1703: A Franco-Bavarian army takes Vienna

http://www.uni-mannheim.de/mateo/camenaref/cmh/cmh514.html

With the spring of 1703, the French prepared to utilise the path to Vienna thrown open to them by Bavaria's action. In March Villars secured Kehl, and, pushing across the Black Forest by Villingen, joined the Bavarian Elector near Ulm (May 9), unimpeded by Lewis of Baden, who lay inactive in his celebrated lines of Stolhofen, watched by another French corps under Marshal Tallard. The Elector would not have been there for Villars to join, had but Styrum, who commanded the troops of the Franconian Circle, cooperated with the 19,000 Austrians under Schlick on the Inn. Their failure to unite had allowed the Elector to capture Ratisbon, and to inflict on Schlick's isolated corps a sharp reverse at Scharding (March 11).

Vienna was now in dire peril. Had Villars and the Bavarian Elector pushed on down the Danube, it is difficult to see how the city could have been saved. Lewis of Baden was helpless, Marlborough fully occupied in the distant Netherlands, Hungary actually in insurrection ; and not even Eugene could prevent the army of Italy from being pressed back through Tyrol by Vendôme's superior forces. But, like his son Charles Albert thirty-eight years later, Maximilian Emanuel missed his chance. Intent on securing communication with much-coveted Milan, he turned aside into Tyrol, leaving Villars, much to the French commander's chagrin, to cover his operations against Lewis of Baden, who had come up from Stolhofen with most of his corps and joined Styrum (June). But the conquest of Tyrol did not prove so easy as the Elector anticipated. Though opposed by the peasantry, he reached Innsbruck (July 2) and even pushed a detachment forward to the Brenner Pass, only to find that Vendôme had not arrived. The latter, indeed, never started for Trent till July 20 ; and, by the time he reached it (September 2), the Bavarians, harassed by the Tyrolese mountaineers, who cut off their detachments and threatened their communications, had given up hope of his coming and had beaten a costly retreat to Bavaria (August). During this time Lewis of Baden and Styrum had let slip the chance of combining their forces against Villars, who, profiting by their separation, parried the Margrave's attack on Augsburg by falling on Styrum's weaker force at Höchstädt (September 20) and completely defeating him. This checked Lewis, who had to abandon Augsburg and retire into winter-quarters, just north of the Lake of Constance. Even at this late point in the campaigning season Villars was anxious to try a dash at Vienna, now seriously menaced by the Hungarian insurgents ; but the Elector's refusal to contemplate the project led to violent quarrels between him and Villars, and to the recall of the latter before the next campaign.
WI Villars had convinced the Bavarians to go for Vienna and the city had fallen? Would this be enough to end the war? Would it at least turn the tide in France's favor by securing Hungarian independence and preventing the defection of Savoy?
 

Thande

Donor
That's a nice POD. As for the effects, I'd have to read up on the War of the Spanish Succession a wee bit more to give a qualified opinion...
 
Pretty sure a seizure of Vienna would have ended Autrian activities in the war. (I can't tell whether it was possible in military terms. This is one of the main questions.) Whether the war goes on depends on how the other parties would see their interests satisfied after such a total defeat of Austria.

Paralyzing Austria would create quite a power vacuum - which Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria would love to fill. A Bavarian Emperor is possible - but acceptable for France? Perhaps. But after such a sudden gain in power, England and the Netherlands would readjust their preference for J.F. on the Spanish throne.
Another question, obviously, would be how much of the loot could be stripped off the Habsburgs?


Afaik, Vienna has never been conquered between Migration Period and WWII. So this would create quite a singularity ...
 
Afaik, Vienna has never been conquered between Migration Period and WWII. So this would create quite a singularity ...

Actually Mathias Corvinus conquered the city in the 15th century, and even made it his capital.
About the question proposed, did Joseph Ferdinand have any real claim to the Spanish throne? Because his son's claim came from his mother, not from the Wittelsbachs.
 
Pretty sure a seizure of Vienna would have ended Autrian activities in the war. (I can't tell whether it was possible in military terms. This is one of the main questions.) Whether the war goes on depends on how the other parties would see their interests satisfied after such a total defeat of Austria.

Paralyzing Austria would create quite a power vacuum - which Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria would love to fill. A Bavarian Emperor is possible - but acceptable for France? Perhaps. But after such a sudden gain in power, England and the Netherlands would readjust their preference for J.F. on the Spanish throne.
Another question, obviously, would be how much of the loot could be stripped off the Habsburgs?


Afaik, Vienna has never been conquered between Migration Period and WWII. So this would create quite a singularity ...

Um, proposed fall of Vienna is in 1703. Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria died in 1699. His death was the cause of the war of spanish succession; his death meant that the closest claimants were either Austrian Hapsburgs or French Bourbons. At this stage, I don't see how English or Dutch preference for Joseph Ferdinand (whom they, in fact, were pushing as the next king) would make a difference.

I suppose the only real question is if Britain and the Netherlands fight on, or if they decide to come to the negotiating table sooner or later. Austria cannot fight on without their help, but a major austrian defeat may disenchant them enough that they back out. either way, the french strategic position just got a strong boost.
 
Ahem, right. Certainly the current Bavarian Elector cannot have any claim to the Spanish throne. So looks like all parties which are still capable of action would agree to a Bourbon Spain and a Bavarian as Roman Emperor ...
 
I suppose the only real question is if Britain and the Netherlands fight on, or if they decide to come to the negotiating table sooner or later.

I think that if the French ensured them that the 2 Bourbon monarchies stayed separate (in 1703 both Philip's father and older brother were still alive, so for him to inherit the French throne did not yet seem such a serious threat) and that the Southern Netherlands went to someone else (maybe Prussia, that would be interesting) then the English and Dutch would agree to a peace and hope they can build up some other German state (Bavaria, Prussia) as a bulwark against France.

The source mentions a Bavarian interest in Milan (which I expect Spain and Savoy would also want) and presumably the Tyrol. Does anyone know if the elector wanted anything else? I'm thinking Bohemia and the Habsburg possessions in Swabia, but I don't know if that's what he was thinking.
 
Last edited:
I think that if the French ensured them [.....] that the Southern Netherlands went to someone else (maybe Prussia, that would be interesting) then the English and Dutch would agree to a peace and hope they can build up some other German state (Bavaria, Prussia) as a bulwark against France.

Why not the Netherlands themselves? Or possibly a split of the southern Netherlands with the south going to France (Hainaut, Namur, maybe parts of Luxemburg, Brabant and Flanders), the Northern part to the Netherlands (most or all of Gueldres, Flanders and Brabant) and the eastern part to Prussia (the rest of Luxemburg, Limburg and Gueldres).
 
Why not the Netherlands themselves?

To my knowledge there was no more interest in the Dutch Republic to acquire the south after the mid-17th century. Obviously something like the Barrier Treaties would be agreed to, garrisoning the southern fortresses with Dutch troops.
 
To my knowledge there was no more interest in the Dutch Republic to acquire the south after the mid-17th century. Obviously something like the Barrier Treaties would be agreed to, garrisoning the southern fortresses with Dutch troops.

For Britain, the Barrier Treaty wasn't worth it's salt. The Dutch didn't defend them well in the War of the Austrian Sucession (Louisburg in Canada had to be traded for French withdrawal from the Low Countries) and they stayed out of the 7 years war. Of course, Britain dosen't know that at the moment, so it's a possibility. Spain will get the Bourbon, Naples and Sicily, Savoy might get Milan. The Netherlands could be reformed into a new Duchy of Burgundy.
 
To my knowledge there was no more interest in the Dutch Republic to acquire the south after the mid-17th century.

I believe that that isn't entirely correct. Sure most (relevant) people didn't consider it worth starting a war for, but it was considered a good price. The major reason the Netherlands didn't gain much (it did gain something, part of Gueldres became Dutch) during the war was to keep the more important allies happy, mainly Austria. The English basicly ignored the Dutch in the peace treaty and some Dutch were pretty angry about it. Austria is out of the war in this timeline and the Dutch and English still want to prevent French control of the Southern Netherlands and almost all cost. The most reasonable choice here would be the Netherlands, although Prussia would most likely share in the spoils (which is why I gave them the eastern and more German part).
 
Afaik, Vienna has never been conquered between Migration Period and WWII. So this would create quite a singularity ...
Bright day
And it has also been conquered by Rudolph Habsburg as Viennese favoured Przemysl Ottocar.

As for Bohemia going to Bavaria- well it almost happened in the war of Austrian Sucession so some thought about it would probably appear.
 
Austria is out of the war in this timeline and the Dutch and English still want to prevent French control of the Southern Netherlands and almost all cost. The most reasonable choice here would be the Netherlands, although Prussia would most likely share in the spoils (which is why I gave them the eastern and more German part).

Well your plan would actually give the French a piece of the Southern Netherlands, unlike mine. Besides, having a foreign power between France and the Republic basically obliges that foreign power to defend the Dutch, at least if you can make sure they can't invade through the Bishopric of Liege - and I think you can get rid of that corridor through a territorial exchange between Liege and the newly Prussian Netherlands.
 
Part of me wonders why Prussia is being awarded this territory. At this point in time, Prussia isnt a particularly important player in the european balance of power. Why would they be made protectors of the Spanish netherlands (especially if france and the dutch are splitting part of the territory, in which case Prussia is merely being rewarded for doing nothing during the war)? And can anybody think of any plausible alternatives, aside from the dutch (these may be a bit far out, but for some reason england and portugal popped into my head).
 
Part of me wonders why Prussia is being awarded this territory. At this point in time, Prussia isnt a particularly important player in the european balance of power. Why would they be made protectors of the Spanish netherlands (especially if france and the dutch are splitting part of the territory, in which case Prussia is merely being rewarded for doing nothing during the war)?

My idea was to give most of it to Prussia, not to split it. The Maritime Powers wouldn't accept the Bourbons there; the Habsburgs have just gotten their asses handed to them, so not only is there no justification in awarding them territory but there is no guarantee they can defend it; and I presume the Dutch would only want a piece, lacking the stomach for all those Catholics and the army for all that territory.

So they'd need someone in Brussels who wasn't French, Spanish, Austrian, or Dutch. The 3 most likely candidates IMO are Prussia, Bavaria and Hanover. I expect Bavaria to be excluded by its alliance with France during the war. True, this is a stronger Bavaria with fewer reasons to repeat that alliance, but the Allies won't take chances. Hanover is unacceptable to the French because of the great likelihood of an Anglo-Hanoverian personal union after the death of Queen Anne. They'd feel, quite justifiably, that they've earned the right not to have the English on their northern border, and the English themselves wouldn't be too thrilled about having to maintain a continental army. So that leaves just Prussia.

In exchange for the Southern Netherlands, Prussia would have to renounce any claim to the inheritance of William of Orange and the right of succession to Neuchatel. The Principalities of Orange and (when its last ruler dies in a few years) Neuchatel are to go to France.
 
Last edited:
OK, so how's this for a final peace treaty:

1) Philip is recognized as King of Spain and receives all its European possessions except Milan and the Southern Netherlands. He and his descendants are barred from the French throne.

2) Most of the Southern Netherlands are ceded to Prussia, with the Dutch Republic receiving a piece of Guelders and/or Limburg and a territorial exchange with Liege to ensure that it no longer borders France. The Dutch have the right to garrison the region's southern fortresses. Prussia renounces all claims to the inheritance of William of Orange.

3) The Duchy of Milan is divided between Bavaria, Savoy and Mantua-Montferrat. The city itself goes to Bavaria, which also annexes Egerland, the Bohemian Forest, the Tyrol, Vorarlberg, and all the Austrian possessions in Swabia except the Breisgau.

4) France takes the Breisgau, Bar and Orange. Prussia renounces the right of succession to Neuchatel in France's favor in exchange for Oppeln in Silesia.

5) An independent Kingdom of Hungary, including Croatia, is established with Archduke Charles as king. He and his descendants are barred from the Imperial, Austrian and Bohemian thrones. Francis Rakoczi is made an autonomous Prince of Transylvania and the Partium.

6) France agrees to recognize the Act of Settlement. The Imperial ban is removed from all French allies. Bavaria is guaranteed the right to appoint the bishops of Cologne and Liege from its own dynasty.

I think that would be acceptable to both France and England. I've no idea what to do about the colonial outcome or the issue of Scottish succession, though, or how this spills over into the Great Northern War.
 
hmmm. A few thoughts...

- On the topic of the great northern war, i think a french victory benefits Sweden (allies, plus weaker support for the danes by england/holland). The same issues that Charles faced in his war with Russia still exist, however. It boils down to whether Charles is able to defeat the russians and force some sort of treaty which colsolidates his gains.

- Would the french push on for any other gains, now that Vienna has fallen? I don't think that the loss of the capital would immediatly halt the conflict; would the french have time for further victories in other theatres, riding the momentum of Villars' victory?

- What happens a few years down the road, if/when Le Grand Dauphin, the duc d'Bourgogne, duc d'Bretagne, and duc d'Berry all die within three years (granted, by no means assured with about a decade's worth of butterflies; for instance, one could easily remove the case of measles which killed Bourgogne and Bretagne)? Assuming that we see the French Bourbons suffer a parallel run of bad luck, suddenly Philip V of Spain's removal from the line of succession is not so simple, but by now he is already enthroned. How do the powers of Europe react, and is there the possibility of a War of French Succession looming in the future?
 
My idea was to give most of it to Prussia, not to split it. The Maritime Powers wouldn't accept the Bourbons there; the Habsburgs have just gotten their asses handed to them, so not only is there no justification in awarding them territory but there is no guarantee they can defend it; and I presume the Dutch would only want a piece, lacking the stomach for all those Catholics and the army for all that territory.

So they'd need someone in Brussels who wasn't French, Spanish, Austrian, or Dutch. The 3 most likely candidates IMO are Prussia, Bavaria and Hanover. I expect Bavaria to be excluded by its alliance with France during the war. True, this is a stronger Bavaria with fewer reasons to repeat that alliance, but the Allies won't take chances. Hanover is unacceptable to the French because of the great likelihood of an Anglo-Hanoverian personal union after the death of Queen Anne. They'd feel, quite justifiably, that they've earned the right not to have the English on their northern border, and the English themselves wouldn't be too thrilled about having to maintain a continental army. So that leaves just Prussia.

In exchange for the Southern Netherlands, Prussia would have to renounce any claim to the inheritance of William of Orange and the right of succession to Neuchatel. The Principalities of Orange and (when its last ruler dies in a few years) Neuchatel are to go to France.

The problem with Prussia is that it not yet the powerhouse it was in the 19th century. It was one of the strongest nations in Germany, but certainly not the strongest (which would be Austria), it might be in second place, but not with a strong lead (and second place is even debatable, I think).


Prussia renouncing the inheritance of Willem III (meaning Lingen and Moers going to Willem IV and Prussia renouncing the basicly empty tile prince of Oramge) and the Netherlands gaining part of the Southern Netherlands could do the trick, maybe. I stll think the Netherlands probably gains some territory in the south. Even if it mainly is to better connect zeelandish Flanders to the rest of the Netherlands. So I would say Gueldres to the Netherlands, the northern part of Flanders (up to Bruges) to the Netherlands increasing Dutch/Zeelandish Flanders and the northern part of Brabant (including blackaded and thus useless Antwerp) to the Netherlands, better connecting Zeelandish Flanders to the Netherlands. The rest of the southern Netherlands (including most of Flanders and Brabant) to Prussia. The Netherlands gains the right to man forts at the Franco/Prussian border. That might work, Prussia does gain a lot in this scenario and there is no more doubt it will be the second strongest nation in Germany. But it too suddenly has a lot of catholics for a protestant country.




Btw the reason I gave France part of the southern Netherlands is that I think it will be hard to convince a France. who had beaten Austria, to completely leave the southern Netherlands. If you think it is possible, none of the southern Netherlands will go to France.
 
Regarding the colonial war:

Given the end of the War of Spanish Succession in 1704/1705, I'd say the colonial war would result in a status quo ante bellum in the colonies, as the Americans had yet to make any signficant advances.

However France might be persuaded to "sweeten" the pot by giving England some "worthless" colonial possessions in exchange for European gains.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
OK, so how's this for a final peace treaty:

1) Philip is recognized as King of Spain and receives all its European possessions except Milan and the Southern Netherlands. He and his descendants are barred from the French throne.

Fine through give Neaple, Sicily and Maybe Sicily to Archduke Charles

2) Most of the Southern Netherlands are ceded to Prussia, with the Dutch Republic receiving a piece of Guelders and/or Limburg and a territorial exchange with Liege to ensure that it no longer borders France. The Dutch have the right to garrison the region's southern fortresses. Prussia renounces all claims to the inheritance of William of Orange.

Seems fine through pompejus seems a good idea

3) The Duchy of Milan is divided between Bavaria, Savoy and Mantua-Montferrat. The city itself goes to Bavaria, which also annexes Egerland, the Bohemian Forest, the Tyrol, Vorarlberg, and all the Austrian possessions in Swabia except the Breisgau.

I think Bavaria would get Breisgau instead of the Bohemian forest.

4) France takes the Breisgau, Bar and Orange. Prussia renounces the right of succession to Neuchatel in France's favor in exchange for Oppeln in Silesia.

France didn't seem to have much interest in territories east of the Rhine, so as I said before give in to Bavaria, let France get some of the Southen Netherland instead.

5) An independent Kingdom of Hungary, including Croatia, is established with Archduke Charles as king. He and his descendants are barred from the Imperial, Austrian and Bohemian thrones. Francis Rakoczi is made an autonomous Prince of Transylvania and the Partium.

I think that Emperor would keep Hungary-Croatia without Transsylvania, the Ottomans are still a credible opponent, so the European states has a interest in a strong neighbour to it.

6) France agrees to recognize the Act of Settlement. The Imperial ban is removed from all French allies. Bavaria is guaranteed the right to appoint the bishops of Cologne and Liege from its own dynasty.

Seems fine and a quite nice compromise
 
Top