The lands of Cologne and Trier went to Prussia IOTL, while Mainz went to Hesse-Darmstadt (for the most part at least). Considering that Napoleon effectively annexed all those lands and restoring ecclesial states within Germany just wasn't considered and seeing how the fates of Cologne and Mainz IMO are set in stone... That might allow the area around Trier to be considered to go to someone to counter-act lands being given to Nappy's respectable relatives (Murat & Beauharnais, essentially), however giving that land directly to them seems like a bad option because it'd be too close to the French border.
A Beauharnais State in Italy
- Thread starter JonasResende
- Start date
The lands of Cologne and Trier went to Prussia IOTL, while Mainz went to Hesse-Darmstadt (for the most part at least). Considering that Napoleon effectively annexed all those lands and restoring ecclesial states within Germany just wasn't considered and seeing how the fates of Cologne and Mainz IMO are set in stone... That might allow the area around Trier to be considered to go to someone to counter-act lands being given to Nappy's respectable relatives (Murat & Beauharnais, essentially), however giving that land directly to them seems like a bad option because it'd be too close to the French border.
Which brings us back to Italy. What could be given to the Habsburgs to make them willing to give up the former Serenissima?
Prodigal
Banned
I think the idea of an independent Duchy of Venice paralleling the Piedmontese Duchy of Genoa would be cool. After all, Eugene was Prince of Venice... However this would require Austria not losing Belgium as Venice was compensation for losing it. Maybe if there are no 100 days and the Polish-Saxon debacle continues, Austria can give up Venice and in return Saxony is guaranteed sovereignty?
They had traded their rather lucrative Netherlands for it. That bit of land connected them with their holdings in Milan, removed a large bump in their southern border, and meant that besides Piedmont all of northern Italy was basically Hapsburg of one sort or another. Unless you offer Silesia and Switzerland, I don't think they would bite.
Hindsight? The first steam motor was installed in the Austrian Netherlands in 1720, by 1727 more steam pumps were used to de-water coal mines in Mons and Charleroi. Ghent textile industry adopted the British-invented spinning jennies in 1799. By 1810 there were 84 blast furnaces, and most of the guns used by Napoleon were produced in Wallonia.
http://searchinginhistory.blogspot.com.au/2015/03/the-industrial-revolution-of-belgium.html
IMHO the Austrian negotiator who chose to exchange the Catholic Netherlands for Venetia were either ignorant of the economics of Wallonia or badly suffering of tunnel vision.
Have you read Look to the West? Some spoilers, but when the Austrians have a chance to trade the Austrian Netherlands for the Electorate of Bavaria, they took it. Why? Because though they recognized it would bring in fewer taxes, it would fulfill age old dream as well as lowering defense issues along the porous Austrian border, as well as meaning they wouldn't need to defend multiple areas seperated by multiple other states. Besides, the French, Dutch, and British had been mucking things up in the area anyways for economic reasons. It was also traded as part of a peace treaty. After all, the Austrians already got loads from the Partitions of Poland, though they had to give up much of their share to the Russians in exchange for their own gains in the west. Also the issue of if they try getting back Further Austria as well.
The connection between Tyrol-Trentino and Milan could be easily made by awarding Austria Bergamo and Brescia taken from the former territory of the Serenissima, with the border between Lombardy and Venetia set on the Mincio river (the border agreed in 1859). In such a case I think that Venetia should also include coastal Istria and Dalmatia (which anyway would not be a big benefit for Austria).
Austria would obviously keep the Austrian Netherlands and possibly gain Trier and Cologne, while Holland could be compensated with lands in Germany.
In this scenario,Prussia would make good its claim in Saxony (which was what they really wanted, and the reason for the bad feeling in the Coalition in late 1814-early 1815: Prussia and Russia vs. GB and Austria,the latter supported by France). The guy left without a chair would be the king of Saxony who might be compensated by Berg or Neuchatel.
Prodigal
Banned
In OTL, sure. But that's what AH is for, to see different paths and where they lead. All it would take is an economical looking Prime Minister or Emperor and the Austrian Netherlands would remain Austrian and Venice Venetian.
If I recall correct though, hadn't the deal Prussia been offering around was for France to get Belgium, the House of Oranje(They had to change the spelling to not piss off the French) became monarchs and got the northern Rhineland, while the Russians took the near entirety (even more than IOTL) territory of Poland-Lithuania, including the entirety of what Austria had gotten from it?
I don't remember the Prussians ever offering to let their share of Poland go.
Mainz, Trier and Cologne were up for grab and the Prussians really wanted Saxony.
Austria had this surprising urge to let the southern Netherlands go, and to consolidate their possessions around Austria, Bohemia and Hungary
Mainz, Trier and Cologne were up for grab and the Prussians really wanted Saxony.
Austria had this surprising urge to let the southern Netherlands go, and to consolidate their possessions around Austria, Bohemia and Hungary
They and the Austrians each gave up half their shares IOTL. I imagine the Prussians would have wanted to keep part of West Prussia, though getting the Austrians to agree to losing Venice, their share of Poland, as well as their Saxon friends might have been... Well, impossible. What happens with Mainz, Trier, and Cologne anyways? They go to Bavaria as they and the Palantine had been appointing sons of their ruling family to be Prince-Bishops and Electors of the three for generations? Since thos jobs had been combined in one person for so long do they get a Duchy? Or they end up with the Austrian Netherlands?
Posen was on the table as it was part of the duchy of Warsaw, the rest not so much. I don't recall ever reading anything about about Austria giving up all of Galicia either.
It was a Prussian offer. The Austrians didn't really have a say in that matter. Though possible it just meant Cracow. Pretty sure they were offering up all of Austrians share of the spoils, though.
Remember that the POD is no 100 Days: the situation is as per January 1815 with Alexander I strongly supporting Prussia's claim on Saxony and a serious possibility of military confrontation. I think that Austria might have to back down, Metternich was really worried (and I don't think GB would be willing to back Austria to the hilt). At least one of the former Archbishoprics might be a compensation for the former king of Saxony, another might go to the Netherlands and the third one to Austria. In Italy Austria would get eastern Lombardy, as well as Parma for Marie Louise. Then there are the Papal Legations which might be used as a compensation tool: a game of musical chairs, asI've already said.
Anyway the easiest way to find a throne for Eugene is to give him Bologna, Ferrara, Romagna and Marche,with the rest of the map unchanged from OTL.
The pope get screwed but that's life.
Anyway the easiest way to find a throne for Eugene is to give him Bologna, Ferrara, Romagna and Marche,with the rest of the map unchanged from OTL.
The pope get screwed but that's life.
Yeah. Besides, they keep dying every couple of years so it's not like they'll hold a grudge.
Have to disagree: IOTL the church never really forgot (much less forgave) the annexation of the Papal States by the kingdom of Italy. At the very least, they held a very public grudge from 1860 to 1929 (including the excommunication of the Italian kings and the ban on the participation of Catholics in Italian politics).
OTOH in 1815 the church influence is at a low, and maybe they will be less vocal than they were IOTL.
Out of curiosity, if the church's influence was at an all time low, why bother restoring the Papal States at all? Was it solely to prevent a preponderance in Italy of either the Habsburg or the Bourbons? Or were there other reasons? And what might be the limit to which the Patrimony of St. Peter would be reduced?
Most major countries had already swiped vast amounts of land, though admittedly the Wettins, Habsburgs, and Wittlesbachs had been using the the church lands in Germany as their own puppets for centuries, while the Soanish did what they liked with the church organization in Iberia and the Americas. While the French had been doing that Jansenism stuff to make a Gaullic church where the King decided if Bishops could leave the country... Anyways, the Patrimony and nearby areas the popes had previous conquered were nothing major. It was far better to keep a shred of legitimacy with the lower classes, since it was the peasants and parish priests who had fought the revolution in revolts and rebellions in Spain and France. Heck, during the revolution and the Tennic Court Vow it was the parish priests and not the noble-born bishops who had joined the Third Estate. Yet later it was the Bishops who took the vows to be state employees and renounce the authority of the Pope while the parish priests refused. If the only portions of the ecclesial lands in Europe actually controlled by the Pope were split up so that the family of philandering, sterile wife of the former Emperor who kept conquering everyone got rewarded it would be seen negatively.
https://archive.moe/download/int/image/1363/70/1363708070756.png
In the bigger picture of rearranging the map of Europe and preventing another outburst of revolution, Austria was supposed to become the policeman of Italy where they had direct control over Lombardy-Venetia and almost direct control over Parma (Marie Louise), Modena (Habsburg-Este) and Tuscany (Habsburg-Lorraine). Obviously Austria wanted also to keep her influence in Germany, where the task of ensuring that the Restoration policies was to be shared with Prussia. Russia was to be the overall guarantor of the status quo.
As the uncrowned overlord of Italy, Austria had her say in the way the map was to be re-designed and the full restoration of the Papal States was mainly her choice (with Spanish support). Mind, Metternich came to regret his decision in the 1830s, when he had to admit that the incapacity of the Papal States to put their house in order was effectively working to cross-purpose with his conservative policy.
None of the other coalition members (with the only exception of Spain,which was anyway a junior partner) had an interest in restoring the Papal States, but the big question to be asked was who would get the lands not returned to the Pope: Austria was not a supporter of Eugene and did not certainly want to increase the presence of Borbonic princes (either from France or Spain) in Italy.
How little the Papal States might be reduced to? IMHO the Pope would certainly keep Latium and (possibly Umbria, but Umbria might also be given to Tuscany to sweeten the Habsburg disappointment).
I was wondering if anyone could raise any objections to the Beauharnais getting a state in the Balkans (OTL the Oldenburgsky prince that was put forward as a candidate for the Bulgarian crown, had been part of a double marriage between the Oldenburgskys and the Russified Beauharnais, so it would just be a swap around - which might make it more palatable to France, that they support the candidacy)