How To Get Britain Really Humiliated During the Napoleonic Wars

2nd of April 1801 onboard the RN flagship just outside Copenhagen.

The battle has raged for hours between the British fleet and the Danish blockships defending Copenhagen, but no decision appear to be close. The overall commander Adm Parker is nervous and orders: "Set signal for Nelson to withdraw!"

The flagsignal is set and at Nelson's flagships the junior officer with the special task of watching signals from the flagship shouts to Nelson: "Sir, we're ordered to withdraw!"

Nelson looks annoyed but turns toward the flagship and puts his looking glass in front of his eye.

So far everything is OTL, but:

In the same moment a huge "thhuugghh - swisshh!" sounds across Nelson's ship and where just before Adm Nelson had been standing a headless body with blood pulsing from the neck stands for a splitsecond before it collapses on the deck.

The next few minuttes are chaos, but the second in command had also seen the signal and orders: "Signal to the line to withdraw!"

As the British ships withdraw they can hear the Danish crews cheer. "Damned - just an hour more and we would have had them!" it sounds from many experienced gunner and the younger ones soon agreeing.

But anyway the Armed Neutrality Union between Denmark-Norway, Sweden, Prussia and Russia stands together as firmly as ever and it is agreed to rig a combined fleet of 50 ships of the line (SoL).

The RN has 113 SoL but also has to keep the combined French-Spanish fleets of 90 ships at bay. So in short, in the next couple of years the RN is grinded down in constant battles with the Neutrality Union in the North and the French-Spanish in the south. In 1809 GB is invaded by a French lead force containing representatives from most European nations...

Regards

Redbeard

We're the Armed Neutrality that anti-British?
 
I mean, who is there to compete? Dumoriez? He may already have been gone, like Lafayette.
I was reading a publication of l'Histoire recently (a French magazine, I'll let you guess what about) who propped up Dumas quite a lot. He was extremely popular and successful but had falling outs with Napoleon who then swept him under the rug of history.

[EDIT: would be really fun to get a PoD where a black man leads France, as a chief of state, in the early XIXth century]

M0796-0000139.jpg


Also, regarding the question, would Napoleon have been Napoleon without the Terror? My father had a quote on his laptop "heroes are men in the middle of circumstances"
 
Last edited:

Redbeard

Banned
We're the Armed Neutrality that anti-British?

No, not necessarily.

Denmark-Norway for a start would prefer cordial relations with GB, as that would be best for trade and the huge Danish-Norwegian merchant fleet. But the Union explicitly was directed against British restrictions on the member state's trade and would if necessary fight against such restriction with armed force - i.e.: We trade with whom we want to, even if its Napoleon!

Anyway the British saw the Union as a threat to British interests.

In OTL the British action at Copenhagen, before the Union could rig and unite a combined fleet had the Union dissolve, but in this context I guess an action at Copenhagen were the Danes do not feel compelled to give in to any British demands will give the Union a realistic option to do what it was intended for: Armed action against British interferrence against trade.

The RN had a total strength at that time of approx. 110-120 SoL, which is well above the appr. 50 SoL the Union would be able to send to sea in the Baltic, but sending the main RN force into the Baltics would leave the sea open to the French-Spanish who combined had about 90 SoL.

A British option would be to try to utilise a central position to strike first at one (Union) and defeat them, and then the other (Napoleon) - utilising that they are not allied. That would however mean leaving the Mediterranean (incl. Spain and Portugal) to the French-Spanish - a huge price to pay indeed and which in itself would breed some hordes of huge butterflies!

Perhaps better to try to strike first in the Med and count on the Union not being too aggressive in the North (likely) but for a start that plan requires Trafalgar being won without Nelson. Even it it happens, it still requires a major effort to enforce the RN's will in the Baltic vs. strong enemy forces combined with "simple" problems like navigating through the Danish straits - holds a multitude of likely failures. Without control of the Baltic the British will be short on supplies of timber, tar and other naval supplies - not good!

I will not exclude that the British could fight themselves out of this, they have afterall shown some remarkable resilience and fighting spirit on the seas, but it also holds some realistic options for the humiliations asked for by the thread starter.

Regards

Redbeard
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Interesting POD, definitely...

Who gets the command of the Baltic allies fleet? What was the breakdown between Danish, Russian, and other?

Best,
 

Redbeard

Banned
Who gets the command of the Baltic allies fleet? What was the breakdown between Danish, Russian, and other?

Best,

AFAIK Russia had 34 SoL and Denmark 21, but some Russian probably would be in the Black Sea. I have no exact numbers on the Swedish and Prussian navies, but probably 15-20 Swedish SoL and very few if any Prussian.

My guess would be a Russian commander. After all Russia would have to be considered the senior partner in this alliance.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
This could be a really interesting tale;

AFAIK Russia had 34 SoL and Denmark 21, but some Russian probably would be in the Black Sea. I have no exact numbers on the Swedish and Prussian navies, but probably 15-20 Swedish SoL and very few if any Prussian.

My guess would be a Russian commander. After all Russia would have to be considered the senior partner in this alliance.

Britain locked out of the Med and Baltic and certainly having to face a real threat in the eastern Atlantic is a very different strategic allignment for Napoleonic France and the Continent generally...

Best,
 
Speaking of research, would a French-Danish expedition to Sweden during or shortly after the 3rd Coalition have been effective in cutting off their timber exports to Britain? And if so, how damaging would that have been to the latter's war effort?
 
For a total humiliation, Britain would have to be deprived of some territory it really wanted to keep. My vote's for India.

I'm not sure how best to do it; it wouldn't be by sending an army there. Maybe the British government would panic if Nelson's fleet couldn't get back from the Egyptian expedition because the straits of Gibraltar were mined and blockaded, and there was an ominous shipbuilding program along the French coast.

To fit the thread premise, Napoleon has to seize power a bit earlier than OTL.
 
Top