What if the Turks won at Vienna?

I cleverly use hyperbole by saying the world, don't take it literally.

[evanaskew]

So Poland saves Austria from conquest and a century later Austria takes part in 2 of the 3 partitions of Poland between Russia, Prussia and Austria. How trustworthy.

[jonasabrams]

I think a more interesting scenario would be what is the Turks won at Vienna in 1529 under Suleiman, in my opinion its overlooked far too much.

[dohanicempire]

The leader of the Ottomans were just bad after the 1650’s.

[Rambo-dupu]

What if Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent never killed Prince Mustfa?

[oguzhanturk]

*What if comment section stop doing crusades with their keyboards*

[mchrzestek]

As a Pole I sometimes wonder - if Turks had conquered Habsburg Empire, would have there been Partitions of Poland?

[TheThebestgame]

the reason why the ottomans lost at Vienna was because the second army deployed by the leader of the first army revolted against the ottomans and didn't stop incoming Polish Troops. The siege leader knew that polish would send help so he gathered a big second force to inturrpt them he put a Crimean Prince to charge. But he revolted against the ottomans to gain independency in Crimea. He was executed later.

[charleskidd]

Why wouldn’t bohemia just declare independence after the fall of Vienna? It’s not like the ottomans would bother marching to Prague after the arduous Austrian campaign

[weedbaron]

The whole Point of conquering Vienna, was for the Ottoman Army to have a new base from witch to campaign into Central Europe. I agree that they wouldn’t have gotten much further and would probably fail at a city like Krakow, Berlin or Venice, but not because they couldn’t reach it.

[alexius]

A better question would be if Suleiman the Lawgiver had captured Vienna in 1529.

[truth-tellerchom]

If Ottomans won at Vienna, they would want to conquer Rome, second Constantinople.

[emptycloud]

2:13 Finally someone pointed this out, THANK YOU.

[andrzejkucik]

Sobieski actually considered allying himself with the Ottoman Empire to recover Silesia from Habsburgs, so this timeline isn't that unlike. However, I don't think that the fall of Vienna would mean that the entire domain of Austrian Habsburgs would fall into Ottoman hands.
And in your timeline Poland-Lithuania simply disappears (as they did in ours), but this seems unlikely. Not only because Austria participated in the partitions of Poland, and now it was out of the equation, but also because Ottomans, now being a bit stronger, wouldn't allow it, fearing the rise of power of Russia and Prussia.
Also, Czech Republic was not a thing until 1993, so I don't understand why you name it in 1600s.

[oghuzkhan]

Gibbons writes " It can not be argued that the Ottomans were the first nation in the new age to use the principle of religious freedom as fundamental idea in establishing their state ". Jean Bodin(1520-96)founder of European state laws, recommended to the King of France that he take the ruling of the Ottoman State as an example. He said that Padishah(Ottoman Ruler) treated the Orthodox, the Catholics and Jews as equal to Muslims and protected them all. Chenier of Geneva said in 1717: " The Turks have a very wide perspective of religion and show great tolerance"

No one was punished for their religious beliefs, except for those who deliberatly insulted Islam.The few priest punished were not charged with religious offences, but with treason. Marshall Von Moltke found this source of this tolerance towards Christians that reason for this could only be their solid and strong belief in Islam.

The violence and aggression between rival Christians(Catholics and Orthodox Christians)sects in those years is recorded in their own books. After Viennas defeat, The Venetians invaded Sakiz for a short time and Mora for quite a long time. They caused so much violence that when the Ottomans resumed control, the Greeks greeted them with songs and celebration.

The Ottomans also collected The Jizya from the people of the book in return for their exemption from military service and for protection Christians soldiers did not have to pay this tax.Soldiers from southern Romania, presented for service to the Ottomans in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries became very important part of army.

Many non Muslims lived in the Empire, especially in port cities. The state protected them and gave them complete freedom to conduct business, visit religious places, or just tour the country. V Morrin of Rokebey wrote that he went to Istanbul in 1794, when he was 22 years old, and had roamed freely among the Turks and found them very helpful.

Ottomans respected the art of ancient civilizations.The mosaics in Ayasofia(Aya sofya) the number most famous mosques, were not touched from 1453 until 1922. Out of respect for Christians feelings, the mosaics were painted over.

Orientalists, basing themselves on the twentieth century values have problem with dhimmi status of non Muslims Ottoman subjects. However they are gravely mistaken. I have mentioned the vast rights given to them in theory and practice.

[ba]

As historians say: ”never make history with ”what if””

[petermann]

Keeping with the Big Blue Blob theme, could you do "What if Napoleon beat Russia?"

[YoghurtKiss]

"Christendom" on the Map made me laugh out loud, specially when you didn't include Russia in it. :P

[Kharon]

If french revolution not happened as a result
Maybe Ottoman Empire dissolution would be more peaceful like British Empire after WW2

[hoveb]

You points you make about the Ottoman Empire are absolutely true. Congrats on that. Even if they had won at Vienna, the empire was destined to collapse.

[delta]

The Ottomans were just about to take Vienna and.... THEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED!