HRE collapse pre-1648

With a PoD no later than 1648, how could the HRE disappear or lose a significant number of member states? Perhaps if the Peace of Augsburg never happens and the Protestants see no alternative than to break away?
 
For me personally the period of 1618-1621 is ideal.

If Ahmed I lives past 1617 and participates in the 30 years war the Habsburgs are in real trouble. Ottomans besieging Vienna, giving the Bohemians and the Protestant states chance to prepare.
 
I think nightmare for Habsburg would be situation, when PLC and Sweden are allied to each other and France (say John III Vasa of Sweden had two sons with Catherine of Poland-one Protestant who takes Sweden and one Catholic who takes PLC), PLC being safe from the north (Sweden is ally) and East (Russia is weakened after Time of Troubles) use opportunity to grab Silesia from Habsburgs.
 
I heard they would have been overstretched... but why exactly? Could a bit of decentralization have helped?

The logistics were horrible. The Balkan geography is horrible. And then there was still a long time from Belgrad to Vienna. The Army being around 100-150k did not help either.

Decentralisation would cause different problems.
 
The logistics were horrible. The Balkan geography is horrible. And then there was still a long time from Belgrad to Vienna. The Army being around 100-150k did not help either.

Decentralisation would cause different problems.

Suleiman was marching from Ottoman Bulgaria, not Serbia so Belgrad is not very important, except for the fact that a march from Bulgaria to Vienna is noticeably longer. :openedeyewink:

Only a limited number of troops could be left in Vienna over the winter (almost definitely, no timarli sipahi and I doubt that it would be politically feasible to left most of the Janissary there).

As for 100 - 150K, would be available even at that time unless one starts counting the irregulars and vassal troops. In this case, Moldavia and, when he reached the Mohács plain, a cavalry force led by John Zápolya. Probably, experience of his next campaign against Vienna (1532) should give a hint regarding the real size of his army: all of it stopped at a small fortress of Kőszeg that was defended by 700 - 800 Croatians and did not have an artillery and could not even take it.
 
A name we're not seeing here is Francis. Let's say he either wins at Pavia or manages to sidestep the disaster somehow. The French claims in Italy stay active, the kingdom of France isn't paralyzed by his captivity, and the enormous ransoms aren't paid to Charles. Of course, that's not the end of anything. But let's say it critically weakens Charles for the other tests of his reign, so that he's constantly having to commit resources to Italy to counter Francis and the pope. Each time another foe appears, his resources are just a bit more drained, the battle is just a bit closer, until finally one or the other of them overwhelms him at a crucial point. Let's say there's bad luck in Hungary. Nothing as dramatic as a bad outcome of the Siege of Vienna. Just, bad luck in Hungary.

Maybe it becomes apparent at that point the institutions of the empire and the Habsburg heirs cannot do the job. Or, maybe the Ottoman Sultan simply says they can't be the Holy Roman Empire any more because he is the unique heir of ancient Rome, and that's the price he exacts to go away.

Anyway, that's my thinking.
 
Top