Perhaps I have the details wrong, but Josephine's inability to conceive a child with Napoleon Bonaparte seems to have led directly to their divorce. So basically, what if Napoleon had successful fathered an heir with his first wife? Now I know that Josephine had an affair at one point, so let's say the timing of the conception is such that Napoleon can be fairly confident that the son is his. Now we get to the question of timing. That is when would this alt Napoleon II be born? How would the presence of a male heir before 1810? How are the Napoleonic Wars impacted? What difference, if any does this change make?
A Different Napoleon II: "Had Josephine been my mother..."
- Thread starter Glass Onion
- Start date
Emperor-of-New-Zealand
Kicked
I don't think much would change. The wars end in 1815, Napolean may get a slightly better deal for exile if he has a wife and child, but that's about it really.
Especially if Josephine has a son for him in 1797 or so, this could have fascinating implications if everything else still turns out the same or similar. Is it possible to put his son on the fast track towards the battlefield by the mid 1810s?
And what do the Allies do with the near-adult son if Napoleon I goes into exile?
And what do the Allies do with the near-adult son if Napoleon I goes into exile?
https://www.alternatehistory.com/Discussion/showthread.php?t=158353
It's an old thread I posted where I asked the same question.
As a matter of fact, in the thread I gave, someone had mentionned Josephine might have thought herself pregnant before her marriage to Napoleon. Make this a fact, and you have young Napoleon II born in 1796.
The obvious consequence of Josephine giving birth of an ATL Napoleon II is that Napoleon I won't divorce her in 1809. I don't know if this is a good thing but to me that's a plus since Josephine and Napoleon were a very close couple: they even remain in good terms after their OTL divorce.
Josephine giving birth to Napoleon's son could also improve her relationship with the rest of the Bonaparte family who hated her and tried several times to convince Napoleon that he should divorce.
After that, it will depend on when this ATL Napoleon II is born. If we take the earliest option which is 1796, that would make him 16 in 1812. A funny fact that was brought up in the thread I mentionned earlier in the post was that it may lead to TTL Napoleon II marrying Marie Louise of Austria (or a Hapsburg relative) instead of his father.
I'm wondering if having a son earlier wouldn't affect Napoleon's personna and psychology. He might wish to give his son a stable and pacified Empire, leading to him being more cautious in politics and trying to avoid war. Yet again, I'm no expert on Psychology so I don't know how plausible this is.
It's an old thread I posted where I asked the same question.
Well, the issue of the absence of children was linked to Josephine's sterility. We don't know exactly how or why she became sterile, although there is a theroy that she suffered a miscarriage while being imprisonned. Anyway, with a POD that butterflies away Josephine's sterility, the child can be born as early as 1796 if your timing is perfect.Glass Onion said:
As a matter of fact, in the thread I gave, someone had mentionned Josephine might have thought herself pregnant before her marriage to Napoleon. Make this a fact, and you have young Napoleon II born in 1796.
Glass Onion said:
The obvious consequence of Josephine giving birth of an ATL Napoleon II is that Napoleon I won't divorce her in 1809. I don't know if this is a good thing but to me that's a plus since Josephine and Napoleon were a very close couple: they even remain in good terms after their OTL divorce.
Josephine giving birth to Napoleon's son could also improve her relationship with the rest of the Bonaparte family who hated her and tried several times to convince Napoleon that he should divorce.
After that, it will depend on when this ATL Napoleon II is born. If we take the earliest option which is 1796, that would make him 16 in 1812. A funny fact that was brought up in the thread I mentionned earlier in the post was that it may lead to TTL Napoleon II marrying Marie Louise of Austria (or a Hapsburg relative) instead of his father.
I'm wondering if having a son earlier wouldn't affect Napoleon's personna and psychology. He might wish to give his son a stable and pacified Empire, leading to him being more cautious in politics and trying to avoid war. Yet again, I'm no expert on Psychology so I don't know how plausible this is.
The big question would be what does he do with Austria after Austerlitz. Levelling the place, while an option, bodes ill for he and his son's acceptance as legitimate, "regular" monarchs. But he's not going to divorce Josephine and marry an Austrian for the sake of peace if he already has an heir. How does he try to guarantee their cooperation? Does he just give up and try and put Joseph on the throne in Vienna?
Grey Wolf
Donor
There was a plan to get Esterhazy to accept the crown of an independent Hungary, but he wouldn't do it, I don't know at what date that was but indicates that Napoleon was open to other long-term alternatives to continued Habsburg hegemony
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Why should be it any different from OTL? Austerlitz was in 1805. Napoleon only started to think to remarry in 1809, and even then his first aim was Tsar Alexander's sister, Grand Duchess Anna. It was only in early 1810 that he arranged his marriage to Marie Louise.
Grey Wolf
Donor
Free encyclopedias, which generally copy each other, all say 1809 was the year Esterhazy was offered the crown of Hungary
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Esterhazy.aspx
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Esterhazy.aspx
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Guys
I'm guessing that was after the 1809 campaign where the Hapsburg's gave Nappy a tough fight and a bit of a fright a couple of times. Something I'd considered having him do in a timeline but presumed he would offer the throne to one of his brothers or just possibly a Marshall. Which may be less popular in Hungary than a native but may still work. That would have some very interesting butterflies.
Steve
That would be interesting indeed. Who could be Napoleon's choice for the Hungarian throne? BTW, why did he choose Murat for Naples and not other Marshall?
Grey Wolf
Donor
Because Murat was his brother-in-law (married to his sister). Leclerc was in a similar position, but got to go and have fun in Haiti instead!
I wonder if Leclerc would have made Marshal had he lived - presumably if he had delivered Haiti back to France in some semblance of usability it would have overcome charges of nepotism
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Thanks, I forgot that!
Just an idea, now that Napoleon has a son with Josephine, maybe he could make her earlier son Eugène de Beauharnais the new king of Hungary?
Alex Richards
Donor
He was already promised the title of King of Italy (this being the Italian Kingdom that included Lombardy, Venezia and the Papal Marches). This seems unlikely to change.
That would be interesting, but I doubt that such an enlarged Bavaria would get the Czech lands too.
I dont see how the presence of a male child born to Napoleon and Josephine is going to impact history unless perhaps the attraction of a qiuet family life somehow limits Napoleon's ambition and he does not elect to take on Britain and Russia and subsquently lose.
It occurs to me that Napoleon II was not simply the son of the exiled Emperor of the French, he was also the grandson of the Austrian Emperor, raised in Vienna at his grandfather's court.
Marie Louise and her son appear to have been afforded special protection and provision after the collapse of the Napoleonic regime due to her status as an Archduchess of Austria.
A child of Napoleon and Josephine would have no such glittering connection (there would be the Bavarian connection via his half brother Eugene but that would not be too significant at this stage) and he could have simply been just another Bonaparte family member biding his time.
It occurs to me that Napoleon II was not simply the son of the exiled Emperor of the French, he was also the grandson of the Austrian Emperor, raised in Vienna at his grandfather's court.
Marie Louise and her son appear to have been afforded special protection and provision after the collapse of the Napoleonic regime due to her status as an Archduchess of Austria.
A child of Napoleon and Josephine would have no such glittering connection (there would be the Bavarian connection via his half brother Eugene but that would not be too significant at this stage) and he could have simply been just another Bonaparte family member biding his time.
Alex Richards
Donor
The potential impact on the Restoration period however must not be underestimated. Part of the reason why people were wary of the Bonapartes until Louis-Napoleon was because once OTL Nap II died the people inbetween in the sucession weren't particularly popular. If we have Nap I's son surviving into the 1830s, 40s or 50s, then that could have tremendous effects on the development of a *2nd Empire
That's interesting. I think the birth of a son by Joséphine a round 1797 would have huge consequences.
The first one being that Napoléon would not have made the mistakes he made by trying to trying un vain to conclude at any cost a dynastic alliance with the Romanov. He made illusions on the effect of these dynastic alliances. So if he had had a 10-year-old son in 1807, he might not have given incredibly lenient terms to Alexander in the Tilsitt treaty : these too lenient terms were the main reason for the next conflict between France and Russia, which burst only in 1812 but was manifest as soon as 1809.
Then one can imagine many things.
The first one being that Napoléon would not have made the mistakes he made by trying to trying un vain to conclude at any cost a dynastic alliance with the Romanov. He made illusions on the effect of these dynastic alliances. So if he had had a 10-year-old son in 1807, he might not have given incredibly lenient terms to Alexander in the Tilsitt treaty : these too lenient terms were the main reason for the next conflict between France and Russia, which burst only in 1812 but was manifest as soon as 1809.
Then one can imagine many things.
From what i understand napoleon was frustrated about having no heir.
I could imagine that with an heir early on his policies would be less reckless & short term, and more aimed at the future. More trying to consolidate the gains after a while.