The Grand Duchy of Salonika (Napoleonic)

I had France's holdings in Anatolia and in India mean that they never went after Algiers. I think the Bonapartes would continue to have better relations with the Dey than did the Bourbons who in part resented Algiers' claims on French moneys because the debt was run up by Napoleon.

I doubt it: (a) stomping the Barbary pirates once and for all; (b) more prestige for France, and (c) area denial against potential British interests. Tunisia almost became a British protectorate IOTL, due to influence from Malta.

Regarding lack of mention of the US, I guess it was because it was a dream and the focus was on the immediate area.

I was thinking France would end up pre-eminent in Southern India, in alliance with Mysore, but that other holdings existing AT THAT TIME would remain British,

That would require a PoD in the Seven Years' War, since Britain aquired the Carnatic at that time, which would cause massive butterflies.

Something more plausible would be for the Anglo-Mysore wars to go wrong for Britain. Something to do with the Third Anglo-Mysore War, probably, since the Fourth one would be too late...

but that British expansion in the area of India would be confined to the East; Assam, Burma etc.

That would require the Anglo-Maratha Wars to go badly wrong for Britain too. Or at the very least, the Third one.

The problem with that is, (a) Britain without India wouldn't be that much of a threat to a Napoleonic Empire, and (b) what's to stop the BEIC from trying again later on.

Of course, the whole question of what on Earth has gone on in Central and South America needs addressing - especially if Joseph is secured on the throne in Madrid, I don't see France letting all of Spain's colonies become independent.

To be honest, I'm not sure how much France could do in such a scenario, unless they had made some kind of agreement with Britain to allow Franco-Spanish troops to go to some parts, and leave others as a British SoI.

If anything, Britain would be stuffing the pockets of the local revolutionary leaders to (a) ensure market access, and (b) prevent Napoleonic influence.

You may well see Cold War style proxy wars happening in some countries, between British- and French-backed factions...
 
A country can get things in a peace treaty it hasn't secured in a war as long as it has kept its forces in action in that theatre.

Similarly, a treaty can require someone to give up something they have, but not to the other side directly.

I know that in the dream Delhi definitely wasn't British, because that was the destination of the GER

I'll look some more into the India wars and see what makes sense

Regarding the Americas, a Bonapartist Spain would be in a better position to fight off some of the rebel movements, since it would imply direct French help. Especially after a general peace in Europe, there would be surplus French armies and a need to do something with men whose whole professional lives have been as soldiers

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Definitely a good point, but would Francis have accepted that, or would he have pressed for a crown of Austria as well? I could see it being a part of the final treaty that sorted things out

Yes, I think one kingdom would be enough.
Being the wearer of Saint Wenceslas' venerable crown raises him above Germany's new kings and would give him a good claim to being the first among them.
A new Austrian kingdom would be rather counterproductive.

Similarly I was thinking Austria (sic) could get Trieste back that way. France doesn't NEED the entire Adriatic coast. I'm going to do some reading up on the Illyrian province anyway, to see what exactly it did consist of, and if it was all equal

I hope so. It would help to cement Bohemia-Austria's relative independency.

By the way, the new reduced Habsburg dominion seems to resemble Ottokar II's empire. Ironically, he was also the archenemy of Rudolf I, the first royal Habsburg ruler.
 
Some good thinking here.

I agree that Austria wouldn't be a separate crown to Bohemia, in fact you're likely to see the Habsburgs proclaiming themselves more and more as Bohemian rather than the OTL "Austrian Empire". Which would have an interesting impact on Poland vis a vis Prussia.

I can't see a strong French India but a French backed anti-British Indian Alliance seems reasonable.

With a Bonapartist Spain the Spanish colonies will now get a lot more support from the UK in their independence efforts so probably a British backed Mexico but with others gaining greater autonomy under Spain to forestall a repeat and keep them in the Spanish/French orbit. I feel that the UK will keep the French Caribbean possibly joining all the Guianas into a single state.
Britain's relationship with the US may continue warming especially if it guarantees Louisiana as US (if Mexico is British allied) or may be rather frosty indeed if Mexico has strong support and maintains California & Texas.

I keep seeing a tripartite world of British coalition vs French Empire & vassals vs Russian allies with Russia & Britain allied in Europe but opposed in Asia and America.
Sweden might be maintaining neutrality between Russia and France; and I can certainly see them aiming towards a Baltic alliance to do so.
 
I would take care not to overstate the ethnic cleansing of Muslims from Russian-annexed regions. For all that happened to the Circassians, the general rule of Russian conquest was a much lighter hand than typically found among other colonial powers, much less among colonial powers that were actively exporting settlers. It's worth noting that much of the Caucusus, the region around the southern Urals, and Central Asia are still full of Muslims. Go back to the equivalent time period in OTL and the Crimea had a serious population as well.

There are only so many Russian settlers to go around. We should expect the Russians to be displacing fewer Muslims as their Muslim territories increase, by simple virtue of the colonists being more diffuse. Of course Constantinople/Istanbul probably has yet to recover from its capture and nigh-inevitable sacking.
 
I would take care not to overstate the ethnic cleansing of Muslims from Russian-annexed regions. For all that happened to the Circassians, the general rule of Russian conquest was a much lighter hand than typically found among other colonial powers, much less among colonial powers that were actively exporting settlers. It's worth noting that much of the Caucusus, the region around the southern Urals, and Central Asia are still full of Muslims. Go back to the equivalent time period in OTL and the Crimea had a serious population as well.

There are only so many Russian settlers to go around. We should expect the Russians to be displacing fewer Muslims as their Muslim territories increase, by simple virtue of the colonists being more diffuse. Of course Constantinople/Istanbul probably has yet to recover from its capture and nigh-inevitable sacking.

I was looking at what happened in the Principalities and in Serbia as an example, where laws were passed forbidding Muslims to own land, and requiring them to sell it.

But I guess direct Russian rule is different from newly independent/autonomous nation states wanting to rid themselves of the legacy of Muslim domination.

I do, though, think that there would be a substantial exodus of the upper classes and the educated to Egypt which would have become the centre of the Muslim world

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
1804/1806 Francis II assumed and retained the title of EMPEROR of Austria. This is an Imperial Crown, and beats hands down the royal crown of Bohemia, which would be subsidiary to it.

Thus I will keep the name Austria for the Habsurg remnant entity.

I have made a few decisions on the map :-

- Wurzburg I have wiped out as part of the general peace treaty, by which Austria regains Lienz and Trieste
- Pola and Fiume I have added to the Illyrian Provinces, leaving Trieste as the Austrian outlet onto the Adriatic, and the major gain from the peace
- Since Prussia did not lose Silesia in OTL, I don't see how after the ATL events of 1812+ they would do anything that would result in such punishment
- Whilst maps of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw appear to show their holdings extending NE towards Suwalki, past but not including Bialystock, I reckon that a general peace that includes the reassumption of a Polish crown, and the extension of dominion over Austrian Polish territories, would see these couple of areas end up in Russian hands
- I've given Missolonghi to Janina
- Frankfurt is not too hard to create, but Hesse is a pain as Victoria 2 has a large province for Wiesbaden (aka Nassau) but to create the GD of Hesse one would need to split it in two
- I am assuming Sigmaringen was given to Wurttemburg
- I expanded France's borders somewhat significantly based on where they were in 1812, including over all of Savoy, whilst Genoa fits in nicely with Italy and that's good since the dream had all 3 of the historical Italian ports (Genoa, Pisa and Venice) as part of the French satellite kingdom of Italy
- I am thinking that part of Britain's accession to any final peace would be the restoration of some kind of Hannover, tho this creates an unfortunate hole in the middle of Westphalia

I still need to split the Two Sicilies in V2 but its obvious what I want to create - a Murat Naples, and a Bourbon Sicily, which intriguingly would be the ONLY Bourbon kingdom remaining in this ATL. Unless somewhere in the Americas becomes a Spanish Bourbon successor state?

Regarding India, the EIC is NOT the British government and the fact that in 1804 the EIC forced the Mughal Emperor to disband the Mughal army does not mean that in any general over-arcing peace this would not be undone. Mughal sovereignty was always there in theory, and the distance between 1804 and any potential general peace would be a lot shorter than between it and for example the Indian Mutiny. In addition the possibility remains that there IS a Third Maratha War, somewhat different from OTL but the same idea, and that for France to agree to the gains in it Delhi is neutralised - as in made neutral.


Best Regards
Grey Wolf

.

2upload.jpg
 
A PoD in 1812 probably wouldn't manage all the things you've thought of, though.

A Napoleonic victory in Egypt in the late 18th century, on the other hand... ;)

I know that in the dream Delhi definitely wasn't British, because that was the destination of the GER

I'll look some more into the India wars and see what makes sense

See below for my ideas on India.

Regarding the Americas, a Bonapartist Spain would be in a better position to fight off some of the rebel movements, since it would imply direct French help. Especially after a general peace in Europe, there would be surplus French armies and a need to do something with men whose whole professional lives have been as soldiers

I agree with The Professor on Spanish America, especially with the Royal Navy (and maybe even American backing) in the way. If anything, keeping the Bourbons on the Spanish throne would grant them (and by extension Napoleon) legitimacy in controling more of their empire.

Parts of it are coming off, one way or another. Especially Rio de la Plata, and probably New Granada; Britain may well give the US carte blanche in regards to Florida, and maybe even Louisiana*. Spain may keep Mexico and Peru if they play their cards right.

However, a Bourbon-in-exile Mexico, like what the Braganzas did with Brazil IOTL might be plausible as well.

Alternatively, even if there is still a *War of 1812, which goes more or less as per OTL, the US might just go into a neutral stance - trade with everyone, side with no one.

*They could do a deal there, I suppose, with Britain purchasing parts of northern Louisiana (maybe north of the Missouri River) to pad Canada. The US only wanted New Orleans, after all, and with Lower Louisiana, they at least have plenty of space to expand into.

I have made a few decisions on the map :-

- Wurzburg I have wiped out as part of the general peace treaty, by which Austria regains Lienz and Trieste
- Pola and Fiume I have added to the Illyrian Provinces, leaving Trieste as the Austrian outlet onto the Adriatic, and the major gain from the peace
- Since Prussia did not lose Silesia in OTL, I don't see how after the ATL events of 1812+ they would do anything that would result in such punishment
- Whilst maps of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw appear to show their holdings extending NE towards Suwalki, past but not including Bialystock, I reckon that a general peace that includes the reassumption of a Polish crown, and the extension of dominion over Austrian Polish territories, would see these couple of areas end up in Russian hands
- I've given Missolonghi to Janina
- Frankfurt is not too hard to create, but Hesse is a pain as Victoria 2 has a large province for Wiesbaden (aka Nassau) but to create the GD of Hesse one would need to split it in two
- I am assuming Sigmaringen was given to Wurttemburg
- I expanded France's borders somewhat significantly based on where they were in 1812, including over all of Savoy, whilst Genoa fits in nicely with Italy and that's good since the dream had all 3 of the historical Italian ports (Genoa, Pisa and Venice) as part of the French satellite kingdom of Italy
- I am thinking that part of Britain's accession to any final peace would be the restoration of some kind of Hannover, tho this creates an unfortunate hole in the middle of Westphalia

Fair enough.

Wasn't Napoleon going to add the Illyrian Provinces onto the Kingdom of Italy? Anyway, is it still going to be in personal union with France, or will it be inherited through lateral succession.

I still need to split the Two Sicilies in V2 but its obvious what I want to create - a Murat Naples, and a Bourbon Sicily, which intriguingly would be the ONLY Bourbon kingdom remaining in this ATL. Unless somewhere in the Americas becomes a Spanish Bourbon successor state?

I'm assuming that you have Sardinia either handed to Bourbon Sicily in the peace treaty or have the Savoyards marry into them. The latter poses a problem, because Savoy had Salic Law (I'm not sure if that carried over into Sardinia-Piedmont, though), but there are fudges around that...

Regarding India, the EIC is NOT the British government and the fact that in 1804 the EIC forced the Mughal Emperor to disband the Mughal army does not mean that in any general over-arcing peace this would not be undone. Mughal sovereignty was always there in theory, and the distance between 1804 and any potential general peace would be a lot shorter than between it and for example the Indian Mutiny. In addition the possibility remains that there IS a Third Maratha War, somewhat different from OTL but the same idea, and that for France to agree to the gains in it Delhi is neutralised - as in made neutral.

On further thought, if you have a less ambitious governor general in India - say someone other than the Duke of Mornington - then they might have a more informal SoI over the region.

Actually, a LTTW-style Durrani Neo-Mughal Empire/Bloated Afghanistan, or surviving and expanded Sikh empire/Uber-Punjab might cover your non-British Delhi idea.
 
Some good thinking here.

I agree that Austria wouldn't be a separate crown to Bohemia, in fact you're likely to see the Habsburgs proclaiming themselves more and more as Bohemian rather than the OTL "Austrian Empire". Which would have an interesting impact on Poland vis a vis Prussia.

I can't see a strong French India but a French backed anti-British Indian Alliance seems reasonable.

With a Bonapartist Spain the Spanish colonies will now get a lot more support from the UK in their independence efforts so probably a British backed Mexico but with others gaining greater autonomy under Spain to forestall a repeat and keep them in the Spanish/French orbit. I feel that the UK will keep the French Caribbean possibly joining all the Guianas into a single state.
Britain's relationship with the US may continue warming especially if it guarantees Louisiana as US (if Mexico is British allied) or may be rather frosty indeed if Mexico has strong support and maintains California & Texas.

I keep seeing a tripartite world of British coalition vs French Empire & vassals vs Russian allies with Russia & Britain allied in Europe but opposed in Asia and America.
Sweden might be maintaining neutrality between Russia and France; and I can certainly see them aiming towards a Baltic alliance to do so.

The Indian alliance idea makes a good deal of sense, and France would control the sea route - there may be a Suez Canal by 1875 anyway, but even if not the OTL route beforehand was steamship to Mediterranean Egypt, carriage and later train to Red Sea Egypt, and then steamship to India.

Here, that would be in France's control, though Egypt itself might have better control of the overland part, especially as the major Muslim power, controlling as it is the route to Mecca.

I'll do some more reading on events in the Americas to get a sense of how it might work out here

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
I'm wondering if it makes more sense for the Borbons to regain the Spanish throne, as France would be busy in the East 1812+ and whilst not defeated like in Russia, or losing men like in Russia, they are still unlikely to be able to devote any more resources to Spain, and Joseph may well still decide to urinate

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
The Indian alliance idea makes a good deal of sense, and France would control the sea route - there may be a Suez Canal by 1875 anyway, but even if not the OTL route beforehand was steamship to Mediterranean Egypt, carriage and later train to Red Sea Egypt, and then steamship to India.

Thing is, with uber France, Britain (and the EIC) is going to be taking all steps to make sure that someone else doesn't get a toehold in India.

What you'd need, paradoxically, is less French influence in India at first, followed by a prolonged period of peace, leaving more open France to extend its influence into South Asia later on. Maybe the Neo-Mughal state (or whatever), concerned with a recent bout of British/EIC expansionism, decides that reaching out to the French would be a good idea... ;)

EDIT: Actually, come to think of it, the EIC also having the Dutch East Indies under their aegis might prompt them to expand there instead of in western India so much, leaving the door open for the French later on.
 
Last edited:
I'm wondering if it makes more sense for the Borbons to regain the Spanish throne, as France would be busy in the East 1812+ and whilst not defeated like in Russia, or losing men like in Russia, they are still unlikely to be able to devote any more resources to Spain, and Joseph may well still decide to urinate

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

Perhaps with the Peninsular War still in stalemate Napoleon doesn't integrate Catalonia into France but makes it a Bonaparte client/vassal Kingdom with Spain proper under a neutral Bourbon restoration?
 
Perhaps with the Peninsular War still in stalemate Napoleon doesn't integrate Catalonia into France but makes it a Bonaparte client/vassal Kingdom with Spain proper under a neutral Bourbon restoration?

That sounds quite fun :) I imagine Joseph wouldnt want it, as it would be an embarassing step down from all of Spain, but maybe Eugene could be elevated to it? Especially as Davout has got his own kingdom in Hungary, and some OTL general the Grand Duchy of Salonika

I am thinking Louis II gets Holland back too

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
I doubt it: (a) stomping the Barbary pirates once and for all; (b) more prestige for France, and (c) area denial against potential British interests. Tunisia almost became a British protectorate IOTL, due to influence from Malta.

Without the Ottoman Empire France is in a perfect position to simply dominate them diplomatically. Conquering Algiers in OTL was a Hellish concept and took a long time to fully achieve.

I would imagine a last Barbary War that stops their practices, after all they had one around the time of the PoD anyway, was it the Third?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Let us assume that a general peace is agreed in 1814/15 and signed in 1815, binding all European powers, and shuffling bits and pieces around from previous treaties so as to gain an outcome that all sides can agree to.

Thus from 1814 the situation in Spain is that Eugene's Kingdom of Catalonia exists as a French client state, and the rest of Spain is liberated and reunited under Ferdinand VII. OTL Ferdinand VII promised a lot, but then reneged finding that his domestic support was strongest amongst conservative elements.

Here, however, Spain is an extremely important element in what will become post-war Brritish policy. There is no Holy Alliance here, no Congress System, and Britain's traditional allies against France (Austria, Prussia) have been seriously weakened although they survive as relatively strong regional powers.

Furthermore, independence movements abroad are going to have the "stain" of revolution upon them, and thus be seen as potential vehicles for French domination of Southern and Central America. There will be British units still in Spain, and a formal alliance between Spain and Britain, aimed at France but not something that one can pick and choose at compliance too easily.

However, events up to 1814 cannot be changed in any great detail in the Americas, and it is the reassumption of power of Ferdinand VII which forms the PoD there, whilst affected by the butterflies from 1809 onwards, and certainly 1812 onwards in Europe.

The 1815 expedition to New Granada looks like it would proceed as per OTL, as would San Martin's invasion of Chile, but things will go differently from then on. Bolivar is not going to give up, but a combination of factors is going to work against him, not least that the reinforcements of 1820, or their equivalent, will arrive in New Granada as there won't be a revolt against Ferdinand VII in Spain, as he has already confirmed the constitution upon his accession.

Although fighting on in Chile, I can't really see the Spanish succeeding on every front they are fighting on, even in better terms than OTL, and will let San Martin have his victory. But Cochrane is going to get his come-uppance, if indeed it is he himself who is there as naval affairs have gone drastically differently since the original PoD of this timeline. Either way, Cochrane's support for Chile is one thing, since that entity already exists and he is providing it with a naval force, but the idea of then using this naval force to power project into Peru is going to be too much. Such a thrust would threaten the underbelly of restored Spanish power in the North of South America.

I thus see British intervention in the Pacific, even if just to provide a blockading force in Spain's favour along the Peruvian coast. Without a navy, San Martin can't launch his invasion of Peru, and would probably focus on co-ordinating rebel movements in Alto Peru (Bolivia) and drawing them into the fold.

Mexico is in a strange situation, and one could see that for different reasons the opposing forces might still come together to oppose the Spanish. Initially this is on the basis of searating Mexico from Spain politically, but retaining the personal union of the monarch, so that Ferdinand VII would be King of Spain and Emperor of Mexico. Its not in his nature to agree this, and as per OTL the Vicceroy would be negotiating with the Mexicans about a different solution - OTL other Bourbons, or the Habsburg Archduke Karl of Teschen were suggested.

However, I am going to throw in a googly here. The one royal who is most dispossessed, apart from the French Bourbons, is Ferdinand von Habsburg, one-time Grand Duke of Tuscany, most recently Grand Duke of Wurzburg, but who lost his throne as a result of the territorial shuffllings of the 1815 general peace.

We thus have a Habsburg Mexico in 1821, with Ferdinand entering Mexico City escorted by Iturbide, Guerrero and Guadeloupe Victoria and Viceroy O'Donaju who will be dead before the year is out. It is in Britain's interest to support this Mexico,

One thing to note is that US-British relations won't be so cosy in this era. After fighting the War of 1812-1815, Britain is then actively supporting Spain in its efforts to reassert its control in its colonies in the Americas. There is no Monroe Doctrine, and there is lingering British-American hostility. This, plus constant worries over France's policies in the Americas, is going to drive Britain to recognise the newly independent Mexico, despite Spanish protests.

The Empire of Mexico takes the Captain-Generalcy of Guatemala (all of Central America) with it, and though down the line it may have to fight to hold onto this, it is part of its integral territory.

The United Provinces of La Plata, Paraguay and some sort of Chile-Bolivia (sic) union emerge as the independent powers in South America, whilst the Empire of Brazil, and the independent but primitive Mapuche in Patagonia and Araucania complete the map. Uruguay will probably still emerge as independent as both France and Britain are going to be pushing their various interests.

Thus two Spanish "kingdoms" remain, one focused on Peru and one on Colombia, but also incorporating Venezuela in the same kind of grand union that Bolivar created for himself in OTL, but here under the Spanish crown. Panama is a province of this Granada.

We thus have created the basic outline of the map of South America and if the ATL started at 1830 we could leave it there, but since the dream specified 1875 we need to look onward and forward.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
One thing to note is that different strategic decisions will result in different requirements and decisions. I see the Kingdom of Hawaii becoming a British client state, and Britain perhaps "purchasing" the Galapagos Islands off Spain.

In the Caribbean, Spain retains Santo Domingo as well as Cuba and Puerto Rico, but of course its main focus is on Granada (Colombia-Venezuela) and on Peru (Peru-Ecuador).

We are looking at the best part of five decades between the solution of the South and Central American wars, and the period of the dream, 1875. The status of the Guyanas needs to be ascertained in this. I think in 1815 France is going to demand the return of their colonial holdings, but acquiesce in the loss of Holland's to Britain, thus enlarging directly British Guyana.

Britain is also going to assert a direct formal protectorate over Miskitia, as US complaints can go hang.

I see Tejas going the same way as OTL, with American settlers eventually forming a critical mass and declaring independence from Mexico. However, in this ATL's 1835 what happens then? Britain is going to be inclined to uphold the Mexico of Emperor Leopoldo, but not to the point of giving aid, only to that of preventing US intervention. However, British rhetoric is going to come up against the fact that there is nothing that can be done to prevent unofficial American aid from flooding into Texas - volunteers, supplies etc. This is going to raise the tensions between Britain and the USA dangerously.

Imperial Mexico is going to be somewhat more competent than that of Santa Anna, and won't be hamstrung by having their forces led into battle by the head of state - in fact, somewhat amusingly Leopoldo may well send Santa Anna as commander of the army, but it will be a better army and there will be less political division behind it. I see Britain as wanting to find a solution in Mexico's interests that nevertheless could help with their own, and the idea of an autonomous Texas under Mexican suzerainty, but open to independent British penetration may well appeal to London. It would also be a kick in the head for the Americans.

British-American tensions are going to be felt elsewhere too - in the Red River, in the case of Fort Astoria, and in Northern Maine, all of which over the course of a couple of decades would add to the rivalry between the two. Britain is not going to cede any territory to the USA, nor any rights, whilst the US is going to continue to push.

Of course, one area that is going to be key is Florida, which in 1814 is Spanish and thus forming a part of the restored domain of Ferdinand VII, a restored domain remember that Britain has vital interests in upholding. The British-American War does not end until 1815, with the Battle of New Orleans, but this time British defeat is not going to be assuaged by their being able to focus on a final campaign against Napoleon and an invasion of the European continent. That war is done too, and its aftermath is now the focus of British policy.

Thus the attempt by American settlers/merchants to separate West Florida from the Spanish crown and petition for entry into the USA is going to come as a crisis in British-American relations. Short of direct action, which could lead to war with the USA, Britain can't act to undo the secession, however much she might like to, but in its aftermath they can certainly act to build up Spanish government in the rest of Florida.

British money, administrative expertise and veterans from the Peninsular campaigns would be available to help turn Florida into a better-run and viable colony, bringing the Seminole under control, and protecting what is basically an undefended frontier with the USA. Thus there is no Jacksonian invasion, and Florida remains as part of Spain, many of the British veterans eventually settling there, especially those with Spanish families.

Near-war in 1840 over the Northern Maine border pushes Britain and the USA to the brink, and it only takes a spark to ignite. With Texas remaining as an autonomous satellite of Mexico, the cause for direct conflict between the USA and Mexico is somewhat obviated, or more likely definitely in second place behind the causes for direct conflict between the USA and Britain

Oregon of course is the spark, it is the mid 1840s and by now it is simply too much effort to avoid a war.

BRITISH-AMERICAN WAR, 1846-1848

Britain fights this war alone, though with the benevolent neutrality of Leopoldo's Mexico and of Spain, now under Isabella II.

Britain has built up a significant naval presence in the Pacific, which compliments their position in the Atlantic and Caribbean, ensuring command of the seas. Britain is thus going to be blockading American trade off New Orleans, and off New England, Virginia etc. One worry for Britain is going to be a reverse influx of volunteers from Texas into the USA, despite Mexico forbidding such actions.

France is also going to be a worry, but it could certainly be in French interests to watch two of its major rivals battle each other to exhaustion. As in the ACW of OTL it will probably provide ship building, loans etc but not directly intervene, thus allowing American blockade runners and commerce raiders to operate out of European waters. The USA also has a Mediterranean Squadron, the successor of Decatur, and this is going to have some role to play, although it is more likely to be in disrupting British trade in that sea than in successfully running the Straits of Gibraltar.

I'm not going to do a blow by blow account as this is background on the strategic level, rather than the timeline itself. Its filling in the gaps, er gaping holes!

I'm going to be controversial and say that this war is a draw, but one that solves things as the resultant peace accepts and confirms territorial boundaries - for Britain, the USA confirms their possession of N Maine, the Red River and Seattle, but for the USA the boundary is otherwise set at the parallel, and de facto US control of areas it contests with Mexico in the Plains is accepted by Britain.


The end of the British-American War runs into a period of continual crises for the Empire of Mexico, Leopoldo's authority at home having been somewhat damaged by what many see as the betrayal of Britain over the Great Plains, and severely strained by the Californian Crisis. Here prospectors and adventurers from many nations have rushed to the gold fields, overwhelming the Mexican authorities ability to deal with them and effectively running their own communities albeit in a rough and violent way.

The British Pacific fleet, fresh from securing Seattle in the recent war, lands Marines which co-operate with Mexican authorities in restoring order around San Francisco.

Mexico is busy with another series of wars in Central America, putting down secessionist movements in Costa Rica and Nicaragua, and also in trying to deal with the aftermath of the British-American War in Texas where the veterans who had volunteered for American service have now returned home to radicalise the population.

When a full-scale revolt breaks out in California, and Britain has to retire its Marines in the face of it, it soon becomes clear that a critical mass of prospectors led by American adventurers have gained control of the province. Britain is reluctant to field an army, only just recovering from the expenditure of the British-American War, whilst Mexico cannot afford one, even with the taking on of further British loans, since it has to push the war in Central America to a conclusion.

When the Bear Flag Republic, as the Californian secessionists name themselves, calls upon the USA to recognise their independence, Britain approaches the other powers to convene a congress to deal with the matter as one of international importance. With France and Russia acquiescing, and Bavaria offering to act as an Honest Broker, the California Committee meets in Havana, Cuba, and debates the issue.

As American goods are now finding their way across the Rockies into California, and it is strongly suspected that these include arms and ammunition, a coercive solution looks less and less attractive. Eventually the powers agree that California should be independent, under a joint guarantee. Mexico protests loudly but there never was any realistic hope of a Texan style solution of giving self-government but retaining Mexican oversight, since this latter is clearly gone and Mexico is not in a position to restore it.

Britain, France, Russia and the USA, albeit with the latter acting reluctantly, issue a Joint Guarantee of Californian Independence, reserving the rights of the powers acting in concert to intervene, and of their individual consulates to act in the interests of their populations. The Californian border is set by a commission under Bavarian auspices, excluding San Diego which has remained under Mexican control.

This blow to Mexican pride is somewhat ameliorated when the war in Central America is brought to a successful conclusion, but the end of the period of Mexican crises is not over yet.


TEXAN INDEPENDENCE

The protocol of the late 1830s guaranteeing Texan self-rule and autonomy, ie virtual independence whilst retaining Mexican suzerainty, has been pushed to the brink by both the British-American War and its aftermath where veterans, radicalised by their time with the US army against the British, return home and push for full independence.

The events in California provide a further push in this direction, and by 1852 there is a groundswell of support for a complete break with Mexico. Since the end of the British-American War, Mexican officials and commissions have had a much harder time of it in Texas, and now a national boycott is launched, effectively blanking all residual Mexican rights, and taking all remaining powers into Texan hands.

This Texas is better off financially than its OTL equivalent, the period of Mexican suzerainty having kept it within the trading framework of Leopoldo's empire, whilst British investment into Texas, although the subject of much ire in the aftermath of the British-American War, has provided a measure of industrialisation and financial security. British companies thus have a relatively strong stake in the Texan economy, and with British merchants and industrialists always strongly represented in parliament in London, their interests are a natural concern of the British governnment.

Fresh from the twin outcomes of losing California and retaining Central America, Mexico is in a mood to fight for its rights in Texas, but the USA makes it very clear that any such move would be seen as tantamount to a declaration of war, and Britain, having only made peace with the USA a handful of years before, is in no mood to fight a second war against them, this time on Mexico's behalf.

As Britain's position becomes clear, there are riots against British interests in Mexico City, and when the Imperial Guard move to suppress them there is a revolution, led by liberal elements of the regular army, that succeeds in overthrowing and imprisoning Emperor Leopoldo. Crown Prince Ferdinand was in Vera Cruz, where he is a naval officer, although shore-based, and Britain moves quickly to secure his person, landing Marines from the Caribbean fleet to "aid him" in taking control of the immediate area.

It soon becomes clear that the rebels in Mexico City lack any general support, especially amongst the establishment, and in their desperation they turn to arming the populace, thus bringing the spectre of a return to revolutionary war back to Mexico. Britain makes an agreement with Ferdinand to restore him to his throne (the rebels have got his father to abdicate under pressure, and neither Ferdinand nor London is that concerned to get this rescinded). In return, Ferdinand will agree to the full independence of Texas.

Ferdinand readily signs the agreement, and under his theoretical command, an army heavy with British Marines, and British colonial troops from Jamaica and Miskitia, advances from Vera Cruz towards Mexico City. At the same time, the Northern Army of Mexico which had been standing on the Texan border turns and advances South towards the capital, causing a flurry of contacts until the British are able to establish that it is acting in the name of Ferdinand, and not the rebels.

Almost by the by, the Convention of Galveston sees Mexico, Britain and the USA sign a treaty recognising that Texas has full independence, and that none of the three signatories has any special or pre-eminent position.

The rebels in Mexico City are crushed, the emaciated but hardy ex-Emperor Leopoldo released from confinement, and Ferdinand officially crowned as Emperor Ferdinand II of Mexico in the capital's largest cathedral. Leopoldo retires to Austria to live on an estate that the Emperor in Vienna grants to him in his retirement.


Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Territorially, that is it for Central and North America, there are not going to be any changes between the mid 1850s and the mid 1870s. The only issue that would remain unresolved is that of the border between British and Russian territory in Alaska/Yukon and I would imagine this would be dealt with by the 1860s, as the borders further South become fully firmed up as settlement and border patrols create a reality out of paper, thus leaving only that in the far North-West to be sorted.

In the settlement, I gave Russia more of the Yukon area as it would be made at a time when Britain is stretched, and thus end up more favourable to Russia. They didn't get everything that they wanted though.

The rest of the Americas also needs working out. We may know the geographical set up as of the 1830s but can we assume that it stays the same by 1875? History usually argues in the negative.

One would assume that the Chilean state, and the United Provinces of La Plata, are not going to be either stable, or friendly. Wars and skirmishes are going to break out, dragging in Uruguay or Brazil in some guise, and affording ample opportunity for Britain and France to get involved in the detail.

The government of the United Provinces, back when, was initially opposed to San Martin's Chilean adventure, and is not going to view Britain's later intervention to prevent San Martin moving on from Chile to Peru in any particuarly poor light. There is also the Mapuche to consider, that whilst the United Provinces, or Chile, might claim to have sovereignty over Patagonia and Araucania, unless they could make this a realistic control, then the Indians retained that for themselves.

Territorially, the main question would be over the Alta Peruvian highlands, annexed to Chile by San Martin. They don't sit very easily with Chile, and they have their own culture, their own political aims etc.

Whilst again not wanting to go into too much detail of events in this back story, I am looking at an expansion of the United Provinces Northwards, and at independence for Alta Peru under the name of San Martin (hardly going to name themselves after Bolivar). I think Chile would hold onto the coast, though.

The other major question would be in the North, with the Spanish "kingdoms" of Peru (with Ecuador) and Granada (with Venezuela).

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
The two main focal areas of revolutionary activity remaining in Spanish America are Quito, which resented being included as part of the Kingdom of Peru, and Venezuela, a Captain-Generalcy as opposed to a Viceroyalty, but since the Spanish fight-back viewed as a part of Granada, and still with a lot of local feeling against rule from Spain.

The example of Mexico, rather than of Argentina (as the United Provinces of La Plata become formally known as after the mid-century wars), or of Chile. Mexico offered to become a self-governing kingdom under personal union with Spain, and one can imagine Isabella II seeing some attraction in any proposal of that nature from her remaining American possessions. Of course, her father had not seen such, and Mexico had ended up as a Habsburg empire.

However, I think in the end her interest is going to be a disuprive factor, rather than one which works towards a solution. Her ministers in Granada are going to be trying to keep things together, whilst the rebels are going to be paying lip-service to her interest, but primarily concerned with defeating the authorities that are trying, actively, to subdue them

The outbreak of revolution across Central America, although eventually put down by the Mexican Empire, would provide the impetus for a renewed outburst of revolutionary activity in the North of South America. It would also coincide with the wars further South, which see the end of the Chile-Alta Perus union and conflict over the spoils, leading to the emergence of an independent Republic of San Martin, albeit losing some territory to Argentina, and to Chile.

This coinciding of timing would help Spain in one way, meaning that its Southern border in Peru was not menaced in any serious way. But at the same time, it gave to the rebels the same rhetoric that was used successfully further South, and the same dangers of foreign support. Whereas Britain had built up a strong commercial position in Argentina, France had been chasing, and whilst maybe focusing on Chile in the immediate period, this would be no more than an opportunistic move as Chile and Argentina scrabble over Alta Peru. France could well come out as the supporter, even the benefactor, of the new nation of San Martin, but it is a remote and landlocked nation, and not what French strategists would have been hoping for.

Venezuela, however, offers them the perfect opportunity, and it comes at a time when Britain is over-stretched, focused on North America, and not as close to Spain as they had been in the past. Nevertheless, I see France being wary about being dragged into all-out war with Spain, since that would be the one situation where Britain would feel bound to intervene. Instead, France would provide funds, advisors, encouragement, materiele, arms etc, whilst Spain would try to blockade the coast, and invade across land.

With Quito also rising, I see the outcome being the creation of an independent Venezuela, mainly in the Eastern part of what we think of Venezuela, and of an autonomous Ecuador, independent in all but name, but with Spain as its suzerain and Isabella II its head of state.

The main bulk of remaining Spanish possessions are now unified as Granada, with Western Venezuela retained and now blended in as an integral part of this. Peru is the second kingdom, abutting Granada, but in the mountains, whilst on the coast divided from it by Ecuador.

This may not be as inspiring as it should; I've got a headache and no money, so I'm doing my best!

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Top