Could the Napoleonic Wars be fought to a draw?

Sorry if I make any huge blundering mistakes with this, the Napoleonic Wars aren't exactly my strongest point. I've been trying to research more about them for a TL I'm planning. My POD is in the late 1770s, and the main focus of the TL is North America. I'm just now trying to figure out what to do with Europe. Basically, in my TL, the Napoleonic Wars start exactly the same as OTL, since the butterflies haven't crossed the Atlantic yet. But I want the whole thing to end with some sort of negotiated peace. I want Napoleon to have a fairly large empire, but still leave Britain, Austria, Prussia, and Russia intact and relatively strong (especially Britain and Russia, because they will come into the story later). I know that the various European powers made several peace treaties during this time period but they were always broken in short order (thus the Napoleonic "Wars" rather than "War"). Is it possible to make one of these treaties stick? If so which one? As I said, I don't know a whole bunch about early-1800s Europe, so any help you could give would be great.
 

Philip

Donor
But I want the whole thing to end with some sort of negotiated peace. I want Napoleon to have a fairly large empire, but still leave Britain, Austria, Prussia, and Russia intact and relatively strong (especially Britain and Russia, because they will come into the story later).
]

I don't think this would really be considered a draw in the Napoleonic Wars -- seems like a victory for France to me.


I know that the various European powers made several peace treaties during this time period but they were always broken in short order (thus the Napoleonic "Wars" rather than "War"). Is it possible to make one of these treaties stick? If so which one? As I said, I don't know a whole bunch about early-1800s Europe, so any help you could give would be great.
I would try to get the Treaty of Tilsit to stick. Of course, how to do that is the hard part. France will probably have to support Russia against the Ottomans. Austria will be weakened at this point (hard to avoid unless you want to stop the wars very early on), but UK and Russia are in good positions.
 
I don't think this would really be considered a draw in the Napoleonic Wars -- seems like a victory for France to me.

Yeah, I guess I probably worded that wrong. What I meant by "draw" is Napoleon doing better than he did in OTL (getting completely defeated) but not so good that it gets cliched and unrealistic ("Nappy pwns all of Europe!"). I'm basically looking for a scenario where the UK, France, and Russia are all strong following the Napoleonic Wars.

I would try to get the Treaty of Tilsit to stick. Of course, how to do that is the hard part. France will probably have to support Russia against the Ottomans. Austria will be weakened at this point (hard to avoid unless you want to stop the wars very early on), but UK and Russia are in good positions.

Could work. That treaty made peace between Russia, France, etc. But the problem is that the UK was still at war with France after the treaty. If I tried to go this route I'd have to find a way to get the UK to make peace with France at a later date. Plus I think that leaves France a little too strong. I want to create parity (or as close as I can get) between France, and the UK. With Russia lagging slightly behind, but close enough to be an important force on the continent. But these are really just rough ideas, so I may not get exactly what I want anyway.
 
One of the What If books has a "Napoleon is nice at Tilsit" scenario that turns out better for him. You might want to take a look at that.
 

Philip

Donor
But the problem is that the UK was still at war with France after the treaty.

Yeah, that's the going to be a problem. IIRC, UK only made peace once during the French Revolutionary Wars/Napoleonic Wars -- after the 2nd Coalition. Any chance that can be maintained? I know neither side was happy with. Perhaps you could have it last a bit longer and get UK distracted with something else?
 
I'd actually say, since what's five more years with such a tight butterfly net already in place, that a scenario closer to your wish could be achieved after 1812. Napoleon pressing home his advantage better after Bautzen could rest in a Europe-wide compromise masterminded by Metternich. Austria was still wavering about deposing Napoleon and stripping France of the Rhineland in 1814.

Tilsit left Prussia as a second- or third-order power and in general France lorded it over everything. It was also not terribly sustainable, in my opinion.
 
I think the trouble is that Britain was justifiably confident in naval supremacy- Trafalgar sealed that perception- and pretty much had the ability to cut the French ability to operate anywhere outside Continental Europe. Even in a peripheral part of Continental Europe, Portugal, Britain with naval supremacy was able to land and supply an army which was a thorn in Napoleon's side. There was no real way for France to do the same to Britain. Arguably since your POD is in the 1770s you could butterfly away the loss of talented and experienced French naval officers and keep the French Navy strong but navies are expensive and that means the French armies are going to be that much weaker which changes things in the land campaigns in Europe itself.

Also with this in mind there was no way the UK was going to stop it's policy of funding anti-French states. Napoleon and the French had pretty much been demonised which meant even less incentive to end the fighting. Basically a stalemate is hard to achieve when one side can keep on fomenting instability with relative impunity. If Napoleon forces peace on one power Britain can run around funding anti-French interests in other countries. When Napoleon smacks those countries down they go back to the first guys and start creating trouble there once more. Unless a credible invasion of Britain itself can be mounted Napoleon is stuck on the grand strategic defensive only able to react to British meddling.
 
Yeah, that's the going to be a problem. IIRC, UK only made peace once during the French Revolutionary Wars/Napoleonic Wars -- after the 2nd Coalition. Any chance that can be maintained? I know neither side was happy with. Perhaps you could have it last a bit longer and get UK distracted with something else?

You could do it the other way - not make peace at Amiens, have the war go on a few more years, then make peace

Part of the problem after Amiens, was that no British politician believed that Napoleon could be trusted after he broke it. Thus, the chances of a SECOND peace were massively reduced

If you delay the first peace long enough, then when it does come both sides could be more committed to it

Best Regards
Grye Wolf
 
I think the trouble is that Britain was justifiably confident in naval supremacy- Trafalgar sealed that perception- and pretty much had the ability to cut the French ability to operate anywhere outside Continental Europe. Even in a peripheral part of Continental Europe, Portugal, Britain with naval supremacy was able to land and supply an army which was a thorn in Napoleon's side. There was no real way for France to do the same to Britain. Arguably since your POD is in the 1770s you could butterfly away the loss of talented and experienced French naval officers and keep the French Navy strong but navies are expensive and that means the French armies are going to be that much weaker which changes things in the land campaigns in Europe itself.

Also with this in mind there was no way the UK was going to stop it's policy of funding anti-French states. Napoleon and the French had pretty much been demonised which meant even less incentive to end the fighting. Basically a stalemate is hard to achieve when one side can keep on fomenting instability with relative impunity. If Napoleon forces peace on one power Britain can run around funding anti-French interests in other countries. When Napoleon smacks those countries down they go back to the first guys and start creating trouble there once more. Unless a credible invasion of Britain itself can be mounted Napoleon is stuck on the grand strategic defensive only able to react to British meddling.

This is why I think some sort of peace with Britain is the key. Tilsit looked pretty watertight on paper, but the fact was that once Russia had squeezed Sweden and the Ottomans, there was nothing in it for them except the hardships of the CoSys. Add in suspicion about the DoW, Wellington's exploits, etcetera, and Russia was going to jump ship, to which Napoleon's only response, of course, was invasion.

I maintain that the best way to bring Britain to the table, barring an early naval PoD, is a better French policy in Spain, which could remove the most prominent ulcer. The butterflies (South America, 1809) also work against us, and may force us to make a compromise peace, leaving us with a suspicious, roughly four-poled Europe.
 
Also with this in mind there was no way the UK was going to stop it's policy of funding anti-French states. Napoleon and the French had pretty much been demonised which meant even less incentive to end the fighting. Basically a stalemate is hard to achieve when one side can keep on fomenting instability with relative impunity. If Napoleon forces peace on one power Britain can run around funding anti-French interests in other countries. When Napoleon smacks those countries down they go back to the first guys and start creating trouble there once more. Unless a credible invasion of Britain itself can be mounted Napoleon is stuck on the grand strategic defensive only able to react to British meddling.

Well, in my TL, I have the French and British basically doing this to one another in North America. The British inciting rebellions and eventually just invading Louisiana (which due to earlier events is known to be French, unlike OTL when the sale from Spain to France was a secret), the French fomenting rebellion in Quebec, etc.. I suppose I should have told you guys that earlier, since an American front (albeit a small one) could affect the wars in Europe. The British aren't using many troops there, just enough to invade virtually uninhabited territory, and the French aren't really sending any troops at all. Just weapons and funding which they are funneling through their allies in the Americas (yes this is a balkanized North America TL).

Would France with 1795 borders at the end count?

I suppose it could. I'm going more for political and military power than land. If a France with those borders could still have the type of power we're talking about then yes it works.
 
What if Napoleon dies at some convenient place, like in 1806, and cooler heads create a peace that sticks? I'm not very knowledgeable about this era, but as Stalin said "death solves all problems: no man, no problem".
 
What if Napoleon dies at some convenient place, like in 1806, and cooler heads create a peace that sticks? I'm not very knowledgeable about this era, but as Stalin said "death solves all problems: no man, no problem".

Hmmm, I hadn't considered that, but it could work. Plus it would give me a freer hand in shaping the peace since I wouldn't have to deal with Napoleon's over-aggressiveness.
 
Top