WI: Thirty Years' War ends in a decisive victory for either side

Circle of Willis

Well-known member
Historically, besides being extremely brutal and killing off a huge swathe of Germany's population, the Thirty Years' War was infamous for refusing to end as every time it seemed someone was on the verge of victory, they'd either hit a major reverse (ex. Gustav Adolf getting killed at Breitenfeld and then the Protestant coalition being crushed at Nordlingen 1634, derailing the train of successes he had started up) and/or more countries would jump in on the opposite side to keep them from winning (this kept happening to the Catholics - first it was the Danes, then the Swedes, and then the French).

After the titular thirty years the war ended in another negotiated settlement, the Peace of Westphalia, which definitely hurt the Catholic/Habsburg side but not fatally so. They lost the Netherlands for good and some peripheral territories, and this was where the principle of Westphalian sovereignty and thus the end of any hopes of turning the HRE into an actual centralized nation were established, but Austria retained the imperial title and Bohemia (the spark that started the war in the first place, also they were able to restore Catholicism to a majority in both Bohemia & Hungary) while Spain still kept considerable European territories outside of the Iberian Peninsula such as the Southern Netherlands, Franche-Comte and large parts of Italy (these had to be progressively eroded by Louis XIV in later conflicts, not in 1648). Also the 'Protestant' alliance couldn't accurately be called that anymore at this stage, as the Catholic French had joined them out of realpolitik and proved the decisive advantage they needed to finally overcome the Catholic/Imperialist faction after the Swedes took a bad hit at Nordlingen.

So. What if either the Protestant or Catholic sides had been able to completely defeat the other and realize their goals in full, well before they had to reach a peace (disadvantageous, but not deadly, to the latter) of mutual exhaustion? What would Europe come to look like with either the Protestants dismantling the Habsburg Empire brick by brick, fief by fief or the Habsburgs demolishing all opposition within (and quite possibly outside of) Germany?
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
So. What if either the Protestant or Catholic sides had been able to completely defeat the other and realize their goals in full, well before they had to reach a peace (disadvantageous, but not deadly, to the latter) of mutual exhaustion? What would Europe come to look like with either the Protestants dismantling the Habsburg Empire brick by brick, fief by fief or the Habsburgs demolishing all opposition within (and quite possibly outside of) Germany?

In the latter scenario, would Protestantism stop being a serious/viable thing outside of the British Isles, Scandinavia, and maybe Latvia/Estonia?
 

Circle of Willis

Well-known member
In the latter scenario, would Protestantism stop being a serious/viable thing outside of the British Isles, Scandinavia, and maybe Latvia/Estonia?
Yes, at least I'd imagine the Habsburgs will try very hard to make that the case. They had considerable success in advancing the Counter-Reformation in Hungary & Bohemia, as I said in the OP, and will likely try to repeat that outcome in Germany. Getting to enforce the Edict of Restitution, for example, would hugely impoverish Protestants by returning their seized properties to the Catholic Church and restoring a bunch of archbishoprics & bishoprics, prominently including the Prince-Archbishopric of Bremen, to serve as future bases for Counter-Reform pushes deep into northern Germany.
 

raharris1973

Well-known member
I've speculated before that massive over performance by the Catholic side, combined with institutional pro-Catholic bias, anti-Protestant persecution could lead to massive Protestant German emigration to English and Dutch overseas colonies, possibly cheapening the cost of free labor a great deal on the American mainland and Cape Colony.

Massive over performance by the Protestant side, combined with institutional pro-Protestant bias and anti-Catholic persecution could lead to major Catholic German emigration to....I'm not sure where. Possibly the colonies of Iberian powers, maybe France?
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Yes, at least I'd imagine the Habsburgs will try very hard to make that the case. They had considerable success in advancing the Counter-Reformation in Hungary & Bohemia, as I said in the OP, and will likely try to repeat that outcome in Germany. Getting to enforce the Edict of Restitution, for example, would hugely impoverish Protestants by returning their seized properties to the Catholic Church and restoring a bunch of archbishoprics & bishoprics, prominently including the Prince-Archbishopric of Bremen, to serve as future bases for Counter-Reform pushes deep into northern Germany.

Could this result in a massive flight of German Protestants up north similar to what we saw with the French Huguenots during Louis XIV's reign?
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
I've speculated before that massive over performance by the Catholic side, combined with institutional pro-Catholic bias, anti-Protestant persecution could lead to massive Protestant German emigration to English and Dutch overseas colonies, possibly cheapening the cost of free labor a great deal on the American mainland and Cape Colony.

What about to the British Isles, the Netherlands, Scandinavia, Livonia, and Estonia? I mean the countries themselves rather than their colonies. Interestingly enough, if a lot of them move to Livonia and Estonia, then they could perhaps complete the Ostsiedlung process there and make those two regions German-majority. That would certainly be interesting. Though those regions also aren't very hospitable to large-scale settlement.

Massive over performance by the Protestant side, combined with institutional pro-Protestant bias and anti-Catholic persecution could lead to major Catholic German emigration to....I'm not sure where. Possibly the colonies of Iberian powers, maybe France?

Louis XIV I suspect would welcome them with open arms in order to augment France's power even further, no?
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
BTW, I forgot another potential destination for Catholic refugees in the event of a decisive Protestant victory in the TYW. Italy but also the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (PLC). The PLC is notable for previously accepting a lot of Jewish refugees during the Middle Ages, so it wouldn't be a radical idea for them to accept a lot of Catholic refugees as well. And Italy could also accept them due to it being the place where the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church are based in during this time. (Yes, I obviously know that Italy was a bunch of separate independent city-states during this time. So, a lot of competition among them over Catholic refugees?)

I wonder if the Catholic immigrants in the PLC along with their descendants could eventually become elites in the PLC. Some kind of landed gentry and/or nobility, perhaps?
 

Circle of Willis

Well-known member
Could this result in a massive flight of German Protestants up north similar to what we saw with the French Huguenots during Louis XIV's reign?
I don't doubt it.

Good call on the PLC. Probably a more natural place for German Catholics to go than France, which has likely played a role in their destruction in the first place. Maybe the influx of refugees could strengthen the Commonwealth to the point where it'll be able to resist any attempt at partition, although I'm not sure how much impact they could have on its political system.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
I don't doubt it.

Good call on the PLC. Probably a more natural place for German Catholics to go than France, which has likely played a role in their destruction in the first place. Maybe the influx of refugees could strengthen the Commonwealth to the point where it'll be able to resist any attempt at partition, although I'm not sure how much impact they could have on its political system.

What role did France playing in causing the TYW? AFAIK, it began due to this incident, but where's France's overall blame here? :


And I suspect that the Catholic refugees and their descendants could play a similar role in the PLC to the role that the Huguenots played in Prussia (and the British Isles) after Louis XIV expelled them. I suppose that they could also push the PLC to adopt aggressively anti-German policies since they would seek revenge on the Protestant Germans for expelling them and/or their ancestors in the first place!
 

Circle of Willis

Well-known member
What role did France playing in causing the TYW? AFAIK, it began due to this incident, but where's France's overall blame here? :


And I suspect that the Catholic refugees and their descendants could play a similar role in the PLC to the role that the Huguenots played in Prussia (and the British Isles) after Louis XIV expelled them. I suppose that they could also push the PLC to adopt aggressively anti-German policies since they would seek revenge on the Protestant Germans for expelling them and/or their ancestors in the first place!
France was already aiding the Protestants long before it directly intervened in the war, being driven by realpolitik to do things like funding the Dutch war effort and inciting Sweden to kickstart its deadly German tour for the sake of undermining (and ideally crippling) the Habsburg adversary.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
France was already aiding the Protestants long before it directly intervened in the war, being driven by realpolitik to do things like funding the Dutch war effort and inciting Sweden to kickstart its deadly German tour for the sake of undermining (and ideally crippling) the Habsburg adversary.

Were Bavarian Catholics simply collateral damage in this?

And Yeah, I guess that it does make sense that in spite of their common faith, France viewed Austria-Hungary as a rival. Similar to Russia and Ukraine right now. Or Iraq under Saddam Hussein and Iran.
 

ATP

Well-known member
I don't doubt it.

Good call on the PLC. Probably a more natural place for German Catholics to go than France, which has likely played a role in their destruction in the first place. Maybe the influx of refugees could strengthen the Commonwealth to the point where it'll be able to resist any attempt at partition, although I'm not sure how much impact they could have on its political system.

Since many would be townspeople,we would have stronger cities as a result.One of main reasons why PLC failed was weak cities.
And,with germans supporting Kings rule over gentry,we would have stronger King as well.
Since Prussia was still polish vassals at that time,we would never lost East Prussia here/in OTL townspeople preferred Poland there to prussians rulers/

Althought many refugees would go to Spain colonies,too.I see much stronger and bigger Mexico here.
In case of protestant defeat - much more protestants there and smaller Mexico.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Since many would be townspeople,we would have stronger cities as a result.One of main reasons why PLC failed was weak cities.
And,with germans supporting Kings rule over gentry,we would have stronger King as well.
Since Prussia was still polish vassals at that time,we would never lost East Prussia here/in OTL townspeople preferred Poland there to prussians rulers/

Althought many refugees would go to Spain colonies,too.I see much stronger and bigger Mexico here.
In case of protestant defeat - much more protestants there and smaller Mexico.

A lot of Protestants could move to English North America, no? Especially to the parts that are now the US. Of course, it's possible that due to butterflies that might not be a US in this TL, at least not the one that we know and love.
 

raharris1973

Well-known member
A lot of Protestants could move to English North America, no? Especially to the parts that are now the US. Of course, it's possible that due to butterflies that might not be a US in this TL, at least not the one that we know and love.
I’ve speculated that an influx of German Protestant refugees to early Georgia could boost the local social constituency to keep the colony slavery free. Similarly cheap indentures for working tobacco lands in western Virginia and North Carolina could reduce the market for slaves there. By the late 1700s Africans might only be considered essential for rice, indigo and nascent cotton and sugar plantations on the mainland, and as domestic servants for high status people, with most farm tenants, work gangs, and small holders being white Central European refugees.
 

Batrix2070

RON/PLC was a wonderful country.
Good call on the PLC. Probably a more natural place for German Catholics to go than France, which has likely played a role in their destruction in the first place. Maybe the influx of refugees could strengthen the Commonwealth to the point where it'll be able to resist any attempt at partition, although I'm not sure how much impact they could have on its political system.
nce many would be townspeople,we would have stronger cities as a result.One of main reasons why PLC failed was weak cities.
Honestly it can be different, most of them are probably peasants but it is not a problem at all!
They can get rid of another difficult problem or even two in one go or three at once.
But from the beginning,
The first one is, of course, the fact that the Polish nobility (or, to be more precise, polonized Ruthenians such as Wiśniewski) may draw them to Sich Zaporizhzhya, settling in the wilderness which was the Wild Fields, in such a way that, because of their cultural alienation from the Ruthenian peasants and the Cossacks recruited from them, they will neither support the Cossacks nor seek in them protectors for their faith - after all, they are Catholics! And they fled to profess the Catholic faith in peace.
And looking at how the Polish Church worked centuries ago, you can be sure that after a few generations they will become Poles (at most in the version of the Walddeutshe, or Germans who do not speak German.) Which will make the polonization of Ruthenia, because not only the wild fields are empty almost all of Ruthenia (today's Ukraine) is!
They can effectively settle the lands east of the Dnieper more effectively binding these lands to Poland than the OTL and making it more difficult for the Orthodox Muscovites to conquer these lands.
In addition, the cities and the network of cities that will probably be created will make it easier to defend against the Tatars, and in the absence of such a Cossack force as the OTL, the Cossacks will probably not cause such a mess in the area as to threaten war.
And it will extend the Polish economic base even further making the overall wealth greater that despite low taxes there will be more money to the treasury of the Crown.

The second thing is that these Germans may give what the Cossacks gave for much lower price and in greater quantity.
What is that? Infantry.
The Commonwealth is a strange country in which it was cheaper and easier to recruit Cavalry than Infantry.
There was simply a lack of people who could be taken under arms and the low population of the whole republic did not help much because taking peasants out of the land to arms weakened the economy very much.
I have read a little about the Polish-Moscow War, probably in 1634, which was difficult and costly for Poland because there was not enough infantry and there were not enough mercenaries to fill the cadres. Mass emigration of catholic Germans (and not only) fleeing from the Protestants to Poland could effectively fill this gap.

The third thing is the royal lands and the problem of Silesia.
One should know that in PLC there was a problem with taking the royal land by those who were given a temporary lease but instead of giving it back after the death of the grantee, for example, they kept it. This of course greatly reduced the revenue to the treasury, the main part of which was the king's personal income.
Germany could first of all strengthen the King's personal lands by making him more independent from the income from taxes imposed on the nobility so he would not have to give them more concessions when recruiting an army for his own purposes.

And what has Silesia to do with it? Namely, in the event of the defeat of the Hasburgs and the collapse of their empire, Poland could, of course, with the will of the Silesians themselves, annex Silesia to the motherland, thus completing the unification of the Polish lands.
One should know that the period of Silesian germanization was only in the 18th century, and only after Prussia took it from Austria. In the 17th century, Silesia outside the main cities was largely Polish-speaking.
The incorporation of this wealthy region with its strong cities could very well change the balance of political power in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in favor of the central government.
A lot of Protestants could move to English North America, no? Especially to the parts that are now the US. Of course, it's possible that due to butterflies that might not be a US in this TL, at least not the one that we know and love.
Or to PLC, in spite of the rampant Counter-Reformation it was still a friendly country to them, most likely they would simply come to Ducal or Royal Prussia to their countrymen strengthening this region economically.
Besides, they could have come to Ukraine to settle it or to Livonia, as in the scenario above.

And most importantly, the very victory of one of the parties will most likely derail the PLC's road to partition.
 

Atarlost

Well-known member
In line with everyone's assumption that decisive means decisive for the Germanies and Hapsburg Empire but that whatever the outcome uncontested areas like Iberian Spain, England, and Poland are not forced to change their religions, I can't imagine an Anglo-Spanish or in a Catholic victory scenario Anglo-French colonial war not blowing up into a new war of religion.
 
Last edited:

ATP

Well-known member
A lot of Protestants could move to English North America, no? Especially to the parts that are now the US. Of course, it's possible that due to butterflies that might not be a US in this TL, at least not the one that we know and love.

I think that we would have german protestant state in North America under british rule,which would take most of Mexico.
In OTL many german settlers come there,now they would be majority.And,becouse they accepted kings,there would be no American Revolution or failed one.

I imagine english protestant running to Mexico from german colonies under british Aegis.

And,as @Batrix2070 said,PLC would take Silesia nas german settlers,which gave us good infrantry.
P.S we have some polish infrantry take from crown lands,but since they were usually gaven to some gentry,it was not much.
So called Piechota wybraniecka.
 
Last edited:

Skallagrim

Well-known member
I wrote a brief scenario about a Protestant victory a few years ago. It's about as comprehensive as I could imagine a Protestant triumph (half-way) realistically getting. It's based around a map portraying the aftermath in the somewhat longer term.




Summer-and-Winter.png



SUMMER AND WINTER


The map we see above portrays Europe in the year 1725, but the origins of this tableau go back a century, to the Twenty-Five Years' War, which is also called the War of German Liberation. The Protestant cause prevailed, aided by the (nakedly opportunistic) support of France. As it happened, Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden and Frederick V of the Palatinate both managed to avoid an early death. The successes that their side achieved led Gustavus Adolphus to lend public support to Frederick V's claims: an event that soon cascaded into the formation of the Second Protestant League— once again with Frederick at its head.

The war concluded in 1643, with the capitulation of the House of Habsburg. The last hope of the Imperial side had been an attempt to induce Denmark to switch sides. This, however, was discovered before Denmark could act, and only prompted Sweden to mount an aggressive and ultimately triumphant campaign against the Danish positions.

The defeat of the Habsburgs entailed nothing less than the complete abolition of the Holy Roman Empire. Ferdinand III had to endure the humiliation of not only renouncing his own Imperial title, but of formally recognising the newly-crowned German Emperor: none other than the head of the Protestant League, Ferdinand V himself. (As was famously noted at the time: "King in the cruel Bohemian Winter, but Emperor come splendid German Summer.") It was not that Frederick was somehow an ideal candidate. It was more that the other contenders (Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden and Johann Georg of Saxony) proved too divisive, whereas Frederick was acceptable to almost everyone.

It helped that the Second Protestant League was far broader than the first had been, which lent a lot of credibility to Frederick as a reasonable and sufficiently legitimate candidate. Thus, the scorned King became the hailed Emperor— albeit a rather powerless one, who was in practice just the primus inter pares of the Protestant German monarchs. (This, in fact, was another reason why Frederick became the candidate for the position: the fact that he was more or less a mediocrity made him sufficiently unthreatening to the other monarchs.)

Still, an Emperor is an Emperor. In humiliated Austria, former Emperor Ferdinand III would now be the one to console himself with the 'mere' title of King— which he at least retained for longer than a single winter. To add further insult to the injuries of the degraded Habsburgs, the Ottomans laid claim to all Hungary, where Protestant rebels soon turned into willing vassals of the Turkish overlords, so long as they were allowed to govern themselves. (Or at least: they were willing to be vassals for the time being...)

The newly-founded German Empire deliberately excluded the deeply Catholic regions in the South, but incorporated Silesia, Bohemia-Moravia, and a wedge cutting South all the way to include the Protestant regions of Württemberg. Bavaria soon moved to bring the remaining lesser Catholic statelets under its own aegis, which was tolerated in order to definitively keep them out of Habsburg hands. Poland-Lithuania, meanwhile, was harshly punished for its support of the Catholic cause: the German Empire annexed the coastal regions of Poland, which the Germans desired in order to establish a direct land connection to East Prussia.

France certainly demanded a high price for its crucial support: excluding only the overwhelmingly Protestant regions on the Left bank of the Rhine, France annexed all the formerly German regions to the West of the Rhine. The former Habsburg Netherlands were additionally divided between the Dutch Republic and France. The lion's share of these spoils went to France, although the Dutch gained Gent, Antwerp and Brussels. In any event, the Dutch were further rewarded with certain gains on their Eastern border— most notably Kleve and Bentheim.

Switzerland underwent some border adjustments, and swung firmly into the Protestant camp. The Germans actually wanted to absorb Switzerland directly, but Bavaria had established that pesky corridor (inhabited by staunch Catholics) right in between Switzerland and Germany. Of course, there was also the matter that France didn't want Germany to get too powerful. Especially since Sweden had opted to resolve its differences with Denmark separately, resulting in a war that Sweden looked set to win. France knew all too well that a powerful combination of Protestant states would eventually become a threat to.... France. Thus, having opportunistically gained what it wanted, France quickly began to mend fences with the Catholic states.

Sweden indeed defeated Denmark soundly, and demanded the permanent cession of Scania, Halland, Blekinge, Bohuslän, Trøndelag and Bornholm (in addition to a substantial indemnity).

A period of minor wars and diplomatic struggles began. Britain saw its monarchy restored. The fact that France had greatly extended its power, only to then turn back to the Catholic camp, soured even Charles II on the prospect of a French alliance. Instead, with its former ally Denmark humbled, England would seek a naval alliance with the Dutch Republic. This was motivated in no small part by a desire by both countries to guard themselves against future French aggression.

James, the Duke of York, was greatly at odds with his brother's policies. Their younger brother Henry, the Duke of Gloucester, was instead a great proponent of the Dutch alliance. He was sent to the Netherlands to argue for a treaty as soon as Charles II took the throne. Not only did he succeed, he returned to England with an engagement on the horizon. While in the Netherlands, Henry had met Maria of Orange-Nassau, sister of the late Stadtholder Willem II. The two found that they were an excellent match, and a year later, they were wedded. A year after that, their son William Charles was born. Ultimately, this would cause the childless Charles II to agree to the exclusionary measures that Parliament proposed to keep his Catholic brother James off the throne. Instead, the firmly Protestant Henry would be his heir.

Unwilling to fight England and the Netherlands at the same time, especially not with its own flank exposed to Protestant Germany, France abandoned any plans of waging further wars of territorial expansion against the Dutch Republic. Instead, the French policy became centred exclusively on building up a new Catholic alliance. One that would see France—now clearly the pre-eminent Catholic power—placed at its head. France successfully supported Savoyard ambitions, cultivating a staunch ally in North-Western Italy. Not to be outdone, Venice sought to exploit Habsburg weakness by annexing certain border regions, but this proved to be far trickier. Ultimately, Venice had to sell its Illyrian possessions to the Ottomans in order to finance its own war with the Austrians. On the plus side, Venice did manage to wrangle certain territorial gains from that campaign.

The Ottomans, meanwhile, were faced with the unpleasant consequences of their victory in Hungary. The new Protestant rulers of the country soon grew tired of being vassals. They claimed all of Hungary, including the regions governed directly by the Ottomans, and made a bid for independence. A successful, German-backed bid. This in turn allowed France to lure the irate Ottomans into the ranks of the anti-Protestant alliance. Furthermore, French influence, the enormous weakening of the Ottomans and the threat presented by Germany ensured the election of François Louis, the Prince of Conti, as King of Poland in 1697.

Come 1700, two major issues presented themselves: the Spanish Succession, and the Russian desire to finally gain proper access to the Baltic. Although France and Austria both had a claim to the Spanish inheritance, both knew that fighting over it would only serve their enemies. Instead, they resolved the matter diplomatically: France would press its claim to the Crown of Castille, while Austria gained the Crown of Aragon. The former would go to a separate line of the House of Bourbon, while the latter would go into full personal union with Austria under the Habsburgs.

The Russian Baltic issue was resolved through war, but not one against Sweden (which many had expected). The fact that France had enticed the Ottoman Empire into its alliance had soon brought Russia into closer league with the Protestant bloc. Rather than fight each other, Sweden and Russia worked together in dismantling Poland-Lithuania. As it happened, the Swedes did most of this, while the Russian simultaneously pursued an offensive against the Ottomans. The Germans, Dutch, English and Hungarians ensured that France and the other Catholic powers could not intervene, by declaring their resolve to enter the war if such intervention was undertaken.

By 1717, Poland had been reduced to a rump state, while Russia had driven the Ottomans from the Northern shores of the Black Sea. Sweden had conquered the vast Polish-Lithuanian territories, including those that could provide Russia with access to the Baltic. Having little use for such an inland empire, and knowing how much Russia needed those territories, Sweden swapped them for Karelia and an Ingrian border adjustment. A Danish attempt to re-take Scania provided Sweden with the perfect pretext for a subsequent anti-Danish war. In this, Sweden colluded with Germany and Britain. Together, these powers moved to disassemble what remained of Denmark's empire. Sweden took the lion's share, but although German gains at Denmark's expense were modest indeed, Sweden agreed to cede its own lands within the German Empire in exchange for German support. Britain, for its part, lent its navy to the undertaking, and received Iceland, Greenland, the Faroes and Jan Mayen.

France used the fact that its enemies were distracted to set certain affairs of its own in order, lending military support to the House of Savoy and thus uniting North-Western Italy under an allied regime.

It is now 1725. The Protestant and Catholic blocs (with their respective Orthodox and Muslim allies in Russia and the Ottoman Empire) have now both settled all their outstanding issues. They are both firmly aligned against each other. An all-encompassing war has been avoided thus far, but an intolerable pressure has by now built up. A grand conflagration is not far off, and everybody knows it. "All Europe is now on the brink of war," a philosopher in the Dutch Republic notes in his writing. "The moderate seasons have come to an end. No mild Spring, no gentle Autumn. This is the fierce age of extremes; of burning Summer and icy Winter."
 

raharris1973

Well-known member

Nice map -

What's the Protestant-dominant new version of the Holy Roman Empire called? And I presume anything Dutch, Swiss, and French is excluded from its territorial limits? It's new electoral system?

With this fundamentally divergence opening up in 1643, I wonder if this offers up a chance for substantially different histories of overseas colonization and emigration compared with OTL. The main outlines of the Americas, Labrador to Argentina, were already set. However, in the Americas the survival/non-survival of New Netherlands and New France is not a sure thing. France and Netherlands are both buffed up in home territory/populations. And the initial founding/exploitation Hudson's Bay is not set up yet (till late 1660s).

Even more room for variance is in the antipodes, the Cape (Cape Colony not founded till 1652), Australia, and New Zealand. There's opportunity in this ATL for Netherlands, Sweden, and even this new more northerly, Protestant, maritime oriented but still confederal and decentralized German empire to play a role in those areas.

Meanwhile, the Protestant win will place many, many Catholic Flemings and Dutch under Protestant-dominated government they'll probably dislike, possibly encouraging them to look for opportunities to move to Catholic lands if available. The Protestant win in Germany will likewise put many, many German Catholics under Protestant rule, probably encouraging many of them to look to move, and the Bavarian and Austrian spheres will only have limited real estate, filled with rugged mountains. Many German Catholics will fall under the Catholic, but Parisian-dominated regime of Bourbon France.

Bohemia with the German empire will be an interesting multilingual - German and Czech, and multi-religious - Hussite, Catholic and other Protestant, also Jewish melting pot or salad bowl.
 

Skallagrim

Well-known member
Nice map -
Thanks!


What's the Protestant-dominant new version of the Holy Roman Empire called?
I just call it the German Empire, because it's divested itself of most non-German bits, but it could really end up being called anything. (In German, this could mean that Germany ends up being called Deutschreich instead of Deutschland -- cf. Frankreich.)


And I presume anything Dutch, Swiss, and French is excluded from its territorial limits?
It ends up that way. The Dutch struggle for independence was its own thing, and enough of a separate identity existed. That would make simple (re-)absorption into a Protestant German Empire unlikely.

I noted in the write-up that the Protestants pretty much become dominant in Switzerland, and Germany would like to annex Switzerland (or at least the bulk of it), but there's Catholic lands in-between, which pose an obstacle.

(Of course, my wite-up makes it clear that a big war is probably coming. Annexation of Switzerland will be a German war aim. Meanwhile, the Western, French region of Switzerland is also the most staunchly Catholic part -- excepting Geneva -- and France will have designs there.)


It's new electoral system?
Anybody's guess, really. Probably convoluted, because all the German Princes would only accept Frederick as Emperor if they still got enough of a say for their liking.


With this fundamentally divergence opening up in 1643, I wonder if this offers up a chance for substantially different histories of overseas colonization and emigration compared with OTL. The main outlines of the Americas, Labrador to Argentina, were already set. However, in the Americas the survival/non-survival of New Netherlands and New France is not a sure thing. France and Netherlands are both buffed up in home territory/populations. And the initial founding/exploitation Hudson's Bay is not set up yet (till late 1660s).
With an early Anglo-Dutch alliance, New Netherlands have a pretty good chance.

If France for some reason manages to get its hands on the Hudson Bay region first, then they have a pretty firm foot-hold, and Britain has less of an incentive to push Westward from New England. (No prospect of territorially linking up with Prince Rupert's Land.)

France probably still loses the bulk of New France (the British colonists will be pushing West, and they'll almost certainly still have an overwhelming numerical advantage), but we may end up with a French equivalent to OTL Canada.

Meanwhile, New England will remain a separate colony, divided from the rest of British North America due to New Netherlands being in the way.

The Great Lakes region will no doubt be subject to some dispute.


Even more room for variance is in the antipodes, the Cape (Cape Colony not founded till 1652), Australia, and New Zealand. There's opportunity in this ATL for Netherlands, Sweden, and even this new more northerly, Protestant, maritime oriented but still confederal and decentralized German empire to play a role in those areas.
Not to mention the fact that other powers than Britain might well get a decent sphere of influence in India.


Meanwhile, the Protestant win will place many, many Catholic Flemings and Dutch under Protestant-dominated government they'll probably dislike, possibly encouraging them to look for opportunities to move to Catholic lands if available.
Reverse Huguenots?


The Protestant win in Germany will likewise put many, many German Catholics under Protestant rule, probably encouraging many of them to look to move, and the Bavarian and Austrian spheres will only have limited real estate, filled with rugged mountains. Many German Catholics will fall under the Catholic, but Parisian-dominated regime of Bourbon France.
To some extent, the fairly early POD does mean that religious affiliations among the populace are still pretty mutable. If the people in charge all say "Protestantism yay!", then a lot of the normal folks just trying to make a decent living are going to convert, over time.


Bohemia with the German empire will be an interesting multilingual - German and Czech, and multi-religious - Hussite, Catholic and other Protestant, also Jewish melting pot or salad bowl.
There can be little doubt that Frederick is going all in when it comes to turning Bohemia fully Protestant. I think most Catholic Bohemians would pack their bags and head for Austria.



In general, though, the set-up I've crafted creates a (deliberate) sense of balance. The Catholic powers surround Protestant(-majority) Switzerland, the Protestant powers surround Catholic Poland. Denmark is Protestant but has no inclination to fight for the Protestant bloc, Portugal is Catholic but has no inclination to fight for the Catholic bloc. The Protestants have an ally in Orthodox Russia, the Catholics have an ally in Muslim Turkey.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top