Napoleon in Ireland?!

Also known as the Irish Rebellion of 1798 was largly incited by the French to relive pressure elsewhere and scare the British into peace. General Humbert was sent to Ireland to lead the French regulars in the area. Napoleon was sent to Egypt now let's say they switch places what happens?
(For the sake of it let's say Humbert gets to the Nile but no farther okay?)
Proof: And yes this really vague but it's the first time a forgin army has landed on the British isles since 1066 Linkage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Rebellion_of_1798

Boom22 said:

Proof: And yes this really vague but it's the first time a forgin army has landed on the British isles since 1066 Linkage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Rebellion_of_1798

Click to expand...

No it ain't. What exactly do you call the Dutch contribution to the glorious revolution?

Isn't the problem with this situation the fact that even if the French expeditionary force lands successfully in Ireland, they're then going to be pretty much stuck there? Even if Napoleon secures more victories than Humbert did, sooner or later he's going to be dragged down.

Cockroach said:

No it ain't. What exactly do you call the Dutch contribution to the glorious revolution?

Click to expand...

Plus there was at least one French raid on the Isle of Wight before then plus a French army here during the reign of King John; not to mention the Danish army at the Battle of Largs....

Problem is I can't see Nappy agreeing to lead such a small force in Ireland, he would want a proper army-and I am not sure if a force of size could make it to Ireland in the same way thss small force did.

Having Napoleon as the leader wouldn't help the outnumbered Irish, they would most likely still be overcome and put down. Napoleon would either be captured, killed, or flee back to France. Egypt would probably not be captured either.

England has not been conquered by a foreign army since 1066. The "Glorious Revolution" was a simple regime change, not a military conquest. Boom just made too broad of a statement

Lord Grattan said:

England has not been conquered by a foreign army since 1066.

Click to expand...

That's what we always claim, but it's rather debatable, especially in the 1100s and 1200s.

Basically what Flocc said - Napoleon may have been a genius, but trying to win in Ireland would have been making bricks without straw.

Probably extremely unlikely, but what if the Directory sent Napopleon, and his men, to Ireland instead sanctioning the Egyptian Expedition. This would help Humbert and the Society of United Irishmen.

Say the Directory lets it leak that the Egyptian Expedition is going to happen. The RN sends its fleet as OTL, but french ships were also set to cross to Ireland for Napoleon's troops. No or few French ships are sent to Egypt as decoys.

If I remember correctly - getting through to Ireland was luck rather than skill, in the face of the RN (it was during Humberts expedition that the Droits de la Homme was forced ashore by HMS Indefatigable) and so if Napoleon gets to Ireland, while he'll score a number of victories (and so cause a great panic in England), he'll be trapped there like in Egypt - except with no Acre or plague....

Eventually he'll try and smuggle himself back to France, and with his notorious luck, it'll probably work. Whether Ireland has given him enough prestige to carry out a Brumiare, I'm not certain - I think probably, because of the landing on 'England'. So, in the long run, maybe less of an effect on OTL France than might be imagined.

It is in England that the greatest effects will be seen - a bigger militia to protect the home islands, probably harsher treatment of Ireland, opprobrium poured on the Navy rather than glory (any victory in the Med will seem little benefit when the French are in Ireland) - all in all a weaker Britain to resist Napoleon later on.

larpsidekick said:

If I remember correctly - getting through to Ireland was luck rather than skill, in the face of the RN (it was during Humberts expedition that the Droits de la Homme was forced ashore by HMS Indefatigable) and so if Napoleon gets to Ireland, while he'll score a number of victories (and so cause a great panic in England), he'll be trapped there like in Egypt - except with no Acre or plague....

Click to expand...

Well this is what the Directory wants anyway, Napoleon away from France and no longer a problem for them.
Also more French support may bulster the ranks of the Society of United Irishmen with more members joining.

larpsidekick said:

Eventually he'll try and smuggle himself back to France, and with his notorious luck, it'll probably work. Whether Ireland has given him enough prestige to carry out a Brumiare, I'm not certain - I think probably, because of the landing on 'England'. So, in the long run, maybe less of an effect on OTL France than might be imagined.

Click to expand...

I think this would have a greater effect in the eyes of France. Sure in OTL he took Egypt for a short time, but here if he is able to hold Ireland it is going to be an even bigger affront to the British at this time. France is right on their doorstep, the Irish have rebelled and sided with them. This may make some in authority in London think changes are needed to fix their errors and those changes are those who made these bad policies.

larpsidekick said:

It is in England that the greatest effects will be seen - a bigger militia to protect the home islands, probably harsher treatment of Ireland, opprobrium poured on the Navy rather than glory (any victory in the Med will seem little benefit when the French are in Ireland) - all in all a weaker Britain to resist Napoleon later on.

Click to expand...

This bigger militia in England may foster a stronger guerilla/terrorist movement throughout Ireland. More troops in Britain may mean somewhere else is going to be weakened, at least for the short term.

By the time the French landed the game was up.

Even the Corsican isn't going to conquer Ireland with a little over a thousand men in his army and a few thousand more rebels more interested in thieving and murdering than fighting.

By the time of Humbert's defeat he had 26,000 men in the field against him and 5,000 of his own (which quickly melted away).

The British had thousands more to call upon just in Ireland.

I wouldn't expect the French, or the Irish themselves, to hold Ireland for long. What I would expect though is drastic changes in Britain in there policies toward the Irish. Most likely becoming even more draconian. While the British are preoccupied with straightening up at home, it may give France a better chance at some scheme elsewhere in the world.

And as I've said before the Directory wanted Napoleon out of the way. If its a total failure in Ireland, Napoleons supporter may lose face and stop backing him, if he gets back to France.