Would the Ottoman Empire have still gotten expelled from the Balkans and North Africa if it wasn't for the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars?

WolfBear

Well-known member
Would the Ottoman Empire have still gotten expelled from the Balkans and North Africa if it wasn't for the French Revolutionary Wars and Napoleonic Wars occurring beforehand? In real life, most of the Ottoman Empire's territorial losses in the Balkans and North Africa only occurred after the end of the Napoleonic Wars:

KAPPA3033527.jpg


On the flip side, though, there were already unrealized discussions to expel the Ottoman Empire from Europe even before the French Revolution:


Anyway, what do you think?
 

stevep

Well-known member
Would the Ottoman Empire have still gotten expelled from the Balkans and North Africa if it wasn't for the French Revolutionary Wars and Napoleonic Wars occurring beforehand? In real life, most of the Ottoman Empire's territorial losses in the Balkans and North Africa only occurred after the end of the Napoleonic Wars:

KAPPA3033527.jpg


On the flip side, though, there were already unrealized discussions to expel the Ottoman Empire from Europe even before the French Revolution:


Anyway, what do you think?

I would agree with HW on this. There was already a growing technological and social advantage in the west over a more moribund Ottoman state. Your map I think is inaccurate as Croatia and Slovenia were already in Austrian lands and of course before this the Turks had lost all of Hungary to Austria.

Part of the problem was it was a monolithic state with little scope for discussion and new ideas to be accepted. For instance printing was very tightly restricted which kept the storage and spreading of knowledge limited. Also there seems to have been an issue that rulers started killing off all their brothers - to avoid civil wars - and raising their children in the harem which limited heirs knowledge of the wider world. Also even before Napoleon's time as well as growing Christian desires for better treatment there was widespread corruption and factionalism with Egypt being increasingly a region outside real rather than token Ottoman control.

Russia was growing stronger and while it was heavily involved in European politics it was also determined to gain control of the straits and sometimes as an excuse for this, sometimes with real belief sought to 'liberate' their Orthodox brethren. Also France retained at least theoretical interests in parts of the Levant. It basically needed the growing strength of one or more powerful European states to be free to support their interests inside the empire, either because there were no great internal crisis inside Europe or no European great powers willing to defend the empire, as Britain and sometimes other powers were willing to do for much of the 19thC.

Steve
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Yes, the Balkan Christians were starting to stir and the Austro-Russians were becoming increasingly serious about dealing with the Turks to their South.

I would agree with HW on this. There was already a growing technological and social advantage in the west over a more moribund Ottoman state. Your map I think is inaccurate as Croatia and Slovenia were already in Austrian lands and of course before this the Turks had lost all of Hungary to Austria.

Part of the problem was it was a monolithic state with little scope for discussion and new ideas to be accepted. For instance printing was very tightly restricted which kept the storage and spreading of knowledge limited. Also there seems to have been an issue that rulers started killing off all their brothers - to avoid civil wars - and raising their children in the harem which limited heirs knowledge of the wider world. Also even before Napoleon's time as well as growing Christian desires for better treatment there was widespread corruption and factionalism with Egypt being increasingly a region outside real rather than token Ottoman control.

Russia was growing stronger and while it was heavily involved in European politics it was also determined to gain control of the straits and sometimes as an excuse for this, sometimes with real belief sought to 'liberate' their Orthodox brethren. Also France retained at least theoretical interests in parts of the Levant. It basically needed the growing strength of one or more powerful European states to be free to support their interests inside the empire, either because there were no great internal crisis inside Europe or no European great powers willing to defend the empire, as Britain and sometimes other powers were willing to do for much of the 19thC.

Steve

What about having the Ottoman Empire still eventually get expelled from North Africa (the Maghreb and Egypt) in this TL?
 

Buba

A total creep
Would the Ottoman Empire have still gotten expelled from the Balkans and North Africa if it wasn't for the French Revolutionary Wars and Napoleonic Wars occurring beforehand?
Yes.
Your map I think is inaccurate as Croatia and Slovenia were already in Austrian lands and of course before this the Turks had lost all of Hungary to Austria.
That map sucks. Besides being innacurate it misleadingly does not differentiate between vassal states and core territories.
 

Buba

A total creep
Same.
In OTL the Ottomans were kicked out from most of those places by ... Egypt. Or Saudis. Only European intervention kept them going.
Heck, without the Concert of Europe not stepping in Muhammad Ali of Egypt could had been the new Sultan/the Grand Vezir and Protector of the People and their Pets for Life.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Same.
In OTL the Ottomans were kicked out from most of those places by ... Egypt. Or Saudis. Only European intervention kept them going.
Heck, without the Concert of Europe not stepping in Muhammad Ali of Egypt could had been the new Sultan/the Grand Vezir and Protector of the People and their Pets for Life.

I'd like a three-way Ottoman partition, frankly:

-Egypt, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and possibly the Hejaz become a part of Muhammad Ali's Neo-Pharaonic Egyptian Empire
-Mesopotamia (Iraq) becomes independent
-Turkey remains the rump Ottoman Empire
 

stevep

Well-known member
I'd like a three-way Ottoman partition, frankly:

-Egypt, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and possibly the Hejaz become a part of Muhammad Ali's Neo-Pharaonic Egyptian Empire
-Mesopotamia (Iraq) becomes independent
-Turkey remains the rump Ottoman Empire

I think that three way partition, if there had been no or a different European intervention or without it there was enough Turkish strength/influence to prevent a total Egyptian domination - possibly the rump Turkish state becomes a Russian subject which I have used in one TL myself. ;) However I think in that sort of situation Mesopotamia would come under Iranian domination.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
I think that three way partition, if there had been no or a different European intervention or without it there was enough Turkish strength/influence to prevent a total Egyptian domination - possibly the rump Turkish state becomes a Russian subject which I have used in one TL myself. ;) However I think in that sort of situation Mesopotamia would come under Iranian domination.

"Subject" meaning a part of Russia or a Russian vassal? Because the former sounds more interesting than the latter, frankly.
 

History Learner

Well-known member
Interesting fact: Before the muhacirs fled, emigrated, or were expelled en masse from the Balkans in the 19th and early 20th centuries, the Balkans were more Muslim than they are right now:


balkans1877popc-gif.45393

I know that map comes from a Ottomanphile from 2008, IIRC there's been a lot of pushback on it since then based on other sources and newer research.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Last edited:

stevep

Well-known member
"Subject" meaning a part of Russia or a Russian vassal? Because the former sounds more interesting than the latter, frankly.

Well its a scenario I have with the initial PoD in 1809. In the 1940's Britain is involved in a two front war with France and the US and Germany split with conflict between Austria and Prussia and their respective allies so when Muhammad Ali starts stomping through the Ottoman empire Russia is the only power in the position to aid them.

Technically the Ottoman empire is an informal protectrate of Russia, although losing most of its lands south of Anatolia to Egypt and Mesopotamia [Iraq] is in chaos with Russia, at the length of its reach clashing with Persian and local groups. It does mean imperial overstretch for Russia, especially since maintaining formal Ottoman rule in the Balkans poisons Russian relations with local Orthodox groups.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member

raharris1973

Well-known member
Well its a scenario I have with the initial PoD in 1809. In the 1940's Britain is involved in a two front war with France and the US and Germany split with conflict between Austria and Prussia and their respective allies so when Muhammad Ali starts stomping through the Ottoman empire Russia is the only power in the position to aid them.

Technically the Ottoman empire is an informal protectrate of Russia, although losing most of its lands south of Anatolia to Egypt and Mesopotamia [Iraq] is in chaos with Russia, at the length of its reach clashing with Persian and local groups. It does mean imperial overstretch for Russia, especially since maintaining formal Ottoman rule in the Balkans poisons Russian relations with local Orthodox groups.

Where is this scenario/timeline written down?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top