wi No Napoleon Bonaparte

There might have been other marshals in history who could have taken Napoleon's place in history as first consul/strongman/dictator AND fended off several of the various Coalitions militarily, but I can't think of one with the hubris AND skill (both are required) to try to be a latter day Charlemagne (who Napoleon compared himself too often) as self-crowned Emperor and would-be ruler of the continent. I can't think of another marshal who try to marry off his mediocre siblings and relatives to the crowned heads of Europe (given almost all the marshals were anti-monarchical republicans) and create puppet states for said siblings to rule. I can't think of another marshal would make such a cohesive peace with the Catholic Church that the Concordat would last till 1905 (and in Alsace/Lorraine still does) given how many anti-religious (not just anti-clerical as Nappy was) officers there were in the ranks (indeed several marshals protested against the concordat to Napoleon). I also can't think of any marshal who would try to impose the Continental system against the British all over Europe and then invade Russia.

Napoleon, for good or ill, was a once in a lifetime sort of personality which I don't think any other French revolutionary officer could quite replicate. Without him, things would have gone quite differently (perhaps even better for France in the long run, considering how his ambitions finally hurt them).
 
Going a bit further afield, wouldn't this mean no Anglo-U.S. war around 1810?

Would a surviving HRE mean Austria unifies the German provinces? Or Saxony? (Presuming Prussia's doing it gets butterflied.)

Doesn't it also mean the 1848 revolutions don't happen, in the main, because of the less-stimulated nationalism?

Does it mean France TTL controls all of Switzerland, too?
 
Last edited:
Top