AHC: Austria Wins the Austro-Prussian War

[KarneeKarnay]

How would Austria win the Austro-Prussian War? To a degree to me this war was decided by items before the war even started.

- Prussia has better equipment. The Austrian muzzle loaded rifle was not as quick or easy to use as the Prussian rifle.

- Prussia had a much more developed rail system that allowed the quick transport of troops and goods.

- Prussian soldiers were continuously training for war, while Austrian forces were more conscription based.

What could Austria have done to win this war? Could they have won it from the start of the conflict, or would it require a PoD much earlier. Could Sweden or some of the other neutral states tripped the conflict in Austria's favor.

 

[Ludwig von Stieglitz]

How would Austria win the Austro-Prussian War? To a degree to me this war was decided by items before the war even started.

- Prussia has better equipment. The Austrian muzzle loaded rifle was not as quick or easy to use as the Prussian rifle.

- Prussia had a much more developed rail system that allowed the quick transport of troops and goods.

- Prussian soldiers were continuously training for war, while Austrian forces were more conscription based.

What could Austria have done to win this war? Could they have won it from the start of the conflict, or would it require a PoD much earlier. Could Sweden or some of the other neutral states tripped the conflict in Austria's favor.

A) not entirely true: while technologically superior, Prussian Dreyse needle gun was unreliable and showed a trend in spitting smoke in the face of the user, which forced it to be fired from the hip.
B)Partly true, but that only accounted for mobilization phase, which did not prove to be decisive in this war as it would have been in the french-prussian war. Also Bohemia was one of the most developed regions of the empire, infrastructure-wise.
C)Austria's problem as not in it's average infantryman but in it's military leadership.
Back to the subject of your thread, it is totally possible for Austria to win the war; yo need one (or more) of the following:

A) Better Austrian leadership, capable to inflict a loss to the Prussian at Königgratz. This is the main point; if the Prussian lose at Königgratz they are screwed.
B) Better coordination between Austrian allies: for instance have the hannoverian army link up with the Bavarian one, so to threaten Prussian flank.
C) Negotiate with other powers: the Russians where eager to intervene on Prussian side: promising them Austrian Galicia may work in appeasing them; also losing Galicia while gaining Silesia is a definitive plus.
D) looking at the greter picture, have the Austrians understand that their main focus must be on Germany, not Italy or the Balkans

 

[KarneeKarnay]

SNIP

Good points. What I've read made it sound like Prussia was pretty much destined to win the War.

Back to the subject of your thread, it is totally possible for Austria to win the war; yo need one (or more) of the following:

A) Better Austrian leadership, capable to inflict a loss to the Prussian at Königgratz. This is the main point; if the Prussian lose at Königgratz they are screwed.
B) Better coordination between Austrian allies: for instance have the hannoverian army link up with the Bavarian one, so to threaten Prussian flank.
C) Negotiate with other powers: the Russians where eager to intervene on Prussian side: promising them Austrian Galicia may work in appeasing them; also losing Galicia while gaining Silesia is a definitive plus.
D) looking at the greater picture, have the Austrians understand that their main focus must be on Germany, not Italy or the Balkans

What was the main problem with Austrian Leadership? Was it too top heavy? From what I've read the Prussian focus on smaller more organised units helped a lot. One thing I've been struggling to find more information on was the failures of the Prussian military. Were there tactics and points that a more capable Austrian commander could have exploited?

If Austria didn't have to contest with Italy, or even had an ally like Sweden, would that be enough to sway the war? How important was the Battle of Königgratz? Was it more the build up or the actual battle that had the most impact. I read somewhere that Benedek being more aggressive before the battle could have wiped out Prussian armies before they could gather in strength.

 

[Ludwig von Stieglitz]

Good points. What I've read made it sound like Prussia was pretty much destined to win the War.



What was the main problem with Austrian Leadership? Was it too top heavy? From what I've read the Prussian focus on smaller more organised units helped a lot. One thing I've been struggling to find more information on was the failures of the Prussian military. Were there tactics and points that a more capable Austrian commander could have exploited?

If Austria didn't have to contest with Italy, or even had an ally like Sweden, would that be enough to sway the war? How important was the Battle of Königgratz? Was it more the build up or the actual battle that had the most impact. I read somewhere that Benedek being more aggressive before the battle could have wiped out Prussian armies before they could gather in strength.

Austrian leadership was weak, timid and narrow-minded...in the best case; later on we would have seen flamboyant and incompetent buffoons like von Hötzendorf rule the army, but that is another thing.
To answer your questions, well the battle of Königgratz meant everything for the war on the bohemian front: if the Prussian lose they are screwed lest some foreign power intervenes.
Your Swedish thing is a no go: by 1866 Sweden was a weak, isolationist power, with no realistic capability to cross the Baltic in force and seize prussian territory. Also Sweden has nothing to gain in this war, unless Austria offers some Prussian territory...now while Prussia had left the German confederation at the outbreak of war, ceding german territory to a foreign power would be a very unpopular move. Finally Russia is sure to intervene in such a scenario, which would definitely screw both Austria and Sweden

 

[KarneeKarnay]

Austrian leadership was weak, timid and narrow-minded...in the best case; later on we would have seen flamboyant and incompetent buffoons like von Hötzendorf rule the army, but that is another thing.
To answer your questions, well the battle of Königgratz meant everything for the war on the bohemian front: if the Prussian lose they are screwed lest some foreign power intervenes.
Your Swedish thing is a no go: by 1866 Sweden was a weak, isolationist power, with no realistic capability to cross the Baltic in force and seize prussian territory. Also Sweden has nothing to gain in this war, unless Austria offers some Prussian territory...now while Prussia had left the German confederation at the outbreak of war, ceding german territory to a foreign power would be a very unpopular move. Finally Russia is sure to intervene in such a scenario, which would definitely screw both Austria and Sweden

That's a good point. What could have been done to reform the Austrian Leadership? I would have though the Second Schleswig War would be a good opportunity. The Austrian commanders should have taken note at the time of the Prussian tactics. My understanding was that it was ignored or suppressed by those that knew.

How much blame can be pointed at Franz?

 

[DocJamore]

France enters the war on Austria's side. Done.

 

[GauchoBadger]

The O-so-beloved oracle for people with no books on the matter, Wikipedia, claims this about the Battle of Könnigratz:

At 11:00 came the deciding moment of the battle; the Austrian center began a maneuver to flank the Prussian 7th Division, which had pushed back and held off nearly a quarter of the Austrian army. Colonel Carl von Pöckh was sent to drive the Prussians back, and with a fierce infantry charge managed to force the 7th Division back to the outskirts of the forest. Benedek's corps commanders pleaded with him to launch a counterattack to destroy the Prussian First and Elbe armies before the Second army arrived, but Benedek declined to act, letting the opportune moment slip by.

Perhaps a good PoD would be having Benedek not be such a prudent asshole, at least not at the right moment?

 

[Kome]

What was the main problem with Austrian Leadership? Was it too top heavy? From what I've read the Prussian focus on smaller more organised units helped a lot. One thing I've been struggling to find more information on was the failures of the Prussian military. Were there tactics and points that a more capable Austrian commander could have exploited?

Benedek probably hated his life and his job, and definitely hated his corps commanders mutually (while he was a genuine warhero, he was an outsider from the Italian area of operations). And it wasn't exactly topheavy because... the Austrian army basically disbanded the entire top level army commands. The chain of command jumped directly from Supreme Commander to Corps Commander, with no field army level commands in between. And it just gets worse from there.

As for Prussian weaknesses: their cavalry and artillery were weak while Austrian cavalry and artillery were the best parts of their army (and highly regarded among European armies in general). The Jagers and Tyroleans were able to inflict casualties on the Prussians. The Lorenz rifle outranged the Needlegun and with better accuracy, but with a much lower rate of fire. Austrian artillery was both more accurate and longer ranged than Prussian, but this was offset by the fact you can use the Needle gun to lay down. Prussian bayonet drill was poor, but that's almost entirely irrelevant in 1866. Austria also had the high ground and defensive advantage. The Bohemian roads were not very good and Prussian troops tended to get caught up in traffic jams advancing upon it. For this reason the Prussians also preferred to divide their armies on the march in ways that they were unable to mutually support each other and then only bring them back together to hit the flank in a decisive battle.

So, Prussia basically won Koniggratz entirely on infantry, no thanks to their artillery. While the Prussian cavalry almost failed to notice the large Austrian concentration at Koniggratz.

That's a good point. What could have been done to reform the Austrian Leadership? I would have though the Second Schleswig War would be a good opportunity. The Austrian commanders should have taken note at the time of the Prussian tactics. My understanding was that it was ignored or suppressed by those that knew.

How much blame can be pointed at Franz?

Austria came out of that war looking about as good or better than Prussia.

The thing to note is that the Austrian military establishment was essentially fixated on the idea that experience trumped theory (while the Prussians were the exact opposite). The corps commanders were mostly combat experienced (von Benedek earned his von the hard way), and their chief of staffs were all vetrean professional servicemen who had seen and been distinguished in combat before (primarily in Italy or Denmark).

The problem is firstly that in peacetime all the best corps officers tended to be assigned to the Italian command. And then that the Austrian military establishment considered the army to be a battleharded and experienced force with little need for theoretical training, so taught relatively little military theory to its officers, but lots of Radetzky, military history, & engineering. Thats always what the prewar debate boiled down to, Austrian experience vs Prussian theory.

 

[Ludwig von Stieglitz]

Well I agree with the others...btw, as I said, just have von Benedek approach the battle with a more virulent approach, and it is done.
The peace treaty might be very interesting, indeed.

 

[catalfalque]

Wasn't there one moment at Konigratz where Bismarck, Roon and (I think) the Kaiser all standing together came close to being blown away?

 

[BigDestiny]

Austria came out of that war looking about as good or better than Prussia.

Maybe that's the POD. If Austria's attack on Denmark is a complete gong show, they're going to have to regroup or look completely foolish.

 

[Mikestone8]

Wasn't there one moment at Konigratz where Bismarck, Roon and (I think) the Kaiser all standing together came close to being blown away?

Iirc an Austrian shell went off near them. Of course it wouldn't necessarily have killed all three, but even one of them would have big butterflies.

 

[Richter von Manthofen]

Iirc an Austrian shell went off near them. Of course it wouldn't necessarily have killed all three, but even one of them would have big butterflies.

Not even an actual kill, but a rumor of them being killed might cause disturbances throughout the army, You simply need a bit of insecure regimental leaders hesitating, pulling back to regroup, doing nothing , to change the course of action... - Making the whole thing a narrow Austrian victory or even a draw could possibly make both sides reconsidering the whole war.

It might not save Austria as "leader of Germany", but it would cement the split into north and South - with the North being slightly less powerful (Hannover remains independent, politically an Austrian ally, but slipping into the northern economic sphere. the South being split into the basic stesof Baden Bavaria, Hesse and Würtemberg, Saxony remaining in the Austrian camp,... The rest mostly going to the Prussian sphere.

You would remove the French-German war and possibly the system of later alliances will be changed totally - maybe even removed totally as it was based on Bismarcks wish to isolate France. No fix and onesided alliances would probably butterfly a great war (more colonial wars, maybe more small conflicts)

Definitely a better Austrian performace would have greater benefits - even in America - a winning Austria might give more support to Max (though that might be a stretch )

 

[Mikestone8]

Not even an actual kill, but a rumor of them being killed might cause disturbances throughout the army, You simply need a bit of insecure regimental leaders hesitating, pulling back to regroup, doing nothing , to change the course of action... - Making the whole thing a narrow Austrian victory or even a draw could possibly make both sides reconsidering the whole war.

A "draw" would be in effect a win for Austria. The Prussian Army had eaten almost nothing for two days, and its line of retreat would be over land already stripped by its foraging parties. These would also have come under attack from Austrian cavalry, an arm in which Austria was much superior. The Prussians had to win the battle or starve.

 

[Jan Olbracht]

Russo-Prussian relations improved as result of January Uprising-fear of Polish irredentism brought Prussia and Russia closer to each other. Prevent it and Russia would not be so willing to intervene on Prussian side.

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

How would Austria win the Austro-Prussian War? To a degree to me this war was decided by items before the war even started.

- Prussia has better equipment. The Austrian muzzle loaded rifle was not as quick or easy to use as the Prussian rifle.

- Prussia had a much more developed rail system that allowed the quick transport of troops and goods.

- Prussian soldiers were continuously training for war, while Austrian forces were more conscription based.

What could Austria have done to win this war? Could they have won it from the start of the conflict, or would it require a PoD much earlier. Could Sweden or some of the other neutral states tripped the conflict in Austria's favor.

The easiest answer is to have the war take place earlier, just compare the Prussian performance in the First Schleswig War and the Austrian performance durring the First Italian War of Independence.

Heck if you want to go the route of this leading to Austria leading Germany you could use 1848 as the flash point, as the Frankfurt Parliament was officially lead by Archduke John, an Austrian Habsburg.

 

[Ultima Ratio]

Okay, so let's say Benedek steels himself and acts as decisive as he can at Königgrätz, winning the battle clearly, forcing the Prussians to retreat, which turns into a disaster as the Imperial light cavalry turns the retreat to a disorganized rout.

I suppose Saxony and the South German states remain in the Austrian sphere, and I suppose the sudden arrival of troops in Italy goes very badly for the Italians, going back to prewar status quo, with possible reparations from the Italians.

Can the Germans still unite the North German Federation? I know its a common trope for an Austrian victory to lead to Habsburg domination of Germany, but I personally think it would just cement the status quo, with no real solution. Would the bigger North German states lose faith in Prussia and be less inclined to support her in the future?

Would there be a war with France? I think not likely, at least not in the near future, which might work out well for the French, as their industry gains traction.

Would Prussia and Russia fall into a common camp? You guys seem to think so, but I think this is more complex: Prussia will have to choose between Britain and Russia, as with no German unification, there is no common German threat to those two, so the Great Game wouldn't wind down as it did OTL. So if Prussia allies with Russia, Britain will find her own continental allies. Austria would be a good candidate, and France as well, as there is little conflict of interest, and they have a common venture in Mexico (provided Britain doesn't recall her support and a victorious Austria helps out more).

Could this prompt Austrian reform? Now this is a complex question: Austria remains the nominal head of Germany, at least for now, but the Hungarian issue must still be solved. I am always an optimist, so I say that they may be more inclined to a federal solution, given that it's already "working" in Germany. Not too crazy of course, but right to the Hungarians, the Bohemians and Croats (maybe even the Poles and Italians?) could lead to a United States of Greater Austria/Danubian Federation, but that's way down the line. The thing is, if they give right to those three, they could have a free hand on oppressing and assimilating those less fortunate nationalities that were not given a seat at the table (Romanians and Slavs in Hungary, Serbs and Bosniaks in Croatia, etc), allowing Austria to also focus on her German sphere. This is extremely far-fetched, but a mind always races when thinking about a surviving Austrian Empire, in one form or another

 

[Mikestone8]

Okay, so let's say Benedek steels himself and acts as decisive as he can at Königgrätz, winning the battle clearly, forcing the Prussians to retreat, which turns into a disaster as the Imperial light cavalry turns the retreat to a disorganized rout.

I suppose Saxony and the South German states remain in the Austrian sphere, and I suppose the sudden arrival of troops in Italy goes very badly for the Italians, going back to prewar status quo, with possible reparations from the Italians.

Can the Germans still unite the North German Federation? I know its a common trope for an Austrian victory to lead to Habsburg domination of Germany, but I personally think it would just cement the status quo, with no real solution. Would the bigger North German states lose faith in Prussia and be less inclined to support her in the future?

There can't possibly be a North German Confederation if Prussia loses, since the two biggest North German states, and even most of the middling ones, are on the Austrian side. Most likely the German Confederation carries on, but with a tighter military organisation. Prussia loses at least part of Silesia, while her Rhine Provinces become a separate state or states - though Austria may need to reach a deal with France over which prince(s) should rule there.

 

[Ultima Ratio]

There can't possibly be a North German Confederation if Prussia loses, since the two biggest North German states, and even most of the middling ones, are on the Austrian side. Most likely the German Confederation carries on, but with a tighter military organisation. Prussia loses at least part of Silesia, while her Rhine Provinces become a separate state or states - though Austria may need to reach a deal with France over which prince(s) should rule there.

I can't help but wonder: if the Rhine Provinces break away from Prussia, could third large German state form in the region with Hanover and others?

 

[Ludwig von Stieglitz]

To

Okay, so let's say Benedek steels himself and acts as decisive as he can at Königgrätz, winning the battle clearly, forcing the Prussians to retreat, which turns into a disaster as the Imperial light cavalry turns the retreat to a disorganized rout.

I suppose Saxony and the South German states remain in the Austrian sphere, and I suppose the sudden arrival of troops in Italy goes very badly for the Italians, going back to prewar status quo, with possible reparations from the Italians.

Can the Germans still unite the North German Federation? I know its a common trope for an Austrian victory to lead to Habsburg domination of Germany, but I personally think it would just cement the status quo, with no real solution. Would the bigger North German states lose faith in Prussia and be less inclined to support her in the future?

Would there be a war with France? I think not likely, at least not in the near future, which might work out well for the French, as their industry gains traction.

Would Prussia and Russia fall into a common camp? You guys seem to think so, but I think this is more complex: Prussia will have to choose between Britain and Russia, as with no German unification, there is no common German threat to those two, so the Great Game wouldn't wind down as it did OTL. So if Prussia allies with Russia, Britain will find her own continental allies. Austria would be a good candidate, and France as well, as there is little conflict of interest, and they have a common venture in Mexico (provided Britain doesn't recall her support and a victorious Austria helps out more).

Could this prompt Austrian reform? Now this is a complex question: Austria remains the nominal head of Germany, at least for now, but the Hungarian issue must still be solved. I am always an optimist, so I say that they may be more inclined to a federal solution, given that it's already "working" in Germany. Not too crazy of course, but right to the Hungarians, the Bohemians and Croats (maybe even the Poles and Italians?) could lead to a United States of Greater Austria/Danubian Federation, but that's way down the line. The thing is, if they give right to those three, they could have a free hand on oppressing and assimilating those less fortunate nationalities that were not given a seat at the table (Romanians and Slavs in Hungary, Serbs and Bosniaks in Croatia, etc), allowing Austria to also focus on her German sphere. This is extremely far-fetched, but a mind always races when thinking about a surviving Austrian Empire, in one form or another

to answer your question:
Will Prussia manage to unify northern Germany? Hell no: the only big state in northern Germany was hannover and it was on the Austrian side...also,right before entering the war had left the confederation,so it has no ground to unify anything without a victory
To answer your other questions...if the Austrian are smart they will appease Russia with Polish Galicia, acquire Silesia, Rheinland and Westfalen (the last two may be given to a new entity with an Hasburg on the throne. With a solid had in Germany they might abandon the Balkan front and have a giant leverage against Hungary. Now if the Habsburgs are smart, the will drive towards German unification, which by now is at hand and rule Hungary in a mere crown union