Alternate History No Miracle of the House of Brandenburg.

[Agent23]

The Miracle of the House of Brandenburg is the miraculous bout of good luck Prussia and Frederick the Great experienced after the ill-fated, for the Prussians, Battle of Kunersdorf.

What if the Russians and Austrians manage to press harder and eventually take Berlin, this can happen because Elizabeth of Russia manages to hold out a few months longer or because Peter III dies before he can pivot towards the Prussians.

What are the implications for the progress of the 7 years war and for the broader history of the world?

 

[Circle of Willis]

RIP Prussia, surrounded by neighbors who all want to take a bite out of it. Austria's finally going to get Silesia back, Russians will snatch away East Prussia (they need a land connection to it though, so either they're going to also annex Courland in a hurry or trade EP to the PLC for Courland with plans to take it back later as part of a partition of Poland), Sweden can get its hands back on Pomerania (they already started the Pomeranian War two years prior) and Saxony probably gets Magdeburg or something as compensation for the Prussians' unprovoked invasion of it at the very start of hostilities in continental Europe.

Doubt it changes too much elsewhere. By the time of Kunersdorf the French's North American prospects were pretty hosed despite a great start at the Monongahela & Fort Ticonderoga, Louisbourg was already lost and Quebec City was under siege - the Marquis de Montcalm's besieged army was large but unwieldy and mostly comprised of low-quality militiamen who historically got routed by two volleys from the British at the Plains of Abraham a month later, so it's not looking great for French Canada to say the least. However with the French alliance's stronger position in Europe, they might be able to pressure Hanover enough even post-Minden to salvage more of their holdings in southern India or something (it's too late for them to break the strengthened British hold on India by 1759, the Battle of Plassey has already happened and the British East India Company had stomped its French counterpart in pretty much every battle they fought up to that point). Maybe they can use their stronger position to demand Senegal back as well.

Longer term changes...well Prussia will have been crippled, improving Austria's chances of unifying Germany if they ever go that route. The Diplomatic Revolution probably unravels soon enough, with Prussia taken off the board entirely Austria becomes Britain's only plausible continental counterweight to France + Russia while the Austrians in turn no longer really have any reason to stay allied to France and will likely find the Austrian Netherlands under French threat instead. Austria's chances of winning the War of the Bavarian Succession (and thereby gobbling up Bavaria) go way up in the absence of Prussia, or maybe that conflict will just spiral into the European theater of the American Revolutionary War (if it still happens, which isn't guaranteed with a 1759 POD) with France now having to step in to prevent its old Wittelsbach ally from being completely devoured by the traditional Habsburg rival while Britain is going to cheer Austria on (since empowering Austria to better counter France/Russia will be their best route to restoring the European balance of power).

Poland's the big winner here despite not fighting at all, Russia's the only power around that really wants to keep it subordinate or wipe it off the map altogether. The stronger Saxony has an interest in keeping Poland around (since its king is also the PLC's king and the Wettins were pro-Polish as late as the Napoleonic Wars IRL), and IIRC while Austria had some interest in Galicia but not in completely destroying Poland or gaining a border with Russia (they even sat out of the 2nd Partition, which was all Russia/Prussia historically). The castrated Brandenburg, of course, has neither strength nor any real reason to fight Poland anymore.

 

[Agent23]

Don't you think think that at some point the Austrians and the Poles will go to loggerheads without Prussia and with Austria taking some of its territory?

 

[Batrix2070]

Don't you think think that at some point the Austrians and the Poles will go to loggerheads without Prussia and with Austria taking some of its territory?

No, because Austria had no interest in it. They took Galicia and Lodomeria so that no one else would take it, but OTL the partition of Poland was unfavorable to Austria.

Now that one of the three partitioners has disappeared from the real equation, the de facto game is for the whole thing and Austria has no interest in this case in a weak PLC because it brings a dangerous adversary closer to itself.

Much more often Austria and Poland were in alliance than as adversaries. In these Napoleonic wars Poland will most likely appear as part of the great anti-Napoleonic/anti-revolutionary coalition because there is no reason to support France, as Brandenburg as the great loser of the 18th century will do in this ALT.

Once the Polish-Austrian dispute will be about something, it will be about Silesia. Perhaps about the New March/Lubusz Land, that is, de facto land that is part of the Polish ecclesiastical province that reflects the shape of the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland in its entirety. King Kazimierz III relinquished these claims, but not the Crown.

Which the canny and efficient Wettin could exploit to gain a connection between Saxony and Poland. But this is more the 19th century, after the Napoleonic wars.

 

[Agent23]

No, because Austria had no interest in it. They took Galicia and Lodomeria so that no one else would take it, but OTL the partition of Poland was unfavorable to Austria.

Now that one of the three partitioners has disappeared from the real equation, the de facto game is for the whole thing and Austria has no interest in this case in a weak PLC because it brings a dangerous adversary closer to itself.

Much more often Austria and Poland were in alliance than as adversaries. In these Napoleonic wars Poland will most likely appear as part of the great anti-Napoleonic/anti-revolutionary coalition because there is no reason to support France, as Brandenburg as the great loser of the 18th century will do in this ALT.

Once the Polish-Austrian dispute will be about something, it will be about Silesia. Perhaps about the New March/Lubusz Land, that is, de facto land that is part of the Polish ecclesiastical province that reflects the shape of the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland in its entirety. King Kazimierz III relinquished these claims, but not the Crown.

Which the canny and efficient Wettin could exploit to gain a connection between Saxony and Poland. But this is more the 19th century, after the Napoleonic wars.

Assuming we have any Napoleonic wars, of course.

 

[Batrix2070]

Assuming we have any Napoleonic wars, of course.

Napoleonic Wars, Revolutionary Wars as you like. Regardless, the main trajectory when it comes to the outbreak of the French Revolution doesn't seem too disrupted. I guess, it is possible that the surviving PLC will prevent a famine in France (for it will sell grain much cheaper than Russia or Prussia) and thus France will get through its turbulence much better, without a bloody crackdown.

 

[Agent23]

Napoleonic Wars, Revolutionary Wars as you like. Regardless, the main trajectory when it comes to the outbreak of the French Revolution doesn't seem too disrupted. I guess, it is possible that the surviving PLC will prevent a famine in France (for it will sell grain much cheaper than Russia or Prussia) and thus France will get through its turbulence much better, without a bloody crackdown.

Yeah, and the Russians would probably have better relations with the french because they don't do a heel face turn, so the Ancien Regime might last longer and maybe even gradually reform into something resembling a constitutional monarchy.

The 7 years war and the blood and treasure the French spent on it were a major factor in subverting the French monarchy.

 

[ATP]

The Miracle of the House of Brandenburg is the miraculous bout of good luck Prussia and Frederick the Great experienced after the ill-fated, for the Prussians, Battle of Kunersdorf.

What if the Russians and Austrians manage to press harder and eventually take Berlin, this can happen because Elizabeth of Russia manages to hold out a few months longer or because Peter III dies before he can pivot towards the Prussians.

What are the implications for the progress of the 7 years war and for the broader history of the world?

No Partitions,normal germans,not prussian clones.No world wars.

British would support Austria now,which in turn would support PLC and Saxony.
France would support Bavaria and Russia.
Sweden and turkey would still fought Russia,Persia,too.

So,wars from time to time with small changes of territory,but nothing like WW1 or WW2.There should be no French Revolution,too.
Maybe no USA - if France keep more,they should be less inclined in supporting rebels there.And,without that,USA would be killed in cradle.Better for indians there.

Napoleonic Wars, Revolutionary Wars as you like. Regardless, the main trajectory when it comes to the outbreak of the French Revolution doesn't seem too disrupted. I guess, it is possible that the surviving PLC will prevent a famine in France (for it will sell grain much cheaper than Russia or Prussia) and thus France will get through its turbulence much better, without a bloody crackdown.

This,i think that there would be no famine- no revolution there.

All in all - we would still have real Kings now.Strong PLC,strong Austria and Saxony,and Russia would eat Turkey and get Constantinopole - nobody would fight to save them.
When attacking PLC would trigger Austria and Sweden response.

What is more important - NORMAL GERMANS,WHO DO NOT TRY TAKE OVER EUROPE EACH GENERATION.

 

[Agent23]

So do we ever see a German nation created in any shape or form?

I'd assume that even if we do get a 'Reich' it will be something of a more confederate nature, along the lines of the German Cofederation with more of an emphasis on trade and shared language and culture than of the prussian obsession with barking orders and shitty leather horse-riding jackboots.
Maybe even a proto-EU.

But the Spring of peoples will probably come eventually, and some Garibaldi wannabe might try and centralize everything, maybe even under the Austrians.

Also, Austria might try to restore the HRE/be the germanic unifying force at some point.

On the other hand, a larger Austria might be a less stable one down the line.

 

[ATP]

So do we ever see a German nation created in any shape or form?

I'd assume that even if we do get a 'Reich' it will be something of a more confederate nature, along the lines of the German Cofederation with more of an emphasis on trade and shared language and culture than of the prussian obsession with barking orders and shitty leather horse-riding jackboots.
Maybe even a proto-EU.

But the Spring of peoples will probably come eventually, and some Garibaldi wannabe might try and centralize everything, maybe even under the Austrians.

Also, Austria might try to restore the HRE/be the germanic unifying force at some point.

On the other hand, a larger Austria might be a less stable one down the line.

Habsburgs would try that,France would fight it.Who would win? we could only quess.

 

[Agent23]

Habsburgs would try that,France would fight it.Who would win? we could only quess.

The various free cities and burgers, hopefully.

 

[Circle of Willis]

So do we ever see a German nation created in any shape or form?

I'd assume that even if we do get a 'Reich' it will be something of a more confederate nature, along the lines of the German Cofederation with more of an emphasis on trade and shared language and culture than of the prussian obsession with barking orders and shitty leather horse-riding jackboots.
Maybe even a proto-EU.

But the Spring of peoples will probably come eventually, and some Garibaldi wannabe might try and centralize everything, maybe even under the Austrians.

Also, Austria might try to restore the HRE/be the germanic unifying force at some point.

On the other hand, a larger Austria might be a less stable one down the line.

Technically the HRE is still around and not in need of restoration as of the 18th century, Napoleon didn't destroy it until 1806 - and for that matter he may not even be born ITL depending on how hard & fast you're playing with the butterfly effect, since he won't be born until 6-7 years after Elizabeth of Russia croaked. I could see the Habsburgs, if they've succeeded in taking Bavaria to reinforce their power (especially in Germany), using its existing framework as the basis for a unified but non-absolute Germany.

IIRC Maria Theresa's oldest son Joseph II was the only Habsburg in this timeframe who was rabid about imposing enlightened absolutism and centralism, his brother & successor Leopold II was a pretty chill monarch and Leopold's successor Francis II (if he is still born at all, same problem as Napoleon) only became a censorious conservative hardliner in response to the French Revolution & ensuing wars, so if the Revolution can be avoided or take a less extreme course in this timeline he probably wouldn't turn out the same way. While obviously interested in maintaining & enhancing Habsburg power, both men seemed prudent enough to not push their luck too far and make concessions to their rivals when necessary for the sake of self-preservation (Leopold backtracked on practically everything Joseph did that had pissed off everyone else in the Austrian domains, Francis suffered the embarrassment of marrying his daughter Marie-Louise to Napoleon himself to ensure that the Habsburgs wouldn't be joining their Holy Roman Empire in the dustbin of history).

If nationalist sentiment still surges at some point though, the behemoth that would be a Habsburg-led HRE (which after all includes Hungary, Croatia and Tuscany as well as pieces of Italy - Milan, Mantua, etc.) will indeed find itself in a pickle. How it's going to resolve tensions with its non-German subjects is beyond my expertise.

 

[Agent23]

Technically the HRE is still around and not in need of restoration as of the 18th century, Napoleon didn't destroy it until 1806 - and for that matter he may not even be born ITL depending on how hard & fast you're playing with the butterfly effect, since he won't be born until 6-7 years after Elizabeth of Russia croaked. I could see the Habsburgs, if they've succeeded in taking Bavaria to reinforce their power (especially in Germany), using its existing framework as the basis for a unified but non-absolute Germany.

IIRC Maria Theresa's oldest son Joseph II was the only Habsburg in this timeframe who was rabid about imposing enlightened absolutism and centralism, his brother & successor Leopold II was a pretty chill monarch and Leopold's successor Francis II (if he is still born at all, same problem as Napoleon) only became a censorious conservative hardliner in response to the French Revolution & ensuing wars, so if the Revolution can be avoided or take a less extreme course in this timeline he probably wouldn't turn out the same way. While obviously interested in maintaining & enhancing Habsburg power, both men seemed prudent enough to not push their luck too far and make concessions to their rivals when necessary for the sake of self-preservation (Leopold backtracked on practically everything Joseph did that had pissed off everyone else in the Austrian domains, Francis suffered the embarrassment of marrying his daughter Marie-Louise to Napoleon himself to ensure that the Habsburgs wouldn't be joining their Holy Roman Empire in the dustbin of history).

If nationalist sentiment still surges at some point though, the behemoth that would be a Habsburg-led HRE (which after all includes Hungary, Croatia and Tuscany as well as pieces of Italy - Milan, Mantua, etc.) will indeed find itself in a pickle. How it's going to resolve tensions with its non-German subjects is beyond my expertise.

By creating the Holy Roman Confederacy or something?

 

[Buba]

As noted by others, a quite different world.

With Prussia crushed in 1758/9 and the war over by the time Elizabeth pops her clogs - does Catherine manage to topple and murder Paul? If not - this derails history of Russia and neighbourhood.

 

[ATP]

As noted by others, a quite different world.

With Prussia crushed in 1758/9 and the war over by the time Elizabeth pops her clogs - does Catherine manage to topple and murder Paul? If not - this derails history of Russia and neighbourhood.

Not so much.Any Russia would try conqer Poland or Turkey.
And,with PLC here still with Saxon Kings,it mean Turkey.

 

[Buba]

Any Russia would try conqer Poland or Turkey.
And,with PLC here still with Saxon Kings,it mean Turkey.

Peter III - who knows what his brand of crazy might had been.
True that a push at the Straits makes most sense, but that is a commodity often lacking in Sankt Peterburg.
Involvement in German affairs is quite likely.

 

[Skallagrim]

As has been noted: Prussia is screwed. The OP leaves it a bit vague as to whether we're talking about the first of second 'miracle' here. (This first is that Prussia's enemies tarried and failed to exploit Prussian weakness after Kunersdorf in '59. The second is that Elizabeth croaked in January '62.) But either one would screw over Prussia. I think the latter is most often-explored, and the former actually has a good chance of ending the war earlier (which has more potentially interesting ramifications), so I'll run with that one.

-- Frederick II, in all likeihood, commits suicide when it becomes clear that total defeat is inevitable and that kis kingdom is about to be destroyed.

-- Prussia is indeed dismantled and reduced to the Margriavate of Brandenburg. The Hohenzollerns are compelled to give up their royal title and any claims to a "Prussian" realm.

-- Austria takes not only Silesia, but also Prussia's outlying regions in the West (Mark, Cleves, Ostfriesland, Minden, Ravensberg...)

-- Saxony takes Magdeburg, Hohnstein, and other outlying bits on the Southern side of former Prussia.

-- Sweden takes all of Pomerania (which is made easier by ceding any designs on Ostfriesland).

-- Russia has a claim to East Prussia, which it promptly exchanges with the PLC, for Courland and Polish Livonia.

-- With Prussia gone, the war on the continent is a done deal, and Britain will have to sign a reasonable peace to prevent Hanover from being pressured altogether too much. I think that as has been observed already, the war in North America is a done deal, and France isn't getting anything back over there. But I think the British will be pressured to cede the outlying Hanoverian regions (Göttingen-Grubenhagen) to Austria, and reach an accomodation with the French in India.

-- The latter will mean that the Gangetic plain is definitely the British back-yard, but South(-East)ern India will be the French sphere of influence. Meanwhile, France will have to promise to stay off the West Coast of the Subcontinent.

-- Britain won't be able to force France to demolish its fortifications around Dunkirk, either. (A stipulation that was aborgated in 1783 in OTL anyway.)

-- I don't think the French will push for the return odf any other colonies. Rather, they'll want to keep Minorca instead of returning it to the British.

-- Louisiana will still be secretly ceded to Spain by France.



Beyond this, the outcome of the war will be much the same, although it ends a bit earlier. That also means that it doesn't meaningfully affect Russian history. Paul will still be removed, instead of some drastic change occurring there (which could be possible if we go with "Elizabeth lives longer" as a POD instead).

But what then of longer-term results?

A key thing in Germany is going to be the issue of the Bavarian succession. In OTL, the Autrians offered the Austrian Netherlands in an attempt to obtain Bavaria. In this ATL, they can offer their additional territories in North-West Germany (obtained from Prussia) as well. I've read several threads over the years that outlined various possibilities for a complicated game of land-swaps, culminating in Austria being able to offered (basically) an expanded Austrian Netherlands that would lead to them getting Bavaria in exchange-- without a war.

This outcome creates an independent "Kingdom of Brabant" (I don't think they'll go with 'Belgium', and Brabant was still more prominent than Flanders as an entity, at the time), actuallt friendly to Austria. Thus also friendly with Britain, which (as has been pointed out in this thread) will quickly patch things up with Austria to counter French ambitions on the continent.

We thus end up with Britain-Austria versus France-Russia as the main axes of power. Poland will eagerly side with the former, which will after all have zero interest in any partitions. This ironically gets Saxony in board as well, thus actually creating the ground-work for a Germany that is both stable and Poland-friendly.

That Germany is basically the HRE, and Austria-led by default. But to keep everybody on board, they'll need to keep it very confederal.

The underlying causes for the American strugle for independence are already there, so I don't see that going away. The British may have to dedicate more forces to India as they fight the French at the same time, but on the ther hand, if the French have to dedicate more to India as well, they won't be able to help the Americans as much. Net result is about the same as in OTL. France still ends up bankrupt, America still ends up independent. I think France gets driven from India at this point, so in the end they just delayed their collapse there by a bit.

With "Brabant" independent, I think there's not going to be any revolution there. But the Patriotic movement will still exist in the Netherlands (the causes for their discontent go back quite a bit), and without Prussian aid to suppress the discontent by force of arms (and quite possibly with French help for the insurrectionist), I think the Stadtholders are driven from the Republic. The end result will be a French-allied "Batavian Republic", presumably modeled more on the USA than anything else (as this was the example for their early Patriots).

Whether the French still go insane with their revolution is an open question. They had loads of issues, but it wasn't a given that things would go as terribly wrong as in OTL. Since the French are losing their substantial Indian possessions later, there's the potential that the outcome of the ARW (and concurrent Anglo-French war in India) would look like the OTL outcome of the Seven Years' War. The French might at that point, faced with bankruptcy, offer the British to surrender all their Indian possessions completely, in return for an indemnity. They could also sell Minorca back to Spain around this time. Likewise, they could opt not to bay Corsica. Any (or ideally all) of these decisions could reduce the dire situation France was in.

Supposing we go with that scenario (of France avoiding the revolution, or at least a radical version of it), we'd also see continued sympathy towards France in the USA (which was much reduced when the fanatical Jacobins took over). So this would leave the world divided between two alliance systems:

France-USA-Batavia-Spain-Russia versus Britain-Brabant-Austria-HRE-Portugal.

This could easily be the set-up for an ATL equivalent to the Napoleonic Wars. The latter side seems the stronger one, not least because the PLC, Sweden and the Ottoman Empire might be persuaded to join them...

 

[Circle of Willis]

As has been noted: Prussia is screwed. The OP leaves it a bit vague as to whether we're talking about the first of second 'miracle' here. (This first is that Prussia's enemies tarried and failed to exploit Prussian weakness after Kunersdorf in '59. The second is that Elizabeth croaked in January '62.) But either one would screw over Prussia. I think the latter is most often-explored, and the former actually has a good chance of ending the war earlier (which has more potentially interesting ramifications), so I'll run with that one.

-- Frederick II, in all likeihood, commits suicide when it becomes clear that total defeat is inevitable and that kis kingdom is about to be destroyed.

-- Prussia is indeed dismantled and reduced to the Margriavate of Brandenburg. The Hohenzollerns are compelled to give up their royal title and any claims to a "Prussian" realm.

-- Austria takes not only Silesia, but also Prussia's outlying regions in the West (Mark, Cleves, Ostfriesland, Minden, Ravensberg...)

-- Saxony takes Magdeburg, Hohnstein, and other outlying bits on the Southern side of former Prussia.

-- Sweden takes all of Pomerania (which is made easier by ceding any designs on Ostfriesland).

-- Russia has a claim to East Prussia, which it promptly exchanges with the PLC, for Courland and Polish Livonia.

-- With Prussia gone, the war on the continent is a done deal, and Britain will have to sign a reasonable peace to prevent Hanover from being pressured altogether too much. I think that as has been observed already, the war in North America is a done deal, and France isn't getting anything back over there. But I think the British will be pressured to cede the outlying Hanoverian regions (Göttingen-Grubenhagen) to Austria, and reach an accomodation with the French in India.

-- The latter will mean that the Gangetic plain is definitely the British back-yard, but South(-East)ern India will be the French sphere of influence. Meanwhile, France will have to promise to stay off the West Coast of the Subcontinent.

-- Britain won't be able to force France to demolish its fortifications around Dunkirk, either. (A stipulation that was aborgated in 1783 in OTL anyway.)

-- I don't think the French will push for the return odf any other colonies. Rather, they'll want to keep Minorca instead of returning it to the British.

-- Louisiana will still be secretly ceded to Spain by France.



Beyond this, the outcome of the war will be much the same, although it ends a bit earlier. That also means that it doesn't meaningfully affect Russian history. Paul will still be removed, instead of some drastic change occurring there (which could be possible if we go with "Elizabeth lives longer" as a POD instead).

But what then of longer-term results?

A key thing in Germany is going to be the issue of the Bavarian succession. In OTL, the Autrians offered the Austrian Netherlands in an attempt to obtain Bavaria. In this ATL, they can offer their additional territories in North-West Germany (obtained from Prussia) as well. I've read several threads over the years that outlined various possibilities for a complicated game of land-swaps, culminating in Austria being able to offered (basically) an expanded Austrian Netherlands that would lead to them getting Bavaria in exchange-- without a war.

This outcome creates an independent "Kingdom of Brabant" (I don't think they'll go with 'Belgium', and Brabant was still more prominent than Flanders as an entity, at the time), actuallt friendly to Austria. Thus also friendly with Britain, which (as has been pointed out in this thread) will quickly patch things up with Austria to counter French ambitions on the continent.

We thus end up with Britain-Austria versus France-Russia as the main axes of power. Poland will eagerly side with the former, which will after all have zero interest in any partitions. This ironically gets Saxony in board as well, thus actually creating the ground-work for a Germany that is both stable and Poland-friendly.

That Germany is basically the HRE, and Austria-led by default. But to keep everybody on board, they'll need to keep it very confederal.

The underlying causes for the American strugle for independence are already there, so I don't see that going away. The British may have to dedicate more forces to India as they fight the French at the same time, but on the ther hand, if the French have to dedicate more to India as well, they won't be able to help the Americans as much. Net result is about the same as in OTL. France still ends up bankrupt, America still ends up independent. I think France gets driven from India at this point, so in the end they just delayed their collapse there by a bit.

With "Brabant" independent, I think there's not going to be any revolution there. But the Patriotic movement will still exist in the Netherlands (the causes for their discontent go back quite a bit), and without Prussian aid to suppress the discontent by force of arms (and quite possibly with French help for the insurrectionist), I think the Stadtholders are driven from the Republic. The end result will be a French-allied "Batavian Republic", presumably modeled more on the USA than anything else (as this was the example for their early Patriots).

Whether the French still go insane with their revolution is an open question. They had loads of issues, but it wasn't a given that things would go as terribly wrong as in OTL. Since the French are losing their substantial Indian possessions later, there's the potential that the outcome of the ARW (and concurrent Anglo-French war in India) would look like the OTL outcome of the Seven Years' War. The French might at that point, faced with bankruptcy, offer the British to surrender all their Indian possessions completely, in return for an indemnity. They could also sell Minorca back to Spain around this time. Likewise, they could opt not to bay Corsica. Any (or ideally all) of these decisions could reduce the dire situation France was in.

Supposing we go with that scenario (of France avoiding the revolution, or at least a radical version of it), we'd also see continued sympathy towards France in the USA (which was much reduced when the fanatical Jacobins took over). So this would leave the world divided between two alliance systems:

France-USA-Batavia-Spain-Russia versus Britain-Brabant-Austria-HRE-Portugal.

This could easily be the set-up for an ATL equivalent to the Napoleonic Wars. The latter side seems the stronger one, not least because the PLC, Sweden and the Ottoman Empire might be persuaded to join them...

Not too long ago I posted a thread about the Feuillants coming out on top & charting a more moderate course for the French Revolution - seems France's softer landing in this outline might help set up such an outcome, by extension meaning a stronger & less exhausted France with a much stronger relationship with the US (especially with Lafayette around and playing a significant role as the cultural, personal & ideological bridge between the two countries). Avoiding the bedlam of the Revolutionary & Napoleonic Wars in favor of, at worst, another round of much more limited 'cabinet wars' instead also opens the door to other neat 19th century possibilities, like Spain not spiraling into its horrible terminal decline and the Spanish Americas gaining autonomy as new kingdoms under additional Bourbon cadet branches per the Count of Aranda's plans (also talked about in that linked thread) instead of bloodily tearing themselves from their motherland. All in all it's almost certainly a better 19th century, and a better world, than what we actually got historically.

Honestly France + Batavia + Spain + America + Russia vs. Britain + Austria (and by extension the HRE/Germany) + Portugal + Poland-Lithuania + Brabant seems like it'd be a very even fight, the sort perfectly set up to end in negotiations and incremental rather than sweeping gains like most other 'cabinet wars' of the 18th century. I'm not sure what Sweden or the Turks would be able to contribute - IIRC Sweden never really recovered from getting dethroned by Russia during the Great Northern Wars and the Ottomans still had the millstone that was their fully-Praetorianized janissary corps tied around their necks in this timeframe, plus the latter was still fighting wars with Austria. At least the Turks have no easy counter for the Franco-Russian alliance to call in though, whereas to deal with Sweden I'd imagine they can reach out to Denmark-Norway to encircle those guys on east & west. (Maybe offering them Scania back; it'd be quite ironic if D-N actually manages to retake the place soon after Sweden recovers Pomerania, considering that the Scanian War from a hundred years prior was where they definitively lost Scania to Sweden while Sweden in turn lost Pomerania to Brandenburg-Prussia)

 

[Skallagrim]

Not too long ago I posted a thread about the Feuillants coming out on top & charting a more moderate course for the French Revolution - seems France's softer landing in this outline might help set up such an outcome,

Certainly.

by extension meaning a stronger & less exhausted France with a much stronger relationship with the US (especially with Lafayette around and playing a significant role as the cultural, personal & ideological bridge between the two countries).

With a relatively early POD such as the one at play here, we can't be sure whether to expect Lafayette, but as I've outlined: French aid to the American patriots still makes sense, and there are very realistic avenues for a less bankrump, more stable France. This, coupled with overal tendencies towards (classical) liberalism during this era (and France actively sponsoring these), would presumably see such ideas catch on in France itself as well. So: yes, at least 'in spirit' we'd see a triumph of Lafayette's OTL faction and its ideas.

Avoiding the bedlam of the Revolutionary & Napoleonic Wars in favor of, at worst, another round of much more limited 'cabinet wars' instead also opens the door to other neat 19th century possibilities

It does seem very probable that the ATL war(s) would be more limited than their OTL equivalents, since there would be no revolutionary radicalism to facilitate the levée en masse. Nonetheless, I do expect these wars to be quite intense affairs, and not something that can just be shrugged off.

An open question is how aggressive France will be. Something interesting to consider is the utterly random death of the Dauphin (son of Louis XV, father of Louis XVI) in 1765, of tubercolosis. The simple reality of a POD severalyears before and a different outcome to the war almost certainly butterflies him catching the disease at that time. Conceivably, he could die at some other point before his father dies, but he could also live to become an ATL Louis XVI. Which would be interesting, because he was an arch-reactionary. So that could mess with France's international policy (of supporting liberal republics, which he'd detest).

And what of his son, OTL Louis XVI? At the very least, his father -- also a military-minded figure, at odds with his own father who wanted him kept away from the front -- would push for his son to receive extensive military education. And an Austrian marriage would probably be out of the question if Austria is cozied up to Britain. Which means the life of (OTL) Louis XVI is going to be pretty different.

Maybe he's inclined to support liberalism, going against his father, and able to get the people to see him as a saviour because he's not tied to the hated Austrians? The ATL French "revolution" might even be a palace coup, where the popular liberal-minded son deposes the hated reactionary father...

(Hilarious fact: most French thinkers who became reactionaries in OTL after the insanity of the revolution were pro-reform before the revolution. So even, say, Joseph de Maistre would be in favour of reforms! He was in OTL!)

It would be absolutely bonkers if an ATL Louis XVI (presumably known as Louis XVII in this scenario), having received extensive military education and training, but being of a decidely liberal bent, actually more or less takes the place of Napoleon and does his utmost to lead France and its allies to victory in the great war of his time...

Like Spain not spiraling into its horrible terminal decline and the Spanish Americas gaining autonomy as new kingdoms under additional Bourbon cadet branches per the Count of Aranda's plans (also talked about in that linked thread) instead of bloodily tearing themselves from their motherland.

This would be a very good outcome for Spain, although I'm pretty sure that Aranda's plan would never be adopted without modifications. None of this "cadet branches" stuff. Separate kingdoms, yes, but there's no doubt in my mind that they'll all be in personal union under one monarch. The sovereign would know very well that going with cadet branches would just mean dissolution of the empire with extra steps.

All in all it's almost certainly a better 19th century, and a better world, than what we actually got historically.

I agree very much. Avoiding insane radicalism is always good.

Honestly France + Batavia + Spain + America + Russia vs. Britain + Austria (and by extension the HRE/Germany) + Portugal + Poland-Lithuania + Brabant seems like it'd be a very even fight, the sort perfectly set up to end in negotiations and incremental rather than sweeping gains like most other 'cabinet wars' of the 18th century. I'm not sure what Sweden or the Turks would be able to contribute - IIRC Sweden never really recovered from getting dethroned by Russia during the Great Northern Wars and the Ottomans still had the millstone that was their fully-Praetorianized janissary corps tied around their necks in this timeframe, plus the latter was still fighting wars with Austria. At least the Turks have no easy counter for the Franco-Russian alliance to call in though, whereas to deal with Sweden I'd imagine they can reach out to Denmark-Norway to encircle those guys on east & west. (Maybe offering them Scania back; it'd be quite ironic if D-N actually manages to retake the place soon after Sweden recovers Pomerania, considering that the Scanian War from a hundred years prior was where they definitively lost Scania to Sweden while Sweden in turn lost Pomerania to Brandenburg-Prussia)

My thinking is that France would still be in a pretty troubled situation, fiscally. They'd need more time to get out of that. This would make it difficult for France to fight as effectively, unless they're able to find a very talented leader. (Not that this is unheard of.)

I imagine Sweden and the Ottomans as potentially joining up against the Russians opportunistically. At the very least, this possibility would prevent the Russians from going 'all in' against Austria and Poland, because they'd have to keep their flanks guarded, too. Although yes, that would draw in Denmark-Norway. And the Ottomans were a mess.

Mostly, these are all side stages, though-- at least by my estimation. The Americas would be, too. The big question would be how France measures up to Britain. If France has poor leadership and lets its economic woes get the best of it, the British side wins. But if France gets leadership that can unite the nation for the great cause-- well, then it's a different story.

Napoleons aren't a dime a dozen, though. But again: a Louis with a different life experience and an inclination towards reform could make quick work of overhauling the military and appointing the right people in the right positions. That's half the battle won...

 

[Agent23]

As noted by others, a quite different world.

With Prussia crushed in 1758/9 and the war over by the time Elizabeth pops her clogs - does Catherine manage to topple and murder Paul? If not - this derails history of Russia and neighbourhood.

Not necessarily, while the Russians see her as great and while she did do much for their culture and education and science and was "Enlightened", she would not extend those "enlightened" , and I am tempted to call them "18th century woke" values to the peasantry.

Paup was a total moron, and offing him was in the cards always, but my personal reading on Catherine is that she is your basic inferiority complex afflicted provincial/hick aristocracy.
She probably had a huge chip on her shoulder so she over involved Russia in stupid European nonsense at the cost of the peasantry.

She was a minor noble, put into a loveless arranged marriage in what she saw as an ass of nowhere uncivilized country.

IMHO things might turn out better for central and eastern Europe without her.

Frankly, they should have focused more on the south and the black sea and the Ottomans as well as the development of the East, as well as other internal developments.

She is much like Simeon I of Bulgaria, too ambitious, chip on the shoulder, and too clever by half.

Russia will still need a warm water port, but them embroiling themselves in Poland is frankly totally unnecessary.

As long as they can swap Prussia for the territories of Poland where Orthodox Slavs/Belarussuans/Russians live I think the two can probably develop some form of understanding.