Napoleon lost in Egypt - non-European consequences

raharris1973 · Aug 11, 2004

WI Napoleon was lost in Egypt? Many have considered the European consequences of no Napoleonic Empire, but what about other areas-

Effects I can think of immediately -

1. Haiti may have a system of emancipated serfdom, instead of the cycle of reenslavement and race war

2. Louisiana remains Spanish - until the USA takes it

3. The Cape Colony remains Dutch, no "Great Trek". Does Celon remain Dutch?

Other instances where Britain snapped up unguarded territories -

4. A longer lasting Spanish America

5. Some Russian possessions in the Med IIRC

6. Prussia keeps its Senegal colony?

sikitu · Aug 11, 2004

raharris1973 said:
WI Napoleon was lost in Egypt? Many have considered the European consequences of no Napoleonic Empire, but what about other areas-

Effects I can think of immediately -

Other instances where Britain snapped up unguarded territories -

4. A longer lasting Spanish America

5. Some Russian possessions in the Med IIRC

6. Prussia keeps its Senegal colony?

Do you have background info on item 6? I never heard anything of a Prussian colony there at the end of the 18th century. Brandenburg had some trading outposts like Gross Friedrichsburg in the 17th century, but they were all lost very soon.

Anyway, why do you think that there would not have been war against France also without Napoleon?

raharris1973 · Aug 11, 2004

But would the wars be on a Napoleonic scale?

There very well probably would have been some further European wars, but possibly not on the same scale - for instance, Spain might be able to stay out of it or not get occupied. If the Netherlands doesn't suffer prolonged occupation, it might be better off too. No guarantee a non-Napoleon would have done things differently in Haiti, but re-enslavement sounds like a pretty grandiose idea, and Napoleon had very definite ambitions for the Haiti-Louisian combo.

So, the potential divergences are huge.

Regarding the Prussian or Brandenburger colony, I honestly don't know any more detail tahn I gave, it could very well have disappeared by the 1700s.

Grey Wolf · Aug 11, 2004

raharris1973 said:
There very well probably would have been some further European wars, but possibly not on the same scale - for instance, Spain might be able to stay out of it or not get occupied. If the Netherlands doesn't suffer prolonged occupation, it might be better off too. No guarantee a non-Napoleon would have done things differently in Haiti, but re-enslavement sounds like a pretty grandiose idea, and Napoleon had very definite ambitions for the Haiti-Louisian combo.

So, the potential divergences are huge.

Regarding the Prussian or Brandenburger colony, I honestly don't know any more detail tahn I gave, it could very well have disappeared by the 1700s.

I was under the impression that Brandenburg trading posts continued in some form until the mid 19th century. I admit its a long time since I looked at this (I was answering some readers' AFOE questions then)

One note might be that if Napoleon loses in Egypt, one can assume that his entire army is wiped out there. IIRC he got a big segment of it back to France ?

Grey Wolf

raharris1973 · Aug 12, 2004

I'm not sure how much he got back

I know alot were left behind.

Certainly the loss of additional veterans will effect things.

Faeelin · Aug 12, 2004

Napoleon was far from the only person, incidentally, who wanted to reenstate slavery. It's quite probable that some one else would do it.

Paul Spring · Aug 12, 2004

One note might be that if Napoleon loses in Egypt, one can assume that his entire army is wiped out there. IIRC he got a big segment of it back to France ?

If I remember right, most of them were basically left stranded in Egypt, and surrendered about a year later when they faced an Ottoman army attacking by land and British amphibious landings.

Norman · Aug 12, 2004

No War of 1812

Has anybody mentioned that there would be no War of 1812? Without the conflict in Europe, GB wouldn't stop ships and search them.

Also, without a succcessful Napoleon, there would be no reason for the Germans to unify.

raharris1973 · Aug 13, 2004

I stand corrected on Haiti

Now was re-acquiring, and then selling Louisiana, a unique Napoleon position?

Also, the evolution of a Haitian uprising will be affected by whether or not it is simultaneous with a war with Britain.

I too had the distinct impression Napoleon left most of his army in Egypt screwed over.

Some have suggested that without a war of 1812 and he burning of York, Canada might have gravitated towards unity with the United States.

A France missing Napoleon and the veterans might see any number of things, an earlier restoration or a prolonged new regime of formally republican sort. It also may be knocked down to its old boundaries, or, never getting nearly as far Napoleon did, might not scare and unite the rest of Europe so much, resulting in France being able to keep gains in Belgium and the Rhineland.

Grey Wolf · Aug 14, 2004

I suspect I was wrong about getting any significant part of the army out, :-

"He took with him his secretary Bourrienne, four of his aides-de-camp, his stepson Eugene de Beauharnais and three of the savants, Monge, Berhtollet and Denon. Six of his most valuable generals accompanied him also, as well as a Marmeluke from Georgia named Routstam, who would serve as his manservant for the next fifteen years. (Fregosi, 167) Apparently, his mistress Pauline Foures was left behind. He and his party left Egypt in two French frigates on August 23, and sailed for southern France."

A bit less than an army, lol

Grey Wolf

Faeelin · Aug 14, 2004

Why would the Dutch keep the Cape? Britain would want it no matter what.

raharris1973 · Aug 14, 2004

I had the impression they used the Napoleonic wars as excuse

What was the determining factor for Britain putting some Dutch colonies on its hit list but not others? For example the Cape was on it but Java wasn't. Was acquiring the Cape an irrreducible British objective from say the time of the 7 Years War? Do you recall when Britain took Ceylon.

Is there any way the British could have satisfied their ambition for a South African base by just sidestepping Capetown and establishing Natal on their own earlier - I'd be interested in seeing if a scenario is possible where we never get the "Great Trek". Quite possibly, this is not the best PoD for it.

Even sans Napoleon, was a one-man dictatorship inevitable in France?

fhaessig · Aug 14, 2004

Faeelin said:
Napoleon was far from the only person, incidentally, who wanted to reenstate slavery. It's quite probable that some one else would do it.

Napoleon was the only french would-be ruler with a wife who came from the slave-owning Haitian aristocracy.

Faeelin · Aug 14, 2004

fhaessig said:
Napoleon was the only french would-be ruler with a wife who came from the slave-owning Haitian aristocracy.

That doesnt' change my comment though, does it?

fhaessig · Aug 14, 2004

Faeelin said:
That doesnt' change my comment though, does it?

No, but it quite reduces its import. If none of the others who wanted to reinstate slavery was anywhere near a position of power, their opinion don't carry much weight in the winds of history.