Prussia given to Napoleon relative/ client
- Thread starter Byzantion
- Start date
What about instead of Jérôme Bonaparte, bring crowned King of Westphalia and marrying Princess Catharina Frederica of Württemberg, we have him crowned King of the Germans (similar to Napoleon's King of the French) and have Jérôme marry Princess Charlotte of Prussia, she was the eldest surviving daughter of Frederick William III of Prussia, whom in OTL becomes the wife of Emperor Nicholas I, and mother of Emperor Alexander II.
King of the Germans would be an interesting title, do you mean, that Jerome could be a liberal German King , who is the president of a German Confederation or even an emperor of a a unified Germany ? How could the Rheinbund could cooperate in such a scenario ? Would be interesting , if there is a liberal constitution iPrussia aswell.
Projecting enough power to totally dismantle Prussia (which is basically what this is asking for) would be ... tough, even for Napoleon.
I suspect that if he tried, he'd be faced with a bleeding ulcer worse than Spain (where he also tried that trick).
I suspect that if he tried, he'd be faced with a bleeding ulcer worse than Spain (where he also tried that trick).
1) At Tilsit, Napoleon originally insisited on the cession of Silesia, which would have either gone completely to Saxony or Lower S to Saxony and Upper S to Austria.
2) Apparently there was a proposal (i can't determine whether originally French or Russian) to give all of Pomerania to Sweden in exchange for Sweden ceding indefensible Finland to Russia and joining the anti-British Continental System. To Pomerania would have been added the Uckermark from Brandenburg and the Mecklenburg duchies as the new realm of Vendland, correponding to the Sweish royal title of King of the Wends.
(To keep Denmark happy, parts of Mecklenburg might have gone to Holstein.)
The Mecklenburg dukes would have been compensated with (parts of) Brandenburg, presumably the Mittelmark and Neumark.
3) Pomerellia and Danzig (ie West Prussia) would have gone to Warsaw, with Friedrich Wilhelm only keeping East Prussia, while the Tsar also desired the terrtory north of the Niemen for Russia.
IMO there cannot be a relative of Napoleon in the area east of the Vistula. The Tsar would not stand for it. The Duchy of Warsaw as French client was bad enough.
2) Apparently there was a proposal (i can't determine whether originally French or Russian) to give all of Pomerania to Sweden in exchange for Sweden ceding indefensible Finland to Russia and joining the anti-British Continental System. To Pomerania would have been added the Uckermark from Brandenburg and the Mecklenburg duchies as the new realm of Vendland, correponding to the Sweish royal title of King of the Wends.
(To keep Denmark happy, parts of Mecklenburg might have gone to Holstein.)
The Mecklenburg dukes would have been compensated with (parts of) Brandenburg, presumably the Mittelmark and Neumark.
3) Pomerellia and Danzig (ie West Prussia) would have gone to Warsaw, with Friedrich Wilhelm only keeping East Prussia, while the Tsar also desired the terrtory north of the Niemen for Russia.
IMO there cannot be a relative of Napoleon in the area east of the Vistula. The Tsar would not stand for it. The Duchy of Warsaw as French client was bad enough.
As they say, Prussia not a start with an army but an army with a state. In 1806 that may be less evident, but what was france to gain by replacing one Prussian king with another?
Napoleon does not have the Bernadotte precedent, but weaking Prussia is more useful than just replacing its head. Unless that head is someone he can 100% trust, and those are few.
Actually, he might have been able to trust Friedrich August of Saxony, but a Saxon-Prussian-Warsovian behemoth would have looked scary on the map and anyway, Napoleon couldn't have known how loyal FA would prove.
While I'm sure Napoleon would like to do this you would have to make Prussia much weaker than it was in order to pull it off. Prussia was humiliated and weakened but not broken, hence why it was able to turn sides so quickly after the defeat in Russia. Also I doubt Napoleon would let anyone claim the titles of "King of the Germans" or "German Emperor" he was quite happy with leaving Germany in a confederation, un-unified and easier to control.
Yes, among other things, Tsar Alexander was alarmed by the mere idea that France might decide to keep troups in the fortified places of Silesia instead of withdrawing them after Tilsit.
A severe breaking up of Prussia would be hard for him to swallow, but French army units in Breslau, Danzig etc. would have been a casus belli.
Faeelin
Banned
How did Austria feel about partitioning Austria? Compensating Vienna for its losses after Austerlitz with Silesia might have caused an interesting debate.
While I agree, Napoleon also didn't want the position, there is a reason he created the Protector of the Rhine position. He didn't want a single monarchical German state.
While possible, there are two problems with this, first you would still need to have Prussia be in a weaker state but not nearly as much as you would to change the monarch, a relatively small POD would work for that. The second and more problematic issue is Russia. A stronger Poland would drastically strain relations with Russia which Napoleon drastically wanted to keep, that is until the Russia stop participating in the Continental Plan, but then you have a larger problem.
Denying Napoleon the option to do that was the reason for Franz II. to dissolve the HRE.
Removing a sitting Emperor would have been rather difficult, but assuming that Franz II. dies sometime after 1803:
The electors of Bavaria, Württemberg, Baden, Regensburg were in the first wave of Rheinbund members and would have voted for Napoleon, presumably.
Bohemia, Salzburg, Saxony and Hanover would probably not, Hessen and Brandenburg are iffy, but highly unlikely: Prussia could live with the established emeperoship of the Habsburg, but granting it to imperious and dominating Napoleon would have been a capitulation. Kassel was not exactly dependent on Prussia, but a close ally.
+++
Concerning the thread this is in: Even for Napoleon, it would be inconsistent first to negotiate the secession of the Rheinbund states from the HRE in July of 1806 and the to recreate it in August of 1806 after Franz II. abdicates. There is no way Franz would simply transfer the HRE title to Napoleon.
But maybe it could be spun as strong resolution of no confidence against Franz II. The Rheinbund princes could be browbeaten into accepting this swerve if Nepoleon promised no interventon in their internal government and threw them some goodies. Würzburg as successor for Salzburg could be made to join, obviously, and Berg would be made another electorate, probably.
Friedrich Wilhelm III of Prussia would never agree to join a reconstituted NRE. In 1806, they were busy to create their own Northern German Empire with Saxony and Hesse as main allies.
Napoleon would have to beat Prussia up until it has no choice but to place itself under his imperial authority which he then uses to depose its ruler who has not even had the rudimentary intelligence to combine the acceptance of membership in the NRE with a "no deposal" clause?
And if Prussia is so broken that they have to accept anything without conditions (and without allies) - what does the HRE fistion help Napoleon?
That does not add up.
While true, that does not prove much. After all, at least since 1648 the THR has not been anything like a single monarchical German state. And I assume that had he seen the possibility of become the single monarch of a united german state with a loyal population, he would have taken the risk.
In early 1807, Napoleon certainly looked nearly invincible and at the height of his power. But since Vienna acted rather cautiously and tried never to completely burn her bridges with potential allies, I am not sure if they would have taken the bait.
For Napoleon it would have been asuccess had Austria taken (Upper) Silesia back: Prussia will need it back to regain Grand Power status, but Austria will not like it at all to give it up under duress again. That makes negotiations between Austria and Prussia about a potential anti-Napoleonic alliance difficult.
Apparently there was one concept floating around Vienna (don't know if during the Congress of Vienna, or more likely, some time earlier) that sugested that after a defeat of Napoleon, the Bourbons would be restored in their 1789 borders and allowed to unite with Spain shpuld the dynastical situation come up.
Russia would be made superior in all territory of the Orthodox Church, Austria supreme in all catholic areas east of the French border, and the UK-Hanover in all protestant areas, with Prussia reduced to second tier and subservient to Hanover.
Denying Prussia equal or near-equal rank to Austria was a almost constant fundament of Viennese politics since forever.
Russia would be made superior in all territory of the Orthodox Church, Austria supreme in all catholic areas east of the French border, and the UK-Hanover in all protestant areas, with Prussia reduced to second tier and subservient to Hanover.
Denying Prussia equal or near-equal rank to Austria was a almost constant fundament of Viennese politics since forever.