DBWI Poland gets Partitioned

1772 Prussia, Austria, and Russia invaded congress poland with the intention of dividing it up between themselves. Most of the world was sure that Poland was doomed as a country. Instead thanks to various acts of incompetance, a few cases of bad weather, and in the case of Prussia rash of disease that killed Fredrick the great, and of course the bravery and skill of the polish army the alliance was defeated.

Poland exited the war bloodied but they remained intact, the war of triple alliance would go down as their finest moment, Poland for all of its issues would continue to exist to the present day, but the war was at times a near thing. What would the world be like if Poland had lost?
 
Would Eastern-Central Europe and Scandinavia have been spared the scourge of Communionism as set up by the PLC revolution following the Depression?
Would Russia have retreated into Nationalism as OTL?
Would the Scandinavian Royal families have merged while in exile in Iceland (under UK protection) and formed the Royal Scandinavian Federation?
Lots of questions!
 
The French and American Revolutions wouldn't have gone on unimpeded. Poland being Revolutionnary France's best Continental ally, I could see Poland being recreated for a while by Nappy, but still losing in the end. Perhaps not in Finland, perhaps Russia ?
 
1772 Prussia, Austria, and Russia invaded congress poland with the intention of dividing it up between themselves. Most of the world was sure that Poland was doomed as a country. Instead thanks to various acts of incompetance, a few cases of bad weather, and in the case of Prussia rash of disease that killed Fredrick the great, and of course the bravery and skill of the polish army the alliance was defeated.

Poland exited the war bloodied but they remained intact, the war of triple alliance would go down as their finest moment, Poland for all of its issues would continue to exist to the present day, but the war was at times a near thing. What would the world be like if Poland had lost?

Even if the Polish armies were defeated in 1772, I don't believe that Austria, Prussia and Russia will be able to divided the country just after one war, it will take more time to do it. Probably a first partition in 1772, then the Three Black Eagle will set up a puppet regime in Warsaw, and they will fought about influence in this new governement. Probably the three of them could fight between them for who will have more of influence on the Poles, or more of PLC territories during a second partition.

In OTL, the Triple Alliance represent a powerful ennemy to revolutionnary France, when both Austria and Prussia send powerful armies against France in 1792, while Russia protected their borders from Poland and the Ottoman Empire... Austria don't need to protect its eastern and southern border because the Cossacks were doing it, so Austria were able to send more troops to southern France or northern Italy.

Remember that one of the most important reason for russian troops to be unable to crush polish and lituanian armies in the east of the PLC was that at the same time, the Russians were fighting the Ottomans and the Crimean Khanate, it was the Russo-Turkish War of 1768-1775. When the peace was signed, the Russian obtained that both the Wallachian and Moldavian principalities became theirs and it was by this road that russian armies could help Austrian in northern Italy and Swiss to fight against the French. Seems that the Ottoman payed dearly for their support of Poland during the War of Triple Alliance...


Would Eastern-Central Europe and Scandinavia have been spared the scourge of Communionism as set up by the PLC revolution following the Depression?
Would Russia have retreated into Nationalism as OTL?
Would the Scandinavian Royal families have merged while in exile in Iceland (under UK protection) and formed the Royal Scandinavian Federation?
Lots of questions!

One of the aggravating fact of the PLC Revolution was that it was not only a social revolution but the ethnic diversities of both Poland and Hunagry played against them. In Poland, it begun as a revolution of the poor ruthenian peasants against polish middle and high class, and of course against the Jews, sometimes it was as bad and bloody as the Cossacks revolts in the XVIIth century when the Cossacks and the Ruthenian peasants slaughtered alike Polish Szlachta, catholics priests and jewish shopkeepers. It was the same in Hungary, but you replaced the Ruthenian by the Slovaks and the Rumanians...

If Poland was partitioned and didn't existed during the Revolution, a similar fate could happen to Austria or Russia, if these countries were able to keep their multi-ethnic Empire, socially diverse.


The French and American Revolutions wouldn't have gone on unimpeded. Poland being Revolutionnary France's best Continental ally, I could see Poland being recreated for a while by Nappy, but still losing in the end. Perhaps not in Finland, perhaps Russia ?

Well Poland was shocked as much as Europe by the execution of Louis XVI and all the bloody events of the French Revolution. And I don't think you can called PLC, the best ally of Revolutionnary France because the PLC was simply neutral. Later, they were allies but only because Russia gave the Poles an ultimatum about the free travel of russian troops throw PLC territories to save prussian territories from french invasion.

Apart from the partition of Prussia which was reduced to only the Brandenburg, the Revolution in France had another good consequences as the PLC Szlachta realized that the Reformists are right about given more power to the townfolk before they tried something similar to the French Bourgeois revolution. And such they signed the 1794 Constitution. It was the first step to many economic and social reforms in Poland... The Poles reacted the same way after the Saint Barthelemy Massacre in 1572 when in 1573, The Warsaw Confederation extended religious tolerance to nobility and free persons within the PLC.
 
Last edited:
Well, King Augustus the Great centralizing the state and breaking the power of the nobility in the 1760s certainly helped, as did Bourbon France intervening. They would later pay France back by defending the Kingdom of the French from the Triple Alliance, and France and Poland were beacons of Constitutional Monarchy. It was for that reason that Prime Minister Napoleon "Nappy" Bonaparte travelled to Warsaw to thank Jan IV. France, of course, would pay Poland back by liberating it from the scourge of National Republican Russia. Overall I'd say that the alliance that shaped Europe wouldn't exist.
 
Last edited:
Well, there's no Bohemian Deliverance; French forces are very likely routed at Austerlitz without the fortuitous arrival of Polish units from the north. What this means for Republican France I cannot say. A severe defeat at Austerlitz might have spelt doom for the French Republic. It would have shaken the faith of the French people, emboldened subversive elements in Paris, and left France weak to a Coalition invasion.
 
Well, there's no Bohemian Deliverance; French forces are very likely routed at Austerlitz without the fortuitous arrival of Polish units from the north. What this means for Republican France I cannot say. A severe defeat at Austerlitz might have spelt doom for the French Republic. It would have shaken the faith of the French people, emboldened subversive elements in Paris, and left France weak to a Coalition invasion.

OOC: I already said France wasn't a Republic.
 
Adding your own ideas to a DBWI thread is very difficult, I think that both of you should changed your contribution to this thread.

Here a quote from the third post to this thread :

The French and American Revolutions wouldn't have gone on unimpeded. Poland being Revolutionnary France's best Continental ally, I could see Poland being recreated for a while by Nappy, but still losing in the end. Perhaps not in Finland, perhaps Russia ?


OOC: I already said France wasn't a Republic.

OOC : Yes, you wrote that France stay a Constitutional Monarchy but your post don't care about what was written before, when you have a French Revolution, a Revolutionary France and a Napoleon in a position in power in France. So you should change your post.


Well, there's no Bohemian Deliverance; French forces are very likely routed at Austerlitz without the fortuitous arrival of Polish units from the north. What this means for Republican France I cannot say. A severe defeat at Austerlitz might have spelt doom for the French Republic. It would have shaken the faith of the French people, emboldened subversive elements in Paris, and left France weak to a Coalition invasion.

OOC : Again, you should change your post, because of the butterflies, the Battle of Austerlitz will not be fought but probably another battle in the same region after the Austrian armies retreat to the north after loosing Wien. Of course in OTL, the retreating Austrian forces went north because the Russian Army where coming south from eastern Poland occupied by the Russians, in this TL where Poland is a free and independant country, Russians forces will come from the east, so the decisive battle after the loosing of Wien will be fought somewhere in Hungary.
 
Adding your own ideas to a DBWI thread is very difficult, I think that both of you should changed your contribution to this thread.

Here a quote from the third post to this thread :






OOC : Yes, you wrote that France stay a Constitutional Monarchy but your post don't care about what was written before, when you have a French Revolution, a Revolutionary France and a Napoleon in a position in power in France. So you should change your post.




OOC : Again, you should change your post, because of the butterflies, the Battle of Austerlitz will not be fought but probably another battle in the same region after the Austrian armies retreat to the north after loosing Wien. Of course in OTL, the retreating Austrian forces went north because the Russian Army where coming south from eastern Poland occupied by the Russians, in this TL where Poland is a free and independant country, Russians forces will come from the east, so the decisive battle after the loosing of Wien will be fought somewhere in Hungary.

The Revolution of 1789 made France a Constitutional Monarchy; you just need to avoid the insurrection of august 10. I will add in Napoleon, though.
 
Well, King Augustus the Great centralizing the state and breaking the power of the nobility in the 1760s certainly helped, as did Bourbon France intervening. They would later pay France back by defending the Kingdom of the French from the Triple Alliance, and France and Poland were beacons of Constitutional Monarchy. It was for that reason that Prime Minister Napoleon "Nappy" Bonaparte travelled to Warsaw to thank Jan IV. France, of course, would pay Poland back by liberating it from the scourge of National Republican Russia. Overall I'd say that the alliance that shaped Europe wouldn't exist.
What Constitutional Monarchy?A Bonapartist,huh?The French Revolution was a complete failure.While it was initially promising,France eventually became a hereditary military dictatorship under the Bonapartes.Napoleon's formal title was never Prime Minister.Napoleon had Louis XVI grant him the titles of Duke of the French and Generalissimo.Calling Napoleon a Prime Minister is a blatant attempt at downplaying his usurpation of royal prerogatives.To underscore his dominance over the crown,Napoleon had Louis XVI executed and replaced with his son when the former tried to launch a coup to regain his authority.

OOC:Napoleon effectively became a Mayor of the Palace/Sei-i Taishogun.

Adding your own ideas to a DBWI thread is very difficult, I think that both of you should changed your contribution to this thread.

Here a quote from the third post to this thread :






OOC : Yes, you wrote that France stay a Constitutional Monarchy but your post don't care about what was written before, when you have a French Revolution, a Revolutionary France and a Napoleon in a position in power in France. So you should change your post.




OOC : Again, you should change your post, because of the butterflies, the Battle of Austerlitz will not be fought but probably another battle in the same region after the Austrian armies retreat to the north after loosing Wien. Of course in OTL, the retreating Austrian forces went north because the Russian Army where coming south from eastern Poland occupied by the Russians, in this TL where Poland is a free and independant country, Russians forces will come from the east, so the decisive battle after the loosing of Wien will be fought somewhere in Hungary.

OOC:No need to change anything now.
 
What Constitutional Monarchy?A Bonapartist,huh?The French Revolution was a complete failure.While it was initially promising,France eventually became a hereditary military dictatorship under the Bonapartes.Napoleon's formal title was never Prime Minister.Napoleon had Louis XVI grant him the titles of Duke of the French and Generalissimo.Calling Napoleon a Prime Minister is a blatant attempt at downplaying his usurpation of royal prerogatives.To underscore his dominance over the crown,Napoleon had Louis XVI executed and replaced with his son when the former tried to launch a coup to regain his authority.

OOC:Napoleon effectively became a Mayor of the Palace/Sei-i Taishogun.



OOC:No need to change anything now.

I wouldn't call it a hereditary military dictatorship given that Louis XVII restored democracy after Bonaparte died. In any case, Bonaparte didn't do anything bad with his power. He stopped the Sans Culottes when they tried to break into the Concierge, and the whole reason why he seized power was to protect France from the mob.
 
I wouldn't call it a hereditary military dictatorship given that Louis XVII restored democracy after Bonaparte died. In any case, Bonaparte didn't do anything bad with his power. He stopped the Sans Culottes when they tried to break into the Concierge, and the whole reason why he seized power was to protect France from the mob.
You call France following the Constitutional Revision of 1830 after Napoleon's death a 'democracy'?All laws had to be passed through the National Assembly,true,except the Generalissimo has the right to appoint a quarter of it's members(only 3/4 of the National Assembly members are actually elected).Furthermore,the Generalissimo was established as the de jure head of all armed forces.The Constitution of 1830 also established that the post is not only for life,but passed from "the incumbent Generalissimo to whomever of his choosing,and in the absence of a choice,to the nearest male relative through the principles of agnatic primogeniture".The Bonapartes have dominated the post ever since(though to their credit,they usually did do a good job considering,they tend to pick the most talented member of their family as the next Generalissimo rather than the closest relating member).Rather than Louis XVII restoring democracy,it was the Bonapartes--under pressure from the public following the death of Napoleon in 1830--being forced to pass Constitutional reforms in the name of the king.The Generalissimo continued to exercise tremendous influence over government as a result of it's control over 1/4 of the National Assembly as well as the country's armed forces.There's a reason why over half of the French Prime Ministers following the Constitution of 1830 were associated with the Bonapartes(either with the Generalissimo standing also as Prime Minister or with one of their representatives) .
 
Last edited:
Top