Great idea ----- but boring! where is your sense of adventure? daring do? fighting? beer? and other manly stuff!
WI Napoleon King of the Helenes?
- Thread starter Colonel Troutstrangler
- Start date
Looks like fun and plausible so far. When you do subsequent versions, you might want to have the liberating fleet take some storm damage in the operation.
...of course, also, AHP's naturally pro-Ottoman and about as fair to Greek possibilities as Americans and Britons are to the French.
Er, didn't Nappy's die 4 years later? He was only in his fifties when he died IOTL, AHP, and people have a way of surviving alot longer when they feel needed.
...of course, also, AHP's naturally pro-Ottoman and about as fair to Greek possibilities as Americans and Britons are to the French.
Er, didn't Nappy's die 4 years later? He was only in his fifties when he died IOTL, AHP, and people have a way of surviving alot longer when they feel needed.
Greeks rule KO?
I think that Pasha would not be happy if this TL's a success... Snag is, it'd be a complete demolition job of the Ottoman Empire.
FYI, the Russians supported Capodistrias (a dictatorial figure) against the desires of France and England over the Battle of Poros. Da Capo's half-trained Greek army (trained in the French manner) sacked the town whilst the Russians attacked by sea. You have to be a Poriote, Hydran or Spetsean, to understand why Admiral Miaoulis is a hero for burning half the most potent ships of the Greek Navy in Poros harbour. Me, I'm in training for a philHellene.
Despite his remarks about the massacres of Muslims in the Morea, I would like to remind our Ottoman friend of the massacres of Greeks in the Morea and the planned resettlement with Algerian Muslims. This was only stopped by the Battle of Navarino Bay. I respectfully suggest that neither side had clean hands but that events such as the massacre at Chios should be examined.
Coming back to the TL, Napoleon would probably have been acceptable to Russia and France - as long as he fought in and for Greece. Britain would never have trusted him and historically might not have granted the two loans that funded Greek independence (and were mostly wasted by people such as Kapodistrias). So, carry on.
I think that Pasha would not be happy if this TL's a success... Snag is, it'd be a complete demolition job of the Ottoman Empire.
FYI, the Russians supported Capodistrias (a dictatorial figure) against the desires of France and England over the Battle of Poros. Da Capo's half-trained Greek army (trained in the French manner) sacked the town whilst the Russians attacked by sea. You have to be a Poriote, Hydran or Spetsean, to understand why Admiral Miaoulis is a hero for burning half the most potent ships of the Greek Navy in Poros harbour. Me, I'm in training for a philHellene.
Despite his remarks about the massacres of Muslims in the Morea, I would like to remind our Ottoman friend of the massacres of Greeks in the Morea and the planned resettlement with Algerian Muslims. This was only stopped by the Battle of Navarino Bay. I respectfully suggest that neither side had clean hands but that events such as the massacre at Chios should be examined.
Coming back to the TL, Napoleon would probably have been acceptable to Russia and France - as long as he fought in and for Greece. Britain would never have trusted him and historically might not have granted the two loans that funded Greek independence (and were mostly wasted by people such as Kapodistrias). So, carry on.
I Blame Communism
Banned
He certainly does, and speaking as someone who is, I hope, disinterested, this is a really silly idea. Sorry, but it is. British public opinion was wobbly at the time (it was not at all political suicide to call Navarino "a treacherous attack on old allies", IIRC), and just look at the reception Napoleon's nephew got decades after the fact when he assumed power in France by mostly-gela means and immediately promised that the empire meant peace.
Britain is going to go into conniptions. Given this, I don't really see why the Greeks will want Boney as leader. He's no Roman, he's an opportunistic Frank with a record of vague wierd Islamophilia. He's also a ginormous political liability. What can he bring? Not his own genius: he was himself saying he was too old for this in 1812. So, a squad of English Romantic all-stars who mean, in military terms, nothing; and that's pretty much it.
Oh, and Napoleon wasn't particularly popular with that crowd anyway:
'Tis done! But yesterday a king,
And armed with kings to strive,
And now thou art a nameless thing
So abject, yet alive.
Is this the man of thousand thrones,
Who strewed the Earth in hostile bones,
And can he thus survive?
Since he miscalled the morning star,
No nor fiend hath fall'n so far...
...and all that jazz. Having written that, is Byron really going to conspire to slip him out from the clutches of British sea-power?
Terry Pratchett siad something to the effect of "Remember the massacre that they commited us that justifies the massacre that we are about to commit right now!"
Let's not get into that. The point is that it would take a pretty stupid Muslim to side with the Greeks.
The restoration French were willing to spend large sums to ensure that Murat never reigned in Naples. The master himself anywhere at all? Not a chance. Whoops, I've neglected to mention that: this means the end of French support, too.
And a lot shorter when they have horrible swamp-diseases. It wasn't a healthy time, and Greece wasn't a healthy place for northwest Europeans. Ask Byron.
Last edited:
I Blame Communism
Banned
The statesmen at Vienna didn't give three quarters of a bleeding heck about what liberal dreamers thought. They were dominated, after all, by Metternich.
So we must consider, why should the non-issue of Greek independence be raised to the detriment of... all interest but Russian ones. Sort of: if the Russians are going to get a Greek state, they'd like it to be autonomous, not independent (to hold the Ottomans hostage ala Serbia) and ruled by the Orthodox church, not Napoleon (who even Alexander had no desire to give a throne after he repeatedly shot his chances of keeping one in the foot)?
Weakening the Ottomans is contrary to Metternichian principles of foreign policy; Napoleon was not known for being scrupulous and a good son. Given that he'd married her to show the Hapsburgs who was boss...
But if everyone's suddenly down with the Greek aspirations, why not suggest that the Greek state not be ruled by Napoleon, thus serving Russian interests while simultaneously causing Talleyrand to wipe his brow with relief, Britain to stop pulling a huffy face, and the Prussians to throw a party celebrating vengeance!?
They intervened in the Greek war OTL, so it's obviously near enough for them to not want a politically persecuted faction hanging around there plotting to retake power.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
The Ottomans had no debts at all in this period - the debt crisis didn't begin until the Crimean War.
My issue with this scenario is not that there are "heroes" involved, it's that Napoleon is involved. Any sympathy anywhere in Europe will be immediately destroyed once he's involved. Even in France, you may have private people cheering him on, but the government will be running around screaming and mobilizing to help the Ottomans crush him. Any volunteers that he will attract will be counterbalanced by volunteers itching to fight him - not to mention as I said before all the governments of Europe will line up to crush him.
Now Cochrane is a great idea, and there are plenty of other Napoleonic Wars-surplus types probably itching for the good ole days. But you can't take for granted that everyone would join the Greeks - if you look at OTL, way more Europeans entered Ottoman service than that of their enemies... Napoleon himself had planned to when other opportunities came up in France.
Last edited:
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
Is there any reason for this personal attack? All I said was that Napoleon is a terrible choice to participate as it would turn everyone against the Greeks. The Greek Revolt failed on its own in OTL - it was the intervention of the Powers that secured Greek independence. If you have a POD which removes that intervention, then I don't see how what I said is irrationally pro-Ottoman. Participation by some other less contentious hero and the support he could bring with him is a perfectly plausible scenario. But you're not going to see a total collapse of the empire based on a Greek revolt - even if the empire were that fragile, the powers aren't going to allow it.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
I am perfectly aware of atrocities on both sides. I'm not sure why all these discussions have to turn to propagandistic nonsense. My point was that Muslim notables know that any successful breakaway from the empire will result in the total destruction of the Muslim population, and they are simply not going to support such efforts.
If you REALLY think that Napoleon would be acceptable to Russia and France, I'm not sure what to tell you. You REALLY think a Bourbon king is going to support a throne for the hellspawn usurper? And that the Russians, with their own Byzantine ambitions, and having just bled white to stop Napoleon, are going to see him installed as King of Greece? Seriously? And the British? The Austrians? On the entire planet, Napoleon would be the least acceptable person for the job. You could convince more of them to put a cocker spaniel on the throne.
Also, as I said before, these are not easy conditions - the Morea is a poor backwater, with no urban centers or any comforts at all, and lots of disease. Remember how Byron died? No villas for Napoleon, only pestilential goat-herding villages. He was in poor health even in 1812, let alone 1821.
Last edited:
I am not getting into the polemics of Muslim v Christian. I do not believe a god exists, and as such, I do not believe that holy wars, crusades and jihads AND who slaughtered who, are worth the effort that we give them in OTL. Better to realise that "god" is to be found in us all and then we would see some real progress for humanity.
Any road up! (Lancashire phrase meaning "and now back to the matter in hand")
I think AHP has made some pertinent comments regarding the possible support for Boney; or rather the lack of it! I have taken this all in and I am concocting the next little episode. It will be a few days before it "hits the press" but trust me - Boney will still be there!
Stumped!
Jammy and Abdul both gave food for thought. I haven't given up on this, just not been able to write due to pressure of work. (and building wardrobes and shoe cupboards!!!)
Can the necessary aid be found for Boney?
Possible allies: North African states breaking away from the Ottomans? Italians poking the Hapsburg's in the eye? Prussians seeing a second front in a fight for German hegemony? (not really plausible, but I am trying to find an angle here - give me a fricken bone tika tika tika )
It has to work - but how?
Jammy and Abdul both gave food for thought. I haven't given up on this, just not been able to write due to pressure of work. (and building wardrobes and shoe cupboards!!!)
Can the necessary aid be found for Boney?
Possible allies: North African states breaking away from the Ottomans? Italians poking the Hapsburg's in the eye? Prussians seeing a second front in a fight for German hegemony? (not really plausible, but I am trying to find an angle here - give me a fricken bone tika tika tika )
It has to work - but how?
There isn't anyone with the muscle to make this work that would be behind it. Anyone who for any reason wants independent Greece does not want Bonaparte.
And crazy volunteers flocking to his banner aren't going to be enough, even counting the old grumblers.
Colonel,difficult start,difficult thread,but you have started and you need some fair weather ahead,so let's get on with it,as napoleon used to say:"Let's get started and we shall see".
Some points:knowing about lord Cochrane,24 carronades are not his style,since he was an expert on naval artillery,eight 45 pounders is what he would have liked instead(this comes out of his discussion with Admiral Miaoulis about the armament of frigate 'Hellas' recorded as always by the Admiral's secretary).The RN experimented with a frigate armed with 24 carronades but the experiment was deemed unsatisfactory.
The choice of Napoleon is very good so long as he acts behind the sceens.
I disagree with Abdul Pasha,on many factual grounds the primary one being that the Turks by 1823 had been defeated in every given battle ground by the Greeks by land and sea, so much so that the sultan,impotent to carry out the war to the subjugation of Greece He asked the assistance of his vassal(!)Mohamed Ali of Egypt.The civil war between Greeks is actually what save him,Ibrahim Pasha would have arrived too late.About the massacres? The Geeks massacred the population of Tripolis(capital of peloponnese) some 20000 Turks;I would say part payment of what these people had suffered for almost four centuries by the Turks....Peloponnesian Muslims were not massacred,for example Lala stood untouched with its Albano-Turkish population unharmed,and other places.The Greeks committed very little against the Muslims compared what the French army of Italy under Napoleon committed against the Italians and yet the Congress of Vienna investigating war crimes in 1815 only found against marshal Davout,the robbing of the banks at Hannover in 1814 to pay his troops.Just to show that 'massacre' those days wasn't what is considered to be by today's standards and many persons in AH frequently do just that.(Judging past actions according to today's standards)
Napoleon would succeed in attracting around him many of his staff and get funding from Bonapartists in the mainland.
The horses can be used to form dragoon units and Napoleon's staff can procure carbins for that cavalry;decommissioned pieces of artillery(before the Valee system)that were still more modern than the turkish artillery,could be filtered out of France;
Napoleon has four years to prepare whatever the Thread wishes him to prepare,unseen!.All contents of his ships and the men can be conveniently lost in castles and war towers in Mani(mountain aerea in south-western Peloponnese) until such time as the revolution starts,and many more of his veterans could arrive there.
Despite our friend's Abdul'assurances that no muslim warlord would co-operate with the Greeks I will point out one,the most important who would:Ali Pasha Tepelenli of Ioannina
arga was then in French hands and Bonapartists served there.Many Greek war captains that were members of 'Filiki Etaireia'served with Ali Pasha and when later he revolted against the Sultan these Greeks fought against the Turks.Here comes the part of the French and others:their mission Colonel? to destroy Hursid Pasha Kioutachi who was besieging Ioannina.Easy to do with the assistance of Ali's army and the Greeks there.That is the first objective!The Greeks will manage in Peloponnese without assistance as they actually did.Most important!Napoleon must be unseen until the first loan to the Greek gov.at Nafplion is given by the English banks in 1822.But many events will take place until then.Bear in mind That Cochrane cannot and should not command the Greek navy that remained undefeated throughout the long years of the revolution and through countles engagements and sea battles.
Any help you wish to have regarding sources and facts please sent me a message.
Regards,
Cimon
Last edited:
There was a story on Paradox where Napoleon became Emperor of Louisiana. It was underwhelming, because he died a few years later without doing much at all.
Is that what you think the Austrians would do? I think that the Austrians would be very happy to see Napoleon crowning himself king of the Helenes;
because in such a case Napoleon's son with Marie Louise shall be the only legitimate heir to the Greek crown,and Greece becomes part of the Austrian empire without a shot being fired! Would it surprise anyone that such action would spell the destruction of the Ottoman state and its substitution by a Byzantine(but in truth Austrian) empire before the first half of the 19th century?Prince Metternich would never
miss such a golden opportunity.
Last edited:
What golden opportunity? For the House of Bonaparte to (if successful) set up an independent kingdom? That's not good news for Austria and Metternich, that's bad news. And him toppling the Ottoman Empire and setting up more than just Greece is even worse.
An idependent kindom yes,but having as a crown prince an Austrian subject.Napoleon will not probably have the time to consolidate his kingdom and wage another war against the ottomans,but his son will.
He is only an Austrian subject as Duke of Reichstadt. Not for Greece, which remains outside the Austrian Empire. So Austria gains nothing from this except seeing him as - if all goes right for Napoleon - king of an independent realm, instead of merely holding an all but honorary title.
And Napoleon II waging war on the Ottomans meaning the Ottoman Empire is demolished is . . .
Improbable, to say the least.
Even assuming he doesn't get tuberculous as in OTL.