What if Hungary won the 1848/49 War of Independence?

[Tibi088]

Well, putting aside the “bear” part (which is, AFAIK, the British stereotype 😉), there was actually a realistic alternative which would require a relatively simple thing, namely Nicholas I being more pragmatic than ideological (and firing Nesselrode or just not listening to him). Of course, the “rebellion” was a bad thing but there were legitimate reasons behind it, which could satisfy his consciousness and, anyway, FJI was not a crowned king of Hungary, blahblahblah.

Objectively, it was much more beneficial for the RE to have an independent Hungary than OTL Austrian Empire, which was the main competitor on the Balkans. It is rather hard to imagine Hungary trying to implement the same expansionist policy on the Balkans as the Hapsburgs so where is the reason for confrontation? If anything, both are gaining from the good relations. If in 1849 Russia provides military support to Hungary vs. Austria then Hungary ends up as a de facto Russian depended state thus seriously improving Russian chances to dominate the Balkans. And a much weaker Austria would be good for the RE as well. In OTL NI stuck with the idiotic policy of his brother but this was a “subjective” rather than “objective” factor.

Basically, if Hungary formally remains a kingdom, Nicholas can spare Grand Duke Constantine (his second son) as a candidate to the Hungarian throne.

Actually I would also go at it from the Russian angle - Im fairly certain that without russian (or some other) intervention a total victory of the austrian forces was IMO very unlikely. Meaning either Hungary wins and becomes independent or some compromise is made.

Could getting rid of Nicholas I achieve this? Him having an acident or some such.

Finally I will also state that though it was most certainly not baseless, the minority problems are way overblown in this thread, especially concerning 1848-49.

 

[Evil Crusader]

Well, putting aside the “bear” part (which is, AFAIK, the British stereotype 😉), there was actually a realistic alternative which would require a relatively simple thing, namely Nicholas I being more pragmatic than ideological (and firing Nesselrode or just not listening to him). Of course, the “rebellion” was a bad thing but there were legitimate reasons behind it, which could satisfy his consciousness and, anyway, FJI was not a crowned king of Hungary, blahblahblah.

Objectively, it was much more beneficial for the RE to have an independent Hungary than OTL Austrian Empire, which was the main competitor on the Balkans. It is rather hard to imagine Hungary trying to implement the same expansionist policy on the Balkans as the Hapsburgs so where is the reason for confrontation? If anything, both are gaining from the good relations. If in 1849 Russia provides military support to Hungary vs. Austria then Hungary ends up as a de facto Russian depended state thus seriously improving Russian chances to dominate the Balkans. And a much weaker Austria would be good for the RE as well. In OTL NI stuck with the idiotic policy of his brother but this was a “subjective” rather than “objective” factor.

Basically, if Hungary formally remains a kingdom, Nicholas can spare Grand Duke Constantine (his second son) as a candidate to the Hungarian throne.

The point about the "bear" was more about how Hungary would be likely to see Russia in those terms: a domineering and dangerous neighbor. Especially considering British attitudes of the time, there's no way they let Russia become the master of Hungary.
In 1848, whether the Habsburg Empire would focus on the German world or the Balkans wasn't entirely decided yet; in fact the events of the "Crown from the Gutter" arguably took the Prussian status to its lowest since the battle of Jena. Hungary had also showed signs of flirting with the Wallachian government, and employed a veteran Galician (i.e. Polish) General on its northern border.
All things considered, I'm not that sure it would be such an automatic worth to replace a friendly Empire that could be oriented towards Germany (and to mantain Italian influence) with a regional power whose Balkan interest could be much more invested and who would definitely enjoy Anglo-French support.
And that's before discussing whether the people in change would be willing to risk the Concert system which could, for example, make the suppression of Poland much harder to upkeep.

 

[alexmilman]

Actually I would also go at it from the Russian angle - Im fairly certain that without russian (or some other) intervention a total victory of the austrian forces was IMO very unlikely. Meaning either Hungary wins and becomes independent or some compromise is made.

Could getting rid of Nicholas I achieve this? Him having an acident or some such.

This would not help. The problem was not in individuals but in the “traditional” post-Napoleonic Russian policies, which did not produce any benefits whatsoever. IMO, as a much stronger personality, NI was a much more likely person to change this policy than AII.

Finally I will also state that though it was most certainly not baseless, the minority problems are way overblown in this thread, especially concerning 1848-49.

Agree. Basically, both Russian and Austrian empires had been facing similar problems.

 

[alexmilman]

The point about the "bear" was more about how Hungary would be likely to see Russia in those terms: a domineering and dangerous neighbor. Especially considering British attitudes of the time, there's no way they let Russia become the master of Hungary.

If Russia interferes in 1849 on Hungarian side, it may be considered a domineering but also as a savior. As for Britain, nobody would ask its permission. What could it do in 1840s? Nothing. It needed a major continental sucker, and none was available.

In 1848, whether the Habsburg Empire would focus on the German world or the Balkans wasn't entirely decided yet; in fact the events of the "Crown from the Gutter" arguably took the Prussian status to its lowest since the battle of Jena. Hungary had also showed signs of flirting with the Wallachian government, and employed a veteran Galician (i.e. Polish) General on its northern border.
All things considered, I'm not that sure it would be such an automatic worth to replace a friendly Empire that could be oriented towards Germany (and to mantain Italian influence) with a regional power whose Balkan interest could be much more invested and who would definitely enjoy Anglo-French support.

Notion that the Hapsburgs were friendly to the RE existed only in the empty heads of the Russian rulers and the idiots they used as the chancellors. Austria was acting against Russia at Vienna, used NI as a sucker in 1849, acted against it during the CW, was not helpful in 1878, etc.

Now, as far as the conflicting Balkan interests are involved, it is highly unlikely that Hungary would pursue an expansionist policy like AH: it already had too many Slavs and Rumanians. So no conflict there but there is a clear need for the Russian support against Austria. RE, OTOH, gains by having a secure “flank” (or whatever) in its designs regarding domination of the Danube Principalities.

The Brits are patently useless in that regard and, taking into an account a geography, France is pretty much useless as well. So why would Hungary rely on them instead of a trusted powerful neighbor?

And that's before discussing whether the people in change would be willing to risk the Concert system which could, for example, make the suppression of Poland much harder to upkeep.

There are two different issues.
1st, the Concert as a matter of principle. This idiocy was shaping the Russian policy all the way to the CW giving it nothing but trouble. A pre-requisite of the option I mentioned is that NI breaks with that system.
2nd, Polish uprising of 1830 had been suppressed without outside help and rather irrelevant in post-1848. Uprising of 1860 was even a lesser problem because at that time Poland did not have its own army and its peasantry was rather on a happy side with abolishment of a serfdom and getting a chance to receive land of the rebellious landowners. France was making noises but had its own interests elsewhere and not ready for a major war. Austria and Prussia were not interested in creation of the independent Polish state. Which leaves Britain which was, sorry, absolutely irrelevant: CW demonstrated that on its own Britain can do nothing on the continent and that its naval supremacy means very little for the RE. Now, as far as the “suppression” of Poland goes, it was happening in parallel with the noticeable development of the local industry so the moral unhappiness of some was somewhat compensated by the happiness of others thus making “upkeep” possible regardless the British <whatever>. 😉

 

[Tirion]

Re: Hungary and the ethnicities. The problem wasn't just that they were treated badly, plenty of examples of that everywhere in the time period. The situation for Hungary was made much more delicate by the existence of Vlach and south Slavic states as neighbours, and Habsburg attempts at divide and conquer.

 

[Zygmunt Stary]

Re: Hungary and the ethnicities. The problem wasn't just that they were treated badly, plenty of examples of that everywhere in the time period. The situation for Hungary was made much more delicate by the existence of Vlach and south Slavic states as neighbours, and Habsburg attempts at divide and conquer.

And the fact that almost any other empire which treated their minorities badly, tended to have it's dominant nation vastly outnumber oppresed nations, Hungarians didn't have that luxury.

 

[durante]

Új Forrás - 1998. 6.sz. Bona Gábor: A szabadságharc honvédsége

It looks like 40% of the soldiers of the Hungarian Revolution Volunteer Army, as well as half the officers and generals, were from ethnic minorities....

Do we suppose the ethnic minorities resident in Cisleithania at the time (including some of my own ancestors) thought their odds were better under an autocratic Kaiser or a new democratic republic?

 

[EasternRomanEmpire]

Just have Russia not intervene as it signed a secret treaty where Hungary promises not to intervene in the Balkans/ traditional Russian sphere of influence.

 

[EasternRomanEmpire]

The original sin which ultimately doomed the Hungarian insurrection in 1848-49 was their insistence on Magyarization of all the different people under the Crown of St. Stephan. Unfortunately, the Magyars were just around 40% of the population and the other 60% spoke different languages and in many cases subscribed to a different religion. Unsurprisingly, they refused to be turned into Magyars.

At the beginning the minorities did participate against the Hungarians but once it became clear the Habsburgs wouldn't give them more autonomy as they promised they supported the Hungarians, what ended the revolution were Russian troops.

 

[LordKalvan]

At the beginning the minorities did participate against the Hungarians but once it became clear the Habsburgs wouldn't give them more autonomy as they promised they supported the Hungarians, what ended the revolution were Russian troops.

The Hungarians lost their last chance when Kossuth dithered too much before intervening after the 2nd insurrection of Vienna, in october1848. The slow progress of the Hungarian army allowed von Windisch Graetz to mousetrap them on the march with the support of the Croats of Jelacich. If Kossuth had been more decisive, he might have managed to destroy the Croats and then to pin the Austrian army against the walls of Vienna.
I'm not sure even this would have been enough to save the Magyar bacon, but certainly would have improved their position.
Maybe the end result might be that a very early Ausgleich is arranged.

 

[Tibi088]

The Hungarians lost their last chance when Kossuth dithered too much before intervening after the 2nd insurrection of Vienna, in october1848. The slow progress of the Hungarian army allowed von Windisch Graetz to mousetrap them on the march with the support of the Croats of Jelacich. If Kossuth had been more decisive, he might have managed to destroy the Croats and then to pin the Austrian army against the walls of Vienna.
I'm not sure even this would have been enough to save the Magyar bacon, but certainly would have improved their position.
Maybe the end result might be that a very early Ausgleich is arranged.

Yep, the hungarians lost in the fall of 1848. I mean dont mind the spring champaign of 1849, when the hungarian revolutionary army, even in a numerical disadventage kept defeating Windisch-Grätz and the austrian main army, retook the Capital and completely drove out the austrian main force from the country. Their greatest failure was that their plans to surround and destroy the austrian main force failed. This was that drove the austrians to ask for russian help to begin with. If the spring champaign goes even better for the hungarians and they manage to destroy the main austrian army the war could have ended than and there.

But even without that if the russians refuse to send help the hungarian revolutionary army would have faced a similarly sized austrian imperial army, with Hungary mostly cleared from austrian forces. At that point it would have needed tremendous effort, militarily and monetarily for the austrians to defeat the hungarian revolution on their own. I think at that point we would end up either with a negotiated peace (if the austrians manage to turn things around) or total Hungarian independence if they cant.

 

[EasternRomanEmpire]

The Hungarians lost their last chance when Kossuth dithered too much before intervening after the 2nd insurrection of Vienna, in october1848. The slow progress of the Hungarian army allowed von Windisch Graetz to mousetrap them on the march with the support of the Croats of Jelacich. If Kossuth had been more decisive, he might have managed to destroy the Croats and then to pin the Austrian army against the walls of Vienna.
I'm not sure even this would have been enough to save the Magyar bacon, but certainly would have improved their position.
Maybe the end result might be that a very early Ausgleich is arranged.

Remember me how many casualties did Russian troops took when they supported Hungary? I doubt the Austrians would manage to win without Russian support.

 

[Clandango]

Let us just assume the Hungarians do get independent, even if they end up losing Banat, Slovakia, Croatia (wasn’t even their at the time, not really), and parts of Transylvania (which had been an independent Magyar state longer than Hungary had been after over a century of being split up and used as the backwaters of Austria and Turkey), how do those area get treated by the Austrians? Spin them off? Give slightly more autonomy? Or do they try to crush their independence entirely, if not to simply revive the Military Frontier idea, and aiming them at Hungary for disputed lands.

Not that the Austrians need actually give military support (though they might want to guard the border from future bomb throwers crossing either way), much like how they did not support the Hungarians much when a Habsburg was given the Crown of St. Stephen, under the misguided belief that he would help Hungary get independence back, rather than have Royal Hungary turned into a dairy farm and buffer zone. Though back then it was a rather out of the way place not even the Ottomans cared about, the Prince of Transluvania declining the offer to become King of Hungary when he had conquered most of Slovakia. Hungary was just really rather out of the way when the Habsburgs and Ottomans had so many other wealthy areas to look after or strive for.

But anyways, yah. Back to more important topics. Do the Saxons and Swabians get displaced or integrated in this country? And I recall from a book (where I got most of my info in Hungary from) that Jews were treated alright until the Serbs, Croats, Bosnians, Vlach, Szekelys, Swabans, Saxons, Rusyns, Poles, Ruthenians (or Ukrainians, I think they and the Rusyns had some religious differences) were no longer in the country and the Jews being so willing to learn and speak Hungarian no longer counted as much for them when all non-Magyars were seen as potential enemies.

 

[Zajir]

Just a question about Hungary post-independence, the Hungarian government never controlled Croatia, if it gains independence with Russian help, it still won't have Croatia and sea access, what happens then?

Would Russia have any interest in helping Hungary gain access?

The main trading partners of Hungary will still Austria and countries in Western Europe, so some sort of reconciliation with Austria would be needed?
Could Croatia become a co-dominium?

 

[Clandango]

Just a question about Hungary post-independence, the Hungarian government never controlled Croatia, if it gains independence with Russian help, it still won't have Croatia and sea access, what happens then?

Would Russia have any interest in helping Hungary gain access?

The main trading partners of Hungary will still Austria and countries in Western Europe, so some sort of reconciliation with Austria would be needed?
Could Croatia become a co-dominium?

There is also of course the Danube. Really, it depends what they are exporting. might be they need to focus on that, though it would require going a loooong way around if they do not export directly to Austria. The Austrians are likely to put up a lot of custom barriers for Hungary, though plenty of countries did that. Though of course it was deemed as highly undesirable for each country, hence why Poland required its own coastline due to how the Prussians economically strangled them after they first took Danzig, and how the Dutch tried to stop the Belgians from transporting things to the ocean through Antwerp.

Really, I wonder on what priorities the Austrians and Russians had in the Balkans at this point. Hungary may just end up as one more in the many countries competing with each other for territory. I see it probably being on Bulgarian’s side in any world War, or at least not having any animosity with them due to each having probably disputes with Serbia and Romania. Glancing at OmniAtlas, I can also see this was before the Russians deported most of the Circassians, with the resultant instability as Christians and Muslims of all types in Anatolia and the Balkans got angered at hundreds of thousands of people being spread around and given land others were using, or crowding into cities.