Fate of the Ottoman Balkans if the 1848 Hungarian Revolution succeeds?

Inspired by a recent thread.
So, basically, assume that Hungary’s attempted breakaway from the Austrian Empire in 1848-49 is successful. Hungary becomes an independent state, but the Habsburgs in Austria get to keep most of Croatia, primarily due to the Ban’s loyalty.
How does this affect the situation of the Ottoman Balkans to the south? Would there be more or less stability in regards to ethnic autonomy affairs?
 
Last edited:
So, basically, assume that Hungary’s attempted breakaway from the Austrian Empire in 1848-49 is successful. Hungary becomes an independent state, but the Habsburgs in Austria get to keep most of Croatia, primarily due to the Ban’s loyalty.
How does this affect the situation of the Ottoman Balkans to the south? Would there be more or less stability in regards to ethnic autonomy affairs?

What I can say is the Magyars are going to want to keep the rise of Serbian nationalism to an absolute minimum, and will be looking for a hedge against Romania as well considering they will be integrating and attempting to Magyarize Transylvania rather than giving much in the way of rights to the locals. That seems to suggest them wanting to support the Ottomans as a hedge against both those things.
 
What I can say is the Magyars are going to want to keep the rise of Serbian nationalism to an absolute minimum, and will be looking for a hedge against Romania as well considering they will be integrating and attempting to Magyarize Transylvania rather than giving much in the way of rights to the locals. That seems to suggest them wanting to support the Ottomans as a hedge against both those things.

The problem with that assesment is that a successful revolutionary Hungary would be a completly different beast than OTL Hungary after 1867.

First and foremost this Hungary would be led by Kossuth who was very liberal and also one of the more understanding of minority questions of the hungarian politicans on the 19th century. See plans for the Danube Confederation and also that he had reached an understanding with the romanians of transylvania at the later stages of the revolution - which was sabotaged by local magyar nobility.

The point is that a revolutionary Hungary would - at least initially - be a much more liberal place than OTL and would most likely be much more accomodating to national minorities than OTL Hungary. Im not sure he would try to realize a Danubian Confederacy: he got behind it after the defeat of 1849 and is questionable if he would endorsed the idea if he succeeded in the first place. On the other hand Hungary would be landlocked and endorsing this idea could lead to change that. He was also very russophobic and he understood Hungary had no chance against Russia on his own. Actually a crimean like war would be one of his dreams come true - fighting the russians together with the english. Im pretty sure a Hungary led by him would get involved against Russia.

The big question is how the rest of the hungarian elit would take to a Kossuth led Hungary. In one part Kossuth was far too popular to tuch. On the other when OTL the news reached hungary of Kossut's idea on a Danube Confederation the reaction of the hungarian elit was: "I would sooner go to Vienna". Im pretty sure that he would not have the support of the magnates for long (he was not one of them). And if Kossuth looses some of his popularity with the masses or he dies i can imagine a conservative revolution - maybe even bringing back the Habsburgs - most likely a different branch than the one in Austria.

On the Balkans:
Russia is in a much stronger position. With the Habsburg Empire gone from the scene England will have a much harder time opposing Russian moves and they were mainly interested in the straits and not in the rest of the Balkans. We will possibly see more rounds of crimean wars in regards of the straights but aside that an ATL San Stefano like peace can stand on the Balkans. I expect the Balkan would get independent earlier. The british also might decide to wash their hands in absence of a potential ally and that could lead to the partition of the Ottoman Empire.
 
Inspired by a recent thread.
So, basically, assume that Hungary’s attempted breakaway from the Austrian Empire in 1848-49 is successful. Hungary becomes an independent state, but the Habsburgs in Austria get to keep most of Croatia, primarily due to the Ban’s loyalty.
How does this affect the situation of the Ottoman Balkans to the south? Would there be more or less stability in regards to ethnic autonomy affairs?

More stability for the Balkans as Hungary will try to prevent Serbs from breaking apart in Vojvodina with the Principality down South.

The negative part is Russia has more confidence to declare war in the Ottomans. No Austria means less to worry about. Although a divided Austria will have huge effects. Will the UK and France feel more pressure to help the Sultan? And will the Prussians feel more confidence to add the reminder of Austria later on but minus Croatia.

The latter will heavily influence Russo-Prussian Relationship later on.
 
Last edited:
An actual successful revolution means no Austro-Hungarian War though. Even if it happens, and the Hungarians win it, not even then would th Hungarians separate themselves entirely from Austria. That would be suicide. The nutjob Kossuth would be quickly thrown out if he would actually try to refuse to restore relations with Austria and the Habsburgs after the war. If Hungary wins, the personal union would still be restored, no matter what.
 
An actual successful revolution means no Austro-Hungarian War though. Even if it happens, and the Hungarians win it, not even then would th Hungarians separate themselves entirely from Austria. That would be suicide. The nutjob Kossuth would be quickly thrown out if he would actually try to refuse to restore relations with Austria and the Habsburgs after the war. If Hungary wins, the personal union would still be restored, no matter what.

And why would it be suicide? It would be giving up GP status as part of Austria for independence. And Kossuth was incredibly popular so even if someone tried to throw him out it would most likely not end too good for them. And I dont think Kossuth was a nutjob. He believed in democracy and had more backbone than any hungarian politican ever since with the exception of Pál Teleki. I dont think he would have gone for independence if he thrusted Austrian/Habsburg intentions in keeping with the April laws and respecting the constitution of Hungary. IMO he was right on that account. His ideas on national minorities were more progessive than any other leading hungarian politican at the time. He had his faults for sure but IMO he was one of the best politicans Hungary ever had.
 
And why would it be suicide?
Hungary alone can't resist Russia and neither can control its minorities.
Kossuth was incredibly popular so even if someone tried to throw him out it would most likely not end too good for them.
Undeniably, he was very popular, but if he insists on complete independence, then he might lose the support of a good portion of the elite.
And I dont think Kossuth was a nutjob.
That might have been an unnecessarily harsh term, okay.
He believed in democracy
That's good and all, but that can be achieved within Habsburg realm too. Leaving the protection just unnecesarily endangers the country.
I dont think he would have gone for independence if he thrusted Austrian/Habsburg intentions in keeping with the April laws and respecting the constitution of Hungary.
Imo, the declaration of independence was just a poorly thought-out political response to the Olmütz Constitution. The implications were not considered, that's why I'm mad at him.
IMO he was right on that account.
Maybe.
His ideas on national minorities were more progessive than any other leading hungarian politican at the time.
Didn't he simply adopt those ideas because of Austro-Russian successes though? And later because of his rigid anti-Habsburg stance?
He had his faults for sure but IMO he was one of the best politicans Hungary ever had.
Well, once again, maybe.
 
A Hungary that wins it's independence could lead to further nationalist uprisings through the rest of the century, and I think the Balkan nations would be the next to agitate for freedom. All this plays right into Russia's hands, as they could definitely support these uprisings by making that thrust for Constantinople as if that were their tacit objective...though their real goal is to have the newly liberated, mostly Orthodox states in their debt and as their clients.
 
Hungary alone can't resist Russia and neither can control its minorities.

OTL Hungary between 1867 and 1914 is pictured by many as an opressor of its national minoirities. Its mostly truth though that mostly entailed not allowing nationalist clubs and hindering native language schooling of national minorities (not preventing it). Also minimalizing the presence of national minorities in the pairlament. The thing is: it worked. Bad as it sounds Hungary was successful in opressing its national minorities till the war. There has been no mass protest or terrorist attacks or anything. Hungary had to pay the price after the war was lost but thats a different story. My point is if it worked OTL on the basis of opression why wouldnt it work ATL especially if a Kossuth led Hungary manages to reach an agreement with at least some of its national minorities.

And in regards of Russia: Hungary has no hope to stand up to Russia you are right. But why should he? There were a lot of minor Balkans states at the time even worse equipped than Hungary to stand up to Russia and they continued to exist. I also have to add that Austria-Hungary wasnt capable to stand up to Russia as well - especially alone. And the Hungarian elit might be more willing to finance a strong or better army if its his own tool instead as in OTL: a tool in the hands of the Habsburgs making U-plans about the occupation of Hungary and the destruction of the hungarian elit.

Undeniably, he was very popular, but if he insists on complete independence, then he might lose the support of a good portion of the elite.

The problem is not really the elit but the peasents. One of the biggest reason for Kossuth's and the revolution successs in mobilizing such a huge number of people was that they gave land to the peasents. The hungarian magnates and nobles of their own free will made a landreform that was more generous to the peasentry than either the Russian or the Prussian ones that were imposed by the monarch. And he would retain the backing of the liberals.

I agree that he will loose the support of the less or not liberal magnates - if he ever had it.

That's good and all, but that can be achieved within Habsburg realm too. Leaving the protection just unnecesarily endangers the country.

Imo, the declaration of independence was just a poorly thought-out political response to the Olmütz Constitution. The implications were not considered, that's why I'm mad at him.

Maybe.

I think that Kossuth and the rest wouldnt have gone for independence if the April laws were respected. When Vienna has decided to back Jellacic against them I think the die was cast. That it took the revolutionaries and Kossuth so long to reach the decision to declare independence even after they have been fighting austrian troops for nearly a year tells much about their reluctance. I agree the declaration itself was a supid move but i really dont see how avoiding it would have changed anything at that point. It was clear that no outside help was coming for the revolution. I for myself am mostly angry about Kossuth meddling in military affairs - thats what he really shouldnt have done.

Didn't he simply adopt those ideas because of Austro-Russian successes though? And later because of his rigid anti-Habsburg stance?

Maybe and maybe not. But it shows that he was more willing to work with the minorities and give them rights than any of the other leading hungarian politicans of the time.
 
Bukovina, Galicia, Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia are still Austrian TTL, right? That's going to be weird borders-wise.

Hungary is a landlocked entity in serious need of outside diplomatic support. If Hungary is one of two Republics on the continent, then France is a natural ally. That relationship would probably continue even as France becomes an Empire again, as France will still be somewhat isolated on the continent.

If Russia hasn't put down the Hungarian Revolt, would they even feel confident enough (and entitled) to seize the Danubian principalities? I wonder if Russia and Hungary could divide the principalities: Hungary gains Wallachia and Russia gets Moldavia. Hungary would have river access to the Black Sea, but that's only a modest improvement over being landlocked.

Could Hungary end up transforming itself into a liberal Empire like France did in order to appease conservative elements while protecting the broader revolution?
 
Bukovina, Galicia, Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia are still Austrian TTL, right? That's going to be weird borders-wise.

Hungary is a landlocked entity in serious need of outside diplomatic support. If Hungary is one of two Republics on the continent, then France is a natural ally. That relationship would probably continue even as France becomes an Empire again, as France will still be somewhat isolated on the continent.

If Russia hasn't put down the Hungarian Revolt, would they even feel confident enough (and entitled) to seize the Danubian principalities? I wonder if Russia and Hungary could divide the principalities: Hungary gains Wallachia and Russia gets Moldavia. Hungary would have river access to the Black Sea, but that's only a modest improvement over being landlocked.

Could Hungary end up transforming itself into a liberal Empire like France did in order to appease conservative elements while protecting the broader revolution?

Hungary doesn't need more Romanians to their already Multi Cultural State. And Russia will laugh at any attempts to divide the Principalities. Nominal Ottoman Vassals but de facto under Russian influence.

They might have invest heavily on railroads between Rijeka and Budapest. If Austria gets absorbed by a Prussian lead Germany then the risk of Hungary turning into an economical vassal is very likely. Croatia may exists then but also under German Influence.
 
Hungary alone can't resist Russia and neither can control its minorities.

Undeniably, he was very popular, but if he insists on complete independence, then he might lose the support of a good portion of the elite.

That might have been an unnecessarily harsh term, okay.

That's good and all, but that can be achieved within Habsburg realm too. Leaving the protection just unnecesarily endangers the country.

Imo, the declaration of independence was just a poorly thought-out political response to the Olmütz Constitution. The implications were not considered, that's why I'm mad at him.

Maybe.

Didn't he simply adopt those ideas because of Austro-Russian successes though? And later because of his rigid anti-Habsburg stance?

Well, once again, maybe.

Hungary doesn't need to resist the Russians as Russia has no interests there as long as Hungary does not meddle in the Principalities. Hungary needs to survive until Germany gets formed and remain in goodwill of Nicholas I and Alexander II until then.
 
Top