1849 Election Results
Irish Independent Party - 4 -
\/ 33
Independent Liberal Party - 94 -
/\ 7 *
Parti Liberale - 214 -
/\ 92
The Unionist Party - 74 -
\/ 28 **
Parti Nationaliste - 3 -
\/ 27
Parti Conservatuer - 4 -
\/ 46
Faction Anglois - 54 -
/\ 54
Legitmistes - 54 -
\/ 6
*Using English Nationalist figures
**Using merged Liberal Party and Royalist Party figures.
1849-54
Only in the wildest dreams of the French Liberals could such a victory be imagined. But on the final count, they had achieved it. Of the 275 French seats, they had won 214. It was a testament to not only the liberal surge across Europe, but to the great personal popularity of Lord Chancellor de Caen. The total collapse of the Parti Conservateur outside of the municipal level surprised few, but the failure of the Parti Nationaliste or the Legitimistes to fill their place had lead to the greatest landslide in modern history so far. And (perhaps to their detriment) they almost reached the fabled "French Line of Unity" - the point where a party became so successful in the more populous France that they could rule without assistance from English Parties. Though at this point the "line" sat at 224 seats (thanks to Legitimiste abstention), leaving the Liberals 10 short, it was a powerful statement of de Caen's authority. This would be a point of discourse for the Independent Liberal Party, who would argue that this proved that a French Tyranny was no only possible but actually likely, however the Unionists would welcome the strengthened Coalition. The new Government would be a coalition between the English Unionists, the Parti Liberale, and the rump of Conservative electees. By August, the the insurrection that had punctuated the previous five years finally began to extinguish. Demonstrations against the government became more and more sparsely attended, and within student circles open anti-Plantagenism became more taboo than fashionable. Henry X, though still detested by the most rabid of Legitimistes, became considered a French King through-and-through. Perhaps more tellingly, more often than not the Dual-Monarchy was becoming indistinguishable from France - this was the point where, for many, the Dual-Monarchy was France, and France the Dual-Monarchy, whilst England was still considered something different altogether.
But such democratic processes could make one think the 19th century was no longer the era of Kings and dynasties. The death of the Queen of Navarra on the 21st of April, 1850, had opened age-old tensions along the Midi. Navarra was, politically, a subject nation of Aragon - the Euskadian aristocracy, largely interwoven with their Catalan masters, could depend on Barcelona for protection and political capital. However, in recent times sea trade to Bordeaux, far more cost effective than the overland route to the Mediterranean, saw an increasingly Anglo-French dominated economy. Euskadian nationalism, stoked by European fires, hoped to see Navarra break away from Aragonese rule with the assistance of Paris. Similarly, the Valois-led Provence hung onto the Dual-Monarchy's underbelly like a stubborn wart. Though a source of Legitimiste patriotism, the Provencial state could realistically only exist through Aragonese assurances of independence. In Paris, it was believed that, without Barcelona protecting the Valois, Provence could be easily annexed diplomatically. Without Provence acting as annoyance, Paris could take a more direct role in Northern Italian politics and more aggressively oppose Aragon's power in the Mediterranean - and would furthermore rob the southern Nationalists of a figurehead. Even further, the failure of the Etrurian Council in the late '40s had thwarted grassroots Italian Republicans of their natural patron in defying Barcelona - and the northern Italian states, traditional allies of Paris, appealed to the Dual-Monarchy for help in kicking out the Catalonian oppressors. Barcelona needed to prove their continued supremacy, and Paris wished to end it. The Navarran Estates, denying the Infante (who, as luck would have it, was wife of King Henry X) her birthright, crowned the Countess of San Sebastian as Queen of Navarra at the behest of Barcelona. This would not stand.
Paris issued the ultimatum that Aragon withdraw from Navarra and grant to the Infante her sacred and legal rights as Queen of Navarra. The Aragonese made a counter-ultimatum that the Plantagenets renounce their claim on Navarra or it would be war. So war it was. Paris summoned her northern Italian allies - principally, Savoy - as well as Spain whilst Aragon demanded the same. Fighting broke out in Northern Italy as Aragon attempted to expand their control north. But, the war was a foregone conclusion. Aragon lacked the defences, manpower, or leadership to properly fight this was - and the Valois, the long-standing Monarchs of Provence, knew it. They feared invasion by the Dual Monarchy and thus their doom and, hoping to avoid such a fate, refused their call to arms. Aragon was strategically isolated and bitterly assembled a line of defence along the Pyrenees. Despite a heroic and exemplary defence of Navarra itself (fought mainly between Aragon and Spain), Barcelona fell in May 1851. The victorious Anglo-French (whose army direly needed a clear enemy to defeat after the divisions of the previous decade) offered an armistice and conditional surrender: recognition of the Infante's claim on Navarra (effectively annexing Euskadia), and the end of Aragonese influence north of the Pyrenees. Aragon, facing collapse in Italy if the war continued, agreed.
The Battle of Terades, Northern Catalonia, 8th February 1851, The War of Navarran Succession.
Tragically, neither Navarra nor Provence would see their gambles pay off in the Treaty of San Sebastian. The Valois family, who believed that refusing to fight an unwinnable war against the Dual-Monarchy and their Italian allies would exclude them from any loser's settlement, lost Barcelona's independence guarantee. The Treaty, ceding political control all remaining north of the Pyrenees to Paris, assimilated Provence into the Dual-Monarchy. The Valois retained their ancestral titles, but their political autonomy was ended - though they attempted to protest, claiming that they had lost no war and should not suffer the consequences of defeat, no major power was able (or listening) to challenge the Dual-Monarchy's annexation by force. Navarran autonomists, who had also fought for their freedom, had traded semi-independence in association with Barcelona for intergration into a foreign Monarchy. Outside of the Plantagenets, the only other real victors were the states of Northern Italy - their participation in the conflict had legitimised them and proved their value to the Dual-Monarchy. Indeed, de Caen visited Turin immediately after the Treaty of San Sebastian to give his personal thanks to the Italians for their loyal ally-ship - and also to make an offer. Following the War of Navarran Succession, the Dual-Monarchy would take a more active role in Italian politics, beginning with a secret arrangement to form an Italian Kingdom under the leadership of the House of Savoy.
Simultaneously, Central Europe, still under the sway of pervasive liberalism, catapulted itself into a conflict that would redefine European politics from then onwards. German nationalists, having seen the failures of Italy and England, had convinced themselves that a free and liberal nation state could not exist without assistance from existing institutions. The free German states, long having had to endure domination from Burgundy and Bohemia, became increasingly liberal, and pan-German sentiments became firmly embedded in the foreign policy goals of these states. The result of this was the Council of Warsaw in March 1850, where representatives from the various Free German principalities established the aspirations, functions, and future of a united German federation. In Paris, this news was treated with interest - whilst nationalism was incredible dangerous to a bi-polar Empire like the Dual-Monarchy, the creation of a powerful state immediately to the east of Paris's main rival - Burgundy - was too enticing to ignore. De Caen made gentle motions to Spain to allow the second Pan-German Council - the Council of Madrid - to take place. The second Council, in April, finalised the consensus of the Council of Warsaw that a German Federation must be created under the leadership of a German Monarchy, and agreed to offer the crown to (now fairly constitutional) Kingdom of Bavaria. The Wittelsbachs, lead by King Maximilian III, ignored Bohemian demands that they refuse the "crown from the gutter" and united the southern (and a few northern) German states into a single Danubian Federation. The Emperor in Prague reacted angrily - sending Bohemian forces to intervene and put down the Danubian threat. The war - though fought furiously by the Danubians - was fought to a Danubian loss in 1851 as the Dual-Monarchy triumphed over Aragon. And, as if that was not enough of a kick in the teeth, the minor Kingdom of Illyrian invaded, successfully, the border province of Slovenia. Munich was forced to concede the independence of several of the Bohemian aligned principalities. Nonetheless, there was a new player on the European chessboard, and not one that would disappear lightly.
Maximilian of Bavaria, First Emperor of the Danubian Federation.
De Caen would continue to preside over good times domestically. Playing off between the Unionists and the Independent Liberals, de Caen could manipulate legislation to his liking. In 1853 he successfully passed the "Holy Grail" of electoral reform, adding 150 new seats to the Estats-General to compensate for the annexations of Navarra and Provence, which gave a massive advantage to the French seats. In fairness, de Caen's readjustment of seats more fairly represented the demographics of the Dual-Monarchy, and was necessary to integrate the two new provinces. The Faction Anglois, though not truly welcome in the Estats-General, were de Caen's greatest ally, as they saw any advantage given to their brothers in France as a greater bulwark against the evils of English nationalism. The Dual-Monarchy itself experienced a greater economic boom - access to the Mediterranean, France's relative stability compared to Central Europe, and generally competent governance was thanked for this.
Outside of Europe, the colonial empire of the Anglo-French continued to march onwards. Further settlements on the Australian continent, now spreading eastwards, finally began to touch upon the border with Zhourao - the Chinese settler-state on the eastern coast. Though in the south of the continent the remoteness and inhospitably of the border prevented too much strain on the north-eastern coast, where there was considerable Zhouraon settlement, troubles began to stir. Prisoners - many of them treason convicts from the English Revolutionary War - were settled in penal colonies along these conflict zones, with the expectation that these 'rougher men' would be able to defend the Royal colonies more sternly. But the biggest clash in the early '50s was in the Indian subcontinent. Already having established trade and political links with the Kingdom of Bengal, the Anglo-French sought to establish a more permanent base in South Asia to rival that of Burgundy's. Travancore - already having lost northern territories to neighbouring Principalities - depended on trade from Ceylon to survive, however the influx of Anglo-French influence rubbed the local aristocracy the wrong way. The constitutional nature of the Travancorese monarchy afforded these nay-sayers far too much say for the Ceylon Colony's liking, which asked the Paris government to allow the establishment of the Travancore Protectorate. This was granted, and after a short and internationally ignored war Travancore became a colonial state of the Dual Monarchy. And so, thus began the Dual-Monarchy's foothold in India.
1854 arrived, and with it came the familiar friend of the Anglo-French general elections. Many hoped to poke a hole in the Parti Liberale's supremacy, but successes proved otherwise. But, one can always dream.