Alternate Congress of Vienna

I've actually been curious; is there a map of the original treaty? Always wanted to see it.

This is what you asked for:

attachment.php
 
I've actually been curious; is there a map of the original treaty? Always wanted to see it.

I've never seen one; it's mostly just referred to AFAIK. I reckon that it's probably because it's generally overshadowed by the final settlement.

Now that I think about it, was any of that set in stone? I thought negotiations were still ongoing when Napoleon finally returned.

Well, there is that map posted ages ago by Susano showing the provisional borders at the time of the Congress:

EDIT: Beaten by Westphalian.

p814d_a3_mb.gif
 
Well, there is that map posted ages ago by Susano showing the provisional borders at the time of the Congress:

Actually, I believe that even before Vienna it was decided that the Netherlands would get the Southern Netherlands, although the exact eastern borders weren't decided yet. So Luxemburg could end up Prussian, or the Rhineland, unlikely as it might be, could end up Dutch.

Too bad for Susano, because he always hoped Belgium would end up German.
 
They could have restored the Papal enclave of Comtat Venaissin surrounding Avignon in the south of France for one, alongside forcing the state to return the huge swaths of church land seized since the Revolution. These were important revenue-generators and would hurt France as much as territorial losses.
 
They could have restored the Papal enclave of Comtat Venaissin surrounding Avignon in the south of France for one, alongside forcing the state to return the huge swaths of church land seized since the Revolution. These were important revenue-generators and would hurt France as much as territorial losses.

The church land was sold. That revenue they generated were taxes. Even if ownership returns to the church, that doesn't mean those taxes wouldn't flow, unless they'd force France to excempt the church from paying taxes again. And why should such a severe condition on internal politics hold?
 
Actually, I believe that even before Vienna it was decided that the Netherlands would get the Southern Netherlands, although the exact eastern borders weren't decided yet. So Luxemburg could end up Prussian, or the Rhineland, unlikely as it might be, could end up Dutch.

Too bad for Susano, because he always hoped Belgium would end up German.

If I'm not mistaken the map only shows "who was occupying what" at the time of the Congress, and not the plans of how the territory would be divided. Of course, if Dutch troops were already occupying Southern Netherlands at that time then the map is wrong.
 
They could have restored the Papal enclave of Comtat Venaissin surrounding Avignon in the south of France for one, alongside forcing the state to return the huge swaths of church land seized since the Revolution. These were important revenue-generators and would hurt France as much as territorial losses.

Which protestant or orthodox power would want to help the catholic church ?
 
I understand that giving the Netherlands was a result of trying to make a stronger bufferstate in the lowlands, would it be possible to give Baden Alsace/ Lorrie and maybe some of the rhein land to the north to make another counter balance.
 
I understand that giving the Netherlands was a result of trying to make a stronger bufferstate in the lowlands, would it be possible to give Baden Alsace/ Lorrie and maybe some of the rhein land to the north to make another counter balance.

Alsace, maybe. The Lorraine border of 1870 was based on linguistic borders, plus the fortress city of Metz, the first concern of which is unlikely to be of any concern to the Congress. If Lorraine goes, they'd take the whole of Lorraine, which is unlikely.
 
Alsace, maybe. The Lorraine border of 1870 was based on linguistic borders, plus the fortress city of Metz, the first concern of which is unlikely to be of any concern to the Congress. If Lorraine goes, they'd take the whole of Lorraine, which is unlikely.

That makes sense. Then the question is then if Prussia or Austria will allow it and mess with the balance of power with in Germany.
 
I shouldn't think they'd reject it on those grounds; Baden would not be significantly strengthened by gaining Alsace relative to either Prussia and Austria (It isn't especially powerful, period), but the real question would be the effect the loss of Alsace would have on France.
 
The Lorraine border of 1870 was based on linguistic borders, plus the fortress city of Metz

Not even close. In Lorraine only a few border cantons spoke a germanic language. The vast majority of the département spoke french. Even some territories annexed with Alsace never spoke Alsatian or a germanic language (the Welche valley, among others). The annexation of 1871 were never based on any linguistic reality.

What about Austria, a Catholic power?

Alone to restore the papal powers, when everyone agreed to stop making enclave and exclave ? Not going to happen. And this is the same with Mulhouse (which wasn't even a part of Switzerland to start with, only an ally).

Also, the main reason why France keep it's pre-1789 border is simple (even if everybody seem to forget it) : the coalition wanter to punish Revolutionnary and Napoleonic France, not Ancien Régime France. Why would you take away territories that were bourbon terriories. The goal was to restore the old order, not create a new one.
 
Not even close. In Lorraine only a few border cantons spoke a germanic language. The vast majority of the département spoke french. Even some territories annexed with Alsace never spoke Alsatian or a germanic language (the Welche valley, among others). The annexation of 1871 were never based on any linguistic reality.

On the other hand, there were certain territories for which the linguistic argument did go into effect; IE the rest of Moselle departement, and Belfort (though the defense of Belfort also helped that). Leaving them out later proved to be a grievous mistake, because Belfort was just as valuable as Metz as a fortress town, and Longwy was discovered to sit on top of massive iron reserves.

I personally think that there were a multitude of factors however; linguistic nationalism for the Germanic language regions, from Metz, security, and natural resources in general.

Alone to restore the papal powers, when everyone agreed to stop making enclave and exclave ? Not going to happen. And this is the same with Mulhouse (which wasn't even a part of Switzerland to start with, only an ally).

Also, the main reason why France keep it's pre-1789 border is simple (even if everybody seem to forget it) : the coalition wanter to punish Revolutionnary and Napoleonic France, not Ancien Régime France. Why would you take away territories that were bourbon terriories. The goal was to restore the old order, not create a new one.

I was more thinking about generally increasing the strength of the Papal States relative to other states, but yeah, more exclaves is unlikely (not that it stopped them in Germany, but that was a special case).

I did mention the desire to not punish the Ancien Regime earlier in the thread though.
 
Not even close. In Lorraine only a few border cantons spoke a germanic language. The vast majority of the département spoke french. Even some territories annexed with Alsace never spoke Alsatian or a germanic language (the Welche valley, among others). The annexation of 1871 were never based on any linguistic reality.



Alone to restore the papal powers, when everyone agreed to stop making enclave and exclave ? Not going to happen. And this is the same with Mulhouse (which wasn't even a part of Switzerland to start with, only an ally).

Also, the main reason why France keep it's pre-1789 border is simple (even if everybody seem to forget it) : the coalition wanter to punish Revolutionnary and Napoleonic France, not Ancien Régime France. Why would you take away territories that were bourbon terriories. The goal was to restore the old order, not create a new one.

I'm going to make a large dispute with this point.

The Old Swiss Confederacy was not a unitary state, it was a collection of domestically independent cantons bound by 'permanent and eternal' treaties to operate in concert for foreign policy, military operations and rule over the condominium lands (though here it could be anywhere from 2 to all 13 of the cantons for any given condominium). The only difference between the Cantons and the Associates was that the Associates didn't have an official vote on foreign policy and weren't included in the condominiums (except when they were by treaty with one canton or the other, such as Moutier-Grandval's original joint rule by Bern and the Prince-Bishop of Basel).

Furthermore Geneva and the Valais which were returned to Switzerland as full cantons had been in exactly the same position as Mulhouse before the war, while the Prince-Bishopric of Basel was given the Switzerland at Vienna having ceased being an associate in 1735.

Now, you could make the argument that Mulhouse would create a new exclave, thus leading to its exclusion, but in a hypothetical Badenese Alsace situation for example that could be quite easily rectified.
 
Top