Luo Chenchen is a master’s student in world history at East China Normal University, studying French history, public history and historical theory. He is deeply passionate about historical strategy games. He is committed to seriously examining the significance of counterfactual history for historical theory. [1]
I saw the Emperor–this world-spirit–riding out of the city on reconnaissance. It is indeed a wonderful sensation to see such an individual, who, concentrated here at a single point, astride a horse, reaches out over the world and masters it.
– Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, 1806
As many of you know, Napoleon was a great conqueror. And yet he failed to achieve his imperial goals. Thus, the entire historical trajectory following the Congress of Vienna was built upon the foundation of his failure. But had Napoleon triumphed, what would have happened? European brinksmanship, the international system, nationalism, revolution and other important historical developments would certainly have been very different. Producing counterfactual historical claims is not merely an entertaining thought experiment but, in my view, should be seen as a methodology for fundamentally reshaping historical thinking.
Such deduction must remain grounded. The answer to how Napoleon might have ruled after victory (a goal he never achieved in reality) lies in his actual approach with governing empire as attested in historical archives. Similarly, without constructing a counterfactual historical framework, mere archives won’t provide an answer. Though counterfactual history is not yet recognized as serious scholarship due to its alleged weak ties to archival evidence, this ambiguity allowed me to explore the evolution of empire, nationalism, and governance in the counterfactual framework of a Victoria 3 Mod. This article traces the process behind designing the mod: why I chose Victoria 3 as a platform, how I built a plausible alternate timeline, and what creating this project taught me to think about the relationship between history, narrative, and game systems.
Victoria 3, released in 2022 as the latest installment in Paradox Interactive’s grand strategy game series, is set during the industrial era from 1836 to 1936. It bridges the timeline between two other grand strategy titles from the Paradox catalog: Europa Universalis IV (1444–1821) and Hearts of Iron IV (1936–1948). Victoria 3’s predecessors, Victoria and Victoria 2, sought to bridge the same historical gap. The hallmark of the Victoria series lies in its population-driven, detailed economic simulation. As the developers describe: “In Victoria 3, you meet the people of the age in our Pops system. High and low, across cultures and lands – we create a representation of the global population in 1836. Pops have needs, desires and form powerful groups for you to handle. These groups are the foundation of a realistic and dynamic society simulator.”[2]
When Victoria 3 was published three years ago, I began designing a mod for it—The World Spirit (abbreviate below as TWS). This name originates from Hegel’s description of Napoleon as the “World Spirit” (German: Weltgeist). Napoleon was a flesh-and-bones man who embodied both Revolutionism and Imperialism. I couldn’t resist the temptation of making a “Napoleon-wins” mod for a game in which the historical Napoleon was defeated. In historical games, many modders take a contrarian, if not rebellious stance to real history.
To construct an alternative history mod, the first job is to determine two things: the mod’s content and the historical background. Based on my own experience as a modder, a reciprocal relationship exists between game content and historical content. This relationship can help us to better comprehend both the mod and history itself. I will demonstrate this point by answering three questions.
1. Why did I choose Victoria 3 for this mod?
2. What alternate history did I design for my mod?
3. How did I design the historical content of my mod?
As a Social Simulation System: Why Victoria 3?
I believe that any alternate history mod is a fusion of the creator’s own historical perspective and a chosen game with its specific mechanics. Even if players can’t design and produce their own preferred themes as independently as game developers, they can select games that align more closely with their vision of history to craft new mods. For me, grand strategy games are peerless among historical game genres and can serve as ideal testbed for alt-histories, since they focus on large-scale historical simulation. Many counterfactual mods attempt to redesign the real history on which the “base” grand strategy game is based. And so in my case, this left only two recent candidates that met the conditions of similar genre and time period—Europa Universalis IV and Victoria 3.
Europa Universalis IV’s timeline begins in 1444 and ends in 1821, with the Napoleonic Wars taking place during this period. But most Europa Universalis IV mods set their historical background before the 15th century. This is not a coincidence. Europa Universalis IV’s specialty is simulating interactions between countries through diplomatic or military ways. Its system provides an ideal backdrop to simulate the rise and fall of great powers. As Peter Christiansen points out[3], military aspects are prominent in Europa Universalis. Nevertheless, the mechanics simulating the internal affairs of nation-state actors remains crude. Provinces are simplified into development and building units, with their effects limited to providing income and manpower. National administration turns into collecting and using three types of monarch power[4]. This lack of depth is Europa Universalis IV’s Achilles’ heel.
Compared to Europa Universalis IV, Victoria 3 has a more suitable structure for this historical period[5]. Its core mechanical system is population. All economic and politic activities can be traced back to a specific Part of Population (PoP). In Europa Universalis IV, rebels appear due to province’s unrest. If your country has good modifiers and actions to reduce unrest, nothing will happen. Even if you conquer a hostile ethnic group’s homeland after a brutal war. In Victoria 3, conquest usually results in economic loss and degradation local inhabitants’ social status. As a player, you must improve conquered PoPs standard of living to prevent rebellion. Thus, separatism is not just a modifier. It is the specific outcome of PoPs’ grievances caused by the deterioration of their social environment.
Therefore, Victoria 3 seemed better-suited for simulating domestic politics and social changes in 19th century. Since I’m making a mod in which Napoleon has already won, military conflict takes a backseat. For the French Empire, what matters is how to maintain control over Europe. The key point of this alternative history isn’t warfare, but governance. That’s why I chose Victoria 3 for the setting for my alt-history mod.
Napoleon’s Imperfect Victory: Alternative History in My Mod
To create historical content, most alternative history mods choose one or a series of turning points to cause differences and diverge from real history. The turning point that I chose is the campaign of 1812 to 1813, known in history books as “The War of the Sixth Coalition”. Correspondingly, the mod’s subheading is “If Napoleon won the Sixth Coalition War”. Let’s explore how this alternative history unfolds.
Turning Point[2] : In this alternate history mod, Napoleon narrowly mitigates losses during his Russian campaign. Over 40,000 troops and numerous horses successfully cross the Berezina River, enabling him to rebuild a stronger Grande Armée in the Spring Campaign of 1813. He secures tactical victories at Lützen and Bautzen, compelling Sweden to remain neutral. During the Autumn Campaign, Napoleon decisively crushes the Bohemian Army at the Battle of Dresden and captures the monarchs of Russia, Prussia, and Austria. Then he turns north, annihilated Prussian forces and ended the Sixth Coalition.
Napoleonic European Order: In my mod, a triumphant Napoleon convenes the Second Congress of Erfurt to redesign Europe’s political map. Russia is expelled from European affairs. Austria is reduced to a semi-vassal ally. Prussia is dismembered, with the Confederation of the Rhine expanded eastward to the Oder River. In the Peninsular War, war-weariness and financial strain compel France to abandon annexation. Subsequently, Ferdinand VII returns to the Spanish throne. However, his poor policies trigger the Three Liberal Years (1820–1823)[6], culminating in Joseph I’s restoration.
British Division: The Continental System against Britain persists through a prolonged Cold War-esque stalemate until Napoleon’s death in 1830. Blockades make post-Napoleonic Depression[7] greater. The United Kingdom’s control over the British Isles collapses during the Second English revolution. A new Commonwealth is established after the king flees. Hanoverian government-in-exile relocates to Cape Colony and retains control of overseas territories, including India and the Caribbean.
The East: Meanwhile, the Russian Decembrists[8] seize power and support a pro-French reformist tsar. Franco-Russian cooperation facilitates Greek independence and restores Christian dominance in the region during the Ottoman War. Pasha of Egypt Muhammad Ali becomes another big winner, occupying Syria, Mesopotamia (Iraq) and a part of Anatolia.
North America: The United States wins the War of 1812 and annexes Upper and Lower Canada. Emboldened by military adventurism, Andrew Jackson’s administration pursues Manifest Destiny, forging a more aggressive new Monroe Doctrine Order in the Americas.
Recent Background: It is 1830, and Europe is engulfed in turmoil following Napoleon’s death. Jacobins’ and nationalists’ continual revolts force Napoleon II to abandon his father’s militarism policy and enact a liberal constitution in 1833. The Continental Blockade and French exploitation policies collapse. Finally, France and Commonwealth sign the Treaty of Antwerp. Nobody knows yet that this is another Treaty of Amiens[9] or the definitive end of the Forty Years’ Wars. Though rebellions challenge the imperial order, France retains tenuous control over Europe by 1836—the mod’s start date. Subsequent, the fate of this fragile hegemony now lies in the player’s hands.
Divergent Paths of French Empire: Due to Napoleon’s legacy in alternative history, France’s task is to handle eight Empire Crisis journal entries. In Victoria 3, journal entries serve as goals and conditions which provides historical atmosphere. In TWS, they are related to the constitution, regime demilitarization, the Catholic issue, alliances, the economy, the construction of an imagined community, Germany, and Italy. These journals can [3] have different solutions. For example, you can resolve the Catholic issue by making a deal with the Holy See or just ignore it until the church becomes too weak. Another example is the journal of the 1833 Constitution. It can be finished by the liberal reform or retrogressing to police state. If Napoleon II can’t solve half of the empire’s problem, The Civil War in France event will be triggered. As more journal entries are completed, empire becomes more stable and stronger. Therefore, players must choose a viable path to avoid the destruction of the empire, whether liberal or imperialist.
These journals symbolize the normalization of Unitary Bonapartist semi-constitutional monarchy. This presupposes that Napoleonic empire did not become a world empire with completely loyal subjects. The emperor cannot solve these problems by force. That’s why Napoleon can’t win outright in this alternative history. Again, the role of historical content is to lend legitimacy to the content in the mod.
Why Does Alternative History Happen This Way?
Our starting point is that Napoleon achieves the strategic objectives the Napoleonic War and secures diplomatic rule over Europe. Then, what happens? Deducing the subsequent historical trajectory is the counterfactual writer’s job. Of course, serious alternative history isn’t fantasy. It must build up on the real history as solid bedrock. As Trevor Owens has previously argued[10]:
the counterfactual prompt begs us to offer up and appeal to historical information and facts to make our case for how something might have turned out differently.
On the other hand, modders aren’t purely objective interpreters of novel historical trajectories. In Hayden White’s monumental work Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-century Europe[11], he presents an interesting point: the interpretation of history is influenced by the historian’s choices and ideologies.
Placed before the alternative visions that history’s interpreters offer for our consideration, and without any apodictically provided theoretical grounds for preferring one over another, we are driven back to moral and aesthetic reasons for the choice of one vision over another as the more “realistic.” The aged Kant was right, in short; we are free to conceive “history” as we please, just as we are free to make of it what we will.[12]
I will expand on his viewpoint as it echoes my experience. In my opinion, counterfactual historians shape history with initiative[4] as a preferred moral and aesthetic vision, just like their counterparts in real history. The difference is that sometimes the former is too subjective, while the latter is too objective.
In mod creation, we also need to consider retrocausality. To create a more interesting mod script, designer always select a specific historical development track from the myriad possibilities. In my own writing, I excluded other turning points. If Napoleon had won the Campagne de Russie, perhaps no other great powers on the European mainland might have survived his ambition. And if Napoleon had crushed Wellington at Waterloo, France would likely be more liberal than in this timeline. My aim was to create a weak authoritarian empire and build a history for it.
In grand strategy wargames, a strong country always needs a specific mechanism to provide immersion and to contain its power to avoid making the game too boring. Other countries can utilize game mechanism to cope with this strongest country (as a boss). In a sense, mods and drama share the same logic—they both need conflicts as their core. Imperial hegemony and nationalism are opposing sides in this tragedy. In the age of nationalism, can a single man really establish an enduring European Empire which means one ruling nation rules other ruled nations.[6] Therefore, just as playwrights adapt history to highlight dramatic conflict, modders also operate under similar creative imperatives when designing historical content through game mechanics.
Conclusion
Based on the above three questions [10] [13], I discussed how alternate history and the mod’s content mutually shape each other.
To sum up, a mod’s alternative history must base itself on historical research. The creator’s interpretation of historical data and narrative is also crucial. Last but not least, curiosity about counterfactual history should remain an important driver in designing an alternative history mod. This curiosity prompts creators to rethink real history and inquire of historical possibilities. Therefore, the discussion of fictional history is not divorced from reality. On the contrary, it allows us to understand of real history better.
Alternative history can also serve as a parallel reinterpretation of history and drama. What authors achieve is an extrapolation rooted in the inherent contradictions of the source material—real history itself. Divergences in interpreting historical contradictions and figures shape variations in derivative narratives.
When engaging in counterfactual speculation about Napoleon’s paradoxical relationship with nationalism, we must query his seemingly “natural” association with it in real history. In reality, Napoleon needed to align with nationalism to combat legitimist [12] monarchs, casting himself as a revolutionary and nationalist sympathizer. Yet a closer examination reveals his French hegemonic ambitions: he exploited regional nationalisms only to discard them strategically. For instance, he pledged to Tsar Alexander I never to restore the Kingdom of Poland, yet briefly revived it during the Russian campaign, only to abandon Poland as a bargaining chip after retreating beyond the Rhine. Had Napoleon triumphed, his regard for Polish nationalist interests would likely have been negligible.
In TWS, this tension manifests as an expanded—yet still disunited—Duchy of Warsaw (avoiding provocation toward Russia), rather than a sovereign Kingdom of Poland. Through such counterfactual frameworks, alternative history exposes contradictions latent within historical narratives in their real counterparts, thereby offering a more complete interpretation of real history.[16]
Thus, when Napoleon became a symbol of liberalism for the subsequent Bourbon Restoration and July Monarchy in real history, we must return to the authentic Napoleon to examine whether his liberalist image holds true. The counterfactual history in TWS represents precisely this kind of endeavor. In this scenario, a victorious Napoleon would shed his liberalist facade and impose an authoritarian dynastic rule. Rather than viewing such counterfactual situation as “abnormal,” it is more accurate to say that the Napoleon in 1814 and 1815 in actual history was the “abnormal” one. With his power teetering on the brink, he aggressively promoted nationalist and liberalist propaganda to mobilize anti-conservative forces against the Sixth and Seventh Coalition. This brief period accomplished his reinvention from a tyrant to a revolutionary.
When crafting counterfactual history, we need not feel apologetic for diverging from reality. We might boldly pose this question: Is history that actually occurred inherently more “real” than history that never occurred?
Dear readers, if you want to try my mod, search for TWS in Victoria 3’s steam workshop and change your game version to 1.6.2 to make it compatible. Why? Because I’m too lazy and busy to update my mod for the latest game version. Have fun!
References:
Hayden White, Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in 19th-century Europe, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,1973.
[1] Regarding the mod discussed in this article, you can learn more details and track updates at https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2941620709 (Mod) and https://www.zhihu.com/column/c_1505224616758575105 (Update log) — if he finds time to update it.
[2] https://www.paradoxinteractive.com/games/victoria-3/about
[3] https://www.playthepast.org/?p=4742
[4] There are three types of monarch power: Administrative, Diplomatic, Military. Monarch power is generated at the beginning of each month. There is not magnitude difference between big countries and small countries. https://eu4.paradoxwikis.com/Monarch_power
[5] The former is between 1444 to 1821. The latter is between 1836 to 1936.
[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trienio_Liberal This is a real historical event. But in alt-history, Napoleon intervened in Spain instead of Louis XVIII.
[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-Napoleonic_Depression
[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decembrist_revolt
[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Amiens This treaty was initially widely hailed across Europe as the definitive end of the French Revolutionary Wars. However, it collapsed within a year of its signing due to both Britain and France’s failure to honor its obligations.
[10] https://www.playthepast.org/?p=2288
[11] Hayden White, Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in 19th-century Europe, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,1973.
[12] Hayden White, Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in 19th-century Europe, p.433.
[13] Why did I choose Victoria 3 for this mod? What alternate history did I design for my mod? How did I design the historical content of my mod?