Victory at Lepanto 1571

Is this me, or this topic has just never been made a thread here before ?

Anyway, many have said that if the Ottomans won then Ottoman domination over the Mediterranean Sea would be unmatchable. What would be the consequences if that happened ? How this victory would effect the Mediterranean, Europe, and the world later ?
 

Keenir

Banned
Is this me, or this topic has just never been made a thread here before ?

Anyway, many have said that if the Ottomans won then Ottoman domination over the Mediterranean Sea would be unmatchable. What would be the consequences if that happened ? How this victory would effect the Mediterranean, Europe, and the world later ?

If the Sublime Porte, as a result of this victory, gets a swelled head (full of himself)....he might try for expanding to Sicily/Malta/Sardinia...or Italy itself. (Oranto attempt #2?)

if the Porte exhibits restraint and caution after this victory, he might be able to use it to gain trade/diplomatic advantages with his neighbors to the east and to the west (and to the north)
 
To be honest, I think it is a miracle the Ottoman Empire managed to take AND hold the territory it held. Its manpower was far from unlimited, and it already had to devolve much of the local authority to the regional rulers as it was, to where Constantinople's writ on some of the outlying Mediterranean provinces was almost theoretical even near the Empire's zenith.

A victory at Lepanto may actually be worse for the Ottomans in the long term, as they would have a rather hard time expanding further West and being able to keep their conquests. In other words, they are almost overstretched as it is. Further conquests may be made, but are unlikely to last, and may actually cause earlier fall of the Sublime Porte due to the amount of resources and manpower needed to keep them.

I would definitely like to see Abdul's opinion on this, as our resident Ottoman expert. What do you think, Abdul?
 
What would be of the losers (nations of the Holy League) though ?

And what would be the long term effects of Porte victory at Lepanto on Europe ?
 
Lepanto resulted due to an effort to save Cyprus for the Venetians, which the Spanish et al agreed to in exchange for Venetian support in North Africa.

So Lepanto wasn't really about preventing the Ottomans moving West, and the fleet was assembled too late to save Cyprus.

Don Juan came across the Ottoman fleet which had been raiding Venetian possessions along the Adriatic coastline, and the rest you all know.

If the Ottomans had won, it would have been a disaster for the Allies, but they would have been able to rebuild their fleets just as easily as did the Ottomans.

While the morale boost wouldn't have been had, I'm not sure the Ottomans were in a position to follow up.

If they had, their ambition at the time was to consolidate control over North Africa, so I would think any offensive would have been directed at Malta and then Morocco.

That could certainly lead to overextension - note that at this time the Ottomans had just mounted a serious campaign against Cyprus and the attempt to take Astrakhan and build a Don-Volga canal, and I'm not sure the forces to go after Malta could have been assembled fast enough - and the panic that ensued from Lepanto I would think would lead to continued cooperation of the Allies in defense of Malta.

So I think the most likely result would be a minor gain for the Ottomans in the way of pressure lifted, or no difference, and possibly the Ottomans being prompted to reach too far.

In this period, the large Ottoman inferiority in manpower and resources was starting to be felt, as large-scale conquest and the booty thus obtained were drying up, but the Empire didn't seem to recognize the glory days were over yet.

To be honest, I think it is a miracle the Ottoman Empire managed to take AND hold the territory it held. Its manpower was far from unlimited, and it already had to devolve much of the local authority to the regional rulers as it was, to where Constantinople's writ on some of the outlying Mediterranean provinces was almost theoretical even near the Empire's zenith.

A victory at Lepanto may actually be worse for the Ottomans in the long term, as they would have a rather hard time expanding further West and being able to keep their conquests. In other words, they are almost overstretched as it is. Further conquests may be made, but are unlikely to last, and may actually cause earlier fall of the Sublime Porte due to the amount of resources and manpower needed to keep them.

I would definitely like to see Abdul's opinion on this, as our resident Ottoman expert. What do you think, Abdul?
 
My first thought was also that in the wake of a victory at Lepanto there would be another attempt to capture Malta; the Hospitallers were always an annoyance for the Ottomans they're certainly a sensible target after a major naval victory. Abdul, being our resident Ottoman expert, has already discussed that matter in far greater detail than I would probably be able to.

However, assuming that the Ottomans mount a successful attack on Malta I don't think it would be too hard to hold so long as Tunisia and Tripoli are also firmly under Ottoman control; of course the Knights might just end up being relocated to somewhere in Sicily or Southern Italy and continuing their raids on Ottoman shipping from there.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
By the 1570s, power had already shifted away from southern Europe and the Ottomans and towards the Iberian Peninsula for economic reasons. Portugal controlled the trade routes to the East, depriving the Turks of the revenue that came from having the spice trade pass through their territory. Spain now had the immense resources of the New World at its disposal. So, even with a victory at Lepanto, the long-term decline of the Ottomans vis-a-vis Europe would have continued.
 

bard32

Banned
Is this me, or this topic has just never been made a thread here before ?

Anyway, many have said that if the Ottomans won then Ottoman domination over the Mediterranean Sea would be unmatchable. What would be the consequences if that happened ? How this victory would effect the Mediterranean, Europe, and the world later ?

The G.K. Chesterton poem about Lepanto wouldn't be written in the same way.
 
...And he saith, "Break up the mountains where the hermit-folk can hide,
And sift the red and silver sands lest bone of saint abide,
And chase the Giaours flying night and day, not giving rest,
For that which was our trouble comes again out of the West.
We have set the seal of Solomon on all things under sun,
Of knowledge and of sorrow and endurance of things done.
But a noise is in the mountains, in the mountains, and I know
The voice that shook our palaces -- four hundred years ago:
It is he that saith not 'Kismet'; it is he that knows not Fate;
It is Richard, it is Raymond, it is Godfrey at the gate!
It is he whose loss is laughter when he counts the wager worth,
Put down your feet upon him, that our peace be on the earth."
 
By the 1570s, power had already shifted away from southern Europe and the Ottomans and towards the Iberian Peninsula for economic reasons. Portugal controlled the trade routes to the East, depriving the Turks of the revenue that came from having the spice trade pass through their territory. Spain now had the immense resources of the New World at its disposal. So, even with a victory at Lepanto, the long-term decline of the Ottomans vis-a-vis Europe would have continued.

The immense resources of the New World didn't really do much to sustain Spain's power vis a vis Northern Europe - by this period Spain was past it's peak as well.

A victory at Lepanto isn't going to change all that much, since the Ottoman fleet involved was a raiding force, not an invasion expedition, but it was largely Spain's fleet, the loss of which would certainly have been a serious strategic setback.

If Malta was acquired, that would allow pretty significant Ottoman power projection into the Western Mediterranean, and in this period there was no question of Spain attempting to vie with the Ottomans on land.

On the other hand, Ottoman suzerainty was so attractive to the Maghreb largely because it was distant - fear of the Ottomans could soon replace fear of Spain...
 
Pasha, there is something I'd like to ask about.

About the victory over Lepanto, it would may lead to an overstretched OE, which may would further lead Ottoman Empire to a fate even worse than IOTL.

OTOH, you said in my other thread that if the Ottomans had won the competition over Indian Ocean trade routes with Portuguese, it'd have benefited the Ottomans. However, will this going to butterfly away Lepanto ?

I think you can guess what's my real question from this point :)
 
Pasha, there is something I'd like to ask about.

About the victory over Lepanto, it would may lead to an overstretched OE, which may would further lead Ottoman Empire to a fate even worse than IOTL.

OTOH, you said in my other thread that if the Ottomans had won the competition over Indian Ocean trade routes with Portuguese, it'd have benefited the Ottomans. However, will this going to butterfly away Lepanto ?

I think you can guess what's my real question from this point :)

In my mind Lepanto just isn't that important. The Ottomans certainly didn't think it was. It really changed nothing. The victorious alliance did nothing to follow up their victory and the Ottomans simply rebuilt their fleet.

In the Indian Ocean, however, there's a lot at stake. It's possible that a different struggle there would butterfly away Lepanto, but even if not, I don't see that it makes much difference. It's not like the entire Ottoman navy was sunk and lost forever - it was back at full strength the next year.
 
In my mind Lepanto just isn't that important. The Ottomans certainly didn't think it was. It really changed nothing. The victorious alliance did nothing to follow up their victory and the Ottomans simply rebuilt their fleet.

In the Indian Ocean, however, there's a lot at stake. It's possible that a different struggle there would butterfly away Lepanto, but even if not, I don't see that it makes much difference. It's not like the entire Ottoman navy was sunk and lost forever - it was back at full strength the next year.

There was also the human loss, a lot of skilled naval officers reduced the effectivity of the ottoman navy. There was also the feeling that they had to increase the firepower of their infantry if they wanted to keep the level with the spaniards. The Timariots were ordered to buy more fireweapons and learn how to use it, change Lepanto for a victory and you'll keep the ottoman army sticking to bows.
 
In my mind Lepanto just isn't that important. The Ottomans certainly didn't think it was. It really changed nothing. The victorious alliance did nothing to follow up their victory and the Ottomans simply rebuilt their fleet.

In the Indian Ocean, however, there's a lot at stake. It's possible that a different struggle there would butterfly away Lepanto, but even if not, I don't see that it makes much difference. It's not like the entire Ottoman navy was sunk and lost forever - it was back at full strength the next year.

How about if the Ottomans were both victorious at both Indian Ocean and Lepanto ?
 
In my mind Lepanto just isn't that important. The Ottomans certainly didn't think it was. It really changed nothing. The victorious alliance did nothing to follow up their victory and the Ottomans simply rebuilt their fleet.

In the Indian Ocean, however, there's a lot at stake. It's possible that a different struggle there would butterfly away Lepanto, but even if not, I don't see that it makes much difference. It's not like the entire Ottoman navy was sunk and lost forever - it was back at full strength the next year.

Good point, and your right, it is not that important, but the reason it is not important, is also why it could be more important if the Ottomans won. The reason it is not important, is the coalition, were totally unable to follow up on the victory, because of the division, and in fighting in their own ranks. The Ottomans didn't have such a problem, and would of been more able to follow up the victory with others, and make the battle more important for the Ottomans. If the Ottomans would of won in the Indian, you would have a much more unified front from Europe against the Ottomans by Lepanto.
 
In the Indian Ocean, however, there's a lot at stake. It's possible that a different struggle there would butterfly away Lepanto, but even if not, I don't see that it makes much difference. It's not like the entire Ottoman navy was sunk and lost forever - it was back at full strength the next year.

I see. But what if in this case, Lepanto was a victory ?
 
Top