I know this topic has been discussed multiple times before, but, most of the time, i feel like the threads devolve into discussing whether or not the Ottomans would have attacked Germany next, despite their overstretched supply and comms lines.
So, i ask: what if the Ottomans had successfully captured and held Vienna in 1683, repulsing the Habsburg and Polish defending forces?
-Would the Ottomans directly annex Vienna as a province, or would they hand it and its surroundings to Imre Thokoly as another fiefdom for him to play around with? Would Bavaria annex or occupy the remainder of Habsburg Austria?
-What are the effects on the War of The Reunions, that is about to break out in the Habsburg territories west of the Rhine? Seeming as the Habsburgs are now weakened and busy dealing with the Turks, would Louis XIV seize the opportunity and launch larger raids on Habsburg territory near France?
-What are the effects on the Spanish Succession War? I guess that, with less of an empire to call upon, the Habsburgs won't even contest the Bourbon accession to the Spanish throne.
-Can the Crimean Khanate survive?
-What happens to Carniola, Styria, and Carinthia? Those provinces would seem vulnerable to Turkish raids.
 
I know this topic has been discussed multiple times before, but, most of the time, i feel like the threads devolve into discussing whether or not the Ottomans would have attacked Germany next, despite their overstretched supply and comms lines.
So, i ask: what if the Ottomans had successfully captured and held Vienna in 1683, repulsing the Habsburg and Polish defending forces?
-Would the Ottomans directly annex Vienna as a province, or would they hand it and its surroundings to Imre Thokoly as another fiefdom for him to play around with? Would Bavaria annex or occupy the remainder of Habsburg Austria?
-What are the effects on the War of The Reunions, that is about to break out in the Habsburg territories west of the Rhine? Seeming as the Habsburgs are now weakened and busy dealing with the Turks, would Louis XIV seize the opportunity and launch larger raids on Habsburg territory near France?
-What are the effects on the Spanish Succession War? I guess that, with less of an empire to call upon, the Habsburgs won't even contest the Bourbon accession to the Spanish throne.
-Can the Crimean Khanate survive?
-What happens to Carniola, Styria, and Carinthia? Those provinces would seem vulnerable to Turkish raids.

I can answer a few.

If the Ottomans won the second siege of Vienna, they would probably hand it's surroundings to Imre Thokoly. The Ottomans after this have two options. 1, they do a mass project of secularization, to encompass as much of the empire under control as possible, or 2 they divide the empire into a few lose states that report to the Sultan. After Vienna, the Ottomans technically could keep expanding into Europe, but they probably won't want to. They will probably seek to industrialize. IIRC one of the downfall players of the Ottoman Empire was that they remained conservative for a long time, as there was nowhere to expand.

The Ottomans after this might seek to ally themselves with other European powers. A Franco-Ottoman alliance might be sped up, but they might ally with Muscovy against Poland, and Lithuania.

The Crimean Khanate is difficult to know, as the Ottomans have the Bospherous, they don't really need to control the entire Black Sea, but might seek to grant the Russians a few key ports, as the Russians could be a rival in the Black Sea in the future, giving the economic measures to the Russians might stop a aggressive Russia.
 
I know this topic has been discussed multiple times before, but, most of the time, i feel like the threads devolve into discussing whether or not the Ottomans would have attacked Germany next, despite their overstretched supply and comms lines.
So, i ask: what if the Ottomans had successfully captured and held Vienna in 1683, repulsing the Habsburg and Polish defending forces?
-Would the Ottomans directly annex Vienna as a province, or would they hand it and its surroundings to Imre Thokoly as another fiefdom for him to play around with? Would Bavaria annex or occupy the remainder of Habsburg Austria?
-What are the effects on the War of The Reunions, that is about to break out in the Habsburg territories west of the Rhine? Seeming as the Habsburgs are now weakened and busy dealing with the Turks, would Louis XIV seize the opportunity and launch larger raids on Habsburg territory near France?
-What are the effects on the Spanish Succession War? I guess that, with less of an empire to call upon, the Habsburgs won't even contest the Bourbon accession to the Spanish throne.
-Can the Crimean Khanate survive?
-What happens to Carniola, Styria, and Carinthia? Those provinces would seem vulnerable to Turkish raids.

- Vienna would be Imre Thokoly's responsibility, the Ottomans would only care about the defeat of the Habsburgs.

Bavaria can't annex Austria as the Habsburgs are still alive and probably settled in Prague if Vienna falls. For Bavaria to take Austria it requires an immediate French intervention by latest... 1685.

- France would most definitely declare war and advance on the Rhine by no later than 1686

- a non existent Austria means Francr will dominate if Charles II dies. Austria did a lot to check the French. If Austria exists then they have less resources than in OTL 1700. But then again they also don't have the Kuruc uprising. I'd see France having an easier time.

- Crimean Khanate survived another century after the Ottomans lost at Vienna. If Austria is out as a danger in Hungary then the Ottomans have more men to send to the Ukraine. I'd expect the Ottomans to to interfere in PLC affairs to keep the Russians away. So the CK would likely see the 19th century at least

- Turkish raids on Austria will be either small or non existent by the late 17th century. In order to keep the Germans out of Hungary it might be better not to raid Austria. Slovenia and Croatia is a different matter. In OTL Pashas of Bosnia usually raid Croatia but then again that was the 16th and early 17th century.

I hope you have your answer :)
 
Last edited:
I can answer a few.

If the Ottomans won the second siege of Vienna, they would probably hand it's surroundings to Imre Thokoly. The Ottomans after this have two options. 1, they do a mass project of secularization, to encompass as much of the empire under control as possible, or 2 they divide the empire into a few lose states that report to the Sultan. After Vienna, the Ottomans technically could keep expanding into Europe, but they probably won't want to. They will probably seek to industrialize. IIRC one of the downfall players of the Ottoman Empire was that they remained conservative for a long time, as there was nowhere to expand.

The Ottomans after this might seek to ally themselves with other European powers. A Franco-Ottoman alliance might be sped up, but they might ally with Muscovy against Poland, and Lithuania.

The Crimean Khanate is difficult to know, as the Ottomans have the Bospherous, they don't really need to control the entire Black Sea, but might seek to grant the Russians a few key ports, as the Russians could be a rival in the Black Sea in the future, giving the economic measures to the Russians might stop a aggressive Russia.

I noticed some things or two:
- I don't understand with what you mean with mass secularisation?

- Not happened in 1590s, not happened in 1682, not happening if Vienna falls. I agree that the empire is too large with Hungary but division is not an option.

- I agree with not expanding anymore. Reaching Hungary was already a pain in the ass. The last regions in Europe to take are Dalmatia, Ionian Islands... and maybe Malta. Depends on the strenght of the empire. Even in the 18th century Knights of St. John were a pain in the ass for Muslim shipping.

- In what way did they remain conservative? As early as the 1620s there were efforts tp modernise. The conservative faction was the Janissary Corps due to the large force with a lot of benefits. Since 1699 there were attempts to reform by the Sultans up until the end. The only two not doing it was Mustafa IV being against the Nizam-I Cedid reforms and Murad V for his 3 months rule which can be neglected. And having nowhere to expand did not keep them conservative. The Tulip Era is the best example.

- They need to control it, directly or Vassal rule by the Tatars. When Russia built its fleet there the Ottomans were punched too much by them. And giving them a port is no option either. That is angering the Crimean Tatars while helping the Russians even though they will still hate you. Hitting yourself twice with one stone.

An alliance with Muscovy sounds nice and all but it isn't in reality. Muscovy is a potential superpower and PLC is already too unstable to be a threat.
 
I know this topic has been discussed multiple times before, but, most of the time, i feel like the threads devolve into discussing whether or not the Ottomans would have attacked Germany next, despite their overstretched supply and comms lines.
So, i ask: what if the Ottomans had successfully captured and held Vienna in 1683, repulsing the Habsburg and Polish defending forces?
-Would the Ottomans directly annex Vienna as a province, or would they hand it and its surroundings to Imre Thokoly as another fiefdom for him to play around with? Would Bavaria annex or occupy the remainder of Habsburg Austria?
-What are the effects on the War of The Reunions, that is about to break out in the Habsburg territories west of the Rhine? Seeming as the Habsburgs are now weakened and busy dealing with the Turks, would Louis XIV seize the opportunity and launch larger raids on Habsburg territory near France?
-What are the effects on the Spanish Succession War? I guess that, with less of an empire to call upon, the Habsburgs won't even contest the Bourbon accession to the Spanish throne.
-Can the Crimean Khanate survive?
-What happens to Carniola, Styria, and Carinthia? Those provinces would seem vulnerable to Turkish raids.

1. Imre gets to run the region as a tributary state, though as a strategic and vulnerable frontier of the Empire he probably gets a special "marcher lord" deal similar to the Crimean Khanate; having to send in less hard currency and rather fulfill his duties by providing specialized troops (Artillerymen?) and garrisoning assigned fortifications to protect against Polish and Cossacks raids. Without Vienna, the rest of Habsburg Austria is probably not considered tenable: at least so far as the Danubian basin is concerned, and so will be signed away in the peace to keep defendable borders. A caveat of this is probably that Belgrade either loses a solid chunk of its importance, or the Ottomans change their standing army policy to either keep two larger field military presences (one deeper into the Danube/Balkans, either Belgrade or a major Hungarian city) or rebase the main army while forming a new system of "Imperial Guard" units in Constantinople.

2. France is certainly on a lot stronger footing, and are in a great position to seize key territories in the Low Countries and Rhineland to make a powerful sweep at the Netherlands. However, France is now the Big Bad, which means you also see a strong coalition coming together to contain them.

3. They would, if only for the same reason France opposed the Hapsburgs whenever they could: nobody wants a single alliance/dynasty dominating Europe and rendering themselves impotent.

4. Very yes.

5. Rump state or see 1
 
Are they smart enough to stop at Vienna or does the next battle where they are overextended become the big Christian victory?
 
Are they smart enough to stop at Vienna or does the next battle where they are overextended become the big Christian victory?

Yes they are. In fact the Ottomans basically physically can't march a full army any further than Vienna and back during the campaign season if they leave from the Bosphorus (as per their basic army organization), which unintentionally protects them from making tactical blunders of that nature without being absolute logistical imbeciles
 
I know this topic has been discussed multiple times before, but, most of the time, i feel like the threads devolve into discussing whether or not the Ottomans would have attacked Germany next, despite their overstretched supply and comms lines.
So, i ask: what if the Ottomans had successfully captured and held Vienna in 1683, repulsing the Habsburg and Polish defending forces?
-Would the Ottomans directly annex Vienna as a province, or would they hand it and its surroundings to Imre Thokoly as another fiefdom for him to play around with?


All this assumes that with capture of Vienna is war is over. However, this hardly was the case. Even before arrival of Sobiessky there was a sizable imperial army (47,000 Germans and Austrians with some 112 guns vs. 27,000 Poles with 28 guns) led by extremely talented general, Charles of Lorraine, who in OTL was responsible for kicking (after Vienna) the Ottomans out of most of Hungary. After capturing Vienna Kara Mustafa would only find himself in a more difficult strategic position because he'd have to leave a substantial garrison there weakening force available for the field operations. The Ottoman idea was to leave Vienna to Emeric Thököly as a mini-kingdom but such a kingdom would exist for only as long as a big Ottoman army is standing somewhere nearby: the city with the fortifications destroyed by the siege would be indefensible and, while seemingly being a reasonably good cavalry general, Thököly was not very lucky as independent commander and neither did he have a strong military force of his own.

But Kara Mustafa could not either advance from Vienna or to stay in it: the whole idea behind this campaign was a speedy SURRENDER of the city with a contribution received to fill sultan's (rather depleted) treasury. While the Janissary and Sipahi had been more or less controllable (the long campaign would mean problems for the Sipahi who needed to supervise their estates), relations with the Khan had been almost completely broken and loyalty of the Moldavian and Wallachian troops was a big question mark. So Kara Mustafa would have the following options:

(a) To leave a small garrison in Vienna and try to engage Imperial-Polish army in a field battle. His chances NOT to lose were low enough even for him to recognize the fact (otherwise he'd try to engage Charles of Lorraine before arrival of the Poles).

(b) Take whatever is possible from Vienna and march back leaving Thököly with a small force to defend the city. Vienna would be lost within a very short time and Kara Mustafa would be executed.

(c) Try to fight a prolonged campaign using Vienna as his base. While seems more or less reasonable, it was hardly practical in Mustafa's specific situation: probably the Tatars would leave (such a campaign did not promise any loot), Sipahi could not stay forever, there would be serious supply problems (meaning revolt of the Janissary).

Would Bavaria annex or occupy the remainder of Habsburg Austria?

No. Besides the fact that the loss of Vienna would not mean the end of Hapsburgs, the general state of minds in Europe would not allow such a thing: even Louis XIV was forced to make an armistice with the Hapsburgs instead of using the Ottoman offensive for attacking them in a rear.

-What are the effects on the Spanish Succession War? I guess that, with less of an empire to call upon, the Habsburgs won't even contest the Bourbon accession to the Spanish throne.

Only if they lose the war, which is not in your scenario. :)

Temporary loss of Vienna meant very little (Mattias Corvinus hold it for a while, so what?) and the imperial resources had been far from exhausted: in OTL they were adequate (with the Poles leaving to fight their own war) for throwing Ottomans out of all Hungary and Banat.

-Can the Crimean Khanate survive?

Depending on what you mean. It hardly could survive forever: as soon as Russia became powerful enough it was doomed. But why wouldn't it survive in a near future?
 
All this assumes that with capture of Vienna is war is over. However, this hardly was the case. Even before arrival of Sobiessky there was a sizable imperial army (47,000 Germans and Austrians with some 112 guns vs. 27,000 Poles with 28 guns) led by extremely talented general, Charles of Lorraine, who in OTL was responsible for kicking (after Vienna) the Ottomans out of most of Hungary. After capturing Vienna Kara Mustafa would only find himself in a more difficult strategic position because he'd have to leave a substantial garrison there weakening force available for the field operations. The Ottoman idea was to leave Vienna to Emeric Thököly as a mini-kingdom but such a kingdom would exist for only as long as a big Ottoman army is standing somewhere nearby: the city with the fortifications destroyed by the siege would be indefensible and, while seemingly being a reasonably good cavalry general, Thököly was not very lucky as independent commander and neither did he have a strong military force of his own.

But Kara Mustafa could not either advance from Vienna or to stay in it: the whole idea behind this campaign was a speedy SURRENDER of the city with a contribution received to fill sultan's (rather depleted) treasury. While the Janissary and Sipahi had been more or less controllable (the long campaign would mean problems for the Sipahi who needed to supervise their estates), relations with the Khan had been almost completely broken and loyalty of the Moldavian and Wallachian troops was a big question mark. So Kara Mustafa would have the following options:

(a) To leave a small garrison in Vienna and try to engage Imperial-Polish army in a field battle. His chances NOT to lose were low enough even for him to recognize the fact (otherwise he'd try to engage Charles of Lorraine before arrival of the Poles).

(b) Take whatever is possible from Vienna and march back leaving Thököly with a small force to defend the city. Vienna would be lost within a very short time and Kara Mustafa would be executed.

(c) Try to fight a prolonged campaign using Vienna as his base. While seems more or less reasonable, it was hardly practical in Mustafa's specific situation: probably the Tatars would leave (such a campaign did not promise any loot), Sipahi could not stay forever, there would be serious supply problems (meaning revolt of the Janissary).



No. Besides the fact that the loss of Vienna would not mean the end of Hapsburgs, the general state of minds in Europe would not allow such a thing: even Louis XIV was forced to make an armistice with the Hapsburgs instead of using the Ottoman offensive for attacking them in a rear.



Only if they lose the war, which is not in your scenario. :)

Temporary loss of Vienna meant very little (Mattias Corvinus hold it for a while, so what?) and the imperial resources had been far from exhausted: in OTL they were adequate (with the Poles leaving to fight their own war) for throwing Ottomans out of all Hungary and Banat.



Depending on what you mean. It hardly could survive forever: as soon as Russia became powerful enough it was doomed. But why wouldn't it survive in a near future?

Important: The Habsburgs used additional troops from the rest of the HRE as well. The loss of Vienna might not have a direct effect but it gives France a signal. And that is where the trouble begins.

The Ottomans were caught between two fires. The Polish-German relief forces and the Viennese garrison. Normally it isn't too nice to be caught by a relief force while besieging a city for several months. If victorious, there is no being caught besieging and Kara Mustafa can focus his Army against the Relief force of Sobieski. That is a whole different situation than Sobieski having the Ottomans caught during the siege and Murad Giray not preventing the attack of the relief forces. That as well would be gone.

Kara Mustafa was a part of the Koprulu family. Able family with great Grand Viziers. Even the Pasha of Buda was appealing for his life to the Sultan quouting he was a very able man.
 
Last edited:
Important: The Habsburgs used additional troops from the rest of the HRE as well. The loss of Vienna might not have a direct effect but it gives France a signal. And that is where the trouble begins.

The PR around the Ottoman offensive was such that Louis XIV could not continue fighting against the Hapsburgs: it was inconvenient for him to act openly against the HRE when there was the Ottoman advance endangering the whole Europe and blahblahblah (one of the cases of a very effective propaganda). These considerations forced him to stop bombardment of Luxemburg in March 1682 (War of the Reunions) and withdrew his troops. The Ottoman defeat at Vienna simplified his situation allowing him to renew the military activities in November of 1683 but Ottoman victory would not.

The Ottomans were caught between two fires. The Polish-German relief forces and the Viennese garrison. Normally it isn't too nice to be caught by a relief force while besieging a city for several months.

Yes, this is a very difficult situation for the besiegers. Gustav Adolph had been forced to abandon siege of Nuremberg after failing at Alte Viste, Charles XII defeated Russians at Narva, Prince Eugene defeated French at Turin, Frederick II had to abandon siege of Prague after defeat at Kolin, Hunyadi defeated Sultan Mehmed II at Belgrade, Poles defeated Russians besieging Smolensk during Smolensk War and the list is going on.

If victorious, there is no being caught besieging and Kara Mustafa can focus his Army against the Relief force of Sobieski. That is a whole different situation than Sobieski having the Ottomans caught during the siege and Murad Giray not preventing the attack of the relief forces. That as well would be gone.

Of course, Mustafa's situation would be better but not too much if we ignore obviously inflated numbers of the Ottoman army and keep in mind that part of what would left were of a questionable loyalty, like Moldavian and Walachian contingents. Even loyalty of the Crimean Tatars was a big question: Khan detested Kara Mustafa and, as you remarked, did not even try prevent the Poles from advancing toward Vienna. Not to mention that by that time the Ottoman ability to fight a successful field battle against the high quality Western army of approximately the same side and competently led was, shall we say, "limited". And, taking into an account that opponent had not one but TWO very competent commanders (who managed to cooperate with each other) in charge, these chances would be quite low.

Kara Mustafa was a part of the Koprulu family. Able family with great Grand Viziers. Even the Pasha of Buda was appealing for his life to the Sultan quouting he was a very able man.

But his abilities were not necessarily adequate for the task. From the very beginning he deviated from an accepted (by Sultan) safer plan of the campaign (capturing fortifications of the Hapsburg Hungary) in favor of more risky attack on Vienna mostly because he expected getting a big contribution if city surrenders. When he was besieging the city, he did not bother to create an outer line of the fortifications, which was more or less customary at that time. Then, even with the opponent's attack developing, he kept quite a few Janissary in the trenches planning attack on the city while being himself under attack. Most of these Janissary had been surrounded and slaughtered when the attackers broke into the camp. He did not even try to concentrate his troops for a powerful counterattack while forces of the Holy League still were separated: units of his infantry were trying to stop the Polish advance from down from Kahlenberg but this was just a passive defense.
 
Top