A division of Europe between the Bourbons and the Habsburgs

With a Pod at the earliest at the beginning of the reign of Louis XIV, make an alliance/agreement between the Bourbons and the Habsburgs on their areas of influence in Europe.

For my part I was thinking of such a sharing with a Pod during the War of Spanish Succession:
-France places a Bourbon on the Spanish throne and the other dependencies of Madrid (Spanish Netherlands, Kingdom of the two Sicilies etc...).
-France abandons all influence on the HRE and its alliance with the Ottomans.
-The Habsburgs by invasion or marriage reclaim Bavaria (the French "let").
-The Habsburgs can go to war with the Ottomans in the Balkans without French intervention on the side of the Turks.
-The Habsburgs are free to intervene in the Polish quarrels over the succession and to put their candidate.

To justify this alliance one or more common enemies would be needed. I was thinking of Great Britain and Russia. Of course this alliance would not prevent both sides from trying to nibble at each other's sphere of influence. It would in a sense be proto-Cold War.

What do you think?
 
That’s a great accumulation of power to France. But perhaps Austria can’t do much about it. Maybe the Dutch and Britain are being noncommittal.

Can Austria get Bavaria, Venice (and it’s possessions) and Milan? That might work. A nice contiguous empire not bordering France.

What of Lorraine? Can it go to France with compensation somewhere in Germany?
 
Could you elaborate on your idea?
The Bourbons never ruled Austria, and the Hapsburgs never ruled France, but many areas have been ruled by iterations of both.

Capetian:
France
Spain
Portugal
Two Sicilies
Milan
Poland
Burgundy
Hungary
Albania

Hapsburg/Hapsburg Lorraine:
Austria
Spain
Portugal
Naples & Sicily
Milan
Poland
Burgundy
Hungary
Bohemia
 
Last edited:
Success in the Seven Years War likely maintains the Bourbon-Habsburg alliance. A Southern Netherlands to France in exchange for Austria being allowed to gain Bavaria could then be on the cards, once Prussia is out the picture. You could then follow it up with the Bourbons being given free reign in Italy in exchange for Habsburgs being allowed free reign in Germany.
 
Even in losing the 7YW they controlled Italy together. Bavaria was neutralized by the alliance. But.... Prussia still had a range of motion in Germany. Russian power was on the rise.

So they win the war. On land anyway. I think the Netherlands/Parma swap was off the table. But maybe in victory it emerges again. How about Austria takes Bavaria and the elector goes to the Austrian Netherlands as a French client. What would his state be called?

They’ve still got Italy under control with all their marriages.

Prussia is out of play. Austrian recapture of Silesia cements it’s ascendancy in Germany.

What happens with Russia? Maybe instead of the the partitions of Poland there is a war in which Russian influence is expelled and some French Prince is installed there.

Thats a big chunk of Europe under French and Austrian control.
 
Prussia is out of play. Austrian recapture of Silesia cements it’s ascendancy in Germany.

What happens with Russia? Maybe instead of the the partitions of Poland there is a war in which Russian influence is expelled and some French Prince is installed there.
AFAIK, the (almost) only realistic way for Austria to get back Silesia was continued Russian active participation in the war as an ally. “Active” means going well beyond what it amounted to on the last stage of the alliance (operations in Pomerania to establish a reliable supply line and “saving the soldiers” by limiting other operations to guarding the supply depots in Poland). So nothing would “happen” to Russia except potential annexation of already occupied East Prussia (population of which swore allegiance to Elizabeth) and probably Courland, just to improve communications. OTOH, if Russia sticks to the pre-war plan, East Prussia goes to the PLC while Russia is getting Courland and Southern part of the Polish Ukraine.

Basically, Russia emerges as a regional power broker and its army is getting (deservedly or no) even a higher reputation than in OTL.

The 1st Partition of Poland happened as a result of the Austrian and Prussian diplomatic pressure on Russia. In this TL Prussia becomes a second rate power (which would most probably look to Russia for support to a much greater degree than in OTL) and Austria even with Silesia is not necessarily powerful enough to start a war against Russia over Poland: there are still common anti-Ottoman interests and France can do very little in the terms of a practical military help. Anyway, Bourbon-Hapsburg alignment is fine but having a French Prince in the PLC means a potential disruption of the “European balance” not to Austrian favor, especially taking into an account that Austria would have to do most of the fighting with a very unclear outcome. In the case of pre-war plan being implemented (PLC is getting East Prussia, courtesy of Russia), Russian influence in Poland is backed not just by the bayonets (and general corruption of the nobility) but by a gratitude factor and a fear that the territory will be lost just as easily as it was acquired in the case the PLC decides to go against Russia (with what? it did not have an army worth mentioning).

Obviously, the combination would mean Russian-British alliance to which Prussia (admittedly much weakened but preserving at least its military structure) could be easily added by the British subsidies and promise to get Silesia back. If the PLC decides to side with Austria, the East Prussia would be added to the list of the carrots.
 
AFAIK, the (almost) only realistic way for Austria to get back Silesia was continued Russian active participation in the war as an ally. “Active” means going well beyond what it amounted to on the last stage of the alliance (operations in Pomerania to establish a reliable supply line and “saving the soldiers” by limiting other operations to guarding the supply depots in Poland). So nothing would “happen” to Russia except potential annexation of already occupied East Prussia (population of which swore allegiance to Elizabeth) and probably Courland, just to improve communications. OTOH, if Russia sticks to the pre-war plan, East Prussia goes to the PLC while Russia is getting Courland and Southern part of the Polish Ukraine.

Basically, Russia emerges as a regional power broker and its army is getting (deservedly or no) even a higher reputation than in OTL.

The 1st Partition of Poland happened as a result of the Austrian and Prussian diplomatic pressure on Russia. In this TL Prussia becomes a second rate power (which would most probably look to Russia for support to a much greater degree than in OTL) and Austria even with Silesia is not necessarily powerful enough to start a war against Russia over Poland: there are still common anti-Ottoman interests and France can do very little in the terms of a practical military help. Anyway, Bourbon-Hapsburg alignment is fine but having a French Prince in the PLC means a potential disruption of the “European balance” not to Austrian favor, especially taking into an account that Austria would have to do most of the fighting with a very unclear outcome. In the case of pre-war plan being implemented (PLC is getting East Prussia, courtesy of Russia), Russian influence in Poland is backed not just by the bayonets (and general corruption of the nobility) but by a gratitude factor and a fear that the territory will be lost just as easily as it was acquired in the case the PLC decides to go against Russia (with what? it did not have an army worth mentioning).

Obviously, the combination would mean Russian-British alliance to which Prussia (admittedly much weakened but preserving at least its military structure) could be easily added by the British subsidies and promise to get Silesia back. If the PLC decides to side with Austria, the East Prussia would be added to the list of the carrots.
British subsidies to Prussia (and other mainland allies) was a major topic of debate in the British parliament and could easily be cut at any time if the Tories come to power. That could see Austria beat back Prussia even with Russia's more limited participation late in the war.

I am also far from convinced the East Prussia-Courland swap happens. It already fell away from plans in OTL, for good reason. East Prussia is more valuable to Russia than Courland is, as a way to project power into central Europe. If Peter comes to power after the war, it would be way too late to give it back to Prussia, but his Germanophilia would make him prefer it to Courland. Plus, it is a nice stopping off point to connect to Holstein.
 
British subsidies to Prussia (and other mainland allies) was a major topic of debate in the British parliament and could easily be cut at any time if the Tories come to power. That could see Austria beat back Prussia even with Russia's more limited participation late in the war.

I am also far from convinced the East Prussia-Courland swap happens. It already fell away from plans in OTL, for good reason. East Prussia is more valuable to Russia than Courland is, as a way to project power into central Europe. If Peter comes to power after the war, it would be way too late to give it back to Prussia, but his Germanophilia would make him prefer it to Courland. Plus, it is a nice stopping off point to connect to Holstein.
As far as strictly Prussia vs. Austria confrontation is involved, I’m somewhat sceptical about Austrian ability to get back the whole Silesia because Daun was not aggressive enough and M-T encouraged this approach: to honor him she ordered a medal with a motto “Keep winning by procrastinating”; his style was one of the reasons for the spoiled relations with the Russian counterparts who suspected him in intention to push the main burden on them. It may be argued that perception was not quite correct but it did exist.

Now, as far as East Prussia and Courland are involved, the swap was a part of the official Russian plan. This does not mean that Elizabeth would stick to it but, OTOH, the fact that population of EP was forced to swear loyalty to her is also not enough for the definite conclusion: during war with Sweden she encouraged creation of Kingdom of Finland and the estates swore loyalty to their future monarch (Peter Ulrich) but by the peace treaty Sweden got Finland back. Of course, EP was much more valuable than a tiny Courland but this has nothing to do with Germanophilia: in both cases the ruling class was German.

I’d not discount the 3rd possibility: Russia gets both. Anyway, by that time Courland was controlled by Russia and the rest was a formality.
 
As far as strictly Prussia vs. Austria confrontation is involved, I’m somewhat sceptical about Austrian ability to get back the whole Silesia because Daun was not aggressive enough and M-T encouraged this approach: to honor him she ordered a medal with a motto “Keep winning by procrastinating”; his style was one of the reasons for the spoiled relations with the Russian counterparts who suspected him in intention to push the main burden on them. It may be argued that perception was not quite correct but it did exist.

Now, as far as East Prussia and Courland are involved, the swap was a part of the official Russian plan. This does not mean that Elizabeth would stick to it but, OTOH, the fact that population of EP was forced to swear loyalty to her is also not enough for the definite conclusion: during war with Sweden she encouraged creation of Kingdom of Finland and the estates swore loyalty to their future monarch (Peter Ulrich) but by the peace treaty Sweden got Finland back. Of course, EP was much more valuable than a tiny Courland but this has nothing to do with Germanophilia: in both cases the ruling class was German.

I’d not discount the 3rd possibility: Russia gets both. Anyway, by that time Courland was controlled by Russia and the rest was a formality.
One thing I have been meaning to pick your brain about. If Elizabeth saw out the war and butterflies means Peter III lasts in power, who would he back to be King of Poland? The next Wettin heir?
 
One thing I have been meaning to pick your brain about. If Elizabeth saw out the war and butterflies means Peter III lasts in power, who would he back to be King of Poland? The next Wettin heir?
This would depend on many factors. In OTL Catherine & Fritz opted for the Polish candidate because Wettin was considered to be pro-Austrian. Criteria, as formulated, was that the candidate should pro-Russian (preferably a member of the “Family”) but not be rich enough to become independent (aka, no Czartoryski), which left Poniatovski. PIII would coordinate with Fritz so criteria should be more or less the same even if specific candidate may be different.

Of course, we can’t also exclude a possibility of everybody sticking to a “traditional” choice based upon the assumption that the PLC was pretty much under the Russian control and personality of its king did not matter too much because it was quite easy (and not too expensive) to block any royal action.
 
This would depend on many factors. In OTL Catherine & Fritz opted for the Polish candidate because Wettin was considered to be pro-Austrian. Criteria, as formulated, was that the candidate should pro-Russian (preferably a member of the “Family”) but not be rich enough to become independent (aka, no Czartoryski), which left Poniatovski. PIII would coordinate with Fritz so criteria should be more or less the same even if specific candidate may be different.

Of course, we can’t also exclude a possibility of everybody sticking to a “traditional” choice based upon the assumption that the PLC was pretty much under the Russian control and personality of its king did not matter too much because it was quite easy (and not too expensive) to block any royal action.
Poniatovski was in the mix mainly because he was Catherine's lover right? Which other candidates could fulfill those conditions? Presumably Prussia would matter less if it got more of a kicking.
 
This would depend on many factors. In OTL Catherine & Fritz opted for the Polish candidate because Wettin was considered to be pro-Austrian. Criteria, as formulated, was that the candidate should pro-Russian (preferably a member of the “Family”) but not be rich enough to become independent (aka, no Czartoryski), which left Poniatovski. PIII would coordinate with Fritz so criteria should be more or less the same even if specific candidate may be different.
IOTL Peter was stupid enough to support Czartoryski. He allegedly summoned him (prince Adam Kazimierz) to Petersburg when he stated that he wants him to be next king. Even if his surrounding could persuade him this idea, the new king wouldn't be Poniatowski. Peter hated his wife and wouldn't want anyone involved with her to be on any position. Not to mention, that if he came to power later and it would be too late for him to give away all conquests to Prussia and therefore lose the support of nobility which he had after abolishing the obligation of doing so-called "state service", he'd most likely divorce his wife, kill her or place her in monastery and marry his lover, Elizaveta Vorontsova. If he had a son by Vorontsova, he'd also disinherit Paul in favor of that son. When it comes to PLC's royal election, it means that preferred by Peter alternative to Czartoryski would not be Poniatowski, but rather Frederick Augustus (sort of "rightful king", German, but his disadvantage is having Saxon support) or Henry Hohenzollern, brother of Frederick II (he wanted to become king of Poland IOTL).
 
upload_2019-12-29_13-23-15.png


I made a map of Europe to illustrate what I imagined. The pod of my map remains the War of the Spanish Succession but I think it can be easily transposed to the Seven Years War for example.

dark blue: The Bourbons of France.
light blue: Bourbon of Spain, Savoy, Sicily and Naples (Spain ?).

dark red: The Habsburgs of Austria.
light red: HRE, Venice, Tuscany (Habsburg ?), Wallachia, Modalvie.

dark purple: Great Britain, Ottoman and Russia, opposed to a Franco-Austrian cartel and a division of Europe.
light purple: undecided states, they could join France or Austria or form a new block with Russia or the UK (Saxony-Poland, Prussia, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Portugal).
 
Poniatovski was in the mix mainly because he was Catherine's lover right? Which other candidates could fulfill those conditions? Presumably Prussia would matter less if it got more of a kicking.
He was her former lover (but as soon as she ascended the throne Catherine asked him not to visit St. Petersburg) which could be an additional but not critical criteria: he looked as a convenient figure by too many parameters. Close to the “Familia”, aristocrat, not rich, was well-known in St. Petersburg, well-educated, had influential friends in Britain (with which Catherine at that time kept close relations), had a diplomatic experience and was personally charming.

Probably somebody else could be found but Czartorysky (the most obvious candidate) was considered too rich and independent so why would Catherine bother with a wild geese chaise if there was someone whom she considered a good candidate?

As for Prussia, in his letters exchange with CII Fritz expressed willingness to support anybody whom she considers a good candidate so there was no need in the extra “kicking”. :)
 
IOTL Peter was stupid enough to support Czartoryski. He allegedly summoned him (prince Adam Kazimierz) to Petersburg when he stated that he wants him to be next king. Even if his surrounding could persuade him this idea, the new king wouldn't be Poniatowski. Peter hated his wife and wouldn't want anyone involved with her to be on any position. Not to mention, that if he came to power later and it would be too late for him to give away all conquests to Prussia and therefore lose the support of nobility which he had after abolishing the obligation of doing so-called "state service", he'd most likely divorce his wife, kill her or place her in monastery and marry his lover, Elizaveta Vorontsova. If he had a son by Vorontsova, he'd also disinherit Paul in favor of that son. When it comes to PLC's royal election, it means that preferred by Peter alternative to Czartoryski would not be Poniatowski, but rather Frederick Augustus (sort of "rightful king", German, but his disadvantage is having Saxon support) or Henry Hohenzollern, brother of Frederick II (he wanted to become king of Poland IOTL).
Stories about Peter’s stupidity usually have the same source: Catherine and her entourage. There was nothing stupid in supporting Czartorysky: Catherine kept relying on their services after Poniatowski failed to deliver on the “dissidents” issue. Taking into an account that, with all their wealth, the members of the Familia kept asking for money their loyalty to Russia would be guaranteed and probably they would be able to achieve slightly more than King Stanislav or at least not to be worse (from the Russian perspective) than he was.

Issue of the public annoyance about the conquests in Prussia is a classic piece of Catherine’s smear campaign. To start with, CII did not repudiate the peace made by PIII and was quite cozy with Fritz for the years to follow. Then, most of the noise about these “losses” had been made by the people who did not fight: few members of St.Petersburg aristocracy whom Peter offended by ordering to pass through elementary military training to justify their high military ranks (generously given to the civilians) and the Guards who did not live St. Petersburg and upon whom PIII tried to enforce at least elementary discipline (*).

There were no noises coming from the fighting army. More than that, the most prominent Russian general, Rumiantsev, was an open supporter of PIII. The war was not popular among the troops, relations with the Austrians had been soured, Treasury was exhausted and nobody really gave a s—t about Eastern Prussia (or expected to benefit from its “conquest” because there was no free land). Enthusiasm caused by the law about “freedom from service” was overwhelming and not spoiled by the decision to make a peace with Prussia. It is just that nobility was all over the country, Rumiantsev with an army was far away and the Guards were “here and now”. If PIII did not lose his head, he would flee from the area while sending Rumiantsev an order to march on the capital. Few regiments of the 7YW veterans would be enough to squash the ever-drunken Guards among whom support of the coup was not uniform and most of whom had zero fighting experience.

As far as the Polish affairs are involved, PIII would coordinate his actions with Fritz, which means that Saxon candidate is 7nlikely, being considered pro-Austrian. Considerations are the same as with CII even if final candidate could be different.

_______________
(*) Now, I agree that this was really stupid because PIII did not bother to create his own military backup. Empress Anne created her own Izmailovo and Cavalry Guards regiments. Peter had a small detachment of the Holsteinians whom he did not even bother to incorporate into the Guards.
 
The Bourbons never ruled Austria, and the Hapsburgs never ruled France, but many areas have been ruled by iterations of both.

Capetian:
France
Spain
Portugal
Two Sicilies
Milan
Poland
Burgundy
Hungary
Albania

Hapsburg/Hapsburg Lorraine:
Austria
Spain
Portugal
Naples & Sicily
Milan
Poland
Burgundy
Hungary
Bohemia
Both sides also (through Burgundy) ruled Flanders, as well as Catalonia.
 
Stories about Peter’s stupidity usually have the same source: Catherine and her entourage. There was nothing stupid in supporting Czartorysky: Catherine kept relying on their services after Poniatowski failed to deliver on the “dissidents” issue. Taking into an account that, with all their wealth, the members of the Familia kept asking for money their loyalty to Russia would be guaranteed and probably they would be able to achieve slightly more than King Stanislav or at least not to be worse (from the Russian perspective) than he was.

Issue of the public annoyance about the conquests in Prussia is a classic piece of Catherine’s smear campaign. To start with, CII did not repudiate the peace made by PIII and was quite cozy with Fritz for the years to follow. Then, most of the noise about these “losses” had been made by the people who did not fight: few members of St.Petersburg aristocracy whom Peter offended by ordering to pass through elementary military training to justify their high military ranks (generously given to the civilians) and the Guards who did not live St. Petersburg and upon whom PIII tried to enforce at least elementary discipline (*).

There were no noises coming from the fighting army. More than that, the most prominent Russian general, Rumiantsev, was an open supporter of PIII. The war was not popular among the troops, relations with the Austrians had been soured, Treasury was exhausted and nobody really gave a s—t about Eastern Prussia (or expected to benefit from its “conquest” because there was no free land). Enthusiasm caused by the law about “freedom from service” was overwhelming and not spoiled by the decision to make a peace with Prussia. It is just that nobility was all over the country, Rumiantsev with an army was far away and the Guards were “here and now”. If PIII did not lose his head, he would flee from the area while sending Rumiantsev an order to march on the capital. Few regiments of the 7YW veterans would be enough to squash the ever-drunken Guards among whom support of the coup was not uniform and most of whom had zero fighting experience.

As far as the Polish affairs are involved, PIII would coordinate his actions with Fritz, which means that Saxon candidate is 7nlikely, being considered pro-Austrian. Considerations are the same as with CII even if final candidate could be different.

_______________
(*) Now, I agree that this was really stupid because PIII did not bother to create his own military backup. Empress Anne created her own Izmailovo and Cavalry Guards regiments. Peter had a small detachment of the Holsteinians whom he did not even bother to incorporate into the Guards.
I didn't stated that Peter was totally stupid person. I agree, that some decisions that he made proved to be quite useful to Russia. For me, both PIII and CII were quite average rulers in the terms of competence, difference between the two lies mainly in CII having better propagandists than Peter and CII eventually getting to rule in her own right, which created image of Peter as a weak, despicable person who was overthrown by his own wife. He should not have had listened to his uncle and arrest Catherine when he had a chance to do this. Having said that, I disagree about Czartoryski being no worse than Stanisław. Stanisław was a puppet, not treated seriously by anyone in Poland. He didn't even manage to gather genuine supporters from nobility, he had to rely on ridiculous group of foreign individuals with very bad reputation. Even "Great Sejm" and Constitution of 3rd May were not his ideas, Stanisław was cautious (but I'll give him that he had more realistic view than majority of envoys) and his vision of foreign and to some extent domestic policy was different than vision of so-called "patriotic fraction" (which was in the large numer fraction loving Prussian money). Czartoryski, on the other hand has his clients almost everywhere in Poland, is widely respected and is an heir to the 100 mln zlotys. Czartoryski is able to pursue much more indepedent policy than Stanisław, having money for bribes, 7 thousands of private army and his own clients, which aren't low qualified foreigners.

I didn't know about Rumianstev pro-Peter stance, and you're right in a further part of post. So the most likely candidate is Henry Hohenzollern, he wanted that crown and Fritz could support his candidature in hope of strenghtening his influence in Poland.
 
I didn't stated that Peter was totally stupid person. I agree, that some decisions that he made proved to be quite useful to Russia. For me, both PIII and CII were quite average rulers in the terms of competence, difference between the two lies mainly in CII having better propagandists than Peter and CII eventually getting to rule in her own right, which created image of Peter as a weak, despicable person who was overthrown by his own wife. He should not have had listened to his uncle and arrest Catherine when he had a chance to do this. Having said that, I disagree about Czartoryski being no worse than Stanisław. Stanisław was a puppet, not treated seriously by anyone in Poland. He didn't even manage to gather genuine supporters from nobility, he had to rely on ridiculous group of foreign individuals with very bad reputation. Even "Great Sejm" and Constitution of 3rd May were not his ideas, Stanisław was cautious (but I'll give him that he had more realistic view than majority of envoys) and his vision of foreign and to some extent domestic policy was different than vision of so-called "patriotic fraction" (which was in the large numer fraction loving Prussian money). Czartoryski, on the other hand has his clients almost everywhere in Poland, is widely respected and is an heir to the 100 mln zlotys. Czartoryski is able to pursue much more indepedent policy than Stanisław, having money for bribes, 7 thousands of private army and his own clients, which aren't low qualified foreigners.

I didn't know about Rumianstev pro-Peter stance, and you're right in a further part of post. So the most likely candidate is Henry Hohenzollern, he wanted that crown and Fritz could support his candidature in hope of strenghtening his influence in Poland.

Selection of Poniatovski instead of Czartorysky was based upon the factors you listed taken with “minus”: CII (and by extension Fritz who approved of her choice) considered greater wealth, a big following and more brains as being the arguments against C’s candidacy. Within very short time it became clear that she bet on the wrong horse: Stanislaw proved to be totally impotent on the issue of the “dissidents” rights (about with both C2 and Fritz did care) and she turned to Czartorysky for help. BTW, with all their wealth Cartoryskies started begg8ng for money. How Czartorysky as a king would fare is anybody’s guess but he hardly could do worse than Stanislaw.

PIII was not stupid but (a) he was indecisive and could not react fast to the unexpected situations (which his wife and the plotters knew quite well and counted upon) and (b) he was excessively assured in the legality of his rule and did not take measures to back it up with a military force.

Regarding Rumiantsev, he was loyal to Peter and CII did not quite trust him, at least initially, (*) but after the dust settled she could not ignore the fact that after the 7YW he emerged as the best Russian general and was genuinely liked by the troops (and his sister, Praskovia Bruce, was Catherine’s close friend). Still, during her 1st war with the Ottomans she initially appointed him a commander of the 2nd Russian army with a function to guard the border against Tatar raids and only after she became unhappy with commander of the 1st Army Rumiantsev was appointed its commander and won the famous battles of Larga and Kagul. After the war he remained governor-general of Malorossia (formally, a very important position but completely dependent from the central power; Potemkin held him short of money funneling all available funds to Novorossia). During the second Ottoman War he, again, was made a commander of a small undersupplied army while most of the troops and resources went to Potemkin (**) who wasted them on incompetently conducted siege of Ochakov.


____________
(*) If the rumors regarding his true father were true, even he had greater right to the throne than Catherine.

(**) The main reason for Potemkin getting his appointment was his wish to get Order of St.George 1st class, the only Russian high award that he did not have and the only one he could not get (by order’s statute) without being a successful commander of an army. Needless to say that he was clearly unqualified for this role by a character and (in)competence. Siege of Ochakov turned into a protracted affairs in which Russian troops suffered big losses due to the diseases, cold and malnutrition. When the siege was finally over, Rumiantsev (who was quite successful in Moldavia) had been removed from his position and replaced by Potemkin (the following Russian successes were predominantly due to Suvorov’s victories).
 
Top