WI No Napoleon - Better/Worse outcome for France

Without Napoleon playing any role in the Revolution would France be better/worse off/the same?

  • Better Off/More Territory/Stronger Position/More Liberal

    Votes: 23 41.1%
  • Worse Off/Less Territory/Weaker Position/More Autocratic

    Votes: 16 28.6%
  • About the Same

    Votes: 13 23.2%
  • Other combinations (Please specify below)

    Votes: 4 7.1%

  • Total voters
    56

VVD0D95

Banned
Being more liberal isn’t necessarily a benefit in my view, to France here.
 
Last edited:
What is the impact of a no Napoleon situation for France?

Militarically or politically?

Politically France might had been much more instable at least during first years of 19th century. Probably First Republic was already doomed or at least it needed serious changes for surviving.
 
I say in many ways better off just because of the number of French lives saved and less money wasted on Nappy's military exploits. I think at some point in early 1800's the Republic stabilizes as a non-revolutionary player that the old regime would find grudgingly acceptable. Territorial end game is probably based largely on the 1792 borders but I would not consider it in a stronger position or more liberal
 
To me, I’m leaning better off. It’s hard to say just because of how consequential Napoléon was for the 19th century, and taking him out of it radically changes the next two hundred years in Europe. I’ll go with a Point of Divergence of Napoleon dying in combat or of disease (much of his army was sick in Egypt) just before the coup of 18 Brumaire, so everything else before then stays the same.

I cannot see the Directory lasting long, or at least one led by Paul Barras. It’s surprising how long he did last considering his endless open affairs with women and secret affairs with men, embezzlement from the nation, and his general opportunism. If not Napoléon, another general, or perhaps generals, would act against Barras. Keep in mind that coups, big and small, were common in revolutionary France. Its practically a question of when, not if, there is a coup. Victor Moreau, who had helped Napoleon seize power IOTL, was a leader of a dissidents faction in the wake of Napoleon's solidification of power, and was known to be less autocratic/imperialistic minded than the little corporal. Moreau came to be seen as a threat to Napoleon's power and was banished. This all shows that he indeed had an interest in politics himself, and was known to oppose both Napoleon being crowned Emperor and a hypothetical restoration of the old monarchy.

So, as the War of the Second Coalition draws to a close, and political instability plagues France, Moreau makes his move on Paris and arrests the directory, declaring himself the head of state. He assembles a new government composed of less-corrupt, more-reformist politicians and military officers beneath him, likely choosing Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte (OTL Charles XIV John of Sweden) as his second-in-command. The war probably continues identical to OTL, ending with the Treaties of Luneville and Amiens that establishes France's "natural borders" on the Rhine and a white peace with England. The war of the third coalition likely does not happen under Moreau, but I do imagine Europe being an uneasy continent with fighting between France and her allies against the "traditionalist" British, Russians, Austrians. As for things at home, I think Moreau would reopen elections but I imagine they would be controlled to prevent the return of extremists or reactionaries.
 
I’d advise you delete this because this could lead to a current politics argument and/or be interpreted as a current politics comment.
Don't worry. He is a monarchist (as opposed to a liberal in the 19th century meaning), which is a fringe viewpoint these days and generaly irrelevant in current politics.
 
Worse off domestically, the Directory's rule was terrible and unstable

The Napoleonic Code, the end of the religious persecutions, it all was a large improvement over what came before during the Revolution and Nappy's support for a "moderate" take on the revolutionary ideals was also much better than whatever the radical traditionalists would want to impose on France if they got back in power, as seen IOTL

Foreign policy wise?

Much better off
The Napoleonic Wars have this name for a reason, Nappy's warmongering led to millions of deaths and left not only France but the whole Europe financially broken and weaker than when he had taken power
His rule led to the end of the French Empire and the age of nationalist that destroyed the "Old Europe" and the following wars would continue to one-up his wars bringing even greater devastation and leaving Europe unrecognizable, with it's colonial empires gone for good

If Napoleon the Administrator and Napoleon the General-Emperor were two different people one would only receive songs of praise while the other would be scorned like Hitler is

But as it stands, they were the same person, so we have to take the good with the bad with that one, unfortunately
 

Grey Wolf

Donor
Does Toulon fall? And a British-led force establish a bulkhead there?

Does Kleber attempt to do in Italy what Napoleon did? Or do butterflies mean Joubert lives?

Nobody is going to Egypt without Napoleon, and quite probably nobody is going to Malta either

Maybe Leclerc makes a name for himself in fighting to defend France and doesn't die in a useless Caribbean adventure
 
Worse off domestically, the Directory's rule was terrible and unstable

The Napoleonic Code, the end of the religious persecutions, it all was a large improvement over what came before during the Revolution and Nappy's support for a "moderate" take on the revolutionary ideals was also much better than whatever the radical traditionalists would want to impose on France if they got back in power, as seen IOTL

Foreign policy wise?

Much better off
The Napoleonic Wars have this name for a reason, Nappy's warmongering led to millions of deaths and left not only France but the whole Europe financially broken and weaker than when he had taken power
His rule led to the end of the French Empire and the age of nationalist that destroyed the "Old Europe" and the following wars would continue to one-up his wars bringing even greater devastation and leaving Europe unrecognizable, with it's colonial empires gone for good

If Napoleon the Administrator and Napoleon the General-Emperor were two different people one would only receive songs of praise while the other would be scorned like Hitler is

But as it stands, they were the same person, so we have to take the good with the bad with that one, unfortunately
Napoleons warmongering?

Austria declared war on him and got squashed twice
Preussia declared war on him and got squashed
The Dutch allied with England and got squashed

When he returned from Elba he did want peace, but was declared enemy of Europe despite him not wanting war.
 
Napoleons warmongering?
Sorry, roman-style "defensive peace"
Austria declared war on him and got squashed twice
Preussia declared war on him and got squashed
The Dutch allied with England and got squashed
True, it was pretty epic, so?
When he returned from Elba he did want peace
Peace dictated by his terms with France and by extension him on a dominant position, yes
but was declared enemy of Europe despite him not wanting war.
Saying he didnt want war considering a whole lot of his invasions were his ideas and war was where he excelled at is naive at best
Ill not dispute however that the rest of Europe was just as itching for a chance to strike France down as he was to kick their collective arses and that they were waging war on France even before he showed up to kick things up a notch
 
I think at some point in early 1800's the Republic stabilizes as a non-revolutionary player that the old regime would find grudgingly acceptable.
The Ancien Regime will never, ever accept a Republican style of government in France under any cirumstances whatsoever. There is no possible compromise here. Either the Republic is squashed, or it drives out the Bourbons for good.

Napoleon as a whole was a good thing for Europe. His conquests carried democratic ideals across the continent with fire and sword. In a way he ended the Age of Absolutism, without which Europe could not be as it is today. The Anglophone world tends to ignore the awful state of the countries which he conquered, and doesn't remember the tremendous good the French Empire brought to Germany and Poland and Italy. Constitutional government, the self-determination of nations and the end of serfdom.

The victory of reaction at Leipzig ushered in the long repression of the democratic movement across Europe. Napoleon's defeat was nothing short of a catastrophy for the people of Europe.
 
France will bugger it up eventually. War against Prussia, Austria, Spain. Britain, the Dutch, take your pick. Without Nappy they will lose heavily. Lots of dead Frenchman, lots of money wasted , however it maybe only one war, more likely two before they stop trying. Meaning less dead Frenchman, and more money left. Things petty much the same but 10 years earlier, if you know what I mean
 
Top