Question on HRE

During the War of the Austrian Succession the Bavarian Elector, Charles, claimed the Kingdom of Bohemia and Archdukedom of Austria. If he had succeeded in gaining those claims it would mean he would have 2 electoral votes (Bohemia and Bavaria). However Imperial law doesn't allow for that. In fact OTL when Palatinate and Bavaria United Palatinate's electoral vote was suppressed in favour of Bavaria's. So in this ATL with Emperor Charles having both Bavaria and Bohemia what would happen with his votes. Would he be able to keep both Bavaria and Bohemia's vote or would he have to suppress one vote. If the latter then which vote would be suppressed?
 
Where in the imperial law forbade holding two electorates? Wenceslaus and Sigismund of Luxemburg were both Kings of Bohemia and Margraives of Brandenburg.
 
Where in the imperial law forbade holding two electorates? Wenceslaus and Sigismund of Luxemburg were both Kings of Bohemia and Margraives of Brandenburg.
I don't believe either held both titles at the time of any election.
 
Indeed they didn't, but once again, if it was forbidden they wouldn't hold both titles to begin with.
 
Indeed they didn't, but once again, if it was forbidden they wouldn't hold both titles to begin with.

To be honest I'm not familiar with the Pre-Westphalian HRE, so I can't comment on that. But considering how dramatically the Thirty Years' War and Peace of Westphalia changed the HRE I don't think Weneclaus was subject to the same law on holding multiple electorates.
 
Consulting the text of the Golden Bull, I couldn't find anything that explicitly forbids one man from holding two electoral titles, though it's worth noting that there are several passages that clearly assume that the two are different people (for example, with regards to how they are to be seated at coronations of the Emperor, or the order in which they are to march in procession). The best I could find is

Within the imperial place of session tables shall be prepared for the seven prince electors, ecclesiastical and secular,-three, namely, on the right, and three others on the left, and the seventh directly opposite the face of the emperor or king, as has above been more clearly defined by us in the chapter concerning the seating and precedence of the prince electors; in such wise, also, that no one else, of whatever dignity or standing he may be, shall sit among them or at their table.

...which seems to explicitly say there should be 7 of them. If I were someone who wanted to challenge the legality of one person holding two electoral titles, I'd do things like ask them to sit in two such chairs at the same time, and stuff like that. I suspect it would go to court and probably end up in Papal court.

Of course, the King of Bavaria is not an elector in this scheme anyway. The Peace of Westphalia, which formalizes the transfer of the Count Palatine's vote to Bavaria, doesn't seem to much touch on the subject, except, again, to assume 7 electors when discussing a hypothetical 8th electorship that can never exist for the Count Palatine.

So, legally, it's ambiguous. In practice I suspect the other electors wouldn't like it. They'd probably either force Charles to give up one or the other title, or allow the Bavarian electorship to revert to the Count Palatine (as Westphalia mandates it do so in the even that the Bavarian royal line dies out)
 
I cannot dig it up right now, but AFAIK, the electorates of the Palatinate and Bavaria were extra complicated due to the Pal one being transferred to Bav to reward the Duke and punish the Winter King. But then an additional, 8th one was created as consolation prize for the Palatinate. I seem to remember that, as the two Wittlesbach branches could clearly inherit if the other one died out, it was specifically set up that in the case of inheritance the younger, "lesser" electorate would cease to exist.

IIRC, no comparable provisions exist for a combination of the other electorates.

Ah, got it: The Treaty of Osnabrück as one of the two treaties that make up the Peace of Westphalia, says in Article IV:

Falls sich aber zutrüge / daß die Wilhelmische Mannliche Lini außsturbe / vnd die Pfältzische vberbliebe / alßdann soll nicht allein die Ober-Pfaltz / sondern auch die Chur-Dignitetwelche die Hertzogen in Bäyern gehabt / an die noch lebende Pfaltzgraffen / so entzwischen mit belehnet seyn / heimbfallen / vnd die Achte Chur-Stelle gäntzlich erlöschen. Also aber soll die Ober-Pfaltz / vff diesen begebenden Fall an die noch lebende Pfaltzgraffen gelangen / daß dennoch denen eygenthumblichen Erben deß Herrn Churfürsten in Bäyern jhrige Ansprüche / vnd Beneficia, so jhnen von Rechtswegen gebühren / vorbehalten seyen.

short: If the Bavarian branch dies out and the Palatinate Branch survives, the Upper Palatinatre and the Bavarian Vote will return to the Palatinate, but the new eighth vote will completely expire.

That this is explicitly mandated in the treaty is IMO a clear hint that the non-stacking of electoral votes is not common imperial law.
 
So I guess since Charles now has Bohemia's vote that the. Imperial Diet could force the implementation of that article, because technicalities?
 
No, Bohemia and Bavaria had different electoral votes. The Bavarian-Palatinate stuff is complicated, they were both Elector Palatine, but the Palatinate was a "lesser" one, hence why it disappears once one inherits another.
 
No, Bohemia and Bavaria had different electoral votes. The Bavarian-Palatinate stuff is complicated, they were both Elector Palatine, but the Palatinate was a "lesser" one, hence why it disappears once one inherits another.

However the HRE was against doubling up of electoral votes. So they could consider the Wittelsbachs becoming the Elector of Bohemia reason to implement this article. Seeing as there's already a system in place to get rid of Bavaria or rather Palatinate's vote and the Diet could claim that by becoming King of Bohemia the Wittelbachs must vacate their Palatinate vote.
 
A solution in TTL for Charles VII would be for him to abdicate his electorate and allow his son Maximilian to succeed him. If Charles (his health still being a factor) was nervous about securing the imperial throne for Maximilian, he could have Maximilian elected king of the Romans. If the abdication were to take place before Maximilian turned 18, then Charles’s nephew, Clement August, could be regent and use the electoral vote on Maximilian’s behalf.
 
A solution in TTL for Charles VII would be for him to abdicate his electorate and allow his son Maximilian to succeed him. If Charles (his health still being a factor) was nervous about securing the imperial throne for Maximilian, he could have Maximilian elected king of the Romans. If the abdication were to take place before Maximilian turned 18, then Charles’s nephew, Clement August, could be regent and use the electoral vote on Maximilian’s behalf.

That sounds like shops idea, but I'm worried about how the empire would react. I mean it's obvious that Charles would still control Bavaria's vote.
 
More likely than not, i suspect hemay retain the electoral rights and privileges but be unable to exercise them, like the Austrian Habsburg's couldn't excercise the electoral vote of the Kindgom of Bohemia until the elector of Hanover was added though this was for religious reasons (here I'd imagine the fact that the wittlesbach's are elector's Bavaria, Palatine & Cologne; would cause a lot of issues if you add Bohemia's vote more likely than not the imperial throne would be locked down for the wittlesbach's).
 
More likely than not, i suspect hemay retain the electoral rights and privileges but be unable to exercise them, like the Austrian Habsburg's couldn't excercise the electoral vote of the Kindgom of Bohemia until the elector of Hanover was added though this was for religious reasons (here I'd imagine the fact that the wittlesbach's are elector's Bavaria, Palatine & Cologne; would cause a lot of issues if you add Bohemia's vote more likely than not the imperial throne would be locked down for the wittlesbach's).

After a few centuries of Habsburg lockdown, it's clear that was exactly what the Wittelsbachs were aiming for.

And I don't think anyone but said Habsburgs would be more concerned than their own interests dictated. A Habsburg shoe-in Emperor or a Wittelsbach shoe-in is no big difference unless you're allied to either.
 
After a few centuries of Habsburg lockdown, it's clear that was exactly what the Wittelsbachs were aiming for.

And I don't think anyone but said Habsburgs would be more concerned than their own interests dictated. A Habsburg shoe-in Emperor or a Wittelsbach shoe-in is no big difference unless you're allied to either.

True, however unruly imperial estates always had a counter-balance in France, now not to say that the Franco- Wittlesbach alliance can't be broken but a Wittlesbach HRE alliied to France (which is still by far the most dominant power in w & c europe; bourbon family ruling Spain and Italy too, UK & Russia can snipe all they want but they're quite peripheral and can focus on other places in the world) & with 4 electorates in his hand doesn't sound like a good situation for any potentially unruly imperial estate.
 
True, however unruly imperial estates always had a counter-balance in France, now not to say that the Franco- Wittlesbach alliance can't be broken but a Wittlesbach HRE alliied to France (which is still by far the most dominant power in w & c europe; bourbon family ruling Spain and Italy too, UK & Russia can snipe all they want but they're quite peripheral and can focus on other places in the world) & with 4 electorates in his hand doesn't sound like a good situation for any potentially unruly imperial estate.

OTOH it also changes things for the house of Wittelsbach, now they are the Imperial dynasty and probably ITTL managed to ensure most of the Habsburg inheritance instead of Maria Theresia & Francis Stephen.
IMHO they probably also have ambitions of their own and would be less inclined to always serve the needs of France.
A comparison might be election of the Luxembourg dynasty as the new Imperial dynasty; given the proximity of their ancestral lands to France they gradually came into the French orbit and were pro-French, but once they ruled Bohemia (later also Brandenburg and Hungary) and the HRE, this relationship became more complex.
 
Last edited:
Top