Wi: Napoleonic victory in Leipzig

[Diego]

At the thread about a Napoleonic victory in Waterloo, the user @Matteo made the following post that I am going to answer here as I don't want to derail that thread. I also wish to start a discussion about what would happen if said scenario of Napoleon capturing the monarchs of Prussia and Russia, plus their general staffs had happened.

Napoleonic France’s very last opportunity to retain a quite dominant position in Europe was the battle of Leipzig. On the first day of the battle, a French squadron almost captured by chance the Russian and Prussian sovereigns and their general staff.

Such an event would probably behead the continental coalition because Alexander I of Russia, much more than Britain, was the soul of the continental coalition. Alexander, although inept on the field, was the one who made the strategic decision not to let Napoleonic France take its breathe back after the 1812 campaign of Russia and to chase him back up to Paris. With Alexander prisoner, this will and goal of the continental powers will crumble and Napoleon then has an opportunity to strike a real peace with the continental powers, no matter Britain agrees or not to these terms.

The terms shall be that France can just retain all Rhineland and Piedmont (with all or but the western half of Liguria) but give up hegemony over any other european country (Spain of course but also Italy).

Russia will have its share of Poland as OTL.

Austria will recover all its losses since 1805, that is Venezia and Trentino.

Prussia will of course recover its 1807 losses and will get Westphalia but not north Rhineland as OTL.

I don't think that Napoleon would be so magnanimous, maybe he could let Spain go, retaining only Catalonia, and make white peace with Austria, but he probably wouldn't settle for less than what he already expected before his (astonishing) victory. After a victory like that he would probably go for Erfurt 2.0, with Prussia receiving the heavier punishment again. A draconian peace would be more plausible, something like:

Prussia loses Silesia and West Prussia, with the royal family (or at least a good part of them) being invited to be prisio-guests of Napoleon.
The king of Saxony would receive Silesia, but give up Warsaw.
Russia would give the territory took from Poland in 1793 back to Warsaw.
West Prussia given to Warsaw.
Warsaw elevated as Kingdom under Joseph Bonaparte, or maybe Napoleon would take the title for himself as Poland would be too big to have independence.

Obviously, Russia and Britain would want another round, Catalonia and the German lands could and probably will rise up in revolt just like Spain and Tyrol did before, and maybe Napoleon could lose popularity and support in Poland, but this is past the point. The point is that a peace after a miraculous victory in Leipzig is going to be more draconian than lenient.

 

[Matteo]

At the thread about a Napoleonic victory in Waterloo, the user @Matteo made the following post that I am going to answer here as I don't want to derail that thread. I also wish to start a discussion about what would happen if said scenario of Napoleon capturing the monarchs of Prussia and Russia, plus their general staffs had happened.




I don't think that Napoleon would be so magnanimous, maybe he could let Spain go, retaining only Catalonia, and make white peace with Austria, but he probably wouldn't settle for less than what he already expected before his (astonishing) victory. After a victory like that he would probably go for Erfurt 2.0, with Prussia receiving the heavier punishment again. A draconian peace would be more plausible, something like:

Prussia loses Silesia and West Prussia, with the royal family (or at least a good part of them) being invited to be prisio-guests of Napoleon.
The king of Saxony would receive Silesia, but give up Warsaw.
Russia would give the territory took from Poland in 1793 back to Warsaw.
West Prussia given to Warsaw.
Warsaw elevated as Kingdom under Joseph Bonaparte, or maybe Napoleon would take the title for himself as Poland would be too big to have independence.

Obviously, Russia and Britain would want another round, Catalonia and the German lands could and probably will rise up in revolt just like Spain and Tyrol did before, and maybe Napoleon could lose popularity and support in Poland, but this is past the point. The point is that a peace after a miraculously victory in Leipzig is going to be more draconian than lenient.

Well, if he wants a real and lasting peace in order to break the coalition apart, that is to have Russia and Austria not follow Britain in its generation long feud against France, then he will have to be that magnanimous.

I think he had perfectly understood it and what made him refuse OTL the Frankfurt base was that he had understood they were not for real but just a trap (as Metternich later wrote).

Napoleon needs that victory to secure a real peace with a wonderful position for France that will however need not to be crushingly dominant as it was until 1812. And if he doesn’t, he may face a coup by the French elites who were afraid to lose all they had won and wanted peace.

But neither Russia, nor Austria nor Prussia will agree to a real lasting peace of Napoleonic France retains dominance in western Germany and in Italy (by October 1813, Spain was already lost).

 

[dandan_noodles]

Well, if he wants a real and lasting peace in order to break the coalition apart, that is to have Russia and Austria not follow Britain in its generation long feud against France, then he will have to be that magnanimous.

I think he had perfectly understood it and what made him refuse OTL the Frankfurt base was that he had understood they were not for real but just a trap (as Metternich later wrote).

Napoleon needs that victory to secure a real peace with a wonderful position for France that will however need not to be crushingly dominant as it was until 1812. And if he doesn’t, he may face a coup by the French elites who were afraid to lose all they had won and wanted peace.

But neither Russia, nor Austria nor Prussia will agree to a real lasting peace of Napoleonic France retains dominance in western Germany and in Italy (by October 1813, Spain was already lost).

Metternich wrote that because he wanted to appear more committed to Napoleon's overthrow than he really was; when you actually look at the contemporary Austrian correspondence, it's exceedingly clear they're trying to angle for a negotiated peace. Replacing Napoleon or the Bonapartes as a whole would open the door for the Russians to install Bernadotte as their client (the Bourbons only became a realistic possibility as a compromise candidate after Wellington was already on French soil). Moreover, Napoleon did conditionally accept the terms (too late, as it happens, but still), but the terms in which he couched his acceptance (holding out the possibility for his siblings to hold their German and Italian kingdoms) show how wildly unrealistic he was. His rejection was driven by frankly delusional projections of French public opinion, not a realistic appraisal of his prospects for success. The idea that the man who ordered the gunpoint abdication of Bayonne and thought he could retain Germany after his armies were crushed at Leipzig would concede anything while he had three monarchs at his mercy is simply not credible.

 

[GauchoBadger]

Replacing Napoleon or the Bonapartes as a whole would open the door for the Russians to install Bernadotte as their client (the Bourbons only became a realistic possibility as a compromise candidate after Wellington was already on French soil).

Bernadotte as King/Emperor of France? That sounds rather unlikely, considering he was already King (EDIT: sorry, Crown Prince) of Sweden and had just converted to Protestantism for that purpose (thus possibly forfeiting the support of the French nobility)... do you have a source on that?

 

[M79]

A possible outcome:

-Peace with Spain and Portugal with Catalonia to vote on its fate

-Italian Peninsula, German Confederation, Low Countries, and Poland to remain in French orbits

-Russia settles for roughly status quo antebellum, Austria surrenders Tyrol and scant Polish territory

-Prussia reduced with Madgeburg and Silesia released as independent states, Prussia east of the Oder given to Poland, and Saxony taking over many of the German minors directly

-Britain gets something token in exchange and a promise for France not to interfere in Ireland or its colonies

 

[dandan_noodles]

Bernadotte as King/Emperor of France? That sounds rather unlikely, considering he was already King of Sweden and had just converted to Protestantism for that purpose (thus possibly forfeiting the support of the French nobility)... do you have a source on that?

As a matter of fact, he was crown prince and regent at this juncture; the previous king was still alive, if in dotage.

In Munro Price, The End of Glory,
"Bernadotte was far too canny openly to declare himself, but several witnesses alleged that he now aimed, with the Czar’s backing, to become king of France. One of them attributed to him some remarkable words: ‘Bonaparte is a rascal, he has to be killed; as long as he lives, he will be the curse of the world; there must be no emperors, this is not a French title; France needs a king, but a soldier-king; the Bourbon dynasty is exhausted and will never return. Who could suit the French more than me?’ "

"This easy progress [into France] had a powerful effect at allied headquarters, and particularly on the Czar, who arrived in Langres on 22 January. Alexander saw his ultimate goal, a triumphal march on Paris and the overthrow of his great enemy Napoleon, within his grasp. He even began to look beyond this, and revived his old idea of placing Bernadotte, who would be an obedient Russian client, on the French throne."

" ‘We have no interest in sacrificing a single soldier to put Bernadotte on the French throne,’ Metternich wrote to Schwarzenberg on 16 January. ‘You think I’m mad? Well, I’m not; this is the plan!’ Schwarzenberg was equally horrified. ‘I’ve received your letter,’ he replied, ‘ . . . and ever since I can’t get B[ernadotte] out of my mind. What! The world has witnessed an alliance between the greatest sovereigns of Europe to arrive at such a scandalous result!!! Impossible! I count on you [to avoid it].’ "

 

[dandan_noodles]

-Italian Peninsula, German Confederation, Low Countries, and Poland to remain in French orbits

-Britain gets something token in exchange and a promise for France not to interfere in Ireland or its colonies

Britain accepts no peace that leaves Antwerp in French hands. Some of the Rhineland, quite possibly, but the Channel ports of the low countries are their ne plus ultra.

 

[Matteo]

Metternich wrote that because he wanted to appear more committed to Napoleon's overthrow than he really was; when you actually look at the contemporary Austrian correspondence, it's exceedingly clear they're trying to angle for a negotiated peace. Replacing Napoleon or the Bonapartes as a whole would open the door for the Russians to install Bernadotte as their client (the Bourbons only became a realistic possibility as a compromise candidate after Wellington was already on French soil). Moreover, Napoleon did conditionally accept the terms (too late, as it happens, but still), but the terms in which he couched his acceptance (holding out the possibility for his siblings to hold their German and Italian kingdoms) show how wildly unrealistic he was. His rejection was driven by frankly delusional projections of French public opinion, not a realistic appraisal of his prospects for success. The idea that the man who ordered the gunpoint abdication of Bayonne and thought he could retain Germany after his armies were crushed at Leipzig would concede anything while he had three monarchs at his mercy is simply not credible.

I agree with you but Metternich wrote it after events. It is highly probable that such a shrewd Statesman was prepared to make another decision if the outcome of the war had been different. But for this to happen, he will demand a drastic reduction of the power gap between Austria and France. That’s what Austria demanded before joining the coalition in the middle of 1813. It wanted to become either a quite equal partner with a victorious France (but no longer let France to dominate crushingly), or an equal partner with Russia and Britain in a coalition victorious over France.

 

[Diego]

-Russia settles for roughly status quo antebellum, Austria surrenders Tyrol and scant Polish territory

To me it doesn't make much sense to let Russia go free and instead try to punish Austria. I think that Napoleon would reason that Austria is the only one that is still capable of fighting and capable of leading the resistance against him, so he needs to deal with them quickly, a white peace with Austria is the safest option to destroy the coalition, at least in Germany. BTW, Austria doesn't have Tyrol at this time.

-Britain gets something token in exchange and a promise for France not to interfere in Ireland or its colonies

I don't think that Britain is going to make peace, they are probably going to continue their blockade until Napoleon die or is defeated.

 

[dandan_noodles]

I agree with you but Metternich wrote it after events. It is highly probable that such a shrewd Statesman was prepared to make another decision if the outcome of the war had been different. But for this to happen, he will demand a drastic reduction of the power gap between Austria and France. That’s what Austria demanded before joining the coalition in the middle of 1813. It wanted to become either a quite equal partner with a victorious France (but no longer let France to dominate crushingly), or an equal partner with Russia and Britain in a coalition victorious over France.

Yeah, Metternich wanted France much less powerful (Austria could not pursue independent foreign policy with French domination of Germany, Poland, and Italy), but in the context of the Frankfurt proposals, that end had already been achieved. The Grande Empire was dead in the water, Austria's ability to pursue an independent foreign policy had been restored. As such, there's no reason to believe that at this point, he actually intended to reduce French power further, especially since this would remove a counterbalance against Russian-Prussian alliance. In this context, Napoleon's initial rejection then equivocation and caginess with these peace terms are evidence of his delusion in defeat. In the flush of victory, he'd likely be even more unrealistic about the empire's long term prospects.

I don't think that Britain is going to make peace, they are probably going to continue their blockade until Napoleon die or is defeated.

Castelraugh was willing to allow Napoleon to keep his throne if there didn't appear to be public support for the Bourbons in France. Whatever else, they preferred an independent France to one controlled by Russia through their client Bernadotte.

 

[Curtain Jerker]

Britain accepts no peace that leaves Antwerp in French hands. Some of the Rhineland, quite possibly, but the Channel ports of the low countries are their ne plus ultra.

What could France offer that would make sure the British make peace and keep said peace while keeping Napoleon on the throne? Anything?

 

[dandan_noodles]

What could France offer that would make sure the British make peace and keep said peace while keeping Napoleon on the throne? Anything?

If the army is powerful and solidly loyal to Bonaparte and there aren't any shows of public support for the Bourbons, the British would probably accept something like the Natural Frontiers minus Flanders. They won't accept a peace that leaves Prussia and Austria unable to pursue independent foreign policy; they need counterbalances on the Continent against France and Russia.

 

[Matteo]

What could France offer that would make sure the British make peace and keep said peace while keeping Napoleon on the throne? Anything?

Flanders is non negotiable for France. It will agree to give it up only if defeated as OTL in 1814.

And the point for France to obtain a true and solid peace is less Britain (it can just not be conquered but can do nothing more than naval blockade and harassment with a medium-size mobile army) than Russia and Austria who can put big numbers on the field.

Prussia was then still a quite junior player.

If France strikes a deal with Russia and Austria, Prussia will follow (it was in 1813-1814 almost a vassal State of Russia). And Britain will be compelled to agree to peace terms that Russia and Austria consider acceptable.

Basically, to satisfy Russia and Prussia, Napoleonic France needs to give up its hegemony and military presence in Germany, meaning on the right bank of the Rhine, France keeping Rhineland on the left bank, including what was not Belgium yet and Dutch Brabant.

It needs to do quite the same in Italy. That is retaining just Piedmont and (all or just the western half of) Liguria that it had annexed in 1804.
Venezia and Trentino have to be handed back to Austria (Austria had previously acquired Venezia but lost it after Austerlitz).
The house of Savoy can have the duchy of Milan in compensation, and maybe Parma and Modena to create a complete buffer State between the French and Austrian territories and would enable it to have a sea access to Sardinia.
The Bourbons have to be restored in Napoli.
The papal Estates have to be restored.
Maybe Joseph Bonaparte can have compensation with Etruria for giving up the Spanish throne.

All the other parents of Napoleon will have to give up their thrones (Jerome Bonaparte and Joachim Murat).

Russia will have its share of Poland as OTL.

Prussia will have Westphalia.

The Spanish Bourbons will of course be restored and France will keep no Spanish territory (which means giving Catalonia back to Spain).

And Britain will have Hanover back and the same overseas terms as OTL.

That’s a quite good balance of powers in Europe that can have Britain satisfied although not enthusiastic.

France, although still number 1 continental power, no longer crushingly dominates the continent. It is balanced by Russia and Austria. A concert of nations makes sure that France will no longer attempt to overthrow this balance.
Germany is kind of neutralized with a Confederacy quite comparable to OTL (although its western border is on the Rhine).
European countries are open again to British trade and Britain dominates the oceans and enjoys a huge and highly profitable colonial empire.

 

[Diego]

Well, if he wants a real and lasting peace in order to break the coalition apart, that is to have Russia and Austria not follow Britain in its generation long feud against France, then he will have to be that magnanimous.

I think he had perfectly understood it and what made him refuse OTL the Frankfurt base was that he had understood they were not for real but just a trap (as Metternich later wrote).

Napoleon needs that victory to secure a real peace with a wonderful position for France that will however need not to be crushingly dominant as it was until 1812. And if he doesn’t, he may face a coup by the French elites who were afraid to lose all they had won and wanted peace.

I think that you are making some assumptions that have more chance of being wrong than right. The first assumption is that Napoleon understood that he would not win in the end unless he negotiated a peace, but I think that we have more reason to believe that he was delusional about his situation...

The second is that Napoleon didn't trust the coalition before Leipzig, but he would trust them after winning that battle, and winning by pure luck.

The third is that the French elites are going to rise against him after Napoleon is victorious, but certainly that is something that Napoleon didn't fear and his was right in doing so, as that is something that didn't come to be even when he was clearly going to lose.

But neither Russia, nor Austria nor Prussia will agree to a real lasting peace of Napoleonic France retains dominance in western Germany and in Italy (by October 1813, Spain was already lost).

Napoleon never chose real lasting peace over French supremacy, I don't think that he is going to make this choice unless badly defeated. In this situation the Coalition is a ship that is sinking fast and Austria is the only one that could keep it afloat, but they probably are much more eager to jump at the first lifeboat that Napoleon presents them, without Austria, the coalition is done, Russia can't be destroyed, but is going to be weakened for some years, and Prussia can be completely smashed and neutralized as a government, I mean, the people of Prussia can rise again, but the state is too weak to do anything.

The only one that could expect some magnanimous action from Napoleon would be Bavaria, meanwhile Mecklemburg would probably be annexed by France, or maybe if Napoleon is able to be grateful and feel pity he could give the duchy to Denmark as a consolation prize for their loss of Norway.

 

[alexmilman]

Napoleon never chose real lasting peace over French supremacy, I don't think that he is going to make this choice unless badly defeated. In this situation the Coalition is a ship that is sinking fast and Austria is the only one that could keep it afloat, but they probably are much more eager to jump at the first lifeboat that Napoleon presents them, without Austria, the coalition is done, Russia can't be destroyed, but is going to be weakened for some years, and Prussia can be completely smashed and neutralized as a government, I mean, the people of Prussia can rise again, but the state is too weak to do anything.

The only one that could expect some magnanimous action from Napoleon would be Bavaria, meanwhile Mecklemburg would probably be annexed by France, or maybe if Napoleon is able to be grateful and feel pity he could give the duchy to Denmark as a consolation prize for their loss of Norway.

Very interesting points. It is probably safe to say that by that time Napoleon was somewhat delusional about his personal abilities to produce a miracle and victory at Leipzig would just strengthen this illusion.

OTOH, it was unclear, on both sides, what would be conditions for the lasting peace and in this aspect his opponents were not better then him.

The question is for how long the war could continue especially if Austria bails out? Both Russia and Prussia had been driven by paranoia but both were in serious financial trouble which British subsidies could could solve. For how long Russian nobility would be willing to support Alexander’s military adventures beyond the Russian borders? He was squandering the glory of 1812 with no clear gain for Russia and who was paying? Mostly the estate owners. Him being de facto at the head of the Russian armies would bring back memories of Austerlitz and no Tsar of Russia (post Petrian) could ignore will of the nobility for too long. So it should be either glory or peace. Prussia on its own did not matter.

So as a vital component we need a realistic Nappy willing to offer a honorable peace (with a lot of praise going to the Russian bravery, etc. to save the faces).

BTW, at that time Norway still was under Danish rule.

 

[Diego]

The question is for how long the war could continue especially if Austria bails out? Both Russia and Prussia had been driven by paranoia but both were in serious financial trouble which British subsidies could could solve. For how long Russian nobility would be willing to support Alexander’s military adventures beyond the Russian borders? He was squandering the glory of 1812 with no clear gain for Russia and who was paying? Mostly the estate owners. Him being de facto at the head of the Russian armies would bring back memories of Austerlitz and no Tsar of Russia (post Petrian) could ignore will of the nobility for too long. So it should be either glory or peace. Prussia on its own did not matter.

Leipzig would be known to history as the victory that Napoleon so desperately chased in Russia, but that ultimately was presented to him in Germany by the Czar in person.

So as a vital component we need a realistic Nappy willing to offer a honorable peace (with a lot of praise going to the Russian bravery, etc. to save the faces).

I think that the problem is that both sides are going to back down only when they reach the verge of desperation, and if one side is desperate the other certainly is not.

BTW, at that time Norway still was under Danish rule.

My bad, mixed the dates.

 

[lucaswillen05]

Not possible unless Napoleon wom decisively p 16 July on the southern sector and then won against the Army of the North. A very tall order indeed. Most likely the war continues with Napoleon still losing somewhere else or having to retreat from Germany with more of his allies deserting him in droves

 

[funnyhat]

Britain accepts no peace that leaves Antwerp in French hands. Some of the Rhineland, quite possibly, but the Channel ports of the low countries are their ne plus ultra.

They did agree to it at Amiens. Of course they were not happy about it and would surely prefer to avoid a repeat. But maybe - if the rest of the Coalition is ready for peace - they offer some compromise where Antwerp is demilitarized, as Dunkirk was after the Seven Years’ War.

 

[alexmilman]

Leipzig would be known to history as the victory that Napoleon so desperately chased in Russia, but that ultimately was presented to him in Germany by the Czar in person.

I think that the problem is that both sides are going to back down only when they reach the verge of desperation, and if one side is desperate the other certainly is not.

Yes, and it is an open question of how long Alexander would be allowed to continue unsuccessful war of a personal revenge especially if a honorable peace is offered. Unfortunately, as you wrote, the chances of any side being reasonable had been quite slim.

The interesting political situation would appear if by the end of a day Alexander is dead: of course, Constantine is an active member of anti-Napoleonic faction but he totally lacking his brother’s personal charm, (rather questionable) diplomatic skills and pretty much any other skills needed for a head of state. Plus, at least in 1812, he was an open enemy of Barclay who eventually ordered him to leave the army. So, with him aa a leader of the alliance, the alliance may fall apart given a slightest opportunity.