Plausibility Check: ALT Congress of Vienna (1815)

[Rdffigueira]

Hello, friends, I'm doing some research about the Napoleonic period, and especially post-Napoleonic. Obviously this was a period that witnessed fundamental transformations in European geopolitics, and the Congress of Vienna in 1815 sought to restore the "old" order (apparently championed by Metternich) and to restablish the balance of power between the nations.

Now, if we get Napoleon's rise and fall similar to what happened IOTL (disastrous invasion of Russia, defeat at Leipzig, Hundred Days, defeat in Waterloo, etc.), how plausible are those "modifications" to the terms of the Vienna Convention?

1) Prussia does not receives the Rhineland provinces, but instead the whole Kingdom of Saxony is annexed, or joined into a personal union with the King of Prussia, perhaps with some other minor states of the former Confederation of the Rhine as a bonus. Besides, it receives the territories resulting from the final partition of Poland, just like OTL

[IOTL, the Kingdom of Prussia received the Rhineland (which had been annexed by Revolutionary France), supposedly to act as bulwark against France, and 40% of Saxony, due to the fact that the Saxon King Frederick Augustus was considered a "collaborator" of France against the other German states. Now, I read that Prussia in fact pushed for the annexation of the whole of Saxony, but instead it continued existing, with minor territory, and with Frederick Augustus restored to the throne].

2) The Rhineland is either annexed to the Kingdom of Hannover or created as another independent German State (i.e. Kingdom of Rhineland, or something like that), with perhaps a prince from a minor German state as its new king.

[Simply adding it to Hannover I'm not sure if it's plausible, because at the time Hannover was in personal union with the UK, and the break-up that happened between the countries in the 1830s certainly wasn't predictable by 1815, as it happened because of the ascension of Queen Victoria. Also, I'm not sure if the Great Powers would want a smaller German state on the French border, at least not if it wasn't allied with another Great Power, such as Austria or Prussia].

3) Suggestion for an alternative partition of Poland? This one I don't know, but am interested to know if there were proposals in the debates. Considering Russia was perhaps the "biggest winner" of the Napoleonic Wars, I doubt the European powers in 1815 would deny giving it the most of Polish territory... as it happened with Congress Poland.

Is it plausible for Poland to remain an independent state, like the Duchy of Warsaw (one of France's most reliable allies), but ruled by a foreign king, perhaps a Romanov, or a Habsburg?

4) Alternate arrangements regarding Italy? After the wars, Austria was restored to its position in northern Italy (controlling Lombardy) which it held since before the Revolutionary Wars. Neverthless, could we see an alt-Kingdom of Lombardia-Venetia created, like IOTL, but without Francis I of Austria as its king? Perhaps giving it to another member of Habsburg family, or even giving it to an Italian prince, the Grand Duke of Tuscany (after all, Grand Duke Leopold of Tuscany was a Habsburg prince).

Can anyone help?

 

[Janprimus]

Austria gave up the Southern Netherlands and part of the compensation was Lombardia-Venetia. If they don't get more there directly, they might be considered for more German Lands instead.

I do wonder if the UK would want a drastically increased Hanover, but I can see Hanover gaining Westphalia.

 

[JonasResende]

First of all, a separation of the UK and Hannover was predictable in 1815. The only grandchild of George III was Princess Charlotte of Wales, thus, everyone knew that as soon as the Prince Regent kicks, one of his brothers will be getting Hannover.

But, the territory Hannover wanted was bartered away to Kassel and Prussia/Oldenburg (I think).

That said (and I'm sure this is a typo), while the Rhineland is rather large (the archbishopric-electorates plus the grand duchy of Berg) you state that you would recompensate the king of Saxony with a state in the Rhineland, but then proposing to give the entirety of the Rhineland away to another power. So where does that leave the king of Saxony?

 

[Janprimus]

First of all, a separation of the UK and Hannover was predictable in 1815. The only grandchild of George III was Princess Charlotte of Wales, thus, everyone knew that as soon as the Prince Regent kicks, one of his brothers will be getting Hannover.

But, the territory Hannover wanted was bartered away to Kassel and Prussia/Oldenburg (I think).

That said (and I'm sure this is a typo), while the Rhineland is rather large (the archbishopric-electorates plus the grand duchy of Berg) you state that you would recompensate the king of Saxony with a state in the Rhineland, but then proposing to give the entirety of the Rhineland away to another power. So where does that leave the king of Saxony?

If the king of Saxony was stripped from his territories due to being seen having collaborated with France against the interests of the German States, I doubt they would entrust him with the Rhineland and the vital job to contain potential future French aggression.

 

[Zireael]

Alt Vienna doesn't change the partitions of Poland - they happened in 1772, 1793 and 1795.
The Duchy of Warsaw also post-dates the partitions, as it was established in 1807 by Napoleon. The ruler was the then King of Saxony.
To prevent the Duchy being occupied and then divided between Russia and Prussia, you'd need the Saxony king to act in the Polish and not French interests.

 

[Rdffigueira]

First of all, a separation of the UK and Hannover was predictable in 1815. The only grandchild of George III was Princess Charlotte of Wales, thus, everyone knew that as soon as the Prince Regent kicks, one of his brothers will be getting Hannover.

But, the territory Hannover wanted was bartered away to Kassel and Prussia/Oldenburg (I think).

That said (and I'm sure this is a typo), while the Rhineland is rather large (the archbishopric-electorates plus the grand duchy of Berg) you state that you would recompensate the king of Saxony with a state in the Rhineland, but then proposing to give the entirety of the Rhineland away to another power. So where does that leave the king of Saxony?

Thanks for the info, I didn't realize the break-up between Hannover and UK was indeed foreseen in 1815, but what I meant is that perhaps the European powers in Vienna didn't want an enlarged Hannover (receiving the Rhineland, that is) "belonging" by proxy to the British Crown. As I said, I was just speculating.

If the king of Saxony was stripped from his territories due to being seen having collaborated with France against the interests of the German States, I doubt they would entrust him with the Rhineland and the vital job to contain potential future French aggression.

That's my premise, sorry if wasn't clear, @JonasResende. I meant that if Prussia is given the whole of Saxony, then the King of Saxony, Frederick Augustus is deposed. After all, he was a political prisoner of Prussia until 1815, and the Prussians certainly didn't have the intention of restoring him to power. Indeed, I imagined what @Janprimus said: the Great Powers would entrust him with the Rhineland, but rather with some small appanage inside Prussia, perhaps.

Also, in the previous post you mentioned that Austria gained Lombardia-Venetia due to the loss of Southern Netherlands/Belgium, and it might seek more German states. Can you imagine which states of Germany would be granted to Austria? Would the Rhineland be an interesting concession for Austria?

 

[Rdffigueira]

Alt Vienna doesn't change the partitions of Poland - they happened in 1772, 1793 and 1795.
The Duchy of Warsaw also post-dates the partitions, as it was established in 1807 by Napoleon. The ruler was the then King of Saxony.
To prevent the Duchy being occupied and then divided between Russia and Prussia, you'd need the Saxony king to act in the Polish and not French interests.

That's what I imagined. To get a Duchy of Warsaw surviving would be against Prussia and Russia's interest... even more because if it was created as some sort of client state of Prussia or Russia, it would piss off the losing party.

Your proposal for the King of Saxony as an independent Duke of Warsaw is interesting... perhaps he tries to be absolutely neutral regarding the War of the Sixth Coalition, the Duchy of Warsaw can survive, even after ceding some of its territory to Prussia and Russia.

 

[Zireael]

It is not a proposal, it's what happened IOTL.

Since the consensus in this thread seems to be that he picked a bad side, he can either remain neutral or a different Duke of Warsaw has to be found.

 

[Autocrat]

What your proposing is what nearly resulted in a war OTL. OTL the Russians wanted more of Poland, which the Prussians were willing to agree to if they got more of Saxony. However this was against the interests of Austria and Britain. But due to the 2 v 2 nature of the conflict it seemed to be a diplomatic stalemate until the French monopolized the situation by having them become a full member of the peace negotiations and then changing the 2v2 to a 3v2. So in OTL you either have to have the British and Austrians fold to the Russian and Prussian demands (do remember Prussia and Austria were wrecked, Britain financially was running out of steam, but Russia still had huge armies roaming Europe) or have their be a war, which Russia and Prussia would have won (albeit Britain wouldn't truly have been defeated.

 

[Rdffigueira]

What your proposing is what nearly resulted in a war OTL. OTL the Russians wanted more of Poland, which the Prussians were willing to agree to if they got more of Saxony. However this was against the interests of Austria and Britain. But due to the 2 v 2 nature of the conflict it seemed to be a diplomatic stalemate until the French monopolized the situation by having them become a full member of the peace negotiations and then changing the 2v2 to a 3v2. So in OTL you either have to have the British and Austrians fold to the Russian and Prussian demands (do remember Prussia and Austria were wrecked, Britain financially was running out of steam, but Russia still had huge armies roaming Europe) or have their be a war, which Russia and Prussia would have won (albeit Britain wouldn't truly have been defeated.

Interesting point, I didn't know about this. It's amazing that after the whole disasters of the Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars, the Great Powers could start another war right after defeating Napoleon. This would probably provoke the collapse of the Austrian Empire... and that's an interesting TL in its own right.

 

[Westphalian]

Alt Vienna doesn't change the partitions of Poland - they happened in 1772, 1793 and 1795.
The Duchy of Warsaw also post-dates the partitions, as it was established in 1807 by Napoleon. The ruler was the then King of Saxony.
To prevent the Duchy being occupied and then divided between Russia and Prussia, you'd need the Saxony king to act in the Polish and not French interests.

Having the King of Saxony and Duke of Warsaw leaving the French side and going over to the allies as soon as Napoleon flees Russia, probably, so close after Prussia, would be a huge POD.

This were his territories then:

If the king changes side early, for political reason his possessions have to be reserved; and historically spoken, Austria/Metternich will certainly be his big patron. In this case Friedrich August I. certainly keeps all of his Saxon inheritance and either keeps Poland ("Warsaw") or will get a huge territory in the West: The OTL Prussian Rhineland and Westphalia have in 1815 about 3 mn inhabitants. IOW, they will not be enough to compensate, under Vienna rules, for the 4,3 mn inhabitants of the Duchy of Warsaw...

Edit: But then, the Prussian-Dutch border was not set in stone. A huge Western compensation for the Saxon king might have encompassed the Luxembourg/Liege/Limburg area. That might give him anothe million subjects to compensate for those lost in Warsaw.

 

[Rdffigueira]

(...)

If the king changes side early, for political reason his possessions have to be reserved; and historically spoken, Austria/Metternich will certainly be his big patron. In this case Friedrich August I. certainly keeps all of his Saxon inheritance and either keeps Poland ("Warsaw") or will get a huge territory in the West: The OTL Prussian Rhineland and Westphalia have in 1815 about 3 mn inhabitants. IOW, they will not be enough to compensate, under Vienna rules, for the 4,3 mn inhabitants of the Duchy of Warsaw...

I guess that indeed satisfies Austria, who'd prefer a buffer state led by a friendly ruler than giving it away to Russia.

 

[Westphalian]

Anyway, since the PoD is a change at and not before Vienna, here is a map of Germany as the congress assembled:

Territorial changes can happen by expropriation from French allies, by direct exchange or by circle trade (like the OTL Norway from the Danish king to Sweden, Pommern from Sweden to Prussia, East Frisia from Prussia to Hanover,Lauenburg from Hanover to the Danish king).

The biggest disposable territories were Poland, Saxony, Westphalia and the Rhineland with the Palatinate, plus smaller areas in the Bavarian-Hessian border zone.

(OTL, the Prussian government explicitly suggested a smallish Kingdom of Westphalia made up from the former bishoprics of Münster and Paderborn as compensation for the deposed King of Saxony). Weak, rather poor and still far from the French borders.

 

[Westphalian]

I guess that indeed satisfies Austria, who'd prefer a buffer state led by a friendly ruler than giving it away to Russia.

Yes, it would be highly adventageous for Austria, if "Warsaw" stayed in the Hands of FA1, who would be a clear Austrian client by that time, as it would mean that Russian armies would have to start much farther to the east when marching towards Galicia and Hungary (and basically all of Germany).

The same is the reason why it is difficult to imagine that Russia goes along with it. The only price it might accept would be carte blanche (guaranteed by all Great Powers) for future endeavours against Ottoman South East Europe.

 

[Rdffigueira]

(...)

Territorial changes can happen by expropriation from French allies, by direct exchange or by circle trade (like the OTL Norway from the Danish king to Sweden, Pommern from Sweden to Prussia, East Frisia from Prussia to Hanover,Lauenburg from Hanover to the Danish king).

The biggest disposable territories were Poland, Saxony, Westphalia and the Rhineland with the Palatinate, plus smaller areas in the Bavarian-Hessian border zone.

(OTL, the Prussian government explicitly suggested a smallish Kingdom of Westphalia made up from the former bishoprics of Münster and Paderborn as compensation for the deposed King of Saxony). Weak, rather poor and still far from the French borders.

That's very interesting, thanks for the info, friend! It's amazing how at these times entire countries were bartered away like fruits in the political market

 

[Emperor Constantine]

Ah the Congress of Vienna, the event that established a century of relative peace in Europe and borders that more or less remained intact until the first World War. Always a fun topic. I'll answer in the order of your questions.

1. If Prussia tried to annex the whole of Saxony, with Russian backing mind you, there would be a war between the two and a triple alliance of Austria, France and Great Britain. None of those three wanted to see Saxony disappear from the map for their own reasons: France because it would violate the ideal of legitimacy that was supposed to guide the congress and would place their campaign to restore Naples to the Bourbons in jeopardy, while Austria and the UK feared Russia gaining most of Prussian Poland, creating a puppet mega state that would allow the Tsar to project his influence into Central and Western Europe. I'd suggest reading up on the Polish-Saxon crisis for more info.

2. A Hanovarian Rhineland is out of the question. it was never even mentioned once, so I doubt that the Prince Regent was interested in it. As to an independent Rhineland, I think that is doable if its not given to Prussia, either as one state, not unlike the Napoleonic Kingdom of Westphalia, or several, similar to the Electorates of Trier and Cologne that originally ruled the region.

3. Poland was another difficult one, tied to #1. Any restored or alternate Poland would be dominated by Russia, something the rest of the great powers had no desire to see. Any kind of revived Poland would have a legitimate claim to chunks of Austrian and Prussian territory and would eventually go to war (backed by the puppet master in St. Petersburg) to regain them. Its tied to the Saxon-Polish crisis and the compromise that followed. Poland was to big a threat to be restored in any way that was realistic (the Congress Kingdom was a puppet of Russia and everyone knew it) and no one wanted Russia to try and gain Galicia or Pozen and Danzig.

4. Italy was basically gifted to Austria to keep down a revolutionary threat. Northern Italy was basically a mess of revolutionary ideas and half-formed ideas that terrified the Great powers and was thought to be better off under Austria. Plus Austria had lost the most territory during the Napoleonic wars, was the host of the Congress and already occupied much of Italy. The only actual territory added to Austria's pre-revolutionary borders was the Republic of Venice, considered a relic that wasn't worth restoring. As to placing a cadet branch in Northern Italy, I don't believe it was ever considered at any point so it would be highly unlikely.

Hope these answers help!

 

[Don Quijote]

What about concessions to Russia at the expense of the Ottamans? Serbia or Bulgaria could become Russian client states, but 60-70 years earlier than OTL.

 

[Rdffigueira]

Ah the Congress of Vienna, the event that established a century of relative peace in Europe and borders that more or less remained intact until the first World War. Always a fun topic. I'll answer in the order of your questions. (...) Hope these answers help!

It did help, thank you very much, @Emperor Constantine! I had figured out that Poland was too much of a geopolitical mess to go out of the Napoleonic Wars intact.

My main interest was about Rhineland and Italy, in fact. I supposed that if Austria didn't have a direct foothold in Italy it might have seen an earlier unification of the peninsula (which, indeed was against the interests of the GPs, especially if it adopted a revolutionary ideology).

What about concessions to Russia at the expense of the Ottamans? Serbia or Bulgaria could become Russian client states, but 60-70 years earlier than OTL.

That's an interesting point, mentioned by @Westphalian in a previous post. I'm not sure if Britain and Austria would be interested in this arrangement, especially considering that the Ottoman Empire had only been peripherically involved in the Napoleonic Wars (indeed, they were declared against France since Napoleon's ill fated expedition to Egypt, it would hardly be fair that it should be the one to lose at the Vienna Congress).

The question is fascinating, however, because not long after the Napoleonic Wars began the fracturing process of the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans: the Greek Revolution, and the two Serbian revolts (which might or not be supported by Austria).

It would be an interesting scenario: Poland remains an independent rump state between Prussia and Russia (possibly ruled by Frederick Augustus, if he's indeed restored to power), but Russia is now free to intervene in the Balkans.

 

[Gloss]

Could Bavaria end up differently? Maybe with less land.

 

[Don Quijote]

I don't think Austria would support Serbia, preferring to keep the Ottamans going for a bit longer to hold the attention of the Russians. Gloss is right about changes to Bavaria, as Austria will want to expand in some direction. It would also help their position as the main German state, rather than Prussia. Munich is a pretty important city in the area, and could act as a 'northern Budapest' for Austria.