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?
 
Last edited:
An odd idea: if the uprising is more successful and manages to at least hold out for a few more years (if not gaining critical momentum), could "Franz" Napoleon II, son of Napoleon and Marie Louise, end up fleeing his golden cage in Austria towards the north, and, by circumstance, be acclaimed as King of Poland?
 
If the Poles in Russia start doing too well for themselves, I would think Prussia and Austria would see a need to get involved.

Might a deal be cut with Prussia perhaps? Prussia annexes Saxony and the Wettins become Kings of Poland. Wettin Poland gains Krakow and Posen.
 
Could the Ottoman Empire under Mahmud II, sensing that an independent Poland would be in its strategic interests, decide to support the Polish in their struggle? After all, this is after the execution of Ali Pasha of Ioannina, after the Auspicious Incident, and the conflict in Greece is already winding down...
To boot:
The November Uprising (1830-31) marked a turning point in the history of Polish political emigration in general, and of the Polish presence in the late Ottoman Empire in particular. Following this armed rebellion against Russia in the semi-autonomous Congress Kingdom, the heartland of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, a mass emigration of political elites took place. Along with France and England, the Ottoman Empire became an important destination for nineteenth century Polish political emigration. Remarkably, the prophecy of a Ukrainian bard called Wernyhora had been gaining popularity since the November Uprising among Poles in exile as well as in the lands of partitioned Poland-Lithuania. The prophecy stated that after a long struggle the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth would regain independence when a Muslim watered his horse in the waters of the Vistula river. Although only a prophecy, Wernyhora’s words became for many a spiritual imperative to turn their hopes towards the Ottoman Empire.

The foundation of the Polish-Ottoman cooperation was set in Paris and London by representatives of the leading political faction in exile called Hôtel Lambert, members of which, in the 1830s, frequently met with the Ottoman diplomats. The Polish intelligentsia in exile regarded the Ottoman Empire as a natural ally against a common enemy, Russia. Poles fled to the Bosphorus from émigré communities in the west as well as from former Polish-Lithuanian territories hoping for Ottoman support in their efforts to regain independence. The number of Polish émigrés within Ottoman borders tended to increase during periods of armed conflict between any potential ally and Russia. Accordingly, major waves of Polish immigration to the Ottoman Empire occurred during the Hungarian Revolution of 1848, the Crimean War (1853-56), the January Uprising in 1863 and finally, during the Russo-Ottoman War (1877-1878).
 
Last edited:
Could the Ottoman Empire under Mahmud II, sensing that an independent Poland would be in its strategic interests, decide to support the Polish in their struggle? After all, this is after the execution of Ali Pasha of Ioannina, after the Auspicious Incident, and the conflict in Greece is already winding down...
To boot:

They still need to time to complete the military re-organization and start the Tanzimat, though joining in with a political/diplomatic effort to pressure Russia to submit to a (mediated, of course) independence for Poland would be something they'd be highly interested in. It would help them get back into good graces with the Western European nations if they're pressing for it as well (As France likely will), which Greece has soured.
 
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?

In OTL the Poles could not successfully defend even their own territory so an attempt to take (and defend) a noticeably bigger one (with a marginal support outside Lithuania) would mean spreading their limited resources even thinner.

With Russia had greater resources, Austria and Prussia maintaining friendly neutrality toward Russia, Louis Phillip being concerned with strengthening his own position and Britain remaining friendly to Russia "to prevent Poland, whom it regarded as a national ally of France, from becoming a French province of the Vistula", Polish chances had been lousy, to put it mildly. As "subjective factors" add numerous resignations and dismissals of the Polish commanders, political turmoil and limited enthusiasm of the Polish peasants.
 
In OTL the Poles could not successfully defend even their own territory so an attempt to take (and defend) a noticeably bigger one (with a marginal support outside Lithuania) would mean spreading their limited resources even thinner.

With Russia had greater resources, Austria and Prussia maintaining friendly neutrality toward Russia, Louis Phillip being concerned with strengthening his own position and Britain remaining friendly to Russia "to prevent Poland, whom it regarded as a national ally of France, from becoming a French province of the Vistula", Polish chances had been lousy, to put it mildly. As "subjective factors" add numerous resignations and dismissals of the Polish commanders, political turmoil and limited enthusiasm of the Polish peasants.
It's hard to succeed if you leave the initiative to the enemy and do nothing. Striking into the "lost territories" might be successfull or not, standing on Vistula and waiting for Russians could not lead to anything good.

But even if Poles successfully defeat, or rather utterly destroy, Dybitsch's army in 31, then the second army in 32 and possibly third one in 33, and for whatever reason Austria and Prussia doesn't intervene and Russia allows the Congress Kingdom go, it would leave Poland a war worn and impoverished country with ruined treasure and economy, great population losses, surrounded by enemies, without access to international markets and diplomatically isolated.

Perhaps the Spring of Nations would be a better time to launch an uprising.
 
It's hard to succeed if you leave the initiative to the enemy and do nothing. Striking into the "lost territories" might be successfull or not, standing on Vistula and waiting for Russians could not lead to anything good.

Attacking in a number of directions when you don’t have enough forces even for a successful defense is not a good strategy either. Actually, there were uprisings in the “lost territories” but they were on a small scale because outside Lithuania support base was quite limited.
 
It's hard to succeed if you leave the initiative to the enemy and do nothing. Striking into the "lost territories" might be successfull or not, standing on Vistula and waiting for Russians could not lead to anything good.

But even if Poles successfully defeat, or rather utterly destroy, Dybitsch's army in 31, then the second army in 32 and possibly third one in 33, and for whatever reason Austria and Prussia doesn't intervene and Russia allows the Congress Kingdom go, it would leave Poland a war worn and impoverished country with ruined treasure and economy, great population losses, surrounded by enemies, without access to international markets and diplomatically isolated.

Perhaps the Spring of Nations would be a better time to launch an uprising.

It's why I think a deal would need to be cut with Prussia regarding a takeover of Saxony and the Wettins getting Warsaw-Posen.
 
It's why I think a deal would need to be cut with Prussia regarding a takeover of Saxony and the Wettins getting Warsaw-Posen.

At that time independent Polish state, no matter who is its ruler, would be not in the Austrian, Russian or British (because of an anticipated French influence) interests. Within such a framework a proposed exchange hardly would be realistic both because Prussia could not be guaranteed against future Polish territorial demands and because it would mean a conflict with the neighbors. It is also a big question if in 1830s the Wettings would jump to such an offer: the Poles proved to be quarrelsome subjects and their king would be a powerless and moneyless puppet facing a war with, at least, Russia after which war he’d end up without any kingdom.
 
Russia is big winner in the long term. Successfull November Uprising is borderline miracle, but once it happen...
It was discussed on Polish forum. Genearl conclusion was that after such humiliation Russia would go through radical reforms. OTOH after compromitation in Poland, Western powers would underestimate power of Russia and would not be much concerned about Russia gradually getting stronger. One day they'll be surprised, very.
Poland OTOH would not do well, being landlocked and surronded by enemies.
 
Could the Ottoman Empire under Mahmud II, sensing that an independent Poland would be in its strategic interests, decide to support the Polish in their struggle? After all, this is after the execution of Ali Pasha of Ioannina, after the Auspicious Incident, and the conflict in Greece is already winding down...
To boot:

In 1830, the Ottomans had just lost a war vs Russia. And there is the threat of war vs Mehmed Ali Pasha of Egypt. Yeah no. Mahmud II won't risk a new war.
 
Last edited:
Top