They got handed over in 1864 IOTL to bolster George I's reign, and even with the Greeks doing better I don't see the islands being handed over much more than a couple years earlier.So if the Greek win, will the British hand over the United States of the Ionian Islands? Or will they wait?
Thank you, I would certainly appreciate any help you could give me in regards to South America during this time period. Although at the moment, I don't think anything ITTL should have effected them yet.
Apologies for the delay, but the next part is a bit of a bear.Just waiting for more...
· Russia shall return to the Ottoman Empire all territory within Europe, hitherto occupied by the Russian Army, with the exception of the mouth of the Danube and its outlying islands which shall be ceded to the Russian Empire.
· The cities and fortresses of Anapa and Sujuk Kale, along with their surrounding hinterlands shall be ceded to the Russian Empire.
· The Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti, Imeretia, Mingrelia, Guria, and Kars shall be ceded to the Russian Empire.
· All territory hitherto unmentioned and remaining under occupation of the Russian Army shall be returned to the Ottoman Empire.
· The Ottoman Empire shall accept the terms of the Treaty of Turkmenchay between the Russian Empire and the Sublime State of Persia.
· The Ottoman Empire shall permit Russian and foreign merchants the rights to traverse the Bosporus and Dardanelles Straits freely and safely.
· The terms of the Akkerman Convention shall be reaffirmed by all parties, establishing Wallachia, Moldavia, and Serbia as autonomous Principalities subject to the Ottoman Empire.
· The Principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia shall remain under Russian dominance until the payment of war indemnities amounting to 1.2 Million Dutch Guilders is paid by the Sublime Porte to the Empire of Russia.
· The fortresses of Braila, Giuriu, and Turnu shall be ceded to the Principality of Wallachia.
· The Ottoman Empire shall abide by the terms laid forth in the Treaty of London, establishing Greece as an autonomous state subject to the Ottoman Empire.
The events on the Caucasus Front are more or less from OTL, primarily because they were such an extraordinary turn of events, but also because the butterflies in Greece probably wouldn't have effected a discernible effect on Russia, or Eastern Anatolia for that matter to any significant degree. Paskevich was routinely outnumbered during the Caucasian Campaign and yet he still managed to achieve victory after victory in rapid succession due in large part to the knowledge of the environment and the experiecne of his troops. His soldiers were drawn primarily from the Christian peoples of the Caucasus Mountains, namely the Georgians and Armenians, they were incredibly hardy soldiers who were battle tested and extremely proficient for fighting in the hills.Wow, that was a hell of a war. Did Paskevich pull off all of that crazy stuff OTL?
Looking at Wikipedia it seems like the differences to the OTL Treaty of Adrianople are that the Straits Question has been settled earlier and maybe a more favorable deal for Russia in Romania—not sure though.
The major changes from the OTL Treaty are the retention of Kars
Kars was a world renowned castle town which was a very important part of the border defenses for the Ottoman Empire in the East. It provided the Ottoman Empire with a strong forward defensive position, while also serving as the primary fortification on the road to Erzurum. Obviously Russia taking Kars in 1829 is a pretty big deal as it deprives the Ottomans of this fortress and it makes Erzurum much more vulnerable, but it also allows the Russians to have a more westerly jumping off point for their future offensives into Anatolia.Well, that will suppose the considerable enlargement of OTL Ottoman territory with Armenian population under Russian rule.
AFAIK Kars had significant strategic importance in Caucasus Wars betweeen Russians and Ottomans....will ITTL seizure of the fortress allow the Russians to advance further (Erzurum) in the subsequent Russo-Turkish wars?
Kars was a common target for the Russians in the two subsequent wars between them, and on both occasions the Russians succeeded in capturing Kars. In a situation where the Ottomans are not as capable as they were in OTL, it would seem reasonable to me that the Russians take Kars now rather than in a future war since the Ottomans are in such a poor condition. That said, there will be some consequences for this land grab.
In regards to more of the Armenian population being brought into the Russian Empire, this is both a good and bad thing for both everyone involved due to the rising tide of nationalism around the world. The Russians weren't exactly the best caretakers of their minorities in this time period either as Russification became a major part of Tsar Nicholas I's, and his son Alexander II's internal policies leading to a period of unrest across the Russian Empire that, if anything, will probably be worse ITTL as a result.
Taking Kars is certainly an issue for the Ottomans and one they will certainly wish to rectify as soon as possible. I will admit that I am being rather harsh on the Ottomans right now, but this is generally consistent with the events of OTL in this time period, it really was a rough period for the Ottomans from 1820 to 1840 with almost every region of the Empire engaged in some form of conflict or unrest, and unfortunately it will probably get worse ITTL before it gets any better for them as Egypt has yet to have their say in Syria, not to mention the Bosnians and Albanians. But as you said it will force them to go further in regards to their reforms which will help them in the long run, provided they can survive the next few hurdles relatively intact. And as was the case in OTL the Great Powers, barring Russia, will seek to prop the Ottoman Empire up as an alternative to Russia, as no one, not even Greece, wants to see Russia on the Mediterranean.First of all, Russian Kars seems like an existential threat to the Ottoman frontier. I am not sure that the Ottomans won’t take it back as soon as they can. Moreover, this is still a point where the Ottomans can turn things around militarily and politically; the Tanzimat could be much more successful ITTL if the Ottomans are more desperate.
If the Russians do keep the region the Armenians themselves may not be totally out for the count. Given their geographical isolation, they could start a nasty Caucasian rebellion if Russification gets too bad. That didn’t go well for the Circassians OTL, but Armenia might be able to call for foreign aid—a long shot but the Egyptians might be able to help them?
Taking Kars is certainly an issue for the Ottomans and one they will certainly wish to rectify as soon as possible. I will admit that I am being rather harsh on the Ottomans right now, but this is generally consistent with the events of OTL in this time period, it really was a rough period for the Ottomans from 1820 to 1840 with almost every region of the Empire engaged in some form of conflict or unrest, and unfortunately it will probably get worse ITTL before it gets any better for them as Egypt has yet to have their say in Syria, not to mention the Bosnians and Albanians. But as you said it will force them to go further in regards to their reforms which will help them in the long run, provided they can survive the next few hurdles relatively intact. And as was the case in OTL the Great Powers, barring Russia, will seek to prop the Ottoman Empire up as an alternative to Russia, as no one, not even Greece, wants to see Russia on the Mediterranean.
The Armenians generally did well under the Russians for many years as merchants and proto-capitalists and for the most part they were model citizens of the Russian Empire. It was only during the last days of the Empire where relations between the Russians and Armenians became worse, primarily under Alexander III and Nicholas II, with several riots and terrorist attacks taking place in Eastern Armenia from 1887 to 1905. Even then their behavior was relatively mild compared to the other minorities in the Russian Empire during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Mahmud II was certainly was one the better Sultans for the Ottoman Empire and his reforms were extremely beneficial to the Empire. Unfortunately, he was dealt a really bad hand for much of his reign with a series of conflicts from the Serbian Revolution, the Wahhabi Wars, the Greek Revolution, the war with Russia, and the two Wars with Egypt, not to mention the growing influence of the Powers over his country. The point you made about their currency was especially problematic for the Ottomans with the Piastre losing more than half its value in the span of five years from 1820 to 1825 and mounting debt would plague the Empire for the rest of its existence.I think you can argue with a straight face that Machmud gave the Ottoman empire one more century of life and his reforms more or less formed the basis of what became modern Turkey. That said I'm not certain how much further you can go with them given the hand he was dealt with. He's certainly going to at least be matching the OTL performance, losing a few more islands to Greece and Karl to the Russians is not affecting his core tax Base all that much, losing Reshid is probably a worse blow in the short term and losing Crete a blessing in disguise the 1866 revolt cost millions of pounds and thousands of soldiers by itself. On the other hand the economic strain of both his reform and his wars is massive, it's no accident that the silver content of the currency, already dropping took a nose dive during his reign. And you still have Muhammed Aly and Ibrahim waiting around the corner... And their fleet was not at Cesme I note.