The Bonaparte Legacy (1860's AH./Closed)

[Of the Quendi]

1. Well, he IS the Spanish Prime Minister, so that section might as well become a Spanish satellite if he's put in charge of it .
2. Quendi is right: even if Napoleon liked using fancy Roman titles and regalia, handing all of Portugal over seems like an odd choice. Madrid also would have some chronic guerrilla problems during its early years, making taking over Portugal problematic at best.
--
1. Spain is going to get either the far south or north. It depends on which one he wants. I'm keeping the map blank there until he decides.

2. I'm afraid I can't allow that. The primary reason is the Ottoman Empire needs to remain strong to counteract Russian influence, and losing all of North Africa (though it's mostly an issue of Egypt) would be a huge blow to both her internal stability and income. If the Empire were weakened and the population turned against the French, there runs a real risk of Russia "sphering" them and disrupting the balance of power France needs to insure Russia is ringed with strong, French-aligned nations to prevent her from trying to taking another bite at the apple (Though, Segmentia should chime in on this).

3. I can agree to that

4. It's your Confederation, so it's your choice.

5. Denmark-Norway was already a country, and Sweden; bottled between them and Russia, would need to come to some kind of terms. I was thinking any union would be more of a Duelist structure, with a joint military, currency and customs union. After all, Sweden's branch of the Holstein-Gottorp family was about to go extinct and the nation was in political chaos: with the Danish having the upper hand one of the terms of peace could be having Frederick VI named heir to the throne of Sweden (Though keeping Sweden as a separate nation)

6. Well, the issue here is Great Britain still rules the waves, and the Portuguese and Bourbon Spaniard now have the center of their power in the New World. The standing idea I'm working with is, while France is dominate in Europe, the former members of the Coalition still put up a strong resistance in Asia and the Americas. France really can't make many demands so far as the New World is concerned beyond a White Peace, since the Imperial navy was a joke compared to the Royal one (Though this may have changed somewhat in the last 50 years; just as I'm sure the British Army has grown to better match the French threat).

I'm sticking with New Spain (And New Granada) for the Bourbons once I can work out the historical issues involved with the US.

One of the main issues is the tensions between France, Britain, and Russia: Russia doesn't like British influence in the East but similarly dislikes the Pro-French hegemony blocking her advances west. Britain hates Russia's guts and her possible threat to dominance in India and China, but also wants to break up her alliance with France to start a War of the Fifth Coalition and 'liberate' Europe. France wants the status quo, of course, since she's dominant.

1. He wouldn't remain Prime Minister after he became Prince. He was already deeply unpopular due to his extremely pro-French policies and the whole point of giving him a kingdom was to reward a staunch Bonapartist supporter with one of the best golden handshakes in modern history. It would be much more under French than Spanish influence.
-

1. OK. Since the northern region is by far the richer I expect to get it as I wants anyway.
2. Well regarding Egypt its lost to the Ottomans anyway and had been for a while. Its for all intents and purposes a sovereign state ruled by Muhammad Ali's dynasty which doesn't in anything but name (if even that) accept Ottoman leadership. By letting France take Egypt the Ottomans is actually strengthened as they won't have to deal with two costly wars between Egypt and the Ottomans.
4. Then isolation it is for those bastard Prussians.
5. The most I can think of is a personnel union in the mold of the Sweden-Norway union. Even that in the end proved too much for the Norwegians and I don't think the Danes could hope to impose more on Sweden or, in the long run, even Norway.
6. The naval inferiority of the French is being greatly exaggerated. Even after Trafalgar the French navy recovered and was able to force the British to maintain an expensive and straining blockade while Napoleon drew up plans for a huge expansion of the French navy that, if not checked by his disposition, would have allowed the French navy to grow bigger than the British one sometime in the 10s. Adding the navies of Spain, Italy, Sicily and Denmark-Norway (which as I understand the OP didn't loose its fleet) the United Kingdom would inevitably eventually have become inferior.

New Spain sounds fine but even if the Bourbons are initially able to cling on to New Granada I can't imagine them ruling it still in 1860. In fact even if they set up shop in New Spain in the 1810s successfully that won't stop the instability in their former empire and I would be surprised if they hasn't been displaced at least once by a Republic. Certainly whatever war saw New Spain loose all its northern territory to the US would have caused chaos and turmoil in the Kingdom/Empire.

-snip-

I am afraid there is a number of issues with your application. As the name suggest this RP is set in a world where Napoleon did better than in RL, in large part on Prussia's expense. The Treaty of Tilsit was made reducing Prussia to the blue on this map. Its population would probably be around ten million not the forty million of RL Prussia.

[Claven]

Question: Why does Britain not control the Pakistan area? Is this because it was butterflied away in this timeline?

And secondly, did the Greek war of independence happen? Did Napoleon support the Ottomans? If so, how did that affect Russia-France relations? And how did the general European society react to it?

[Of the Quendi]

Question: Why does Britain not control the Pakistan area? Is this because it was butterflied away in this timeline?

And secondly, did the Greek war of independence happen? Did Napoleon support the Ottomans? If so, how did that affect Russia-France relations? And how did the general European society react to it?

If there was a Greek war of independence France would probably have stayed neutral. While the details of the Franco-Ottoman Alliance would depend on things currently being debated it would chiefly be an alliance where France offers the Ottomans assistance against foreign aggressors. An uprising by a Christian minority group would not compel France to side with the Ottomans.

[Claven]

Question: Why does Britain not control the Pakistan area? Is this because it was butterflied away in this timeline?

And secondly, did the Greek war of independence happen? Did Napoleon support the Ottomans? If so, how did that affect Russia-France relations? And how did the general European society react to it?

If there was a Greek war of independence France would probably have stayed neutral. While the details of the Franco-Ottoman Alliance would depend on things currently being debated it would chiefly be an alliance where France offers the Ottomans assistance against foreign aggressors. An uprising by a Christian minority group would not compel France to side with the Ottomans.

But how would Russia have reacted? Even though the war was met initially with hostility, didn't the czar view himself as the protector of the Orthodox Church?
Plus, weren't the monarchs of Europe very Philhellenistic?

[Of the Quendi]

But how would Russia have reacted? Even though the war was met initially with hostility, didn't the czar view himself as the protector of the Orthodox Church?
Plus, weren't the monarchs of Europe very Philhellenistic?

I expect Russia would support the rebellion like it did in RL due to shared orthodoxy and an eagerness to jump at any opportunity to weaken the Ottomans. And yes the monarchs, and indeed many people in Europe, where Philhellenic and France would also be sympathetic. Even in a scenario where France stayed neutral (and its possible that France wouldn't stay neutral but would actively fight the Ottomans) eventually Napoleon would probably call a conference, tell the Ottomans to accept Greek independence and get the Russians and British to agree to some lines drawn by Napoleon on a map.

The real question is if a Bonaparte would become king of Greece.

[Prusslandia]

Hrmmm. If possible, reserve Japan for me.

[Togeria]

1. Well, he IS the Spanish Prime Minister, so that section might as well become a Spanish satellite if he's put in charge of it .
2. Quendi is right: even if Napoleon liked using fancy Roman titles and regalia, handing all of Portugal over seems like an odd choice. Madrid also would have some chronic guerrilla problems during its early years, making taking over Portugal problematic at best.
--
1. Spain is going to get either the far south or north. It depends on which one he wants. I'm keeping the map blank there until he decides.

2. I'm afraid I can't allow that. The primary reason is the Ottoman Empire needs to remain strong to counteract Russian influence, and losing all of North Africa (though it's mostly an issue of Egypt) would be a huge blow to both her internal stability and income. If the Empire were weakened and the population turned against the French, there runs a real risk of Russia "sphering" them and disrupting the balance of power France needs to insure Russia is ringed with strong, French-aligned nations to prevent her from trying to taking another bite at the apple (Though, Segmentia should chime in on this).

3. I can agree to that

4. It's your Confederation, so it's your choice.

5. Denmark-Norway was already a country, and Sweden; bottled between them and Russia, would need to come to some kind of terms. I was thinking any union would be more of a Duelist structure, with a joint military, currency and customs union. After all, Sweden's branch of the Holstein-Gottorp family was about to go extinct and the nation was in political chaos: with the Danish having the upper hand one of the terms of peace could be having Frederick VI named heir to the throne of Sweden (Though keeping Sweden as a separate nation)

6. Well, the issue here is Great Britain still rules the waves, and the Portuguese and Bourbon Spaniard now have the center of their power in the New World. The standing idea I'm working with is, while France is dominate in Europe, the former members of the Coalition still put up a strong resistance in Asia and the Americas. France really can't make many demands so far as the New World is concerned beyond a White Peace, since the Imperial navy was a joke compared to the Royal one (Though this may have changed somewhat in the last 50 years; just as I'm sure the British Army has grown to better match the French threat).

I'm sticking with New Spain (And New Granada) for the Bourbons once I can work out the historical issues involved with the US.

One of the main issues is the tensions between France, Britain, and Russia: Russia doesn't like British influence in the East but similarly dislikes the Pro-French hegemony blocking her advances west. Britain hates Russia's guts and her possible threat to dominance in India and China, but also wants to break up her alliance with France to start a War of the Fifth Coalition and 'liberate' Europe. France wants the status quo, of course, since she's dominant.

1. He wouldn't remain Prime Minister after he became Prince. He was already deeply unpopular due to his extremely pro-French policies and the whole point of giving him a kingdom was to reward a staunch Bonapartist supporter with one of the best golden handshakes in modern history. It would be much more under French than Spanish influence.
-

1. OK. Since the northern region is by far the richer I expect to get it as I wants anyway.
2. Well regarding Egypt its lost to the Ottomans anyway and had been for a while. Its for all intents and purposes a sovereign state ruled by Muhammad Ali's dynasty which doesn't in anything but name (if even that) accept Ottoman leadership. By letting France take Egypt the Ottomans is actually strengthened as they won't have to deal with two costly wars between Egypt and the Ottomans.
4. Then isolation it is for those bastard Prussians.
5. The most I can think of is a personnel union in the mold of the Sweden-Norway union. Even that in the end proved too much for the Norwegians and I don't think the Danes could hope to impose more on Sweden or, in the long run, even Norway.
6. The naval inferiority of the French is being greatly exaggerated. Even after Trafalgar the French navy recovered and was able to force the British to maintain an expensive and straining blockade while Napoleon drew up plans for a huge expansion of the French navy that, if not checked by his disposition, would have allowed the French navy to grow bigger than the British one sometime in the 10s. Adding the navies of Spain, Italy, Sicily and Denmark-Norway (which as I understand the OP didn't loose its fleet) the United Kingdom would inevitably eventually have become inferior.

New Spain sounds fine but even if the Bourbons are initially able to cling on to New Granada I can't imagine them ruling it still in 1860. In fact even if they set up shop in New Spain in the 1810s successfully that won't stop the instability in their former empire and I would be surprised if they hasn't been displaced at least once by a Republic. Certainly whatever war saw New Spain loose all its northern territory to the US would have caused chaos and turmoil in the Kingdom/Empire.

-snip-

I am afraid there is a number of issues with your application. As the name suggest this RP is set in a world where Napoleon did better than in RL, in large part on Prussia's expense. The Treaty of Tilsit was made reducing Prussia to the blue on this map. Its population would probably be around ten million not the forty million of RL Prussia.

Yeah I based it off RL, but if I need to change it I'll do so.

[Claven]

The real question is if a Bonaparte would become king of Greece.

Wouldn't that antagonize the Ottomans a bit too much?. Having a Bonaparte on the throne of state that had revolted against the Ottomans, an ally of France.

[New Granadeseret]

1. Fair enough.
2. That's a complicated issue. Though in Ali was given the governorship in 1805, there is the little matter of the Fraser expedition, which continued past the POD. My personal standing idea is that the Ottoman army steps in and helps drive them out, tightening their grip on his semi-independence. This is partially a realist measure (Since the Ottomans, unlike IRL when they weren't completely aligned in France, are their allies in this timeline and would need to respond swiftly to any British incursion), and partially to make the Ottomans a more viable power, giving more options for nations with a degree of autonomous power in the French sphere of influence (Spain has some, but the rest are little more than French puppets).
5. A personal union/confederation was what I had in mind. A shared monarch, alliance, open borders, currency union, ect., but with autonomous parliaments
6. All the resources I'm finding (Both on the websites an in what books I have on Napoleonic warfare) seem to comment to the contrary. Can you point me to where you're getting that information?

Well, it's more a Constitutional monarchy, operating on the Spanish Constitution of 1812. I'm waiting until the Peruvian app comes up to see what their history is, because the fate of New Granada will be largely based on that (Basically, if they're not using Bolivar he'll show up)

[The Dominion Of The Corn]

1. Fair enough.
2. That's a complicated issue. Though in Ali was given the governorship in 1805, there is the little matter of the Fraser expedition, which continued past the POD. My personal standing idea is that the Ottoman army steps in and helps drive them out, tightening their grip on his semi-independence. This is partially a realist measure (Since the Ottomans, unlike IRL when they weren't completely aligned in France, are their allies in this timeline and would need to respond swiftly to any British incursion), and partially to make the Ottomans a more viable power, giving more options for nations with a degree of autonomous power in the French sphere of influence (Spain has some, but the rest are little more than French puppets).
5. A personal union/confederation was what I had in mind. A shared monarch, alliance, open borders, currency union, ect., but with autonomous parliaments
6. All the resources I'm finding (Both on the websites an in what books I have on Napoleonic warfare) seem to comment to the contrary. Can you point me to where you're getting that information?

Well, it's more a Constitutional monarchy, operating on the Spanish Constitution of 1812. I'm waiting until the Peruvian app comes up to see what their history is, because the fate of New Granada will be largely based on that (Basically, if they're not using Bolivar he'll show up)

One big issue is that if Britain still rules the waves, Ireland needs to be on constant vigil for an ass-fucking.

[Of the Quendi]

Wouldn't that antagonize the Ottomans a bit too much?. Having a Bonaparte on the throne of state that had revolted against the Ottomans, an ally of France.

I would be far more concerned about how the British and Russians feel about it. The Ottomans would be in no position to object.

1. Fair enough.
2. That's a complicated issue. Though in Ali was given the governorship in 1805, there is the little matter of the Fraser expedition, which continued past the POD. My personal standing idea is that the Ottoman army steps in and helps drive them out, tightening their grip on his semi-independence. This is partially a realist measure (Since the Ottomans, unlike IRL when they weren't completely aligned in France, are their allies in this timeline and would need to respond swiftly to any British incursion), and partially to make the Ottomans a more viable power, giving more options for nations with a degree of autonomous power in the French sphere of influence (Spain has some, but the rest are little more than French puppets).
5. A personal union/confederation was what I had in mind. A shared monarch, alliance, open borders, currency union, ect., but with autonomous parliaments
6. All the resources I'm finding (Both on the websites an in what books I have on Napoleonic warfare) seem to comment to the contrary. Can you point me to where you're getting that information?

Well, it's more a Constitutional monarchy, operating on the Spanish Constitution of 1812. I'm waiting until the Peruvian app comes up to see what their history is, because the fate of New Granada will be largely based on that (Basically, if they're not using Bolivar he'll show up)

2. It sounds unlikely to me that the Ottomans, at war with Russia throughout the later years of the Napoleonic Wars would have been able to reassert control over Egypt but alright lets say they did. That still leaves a fifty years period where they can be constantly on the cusps of collapse in which France could have decided to take control of North Africa. The aforementioned Greek War of Independence for example. For the Ottomans surely it would be preferable to get rid of the most distant territories and then win an alliance with a strong power rather then to cling on to territory that both France and the United Kingdom would inevitably covet.
5. I suppose that could work. For a time at least. At the end of the day I expect that at least Sweden will eventually secede, further down the line Norway might go as well but in 1860 it could work.
6. I once found a source on the whole of the French post Trafalgar naval warfare but I have forgot where it was. It keeps me awake at night. Oh my god I just found it. This link describes the naval buildup France began. As a secondary source wikipedia's article for the different ship types used by France at the time mentions a large number of cancellations of ships under construction. This link sets the hypothetical Napoleonic navy in 1813 at 80 ships of the line with 35 under construction in 1813. The UK had 102, their number declining.

[The Dominion Of The Corn]

6. I once found a source on the whole of the French post Trafalgar naval warfare but I have forgot where it was. It keeps me awake at night. Oh my god I just found it. This link describes the naval buildup France began. As a secondary source wikipedia's article for the different ship types used by France at the time mentions a large number of cancellations of ships under construction. This link sets the hypothetical Napoleonic navy in 1813 at 80 ships of the line with 35 under construction in 1813. The UK had 102, their number declining.

Hooray. I'm trying to decide how many ships Ireland would have after 50 years of independence. Nothing that could in any way rival Britain, but we'd have French help and we'd be primarily focusing on keeping Britain out of the Emerald Isle.

[Baja California y Sonora]

Actually I'd like to drop the Peru reservation.

[New Granadeseret]

Actually, based on the fact interest seems to have collapsed (and didn't exist that strongly in the first place), I'm thinking I'm going to shut this down. It doesn't look like it's going to get off the ground

[The Dominion Of The Corn]

Actually, based on the fact interest seems to have collapsed (and didn't exist that strongly in the first place), I'm thinking I'm going to shut this down. It doesn't look like it's going to get off the ground

but....
Y u do dis