---

---

---

Bavaria was the battleground of the War of the Third Coalition, and so submitted willingly to the French victors who drove the Austrians from the Bavarian Alps. Then-Elector Maximilian IV of Bavaria, under counsel from Maximilian von Montgelas, openly supported the supposed ‘liberation’ which the Bavarian Wittelsbach family believed to be their freedom from an often stifling Holy Roman Empire. Gaining territory in Tyrol and being elevated to the status of Kingdom, the Elector was crowned King Maximilian I of Bavaria. The Bavarians raised 30,000 men for a Bayerische Legion, forming a veteran rear guard of Napoleon’s Grande Armee.

The consequences of the subjugation of the German states was not all beneficial for the Bavarians, as the Treaties of Tilsit forced the drafting and passing of a Constitution in 1808. The Constitution was largely powerless, and while the land reforms and revising of the tax system were already underway before Tilsit, these forced demands upon the Confederation of the Rhine filled the King with unease. Montgelas managed to convince the King that the demands were a means to an end to render the Prussian Junkers (which Bavaria long despised) extinct.

After the Russian refusal to submit to Tilsit any longer, it was the Bavarians who followed the legions of French, Poles, and fellow Germans into the Russian plains. The campaign, while a success which neutered the Russian ability to rise against the Continental System, came with a cost. Of the 30,000 Bavarians who marched into Russia, only 4,000 returned alive and unharmed. The exhaustion of war had a stranglehold on Bavaria, and an uprising in Tyrol during the Russian Campaign had destabilized the border with Austria. King Maximilian shut out Montgelas, turning to his son, Ludwig (an absolutist and Bavarian division commander), and Karl von Wrede (the Marshal of all Bavarian military forces). His son and most trusted general both advocated a betrayal of the French, and the Bavarians, coordinating with Austria, joined the War of the Sixth Coalition.

The Bavarians formed a Corps of the Austrian Army, who intended to surround the embattled French forces at Leipzig at the village of Hanau, but were engaged when the French attempted a fighting retreat westwards. Marshal von Wrede, put in command of the joint Austro-Bavarian Army, positioned his troops for a fight, but the positions were predicted by Napoleon, who forced through and annihilated the joined allies. What remained of Bavaria’s army evaporated, and both of Maximilian I’s sons, Ludwig and Karl Theodor, were killed in the battle. Marshal von Wrede, for his part, was shot and managed to survive an infection, however was permanently immobilized.

Bavaria could fight no longer, and what few Bavarians were left fought under an Austrian banner for the remainder of the campaign. Upon the emancipation of the German states from the Confederation of the Rhine, Bavaria found itself with a generation lost to warfare, coffers rapidly draining, and with its Tyrolian province now returned to Austria. King Maximilian I, so drowned in grief, all but handed the day-to-day affairs of the kingdom to Montgelas. This grief plagued the King for the remainder of his life, reportedly having hastened his own passing in 1824.

The King had been largely despondent for his last few years of life, failing to establish a concrete succession in absence of any living male heirs or nephews in the Wittelsbach line. The succession would’ve fallen either to Caroline, who was the wife of the Emperor of Austria, or Augusta, who had at one point married a Napoleon but had her marriage annulled, instead managing to be married off to a Bourbon in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars. The newly-established European Congress System stepped in with its 1825 Convention, aiming to prevent a War of Bavarian Succession, decreeing the surviving daughters Caroline and Augusta unfit for inheriting the Bavarian Crown, instead putting the burden upon the first daughter of the deceased king’s second marriage, Elisabeth, twenty years of age and still without engagement to any suitor.

With the Crisis of Succession solved, the affairs of Bavaria could move forward. Montgelas, Elisabeth’s godfather and now her new confidant, retained much of his power on the management of the Kingdom. He ‘honored’ the Constitution, even submitting amendments for approval of the Queen and the House of Councilors (which consisted entirely of wealthy landholders and personal friends of Montgelas). The reforms of Montgelas, known as the Ansbacher Acts, managed to save Bavaria from destitution by reorganizing the civil service, including establishing a tax enforcement service which properly carried out the reformed British-style tax system. Taxation was imposed on Catholic organizations as well as on members of the clergy. Montgelas was only saved from the personal ire of the Catholic Church due to his connection with the Bavarian Crown and sham legislature, which both brought legitimacy to the decrees. Montgelas also allowed for Protestants to claim Bavarian citizenship (primarily in the interest of collecting more taxes, however the minister also held Reformation ideologies), as well as allowing limited citizenship for Jews and other non-Christians.

The ramifications of the reforms were not felt overnight, but the brewing resentment for the civil service and the policies of Montgelas (colloquially termed the Dienstpragmatik) eventually fueled the rise of a Ultramontanist party. The Ultramontanes were staunch Catholic supremacists, believing in the absolutism and infallibility of both the Bavarian monarch and the Pope. Appealing to the Catholic masses which still constituted a majority of all Bavarians, Ultramontane candidates flooded the largely powerless lower house of the Bavarian Parliament, becoming a majority of all members. Despite the weak lower house having little power, the pressure of the Ultramontanists forced a reversal on certain policies, such as reverting Protestants to limited citizens and returning monasteries to their status as untaxed and Church-owned land, all at the decree of Elisabeth I, who then controversially dissolved the parliament and called for new elections and appointments. While most statesmen immediately regained their positions by election or appointment, the shake-up of the legislature served to temper many of the more radical elements.

It is now 1836, and the new Parliament of Bavaria has been seated in Munich. Montgelas is old, and his health is failing, while the Queen is gaining confidence in her rule. Elements in Bavaria call for more radical reforms. Ultramontanes call for a return to the absolutism of the monarchy and the return of ‘Catholic morality’, students and liberal Protestant professors dubbed ‘Nordlichers’ preach for a return of the Ansbacher Reforms and the institution of a true republic, while rumors of subversive gentlemen’s societies fuel the public fear of an autocracy, neither royal nor republic. Acts from Austria and France balance the kingdom once again between two competing powers which may not have the best interests of Bavaria in mind. Day by day, the Catholic bastion slips closer to Revolution.

Name: Danubian Principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia

Leaders: Alexandru Dimitrie Ghica of Wallachia and Ioan Sandu Sturdza of Moldavia

History:

In the wake of the First Russo-Turkish war of 1806, mutual fears of Napoleonic intervention appeared to have brought the conflict to an abrupt halt in 1812. In their haste, the Conventions which would cease the conflict overtured the vassal state of Moldavia - at the time a puppet of the Ottoman Empire - over to the jurisdiction of the Russian Empire as a protectorate. The Treaty of Bucharest that solidified this agreement of ceasefire would initially be greeted with mere hums from their Moldavian underlings, many of whom only saw the recent protectorate as merely a slight change of the guard. Few in the region could have predicted the rapid changes that would ensue in the wakes which rippled: As the Russian Army was transferred from the Balkans to Poland, the nominal protectorate which would be established in Iași soon grew accustomed to the distinct lack of lordship on beheadst of the Tsar in Saint-Petersburg.

Although established in nomine solo as the Danubian Principalities, de jure the Kingdoms of Wallachia and Moldavia were legally separate entities in spite of their common affiliation with the general geographic regions of the lands north of the Danube. The Principalities, in particular Wallachia, likewise still remained as tributary states of the Ottoman Empire, and were as such expected to return to the issue of stipends for the Imperial Tax.

In 1821, long simmered with the disappointment of the ingrainment of the hellenic Phanariote establishment, Wallachian revolutionary and court assistant Tudor Vladimirescu had launched a rebellion. While Vladimirescu was innately adept at both court politics of all stripes and had acquired a strong following from the Serbian Uprisings of 1812 and 1815, his charisma was often at odds with Vladimirescu's own goals, which constantly shifted in accords to the complex political situation and the rapid process at which the rebellion was unfurling in Wallacha. At first initially squared with the dislodging of solely the Phanariotes in the upper echelons of Wallachian aristocracy, the goals of Vladimirescu's rebellion often shifted as the situation did in accord. His own state of affairs was often found complicated by the myriad of revolutionaries which had assembled for his cause: Wallachia in particular sat in a unique geopolitical landscape, for Bucharest had been the hotbed for both revolutionaries from Serbia and from Greek revolutionaries lead by a certain Alexander Ypsilantis - both of whom Vladimirescu was quite familiar with. Initially, Ypilantis had little interest in aligning himself with the affairs of Serbia nor the cause of Romania, however his braggart nature had foiled his plans for a a clandestine uprising in the Peloponnese, which the Ottomans had caught onto after the Serbian revolts. This forced him and his Hellenic separatists into an alliance with Vladimirescu, who himself had allied with Serbian revolutionaries.

The 1821 rebellion would quickly be shown to be abortive: Vladimirescu's constant shifting of campaign goals put strains upon his hodgepodge armies, who each in turn expected different results from the rebellion. Managing the diverse interests of the Hellenic rebels - who in turn had largely viewed the charade as an alliance of opportunity against the Turks - the Romanian peasantry, and the Serb revolutionaries had led to a breakdown of cohesion by late summer, wherein the rebel armies quickly devolved into mass banditry. When news of the Ottoman armies arrived to the rebels, many simply dropped arms and fled, either to return to civilian life, or in the case of more accomplished revolutionaries, had fled across the border of Oltenia into Serbia or Transylvania. Vladimirescu himself would be captured by Ottoman irregulars in Bucharest and later executed in Târgoviște. Ypsilantis and his Greek revolutionaries pillaged whatever supplies they could from the countryside before retreating back to Greece, with several of Vladimirescu's most accomplished generals following suit. In the end, the Revolution of 1821 would prove to be futile, but the radical ideas which had spread as a result, combined with the devastation of much of Wallachia's rural peasant base, would soon prove the kindling for later years.

Lingering resentment over Ottoman occupation would simmer beneath greater Danubian ethos for the years to come. Due to the mass banditry which ensued between the fighting of Ottoman irregulars and of Vladimirescu's ill-trained bandit army, the Ottoman's increased taxation as a result of the rebellion would take years to fully repay, which in turn had a mutually crippling effect on the daily life of Wallachia's people. In display of solidarity between common brothers, Moldavian intellectuals and reformist clergymen, inspired by Enlightenment ideals, would often make pilgrimage to aid in their recovery, who in turn often interacted with Wallachian revolutionaries who had partook in Vladimirescu's rebellion or those who harbored sympathies towards his rebellious character. The actions of the clergy in particular often earned the scorn of much of the higher echelons of the Orthodox Church and the boyar aristocracy, over whom the issue of slavery of Gypsies in the Principalities became a hotly contested issue. Many younger and lower-ranking clergy, inspire by Enlightenment ideals of abolitionism and the natural rights of man, which was syncretically combined with the teachings of Christ, had taken fault with the adoption of slavery, which in turn would continue to send rifts across the Orthodox world between revolutionary reformists and the entrenched elites.

Soon after, inspired by the recent Russo-Turkish War of 1828, several intellectuals and clergy of the Orthodox Church opted to fight as co-belligerents in the ensuing war. Leading the 1828 Revolution would be Ionică Tăutu, a Moldavian low-ranking boyar, Enlightenment-inspired pamphleteer, and craftsman, whom returned from self-exile in Constantinople two years prior. With the intention of initially enacting sweeping social reforms - most prudently the issue of slavery and peasants rights - the revolt quickly turned into the outright abolition of the boyar class and the removal of Ottoman influence from the Principalities. Fighting alongside him would become a distinguished figure, a Macedonian prince by the name of Aleksandar Konstantin Valentinov, who won several key victories over the Ottomans such as in the Battle of Silistra, where he and his revolutionaries would route the Ottoman armies along the Danube and would chase them all the way to the Black Sea. In spite of the sweeping military successes of the rebellion, Ionică passed away in late 1828, which in turn heavily fractured the rebellion along separate lines of concession. Some held fast to Ionică's ideals of the creation of a new constitution in the Principalities inspired by western ideals, including proposed habeas corpus, free trade, as well as a radical definition of private ownership which denied confiscation under any circumstances. Ionică himself was an adversary of the French Revolution, citing the necessity for the privileges of the boyar class in maintaining social order in stark contrast to the actions of Napoleon. Nevertheless, he found his ideas co-opted by various revolutionaries: In particular, Wallachian poet and revolutionary Sorin Cosminescu, who demanded from the revolutionary goals an abolition of the boyar and ecclesiastical aristocracy, sweeping land reforms for the peasantry, free press, free assembly, and the establishment of a revolutionary Republic.

In the aftermath and much like its predecessor in 1821, the revolution failed to achieve many of the original demands outlined by its founding revolutionaries. Moldavian revolutionaries were more willing to compromise than those found in Wallachia, which lead to many original demands being dropped or lessened in severity. The result was outlined in the 1829 Treaty of Adrianople: Greece would be given full independence while Serbia would be given autonomy. The Danubian Principalities would be jointed together under the same judiciary state with extended autonomy, while both Wallachia and Moldavia remained to serve as Russian protectorates. Wallachia in particular would also gain control over Dobruja, with the exception of the city of Köstence (Romanian: Constanța) to act as the Ottoman forward garrison in the region. In practice, the Principalities operated de facto as independent states, and in spite of the nominal political union between Wallachia and Moldavia, the two remained as functionally independent entities: Both had separate heads of state under different princes, had their own sets of laws even written in separate scripts. Although the Principalities are de jure a Russian protectorate, in reality they are sparsely protected, and Russian hard power over the Principalities remains minute, sparing Russian garrisons stationed in Chișinău and Cetatea Albă.

As a result, the Revolution of 1828 was often seen as abortive or incomplete: It gained for the Principalities a little more political freedom, but did little to alleviate the social demands of many of its revolutionaries in regards to issues such as slavery, elections, and the powers of the boyars. It did achieve one vital thing, however: It gave the confidence in Danubian revolutionaries that the Ottomans could be militarily defeated. Many in Moldavia, inspired by the Revolution of 1828 and the courageous actions in the Napoleonic Wars, fashioned themselves into self-styled revolutionary hussar corps which they called "Cărvunari", after an antiquated Romanian rendition of the Italian carbonari. Following in their lead, the first organized liberal movement, taking inspiration from the French Revolution and having for its stated purpose the encouragement of culture, was Societatea Filarmonică (the Philharmonic Society), established in 1833. Both would grow in magnitude and influence throughout the recent years, heavily inspired from Napoleonic ideals of liberty and the heroic mythos which had grown around figures such as Vladimirescu and Tăutu, where they call for a truly unified Principalities free of Ottoman influence.

Many revolutionaries take note from or actively collaborate with several revolutionaries from other South European states, in particular Serbian revolutionaries, with whom the mutual cooperation and ease of travel between one another has formed a hotbed of revolutionary activity all across the Balkans. With the outbreak of even more insurrectionist activity, including mass peasant strikes in 1834 as well as the combined actions of the Cărvunari and the Societatea against the Ottomans in Constanța - both of which invited heavy-handed responses from the latter - it would not take much to ignite this powder keg once again...

Historical Characters:

Fath-Ali Shah Qajar: The second Shah of Qajar Iran, reigning from 1797 to 1834. He is responsible for the Franco-Persian alliance and its military victories against Russia in the Caucasus. He is the grandfather of Mohammad Shah Qajar.

Abbas Mirza: The Crown Prince of Iran, who died in 1833. Because the Crown Prince had died before the Shah, succession was passed along to his son, Mohammad Mirza (later Mohammad Shah.) This triggered a crisis in 1834 where his brothers attempted to assert control of the throne.

Hossein Ali Mirza: Another son of Fath-Ali Shah Qajar, although not the Crown Prince. Despite this, and because of his brother's death in 1833, Hossein Ali declared himself Shah in the autumn of 1834. He was defeated by loyalists to Mohammad Shah Qajar and was imprisoned. He died of cholera in 1835.

Abol-Qasem Qa'em-Maqam: The first Grand Vizier of Mohammad Shah Qajar. Although loyal to both Fath-Ali Shah and Mohammad Shah, Abol-Qasem lost much of his influence after the coronation of the new Shah. At the insistence of Mohammad Shah's mentor, Hajj Mirza Aqasi, Abol-Qasem was strangled to death in 1835.

Qajari Imperial Court:

Mohammad Shah Qajar: The current Shah of Qajar Iran. Young, inexperienced, and previously a quiet and unassuming child, Mohammad Shah is responsible for asserting Persian authority in the Middle East. He must also struggle with the leftovers of Napoleon's empire in the form of the French exiles.

Hajj Mirza Aqasi: Mohammad Shah's longtime mentor and advisor, formalized under his current reign as the Grand Vizier. A mysterious Sufi, he is distrusted by the Islamic clerics of Iran. There are many who believe that Aqasi controls the empire, speaking through Mohammad Shah as a figurehead. There is an underlying cunning to Aqasi, as he came to power himself after convincing the Shah to kill his previous Grand Vizier.

Mirza Abolhassan Khan Ilchi: The Qajari foreign minister. Mirza Abolhassan had achieved great success negotiating the return of Caucasian territories to the Franco-Persian alliance during its wars with Russia. He was loyal to Fath-Ali Shah and later his grandson, Mohammad Shah. Mirza Abolhassan is still able to exert great diplomatic pressure in order to achieve Iranian goals.

Bonapartist Exiles in Iran:

Pierre Amédée Jaubert: One of Napoleon's former orientalist advisors who had been sent to Iran in 1805. Under the "Jaubert Mission", he established the foundation of the Franco-Persian alliance and paved the way for Fath-Ali Shah's assistance towards Napoleon Bonaparte during his invasion of Russia. After Napoleon's eventual defeat, Jaubert remained in Iran under Mohammad Shah's exile-friendly court.

Claude Matthieu: Arriving shortly after Jaubert, Matthieu served as an officer in Napoleon's army. He was responsible for the military transformation of the Qajari forces. With improved training, organization, leadership, and equipment, the Persians were able to decisively defeat the Russians and regain much of their lost Caucasian territory. As with Jaubert, Matthieu remained in Iran after Napoleon's defeat, certain that his career would be over back home if he ever returned.

The Russo-Persian wars defined the perilous state of the Qajar dynasty at the turn of the 19th century. Territories in the Caucasus traditionally belonging to Iran had swapped hands at the end of the 18th century as the Georgian monarch Erekle II pledged allegiance to Russia instead of the Persians. Infuriated, the reigning monarch of Persia, Fath-Ali Shah Qajar, declared war on the Russians in 1804. Despite early victories against the Russians, the Persians were quickly outmatched by superior Russian technology and military organization once advanced Tsarist weapons were shipped to the theater.

To this end, the Qajars tried to strike a deal with the British in exchange for assistance in the war. Yet they were denied, as their previous agreements only included help against French invasion, not Russian. Fath-Ali Shah turned to the French, striking a deal with Napoleon in 1807. French forces arrived in Iran to modernize and instruct the fledging Qajar tribal military, in exchange for direct support to a potential French invasion of British India. This invasion never happened, as the French were far more tied up in Europe than anticipated. In 1807, the French schemes to diplomatically pacify the Russians and focus on the British threat were disrupted when Napoleon reneged on agreements made at the Treaties of Tilsit.

Russia, believing that France was in violation of the treaty after its agreements about the Prussian monarchy fell through, was infuriated. No armistice with the Russians was ever signed, and the French continued to work with the Persian military to equip and train them with great haste. Napoleon recognized Fath-Ali Shah’s claims to Georgia in the Caucasus, keeping the Persians on good diplomatic terms while he prepared for continued war with Russia. In the Caucasus, the Perso-Russian War came to a standstill as small fronts of elite French-trained Iranian forces put up fierce resistance against Russian invaders.

In 1812, when Napoleon invaded Russia once again, the situation for the Tsarist kingdom was dire. Napoleon burned down Moscow, sending the Russian state into panic. The Iranians retook large parts of Armenia and Azerbaijan, though were kept from Georgia and Dagestan in the north. A truce between the two countries was settled as the Iranians consolidated their gains and Russia caused great losses against Napoleon’s armies.

Fath-Ali Shah, bolstered by this victory, celebrated all things French. Bribing French diplomats and officials with lavish gifts, gold, and large tracts of land, he declared himself a Francophile and praised the character of the Franco-Persian alliance. French scientists, educators, generals, doctors, and bureaucratic professionals were encouraged to modernize all facets of Persian society. Upper-class Tehranis dressed like Parisians, adopting French slang and language as high fashion. The military changed out their tribal garb for Napoleonic uniforms, organizing their armies after the French.

With French influence in the Persian systems of bureaucracy, the Qajars consolidated their hold over Iran. Traditionally, the Persians lacked a form of centrally controlling the tribes in their borders. The concept of the gendarmerie, imported from France, rapidly improved the reach of the Qajars’ rule. The long arm of the law could now stretch from Tehran to the most remote corners of Persia, thanks to ruthlessly efficient gendarmes patrolling the rural areas by the 1820s. Systems of industrialization, capital employment, and trade turned the Persian Gulf into a series of boom towns. Fath-Ali Shah was, however, criticized for his tendency to allow very high shares of these companies to be owned by the French.

When Napoleon suffered his defeat in Europe and exiled to Elba, it was said that Fath-Ali Shah mourned. Diplomatic relations with the Bourbons were often tense, the Persians refusing to cooperate on much. French companies, weakened from the Empire’s decline, lost their grip to entrepreneurial Persians. Napoleon in Elba, of course, plotted his return to France and eventually succeeded: the Persians were happy to see their friend return, watching the anti-Napoleon coalition’s rout at Waterloo with great interest. They approached France with a proposition: an invasion into the underbelly of Russia utilizing their French-trained military, to take advantage of the postwar chaos. Napoleon agreed, publicly asserting Iranian rights to Georgia and Dagestan.

The Iranians continued their Francophile regime even after Napoleon's final defeat. Encouraged again by the decade-old proclamation by the Emperor of Europe, the Persians took to arms and invaded the Caucasus again in 1832. The war brought some territorial gains to the Persians but was severely hampered by the death of Fath-Ali Shah in October of 1834. His designated heir, Abbas Mirza, had passed away in 1833. His 24-year-old son, Mohammad, was selected to take the throne instead. Drama struck the Peacock Throne shortly after Fath-Ali Shah’s death, as his son Ali Mirza attempted to take the throne in defiance of his father’s choice of heir. Ali Mirza reigned for forty days before being deposed by a court loyalist to Fath-Ali Shah. Mohammad was crowned king: Mohammad Shah Qajar.

This turbulence had distracted the Persian military, who were left defending battle positions in the Caucasus for almost three months in the winter of 1834-1835. The Persians could ultimately not muster the momentum to push fully into Chechnya and Dagestan and settled for an armistice slightly more beneficial than a white peace. Some territories were recaptured, but the goal of marching Persian troops deep into the North Caucasus was not accomplished. Napoleon fell to the British coalition during his invasion of the United Kingdom shortly thereafter: the uncertainty put a pause to Persian military ambitions.

Mohammad Shah Qajar had lived his life almost entirely under the Francophile craze in Iran and was no different than his predecessor. Humiliated and disgraced French officers, who could not stand what was being done to France, were gladly accepted by the Qajar dynasty in Persia. French advisors were popular with Mohammad Shah, and he gladly took anyone he could get. With some leverage, Mohammad Shah permanently employed these French expatriates in exchange for loyalty to the Persian monarchy. Such activities concerned the former coalition in Europe, who would rapidly become concerned that the Shah sought to become a Napoleon of his own.

The grand aspirations of the Persian state, headed by the sickly but devoted Mohammad Shah, are enough to trigger interest from the European powers. Mohammad Shah eyes the east, the French advisors to the throne seeking to further Napoleon’s late plan of taking India from the British. Russia, too, is on edge for a Persian re-invasion of the Caucasus and Central Asia. The Ottomans, always wary of their traditional rivals, are on guard against the Iranians.

Inside Iran, the Westernization is enough to drive fault lines between the traditional Shiite beliefs and newer Western ideals. The old guard of clergy, bazaaris, and feudal lords eye the new “progressive” Shah with intense hesitation and resentment. At any time, he may feel bold enough to take away their traditional sources of wealth and power. The French foreigners in Tehran are replacing the Iranian tribes, angering those far from the capital. As Persia seeks to play the “great game” at the behest of its Francophile tendencies, many at home are not happy with the choice. How they choose to act out remains to be seen.

Name: Vilayet of Egypt

Leader: Muhammad Ali of Egypt

History: Taking advantage of the power vacuum left in Egypt due to the departure of the Napoleonic Expedition which had taken it from the Ottoman Empire in the last years of the eighteenth century, Muhammad Ali Pasha, an Albanian commander who was part of the Ottoman forces sent to reoccupy Egypt, used the personal troops under his employ as well as his canny political skills to play the old elites and his fellow newcomers against each other, eventually rising to power as Egypt's new governor. As the Napoleonic Wars wound down, he dispatched his chief rivals, the Mamluks, through a bloody massacre that broke their power forever.

This allowed him to pass vital reforms without interference, such as the nationalization of land and the taxation of charitable endowments. Through a monopoly on trade and the improvement of Egypt's much-neglected agricultural system, he made enough revenue to not just buy Western weapons, but build factories that produced muskets and a shipyard capable of building 100-gun warships (this was IRL). He built dams, and technical schools, and allowed European Businesses to enter the country as long as they contributed part of their profits to his treasury. This allowed for rapid modernization and development, especially as he also sent students to Europe in order to make sure that he had specialists who knew how his weapons worked.

Eventually, he managed to provoke a dispute between himself and the Governor of Syria (which included everything from Antioch to Jerusalem at this time), which he used as a cassus belli for rebelling against the Ottoman Empire and invading it, bringing it down to its knees with his new modernized army, which advanced almost to Constantinople itself until the West sent an ultimatum: Back down or be broken. When he refused, he met his first serious setback, with his forces and navy being defeated and being beaten back to Cicilia, where he managed to save his conquests by making hasty diplomatic concessions, including pledging loyalty to the Sultan in exchange for continued rulership of Southeastern Anatolia and the Levant.

As he reconsolidated his position, the next challenge was a rebellion in Palestine, where high taxes and loss of power caused both peasants and local elites to revolt against his rule. Crushing this rebellion with immense brutality (a dark side to his rule), Muhammad Ali rebuilt his modern army and navy, careful to deal delicately with the Europeans so that they do not interfere. During that time, he sent expeditions south to make sure the region of Sudan was under his thumb, providing valuable gold to further finance his modernization programs while securing the best possible education for his sons and grandsons.

His ambitions were temporarily held in check by his realization that the European Powers would brook no threat to the status quo in the Middle East, and so Muhammad Ali focused on Sudan and the Levant and their development. Sudan was both brutally pacified and searched for mineral resources, while Greater Syria's cities, including Jerusalem and Damascus, were put under the new central administration. Plans were also made to take advantage of Ethiopia's troubles to the south, as that country was still in civil war...