PC: Bavaria Swapped for the Austrian Netherlands, 1740-1745

[isabella]

My bad. But the argument still stands that with a marriage less than two months old no one's going to be looking at a French match for Maria Antonia at the time. Max? Sure. He gets Madame Henriette or Madame Adélaïde (Louis was attached to Henriette, and there's thought that had she lived, Madame de Pompadour would never have come to assert the level of influence - or rather, that she would've been "balanced out" by Henriette - she did.

Oh, yes that is guaranteed, at the start would be planned only the wedding between Max and Adelaide but once the Dauphin became widowed Maria Antonia would be the most logical match for him

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

Oh, yes that is guaranteed, at the start would be planned only the wedding between Max and Adelaide but once the Dauphin became widowed Maria Antonia would be the most logical match for him

Assuming that she is still single or that the dauphin is still widowed on schedule. If Maria Teresa lasts until, say, 1750, no way they haven't found an alternative candidate for Maria Antonia by then. Admittedly, there is a shortage of candidates, but matches to Savoy, or her OTL one to Saxony, for instance, are still possible. George II was looking - in the beginning of the 1740s for a Catholic bride for the duke of Cumberland (either an Este or a Savoyard princess) as a way of separating Britain and Hannover by violating the Act of Union. Unfortunately, the '45 intervened, and no Catholic girl wanted to marry "the butcher".
Uprising was in August 1745, (after Pfaffenhofen in April), so things might go differently (as in the rising flames out like the 1715 or 1719) and Maria Antonia could end up married to Cumberland (a match with the Netherlands makes more sense than a match with Modena or Savoy) or in the event of a victory, to Bonnie Prince Charlie.

 

[isabella]

Assuming that she is still single or that the dauphin is still widowed on schedule. If Maria Teresa lasts until, say, 1750, no way they haven't found an alternative candidate for Maria Antonia by then. Admittedly, there is a shortage of candidates, but matches to Savoy, or her OTL one to Saxony, for instance, are still possible. George II was looking - in the beginning of the 1740s for a Catholic bride for the duke of Cumberland (either an Este or a Savoyard princess) as a way of separating Britain and Hannover by violating the Act of Union. Unfortunately, the '45 intervened, and no Catholic girl wanted to marry "the butcher".
Uprising was in August 1745, (after Pfaffenhofen in April), so things might go differently (as in the rising flames out like the 1715 or 1719) and Maria Antonia could end up married to Cumberland (a match with the Netherlands makes more sense than a match with Modena or Savoy) or in the event of a victory, to Bonnie Prince Charlie.

Well I was assuming who Dauphine Marie Thérèse died on schedule. If the Dauphin is not widowed as OTL Maria Antonia will surely marry elsewhere, likely in Saxony as OTL.

 

[Emperor Constantine]

Well realistically if Max died childless, then we'd probably see a War of the Brabant Succession, as the exact line of succession would be quite blurry at best. Most of the Provinces allowed for female succession, so his sisters would have claims, and I can easily see the Austrians under Josef II making a play for their former territory as well. Hell if MT was smart she would include secret revision provisions in the Treaty, so that the Habsburgs could inherit if Maximilian dies childless (make it a grant to Max's line, not the Wittelsbachs in general). So we'd have the Saxons, the Badens, the Elector Palatine, and the Habbsurgs (doubly strengthened if Josef II had a son with Maria Josepha).

 

[isabella]

Well realistically if Max died childless, then we'd probably see a War of the Brabant Succession, as the exact line of succession would be quite blurry at best. Most of the Provinces allowed for female succession, so his sisters would have claims, and I can easily see the Austrians under Josef II making a play for their former territory as well. Hell if MT was smart she would include secret revision provisions in the Treaty, so that the Habsburgs could inherit if Maximilian dies childless (make it a grant to Max's line, not the Wittelsbachs in general). So we'd have the Saxons, the Badens, the Elector Palatine, and the Habbsurgs (doubly strengthened if Josef II had a son with Maria Josepha).

Joseph II will definitely NOT marrying Maria Josepha of Bavaria/Netherland as second wife here but her cousin Maria Kunigunde of Saxony...
In any case would be pretty complicated excluding Max’s sisters from the succession to Southern Netherlands so is most likely who Maria Antonia and her ATL kids will inherit it...

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

so that the Habsburgs could inherit if Maximilian dies childless (make it a grant to Max's line, not the Wittelsbachs in general). So we'd have the Saxons, the Badens, the Elector Palatine, and the Habbsurgs (doubly strengthened if Josef II had a son with Maria Josepha).

my question is why the Habsburgs would want it back? I get the prestige and all, but by the 18th century, the Austrian Netherlands were at a "low ebb". Essentially, the only reason that the Habsburgs still had half the Low Countries was because a) nobody but France wanted them and b) everybody (aka England) didn't want France to get them.

 

[TrickyApe]

my question is why the Habsburgs would want it back? I get the prestige and all, but by the 18th century, the Austrian Netherlands were at a "low ebb".

Not to mention that the Scheldt was closed, choking Antwerp's commerce, and the Austrian government in the Netherlands was limited by all sorts of local liberties and autonomies, which the Belgians were prepared to defend by force in 1789.

 

[Nivek]

my question is why the Habsburgs would want it back? I get the prestige and all, but by the 18th century, the Austrian Netherlands were at a "low ebb". Essentially, the only reason that the Habsburgs still had half the Low Countries was because a) nobody but France wanted them and b) everybody (aka England) didn't want France to get them.

Nope they wanted to swap it as the Bavarian region unify their German holdings and give them a stronger alpine foothold, and the wittebasch can still rule as count palatine from Brussels

 

[Jürgen]

my question is why the Habsburgs would want it back? I get the prestige and all, but by the 18th century, the Austrian Netherlands were at a "low ebb". Essentially, the only reason that the Habsburgs still had half the Low Countries was because a) nobody but France wanted them and b) everybody (aka England) didn't want France to get them.

I think everyone is fine with the Bavarians having it, except after a few years the French. Because with the Austrians out of western Germany, and the Wittelsbach not having any possessions in southern Germany, the Wittelsbach entire policy focus have changed. They will now need end up in orbit of the British to protect them against the French, they will likely invest in colonial companies. Come the Diplomatic Revolution they will end up on the same side as the British and Prussians, likely not in time for the the Seven Year War. Of course with Austrian Bavaria, Austria may end up winning against the Prussians.

 

[Nuraghe]

My other question is how Maria Theresia/Habsburg rule would be received in Bavaria? Didn't Karl VI hand the place back because it was sort of in constant rebellion during the previous Habsburg occupation in the War of the Spanish Succession?

As far as I know, there was only one serious attempt independently organized by the local population to rise up against the joint Austro-Palatinate occupation during the WoSS, namely that of 1705 - 06, which lasted 75 days and was crushed with the battle of Aidenbach, following the failed attempt to free Munich from Habsburg control, for the rest the Bavarians were quite calm under the government of Vienna ( except for any sorties organized by the Wittelsbachs and above all by Louis XIV, but with little success ) for the rest I agree that an exchange of this kind potentially puts Paris, at odds with the Wittelsbachs, facilitates the MT government, which finds itself with a new province not so easily exposed to an enemy invasion, eliminates a troublesome adversary for Austria ( as well as once again making the Habsburg hinterland safe which leads to Vienna ) and strengthens imperial control in southern Germany, given that with the Bavarian annexation, the land bridge is created that connects the main archducal possessions with the territories in the lower Rhine ( Further Austria is also more easy to assimilate to the "majority culture" of the Habsburg monarchy ) also facilitates the economic growth of the area, given that the region would be included in the Austrian free zone, "created" by Charles VI ( it is perhaps more correct to say, recycled from the ideas of the brother ) and finally allows Vienna not to have to constantly worry about guarding an extremely vulnerable border with France, but rather to exchange it for a shorter and easily defensible one

p.s
it also allows us to gain a new cardinals in the curia under Habsburg control ( since those currently in the service of the Wittelsbachs will now have to answer to Vienna ) and this could allow the extension of the state reforms concerning the church by MT also to Bavaria, alleviating the local anticlerical sentiment that gave rise to the Illuminati ( who were in any case a small niche group, on a par with the freemasons ) and also address the issue of Febronianism, this would probably also entail a possible papal visit to Bavaria ( since both under MT and Joseph II, Pius VI visited Vienna ( several times ), also Munich in 1783 )

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

To your statement of Paris being at odds with the Wittelsbachs, I wonder if this won't lead to a continued Franco-Prussian or Anglo-French (or both) alliance. The Habsburgs would now control more of Germany than OTL, and likely they've assumed the Wittelsbach proviso of being able to appoint family members to sees like Eichstatt, Freisung, Paderborn, etc etc etc. Which- while the Habsburgs are still "making up the numbers" is fine, but once Maria Theresia has a spate of grandsons like she did OTL, it shouldn't be an issue to find minor archdukes to take up a bishop's mitre. By contrast, the Wittelsbachs would be in a form of "rough" control of not only the Netherlands but also everywhere on the Rhine between Heidelberg and Dusseldorf, Cologne was held by Karl VII's brother, Trier was under a Neuburg Wittelsbach appointed by Karl VI and Mainz was also a Wittelsbach (or at least a client of theirs). Julich and Berg are in the Wittelsbach Elector Palatine's hands per Karl VI's ruling on the Treaty of Xanten from a decade previous. I don't see Prussia or the Dutch or the Hannoverians being entirely comfortable with this set up. And no doubt the French will be more than happy to play on those fears

 

[ghappy1000]

I think everyone is fine with the Bavarians having it, except after a few years the French. Because with the Austrians out of western Germany, and the Wittelsbach not having any possessions in southern Germany, the Wittelsbach entire policy focus have changed. They will now need end up in orbit of the British to protect them against the French, they will likely invest in colonial companies. Come the Diplomatic Revolution they will end up on the same side as the British and Prussians, likely not in time for the the Seven Year War. Of course with Austrian Bavaria, Austria may end up winning against the Prussians.

If the Seven Years War still occurred as in otl (with a Britain-Prussia alliance on one side and a France-Austria alliance on the other), but with a neutral or a Britain-aligned Wittelsbach Belgium, wouldn't this mean that the French would invade Belgium and British subsidies and troops would end up defending Belgium from France rather than Hanover and Prussia from France? On the plus side, even the surplus Austrians from Bavaria would need to make up for the losses of Austrian troops from Belgium and the Austrians would need to defend themselves from Hanover (without France attacking there), so, Prussia could win bigger than otl or accomplish the same otl victory against Austria even with fewer British subsidies (British troops fighting with Prussia were allocated to Hanover against France rather than to Prussia against France and Austria). If the Austrians and French won the Seven Years War, Hanover and bits of Prussia attached to Hanover and/ or France would be exchanged to Britain in exchange for French colonies and non-European territory (slightly smaller British empire from 1763 to the American Revolution) and Prussia would be totally no more as a great power. If the Prussians and the British won the Seven Years' War, things would proceed as in otl, but with the adjustments for Wittelsbach Belgium instead of an Austrian, a French, a Dutch and a Saxe-Coburg Belgium and an Austrian Bavarian instead of a Wittelsbach and a subsequently Germany-controlled Bavaria.