Pride Goes Before a Fall: A Revolutionary Greece Timeline

[A_simple_pilgrim]

I just think that during that war Greece will attack with the Russians since Britain didn't interfere in this war otl and ittl I'd think Britain will be fine with Greece fighting in the Balkans considering this war will worsen Greco Russian relations since Greece will want a significantly smaller Bulgaria than what the Russians wanted. Cyprus would in all likelihood be released from Ottoman yoke by the Greeks since Greece would have a better navy ittl. I think Greece will participate ittl instead of not being belligerent and they'll be one of the major winners and the ascension of Greece to relevancy in the great power's eyes.

PS: I hope we see King Leopold patronising the Megali since Ionia and Bithynia have a lot of Greeks in them. I'd think they would focus on Western Anatolia before ever trying to get a colony in Africa and I'd think Leopold would understand that.

Leopold is a cautious guy, so he will avoid war against a bigger country as much as he feasibly can. The man's goal for years and years was to be a king, but the opportunity to do so was ripped away from him again and again. Finally he becomes the king of some poor backwards nation, but now in his old age it's actually becoming a state he can be proud of ruling. He won't risk any chance of throwing away his life's work and his last chance to be what he always wanted to be.

Now though, he's old. Konstatine is the new man on the block, and he has something to prove. His dad is the father of greece, unifier, and bringer of prosperity. That father was also never very affectionate to him. He will want to surpass Leopold, and the only way that will happen is if he wins a major war.

Now as to western Anatolia, I do think the greeks will at least attempt to hold vast swathes of land there, more than just a city or two, but I feel like that won't be super successful. Also remember that the population gain from exchanges often fuels an economy, such as the west German economy being fueled by those fleeing the soviets in the east. I can see a lot going wrong in western Anatolia, though I remain confident in large balkan gains. Though the war with Bulgaria will be something else, probably as bitter and hateful as against the turks.

 

[Lascaris]

Leopold is a cautious guy, so he will avoid war against a bigger country as much as he feasibly can. The man's goal for years and years was to be a king, but the opportunity to do so was ripped away from him again and again. Finally he becomes the king of some poor backwards nation, but now in his old age it's actually becoming a state he can be proud of ruling. He won't risk any chance of throwing away his life's work and his last chance to be what he always wanted to be.

Now though, he's old. Konstatine is the new man on the block, and he has something to prove. His dad is the father of greece, unifier, and bringer of prosperity. That father was also never very affectionate to him. He will want to surpass Leopold, and the only way that will happen is if he wins a major war.

Now as to western Anatolia, I do think the greeks will at least attempt to hold vast swathes of land there, more than just a city or two, but I feel like that won't be super successful. Also remember that the population gain from exchanges often fuels an economy, such as the west German economy being fueled by those fleeing the soviets in the east. I can see a lot going wrong in western Anatolia, though I remain confident in large balkan gains. Though the war with Bulgaria will be something else, probably as bitter and hateful as against the turks.

I'm uhm obviously biased for reasons relating to a Turtledove candidacy that shall remain unnamed.

But from the Greek point of view holding West Anatolia is vastly preferable. A lot of things can go wrong yes. But from the moment the fate of the Greek population of Anatolia will come at stake (if it does which should not be necessarily taken for granted) then Greek options contract to at a minimum getting said populations physically safe in Greece with anything gained beyond that being an improvement.

Now is a Greek western Anatolia defensible? Depending on the exact border actually way more than the Greek borders in the north...

 

[cmakk1012]

Some of Western Anatolia is extremely plausible, especially with this very early PoD; it’s the size of it that matters . The coasts are easy gain with lots of Greeks already in residence, but taking big swaths of inland steppe is an exercise in wasteful expansion. It’s not very valuable and heavily Turkish. Of course they’ll have to take some inland territory, but it’s less useful to any Greek state than the coasts.

 

[A_simple_pilgrim]

holding both sides of the Bosphorus and Aegan would be immensely preferable indeed. The trade benefits, the resource benefits, the farmland, the ports, all of it has value. A place where the greek population can expand has value. Even making turkey a smaller country with little sea access has value in a world where greco-turkish relations never improve.

My concern is on how to defend these gains. Seriously, you'll have a Turkish majority once you go beyond a painfully thin coastal strip. I can't see defensible borders that don't contain millions of unhappy turks which will have the undying support of a bitter state across the border. It don't see it working out without a major ethnic cleanse, hopefully of the deporting type instead of anything else.

It would have to happen during a time of extreme global upheaval otherwise the world won't tolerate it. It can happen though, look at how many germans are left in the Sudetenland or Prussia. It would be a stain on the country though, that I'm not sure I want to see occur.

I'd prefer a greco-turkish reconciliation at some point, and taking a reasonable chunk of the coast probably precludes that.

 

[Duke of Orlando]

holding both sides of the Bosphorus and Aegan would be immensely preferable indeed. The trade benefits, the resource benefits, the farmland, the ports, all of it has value. A place where the greek population can expand has value. Even making turkey a smaller country with little sea access has value in a world where greco-turkish relations never improve.

My concern is on how to defend these gains. Seriously, you'll have a Turkish majority once you go beyond a painfully thin coastal strip. I can't see defensible borders that don't contain millions of unhappy turks which will have the undying support of a bitter state across the border. It don't see it working out without a major ethnic cleanse, hopefully of the deporting type instead of anything else.

It would have to happen during a time of extreme global upheaval otherwise the world won't tolerate it. It can happen though, look at how many germans are left in the Sudetenland or Prussia. It would be a stain on the country though, that I'm not sure I want to see occur.

I'd prefer a greco-turkish reconciliation at some point, and taking a reasonable chunk of the coast probably precludes that.

I mean, a population exchange is almost a certainty at some point. I’m hoping for one that’s less sweeping and all encompassing than OTL but unless the ottoman’s truly collapses at some point Turkey and Greece are are both going to have large populations they don’t want in areas they control. A population exchange is the likely response. expect a more successful Greece will have more reasons to be magnanimous and gentle to their departing citizens. A more beat up, revanchist Turkey likely has every reason not to be though.

As far as a Greek and Turkish rapprochement goes, I expect that has far more to do with 20th century global politics than where the eventual border ends up unless the Greeks are pushing the border insanely far inland to like near Ankara or something like that

 

[Quinkana]

Some of Western Anatolia is extremely plausible, especially with this very early PoD; it’s the size of it that matters . The coasts are easy gain with lots of Greeks already in residence, but taking big swaths of inland steppe is an exercise in wasteful expansion. It’s not very valuable and heavily Turkish. Of course they’ll have to take some inland territory, but it’s less useful to any Greek state than the coasts.

I think Bithynia, Ionia and the Hellspont would be the main objectives of Greece in Anatolia. If Greece controls the islands in the Aegean, Turkey essentially is locked out of the Aegean and Greece gains the most industrially productive regions of Turkey too.

PS: Ankara is quite exposed to Greece if Greece holds Western Anatolia, even if it's less exposed than Constantinople. Sivas may be a good alternative even though it may be more exposed to Russia. Adana-Mersin would be a great place to be Turkey's capital too if the Armenians get genocided.

 

[X Oristos]

I would like to comment on the coming perfect storm for greek industrialization.

There are five things to consider that lead up to that perfect storm:

- The British have just upgraded the major greek ports, making the importation and exportation of goods easier and cheaper.

- A major coal field is being developed, providing lignite as a fuel for the emerging industry.

- The grapevine blight is around the corner and with it a significant influx of hard currency via currant exports.

- Thessaly already provides a lot of grain and perhaps may allow Greece to break even in wheat by 1870. Even if it doesn't, it still means that a lot of hard currency that had to go for wheat imports, would be available.

- The American Civil War. I assume that it takes place in TTL as well. The ACW led to a boom in cotton production and export in the Ottoman Empire. For a brief period in the 1860s, 2,4% of the global cotton production was located in Western Anatolia and was exported via Smyrna. However, after the ACW ended, the demand for ottoman cotton fell dramatically: for the rest of the century only 0,2-0,4% of the world cotton production was located in Western Anatolia. The western anatolian cotton was often cultivated by Greeks and the cilician cotton by Armenians. Now, we come to 1870 and Britain doesn't buy the lower quality ottoman cotton: Dixie feeds the Lancashire mills once again alongside India and Egypt. From the Ottoman farmer's perspective that is a disaster. In order to cultivate cotton in Smyrna, a farmer needed to invest: buy land with water sources or dig wells. At the same time, the import tariffs were 5%, so it was very cheap to import manufactured goods and more than 80% of the textiles consumed in the Empire were imported.

Last but not least, good quality cotton was to be found in Egypt where cotton trade was controlled by the greek mercantile community.

The aforementioned conditions lead to a perfect storm for the greek industry. By 1870 it will have capital, energy, infrastructure and a ready source of cotton that no other industry really wants. Granted, ottoman raw cotton was of lower quality and yielded lower quality textile. But when it comes to excellent quality cotton, Egypt with its Greek cotton merchants is there as well. These facts combined with the Ottoman Empire being a major market for manufactured goods with low import tariffs may lead to a greek textile boom. Greece can easily develop a medium-sized yet virile textile industry.

 

[emperor joe]

Now with the mines of megalopolis been opened a railroad to kalamata would make sense as the terrain from megalopolis to kalamata is relatively flat in comparison to megalopolis to Patra. With the railroad kalamata could experience a small economic boom with the plains of Messenia producing all kinds of agricultural products like olives, wheat and a large pig population the city will have some industry attracting poor farmers looking for work,especially from Mani.maybe ttl manianiatika will not be located in Piraeus but in kalamata

 

[Quinkana]

https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginarymaps/comments/srkbpo

My hopes and dreams... Seriously though, I think the Pontus and Crimea shouldn't be part of Greece, but Southern Italy is plausible-ish. The Holy land colony is weird really.

 

[Duke of Orlando]

https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginarymaps/comments/srkbpo

My hopes and dreams... Seriously though, I think the Pontus and Crimea shouldn't be part of Greece, but Southern Italy is plausible-ish. The Holy land colony is weird really.

In what world is Pontus less plausible than Southern Italy? Not that Pontus is particularly plausible either but I don’t see your reasoning for how Southern Italy is more plausible. The distance is smaller but the Griko population is tiny. Sure Pontic Greeks aren’t that giant of a population either but they’re larger than that Griko’s.

 

[Quinkana]

In what world is Pontus less plausible than Southern Italy? Not that Pontus is particularly plausible either but I don’t see your reasoning for how Southern Italy is more plausible. The distance is smaller but the Griko population is tiny. Sure Pontic Greeks aren’t that giant of a population either but they’re larger than that Griko’s.

It's more of a personal preference thing but I can see Italy be dismantled by the victorious powers in an alt WW while it is likely that Pontus would be dictated by Russian actions.

 

[Nagisaki]

It's more of a personal preference thing but I can see Italy be dismantled by the victorious powers in an alt WW while it is likely that Pontus would be dictated by Russian actions.

...why would Italy be dismantled?

 

[Roland Traveler]

...why would Italy be dismantled?

Clearly the universe will bend every law to screw any country that Greece has even the flimsiest claims on. Before you know it, Greece will be claiming Iraq as part of the legacy of the Macedonian Empire.

 

[cmakk1012]

If Italy were for some reason dismantled it would just go back to the states that made it up before unification, not some silly resurrection of a notion that died long before even the Byzantine Empire itself did. In even the most extreme Greekwank possible I don’t see why they wouldn’t just go for a vassal state through a revived Sicily than direct control.

But that map is silly anyway—they get Crimea through holding it for the White Russians? I don’t care how strong this Greece is, as soon as Russia and its millions of men stop killing each other they’re marching south and seizing it back and there’s not a damn thing Greece can do about it.

 

[goumaister]

If Italy were for some reason dismantled it would just go back to the states that made it up before unification, not some silly resurrection of a notion that died long before even the Byzantine Empire itself did. In even the most extreme Greekwank possible I don’t see why they wouldn’t just go for a vassal state through a revived Sicily than direct control.

About that, would a personal Union with the Kingdom of Naples would have worked to unify on some levels the two states? I would think not so as Naples is a bigger and more populous state but with Sicily as a third party some things could be done to balance the difference.

Anyhow the map is indeed way too much on areas that Greece can't control although we don't know the POD I would guess it needs one before the POD in this thread by more than a decade at least.

 

[X Oristos]

Another topic I would like to touch is the great victor of the Anglo-Russian War: France.

However, in the May Referendum on Belgian Independence, four provinces of the much reduced Kingdom of Belgium (Hainut, Namur, Liege, and Arlon) voted to join with France. The vote in Brabant was highly contested however, with rampant reports of wrongdoing on taking place both sides. The worst allegations came from Brussels where many thousands of Flemish refugees who had fled the city during the war, were barred from returning to the city after the conflict, providing the Walloon populace with a slight advantage over their Fleming neighbors. Ultimately, the region was split in two, with the North of the province electing to join the Netherlands and the South choosing to unite with France.

France has just annexed the most industrialized area in the world that is not Britain. While the following table shows Belgium in its entirety, inside OTL Belgium, the francophone provinces were the most industrialized. Therefore, I would guess that the industrial output per capita of the annexed provinces would be higher than the OTL national one.

The time could not have been better: by that point most of the major canals that connect Wallonia with France (e.g the Oise-Sambre Canal) have been built. Now the coal-rich zones of Wallonia and France are a unified economic zone, connected with canals and soon with railroads. Moreover, the wallonian industry will be able to get lorraine iron tariff-free. The synergies from this development might lead to a greater and quicker economic development of both Wallonia and the north-east of France.

Beyond the vast economic benefits of this annexation, the strategic position of France improved in a rather dramatic way. An independent and strictly neutral Belgium was mostly beneficial for Britain and the second strongest western land power. Before 1866, Prussia was the second strongest power and post-1871 it was France. Now France is the strongest land power and it has no buffer neutral state between her and Germany and Netherlands. The relative strategic position of France is vastly improved. The Hague needs to be very carefully as there is no treaty signed by everybody to protect the Dutch and the French can easily project power in the Low Countries. The German Confederation has to deal with a french Liege. From Liege the French can project power towards Aachen and from there to the Ruhr. There are no Ardennes or major rivers between Liege and Dusseldorf.

While France had this major increase in economic and strategic might, her major adversary spent a lot of treasure and blood fighting the Russians. Not to mention that the british public debt was vastly increased. France on the other hand, was making money out of the conflict. Britain, between the cost of the war and of the Indian Rebellion for a few years has to lay low, since it would be folly to enter another major war without a very good reason. While France remains a rival and Britain will try its best to oppose it, under the current circumstances some appeasement is in order as well.

By all accounts, France is on the rise. And a when a hegemonic power is having a field day, they flex their muscles. But where? How? France has the political capital to look to important objectives, not like OTL with Vietnam when the french interests in the regions were zero and was just a prestige matter. In coming years, I see three different objectives that the French may pursuit: Morocco, Tunisia and Lebanon.

Morocco would have been the most valuable prize as it controls the entrance to the Mediterranean alongside Gibraltar. Holding Tangiers would vastly enhance the strategic position of France. The problem is that control of choke-points is the cornerstone of the british global strategy. Other than the Strait of Dover itself, Gibraltar is most important passage for Britain. Therefore, it would be a high-risk - high-reward gamble.

Tunisia and Lebanon are of less importance compared to the Gibraltar Strait but a major prize if Morocco cannot be obtained. Tunisia ensures the security of Algeria and allows projection of power in the Sicilian Straits and Central Mediterranean. Bizerte is a wonderful base against Malta.

Lebanon itself is an interesting case of a potential imperial project. It would be one of the very few imperial projects where the great majority of the prospective subjects (Maronites) would enthusiastically welcome french rule. In 1860, the Maronite peasants will revolt against the Druze feudal lords. Moreover, such project would have widespread appeal to almost all stakeholders in french politics:

- For the Conservative Catholics, it is a case of fellow Catholics rebelling against their Muslim (well, Druze) overlords. After all, the King of France was the traditional protector of the Catholics in the Ottoman Empire.

- For the Liberals, it is the struggle of oppressed serfs against their feudal overlords. The social aspect is as important to them, as the religious aspect is important to the Conservatives.

- For the imperialists, it is an easilly protected province in a strategic region. It is a vast mountain after all that from one side borders friendly Egypt. Moreover, Suez Canal will soon open up and an easily defended base in east Mediterranean will be of even greater importance.

- For the economic lobby (read industrialists) it provides a base close to Egypt, the third biggest cotton producer in the world after USA and India. They have already invested much in Egypt and in the coming years egyptian cotton will be even more important.

 

[Quinkana]

Lebanon itself is an interesting case of a potential imperial project. It would be one of the very few imperial projects where the great majority of the prospective subjects (Maronites) would enthusiastically welcome french rule. In 1860, the Maronite peasants will revolt against the Druze feudal lords. Moreover, such project would have widespread appeal to almost all stakeholders in french politics:

I think if the French are able to make this Lebanon they could convince the Maronites to speak Aramaic and identify with the inland Assyrians they could claim Assyria which would be interesting to see. Also the same dynamic of Assyrian peasents and Kurdish landlords would make the Maronite Lebenonese very sympathetic to the Assyrian's plight.

 

[Duke of Orlando]

Another topic I would like to touch is the great victor of the Anglo-Russian War: France.



France has just annexed the most industrialized area in the world that is not Britain. While the following table shows Belgium in its entirety, inside OTL Belgium, the francophone provinces were the most industrialized. Therefore, I would guess that the industrial output per capita of the annexed provinces would be higher than the OTL national one.

View attachment 718767

The time could not have been better: by that point most of the major canals that connect Wallonia with France (e.g the Oise-Sambre Canal) have been built. Now the coal-rich zones of Wallonia and France are a unified economic zone, connected with canals and soon with railroads. Moreover, the wallonian industry will be able to get lorraine iron tariff-free. The synergies from this development might lead to a greater and quicker economic development of both Wallonia and the north-east of France.

Beyond the vast economic benefits of this annexation, the strategic position of France improved in a rather dramatic way. An independent and strictly neutral Belgium was mostly beneficial for Britain and the second strongest western land power. Before 1866, Prussia was the second strongest power and post-1871 it was France. Now France is the strongest land power and it has no buffer neutral state between her and Germany and Netherlands. The relative strategic position of France is vastly improved. The Hague needs to be very carefully as there is no treaty signed by everybody to protect the Dutch and the French can easily project power in the Low Countries. The German Confederation has to deal with a french Liege. From Liege the French can project power towards Aachen and from there to the Ruhr. There are no Ardennes or major rivers between Liege and Dusseldorf.

While France had this major increase in economic and strategic might, her major adversary spent a lot of treasure and blood fighting the Russians. Not to mention that the british public debt was vastly increased. France on the other hand, was making money out of the conflict. Britain, between the cost of the war and of the Indian Rebellion for a few years has to lay low, since it would be folly to enter another major war without a very good reason. While France remains a rival and Britain will try its best to oppose it, under the current circumstances some appeasement is in order as well.

By all accounts, France is on the rise. And a when a hegemonic power is having a field day, they flex their muscles. But where? How? France has the political capital to look to important objectives, not like OTL with Vietnam when the french interests in the regions were zero and was just a prestige matter. In coming years, I see three different objectives that the French may pursuit: Morocco, Tunisia and Lebanon.

Morocco would have been the most valuable prize as it controls the entrance to the Mediterranean alongside Gibraltar. Holding Tangiers would vastly enhance the strategic position of France. The problem is that control of choke-points is the cornerstone of the british global strategy. Other than the Strait of Dover itself, Gibraltar is most important passage for Britain. Therefore, it would be a high-risk - high-reward gamble.

Tunisia and Lebanon are of less importance compared to the Gibraltar Strait but a major prize if Morocco cannot be obtained. Tunisia ensures the security of Algeria and allows projection of power in the Sicilian Straits and Central Mediterranean. Bizerte is a wonderful base against Malta.

Lebanon itself is an interesting case of a potential imperial project. It would be one of the very few imperial projects where the great majority of the prospective subjects (Maronites) would enthusiastically welcome french rule. In 1860, the Maronite peasants will revolt against the Druze feudal lords. Moreover, such project would have widespread appeal to almost all stakeholders in french politics:

- For the Conservative Catholics, it is a case of fellow Catholics rebelling against their Muslim (well, Druze) overlords. After all, the King of France was the traditional protector of the Catholics in the Ottoman Empire.

- For the Liberals, it is the struggle of oppressed serfs against their feudal overlords. The social aspect is as important to them, as the religious aspect is important to the Conservatives.

- For the imperialists, it is an easilly protected province in a strategic region. It is a vast mountain after all that from one side borders friendly Egypt. Moreover, Suez Canal will soon open up and an easily defended base in east Mediterranean will be of even greater importance.

- For the economic lobby (read industrialists) it provides a base close to Egypt, the third biggest cotton producer in the world after USA and India. They have already invested much in Egypt and in the coming years egyptian cotton will be even more important.

Isn’t Lebanon in Egyptian hands at the moment in TTL? I need to go back and re read the Egyptian updates cause I’m not sure exactly how far north the Egyptians are right now. I only bring this up because of the French were to take Lebanon from Egypt it would probably send them right back into the arms of the English.

And while I agree that France is definitely on the rise and in a good position, I am worried this might come back to haunt them. A France that is a bigger rival to Britain is one who might not have British help when a world war happens. And the Dutch likely side against the French because they want the rest of the Brabant and maybe other pieces of Belgium back. I’m not saying it will happen that way but the French could find themselves desperately lacking in friends if things keep up the way they are.

 

[X Oristos]

Isn’t Lebanon in Egyptian hands at the moment in TTL? I need to go back and re read the Egyptian updates cause I’m not sure exactly how far north the Egyptians are right now. I only bring this up because of the French were to take Lebanon from Egypt it would probably send them right back into the arms of the English.

I am under the impression that Lebanon is in Ottoman hands whereas south Syria (Damascus) belongs to Egypt.

And while I agree that France is definitely on the rise and in a good position, I am worried this might come back to haunt them. A France that is a bigger rival to Britain is one who might not have British when a world war happens. And the Dutch likely side against the French because they want the rest of the Brabant and maybe other pieces of Belgium back. I’m not saying it will happen that way but the French could find themselves desperately lacking in friends if things keep up the way they are.

If a World War happens, it will be very different to OTL with very different states. To analyze the new geopolitical environment, we need to see firstly what will happen to Germany and Italy and what institution these states will develop. Will they be federations? Confederacies? Centralized states? How will they develop internally?

Lastly, we have a significantly more powerful Russia and smaller states in the Danubian Basin instead of Austria-Hungary. This is a very different Europe.

 

[Wendell]

https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginarymaps/comments/srkbpo

My hopes and dreams... Seriously though, I think the Pontus and Crimea shouldn't be part of Greece, but Southern Italy is plausible-ish. The Holy land colony is weird really.

Yeah, I would go even farther than you and add that Anatolia and the Levant just aren't in the cards either. Also, I don't think that southern Italy foray is plausible at all.