WI: Napoleon dies fighting Austria in 1809?
- Thread starter GauchoBadger
- Start date
Seems like its very likely France is gonna come out of Nappy's early death with a France to the Rhine as the outlying kingdoms under the various brothers slowly drift away from French influence or get picked off in later wars. Kinda like ablative armor so that France can hide behind the river defenses. With Nappy dead and Joseph doing his best to peace out, i can see Russia setting their eyes on easy to pick off pieces of territory off of Prussia and Austria if they try to continue to prosecute a war against France, or more likely the Kingdom of Westphalia and Bavaria who will France will try to keep on as client kingdoms.
An enlarged France to the Rhine, plus bits of Italy that they can hold onto, will make for an interesting power when the Industrial Revolution kicks off.
An enlarged France to the Rhine, plus bits of Italy that they can hold onto, will make for an interesting power when the Industrial Revolution kicks off.
The most probable acquisition for Russia would be the Duchy of Warsaw or its part with the rest going back to Prussia. During the time in question Russia was at war with Sweden (until September 1809) and the Ottomans (until 1812) so it was rather busy. However, the Duchy of Warsaw would be an obvious target for Russia and especially Prussia, especially if the French military presence in Germany is minimized.
I could see something like the Carlist Wars still breaking out in the 1830's, and being the next large scale conflict, if Ferdinand VII and Charlotte Bonaparte only have surviving daughters ITTL, which is not impossible given the king's OTL progeny.
I do wonder just how much of Italy and Switzerland Joseph's empire could keep in the long term. The really interesting thing here will be the myriad marriages that result from whatever the Peace of 1809 looks like. As far as upcoming wars go, with the 1810's potentially free of a general war, I'd expect Austria and/or the Italian states to engage in the Serbian Revolution against the Ottomans. Russia in the near term has the Swedes and the Turks to deal with.
I actually think that the Russians might see value in preserving the Grand Ducky of Warsaw as a buffer state and potential ally. In the age of nationalism, Russia bills itself as a champion of Slavic peoples. and with Warsaw Russia shares opponents in Prussia and Austria. I do wonder what consequences if any this has for the Swedish War, let alone Swedish succession. I almost want to consider this topic from a Tilsit POD with the death of Napoleon in 1809 the first major butterfly.
Having a Polish state as a “buffer” in alt-1809 would not make any practical sense for Russia:
1st, “buffer” against whom? Prussia is a friendly state and is weakened to such a degree that, in an absence of Nappy, it is almost Russian client and has to count on the Russian support if it wants to get back some of the lost territories. So having a buffer against it does not make sense.
2nd, the Poles at that time are considered (and mostly are) to be hostile to the Russian Empire and loyalty of those within the empire is questionable so retaining their state may cause the obvious problems. Plus, the Duchy has close links to France and, by definition, hostile to Prussia (and vice versa) and as an ally Prussia is more valuable and more “traditional”.
3rd, the age of nationalism is not there yet and in OTL Russia was positioning itself much more as a defender of the Orthodox people (the Greeks are not Slavs and neither are the Romanians/Moldavians) rather than the Slavs (AFAIK, the Croats never were on the list and neither were the Poles). Anyway, even the craziest Russian Slavophiles (which are not yet around in 1809) did not profess the warm feelings toward the Poles (see #2) and in the Russian literature of the XIX they are painted in a predominantly negative way even by the “progressive” writers.
4th, in 1809 neither Prussia nor Austria are “opponents” and when are forced to fight each other (in 1812) they are passing through the “moves”. Both are traditional allies of Russia and hostility is an issue of unpredictable future.
In OTL even creation of the Congress Poland did not produce an excessive enthusiasm on the Russian side especially when the influential Poles tried to convince Alexander to expand it by inclusion of the former PLC territories (including Belorussia, Lithuania, Right Bank Ukraine and Courland) annexed by Russia during the Partitions. Political backlash to these proposals was severe enough to convince Alexander to abandon such an idea. He seemingly liked the Poles (and had a Polish mistress, Marya Naryshkina, born princess Maria Czetwertyński-Światopełk) and Adam Czartoryzski was his close friend (and presumably lover of his wife, with Alexander’s approval) but he liked to stay alive even more. 😂
Impact on the Russian wars:
With the French danger gone Russia can put much more resources against the Ottomans and, not being pressed by time (in OTL there was a need to have the Danube Army free in a view of expected Napoleon’s invasion) it can get more substantial gains, especially on the Caucasus: in OTL Russia got Bessarabia and the trading rights on the Danube (probably could get the whole Moldavia) but gave back most of its conquests on the Caucasus (which it had to conquer again during the next war) so perhaps they could be kept.
By the time of POD (April 1809) Sweden already lost Finland and in March Russians successfully invaded Sweden proper. Gustav IV was already dethroned and if the CS is not on the table anymore the war could end few months earlier (see the map below for the last stage of that war). An issue of the successor for Charles XIII is an interesting one because one of the main OTL considerations, pleasing Napoleon, is gone (the Swedes asked for Nappy’s approval of a candidate and got it). Getting Finland back without the French probably would not look realistic even to the most enthusiastic Swedes. Of course, the OTL situation could not be completely excluded because not everybody was happy with the Danish option and having a high-ranking French military figure as a heir to the throne had its advantages (after all, the French empire is not going anywhere and can be an useful ally in the future).
OTOH, if Joseph is an emperor then it is highly unlikely that Bernadotte is going to be interested in a proposal (Massena and Eugene rejected an offer). In OTL his relations with Napoleon were at their worst level and he had to chose between a complete retirement (with a clear possibility of Nappy taking back a big part of his sources of income, as was his habit) and position of administrator of the Rome (not too bad but not a high position either). Small wonder that he played the Swedish card quite energetically (and later spent a considerable effort to guarantee his financial well-being). But with Joseph is an emperor, Jean Baptist would be able to count upon one of the highest positions in the Empire so it is anything but clear if the temptation would be there (and there could be a clear possibility for a future marriage of Oscar to Joseph’s daughter Zenaide with all related consequences).
Last edited:
As Zenaide is only three years older than Napoleon Louis, I think they will marry as Joseph’s eldest daughter is the most logical match for his designated heir but that would leave her younger sister Charlotte available for Oscar. Maybe Oscar’s OTL wife can end in Naples as wife for Murat’s eldest son...
Who on that scenario is going to be a “designated heir” is an open question and it is not necessarily will be one of Joseph’s brothers or their children. Nappy did not introduce any succession law and was appointing whoever was pleasing him. The “most logical” match for Joseph would be one strengthening his position and, with an “old royalty” rejecting these matches (in OTL Napoleon offered Zénaïde in marriage to Ferdinand, the deposed king of Spain, but the offer was refused), a domestic powerful figure would more “logical” than a marriage to one of the Bonaparte cousins which would be a liability (this did happen in OTL but by that time none of the persons involved was anywhere close to power) complicating relations with the old regimes. Probably both Clary sisters would support such a match: they were seemingly very close and Joseph and Jean Baptist also had been friendly.
BTW, in this TL I would not bet on Murat’s chances to remain the King of Naples for very long.
Well Napoleon LoII’s was pretty much considered the heir of Napoleon by many AND Napoleonic’s Imperial succession was clearly reserved only to Bonaparte males with the exclusion of Lucien’s branch.
Murat’s chances to keep Naples here are pretty good for me as they were in OTL before the 100 days
But Russia allying with Napoleon to start with, and standing aside in the 1809 campaign demonstrates that the Russians don't particularly trust the Austrians and the Prussians either. If offered East Prussia at Tilsit, would Russia have refused it? AS it was, the most capable minds of the Prussian army were already fighting for the Czar.
And a Polish state outside of Russia but boxed in by Austria and Prussia is in no position to try to assert itself in eastward places where few Poles live, but southward and westward, both of which have Poles. And, yes, Russia cares more for the Orthodox than the Slavs per se, but that would be another reason to one day align with Warsaw against Austria. Not soon, perhaps, but eventually. Also, a Polish state gives Russia more flexibility in dealing with potential Polish troublemakers inside Russia. Remember too that Russia very nearly went along with an actually independent Congress Poland in 1815, and that was at a time when fears of Russia being invaded from the West had been realized.
Last edited:
I’m afraid that you are too much into the matchmaking (🤪) at the expense of a Realpolitik. In 1809 Joseph suddenly becomes an emperor in a very difficult situation. Spain is in a turmoil, the war of the 6th Coalition is going on and, with Nappy dead, the coalition may easily get Prussia (almost definitely) and Russia (as soon as there is a peace with Sweden; the Ottoman war may continue to be a relatively low resource conflict). Situation in the French army is anything but clear in an absence of a single overwhelming authority. At best, whoever is chosen as c-in-c is capable to take Vienna and to arrange for a ceasefire. To survive as an emperor Joseph must have situation under control both domestically and internationally really fast. He may get political support at home due to his existing connections but he also needs support in the army and while he is on good terms with some marshals, the only really reliable one is Bernadotte (who also had good connections in Northern Germany and quite popular with the Saxons). So getting him even closer would be a reasonable thing to do. Nobody is talking about the immediate marriage because both Oscar and Zinaide are still children but discussion of the possibility would be quite realistic and even their future marriage does not necessarily mean that succession goes to their children (was Joseph too obsessed with this specific issue? I don’t know).
Now, the international part of the equation. The opponents are not idiots and they are clearly understand situation in which a new emperor finds himself so they are going to squeeze as much as possible. The key item for the Brits (who are paying for the music) is CS and it has to go (Bernadotte during his tenure as a governor in Germany was breaking it all the time and so was Louis in Holland). With it is being gone, few things immediately lose the sense. As a result, Spain is returned to the Bourbons and Illyrian Provinces to Austria (none of them makes sense without the CS). But this is hardly enough to please the allies so the arrangement in Germany should be changed and this most probably means that the Kingdom of Westphalia ceases to exist and its territories are returned to Prussia with Hanover being restored. So Jerome has to go. Now, while Louis is trying to be as Dutch as he can, the Brits do not want Bonaparte in the Netherlands (in OTL they landed inlanded at Walcheren on 30 July). Most probably, restoration of the House of Orange would be one of the requirements of peace because French-held Antwerp was one of the triggering points of the British paranoia. So Louis has to go as well. In OTL after annexation of his kingdom in 1810 he fled to Austria but in this TL he probably stays in France, potentially as a heir apparent. He is already married to Hortensia and his children are just few years old and, even if he acknowledged his parenthood, the nasty rumors are circulating and, if needed, can be used to remove them from a succession line. The Naples is another part of the equation. The kingdom is poor and logistics needed for its support is quite complicated, especially taking into the account British naval supremacy. The Brits and Austrians would prefer restoration of the Bourbons to having Murat as a King.
If he becomes an emperor, Joseph would be mostly concerned about his own political survival rather then Napoleon’s rules of 1806 and changing themby allowing the male succession from female line would not be such a big deal or, in the “worst case scenario”, succession would eventually go to Louis and his line. In 1809 Joseph can still expect to produce a heir of his own but a need to preserve his brothers on their thrones would be a huge liability without which he can live. Even if eventually succession by one of them proves to be unavoidable, he still has quite a few years to survive as a ruler of an empire and he needs all support he can get. And as far as “support” is involved, Jerome and Louis are pretty much useless: as soon as Napoleon is gone and the French Empire minimizes it’s influence on the continent as the only way to survive, they are gone. They may end up in France as the kings in exile and eventually one of them may inherit the imperial crown but this is neither here nor there as far as Joseph’s own political survival is involved: they can’t strengthen his rule but Bernadotte can.
Now, your opinion regarding Murat’s chances clearly was not shared by Murat who found that the allies are planning to remove him and to reinstall the Bourbons. From the alt-France perspective, retaining the Naples would be untenable politically, militarily and economically (Kingdom of Italy was a different case) and he could not survive on his own.
I don't know why this post won't work correctly....
My understanding is that there were a myriad of potential candidates for the Swedish throne. I don't know if this was ever a possibility, but George of Oldenburg might have been interesting. The Prince of Vasa has working against him that his father was purposefully deposed, so bringing him back into the line of succession may not be popular, but is a better choice than some if Bernadotte and the need/desire to please France is off the table. Depending on events in Baden, a Zahringen candidacy seems possible and not unprecedented.
It might be interesting having a Russian prince ruling Moldavia in this era, unless the region is annexed entirely.
My understanding is that there were a myriad of potential candidates for the Swedish throne. I don't know if this was ever a possibility, but George of Oldenburg might have been interesting. The Prince of Vasa has working against him that his father was purposefully deposed, so bringing him back into the line of succession may not be popular, but is a better choice than some if Bernadotte and the need/desire to please France is off the table. Depending on events in Baden, a Zahringen candidacy seems possible and not unprecedented.
Nonetheless, I could see Bernadotte ending up with something. Prince of Andorra, perhaps?
I agree with you that the succession to Joseph could get messy. For me, that was why his older daughter's OTL marriage made sense, and could still in this ATL. As for Murat, it's interesting that you think he would fall eventually anyway. You may well be right, but what are your thoughts as to why, and by whom?
When was Lucien's brranch formally excluded, and why do you think Murat's reign and lineage could endure in Naples?[/quote]
Last edited:
Interesting analysis, though I could see Jerome ruling a rump Westphalia (and none of it going to Prussia if it gets back what it lost in the East at Tilsit). Likewise, there are small contrivances within Germany, err, the Confederation of the Rhine, that could go to Louis and/or his sons, or to Jerome and his heirs, for now at least. Likewise for Murat, who had ruled in Berg before getting Naples. What do you see happening with Eugene de Beauharnais and his kingdom?
What do you mean by “standing aside”? In 1809 Russia was fighting two wars while spending all available resources on expansion and modification of its army. Starting the 3rd war was simply unrealistic. Prussia did not participate in the war of the 6th coalition at all. BTW, at Tilsit Alexander was trying to protect the Prussian interests (not successfully but nonetheless) and Prussia was a close ally in the 5th coalition. Not sure if and why would Russia be interested in East Prussia or why Napoleon would offer such a “gift”. BTW, Clausewitz went on the Russian service only in 1812 y which time he was a junior officer. Blucher, Sharnhorst and Gneizenau remained in Prussia. The only “mind” who went of the Russian service in 1806 was general Phull and it is an open question if he qualified as “capable”: his plan for 1812 would be a disaster for the Russian army.
Your logic related to aligning with the Catholic Poland against Catholic Austria to defend the Orthodox Slavs completely escapes me. 🤪 The sane goes for pretty much everything else related to the Polish part: in OTL existence of the Congress Poland did not simplify anything and an idea of the invasion from the West in 1815 was a plain political bluff with no realistic chances for happening.
For the most part i agree with your assessment. The part I doubt the most is the rest of the continent caring all that much if the Brits have the "Dagger of Antwerp" pointed at their throats. It's one thing to go all the way to Paris to slay the Ogre, it's another thing to prosecute a war into France just so the Brits dont have their fees fees hurt about a France to the Rhine. A France that hasnt been utterly degraded by the festering sore in Spain and the crippling annihilation of a lost Grande Armee. That's just something i dont see the continental powers wanna get tangled with, no matter how much money the Brits dangle in front of them. With CS likely taken down by Joseph, why bother with more war when trade is now unrestricted.
Russia gonna try to get all she can if Prussia/Austria get too distracted by foreign adventures, while smashing down on the Swedes and Turks for all they can grab.
Habsburgs at most will want their valuable Northern Italian possessions back, and theyre not gonna go jump into the meatgrinder for the Low Countries, nor distract or weaken themselves too much if Russia or Prussia get frisky about Galicia. Not mention the Balkan games theyre playing with the Turks.
Prussia is too busy consolidating her position and trying to bum rush whatever clay they can get from a likely defunct Westphalian Kingdom/Confederation of the Rhine. Giving up everything West of the Rhine to secure everything East of the Rhine is an easy choice to make for a power that was dismembered a few years prior. Pushing West across the Rhine to "punish" France has waaaaay too many downsides to risk their safe position.
I dont see any nation of note willing to be the first man into the breach in trying to invade France proper. Maybe Joseph might try to fight it out a bit in Italy or Confederation of the Rhine, to try to preserve some client state ablative armor. Giving some flashpoint tensions, as Austria and Prussia, respectively, try to muscle in on more clay. The French win (very possible they have alot of military talent even sans Nappy) in those limited wars i can see everyone backing off with France keeping Italy proper, and forming a small buffer state East of the Rhine. If France loses, as long as the losses arent catastrophic, they can retreat behind the Rhine river defenses and Alps and dare folks to come dig em out.
With Britain it would not be an issue of their hurt feelings but a possibility of getting a lasting peace. Of course, it can be argued that if both Austria and Russia (well, and Prussia, which at this specific point is not a big independent military factor) are fully satisfied and there is no CS then the Brits are either willing to overlook an issue of Antwerp (which is in Belgium and has nothing to do with Louis but there can be provision regarding it being demilitarized ) or are powerless on the land anyway. However, I would not underestimate the existing “anti-revolutionary” feeling in Europe and the British ability and willingness to spend money on anti-French coalitions. France still has some colonial possessions and at least Martinique was in the British hands (Guadeloupe was occupied by the Brits in 1810) some of which are being held by the Brits and, in general, commercial traffic required peace. In 1809 Kingdom of Holland and even Louis are not happy with the status of French vassal so in this TL Louis most probably trying to become fully (or at least much more) independent. Nappy “solved” the problem with annexing the kingdom (and Louis fled to Austria). Joseph would have to be more subtle. So we have two main scenarios:
1st, Louis manages to position himself as an independent figure (he was seemingly loved by the Dutch) and the Brits & Co are OK with this. Rather unlikely because the Brits generally supported House of Orange-Nassau and in 1809 prince Willem Frederik was going to join the Austrian army (in May so he may or may not join in this TL) and later was backed by Alexander. Anyway, if Louis survives as a king, his independence probably disqualified him as a welcomed candidate to the French succession so the law of 1806 is going to be modified.
2nd, Britain, Austria, Prussia and Russia are backing William and there is a possibility of “War for Louis’ interests”. With France still holding Belgium, would supporting Louis be important enough?
I feel it doesnt matter what Louis does or what the Dutch/Belgiums want to do. Joseph is gonna hold onto the Low Countries with an iron grip, for its economic potential and ease of defending his eastern frontier from a horde of unwashed Germans/Russians/whatever else might come. If the Coalition wants to force the issue, i feel they need to score 2 major offensive victories, the 1st major win to boot the French across the Rhine (assuming Joseph wishes to contest), the 2nd win to pry the Rhenish frontier away from France. My money is on the French Marshals able to at least scrape 1 draw that stops the coalition forces at the Rhine and make further offensive action too much of a hassle. The loss of Napoleon will temporarily cripple offensive elan and audacity, but i think on the defensive, the senior upper tier French marshals will perform ably, with interior lines, and standing on the defensive.
Anti-revolutionary feelings or whatnot when UK cant find any willing meat shields to do the heavy lifting of fighting the French on land, yea I can see them sullenly just focus on jacking the remaining French overseas colonies. UK cant (or are unwilling) force the issue on their own, and i dont see Spain all that eager to invade an alive and kicking France. Is Russia really gonna arse itself to move a massive army across Europe with Nappy dead and not much spoils to be had. I'm just doubtful that other European powers will go above and beyond to put France down at this point, make immediate grabs into Central Germany and Northern Italy, sure, but not much more otherwise theyll badly overstretch. I really think they'll just blame Nappy for everything and with Joseph acting all peaceful like, they'll all settle back down into a game of balance of power.
After giving this issue an extra consideration, I agree with you: French border on the Rhine was more or less an accepted reality. In 1809 Holland is still an independent kingdom (was added to France only in 1810) so there is some potential for the Allied pressure but, with neither Austria nor Russia being eager to go to war over this specific issue, it all boils down to the British willingness or unwillingness to accept the Bonaparte king there. Taking into an account that Louis was known for his unwillingness to enforce the CS and to play along with Nappy on some other issues, I’d say that there would be a reasonable chance of his political survival if this is the only major issue left on the table.
But as far as Joseph’s interests are involved, it is a different story. Belgium is a part of the Empire but Holland is not and its interests are not the same, especially as French exploitation of the Dutch economy is involved. Louis was trying to resist this under Napoleon and he would be in a much better position to do so under Joseph. Of course, Joseph can do the same thing as Nappy and simply occupy the kingdom but this could easily destroy the newly-established European peace. Not because everybody cared about Holland but because Joseph would look like too Napoleonic” and not trustworthy in his policies. So we are talking about co-existence of these two states. But were their interests compatible? In OTL Belgian economy was to a great degree France-oriented and after the CS was abolished the cheap British products were competing with Belgian production while the Dutch part, still predominantly agricultural even in 1820s, was the eager consumer of the British goods to the exclusion of the Belgian ones. The Dutch also were interested in maintaining their East India colonies and this dictated a need to be on the good terms with the Brits who occupied most of them (in OTL returned by Congress of Vienna). Probably sooner rather than later Louis was going to drift toward the closer ties with Britain even if he retains friendly relations with France (providing Joseph is reasonable enough).
Now, back to the initial (not my favorite subject) issue of the succession and who is marrying whom. By the law of 1806 Louis and his male children are on the line of succession after Joseph (and his non-existent male children). But in this post-1809 TL political situation is different: Louis is an independent king and his policies and interests are not exactly pro-French. Not a good scenario for having him as a heir apparent. Which leaves Jerome and his male issue but the problem is that Jerome is not even mentioned in the law of 1806 because in 1805 he married a daughter of the American merchant, pissing off the elder brother who forbade her even to enter France and, after her son was born in England, officially divorced Jerome. The second marriage (to Princess Catharina Frederica of Württemberg) happened only in 1807. Not sure if Napoleon ever bothered to augment the law of 1806 and if he did not, then Joseph has a lot of a latitude updating the old law any way he wants. Probably if Westphalia ceases to exist Jerome is back to France and is given some honorific appointment (as eventually happened in OTL) and made a heir apparent (as in OTL in 2nd Empire). As far as the family relations are involved, his wife is on the good terms with both Clary sisters (in 1813 she and Désirée Clary took refuge with Julie Claryat Mortefontaine, and when the allied troops took Paris, they took refuge in the home of Desirée Clary in the capital) so there should be no major opposition from that corner. His son from the 2nd marriage is too young for marrying any of Joseph’s daughters so the family marriage is out of the question.
So that leaves us with Eugene de Beauharnais. He was Viceroy of Italy in 1809 -- would the kingdom he controlled in the name of his stepfather survive the last Napoleonic war or would the Austrians prefer it to be dissolved and replaced by a number of petty duchies as was the status quo before? If he's forced to leave Italy, what will he do at Joe's court?