Napoleon, Mister Nice Guy

What if Napoleon Bonaparte took a different approach to things. As consul of post-revolutionairy France he wanted to spread the Enlightment as well as the Jacobite centralized state in the rest of Europe. He realized that the thought of the Enlightment would spread on its own, seeing that there were French Revolution inspired revolts in the Austrian Netherlands, but that he himself would need to help the idea of an Jacobite centralized state spread. Therefor he turned to the most influential person in Europe, the Pope; claiming that there is no mention of Counts and Dukes in the Bible. Therefor the only 3 'legitimate' forms of government are the 3 'desired by God';

1) an Empire; like the Roman Empire mentioned countless times in the Bible
2) a Kingdom; like Egypt under the Faraos and biblical Isreal (Kind David, etc.)
3) a Republic, ruled by either a President, a Pope or a Consul; the Papacy was according to Napoleon a form of Republic

He proclaimed that it was time Europe adapted "Gods will" by ending the medieval feodality themselves either by joining together in large states or by joining a existing state; and if they would not do so voluntarily, he and the others would bring the lesser state into the New Age by force. He even gave Rousillon back to Aragon (which ITL didn't merge with Castille; Portugal is the Porto region and Galicia, the rest are the Algarvian and Lusitanian provinces of Castille) and promised to undo the territorial changes made by Louis XIV in the North when the Austrian Netherlands were stable as a token of goodwill. The Pope was intrigued by his thoughts and spreaded this 'Proclamatio Napoleontis' over Western and Northern Europe.

-----------------------------------------------------

With this in mind, which countries would be formed or which countries would expand leading up to the 1800's?
 
The Enlightenment would work fine, actually if you look at the Code Napoléon there is Enlightenment influence at work, by Jacobites do you mean the Jacobin Club? If so it wouldn't have worked. The Jacobins ruled through chaos and fear, hence the la Terreur (Reign of Terror) and Napoléon was, if anything, ambitious and lawful. Also the Jacobins hated anything religions especially the Catholic Church, which would negate anything the Pope could say. If you mean the Jacobites as in the British Jacobite Wars I'd have to think more on that.
 
The Enlightenment would work fine, actually if you look at the Code Napoléon there is Enlightenment influence at work, by Jacobites do you mean the Jacobin Club? If so it wouldn't have worked. The Jacobins ruled through chaos and fear, hence the la Terreur (Reign of Terror) and Napoléon was, if anything, ambitious and lawful. Also the Jacobins hated anything religions especially the Catholic Church, which would negate anything the Pope could say. If you mean the Jacobites as in the British Jacobite Wars I'd have to think more on that.

I indeed meant the Jacobin Club, but only their system of the Centralized State. Napoleon still rules ambitiously and lawful and none of the Jacobins are ruling now. But I was talking about Napoleon trying adopting their idea of a Centralized State (in other words a state with central government in the capital with a further division into regions/states/provinces instead of lands ruled by counts, dukes, barons, etc. under a king) to the rest of Europe
 
In that case, then it would probably have been one of the strongest countries in Europe. And as long as Napoléon made it clear on how succession work, which he was smart enough to think about before hand. It certainly would have gon overwell with the populace, those who disliked the monarchy would have suported it, and all but the most stanch royalist would have been with him also as it would bring back the Church.
 
the more I think about this the more I like the idea, I still think that the Napoleonic wars is inevitable, so I'd have to think more how that would change, but two other consuls could help keep Napoléon from over extending the army
 
the more I think about this the more I like the idea, I still think that the Napoleonic wars is inevitable, so I'd have to think more how that would change, but two other consuls could help keep Napoléon from over extending the army

Yeah, the Napoleonic Wars OTL is Napoleon way of 'bringing the lesser states into the New Age by force if they will not adapt' ITL. Are you willing to write a scenario? I suck at writing out my ideas so...
 
claiming that there is no mention of Counts and Dukes in the Bible. Therefor the only 3 'legitimate' forms of government are the 3 'desired by God';

1) an Empire; like the Roman Empire mentioned countless times in the Bible
2) a Kingdom; like Egypt under the Faraos and biblical Isreal (Kind David, etc.)
3) a Republic, ruled by either a President, a Pope or a Consul; the Papacy was according to Napoleon a form of Republic
Honestly, no offense, I think this is a very silly argument that isn't likely to convince many people, nor do I think the Pope would be likely to endorse it. Among other issues, neither the Romans nor the Egyptians get a lot of good press in the Bible, and the mere mention of something in the Bible doesn't legitimize it; the Papacy is more of an elective monarchy than a Republic; and Catholics aren't huge on Biblical literalism. There's no mention of mayors of comptrollers in the Bible, either, so who would administer these superstates? Only positions mentioned in the Bible? So, like, all princes and governors?
 
As I Catholic, and a amateur historian, philosopher, and theologian I see no issue with it, And actually the less literal thing works to a greater advantage given the right person is arguing, since in the Old Testament the Israelites were warned about the evils of a king, and then got a large string of kings that proved that point, (while there was some good things) crushing taxes, insesant wars, adultry, the list goes on. Pharoes I kinda agree with you on, but as for Rome, Constantine the Great redeem Rome when he converted to Christianity, and all through the Dark and Middle Ages Rome was the ideal, shown by Charlemagne being crownd Emperor of the Romans in 800. There were also fully functional Catholic republics in Italy at the time, and I'm not talking about the Medici, and I think it would be easier for Napoléon to convince the Pope to make this proclamation than it was for him to proclaim Napoléon Emperor seeing as the last time a Pope proclaimed an Emperor that was that powerful it was Barbarossa, who turned around and said the Emperor was better than the Pope, and when that didn't work created the Antipope to replace the Pope. And I'd live to write a scenario, I have also been trying to come up with a POD for a book I've been trying to right and if it is ok with you this would work great.
 
Sorry forgot to throw this in, while the Pope was on the royalist side, politically he would have have been willing to work with the Republic, because most of the people were Catholic, this didn't happen because the Republic removed anything religious, including changing the calendar, activly hunted any clergy that did not swear alligence to the Republic before the Pope (the same issue is in China today) and severely harassed anyone who was religious (not just Catholics) because they were a "threat" to the state.
 
I'm not understanding the whole centralized state part. I mean the French Empire WAS centralized and fairly well organized. I'm not seeing how its not. Also, you would have to change Napoleon's personality completely to have him take a 'nice guy' stance. Napoleon would NEVER ask for approval from the Pope. He would demand it. Also, why would he give up territory? And why is Aragon independent? Is this supposed to be a DBWI or what?
 
The France part was, it kept that from the early Republic, the difference was in the during the Empire Napoléon apointed kings, duke, etc. for the newer territories. And a failed assassination atempt can change someones' personality dramatically and there was plenty of plots during the Consulate, but what I'm thinking (I don't speak for BryanIII) is less so a personality change and more that he does not take Fouché's advice to make an empire, France stays a consulate republic, and essentaly what keeps Napoléon in check is the other consuls, but more so public opinion, something Napoléon was huge on. As for the Pope you are right he would have told the Pope to make the proclamation, however nobody may have been think about this at the time because everyone was scared of him, if the Pope said no and Napoléon took action he would loose a huge amount of public support since a large portion of the populace was behind him at the time because he brought the Church back to France.
 
I'm not understanding the whole centralized state part. I mean the French Empire WAS centralized and fairly well organized. I'm not seeing how its not. Also, you would have to change Napoleon's personality completely to have him take a 'nice guy' stance. Napoleon would NEVER ask for approval from the Pope. He would demand it.

Trackah took the words right out of my mouth. Maybe if he lives longer then OTL not being in St Helena and such, the pope may name him Emperor in his final years of life (kinda like Charlemagne), but I'm not sure 'bout that at this moment.

Also, why would he give up territory?

As a token of 'not seeking war', the territory he gives away are just small portions of land in comparison to what he gets while 'forcing the lesser states into the Modern Age'


And why is Aragon independent?

ITL Ferdinand II of Aragon didn't marry Isabella of Castille. Afonso V of Portugal married with Isabella instead and the two nation were politically unified by Charles V, sparking a Portuguese rebellion in the North-East (Porto region and Galicia)
 
With a POD of Fernando II not marrying Isabel I this whole idea becomes ASB. There's no way Napoleon would still exist, or for that matter the same French Revolution, if the POD is over 300 years old! The butterfly effect wouldn't allow it.
 
Ok scenario: On the 17th of May 1804, Napoléon decides against creating the First French Empire (I have a reason working the bugs out of it now) Napoléon stays up all night to fix the problem of what happens after he dies, and on the 18th of May 1804 (the day he founded the Empire), reveals his new plains for how to keep the France a consulate after he dies, (which I do have it is a long and complicated process, like something he would come up with). The Pope also makes the Proclamatio Napoleontis. Austria, being the only powerful Catholic Monarchy feels threatened by this declares war and starts the War of the Third Coalition. Prussia and Great Britain, of course, join. France wins the war, and at the Peace of Preßburg a treaty is made. The Holy Roman Empire is dissolved, the Coalition will regognize the Republic of Italy, and the Republic of Rhineland. (Here I differ a little from were BryanIII is coming from as here Ferdinand II of Aragon did marry Isabella of Castille to form Spain) Napoléon was done but the other French Consuls and the Coalition was not. Napoléon became frustrated and excused himself as not to loose his temper infront of the diplomats. As such the final parts of the treaty was signed with out him (later he did sign it saying "because it the the will of the Republic") the Republic of Spain was split in two the South-Western portion became the Kingdom of Castille and the rest became the Republic of Aragon a French satellite like Italy and Rhineland.
 
Still the same problem.

This still leaves all of the other continental powers aligned against France as they are achieving continental hegemony. There won't be a lasting peace, and Napoleon not being Emperor isn't going to change any of that at all.

Radically restructuring the Political and Diplomatic landscape of Europe is exactly what got all of the powers to align against Napoleon and France in the first place. So him doing even more of that is not going to do anything but make the problems worse.

When your house is burning down the Answer is not More Fire.
 
This still leaves all of the other continental powers aligned against France as they are achieving continental hegemony. There won't be a lasting peace, and Napoleon not being Emperor isn't going to change any of that at all.

Radically restructuring the Political and Diplomatic landscape of Europe is exactly what got all of the powers to align against Napoleon and France in the first place. So him doing even more of that is not going to do anything but make the problems worse.

When your house is burning down the Answer is not More Fire.

Not to mention the whole independent Aragon thing. I mean the changes something like that would cause would be astronomical:eek:! I mean Napoleon would never exist. So lets just ignore the Aragon part.

But I agree here. It wasn't Napoleon who caused the Nations of Europe to band against the French Republic, it was the Republic itself. Its very existence was an abomination and threat in the eyes of Europe's Sovereigns. Not to mention the huge social, political and geographical (ie Border) changes made by the Republic. I doubt the Pope would sign off on this, and even if he did, no chance the rest of Europe would accept. This whole thing is pretty ASB.
 
Ok, since you guys didn't like my storytelling style I'll do it in list form, which will hopefully make my thinking more apparent. Keep in mind in my version Aragon is notindependant until Peace of Preßburg in 1805.


  1. 18th of May 1804, Napoléon stengthens the Consulate instead of creating the First French Empire
  2. 2nd of December 1804, the Pope issues the Proclamatio Napoleontis, he had as much choice in that as he did in the involvment coronation of Napoléon as emperor
  3. Instead of appointing his family as royalty in territories outside of France he sets up satelite republics
  4. The Wars of Coalition three through five happen mostly as they do in history (they use the Proclamatio Napoleontis as an excuse, just like the coronation) the big differences are the Peace of Preßburg splits Castile (a monarchy) in Aragon (a republic), and creates the Republic of Rhineland instead of the Confederation of the Rhine
  5. After the Battle of Borodino Napoléon does commit the Guard to the Battle crushing the Russian resistance and has no need to march to Moscow, he does this because he thinks that he needs a great victory to keep public support for the war, since he did not create the Empire Napoléon never relaized the full exten that the French people would follow him, Napoléon then uses the Grand Armée, to defeat the Duke of Wellingtion's in the Peninsular War (which is now the minor war between Castile and Aragon) when the Duke of Wellingtion is forced from Iberia, the War of the Sixth Coalition ends with the Peace of Moscow. The biggest affects of the Peace of Moscow is Moscow is forced to rejoin the Continental Blockade, so is the Kingdom of Castile, and it strengthens the Franco-Austrian Alliance
  6. On the 20th of March 1815, the Kingdom of Castile breaks the Peace of Moscow and renews the war with Aragon, this starts the War of Seventh Coalition (consisting of Castile, United Kingdom, Prussia, Sicily, Sardinia, Sweden and Portugal as the Seventh Coalition: against France, Aragon, Austria Italy Poland, Holland, Naples, Rhineland, Helvetica (Switzerland) and Denmark-Norway) Russia mantains an embargo against the Seventh Coalition but does not enter military action. Castile is invaded and the King is forced to abdicate recreating the Republic of Spain, Then Napoléon, focuses on breaking the Prussian army, once that happens public support in the United Kingdom is at an all time low, the common people have had enough death, the King has no hope of regaining his ancestrial home of Hanover and Ireland is in open revolt, the rest of Seventh Coalition knows they cannot fight Napoléon alone. On the 29th December 1818 everyone signs the Treaty of Zaragoza, end the Napoleonic Wars. Napoléon no longer believes that France as the capasity to mount an invasion of England, so he turns his attention to rebuilding French industry, society, and navy, Napoléon dies in 5th of May 1821, before e believe France is ready.
 
Top