The Austro-Prussian War of 1866 and its precursors

Bytor

Monthly Donor
So the Austro-Prussian War in 1866 was a result of disagreements about the handling of the Second Schleswig War in 1864. That war was a result of the Diet of the German Confederation in 1858 invalidating the Danish-Holstein union constitution from 1855. And that constitution was an attempt to resolve the lingering problems from the First Schleswig War of 1848-51.

But in my ATL Balance of Power, the First Schleswig War was shorter and went much differently. Frederick VII of Denmark, banking on Concert of Europe's tendencies under British pressure to prohibit intervention, promulgates a union constitution in 1848. Prussia becomes involved, but as in OTL, is defeated and signs the Treaty of Malmö. In addition, the union constitution which gave Holstein and Saxe-Lauenburg their own parliaments (and thus expanded rights for the bourgeoisie and petty nobility) reduces support for Christian August II, Duke of Augustenburg, and his rebellion. Christian August, seeing the writing on the wall, renounces his claims to the three duchies of Schleswig, Holstein and Saxe-Lauenburg and his attempt to separate them from Denmark in return for being named the heir of the childless and presumed infertile Frederick VII. (Ironically, Christian August II of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Augustenburg, is actually slightly more closely related to Frederick VII than the OTL heir Christian of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg who became Christian IX.)

Another difference in my ATL is that the Humiliation of Olmütz, rather than being a humiliation of Prussia who must accept a reconvened Diet of the German Confederation, it is instead a humiliation of the Austrian Habsburgs who must accept the German Confederation's dissolution thanks to a different outcome of the rebellion in the Electorate of Hesse.

Without a Diet of the German Confederation to invalidate the Danish union constitution, as in OTL there's no Second Schleswig War and thus no differences over the handling of that to directly ignite the Austro-Prussian War.

Oh, the butterflies! :)

So my question to you, dear reader, is was the Austro-Prussian War, which was really about who was the preeminent German state, an inevitable conflict? And what does this mean for the North German Confederation and the German Empire?
 
So the Austro-Prussian War in 1866 was a result of disagreements about the handling of the Second Schleswig War in 1864. That war was a result of the Diet of the German Confederation in 1858 invalidating the Danish-Holstein union constitution from 1855. And that constitution was an attempt to resolve the lingering problems from the First Schleswig War of 1848-51.

But in my ATL Balance of Power, the First Schleswig War was shorter and went much differently. Frederick VII of Denmark, banking on Concert of Europe's tendencies under British pressure to prohibit intervention, promulgates a union constitution in 1848. Prussia becomes involved, but as in OTL, is defeated and signs the Treaty of Malmö. In addition, the union constitution which gave Holstein and Saxe-Lauenburg their own parliaments (and thus expanded rights for the bourgeoisie and petty nobility) reduces support for Christian August II, Duke of Augustenburg, and his rebellion. Christian August, seeing the writing on the wall, renounces his claims to the three duchies of Schleswig, Holstein and Saxe-Lauenburg and his attempt to separate them from Denmark in return for being named the heir of the childless and presumed infertile Frederick VII. (Ironically, Christian August II of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Augustenburg, is actually slightly more closely related to Frederick VII than the OTL heir Christian of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg who became Christian IX.)

Another difference in my ATL is that the Humiliation of Olmütz, rather than being a humiliation of Prussia who must accept a reconvened Diet of the German Confederation, it is instead a humiliation of the Austrian Habsburgs who must accept the German Confederation's dissolution thanks to a different outcome of the rebellion in the Electorate of Hesse.

Without a Diet of the German Confederation to invalidate the Danish union constitution, as in OTL there's no Second Schleswig War and thus no differences over the handling of that to directly ignite the Austro-Prussian War.

Oh, the butterflies! :)

So my question to you, dear reader, is was the Austro-Prussian War, which was really about who was the preeminent German state, an inevitable conflict? And what does this mean for the North German Confederation and the German Empire?
Prussia and Austria will come to blows and Prussia will seek to connect it's territories.
Assuming the Prussians still win you could just end up with a giant Prussia opposed to a north german confederation but either way it will so throughly dominate the Germanies that even if their is no dejure german unification all of Germany will be taking orders from Berlin regardless.
 

Bytor

Monthly Donor
Prussia and Austria will come to blows and Prussia will seek to connect it's territories.
Assuming the Prussians still win you could just end up with a giant Prussia opposed to a north german confederation but either way it will so throughly dominate the Germanies that even if their is no dejure german unification all of Germany will be taking orders from Berlin regardless.

OK, so without Schleswig to touch it off, what does? What gives Prussia the casus belli to invade Hannover, Nassau, Hesse or any of the others?
 
OK, so without Schleswig to touch it off, what does? What gives Prussia the casus belli to invade Hannover, Nassau, Hesse or any of the others?
Im sure they find something, assuming they diplomatically isolate their enemies their casus belli doesn't even have to be good.
 
Top