Part 41: Roi de Belgique
  • Part 41: Roi de Belgique

    650px-Wappers_-_Episodes_from_September_Days_1830_on_the_Place_de_l%E2%80%99H%C3%B4tel_de_Ville_in_Brussels.JPG

    Scenes from the Belgian Revolution

    The final fallout from the 1830 July Revolution in France would take place in the neighboring Kingdom of the Netherlands. At the end of the Napoleonic Wars, the lands constituting the defunct Austrian Netherlands were united with the Dutch Kingdom of the Netherlands at the behest of Britain. Officially this transfer of land was compensation for the loss of their colonial territories in South Africa and India to the British during the war, with Austria receiving sovereignty over the territory of Venice and Milan in turn. But in truth, this act was a means of bolstering the Netherlands against France who many still feared even after the downfall of Napoleon. This arrangement would unfortunately cause more problems than it would solve for everyone involved as the Austrians would experience perpetual unrest in their Italian territories for the remainder of the 19th Century, while the Flemish and Walloon peoples of the Southern Netherlands would prove themselves to be a restless and unruly people for the Government in Holland. This divide was made worse by King William I of the Netherlands who gradually came to enforce a policy of strict cultural assimilation of the Flems and Walloons in the South of his country.

    In 1823, Dutch was imposed as the official language of government across the region of Flanders angering the French speaking upper and middle class in the Southern Provinces. The King’s strict adherence to Dutch Reformed Church also sparked fears of religious persecution and the intolerance of their Catholic faith by the government in Holland. In addition, despite comprising roughly two thirds of the country’s population, the peoples of Belgium only held 50% of the seats in the States General of the Netherlands. This disparity was also seen in the Army of the Netherlands which was staffed almost entirely with Dutch officers from the North despite recruiting many thousands of soldiers from the South. National institutions were also headquartered in the North of the country making it difficult for the peoples of the Southern Provinces to air their many grievances against them. It was no wonder then that protests became an almost daily occurrence in the city of Brussels, which soon became a hotbed of revolutionary and patriotic activity. Despite their innate differences, even the Liberals and Catholics of the Southern Provinces came together in their opposition to the Dutch forming a broad coalition of dissent. By the Summer of 1830, it was clear that the Southern Netherlands had become a tinderbox ready to go off at any moment.

    The final spark would come from the most unlikely of sources, a simple play. As part of King William’s birthday festivities on the 25th of August, the new play La Muette de Portici (The Mute Girl of Portici) was chosen for a performance in the Theatre de la Monnaie in Brussels before an agitated crowd.[1] Though it started as any other play performed that day, the evening showing would quickly escalate in emotion and fervor. The crowd of theatergoers were so inspired by the patriotic and romantic tenor of the famous aria Amor Sacre de la Patrie (Sacred Love of the Fatherland) that they rose from their seats to a man and stormed out into the streets shouting “aux armes, aux armes”. Together with the regular protestors, the mob rapidly grew as the revolutionary spirit passed from person to person throughout all of Brussels. Within minutes the entire city was up in arms against their Dutch oppressors with Dutch soldiers and civilians being targeted for wanton destruction and persecution. Windows were smashed, stores were looted, buildings were burned to the ground, and men were shot dead in the streets. The Belgian Revolution had begun in earnest.

    The Revolution could have been ended then and there had the Dutch garrison acted quickly and forcefully against the protestors. Instead, the Crown Prince William agreed to meet with the dissidents on the 1st of September and hear their demands rather than forcibly subdue them. As the Prince was generally popular with the people of Brussels and the Southern Provinces it was hoped that he could bring an amicable solution to the unfolding crisis. He quickly became convinced that only by granting autonomy to the southern provinces could the crisis be ended peacefully. Agreeing to work on their behalf, Prince William returned to Amsterdam along with his brother Frederick to relay the rioters’ requests to their father. Unfortunately, the King would not give his response for nearly two weeks as he awaited the gathering of the States General before making his decision. When King William finally did refuse the rebels’ terms on the 14th of September, it would be another 7 days before he ordered his sons back to Brussels this time at the head of an army 14,000 strong to subdue the burgeoning unrest in Brussels with force if necessary.

    During the four and a half weeks that King William had hesitated, however, the people of Brussels had been joined by thousands of volunteers from across the countryside, bolstering the revolutionaries' numbers significantly. The level of resistance the Dutch army encountered upon their arrival on the 25th of September had also stiffened substantially, as they found a determined and deeply entrenched mob of Belgians eager to fight for their ideals with guns at the ready. Barricades of furniture, upturned paving stones, rubble, and random debris where strategically placed throughout Brussels to channel the Dutch soldiers into prepared kill zones along the main avenues of the city. Houses were filled to the brim with partisans and patriots who effortlessly picked off the Orangemen as they advanced down the open boulevards leaving a trail of dead and dying men in their wake. Still the Dutch pressed on under a relentless hail of projectiles and gunfire, but by nightfall, Prince William had had enough. Recognizing that the situation was rapidly deteriorating and progress was dreadfully slow, the Prince withdrew from the city with his men under the cover of darkness, ending the engagement in the early hours of the morning. Much to the surprise of the people of Brussels and the rest of Europe, the Belgians had won.

    600px-Attaque_du_parc_de_Bruxelles.jpg

    The Battle of Brussels

    With their effective resistance against the Dutch Army at Brussels, the Belgians had proven their mettle on the field of battle. Prince William and Prince Frederick would remain in the outskirts of the city for two more days, skirmishing with the locals and attempting other means of pushing into the city, before finally withdrawing north on the 27th towards the fortresses of Maastricht, Venlo, and Antwerp while they awaited further reinforcements from their father. During this lull in the fighting the leaders of the Belgian revolution convened to discuss their future. With their actions in Brussels, they had crossed the Rubicon and could not return to Dutch rule without dire consequences and so they pressed for full independence. On the 4th of October 1830, the state of Belgium declared its independence from the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

    This development was met with mild curiosity but also fear and skepticism by the Powers who would soon gather in London to determine Belgium’s fate. Of the five, only France supported the independence of Belgium initially, while Austria, Britain, Prussia, and Russia were all opposed to the rebellion of the Belgians against the Dutch and wished for a return to the Dutch rule over Flanders and Wallonia. None were ready or willing to aid the Dutch, however. Russia was busy rounding up its own dissidents in Poland and was eyeing the events in the Ottoman Empire with great concern. Austria would similarly be locked in a bloody uprising of its own in Italy later that Fall diverting any attention it could spare towards the Low Countries. The Kingdom of Prussia, King William’s closest ally, was the most vocal in supporting Dutch territorial integrity, yet it too was unable to provide more aid to the Netherlands at the time, given its own financial troubles and fears of unrest among their own Polish population. With no one else willing to intervene, the British stayed their hands as they were unwilling to act alone in this matter, leaving the Netherlands to resolve the matter themselves.

    With no support from his supposed allies’, King William was forced to stay on the defensive given the complete disintegration of his army after Brussels. Many of the soldiers sent against the revolutionaries had been from the Southern Provinces and had begun defecting in alarming numbers following the declaration of independence on the 4th of October. In some instances, Belgian soldiers would mutiny against their Dutch officers, imprisoned them, turn over their positions to the Belgian Revolutionaries, before siding with the Revolutionaries themselves. By the end of the month, only 6,000 men remained in the fortresses of Antwerp, Maastricht, and Venlo forcing the Netherlands to undergo a massive reorganization of their army over the Fall and Winter. Fortunately for the King, he found no shortage of volunteers who enlisted in great numbers to quell the uprising in the South, still it would take time to properly arm and train the new soldiers. As a result, a cease fire of sorts would go into effect the remainder of the year as the Dutch regrouped for a Spring offensive.

    The Belgians were also incredibly active in the months following the battle of Brussels, establishing government institutions, organizing a proper army, and beginning the search for a King. Despite possessing a strong liberal following that supported the declaration of a republic, most of the Belgian leadership recognized that carving out a new democratic state in old Europe would be akin to a death sentence for the young state; the only chance for Belgium to exist in conservative Europe would be through a monarchy. The institution of the monarchy, however, would be heavily restricted by a constitution, limiting the powers of the king. In addition, the King would be chosen solely at the discretion of the Belgian National Congress, the only questions remained who to pick as King of Belgium.

    550px-Het_voorlopig_bewind%2C_door_Charles_Picqu%C3%A9.jpg

    The Provisional Government of Belgium-
    (From Left to Right: Alexandre Gendebien, Andre Edouard Jolly, Charles Rogier, Louis de Potter, Sylvain Van de Veyer, Feuillien de Coppin de Falaen, Felix de Merode, Jospeh Van der Linden, Emmanuel Van der Linden d'Hoorghvoorst)

    Initially, there was a strong interest in having a member of the House of Orange, particularly the Prince of Orange, serve as King of Belgium in order to maintain good diplomatic and economic relations with the Netherlands following the end of the Revolution.[2] The selection of the Prince of Orange would also mitigate any worries that the Powers may have had concerning their new state. Sadly, this plan was scuttled before it ever came to fruition by the continued hostilities of King William and the Dutch. Under orders from King William and the Prussian General Charles Bernard, Duke of Saxe Weimar, the Dutch general David Henrik Chasse opened fire upon the city of Antwerp following a skirmish with an unruly band of Belgian revolutionaries. 92 civilians were killed in the ensuing bombardment and many hundreds were left homeless as a raging fire swept through the city in its aftermath.

    Incensed at the maliciousness of the Dutch, the Belgian National Congress explicitly excluded the House of Orange-Nassau any claim to the new throne of Belgium in perpetuity. Their own choice for a native Belgian king was also foiled when Count Felix de Merode refused any consideration for the Crown as he considered himself unworthy of. Similarly, the Duke of Arenberg, Prosper Louis exhibited little interest in serving as King of Belgium despite the support he received from the Church. It was clear that a foreign noble would be required to resolve their King dilemma, and so the Congress was called to vote on the prospective candidates for the Belgian throne. For their first round of voting, there were three candidates; the Duc de Nemours, the Duke of Leuchtenberg, and the Duke of Teschen.

    The first and most popular choice voted on by the delegates was the French Prince Louis de Orleans, Duc de Nemours who received a total of 97 votes out of a total of 190. Prince Louis was the second son of the new French King Louis-Philippe, which would provide Belgium with a strong connection to their closest and most obvious ally in France. However, as Prince Louis was still a minor at 16 years, the decision was left to his father the King. Unfortunately, due to the intense diplomatic pressure from Britain and Austria, Louis-Philippe was forced to decline the honor for his son despite his own interest in the Belgian monarchy. To the Governments of Britain and Austria, the assumption of Prince Louis to the throne of Belgium would be akin to the French annexation of Belgium in its entirety. For France to so blatantly expand its influence into the Netherlands while simultaneously working to expand its influence in Italy through the Carbonari would be simply unacceptable to them and tantamount to war. And so, the Duke of Nemours and his father were forced to decline the offer.

    With the Duke of Nemours removed from consideration, the Congress was forced to approach their second choice Auguste de Beauharnais, Duke of Leuchtenberg who had received 74 votes. Auguste Beauharnais was the oldest son of Eugene de Beauharnais, the former step son of Emperor Napoleon and Viceroy of the Kingdom of Italy. It was this very relationship that would ultimately cost the Duke of Leuchtenberg any possibility of having the Belgian throne. As part of King Louis-Philippe’s agreement with Britain and Austria, his son Prince Louis would renounce his candidacy for the Belgian throne provided they blocked Auguste de Beauharnais from assuming the Belgian throne in the event he was chosen. Ultimately, when the powers made known their opposition to the Duke of Leuchtenberg's candidacy, the Belgian Government was forced to rescind their offer.

    Their third choice, Archduke Charles of Austria, Duke of Teschen was similarly blocked from ascending the Belgian throne, this time by Chancellor Metternich and the Austrian Government who did not want a Hapsburg to accept a crown from the gutter. Without a king, the Belgian National Congress selected the Belgian Baron Erasme-Louis Surlet de Chokier to serve as regent until a proper choice could be selected by the National Congress and approved by the powers. With their first three candidates unacceptable to the Powers that be, the National Congress was forced to look at a second batch of candidates; Prince Charles Ferdinand of the Two Sicilies, Prince Otto of Bavaria, and Prince John of Saxony. Almost immediately, Prince John of Saxony was forced to decline given his status as his brother’s, King Frederick Augustus’ heir and the preposition of a union between Saxony and Belgium proved to be unattractive to both parties. Prince Charles Ferdinand of the Two Sicilies would also prove unacceptable to the Belgians who were in opposition to his family’s history of reactionary rulers. King Louis-Philippe had also started to distance himself from him given his burgeoning support for the exiled Duchess of Berry and her son the Comte de Chambord.

    By May 1831, the only candidate remaining was Prince Otto of Bavaria. Prince Otto was generally considered to be an acceptable choice for the Belgian Government as he came from a devoutly Catholic family and his father had exhibited liberal leanings in the past, which many hoped would carry over to his son. The only point of contention was his young age, at 15 years he would necessitate the establishment of a regency until his 20th birthday. King Louis-Philippe even gave his approval of the Bavarian Prince’s candidacy, even going so far as to offer one of his daughters in marriage to young Otto should he become King of Belgium. Austria was generally amenable as well given Prince Otto’s relation to his uncle, Emperor Francis I of Austria and his wife Princess Caroline of Bavaria, Otto’s Aunt. Prussia similarly shared a dynastic connection to Bavaria through the Crown Prince Frederick Wilhelm and his wife, Princess Elisabeth Ludovika of Bavaria, another one of Otto’s aunts. While they remained unhappy with the developments in Belgium, their opposition was based primarily on their alliance with the Netherlands, rather than any wrongdoing on Prince Otto’s part. Britain remained entirely unconvinced however leaving the Powers and the Belgians at a standstill.

    250px-Prinz_Otto_von_Bayern_Koenig_von_Griechenland_1833.jpg

    Prince Otto of Bavaria


    With none of the prospective Princes amenable to the Powers, Belgium would continue without a King leaving many to fear the eventual reconquest of the country by the Dutch. In response, France changed tactics and put forward a plan calling for the partition of the Belgian territory among its three neighbors, France, Prussia, and the Netherlands. The southern half of the country, including much of East Flanders, all of Brabant, Hainaut, and Namur west of the Meuse would be ceded to France. Prussia would receive Liege, parts of Limburg East of the Meuse, and parts of Namur East of the Meuse. The Netherlands would receive the province of Antwerp, barring Antwerp itself, parts of Limburg West of the Meuse, and parts of Brabant in the North of the Province. Lastly, an autonomous protectorate comprising the remaining territory of Antwerp and Flanders under the protection of Britain would be created as well. This plan was rejected out of hand by the other Powers as a blatant land grab by France, yet strangely enough the partition plan worked to bring the Powers into agreement on Belgium’s independence.

    Fearing French expansion as the alternative to the independence of Belgium, the ailing British Prime Minister George Canning and his government finally abandoned their opposition to Prince Otto as a means of mitigating French gains in the region. Though they remained unhappy with the outcome, the only other option was war, which remained equally unpopular in Parliament. Prussia also gave up its intentions of preserving the territorial integrity of the Netherlands and joined with the rest in supporting Belgian independence, albeit begrudgingly. Signing the Treaty of London, Austria, Britain, France, Prussia, and Russia called for the declaration of an independent Belgium with Prince Otto of Bavaria as its first king. With the Powers reconciled to their decision, the Belgian National Congress dispatched their offer to Prince Otto and after little debate, he accepted on the 10th of July.[3] Four weeks later, on the 7th of August, Prince Otto entered the country at Verviers in an open top carriage and a company of Bavarian cavalrymen at his back.

    The King elect and his escort proceeded quickly to Brussels where he was met by the Count de Sauvage, Baron d’Hooghvorst, and a contingent of the Belgian Civic Guard who directed the Prince’s carriage through the city towards the Place Royale (Royal Square) and the entrance of the church Saint Jacques-sur-Coundenberg. All along the road were throngs of people cheering and cajoling as the Bavarian Prince’s carriage passed through. The Belgian soldiers lining the road were adorned with their finest uniforms and their impressive black cockades making them a sight to behold to the common man, but they paled in comparison to the elaborately adorned soldiers Otto had brought with him. The black, red, and yellow flags of Belgium flew high and mightily over the city of Brussels, trumpets blared in triumph, the people sang and danced with great passion and vigor. Finally reaching the steps of the church, Prince Otto of Bavaria was crowned King of Belgium before an adoring crowd.

    Not all were impressed by the boy King, as not a moment sooner than the end of Otto’s coronation did a Dutch army 45,000 strong invade Belgium on the 10th of August. Crossing the border near Poppel, the Dutch quickly overwhelmed what little defenses existed along the border capturing the city of Turnhout, before advancing on Antwerp which would similarly fall two days later on the 12th. The invasion by the Dutch was in direct defiance of the Treaty of London establishing Belgium as an independent state, it was also a move meant to disrupt King Otto’s acclimation to his new country as well. By throwing the nascent kingdom into chaos immediately, King William hoped to destabilize it and reassert his control over the whole of the Southern Netherlands.

    As he was still a minor at only 16 years, King Otto was forced to rely extensively on his advisors Baron d’Hooghvorst, Amedee de Felly, and the Bavarian general William von Le Suire who proposed marching the Belgian army North to confront the Dutch, rather than calling on the British and French for aid. Morale for the Belgian soldiers remained high following their victories against the Dutch the previous September and volunteers assembled at Brussels in droves ready to confront their oppressors as it was strongly believed they would win their independence by their own hands. Two armies were prepared for the Belgian counterattack, the Army of the Meuse, stationed near Tongeren would advance on Maastricht, while another army, the Army of the Scheldt assembled outside Brussels, would move to counter the Dutch coming from Antwerp. It was a risky plan as it effectively allowed the Dutch to cut them off from one another, but they could not allow the Dutch to roam freely in both the North and East of the country. As predicted this is precisely what happened.

    Over confident of their own success, the Belgian Army of the Meuse quickly outpaced their meager artillery train during their march on Maastricht on the 14th of August. Reaching the outskirts of the city around noon, they soon encountered 2 Divisions of the Dutch army who had sortied from Maastricht’s citadel to meet the approaching Belgians. The Belgians surprisingly managed to match the Dutch soldiers blow for blow initially despite being outnumbered 20,000 to 12,000, lacking both artillery and cavalry, and fielding poorly trained militia against professionally trained soldiers. However, the arrival of a third Dutch Division, coming from the Southeast quickly changed that as this division's advance threatened to surround the already overly stretched Belgians.

    They were only spared from complete annihilation by the sacrifice of the Civic Guard which acted as a rearguard while the main army attempted to escape back the way it came. Despite their valor and ferocity, the militiamen of the Civic Guard were completely outmatched and quickly eviscerated by the Dutch soldiers forcing their surrender after all of twenty minutes. The ensuing chase of the reduced Army of the Meuse was just as bad for the Belgians with many men and boys falling on the road as the Dutch cavalrymen cut them down as they fled. The slaughter was only curtailed by the coming of nightfall and the protection of Tongeren’s guns. Out of a starting strength of 12,000 men for the Army of the Meuse nearly 3,000 men were lost, most of whom were captured, and another 3,000 were wounded. The Dutch for their part lost all of 600 men, with an unknown number of wounded although it was presumably low.

    600px-Cut_out_of_Overwinning_voor_Leuven%2C_op_den_12den_Augustus_1831.jpg

    The Dutch Rout the Belgians at Maastricht

    The Belgian army of the Scheldt met with similar results as they were defeated along the banks of the Nete river where the Dutch had encamped themselves. Rather than wait for the Orangemen to make the attack themselves, the overeager Belgians rushed across the narrow bridge North of Mechelen. While the Dutch were initially caught off guard by the brash tactics of the Belgian fighters, they were quickly rallied by Prince William and eventually managed to push them back across the river. Like the army of the Meuse, the Army of the Scheldt also lacked any measurable artillery beyond a handful of old 12 pounders. Their cavalry contingent also paled in comparison to that of the Dutch army, and in the ensuing chase back to Brussels, hundreds of Belgian men and boys were cut down while fleeing.

    Faced with the collapse of both his armies, King Otto and the Belgian government were forced to call upon the Powers to intervene. Two days later on the 18th of August, Marshal Etienne Maurice Gerard and 60,000 French soldiers crossed the border into Belgium and promptly forced the Dutch army to retreat to their original lines eight days earlier. By the end of the 20th of August, a tentative peace had settled across Belgium. King Otto’s problems did not end there however. While he had succeeded in saving his country, albeit through the military aid of the French, the previous ten days had been a complete humiliation for him and Belgium, one they would not soon forget.

    The French intervention in Belgium had also reignited the fears of French dominance of the continent and in the ensuing peace talks, the terms given to Holland were much more favorable than the previous terms issued in the London Conference several months before. Parts of Limburg on the Eastern bank of the Meuse were to be returned to the Netherlands under the new treaty. In addition, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was to be divided with the Western half remaining under Belgian control, and the Eastern half being returned to the Netherlands. The southern bank of the Western Scheldt which was presently occupied by the Belgium as well was also to be returned to Holland. This represented a significant reduction in the territorial extent of Belgium as both the Eastern halves of Limburg and Luxembourg had been assigned to an independent Belgium under the earlier Treaty of London. These revisions did not sit well with King Otto or the Belgian Government, but as they still required the Powers support against the Netherlands, there was very little they could do to change it without upsetting their benefactors.

    While Otto and Belgium would reluctantly acquiesce to the terms established in the New Treaty of London, William and the Netherlands would not, as he pointedly refused to withdraw from the Belgian territory still under his control, namely Antwerp, Brecht, and Turnhout. After several months of continued resistance to the Power’s demands to vacate from Belgian territory, French soldiers were ordered to dislodge him beginning the siege of Antwerp in February 1832. The siege would last for little over two months and result in the destruction of several dikes in the area by both sides intentionally and unintentionally. Nevertheless, the outcome of the endeavor was never in any serious doubt as the French ultimately secured all of Antwerp by early April, even still King William refused to abide by the Treaty of London’s terms. Tired of the whole endeavor, the French and the British allowed the Belgian government to administer the territories of Limburg, Luxembourg, and Zeeland under its control until the Netherlands agreed to evacuate the cities and fortresses still under its control in Belgium.

    600px-Citadelle_d%27Anvers_apr%C3%A8s_le_bombardement_de_1832.jpg

    The Siege of Antwerp

    Next Time: Ruination
    [1] La Muette de Portici was a play about the failed 1647 Neapolitan insurrection against the Spanish king. The play had been written by the playwright Daniel Auber and debuted in 1828, making it quite popular in the time before the Belgian Revolution. Due to the unrest in Belgium before the Revolution, the play had been temporarily banned until the King’s birthday on the 24th of August. Surprisingly, King William really liked the play which is ironic given its role in sparking the Belgian Revolution against him.

    [2] The Belgian Provisional Government were afraid of having their merchants and their goods barred from the lucrative Dutch and Indonesian markets. That said, they quickly got over their fears when the Dutch continued to bombard Antwerp killing several civilians and leaving hundreds more homeless and destitute.

    [3] Leopold as he was known to do, took his time considering the offer from the Belgian National Congress. It took nearly two before he finally accepted the Belgian offer to become their King and it would be another four weeks before he actually arrived in the country and had his coronation.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 42: Ruination
  • Part 42: Ruination


    Batak-klane-Piotorvskii-1889.jpg

    The Ruin of Tirana

    With the War against Egypt over, the full attention of the Ottoman Empire shifted from the Levant back to the Balkans and the fledgling states that had dared to assert their independence from the Empire. Thanks to Egyptian interference, the rebel Beys and Ayans of Albania and Bosnia, who had originally risen to protest the various reforms Sultan Mahmud had enacted, now stood poised to establish themselves as independent entities. During the lull in the fighting caused by the Syrian War, the rebels managed to establish their own provisional governments and their own institutions.

    In Albania, Mustafa Bushatli Pasha of Shkoder became the de facto leader of the Albanian rebels in the North. His influence did not extend across all of Albania though, as the South remained loosely coalesced around the many Beys and chieftains of the region. In Bosnia, the Ayan Husein Gradascevic was proclaimed Vizier of Bosnia and entrusted with the complete military and civilian power of the self-declared Bosnian state. Gradascevic was not universally accepted though as many Southern Ayans in Herzegovina opposed him in remaining loyal to the Porte. However, without any substantial support from the Ottoman Government, many were killed and the rest were forced to flee over the past year solidifying Gradascevic’s hold on power. Thanks to the cooperation of the Albanians and the Bosnians, both groups had achieved impressive results as nearly all the territory comprising the Eyalets of Bosnia, Scutari, and Yanina had fallen to the rebels by the end of 1831.

    With the signing of the Treaty of Kutahya in mid-1832, however, Egypt had ceased hostilities with the Porte allowing the Ottoman armies to turn West. Some of the older Albanian and Bosnian leaders were rightfully concerned at this development, but many were unconvinced. Had they not successfully driven the Ottomans from their villages, and their hills. Had they not successfully defeated them in battle despite numerical inferiority at Novi Pazar and Stimlje, Kastoria, Mestovo, and Kraste. The poor performance of the Ottomans during the war with the Greeks, the war with the Russians, and the war with Egypt had clearly left an impression of ineptitude and poor martial ability on the part of their Turkish adversaries. To say they had become over confident would be an understatement, however.

    While the Ottomans had certainly been beaten over the past few years, they were far from defeated. The reforms which had originally sparked the Albanians and Bosnians to revolt had also begun to take root in the Ottoman military, restoring discipline, order, and fighting spirit to the Sultan’s soldiers and sailors. Within weeks of the treaty’s signing, tens of thousands of battle hardened Ottoman troops flooded into the Balkans ready to quash the treacherous Albanians and Bosnians. First to arrive in the region was the army of Emin Pasha.

    After a brief layover in Monastir, Emin Pasha’s army advanced on the Qafe Thane on the far side of lake Ohrid. As it was the most direct route into the Albanian interior, its capture by the Ottoman army was paramount to any future efforts to control the region, similarly, for the Albanians its protection was necessary to the defense of Albania. Following the old Roman road, the Via Egnatia, the Ottoman army quickly advanced westward into the highlands overlooking Ohrid. The craggy mountain road proved to be an ideal sight for an ambush as hundreds of Albanian men and boys, bandits and mercenaries, farmers and herders waited in the rocks above the pass. When the Ottomans finally arrived on the 10th of June, nearly 4,000 Albanians had assembled to oppose them under the tenuous command of the Tepelenian fighter Tafil Buzi. Despite being outnumbered 5 to 1, the Albanians, used the tight confines of the pass to their advantage. Seeking to entrap the Turkish force in the hills where it could be systematically destroyed, Tafil Buzi dispatched a second band of Albanians on an end around to the North, before coming down behind the Ottoman force.

    Before they could close the vice, however, the over anxious Albanians revealed their positions prematurely alerting the Ottomans to their presence. With the element of surprise lost, Emin Pasha was able to successfully counter the approaching Albanians before managing to safely withdraw back the way he came to Ohrid. Though they had won the day and inflicted terrible losses on their adversary, the Albanians had failed to destroy the Ottoman force as planned costing them an opportunity they could ill afford to lose. The Albanians and Bosnians achieved better results to the North, where Gradascevic and his men successfully routed an Ottoman army under Ali Pasha of Stolac near the city of Pristina.


    520px-Hercegovci_u_zasedi%2C_Srbadija.jpg

    The Albanians at the Pass of Thana

    The victories over the Ottomans at Thana and Pristina bought the rebels precious time to negotiate a ceasefire with the Sublime Porte and the Powers. While the Sultan and his emissaries made promises of compromises and diplomatic solutions, their actions betrayed their words, when another army of Ottoman soldiers under Grand Vizier Khosref Pasha began attacking the rebel’s positions near Pristina. It was clear that the Sultan had no interest in meeting any of their demands and that war was their only choice now. With peace no longer an option, the rebels turned to the Powers for assistance against the Porte. The Powers had other ideas, however.

    While France was sympathetic to their plight and Russia was always interested in weakening the Turks provided it worked to their benefit, the Austrians, Prussians, and British were firmly against any initiative to aid the rebels. Metternich, true to form, continued to resist any efforts to aid rebels or respect the rights of nationalities, lest he provoke the many disparate peoples of his own country to rebellion. Prussia took a similar tact as Austria and remained thoroughly opposed to aiding the rebel Albanians and Bosnians but it would be Britain’s reaction which would prove to be the most surprising, given the Canningite ministry’s earlier support of the Greeks against the Ottomans. This change was the direct result of the poor showing by the Ottomans in the Syrian War with Egypt, which provoked fears of the Porte’s imminent collapse should any additional territory be carved off in such a manner. King William IV and many prominent Tories had also been displeased with the British actions in favor of the Greeks during their war for independence and pressed upon Canning and his ministry to conduct themselves accordingly, resulting in the more restrained approach to the Albanians and Bosnians.

    While certainly not the deathblow some proclaimed it to be, the lack of support of any kind from the Powers crushed the morale of the Albanian and Bosnian rebels who had hoped for an intervention on their behalf. Their situation was made worse by the collapse of their defensive positions in Kosovo in late December. The region around Pristina had served as the link between the two groups, with Pristina serving as their primary redoubt in the region. While a secondary route through the hills still existed through the village of Pec, that too was cut off by early January effectively cutting the two off from one another by land. The Ottomans had also started to break through the Albanian’s defenses at Qafe Thane on the 15th of January and would begin attacking the Qafa e Valbones Northeast of Shkoder a few weeks later in February. The rebels still managed to resist the Ottomans with some success in the far South in the Mestovo pass and around Kastoria, thanks in part to Greek border which anchored the Albanian frontier, but it was clear that the rebellion was in dire straits.

    Compelled to defeat the Ottomans on his doorstep or die trying, Husein Gradascevic and an army of 40,000 Bosnians march south from Sarajevo to combat the Turks near the town of Sjenica. Though they were relatively matched numerically, the Bosnians were comprised primarily of bandits, private bodyguards, and volunteers rather than actual soldiers with any extensive training or discipline. They also lacked in cavalry beyond those in Gradascevic’s and the Ayan’s personal guard. The Ottoman force, armed with the latest weaponry available, bloodied from many months battling the Egyptians, and trained along modern European lines was a decidedly more lethal instrument than their Bosnian counterpart, making the ensuing battle a complete catastrophe for the Bosnian Ayans. In the ensuing carnage, nearly a third of the Bosnian host would be lost with over 4,000 being slain and another 9,000 being captured.

    554px-Turkish_troops_storming_Fort_Shefketil_%28cropped%29.jpg

    The Siege of Sarajevo

    This disaster nearly threatened to unravel the entire rebellion, with even Gradascevic himself considering fleeing while he had the chance. Spurred on by the continued resistance of his Albanian allies and the tepid promises of support from the Egyptians, Gradascevic gathered a second army to oppose the Ottomans outside Sarajevo.[1] The outcome of the battle was technically a Bosnian victory as the Turks were driven from the field of battle, but would later return nine days later with fresh reinforcements, forcing the depleted Bosnian army to retreat behind their walls. The situation now decidedly against him, Gradascevic attempted to escape, but was quickly forced back to Sarajevo when he was discovered by Turkish scouts. With no other option, Gradascevic dispatched his emissaries to negotiate a peaceful surrender to avoid any further bloodshed. In return for the safe passage of he and his family to Austria and permitting his followers to keep their arms and remaining properties, Gradascevic would surrender Sarajevo and all of Bosnia to the Sublime Porte. He would be sorely disappointed by the Turkish response.

    Less than an hour later, the Ottoman envoy arrived bearing Grand Vizier Khosref Pasha’s terms which were short, terse, and to the point. The Porte would only accept the unconditional surrender of the rebel Ayans. All arms and munitions were to be handed over immediately, the city - and the rest of Bosnia - would be governed by officials appointed directly by the Sublime Porte, the rights of the Ayans were diminished to the point of irrelevance, and Gradascevic and his officers would be transported to Constantinople where they would be imprisoned, with Gradascevic likely facing death as a traitor. Any resistance to these terms would be met with a resumption of hostilities and any delay in accepting the terms would be met with cannon fire. The Ottoman’s hardline stance was driven in part to reaffirm the Sultan’s reform policies of centralizing the state at the expense of the provincial Ayans, Beys, and Pashas. Lest the Empire face upheaval again in another time of troubles or weakness, the Ayans and Beys of both Bosnia and Albania must be dealt with now and they must be dealt with overwhelmingly so that they never rise again against the Empire.

    With it abundantly clear that no help was incoming and escape no longer an option, Gradascevic and the few remaining Bosnian Ayans trapped inside Sarajevo surrendered to the Grand Vizier’s army on the 9th of May 1833. Some Bosnian rebels would continue the fight against the Ottomans deep into the mountains and hills for months on end, but within days of Sarajevo’s fall, the majority of Bosnia would return to Ottoman rule either peacefully or through force. That was not the case to the South in Albania where the fighting continued with great intensity well into 1833 and 1834. The siege of Tirana would prove to be especially brutal, and have lasting effects on the region for decades to come.

    Husein_Grada%C5%A1%C4%8Devi%C4%87.jpg

    Husein Gradascevic, Vizier of the Revolutionary State of Bosnia

    Following the defeat of the Albanians at the Qafe Thane in early February, the Ottomans advanced methodically towards the city of Elbasan in the center of the rebel country. At roughly 10,000 people it was among the larger settlements in Albania and it provided the rebels with a strong defensive position against the East. The Albanians had also assembled most of their fighters in and around Elbasan in an effort to blunt the Ottoman offensive into their land, still at roughly 6,000 men and boys, they paled in comparison to the now 35,000 Ottoman soldiers marching against them. Their efforts to repel them at Hotolisht was thrown back with minor losses, and their attempt to ambush them at Librazhd almost ended in disaster. By the end of March, the Albanians had been pushed into Elbasan itself with the Ottomans swarming before its walls like moths to an open flame. Despite their gallantry and steadfastness to their cause, the Albanians were defeated and Elbasan was reconquered by the Ottomans after a six-week long siege.

    The Albanians attempts to defeat the Ottomans in the Krraba Pass met with similar results and in early June the Ottomans had reached the makeshift Albanian capital of Tirana. Unaware of Gradascevic’s surrender and the fall of Bosnia, the Albanians would resist the Ottomans defiantly for many months, harrying their supply lines, making raids upon their camp, and sortieing with vigor and tenacity. Despite their valor, the Albanians were clearly outmatched and had little chance of actually achieving victory. Their only hope was to bloody the Ottomans to the point where they would offer more lenient terms to the rebels. It was a bold hope, but also a fool’s hope as the Ottomans became increasingly irate at the resistance of the Albanians, the rising casualties among their ranks did little to ease their anger towards the rebels either. Albanian prisoners were often treated poorly, with many being beaten, tortured, or even killed in some rare instances, the Albanian civilian populace fared little better as villages were burnt to the ground as reprisals for raids on the Ottoman camp, and those suspected of supporting partisans were hung.

    By early September though, things began to turn against the Ottomans as the winter storms came early that year. Within days, the rains had made a mess of the Ottoman camp turning the already poor conditions into a squalid mess ripe for disease. Typhus would be the most destructive as men fell by the hundreds to the disease as it raced through the Ottoman ranks slowing their progress against Tirana to a halt.[2] Unfortunately, the illness soon spread to the Albanians as well when they captured several infected Turkish soldiers during a nighttime raid on the Ottoman camp. Before they knew what hit them, the disease had spread through their own ranks mitigating many of the gains they had achieved over their weakened foe. Sadly, for all, the disease would not stop with the Albanians of Tirana, and would manage to escape its wall to the people of the countryside as well. The illness would find good ground in the war-torn land with the impoverished and famished people ripe for reaping.

    After seven months of starvation, disease, and attacks, the city’s garrison had dwindled to barely a third its original size, the city’s civilian population didn’t fare much better, suffering close to 4,000 dead. Exhausted, starving, and overwhelmed, the last few Albanians surrendered the ruined city of Tirana on the 29th of January 1834. This scene would repeat itself at Berat and Durres although by this time, the fire had clearly gone out in the Albanian cause. Mustafa Bushatli Pasha would himself surrender in April after a brief month-long siege upon receiving lenient terms while Ioannina, Korce, Vlora, and many of the remaining cities in the South would similarly surrender to the Ottomans, handing over their treacherous lords and their followers to face the Sultan’s wrath in return for mercy and an end to the fighting.

    Some were indeed put to death for their actions, although not by the Sultan or his men, but by the Albanian people themselves for leading them into the current disaster which plagued their lands. Only Gradascevic would meet with death, and even then some assume it was by disease rather than the agents of the Porte. Most captive Albanians and Bosnians would live out their days imprisoned in Constantinople, or they were uplifted and moved to Anatolia where they would be of little consequence far from their base of power. Some, however, managed to flee across the borders to Greece, Serbia, or Austria.

    520px-Hercegova%C4%8Dki_begunci_1889.png

    The Refugees from Albania

    In total, some twenty-two Albanian beys, their remaining followers, and their families amounting to just below 2,800 people fled across the border into Greece seeking refuge from the Ottoman retribution against them. Some were Greeks, some were Souliotes, but most were Muslim Albanians, still King Leopold, Ioannis Kapodistrias and the Greek Government offered them sanctuary in their country provided they behaved themselves and handed over their weapons. Their hospitality nearly sparked an armed confrontation between the Greeks and the Ottomans as one of the Albanians who had fled was Arslan Bey of Ioannina, the man who originally sparked the uprising in 1830. What followed were several months of negotiation, diplomacy, and heated debate regarding what to do with the Albanian refugees with many wishing to repatriate them to the Ottoman Empire lest they incur its wrath, while many more wished to encourage them to rise in revolt once more if only to spite the Ottomans.

    Ultimately, through the use of diplomacy, King Leopold and Prime Minister Kapodistrias managed to secure an amicable solution to the predicament with the Ottoman Porte. The Albanian Beys, their families, and their followers would be allowed to remain in Greece under the condition that they be housed on Crete far from the border to prevent their continued agitation and rebellion. Some would eventually return to the Ottoman Empire once tensions had cooled and the Typhus endemic had died down, but generally most chose to stay in Greece. While tensions were initially high between the Greeks and Albanians, owing to the latter’s role in the Greek War of Independence, relations quickly improved between the two communities with the Greeks proving to be very hospitable and courteous to their new neighbors.

    In later years, the Albanian and Bosnian War of 1830-1834 would be viewed as a catastrophe for nationalists and patriots of these peoples. Over 50,000 Albanians would succumb to wounds suffered in battle or fall to the pandemic which ravaged the land and another 20,000 Bosnians, 6,000 Serbians, and 3,000 Greeks would also perish in the conflict compared to some 36,000 Ottomans. Additionally, another 12,000 Albanians and Bosnians would be forced to leave their homelands either by force or by necessity with some settling in Greece and others being relocated in Anatolia. The depopulation of the Albanian heartland would have lasting effects on the region for generations to come, with many villages and towns remaining vacant for years on end, Tirana in particular was almost completely destroyed between the siege and the ensuing Typhus endemic. The Albanians and Bosnians had also suffered irreparable harm to their autonomy and leadership which would inhibit their later attempts at revolt. The only positive effects to come from the Albanian and Bosnian Rebellions of 1830-1834 would be in the improved relations between the Albanians and the Greeks who would continue to receive a trickle of refugees for months after the final shot was fired.

    The influx of refugees provided the Kingdom of Greece with a means of filling their own depopulated regions following the Greek War for Independence. Though they would attempt to maintain their identities and distinctions from their Greek neighbors, as the years past, the younger generations began to adopt more Hellenic names and characteristics and by the 20th Century they were all but assimilated. Despite this, the Albanian refugees provided an "Illyrian" accent to Greek communities that can still be seen as late as the modern day in some regions of the country, particularly on Crete. They also provided Greece with the first stirrings of the Pan Hellenic and wider Balkans ambitions that could come to rule Greek policy many years in the future.

    Next Time: Hellas Rising
    [1] After a similar defeat in OTL, Gradascevic fled from Sarajevo to his home of Gradacac, but eventually fled from there to Austria where he would remain in exile for several months with his family, followers, and servants. Here, with the Albanians still in revolt, Gradascevic opts to continue fighting and stays in Sarajevo.

    [2] In Napoleon’s famous retreat from Russia in 1813, more French soldiers died from Typhus than died from Russian bullets. It was a truly devastating disease during the time which ravaged armies, especially those camping in poor conditions.
     
    Part 43: Hellas Rising
  • Part 43: Hellas Rising

    650px-Peter_von_Hess_-_The_Entry_of_King_Othon_of_Greece_in_Athens_-_WGA11387.jpg

    King Leopold Enters Athens

    The 1830’s would prove to be a productive decade for the Kingdom of Greece, full of great achievements, great advancements, and great milestones. Under the firm hand of King Leopold and the brilliant leadership of Prime Minister Ioannis Kapodistrias, Greece began to steadily rebuild after nine terrible years of war. The ingenuity of the Greek people was on full display as they began to thrive once more, the economy of Greece rebounded at a steady pace, and the country was in relative peace. Everywhere from Missolonghi to Heraklion saw signs of great progress, but nowhere was this burgeoning prosperity more noticeable than in the ancient city of Athens.

    Established as the official capital of the Kingdom of Greece in 1831, Athens had been relegated to a relative backwater under the Ottoman Empire who disregarded the ancient city and its illustrious past. Before the revolution, Athens had been a small city of around 11,000 people situated at the foot of the mighty Acropolis. With its narrow streets riddled with ancient ruins and much of the land owned by the clergy, it had been left to its own devices by the Sublime Porte who invested little in the city or the surrounding region. With the coming of independence, however, Athens began to blossom into the great city it would become once more.

    During the war, Athens would be the scene of one of the great early victories by the Greeks over their Ottoman oppressors in 1822 with the surrender of the Acropolis and the Turkish garrison after a long and grueling siege. With its freedom achieved, Athens would become a bastion of Greek liberty in Southern Rumelia that would remain steadfast against Ottoman incursions into the South. Following the war, through the process of land reform and autocephaly, the clergy were made to sell their land to the Greek State leading to its development and cultivation by the people and the Government began the long and grueling endeavor of moving their agencies, institutions, and ministries from the old capital of Nafplion to Athens over the course of several long years. Displaced refugees with nowhere to return to and rural Greeks from the countryside seeking work settled in Athens by the thousands, boosting the population of the city from just below 8,000 in 1830 to over 15,000 in 1834. Still, more was needed to update the city from a quaint medieval town into a modern capital city.

    To that end, Kapodistrias called upon the Greek Architect Stamatios Kleanthis and his Prussian partner Eduard Schaubert to survey and design a new urban plan for Athens.[1] Making efforts to respect the extensive heritage of the site, Kleanthis and Schaubert painstakingly recorded every ancient ruin, every Byzantine structure, and every contemporary building of the city. The proposal that they landed upon was a neoclassical city with expansive vistas which perfectly portrayed the ancient and medieval wonders of the city in an elegant light while providing the necessities for a modern metropolis. The site would encompass the Northern half of the old city with the New City expanding to the North, East, and West of the Acropolis, while the Southern half of the Old City would be left vacant to preserve its relics and ruins for future archaeological purposes. New buildings were constructed to accommodate the Legislature and the Judiciary, while a relatively grand palace was built to house the King, his family, and his court on the Northern edge of the city. Barracks for the royal guard and gendarmeries were located near the palace, while an expansive market would be placed in the center of the city. The streets were to be widened to allow heavy foot traffic through the city, while gardens and parks were planted across the town to complement the already beautiful panorama of Athens.

    Unfortunately, Kleanthis’ and Schaubert’s plan called for the demolition of numerous buildings to clear the necessary space for the three main avenues and the new structures laid out in their proposal. Understandably, this met with intense resistance by the people of Athens themselves as many were faced with destitution following the Government's failure to fully reimburse or adequately move the affected populace. Work was quickly halted due to a series of protests and demonstrations all across the city and while the unrest would eventually be quelled by the local authorities, the point had been made. Another problem which immediately emerged was financing. While the Government would receive the second installment of the French loan in 1832 and the third installment in 1833, the Greek Government simply had too many other expenditures to fully meet Kleanthis’ and Schaubert’s proposals. Without adequate funding the pair were forced to cut back on the more elaborate and grandiose embellishments of their plan for the time being.

    After some slight modifications to their plans, a second revised city plan was presented to Kapodistrias and Leopold which was summarily approved. The setting of the royal palace was also relocated from the North to a defile running along the Eastern edge of the city between the Acropolis and Mount Lycabettus and the gardens were sheared down extensively to help cut down on costs. The palace itself was similarly curtailed from the massive abode it was originally envisioned to a more modest venue, although it was still quite impressive compared to the humble houses of the Athenians. The existing roads were to be widened and repaired, rather than replacing them entirely with new avenues. While some continued Athenians remained displeased, the plan went ahead in 1833.

    TX1_05.jpg

    Kleanthis’ and Schaubert’s revised plan for Athens

    Kleanthis and Schaubert would be tasked with their most delicate project three years later in 1836, when the pair along with the Danish architect Hans Christian Hansen and the Scottish archaeologist Ludwig Ross, partially restored the Temple of Athena Nike on the Acropolis.[2] As with everything they had done thus far, Kleanthis and Schaubert took great care to protect the ancient temple from further degradation. Other architects and engineers like Hans Christian Hansen, his brother Baron Theophil Edvard von Hansen, and the Greek architect Panagis Kalkos would be responsible for the design and construction of other important structures around the capital such as the Athenian Mint, the University of Athens, the National Observatory, and the Parliament building along with many others. In addition to their work in Athens, Kleanthis, Schaubert, and several other architects were also commissioned to modernize the port of Piraeus and the coastal town of Eretria near Aliveri during this time in preparation for the looming industrialization of the region.

    In March 1832, public and private investors established the Aliveri Coal Company (EAK), a privately-owned coal mining entity headquartered in the town of Aliveri. Two months later in May, representatives of the Greek Government together with private interests established the Dirfys Iron Company (DES) and tasked it with conducting iron mining operations in the area around Dirfys. In June 1832, the EAK signed a contract with the Greek Government permitting the EAK to conduct mining operations near Aliveri, while the DES was granted a similar permit to mine the iron deposits near Dirfys later that year in September. With the legal intricacies settled, the EAK and the DES were provided with interest free loans from the Greek Government allowing the companies to begin hiring workers and purchasing equipment and by the end of May 1833 both mines were fully operational. Problems quickly began to arise for both companies however.

    The coal was overwhelmingly lignite, rather than the more lucrative anthracite coal, making its profitability much lower than anticipated. Because of this, any plans to trade the coal overseas were immediately dashed and were instead refocused towards domestic use. Production of the coal was also disappointing at roughly 11,000 tons in its first full year due to problems with breaking equipment and labor shortages among other things. The iron ore production was worse at roughly 8,000 tons in the first 12 months the Dirfys mine was open, although this shortfall was made up somewhat with another 2,000 tons of nickel in that same time. Over time though these production totals would gradually increase as deficiencies in the mining process were worked out of their systems and more workers were brought in to mine. As a result, the coal mine at Aliveri would reach a per annum total of 23,000 tons in 1840, while the mine at Dirfys would produce 19,000 tons of iron ore and 6,000 tons of nickel per annum in that same time.[3] Nearly 1,300 Greeks would be directly employed as miners, engineers, administrators, or managers by the two mining companies while another 500 people would be employed in service vocations supporting the miners as doctors, nurses, entertainers, cooks, etc.

    Other mines and quarries would soon begin appearing across Greece in the following years as the success of the Euboean mines became evident. The ancient silver mines at Laurium to the southeast of Athens were reopened in 1839 after being closed for nearly 1,200 years and the marble quarry on the island of Paros was reopened by the architect Stamatios Kleanthis in 1838. Uses for these minerals was usually predetermined well before they left the ground, with the nickel and silver primarily being allocated for the minting of the Greek currency, the Phoenix, while the marble among other things was used extensively in the construction of various monuments and palaces across the country. Some of the coal would go towards residential and commercial heating, but a significant portion was directed towards the new smelting facilities at Chalcis along with the iron ore following the completion of the facility in November 1836, where it was summarily worked into usable products like wrought and cast iron. While most of the iron wares were used on more mundane commodities like farm plows, some of the higher quality cast iron was forged into rail tracks for locomotives.

    In 1835 the Athens Railway Company (ESA) was established by the Greek government and private investors, with one of the largest investors being King Leopold himself. The ESA was charged with constructing, running, and performing general maintenance on the railways throughout the Nomos of Attica-Boeotia, although in truth its scope was focused primarily on Athens and its immediate environs. The Greek Government had pushed ahead with efforts to construct their own railway running from Athens to Piraeus in an effort to jumpstart development of the capital region and spur economic growth. While it was technically a private entity run by an independent Governing Board, King Leopold was officially named as the Company’s Honorary President as he was the single largest shareholder in the company and had been instrumental in pushing for the development of railways in Greece.

    The Greek Government also supervised the ESA’s initiatives with constant oversight and relatively fair, but firm regulations. Additionally, the State provided generous loans to the company and provided military engineers to help survey an optimal route from Athens to Piraeus. With the ESA organized, the Greek Government pushed ahead with efforts to begin construction of the Athens-Piraeus Railway. A permit was agreed to with the ESA allowing them the right to begin constructing the railway once the appropriate money and resources had been gathered. Like all good plans though, it would take until the end of October 1839 before the first line of track would be laid and the first spike hammered into place, but upon its completion in 1847 it would show immediate dividends.

    550px-Construction_of_the_Athens-Piraeus_highway%2C_1835-36.jpg

    Construction of the Athens-Piraeus Railway

    Other lucrative initiatives came at sea with the founding of the Hellenic Steamship Company (EEA) in 1837 by former British Philhellene turned entrepreneurial steamship captain Frank Abney Hastings. Faced with little prospects at home in Britain, Captain Hastings chose to remain in Greece after the war’s end. His career in the Hellenic Navy would unfortunately be ended prematurely by a freak training accident forcing him to retire from active duty. For the next few years, Hastings spent his time as a naval advisor to King Leopold and the Greek Government in Athens and as an instructor at the Hellenic Naval Academy at Piraeus. He would not stay retired long, however, as the call of the sea spurred him to return to the water once again. Investing the entirety of his fortune, Captain Hastings would establish a private steamship company, the EEA, with the approval of King Leopold, Prime Minister Kapodistrias and the Greek Government in 1837. Though it started small at first, Captain Hasting’s company would quickly begin to grow as steamships baring the EEA's colors could be seen operating across the Aegean, Ionian, Adriatic, and Eastern Mediterranean Seas making him an incredibly wealthy man.

    Captain Hastings wasn’t the only man to earn a great fortune during the middling years of the 19th century. Various land barons and plantation owners became incredibly wealthy selling Greek cotton, olives, grapes, oils, and wines to a European market in great demand of such products. A small, but relatively competitive textile industry emerged across the countryside, while sponge fishing became an incredibly profitable business for many of the islands. Greek ships once again dominated the waves of the Eastern Mediterranean with Greek merchants found far and wide. Greece also became an increasingly popular venue for young noblemen making their grand tours of Europe, with the ancient ruins and magnificent vistas making for an excellent travel experience. Very soon an entire industry began to emerge in Greece, devoted to the service and support of theses tourists. Because of all these initiatives, the Greek economy made great strides by the end of the 1830’s with the Greek Government achieving its first balanced budget in 1838. The 1830’s were not entirely without their trials, however, as they had their fair share of frustration and disappointments. Nowhere was this more evident than in their dealings with the Ottoman Empire.

    Fearing the loss of his Greek subjects to the nascent Kingdom of Greece and citing reports of Greek support for the rebel Albanians and Bosnians, Sultan Mahmud II imposed heavy sanctions upon all trade with the nascent Kingdom of Greece.[5] Ships flying the Greek ensign were barred from Ottoman ports, Greek merchants were subject to terrible tariffs which threatened to bankrupt them, and immigration to the Kingdom of Greece was strictly prohibited. As trade remained the lifeblood of the Greek economy, this matter was extremely important to Leopold and the Greek Government. The matter was made worse by the flight of nearly three thousand Albanians along with 22 Rebel Beys to Greece in 1834. Faced with calls by the Ottoman envoy to hand over the rebel beys or risk a further deterioration of relations, Leopold was put in a terrible bind.

    The kinship shared between the Albanians and Greeks, along with the matter of Greek pride demanded Leopold protect the Albanian refugees against the malice of the Porte, no matter the cost and yet Leopold recognized the heavy cost Greece would likely bare should worst come to worst and war be declared. Unwilling to press the issue more than was necessary as some of his more boisterous advisors desired, King Leopold sought to make amends with the Sublime Porte and began seeking a compromise. Impressed by the tact and diplomatic acumen of King Leopold, Sultan Mahmud relented and the Porte finally came to an agreement with the Greek Government.

    The sanctions against Greek merchants would be eased and the Albanian refugees would be permitted to remain in Greece if they so choose, provided the Beys be confined to Crete under careful watch of the Greek government. However, the Greek Government was forced to curtail any efforts by its citizens to propagate seditious activities in the Ottoman Empire. This last term was not received well by the Greek people who loudly proclaimed their support for their Illyrian brothers and saw the cowardly retreat of the Greek Government as a betrayal. Despite this angst, the matter would eventually pass following the birth of the King’s first son later that year, the continued improvement of the economy, and the completion of the 1836 census.

    While there had been prior censuses across Greece, their numbers were plagued with inconsistencies and inaccuracies that marred their results. They also lacked extensive information regarding the distribution of the people across the Nomoi making it impossible to fairly allocate legislators to the provinces. The 1835-1836 Census was different however as it had standardized its methods and procedures, making the results more accurate than its predecessors. On the 16th of August 1836 the results of the Government’s official census for the year 1836 returned a total population of 990,825 people.[6] Given the population at the time of its completion it was believed that the Greek population would cross one million people in the coming months as the 1837 census would later confirm when it returned with a result of 1,011,293. More importantly the 1836 Census finally revealed the population for each Nomos of the country:

    1. Nomos of Argolis-Corinthia: 62,116 people
    2. Nomos of Arcadia: 124,937 people
    3. Nomos of Laconia: 67,614 people
    4. Nomos of Messenia: 64,319 people
    5. Nomos of Achaea: 87,206 people
    6. Nomos of Attica-Boeotia: 86,366 people
    7. Nomos of Phthiotis-Phocis: 62,317 people
    8. Nomos of Euboea: 43,855 people
    9. Nomos of Aetolia-Acarnania: 60,348 people
    10. Nomos of Arta: 39,954 people
    11. Nomos of the Archipelago: 98,252 people
    12. Nomos of Chios-Samos: 50,424 people
    13. Nomos of Chania: 61,055 people
    14. Nomos of Heraklion: 82,062 people

    With the Census complete, the economy continuing to grow, and the country displaying signs of relative stability the Government's justifications for delaying the elections no longer held any weight and the impetus for elections began to grow exponentially. Over the coming days, Constitutionalists and Liberals called on the King and the Government to hold elections as was their responsibility under the law and demonstrations soon began in Athens. While, some within the King's inner circle wished to continue with the status quo as it had contributed greatly to the present prosperity of Greece, most supported elections. Even Prime Minister Kapodistrias believed that the people were ready to take their destiny into their own hands and so after a month of debate and deliberation, King Leopold announced that elections would be held in one years’ time on the 10th of September 1837.

    Next Time: The First Election


    [1] Kleanthis and Schaubert were responsible for the redesign of Athens following the war in OTL. Initially hired by Ioannis Kapodistrias in 1831, the pair would work for King Otto to modernize Athens and Piraeus before Kleanthis retired from his work after disagreements with the Greek Government and specifically Leo von Klenze the Bavarian court architect King Ludwig had sent with Otto. With the survival of Kapodistrias I see no reason why they wouldn’t do the same in TTL and possibly do even more than OTL.

    [2] During the Venetian Siege of Athens in 1687, the Ottomans demolished the Temple for its materials in an effort to reinforce their defenses on the Acropolis. This same siege also resulted in the destruction of the Parthenon and the Propylaea, both of which had been used as powder magazines. The buildings on the acropolis would remain in this sorry state for nearly 150 years before the Greeks finally started to preserve and restore the site.

    [3] The first serious attempt to mine coal at Aliveri wouldn’t take place until 1873 and it would only reach an annual production of 23,000 tons in 1920. It would eventually reach its peak production of 750,000 tons per year in 1951 so it is definitely possible to have high coal production at the Aliveri coal mine, but in its early days it will be relatively low especially without more modern mining equipment.

    [4] Just for reference, the OTL Athens-Piraeus Railway began construction in 1857 and wouldn’t be finished until 1869. Without the political instability that was prevalent throughout all of King Otto’s reign, having a relatively improved economy, and having a driving force behind the effort Greece is able to finish the railway much earlier than OTL.

    [5] While the Greeks had lost their status as the preeminent Dhimmi of the Ottoman Empire, they still remained an influential and wealthy populace who provided numerous economic and societal benefits to the Empire. As such, there was a legitimate concern that Greeks would immigrate to Greece and so the Porte acted to prevent this both in OTL and ITTL.

    [6] For those of you who would like to know how I got to this number, I used the 1836 Greek census which reported 751,077 people as a base. From there I added 143,117 people from Crete, 50,424 people from the islands of Chios, Samos, Psara, Icaria, and the Fournoi Korseon. The population for Phthiotis-Phocis was increased by 4,500 people for the towns of Domokos, Almyros, Farsala, Leontarion, and their environs. 30,526 people were added for the Nomos of Arta, which includes Arta, Preveza, Louros and the surrounding area, the remaining 9,428 people from the Nomos of Arta were in the OTL Greece as part of Evrytania which was originally included in the OTL Nomos of Aetolia-Acarnania following independence. 4,500 people were added to the Nomos of Aetolia-Acarnania to reflect the successful escape of the Missolonghi population during their famous sortie, and about 3,500 people were added to Attica-Boeotia to reflect the lack of warfare in the region since Dramali’s invasion in 1822. Lastly, I included the Saronic islands in the Nomos of Attica Boeotia, whereas they were a part of Argolis Corinthia in OTL.
     
    Part 44: The First Election
  • Part 44: The First Election

    650px-The_Hellenic_Parliament_%284551856563%29.jpg

    The Hellenic Parliament

    While Greece had officially been declared a Constitutional Monarchy with a fully functioning Legislature following the Fifth National Assembly in 1830, in truth power rested solely in the hands of King Leopold, Prime Minister Ioannis Kapodistrias, and the Cabinet. Though the Senate existed as a functioning Chamber of the Legislature, it was effectively a toothless institution filled with political appointees and loyalists who generally did as they were told by the King and Prime Minister. The other Chamber of the Legislature, the House of Representatives remained vacant as elections were regularly postponed. Reasons for this delay ranged from instability and unrest, shoddy communication with the many villages and isolated communities of the country, the lack of a permanent Parliament building for the Senate and House, and poor census data along with a myriad of other excuses.

    Provided their families had a roof over their heads, food in their bellies, a sense of upward mobility, and they could live in relative peace as good Orthodox Christians, most Greeks didn’t care if they couldn’t vote. For a time, this was true as the common people generally went about their everyday lives without a thought paid to suffrage and representation, but as the years progressed and the final tenants of the 1830 Constitution continued to remain unfulfilled, many Constitutionalists and Liberals within Greek society grew increasingly worried that their liberties were being worn away. Soon, demonstrations began taking place in Athens with increasing prominence and regularity as these concerned citizens made their voices known to the King and the Cabinet that effectively ruled their country. Fortunately for all, their concerns would be assuaged when King Leopold and the Greek Government announced on the 11th of September 1836, that elections would be held in one year’s time to select members for the House of Representatives.

    The motive for this announcement lay in the strong rapport Leopold and Kapodistrias had built in the preceding years that had lifted Greece out of the fires of war and into the Modern era. While they were by no means dictators or authoritarians, they felt it best to hold the reins of power until the people were ready to decide for themselves how they wished to be governed. By the Fall of 1836 it would seem that the people were finally ready and so the decision was made. Regardless of their rational, this pronouncement sent the Hellenic Government into a whirlwind of activity and debate as they discussed how to go about the election. Many questions swirled around them as they determined who would be able to vote, how long could they vote for, where could they vote, what candidates could they vote for, and so on, and so on. It is fortunate that some of these issues had been settled during the 1830 Assembly, such as suffrage and the distribution of representatives, but many still needed to be dealt with.

    Under the Constitution of 1830, the right to vote was bestowed to all citizens above the age of 25, with citizenship being restricted to men of Hellenic descent residing in the territories comprising the Kingdom of Greece. This includes all the Greeks of the Morea, Southern Roumeli, and the Islands as well as all Greek refugees from Asia Minor, Macedonia, Thessaly and Thrace who fled the Ottoman Empire during the War and remain in the Greek State to this day. Those Greeks serving the Hellenic State from abroad in an official or professional capacity such as diplomats or merchants during the 1830 National Assembly were also bestowed citizenship in absentia. Finally, any other people professing loyalty to the Greek state and primarily residing within its borders following the war were granted citizenship as well. This included the former Philhellene volunteers who remained in Greece after the war’s end, the remaining Cretan Muslims, and the recent refugees from Albania who were later granted citizenship in December 1836.[1] According to the 1836 Census, the total male population of Greece was recorded at 496,258, with the number of voting age men at 308,129. As a result, just under a third of the country’s total population (31.1%) possessed the right to vote in the coming election.

    As for the setting of the election, voting would take place on the 11th of September 1837 from sunrise to sunset. Voting would take place in any location prepared by the local municipal and provincial officials, such as a schoolhouse, local church, or town hall for instance. Corruption was a major concern for the Kapodistrian Ministry which proposed that any attempts to impede or influence voters through bribery or coercion was to be considered a criminal offense punishable by fines or even imprisonment. Additionally, attempts to falsify or rig the election for any one candidate would be considered a criminal offense punishable by fines or imprisonment. To ensure a fair voting process, Government officials from the Ministry of Internal Affairs would be on site serving as election judges to aid voters in their endeavor and to guard against criminal behavior. Despite their best efforts, however, corruption and attempts to rig the elections were unfortunately inevitable.

    missolonghi-western-greece-1888.jpg

    The Byron School of Missolonghi (pictured above) would serve as a Polling Place during the 1838 Election​

    Anyone could run for office provided they met all the necessary prerequisites, namely that they were citizens of the Kingdom of Greece, that they were above the age of 25, that they were residents of the district they were campaigning for, and that they register with their respective Nomos Advisory Council before election day. Candidates could come from any variety of backgrounds, any number of vocations, and any political ideology or affiliation. Prospective legislators could campaign for office in any manner they so choose, provided they did not engage in criminal behavior which would result in their immediate suspension of their candidacy. On election day, voters would be free to vote for the candidate of their own choosing from sunrise until sunset at which point voting would cease and all the collected votes would be sent to the Nomos capital where they would be tallied and recorded. When the process was finally completed, the winners would be announced to the general populace as soon as the results become readily available.

    If elected, a Representative would serve for a 4-year term as prescribed in the 1830 Constitution with the start of their term beginning on the 1st of January 1838. Candidates or incumbent Representatives could run for as many terms as they were able provided they remain residents of their respective Nomos with new elections taking place every four years. Should the King decide to dissolve Parliament, new snap elections could be called a set time afterwards. Once in office, Representatives were free to join any caucuses, any political organizations, or any factions of legislators within the Chamber. Representatives would also be privy to economic restitution for their services and they would enjoy the legal protections their office includes such as protection from prosecution or imprisonment unless they were caught in flagrante delicto. Should a Lawmaker charged with an offense, they would be subject to review by their peers in the event of a criminal indictment against the Representative.

    The House of Representatives would be a chamber whose minimum size would be no less than 80 members with the total number determined by population. A Nomos would be awarded a representative for every 10,000-people living within the Nomos. Based on the 1836 Census data, there would be 94 members in total for the first meeting of the House of Representatives from 1838 to 1842. The Nomos of Argolis-Corinthia would receive 6 Representatives, the Nomos of Arcadia would receive 12, the Nomos of Laconia would receive 6, the Nomos of Messenia would receive 6, the Nomos of Achaea would receive 8, the Nomos of Attica-Boeotia would receive 8, the Nomos of Phthiotis-Phocis would receive 6, the Nomos of Euboea would receive 4, the Nomos of Aetolia-Acarnania would receive 6, the Nomos of Arta would receive 4, the Nomos of the Archipelago would receive 9, the Nomos of Chios-Samos would receive 5, the Nomos of Chania would receive 6, and the Nomos of Heraklion would receive 8.

    With the parameters for the election established, the information was disseminated to the Nomoi and the campaigns began in earnest early the following year. Within days, hundreds of men registered for office. Some were old war heroes from the Revolution, others were former political leaders or delegates to the many Assemblies during the war, others still were bankers, financiers, traders, and merchants who had invested heavily in the Greek cause. In many ways the candidates were among the most talented, the most powerful, and the most influential people in Greece. Most shared the same desire to strengthen Greece, to restore her to greatness and respectability on the world stage, the means of achieving that differed from person to person however.

    Several weeks before election day, it became clear that the contestants were coalescing into one of two broad groups, the Kapodistrians, those who supported Prime Minister Ioannis Kapodistrias, and the Anti-Kapodistrians, those who opposed him. In many ways the Kapodistrians were advocates of the common man, they were modernizers, industrializers, small landowners, and former klephts. The Anti-Kapodistrians in turn were generally wealthy merchants, the ship lords from the islands, the landing owning Primates, a few Phanariotes, and several obstinate priests who all opposed the modernizing and centralizing policies of the Prime Minister. In a sense the Kapodistrians and Anti-Kapodistrians could be considered Proto-Political Parties in the early years of the Kingdom of Greece.

    While groups had existed in Greek politics before, such as the Magnate faction and Military faction, or the Moreots, Roumeliotes, and the Islanders, they were more akin to caucuses of men from similar geographic or economic backgrounds rather than actual political parties like the Whigs and Tories of the British Parliament. It is a testament to Ioannis Kapodistrias’ popularity and divisiveness as a leader that Greek politics in the early years of the Kingdom became more about support for or opposition against the Count of Istria rather than an innate political difference between the leading men of the country. Still, the divide between them was deep and it was real with fights occasionally breaking out between the groups and their supporters.

    HBalegeri.jpg

    Fight between Kapodistrians and Anti Kapodistrians at a Patras Polling Station

    It was clear that this split would not be resolved easily as the divide was spurred on by the interference of foreign powers, namely Britain and France who continued to interject into Greek affairs.[2] Kapodistrias remained a constant concern to the leading men of London and Paris who saw the Count of Istria as a Russian Proxy regardless of his stated intentions, and so they worked tirelessly to oppose him. Even the stern diplomacy and relative popularity of Leopold wasn’t enough to deter the most determined British and French efforts against Kapodistrias who donated to his opposition and established media outlets in the country denouncing the Prime Minister as a tyrant. Strangely enough their efforts to destroy Kapodistrias met with little success across the country given his immense popularity and support among the general populace. Thankfully, the matter was mitigated to simple political bickering and the occasional scuffle rather than outright conflict and violence due to the careful navigation of Kapodistrias who announced he would retire from public life at the end of the next term in 1842 after 15 years of service to his country. Ultimately, the election came and went without controversy or incident, for the most part, and for the next few weeks the results slowly made their way in. When all was said and done a total of 63 Kapodistrians and 31 Anti Kapodistrians had won elections who made their way to Athens in the following days and weeks.

    With the election over the old system of governance by the King, Kapodistrias, and the Cabinet was gradually replaced with a joint system of governance alongside the newly elected Legislature. After years of debate, planning, and preparation, the elected members of the House of Representatives stood poised to take their place in the Hellenic Parliament, the only obstacle remaining was the oath of office. In a spectacle not to be forgotten, King Leopold, addressing the joint Chambers of the Parliament in his heavily accented Greek, congratulated the men on their victories and tasked them with doing their utmost to serve Hellas and the Hellenes. His speech complete, the King promptly read aloud the oath of office, which the assembled legislators repeated in kind and with that, the First Parliament of the Kingdom of Greece had taken its place in the Greek Government.

    Next Time: Victoria and Leopold


    Author's Note: Special thanks to everyone reading this timeline, everyone commenting on this timeline, and everyone providing critiques, criticism, and advice to me for this timeline. I couldn't do this without your support.

    [1] Technically King Leopold, Queen Marie, and their respective entourages were included in this last group as well.

    [2] Even with Leopold as King of Greece I find it hard to believe that Britain, France, and Russia would remain detached from the affairs of the Greeks, especially if Ioannis Kapodistrias is still around and in a position of power. Leopold was in many ways treated as a parvenu King of a parvenu country in OTL and I see no reason why he would be treated any differently in Greece in TTL, especially when the Powers have a vested interest in interfering in his country's elections, ie to limit Russian influence.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 45: Victoria and Leopold
  • Part 45: Victoria and Leopold

    350px-Wedding_of_Queen_Victoria_and_Prince_Albert.jpg

    Leopold’s Great Victory, the Marriage of Victoria and Albert

    While Leopold had agreed to give up his “emergency” powers to the Legislature by holding fair and free elections in the Fall of 1837, he was by no means ceding all his powers to the newly elected Parliament. Under the 1830 Constitution, the king was endowed with several powers ranging from his responsibilities as Commander in Chief of the Hellenic Military during times of war to his office as the Chief Executive of the Greek Government. He could still appoint Ministers and Judges, provided they received approval from the Legislature for their nomination, and he could appoint anyone to the Senate of his own volition without the interference of the Lower Chamber of Parliament.

    The King also had veto power over prospective pieces of legislation, but it was merely a suspending veto rather than an absolute veto. As such, Leopold would make sparing use of it over the early years of his reign, only vetoing two bills in 1838 and 1840 respectively. While these were hardly substantial by themselves, under an astute statesman like Leopold the powers of the Monarch were pushed even further by utilizing various loopholes and abstract clauses in the constitution to exert his limited authority to its fullest potential.

    He remained an active, yet neutral figure in the Legislative process, who used his platform to serve as an impartial mediator, an honest negotiator, and an effective dealmaker who worked tirelessly to ease along the legislative process. He frequently met with disgruntled Representatives and made speeches on the House floor calling for unity and compromise between the two “Parties” for the betterment of the people. While he tried to remain above the pettiness of partisan politics, he would on occasion intervene in favor of one side over the other, but only when it was necessary to maintain his own powers and prerogative from those who threatened it. By far though, his greatest strength was his good relationship with Prime Minister Ioannis Kapodistrias as Leopold had come to view the Count of Istria as a close confidant over the course of their 7 years together.

    Together the two would discuss politics, philosophy, art, music, various innovations and technological advancements among a list of other topics. Of course, these meetings would always turn to politics and how to better the Greek state and the Greek people. On many a night, the pair would work long into the night debating different policies, different programs, and different initiatives which might prove effective in advancing the cause of their Kingdom. Leopold for better or for worse viewed himself as the Atlas upon which Greece rested; that its burdens were his burdens, that its ills were his ills, and that its success would be his success as well, and Kapodistrias for his part felt the same. It is fortunate that they found allies in one another who shared many of the same goals and aspirations, and though they would not always be in alignment on all issues, the two wholeheartedly trusted one another’s intentions to benefit Greece and the Greek people.

    Another area where the King seemingly retained some degree of authority was over the military of Greece. Under the Constitution the King served as Commander in Chief of the Hellenic Military which effectively granted Leopold complete control over the nation’s army and navy. In truth though, most military matters were delegated to the King’s Aide de Camp, Ypostrategos Panos Kolokotronis, his Chief of the General Staff, Strategos Demetrios Ypsilantis, and the Ministries of the Army and Navy, effectively relegating Leopold to little more than a figurehead status during times of peace.[1]

    Even still, Leopold retained considerable power over the Greek Military, namely he could appoint the Minister of the Army and the Minister of the Navy as well as the members of the General Staff. As such he could still effectively influence the military policy and procedures of the Hellenic Armed Forces through his selection of ministers and the General Staff. In an effort to showcase his role as Commander in Chief, Leopold routinely reviewed the soldiers of the Royal Guard in Athens and on occasion he would travel to the Northern border to visit the men stationed along the frontier with the Ottoman Empire. He frequently dined with officers from the Army and Navy, and he made a concerted effort to sit in on every meeting of the General Staff even when his was presence was not required.

    While he worked tirelessly to broaden and preserve his powers wherever he was able; the only area in the Greek Government where King Leopold retained unbridled power and influence was in the arena of diplomacy and foreign affairs. As the king of an extremely prestigious, if relatively powerless state, Leopold stood poised to engage in diplomatic mediation with the other Heads of States across the globe, whether they be Kings and Queens, or Prime Ministers and Presidents. If anything, the relative military and economic weakness of his state made the successful utilization of diplomacy paramount to the security and safety of the Greek State and the pursuit of its interests around the world.

    To that end, Leopold engaged in regular discussions with the Tsar of Russia, he opened dialogue with the Ottoman Empire, and he frequently sent dispatches to the crowned heads of France and Germany. He even engaged in cursory exchanges with the United States of America, the Empire of Brazil, and the Republic of Haiti, sending platitudes to the Americans who had helped inspire the Greeks to fight for their independence.[2] By far though his closest and best documented correspondence was with his niece, the heir presumptive of the British Empire, Princess Alexandrina Victoria, soon to be Queen Victoria.

    280px-Dronning_victoria.jpg

    Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland

    Due to the close familial and personal relation he shared with Princess Victoria, King Leopold took great care to impart as much wisdom and provide as much support as he was able for the young girl. Because of the great distance between them, much of Leopold’s correspondence with Victoria was done through letter, although he would on occasion dispatch aides or family members to meet with her in person to convey his words and intentions. Though the number of these letters were unfortunately limited in their volume, Leopold made sure that each dispatch was as detailed and thorough as possible, effectively making up for the lacking quantity with pristine quality.

    Even still, the King would pen letters to his niece every month conveying advice he had collected over the years, providing simple words of encouragement, and lauding her with constant affection. They exchanged gossip, they talked politics, they shared news of family, and they talked of the difficulties of ruling among a slew of other topics. The frequency of these letters would only increase as she approached her majority and by the time her uncle King William IV had died in June 1837, the flow of letters had grown into a great deluge.

    While his actions to aid Victoria were genuinely compassionate in nature and he would never intentionally do anything to harm her or her country, it cannot be denied that Leopold had ulterior motives to his benevolence. Britain was the closest economic and diplomatic partner Greece had following the war for independence, with Russia being a close second and France a more distant third. Most of the funding the Greek Revolutionaries received during the war came from British supporters and bankers who had purchased stocks and bonds to fund the Greek cause. The effort to intervene in the War for Independence was driven primarily by the British and Russian Governments who aimed to aid the Greeks in whatever way they could. The Allied Fleet sent to the Aegean in 1827/1828 was led by a British Admiral (Codrington) and composed primarily of British ships. The Appointed King of Greece (Leopold) had been the preferred British candidate with a close familial relation to the Heir Presumptive of the British Crown.

    The close relation between Greece and Britain continued to remain strong under the Canningite Government following the war as a series of trade deals were soon drafted between the British and Greek States in the months that followed. The British Mediterranean Fleet, along with their French and Russian counterparts, would continue to patrol the waters around the Kingdom of Greece for an additional 5 years after the revolution, providing Greece with a potent shield against any aggression on the part of the Ottomans. The only point of contention between the two, if one could call it that, was over the status of the Ionian Islands.

    Even before the end of the war, talks of Enosis, Union, between the Greek state and the United States of the Ionian Islands emerged as a prominent topic among Greek circles. This issue became even more pronounced following the selection of Leopold of Saxe Coburg as King of Greece, given the believed perception that he was a client of the British. For its part, the Canningite Government of Great Britain proved genuinely amenable to the idea at the London Conference of 1830 and talks began in earnest regarding the possible cessation of the islands to Greece in return for basing rights and other privileges for the British. Sadly, these talks would prove to be just that, only talks, as matters closer to home soon required the full undivided attention of the British government and its Prime Minister.

    400px-Flag_of_the_United_States_of_the_Ionian_Islands.svg.png

    The Flag of the United States of the Ionian Islands

    When the fires of revolt and revolution across Europe finally settled in late 1833 George Canning lay on his deathbed and was forced to withdraw from government for the last time leaving the matter to his successor, the incredibly recalcitrant Duke of Wellington who nixed any discussion regarding the ceding of the islands to Greece in the bud. With Wellington’s ascension to the Premiership, the matter lost much of the momentum that had seemingly been building before Canning’s death. Even the succession of Queen Victoria to the throne in 1837 did little to move the matter in Greece’s favor as the islands remained stubbornly separate. Ultimately, discussion of Enosis was laid to rest for the immediate future greatly disheartening the Greek people.

    Though he was an immensely popular man in Greece, Leopold’s fame was decidedly less so in Britain where his many adversaries and enemies had coalesced against the parvenu King. Many of his doubters and rivals, Wellington included, had been the loyal lapdogs of his former Father in Law George IV and his equally distasteful brother, King William IV, both of whom had viewed Leopold with contempt for his marriage to Princess Charlotte and his continued residency in their country following her death. Leopold's continued presence in Britain served as a constant reminder to King George of his daughter's death, and the matter was made worse by Leopold's support for his estranged wife Queen Caroline in the terrible debate over the Pains and Penalties Bill in 1820. Though the friendly Premiership of George Canning would do much to mask the dissension between Leopold and his antagonists, their bombacity would return greater than before following Canning’s death in early January 1834.

    Wellington and many of his High Tories widely assumed that Greece would collapse to infighting and that Leopold would flee to Britain once more with his tail between his legs. The years that followed proved to be incredibly grating to Wellington and Leopold's other adversaries who grew increasingly frustrated by the resilience of the Marquis Peu-Peu.[3] If nothing else, Leopold wished to prove his doubters wrong and he hoped that by tying himself to the future Queen Victoria, Leopold could exert some influence over the girl and lay low his political adversaries in the process. Unfortunately for Leopold, Victoria would prove highly resistant to his intrigues, forcing her dear Uncle to earn the begrudging respect of his rivals the hard way.

    While Princess Victoria was a willing student of her uncle’s advice, she had steadily grown into an independent young woman, capable of making her own decisions for the good of her own country. As such, she began ignoring the advice of her uncle, choosing her own advisors and ministers contrary to Leopold’s endeavors. Even still, Leopold refused to give up and changed course, if Victoria could not be persuaded by him, then he would find someone who could, he would find her a husband. As the Queen of a Great Power, it fell upon her to marry and have children so that her dynasty might continue for the good of the country.

    Fortunately for Leopold, he need not look far, as he had a perfect candidate in mind that might further his influence over the young Queen. His candidate for Victoria’s husband was his nephew, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. Prince Albert was the younger son of Leopold’s eldest brother Francis, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, making him Victoria’s first cousin through her mother Duchess Victoria of Kent. He was a remarkable physical specimen, who shared an uncanny resemblance to Leopold in his younger years, and his mind was equally sharp and perceptive as that of his dear uncle Leopold.[4] Unlike his father and older brother, Albert was a considerate youth who was charming, gentle, kind, and above all he was a Coburg through and through.

    280px-Prince_Albert_-_Partridge_1840.jpg

    Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha

    In many ways, Albert also provided the House of Saxe Coburg with another opportunity to stake a claim to the British throne as Leopold himself had attempted to do nearly twenty years prior with the late Princess Charlotte. First proposed by Leopold’s own mother the Dowager Duchess of Saxe Coburg and Saalfeld, Countess Augusta Reuss in 1821, Leopold made it his mission to see to its realization.[5] As such, Leopold heavily invested in the boy’s education so that he might become a worthy husband of Victoria, and to that end the King of Greece even dispatched his long-time friend and close advisor Baron Stockmar to aid in the boy’s grooming. He practiced fencing and horseback riding, he partook in lessons on music and the arts, and he developed a curiosity for science and philosophy all in a bid to impress the Young Queen Victoria.

    Despite exhibiting a great interest in Prince Albert during their first meeting in 1836, the Queen would prove resistant to her uncle’s attempts to rush her into marriage choosing instead to postpone talks of an engagement to any suitor indefinitely. Much of the early resistance to Albert can be attributed to Victoria’s overbearing uncle King William IV who strongly opposed another match between the House of Hannover and the Coburgs of Saxony and would remain strongly opposed to the match for the remainder of his life. Most of the British government and the British Public were similarly against the match given the low standing and prestige of Albert’s House.

    Rather than needlessly pushing the issue, Leopold wisely changed tactics once more, opting instead to give Victoria time to settle into her new role as Queen of Britain and Ireland while he continued with Albert’s preparation. Suffice to say, the ploy worked as distance had indeed made the heart grow fonder between the two with the young Queen routinely inquiring about Albert’s progress over the years. When the pair met once again in 1839, they were instantly smitten with one another prompting the young Queen Victoria to propose to Prince Albert in early November 1839. On the 10th of February 1840 Queen Victoria and Prince Albert married in the Chapel Royal of St. James Palace. In attendance were many members of Parliament, numerous Peers, several Uncles and Aunts from the House of Hannover, Albert’s Father and Brother, and one very pleased King Leopold of Greece.

    610px-Victoria_Marriage01.jpg

    The Wedding of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert

    For Leopold, the match between Victoria and Albert was a great personal victory for him and his house and the completion of a lifelong goal to have the Coburgs seated upon the throne of Britain. It also earned him the begrudging respect of his rivals in London who finally began to make amends with Greek King’s successes. Victoria for her part was no less grateful to her Uncle for all his efforts to bring her happiness and joy, and though they would endure their share of hardships and despair, they would certainly have great joys and glad tidings. Within days of Victoria and Albert’s wedding the relationship between Leopold and his beloved niece would face its greatest challenge yet. On the 2nd of March 1840 the Ottoman Empire invaded Egypt, throwing the Middle East into the fires of war once more, and caught in the midst of their fighting was the little Kingdom of Greece.

    Next Time: The Ottoman Empire Strikes Back


    [1] In OTL, Panos Kolokotronis’ younger brother Ioannis served as King Otto’s Aide de Camp during the 1830’s and early 1840’s. As Panos is alive in this timeline I thought it would be interesting to keep him around in an official capacity and so I gave him the role ITTL. Demetrios Ypsilantis is still alive as well as a result of the different circumstances for him during and after the war.

    [2] Haiti was coincidentally the first foreign state to recognize Greece as an independent country during the Greek War of Independence.

    [3] One of Leopold’s less kind nicknames was Marquis Peu-Peu, which was meant to be a derogatory term, mocking his overly cautious nature. Instead, Leopold would surprisingly take it as a badge of honor, as his caution and patience carried him through a series of crises in his life.

    [4] There were some wild rumors that Albert was not Duke Ernest’s son, but rather Leopold’s illegitimate son. Apparently, the marriage between Duke Francis and his wife Princess Louise was very estranged due to Francis’ infidelities, ultimately resulting in their divorce in 1824 and had been taking place soon after their marriage in 1817. It was around this time that Leopold returned to visit Coburg following the death of Princess Charlotte and in his despair and her self-pitying they had a brief affair which led to Albert’s birth. Leopold for his part was a known womanizer who had various affairs with both single and married women and he even took a few mistresses throughout his life so there certainly could be some validity to this account, but whether it is actually true or not is unknown.

    [5] For this reason alone, I believe a match between Victoria and Albert was almost predetermined from the get go. Their relationship is also one of the genuinely sweet aspects of the 19th Century and so I decided to keep it for this timeline. Also, due to the fact that most of the butterflies have been contained to Greece and the Ottoman Empire prior to 1830, Victoria and Albert generally developed the way they did in OTL, meaning they would likely have the same interests and tastes as OTL, with a few exceptions. That said, things will be very different for Victoria and Albert going forward due to some changing circumstances in the world around them.
     
    Part 46: The Ottoman Empire Strikes Back
  • Part 46: The Ottoman Empire Strikes Back

    300px-Mahmud_II.jpg

    Sultan Mahmud II of the Ottoman Empire

    In many ways the Second Syrian War between the Ottoman Empire and the Khedivate of Egypt was inevitable and came as no surprise to anyone. The peace between them was tense, the political differences were too deep, and the continuance of the status quo was deemed impossible. Either the master should destroy the servant, or the servant should rise and kill the master, regardless of the outcome both sides understood that there could not be two lords of the Ottoman Empire. So, it was that the intervening years between the end of the First War and the start of the Second were spent preparing for the looming rematch between the Egyptians and the Turks. For their part, Sultan Mahmud II and the Ottomans would undertake the most extensive reformation of the Ottoman bureaucracy, economy, and military since the time of Suleiman the Magnificent in a bid to close the great gap between them.

    Following the final defeat of the Albanian and Bosnian Rebels in 1834, the Sultan issued a new series of edicts continuing his earlier reforms to an even greater degree. All property belonging to the rebel Beys and Ayans was seized by the crown, while the rebel Eyalets themselves were subject to extensive reorganization and revisions. The Bosnian Eyalet was split in twain with the southern Sanjaks being molded into the new Eyalet of Hercegovina which was in turn bestowed upon the loyal Ali Ridvanoglu Pasha. The remaining northern Sanjaks of the rump Bosnian Eyalet were denuded of their local autonomy and were to be henceforth administered directly by the Capital. The Albanian Eyalets were similarly carved up with the Pashaliks of Scutari and Ioannina dissolved and their constituent Sanjaks were summarily reabsorbed into the Eyalet of Rumelia.

    With the Balkans secured, Sultan Mahmud turned East to Anatolia and the Derebeys who would also see their power and privileges reduced by the centralizing policies of the Sultan. Though they had once been great magnates of Anatolia in the earlier days of the Empire, providing the Ottoman armies with bountiful levies, they had grown corrupt and indulgent over the years with power coalescing into their own hands rather than that of the Sultan and the Porte. As the State was no longer dependent upon the Derebeys for manpower thanks to the previous military reforms by Mahmud II in 1826, the raison d’etre for their continued existence had been extinguished. Sultan Mahmud now began the arduous process of clawing back the power, autonomy, and privileges, multiple generations of Sultans had bestowed upon them. It would be a grueling process as many would violently resist rather than peacefully surrender, but little by little the Derebeys were forced to submit to the Porte.

    Along with the administrative reforms came a series of budgetary reforms to sure up the flagging Ottoman economy which had been thoroughly exhausted after nearly twenty-five years of constant warfare and unrest. Taxation policies were amended with a series of commissions established to regulate the collection of the Haraç, a capitation tax which had been fraudulently utilized by unscrupulous tax collectors to their own benefit. In addition, the Timar system, the Ziamets, and the practice of tax farming were abolished as was the assessment of vexatious charges by Government officials. In 1839 a new paper banknote Piastre was designed to supplement the incredibly debased silver coin Piastres, while a new gold coin, the Lira was scheduled for production in 1844.

    Sultan Mahmud would also abolish vacant and unneeded offices as well as titles that lacked responsibilities or duties. He furloughed ineffective and incompetent government officials and he imprisoned corrupt ministers and governors who abused their powers solely to enrich themselves. The effects of these economic and administrative initiatives were immediate as the revenue of the Ottoman Government by the end of the 1830’s would actually surpass the total government revenue collected at the start of his reign in 1808 despite the significant loss of territory and people over the years. While he eliminated redundant and ineffectual offices, the Sultan also created a new council of Ministers, the Meclis-i Vukela, which aided him in crafting and implementing new reforms and modernization policies. Another initiative Mahmud took to cut away at the rampant corruption in his Empire was to regularly attend the Divan-i-Hümâyûn, the Imperial Council and develop the institution into a more contemporary institution akin to the Ministries of Modern European Governments with the aid of the Grand Vizier.

    550px-Jean-Baptiste_van_Mour_007.jpg

    The Divan-i-Hümâyûn, the Imperial Council

    Militarily the organization and armament of the Nizami Corps was fully underway by 1834 and by the end of the decade, its effective strength during peacetime would rise to 80,000 professional soldiers, while during times of war they would be supported by a reserve force some 300,000 strong. All soldiers were organized into proper units modeled after modern European formations with the basis of their armies being the Regiment. Recruitment for the armies was fulfilled primarily through volunteers, but conscription would come into use to meet the numbers required to effectively fill their ranks. When its reorganization was finally complete in mid-1840, the new professional units of the Ottoman Army were christened the Asakir-Mansure-i-Muhammadiye, the Victorious Soldiers of Muhammad or more commonly, the Mansure Army.

    Foreign advisors and instructors from Austria, Britain, and Prussia were welcomed by the dozens to impart modern tactics, strategy and techniques into the Ottoman soldiers and their officers. Included among this number of foreign officers was the young Prussian Captain Helmuth von Moltke who both served as an instructor and aide to his Ottoman hosts for much of the 1830’s. Captain Moltke’s records are among the most detailed of Ottoman military policy for this time, and intricately detail the great shift in the institution. To further this endeavor, a formal military academy, the Mekteb-i-Harbiye, was established at Heybeliada near Constantinople to generate a steady supply of quality army officers for the army. There, they would be trained in the art of war, and schooled in engineering, mathematics, science and philosophy among a myriad of other topics. A defined chain of command and General Staff was established with a clear hierarchy between the command personnel, the field officers, and the soldiers in the field.

    The Ottoman Navy also received an increased investment from the Sublime Porte thanks to the determined efforts of Sultan Mahmud and his new Kapudan Pasha, Ahmad Fevzi Pasha. Over the course of the 1830’s the Navy would increase from the 44 battered and bruised fighting ships that remained in 1832 after the war with Egypt to 104 warships in 1840, including a batch of 22 newly minted steamships and 7 additional Ships of the Line. Additionally, the flagship Mahmudiye was thoroughly repaired and refitted removing much of the dry rot from the ship that had plagued the vessel during its first sortie in 1831. When its repairs were complete in 1838 it could be said that the Mahmudiye was truly a floating fortress on the seas. As was done with the army, the Bahriye Mektibi Naval School was reestablished at Kasimpasa in 1837 to provide the Ottoman Navy with a cadre of skilled Naval officers trained in the art of modern naval doctrine and tactics.[1] With his military reforms now complete, Sultan Mahmud now wished to test it, fortunately he need not look far as events on the Barbary Coast soon drew his attention.

    Though they officially remained territories of the Ottoman Empire in de jure, the Eyalets of Algiers, Tunis, and Tripolitania had become effectively independent states over the course of the 18th century, operating under the sheerest veil of Ottoman suzerainty. While they had done well for themselves under Ottoman rule, the only facet of their relationship that proved of any value to them was the protection the Ottoman Empire provided. In return for a token tribute and supplying the Ottoman military with ships and men during war, the Porte would shield their piracy with all the might of Turkish arms no matter the circumstance or powers involved. For a time, this arrangement worked well for both, but by the end of the 1700’s this began to change as the power of the Ottoman Empire would wane significantly, allowing the Great Powers of Britain and France, along with the lesser powers of Spain, Sweden, Sicily, and even the United States of America to begin challenging the corsairs of Northern Africa. Try as they might, the Pirates of Algiers, Tripoli, and Tunisia were no match for the strength of arms of the ascending European states without the aid of the Ottomans and by 1815 Piracy was officially ended in the Mediterranean, although sporadic raids would continue for several years to come.

    550px-British_sailors_boarding_an_Algerine_pirate_ship.jpg

    British Sailors Fighting Barbary Corsairs

    The end of piracy, followed soon after by the growing global abolitionist movements would cut deep into the economies of the North African states, of which Tripolitania suffered the worst. With poverty skyrocketing in the North African state, the people of Tripolitania began lashing out at their aging and increasingly ineffectual leader Yusuf Karamanli Pasha. Yusuf Pasha’s reign had been troubled from the start as he himself had forcibly taken the throne from his own brother Hamet in 1795, and ever since his own kin had been vying to take it away from him. With demonstrations against his rule increasing in frequency and violence the elderly Yusuf Pasha abdicated in favor of his eldest son Ali II Karamanli on the 14th of November 1833 in a bid to preempt any further unrest. Rather than lessen the growing dissent in his state, this act only made it worse as Ali Pasha’s jealous brothers Mehmed and Ahmad denounced the rule of their brother and rose in rebellion several days later, sparking a bloody civil war that would last for several years.[2]

    Taking advantage of this opportunity to reassert his authority in the region, Sultan Mahmud threw his support behind the embattled Ali Karamanli in February 1836 and dispatched men and ships to aid him. The defense of Ali Karamanli’s rights were not his true goal, however. Instead, Sultan Mahmud planned the overthrow of the Karamanlis entirely restoring Tripolitania to direct Ottoman rule. With his supposed Ottoman benefactors providing him with thousands of men, Ali Pasha promptly defeated his younger brothers, who were summarily forced to flee into the deserts of Fezzan leaving Ali in total control of Tripolitania and Cyrenaica. With the younger Karamanli brothers beaten, the Ottomans abruptly turned on the victorious Ali Pasha, dispatching his remaining loyalists and reestablishing Ottoman authority in the region.

    The Ottoman victory in Tripolitania had another effect as the ruler of Tunis, Mustafa ibn Mahmud Bey was successfully cowed into vassalage once more, albeit to a lesser degree than his predecessors. The matter in Tripolitania, however, would not end there as Mehmed and Ahmad Karamanli would soon reconcile their differences and reignite the fight against the Ottomans from the Southern deserts of Fezzan. Despite their earlier loss and humiliation, thousands of Arab and Berber volunteers joined their cause, attracted by the riches and weapons given away by the brothers to their supporters. Though it has remained unproven, many scholars believe that these wares had been provided by the neighboring Egyptians in a bid to disturb Ottoman interests in the region, as the Eyalet’s treasury and munitions depots had been captured along with their brother Ali in Tripoli. Regardless of the identity of their backer, the Karamanli rebellion would successfully hamper Ottoman efforts in the region for years to come. With Tripolitania largely secure, and Tunis cowed once more, the Sublime Porte could finally turn its attention to the last thorn in its side, Egypt.

    Not all had been pleasant for the House of Kavalali in the intervening years as a series of uprisings and revolts against their rule took place across the Levant and Arabia. In 1832, just months after the conclusion of the war against the Ottoman Empire, the Saudis of the Najd would revolt for a third and final time in 1832. Though they fought with vigor and fanaticism, they were put down once again, with as much brutality and finality as Ibrahim Pasha could muster. Two years later in 1834, the Druze of Lebanon would riot against the Muhammad Ali’s ally Bashir Shibab of Mount Lebanon for his supposed favoritism of the Maronites in his administration. Ironically, the Maronites would also revolt against Emir Bashir II for his heavy taxation and conscription policies which had been imposed in accordance with the Egyptian demands. As was the case with the Egyptians aiding the Karamanlis in Tripolitania, it strongly believed that these revolts in the Levant and Arabia were spurred on at the insistence of the Ottoman Government who covertly provided the rebels with arms and munitions to fight the Egyptians and their allies.

    The most serious rebellion against Egyptian rule in the Levant would take place in the Summer of 1837 when the residents of the cities of Ascalon, Hebron, Jerusalem, Jaffa, and Nablus rose up in rebellions against their Egyptian masters. While the peoples of Palestine were unhappy with the heavy tax policies of the Egyptians, the conscription of fighting age men into the Egyptian armies, and the hated modernization initiatives which disrupted their simple lifestyles, the spark of the revolt was the result of a tribal conflict between rival factions in Egyptian Palestine. The Qasim Clan and the Abu Ghosh Clan had been relatively prominent power brokers in Ottoman Palestine, but under the Egyptians they had been gradually replaced by members of the Abd al-Hadi clan who were staunch allies of the Egyptians. The shunning of tradition and local politics by Ibrahim Pasha and the Egyptian Government was too much to bare for the already oppressed peoples of Palestine who revolted in great numbers on the 29th of April 1837 when the chief of the Qasim Clan was imprisoned by the Egyptian authorities for inciting sedition against them.

    Within days, tens of thousands of Arab and Bedouin peasants and magnates rose in revolt catching the Egyptians off guard. Those loyal to Muhammad Ali and his son were ruthlessly butchered by the rebels, who violently beheaded every Egyptian soldier and administrator they could get their hands on. Outside of the Abd al-Hadi Clan and those loyal to Emir Bashir Shibab of Lebanon, the Egyptians had thoroughly alienated every individual, family, and clan in Palestine against them. As was the case with the earlier revolts contact did exist between the rebels and agents of the Sublime Porte who provided money and munitions to the Palestinians. The rebels for their part, made no secret that they received aid from the Sublime Porte, nor did they try to hide their proclamations calling on the Sultan to aid them in their struggle.

    550px-Jean-Baptiste_Huysmans_1.jpg

    The Ascalon Massacre

    For Sultan Mahmud II and the Ottomans, these revolts represented a perfect opportunity to retake the provinces of Adana, Aleppo, Damascus, Sidon, and Tripoli which had been lost to Muhammad Ali at the end of the last conflict between them in 1832. To that end, the army was called up and given marching orders, all that remained was the issuing of the final go ahead from the Sultan. Their efforts would ultimately be for not when the Sultan fell ill with a terrible case of tuberculosis in June rendering him incapable for several weeks. Despite his many administrative and bureaucratic reforms over the years, many of the Government’s initiatives still fell under the prerogative of Sultan and as he was indisposed, the opportunity came and went with the Ottomans doing little to aid the dissidents.

    Without the aid of the Sultan and the Ottoman army, the Palestinian uprising was methodically and brutally crushed by the Egyptians. Ibrahim Pasha directed his army against the city of Jerusalem where he mercilessly destroyed all who opposed him. The rebels were butchered, their leaders were executed, and their families were deported to Egypt where many would die in poverty and destitution. This process was repeated at Jabal Nablus, Gaza, Galilee, Hebron, and everywhere else that the rebels had dared to rise against him and by the end of the year, the Levant was at peace once more, it would not be the last revolt against Egyptian rule however. Three years later in January 1840, outside the city of Hamah, an altercation between an Egyptian officer and a local merchant would lead to the merchant’s death. Angered by this outcome, the people of Hamah fell upon the Egyptians, slaughtering the lot of them, sparking the next in the long series of revolts against the Egyptians.

    When news of this Syrian Uprising reached the Sultan’s palace in Constantinople, Sultan Mahmud immediately issued the orders to ready his forces for war. On the 2nd of March, the commander of the Eastern Ottoman Army Hafiz Osman Pasha received his orders are marched across the border into Adana. The 2nd Syrian War had begun in earnest and unlike the First this war would be much less one sided. Marching from their barracks in Konya to the city of Mersin on the Mediterranean coast, the Ottoman Army, some 100,000-strong made quick progress reducing its defenses and taking the city by storm on the night of the 10th. This victory was soon followed by the recapture of Adana nine days later, Alexandretta would fall in early April, and Gaziantep would follow a month after that. By the start of May, the entirety of Egyptian Adana had fallen and the Ottoman army now stood poised to reenter Syria.

    For the Egyptians, this development was incredibly alarming. While they had anticipated Ottoman intervention on the side of the rebels and had strengthened the northern garrisons accordingly, they did not anticipate their defenses along the border collapsing as quickly as they did. Ibrahim Pasha had hoped that his forces in Adana would hold long enough for him to deal with the Syrian rebels before marching north to relieve his men to the North. While he had succeeded at capturing Tartus and Homs from the dissidents and his compatriot Suleiman Pasha had captured al-Salt, Amman and Damascus, Hamah remained obstinately opposed to him, forcing Ibrahim to starve the rebels into submission. Now caught between the Ottoman army to the North and the remaining Rebels to his South, he faced a terrible predicament.

    300px-Henri-daniel-plattel-portrait-of-ibrahim-pasha-1840.png

    Ibrahim Pasha (1840)

    Ibrahim and his force could march north to combat the Ottoman Army which was presently besieging Aleppo, but in doing so he would run the risk of the rebellion reigniting in the region. His force was also much smaller than his foes’, numbering slightly higher than 50,000 and while he had defeated forces many times his own numbers before, he recognized that the Ottomans had improved somewhat since their last encounter. Alternatively, he could hold his ground outside Hamah and destroy the few remaining rebels before the Ottomans could arrive to assist them, but in doing so he would likely condemn his soldiers at Aleppo to death. A third option to retreat and join with Suleiman Bey did exist, but was soon thrown out. Ibrahim would eventually settle on a compromise of the first two plans, he would leave behind a small screening force of 10,000 men to continue the siege of Hamah, while the remainder of his forces would march north to combat the Ottomans.

    Curiously, throughout this entire endeavor much of the Egyptian fleet remained unaccounted for as Muhammad Ali had recalled his ships to Alexandria at the start of the war. When news reached his court in late-March that Ottoman forces had crossed into his territory and taken his cities, Muhammad Ali, who was now approaching his 71st year on this Earth, rallied his soldiers and sailors for war and prepared his own fleet to drive back the Ottoman invasion, the Kapudan Pasha Ahmad Fevzi had plans to the contrary however. Two days later, on the 28th of March 1840, 74 ships of the Ottoman Navy appeared on the horizon, their sailors ready for war and their cannons aimed at Alexandria.

    Next Time: Egypt in the Maelstrom


    [1] The Bahriye Mektibi Naval School had been around since 1773, along with the Naval High School but it had been subject to numerous renovations, relocations, and closures due to financial issues and a particularly bad fire in 1822. Before this point in TTL, or 1838 IOTL, the Bahriye Mektibi Naval School was more akin to a cartography school for prospective navigators rather than an actual naval academy.

    [2] I managed to find a source indicating a man by the name of Mehmed Karamanli claimed to be the Ruler of Tripolitania from 1832 to 1835 when the Ottomans reconquered the region in OTL. That said, I didn’t find any information about a second brother named Ahmad, so I picked that name at random because it was a relatively common name in the Karamanli family.
     
    Part 47: Egypt in the Maelstrom
  • Part 47: Egypt in the Maelstrom

    680px-View_of_Pompey%27s_Pillar_with_Alexandria_in_the_background_in_c.1850.jpg

    Alexandria on the Eve of War

    Coinciding with Osman Pasha’s invasion of Adana, the Kapudan Pasha of the Ottoman Empire Ahmad Fevzi Pasha was tasked by Sultan Mahmud II with attacking the city of Alexandria. It was the hope of the ailing Sultan and his aging Grand Vizier Khosref Pasha that the Ottoman Navy might destroy or otherwise incapacitate much of the Egyptian flotilla before they could join with Ibrahim Pasha’s army in the Levant. It was believed that if such a decisive blow could be struck against their enemy, then the whole region would rise in revolt against the Kavalali once again and an Ottoman victory in the war would be all but assured. With the Levant in rebellion and their fleet destroyed, the Egyptian force in Syria would become trapped between the Mediterranean Sea to the West, the Ottoman Army to the North, the Syrian desert to the East, and the rebels to their South with little hope of escape or resupply.

    To achieve that end, the lion’s share of the Ottoman Fleet, some 74 ships in total were dispatched on the mission to Alexandria in what was to be a coup de main against Muhammad Ali. Departing from their base in Constantinople at midday on the 20th of March, Ahmad Fevzi Pasha led his armada on a southerly route along the Aegean coast of Asia Minor. After passing the isle of Rhodes on the 21st the fleet immediately shifted course, bearing Southeast towards Egypt and the Nile Delta. Soon though, the weather began to turn against the Turkish fleet as dark clouds gathered on the horizon, the winds increased, and the seas worsened as a late winter storm fell upon the unsuspecting fleet, throwing eighteen ships far off course. The billowing winds of the tempest were so great that two ships, the 44-gun Frigate Mirat-i Zafer and the 80-gun Third Rate Necm-i Sevket would be blown as far away as Crete some 90 miles away to the West.

    Rather than press on without them, Ahmad Pasha instead waited off the coast of Rhodes for three days while he searched for his missing ships and sailors. While his decision to wait may have been compassionate in nature, it was also rational given the extensive battering many of his ships had endured during the storm. Several ships suffered varying degrees of damage, most of which consisted of ruined rigging or ripped sails that would require mending, but some had suffered hull damage and were taking on water when they were thrown against hidden rocks and sand barges. Additionally, nearly three dozen sailors and officers had fallen overboard during the storm leaving some of the smaller ships undermanned necessitating some reshuffling of crewman between ships. While a search was made for the missing sailors, it was quickly abandoned the following day in favor of finding the missing ships and all men were presumed lost at sea. Eventually the last of the ships were discovered on the 25th and the last of the repairs were completed the following day allowing the fleet to set off once again for Alexandria this time without issue and would arrive at their destination at dawn on the 28th of March.

    Rather than immediately bombard the city and the Egyptian fleet within its harbor as he had been instructed, Ahmad Fevzi Pasha would instead opt to enter negotiations with the civilian and military leaders of Alexandria, demanding the surrender of the city to the forces of the Ottoman Sultan. This questionable decision was compounded even further when he offered the Egyptian leadership until sunrise the following day to consider his demands. Whether Ahmad Pasha was simply overconfident of his fleet’s capabilities or reluctant to begin the attack no one can say, his decision to postpone the attack would cost the Ottomans dearly. The Egyptians for their part had been woefully unprepared for an attack against them so soon and spent several crucial moments in a panic, but when it became apparent that the Ottomans were not attacking immediately, they quickly collected themselves and prepared an attack of their own.

    The Egyptians were at a distinct disadvantage, however, as the tight nature of their harbor’s entrance made it so only two or three ships could pass through at a time. With the Ottoman fleet positioned at its exit, any attempt to sortie would be spotted immediately and snuffed out under a withering volley of cannon fire. Four warships had been caught outside the harbor when the Ottomans arrived and another seven ships were docked in the old port, but they would most likely be overwhelmed before they could join with the rest of their forces coming from the new port. Despite this obvious handicap, the Egyptians hoped that they could strike the Ottomans whilst they remained unsuspecting of their true intentions and went ahead with the attack anyway. And so, with daylight fading the Egyptians made their move.

    Despite his apparent reluctance to fight, Ahmad Pasha had permitted his ships to defend themselves if threatened, which the Egyptian sortie clearly was leading most to respond accordingly, as they turned their cannons on the approaching ships. Within moments, 2 of the 4 Egyptian ships outside the harbor were almost instantaneously destroyed by the withering cannon fire of the Ottoman fleet as were the first 3 ships that exited the harbor that came to aid them. The other two, the 80 gun Barecham and the 58 gun Aboukir were quickly captured by the Ottomans before they could make their attack. One ship, the old frigate Souriya would succeed in firing upon the Ottoman fleet and make a frantic attack on the Ottoman Steamship Mesir-i-Bahri, shooting one cannonball through the aft mast of the ship and another just above the waterline before it too was reduced to a floating mass of fiery debris by the heavy broadsides of the Turkish ships. Unable to effectively engage the Ottomans, who vigilantly guarded the opening to the port, the remaining Egyptian ships were forced to abandon their attack before it ever really began, with the only accomplishments of their failed endeavor being the loss of 8 ships. With the Egyptians showing their hand, Ahmad Pasha was forced to begin the attack on Alexandria itself, and within minutes of the failed attack, the city was under siege.

    The Egyptians were only spared from a complete catastrophe by a combination of three factors; first the Egyptian fleet in Alexandria’s harbor represented only half the number of the vessels available to the Khedivate of Egypt. The other half of the Egyptian fleet had been scattered across the Eastern Mediterranean aiding Ibrahim’s forces in Syria at the time of the attack. They were also incredibly fortunate that Muhammad Ali had sent the order to recall them to Alexandria only days before the Ottomans arrived, providing the defenders with the sense that help was coming. The Ottomans for their part had been under the impression the entire Egyptian fleet had been in port at Alexandria resulting in a slackening of their diligence and determination to finish the siege as rapidly as possible.

    Secondly, the high winds within the harbor mitigated the spread of the fires caused by the Ottoman bombardment. While many shells did indeed hit their targets, igniting munitions caches and sparking fires on sea and shore, these were relatively contained to the stricken ship or depot thanks to the swirling winds of Alexandria’s port which changed at a moment’s notice.[1] Finally, the defenses of Alexandria had been stiffened considerably over the many years of Muhammad Ali’s reign. The Citadel of Qaitbay at the mouth of the harbor had its walls reinforced, its guns were updated to contemporary standards, and the ramparts had been refurbished as had all the other forts in the city. Together with the littoral guns which had been positioned around the entrances to the two ports any Ottoman ship that dared enter their range risked annihilation.

    650px-QaitbeyCitadel2.jpg

    The Citadel of Qaitbay

    The guns of Qaitbay proved especially adept at hitting the Turkish ships forcing Ahmad Pasha to steadily move his fleet further and further afield to protect his own vessels, but this in turn steadily reduced his own force’s accuracy. As a result, a stalemate of sorts developed as the Ottomans fired on Alexandria and the Egyptians in turn fired upon the Ottomans, only for both sides to miss their targets completely. Had he been aware of his own numerical advantage over the Egyptians, Ahmad Pasha could have pushed his advantage and destroyed the enemy fleet. Instead he continued to keep his distance from the littoral guns while his ships sporadically fired on the town to little effect. His predicament was made worse by the lack of soldiers aboard his ships, preventing him from landing a force down the coast which could in turn attack Alexandria from land. Because of this, the farce that was the Siege of Alexandria would continue for four long days with the Ottoman ships firing upon the city’s harbor to minimal effect. Eventually though the attack would cease at noon on the 3rd of April and it soon became apparent why.

    Moharram Bey, commander of the Egyptian naval detachment aiding Ibrahim Pasha had returned to Alexandria with the remaining half of the Khedivate Fleet, some 51 ships and was charging upon the Ottoman fleet as fast as the winds would carry him. Though many of his ships were older than the freshly lain down Ottoman ships, the Egyptian crews were experienced sailors and their officers were adept commanders who had spent most of their lives at sea. Moharram Bey was himself a grizzled veteran of the war with the Greeks and the first war with the Ottomans in 1831, having directed invasion of the Morea and the naval bombardments of the littoral Levantine cities. With the arrival of the Main Egyptian Fleet, the battle of Alexandria began once more as the battered ships within Alexandria’s harbor made another determined sortie against the now outnumbered Ottoman fleet. Faced with a numerically superior force attacking from two opposing directions, Ahmad Pasha’s force quickly lost all sense of cohesion as the Egyptian ships broke through his hastily erected battle lines.

    The engagement that followed was sordid affair as battle lines on both sides quickly collapsed leading to a mass frenzy on the waves. Smoke and gunfire filled the azure sky, ships crashed into one another, men fell overboard by the dozens, and friendly fire was abundant. One particularly account details the sinking of the Ottoman steamship Eser-i Hayır by the Mahmudiye, which had mistaken it for the Egyptian steamship Mehmet Ali which had been spotted near the Eser-i Hayr. With its vision obstructed by smoke, the Mahmudiye fired all 60 of its portside guns upon their own compatriots without question. Only when the smoke cleared could they see the Ottoman ravaged horsetail fluttering in the wind and realize their mistake. Of a total crew of 192, only 48 members of the Eser-I Hayr’s crew would survive this unfortunate case in mistaken identity and they would not be the only case that day.

    Conflagration was also a clear and present danger for both fleets as open flames and lucky shots threatened to ignite exposed munitions caches aboard every ship. The old French Ship of the Line Scipion, having been sold to the Egyptians in 1834, was the unlucky victim of a fireship, which attached itself to the hull of the old ship like a magnet to metal and doggedly resisted all attempts by the Scipion’s crew to draw it away.[2] Overshotting also risked blowing ships to smithereens as overanxious captains seeking to gain an advantage on their adversaries stuffed their cannons well beyond their intended capacity. Many cannonades were filled with extra balls or even grapeshot providing an extremely volatile, yet remarkably effective concoction. The large supply of black powder needed to fire these heavy loads risked destroying the guns or even sinking the ships, but due to their lethality to enemy ships the technique was permitted if only this once.

    For two long hours, the battle would rage with the outcome listing on the edge of a knife, As the sun reached its pinnacle, Muhammad Ali’s trump card revealed itself when the Ottoman flagship, Mahmudiye suddenly and inexplicably burst into flaming debris. Over the course of the week-long engagement, Mehmet Ali had been courting Ahmad Pasha to his side with promises of riches and prestige.[3] It also helped Muhammad Ali’s cause that Ahmad Fevzi had no love for his superior, the Grand Vizier Khosref Pasha. The pair had a particularly bad falling out many years before and had never reconciled in their many years of working together, if anything their relationship worsened following Khosref’s promotion to Grand Vizier. This dispute had also turned the once loyal Ahmad Pasha against Sultan Mahmud who had come to see Khosref Pasha as a kindred spirit, resulting in the Kapudan Pasha’s opposition to the Sultan’s more extreme reforms. As such he and a few of his fellow like-minded subordinates, proved amenable to talks with the Khedive of Egypt during their initial correspondence on the 28th of March.

    550px-Battle_of_Sinop.jpg

    The Mahmudiye in Flames

    It is likely that the bombardment of Alexandria thus far had been used as a bargaining tactic for Ahmad Pasha and his fellow co-conspirators to raise the price of their defection. While it did no real damage to the city or the ships hiding within its walled harbor, it did serve as a aggravation for Muhammad Ali as it denied him from aiding his forces in Syria to his fullest ability. By leveraging his blockade and bombardment of the city against Muhammad Ali, Ahmad Pasha believed he could pry more riches and privileges from him in return for his services. Instead, his plans were ruined by the sudden arrival of Moharram Bey’s ships which likely disrupted their arrangement, forcing the conspirators into action in a bid to destroy any evidence of their treason.

    Still the destruction of the Ottoman flagship had the desired effect on the battle as it threw the rest of the Turkish fleet into confusion and despair. They were only saved from total defeat by the quick action of Topai Izzet Pasha who had become the effective commander of the Ottoman Navy following Ahmad Pasha’s supposed demise aboard the Mahmudiye. With the battle clearly against them, Topai Pasha worked to regain control of the fractured fleet and ordered an immediate retreat. Though the Egyptians would attempt to chase down the fleeing Turkish ships, by dusk the battle effectively came to an end although shots would continue to ring out well into the night. In many ways, the battle of Alexandria was a tactical defeat for the Ottomans yet a strategic victory for them as well.

    While the Ottomans were indeed forced to withdraw from Alexandria, the Egyptians clearly suffered worse losses in the battle. Over the course of the engagement the Ottomans would lose 3 Ships of the Line including their Flagship the Mahmudiye, 2 steamships, 3 Frigates, 5 smaller escort ships (brigs, corvettes, sloops and gunboats), and nearly 2,000 sailors and officers who were either killed, wounded, or captured, including Kapudan Pasha Ahmad Fevzi, who would “miraculously” turn up in Alexandria where he would remain as a gilded "guest" of Muhammad Ali. They had succeeded in capturing three Egyptian ships; the 2nd Rate Ship Barecham and the 3rd Rate Aboukir during the initial attack on the 28th of March as well as 2nd Rate Fayoum on the 3rd of April. However, the Aboukir would be scuttled during the following battle on the 3rd to prevent its recapture by the Egyptians and the Fayoum would suffer extensive damage to its hull and it masts in the same engagement, forcing it to withdraw from the battle almost immediately after it was captured.

    The Egyptians for their part lost 3 Ships of the Line, 4 frigates, 1 steamship, and 9 smaller vessels in both the siege and the naval battle that followed along with over 4,000 soldiers, sailors, and civilians over the course of the 5-day engagement. Their losses were recovered somewhat by the capture of the Ottoman 2nd Rate Tesvikiye, the 3rd Rate Ainduie, the steamship Tahir-i Bahri, the frigates Nouhan Bahri and Avnillah, and four smaller vessels. In addition to the ships sunk or captured, dozens of vessels on both sides suffered terribly, with many taking on water and others needing extensive repair that would effectively sideline another 50 ships between the two fleets for several months. The port of Alexandria also suffered immense damage to its docks, dry-docks, munitions depots, and other military structures around the harbor, greatly reducing the Egyptian Navy’s ability to utilize Alexandria as a naval base for the immediate future. Furthermore, while the Ottoman Navy had been forced to retreat they did not go very far.

    Once his damaged ships and injured crewmen had been sent back to Constantinople, Topai Pasha took his now reduced fleet of 46 ships to raid and pillage the Nile Delta and unlike Ahmad Pasha, he would prove to be a decidedly more loyal and therefore effective commander. This in turn forced Muhammad Ali to dedicate many of his remaining ships to hunting the Ottoman fleet as opposed to aiding his son Ibrahim Pasha who was now faced with defeating the Syrian rebels and the 100,000 strong Ottoman army with his force of 40,000 men. Ibrahim's only support was Suleiman Pasha’s force of 20,000 located to the South of Damascus and Bashir Shibab's Maronites on Mount Lebanon, but both were occupied repressing revolts in their vicinity. If he were to call on either of them, then Ibrahim would run the risk of inciting the region to rebellion once more. Ultimately, it was up to Ibrahim to defeat the Ottomans by himself.

    Next Time: Fire and Thunder on the Plains of Syria


    [1] In 1825, Greek Admiral Constantine Kanaris led an attack against Alexandria in OTL that was also foiled by the winds. Despite making his way into Alexandria’s harbor and attaching his fireships to the Egyptian ships, the Egyptian fleet was saved from a catastrophe by the changing of the wind. Lord Cochrane would make a similar attempt in 1827 several weeks before the battle of Navarino, but his attempt was similarly foiled by the wind. Had either attempt succeeded, the war in OTL may have gone a lot differently.

    [2] The Scipion was the target of a fireship in the OTL battle of Navarino, but thanks to the cooperation of the Scipion’s crew and a neighboring British ship, the fireship was towed away and carefully sunk. Here it isn’t so lucky.

    [3] Ahmad Fevzi Pasha defected from the Ottoman Empire to the Khedivate of Egypt during the Second Egyptian Ottoman War, citing growing Russian influence over the young Sultan Abdulmejid. In the OTL defection, Ahmad Pasha succeeded in taking the entirety of the Ottoman Fleet over to the Egyptians, here he is less successful given the fact that Sultan Mahmud is still alive, albeit barely, and the more extensive reformation of the Ottoman military and administration, has managed to root out several disloyal officers and administrators.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 48: Fire and Thunder on the Plains of Aleppo
  • Part 48: Fire and Thunder on the Plains of Syria

    cde124af-b8ba-45ef-b09e-8c88c9fc85c5_16x9_788x442.jpg

    Egyptian Soldiers in the Battle for Aleppo

    The situation in Syria would steadily turn from bad to worse for Ibrahim Pasha over the course of April and May. Day in and day out, week after week dispatches from his deputy in Aleppo Rashad Bey arrived at his camp outside the rebel held stronghold of Hamah.[1] Each message would prove grimmer than the last as the Ottomans progressively advanced upon the great city of Aleppo. The Kurd Mountains would fall to the Turks on the 10th of April, their defenses in the Afrin Valley would be overrun three days later on the 13th, and on the 18th 45,000 Ottoman soldiers had reached the outskirts of Aleppo itself. Rashad Bey held firm, however, and managed to lead his 8,000 Egyptian soldiers and 1,500 Arab militiamen to a surprising victory against the Ottoman assault on the 19th despite being outnumbered nearly 5 to 1. A second assault on the 21st and a third on the 25th were similarly repelled by the Egyptians defending Aleppo.

    Osman Pasha and the Ottomans were not deterred by these setbacks, however, as they gradually settled in for a protracted siege of the ancient city. Aside from its status as the gateway to Syria, Aleppo had once been the third largest city in the Ottoman Empire as well as one of its richest, serving as a terminus along the old Silk Road to the East and the King’s Highway to the South. Its prestige alone made it an enticing target of Ottoman operations in theater, but it was its strategic location that made it so necessary for the Ottomans to seize the city. The importance of Aleppo was not lost on Ibrahim Pasha either, as he had personally seen to the fortification of Aleppo and its surrounding environs in the years between the two wars. He stationed thousands of his best soldiers and one of his most loyal lieutenants, Rashad Bey, to defend the city against the Ottomans at all costs. Should it fall to the Turks, then it would signal to all the apparent weakness of Egypt, which more than anything would threaten to undo all he and his father had worked to accomplish for all these many years.

    Unfortunately for Ibrahim, he could not immediately march forth himself to rescue his men trapped at Aleppo as Hamah and much of the Syrian countryside remained a breeding ground of unrest and agitation against Egyptian rule in the region. His attempts to obtain their surrender through coercion and compassion had met with repeated failure as the local mullahs and Sheikhs wanted nothing more to do with the Kavalali. He was also limited in his actions by his relatively poor manpower, which by all estimates amounted to 80,000 men dispersed across Palestine and Syria which would take many weeks to fully assemble in advance of any effort to relieve Aleppo. Though he was by no means averse to sending men to their deaths if need be, his experience in Greece had instilled in him the dangers of wasting his men when he could not be easily reinforced. With reinforcements from Egypt hampered by the attack on Alexandria at the end of March, and the continuing raids on Lower Egypt by the Ottoman Navy diverting most of his ships, Ibrahim could ill afford to lose his men on a needless assault against Hamah. To that end, he resolved to slowly starve the rebels into submission and hold out hope that his men in Aleppo would hold out until then.

    Osman Pasha had no such restraint, however, as he sent wave after wave of Ottoman soldiers against the walls of Aleppo on an almost daily occurence, although they were probing efforts rather than full assaults in most cases. When it became apparent that brute force would not achieve victory, the Ottomans turned to siege tactics. They began erecting a series of trenches and earthworks around the perimeter of Aleppo in a bid to cut the defenders off from the outside world and they even dammed the Queiq River to further hamper the Egyptians within the city. Their efforts were relatively successful in securing the roads to the North and West of Aleppo, but they encountered stiffer resistance from the Egyptians to the South and East. Rashad Bey had hastily erected a series of trenches and casemates around Aleppo which he successfully managed to hold for a time, but without help from Ibrahim, it would be impossible to fend off the Ottomans for long.

    Ibrahim to his credit did send men and supplies when he could spare them, sending 3,000 men on the 1st of May, and another 5,000 soldiers would be sent two weeks later, on the 15th. This second force would be of little help, however, as the Ottomans responded with reinforcements of their own following the surrender of Gaziantep on the 4th of May and the capture of Latakia on the 11th. By the end of May, the entire Ottoman army in theater, some 98,000 men had been concentrated at Aleppo which proved too much for the 10,000 plus defenders within Aleppo’s walls. With the disparity between them even worse, Rashad Bey was brutally beaten back from his outer defenses by the endless waves of Turkish infantry, effectively severing his link to the outside world only hours before the second band of Egyptian reinforcements arrived on the 18th. Before losing his lifeline, Rashad Bey dispatched one final envoy to Ibrahim Pasha informing his commander of his imminent defeat and implored him to succeed where he had failed.

    Now completely cut off, conditions within Aleppo rapidly collapsed as food shortages almost instantly became a concern for both the Egyptians and the people of Aleppo. Though some food and water had been stored prior to the battle, a large influx of refugees from the countryside had fled to the city in advance of the Ottoman army putting a greater strain on the supply situation in Aleppo. Attempts to distribute the rationed food amongst the local populace met with stiff resistance when many received less than they needed and some received nothing at all while the Egyptians received their fill and the refugee populace received food that many believed was rightfully theirs. Within days, the situation deteriorated to point where the people of Aleppo were rioting in the streets, setting fires to government buildings, and even murdering Egyptian soldiers and civilians. To quell the unrest, the Egyptian soldiers used deadly force to disperse the rioters and while they were certainly successful in ending the violence at that time, they had also succeeded in turning the entire city against them.

    Several days later a second riot would break out in the city, prompting the Ottomans to make what would be the final push against Aleppo. Though Rashad Bey’s men fought valiantly and even succeeding in pushing the Ottomans back from their wall for a time, they were ultimately undone when a local man shot a bullet through Rashad Bey’s heart as he led the defense, killing him instantly. With their commander dead, their munitions growing desperately short, and the city under siege from without and within, the Egyptian soldiers were quickly overwhelmed by the endless waves of charging Turks. Even still, the Egyptians made one final attempt to holdout in the city’s medieval citadel, as 700 Egyptians would successfully manage to escape there. Despite this, they too were soon forced to surrender two days later on the 1st of June when it became apparent just how bleak their situation truly was; the siege of Aleppo was over after a little less than two months.


    a1262c79ca8cc78710e2b55718309314--aleppo-ottoman-empire.jpg

    The City and Castle of Aleppo (circa 1760)

    When news of Aleppo’s fall reached Ibrahim Pasha’s camp outside Hamah, dread immediately filled his heart as he had clearly underestimated the lengths to which the Ottomans had improved over the years. While he had been relatively successful in subduing much of the Syrian countryside over the past two months, Hamah still remained in rebel hands. Though he had hoped to starve the rebels into submission he knew that he no longer had that luxury now that Aleppo had fallen. With the Ottoman Army of Osman Pasha now free to march south against him, it was imperative that Ibrahim take Hamah. The call was sent out to the city surrender and live, or resist and die; quite predictably they chose to resist. With no other option, Ibrahim Pasha ordered his men to storm the city and take it by force; there would be no prisoners taken and there would be no mercy for those who resisted.

    The assault on Hamah was fierce, but after a bitter two and a half-month siege, the beleaguered defenders were thoroughly exhausted and malnourished, with many proving unable to even lift their weapons or raise their swords against the Egyptians as they rushed the city’s defenses. They were also predominantly peasants with little to no military experience making them poor adversaries for the highly disciplined and incredibly agitated Egyptian soldiers firing upon them. Within all of twenty minutes, the battered remains of Hamah’s walls were occupied and soon after the city had fallen. As promised, Ibrahim had the offending rebels put to the sword and the town was given over to 24 hours of looting and pillaging.

    With Hamah subjugated once more, Ibrahim gave his men one day’s rest before setting off to meet their destiny. Leaving behind the smallest garrison that he dared to garrison the ruined city, Ibrahim and his diminished army of 41,700 soldiers began its precipitous march north in the hopes he could meet the Ottomans on a battleground of his choosing, rather than theirs. He would ultimately decide upon the hills East of Idlib as his choice of battlefields and began to firmly entrench his force atop the highest hill, with stakes and stones thrown up before his force. His Force was divided into three columns, with his trusted Egyptians holding the center and exposed left flank, while his Arab militiamen were aligned along his right flank near the marshes of Matkh Swamp. Ibrahim’s preparations were not a moment too soon as Osman Pasha proved more than willingly to oblige the Egyptian commander with a pitched battle, advancing from Aleppo at a modest pace one day later on the 6th of June.

    Among Osman Pasha’s number was a young Prussian officer by the name of Helmut von Moltke. Captain Moltke had journeyed to the Ottoman Empire in 1835 to serve in an advisory role to the Ottoman Army at the personal request of Sultan Mahmud II. Mahmud had shown a great deal of interest in Moltke’s great talent and ingenuity as a soldier and personally wrote to Berlin asking for his transfer to Constantinople for several months, a term which would later be extended into several years. Captain Moltke primarily resided in Constantinople where he served as an instructor and advisor at the Mekteb-i-Harbiye, developing young Turkish boys into skilled army officers and talented leaders. He was also given exclusive access to map and survey the Ottoman capital and its surrounding districts, as well as many of the European and Anatolian territories of the Empire and would go on to make some of the most intricate maps of the Empire.
    440px-Hafiz_and_von_Moltke_at_Nezib.jpg

    Captain Moltke (Left) and Hafiz Osman Pasha (Center)

    Captain Moltke's keen eye for detail also extended to military formations and tactics, specifically artillery, which allowed him to accurately understand the strengths and weaknesses of Ibrahim’s position. Captain Moltke based on his experience as a soldier and surveyor, cautioned against a frontal assault as the Ottoman guns would be at a disadvantage firing uphill upon the Egyptians. Instead, he advised seizing the lightly defended hills west of Ibrahim, where they could position their own cannons on a more equal footing with the Egyptians. Many of Osman Pasha’s own officers and mullahs disagreed with the young German captain’s advice, arguing that it would take too long to preposition their forces to Moltke’s specifications and in that time Ibrahim would likely retreat denying them the opportunity to achieve a glorious victory on the field of battle. Though he had come to respect the young Prussian captain and appreciate his opinions, Osman Pasha ordered the attack to begin at once despite Moltke’s objections.[2]

    In a display emblematic of the Grande Armée, 102 Egyptian cannons erupted upon the advancing Turkish soldiers ripping their ranks to shreds in a matter of minutes. The 94 guns comprising the booming Ottoman response, while certainly effective at killing scores and maiming hundreds more, was less effective than its adversaries’ guns which killed hundreds and wounded thousands more. Thunder filled the air and fire filled the sky as lead and iron ripped through flesh and bone. As the artillery duel continued unabated, the Ottoman infantry began to hasten their march upon the Egyptian lines. Those men in the Turkish vanguard would suffer terrible casualties on their march up the hill to get within firing range, as cannonballs plowed through tightly packed ranks of men. Of the 20,000 men leading the charge, only 9000 would come within firing range of the Egyptian lines, the rest were either dead, too wounded, or too frightened to move forward.

    Once they reached the crest of the hill, however, they immediately began to engage the Egyptian soldiers opposite them, lessening the blow on their compatriots further down the hill who came streaming in behind them en masse. Within minutes tens of thousands of Ottoman soldiers of the Mansure Army would exchange shot after shot with Ibrahim’s force to brutal effect. Each volley ripped the Egyptians’ ranks to shreds, yet despite this they bravely stood their ground and gave as good as they took in the battle. They even succeeded in turning back the Ottoman cavalry when it attempted to flank Ibrahim’s position from the west. However, their efforts would all be for naught, as the Ottoman attack had met with far better results against the irregular Arab infantry composing the Egyptian right flank. While they managed to hold their ground for a time, the untrained and undisciplined Arab militiamen completely collapsed when the Ottomans fixed their bayonets and began their charge. Within seconds a quarter of his force was sent running and his remaining men now found themselves outflanked, forcing Ibrahim to sound the retreat.

    The Egyptians were ultimately beaten, but not after inflicting a terrible cost on the Ottomans. Osman Pasha suffered over 7,600 dead, and 17,000 wounded, half of whom would be stuck in hospital for many weeks to come, in return for about 3,200 dead Egyptians, 11,000 wounded Egyptians, and 5,400 Egyptian soldiers who were captured during their retreat. Another 6,000 Arab militiamen would desert Ibrahim after the battle reducing his already inferior force to little more than 26,000 bloody and beaten men. More troubling were the loss of his cannons, of the 102 Egyptian guns deployed in the battle, 30 had to be destroyed and another 23 had been captured by the Turks before their crews could properly spike them. No longer capable of standing against the Ottomans with the forces available to him, Ibrahim raced to the neighboring town of Idlib, where he stripped the city of its garrison, plundered the city of its riches, and put it to the torch to deny its use to the Ottomans. From there, he raced to Hamah where he did the same and then moved for Homs.

    He would be stopped on the road by the old Frenchman Suleiman Pasha who had arrived from Damascus with 14,000 reinforcements for Ibrahim Pasha. In the days prior to the engagement near Idlib, Suleiman Pasha had succeeded in crushing the final outposts of the Syrian rebellion around Damascus, permitting him to march North to aid his commander. Ibrahim would be supplemented even further by the arrival of his Palestinian Allies, the Abd al-Hadi clan, as well as the men of Mount Lebanon, under their leader Emir Bashir Shibab. Most importantly, 6,000 men from Egypt under the command of Salim Pasha arrived with fresh stocks of powder and lead, as well as two dozen field batteries to help replace the stock lost at Idlib. With his force rebuilt barely a week after the battle of Idlib, Ibrahim readied himself for the inevitable rematch against Osman Pasha.

    This rematch would prove to be surprisingly slow in its proceedings due in large part to the death of Sultan Mahmud II only days before the battle of Idlib. Mahmud had been plagued with a series of illnesses and ailments for many years, yet despite this he soldiered on for his Empire. Ultimately though, the consumption that ate away at his health would win out on the 1st of June 1840 leaving the throne of the Ottoman Empire to his like-minded son Abdulmejid. Suffice to say this turn of events greatly disheartened the Ottoman soldiers who had achieved all they had achieved because of their great sultan, whose indominable will had pulled the Ottoman military into the 19th century. Now that he was gone, much of the vigor that had fueled them to victory only days before evaporated in an instance.

    It could not have taken place at a worse time as well, now that Ibrahim was properly reinforced, he took the offensive and prepared to strike against the demoralized Ottomans. Although they still outnumbered him , the disparity between their two forces had been significantly reduced when Osman Pasha dispatched 18,000 men to seize Tartus leaving him with only 56,000 soldiers to Ibrahim's now 48,000 soldiers. Ibrahim was also aided immensely by the onset of a sudden sandstorm which concealed his movements towards the Ottoman ranks for several crucial moments. Thanks to high winds and low visibility, the Egyptians and their allies managed to come within 500 paces of the Ottoman camp before being finally spotted by the Turkish sentries. Catching the Ottomans off guard, Osman Pasha quickly ordered his men into battle formation, only for his men to lethargically and halfheartedly move into position.

    Ibrahim_Pasha_Battle_of_Nezib.jpg

    Ibrahim at the Battle of Ar Rastan

    The thunderous storm would continue to wreak havoc on both the Egyptians and the Ottomans as their accuracy suffered immensely in the ensuing engagement, only the cannons fired straight and true and only under careful aim. With gunfire proving largely ineffective, the battle soon developed into a melee as the Egyptians charged down upon the Ottomans. Demoralized, confused, and now under attack, the Ottoman will to fight steadily collapsed after a brief, but bitter fight. The battle of Ar Rastan, despite its relative brevity of only 50 minutes, would prove to be an especially brutal battle with nearly 14,000 men dying on both sides; many would die in accidents due to the storm, rather than from wounds incurred in the battle. A further 23,000 would be injured in the flurry between the Egyptian and Ottoman armies, and nearly 7,800 Ottoman soldiers and officers would be captured in the engagement, including one Captain Helmut von Moltke. The Egyptians would suffer a significant loss of their own, however, with the loss of Suleiman Pasha who suffered a gunshot wound to the gut, which ultimately cost him his life five days later on the 17th of June.

    Despite taking the field, the Egyptians would prove unable to take advantage of this victory at Ar Rastan. In the days following the battle, reports from Alexandria would reveal that Muhammad Ali had fallen terribly ill, forcing Ibrahim to return to Egypt and assume the regency in his incapacity.[3] With Ibrahim gone and Suleiman Pasha on his deathbed, command of the army fell to Salim Pasha. Salim Pasha would prove to be a poor replacement for Ibrahim, as he would dither in the Syrian countryside for several weeks before ultimately withdrawing to Homs in the face of an Ottoman Army in late July, effectively abandoning all territory north of Homs to the Ottomans without so much as a fight. Osman Pasha would similarly fail to take advantage of this new opportunity, only advancing to the outskirts of Homs where he waited cautiously for weeks on end, without so much as a shot fired in hostility. It soon became apparent why, his master, the young Sultan Abdulmejid desired peace.

    After seeing his father eaten away by a lifetime of war, Sultan Abdulmejid had become predisposed towards peace. His armies had secured much of Syria up to a line running from Tartus to Homs to Tadmur and his navy had inflicted a strong, if relatively indecisive blow against the Egyptians in late March. With Muhammad Ali seemingly on his deathbed as well, it would have appeared to all that peace would soon be at hand provided an amicable arrangement could be reached between the Egyptians and the Ottomans. Ibrahim for his part also desired peace, although for a less idealistic rational, his father’s domain was suffering from terrible instability as rebels, new and old rose up against him. Egypt was also suffering from a terrible economic depression as the Ottoman fleet continued to disrupt trade in the region, his navy was evenly matched at sea for the moment, and his manpower was nearly tapped in its entirety. Most importantly, the Powers circled like vultures in the sky awaiting any signs of weakness on either side to swoop in for the kill.

    Though the occasional skirmish would continue in the wilderness of Syria and on the Mediterranean Sea, a truce of sorts came into effect across the theater. With an uneasy ceasefire effectively settling over Syria, representatives of the Ottoman Porte and the Egyptian Khedivate met to discuss terms for peace. Soon though an incident between a French ship and an Ottoman vessel off the coast of Cyprus would threaten to reignite the conflict in its entirety.

    Next Time: The Cypriot Affair


    [1] In OTL, Rashad Bey died in Jerusalem during the 1833-1834 Palestinian Revolt. In this timeline, he survives the Peasants revolt and is later moved to Aleppo where he serves in a similar capacity to OTL.

    [2] A similar event took place in the OTL battle of Nezib in which Moltke the Elder served as an Ottoman advisor and commander of the artillery. IOTL, however, he advised Osman Pasha to withdraw to a more defensible location to engage Ibrahim instead of their easily surmountable position at Mezar.

    [3] There are accounts that believe Muhammad Ali suffered from senility in his last years, or a condition very similar to it either because of his growing paranoia following the war, or because of silver nitrate which he took to treat an especially bad bout of Dysentary. ITTL he unfortunately develops something of the sort a few years earlier forcing Ibrahim to return to Egypt.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 49: The Cyprus Affair
  • Part 49: The Cypriot Affair

    550px-Hamidianmassacres.jpg

    The Nicosia Riot

    French support for the Khedivate of Egypt originally began in the years following the end of the Napoleonic Wars. At its onset, the relationship between Egypt and France was an attempt by Muhammad Ali to strengthen his grip on the Eyalet of Egypt through the modernization and reformation of the Egyptian military and economy. The restored Bourbon Monarchy in turn used it as an opportunity to export liberal officers and troublesome intellectuals to serve in Muhammad Ali’s court while also buying and selling various commodities between one another. Over the years, this relationship would expand to include the shipment of arms, munitions, and even warships which would help cement the Egyptian military as one of the finest in the world.

    These shipments of officers and engineers, weapons and ships would continue unabated through the Greek War of Independence, despite French intervention on the sides of the Greeks in 1827. Even the overthrow of the Bourbons and the rise of the July Monarchy in 1830 failed to impair the relationship between Egypt and France.[1] The French support of Egypt would finally pay dividends during the First Syrian War as the Egyptian Navy, comprised almost entirely of French built warships, completely overwhelmed the cities and fortresses of the Ottoman littoral in Syria and Palestine. The effect was so great that the Ottoman position in the Levant had collapsed within a matter of weeks, rather than the months originally anticipated, bringing the conflict to a swift and decisive conclusion in favor of Muhammad Ali. This result would in turn lead the Ottoman government to seek military aid of its own from the Prussians, Austrians, and British, helping them to narrow the gap between themselves and the Egyptians.

    When the Second Syrian War broke out in March 1840, it came as no surprise that the French continued to support their client in the face of the Ottoman aggression. If anything, the surprising success of the Ottomans on the battlefield in the initial weeks of the war necessitated further involvement by the French to prop up the beleaguered Khedivate lest they lose their foothold in the region entirely. As early as mid-April, French flagged ships began appearing along the Levantine coast bearing food, clothing, and medical supplies at first, but soon thereafter they were hauling rifles, cannons, and Egyptian soldiers to the front in Syria from Egypt stretching the bounds of their neutrality to the limit.

    Unsurprisingly, the Ottoman Government would take great umbrage with this interference in their internal affairs and a formal complaint was dispatched to Paris, and the French ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, Edouard Pontois was publicly lambasted by the ailing Sultan Mahmud II. Beyond this however, no hostility actually took place between the Ottomans and the French as both feared an escalation of the conflict between them. Eventually, tensions would cool as the conflict in Syria ground to halt following the battle of Ar Rastan, the death of Sultan Mahmud, and Sultan Abdulmejid’s subsequent call for a ceasefire. The magnanimous young Sultan even offered the French a seat at the peace conference as a mediator, alongside Britain, Austria, Prussia, and Russia. But before that conference could take place, an incident at sea would threaten to unravel everything.

    300px-Sultan_Abd%C3%BClmecid_I.jpg

    Sultan Abdulmejid I (circa 1840)

    On the 3rd of July, the French Frigate Résolue and her sister ship Thetis left port in Alexandria alongside 3 smaller merchant ships carrying the latest shipment of arms and munitions for the Egyptian soldiers in the Levant. Though the fighting had officially ceased, skirmishes and the occasional raid still occurred between the Ottomans and Egyptians necessitating the continued influx of military supplies into the region. The lack of a firm response to their earlier behavior by the Ottomans had made them careless, however, leading the French ships to choose the shorter route directly across the Mediterranean rather than the safer, albeit longer route along the Levantine coast. This decision would unfortunately be their undoing as it put them in the direct path of an Ottoman naval patrol that had set out from Cyprus earlier that same day.

    By chance, the four Ottoman warships; the third rate Sadiye, the two frigates Chabal Bahari and Naoum Bahari, and the sloop Bayramli, successfully managed to intercept the French vessels some 22 nautical miles off the South-Eastern coast of Cyprus on the 4th of July. Initially, the Ottoman ships proved cordial enough to the French vessels, asking about their journey thus far, where they had departed from, and where they were headed towards. When it became clear that the ships were headed for Syria, the Ottoman commander Enver Reis requested to see the manifests for the ships. When these documents proved insufficient, he then requested permission to search the French ships of their cargo; baring that, the French vessels would have to be escorted to an Ottoman port where they would be docked until the end of the conflict between Egypt and the Porte to ensure that no breach of the cease fire took place. Panicked at this sudden development, the new Captain of the Résolue, Louis-Adolphe Bonard immediately cut communication with the Ottoman ships and made course for the Levantine Coast at full sail with the other French ships following its lead.

    Enver Reis took great umbrage at this and after several attempts to peacefully divert their course, he directed his ships to fire a series of warning shots just ahead of the lead ship, the Résolue. A miscommunication would instead result in the Sadiye firing upon the Résolue itself rather than ahead of it as intended by Enver Reis. This shot was unfortunately well placed, punching through the ship’s stern, instantly killing three sailors who had unfortunately been in the wrong place at the wrong time, and wounding another seven. This act immediately prompted the young Captain Bonard to return fire on the chasing Ottoman ships with his full complement of guns. This in turn was followed seconds later by the Thetis which opened fire on their pursuers as well leading the Ottoman ships to retaliate as well.

    What had been a relatively peaceful interaction only moments before, quickly degenerated into a bloody brawl as the French and Ottoman ships fired round after round on each other with complete abandon. Though the Ottomans technically had the advantage in number of warships at 4 to 2, the French frigates proved especially adept at hitting their targets while still maintaining their course for the Levantine coast. In an attempt to stop the violence before matters escalated any further, Enver Reis unilaterally ceased fire, an act which the French reciprocated, ending the confrontation three and a half minutes after it began. Despite its brevity, nearly 65 men would lose their lives in the skirmish, and another 384 suffered from varying injuries, from gunshot wounds to shrapnel wounds. Though the Ottoman ships would continue their pursuit of the French ships a little longer, they eventually gave up the chase and turned for the nearest port as night began to fall on the Eastern Mediterranean.

    550px-Proserpine-Antoine_Roux.png

    The Résolue Incident

    While the incident at sea was bad enough, it was unfortunately compounded even further by events on land when the damaged Turkish ships arrived in port at nearby Larnaca for repairs. The Bayramli had lost its main mast, the Chabal Bahari was taking on an alarming amount of water, the Sadiye was riddled with holes, and the Naoum Bahari has suffered damage to its rudder. More importantly, however, 38 Ottoman sailors had lost their lives in the engagement and another 194 had been wounded including the Squadron’s commander Enver Reis who had been struck in the shoulder by a flying piece of shrapnel. The return of the Ottoman squadron so soon after it had departed was a concerning development for the gathered crowd, but the sight of mutilated ships and numerous men being carried away on stretchers infuriated the placid crowd that had gathered at the docks.

    According to accounts of the incident, several individuals proceeded to gin up the angry mob to the point of violence. Hellbent on avenging the wrongs that had been committed that day, the enraged populace soon marched from the docks in the direction of the French quarter in the town. French traders were harassed, their stores were vandalized, and their goods were stolen. Windows of French owned properties were smashed, buildings were set ablaze, and some Frenchmen were even killed in the streets in retribution for the attack at sea. A more brazen act would take place in Nicosia on the following day, when the Turkish populace of the city marched on the French consulate once they learned of the events at sea. In their anger, the crowd threw rocks, roof tiles, and other projectiles at the diplomatic compound striking one French official dead and injuring several others in the process. Shouts of anger and cries of sorrow filled the air as protestors angrily berated the French for their impropriety. The violent mob even attempted to storm the consulate before the Ottoman soldiers moved to secure the scene finally ending the confrontation.

    The riots were not limited to the French communes in Nicossia and Larnaca sadly, as the neighboring villages of Lakatamia, Strovolos, Lympia would also report incidents of violence and unrest as well. Despite their innocence in the whole matter, some Greek Cypriots were targeted for attacks by the angry masses of Turkish Cypriots who wantonly terrorized their neighbors, looted their homes and stores, and even killed some unfortunate Greek Cypriots who attempted to calm the situation. Eventually the violence on Cyprus would come to an end when the Ottoman authorities cracked down on it, but by that point 17 Frenchmen had been killed as had an undetermined number of Greek Cypriots who had unfortunately been caught up in the commotion.

    Some of this anger can be attributed to the incident itself between the French convoy and the Ottoman Squadron, as a handful of Turkish Cypriots had been aboard the effected ships during the engagement against the French, but a more likely cause of this expression of rage originated from the French role in the war against the Egyptians. Many Turkish Cypriots had been conscripted into the Ottoman Army and Navy to fight in the ongoing conflict and those left behind were beset with heavy taxes to support the war effort. While certainly burdensome, these policies were tolerable so long as the Ottomans continued to find success on the battlefield and the prospect of a short war remained alive. However, thanks to French efforts to aid the Egyptians through the continued shipment of arms and munitions the war had stalemated and the Egyptians spine had been steeled. As a result, the ongoing standoff in Syria was as much France’s doing as it was Egypt’s. Regardless of the rationale behind it, the Larnaca and Nicosia Riots unnecessarily escalated an already tense relationship between the French and Ottomans.

    In the days and weeks that followed the incident at sea and the ensuing riots on land, relations between the French and Ottomans Governments steadily declined with each blaming the other for the confrontation. The Ottomans blamed the French for refusing to accept Ottoman demands to search their ships, while the French for their part blamed the Sublime Porte for deliberately firing upon a neutrally flagged ship and failing to prevent the violence on Cyprus. The only success after several days of tense negotiation was an official statement by the Ottoman government lamenting the loss of life on both sides, but saying little on the events that resulted in that loss of life nor offering any restitution to the French for their destruction of their property and the deaths of their men. Suffice to say, this response proved unsatisfactory to the French Government who responded by dramatically escalating the situation in the following days.

    Four weeks after the skirmish at sea on the 31st of July, the majority of the French Mediterranean Fleet departed for the Eastern Mediterranean under the command of Admiral Julien Pierre Anne Lalande.[2] Their target was the island of Cyprus which they were resolved to blockade until the Porte complied with their demands for proper restitution and a formal apology for causing the incident. Cyprus was deemed a satisfactory target for French retribution due to its proximity to the initial naval confrontation some 20 miles off its coast and for its involvement in the ensuing riots and pogroms against French citizens on the island. Provided they did nothing further to antagonize the Sublime Porte, it was believed by the crowned heads at Tuileries that a French blockade of Cyprus would be deemed insufficient to elicit a proper military response from the Ottomans given Cyprus’ peripheral strategic and economic importance to the Ottoman empire. Once they made a show of their determination to seek reparation, they believed that the Ottoman Government would submit to their demands to save face and the confrontation would be ended peacefully.

    Unsurprisingly, the Ottoman Government refused to acquiesce to French saber rattling, especially once the governments of Britain and Austria openly sided with the Porte against the French. Though Austria and Britain had sympathized with France over their loss of life at Larnaca and Nicosia, they recognized that this outcome was a direct result of their actions to flagrantly aid the Egyptians in their war against the Ottomans. Moreover, their blockade was completely irresponsible and a blatant display of gunboat diplomacy. Though they made no official act against the French initially, they believed that diplomatic pressure would be enough to persuade the French Government from its current course once it became clear that Britain and Austria would not allow the Ottomans to cave to French demands. The French however, proved especially stubborn in the maintenance of their blockade despite the protests of London and Vienna and as a result, this tense standoff would continue for nearly 10 days without resolution.

    550px-Batalla_de_la_Vuelta_de_Obligado.jpg

    The Blockade of Cyprus

    While the blockade had little effect on the French or the Ottomans it did have a significant effect on the island of Cyprus itself as law and order on the island slowly collapsed despite the best efforts of the Ottoman officials to the contrary. In the neighboring Kingdom of Greece, the French blockade of Cyprus would elicit a flurry of activity and debate as well once news from the island made its way to Athens in the following days. Seeking to take advantage of this opportunity, members of the Kingdom’s small, but relatively influential Cypriot community practically begged the Greek Government to intervene and liberate the island for Greece on their behalf. Many believed that the poor treatment of the Greek Cypriots in recent days demanded action by the Greek state, however, King Leopold and much of the Greek Government proved reluctant to interject themselves militarily in this present matter, a matter which was deteriorating by the day.

    Although the French were belligerent towards the Ottomans, they were not quite at war with one another yet, and while the treatment of the Greek Cypriots was appalling, it was not apparent that it had been carried out on behalf of the Ottoman government. It was clear that the Greek Government was content to wait and see what took place on Cyprus for good or for ill. Aside from refitting the aging RHS Hellas for active duty following a brief sojourn as a training ship and authorizing the raising of an additional 4 battalions for Hellenic Army and 4 battalions for the Ethnofylaki (National Guard), they made no definitive efforts to provoke the Ottomans, nor did they make any official claims to the island of Cyprus.[3] Without official backing from the Greek Government, some Cypriots would ultimately back down on the call for war, others like the Cypriot hero from the Revolutionary War, Nicholas Theseus did not, however, and began making their own preparations.

    Next Time: The Labor of Theseus


    [1] Several French Naval officers were aboard the Egyptian ships at Navarino on October 20th, 1827 in OTL but they were sent ashore after some negotiation by Codrington and de Rigny right before the battle took place.

    [2] Lalande was the French admiral in command of the French Levant Fleet during the OTL Second Egyptian Ottoman War. He actually proposed that the French seize the Ottoman forts in the Dardanelles region, thus preventing the Russian Black Sea fleet from joining with the Ottoman, British, and Austrian fleets in the Mediterranean. Suffice to say, this would have been an act of war by France and an escalation of the OTL war into something much worse.

    [3] The Greek Prefix for their ships is ΒΠ (VP) which stands for Βασιλικόν Πλοίον (Vassilikón Ploíon) "Royal Ship", hence the English translation being "Royal Hellenic ship" (RHS).
     
    Last edited:
    Part 50: The Labor of Theseus
  • Part 50: The Labor of Theseus

    Kanaris_Kypros.jpg

    Nicholas Theseus Landing at Polis Chrysochous

    Originating from a wealthy Greek Cypriot merchant family from Marseilles, Nicholas Theseus was every bit the idealist and nationalist as his countrymen in the Ottoman Empire. Upon the outbreak of war in 1821, young Theseus would return to Greece with all the speed he could muster, ready to fight and determined to win the independence of his ancestral homeland. Despite coming from wealth and enjoying a life of comfort and luxury in the diaspora, Theseus would dedicate his life and his fortune to the liberation of Greece, an endeavor that would consume the next twenty years of his life. He would distinguish himself in battle during the battle of Bralos in 1825 and again in the Second Battle of Nafpaktos the following year, before he joined in the expedition to liberate Cyprus when the Egyptians withdrew from the island in late 1827. Sadly, the expedition was complete disaster as the Ottomans arrived in force on the island in early 1828 and ruthlessly crushed all dissent on Cyprus, forcing the paltry Greek force to flee.

    Instead of escaping to Greece alongside his comrades, Theseus would remain behind on Cyprus where he would plan for a second revolt against the Ottomans when the time was right. That time would come in early 1833 following the abject humiliation of the Ottomans in the war with Egypt and coincide with the ongoing revolts in Albania and Bosnia. Moreover, the island of Cyprus had been subject to a serious of Sultan Mahmud II’s reforms which reduced the island’s autonomy and increased taxes on the population making conditions ripe for a revolt. Theseus, proving to be a charismatic figure, effectively turned the agitation of the people of Cyprus against the Ottoman authorities and for a time his revolt had some signs of life with the Cypriots capturing the cities of Larnaca, Nicosia, and the villages of Lakatamia and Stavrovouni. Theseus even managed to secure the support of numerous Turkish Cypriots in his rebellion despite their past differences and hostility towards one another. Yet despite his early successes, Theseus’ endeavor would meet with failure thanks to the guile of Sultan Mahmud II.

    With his armies occupied fighting in the hills of Albania and Bosnia, and his navy still rebuilding from the war against Egypt, Sultan Mahmud II responded by modifying his tax proposals for Cyprus in a bid to alleviate some of the concerns of the Cypriots. This in turn dealt a major blow to Theseus’s cause as many of Theseus’ followers would desert him in the days following the Sultan’s proclamation as a result. The revolt would limp along for several more weeks, but when the Ottoman army finally arrived in force on Cyprus later that Spring, Theseus and his followers were forced to flee to the Kingdom of Greece. Two other uprisings would take place in Cyprus later that year, but both would meet with similar fates, leading to the flight of hundreds, if not thousands of Greek Cypriots to the Kingdom of Greece over the course of 1833.[1] Now seven years later, Theseus and his followers prepared for their return home, but to that end they needed support.

    They received some aid from like-minded individuals in Greece, mostly from other Greek Cypriots and their fellow exiles from the Ottoman Empire, but their efforts to reach out to the Greek Government fell on deaf ears. King Leopold refused to hear any details of the plot and many other members of the government, while certainly sympathetic, offered little assistance beyond vague promises and moral support. A meeting between Nicholas Theseus and Greek Prime Minister Ioannis Kapodistrias would bring similarly mixed results. While Kapodistrias personally supported the Cypriots and their effort, he had organized the failed expedition to Cyprus in 1827/1828, he recognized the inherent dangers such a venture would bring to Greece if he did anything to aid them in his official capacity as Prime Minister. As such, he was forced to stay his hand for the moment, with the only aid he could offer being his prayers for their endeavor and whatever personal funds he happened to have on hand at the time of their meeting.

    Theseus and his comrades would receive more concrete support from the French Ambassador to Greece, Marie Melchior Joseph Theodore de Lagrene. Lagrene was a career diplomat for the Kingdom of France serving in various capacities as both an envoy and ambassador to several different countries over the years from Spain to Russia. Lagrene would prove to be the Cypriot adventurers’ greatest benefactor, as he provided them with an unrecorded number of French Francs to purchase arms and munitions for their endeavor. With these funds the Cypriots and their allies would purchase enough rifles, musket balls, and gunpowder to equip a small regiment. They even managed to acquire three old 12 pounders for their enterprise. More importantly, Lagrene provided them with the necessary paper work and credentials to make their way through the French Blockade and onto to Cyprus.

    450px-Julesitier.jpg

    French Ambassador to Greece, Marie Melchior Joseph Theodore de Lagrene
    (Second from the left)

    Whether Lagrene was simply enamored with the personal charisma of Nicholas Theseus or if he was operating under the orders of the French Government none, but Lagrene can say as all evidence regarding any role of the French Government might have played in supplying and funding the Cypriot revolt of 1840 were conveniently lost in a fire at the French Embassy less than three weeks later. Regardless, Lagrene’s efforts, whether they were of his own doing or those of his government, were instrumental in the organization of Theseus’ escapade. All told, 571 Greek adventurers, Cypriot expats, and Albanian journeymen would take the long voyage to Cyprus where they would arrive in early September, nearly two months after the initial incident at sea between the Ottomans and the French.

    Landing at the secluded seaside fishing town of Polis Chrysochous, on the island’s northwest coast, Theseus and his followers promptly declared a state of rebellion against the Ottoman rule of the island before heading inland to make camp. Citing the unjust increase in taxes to support the war against the Egyptians, the recent murder of Greek Cypriots by their Turkish oppressors, and the failure of the Ottoman authorities to restore law and order to the island in the wake of this unrest; Theseus and his followers declared the Sublime Porte and its agents to be unfit rulers of Cyprus and declared themselves for independence. Suffice to say, the outpouring of support from the locals left something to be desired as only 62 Cypriots would arrive in Theseus’ camp outside the rural village of Prodhromi during the first week of their “rebellion”. This lack of support from the Cypriot people was unsurprising given the great suffering they had endured in the previous 20 years following their prior attempts at revolt.

    Despite having little direct involvement in the War itself, the Greek community on Cyprus suffered mightily during the first months of the Greek War of Independence.[2] Any signs of unrest were brutally squashed before it could metastasize into an open revolt on the island, the Cypriots were thoroughly disarmed, and their leadership was summarily arrested and then executed by the Ottoman authorities. Even the island’s ecclesiastical leader wasn’t spared from the Ottoman repression as Archbishop Kyprianos along with the Bishop Chrysanthos of Paphos, Bishop Meletios of Kition, and Bishop Lavrentios of Kyrenia were executed for their support of the revolution on the mainland in 1821. Added to this were the ensuing pogroms and executions by the Ottomans following the failed 1828 uprising and the three revolts of 1833 and it was no wonder that the Cypriots were reluctant to join in yet another rebellion.

    However, as it became apparent that the Ottomans would not or rather could not do anything to immediately subdue Theseus or his followers, some Cypriots slowly began to take the jump to rebellion. By the end of September, another 403 men would join with Theseus’ band bringing his total number to a little over a thousand men and boys. Even still, this number was much lower than Theseus had hoped for and far lower than was needed if they were to have any success at all in liberating Cyprus. Most Cypriots recognized that while the Ottomans were still distracted with the war against Egypt and the ongoing blockade of Cyprus by the French fleet it was blatantly obvious that they would not last forever. Moreover, the Ottoman army would simply return in force to Cyprus ready to inflict their retribution upon all those who revolted against them once the war with Egypt and the French blockade finally met their end. As a result, most Greek Cypriots simply chose to endure the current situation rather than strive to change it.

    To achieve any measure of success for his venture, Theseus needed to attract more men to his cause, furthermore, he needed outside support if he was to have any realistic chance of success and to achieve that he needed a victory over the Ottomans and he needed to do so quickly before the French fleet was forced to withdraw. Therefore, he made his move against the nearby port town of Paphos located on the Western edge of the island. While it was one of the smaller cities on the island, more akin to a large town than a small city, its harbor was one of the finest on the island and its isolated nature made it an ideal target to attack. More importantly, Paphos possessed one of the weakest garrisons on the island at only 912 men compared to the several thousand Ottoman soldiers at Nicosia, Limassol, or Larnaca. With their target set, Theseus and his followers made quick progress through the foothills and forests of the Troodos Mountain, arriving outside Paphos on the 4th of October.

    450px-Vryzakis-Stratopedo_Karaiskaiki.jpg

    The Cypriot Rebels Arrive at Paphos

    After a brief skirmish outside the town, the Ottoman soldiers withdrew behind the walls of Paphos Castle, effectively ceding control of the town to the Cypriot rebels. Within a matter of minutes, Paphos had been liberated by Theseus and his compatriots, but very quickly events began to turn against him. While the “liberation” of Paphos was a victory, it was incomplete so long as the castle remained under Ottoman control and his attempts to capture left something to be desired. The assault against the castle's walls was a complete failure and the three cannons that Theseus had brought along from Greece made little progress against the walls of Paphos Castle, forcing Theseus to resort to starving its defenders out. Sadly, outside events would undo all of Theseus’ efforts, as news of their revolt had reached the ears of the British and Austrian Governments.

    By the beginning of October, both London and Vienna had grown tired of the French blockade of Cyprus which had continued much longer than anticipated. While they had originally hoped that France would quickly come to its senses and leave peacefully, it had become increasingly apparent that the French were being anything but sensible. Moreover, the news of the latest uprising on the Cyprus did little to improve the British or Austrian opinion of the blockade especially when reports of a French connection began to emerge. While they had little evidence to support their allegations, both were under the impression that Theseus’ uprising had been spurred on at the insistence of France, or at the very least they had aided in its cultivation. This was simply too much for the British or Austrians to ignore.

    When the British Ambassador to France, Earl Granville met with French Prime Minister Adolphe Thiers in late October, Granville, made it abundantly clear that the British Government would not tolerate French aggression and sedition against the Ottoman Empire. Thiers for his part feinted ignorance to the charges of supporting sedition on Cyprus and continued to play the part of the aggrieved victim who was simply seeking the justice it deserved. Granville would have none of it however. Moreover, he stated that should the French blockade of Cyprus continue into the new year, then a state of war would exist between the British and the French, with the Austrians and Ottomans joining in against them. Much to his chagrin and with no other choice, Thiers recalled the French fleet.

    The news of the uprising on Cyprus also caused the British Government to approach the Greek Government to discern their involvement in the affair. While the British admittedly assumed the French were the primary actors behind the plot, they also suspected Greek involvement to some extent as well. A meeting between British Ambassador to Greece Sir Edmund Lyons and Prime Minister Ioannis Kapodistrias would indicate this suspicion as Lyons in no uncertain terms made clear the consequences any such involvement would have. At best, the Greeks would suffer a small diplomatic humiliation, while at worst they would face war with the Ottoman Empire without the support of the British. Despite their limited involvement in the plot, the Greek Government had known about the plot and done little to prevent hundreds of their citizens from traveling to a foreign country to sow unrest, an act which was akin to an act of war.

    250px-Edmund_Lyons_%28large%29.jpg

    Sir Edmund Lyons, British Ambassador to Greece

    To ensure that there were no “misunderstandings” or salacious rumors made against the good name of the Kingdom of Greece, Lyons encouraged the Greek Government make a declaration condemning the violence on Cyprus. In truth though, this suggestion was much more than a simple request and one which the Greeks could not lightly ignore [3] Following the meeting with Lyons, Prime Minister Ioannis Kapodistrias proclaimed his and the Greek Government's support for an immediate end to the violence on Cyprus and their support of a peaceful resolution of the unrest in Cyprus. For all intents and purposes this would prove to be a death knell for the Cypriot revolt, as many would abandon the rebel camp outside Paphos in the following days. It would only worsen from there for Theseus and his followers as the Ottoman army transported 6,000 soldiers onto the island once the French Fleet finally withdrew from Cyprus in early November. Without any outside support, the Cypriot revolt effectively collapsed in the face of the Ottoman army.

    With Greece effectively closed off to them, Theseus and his remaining followers were forced to retreat into the Troodos Mountains, where they managed to elude the Ottoman authorities for several months before they were finally cornered in early February 1841 at the mountain monastery of Kykkos. For two and a half days, 78 Cypriot rebels would successfully fend off nearly 4,000 Ottoman soldiers before they were ultimately overwhelmed by the Turkish soldiers opposing them. In a final act of defiance, Theseus and his compatriots detonated their remaining stock of gunpowder as the Ottomans broke into the Monasteries’ courtyard killing all that entered in a fiery explosion. Miraculously, the frescoes and collection of holy icons housed at Kykkos Monastery were largely unharmed in the three days of fighting. When the smoke cleared, several hundred Turks and all 78 Greek Cypriots lay dead, including Nicholas Theseus.

    By all accounts, the Cypriot revolt of 1840 was an abject failure as Cyprus remained firmly planted within the Ottoman Empire and it would remain so for many years to come. However, Nicholas Theseus’ final stand at Kykkos would provide the Cypriot cause with more fuel than any of his earlier efforts as his heroic stand at Kykkos would galvanize future Cypriots. Despite his death, rumors about a possible escape from Kykkos and his continued escapades against the Ottomans would tantalize the countryside of Cyprus for many months leading the Greeks and the Turks to speculate as to his true fate. The end of Nicholas Theseus’ revolt would also bring an end to the Cyprus Affair, as France left the region utterly humiliated and their influence significantly curtailed. Though they would later join Austria, Britain, and Russia in opening Ottoman markets to European goods in 1844, this was small recompense for their lost prominence in the Eastern Mediterranean following the collapse of Egypt. With their only ally forced to withdraw from the region, Ibrahim Pasha, still acting as his father’s regent, was finally forced to the negotiating table and together on the 21st of January 1841 the Sublime Porte made peace with the Khedivate of Egypt.

    • The Khedivate of Egypt is reaffirmed as a constituent territory of the Ottoman Empire.
    • The Eyalets of Adana, Aleppo, Sidon and Tripoli shall be restored to the domain of the Sublime Porte.
    • By the grace of the Ottoman Sultan Abdulmejid I, the Eyalets of Damascus and Hejaz shall be bestowed upon Ibrahim Pasha until the time of his death, at which time they shall revert to the Ottoman Crown.
    • The rights and privileges of the Kavalali of Egypt, the Shibab clan of Lebanon, the Abd al-Hadi clan of Palestine, and all those who opposed the Ottoman Empire shall be guaranteed and affirmed by the Ottoman Porte.
    • In his magnanimity, the Sultan Abdulmejid I shall issue a general amnesty for all his Egyptian, Syrian, Lebanese, and Palestinian subjects that sided against the Empire during the previous conflict.
    • The Egyptian Army shall be reduced to no more than 40,000 men and the Egyptian Navy shall be reduced to no more than 50 warships.
    • Finally, peace shall be established between the Ottoman Porte and the Khedivate of Egypt.
    The Cyprus Affair and its surrounding events would lead to a worsening of relations between France and Britain that would plague the two countries for the next few years. Although they were by no means as poor as they had been during the Napoleonic Wars, the immediate aftermath of the Second Syrian War would represent a nadir in relations between them during this time. For Greece the Cypriot Affair would mark the end of Ioannis Kapodistrias’ Premiership. After nearly 14 years in power, the Count had chosen to fall on his sword for Greece, sacrificing his reputation with the people for the good of the country. Kapodistrias' resignation would also signal a greater changing of the guard in Greek society as the older generation began to give way to the newer generation.

    Next Time: Changing of the Guard


    [1] The Three 1833 Cypriot Uprisings are generally the same as OTL here.

    [2] About 1,000 Cypriots would fight in the Greek War of Independence. Most Cypriots, however, refrained from partaking in the fight themselves during the early stages of the war, choosing instead to send money and supplies to the Greeks on the Mainland. Their efforts were discovered unfortunately and as a result nearly 2,000 Cypriots would be killed by the Ottoman Authorities to prevent a general uprising on the island. The Cypriots would attempt a revolt of their own in 1828 at the encouragement of Ioannis Kapodistrias in OTL, but he was unable to provide them the necessary support to help them win their independence, ultimately resulting in their defeat.

    [3] Despite being relatively friendly early on in their relationship, Edmund Lyons would become increasingly antagonistic towards King Otto of Greece in OTL for his absolutism as well as his general “unfriendliness” to Britain. Moreover, he constantly acted to subvert Otto’s legitimacy and authority in Greece. I suspect that had Ioannis Kapodistrias survived, Lyons would have a similar relationship with Kapodistrias given the British Government’s widely held belief that he was nothing more than a Russian puppet in OTL.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 51: Changing of the Guard
  • Part 51: Changing of the Guard

    400px-Evzones6.jpg

    The Changing of the Guard outside the Royal Palace (circa 1910)

    The resignation of Prime Minister Ioannis Kapodistrias on the 27th of February 1841, came as a surprise to the general populace of Greece. While the Greek economy had been suffering from a sharp downturn, thanks in no small part to the recent war between Egypt and the Ottomans and the disruption to Greek trade that this conflict had caused, conditions in Greece had generally improved under his leadership and it was hoped that they would continue to do so now that the war was over. The extensive land reforms enacted in 1831 were finally bearing fruit as tens of thousands of new small farms now dotted the countryside providing the Greek people with stability and sustenance. Construction of the ambitious Athens to Piraeus Rail Line had finally started and the development of Athens into a modern European capital was well under way. Exciting new industries and opportunities were emerging across Greece and hugely ambitious projects were being planned. Literacy rates were slowly, but steadily improving; piracy and brigandage had been all but eliminated in Greece, and the spread of lethal pandemics had been dramatically curtailed as well under his stewardship. By all accounts this was all Kapodistrias’ doing and yet to those who worked with him day in and day out, it was clear that Kapodistrias was nearing the end of his tether by the start of 1841.

    For 14 long years, Ioannis Kapodistrias worked feverously from sunrise to sunset with hardly any time for rest and relaxation in between. The constant worry and stress he endured as a Head of State during a time of war and then later as a Head of Government during a time of rebuilding had taken its toll greatly aging him well beyond his 65 years. His hair, which had been distinctly grey when he first landed in Greece in January 1827, had gone completely white by the Summer of 1832 and his weight, which had been relatively gaunt to begin with, had gotten noticeably lighter every year. While he was by no means on his deathbed or incapable of running the government, it was becoming abundantly clear that his brilliant mind and relentless energy, that had so defined his earlier years had been thoroughly fatigued by the rigors of public office.

    Part of the issue behind this decline in health for Kapodistrias was the sizeable cacophony of detractors, political opponents, personal rivals, and foreign adversaries who relentlessly hounded him at every turn. Though he remained immensely popular with the common man and he held the unequivocal support of King Leopold and several prominent members of the Government, his rivals and political opponents were steadfast in their desire to unseat him as his policies directly threatened their power and privileges. Many of the Anti-Kapodistrians, as they came to be called, came from the old landed Primates of the Morea or the ship masters of the islands. Some came from the clergy while others were Constitutionalists who disagreed with Kapodistrias’ politics, regardless of their origins they all came to oppose the Count uniting to form the broader movement against him.

    They criticized his spending policies with some arguing that the government wasted too much on needless vanity projects like his railroads and mines, while others argued that he spent too little to aid those who had been left destitute and homeless after the war. Many critiqued his relentless push for modernization and industrialization as a betrayal of their traditional institutions and life style with the dissolution of over 500 monasteries and churches being a particularly heated point of contention. A few even resisted his efforts to centralize the state as well as any effort to curtail their traditional rights and privileges. No matter the issue, it would have seemed that Kapodistrias was bound to receive some level of scrutiny for his efforts regardless of the positive effect most of his policies had on Greece.

    By far though his greatest opposition came from Britain which remained obstinate in its opposition to the former Russian Foreign Minister. Believing him to be nothing more than a willing pawn of the Russian Tsar, despite his claims to the contrary, the British Government supplied his politcial opponents with a large degree of financial and material support in an effort to oust him from power lest he turn Greece into a Russian satellite. Most of their efforts were done through the nascent Greek press, which was heavily dominated by Kapodistrias’ opponents. A constant flurry of editorials and publications deriding Kapodistrias as a Russian stooge filled the streets of every major city in Greece, yet surprisingly they had little to no effect on the majority of the Greek people who continued to support him.

    The British also organized protests and political rallies against him, and on a few occasions they even encouraged their Greek agents to engage in more forceful acts against Kapodistrias during the later years of the war with the upheaval in late 1830 being one such case. Leopold's acceptance of the Greek Crown, however, would do much to alleviate their concerns of Russian dominance in Greece leading them to cease their more duplicitous efforts to unseat Kapodistrias in a bid to preserve the state’s stability. Despite this change in behavior on their part, the innate distrust of Kapodistrias by the British Government would remain for the remainder of his Premiership.

    Kapodistrias didn’t help himself much in this regard either as his penchant for rubbing people the wrong way remained as prevalent as it had ever been during the later years of his Premiership. Nowhere was this more evident than in his own cabinet as he quickly burned through no less than 5 different Foreign Ministers, 4 Ministers of the Army, 3 Ministers of the Navy, 2 Justice Ministers, 3 Internal Affairs Ministers, and 3 Treasury Ministers. Kapodistrias would manage to keep a decent working relationship with his Commerce Minister Andreas Zaimis during their nine years of working together, however, his untimely death in December 1840, would unfortunately deprive the Count of a reliable ally in the government. Moreover, his tendency for flaunting the Legislature had earned him several enemies among the so called Constitutionalist wing of the Anti-Kapodistrians during his earlier years in power and while he eventually learned to cooperate with the House on most matters, he would occasionally work around it on some issues. By far the most problematic issue for Ioannis Kapodistrias were his incredibly unpopular brothers, Viaros and Augustinos who had followed their more accomplished sibling to Greece in 1827.

    200px-Avgoustinos_Kapodistrias.jpg

    Augustinos Kapodistrias

    Both brothers possessed many of Ioannis’ faults, yet few of his talents; they were incredibly arrogant, overbearing, and presumptuous, and while they were certainly talented as soldiers, politicians, lawyers, and diplomats to some degree, they were incredibly prone to interfering in the affairs of others. Following his arrival in Greece, Augustinos was summarily appointed to the Hellenic army of Western Roumeli under the command of the Souliot Markos Botsaris. Augustinos would prove himself to be a relatively competent officer leading the Greeks in the liberation of Antirrio and then later Agrinion, whether this success was his own doing or a result of the general collapse of the Ottoman war effort none can say. However, his primary responsibility was as a quartermaster of sorts, giving him control over the payment, supply, and rationing of the Greek army.

    Augustinos would prove himself inadequate for this position as he constantly diverted resources to supposedly more important fronts leaving Botsaris’ force to scrounge by with what they had on hand. Many men would be in arrears for weeks on end and some units lacked even the most basic of weapons with which to fight the Ottomans. This would unfortunately delay Botsaris’ effort to liberate Missolonghi in 1828 by several months. Sadly, this chronic supply shortage would appear once more during the Summer of 1829 when Markos Botsaris made his last push toward the Souli Valley and because of Augustinos' close relationship with Ioannis Kapodistrias there was little he could do about it. With gunpowder in short supply and his men teetering on the edge of mutiny over their lack of pay, Botsaris was unable to reach his ancestral homeland before the end of the war.

    Viaros’ short tenure as the Governor General of the Aegean Islands was perhaps even worse as the islanders chafed under his disparaging rule. He diminished the islanders’ traditional autonomy, ignored local officials in favor of government appointed ones, and cracked down on any opposition to his brother’s Governorship. While these initiatives were generally successful in establishing the Central Government’s authority over the willful islands, they were also successful at nearly inciting the islanders to revolt against Ioannis Kapodistrias in 1830, a matter which was only averted by the careful diplomacy of King Leopold and the compromise of Kapodistrias.

    Following the end of the war, Viaros would be removed from the Aegean Islands and sent to the Ministry of Internal Affairs where he was named Chief of the Royal Gendarmerie. In 1832 he was appointed Internal Affairs Minister following the reassignment of Spyridon Trikoupis to Foreign Affairs Minister and then in 1836, Viaros was appointed Justice Minister following Christodoulos Klonaris’ selection to the Supreme Court. His younger brother Augustinos would similarly leave the Army in 1833 to become Ambassador to Russia, a post which he held for the remainder of Kapodistrias’ Premiership. The reason behind his brothers appointments to important posts likely lay in his innate distrust of the Greek notables who governed Greece before his arrival and in his cynicism, he appointed only those that he could trust to positions of power. But because of the continued prominence of his brothers in the Government, Ioannis Kapodistrias was frequently charged with nepotism and corruption by his many opponents throughout his Premiership. Despite the continued scandals and crises incurred by his brothers, Ioannis would continue to publicly defend them time after time even at great cost to his own political capital. Despite Kapodistrias’ great vigor and incredible talent, even he had his limits and by the start of 1841 he had reached it.

    During a public appearance at the grand reopening of the National Archaeological Museum in Athens following an extensive period of renovations and expansions, he collapsed while giving a speech before a crowd of several hundred people. Though it was a minor incident it was enough to shake his own confidence. After fourteen years in charge of the Greek Government, fourteen years of constant criticism and opposition, fourteen years of controversies, scandals, and crises, he knew his time in Office was at an end and on the 27th of February 1841, Ioannis Kapodistrias produced his letter of resignation to King Leopold. His intention had been to serve until the following January when a new Legislature would be ushered in following the completion of the elections in October, but this recent health scare, combined with the fallout over the Cyprus Affair and the management of the ongoing economic downturn had clearly worn him out, necessitating his premature resignation. After a brief, but entirely cordial conversation between the two men, King Leopold reluctantly accepted Ioannis Kapodistrias’ resignation from the Office of Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Greece.

    Despite officially leaving office, Kapodistrias would remain in Athens to provide insight to the King and the Greek Government from time to time. Freed from the confines and scrutiny of public office, he was reinvigorated to some degree allowing him to pursue other passions like charity, education, and medicine. During this time, he would also take up a position as the Rector of the University of Athens from August 1841 to May 1844 when he finally retired from public life. The final years of his life would be spent writing his memoirs and records of the Greek War for Independence which have provided a vivid, albeit somewhat biased firsthand view of the conflict. Ioannis Kapodistrias would pass away in his sleep on the 9th of October 1848 at the ripe old age of 72 and though he had been despised by some in life and feared by others, by the time of his death there was not a soul in Greece who did not appreciate the tireless and thankless work he did on behalf of his country. When his casket was carried through the streets of Athens towards his final resting place, throngs of people from all walks of life turned out in the pouring rain to see him off one last time. To this day, his grave site at the First Cemetery of Athens is among the most visited sites in the entire city reflecting the great influence and respect this man had and still has in Greece today.

    250px-%CE%86%CE%B3%CE%B1%CE%BB%CE%BC%CE%B1_%CE%99%CF%89%CE%AC%CE%BD%CE%BD%CE%B7_%CE%9A%CE%B1%CF%80%CE%BF%CE%B4%CE%AF%CF%83%CF%84%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%B1%2C_%CE%A0%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B5%CF%80%CE%B9%CF%83%CF%84%CE%AE%CE%BC%CE%B9%CE%BF_%CE%91%CE%B8%CE%B7%CE%BD%CF%8E%CE%BD_6624.jpg

    A Monument to Ioannis Kapodistrias, Governor and Prime Minister of Greece

    Of all his many accomplishments - of which there are many - his greatest were his efforts to secure the well being of the Greek people. It was his hope that one day every Greek man, woman, and child would not go hungry, that they could enjoy the fruits of their labors, and experience a life free from oppression. His initiative for land reform in 1831 had been in the pursuit of this goal so that the people of Greece would be able to feed themselves and their families, that they would be able to make ends meet, and that they could experience some degree of upward mobility. To aid in that initiative, he gradually developed and redeveloped the education system in Greece first with simple church schoolhouses and then institutes of higher education such as the University of Athens. Though it would take several years, by the end of the 19th Century, literacy rates in Greece would approach 60% - up from 20% at the end of the war - and Greece would once more be recognized as a land of learning. Finally, he encouraged the construction of numerous clinics and hospitals around the countryside, from every seaside town to every mountaintop village, he wanted the people of Greece to have at least some access to basic medical assistance. His most lasting achievement in this regard would be the Kapodistrian School of Medicine at the University of Athens which to this day is considered one of the finest medical institutes in the world.

    Kapodistrias’ retirement in February 1841 would leave the Greek Government in a bit of a quandary, however, as there existed no clear candidate to succeed him. By right of the Constitution of 1831, the King maintained the sole prerogative to nominate whichever candidate he chose for the position, provided they could win a majority vote in the House. However, it remained to be seen if any one candidate could actually succeed Ioannis Kapodistrias as Prime Minister given the powerful grip he had held on the country for so long. While his supporters, the so called “Kapodistrians” possessed the largest number of seats in the Vouli at 59 – down from 63 as one “Kapodistrian” had retired in 1839 and another three had resigned in 1840 following the Cyprus Affair - they had only been nominally tied together due to their shared support of Ioannis Kapodistrias. Now with his retirement, it was unclear where many of these men stood regarding his successor as various candidates across all corners of Greek politics presented their cases for the office, chief among them being Ioannis Kolettis, Alexandros Mavrokordatos, Panos Kolokotronis, and Constantine Kanaris.

    Of the four main contenders, Ioannis Kolettis had the smallest, but arguably most vocal band of supporters in the Vouli. Following his bruising at the hands of the klepht captain Sotiris Charalamvis in January 1825, Kolettis retreated from the realm of politics for several months while he treated his wounds as well as his wounded pride. During his short time away from the Revolutionary Government, the Epirote doctor reinvented himself as a military man and embarked on a military campaign ostensibly to aid the Greeks of Pelion who were at that time under attack by the Ottoman Serasker Resid Pasha.[1] The Greek expedition was poorly coordinated however and Kolettis’ skills as a military strategist were found to be incredibly wanting, resulting in an unmitigated disaster on the part of the Greeks and the collapse of the last major pocket of Greek resistance north of Lamia. Rather than reviving his flagging support, the venture only served to humiliate Kolettis even further, leading him to retreat from public life once more. During this second period of self-imposed exile Kolettis turned to writing where he quickly found his mark as a romanticist and nationalist who espoused the dream of a Greater Greece, a belief that would gain a great following among the Greek people in the years that followed the war.

    When Kapodistrias first arrived in Greece in January 1827, Kolettis initially positioned himself behind the Count as a firebrand supporter, constantly praising his work in his editorials and theses. For this dogged support, Kolettis was appointed to the Senate in late 1827 and was later made Ambassador to France in 1832. Despite this the pair had a rather mixed relationship as Kolettis’ views routinely clashed with Kapodistrias’ especially on matters of the press, which Kapodistrias was frequently against, and on foreign policy, where Kolettis espoused incredibly vocal Francophile views. Moreover, Kolettis had a very troubled relationship with King Leopold as Kolettis had been among the strongest and loudest proponents of the Duc de Nemours’ candidacy for the Greek Crown and would remain so right until the day Leopold landed in Greece, but it was Kolettis’ politics that truly bother Leopold. While he had once considered himself a liberal in his younger years, Leopold had grown more conservative with age, making Kolettis’ staunch liberalism an uncomfortable feature for the King to stomach in his prospective Prime Minister. Ultimately, Kolettis was passed over by Leopold for the position because of these reasons.

    300px-%CE%9F_%CE%99%CF%89%CE%AC%CE%BD%CE%BD%CE%B7%CF%82_%CE%9A%CF%89%CE%BB%CE%AD%CF%84%CF%84%CE%B7%CF%82_%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B1%CE%B3%CE%B3%CE%AD%CE%BB%CE%BB%CE%B5%CE%B9_%CF%84%CE%B7%CE%BD_%CE%B5%CE%BA%CE%BB%CE%BF%CE%B3%CE%AE_%CF%84%CE%BF%CF%85_%CE%9F%CE%B8%CF%89%CE%BD%CE%B1._%CE%95%CE%B3%CF%87%CF%81%CF%89%CE%BC%CE%B7_%CE%BB%CE%B9%CE%B8%CE%BF%CE%B3%CF%81%CE%B1%CF%86%CE%AF%CE%B1._Peter_Von_Hess..jpg

    Kolettis Announcing the Election of Kapodistrias as Governor in 1827

    Alexandros Mavrokordatos had been equally troublesome for Prime Minister Kapodistrias over the past decade as the de facto leader of the “Anti-Kapodistrians”. Following the 1831 National Assembly, Mavrokordatos had been appointed to Kapodistrias’ Cabinet as Foreign Minister in a show of unity, however, they immediately began arguing over foreign policy as well as matters of internal policy, namely the preservation and enacting of the Constitution. As a result, it came as no surprise that Mavrokordatos resigned from office less than a year after originally assuming the post in March 1832. He would then emerge as the loudest voice in opposition to Kapodistrias charging the count with acts of tyranny and authoritarianism as he continually delayed elections from 1834 to 1835, then 1836, before finally setting them for October 1837 nearly six and a half years after the 1831 National Assembly had originally called for them. Despite this concession by Kapodistrias to the “Constitutionalists”, they would remain his greatest critics throughout the remainder of his Premiership leading King Leopold to sour on Mavrokordatos as a potential successor to Kapodistrias despite their shared Anglophilic views.

    Panos Kolokotronis was a surprising candidate for the office of Prime Minister. Of the four main choices, he was the youngest at 40, and of the four he had the least political experience, his only foray into politics had been a brief tenure as commandant of Tripolitsa during the war. However, of all the candidates he maintained the single largest block of support in the legislature, having near unanimous support among the Moreot delegation to the Vouli. He was well connected, through his marriage to Eleni Bouboulina, daughter of the famous Admiral Laskarina Bouboulina and he held the full support and friendship of King Leopold, having worked with him personally for many years. By far though his greatest support came from the people of the Morea who loved and respected Panos Kolokotronis, as he had vehemently defended them numerous times during the Revolution. He was recognized as a hero for his efforts during the war; the Liberator of Kalamata, the Captain of the Morea, and the Scourge’s Bane among a host of other accolades and accomplishments all of which earned him the rather disappointing honor of being named King Leopold’s Aide de Camp once the war came to an end.

    250px-Panos_Kolokotronis_012.JPG

    Panos Kolokotronis [2]

    In truth, this position would have been a tremendous waste of Panos’ great talents and abilities had King Leopold not trusted him so deeply and had Panos not taken full advantage of the situation presented to him. Over the years, Panos would manage to glean the finer details of statecraft and governance from King Leopold and Prime Minister Kapodistrias through his firsthand interactions with the two men. Wise beyond his years and charismatic beyond all measures, he was a marvelous speaker who could hold the King’s attention for hours on end, a feat not even Ioannis Kapodistrias could boast. Thus, it came as no surprise that Panos quickly began to rise through the ranks of the Hellenic Army from the King’s Aide de Camp in 1831 to Chief of the General Staff in 1838. Though his rivals would attempt to attribute his meteoric rise to the sudden death, retirement, or resignation of those officers ahead of him in the chain of command, it cannot be denied that he was incredibly deserving of the post and now in 1841, it seemed as if he was poised to rise in stature once more to Prime Minister.

    However, in an act of humility or political expediency, Panos Kolokotronis would surprisingly decline the offer for the position, citing his own inexperience in politics as well as an undisclosed personal reason. Most likely his reasoning had something to do with Ioannis Kolettis’ relatively strong support in the Legislature, which combined with the Anti-Kapodistrians of Mavrokordatos provided an arduous barrier to his nomination. Though time had done much to heal old wounds, Kolettis almost certainly remembered the humiliation he had endured at the hands of Panos’ former benefactor and ally Sotiris Charalamvis during the war, and likely attributed part of that humiliation to Panos, which now manifested itself in this current debate. In addition, his youthful antics during the war had earned him the ire of many powerful men who now found themselves in Parliament and would more than likely oppose his candidacy as well.

    The final of the original four candidates, the Minister of the Navy Constantine Kanaris was similarly forced to decline the King’s considerations as he had unfortunately fallen ill in the preceding days with a terrible case of tuberculosis. Though he was a prominent supporter of Kapodistrias, Kanaris had earned the begrudging respect of the island magnates during the war for his gallantry and vigorous naval campaigns to liberate Psara and Chios in 1827/1828. It also helped that he lacked some of Panos Kolokotronis’ weaknesses, namely he had served with these very same men in government as both a member of the Senate and then as Minister of the Navy while Panos had only recently taken a seat in the Cabinet as General Chief of Staff in late 1838. Though Kanaris would eventually recover in late May, his opportunity to become Prime Minister in 1841 had sadly passed him by. With the four main contenders out, Leopold was forced to look elsewhere for Kapodistrias’ replacement. It was fortunate then that Ioannis Kapodistrias made perhaps his most important decision in his entire Premiership at this time by suggesting to King Leopold that the Eptanesian Andreas Metaxas be considered for the position.

    220px-Andreas_Metaxas.jpg

    Andreas Metaxas, Ioannis Kapodistrias’ successor and 2nd Prime Minister of Greece

    Born in 1790 on the island of Cephalonia to the prestigious Metaxa family, Andreas Metaxas enjoyed a relatively comfortable life in Argostoli where he worked as a bailiff and solicitor. Over the years, however, he became increasingly infatuated with the idea of Greek Independence and promptly joined the Filiki Eteria (the Friendly Society) in the months leading up to the War for Independence. When the Revolution finally began in March 1821, Andreas Metaxas, alongside his brother Anastasios and their cousin Konstantinos, traveled to mainland Greece with several hundred volunteers to fight against the Ottomans. While his brother and cousin would show great valor in battle, Andreas’ fighting days were ended before they ever truly began when he suffered terrible injuries to his hands in the Battle of Lalas in late May 1821.[3] Unable to fight on the field of battle, Metaxas turned to politics where he would continue to fight for Greek independence as the Minister of Police and the Minister of War. It was during his time as a politician that he met with Ioannis Kapodistrias and became one of the primary actors behind his election to the Governorship in 1826.

    Under Kapodistrias’ government, Metaxas would serve as a member of the Senate and then as the Nomarchos (Prefect/ Governor) of Laconia after the war. He was later elevated to the Office of Foreign Minister in 1833 following the appointment of Spyridon Trikoupis as Ambassador to Great Britain, and then Minister of the Army in 1838 following the death of Demetrios Ypsilantis. Though he was a stalwart supporter of Ioannis Kapodistrias, Metaxas was well respected in the Legislature, making him a perfectly acceptable pick for even the most hardened Anti-Kapodistrians. Despite his own Russophile views, Metaxas would also earn the strangely candid support of the British Ambassador to Greece Lord Lyons. With no major signs of complaint, King Leopold approached Metaxas and tasked him with forming a government.

    While lacking some of Kapodistrias’ great brilliance and ingenuity, Metaxas had been a loyal supporter of the Prime Minister for many years and would reliably continue the Count’s policies of modernization and industrialization. It is no surprise then that Metaxas continued some of the more questionable policies of Kapodistrias as well, namely his penchant for major industrial projects such as the Corinth Canal and the draining of lake Copais. Both projects were frequently delayed unfortunately, due to concerns of high costs and would not come to fruition during his comparatively short Premiership. He also supported the expansion of educational institutions across the country, he expanded many of the Government’s charitable initiatives to help widows and orphans who had lost family in the war, and most importantly he continued the various economic reformations to uplift the common people of Greece.

    Metaxas also engaged in several rearrangements of the Cabinet retaining his close colleague Constantine Kanaris as Minister of the Navy and appointing his allies Panos Kolokotronis and Rigas Palamidis as Minister of the Army and Internal Affairs Minister respectively. Yet, in a surprising act of unity, Metaxas would also go on to appoint several allies of Alexandros Mavrokordatos and Ioannis Kolettis to the Cabinet much to the King’s chagrin. Moreover, the Ministry of Commerce was dissolved, with its assets and responsibilities absorbed by the Treasury Ministry while a new Ministry was created in its stead, the Ministry of Culture, Education, Religious Affairs headed by the Phanariot lawyer Michael Schinas.

    The Metaxas Government in 1841:

    Prime Minister: Andreas Metaxas

    Foreign Minister: Iakovos Rizos Neroulos

    Internal Affairs Minister: Rigas Palamidis

    Justice Minister: Leo Malas

    Minister of the Army: Panos Kolokotronis

    Minister of the Navy: Constantine Kanaris

    Treasury Minister: Nicolas Theocharis

    Minister of Education and Religious Affairs: Michael Schinas

    The end of Kapodistrias’ tenure as Prime Minister also marked the end of an era in Greece as many of the great leaders, generals, and politicians of the revolution began to leave office -intentionally or not - in favor of the younger generation. Bishop Metris Meletios of Argos, who presided over the coronation ceremony of King Leopold in Nafplion so many years ago, had unfortunately passed away in January 1835 from what was believed to be pneumonia. He was followed a few months later by the Greek Admiral, Minister of the Navy, and Hydriot ship captain Andreas Miaoulis who died in his sleep on the 15th of June 1835, leaving behind a wife of 43 years in Irene Bikou and six children. In honor of his great efforts to liberate Greece and in re-founding the Greek Navy during the war, Miaoulis was laid to rest overlooking the Aegean Sea in Piraeus where according to legend the Great Athenian sailor and statesman Themistocles was also buried.

    Three years later in 1838 Miaoulis’ counterpart, the former Archstrategos of the Hellenic Army, Chief of the General Staff, and Minister of the Army Demetrios Ypsilantis died from what was later identified as Myotonic dystrophy, a terrible disease which had left him bedridden and in excruciating pain during his final days. Ypsilantis was survived by his wonderful wife of 11 years Manto Mavrogenous and two young sons, Constantine and Alexander. For his heroic actions during the war, Ypsilantis was given the honor of a state funeral attended by the King and Prime Minister Kapodistrias and was laid to rest in the First Cemetery of Athens. More recently was the unfortunate death of the former President of the Executive and incumbent Commerce Minister Andreas Zaimis who succumbed to a terrible illness in December 1840 leaving behind a wife of 19 years in Eleni Delliyani, and a son, Thyrasyvoulos. His passing exacerbated the already tumultuous Kapodistrian government which had had more than its fair share of turnover in its 14 years.

    The Hellenic Army also experienced its fair share of upheaval and reorganization as the famed Souliot Strategos Markos Botsaris, the Hero of Missolonghi and the Commander of the 1st Army of the Hellenic Army was forced into an early retirement as his injuries from the war rendered him unfit for continued military service in 1836. Rather than seek public office, Botsaris retired to the countryside of Missolonghi where he lived in peace for the remainder of his days. Strategos Yannis Makriyannis, the Hero of Myloi would also leave the Hellenic military following an especially heated argument with Ioannis Kapodistrias and King Leopold. When the House was finally opened in 1838 it came as no surprise that Makriyannis was found among their membership as a vocal Anti-Kapodistrian. Ypsilantis’ death, Botsaris’ retirement, and Makriyannis’ resignation would leave a substantial hole in the upper echelons of the officer’s corps of the Hellenic Army that was filled with a cadre of younger officers like Panos Kolokotronis.

    The resignation of Kapodistrias and the appointment of Metaxas in 1841 exemplified the burgeoning Greek Democratic system of Government. Power was peacefully transferred between the two individuals in a manner that would come to form the basis of future successions in Greece for decades to come. It also marked a shift in Greek society away from the years of rebuilding and recovery that had followed the war and into a period of peace and prosperity of the 1840’s and early 1850’s. 1841 would also see another important transfer of power far across the Atlantic Ocean in the United States of America, where the new President William Henry Harrison began his Presidency.

    Next Time: Land of Liberty
    Author's Note: Apologies for the excessive length of this part, but I wanted to get all of this in one update. In the future I'll try to have smaller updates at a more frequent pace.

    [1] I mentioned way earlier in the timeline that there were pockets of Greek fighters in Thessaly and Macedonia that persisted several years into the war. One of the last pockets was in the area to the east of Volos, in the foothills of Mount Pelion, which was reconquered by Resid Pasha in early 1825 both in OTL and in TTL.

    [2] Technically this is a picture of his half-brother, Panos Kolokotronis who was born after the war and named in honor of his murdered older brother Panos, the one featured ITTL. To my disappointment, I could not find any pictures of the elder Panos Kolokotronis in any of the sources I used, so I opted for a picture of his younger brother instead.

    [3] These injuries would earn Metaxas the nickname Conte Lalas. It wasn’t intentional on my part, but the first two Prime Ministers of Greece have both come from the Ionian Islands and they are both “counts” although in the case of Metaxas it is purely satirical.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 52: Land of Liberty
  • Part 52: Land of Liberty

    600px-Harrison_inauguration.jpg

    The Inauguration of President William Henry Harrison

    The United States of America shared much in common with the Kingdom of Greece. Born in the fires of revolution and war; the struggle for independence by the Thirteen Colonies against the the British Empire served as an inspirational development to the long-oppressed Greeks of the Ottoman Empire. Their messages of freedom from tyranny, liberty and justice for all, the equality of all men, and the inalienability of these rights found an incredibly receptive audience in the Greeks. According to legend, a small band of Greek freedom fighters was so moved by the American cause that they had journeyed to the new World where they joined the Continentals in their war against the tyranny of their British overlords. Standing side by side, the Continentals and the Greeks under the leadership of their commander, a man by the name of Demetrios Ypsilantis, bravely fought against the British in the battle of Monmouth Courthouse in the Summer of 1778 abd successfully fought the indomitable British Army to a draw alongside their American compatriots.[1] Regardless of the tale’s accuracy, it cannot be denied that the land and people of Greece had a great deal of infleunce on the development of the nascent United States of America.

    Following the War’s end, the United States of America would construct their government in the model of Ancient Athens and Ancient Rome, establishing themselves as a Federal Republic with a democratic electoral system. Their symbolism was heavily inspired by the ancient Romans and Greeks as were their public buildings and monuments which were constructed primarily in the Neo-Classical architectural style. Like the Greeks, the Americans were a mercantile people who maintained a large fleet of commercial ships who did business with the far corners of the world. Like those in Europe, the American people were also greatly fascinated by the myths and legends of Ancient Greece and so, when the Greeks attempted to win their own independence in 1821 it came as no surprise that the Americans looked on with great interest.

    A letter by the Maniot chieftain Petros Mavromichalis appealing to the American Secretary of State John Quincy Adams for aid was well received by the American public as it detailed their shared ideals, their closeness in relations, and their kinship as liberty loving patriots. Though the American government would be disinclined from officially aiding the Greek Revolutionaries following the enactment of the Monroe Doctrine in 1824, the American people turned out in droves to support their brothers in arms across the sea in their War for Independence. A few Americans would travel to Greece to take up arm alongside the Greeks in their fight against the Ottomans, but the true extent of the American Philhellene contribution came in the form of humanitarian aid and monetary support.

    Tens of thousands of American dollars from private donors and well-wishers flooded into the Greek Government’s coffers, as did a considerable amount of medical supplies, cereals and other non-perishable food items, blankets, cots, clothing, and other simple commodities which saved hundreds if not thousands of Greek refugees from starvation, disease, or exposure to the elements. American philanthropists constructed numerous hospitals and clinics, schools and orphanages for the Greeks during the war. More doctors and missionaries would journey to Greece than actual fighters, although a sizeable number of Americans did indeed fight with distinction at Missolonghi, Nafpaktos, Bralos, and Lamia. Some who made the journey to Greece were journalists and writers who regaled American audiences with tales of the valiant Greeks in their fight against the dastardly Ottomans, others were archaeologists who explored the ancient wonders and ruins of this storied land. One American in particular who eventually made the long voyage to Greece was the eldest son of former President John Quincy Adams, George Washington Adams.

    250px-George_Washington_Adams.jpg

    George Washington Adams as a Young Man

    Born on the 12 of April 1801, George Washington Adams was the son and grandson of two American Presidents, and bearing the name of a third President it was believed that much was to be expected of the young Adams boy, perhaps too much. George would go on to attend the University of Harvard where, like his father and grandfather before him, he would study law and become an accomplished attorney from the Boston area. Young George was an incredibly intelligent, if somewhat mercurial young man, who was a gifted speaker in his own right, his July 5th speech at Quincy being a particularly impressive performance in 1825. The following year in 1826, George was elected to the Massachusetts House of Representatives where he would serve with distinction in spite of his young age of 25. However, despite the success and acclaim he had garnered as a lawyer and state legislator George remained unsatisfied with this life and swiftly left office a year later in 1827. It was during this time that he came to develop a great interest in the land of Greece.

    Like many Americans, George was captivated by tales of the war in Greece which filled the papers and editorials throughout the country. He had read the Iliad and the Odysseus in his youth and throughout his many years of schooling he had studied Pericles’ famous Funeral Oration and the Trial of Socrates. But it was Lord Byron’s latest poem, Hellas, detailing the Baron Byron’s own adventures in Greece which truly inspired George to see it for himself.[2] Though Byron’s work did much to dispel the myths that surrounded the conflict and painted a remarkably human picture of the supposedly noble and flawless Greek heroes fighting the war, his vivid writings on the ancient wonders and majestic panoramas that dotted the countryside reportedly brought the young Adams boy to tears upon first reading it. George’s efforts to convince his overbearing father, then President John Quincy Adams, to permit him to go fulfill this aspiration would unfortunately run into difficulties.

    As the eldest son of the President of the United States, his presence, however minor it may be, would undoubtedly provide the Greek rebels with the appearance of recognition and legitimacy on the part of the American Government and would likely serve as a breach of the Monroe Doctrine. Moreover, with the Presidential Election several months away, he did not wish to jeopardize his standing prior to the election. His father also did not wish for him to go as Greece was a land wracked in war and rife with violence. Should George travel to Greece in person, then he not only risked the sanctity of the Monroe Doctrine, he would also be risking his very life. While his father sympathized with the Greeks and with his son’s desire to aid them, the answer to his request would have to be a resounding no.

    Crestfallen, George began to fall into a melancholy of sorts which would linger with him for much of 1828 leading him to grow gloomier with each passing day.[3] While it was generally misunderstood at the time, it is now believed that George Washington Adam’s erratic behavior was attributed to a terrible case of depression that afflicted him for much of his life. The rejection by his father had only served to worsen problems which were present for the young man leading to a noticeable shift in his mood and disposition in the days following the heated meeting with his father. As his mood continued to darken, George began considering a myriad of terrible plots, including the ending of his own life to end his depression all of which culminated in a failed suicide attempt in late 1828 following the loss of his father to General Andrew Jackson in the 1828 Presidential Election.

    Fearing for his son’s health and having lost his bid for reelection to General Andrew Jackson, George’s father John Quincy Adams, reconsidered his son’s earlier proposal. Given that the situation in Greece had changed remarkably over the past few months with the intervention of the British, French, and Russias on the side of the Greeks, and the notion of Greek independence becoming an increasingly likely prospect, the matter of American recognition of the Greeks had lost its significance. Moreover, the withdrawal of the Egyptians and the resurgence of the Greeks had done much to secure the Greek countryside, making any trip there much safer for George and his companions. With the political sensitivities of the matter greatly diminished and the risk of injury or death greatly reduced as well, George received his father’s blessing to finally embark on his journey to Greece.

    Departing from Boston Massachusetts on the 21st of January 1829 for the Spanish port of Sevilla, George Washington Adams began his long and well recorded journey to Hellas. In Adams’ possession throughout the entire journey to Greece were a collection of journals which detailed each step young George took along the road to Greece. His writing depicts in great detail the grandeur of the Great Rock of Gibraltar as his ship sailed through the Pillars of Hercules. He remarked upon the bustling streets and busy markets of Barcelona. He wrote of gentle tides splashing upon the beaches of the beautiful French Riviera, he dined in Genoa with the mayor of the city and vacationed in the magnificent Tuscan countryside for several weeks before departing from Ancona for the island of Zakynthos where he would make the final leg of his journey to Greece. While the war was still ongoing in neighboring Greece, the conflict at sea had all but ended months before as the Allied Fleet of British, French, and Russian ships had swept aside any measure of organized resistance by the Ottoman Navy. Though the occasional Turkish ship could be found in the Aegean, they no longer dared to stray too far from their ports and they would never think of attacking a foreign flagged ship. And so, it came as no surprise that the final undertaking from Zakynthos to Nafplion was a relatively uneventful, if somewhat boring trip for George and the other passengers aboard his ship.

    Finally arriving at the city of Nafplion on the 19th of May 1829 George fell in love with the land at first sight. The people were incredibly charming, kind, and hospitable to the young American, offering him every courtesy they could offer even when they themselves had very little for their own families. He traveled the Morean countryside and explored the famous cities of Sparta, Argos, Corinth, and Mycenae. He visited the battlefields of Dervenakia, Maniakion, and Myloi where the Greeks had valiantly fought against their Ottoman and Egyptian adversaries. He toured the Aegean islands and experienced the wonderous vistas from beautiful Santorini and Naxos. He also engaged in philanthropic activities himself while in Greece as he worked as an aide in the various hospitals across the countryside and he provided what he could to those in need. By far though his most documented venture was his trip to the city of Athens where he walked through the hallowed remains of the great structures atop its Acropolis. Passing through the mighty gatehouse of Propylaea, he stood in awe of the majesty of the Parthenon for several moments in complete silence as the sun set between the marble columns in a beautiful amalgamation of color. When George finally departed from Greece on the 4th of August, he did so as a fully rejuvenated man; his body had been cured of the ills that ailed it and his mind had been saved from the darkness that clouded his thoughts.

    600px-Peytier_-_Mosque_in_the_Parthenon.jpg

    The Parthenon (circa 1830)

    Thoroughly refreshed in both mind and body, George would return home to Boston in late November 1829 where he started his life once again. Despite the objection of his parents and their threats of his disownment, he would go on to marry his longtime mistress Eliza Dolph in a small private service in early February that was attended only by George’s brother John and Eliza’s immediate family, and their closest friends. Theirs was a happy, if somewhat troubled life together as the Adams family remained obstinately opposed to the match and refused to contact the couple for several months before they finally made amends following the birth of George and Eliza’s first child together John Quincy in April 1831. George’s eccentric behavior also made finances difficult for the family as he would routinely change vocations every few months, trying his hand at writing, teaching, medicine, and business before finally returning to practicing law in the Spring of 1832. George would also depart on unannounced trips overseas at various points throughout their marriage putting undo stress on Eliza and the family. Yet despite their troubles, the couple would go on to have another three children, Abigail born in 1832, Charles born in 1834, and Thomas born in 1835 and the pair remained genuinely in love with one another for all their many years together.

    In 1833, George would run for and win back his old seat in the Massachusetts statehouse where he would continue to serve with distinction for another two years before running for and winning a seat in the Massachusetts State Senate. Once more though the tedium of the Massachusetts Statehouse began to wear on Adams leading him to the announcement that he would not seek reelection in 1837 choosing instead to run for Congress in the 1838 Midterm Elections as a member of the Whig Party. The seat that he would be running for was the 3rd District of Massachusetts and had been his father’s, who had now decided to walk away from politics after four consecutive terms in Congress. With his beliefs and dreams firmly implanted in his sons, John Quincy Adams had felt it was time to retire and return to writing his memoirs and biography of his father.

    Despite claims by his Democratic opponents of being an American royal who relied solely on his family name to get anywhere in life, Adams would gain great popularity among the people of the 3rd District owing to his magnificent speeches and his vivid portrayal of the Whig party platform. He also had the full support of his father as well as his various connections in Congress who similarly endorsed George for the job. Most importantly was the rather strong anti Jacksonian fervor sweeping across the country at the time of the midterms as a result of the Panic of 1837 and it was no surprise that George Washington Adams won the election by a decisive margin of 56 to 41 percent. However, in the midst of his greatest triumph yet, tragedy would strike once more as his youngest son Thomas fell ill and died to the measles in late December 1838.

    The loss of his beloved son devastated the man, sending him back into the doldrums of depression that had wracked him so deeply nearly ten years before. For days on end, he remained locked away inside his bedroom, refusing to leave the room for even the most basic of necessities. As time continued to pass and George continued to remain hidden away in the safety of his home, many began to believe he had killed himself in his grief; their only proof to the contrary were the rare glimpses of him through the bedroom window and the sounds of his weeping which disturbed the quiet of the night. Though it would take some time, nearly two months in fact, he would eventually recover thanks to the love and support of his family and close friends to the point where he was well enough to make the trip to Washington D.C. in early March 1839 for his first term in the US House of Representatives.

    Fascinated by the new and exhilarating atmosphere he found himself in, Adams would quickly regain his composure as a politician and an orator. Though he was a junior Congressman from Massachusetts, George became an incredibly vocal opponent of the ruling Democratic administration of President Martin van Buren especially over the matter of slavery. His fiery speeches on the House floor deriding the President for his involvement in the Amistad Case earned him quite the following among the Whigs in Congress as well as the attention of the Senior Senator from Massachusetts Daniel Webster and his close colleague the Senator from Kentucky, Henry Clay. Both men had been deeply impressed by Adams’ talents as a speaker as well as his demeanor following the death of his son. Clay, in particular, having been a close friend of George's father John Quincy, even offered to take young Adams under his wing and personally invited him to attend the Whig National Convention in December.[4]

    The primary purpose of the Convention was to unite the Whigs behind one nominee for President as a divided Whig party had been their undoing in the 1836 Presidential Election. To win the Party’s nomination, a candidate needed to earn the support of at least 50% of the delegates in attendance at the Convention and it was clear that no candidate had the required amount. Of the three prospective nominees, General Winfield Scott had the lowest number of delegates supporting his candidacy at 57 having only won the states of New York, New Jersey and Vermont. General William Henry Harrison came in second on the first ballot with 94 delegates, having won the states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Massachusetts, Maine, Indiana, New Hampshire, and Michigan. Finally, Senator Henry Clay came in first on the first ballot with 103 delegates having won the remaining states of Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, Maryland, Connecticut, Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Illinois, Delaware Rhode Island and Missouri, however this still fell short of the required 50% needed to win the Party's nomination. Clay had also won the states of South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, and Arkansas, yet for one reason or another, those states had chosen to withhold their delegates from the Convention much to Clay’s dismay.[5]


    250px-Clay.png
    240px-James_Reid_Lambdin_-_William_Henry_Harrison_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg
    237px-General-Winfield-Scott-%281786-1866%291835.jpg

    Senator Henry Clay (Left), General William Henry Harrison (Center), and General Winfield Scott (Right)

    What had originally been portrayed as a coronation of Henry Clay as the official Whig nominee for President quickly became a heated horse race between all three candidates. Backroom deals, secret negotiations, lobbying and debate filled the town of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania as the three Whig Candidates jockeyed for an advantage over their opponents. The second round of voting would garner the same result; 57 votes for General Scott, 94 for General Harrison, and 103 for Senator Clay. In the third round, however, Massachusetts would flip from Harrison to Scott and Connecticut would flip from Clay to Scott resulting in a new balance of 68 votes for Scott, 91 for Harrison, and 95 for Clay. The fourth vote would achieve the same result as the third leaving the Convention in a stalemate.

    In a bid to break the gridlock, Clay organized a meeting with General Scott at the Astor House in New York City where he hoped to convince Scott to withdraw from the race and endorse his candidacy. Clay would never get the opportunity to convince Scott to withdraw as he was beaten to the punch by the Harrison campaign. On the 8th of December 52 of Scott’s 68 delegates openly sided with Harrison in the fifth round of balloting, pushing him well above the 50% threshold needed to win the Whig nomination. When Clay learned of Scott’s treachery, Clay lost control of himself and physically attacked the General sparking a vicious brawl between the two men. The fight was only broken up after several moments by the quick reaction of George W. Adams and John J. Crittenden who had to physically remove Clay from the room where they had been cordially meeting only moments before.

    The tension between the two men would continue for several days and threaten to unravel all the hard-won unity that the Whigs had worked so hard to achieve over the past few years. Relations between Scott and Clay would continue to deteriorate to the point where General Scott openly challenged Senator Clay to duel to the death before Adams and Crittenden were forced to intervene. Through the careful diplomacy and mediation of the Representatives from Massachusetts and Kentucky, the conflict between Clay and Scott was resolved, albeit barely. Once again, Adams’ actions did not go unnoticed as the Whig Party's nominee for President, General William Henry Harrison had recognized Adams’ loyalty to Clay and he had heard of his efforts to reconciling Clay with Scott for the good of the party, and for the good of Harrison’s candidacy.

    With the Convention over, the 1840 Presidential Election began in earnest. Portraying himself as a humble frontiersman and his opponent President Martin van Buren as an out of touch elite, Harrison managed to secure the support of the common man in America. He campaigned on the repudiation of Jacksonian policies, strengthening the American economy, and cracking down on corruption in Government. The Democrats efforts to paint Harrison as a drunkard and a buffoon backfired tremendously as Harrison would adopt the log cabin and cider jar as his campaign symbols, while his campaign slogan “Tippecanoe and Tyler Too” became one of the most famous in American history. Thanks to the concerted effort of Whig leaders like Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, George W. Adams, John J. Crittenden, and many others, Harrison would win the 1840 Presidential Election in a landslide with a margin of 262 electoral College Votes to 32. The popular vote was much closer however at 54% to 46%, or a difference of about 155,000 votes, but with the final votes tallied it was clear that William Henry Harrison would be the 9th President of the United States of America.

    Next Time: Tippecanoe and Earl Grey Too
    Author's Note: Apologies for the lack of significant divergences in this update. Aside from George Washington Adams' survival not much different in this part from OTL, but it does set up events to come in the United States.

    [1] There were in fact several Greeks who did fight in the American Revolution, but this Demetrios Ypsilantis is definitely not the Demetrios Ypsilantis of the Greek War for Independence, as he was born in 1793, well after the end of the American Revolutionary War.

    [2] ITTL Footnote: "Following the completion of Don Juan in late, 1825, Lord Byron would go on to record his narrative of the Greek War for Independence. The work simply titled, Hellas was released in Britain in the Summer of 1826 and received critical acclaim given the popularity of Greece at the time in Europe. It would not reach American shores until the Summer of 1827."

    [3] George Washington Adams suffered from depression and paranoia for much of his life. His depression became so bad that he ultimately took his own life in April 1829 while traveling at sea aboard the steamship Benjamin Franklin.

    [4] John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay had an interesting relationship as they were at different points in their lives hated rivals and best friends.

    [5] Even with the added votes of the Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia, and Arkansas delegates, Clay would have been 4 votes shy of the 50% margin which would have been 147 had all the states participated in the convention.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 53: Tippecanoe and Earl Grey Too
  • Part 53: Tippecanoe and Earl Grey Too

    300px-WmHHarrison-campaign_poster.jpg

    William Henry Harrison 9th President of the United States of America

    With the 1840 Presidential Election decided in his favor, President-Elect William Henry Harrison began forming his cabinet and preparing for his inauguration ceremony which had been scheduled for the 4th of March. Among other things, Harrison busied himself over the list of attendees which would include former President Martin van Buren, most - if not all - members of Congress, the members of the Supreme Court, various representatives from foreign countries and an untold number of Americans who would flock to the inauguration in great numbers. He planned on entering the city aboard a locomotive, the first of any American President, and from the train station he would ride a horse to the Capital Building where he would take the Oath of Office. Another matter Harrison spent a great deal of time on between election day and his inauguration, was the writing of his speech.

    It was a marvelous speech, and one which he had written himself. In it he detailed the various planks of the Whig platform that he wished to enact during his term as President namely, his support for the reinstitution of a National Bank and expansion of its powers, his intention to defer to the will of Congress on legislative matters, his desire to undo the spoil system of Cabinet posts and administrative positions to his political allies and supporters. Much to his chagrin, however the speech was paired down immensely by a team of editors led by his close friend and colleague, the Senator from Massachusetts Daniel Webster who famously quipped he had killed 19 Roman Proconsuls in the process of reducing Harrison’s speech. Webster had originally considered reducing it by 18 but his colleague George Washington Adams suggested 19 instead to save on time. Even still, the speech at 7,955 words would be the longest inaugural speech to date and to this day remains one of the longest in American history.

    When the day finally came on the 4th of March 1841, the weather couldn’t have been more foul. The temperature on that day was a scant 48.5 degrees Fahrenheit (9.2 degrees Celsius) which was made worse by a frigid wind gusting through the narrow streets of Washington D.C. chilling every poor soul in attendance to the bone. Harrison’s own wife Anna, had been forced to stay home due to the weather as she only just recovered from a terrible illness that had plagued her over the past month. Harrison was undaunted however. Despite the cold and his own relatively poor health, Harrison would forgo wearing a heavy overcoat in favor of a lighter suit and he opted to stay atop his horse rather than take a closed carriage to the Capital Building. For his bravery, Harrison was comforted by the thousands of hardy men and women who had braved cold to catch a glimpse of their new President as he made his way through the streets of Washington D.C. to the dais outside the Congress building and began his speech to thunderous applause.

    What followed was an hour and thirty-six minutes of political discourse, tariff policy, and the intricacies of the Whig agenda, all of which made for an incredibly dull and needlessly long speech. Nevertheless, the crowd remained relatively responsive to Harrison’s words for the duration of his performance in spite of the chill, cheering and chanting when appropriate and even sometimes when it wasn’t. When the speech finally came to a close, all those present released an audible sigh of relief that it had finally ended and raucous applause soon followed. The remainder of the day was spent celebrating, with music, dances, and entertainment, yet when the night of pageantry and patriotism drew to a close President Harrison’s attention began to shift towards the establishment of his Administration. He would appoint various congressional leaders like Daniel Webster, Thomas Ewing, John J. Crittenden to his cabinet and many more to the various posts and vacancies throughout the government to capable men.

    600px-Capitol1846.jpg

    The United States Capital Building as it was at the time of the Harrison Presidency

    One man who had peeked Harrison’s interest throughout the entire campaigning process was the young Congressman from Massachusetts, Representative George Washington Adams. Adams’ had come to Harrison’s attention during the Presidential Campaign in the immediate aftermath of the Whig National Convention for his role in the reconciliation of Henry Clay and Winfield Scott. In recognition of his experience overseas earlier in his life and for his remarkable negotiating skills and charisma, Harrison had thought it best to nominate him for one of the vacant diplomatic posts, moreover, Adams had the support of Harrison’s good friend and nominee for Secretary of State, Daniel Webster, who recommended the young Congressman for a diplomatic posting as well. While the most prestigious Minister Residencies to Britain and France were filled or promised to other individuals like Adams colleague Edward Everett, the former Governor of Massachusetts, many important Minister Residencies and chargé d'affaires were scheduled to become vacant soon. In the days and weeks following the Inauguration the Minister Resident to the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Minister Resident to Russia would both retire from their posts, posts that Adam’s father had taken earlier in life. In truth though there was only one post that George Washington Adams desired at this time, Greece.

    Harrison was perplexed by the request. Compared to grandeur and opulence of St. Petersburg and the culture and refinement of Amsterdam, Athens was a relative backwater. The post was unglamorous and likely to do little for his career going forward. Moreover, the American consulate in Athens was little more than a small manor, ill fit to serve as a proper embassy and would likely need extensive renovations and expansions to fit his needs. A more embarrassing reason for its poor state likely came from the fact that the United States had neglected to send an official representative to Greece for one reason or another, despite recognizing their independence in 1833. Despite all this, George persisted in his choice and Harrison put forward his nomination for the post. With the Whigs in control of Senate, Adam’s nomination was a simple matter and within a matter of weeks he was appointed as the First American Minister Resident for the Kingdom of Greece.

    When Adams arrived in Greece in mid-November 1841, he discovered that much had changed in the country since he had last seen it nearly 12 years before. The countryside which had been thoroughly ravaged and ransacked by war had been rejuvenated and restored to its idyllic prewar state. The people who had been desperately impoverished and famished were, for the most part, well fed and generally well off. Even the government, which had been a republic nearly twelve years ago, had been supplanted by a monarchy and a German king who spoke a heavily accented Greek. Nevertheless, Adams remained infatuated with the country and its people for the entirety of his time there. During which time, he successfully established a series of treaties between the Kingdom of Greece and the United States which defined their tariff policies towards one another as well as American investment in Greece among a host of other issues.

    Back in the United States, President Harrison followed through on his campaign promises to limit the spoils system, choosing instead to appoint men whom he felt were appropriately qualified for their positions rather than doling them out as rewards for loyalty or services rendered as the Jackson and van Buren Administrations had done. Additionally, President Harrison would show an incredible amount of deference to Congress when it came to signing legislation. In a special session of Congress starting in early May 1841, President Harrison would sign into law a bill authorizing the establishment of a new National Bank, following some last-minute modifications at his request to alleviate concerns that it would unfairly compete with state and local banks. He would also repeal the Independent Treasury Act, and signed into law the Bankruptcy Act allowing private citizens to voluntarily enter bankruptcy. Another bill signed by Harrison was the Preemption Act of 1841 which permitted settlers to buy up to 160 acres of government land without the competition of an auction. The final major piece of legislation President Harrison would sign into law was the appropriately named Black Tariff Bill which raised tariff rates from 20% on all foreign goods to 40%.

    500px-Panic1837_crop.jpg

    A Whig Political Cartoon Blaming Democrats for the Economic Downturn

    President Harrison did show some resistance to Henry Clay’s agenda and threatened to veto several bills when they failed to meet his expectations. Harrison was especially concerned with the public land disbursement plan that accompanied the Tariff of 1842, but eventually consented to it after some extensive revisions by Clay and the Congressional leadership. The President would also take the initiative on several other issues pertaining to the military, like the increased funding of the US Navy and the establishment of a Naval Academy in 1844. He would also admit the state of Florida to the Union in March of 1845, only days before leaving office. For the most part, William Henry Harrison proved himself to be a fairly uncontroversial President. The only questionable decisions on his part being his refusal to unilaterally annex the Republic of Texas to the United States, choosing instead to let the people of Texas decide their fate and his decision to not run for reelection in 1844. Another more contentious issue during the Harrison years was the Federal Government’s intervention in the Dorr Riot of 1842.

    The Dorr Riot was a brief period of civil unrest in Rhode Island between the Dorrites, led by Thomas Wilson Dorr and the Charterites led by Rhode Island Governor Samuel Ward King. By the start of the 1840’s, Rhode Island was the only state in the Union to not provide universal white male suffrage to its inhabitants, instead using the old colonial charter established in 1663 to restrict voting rights to land owning white males. Tensions in Rhode Island began to boil over in 1841 when the Dorrites demanded the holding of a state convention to amend the State’s constitution to expand voting rights to include all white males of voting age, including immigrants and those without the property. Dorr even suggested expanding the right to vote to the Blacks, although he would later recant this view under pressure from his supporters in the immigrant community. These demands by Dorr were immediately refused by the Governor King forcing Dorr and the Dorrites to establish their own legislature and governorship which promptly passed their desired amendments to the state’s constitution. Alarmed at the lawless assemblages and the flagrant violation of his will, Governor King ordered the Rhode Island militia to arrest Dorr and the Dorrite Assemblymen. Governor King also petitioned President Harrison for Federal Troops to help aid him in subduing the rebels and malcontents.

    President Harrison would oblige the Governor, dispatching 200 men to assist the militiamen in quelling the Dorrites who were quickly rounded up and arrested. Some Dorrites, would resist and a shootout would sadly occur between the two sides leaving 12 dead in an especially bloody shootout near Woonsocket including the Dorrite leader, Thomas Dorr. The resulting fallout from the Dorr Riot would ultimately lead Governor King to enact a revised version of the Dorrite Constitution in early 1843, establishing universal white male suffrage in Rhode Island. The Riot also served to inflame the relations between the Harrison administration and the Democrat Party, which had nominally supported Dorr and his followers leading to a decline in bipartisan initiatives in Congress for several months following the incident.

    The timing of this incident could not have been worse for Harrison and the Whigs, however, as the Dorr Riots ended only months before the 1842 Midterms. Combined with the relatively mixed results of the Whig economic policies and the outrage over the Woonsocket massacre as it was later called by some, and it was no wonder that the Whigs would lose much of their majorities in both Houses of Congress, going from 29 Senate seats to 27 and 142 seats in the House down to 124. These electoral losses were compounded further by the departure of Kentucky Senator Henry Clay from the Senate to prepare his Presidential campaign in 1844. With their Congressional majorities eroded and lacking the political acumen of Henry Clay, the Congress would effectively ground to a halt on most matters following the Midterms.

    While most domestic policy during the first half of the Harrison Presidency could reasonably be attributed more to Henry Clay than the President, Harrison’s legacy was to be defined more so by his foreign policy achievements than his domestic ones. Apart from the treaties signed with Greece in 1842, President Harrison would also sign on to the Treaty of Wanghia with the Qing in July the following year which established a general opening of relations between the two states and he agreed to a commercial treaty with the German Zollverein in 1843. President Harrison also deferred any decision on the annexation of the Republic of Texas angering many in the South who viewed his decision as a sign of Whig opposition to slavery and their way of life. By far though his most important diplomatic achievements would be with the British Empire.

    Relations between the United States and Great Britain had been tumultuous over the past few years as various border disputes, the Monroe Doctrine, and the Caroline Affair had negatively impacted the relationship between the two states. Although they would avoid war and open conflict between one another, their grievances were still problematic and had frequently threatened trade between the US and the UK, and so at the beginning of the Harrison Presidency they began efforts to resolve their outlying issues with each other. Of all the tension points between the United States and Great Britain, the border between Maine and New Brunswick was one of the most contentious.

    The border had been left relatively undefined by the 1783 Treaty of Paris, with it roughly following the St. Croix River from its mouth to its source. However, the source of the river was unknown and the line of demarcation beyond this point was incredibly vague. As was to be expected, this resulted in numerous problems for both the Americans and the British who agreed under the 1794 Jay Treaty to find the source of the St. Croix River. In 1798, a joint survey team was finally dispatched and the source of the St. Croix River was established as the Chiputneticook Lakes. The dispute would be addressed further by the Treaty of Ghent in 1815, which saw the distribution of the various islands off the coast of Maine and New Brunswick to both countries. A subsequent conference to resolve the dispute between Britain and the US was held in Amsterdam in 1831, but the talks ultimately fell through as the British diplomats walked out of the conference to protest the outbreak of renewed war between Belgium and the Netherlands that Spring.

    With the dispute still unresolved tensions would flare up once again in 1820’s and 1830’s as the states of Maine and Massachusetts - which still lay claim to Maine’s territory - issued competing permits to prospective lumberjacks for all land up to the St. John River and its tributaries. The Canadian authorities issued their own permits to their own lumberjacks and huntsmen as well leading to numerous incidents between bands of American and Canadian frontiersmen. More problematic were the numerous settlements, townships, and communities which had sprung up in the contested area as both the US and Canada continued to lay claim to the region. Tax collectors and state officials from both countries were sent into the St. John River region to further their claim, and in response each state sent in soldiers to remove the trespassing officials. Military forts were established in the area and tensions gradually began to rise all of which nearly resulted in a bloody conflict in 1838-1839. By some miracle, violence was avoided between the United States and Great Britain as each side agreed to responsibly resolve the dispute. This draw down in tension was in large part to the capable administration of British Prime Minister Charles Grey, 2nd Earl Grey.

    250px-Charlesgrey2.jpg

    Sir Charles Grey, 2nd Earl Grey and Prime Minister of the British Empire

    Earl Grey had been appointed to the office of Prime Minister in 1834 following the death of former Prime Minister George Canning and the resignation of the Duke of Wellington. His first years in the post were relatively quiet and much less controversial than those of his predecessor George Canning who had intervened in the Greek War for Independence in 1827, abolished slavery throughout the Empire in 1831, and passed the Parliament Reform Act in 1832. Wellington’s Premiership was equally tumultuous which saw the emancipation of the Catholics in the Empire, the reformation of appropriations of church tithes in Ireland, and the reformation of the Corn Laws which greatly reduced the potency of the tariffs. Grey would enjoy several years of relative quiet service as most urgent matters of state had been resolved by Canning and Wellington. However, as he continued to advance in age, Grey considered retiring from public life following the coronation of the new Queen Victoria in 1837, however, at the Queen’s request he remained on for several weeks while she acclimated to the role.

    Weeks quickly turned into months and then months turned into years. Grey would routinely ask the young Queen for permission to retire from office, and the Queen would ask the elder statesman to stay on a little longer while she continued to settle into her role as monarch. By the Fall of 1839, he was still in office as PM and with the outbreak of war against the Qing and in the ongoing crisis between the Ottoman Empire, Egypt, and France; Grey thought it best to continue serving despite his advanced age in the sake of stability.[1] When the crisis in the Middle East finally ended in 1841, negotiations over the Maine-New Brunswick border started up again leading Grey to famously announce that he would stay in office until the dispute had been resolved. To that end, Earl Grey dispatched the British diplomat Alexander Baring, 1st Baron Ashburton to Washington D.C. to meet with the new American Secretary of State Daniel Webster in order to reach an acceptable compromise between the two states.

    After nearly seven months of negotiation, debate, and compromise, Webster and Ashburton would come to an agreement that would effectively split the contested territory between the United States and Canada. The Webster-Ashburton Treaty among other things established the United States-Canadian border along the St. Croix River in the East, to the Chiputneticook Lakes, and then Northward towards the St. John River. The border would then follow the St. John River to its tributary the St. Francis River and follow it towards its source, Lake Pohenegamook before traveling directly Southwest to the source of the Northwest Branch of the St. John River. From this point, the border would extend Southwest towards the preestablished line of demarcation along the Southwest Branch of the St. John River.[2] The treaty also reestablished the border between Canada and the United States as following the Collins Valentine Line towards the Great Lakes and the 49th Parallel up to the Rocky Mountains. What’s more both countries announced their support for the end of the slave trade and they standardized their terms for extradition with one another.

    The Webster-Ashburton Treaty was not universally praised however. In the United States, many residents of Maine and Massachusetts were disappointed at the loss of nearly 5,000 square miles of territory to the British which they believed to be rightfully theirs. Many in the South were also irritated by the proclamation supporting the end of the slave trade as a precursor to the end of slavery in the United States. The reaction in London was generally received better than it had been in the United States as it secured the road between Quebec and Halifax, but there were still those who were disadvantaged by the deal like the Canadian inhabitants of the area. Still the measure was generally applauded by members on both sides, especially after Secretary of State Daniel Webster produced several documents alleging the great American statesman Benjamin Franklin had proposed this very border for the territory of Maine so many years ago.

    Buoyed by the successful negotiation of the Webster-Ashburton Treaty, President Harrison would once again task Daniel Webster with opening talks with Britain over a possible resolution of the other major territorial dispute between them, the Oregon Territory Dispute. The Oregon Boundary Dispute was a relatively recent development in comparison to the 59-year Maine Boundary Dispute, with the United States first staking its claim to the region with the famous Louisiana Purchase in 1803. Prior to that time, the region had been vaguely divided between the Spanish to the South, the British to the Northeast, and even the Russians to the Northwest. Even still, it was a relatively uninhabited region of the world and attracted little interest from both the Europeans and the Americans for many years. Even the War of 1812 changed little in the area as the only activity by either side in the Oregon Country was the capturing of the abandoned American Fort Astoria along the southern banks of the Columbia River’s mouth.

    550px-Fort_Vancouver_1845.jpg

    Fort Vancouver, Oregon Country

    Following the war, interest in the region would increase, albeit barely, as the representatives of Britain and the United States met in 1818 to devise a more permanent solution to the territorial dispute. While the diplomats would fail to reach a lasting compromise, they did agree to a joint occupation of the Oregon Country for a period of ten years. During this time, the Spanish would withdraw their claim to any territory North of the 42nd Parallel following the signing of the Onis-Adams Treaty in 1819 and the Russians would do the same with any territory below the 54-40 Parallel with the signing of the American-Russian Treaty of 1824 and the 1825 Treaty of St. Petersburg.

    The Oregon Boundary Dispute would become a more pronounced issue as the end of the agreed upon ten-year joint occupation approached forcing then British Foreign Secretary George Canning to refocus his attention on the issue in the mid-1820’s. Canning would prove himself to be incredibly inflexible on the matter, however, as his rigid demands for a border along the Columbia River promptly scuttled any hope of progress under his term as Foreign Secretary and later as Prime Minister. With a permanent solution to the dispute lost, the United States and Great Britain were forced to renew the earlier Treaty of 1818 to occupy the Oregon jointly for another ten-years. Despite this disappointment, the issue remained a prominent focus of the British Canningite Government which made some progress on the dispute. But with Canning’s death in January 1834, the focus of the British government turned to other, more important matters leaving the Oregon Dispute incomplete.

    The successful resolution of the Maine Boundary Dispute in the Summer of 1842 would bring renewed interested to the Oregon Country leading the veteran statesman Earl Grey to announce in late October 1842, that he would agree to the American proposal for another conference on the Oregon Country and that he would once again stay on for a few more months until the ‘Oregon Matter’ was finally resolved. Like their earlier negotiations, however, Grey instructed British Foreign Secretary Henry John Temple, Lord Palmerston, to stick to Canning’s policy for a border along the Columbia River when he met with the Americans in early March 1843. However, as was the case in their previous meetings over the Oregon, these demands proved to be unworkable for the American delegation led by Secretary of State Daniel Webster who insisted upon the 49th Parallel as a compromise which was summarily rejected out of hand by Palmerston and the British. With no signs of progress, the talks between the Americans and the British would sputter aimlessly for several weeks before a new development in the Oregon Country forced the British to the negotiating table.

    The British would soon discover that much had changed in the Oregon Country since their last major conference over the dispute in 1825. Starting in the 1830’s, American settlers had begun to make the trek into the region. It was a slow trickle at first with a handful families making the treacherous journey across the continent, but over time it gradually grew, increasing the American presence from a few dozen hunters, lumberjacks, and traders in the 1820’s to several thousand men, women, and children that were there to stay by the start of 1843. More prominently, the Harrison Administration had encouraged the establishment of a Provisional Government in 1841 to administer the territory and had even stationed Federal troops in the region to help enforce a semblance of order over the land. The coup de grais would be the so called “Great Wagon Train of 1843 which saw over 1,200 Americans make the journey West to Oregon in a wagon train reportedly stretching as much as five-miles long.

    For Earl Grey and the British Government, the strong American presence in the Oregon Country was a stunning development as the British had failed to counter it in any meaningful capacity. The Hudson Bay Company (HBC), which effectively managed the Oregon Territory on behalf of the British Government simply lacked the manpower or resources needed to adequately combat the growing flood of American settlers into the region. With more American settlers arriving in Oregon every day and in greater numbers than their British counterparts, the tone of the Oregon Country quickly took on a distinctive American accent. The British were only saved from a complete disaster only by the Americans’ failure to understand their growing demographic advantage over the British. One factor which ironically was in their favor was the decline of the fur trade in the region, making the Columbia River less crucial to British interests.

    Without their raison d'être, the British were now willing to reach a compromise with the United States and proposed a second conference in the Spring of 1844. However, the Harrison Administration had been caught off guard by the sudden reversal of the British and showed little interest in hosting further talks with them at this time. And yet the Americans would soon be drawn to the negotiating table as well as politics and partisanship would see the Oregon Boundary Dispute become a mainstream political issue in the United States, thanks in no small part to the Democratic Candidate for the Presidency, former Governor of Tennessee and Speaker of the House James K. Polk.

    250px-James_Knox_Polk_by_GPA_Healy%2C_1858.jpg

    The 1844 Democrat Nominee for President, James K. Polk

    Compared to his opponent Henry Clay, a man who had successfully revived the American economy with his various initiatives and had aided the common man in the settling the West, Polk was a relative nobody. Polk had served in Congress for 8 years and was renowned as a devout Jacksonian Democrat at heart, but with the Panic of 1837 still fresh in the minds of many, he was seen as a long shot for the presidency. However, Polk quickly found his footing as an expansionist calling for the annexation of both Texas and the Oregon Country for the United States. Though it had been a distant area of the continent, it remained a sore spot for many within the country who saw the land as rightfully theirs, and Polk, ever the opportunist used the ongoing dispute against his Henry Clay to great effect. Within a matter of days Polk had earned a surprising degree of support among many key groups across the country giving Polk and the Democrats an edge in the Presidential Campaign. Seeking to deny the issue to Polk, many of Clay’s allies in President Harrison’s cabinet convinced him to agree to another round of negotiations with the British and after several weeks the American and British diplomats would reach an agreement in early May.

    The Oregon Country would be split along the 49th Parallel with all territory to the North going to Britain, and all territory to the South going to the United States. The island of Vancouver would be given to Britain in its entirety. Both states shall enjoy freedom of navigation throughout all the waters off the coasts of the Oregon Country. The rights and property of Americans and British citizens on the wrong side of the border were to be respected as would all property and assets belonging to the Hudson Bay Company and its subsidiaries now located in the United States. [3] With that the Oregon Boundary Dispute was resolved. While neither side truly got all they had desired, with some on both sides desiring the entire region for themselves, most were pleased by the deal as it settled a long-lasting point of contention between the two countries and removed the greatest remaining prospect of war between them.

    Earl Grey would not see the fruits of his efforts unfortunately as the onset of a sudden illness in early February finally forced the elder statesman from the Premiership and by the 21st of June he was dead. Even so, his successor Lord Melbourne would see to the fulfillment of his predecessor’s work and signed on to the Oregon Treaty of 1844 when it reached his desk in late June. With the Oregon Dispute resolved in a satisfactory manner, Harrison had effectively deprived James K. Polk one of his campaign’s major talking points and provided a policy victory to Clay and the Whigs. While it cannot be determined one way or another what the true effect of this deal on the Presidential Election of 1844 was, what is certain is that the Polk campaign lost much of the momentum it had been gaining before the announcement of the Oregon Treaty in June 1844. While the race would remain close, it no longer held the same intensity and duality that it had before and by election day it was clearly Clay’s election to lose.

    The resolution of the last major territorial dispute between the United States and Great Britain would also mark an upturn in relations between the two countries. While they would at times express differences with one another, the continued interweaving of their economies combined with the special relationship they shared as two English speaking peoples of Anglican descent ensured that no major hostilities would occur between them for the next few decades. The same could not be said of France. Tensions between the Britain and France had been steadily rising since the outbreak of the Second Syrian War in 1840 as France aligned itself behind its ally Egypt, while the British backed the Ottomans. Moreover, its conquest of Algiers was seen as a blatant land grab and dastardly by the other countries of Europe. Its self-destructive policies and short-sighted initiatives had served to isolate the French, with the only states choosing to maintain even a semblance of cordial relations with France being Bourbon Spain and Naples, Greece, the Khedivate of Egypt, and the nascent Kingdom of Belgium which was reliant upon French soldiers to protect them against the perfidious Dutchmen.

    Next Time: Matters of State


    [1] The First Opium War starting on schedule.

    [2] Essentially the OTL border. Personally, I do not believe the survival of Harrison would have had any significant impact on the development of the Webster-Ashburton Treaty, but if you believe otherwise please tell me and I will consider editing it accordingly.

    [3] Also OTL, the only major difference being the timing. The historical Oregon Treaty was signed in 1846 well after the 1844 Presidential Election. While James K. Polk did campaign on the annexation of the entire Oregon Country up to the 54-40 to the United States, he quickly backed off this demand and accepted a compromise at the 49th Parallel. Here the United States makes the same deal two years earlier and there certainly was interest in resolving it at this time, Secretary of State Daniel Webster strongly supported a resolution to the dispute in 1843, but the lack of support and dis-functionality of the Tyler Administration caused him to abandon the issue.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 54: Matters of State
  • Part 54: Matters of State

    600px-Athen_-_Wrangel_Ludwig_-_1839.jpg

    Athens: the Political, Economical, and Cultural Capital of Greece

    The early 1840’s would be a rather mixed period in Greek history as while the Greek state certainly prospered as a whole, the Kapodistriakoi Government of Andreas Metaxas suffered from no shortages of problems throughout its existence. Despite his efforts to form a United Government, the Metaxa Ministry would be anything but as the Koléttikoi and the Mavrokordátikoi frequently made life difficult for the new Prime Minister and his supporters.[1] Named after their respective leaders, Ioannis Kolettis and Alexandros Mavrokordatos, the “Kollétikoi” and the “Mavrokordátikoi emerged from the nebulous Anti-Kapodistriakoi of the 1830’s to become the primary opposition parties to Metaxas and the Kapodistrians. While there was some overlap between the three in terms of political leanings and interests, each group had their own distinct differences that would bring them into conflict with one another over the next few years.

    In most regards, the Koléttikoi were generally defined as an ideologically disparate group in Greek politics, although they tended to lean liberal more than they did conservative. They supported initiatives for egalitarian land reform, the centralization of the state, and a degree of government intervention in the economy. They also favored more progressive issues such as the freedom of the press and government support for public education, but by far their most famous platform would be the rapid expansion of the Greek state to include all traditionally Greek territories by any means necessary. The Koléttikoi generally drew their support from the Roumeliotes of Central Greece, the Greeks of Euboea, and several of the land owning Kodjabashis (Primates) of the Morea providing them with 19 seats in the Vouli (Lower Chamber of the Greek Parliament).

    In comparison, the Mavrokordátikoi were a relatively liberal group. They supported a laissez faire economic policy, limited government, and the empowerment of the regional Nomoi at the expense of the central authority in Athens. Their main platform was the enforcement and protection of the Constitution of 1831 which had occasionally brought them into conflict with Ioannis Kapodistrias and his supporters in the past. While they generally supported the modernizing policies of the Kapodistriakoi, they also pushed for the freedom of the press alongside the Koléttikoi. The Mavrokordátikoi were mainly derived from the Phanariotes, the Morean Primates, and the wealthy ship owners of the Aegean islands earning them 16 seats in the Vouli.

    Lastly, the Kapodistriakoi were generally considered to be the most conservative of three by the standards of the time. They strongly supported the Greek Orthodox Church, the agriculture industry, and they generally resisted any efforts to weaken the institution of the monarchy and Central Government. Yet the Kapodistriakoi were also committed to Ioannis Kapodistrias’ initiatives and reforms that had favored the small farmers over the large plantation owners, and had helped modernize and industrialize the country. Of the three, the Kapodistriakoi held the largest degree of support among the peoples of Crete, the Morea, and Attica-Boeotia given the popularity of their de facto founder Ioannis Kapodistrias and their strong association with the revolution and independence of Greece. Because of their strong popular support, the Kapodistriakoi would enjoy a 59-seat majority in the Vouli at the start of 1841.

    Unfortunately for Andreas Metaxas, the differences between the parties would come into play almost immediately as he was soon faced with his first major roadblock as Prime Minister less than a week into the role. When his proposed budget for the 1841-1842 fiscal year was brought to the Vouli’s floor for a vote in early April, the bill met with stern opposition from a coalition of his political opponents and a few of his supposed allies in the chamber. Though the Kapodistriakoi officially held a 59 to 35 majority in the lower chamber, the Koléttikoi and the Mavrokordátikoi still maintained a large enough block to impede the Prime Minister’s agenda, especially when they were aided by some members of the Kapodistriakoi.

    Ultimately, the budget would pass following some revisions to several important provisions in the bill, allocating additional funds to various regions of the country. The most notable amendments to the budget were the inclusion of another 1,000,000 Phoenixes which would be split between the islands of Chios, Crete, Euboea, and Psara to help them recover from some lingering wounds that had been inflicted during the War for Independence. A further 200,000 Phoenixes would be allocated to the municipalities of Arta and Agrinion to improve their infrastructure, while an additional 400,000 Phoenixes would be granted to the municipalities of Preveza and Nafpaktos to expand their ports and commercial facilities. Finally, several restrictions on the press enacted under Ioannis Kapodistrias’ Premiership were to be rolled back, establishing the media as a protected entity in Greece, free from the persecution of the government.

    600px-IAN_0087.jpg

    The Port Town of Preveza

    These concessions would earn Andreas Metaxas a brief respite from the partisan gridlock in the Vouli. That is until the next major piece of legislation came to the House floor in early May when the National Bank of Greece’s charter came up for renewal. While the measure would narrowly pass, several Kapodistriakoi had sided against the bill making the vote much closer than anticipated. The Military Expansion Act of 1841 - which increased the combined active and reserve forces of the Hellenic Army from a nominal strength of 64 Battalions to 72 - was also approved by a razor thin margin in June. The permit for the Lake Copais Company to begin work on draining the lake was tentatively approved after receiving surprisingly bipartisan support from the Koléttikoi in late August 1841. Similarly, the measure establishing the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs was met with some opposition in the Vouli as well. Yet despite the gridlock which seemed to constantly grip the Hellenic Parliament, the people of Greece generally went about their daily lives as their basic needs were usually taken care of regardless of politics. The country was at peace, the people were safe, and their families were spared from the tragedy of famine or exposure to the elements, all of which was due in large part to the resurgence of the Greek economy in 1841.

    The last year of Ioannis Kapodistrias’ Premiership had been marred by a noticeable downturn in the Greek economy. Despite its brevity, the Second Syrian War had thoroughly disrupted trade in the region as numerous merchant ships remained locked away in port for months on end in fear of privateering, harassment, or blockade. Though the attack on Alexandria by the Ottoman Navy at the beginning of the conflict is often considered to be the most famous and the most devastating naval engagement in the war, there were in fact over one hundred raids and counterraids from the Nile Delta in Egypt to the Levantine and Anatolian coasts. The Egyptians even attempted a daring attack of their own on the port of Smyrna, but they were thwarted when their fleet was discovered prematurely by a small Rhodian fishing boat. Despite their neutrality in the conflict, Greek ships denied access any ports in the contested region depriving them of their markets in the East.

    However, while some avenues of trade were now closed to them, others quickly became available. As the Ottomans and Egyptians were largely distracted by their war, an opening began to emerge which the Greeks quickly moved to fill. Soon, vessels bearing the Greek ensign would appear in every port and every harbor from Odessa and Sevastopol in Russia to Venice and Ancona in Italy, capably filling the role that the Ottomans and Egyptians had once held themselves. Over the months Greek goods slowly replaced Turkish and Egyptian goods in Western European markets. Even the distant banks of the mighty Danube River would see a greater number of vessels bearing the Azure and White rather than the Star and the Crescent. When the Egyptian and Ottoman merchants finally returned to the sea after several months of fighting, they found that they had been almost entirely replaced by the Greek Merchant Marine.

    The Greeks were also aided by the redirection of a large portion of foreign shipping to Greek ports as a result of the war in the Orient. Foreign vessels bound for the ravaged and ruined ports of Alexandria, Acre, Beirut, Alexandretta, and Icel would instead layover at the peaceful Greek ports of Piraeus, Preveza, Patras, Chania, Rethymno, and Heraklion to escape the risks of the war. This rise in traffic ultimately resulted in the rapid development of these harbors into major centers of commerce in the region. New warehouses were constructed, docks were expanded, and harbors were dredged to make way for the Austrian, British, French, Italian, and Spanish ships which now began to appear in these ports. Piraeus in particular would experience a massive boom in its population thanks to this increase in activity, growing from a small town of several hundred people after the Greek War for Independence to a city of several thousand at the end of the Second Syrian War in 1841.

    600px-Piraeus_1837.JPG

    The Port of Piraeus

    Another important cause for the growth in the Greek shipping during this time can be attributed to the harmonious relations the Kingdom of Greece shared with many countries across Europe. Even before the end of the War for Independence and the signing of the Treaty of London in May 1830, Greece had opened formal diplomatic relations with Britain, France, and Russia. These diplomatic relations were quickly followed by commercial relations, as Greece would sign the Anglo-Hellenic Shipping and Trade Treaty in June 1831, establishing an official trade agreement between the two nations. Under the terms of the agreement Greece would provide Britain with its most favored nation status in return for lower tariffs on Greek goods bound for British markets. This treaty would also be the first of many trade and shipping agreements signed between Greece and the countries of Europe, Asia, Africa, North America, and South America in the coming years.

    The influx of foreign capital would lead the Government of Greece, as well as several private interests, to begin investing into other industries which began to emerge at the start of the 1840’s, such as the lucrative Hydriot sponge industry, the Cretan texile industry, and the shipbuilding industry in Syros. On the mainland, coal deposits were discovered near the city of Megalopolis in Arcadia spurring debate on the construction of a mine in the area. The silver industry in Greece began to elicit a large degree of interest that would lead to the formation of 11 different silversmiths across of the country. In addition to foreign capital, Greece would also see an influx of immigrants from the German and Italian states during the late 1830’s and early 1840’s, providing the Greek economy with a desperately needed source of skilled craftsmen and engineers who aided in the development of Greece’s nascent industrial and manufacturing sectors.

    Many of the internal trade barriers between the regions of Greece had also been eliminated furthering domestic trade and development. More importantly, the road network on land was finally beginning to show signs of improvement as the isolated villages of the Greek interior began exporting their products to a larger global market. Mules and horses, which had traditionally borne their master’s products to the coastal cities in the past, were gradually being replaced by carts and wagons as the country’s roads continued to improve. This enabled a higher quantity of goods to make the long journey from the inland of the country to the various ports on the coast at a much faster pace than before. Moreover, with the easier and faster transportation of these products from the interior, the high price of transportation gradually fell, which in turn reduced their final prices dramatically, making them more competitive with foreign goods in Greek and foreign markets. And compete it did.

    Despite its small size, Greece would quickly become the world’s third largest producer of olive oil behind only the Kingdom of Spain and the Ottoman Empire, and with the Kingdom of Two-Sicilies in a close fourth. Olive groves had existed in Greece since ancient times and remained a prominent feature of the countryside ever since. They could be found everywhere from Aetolia and Crete to Macedonia and Asia Minor, but by far the most famous and plentiful olive groves were found near Athens which produced thousands of tonnes of olives every year. After they were harvested, most olives were generally converted into oils, although a sizeable portion would remain as a fruit for local and foreign consumption. In total, olives and olive oils were the single largest export of Greece, constituting nearly 35% of all exports in 1839 alone. Greece also boasted a high number of fig farms in the Morea, a sizeable citrus industry on Crete, a moderate cotton industry spread between Aetolia-Acarnania and Phocis-Phthiotis. But it would be the Greek raisin industry which would prove to be the most popular and the most profitable.

    As part of the broader Philhellenic craze that swept across Western Europe following the Greek War for Independence, numerous Europeans were eager to experience Greek cuisine and delicacies, one of which was the Corinthian raisin, also known as the Zante currant. With its sweet taste and convenient size, Corinthian raisins made for a delicious snack to Western European consumers whose ate them up at an incredible rate which would continue to climb ever higher year after year. Demand for these raisins would reach such heights that numerous farmers throughout Greece would convert their entire crops into raisins, developing a monoculture in some parts of the Morea to meet the demand. Panarition, a small farming town to the west of Corinth, would become a particularly infamous example of this phenomenon as raisins would form the entirety of the village’s economy as early as 1835. While the Government certainly enjoyed the high demand for raisins, and the money they earned off them, they also encouraged farmers to diversify their crops in an effort to prevent what was quickly becoming an oversupply of raisins on the market.

    500px-Zante_currant_drying_in_Tsilivi.jpg

    A Raisin Vineyard on Zakynthos

    The agricultural boom in Greece was so great, that the total agricultural production had increased from 45,000,000 Phoenixes in 1831 to 80,000,000 Phoenixes in 1841.[2] As a result of the economic development, the tax and tariff revenue collected by the Government also grew exponentially from 7,101,915 Phoenixes (£255,465) in 1831 to 22,389,400 Phoenixes (£805,374) in 1840. Yet despite more than tripling their annual revenue, the Governments’ budget had barely increased over the past ten years. In fact, throughout much of the 1830’s, the Greek government was forced to make sharp cuts to their military, civil service, and bureaucracy in order to pay their bills, specifically the interest on their loans.

    During the War for Independence, Greece had developed a massive debt well in excess of £3,000,000 as it was frequently forced to borrow money from various distributors to finance their war effort against the Ottoman Empire. The lion’s share of this amount would come from two loans worth £800,000 and £2,000,000 respectively, which had been donated to the Greeks by British Philhellenes, investors, and bankers. The Greeks would also take out additional loans from various other sources like the Philhellenes Lord Byron and Tsar Nicholas of Russia. Following the war, Greece would take out another loan from the Powers, which amounted to £2,500,000, bringing their total debt to nearly £6 million in 1831.

    Paid out over three installments in 1831, 1832, and 1833, the Post War Loan would aid in the reconstruction and rebuilding of the country after the devastation it had endured during the war. Some of the money would be lent to Greek families, refugees, and veterans enabling them to purchase land, farm tools, and crops. Some would be used to build roads and markets, it went towards the dredging of ports and harbors, as well as the mending of ruined docks and the purchasing of new merchant ships. It also helped establish much needed government institutions like the various ministries and it was used to hire numerous government employees and civil servants like tax collectors, lawyers, administrators, and accountants. However, a significant portion of the loan would go towards the interest payments on their debt which amounted to over 8,400,000 Phoenixes or £300,000 every year.

    It is fortunate then that Greece’s economy grew as quickly as it did because Post War Loan was spent rapidly and by the Summer of 1834 it was entirely exhausted. Within weeks, the Greek state would burn through its meagre savings, leading it to make some difficult decisions in order to meet their fiscal requirements. For obvious reasons, the Greek Government would have to pay the interest on their debt, lest they run the risk of bankruptcy or a worsening of their credit. Nor could they refuse to pay the rest of their bills lest they lose faith with their own people. As such the solution to their financial shortfalls would have to come from budget cuts, tax/tariff increases, or taking out further loans to pay for the military, the government bureaucracy, and the various ongoing government projects. Ultimately, the Government would be forced to do a little bit of everything to make ends meet.

    While they refused to directly cut down on the size of the army, the Government would not actively seek to refill their ranks following retirements, deaths, and other discharges from the Army. As was to be expected attrition began to take its toll as the true strength of the Army dropped from 14,521 men in 1834 to its nadir of 11,910 men in 1838. The Navy also experienced some cutbacks as the Flagship Hellas was mothballed in 1835 along with the Kronos. The steamships Epichiris and Karteria were also removed from active duty due to their frequent engine problems and the high maintenance costs needed to repair them. Some ships ran on skeleton crews, while others were reduced to port duty. Several of state employees were furloughed indefinitely and many others had their pay slashed, even King Leopold cut down his own annual subsidy from 400,000 Phoenixes to 300,000 in solidarity with the soldiers, sailors, and civil servants who lost their jobs or their incomes because of the debt crisis. Unfortunately, this would still not be enough and the Greek Government which was then forced to take out additional loans with the Zosimades of Ioannina and the Romaniote Jews of Thessaloniki to make up the difference in 1835 and 1836.[3]

    The Greek Government would attempt to address their debt issue through diplomacy with the Powers, yet because of financial and political reasons these efforts would fall on deaf ears in Paris and St. Petersburg. Their efforts with London would prove to be more complicated however. In 1834, the Government of Greece approached the British Government regarding various discrepancies in their financial records of the two loans issued to Greece during the war, the London Greek Committee loan of 1824 and the Ricardo Banking House loan of 1825. While the two loans were nominally recorded as £800,000 and £2,000,000 respectively, Greece had only ever received £536,000 and £1,125,000, far short of the £2.8 Million they had been charged with. The British Government of Sir Arthur Wellesley and King William IV however, proved indifferent to the Greeks complaints, believing they had simply wasted the missing funds in their corruption and kleptocracy. As such they refused to speak of the matter any further and compelled the Greeks to continue paying their debts as they were currently constructed.

    The matter would remain unresolved until the Spring of 1838, when King Leopold of Greece traveled to Britain for the coronation of his niece Queen Victoria. During his stay in London, Leopold made every effort at convincing the new Prime Minister Sir Charles Grey to readdress the Wartime loans. While Earl Grey proved receptive to King Leopold’s concerns, he did little to advance the issue beyond simple platitudes and vague promises. So it was that when Leopold returned to Britain in February 1840 for the marriage of Victoria and Albert, he did so with an army of accountants, financiers, lawyers, and diplomats at his back. After several meetings and the personal intervention of Queen Victoria, Grey would finally agree to an investigation of the Greek Government’s complaints on the matter of their debt.

    In his investigation, Earl Grey would discover reports of corruption, embezzlement, and malpractice on the parts of the loans promoters. It quickly became apparent that numerous bankers, accountants, and financiers had used the loan to inflate their own fortunes while the Greeks were ladened with an enormous debt and the British people were robbed of their money. While the Greek agents Andreas Louriotis and Ioannis Orlandos were also criticized for their role in the contracting of the loans and for the rather sizeable commissions they had taken from the loans, the brunt of the criticism would be directed at the London Greek Committee and its former Secretary Sir John Bowring. Bowring’s actions in particular were especially scandalous as he effectively lined his pockets with the charitable donations of beguiled Londoners who earnestly believed they were the Greeks. The investigation would unfortunately take several months to fully root out the extent of the corruption, but with the discovery of the unscrupulous behavior of the London Greek Committee and Sir Bowring it was only a matter of time. Finally, by the Summer of 1841, the British Government announced that they would reduce the nominal amount loaned of £2.8 Million to better reflect the actual amount of £1,686,000.[4]

    The announcement was a huge victory for the newly appointed Metaxa Ministry which was now able to gradually draw down the various austerity measures that had been enacted during the mid- 1830’s. Together with the burgeoning economy, Andreas Metaxas and the Kapodistrians would win 57 of the 94 seats in the Vouli during the 1841 National Elections. Though this was far shorter than the 63 seats Ioannis Kapodistrias had secured in the 1837 elections, Metaxas had still managed to hold onto a solid majority in the Vouli, enabling him to begin work on a number of new projects, initiatives, and expansions that had been downsized or delayed over the past few years because of the financial crisis.

    Next Time: Ethos and Mythos


    [1] These “parties” are essentially this timeline’s equivalent of the English, French, and Russian Parties of OTL. There are a few differences however, most notably the reduced influence of the English, French, and Russians in the parties.

    [2] This is probably a conservative estimate on my part considering the development of the Greek Agricultural Sector in OTL grew from 30 million Drachma in 1833 to 50 million in 1849. Considering TTL’s Greece has managed to avoid a lot of the destruction of OTL’s war, its under better management with Kapodistrias and Leopold, and it has Crete, which has a pretty good agricultural industry, I think a growth of 77.78% is a relatively fair increase over OTL’s 66.7%. Then again the OTL growth took place over 16 years while this was only 10 so it may actually be too much of an increase all things considered.

    [3] The Zosimades were a family of Greek bankers and traders from the city of Ioannina. They were one of the single largest financial supporters of the Greeks during the Greek War for Independence. After the war, they continued to support the Kingdom of Greece through additional loans prior to the reinstitution of the National Bank of Greece in 1841. They were also involved in various charitable activities and were strong advocates of education both in Greece and the Ottoman Empire.

    [4] The British would do something similar to this in 1878, albeit with a very different set of circumstances.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 55: Ethos and Mythos
  • Part 55: Ethos and Mythos

    700px-The_Lion_gate_at_Mycenae_by_Th%C3%A9odore_Du_Moncel.jpg

    The Lion Gate of Mycenae

    An important, yet often understated decision by Greek Prime Minister Andreas Metaxas and his Government was the renaming of the Phoenix in the Fall of 1841. Over the course of its 14-year existence, the Phoenix developed a rather poor reputation among the Greek people as a relatively unlikeable and worthless currency. The reason for this poor reception dates back to the origin of the Phoenix during the waning months of the War for Independence, when then Governor of Greece Ioannis Kapodistrias unilaterally pronounced the Phoenix as the official currency of an independent Greece. Despite purchasing a coin press in Malta, ordering special coin dies from the Armenian jeweler Chatzigrigoris Pyrobolistis, and establishing a minting facility at Aegina, Greece simply lacked the necessary raw resources - gold, silver, and copper - to make the coins in a sufficient quantity.

    All told, between January 1827 and May 1830, only 20,000 silver Phoenix coins and a handful of gold Phoenix coins would be produced. The resulting shortfall in available capital in Greece during the formative years of the currency almost certainly doomed the Phoenix to failure as its reputation among the people suffered and the Government’s attempts to rectify this issue only exacerbated it even more when they began printing paper Phoenix banknotes. Lacking the same integral weight and value as the silver and gold coins, the people spurned them in favor of foreign currencies like the Ottoman Piastre, the French Franc, or the British Pound. Even when the Greek Government committed itself to continue supporting the Phoenix after the war and purchased the resources needed to produce them, it was too late as the Phoenix had been thoroughly discredited among much of the Greek people and many members of the Government.

    The Phoenix would only survive until the dawn of the 1840’s thanks to the efforts of Prime Minister Ioannis Kapodistrias who stubbornly refused to concede the issue to his economic advisors. Kapodistrias would even go as far as to sack his own Treasury Minister Georgios Kountouriotis in 1833 for refusing to enforce a law prohibiting Ottoman Piastres from being used in Government venues. However, with Kapodistrias’ retirement from public office in February 1841, the Phoenix had lost it most prominent and vocal supporter as his successor Andreas Metaxas would prove himself to be much less emotionally and politically attached to the Phoenix. Metaxas generally agreed with the Phoenix’s detractors and ultimately announced his intention to rename the currency several weeks after assuming the office of Prime Minister in the Summer of 1841.

    The process of rebranding the Phoenix was done in a respectful and proper manner, as numerous names, designs, and breakdowns of the new currency were considered ad nauseam. Eventually though, Metaxas and his compatriots decided upon the Drachma in early October. The Drachma (₯) would replace the Phoenix at par and it would be comprised of the same precious metals (90% silver and 10% copper) for a 1 Drachma coin while the 20 Drachma coin would be comprised primarily of gold just like the 20 Phoenix coins had been. The Lepta would also remain unchanged as the primary subdivision of the Drachma, with 1 Lepta being worth 1/100th of a Drachma. The design of the Drachma would feature King Leopold’s profile on the face of the coin, and the coat of Arms of Greece on the reverse replacing the unpopular phoenix emblem. Phoenixes would be allowed to continue circulation throughout the Greek economy indefinitely, however, the production of new Phoenixes would be halted effective immediately upon the start of the production of the Drachma in late November. Additionally, any Phoenixes collected by the Greek Government through taxes, fines, donations, or any other means going forward would be destroyed and/or converted into new Drachma.


    500px-Old_greek_money_1.jpg

    Drachma Coins and Banknotes

    The reasoning for the choice of Drachma is rather obvious given the cultural and historical importance associated with the name. As the most prominent and widespread currency in the Ancient Greek world, the Drachma possessed a degree of prestige and legitimacy among the Greeks that the Phoenix simply never could attain. The reception of the Drachma also benefitted immensely from the opening of the silver mines at Laurium nearly two years earlier, which helped to reduce the chronic silver shortages that had unfortunately plagued the Phoenix throughout its short existence. As a result, the Drachma enjoyed a great deal of popular support among the people of Greece and from their friends abroad who praised the Greek Government for their fresh start.

    The resurrection of the Drachma also coincided with an important development in the field of archaeology in the Kingdom of Greece. In what was to be the first of many, the French Government announced their decision to begin construction on a school of archaeology in Athens. The French School of Athens, as it was officially known would aid French and Greek archaeologists in the surveying, recording, and excavating of the various ruins, abandoned settlements, and ancient wonder scattered across the Greek countryside. The School would also train prospective students in the modern art of archaeology through lectures and field trips to various sites around Greece. The French School would also work alongside the National Archaeological Museum of Athens and the Archaeological Society of Athens in many of their own expeditions as well.

    The main sites targeted by these groups were the Acropolis in Athens which saw the most activity over the years, the ancient sanctuary of the Hellenic Gods at Olympia, the Temple of Poseidon at Sounion, the island of Delos, and the sanctuary of Apollo and the Delphic Oracle at Delphi among many others. Some Medieval structures like the Frankish palace at Mystras, the Hexamilion Wall near Corinth, and the Byzantine Church of Panagia Kapnikarea in Athens, the Nea Moni monastery of Chios, and the Church of Paregoretissa in Arta attracted some interest as well, albeit on a much lower scale compared to their classical counterparts. Surprisingly, however, a Bronze Age site predating even the golden age of Greek democracy, culture, and architecture would soon attract a substantial degree of attention over the course of 1841, 1842, and 1843. On the 28th of August 1841, a team of 7 laborers under the direction of the Greek archaeologist Kyriakos Psistakis began working in and around the ancient city of Mycenae, with their primary task being the restoration of the famous Lion Gate.[1]

    Mycenae was a city steeped in myth and legend, famous for its status as the capital of the mighty King Agamemnon from Homer’s Epics, the Iliad and the Odyssey and for its brief, but very detailed depiction in the tragedy Oresteia by Aeschylus. While the local Greeks had known of the abandoned settlement for countless generations, little archaeological and historical evidence actually existed linking the ruined Argolic city with Homer’s “Golden Mycenae”. The Greek geographer Pausanais had written of the city during his many travels in the Second Century, and the Venetian Provveditore Generale Francesco Grimani had briefly mentioned a site resembling Mycenae in his survey of the Morean countryside in 1700. Sadly, however, the site was relatively untouched throughout the intervening years and would only experience any large degree of activity in the Fall of 1841 when Psistakis and his team began work at the site.

    550px-117_of_%27Pausanias%27s_Description_of_Greece._Translated_with_a_commentary_by_J._G.Frazer%27_%2811247694736%29.jpg

    Map of the Mycenae Acropolis

    Over the years falling rocks, loose soil, random debris, and untamed vegetation had built up around the ancient settlement making the site almost unnoticeable from the road below. Now Psistakis and his men began the grueling task of clearing the outer walls and the distinctive Lion Gate, a project that would take nearly a month to complete. Progress was dreadfully slow as funding remained a constant issue for the team of archaeologists and laborers as resources were diverted to more lucrative expeditions. Yet their efforts quickly began to attract attention from both the archaeological community in Greece and the Greek Government. Eventually, Psistakis and his team would finish their work on the Lion Gate as well as much of the Cyclopean and Ashlar walls on the 2nd of October 1841 to the cheering of a small crowd that had gathered nearby.[2] Aside from twenty or so local villagers and goat herders who had stopped by to witness the spectacle, there were a half dozen journalists to record the event, a pair of representatives from the National Archaeological Museum, one observer from the French School, five men from the Archaeological Society of Athens who had sponsored the expedition, and most surprisingly, King Leopold himself.

    At first glance, King Leopold was not a man many would have expected to see at a dusty and dirty archaeological site far from the luxury and comfort of the capital. Yet, while his public façade had grown cold over the years by cynicism, heartbreak, and personal tragedy; he remained a romantic at heart who desperately yearned to fulfill his romantic urges through adventure and artistic endeavors. “I think it will be very pleasant to breathe the balmy Aegean air, to wander through groves of myrtle, olives, and oranges, and to sit beneath blue silk tents while beautiful Greek women dance their tremendous dances before me. To visit the ancient ruins, to travel across a land of great wonders and greater men shall satisfy the poetic needs of my soul.” -Leopold of Saxe Coburg and Gotha to Christian Friedrich Freiherr von Stockmar in March 1830

    It was no secret that Leopold had accepted the Greek crown primarily for the past prestige and sophistication that the land had once held, rather than the present rural and uncouth country that it had become. Yet even still, the ruins and abandoned settlements that dotted the Greek countryside inspired Leopold to restore the past grandeur and greatness of Greece. To that end he became a prominent supporter of the arts and archaeology in Greece. He patronized various artists across the country like the painters Dionysios Tsokos who painted Leopold’s state portrait in 1843 and Andreas Kriezis who decorated the Royal Palace in Athens. He hired sculptors for various projects and he sponsored writers for many translations and duplications of ancient texts. Leopold also made a point of visiting various archaeological sites which he deemed to be historically and culturally important to Greek history and culture like Mycenae.


    350px-King_Leopold_I_of_Belgium.jpg

    The State Portrait of King Leopold by Dionysios Tsokos

    With the Lion Gate cleared, Leopold thought it best to travel to the site in person to see it for himself. Impressed by Psisakis’ work, King Leopold encouraged the archaeologist and his team to expand their excavation of Mycenae from the gateway and outer walls to the Citadel and upper city itself. This would be a herculean task which would undoubtably require multiple years of hard work to fully clear and thousands upon thousands of Drachmae to pay for the crew of laborers and archaeologists that would be needed throughout the expedition. Yet the King, his ministers, the National Archaeological Museum, and the Archaeological Society of Athens all backed the endeavor and a tentative starting date for the second round of excavations at Mycenae was scheduled for the following Spring.

    When Psisakis and his men returned to Mycenae in early March 1842, they did so with an army of laborers, historians, and archaeologists at their back. They were also joined periodically by several foreign archaeologists who came to aid in the excavation from time to time, the most prominent being the Frenchmen Jean Antoinne Letronne and Charles Lenormant, the Prussian Karl Otfried Muller, and the Lübecker Ernst Curtius among a few others. Initially, work was to be focused in and around the acropolis of Mycenae in an area believed to be the site of the ancient palace. Yet several days into the expedition, their plans would change completely as a series of mounds near the entrance to the town attracted their attention.

    From a distance they appeared to be a natural feature of the site, but upon a closer inspection one could see that they were in fact burial mounds. Immediately, their focus shifted to the graves which quickly revealed a series of ancient stone stelae. The burial markers bore images resembling chariot races, battle scenes, or hunts among other impressive feats of strength or power. Inspired by the belief that they had stumbled upon the burial sites of the ancient Mycenaean Kings of yore, the team quickly began work removing the dirt from atop the graves. Digging deeper, they would quickly discover a set of six shaft graves underneath the mounds which contained 19 bodies in total, 8 men, 9 women, and 2 children. Accompanying the bodies were a number of jewels and precious stones as well as an untold number of gold, silver, and bronze artifacts ranging from rings and bracelets to swords and scepters. The most awe-inspiring piece, however, was a golden burial mask depicting a older man’s face. As it was the most impressive and prominent find in the graves, many of the archaeologists began calling it Agamemnon’s Death Mask, in honor of the great Mycenaean King of legend.

    350px-MaskOfAgamemnon.jpg

    Agamemnon’s Death Mask

    The discovery of Agamemnon’s Death Mask was quickly followed up by the recovery of a golden goblet believed to be King Nestor’s famous Cup from the Iliad. The recovery of two items associated with two key figures from the Epics of Homer brought several men to tears, and then quickly thereafter raucous celebration filled with drinking, dancing, feasting, music, and merriment. Yet when the party came to an end and the sun rose the following morning, the team of archaeologists, historians, and laborers assembled at Mycenae discovered to their horror that Agamemnon’s Death Mask, the Cup of Nestor and an untold number of gold and silver rings, bracelets, necklaces, headpieces, and chalices had been stolen. A quick rollcall would reveal that six men had deserted from the camp during the night making them the most obvious suspects to have absconded with the missing treasures.

    Immediately, a team of riders were dispatched to notify the local authorities at Nafplion as to theft at Mycenae. Fortunately, by the end of the day four of the six missing men had been captured, and their ill-gotten goods were recovered, including Agamemnon’s Death Mask and King Nestor’s Cup. Sadly, two men would manage to escape the authorities and flee overseas to Italy and from there to France and Germany where they subsequently sold the stolen artifacts to the highest bidders. Although many of the treasures would eventually be restored to Greece in the coming months and years, the entire incident was a terrible embarrassment to the Greek Government that had caused them needless headache and humiliation. It also served as a harsh reminder of the loss of the Elgin Marbles nearly three decades earlier.

    The Elgin Marbles, as they were known to the British public, were a massive collection of statues, sculptures, and friezes recovered from the Acropolis in Athens by the former British Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire Lord Thomas Bruce, the 7th Earl of Elgin. While most of the marbles were taken from the Parthenon, several works came from the Erechtheion, the Propylaea, and the Temple of Athena Nike; all of which represent approximately half of the surviving pieces from the Acropolis today. The process of excavating and removing the sculptures to Britain took many years to accomplish, beginning in 1803 and finishing in 1812, and required the complicity of the local Ottoman authorities. As the Acropolis was still a military fortification of the Ottoman Army at that time, chicanery was needed to gain access to the site. To that end, Elgin presented a dubious translation of what he proclaimed to be a Firman from the Sultan Selim III allowing him and his associates permission to the Acropolis. A second Firman of similar questionability also permitted Elgin and his men permission to remove the sculptures from the site and send them to Britain. While the means of taking the marbles were bad enough, the justification for his actions were equally disturbing.


    550px-Temporary_Elgin_Room_at_the_Museum_in_1819.jpg

    The Elgin Marbles

    Although Eglin presented his actions in the light of an altruist philanthropist seeking to preserve these artistic wonders for posterity, in truth, his pilfering of the Acropolis Marbles was done out of a vain desire to decorate his manor in Scotland. Even then, the Marbles would not remain at his home of Broomhall for long, as a costly legal battle with his wife the Lady Mary Nisbet would force Elgin to sell the Marbles to the British Government to pay his arrears in 1816. The Elgin Marbles were then bestowed upon the British Museum and remained with them ever since, throughout the years of the Greek War of Independence and into the first years of the nascent Kingdom of Greece.

    The removal of the Elgin Marbles from the Acropolis proved to be a touchy subject the Greeks themselves. Though they had not been consulted on the matter during the original removal of the Acropolis Marbles and the Greek state had not been independent at the time of the act, the Greek government continually requested that the Marbles be returned to them as the rightful heirs of Ancient Greece. These requests were continually rejected by the British Government as the pieces had become quite popular among the British public by the 1830’s and the matter was ultimately deadlocked for many years to come. Even the aid of the great writer and Philhellene, Lord Byron proved insufficient to the task of convincing the British Museum to return the Marbles.[3] The matter would only come to the foreground of British-Greek relations in 1841 thanks to the death of the Earl of Elgin in mid-November of that year.

    As had been the case with the prior meetings on the Elgin Marbles, however, the December 1841 negotiations ended in failure. Despite offers by the Greek Government to make perfect replicas of the Elgin Marbles from Pentelic marble, the British refused to return them. Even a desperate bid to buy the marbles was turned down much to the despair of the Greek representatives. Sadly, the unresolved matter would serve as a minor blemish on the otherwise excellent relationship between Great Britain and Greece. However, the failure of the 1841 Elgin Marble Negotiations would help bring about some reforms of archaeological practices in Greece, especially after the incident at Mycenae and the theft of various artifacts from the dig site there the following Spring.

    Going forward, the Greek Government expressed its desire to exhibit more control over the countless ancient ruins, structures, treasures, and artifacts throughout Greece. It required that a member of the Internal Affairs Ministry be present at all active excavation sites across the country and that all artifacts be brought to the attention of the Greek Government. While the thefts of ancient artifacts by day laborers, archaeologists, and random passersby would continue, they did decline by a moderate margin. Despite the success of these new policies, they were not a perfect solution as many harmful excavation practices had remained unresolved and would sadly continue for years to come.

    While some elements of Greek culture looked to the past other aspects looked to the West especially in regards to dress and literature. During the Ottoman era in Greece, clothing had been extensively regulated by the Sublime Porte which forced people to dress according to their religion and profession. Most men from the rural Greek countryside tended to wear the fustanella with a tunic, fez, leggings, and pair of simple leather shoes or boots, although the exact colors and materials used varied from region to region. The islanders and sailors of Ottoman Greece generally wore a similar costume with a pair of knee breeches called “vraka” instead of the mainlander’s fustanella. Men of wealth and prominence, such as the Phanariotes or successful merchants generally favored the attire of western courts such as breeches, coats, and ties as they tended to interact with merchants and diplomats from the West.

    The Greek War of Independence and the liberation of Greece in 1830 would see little in the way of immediate change regarding Greek fashion despite doing away with the Ottoman laws which had determined dress in Ottoman Greece. But, by the late 1830’s and especially by the start of the 1840’s Western apparel began making greater inroads among Greek men in the middle and lower classes of Greek society, particularly those living in the major city centers of Greece. Despite these changes in Greek dress during this period, the traditional fustanellas, vrakas, and tunics of earlier years remained incredibly popular among the Greeks. The fustanella did experience some changes during this time as it generally became shorter in length, rising from just below the knee to just above it in the years following the War for Independence.

    Women’s dresses would also experience a noticeable change as well thanks in large part to the influence of the young Queen Marie. Seeking to ingratiate herself in her new land, Queen Marie developed her own version of the traditional Greek woman’s dress, incorporating a loose fitting blouse with an ankle length skirt. The outfit was complemented by a distinctive lace jacket, with the most popular coloring being in blue and golds, and a simple red fez on top, although the fez was commonly switched out with a veil for church services and other formal social gatherings. This look later known as the “Marie Dress” would become incredibly popular among the women of Greece and could soon be seen from Athens to Belgrade and Ioannina to Constantinople. Other changes would take place including the incorporation of various luxury fabrics, materials, and colors into men and women's clothing that had been outlawed by the Ottoman Empire.

    650px-Travels_in_Italy%2C_Greece%2C_and_the_Ionian_Islands._-_In_a_series_of_letters%2C_description_of_manners%2C_scenery%2C_and_the_fine_arts._%281820%29_%2814766365042%29.jpg

    Typical Dress for Greek Men and Women during the Ottoman Era​

    250px-KaterinaRosaBotzaris.jpg

    Katarina Botsaris, daughter of Greek General Markos Botsaris wearing “Marie Dress”​

    Greek literature and writing also experienced a number of important developments during this period as the language debate came to the fore of Greek society. The Greek Language Debate was a protracted scholarly dispute regarding the official language of Greece. At the turn of the 19th century, two Greek dialects were in use, Demotic and Katharevousa. Demotic or dimotiki was a dialect of Greek spoken by the vast majority of the people of Greece and generally considered to be the natural evolution of Ancient Greek by its relatively few supporters. However, many Greek scholars, philosophers, and linguists considered it to be a bastardization of Ancient Greek that had been heavily corrupted by Turkish and other foreign languages. Katharevousa in comparison was considered a more faithful recreation of ancient Greek thus earning it the support of many intellectuals and influential Greeks.

    Katharevousa also served as the official language of the Greek Government as it was considered nobler and more formal than the vulgar and crass Demotic Greek of the masses. This decision was generally well received by the legal experts, wealthy merchants, and educated class of Greek society, but it did cause problems with the general public who were generally illiterate and uneducated in most scholarly matters. Ioannis Kapodistrias' efforts to boost education throughout the country were relatively successful, albeit incredibly slow. Teaching was done almost exclusively in Katharevousa in a bid to help proliferate the language among the people. Ultimately, it was the hope of many Greek scholars and linguists that Katharevousa would serve as a stepping stone, rather than an end goal, between the lowly Demotic Greek and the nobler Ancient Greek.

    Another important spreader of Katharevousa across Greece was literature and poetry, and of all the writers of the era, none championed Katharevousa more than the famous Greek poet Panagiotis Soutsos. In many ways, Panagiotis Soutsos was the Greek equivalent of Lord Byron, an exemplary poet of his time who certainly made his opinion known throughout his many works which were themselves extremely popular and influential among the people of Greece. By exclusively using Katharevousa in all of his works, Soutsos helped to proliferate the dialect across the country among his many readers. There were some problems that arose because of the Language Debate however.

    While Katharevousa and Demotic were generally recognizable to one another there were several key differences and these differences unfortunately resulted in several clashes between the supporters of each. The most famous, or rather the most infamous incident surrounding the Greek Language Debate was the Agora Riots of 1847. Following a rendition of the play Seven Against Thebes performed in Demotic, the crowd, which was primarily composed of Katharevousa supporters, attacked the actors, set fire to the theatre, and raged through the streets of Athens causing wanton destruction on their way towards the ancient Agora. The event was only halted by the quick intervention of the local authorities who swiftly surrounded and subdued the rioters any further harm could be done. Sadly, two individuals would lose their lives in the event and hundreds of Drachmae in damages had been incurred. Despite this embarrassment, Katharevousa would retain its popularity among the upper class of Greek society for years to come.

    Next Time: A Window to the East


    [1] Aside from the date, this is the same as OTL.

    [2] The Walls of Mycenae were so tall and thick that many ancient Greeks believed they had been built by cyclopes, providing the walls with their distinctive name, the “Cyclopean Walls”. Cyclopean masonry is generally defined by the massive boulders and unworked stones that form the structure and are held together by their sheer weight and size rather than with mortar. Mycenae also features some examples of Ashlar masonry as well, with the Lion Gate being the best example of Ashlar masonry monument at the site.

    [3] Lord Byron was extremely critical of Elgin’s removal of the Marbles from the Acropolis, going so far as to call him a vandal and a looter. He would even write about the event in one of his poems, Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage in 1812.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 56: A Window to the East
  • Part 56: A Window to the East

    600px-View_of_the_Seraglio_Point_from_Pera.jpg

    Ḳosṭanṭīnīye, Capital of the Ottoman Empire

    The final, and arguably most controversial policy by the Metaxa Ministry regarded their stance towards the Ottoman Empire. Relations between the Greeks and the Ottomans were complex to say the least given their past histories with one another, histories that were full of violence and bad blood. While emotions had settled since the end of the Greek War for Independence in 1830, it was clear that a general sense of bitterness and resentment remained on both sides. Most held a deep-seated hatred for the other thanks to the various atrocities, massacres, and acts of terrorism committed during the conflict. Others held far older grudges dating back to a time before the war, such as the imposition of the Devshirme system. Despite these cold feelings towards each other, their governments both recognized the importance of peace and benignity between them and begrudgingly worked to normalize relations.

    The first step in this process would take place in 1834 following the end of the Albanian and Bosnian Rebellions as the ensuing influx of refugees nearly threatened to reignite the war between the Ottomans and the Greeks. The conflict in the Ottoman Empire had killed thousands and thousands more had been left destitute and homeless. Those that could fled from the devastated regions with many traveling North to Austria while many others went South to Greece seeking asylum from their Turkish oppressors. Complicating matters greatly were the inclusion of several dozen Albanian Beys and Aghas who had originally instigated the revolt in 1830, and were now hiding among the other refugees in Greece. Their presence was an insult to the Sublime Porte who demanded in the harshest terms that the Greek Government extradite them the Empire immediately. The Greeks for their part refused, as they were compelled by their sense of honor and kinship to their Albanian cousins to defend and protect them no matter the cost.

    As a result, tensions between the two began to escalate as diplomacy proved insufficient to resolving the issue at hand. Soldiers were mustered, arms were readied, and both nations readied themselves for war. Yet by some miracle hostilities were averted. A compromise was reached, peace carried the day, and war was narrowly avoided. Several months later, the Ottoman Empire and the Kingdom of Greece began a series of talks regarding the formalization of relations between the two states. After several weeks of debate and discussion, the two would sign the Treaty of Constantinople in late November 1834.

    Under this treaty, trade was formally permitted between the Kingdom of Greece and the Ottoman Empire for the first time in over 13 years and the borders were formally opened to diplomats, merchants, refugees, and travelers. A Greek consulate was established in Constantinople for the newly appointed Greek ambassador the Phanariot Alexandros Mavrokordatos, although he would only hold the post for a few months before resigning and returning to Greece in 1837.[1] A consulate was similarly prepared for the Ottoman ambassador in Athens, however, it would remain vacant for several years as the Ottoman court continually delayed the appointment of a diplomat to the post for one reason or another. Eventually though, the Sublime Porte would appoint the Phanariot Konstantinos Mousouros as their ambassador to the Greek state in the Fall of 1838, nearly two years after the Greeks had appointed their own ambassador.

    580px-The_Ottoman_ambassador_and_his_page_at_a_ball_at_the_royal_residence_in_Athens%2C_1838.jpg

    The Turkish Ambassador Konstantinos Mousouros at a Royal Ball in Athens

    Commerce and trade would also prove to be incredibly important factors behind the burgeoning détente between the two states as their economies became increasingly connected in terms of the goods and services they provided each other. For the Kingdom of Greece, the Ottoman Empire and their subsidiaries (Serbia, Wallachia, Moldavia, etc.) represented their fourth largest trading partner in the early 1840's, behind only the British Empire, the Russian Empire, and the Kingdom of France and by 1850, they would pass France, becoming the 3rd largest trading partner for Greece. Greek merchants were a common sight in the many markets and bazaars of the Empire, while ships bearing the Greek ensign were routinely found in great numbers along the Levantine coast and in the Sea of Marmara. In fact, most bakals (small merchants or grocers) in the Ottoman Empire were Greeks from either the Kingdom of Greece or one of the many Greek communities still within the Ottoman Empire.

    The Kingdom of Greece was an important trading partner for the Ottoman Empire as well, although not nearly to the same degree that they were for the Greeks. Even still, a sizeable portion of their wares would make their way to the vendors in Athens, Heraklion, and Patras among others. Greek ships were still responsible for transporting a significant amount of the Ottoman Empire’s exports to Western markets despite efforts by the Sublime Porte to develop their own Turkish merchant marine. The Ralli Brothers (Zannis, Augustus, Pandia, Toumazis, and Eustratios) from the prestigious Chian Ralli shipping family and their allies in the Rodocanachi Shipping family were particularly active in the Ottoman Empire and Greece during this time. With their branches in London, Marseilles, Athens, Chios, Smyrna, Constantinople, St. Petersburg, Bombay, Calcutta, New York, and New Orleans they were a truly global entity and are partially responsible for opening the Ottoman and Greek markets to the greater global market to the benefit of both states.[2] These merchants, shipping giants, and bankers also held great sway over Greek politics during the 1830's and 1840's as their immense wealth and influence provided them a degree of political power in Athens enabling them to push their interests as Greece's interests, and their interests necessitated peace with the Ottoman Empire.

    Despite this, relations between the two would remain tepid at best for the next few years until the outbreak of the Second Syrian War and the ensuing Cyprus Affair which would once again threaten to bring Greece and the Ottomans to the brink of another confrontation. Fortunately for both sides, the matter was resolved before any hostilities could occur and relations returned to normal in the course of several months. This swift recovery in relations between the Greeks and the Ottomans so soon after a potentially scandalous incident is largely due to the ascension of the new Sultan Abdulmejid I who would work tirelessly to facilitate peace and stability in the region. Despite being an incredibly young man, Abdulmejid was already an especially capable and magnanimous ruler whose reputation for progressive ideals and sensibilities as well as the enactment of various reforms over the course of his reign, reforms that went well beyond the scope and scale of his father’s many modernization policies. Where Sultan Mahmud II had focused on building a stronger military and a more efficient Government to sure up the flagging fortunes of the state, Abdulmejid worked towards tolerance, emancipation, and political representation to treat the Empire’s various ailments.

    In 1843, he issued a Firman declaring the complete abolition of slavery throughout the Ottoman Empire and the immediate emancipation of all those still in bondage. In 1847, he would begin lifting restrictions on the renovation and rebuilding of old churches and synagogues throughout the Empire. Additionally, enlistment in the Ottoman military was opened to Christians and Jews, although very few, if any actually enlisted. In 1848, the Greek Government and the Church of Greece made an appeal to the Ottoman Sultan requesting his aid in convincing the Patriarch to accept the Autocephaly of the Church from the Patriarchate. After some negotiation, Abdulmejid agreed to intercede on their behalf and encouraged the Patriarch to accept the Church's independence from Constantinople. Sultan Abdulmejid was also an avid supporter of education and would see to the establishment of several hundred schools, universities, libraries, and other places of education and learning across the Empire over the course of his reign. This endeavor also included the loosening of restrictions on Greek investment in the Ottoman Empire, enabling them to build their own schoolhouses for their communities, provided they paid for it from their own coffers. His reforms also attempted to create secular courts that would be open to both Muslim and Christian judges and jurors, he established the Ottoman Postal Service, and he implemented various other land reforms and updates to the Ottoman legal system. Lastly, Sultan Abdulmejid would also go on an extensive diplomatic offensive, in a bid to gain new allies and acquire desperately needed foreign investment for his Empire.

    Over the course of the last half century, the Ottoman Empire had found itself becoming increasingly isolated on the diplomatic stage with very few allies and many foes. This nadir of Ottoman diplomacy would be most obvious during the Greek War of Independence when the Great Powers of Britain, France, and Russia openly sided against the Sublime Porte in favor of the Greek rebels. Together their ships attacked Ottoman vessels, while their soldiers killed Ottoman soldiers and occupied Ottoman territory. Ultimately, their efforts would see the Morea, Southern Rumelia, Crete, and most of the Aegean Islands severed from Ottoman dominion. Moreover, they successfully convinced the Wali of Egypt Muhammad Ali to make peace with the Greek rebels and abandon the Turks, beginning the chain of events that would lead directly to the First Syrian War in 1831 and the Second Syrian War in 1840.

    The Independence of the Greeks in 1830 and the two wars with Egypt would not end the antagonism of the French or the Russians, however, as they continued to look upon the Ottoman Empire with lustful ambitions. Russia continued to vie for the Straights, while France desired to carve out an Empire of their own from the Ottoman carcass. To counter these growing threats by the French and the Russians, Abdulmejid expanded upon his father's policy of seeking rapprochement with the British, the Austrians, and the Prussians and to his delight they proved to be incredibly receptive. The Young Sultan presented an attractive face for the Empire, one that was modern, relatively Western in his orientation, and increasingly open to foreign ideas and foreign investors. Military instructors were sent to the Ottoman Empire by the dozen to train their army and navy in the modern art of war, while numerous loans were floated to the Porte to help them with their many projects and initiatives. Abdulmejid also gained the personal approval of various crowned heads across Europe like Queen Victoria, who would frequently send the young Sultan gifts and letters. Surprisingly, however, Sultan Abdulmejid would enjoy what he considered to be an incredibly strong personal relationship with his neighbor King Leopold of Greece.

    Congr%C3%A8s_de_Paris%2C_1856.jpg

    Sultan Abdulmejid I (featured center) alongside the other Sovereigns of Europe

    Despite, never meeting in person with one another Leopold and Abdulmejid would write several dozen letters to one another over the years indicating at least a cordial bond between the two men. It is believed that their relationship had been spurred on at the insistence of Queen Victoria and the British government in an attempt to foster good will and peace in the region, and to their credit, it would appear that their efforts payed off. Leopold would send large all-encompassing scripts to the Ottoman Sultan, discussing everything from politics, diplomacy, and economics to family matters, ancient philosophy, and even art. Abdulmejid’s responses were no less thoughtful or intricate displaying a keen mind for a man of his age, as well as a great amount of respect and admiration for the Greek King. However, Leopold’s relationship with the Ottoman Sultan would have a political cost for him and his allies in Greece.

    In the 1845 National Elections, the ruling Kapodistriakoi Party of Prime Minister Andreas Metaxas would lose its majority in the House, falling from 57 seats to 41. The biggest gainers in the election were the Koléttikoi, or the Kómma Ethnikofrónōn (the Nationalist Party) as they would later be called, who picked up 11 seats in the election boosting their total to 37 seats in the House, while the Mavrokordátikoi, later becoming the Kómma Filelefthéron (the Liberal Party), claimed the remaining 5 seats increasing their total to 22 seats. Although his supporters still maintained the single largest plurality in the House, this electoral defeat was a stunning rebuke of Andreas Metaxas and the absence of a majority in the Legislature had effectively made his position as Prime Minister incredibly unstable. Making matters were for Metaxas were the emerging differences within the Kapodistriakoi, who were comprised of many different men with many different ideals, who had only been held together by their mutual respect and admiration for Ioannis Kapodistrias and by 1845, these differences had become very evident, especially regarding relations with the Ottomans. Ultimately, Andreas Metaxas would resign from office in late December 1845, ending his Premiership after a little more than 4 and a half years in power.

    Although it cannot be completely verified, the collapse of Andreas Metaxas’ Government in 1845 is likely due to his and King Leopold’s relatively cordial relations with the Sublime Porte during the mid-1840's. Many Kapodistrias were opposed to Metaxas' effort to invest in Greek communities within the Ottoman Empire instead of Greek communities within Greece, this issue along with a myriad of other issues drew the ire of many nationalistic and Pro-War Greeks who turned from the Kapodistriakoi towards Ioannis Kolletis and his Koléttikoi. Regardless, if the Greek people were looking to replace Metaxas with a Prime Minister in the mold of Kolettis, they would be sorely disappointed as King Leopold would appoint the Anglophilic Alexandros Mavrokordatos to replace Andreas Metaxas as Prime Minister in early January 1846. Despite their political differences, King Leopold and Mavrokordatos were united in their opposition to Ioannis Kollettis becoming Prime Minister. The need of Mavrokordatos' supporters to form a stable government without having relying upon Kolletis or his Koléttikoi were another important factor behind his selection as PM in 1846.

    Mavrokordatos1.jpg

    Alexandros Mavrokordatos, the 3rd Prime Minister of Greece
    Mavrokordatos' Premiership would be marked by his constant clashes with Ioannis Kolettis and his supporters who openly advocated for war against the Ottomans and continually lampooned Mavrokordatos as a coward and a traitor to the Greek people. While Mavrokordatos was generally in favor of maintaining the peace with the Ottoman, he led a coalition government with a relatively slim majority in the House comprised of the divided Kapodistriakoi party and his own Mavrokordátikoi. As a result, he would begrudgingly acquiesce to the demands of the growing “War Party” on several important initiatives such as military spending, defensive works, and infrastructure projects.

    In 1847, the Mavrokordatos Government would approve legislation increasing the number of active duty battalions in the Hellenic Army from 36 in 1846 to 44 by the end of 1853. The National Guard, the Ethnofylaki, would also see a modest increase with the addition of 4 more infantry battalions and a regiment of cavalry during this time as well. To fill these new units, the Vouli passed legislation amending the use of conscription by the Hellenic Military. Under these changes, conscription would be a short term of compulsory service lasting no more than 2 years, although it could be extended if needed and it was open to all Greek men above the age of 17 and below the age of 40. Conscripts would be selected via a draft, with no prejudice to location or economic means. An exception would be made for men with important vocations such as doctors, lawyers, or politicians, and draftees could avoid service by finding a willing alternate who met all the requirements for military service.

    The Hellenic Navy was similarly expanded with the acquisition of the Razeed Third Rate HMS Warpsite in 1847 and the ordering of five new Screw Frigates, the Hydra, the Spetsai, the Psara, the Samos, and the Chios from the Thames Shipyards. The first two would be delivered to Greece in 1851 and 1852 respectively, but the Psara and Samos would unfortunately be delayed due to political tensions in the region during the mid-1850’s and would not arrive in Greece until late 1856, while the Chios was delayed indefinitely and eventually cancelled mid way into its construction. Defensively, a series of earthworks, fortresses, and supply depots were constructed along the border with the Ottoman Empire with the most prominent being the Froúrio Karaïskáki near Arta and Froúrio Diakos North of Lamia.[3] The long delayed Corinth Canal Project would also begin under his Premiership, although work on the canal would be routinely disrupted by budget shortfalls, the time of completion was gradually pushed back, and prices for the project gradually increased to the tune of 60 million Francs. Nevertheless, it was deemed to be an important development that would provide both military and economic value to Greece in the not so distant future.

    Sultan Abdulmejid also experienced a large degree of opposition to his reforms and diplomatic initiatives from broad segments of the Ottoman Empire's populace. Despite formally abolishing slavery in 1843, the practice would continue in secret along the edges of the Empire where the Sultan's authority was weakest. Slave markets could be found in Damascus and Baghdad as late as the early 1860's, while many Circassians and Caucasians were found in bondage as late as the 1880's. The numerous magnates, chieftains, emirs, and Aghas of the Empire were almost unanimously opposed to his broad reforms which chipped away at their powers and privileges, leading some to resort to violence. His efforts to improve religious tolerance in the Empire were almost universally despised by the Muslim population of the Empire who viewed his actions as a flagrant disregard of tradition and the teachings of the Koran. If anything, Sultan Abdulmejid's religious reforms made religious persecution worse as many Christian peoples were subjected to terrible acts of cruelty at the hands of their Muslim neighbors, while pogroms and massacres became common occurrences in the countryside. One such people were the Assyrians of Southeastern Anatolia and Northern Mesopotamia.

    Nestled between Lake Van to the Northwest, Lake Urmia to the East, and the Plains of Nineveh to the South; the foothills and valleys of Hakkari, Barwari, and Nineveh had served as the ancestral home and safe refuge for the beleaguered Assyrian people for millennia. The safety that the mountainous Assyrian Triangle provided, would enable the Assyrian people to survive countless generations of turmoil, oppression, and brutality, from the Persians and the Romans to the Turks and Mongols. Throughout it all they survived with their communities relatively intact while their kin living beyond the safety of their hills were butchered and enslaved by each passing conqueror or king. When the Ottoman first occupied the region in the late 16th century it was believed that they would be no different than all those who had come before, and for a time they were right.

    In return for their loyalty to the Ottoman Sultan and nominal submission to the Sublime Porte through the payment of taxes and fees, the Barwari, Hakkari, Nochiya, and Tyari Assyrian tribes - among many, many others - were permitted to retain a level of internal autonomy in their lands. They could select their own Patriarch who would serve as their leader, they could follow their own customs and traditions, they were permitted to carry arms, and they were entitled to the protection of the Ottoman Sultan and his armies during times of war with a foreign power.[4] Despite this arrangement, the Assyrians would find themselves under constant siege by their Kurdish neighbors who continually raided their villages and towns for slaves and treasure on an annual basis. Nevertheless, the Assyrians of Hakkari endured for generation after generation. However, their situation would dramatically worsen following the First Syrian War in 1831 as their Kurdish rivals, who had been kept in check by the Ottoman Porte, became emboldened by the stunning defeat of their Turkish overlords at the hands of Muhammad Ali and his Egyptians. Within a matter of weeks, numerous Kurdish Emirs and Aghas, in addition to various other magnates and warlords in Eastern Anatolia and Northern Mesopotamia began to reassert their autonomy from Constantinople, effectively making them independent states in all but name.

    The Emir of Soran, Mir Muhammad would prove to be an especially ambitious man who sought to unite the various warring Kurdish states into a single unified kingdom with himself as its sole ruler and he committed himself to fulfilling this ideal through whatever means necessary. What followed was half a decade of conquest, massacres, and brutalizations by the Emir of Soran who established a mighty domain stretching from the city of Mardin in the West to the Persian border near Urmia in the East making him one of the strongest magnates in Eastern Anatolia. By the Fall of 1837, Mir Muhammad turned his attention to the Emirate of Hakkari which lay betwixt his many territories. Against his substantial hosts, the Emir of Hakkari Nur Allah stood no chance of victory on his own and so he turned to the nearby Assyrians for aid.

    The Patriarch of the Assyrians, Shimun XVI Abraham, had been a tepid supporter of the Hakkari Emir for several years, yet their relationship had never been particularly close. Nevertheless, Shimun recognized the threat to his community that Mir Muhammad posed and consented to Nur Allah’s request for aid. Rallying the Assyrians to the side of the Hakkari Kurds, Patriarch Shimun XVI Abraham and Emir Nur Allah managed to successfully fend off Mir Muhammad’s forces until the onset of Winter which forced Mir Muhammad to withdraw. While Mir Muhammad would prepare for a second attempt the following Spring, he would never get the chance to follow through on his preparations as he was soon waylaid by a band of rival Kurds while traveling to his capital Rewanduz in late December. While the attackers were quickly fought off, the Emir and his closest companions were killed in the brief skirmish, bringing an unexpected end to Mir Muhammad's conquests.

    Group_of_Targawar_Assyrian_Warriors.jpg

    Warriors of the Assyrian Nochiya Tribe, circa 1870’s

    While Mir Muhammad had been killed, the conflict in the region would only worsen as new warlords moved to fill the void his sudden removal had left behind. One of which would be the Emir of Bohtan, Badr Khan who opted for a slower, more methodical approach to power by building alliances and pitting rivals against rivals. By the start of the Second Syrian War in late 1840, he had established an impressive network of territories running from the outskirts of Diyarbakir to Sirnak. Feeling confident in his own strength and with the Ottomans distracted once more by war in Syria, Badr Khan made his own attempt at conquering the Hakkari Emirate in the Summer of 1840. However, unlike Mir Muhammad’s invasion in 1840, Badr Khan discovered that the Kurds and Assyrians of Hakkari were no longer united in opposition to their invaders as the Assyrian Patriarch Shimun and the Kurdish Emir Nur Allah had suffered an especially bitter falling out in the intervening years, leaving the two at odds with one another. Taking advantage of the divide between his adversaries, Badr Khan swiftly moved to coerce Nur Allah into an alliance, making him vague promises of recompense in return for his assistance to which the Emir of Hakkari readily agreed.

    With the Nur Allah on his side, Badr Khan directed his full efforts against the Assyrian communities of Hakkari with brutal efficiency. Those that surrendered immediately were spared from the worst of his brutality, but those that resisted were punished severely. His warriors destroyed entire villages, slaying all men above the age of ten, raping all the women they could find, and enslaving all those who survived the onslaught. No distinction was made between Assyrians, Armenians, or even their fellow Kurds who had chosen to stand opposed to Badr Khan; regardless of their culture or creed they were all cut down with a viciousness and cruelty unseen since the dark days of Timur. The invading Kurds pillaged anything that wasn’t nailed down, including religious artifacts and relics, before putting everything that remained to the torch. Despite their valor and bravery, the Assyrians would prove to be no match for their adversaries and would watch in despair as village after village fell to their attackers. While they would manage to stave off their complete destruction at the hands of Badr Khan, the Assyrians of Hakkari were thoroughly decimated as a community, having lost 3,000 members of their community to the massacres and raids, and an equal number to enslavement during the campaign.

    Despite this success, Badr Khan’s conquest remained unfinished by the start of Winter, necessitating a second campaign to finish the job in the following Spring. In April 1841, a second invasion against the Assyrians was launched, but this time the Assyrians would manage to stave off the main offensive against Qodchanis for several weeks before word reached Badr Khan of the arrival of a large Ottoman army in the region. With the War in Syria effectively over, the new Sultan Abdulmejid I had sent his armies to begin subduing the upstart magnates of Eastern Anatolia and Northern Mesopotamia. Badr Khan, Nur Allah, and all the other lords and rulers of the petty Eastern Anatolian principalities were soon forced to submit to the will of the Sultan, ending their ambitions of greatness and saving the Assyrians of Hakkari, Barwari, and Nineveh from complete destruction. However, the price of this intervention was high. In return for Ottoman aid, the Assyrians would lose the remainder of their autonomy and independence; their militias were forcibly disbanded, and the Sublime Porte gained a say in their internal affairs. While it would seem to be a small price to pay at the time given the existential threat the Kurdish Emirates had posed to them, their troubles would sadly continue as Sultan Abdulmejid's Firmans declaring religious tolerance and religious equality would unfortunately lead to further bouts of violence against the Assyrians by their neighbors in the coming years.

    Other regions of the Empire were just as contentious as the provinces of Eastern Anatolia; the Emirate of Mount Lebanon for instance would experience its own degree of internal conflict during this period as well. While Emir Bashir Shihab had managed to retain the autonomy of his Emirate, it had only occurred thanks to the mercy of Sultan Abdulmejid and the personal intervention of his ally Ibrahim Pasha, who had vigorously aided the Maronite Chieftain in the defense of his Emirate in 1840.[5] Had the Egyptians been defeated in the Second Syrian War, it is almost guaranteed that Bashir Shihab would have been ousted from power and sent into exile along with his immediate family members. Nevertheless, his continued survival in Lebanon had cost him much of his autonomy and power. He no longer held complete control over his own internal affairs and his domain had been sheered down from the entirety of the Sidon Eyalet, to the size it had originally been before the First Syrian War in 1831.

    His enemies, who had never been completely defeated, circled around him like vultures waiting for any opportunity to pounce. The Druze and Maronites both opposed him for varying reasons; the Druze hated him for having betrayed their trust and converting to the Maronite faith, and the Maronites resisted him for imposing heavy taxes on them and forcibly conscripting them into his armies. Revolts were a constant threat to the Shihab clan who held onto their power as tightly as they could for fear of losing it. Clashes between the Druze and the Maronites were a prevalent fixture in Lebanon during the 1840s as both groups vied for dominance in the region. A revolt against his rule in 1844 would see the neighboring Ottoman Wali of Sidon intervene to establish himself more prominently in the region, heavily diminishing Bashir's already weakened authority. Yet through his own force of will and the aid of his Egyptian allies and their mutual benefactor, the Kingdom of France, Bashir Shihab would survive for another 9 years before finally succumbing to old age in February 1850.

    Egypt would also experience a fair amount of upheaval as the great Khedive of Egypt, Muhammad Ali Kavalali died on the 7th of April 1847 at the age of 78. His final years had sadly been marked by frequent bouts of tuberculosis and a gradual descent into dementia making for a sad end to the Great Wali. His son Ibrahim Pasha would succeed him as Khedive of Egypt and the Sudan, and the Wali of Damascus and the Hejaz, yet his rule would be troubled from the start. The Arabs of Palestine and Damascus continued to oppose Egyptian rule and riots against his strict governorship would become a regular feature of his reign. His attempts to quell the unrest, while successful, lacked the same effectiveness they had held in years past. Under normal circumstances, Ibrahim would have led his forces to subdue the dissenters with ruthless efficiency, but by 1847, Ibrahim was suffering from a litany of ailments and past injuries that had effectively relegated him to his palace in Alexandria. More problematic was the deterioration of the Egyptian military as the last war against the Ottomans had also cost him thousands of his most experienced officers and soldiers who had served with him in Arabia, Greece, and Anatolia. His navy had also been thrashed and his economy had been upended by the conflict in Syria. Nevertheless, Ibrahim would persevere through the all trials facing him, proving himself to be not only a brilliant commander, but also a capable administrator who would preserve his father’s legacy for the duration of his comparatively short reign as Khedive of Egypt.

    Finally, along the Western edge of the Empire in the Eyalet of Tripoli, the Fezzan War raged on as the remaining Karamanli brothers and their allies resisted the Ottoman imposed government in Tripoli with all their might. Although their eldest brother, Ali Pasha Karamanli had been deposed and their benefactor Egypt had been greatly humbled, the two remaining brothers (Mehmed and Ahmad) mounted raid after raid upon Ottoman outposts in the country from the relative safety of the Sahara Desert. Their attacks were generally successful in the early years of the conflict, inspiring various adventurers and malcontents to join them for blood and booty. Nevertheless, their success would make them overconfident and careless, leading them to advance out from the safety of the desert and make their attacks on the coastal cities of Tripoli, Tobruk, Sirte, Misrata, and Benghazi in quick succession. As was to be expected, they were defeated leading to the death of the youngest Karamanli brother, Ahmad and a large number of their supporters during their assault on the small coastal city of Benghazi in 1843. The death of Ahmad would effectively end the Fezzan War as a formal military conflict as the few remaining Karamanli loyalists degenerated to banditry and tribalism. Nevertheless, the Sublime Porte’s authority would remain limited beyond the coastline for many years to come.

    Next Time: The Sun Throne and the Tricolour
    Author's Note: After an incredibly long, and largely unplanned hiatus, I am back with the next chapter of this timeline. I do apologize for the delay, 4 weeks is much longer than I intended, but to make up for it I've made this update a bit larger than usual and I've already started on the next two parts which will be ready in the next few days.

    [1] Mavrokordatos served as the Greek Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire in OTL as well, although it was a few years later than ITTL, and he only served for a few months there as well.

    [2] The Rallis of Chios were a prominent merchant family who traded everything from silk and textiles to grain and fruit. The Greek War of Independence and the Chios Massacre in particular would cause the Rallis to flee Chios for Mareilles and then London which was the economic capital of the world in the 19th Century. Soon their business would grow to include several tens of thousands of employees, several dozen ships, and branches all across the British Empire, Russia, the Ottoman Empire, and the Americas among many other locations.

    [3] These are named in honor of the fallen heroes of the War for Independence Theodoros Kolokotronis, Georgios Karaiskakis, and Athansios Daikos who died well over a year before the POD in this timeline.

    [4] Unlike the Eastern Orthodox Church or the Papacy, the Patriarch of the Assyrian Church of the East (which is a traditionalist subset of the Greater Church of the East) developed into a hereditary position that was inherited by members of the Shimun family, kind of like the Title of Holy Roman Empire which became dominated by the House of Hapsburg.

    [5] Bashir Shihab was ousted from Power in OTL following the Second Egyptian-Ottoman War, although surprisingly, the British and the Ottomans gave him multiple opportunities to split from Muhammad Ali to save himself. Therefore I don't think its too outlandish for him to remain in power ITTL especially considering the fact that the war effectively ended in a stalemate. That said, his position is extremely tenuous and Lebanon was not a particularly peaceful place during the mid-19th Century.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 57: The Sun Throne and the Tricolour
  • Part 57: The Sun Throne and the Tricolour

    750px-Ambassade_Perse_aupr%C3%A8s_de_Louis_XIV.jpg

    The Persian Embassy to the French King Louis XIV

    The fractious nature of the Ottoman Empire was a trait it shared with its eastern neighbor, the Sublime State of Persia who was embroiled in their own prolonged period of upheaval and reform. By the start of the 1840’s, Persia was no longer the global power it had once been under Shah Abbas the Great, whose reign in the late 16th Century saved the embattled Iranian kingdom from civil war and foreign invasion. Nor was it the equal of the brilliant Nader Shah whose talents as a military commander turned the troubled state into a global superpower for one brief moment in history.

    No, the Persian state of the 19th Century was a kingdom riddled with ailments and illnesses ranging from rampant corruption and administrative inefficiency in the Government to economic stagnation and domestic instability across the countryside. The Persian Army had been thoroughly degraded by prolonged bouts of infighting and it had been greatly demoralized in disastrous wars against the Ottoman and Russian Empire. The Persian Navy had also been diminished by disrepair and disuse over the years enabling foreign powers like Britain to occupy prominent ports along the Persian Gulf coast from which they extracted great wealth and great influence over the Tehrani Court. Most troublesome of all however was the territorial collapse of the Persian State itself, as it would see nearly half of its lands stripped away from it in the span of a few short years.

    During the chaos of the 18th Century, many of the petty Kingdoms, Principalities, Emirates, and Khanates of Transcaucasia had broken free of Persian suzerainty. This development was simply unacceptable to the Persian government who had lorded over the region since ancient times, as severing Transcaucasia from Iran was akin to losing Fars or Khorasan. Upon seizing the throne in 1794, the patriarch of the Qajar Dynasty, Agha Mohammad Shah Qajar began a series of raids into Transcaucasia to reverse these loses through whatever means necessary. While Agha Mohammad would ultimately succeed in recouping Karabakh, Yerevan, Ganja, Shirvan, and Kartli-Kakheti through force or coercion, his ruthless subjugation of the Georgian Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti would put the Sublime State at odds with the Russian Empire who claimed the mountainous kingdom as their protectorate and vassal thanks to the 1783 Treaty of Georgievsk.[1]

    The invasion and occupation of the Georgian kingdom was a clear violation of the Treaty and prompted the Russians to invade and occupy the region themselves in 1801. This act of aggression combined with a Russian attack on the city of Ganja in 1803 would ultimately spark the Russo-Persian War of 1804-1813. Despite the disparity in size and resources between the two, the conflict would be a close fought affair as much of the Russian Empire’s attention and resources were focused to the West in the Wars against France and the Corsican Devil, Napoleon Bonaparte. Utilizing the Russo-Persian War to his advantage, Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte of France dispatched an envoy to the Persian court in a bid to bring the Persians into an alliance against his many adversaries.

    To gain their support, Napoleon promised considerable aid to the Persians in their present war against Russia, sending them weapons and military advisors, and he agreed to honor all their claims in Georgia. As a sign of good faith, Napoleon would also convince his Ottoman allies to move against the Russians as well, sparking the Russo-Ottoman War of 1806. In return, Napoleon asked that Agha Mohammad’s successor, Fat’h-Ali Shah Qajar abandon his alliance with the British and join the French. Fat’h-Ali Shah Qajar agreed to the arrangement and the two sides signed the Treaty of Finckenstein, establishing the Franco-Persian Alliance in May 1807. Napoleon sought to leverage his support against Russia, as a means of striking against British India by means of his new Persian ally, however the subsequent peace between France and Russia would make such an arrangement unnecessary.

    550px-The_Persian_Envoy_Mirza_Mohammed_Reza_Qazvini_Finkenstein_Castle_27_Avril_1807_by_Francois_Mulard.jpg

    Persian Envoys meet with Emperor Napoleon

    Less than two months after signing the Treaty of Finckenstein, the Franco-Persian Alliance would be effectively undercut when Emperor Napoleon made peace with the Russian Empire at the end of the War of the Fourth Coalition. The resulting Treaty of Tilsit, established an alliance between the two Empires, straining the French alliance with the Persians. More damning was Napoleon’s decision to recall the military advisors he had dispatched to Tehran only weeks before, an act which was in direct contradiction to the earlier Treaty of Finckenstein. Despite these issues, Napoleon would attempt to maintain the alliance for some time but would ultimately be forced to abandon the alliance after the Persians openly denounced his rapprochement with the Russians and began approaching the British themselves in turn.

    Although the Russians were still distracted by their war with the Ottoman Empire (the Russo-Turkish War of 1806-1812), they began a series of offensives against the Persian armies, pushing southward towards the banks of the Aras River. Nevertheless, the war with Persia remained a hard-fought affair that would drag on for additional six years before Russian arms would finally carry the day at Aslanduz and Lenkaran. With these great victories in hand, the Persians were finally forced to make peace with their Russian adversaries. The ensuing Treaty of Gulistan would see the provinces of Kartli-Kakheti, Baku, Dagestan, Derbent, Ganja, Quba, and Shirvan formally ceded to the Russian Empire, while Russia would return all captured territory South of the Aras River. The Persians were also forbidden from posting military vessels on the Caspian Sea and the Persian state was forced to open its markets to Russian goods which greatly destabilized the already fragile Persian economy.

    Angered by the unjustness of the treaty and spurred on at the insistence of British agents in Tehran, who promised them military and financial aid in their cause; the Persians would provoke the Russians into fighting another war with Russia in 1826. Despite fielding more soldiers in the conflict than their Russian opponents, the Persian armies were completely and utterly outmatched by their adversaries. They were thoroughly outclassed in both weaponry and leadership which would cost them battle after battle in the war and their will to fight and general morale was severally lacking. Overwhelmed, the Persians were quickly forced to sue for peace, a peace that would see the Sublime State lose Mughan, Nakhchivan, Orbudand, Talysh, and Yerevan to Russia. By themselves, these defeats against the Russians were embarrassing enough, yet the Qajar Dynasty would suffer an even more humiliating series of defeats at the hands of the lowly Afghanis over the same period.

    Like the petty kingdoms of Transcaucasian, the lands of Afghanistan had broken free from the Persian Empire following the death of the Great Nader Shah in 1747. Nader Shah had recognized the prowess of the Abdali tribe of Afghanistan and utilized them in his campaigns against the Mughals and Ottomans. However, the assassination of their patron in 1747 would bring an end to the Abdali’s prominence in the Mashhad Court with many being imprisoned or sent into exile. Even their commander, Ahmad Khan Abdali was forced to flee to his ancestral homeland of Afghanistan where he sought sanctuary and a safe refuge from his many rivals. Despite being a young man in his mid-twenties, Ahmad Khan Abdali was a talented leader who had held the personal favor of the former Afsharid Shah and his lineage as the son of the Abdali chieftain would earn him a great deal of support among the magnates and tribal chieftains of Afghanistan.[2] With their backing, Ahmad Khan Abdali was named Emperor of Afghanistan and declared the independence of the Durrani Empire from Persia.

    Ahmad_Shah_Baba.JPG

    Ahmad Shah Durrani, Founder of the Afghan Durrani Empire

    Nevertheless, Ahmad Shah Durrani was still in a tenuous position and his declaration of independence would have likely ended in disaster were the Persians not distracted by their own petty infighting. Using this opportunity, Ahmad Shah quickly established himself in his new Empire and subdued his remaining opponents within Afghanistan before striking Southeast towards the rich lands of India. There Ahmad Shah would win a series of great victories against the decrepit Mughal Empire, claiming the regions of Baluchistan, Sindh, Punjab, and Delhi for his growing Empire. He would even manage to sack the Mughal Capital of Delhi in 1757, making off with a vast horde of gold, silver, jewels, and other fine wares. Ahmad Shah would also win a great victory against the ascendant Maratha Empire at Panipat in 1761, ending their aspirations of conquering Afghanistan.

    However, the Durrani Empire’s fortunes would begin to wane almost immediately after the 3rd Battle of Panipat as Ahmad Shah was forced to abandon Delhi and much of Punjab to the Maratha Empire. While the Afghans remained a formidable power in the region for the remainder of Ahmad Shah’s life, their decline would accelerate soon after his death in 1772 and within 54 years, the Empire had fallen completely. Even still, the Afghanis remained a potent foe for the troubled Sublime State of Persia in the years ahead who would try on four separate occasions to regain their loss provinces.

    The first attempt to reconquer Afghanistan came in 1805. During a brief stalemate in the War with Russia, Fat’h-Ali Shah Qajar would attempt to reconquer Afghanistan only to be stopped at the city of Herat. Unable to capture the city and with the Russians ramping up for a great offensive in 1806, Fat’h-Ali Shah was soon forced to lift the siege after only a few months. When the war against Russia finally concluded in 1813, Fat’h-Ali began preparing for a second invasion of Afghanistan that would finally commence in late 1816 after several delays. While the Persians would successfully capture the city of Herat on this attempt, their invasion was stopped soon after by the British who threatened war with the Persians if they did not relinquish all their gains and withdraw across the border. Not wishing to provoke a conflict with the British so soon after fighting the Russians, Fat’h-Ali Shah acquiesced to their demands and ended his campaign against Afghanistan.

    A third attempt would take place one year later when the British were distracted by a war with the Maratha Empire in 1817. Believing that the conflict would drag on for years, Fat’h-Ali Shah would order the invasion of Afghanistan once more. Under the command of his own son Mohammad Vali Mirza, the Qajar army would quickly advance into Afghanistan in early 1818, seeking to conquer the region and present the British with a fait-accompli before they could respond. However, in their haste the Persians became blind to the lurking Afghan army which ambushed Mohammad Vali and his men near the town of Ghurian. The Persians were quickly defeated in a humiliating display and forced to retreat back to Persian territory ending the invasion in its tracks. Complicating matters was the abrupt end of the war in India, which freed British resources in the region and enabled them to intervene in Afghanistan should the need present itself. Ultimately, Fat’h-Ali Shah was compelled to give up on his ambition to reconquer Afghanistan, leaving the matter to his grandson and heir, Mohammad Mirza who would make his attempt nearly twenty years later in 1837.

    280px-Mohammadshah.jpg

    Mohammad Shah Qajar, Shananshah of the Sublime State of Persia

    Following the death of his Grandfather in October 1834, Mohammad Mirza ascended to the Sun Throne as Mohammad Shah Qajar. Almost immediately however, the new Shah would be faced with an existential crisis as his ambitious uncle Ali Mirza and a small group of rivals would successfully seize control of the Royal court, usurp the throne, and imprison Mohammad in a gilded cage plunging the state into yet another crisis. Ali’s rule over Persia would not last long, however, as his tyrannical nature and the illegitimacy of his ascension would lead many to oppose him and within the span of 47 days he was ousted from power by elements of the Persian government loyal to Mohammad Shah. Nevertheless, the entire episode had underscored how weak the Shah’s position had become and how many enemies lurked within his government.

    Fearing internal dissent in every corner, Mohammad Shah turned towards foreign advisors for aid. However, unlike his Grandfather, Mohammad Shah was not keen on maintaining the “alliance” with Britain that had formed following the Napoleonic Wars. He had learned through experience that the British Government was perfidious in nature and that the alliance between them worked only to the benefit of the British. They had been less than forthcoming in providing aid in their recent war against Russia in 1826 and they continually opposed Persian efforts to reclaim Afghanistan or their ports along the Gulf coast which were under Omani and British control. They even threatened their so-called ally with war if they did not do as they were instructed. In truth the relationship was more akin to a master and a slave, rather than an alliance between two friends.

    It was at this point that Mohammad Shah began turning to their rival in the region, the Russian Empire. Despite being the architect of two disastrous wars against Persia, the young Shah was impressed by the great strength and prowess of Russia and sought to emulate it in his own realm. He invited Russian advisors, officers, and dignitaries to help modernize and reorganize his government and military, with the most famous, or rather infamous of these individuals being the lead Russian envoy to Tehran, Count Ivan Simonich.

    Simonich would carefully and methodically worm his way into the grace of the impressionable young Shah, while his silver tongue and keen intellect would allow him to steadily gain great influence over the Persian court. At Simonich’s counsel, Mohammad Shah established a proper army regiment comprised of Russian and Polish deserters, adventurers, and mercenaries (the Bogatyr Battalion). Most daring of all however, Count Simonich would successfully convince Mohammad Shah to invade Afghanistan once again in November 1837. It had been Mohammad Shah’s desire to regain the lost provinces of Afghanistan, but his decision to act on this ambition now, was driven solely by Simonich and his compatriots Samson Makintsev and Yevstafii Skryplev.[3]

    Crossing the border in late November, the Persian Army would quickly advance on the city of Herat and besiege the city for the third time in nearly thirty years. Yet despite his best efforts, the city would continue to resist him for nearly 8 long months. By the start of June 1838, Count Simonich’s influence over the Shah had grown so great that he had become the de facto commander of the Persian army besieging Herat and began openly leading the Iranians with expert precision and authority on the field of battle. However, before he could make any significant progress against the city, the British ambassador to Tehran Sir John McNeill moved to intercede on his government’s behalf.

    Threatening the Persians with war if they took the city of Herat, McNeil would also manage to convince the Shah to delay a number of prepared assaults upon the city citing unverified reports which claimed an absurdly large garrison within the city. Moreover, he openly challenged Simonich’s authority before the Shah and his soldiers, greatly reducing Persian morale and diminishing their efficiency in constructing their siege works. Lastly, he sent several dispatches to the Russian Government in St. Petersburg accusing Count Simonich of overstepping his authority as an envoy of the Russian Empire and to Simonich’s eternal misfortune, the ploy worked as he would soon receive a message from his superiors in Russia demanding his immediate return for questioning.

    In desperation and frustration, Simonich ordered an immediate assault against Herat’s walls which nearly succeeded despite the suddenness and unpreparedness of the Persian army to make such an attack. The Afghans defending the city’s walls were similarly caught off guard and were initially driven from their posts in some points, but after regrouping they would make a valorous counterattack and repelled the attacking Persians in a magnificent charge. With the assault ending in a bloody failure, Simonich was ultimately forced to return to Russia in shame lest he provoke any further repercussions. However, the departure of Simonich would not end the siege of Herat as it would continue aimlessly for several more days, but with his Russian advisers recalled, the British becoming increasingly bellicose against the Persian State, and his troops in low morale and despair, Mohammad Shah ultimately abandoned the siege of Herat in early July and left for home.


    680px-The_repatriation_of_the_Russian_deserters_in_Persia_%28Iran%29%2C_1838.jpg

    The Departure of Simonich and the Russian Soldiers

    The 1838 Siege of Herat was an embarrassment to Mohammad Shah as his forces had failed to take the city despite fielding well over 40,000 men against a force less than half their size. Moreover, the entire venture had ruined his relations with Britain as they openly challenged the Persian Shah undermining his authority and legitimacy. More insulting was the unbridled hypocacy of the British as they subsequently invaded Afghanistan themselves after threatening Persia with War over their invasion only weeks before. It was clear to Mohammad Shah that a confrontation with the British would likely take place were he to move against Afghanistan once again, but with his Russian advisers recalled or disgraced Mohammad Shah was forced to look elsewhere for aid. The British were clearly antagonistic towards the Qajar Shah, and the German Powers of Austria and Prussia were either unwilling or unable to provide any meaningful assistance at this time, which left the Kingdom of France as his only option.

    In the Fall of 1838, Mohammad Shah dispatched his deputy Mirza Hosein Khan to Paris where he soon gained an audience with the French King Louis-Phillipe requesting that a military mission be sent to Persia to reform and reorganize the Persian military. The French King, eager to expand his state’s influence into new lands, readily agreed to the request and dispatched a team of 8 instructors and engineers, 1 gunsmith, and 1 glassblower, under the command of Captain Henry Boissier in the Spring of 1839. The company would arrive in the small port town of Bushehr in late August ready to begin their work for the Persian Shah. While the French would make some progress in reorganizing the Persian armed forces, their efforts were handicapped by the Shah who remained under the lingering influence of his Russian advisors. This conflict of interests resulted in many French instructors going unpaid for their services to the Persian court. Ultimately, with his men still in arrears, Captain Boissier and his company would depart from Tehran for France the following Spring effectively ending the French military mission to Persia after a few months.

    While the military mission was a disappointing failure by all accounts, there were several important cultural and economic benefits that emerged from the endeavor. The French diplomat Eugene Bore had traveled to Persia alongside Captain Boissier and his men in 1839 and managed to successfully convince Mohammad Shah to issue a Farman permitting the establishment of French schools and Lazarist churches across Persia for the native Chaldean Christians. This concession by the Persian Shah helped amend the frayed relations between the two states and laid the groundwork for later cooperation between them in the years ahead. In 1844, the Persian court permitted a French scientific expedition to explore the ancient ruins, to chart the topography, and research the botany of Persia. In 1845, Mohammad Shah would appoint the French doctor Ernest Cloquet as his personal Physician, providing the French with a direct connection to the Shah. Despite the peaceful manner of these endeavors, the renewal in Franco-Persian relations during the mid-1840’s was driven primarily by French revanchism.

    Following the utter humiliation of the Kingdom of France in the Second Syrian War at the hands of the British, the French Government began efforts to repay their perceived slight against the British through whatever means possible. While they were certainly not interested in provoking a direct conflict with Britain themselves, the French Government almost certainly wished to bloody their nose and chasten them, just as the British had done to them. Given their close proximity to British India, Persia was a perfect ally for such an ambition. As such, King Louis-Phillipe and the French Government dispatched a series of envoys to Tehran in 1842 and 1844, suggesting the renewal of relations between the two states and the expansion of the earlier military mission beyond the 11 men dispatched in 1839. Mohammad Shah, having completely fallen out with his Russian aides in the intervening years and becoming increasingly agitated by the continued British interference in his state’s internal affairs, readily agreed to the French suggestions in late August 1844.

    Within months, a company of 38 officers, engineers, instructors, gunsmiths, glassblowers, and blacksmiths under the command of Captain Ernest Courtot de Cissey arrived in the Persian port of Bandar Bushehr, in full view of the British Consulate. While they would only be in Persia for four years, their effects on the Persian armed forces were remarkable. They drilled Persian soldiers in the modern art of warfare, they schooled Persian officers in the tactics and maneuvers of the West, they supplied the Persian army with new rifles and cannons, and they provided the Persian navy with French built warships. By the Spring of 1847, Mohammad Shah felt confident in his army’s abilities to fight on an even footing with their adversaries, whomever they may be, and began preparing for his long awaited second invasion of Afghanistan. He needn't wait long as events in Europe would soon provide Mohammad Shah with just such an opportunity he desired.

    Next Time: A Prelude to Revolution

    [1] In 1783, fearing the subjugation of his kingdom at the hands of the Persians or the Turks, King Erekle signed the Treaty of Georgievsk which established Kartli-Kakheti as a protectorate of the Russian Empire. Despite this agreement, when Erekle called on Russia to help him against Agha Mohammad and the Persians in 1795, the Russians ignored his pleas for help and left him to his fate. However, they used his oath of loyalty to their advantage, using his ousting as a casus belli to annex the region in 1801.

    [2] The Abdali were a confederacy of Pashtun tribes in Afghanistan, second only to their rivals the Ghizilids in size and strength.

    [3] Samson Makintsev and Yevstafii Skryplev were Russian soldiers who deserted the Russian Army for Persia during the Russo-Persian Wars. Together with Simonich, they established the Bogatyr Battalion which was a unit of Russian deserters, who would fight in the Russo-Persian Wars, and the Invasions of Afghanistan. But upon the conclusion of the 1838 Siege of Herat they were forced to return to Russia.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 58: A Prelude to Revolution
  • Part 58: A Prelude to Revolution

    430px-Caricature_Charles_Philipon_pear.jpg

    Louis-Philippe Becomes a Pear, a Political Cartoon Depicting the French King’s Declining Popularity

    By the dawn of 1847, much of Europe had been at peace for the last 16 years as the states of Britain, France, Russia, Prussia, and Austria maintained an uneasy sense of stability over the continent. The failed uprisings of 1830 and 1831 had fallen short of their altruistic goals of liberalism, nationalism, and republicanism for all as they would only succeed in ousting the hated Bourbon dynasty in France, establishing a new constitution in Switzerland, and creating the new Kingdom of Belgium in the Low Countries. Most revolutionaries were rounded up and imprisoned in the aftermath of their revolts, whilst aristocrats and monarchs returned to the earlier status quo where they paid little concern for the wants and needs of the common folk. On the surface it would seem that this gilded age of absolutism and monarchism would continue unabated as it had for much of the last century, however, beneath the veneer there remained widespread unrest and dissatisfaction which grew with each passing year. Nowhere was this felt more so than in the Kingdom of France.

    Having been ushered into power by a flurry of revolutionary fervor in late July 1830, the new King Louis-Philippe of the House of Orleans provided the common folk of France with the hope of a brighter future. He swore in his coronation oath that he would roll back King Charles X’s reactionary dictates, to begin much needed land reform, and to enact broad sweeping reforms to the French Government. He would abolish many of the old titles, honorifics, and privileges of the old Ancien Régime, even going as far as to modify his own title from “the King of France and Navarre” to “King of the French” in keeping with the old Constitution of 1791. Most, if not all of the July Ordinances were immediately repealed upon his ascension as were several of the more reactionary policies of the restored Bourbon Monarchy such as the use of capital punishment for those who slandered the Catholic church. Several Jacobins, Republicans, and Bonapartistes were permitted to return to France after several years in exile and Louis-Philippe would end the persecution of politics clubs across the country. For all these promises of liberal reforms, as well as his austere image as a bourgeoisie monarch, he was praised as "le Roi Citoyen" (the Citizen King). However, despite fulfilling many of his promises, the July Monarchy immediately faced immense perils from without and from within.

    Although he was strongly opposed to the Ultra-Royalists policies of his Bourbon predecessors, and despite portraying himself as an avid liberal in his younger years and more recently as a champion of the liberal cause during the July Revolution; by the start of the 1830’s King Louis-Philippe was by all accounts a moderate conservative. This would bring him no shortage of trouble as the illegitimacy of his ascension in the eyes of French Conservatives earned him their undying hostility, and his efforts to avoid completely alienating the conservatives of French society only served to anger his liberal supporters whom he had relied upon to gain the throne in 1830. For all his good intentions the Legitimists (supporters of the "legitimate" Bourbon dynasty) would have none of it, as many in the French Government simply refused to accept King Louis-Philippe's authority over them, ultimately forcing him to purge them from Government entirely. They also charged him with the murder of the Ultra-Royalist Prince of Conde, who died shortly after the July Revolution under mysterious circumstances, although little evidence existed to support these allegations and the King was later cleared of all wrong doing.[1] Tensions between the two would worsen the following February, when a memorial service for the late Duc de Berry sparked a Legitimist protest against the ruling July Monarchy on the streets of Paris. The protests would soon escalate as counter protests by liberal groups descended upon the Legitimists and beat them to a bloody pulp. By far though the most infamous act of Legitimist opposition to the Orléanist Government was the Vendee Revolt of 1832.

    In the Spring of 1832 the former Duchess of Berry, Princess Caroline de Bourbon returned to France seeking to push her son's claim for the French throne. Her arrival would bring many Legitimists to the Vendee where they would promptly instigate a revolt against the French Government. While the uprising would see several thousand supporters take up arms against the Orléanist Government, the July Monarchy quickly responded to the uprising by dispatching an army under the command of the renowned Republican General Jean Maximilien Lamarque. Lamarque and his force raced to Nantes where they would engage and then disperse the Legitimist rebels in short order, ending the rebellion in an instant. With the revolt a failure, the Duchess of Berry was forced to flee France once again never to return, effectively ending the Legitimist threat to King Louis-Philippe and the House of Orleans. However, as conflict with the Legitimists died down, conflict with the Republicans soon emerged.

    Initially many on the political left gave the new king some degree of leniency in the hope he would follow through on his many promises to them, yet the new King's half measures left many Liberals disappointed. Nationalists were also dissatisfied by the new July Monarchy as King Louis-Philippe had promised French support to the Italian and Polish revolutionaries in their fights for independence, only to then betray them to their Austrian and Russian overlords who quickly quashed the revolutions in their lands. The Citizen King’s vehement refusal to abolish peerages and broaden suffrage to all men earned him the outrage of many Republicans across France, and his failure to appropriately deal with the Cholera epidemic which had settled over France resulted in frequent demonstrations by the afflicted Parisian populace outside Tuileries Palace. While tension was certainly high in Paris, it would only boil over following the death of the beloved Liberal General Lamarque in early June 1832 to Cholera.

    General Jean Maximilien Lamarque was a respected figure in Parisian society having been a loyal Republican and Bonarpartiste in his younger years. He would also become one of the July Monarchy's most ardent critics in the French Parliament and the French press. Nevertheless, he remained a loyal Frenchmen who served his country and his people to the best of his abilities, causing him to develop quite the following among the poor and downtrodden across the country. His death to cholera on the 2nd of June 1832, however, would spark riots against the July Monarchy as many within the Parisian Mob believed the Government had killed their General out of jealousy and contempt.[2] By the night of June 6th, much of Paris was up in arms as several thousand Radical Liberals, Republicans, Jacobins, and Bonapartistes established blockades and barricades across the city and declared a revolution. Many revolutionaries wished to re-establish the old republic, while many more were simply angered by the Government's poor handling of the French economy, which had left hundreds of thousands of Frenchmen impoverished. For three days, the Parisian mob would wantonly destroy government buildings and burn the businesses of known merchants, tradesmen, and bankers (all men who were commonly regarded as being the King's closest supporters). They would attack Government ministers and even attempt to assault Tuileries Palace, before being pushed back by the National Guard.

    650px-June_Rebellion.jpg

    A Scene from the 1832 Paris Uprising

    Although the death of General Lamarque had served to unite the Parisian Mob in opposition to the July Monarchy, it also deprived them of a capable leader and talented military commander who could turn their anger into something greater. Without a singular figure to coalesce around the revolutionaries would soon fall to infighting as they were divided on what to do should they succeed in their goals of toppling the July Monarchy. Their differences would unfortunately prove too great for them to overcome, leaving the would be revolutionaries an easy target for the French Army and National Guard who methodically quashed the uprising across the city and on the 9th of June the "revolution" was officially dead in Paris. Other uprisings would emerge in the cities of Lyon, Limoges, and Marseille among several others, but they too suffered from disorganized and internal division, and were soon dealt with. Nevertheless, protests and riots would continue across the country for some time, but for King Louis-Philippe he had weathered this dangerous storm relatively unscathed.

    With the trials of 1832 behind them, the Orléanist Government was finally permitted a chance to breath thanks to a modest recovery in the French economy that began in the mid-1830’s. The good economic news would be followed soon after by the marriage of the King’s children to various princes, princesses, dukes, and duchesses across Europe. His eldest daughter Princess Louise would be married to her cousin, Prince Leopold of the Two Sicilies in January 1834, relieving the lingering tension between the two royal houses. The following November, his youngest daughter Princess Clementine would marry King Otto of Belgium bringing the Belgian kingdom into the French sphere through holy matrimony. His son and heir, Prince Ferdinand Philippe was married to the Duchess Helene of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, a cousin of the King of Prussia Friedrich Wilhelm III and Queen Victoria of Britain in May 1837. Finally, his second daughter Princess Marie would marry Prince Alexander of Württemberg, a cousin of Queen Victoria of Britain and a nephew of King Leopold of Greece later that same year in October 1837. The French state also enjoyed success in its overseas ventures during this time as well.

    In Algeria, local unrest had finally begun to die down in the colony after making peace with Emir Abdelkader in 1837 and the ensuing settlement of French citizens in the region began providing much needed dividends to the costly enterprise. Relations with Egypt continued to prove fruitful and beneficial to both parties, while a new relationship was forged with Persia in 1839 providing the French Arms Manufacturing industry with a constant source of demand. The French would also engage themselves in Mexico and Argentina as unrest in the two countries had unfortunately seen French citizens brought to harm. With the reluctant aid of the United States of America and the Republic of Texas, France was able to enforce a blockade on the troubled Centralist Republic of Mexico and force several concessions from them. Their efforts in Argentina while not nearly as successful, certainly demonstrated French power and influence in the region, helping to bolster their Great Power status throughout the South American continent.

    Problems did exist for the French Court during this time as the July Monarchy's relationship with Great Britain was unfortunately very troubled. Rumors of British support for the Duchess of Berry's Vendee Revolt in 1832 would unfortunately sour relations between the two states during the early 1830's. While little evidence existed to perpetuate the Duchess of Berry's claims of British aid for her Legitimist uprising - aside from Canning's longtime friendship with King Charles X and a few interactions between Canning and the Duchess - the rumors themselves proved to be more than enough to scuttle any friendship between the two for some time. Matters would only worsen further in 1834 as the French Ambassador to Britain, Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord would have a falling out with the interim British Prime Minister Arthur Wellesley, the Duke of Wellington over differing views for the Middle East and the Iberian Peninsula leading to Talleyrand’s resignation from the post in the Fall.[3] His replacement Louis-Mathieu Molé was not received well by the British public and his relationship with the new British Prime Minister Earl Grey, and by proxy France’s relationship with Britain, suffered as a result.

    Relations between the two would suffer another blow following the Blockade of Mexico in late 1838/early1839 as Britain had sided alongside Mexico against the French and had mediated the dispute in Mexico's favor, but it would be the Second Syrian War and the coinciding Cyprus Affair which would see relations between the two Powers reach their lowest ebb since the Napoleonic Wars. France's support of the Khedivate of Egypt would unfortunately result in a clash between French and Ottoman ships off the coast of Cyprus in the Summer of 1840. France, seeking recompense, demanded the Ottomans make a number of humiliating concessions to them. The Ottomans, with British support refused, leading the French navy to enact a blockade around the island for over a month before they were forced to abandon the venture under threat of war by Britain. While the deterioration of relations with Britain were disappointing, a more concerning development to the Orléanist court were various reports indicating that the Duke of Reichstadt (Napoleon II) had survived the Battle of Pavia in 1831.

    350px-Napoleon_II.%2C_Herzog_von_Reichstadt.jpg

    Napoleon II in 1840
    Most had thought him dead, but the lack of a body as well as admissions of doubt by the Austrian Government, enabled rumors of Napoleon Franz's survival to persist long after that fateful day. In truth, young Franz was very much alive in the Swiss Canton of Thurgau where he lived alongside his two cousins, Charles-Louis Napoleon (Napoleon III) and Napoleon-Louis (Louis II of Holland). In the chaos of the Italian Uprising of 1830-1831, the Duke of Reichstadt had managed to elude his handlers and slip away into the Alps where he was soon joined by his cousins, their mother the Duchess of Saint-Leu, and a small band of loyal followers. During his time in Switzerland, young Franz enjoyed a quiet, but comfortable life as an officer in the Swiss Army, where he furthered his abilities as a leader of men and where he would learn of the plights of the common folk. His time in hiding would not last forever, as word of his survival would find its way out of Switzerland to his many allies and enemies. Beginning in late September 1835, his hated adversary Austrian Chancellor Metternich began dispatching agents into Switzerland seeking to reclaim the wayward Duke of Reichstadt by force if necessary. Having been granted a small taste of freedom after years in a gilded cage, Napoleon Franz refused to return to Vienna and chose instead to depart Europe for the Americas where he would remain for some time.

    Traveling first to Brazil, Napoleon Franz would make his way to the United States of America where he would wine and dine with prominent businessmen and politicians from New York to Washington D.C. During his stay in the US, he would briefly visit his uncle Joseph's old manor Point Breeze in New Jersey, a place once renowned across America for its magnificent art gallery and picturesque gardens. His time in America was generally quiet however, filled with dinner parties and social events with socialites sympathetic to his plight. By the start of 1841, young Franz would choose to leave the Americas and return to Europe this time by way of Great Britain. In what was a great about-face from the Napoleonic Wars, Napoleon II was well received by the British public and British Government who lauded him with praise and admiration compared to the hated and vilification they held for old King Louis-Philippe. During his stay in London, Napoleon Franz would meet with the young Queen Victoria who was instantly smitten by his kindness, his intelligence, and his charming demeanor and would develop a fond opinion of the young man. Despite traveling far and wide from Italy and Switzerland to the Americas and Great Britain, Napoleon Franz managed to keep a close tab on the events in France through his vast network of supporters and benefactors.

    The exact extent to which Napoleon II was in contact with his followers in France is unknown, but it was clear that he was sending letters and aides across the border with some regularity. Several Bonapartistes had allegedly been seen meeting with the former French Emperor at his residence Chateau Arenenberg in Salenstein during his short stay there according to King Louis-Philippe's agents and talks of a coup against the Orléanist Government began to emerge. In fact, when word of the Eaglet's survival became common knowledge in France a series of disorderly uprisings would break out across the country in his favor, yet in spite of their great bravery and valor, the rebels were quickly subdued by forces loyal to the July Monarchy. Fearful that other Bonapartistes would rise in rebellion again at a later date, the French Government became increasingly paranoid and began cracking down on known Bonapartiste and Republican elements within the military and Government. Some officers were reassigned to Algiers or the Caribbean, while others were cashiered out of the military entirely; similarly the Government bureaucracy would also have several of its more radical actors removed from positions of power.

    As the years progressed, the French Government began taking harsher measures against its adversaries as acts of violence and assassination attempts against them escalated. An attack on the king and his family in July 1835 would see several of King Louis-Philippe's closest aides killed while two of the King's sons, the Duke of Nemours and the Prince de Joinville, were injured in the attack. Several of the King's ministers and most vocal supporters were also targeted by militant Republicans in several plots over the years, resulting in the deaths of the President of the Council of State Amedee Girod de l'Ain in February 1838 and Finance Minister Georges Humann in June 1842 along with a few others all of which greatly destabilized the July Monarchy. Fortunately, most of these plots and plans ended in failure, resulting in the imprisonment of numerous conspirators and saboteurs, enabling the Orléanist Government to gradually consolidate its control over the country and by the end of 1844, the July Monarchy had successfully dealt with the most glaring threats to their regime. While the July Monarchy had done its best to calm the situation in France, matters outside of their control would quickly unravel all the work that King Louis-Philippe and his government had done to secure his family's hold on the French throne.

    580px-Attentat_durch_Joseph_Fieschi_auf_K%C3%B6nig_Louis-Philippe_I.jpg

    An Assassination Attempt on King Louis-Philippe on the Boulevard du Temple (1835)

    Beginning in 1845, a terrible blight began afflicting potato harvests all across Europe from France and Britain to Austria and Russia. Although the crop made up a small portion of the average European’s diet its sudden absence from most groceries would see prices for all other food stuffs increase dramatically that year. The situation was even worse in France as their cereal harvests had been especially poor that same year leaving many thousands of French men and women to go hungry. Thousands would die of hunger in 1845, while many thousands more would go hungry leading anger to rapidly build against the Orléanist Government for failing to effectively combat the famine. The following year would see the potato blight continue unabated and that year’s grain harvest also ended in failure leading to frequent demonstrations outside Tuileries Palace. Growing tensions between the government and the people nearly sparked another revolution in France in 1846, as had occurred in both 1789 and 1830, and was only averted by the quick reaction of King Louis-Philippe and his government, authorizing the purchase of Ukrainian and Egyptian grain at a great expense.

    The next year would bring a better grain harvest, alleviating some of the concerns for the French Government, but their relief was cut short as the French economy began experiencing signs of a deepening recession. The cost for regular goods continued to skyrocket with some prices rising nearly 150% from their price in 1844, demand for goods plummeted, wages decreased dramatically with some losing nearly 30% of their incomes, and unemployment ballooned above 25% of the labor force. In Paris alone, nearly 200,000 men were without regular work, while another 100,000 were day laborers who worked for scraps.[4] Sadly, the economic recession did not stop at the French borders as every European Country from Portugal to Greece experienced some degree of economic hardship.
    Perhaps one country that had endured hardships just as great as France was the neighboring Kingdom of Belgium whose short life had been nothing but turmoil and unrest.

    Like France and the rest of Europe, Belgium suffered through the terrible famines of 1845 and 1846 and the economic collapse that followed it. Many were suffering from widespread starvation and hunger, leading to bread riots on a regular basis in the streets of Brussels. The Belgian metallurgy industry declined by as much as 50% between 1845 and 1848, while Belgian linen exports declined by two thirds because of the dominance of cheaper British textiles on the market. Numerous businesses and enterprises were bankrupted, while thousands were left unemployed and homeless. It was a difficult situation for any country to handle, and yet it was made worse by the inadequate leadership of King Otto and the Belgian Government.

    Prince Otto of Bavaria had ascended to the throne of Belgium in the Spring of 1831 following his election at the hands of the Second Belgian National Congress, yet his rule would be troubled from the start. Due to his age, the King required a regency to rule in his name until his majority, a regency which many Belgian Liberals hoped would be directed by men like themselves who would sway their young sovereign towards their ideals of a constitutional monarchy. Sadly, their efforts would be confounded by the young King's regency would be comprised primarily of Bavarians who favored the rights of kings over the rights of man. They vehemently defended their sovereigns' powers and privileges, and would even attempt to expand upon them where they were able. Due to their foreignness as well as their tyrannical nature, they developed a poor reputation among the people of Belgium who came to despise and hate them. Otto would disappoint Belgian Liberals once again when he reached his majority in June 1835, as he chose to retain the services of his former regents in his Government much to the displeasure of his subjects. He would also exhibit many of the absolutist tendencies that the people of Belgium had opposed in their former King, King William I of the Netherlands and would unfortunately lead to conflict between the Belgian Parliament and the Belgian Monarchy. Despite these disappointments, hope for the monarchy would be rekindled upon the announcement of King Otto's engagement to Princess Clementine of France.

    300px-Portrait_of_Princess_Cl%C3%A9mentine_of_Orl%C3%A9ans_by_Franz_Xaver_Winterhalter_%28Versailles%29.jpg

    Princess Clementine of France

    King Otto's marriage to the young Princess Clementine of France in November 1835 aided his cause immensely as he could now attach himself directly to his primary benefactor, King Louis-Philippe through marriage. Sadly though, their union would be a troubled one. Although the new Belgian Queen was certainly agreeable to the Belgian King and the Belgian court, she would prove unable to provide a male heir for the dynasty leaving its future in doubt. In 1837 her first pregnancy would sadly end in a stillbirth of a baby boy, causing the couple great suffering and heartache. Two years later in 1839, the Queen would give to a girl, whom the King and Queen named Maria Amelia after Clementine’s mother, yet tragedy would strike once again as young Maria Amelia was born sickly and frail, and by year's end she was dead. A third attempt at a child would result in another daughter, named Clotilde in 1842 who would be the only child of Otto and Clementine to survive childhood. Unfortunately for Otto and Clementine, the birthing process for Princess Clotilde had left the young Queen terribly weak and unwell forcing the royal couple to effectively abandoned any plans for any further children. While Otto would still care for Clementine, his affection for her waned over the years leading him to attract several mistresses with whom he allegedly had several children leading to unrest in the King's household. Unrest would also emerge between Belgium and its allies thanks in no small part to the misguided efforts of King Otto.

    In 1832, the Belgian Government at the request of France, began the complete demolition of the Barrier, a system of forts along the border between Belgium and France that had been established by the Duke of Wellington following the end of the Napoleonic Wars. French soldiers would also be permitted to garrison several fortresses along the border with the Netherlands, as Dutch soldiers frequently raided the frontier between Belgium and the Netherlands and the Belgian Army had proven incapable of stopping them. These moves by the Belgian Government, combined with King Otto's apparent closeness with King Louis-Philippe sparked fears in both Amsterdam and London of a growing French influence over the region which unfortunately alienated any allies Otto and the Belgian Government might have had in Westminster. Britain for their part was not blameless in the deterioration of relations between themselves and little Belgium as their mechanized textile industry effectively bankrupted the Belgian linen industry. As cheaper British goods flooded across the Channel, Belgian wares lost much of their value resulting in soaring unemployment and rising impoverishment which only served to aggravate matters between them even further.

    While Otto was certainly earnest in his efforts to aid his country, his constant interference into the matters of the Parliament and his frequent disregard of the Belgian Constitution earned him the vilification of the Belgian political class. His rule was becoming increasingly reliant upon the support of the conservative Catholic Party who generally tolerated his absolutism more than their hated rival, the Liberal Party who were more pronounced in their opposition to Otto's governance. For most matters, Otto was able to simply push his initiatives through with the support of Catholic votes alone, but as the years progressed, the Liberals began gaining seats in Parliament in far greater numbers than the Catholics, and after the 1846 elections they would hold a clear majority in the Legislature much to the King's dismay. The lack of a clear heir, combined with the poor Belgian economy certainly didn't help Otto's standing among the Belgian politcal class, nor the people of Belgian. More detrimental to Otto, however, was his apparent inability to deal with Belgium’s neighbor to the North, the Kingdom of the Netherlands whose continued hostility remained a constant burden for Belgium.

    Although the Kingdom of the Netherlands had been driven from Belgium following the Revolution in 1830, King William I of the Netherlands obstinately refused to accept the 1831 Treaty of London establishing Belgium as an independent country. His soldiers frequently skirmished with Belgian troops, if only to reaffirm his claim to the Southern Provinces, and he barred all Belgian ships from Dutch ports both in Europe and in his overseas territories which was incredibly damaging to the Belgian economy. Moreover, he continually ginned up unrest and agitation in the regions of Flanders against the increasingly French and Walloon dominated Belgian Government. However, this act of sedition was surprisingly mitigated somewhat by King Otto who travel the Belgian countryside visiting various Flemish communities in an attempt to foster good will between the people and the crown.

    Sadly, these acts would do little to resolve the differences between the Walloons and the Flemish who had failed to develop a united national identity since achieving their independence in 1831. The Flemish had been unwilling partners of the Walloons in the Revolution, only being tied to the new state by the efforts of Walloon revolutionaries and French soldiers in the war against the Netherlands and were effectively treated as second class citizens by the ruling Walloon elite in Belgium. Persecution of Flemish communities by their Walloon neighbors both during and after the revolution would see many homes burnt to the ground, many businesses ruined, and many families left to fend for themselves. Between the destruction of the Revolution and the persecution by the Walloon controlled government, Flanders would become an impoverished shadow of its former self as wealth was directed to the north to the South of the country rather than the North. The city of Antwerp, once the jewel of the Southern Provinces had been reduced to a burnt out shell thanks to the prolonged siege of the city by the French army in 1831 and the lackluster recovery effort by the Belgian Government had done little to aid the city's inhabitants. This poverty in the North of the country would worsen dramatically following the famines of 1845-1846 and the economic recession of 1847.


    530px-Exp%C3%A9dition_de_Risquons-tout.jpg

    The Belgian Military Attacks the Flemings
    Radical ideas of republicanism and socialism began making broad inroads into both Flanders and Wallonia leading many to openly protest the Monarchy and Belgian Government. Protests and riots began occurring in greater frequency, while the Legislature did little to resolve the growing unrest in Flanders. Surprisingly, it would be King Otto who acted first to deal with the issue. In what was to be King Otto's finest act, but also his most foolish, he unanimously declared that the Belgian Government would begin issuing and accepting the usage of both Dutch and French in all official paperwork, public laws and Royal orders. While this decision was generally applauded by the Flemish intellectual community; it was overwhelmingly denounced by the Walloons and Belgian Parliament as an act of tyranny. Protests would soon appear on the streets of Charleroi, Namur, Tournai, and numerous other Walloon towns and villages condemning the Monarchy. When the protests finally reached Brussels in early September while King Otto and his family were away visiting the town of Bastonge, the Belgian Parliament made its move against King Otto with the support of the Belgian Army. Staging an impromptu vote of no confidence in the continuation of the present monarchy, the Legislature voted to remove King Otto from power by a relatively wide margin as most of the Fleming Legislators had boycotted the event in opposition.

    When it became clear that the people and the army were against him, Otto, upon the advice of his in-laws, agreed not to resist the will of the people and crossed the border into France. Despite leaving his Kingdom, Otto refused to accept his deposition under the vain hope that his people would see the error of their ways and call for his return. Sadly for the one time Belgian King, no such call would ever happen, and with that the reign of King Otto had come to an end. Little did anyone know, the events in Belgium on the 3rd of September 1847 would spark a far greater calamity that would scar Europe for generations to come.

    Next Time: The Second Belgian Revolution


    [1] The Prince of Conde’s son had been killed during the Napoleonic wars leaving him without an heir of his body, as such he named his godson, Prince Henri, son of Louis-Philippe as his legal heir. Legitimists believed that Conde was contemplating fleeing to Britain alongside the Bourbons after the July Revolution, effectively disinheriting Prince Henri, the Duke of Aumale. Seeking to preserve his son’s inheritance, the Legitimists argued that King Louis-Philippe had had Conde murdered. While the case would go to trial, no incriminating evidence was discovered, and the Prince’s death was ruled a suicide in an apparent act of autoerotic asphyxiation.

    [2] The manner in which cholera was spread was still relatively unknown in the 1820’s and 1830’s, leading many people to believe that it was a poison. So in effect, many Parisians believed that General Lamarque had been murdered by the July Monarchy who were jealous of their beloved general.

    [3] France was forced into joining the Quadruple Alliance by a fait-accompli from the British.

    [4] For reference, the population of Paris was just above 900,000 people at the time of the 1848 Revolutions.
     
    Part 59: The Second Belgian Revolution
  • Part 59: The Second Belgian Revolution

    530px-Rogier_%C3%A0_la_t%C3%AAte_des_volontaires_de_Li%C3%A8ge_%28Soubre%2C_1878%29.jpg

    Charles Rogier leading Belgian Revolutionaries through the Streets of Brussels

    In many ways, the deposition of King Otto of Belgium on the 3rd of September 1847 did little to resolve the many issues facing the beleaguered Kingdom of Belgium. The widespread famine continued unabated across the countryside with thousands going hungry and hundreds more dying of starvation. The Belgian economy continued to falter as their Dutch and British competitors steadily bankrupted Belgian businesses and civil unrest continued to fester in Flanders as the Government continued to turn a blind eye to their plight and persecution. If anything, the deposition of King Otto created more problems for little Belgium than it solved as their relations with the Kingdom of Bavaria suffered extensively and the small German population in and around Luxembourg became increasingly embittered towards their government. Most worrying of all however, was the ensuing political instability which now gripped the Belgian Government.

    Under the Belgian Constitution, the Sovereign retained considerable powers as Head of State, namely the ability to select and remove Ministers and his role as Commander in Chief of the Belgian military. Yet in this time of economic and political turmoil, it was paramount that the Belgian Government endow these powers upon someone. Many within the Belgian Government were inclined to replace Otto with a Prince from another royal house, providing Belgium with much needed diplomatic link to the established monarchies of Europe. Some desired King Louis-Philippe of France to take the Belgian crown for his own, while others wanted one of his sons as their king, a few wanted various princes and dukes from other royal houses, but none would succeed in gaining a majority vote by the Belgian Government.

    These efforts to elect a new King were complicated by the emergence of various radical elements in Belgian society who were opposed to the institution of monarchy altogether. The followers of Victor Considerant, Karl Marx, and Friedrich Engles held great sway over the urban populace of Brussels who called for the abolition of the Monarchy and the establishment of a republic in its place.[1] Unsurprisingly, this measure of republicanism met with resistance by the conservative Catholic parties and members of the more moderate Liberal Party who feared the diplomatic isolation such a decision would entail. With the Belgian Parliament deadlocked, no definitive solution to their executive vacancy could be found. The only matter that could be agreed upon by all sides was the establishment of a Regency to hold the Head of State’s powers until a new sovereign was elected or until a republic was declared.

    Unlike the earlier Belgian Regency by Baron Surlet de Chokier in 1831, this Regency was a council of nine men; Henri de Brouckère, Sylvain Van de Weyer, Alexandre Gendebien, Felix de Merode, Adolphe Deschamps, Albert Prisse, Jean Baptiste Nothomb, Pierre de Decker, and its chairman, the Revolutionary War hero Charles Rogier. These men were prominent figures of varying backgrounds and political inclinations in Belgian society, who were meant to provide an outward appearance of unity between Conservatives and Liberals, Walloons and Flemings; yet it would be just that, an appearance. The powers of the Regency Council were structured in such a way that any measure sent up from the Belgian Parliament could be passed into law on a simple majority vote and because the Council was comprised of 5 Liberals (Rogier, Brouckere, Van de Weyer, Gendebien, and Nothomb) to 4 Catholics (Merode, Deschamps, Prisse, and de Decker), the Liberals could generally approve whatever legislation they so desired and block whatever measures they did not.

    The ethnic breakdown of the Council was also suspect as de Brouckère, Prisse, Nothomb, and Charles Rogier had been born and raised in France, while Van de Weyer, Felix de Merode, and Alexandre Gendebien openly supported French annexation of Belgium.[2] Adolphe Deschamps’ support for the Flemings was genuine due to his strong philanthropic nature, but he vacillated between benign neglect and modest advocacy towards them over the years. Only Pierre de Decker could be considered a stalwart ally of the Flemings and openly supported the continuance of King Otto’s controversial 1847 Language Ordinance, an act which earned him the ire of his compatriots in the Belgian Government. Sure enough, this disparity in the makeup of the Council would be seen in its first days as they would swiftly approve legislation undoing King Otto’s unilateral language dictate on a 7 to 2 vote, with only de Decker and Deschamps voting against. Although this decision was met with much outrage and protest by the Flemings, the Government paid it little heed initially and redirected its energies to other focuses.


    333px-Adolphe_Dechamps.png
    Pierre_De_Decker.jpg

    Adolphe Deschamps (Left) and Pierre de Decker (Right)

    With their political affairs sorted, the Belgian Government initiated various reforms intended to improve Belgium’s struggling economy. Large sums of Belgian Francs were spent to improve the antiquiated Belgian infrastructure system through the construction of new canals and railroads, aiding the movement of products from the countryside to the global market. The Belgian Government also hired unemployed artisans, engineers, merchants, and laborers to aid in the construction of these infastruction projects, providing employment to those in need. Sadly, these efforts did little to relieve the worsening famine in Belgium, forcing the Government to import vast quantities of food from overseas in order to feed its hungry people. While the influx of new products would help to relieve the hunger of the people somewhat and provide some people with temporary jobs, these efforts by the Government would unfortunately balloon the Belgian national debt at an alarming rate, necessitating a general increase in tax and tariff rates nationwide.

    The sudden influx of cheap foreign foodstuffs would also harm the native Belgian agriculture industry as many small Walloon and Fleming farmers were forced to sell their own crops at a great loss in order to compete with the cheaper foreign products, leading many formerly self-sufficient farmers to fall into poverty. These developments in turn served to further the economic recession throughout the country which in turn resulted in a run on banks across the country as many sought to secure their capital in the event of a worsening economic crisis. Needless to say that is exactly what would happen as interest rates on British and French loans steadily increased in response to the political and economic instability of the country.

    With the renewed persecution of their language and culture, combined with the worsening economic crisis, it would come as no surprise that Flemish demonstrations against the Belgian Government began to emerge across Flanders in mid-October 1847. From Antwerp and Mechelen to Bruges and Ghent, angered Flemings took to the streets demanding equal rights and equal protection under the law. They also demanded that the Government increase its investment into Flemish communities, as only 1 out of every 5 Belgian Francs collected through taxes and tariffs in Flanders made its way back to the region under the current investment system. Most protests were peaceful in nature, although some tended to be rowdier than others leading to a number of arrests and a few injuries, but nothing outside the norm for 19th Century protests. This situation would continue for several weeks before tragically changing for the worse following an incident in the coastal city of Oostende in early November 1847.

    On the 9th of November, a large crowd of impoverished and malnourished Flemish men and women from the countryside descended upon the city of Oostende. Numbering somewhere between 300 to 400 people, the famished Flemings hoped to find food for themselves and their families in the bustling port town as a shipment of grain, fruits, and fish had arrived at the docks in recent days. With the Dutch still baring Belgian ships from the Scheldt, Oostende had been forced to develop from a tiny fishing hovel in the 1820’s to a major commercial port where foreign goods arrived by the shipload every day. Sadly for these men and women, their efforts to find sustenance would be hindered by the presence of a Garde Civique platoon which had been dispatched to the city to keep the peace. Mistaking the large crowd for a separate protest taking place across town, the soldiers refused to let the crowd pass to the markets beyond them, much to the Flemings’ dismay.

    Undeterred, several men and women began pushing and shoving the soldiers in an attempt to get past them as hunger and desperation overcame rationality and self-preservation. Unfortunately, these efforts would be met with the butt of the guards’ rifles and the point of their bayonets. As tensions continued to mount, some angered Flemings resorted to throwing whatever they could find, with a few tossing bottles and cans, while others threw bricks and paving stones at the soldiers. One Guardsman was struck in the head with a stone, knocking him unconscious, while three more were brought to their knees by the flying debris. Having seen enough, one nervous soldier fired into the air to scare away the crowd, however, this warning shot would unfortunately elicit a volley of gunfire from his comrades into the ranks of the Flemings before them. The lead bullets ripped through the haggard crowd with ruthless efficiency, killing a dozen and maiming several more in a macabre spectacle of blood and guts. Fearing for their lives, the remaining Flemings fled in any which way they could, providing a quick and panicked ending to the once peaceful movement. While no one knew it at the time, the first shots of the Second Belgian Revolution had now been fired.

    450px-Bardouxha_Mont_1893-mw-c.jpg

    The Oostende Massacre

    After two days of investigations and deliberations, the Belgian Government announced that it would not bring charges against any of the Guardsmen involved in the massacre, leading Pierre de Decker to resign in protest, with Adolphe Deschamps’ resignation the following week on the 17th. The Oostende Massacre would prove disastrous for the Belgian Government as Flemish protestors became increasingly violent and forceful in their demonstrations, leading the Regency to react in kind. Brussels would temporarily outlaw all public demonstrations across Flanders on the 25th of November in an attempt to curtail unrest. Yet, when this measure proved insufficient in ending the protests, they mobilized the Garde Civique across Flanders on the 1st of December, effectively declaring martial law in the north of the Country. While these efforts had been intended to undercut the growing turmoil in Belgium, they unfortunately had the reverse effect as violent clashes between protestors and guardsmen become more frequent, not less.

    One such incident would see an entire company of Guardsmen brutalized by a frenzied Fleming mob in Louvain leading to vicious acts of reprisals by enraged soldiers in other Flemish cities. One last attempt for peace between the Flemings and the Walloons was held on the 7th of December, as the Flemish representatives Pierre de Decker and Jan Frans Willems made a humble request upon their Walloon countrymen for equal rights and equal protection for the Flemings under the law. Despite attending these talks in good faith, de Decker and Willems were betrayed by the Belgian Government and imprisoned for allegedly inciting sedition against the lawful Belgian Government. For the angry Flemings, this was the last straw, and within a matter of days all of Flanders was up in arms. The uprising of the Flemings would lead many states in Europe to look on with concern and trepidation, while others looked on with great interest and anticipation. None more so than the Kingdom of the Netherlands and its King William II.

    Having succeeded his father, King William I as the ruler of the Netherlands in 1842, William II presented a much more nuanced stance towards the Southern Provinces than his rigid father. While he tepidly maintained the Netherlands’ old claim to the region thanks to the lack of pressure by the British and the other Powers, he also possessed a personal attachment to the region having spent much of his youth in Antwerp and Brussels.[3] William II also presented a more moderate sovereign than his father, as he generally stayed clear of politics and made sensible reforms when necessary enabling the Netherlands to avoid much of the economic and political turmoil which was plaguing the rest of Europe. King William II also recognized that many Flemings within Belgium still remained loyal to the House of Orange and the Kingdom of the Netherlands to some degree, a feeling that was only heightened after recent events in Belgium, and he would choose to act upon that sentiment with all the means available to him.

    324px-William_II%2C_King_of_the_Netherlands%2C_by_Nicaise_de_Keyser.jpg

    King William II of the Netherlands​


    To that end, King William II authorized smugglers to transport arms and munitions across the border into Belgium where they would be provided to Flemish partisans at a great discount. The Flemings eager for support, readily accepted the Dutch offer of weapons and began fighting against their Walloon oppressors with increasing efficiency. Roving bands of Fleming militiamen would fall upon hapless Civic Guardsmen with near impunity. One such battle in Bruges would see an entire battalion of Guardsmen cut down to a man by the ravenous Flemish mob, while another engagement in Mechelen would see the entire Garde Civique driven from the city after a fierce firefight with the rebels. With Winter fast approaching and the professional Belgian Army hesitant to march North so late in the campaign season, the beleaguered Garde Civique was gradually forced to abandon much of Flanders to the rebels.

    Utilizing the lull in the fighting, the Flemings would declare their independence from Belgium on the 24th of December, establishing the Flemish State or Republic of Flanders as it was called by its contemporaries. They would establish a Provisional Government in the city of Antwerp and elect the Ghent lawyer Hippolyte Metdepenningen as its first President. Moreover, the Flemish State began seeking international recognition and support for their cause. Aside from the Netherlands, they received little formal recognition or aid from any other country in Europe, although some proved more receptive than others. France was strongly against them however, viewing any alteration of Belgium’s territorial integrity to be contrary to their interests in the region. The Belgian Government in Brussels, which by this time was a Walloon government for all intents and purposes, strongly opposed the loss of their northern provinces on a purely economic basis as well and vowed to reclaim them as soon as the weather allowed them.

    When the Winter snows finally started to clear in late February 1848, the small Belgian Army some 12,000 strong, began its advance North from Brussels to Antwerp seeking to crush the Flemish rebellion in one fell swoop. The Flemings in response quickly mustered a force numbering over 14,000, which was supported by a small cadre of 1,200 Dutch volunteers, before sallying forth to combat their foe, meeting them near the town of Mechelen. Despite boasting more fighters than their Walloon adversaries, the Flemings were at a major disadvantage, lacking both the discipline and capable leadership of their adversaries as no one man held the reins of leadership in the army. Their cavalry and artillery were also severally lacking, and many men were armed only with clubs and polearms, rather than muskets and rifles. Matters were made worse for the Flemings as most of their men were untrained militiamen or irregulars as most Fleming soldiers in the Belgian army had been detained by the Belgian Government in the weeks leading up to the fighting between them.

    The Walloons in contrast had benefited from years of French training, they were fully equipped with French armaments, and a number of French volunteer officers commanded several regiments within the small Belgian army. They boasted a larger cavalry contingent than their Fleming adversaries and they maintained a sufficiently large artillery train of 24 cannons compared to the 7 small cannons the Flemings possessed. They were also directed by the Walloon General Pierre Emmanuel Felix Chazal whose years of experience in both the French and Belgian armies made him a capable commander of men. Suffice to say, the professional Belgian army was more than a match for the rowdy and wild Flemish force sent to oppose them.

    Despite these disadvantages, the Flemings felt confident in their chances for victory against the Walloons, trusting that their greater numbers and high morale would carry the day. Rather than wait for the Walloons to attack them, the Flemings threw caution to the wind and boldly charged the advancing soldiers as they crossed the River Nete north of Mechelen. Overcoming the initial shock, the Belgians bravely held their ground in the freezing waters of the Nete against the wave of Fleming rebels and unloaded volley after volley into their charging adversary, killing or maiming scores of enemy combatants. Despite this the Flemings would reach the Belgian lines initiating a fierce hand to hand melee between the two sides. After several dreadful minutes, the stalemate would be broken as the pitiful Fleming horsemen scattered before the superior Belgian cavalrymen, who then turn their sights onto the exposed Fleming infantrymen. With their flanks and rear exposed, several Flemings panicked and fled the field of battle sparking a cascade effect of fear and trepidation across the entire army. They were only saved from complete destruction at the hands of the Belgians thanks to the efforts of the Dutch volunteer regiment which bravely served in a rearguard duty to protect the Fleming’s retreat from the field of battle. Despite enduring ghastly casualties, the Dutch soldiers stubbornly held their ground for several hours, before retreating in good order themselves as night began to fall.

    434px-Bruxelles_%C3%A0_travers_les_%C3%A2ges_%281884%29_%2814576755848%29.jpg

    The Belgian (Walloon) Army in 1848

    Despite the heroics of the Dutchmen, the Battle of Louvain was a complete disaster for the Flemish rebels who would lose nearly 3,000 men, most of whom were killed in the disorderly retreat to Antwerp, while another 2,000 would desert the cause all together in the days that followed, while the Walloons in comparison only lost 700 men. The next few days would serve as preliminary actions for the ensuing siege of Antwerp as both sides settled in for a protracted siege of the city after an assualt by the Belgian forces failed to take the city on the 5th of March. Skirmishes would take place between both sides on a frequent basis, with battles occurring near Beveren, Burcht, Doel, Edegem, Kapellen Mortsel, and Schoten. To impede their opponents, the Fleming Soldiers resorted to destroying the dams and dikes around the city, turning the rolling plains into a marshy bog. Nevertheless, the Belgians met with some success taking the strategic hamlets of Edegem and Mortsel on the 7th, Burcht and Schoten would fall to the Government’s troops on the 11th, and Beveren would capitulate two days later.

    By late March, only a precarious route along the banks of the Scheldt remained open to the Flemings who desperately dispatched messengers down the river seeking aid from Amsterdam. King William II and the Dutch Government would prove very eager to assist their Fleming kinsmen and readily agreed to their requests for military aid on the condition of the immediate reunification of Flanders and the Netherlands. As a Walloon victory would likely mean their imprisonment or deaths, the Flemish Provisional Government had little recourse but to accept the Dutch Government's demands and so on the 9th of April, 40,000 Dutch soldiers poured across the border into Flanders.

    Caught off guard by the sudden intervention of the Dutch, the Walloon forces were quickly overwhelmed by the combined Fleming-Dutch force at Antwerp. Despite the skill and tenacity of the Belgian General Chazal, his men were outmatched by the Dutch force under the Prince of Orange and was quickly forced into retreat. In a matter of days, the situation in Belgium had completely reversed as the Flemings and Dutch drove the Walloons southward towards Brussels. Unable to mount a proper resistance against the approaching Orangemen, the Belgian Government was forced to abandon Brussels to the approaching Dutch army on the 13th of April. While the fall of Brussels would cause the Fleming-Dutch Army to pause for some time, many within the Dutch Government and military desired the complete reconquest of the Southern Provinces and pushed for the Army to advance south into Wallonia, which it would do on the 16th of April. Fearing a complete collapse in their positioning, the Belgian Government invoked the 1831 Treaty of London and called upon the Powers for assistance against the Netherlands.

    Despite their own internal unrest and economic instability, the Kingdom of France immediately heeded the call to arms almost immediately and began moving forces towards their border with Belgium. After some delay, Prussia also began moving troops towards its border with the Low Countries, while Austria and Russia remained quiet. Given their own internal unrest and distance from the theater, their silence was generally ignored by all parties. Most surprising of all however, was Britain’s overt refusal to meaningfully assist the Belgian Government in its fight against the Netherlands.

    Despite being a signer of the 1831 Treaty of London, Britain was reluctant to aid a state, which for all intents and purposes in their eyes was a French satellite. French influence in Belgium had been a cause for concern under the deposed King Otto, and many had hoped that his removal from power would bring a friendlier government to power in Brussels. Yet London would be greatly disappointed when the new Walloon dominated Government continued its turn towards France, with many prominent ministers and representatives openly clamoring for the unification of Belgium with France. Britain had also begun rapprochement with the Netherlands in recent years and it had signed various trade deals that they were hard pressed to abandon given the strong economic ties between them. While the events in the Low Countries were certainly troublesome, other matters also drew London's attention.

    In Central Asia the Persian Army of Mohammad Shah Qajar had boldly crossed the border into the Emirate of Afghanistan and captured the city of Herat in less than a month, shocking British agents in the region who doubted the Persians could manage such a feat. This resurgence of Persian power in Central Asia posed a significant threat to British interests in India necessitating that more military assets to be redirected to the Subcontinent. This development in Asia also reeked of French meddling, making any semblance of cooperation between Britain and France in the Low Countries an unseemly decision for the British government. Other theaters also required London’s attention, namely the Ionian Island which were clamoring for Enosis with Greece and Ireland which was clamoring for food for its starving masses. Like the rest of Europe, Britain was also struggling from economic and political upheaval of its own which limited the state’s ability to make war and the ongoing potato famine hurt Ireland immensely leading to constant unrest on the island. The growth of Socialism and Fourierism in Belgium also soured Westminster's opinion of the Belgian Government as these movements shared much in common with the damnable Charterist movement in Britain. As these groups held great influence over the Belgian Government's proceedings and measures an unfortunate correlation between the two grew as a result in London.

    Nevertheless, Britain was bound by treaty to aid the Belgians should their territorial integrity be violated by any power, be it a friend or a foe. To that end, they would dispatch several ships of the Western Squadron of the Royal Navy to patrol the waters off Belgium’s coast, interdicting any Dutch vessels found in their waters. While this was deemed unsatisfactory to the embattled Belgian Government, Britain remained unconcerned with the Walloon complaints as they had technically fulfilled the terms of the treaty despite doing little to actually aid the Belgians on the ground.

    With Britain ostensibly in the war and a French army some 84,000 strong under the command of the veteran commander, Marshal Thomas Robert Bugeaud, duc d’Isly marching to the Walloons aid, the Flemish and Dutch began withdrawing to their defensive positions North of Brussels where they would prepare for the coming attack. Between the 18th of April and the 5th of May a handful of skirmishes and sorties would take place between rearguard units of the Dutch army and advanced units of the French Army, but before the might of the French army the Dutch force of some 45,000 men stood little chance. Over the course of two weeks, the Dutch and Flemings were steadily forced northward by the superior French army. Making matters worse were a series of reports on the movement of a 63,000 strong Prussian army under the command of the Prince of Prussia, that was marching on their position with great haste. However, unbeknownst to both sides, Prince Wilhelm of Prussia had no intention of aiding the French and their Walloon allies. On the 6th of May, 1848, Prussian General Moritz von Hirschfeld and the 15th Division of the Prussian 1st Army opened fire on elements of the French army North of Liege revealing their entrance into the Second Belgian Revolution alongside the Dutch and Flemings.

    Next Time: The Fire Spreads


    [1] Around the time of the 1848 Revolutions in OTL, Karl Marx was indeed active in and around Brussels.

    [2] Technically, Brouckère and Van de Weyer were born in French occupied Flanders during the Napoleonic Wars, but as noblemen from French speaking households they held strong affinities to France and the Walloons that would shape their politics.

    [3] Due to increased tension between Britain and France, and by virtue Britain and Belgium, the Dutch have managed to avoid completely abandoning their claims to Belgium which has helped the Orangist movement in Flanders ITTL.
     
    Last edited:
    Part 60: The Fire Spreads
  • Part 60: The Fire Spreads

    780px-Carlo_Bossoli_-_L%27armeria_del_nobiluomo_Ubaldo.jpeg

    Scene from the Milanese Uprising of 1848

    Although the war in Belgium was certainly the first major conflict to arise from the Revolutions of 1848, it was not the only major flashpoint of social unrest and political activism taking place across the European continent at this time. The deposition of King Otto had pried open the gates of liberalism and radicalism that had been barred shut since the end of the Napoleonic Wars and soon every state from Britain and France in the West to Austria and Russia in East would feel the fire of revolution. The German Confederation would be no different as revolutionary fervor soon took hold of various states across the region beginning with the small Grand Duchy of Baden. Located along the frontier with France, Baden had long been a hotbed of German liberalism since the Napoleonic Wars as feudalism and serfdom remained prominent features of Baden’s society. The people generally lived as peasants in relative squalor while the nobility enjoyed a life of leisure and luxury, leading to anger and hostility between the classes and enabling revolutionary ideals to take root in land. Over time these feelings would dissipate thanks to an improving Badische economy in the 1820’s and the persecution of liberals by the resurgent nobility, but they would never truly disappear.

    The ascension of Grand Duke Leopold in 1830, would serve to reignite these lingering embers as he would prove to be a remarkably progressive ruler for his time. He appointed liberal ministers throughout his government and he lessened the restrictions on the press. He would end the persecution of political clubs and religious minorities earning him great praise from the people of Baden. Leopold would even engage in popular economic reforms and industrialization projects, meant to improve the livelihoods of his people, most of whom remained beholden to the land they toiled and tilled upon. And yet, for all his promises and accomplishments, Leopold would be reluctant to support more radical initiatives such as the complete abolishment of feudalism in Baden, the establishment of a written constitution, and the unification of Germany disappointing many liberals within Baden.

    The famines of 1845, 1846, and 1847, along with the ensuing economic recessions of 1846 and 1847 would utterly devastate the Grand Duchy’s agricultural industry leaving tens of thousands unemployed and leading many thousands to fall into poverty. The region which had struggled with overpopulation for years now was ravaged with famine as entire families starved to death. Leopold’s industrialization initiatives would only worsen matters for the people of Baden as the Government’s already limited resources were funneled towards factories and mills, rather than food and simple sustenance. Angered at the callousness of the Badische elite and with nothing better to do, most of the unemployed began agitating for reform, protesting before their local municipal buildings or demonstrating outside the Badische Landtage in Karlsruhe. By the Summer of 1847, the Grand Duchy of Baden had all the warning signs of a revolution in the making. All it needed was a spark to ignite it and they needn’t wait long for that.

    Emboldened by the overthrow of King Otto of Belgium in early September 1847, many of Baden’s leading liberals would flock to the important railroad junction of Offenburg on the 13th of September to air their grievances and make their demands for reformation known. In attendance were well over 700 leading liberals, radicals, revolutionaries, nationalists, and socialists from across Baden and the German Confederation, with the most prominent men in attendance being the firebrand democrats Gustav Struve, Valentin Streuber, and Friedrich Hecker. While some held differing opinions on the form of government they desired most, many if not all shared a common aspiration to establish a liberal constitution and a representative government in Baden. The Offenburg Assembly would take some time, but after several days of deliberation and debate, the assembly came to a consensus on their demands; the Offenburg Resolution.

    570px-Forderungen_volkes_1847.jpg

    The Offenburg Resolution

    Firstly, they called for the writing of a constitution, establishing a representative form of government modeled after the United States of America, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the Kingdom of Greece. Under the Offenburg Resolution, the Grand Duke would retain his status as the head of state, but his powers and privileges would be reduced from their present highs. The Badische Landtage would also be expanded into a bicameral legislature comprised of popularly elected representatives independent from the Grand Duke. The Resolution also called for the powers and influence of the Church, or more specifically the Jesuits, over the state’s bureaucracy to be curtailed significantly. They demanded the establishment of Jury Courts, based on the English Court of Sessions, enabling the accused to be tried before a jury of their peers. Finally, serfdom was to be abolished and all duties due to the nobility by the tenants on their lands were to be annulled.

    Aside from these demands for political reform, the Offenburg Resolution included amendments to Baden’s economy, calling for yeomen farmers and small business owners to gain special privileges and protections against their larger competitors. They wanted tax rates and interest rates to be reduced from their present highs and that a progressive system of taxation be implemented in place of the current system which favored the nobility. The Badische military was also targeted for reform, with the Assembly demanding that the regular army be replaced with a national militia comprised of soldier citizens, loyal not to a sovereign, but to the constitution. They demanded that corporal punishment for both soldiers and civilians be ended upon humanitarian grounds, and they requested that practice of substitutions for military service be abolished. The final clause of the Offenburg Resolution called for the revocation of the Carlsbad Decrees which limited freedom of the press, the freedom of belief and conscious, the freedom of liberal professors to teach, the freedom to associate and assemble, and the freedom of German liberals to travel freely throughout the Confederation.

    A meeting one month later by many of these same men in the town of Heppenheim would condense these many points into the Heppenheim Demands; the establishment of a Badische legislature, the abolition of feudalism and serfdom in Baden, the abolition of the army and its replacement with a citizens’ militia, the unrestricted freedom of the press, and the establishment of jury courts.[1] This condensed list of demands was then passed onto the Badische Landtage in Karlsruhe in late November 1847 where it would remain for several weeks much to the anger of the Badische liberals. The Diet was initially concerned over the radical demands of the resolution, but with popular demonstrations growing in size and increasing in violence by the day, they would be hard pressed to reject it. Ultimately, the people of Karlsruhe would make their decision for them, as a violent mob of 12,000 stormed the Landtage building on the 7th of December and successfully coerced the Diet into passing the Heppenheim Demands.

    The successful enactment of the Heppenheim Demands in Baden would prompt other German Liberals across the German Confederation to begin pushing forward with their own assemblies and manifestos to varying degrees of success in the new year. Some rulers like King William I of Württemberg were compelled to appoint liberal ministers to their cabinets, while King Ernest Augustus of Hanover was forced to issue a new constitution that was slightly more liberal than the last. Other states like the Electorate of Hesse-Kassel and the Kingdom of Saxony would abolish serfdom, the system of substitution, and the exemption of the wealthy and well to do from military service. Some monarchs like King Ludwig of Bavaria and Grand Duke Louis II of Hesse and by Rhine would even be forced to abdicate in favor of their heirs due to strong public pressure against them. Yet amidst this cascade of liberalism spreading across Germany in 1848, Austria would prove much less conciliatory.

    530px-1848_politische_versammlung_in_berlin.jpg

    The Assembly of Eberfeld​

    The Austrian Empire had long been the bulwark of conservatism and absolutism in Central Europe, yet it too would experience its share of social unrest and political activism in 1848. As it was a multiethnic empire of Germans and Magyars, Czechs, and Croats, Poles and Transylvanians, Slovaks and Slovenes, stretching from the Alps in the West to the Carpathians in the East, it was a diverse state of differing peoples and differing ideals. The Hapsburgs and their Chancellor, Klemens Wenzel Nepomuk Lothar, Prince of Metternich had long opposed the democratization and decentralization of the Empire, going to great lengths to oppress nationalists and revolutionaries through whatever means necessary. The Empire had survived the 1830 Revolutions relatively unscathed, with the only major uprising taking place in the Italian Peninsula. Many of the would-be revolutionaries were imprisoned and some 120 to 200 ring leaders would executed for treason and sedition in the immediate aftermath of the conflict, providing Metternich and the Hapsburgs with the appearance of a grand victory over their opponents.

    However, beneath this façade of strength existed a rotting edifice ripe for change. The persecution and execution of the Carbonari leadership would only succeed in making them martyrs, strengthening the cause of Italian independence. Metternich’s harsh reprisals against similar groups in Bohemia, Galicia, and Hungary would also elicit great hatred among the nobility and commoners for the man and the Austrian government which he served. Nevertheless, the Austrian Chancellor had been awarded a great deal of leeway by Emperor Francis II thanks to his successful handling of the Italian Uprising and for his stalwart defense of the realm. But, by the start of 1848 Metternich was no longer the in insurmountable leader that he had once been as age and exhaustion had made him a sunken shadow of his former self. Mistakes in his once formidable judgement were becoming commonplace, with caution and patience being replaced with hubris and vanity, which would play out disastrously in his botched handling of the 1848 Revolutions.

    The tide of revolution would sweep into Vienna in early March 1848 where it immediately took root among the intellectual class and the downtrodden. It would also inspire numerous students from the University of Vienna to begin writing pamphlets expressing liberal ideals that were soon spread across the city. Calls soon emerged demanding Metternich’s resignation and called on the Emperor to replace him, even many of his peers within the Austrian Government called for his removal from power. Despite this opposition, Metternich refused to resign unless explicitly ordered to do so by the Emperor and would stubbornly remain in power thanks to the support of a few key allies, albeit just barely.[2] With his power intact, Metternich ordered soldiers onto the streets to restore order to the city and for a time the unrest in Vienna would come to an end. While Metternich had succeeded in temporarily quieting Vienna, tensions would soon begin to boil over into armed conflict in other regions of the Empire.

    Metternich’s retention of power would not serve him well in the Kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia where dissidents and nationalists rallied against him on a daily basis. An armed uprising had been narrowly avoided back in January when several demonstrators were killed by Austrian soldiers, leading Field Marshal Radetsky to imprison the offending soldiers and restrict the rest of his men to their barracks. The old Field marshal went to great lengths to keep the peace between the people and the soldiers, but his orders from above put him at a great disadvantage. While these measures certainly ingratiated Radetsky to the Milanese, his superiors in Vienna disapproved of his actions and ordered him to return his men to the streets.

    280px-Radetzky-von-radetz.jpg

    Field Marshal Joseph Radetsky von Radetz, Commander of the Austrian Army in the Kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia

    Sure enough, the return of Austrian soldiers to the streets of Milan would only inflame the situation as dissidents began protesting once again throughout the city. On the 25th of March, a band of radical republicans converged on the Governor’s palace at the Piazza della Scalla. As they progressed through the city their ranks swelled from what had initially been a small crowd in the hundreds to nearly 8,000 people, some of whom were armed. When the congregation reached the Piazza della Scala around noon they immediately pushed their way through the guards, killing three in the process. Once inside the rebels quickly confronted the acting Governor of Lombardy-Venetia, Maximilian Karl Lamoral O’Doneell demanding the freedom of the press, the creation of a national guard, and the establishment of a legislature.

    Under duress, O’Donnell accepted the demands to the glee of the mob who promptly dispatched messengers to relay the news throughout the city. At this time Field Marshal Radetsky and his soldiers began investing the city hall, sparking a fierce melee between the Milanese and the Austrians. The battle in the Piazza della Scala would carry on for several hours, but by nightfall the city center was fully secured. Now freed, O’Donnell immediately renounced his earlier acceptance of the dissidents’ demands, but by this time it was too late as word had spread across the city of fighting between soldiers and civilians sparking a general uprising across the city. By dawn the next day, hundreds of barricades had been erected and tens of thousands of armed and angry Milanese defiantly stood atop them, effectively daring the Austrians to attack.

    Radetsky’s troubles would only worsen in the days ahead as Metternich’s close ally Karl Ludwig, Count of Ficquelmont arrived in the city on the 28th of March to take control of the situation.[3] Ficquelmont had briefly served as Chancellor of the Kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia the year prior to disastrous results as he thoroughly disenfranchised the local Milanese with his oppressive administration. Upon his arrival in Milan, Ficquelmont immediately ordered Radetsky to hold the city until reinforcements from Austria could arrive. For Radetsky this was an impossibility as his force of 60,000 was dispersed across the entire Po valley, of which only 12,000 were in Milan. In fact, Radetsky had been preparing to evacuate the city prior to Ficquelmont’s arrival on the scene, a premise which Ficquelmont found distasteful and reprehensible. Despite their disagreement Ficquelmont's authority was unquestionable as he was a stalwart ally of Chancellor Metternich, and so Radetsky was forced to comply.

    330px-Karl_von_Ficquelmont.jpg

    Karl Ludwig (Born Charles Louis), Count of Ficquelmont

    Soon word would reach Radetsky and Ficquelmont of additional revolts breaking out across Lombardy prompting nearly half of the Italian units in Austrian service to desert or defect en masse to the revolutionaries. Despite this worsening situation, Radetsky’s men still maintained control over much of the city center and the old Spanish walls providing some semblance of safety to the beleaguered Austrians. However, their situation was rapidly deteriorating as the Milanese would capture the Porta Lodovica on the 31st of March and the Porta Genova the following day, forcing a general withdrawal behind the old Medieval walls. Supply shortages were fast becoming an issue for the Austrians as they were effectively cut off from the outside world, leading to strict rationing of food and water as well as musket balls and powder. The worst news would come on the 3rd of April as preliminary reports indicated that the Sardinian Army had crossed the border into Lombardy-Venetia and were making for Milan at a rapid pace. While it was unclear which side they were on exactly, skirmishing had taken place along the border near Vigevano and Pavia indicating that the Sardinians were on the side of the revolutionaries.

    With the situation rapidly deteriorating, Radetsky ordered his men to make a desperate breakout attempt towards the East over the objection of Ficquelmont and the Austrian Government. After several painstaking hours of fierce hand to hand fighting, the battered and bruised Austrian army would successfully escape Milan, but at a ghastly cost. Of the 16,000 Austrian soldiers who had been stationed in Milan or arrived as reinforcements in the days following the initial uprising, over half would be captured, killed, or wounded during the endeavor. More damaging however, was the removal of Radetsky from his command as Ficquelmont blamed the old Field Marshal for losing Milan and much of Lombardy to the Italian Revolutionaries.

    The events in Lombardy were not the only source of conflict and revolution on the Italian Peninsula as the Papal States, the Duchies of Tuscany, Parma, and Lucca, the Kingdom of Sardinia-Piedmont, and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies experienced their own extensive revolutions. The origin of this unrest dates back to the election of Pope Pius IX to the Papacy in May 1846 as he would begin a flurry of progressive reforms implemented throughout the Papal States during his tenure as the Bishop of Rome. He would pardon political prisoners and common criminals. He would appoint liberal ministers to influential posts and laymen to the bureaucracy. Finally, he would establish a municipal council for the governance of the city of Rome by its people. Most importantly, he was somewhat antagonistic towards the Austrian government for its heavy-handed punishment of Italian revolutionaries and nationalists, as well as the illegal occupation of Ravenna and Ferrara that took place in 1838.

    However, these developments were unfortunately misinterpreted by many Italian liberals and nationalists who flocked to the Papal States in the vain hope that Pope Pius would bring about the independence of a united Italy. While the Pope was certainly sympathetic to the plight of the Italians and supported their desire for constitutionalism, he was not a nationalist, nor was he was a revolutionary. Nevertheless, Pius’ actions would inspire Italian nationalists and revolutionaries in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies to rise in revolt against the tyrannical Bourbon monarchy on the 12th of January 1848. The Sicilians of Palermo would quickly drive the Bourbon soldiers from the city, before declaring the restoration of the earlier 1812 Constitution establishing a Sicilian Parliament, as well as the deposition of King Ferdinand II. The Sicilian Revolutionaries would soon thereafter claim the rest of the island, baring Messina, effectively splitting the Kingdom of Two Sicilies in two, Sicily which was held by the Revolutionaries, and Naples which was maintained by the Bourbons.

    630px-Rivolta_di_Palermo_1848.jpg

    The People of Palermo rise up in revolt against the Bourbon Monarchy

    Attempts to carry the revolution over to the mainland in Naples would generally meet with little success, as the Bourbons maintained naval supremacy near the straights of Messina. Nevertheless, some Nationalists would manage to make their way to Taranto and Bari where they attempted to raise the flag of revolt as well. While their efforts would meet with some initial success, they were steadily beaten back by government troops causing Bari and then Taranto to fall to the Bourbons in quick succession, leading many to flee in any direction that they could. Some would make their way back to Sicily where they would join in the fate of the revolution there, others would travel north to join the Lombards and Venetians in their fight against the Austrians, some would even attempt to cross the Adriatic Sea to the Balkans bringing their liberal ideals and nationalistic fervor with them.

    The Kingdom of Greece was generally quite during the opening months of 1848 as economic stagnation and crop failures were comprised the worst concerns of the Greek Government. There was some unrest in April as students from the University of Athens advocated for various economic and social reforms, but nothing notable came of them aside from the lowering of the poll tax from 10 Drachma to 5 and the abolishment of all remaining restrictions on the press that had been holdovers from the Kapodistrias and Metaxas years. The Ottoman Empire was also relatively stable during this time aside from some provincial disputes and murmurs of nationalistic discontent. The Ottoman Empire’s vassals, the Danubian Principalities and the Principality of Serbia, were quite active as nationalists and liberals began advocating for greater autonomy and the liberation of their people from foreign oppression with increasing tenacity. By far though, the most active community in the Balkans during the opening months of the 1848 Revolutions were the Eptanesians of the Ionian Islands.

    The Eptanesians were especially susceptible to the nationalistic and liberal messaging of the Neapolitan revolutionaries. For generations, the Ionian Islands had been under the suzerainty of the Serene Republic of Venice, only to fall under the sway of first the French then the Russians and Ottomans, before returning briefly to French rule, only to then fall under the protection of the British after the Napoleonic Wars. Established as the United States of the Ionian Islands, the Eptanesians were a de facto vassal of the British Empire, providing the Royal Navy with warm water ports in the Eastern Mediterranean all year long in return for a sizeable degree of autonomy in their internal affairs. This situation was generally amenable to the Eptanesians initially as they enjoyed some degree of local autonomy compared to their countrymen on the mainland. However, over time the British would erode the freedom of the Eptanesians, effectively reducing them to a British Colony in all but name. They deployed British soldiers on their islands and patrolled their coastlines with British ships, they controlled Eptanesian foreign and domestic policy, and they governed the islands with British administrators appointed not from Corfu, but from London.

    This British occupation would unfortunately worsen following the outbreak of the Greek War of Independence in 1821. Using their wealth and resources, the Eptanesians would provide invaluable support to the Greek Revolutionaries during the Greek War of Independence, with some of the great leaders of the war emerging from the Islands like the remarkable Strategos Panos Kolokotronis and the former Greek Prime Minister Andreas Metaxas. Numerous weapons, funds, and men were funneled through the islands, much to the aggravation of the British Government which remained decidedly neutral, if not somewhat hostile towards the Greeks during the first years of the conflict. Several ships laden with provisions for the Greek Revolutionaries were unfortunately confiscated by the British authorities over the course of the war, leading to a building resentment between the British and the Eptanesians that would only worsen after the war’s end.

    Although it would be slow at first, a movement clamoring for enosis, union with Greece began to emerge on the island after the end of the war in 1830. Demonstrations calling for union with Greece were a common occurrence in the various cities of the Ionian Islands, and measures calling for union with Greece would occasionally find their way to the Ionian Parliament, where they were swiftly voted down by the British dominated legislature. This situation would change in late October 1847, as the many disunited groups clamoring for union with Greece would coalesce to form the Kómma ton Rizospastón (the Party of Radicals), which campaigned on the promise of union with Greece. The Party of Radicals would prove to be a significant thorn in the side of the British Governor of the Ionian Islands, Lord High Commisioner John Colborne, 1st Baron Seaton.

    530px-Senate_representatives_of_the_United_States_of_the_Ionian_Islands.jpg

    The Party of Radicals (Kómma ton Rizospastón)

    They organized protests against the continued British rule on the island and they purposefully boycotted British goods in favor of local Eptanesian products or Hellenic imports. The Party’s popularity among the people would earn them several seats within the Ionian Parliament where they began pushing their measures for enosis with greater effectiveness. These efforts were strongly opposed by the British Authorities on the islands who promptly arrested and imprisoned various Eptanesian MPs and unionists on the islands for seditious activity and treason against the Crown prompting mass unrest and riots across the islands. The arrival of several Neapolitan revolutionaries from Bari in late April 1848 would only serve to further destabilize the British’s hold on the islands as protests calling for union with Greece only intensified in the wake of the MP’s arrests.

    Under orders from London to keep the peace on the islands, Baron Seaton declared martial law over the Ionian Islands and instated a curfew in Kerkyra (Corfu city). He forcibly closed various Radical newspapers, and he would even deport prominent Unionists from the islands. When these acts proved insufficient in ending the demonstrations, Seaton ordered the hanging of a handful of violent offenders for their behavior as a warning against further unrest. These acts by the British, would only worsen the demonstrations against them, leading to a gradual collapse in British rule on the islands. The British actions would also bring about stern condemnation from the Greek Government which issued a diplomatic complaint.

    The events on the Ionian Islands were of little consequence to the British Government however. While the unrest was certainly unfortunate and unwanted, their focus was directed elsewhere, namely across the Channel in the lands of the now defunct Kingdom of Belgium and across the narrow sea in Ireland where famine and discontent reigned supreme. There was also the matter of Persia, which had defied British demands to vacate Afghanistan, necessitating a response by Parliament. War with the Persian Shah was undesirable, but it now seemed unavoidable given his recalcitrance and his continued propagation of war in the region. More worrying were reports of Russian aggression in Central Asia, as they had established forts along the Syr river and were fielding steamships in the Aral Sea.

    The British were also embroiled in their own problems as the Charterists boldly made their move in mid-April. According to reports, some 150,000 men, women, and children had attended the Charterist assembly at Kennington Commons on the 12th, in a show of force meant to press the British Parliament into accepting their petition for reform. The Government in response assembled nearly 100,000 policemen, soldiers, and constables to maintain the peace and prevent any acts of aggression by the crowd. The Charterists were generally peaceful and the event came and went without much concern, nevertheless it provided quite the scare for the British government. With their attention diverted elsewhere, it came as no surprise that the events on the Ionian Islands were given little attention by the British Government, effectively leaving the matter for another time.

    Next Time: Prussian Blues


    [1] Based on the Four Pressing Demands by Gustave Struve.

    [2] Metternich is in slightly better standing ITTL thanks to the lesser scale of the Belgian Revolution compared to the French Revolution of OTL. While there are still calls for his resignation, they are fewer and farer between enabling him to just barely remain in power for now. But he will soon wish he hadn’t.

    [3] Karl Ludwig, Count of Ficquelmont was a prominent supporter of Metternich and had been appointed as chancellor of the Kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia in 1847 to improve the Empire’s standing in the region. However, with the start of the Revolutions of 1848, he was recalled to Vienna and took part in the government following Metternich’s resignation until he too was forced to resign due to his association with Metternich. As Metternich has remained in power ITTL, Ficquelmont was sent back to Lombardy-Venetia to resume his earlier work of shoring up Austrian interests there.
     
    Last edited:
    Top