How would this match up go? France and Italy align with Denmark against Prussia, Austria and German States in 1864?

[raharris1973]

Let's hand-wave the following the situation. Louis-Napoleon simply is not involved in the Mexican intervention scheme in the 1860s, so he is more sensitive to events on the continent.

Not liking Prussian assertiveness, and seeking profit for France in the Rhine territories and ultimate freedom of action in Luxembourg, he declares war on Prussia when Prussia declares war on Denmark. Since Austria (and the rest of the German confederation) is allied with Prussia at this time, Louis Napoleon, entices Italy into the war by promising them Venetia for going to war against Austria to tie down their forces.

How does this war go militarily? What is the longest it can last? What attitude will Britain and Russia take? They were broadly pro-Danish by inclination, but couldn't justify supporting the Danes in this particular instance and the Russo-Prussian relations were excellent at the time. Russia disliked both France and Austria at the time.

 

[Sian]

Sweden would likely have the time needed to organize military support as this was the time where Pan-scandinavianism was fairly sizeable, meaning that there was immense political pressure in Sweden to support Denmark ... this in turn might well inadvertently involve a sorta-reluctant Russia on the other side, which could involve Britain on the Danish side ... WW1, 50 years earlier might well be the result, unless Prussia recognizes early on that it's a poor idea and pulls back

 

[Rfl23]

Perhaps if the uk kept hanover maybe then it could support the danes even more out of fear losing hanover

 

[Aghasverov]

Badly, for Nap III... Not being involved in Mexico wouldn't free up enough French troops (40,000 at best) to be of any use against Prussia AND Austria, the Italians would still be a bit disorganized and drained after 5+ years of near-constant fighting to do much good against Austria (and were still feeling a bit screwed by Napoleon, having been essentially promised Venezia and the Papal States by Nap and not getting them in 1859, and being huckstered out of Nice and Savoy to boot). Also Nap III was attempting to both aid in the Risorgimiento and not piss off Austria (or the Pope) TOO badly at the same time, a strategy that was doomed to failure.
The UK and Russia would have both sympathized with Denmark, but as in OTL, not enough to get involved. All in all, it would've just been yet another Nap III flash-in-the-pan, a strategic failure leading to multiple tactical failures leading in turn to catastrophe...

 

[raharris1973]

The UK and Russia would have both sympathized with Denmark, but as in OTL, not enough to get involved. All in all, it would've just been yet another Nap III flash-in-the-pan, a strategic failure leading to multiple tactical failures leading in turn to catastrophe...

What's the end game of Napoleon's failure as you see it. If he takes on the Germans and fails to even get Italy on his side and has multiple tactical failures, what does the settlement look like? Does he lose Alsace-Lorraine? If so, to whom? Does he get overthrown? What happens to post-war Prusso-Austro-German politics?

....and same question all over again, but if he somehow suckers Italy into allying with him, and France and Italy both get tactically defeated, what happens then?

-----separately-----

Sweden would likely have the time needed to organize military support as this was the time where Pan-scandinavianism was fairly sizeable, meaning that there was immense political pressure in Sweden to support Denmark ... this in turn might well inadvertently involve a sorta-reluctant Russia on the other side, which could involve Britain on the Danish side ... WW1, 50 years earlier might well be the result, unless Prussia recognizes early on that it's a poor idea and pulls back

So that's an interesting grudge match to set up- The "Holy Alliance" essentially of Prussia, Austria (with German Confederation) and Russian, versus the flanking states of Scandinavia, Britain, France, and Italy. - "Heartland versus Rimland". It seems like that could go on for awhile.

 

[Aghasverov]

What's the end game of Napoleon's failure as you see it. If he takes on the Germans and fails to even get Italy on his side and has multiple tactical failures, what does the settlement look like? Does he lose Alsace-Lorraine? If so, to whom? Does he get overthrown? What happens to post-war Prusso-Austro-German politics?

....and same question all over again, but if he somehow suckers Italy into allying with him, and France and Italy both get tactically defeated, what happens then?

-----separately-----



So that's an interesting grudge match to set up- The "Holy Alliance" essentially of Prussia, Austria (with German Confederation) and Russian, versus the flanking states of Scandinavia, Britain, France, and Italy. - "Heartland versus Rimland". It seems like that could go on for awhile.

Hooo, boy... this one's a little tricky. There wasn't even a North German Confederation yet in 1864. A LOT happened in OTL between 1864 and 1870. A war with France in 1864 would've sort of monkey-wrenched Bismarck's plans, but I suspect he would've taken it in stride and adjusted his plans accordingly. A French attack would've distracted (to say the least) Prussia from the matter-at-hand, the Schleswig-Holstein question, which Bismarck would in OTL use as a "wedge" between Prussia and Austria. He would use the French incursion to further make common cause with Austria, at least for the time being (they were already united in cause against Denmark). Another factor to consider would be the smaller German states - not having yet to have been forced to pick a side between Prussia and Austria, they would see a common enemy - France - especially Bavaria and Baden, who conceivably could have some skin to lose in the game.
The French intervention would give Denmark some breathing room, but I doubt the eventual outcome for them would be any different than in OTL, just maybe slightly later.
The Italians are a bit of a wild card. Now while they may have felt a bit snookered by Nap III in 1859, the Bonapartes seem to have had some strange persuasive ability about them . "Well, sorry getting Venezia to you didn't happen in '59, but I'll make sure you get it this time!" While Italy would wind up taking Venezia in 1866 in OTL, they only managed to do that by making common cause with Prussia against Austria. With Austria firmly on the side of Prussia, an attempt by Italy to take Venezia in 1864 would've probably just ended in a sore disappointment.
The end game would've probably turned out quite differently in 1870 though, with Nap III's army being defeated on the soil of Prussia or one of the other German states, and driven back across the border... I doubt in 1864 the Prussian/German-allies force would have pursued. No Siege of Paris or capitulation in this scenario. Just a lot of dead men on both sides and Nap III with a bloody nose.
As far as the aftermath, I don't think Prussia would've taken Alsace-Lorraine at that point. For one thing, that could antagonize states like Bavaria and Baden. Possibly just some reparations, some reassurances regarding ending French ambitions in Luxembourg and Belgium (both of which Nap III had designs on), guarantee of Austrian possessions in Italy (which might last a few more years than in OTL).
Don't think the French were quite fed up enough yet with Nap III to get rid of him, but their patience would be worn thin after a major loss... He could either try to regain face with some kind of grandiose new scheme, or may just be cowed enough to quit meddling in the affairs of his neighbors - with Nap III it's sort of hard to guess. After all he was considered insane at one time... Not sure if that early consensus was that far off
As far as post-war Prussian-Austrian relations, I don't think it would've changed Bismarck's agenda a bit.... I don't see a Grossdeutschland on the horizon. He would continue his plan for Prussian dominance and pushing Austria out... might just delay it by a couple years.

 

[Rfl23]

Hooo, boy... this one's a little tricky. There wasn't even a North German Confederation yet in 1864. A LOT happened in OTL between 1864 and 1870. A war with France in 1864 would've sort of monkey-wrenched Bismarck's plans, but I suspect he would've taken it in stride and adjusted his plans accordingly. A French attack would've distracted (to say the least) Prussia from the matter-at-hand, the Schleswig-Holstein question, which Bismarck would in OTL use as a "wedge" between Prussia and Austria. He would use the French incursion to further make common cause with Austria, at least for the time being (they were already united in cause against Denmark). Another factor to consider would be the smaller German states - not having yet to have been forced to pick a side between Prussia and Austria, they would see a common enemy - France - especially Bavaria and Baden, who conceivably could have some skin to lose in the game.
The French intervention would give Denmark some breathing room, but I doubt the eventual outcome for them would be any different than in OTL, just maybe slightly later.
The Italians are a bit of a wild card. Now while they may have felt a bit snookered by Nap III in 1859, the Bonapartes seem to have had some strange persuasive ability about them . "Well, sorry getting Venezia to you didn't happen in '59, but I'll make sure you get it this time!" While Italy would wind up taking Venezia in 1866 in OTL, they only managed to do that by making common cause with Prussia against Austria. With Austria firmly on the side of Prussia, an attempt by Italy to take Venezia in 1864 would've probably just ended in a sore disappointment.
The end game would've probably turned out quite differently in 1870 though, with Nap III's army being defeated on the soil of Prussia or one of the other German states, and driven back across the border... I doubt in 1864 the Prussian/German-allies force would have pursued. No Siege of Paris or capitulation in this scenario. Just a lot of dead men on both sides and Nap III with a bloody nose.
As far as the aftermath, I don't think Prussia would've taken Alsace-Lorraine at that point. For one thing, that could antagonize states like Bavaria and Baden. Possibly just some reparations, some reassurances regarding ending French ambitions in Luxembourg and Belgium (both of which Nap III had designs on), guarantee of Austrian possessions in Italy (which might last a few more years than in OTL).
Don't think the French were quite fed up enough yet with Nap III to get rid of him, but their patience would be worn thin after a major loss... He could either try to regain face with some kind of grandiose new scheme, or may just be cowed enough to quit meddling in the affairs of his neighbors - with Nap III it's sort of hard to guess. After all he was considered insane at one time... Not sure if that early consensus was that far off
As far as post-war Prussian-Austrian relations, I don't think it would've changed Bismarck's agenda a bit.... I don't see a Grossdeutschland on the horizon. He would continue his plan for Prussian dominance and pushing Austria out... might just delay it by a couple years.

So will this mean no german colony or just renamed for example prussian east africa? And since the french never create a second mexican empire what happened with the mexican os the civil war got prolonged (with a us intervention after the civil war maybe?)

 

[Aghasverov]

So will this mean no german colony or just renamed for example prussian east africa? And since the french never create a second mexican empire what happened with the mexican os the civil war got prolonged (with a us intervention after the civil war maybe?)

Oh, I think there would've still been a united German Empire, but I don't think it would've happened immediately following this theoretical War of 1864. Bismarck was dead-set on uniting as many German states as he could under the leadership of Prussia, and to do so by pushing the Austrians out. For one thing, he wanted "his" united Germany to be majority Protestant, which could never happen if Austrian territory was included. So the break with Austria would've come, I just doubt it would be right on the heels of the 1864 war. Would still be a German Empire and German colonies as in OTL, just the dates may be a little different.
Not sure if Emperor Max's absence would've made much difference in Mexico. Mexico's chronic instability makes an ATL for those few years of the Second Mexican Empire anybody's guess. But, since the main pretext for US (or joint US-Confederate, as proposed at Hampton Roads) intervention WAS Maximillian, that pretext would be gone. Maybe if he had stayed in Europe, and if the German/Austrian coalition had defeated the French/Italian/Danish coalition in 1864 (as I think they would have), he could've been made the puppet ruler of a semi-autonomous Venetia! He had been Viceroy in Lombardy-Venetia after all, and I believe was fairly well-regarded there. Having Venetia as a semi-autonomous buffer state, instead of a fully incorporated province of A-H, may have helped to blunt further Italian irredentism in that area, for a few years anyway...

 

[Rfl23]

Oh, I think there would've still been a united German Empire, but I don't think it would've happened immediately following this theoretical War of 1864. Bismarck was dead-set on uniting as many German states as he could under the leadership of Prussia, and to do so by pushing the Austrians out. For one thing, he wanted "his" united Germany to be majority Protestant, which could never happen if Austrian territory was included. So the break with Austria would've come, I just doubt it would be right on the heels of the 1864 war. Would still be a German Empire and German colonies as in OTL, just the dates may be a little different.
Not sure if Emperor Max's absence would've made much difference in Mexico. Mexico's chronic instability makes an ATL for those few years of the Second Mexican Empire anybody's guess. But, since the main pretext for US (or joint US-Confederate, as proposed at Hampton Roads) intervention WAS Maximillian, that pretext would be gone. Maybe if he had stayed in Europe, and if the German/Austrian coalition had defeated the French/Italian/Danish coalition in 1864 (as I think they would have), he could've been made the puppet ruler of a semi-autonomous Venetia! He had been Viceroy in Lombardy-Venetia after all, and I believe was fairly well-regarded there. Having Venetia as a semi-autonomous buffer state, instead of a fully incorporated province of A-H, may have helped to blunt further Italian irredentism in that area, for a few years anyway...

Well i think piedmont would still unite italy and the us civil war doesnt change at all perhaps in this timeline we would see a more balkanized mexico perhaps, what about about britain tho i think with them still having hanover and not losing them (due to salic laws) it would make them much more aggresive towards the idea of a united germany and will this have any consequence in ww1?

 

[Aghasverov]

Well, to bring Hanover into the mix, you'd have to move the POD back a ways, to before 1837 and Victoria's accession in the UK. Even so, you can't really say that Britain "had" Hanover pre-1837, as they were united by the Crown in a personal union ONLY, and functioned as two fully independent entities. But yeah, if Hanover had still been united to the British Crown in 1864, now THAT could've complicated things for Bismarck quite a bit! I don't think he would've risked war with Britain in any way, shape, or form. Who knows, you may have seen a German unification, but with a big pink space left out in the northwest!

 

[raharris1973]

There wasn't even a North German Confederation yet in 1864.

I wasn't thinking of that one, I was thinking of this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Confederation

with the mexican os the civil war got prolonged (with a us intervention after the civil war maybe?)

I don't think the US would be in the mood after the ACW to look for such trouble.

what about about britain tho i think with them still having hanover and not losing them (due to salic laws) it would make them much more aggresive towards the idea of a united germany

But yeah, if Hanover had still been united to the British Crown in 1864, now THAT could've complicated things for Bismarck quite a bit! I don't think he would've risked war with Britain in any way, shape, or form. Who knows, you may have seen a German unification, but with a big pink space left out in the northwest!

Hmm, I wouldn't be too sure. The British parliament really, really, really didn't want the Hanoverian tail to wag John Bulldog. The prospect of getting into a war over Hanover alone, and absolutely no other British interest, would make the British parliament and public want to wretch. When the the British did historically fight for and with Hanover, it was part of a bigger struggle that mattered for multiple reasons - rivalry with France, the Protestant interest.

 

[Rfl23]

I wasn't thinking of that one, I was thinking of this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Confederation



I don't think the US would be in the mood after the ACW to look for such trouble.




Hmm, I wouldn't be too sure. The British parliament really, really, really didn't want the Hanoverian tail to wag John Bulldog. The prospect of getting into a war over Hanover alone, and absolutely no other British interest, would make the British parliament and public want to wretch. When the the British did historically fight for and with Hanover, it was part of a bigger struggle that mattered for multiple reasons - rivalry with France, the Protestant interest.

What will happen to italy if they join the war and more importantly will the papal state survives?

 

[Nivek]

What will happen to italy if they join the war and more importantly will the papal state survives?

They survived till their benefactor(France) got defeated here as both france and italy work together, maybe Austria is their new benefactor?

 

[Rfl23]

They survived till their benefactor(France) got defeated here as both france and italy work together, maybe Austria is their new benefactor?

Well perhaps i mean if austria became a benefactor will we see another italian war of unification (piedmont lead of course)

 

[Lyr3866]

Well perhaps i mean if austria became a benefactor will we see another italian war of unification (piedmont lead of course)

Piedmont lead?

 

[Vanity 6]

This war could have rather explosive ramifications! It is not the war Bismarck desired in Denmark but it may very well provide Germany with the results it got in 1864, 1866 and 1870 all in one war.

All three enemy combatants are beaten handily. Prussia can likely handle France and Denmark while Austria fights in Italy.

In Denmark, the duchies are occupied. France is beaten back and Napoleon III falls. Prussia does not invade France. With Austria occupied in Italy, Prussia is able to assert itself in Germany. Perhaps ultimately they federate with all states except Bavaria which retains a diplomatic relationship with Austria.

In Italy, the government and country collapse completely. Anything is possible. A march on Rome, territorial revisions and even a reorganization of the peninsula are all on the table I think.

Here you have it. German unification without an Austrian-Prussian War. Prussia gets Germany and Austria gets Italy. I just think Austria has to be happy with this. They are not going to be able to challenge it. It’s done.

So there’s my thesis. Enjoy!

 

[Rfl23]

This war could have rather explosive ramifications! It is not the war Bismarck desired in Denmark but it may very well provide Germany with the results it got in 1864, 1866 and 1870 all in one war.

All three enemy combatants are beaten handily. Prussia can likely handle France and Denmark while Austria fights in Italy.

In Denmark, the duchies are occupied. France is beaten back and Napoleon III falls. Prussia does not invade France. With Austria occupied in Italy, Prussia is able to assert its let on Germany. Perhaps ultimately they federate with all states except Bavaria which retains a diplomatic relationship with Austria.

In Italy, the government and country collapse completely. Anything is possible. A march on Rome, territorial revisions and even a reorganization of the peninsula are all on the table I think.

Here you have it. German unification without an Austrian-Prussian War. Prussia gets Germany and Austria gets Italy. I just think Austria has to be happy with this. They are not going to be able to challenge it. It’s done.

So there’s my thesis. Enjoy!

Do in the future germany still want bavaria after all this?

 

[Vanity 6]

Do in the future germany still want bavaria after all this?

Possibly. But maybe not. The Bavarians and Austrians are similar culturally, linguistically and especially religiously so why not just leave them out?

 

[Tibi088]

Actually Napoleon can give Rome to Italy right away as an incentive to fight - with some consessions for the pope to not completly alienate french catholics. Protector of the Papal state ment in practice french soldiers in Rome. That wont simply change in an instant to Austrian soldiers.

As for the war itself there are a lot of factors you havent considered. The prussian army is not the army of 1870 - it hasnt been improved after the experience of 2 wars and sorting out its problems. Moltke himself is in a much weaker position. That said I still think that the germans will win: Austria can handle Italy on its own and still field a stronger northern army (they were capable to in 1866). France will have most of its forces on the Rhine maybe having a smaller force support Italy so its not an Austrian mop up there. The german will likely beat back the french invasion but I think it unlikely they can or will make a signifcant push in to France proper. I think they will defend on the Northern front while beating back the french and concentrate o beating the danish after the french are driven back to their country.

The british are at this point not too happy with Nappy III so they will be rooting team germans against the french. Bismarck made sure that Prussian-Russian relation were good.

Peace: Depending on what Bismarck wants I think he could get S-H alone. In this case Austria gets back Lombardy from Italy and France doesnt loose any territory.

 

[Rfl23]

Possibly. But maybe not. The Bavarians and Austrians are similar culturally, linguistically and especially religiously so why not just leave them out?

So if they decided to claim bavaria after this war but before ww1 will they succeed?