Too soon really. I mean before the sun set on the British Empire they will shine the brightest. Also depending on OTL WW1 they might keep their power. In the 19th century we are on the current TL the British are the undisputed master of seas, so we have a long way till the British fall.
Pride Goes Before a Fall: A Revolutionary Greece Timeline
- Thread starter Earl Marshal
- Start date
Carter I'm Yog
Banned
Rule, Britannia, Britannia rules the waves~
If anybody could do an "Extras" post, a sidestory on TTL Greek patriotic songs would be interesting.
This. Because who's said Uncle George can be stop by being on a mere different universe?
A bit early yet to talk about 1912 considering that's still more than 50 years away. With the current status quo it would not surprise me if we would see the Ottomans and Russia get into another big conflict long before that.
But if they play their cards right I could see the Assyrians get their own state in what is now Iraq, maybe they could cozy up to their overlords if it does end up under colonial rule.
Wait there's going to be a war in 1912?!?
As of now, the Assyrians are in a very similar state to OTL, having recently endured a series of brutal pograms in Hakkari province. However, now that the Ottoman/Russian Border has shifter further west and south in Anatolia, the Russians are in a much better position to support the Assyrians in any future revolt if they choose to do so - effectively being on the northernmost edge of the Assyrian homeland. If OTL is any reference, then an Assyrian state will probably need to maintain their independence through force of arms against their neighbors as I doubt the Kurds and Arabs will take kindly to an ethnic and religious minority taking territory that they have claims to. Overall, the Assyrians are still in for a hard time, but it might end better for them here than it did for them in our history.
There'd most likely be a Russian-Turkic war in 1878ish. I think we'll see Serbia and Bulgaria gain formal independence. No idea which country Thrace will be in tho.
Lol duhWait there's going to be a war in 1912?!?
If they get independence I'd think a lot of Assyrians would survive which will make things very different than otl. I'd think everyone would hate the Assyrians but I think that'd be fine if they have good military leadership.
Asking the mother of spoilers: would Israel exist? That difference changes a lot of things in the middle East.
Even without OTL’s 19th and 20th century persecutions the Assyrians only occupy a small and peripheral region, which will make it very, very hard for them to survive as an independent state. Either they’ll essentially be a quasi-dependent on someone like Russia (think modern OTL Armenia) or part of a larger Mesopotamian federation that grants them significant autonomy.
As for Israel, I think it’s too early to know. Palestine would have to pass to a Mandate first, I think, since the Jews were not populous and established enough by the time of freedom from the Ottomans to win, and there’s no guarantee we get a British Palestinian mandate ITTL. What if Egypt gets the region instead, for instance?
I'd think if anything Assyria would either encompass Kurdistan (population transfers galore) or be part of Kurdistan as a significant automous region. I'd think the automous region would make more sense but if the Russians are significant players I can see them clearing swaths of land for the Assyrians. It would be bloody and unessesary but it would do the job.
That's why I'm asking the mother of spoilers on this one. If Egypt crumbles I'd think Israel would be possible.
An Egypt that is s regional power that acts as the major rival of Greece would be very interesting and would change a lot. Let's hope Egypt industrialises properly ittl and forces Persia to do so too and become proper democratic powers. An Egypt that's strong may also take west Arabia and Mecca which would be very interesting. A strong and secular Egypt will also work against radical Islamists although Egypt will be Islamist in general.
For the life of me I can't see why the Russians would care about the Assyrians. They Live far from the borders of Russia, not any closer to that lovely sea port that they want in very small numbers. Why not make the Kurds a puppet? They are more in numbers , they have a warrior tradition and they have a social structure and they occupy in a far bigger area which means better survivability. So why spend money and manpower on the Assyrians? For oil? Oil is not yet that valuable it would be after the internal combustion engine. So why?
Israel can't exist without foreign support. Also not that many Jews would leave their countries to go to the edge of the world in an uncivilized area. Without WW2 genocide attempts I doubt the Jews would go to Israel.
Egypt already controls West Arabia form the times of Muhammad Ali and I don't remember giving it back , although I could be wrong on that. Either way they have strong claims and If they stabilize they can dominate the area. Also I can't see why industrialization would bring democracy. I mean USSR wasn't democratic nor it became after it's industrialization. On the point that they push Persia and themselves to more stable path I would as well like to see that. In a Ottomans fall scenario we could see them getting Syria, Arabia(if they don't have it) and maybe even Cilicia and the Persians get OTL Iraq, depending on what the Russians carve out for themselves.
On the topic of Persia I would like to see for geopolitical reasons the British allying them as the French have done with Egypt and see the two powers duke it on diplomatic levels.
Anyway all of that is in the future. Even the war of 1877 can be avoided if the Turks don't go berserk on the Bulgarians or if the British and French decide to stop the Russians from getting any ideas of expansion and maybe create autonomous states in the Balkans so future massacres won't happen. Also we are in the early 60's so we have a lot of times to see were the author wants to go.
It's actually true but I'm just asking. A independent Kurdistan is much more plausible and should be able to claim more of otl Turkey.
And that's why I'm asking for the mother of spoilers. We'd know a lot if we know Israel exists or not.
We don't know, but it's definitely possible that industrialisation means that they're not aligned with the Western powers which have a tendency to be democratic.
That would distract Turkey/Egypt and it would be good for Greece.
Do you think the Turks wouldn't be brutal against the Bulgarians? The Bulgarians did still fight against the Turks and when increased repression occurs the three powers will want a permanent solution. It's definitely preventable technically but stopping one massacre won't prevent another one from occurring.
I see a few posts about Greek taking the southern part of Albania and Macedonia.
I think it will be a bad idea for Greek. The Albanian nation is not formed, but the Albanian national movement is on the rise. If Greece takes more land, it could lead to a reaction against Greece same for Macedonia that is claimed by Serbia and Bulgaria if Greece starts to take these lands they will have every Balkan nation against them including the Ottoman empire ready to profit from the situation. (Furthermore, each of these nations could have the support of great power ), and Greece could suffer the same fate that Bulgaria in the Second Balkan War. Maybe the Greek government would still try, but I think they will focus currently on their main enemy the Ottoman Empire, and to reach Constantinople. They are their main objectives to do it they will need to focus on the length of the Aegean sea, with southern Macedonia, and Thrace, and both areas have a lot of non-greek people. I think that Italy will soon be interested in Albania, and the rest of Macedonia is far away and has a lot of minorities. I don't think they will focus on these lands, even if they could encourage greek education here as a soft power, but even here, it will be a second field their objectives are elsewhere.
I think it will be a bad idea for Greek. The Albanian nation is not formed, but the Albanian national movement is on the rise. If Greece takes more land, it could lead to a reaction against Greece same for Macedonia that is claimed by Serbia and Bulgaria if Greece starts to take these lands they will have every Balkan nation against them including the Ottoman empire ready to profit from the situation. (Furthermore, each of these nations could have the support of great power ), and Greece could suffer the same fate that Bulgaria in the Second Balkan War. Maybe the Greek government would still try, but I think they will focus currently on their main enemy the Ottoman Empire, and to reach Constantinople. They are their main objectives to do it they will need to focus on the length of the Aegean sea, with southern Macedonia, and Thrace, and both areas have a lot of non-greek people. I think that Italy will soon be interested in Albania, and the rest of Macedonia is far away and has a lot of minorities. I don't think they will focus on these lands, even if they could encourage greek education here as a soft power, but even here, it will be a second field their objectives are elsewhere.
Last edited:
Good idea, bad idea, whatever. It's the nature of men to overreach. We'll see if they make good decisions or not.
I think Greece ittl should have more land side they're more prosperous than otl. By how much? That's a debate that we're having.
I think Greece could take the bit that they took off Albania otl in the 1920s without much problems. I also think Greece could occupy more of the Rhodope mountains for better defences for Constantinople. Other than that idk.
Not exactly certain what is being proposed here. How exactly the Greeks are supposed to get to Constantinople without liberating/annexing (pick your term) Macedonia? Or are you proposing they stick to the Olympus and leave the third largest Greek city in the world to Bulgaria/the Ottomans?
I am pretty sure he is talking about Northern Macedonia.
I think Greece would do alright and not piss Serbs that much if they just take the southern parts of North Macedonia from Bitola to Novo selo and the areas directly south of Ohrid.
Last edited:
I talked Macedonia as "all the Macedonian region", it's for that I talked about southern Macedonia the Macedonian regions under Greece later as Greek objective. ( I didn't say greek Macedonia in my last post because like danyboy say they could go a little further)
Last edited:
Yeah, the term Macedonia unsubstantiated means the country for most people (for better or worse).
It will take longer to change in the public consciousness (you would expect more accuracy in a Greece thread though lol)The country's called North Macedonia now, though