WI Leopold I dies in 1670

In January 1670 Emperor Leopold I suffered a severe illness that, at least for a short time, led some people in the Imperial court to start thinking about what would have happened had he died. Of course IOTL he recovered quickly but if he had died at that point it would have ended the Austrian branch of the Habsburgs. In January of 1670 Leopold was still married to his niece Margaret Theresa of Spain. She had previously had a daughter, Maria Antonia, and was at the time pregnant again with a son who IOTL would die shortly after his birth the following month. I would think that the stress of her husband's death isn't going to help her pregnancy along so its still likely the child doesn't live. So with that the male line of Ferdinand I is ended and the only remaining male Habsburg left is Leopold's nephew and MT's brother, the sickly boy King Charles II of Spain whom everyone expects to drop dead any day. So what happens now? Is it even possible to avoid a total collapse of the Austrian dynastic state?

I believe the order of succession would be as follows for Austria and Bohemia and in theory Hungary. Its ironic that the Habsburgs, while having no male heirs, have a plethora of Archduchesses.

1. Maria Antonia of Austria b.1669 An infant barely a year old. A dangerous thing to hang the fate of a dynasty on.
2. Mariana of Austria b. 1634 Leopold's eldest sister and Ferdinand III's eldest daughter. Widow of Philip IV of Spain and regent for her son Charles. She's not going to remarry nor have any more children nor likely ever leave Spain.
3. Charles II of Spain b. 1661 Mariana's son and current King of Spain, a sickly child who's health is so precarious that Leopold had only a year prior agreed on a partition treaty with Louis XIV in order to divide up the Spanish Empire upon his death.
4. Margaret Theresa of Spain b. 1651 Mariana's daughter and Leopold's widow who is an heiress in her own right as a granddaughter of Ferdinand III. Theoretically young enough to remarry and perpetuate her claim beyond Maria Antonia. One interesting point is that any male children she might have from a second marriage, while having a claim inferior to Maria Antonia's to Austria, would have the superior claim to Spain.
5. Eleonora Maria of Austria b. 1653 Ferdinand III's second daughter. A marriage contract was signed with Michal Korybut of Poland in December but the wedding has not yet taken place. If the marriage still goes ahead she'll have to renounce her claim to Austria but does it still happen?
6. Maria Anna Joseph of Austria b. 1654 Ferdinand III's third daughter. No marriage negotiations had occurred for her as of yet.
7a. Ferdinand Maria of Bavaria b.1636. Grandson of Ferdinand II via his daughter Maria Anna of Austria. Current Elector of Bavaria. Though I believe her marriage was likely subject to a renunciation so its unclear if her line has a legitimate claim.
7b. Claudia Felicitas b.1653 Last surviving member of the Tyrolean line of Archduke Leopold V (younger brother of Ferdinand II). Her mother Anna de' Medici had been pushing her rights against Leopold's claims since this branch died off in the male line with Sigismund Francis in 1665. Anna could also potentially argue that if the male line is ended then Tyrol should pass to the female heirs of its branch rather than the female heirs of the main line.

Bohemia had been so thoroughly crushed during the 30YW that they will follow the Austrian succession without much push back but Hungary is another matter. The Hungarian Estates are still truculent and jealously guard their privileges and Hungary is a powder keg in early 1670. The magnate conspiracy is ongoing and IOTL Leopold would go on to arrest the conspirators later that year and touch off a short lived rebellion. The conspirators would almost certainly avail themselves of the opportunity provided by Leopold's death and proclaim their right to elect a new King. Presumably the Austrians will try to delay any formal succession until MT gives birth in the hopes that a miracle occurs and Austria is blessed with a posthumous male heir. The Hungarians may go along with that if only to allow themselves time to gather their forces and sound out candidates for the Hungarian throne but things will come to a head when MT fails to deliver a living Archduke. But who would the magnates look to elect as King of Hungary? Is a successful rebellion possible or maybe even probable?

The Imperial election cannot be delayed and the Electors will gather to select Leopold's successor probably in February. Since they will be down a vote with the position of King of Bohemia in abeyance pending MT's pregnancy its possible the proceedings are dragged out until the Bohemian succession is resolved, likely upon Maria Antonia and thus an Austrian Regency. Does Louis XIV put himself forward as a candidate? I don't think he'd find much actual support as even the most friendly German princes will be wary of a strong French King ruling over the Empire at a time when the apparent collapse of Austria is leaving a huge power vacuum in Germany. I think the most probable German candidates would be Philip William of Pfalz Neuburg or Ferdinand Maria of Bavaria. Philip William has the advantage of being older and thus he might be seen as a suitable placeholder/compromise. But are there any other probable candidates?

As for France, Louis is already preparing for his Dutch War. IOTL he would occupy Lorraine that summer and send its Duke into exile yet again. The Treaty of Dover was signed with England in June and the French were working on agreements with various German states. Presumably Louis will now view his partition agreement with Leopold as a dead letter and expect to take all of Spain. But how does this shift French policy? Does Louis still strike at the Dutch or does he try to meddle in the Austrian succession, perhaps to aid the Hungarians? It seems like the Dutch will have a harder time without Leopold to help reinforce an anti-French coalition. Brandenburg won't risk doing much on its own and Leopold's successor as Emperor will be weak (Neuburg) or vaguely pro-French (Bavaria). Knocking out the Dutch while Austria is in chaos could be the key to securing the Spanish succession. But if the Hungarians have an early success the temptation to assist their revolt and completely destroy Austria may be too irresistible for Louis especially if he can put a French prince on the Hungarian throne.

Does Charles II of England have any concerns about the potential for too much French aggrandizement? Would he have any second thoughts which could forestall an agreement as was reached ITOL at Dover?

I don't know how this would affect Poland. Would Michal Korybut have second thoughts about marrying Eleonora now that the Austrians have lost their grip on the Empire and Hungary is in revolt? Or would her position as a potential heiress make up for that? As for the Ottomans, would the Porte be inclined to cut a more lenient deal to end hostilities in Ukraine so they can take advantage of the situation in Hungary?

In some ways this seems to be a set up for a huge French wank which would see the French gaining Spain and its Empire while Austria, Bohemia and Hungary are divided up among rival claimants. But is it possible that a competent Austrian regency could overcome rebellion in Hungary while initial French successes bring forward the creation of a broad but highly unstable anti-French coalition across western Europe?


Other miscellaneous dynastic considerations;

Philippe d'Orleans could still be looking for a new wife later in the year. But the situation would be vastly different so the Palatine match may be less appealing than say to Philip William's daughter and Leopold's OTL third wife Eleonore. Or perhaps even to an Archduchess like Claudia Felicitas with her potential claim to the Tyrol.

James of York is also likely looking for a second wife before too long and again the calculation could be very different than it was ITOL with implications for the future English succession.

Mariana and her daughter Margaret Theresa would probably see the solution to the Habsburg crisis to be the marriage of Charles and Maria Antonia. Aside from being a terrible idea that will only lead to the total extinction of their line it would be opposed by everyone outside of Spain and Austria.

Don Juan Jose, Philip IV's illegitimate son, is also still around. He has no claim to anything but could be seen as a useful vehicle for continuing the Habsburg line if married to one of the available Archduchesses, say Claudia Felicitas or Maria Anna Josepha. I'm sure Mariana would be happy to get him out of Spain so Tyrol could be seen as a suitable way of getting rid of him though in the long run it could create more problems than it solves.

The Dowager Empress Eleonora Gonzaga may play an outsized role in Vienna. She's more politically experienced than the still young MT and she'll probably be concerned to safeguard the prospects of her daughters with Ferdinand III.


@VVD0D95 @Kellan Sullivan @isabella @Jan Olbracht @Emperor Constantine @Valena
 
I am very intrigued by this. I imagine Maria Antonia would be Queen of Hungary and Bohemia in her own right, like Maria Theresa was IOTL?
 
I am very intrigued by this. I imagine Maria Antonia would be Queen of Hungary and Bohemia in her own right, like Maria Theresa was IOTL?
Hungary, potentially yes (given they elected dynasties not individuals AFAIK @Fehérvári @Tibi088). Bohemia I'm not sure of since even with Maria Theresia they went with Karl Albrecht originally. But in Hungary this is also the era of Imre Thökoly, the Kurocz Rebellion of 1678 etc so who knows if they will accept an infant queen.

@Vitruvius, at this point Maria Anna was being considered for Karl Emil of Brandenburg, but Leopold was throwing up all sorts of obstacles about religion and her dowry (the same duchies in Poland promised to Władysław IV and his dad which were never paid).

Will answer some more later when my laptop battery isn't so low
 
Hungary, potentially yes (given they elected dynasties not individuals AFAIK @Fehérvári @Tibi088).
In Hungary theoretically only males inherited before accepting the Pragmatica Sanction in 1723. If the male line of the first elected member of a dynasty went extinct the hungarian nobility was (again in theory) completely free to elect whomever they wanted. So to make an example: Hungary elected as king Ferdinand in 1526. From than on every male descendant of Ferdinand was electable to be king of Hungary. However this gave no rights whatsoever to the throne of Hungary to members of the dynasty who were not his male-line descendants - for example Charles V and his descendants had no valid claim to the throne. Further the nobility was in theory free to elect any member of the ruling dynasty with a valid claim as the next king - in practice they always duly elected the next Habsburg heir without a fuss but theoretically they were not required to do so.

Finally in 1670 the Ottomans were still in posession of most of the Kingdom of Hungary - meaning it was very-very likely that whomever the bohemians and the austrians elect as their new ruler will be elected as well in Hungary. Hungary was dependent on the aid of the other parts of the Empire to help survive the Ottomans.

edit: thinking a bit more im less sure about whom the nobles would elect. Even the catholic (usually loyal) hungarian nobility were very dissatisfied with the lacklustre austrian efforts and especially the peace afer the last ottoman war and they were organizing a rebellion which was discovered in 1669 but most of the the arrest happened only in 1670 - here after Leopold's death.
 
Last edited:
Also re:Margarita Teresa remarrying, the question is, to whom?

I only throw this out there because of her young age and status as an heiress not only to Austria but to Spain. There are not many good candidates. Though I was thinking possibly Charles of Lorraine. He'd be in exile in Austria, he had military experience campaigning in Hungary in the 1660s and he'd be of sufficient rank to at least make the match plausible. So really it would be away of creating a back up line while also provide a capable male ruler to bolster the regency. But it does create potential conflict down the road as Charles would be focused on ending the French occupation of Lorraine and any child he has with her could just end up being rivals. And France will hate the idea of a Duke of Lorraine with a claim to Spain.

In Hungary theoretically only males inherited before accepting the Pragmatica Sanction in 1723. If the male line of the first elected member of a dynasty went extinct the hungarian nobility was (again in theory) completely free to elect whomever they wanted. So to make an example: Hungary elected as king Ferdinand in 1526. From than on every male descendant of Ferdinand was electable to be king of Hungary. However this gave no rights whatsoever to the throne of Hungary to members of the dynasty who were not his male-line descendants - for example Charles V and his descendants had no valid claim to the throne. Further the nobility was in theory free to elect any member of the ruling dynasty with a valid claim as the next king - in practice they always duly elected the next Habsburg heir without a fuss but theoretically they were not required to do so.

Finally in 1670 the Ottomans were still in posession of most of the Kingdom of Hungary - meaning it was very-very likely that whomever the bohemians and the austrians elect as their new ruler will be elected as well in Hungary. Hungary was dependent on the aid of the other parts of the Empire to help survive the Ottomans.

edit: thinking a bit more im less sure about whom the nobles would elect. Even the catholic (usually loyal) hungarian nobility were very dissatisfied with the lacklustre austrian efforts and especially the peace afer the last ottoman war and they were organizing a rebellion which was discovered in 1669 but most of the the arrest happened only in 1670 - here after Leopold's death.

My thinking is that the only plausible candidate to oppose Maria Antonia would be a French prince in the hopes that Louis would provide direct aid. And of course post-Vasvar the Ottomans are in an incredibly strong position in Hungary with control of Uyvar north of the Danube. So it is hard to imagine an independent King of Hungary ruling from Pressburg in opposition to both the Austrians in Vienna and the Ottomans in Buda.

There's also the issue of Croatia. The Grenzer in the military frontier districts will remain loyal to Austria, or at least to whoever secures control of Inner Austria since Styria, Carniola and Carinthia provided arms, supplies and the officer class for the Varazdin and Karlovac Generalates. And of course the Grenzer will jealously guard the rights they secured under the Statuta Valachorum against the Croatian Ban and Sobor. So it may not be too hard to neutralize the Zrinski.

So perhaps the Hungarians just accept Maria Antonia but with strict limitations? Basically Hungarian becomes completely autonomous with its own regency and the magnates are left to run the country as they see fit? Or is it possible Charles of Lorraine could be elected and then married to Margaret Theresa? The idea being that he would be a more active leader against the Turks.

@Vitruvius, at this point Maria Anna was being considered for Karl Emil of Brandenburg, but Leopold was throwing up all sorts of obstacles about religion and her dowry (the same duchies in Poland promised to Władysław IV and his dad which were never paid).

But was that ever very serious? Though I suppose it could get serious very fast if the Austrians need Brandenburg's support. But if Philip William is elected Emperor her OTL marriage to his son still makes sense if for no other reason that to block a French match with the new Imperial family.
 
My thinking is that the only plausible candidate to oppose Maria Antonia would be a French prince in the hopes that Louis would provide direct aid. And of course post-Vasvar the Ottomans are in an incredibly strong position in Hungary with control of Uyvar north of the Danube. So it is hard to imagine an independent King of Hungary ruling from Pressburg in opposition to both the Austrians in Vienna and the Ottomans in Buda.
Certainly not independent. But maybe polish? Or ottoman vassal - like Thököly.
There's also the issue of Croatia.
The leaders of the rebellion were beside Wesselényi the Zrini's - croatians.
The Grenzer in the military frontier districts will remain loyal to Austria, or at least to whoever secures control of Inner Austria since Styria, Carniola and Carinthia provided arms, supplies and the officer class for the Varazdin and Karlovac Generalates. And of course the Grenzer will jealously guard the rights they secured under the Statuta Valachorum against the Croatian Ban and Sobor. So it may not be too hard to neutralize the Zrinski.
The grenzer dont exist yet - they were established in the early 18th century.
So perhaps the Hungarians just accept Maria Antonia but with strict limitations? Basically Hungarian becomes completely autonomous with its own regency and the magnates are left to run the country as they see fit? Or is it possible Charles of Lorraine could be elected and then married to Margaret Theresa? The idea being that he would be a more active leader against the Turks.
Again woman are officially excluded. Its more likely that they will simply elect the husband if they go the remain loyal route.
 
The leaders of the rebellion were beside Wesselényi the Zrini's - croatians.

The grenzer dont exist yet - they were established in the early 18th century.

But the Grenzer did exist. The command structure on the military frontier was long established by 1670. The Brucker Libell in 1578 setup the Inner Austrian Hofkriegsrat in Graz and the associated provisioning system whereby the Estates of Styria undertook to provide arms and provisions to units formed from the Varzadin district while the Estates of Carniola and Carinthia jointly undertook the same for the units formed from the Karlovav district. The Statuta Valachorum from 1630 formalized the military obligations owed by the mainly Serb settlers of the military frontier and their associated rights as against the claims of the Croatian magnates and the Sobor. The command structure was also formalized with the Grenzer appointing their own unit commanders, the Inner Austrian Estates providing the officers and Emperor appointing the General in over all command of each Generalate.

Those two generalates were then joined by a third under direct Croatian control in the 1690s from territory between the Kupa and Sava recovered from the Ottomans during the great Turkish war. With the Sobor providing arms and provisions and the Ban commanding. Then all three were significantly reformed in the 1740s and 50s as the overall frontier moved further SE and additional military frontiers were created in Slavonia. Obviously the Grenzer of the 18th century were substantially different in organization and command by virtue of the those reforms but generally speaking the Grenzer had existed as a military force on the frontier since the Long Turkish War.

It's my understanding that the Grenzer units of the Karlovac and Varazdin were in part what defeated the Zrinski in the 1670s IOTL. So, since command of the units formed in the military frontier generalates would theoretically remain under Austrian control they could be used against any rebels in Croatia as IOTL.

Again woman are officially excluded. Its more likely that they will simply elect the husband if they go the remain loyal route.

Fair enough. So that may be more incentive for Margaret Theresa to remarry, to basically provide a suitable candidate for King of Hungary who would remain bound/loyal to Austria.
 
Again woman are officially excluded. Its more likely that they will simply elect the husband if they go the remain loyal route.
Women weren't excluded afaik, they just weren't preferred (and were relegated to be a last resort option). The case of King Mary is a proof of this.
 
But the Grenzer did exist. The command structure on the military frontier was long established by 1670. The Brucker Libell in 1578 setup the Inner Austrian Hofkriegsrat in Graz and the associated provisioning system whereby the Estates of Styria undertook to provide arms and provisions to units formed from the Varzadin district while the Estates of Carniola and Carinthia jointly undertook the same for the units formed from the Karlovav district. The Statuta Valachorum from 1630 formalized the military obligations owed by the mainly Serb settlers of the military frontier and their associated rights as against the claims of the Croatian magnates and the Sobor. The command structure was also formalized with the Grenzer appointing their own unit commanders, the Inner Austrian Estates providing the officers and Emperor appointing the General in over all command of each Generalate.

Those two generalates were then joined by a third under direct Croatian control in the 1690s from territory between the Kupa and Sava recovered from the Ottomans during the great Turkish war. With the Sobor providing arms and provisions and the Ban commanding. Then all three were significantly reformed in the 1740s and 50s as the overall frontier moved further SE and additional military frontiers were created in Slavonia. Obviously the Grenzer of the 18th century were substantially different in organization and command by virtue of the those reforms but generally speaking the Grenzer had existed as a military force on the frontier since the Long Turkish War.

It's my understanding that the Grenzer units of the Karlovac and Varazdin were in part what defeated the Zrinski in the 1670s IOTL. So, since command of the units formed in the military frontier generalates would theoretically remain under Austrian control they could be used against any rebels in Croatia as IOTL.
You are right - my mistake.
Women weren't excluded afaik, they just weren't preferred (and were relegated to be a last resort option). The case of King Mary is a proof of this.
She actually proves my point I think for she was both an exception to the rule and was only allowed to take the throne after she was in legal sense made male - even you called her correctly king. So as I said, theoretically only males - with one exception very long ago that was also only kind of an exception.
 
She actually proves my point I think for she was both an exception to the rule and was only allowed to take the throne after she was in legal sense made male - even you called her correctly king. So as I said, theoretically only males - with one exception very long ago that was also only kind of an exception.
From what I read it was a real struggle to get the estates to aknowledge female succession, but there were no actual laws prohibiting it. In fact, Mary wasn't the only woman before Maria Theresa the estates aknowledged as rightful heir to the throne. The daughter of Sigismund of Luxemburg, Elisabeth was also aknowledged as such. She gave up her rights in favour of her husband, Albert von Habsburg however. When King Albert died, her explicit consent was also needed by the estates to be able to elect a new king. Once her son was born though, she rescinded her consent, but that's already a whole other story.

Anna Jagiellon, daughter of Vladislaus II and wife of Ferdinand I, also maintained the position of possessing rights to ascend to the throne of Hungary. This position was even supported by Ferdinand, since it made his own position as King of Hungary inherited and not elected. Anna even planned to rule Hungary completely on her own in her own right, should Ferdinand pass on before her.
 
Last edited:
Ok, so perhaps the best case for the Austrians to retain Hungary would be to find someone for Margaret Theresa to marry who can be elected King there rather than a protracted struggle to get her infant daughter elected especially in an age of high infant mortality.

The problem I foresee with Charles of Lorraine, however, is that the pitch would be something like "he's a proven commander, has fought the Turks, will be more aggressive in defending Hungary" but then after his election the Hungarians will likely find that his attention is fixed in the west as he focuses all his energy on recovering his ancestral duchy from the French. However I don't know who else would make sense.
 
Ok, so perhaps the best case for the Austrians to retain Hungary would be to find someone for Margaret Theresa to marry who can be elected King there rather than a protracted struggle to get her infant daughter elected especially in an age of high infant mortality.

The problem I foresee with Charles of Lorraine, however, is that the pitch would be something like "he's a proven commander, has fought the Turks, will be more aggressive in defending Hungary" but then after his election the Hungarians will likely find that his attention is fixed in the west as he focuses all his energy on recovering his ancestral duchy from the French. However I don't know who else would make sense.
I do like the suggestion of Charles of Lorraine as a second husband for MT - the Hungarians though may very well find that he isn't all that they hoped.
 
From what I read it was a real struggle to get the estates to aknowledge female succession, but there were no actual laws prohibiting it. In fact, Mary wasn't the only woman before Maria Theresa the estates aknowledged as rightful heir to the throne. The daughter of Sigismund of Luxemburg, Elisabeth was also aknowledged as such. She gave up her rights in favour of her husband, Albert von Habsburg however. When King Albert died, her explicit consent was also needed by the estates to be able to elect a new king. Once her son was born though, she rescinded her consent, but that's already a whole other story.

Anna Jagiellon, daughter of Vladislaus II and wife of Ferdinand I, also maintained the position of possessing rights to ascend to the throne of Hungary. This position was even supported by Ferdinand, since it made his own position as King of Hungary inherited and not elected. Anna even planned to rule Hungary completely on her own in her own right, should Ferdinand pass on before her.
I would cite the pairlament of 1687 where the hungarian nobility adopted male primogeniture (I cite the article II and III in hungarian):
1. § Ez oly nagy s örökké hálával emlitendő jótéteményeknek emlékezetére, s alázatosan kedveskedő lelküknek mindenkorra felismerhető hálája jeléül, e Magyarországnak s kapcsolt részeinek összes karai és rendei kinyilatkoztatják, hogy mostantól jövőre s örök időkre senkit mást, mint fennczimzett Ő császári s királyi felségének saját ágyékából származott fiörökösei közül az első szülöttet (ugyanezt határozván az 1547-ik évi 5-ik s más e felől alkotott törvénycikkek) fogják törvényes királyuknak s uruknak ismerni és azt mindenkor és annyiszor, valahányszor ily felavatás ujból bekövetkezik, a fentebb kijelentett hitlevélben foglalt czikkelyek előrebocsátandó elfogadása, vagy királyi biztositása s e felől oly alakban, mint elődei teljesitették, leteendő eskü után, országgyülésileg, e Magyarországon belül, meg fogják koronázni.

Ha pedig (a mit a Jó isten századokra kegyelmesen elháritani méltóztassék) Ő császári s királyi felsége fiágának magvaszakadása bekövetkeznék, akkor az ilyen átszállandó s felveendő uralkodásban való utódlás (szintén megelőző s a fennkijelölt módon előre bocsájtandó királyi biztositás, s az emlitett hitlevélben foglalt czikkek elfogadása és az ezekre teendő eskü után) háruljon és menjen át Spanyolország királyának, második Károly urnak hasonlóképen fiágu magvára, s igy csak abban az esetben (melyet Isten kegyelmes jósága távol tartson), ha ugy a fentisztelt Ő császári és királyi szent felségének, mint Spanyolország emlitett felséges királyának fimagva kihalna, nyerjen helyet a mondott karok és rendek ősi és régi helybenhagyott szokása, s előjoga a királyok választására s koronázására nézve.


For those who dont speak hungarian, the nobility in gratitude for freeing the country from the turks grants Leopold and all his descendants male primogeniture sucession in II and in III they add that if the male line is broken the spanish male line of Charles II gets the right to inherit (they were a funny bunch).

Finally it finishes by stating that only if both male lines are broken do the nobles get back their old right of electing and crowning kings. So if we accept your argument that female sucession was actually legal before this than the Habsburgs would have given up on it by getting this and only to bargain with the nobility to get female sucession a bit later in the Pragmatica Sanction.

My point is that in 1687 the crown clearly has gotten the better of the nobility and looking at that law its clear that neither regarded female sucession as legal before 1687.
There were exceptions yes - but they were - as you yourself pointed out - always very controversial.
 
Last edited:
Top