Wettin Kingdom of Burgundy

  • Thread starter Deleted member 109224
  • Start date

Deleted member 109224

Prussia at the end of the Napoleonic War controlled Belgium and Rhineland. During the Polish-Saxon Crisis the Prussians tried to gain Saxony and give the Wettins the Prussian Rhineland. One natural issue was that there was a desire for there to be a Rhenish watchdog staring down the French.

So here's a thought: a Wettin Kingdom of Burgundy comprised of the Southern Netherlands (including Zeeland and Limburg), Prussian Rhineland, and Westphalia.

The Dutch are compensated with Friesland (previously Prussian), Emsland, and Heligoland.


upload_2019-4-19_11-21-8.png
 

Gloss

No that's simply too much stuff, it's not a compensation then, it's a reward.

Westphalia is going to Prussia in this situation any way and the Netherlands are going to take more of Belgium.
 

stevej713

I think Britain would be very wary of a state like that. Giving the wealthy and populous Rhineland access to the sea ensures competition in the Atlantic down the road. Britain supported the creation of Belgium because in their view, the state could never conceivably pose a threat to their maritime dominance.
 

yeetboy

Banned
Why would the Wettins gain control of Belgium and Westphalia? Belgium a rich, populous Flemish and Walloon province would not accept a German head of state. Trading Westphalia would remove any Prussian significance in West Germany, and as stated before would of been rewarding the Wettins for doing nothing, rather than a trade.

Assuming the Wettins only gain Prussian Rhineland (unincluding Westphalia and Belgium), you would see a significant change in German unification history. The first king of Saxony following the congress of Vienna was a staunch supporter of reforming Poland (in which he had a claim to). I could see in this timeline where he didn't have to manage a crumbling Saxony's economy and could instead focus on geopolitics with a Saxon-Rhineland, you could expect to see an anti-Prussian state form along Prussia's west.

I vaguely remember the person who suggested the concept of Trias being from Saxon/Bavarian origin, and the reason Trias failed was due to Bavaria not gaining enough support. Trias was the concept of a third German power out of the influence of the Austrian and Prussian circles, and would also be lead by Bavaria. With a better situated Wettin family that is now also anti-Prussian, they may be more keen in exploring this plan.

The Austro-Prussian war could of gone a lot differently with a stronger Wettin defensive, but assuming another Prussian victory you could see the abolition of the kingdom and it's incorporation into the North German confederation, and history would progress normally. However if Austria were to win the war somehow (possibly with a stronger Bavaria following a trias policy) I would assume either an annexation of Westphalia by Saxon-Rhineland, or the Saxon-Rhineland fall into the influence of a Bavarian lead South-German Confederation. The Austrians would also be a much more stable empire in this timeline, and be aligned with the SGC alienating Prussia causing a rebalance of powers in which you could see a Prussian British alliance reform.

Overall, I wouldn't expect the Lotharingia super-state your map had included, but either a more powerful Bavaria/a Bavarian lead coalition, or a medium-power to the west of Prussia following anti-Prussian ideologies, falling under spheres of influence of whoever would oppose the Prussians (French/Austrian/Bavarian,etc.)

I'm interested in how Saxon-Rhineland would interact with the British Hannover, but I don't know enough to predict anything about it.

EDIT: I'm also interested why you named this Kingdom 'Burgundy' when it includes zero Burgundian lands/connantations...
 
Last edited:

Kellan Sullivan

yeetboy said:
Belgium a rich, populous Flemish and Walloon province would not accept a German head of state
Click to expand...

So what the Hell were both the duke of Teschen (who they wanted) and Leopold of Coburg (who they got?), who was ironically a Wettin. Just from the wrong religion and the wrong side of the family (Ernestine instead of Albertine).
 
Last edited:

Kellan Sullivan

yeetboy said:
I vaguely remember the person who suggested the concept of Trias being from Saxon/Bavarian origin, and the reason Trias failed was due to Bavaria not gaining enough support. Trias was the concept of a third German power out of the influence of the Austrian and Prussian circles, and would also be lead by Bavaria. With a better situated Wettin family that is now also anti-Prussian, they may be more keen in exploring this plan.
Click to expand...

That was in the 1820s (IIRC) and included Bavaria, Saxony, Württemberg and Hannover - i.e. the four "big" kingdoms. However, Britain wasn't interested, which led to Hannover falling away, and then the king of Württemberg's Russian wife died, following by her half-Württemberger oldest brother and her Württemberger mom. Russia under Nikolai I was more open to Prussia (thanks to his wife) and as such, you get left with Bavaria and Saxony on the dance-floor. Bavaria's not particularly interested - her king's daughters/half-sisters are the empress of Austria and the future queen of Prussia. Her wagon is hitched to the right horses - which leaves poor Saxony all alone.
 

EnvarKadri

Maybe if the Rhineland Wettins are the ones to occupy Belgium after their revolution against the Netherlands than maybe the belgian elite would accept this Wettin as their king, if their independence depended on him. But they would want to be their own french speaking Kingdom under personal union. The flemish don't matter though, before the late 19th century they don't have a voice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top