Different German unification

[JJohnson]

After seeing a nice new timeline with a different take on German unification it got me wondering about an alternate scenario. Is there a possibility that the 1848 revolution could have any chance of unifying the German lands in the German confederation of the time into an actual federal structure? And with such a unification happening, do you think France would risk a war against that country? Could such a war, if it happened, be an excuse to take Alsace-Lorraine from France even earlier than 1871? What kind of country would an 1848-baseline Germany be? I'm researching now, but some direction and ideas would be appreciated. I'm thinking such a Germany could avoid the Prussian militarism that led into WW1, but I doubt it will avoid entirely a European war at some point in the late 19th to early 20th century over something or other.

 

[Mikestone8]

After seeing a nice new timeline with a different take on German unification it got me wondering about an alternate scenario. Is there a possibility that the 1848 revolution could have any chance of unifying the German lands in the German confederation of the time into an actual federal structure? And with such a unification happening, do you think France would risk a war against that country? Could such a war, if it happened, be an excuse to take Alsace-Lorraine from France even earlier than 1871? What kind of country would an 1848-baseline Germany be? I'm researching now, but some direction and ideas would be appreciated. I'm thinking such a Germany could avoid the Prussian militarism that led into WW1, but I doubt it will avoid entirely a European war at some point in the late 19th to early 20th century over something or other.

It's more likely to be Russia that intervenes. As it was they came to Austria's help in Hungary, and would probably do likewise against Prussia.

 

[JJohnson]

This is the other timeline I've been reading, which looks really well done. I'm curious as to what the future of such a Europe would look like in 2013.

 

[Beer]

Hi!

First a thank you that you find my new TL interesting! Technically, if someone just would kick Friedrich Wilhelm IV to take the crown presented by the Paulskirche, it would happen. Only because of "image reasons" FW4 did not take the crown OTL.
I doubt that France would or could truly intervene, they had their own "packet to lift" at that time. Equally I doubt that someone would try for A-L, because a) a war directly then is highly improbable and b) even OTL taking Alsace-Lorraine was not decided without differening opinions. If there is no war, it is not even on the plate at all

I have to disagree with Mikestone. The Russians would not attacked Prussia and the new Germany! The relations with the Bear were quite well for most of the 19th. century. Russia did intervene in Hungary only because of an explicit request by Vienna.
There would be tensions later on, but around 1848 there would have been no war, if a unification would have happened.

 

[MrHaakwood]

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=148492

Have fun

 

[Mikestone8]

I have to disagree with Mikestone. The Russians would not attacked Prussia and the new Germany! The relations with the Bear were quite well for most of the 19th. century. Russia did intervene in Hungary only because of an explicit request by Vienna.
There would be tensions later on, but around 1848 there would have been no war, if a unification would have happened.

There would have to be war.

Austria would never have acquiesced without a fight, and she would at the least have had Bavaria and Wurttemberg (which had never adhered to Prussia's Erfurt Union) as allies. And the Tsar can't allow her to lose, since this could lead to an independent Hungary (which wasn't finally beaten until August) on his Polish border. And at the first defeat, Prussia's northern allies, Hanover and Saxony, will probably defect.

If you want to turn the Confederation into a closer union, your best bet is to kill off Bismarck before Summer 1863, and have Wilhelm I go to the Congress of Princes. If he and Franz Josef can reach a deal, then you're in business.

 

[Beer]

Austria would never have acquiesced without a fight, and she would at the least have had Bavaria and Wurttemberg (which had never adhered to Prussia's Erfurt Union) as allies.

By your leave, that is daffery! If you would study the inner-german politics of the Era you would see that in Austria two directions fight for the top position. The "Austria first" faction under von Biegeleben and the moderates under von Rechberg, who would accept a unification under prussian leadership, even a unification without Austria, in exchange of several guarantees, like a guarantee of the still austrian italian possessions and a free hand in the Balkans. (By the way von Rechberg had a good personal rapport with Bismarck)
OTL due to several events adding up, Bismarck could not give von Rechberg the wished for guarantees, so von Biegelebens confrontational course prevailed. Change just a handful smaller events, then Bismarck can give the guarantees von Rechberg wanted. This would give von Rechberg the lead and with that the 1866 war will not happen.
Besides, you mix something about the Erfurt Union up with other reasons.

 

[Mikestone8]

By your leave, that is daffery! If you would study the inner-german politics of the Era you would see that in Austria two directions fight for the top position. The "Austria first" faction under von Biegeleben and the moderates under von Rechberg, who would accept a unification under prussian leadership, even a unification without Austria, in exchange of several guarantees, like a guarantee of the still austrian italian possessions and a free hand in the Balkans. (By the way von Rechberg had a good personal rapport with Bismarck)
OTL due to several events adding up, Bismarck could not give von Rechberg the wished for guarantees, so von Biegelebens confrontational course prevailed. Change just a handful smaller events, then Bismarck can give the guarantees von Rechberg wanted. This would give von Rechberg the lead and with that the 1866 war will not happen.
Besides, you mix something about the Erfurt Union up with other reasons.

Which "era" are you talking about?

IN 1849 Bismarck's opinions are irrelevant, since he isn't in power yet. And the Erfurt Union is highly relevant inasmuch as states which were unwilling to join that are presumably even less likely to go along with FW4 proclaiming himself Emperor.

If you mean 1863, it's not at all clear to me that Franz Josef called the Congress of Princes just to acquiesce in a Germany under Prussian leadership, and still less one without Austria. He considered himself the leading German Prince, and any minister who advised him to renounce that position without a fight would have been unlikely to keep his portfolio for very long.

 

[Beer]

Hi!

@Mikestone
As said, you mix things up. That the diet of Princes was called in at all was the making of the Austria first faction. FJ did that because he wanted to affirm his standing as the leading monarch, no question.
BUT von Rechberg´s faction was in decline at that moment, because he could not deliver the guarantees. Would he have been able to get them, the diet of princes would NEVER have happened. Because if you read the old documents, it becomes clear that for Vienna guarantees from the other states for help in Italy if needed and a free hand in the Balkans were infinitely more desirable than be leading state in the Confederation.
Austria´s main goals had developed differently after 1815 than most other german states and von Rechberg saw that. IN OTL due to the events going as they did, von Biegeleben and his confrontational course got step by step more important. Had von Rechberg been successful, von Biegeleben would have been sidelined fast. By the way, von Rechberg was foreign minister of Austria quite a time, only replaced after 1866. So much for "any minister...".

 

[Mikestone8]

Hi!

@Mikestone
As said, you mix things up. That the diet of Princes was called in at all was the making of the Austria first faction. FJ did that because he wanted to affirm his standing as the leading monarch, no question.
BUT von Rechberg´s faction was in decline at that moment, because he could not deliver the guarantees. Would he have been able to get them, the diet of princes would NEVER have happened. Because if you read the old documents, it becomes clear that for Vienna guarantees from the other states for help in Italy if needed and a free hand in the Balkans were infinitely more desirable than be leading state in the Confederation.

Still not sure I follow. I don't doubt for a moment that Franz Josef would have welcomed the guarantees of which you speak, but I don't see how the Congress of Princes depended on them. FJ was the President of the Confederation and heir of the old HRE, so for him more power in Germany was a worthwhile objective in itself. His timing had more to do with the current constitutional crisis in Prussia, which he hoped would make King Wilhelm more amenable. He didn't realise what Bismarck was capable of.

Also, look at the desperate efforts Bismarck made to prevent the King from going to Frankfurt. What was he in such a lather about if the Congress was doomed to failure? He could have quite cheerfully let Wilhelm go, fail to reach agreement with FJ, and come back in a bad temper feeling thoroughly anti-Austrian. Bismarck was all too clearly scared out of his tiny mind that Wilhelm and FJ would reach agreement, and that he might find himself no longer needed.

 

[Beer]

Hi!

@Mikestone
I think you miss the point. OTL the Austria first faction had the ear of FJ, because the moderates around von Rechberg could not get the guarantees they wanted from Prussia to show. So the diet of Princes was called in because the moderates had lost and Vienna wanted to show that they were the big guys in the ring and to kick Prussia.
If the situation had been a bit different and Bismarck´s situation had allowed for giving von Rechberg the guarantees (as said in addition they had a really good rapport), von Rechberg´s moderate side would become the greater influence on FJ.
The diet of Princes 1863 would then not have happened (as said, that calling in was the work of the austria first guys, which in our hypothetical ATL were now on the sidelines) and a later alternate diet would have called in and would have been successful, because in the meantime von Rechberg and Bismarck could have drawn up a compromise both sides could live with.

 

[Boto von Ageduch]

Why do you all take for granted that Austria is out of this business?

If you say "united Germany!" in a 1848 context, this implies all German-speaking countries (except those in Switzerland). And that is the whole dilemma.

The Paulskirche Constitution explicitly ruled that a foreign monarch must not obtain a German crown (in one of the German states), and that a German monarch must abdicate before accepting a foreign crown.

Basically, this rules out the possibility of the Austrian Emperor holding at the same time the crowns of Hungary, Croatia, Bohemia etc.

The idea of leaving Austria out of it only came up because of this dilemma, but it didn't really catch on until implemented with force.

So let's think of alternate ways of solving this situation:
One compromise would be that the Austrian Emperor also is crowned German Emperor - but only having transferred the rule over the non-German speaking parts of his Empire to a close relative. Then Austria-Hungary will no longer exist as a single state - at least formally - but be replaced by a close alliance. (This could make the political situation more stable in the long run, but it might as well aggravate the conflict between Czechs, Croatians etc. against the privileged Hungarians.)

But why should Austria consent to such a massive work-over of its internal affairs?
I think you need two ingredients for that:
- Get Austria into some trouble, so that their position is somewhat weaker - preferrably if the unification tends to improve it.
- Grant Austria the leeway so that the split of the Empire is more or less only formal - for instance, in a way that the administration of non-German Austria-Hungary is effectively handled by officials without much involvement of the monarch - and the top-level officials could even be the same as in the German-speaking regions, obeying the orders of the Emperor.

Of course, there is still the question how Prussia (less so, Bavaria and Saxony) will like the idea of being included in an Austrian-led state. No doubt, Austria the the #1 and has a natural claim on a pan-German throne once it exists. But Prussia might hope to better keep her rival in check without the German crown. But perhaps the Empire-split does the trick? After all, it would at least seem a great relief if Austria is formally cut from its Eastern and Southern possessions.

 

[Simreeve]

1815: George IV pushes the Congress of Vienna into accepting that Salic Law no longer applies to the succession in Hanover, for his daughter's sake.
1837: His niece Victoria inherits Hanover as well as the UK.

1848: The pro-democracy faction in Germany decides that Friedrich Wilhelm is probably still too autocratic for their tastes, and that Victoria (more accustomed to dealing with a parliament, and with enough interests elsewhere to keep her [hopefully] from trying to meddle too much in Germany) would be a better choice as head-of-state.
Victoria accepts their offer, and the UK's government -- for some reason, however unlikely -- doesn't block this.
After considerable debate a German Federation that excludes (for now) not only Austria but Prussia as well is formed.

 

[Mikestone8]

Hi!

@Mikestone
I think you miss the point. OTL the Austria first faction had the ear of FJ, because the moderates around von Rechberg could not get the guarantees they wanted from Prussia to show. So the diet of Princes was called in because the moderates had lost and Vienna wanted to show that they were the big guys in the ring and to kick Prussia.
If the situation had been a bit different and Bismarck´s situation had allowed for giving von Rechberg the guarantees (as said in addition they had a really good rapport), von Rechberg´s moderate side would become the greater influence on FJ.
The diet of Princes 1863 would then not have happened (as said, that calling in was the work of the austria first guys, which in our hypothetical ATL were now on the sidelines) and a later alternate diet would have called in and would have been successful, because in the meantime von Rechberg and Bismarck could have drawn up a compromise both sides could live with.

So what exactly was Bismarck's objection to Wilhem attending the Congress? From what I've read he seems to have been absolutely hysterical at the prospect.

 

[Beer]

So what exactly was Bismarck's objection to Wilhem attending the Congress? From what I've read he seems to have been absolutely hysterical at the prospect.

Hi!
I think that one or two historians were a bit too fond of "plushing up" their work and took a lot too literally. e.g. Bismarck was fond of saying that his "energy reserves were empty" or that he was "too old for all this", sometimes even "too young for this" , already just shortly after becoming PM. It seems, it was some part of Bismarck´s stress coping system.

Anyway, as I wrote before, the Diet of Princes was a try by Austria to take advantage of the internal political problems Prussia had at that time. It should go about a reformation of the German Confederation or without PC, a plan for a unification of the german states - under Vienna´s leadership.
Bismarck feared that if Wilhelm went there, someone could use the internal problems of Prussia to talk the King into giving in. But Bismarck knew that if Prussia did not come to the Diet, it would end without result.
Because unlike von Biegeleben, Bismarck knew the relative likes and dislikes of the german states and was correctly sure, that without a clear message by Prussia (one of the important Great Powers of that time) the small and medium states would not declare for Austria. In 1863, Austria´s goals had quite developed away from those of the other german states. If the same situation had arisen earlier, say 1830, Austrias chances would have been better.

 

[Boto von Ageduch]

1815: George IV pushes the Congress of Vienna into accepting that Salic Law no longer applies to the succession in Hanover, for his daughter's sake.
1837: His niece Victoria inherits Hanover as well as the UK.

1848: The pro-democracy faction in Germany decides that Friedrich Wilhelm is probably still too autocratic for their tastes, and that Victoria (more accustomed to dealing with a parliament, and with enough interests elsewhere to keep her [hopefully] from trying to meddle too much in Germany) would be a better choice as head-of-state.
Victoria accepts their offer, and the UK's government -- for some reason, however unlikely -- doesn't block this.
After considerable debate a German Federation that excludes (for now) not only Austria but Prussia as well is formed.

Not very likely.
As I said about Austria, the democrats-nationalists were extremely crabby about non-German influence on German affairs. (For a not too distant comparison, think of the apprehension of the newly founded USA against recolonialization by any power, and rules to which this led, as about the birth place of the president that is still in place.) You indicate that there would also mostly dissent about it in Britain, so who is left to support this solution?

Moreover, by leaving out Prussia AND Austria you throw out something around 2/3 of all Germans. Is that worth the effort? That was certainly not the purpose of the exercise.

Moreover, the ensuing "German" territory would be extremely lacerated in the North (bordering with Prussia) and highly inconnected. This is another medieval element that Paulskirchians would probably detest as an old-fashioned feudal trait.

 

[Mikestone8]

Hi!
I think that one or two historians were a bit too fond of "plushing up" their work and took a lot too literally. e.g. Bismarck was fond of saying that his "energy reserves were empty" or that he was "too old for all this", sometimes even "too young for this" , already just shortly after becoming PM. It seems, it was some part of Bismarck´s stress coping system.

But if the Congress had no chance of succeeding, then what had he to be stressed about? If it failed, Wilhelm would just return to Berlin, a bit sulky and annoyed with the Austrians, but otherwise nothing changed - which wouldn't harm Bismarck at all.

Anyway, as I wrote before, the Diet of Princes was a try by Austria to take advantage of the internal political problems Prussia had at that time. It should go about a reformation of the German Confederation or without PC, a plan for a unification of the german states - under Vienna´s leadership.
Bismarck feared that if Wilhelm went there, someone could use the internal problems of Prussia to talk the King into giving in. But Bismarck knew that if Prussia did not come to the Diet, it would end without result.

Because unlike von Biegeleben, Bismarck knew the relative likes and dislikes of the german states and was correctly sure, that without a clear message by Prussia (one of the important Great Powers of that time) the small and medium states would not declare for Austria.

IOW, Bismarck feared that if Wilhelm got to Frankfurt, he and FJ would reach agreement and the Reform Act would go through. He did not assume that anything Rechberg did or didn't want would necessarily prevent it.

In 1863, Austria´s goals had quite developed away from those of the other german states. If the same situation had arisen earlier, say 1830, Austrias chances would have been better.

But how is that an argument against the proposed reform? It is indeed possible that a reformed GC still wouldn't help Austria in Italy or the Balkans, but an unreformed one certainly wouldn't. Afaics it is still a "no lose" situation for Austria.

 

[Beer]

But if the Congress had no chance of succeeding, then what had he to be stressed about? If it failed, Wilhelm would just return to Berlin, a bit sulky and annoyed with the Austrians, but otherwise nothing changed - which wouldn't harm Bismarck at all.

I do not say that Bismarck was not stressed, just less than some historians try to project. Bismarck´s fear OTL was, that Wilhelm would give into a type of reform to Austria´s likes, which would harm Prussia aims. To make sure no such thing happened, he worked on the King to not go to Frankfurt, which negated a reform to the likes of Austria automatically. When the King did not go, Bismarck could be sure and satisfied.

IOW, Bismarck feared that if Wilhelm got to Frankfurt, he and FJ would reach agreement and the Reform Act would go through. He did not assume that anything Rechberg did or didn't want would necessarily prevent it.

As said above, OTL and the possible ATL the OT wished for, are two different kind of shoes. In OTL von Rechberg could not influence the Emperor much, because Prussia did not give him the guarantees he would need to change the Emperor´s course.

In ATL Bismarck has the room to give von Rechberg the guarantees he wanted. If von Rechberg gets what he wanted, he could change the course of Austria from confrontational to moderate and conciliatory. The guarantees are the material proof that von Rechberg´s moderate course is better than von Biegeleben´s all or nothing. So in ATL the Diet of Princes would never happen or if, then with a very different mindset, because unlike OTL, Austria and Prussia have an understanding.

 

[Mikestone8]

I do not say that Bismarck was not stressed, just less than some historians try to project. Bismarck´s fear OTL was, that Wilhelm would give into a type of reform to Austria´s likes, which would harm Prussia aims. To make sure no such thing happened, he worked on the King to not go to Frankfurt, which negated a reform to the likes of Austria automatically. When the King did not go, Bismarck could be sure and satisfied.

So sure and satisfied that he slammed a door so violently that the handle came off, and hurled a glass jug across a room.

But anyway, all this seems only to confirm my point - that (at least in Bismarck's opinion) had Wilhelm I gone to Frankfurt he and FJ might well have reached agreement - producing a tighter and more "federal" German Confederation, as desired by the OP. It wouldn't, of course, has been as tightly knit as OTL's Second Reich, but no Germany could be that included Austria and Prussia both.

 

[Beer]

So sure and satisfied that he slammed a door so violently that the handle came off, and hurled a glass jug across a room.

Hi!

One can always misunderstand on purpose. That episode was before the King decided not to go to Frankfurt. And while there are true instances of Bismarck´s strange methods, excentricity and temper in some cases, alot of the anecdotes are of dubious reliability. Bismarck did some of the things, but a sizeable number of told incidents were pinned on him by others without a bit of truth in them.