true but they all were sorts on one hat and fairly simple....but cant imagine itd be easy getting the imperial crown and austrian on at the same time, let alone adding hungary to the mix....think the other 3, depending on design would make it wobbly a tad x3
AHC: The Habsburg Monarchy gets a Third Crown
- Thread starter Franz Josef II
- Start date
true but they all were sorts on one hat and fairly simple....but cant imagine itd be easy getting the imperial crown and austrian on at the same time, let alone adding hungary to the mix....think the other 3, depending on design would make it wobbly a tad x3
A situation wherein Vienna pulls an ambiguous "king of all the slavs" thing is never going to work. For one thing, the various groups would all object - ESPECIALLY the Czechs. Vienna politicians would never allow a "crown" for the Slovenes as they are typified as being Austrian. The South Slavs would seriously resent being lumped together with the Poles and the Czechs, and vice versa. Yes, there were already 'kingdoms of...' for the Croats and Czechs, and this is what the thread is about: instead of just being a title, make it a reality. There were tentative steps taken in the 1880s which were unfortunately shot down
Wolfpaw
Banned
Well if the Habsburgs forgo the "King of the Slavonians" or whatever, they are going to have to pick either Czechia or Croatia. The thing of it is is that the Austrians can count on the Germans if the Czechs start getting rowdy, whereas they've got nobody but the Magyars to help them pin down Yugoslavia if that gets ugly. Too, picking Croatia over Czechia means that Budapest--rather than Vienna's--power is significantly curbed.
Bosnians are too Muslim to become the favored people; the Habsburgs need a Catholic crown.
Wolfpaw
Banned
Then it becomes a Magyar problem. Croatia was controlled by Hungary/Transleithenia, and the Croatian crown was a title subordinate to the Holy Crown of Hungary.
This is why I think that Croatia/Slavonia is a more likely option. It allows the Habsburgs to curry favor with South Slavs. It also allows the Habsburgs to confront the Magyar nobility and curb reverse the Ausgleiche concessions.
Czech hardliners will not be mollified, but if the Austrians are willing to grant some cultural/autonomy concessions within Cisleithenia, then things may cool down there. Again, the restive South Slavs can cause a ruckus in the Balkans, whereas nobody is going to be able to help the Czechs if they kick up a fuss.
If the monarch wants to get really ambitious, he may have himself crowned "Car of Slavonia" in some grand ceremony (maybe in Split? Maybe in Diocletian's Palace?) since a mere King is equal to neither an Emperor nor Apostolic King.
Wasn't Croatia considered part of Hungary following the 1867 compromise? They had their own Diet, of course, but were essentially forced into lockstep with Hungary. I recall a dispute as early as 1867 over Rijeka (sp?) as the Croats wanted it but Hungary did as well so as to have a port. There was also the issue that Dalamtia remained part of the Austrian part of the empire, rather than being united with Croatia.
I personally think Bohemia would be a better choice, as the Czechs were highly politicized following the 1867 compromised unlike other ethnic groups in the empire. In many ways, they were much like the Hungarians. Other ethnic groups had some form of national consciousness, of course, but it wasn't as developed as in Bohemia, which was a highly industrial and literate region.
By creating a Trialism system with the Czechs, the Austrians would have a potential ally in the annual negotiations of the compromise to back them against Hungary. Of course, the issue of any potential third crown is it could backfire. Hungary regularly blackmailed Austria into doing what it wanted, and even the Austrian portion of the empire had Constitutional Crisises on a regular basis, forcing the Emperor to rule by decree. Indeed, during the Belle Epoque when most European states were increasing their military spending, Austria's actually shrunk. The Constitutional Crisis in 1909-1910 also delayed construction of Dreadnaughts. The Bohemians or Croats could do the same thing (perhaps even with Hungarian support!), causing further headaches and issues.
A third crown in Bohemia or within the South Slavs does give the Emperor a chance to quash the Magyars, but it also runs the risk that the Slavs or Bohemians may ally with Hungary and make the situation even worse.
It was more complicated than that. Though Croatia as in land was considered part of the lands of the Crown of St. Stephen, the title king of Croatia was an independent one. One inheriting the Holy Crown of Hungary would inherit the lands of Croatia but not the title King of Croatia, yet the person inheriting the title King of Croatia would inherit the lands of Croatia.
Also Habsburgs were already kings of Slavonia, a sub-division within the kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia, so using a title King of Slavonians (name for inhabitants of Slavonia) to cover all Slavs would just make no sense.
wolf_brother
Banned
Best for the Hapsburgs at that point to inaugurate some sort of federal commonwealth-esque scenario.
wolf_brother
Banned
Franz Ferdinand's United States of Austria?
I'm thinking something much sooner, and something that's truly based on equal rights for each of the respective crowns. Franz Ferdinand's plan was a last ditch effort to save the polygot empire.
I think we'd need a different Emperor. Never gonna happen with Franz Josef. Maybe he dies young and the ill fated Max ends up Emperor of Austria rather than Mexico. He was quite liberal; indeed, he was removed from his post as Viceroy in Lombardy-Veneto because he was pursuing too liberal policies for the Emperor and his cabinet.
He also loved the navy and Trieste.
He may be just the man to change things.wolf_brother
Banned
I think we'd need a different Emperor. Never gonna happen with Franz Josef. Maybe he dies young and the ill fated Max ends up Emperor of Austria rather than Mexico. He was quite liberal; indeed, he was removed from his post as Viceroy in Lombardy-Veneto because he was pursuing too liberal policies for the Emperor and his cabinet.
He also loved the navy and Trieste.
The only problem with that is that you'd need the succession to go through Ferdinand, Franz Karl, Franz Joseph, and then finally end with Maximilian.
Perhaps if Franz Joseph's assassination attempt in 1853 was successful? I can't see Maximilian being lured into the Campagne d'Italie the same way Franz Joseph was, and given his liberal policies in Hapsburg Italy the moderate and conservative Italians might be swayed away from the risorgimento. Milan is likely still going to change hands, I don't see the epicenter of the movement staying under the Hapsburgs sway, but Venice and Tuscany might stay within the empire.
The problem though is that this doesn't result in a Hapsburg monarchy with three crowns as the OP asks for, nor the federal commonwealth I was speaking of. At the least you'd need the initial POD, then for Maximilian to do very well and overcome the reactionaries in Vienna (and Zagreb) and make some moderate liberal reforms, and even then you'd need him to be followed up by an heir who was just as much a liberal reformist. And all the time the Hapsburgs would need to not get bogged down in foreign entanglements, while keeping their restive populations content, and to keep up, both in power and prestige, with the other great powers. That's a fairly tall order.
EDIT: Maximilian's Wikipedia page indicates that Maximilian & Charlotte's adoption of Augustine I's grandsons was actually a gamble intended to force his cousin, Karl Ludwig, to give up one of his children to the imperial family as an heir. Perhaps ITTL Maximilian, who is now the Hapsburg emperor, simply decrees one of Karl Ludwig's children to be his heir - which likely means Franz Ferdinand.
Last edited:
What about Rudolf, if Franz Joseph died before the Mayerling incident would have occurred?
Remember that Fedinand was an imbecile.; he governed by a council of Regents and often mocked as Gütinand der Fertige
Goodinand the Finished) after his abdication.As for the Archduke Franz Karl, he was a weak man and dominated by his wife. It was her who made him give up his rights to Franz Josef. Perhaps with Franz Josef dying at birth, Max becomes Emperor in 1848. Of course, the 1853 scenario works as well, but it's honestly not too difficult to get him here. Ferdinand couldn't rule, Franz Karl didn't want too, and his wife wanted her son to be Emperor.
As for Italy, I agree Milan is lost. Retaining Venice is possible, but Tuscany isn;t., Remember that Tuscany wwas independent principality merely ruled by a branch of the Habsburgs. A branch also ruled in Modena and in Parma (Maria Louise, until 1848). If Italy does unite, I can see them eying Venice, but perhaps a sound defeat will end their ambitions. Especially if Venice is well integrated. It'd make an excellent port for the Habsburgs,
By 1888 Rudolf was sick and had syphilis. He was also addicted to morphine. It was suggested he go abroad to Corfu and the like for his health, but he reefused. Theere is also the issue that he had no male heir: his wife Steohanie of Belgium had given him a daughter, but she was later rendered infertile because Rudolf gave her gonorrhea.