@Earl Marshal This TL isn't really my thing but I appreciate how you treat the Ottomans fairly and don't descend into the same lame cliches and hate that are usually the norm. Especially while doing a TL on "the other side".
Thank you. Both sides were responsible for their fair share of unfavorable moments, although the Philhellenic Press in the West really downplayed a lot of the Greeks negative actions in the war while playing up the Ottoman's atrocities. They were complex people living in a complex time and while a lot of things they did can't be justified under any circumstance, it isn't fair to paint the Ottomans as this purely evil power and the Greeks as this innocent little state. That said, this timeline is generally going to follow the point of view of the Greeks, but in the future I will explore the events happening elsewhere in this TTL's world.@Earl Marshal This TL isn't really my thing but I appreciate how you treat the Ottomans fairly and don't descend into the same lame cliches and hate that are usually the norm. Especially while doing a TL on "the other side".
Thank you. Both sides were responsible for their fair share of unfavorable moments, although the Philhellenic Press in the West really downplayed a lot of the Greeks negative actions in the war while playing up the Ottoman's atrocities. They were complex people living in a complex time and while a lot of things they did can't be justified under any circumstance, it isn't fair to paint the Ottomans as this purely evil power and the Greeks as this innocent little state. That said, this timeline is generally going to follow the point of view of the Greeks, but in the future I will explore the events happening elsewhere in this TTL's world.
I considered a few different POD's originally with Mustafa IV successfully killing Mahmud II in 1808 being one of them. It is a very interesting POD with a lot of possibilities and it would obviously result in a very different situation from OTL, especially in regards to the Greeks. I guess you could say I was being lazy or unimaginative in choosing the POD that I did, as it allowed me to follow the events of the OTL war, like Dervenakia, the First Siege of Missolonghi, the 2nd National Assembly, the Greek Civil Wars, etc with a few distinct differences from OTL. That said it would be interesting to see what effects this would have on the end of the Napoleonic Wars an the eventual Greek War of Independence.Did you consider doing a "Mahmud II dies along with Selim III" PoD before deciding on this one? I've seen some speculation that this could have netted the Greeks Istanbul.
Napoleon II surviving longer would definitely make for some interesting butterflies. Currently though, I'm using a bit of a butterfly net when it comes to divergences outside of Greece unless something directly effects it, a la Lord Byron surviving. Once the war ends I will be more generous with the butterflies for the rest of the world, so it is certainly possible something could happen that results in Napoleon II living longer than OTL considering he died in July 1832. That said, his death was very soon after the end of the war, so I would need to find a reasonable solution as to why he doesn't die in TTL.Might Napoleon II survive in this timeline? That might make for an interesting little butterfly
I considered a few different POD's originally with Mustafa IV successfully killing Mahmud II in 1808 being one of them. It is a very interesting POD with a lot of possibilities and it would obviously result in a very different situation from OTL, especially in regards to the Greeks. It would be interesting to see what effects this would have on the end of the Napoleonic Wars and the eventual Greek War of Independence.
I'm not as familiar with the Russian Serbian alliance proposal in 1807 as I am with their later relations, but I am pretty sure a POD resulting in the death of Mahmud II in 1808 would have some major effects on the outcome of the Serbian revolution. If Mustafa is the only remaining heir of Osman, as he intended, then bad times are ahead for the Ottoman Empire. He was strongly opposed to Selim's reforms and actively worked to roll them back in the brief time he was Sultan, so I would expect this to continue under his reign unless he finds a backbone, which seems unlikely. He was also more or less a puppet of the Janissaries and effectively did what they told him to do or else. At the very least I would expect some sort of civil war or civil unrest across a wide swath of the Empire.If you don't mind me being a shillaber, such a POD could possibly be combined with one regarding the First Serbian Uprising, specifically the failure of the signing of the Russian-Serbian Alliance of 1807 and the successful signing of Ičko's Peace with the Ottomans. Granted, just saying that makes it seem simple (and believe me, it isn't), but the knock-on effect from its signing, as well as Mahmud II's execution, would prove to be a rather intriguing scenario, if I may say so myself.
I'm not as familiar with the Russian Serbian alliance proposal in 1807 as I am with their later relations, but I am pretty sure a POD resulting in the death of Mahmud II in 1808 would have some major effects on the outcome of the Serbian revolution. If Mustafa is the only remaining heir of Osman, as he intended, then bad times are ahead for the Ottoman Empire. He was strongly opposed to Selim's reforms and actively worked to roll them back in the brief time he was Sultan, so I would expect this to continue under his reign unless he finds a backbone, which seems unlikely. He was also more or less a puppet of the Janissaries and effectively did what they told him to do or else. At the very least I would expect some sort of civil war or civil unrest across a wide swath of the Empire.
The Russo-Serbian alliance was merely to have another front south of the Danube for the Ottomans. Russia pressured the Serbs to keep up the rebellion instead of peace out.
Mustafa IV was an opportunist. A guy who would change his principles just to get the throne. And he did it. If he really did kill Mahmud II along with Selim III there is no telling what would happen. Most likely bad things. But then again, Alemdar Mustafa Pasha could force Mustafa IV as a puppet as well. He had the forces in the capital during the (attempt) execution. He controled the capital and could have his (more chaotic) Auspicious Event. And then wait until Mustafa IV gets his male heir. Why give up when you defeated most of your enemies?
Your statement about the Russo-Serbian alliance is interesting. Do you have a source I could look into?
I agree that we can't really know if Mustafa would continue being anti-reformist. After all, Mahmud II himself wasn't super friendly towards reform during the first year of his accession. However, I don't see how Alemdar could have beat the Janissaries when his forces were tied up fighting the Russians. That's why he couldn't prevent his OTL murder after all. Though this is getting somewhat off-topic...
The Russo-Serbian alliance was merely to have another front south of the Danube for the Ottomans. Russia pressured the Serbs to keep up the rebellion instead of peace out.
Your statement about the Russo-Serbian alliance is interesting. Do you have a source I could look into?
I'll look at the source four you if I find it again
The reason Alemdar Mustafa was able to move against Mustafa IV was a truce with the Russians for some time.
The Russo-Serbian alliance was merely to have another front south of the Danube for the Ottomans. Russia pressured the Serbs to keep up the rebellion instead of peace out.
Mustafa IV was an opportunist. A guy who would change his principles just to get the throne. And he did it. If he really did kill Mahmud II along with Selim III there is no telling what would happen. Most likely bad things. But then again, Alemdar Mustafa Pasha could force Mustafa IV as a puppet as well. He had the forces in the capital during the (attempt) execution. He controled the capital and could have his (more chaotic) Auspicious Event. And then wait until Mustafa IV gets his male heir. Why give up when you defeated most of your enemies?
Your statement about the Russo-Serbian alliance is interesting. Do you have a source I could look into?
I agree that we can't really know if Mustafa would continue being anti-reformist. After all, Mahmud II himself wasn't super friendly towards reform during the first year of his accession. However, I don't see how Alemdar could have beat the Janissaries when his forces were tied up fighting the Russians. That's why he couldn't prevent his OTL murder after all. Though this is getting somewhat off-topic...
I'll look at the source four you if I find it again
Mahmud II wasn't anti reformist. He was against the power of the landlords that came with Alemdar Mustafa's intervention in 1808. Luckily for Mahmud, Alemdar Mustafa died the same year when blew himself and the Janissaries besieging his house up and so was the power behind the landlords gone. The events afterwards were chaotic.
The reason Alemdar Mustafa was able to move against Mustafa IV was a truce with the Russians for some time. When he entered the city he quickly restored order, killed most of the allies of Mustafa IV including the leading Janissary Officer Kabakçi Mustafa who deposed Selim III. Alemdar Pasha has by now the capital and so the Sultan at his hands.
If anything, this conversation has made me recognize that I need to address the Auspicious Incident as it was pretty important in the development of the Ottoman Empire going forward. It also provides me with a very interesting insight into the Serbian Revolution and the early years of Mahmud's reign among other things.I wouldn't exactly say pressured is the right choice of words here. The Serbs had already gotten Russian support as early as November of 1804 (a fact that could be changed with a POD in May), and the Russians were traditionally seen as close friends due to their Slavic Orthodox nature, as well as how their state served as an a beacon of hope that they could achieve the same sort of success.
By 1807, while there were some close calls when it came to the possible worsening of Serbo-Russian relations, the Serbs had been receiving support in the form of arms and other things needed to support a revolution. And with the many victories they had by then (and the delayed signing of Ičko's Peace on the Ottoman end didn't help), capped off with the successful Siege of Belgrade in 1806, the Serbs were emboldened and encouraged by the Russians to make a formal alliance, though they believed that the Russians would directly assist them rather than just being used as cannon fodder while the Russians continued fighting in the Romanian Front of the Russo-Turkish War that had started in late 1806, with Russian hope being that they would manage to keep Serbia under their influence, as the Christian Balkans had been seen as traditionally protected by them.
The Peace of Tilsit of July 1807, if I recall correctly.
But I agree with 1-9blaaa that this is rather off topic at this point, and I'd like to apologize for that fact.
[5] The story regarding the American Frigates is laughably bad. Orlandos and Louriotis sent the French Philhellene Charles Lallemand to New York in March 1825 to purchase two Frigates. Unfortunately, none were available for sail so he placed an order to construct two new frigates. Right off the bat, the price for the frigates were estimated at around 100,000 Pounds each. To “lower” the costs, Lallemand, who had no knowledge what so ever regarding ship building, agreed to build the ships through day’s work, a process that slowed their construction to a crawl.
[6] The Elephant briefly served as Admiral Horatio Nelson’s flagship during the battle of Copenhagen in 1801.
Yeah John Bowring seems like quite a scumbag in all honesty which is very surprising given his earlier efforts to help the Greeks. And while Orlandos and Louriotis didn't do themselves any favors while in London, Bowring's actions were borderline criminal.Per the Greek accounts Orlandos and Louriotis were mostly forced to accept the decisions of the British members of the committee but the end result remains the same. Also if I may so suggest Excellent shouldn't be up for sale in 1825, she is being razed for further service with the RN. On the other hand HMS Saturn was decommissioned to harbour service in 1825 and HMS Leander laid up as a receiving ship in 1823. All three (counting Elephant) would cost about 75000 pounds (each of the used ships was costing 25,000) which leaves another 75000 compared to OTL for other uses.
Yeah John Bowring seems like quite a scumbag in all honesty which is very surprising given his earlier efforts to help the Greeks. And while Orlandos and Louriotis didn't do themselves any favors while in London, Bowring's actions were borderline criminal.
Thank you for the heads up on the ships, I'll make the changes right away.
[4] In OTL, Karaiskakis was in correspondence with the Greeks in Missolonghi. He allegedly promised to aid them in their escape, but his promised aid never materialized. Karaiskakis, while a brave man by means, he was also incredibly opportunistic and had a strong sense of self preservation. Markos Botsaris was a selfless individual in comparison and I fully believe that he would have aided the Missolongiotes to the best of his ability.
That's a great source, thank you! I'll probably stick with Kronos and Leander/ Leandros as it generally fits with their current naming convention for ships, namely Greek Gods and Heroes, but I am open to changing it if it makes sense.Speaking of ship names, the link here is from the Greek Wikipedia and contains a reasonably comprehensive list of ships for the fleets of the three islands (6, 29 and 50 from the Hydriot navy by the way were Orlandos ships). I short of suspect we might see Saturn and Leander becoming Themistocles and Athena or Leonidas based on it even though they begin with Greek names (Kronos and Leandros). Not that it really matters. Oh and come to think of it Hellas at least was present for the 4th Messolongi if I have my timing right...
https://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ελληνικό_Ναυτικό_στην_Επανάσταση_του_1821#.CE.A0.CE.BB.CE.BF.CE.AF.CE.B1_.CF.84.CE.B7.CF.82_.CE.A3.CE.AC.CE.BC.CE.BF.CF.85
I did briefly mention Odysseus Androutsos about 10 parts ago when Byron was still in Greece, but I haven't mentioned him since as the narrative has taken me elsewhere. I would argue that he is probably still alive and that the Greek Government has made some attempts to rein him with mixed results. I'll be sure to mention what has been going on with him in the near future.Belated comment here but Karaiskakis was also suffering from tuberculosis. By all accounts at the time of the OTL exodus he was down with a heavy bout of it. Of course you had him killed which while plausible, he had this tendency to lead from the front, is also most unfortunate especially with Kolokotronis also dead. On the other hand Botsaris is alive and no mention was made of Odusseas Androutsos which is... interesting. If alive he'll be in good terms with the government as Kolletis is in bad terms with it and he has his own close contacts with Byron Trelawny is his brother in law after all.