If Greece gets a colony in ITTL, it will be Cyreniaca... perhaps taken in a venture with Italy, with them taking Libya, and maybe getting Tunisia ITTL.

That chunk of northern Africa could easily be assimilated into Greece... ans given the MASSIVE oil reserves there, would pay off richly in the long term.

As others have pointed out, with Greece getting the first taste of Northern Epirus, we likely are going to see a much different Albania, if we do see an Albania at all... perhaps Vlore to Lake Ohrid is firmly Greek, while Albania instead stretches north to OTL Kosovo.
 
Once Greece properly integrates this new land, they should focus on naval power.

Reason is, that the only country that Greece should think about going to war with, hell the only country they border, is the Ottoman Empire. However, no matter how deeply Greece invests in its army, it will always be a bad matchup against the ottomans. They are simply too large a country, with too large a population, and too low infrastructure. The greeks can't match their manpower, and logistically they would be hard pressed to push into ottoman territory, and they simply could not get far enough to force the turks into peace. The more they push into Macedonia and Albania, the worse the logistics, and the wider the front, pushing the advantage firmly on the Turkish side. To put it simply, unless the turks have several other major enemies to deal with, a greek army isn't going to march on Constantinople any time soon.

However, the naval game is an entirely different matter. Here the greeks do stand a chance of matching and surpassing the Turkish navy. If they can catch it out of position early in the war, and maintain the advantage, Greece could close the southern Aegean easily. With enough investment, they could even think of locking the turks out of the entire mediterranean, relegating them to the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea. A large blockade of this scale would cause terrible damage to the country the longer it drags on, and could force some serious concessions. As long as the army is not neglected, it shouldn't be hard to create a force that can hold the border against a larger Turkish army, since the new border is quite defensible indeed.

Anyway, that's what I see as the best strategy Greece could adopt in a 1 v 1 conflict with the turks.

I admit another school of though is that as long as the British prop up the Ottomans, the navy should be mostly ignored, as they can't match the UK in the sea unless they are highly distracted in multiple other theaters. In this school of thought, Greece should plan to work with the Russians to have a two-pronged attack in the balkans. With half a million Russian troops in the north and 150k-200k greeks in the south, it could divide Turkish attention and logistics to the point they can have a swift conclusion in Rumelia before the inevitable British blockade takes its toll. Reason I wouldn't support this strategy is because it presupposes war with England. And as they are our biggest trade partner and investor it's hard to see the benefit in such a conflict. If the turks are falling apart to the point where we could take enough land to justify going into recession for a few years and crippling future growth, then we could just take the land diplomatically by threatening war, and get the best of both worlds. Which is exactly what happened in the recent update. And while this strategy is slower than the Russian "total war against the turks once per generation", it will mean that by the time we are ready for the coup de tat, and crushing them once and for all, Greece will be a rich and prosperous state, rather than one which has been bleeding for 50 years to get to where it is.
 
man idk of Greece messed up or not but that shit right their is extortion in my book and you can bet your ass Britain and the Ottoman Empire will remember that. Especially if Russia loses, you can expect groups in both empires will look at little Greece and think about how to punish it for its... impudence seems appropriate.
 
man idk of Greece messed up or not but that shit right their is extortion in my book and you can bet your ass Britain and the Ottoman Empire will remember that. Especially if Russia loses, you can expect groups in both empires will look at little Greece and think about how to punish it for its... impudence seems appropriate.
You'd think they might, but if you look at it from another angle, it's kind of a win-win for both countries as the Ottomans cut their losses on two hick regions that are more often than not a hornet's nest of rebels and rabblerousers (at least they kept Macedonia and the rest of Albania), while Britain saves itself from another quagmire in the Aegean that it has to deal with, especially with Russia still around (not to mention saving the Anglo-Greek alliance from falling apart).
 
You'd think they might, but if you look at it from another angle, it's kind of a win-win for both countries as the Ottomans cut their losses on two hick regions that are more often than not a hornet's nest of rebels and rabblerousers (at least they kept Macedonia and the rest of Albania), while Britain saves itself from another quagmire in the Aegean that it has to deal with, especially with Russia still around (not to mention saving the Anglo-Greek alliance from falling apart).
Nationalists will never see losing any land, even hick, poor, rebellious land, as a good. There’ll inevitably be at least a faction in the empire that sees these losses as disgraceful and, honestly, something to be reversed if they can, much like with Egypt. I’m very curious to see what happens with the Bulgarians as well on this front in a few decades.
 
man idk of Greece messed up or not but that shit right their is extortion in my book and you can bet your ass Britain and the Ottoman Empire will remember that. Especially if Russia loses, you can expect groups in both empires will look at little Greece and think about how to punish it for its... impudence seems appropriate.
Britain won’t care much imo. They organized the whole thing as it was easier and cheaper than another front in the war for them. The ottomans will likely be divided. But if the Russians win I’m sure the larger part of the country will be happy to have paid a bribe to prevent something worse from happening.

As for the Albanians, I can absolutely see southern Albania joining up and identifying with the Greeks in this world. Maybe even central Albania to an extent. Right now the only people in the Balkans with progress towards freedom are the Greeks. Hitching your wagon to theirs isn’t the worst decision you’re could make, especially if it doesn’t come with a mountain of pressure to change every single thing about your culture.
 
Here it’s twenty years earlier, and arguably in more core territor
I am not so sure that Epirus is more core territory than Bulgaria, Macedonia and Thrace. The percentage of muslims is lower in Epirus than in any of the above. Ioannina is a prosperous city, but the wealth is in christian hands, even the muslim elite was greek-educated and a lot of them not even sunnis. The city was more important as an administration center. The rest of the region was settled by Greek, Albanian and Vlach pastoralists wpand had fewer andnpoorer chifliks than Thessaly.

If San Stefano that threatened the existence of the Empire in the Balkans didnt produce a Young Turk movement, I dont see how this treaty could. Instead, I think we will see earlier Hamidian policies.


On the other hand, the diehard Albanian nationalists that will inevitably exist eventually will claim all of the Albanian-speaking land, and I can see TTL’s debate of the Albanian national identity focused on its northern half. If we want to get really weird—a conflict between Greece and Serbia over it?
Places were orthodox are a majority or plurality can indeed become the next focus of greek policy in Albania. But muslim and catholic areas I very much doubt. Not the most crazy nationalist will want anything north of Valona.

Once Greece properly integrates this new land, they should focus on naval power.
Indeed! I have no doubt that Greece will have the most powerful navy in East Med. The Ottomans are a land power and have less land, resources and population than OTL. Dont forget that the profitable pilgrim route to the Holy Cities is in Egyptian hands. The focus of the ottoman naval resources would be the protection of the Straits and capital. They cannot afford two large fleets, one in the Straits and one in the Levant.

That means that Cyprus is very much exposed. Crete in the OTL 19th century was never as exposed as Cyprus is now. Lets say a rebellion takes place. What can the Ottomans do? Send their fleet to pass in front of a dozen greek ports, to fight its way through, only to leave Gallipoli exposed and arrive in a place where they are cut off from their bases? Due to this alt-Crimean War, Cyprus is a ripe fruit, ready to fall.

In 1897, Greece without so many islands and Crete, without industry and bankrupted, had a fleet that denied Ottomans the Aegean, just by standing guard in Northern Euboea. If under these circumstances there was naval parity, in TTL there would be naval supremacy.
 
I am not so sure that Epirus is more core territory than Bulgaria, Macedonia and Thrace. The percentage of muslims is lower in Epirus than in any of the above. Ioannina is a prosperous city, but the wealth is in christian hands, even the muslim elite was greek-educated and a lot of them not even sunnis. The city was more important as an administration center. The rest of the region was settled by Greek, Albanian and Vlach pastoralists wpand had fewer andnpoorer chifliks than Thessaly.

If San Stefano that threatened the existence of the Empire in the Balkans didnt produce a Young Turk movement, I dont see how this treaty could. Instead, I think we will see earlier Hamidian policies.
It’s not just about the actual land taken. It’s the perceived encroachment on Macedonia and Thrace from multiple fronts without any sort of attempt to defend this ancient Ottoman land by force of arms. It’s a real sort of national humiliation, that the British and their upstart klepht lackeys* can pry away such land so easily.

However, I think you’re more on the nose than I was with the Hamidian policies idea. Turning to modernization coupled with centralization and Islamic nationalism is a reasonable response to these setbacks. Modernization and reformation can hopefully allow the Porte to strengthen itself to end this period of humiliation, and pan-Islamic support is a natural response to the kind of sort of Christian nationalism in Europe arrayed against them. This could have the fascinating knock-on effect of having the British take the Prussians’ place as their chief modernizing backers, too...

*That‘a not my actual belief about Greece ITTL, of course!
 
This could have the fascinating knock-on effect of having the British take the Prussians’ place as their chief modernizing backers, too...
But what was really the Hamidian modernization effort?

The law continued not to allow christians as witnesses in a court of law, thereby ensuring the separation of different religions in economic activities. Christians continued to be second class citizens in the eyes of the law and no policy maker thought to rectify it.

In the field of education, hamidian modernization provided incredibly bad education, just with the addition of praising the sultan in the classroom.

In economy modernization included the export of agricultural products (tobacco, olive oil, raisins, dried figs, cotton), without investing in industry or even improving the land. For example Macedonia was a core province yet there were not even theoretical plans on draining the multiple large malarial swamps. The only modernization effort in economy included railroads paid by french and british capital.

The only real modernization effort of both the Hamidian Era and the Young Turks was modernization of the army. And they built an excellent officer corps that I could argue was better than e.g the british one. However, an investment in army without an investment in legal, educational and economic institutions, builds just a giant with clay feet. The mindblowing fact is that according to the literature even the most progressive elites didnt support any modernization of the legal system or better schools (at the level of the OTL french, american or greek schools of the Empire) for the muslim peasantry. The muslim elite had superb education, but nobody cared for the peasants of Anatolia and the Levant.

The big problem for the Ottomans after the Eurasian War won't be Greece, but the Bulgarian subjects of the Empire. Bulgarians had already their national awakening and this war is bein fought in bulgarian soil. I have no doubt that the Russians will arm every single Bulgarian they can. Perhaps a teenager Vasil Levski will leave school to become a freedom fighter?

At least, greek naval power can be a deterrent of any notion of implementing Hamidian-style massacres on greek populations. The threat that Smyrna, Salonica and the Straits can be blockaded should he enough. In such a senario, the imperial economy would be destroyed, as they had to export agricultural products to pay for military-related imports and make payments for the increasing debt.
 
Last edited:
Ah, I didn’t actually mean that these modernization attempts would succeed in saving the Empire :p I just think the Ottomans would be foolish to not try something new after how badly this period seems to be going for them. I agree that there’s a real systemic flaw in how the Empire viewed its lower class subjects, and not one that will be fixed any time soon ITTL.
 
Actually greece has gained a pretty good amount of academic institution from this expansion as well given that Ioannina holds the Zosimaia school while Kerkyra holds the Ionian Academy,there is also the Ionian bank in Kerkyra

Also now that I am thinking about it the corinth canal will connect Greece and as such will be the main road from which the islands of the aegean will trade with the west(of course there will be trade routes that pass south of the Morea but given the central location of the canal it will probably become the main trade route)

Black sea>Constantinople>Thessaloniki>Volos/Smyrna>Aegean Islands>Athens>gulf of corinth >Patras>Western Europe

Suez canal>Egypt>levant>anatolia> Crete/Dodecanese>Cyclades> Athens>gulf of corinth>Patras>Western Europe
Basically this
greece sea trade lanes.png
 
Last edited:
It’s not just about the actual land taken. It’s the perceived encroachment on Macedonia and Thrace from multiple fronts without any sort of attempt to defend this ancient Ottoman land by force of arms. It’s a real sort of national humiliation, that the British and their upstart klepht lackeys* can pry away such land so easily.
Plus well, the timing. It's one thing if ti was out of the blue, but a fight against their historic foe, Russia? A fight when both of them share a religion, Orthodox Christianity?

It's the kind of thing that makes paranoid and unhinged minds start to wonder how coincidental it is.
 
From the British perspective, the greeks did nothing wrong .In fact they were wonderfully "cooperative" agreeing to stay out of the war, and act as a logistical backbone. They even took those pesky rebellious islands off our hands, while giving us a great excuse to get rid of them. Really to the average Brit, the greeks were on their side during the war, with the British ships docking in greek harbors, and greek ships transferring supplies. Only the people in parliament present for the negotiations would know how strongly Greece tried to strong-arm the UK, but they are pragmatic people, so they won't hold any harsh feelings about it. Since really, the UK lost nothing in their deal. They would have given up the islands at some point anyway, after the rebellions everyone knew that, and they would have had to invest in logistic capabilities in someone, and Greece was always a prime candidate. So I don't see any grudges forming from this situation.

The turks on the other hand. Oh boy. They will always remember this dastardly stab in the back by the hated foe and the 5th columns in society. You must note, the turks didn't get any basing rights, or supplies, or any help whatsoever. All they saw was Greece extorting the land out of them in a moment of weakness, the hated insurgents acting up while they fought the ancestral foe. That's how they will feel. They would probably get mad at the British too, if they didn't rely on them so deeply for the continued existence of their state.

The only concern I would have, is if the turks feel they need to get rid of this thorn that has grown into a blade pointing at their heart before the next war. The ottomans might decide that they can't properly fight the Russians until the greek threat has been properly resolved. Meaning they might decide to simply fabricate a war with Greece, while keeping all the other great powers out of it. They would probably try to involve Britain, but it's hard to imagine them joining the ottomans in a war against us. Well, further developments depends n the conclusion of the Eurasian war, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if the next major war in the balkans is Greece vs Ottomans in a 1 v 1 (ignoring the tens of thousands of rebels that will also rise up that is).
 
The only concern I would have, is if the turks feel they need to get rid of this thorn that has grown into a blade pointing at their heart before the next war. The ottomans might decide that they can't properly fight the Russians until the greek threat has been properly resolved. Meaning they might decide to simply fabricate a war with Greece, while keeping all the other great powers out of it. They would probably try to involve Britain, but it's hard to imagine them joining the ottomans in a war against us. Well, further developments depends n the conclusion of the Eurasian war, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if the next major war in the balkans is Greece vs Ottomans in a 1 v 1 (ignoring the tens of thousands of rebels that will also rise up that is).
There's always the problem that if the Ottomans initiate a war against Greece, there is always the chance that they get one or more great powers intervening against them. After all technically Greek independence had been guarranteed by Britain, France and Russia. Not a good thing.
 
And let's not forget that the greeks are not the only rebellious subjects of the empire...
true if the turks attack the greeks,then the Greek,Bulgarian and Serbian subjects of the empire are going to rebel,not to mention that Russia will intervene in the defence of an Orthodox Christian nation

There is also the matter that Britain is upgrading the ports of greece and the funding the construction of the corinth canal,Albion wouldnt let the ottomans attack Greece outrigth given the good relations and the bonds each kingdom has with each other,there is also the matter that Albion will lose the influence that it has within greece and push them to the side of Russia

Given the Strategic Position that Greece holds,such a thing would be perceived as a disaster by the British
 
Last edited:
With all these dynamics between the major powers I do wonder how the next war between Greece and the Ottomans would even happen; it's almost like the alliance system in place prior to ww1 with everyone pointing a gun at one another and no one willing to fire the first shot because of who else would get involved
 
A potential to consider: regardless of the outcome of this war, whichever Sultan of the Porte signed off on this treaty is going to become incredibly unpopular for it among patriotic and nationalist circles. Then factor in the Great Eurasian War, and the fact that even if the Ottomans avoid being stomped by the Russians (and perhaps Persians), this will have been a devastating and extremely ill-advised conflict. Through both of these, I see Ottoman faith in the U.K. being very strongly shaken - the Brits pressured the Porte into giving into them and starting this war with Russia, then backed Greece's demands for massive concessions of irredenta in exchange for peace.

Could this be an opening for a palace coup and the installation of a new sultan? If that were the case, then who is to say that the Porte would continue to uphold the Treaty of Constantinople? The author did mention that Thessaloniki would be Greek sooner than one would expect, and a revanchist conflict before the Porte was recovered from the GEW would be a good opportunity for this to happen.
 
The only concern I would have, is if the turks feel they need to get rid of this thorn that has grown into a blade pointing at their heart before the next war.
Don't forget that Egypt remains a major player, with aspirations for the Levant. This Ottoman Empire is surrounded by more potent enemies, while having all the internal problems of OTL.

Guys check this phd thesis here, it has everything you need to know on the ottoman war effort. I hope you will find it useful @Earl Marshal


It states that the quality of Russian officers in the Caucasus Front was better than the rest , because because many talented but politically unreliable officers were sent there as a punishment. They also had more war experience due to the conflict with the various tribes (ethnic cleansing actually).

Another interesting fact is that a major part of the Ottoman Army in Caucasus was not regulars, but bashibozuks, irregulars notorious for their lack of discipline. When they entered Georgia, their behavior turned even the muslim Georgians into enemies. Specifically, the field army in Ardahan in 1853 had 2,000 Regular infantry, 10,000 reservists and 6,000 bashibozuks. In July 1854 the whole field ottoman army included 44k Regulars and Reservists and 17k Bashibozuks. This army was defeated handily by a russian army of 13k infantry, 3k regular cavalry and 4k irregular cavalry. The irregulars and the reservists tended to desert in great numbers. Each winter in the war, costed something like 20k dead due to malnutrition and disease.

Frankly, the forces the author has assigned to the Caucasus are enough to destroy everything in their pass. Their greatest enemy would be logistics.

Regarding financing the war this is what the author states:
Th e tithe on agricultural products (aşar or öşür) still formed the big-
gest item among all tax revenues of the Porte (about one fourth of total
revenues). This implied that a bad harvest meant a serious decrease
in tax revenues. Another important source of revenue was internal
and external customs duties, but those, especially the import duties,
were very low. In fact, it was here that the strangest economic policy
in the world showed itself, for the Ottomans charged more duties on
exports than on imports, contrary to the practise of such industrialis-
ing countries as the USA, the German Confederation, and Russia that
protected their domestic industries
A great part of the taxes went to tax farmers and various officials. The empire tried to collect taxes with its own representatives but the system failed and they were back to tax farming. In 1851 the empire went bankrupt after 2 years of poor harvests. The war effort (with France as the major land army) consumed 67% of the ottoman budget. Not only artillery and steamships, but ever saddles and sabres had to be imported from France and Britain. The war expenditures broke OE's back and it was only 17,3 million pounds. Compare this number to expenditures of 128,9 million pounds for Russia, 127,9 for France, 154,2 for Britain . In TTL Britain has to cover much much much more expenses as the OE is in such sorry state.

Lastly, the OTL Ottoman war effort was assisted by Egypt:
Egypt's contribution was 24k men, a naval squadron, tribute and donations.



One interesting thought: A Greek merchant who is a British or French citizen can export greek industrial products to OE by paying 5% duty, while every ottoman export paid 12% duty. I expect greek industrial products to find a prominent market in the OE.
 
Last edited:
Top