Plausibility check: a greater War of the Bavarian Succession

[Socrates]

POD is no Miracle of Brandenburg meaning Prussia is dismantled and Austria regains Silesia. France still loses in the West so French resentment of Britain is the same. French fear of Britain and Austrian fear of Russia cements the Bourbon-Habsburg alliance. Butterflies mean the American Revolution is averted.

This all means when Joseph II goes hungering for Bavaria, Prussia is too broken to stop him. France is uncomfortable but willing to do it in exchange for the Southern Netherlands. The Elector Palatinate gets Tuscany, and his offspring get the various minor French and Austrian exclaves scattered in Western Germany.

Britain is obviously very unhappy about all this, but what can they actually do about it? They don't have much of a land army and few prospective allies. Hannover will be in the British camp, but who else?

- Russia isn't that amenable to an alliance and too far away from France anyway. Would they really want to go to war over this?
- Spain is allied to France and seems to want that to continue.
- Portugal has been willing to stand by Britain before against Spain, but also lacks a land army beyond her own defense.
- The Dutch Republic is clearly horrified at mega-France grabbing the border forts, but they are at France's mercy now they've been handed over. Would they want to risk war given loss may mean annihilation?
- Saxony was on Austria's side in the last war and faces little to gain from upsetting the two major powers it is now sandwiched between.
- Naples is an interesting one. Nationally a Bourbon ally, but keen to get out from under Spanish domination.

So what do you reckon, could Britain string together a viable alliance? If not, does she accept the fait accompli? Or does she go naval war alone in an effort to get more colonies? What would be the outcome?

 

[isabella]

Naples would firmly remain in the camp of Austria and France as the one who wanted most getting away from the influence of Spain was Queen Carolina, who would NOT break with her siblings in Austria and France

 

[Socrates]

Naples would firmly remain in the camp of Austria and France as the one who wanted most getting away from the influence of Spain was Queen Carolina, who would NOT break with her siblings in Austria and France

I suppose you're right. Her anti-Spanish attitude was to reduce influence in favor of Austria, so it seems she would do the same pro-Austrian position here. Not just stay neutral, but actively support Austria. So it looks like Britain is facing an alliance of France, Austria, Spain, Naples. Britain will have Portugal and Hannover in all likelihood. I can't see Saxony and rump Brandenburg joining that unless Russia also joins in.

If there's no Miracle, Catherine's coup probably doesn't get the necessary support to succeed. So I guess Peter III decides whether there's a general European war or not?

(I do wonder what would happen to Sir John Aston though.)

 

[isabella]

I suppose you're right. Her anti-Spanish attitude was to reduce influence in favor of Austria, so it seems she would do the same pro-Austrian position here. Not just stay neutral, but actively support Austria. So it looks like Britain is facing an alliance of France, Austria, Spain, Naples. Britain will have Portugal and Hannover in all likelihood. I can't see Saxony and rump Brandenburg joining that unless Russia also joins in.

If there's no Miracle, Catherine's coup probably doesn't get the necessary support to succeed. So I guess Peter III decides whether there's a general European war or not?

(I do wonder what would happen to Sir John Aston though.)

Not be so sure about Portugal as right now they are pretty close to Spanish Bourbons… They could easily decide to remain neutral here

 

[Socrates]

Not be so sure about Portugal as right now they are pretty close to Spanish Bourbons… They could easily decide to remain neutral here

Could you tell me more about that closeness? They were on the other side of the Seven Years War.

 

[isabella]

Could you tell me more about that closeness? They were on the other side of the Seven Years War.

Maria’s mother was a Spanish princess and had a lot of influence over her daughter, plus the war of Bavarian succession was just after the arrangement of a double match between Spain and Portugal (without the involvement of the direct heirs but still)

 

[Socrates]

Maria’s mother was a Spanish princess and had a lot of influence over her daughter, plus the war of Bavarian succession was just after the arrangement of a double match between Spain and Portugal (without the involvement of the direct heirs but still)

Interesting, but it still doesn't sound like enough to abandon the British alliance over it.

 

[Socrates]

Interesting, but it still doesn't sound like enough to abandon the British alliance over it.

The more I think about this, the more I think it comes down to a decision from Peter III.

@alexmilman
You are the expert on Peter. If he inherits the throne after the 7YW is over and Prussia is broken, would he go to war with France/Austria/Naples/Spain over Bavarian succession, joining a British/Portuguese/Hannoverian alliance? If so, which side would win?

 

[alexmilman]

The more I think about this, the more I think it comes down to a decision from Peter III.

@alexmilman
You are the expert on Peter. If he inherits the throne after the 7YW is over and Prussia is broken, would he go to war with France/Austria/Naples/Spain over Bavarian succession, joining a British/Portuguese/Hannoverian alliance? If so, which side would win?

Impossible to say.

 

[Socrates]

Impossible to say.

To the first question or the second?

 

[SWS]

I've always considered such an idea had Washington achieved a Cannae at Germantown.

 

[alexmilman]

To the first question or the second?

On both. Not enough information.

 

[Socrates]

On both. Not enough information.

What is the critical information that would differentiate the yeses and nos, in your opinion?

 

[alexmilman]

What is the critical information that would differentiate the yeses and nos, in your opinion?

A lot. Real character of PIII, real condition of the Russian treasury, ability to get big subsidies, quite a few things regarding domestic situation in Russia including ability to raise the new troops. Then, why would Peter agree to such an idea? He was admirer of Fritz but why would he care about Britain and Hanover? Or Bavaria?

 

[Socrates]

A lot. Real character of PIII, real condition of the Russian treasury, ability to get big subsidies, quite a few things regarding domestic situation in Russia including ability to raise the new troops. Then, why would Peter agree to such an idea? He was admirer of Fritz but why would he care about Britain and Hanover? Or Bavaria?

That last point is what I was thinking. I guess the reasons he would do it was because he was supposedly interested in projecting power into Germany. That might mean he would be interested in preventing Austria expanding her power. He also supposedly wanted a British alliance, so maybe it's a way for him to cement that?

 

[Count]

POD is no Miracle of Brandenburg meaning Prussia is dismantled and Austria regains Silesia. France still loses in the West so French resentment of Britain is the same. French fear of Britain and Austrian fear of Russia cements the Bourbon-Habsburg alliance. Butterflies mean the American Revolution is averted.

This all means when Joseph II goes hungering for Bavaria, Prussia is too broken to stop him. France is uncomfortable but willing to do it in exchange for the Southern Netherlands. The Elector Palatinate gets Tuscany, and his offspring get the various minor French and Austrian exclaves scattered in Western Germany.

Britain is obviously very unhappy about all this, but what can they actually do about it? They don't have much of a land army and few prospective allies. Hannover will be in the British camp, but who else?

- Russia isn't that amenable to an alliance and too far away from France anyway. Would they really want to go to war over this?
- Spain is allied to France and seems to want that to continue.
- Portugal has been willing to stand by Britain before against Spain, but also lacks a land army beyond her own defense.
- The Dutch Republic is clearly horrified at mega-France grabbing the border forts, but they are at France's mercy now they've been handed over. Would they want to risk war given loss may mean annihilation?
- Saxony was on Austria's side in the last war and faces little to gain from upsetting the two major powers it is now sandwiched between.
- Naples is an interesting one. Nationally a Bourbon ally, but keen to get out from under Spanish domination.

So what do you reckon, could Britain string together a viable alliance? If not, does she accept the fait accompli? Or does she go naval war alone in an effort to get more colonies? What would be the outcome?

Firstly, which miracle? There were two, one in 1759 when Prussia was almost destroyed but the allies failed to press their chances, and again in 1762 when Russia defected. The first one is the main miracle, so I’ll presume that one. This means that at the very moment of Britain’s annus mirabilis at sea, they find themselves friendless on the Continent and with France now able to turn its resources towards a naval conflict.

One important thing to remember is that according to the Second Treaty of Versailles, in the recovery of Silesia Austria was to cede the Southern Netherlands to France. Therefore France ought to have at least gained that. Britain might not like it but with Prussia forced out, there’s not a whole lot they can do on the Continent. It’s possible that despite France’s greater resources, the British continue the war until France ceded them something more than they did OTL to balance things, or more likely mutual exhaustion leaves things ending much as otl colonially. Defeated abroad, France would nonetheless be a satisfied continental power. I expect they would follow their OTL polic y if improving their navy and isolating Britain diplomatically for the next war. They might continue their arrangement with Austria, since it was a success. More likely new rivalries begin to fracture the alliance as the dismemberment of Prussia leaves Austria once again a dangerous potential hegemon in Germany. All said, the war of the Bavarian succession has considerable potential to escalate.

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

A lot. Real character of PIII, real condition of the Russian treasury, ability to get big subsidies, quite a few things regarding domestic situation in Russia including ability to raise the new troops. Then, why would Peter agree to such an idea? He was admirer of Fritz but why would he care about Britain and Hanover? Or Bavaria?

That last point is what I was thinking. I guess the reasons he would do it was because he was supposedly interested in projecting power into Germany. That might mean he would be interested in preventing Austria expanding her power. He also supposedly wanted a British alliance, so maybe it's a way for him to cement that?

I'd say that his opinion of Hannover/Britain would be formed with regards to his ambitions in Denmark, namely taking back his "inheritance". If Britain agrees to him doing that (and throwing Denmark under the bus), he might side with them, if France-Austria is the one who agrees to it, that's the side he'll go for.

Also @Socrates , the Elector Palatine specifically wanted the Netherlands. He wouldn't trade Bavaria for any random area. And likely, in a no Miracle of the House of Brandenburg, if things went as they were "supposed to" ISTR that France would've been rewarded by getting Prussia's Rhineland territories . The Elector Palatine controls the other half of those Rhineland territories (duchy of Julich). Which makes it that France would likely support the swap in exchange in expectation of being given the duchy of Julich rather than the Electoral Palatinate. The latter would cause France to be regarded as an aggressor in Germany (since it cuts off any and all other Wittelsbach princes - many of whom were at the French court or in the French army - from their inheritance), the Neuburg inheritance OTOH, IIRC had been decided by Karl VI that it would pass to Karl Theodor rather than revert to Prussia (which was AIUI the original text of Xanten). France taking/expecting Julich/Juliers makes this a Franco-Prussian matter, not a Franco-German matter.

 

[Socrates]

Firstly, which miracle? There were two, one in 1759 when Prussia was almost destroyed but the allies failed to press their chances, and again in 1762 when Russia defected. The first one is the main miracle, so I’ll presume that one. This means that at the very moment of Britain’s annus mirabilis at sea, they find themselves friendless on the Continent and with France now able to turn its resources towards a naval conflict.

The second Miracle.

One important thing to remember is that according to the Second Treaty of Versailles, in the recovery of Silesia Austria was to cede the Southern Netherlands to France. Therefore France ought to have at least gained that.

An article to the treaty removed by the Third Treaty of Verasailles, so no longer relevant to the 7YW, especially as France contributed so little to the reconquest of Silesia.

Britain might not like it but with Prussia forced out, there’s not a whole lot they can do on the Continent.

The 7YW was two simultaneous wars in East and West. France lost the war badly in the West and was partially bailed out by the new British King wanting an end to the war and giving a generous peace. With Prussia conquered, the war in the East ends and Austria will have no desire to continue fighting for French strategic goals. The war in the West ends in the same way.

It’s possible that despite France’s greater resources, the British continue the war until France ceded them something more than they did OTL to balance things, or more likely mutual exhaustion leaves things ending much as otl colonially.

Britain will not be exhausted. As we saw in the Napolenic Wars, Britain had far more capacity to fight on for years and years, and to sustain the debt from that with its constitutional system. The French ancien regime not so much.

Defeated abroad, France would nonetheless be a satisfied continental power. I expect they would follow their OTL polic y if improving their navy and isolating Britain diplomatically for the next war. They might continue their arrangement with Austria, since it was a success.

As I said in the first post, I think this is the most likely scenario and the context for my questions here.

More likely new rivalries begin to fracture the alliance as the dismemberment of Prussia leaves Austria once again a dangerous potential hegemon in Germany. All said, the war of the Bavarian succession has considerable potential to escalate.

I think France is far more worried about Britain in this scenario and will maintain the Habsburg alliance. Especially if they can get the AN out of it. The question is what Russia does.

 

[Socrates]

I'd say that his opinion of Hannover/Britain would be formed with regards to his ambitions in Denmark, namely taking back his "inheritance". If Britain agrees to him doing that (and throwing Denmark under the bus), he might side with them, if France-Austria is the one who agrees to it, that's the side he'll go for.

I think this is sound thinking. The issue is that in OTL none of the Western powers seemed to give a damn. Peter seemed more pro-British and anti-Austrian, so I don't think he comes in on the Austrian side. But he may stay neutral. I can also see Peter and Joseph seeing themselves as similar monarchs which could help the relationship thaw.

Also @Socrates , the Elector Palatine specifically wanted the Netherlands. He wouldn't trade Bavaria for any random area.

Would he not? My understanding is that he preferred a better climate and he wanted prestige, so Tuscany works well for both. He also wanted land for his various bastards to inherit, so a scattering of French and Austrian lands also works. I know he had grand aims of resurrcting Burgundy but that is delusional. Also part of the interest was that Joseph may have gone to war if he didn't go along with things and he may have ended up with no Bavaria regardless, so he has an incentive of conceding to whatever Austria and France agree to, especially with no Prussia on the scene.

And likely, in a no Miracle of the House of Brandenburg, if things went as they were "supposed to" ISTR that France would've been rewarded by getting Prussia's Rhineland territories .

In the scenario I am planning, France continues to lose in the West as they did in OTL. Austria does not commit a fresh army to help them as (a) they need their troops to occupy Silesia and Brandenburg and (b) it's not in their interest. I suppose you are right France might still be given this small territory as part of the general Prussian dismemberment.

The Elector Palatine controls the other half of those Rhineland territories (duchy of Julich). Which makes it that France would likely support the swap in exchange in expectation of being given the duchy of Julich rather than the Electoral Palatinate.

I was proposing the French get the Austrian Netherlands, which is more valuable than the Duchy of Julich.

The latter would cause France to be regarded as an aggressor in Germany (since it cuts off any and all other Wittelsbach princes - many of whom were at the French court or in the French army - from their inheritance), the Neuburg inheritance OTOH, IIRC had been decided by Karl VI that it would pass to Karl Theodor rather than revert to Prussia (which was AIUI the original text of Xanten). France taking/expecting Julich/Juliers makes this a Franco-Prussian matter, not a Franco-German matter.

Not sure I follow your point. Prussia is an ex-power in this scenario.

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

Would he not? My understanding is that he preferred a better climate and he wanted prestige,

no. He was born in Brussels (Droogenbosch), held the title of marquis of Bergen-op-Zoom via his mom, and he wanted to go back.

He also wanted land for his various bastards to inherit, so a scattering of French and Austrian lands also works. I know he had grand aims of resurrcting Burgundy but that is delusional.

How is it delusional. Joseph gets rid of a state that doesn't bring him anything really (he never visited it, even when he travelled to France AFAIK), and leaves Karl Theodor to deal with the mess. He didn't plan to resurrect Burgundy, he simply considered using the title. He can create a centralized state there far better than the Habsburgs could. Plus, it has the added benefit of removing Maria Christine/Albrecht (neither of whom Joseph liked for what they got out of Maria Theresia, and who constantly spited his attempts to reform*) from that picture. Karl Theodor getting Burgundy clears up what happens to his bastards, since his bastard son will get it when he dies (this was in the treaty), along with Julich-Berg. The Electoral Palatinate will pass to the Zweibrucken branch of the Wittelsbachs, so it'd be more of a personal union than a "single state". But, since, at the time of the treaty, Karl II of Zweibrucken's only son was already dead, the future Maximilian I of Bavaria wasn't married yet, and their sisters hadn't married the elector of Saxony or the duke of Birkenfeld-Gelnhausen (Sissi's great-grandpa), it seemed very likely that Burgundy would either include the Palatinate (that clause was also in the treaty IIRC - which was what most objected to - that if the legitimate lines went extinct, Karl Theodor's bastard son's line would inherit the Palatinate instead of it reverting).

Karl Theodor would have to deal with making "Belgium" into a centralized state, not Joseph. Whether he'd succeed is questionable. But it'd be very hard for the "Belgians" to rally against him in a Brabant Revolution or a Liège Revolution in similar manner to how they did against Mimi-Albrecht. After all, they can't use the "foreign ruler" trying to meddle analogy they did OTL (where they compared it - down to their 'declaration of independence' looking liike an updated version of the Act of Abjuration of 1579).

TBH, Karl Theodor isn't well remembered in Bavaria (where he also gets seen as a foreigner and generally distrusted because of his three attempts (1777, one in the 1780s and another during the Revolution) where he'd attempted to trade them to Austria), but it's hard to believe that in Brussels he'd do that much worse. They'd be getting their first "johnny-on-the-spot" ruler since Albert and Isabella. And, lo and behold, while English writers call him extravagant and despotic, according to German sources he's described as "far sighted" and "improving the judiciary", "forbidding the sale of government posts" and "introducing unpopular austerity measures", but noting his enthusiasm quickly flagged. But he established universities, encouraged the sciences, was far more tolerant of Lutheran and Reformed than his predecessor. Sounds a bit like Louis XVI, really, tries to implement reforms but everyone complains about them.

*this was actually a conspiracy among Leopold II/Mimi/Ferdinand to all block Joseph's reforms. The only siblings he trusted as a result where Antoinette and Caroline (who had no hold) and Maximilian (who was unfairly regarded by their mother as "too partisan" to Joseph's ideas)