Joseph Bonarparte not as King of Spain

Green Painting · Apr 24, 2014

I mean, if Napoleon appoint his family members as kings of smaller countries, like Naples or Westphalia, they still couldn't do too much damage even if they were incompetent. But Joseph Bonaparte was a hopeless leader, and he even betrayed brother by trading with the British, defying the continental system.

Could Napoleon have granted kingship to someone else?

Perhaps Bernadette as Juan Bautista I of Spain? Or should the crown goes to someone more religious and thus more acceptable to the Spaniards?

Emperor Constantine · Apr 24, 2014

Green Painting said:
I mean, if Napoleon appoint his family members as kings of smaller countries, like Naples or Westphalia, they still couldn't do too much damage even if they were incompetent. But Joseph Bonaparte was a hopeless leader, and he even betrayed his brother by trading his British, defying the continental system.

Could Napoleon have granted kingship to someone else?

Perhaps Bernadette as Juan Bautista I of Spain? Or should the crown goes to someone more religious and thus more acceptable to the Spaniards?

Well if he was smart Napoleon would have left Fernando VII on the throne. He would be the rightful monarch and the accepted choice by the Spanish. Failing that, maybe one of Fernando's brothers? Really any Spanish Bourbon would do.

Nanwe · Apr 24, 2014

Emperor Constantine said:
Well if he was smart Napoleon would have left Fernando VII on the throne. He would be the rightful monarch and the accepted choice by the Spanish. Failing that, maybe one of Fernando's brothers? Really any Spanish Bourbon would do.

Except Fernando had led two rebellions against his father's and Godoy's pro-French policy, supported by the people of Madrid. Fernando is a no-go, and Carlos clearly was too weak to govern efficiently, even with Godoy, who was hated by the people, after all, rumours were widespread of how desire to create for himself a small country in southern Portugal and that he was sleeping with the King's wife.

I don't know about the brothers, so I can't comment. Carlos was clearly a traditionalist so probably not the best indicated for a French puppet. The other one is Francisco de Paula de Borbón, who in 2/5/1808 shouted when the French were taking out of the Madrid "Treason! They have taken away our King and now they want to take away all royal people! Death to the French!" and he was just 14 in 1808. So he's probably not a good candidate.

I don't know if any imposed monarch will fare differently from Pepe Botella.

Mikestone8 · Apr 24, 2014

Green Painting said:
I mean, if Napoleon appoint his family members as kings of smaller countries, like Naples or Westphalia, they still couldn't do too much damage even if they were incompetent. But Joseph Bonaparte was a hopeless leader, and he even betrayed his brother by trading his British, defying the continental system.

Everybody betrayed the Continental system - even Napoleon himself.

His troops marched to Moscow wearing boots and greatcoats made in Nottingham and Manchester, and smuggled in. Imports from Britain were indispensable to most European countries. The Continental System was a crack-brained fantasy.

Emperor Constantine · Apr 24, 2014

Nanwe said:
Except Fernando had led two rebellions against his father's and Godoy's pro-French policy, supported by the people of Madrid. Fernando is a no-go, and Carlos clearly was too weak to govern efficiently, even with Godoy, who was hated by the people, after all, rumours were widespread of how desire to create for himself a small country in southern Portugal and that he was sleeping with the King's wife.

I don't know about the brothers, so I can't comment. Carlos was clearly a traditionalist so probably not the best indicated for a French puppet. The other one is Francisco de Paula de Borbón, who in 2/5/1808 shouted when the French were taking out of the Madrid "Treason! They have taken away our King and now they want to take away all royal people! Death to the French!" and he was just 14 in 1808. So he's probably not a good candidate.

I don't know if any imposed monarch will fare differently from Pepe Botella.

Not necessarily about any of them really. Fernando led rebellions against his parents and Godoy but not technically against Napoleon. Looking at his later reign, Fernando was a fairly weak monarch and if he has good (read French/pro-French) advisers, he'd probably stay loyal to Paris. As for Francesco Paula, that sounds like a coached moment to me, so he'd probably be a good puppet if push came to shove. Really the whole Spanish Royal family would. None of them were that politically strong, at least not enough to say no to Napoleon when directly asked to do something.

Mikestone8 said:
Everybody betrayed the Continental system - even Napoleon himself.

His troops marched to Moscow wearing boots and greatcoats made in Nottingham and Manchester, and smuggled in. Imports from Britain were indispensable to most European countries. The Continental System was a crack-brained fantasy.

Yes the Continental system was betrayed, but it was fairly effective. I don't have it with me right now, but I have a book on Napoleon that shows statistics on just how much British trade fell during those years. From what I remember it fell a good 30% at the very least, so give it a few more years and a general election and we'd probably see Parliament demand peace, sort of like what happened with the Spanish Succession war a century earlier.

Mikestone8 · Apr 25, 2014

Emperor Constantine said:
Yes the Continental system was betrayed, but it was fairly effective. I don't have it with me right now, but I have a book on Napoleon that shows statistics on just how much British trade fell during those years. From what I remember it fell a good 30% at the very least, so give it a few more years and a general election and we'd probably see Parliament demand peace, sort of like what happened with the Spanish Succession war a century earlier.

How much did the Continental countries' trade suffer?

Britain could probably put up with it at least as long as they could.

unprincipled peter · Apr 25, 2014

it requires changing some personalities, but.... Lucien Bonaparte, had he played his cards better, was in line for the throne. Nap wanted him to marry one of the Spanish princesses. Lucien not only said no, he also then set about thumbing his nose in every manner possible at Nap. If Lucien had been a toady like Joseph, he'd have married the princess and had some sort of legitimacy to taking the spanish throne. It probably still fails, but would have a better shot than Joseph

hasdrubal barca · Apr 25, 2014

Keep Joseph in Naples and install Murat as king of Spain. He can at least command well. He'll fight hard to keep his throne, i don't see him being easily defeated by the British.

euromellows · Apr 25, 2014

hasdrubal barca said:
Keep Joseph in Naples and install Murat as king of Spain. He can at least command well. He'll fight hard to keep his throne, i don't see him being easily defeated by the British.

Interesting choice.

Razgriz 2K9 · Apr 25, 2014

Personally, I see Joseph as a weak-willed leader of men, who probably would've been better off at Naples (since the only threat besides the British was Sicily, and we all know how that would turn out...)

Murat indeed would be a better choice than Joseph yes, and he would've been more than capable to handle a Bonapartist Spain than he ever would, but that being said, I feel that Spain and Napoleon in general would've been better off if Fernando took the throne. While he was of a much stronger will than that buffoon of a King Carlos IV, he wouldn't dare resist the might of Napoleon. Probably might've helped the Colonies survive a tad bit longer, perhaps...

Emperor Constantine · Apr 25, 2014

Razgriz 2K9 said:
Personally, I see Joseph as a weak-willed leader of men, who probably would've been better off at Naples (since the only threat besides the British was Sicily, and we all know how that would turn out...)

Murat indeed would be a better choice than Joseph yes, and he would've been more than capable to handle a Bonapartist Spain than he ever would, but that being said, I feel that Spain and Napoleon in general would've been better off if Fernando took the throne. While he was of a much stronger will than that buffoon of a King Carlos IV, he wouldn't dare resist the might of Napoleon. Probably might've helped the Colonies survive a tad bit longer, perhaps...

I completely agree. For better or worse the Spanish still loved their Bourbons, and removing them really hurt Napoleon.

Gurroruo · Apr 25, 2014

Razgriz 2K9 said:
Personally, I see Joseph as a weak-willed leader of men, who probably would've been better off at Naples (since the only threat besides the British was Sicily, and we all know how that would turn out...)

Murat indeed would be a better choice than Joseph yes, and he would've been more than capable to hand he was of a much stronger will than that buffoon of a King Carlos IV, he wouldn't dare resist the might of Napoleon. Probably might've helped the Colonies survive a tad bit longer, perhaps...

I would never call Carlos a buffon, he was just weak. What if Carlos III's successor was like him, that would lead to plenty of ripples in time history

Razgriz 2K9 · Apr 25, 2014

Gurroruo said:
I would never call Carlos a buffon, he was just weak. What if Carlos III's successor was like him, that would lead to plenty of ripples in time history

He never had a hand in government, for a pious Roman Catholic, he let slide the rumors of the hypothetical affair between his wife and Queen Maria Lusa with his Chief Minister Godoy, who's indecisiveness practically begged for Spain to be invaded, and yet still managed to keep him in power after a whole mess of failures. Now I know weak rulers, but this...I'm sorry but this is just going into borderline stupidity.

If Carlos III's successor was like his predecessor, then yeah maybe we'd see a probably stronger chance of a Spain who could probably continue to resist France (well, more like a Western European Austria than anything else.)

Dathi THorfinnsson · May 1, 2014

Replacing a weak and dubious ally (Fernando) by a loyal brother no doubt seemed tempting to Napoleon. But it backfired hugely, and Spain became a massive bleeding ulcer instead of a weak ally.

Napoleon should simply have left well enough alone there.

Space Oddity · May 1, 2014

Dathi THorfinnsson said:
Replacing a weak and dubious ally (Fernando) by a loyal brother no doubt seemed tempting to Napoleon.

Add to that, Joseph had been pretty successful as King of Naples, and it's easy to see that Napoleon figured he could work the same magic in Spain, once again replacing an inept Bourbon with an able Bonaparte. And in the short term, it did work--many of Spanish nobles and members of the intelligentsia accepted Joseph, and even thought he might be able to help the nation. But in between the guerillas, and Napoleon's eternal insistence that Rey Jose supply him with men and material to fight his other wars--well, we all know the tune.

In my humble opinion, the real problems in Spain go right to the top, with the French Emperor himself.