Disaster at Leuthen TL - Frederick the Great dies in battle

Nova Scotia was ceded to France
There was a lot of Anger in America when Britain gave Louisbourg back in 1748. However OTL the "Baron of Boston"* never attracted much political Traction.
ITTL I can see More anger, and The Baron gaining more, maybe even becoming Mayor of Boston.

I also see a lot more Americans Smuggling to the Spanish America, OTL Britain tried to keep the American smuggling to a minimum. ITTL the British will be a lot angrier at Spain.
In North America French claims in the Ohio Valley were accepted,
I doubt a 1763 line. With the French claiming the Ohio and Mississippi Valleys [both sides] and the Spanish the Gulf Coast - Britain will encourage Settlers to move West.

Wonder if King George paying more attention to Hanover --?Will whe have - More? or Less? immigration from Germany?
My guess is More as the increased problems in the HRE feeds emigration. Whe may also have King G, Hiring Germans as Mercenary troops for America.

OTL the British gaining of Florida in 1764, stopped the growing escape of Slaves into Florida, Here it will continue, Upsetting the small but growing population of Slave Holders.
If Whe are lucky - the movement of Slave holders into former Free Georgia, will slow or stop.


* A prominent Boston Merchant who financed the Attack. OTL He was Knighted for his leadership in the 1745 capture of Fort Lousisbourg. First native born American to be Knighted
 
Last edited:
Will whe have - More? or Less? immigration from Germany?
My guess is More as the increased problems in the HRE feeds emigration.

What increased problems in the HRE? IOTL, there was dualism between Austria and Prussia. ITTL, Prussia is weakened and Saxony is strengthened. Due to the personal union with Poland we'd likely see Austrian-Saxon dualism - not that much of a difference. Given that in such a situation Prussia might become an Austrian ally it might actually be better than OTL for the Austrians - it's always better to fight Saxony than Prussia.

What I'd expect for the future is an Austrian try to exchange the Austrian Netherlands against Bavaria - this time probably countered by the Saxons rather than the Prussians.
 
Yeah I wasn't sure about Guiana, I just took the map from this site's wiki, I'll change it later. Definately, with Barbados and their other territories France is much stronger, wealthier and more unified than OTL; which will have some interesting results come 1789.

It is a common mistake on this site. For some reason the basemap is wrong and everybody assumes it is actually correct. British guyana only become British in 1814, although during the Napoleonic wars and the French republican wars before it, it was occupied for a while (and even briefly returned to the Netherlands).
 
What increased problems in the HRE? IOTL, there was dualism between Austria and Prussia. ITTL, Prussia is weakened and Saxony is strengthened. Due to the personal union with Poland we'd likely see Austrian-Saxon dualism - not that much of a difference. Given that in such a situation Prussia might become an Austrian ally it might actually be better than OTL for the Austrians - it's always better to fight Saxony than Prussia.

What I'd expect for the future is an Austrian try to exchange the Austrian Netherlands against Bavaria - this time probably countered by the Saxons rather than the Prussians.

And a stronger Saxony in personal union with Poland-Lithuania would keep the latter from being swallowed up so easily.
 
I guess we can see a Maraths state under French influence and a Moghul empire under British control... However, a divided India in the end.
 
I guess we can see a Maraths state under French influence and a Moghul empire under British control... However, a divided India in the end.

Yeah this is basically the idea. I can say now that no European power will ever unite India in TTL.

And a stronger Saxony in personal union with Poland-Lithuania would keep the latter from being swallowed up so easily.

Saxony will be safer yes. Of course, that depends on how long the union lasts. Something terrible might happen to Poland's king....

It is a common mistake on this site. For some reason the basemap is wrong and everybody assumes it is actually correct. British guyana only become British in 1814, although during the Napoleonic wars and the French republican wars before it, it was occupied for a while (and even briefly returned to the Netherlands).

Ok yeah I'll change it now. France has got enough gains I think anyway with Guiana.

What increased problems in the HRE? IOTL, there was dualism between Austria and Prussia. ITTL, Prussia is weakened and Saxony is strengthened. Due to the personal union with Poland we'd likely see Austrian-Saxon dualism - not that much of a difference. Given that in such a situation Prussia might become an Austrian ally it might actually be better than OTL for the Austrians - it's always better to fight Saxony than Prussia.

What I'd expect for the future is an Austrian try to exchange the Austrian Netherlands against Bavaria - this time probably countered by the Saxons rather than the Prussians.

Saxony is definately going to be an issue. It's union with Poland will help it survive, as long as the union lasts at least. Prussia is weakened but not out, they still have a strong, determined and well trained army, whereas, like you said, Saxony does not. The main crisis will be around Bavaria, especially in the 1770s and 1780s.

There was a lot of Anger in America when Britain gave Louisbourg back in 1748. However OTL the "Baron of Boston"* never attracted much political Traction.
ITTL I can see More anger, and The Baron gaining more, maybe even becoming Mayor of Boston.

I also see a lot more Americans Smuggling to the Spanish America, OTL Britain tried to keep the American smuggling to a minimum. ITTL the British will be a lot angrier at Spain.

I doubt a 1763 line. With the French claiming the Ohio and Mississippi Valleys [both sides] and the Spanish the Gulf Coast - Britain will encourage Settlers to move West.

Wonder if King George paying more attention to Hanover --?Will whe have - More? or Less? immigration from Germany?
My guess is More as the increased problems in the HRE feeds emigration. Whe may also have King G, Hiring Germans as Mercenary troops for America.
OTL the British gaining of Florida in 1764, stopped the growing escape of Slaves into Florida, Here it will continue, Upsetting the small but growing population of Slave Holders.
If Whe are lucky - the movement of Slave holders into former Free Georgia, will slow or stop.


I'm not sure about the Baron, but I could see it happening. Yeah there will be considerable British emmigration into the French Ohio Valley, which will be an issue, but the French realistically can't do much to stop it. The emmigration levels from Germany won't be to different from OTL, the main hope will be that with Prussia minimalised the tensions in Germany might decline... a foolhardy wish. The Slave issue will also be prevelent in the future as the southern colonies will increasingly push for action against Florida to regain their slaves.
 
I was looking over the situation in North America and I was curious about the border in northern NY. Do the French still hold Fort Carillon/Ticonderoga? They defended it in '58 and only lost it in '59. I'm guessing that with the momentum now shifting in favor of the French they could hold it. Unless the British mount a successful campaign in '59 before they sue for peace.

If you have the French retain their forts in upstate NY it would push the border to the south of Lake Champlain and would be a major threat to the colony of NY (Hudson valley). I could see that being a major source of tension in the colonies with the French looming ominously up the Hudson kind of like French Nova Scotia would be to New England and Florida is to the south.

Looking over the rest of the border forts in this scenario I'm guessing the British still will hold Ft William Henry south of Lake George, Crown Point is debatable if the French have Ticonderoga. Ft Niagara I'm guessing is French. Ft Oswego was destroyed by the French in '56 I doubt they'll let the British rebuild it likewise for Ft Bull (near Rome NY). The French probably also retain Ft Presqu'ile. This denies the British a presence in/on the Great Lakes. You mention Indian resistance so I'm assuming the French Forts would be constantly harassed by the Iroquois which would limit their ability to project power in the region. Nevertheless its a nice defensive perimeter for New France. So with the exception of Ft Duquesne/western PA (I'm not clear on whether the British still control that or not after the captured it) the border seems like it will be fairly close to the Proclamation Line of 1763. Am I interpreting this correctly or are the British able to secure their position a little better under the Treaty of Rotterdam?
 
I was looking over the situation in North America and I was curious about the border in northern NY. Do the French still hold Fort Carillon/Ticonderoga? They defended it in '58 and only lost it in '59. I'm guessing that with the momentum now shifting in favor of the French they could hold it. Unless the British mount a successful campaign in '59 before they sue for peace.

If you have the French retain their forts in upstate NY it would push the border to the south of Lake Champlain and would be a major threat to the colony of NY (Hudson valley). I could see that being a major source of tension in the colonies with the French looming ominously up the Hudson kind of like French Nova Scotia would be to New England and Florida is to the south.

Looking over the rest of the border forts in this scenario I'm guessing the British still will hold Ft William Henry south of Lake George, Crown Point is debatable if the French have Ticonderoga. Ft Niagara I'm guessing is French. Ft Oswego was destroyed by the French in '56 I doubt they'll let the British rebuild it likewise for Ft Bull (near Rome NY). The French probably also retain Ft Presqu'ile. This denies the British a presence in/on the Great Lakes. You mention Indian resistance so I'm assuming the French Forts would be constantly harassed by the Iroquois which would limit their ability to project power in the region. Nevertheless its a nice defensive perimeter for New France. So with the exception of Ft Duquesne/western PA (I'm not clear on whether the British still control that or not after the captured it) the border seems like it will be fairly close to the Proclamation Line of 1763. Am I interpreting this correctly or are the British able to secure their position a little better under the Treaty of Rotterdam?

The British took Fort Ticonderoga much like OTL. They had some successes in the Ohio Valley / Great Lakes area before the peace, which is partly why theres so much anger at the French being allowed to take all of the Ohio Valley. The Proclamtion of 1763 is effectively the border that exists in TTL. The French traded some of the forts for Barbados and Nova Scotia, Crown Point and Duquesne are British, but Oswego has not been rebuilt. Niagra is definately French, they're not letting that one go. The British have effectively no influence on the Great Lakes following Rotterdam.

But yes in conclusion New France is sitting pretty with a strong defensive perimeter. Their major threats are the Indian raids, especially the Iroqouis in the north east, and internal problems. The encircling French threat will have a great impact on future developments in the British colonies.
 
The funny thing is that Prussia is still Prussia, despite losing the territory itself to the PLC. Maybe people TTL only call it Brandenburg?
 
The Third War of Polish Succession
(1768-1772)
Part I

The conflict in eastern Europe between 1768 and 1772 is known and was known by many names, the Polish Civil War, the Confederate Uprising, the Crimean War, but the title of the Third War of Polish Succession, though not strictly accurate, is the one that is most widely used and is representative of the war as a whole rather than painting it as a local or regional conflict. The origins of the Third War of Polish Succession (the first two being 1587-1588 and 1733-1738) stem from the ‘election’ of Stanislaw II August Poniatowski as king of Poland in 1764, a nomination that was encouraged by Russian troops. This rigged election upset many leading Polish aristocrats and religious leaders who wished to rid Poland of Russian influence. Following the Four Year’s War (1756-1760) the Prussians began taking an active interest in developments in Poland. The alliance with Britain, though helpful, was strained and the Prussians needed to look for a continental ally, thus they began secret negotiations with the anti-Russian forces in Poland, also pro-Prussian lobbying is stepped up in Istanbul.

King Stanislaw:
Stanis%C5%82aw_August_Poniatowski_by_Johann_Baptist_Lampi.PNG


In 1768 a meeting of these Polish-Lithuanian nobles meet at the fortress of Bar. They declared their intentions to be the removal of Russian influence from the Commonwealth and the deposing of King Stanislaw August Poniatowski, who was seen as a Russian puppet. The Confederate forces soon began taking control of the west of the country, while a simultaneous revolt breaks out in Polish controlled Ukraine. They begin raising an army in the west and use weapons imported from Prussia. The Bar Confederation immediately send a message to Berlin, offering the return of East Prussia in exchange for Prussian aid. The young Prussian King, Frederick William II, is encouraged by his hawk-like ministers, who were angry with the Treaty of Dresden, to recognise the Confederate cause, as indeed many of its members have been Prussian allies since the end of the Four Year’s War. Prussian forces begin mobilisation and veteran Prussian officers are sent to advise the Confederate forces. This is met by a declaration of war on Prussia by the Russians and King Stanislaw August. The current Elector of Saxony, Frederick Christian [1], was the son of the previous king of Poland, and begins negotiations with Prussia and the Bar Confederation, offering himself as an alternative to King Stanislaw.

Frederick Christian:
Friedrich-Christian.jpg


In September a force of Russian Cossacks sent to aid King Stanislaw pursue a Confederate force into Ottoman territory [2]. The Ottoman Sultan Mustafa III, a reform minded king who was determined to reverse the Ottoman decline, with backing and encouragement from his Prussian allies, declared war on Russia and Stanislaw in response. A Prussian army under the command of General Wichard von Mollendorf invades western Poland late in the year and heads straight for East Prussia in an attempt to take Konigsberg from the pro-Stanislaw garrison. The Prussians are opposed to the plans of Frederick of Saxony and influence the Confederates to refuse the Saxon’s offer. Upon hearing of the rejection King Stanislaw sends an alternative offer to Saxony. He offers to wed his daughter Izabela to Frederick Christian’s son Frederick Augustus and will name Augustus as his heir to the Polish throne if Saxony intervenes against Prussia, thus recreating the dynastic union of Poland and Saxony.

Leaders of the Bar Confederation at prayer before a battle:
Artur_Grottger_Modlitwa_konfederat%C3%B3w_barskich.PNG


[1] Died in OTL in 1763 of smallpox
[2] OTL
 
Last edited:
So this is the "Prussia attempts to regain lost power" war? And... I assume they'll demand East Prussia back as a price? ;)

Oh you bet, their not helping for free. Plus this way they get to fight Saxony to see whos top dog in northern Germany, depending of course on what the Hapsburgs do.
 
Oh you bet, their not helping for free. Plus this way they get to fight Saxony to see whos top dog in northern Germany, depending of course on what the Hapsburgs do.

If the Habsburgs play their cards right, they'd alternate between the two, so neither become too strong to challenge Austrian authority.

Of course, in OTL Prussia was simply too strong.
 
If the Habsburgs play their cards right, they'd alternate between the two, so neither become too strong to challenge Austrian authority.

Absolutely.

Question is now whether the Saxons accept the alliance to Poniatowski. That should see the first direct Austrian meddling - Austria should be against renewing the personal union between Saxony and Poland.

Next question would be who the union of Bar chooses as king. There's always a Hapsburg available, right? Good catholic stock, bringing in at least the friendly neutrality of Austria.
 
Absolutely.

Question is now whether the Saxons accept the alliance to Poniatowski. That should see the first direct Austrian meddling - Austria should be against renewing the personal union between Saxony and Poland.

Next question would be who the union of Bar chooses as king. There's always a Hapsburg available, right? Good catholic stock, bringing in at least the friendly neutrality of Austria.

Saxony-Poland-Lithuania would be a legitimate threat to Habsburg interests, so it would indeed make the Austrians favor an older rival.
 
I'm curious to see who the Confederates choose to support as King. Seems like anyone they pick is going to drag another power into the war. What about a French candidate? In the past they proffered the Prince of Conti as candidate and he's still around, if a little old. Or maybe the Duke of Parma since he never got his Kingdom in the Austrian Netherlands.

I assume Catherine came to power in Russia more or less as in OTL. And I'm assuming that Joseph II is still sharing power in the Austrian domains with his mother Maria Theresa. I could definitely see some inconsistent foreign policy coming out of Austria.
 
Top