King Theodore's Corsica
- Thread starter Carp
- Start date
That Paris may say goodbye to them.
Depending how will become it, I mean Theodore would agree willingly or some form of pressure - from Britain or the inside - will come?
Nemesis
Nemesis
Prussian soldiers make a stand at Soldin
Prussian soldiers make a stand at Soldin
One might argue that the Anglo-French War of 1756 began in the Mediterranean, as it was France’s invasion of Minorca which goaded Britain into declaring war. This invasion, however, was merely an escalation of a conflict which had begun half a world away. From 1754, the two powers had clashed in North America over disputed boundaries in the Ohio Valley. The British had been the losers in these early engagements, and responded by launching a devastating but undeclared war against French merchant shipping, as well as interdicting French fleets bearing men and supplies to bolster their colonial forces. The Minorcan expedition was a further escalation which prompted mutual declarations of war, but the Mediterranean was merely a secondary theater to what was originally and principally a colonial war.
By the time the Mediterranean was lost to the French in 1759, the outcome of that colonial war was still in some doubt. The French proved themselves quite formidable in land engagements, and particularly early on the French and their Indian allies regularly defeated British regular and colonial forces. After a series of naval victories in 1758 and 1759, however, including the decisive Battle of Cape Nao, Britain achieved near total supremacy in the Atlantic. Louisbourg fell to the British in 1758 after a costly siege, which combined with this naval supremacy allowed the British to blockade the St. Lawrence estuary, the artery of New France. The French were not yet vanquished, as the failure of the badly bungled British siege of Quebec in 1759 demonstrated. But the cumulative effects of the blockade, the growing familiarity of the British and colonials with American warfare, and - most critically - the arrival of a new wave of British reinforcements in early 1760 threatened to overwhelm the embattled French colonial forces.
With the French on the defensive in the New World and French colonies in the West Indies falling one after another, it was clear that only European victories could save the French colonial empire. The seizure of Minorca had not given the British pause, but the conquest of the Electorate of Hanover might make King George II rethink his country’s overseas belligerence. Here, however, the Anglo-French contest overlapped with the Third Silesian War, which pitted King Friedrich II of Prussia against Austria, France, and Russia.[1] This parallel war was effectively a continuation of the War of Austrian Succession, as Empress Maria Theresa had never accepted Friedrich’s theft of Silesia as legitimate or permanent. The Empress had in fact been preparing to start a war of her own, probably slated for 1757, but Friedrich had preempted her. Alarmed by the grand alliance which had arisen about him, the King of Prussia launched a surprise attack against the Electorate of Saxony (ostensibly neutral, but secretly in league with Austria). Before the Austrians could react, the Saxon army was surrounded, Dresden was occupied, and Friedrich was preparing to march on Bohemia.
Friedrich had formed a low opinion of the Austrians from his experiences in the prior war, but these were not the same old Austrians. Since 1748 the Austrian army had undertaken serious reforms in tactics and organization, as well as a thorough overhaul of the artillery corps. Its generals, too, were made of better stuff; the venerable mediocrities who had served Austria so poorly in the 1740s had largely left the stage and were replaced by younger, more capable commanders.
Friedrich’s Austrian counterpart was the 51 year old Field Marshal Maximilian Ulysses, Graf von Browne, who had distinguished himself in Italy and Provence in the War of Austrian Succession and was one of the few senior Austrian commanders to have emerged from that war with a good reputation. He had opined at court that the King of Prussia was, in his opinion, a considerably overrated general, and got an opportunity to test that assertion when he became the first Austrian commander to face the Prussians in battle in 1756. In this year he engaged Friedrich twice along the Elbe at the battles of Leitmeritz and Altendorf. Browne retreated from both battles and withdrew from Saxony, allowing Friedrich to claim the victory, but nevertheless achieved his strategic objectives for the campaign - halting the Prussian advance into Bohemia for the year and rescuing 11,000 starving and desperate Saxon soldiers from Prussian encirclement - while parrying every Prussian attempt to cut off his retreat.
Marshal Browne and King Friedrich
The empress’s decision in early 1757 to subordinate Browne to Prince Karl Alexander, the brother of Emperor Franz Stefan, brought the Austrian cause to its lowest point. Browne disagreed with Prince Karl on almost everything, and they quarreled so violently it was reported they nearly came to blows. Their relationship broke down entirely after the Battle of Prague, in which Browne (commanding the right wing) led a counterattack which arguably turned an Austrian defeat into a bloody draw and compelled the Prussians to fall back from Prague as more Austrian reinforcements arrived. To Browne’s great fury, Prince Karl accepted credit for this “victory” despite the fact that he had been incapacitated with an asthma attack for most of the battle, and declined Browne’s pleas to immediately pursue the Prussians (although given the state of the Austrian army after the battle, this may not have been possible). After another explosive argument between the two, the prince relegated Browne to a reserve command, spurring Browne to send a letter to Vienna offering his resignation. Before the empress could consider this, however, Prince Karl - finally following the Prussians after regrouping his forces - strode confidently into a trap and was disastrously defeated by Friedrich at the Battle of Welbern.
With the Austrians recovering from this blow, Friedrich turned to the French, who had overrun most of Hanover and were now invading Saxony from the west alongside imperial troops. Friedrich expected more of a fight from the French than the Austrians, but the vaunted French army made a shockingly poor showing compared to their great feats under the late Maurice de Saxe. Deficient in leadership, organization, tactics, and the quality of their soldiers, the French blundered their way into Friedrich’s jaws and suffered one of the worst defeats in French history at the Battle of Auerstedt. This Prussian victory re-energized the British, who lavished Friedrich with subsidies and pledged more British troops to the continent. It also effectively decoupled the Anglo-French and Austro-Prussian wars, as after Auerstedt the French no longer had the stomach to send further armies against Friedrich. Although Prussian and Austro-Imperial forces did take part in the campaigns in Hanover, the two wars proceeded mostly in parallel after 1757.
Welbern and Auerstedt were Friedrich’s twin masterpieces, but 1757 was a summit to which Friedrich would not return. The Austrians profited from the humiliation at Welbern, as it forced the empress to choose between reclaiming Silesia and gratifying her brother-in-law. In the end she chose the former, removing Prince Karl from active service and restoring Browne to overall command. The departure of the French, meanwhile, was more than compensated for by the arrival of the Russians, who had invaded East Prussia in 1757 and would make their first forays into Brandenburg in 1758 under General Pyotr Saltykov. The Austrians opened that year’s campaigning with an invasion of Silesia, and Browne redeemed the reputation of Austrian arms with his own tactical masterpiece. At the Battle of Soldin, an overconfident Friedrich attacked a strong Austrian position with poor reconnaissance, only for the Prussians to be bled white by Austrian light troops and surprised by a massive counterattack. The Prussians were swept from the field and hounded in their retreat by Browne’s vicious hussars and Croat grenzers. Friedrich himself was very nearly captured by a squadron of vengeful Saxon chevaulegers.
Friedrich was by no means Browne’s inferior, and got the better of the marshal a few months later at the Battle of Löbau. But while Browne would gain no more Soldins, neither would he give Friedrich more Welberns. The marshal would continually try and circle around Friedrich with a swift march, take some advantageous position which threatened the Prussian lines of retreat and supply, and then dare Friedrich to attack him. Browne lost more often than he won, but always managed to withdraw in good order, and the Prussians frequently lost just as many men as the Austrians - or even more - attempting to dislodge him. Most importantly, Browne’s aggressive maneuvering was successful in keeping Friedrich from relieving his Silesian garrisons, which fell one by one to a second Austrian army under Leopold Joseph von Daun. By 1759 the Prussian king was on the defensive; with Brandenburg itself under threat, he no longer had the capability to contest Silesia with his main force.
In that year it became clear to all that Prussia was in a desperate state. Although Friedrich was still capable of swift maneuvers and unlikely victories, his army had become a shadow of its former self. Constant bloody battles with Austrian and Russian armies had severely depleted his supply of veteran soldiers and officers, who could only be replaced with inexperienced conscripts. This depletion led to disaster at the decisive Battle of Küstrin, in which Friedrich attempted to quickly defeat the Russian army before they could link up with the Austrians for the season. Contrary to his expectations, the Russians held on despite horrendous losses, and an Austrian advance corps under General Franz Moritz von Lacy arrived faster than anyone expected on the Prussian flank. For the first time in the war, part of the Prussian line simply broke and fled, and soon the entire army was in a disorganized retreat westward.
Browne arrived too late for the battle, but upon receiving word of the Prussian disintegration he abandoned both the Russians and his own supply train to give chase. Friedrich was making a desperate fighting retreat westwards with his rearguard, harassed constantly by the Austrian light cavalry and bands of Russian cossacks. He managed to slip out of every attempt to encircle him until the village of Strausberg, twenty miles east of Berlin, where General Franz Leopold von Nádasdy finally managed to cut him off. Friedrich lost his horse and was struck in the leg by a musket ball. Wounded and surrounded, the King of Prussia took an overdose of opium. At a barn in Strausberg on September 3rd, Friedrich breathed his last.
Browne stormed into Berlin, and his conduct there elicited much controversy. The marshal was beloved by his men and usually had little difficulty controlling them, but the strenuousness of the forced march and the opportunity of despoiling the enemy’s capital caused discipline to unravel. The Austrians began indiscriminately looting the city, and Browne either could not or did not care to reign them in. Hundreds of civilians lost their lives. Most blamed the Croats, notorious plunderers whom Browne had quartered in the city, but the army’s orgy of vengeful greed appears to have been a multinational affair.
Yet the war was not yet over, and Prussia seized one final moment of glory. Although Friedrich was succeeded as king by his young nephew, command of the army was vested in his younger brother Prince Heinrich, himself a very able commander. In his zeal to strike a finishing blow Browne had far outpaced his supplies, and the Russians (who had suffered heavily at Küstrin) made no move to support him. After amalgamating the scattered remnants of Friedrich’s army with his own corps, Heinrich marched on Berlin and threatened to encircle the city, forcing the marshal to hurriedly evacuate. Heinrich defeated Browne’s disordered and exhausted troops at the Battle of Luckenwald, capturing the marshal’s baggage and forcing Browne to retreat all the way to the Saxon border, while the Russians drew back into Pomerania of their own accord and wintered in Polish territory.
Prince Heinrich of Prussia
Although Prussia was spent, its enemies were also losing the will to fight. The Russian supply situation was a mess and Austria’s finances were so badly strained that minister Wenzel Anton Kaunitz doubted if the empire could sustain another year of campaigning. Prince Heinrich, however, was not looking to drag the conflict out any further. Despite his success at Luckenwald, he knew the country was in tatters and his ramshackle army was in no condition to liberate Silesia or Saxony from the Austrians. Heinrich had been urging his brother to make peace since 1758, and now he was in a position to make it himself. At the outset of the war, the empress had dreamed of dismantling Prussia utterly, but with her bête noire Friedrich out of the picture and Prince Heinrich now ready to relinquish Silesia - the original bone of contention - she authorized Kaunitz to pursue a more limited peace. The Silesian War continued in 1760 but the campaigning was desultory. The Russians re-occupied East Pomerania and then hardly stirred at all. Replacing Browne, Field Marshal Daun launched an offensive into Brandenburg to keep the pressure on, but did so at a glacial pace and with exceeding caution. He had no desire to throw away with a careless blunder what had taken years to win.
The main obstacle to peace was the position of France. The Silesian War could not be definitively concluded without them, but French forces occupied the scattered lands of Prussian Westphalia and King Louis did not wish to relinquish them for nothing. France floated the prospect of annexing Mark and Cleves, which could then be traded to Austria for equivalent portions of the Austrian Netherlands. This proposal, however, was scuttled by a stunning French defeat at the Battle of Hameln at the hands of an Anglo-Hanoverian army. With the French economy in ruins, its navy defeated, and the colonial war going poorly, France badly needed Austrian assistance to turn the German campaign around. The empress, however, could not spare a significant army so long as the war with Prussia remained hot. It thus became imperative for the French to end the Silesian War, with or without territorial compensation from Prussia.[2]
On June 25th, representatives of Prussia and her enemies put the finishing touches on the Treaty of Prague. Austria regained Silesia and Schwiebus, gaining no new territory but reclaiming all that had been lost to Prussia in the War of the Austrian Succession. Saxony received the Prussian enclave of Cottbus and the "Crossen corridor," a small but strategically significant piece of land connecting the Electorate of Saxony with the Kingdom of Poland. Russia acquired East Prussia, which was later traded to Saxony in the Treaty of Krakow for Courland and a swath of Polish territory on the Russian border. Sweden’s costly but strategically insignificant contribution to the war gained them the islands of Usedom and Wolin which they had lost in 1720. Prussia kept its Rhenish territories, but the treaty stipulated that they would remain under French occupation until the end of the war with Britain, and Prussia was obliged to pay a considerable indemnity for their relief. The Prussians further pledged to give no assistance to Britain in the ongoing war.
The Treaty of Prague caused panic in London, and indeed it seemed as thought it would be a disastrous blow. Shortly after the treaty was signed, General Daun marched 30,000 men to Stolberg on the western frontier of Saxony, forcing the Anglo-German forces to beat a hasty retreat northwards. Yet despite having ample opportunity to cut them off, Daun allowed them to escape back into Hanover. Daun was naturally cautious and Austria and Britain were not actually at war. But the real reason for Daun's failure to move was his orders from the empress, which instructed him to conserve his forces, guard his supply lines, and otherwise exercise utmost prudence. Maria Theresa had pledged to support her French allies, but she had been annoyed by their failure to support her adequately against Prussia and she was unwilling to actually risk anything on their behalf. Faithful to his instructions, Daun spent his time methodically reducing Hesse-Kassel and fussing over his logistics while the Anglo-German forces were allowed to regroup in Hanover unmolested. French protests against Daun’s “tardiness” and their high esteem for Browne eventually led to Daun's removal and replacement by Marshal Browne in September, but the empress’s priorities remained the same.
The final blow came in late August, when the news arrived from America that Quebec had finally fallen to British forces. New France was now utterly at the mercy of the British. In Versailles, this loss forced a grim reckoning with the facts. It was possible, perhaps even likely, that they might still conquer Hanover. At the speed things were going, however, it seemed very unlikely that this would be accomplished in the remainder of 1760. Another year of campaigning would be required, but the very idea made the French treasury groan. Moreover, even if fortune favored the French in Hanover, any gains there were likely to be offset by further British gains in America, gains which they were almost certain to make with rapidity now that Quebec was in their hands. Thus, even after another long and ruinously expensive year of fighting, Louis’s ministers could not promise that he would possess any more leverage than he had now - and possibly even less if the Hanoverian campaign foundered or the Austrians failed to fully live up to their obligations. It was time to sue for peace.
Although some British politicians clamored for the total spoliation of France, the situation in Germany tempered these maximalist demands. The Austrians hinted that if Britain continued to hold out for all the marbles, the empress-queen might be forced to declare war and actually take the Hanoverian campaign seriously. Given Austria’s difficult financial situation this may have been an empty threat, but the British were inclined to take it seriously. The replacement of Daun with the energetic Browne, whose reputation was by now considerable, seemed to lend credibility to her ultimatum. There was also the possibility that Louis might renege on the Treaty of Prague and return to his previous designs on Prussian Westphalia, and the prospect of France making gains in Germany or the Netherlands was not at all appealing to the British government. Britain would emerge the victor, but her victory would not be total, and France’s abasement incomplete.
The war finally ended on October 10th, 1760 with the Treaty of Paris. In Europe, France withdrew from the Netherlands, dismantled the fortifications of Dunkirk, and vacated the territories of Prussia and the pro-Hanoverian German princes. In North America, France ceded the Ohio River valley and the whole of Canada to Britain, save only for the Isle Saint-Jean which was restored to France along with rights to the Newfoundland fishery.[A] France the rest of their North American territory and regained the islands of Guadeloupe, Dominica, and Martinique. A most unusual proposal submitted to the British ministry by none other than King Theodore of Corsica, who proposed the cession of a “minor island” in the West Indies to Corsica as compensation for wartime losses and as an experiment in “the productive exercise of liberty,” was not seriously entertained.[3] France’s West African outposts were returned in full. In India, the French effectively lost their position in Bengal but retained their base at Pondicherry in the south, while the British recovered Madras; as it happened, British forces in India regained Madras on their own less than two weeks after the treaty was signed.
In the Mediterranean, France returned Minorca to Britain in exchange for Britain’s evacuation from Corsica and the return of Ajaccio to Corsican sovereignty. France renounced “all debts and indemnities” concerning the Kingdom of Corsica, and both powers agreed that they would not station troops on “the Isles of Corsica and Capraia.” France recovered its trading outpost of La Calle (the Bastion de France) in Algiers, but renounced the Royal African Company’s rights to coral fishing on the Tunisian coast east of Tabarka.
The “Four Years’ War,” as it was known in Europe (though the fighting in America had started years earlier), was in some ways a return to the European status quo. Austria recovered her lands and her reputation, firmly demonstrating that she was not - or at least was no longer - the derelict and toothless beast which King Friedrich had derided in the 1740s. Prussia was restored to its “proper place,” but Prince Heinrich’s stalwart defense ensured that it was merely trimmed rather than dismantled. What stung most was the apparent loss of the royal dignity, as without Ducal Prussia the state was merely the Electorate of Brandenburg and its possessions.[4] Although crippled in the short term by the devastation of war, the electorate was not greatly diminished in size or resources from what it had been before Friedrich’s ill-fated rule, and would return to European politics in time.
The effects of the war, however, went beyond borders and titles. The alliances hastily forged in 1756 had held, but only barely. The new Franco-Austrian alliance was particularly badly frayed, for the French could not help but resent the fact that while they had lost much of their empire, their “ally” the empress had regained everything she had lost and emerged from the war more powerful than ever. As in 1748, it seemed that French blood and fortune had been thrown away just to enrich France’s ungrateful allies. The Austrians, meanwhile, looked apprehensively to the east, for Russia too had emerged from the war looking more formidable than ever before. The succession of the ambitious and belligerent Peter III to the Russian throne in 1761 contributed to their anxiety. The next round of crises in Europe would come not from beaten-down Brandenburg or embittered France, but from a Russian state which was newly cognizant of its influence. As for Britain, the island kingdom had gained the most from the recent war, but the growth of its overseas empire had come at the cost of its alienation from the continent.[B]
The borders of Europe at the end of 1760 following the treaties of Prague, Paris, and Krakow
Footnotes
[1] Other states participated in minor roles. Sweden joined the Austrian side in an attempt to regain Western Pomerania, but their small and ill-prepared army did not accomplish much.
[2] After Friedrich’s death, the British had attempted to use their funding of Prussia as leverage over Austria. British representatives proposed to the empress a reciprocal withdrawal of support - they would cut off their subsidies to the Prussians if Austria would pledge to give no assistance to the French. As tempting as this was, however, the empress was reluctant to betray her French allies. The Austrian diplomats strung the British along until negotiations fell through in the summer of 1760, resulting in Prussia exiting the war without any intervention by Britain.
[3] This eyebrow-raising attempt by the King of Corsica to establish a colonial empire seems to have been only partially motivated by material gain. Theodore, a lifelong abolitionist, proposed nothing less than the gradual dismantling of the institution of slavery on a “minor island” of the West Indies as a test case, as he proposed that slavery was not only immoral but economically inefficient. In his missive to the British he used his own kingdom as an example, arguing that the poverty of Corsica was solely due to the Genoese dominion of the Corsicans, who “before Our arrival” were “slaves in fact, and free only in name.” Thus, he wrote, they were “devoid of any desire to improve, or in any way contribute to the productive industry or civilization of their isle, as they had no expectation of reward thereby… rather in a perverse fashion, the greater their toil, the greater the rewards which accrued to the men who held them in fetters.” He confidently predicted that under wise and rational governance, a population of “free negroes and mulattoes” would be just as productive as a slave colony, if not more so. Although this “wise and rational governance” was assumed to be governance by white Europeans - the king was not so progressive as to propose that the “negroes and mulattoes” should rule themselves - it was nevertheless a proposal ahead of its time. It was also wildly impractical for reasons too numerous to list, and as a result historians have tended to doubt the king’s sincerity. Theodore, however, never gave any indication that the proposal was in jest.
[4] Some joked that the elector ought to style himself “King in Lauenburg,” one of the small Polish fiefs which Brandenburg still controlled outside the borders of the empire.
Timeline Notes
[A] Isle Saint-Jean is OTL’s Prince Edward Island. IOTL the French attempted to preserve some colonial presence on the St. Lawrence Bay to access the fishery. Their first choice was Cape Breton Island, but this was too strategically important and Britain wouldn’t allow it. Saint-Jean/PEI was also proposed by France as an alternative, but ultimately all Britain would give them was Saint-Pierre and Miquelon.
[B] Posting this update makes me a little nervous because the SYW isn’t a specialty of mine, but I hope my alt-SYW is at least plausible. I have tended to focus on the “Silesian” theater as I’m most familiar with that; apologies for not giving more details on, say, the Canadian campaign, but I’m afraid this isn’t the TL for that sort of thing. Keeping Browne around was my main tool, and I really do think Austria would have done better if he had not been killed at the OTL Battle of Prague in 1757. Frederick’s death is a bit dramatic, but having him die helps achieve more “moderate” peace - firstly because Frederick was personally hated by his enemies, and secondly because Prince Henry was much more interested in negotiation even if it required some concessions. The end result is something that’s clearly different than OTL, but perhaps not entirely unrecognizable. France does marginally better in the colonies, while “Prussia” is trimmed and bloodied but emerges from the war with most of its core territory still intact. The other major difference ITTL is that because the war ends earlier, Spain never enters it, meaning that Florida is still Spanish and Louisiana is still French.
Last edited:
Nice update, big departure from OTL.
1) Did Russia finalize the proposed exchange between Ducal Prussia and Polish Courland/Royal Livonia? Or did they keep Prussia as an exclave (as, ironically, they partly do today IOTL)?
2) Is Peter III's wife a certain German princess?
3) The original Franco-Austrian alliance assumed France getting something in the Low Countries to compensate the return of Silesia to Austria. Here, Austria even expands her Low Countries territories. While French contribution to Austrian victory is indeed dismal, wouldn't Paris insist on some compensation there at least?
1) Did Russia finalize the proposed exchange between Ducal Prussia and Polish Courland/Royal Livonia? Or did they keep Prussia as an exclave (as, ironically, they partly do today IOTL)?
2) Is Peter III's wife a certain German princess?
3) The original Franco-Austrian alliance assumed France getting something in the Low Countries to compensate the return of Silesia to Austria. Here, Austria even expands her Low Countries territories. While French contribution to Austrian victory is indeed dismal, wouldn't Paris insist on some compensation there at least?
Last edited:
Also, North America is set to be very divergent. The shorter war causes a lot less need for colonial taxation; while Westminster will still want the American colonists to pay their own defence at least, something like the Intolerable Acts is far less likely. On the other hand, France retains a significant presence in North America that would make the colonists warier of cutting ties with Britain (and Britain warier of Acadiens and Quebecois, so probably no OTL-like Quebec Act).
The ARW as we know it would be either delayed, butterflied away through compromise (which both sides will have more incentives to seek) or turned into something very different (I can see minor uprisings that end crushed, followed by either reform or recursive spiral of revolts and repression, not unlike Ireland or Congress Poland).
The ARW as we know it would be either delayed, butterflied away through compromise (which both sides will have more incentives to seek) or turned into something very different (I can see minor uprisings that end crushed, followed by either reform or recursive spiral of revolts and repression, not unlike Ireland or Congress Poland).
Last edited:
Deleted member 67076
France keeping Senegal and Louisiana will really help its finances as the burgeoning cotton, sugar and peanut sectors won't be disrupted under British rule. Furthermore, Louisiana can be a nice dumping ground for settlers in a way Haiti couldn't be. Speaking of which, Haiti won't see its 1760s restrictions on Free People of Color in response to the losses in the mainland.
And of course, Spain keeping Florida means the British dont expel the settlers there which improves naval defenses in the Caribbean and its broader economy. Along with not wasting millions of reales on war.
And of course, Spain keeping Florida means the British dont expel the settlers there which improves naval defenses in the Caribbean and its broader economy. Along with not wasting millions of reales on war.
I expect an Anglo-Spanish confrontation in the future however, especially as France is far better positioned to back Spain if something like the Falkland crisis of 1770 happens.
The period saw a lot of tense Atlantic colonial horsetrading, especially between Spain and Portugal, it may be that here we see a purely Atlantic/Indian war in nature (like the ARW was IOTL) with Britain and Portugal vs. France and Spain, with minimal continental entanglement in Europe (although plenty of ways for entanglement to occur exist: Poland and Bavaria come to mind).
Anyway, I tried a quick and dirty postwar world map. @Carp , do you want me to post it?
Actually, a little Island in French West Indies won't have been so impossible to give to Corsica; How Corsica meant to keep it from a French reconquest, was the right question to answer.
Hmm. An earlier despoliation of East Prussia could perhaps lead to people clamoring that Prussia's royal title be defunct, with them after all now reduced mostly to Brandenburg. At the least, I'd expect that to be a common joke in Austria.
With a recovery of Silesia, it is presumably readded to the 'Bohemian crown' part of the Hapsburg empire. Would this not potentially be a deathblow to the Czech national awakening? I can't find the ethnic composition of Silesia for the 18th century, but I'd presume it's majority German, with the largest minority being Polish?
With Austria and Britain both winning their respective wars, the former looking at an almost empty treasury and the latter bereft of a strong continental ally, would there not be a substantial number of people among both nations diplomatic corps seeking to undo the diplomatic revolution post-haste?
With a recovery of Silesia, it is presumably readded to the 'Bohemian crown' part of the Hapsburg empire. Would this not potentially be a deathblow to the Czech national awakening? I can't find the ethnic composition of Silesia for the 18th century, but I'd presume it's majority German, with the largest minority being Polish?
With Austria and Britain both winning their respective wars, the former looking at an almost empty treasury and the latter bereft of a strong continental ally, would there not be a substantial number of people among both nations diplomatic corps seeking to undo the diplomatic revolution post-haste?
Sad day for all Prussophiles, no Miracle of House Brandenburg.
With Russia and Austria starting to look at each other with hunger. I wonder where the other great and medium powers will align.
France and Russia wanting to eat at the empire from West and East, meanwhile will Prussia jump into the dismantle Austria fest or support the Queen of Hungary in order to regain East Prussia?
Interested to see what the Corsican royal family thinks of all this.
With Russia and Austria starting to look at each other with hunger. I wonder where the other great and medium powers will align.
France and Russia wanting to eat at the empire from West and East, meanwhile will Prussia jump into the dismantle Austria fest or support the Queen of Hungary in order to regain East Prussia?
Interested to see what the Corsican royal family thinks of all this.
Interestingly, without an unpopular peace treaty with Prussia, Peter stands a good chance of avoiding assassination, and Catherine stands a good chance of being shuffled off to a monastery.
Things are getting different in Europe! :O The original subtle changes of this timeline are starting to have knock-on larger changes. Can't wait to see what you do next, as always.
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
Peter stands a better chance of reigning true, though it doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be crazy dangerous of him to move against his wife (and, in any event, he won’t be sending her to a monastery... at least, I wouldn’t think so
).On East Prussia: My impression is that despite the original plan to swap East Prussia and Courland, Elizabeth forced the locals to swear allegiance to her and otherwise hinted that she might just keep East Prussia. Accordingly, ITTL Elizabeth held on to the territory during the last year of her reign. Now that Peter is in charge, he might decide to make the swap after all. But it’s also occurred to me that he might return the province to Prussia - after all, he was perfectly willing to give up his conquests IOTL, and although his idol Frederick is dead Peter might still have Prussian sympathies. It would not be a wholly ridiculous move - though weakened, Prussia is not unimportant, and establishing Prussia as a client would aid Peter’s ambitions against Denmark and improve Russia’s position relative to Austria and Poland. But I suspect it would also badly strain Austro-Russian relations, and a (mostly) restored Prussia might not remain a client forever.
On the Tsar: Catherine is still Peter’s wife ITTL, although whether she will pull off her historical coup is as yet undetermined. Keeping Peter around is rather appealing to me, mostly because I think he and Theodore would get along well. One of Peter’s most notorious acts in his brief reign, after all, was establishing religious freedom. (For what it’s worth, there’s even a remote family connection - Peter and Theodore’s wife Eleanora are both members of the extended house of Oldenburg, as both are directly descended from Frederick I of Denmark in the male line). If he does remain in power, there will be trouble immediately - he’s likely to pursue his claims to Schleswig, and Poland will become an issue shortly (IOTL, King Augustus III died in 1763). I’m not exactly sure who gets the Polish crown with Prussia out of the picture and Peter on the throne - certainly not Poniatowski.
On America: The outcome of the Four Years’ War is more favorable to the French colonial empire than its OTL counterpart, but the terms of 1760 need not be permanent. The collapse of Prussia and the subsequent threat of Browne crashing into Hanover forced the British to the peace table earlier than they might have liked, and this will probably be a source of great resentment in Britain - “We could have wrapped up the whole French empire if it weren’t for that damned Hanover!” British politicians may be spoiling for a rematch soon, particularly if they manage to find a way to keep Austria from joining in (perhaps using the threat of Russia). Some of you have observed that the French are better off financially because of the shorter war, but this may mean that France is more willing to seek another confrontation. If Austria managed to regain Silesia, why can’t France bounce back too? Spain might well join them - the Spanish are also in a much better position than IOTL, and are undoubtedly feeling threatened by Britain’s expansionism. Another Anglo-Bourbon war seems probable to me, with or without a colonial rebellion to get things started. I suspect Portugal is likely to be drawn in - and perhaps the Corsicans too, if they’re not careful.
On the Alliance: Certainly the Franco-Austrian alliance is strained, but it’s stronger than it looks. France now definitely sees Britain as its main opponent, and fighting Britain again will be unimaginably harder (and much more expensive) if France has to fight both the British navy and the Austrian army. Even if Austria does nothing to help France, at least the alliance keeps the Austrians from taking Britain’s side. As for the Austrians, their main concern now is with the growing power of Russia, and the absolute last thing they want is to be encircled by a hostile Franco-Russian alliance. Keeping France friendly means they won’t have to fight a two-front war against two great continental powers, which is always a good thing. Thus, while Vienna and Versailles aren’t very happy with one another right now, their strategic interests are arguably still best served by remaining allied.
On India: I left India’s situation a little vague on purpose, as it’s far from my area of expertise. My basic thought was that while British funds and naval power gave them the edge here, they simply did not have time to drive the French out of the south given the war’s early (relative to OTL) end, which is why France retains Pondicherry. I will probably have to flesh out these details a little at some point, but for the time being it doesn’t have a significant impact on the main story (that is, Corsica).
The addition of Prussian Gelders was something of an afterthought, but I think you’re probably right as to the implications of that acquisition for France. I’m thinking I might revise the settlement and restrict Austria’s winnings to Silesia.
Sure thing, although I might yet make some tweaks to the final outcome.
On the Tsar: Catherine is still Peter’s wife ITTL, although whether she will pull off her historical coup is as yet undetermined. Keeping Peter around is rather appealing to me, mostly because I think he and Theodore would get along well. One of Peter’s most notorious acts in his brief reign, after all, was establishing religious freedom. (For what it’s worth, there’s even a remote family connection - Peter and Theodore’s wife Eleanora are both members of the extended house of Oldenburg, as both are directly descended from Frederick I of Denmark in the male line). If he does remain in power, there will be trouble immediately - he’s likely to pursue his claims to Schleswig, and Poland will become an issue shortly (IOTL, King Augustus III died in 1763). I’m not exactly sure who gets the Polish crown with Prussia out of the picture and Peter on the throne - certainly not Poniatowski.
On America: The outcome of the Four Years’ War is more favorable to the French colonial empire than its OTL counterpart, but the terms of 1760 need not be permanent. The collapse of Prussia and the subsequent threat of Browne crashing into Hanover forced the British to the peace table earlier than they might have liked, and this will probably be a source of great resentment in Britain - “We could have wrapped up the whole French empire if it weren’t for that damned Hanover!” British politicians may be spoiling for a rematch soon, particularly if they manage to find a way to keep Austria from joining in (perhaps using the threat of Russia). Some of you have observed that the French are better off financially because of the shorter war, but this may mean that France is more willing to seek another confrontation. If Austria managed to regain Silesia, why can’t France bounce back too? Spain might well join them - the Spanish are also in a much better position than IOTL, and are undoubtedly feeling threatened by Britain’s expansionism. Another Anglo-Bourbon war seems probable to me, with or without a colonial rebellion to get things started. I suspect Portugal is likely to be drawn in - and perhaps the Corsicans too, if they’re not careful.
On the Alliance: Certainly the Franco-Austrian alliance is strained, but it’s stronger than it looks. France now definitely sees Britain as its main opponent, and fighting Britain again will be unimaginably harder (and much more expensive) if France has to fight both the British navy and the Austrian army. Even if Austria does nothing to help France, at least the alliance keeps the Austrians from taking Britain’s side. As for the Austrians, their main concern now is with the growing power of Russia, and the absolute last thing they want is to be encircled by a hostile Franco-Russian alliance. Keeping France friendly means they won’t have to fight a two-front war against two great continental powers, which is always a good thing. Thus, while Vienna and Versailles aren’t very happy with one another right now, their strategic interests are arguably still best served by remaining allied.
On India: I left India’s situation a little vague on purpose, as it’s far from my area of expertise. My basic thought was that while British funds and naval power gave them the edge here, they simply did not have time to drive the French out of the south given the war’s early (relative to OTL) end, which is why France retains Pondicherry. I will probably have to flesh out these details a little at some point, but for the time being it doesn’t have a significant impact on the main story (that is, Corsica).
The addition of Prussian Gelders was something of an afterthought, but I think you’re probably right as to the implications of that acquisition for France. I’m thinking I might revise the settlement and restrict Austria’s winnings to Silesia.
Sure thing, although I might yet make some tweaks to the final outcome.
On East Prussia: My impression is that despite the original plan to swap East Prussia and Courland, Elizabeth forced the locals to swear allegiance to her and otherwise hinted that she might just keep East Prussia. Accordingly, ITTL Elizabeth held on to the territory during the last year of her reign. Now that Peter is in charge, he might decide to make the swap after all. But it’s also occurred to me that he might return the province to Prussia - after all, he was perfectly willing to give up his conquests IOTL, and although his idol Frederick is dead Peter might still have Prussian sympathies. It would not be a wholly ridiculous move - though weakened, Prussia is not unimportant, and establishing Prussia as a client would aid Peter’s ambitions against Denmark and improve Russia’s position relative to Austria and Poland. But I suspect it would also badly strain Austro-Russian relations, and a (mostly) restored Prussia might not remain a client forever.
On the Tsar: Catherine is still Peter’s wife ITTL, although whether she will pull off her historical coup is as yet undetermined. Keeping Peter around is rather appealing to me, mostly because I think he and Theodore would get along well. One of Peter’s most notorious acts in his brief reign, after all, was establishing religious freedom. (For what it’s worth, there’s even a remote family connection - Peter and Theodore’s wife Eleanora are both members of the extended house of Oldenburg, as both are directly descended from Frederick I of Denmark in the male line). If he does remain in power, there will be trouble immediately - he’s likely to pursue his claims to Schleswig, and Poland will become an issue shortly (IOTL, King Augustus III died in 1763). I’m not exactly sure who gets the Polish crown with Prussia out of the picture and Peter on the throne - certainly not Poniatowski.
On America: The outcome of the Four Years’ War is more favorable to the French colonial empire than its OTL counterpart, but the terms of 1760 need not be permanent. The collapse of Prussia and the subsequent threat of Browne crashing into Hanover forced the British to the peace table earlier than they might have liked, and this will probably be a source of great resentment in Britain - “We could have wrapped up the whole French empire if it weren’t for that damned Hanover!” British politicians may be spoiling for a rematch soon, particularly if they manage to find a way to keep Austria from joining in (perhaps using the threat of Russia). Some of you have observed that the French are better off financially because of the shorter war, but this may mean that France is more willing to seek another confrontation. If Austria managed to regain Silesia, why can’t France bounce back too? Spain might well join them - the Spanish are also in a much better position than IOTL, and are undoubtedly feeling threatened by Britain’s expansionism. Another Anglo-Bourbon war seems probable to me, with or without a colonial rebellion to get things started. I suspect Portugal is likely to be drawn in - and perhaps the Corsicans too, if they’re not careful.
On the Alliance: Certainly the Franco-Austrian alliance is strained, but it’s stronger than it looks. France now definitely sees Britain as its main opponent, and fighting Britain again will be unimaginably harder (and much more expensive) if France has to fight both the British navy and the Austrian army. Even if Austria does nothing to help France, at least the alliance keeps the Austrians from taking Britain’s side. As for the Austrians, their main concern now is with the growing power of Russia, and the absolute last thing they want is to be encircled by a hostile Franco-Russian alliance. Keeping France friendly means they won’t have to fight a two-front war against two great continental powers, which is always a good thing. Thus, while Vienna and Versailles aren’t very happy with one another right now, their strategic interests are arguably still best served by remaining allied.
On India: I left India’s situation a little vague on purpose, as it’s far from my area of expertise. My basic thought was that while British funds and naval power gave them the edge here, they simply did not have time to drive the French out of the south given the war’s early (relative to OTL) end, which is why France retains Pondicherry. I will probably have to flesh out these details a little at some point, but for the time being it doesn’t have a significant impact on the main story (that is, Corsica).
The addition of Prussian Gelders was something of an afterthought, but I think you’re probably right as to the implications of that acquisition for France. I’m thinking I might revise the settlement and restrict Austria’s winnings to Silesia.
Sure thing, although I might yet make some tweaks to the final outcome.
1) Then I'll wait you decision about East Prussia before posting the map. I think that Peter will not return it to Berlin no matter what. He may have admired Frederick, but now the place belongs to Russia by treaty (even if maybe conditional to a swap to Poland). Giving away lands you actually own for nothing or almost nothing was generally Not Done (and would make Peter extremely vulnerable to an virulent case of Court Intrigue). The swap with Poland still makes sense both as consolidation of both countries territorially, and as consolidation of the mutual "alliance" (more Polish subservience to Russia actually, but still). Russia gains expanded Baltic access in Courland and continued possibility to transit her troops through Polish territory, which are both useful against the Danes, the likely most immediate target for Peter. The other likely short-term targets are the Ottomans, and Polish cooperation against them is also useful (as would be continued alliance with Austria), and the Swedes, against whom also having Courland and alliance with Poland are bonuses.
Keeping Poland as a client (which already is) seems more tempting than trying establishing Prussia as one, all considered.
2) The Saxon elector seems the obvious choice for the next King of Poland, which Austria and Russia would both have reason to support and everyone else involved could find tolerable. That would be also a way to "compensate" Saxony for the scarce gains at Prussia's expense in 1760. This choice also points a new anti-Ottoman alliance. The Russo-Ottoman war of 1769, with its important consequences, seems butterflied away in any scenario where Poniatowski is not elected in Poland, but an equivalent in a similar timeframe is extremely likely.
3) Austria will want to punish Brandenburg as much as possible, so I guess they'll reason that, if some border change with France is the price for the Prussian Guelders, so be it. The British and the Dutch would not be pleased, but there is not very much they can do about it.
4) An Anglo-Bourbon rematch seemed likely IOTL and indeed happened (with the ARW); there were at least two other occasions before that that could have easily spiralled into war, namely the Corsican Crisis (obviously not relevant to TTL) and the Falklands Crisis.
I think the main reason why neither escalated IOTL was the cautious attitude of both France, which felt not ready for a rematch yet and was burdened by an already dire financial situation, both situations alleviated by the far shorter war here, and Britain, because she felt not confident to pick a fight without allies on the continent, which is also the case IOTL with the possible exception of Portugal (not a very useful ally). I can see France and Spain itching for a fight. Spain wants Gibraltar and Minorca back, badly.
I honestly feel for Prussia. If only Friedrich didn't commit suicide, maybe Peter III could have flipped sides as OTL and he might have won in the long term. Technically, Prussia performed very well in this war as well.
What I find interesting, is in this war we will have a clear winner from both sides (Britain and Austria, plus Russia) and a clear loser (France, Prussia) despite the latter cases weren't so horribly compromised. Prussia might still recover some ground later even without Silesia; France might or not might still dodge the revolutionary bullet, for now has still Louisiana, the Senegal outposts and its West Indies, so economically can still recover - maybe.
Paradoxally, I didn't find Theodore's request to get a small West Indies island so extravagant - it would have been a formidable Corsican trade outpost and boon. If only presented better his pleas to London.
What I find interesting, is in this war we will have a clear winner from both sides (Britain and Austria, plus Russia) and a clear loser (France, Prussia) despite the latter cases weren't so horribly compromised. Prussia might still recover some ground later even without Silesia; France might or not might still dodge the revolutionary bullet, for now has still Louisiana, the Senegal outposts and its West Indies, so economically can still recover - maybe.
Paradoxally, I didn't find Theodore's request to get a small West Indies island so extravagant - it would have been a formidable Corsican trade outpost and boon. If only presented better his pleas to London.
Agreed on Theodore getting an island. It's hardly an dxtavsgent request and seems quixotic enough to cap off the kings reign.
A Russian war with the Ottomans opens up the interesting possibility of a partial Venetian revival...
I am sad to see Prussias wings clipped, and not just because I am a fan of Frederick. The geopolitical implications of Austria being relatively unchallenged in Gemrany are profound; neither Italy nor Gemrany aeem likely to emerge TTL, especially given Napoleons absence.
A Russian war with the Ottomans opens up the interesting possibility of a partial Venetian revival...
I am sad to see Prussias wings clipped, and not just because I am a fan of Frederick. The geopolitical implications of Austria being relatively unchallenged in Gemrany are profound; neither Italy nor Gemrany aeem likely to emerge TTL, especially given Napoleons absence.
I can't say for Italy, at least not yet, but for Germany not necessarily is needed a Napoleon. Depending if and how the Holy Roman Empire will reform, and how the industrial revolution will take shape in those regions. The smaller German realms may start to ask for more representation in the Imperial elections, the Diet might be called more often to reply growing grievances, etc. Austria is dominant but not yet supreme in the Reich. And would have to look too fronts...