Congress of Vienna POD

[Monty Burns]

During the Congress of Vienna, the "Saxon question" almost caused a war and was solved by Prussia getting th Rhineland, the Sarre region and Westphalia. IMHO, this is a greatly underestimated decision, as it resulted in Prussia "growing into Germany", whereas Austria "grew out of Germany".

What if Austria noticed this and the redistribution of lands was changed? Let's assume Prussia gets what it got IOTL. But Austria gets the Austrian Netherlands back. The effect o this is Prussia "encircling" northern Germany and Austria "encircling" Prussia.

Although this would be an interesting POD by itself, I already know the next arguments: "What happens elsewhere?". So:

I'd propose Austria giving up all Italian possesions, thus Venice is restored - albeit in the frontiers of the chunk of land Austria lossed to Ialy 1871 IOTL. Dalmatia and Istria stays with Austria as does Trentino. Mailand becomes independent - I assume some ruling family could easily be found. Furthermore, an Italian Confederation is founded, with Britain as "Protector" or something.

And to make thingseven more interesting: let's punish France a bit more: Alsace-Lorraine becomes an indeenent princedom within the German confederation - again there should be no problem in finding a ruling family. Belfort and Metz become federal fortresses. Additionally, France looses Lille, the northeastern frontiers of the Spanish Netherlands 1648 are reestablished for the Austrian Netherlands.

Consequences I could think of so far:
-France is weaker
-easy Italian unification possible
-Austria is more involved in German affairs, especially considering economic union to link Austria proper to the Netherlands
-Austria will industrialize sooner/more due to the early indstrialized Austrian Netherlands
-France will industrialize later

What do you think?

[Susano]

There ar esome problems with your scenario. The most obvious ones are that by the time of the Congress, Austria already owned Venetia-Lombardy. This was merely confirmed at the Conrgess IOTL, and there is really no reason why Austria would give it up without getting compensation somewhere else. And Austria would not accept the Southern Netherlands for that - they were happy to have traded in that difficult to defend, far away exclave for the continus territorial expansion of Venetia-Lombardy.

It also wouldnt solve the problem, really: Prussia "grew into Germany" because, compared to before Napoleon, it traded in ethnic Polish territories with ethnic German territories. That would still happen if it gains Saxony instead of Rhineland-Westphalia for the lost Polish territories...

Of course 1648 borders restored at the Congress is something Ive often championed myself here

[Monty Burns]

OK, I see you points Susano. So what can I do in a pre-congress POD to get this anyway?

Originally Posted by Susano

There ar esome problems with your scenario. The most obvious ones are that by the time of the Congress, Austria already owned Venetia-Lombardy.

Well, Austria governed them - I thought that a whole lot of lands were not governed by the countries to own them later, especially in Italy. How did administrations work in this time of flow anyway?

Originally Posted by Susano

Austria would not accept the Southern Netherlands for that - they were happy to have traded in that difficult to defend, far away exclave for the continus territorial expansion of Venetia-Lombardy.

That's definitely a problem.

I thought aout several reasons for this outcome of the Congress:
1. Prussia got a far away, catholic exclave although it wanted continuous expansion, so Austria could be forced to accept the same?
2. The other powers might support this to bring Austria closer to France and have the Netherlands better defended against France. They'd use Austria and Prussia as a bulwark against France. Maybe Napoleon does better in the 100 days so fear of France is greater and the other powers feel "safer" with Austria in the North and Britain bound on the continent as protector of an Itali confederation?
3. I once read that such a Italian confederation was planned, especially supported by Britain. This should be easier without Austria dominating the north of Italy.
4. The principle of "Legitimity" an "Restauration" should also apply for Venice. Why didn't it anyway?

Originally Posted by Susano

It also wouldnt solve the problem, really: Prussia "grew into Germany" [...] That would still happen [...]

Well yes, I just tried to do something similar with Austria. If Austria has a significant exclave on the western frontier of Germany, it should bemore interested in cooperation, especially economic cooperation. IOTL, Austria stayed outside of the tariff union. ITTL Austria would strongly consider being part of it.



Anyway, I'm going to look up your Congress of Vienna PODs!

[bobbis14]

Austria never really wanted the Netherlands, they only got them because Britain didn't want France to have it. They are in a strong barganing position, it'd be far more wise for them to stick with their holdings in North Italy

[Susano]

I dunno if I have made many threads about the Congress, though I like to post in such threads. You could look up Valdemar II's threads, hes another Congress Fan Off top of my hand theres only this of me (with the intent to have a wanked German Confederation and a punished France )

Originally Posted by Monty Burns

OK, I see you points Susano. So what can I do in a pre-congress POD to get this anyway?

Well, if the Nassau-Oranges dont manage to get their act together and the Netherlands are chaotic, then the Congress might... not be inclined to give the Southern Netherlands to them. But even then Prussia (which, as said, had the SNL occupied during the Congress) would probably be a more logical choice as a strong barrier power to France than Austria - those geographcial distances simply are a problem.

Alternatively, if Bavaria doesnt change sides like the rest of the German states, the Congress could treat them as a defeated power - Austria could be given Bavaria, while the Bavarian King could gain the SNL as compensation. Of course, an independant SNL at the border to France could be seen as problematic...

Well, Austria governed them - I thought that a whole lot of lands were not governed by the countries to own them later, especially in Italy. How did administrations work in this time of flow anyway?

Good question. In Napoleonic times already near every year had territorial changes somewhere in Germany. I do wonder at times, too, how the various
administrations managed to cope with that...

However, Austria had already been given Venetia in 1797, before Napoleon. Napoleon later conquered it again, yes, but due to that Austria formally reannexed those lands, and did not merely hold them in administration during the Congress.

1. Prussia got a far away, catholic exclave although it wanted continuous expansion, so Austria could be forced to accept the same?

It wasnt that far away for Prussia. At the closest distance the two parts were merely a bit more than 50km apart. Besides, Prussia did have few alternatives, as Austria, France and GB were absolutely opposed to Prussia fully annexing Saxony (though if theyd really go to war about that - probably not. It wouldve been a gamble though, and everybody wanted a successful Congress). Austria had an alternative, though: Veneto-Lombardy.

2. The other powers might support this to bring Austria closer to France and have the Netherlands better defended against France. They'd use Austria and Prussia as a bulwark against France. Maybe Napoleon does better in the 100 days so fear of France is greater and the other powers feel "safer" with Austria in the North and Britain bound on the continent as protector of an Itali confederation?

Yeah as I said abive... But a far away exclave doesnt really make for a good bulwark, and Prussia would hence be a better choice for that.

3. I once read that such a Italian confederation was planned, especially supported by Britain. This should be easier without Austria dominating the north of Italy.

Why? The German Confederation includes Luxemburg (belonging to the United Netherlands) , Schleswig-Holstein (in personal and partly even institutional union with Denmark) and Hannover (personal union with the UK), to say nothing of how both Prussia and Austria were partly within and without it. So why couldnt Austria be a member for its Lombardian and Venetian territories? As it is a great power and stable supporter of restauration one could even give it the Presidency, though of course it already has the Presidency of the German Confederation...

4. The principle of "Legitimity" an "Restauration" should also apply for Venice. Why didn't it anyway?

Why didnt it apply to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and most little German states from before the French Revolution? Restauration really only referred to the political order/iodeology - territorial restauration everywhere would not have been accepted by most states who had gained land at the expense of those absorbed smaller states.

Well yes, I just tried to do something similar with Austria. If Austria has a significant exclave on the western frontier of Germany, it should bemore interested in cooperation, especially economic cooperation. IOTL, Austria stayed outside of the tariff union. ITTL Austria would strongly consider being part of it.

It stayed outside of it because its economy just was not up to the standard of the rest of Germany. That wouldnt change, and far away as the SNL would be a toll-free link to it would not be all that big a thing... The only thing I could really see is the German Confederation being strengthened, as as said Austria has the Presidency. Both efforts of Prussia to unite Germany around itself were also about destroying the Confederation, after all, so as counterweight Austria could try to strengthen it (and in fact tried in the 60s - but by then it was too late, and Bismarck opposed the efforts ardently).

[Valdemar II]

Originally Posted by Susano

Why? The German Confederation includes Luxemburg (belonging to the United Netherlands) , Schleswig-Holstein (in personal and partly even institutional union with Denmark) and Hannover (personal union with the UK), to say nothing of how both Prussia and Austria were partly within and without it. So why couldnt Austria be a member for its Lombardian and Venetian territories? As it is a great power and stable supporter of restauration one could even give it the Presidency, though of course it already has the Presidency of the German Confederation...

Incorrect it included Holstein and Lauenburg, while Schleswig was part of the same inherience as Holstein, it was a feudal duchy which swore fealthy to Denmark, which was also in personal union with it, Holstein and Lauenburg.

[Monty Burns]

OK, you convinced me that Austria, if it has the choice, would go for Lombardo-Venetia. So how could I deny them this choice?

For once, I still believe that Venice could be restored:

Originally Posted by Susano

However, Austria had already been given Venetia in 1797, before Napoleon.

True, Austria got Venice before Napoleon became Emperor, or even first consul. Yet it got Venice as a direct consequence of the revolutionary wars which as a whole were at disposition in Vienna.

Originally Posted by Susano

Why didnt [the principle of restauration] apply to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and most little German states from before the French Revolution? Restauration really only referred to the political order/iodeology - territorial restauration everywhere would not have been accepted by most states who had gained land at the expense of those absorbed smaller states.

Considering the German smaller states and the clerical states, they were dissolved by the Reichsdeputationshauptschluss, thus one could argue that the old Empire decided to do it, and it was not a direct ruling by revolutionary France or Napoleon himself.

I've to admit that this is only a legal question, really...

The Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, on the other side, was dissolved by the neighbouring three great powers. The failure of the Koscuiszko Uprising gave an excuse. Again, not a direct conequence of involvement of revolutionary France or Napoleon.

Venice on the other side was conquered by revolutionary France explicitly to be given to Austria in exchange for other territories. Thus one can argue that Venice ended due to France, unlike the other examples. Again, however, rather a question of legal definition...

Nevertheless, aside from introducing a legal system of restauration into the Congress that helps Venice to survive, what about really surviving? Sardinia-Piemont survived on Sardinia. Could Venice survive on Korfu or Crete or Morea (assuming they'd still hold them)? For example the Venetian fleet fleeing the French and supporting the British during the wars? And then the surviving Venetian government in exile demands the Terra Ferma back?

[Susano]

Originally Posted by Valdemar II

Incorrect it included Holstein and Lauenburg, while Schleswig was part of the same inherience as Holstein, it was a feudal duchy which swore fealthy to Denmark, which was also in personal union with it, Holstein and Lauenburg.

...I have no idea what hit me there. Youre completly right of course.

Originally Posted by Monty Burns

OK, you convinced me that Austria, if it has the choice, would go for Lombardo-Venetia. So how could I deny them this choice?

For that somebody else has to hold Venice firmly in its grip, I think. Or maybe a buffer state between Austria and Italy makes sense. Maybe a Napoleonic or Radical Italy (under Murat, maybe)? But its hard to imagine how such an Italy could hold, yet France could not...

True, Austria got Venice before Napoleon became Emperor, or even first consul. Yet it got Venice as a direct consequence of the revolutionary wars which as a whole were at disposition in Vienna.

Considering the German smaller states and the clerical states, they were dissolved by the Reichsdeputationshauptschluss, thus one could argue that the old Empire decided to do it, and it was not a direct ruling by revolutionary France or Napoleon himself.

You contradict yourself there Yes, the Empire decided the Reichsdeputationshauptschluss, but it was a direct consequence of that treaty with Revolutionary France that ceded the territories west of the Rhine. But most essentially, the Congress had no legal bounds, and its ideals were only followed as far as that wasnt an inconvinience to the Great Powers..

The Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, on the other side, was dissolved by the neighbouring three great powers. The failure of the Koscuiszko Uprising gave an excuse. Again, not a direct conequence of involvement of revolutionary France or Napoleon.

Hm, I dunno how much it was a reason and how much a pretext. I think the powers were indeed scared enough by Poland so that they might truely have feared Poland going radical, too. Now wether it was reason or trigger, without the French Revolution it most likely wouldnt have happened...

Nevertheless, aside from introducing a legal system of restauration into the Congress that helps Venice to survive, what about really surviving? Sardinia-Piemont survived on Sardinia. Could Venice survive on Korfu or Crete or Morea (assuming they'd still hold them)? For example the Venetian fleet fleeing the French and supporting the British during the wars? And then the surviving Venetian government in exile demands the Terra Ferma back?

Any such a government would be a non-entity... and didnt the then French Ally Russia conquer the Ionian Islands?

So yes if you want a Venice at all costs I think your best bet is as a buffer state. I just have no idea what could realistcially be at the other side of the buffer...

[Boto von Ageduch]

Originally Posted by Susano

Alternatively, if Bavaria doesnt change sides like the rest of the German states, the Congress could treat them as a defeated power - Austria could be given Bavaria, while the Bavarian King could gain the SNL as compensation.

Wow. That's both a fair distance from OTL and a mind-twisting absurdity. AND it sounds genuinely congress-ish!

So when's the Flamish-Dampfnudel tl going to start? ;-)

[Susano]

Originally Posted by Boto von Ageduch

Wow. That's both a fair distance from OTL and a mind-twisting absurdity. AND it sounds genuinely congress-ish!

So when's the Flamish-Dampfnudel tl going to start? ;-)

Write it!