WI: No Hundred days for Napoleon?

After Napoleon's first defeat in 1814 France received what amounted to a sweet-heart deal from the allies. France retained her 1792 borders, kept all the art looted from across Europe, suffered no indemnities, wasn't occupied and had no limits placed on her military. This deal basically collapsed after Napoleon's return and final defeat, leaving France much weaker than when Nappy found it.

So what if Napoleon's hundred days never happened? Either Napoleon stays on Elba, is sent somewhere much farther from Europe (ie St. Helena) or dies early. The point is there is no last hurrah for the Bonapartists and France retains everything she had in the 1814 Treaty of Paris. What's the long-term affects of a stronger France in the 1810s? A revival of French muscle? France regaining its first among equals position on the continent? A potentially more stable Bourbon Restoration? Thoughts?
 
Probably gonna warrant either sending Napoleon further away into exile or killing him in order to prevent a Hundred Days but that's not what the OP is talking about.

On the domestic scene, and this might surprise you, but had the Hundred Days' not happened. Louis XVIII would've actually have had more a role in government than he did post-Hundred Days'. Whether or not that would change if the Polish-Saxon Crisis does lead to war, I do not know. But it is likely that the Bourbon Restoration could've led to a restoration of absolute monarchy, despite the Charter of 1814. Only this time, with no Hundred Days and the worst aspects of a possible Polish-Saxon War only being in Central Europe, I don't think the financial costs of the war would be too overly straining (at worst case, territorial compensation for the deposed House of Wettin at the expense of France.)

Now I'm only speculating, and I'm probably missing something somewhere so take what I say with a grain of salt.
 
As the guy above me said, take my thoughts with a grain of salt.

One of the major reason that Napoleon could and did return to France was that there were major protest against the government. If Napoleon couldn't/didn't return to France, I'd imagine that these protests would continue. What happens from there I can't be certain, but I imagine a weakening of the government or even an insurgency in France that could keep it very destabilized, and essentially just repeat 1830 and 1848 again
 
Probably gonna warrant either sending Napoleon further away into exile or killing him in order to prevent a Hundred Days but that's not what the OP is talking about.

On the domestic scene, and this might surprise you, but had the Hundred Days' not happened. Louis XVIII would've actually have had more a role in government than he did post-Hundred Days'. Whether or not that would change if the Polish-Saxon Crisis does lead to war, I do not know. But it is likely that the Bourbon Restoration could've led to a restoration of absolute monarchy, despite the Charter of 1814. Only this time, with no Hundred Days and the worst aspects of a possible Polish-Saxon War only being in Central Europe, I don't think the financial costs of the war would be too overly straining (at worst case, territorial compensation for the deposed House of Wettin at the expense of France.)

Now I'm only speculating, and I'm probably missing something somewhere so take what I say with a grain of salt.

I may be wrong, but wasn't the Poland-Saxony Crisis practically resolved by the time Napoleon was back in France?
 
I may be wrong, but wasn't the Poland-Saxony Crisis practically resolved by the time Napoleon was back in France?

This is true. By March the great powers had agreed to Prussia annexing 2/5ths of Saxony and Russia gaining most of Prussian Poland. I think the only thing holding it up was getting the Saxon King's ascent.

Really by the time of Napoleon's return most of the Congress of Vienna's work was finished and the final act would have probably been signed in April or May without the Hundred days. As for the situation in France, its true that protests had started against the Government and that a lot of people were disgruntled. However, without Napoleon I don't think the various protests and/or revolts would be able to coalesce into a full-blown rebellion or insurgency.

Also, this is before the Napoleonic purge of the armed forces and government, so chances are the army would be in a much stronger position, with its Napoleonic officers and veterans still in service, to be able to put down any revolt. Especially if it goes Republican. The Napoleonic elite would have no love for a Republic that would not guarantee their noble titles, lands and other perks from Napoleon.
 
Then running by that logic, the Bourbon Restoration without a Hundred Days would be more or less a codified absolute monarchy, albeit one with the freedoms as established under the 1814 charter (freedom of religion, limited freedom of speech et.al.) Probably more or less better off than the reign of his younger brother and successor, Charles X.

Still have to deal with the succession though, namely Charles Ferdinand, Duke of Berry. Whether or not Louis allows change to semi-Salic or not is up in the air though.
 
Then running by that logic, the Bourbon Restoration without a Hundred Days would be more or less a codified absolute monarchy, albeit one with the freedoms as established under the 1814 charter (freedom of religion, limited freedom of speech et.al.) Probably more or less better off than the reign of his younger brother and successor, Charles X.

Still have to deal with the succession though, namely Charles Ferdinand, Duke of Berry. Whether or not Louis allows change to semi-Salic or not is up in the air though.

I wouldn't go that far. I think more likely Restoration France would end up like Stuart or Tudor England: the Parliament exists as a rubber-stamp with powers over taxation and de-jure legislative, the Crown has vast but not absolute power and the ministers more or less govern on the King's behalf.

As to the succession, that's really the easiest part. Just have the Duc de Berry's assassination fail. I mean OTL the line survived with the posthumous Duc de Bordeaux. Worst came to worst salic law would be abolished in favor of Madame Royale and any female issue of Berry.
 
I wouldn't go that far. I think more likely Restoration France would end up like Stuart or Tudor England: the Parliament exists as a rubber-stamp with powers over taxation and de-jure legislative, the Crown has vast but not absolute power and the ministers more or less govern on the King's behalf.

As to the succession, that's really the easiest part. Just have the Duc de Berry's assassination fail. I mean OTL the line survived with the posthumous Duc de Bordeaux. Worst came to worst salic law would be abolished in favor of Madame Royale and any female issue of Berry.

Why are we positing an absolute or quasi-absolute monarchy in France? The idea that nineteenth century France is going to be much like sixteenth century England in its governmental structures seems kind of absurd to me. The regime isn't run by Ultra-Ultras, it's going to actually be *more* dependent on Bonapartist officials than it was OTL, since none of the Bonapartists will have betrayed Louis XVIII during the Hundred Days. I'm not sure I see why the Restoration government is going to be particularly different than OTL.

Also, this is before the Napoleonic purge of the armed forces and government, so chances are the army would be in a much stronger position, with its Napoleonic officers and veterans still in service, to be able to put down any revolt. Especially if it goes Republican. The Napoleonic elite would have no love for a Republic that would not guarantee their noble titles, lands and other perks from Napoleon.

And I think the Napoleonic elite's commitment to the Bourbons is being wildly exaggerated here. In the first place, very few of them have noble titles, and any regime, republican, Bourbon, Orleans, or bonapartist, isn't going to mess with their lands. The regime most likely to do so, in fact, is the restored Bourbon regime, which is the one friendliest to the Catholic Church.

The former Bonapartists did not become ultra-loyal servitors of the Bourbons. They're the people who created the July Monarchy. Even if Louis XVIII keeps them loyal by being relatively neutral between them and the Ultras, Charles X is going to fuck it up and alienate them. If anything, they're going to expect *more* deference than they did OTL, since the ones least loyal to the Bourbons, who OTL went over to Napoleon in 1815, are still going to be in positions of power. And Charles X is going to be no more inclined to give it to them.

So, basically, I tend to think things go fairly similarly to OTL here.
 
Why are we positing an absolute or quasi-absolute monarchy in France? The idea that nineteenth century France is going to be much like sixteenth century England in its governmental structures seems kind of absurd to me. The regime isn't run by Ultra-Ultras, it's going to actually be *more* dependent on Bonapartist officials than it was OTL, since none of the Bonapartists will have betrayed Louis XVIII during the Hundred Days. I'm not sure I see why the Restoration government is going to be particularly different than OTL.



And I think the Napoleonic elite's commitment to the Bourbons is being wildly exaggerated here. In the first place, very few of them have noble titles, and any regime, republican, Bourbon, Orleans, or bonapartist, isn't going to mess with their lands. The regime most likely to do so, in fact, is the restored Bourbon regime, which is the one friendliest to the Catholic Church.

The former Bonapartists did not become ultra-loyal servitors of the Bourbons. They're the people who created the July Monarchy. Even if Louis XVIII keeps them loyal by being relatively neutral between them and the Ultras, Charles X is going to fuck it up and alienate them. If anything, they're going to expect *more* deference than they did OTL, since the ones least loyal to the Bourbons, who OTL went over to Napoleon in 1815, are still going to be in positions of power. And Charles X is going to be no more inclined to give it to them.

So, basically, I tend to think things go fairly similarly to OTL here.

You do realize that the Napoleonic Empire was the most centralized, absolute government in Europe sense the Roman Empire right? As long as their privileges are maintained the Bonapartist elite will have no problem with serving an absolute Bourbon monarch. But your right that the main issue would be Charles X purging them after his accession. If the Duc de Berry isn't assassinated, by a Bonapartist nonetheless, then perhaps Charles might be willing to keep some of the Napoleonic officials in power.
 
Another effect could be a possible survival of Joachim Murat, either as ruler of Naples or in general. It was him throwing in his hat with Nappy that lead to his execution after all...
 
Another effect could be a possible survival of Joachim Murat, either as ruler of Naples or in general. It was him throwing in his hat with Nappy that lead to his execution after all...

He'd never last as King of Naples. By the time of Napoleon's return Talleyrand had been pushing hard for the principle of Legitimacy to be applied to Naples and to restore the Neapolitan Bourbons to their throne and had won over some of the other powers to his cause. Chances are the final Act of the Congress would remove Joachim from the throne.
 
You do realize that the Napoleonic Empire was the most centralized, absolute government in Europe sense the Roman Empire right? As long as their privileges are maintained the Bonapartist elite will have no problem with serving an absolute Bourbon monarch. But your right that the main issue would be Charles X purging them after his accession. If the Duc de Berry isn't assassinated, by a Bonapartist nonetheless, then perhaps Charles might be willing to keep some of the Napoleonic officials in power.

Yes, the Napoleonic regime is centralized and authoritarian. I'd not use "absolutist," though, which is a term that seems to me to refer to the ancien regime.

But I don't think this is relevant. The same elites who were happy to serve Napoleon were, throughout the entire length of the Restoration, advocates of moderate and constitutional government through the Chambers. This is because absolute rule by the Bourbons would absolutely not involve maintaining their privileges. The Bourbons are not their friends. The Bourbons' friends are the people whose stuff the Bonapartist elites took. The more power the Bourbons have, the more likely they are to use it to take the Napoleonic officials' ill-gotten gains. Which is why Talleyrand and company supported constitutional government in OTL, and why they'd support constitutional government in the ATL as well.
 
He'd never last as King of Naples. By the time of Napoleon's return Talleyrand had been pushing hard for the principle of Legitimacy to be applied to Naples and to restore the Neapolitan Bourbons to their throne and had won over some of the other powers to his cause. Chances are the final Act of the Congress would remove Joachim from the throne.

He probably doesn't go before the firing squad, though.
 
He probably doesn't go before the firing squad, though.

Well remember that he wasn't initially sent to the firing squad. Joachim was executed after he attempted to invade Naples after he was deposed. If he does that ATL and fails again chances are he'd be before the guns again.
 
Well remember that he wasn't initially sent to the firing squad. Joachim was executed after he attempted to invade Naples after he was deposed. If he does that ATL and fails again chances are he'd be before the guns again.

Ah, so he was. I had completely forgotten that (I assume I must have known it at some point). What a stupid thing to do.

That being said - if he's deposed while the Bourbons are still on the French throne, he probably doesn't go to France. Perhaps to Switzerland instead? It's harder to arrange another attempt on Naples from there. I suppose he could also head to Rome and make trouble from there, but I don't think Pius VII is going to be as welcoming to Murat as he was to the Bonapartes unless Murat renounces his claim to Naples.
 
Top