Emasculated Prussia in the 19th Century?

[JonasResende]

Okay, so it won't be getting so emasculated. just a touch.

OTL the king of Saxony/Grand Duke of Warsaw's unwillingness to jump from the Napoleonic ship led to Prussia being allowed to annex large parts of Saxony (which they actually wanted, as opposed to the Rhineland which they didn't).

But say the king of Saxony suffers from a hunting/military accident that leaves him incapacitated for a while, and the Regent - who I assume would be his brother - jumps the French ship around the same time as the Bavarians. Saxony however, is cautious, it doesn't declare for the Allies immediately after abandoning Napoléon, but instead opts for neutrality until it's certain which way the wind is blowing.

Does Saxony get punished for acting the same way as Bavaria or any of the other German states?
And what of Prussia and the Rhineland? Prussia doesn't want it. Austria doesn't want it. The Netherlands wants it (they wanna connect their state in the Low Countries with the duchy of Nassau in Germany), but no one's biting.
And how does not acquiring large parts of Electoral/Royal Saxony (IDK if they got hold of the silver mines and the coal fields) affect Prussia in the 19th century?
Will the Allies have to take land elsewhere (where?) or does Alexander I simply say to Friedrich Wilhelm III 'sorry, old boy, can't do anything' (since he's not likely to give up his gains in Poland so the king of Prussia can be compensated).

Please discuss.

 

[JonasResende]

Sorry for the double post, but basically what I'm wondering is how this would affect the future of Germany in the 19th century. Prussia is unlikely to be as strong as she was OTL, but let's face it, in the 18th century Prussia had a knack for being able to punch above her weight-class (before the army ran to seed under Friedrich Wilhelms II, III, and IV). Munich and Dresden can just as easily be two counter-poles to Berlin in TTL. OTL Saxony stayed close to Prussia in the 19th century, but in the 17th and 18th had been more pro-Austrian, while Bavaria tended to be anti-Austrian/independentist until 1777, but pro-Austrian or at least Austrian-friendly in the 19th century. So does this mean a different unification (maybe a Grossdeutschland? or a Kleindeutschland with a Wettin/Wittelsbach emperor?) or simply no unification at all?

 

[JackLumber]

Sorry for the double post, but basically what I'm wondering is how this would affect the future of Germany in the 19th century. Prussia is unlikely to be as strong as she was OTL, but let's face it, in the 18th century Prussia had a knack for being able to punch above her weight-class (before the army ran to seed under Friedrich Wilhelms II, III, and IV). Munich and Dresden can just as easily be two counter-poles to Berlin in TTL. OTL Saxony stayed close to Prussia in the 19th century, but in the 17th and 18th had been more pro-Austrian, while Bavaria tended to be anti-Austrian/independentist until 1777, but pro-Austrian or at least Austrian-friendly in the 19th century. So does this mean a different unification (maybe a Grossdeutschland? or a Kleindeutschland with a Wettin/Wittelsbach emperor?) or simply no unification at all?

Prussia will get the Rhineland whether they want it or not because the British wanted them to have it, you have made Prussia slightly weaker but I doubt by enough to change much about the course of history.

 

[dcontreras]

True the British wanted Prussia to have the Rhineland, to create a buffer between France and the rest of Europe, but in retrospect, Prussia's new geographical presence in the western part of Europe as well as its new presence in strategical areas of Germany might sit well as the 1850's and 1860's roll around and give Bismarck and the Prussians some advantages once they begin the process of unification of Germany. Remember, they now will be present in areas that once were exclusive only to the Austrians.

 

[Minchandre]

Prussia will get the Rhineland whether they want it or not because the British wanted them to have it, you have made Prussia slightly weaker but I doubt by enough to change much about the course of history.

I always wondered why the British felt the need to staple the Rhineland onto Prussia; why not just establish it as its own buffer state? Or maybe staple it onto the one German state they know will be loyal: Hanover.

 

[Mikestone8]

Prussia will still have a province on the Rhine, since most of Westphalia already belonged to her prewar, and will presumably be restored. For the rst, maybe the King of Denmark cops it even worse than OTL, and Prussia takes all or part of Schleswig-Holstein.

 

[dcontreras]

But the Austrian Netherlands will be handed over to the Dutch if I am correct. (Later to become of Belgium.) So Austrian presence becomes less in that area an thus the presence of Prussia even more so. If I am wrong please let me know.

 

[JackLumber]

I always wondered why the British felt the need to staple the Rhineland onto Prussia; why not just establish it as its own buffer state? Or maybe staple it onto the one German state they know will be loyal: Hanover.

Because they didn't want a run of the mill buffer states, they wanted someone who could make the french think twice about invading to begin with but not someone already strong enough that this additional territory could make them a threat (ie make them strong enough to dominate the continent) in the minds of the British Prussia was the only option for this.

 

[Saci]

Prussia is going to be compensated any way or the other. If you block the annexation of large swats of Saxony it's probably Prussia would receive even more land around the Rhineland.

 

[dcontreras]

Because they didn't want a run of the mill buffer states, they wanted someone who could make the french think twice about invading to begin with but not someone already strong enough that this additional territory could make them a threat (ie make them strong enough to dominate the continent) in the minds of the British Prussia was the only option for this.

Ironic. Prussia will do exactly that. As the unifier of Germany, they will become a dominant factor in Europe.

 

[Minchandre]

Because they didn't want a run of the mill buffer states, they wanted someone who could make the french think twice about invading to begin with but not someone already strong enough that this additional territory could make them a threat (ie make them strong enough to dominate the continent) in the minds of the British Prussia was the only option for this.

And I guess using Hanover wouldn't be amenable to the UK's favorite game of "let's you and him fight".

 

[Larus Marinus]

Hanover already had a nasty habit of being invaded and overrun in any (continental) war Britain got involved in. It's not exactly good buffer state material.

 

[JackLumber]

Ironic. Prussia will do exactly that. As the unifier of Germany, they will become a dominant factor in Europe.

It was rather ironic but no one at the time foresaw the beast Prussia would become.

 

[dcontreras]

It was rather ironic but no one at the time foresaw the beast Prussia would become.

I think the growth of Nationalism prior to, during, and after the Revolutions of 1848 helped Prussia more so than Austria. The Hapsburg's were so tied to their pre-French Revolutionary philosophies and practices of dynastic territories, they failed to truly grasp the growth and popularity of German Nationalism. Too bad for them because I think for most of German history, the German people, who tended to be conservative in their "traditions" would have preferred the Hapsburg's to the Hohenzollerns. The Hapsburg's, the Metternich's of Austria just never thought the German people would prefer a "German" Nation and needs to the traditional dynastic loyalties the Hapsburg's assumed they had to themselves.

You would think the Frankfurt Assembly's offer of an Imperial Crown to Prussian King Frederick Wilhelm IV instead of a young Austrian Emperor Franz Josef I would have opened their eyes.

 

[Larus Marinus]

You would think the Frankfurt Assembly's offer of an Imperial Crown to Prussian King Frederick Wilhelm IV instead of a young Austrian Emperor Franz Josef I would have opened their eyes.

It's worth noting, however, that the title of Imperial regent was offered to (and accepted by) a Habsburg archduke over half a year before the crown was ever offered to the king of Prussia.

John of Austria seems to have been a bit of a black sheep though, given his liberal (by Habsburg standards) leanings and whatnot.

 

[dcontreras]

Thanks for the noting. But during the Revolutions of 1848, while all areas of the Austrian Empire exploded in revolt, Germany, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Bohemia, you name it, any member of the Hapsburgs were very likely to do anything to save their necks. (All European Royalty still had nightmares of Louis XVI's 1793 execution in the midst of the French Revolution.)

 

[JonasResende]

I'm not so sure that in 1815 anyone could have foreseen that Prussia would've united Germany, at least, that's my opinion. Bavaria could've been just as likely a candidate. I once read in the biography Der Traum König (on Ludwig II) that he, Ludwig, actually protested at Prussia's unifying of Germany, as well as the title of German Emperor, which he believed the Hohenzollerns had no right to, since he believed it should belong to the Habsburgs or the Wittelsbachs. Now, Bismarck merely bought Ludwig off by settling his debts (which is what you tend to incur when running up massive castles out of your private fortune), and promising him that the Hohenzollerns would alternate with the Wittelsbachs the title of 'German Emperor'.

Nor was Ludwig the only German prince who took umbrage at the Hohenzollern imperial title. When a duke of somewhere (I can't remember where) was summoned to the court in Berlin to pay his respects to the new German Kaiser Wilhelm II, he replied that "the Hohenzollerns were mushrooms, sprung up in a night, and if any one should be paying respects, it was the kaiser to him" he also carried the mushroom metaphor further saying "and like mushrooms, they are indigestable to many".

 

[dcontreras]

I'm not so sure that in 1815 anyone could have foreseen that Prussia would've united Germany, at least, that's my opinion. Bavaria could've been just as likely a candidate. I once read in the biography Der Traum König (on Ludwig II) that he, Ludwig, actually protested at Prussia's unifying of Germany, as well as the title of German Emperor, which he believed the Hohenzollerns had no right to, since he believed it should belong to the Habsburgs or the Wittelsbachs. Now, Bismarck merely bought Ludwig off by settling his debts (which is what you tend to incur when running up massive castles out of your private fortune), and promising him that the Hohenzollerns would alternate with the Wittelsbachs the title of 'German Emperor'.

Nor was Ludwig the only German prince who took umbrage at the Hohenzollern imperial title. When a duke of somewhere (I can't remember where) was summoned to the court in Berlin to pay his respects to the new German Kaiser Wilhelm II, he replied that "the Hohenzollerns were mushrooms, sprung up in a night, and if any one should be paying respects, it was the kaiser to him" he also carried the mushroom metaphor further saying "and like mushrooms, they are indigestable to many".

BY 1871 the Prussians had won the right by arms to be paid homage as the leaders of the new Empire with their King's as Kaiser. Sort of like the bully threatening to beat you to a pulp if you don't be his friend.

Sort of like Trump is doing to the Republican Party in the US. (Sorry don't mean to digress. Just couldn't refrain.)

 

[JackLumber]

I'm not so sure that in 1815 anyone could have foreseen that Prussia would've united Germany, at least, that's my opinion. Bavaria could've been just as likely a candidate. I once read in the biography Der Traum König (on Ludwig II) that he, Ludwig, actually protested at Prussia's unifying of Germany, as well as the title of German Emperor, which he believed the Hohenzollerns had no right to, since he believed it should belong to the Habsburgs or the Wittelsbachs. Now, Bismarck merely bought Ludwig off by settling his debts (which is what you tend to incur when running up massive castles out of your private fortune), and promising him that the Hohenzollerns would alternate with the Wittelsbachs the title of 'German Emperor'.

Nor was Ludwig the only German prince who took umbrage at the Hohenzollern imperial title. When a duke of somewhere (I can't remember where) was summoned to the court in Berlin to pay his respects to the new German Kaiser Wilhelm II, he replied that "the Hohenzollerns were mushrooms, sprung up in a night, and if any one should be paying respects, it was the kaiser to him" he also carried the mushroom metaphor further saying "and like mushrooms, they are indigestable to many".

Seems like a terribly unwise attitude to have towards the man with the most powerful army in europe

 

[JackLumber]

Besides the Wittelsbachs had fairly large and wealthy holdings throughout history and what did they ever do with it? The Hohenzollerns were given a sandbox and a slice of the Baltic and they seized power by the throat.
The Wittelsbachs are a bunch of under achieving losers.