France annexes Belgium in 1748

It is not how Butterfly Effect works too, but erasing the last and boldened part of the comment could make it a good description of how butterfly works.

Please explain. The very birth of Napoléon is a consequence of facts (French conquest of Corsica and Corsican resistance to it) that would not exist ITTL. He is litteraly butterflied away.
 
Please explain. The very birth of Napoléon is a consequence of facts (French conquest of Corsica and Corsican resistance to it) that would not exist ITTL. He is litteraly butterflied away.

Carlo and Leitizia were married before the French invasion, so Napoléon may have still existed but yes, without the French conquest he probably never becomes famous.

I'm not sure that French annexation of Belgium means that there is no annexation of Corsica, though. French kings had wanted Italian influence for centuries and Corsica was a soft target.
 
Carlo and Leitizia were married before the French invasion, so Napoléon may have still existed but yes, without the French conquest he probably never becomes famous.

I'm not sure that French annexation of Belgium means that there is no annexation of Corsica, though. French kings had wanted Italian influence for centuries and Corsica was a soft target.

French troops invaded Corsica in 1738, then left in 1741, only to come back in 1756, under the cover of acting for Genova. They kept garnisons in coastal towns until the formal annexation and the subsequent war. Napoléon's parents were married under Paoli's orders, as he wanted to unite pro-independence families. He was conceived during the war (his mother was famously pregnant with him in the last times of the Corsican resistance), so his birth is directly determined by the french intervention.

As I wrote earlier, evacuation of Corsica by the Austro-British-Savoy was a direct consequence of the peace talks, in which Louis XV agreed to withdraw from the Austrian NL in exchange for the ending of occupation of France ´s italian allies. As we know, Paoli was quite willing to ally himself with the British in order to keep Corsica free. He would probably play the same card in the 1750'.
 
French troops invaded Corsica in 1738, then left in 1741, only to come back in 1756, under the cover of acting for Genova. They kept garnisons in coastal towns until the formal annexation and the subsequent war. Napoléon's parents were married under Paoli's orders, as he wanted to unite pro-independence families. He was conceived during the war (his mother was famously pregnant with him in the last times of the Corsican resistance), so his birth is directly determined by the french intervention.

As I wrote earlier, evacuation of Corsica by the Austro-British-Savoy was a direct consequence of the peace talks, in which Louis XV agreed to withdraw from the Austrian NL in exchange for the ending of occupation of France ´s italian allies. As we know, Paoli was quite willing to ally himself with the British in order to keep Corsica free. He would probably play the same card in the 1750'.
So France doesn't annex Corsica anymore? How come and what happens with Corsica then?
 
So France doesn't annex Corsica anymore? How come and what happens with Corsica then?

France ´s policy in regard to Corsica was to control it for Genova ´s sake, in order to maintain the Republic as a fench client state. If Louis XV took in 1748 the decision to ditch his clients and allies in Italy, whose territories were occupied by the Austrian alliance, in order to keep the ANL for himself, no way the Austrians and British would simply give the occupied lands back to their previous owner. Instead of going back to Genova, a french ally, Corsica would be attributed to Savoy, an austrian ally.

Does it mean France would never annex Corsica ? We cannot say. This alt-1748 peace would be as inconclusive as the OTL one was, so an alt-7YW is to be expected. Maybe, in the case of a french victory, Corsica could end up a fench province. It would not be, however, at the same time nor in the same circumstances as OTL annexation. So, no Napoléon.
 
Does an enlarged France that includes Belgium also defeats Prussia and the German states in 1870-1871? What are the chances? It doesn't actually have to be those years, but a similar war over German unification with Bismarck in charge in Prussia.
 
Does an enlarged France that includes Belgium also defeats Prussia and the German states in 1870-1871? What are the chances? It doesn't actually have to be those years, but a similar war over German unification with Bismarck in charge in Prussia.

You already asked the same question last week !

Again, we cannot assume Bismarck would end up as Prussian PM, nor Prussia would lead a war for German Unification. I have already wrote that the chosen POD butterflies away Napoléon, meaning all 19th c. Europe would be radically different. But this is not the only butterfly of the PoD. If you want to go straight from 1748 to 1848 or so, you need to explain what happens in between. Are they a 7YW, an AIW, a French Revolution in your TL ? If not, why ? Who wins ?
 
You may have written it but it is not sure at all that the POD of France annexing the ANL in 1748 will butterfly away French purchase or Corsica, birth of Napoleon as a French subject, nor Bismarck’s birth as a Prussian noble.

France annexing the ANL does not either unavoidably butterfly away the French Revolution because the ANL won’t bail out the French treasury in 1789.

Only India could bail out the French treasury. India OTL enabled Britain to spend, borrow, spend and borrow again to an unprecedented level and it was one of the main reasons for Britain being able to wage war for 23 years against revolutionary and Napoleonic France.

In the previous English-French conflicts, the british treasury was almost as close to collapsing as the French treasury was.
 
You may have written it but it is not sure at all that the POD of France annexing the ANL in 1748 will butterfly away French purchase or Corsica, birth of Napoleon as a French subject, nor Bismarck’s birth as a Prussian noble.

France annexing the ANL does not either unavoidably butterfly away the French Revolution because the ANL won’t bail out the French treasury in 1789.

Only India could bail out the French treasury. India OTL enabled Britain to spend, borrow, spend and borrow again to an unprecedented level and it was one of the main reasons for Britain being able to wage war for 23 years against revolutionary and Napoleonic France.

In the previous English-French conflicts, the british treasury was almost as close to collapsing as the French treasury was.

Budget problems were not the only reason for the French Revolution. If you want to focus on it though, the idea of an unavoidable deficit in 1789 on which no PoD could have consequences is the very negation of alt history. France could fix its problems by many ways, such as internal reform and less injust taxation or less foreign interventions and wars. It was not doomed to have crippling budget issues in 1789 !

For the "Great Men" topic, Napoléon's birth was conditionned by the Corsican Independence War. ITTL, this war would be very different, as Corsica is occupied by Savoy (+Britain), rather than by Genova (+France). You cannot expect any son of Carlo and Letizia Buonaparte to be THE Napoléon. No Napoléon, no Napoleonic Wars. As Bismarck's birth was conditionned by Napoleonic Wars,... well you get the idea
 
Last edited:
If France takes Belgium, how big is the chance that the Netherlands joins Germany with more autonomy like Bavaria.
 
If France takes Belgium, how big is the chance that the Netherlands joins Germany with more autonomy like Bavaria.

No more than Denmark : that is none.

The United Provinces were anyway allied to Britain and Austria during the war of Austrian succession. So it did not need to become part of the HRE since it was anyway allied with Austria.
 
Top