Yes, they might be free of hemophilia, because Bonapartes are not so much inbred like other European royal families?
After 1870 : Second Empire Vignettes
- Thread starter galileo-034
- Start date
The same could be said of every single dynasty in Europe five or ten centuries back in time...
Unluckily Beatrice was a carrier so is impossible who all her children will be safe from it.
At his heels a stone : the Vice-Emperor
"... as the Emperor sat down on his chair to preside the council, and in turn, all ministers fell into theirs around the table, Eugène Rouher continued to stand. To everyone's concern, to the Emperor in particular, the prime minister was irresponsive, his regard caught in the distance for an instant, and before anyone could do anything, he collapsed onto the floor.
The council of ministers on that Wednesday, June 14th, 1882, had been intended to discuss the latest developments out of Egypt. Instead, it morphed into a political crisis as the prime minister suffered a massive stroke. As it became increasingly obvious in the days that followed the council that Rouher would be unable to continue serving as Prime Minister, the question began to grow and spread across Paris, the question that the young Emperor had to answer: who could succeed the "Vice-Emperor" ?
Eugène Rouher had governed as Prime Minister since 1873, and had single-handedly embodied the "return to normalcy" that found France in a renewed confidence after the Debacle of '70. His mantle was a heavy one to carry for, indeed, he had been deserving of the epithet the opposition had given him for the past twenty years. He had been the loyal, competent instrument of every major reform that Napoléon III had instigated, and then the man Dowager Empress Eugénie needed in the incertain hours of the Regency.
War minister Marshal de Chabaud-Latour, as dean of the cabinet at age 78, had filled in as prime minister on an interim basis, but for his advanced age, noone, not even himself, considered he would fit the requirements for the position and take on the burden. Only two names in the cabinet commanded enough authority to pretend to it: Eugène Eschassériaux, Minister of Public Works, and Oscar Bardi de Fourtou, Minister of the Interior.
Eschassériaux had been the architect of the alliance with the Orleans back in 1873, one that formed the bedrock of the Dynastic Majority into the elections of 1874 and 1880, and as the chief whip for the Bonapartists, had been a capable lieutnant to Eugène Rouher. He had not been shy about using his position at the Ministry of Public Works to enhance his network of allies in the business establishment and supporting the "unofficial candidates" with public spending in their circonscriptions. But for all his advantage, Eschassériaux had the fault of being anti-clerical, even a moderate one when compared to Prince Napoléon, and thus not particularly liked by the Dowager Empress.
Oscar Bardi de Fourtou meanwhile had risen through the ranks, noticed for his competence and hardworking character by Rouher, and eventually propelled to the Interior Ministry. He had been the Man of the Lois Scélérates - Villainous Laws - in 1879, and his control of the Interior Ministry had had him in charge of the state's apparel of government employees and agents, from the prefects down to the postmen, completing - and competing with - the patronage machine of Eschassériaux, his chief rival in Cabinet and Court. He also happened to be of the sycophantic suite of guests of the Dowager Empress' circle, whose favor he consistently courted, and whose favor was enough of a difference to make it on top. And so it was that on Monday, June 26th, he was called to the Tuileries and invited by the Emperor to form a new government.
When on the very next Wednesday, he presented his cabinet to Napoléon IV, the tone was set for what was to be, in more than a sense, the best epitaph for Eugène Rouher's ministry. What had defined Rouher's long tenure had not been his political acumen - he was not a canny political operator or a man of intrigue - but his drive for consensus and his pragmatism, both in domestic and foreign affairs, a quality that was decidely absent from de Fourtou, a man with markedly authoritarian instincts. Keeping the Interior Ministry to himself, he had made no qualm of evicting Eschassériaux from the cabinet to the golden exile of the Corps Législatif's presidency. To imprint his "ardent and vigorous spirit" onto the new government, he also made quick work of the diplomatic Duke Decazes and put in his stead a more aggressive Prince of Arenberg at the Quai d'Orsay, then replaced the retiring Maréchal de Chabaud-Latour with a friend and ally of his, Général de Négrier, at the War Ministry, and finally, in his most fateful appointment, replaced Louis Passy at the Finance Ministry by Paul-Eugène Bontoux.
To be fair, the upending and collapse of the status quo - that had characterized Eugène Rouher's tenure - under de Fourtou's watch, was probably unavoidable, but it's undisputed that de Fourtou's management of it had turned what would have been a "bad time" into the most serious crisis the imperial regime had faced since 1870... "
Last edited:
Well, I may elaborate on that in a future post, but short answer : a seat at the table and a not insignificant compensation for the confiscations of their properties in 1852. But that's the short answer, mind you.
Can't wait for it! One branch the Bonapartes will not have to worry about. Hope theyc an get the Bourbons out of their hair for good too
Notes - part 1
Hi,
Since I couldn't figure a proper way to put it into the tale, I'd add some notes as to the context of the last updates.
First, the TTL Sino-French war.
In the Red Sea.
A Tale of Two Courts
The Vice-Emperor
List of Governments from 1869 onwards :
Since I couldn't figure a proper way to put it into the tale, I'd add some notes as to the context of the last updates.
First, the TTL Sino-French war.
The OTL Sino-French war of 1884-1885 came on the heels of the death of French commandant Henri Rivière at Hanoi. However, nine and half years before, in 'almost' identical circumstances, French officer Francis Garnier - a veteran of China, Cochincina, and an explorer of the Mekong river valley, (re)discoverer of Angkor Vat - was killed at Hanoi. The French government, too busy and occupied in its task of rebuilding France in the aftermath of the devastating war and the upheaval that followed, between the Commune and the struggle between Republicans and Monarchists, was not much able to act on it.
ITTL, France needs a "splendid little war" to turn the page of 1870, and Garnier's death is the perfect excuse.
The expedition to Korea hinted at is more or less a Round Two for the OTL expedition of 1866 that the French had waged to an 'unsatisfactory' conclusion. The developments in Europe, on the tails of the Mexican debacle, didn't give them the luxury of a sustained expedition. If the occasion had arisen, the clerical lobby would have certainly taken it to finish the job and open Korea to the Catholic faith, and to French trade of course. IOTL however, the republican colored government of Jules Ferry was not exactly a fan of the Catholic Church as you may understand.
As for Siam, the 1870s were not quite a calm time. The Front Palace incident had opposed young and reformist King Rama V to his conservative 'co-king' (or whatever you can translate the "Front Palace" title to) in 1874-1875. The context and thus the outcome are alterated ITTL because of the TTL Sino-French War, notably because of its ripples in Laos : while the French are fighting the Black Flags in Tonkin, the Thais were fighting the Red Flags in the Lao highlands in what was called the Haw Wars. ITTL, the French would be coordinating with the Siamese forces to fight the Black and Red Flags in the region, through the intermediary of a military mission. French involvement, even accidental (not precluding opportunism though), would in turn draw British involvement - after all, they invaded and finished off the vestiges of the independent Burma in 1885 because the Burmese had become a bit too cozy with French merchants for London's liking (Third Anglo-Burmese War). Note, that does not mean Siam has become a French protectorate because the British would not like it; we're more in a Egyptian style neutrality, French friendly version.
In the Red Sea.
IOTL, the British took advantage of the Khedive's dire finances to captate Egypt's share of the Suez canal company. ITTL instead, de Lesseps and the French are faster; however, for diplomatic reasons, not to antagonize the British, Paris offers a 50-50 deal to appease London.
Further south, the early 1870s were a time of Ottoman expansion into southern Arabia. In 1872 IOTL, they conquered the Emirate of Asir (al Ayedh dynasty) and the Zaidi Imamate of Sanaa. Meanwhile, the French had a small foothold in southern Arabia, an offshoot of their presence in Djibouti, at Cheikh Said purchased in 1868, but never really integrated in France's colonial empire. As for Tonkin, the war of 1870 broke the dynamic of French expansion in the Red Sea region, which I have slightly changed ITTL. However, with Britain in the game, that means a stronger British reaction, hence Aden absorbing Sanaa into its orbit of clients after the French had put the Emirate of Asir under their protection, essentially to stave off the OTL Ottoman annexation.
A Tale of Two Courts
Not much else to say than I already wrote in previous comments or that might develop in future updates.
The idea behind that update was to introduce a notion of court politics that I think would be one of the most fundamental differences between the OTL Third Republic and a continued TTL Second Empire. Political intrigues were not unknown under the Third Republic, but they were much more chaotic and fluctuent due to the parliamentarian nature of the regime - as fluctuent as parliamentarian majorities, elections and one new government every ten months or so between 1871 and 1914; ITTL, there is much more long-term consistency to be had, when putting dynastic "stability" in the bag, and that's what I set out to explore.
Politics aside, the Duchess of Teck's character - which I found out while looking for a chaperone Victoria would give to her daughter - was too good an occasion to pass to get a sneak peek at the social and cultural life of the Belle Epoque, and fitted quite well into the narrative.
Consider this chapter of the story as a prologue though. I'm putting the characters on the stage, but the play has not yet begun.
PS: The title of the chapter seemed obvious to me as I started from the premise of Biarritz vs Trouville-Deauville. And I cannot exclude that Zola would ITTL have one of his Rougon-Macquart novels - which featured the social and political history of the Second Empire in prominent manner - take place on that background of court politics.
The Vice-Emperor
Eugène Rouher largely deserved, in my opinion, the nickname opponents of the Empire gave him. He was never formally a prime minister for Napoléon III, but he might as well have been one. The man was instinctively conservative, but he was pragmatic and knew the meaning of compromise, such as when he defended the Law of 1868 on the freedom of the press, which he was not personally a partisan of, but passed through on the Emperor's behalf. As it transpired IOTL after the fall of the Empire, he was the only person that could hold the bag for the Bonapartists, and the only one available to Eugénie if she wished to take her distance with the reformist mood of the parliament. Understandably, his clothes are however very large to wear for any wannabe successor, and as such, one cannot expect things to go smooth, can they?
Rouher did have a debilitating stroke IOTL in 1883, though I can't remember when or the exact circumstances (from Robert Schnerb's 1949 biography); ITTL though I advanced it, taking into account the amount of extra stress that would befall on the man ITTL as he is in charge of the government. I dithered a bit on the timing because of what is to follow, but I'm going for 1882.
Originally, I thought of an update covering the crisis to come from beginning to conclusion, but as I imagined my way through it, it became evident it was too wide to make it into a single post, so here we have the second part of the prologue begun in "A Tale of Two Courts".
List of Governments from 1869 onwards :
Last edited:
I am obviously coming pretty late to this party and I have not read through yet. So forgive me if this has been discussed already.
However, 1875 is firmly in the territory of the Earl of Derby being Foreign Secretary in Britain under Disraeli. Derby would likely have been somewhat in favour of a delineation of interests as a means to avoid conflict. However, the exact terms of the settlement would be important. Disraeli was not one to want the perception of giving up British interests to be attached to his ministry.
In any case, however, no formal, or even informal tie between France and Britain would have been contemplated at this time. At this time Britain felt that alliances were an unnecessary constraint on their freedom of action and avoided them at all costs. They would work with whoever they felt aligned with their goals in whatever crisis came up. Derby was perhaps the epitome of splendid isolationism. So a pro-British policy on the part of the Quai d'Orsay would have to be a pretty one sided affair. You are not going to see a willingness for British politicians to consider longer term deals until at least the 1880’s.
All valid. The convention of 1875, like the otl entente cordiale (the alliance did not come formally until the Great War began if I'm not mistaken), is no alliance, but more of an understanding. And the whole matter is essentially France conceding to Britain's interests. They retrocede to London half of the Egyptian shares to set up the 50-50 ownership of the canal, instead of retaining it all as @KingSweden24 did in his TL. They drop any project of expedition against Pekin, leave the British annex Burma and swear they'll let Siam stay independent. Overall, the UK is still into its splendid isolation phase, and unlike OTL entente cordiale, there has not been Germany antagonizing London with the naval arms race.
But this TTL convention/understanding is more or less a continuation of the anglophile orientation of French foreign policy started under Napoléon III, which the Third Republic interrupted for the next thirty years (between colonial rivalry and protectionism). Then, anglophile doesn't mean suppine, but more about avoiding big clashes with the British and keeping friendly or neutral, which essentially means Napoléon IV is not going to committ the mistakes Wilhelm II did.
Fair enough. Seems like compromises that Derby and especially Salisbury could work with. Though the later would negotiate vociferously. It would probably suite Granville and Gladstone even more, though the French would probably get even less obvious thanks from then for it.
Moving faster than Disraeli on Suez would be difficult. He was already looking into buying into the Canal when the Khedive came knocking and he cut basically every corner available to purchase them first. There were literally only 9 days between the first inkling of the Khedive meaning to sell and the British purchase. Nonetheless, it’s something I can accept as a possibility.
Presumably the 1882 action in Egypt would have been an Anglo-French affair all the way through rather than the French Fleet returning home and the British taking Egypt? With Britain not quite as secure in the Eastern Med as OTL they are more likely to still maintain a posture against Russia on the Straits. This and lesser losses to Germany in 1870 could possibly preclude the Russo-French alliance. Which obviously has interesting consequences down the line, if so.
Additionally, with a long term policy of maintaining relations with Britain and a continued Monarchy I doubt Aubé and the Jeune Ecole gets much of a look in. That would probably help the French Navy with a more consistent policy in place.
Last edited: