Not really - it's fairly uncommon to meet people who speak a regional language these days, outside of the elderly generations.
WI. France wins the Franco-Prussian War
- Thread starter tallthinkev
- Start date
Not really - it's fairly uncommon to meet people who speak a regional language these days, outside of the elderly generations.
Italy wouldn't dare angry a victorious France.also why would any other country come to Italy's aids when they are the aggressor against the papal state?
Couldn't France annex some border territories from the germans? Would they take any land east of the Rhine?
The goal for a long time was for the Rhine to be the border. The lands that might be annexed would be west of it.
Nah, the Rhineborder was just an excuse for French expansionism. If France would ever have gotten the Rhineborder, it would soon find some other natural border to expand to (case in point, when the French actualy got the rhineborder in 1810, within months it annexed the rest of the Netherlands).
Although I admit that the French might actualy started to believe their own 17th century propaganda in the 19th century. That said, the French barely tried anything to actualy gain some parts of the rhineborder in the 19th century.
Agree and that generation is slowly going away. Even in Belgium you will have troubles finding peoples who speak regional languages over the officials dutch, french and german.
Last edited:
That was in the context of the war with Britain. Napoleon wanted a stronger control over the coast to enforce the Continental system. I don’t think he really expected to keep the Netherlands in a final peace settlement (though he certainly wanted to keep Belgium).
As I have said, I doubt France would gain Luxemburg. The Netherlands is not part of this war. There could be a secret clause in the peace treaty the Prussia/Germany would not object to France buying Luxemburg, but I doubt it.
France would not go for all of the Prussian Rhineland. Both Belgium and the Netherlands would see it as a sign that France is still after the rhineborder and would know/think that they are next. All the German staates would dislike it in the age of nationalism. And Britain would not be happy. Basicly France would isolate themselves.
Personaly I think France would go at least for the (German) areas lost in 1815 after the 100 days, possibly a bit more (but I doubt they would cross the Moselle):
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...e_The_Second_Peace_of_Paris_20th_Nov_1815.jpg
I disagree with you. The paradox of French expansionism in the 16th to 18th century was that it was defensive.
In the 16th century, the north-east frontier (and a hostile one since it was the Habsburg empire on the other side) was barely 200 kilometers of Paris. That was the main reason France pushed estawards and northeastwards.
And all strategists knew that the French border was still a defensive nightmare in France’s 18th century borders (which were almost the same as today’s).
This is why France needed a divided political map on its north-eastern frontier. And this was Richelieu’s and Mazarin’s masterwork to have secured for 2 centuries an ever more divided HRE through the treaties of Westphalia.
Now, I agree on the very limited character of possible french annexations in 1870. This was the era of nationalities. But it would have been a strategic triumph for France to separate all or part of Prussian Rhineland-Westphalia from Prussia and turn it into an independent German State, like Bavaria, Württemberg, Hessen, ... etc.
I disagree. France might have had the goal to have more defensible borders but that doesnt change the simple fact that conquering territory by starting wars is not defensive.
Given OTL, I find it doubtful France would be able to ask and enforce any punishing terms if it wins as it probably wouldn't be a crushing victory.
Now, I wonder what the effects would be in term of German politics. If I remember, the Southern states were quite reluctant to join the war and formally join Prussia.
Would they realign to France for a great Catholic Alliance or would they be reeling from this?
Now, I wonder what the effects would be in term of German politics. If I remember, the Southern states were quite reluctant to join the war and formally join Prussia.
Would they realign to France for a great Catholic Alliance or would they be reeling from this?
TruthfulPanda
Gone Fishin'
Restore German states annexed by Prussia in 1866 too. And here Hannover could be given Westphalia.
Rhineland is trickier - if France annexes anything here then it'd be the Rheinland part of today's Rheinland-Pfalz. What to do with the northern part, Nordrhein today? Gift to Netherlands in exchange for Luxemburg?
FillyofDelphi
Banned
You're both right. The action of conquering territory (IE: The Tactics) certainly isen't defensive. But it was part of establishing a secure border on a major commerical-political artery that would allow France to efficently fortify its position, prevent the consolidation of a threatening unified German polity, and provide enough of a "decisive answer" to the question of disputes over the region to dissuade future wars over it. That's a broader policy (IE: The Grand Strategy) that's clearly defensive in nature.
Max Sinister
Banned
It all depends on who participates in the war and on which side. OP didn't say anything about eg the southern German states not joining Prussia, or possible uprisings in Hanover and such, or even whether Denmark would join.
The hardest question would be Italy, e.g. what they'd get: Nappy III can't give them Rome or he'll piss off the church, Savoy + Nice is also improbable, France didn't have Tunis yet... maybe if Austria fights Prussia too, they can make a bargain: Silesia to Austria, Trient and Trieste to Italy?
The hardest question would be Italy, e.g. what they'd get: Nappy III can't give them Rome or he'll piss off the church, Savoy + Nice is also improbable, France didn't have Tunis yet... maybe if Austria fights Prussia too, they can make a bargain: Silesia to Austria, Trient and Trieste to Italy?
FillyofDelphi
Banned
Austria is not going to peacefully peddle off its sole quality commercial port on the Adriatic. Especially post-Austro-Hungarian compromise, that's effectively rendering herself economically and militarily landlocked.
I agree with you in the meaning it was both defensive and of course offensive. That’s what I meant when I stressed the paradoxical aspect of French expansionism.