Austria, mid 1800s onward

Right from the get go I will state Austrian history is not my primary interest, therefore my following questions are probably inherently flawed, but that is why I ask.

Working from a departure point in 1836 or 1837, I am trying to come up with a hypothetical plan to bring Austria forward somewhat intact, and in a much better position generally than historical.

In the long term I wish mainly to work towards Austria as a fully constitutional monarchy with Hungary still in the fold, either as historical or otherwise, with extra freedoms for the Slavic peoples if possible; and to create an overarching "Austrian" culture opposed to the current German/Hungarian/Slavic mixture, similar to other empires through history.

I do not have this fully planned out however, so any suggestions would be welcome, but there is a few short term (in comparison) things I wish to accomplish.

It is no doubt impossible the fully avoid the 1848 tumults, but I think it would be worthwhile to try and blunt them, mainly by loosening the grip that the government now has on the populace (it is practically a police state), and doing away with the peasant system that still is in widespread use throughout Austria (though being banned in Hungary by the Diet from what I recall.) I do not think there would be a tremendous amount of opposition to the latter, however I am not sure how to proceed in bringing the vices of it to the attention of Metternich, and how to carry on from there. Any suggestions?
The justice system is quite bad off; entire trials, including examination of witnesses, is entirely private; the decisions of judges are not published so there is no way to determine a standard on rulings, and other things, however I do understand this may not be plausible until Metternich is no longer in power, though I do think his reactionary nature in terms of internal politics is exaggerated by a certain amount.

One other thing I would like to set up before the revolutions of 1848, if possible, is a peerage with a sort of Diet of our own that would take over control of different aspects of the government. This would be composed of Hungarians as well, but it would not replace the Hungarian Diet so they should not be opposed to the idea as it is not in any way affecting their rights and if anything is giving them more say in matters (however this works as a reason the German groups may not welcome it).
However, after the revolution I might consider expanding it in some way and not reconstituting the Hungarian Diet down the line, instead working towards a national Parliament or Diet.


For the revolution itself I do not think there will be many areas in which one could do things differently, but after it is squashed, i.e. once Hungary is under military control I intend to handle the aftermath differently; instead of treating poorly those races and people groups which sided with the Austrians against the Hungarians (out of fear of the Hungarian nationalism program), they will be split off directly from Hungary so to leave Hungary no sense that they are rightfully part of Hungary. This should help down the line as Hungary will not feel as much like resisting me over them due to them being divorced entirely from those areas. Which territories this will encompass is still to be determined, though Croatia, Illyria and the Military Frontier come to mind, perhaps even Transylvania.

To help create a more 'Austrian' culture the intent is to merge the army fully and entirely at this time as well.

Now, I will not pretend both of these are going to make them more amiable in the short to mid term, so, as well with the rest of the Empire, I am thinking that keeping some of their reforms or putting in reforms of our own would act as the carrot end of the bargain. What reforms exactly I am not sure yet, but more extensive and far reaching changes to the justice system, abolition of serfdom (if that is not already accomplished by the time and was historically done at this juncture), and generally leaving them their freedoms from before the revolution, but also bringing the level of freedom for the rest of the Empire towards the Hungarian level, partly as a reward to those loyal to us, partly to keep people happier and work towards the end goal.


To boil it down, my questions are as follows:

-How long until serfdom can be abolished and what paths should one take to accomplish this?
-What type of reforms would it be reasonable for one to have Metternich to do to loosen slightly the police state which, as we must remember, he himself played a hand in setting up?
-When would it be possible, and how long would it take, to set up a Diet of nobles-cum-peers?
-What negative effect to the Hungarian attitude will splitting off the different provinces and removing entirely any say they had in their armed forces have remembering that one of their demands pre revolution was to control their own army?
-What positive or negative effects to the Hungarian attitude will Austria leaving their freedoms generally intact and not revoking everything they did have post revolution?
-How many freedoms would it be possible to give the population from the rest of the empire immediately after the revolution, both in reward and to win them over?
-How will treating those who assisted Austria better effect their attitude over the long run?

Any comments welcome.
 
Last edited:
Right from the get go I will state Austrian history is not my primary interest, therefore my following questions are probably inherently flawed, but that is why I ask.

Working from a departure point in 1836 or 1837, I am trying to come up with a hypothetical plan to bring Austria forward somewhat intact, and in a much better position generally than historical.

In the long term I wish mainly to work towards Austria as a fully constitutional monarchy with Hungary still in the fold, either as historical or otherwise, with extra freedoms for the Slavic peoples if possible; and to create an overarching "Austrian" culture opposed to the current German/Hungarian/Slavic mixture, similar to other empires through history.

It'd be very difficult, after Napoleon, to prevent the various national awakenings (Czech, German, Polish, Croat, Hungarian, etc) from happening; but most of these movements had by 1914 already reached the stage of being happier with the monarchy than with any plausible alternative.

Make the monarchy farer, more efficient, in a better international position, and this feeling can be deepened and give the Austrian state quite a bit of vitality. It's gragility is in any case often overstated; I think a Hapsburg empire in the Danube can absolutely be with us in 2010, given luck.

I do not have this fully planned out however, so any suggestions would be welcome, but there is a few short term (in comparison) things I wish to accomplish.

It is no doubt impossible the fully avoid the 1848 tumults, but I think it would be worthwhile to try and blunt them, mainly by loosening the grip that the government now has on the populace (it is practically a police state), and doing away with the peasant system that still is in widespread use throughout Austria (though being banned in Hungary by the Diet from what I recall.) I do not think there would be a tremendous amount of opposition to the latter, however I am not sure how to proceed in bringing the vices of it to the attention of Metternich, and how to carry on from there. Any suggestions?

True, the revolutions were as you say products of factors going back quite far; but I think it's possible to avoid nything on the same scale at any rate. The middle classes were angry because the state A) tried to control their intellectual discourse and B) didn't work: at least in neo-absolutist Austria the trains didn't work. And the peasants were angry about the increasingly anachronistic serfdom system.

A dynamic government which pulls the trick of 1846 and 1848 (appease the peasants, give some encouragement to the small nations, remind the big nations No Dreams, Gentlemen, No Dreams) has solved a lot of these problems. If there are consultive assemblies, if various nations have more rights (and these are reforms I can see Metternich making, given the chance), and the serfs are freed, I don't think Austria need ever suffer revolutions.

The justice system is quite bad off; entire trials, including examination of witnesses, is entirely private; the decisions of judges are not published so there is no way to determine a standard on rulings, and other things, however I do understand this may not be plausible until Metternich is no longer in power, though I do think his reactionary nature in terms of internal politics is exaggerated by a certain amount.

Oh, I definately agree. Metternich was never a reactionary True Believer and recognised that he was in charge of a rotten system, but he didn't have the influence of will necessary to challenge the domestic system of reaction championed by Kaiser Franz.

A PoD rather differant to my idea (although it could had a similar result) would be to replace) Ferdie with someone capable, pragmatic, and flexible. Not sure who...

One other thing I would like to set up before the revolutions of 1848, if possible, is a peerage with a sort of Diet of our own that would take over control of different aspects of the government. This would be composed of Hungarians as well, but it would not replace the Hungarian Diet so they should not be opposed to the idea as it is not in any way affecting their rights and if anything is giving them more say in matters (however this works as a reason the German groups may not welcome it).
However, after the revolution I might consider expanding it in some way and not reconstituting the Hungarian Diet down the line, instead working towards a national Parliament or Diet.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, but of you mean an all-empire parliamentary assembly, it seems doable to me. My hypothetical non-Ferdinand could shift the empire in this constitutional direction, since IIRC that's what Metternich said he's do if he could.

For the revolution itself I do not think there will be many areas in which one could do things differently, but after it is squashed, i.e. once Hungary is under military control I intend to handle the aftermath differently; instead of treating poorly those races and people groups which sided with the Austrians against the Hungarians (out of fear of the Hungarian nationalism program), they will be split off directly from Hungary so to leave Hungary no sense that they are rightfully part of Hungary. This should help down the line as Hungary will not feel as much like resisting me over them due to them being divorced entirely from those areas. Which territories this will encompass is still to be determined, though Croatia, Illyria and the Military Frontier come to mind, perhaps even Transylvania.

Actually Transylvania and Croatia were seperated from Hungary, and the Serbs got their own institutions in the Banat. The Hungarians just squashed everything again in 1867, although there had been some rather appeasing moves before that.

But a sterner and lasting policy towards Greater Hungary seems a plausible outcome of either of my scenarios. The Hungarians won't like it ("Union" was one of their famous Twelve Demands in '48, and just look at what happened after Trianon...) but nor can they do anything about it, and a Vienna government had no motive to abuse the Hungarians living outside Hungary proper, only to make them participate in Romanian and Serb institutions. If the Hpabsurg monarchy is obviously here to stay, I think the Magyars can get used to their new situation.

To help create a more 'Austrian' culture the intent is to merge the army fully and entirely at this time as well.

The army was indeed a coherent body before 1867.

Now, I will not pretend both of these are going to make them more amiable in the short to mid term, so, as well with the rest of the Empire, I am thinking that keeping some of their reforms or putting in reforms of our own would act as the carrot end of the bargain. What reforms exactly I am not sure yet, but more extensive and far reaching changes to the justice system, abolition of serfdom (if that is not already accomplished by the time and was historically done at this juncture), and generally leaving them their freedoms from before the revolution, but also bringing the level of freedom for the rest of the Empire towards the Hungarian level, partly as a reward to those loyal to us, partly to keep people happier and work towards the end goal.

The big issue, of course, is the Sudeten Germans. They'd gum up any attempt by Vienna to conciliate the Czechs, which was the big problem OTL, really: Galicia ruled itself and Croatia did have the worst deal in the world under the '68 settlement (ITTL it will also have Dalmatia and crownland status).

If special status for the Czech lands happened earlier, that could help overcome that problem, but the thing is that in the mid-30s political Czechism wasn't taken very seriously. The movement was just flowering in 1848.

But create a Kingdom of Bohemia and the rest if pretty simple.

To boil it down, my questions are as follows:

Well, going with my "Ferdia replaced by effective reformer" concept...

-How long until serfdom can be abolished and what paths should one take to accomplish this?

In OTL, the Austrians dismantled serfdom to reign in the peasants and use them against aristocratic nationalism starting with the '46 Galician Slaughter. The policy makes sense: a more dynamic administration could easily carry it out by 1840 or so, without blood having to be shed.

-What type of reforms would it be reasonable for one to have Metternich to do to loosen slightly the police state which, as we must remember, he himself played a hand in setting up?

With a free reign given to him by the monarch, I can see Metternich creating consultive assemblies at the provincial and perhaps even imperial level which could serve as the basis for further change. They'd be nobles and very small franchises at that stage, obviously, but it's a start.

-When would it be possible, and how long would it take, to set up a Diet of Hungarian nobles-cum-peers?

...Well, the Diet already existed, and was a very aristocratic institution.

-What negative effect to the Hungarian attitude will splitting off the different provinces and removing entirely any say they had in their armed forces have -remembering that one of their demands pre revolution was to control their own army?

They'll be pissed, but in a sufficiently functional state I don't see what they can do. It'll take them decades to get over it, though.

-What positive or negative effects to the Hungarian attitude will Austria leaving their freedoms generally intact and not revoking everything they did have post revolution?

That will sweeten the pill rather a bit. Metternich was certainly not a devotee of Germanisation, so in my scenario he'll definately allow Hungarian publishing, as long as it doesn't do anything silly like criticise the government too much.

-How many freedoms would it be possible to give the population from the rest of the empire immediately after the revolution, both in reward and to win them over?

Well, as I say, I don't think a rveolution is entirely necessary, but by 1850 I can certainly see my scenario having autonomous parliamentary assemblies and full righst for the national language in three-province Croatia, three-province Czechia, and Galicia. Also young Serb and Romanian insititutions.

The Slovene and Slovak languages could also receive much more official toleration; the Ukrainian movement doesn't exist much yet, but when it comes along, balancing the anti-Russian tendency with the sensitivities of Poland will be a job and a half.

To be honest, sitting on the Italians is the best option for Vienna. Assuming Lombardy-Venetia is gone, they can't cause any trouble by themselves; but while irredentism exists, the Slovenes and Croats have a good reason to snuggle up with the Austrian government. As we saw in 1915...

-How will treating those who assisted Austria better effect their attitude over the long run?

No-one has any real grievance, assuming the whole Czech thing can be overcome, except the Italians: it may be necessary to jettison them, since I doubt unification can be held off forever. But the Romanians and all the Slavs could, without an Ausgleich, get used to the Austrian system and learn to prosper within it. the Slovenes, Croats, and Poles all pretty much had already.

Any comments welcome.

Best second post we've had from anyone in ages; welcome to the site! :)
 
It'd be very difficult, after Napoleon, to prevent the various national awakenings (Czech, German, Polish, Croat, Hungarian, etc) from happening; but most of these movements had by 1914 already reached the stage of being happier with the monarchy than with any plausible alternative.

Make the monarchy farer, more efficient, in a better international position, and this feeling can be deepened and give the Austrian state quite a bit of vitality. It's gragility is in any case often overstated; I think a Hapsburg empire in the Danube can absolutely be with us in 2010, given luck.

True, the revolutions were as you say products of factors going back quite far; but I think it's possible to avoid nything on the same scale at any rate. The middle classes were angry because the state A) tried to control their intellectual discourse and B) didn't work: at least in neo-absolutist Austria the trains didn't work. And the peasants were angry about the increasingly anachronistic serfdom system.

A dynamic government which pulls the trick of 1846 and 1848 (appease the peasants, give some encouragement to the small nations, remind the big nations No Dreams, Gentlemen, No Dreams) has solved a lot of these problems. If there are consultive assemblies, if various nations have more rights (and these are reforms I can see Metternich making, given the chance), and the serfs are freed, I don't think Austria need ever suffer revolutions.

I never actually considered the possibility that they may be avoided entirely, I do need to do this cautiously, and the revolutions do bring the benefit of being able to consolidate the remainder of the territory outside Hungary without them being able to make a peep (so to speak) once they are crushed.
On the other hand I certainly would not mind having Metternich around longer.


Oh, I definately agree. Metternich was never a reactionary True Believer and recognised that he was in charge of a rotten system, but he didn't have the influence of will necessary to challenge the domestic system of reaction championed by Kaiser Franz.

A PoD rather differant to my idea (although it could had a similar result) would be to replace) Ferdie with someone capable, pragmatic, and flexible. Not sure who...

I was hoping that Ferdinand himself could be useful in the sense that his disabilities could be actually utilized to give Metternich a much freer hand, in that he wouldn't interfere. Metternich and Kolowrat around 1836-1838 totally reorganized Austrian finance, and, as one era thing I read said, 'purposed to do all they could for Austrian economically', or something in that vein. Freeing up the serfs would work with that to a certain extent I think, but this freedom could be slowly extended to other matters as well.

Regarding the economy, I was also thinking of having Austria finance an expanded (and useful) Ludswigkanal, clear the Danube to make it navigable all the way to the Black Sea and build at least two rail lines to Buda and to Trieste.


I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, but of you mean an all-empire parliamentary assembly, it seems doable to me. My hypothetical non-Ferdinand could shift the empire in this constitutional direction, since IIRC that's what Metternich said he's do if he could.

I am speaking more of a 'House of Lords' so to speak to get the ball rolling, more than anything. Later on it would expand into a two level thing similar to the British parliamentary system with its own unique twists.


Actually Transylvania and Croatia were seperated from Hungary, and the Serbs got their own institutions in the Banat. The Hungarians just squashed everything again in 1867, although there had been some rather appeasing moves before that.

But a sterner and lasting policy towards Greater Hungary seems a plausible outcome of either of my scenarios. The Hungarians won't like it ("Union" was one of their famous Twelve Demands in '48, and just look at what happened after Trianon...) but nor can they do anything about it, and a Vienna government had no motive to abuse the Hungarians living outside Hungary proper, only to make them participate in Romanian and Serb institutions. If the Hpabsurg monarchy is obviously here to stay, I think the Magyars can get used to their new situation.

Yes, they were separate but as you said, they did feel somewhat possessive of them; the idea would be to leave them no illusions of the fact.

The army was indeed a coherent body before 1867.

Okay, I wasn't sure when this came about. All I know is that pre revolution they had their own regiments even though they were deployed mixed, I believe.


The big issue, of course, is the Sudeten Germans. They'd gum up any attempt by Vienna to conciliate the Czechs, which was the big problem OTL, really: Galicia ruled itself and Croatia did have the worst deal in the world under the '68 settlement (ITTL it will also have Dalmatia and crownland status).

If special status for the Czech lands happened earlier, that could help overcome that problem, but the thing is that in the mid-30s political Czechism wasn't taken very seriously. The movement was just flowering in 1848.

But create a Kingdom of Bohemia and the rest if pretty simple.

Seeing as the Sudetenland and Bohemia would still be part of the Empire, would splitting them at this time be plausible? It would make for some awkward maps, but then this is Europe.
Or is that what you meant by creating a Kingdom of Bohemia? I do think there is one already, from what I know, Moravia as well.



In OTL, the Austrians dismantled serfdom to reign in the peasants and use them against aristocratic nationalism starting with the '46 Galician Slaughter. The policy makes sense: a more dynamic administration could easily carry it out by 1840 or so, without blood having to be shed.

Hmm, very useful, I wonder how much it hinges on getting an entirely new administration; that is the biggest obstacle more than anything, people's attitudes.


With a free reign given to him by the monarch, I can see Metternich creating consultive assemblies at the provincial and perhaps even imperial level which could serve as the basis for further change. They'd be nobles and very small franchises at that stage, obviously, but it's a start.

Somewhat like the Noble parliament/diet line I was thinking towards?


They'll be pissed, but in a sufficiently functional state I don't see what they can do. It'll take them decades to get over it, though.

For sure, but ya got to do what ya got to do.

Well, as I say, I don't think a rveolution is entirely necessary, but by 1850 I can certainly see my scenario having autonomous parliamentary assemblies and full righst for the national language in three-province Croatia, three-province Czechia, and Galicia. Also young Serb and Romanian insititutions.

The Slovene and Slovak languages could also receive much more official toleration; the Ukrainian movement doesn't exist much yet, but when it comes along, balancing the anti-Russian tendency with the sensitivities of Poland will be a job and a half.

I think personally it would take time for these things to be accepted, but I do think it could be done, if carefully.

To be honest, sitting on the Italians is the best option for Vienna. Assuming Lombardy-Venetia is gone, they can't cause any trouble by themselves; but while irredentism exists, the Slovenes and Croats have a good reason to snuggle up with the Austrian government. As we saw in 1915...

I was hoping to at least hold onto Venice, if not a bit more; you are saying that this would help matters?

No-one has any real grievance, assuming the whole Czech thing can be overcome, except the Italians: it may be necessary to jettison them, since I doubt unification can be held off forever. But the Romanians and all the Slavs could, without an Ausgleich, get used to the Austrian system and learn to prosper within it. the Slovenes, Croats, and Poles all pretty much had already.

Yeah, its a lot of little things really that might add up to some big ones if done improperly.


Best second post we've had from anyone in ages; welcome to the site! :)

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I never actually considered the possibility that they may be avoided entirely, I do need to do this cautiously, and the revolutions do bring the benefit of being able to consolidate the remainder of the territory outside Hungary without them being able to make a peep (so to speak) once they are crushed.
On the other hand I certainly would not mind having Metternich around longer.

The revolutions were a much-needed jolt of electricity for the Austrian state as it stood by the latter 1840s, definitely, but I think with a PoD in the mid-30s it is possible to avoid "the revolution". That's not to rule out other outbreaks like, say, a Hungarian version of Galicia '46, which would obviously be rather bigger and more serious.

I was hoping that Ferdinand himself could be useful in the sense that his disabilities could be actually utilized to give Metternich a much freer hand, in that he wouldn't interfere. Metternich and Kolowrat around 1836-1838 totally reorganized Austrian finance, and, as one era thing I read said, 'purposed to do all they could for Austrian economically', or something in that vein. Freeing up the serfs would work with that to a certain extent I think, but this freedom could be slowly extended to other matters as well.

I think Metternich was the man to get the Austrian Empire out of its difficulties if he could have gotten a proper mandate to run domestic policy. How he gets one is an interesting question, but the idea of a Ferdinand who's genuinely incapable of running anything sounds like it could work.

Regarding the economy, I was also thinking of having Austria finance an expanded (and useful) Ludswigkanal, clear the Danube to make it navigable all the way to the Black Sea and build at least two rail lines to Buda and to Trieste.

The state took a pretty active part in railway-building prior to 1854: I could see this continuing.

I am speaking more of a 'House of Lords' so to speak to get the ball rolling, more than anything. Later on it would expand into a two level thing similar to the British parliamentary system with its own unique twists.

That sounds plausible. As far as the most troublesome regions, Hungary and Galicia, are concerned, the aristocracy and the revolutionary movement overlapped pretty closely. Giving them some sort of consultive body removes a lot of pressure.

Yes, they were separate but as you said, they did feel somewhat possessive of them; the idea would be to leave them no illusions of the fact.

They're going to feel possesive for some time whatever happens, but a tougher line from Vienna could certainly make them more aware of the realities of the new situation.

Okay, I wasn't sure when this came about. All I know is that pre revolution they had their own regiments even though they were deployed mixed, I believe.

There was an elaborate politicaly mix-up of all the differant regiments, especially the Hungarians in Italy. It was a juggle the empire continued right up to the end, when Croat and Slovene soldiers were sent against Italy, who wanted to annex their lands and Italianise them, but not against Russia or Serbia is it could be avoided.

But without the Ausgleich, the game will be played under a single unified command structure, rather than the curious triple-army that emerged OTL.

Seeing as the Sudetenland and Bohemia would still be part of the Empire, would splitting them at this time be plausible? It would make for some awkward maps, but then this is Europe.

It's theoretically possible, and I wouldn't say a pragmatic regime in Vienna would never do it (the Serbian Banat didn't have many historical antedecents and the Military Frontier was just as physically awkward); but the thing is no-one really wants it at this point. The Czechs don't want their ancient territory broken up; and the Germans are at this point not restricted to the borderlands: the Germans of Prague and Brno wouldn't want to be stranded in a Czech kingdom.

Or is that what you meant by creating a Kingdom of Bohemia? I do think there is one already, from what I know, Moravia as well.

I meant fulfilling the Czechist political programme of a parliamentary authority covering the three Czech lands, official status for the Czech language throughout, and a pro-Czech revision of the Prague University situation.

Hmm, very useful, I wonder how much it hinges on getting an entirely new administration; that is the biggest obstacle more than anything, people's attitudes.

The Austrians had always been willing to play peasants off troublesome nobles, I think: they started beefing up the economic rights of peasants as soon as they arrived in Galicia. And when they had to do it, they didn't hesitate to ally with Avram Iancu and such. I think a regime with the necessary political will and confident that it's in control would be able to play the same game.

Somewhat like the Noble parliament/diet line I was thinking towards?

Very much.

I think personally it would take time for these things to be accepted, but I do think it could be done, if carefully.

Exactly.

I was hoping to at least hold onto Venice, if not a bit more; you are saying that this would help matters?

Hmm. One could say Austria's big diplomatic problem was that it never chose "Germany of Italy" after the Crimean War and ended up losing both. The Italians had a very energetic nationalist movement that was popular at home and abroad, and if Austria's lost Lombardy, we have a Kingdom of Italy on our hands, keen to grab Venice at the earliest opportunity.

It's not impossible for Austria to keep up a diplomatic balancing act and retain part of her Itaian possesions, but I'm not sure if its worth it compared to some of the benefits of a dignified retreat.

Yeah, its a lot of little things really that might add up to some big ones if done improperly.

Yep.
 
Even if you decide to get rid of Ferdinand you don't have to go with Franz Josef - his father stepped aside in the chaos of 1848, but a more orderly abdication could have left you with a biddable AND more stable monarch, with an heir of his own, to boot

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
I think Metternich was the man to get the Austrian Empire out of its difficulties if he could have gotten a proper mandate to run domestic policy. How he gets one is an interesting question, but the idea of a Ferdinand who's genuinely incapable of running anything sounds like it could work.

Even if you decide to get rid of Ferdinand you don't have to go with Franz Josef - his father stepped aside in the chaos of 1848, but a more orderly abdication could have left you with a biddable AND more stable monarch, with an heir of his own, to boot

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

This is what I read (albeit on wikipedia, I try to use it only for the very basics, and it has so very little on the Austrian Empire anyways) regarding Ferdinand:

Ferdinand was incapable of ruling his empire, so his father, before he died, drafted a will promulgating that he should consult Archduke Louis on every aspect of internal policy, and urged him to be influenced by Prince Metternich, Austria's foreign minister.

Ferdinand has been depicted as feeble-minded and incapable of ruling, but although he was epileptic and certainly not intelligent, he kept a coherent and legible diary and has even been said to have a sharp wit. Having as many as twenty seizures per day, however, severely restricted his ability to rule with any effectiveness. Though he was not declared incapacitated, a regent's council (Archduke Louis, Count Kolowrat and Prince Metternich) steered the government..... He is famous for his one coherent command: when his cook told him he could not have apricot dumplings because they were out of season, he said “I'm the Emperor, and I want dumplings!”
What if I use this to give Metternich more freedom, but then eventually have a more orderly abdication? Metternich cannot survive forever, (1859 historically) and good leadership is just as important after the fact as it is now; plus, if Metternich manages to obtain a certain amount of freedom to do what he wishes (and gains popularity while he is at it) any new emperor wouldn't necessarily wish to tangle with him if he could avoid it; him being a legend enough as it is already.
When he eventually retires or dies, then the new monarch could take more of that freedom of action back, as lets face it, there is not likely to be another Metternich, and everyone would know it.

I may need to have this Archduke Louis fellow moved however, or something to deal with the Absolutism aspect of his nature:

He also demonstrated his political abilities by representing his brother, Emperor Francis II, in several occasions and was appointed in his brother’s will to be head of the State Conference (from 1836 to 1848) which controlled all government offices on behalf of Emperor Ferdinand I. The Archduke was in favour of Metternich’s politics and supported Absolutism.
Grey Wolf, are you suggesting I have Archduke Franz Karl become the next monarch or that I somehow change the line of descent? I was thinking that the younger brother of Ferdinand's father looked pretty decent, or at least one of his sons, but that might be messing up the line of descent too much.

That sounds plausible. As far as the most troublesome regions, Hungary and Galicia, are concerned, the aristocracy and the revolutionary movement overlapped pretty closely. Giving them some sort of consultive body removes a lot of pressure.

Then that is something I will aim for, perhaps for the actual sessions starting in 1842 or something; do you know how I would go practically about this? Its something I haven't been able to find much upon.

I was thinking basically creating all my Princes and Counts (numbering about 20 and 300 respectively) into a peerage and then this is where I get lost. It has to be signposted, as they say, and I am not sure exactly what signposts are needed.


They're going to feel possesive for some time whatever happens, but a tougher line from Vienna could certainly make them more aware of the realities of the new situation.

For sure, but that is what I am counting on, them being told 'No' -especially if they cannot do anything about it- being quite beneficial.


There was an elaborate politicaly mix-up of all the differant regiments, especially the Hungarians in Italy. It was a juggle the empire continued right up to the end, when Croat and Slovene soldiers were sent against Italy, who wanted to annex their lands and Italianise them, but not against Russia or Serbia is it could be avoided.

But without the Ausgleich, the game will be played under a single unified command structure, rather than the curious triple-army that emerged OTL.

It was rather mixed up, even before during the Napoleonic wars, but likely not as much as it was after the Ausgleich. I am still debating what to do about the Grenzers in the long run..


It's theoretically possible, and I wouldn't say a pragmatic regime in Vienna would never do it (the Serbian Banat didn't have many historical antedecents and the Military Frontier was just as physically awkward); but the thing is no-one really wants it at this point. The Czechs don't want their ancient territory broken up; and the Germans are at this point not restricted to the borderlands: the Germans of Prague and Brno wouldn't want to be stranded in a Czech kingdom.

I meant fulfilling the Czechist political programme of a parliamentary authority covering the three Czech lands, official status for the Czech language throughout, and a pro-Czech revision of the Prague University situation.

Ah, okay, for whatever reason I was thinking more in the later years I guess. It is rather something of a pickle all around; it would likely take a few decades to bring this Czechsifying about anyways, would it not?
I wonder if there is any way to subtly encourage the Germans to migrate back to Austria.


The Austrians had always been willing to play peasants off troublesome nobles, I think: they started beefing up the economic rights of peasants as soon as they arrived in Galicia. And when they had to do it, they didn't hesitate to ally with Avram Iancu and such. I think a regime with the necessary political will and confident that it's in control would be able to play the same game.

That is very useful to know, thank you; it gives a few more options, and as you can tell, they are going to be very much in control, though not in that perfectly reactionary way.


Hmm. One could say Austria's big diplomatic problem was that it never chose "Germany of Italy" after the Crimean War and ended up losing both. The Italians had a very energetic nationalist movement that was popular at home and abroad, and if Austria's lost Lombardy, we have a Kingdom of Italy on our hands, keen to grab Venice at the earliest opportunity.

It's not impossible for Austria to keep up a diplomatic balancing act and retain part of her Itaian possesions, but I'm not sure if its worth it compared to some of the benefits of a dignified retreat.

I wasn't sure myself, however I would at least like to keep Venice for a few more years as a naval base until Pola is built; I was trying to think of a way that the Italians in the area could be made to accept it as well, but the revolutions in the rest of Italy would not make that all that easy.
 
Last edited:
I was suggesting Franz Karl - I don't read him as a particuarly strong-willed figure, but a safe pair of hands who would let his ministers get on with things. He has Franz Josef in place as an heir, so he would be both better than Ferdinand for his more stable personality, and seem a good family man, and the type of monarch that both people and politicians want - ie the succession is secure, and he is not going to be too interfering

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Okay, thanks for clearing that up. I hadn't thought too much on him before, however that may work well.

If I have Ferdinand be slightly worse off perhaps, and find a way for Metternich to take over Internal affairs, then as I said above, Metternich would be given relative freedom, due to the increased incapability of Ferdinand.

Once we hit 1843 perhaps, or somewhere in there, I replace Ferdinand with Karl, (citing perhaps Ferdinand's increased illness) and there he is for some time.
In that sense it wouldn't be a rushed 'get rid of this chap to bring in this one' but it would give some time to have it signposted.
 
Last edited:
Okay, thanks for clearing that up. I hadn't thought too much on him before however that may work well.

If I have Ferdinand be slightly worse off perhaps, and find a way for Metternich to take over Internal affairs, then as I said above, Metternich would be given relative freedom, due to the increased incapability of Ferdinand.

Once we hit 1843 perhaps, or somewhere in there, I replace Ferdinand with Karl, (citing perhaps Ferdinand's increased illness) and there he is for some time.
In that sense it wouldn't be a rushed 'get rid of this chap to bring in this one' but it would give some time to have it signposted.

True - tho Ferdinand had a remarkably long life considering. But if his illness was debilitating in terms of being able to perform his duties at all, and maybe fears for his life, then whether he recovers later should not be an issue.

You can also look at Krakow - its change of status was in some way wrapped up with troubles in that part of the world in 1848

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
True - tho Ferdinand had a remarkably long life considering. But if his illness was debilitating in terms of being able to perform his duties at all, and maybe fears for his life, then whether he recovers later should not be an issue.

You can also look at Krakow - its change of status was in some way wrapped up with troubles in that part of the world in 1848

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

It seemed that he did have trouble performing his duties (the simple fact that his father instructed him to talk to his minister of internal affairs about everything, and that he, it seems, only once issued a definite command somewhat aid me in this perspective). However, that was no reason to replace him fully historically, but if his life really was in danger at any given point due to the illness, that may be used here.

I certainly don't want anything 'cheesy' or whatever the equivalent terms are.

I will look into Krakow, thanks.
 
Last edited:
It seemed that he did have trouble performing his duties (the simple fact that his father instructed him to talk to his minister of internal affairs about everything, and that he, it seems, only once issued a definite command somewhat aid me in this perspective). However, that was no reason to replace him fully historically, but if his life really was in danger at any given point due to the illness, that may be used here.

I certainly don't want anything 'cheesy' or whatever the equivalent terms are.

I will look into Krakow, thanks.

Ferdinand could easily and plausably suffer a severe epilectic seizure with fatal consequences at any time you choose. For example, in my CoHE TL he suffered a seizure during Mass and died soon thereafter.
 
It seemed that he did have trouble performing his duties (the simple fact that his father instructed him to talk to his minister of internal affairs about everything, and that he, it seems, only once issued a definite command somewhat aid me in this perspective). However, that was no reason to replace him fully historically, but if his life really was in danger at any given point due to the illness, that may be used here.

I certainly don't want anything 'cheesy' or whatever the equivalent terms are.

I will look into Krakow, thanks.

btw this is a fantastic resource for 1848

http://www.ohio.edu/chastain/contents.htm

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Ferdinand could easily and plausably suffer a severe epilectic seizure with fatal consequences at any time you choose. For example, in my CoHE TL he suffered a seizure during Mass and died soon thereafter.

I would actually rather he just kind of go away and not die, I don't like killing people off if I can help it. :p
However it is an option, though at the moment I am more concerned Archduke Louis might get in the way, being in charge of internal affairs as well as Absolutist.

btw this is a fantastic resource for 1848

http://www.ohio.edu/chastain/contents.htm

Best Regards
Grey Wolf


Splendid, thanks!
 
Last edited:
I know that it has been a while since the last post in this thread, but I have a few more questions and I thought it best to revive the thread than to post a new one.

As a small update, and to set the stage for my questions below, I shall try and detail what has gone on. Many things have gone somewhat differently than I had planned above, however it has not entirely proven unhelpful.

For starters a major war between most of Europe and Russia delayed some of my plans, but with a certain amount of unrest generated by the war managed to abolish serfdom in 1843.

I was also provided the opportunity to begin bowing out of Italy due to the war in Russia. Tensions are still very obvious between Russia and Austria, and for a while there we were not sure what Prussia was going to do. That left us with one possible continental friend, France, and dealing with Italy was obviously required to ensure they were less hostile in the long run. As of July 1845 Lombardy is now a part of Piedmont-Sardinia, though we got some favourable trade agreements and a fair amount of cash in return.
Venice was split into two, Venice and Verona. The former I intend to hold on to as long as possible, however I am thinking Verona might be used to help towards that end.

Ferdinand is still around, however he is growing more ill (he already had to back out of most affairs in 1838) though I did read that the one thing that kept the rebellions in 1848 from going republican was the love for him the people had, so I am not sure if I want to keep him or put in his brother now.

I managed to begin reforms to the judicial system (opening it up a little); to open the border between Hungary and the rest of the empire; to come to an arrangement with the Zollverein where we would open borders with one another allowing me the opportunity to consider joining it later on; to open markets in Britain, France, Germany, Portugal, Sardinia and other places for my agricultural products, which with Hungary open should help; to bring in a few less reactionary figures into the Ministry (Pillersdorff in Internal Affairs) and also to begin to lay framework for consultative assemblies in the provinces, the first one in either Bohemia or Austria proper hoping to be set up in 1846 or so.

Anyways, with these things in mind, the largest issue remaining before 1848 is the matter of freedom of science, of the press, and of speech in general. While Metternich was somewhat more liberal at home than abroad, is there any plausible way to deal with this, or even to begin to deal with this, before 1848? I can always leave it until 1848 and then find a way to have reforms made, but of course the downside of that is that some of my people will undoubtedly yell and shout that it is caving into revolutionaries as they did over Galica.

Other than that, the Italian situation is certainly a plus, I cannot obviously support unification, but I can do much less to hinder peaceful unification (and they may then turn out rather more friendly to me for it), all of which allows me to deal with Hungary earlier and more effectively.

Obviously I cannot expect Russian help in resolving the Hungarian situation, but having the large army in Italy now in the other areas of the Empire from the get go will mean I can take strong action immediately instead of trying to conciliate Hungary to buy time to deal with Sardinia.
Does this sound plausible? Does anyone have any resources a little more detailed on the war with Hungary than Wikipedia is?
While I somewhat personally sympathize with many of the Hungarian points of view (I am of English heritage, the seeds of liberty have been drilled very very deeply), obviously I cannot accept most of their demands, and at any rate feel that holding Hungary by force of arms for even a short period might be useful as I can split Croatia/Transylvania from Hungary.

I want to then set up an assembly along the lines of the other ones and use that to conciliate Hungarian opinion, working at the same time with the other assemblies towards a full constitutional monarchy.
From what I recall, after the war Austria was very harsh on Hungary, and I assume they dissolved the Diet for good. I am thinking of replacing that here with the assembly thing.
Does all this sound reasonable?

And finally, how would the lack of Metternich's resignation affect the Frankfurt Parliament? I read somewhere that had he not resigned it could not have gone on at all.
Obviously it is not something Austria can countenance, and with the conservative elements still at large in Prussia, would make short work of any attempts to unify Germany as a revolutionary Reich.

Basically:

- Is there any plausible way to deal with Freedom of speech before 1848?
- Does anyone have any further information on the Hungarian revolution and the ensuing war? The Encyclopaedia of the Revolutions of 1848 certainly helped but I couldn't seem to find a lot on Hungary.
- Is there any thoughts on how the Hungarian revolution would work out without me having to wait until Sardinia is in hand to deal with Hungary?
- What sort of effects would all this have on the Frankfurt Parliament and Germany?
 
From previous plans, I have begun to work out how I wish to change the empire post 1848. Each section will be an individual province, most being a group of previous territories.

Yellow is Upper and Lower Austria, Styria, Tyrol, Carinthia, and Vorarlberg
Light Green is Hungary
Faded Green is Croatia, Dalmatia, the Illyrian Coast, Slavonia, and Carniolia
Gray is Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia
Red is Slovakia
White or very very pale yellow is Galicia and Lodomeria
Orange is Venice
Pale Yellow is Transylvania


(Click for larger version)

Am I taking too much from Hungary? How will they, to a large extent, react in the long term?

Remember the idea is to counterbalance the splitting off of some of Hungarian territory by being lenient in other ways, such as (I am thinking) of somehow getting Ladislas Szalay as the Prime Minister of this new Hungary seeing as he seems suitable for the role, and with an earlier crackdown on Hungary, he may not have his mental breakdown.
On a similar note, I assume the Hungarian Diet was dissolved in 1848 or 49, am I correct? Does anyone know when it was reinstated?

Slovakia isn't set in stone as independent, they supported the Hapsburgs hoping for a measure of independence from Hungary, so I would like to do it.

I gave Transylvania about half of what they did not get back after independence, in the north, to connect it partially to Galicia.

Croatia is given the land borders of the later Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia.
 
From previous plans, I have begun to work out how I wish to change the empire post 1848. Each section will be an individual province, most being a group of previous territories.

Yellow is Upper and Lower Austria, Styria, Tyrol, Carinthia, and Vorarlberg
Light Green is Hungary
Faded Green is Croatia, Dalmatia, the Illyrian Coast, Slavonia, and Carniolia
Gray is Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia
Red is Slovakia
White or very very pale yellow is Galicia and Lodomeria
Orange is Venice
Pale Yellow is Transylvania


(Click for larger version)

Am I taking too much from Hungary? How will they, to a large extent, react in the long term?

Remember the idea is to counterbalance the splitting off of some of Hungarian territory by being lenient in other ways, such as (I am thinking) of somehow getting Ladislas Szalay as the Prime Minister of this new Hungary seeing as he seems suitable for the role, and with an earlier crackdown on Hungary, he may not have his mental breakdown.
On a similar note, I assume the Hungarian Diet was dissolved in 1848 or 49, am I correct? Does anyone know when it was reinstated?

Slovakia isn't set in stone as independent, they supported the Hapsburgs hoping for a measure of independence from Hungary, so I would like to do it.

I gave Transylvania about half of what they did not get back after independence, in the north, to connect it partially to Galicia.

Croatia is given the land borders of the later Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia.

Actually red is the Venice coast (Trieste to Venice)
Which bring the question: what about the italian minority (south tirol and north Illirian)?
 
Perhaps I should have made the orange a little bit more prominent.

Nevertheless, the border between Venice and Dalmatia isn't set in stone, for the moment I had just used the default border, but I might fiddle with it. Trieste is just a bit lower than the border.
Regard the Italians in Tyrol, I suppose if necessary something can be arranged with any eventual Italy, though they are small enough that I don't think it necessary to give them their own province. If I started doing that, everyone would want one, and I am hoping I found the balance here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Austria-Hungary_map_new.svg

At any rate, for the moment my biggest questions are regarding Hungary. With a military win over them, and with a strong willed, intelligent Metternich still in power, I am sure it can be done, especially as it was requested by the other ethnic groups, and I intend to reward them more for their aid.
The question is more how badly will they take it? I am hoping with the right mixture of carrot and stick it can be arranged most effectively for the future.
 
Last edited:
As in the last Austria-Hungary thread I'd suggest introducing gradual freedom of language and education in their own language for the various minorities to help buy them off linked with the mandatory teaching of Austrian German to act as a lingua franca for the Empire. Now that might work against your idea of building an overarching "Austrian" culture a bit but I think you're going to suffer a certain amount of nationalism regardless so better to give them as little as possible whilst also generally contented.
 
I like that idea about the languages, thank you for making that suggestion.

I expect nationalistic sentiment, and I am not even confident my plans for an Austrian culture would work this late in the day, however I think there is nominally enough similarities to work from (religion being one, though I may need to eventually fudge the lines between Protestant and Catholic.)

Your suggestion for language is really helpful though, being interested in British history primarily, everyone will have to forgive me for continually referring to them. :p
Anyways, I see it similar to how it was done in the UK where English became the lingua franca while the other languages, dress, food and all that was not suppressed but incorporated as 'British'.
I don't intend to Germanize everyone, that didn't work historically, but having one main language would certainly help, while leaving them their own distinctive languages.

Also, does anyone have links to other threads on Austria? I have seen a few, but the more the better to help me get a full grasp on the situation.
 
Top