CONGRESS OF VIENNA
MUNUC 32 UPDATE PAPER
Introduction to Nobility
Understanding the Noble system is important to understanding hierarchy and alliances in Europe. Generally, land is organized as a ‘title’ which is presented to a family.
These titles confer corresponding noble ranks upon their holder. The titles as well are arranged in a hierarchy, with larger titles usually including a series of enfiefed smaller titles below it. For example, an Empire may have several Kingdoms and numerous Duchies inside of it associated with its title. A generalized set of titles and the title-holder nomenclatures is giving below in descending order:
1. Empire - Emperor / Empress
2. Kingdom - King / Queen
3. Archduchy - Archduke / Archduchess
4. Grand Duchy - Grand Duke / Grand Duchess
5. Duchy - Duke / Duchess
6. County - Count / Countess
7. Barony - Baron / Baroness
There are also cases where land is held by Christian theocratic leadership corresponding to ecclesiastical position:
1. Prince Archbishopric - Prince Archbishop (Compare to Duchy level title)
2. Prince Bishopric - Prince Bishop (Compare to County level title)
3. Prince Abbot - Prince Abbot (Compare to Barony title)
Certain titles were bestowed as a reward for bureaucratic service or to recognize the non-successive low nobility. These titles did not bestow any land rights:
1. Marquis / Marquess
2. Viscount / Viscountess
3. Baronet / Baronetess
4. Master (Mr.) / Mistress (Ms. or Mrs.)
Usage of these titles varied from culture to culture, and each title has different terminology in different languages ex. Herzog, Graf, and Freiherr are Duke, Count, and Baron in German.
Titles could be held in the plural, united by only their monarch. For example, the
Kings of Great Britain were also the Prince-Electors of Hanover, and the Danish Kings held the Kingdom of Norway and Duchy of Holstein as well. In this case, the multiple titles were held in Personal Union, such that they could have separate de jure laws, succession, and assemblies if applicable while united by the same Monarch. This led to the strongest form of alliance between states, while still permitting legal and cultural differences. In our own timeline, Hanover and Britain split when Queen Victoria ascended to the British throne, as the constitution of Hanover did not permit women (Cognatic) in succession.
Generally in Europe, the transfer of titles was dictated by an agnatic primogeniture succession, wherein the eldest male child of the direct line inherited the full title of his father.
2
However, there are instances where other children were eligible to inherit. For example, certain succession laws utilized agnatic gavelkind, where all male children received a share of the titles. Primogeniture usually secured larger unified realms, whereas gavelkind caused the mass fragmentation observed in the old HRE.
There are also instances where a noble could choose to land a second or third son by granting them a different title than that of the primary successor. This established what is known as a Cadet Branch. The Cadet line, while still part of the dynasty, usually received a new noble name based on their title, or sometimes indicated by a hyphen. Due to the longevity of the lines, this can sometimes be quite confusing. For example, the House of Bourbon
(Congress: France, Spain, Naples) is really a Cadet line of the Capetian Dynasty, but is significant enough to just be called Bourbon for their original ducal title in France. In comparison, the Romanovs of the Russian Empire are sometimes demarcated as Holstein-
Gottorp-Romanov, indicating they descend from Holstein-Gottorp. However, the Holstein-
Gottorps are themselves a Cadet Branch of the House of Oldenburg. To further complicate this, the Danish Monarch is also a member of the Oldenburg Dynasty by the route of
Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, usually just called the House of Glücksburg.
Like I said, very confusing to the normal modern American reader.
To help simplify this, the Monarchies are listed, with Dynasty preceding Cadet nomenclature if applicable. Dynastic Relations are suggested. The conventional name is bolded:
o [Habsburg]-Lorraine
o Dynastic Relations: France (mother)
3
• Russian Empire:
o [Oldenburg]-Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov
o Dynastic Relations: Wurttemberg (mother), Baden (marriage), Sweden (kin) , Prussia
(betrothal) , Denmark (Distant kin)
• United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
o [Brunswick-Lüneburg]-Hanover
o Held in personal union over Hanover
o Dynastic Relations: Mecklenburg (cousin in-law), Denmark (cousin), Wurttemberg (in-
law)
o [Hohenzollern]
o Dynastic Relations: Russia (betrothal) , Netherlands (in-law, cousin)
• Kingdom of France
o [Capet]-Bourbon
o Dynastic Relations: Saxony (mother), Sardinia (marriage) Spain (kin), Sicily (kin)
o [Burgundy]-Aviz-Braganza
o Dynastic Relations: Spain (regent marriage)
• Kingdom of Spain
o [Capet]-Bourbon-Anjou
o Dynastic Relations: Portugal (marriage), France (kin), Sicily (kin), Sardinia (nephew)
• Kingdom of Sweden
o Heir Apparent: [Bernadotte]
o Heir Pretender: [Oldenburg]-Holstein-Gottorp
4
▪ Dynastic Relations: Baden (Mother), Russia (kin), Denmark (distant kin)
• Kingdom of Denmark
o [Oldenburg]
o Dynastic Relations: Great Britain (Mother), Russia (distant kin), Sweden (distant kin)
• Kingdom of the Netherlands
o [Nassau]-Orange
o Dynastic Relations: Prussia (marriage, mother)
• Southern Netherlands
o Not its own monarchy, held by Austrian Habsburg-Lorraines
o [Wettin]
o Held in personal union under Saxony
o [Wettin]
o Held in personal union over Warsaw
o Dynastic Relations: France (cousin), Bavaria (marriage, mother) , Sicily (nephew)
• Swiss Confederation
o Cantonal Confederation, no Monarch
o [Wittelsbach]-Palatinate-Zweibrücken-Birkenfeld
o Dynastic Relations: Saxony (in-law, cousin), Baden (marriage)
• Kingdom of Wurttemberg
o [Wurttemberg]
o Dynastic Relations: Russia (in-law), Great Britain (marriage)
5
o [Brunswick-Lüneburg]-Hanover
o Held in personal union under Great Britain
• Grand Duchy of Baden
o [Zähringen]-Baden
o Dynastic Relations: Bavaria (in-law), Russia (in-law), Sweden (in-law)
• Grand Duchy of Mecklenburg-Schwerin
o [Mecklenburg]-Schwerin
o Dynastic Relations: Great Britain (cousin in-law)
o Papal Succession, no Monarch
• Republic of Genoa
o Republic, no Monarch
o [Savoy]
o Dynastic Relations: France (in-law), Spain (mother)
• Kingdom of Sicily
o [Capet]-Bourbon-Anjou
o Dynastic Relations: Saxony (mother), Spain (kin), France (kin)
• Kingdom of Naples
o Apparent: [Murat]
o Pretender: [Capet]-Bourbon-Anjou (Sicily)
6
The extent to which these noble relations are relevant to the politics of committee is an open question for Congress delegates, but they should assume that other states of their noble house or married to it would serve as safer allies. Delegates can also choose to place members of any dynasty on any open or invented titles if the Congress approves.
7
Potential Saturday Open Session Topics
The dais may choose to introduce an update at the beginning of the open session in addition to any uncovered agenda items. The following two topics are also interesting topics relevant for Congress decisions if delegates are interested.
The Eastern Question
The ease Napoleon’s invasion of Ottoman Egypt has brought to attention the apparent decay of the ages-old empire. Russian marines, working alongside the Ottoman Navy during the first conquest of the Ionian Isles, also noticed the increasing corruption and ineptitude of the
Janissary Corps that had once threatened even Vienna just some two hundred years ago.
Meanwhile, a significant revolution has gripped the Ottoman Pashalik of Serbia for the last decade. The Serbian revolutionaries have beaten back the Ottoman forces multiple times and are asserting newfound sovereignty from their capital at Belgrade. The Congress could choose to intervene in this situation.
The first question is whether Europe ought to intervene at all. The Serbians are fellow
Christians and have been under Ottoman domination long enough. However, with the
Napoleonic Wars having only just concluded, it is an open question of whether possible conflict with the Turks is worth it, and if so, whose militaries would be committed.
If intervention is chosen, there is also the question of which Serbian leadership the
Congress would like to support. Two rivals are jockeying for control of the revolution, and the winner is likely to become Serbia’s founding father. One option is Đorđe Petrović, known for his nickname Karađorđe (Black George), who fought the Ottomans initially in a volunteer
8
corps for the Austrian Military. The other is Miloš Obrenović, a civil leader in Serbia with contacts in the Russian Empire. Who we select will likely have dramatic implications for the future of Serbian, and possibly Balkan, history.
Freedom of Trade
Trade has recently become a fundamental element of state capacity. Numerous countries now fund their development and government budgets with the coin made from colonial exploitation and trade tariffing. Both blockades and key battles throughout the
Napoleonic Era such as the battles for Malta and Egypt demonstrated the value of controlling the avenues of trade. Recognizing this reality, the Congress has an opportunity to intervene and set new trade rules for Europe. As a general rule, increased trade liberalization can benefit everyone, but does harm the state which might control a local node of trade like a strait or river. The more industrialized the economy, the better trade benefits. There are three topics to discuss:
First is precisely those rivers. Europe is criss-crossed by a number of deep, navigable rivers which facilitate transport and trade. However, controlling the banks of these rivers allows states to impose tolls or close them as they see fit, which can be severely disruptive.
The Congress may decide if rivers ought to be considered international waterways, or whether state sovereignty covers these pathways.
Second and third are the control of two critical straits, the strait of Gibraltar and the
Danish Belts. The former can be effectively shut by placing artillery at two close points across the straits: at the British enclave of Gibraltar, and the Spanish enclave of Ceuta, which was taken originally from the Portuguese during the Iberian Union. In theory, two allied nations
(or one nation possessing both!) could cooperate to close the strait to any foreign movement.
9
However, there is no feasibility of a toll. Meanwhile, the Danish belts lock the entrance in and out of the Baltic Sea, and are enclosed entirely within Danish controlled territory. The Danes presently and historically have collected a Sound Toll and customs inspection at their belts.
Naturally, these straits affect proximal trade - those states closer to the Baltic sea have more cause to concern themselves with the Danish belts, and those on the Mediterranean have more cause to worry about the strait of Gibraltar. Should these points be regulated by anyone is an open question.
Additional Questions Answered (Candidly)
1. I don’t understand something!
a. No problem, contact me: [email protected]
2. How big is the committee?
. We have 60 delegates assigned, all of which are shown in the Background Guide and the Committee page at https://munuc.org/committees/vienna/ a. Naturally, attendance can vary a little bit, so assume at least 50 delegates.
3. What are my crisis powers?
. Congress of Vienna is not a crisis committee.
4. I can’t find information on my character?
. You don’t need to, check the footnote on the bio in the BG. a. Also, don’t worry about your character, worry about your country.
5. I don’t know what my country’s agenda should be?
10
. The BG suggests a little of your general agenda, and your approach to the congress.
Start there. a. Look at what happened historically and see if you can deduce what your country was angling on, and whether or not they were successful. b. Consider the defense of your capital, the politics of your country, your allies, your state religion, and your ideology. All of these are hints towards your agenda. c. Feel free to workshop ideas over email with me. I love enthusiasm. d. Ultimately remember you’ll receive a secret agenda from me, so don’t worry.
6. What’s an article, and how is it different than a resolution?
. I’m expecting these articles to be focused on one agenda item each, be less than a page in length, and presented without Q&A. Details are less important than the strategy espoused. We’re passing several each session (or not!).
7. Are we going to get through the whole agenda?
. Maybe, maybe not. It’s ok either way.
8. What’s the ‘Open Session’?
. If we missed something, we’ll cover it then. It’s also a time to introduce any personal agenda outside of the formal agenda that your country wants. If the committee needs some spice, the dias will introduce an update.
9. What’s the ‘Gala at the Hofburg’?
. You’ll see!
10. Explain the roster again?
. Every delegate has one vote. However, certain countries have more or less delegates proportional to a number of factors I’ve determined. Generally the major powers have 6, the mid-sized powers 3 or 2, and the minor powers 1. Larger powers operate as a predetermined
11
bloc, so to MUN speak. Minor powers are in coalitions of equal sizes to the major powers.
Everyone is free to disagree and shift their votes.
11. What is vote-trading / log rolling?
. For example, a small North German state may not have any stake in Italian politics, but will need votes for their own agenda later, as well as the reverse being true. They can agree with an Italian state to vote for their article, and in return the Italian state can agree to vote for their article despite neither having a technical interest in the other. You see a lot of this in the US Congress.
12. Why do you want me to bring a copy of the BG?
. You can review each agenda item in a couple minutes before you debate it. Super easy.
13. Sri, this all sounds like a lot…
. Maybe. But it’s going to be a lot of fun, it’s going to be very accessible, and I’ll make sure you get all the help/info you need. I designed this topic to be easy to debate even if you know very little about history, and I think you’ll experience that as soon as we get into it.
12