AHC/WI: Succesful Flanders Campaign (1793..) and succesful Kościuszko Uprising (1794)

How could the First Coalition have had a succesful Flanders Campaign and how could the Polish uprising a few years later have been succesful for the Poles too?

What consequences would these two changes have? Would this butterfly away Napoleon's influence on the era? What will Europe's future look like?
 
To be fair, I don't know much about it. The question is, what exactly is a succesful Flanders campaign? Containing Republican France into France? Restoring the monarchy in France? Something else?

The main effect looks like continuing the status quo pre revolution in Europe.
 
I'd say containing Republican France and stopping its 'aggression', to prevent the Revoltionary and Napoleonic Wars.
I wonder if that could lead to a less millitaristic spread of the revolution. I think a lot of countries were unhappy with their rulers (certainly the Netherlands and "Belgium" were and I suspect others too), so I could see other local revolutions.
 
I wonder if that could lead to a less millitaristic spread of the revolution. I think a lot of countries were unhappy with their rulers (certainly the Netherlands and "Belgium" were and I suspect others too), so I could see other local revolutions.

You might have the Netherlands become a republic again, and perhaps quite a big one with a succesful Flanders Campaign...
 
You might have the Netherlands become a republic again, and perhaps quite a big one with a succesful Flanders Campaign...

Doubt it. With British,Prussian and Austrian armies in the region the Netherlands would never be a true republic. Hell it might become a Kingdom earlier. And I doubt the Dutch would gain the Southern Netherlands, as Austria would still control it,
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Success for the Kościuszko Uprising was always doubtful, but obviously if Kościuszko hadn't been wounded and captured at the Battle of Maciejowice it would have had at least a chance of still working.
 
Success for the Kościuszko Uprising was always doubtful, but obviously if Kościuszko hadn't been wounded and captured at the Battle of Maciejowice it would have had at least a chance of still working.

I understand it was doubtful, but can we assume that with a bit of luck, it could've prevented the third partition?

Looking at the below...
Wikipedia said:
Despite the promise of reforms and quick recruitment of new forces, the strategic situation of the Polish forces was still critical. On 10 May the forces of Prussia crossed the Polish borders and joined the Russian armies operating in northern Poland. On 6 June Kościuszko was defeated in the Battle of Szczekociny by a joint Russo-Prussian force and on 8 June General Józef Zajączek was defeated in the Battle of Chełm. Polish forces withdrew towards Warsaw and started to fortify the city. On 15 June the Prussian army captured Kraków unopposed, but the Russian forces were defeated in a series of skirmishes near Warsaw and the defenders managed to finish the fortification efforts. Although it was besieged by Russo-Prussian forces on 22 July, the siege was unsuccessful. On 20 August, an uprising in Greater Poland started and the Prussians were forced to withdraw their forces from Warsaw. The siege was lifted soon afterwards, on 5 September. Russian forces commanded by Ivan Fersen were withdrawn towards the Pilica River.

Although the opposition in Lithuania was crushed by Russian forces (Vilnius was besieged and capitulated on 12 August), the uprising in Greater Poland achieved some success. A Polish corps under Jan Henryk Dąbrowski captured Bydgoszcz (2 October) and entered Pomerania almost unopposed. Thanks to the mobility of his forces, General Dąbrowski evaded being encircled by a much less mobile Prussian army and disrupted the Prussian lines, forcing the Prussians to withdraw most of their forces from central Poland.
Meanwhile, the Russians equipped a new corps commanded by General Aleksandr Suvorov and ordered it to join up with the corps under Ivan Fersen near Warsaw. After the battles of Krupczyce (17 September) and Terespol (19 September), the new army started its march towards the Polish capital. To prevent both Russian armies from joining up, Kościuszko mobilised his forces in Warsaw and on 10 October started the Battle of Maciejowice. Despite Kościuszko's plans, both Russian units entered the combat simultaneously and won the battle. Kościuszko himself was wounded in the battle and was captured by the Russians, who sent him to Saint Petersburg.
The new commander of the uprising, Tomasz Wawrzecki, was not able to control the spreading internal struggles for power and ultimately became only the commander of weakened military forces, while the political power was held by General Józef Zajączek, who in turn had to struggle with both the leftist liberal Polish Jacobins and the rightist and monarchical nobility.
On 4 November the joint Russian forces started an all-out assault on Praga, the right-bank suburb of Warsaw. After 4 hours of long hand-to-hand struggle, the 24,000 men strong Russian forces broke through the Polish defences and started to loot and burn the borough. The whole district was completely destroyed and approximately 20,000 of its inhabitants were murdered. The event became known as the massacre of Praga. Dispirited Wawrzecki decided to withdraw his remaining forces southwards and on 5 November Warsaw was captured.
On 16 November, near Radoszyce, Wawrzecki surrendered. This marked the end of the uprising. The power of Poland was broken and the following year the third partition of Poland happened, after which Austria, Russia and Prussia annexed the remainder of the country.
... I'd say if the underlined parts would've been succesful for the Poles (and Lithuanians), there's a chance that the Poles would've been able to prevent the third partition - if there's any way for those battles to be succesful for them.
 
Doubt it. With British,Prussian and Austrian armies in the region the Netherlands would never be a true republic. Hell it might become a Kingdom earlier. And I doubt the Dutch would gain the Southern Netherlands, as Austria would still control it,

And what if the French would defeat the Austrians at first, gaining the Southern Netherlands, but later a new counterattack by the First Coalition would recapture it. They might decide to unite it with the Netherlands then, since (a) that would provide a stronger buffer state north of France, and (b) it would not be an exclave of a foreign power, so that the people wouldn't be as friendly towards the French and it would be less hard to mobilise troops there.

A second throught that just popped up into my mind is: what if the Flanders Campaign leads to a sort of stalemate. The Southern Netherlands could be divided, France's aggression would have been stopped, perhaps, in a way. The tensions between Republican France and the monarchist powers of Europe would remain. Would there be a possibility of a 19th century world war then...?

How about... this?

netherlands-france compromise map.png
 
And what if the French would defeat the Austrians at first, gaining the Southern Netherlands, but later a new counterattack by the First Coalition would recapture it. They might decide to unite it with the Netherlands then, since (a) that would provide a stronger buffer state north of France, and (b) it would not be an exclave of a foreign power, so that the people wouldn't be as friendly towards the French and it would be less hard to mobilise troops there.

A second throught that just popped up into my mind is: what if the Flanders Campaign leads to a sort of stalemate. The Southern Netherlands could be divided, France's aggression would have been stopped, perhaps, in a way. The tensions between Republican France and the monarchist powers of Europe would remain. Would there be a possibility of a 19th century world war then...?
...

No ideas at all?
 
Top