Napoleon stays in power

Maybe I just haven't checked the pre-1900 forums a lot, but it seems their is never a lot of AH associated with a successful Napoleon, as in he manages to keep ruling France. I don't mean after Waterloo or after his defeat in 1814, I simply mean Napoleon getting to a point, say 1808-ish, were he just decides he's done conquering and will keep what he can get. Is this plausible, and if it is what would be the result? I'm simply curious as I am busy chugging through a history of the Napoleonic Wars and the thought occured to me.
 
I think the coalition offered a status quo peace to Napoleon 1813 or early 1814, giving France her "natural" borders, ie the Rhine, Alps and Pyrenees, while losing the colonies. Napoleon thought he could do better and refused. That could be your PoD I guess.

With the mines in Alsace-Lorraine and Wallonia under French control, I guess French industrialism will be heavier.
 
Hmm simple, have Nappy continue good relations with Russia, in otl he alienated Russia this tl he marries a Russian princess who is close to the tsar and the two develop much closer bonds, have Britain screw up against Russia and commit some blunder alienating Russia, get rid of Continental system, the. Russia can sell it's trees for money. So we have extremly clsoe Russo-Franco relations, Prussia is silenced and Austria keeps it's mouth shut. Thus Britain loses all allies on the continent, so Britain realizes it's *****d in Europe.
 
It depends on how long Napoleon stays alive without a steady diet of arsenic on St. Helena, who his eventual successor is and most of all he ever able to get his ego under control.
 
Napoleon has several ways to stay in power around 1808 up to 1813.

-First thing would be for Nappy to somehow avoid the Peninsula War. Having him support Ferdinand VII's coup against his father Charles IV could do the trick : Joseph Bonaparte wouldn't become King of Spain but Napoleon wouldn't have to use part of his troops to suppress (and fail) into repressing the Spanish rebellion.

-Another scenario involves Napoleon being able to avoid or to win the Russian Campaign. Keeping good relationship with Russia to avoid war would be... problematic. Napoleon and Czar Alexander I didn't get along. You could have the possibility of replacing Alexander I by his brother Constantine, who was an admirer of Napoleon, but I'm not sure it would led the Russians to support the Continental System if it is bad for their economy.
You can also have a different Russian Campaign that ends with a complete Napoleonic Victory if the Russian Commander in chief is not Barclay de Tolly. I'm trying to make a timeline on this subject, but I have trouble in finding the time and I'm still documenting myself not to make any big mistakes.
Barclay was very reluctant with fighting Napoleon directly as he feared (and that could be understood) l'Empereur would crush the Russians in an Austerlitz or Iena-like Battle. Thus, he kept avoiding direct confrontation with Napoleon for which he was heavily criticized, particularly by Bagration. However, Barclay was only replaced later in the campaign by Koutouzov and, by that point, Napoleon was already to deep in Russia to win. Not to mention Koutouzov followed Barclay's policy until the Winter came on and weakened the French army. However, if Barclay isn't the Russian commander in chief, the Russians generals would have had a more aggressive tactic and probably get a beating at Nappy's hands.

-Then you have the 1813 peace offer, where France was to keep only her natural borders : the Netherlands, the Papal States and every land outside of these borders would have returned to their original owners. To reach this, the peace negotiation would have to be successful.
Something similar could happen if there were no Leipzig or if Napoleon was able to somehow crush the Allies earlier.

In any case, the result of Napoleon staying in power would be this :
-A bigger France than OTL, who will have the coal mines of the Rhineland and Belgium. This also means a more industrialized France.
-Britain's hostility. The British didn't like Napoleon and, more importantly, wanted only one thing : that he got out of the picture.

Peabody-Martini said:
It depends on how long Napoleon stays alive without a steady diet of arsenic on St. Helena, who his eventual successor is and most of all he ever able to get his ego under control.

Considering the living conditions Napoleon had on St.Helena and the ages of death of his brothers, I think Napoleon could live at least a decade longer. This would make him die around 1831 or even after that. At that point, Nappy II would be in his 20s if he didn't die.
After that, everything depends on Nappy II. Around 20 is pretty young, but we have younger great rulers in other countries (like Victoria in Great Britain). No one knows what kind of monarch Nappy II could have been, so everything's possible.
 
Last edited:
Hmm simple, have Nappy continue good relations with Russia, in otl he alienated Russia this tl he marries a Russian princess who is close to the tsar and the two develop much closer bonds, have Britain screw up against Russia and commit some blunder alienating Russia, get rid of Continental system, the. Russia can sell it's trees for money. So we have extremly clsoe Russo-Franco relations, Prussia is silenced and Austria keeps it's mouth shut. Thus Britain loses all allies on the continent, so Britain realizes it's *****d in Europe.

But the Continental System was Napoleon's key strategy against Britain and one he wasn't willing to drop despite the questionable (At best) impact it was having in France's favour. The Russians were already breaking it a year or so before Napoleon marched into Russia because economic realities made it happen. Plus, the two couldn't agree on how Eastern Europe should be split, both sides wanting more than the other felt comfortable giving away. In order to prevent the conflict entirely, you'll need Napoleon to compromise at Tilsit in some fashion, using Prussia against Russia.
 
But the Continental System was Napoleon's key strategy against Britain and one he wasn't willing to drop despite the questionable (At best) impact it was having in France's favour. The Russians were already breaking it a year or so before Napoleon marched into Russia because economic realities made it happen. Plus, the two couldn't agree on how Eastern Europe should be split, both sides wanting more than the other felt comfortable giving away. In order to prevent the conflict entirely, you'll need Napoleon to compromise at Tilsit in some fashion, using Prussia against Russia.

Yeah but what you fail to realize is After Austerlitz the Russo-Franco relations were at an all time high, however Nappy angered Russia in many ways first while negotiations went on he married the Austrian princess and second the continental sytem hurt Russia because Russian nobility had none to buy their huge surprus of timber. So many protested, however you must realize by this time Russia despised Austria because the Austrians literally betrayed Russia during the third coalition plus most Russians did not trust Britain thinking of Britain as schemy bastards Also all of Russian society was based on France, the nobility acted, spoke, behaved, talked, etc like the French, intact many Nobles adored the French and many Russian nobles were sent to France for studying abroad. In fact had Nappy not brought continental system and allowed free reign in the East in return for an allaince. This would lead to a status quo in Europe.
 
most Russians did not trust Britain thinking of Britain as schemy bastards

But they still had to do business with them. That was the entire reason why the Continental System collapsed.

intact many Nobles adored the French and many Russian nobles were sent to France for studying abroad

Which changed during Napoleon's reign. Hell, he was even compared to the Anti-Christ by the Russians and several Russian officers were killed by their men because they spoke French. There was a large anti-French feeling due to the rise of Russian nationalism at the time.

In fact had Nappy not brought continental system and allowed free reign in the East in return for an allaince.

Why would Napoleon abandon all his ambitions in the East for Russia? If he abandoned Poland as Russia had wished without a fight, he'd lose a huge amount of prestige, something he refused to consider in OTL, much like simply abandoning the Continental System. Both would undermine his authority even if the latter would bring practical benefits.
 
Top