WI: Alternate War of the Austrian Succession and Post-War

[GenghisKhanfan]

Breaking down the scenarios (and I'm still open to hearing your thoughts, agreements/disagreements about each of the flashpoints) which COULD result in the listed flashpoints. For each flashpoint, I will list three possible catalysts.....yea there can always be more, but if I spent time listing them all, it would take up 5-10 additional pages, so I won't.

Poland-Lithuania Scenario #1
With the coronation of a Hapsburg prince to the Polish throne and the increasing Austrian influence at court, Poland can start looking toward the east, to Russia, to try and reclaim the territories they held during the Time of Troubles. Austria agrees to Poland's plans in exchange for receiving support for the reconquest of Silesia from Prussia and reconquest of the Austrias (Upper and Lower) from Bavaria. Russia and Hungary, fresh from their victory against the Ottoman and fearful of a revival of Hapsburg power coupled with Polish aspirations, renew their alliance and reach out to Prussia and Bavaria in an effort to diplomatically surround the two nations. While Bavaria doesn't agree to an alliance, preferring to normalize relations with Rump Austria, they nevertheless sign a mutual assistance treaty with Prussia in the event of an Austrian invasion-but not a Polish one. Tensions start to rise until Hungary, without consulting their Russian allies and wanting to pre-empt an expected Austrian attack, launches an invasion. Poland reacts by sending one army into Austria to head off the Magyars while three more armies are sent against Russia, believing an invasion imminent. Prussia declares war in support of Russia, but Bavaria turns against Prussia, not seeing justification and further realizing Hungary had acted first. As the regional war heats up, the Ottoman Empire sees a chance to take back territory it lost to Russia and Hungary and signs a nonagression pact with Austria and an aliance with Poland. The war goes well for the Russo-Magyar-Prussian Alliance, but Bavaria is able to use its new Imperial status to invoke the Ban on Prussia, which mobilizes the rest of the HRE and likely draws in Sweden and France. Denmark, not wishing to see Sweden regain its prestige in the Baltic, joins the Alliance, which prompts Britain to side with Austria and Poland out of concern for the security and free passage of ships through the Danish Sound. The length of this war could vary depending on who joins as the war intensifies, but a roughly 5-9 year conflict is likely (read also not set in stone)

Scenario #2:
Austria supports a pro-Hapsburg king in Poland-Lithuania, leading to trade agreements and eventually a military alliance between the Commonwealth and Rump Austria directed on the one hand against a militant Humgary and on the other against an expansionist Russia. Thanks to security guarantees and generous trade concessions, Prussia is kept benevolently neutral and Bavaria, seeing Rump Austria as a defensive glacis against the Hungarians, draws closer to the Hapsburgs. This could lead to a revision of the treaty which gave Tyrol and the Austrias to Bavaria (Bavaria ceding Tyrol back to Austria). Meanwhile in Russia, concerns about the new axis forming around Munich, Vienna and Warsaw lead them to draw closer to Budapest, and begin a program of instigating separatist groups in the Lithuanian half of the PLC with the goal of detaching Lithuania from Poland and eventual annexation into Russia. The internal discord within the PLC is traced back to Russian agents and the PLC, feeling under threat, declares war on Russia, bringing Rump Austria in as their ally-but not at first either Bavaria or Prussia. Hungary joins in, eager to seize what remains of the old Monarchy and put themseles in position to challenge Bavaria. This forces them to pull troops from the newly established frontiers with the Ottoman Empire (assuming Russia doesn't make the ultimate hail-mary by conquering Istanbul) and opens the door to Ottoman revanchist ambitions and their joining the war on Poland's side. The length of this war may be shorter than 7 years but no longer than 5 as long as any simmering tensions in the west don't explode in fighting and becomes merged with this conflict.

Scenario #3:
Poland-Lithuania and Austria form an alliance which involves no placement of a Hapsburg on the Polish throne but provides mutual assistance in the event of an attack by an outside power. This alliance is seen by St Petersburg as a direct threat to their ambitions in Central Europe and they reach out to Prussia and Hungary. Meanwhile tensions remain high until either a catalyst event occurs here or in western Europe between Spain, France, Holland, and Britain that brings in the eastern rivals and leads to a war longer than 7 years, spreading across the seas and to all the colonial territories particularly of the western Powers.

Ottoman Empire Scenario #1:
The Ottoman Empire is brought to the brink of partition by the Hungarians and Russians, but finally enacts the desperately needed reforms due to the conviction in the Ulema and among the Islamic clerics that westernization is better than dissolution and partition. At the eleventh hour a western-trained and organzied Turkish army drives the Russians back across the Danube and holds them there while a second army, from Anatolia, crosses the Straits and begins to beat back the Hungarians. A 5-Year Truce is agreed between the combatants which allows for only modest final gains by Hungary and Russia and allows the Turks to rebuild their military infrastructure to accomodate the new western-style armies being trained. Meanwhile, to further guarantee the truce, Turkey reaches out to Rump Austria and Poland, forging mutual defense treaties with both and welcoming additional military officers from both nations to further train and modernize their armies. This leads Hungary to fear for its integrity, trapped once again between the Hapsburg 'slave-makers' and the Turkish 'hordes'. They draw closer to Russia as the only means of balancing the Austro-Turkish combination and at the same time, they begin to intrigue with the various Balkan peoples to rise up against the Turks with the goal of crippling them enough that a Hungarian offensive in league with Russia will finally drive the Turk from Europe forever. Uprisings duly break out among the Serbian and Bulgarian populations, resulting in Turkish reprisals of increasing severity and outraging Russia to such a degree that war is declared. Despite feeling similar unease at the Turkish brutality, Austria keeps to its obligations and declares war on Russia, prompting Hungary to declare against Austria and Poland to declare against both Russia and Hungary

Scenario #2:
Spanish naval power, temporarily crippled in the previous War of the Quadruple Alliance (which would happen as IOTL) revives under the protection of the French and they're soon setting their sights on the Aegean and Athens. Spain, showing initiative and despite the protests of their French ally, declare war on the Ottoman Empire with the objective of capturing Greece and establishing Spanish commercial claims in the Levant and Egypt. Russia, not missing the chance the Spanish invasion has given them, also declares war with the lie that they're protecting Istanbul from the 'idolatrous' Spanish but in truth to seize the Ottoman capital and as many of the Aegean islands as they can secure before the Spanish can. Tension rises between Russia and Spain over the fate of the Ottoman Empire, which meantime hastily begins reforming their military to meet the double challenge, as well as reaching out to both Austria and Britain. A miscommunication or incident occurs between Russian and Spanish squadrons in the eastern Mediterranean that further inflames the conflict in the Aegean and Balkans into a regional war. Should Britain and France-possibly in alliance-then combine militaries to bring Spain to the table, the war could spread into the High Seas and the colonial theaters, with Spanish colonies falling under British and French control. Britain could side with Russia, but only with the proviso that they moderate their territorial demands vis-a-vis Turkey, which Russia reluctantly agrees to.

I'll do more scenarios for the other potential flashpoints later on, so stay tuned...and in the meantime, tell me your thoughts about the selected flashpoints and the scenarios I've listed thus far.

 

[Fernan3451]

1) Assuming that Poland-Lithuania comes under the rule of a Habsburg and receives substantial Austrian aid (much as Spain received French legislative assistance when Philip V assumed the throne IOTL), I could see a situation in which Russia-despite assurances from Poland and Austria of no aggressive designs against them, begins feeling uneasy about a resurgent PLC. Is it possible that they use the new alliance with independent Hungary, already so successful against the Ottomans, to threaten both nations? Do they attempt to bring Prussia into this scheme and create a Triple Alliance of the East (Russia, Prussia, Hungary) against Rump Austria and the PLC?

Odd enough, this may cause the three countries to consider even more to destroy the PLC in the future and weaken the Habsburgs.

2) With the Ottoman Empire possibly facing early partition between Russia and Hungary, what would the internal situation in Istanbul be like? Might they finally begin making the needed military and fiscal reforms that would enable them to resist the Allied advance, maybe even drive them back from the capital? What is the position of France, Britain, Naples, and Rump Austria? Could Russia's Catherine the Great implement the 'Grand Design' by instigating revolts in Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia with the hope of placing one of her sons on the throne of a resurrected Byzantium in Istanbul (or as the Russians called it, Tsargrad)?

Maybe this causes a weird alternate war in which Russia becomes some sort of enemy against Europe's balance of power.

3) Italy is now wide open with the fall of the Habsburg (yea, I'll interchange Habsburg and Hapsburg because I've also seen it spelled with a 'p') Monarchy and loss of indirect control in the peninsula. This would of course leave the door open for France, Savoy-Piedmont, Spain and Naples to carve it up, while the Popes could further assert their independence within their Patrimony, possibly by playing one potential rival against another (a la Rome and the barbarians). Could this eventually backfire on the Popes and see an enemy army again sack the Eternal City? How would a regional alliance system play the Italy game? What of the mercantile republics like Genoa, Florence, Pisa, Venice and Milan?

The Pope may be fine as long as his territory isn't invaded. The other states may fall under control of various countries as proxies.

Why is Naples going to be independent and not under union with other country (such as Spain)?

Also, Florence and Pisa don't exist anymore at this point, and Milan isn't a mercantile republic.

4) The Holy Roman Empire has a Wittelsbach Emperor for the very first time. Bavaria's hold on the Title is shaky however as other middling German states such as Baden, Wurttemburg, Hannover and Saxony would now become ambitious to pull off a coup to seize the Title for themselves, though for the time being they bide their time. Prussia, not fully open to German unification but nonetheless eager to gain greater prestige, might also want to seize the Title. Then there's Rump Austria, not only suffering from the loss of economic support, territorial integrity but also the loss of prestige they had as Holy Roman Emperors. How would Bavaria manage the maze of Imperial politics in the face of the overt and covert hostility and ambition of its fellow Germans? Might France, Sweden and Russia play any role in this chaos? Who could potentially start a conflict within the HRE that drags the other European states in?

Odd enough, this may cause more wars in Central Europe for the title of Holy Roman Emperor.

5) There is a possibility I didnt mention before, of a partition of the formerly Austrian Netherlands between Holland (which could gain Antwerp and Flanders) and France (which could gain Wallonia and Brussels). With this in mind, how long might the situation remain calm between the new neighbors? Might Holland attempt to develop an Ostend Company much as Austria tried to do IOTL, and what would Britain's reaction to such a development be? Would France try at some immediate future date to seize Antwerp, feeling they had been robbed? How would the HRE states closest to the region align with one side, the other, or possible neutrality?

My idea is that Hainaut, Flanders, and Namur go to France and that Brabant and Limburg go to the Netherlands (decreasing the area's bordergore).

6) A little covered region of the world, to be sure, but the Western Hemisphere wouldn't escape the revolutionary (no pun intended) changes that have already rocked Europe in the post- alt WoAS. Would France likely gain additional territories in the Caribbean? North America? What is the state of the Thirteen Colonies at this alterna time-period? Could the colonists make an attempt to break free of Britain and create the United States and would France and Spain's role in this be greater than IOTL?

Well. That depends on how the history of Europe develops ITTL with a dead Austria.

7) Another little-covered region of the world, but with the likelihood that France would make gains here too as a result of the alternate WoAS. How would the two major Indian powers, the Mughals and Marathas, react to the new situation? Would they start seeking French aid in their clashes between each other? Would one side try to make accomodation with Britain (which wouldnt be totally shut out of India, unlike France IOTL) to balance the French assistance given the other? Could this lead to a colonial war between the two rivals?

The British would need to establish themselves fully in the continent without France on the way like the takeover of Bengal in 1756.

8) Manchu China would be near its peak power at this time. While I think they would retain their distrust of 'foreign devils' as they did IOTL, the increasing likelihood that France could get an early start in Indochina while Spain makes a play for Hainan or Taiwan (they did briefly have an outpost on the island IOTL but because of disease they soon abandoned it) could put the Manchu in a difficult situation, not to mention they've already encountered the Russians, who are still eager to seize more territory in the north (possibly including Mongolia). Might the Manchu sink their disgust (even if temporarily) and align with Russia to help block the designs of France and Spain? Could they reach out to Britain? Could the Manchu even sink their differences with Japan and join in an East Asian version of a Grand Alliance which would also include a couple of European nations?

If it's a threat to the Qing, this may accelerate their decline somehow?

9) Scandinavia played something of a role IOTL's WoAS by diverting Russian efforts that might otherwise have contributed to the fall of the Monarchy (or not). In the 7YW IOTL Sweden was willing to join in the partition of Prussia with France, Austria and Russia. As TTL's Austria is nothing more than a pathetic rump of its former self, Bavaria is the Holy Roman Emperor and Prussia has already gained Silesia, What would Sweden likely do to protect its Westphalia guarantor status? How might Denmark play a role, spoiler to Sweden? or in league with Sweden

This may cause even more problems to Bavaria as they not only have to face Sweden, but also France, Prussia, and Russia at once.

 

[Anarch King of Dipsodes]

Spain would almost certainly gain Sicily, Naples...

Spain got Sicily and Naples in 1734, during the War of the Polish Succession. That is, Spain conquered the territory, which was awarded to King Philip V's younger son Charles.

... and potentially Sardinia

 

[GenghisKhanfan]

Odd enough, this may cause the three countries to consider even more to destroy the PLC in the future and weaken the Habsburgs.

Maybe this causes a weird alternate war in which Russia becomes some sort of enemy against Europe's balance of power.

The Pope may be fine as long as his territory isn't invaded. The other states may fall under control of various countries as proxies.

Why is Naples going to be independent and not under union with other country (such as Spain)?

Also, Florence and Pisa don't exist anymore at this point, and Milan isn't a mercantile republic.

Odd enough, this may cause more wars in Central Europe for the title of Holy Roman Emperor.

My idea is that Hainaut, Flanders, and Namur go to France and that Brabant and Limburg go to the Netherlands (decreasing the area's bordergore).

Well. That depends on how the history of Europe develops ITTL with a dead Austria.

The British would need to establish themselves fully in the continent without France on the way like the takeover of Bengal in 1756.

If it's a threat to the Qing, this may accelerate their decline somehow?

This may cause even more problems to Bavaria as they not only have to face Sweden, but also France, Prussia, and Russia at once.

1) On this point, I have to agree. Even if Austria managed to guarantee Polish integrity and sovereignty, should the Triple Alliance of the East prove victorious, Poland would be carved up among the victorious powers while what little remained of Austria would likely fall fully to Hungary, giving them a seat at the Imperial Diet from which they could try to challenge Bavaria.

2) The only time this actually happened IOTL was the Crimean War...when even Prussia was in theory if not in fact opposed to Russian designs against Turkey. While the Prussians didn't participate even indirectly in the war, Austria occupied the Danubian principalities to cut off Russia's entry point while Britain and France destroyed the Russian strongholds along the Ukrainian coast. I could definitely see a situation where Russia pushes its military campaigns too far and brings the wrath of nearly all of Europe down on them, with only Hungary as their ally.

3) Firstly, you are correct, Florence and Pisa had merged into Tuscany so technically didnt exist. Having said that, I would not be surprised if the Popes didn't at least attempt in enforce their sovereignty in Florence (making it a State of the Church) to pre-empt any perceived threat of conquest by Savoy-Piedmont. Its also possible that Spain could invoke the old Aragonese union with Naples and seize them, joining them again to Sicily and reestablishing Spanish rule in the south. France and Savoy would have to come to an agreement on how to handle Milan, but its likely both would be agreed that a return of even modest Hapsburg influence there would be dangerous. And you're correct that Milan was never a mercantile republic.

4) The alignment of forces in this struggle would be interesting to say the least. Bavaria might have a temporary ally in Prussia and Hannover (thru their link with Britain) as a counterweight to both France and Russia, but this would likely break down as states like Baden, Wurttenburg, Saxony, the Palatinate and even Hannover make no secret of their wish to strip Bavaria of the Imperial mantle. Austria and Prussia would, in my opinion, be the wild cards in this.

5) While I agree that this arrangement would remove the prospects of bordergore between Holland and France, keep in mind that ancient feudal obligations were still recognized right up to the French Revolution IOTL. If this feudal system is applied IITL, there would still likely be some bordergore, and likely future areas of tension between Holland and France. The wild card here would be Britain, and whether they'd accept the partition of the formerly Austrian Netherlands.

6) In my opinion, a dead or fatally crippled Austrian Monarchy would open wide the doors to the hegemony of Europe. Prussia, Britain, Spain, France, Sweden, Russia, and Ottoman Turkey would be the key rivals for this, but there's also ample opportunity for smaller upstarts like Bavaria, Hannover, Poland, Savoy-Piedmont, and Portugal to play the same part Savoy and Brandenburg-Prussia played in IOTL's WoSS and emerge as major powers (or in Poland's and Portugal's cases, re-emerge). Whatever happens in Europe may vastly alter the situation in the American colonies, though any rebellion in the 13 Colonies could either happen earlier or later depending on British naval strength vis-a-vis France, Spain, and Russia.


7) It could be possible, though if the French are allied or closely aligned with either the Mughals or Marathas (or even both), this would matter little as Britain could face an Indian force trained and equipped with French materials and officers. France would only need deliver the coup de grace to deprive Britain of all but a scattering of trade-stations and assume supremacy in India.

8) Possibly. Manchu emperors likely would still have their innate distrust of the "foreign devils" and while an alliance with Russia and Britain would solve the problem of French and Spanish encroachments on the peripheral territories of the Chinese Empire, in the end, they would demand compensation from the Manchu and could even, down the line, lead to an increase of tension between them leading to an East Asian war that spreads into Europe.

9) I will disagree slightly. Slightly because remember, France supported the Bavarians during the WoAS because it meant the Imperial title would not be held by a Hapsburg, as the Hapsburgs at one time had territory all around France, essentially hemming them in. France might remain close to Bavaria as a means of keeping the Hapsburgs from reclaiming the Title, and because they were allied with Sweden, the Swedes would even support Bavaria. It would be Prussia, Russia, and some of the middling German states that would pose a threat to continued Bavarian possession of the Imperial mantle.

Appreciate the input, by the way

 

[GenghisKhanfan]

Guess I'll start this off (I dont mind, if only to get the ball rolling)
1) Assuming that Poland-Lithuania comes under the rule of a Habsburg and receives substantial Austrian aid (much as Spain received French legislative assistance when Philip V assumed the throne IOTL), I could see a situation in which Russia-despite assurances from Poland and Austria of no aggressive designs against them, begins feeling uneasy about a resurgent PLC. Is it possible that they use the new alliance with independent Hungary, already so successful against the Ottomans, to threaten both nations? Do they attempt to bring Prussia into this scheme and create a Triple Alliance of the East (Russia, Prussia, Hungary) against Rump Austria and the PLC?

2) With the Ottoman Empire possibly facing early partition between Russia and Hungary, what would the internal situation in Istanbul be like? Might they finally begin making the needed military and fiscal reforms that would enable them to resist the Allied advance, maybe even drive them back from the capital? What is the position of France, Britain, Naples, and Rump Austria? Could Russia's Catherine the Great implement the 'Grand Design' by instigating revolts in Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia with the hope of placing one of her sons on the throne of a resurrected Byzantium in Istanbul (or as the Russians called it, Tsargrad)?

3) Italy is now wide open with the fall of the Habsburg (yea, I'll interchange Habsburg and Hapsburg because I've also seen it spelled with a 'p') Monarchy and loss of indirect control in the peninsula. This would of course leave the door open for France, Savoy-Piedmont, Spain and Naples to carve it up, while the Popes could further assert their independence within their Patrimony, possibly by playing one potential rival against another (a la Rome and the barbarians). Could this eventually backfire on the Popes and see an enemy army again sack the Eternal City? How would a regional alliance system play the Italy game? What of the mercantile republics like Genoa, Florence, Pisa, Venice and Milan?

4) The Holy Roman Empire has a Wittelsbach Emperor for the very first time. Bavaria's hold on the Title is shaky however as other middling German states such as Baden, Wurttemburg, Hannover and Saxony would now become ambitious to pull off a coup to seize the Title for themselves, though for the time being they bide their time. Prussia, not fully open to German unification but nonetheless eager to gain greater prestige, might also want to seize the Title. Then there's Rump Austria, not only suffering from the loss of economic support, territorial integrity but also the loss of prestige they had as Holy Roman Emperors. How would Bavaria manage the maze of Imperial politics in the face of the overt and covert hostility and ambition of its fellow Germans? Might France, Sweden and Russia play any role in this chaos? Who could potentially start a conflict within the HRE that drags the other European states in?

5) There is a possibility I didnt mention before, of a partition of the formerly Austrian Netherlands between Holland (which could gain Antwerp and Flanders) and France (which could gain Wallonia and Brussels). With this in mind, how long might the situation remain calm between the new neighbors? Might Holland attempt to develop an Ostend Company much as Austria tried to do IOTL, and what would Britain's reaction to such a development be? Would France try at some immediate future date to seize Antwerp, feeling they had been robbed? How would the HRE states closest to the region align with one side, the other, or possible neutrality?

6) A little covered region of the world, to be sure, but the Western Hemisphere wouldn't escape the revolutionary (no pun intended) changes that have already rocked Europe in the post- alt WoAS. Would France likely gain additional territories in the Caribbean? North America? What is the state of the Thirteen Colonies at this alterna time-period? Could the colonists make an attempt to break free of Britain and create the United States and would France and Spain's role in this be greater than IOTL?

7) Another little-covered region of the world, but with the likelihood that France would make gains here too as a result of the alternate WoAS. How would the two major Indian powers, the Mughals and Marathas, react to the new situation? Would they start seeking French aid in their clashes between each other? Would one side try to make accomodation with Britain (which wouldnt be totally shut out of India, unlike France IOTL) to balance the French assistance given the other? Could this lead to a colonial war between the two rivals?

8) Manchu China would be near its peak power at this time. While I think they would retain their distrust of 'foreign devils' as they did IOTL, the increasing likelihood that France could get an early start in Indochina while Spain makes a play for Hainan or Taiwan (they did briefly have an outpost on the island IOTL but because of disease they soon abandoned it) could put the Manchu in a difficult situation, not to mention they've already encountered the Russians, who are still eager to seize more territory in the north (possibly including Mongolia). Might the Manchu sink their disgust (even if temporarily) and align with Russia to help block the designs of France and Spain? Could they reach out to Britain? Could the Manchu even sink their differences with Japan and join in an East Asian version of a Grand Alliance which would also include a couple of European nations?

9) Scandinavia played something of a role IOTL's WoAS by diverting Russian efforts that might otherwise have contributed to the fall of the Monarchy (or not). In the 7YW IOTL Sweden was willing to join in the partition of Prussia with France, Austria and Russia. As TTL's Austria is nothing more than a pathetic rump of its former self, Bavaria is the Holy Roman Emperor and Prussia has already gained Silesia, What would Sweden likely do to protect its Westphalia guarantor status? How might Denmark play a role, spoiler to Sweden? or in league with Sweden

Again, feel free to tackle an individual flashpoint and agree/disagree and offer a counter...
or tackle them all if you have the time. In either case, I'm open to hearing what you think

PLEASE NOTE: I"m citing this post for future scenario ideas so I can remember each flashpoint, so please don't hang me

Italy Scenario#1:
The Fall of the Hapsburg Monarchy has created a situation in the Italian peninsula where the Hapsburg client-rulers in Tuscany, Milan, Modena and Mantua are suddenly left out on a precarious limb. For Tuscany especially, with their proximity to the Patrimony of St Peter (The Papal States), the danger is that the Pope could find or create a pretext to lay feudal claim on part or all of the Grand Duchy. The Stato de Presideii, the cluster of tiny islands off the Tuscan coast, are an easy prize for the Spanish, whose navy is reviving thanks to their close ties with France. These little islands soon become a bone of contention between Tuscany, the Papal Patrimony and Spain with each claiming ancient or even fraudulent rights over the islands. France, meanwhile, has its eyes on the tiny Savoyard provinces of Savoie and Nizza, but there is talk of potentially annexing the whole of Savoy-Piedmont to Framce, leaving that ancient House with only the island of Sardinia (which is also being viewed as a prize by Spain). As tensions over the Stato islands rises, Spain prepares to send troops in, both to secure the islands and to force Tuscany to acknowledge the Spanish claims. They request Savoy allow them to use Sardinia as a staging area, offering to assist them in conquering Genoa in exchange, but Savoy, already aware of Spanish plans regarding Sardinia refuses and reaches out to Tuscany and the Pope. Spain appeals to France for assistance against Savoy, agreeing to the French annexation of the territories they covet in exchange for French acknowledgement of Spain's conquest of Sardinia. Naples, which up to this point has been trying to maintain neutrality but is increasingly alarmed by Spanish power, aligns with Savoy while at the same time fortifying Sicily as its clear Spain also intends to reclaim that island. Meanwhile, Rump Austria, trying to reestablish some measure of credibility as a Power, forges alliances with the Venetian Republic, Ferrara and the Papacy, predominantly against Savoyard aggression-believing they will unite with the French or Spanish to pursue their expansionism. The situation is so volatile in the peninsula that all it takes is one miscommunication, or act of aggression from any of the rival or allied powers before the powder keg is set alight.

Scenario #2:
Savoy sees the collapse of Hapsburg influence in Italy as their means of expanding their territory and potentially even leading a Lombard Union which would oppose both the Hapsburgs and France. Unaware of this ulterior design, France is willing to endorse Savoy's program and urges Spain to join in a league which would redivide the peninsula between the three of them, with France gaining Savoie and Nizza, Spain gaining Naples, Sicily, Sardinia and the Stato de Presidii islands, and Savoy gaining Milan, Parma, Piacenza, and nearly all the Venetian terra firma (subsequently reducing Venetia to the immediate coastal mainland and the lagoon and ignoring the Dalmatian and Adriatic strongholds). The Pope attempts to play the role of spoiler, offering each of the allies full recognition of their claims and hoping to divide them before they can put their plan into action. Naples, already fearing Spain's future designs on them, reaches out to the Papacy and Tuscany, building a Pan-Italian Alliance to counter the Savoy-dominated Lombard Union and their French and Spanish sponsors. Rump Austria, still nominally allied to France but fearing for the safety of Venice in the face of Savoyard expansion, draws closer to Venice. Assuming the situation in Eastern or Southeastern Europe is beginning to boil over, Spain could use Russia and Hungary to distract the Austrians while they advance their plans. The role of the Ottoman Empire, next door to the Italian boot, is uncertain as it would depend on how much territory they lost to Russia and Hungary, how many men were killed, how bad their infrastructure has been damaged, and how rapidly they can rebuild and modernize their armed forces, including their navy.

Scenario #3:
A new generation of ambitious popes come to power in Rome, with the dream of bringing central Italy more firmly under their rule and even lay the groundwork for an ambitious effort to unite Italy in a Holy Kingdom in which they exercise both the temporal and spiritual authority they've been denied in the past. Their first target is just next door: Tuscany. When the last Grand Duke dies without male heirs, the Papacy invents a feudal claim to the duchy and invades. Savoy, Spain and Naples, alarmed by this sudden power-grab by the Pope, declares him to be excommunicated, resulting in the rulers of those states being excommunicated in their turn by the Pope. A new Papal schism is now very likely as the three states meet and discuss placing a new Pope on the Throne of St Peter and condemning the current one as an outlaw. All across Catholic Europe, opinion is divided on whether to back the replacement Pope or the current rogue Pope. The chaos in Rump Austria comes at a bad time as Bavaria announces its support for the new Pope while the Hapsburgs cling to their association with the rogue. Tensions between Rump Austria and Hungary, already at boiling point over Hungary's conquests in the Balkans and their threat to Austria's remaining territories, now explode when Hungary also announces support for the new Pope (unlike Bavaria, who is unwilling to break with Austria as they're seen as a shield against the new "barbarism" of the Magyars). France soon also endorses the new Pope, which puts them at odds with Tuscany, Genoa, and Venice. Thus a grand opportunity for France and Savoy is provided and war will likely soon follow.

Holy Roman Empire Scenario #1:
Bavaria begins to consolidate its hold on the Imperial Title, granting electorate status to several of the tiny Imperial Knight realms, and even making the city of Vienna, formerly capital of the Hapsburg Monarchy a Free City (as opposed to becoming the new Bavarian capital, as a way to reconcile with Austria). The fact that the Imperial Knight realms are often enclaves surrounded by slightly larger states such as Hesse-Darmstadt, Mainz, and Trier angers them as they had hoped Bavaria would allow them to clean up their borders and gain additional sources of revenue. Bavaria's new status also upsets states such as Saxony, Prussia, Hannover, and Wurttenburg for reasons ranging from security concerns (Hannover and Saxony) to personal ambitions of their rulers (Prussia) and in-between (Wurttemburg). Despite Bavaria's success at winning over many of the middling German princes and Free Cities, there is an undercurrent of tension further exacerbated by the fact Bavaria can only bestow Grace because they have the financial backing of France, determined both to control their Wittelsbach client and ensure no other German House can challenge the supremacy of France (such as Prussia would later do IOTL). Denmark uses the confusion of the early Bavarian period to seize back Schleswig-Holstein, causing outrage in Hannover and Prussia which Bavaria is powerless to calm down. This results in a league coalescing around Hannover and Prussia, who sink their own differences for the dual purpose of retaking Schleswig-Holstein from Denmark and challenging Bavaria in the Imperial Diet..and possibly even for the Imperial Title itself. Hannover can rely on the British Royal Nay since their Elector is also King of Great Britain, thus bringing the potential of the conflict expanding.

Scenario #2:
A three-way split begins to develop as Bavaria and those middling states that they can win over as new Holy Roman Emperors will face a league originally formed by Prussia to oppose the Wittelsbachs in the Imperial Diet-but which Prussia, losing its leadership role as several states such as Saxony and Hannover fear the League could be the beginning of a Prussian program to forcibly unify Germany. A standoff thus develops between Bavaria and its allies, the 'Third Germany' led jointly by Hannover and Saxony, and Prussia. It would remain to be seen what role France, Rump Austria, Russia, Poland, Holland, Sweden and Britain would play should a conflict begin within the Holy Rome Empire, but its almost certain it would lead to a greater bloodshed than the Thirty Years War, and affect many of the same areas which had YET to fully recover from that war

More to come later.

 

[Osman Aga]

Okay, its been a looooooong time since I actually posted something other than replies, and I hope this will open the floor to discussion. Maybe someone will even tackle this as an alternate timeline-assuming it hasn't already been done. With all that said, here's the 'What If'.....and the opening setup:

According to what I recently read in the book The Pursuit of Glory: Europe 1648-1815 by Tim Blanning. In the run-up to the War of the Austrian Succession, Charles VI-Archduke of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohemia and Holy Roman Emperor, had failed to sire a male successor. As a means of maintaining the unity of the Hapsburg Monarchy, he drafted a edict called the Pragmatic Sanction which in essence guaranteed that should he die without a male heir, his dominions would pass undivided to his eldest daughter, Maria Theresa, effectively bypassing the heirs of his close relative and predecessor Joseph I. Charles VI had to practically promise the moon and some stars in order to get the Austrian estates, the Hungarian diet, the Diet of the Holy Roman Empire, and finally the courts of Europe to accept the Sanction and recognize Maria Theresa as his heir*. Within days of his death, Austria's neighbors began to repudiate the Sanction and attack the Monarchy, starting with Prussia's invasion and conquest of Silesia. Frederick the Great later admitted he had done it to pre-empt the Saxons, who were also looking to claim Silesia to bridge the gulf between the Electorate and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, where the Saxon elector was also king. France backed the candidacy of Charles Albert, Elector of Bavaria for Holy Roman Emperor against Duke Frances Stephen of Lorraine, whose territory was almost wholly surrounded by France. Charles Albert even made a claim on Bohemia and Upper Austria as a means of securing his claim to the Imperial title. Spain hoped to make gains in the Italian peninsula at Austria's expense and potentially restore the position they had lost as a result of the War of the Spanish Succession (1700-1716). Comte de Vergennes, France's minister, even had a plan for the partition of the Hapsburg Monarchy would would've created three new power-blocs in the HRE, awarded Spain and Sardinia-Piedmont some territory in Italy, and awarded the Austrian Netherlands (i.e Belgium) to France along with the right of succession to the Duchy of Lorraine.

* Spain had already won Parma and Piacenza in central Italy, both as part of the terms of the treaty ending the Polish Succession War and as a pre-condition of their acceptance of the Pragmatic Sanction. France also had already secured the acquisition of the Duchy of Lorraine, which would've allowed Francis Stephen to become Duke of Tuscany in exchange and as a pre-condition of their adherence to the Pragmatic Sanction.

What if the War of the Austrian Succession gone the way de Vergennes had planned it (more or less), and the Vergennes Plan been fulfilled as a result of victory? What would an alternate Europe look like as a result? Would there be a Seven Years War? American War of Independence? French Revolution? Now here are some things to consider when discussing this What If:

- France would be more focused on the continental campaigns and initially only defend her colonial empire from Britain, until their objectives were fulfilled and Austria were brought to her knees. Then and only then would they switch to a "blue water" strategy, both repelling British attacks and even going on the offense themselves with Spanish assistance.

-The United Provinces (Holland or The Netherlands) would be overrun quickly by the French, forcing them out of the war. What the terms of surrender would be can be left open, but most likely they would lose some territory overseas and pay a large indemnity. They could even be forced to join the French side and go to war with Britain. Again, this can be left open to discussion.

-Frederick the Great would still gain Silesia much as IOTL (except maybe a small portion in the south of the province, which Saxony would seize and thus link their Electorate-however small-with their Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth lands. Saxony could potentially, and as a means of compensation, divide the Swabian territories of the Hapsburgs with Bavaria.

-Bavaria would not only be able to seize and hold Bohemia (possibly with Saxon and Prussian assistance) and Upper Austria, but they could even invade and occupy Lower Austria or the Tyrol (or both) and make restoring one of those territories the condition of peace with Austria. As new Holy Roman Emperors they could even forbid any future ambitions for the Imperial Crown from the Hapsburg dynasty. This can be left open to discussion.

-Hungary could use the distractions and invasions of the Monarchy to assert their independence, and receive recognition of such from Prussia, France, Spain, Bavaria and possibly even the Ottoman Empire. While they may or may not become involved in the war, any opportunity to cripple the Hapsburgs would be welcomed by the Ottoman Empire as it would mean one less rival in the Balkans to have to contend with.

-The role of Russia, Sweden and Portugal would be open to discussion as its unknown how big or small a role these nations played in the Austrian Succession War. Perhaps Russia gets involved as a belated ally of Austria to try and prevent Bavaria and Prussia from tearing the Monarchy apart. Perhaps Russia becomes a neutral. Perhaps Russia joins in the partition. The same could be said of Sweden, as they still held German territory along the Baltic. They could join in Austria's partition not so much for territory as for guarantees from the new, Bavarian Emperor for commerce and security.

Let me be clear, I dont have exact figures on military strength, finance so I won't even venture to make a guess on those. Also there may have been a few things I left out...I'm only Human. Lastly I don't intend this to go into ASB territory, which is why the source information I provided in Italics was written, so no one thinks I'm doing an ASB. If there already exists an alternate timeline coming off the war which I am not aware of, please provide a link so I may check it out.

Aside from that, the floor is now open to discuss, debate, strategize and create

The Ottoman Empire was just out of war with the Austrians and fairly successful, regaining Serbia from Austria. If the Habsburgs delay their war until 1739, the Ottomans will be in that war for a longer time, preferring more territory like the lost Banat or even Slavonia and Syrmia. If they get too ambitious they may try to revive their old Transylvanian Vassals, but that depends on if the Hungarians resist too much and how much the French and Prussians are dedicated to maul the Austrians in the West. And of course, depending on how much the Ottoman Army can perform beyond the Danube-Sava line, outside of their own territory.

 

[alexmilman]

Breaking down the scenarios (and I'm still open to hearing your thoughts, agreements/disagreements about each of the flashpoints) which COULD result in the listed flashpoints. For each flashpoint, I will list three possible catalysts.....yea there can always be more, but if I spent time listing them all, it would take up 5-10 additional pages, so I won't.

Poland-Lithuania Scenario #1
With the coronation of a Hapsburg prince to the Polish throne and the increasing Austrian influence at court,

To start from the initial idea, in post-WoAS world the PLC would not be allowed to have a monarch which Russia considers not its client. It had been demonstrated by the WoPS and eventually by election of Poniatovski. At any danger of the unwelcome dud scenario Russia was bringing up its candidate (even if there was already a duly elected king there is already a minority ready to vote for the Russian candidate) and, if needed, interfere with a military force. Taking into an account a domestic situation in the PLC, size of that force would not be significant:

In 1733-34 it took approximately 18,000 troops and the only point of a serious resistance was Danzig: a well-fortified city with approximately 24,000 garrison and the French reinforcements. Took approximately 4 month to force it capitulation (with the French troops), mostly because it took 2 months for the heavy artillery (Russian and Saxon) and Russian squadron (with more heavy artillery) to arrive.

In 1764 CII wrote to Old Fritz that she may need to send couple thousands Cossacks to guarantee election of Stanislav Poniatovski (reasonably small bribes proved to be enough) instead of Elector of Saxony whom she considered Austrian candidate.

The PLC “court” was almost an useless place to exercise influence at (as CII later found out) because the PLC nobility took a good care of making its kings having a bare minimum of a power. An idea that a prince from a defeated and almost powerless Hapsburg family, if he is permitted by Russia (and Prussia) to take the PLC throne is capable of performing a miracle that makes it a state with a functional administration and a powerful army belongs to the ASB category because it required 180 degree turn of a collective mindset of the Polish nobility. It goes without saying that this “miracle worker” does not have money to bribe the decision makers and does not have a military force of his own.

Poland can start looking toward the east, to Russia, to try and reclaim the territories they held during the Time of Troubles.

Which means that it is looking for getting back Smolensk region and Eastern Ukraine. The areas had been lost when the PLC still was a regional power with a working (if getting obsolete) military system and Tsardom still was operating with a mixture of the newly created modern troops (at the peak up to 60,000) and an old style army. In the mid-18th century, Russian ground forces had 330,000 men, including 172,000 in field units. Not, yet, at the peak of its XVIII performance but already good enough to beat the Ottomans (who managed to beat the Austrians), Swedes and, in few years, to fight Prussians with a considerable success (out of 4 major battles one draw and 3 victories). And the PLC has what? In OTL - nothing worth mentioning and even in alt reality you can’t create an army out of nothing in a very short time with no funds.

Austria agrees to Poland's plans in exchange for receiving support for the reconquest of Silesia from Prussia and reconquest of the Austrias (Upper and Lower) from Bavaria.

Well, Austria is defeated with a loss of at least half of its territories and does not have either a powerful army or the revenue sources allowing to raise it with a predictable future. The PLC does not have a modern army and its ruler has a very limited income. The rulers of these two countries are planning to challenge 2 Great Powers (the term is anachronistic but it reflects situation), Russia and Prussia, backed up by two more serious powers, Wittelsbachs “Empire” and Hungary. Sounds like a perfectly suicidal scenario to me.

Russia and Hungary, fresh from their victory against the Ottoman and fearful of a revival of Hapsburg power coupled with Polish aspirations, renew their alliance and reach out to Prussia and Bavaria in an effort to diplomatically surround the two nations.

Probably I’m missing something fundamental in the logic of this scenario. Taking aside a practical almost impossibility of the PLC having anti-Russian monarch, why exactly two military successful countries one of which is a “regional Great Power” are being afraid of an alliance of two weak neighbors one of which recently suffered a terrible defeat with a loss of a big part of its territory and another is not being considered a serious military factor for the last half a century? Why would a “non-factor” one suddenly develops the overly ambitious plans of a major conquest of a territory from a much stronger neighbor to whom that territory was lost when it was much weaker? Taking into an account that a considerable part of the decision-making group of the PLC does not give a damn about these territories (and that a noticeable segment of it is getting considerable handouts from Russia), why such a suicidal bloodthirstiness?

While Bavaria doesn't agree to an alliance, preferring to normalize relations with Rump Austria, they nevertheless sign a mutual assistance treaty with Prussia in the event of an Austrian invasion-but not a Polish one. Tensions start to rise until Hungary, without consulting their Russian allies and wanting to pre-empt an expected Austrian attack, launches an invasion. Poland reacts by sending one army into Austria to head off the Magyars while three more armies are sent against Russia, believing an invasion imminent.

Sure, there is also army sent to conquer China and a mighty fleet carrying one more army to conquer the Spanish and British colonies in the Americas... 😂

Of course, we are in alt-history but it is supposed to have some link to a reality.

 

[Vladivostock]

Okay, its been a looooooong time since I actually posted something other than replies, and I hope this will open the floor to discussion. Maybe someone will even tackle this as an alternate timeline-assuming it hasn't already been done. With all that said, here's the 'What If'.....and the opening setup:

According to what I recently read in the book The Pursuit of Glory: Europe 1648-1815 by Tim Blanning. In the run-up to the War of the Austrian Succession, Charles VI-Archduke of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohemia and Holy Roman Emperor, had failed to sire a male successor. As a means of maintaining the unity of the Hapsburg Monarchy, he drafted a edict called the Pragmatic Sanction which in essence guaranteed that should he die without a male heir, his dominions would pass undivided to his eldest daughter, Maria Theresa, effectively bypassing the heirs of his close relative and predecessor Joseph I. Charles VI had to practically promise the moon and some stars in order to get the Austrian estates, the Hungarian diet, the Diet of the Holy Roman Empire, and finally the courts of Europe to accept the Sanction and recognize Maria Theresa as his heir*. Within days of his death, Austria's neighbors began to repudiate the Sanction and attack the Monarchy, starting with Prussia's invasion and conquest of Silesia. Frederick the Great later admitted he had done it to pre-empt the Saxons, who were also looking to claim Silesia to bridge the gulf between the Electorate and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, where the Saxon elector was also king. France backed the candidacy of Charles Albert, Elector of Bavaria for Holy Roman Emperor against Duke Frances Stephen of Lorraine, whose territory was almost wholly surrounded by France. Charles Albert even made a claim on Bohemia and Upper Austria as a means of securing his claim to the Imperial title. Spain hoped to make gains in the Italian peninsula at Austria's expense and potentially restore the position they had lost as a result of the War of the Spanish Succession (1700-1716). Comte de Vergennes, France's minister, even had a plan for the partition of the Hapsburg Monarchy would would've created three new power-blocs in the HRE, awarded Spain and Sardinia-Piedmont some territory in Italy, and awarded the Austrian Netherlands (i.e Belgium) to France along with the right of succession to the Duchy of Lorraine.

* Spain had already won Parma and Piacenza in central Italy, both as part of the terms of the treaty ending the Polish Succession War and as a pre-condition of their acceptance of the Pragmatic Sanction. France also had already secured the acquisition of the Duchy of Lorraine, which would've allowed Francis Stephen to become Duke of Tuscany in exchange and as a pre-condition of their adherence to the Pragmatic Sanction.

What if the War of the Austrian Succession gone the way de Vergennes had planned it (more or less), and the Vergennes Plan been fulfilled as a result of victory? What would an alternate Europe look like as a result? Would there be a Seven Years War? American War of Independence? French Revolution? Now here are some things to consider when discussing this What If:

- France would be more focused on the continental campaigns and initially only defend her colonial empire from Britain, until their objectives were fulfilled and Austria were brought to her knees. Then and only then would they switch to a "blue water" strategy, both repelling British attacks and even going on the offense themselves with Spanish assistance.

-The United Provinces (Holland or The Netherlands) would be overrun quickly by the French, forcing them out of the war. What the terms of surrender would be can be left open, but most likely they would lose some territory overseas and pay a large indemnity. They could even be forced to join the French side and go to war with Britain. Again, this can be left open to discussion.

-Frederick the Great would still gain Silesia much as IOTL (except maybe a small portion in the south of the province, which Saxony would seize and thus link their Electorate-however small-with their Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth lands. Saxony could potentially, and as a means of compensation, divide the Swabian territories of the Hapsburgs with Bavaria.

-Bavaria would not only be able to seize and hold Bohemia (possibly with Saxon and Prussian assistance) and Upper Austria, but they could even invade and occupy Lower Austria or the Tyrol (or both) and make restoring one of those territories the condition of peace with Austria. As new Holy Roman Emperors they could even forbid any future ambitions for the Imperial Crown from the Hapsburg dynasty. This can be left open to discussion.

-Hungary could use the distractions and invasions of the Monarchy to assert their independence, and receive recognition of such from Prussia, France, Spain, Bavaria and possibly even the Ottoman Empire. While they may or may not become involved in the war, any opportunity to cripple the Hapsburgs would be welcomed by the Ottoman Empire as it would mean one less rival in the Balkans to have to contend with.

-The role of Russia, Sweden and Portugal would be open to discussion as its unknown how big or small a role these nations played in the Austrian Succession War. Perhaps Russia gets involved as a belated ally of Austria to try and prevent Bavaria and Prussia from tearing the Monarchy apart. Perhaps Russia becomes a neutral. Perhaps Russia joins in the partition. The same could be said of Sweden, as they still held German territory along the Baltic. They could join in Austria's partition not so much for territory as for guarantees from the new, Bavarian Emperor for commerce and security.

Let me be clear, I dont have exact figures on military strength, finance so I won't even venture to make a guess on those. Also there may have been a few things I left out...I'm only Human. Lastly I don't intend this to go into ASB territory, which is why the source information I provided in Italics was written, so no one thinks I'm doing an ASB. If there already exists an alternate timeline coming off the war which I am not aware of, please provide a link so I may check it out.

Aside from that, the floor is now open to discuss, debate, strategize and create

Hello there
I see this thread has gone a long way but I'd still like to get back to the beginning. There were several plans of reorganizing Europe during WotAS. As mentioned before, I also suspect what possible role Vergennes could have had at the time but never mind. This proposal is quite similar to some other ideas I've read about.
There are some problems to it though. Spain and Sardinia dividing Italy between themselves sounds good but the problem is they couldn't agree on who gets what. And also, Sardinia most certainly did not want to see the Bourbons dominate Italy. The reason they grew so much is that they used their buffer zone position to play off both sides and make small but certain gains. This was an era when the balance of power was the key principle in politics and no one wanted Farnese's sons to take over most of Italy (except Elisabeth herself).
The situation in Germany has some similarities. No one wants to replace powerful, but somewhat troubled Austria with a Bavarian dominance over Germany. Even in OTL, after Frederick II took most of Silesia and had seen the French, Bavarians and Saxons taking Prague and advancing into Austria, he immediately stopped his troops and left the war. At one point, he even offered Maria Theresa an alliance if she would only confirm his conquest. In fact, it was this pause that allowed Austria some breathing room to bounce back and invade Bavaria, which was a complete success.
Basically, to make a plan like this work you need to have five or six countries coordinating and cooperating their invasion and even then it is difficult as hell. The Ottomans failed to take Vienna with massive armies when they were at their prime so a conquest of Vienna by a guy like Charles VII seems a bit impossible.
The failure to coordinate was very obvious. Sardinia immediately refused to join an attack on Austria since they feared Bourbon domination of Italy. Frederick II was in it only for his own interests. Once they were achieved, he will abandon the others no matter what. Saxony was lukewarm from the beginning too. They joined the attack on Bohemia but once they realized they failed to get their connection to Poland, Saxony was on its way out until they even changed sides.
France wasn't even officially at war until 1744. Their support to Bavaria was very significant but they didn't join in full force until after Fleury's death.
If by some miracle, a concentrated attack towards Vienna is organized, be sure the Maritime Powers will move heaven and earth to break it up. They succeeded in 1704 and could do so again. True, Marlborough was gone, but simple things like detaching Prussia from the alliance (which is possible if they promise to guarantee his possession of Silesia with an additional cash incentive) is probably enough to save Vienna. Don't forget, the French and the Bavarians were in Linz and Prague in 1742, but Austrians were invading Alsace in 1744 so I don't think this carving up of the Habsburg Monarchy is as easy as drawing lines on a map

 

[GenghisKhanfan]

To start from the initial idea, in post-WoAS world the PLC would not be allowed to have a monarch which Russia considers not its client. It had been demonstrated by the WoPS and eventually by election of Poniatovski. At any danger of the unwelcome dud scenario Russia was bringing up its candidate (even if there was already a duly elected king there is already a minority ready to vote for the Russian candidate) and, if needed, interfere with a military force. Taking into an account a domestic situation in the PLC, size of that force would not be significant:

In 1733-34 it took approximately 18,000 troops and the only point of a serious resistance was Danzig: a well-fortified city with approximately 24,000 garrison and the French reinforcements. Took approximately 4 month to force it capitulation (with the French troops), mostly because it took 2 months for the heavy artillery (Russian and Saxon) and Russian squadron (with more heavy artillery) to arrive.

In 1764 CII wrote to Old Fritz that she may need to send couple thousands Cossacks to guarantee election of Stanislav Poniatovski (reasonably small bribes proved to be enough) instead of Elector of Saxony whom she considered Austrian candidate.

The PLC “court” was almost an useless place to exercise influence at (as CII later found out) because the PLC nobility took a good care of making its kings having a bare minimum of a power. An idea that a prince from a defeated and almost powerless Hapsburg family, if he is permitted by Russia (and Prussia) to take the PLC throne is capable of performing a miracle that makes it a state with a functional administration and a powerful army belongs to the ASB category because it required 180 degree turn of a collective mindset of the Polish nobility. It goes without saying that this “miracle worker” does not have money to bribe the decision makers and does not have a military force of his own.



Which means that it is looking for getting back Smolensk region and Eastern Ukraine. The areas had been lost when the PLC still was a regional power with a working (if getting obsolete) military system and Tsardom still was operating with a mixture of the newly created modern troops (at the peak up to 60,000) and an old style army. In the mid-18th century, Russian ground forces had 330,000 men, including 172,000 in field units. Not, yet, at the peak of its XVIII performance but already good enough to beat the Ottomans (who managed to beat the Austrians), Swedes and, in few years, to fight Prussians with a considerable success (out of 4 major battles one draw and 3 victories). And the PLC has what? In OTL - nothing worth mentioning and even in alt reality you can’t create an army out of nothing in a very short time with no funds.




Well, Austria is defeated with a loss of at least half of its territories and does not have either a powerful army or the revenue sources allowing to raise it with a predictable future. The PLC does not have a modern army and its ruler has a very limited income. The rulers of these two countries are planning to challenge 2 Great Powers (the term is anachronistic but it reflects situation), Russia and Prussia, backed up by two more serious powers, Wittelsbachs “Empire” and Hungary. Sounds like a perfectly suicidal scenario to me.




Probably I’m missing something fundamental in the logic of this scenario. Taking aside a practical almost impossibility of the PLC having anti-Russian monarch, why exactly two military successful countries one of which is a “regional Great Power” are being afraid of an alliance of two weak neighbors one of which recently suffered a terrible defeat with a loss of a big part of its territory and another is not being considered a serious military factor for the last half a century? Why would a “non-factor” one suddenly develops the overly ambitious plans of a major conquest of a territory from a much stronger neighbor to whom that territory was lost when it was much weaker? Taking into an account that a considerable part of the decision-making group of the PLC does not give a damn about these territories (and that a noticeable segment of it is getting considerable handouts from Russia), why such a suicidal bloodthirstiness?





Sure, there is also army sent to conquer China and a mighty fleet carrying one more army to conquer the Spanish and British colonies in the Americas... 😂

Of course, we are in alt-history but it is supposed to have some link to a reality.

Those are good points you made. Its a good thing I left my scenarios with a little wiggle room
It does mean that in terms of Poland and Austria forming an alliance would still not be able to withstand a concerted invasion by Hungary and Russis-unless they received additional allies. The Turks may have been beaten, but they're not fully broken as they could still draw upon manpower from Anatolia and the Middle East. Sweden could also be motivated to join against Russia for the simple purpose of reclaiming the Baltic territories they lost in the GNW

You've given me quite a good deal to consider/reconsider

 

[GenghisKhanfan]

Hello there
I see this thread has gone a long way but I'd still like to get back to the beginning. There were several plans of reorganizing Europe during WotAS. As mentioned before, I also suspect what possible role Vergennes could have had at the time but never mind. This proposal is quite similar to some other ideas I've read about.
There are some problems to it though. Spain and Sardinia dividing Italy between themselves sounds good but the problem is they couldn't agree on who gets what. And also, Sardinia most certainly did not want to see the Bourbons dominate Italy. The reason they grew so much is that they used their buffer zone position to play off both sides and make small but certain gains. This was an era when the balance of power was the key principle in politics and no one wanted Farnese's sons to take over most of Italy (except Elisabeth herself).
The situation in Germany has some similarities. No one wants to replace powerful, but somewhat troubled Austria with a Bavarian dominance over Germany. Even in OTL, after Frederick II took most of Silesia and had seen the French, Bavarians and Saxons taking Prague and advancing into Austria, he immediately stopped his troops and left the war. At one point, he even offered Maria Theresa an alliance if she would only confirm his conquest. In fact, it was this pause that allowed Austria some breathing room to bounce back and invade Bavaria, which was a complete success.
Basically, to make a plan like this work you need to have five or six countries coordinating and cooperating their invasion and even then it is difficult as hell. The Ottomans failed to take Vienna with massive armies when they were at their prime so a conquest of Vienna by a guy like Charles VII seems a bit impossible.
The failure to coordinate was very obvious. Sardinia immediately refused to join an attack on Austria since they feared Bourbon domination of Italy. Frederick II was in it only for his own interests. Once they were achieved, he will abandon the others no matter what. Saxony was lukewarm from the beginning too. They joined the attack on Bohemia but once they realized they failed to get their connection to Poland, Saxony was on its way out until they even changed sides.
France wasn't even officially at war until 1744. Their support to Bavaria was very significant but they didn't join in full force until after Fleury's death.
If by some miracle, a concentrated attack towards Vienna is organized, be sure the Maritime Powers will move heaven and earth to break it up. They succeeded in 1704 and could do so again. True, Marlborough was gone, but simple things like detaching Prussia from the alliance (which is possible if they promise to guarantee his possession of Silesia with an additional cash incentive) is probably enough to save Vienna. Don't forget, the French and the Bavarians were in Linz and Prague in 1742, but Austrians were invading Alsace in 1744 so I don't think this carving up of the Habsburg Monarchy is as easy as drawing lines on a map

Very true
But the fact that Prussia was willing to have Bavaria and Saxony join in the partition of the Hapsburg Monarchy-by all logic-should not have even happened. Frederick II was obviously using them as pawns to draw the Austrians off, but if in this alternate scenario, they pulled off the surprise victory and opened the way to Vienna, I feel that Frederick II would preferred that his armies marched in, instead of the Bavarians or Saxons, as it would allow him to reduce their victory by awarding them less than they were seeking. Nevertheless, Austria would've been in dire straits because if they had pulled off their victory, Hungary could've used that as an opportunity to push for full independence, which France would've supported because it deprived the Hapsburgs of a major source of cavalry and light infantry

Admittedly, I'm no expert on military tactics, but such a loss as that would no doubt put Austria in a bad situation in regard to Bavaria especially. Bavaria could seize enough Austrian territory to make them a credible axis of leadership among the Catholic states of the HRE and turned the Hohenzollern-Hapsburg rivalry into a Hohenzollern-Wittelsbach one and relegate the Hapsburgs to a barely-significant House. Just this one change would've likely had a major effect on European and world history

 

[GenghisKhanfan]

I'll have two more flashpoints and scenarios written up tomorrow......need to sleep

 

[alexmilman]

Those are good points you made. Its a good thing I left my scenarios with a little wiggle room
It does mean that in terms of Poland and Austria forming an alliance would still not be able to withstand a concerted invasion by Hungary and Russis-unless they received additional allies. The Turks may have been beaten, but they're not fully broken as they could still draw upon manpower from Anatolia and the Middle East. Sweden could also be motivated to join against Russia for the simple purpose of reclaiming the Baltic territories they lost in the GNW

You've given me quite a good deal to consider/reconsider

Sorry, I’m confused: who is going to invade whom? You started with the PLC planning to invade Russia with a purpose to return the territories lost in mid-XVII (century prior to the discussed events) and Austria, supported by the PLC (*), planning to attack Prussia (and Bavaria?) with a purpose to return the lands lost in WoAS. And now they are somehow the victims of a potential Russo-Hungarian invasion purpose of which is absolutely unclear because Hungary got its territories and Russia did not have any claims on the PLC territory until it was forced into the 1st Partition by the joined efforts of Prussia and Austria.

Sweden already tried to return the losses of the GNW, had been beaten in the war of 1741-43 and by the Treaty of Abo got a pro-Russian heir to the throne (uncle of the Russian heir to the throne) who became a king in 1751.

Not sure when and how the Ottomans got into the picture by your scenario but in OTL during that period there were no Russian-Ottoman wars or territorial claims (by the last war fought the Ottomans suffered minimal losses in strategically unimportant area). Government of Empress Elizabeth was not into the anti-Ottoman wars so why would the Ottomans be interested in an aggressive war with the unclear goals?

Then, if the Austrian goal is to get back Silesia and Tyrol, how come that Prussia and Bavaria are absent from the picture?

(*) It probably worth noticing that during the Great Ottoman War Sobiesski managed to raise only approximately 20,000 troops (not counting the Lithuanian army which was looting Hungary) and even then needed to Austrian subsidies as soon as he crossed the border. In your scenario you gave numerous Polish armies marching East and West.

 

[GenghisKhanfan]

Sorry, I’m confused: who is going to invade whom? You started with the PLC planning to invade Russia with a purpose to return the territories lost in mid-XVII (century prior to the discussed events) and Austria, supported by the PLC (*), planning to attack Prussia (and Bavaria?) with a purpose to return the lands lost in WoAS. And now they are somehow the victims of a potential Russo-Hungarian invasion purpose of which is absolutely unclear because Hungary got its territories and Russia did not have any claims on the PLC territory until it was forced into the 1st Partition by the joined efforts of Prussia and Austria.

Sweden already tried to return the losses of the GNW, had been beaten in the war of 1741-43 and by the Treaty of Abo got a pro-Russian heir to the throne (uncle of the Russian heir to the throne) who became a king in 1751.

Not sure when and how the Ottomans got into the picture by your scenario but in OTL during that period there were no Russian-Ottoman wars or territorial claims (by the last war fought the Ottomans suffered minimal losses in strategically unimportant area). Government of Empress Elizabeth was not into the anti-Ottoman wars so why would the Ottomans be interested in an aggressive war with the unclear goals?

Then, if the Austrian goal is to get back Silesia and Tyrol, how come that Prussia and Bavaria are absent from the picture?

(*) It probably worth noticing that during the Great Ottoman War Sobiesski managed to raise only approximately 20,000 troops (not counting the Lithuanian army which was looting Hungary) and even then needed to Austrian subsidies as soon as he crossed the border. In your scenario you gave numerous Polish armies marching East and West.

I fully intend to come back and revisit those questions, and I'm happy that you brought them up. I'll hopefully be able to clear up any confusion. This is exactly the reason I like having these discussions.

On another subject which I did briefly mention before, about doing an alternate timeline or ALT, I have become more convinced to do one as a colaborative effort involving at least one (maybe two) other people who would of course have co-author credit. In fact I prefer that the two or three of us be considered co-authors so that no one person gets too much credit. As to where the POD would happen, I'm almost convinced that this will be a series of PODs instead of a single one, with the final POD being around the time of the War of the Austrian Succession so that I can maintain a link to actual events, but at the same time present one of a possble dozen or more alternate outcomes. I will reread many of the posts others have made and likely contact them by PM to see if they're willing to join in a cooperative. You my friend are at the top of my list, but I will also look at others' responses

 

[Vladivostock]

Very true
But the fact that Prussia was willing to have Bavaria and Saxony join in the partition of the Hapsburg Monarchy-by all logic-should not have even happened. Frederick II was obviously using them as pawns to draw the Austrians off, but if in this alternate scenario, they pulled off the surprise victory and opened the way to Vienna, I feel that Frederick II would preferred that his armies marched in, instead of the Bavarians or Saxons, as it would allow him to reduce their victory by awarding them less than they were seeking. Nevertheless, Austria would've been in dire straits because if they had pulled off their victory, Hungary could've used that as an opportunity to push for full independence, which France would've supported because it deprived the Hapsburgs of a major source of cavalry and light infantry

Admittedly, I'm no expert on military tactics, but such a loss as that would no doubt put Austria in a bad situation in regard to Bavaria especially. Bavaria could seize enough Austrian territory to make them a credible axis of leadership among the Catholic states of the HRE and turned the Hohenzollern-Hapsburg rivalry into a Hohenzollern-Wittelsbach one and relegate the Hapsburgs to a barely-significant House. Just this one change would've likely had a major effect on European and world history

I'm not really getting your whole idea here. You have several chronologies mapped out (somewhat roughly) but I don't see how we're getting there. You are talking about "this scenario" but all that was said is "somehow, Vergennes'plan works and Austria is carved up, Spain and Sardinia divide up Italy, France takes the Austrian Netherlands, Prussia, Bavaria and Saxony divide Bohemia and Austria" There are a lot of things to deal with in the 1740s before Polish or Hungarian reconquests in the 1760s. Like who gets what, how and when. That determines the new relations between these monarchs and the new power politics.

For instance, Prussian conquest of Vienna was never on the table. Conquest of Silesia was a surprise, relatively easy and quick. Actually, it emboldened others, like Bavaria and Saxony to attack, with limited French support because Fleury was not inclined to an all out war. They, in turn, were successful in Upper Austria and Bohemia proper because their attack was quick and they had local support initially, but also because the Austrians had only one real field army at the time and that was tied down fighting the Prussians. Frederick's further campaigns in Bohemia and Moravia were not meant for more conquests but only to secure the possession of Silesia. To take Vienna Frederick would have to take most of the towns and forts in Moravia to secure his communications, move south into the heart of Austria, build several bridges across the Danube to secure his siege lines and then begin the siege of what was one of the biggest cities of central Europe against what would probably be a very numerous and well supplied and firmly resolute garrison with strong fortifications, plenty of heavy artillery, with Austrian troops and Hungarian irregulars attacking his supply lines day and night. Now, as much as the Prussians were capable and disciplined, they were not on this level and neither are their finances, even if they had French subsidies. Bavarians and the French could help but seeing how Fleury was not really committed I don't think it would be enough. Saxons would most likely not contribute much. That is, if all of them together can coordinate and pay for this, which they never could.

And then, what could Frederick gain by taking Vienna? Silesia is secured with much less effort. At best, he could take entire Silesia, rather than most of it and maybe a part of Moravia but an undertaking like this is not worth it. Mind you, in 1740 Prussia is still a second-rate power and not the war machine it was known as later in the 19th century. And Silesia was more than enough to satisfy Fredericks needs right now. Bavaria holds Bohemia and Upper Austria and fighting any further would only serve Bavaria and France. Frederick, a realist pragmatic politician that he was, would not fall for this. In short, maximizing Prussian gains is hard and would be of use only to others, with much more trouble than its worth. One possible result of this could be Frederick's allies turning his back on him and a Habsburg-German-British-Russian coalition being formed to bring him down for being a bit too greedy (similar to SYW). Remember, at this time it is all about the balance between powers.

As for Hungary, the chance for the breaking free is less than minimal at this moment. Nobility was firmly supporting MT since she stepped on the throne. They got some concessions from her and there were no rebels. There were some small local serf rebellions later on but that was nothing serious nor any threat to Vienna. Besides, deposing the Habsburgs in Hungary and creating some kind of "Confederate monarchy/republic" (the idea in Rakoczi's time) could easily result in Hungary becoming a hemmed-in buffer zone between the Ottomans and whoever was the top dog in Germany, being exploited by both sides. Not a good thing for any reconquests in the future.

As for the Ottomans, like mentioned before, they had other things to do and were not planning on fighting Austria at the time.

 

[alexmilman]

I'm not really getting your whole idea here. You have several chronologies mapped out (somewhat roughly) but I don't see how we're getting there. You are talking about "this scenario" but all that was said is "somehow, Vergennes'plan works and Austria is carved up, Spain and Sardinia divide up Italy, France takes the Austrian Netherlands, Prussia, Bavaria and Saxony divide Bohemia and Austria" There are a lot of things to deal with in the 1740s before Polish or Hungarian reconquests in the 1760s. Like who gets what, how and when. That determines the new relations between these monarchs and the new power politics.

For instance, Prussian conquest of Vienna was never on the table. Conquest of Silesia was a surprise, relatively easy and quick. Actually, it emboldened others, like Bavaria and Saxony to attack, with limited French support because Fleury was not inclined to an all out war. They, in turn, were successful in Upper Austria and Bohemia proper because their attack was quick and they had local support initially, but also because the Austrians had only one real field army at the time and that was tied down fighting the Prussians. Frederick's further campaigns in Bohemia and Moravia were not meant for more conquests but only to secure the possession of Silesia. To take Vienna Frederick would have to take most of the towns and forts in Moravia to secure his communications, move south into the heart of Austria, build several bridges across the Danube to secure his siege lines and then begin the siege of what was one of the biggest cities of central Europe against what would probably be a very numerous and well supplied and firmly resolute garrison with strong fortifications, plenty of heavy artillery, with Austrian troops and Hungarian irregulars attacking his supply lines day and night. Now, as much as the Prussians were capable and disciplined, they were not on this level and neither are their finances, even if they had French subsidies. Bavarians and the French could help but seeing how Fleury was not really committed I don't think it would be enough. Saxons would most likely not contribute much. That is, if all of them together can coordinate and pay for this, which they never could.

And then, what could Frederick gain by taking Vienna? Silesia is secured with much less effort. At best, he could take entire Silesia, rather than most of it and maybe a part of Moravia but an undertaking like this is not worth it. Mind you, in 1740 Prussia is still a second-rate power and not the war machine it was known as later in the 19th century. And Silesia was more than enough to satisfy Fredericks needs right now. Bavaria holds Bohemia and Upper Austria and fighting any further would only serve Bavaria and France. Frederick, a realist pragmatic politician that he was, would not fall for this. In short, maximizing Prussian gains is hard and would be of use only to others, with much more trouble than its worth. One possible result of this could be Frederick's allies turning his back on him and a Habsburg-German-British-Russian coalition being formed to bring him down for being a bit too greedy (similar to SYW). Remember, at this time it is all about the balance between powers.

As for Hungary, the chance for the breaking free is less than minimal at this moment. Nobility was firmly supporting MT since she stepped on the throne. They got some concessions from her and there were no rebels. There were some small local serf rebellions later on but that was nothing serious nor any threat to Vienna. Besides, deposing the Habsburgs in Hungary and creating some kind of "Confederate monarchy/republic" (the idea in Rakoczi's time) could easily result in Hungary becoming a hemmed-in buffer zone between the Ottomans and whoever was the top dog in Germany, being exploited by both sides. Not a good thing for any reconquests in the future.

As for the Ottomans, like mentioned before, they had other things to do and were not planning on fighting Austria at the time.

Quite agree. Installing Bavarian Emperor was a relatively harmless thing but dismemberment of the Hapsburg hereditary “empire” was a completely different issue that would disrupt the existing balance of power too much.

A potentially interesting scenario would be Charles VII living much longer and being succeeded as an emperor by his son, Maximilian. In that case we have the Bavarian emperors (who are also Kings of Bohemia) with the powerful Hapsburgs (kings of Hungary, Archdukes of Austria, etc.) and Prussia as a growing power. In theory it would make some sense for a Bavarian Emperor to take Vienna but I’m not sure that the French troops of that time were capable of a successful advance all the way to it and that Bavaria would be able to hold it on its own. In OTL the French had been isolated in Prague and forced to capitulate, most of Bavaria had been occupied by the Austrians and returned only during the 2nd Silesian War when Frederick attacked the Hapsburg possessions. So we would need a completely different war for the things like that to happen.

“Conquering Vienna”, if taken literally as capturing the city during the war was probably technically possible but this would be inevitably a token action like occupation of Berlin by the Russian and Austrian troops during the 7YW: city opens the gates, the foreign troops enter, receive a contribution and get the Hell out ASAP.

Then, we probably have to distinguish the 1st and 2nd Silesian Wars even if the are coming under the same umbrella of the WoAS. During the 1st Russia was still vacillating between pro-French and pro-Austrian policy and engaged in war with Sweden (1741-43). Even as long as the 2nd war was not going well for Frederick Russia remained neutral but as soon as he became successful and attacked Saxony (which potentially impacted Russian interests in the PLC) position of St-Petersburg changed, forcing Frederick to sign Peace of Dresden in 1745. Russian-Austrian alliance for 25 years had been signed in 1746. Now about the truly important factors (aka money 😜). In 1747 Britain promised to pay 100,000 pounds annually for Russian agreement to maintain 30,000 troops in its Baltic provinces (near the Prussian border) to counter Frederick’s possible aggressive actions (nobody fully trusted him maintaining a peace). The next year a new treaty had been signed: for the additional 300,000 pounds per year Russia promised to send additional 30,000 troops for service on the Rhine (“on Mosel or in the Netherlands”). So it is reasonable to assume that if things go worse than in OTL for the Hapsburgs then the Brits would be ready to pay subsidies to Russia earlier than in OTL and this means adding at least 60,000 troops on Austrian side.

 

[GenghisKhanfan]

I'm not really getting your whole idea here. You have several chronologies mapped out (somewhat roughly) but I don't see how we're getting there. You are talking about "this scenario" but all that was said is "somehow, Vergennes'plan works and Austria is carved up, Spain and Sardinia divide up Italy, France takes the Austrian Netherlands, Prussia, Bavaria and Saxony divide Bohemia and Austria" There are a lot of things to deal with in the 1740s before Polish or Hungarian reconquests in the 1760s. Like who gets what, how and when. That determines the new relations between these monarchs and the new power politics.

For instance, Prussian conquest of Vienna was never on the table. Conquest of Silesia was a surprise, relatively easy and quick. Actually, it emboldened others, like Bavaria and Saxony to attack, with limited French support because Fleury was not inclined to an all out war. They, in turn, were successful in Upper Austria and Bohemia proper because their attack was quick and they had local support initially, but also because the Austrians had only one real field army at the time and that was tied down fighting the Prussians. Frederick's further campaigns in Bohemia and Moravia were not meant for more conquests but only to secure the possession of Silesia. To take Vienna Frederick would have to take most of the towns and forts in Moravia to secure his communications, move south into the heart of Austria, build several bridges across the Danube to secure his siege lines and then begin the siege of what was one of the biggest cities of central Europe against what would probably be a very numerous and well supplied and firmly resolute garrison with strong fortifications, plenty of heavy artillery, with Austrian troops and Hungarian irregulars attacking his supply lines day and night. Now, as much as the Prussians were capable and disciplined, they were not on this level and neither are their finances, even if they had French subsidies. Bavarians and the French could help but seeing how Fleury was not really committed I don't think it would be enough. Saxons would most likely not contribute much. That is, if all of them together can coordinate and pay for this, which they never could.

And then, what could Frederick gain by taking Vienna? Silesia is secured with much less effort. At best, he could take entire Silesia, rather than most of it and maybe a part of Moravia but an undertaking like this is not worth it. Mind you, in 1740 Prussia is still a second-rate power and not the war machine it was known as later in the 19th century. And Silesia was more than enough to satisfy Fredericks needs right now. Bavaria holds Bohemia and Upper Austria and fighting any further would only serve Bavaria and France. Frederick, a realist pragmatic politician that he was, would not fall for this. In short, maximizing Prussian gains is hard and would be of use only to others, with much more trouble than its worth. One possible result of this could be Frederick's allies turning his back on him and a Habsburg-German-British-Russian coalition being formed to bring him down for being a bit too greedy (similar to SYW). Remember, at this time it is all about the balance between powers.

As for Hungary, the chance for the breaking free is less than minimal at this moment. Nobility was firmly supporting MT since she stepped on the throne. They got some concessions from her and there were no rebels. There were some small local serf rebellions later on but that was nothing serious nor any threat to Vienna. Besides, deposing the Habsburgs in Hungary and creating some kind of "Confederate monarchy/republic" (the idea in Rakoczi's time) could easily result in Hungary becoming a hemmed-in buffer zone between the Ottomans and whoever was the top dog in Germany, being exploited by both sides. Not a good thing for any reconquests in the future.

As for the Ottomans, like mentioned before, they had other things to do and were not planning on fighting Austria at the time.

Well, to clarify, I never said the Prussians would actually annex Vienna. Think of how Napoleon IOTL occupied/beseiged Vienna and forced the Austrians to come to terms with him. Its in that same sense that the Prussians would march on Vienna. NOT to take and annex it, but to force the Austrians to sue for peace.

Its true that the Hungarian magnates threw their support behind Maria Teresa, but that was only after she made a direct, personal appeal, bearing her son Joseph II on her breast. It was the appeals of a woman and a mother that won them over. Had she not made that direct effort, and had the victories Prussia and her allies won led to far greater results for them (which is the point of this alternate timeline...and the reason I'm discussing it before I consider plotting it out), the magnates would've seized their chance to break free of Hapsburg control. They only really accepted it because it promised them freedom from what they perceived to be oppression by the Islamic Turks.

So to make clear..Prussia would not have annexed Vienna. But with the Saxons in lower Silesia, and a Franco-Bavarian army in occupation of Bohemia and Upper Austria, the way would've been clear for the Prussians to finalize their victory by marching on Vienna and forcing Maria Teresa (who was, remember, only Queen of Bohemia and Hungary*) to accept terms which would've included in all likelihood the Bavarian annexations and recognition of their Imperial status, Prussian control of a greater part of Silesia-Saxony getting what remained, and French conquests in the Low Countries.

* Maria Teresa's future status as Archduchess of Austria would've likely depended on the Bavarians

On another area where there was expressed confusion, the Poland-Austria v Russia-Hungary situation. Allow me to clarify. Poland-Lithuania, with the resources brought by association of some kind with Rump Austria (a Hapsburg prince elected king, a personal union, or even an alliance) would've been in a position to start looking at reclaiming those territories that Russia had seized both during the aftermath of the Time of Troubles and the 'Deluge' (when Swedes, Muscovites and Brandenburgers came very close to partitioning the Commonwealth) Austria's goal would've been (much as IOTL) the reconquest of Silesia and the humbling of Frederick the Great. Plans would be discussed in a series of meetings. BUT though its unlikely-but not impossible-for Russia to know of the discussions, the very fact Poland-Lithuania was in a reform program could only be seen as the ending of any influence St Petersburg had within the Sejm, and Russia would be determined to maintain their influence at any cost. Therefore, they would draw closer to Hungary with the primary objective of ending Poland's reforms and the secondary objective of preventing a military alliance between Austria and Poland because in Russia's eyes, that would be the key step needed before Poland could put its plan into action. AGAIN, it would depend on timing..whether Poland could raise enough troops(possibly even adding Saxons to their army) to be a force substantial enough to be considered by Russia as a threat, whether Russia and Hungary could conclude their campaign against the Ottoman Empire in time to then switch their forces north to confront Austria and Poland, whether either side could win over Prussia and Bavaria to their cause, and ultimately...who makes the first move.
Again, I'm not great military expert-which is why if I decide fully to do an alternate timeline, I would need assistance with that aspect, and why it would be a collaborative work. This is also why, in all these discussions, I've refrained from offering even hunches as to the number of troops, logistical support, stuff like that. I'm more apt at the geopolitical aspects. But I do hope this clears up two of the main sources of confusion, and I'd be happy to attempt to clear up any other areas.

At this point, I feel I need to ask this question:
What would be the most suitable PoD(s) to start from which would provide the means in which the outcome of the War of the Austrian Succession plays out as I have proposed at the beginning? I ask this because I'm more and more convinced to do the timeline, but as has been pointed out already, many of the outcomes I've summarized would either be highly unlikely or outright impossible, which leads me to the conclusion that in order for this timeline to fully take off, there would need to be at least PoD before the war actually happens that alters thegeopolitics enough to make what I summarized at the beginning even plausible (maybe not fully possible, but at least within realistic boundaries). I will admit, I'm a noob when it comes to drafting an alternate timeline, which is the main reason I wanted to sound out my ideas beforehand, so that those who I acknowledge are admittedly much better than I am can point out where I'm going off the edge but also where I'm actually doing good., because that also helps in that I dont honestly feel like such a noob

 

[alexmilman]

On another area where there was expressed confusion, the Poland-Austria v Russia-Hungary situation. Allow me to clarify. Poland-Lithuania, with the resources brought by association of some kind with Rump Austria (a Hapsburg prince elected king, a personal union, or even an alliance) would've been in a position to start looking at reclaiming those territories that Russia had seized both during the aftermath of the Time of Troubles and the 'Deluge' (when Swedes, Muscovites and Brandenburgers came very close to partitioning the Commonwealth)

As I keep repeating (without any obvious result), the PLC with the “rump” Austria would not be in a position to start a war of conquest against the Russian Empire. It would not be in a position to do so even in alliance with OTL “full” Austria.

The PLC did not have “resources” for such a war and a king from the Hapsburg dynasty would not produce some miracle by a fact of his election: the state was dysfunctional and did not have anything resembling an operational army or a government capable or willing to finance such an army. Not to mention the obvious fact that if Austria is hostile to Russia, its candidate would never be permitted to get the PLC throne.

The lands lost by the Truce of Andrusovo (1667) were not the Polish territories ethnically and a revanchist idea that you keep bringing up was not popular among the Polish nobility as bringing nothing but expenses and trouble.

Austria's goal would've been (much as IOTL) the reconquest of Silesia and the humbling of Frederick the Great.

While at that time being in a state of war with Russia? A pure fantasy because in OTL Russian pro-Austrian position was an important factor for Frederick agreeing to make a peace of Dresden and in the 7YW Austria greatly depended upon the Russian military help. So why would a defeated Austria opt for an useless alliance with the PLC at the expense of alienating its Russian ally? The logic is absent.

Plans would be discussed in a series of meetings. BUT though its unlikely-but not impossible-for Russia to know of the discussions, the very fact Poland-Lithuania was in a reform program could only be seen as the ending of any influence St Petersburg had within the Sejm, and Russia would be determined to maintain their influence at any cost.

There could be no reform program at that time and Russian method of dealing with such a potential threat was simple and effective: use a loyal minority in the Sejm to prevent anything from being done and, if this is not enough, invade and deal with the problem. You may look at the biography of Karol Stanisław Radziwiłł «Panie Kochanku» to figure out what would happen even to the most powerful figures of the PLC if they dare to oppose Russia. The lesser figures may easily end up in some not too pleasant part of Siberia.

Again, I'm not great military expert-which is why if I decide fully to do an alternate timeline, I would need assistance with that aspect, and why it would be a collaborative work. This is also why, in all these discussions, I've refrained from offering even hunches as to the number of troops, logistical support, stuff like that. I'm more apt at the geopolitical aspects. But I do hope this clears up two of the main sources of confusion, and I'd be happy to attempt to clear up any other areas.

You don’t need to be a military expert to figure out that a country with de facto zero army realistically does not start a war against a neighbor (A) who has an army of over 300,000, especially when a “zero army” aggressor has a powerful lobby favoring a stronger neighbor (A) and capable, by using the legislative procedures, to block any decision toward creating an army or declaring a war.

The same goes for an alleged ally of a “zero army” aggressor: it is already beaten by a stronger neighbor (B) with a considerable loss of a territory and is planning to regain that territory by ... siding with a “zero army” neighbor in its conflict against (A) instead of siding with (A) against (B) while ignoring “zero” neighbor, as did happen in OTL. In other words, your scenario does not make any practical sense.

 

[GenghisKhanfan]

As I keep repeating (without any obvious result), the PLC with the “rump” Austria would not be in a position to start a war of conquest against the Russian Empire. It would not be in a position to do so even in alliance with OTL “full” Austria.

The PLC did not have “resources” for such a war and a king from the Hapsburg dynasty would not produce some miracle by a fact of his election: the state was dysfunctional and did not have anything resembling an operational army or a government capable or willing to finance such an army. Not to mention the obvious fact that if Austria is hostile to Russia, its candidate would never be permitted to get the PLC throne.

The lands lost by the Truce of Andrusovo (1667) were not the Polish territories ethnically and a revanchist idea that you keep bringing up was not popular among the Polish nobility as bringing nothing but expenses and trouble.


While at that time being in a state of war with Russia? A pure fantasy because in OTL Russian pro-Austrian position was an important factor for Frederick agreeing to make a peace of Dresden and in the 7YW Austria greatly depended upon the Russian military help. So why would a defeated Austria opt for an useless alliance with the PLC at the expense of alienating its Russian ally? The logic is absent.



There could be no reform program at that time and Russian method of dealing with such a potential threat was simple and effective: use a loyal minority in the Sejm to prevent anything from being done and, if this is not enough, invade and deal with the problem. You may look at the biography of Karol Stanisław Radziwiłł «Panie Kochanku» to figure out what would happen even to the most powerful figures of the PLC if they dare to oppose Russia. The lesser figures may easily end up in some not too pleasant part of Siberia.



You don’t need to be a military expert to figure out that a country with de facto zero army realistically does not start a war against a neighbor (A) who has an army of over 300,000, especially when a “zero army” aggressor has a powerful lobby favoring a stronger neighbor (A) and capable, by using the legislative procedures, to block any decision toward creating an army or declaring a war.

The same goes for an alleged ally of a “zero army” aggressor: it is already beaten by a stronger neighbor (B) with a considerable loss of a territory and is planning to regain that territory by ... siding with a “zero army” neighbor in its conflict against (A) instead of siding with (A) against (B) while ignoring “zero” neighbor, as did happen in OTL. In other words, your scenario does not make any practical sense.

WHICH...is why I'm also exploring the idea of a multiple PoD timeline
But again, you make good points, and if I've failed to grasp the impossibility of a Poland-Austria war against Russia, its because I dont always subscribe to practicality. If you think about it, the Swiss should never have been able to defeat the many attempts by the Hapsburgs to bring them to heel in the late 1300s-early 1400s, yet they managed to overcome all the odds against them and force the Hapsburgs to concede defeat. I'm not even remotely suggesting that Poland would ultimately have that same luck against Russia because even if they managed to win a war against them, at some point down the line the Russians would seek to atone for the humiliation of defeat, and should the Austrians be forced to terminate their alliance with Poland, then its days as an independent nation would be numbered.

IOTL, Poland during the many uprisings between 1795 and 1860 (excepting the Napoleonic interlude), they had managed to defeat the Russians in small engagements. It was the overwhelming power of Russia, the tacit consent of the Prussians and Austrians, and the inability of Britain and France that ultimately proved fatal to Polish nationalist dreams. So yea, I cling to the idea of a Poland-Austria alliance directed mainly at Russia and Prussia...but I haven't forgotten the fact that even with the victories they could potentially win, later on and likely as a result of a new war, Russia would ultimate defeat Poland and claim their prize.

Also, the idea of Austria going to war with Bavaria while also at war with Russia was but one possibility. The others were also listed: Bavaria and Austria would either come to an agreement and forge closer ties, or Bavaria would declare neutrality in order not to offend Austria or Russia, leaving them to fight it out on their own. While you make a good point in that Maria Theresa was still clinging to the association with Russia as a means of countering Frederick the Great, both Joseph II and Leopold II were frustrated by the alliance because it ultimately forced them to commit troops to the Ottoman front at a time when Frederick William III was already looking to come to terms with the Hapsburgs once and for all. It was only the outbreak of the French Revolution that forced Austria and Prussia to bury the hatchet and present a common front against the Revolutionaries in France, giving Catherine II the opening to deal with the Polish reform movement of May 3rd on her own.

In any event, I'm seriously gonna plan on at least three PoDs for the timeline, though it may take more (and if it does, so be it)

 

[alexmilman]

WHICH...is why I'm also exploring the idea of a multiple PoD timeline
But again, you make good points, and if I've failed to grasp the impossibility of a Poland-Austria war against Russia, its because I dont always subscribe to practicality. If you think about it, the Swiss should never have been able to defeat the many attempts by the Hapsburgs to bring them to heel in the late 1300s-early 1400s, yet they managed to overcome all the odds against them and force the Hapsburgs to concede defeat.

Actually, this is a bad example because during that period the Swiss could and did master a much bigger and stronger military force than any of their opponents, including the Hapsburgs: they could mobilize up to 10% of their population and their system of the pikemen columns was tactically superior to the feudal militias of the Hapsburgs and Burgundian Valois. Which was opposite to the PLC case because in the XVII-XVIII it could raise the armies numerically inferior to those of their opponents and, by 1700 or even earlier, tactically obsolete.

I'm not even remotely suggesting that Poland would ultimately have that same luck against Russia because even if they managed to win a war against them, at some point down the line the Russians would seek to atone for the humiliation of defeat, and should the Austrians be forced to terminate their alliance with Poland, then its days as an independent nation would be numbered.

This is not an issue I was talking about. My point that in the XVIII century nobody marginally sane in the PLC would seriously contemplate reconquest of the Eastern Ukraine.

IOTL, Poland during the many uprisings between 1795 and 1860 (excepting the Napoleonic interlude), they had managed to defeat the Russians in small engagements.

See above. You are talking about the defensive actions: in all these cases the Poles had been fighting on their own territory and their purpose was to defend or regain its independence, not to get engaged in a conquest.

As for Austria, war with Russia simply did not make practical sense because Austria was not interested in the Russian-held territories and vise versa.

 

[GenghisKhanfan]

I will not post again until Monday as I will be getting ready to go on vacation in north Georgia (Dahlonega mostly). HOWEVER, as I have no intention of abandoning my idea of an alternate War of the Austrian Succession despite the fact I'm clearly lacking in critical information, I will open up discussion on the possibility of a multiple PoD situation in order to try to be more realistic (or as this is an alternate timeline) a more plausible one (while alternate timelines do have a basis in reality, the fact they're alternate means that reality can be stretched within plausible boundaries). That said, I'm also wishing to continue the discussion on the flashpoints I listed a few pages back (and please lets get more people involved, because as much as I enjoy constructive debating and criticism, when the same one or two people respond, it tends to feel stale-no offense meant).

I would like to find a suitable point for a PoD for each of these countries:
1) Poland-Lithuania
2) Austria
3) Brandenburg-Prussia (later Prussia)
4) Muscovy (Russia)
5) Ottoman Empire
6) France
7) England (Great Britain)
8) Spain
9) The Holy Roman Empire (yes, ALL of it)
10) Bavaria
If it requires more than one PoD, that's fine. Once I have that available, I will attempt to forge them into a backstory that will make the results of the alternate WoAS more plausible. I will begin a separate thread (with a link to this one) for the actual timeline. As I still wish this to be a collaborative work, I will also very soon be seeking potential co-authors. Until Monday, however, I will not reply to any posts left here because-again-I will be preparing for my vacation during the week of June 7-12