AHC: Alternate Dreyfus Affair

With a PoD no earlier than 1897, what changes to how (or whether) the Dreyfus Affair unfolded would have the biggest changes on France in the years leading up to the Great War?

Some background -- Dreyfus, TTL, is still arrested for treason in 1894, and is sentenced to Devil's Island in January 1895; TTL also still has the new French Director of Intelligence discover the real culprit in August 1896, upon which he is still silenced by being transferred to Tunisia in November of that year. (Lazare also likely still publishes A Miscarriage of Justice that same month.) Now, OTL saw Zola publish J'Accuse in January 1898, President Loubet pardon Dreyfus in 1899, and his official exoneration in 1906 -- and more still, all lending to a watershed moment for French and Jewish identity.
 
One more thing about OTL I should mention -- Loubet had only become President in February of that year (1899) due to the death of his predecessor, Felix Faure (who, to my knowledge, is the only head of state ever to die as a result of sex). As I understand the Third Republic Presidency, terms were for seven years, so if he doesn't die this strange death, Faure would be President through 1901.
 
Well, if the scandal is resolved fairly early then it might slow the rise of Clemenceau.

I wonder what effect no affair would have on Jewish culture and history? Could it change the demographics even slightly, with more Jews seeing France as a desirable place to live?

Also, will it slow down Charles Maurras?
 

birdboy2000

Banned
It was the Dreyfus affair that convinced journalist Theodore Herzl, who had covered the case, that Jews would never be accepted in Europe and turned him to become the founder of Zionism. So yeah, huge knock-on effects on the middle east - yeah, antisemitism was still there, but avoid an outbreak of it like this and you raise Jewish hopes that it'll disappear with the modern age.
 
So if the army doesn't cover up Dreyfus' wrongful conviction in 1896, you'd see, for example, a much weaker Zionism, and Clemenceau wouldn't have such a powerful rise in politics (meaning he likely doesn't get to be Prime Minister by the time WWI breaks out). Technically before the OP, but I'm intrigued...
 
There was the possibility for some drastic changes in governance in France during the 1898-1899 period of instability resulting from the Dreyfus affair and the sudden death of Felix Faure. We could see a Boulanger-inspired coup by a general and his opportunistic supporters, a Bourbon restoration, or even an attempt by Napoleon V to make a comeback. Cross-posting from an old thread of mine:


Cross-posted from this thread. wanted to give this its own thread to get some discussion going.
-
(btw, most of this is from memory, referencing a JSTOR article called "'La République en danger'? The Pretenders, the Army and Déroulède, 1898-1899", by Maurice Larkin, from 1985.)
'
Though it was a fairly stable republic (compared to Napoleon's Second Empire, or the Second republic) here are a few ways to collapse the Troisième République and replace it with another REACTION. For example, in the late 1890s, the state had to deal with both the affaire Dreyfus, and a political crisis after the death of president Félix Faure in Feb. 1899. During his funeral, reactionary / revanchist politician Paul Déroulède sought to instigate a coup against the Third Republic, centered around his political group, the Ligue des patriotes (League of Patriots, an organization which had become anti-republican, xenophic and antisemitic after its creation), which had supported General Boulanger's populist movement earlier in the decade...

Before the funeral of President Faure, Déroulède sought the support of two prominent generals - Gauderique Roget and Georges de Pellieux, who was the opponent of Alfred Dreyfus and Emile Zola in the affaire Dreyfus - in staging a military coup. The date was set for 23 feb 1899... but Pellieux lost his nerve at the last minute and bowed out, which led to Déroulède literally begging Gen. Roget to march on L'Elysee and instigate the coup. Roget remained loyal to the Republic, and the coup failed. Déroulède was arrested, and that was that.

There are a few interesting possible outcomes of these events. The first is the most obvious - Georges de Pellieux goes all in on the coup attempt, and Roget does not back down. The Republic falls, to be replaced with a more authoritarian state (yet still republican- Déroulède was opposed to the Orléanistes and the Bonapartes, though less the latter than the former) based on a more conservative state / watered-down 2nd Empire, with a weak parliament and a strong president elected by universal suffrage.

Another possibility is that, even if Pellieux backs out, Roget and Déroulède go ahead with the coup. It fails miserably, and upon arrest Roget claims that he was innocent the whole time and M. Déroulède made him do it... but the republic is still thrown into chaos, and both the Bonapartistes and the Orléanists rally in support of Victor Napoléon and Prince Philippe d’Orléans, respectively, to restore either a Third Empire or a ... second "July Monarchy"?... and if it comes to this, my money is on the Orléanistes, as the Bonapartisans ( ) were too timid after the fall of Napoléon III, so would probably cede the initiative to the bolder supporters of Prince Philippe. After all, this is all going to go down in a matter of hours: 23 Feb 1899, General Roget and Déroulède march on Parliament, throwing the government into disorder. By the 24th or 25th, someone is going to be sitting in l'Élysée, either as provisional President of the Republic, or provisional Chief of State of a restored monarchy.

And things go downhill from there...
 
There was the possibility for some drastic changes in governance in France during the 1898-1899 period of instability resulting from the Dreyfus affair and the sudden death of Felix Faure. We could see a Boulanger-inspired coup by a general and his opportunistic supporters, a Bourbon restoration, or even an attempt by Napoleon V to make a comeback.

That would be something; could this all make France more militaristic in the early 20th Century, giving us an earlier WWI, or might this have the opposite effect? Also, how would one of these outcomes affect Zionism?
 
That the Dreyfus Affair was the prime instigator of Herzl has been reconsidered by more recent assessments of historians. It was most probably the anti-semetic activity in Vienna, notably the rise of Karl Lueger in the mid '90s, that propelled Herzl. Dreyfus started being mentioned in Herzl's discourse only later. He actually initially believed in Dreyfus' guilt.

So, I don't see any profound changes in the course of Zionism if Dreyfus was resolved early or later.
 
Top