A Smarter Louis IX

Agathocles

Banned
OTL
Despite wasting fortunes and human resources building Versailles, in outrageous parties lasting several days, clothing, jewels, clocks, funrniture, uprooting and transporting huge trees across France to plant them in Versailles, in unporductive wars with the Netherlands, A-H, England,, Spain, etc, Louis IX had the strongest army and for a while the strongest navy in Europe, but he used them dismally.

His army invaded the Netherlands rapidly, completely surprising and overwhleming Dutch forces. However, he stopped in the middle of the invasion to negotiate, enabling the Dutch to rally, deploy strong forces, secure alliances, flood the fields and stop the invasion, inflicting great losses and expenses on France and forcing Pouis to sue for peace.

Although he inherited New France and received Louisiana, he did not settle or develop his huge colonies nor built a large number of shipyards to boost his navy and merchant fleet with the abundant lumber of his colonies, preferring to waste his time, ships, men and fortune in Europe and building all his ships in France, where timber was scarce, so he had to import it from Scandinavia, etc, to build the largest navy in the world in a few years, only in France.

His long and costly European wars and his alliance with the remote Ottoman Empire, ruined all Europe and fostered Muslim piracy and domination of N Africa, the Balkans, etc,

ATL
Louis IX realizes in 1660 that fighting strong armies in Europe, over crowded territories is much less productive than seizing and settling remote, sparsely populated and primitive nations.

In order to rapidly develop the colonies, he offers free passage to all European, Irish, English and Scottish settlers to his colonies, work building towns, shipyards, ships, roads, logging, clearing stumps for orchards and farmland, producing pemmican, salted cod, mining, etc, inexpensive land and strong armed forces to prevent Indian attacks.

He cancels the Ottoman alliance and urges Russia, Persia, Poland-Lithuania, Austria and Spain to form a coalition and fight the Ottomans, while he develops his colonies and expands his fleet, trade and economy. If Russia, Persia and Poland-Lithuania invade Romania, Bulgaria, Anatolia, Syria, Mesopotamia, etc, while Spain and Austria invade Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Greece, etc, piracy will be greatly reduced and the Ottoman Empire will soon collapse. France will sell cannon, munitions, etc, to Persia, Poland-Lithuania, etc, if they need them.

Louis signs 10-year non aggression pacts with England, Spain-Portugal, Russia, Austria, Poland Lithuania and Sweden.

Louis lures and hires the best ship designers and builders, wrought iron industrials, machine and gun designers, farmers, inventors, chemists, physicists, mathematicians, engineers, physicians, naturalists, etc, from the Ottoman Empire, Netherlands, England, Scotland, Norway, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Denmark, Japan, China, etc, and builds huge wind-driven sawmills and shipyards in all his territories with lumber. So that his industry, agriculture, merchant fleet and then his navy grow at an unprecedented rate and with ships of unprecedented size and speed.

By 1669, there are hundreds of thousands of Europeans in French colonies (even Spaniards, Englishmen, Portuguese and Dutch immigrants flock to French colonies with free passage and plenty of
jobs, rather than to their own colonies, having to pay expensive passage and with few jobs on arrival). Louis operates over 200 shipyards worldwide.

Louis occupies practically unpopulated Palawan and offers an alliance to the Netherlands, in order to invade together and share Formosa, Okinawa, Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea and Manchuria.

The Netherlands agree to invade together valuable Formosa, which soon falls to a large Franco-Dutch fleet, transporting 15,000 French troops and 5,000 Dutch troops. However, France settled and develops his half much faster than the Netherlands do.

France then invades tiny, strategically located Okinawa, with better climate than Formosa and Japan. Then Louis invades Kyushu with a huge fleet and issues an ultimatum to Japan, whose small, obsolete fleet and army are no match for their French counterparts. Japan complies with the ultimatum and becomes a French colony, which soon thrives with shipyards, silk production, etc, for the French market.
Large numbers of Japanese recruits are trained and armed and with French officers, invade Vietnam, then Cambodia and Thailand and finally, also with Vietnamese and Thai troops, they invade coastal and riperian China.

By the time the non aggression pacts lapse, the French navy, merchant fleet, industry, agriculture and army are truly formidable.
 
Despite wasting fortunes and human resources building Versailles, in outrageous parties lasting several days, clothing, jewels, clocks, funrniture, uprooting and transporting huge trees across France to plant them in Versailles, in unporductive wars with the Netherlands, A-H, England,, Spain, etc, Louis IX

Do you mean Louis XIV?
 
You stole my question. :-(

However, a smarter St. Louis (Louis IX) would also be a bonus for France.

Must admit, this sounds like a massive France wank that will cause a Napoleonic type reaction from the rest of Europe. I mean, conquering Formosa, Okinawa, Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea and Manchuria at this point sounds pretty ASB, not to mention, besides authorial fiat, what would the gain be for France?
 
OTL

Although he inherited New France and received Louisiana, he did not settle or develop his huge colonies nor built a large number of shipyards to boost his navy and merchant fleet with the abundant lumber of his colonies, preferring to waste his time, ships, men and fortune in Europe and building all his ships in France, where timber was scarce, so he had to import it from Scandinavia, etc, to build the largest navy in the world in a few years, only in France.

His long and costly European wars and his alliance with the remote Ottoman Empire, ruined all Europe and fostered Muslim piracy and domination of N Africa, the Balkans, etc,

To start from the end, the good relations with the Ottomans benefited France economically by giving it almost a monopoly on a profitable trade in Levant. Also, from the French perspective, the Ottomans in Louis' time had been providing an useful detraction of the Hapsburg forces and the French ships were (more or less) protected from the pirates of the Barbary Coast most of whom were the Ottoman subjects. Why Louis had to worry about the fate of the fate of the Ottoman Christian subjects is anybody's guess (as late as in the 1870's Disraeli stated that this is not British concern so why in the XVII should it be French concern?).

As far as the New France is concerned, settlement there was a volunteer act so what Louis was supposed to do? Forcefully deport a big chunk of the French population into the colony to get a cheap timber? FYI, in OTL Britain was extensively importing the ship-building materials from Sweden and Russia even in the early XIX and besides timber you'd need iron, wax, hemp, flax and many other items and while the hemp was a popular crop in North America since the early XVII, it was grown mostly for the domestic consumption leaving Russia a virtual monopolist in its exports until early XIX. The same goes for flax production: while the 1st production in Canada is dated by 1617, the Brits kept exporting it from Russia until early XIX. And you'd still need iron and quite a few other material not easily obtainable in the colonies, not to mention skilled workers and crews. In other words, the program of switching ship-building into the colony would not be practical.


ATL
Louis IX realizes in 1660 that fighting strong armies in Europe, over crowded territories is much less productive than seizing and settling remote, sparsely populated and primitive nations.

In order to rapidly develop the colonies, he offers free passage to all European, Irish, English and Scottish settlers to his colonies, work building towns, shipyards, ships, roads, logging, clearing stumps for orchards and farmland, producing pemmican, salted cod, mining, etc, inexpensive land and strong armed forces to prevent Indian attacks.

IIRC, the British colonies in the North America were not profitable, to put it mildly, and produced little by troubles (with the final one being caused by refusal of these colonists to pay taxes to the crown) and they were willing to create "strong armed forces" only when it came to fighting the Crown. So why do you think that that "infrastructure" project would add anything substantial to the strength/wealth of Louis' France?

He cancels the Ottoman alliance

And the Levantine trade goes down the tubes ...

and urges Russia, Persia, Poland-Lithuania, Austria and Spain to form a coalition and fight the Ottomans, while he develops his colonies and expands his fleet, trade and economy.

There is no "Russia" in 1660, just "Tsardom of Moscow", and there was no intention whatsoever to fight against the Ottomans until this happened as a byproduct of the Cossack Wars. Needless to say that most of the time Russian and Polish interests had been mutually exclusive and in 1654–1667 they were at war.

The PLC during that period was an Ottoman ally or opponent based upon its own interests and/or position of the Crimea (during the Cossack Wars the Crimeans changed sides at least once).

Austria in 1661 - 64 was at war with the Ottomans and Battle of St. Gotthard Abbey was fought with the French troops fighting as a part of the League of the Rhine.

If Russia, Persia and Poland-Lithuania invade Romania, Bulgaria, Anatolia, Syria, Mesopotamia, etc,

They'd probably love to but for doing this in the 1660s there would be a need of one more participant of the alliance, the ASBs (who, unfortunately, had been busy elsewhere during this specific period of time).

For the Russia circa 1660s to invade Romania and Bulgaria, there would be a need to start with conquest of the big part of the Left Bank Ukraine and the Northern coast of the Black Sea; task that Russian Empire was able to accomplish only in the 2nd half of the XVIII century.


while Spain and Austria invade Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Greece, etc, piracy will be greatly reduced and the Ottoman Empire will soon collapse.

The Austrian Hapsburgs considered themselves lucky being able to stop the Ottomans at St. Gotthard Abbey and to make a peace: there was no interest in either Germany or France to get involved in a protracted campaign of conquest of Hungary and on their own the Austrian Hapsburgs could do little. Ability of the Spanish Hapsburgs to conquer and hold a big part of the Northern Africa is a big question mark.

France will sell cannon, munitions, etc, to Persia, Poland-Lithuania, etc, if they need them.

"Selling" implies someone's ability to buy (aka, to pay for the purchase). In the PLC Sejm was unwilling to pay even for the maintenance of the troops during the war. Selling arms to Persia would require navigation around Africa.

An idea that everybody happily observes creation of the world-wide French empire without trying to prevent this from happening is slightly too much on an optimistic side.
 
Must admit, this sounds like a massive France wank that will cause a Napoleonic type reaction from the rest of Europe. I mean, conquering Formosa, Okinawa, Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea and Manchuria at this point sounds pretty ASB, not to mention, besides authorial fiat, what would the gain be for France?

I tried to express the same feelings in my post. Even prior to the colonial empire there are too many unrealistic or mutually exclusive ideas for the schema to be marginally realistic.
 

Agathocles

Banned
Must admit, this sounds like a massive France wank that will cause a Napoleonic type reaction from the rest of Europe. I mean, conquering Formosa, Okinawa, Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea and Manchuria at this point sounds pretty ASB, not to mention, besides authorial fiat, what would the gain be for France?
the tiny Dutch East Indies Company did invade Formosa and held it for a while. They lost it only because of a tiny population and garrison. Louis XIV has for greater resources than the DEIC. Okinawa is much smaller, weaker and has a much smaller population. Manchuria has a tiny population, because the Chinese emperors have stopped migration.
The rest of Europe wouln'd even realize than France had conquered those lands and could not care less. They worried about an invasion in neighboring or allied countries, which was rather frequent.
Capturing Manchuria is an order of magnitude easier than fighting a modern European army after another, as Louis did for decades, without gaining territory, just wasting men and money.

Spain ruled the PI, the Dutch ruled the DEI, Ceylon, etc, and Portugal ruled Brazil, Cape Verde, Angola, Mozambique, etc, with ridiculous forces and engaged in awesome trade. In contrast, simultaneously, Louis incurred huge losses in every a single battle.
 

Agathocles

Banned
To start from the end, the good relations with the Ottomans benefited France economically by giving it almost a monopoly on a profitable trade in Levant. Also, from the French perspective, the Ottomans in Louis' time had been providing an useful detraction of the Hapsburg forces and the French ships were (more or less) protected from the pirates of the Barbary Coast most of whom were the Ottoman subjects. Why Louis had to worry about the fate of the fate of the Ottoman Christian subjects is anybody's guess (as late as in the 1870's Disraeli stated that this is not British concern so why in the XVII should it be French concern?).

As far as the New France is concerned, settlement there was a volunteer act so what Louis was supposed to do? Forcefully deport a big chunk of the French population into the colony to get a cheap timber? FYI, in OTL Britain was extensively importing the ship-building materials from Sweden and Russia even in the early XIX and besides timber you'd need iron, wax, hemp, flax and many other items and while the hemp was a popular crop in North America since the early XVII, it was grown mostly for the domestic consumption leaving Russia a virtual monopolist in its exports until early XIX. The same goes for flax production: while the 1st production in Canada is dated by 1617, the Brits kept exporting it from Russia until early XIX. And you'd still need iron and quite a few other material not easily obtainable in the colonies, not to mention skilled workers and crews. In other words, the program of switching ship-building into the colony would not be practical.




IIRC, the British colonies in the North America were not profitable, to put it mildly, and produced little by troubles (with the final one being caused by refusal of these colonists to pay taxes to the crown) and they were willing to create "strong armed forces" only when it came to fighting the Crown. So why do you think that that "infrastructure" project would add anything substantial to the strength/wealth of Louis' France?



And the Levantine trade goes down the tubes ...



There is no "Russia" in 1660, just "Tsardom of Moscow", and there was no intention whatsoever to fight against the Ottomans until this happened as a byproduct of the Cossack Wars. Needless to say that most of the time Russian and Polish interests had been mutually exclusive and in 1654–1667 they were at war.

The PLC during that period was an Ottoman ally or opponent based upon its own interests and/or position of the Crimea (during the Cossack Wars the Crimeans changed sides at least once).

Austria in 1661 - 64 was at war with the Ottomans and Battle of St. Gotthard Abbey was fought with the French troops fighting as a part of the League of the Rhine.



They'd probably love to but for doing this in the 1660s there would be a need of one more participant of the alliance, the ASBs (who, unfortunately, had been busy elsewhere during this specific period of time).

For the Russia circa 1660s to invade Romania and Bulgaria, there would be a need to start with conquest of the big part of the Left Bank Ukraine and the Northern coast of the Black Sea; task that Russian Empire was able to accomplish only in the 2nd half of the XVIII century.




The Austrian Hapsburgs considered themselves lucky being able to stop the Ottomans at St. Gotthard Abbey and to make a peace: there was no interest in either Germany or France to get involved in a protracted campaign of conquest of Hungary and on their own the Austrian Hapsburgs could do little. Ability of the Spanish Hapsburgs to conquer and hold a big part of the Northern Africa is a big question mark.



"Selling" implies someone's ability to buy (aka, to pay for the purchase). In the PLC Sejm was unwilling to pay even for the maintenance of the troops during the war. Selling arms to Persia would require navigation around Africa.

An idea that everybody happily observes creation of the world-wide French empire without trying to prevent this from happening is slightly too much on an optimistic side.

Philip II of Spain-Portugal and his half brother, the emperor of Austria did trounce the Ottoman's in Lepanto and did invade parts of N Africa. Austrai made the great mistake of fighting the Ottomans in the much more defensible Balkans, than in N Africa for centuries.

Philip ruled over Spain, Naples, Portugal, etc, and Austria ruled the catholic part of the Holy Roman Empire, if attacking the Ottomans in a coalition with Persia, Russia and Poland-Lithuania, they would have wiped out the Ottomans rapidly. Unfortunately, Louis XIV sided with the Ottomans and the Protestants (Swedes and Germans) against the Habsburgs, dooming Europe and boosting the Swedes and the Ottomans.

In this thread, Louis is expanding overseas and developing his colonies and trade, letting W Europe wipe out the Ottomans and keeping Sweden in check. Instead of Frenchmen and Spaniards, Austrians, etc, killing each other, Frenchmen are conquering, settling and developing distant territories.

It is obvious that paying for passage and providing jobs (building shipyards, sawmills, foundries, towns, a city, etc,), sending troops, etc, will result in much more rapid settlement of Acadia, Montreal, etc, than leaving a few hundred Huguenots, etc, lead an extremely difficult life, isolated in tiny communities, with little protection, trade, transportation, medical care, etc,

It is incredible that despite Britain starting colonization at nearly the same time, many a town in New England had a larger population than all Louisiana (about 800 inhabitants in 1750), In contrast,it was not unusual for France to loose or have crippled thousands of men in a single battle, dozens of times almost every decade.
 
OTL
Despite wasting fortunes and human resources building Versailles, in outrageous parties lasting several days, clothing, jewels, clocks, funrniture, uprooting and transporting huge trees across France to plant them in Versailles, in unporductive wars with the Netherlands, A-H, England,, Spain, etc, Louis IX had the strongest army and for a while the strongest navy in Europe, but he used them dismally.

His army invaded the Netherlands rapidly, completely surprising and overwhleming Dutch forces. However, he stopped in the middle of the invasion to negotiate, enabling the Dutch to rally, deploy strong forces, secure alliances, flood the fields and stop the invasion, inflicting great losses and expenses on France and forcing Pouis to sue for peace.

Although he inherited New France and received Louisiana, he did not settle or develop his huge colonies nor built a large number of shipyards to boost his navy and merchant fleet with the abundant lumber of his colonies, preferring to waste his time, ships, men and fortune in Europe and building all his ships in France, where timber was scarce, so he had to import it from Scandinavia, etc, to build the largest navy in the world in a few years, only in France.

His long and costly European wars and his alliance with the remote Ottoman Empire, ruined all Europe and fostered Muslim piracy and domination of N Africa, the Balkans, etc,

ATL
Louis IX realizes in 1660 that fighting strong armies in Europe, over crowded territories is much less productive than seizing and settling remote, sparsely populated and primitive nations.

In order to rapidly develop the colonies, he offers free passage to all European, Irish, English and Scottish settlers to his colonies, work building towns, shipyards, ships, roads, logging, clearing stumps for orchards and farmland, producing pemmican, salted cod, mining, etc, inexpensive land and strong armed forces to prevent Indian attacks.

He cancels the Ottoman alliance and urges Russia, Persia, Poland-Lithuania, Austria and Spain to form a coalition and fight the Ottomans, while he develops his colonies and expands his fleet, trade and economy. If Russia, Persia and Poland-Lithuania invade Romania, Bulgaria, Anatolia, Syria, Mesopotamia, etc, while Spain and Austria invade Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Greece, etc, piracy will be greatly reduced and the Ottoman Empire will soon collapse. France will sell cannon, munitions, etc, to Persia, Poland-Lithuania, etc, if they need them.

Louis signs 10-year non aggression pacts with England, Spain-Portugal, Russia, Austria, Poland Lithuania and Sweden.

Louis lures and hires the best ship designers and builders, wrought iron industrials, machine and gun designers, farmers, inventors, chemists, physicists, mathematicians, engineers, physicians, naturalists, etc, from the Ottoman Empire, Netherlands, England, Scotland, Norway, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Denmark, Japan, China, etc, and builds huge wind-driven sawmills and shipyards in all his territories with lumber. So that his industry, agriculture, merchant fleet and then his navy grow at an unprecedented rate and with ships of unprecedented size and speed.

By 1669, there are hundreds of thousands of Europeans in French colonies (even Spaniards, Englishmen, Portuguese and Dutch immigrants flock to French colonies with free passage and plenty of
jobs, rather than to their own colonies, having to pay expensive passage and with few jobs on arrival). Louis operates over 200 shipyards worldwide.

Louis occupies practically unpopulated Palawan and offers an alliance to the Netherlands, in order to invade together and share Formosa, Okinawa, Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea and Manchuria.

The Netherlands agree to invade together valuable Formosa, which soon falls to a large Franco-Dutch fleet, transporting 15,000 French troops and 5,000 Dutch troops. However, France settled and develops his half much faster than the Netherlands do.

France then invades tiny, strategically located Okinawa, with better climate than Formosa and Japan. Then Louis invades Kyushu with a huge fleet and issues an ultimatum to Japan, whose small, obsolete fleet and army are no match for their French counterparts. Japan complies with the ultimatum and becomes a French colony, which soon thrives with shipyards, silk production, etc, for the French market.
Large numbers of Japanese recruits are trained and armed and with French officers, invade Vietnam, then Cambodia and Thailand and finally, also with Vietnamese and Thai troops, they invade coastal and riperian China.

By the time the non aggression pacts lapse, the French navy, merchant fleet, industry, agriculture and army are truly formidable.

Why? What benefit has France from this? Why would they forget all hostilities to fight the enemy of the French enemies?

Another thing:
- There is no Russia

- Persia post-1640 is weak as hell and no threat to the Ottomans aside from the borders. And it faces conflict with the Uzbeks and Mughals, another front pretty much wreak them to a new dynasty and internal chaos...

- Poland-Lithuania doesn't get anything they wish? In 1683, they wanted Podolia back. That is not the case in the 1660s...

- Austria didn't suddenly want to conquer Hungary. They got the chance after the Ottoman Army was destroyed and the best Grand Vizier executed because of it.

- Spain is hardly a Land Force threat to the Ottomans. Their last war was in the 1580s or so. Almost a century afterwards. Besides, Morocco is a bigger threat to them in the region

To think this will work means you either play a lot of Empire total war/EU IV or don't know about the era much.
 
Philip II of Spain-Portugal and his half brother, the emperor of Austria did trounce the Ottoman's in Lepanto and did invade parts of N Africa. Austrai made the great mistake of fighting the Ottomans in the much more defensible Balkans, than in N Africa for centuries.

Philip ruled over Spain, Naples, Portugal, etc, and Austria ruled the catholic part of the Holy Roman Empire, if attacking the Ottomans in a coalition with Persia, Russia and Poland-Lithuania, they would have wiped out the Ottomans rapidly. Unfortunately, Louis XIV sided with the Ottomans and the Protestants (Swedes and Germans) against the Habsburgs, dooming Europe and boosting the Swedes and the Ottomans.

In this thread, Louis is expanding overseas and developing his colonies and trade, letting W Europe wipe out the Ottomans and keeping Sweden in check. Instead of Frenchmen and Spaniards, Austrians, etc, killing each other, Frenchmen are conquering, settling and developing distant territories.

It is obvious that paying for passage and providing jobs (building shipyards, sawmills, foundries, towns, a city, etc,), sending troops, etc, will result in much more rapid settlement of Acadia, Montreal, etc, than leaving a few hundred Huguenots, etc, lead an extremely difficult life, isolated in tiny communities, with little protection, trade, transportation, medical care, etc,

It is incredible that despite Britain starting colonization at nearly the same time, many a town in New England had a larger population than all Louisiana (about 800 inhabitants in 1750), In contrast,it was not unusual for France to loose or have crippled thousands of men in a single battle, dozens of times almost every decade.

Lepanto did not achieve anything. The battle was against a fleet captured in surprise with two commanders hating each other. Still good for morale but nothing that stopped the Ottomans.
Austria fought North of the Balkans, hardly a defensible region. Have you ever looked at the Hungarian geography? It is a military hell for Armies coming from the South to defend it. And North Africa is hardly a concern for Austria...

The Ottomans faced many coalition and only came to a certain defeat in 1687. Köprülü Mustafa Pasha succeeded and drove the League forces back to Hungary. A new coalition, and especially with states like Persia and yet non-existent as Russia is hardly enough.
Louis XIV siding with the Ottomans and Protestants was the right thing from French perspective. Why should all of Europe be his concern?

What Western European State was an enemy to the Ottomans in the 1660s? Other than Venice, the Knights and the Pope?

Your ideas of Frenchmen doing all these things is an utopia. It is not beneficial for France. Especially when European Powers will thwart him anyway.
 
Philip II of Spain-Portugal and his half brother, the emperor of Austria did trounce the Ottoman's in Lepanto and did invade parts of N Africa. Austrai made the great mistake of fighting the Ottomans in the much more defensible Balkans, than in N Africa for centuries.

Philip ruled over Spain, Naples, Portugal, etc, and Austria ruled the catholic part of the Holy Roman Empire, if attacking the Ottomans in a coalition with Persia, Russia and Poland-Lithuania, they would have wiped out the Ottomans rapidly. Unfortunately, Louis XIV sided with the Ottomans and the Protestants (Swedes and Germans) against the Habsburgs, dooming Europe and boosting the Swedes and the Ottomans.

In this thread, Louis is expanding overseas and developing his colonies and trade, letting W Europe wipe out the Ottomans and keeping Sweden in check. Instead of Frenchmen and Spaniards, Austrians, etc, killing each other, Frenchmen are conquering, settling and developing distant territories.

It is obvious that paying for passage and providing jobs (building shipyards, sawmills, foundries, towns, a city, etc,), sending troops, etc, will result in much more rapid settlement of Acadia, Montreal, etc, than leaving a few hundred Huguenots, etc, lead an extremely difficult life, isolated in tiny communities, with little protection, trade, transportation, medical care, etc,

It is incredible that despite Britain starting colonization at nearly the same time, many a town in New England had a larger population than all Louisiana (about 800 inhabitants in 1750), In contrast,it was not unusual for France to loose or have crippled thousands of men in a single battle, dozens of times almost every decade.

Actually, it was not Louis XIV but Francis I who sided with the Ottomans and he did this by a valid reason, fighting the Hapsburgs. In case you missed it, France and the Hapsburgs were in almost uninterrupted state of war/hostility between early XVI and the 2nd half of the XVIII. If anything, friendship with the Ottomans was benefitting French economy (Levantine trade).

As for the Swedes, alliance with them had been started by Richelieu, not Louis XIV, by the same reason: France was hostile to the Hapsburgs. Sweden was “boosted” during the 30YW, well before Louis became a king. BTW, expressed opinion of the numerous historians and writers was that Europe (or at least Germany) would be “doomed” with the Hapsburgs victorious in the 30YW and that it was saved by the “Lion of the North”. And I’m not even going into the doom and gloom scenarios involving victorious Phillip II.

Why would all the existing history be forgotten (without France getting even the French-speaking territories held by the Hapsburgs) in a favor of some untested colonial schemes of dubious profitability while abandoning the profitable existing trade with the Ottomans?

An idea that creation of a colonial empire was something that Louis could accomplish by clicking his fingers, is extremely naive. He could not force the big numbers of French to migrate and to create out of nothing the industries of which France itself did not have enough. He could not force creation of a trade empire in an absence of a big merchant class interested in a colonial trade.

Not sure how sending the troops would be conductive to the population growth (at least there should be some available women in the area), medical care and transportation but AFAIK in OTL French colonial policies resulted in much lesser confrontations with the Indians than the British style mass settlements. Anyway, neither French nor British colonies in the North America had been profitable to the state so what exactly Louis was going to gain by creating the French version of the 13 colonies? The profitable colonies in both cases were Caribbean islands producing the “colonial goods”.

And, as was already remarked, an idea of the Russian-Polish alliance against the Ottomans in the 1660’s is a fantasy (they were at war in 1605 - 18, 1632 - 34, 1654 - 67 and stopped just by a pure exhaustion).
 
Top