Of Lions and Eagles: A Timeline

I would just like to point out that in 1753, the British did not have that much of India. It was still under the Nawab of Bengal, and so loosely under Mughal rule. Though that is something wrong with the basemap and nothing you have written.:)

Also, interested in the timeline, and will definitely follow.:D

Ah! Thank you. It was not my basemap, and admittedly I know too little of non-Western history to catch such errors. I would go back and edit it, but the time limit expired a while ago.



As I said, I don't know a lot about Indian history. That is one of the reasons I haven't posted anything about India. I recall Flocculencio mentioning that India and Europe were about the same in terms of military technology at the time, and that conquest was no certain ordeal. This is very interesting to me, but I haven't put in the effort to research it yet.
I've basically been stuck where I am. Writing wars plausibly is difficult, at least for me. I was given quite a bit of help and advice by various people in the Help and Feedback forum, but I haven't made the time to put it to use. I have some stuff written about after the coming war, but much less if at all about the actual war, for which I apologize. Politics is easier to write about than war, because politics is a lot more bullshit than war.
 
Ah! Thank you. It was not my basemap, and admittedly I know too little of non-Western history to catch such errors. I would go back and edit it, but the time limit expired a while ago.



As I said, I don't know a lot about Indian history. That is one of the reasons I haven't posted anything about India. I recall Flocculencio mentioning that India and Europe were about the same in terms of military technology at the time, and that conquest was no certain ordeal. This is very interesting to me, but I haven't put in the effort to research it yet.
I've basically been stuck where I am. Writing wars plausibly is difficult, at least for me. I was given quite a bit of help and advice by various people in the Help and Feedback forum, but I haven't made the time to put it to use. I have some stuff written about after the coming war, but much less if at all about the actual war, for which I apologize. Politics is easier to write about than war, because politics is a lot more bullshit than war.

Honestly, no worries. I'll enjoy this no matter what. I like this timeline and want to see where it goes.
 
Honestly, no worries. I'll enjoy this no matter what. I like this timeline and want to see where it goes.

Helios Ra

I'll echo that. Take you're time and make sure you're happy with what you put in. I've got it subscribed so will catch up with any updates.:D

Steve
 
So tonight I was struck by some inspiration which led to me write out my first proper outline of the war (in Europe). I also finished up a new update, which is admittedly another mostly irrelevant and brief one on oter things happening in Europe. I don't expect to change it much but I might flesh it out a little. I would expect the update within twenty four hours I think.
 
So tonight I was struck by some inspiration which led to me write out my first proper outline of the war (in Europe). I also finished up a new update, which is admittedly another mostly irrelevant and brief one on oter things happening in Europe. I don't expect to change it much but I might flesh it out a little. I would expect the update within twenty four hours I think.

Helios Ra

Great news, looking forward to it.

Steve
 
Revolution in Italy

In the Autumn of 1755, with leaders across Europe paralyzed by war and the threat of war, revolutionary leader Pasquale Paoli formally declared the independence of rebellious Corsica from Genoa, who had ruled the island for over four hundred years. The Corsican Republic’s remarkably liberal constitution called for free elections, which resulted in Paoli’s election to the head of the Corsican parliament. Corsica held a neutral position during the European War. Following the events of the war Britain, seeking more influence in the Mediterranean Sea to help counter France’s Continental Victories, recognized the fledgeling Republic and established diplomatic relations in 1764, despite Genovese protests. With no other major political backers the Republic would increasingly become a de facto British protectorate.

Corsica Map.png

Corsica Map.png
 
Caoster

I find what you say a bit disjointed. Basically if France wants to concentrate solely on a maritime war with Britain it doesn't want to fight Austria, I agree. However if its allied to Prussia and Britain to Austria then there is the possibility that war will become general and you seem to assume that is the case.

Prussia is something of a military giant, compared to its size. However its still very much a 2nd rank power. At the very least it will need to have subsidies from France, which will be expensive. Also if France doesn't attack either the Austrian Netherlands and/or western Germany Prussia will be very upset as its getting left on its own and it frees up the western German states, probably funded by Britain, to join in the war against Prussia.

If Prussia doesn't get aid via a French ground attack then it is likely to be ground down. Unless it decides not to fight and Austria not to seek the regaining of Silesia. [Suspect neither of those are likely events.

Answering some of you're points below.

Steve

Given that Prussia is the main ally, France is in a stronger position. Look at the point of view of Prussia. Prussia has traded Hannover, who's army was small, poorly led, and a huge liability, for France, the army that gave Prussia the hardest time in the Seven Years War. All else being the same, this is a substantially better position for Prussia. It was Prussian arms back by British funds that tied up huge amounts of French resources. Those resources are now freed up.

Those resources are freed provided that a) Prussia manages to survive and b) Austria and the continental allies don't aid Britain. Also the army that France has lost in return for getting Prussia's is the Austrian, which while not as well led is bloody big and has a pretty strong economy supporting it.

Why would France attack the Netherlands? If, as you say the whole point of the diplomatic revolution from France's perspective was to avoid a continental war to focus on Britain, there would be no reason to. She didn't do so in OTL, she has even less reason to TTL. And why would the Netherlands get involved in this war? The Netherlands would gain nothing from supporting the Austrians, and without French aggression seeking more of the low countries, the Netherlands has no motive to join either. If anything, the French could offer the Dutch a chunk of the Austrian Netherlands to coax them into joining the French. If France has no continental expansion ambitions, there is nothing to motivate a reformation of a Grand Alliance.

If France doesn't attack into Germany or the Netherlands then Prussia is likely to go down pretty quickly, which will free up both British and allied resources for the war against France.

The Dutch have an interest in keeping the southern Netherlands outside hostile control as a buffer. Austria, with its scattered territories is not seen as a threat. France, which even if it tries a purely maritime policy, isn't forgetting its continental aspirations, is. Therefore the Dutch, while they would prefer to stay neutral and make money will be dragged in if France attacks the southern Netherlands. Similarly they will not want to remove that buffer or angering the Austrians by allying with the French. Especially since this would put them at war with Britain and while their fleet is still powerful its not a match for the RN and as previous wars have shown geographically Britain can strangle their trade.

Prussia is more than capable of handling Austria and Hanover without any help from France.

It will need French funds to do this. More so its fighting at the least Austria, which it can't decisively defeat, Russia and most of western Germany if the French don't distract some forces.

Also, it was France that brought Sweden in against Prussia last time. Why would Sweden break the other way this time? Even if Sweden does join in against Prussia, she is not likely to do any better, given that Prussia has 1 fewer major opponent.

Pomerania, which is split between Sweden and Prussia and a source of tension between the two.

Poland will stay on the sideline. The Sejm will see to that, with Prussian subsidies and their typical gridlock. Saxony herself will be steam rolled per usual the first month of the war.

Poland will stay on the side-lines most noticeably, but Russia won't. Frederick may be able to do a quick smash and grab on Saxony as he did OTL and this was important for enabling him to hold on until war weariness, British victories in the maritime struggle and the death of the Czar saved him. However Prussia faces markedly greater problems TTL.

Overall I don't think France can hang Prussia out to die as it will free up the allies, possibly fairly quickly, to concentrate against France as they did in Louis XIV's time. It must send at least a hell of a lot of funds and probably troops as well to pin alliance resources in western Germany.

Steve
 
Caoster

I suggest you read up on the war as you seemed to know very little about it. Yes there was an humilating early defeat for the Duke of Cumberland but the British response was to immediately send a new army and new subsidies to other powers in western Germany. As well as the subsidies that helped keep the Prussians in the field.

I'm confused about what you said earlier because you said France wanted a solely maritime war but at the same time suggested they would send armies east. Its sounds like you're presuming that France will ignore events on the continent, including not even sending subsidies to Prussia? Which is a drastically different situation to OTL. [On the other hand you're also talking about Hanover being a bargaining chip, which would imply you think France will take a hand?:confused:].

Steve

If you find what I say disjointed, that is because you clearly know nothing about the Seven Years war in Europe.



Why would she need the subsidies? Prussia managed the first three years of the war against the combined might of Austria, France, Sweden, Russia and the Holy Roman Empire fine by herself, without help, and with the boat anchor of Hanover folding at the first sign of French troops. All that happened OTL, and Prussia managed to fight on another 4 years.



Why? She didn't go down OTL with out a British ground attack. The only reason Prussia pulled out of Bohemia was to face off against the invading French armies that were heading right for her, after they singlehandedly knocked Hanover out of the war in one battle. That won't be happening TTL. Or rather, it will happen, but its ok because Prussia and France are on the same side.




You seem to be missing my point. Prussia managed to survive OTL against the combined forces of Austria, France, Russia, Sweden, and the Holy Roman Empire just fine without outside forces. TTL, she has a major continental ally. How is this anything but an improvement for Prussia?



Once again, why? Prussia is facing off against all the same opponents she did OTL, with out the 600lb gorrilla France at her back.

Explain to me how France's participation in the campaign of 1757 is anything but a massive victory for Prussia. France knocked Hanover out of the war in 6 weeks, forcing Prussia to pull back from Bohemia to defend Brandenburg. TTL, they are on the same side. Prussia keeps going full steam ahead into Austria, and Hanover is down for the count. There will be no Ferdinand of Brunswick leading a counter invasion to rescue Hanover. There will be no Franco Imperial invasion of Saxony, no battle of Rossbach. Without the Franco-Imperial invasion of Saxony, Prussia keeps up the pressure on Austria. This means no opening for counter invasion of Silesia by Austria. Or maybe Austria does it anyway. That means Bevern doesn't fight the battle of Breslau alone, and Frederick is there to support. Meaning we get another victory on the scale of Leuthen, but bigger. Prussia has just crushed Austria completely in the field again. Now most likely taking Prague sometime in 57. France and Prussia are on the same side. Every major battle of the war where Prussia and France fight has been negated. The strongest opponent Prussia faced is now her ally. Hanover is now a huge bargaining chip in France/Prussia's hands, that George II will give a lot to get back.




You haven't explained why either side would attack the other. France didn't attack the Netherlands OTL, and the Netherlands didn't attack the French OTL. They stayed away from each other, because neither had anything to gain. Explain one reason why this would change. Without a change from OTL, the Netherlands stay neutral, so they aren't part of the equation.




Why would it need French funds to do this? It fought them all to a standstill, including France, for the first 3 years of the war. The strongest power that was against it is now its ally. It is fighting the same opponents it fought OTL, minus the one opponent that was actually a threat to it.




Sweden was France's ally and entered the war at their prompting, via massive subsidies. Why would Sweden change sides TTL? But even if they did, Prussia handled them with supreme ease OTL.



You keep saying "Prussia faced markedly greater problems TTL" but you don't say why. Assuming she faces all the same opponents she did OTL(which I don't believe), she is still massively better off not having to fight France.




Why? You haven't said why Prussia needs French help and resources. Prussia is fighting against fewer powers then OTL. She's now fighting on one fewer front entirely. Prussia isn't constantly having to jump between Austria/Russia/France. TTL its just Austria and Russia.
 
This is a fascinating debate (not to mention it keeps my thread bumped), so I don't want to interrupt too much.

Caoster, what about Dutch-garrisoned fortresses in the Austrian Netherlands? Can the French really be expected to let them be in an invasion?
Also, where did you get those figures for troop strengths? I would love to get my hands on it.
 
This is a fascinating debate (not to mention it keeps my thread bumped), so I don't want to interrupt too much.

Caoster, what about Dutch-garrisoned fortresses in the Austrian Netherlands? Can the French really be expected to let them be in an invasion?
Also, where did you get those figures for troop strengths? I would love to get my hands on it.

Helios Ra

Sorry, we have rather hi-jacked the thread.:eek:

Caoster is correct in one point in that it is some years since I read up on the conflict, so working from memory and no books on it to hand.Taken a quick look at the Wiki entry, which does kind of match the French numbers, although this was one of their problems. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Hanover_(1757)

This however supports my memory that he is wrong on a number of other points. Forces from Hesse and Brunswick would still have been in the force, especially since they were traditional allies of the anti-French bloc in Germany. Interesting OTL, before the alliance with Prussia there was a plan to hire 50000 Russian troops to defend Hanover and the region. Don't know what they would have done TTL.

One thing I was confused about was what strategy he was assuming for France as it was unclear whether he was talking about a purely maritime one or the traditional attack on its eastern enemies. It now seems he is assuming that it will attack western Germany but not attack the Austrian possessions in the Netherlands? Don't know how practical this is either logistically or politically let alone militarily. A lot would depend on the butterflies but the simplest answer would probably be Britain subsidies the allies forces defending both regions, which with Austria as an ally will mean a lot more troops available. As I have said repeatedly, if the French attack the Austrian Netherlands, and difficult to see them attacking east without doing so, the Dutch will be drawn in by both treaty and self-interest.

A lot would of course depend on butterflies. Would Cumberland still be in charge or would it have a better leader? He came close according to the report to holding out until his nerve went when the French were on the verge of withdrawing so a different commander with a bit more strength could be markedly more successful. Will Pitt still come to power. Britain will be markedly weaker without his drive and organisation but he did have a definite bee in his bonnet about not committing British troops [as opposed to funds] to the continent.

Steve
 
You are completely wrong on this. Brunswick was tied through numerous marriages and long service to Prussia. The only counter example was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_Louis_Ernest_of_Brunswick-Lüneburg. Who fought for the Austrians against his brothers in the War of Austrian Succession, but was not a participant in the Seven Years war, because of the Dutch policy of Neutrality(he had been chosen their Captain general in the interim).

I will grant you that some Hessian may have been available to the British, but it will be up to you to explain which.

Hesse-Kassel will not be, and they were by far the largest contigient of Hessians, as their leader Frederick_II,_Landgrave_of_Hesse, had pledged personal service to Frederick.

I can find no easy reference Anhalt-Zerbst, Ansbach-Bay

I think you're getting confused between Brunswick the state and Brunswick the general.


An interesting possiblity, I request you provide a citation for this.

I could point out that you haven't supplied any for any of you're assumptions. Don't have a citation because, as you should have realised if you read my post it was a surprise to me. It was a brief entry in the Wiki entry for the 1757 French invasion.

What treaty requires the Dutch to fight for the Austrian Netherlands? And what self interest is there for the Dutch to die defending Hapsburg lands? The Austrian War of succession went on for 5 years before the Dutch joined in. Regarding attacking east, they did so OTL easily. You have to remember that rivers are the main highways in this period. The French forces will move east into Cologne and Kleves, just as they did in the Austrian Succession, and then north east from there. The Wesel-Kleve garrison makes a great jumping off point for this.

If you are confused, it was your fault. I was responding to your post regarding the French goals or desire, and quoted you several times(though some of those posts are months old). If you would like my own summation, I will give it.

I made the mistake of assuming you would actually read my post. I notice this is the 1st time you have actually answered the question I've been asking.

The war begins, like OTL, on the us Frontier. Prussia, deciding war is imminent, decides to strike first at Saxony and then Austria as per. This catches everyone by surprise, including their allies(it did OTL). The French begin their mobilization. Their primary and only enemy in their mind is Britain, everything else is a sideshow. However, Britain's King is also Hanover's elector, and Hannver is the one big, valuable and vulnerable target for the French army that the British navy can do nothing about. At the same time, France calls up her allies in the Palatine and Wurtemberg, who's armies begin mustering. Like France, neither is ready to act before 1757, but will form a counterweight to the rump Reichsarmee and the Bavarians. 1757 goes initially much like I have already written. Once Hanover is down, the French are free to turn back to the Austrian Netherlands, if they feel like it. But the Austrian Netherlands have very little to no offensive power, and not much ability to resist. If the French choose, it will be a replay of Saxe's campaigns of 46-48. But honestly, with Hanover down and the Rheinland secure, there isn't much reason to. The French do not want to antagonize the Dutch, and the Dutch(having learned from the War of Austrian Succession), do not see any benefit to joining to prop up the Austrians. Prehaps the French can temp the Dutch with pieces of the Austrian netherlands, I'm not sure how wedded the Dutch were to neutrality, but I suspect fairly strongly. They are surround on all sided by enemy or enemy held territory, and the British navy off their shores.

After winter the Prussian invasion of Bohemia goes per OTL intially, with the defeat at Kolin causing him to pull back and regroup.

July of 1757 things start to diverge more. The second French Army, under Soubise, crosses the Rhein and links up with their allies, to face the rump Reichsarmy. The French army alone numbers 24,000, with her allies and auxilliaries it will be over 40,000(Palatine and Wurttembergers). Facing her is the Reichsarmee, (OTL Paper strength of 50,000, but never had more than 25,000 thousand in the field OTL, and that was with the Palatine and Wurtemberg contingents, who are not there), plus 8,000 additional Austrian troops. The French defeat the Reichsarmee, and Saxony is more secure then ever.

Frederick is please by this(OTL this caused him to pull out of Silesia, because those two armies joined up to invade Saxony). He is able to depose his troops as wishes, and wait for the Austrians.

The Austrians are now faced with a tough choice. Divert more troops to Bavaria and the Reichsarmee, or keep your forces against Frederick. It doesn't really matter. The troops Austria had OTL would win again Bevern at Breslau, without Frederick there. TTL, this does not happen.

And this is where it gets pretty detailed, if you want specifics, you'll have to look them up. Sometime in late August or early September, Frederick will be able to bring the Austrians to battle(he does not leave to Saxony on Aug25 per OTL). Frederick will get his Leuthen, but on a grander scale(it will not be 28,000 Prussians vs 70,000 per OTL, with 6,500 Austrian killed and wounded, and about 21,500 Austrians were taken prisoners the day of the battle and during the following days. The Prussians captured 51 flags and 116 guns. The Prussians lost in killed 1,141, in wounded 5,118 ) TTL it will be 56,000 Prussians(the force Frederick had before spliting it in the face of the Saxon invasion, against 95,000 Austrians(Nasdady force will still be there, and will not have gone to Moys, Winterfeldt will not die). So for easy of numbers, we can roughly double the outcomes(but I will be lenient on Austrian prisoner numbers). Call it 3,000 Prussians killed, 10,000 wounded, to 13,000 killed and wounded Austrians and 35,000 prisoners. Austria has lost half of her entire bohemian forces, and Prague is now wide open to Frederick.

Frederick will take Prague, going into winter quarters there and gather additional funds and troops in Bohemia, clearing out any remenant forces in the fall.

I suspect at this point diplomacy takes over. Maria Theresa has always been willing to cut a seperate deal, and over the winter some agreement will be reached. Prussia will get the rest of Austrian Silesia, and Saxony, and peace out of the war, leaving France holding Hanover and staring at Britain across the channel.

That's a possible line of events but you are assuming no effects from the butterflies which is risky. Also you're assuming that Prussia will

And that's it for me. I'm not posting anymore to this thread, because I'm tired of writing detailed researched thought out threads in response to vague generalizations and hand waving responses from stevep.

You have shown no signs of 'detailed researched thought out threads' prior to today. Instead you have posted assumptions that you gave little or no breakdown to, personal attacks and comments that suggested you paid little attention to my posts. I suggest we end this now.

Steve




Yes, Cumberland will still be in charge. It will take a massive defeat for George II to pull the plug on him, and nothing OTL short of Kloster-Zeven did, why would this change?

You have offered not a single specific detail or argument to anything I've written, instead you repeat that you're "confused" about my points(which actually were my responses to your points regarding french motivations). Have fun.
 
Developments in America

About November 1754 to Mid-June 1755, North America

France inflamed the already burgeoning crisis by dispatching regulars to Canada, stoking fears of invasion in the northern British colonies. Increased pressure on Parliament lead to Major General Edward Braddock being granted the command of British forces in the Colonies. Arriving in November of 1754, he declined to launch an expedition to the Ohio Country until the winter had passed. In the meantime, the British navy harassed French commerce and commenced a blockade of French ports.

In the Spring of 1755 Braddock led his expedition of some 2,500 regular and colonial forces into the Ohio Country, aiming to seize the French fortifications that had previously resisted. The Canadien commanding at Fort Du Quense, Gautier Odon de Saint Marc, having heard of the incoming British force, led an ambush against the British rather than face them in a seige. His native allies who made up the bulk of his detachment opposed the move against a superior force, only reluctantly agreeing to participate. Prior to the engagement however they abandoned de Saint Marc. He was killed when his remaining force of mostly Canadiens was discovered by the British while attempting to retreat. Braddock reached Fort Du Quense in mid-June, accepting the surrender of the negligible French garrison after less than a day of negotiations. Britain had already gained the upper hand in North America.

braddock.gif

 
So it's certainly been a while, but I was struck with the urge to write tonight. I actually got quite a bit more done than just this tonight, but I wouldn't want to info-dump and then find out something was too implausible. Forgive some convergent names or behavior, but I do have a soft-spot for parallelism and... inversion, perhaps, would be the right word?
 
The European Theatre Opens

About January 1755 to Mid-November 1755, Europe

King George II of Great Britain and his nephew King Frederick II of Prussia had two things in common: both ruled swathes of land in northern Germany, and neither wanted to lose them in the looming conflict. George’s Hanover was close to France on the Continent, and even closer to France’s ally Prussia. The Convention of Saint Petersburg significantly allayed his fears, but only made Frederick more paranoid about foreign threats. In spite of a top-rate military, Prussia was nevertheless lacking in strategic depth and recalled well enough the horrors of the Thirty Years’ War to underestimate the danger of foreign occupation.

As news of defeats in the Ohio Country and Acadia reached Versailles and its position in North America grew weaker, Louis XV’s government in mid-1755 concluded that a strike against Hanover would force Britain to divert resources at its king’s insistence. Between Hanover and France lay the Austrian Netherlands however, and the Austrians were allies of the British. Crossing to reach Hanover would certainly bring Austria into the war. Levies were raised in France and began to be massed on the border in September, stoking Austrian fears. As Austria grew more wary, so did Prussia. France planned an invasion for the late spring of 1756, hoping to launch a long but far-reaching campaign through the Austrian Netherlands and Hanover. Prussia was to be approached within weeks to be asked to join in this effort.


Unfortunately for the French, Frederick II launched a preemptive strike against Austria, both misinterpreting the French military presence on the Austrian border as the sign of an imminent campaign and wishing to seize the initiative. Some 70,000 Prussians crossed the Prusso-Saxon border on September 24th, 1755. Saxony had long been close to Austria, and its elector Augustus was also the elected King Augustus III of Poland-Lithuania. Prior to Prussia’s acquisition of SIlesia during the War of the Austrian Succession there had been rumors of the sale of land in northern Silesia to Saxony, linking its lands with that of Poland and surrounding Prussia. By seizing Saxony Frederick reasoned that he could eliminate a long-standing threat and strengthen his position relative to Austria.
With this action declarations of war came rolling in. First Austria on Prussia for its act of aggression, then France on Austria for its declaration of war on its ally. Great Britain followed up by finally declaring war on France after some two years of unofficial hostilities. Russia meanwhile mulled its options, finally declaring war on Prussia and France to fulfill its obligations to Britain after Saxony’s surrender in mid-November. The first stage of the war in Europe had ended, with only more to come.
 
Top