No restoration of France as Great Power 1815

[Susano]

IOTL, the Conference of Vienna came to the conclusion that it was foremostly important to keep those pesky democrat movements down, and have a stable Europe with a balance of power. To achieve this, France was not punished but retained its pre-revolutionary borders, lest it become a centre of instability.

So, the question here is: What if the European powers decided otherwise? What if France has to cede territory, pay reperations, etc.? How could it come to this, and how would things go from there?

 

[stevep]

IOTL, the Conference of Vienna came to the conclusion that it was foremostly important to keep those pesky democrat movements down, and have a stable Europe with a balance of power. To achieve this, France was not punished but retained its pre-revolutionary borders, lest it become a centre of instability.

So, the question here is: What if the European powers decided otherwise? What if France has to cede territory, pay reperations, etc.? How could it come to this, and how would things go from there?

Susano

Depends on exactly what you mean. Barring an extremely draconian and highly unstable peace in which the various victors split the country between them any rump France maintaining its core territories will still be a great power. Its population and wealth, plus some of the changes resulting from the revolution will ensure that. You could see some border areas carved off, say an independent Brittany and a kingdom of Lorraine, say including Alsace and Bar along with changes on the Flanders and Savoy borders. However that's about the limit that might be practical I think without prolonged and ultimately successful national discontent striving for reunification. Anything more extreme would tend to fall apart pretty damned quickly I think as continued unrest will require continuous, large and expensive occupation forces. Very quickly the various powers will get tired to the strain of that.

Steve

 

[Susano]

Oh, I agree, any realistic peace will leave France in a position to eventualyl resume the statius of a Great power. However, teh difference is that IOTL this was fully intended so in Vienna, and France had to mad eno cocnessions for the revolution and Napoleon.

As for what could realistically be done, at maximum: 1648 border to the Netherlands and the German Confederation, losing Corsica (to Sardinia-Savoy, presumably), losing Rousillion and some other Pyrenee territories to Spain, and losing some ports (Calais, of course) to the UK. At the utmost, maybe teh Provence to Savoy, too, and Britanny to the UK or as British vasall.

Rump France still is enough to form a great power, but it would be a noticeable difference from history.

 

[Kvasir]

Could Franche-Comte be given it's independence? Would they be able to weaken France by giving the regions more autonomy, eg Normandy.

 

[Susano]

Could Franche-Comte be given it's independence? Would they be able to weaken France by giving the regions more autonomy, eg Normandy.

Sure, balkanisation is another way to do this, but I dont think you could stipulate autonomy of the regions on France. The post-Vienna period saw IOTL many "ideological" interventions to prevent democratic systems, but aside form hat the 19th century was also the one where teh concept of state souvereignity was held highest, so... it woul djust be too much of an internal affair in France, I guess.

But Balkanisation could work. Sure there would be a nationalist movement aiming at reunification, but then there was one in Germany, too, and it failed.

 

[Boom22]

Britain saw France as an important strategic asset if it was not torn apart, it saw the riseing power of Prussia as a threat and needed a way to prevent Prussia from getting to the Channel.

 

[ImperialVienna]

Restoration of Burgundy, raised to a Kingdom of course, as a seperate Habsburg crown under [insert Habsburg here]. Burgundy would have traditional Burgundy, the Austrian Netherlands, Luxemburg, and parts of eastern France and perhaps the Rhenish Palatinate.

 

[Susano]

Britain saw France as an important strategic asset if it was not torn apart, it saw the riseing power of Prussia as a threat and needed a way to prevent Prussia from getting to the Channel.

Rising Power? Of Prussia? in 1815, after having survived the Napoleonic with more luck than anything else? Hardly.

 

[Earling]

Russia is a growing British concern but in 1815 what state France is in has relatively little importance for that rivalry.

Determining what happens seems to depend on two questions.

1. Did France have areas that really did want to be independent and did these areas have the economic and military potential to remain independent for any length of time in the face of a resurgent Paris.

In my view she didn't. It seems any area which is made independent will fall very quickly to 'Rump France' if unassisted. Paris (which shall remain the heart of France) has the military, economic and cultural strength to ensure this.

2. Given the costs of occupation and maintaining large armies how long are the European powers going to maintain any such carve up through force?

The British will keep British soldiers in France for as short a time as they can get away with. Maintaining an independent Britanny, something which would require a substantial standing army, as Royal Navy couldn't enforce it alone, seems more a pipe dream than a policy which would actually be undertaken.
Prussia? Well as you say, Prussia had survived more by luck than judgement. She is busy digesting her gains from the Napoleonic war. She doesn't want another war which will risk much and see her gain little.
Austria? She has potential, but the costs of the Napoleonic war were considerable upon her and while she might like to maintain a force ready to oppose Paris she is unlikely to be able to do so. She has her own ambitions in Germany, Italy and the Balkans to consider.
Russia? Kind of distant. About to become more interested in expansion into Asia rather than messing about with the order of things beyond the Rhine.
Spain is kind of occupied with her own affairs as well.

France is probably even more politically unstable but recovery from the bloodshed of the Napoleonic wars probably takes most of Louis XVIII's reign and prevents an immediate return to war. Sometime in the late 1820's anger probably reaches fever pitch and you have another war to recover the lost territories. How Europe will react is debatable, but I suspect they are not in position to act in concert, nor are they willing to over-extend themselves to support independent little states that were probably never going to last anyway.

 

[Susano]

Did France have areas that really did want to be independent and did these areas have the economic and military potential to remain independent for any length of time in the face of a resurgent Paris.

As for the latter, it is well possible with foreign powers backings aid region/state. As for the former, Britanny maybe would not have minded, hence the suggestion. It certainly makes more snee then taking Normany or Acquitaine for historical reasons, heh.

However, you are overlooking that Germany had about no areas that wanted to be independant, either, and yet all were, and somehow that setup survived for 56 years after the Congress. I do not think any great power would really directly take French territory, but independant states could be set up on French territory, and those would have a chance at surviving. At the time France has dragged itself out of the Napoleonic Devastation, so have Prusisa, Austria and Russia - the Holy Alliance decidcated to keep the Order of Vienna. And in such a TL the independance o fthe enw states would be part of that Order.

 

[Thande]

One way to make this more likely would be to avoid Spencer Perceval being shot: he was even more hardline on France than Lord Liverpool, and certainly less likely to argue with any Russo-Austro-Prussian plan to kick postwar France in the nuts. This also has impact on the War of 1812, and probably more violent Radical and Luddite insurrections, as Perceval had Liverpool's authoritarian instincts and was even more unpopular.

 

[Rex Britanniae]

The only part of France that I can see being easily seperated from the rest is Corsica, which would probably go to Piedmont-Sardinia. Even that is not a major territorial change.

 

[Nietzsche]

As far as territory goes: Giving the Aslace to Prussia? French-Flanders to the Dutch?

Britanny is given autonomy? Britain takes all of France's colonies?(I don't remember if that happened IOTL, so someone please say so if it did).

 

[Susano]

As far as territory goes: Giving the Aslace to Prussia?

Its... Nek who usually rants about that clichee? Ah, no, Pervez it was.

 

[stevep]

Britanny is given autonomy? Britain takes all of France's colonies?(I don't remember if that happened IOTL, so someone please say so if it did).

Think most of them were returned at the peace. Along with most of the occupied Spanish ones. The only power that really lost territory overseas to Britain was the Netherlands! [Ceylon, S Africa and Malaya]

Steve

 

[stevep]

Guys

Forgot about Corsica. Definitely a possibility and it could also have interesting implications for any Bonaparte resurgence. [Since their ancestral homeland is no longer French territory].

Think Brittany is a no-go. It was conservative and royalists as well as deeply Catholic so would not be that suitable a British protectorate. Also there was bad feeling towards Britain from raids in the 7 Years War.

A revival of Burgundy might be a possibility, as that would put a major power if including the Netherlands. However can't see any way that this would be under a Hapsburg. For one thing that would mean deposing of the house of Orange and be unpopular with the Dutch given that so much of their identity was based on their war of independence from that dynasty. Also it makes the Hapsburg's too powerful so is likely to cause a lot of hostility amongst the other powers. Furthermore, while less important than in earlier years you would have the Protestant Netherlands combined with a sizeable Catholic population.

Could also see Spanish gains in the south although given how weak and disunited Spain was whether it could hold that territory would be a difficult point.

Steve

 

[Susano]

Well, you could have a Burgundy with only the Southern Netherlands, but even that might be unrealistic. However, a Burgudny consisting of Franche Comte and Bourgogne might work. The Southern Netherlands (in whosever hands they fall) could extend their borders to the 1648 borders. And well, Lorraine (including Baar and the Three Bishoprics) and the Alsace. That could be possibilities on the Eastern Border.

 

[Valdemar II]

You could also create a Burgundy in South France there the original Burgundy lay.

 

[Rex Britanniae]

They might no longer care somuch for it as they would have hundreds of years prior to this, yet perhaps England could have Calais.

 

[67th Tigers]

Rising Power? Of Prussia? in 1815, after having survived the Napoleonic with more luck than anything else? Hardly.

Yes, Napoleons return "spoiled" what was shaping up to be a war between Britain, Royalist France and Austria on one hand and Prussia, Russia and Bonapartist French on the other. Movements such as the British recreation of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and the half hearted (and eventually blocked) British attempt to create a united Italy were part of the maneouvering leading up to this never to be war.

This itself would make an interesting PoD.