Effects of Murat controlled Naples on Greece/Greek Revolution

[Basileus_Komnenos]

Assuming there's not Hundred Days Campaign, which allows for Murat to essentially maintain his throne in Naples, how would that affect the later Greek War of Independence?

Would Murat join the expedition with France and Russia, sending troops to reinforce the Greeks? Would Murat try getting one of his sons as its King?

Could Murat perhaps ally with the Habsburgs and support some sort of Albanian independence, while Austria marches in on Bosnia and Serbia?

How would the Russians and British view Neopolitan attempts to invade the Ottomans?

@Lascaris @alexmilman @Earl Marshal @pls don't ban me @isabella @RyuDrago @Tanaka did nothing wrong

 

[pls don't ban me]

with Murat on the Throne Naples will be the best nation candidate to form Italy. allying with Habsburgs is not an option since they hold physically and non 1/3 of the peninsula.
He might jump on the ship to help Greece. see it as an earlier versione of what Cavour did by sending troops to Crimea. address the Italian situation. is it early? probably but it would still improve the image of a unified Italy and the prestige of Naples.

The Greeks will refuse his candidates cause they want someone who is related to the Palaiologos, Komneni et cetera. maybe after the first abdication and the need of a new king they might accept his proposal as it would be a very liberal king.

As long as he stick with the french and Russian no one will say anything as he is simply helping the Greeks. the major difference is Greece becoming an ally and friend in the long term if the "magna Grecia" relation is exploited.

 

[Basileus_Komnenos]

with Murat on the Throne Naples will be the best nation candidate to form Italy.

I dunno though. As even in otl Italy much like Greece needed an external sponsor/ally to help them get the ball rolling. Italy here is even more multipolar than in otl, and compared to the Savoyards the Cabonari would probably coalesce in Naples along with a bunch of other dissaffected Napoleonic veterans and Bonapartists finding themselves increasingly unwelcome in France.

Though after the Congress of Vienna, I doubt even the Murats could so openly act against the Papal States. And despite Carlo-Alberto's liberal leanings, he only really at first seemed to try to try and ride the revolution's coattails to attain Milan (lombardy) from the Habsburgs, a longstanding goal of the Savoyards since the days of the Sun King. Now that I think about it, this might actually divide the Revolutionaries between Turin and Naples similar to how Austria and Prussia divided Germany.

There's also Sicily right next door which probably would out of spite, start aggressively modernizing and building up its forces essentially sparking the War of Sicilian Vespers 2.0.

Napoleon III wasn't really trying to unify Italy as a unitary state capable of being a rival to France. What he wanted was more or less a confederation of states, keeping the pretenses of Italian unification, while being small enough for France to influence. Napoleon III actually could end up winning big here by playing all these factions against each other while also allowing for the Pope to survive as the sole "neutral party" within the peninsula. The Pope could end up the leader of the Confederation similar to how in the Confederation of the Rhine von Dalberg, the Prince of Regensberg served as the Prince-Primate, its nominal head as the successor of the Elector of Mainz, the Primus interpares of Germany.

The Greeks will refuse his candidates cause they want someone who is related to the Palaiologos, Komneni et cetera. maybe after the first abdication and the need of a new king they might accept his proposal as it would be a very liberal king.

There would probably still be the other Great Powers who'd want another candidate to be King, still being distrustful of the House of Murat. Though to seal the alliance, I could see the new King possibly marry into the Murat family to shore up a dynastic alliance.

As long as he stick with the french and Russian no one will say anything as he is simply helping the Greeks. the major difference is Greece becoming an ally and friend in the long term if the "magna Grecia" relation is exploited.

Ngl Greece and italy parallel each other with their irredentist dreams. The end of the Italo-Romance presence in the Balkans (istria and Dalmatia primarily) is quite similar to the aftermath of the Greco-Turkish War.

 

[nickmn]

with Murat on the Throne Naples will be the best nation candidate to form Italy. allying with Habsburgs is not an option since they hold physically and non 1/3 of the peninsula.
He might jump on the ship to help Greece. see it as an earlier versione of what Cavour did by sending troops to Crimea. address the Italian situation. is it early? probably but it would still improve the image of a unified Italy and the prestige of Naples.

The Greeks will refuse his candidates cause they want someone who is related to the Palaiologos, Komneni et cetera. maybe after the first abdication and the need of a new king they might accept his proposal as it would be a very liberal king.

As long as he stick with the french and Russian no one will say anything as he is simply helping the Greeks. the major difference is Greece becoming an ally and friend in the long term if the "magna Grecia" relation is exploited.

Considering that there is no one with a Byzantine connection other than maybe tge Romanovs, I doubt that this will matter at all. If anything, the nearby Naples will be viewed better than any irrelevant German prince.

 

[pls don't ban me]

Considering that there is no one with a Byzantine connection other than maybe tge Romanovs, I doubt that this will matter at all. If anything, the nearby Naples will be viewed better than any irrelevant German prince.

OTTO had a connection

 

[Basileus_Komnenos]

OTTO had a connection

That's true, but Otto was only born in 1815, right after the Napoleonic Wars, so I don't think the House of Murat would really have anyone Otto could marry.

Considering that there is no one with a Byzantine connection other than maybe tge Romanovs, I doubt that this will matter at all. If anything, the nearby Naples will be viewed better than any irrelevant German prince.

There were plans to marry Otto to Olga Nikolaevna of Russia, the daughter of Nicholas I. That could have helped Otto stay in power and the children of such a union might have helped form a dynastic link with Naples assuming it survives. A solid dynastic link to Russia would probably dramatically alter Greece's fortunes as Russia might be more inclined towards it, as opposed to Bulgaria.

Still the intervention in Greece does raise the question of what exactly the borders of the fledgling Greek state would look like. Kapodistrias wanted to get to Thessalonica so that the state would have some sort of economic viability. Though I'm not sure how a Neopolitan intervention would help much in this regards unless it more actively participates, sending in a larger army through Naples and into Epirus (Norman style), together with the French fighting their way northwards.

 

[Lascaris]

He will survive to 1821 to begin with? This presupposes that even if he sits tight during the 100 days, the Austrians and British do not invade anyway, to try to restore Ferdinand IV. Which is hardly a given, Murat went to war in the first place because it looked like he was going to be deposed anyway.

 

[Evil Crusader]

He will survive to 1821 to begin with? This presupposes that even if he sits tight during the 100 days, the Austrians and British do not invade anyway, to try to restore Ferdinand IV. Which is hardly a given, Murat went to war in the first place because it looked like he was going to be deposed anyway.

I let this simmer for a bit, but sadly, everything points this way.
Even if for some chance he gets to mantain his throne by 1821, he may well embark in this wild campaign, reasoning his Neapolitan Kingdom is gone as soon as he leaves, and actually ending up as a heroic figure in the Greek fight (and quite likely, a detriment overall as it reduces GP goodwill).

 

[EasternRomanEmpire]

Assuming there's not Hundred Days Campaign, which allows for Murat to essentially maintain his throne in Naples, how would that affect the later Greek War of Independence?

He sends a little bit of material support and not much changes, I doubt he has a navy able to defeat the Egyptian one.

Would Murat join the expedition with France and Russia, sending troops to reinforce the Greeks? Would Murat try getting one of his sons as its King?

France, Britain and Russia decline/ignore, all GP had an agreement about keeping down liberals, category in which Murat enters as a former Marshal of Napoleon so he's not seen very well. Any attempt at putting someone from the Murat dynasty on the Greek throne is going to fail.

Could Murat perhaps ally with the Habsburgs and support some sort of Albanian independence, while Austria marches in on Bosnia and Serbia?

Allying himself with the Habsburgs is impossible since the Austrians hate him because he's a liberal and he's probably trying to champion himself as the leader of Italian nationalism which means conflict with them.

How would the Russians and British view Neopolitan attempts to invade the Ottomans?

Badly, he's probably an international pariah at this point so the intervention in Greece is delayed and Naepolitan relations with the GP are probably worse.

There's also Sicily right next door which probably would out of spite, start aggressively modernizing and building up its forces essentially sparking the War of Sicilian Vespers 2.0.

Isn't Sicily a part of Murat's Kingdom? Even if the answer is no Sicily is uncapable of doing that, the only city with some industry in the entire Kingdom of Two Sicilies was Naples, they're not going to be very relevant in Sicily and the monarchy there is too conservative as seen IOTL, more likely at some point revolutionaries take power there.

 

[pls don't ban me]

Isn't Sicily a part of Murat's Kingdom? Even if the answer is no Sicily is uncapable of doing that, the only city with some industry in the entire Kingdom of Two Sicilies was Naples, they're not going to be very relevant in Sicily and the monarchy there is too conservative as seen IOTL, more likely at some point revolutionaries take power there.

no, in a scenario where Murat remains in power Sicily stays to the Bourbons of Sicily while Murat keeps the rest of South Italy.

i agree the best he might be allowed to do is send equipment.
the main change is that South Italy will make a huge leap and become the best industrialized part of Italy due to it's liberal government, while Sicily will stay as a "shithole"

 

[EasternRomanEmpire]

no, in a scenario where Murat remains in power Sicily stays to the Bourbons of Sicily while Murat keeps the rest of South Italy.

i agree the best he might be allowed to do is send equipment.
the main change is that South Italy will make a huge leap and become the best industrialized part of Italy due to it's liberal government, while Sicily will stay as a "shithole"

Seeing how many times the Bourbons were kicked out of Sicily due to their conservatism despite having all of Southern Italy under their control, I wouldn't expect them to last long.

 

[Basileus_Komnenos]

Seeing how many times the Bourbons were kicked out of Sicily due to their conservatism despite having all of Southern Italy under their control, I wouldn't expect them to last long.

The Bourbons were only really kicked out because the Kingdom of Sicilly-Trinacia (the one ruled from Palermo), became a separate entity after the Angevin conquest. From there it had a rivalry with Naples until eventually both were brought under Spanish rule. Though this didn't unite the two realms into a single unitary realm as Sicily and "Naples" (also officially proclaiming itself the Kingdom of Sicily) were ruled separately in a personal union with the Crowns of Iberia and later when they were spun off for a separate branch of the House of Bourbon.

It's a similar thing with Hungary with the nobles feeling neglected by a "distant" court in Vienna that payed no mind to the their "liberties."

Both Sicily and Naples were indeed quite conservative. Sicily though rebelled because the Bourbons proclaimed a unitary Kingdom and stayed in Naples leaving the Sicilians feeling resentful that their King abandoned them and decided to boss them around from a more distant area.

If anything the Bourbon Conservatism here would actually be more in line with the values of the local populace and elites within Sicily and had they stayed in Palermo, their rule probably would have been secure as well.

It's similar to the Habsburgs actually as under Maria-Theresa, and under Kaiser Francis II, Hungary backed the Habsburgs to the hilt. If say under Napoleon, or a total loss during the War of Austrian succession, the Habsburgs left with only Hungary as their core dynastic realm would increasingly focus on ruling from Budapest curtailing the rebellious streak of the Hungarian magnates who'd lose all pretense of acting so openly against their sovereign. They'd also be more focused on the Balkans which Hungary historically had also involved itself in.

Austria sort of like two sicilies was essentially divided on many fronts with Austria having its hands in Germany/Central Europe, Italy, and the Balkans.

agree the best he might be allowed to do is send equipment.
the main change is that South Italy will make a huge leap and become the best industrialized part of Italy due to it's liberal government, while Sicily will stay as a "shithole"

Would it really though? Naples is more agrarian and doesn't have much in the way of natural resources compared to the North which thanks to the Po River Valley made it a lot wealthier. Southern Italy is a lot more arid compared to the North as well.

 

[pls don't ban me]

Would it really though? Naples is more agrarian and doesn't have much in the way of natural resources compared to the North which thanks to the Po River Valley made it a lot wealthier. Southern Italy is a lot more arid compared to the North as well.

i mean sure, but he'll be able to modernize the country despite it being agrariarian mainly.
no mafia, no medieval peasants in 1870 and no huge debts but an actual economy

 

[EasternRomanEmpire]

Would it really though? Naples is more agrarian and doesn't have much in the way of natural resources compared to the North which thanks to the Po River Valley made it a lot wealthier. Southern Italy is a lot more arid compared to the North as well.

You seem to underestimate the North's capability at taking away any industry the South had.
The South IOTL while conservative had some industries but the Northern politicians moved all capital from the South to the North and used the South to collect a lot of taxes to pay off the huge debt they had accumulated to industrialize the North. This is why the South has always been backwards compared to the North together with politicians letting mafia do whatever they wanted.
Anyways lack of natural resources is not a problem if there's will power to push trough industrialization.

 

[raharris1973]

Could Murat perhaps ally with the Habsburgs and support some sort of Albanian independence, while Austria marches in on Bosnia and Serbia?

I think, in addition to just seeing Murat as a persona non grata for being a Napoleonic revolutionary Marshal and a rival in Italy, the Habsburgs (and Prussians) were also the great power most opposed to undermining the European status quo in principle and in practice by intervening against the Ottomans on behalf of the Greeks, so I don't think of this being likely to happen. The eventual Austro-Hungarian occupation of Bosnia and Novi Pazar, and later annexation of Bosnia, seem to be to be the very late, very limited and very reluctant moves of a Habsburg power not all that excited about acquiring new lands and especially new responsibilities and subjects in the Balkans in the 19th century and 20th century.

It's similar to the Habsburgs actually as under Maria-Theresa, and under Kaiser Francis II, Hungary backed the Habsburgs to the hilt. If say under Napoleon, or a total loss during the War of Austrian succession, the Habsburgs left with only Hungary as their core dynastic realm would increasingly focus on ruling from Budapest curtailing the rebellious streak of the Hungarian magnates who'd lose all pretense of acting so openly against their sovereign. They'd also be more focused on the Balkans which Hungary historically had also involved itself in.

Considering this tangent for a bit, a War of Austrian Succession stripping the Habsburgs of everything west of Hungary (Bohemia, Silesia, Austria, Milan, Hither Austria, Netherlands....gone and partitioned), do we potentially see the rump Habsburg Hungary, distrustful of its thieving western neighbors and allied with Russia by the mid and late 1740s, having a continuous compensatory drive toward the *Balkans* for the rest of the 1700s? Perhaps working to partition Ottoman territories with Russia step by step?
Perhaps this Habsburg Hungary, in pre-French Revolutionary times, with concepts of national identity less stirred up, does not have the later Magyar fears of absorbing "too many" Slavs, Vlachs, etc.?

 

[EasternRomanEmpire]

Considering this tangent for a bit, a War of Austrian Succession stripping the Habsburgs of everything west of Hungary (Bohemia, Silesia, Austria, Milan, Hither Austria, Netherlands....gone and partitioned), do we potentially see the rump Habsburg Hungary, distrustful of its thieving western neighbors and allied with Russia by the mid and late 1740s, having a continuous compensatory drive toward the *Balkans* for the rest of the 1700s? Perhaps working to partition Ottoman territories with Russia step by step?

It would also try to get Bohemia and Austria back at any given occasion, they would probably ally themselves with the Russians against the Ottomans but getting back their western holding is important.

Perhaps this Habsburg Hungary, in pre-French Revolutionary times, with concepts of national identity less stirred up, does not have the later Magyar fears of absorbing "too many" Slavs, Vlachs, etc.?

It was a fear IOTL because the nobility was afraid that with more Slavs the Hungarians are going to lose their privileges, here it's much less the case.

 

[EasternRomanEmpire]

The Bourbons were only really kicked out because the Kingdom of Sicilly-Trinacia (the one ruled from Palermo), became a separate entity after the Angevin conquest. From there it had a rivalry with Naples until eventually both were brought under Spanish rule. Though this didn't unite the two realms into a single unitary realm as Sicily and "Naples" (also officially proclaiming itself the Kingdom of Sicily) were ruled separately in a personal union with the Crowns of Iberia and later when they were spun off for a separate branch of the House of Bourbon.

It's a similar thing with Hungary with the nobles feeling neglected by a "distant" court in Vienna that payed no mind to the their "liberties."

Both Sicily and Naples were indeed quite conservative. Sicily though rebelled because the Bourbons proclaimed a unitary Kingdom and stayed in Naples leaving the Sicilians feeling resentful that their King abandoned them and decided to boss them around from a more distant area.

If anything the Bourbon Conservatism here would actually be more in line with the values of the local populace and elites within Sicily and had they stayed in Palermo, their rule probably would have been secure as well.

This is true at the beginning, but the island turned against the Bourbons after the first time they went in exile there, so much so that in 1812 the king was forced to agree to a constitution that was too liberal for the Bourbons' taste. The main reason why the two kingdoms were reunited was to remove the 1812 constitution, without getting the Kingdom of Naples back the Bourbons are still not going to have perfect relations with the locals.

 

[pls don't ban me]

This is true at the beginning, but the island turned against the Bourbons after the first time they went in exile there, so much so that in 1812 the king was forced to agree to a constitution that was too liberal for the Bourbons' taste. The main reason why the two kingdoms were reunited was to remove the 1812 constitution, without getting the Kingdom of Naples back the Bourbons are still not going to have perfect relations with the locals.

that means that murat without doing anything might get the sicilians uprising an offering him the crown or to reunite South Italy

 

[EasternRomanEmpire]

that means that murat without doing anything might get the sicilians uprising an offering him the crown or to reunite South Italy

Possible, but I think the Sicilians will prefer being independent, unless they are threatened by something and need protection.