WI Congress of Vienna Polish-Saxon crisis leads to war

Polish-Saxon crisis
The most controversial subject at the Congress was the so-called Polish-Saxon Crisis. The Russians and Prussians proposed a deal in which much of the Prussian and Austrian shares of the partitions of Poland would go to Russia, which would create a Polish Kingdom in personal union with Russia and Alexander as king. In compensation, the Prussians would receive all of Saxony, whose King was considered to have forfeited his throne as he had not abandoned Napoleon soon enough. The Austrians, French, and British did not approve of this plan, and, at the inspiration of Talleyrand, signed a secret treaty on January 3, 1815, agreeing to go to war, if necessary, to prevent the Russo-Prussian plan from coming to fruition.[citation needed]
Though none of the three powers were ready for war, the Russians did not call the bluff, and an amicable settlement was set on October 24, 1814, by which Russia received most of the Napoleonic Duchy of Warsaw as a "Kingdom of Poland" - called Congress Poland - but did not receive the district of Poznań, Grand Duchy of Poznań, which was given to Prussia, nor Kraków, which became a free city. Prussia received 40% of Saxony - later known as the Province of Saxony, with the remainder returned to King Frederick Augustus I - Kingdom of Saxony.

Suppose Russia does call the bluff and Russia and Prussia go to war with Britain, Austria and France. Who will win in this scenario and what will the consequences? And what of Napoleon? Will he stil try to escape from Elba and restore himself as Emperor? If so, would he be tolerated (assuming he succeeds) because France is now allied to Austria and Britain?

Ideas? Suggestions?
 

Lucian

Banned
I think Russian's would win that bluff, having the largest and strongest army.
A much larger Polish population and more Polish territories in Russia would make interesting consequences.
 

Eurofed

Banned
I developed this scenario for my own signature TL.

Napoleon returns in the middle of the war between his old enemies, and turns it into a three-way fight, Britain and Austria vs. Russia and Prussia and France vs. everyone else. Murat has an insight and throws his lot with the eastern alliance. Austria is gutted, Britain gets its butt on a plate at Waterloo equivalent but Napoleon is eventually overwhelmed by superior Russo-Prussian numbers. Britain is kicked out of the continent, and throws the towel out of sheer war-weariness. Prussia and Russia dictate a peace of their liking in the reconvened Congress of Vienna.

Russia annexes Finland, the Duchy of Warsaw, the Grand Duchy of Posen, Galicia, Bukovina, Moldavia (Bessarabia had been already annexed in 1812) and Wallachia (the latter two nominally Ottoman vassal states, but the Russians shall proceed to evict the Ottomans with the assent of the other powers in no time). Prussia keeps West Prussia and annexes Rhineland-Westphalia, Hannover, Saxony, and Bohemia-Moravia. Prussia becomes the president of the German Confederation and the dominant power among its 37 members.

The Russo-Prussians realize that France has shown itself to be politically unstable and hostile to their interests under the Bourbon and Napoleon alike. They get rather disllusioned with the Bourbon restoration but certainly they don't want to keep Napoleon in charge, either. Eventually they decide to keep young Napoleon II on the throne with a reaffirmation of the liberal 1815 Napoleonic constitution, in the hope that new regime may be more stable.

France gets an harsher peace than was initially stipulated in 1814. The provinces of Alsace and Lorraine are carved out to re-create the Kingdom of Burgundy which is given to the former King of Saxony. Corsica goes to Sardinia-Piedmont.

A strong Kingdom of Netherlands is set up under the House of Orange and includes the Seven United Netherlands, Austrian Netherlands, and Limburg. Since the Duchy of Luxemburg is deemed to be a German land, it is set up under the joint rule of Netherlands and Prussia.

The victorious powers are equally initially at a loss about to do with Italy, but certainly they don't want it to be an Austrian or French playground. Eventually they decide to build some strong Italian states, as a bulwalk against France and Austria, diminishing the political fragmentation, and since Murat proved to be a good ally against Austria (not that much trustworthy against Napoleon, but he didn't anything really substantial to help him, either), they make his kingdom one of the main Italian states.

Joachim Murat keeps the throne of Naples (although Sicily remains a separate kingdom under the Bourbon dynasty) and gains Lombardy and Veneto. Tuscany, Parma, and Modena are united as the Kingdom of Etruria under the Bourbon-Parma dynasty. Savoy-Piedmont includes Nice, Savoy, Piedmont, Corsica, and Sardinia as the Kingdom of Sardinia. Since Orthodox Russia and Protestant Prussia don't care as much about the territorial integrity of the Papal States, Ferrara and Bologna are given to Etruria and Ravenna, Romagna and Marche are given to Murat to build a land connection between his northern and southern possessions. The Pope keeps Umbria and Latium.

Austria is made to renounce its Imperial title and becomes the Kingdom of Austria and Hungary. It loses Bohemia-Moravia, Galicia, Bukovina, and all Italian possessions, but keeps the rest.

Soon afterwards, Russia delivers an ultimatum to the Ottoman Empire, asking for the cession of Moldavia and Wallachia. When the Sultan refuses, Russia declares war. Superior Russian numbers and organization results in a steady string of Russian victories, eventually backed by the insurrection of Greece. Ottoman control over the Balkans collapses, leading to anarchy in the western Balkans, while Russian armies close in to Constantinople. The perspective of total Russian conquest of Ottoman possessions eventually stirs the other powers to plead for a compromise peace, although Britain and France are still wary to challenge the Russian-Prussian alliance again.

Eventually the Treaty of Constantinople in 1819 saves the Anatolian-Middle Eastern cores of the Ottoman Empire, although its possessions in Europe are summarily abolished. Russia annexes Moldavia, Wallachia, and Bulgaria, Greece is restored as an independent client kingdom of Russia, Naples annexes Albania and Montenegro, Austria gets Bosnia and Serbia. Constantinople and the Straits are established as a free territory ruled by the powers (Britain, France, Prussia, Russia, Austria, and Naples), under the nominal suzerainty of the Sultan. The merchant and war ships of every power are guaranteed free passage through the Straits in peacetime and wartime.

Success makes the Tsar bolder in his liberal leanings, so he grants a liberal constitution and economic reforms. Prussia and Naples follow the example of their ally, and become beacons for the Greater German and Italian unifications, which happen by the early 1830s with Russian blessing, while Austria bunkers in reactionary stalemate and collapses in revolution by the same schedule. Independent Hungary becomes a client of the Eastern alliance.

With Napoleonic France, and the dominat eastern alliance liberal-conservative constitutional monarchies, the liberals wins the civil wars in Spain and Portugal. To balance the power of the eastern alliance, Britain and France reconcile and set up a western power bloc with Spain and Portugal.
 
Last edited:
Impressive scenario Eurofed! Although due to personal preferences, it is not a favourite scenario. And IMHO I seriously doubt it, whether the Austrian Empire will totally be divided; I can see them losing Galicia-Lodomeria and never (re-)gaining Lombardy-Venetia, but they will keep Bohemia-Moravia. A demotion can be used as a diplomatic punishment, but would it necessary?
 
Last edited:
The scenario proposed by Eurofed is effectively ineresting, although I'm not totally satisifed with it...

First, there is Napoleon. I think he knew what was to come to him in 1815 when he did his last campaign and Waterloo : he had all of Europe against him and would have to defeat all the allied armies one by one before they could join force, something he failed to do OTL. However, here we have a different situation... The Allies are divided between Britain and Austria on one side and Russia and Prussia on the other side.
Napoleon is no fool : I think he can understand that having the Allies fighting each other will be his best option to rebuild France's power and to keep the throne would be to let the Allies fight one another and quietly rebuild the Grand Army. That's not such a bad plan and Napoleon has all the qualities to succeed : he is a brilliant general, popular (There wouldn't have been the Hundred Days if l'Empereur had not been) and is far from stupid.

Napoleon could also choose to help one side, which brings out why I'm not really satisfied with Eurofed's scenario : The British's role. Britain's policy was and as always been to keep balance between European powers.
What thread does Napoleon pose by the time of the Congress of Vienna? True, the Emperor is a great general and proved it more than once. But France was defeated in the Napoleonic Wars and greatly suffered. So, he probably is not in a strong position and is (in my opinion) a threat that is less important than the Russio-Prussians.
I'm probably proposing an heresy, but it could be possible for Britain to choose to let Napoleon recover his throne in exchange for his alliance against Prussia and Russia...
Napoleon can also choose to go for the Russio-Prussians, but I doubt he will do it. First, Alexander doesn't like Napoleon and second he is seen as a monster in Prussia (he destroyed there army in only ONE battle : Iena-Auesterdt). I'm not sure if he can go for a "no alliance" or "three way war" tactics as none of these scenario are in his favor.

Lastly, there is Murat's role. If I'm not wrong, the Austrians were the ones to bribe Murat into betraying Napoleon... So why would he go to the Russian's side? It would seem more likely for him to ally the Austrians.

I don't really know how likely my scenario is... But here would be the outline :

-War happens because the Russians call the bluff in the Polish-Saxon crisis. The allies divide themselves between Britain-Austria on one side and Russia-Prussia on the other side.

-Murat goes for the Austro-British in hopes of keeping his kingdom of Naples because of what was promised to him when he betrayed Napoleon.

-Napoleon returns from Elba. He recovers power in France and force the French Bourbons into Exile. He then strenghten his position in France and propose an alliance to Britain and Austria.

-The British accept Napoleon's offer as they know the Russo-Prussians are in a stronger position than the Austro-British. A deal is made in which Napoleon keeps his throne (and maybe France's natural borders) in exchange for declaring war on the Russo-Prussians.

After that, it depends on how the war goes on...

1°) The Russo-Prussian wins. The situation would turn similar to Eurofed's scenario, maybe with a Bourbon restoration in France and Naples (due to Murat and Napoleon fighting on the British side)

2°) The Austro-British and Napoleon wins, which would be the scenario I would go for due to personnal preferences. In this scenario, Napoleon could win a seat in Vienna (ironically) and keep his throne, maybe with France's natural borders. Murat would also keep his throne, Saxony would be still on the Map and Poland might stay independant as a punishment to both Prussia and Russia.
This scenario would also see some sort of cold war between Western Europe (lead by Britain, Napoleonic France and Austria) and Eastern Europe (lead by Russia and Prussia). It would also had some glory to Napoleon as, despite being defeated in 1814, he rises frome his ashes like a Phoenix. Don't know how likely this is, but it is awesome :D

In any case, the Polish-Saxon crisis is probably an interesting POD for a Napoleonic timeline...
 

Eurofed

Banned
Impressive scenario Eurofed! Although due to personal preferences, it is not a favourite scenario. And IMHO I seriously doubt it, whether the Austrian Empire will totally be divided; I can see them losing Galicia-Lodomeria and never (re-)gaining Lombardy-Venetia, but they will keep Bohemia-Moravia. A demotion can be used as a diplomatic punishment, but would it necessary?

The rationale behind Austria getting such an harsh deal in my scenario is that the Russo-Prussian victors would inflict a punitive peace on one of the linchpins of the enemy coalition, which is also one they can truly overwhelm militarly (they can overrun Hannover and kick Britain out of the continent, but they cannot really ever pull an Innominable Mammal), and whose possessions they would have reason to covet. Losing OTL Congress of Vienna gains that never happened ITTL (Lombardy-Veneto, supremacy in Germany) is nowhere enough, Austria has to lose parts of their own holdings that Russia and Prussia would have reason to covet and whose loss would cut Austria down a peg or two. Hence Bohemia-Moravia and Galicia. By the way, this does not "totally divide" the Austrian Empire, it just demotes it to a medium power which nonetheless still owns German Austria, Greater Hungary, Croatia. And the victors still give it a consolation prize of sorts as they award it Bosnia and Serbia when the Ottoman Empire in Europe is dismantled.

In my scenario, the total collapse of the Austrian Empire happens later for different if related butterfly reasons: victory makes the Russo-Prussian-Neapolitan alliance comfortable with liberal reforms (without Metternich's influence, and with victory-fueled confidence, Tsar Alexander I fulfills his liberal plans, and Prussia and Naples follow his example), turning Prussia and Naples into the beacons for Greater German and Italian liberal-national unifications (much like Piedmont IOTL), while Austria reacts to defeat by bunkering down into Metternichian reactionary absolutism. Within a couple decades, this causes 1830/1848 style national-liberal revolutions to sweep Austria and the other German and Italian states, triggering the German and Italian unifications, the downfall of the Habsburg, and the independence of Hungary and Bosnia-Serbia as clients of the German-Russian-Italian alliance.

@Yorel: the rationale for Murat allying himself with the Russo-Prussians is that he had already become quite suspicious of Austria before Napoleon returned. He quite rightfully suspected that Vienna aimed to establish its total supremacy in Italy and in order to do so, would kick him out of Naples and bring the Bourbons back. This is one big reason why he threw his luck with the Hundred Days IOTL.

With the anti-Napoleon coalition breaking before Napoleon's return, he has a different, more favorable option: for geographical reasons, neither Russia nor Prussia are going to be very interested in direct supremacy over Italy unlike Austria, they would appreciate Murattian Naples as a regional hegemon ally. Nor, if Austria and Britain become enemies, they would favor restoring the Sicilian Bourbons that were Austro-British pawns through and through.

I won't deny that Britain making a 180° turn and an ally of convenience with Boney is an interesting twist, if one assumes that British policy may be entirely dictated by balance of power considerations. But let's not forget that Britain has been fighting Napoleon for 15 years. There would be huge political opposition to making an alliance with him. Your scenario sure might happen, but I stand by my just as, if not more, likely assumption that such an alliance would politically untenable for the British government, thus making the war a true three-way fight.
 
Last edited:
Eurofed said:
@Yorel: the rationale for Murat allying himself with the Russo-Prussians is that he had already become quite suspicious of Austria before Napoleon returned. He quite rightfully suspected that Vienna aimed to establish its total supremacy in Italy and in order to do so, would kick him out of Naples and bring the Bourbons back. This is one big reason why he threw his luck with the Hundred Days IOTL.

With the anti-Napoleon coalition breaking before Napoleon's return, he has a different, more favorable option: for geographical reasons, neither Russia nor Prussia are going to be very interested in direct supremacy over Italy unlike Austria, they would appreciate Murattian Naples as a regional hegemon ally. Nor, if Austria and Britain become enemies, they would favor restoring the Sicilian Bourbons that were Austro-British pawns through and through.

I won't deny that Britain making a 180° turn and an ally of convenience with Boney is an interesting twist, if one assumes that British policy may be entirely dictated by balance of power considerations. But let's not forget that Britain has been fighting Napoleon for 15 years. There would be huge political opposition to making an alliance with him. Your scenario sure might happen, but I stand by my just as, if not more, likely assumption that such an alliance would politically untenable for the British government, thus making the war a true three-way fight.

With your explanations, I now understand your logic and I think you base yourself on solid ground. Thus, you convinced me that your scenario is a likely one.

Plus, you've made me realize something... I didn't take Italy into account when I posted my scenario. Napoleon and the Austrians have conflicting interests there as Napoleon had his own plans for Italy during the Napoleonic Wars. Combined with what you said about Britain, I think my idea of an Austro-British alliance with Napoleon is seriously damaged... Of course, it can still happen with compromises but still, it will be hard to do.

I'm still a little bothered by the three-way war though... It doesn't really help two of the three sides : Napoleon has all of Europe against him while the Austro-British fight on two fronts (Napoleon on the West, the Russo-Prussian on the East).
It would seem more logical to have Napoleon consolidate his position on his own but not involving himself in the War between the Austro-British and Russo-Prussians. Then, after the war ends, no matter which side wins, he stands better chances at fighting them.
 

Eurofed

Banned
It would seem more logical to have Napoleon consolidate his position on his own but not involving himself in the War between the Austro-British and Russo-Prussians. Then, after the war ends, no matter which side wins, he stands better chances at fighting them.

Well, this is wholly possible. It would still surely lead to a total defeat of the Austro-British, since they could only win the war by active military cooperation with France. Otherwise the Russo-Prussians would steamroll Austria in a two-front war and then kick the British out of the continent.

A defensive war by Napoleon against the Russo-Prussians may win some battles, however in the long term Nappy still faces the problem that the Russo-Prussians would have a decisive numerical advantage and France is war-weary. I'm not really sure that Nappy can win enough to make the Russo-Prussians recognize his rule in France, although it is not wholly impossible. He can likely win better terms for his son and for France, however.

I'd say that this would make your scenario and my own rather close variants: I would still deem the outcome more probable where Napoleon has to abdicate again, but he is allowed to go into honored exile in America, his son keeps the throne with the liberal 1815 Constitution, and France keeps the OTL 1815 border. If you prefer, you may assume that he remains on the throne, although I find it less politically plausible. Better than OTL borders for France, however, are not any really plausible. In the long term, however, there would still be a liberal Napoleonic France in both scenarioes. And the outcome in the rest of Europe would still be the one I described, the triumph of the Russo-Prussians over the Austro-British would see to that, just Anglo-French detente and alliance against the eastern bloc would be delayed until Napoleon dies.
 
Suppose Russia does call the bluff and Russia and Prussia go to war with Britain, Austria and France. Who will win in this scenario and what will the consequences? And what of Napoleon? Will he stil try to escape from Elba and restore himself as Emperor? If so, would he be tolerated (assuming he succeeds) because France is now allied to Austria and Britain?

Ideas? Suggestions?

Regarding the original proposal, which could have led to a conflict. I can understand the reasons of Russia and Prussia... The other present European nations also didn't like this idea, especially Austria. Their ally Austria didn't like the idea, but if they would have wanted to persuade them, they should have offered something in return, since they require their ally Austria to hand over Galicia and Lodomeria (which BTW they controlled (since IIRC the first partition of Poland), well at least the part they kept IOTL). Obviously Austria wouldn't like or support any proposal, which wouldn't at least compensate them.
 
Last edited:
It's an interesting scenario but what of Egypt's status within the Ottoman empire? It was surely going to win its independence from the Turks and give the Ottomans a run for their money when it came to their territories in Palestine and Syria, what of that? The Ottomans are probably going to keep some of their lands in the Balkans. There are too many Muslims at this point and I doubt you would want to see deaths
 

Eurofed

Banned
It's an interesting scenario but what of Egypt's status within the Ottoman empire? It was surely going to win its independence from the Turks and give the Ottomans a run for their money when it came to their territories in Palestine and Syria, what of that?

As a matter of fact, ITTL the different alliance system and the accelerated death spiral of the Ottoman Empire by sudden loss of the Balkans may well be Egypt's fortune, too, since they might be able to use Russo-German-Italian patronage to balance Anglo-French colonial encroachment and support for Turkey, if they are any lucky and smart..

In USAO, which I think we may use a fairly close template up to a point since the other half of the scenario, the rise of the multicontinental American giant, is not directly influential on Europe till ACW/*WWI, Egypt does so during the *Turkish-Egyptian wars, and hence they come out of them with Hejaz and are not curbstomped by the great powers. This also means that Egypt does not suffer crippling financial problems and can merrily keep on with its steady state-building. They don't get Syria (yet) because the great powers are not (yet) willing to fight a general war over it. Palestine becomes a joint protectorate of the great powers for political reasons. Turkey continues to weaken despitesome well-meaning but half-assed attempts at domestic reform. When *WWI turns around, and in all likelihood the Russo-German-ItalianTriple Alliance curbstomps the Anglo-French-Iberian-Turkish Entente, Allied Egypt may well be able to seize Syria and affirm its status as the new leader of the Muslim world (of course, Russia is going to gobble large chunks of Anatolia and make Iraq and Persia protectorates).

In USAO this is what basically happens to Egypt and Turkey, apart from the fact that the *Entente intervenes in the ACW for the Confederacy to cut super-America down a peg or two, the *CP intervene on the side of the Union, and it becomes a Turtledovian World War spanning Europe, Middle East, and the Americas. Apart from picking a different casus belli and period for *WWI, I think that the scenario may be valid for TTL, too.

The Ottomans are probably going to keep some of their lands in the Balkans. There are too many Muslims at this point and I doubt you would want to see deaths

Large scale genocides are not really a 19th century thing, but I do think that the new Russian overlords would enforce religious uniformity of the Balkans with forced population transfers. OTL Russian conquest of Northern Caucasus was marked by fairly sizable ethnic displacement, after all. The refugees would mostly resettle in the Middle East, although a minority would possibly emgrate to the Americas. Not sure whether they would be welcome there. I'm pretty much sure that I made most of the Muslim minority in the Balkans resettle in the Middle East, but I don't remember if I made some of them emigrate overseas.
 
Last edited:
Top