WI: Ottoman victory at Malta (1565)

[GauchoBadger]

The failed ottoman siege of Malta was the turning point of the ottomans' expansion into the mediterranean. The siege indirectly led to the battle of Lepanto in 1571, which knocked the ottomans for good out of the mediterranean islands. Previous conquests into locations like Corsica and Nice, at one point led by Hayreddin "Red Beard" Pasha (often regarded as one of the best naval commanders in history), were surprisingly successful up until this point.
But what if the ottomans had won the siege, and managed to not decline in naval power?
How different would the expansion of the empire be? Would they be more european or mediterranean focused, leaving Mesopotamia to the persians?
Which territories will the ottomans be able to hold on to? Sardinia? Corsica? Even Sicily?
What happens to Egypt? Will the ottomans be forced into keeping a lighter hand on the territory if they want to focus in other locations?

 

[GauchoBadger]

Bump Pasha.

GauchoBadger

 

[Avrorrange]

The failed ottoman siege of Malta was the turning point of the ottomans' expansion into the mediterranean. The siege indirectly led to the battle of Lepanto in 1571, which knocked the ottomans for good out of the mediterranean islands. Previous conquests into locations like Corsica and Nice, at one point led by Hayreddin "Red Beard" Pasha (often regarded as one of the best naval commanders in history), were surprisingly successful up until this point.
But what if the ottomans had won the siege, and managed to not decline in naval power?
How different would the expansion of the empire be? Would they be more european or mediterranean focused, leaving Mesopotamia to the persians?
Which territories will the ottomans be able to hold on to? Sardinia? Corsica? Even Sicily?
What happens to Egypt? Will the ottomans be forced into keeping a lighter hand on the territory if they want to focus in other locations?

The Ottomans didn't decline as a naval power after Lepanto.They actually rebuilt a navy rapidly after Lepanto and in a much bigger scale.

 

[Ameck16]

The Ottomans didn't decline as a naval power after Lepanto.They actually rebuilt a navy rapidly after Lepanto and in a much bigger scale.

But the did lose all their core officers. After lepanto the ottoman navy was like a Ferrari withou an engine.

 

[GauchoBadger]

The Ottomans didn't decline as a naval power after Lepanto.They actually rebuilt a navy rapidly after Lepanto and in a much bigger scale.

...i hear that the christian europeans had already managed to improve their navies to a significant point at Lepanto.

 

[Avrorrange]

...i hear that the christian europeans had already managed to improve their navies to a significant point at Lepanto.

And the Christian designs were rapidly copied.

 

[GauchoBadger]

And the Christian designs were rapidly copied.

...but even if the ottoman navy was always a force to be reckoned with, why didn't the ottomans make any further attempts at mediterranean conquest after Lepanto?

 

[Avrorrange]

...but even if the ottoman navy was always a force to be reckoned with, why didn't the ottomans make any further attempts at mediterranean conquest after Lepanto?

They actually did and did so successfully.Cyprus was taken and a good number of places in North Africa were retaken.

 

[GauchoBadger]

They actually did and did so successfully.Cyprus was taken and a good number of places in North Africa were retaken.

Well, western mediterranean, i mean.
The ottomans had a great chance of success in capturing Sardinia, Malta, and even southern Italy. But why didn't they expand into these regions?
Well, my guess is that they were disencouraged from it by spanish and italian navies.

 

[Avrorrange]

Well, western mediterranean, i mean.
The ottomans had a great chance of success in capturing Sardinia, Malta, and even southern Italy. But why didn't they expand into these regions?
Well, my guess is that they were disencouraged from it by spanish and italian navies.

They were discouraged by the Spanish and Italian navies,but the same thing about be said about the Spanish and Italian navies.After Lepanto,the Christians didn't have any successful venture into the east either,and the objective of the war,Cyprus,was lost.So the won the battle but lost the war.

Also,about Western Mediterranean,the Ottomans retook a good number of areas in North Africa,including Tunis.They are all in the Western Mediterranean.

You also have to take into account that the OE's probably overstretched and they have enemies other than the Spanish and the Italians.

 

[ben0628]

They were discouraged by the Spanish and Italian navies,but the same thing about be said about the Spanish and Italian navies.After Lepanto,the Christians didn't have any successful venture into the east either,and the objective of the war,Cyprus,was lost.So the won the battle but lost the war.

Also,about Western Mediterranean,the Ottomans retook a good number of areas in North Africa,including Tunis.They are all in the Western Mediterranean.

You also have to take into account that the OE's probably overstretched and they have enemies other than the Spanish and the Italians.

I think your missing the point of the op's question. The Ottoman Empire was able to rebuild its navy but was not able to expand out of the Eastern Mediterranean Sea (Tunis being the exception).

Had the Ottomans destroyed the Italian and Spanish Navies and not have to rebuild theirs, how far could they have gone in additional Mediterranean conquests?

Also for the record, Tunis is part of the Central Mediterranean not West and since it's already in Muslim North Africa (which has a land border with the Ottomans), I wouldn't really say that it's reconquest of the Ottomans is a good example of continued Ottoman naval might after Lepanto. The Christian hold over the city wasn't that great and they were bound to lose the city sooner or later.

 

[Avrorrange]

I think your missing the point of the op's question. The Ottoman Empire was able to rebuild its navy but was not able to expand out of the Eastern Mediterranean Sea (Tunis being the exception).

Had the Ottomans destroyed the Italian and Spanish Navies and not have to rebuild theirs, how far could they have gone in additional Mediterranean conquests?

Also for the record, Tunis is part of the Central Mediterranean not West and since it's already in Muslim North Africa (which has a land border with the Ottomans), I wouldn't really say that it's reconquest of the Ottomans is a good example of continued Ottoman naval might after Lepanto. The Christian hold over the city wasn't that great and they were bound to lose the city sooner or later.

I'm not responding to OP's question.I am just questioning his claim that Ottoman naval power declined after Lepanto.

As for Tunis,conquering it would require a navy.It's difficult to conquer cities or fortresses on the coast since they could be resupplied from the sea without a blockade.

 

[Zulfurium]

What about having the Ottomans conquer Malta when they take the Island of Gozo in 1551, the disparity between the Knights and the Ottoman forces at that point was pretty ridiculous. The fortifications were weak or non-existant, the order was extremely weakened, most of the fleet was in Sicily, the Order was tearing itself apart through factionalism etc. It would honestly take very little for the Ottomans to take the Island in 1551.

Tripoli would likely fall soon afterwards. Without Malta it should ease the logistics between North Africa and the rest of the Empire. I think all you would need is for Sinan Pasha and Dragut Reis to get an idea of exactly how weakened the Order is. Another possibility would be for the Ottomans to realize that there were only about a dozen Knights in Mdina.

 

[trajen777]

After Lepanto the Turkish fleet was never the same -- the quality of the ships were very poor being built so fast and the losses of quality seamen took a long time to recover. Increasingly the Westerners use of firepower also gave them a tech advantage.

Galleasses usually carried more sails than true galleys, and were far deadlier; a galley caught broadside lay all but helpless, since coming broadside to a galleass, as with a ship of the line, exposed an attacker to her gunfire. Relatively few galleasses were built — one disadvantage was that, being more reliant on sails, their position at the front of the galley line at the start of a battle could not be guaranteed — but they were used at the Battle of Lepanto in 1571, their firepower helping to win victory for the Holy League fleet, and some sufficiently seaworthy galleasses accompanied the Spanish Armada in 1588 (e.g. La Girona). In the 15th century a type of light galleass, called the frigate, was built in southern European countries to answer the increasing challenge posed by the north African based Barbary pirates in their fast galleys.

As to the battle of Malta i think if they had won but had the appalling losses of 25,000 - 36,000 it would have been a Pyrrhic victory. The distance form their true source of power in Constantinople made holding this outpost that much more difficult. I also thing the Holy League would have gained more support then it did from a Turk victory.

- More ships
- Better crusade on land that could have recaptured Constantinople?

 

[GauchoBadger]

(1)As to the battle of Malta i think if they had won but had the appalling losses of 25,000 - 36,000 it would have been a Pyrrhic victory.
(2)The distance form their true source of power in Constantinople made holding this outpost that much more difficult.
(3)I also thing the Holy League would have gained more support then it did from a Turk victory.
(4) Better crusade on land that could have recaptured Constantinople?

(1) Those thousands of deaths were mostly from the OTL statistics. If the ottomans are quick in defeating the Holy League at the siege, they'll be off with a still substantial ammount of men.
(2) I doubt the ottomans woukd be unable to hold on to Malta. Heck, they held on to Tunisia, which was arguably furer from Constantinople than Malta, i'm pretty sure they'd be able to hold on to even farther territories.
(3) Having yourself proven weak in a defeat is not good PR.
(4) IMO, this one is out of the question unless all of Europe partakes in the crusade. The ottomans held too much strategic land in the balkans, and had a huge land army, supplanting their equally scary navy.