Like it says on the tin. Could the House of Habsburg, assuming lots and I mean lots of things go right for them, plausibly impose their power over the principalities and electorates scattered throughout the HRE in the period starting with the onset of the Protestant Reformation and the ending with the Thirty Years' War (so from around 1520 to the early 1600s)?
Could the Habsburgs "unify" Germany in the 16th/17th centuries?
Yeah, apparently gustavus adolphus was seriously wounded during the polish-swedish wars while laying siege to Danzig I believe. Let us say the wounds kill him in 1625. With him dead and no clear successor Sweden once more falls into civil war and its neighbors eager to take revenge like Denmark and Russia and also the Polish King Sigismund wanting to retake the throne attack. In such a situation the Swedes are too preoccupied to deal with the HRE. At that time I believe at the traty of luubek in 1626 or 1627 I think, the HRE was controlled fully by the Catholics under Ferdinand. Hence without the intervention of Gustavus Adolphus I dont really see any challenge to Ferdinand. Furthermore I dont think the Poles would have intervened since Ferdinand was the brother in law of Sigismund so even if Sigismund somehow won back Sweden, I think he would not intervene in Germany. At the same time let us say that the Hugenot rebbellions lead by the Duc of Rohan in France are more successfull and the French have a difficult time dealing with them and that leads to them unable to intervene in Germany. This gives precious time for the Holy Roman Emperor to consolidate his power and if he plays his cards right he could secure his borders to the East with PLC, and a weakened france would be in no position to contest on its own the HRE dominence of Germany.
So in such a scenario with a weakeaned France due to a more successful series of Hugenot rebbelions+the premature death of Gustavus Adolphus before the Swedish intervention would I think create the conditions for a united Germany under Austria and the Hapsburg Monarchy.
So in such a scenario with a weakeaned France due to a more successful series of Hugenot rebbelions+the premature death of Gustavus Adolphus before the Swedish intervention would I think create the conditions for a united Germany under Austria and the Hapsburg Monarchy.
Here goes the problem. Most of the HRE had been controlled by the Hapsburg forces but most of these forces had been controlled by Wallenstein (“controlled” as in “paid by him”). Ferdinand did not like Wallenstein and the HRE princes hated him so in OTL they made firing of Wallenstein a prerequisite for the Hapsburg succession to the HRE throne. Ferdinand gave up and Wallenstein was fired. But without him there was no way to pay his army: to a great degree it was financed by his personal income and “taxing” the German states also gone with him. So in no time Tilly found himself practically without an army and chances for the effective Hapsburg control went down the drain (and the same goes for the strong imperial presence on the Baltic Sea shores).
So, if Ferdinand chooses strength over the legality, he keeps Wallenstein in charge and the electors can be forced to vote for the next Hapsburg. The imperial army of up to 100,000 could exercise an effective control over a big part of the HRE. It is an open question if GA would risk landing in Pomerania in that scenario but if he did his freedom of operation would be much more limited than in OTL and outcome less than clear: unlike OTL, there would be a bigger and better administered imperial army to oppose him in the Northern Germany and to prevent Brandenburg of at least Saxony from joining the Swedes.
What could be a good POD in the 16th century? A more decisive victory over the Schmalkaldic League perhaps?
And to run it forward that 100,000 man army needs to eat every day and requires food or money to buy food and in general oppresses the the local population dispersing as they eat out each region and without a corps of officers able to keep order degenerates into roaming bands of pillagers and get screwed over when a disciplined army fetches up up. And that might be a part of Wallenstein's army that keeps its discipline.
Neither Wallenstein nor the Hapsburgs of Austria have access to the New World gold and silver they can throw at the army periodically to keep them in line.
The problem with unifying the HRE is that several other people have no interest at all in a strong powerful HRE ruled by the House of Hapsburg ( or anyone else) including but not limited to the Princes of the Empire, France, Poland, the Ottomans, The UP, England every other Monarchy in Europe, the Pope.
TheSwedishHistorian
Banned
Im sure they could. Austria was Habsburg after all and if they unite the HRE slowly over time it could happen.
Of course, discipline of Wallenstein’s army was low but it was not lower than in the most of the contemporary armies and his system of getting money from the German stated had been working when he was in charge. And as long as the system was working and the troops had been paid with a reasonable regularity, the discipline was not deteriorating below customary level. I have no idea where did you get a notion about an absence of the “corps of the officers” but what you are seemingly missing is that Wallenstein’s system was based upon the regulated money extortions on the state level instead of a chaotic looting of a territory.
Oppression of the local population also was a standard practice of the time and at least he managed to avoid excesses like the sack of Magdeburg or the Swedish intentional campaigns of terror used by the GA and his successor-commanders. Take, for example, Mecklenburg. While Wallenstein was its duke, he improved administration and economy and even introduced a law for helping the poor. When it was occupied by the Swedes, they launched a campaign of a terror to “punish” the dukes. The Dukes survived but population shrunk from 300,000 down to 50,000 and, according to the Swedish fieldmarshal Banner, “Tyere is nothing left in Mecklenburg except sand and air, everything is destroyed to the ground”.
This is a theory but practice was different. The Austrian Hapsburgs had been relying upon the Spanish subsidies for most of the war but Wallenstein did not and it seems that a considerable part of the money and military supplies that he needed was coming from his estates. He was seemingly a very good administrator, which is more than can be said about Ferdinand.
Now, Spain did have all that New World gold and silver and more often than not it was incapable of paying its troops and went bankrupt, unlike the Netherlands which did not have a bullion coming from the New World of France which also did not have an access to the overseas precious metals but managed to subsidized the anti-Hapsburg forces while also dealing with the serious domestic issues.
Princes of the Empire had been, before the “Swedish stage” of a war, reasonably subdued. Of course, not up to the level of having a truly unified HRE but to a degree making Ferdinand a clearly top dog. Position, which he immediately abused with the insane pushing restoration of the positions lost by the Catholic Church.
France was a major problem but (a) until the last stages of the 30YW it did not have an army capable of a serious intervention into the German affairs and had rely upon the subsidies paid to the 3rd parties and (b) in practical terms, it was more concerned with fighting Spain then messing i the HRE.
Poland as an opponent of the Hapsburgs is something new to me. In OTL the imperial troops (under vin Arnim) participated in its war against Sweden. In the practical terms, the PLC as a major factor capable of serious interference into the 30YW did not exist. It could not even kick tye Swedes out of Livonia and it’s main interest was on the Eastern borders (Smolensk War, fighting the Ottomans, war with sweden ).
The Ottomans promised to interfere on the early stage of the 30YW but limited their involvement to the Transylvanian troops and went against the PLC (Hapsburg ally).
The United Provinces had been busy fighting Spain.
England of Charles I was a joke: under the leadership of the Duke of Buckingham it was moving from one embarrassment to another.
Spain was an ally.
Last edited:
The Habsburg-supporter in me does a happy dance at the idea of this scenario. I realize how dorky that sounds.
@Vitruvius
What if Ferdinand dies when he trips getting out of his carriage or falls from his horse or...whatever AFTER the princes are subdued but BEFORE Ferdinand II publishes the Edict of Restitution. While Ferdinand III ISN'T elected "king of the Romans" yet, he IS king of Hungary and Bohemia, but I seriously wonder if any of the princes are going to have the WILL to try and elect somebody else as emperor (being mindful that that was how they wound up in their present situation. Also, Ferdinand III was a capable politician (look at his wheeling in dealing 1637-1648) and not a terrible soldier (I think he fought at Nördlingen and a few other places). What happens next?
@Vitruvius
This is an interesting idea. In OTL FII pretty much destroyed everything that was achieved by sacking Wallenstein (and losing his army) and squeezing the Protestant princes too hard (it seems that in many cases there were not enough Catholic priests to fill the created vacancies).
And after GA got into the picture and bullied Brandenburg, Saxony, etc. into joining him, FII, again, saw himself without an adequate army, had been forced to call, again, Wallenstein and almost immediately afterwards started looking for the way of getting rid of him. One may assume that in your scenario FIII is going to be more intelligent (and he would not need to act as a general).
I have the impression that some of Ferdinand III's positions came about by learning from his father's mistakes but if Ferdinand II dies before making them then cautionary tale isn't there for his son to learn from. On the other hand Ferdinand III may somewhat have his hands tied by an Electoral capitulation if he finds it challenging to get the necessary votes.
Though in the long run I'm not sure this is sufficient to achieve the op goal of unifying the HRE. The Austrians would still have to contend with serious threats from the Ottomans, Transylvanians and the French over the next 50 years or so. And things won't be totally restive in Germany. I think a lot of the religious and political issues were not fully resolved at Westphalia through diplomacy but through exhaustion. Everyone wanted peace so badly that people just gave in or agreed to postpone debate on the more contentious issues (negotia remissa which were in many cases never resolved). But here some of those problems may remain just below the surface of a Peace imposed by Austrian force of arms, festering resentments and grievances that could explode as soon as Austria is at war with a foreign power.
Though in the long run I'm not sure this is sufficient to achieve the op goal of unifying the HRE. The Austrians would still have to contend with serious threats from the Ottomans, Transylvanians and the French over the next 50 years or so. And things won't be totally restive in Germany. I think a lot of the religious and political issues were not fully resolved at Westphalia through diplomacy but through exhaustion. Everyone wanted peace so badly that people just gave in or agreed to postpone debate on the more contentious issues (negotia remissa which were in many cases never resolved). But here some of those problems may remain just below the surface of a Peace imposed by Austrian force of arms, festering resentments and grievances that could explode as soon as Austria is at war with a foreign power.
I would put a POD a bit earlier than the 30YW: the Habsburg Low countries and the Franche comte should go to the Austrian Habsburgs. This strengthens their position in the empire to an incredible degree.
Let's assume that they are a bit more capable in administrating the low countries and the 80yw doesnt break out, or at least not in the same way as OTL. The austrian habsburgs manage to put down the revolt after a while, resulting in an experienced army stationed within the low countries
The moment the 30yw would break out, they immediately could move into germany along the Rhine or the north german plain.
Let's assume that they are a bit more capable in administrating the low countries and the 80yw doesnt break out, or at least not in the same way as OTL. The austrian habsburgs manage to put down the revolt after a while, resulting in an experienced army stationed within the low countries
The moment the 30yw would break out, they immediately could move into germany along the Rhine or the north german plain.
It is even probable the focus of Habsburg power would shift west - probably to the Netherlands or Luxembourg proper, or to Frankfurt, which was just on the Habsburg Burgundian possessions footsteps. This means that Habsburg Swabia is probably gonna be much bigger, making South Germany definetly Habsburg and giving them positions ideal to pressure the Rhineland and march into central and North Germany.
Honestly then the majority of the rich German regions (Rhineland, southern Germany, I'll include the low countries as well) would be under the dominion of the Austrian Habsburgs then. Yeah they could invade northern Germany but outside of the hansa cities (which were in the decline), I don't think they really need to, since they already have the most worthwhile German regions under control. Germany would be well on its way to unification then.
If the Habsburg are able to mollify the Dutch with moderate religious policies it’s unlikely they will anger the Bohemians on the issue either. So the 30YW as we know it might not even happen, or would be more of a unified Imperials vs the foreigners than it turned out to be. With Brandenburg, Saxony, and even the Palatinate behind the Emperor from the start Sweden, Denmark, and France would find far less of a foothold to get into such a war. And without the Dutch war, Spain is in a far stronger position to support the Austrians in such a conflict.
Unlikely-Charles V considered Burgundy to be his domain, not shared with Ferdinand. The lands that Ferdinand inherited were the Austrian realms and those under the Holy Roman Empire, but the rest of the Spanish Empire had been earmarked for Philip from the beginning, and why would Charles deprive his son of such rich lands?
Impossible, but if Philip do not marry Mary Tudor is likely who the Netherlands would be inherited by either Charles’ elder daughter Maria (daughter-in-law of Ferdinand) or by her second son Ernest. In OTL Maria had no male line grandson and her eldest daughter was Philip III’s mother but inheritance of Burgundy would likely change the wedding prospectives of Ernest.
Absolutely, so they would go to either Philip or Maria
Not true (both Milan and Burgundy were parts of the Holy Roman Empire) and Ferdinand had already received everything who was his well before Charles’ abdication as he was ruler of Austria since 1521 and King of the Romans (aka Charles’ elected successor as Holy Roman Emperor) since 1531. Charles had many doubts about what of his children was to inherit Burgundy: if he had two surviving sons the younger would receive the Burgundian inheritance without doubt, but without such boy Maria was taken often in consideration as alternative heiress of Burgundy until Mary Tudor married Philip (and the Burgundian lands were earmarked for their future children)
As pointed out by @isabella perhaps Maria of Spain gets the Burgundian Inheritance as her dowry once she marries her cousin Maximilian II (son of Ferdinand of Austria). This in the end will hugely empower the main Imperial branch, which will rule over the Crowns of Bohemia and Hungary, the Burgundian Lands and at least Austria proper. Only the Austrian Hereditary can be divided for younger sons. Basically no other Prince in the Empire can match the Emperor, though that may be a reason, to become Protestant, to somewhat counter the powerful Catholic Emperor.
Giving the Burgundian inheritance to Austria instead of Spain would help. Austria would have a lot more German land in the west to use in their quest to centralize the HRE.
Ferdinand I keeping Württemberg and a different outcome to the war of the Juliers Succession could also prove interesting/help in that regard.