Edward Lewinski-Corwin, in his book The Political History of Poland, makes an argument for the failure of the November Uprising that happened in 1830, in Poland. He mentions the procrastination and lack of commitment of the Polish rebel leaders, principally that of interim dictator Jozef Chlopicki, who, underestimating the outreach of the uprising, decided to play the safer game and try to negotiate with Tsar Nicholas. Nick quite obviously refused any overtures, and took advantage of Chlopicki's reluctance and inaction to occupy strategic locations in Lithuania, Belarus, and western Ukraine from where his troops could assault Poland. So, if their leadership had been a bit more commited to the cause of full independence, could the Polish rebels have held off the Russian armies and defeated them in detail, possibly also instigating more revolt in the governorates of Lithuania, Minsk, Volhynia and Podolia (which happened IOTL)? Or was Poland's stituation, surrounded by not only Russia but also two other powers uninterested in seeing it free, too unfavourable for any sort of victory? IIRC, they still managed to win over the hearts of the French and British publics, so some sort offoreign intervention would be warranted in this case. Perhaps another large-scale war in central Europe?
What are the effects of an independent Poland on its surroundings for the rest of the 19th century?
How does this affect the 1848 revolutions? Could they be kicked a few years backward into the 1830's?
How would Poland develop politically?
What are the effects of an independent Poland on its surroundings for the rest of the 19th century?
How does this affect the 1848 revolutions? Could they be kicked a few years backward into the 1830's?
How would Poland develop politically?
Last edited: