Splitting the Titles

In the War of Austrian Succession, the Hapsburgs lost control of Silesia to Prussia, the Duchy of Parma and some counties in Italy to Spain.

If they occupied much of France and kept control over Austrian Netherlands and Italy, there would be no need to give territorial concessions and they could hold on to much of their lands.

Conversely, suppose the war goes well for Austria when the Prussians were not involved, but try to peace out Spain early. Suppose they suggest giving Parma to a 2nd cousin of Maria Theresa who also happens to be an Austrian count. Spain has no say in the count's marriage.

Spain's goals were to take Italian territory and weaken Austria. Obviously, such a suggestion does not fit the former goal, but does it fit the latter? Would it be viewed as bad as a personal union from the perspective of Spain, or would it be deemed a bit more acceptable than the Austrian Hapsburgs maintaining direct control?
 
In the War of Austrian Succession, the Hapsburgs lost control of Silesia to Prussia, the Duchy of Parma and some counties in Italy to Spain.

If they occupied much of France and kept control over Austrian Netherlands and Italy, there would be no need to give territorial concessions and they could hold on to much of their lands.

Conversely, suppose the war goes well for Austria when the Prussians were not involved, but try to peace out Spain early. Suppose they suggest giving Parma to a 2nd cousin of Maria Theresa who also happens to be an Austrian count. Spain has no say in the count's marriage.

Spain's goals were to take Italian territory and weaken Austria. Obviously, such a suggestion does not fit the former goal, but does it fit the latter? Would it be viewed as bad as a personal union from the perspective of Spain, or would it be deemed a bit more acceptable than the Austrian Hapsburgs maintaining direct control?

Except Maria Theresia had no second cousins who were also Austrian archdukes. And if she did, we wouldn't be having a War of the Austrian Succession.

Spain's goals weren't necessarily to take Italian territory to weaken Austria (but yay for them if they did), but to reclaim Spanish territory that had been lost at Utrecth (Naples had been in PU with the Spanish king since the 1500s, and then at Utrecht, they had to wave it goodbye and keep smiling.

Austria was already going to get Tuscany as per the treaty of Vienna since Maria Theresia's hubbie had given up his duchy of Lorraine in exchange for it. In comparison with Tuscany, the duchy of Parma's reasonably small fish. Most likely, Parma would've simply been annexed, either to the duchy of Milan (whence it originally came) or to the grand duchy of Tuscany (like in the Napoleonic Wars). Either way, Austria losing Parma doesn't mean Austria's position in Italy is weaker - she still rules Milan, Tuscany and Mantua. All Spain's got is the comparatively poorer south. So Spain has now got Italian territory - to do what with, nobody's quite sure, since in an analysis of Spain in the 18th century the following was said:

"Spain wasted her energies and expended her wealth in a fruitless attempt, first to become the dominant power in Europe, and later to maintain possessions in Italy and the Low Countries which were productive of only trouble; what she took from the Americas with the one hand, she squandered in Europe with the other...Felipe still controlled most of Latin America, which produced enormous wealth in gold and raw materials. Instead of wasting this treasure on the preposterous dream of European empire, the wealth might have regenerated the land.
"...Ultimately she [Isabel Farnese] achieved her aims (and earned the sobriquet "Termagant of Spain"), although it required the rest of her husband's reign - and years more - before Naples was acquired for her firstborn, the duchies of Parma, Piacenza and Guastalla for her second. In the meantime, the neglect of the Spanish land and people continued unabated as all the wealth of the American colonies - not to mention the nation's best talents - was directed toward foreign intrigues."
 
Except Maria Theresia had no second cousins who were also Austrian archdukes. And if she did, we wouldn't be having a War of the Austrian Succession.

I didn't say cousins who were Austrian archDUKES. The Hapsburgs often made junior lines counts. Although I'm dredging through Ferdinand III's descendants and I'm having trouble finding people who don't go through the Spanish line or... died. I did find a cousin of hers from a different ancestor, Henry Benedict Stuart, but he's not Austrian and not a secular noble. Hmmm, you're probably right, if she had any we would be having a War of Austrian Succession.

Spain's goals weren't necessarily to take Italian territory to weaken Austria (but yay for them if they did), but to reclaim Spanish territory that had been lost at Utrecth (Naples had been in PU with the Spanish king since the 1500s, and then at Utrecht, they had to wave it goodbye and keep smiling.

I'm quite sure the Spanish wanted to weaken Austria, but reclaiming Spanish territory was more important. If Hapsburg troops were all over Italy, they wouldn't be able to reclaim it. Wait, I thought Spain already had Naples at the start of the war? They had to reclaim it in the war of Austrian Succession? Huh...

Austria was already going to get Tuscany as per the treaty of Vienna since Maria Theresia's hubbie had given up his duchy of Lorraine in exchange for it. In comparison with Tuscany, the duchy of Parma's reasonably small fish. Most likely, Parma would've simply been annexed, either to the duchy of Milan (whence it originally came) or to the grand duchy of Tuscany (like in the Napoleonic Wars). Either way, Austria losing Parma doesn't mean Austria's position in Italy is weaker - she still rules Milan, Tuscany and Mantua. All Spain's got is the comparatively poorer south. So Spain has now got Italian territory - to do what with, nobody's quite sure, since in an analysis of Spain in the 18th century the following was said:

I thought the exchange of Lorraine for Tuscany was dependent on France recognizing Pragmatic Sanction and since they kind of did not, he should get to keep both.



Situation revision
OK, let's assume the Spanish do want to weaken the Hapsburgs. I think they did. I mean, reclaiming was more important, but if they couldn't do that...

But after 3 years of fighting, 1/4 of their invasion force is prisoners and the rest are casualties or war or retreated back to Spain. Let's say a Savoy army beat a Spanish army triple its size and then to add insult to injury a week later Hapsburg cavalry start killing everyone who doesn't leave all their heavy stuff to flee. Prussia peaced out with Silesia (as in OTL). Austrian and the British kicked the French out of Austrian Netherlands and Lorraine. The entire geographic area of Italy, including Naples, is controlled by Hapsburg or Savoy troops.

The Hapsburg intelligence grossly overestimates the strength of the next Spanish invasion force, which is really just a few raiding parties. They send out peace feelers.

In it the terms are that Spain renounce claims to Naples (I thought it was already theirs at the start of the war, but you said otherwise) and Parma. 1/4 of Parma goes to Milan, its historical origin, and the remaining is broken in counties to go to the Savoys (in OTL Parma was lost, so getting some of it back into Milan where Maria-Theresa rules is an improvement). They also promise to break the Spanish-claimed Italian territory into 4 pieces, 3 of which will be reduced to individual counties and go to the oldest children of Maria-Theresa that don't inherit the Archduchy of Austria (in other words, direct Austrian control will be broken). If she doesn't have 4 children, then the extra pieces stay with the Archduke of Austria and King of Germans for another generation and will get split off when ever a generation has a splitting opportunity, so at SOME point the 3 Hapsburg-Lorraine pieces will be broken off from the main line and won't rejoin unless there is incest. The remaining 1/4 of Naples (remember in this WI the Hapsburgs are sitting on Italy) stays in the Kingdom of Naples and goes to the son of Isabel Farnese.

Would these terms be acceptable to the Spanish or deemed just as bad as direct Austrian control in Italy?
 
I didn't say cousins who were Austrian archDUKES. The Hapsburgs often made junior lines counts. Although I'm dredging through Ferdinand III's descendants and I'm having trouble finding people who don't go through the Spanish line or... died. I did find a cousin of hers from a different ancestor, Henry Benedict Stuart, but he's not Austrian and not a secular noble. Hmmm, you're probably right, if she had any we would be having a War of Austrian Succession.

In what dimension did the Habsburgs do this? Whether they were junior or senior lines, anybody that descended in the male line from Ernst der Eiserne and Cymburgis of Masovia, was an archduke/duchess in addition to any other titles they held (infante of Spain). The only counts that were family of the Habsburgs were ones descending via morganatic marriages - and at this point (1740s), the only one on record is that of Archduke Ferdinand II to Philippine Welser. The two sons - one became a cardinal and the other a burggrave - both left illegitimate issue, but by 1727 IIRC both of their lines went extinct.

Henry Benedict Stuart (if it's the one I'm thinking of, Cardinal-Duke of York), wasn't enrolled in the priesthood in 1740. His brother, Charles Edward, was also a secular noble, but Britain's gonna curbstomp any ideas that see a Stuart ruling anywhere - despite the fact that through Mary of Modena, James III has a pretty good claim to the duchy of Modena at least (even though Modena allowed only male-to-male succession). I toyed with the idea of a Stuart Italy at one point, James III marries Isabel Farnese and their kids are chosen as a neutral option (vs the Bourbons/Habsburgs) to succeed in Tuscany, Parma and/or Modena. But it's a big stretch, and rather unlikely.

I'm quite sure the Spanish wanted to weaken Austria, but reclaiming Spanish territory was more important. If Hapsburg troops were all over Italy, they wouldn't be able to reclaim it. Wait, I thought Spain already had Naples at the start of the war? They had to reclaim it in the war of Austrian Succession? Huh...

Naples was held by the Spanish since the previous war. I was referring to Parma. And as I say, Austria losing/Spain gaining Parma doesn't really shift the power in the same way as Austria losing/Spain gaining Naples or the Austrian Netherlands.

I thought the exchange of Lorraine for Tuscany was dependent on France recognizing Pragmatic Sanction and since they kind of did not, he should get to keep both.

François III Étienne gave up Lorraine to marry Maria Theresia. Karl VI refused a marriage between them without a renunciation of his rights to Lorraine. The king of France's father-in-law, the onetime king of Poland, Stanislas I, was given the now dukeless duchy of Lorraine as compensation - but Lorraine belonged to France by this point, and Stanislas was appointed duke at the French king's discretion. François III was only chosen to succeed in Tuscany because the Bourbons were forced to renounce their rights there in exchange for Austria recognizing that they were now in possession of the kingdom of Naples.

As to recognition of the Pragmatic Sanction - then all states in Europe that swore up and down thatthey would uphold it, and didn't, should be likewise punished.

Situation revision
OK, let's assume the Spanish do want to weaken the Hapsburgs. I think they did. I mean, reclaiming was more important, but if they couldn't do that...

But after 3 years of fighting, 1/4 of their invasion force is prisoners and the rest are casualties or war or retreated back to Spain. Let's say a Savoy army beat a Spanish army triple its size and then to add insult to injury a week later Hapsburg cavalry start killing everyone who doesn't leave all their heavy stuff to flee. Prussia peaced out with Silesia (as in OTL). Austrian and the British kicked the French out of Austrian Netherlands and Lorraine. The entire geographic area of Italy, including Naples, is controlled by Hapsburg or Savoy troops.

The Hapsburg intelligence grossly overestimates the strength of the next Spanish invasion force, which is really just a few raiding parties. They send out peace feelers.

Why do the Habsburgs suddenly just start killing everyone? It's going to make it even more difficult to control the areas where they did this than OTL. Doesn't make sense. How does only the Empire (some of whom (Bavaria, Prussia) weren't on the Austrian side) and Savoy drive Spain from Italy? Did all the Spaniards suddenly turn into cowards? Killing off Isabel Farnese might make sense, since she was kinda a big reason they got involved in the first place? And France? Did all her generals have collective strokes? Remember, at this time, IIRC, the Maréchal de Saxe (arguably one of the best commanders of the 18th century) is leading the French army.

In it the terms are that Spain renounce claims to Naples (I thought it was already theirs at the start of the war, but you said otherwise) and Parma. 1/4 of Parma goes to Milan, its historical origin, and the remaining is broken in counties to go to the Savoys (in OTL Parma was lost, so getting some of it back into Milan where Maria-Theresa rules is an improvement). They also promise to break the Spanish-claimed Italian territory into 4 pieces, 3 of which will be reduced to individual counties and go to the oldest children of Maria-Theresa that don't inherit the Archduchy of Austria (in other words, direct Austrian control will be broken). If she doesn't have 4 children, then the extra pieces stay with the Archduke of Austria and King of Germans for another generation and will get split off when ever a generation has a splitting opportunity, so at SOME point the 3 Hapsburg-Lorraine pieces will be broken off from the main line and won't rejoin unless

I never said that Spain didn't control Naples before the war, the quote I included above was a brief summary of Felipe V's reign. Naples had been Spanish, IIRC since the Treaty of Vienna in 1737.

By June 1740 Maria Theresia had three daughters already, so it could be argued that in lieu of sons these daughters would be heirs to the Habsburg domains in Italy. By June 1745 two of those three daughters were dead, but she had four more children (five in all, two of whom were boys).

unless there is incest

This is European royalty, and the Habsburgs had made their surname a sort of byword for incest already. Not to mention, most European royal families (I'm not talking about somewhere like Wied or Waldeck or whatever, but the major players on the scene) were related within the last two generations. So if by incest you mean brother-marrying-sister, okay, good. But cousin marriages were quite the everyday occurence everywhere except Russia (and other Orthodox countries) at the time.

The remaining 1/4 of Naples (remember in this WI the Hapsburgs are sitting on Italy) stays in the Kingdom of Naples and goes to the son of Isabel Farnese.

How big is this quarter of Naples? Does the kingdom get broken down into the medieval dukedoms/counties (Gaeta, Naples, Capua, Benevento, Apulia etc)? Or is it more like Sicily is a quarter, Naples is a quarter, Parma is a quarter, Presidi is a quarter?
 
I never said that Spain didn't control Naples before the war, the quote I included above was a brief summary of Felipe V's reign. Naples had been Spanish, IIRC since the Treaty of Vienna in 1737.

Whoops! Then then me change the situation again. Also is Frederick the great can beat the larger Austrian Army, why can't the Austrians have a good commander? I mean they didn't have one, but umproving of of their commanders should be sufficient.

Situation revision
Maréchal de Saxe suffers a Salmonela infection and needs to spend a few months in the outhouse (no really, even in WW1 disease casualties was more than fighting ones and Salmonella put many a good fighter out of action and the whole concept of "sanitation" and "don't put human waste close to your well water" was rocket science)

The Austrians and British defended Austrians Netherlands and counterattack, taking Lorraine and occupying much of Normandy. On the Italian front, the Spanish are driven into Sicily. A British Expeditionary force force of 3,180 land to bolster the Italian front, believing that now that the engineers are upgrading the outdated Netherland fortifications, the French can't attack there (especially since the Pragmatic faction beat the French in field battles)

After 3 years of fighting, Spain had seen nothing but field losses. Most of her best fighting men had withdrawn in safety, but a lot of the new soldiers were dead. Still, enough of them were alive and they were planning a comeback. Peace offer came from the victorious Hapsburgs. It was surprisingly generous. The Spanish had expected huge territorial losses and demanding payment for non recognition of Pragmatic Sanction. Both goals of weakening the hated Hapsburgs and recapturing loss territory were down the drain.

Instead 1/4 of Parma goes to Milan, its historical origin, and the remaining is broken in counties to go to the Savoys. The Hapsburgs will offer to pay a token amount to Isabel Farnese, which is a tacit acknowledgement it was rightfully hers even if the monetary sum is very modest even for a small fish like Parma. Maria Theresa asks for Salento to be given to her as individual counties, as a fief. Not only does a lot of Naples remain untouched, but since Salento's counties are being given out as a fief, they keep control of that too. The Hapsburgs say that the Salento lands will be split among 3 separate junior heirs (if Maria- Theresa has only one surviving child, then it will be split among the junior hiers of that kid and so on)

The Spanish will be able to put troops in Naples 4 years after the truce. Immediately after the treaty, they can send civilian administrators and do what they did before. The Spanish ask what will happen t the Imperial and Savoy troops. The Hapsburg representative says they will send almost everyone on a 3 year campaign to "Smash France" and then send 3/4 of it back to Italy, but not into Naples, unless there is a city revolt and the Spanish ask for help to crush it. What of the last 1/4? "probably be stationed in various forts after smashing France"

The Spanish ask if the Hapsburgs plan to make extensive military holdings in Salento. The representative replies that while he can't make guarantees, there is unlikely to be any building of new forts and at most probably upgrading of medieval fortifications into structures with earth to resist cannon fire. They also probably won't bring in more cannons to bolster what has already been taken. The Spanish ask if they intend these junior heirs to live as Napalese counts. The representative replies that while he can't make guarantees, the heirs will likely stay in Austria and rule as absentee rulers, just as Spain ruled Naples from afar. One man in the Spanish court quietly suggests that the Hapsburgs don't really care too much about Salento and will treat it as something expendable, and the Spanish might be able to buy it back later when the bitterness of betrayal over Pragmatic Sanction was gone.

One, would these terms be acceptable to the Spanish?

Two, since the Spanish want to prevent direct Austrian control, is the splitting of Salento from the senior heir any better than letting the Austrians keep it entirely?

Three, will this balance of power be favorable (this is different than acceptable) to the Spanish? Spain keeps Naples, but Austria gets Parma. Still, you said Parma is not as big as Naples or Austrian Netherlands.
 
Whoops! Then then me change the situation again. Also is Frederick the great can beat the larger Austrian Army, why can't the Austrians have a good commander? I mean they didn't have one, but umproving of of their commanders should be sufficient.

Situation revision
Maréchal de Saxe suffers a Salmonela infection and needs to spend a few months in the outhouse (no really, even in WW1 disease casualties was more than fighting ones and Salmonella put many a good fighter out of action and the whole concept of "sanitation" and "don't put human waste close to your well water" was rocket science)

The Austrians and British defended Austrians Netherlands and counterattack, taking Lorraine and occupying much of Normandy. On the Italian front, the Spanish are driven into Sicily. A British Expeditionary force force of 3,180 land to bolster the Italian front, believing that now that the engineers are upgrading the outdated Netherland fortifications, the French can't attack there (especially since the Pragmatic faction beat the French in field battles)

After 3 years of fighting, Spain had seen nothing but field losses. Most of her best fighting men had withdrawn in safety, but a lot of the new soldiers were dead. Still, enough of them were alive and they were planning a comeback. Peace offer came from the victorious Hapsburgs. It was surprisingly generous. The Spanish had expected huge territorial losses and demanding payment for non recognition of Pragmatic Sanction. Both goals of weakening the hated Hapsburgs and recapturing loss territory were down the drain.

Instead 1/4 of Parma goes to Milan, its historical origin, and the remaining is broken in counties to go to the Savoys. The Hapsburgs will offer to pay a token amount to Isabel Farnese, which is a tacit acknowledgement it was rightfully hers even if the monetary sum is very modest even for a small fish like Parma. Maria Theresa asks for Salento to be given to her as individual counties, as a fief. Not only does a lot of Naples remain untouched, but since Salento's counties are being given out as a fief, they keep control of that too. The Hapsburgs say that the Salento lands will be split among 3 separate junior heirs (if Maria- Theresa has only one surviving child, then it will be split among the junior hiers of that kid and so on)

The Spanish will be able to put troops in Naples 4 years after the truce. Immediately after the treaty, they can send civilian administrators and do what they did before. The Spanish ask what will happen t the Imperial and Savoy troops. The Hapsburg representative says they will send almost everyone on a 3 year campaign to "Smash France" and then send 3/4 of it back to Italy, but not into Naples, unless there is a city revolt and the Spanish ask for help to crush it. What of the last 1/4? "probably be stationed in various forts after smashing France"

The Spanish ask if the Hapsburgs plan to make extensive military holdings in Salento. The representative replies that while he can't make guarantees, there is unlikely to be any building of new forts and at most probably upgrading of medieval fortifications into structures with earth to resist cannon fire. They also probably won't bring in more cannons to bolster what has already been taken. The Spanish ask if they intend these junior heirs to live as Neapolitan counts. The representative replies that while he can't make guarantees, the heirs will likely stay in Austria and rule as absentee rulers, just as Spain ruled Naples from afar. One man in the Spanish court quietly suggests that the Hapsburgs don't really care too much about Salento and will treat it as something expendable, and the Spanish might be able to buy it back later when the bitterness of betrayal over Pragmatic Sanction was gone.

One, would these terms be acceptable to the Spanish?

Two, since the Spanish want to prevent direct Austrian control, is the splitting of Salento from the senior heir any better than letting the Austrians keep it entirely?

Three, will this balance of power be favorable (this is different than acceptable) to the Spanish? Spain keeps Naples, but Austria gets Parma. Still, you said Parma is not as big as Naples or Austrian Netherlands.

One, I'm not sure if Britain will land troops in Normandy. There were no plans to do so during any war with France (after the loss of Calais) AFAIK. And especially if the theatre of war is in the Low Countries itself.

I don't see why Isabel would be paid the modest sum. She is the last of the Farnese, but Parma was technically an imperial fief (IIRC) that meant that barring the emperor recognizing her as heiress (as Cosimo III tried to have done with his daughter), she wasn't heiress. When her uncle, Antonio, died with no children, it was supposed, by agreement to go to Isabel's eldest son (Carlos III), along with Tuscany. Then he got it into his head to be king of Naples instead, so the emperor (who had just lost Naples) wanted Parma (and Tuscany) back in exchange.

Why does Maria Theresia want the Salento? I admittedly don't know much about the kingdom of Naples/Mezzogiorno, but IIRC it's economy lagged severely behind the rest of Europe's in the 18th century, and how would having Salento (Lecce, Brindisi, Taranto, Otranto etc) do any good for the government in Vienna? As to it being split into individual counties (probably those associated with the towns just mentioned), I'm not so sure. Either it's going to be in direct relation with Vienna? Or it's going to be given as part of the Tuscan secundogeniture.

"Smash France" seems a bit unlikely. Even if we have the salmonella outbreak that you suggest. France at tht point was the only nation in Europe that had an army (from the officers down to the cooks and medics) comprised of her own nationals (if Nancy Mitford's bio on Friedrich the Great is to be believed). It also had one of the strongest armies in Europe in the 1740s, so I think a "smash France" might simply be a cloud-cuckoo land dream of the ambassadors. Not to mention, if that is Austria's ambition, I dare say Britain might be getting out from under it, and side with France - similar to the volte face they'd pulled post-1711 in the War of the Spanish Succession when they wouldn't countenance a second coming of Karl V's empire.

Spanish aren't ruling Naples from afar anymore. Carlos III is a Spanish infante and son of the king of Spain (until 1746), but not the eldest son, nor even the heir apparent's heir apparent, only the heir presumptive. So Austria might be more accepting of it, although OTL they threw a hissy - alongside some other powers - in 1759 that forced Carlos III (here simply Carlo VII of Naples) to issue a Pragmatic Sanction stipulating that the crowns of Spain and Naples would not be reunited.

I don't see that the Spanish courtier who said that Austria will see it as expendable is far wrong. Their focus, after they lost Naples and Sicily/Sardinia, was on Northern Italy. So, Salento would probably change hands again at the end of the next war, for something a bit closer to home. Spain would probably accept the terms (since it doesn't sound too different to what they were forced to swallow OTL, with the exception of the loss of Salento) except for joining Austria in crushing France. Blood is thicker than water, and the king of Spain was born in France, so it's not impossible that he remembers what his grandpa did in the War of the Spanish Succession and said "I'll stop supporting my grandson, but I won't make war on him", except here in reverse.
 
Oh, I just assumed Normandy would have a bunch of good forts to distract the French. I assume if the French make an attack on the lowlands that failed and ended up with an army being routed, the other side would capture something so that the next fight wouldn't be in the Austrian Netherlands. Maybe I'm wrong with this, but I think the terrain in Normandy gives the side occupying the North advantages, so when they receive an attack they can use light dragoons to harass an advancing column bogged down by a siege train, maybe even bag a wagon. Meanwhile the main troops know an attack is coming ahead of time and can... do something.

@Saphroneth Suppose the British and Austrians occupy Austrian Netherlands, Lorraine, and Normandy and suppose Normandy has 7 forts than can easily be made defensible with some last minute fixes. If the French army is beaten in the field in Netherlands' and leaves behind its field guns in retreat the French leave Normandy and those forts undefended, it is tactically sound or unsound to take Normandy? Assume the forts can be taken with little resistance since the French took the garrisons to Netherland campaign, but if fully stocked will be seriously difficult to take. Assume the British have efficient supplies through the English channel.

Ah OK, so giving a token payment makes no sense.

Slaneto is like the 4th poorest place of Naples and Northern Italy (nominal HRE land) was really the place the Austrians wanted. I was thinking she would use it as secundogeniture if it was held long after the war, or simply sold off at some later point, or perhaps used in a future was as "ok, you can have just this piece back." It's like that land you just collect taxes on, leave the old baurucrats on autopilot and ignore until you hand it over to someone else. The assurances it wouldn't be inherited by primogeniture it to assure the Spanish it won't stay under Vienna's grip for too long.

I didn't mean "smash France" as in destroy the kingdom and annex it, so much as I mean go in, grab stuff of value, smash anyone who resists, and then call yourself the winner. The Pragmatic allies have a nominal technological (cannons) and numerical edge, but leadership and organization seems to be weaker than the French and Prussians. I tink the Austrians got one good general in Italy, who was learning from his Savoyard partner at the beginning of the war. Assuming the Pragmatic allies beat back the French in Austrian Netherlands and take Normandy and Lorraine due to fort garrisons being cannibalized for the field army, I don't think "smash France" will be viable. They have superior leadership and will decide to NOT take men from the forts for the next counterattack. Since they solved their leadership problem, they will probably maul any field army the Pragmatic Allies try to attack them that doesn't outnumber the French 8 to 7 or more, unless the Austrian officers can learn on the fly (ha ha ha... no. Eugene Prince of Savoy was probably their peak).

Oh, I forgot that about Spain. So I guess since Maria Theresa has more to worry about than the slllightly possibility a youngest son who isn't even heir apparent to Spain being King of Naples.

Ah, so I see Spain would except the terms, except "smash France" but that's OK, because I wasn't intending the Austrians to ask the Spanish to help that. When the ambassador said they were going to "smash France" I meant that he was referring to his own troops and the Savoy ones, not the Spanish who will just be chilling out. Once the Italian front was stabilized with the truce with Spain, the Austrians and Savoys (without the Spanish) go to either Lorraine or Netherlands to "smash France" (the ambassador is probably dreaming, they just got a few lucky field victories and occupied some nice ground, but it doesn't change the fact that once the French army reorganizes it will be better than the Austrian one), campaign with the other armies there for 3 years, and then go home (these troops were "extras" being formerly on the Italian front).

Ok cool, thanks for you help. The only thing I am wondering now is does taking Normandy make any tactical sense.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
@Saphroneth Suppose the British and Austrians occupy Austrian Netherlands, Lorraine, and Normandy and suppose Normandy has 7 forts than can easily be made defensible with some last minute fixes. If the French army is beaten in the field in Netherlands' and leaves behind its field guns in retreat the French leave Normandy and those forts undefended, it is tactically sound or unsound to take Normandy
Mornington Crescent?


There's a heck of a lot of assumptions there and I'm not really up on 18th century operational warfare. Also, it's "operational" or "strategic", tactics is basically a matter for the battlefield or smaller scales.
 
Mornington Crescent?


There's a heck of a lot of assumptions there and I'm not really up on 18th century operational warfare. Also, it's "operational" or "strategic", tactics is basically a matter for the battlefield or smaller scales.

What does Mornington Crescent mean?

Oh, right tactical sense would be "can I take it? How do I do it" and operational would be "does this help with keeping the French out of Netherlands"

Oh, so you don't know. Well, thanks for trying anyways.
 
Yeah and Blood was Thicker than Water I didn't mean for the outrageous terms for the Spanish to help the Austrians in fighting.
 
Top