WI: Napoleon dies in 1812?

Suppose, for whatever reason, Napoleon dies in 1812, a year after his son was born. Say he falls off his horse on the way to Russia.

What happens now? Napoleon II would obviously be declared Emperor, with Marie-Louise as regent. Would the rest of Europe's powers accept this and agree to a lasting peace? Presumably, they'd prefer a Bourbon restoration, but that probably seemed unlikely at the time (when the Grande Armée was still essentially undefeated). This would be essentially a post-hoc acknowledgement of Napoleon I's right to rule, but having a Hapsburg regent could allow the young Napoleon II to be groomed to be "respectable" monarch.

If a peace settlement can be reached, what would it be like? Would France achieve its coveted "natural borders" (including the Rhineland and Belgium), or more still? France would be an interesting bargaining position, in possession of a lot territory but probably doubtful of its ability to hang on to much of it.
 
Last edited:
>Napoleon II would obviously be declared Emperor,

yes

> with Marie-Louise as regent.

Not a chance. Just the wife of the emprror, no political power.
 
I thought she was nominally in charge of things when her husband was away at war. No?

Who else would be the regent? One of Napoleon I's brothers?
 
I could imagine Marie-Louise as a figure head recent.

It would probably be either one of Napoleons brothers or possibly a recency council made up of some of Napoleon general's until Nappy II is of age.
 
By French 1804 constitution, the regent is the next male heir aged above 25.

In this case, it is Joseph Bonaparte.

How much power he will have in reality is in question, but he legally is regent.

That is supposing you do not have a successful alt-Mallet.
 
Suppose, for whatever reason, Napoleon dies in 1812, a year after his son was born. Say he falls off his horse on the way to Russia.

What happens now? Napoleon II would obviously be declared Emperor, with Marie-Louise as regent. Would the rest of Europe's powers accept this and agree to a lasting peace? Presumably, they'd prefer a Bourbon restoration, but that probably seemed unlikely at the time (when the Grande Armée was still essentially undefeated). This would be essentially a post-hoc acknowledgement of Napoleon I's right to rule, but having a Hapsburg regent could allow the young Napoleon II to be groomed to be "respectable" monarch.

If a peace settlement can be reached, what would it be like? Would France achieve its coveted "natural borders" (including the Rhineland and Belgium), or more still? France would be an interesting bargaining position, in possession of a lot territory but probably doubtful of its ability to hang on to much of it.

More likely the rest of Europe would immediately declare war. The Grande Armee was good, but with Napoleon out of the picture the other armies have a much better chance of defeating it.
 
Mallet basically was nothing more than a bad joke. He was a mentally sick man and a low rank unknown general.

It was not even like if lieutenant-general Flynn had declared he took power while Obama was at a summit in Vienna.

The difference is that power, under Napoleon, was very very very centralized and that he was himself leading a war in Russia and that news had become very bad. Everybody was very anxious of what might happen if Napoleon died. So when the Timor came that Nappy might have died, this comic-opera lonesome coup triggered a panic and the regime in Paris did not work as it should have.

Now, the date of Nappy's death in 1812 would be a very important choice.

Before the retreat and the disaster will change many things in the course of the war.

After it won't change much. The russians will probably still go for Alexander's strategy of not waiting and launching a massive counter-attack without taking time to heal the terrible suffered (both self-inflicted and by Napoleon) in 1812.
 
More likely the rest of Europe would immediately declare war. The Grande Armee was good, but with Napoleon out of the picture the other armies have a much better chance of defeating it.

They might, but they probably would accept a peace that kept the Napoleonic house intact- probably natural borders. My guess is Joseph and the generals would want peace to consolidate. Militarily, Davout as the main general is no dropoff from Nappy (that's if Davout gets it- my guess is if it comes down to manuevering they might go behind Eugene or one of the less competent generals). You might also lose Poniatowski on any peace deal, and he's good also.


I suspect they would be forced out of Italy, Spain, and Germany though.

Much depends on when in 1812 he dies- early on is a lot better than later on. The War with Russia itself may be butterflied.
 
Davout would probably be better than Nappy.

From 1812 on, Nappy seemed to have lost his Mojo. He probably was fed-up with waging wars again and again and was in a hurry to come back to Paris. This lessened his strategic options and ended making his strategy foreseeable. This also drove him to take dangerous risks.

Davout had all the maestria of Nappy on the field, although not his popularity and magnetism with the common soldier, but Davout was much more careful of his soldiers' lives. And he showed that he had retained the strategic vision that Nappy had lost.

The best thing for Napoleonic France would have been Nappy dying no later than August 1812 when he had not screwed the russian campaign up.
 
The best thing for Napoleonic France would have been Nappy dying no later than August 1812 when he had not screwed the russian campaign up.

Actually, the best would be for Napolaon to die BEFORE attacking Russia, say in June 1812.

IIRC, he actually had a nasty fall from his horse just a few days before attacking Russia (the troops were already gathering on the border). If the PoD is that this fall is fatal, then the attack is obviously called off while the political situation is sorted out. Even if ALexander wants to attack, he will be trashed by an intact Grande Armee in the plains of Poland.
 
Actually, the best would be for Napolaon to die BEFORE attacking Russia, say in June 1812.

IIRC, he actually had a nasty fall from his horse just a few days before attacking Russia (the troops were already gathering on the border). If the PoD is that this fall is fatal, then the attack is obviously called off while the political situation is sorted out. Even if ALexander wants to attack, he will be trashed by an intact Grande Armee in the plains of Poland.

Probably the Grande Armee would have to disperse soon anyway due to the difficulties of keeping so many men supplied. If Alexander has any sense, he'll wait for this to happen before he attacks.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Mallet basically was nothing more than a bad joke. He was a mentally sick man and a low rank unknown general.

That's true. But the important thing to take out of the Malet Conspiracy is that, when rumors swirled around Paris that Napoleon had been killed, it never seemed to occur to anybody that they needed to find his son and declare him the new Emperor.
 
Top