WI: July Napoleonic Monarchy

If Hitler had died during the Beer Hall Putsch, he would be considert a nobody. If George Washington had died during the French and Indian War, he would be considert a nobody. If Napoléon Bonaparte had died before the revolution, he would be considert a nobody. If Abraham Lincoln or Mahatma Gandhi or William of Orange or Nelson Mandela had died young, they would be called nobodies. Napoleon II has a lot of undiscovered potential and therefore is a interesting character for alternate history. And speculating is an essensial part of alternate history.
Since he was an unaccomplished nobody, who was a sickly 10 year old when his father died, how can you claim he had a lot of undiscovered potential? Any potential he had is in your own imagination. It's more likely that if Napoleon's regime survived till his death in 1821, some military, or political strongman would've taken power for himself. Napoleon's regime was constantly threatened with coups, and a 10 year old boy, and his Austrian mother would hardly be a strong center of power to hold together what was essential a military dictatorship.

Napoleon's position was based on the strength of his military prestige, personal popularity, and the loyalty of a police State. The Government, and army were staffed by ambitious men, of tenuis loyalty, with many resenting the Bonaparte family, and the public was volatile. The history of the period 1815-48 showed just how unstable the political situation in France was. It wasn't the Middle Ages anymore, and France wasn't a stable Constitutional Monarchy, it wasn't a time for a long regency. The French expected a strong national leader, to defend the State against foreign enemies, and domestic unrest.
 
Try imagining it as if you lived at that point in history. Napoleon 2 might not have ended up being much, but he was descended from someone who is thought to be the greatest general in the world as well from one of the greatest houses in history. We know how his story ends but imagine what could have been his story instead...
Many great men of history have had sons who turned out to be duds. In fact it's rare to have a secession of competent rulers from the same line. Napoleon II was a sickly boy of 10 when when his father died. We have no reason to think he was a dynamic leader of men, just waiting for his chance to show the world what he was capable of. We have even less reason to believe he would've survived his regency to even get his chance. There were too many ambitious men around him to make that likely. France needed a leader who could actually be in charge of national affairs in the present, not a place holder for one who may take charge in 10 years.
 
Many great men of history have had sons who turned out to be duds. In fact it's rare to have a secession of competent rulers from the same line. Napoleon II was a sickly boy of 10 when when his father died. We have no reason to think he was a dynamic leader of men, just waiting for his chance to show the world what he was capable of. We have even less reason to believe he would've survived his regency to even get his chance. There were too many ambitious men around him to make that likely. France needed a leader who could actually be in charge of national affairs in the present, not a place holder for one who may take charge in 10 years.
Well, in the case of Napoleon II, he showed an early disposition to military affairs and was refused entry into them as much as possible for fear of his possible brilliance.
 
Since he was an unaccomplished nobody, who was a sickly 10 year old when his father died, how can you claim he had a lot of undiscovered potential? Any potential he had is in your own imagination. It's more likely that if Napoleon's regime survived till his death in 1821, some military, or political strongman would've taken power for himself. Napoleon's regime was constantly threatened with coups, and a 10 year old boy, and his Austrian mother would hardly be a strong center of power to hold together what was essential a military dictatorship.
This would be unlikely because if Napoleon stayed in Paris he would not die as in OTL when the dilapidated conditions that OTL had in Saint Helena disappeared and he had at his disposal his GP Corvisart and the highest quality French medical personnel for the time.
 
Well, in the case of Napoleon II, he showed an early disposition to military affairs and was refused entry into them as much as possible for fear of his possible brilliance.
Of course, I am of the opinion that if he had come to power in France in OTL, this would have had his skills very stunted by his Austrian incarceration so he may have been slightly better than Napoleon III, but not as good as his father.

In the TL of Basileus this applies, but it is alternative history so I prefer to entertain myself with what will be made up of it.
 
Well, in the case of Napoleon II, he showed an early disposition to military affairs and was refused entry into them as much as possible for fear of his possible brilliance.
Playing soldier when your 8 years old isn't a strong indication of military genius. All aristocrats of the age got the same kind of schooling. Metternich's concern wasn't because he showed signs of military genius, it was because he was the son of Napoleon. His concerns were about his potential political rise. Even graduating from a military academy and serving as an officer doesn't mean you have great talent. That will only become apparent when given a degree of independence in a military command, under combat conditions. Most serving officers are not much more then competent, and even most generals aren't on that level, many are mediocre. A truly great general has a rare mix of qualities, that are only discovered in a period of crisis.
 
Playing soldier when your 8 years old isn't a strong indication of military genius. All aristocrats of the age got the same kind of schooling. Metternich's concern wasn't because he showed signs of military genius, it was because he was the son of Napoleon. His concerns were about his potential political rise. Even graduating from a military academy and serving as an officer doesn't mean you have great talent. That will only become apparent when given a degree of independence in a military command, under combat conditions. Most serving officers are not much more then competent, and even most generals aren't on that level, many are mediocre. A truly great general has a rare mix of qualities, that are only discovered in a period of crisis.
That they refused again and again to give it to him. And when they gave it, he died. Of course, I am not saying that he is as competent as his father but that he would be moderately competent in military affairs under OTL conditions.
 
This would be unlikely because if Napoleon stayed in Paris he would not die as in OTL when the dilapidated conditions that OTL had in Saint Helena disappeared and he had at his disposal his GP Corvisart and the highest quality French medical personnel for the time.
That's hard to say. By 1815 Napoleon had been in declining heath for years. The stress he was under has a ruler was aging him fast, and his weight kept climbing. Cancer is an insidious thing, that lurks in your body for years. He had a predisposition to a number of illnesses, any one of which could've shortened his life, besides being subject to infectious illness, and toxins. 52 was a common age for men to die at that time. Living another 10 years, so his son would be an adult is possible, but not that likely considering his medical condition.
 
That they refused again and again to give it to him. And when they gave it, he died. Of course, I am not saying that he is as competent as his father but that he would be moderately competent in military affairs under OTL conditions.
He was entrusted to command a battalion, in peace time, but never actually served. His abilities are a matter of complete conjecture.
 
That's hard to say. By 1815 Napoleon had been in declining heath for years. The stress he was under has a ruler was aging him fast, and his weight kept climbing. Cancer is an insidious thing, that lurks in your body for years. He had a predisposition to a number of illnesses, any one of which could've shortened his life, besides being subject to infectious illness, and toxins. 52 was a common age for men to die at that time. Living another 10 years, so his son would be an adult is possible, but not that likely considering his medical condition.
Very true. Cure of cancer did not exist in the XIX century (and it is still a complicated issue right now) so quality of the available medical personnel would not really matter. The treatment of that period AFAIK was limited to prescribing the pain killers (which, being narcotics, could have their own negative impact) and even the modern life-style recommendations (diets, etc.) which may (or may not) prolong life were not known. Of course, the generally bad vs. comfortable living conditions may add to the picture but probably not on a scale of a plus or minus decade. AFAIK, situation was pretty much the same with curing the stomach ulcer (IIRC, another diagnosis of Napoleon’s death). Taking into an account that he was seemingly suffering from either one or another by 1815, an extra 10 years look unlikely (but not necessarily impossible).

As for his son, the youths of his social position had been routinely getting a military training. The Russian Grand Dukes had been starting in the early teens or even earlier . For example, future AII was cornet of the Guards at 7, lieutenant at 9, colonel at 16, major-general at the age of 18 and in 26 was a full general and commander of the Guards Infantry which included 2 infantry divisions (4 regiments and artillery brigade each ) and a rifle brigade (4 regiments with artillery). All that without demonstrating at any point of his life any military abilities outside a foolish bravery (which endangered his outfit) in a skirmish on the Caucasus, that got him awarded with St.George 4th class (just for being under the fire, an ordinary person would have to show much more to gain it).

Future Frederick William III was lieutenant at 14 and lieutenant-colonel at 16. Prince Friedrich Wilhelm Ludwig of Prussia commanded the Guards regiment at 21.

Archduke Charles was an army commander at 22 and Archduke John at 18.

So being a battalion commander is not indication of any military abilities or inclinations. They may or may not exist but this remains a matter of a pure speculation.
 
Last edited:
That's hard to say. By 1815 Napoleon had been in declining heath for years. The stress he was under has a ruler was aging him fast, and his weight kept climbing. Cancer is an insidious thing, that lurks in your body for years. He had a predisposition to a number of illnesses, any one of which could've shortened his life, besides being subject to infectious illness, and toxins. 52 was a common age for men to die at that time. Living another 10 years, so his son would be an adult is possible, but not that likely considering his medical condition.
It is not difficult to say, without Saint Helena Napoleon will continue to develop his cancer, but with a delay of several years because he would not find himself in situations that aggravate his medical condition to such an insidious point.
 
He was entrusted to command a battalion, in peace time, but never actually served. His abilities are a matter of complete conjecture.
Exactly. And I reiterate, it is very likely that it would have shown medium competence given its OTL conditions. Whether other TLs (such as Eaglet Habsburg or Imperator Francorum) attribute exceptional qualities to him at the level of his father or even more is another matter.

In this TL it is assumed that given the conditions of staying with his father on the island of Elba for most of his life, they would have allowed her to better channel his government skills until he was competent enough. From 1 to 9 (5 being the normal level) I would put these statistics:

-Charisma: 8

-Administrative Skills: 7

-Diplomatic Skills: 6

-Military Skills: 6
 
Alright, so, was doing some reading on another topic, and am man enough to admit I was wrong. There was Napoléonic sentiment under the Restauration. Albeit, it was the sort of niche fascination that was reasonably easily crushed:

Emphasis mine:
Louis XVIII's ultra-conservative rule caused an increasing opposition in the country, especially by the way of secrete societies. The most famous of them was the carbonari movement (or carbonarism), which had initially developed in the Kingdom of Naples against the Napoleonian domination (1806-1815) and later against the Italian rulers.
Carbonarism then moved to France, and fought for liberal ideals, unification of Italy and return of the Bonaparte family on the throne of France. Carbonari were organized in ventes of 20 members, called bons cousins. They took part to General Berton's plot in Nantes and to the Four Sergeants' plot in La Rochelle. The Four Sergeants (Boris, Goubin, Pommier and Raoulx) were guillotinized in Paris in 1822. Their great courage initiated a liberal campaign and they became legendary.


The flag used by the Four Sergeants was part of the collection of Imperial Prince Napoléon (a.k.a. Jérôme, 1822-1891]. Used by the carbonari ventes between 1821 and 1822, the flag was seen during the plot of the 29th Regiment of the Line in Belfort, then in Paris, and finally in La Rochelle. It was preserved in La Rochelle, given to Lieutenant-Colonel Caron, then to M. Dubourjal, then to Marquis d'Audan, who finally offered it to Prince Napoleon in 1888.


The flag is a French tricolor, in size 100 cm x 172 cm, equipped with a tricolor sash and a golden peak qs its finial. The obverse and reverse of the flag had the respective white inscription:

Obverse Reverse
CONSTITUTION HONNEUR
ET ET
NAPOLEON II PATRIE


Napoléon II was the son of Napoléon I and Marie-Louise, titled King of Rome, Duke of Reichstadt. Born in 1811, the child was more or less kept prisoner in the Schönbrunn palace until his death in 1832. Recognized Emperor by the Chambers in Paris after his father's abdication, he never reigned.

Now, I'm not sure if those four sergeants were actively campaigning for a Restauration of Reichstadt or whether they were simply protesting in favour of a more liberal government. But,they were arrested on March 19 1820 (roughly a month after the assassination of the duc de Berri by another Napoléonic fanatic), Now, Berton (a veteran of both Waterloo, Toulouse and the Spanish campaign) was agitating for a restauration in Anjou and Touraine for most of the second half of the 1810s, until he met his "Waterloo" :)p) at Saumur.
 
Top