A Bavarian victory in the WotAS (which I've considered) would almost certainly mean a loss of substantial Austrian territory. At the least Bavaria will take Bohemia and Tirol, and France the Low Countries; Prussia walks away with Silesia. IIRC Moravia would have gone to Saxony, and Bavaria also was interested in Upper Austria.

Maybe, although it depends on what you mean by “victory.” Maria Theresa might have disputed the legitimacy of Charles Albert’s election, but the truth was that even if she had been able to vote she wouldn’t have won since all the other electors were browbeaten into voting for Charles Albert. Now, I’ve established that Charles was not long for this world, but if the fortunes of war at the time of his death were such that Max III felt that he could safely claim the imperial throne the French might yet be able to arrange it for him. After all, three of the nine electors were Wittelsbachs; all they need is to get any two from the ranks of Saxony, Prussia, Trier, and Mainz to get a majority, which is eminently doable if the military situation looks decent.

If Max becomes emperor, then the important thing is that even if the Austrians subsequently rally, eject the French alliance from Bohemia, and end up with a status quo peace, it’s hard to imagine them stripping the crown from the duly elected Max III. Even when Maria Theresa’s armies had recaptured Upper Austria and Bohemia and driven Charles Albert from Bavaria entirely, she did not (to my knowledge) assert that her husband or son (b. 1741) was the rightful emperor. Her campaign to crown Francis Stephen did not begin until Charles was dead and the office was vacant again. So it’s quite possible to imagine a scenario in which Bavaria “loses” in a military sense and gains no territory, and yet manages to retain the imperial crown at least for the life of Max III. By some standards, at least, that’s a victory.

The territorial cessions you’re talking about are the Nymphenburg terms, which were quite ambitious but probably unrealistic. The problem was that all the signatories were highly suspicious of one another, and the treaty was especially unfavorable to Prussia. By the treaty of Nymphenburg, Frederick wasn’t even allotted all of Silesia - Upper Silesia, or at least part of it, would go to Saxony along with Moravia (which would be elevated to a kingdom, so that even if the Wettins later lost an election for the Polish crown they would still remain royal). So Frederick’s regional rival Saxony gets Moravia, part of Silesia, and a royal crown, Bavaria gets massively expanded with the addition of (at least) Bohemia, the Vorlande, Upper Austria, and the imperial crown, and Prussia gets… Lower Silesia. I’m pretty hard on Frederick but to be honest it’s no wonder he betrayed his allies with a raw deal like that. Moreover, Bavaria was entirely dependent on French troops and money to achieve the Nymphenburg goals, but France didn’t actually want a powerful Bavaria - they wanted a client emperor, and Bavaria with all that territory might end up a little too strong for their liking.

So between French hesitation and Prussian opposition, it’s hard to see Bavaria actually getting and keeping all that territory - it would require the Austrians to completely collapse and Prussia to accept an utterly intolerable situation. More likely, Prussia would switch sides entirely and fight alongside Austria with the condition that Maria Theresa accept the cession of Silesia, which is exactly what Britain wanted to happen. The only reason it didn’t happen IOTL is because Austria recovered on its own, and Frederick became more afraid of a revanchist Austria than an increasingly unlikely-looking Franco-Bavarian dominated HRE.
 
Last edited:

Schnozzberry

Gone Fishin'
Donor
4. The Comedy Option. I don't know the source exactly, but in Reed Browning's book on the WoAS he mentioned that after the death of Charles Albert one of d'Argenson's stranger ideas was that since the French had no good candidate to run against the Austrians maybe they could compromise and make nobody emperor, and the HRE would become some kind of federal feudal republic. Okay, this is never going to happen, but it would certainly be funny, wouldn't it?

A confederated republic of German monarchies that claims to be Holy, Roman and an Empire.

flat,800x800,070,f.jpg

Joking aside, while this is the least likely option, it is also an incredibly fascinating idea. While it might not survive for five minutes, yet alone the Seven Years War (or equivalent), the impact of such an HRE on the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars (or equivalent) would be even more interesting as it might serve as a more established version of the Confederation of the Rhine and prevent the massive cleanup of the Kleinstaaten that occurred IOTL.
 
Last edited:
Out of curiosity, since Maxie III and his eldest sister only married in 1747, would the Wittelsbachs hanging onto the imperial dignity see a different line-up of marriages? i.e. Emperor Maximilian III is going to marry someone a little more important than his first cousin (to my mind, anyway). Maybe a Bourbon princess who just happens to be free? Louis XV's eldest daughter is already married, and her twin sister, Henriette, was only slated to go to Spain to marry Fernando VI when Queen Barbara fell ill, and emperor would be regarded as suitable compensation for the "waste" that was her twin sister's marriage to a younger son, surely?

As for the diplomatic revolution (and the accompanying Habsburg-Bourbon marriages) being butterflied, I'm not so sure. France, wants a friendly/non-threatening power in Germany, and even if Maxie is married to a French bride, that's no guarantee that they'll be pulling out all the stops to keep Max in power. Friedrich the Great might be in favour of a Wittelsbach emperor (at least at first, since the minute Maria Theresia comes back, the first thing she'll probably go after is his recently-conquered Silesia), provided Maxie agrees to let him keep Silesia, rather than saying part of it must go to Austrian-allied Saxony. The ink on the treaty will probably barely be dry when Versailles starts making overtures to the Habsburg court. After all, allying with the Habsburgs in Hungary would be a good threat to keep the Wittelsbachs in line (and the French did it with the Turks, the Polish and then the Swedes OTL against the Habsburgs).
 
Out of curiosity, since Maxie III and his eldest sister only married in 1747, would the Wittelsbachs hanging onto the imperial dignity see a different line-up of marriages? i.e. Emperor Maximilian III is going to marry someone a little more important than his first cousin (to my mind, anyway). Maybe a Bourbon princess who just happens to be free? Louis XV's eldest daughter is already married, and her twin sister, Henriette, was only slated to go to Spain to marry Fernando VI when Queen Barbara fell ill, and emperor would be regarded as suitable compensation for the "waste" that was her twin sister's marriage to a younger son, surely?

As for the diplomatic revolution (and the accompanying Habsburg-Bourbon marriages) being butterflied, I'm not so sure. France, wants a friendly/non-threatening power in Germany, and even if Maxie is married to a French bride, that's no guarantee that they'll be pulling out all the stops to keep Max in power. Friedrich the Great might be in favour of a Wittelsbach emperor (at least at first, since the minute Maria Theresia comes back, the first thing she'll probably go after is his recently-conquered Silesia), provided Maxie agrees to let him keep Silesia, rather than saying part of it must go to Austrian-allied Saxony. The ink on the treaty will probably barely be dry when Versailles starts making overtures to the Habsburg court. After all, allying with the Habsburgs in Hungary would be a good threat to keep the Wittelsbachs in line (and the French did it with the Turks, the Polish and then the Swedes OTL against the Habsburgs).
I' sure at the very least the wittlesbachs would be keen to strengthen dynastic ties
 
The bavarian-french HRE against Austria-Prussia-Brittain: OTL French military performance in the 7 years war was... lets be kind and say it was underwhelming. So if you have France face of against a Prussia led by Frederick and in a reaction to Frederick heavily militarized Austria (still not Prussian level but much more than France) than France will have some serious problems. Either France did spend a lot more on its military which makes it loose even more badly on the colonial war and I think would still loose in Europe or concentrated its forces as OTL and in that case the question will be how badly do they loose on the continent.

And another small fact (not dependent on the above): A France that doesnt make peace/allies Austria wont have the money and possibility to focus on its fleet and colonial policies nearly as much as OTL - without the diplomatic revolution France will be in a much worse position to intervene in the American revolution. So the USA might owe some statues to Kaunitz.

But if you look at France foreign policy before the diplomatic revolution you will see that they always tried and usually succeeded in findind some eastern ally against Austria. Its hard to imagine they will be content with Bavaria ITTL. Also Prussia was a French ally till they signed the treaty of Westminster - which still could happen. However thats still pretty far away from an Austro-prussian alliance and if I remember correctly Fritz simply didnt understand that signing that will end its alliance with the french so given time he might back off. What would be the reason for an alliance like that? Prussia has nothing to gain by fighting France. Austria too does it usually more out of necessity than in the hope of conquest (France is usually the agressor). Maybe if France tried to replace the lost Prussian alliance with the Wettins it could do the trick. But that still wouldnt have the Prussian committed against France - maybe some token forces but if its start to look like they win (and they would) than Fritz would stop when he has what he wants. And their would win first against Saxony and Poland and so he could jump ship anytime after that.
 
The bavarian-french HRE against Austria-Prussia-Brittain: OTL French military performance in the 7 years war was... lets be kind and say it was underwhelming. So if you have France face of against a Prussia led by Frederick and in a reaction to Frederick heavily militarized Austria (still not Prussian level but much more than France) than France will have some serious problems. Either France did spend a lot more on its military which makes it loose even more badly on the colonial war and I think would still loose in Europe or concentrated its forces as OTL and in that case the question will be how badly do they loose on the continent.

And another small fact (not dependent on the above): A France that doesnt make peace/allies Austria wont have the money and possibility to focus on its fleet and colonial policies nearly as much as OTL - without the diplomatic revolution France will be in a much worse position to intervene in the American revolution. So the USA might owe some statues to Kaunitz.

But if you look at France foreign policy before the diplomatic revolution you will see that they always tried and usually succeeded in findind some eastern ally against Austria. Its hard to imagine they will be content with Bavaria ITTL. Also Prussia was a French ally till they signed the treaty of Westminster - which still could happen. However thats still pretty far away from an Austro-prussian alliance and if I remember correctly Fritz simply didnt understand that signing that will end its alliance with the french so given time he might back off. What would be the reason for an alliance like that? Prussia has nothing to gain by fighting France. Austria too does it usually more out of necessity than in the hope of conquest (France is usually the agressor). Maybe if France tried to replace the lost Prussian alliance with the Wettins it could do the trick. But that still wouldnt have the Prussian committed against France - maybe some token forces but if its start to look like they win (and they would) than Fritz would stop when he has what he wants. And their would win first against Saxony and Poland and so he could jump ship anytime after that.
I would expect any Prussian Austrian alliance to come about rather by convenience than anything else.
Assume the Prussians have bested the Austrians and face little threat of losing Silesia their obvious rival will be Saxony and Poland who I'm willing to guess will be allied to the Bavarians following the alt war of Austrian succession.
So essentially for a Austro-Prussian alliance to exist you need a French-bavarian-Wettin alliance to exist (which shouldn't be hard)
 
TBH lets look at Fritz's options on the ground when the Imperial elections of 1745 comes up:

He can a) back François Étienne's candidacy because Maria Theresia has pinkie promised that she doesn't want Silesia back, honest (I've never understood why history tends to portray Fritz as a backstabber but neglects to note the same of Maria Theresia. She might not have done it as regularly as her Prussian counterpart but that doesn't mean she didn't stab Poland in the back or go back on her word to Fritz about Silesia. Hell she was willing to go against 250 years of tradition and ally WITH France). But be that as it may, this is option 1.
Or 2) back Maxie's candidature. On the understanding he gets to keep ALL of Silesia. Max's gonna be too busy trying to consolidate his rule (for a while yet) to TRY to take Silesia back, and even if he does, the French (as said upthread) don't want Bavaria getting TOO powerful and becoming Austria 2.0, which means they'd be unlikely to sign onto any alliance to help Bavaria take it back.

Is there a way we could ADJUST the Nymphenburg terms to get Friedrich NOT to seem like such an opportunistic bastard?
 
TBH lets look at Fritz's options on the ground when the Imperial elections of 1745 comes up:

He can a) back François Étienne's candidacy because Maria Theresia has pinkie promised that she doesn't want Silesia back, honest (I've never understood why history tends to portray Fritz as a backstabber but neglects to note the same of Maria Theresia. She might not have done it as regularly as her Prussian counterpart but that doesn't mean she didn't stab Poland in the back or go back on her word to Fritz about Silesia. Hell she was willing to go against 250 years of tradition and ally WITH France). But be that as it may, this is option 1.
Or 2) back Maxie's candidature. On the understanding he gets to keep ALL of Silesia. Max's gonna be too busy trying to consolidate his rule (for a while yet) to TRY to take Silesia back, and even if he does, the French (as said upthread) don't want Bavaria getting TOO powerful and becoming Austria 2.0, which means they'd be unlikely to sign onto any alliance to help Bavaria take it back.

Is there a way we could ADJUST the Nymphenburg terms to get Friedrich NOT to seem like such an opportunistic bastard?

Fritz: outright backstabber by choice, didn't try to keep appearances
Maria Theresa: out of circumstance (at least to me anyway)
 
Fritz: outright backstabber by choice, didn't try to keep appearances
Maria Theresa: out of circumstance (at least to me anyway)
If I recall correctly the Habsburgs snubbed the Hohenzollerns first.
If the Habsburgs don't respect you enough too keep their word why keep your word to them?
I wouldn't call Fritz a backstabber an opportunist absolutely but not really a back stabber
 
If I recall correctly the Habsburgs snubbed the Hohenzollerns first.
If the Habsburgs don't respect you enough too keep their word why keep your word to them?
I wouldn't call Fritz a backstabber an opportunist absolutely but not really a back stabber

The only specific snub that I am aware of from the Habsburgs to the Hohenzollerns are the issue of the Silesia inheritance and inheritance on Cleves (glad to learn more). Silesian issue would be the contract with the Silesian Piasts & Leopold taking stuff back after the Great Elector (I think or maybe it was his son) died, but recognition of King in Prussia title and later gaining Prussian Guelders surely compensate for that.
Cleves issue during the era of Charles VI, to be honest their claim appears more distant than the Wittlesbach claim (granted promises were made, however in light of very good opportunistic (not judging, played their had well) diplomacy during the WoSS to gain Guelders & Orange, I wouldn't consider it that big of a deal, though we know the B-Prussia did).
(Also there's whole Emperor intervened to help save me (not saying it was the determinant factor) when my dad was going to kill me and give the throne to my younger brother after I absconded with my very good friend......; though I understand Fritz had something of a personal vendetta after Austrian interference with a marriage alliance with Britain. Life vs Marriage.. eh... I think life wins out, lol)
 
The only specific snub that I am aware of from the Habsburgs to the Hohenzollerns are the issue of the Silesia inheritance and inheritance on Cleves (glad to learn more). Silesian issue would be the contract with the Silesian Piasts & Leopold taking stuff back after the Great Elector (I think or maybe it was his son) died, but recognition of King in Prussia title and later gaining Prussian Guelders surely compensate for that.
Cleves issue during the era of Charles VI, to be honest their claim appears more distant than the Wittlesbach claim (granted promises were made, however in light of very good opportunistic (not judging, played their had well) diplomacy during the WoSS to gain Guelders & Orange, I wouldn't consider it that big of a deal, though we know the B-Prussia did).
(Also there's whole Emperor intervened to help save me (not saying it was the determinant factor) when my dad was going to kill me and give the throne to my younger brother after I absconded with my very good friend......; though I understand Fritz had something of a personal vendetta after Austrian interference with a marriage alliance with Britain. Life vs Marriage.. eh... I think life wins out, lol)

Not to mention Karl VI was also Fritz's godfather IIRC. And it wasn't so much that Karl *intervened* to save Fritz, he just sorta sent a letter to Friedrich Wilhelm and told him that he had no right (under imperial law) to do anything, and the king backed off. If Friedrich Wilhelm had done something, I'm not sure Karl would've actually done anything but shrugged his shoulders and held out thatdamned Pragmatic Sanction and asked Friedrich Wilhelm to please sign on.

Regarding the Silesian inheritance, it was in the reign of the Great Elector that it was promised by the Habsburgs (originally, it was supposed to have dowered the archduchess Maria Anna Josefa when she wed Hereditary Prince Karl Emil of Brandenburg, and then whoops, he died from overactive bowels (IIRC), and the Habsburgs welshed, doubtful they would've paid anyhow - look at the provinces they continually promised to the kings of Poland and never delivered). When things finally came to a head, and Leopold openly denied them the inheritance, the later Friedrich I of Prussia bit his teeth and grinned, but he charged his son or his descendants to hold the Habsburgs to account - which is what Fritz did in the 1740s.
 
In case the anti-Habsburg alliance achieves a total victory in the war, could a more cartographically pleasing partition of Austria be on the table?
I could see Prussia getting all of Silesia and Moravia, Saxony getting Bohemia, and Bavaria getting all of proper Austria, France getting the Southern Netherlands, while Maria keeps Hungary.
 
In case the anti-Habsburg alliance achieves a total victory in the war, could a more cartographically pleasing partition of Austria be on the table?
I could see Prussia getting all of Silesia and Moravia, Saxony getting Bohemia, and Bavaria getting all of proper Austria, France getting the Southern Netherlands, while Maria keeps Hungary.

Can I ask a kinda dumb question: if the Wittelsbachs/French are winning, why is Saxony getting anything? The Saxons didn't claim anything in the War of the Austrian Succession OTL, and they fought on the side of the Austrians, didn't they? So why does Saxony need to get anything but what it had when the war started at Nymphenburg?

EDIT: Apparently Saxony did exactly the same as what Prussia did, i.e. started the war on one side (they were on the Franco-Bavarian side until 1743 when they switched over to the Austrian side) so I would be very surprised that in the event of a Franco-Bavarian victory they'd get anything
 
In case the anti-Habsburg alliance achieves a total victory in the war, could a more cartographically pleasing partition of Austria be on the table?
I could see Prussia getting all of Silesia and Moravia, Saxony getting Bohemia, and Bavaria getting all of proper Austria, France getting the Southern Netherlands, while Maria keeps Hungary.
A more complete victory would also be Interesting the issue is the French, bavarians and Saxons planned on giving the Prussians very little while giving the vast majority of the Bohemian crown lands to Saxony and Bavaria and Fritz wasn' going to accept any less than what he got without them forcing it on him, he also will not want to see any expansion of Saxon power.
 
Top