I’m not saying Greece shouldn’t expand as much as possible, but I am saying that we should expect that once they take, say, Constantinople, the Turks won’t accept it there and then.
And do you expect that the Greeks will leave the Holy City,The Queen of cities in Ottoman/Turkish hands?no given that they are orthodox and greek they will advocate and have such a goal,Constantine King of the Hellenes will have such a goal. given his ambitions

After all A Constantine Forged the Queen of Cities,A Constantine led it in its last stand and it is only fitting that a Constantine Reclaims it
 
Last edited:
Even in a best case scenario for Greek expansion Turkey will still outpopulate them eventually, and more importantly will be willing to ally with anyone they can to try and get their revanchism fulfilled
Outpopulate? Quite probably. Have a bigger economy? A Greece with Constantinople, East Thrace, Smyrna with some hinterland and Cyprus will have a larger economy than Turkey. A Greece that controls the Straits will have a far bigger diplomatic weight as well. The low population density of Thrace and its fertile plains could be a demographic bomb: Today it is the home of 11 million people. The greek crude birth rate until the 50s was 35-40+, similar to today's Sub Saharan Africa. In early 20th century Epirus for example, the average family had 4-5 children. Between this trend and a better state (earlier drainage of swamps, lower infant mortality due to more doctors and hospitals), future demographics will be much different.

The future demographics of Turkey will depend upon whether genocides take place or not. A future without an Armenian Genocide will ensure that the Armenian Highlands won't be part of a turkish state. Without a Pontic Greek genocide, it would be difficult for Turkey to keep the Trabzon Vilayet. Therefore, we will have to see whether the OTL genocides take place, in order to estimate the population and economic potential of future Turkey.

@Sphenodon don't forget the Russian factor. The fall of the Russian Empire is by no means a certainty. Frankly, the OTL fall was the combination of very different factors. I would argue that Pontus would be a prime region for russian expansionism for three reasons: In contrast to Constantinople and the Straits, russian enroachment of Pontus would not raise so many red flags in Europe. The prestige of the czar is raised without facing anything similar to the OTL Berlin Conference. Secondly, the region has "good" potential subjects. The Pontic Greeks were a known entity in the Russian Empire. The third reason is economics: You need the combination of Pontus and the Armenian Highlands to achieve economic synergies. The Highlands on their own, without the ports and minerals of Pontus, would be a poor region and a burden on the imperial treasury. The treasury would have to invest millions of rubles to build "military" railroads. In contrast, railroads that connect Erzurum and Van with the Pontic ports and mines pay for themselves.
 
And do you expect that the Greeks will leave the Holy City,The Queen of cities in Ottoman/Turkish hands?no given that they are orthodox and greek they will advocate and have such a goal,Constantine King of the Hellenes will have such a goal. given his ambitions

After all A Constantine Forged the Queen of Cities,A Constantine led it in its last stand and it is only fitting that a Constantine Reclaims it
It's only fitting as in the prophesy saying so you mean? 😆
 
The Megali Idea is very good, yes, but it also ensures a Turkish arch nemesis forever. Even in a best case scenario for Greek expansion Turkey will still outpopulate them eventually, and more importantly will be willing to ally with anyone they can to try and get their revanchism fulfilled. I’m not saying Greece shouldn’t expand as much as possible, but I am saying that we should expect that once they take, say, Constantinople, the Turks won’t accept it there and then. I would expect multiple wars, probably tied to the world war equivalents ITTL.
The cynic in me would say that aside from 1930-55 Greece had to deal with a hostile Turkey anyway. If that is to be taken, if not for granted but as likely anyway then the next logical assumption is that in a zero sum game the stronger Greece (or Turkey) gets relative to its rival the better. Even seen in purely military terms, modern Greece has a land border of roughly 200 km which are covered by the rough equivalent of 3 mechanised divisions. The Sevres border was in comparison 440 km, call it ~6.5 divisions. Only the garrisons of the Greek Islands take up roughly 3.5 divisions. So modern Greece still has to maintain about as much of an army as it would had needed if it held Ionia but from a worse economic and demographic position.
 
Outpopulate? Quite probably. Have a bigger economy? A Greece with Constantinople, East Thrace, Smyrna with some hinterland and Cyprus will have a larger economy than Turkey. A Greece that controls the Straits will have a far bigger diplomatic weight as well. The low population density of Thrace and its fertile plains could be a demographic bomb: Today it is the home of 11 million people. The greek crude birth rate until the 50s was 35-40+, similar to today's Sub Saharan Africa. In early 20th century Epirus for example, the average family had 4-5 children. Between this trend and a better state (earlier drainage of swamps, lower infant mortality due to more doctors and hospitals), future demographics will be much different.
I think that with the POD in 1920 and a very costly ww2, I had calculated about 17.5 million by 2020, while including heavy immigration to Australia and the US after WW2, but no European gastarbeiters by that point the Greek economy would not justify it. TTL Greece potentially can be much better off as it gets populations much earlier.
 
The Megali Idea is very good, yes, but it also ensures a Turkish arch nemesis forever. Even in a best case scenario for Greek expansion Turkey will still outpopulate them eventually, and more importantly will be willing to ally with anyone they can to try and get their revanchism fulfilled. I’m not saying Greece shouldn’t expand as much as possible, but I am saying that we should expect that once they take, say, Constantinople, the Turks won’t accept it there and then. I would expect multiple wars, probably tied to the world war equivalents ITTL.
This is true, but after the second world war or its equivalent a Greek victory would more or less secure any Greek gains as European revanchism was more or less dead in the water after that
 
So modern Greece still has to maintain about as much of an army as it would had needed if it held Ionia but from a worse economic and demographic position.
I would argue that in your estimation, the whole 4th Corps should be added, not just the formations that cover directly the border. So in total:
In the islands: 2 divisions and 4 brigades.
In Thrace: 3 divisions (4 armored brigades included) and 2 brigades.
These formations field 1250 tanks and around 500 self-propelled artillery.

As Lascaris said, how many more would be needed to cover an anatolian border?


TTL Greece potentially can be much better off as it gets populations much earlier.
It is an accumulation of butterflies and synergies. For example, we have talked about the population numbers added, the natural resources and expertise. It should be also mentioned that the internal market is much bigger than OTL. This butterfly alone assists in industrial development as much as any natural resources.

In contrast, in OTL Greece acquired Epirus and Macedonia in 1912. Yet the almost constant warfare and the National Schism, didn't allow the proper integration of the new provinces during the next decade. Then, Greece was defeated in the Greco Turkish war and had to integrate 1,5 million refugees while heing bankrupt. When the economy started to recover, 1929 came knocking. When the global crisis was over, WW2 happened. One can say that Greece started benefitting from the new provinces only in the 50s. Therefore, proper integration in a timely manner could do wonders.
 
Is it wrong for me to have considered the turks our arch-nemesis since day 1?

Personally, I don't think there was ever a chance for a good peace in this timeline, until the turks are physically too weak to consider attacking Greece. The problem is that with Greece being this successful, it's frighteningly easy to just blame all of the problems of the Ottoman Empire on those damn greeks. And as long as there are greeks living in the Empire, the greeks will want to keep "freeing their brothers".

If the ottomans decide to remove the greeks, genocide, that will cause pretty much infinite bad blood between the two countries. At that point I wouldn't be surprised if there is some sort of ww2 style war of annihilation between the two sides.

Now on to the concern of turkey inevitably having a higher population than Greece, while that is likely, it's not certain. Slice off Kurdistan, losing lands north of syria, much larger Armenia, no Pontus, no straights area, no Thrace, no aegean coast. There's even more they can lose, if you consider Cilicia and any sevres style European exclaves. Turkey is a country that is pretty easy to rip off it's borders. Such a country would mostly be related to highlands and drylands, while lacking most of its coast. If a country like that surpasses Greece's population, then it must have sub-saharan African level birthrates, and probably a similar level of prosperity.

I would not be concerned about that country hating Greece.

Basically I think there's a 2 critical points. There's the point where you take so much land from the turks they never forgive you, then there's the point where you take so much land from the turks there's nothing they can do about you. I think once you get to the first critical point, it makes no sense not to just strive for the second. Because you don't want to be faced with a competent arch nemesis, most would prefer a crippled one.
 
Is it wrong for me to have considered the turks our arch-nemesis since day 1?
No I have been considering them as well,and aside from the good relation that greece and turkey had in 1925-1955 the relations between the two countries have always been cold or viewed each other as an enemy
Personally, I don't think there was ever a chance for a good peace in this timeline, until the turks are physically too weak to consider attacking Greece. The problem is that with Greece being this successful, it's frighteningly easy to just blame all of the problems of the Ottoman Empire on those damn greeks. And as long as there are greeks living in the Empire, the greeks will want to keep "freeing their brothers".
I wouldnt say it is only the greeks that are causing the problems of the ottoman empire,many are imbeded into the structure of the empire,other nations that are causing problems to the ottomans are the russians and the egyptians,

furthermore the ottomans are continuing to slip further and further into the sphere of influence of Britain

There is also the Matter that the Great Eurasian War was instigated by the British so a lot of people will blame it on them rather than the opportunistic greeks,thougth the reverse can also be true given that they can not hurt Britain but greece they can
 
Maybe you could try incorporating those for future turns (or even replace the stock of pics you have of OTL Napoleon III with those pictures in previous turns).

And yes, my design of the Greek coat of arms is still available to use:
I find it unusual that leopold would keep the coat of arms of Saxe-Coburg und Gotha ,given that in otl he had as an escutcheon a quartering of the british coat(given that he was a consort of Charlotte the princess of Wales before she died) and the wettin coat(he is a descendant of the house of wettin after all) while using as the main shield the lion of Belgium(Leo Belgicus)

Is this coat of arms only valid during the reign of Leo I or will it be used by the house after his reign I wonder

Given Contantine's nature ,I would expect a double headed eagle to make an appearance on the greek coat of arms during his reign.
 
Last edited:
I find it unusual that leopold would keep the coat of arms of saxe coburg gotha ,given that in otl he had as an escutcheon a quartering of the british coat(given that he was a consort of Charlotte the princess of Wales before she died) and the wettin coat(he is a descendant of the house of wettin after all) while using as the main shield the lion of Belgium(Leo Belgica)

Is this coat of arms only valid during the reign of Leo I or will it be used by the house after his reign I wonder

Given Contantine's nature ,I would expect a double headed eagle to make an appearance on the greek coat of arms during his reign.
And a ton of purple as well I’d bet. Get that whole Imperial feel going.
 
I find it unusual that leopold would keep the coat of arms of Saxe-Coburg und Gotha ,given that in otl he had as an escutcheon a quartering of the british coat(given that he was a consort of Charlotte the princess of Wales before she died) and the wettin coat(he is a descendant of the house of wettin after all) while using as the main shield the lion of Belgium(Leo Belgicus)

Is this coat of arms only valid during the reign of Leo I or will it be used by the house after his reign I wonder

Given Contantine's nature ,I would expect a double headed eagle to make an appearance on the greek coat of arms during his reign.
And a ton of purple as well I’d bet. Get that whole Imperial feel going.
All I did was adapt the original @Earl Marshal made and made a better version of it. I suppose it would be the coat of arms used by Leo's successors while the personal coat of arms of Leo I himself would be just as you described @Bloodmage (only substitute the Belgian lion with the Greek cross).

I still have the SVG file btw, tucked away in some folders in my flash drive so I can always make edits to it.
 
Last edited:
As far as I can tell, updates come when they come. There hasn't been much of a schedule in the last year or so, certainly nothing as fast as every 2 weeks.

In regards to Coat of Arms, I do dearly want to see the double headed imperial eagle, on a field of purple. That would be downright cathartic. Perhaps upon Constantine's reclamation of Constantinople they can switch the Coat of Arms? As good a moment as any.
 
Is there gonna be a new update today? Im not sure cause the old cycle of updates was every 2 weeks?
As far as I can tell, updates come when they come. There hasn't been much of a schedule in the last year or so, certainly nothing as fast as every 2 weeks.

In regards to Coat of Arms, I do dearly want to see the double headed imperial eagle, on a field of purple. That would be downright cathartic. Perhaps upon Constantine's reclamation of Constantinople they can switch the Coat of Arms? As good a moment as any.
I probably won't have the next chapter out today, but I should have it out sometime this weekend (I'm currently aiming for this Sunday). If possible I would like to get back to that schedule of posting new chapters every two weeks as that was a good pace for me, but right now my goal is keeping it under a month between updates. I will say that the lengthy hiatuses of the past year and a half are definitely behind me now and that the pace of new updates will be much better going forward.
 
Is it possible to see some immigration to the new territories from the old ones? And what about the small turkish communities in the new territories..what will happen to them?
 
I probably won't have the next chapter out today, but I should have it out sometime this weekend (I'm currently aiming for this Sunday). If possible I would like to get back to that schedule of posting new chapters every two weeks as that was a good pace for me, but right now my goal is keeping it under a month between updates. I will say that the lengthy hiatuses of the past year and a half are definitely behind me now and that the pace of new updates will be much better going forward.
That’s great news! Glad whatever was causing the pauses are behind you now. Even under a month is a pretty awesome update schedule.
 
I have loved this story since I first found it and I’m so glad that you are still writing it. Honestly it’s one of the best stories on this website and is filled with so much great Historical detail.

Keep up the good work!
 
Is it possible to see some immigration to the new territories from the old ones? And what about the small turkish communities in the new territories..what will happen to them?
I think we should take into account firstly the manner of each annexation and secondly the different social groups.

In the case of Epirus and Thessaly, they were overrun by rebels -assisted from the Kingdom. Revolutions are always ugly affairs, especially in the blood soaked Balkans. Therefore, if we take into account OTL examples, the majority of the muslim population will have fled. I would argue that the approach of a regular army produces a smaller refugee stream compared to an armed insurrection of irregulars. Now in OTL Balkan Wars, as was shown in a previous post of mine, more than half the muslim population of Epirus fled before the approach of the Greek Army. The majority of the ones who stayed were chiflik owners (410 chifliks in 1912 Epirus) with their extended households and retainers, some burghers of Ioannina and Cham pastoralists in Thesprotia (after 2 more generations of islamization compared to TTL). Of these, the chiflik owners will depart as a whole group, as their serfs now own their land. In OTL they stayed with the support of the greek government. All and all, I expect far more than half of the muslim Epirotes to depar.

In Thessaly were the semi feudal chiflik owners and their households, retainers and armed guards constituted almost all the muslim population, I expect basically all of them to depart. Frankly the TTL revolutions may have expelled almost all the muslim population with the exception of the burghers of Ioannina. I cannot stress enough how this kind of conflict is much different than the OTL Balkan Wars or the 1881 Thessaly annexation.

Lastly, I expect a great part of the Dodecanese muslims to stay in place as they havent faced a revolution. Of course i m talking about the few regular inhabidants, not the civil servants, policemen and officers that constituted the vast majority of the muslims in statistics in the smaller islands (Rhodes excluded). So something like OTL.

Immmigration to the new provinces? You betcha. They had lower population density than the Kingdom and the 19th century Greeks had both a prolific birth rate and a dearth of land.
 
Last edited:
Top