WI: Germany stays balkanized

I agree, though those parts the kingdom of Saxony lost to Prussia might be returned. Finally Schleswig-Holstein might be given to the house of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Augustenburg as ruling prince (titled duke).

Pretty much my picture. Basically I envisage something a lot like Tilsit, except that Prussia loses Silesia while keeping Danzig and Posen, rather than vice versa. I assume Austria won't disturb the current division of Poland, for fear of upsetting the Tsar.

Napoleon III's attitude seems to have been that he would accept changes that "did not upset the European balance of power". This would seem to imply that he was ok with the Habsburgs making gains in Germany to balance their recent losses in Italy - but not more. So if Austria writes off Lombardy and throws in Venetia as well, she is ok to take Silesia in lieu, while the ex-GDs of Tuscany and Modena may acquire new states of similar size to their old ones. He also favoured strengthening Germany's "middling" states, which implies restoring Saxony to its 1813 borders, while the rest of Prussia west of the Elbe is shared out among Hanover, Wurttemburg and Bavaria.
 
IMO they would at least try to preserve a personal union with real royal prerogatives. Hungary might be an independent country in name, but the royal government will keep its politics in line with Vienna's wishes.


It doesn't have to be even nominally independent.

The proposed Reform Act of 1863 included the following provision for the lower house of a Legislature.

" A Versammlung der Bundesabgeordneten (assembly of federal delegates) will have 302 members. 75 will be elected by the Austrian Reichsrath out of its members from the area of the GC, 75 by the Prussian Landtag in the same way, the other by the parliamentary assemblies of the smaller member: 27 by Bavaria, 15 each by Saxony, Hanover, Württemberg, 12 by Baden 12, 9 each by the Hesses, 5 by Holstein und Lauenburg 5, 4 by Luxemburg und Limburg, 3 by Brunswick, 6 together by the Mecklenburgs, 4 by Nassau, 3 by Saxe-Weimar, 2 each by Saxe-Meiningen, Saxe-Altenburg and Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, 3 by Oldenburg, 2 by Anhalt, 2 by Hamburg, 1 each by the other states and cities.
The delegates are not bound to instrictions by their electing bodies. They will receive allowances and expenses. " [1]

This clearly envisges the possibility of member states posessing territories outside the borders of the GC, and even that such "non-German" territories might be represented in the State Parliament. Hence the provisioin that any delegates sent to Frankfurt must be from constituencies within those borders. There doesn't seem to be any requirement that links between "German" and "non-German" territories must be purely personal. That would seem to be left to the discretion of the individual Prince.

Incidentally, this arrangement would result in the Assembly containing a big block of Liberals sent by the Prussian Parliament. Presumably Franz Josef would be no happier about that than King Wilhelm, which might serve to push the two monarchs closer together.


[1] Contributed by Westphalian on the parallel thread re 1863 Reform Act of the German Confederation.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't have to be even nominally independent.

The proposed Reform Act of 1863 included the following provision for the lower house of a Legislature.

" A Versammlung der Bundesabgeordneten (assembly of federal delegates) will have 302 members. 75 will be elected by the Austrian Reichsrath out of its members from the area of the GC, 75 by the Prussian Landtag in the same way...
This clearly envisges the possibility of member states posessing territories outside the borders of the GC, and even that such "non-German" territories might be represented in the State Parliament. Hence the provisioin that any delegates sent to Frankfurt must be from constituencies within those borders. There doesn't seem to be any requirement that links between "German" and "non-German" territories must be purely personal. That would seem to be left to the discretion of the individual Prince.

That works as long as the member states of the GC are themselves sovereign and the GC isn't.

Any devolution of sovereignty to the GC results in a bizarre condition in which the Kingdom of Prussia (for instance) is sovereign in Warthegau and Prussia, but subject to the GC in Brandenburg, Silesia, Pomerania, and Rheinland-Westphalia.

Prussia united most of Germany by replacing the GC with its own supremacy, and incorporated those additional territories, which was easily within its power.

The proposal is that Austria, even if it defeated Prussia in 1866, could not unite Germany under its control, because it would have to include Hungary.

Hungary would not consent to be part of sovereign Germany, nor would German nationalists want Hungary included.

So the Hapsburg Emperor can either rule all of Germany, or rule Hungary - he cannot do both. Except by having only a personal union with Hungary.
 
So the Hapsburg Emperor can either rule all of Germany, or rule Hungary - he cannot do both. Except by having only a personal union with Hungary.


Why not?

So long as Hungary isn't represented in the German Assembly (hence has no say over the internal affairs of Germany) the Germans aren't going to mind. And if Austria has the strength of all Germany to call upon, it isn't going to matter what the Hungarians think.

Is the situation any different from if Austria were to acquire African colonies? She could give them representation in the Vienna Reichsrat if she chose, but they wouldn't have seats in the Frankfurt Assembly. Ditto for Hungary and Galicia.
 
Why not?

So long as Hungary isn't represented in the German Assembly (hence has no say over the internal affairs of Germany) the Germans aren't going to mind. And if Austria has the strength of all Germany to call upon, it isn't going to matter what the Hungarians think.

Is the situation any different from if Austria were to acquire African colonies? She could give them representation in the Vienna Reichsrat if she chose, but they wouldn't have seats in the Frankfurt Assembly. Ditto for Hungary and Galicia.

Hungary might have accepted a personal union, I would be extremely shocked if after 1848, she accepted even the slightest hint of that.
 
Hungary might have accepted a personal union, I would be extremely shocked if after 1848, she accepted even the slightest hint of that.


Does Hungary get a choice?

For a decade after 1849 she was governed under martial law with no self-rule of any kind. This was grudgingly relaxed after Austria's defeat in the 1859 War, but that change ain't irreversible. If Franz Josef gets the kind of power that leading a more united Germany would give him, then expect the Magyars to be put in their place toot sweet.

Keep also in mind that Magyars are only about half the population of Hungary, a fact which made no little contribution to their defeat in 1849. That's still just as true, and the reform of the DB will make Austria more powerful than a decade earlier, so the minorities are even more likely to join the winning side. If the Magyars get uppity, in this situation expect Vilagos all over again, and quicker this time.
 
There is another interesting aspect:

Depending on the exact PoD (1863 or 1866 or inbetween) Austria might still own the Venetia.

How wealthy was Venetia in that time? On one hand, I have read that before 1859, Lombardo-Venetia paid nearly one third of the taxes of all Habsburg domains together. On the other hand, Venetia in the late 19th century is often descibed as very poor, leading to very high emigration. Would it have been a benefit or a drain for the Habesburg finances?

Is there any chance that a Kingdom on Venetia-Istria-Dalmatia in personal union with Austria would have developed a separate cultural and linguistic identity from (the rest of) Italy?
 
Does Hungary get a choice?

For a decade after 1849 she was governed under martial law with no self-rule of any kind. This was grudgingly relaxed after Austria's defeat in the 1859 War, but that change ain't irreversible. If Franz Josef gets the kind of power that leading a more united Germany would give him, then expect the Magyars to be put in their place toot sweet.

Keep also in mind that Magyars are only about half the population of Hungary, a fact which made no little contribution to their defeat in 1849. That's still just as true, and the reform of the DB will make Austria more powerful than a decade earlier, so the minorities are even more likely to join the winning side. If the Magyars get uppity, in this situation expect Vilagos all over again, and quicker this time.

But is that not moving several steps beyond "non unification". In fact, moving to a "Germany unified under Austria" scenario. The OP was "Germany remains Balkanised"

We may surely assume that Austria did not believe that she had the capability to militarily subjugate Hungary OTL , and hold it down. Simply because, if Austria could have done it , she would have.

Austria in a non-unified Germany is not going to have any more capability. If a "non-Unified but Austria is primus inter pares " scenario , a zapped up Confederation, where Austria does not unilaterally command all the armed forces of Germany , then it is hard to see why the other German states would agree to allow Austria to use the "Confederate" army to make herself stronger. It would certainly be to Prussia's interest to NOT agree to that, and even Bavaria would probably not be willing. "If Hungary now, will we be next ?". Austria had often looked hungrily (pun intended!) at Bavaria.

Certainly if somehow Austria (instead of Prussia) becomes leader of a unified, militaristic , pan-German state then Hungary (and a number of other states) might be reduced to subserviency in a *German Reich. But that would take a /lot/ of changes, some of which seem very unlikely indeed.
 
Austria in a non-unified Germany is not going to have any more capability. If a "non-Unified but Austria is primus inter pares " scenario , a zapped up Confederation, where Austria does not unilaterally command all the armed forces of Germany , then it is hard to see why the other German states would agree to allow Austria to use the "Confederate" army to make herself stronger. It would certainly be to Prussia's interest to NOT agree to that, and even Bavaria would probably not be willing. "If Hungary now, will we be next ?". Austria had often looked hungrily (pun intended!) at Bavaria.


Depends how King Wilhelm looks at the matter.

Remember the background. He's in a bitter quarrel with the Prussian Parliament over the military service issue, and seems to have convinced himself that his throne is in danger. With hindsight, this danger seems at least exaggerated, if indeed it existed at all, but it looked real to the King, who in conversations with Bismarck reportedly drew comparisons with Strafford and Charles I.

Given this belief, I can well imagine Wilhelm (with no Bismarck around) signing up to an agreement that he and Franz Josef would support each other against insurrection. And if Prussia and Austria are agreed, the other states are pretty certain to come aboard.

This doesn't of course mean that the reform is in the bag. If Wilhelm and FJ can't agree on the command of Confederate forces, it could all still fall through even without Bismarck. But if Wilhelm vetoes it, he will do so for his own purely Prussian (and probably purely military) reasons. I don't see him worrying much over technical points about the status of Hungary and Galicia. In 1863 that's the least of his concerns.
 
I'm assuming that in that scenario it works on the basis that each state retains command of its own army , but with a "If Germany is in danger everybody has to pitch in" deal . Under that scenario, Austria could use its own army, independently in Hungary, or the Balkans (for example). Or, try to get some or all of the other German states to pitch in .

If there is a unified army with a single permanent commander, then that is really a unified German state. I can't see that happening with Austria in charge unless Prussia was well and truly knocked out. Some sort of massive defeat, and probably territory stripping.

What would hold Prussia back, would be that if FJ gets Hungary well and truly brought into line, that makes him (FJ) more powerful. Which makes Wilhelm, in comparison, less powerful. He won't want that . Bavaria, same problem. Smaller states probably don't care. I agree that the most convincing argument would be "We Kings need to stick together against these Republican rabble rousers. All for one and one for all" argument. That would be even more convincing to the smaller states.

So on that basis could there be some sort of agreement like What Metternich tried to make the "concert of Europe" at the Congress of Verona into, a sort of mutual defence pact for Kings against revolutions ? It worked for Spain in 1823 and then sort of lost commitment. Such a "Concert" could include other states, which solves the Hungary issue, and would probably tend to keep Germany balkanised, by more or less guaranteeing the smaller states. Arguably, the best time for that would be some time in the 1850s, after the scares of 1848. However, if Sadowa happens as OTL, (nothing in a *"Concert" to prevent it ) then Prussia goes on as OTL. What if Russia not just guaranteed the sovereignty of the small German states but mandated their sovereignty. The states in the *"Concert* could not even give up their Koniglich sovereignty willingly. Easily justified , to prevent revolutionaries demanding "voluntary" sacrifices. ISTR something along those lines actually happened at Frankfurt in 1848. ? It would be in his (The Czar's) interest to keep Germany non-unified, and as part of a *"Concert" agreement it would seem legitimate. Then even if the Franco-German war happens in 1870, Russia could say "No unification". Which was the OP challenge

It occurs to me that one thing could impel Austria to make a play for German hegemony (not saying it would be successful, mind) , is if the Hapsburgs actually lost Hungary in 1848 (or whenever). No Hungary, being the chief cheese in Germany seems more attractive. Sort of consolation prize. That wasn't the OP challenge, though , so it's off topic.
 
Last edited:
Getting back to the OP, things could get interesting in 1877/8.


OTL, Austria-Hungary sat out the Russo-Turkish War, though joining GB to defeat Russia diplomatically and undo the Treaty of San Stefano. However, this wasn't inevitable. While the Hungarians were screaming for war against Russia, most of the Austrian army chiefs (who counted for a lot with Franz Josef) would sooner have gone with Russia against Turkey, since for them the Turks were a traditional foe in a way that the Russians weren't.


Well, Germany remaining disunited implies no war in 1866, since that was what really accomplished unification. 1870 just served to bring the last three states on board. No defeat in 1866 means no Ausgleich in 1867, and a Hungary with, at any rate, substantially less political clout than OTL, and most probably no Andrassy at the Foreign Office. So maybe the Generals get their way, and Russia and Austria join forces to sort out the Turks. That probably means the near total eviction of the Turks from Europe, though they may hang on to Eastern Thrace. Subsequent history could get quite interesting.
 
A surviving GC with a mid-1860's PoD creates another interesting butterfly: the quasi-unified Italy lacking the Papal States and Austrian Venetia.

I can see at least most of the Papal States going eventually but Venetia can end up as "Italian" as Corsica is now (or less so).
 
Why not?

So long as Hungary isn't represented in the German Assembly (hence has no say over the internal affairs of Germany) the Germans aren't going to mind. And if Austria has the strength of all Germany to call upon, it isn't going to matter what the Hungarians think.

They are going to mind spending blood and treasure to hold Hungary in subjugation to Austro-Germany.

Austro-Germany would be a constitutional monarchy, dominated by German nationalists. For them, Hapsburg rule over Hungary would be a non-issue.
 
They are going to mind spending blood and treasure to hold Hungary in subjugation to Austro-Germany.

Austro-Germany would be a constitutional monarchy, dominated by German nationalists. For them, Hapsburg rule over Hungary would be a non-issue.


Not if they see Austria as a German state ruling over non-Germans. German nationalists rarely had a problem with that.
 
Last edited:
Incidentally, this arrangement would result in the Assembly containing a big block of Liberals sent by the Prussian Parliament. Presumably Franz Josef would be no happier about that than King Wilhelm, which might serve to push the two monarchs closer together.


Actually, further googling suggests that I may have oversimplified things.
If the site at

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&d=OW18631030.2.11

can be believed, the Reform Act (or at least Franz Josef's original proposal - it might get modified before adoption) provided that if a State had a bicameral legislature, then the Lower House should elect two-thirds of the Deputies, and the Upper House one-third.

In the case of Prussia, this means that the liberal Landtag would choose only 50 of her Deputies, while the far more conservative House of Peers would pick the other 25.

Clearly Franz Josef was taking no chances on too much democracy. However, given Wilhelm's current relations with the Landtag, it might have suited him as well. I can foresee a lot of demands for further reform, though.
 
There could be important consequences on the naval front.

Prussia, TTL, will have about 33 million people, out of about 63 million non-Austrian Germans [1] by the early 1900s, so king (not Kaiser) Wilhelm II may be less inclined to enter any naval races. Apart from a solitary base at Wilhelmshaven, Prussia's only coastline is on the Baltic, and it probably doesn't own the Kiel Canal, if that exists. So Tirpitz' career is likely to be a whole lot less impressive.

[1] Assuming Prussia's borders are still those of 1863, and that Alsace-Lorraine has remained French, but that Schleswig-Holstein has still become German.
 
Well, if the Prussians lose at the Battle of Königgrätz, then the Austrians would win the Austro-Prussian War, ending with a disgraced Prussia, and a surviving, Austrian-controlled German Confederation, without the possible threat of a looming Prussia.

Austria was never as committed to Pan-Germanism compared to the likes of Prussia, so Germany would remain Balkanised.

EDIT: After that, however, is another story altogether. With no German Empire, there would be no Franco-Prussian War, so complete Italian Unification will be delayed, with there still being French Troops garrisoned in the Papal States. Other than that, I'm not sure.
 
Last edited:
JedidiahStott said:
What if Russia not just guaranteed the sovereignty of the small German states but mandated their sovereignty. ...Then even if the Franco-German war happens in 1870, Russia could say "No unification".
This one really fascinates me.:cool::cool: Does this result in no Franco-Russian alliance?

Does this, furthermore, prevent the Dreibund after the Sino-Japanese War?:cool: This makes Japan less isolated & less hostile to Western powers.

It looks pretty obvious there'd be no pre-*WW1 naval arms race, which could butterfly WW1 & WW2 (absent French or *German revanchism).

If Russia is more influential, does this encourage Britain to try & limit her power by allying with more German states, & to maintain the treaty with Japan? Does this increase tension with Turkey?

I wonder, too, about the effect of a more powerful France, were that possible. Can this prevent the creation of the GC to begin with? Or the creation of the Zollverein (depending on how far back the increased power is)?
 
It occurs to me that , if the idea of Russia guaranteeing and mandating the sovereignty of the smaller German states were to take place (it's not quite ASB, in 1849 a lot of the smaller states would have been very pleased to have someone to protect them from their own liberals), then it could lead to a Polandisation of Germany, with the various smaller states becoming client states of either Russia, Austria , or France. And perhaps Prussia , if Prussia remained a significant power. Maybe even eventually a partition of Germany.
 
Top