Southern Netherlands

First, off the bat what was the obsession of the Wittelsbachs (Max II Emanuel, Johann Wilhelm and Karl IV Theodore) and the southern Netherlands (first Spanish then Austrian). And secondly Max wanted to be recompensated with the SNeth if Austria held onto Bavaria with the WotSS, and Karl Theodore wanted to exchange Bavaria for the SNeth in the hopes of ressurecting the kingdom of Burgundy.
Wasn't there a law that said no kings in the HREGN besides Bohemia?
 
First, off the bat what was the obsession of the Wittelsbachs (Max II Emanuel, Johann Wilhelm and Karl IV Theodore) and the southern Netherlands (first Spanish then Austrian). And secondly Max wanted to be recompensated with the SNeth if Austria held onto Bavaria with the WotSS, and Karl Theodore wanted to exchange Bavaria for the SNeth in the hopes of ressurecting the kingdom of Burgundy.
Wasn't there a law that said no kings in the HREGN besides Bohemia?

TO be honest, I'm not really sure what started the Wittelsbach obsession with modern Belgium. Maybe having a very rich trading port or being strategically important. I;m not really sure.

Technically yes there was a law about only one Kingdom in the HRE. However, if we look at Prussia (or more specifically the Kingdom in Prussia) we see that the kingdom law can be circumvented if the Emperor wants to. Plus the Kingdom of Prussia legally existed from 1772to the end of the Empire in 1806 so its not impossible. Finally, at that point in history, the Empire really only existed on paper, so it really didn't matter.
 
I assume it was because what is now Belgium was extemely populous, rich and advanced. They were one of the few areas that emerged from feudalism very early. Antwerp especially was a virtual gold mine.
 
When Friedrich III of Brandenburg became king at the start of the 18th century, Eugen of Savoy told Leopold I he was making a BIG mistake, but Leopold stipulated Friedrich couldn't be king of Brandenburg (because it was IN the HRE) however a loophole allowed him to become king OUTSIDE the empire, and fortunately he owned the duchy of Prussia. Even then the style was only allowed to be KING IN PRUSSIA, the 'in' only changed to 'of' when Friedrich the Great aquired the rest of Polish Prussia during the partitions of Poland.

The king in Prussia was the reason Louis XV used to refer to Friedrich the Great simply as 'Monsieur le Marquis de Brandebourg' (Marquis/Margrave of Brandenburg).

Also, Antwerp's deathknell had rung in the Duke of Alba's time already, since after he besieged it, sacked it from top to bottom and burnt it, the Dutch closed the Scheldt and AFAIK the Bourse was nearly turned into a library!!!
 
First, off the bat what was the obsession of the Wittelsbachs (Max II Emanuel, Johann Wilhelm and Karl IV Theodore) and the southern Netherlands (first Spanish then Austrian). And secondly Max wanted to be recompensated with the SNeth if Austria held onto Bavaria with the WotSS, and Karl Theodore wanted to exchange Bavaria for the SNeth in the hopes of ressurecting the kingdom of Burgundy.
Wasn't there a law that said no kings in the HREGN besides Bohemia?

With KT..it would have united them with the hereditary lands he had previously held in the Rhineland Julich/Kleve and Berg as well as the electoral palatinate, and separated only by the Church lands in Koln, Trier, Mainz and Liege giving him considerable influence across the entire Rhineland ( one of those AB's was generally held by a Wittelsbach as well...Koln I think) including another Two Electors for Emporer ( actually it may Three...).
 
Which 3 electorates would those be?

Wasn't the Hook and Cod Wars also between Jacqueline of Bavaria-something and her uncle? (My knowledge of middle age Europe is sketchy
 
First, off the bat what was the obsession of the Wittelsbachs (Max II Emanuel, Johann Wilhelm and Karl IV Theodore) and the southern Netherlands (first Spanish then Austrian). And secondly Max wanted to be recompensated with the SNeth if Austria held onto Bavaria with the WotSS, and Karl Theodore wanted to exchange Bavaria for the SNeth in the hopes of ressurecting the kingdom of Burgundy.
Wasn't there a law that said no kings in the HREGN besides Bohemia?

Well Burgundy (both in some ways Lotharingia and even Frisia too) wouldn't mean creating a new kingdom, but rather the emperor granting one of the Royal Crowns he theoretically already held to one of his vassals. In that sense it wouldn't be a new kingdom and king (just some else holding that title); and it would be different from raising a title to the Royal rank. However just like as with negotiations of the Valois dukes of Burgundy for a Royal Crown this could lead to a response of the other great houses in the empire. Yet by that point the original territory of Burgundy was French and basically lost for the empire, so in any potential grant of a crown, a different the territory (the Southern Netherlands) will be stipulated and any claims on the now French territories most likely would have to be renounced or at least would have to be toned down.

With KT..it would have united them with the hereditary lands he had previously held in the Rhineland Julich/Kleve and Berg as well as the electoral palatinate, and separated only by the Church lands in Koln, Trier, Mainz and Liege giving him considerable influence across the entire Rhineland ( one of those AB's was generally held by a Wittelsbach as well...Koln I think) including another Two Electors for Emporer ( actually it may Three...).

Well Charles Theodore was more 'at home' in the Rhineland and the Palatinate. Whereas for the Austrian Habsburgs the Southern Netherlands were relatively distant and exchanging these for Bavaria to gain a much more contiguous domain seemed much more attractive. Likewise the Southern Netherlands and the electoral Palatinate are indeed much closer to each other too.
I may misread the last line you wrote, but one person can only hold one electoral vote; when the Wittelsbach elector palatine inherited the Wittelsbach Bavarian electorate these two electorates were merged.
 
Last edited:
I know that KT tried to swap Bavaria for the SNeth because a) he felt like a foreigner in Munich (and rightly so, he was born in the SNeth, grew up in the Rheinpfalz and then moved to Bavaria wgen he was 50) and b) he wanted to circumvent the Wittelsbach house laws and leave the country to his bastard son.

Now what I want to know is if Max II had received the SNeth at the treaties of Utrecht, Rastatt and Baden, and his grandson, Max III had died childless, would it then have passed to Karl Albrecht's bastard son, Graf von Holnstein (who was married to his cousin, the illegitimate daughter of Klemens August, Elector of Koln; and whose son married a bastard daughter of KT) or to Karl Albrecht's nearest heir, KT as Bavaria did (since all of Max II's legitimate descendants in the male line were extincted by 1777)?
 
Out of curiosity was there a recorded/speculated genetic problem with Karl VII's children that none of them by his legitimate children (besides Maria Antonia, Electress of Saxony) had children (legitimate or otherwise).
 
Top