Le Maréchal est Mort!, Alternate Franco-Prussian War

Who Should Enter Alternate Franco-Prussian War?

  • Austria

    Votes: 49 64.5%
  • Italy

    Votes: 25 32.9%
  • Denmark

    Votes: 38 50.0%
  • Great Britian

    Votes: 17 22.4%
  • Russia

    Votes: 15 19.7%

  • Total voters
    76
Well Italy mobilizing isn't really a problem. Prussia/Germany doesn't have a common border with Italy.

On the other hand i don't see Austria resonally siding with France.
France declared war on Prussia/Germany.
Franz Joseph I. himself declared he would act as german prince OTL.
In 1870/71 Austria was Franz Joseph I.
Your POD doesn't show why that would change!
 
Well Italy mobilizing isn't really a problem. Prussia/Germany doesn't have a common border with Italy.

On the other hand i don't see Austria resonally siding with France.
France declared war on Prussia/Germany.
Franz Joseph I. himself declared he would act as german prince OTL.
In 1870/71 Austria was Franz Joseph I.
Your POD doesn't show why that would change!

Interesting regarding Franz Joseph. You may be correct, I would be happy edit the TL based upon comments. From what I know Franz von Kuhnenfeld, Austrian Minister of Defense, was in favor of entering the war on France's side. My thinking was the longer the war goes on the better chance of Austria seeing it as beneficial to enter. Though you might be completely right and Franz Joseph just continues ignoring his military leaders.

Any other opinions on this?
 
From my point of view Italy siding with France would be more important for the austrian course.
In 1859 and 1866 Austria lost Lombardia and Venetia to Austria.
Italy still claimed austrian Trentino and Dalmatia.
If Italy joins France it would/could shift Austria into the prussian camp.

Further Austria had problems with France/Napolean III.
Napoleans mexican adventure lead to Josephs brothers (Maximlian) death.
 
Wasnt Italy's main concern getting Rome? Something that the Empire couldnt give because it would loose the support of the catholics.
And even though there was no decisive defeat the prussians are still doing much better than anyone expected: I mean prewar most thought the fight would be on german soil. So why would they jump in against a still winning side?

Also didnt Prusia have Russian ansurances in the case of Austria causing trouble?I think that at least the kind of armed neutrality was promised you have the austrians and italians doing.
 
Found the diplomatic note Austria gave to France on July 20th:

"kindly repeat to the Emperor and his ministers that, faithful to the engagements we agreed to in the letters exchanged between the two sovereigns last year we shall consider the cause of France our own and contribute to the success of her arms to the fullest extent of our power." Further "under the circumstances the word neutrality which we pronounce not without regret is imposed on us by imperious necessity... But this neutrality is only a means... toward the accomplishment of our policy, the only means whereby we can complete our armament and avoid exposing ourselves defenseless to a sudden attack."

Thoughts?
 
From my point of view Italy siding with France would be more important for the austrian course.
In 1859 and 1866 Austria lost Lombardia and Venetia to Austria.
Italy still claimed austrian Trentino and Dalmatia.
If Italy joins France it would/could shift Austria into the prussian camp.

Further Austria had problems with France/Napolean III.
Napoleans mexican adventure lead to Josephs brothers (Maximlian) death.

France-Austria-Italy were conducting joint war planning prior to the conflict. It seems that Austria has forgiven Italy to an extent, though this of course blows up again by WWI. I agree with you regarding Franz Joseph brother's death I don't think he forgave him.

Wasnt Italy's main concern getting Rome? Something that the Empire couldnt give because it would loose the support of the catholics.
And even though there was no decisive defeat the prussians are still doing much better than anyone expected: I mean prewar most thought the fight would be on german soil. So why would they jump in against a still winning side?

Also didnt Prusia have Russian ansurances in the case of Austria causing trouble?I think that at least the kind of armed neutrality was promised you have the austrians and italians doing.

Napoleon III did actually withdraw from Rome in OTL at outbreak of Franco-Prussian War, though you are correct that prior he had been pressured not to by French Catholics. Prussia does have Russia assurance regarding Austria. My feeling was they would see Prussia heavily occupied and view it as an opportunity to enter. Judging by Austrian diplomatic note they were merely waiting for time.
 
„Sire, ich bin ein deutscher Fürst!“ "Sir i am a german prince!"
Franz Josep to Napoleon as he tried to get an alliance with Austria against Prussia.
Source: Hermann Struschka: Kaiser Franz Josef I, Georg Szelinski, Wien 1888, P. 22 Sorry in german
 
„Sire, ich bin ein deutscher Fürst!“ "Sir i am a german prince!"
Franz Josep to Napoleon as he tried to get an alliance with Austria against Prussia.
Source: Hermann Struschka: Kaiser Franz Josef I, Georg Szelinski, Wien 1888, P. 22 Sorry in german

Thanks! Very interesting. So It seems we have a disconnect between Franz Joseph and his ministers. Kuhnenfeld wants war and Beust is sending the French positive diplomatic messages while the Emperor wants peace.
 
Would an Austrian intervention (or even the realistic possibility thereof) affect Bavaria, beyond Bavaria being the likely entry point for Austrian forces?

Good question. I know that in OTL Napoleon III thought that Bavaria would declare neutrality and was surprised when they instead joined Prussia. Perhaps the Austrian threat gets them to pull out of the conflict or withdraw forces in France? Speculation on my part, I'll have to study Bavarian political situation further.
 
I don't imagine Strasbourg and other fortresses falling so easily.
Strasbourg falling had much to do with the demoralizing effect of the defeat at Sedan.

Here, even though the bulk of the French army is near Paris, they can spare newly raised corps to create a new army in upper Burgundy to relieve the fortresses instead of sitting idle. Since the bulk of each sides armies are between Paris and Metz, the liberatipn of Alsace and relief of Strasbourg is the best chance. Nothing too implausible to imagine since that's more or less the OTL plan for Bourbaki, except here Strasbourg would still be holding and Belfort not yet under strong siege.

You bring up an important points. How would the French people, press, politicians react be to a pull back to Paris? Men like Marshal MacMahon would be pleased that the Emperor is following the military leaders advice but I don't think men like Gambetta would view it the same way. My guess is their would be alot of outcry at the developments. However as galileo-034 pointed out earlier the referendum of 1870 gave the Emperor a popular mandate and some room to maneuver. This would be enough to stave off treasonable actions by the likes of Gambetta.
Gambetta in this context would probably do the national union thing; unlike Lenin and the Bolsheviks, he kept fighting on to the very end, which to me is tantamount to his priority for national defense over the republican regime.
And don't forget, he proclaimed the Republic reluctantly after a crowd invaded the Palais Bourbon.
 
Good question. I know that in OTL Napoleon III thought that Bavaria would declare neutrality and was surprised when they instead joined Prussia. Perhaps the Austrian threat gets them to pull out of the conflict or withdraw forces in France? Speculation on my part, I'll have to study Bavarian political situation further.
The funny thing is that the Bavarian king was rather francophile yet still joined with Prussia.
 
Austria is likely to get involved, I think, along with Italy and resentful Denmark, but the entry of these might well bring Russia into the conflict on behalf of Prussia.

For the old Alternate History Travel Guides, I had this sort of scenario trigger a world war. I think I was right.
 
Austria is likely to get involved, I think, along with Italy and resentful Denmark, but the entry of these might well bring Russia into the conflict on behalf of Prussia.

For the old Alternate History Travel Guides, I had this sort of scenario trigger a world war. I think I was right.

Russia joining on the behalf of Prussia, might in turn, lead to Britain proposing a mediation to everyone (as no one really wants a long and drawn out war), or outright joining France (as while the British had a quite positive view of Prussia and a rivalry with France, they also had a close trade relationship with France... as well as a rivalry with Russia over the Ottoman Empire, Persia and Far East). It might turn into early WWI.
 

yeetboy

Banned
I think an entry of another great power into the conflict could quickly make some of the southern German states exit the war.
 
I see these states as opportunistic - however the balance of power cant be broken. So as long as the fortunes of war are not seriously changing I dont expect either Austria and Italy to get involved. But If prussia starts to loose... You can also add in the Danes in this group.

However I can also see Brittain remain more pro Prussian. IMO London didnt like the Prussians to win as big at they did OTL but it was still acceptable for them. I think that the ideal for the british would be a small Prussian victory. As the conflict is much less clear TTL things seem to be heading in their direction and I expect they will try to keep it isolated and maybe try to broker a peace. The russians are a fail safe for the Prussians. Meaning they wouldnt allow the war ending in a big french victory. And neither would allow Prussia to be ganged upon without aid.

Also thinking about it, as Italy already has Rome what would be the point for them to enter?

edit: in the poll you dont have a "no one" or "it remains isolated" option.
 
A few thoughts on a possible Danish intervention.

In OTL, Napoléon III was not averse to bringing Denmark into the conflict. At the 1866 peace negotiations in Prague between Austria and Prussia, it was the French emperor who insisted on the inclusion of the paragraph 5 stipulation, which opened for a possible plebiscite in Northern Schleswig (which would inadvertently have returned that part of the province to Denmark). As such there existed a considerable pro-French ‘faction’ within the Danish government.

Indeed, the army was actually mobilised in July 1870. Although it was a rather small force of 30.000 men organised into 31 infantry battalions (10 of those reservists), 15 cavalry squadrons (5 of those reservists), 12 artillery batteries (3 of those reservists) and 4 companies of engineers, it was envisioned as an offensively oriented field army whose primary function was to act in concert with the troops of an allied great power.

On the 5th of August, the French ambassador, the duke of Cadore, proposed just such an alliance and the prospect of a French expeditionary corps and naval units. Denmark, in return for her assistance, was to receive the whole of Schleswig. Although the king was vehemently opposed to the idea, a majority of the government’s ministers actually supported a French alliance (although they wanted to include the proviso that any - actual -fighting would have to be done by the French, whilst the Danes would act as mere “forces of occupation”....).

However, news on the 7th of August that the French had suffered initial defeats considerably cooled the heads of the otherwise rather revanchist Copenhagen opinion. Two days later, the government informed Cadore that it could not accept the French proposal on account of “... the imminent dangers such an alliance would bring upon Denmark.” Instead, the government eventually joined the general European league of neutrality in late August.

Now I’m not sure whether or not the French successes ITTL is enough to prevent the government of Ludvig Holstein-Holsteinborg (yup, that’s his name) from joining the league of neutrality. However, it’s a possibility for sure - although any actual military involvement would only be on the table after some darned spectacular French military victories.

Anyways, I hope this helps in some way :)

(Oh, by the way, killer timeline! Most def a fan right here!)
 
Last edited:
Top