WI : Napoleon and Josephine have a son

In OTL, Napoleon had to divorce Josephine because she didn't gave him any children even though she had already had two children (Eugene and Hortence) from her first marriage with Alexandre de Beauharnais. For his part, Napoleon has sired at least two bastard son and had a child in 1811 with Marie Louise, his second wife.

What if Josephine had given birth to Napoleon's son?

The immediate consequence is that it might butterfly Napoleon and Josephine's divorce, because if Josephine gave birth to a son, Napoleon had no real reason to divorce her. What would be the other consequences? What would be the consequences of l'Empereur having an heir before 1809?

I remember reading that Josephine briefly thought she was pregnant by Napoleon before they married. This turned out not to be the case. But with your scenario how about she is pregnant and gives birth in the middle of 1796.
What I find an interesting scenario is Napoleon dies just before his invasion of Russia in 1812. His son would be 16 then. What happens to the French Empire now?

Tried to answer this hours ago but connection crashed

J was born IIRC 1763 so any child is probably around 1801-3. This IS important because by 1814 he is a young adult and a a 12 year old far more a factor in any equation than a youngster

BUT of course his birth, no Austrian marriage, these all have potential echoing butterflies that make recorded history a pliable thing

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

No more thoughts?

I think 1813 Austria hold back IOTL, because they hoped that one day a half-Habsburger would sit on the throne in Paris. Without that it would propably as aggressive as Prussia against Napoleopn. No attemps to compromise, no exil to Elba. Maybe a much more total war against Napoleon, with a much more "Downfall"-like End.

Depending on when Napoleon Jr. is born (let's say 1796 or 1797) maybe he could have been married to Marie Louise instead. Napoleon himself was younger than Josephine, so I believe he would have no problems marrying his son to an elder princess, even more if it is for reasons of state.

And what if Napoleon and Josephine have a daughter?

Salic Law applies according to the 1804 (an XII) Constitution. Napoleon's daughter would not be an Empress.

This said, the Constitution (which curiously states that : "the Government of the Republic is entrusted to an Emperor, whose title is Emperor of the French") also stated that Napoleon could adopt his successor, which he didn't. He could marry his daughter to one of his nephews, who would become the Emperor, the marriage prospect helping to convince one of his brothers to let a son to Napoleon.

If he has a daughter, would he still divorce Josephine in order to try to have a son?

Gonzaga said:

Depending on when Napoleon Jr. is born (let's say 1796 or 1797) maybe he could have been married to Marie Louise instead. Napoleon himself was younger than Josephine, so I believe he would have no problems marrying his son to an elder princess, even more if it is for reasons of state.

Click to expand...

Funny, that thought crossed my mind at one point
I'm not sure how this would fit though... Napoleon met Josephine in 1795 and married her the next year. The earliest date for the birth of Napoleon Jr would thus be 1795 or 1796, making him 14 or 15 in 1810 when Napoleon married Marie Louise (who was 16 if I'm not wrong) OTL.
I know monarchs could marry very young (Such as Louis XVI who married Marie-Antoinette while they were respectively 16 and 15), but would Napoleon go for a mariage for his son as he is 14/15?
Of course, he could arrange the marriage for the next year...

seraphim74 said:

And what if Napoleon and Josephine have a daughter?

Click to expand...

Captain Poplar said:

Salic Law applies according to the 1804 (an XII) Constitution. Napoleon's daughter would not be an Empress.

This said, the Constitution (which curiously states that : "the Government of the Republic is entrusted to an Emperor, whose title is Emperor of the French") also stated that Napoleon could adopt his successor, which he didn't. He could marry his daughter to one of his nephews, who would become the Emperor, the marriage prospect helping to convince one of his brothers to let a son to Napoleon.

Click to expand...

Captain Poplar, your arguments are true and quite good. However, maybe Napoleon could be tempted to let his legacy be perpetuated if he had a daughter and thus he would not apply Salic Law. I don't know if this a very likely scenario, but it is another possibility.
Your scenario is the most likely though. As for the candidates to marry Napoleon's daughter, I'd go for one of Louis's son : Napoleon was very close from Napoleon Louis, the second son of Louis who he made Grand Duke of Berg.

On the Republican Emperor note, Napoleon had established the French Empire on the model of the Roman Empire : the Roman Empire was technically a Republic BUT with an Emperor who had a very great amount of powers as its head of state.
Not to mention that Napoleon took the Imperial Crown (ironically I must say) to preserve the attainments* of the Revolution. It was proven on the french coins during the Empire which stated on one side "Napoleon Empereur" and on the other "Republique Française".

*Sorry if my phrase isn't correct but I'm not a native english speaker and I have a doubt on how to translate the French word I want to say wich is "acquis"...

Gonzaga said:

If he has a daughter, would he still divorce Josephine in order to try to have a son?

Click to expand...

That depends on how his mind evolve now that he has a child.
If he still wishes for a son and Josephine doesn't give him one in the following years, he could still divorce her although maybe later than OTL.
Same happens if she gives him another daughter after the one we're talking but it also push back the divorce from some more years as he could think Josephine can have another child.

Yorel said:

Funny, that thought crossed my mind at one point
I'm not sure how this would fit though... Napoleon met Josephine in 1795 and married her the next year. The earliest date for the birth of Napoleon Jr would thus be 1795 or 1796, making him 14 or 15 in 1810 when Napoleon married Marie Louise (who was 16 if I'm not wrong) OTL.
I know monarchs could marry very young (Such as Louis XVI who married Marie-Antoinette while they were respectively 16 and 15), but would Napoleon go for a mariage for his son as he is 14/15?
Of course, he could arrange the marriage for the next year...

Click to expand...

Marie Louise was 18 when she married Napoleon (she was born in December 1791). So she would be probably 4 or 5 years older than Napoleon's son.

Gonzaga said:

Marie Louise was 18 when she married Napoleon (she was born in December 1791). So she would be probably 4 or 5 years older than Napoleon's son.

Click to expand...

For that matter, Marie-Louise had sisters born in 1797 and 1798 who would be approximately the same age as Napoleon's son. There's no shortage of Hapsburg for him to marry. As for when the marriage takes place - if we still see a War of 1812 (the Russian one) then an obvious possibility would be for the marriage to take place then as a diplomatic means of securing Austria's neutrality. The boy would be 16 or so so it would hardly seem strange.

With a son born between the 1795-1797 the most obviously choice of bride for his son for Napoleon would be the second princess who OTL Napoleon try to marry Anna of Russia, the youngest sister of the zar Alexander I (the first princess was her elder sister Katherine, the third Marie Louise). With a prospective husband of her age or slightly younger Alexander can not denied his sister's hand to Napoleon's heir without offend him and ITTL Napoleon will not in the same hurry for his heir's wedding in which was OTL for his wedding.
A betrothal in 1809/1810 for a wedding in 1811/1812 would be perfectly acceptable for both Emperors (as I said Alexander can not said no directly without offending Napoleon and maybe he can think who is better sacrificing his sister instead of fighting an unnecessary war)

Yorel said:

Not to mention that Napoleon took the Imperial Crown (ironically I must say) to preserve the attainments* of the Revolution. It was proven on the french coins during the Empire which stated on one side "Napoleon Empereur" and on the other "Republique Française".

*Sorry if my phrase isn't correct but I'm not a native english speaker and I have a doubt on how to translate the French word I want to say wich is "acquis"...

Click to expand...

You do much better with English than many native-speakers I've seen.

Keep up the interesting topic, everyone!

isabella said:

With a son born between the 1795-1797 the most obviously choice of bride for his son for Napoleon would be the second princess who OTL Napoleon try to marry Anna of Russia, the youngest sister of the zar Alexander I (the first princess was her elder sister Katherine, the third Marie Louise). With a prospective husband of her age or slightly younger Alexander can not denied his sister's hand to Napoleon's heir without offend him and ITTL Napoleon will not in the same hurry for his heir's wedding in which was OTL for his wedding.
A betrothal in 1809/1810 for a wedding in 1811/1812 would be perfectly acceptable for both Emperors (as I said Alexander can not said no directly without offending Napoleon and maybe he can think who is better sacrificing his sister instead of fighting an unnecessary war)

Click to expand...

But Alexander said no to Napoleon when he wanted to marry Anna so why would he say yes to his son? I mean i guess if his objections was just Napoleon I could see that but if the objection was over the French Empire/ Bonaparte family then i doubt that would be possible.

Captain Poplar said:

Salic Law applies according to the 1804 (an XII) Constitution. Napoleon's daughter would not be an Empress.

This said, the Constitution (which curiously states that : "the Government of the Republic is entrusted to an Emperor, whose title is Emperor of the French") also stated that Napoleon could adopt his successor, which he didn't. He could marry his daughter to one of his nephews, who would become the Emperor, the marriage prospect helping to convince one of his brothers to let a son to Napoleon.

Click to expand...

In legal interpretation "He includes She" and Salic Law was part of the 'Ancient Regime' and does not apply to Napoleon's empire whereby such an empire was the product of the French Revolution where the citizens had equal rights;Citoyenne Bonaparte would have the right to rule and since Napoleon had the right to chose his successor,he would have confirmed the girl as his successor and groom her as the ruler of France,and if she was anything like her father,she would become the "Iron Emperess" something Europe had already precedents(Elizabeth I,Maria Thereza)

The salic principle was widely maintained in Napoleon's imperial constitution. Only sons and brothers could become emperor and transmit the right to imperial succession.

IF they have a son in 1797, one year after their marriage then that child would be 18 in 1815 and perhaps commanding one of the corps at Waterloo. And if that son then is killed during the battle before Blücher arrives and Napoleon is informed. Would he go down in grief?

cimon said:

French Revolution where the citizens had equal rights

Click to expand...

All MALE citizens had equal rights, and even that was mostly a theoretical best-case.
Feminist activism tended to cause closer contact with the Guillotine than most people would like.

Falecius said:

All MALE citizens had equal rights, and even that was mostly a theoretical best-case.
Feminist activism tended to cause closer contact with the Guillotine than most people would like.

Click to expand...

Salic law is nothing that applies to sovereigns,only by usage,however if it were the case you have to explain how Maria Tereza became an emperess of Austria;Napoleon knew and he would do just the same....