Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: Before 1900' started by Nekromans, Apr 18, 2008.
Bumped! I'm working on an ASB Steamfantasy with this as a side-effect of the (carefully-placed) POD.
The Battle of Aspern-Essling is regularly regarded as Napoleon's first defeat.
Wellington would be sent to fight in the War of 1812. Their most likely would have been a Waterloo like battle against the Brittish and Americans. Can you imagine Andrew Jackson leading a calvary charge against Wellington's forces......
Jackson was a pretty good general, so he probably wouldn't try a direct attack on any army led by Wellington: given the numerical disparity, that would be close to suicide.
From what I know of his background, he might well try irregular warfare against any British army of occupation in Louisiana (I'm guessing that's where Wellington would be). And Ol' Nosey knows how damaging that can be from Spain.
Well, pre-Waterloo, I would have said the same about Boney.
Boney wasn't really in command at Waterloo. He was laid low by one of his 56,258 chronic diseases, and Ney was in effective command. Ney was good, but he was no Boney; and, of course, Waterloo was the "damn nearest close-run thing you ever saw in your life" (to quote Wellington) even with that.
In reality, though, Waterloo was won by Nappy's and Ney's seemingly non-existent battle plan , rather than any sort of genius by Wellington.
And for the record, Ney was highly energetic and aggressive, but he lacked subtlety and a grasp on more than basic tactics.
Hanover, with Belgium going to Britain? Plausible?
While Britain may want Belgium, I don't think they would like to give up hanover for it.
Britain is not able to give away Hannover because it isnt theirs
Hannover was an independant state, whose king just happened to also be King of Great Britain - however, in Hannover he wa absolute monarch, whereas in Great Britain he was restricted by Parliament, so that was an important distinction. And I doubt hed just so give away the corelands of his dynasty the Welfs!
Besides, Belgium would be a posoned pill, directly bordering France. Great Britain hardly had any army, and Belgium would only be able to raise a small one, so Belgium would be ill defensible. Hannover, in the meanwhile, lies shielded from France behind Belgium and the Rhineland, bordering old allies liek Brunswick, Prussia (well, okay, Prussia betrayed the good relations and anenxed Hannover for a hwile, but hey, such diplomatic short-time shifts happened at that time) and Hesse-Kassel.
What Susano said.
By 1814, of course, there was little connection between Britain and Hanover: George III "gloried in the name of Briton", George IV never even thought to consider himself German, and the Hanoverians were a tad resentful about having been under French occupation for the past eight years while Britain was fiddling about in Spain. There was the KGL, but I think that's about it.
And yes, though we wanted someone strong to be in control of Belgium to keep the French out, we were unwilling for that someone to be us
Just come across this. Don't think a suicide by Boney in 1814 would have made a big impact on the 1812 conflict. Both sides were already looking for a way out and Britain had sent a good number of veterans west, only for that idiot Paget to waste a number of them at New Orleans. If it went the other way. with an earlier restoration and an initial victory by the French in Belgium then the US might be embolden to extend the struggle, which would probably be bad for them.
From what I have read there was strong feeling about the distribution of the spoils with Britain, France and Austria all strongly opposing the total annexation of Saxony to Prussia - and similarly Russia getting all the Grand Duchy of Warsaw. Got the impression that what became the Prussian Rhineland was given in compensation for not getting all of Saxony but that differs from what had been said here.
Separate names with a comma.