WI, rather than restoring and maintaining the balance of power in Europe, the Congress of Vienna decides to enact punitive measures against France, forcing the French government to pay repairations and to surrender more of its territory. What then transpires?
Congress of Vienna Punishes France
- Thread starter Historyfan 92
- Start date
I Blame Communism
Banned
That wasn't within the power of the actual Congress, which was called to settle the disposition of all the territory occupied by the Coalition in Germany, Italy, the Low Countries and so on. The frontiers and concessions of France were set by the Paris Treaty, and revised after Waterloo.
You'd have to change the actual circumstances of the war to change the Paris settlement; but nobody actually wants a crippled France, except some not very influential German revanches. You might start with butterflies on Tsar Alexander's somewhat fragile mental state, and a lesser perceived role for Britain, a greater one for Prussia in the final victory.
You'd have to change the actual circumstances of the war to change the Paris settlement; but nobody actually wants a crippled France, except some not very influential German revanches. You might start with butterflies on Tsar Alexander's somewhat fragile mental state, and a lesser perceived role for Britain, a greater one for Prussia in the final victory.
I Blame Communism
Banned
What I'm saying is that the whole shebang - exact frontiers, colonies, reparations - were fixed at Paris and revised after Waterloo. They simply weren't on the table at Vienna; that was the source of Talleyrand's strength.
Cuāuhtemōc
Banned
I can imagine a revanchist France emerging out of this should it be punished too severely.
I Blame Communism
Banned
Indeed, that was actually a worry at the time - the Duke of Wellington took a deliberately moderate stance when he returned to Vienna after Waterloo for that reason among others.
Concluding France could have been punished harsher after the Napoleonic wars, but not at Vienna?
I Blame Communism
Banned
Indeed. It would need a change in how France fell in 1814 - one could also make the Waterloo revision harsher, if Napoleon drew with us (and killed the moderate Wellington for good measure) and then got beaten by the Prussians.
Cuāuhtemōc
Banned
Because the whole purpose was to re-establish the balance of power in Europe not punish France horribly?
I Blame Communism
Banned
Indeed. Everyone was afraid that a ruined France would make somebody else too strong. Russia didn't want a British monopoly outside Europe anymore than Britain wanted a Russian one inside it.
Cuāuhtemōc
Banned
And no one needed a extremely powerful Russia with the chance of expanding into Ottoman lands where there were large Slavic Christian populations.
Which brings Austria into the picture, which had a role on the Balkans. Those competing ambitions could prevent one of them to become too strong in that region. Besides an extremely powerful Russia is a problem for all its neighbours, including Prussia, Austria and the Ottoman Empire. And even the United Kingdom and the defeated French didn't want a too powerful Russia, which might have become the dominant power on the European continent.
Last edited:
I Blame Communism
Banned
Quite. Metternich saw the connection between the fates of Europe's great antinational empires, Hapsburg and Osman, as early as 1815.
Cuāuhtemōc
Banned
There's also the issue of the German Confederation and the role of the two most powerful German states Austria and Prussia. There needs to be some sort of balance that prevents the two from becoming more powerful than the other.
I agree, but there were more (and shared by more countries) concerns about the growing power of Russia then about the balance in 'Germany'.
Last edited:
I Blame Communism
Banned
Indeed, and it;s important to realise that Prussia's power mushroomed in the industrial age when they got the jackpot in the Ruhr, Saar, and Upper Silesia. In the latter Napoleonic Wars, they were a 3rd rate power that by exceptional luck and effort got up to being a 2nd rate power.
I was not answering you directly, just what I think would be the worse for France. You sometimes see maps where France loses all of Nord to the Netherlands, Lorraine and the Freche Compte to "Germany", an independent Bretagne, British Normandy (I have still no idea why the British would want that) and various border changes around Spain and Italy (but strangly not around Switserland).
One could take Paris in 1919 as an example to make things worse for France:
-first, one must link the Congress and the fate of France, thus no final treaty is made as IBlameCommunism stated, but the initial treaty is linked to the general thing, as in 1919.
-second, the victors must suffer more, as in WWI. A British defeat at Waterloo might do the trick, as could some serious naval defeat of the British with a subsequent fear of invasion.
-third, I'd propose to hold the congress in Berlin or Amsterdam, where the local government and population may be more anti-French, as France and Paris were anti-German.
-fourth, kill Talleyrand. He was an extremely skillful diplomat. Without him, France is in a significantly worse position. I doubt if in 1815 you could deny the French negotiations altogether as in 1919 happened to the Germans, but if the peace terms are negotiated, Talleyrand makes a difference.