unprincipled peter
Donor
Part 2 of my exploration of what if the French Revolution whithered in 1797. First part can be found at https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=337146
From that thread: "I want to explore several what ifs all stemming from the same POD.
The scenario:
On the day Napoleon Bonaparte was conceived OTL, Momma Bonaparte ATL said "not tonight dear, I have a headache". Poppa B, frustrated, went out behind the woodshed, and took matters into his own hand, and the genius seed that would have become a great military leader was cast upon a pile of unchopped wood.
The first butterfly is Toulon. Nap is undoubtedly a key player, but ultimately with or without him, the siege of Toulon is likely to succeed. We'll take at face value that Nap was instrumental in drawing up and helping to execute the plans that kicking the British out. Without him, I'm ATL extending the siege, but ultimately the British withdraw. In this time period, the Brits on land have a tendency to muck up everything, and there's no reason to believe Toulon would be any different. Bottom line, though is that a front action is extended, and revolutionary France sustains a body punch. Not enough to knock out the revolutionaries, but puts a little wear on them.
Next up is the battle of Saorgio, where Napoleon designed the offensive plan. Andre Massena is one of the key players here, and he ultimately ends up a good commander, so you can't automatically reverse the order of battle. But it's not unreasonable to say that with a different offensive plan, you end up with alternate results. I'm not assuming good, nor bad, because we don't know. Just saying different.
The big point of departure is 13 Vendemiaire. Here, Nap is the hero of the hour and is a decisive figure in saving the National Convention from a royalist uprising with future king Charles X in attendance. With the uprising going completely differently, we can change history to our whim. This is the beginning of the end for revolutionary France. Whether the royalist uprising gains steam and is ultimately successful with Louis XVIII taking the throne , or whether the Convention devolves into an alternate dictatorship/directory is somewhat unimportant for the what ifs I have in mind. The main thing is that the revolution collapses and Europe enters into a period of peace circa 1797-1798.
The stage:
France is basically pre-revolutionary borders.
Holy Roman empire is intact. Austria has a bit more clout, being the only European power still in the game when peace comes. Prussia has dropped out as OTL.
Prussia, Russia are basically OTL
Spain is OTL. It has lost the War of the Pyrenees, and unwisely dropped out just before the French revolution falls apart. An argument can be made that Spain can reverse course again as the Second Treaty of San Ildefonso on 19 August 1796 hadn't signed when French fortunes changed, but I'm sticking with OTL.
Republic of Batavia is in existence. OTL, they were attempting to escape from under the thumb of France, but failed to do so. Britain has given them back the Cape Colony. I'm going with status quo for now. If I get to the installment of South African discussion, that can change.
There are 3-6 million more people available (not dead) for transplant, or crowding others into transplant. Plus, the population dynamics of France are changed as well. OTL, the male/female ration dropped significantly and Napoleonic land reform altered population growth as well, so France's population vis a vis 'germany' changes." I amended the setup for simplicity sake of Louis XVIII being crowned.
So, for the USA, we have 2 major changes: no Louisiana Purchase and no War of 1812. Through 1820-1830ish, US and Spain have tense relations, but ultimately settle on freedom of Mississippi River passage and use of New Orleans as an open port.
No War of 1812 delays US approach to military preparedness. Until a major war shows them the error of their ways, the US continues to rely on militia rather than any real army structure, and there is no real Navy to speak of. Tecumseh's Indian Confederacy lives on a bit longer, but ultimately I think Indian relations end up similar to OTL until Andrew Jackson's presidency. Without the Battle of New Orleans, Jackson may remain a local power, and his presidency could be butterflied away. Without the War, the issues left unresolved by the revolution remain to be resolved.
Without the Louisiana Purchase, the Slavery Question goes massively different. For starters, there is no Missouri Compromise. So how does this butterfly affect the tensions that lead to the Civil War? This is an area I have no idea about.
So, how does the USA progress in such a What If?
From that thread: "I want to explore several what ifs all stemming from the same POD.
The scenario:
On the day Napoleon Bonaparte was conceived OTL, Momma Bonaparte ATL said "not tonight dear, I have a headache". Poppa B, frustrated, went out behind the woodshed, and took matters into his own hand, and the genius seed that would have become a great military leader was cast upon a pile of unchopped wood.
The first butterfly is Toulon. Nap is undoubtedly a key player, but ultimately with or without him, the siege of Toulon is likely to succeed. We'll take at face value that Nap was instrumental in drawing up and helping to execute the plans that kicking the British out. Without him, I'm ATL extending the siege, but ultimately the British withdraw. In this time period, the Brits on land have a tendency to muck up everything, and there's no reason to believe Toulon would be any different. Bottom line, though is that a front action is extended, and revolutionary France sustains a body punch. Not enough to knock out the revolutionaries, but puts a little wear on them.
Next up is the battle of Saorgio, where Napoleon designed the offensive plan. Andre Massena is one of the key players here, and he ultimately ends up a good commander, so you can't automatically reverse the order of battle. But it's not unreasonable to say that with a different offensive plan, you end up with alternate results. I'm not assuming good, nor bad, because we don't know. Just saying different.
The big point of departure is 13 Vendemiaire. Here, Nap is the hero of the hour and is a decisive figure in saving the National Convention from a royalist uprising with future king Charles X in attendance. With the uprising going completely differently, we can change history to our whim. This is the beginning of the end for revolutionary France. Whether the royalist uprising gains steam and is ultimately successful with Louis XVIII taking the throne , or whether the Convention devolves into an alternate dictatorship/directory is somewhat unimportant for the what ifs I have in mind. The main thing is that the revolution collapses and Europe enters into a period of peace circa 1797-1798.
The stage:
France is basically pre-revolutionary borders.
Holy Roman empire is intact. Austria has a bit more clout, being the only European power still in the game when peace comes. Prussia has dropped out as OTL.
Prussia, Russia are basically OTL
Spain is OTL. It has lost the War of the Pyrenees, and unwisely dropped out just before the French revolution falls apart. An argument can be made that Spain can reverse course again as the Second Treaty of San Ildefonso on 19 August 1796 hadn't signed when French fortunes changed, but I'm sticking with OTL.
Republic of Batavia is in existence. OTL, they were attempting to escape from under the thumb of France, but failed to do so. Britain has given them back the Cape Colony. I'm going with status quo for now. If I get to the installment of South African discussion, that can change.
There are 3-6 million more people available (not dead) for transplant, or crowding others into transplant. Plus, the population dynamics of France are changed as well. OTL, the male/female ration dropped significantly and Napoleonic land reform altered population growth as well, so France's population vis a vis 'germany' changes." I amended the setup for simplicity sake of Louis XVIII being crowned.
So, for the USA, we have 2 major changes: no Louisiana Purchase and no War of 1812. Through 1820-1830ish, US and Spain have tense relations, but ultimately settle on freedom of Mississippi River passage and use of New Orleans as an open port.
No War of 1812 delays US approach to military preparedness. Until a major war shows them the error of their ways, the US continues to rely on militia rather than any real army structure, and there is no real Navy to speak of. Tecumseh's Indian Confederacy lives on a bit longer, but ultimately I think Indian relations end up similar to OTL until Andrew Jackson's presidency. Without the Battle of New Orleans, Jackson may remain a local power, and his presidency could be butterflied away. Without the War, the issues left unresolved by the revolution remain to be resolved.
Without the Louisiana Purchase, the Slavery Question goes massively different. For starters, there is no Missouri Compromise. So how does this butterfly affect the tensions that lead to the Civil War? This is an area I have no idea about.
So, how does the USA progress in such a What If?