Maybe OTL's Indian Mutiny could be butterflied away but a different uprising with a different spark but the same powder-keg occurs a few years earlier or later than OTL?
Imperator Francorum: A Napoleon II Timeline
- Thread starter Basileus_Komnenos
- Start date
Yeah there is no way to avoid the mutiny without massively changing how the EIC runs itself in the sub continent. One interesting thing that could change though depending on how Napoleon II does things in France is the outcome of the wars with the Sikh empire. (Early 1840s) and certainly the French can have a greater influence on how things go with China.
It honestly depends tbh.
I totally forgot about the Sikh Empire. Its decline only really began in 1839 I think after Ranjit Singh's death. It could very much industrialize and end up as a regional power. I was doing some reading and I remember reading how Ranjit's more capable grandson Nau Nihal Singh died suddenly after stone fell on him and broke his neck.
Napoleon II would definitely want to stick it to the British so a much better led Sikh Empire in its conflict with the EIC could end up as a proxy war between the British and French.
I'm not that well versed on Qing china, but I'm open to suggestions/ideas if you guys have any.
Lol. There's a lot of stuff to cover in between each decade after all. Due to some of the changes in the timeline, the world here would probably evolve much differently than in otl. For one thing France and the rest of Europe would be much more monarchical in political orientation thanks to some other divergences I have planned.
Relations with China will be dominated by trade, though there isn't a tea based profit motive equivalent to get the French raring to take down China the three main events that Napoleon II would have to deal with are Opium War 1, the Taiping, and possible further intervention in China. It really depends on how French business interests develop most European powers didn't really get involved until the British kicked down the door in 1842 but after that the French had some powerful business interests in China that could be used by an enterprising Qing court to play the powers off on one another. Though given the court attitudes only changed when 8 nations marched through the forbidden city this would be difficult. A western educated emperor is a must for this and also an impossibility.
Last edited:
This actually really interesting as the post-Ranjit Sikh Empire was an absolute viper's nest with almost everyone involved in his succession was assassinated.
His eldest son, Kharak Singh was viewed as lazy and died through probably mercury poisoning, his grandson Nau Nihal got hit in the head by a falling stone, his daughter in law Chand Kaur gets bludgeoned to death by her handmaidens and his second son Sher Singh got shot in the head. So much butterfly potential...
Well, this TL is going to be quite exciting for me to look at as such a world evolving in such a divergent fashion from ours in how monarchism remains the dominant political system and how authoritarianism in the "West" is probably more accepted ITTL. Can't wait to see more from this TL!
Speaking of which, hopefully this TL illustrates the fate of the lesser branches of the Bonapartes and what their role in Napoleon II's Empire would be.
If Nappy II becomes emperor of Austria, I assume if he did not become france's leader He would sponsor Nappy III to take it
I feel like the fate of the Qing was kind of pretty much set in stone due to the nature of the Qing government itself as opposed to past imperial governments. Though if China starts to fall part France would be forced to try and take its piece or risk being left out. Though I do see the French being more involved in seeking Colonies in Asia as opposed to otl.
Otl’s African Colonial Empire under the Third Republic was of little real utility/profit to France and was more a vanity project for France’s wounded ego with the loss of Alsace Lorraine. So France might actually instead seek more higher status colonies as opposed to otl.
Yup. Honestly the whole situation is pretty absurd and it’s sounds quite ASB if it actually didn’t occur.
Without the political mess tying one hand behind its back, the Sikh Empire will definitely be better positioned if something like the first Anglo-Sikh war does occur.
Not every state would be a monarchy of course, nor would every monarchy necessarily be a Constitutional one. The main difference is that ideas like absolutism or executive constitutional monarchy would very much be considered part of the mainstream.
He’s still alive. He however would be someone supporting Napoleon II instead. Also ttl’s “Napoleon III” would actually be either Napoleon II’s son or grandson.
Yeah this is what I’m planning. Though I did allude (early in the TL) to the Murat-Bonaparte blood feud that would develop during the Risorgimento.
Napoleon II is not even close in the Austrian line of succession. There are various other Habsburgs to take throne if say Kaiser Franz’s line dies out.
Let me guess that most republics ITTL are going to be some flavor of post-colonial state or would that be a spoiler?
The Wing are pretty set in stone until at least the 1870s when if memory serves you get the first reform minded ministers rising. Cixi out a stop to this but a different emperor might change things up a bit. However the Qing are fairly doomed. If the Taiping succeed on the other hand they had a very different view at court being at least open to some western ideas (though the whole quasi-Christian cult thing would take precedence)
Well the way in which decolonization occurred in otl was never fated to happen after all as that was a consequence of both World Wars. The European powers bludgeoned each other so thoroughly that they couldn’t maintain their hold over their colonies.
Fully agreed. It was getting to the point that a British takeover was all but inevitable. The Crown was already beginning to do so anyway, but the revolt really accelerated it further.
That’s also true. Though a good portion of this was more because they believed that the revolt was already doomed to failure sort of like with the Polish November Uprising of 1830. A good portion of the Polish peasantry were certainly sympathetic, but the general ineffectiveness of the rebel leadership, and the fact that defeat was all but inevitable turned them away from actively supporting the revolt. Plus a lot of the Indian Princes had been co-opted into the British/EIC’s administration. It was also why that the later Indian National Congress decided to cut the Gordon’s Knot on the whole thing and declared the Princely States abolished in favor of a Federal Republic in 1947.
Free City of Krakow: *chuckles* I’m in danger.
Well there were French attempts to integrate their colonies. Initially many Algerian elites backed this idea of gaining some form of citizenship with the Algerian soldiers who fought in WW1. But when this didn’t materialize they began to move towards independence.
By the time France realized its mistake it was too late. Though I’d say the Fourth Republic had a stronger Constitution the French Union might have gotten off the ground possibly leading to something akin to a French version of the British Commonwealth of Nations.
This was basically how Kaiser Franz I operated. Despite how overlooked he was compared to other figures like Tsar Alexander or Napoleon, he was quite a consequential figure for Austria. With his popularity among the masses, he was able to keep his Empire together despite facing off against Napoleon. The Hungarians supported him to the hilt like they did with his grandmother Empress Maria-Theresa. When the HRE was declared dissolved riots broke out as the people thought there was some sort of conspiracy against the Emperor. And in Tyrol when Bavaria tried to occupy/govern it after Austria was forced to cede it, rebel groups emerged in favor of Austrian rule. It was so bad that the Bavarians requested French assistance in dealing with it.
Kaiser Franz also operated a highly effective surveillance apparatus against domestic threats as well. Under capable leadership Austria thrived. Where things really went wrong was where Kaiser Ferdinand took the throne. He was actually intelligent but his physical defects and frequent seizures prevented him from actually ruling. The regency council put in place was stagnant with the government essentially paralyzed for decades allowing minor issues to snowball until it emerged as the 1848 revolution.
Funny how history often repeats itself.
You could possibly have juntas simply proclaim themselves a monarchy as to try and legitimize their position rather than relying on the veil of a Republican system. Though as to how stable these “monarchies” would be is debatable as demonstrated by Iturbide’s First Mexican Empire in otl.
This is honestly quite an interdisciplinary idea to think about. If a few things change from otl you might have a “Christian” Chinese Empire emerge. Though as for how the new Emperor would reconcile things like the Emperor’s title being “the Son of Heaven” with Christian theology would be interesting. Perhaps Western ideas like Divine right might be combined with the Chinese concept of the “Mandate of Heaven” or something.
Well that theological ground work was already done. The Taiping Emperor Hong Xiuquan claimed divine inspiration had told him that he was the brother of Jesus Christ brought to earth. this preserving the 'Christian' part whilst the Chinese concepts of a divine emperor are still kicking.
The Taiping were also rather...interesting in terms of social policy. They were a cross between Christian Isis and Communists (Mao emphasised for propaganda purposes a link between the PRC and the Taiping). They even had women Generals despite women being excluded from many parts of Taiping society. IIRC the best pod for a successful failing is to prevent the purges that end up hitting the army by killing the king of the North (one of 4 main Taiping commanders) who was actually competent and had a plan home in the war.
True.
This was a later addition added in 1976 via an amendment.
Though this would only really work if say the individual monarchs actually address the economic issues which led to the various Revolutions occurring.
I don't really think Hong Xiuquan's view that he was the "brother of Jesus Christ" would go over very well with Western powers. Other more conservative rulers like in say Russia or even France would view it as blasphemy and probably would be motivated to crush it before it became a viable political entity. I think Hong's philosophy at one point (please correct me if I'm wrong on this) was labeled as the "Red Heresy" due to some of Hong's somewhat proto communist/socialist beliefs.
I don't think the Taiping movement was ever really viable enough to form a basis for a proper state. Though I think perhaps this could lead to a different set of circumstances where a new Imperial dynasty arises possibly by some sort of new warlord or some other figure emerges to overthrow the Qing. In this tl where monarchism is more in vogue as a political ideology, you might see Nationalists co-opting monarchism instead, seeking a native Han Chinese Emperor to overthrow the Qing.
I mean, the Warlords era was very chaotic. If the ideology of monarchism is truly in vogue, there are chances that Sun Yat-sen might be aiming for a restoration for the empire as well instead of a republic, and dude is popular and widely revered enough for him to be able to pull it. Though I guess that's still decades away...
Well, even IOTL, there was strong talk of installing the Duke Yansheng or the Marquis of Extended Grace as the Emperor and Yuan Shikai tried to create an Empire of China which lasted 83 days before rebellions against his rule forced him to drop the whole thing, so there's that.
I mean, some kind of rebellion is likely. Just one in 1857 though? The big one might occur earlier or later...
Though the divergences in this tl start in 1814/1815. For all we know Sun Yat Sen possibly never ends up being born here, or possibly is caught earlier by the Qing officials with the revolution forcefully suppressed.
I noticed that these were titles for Chinese nobility, but I'm not really familiar with these titles. What's the significance of these titles/these political figures?
There was the fact that he was too tied to Revolutionary ideals as opposed to Imperial Chinese traditions which made his position have very little legitimacy.
True.
I guess I'll tackle that subject when I get there.