Development of French Industry in Napoleon wins TL

Assuming Napoleon had stayed in power, with a PoD in 1807. Via diplomacy Napoleon / sanity Napoleon maintains the status quo generally. Doesn't back stab Spain or have the 1809 or 1812 wars.

At some point the British will have to accept some kind of peace with Napoleon, though this could very well take a long time. But after peace does come, it would be logical to assume Nappy gave up north Germany and perhaps Holland ( no more reason to hold these areas after the continental blockade ends ). As for holdings in Italy I am not sure about the potential of him giving stuff over to Italian puppets.

I am not sure but I suspect the French industrial core would be around the Rhineland/Belgium/North Western France due to the massive amounts of coal from Limburg, the Rhineland, and Belgium.

Historically France lagged in terms of industrialization, I think you would likely see much more industrialization than historical.

If it happened in the areas I suspect this could have 2 interesting side effects:

I: The Rhineland and Belgium become Frenchified with new workers moving to the factories.

II. The Brith rate goes up, iirc one of the historical reasons the French birth rate was so low in the 1800s was due to lack of mass industrialization. Potentially this might mean a France with much more manpower long term.

So my questions are:

Would this additional coal fuel much stronger industrialization than historical, or were French shortcomings due to other factors?

Is it likely the area I suggested above becomes the industrial heartland of France, or is industry focused elsewhere for other reasons?

If France has such an alternate industrialization, how much is population growth impacted by it?
 
II. The Brith rate goes up, iirc one of the historical reasons the French birth rate was so low in the 1800s was due to lack of mass industrialization.

I thought that French low birth rate had to do with the fact that after the French Revolution and Napoleon Civil Code, the French peasantsended up being in posessiond of land, which didn't happened in Britain or "Germany". Given French inheritance law, properties had to be divided among sonas and saughters equally. Since families knew that if they had many kids they would see their lands divided in so small parts that they would be worthless, they limited the numbers of kids they had. This is, at least, what Hobsbawm says.
 
I thought that French low birth rate had to do with the fact that after the French Revolution and Napoleon Civil Code, the French peasantsended up being in posessiond of land, which didn't happened in Britain or "Germany". Given French inheritance law, properties had to be divided among sonas and saughters equally. Since families knew that if they had many kids they would see their lands divided in so small parts that they would be worthless, they limited the numbers of kids they had. This is, at least, what Hobsbawm says.

Yup, and France modernized its agriculture, and adopted the cultivation of the potato much latter than its Northern European neighbors.
 
I thought that French low birth rate had to do with the fact that after the French Revolution and Napoleon Civil Code, the French peasantsended up being in posessiond of land, which didn't happened in Britain or "Germany". Given French inheritance law, properties had to be divided among sonas and saughters equally. Since families knew that if they had many kids they would see their lands divided in so small parts that they would be worthless, they limited the numbers of kids they had. This is, at least, what Hobsbawm says.

Yes, this is correct.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Yes, this is correct.

To some extent, but the Germans also had a higher birthrate, from the 1650ties*. Honestly I don't see a Frenchification of the most Germanic areas, more likely any workers moving in will adopt the German language. More likely Greater France will turn into giant Belgium, we will see a split between a Dutch/German north and French south.

To King Gorilla the French seem to have adopted the potato at the same time as the Germans, but potatoes fit less well to French climate than German. Beside that the French agricultural sector was modernise before their neighbours, in the 18th century we see Austria, Denmark and many German minor states reforming their agriculture toward a more french structure, with more more self ownership and removal of serfhood.

*in reality they had that even before, Germans has a long tradition of emigration, while French doesn't, which mean that the French kept their families smaller.
 
Last edited:
To some extent, but the Germans also had a higher birthrate, from the 1650ties*. Honestly I don't see a Frenchification of the most Germanic areas, more likely any workers moving in will adopt the German language. More likely Greater France will turn into giant Belgium, we will see a split between a Dutch/German north and French south.

To King Gorilla the French seem to have adopted the potato at the same time as the Germans, but potatoes fit less well to French climate than German. Beside that the French agricultural sector was modernise before their neighbours, in the 18th century we see Austria, Denmark and many German minor states reforming their agriculture toward a more french structure, with more more self ownership and removal of serfhood.

*in reality they had that even before, Germans has a long tradition of emigratin, while French doesn't, which mean that the French kept their families smaller.

This is also true. I need to dig out my book to be exact, but it had a very good chapter on the 18th century French. In the north especially, especially amongst the peasantry, they tended to marry later (such in their late twenties), and would have 2-3 kids before ceasing. Although birth control as we know it didn't exist, they certainly had their own forms of preventing pregnancy.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
This is also true. I need to dig out my book to be exact, but it had a very good chapter on the 18th century French. In the north especially, especially amongst the peasantry, they tended to marry later (such in their late twenties), and would have 2-3 kids before ceasing. Although birth control as we know it didn't exist, they certainly had their own forms of preventing pregnancy.

Late marriage was a good way of prevention, Danes in this periode tended to marry at 27 for women and 29 for men, the French did the same*, German on the other hand usual married at 18 for women and 20 for men, and remarried fast in case of widowhood, the result was a exploding German birth rate, of course much of it was also a result of a the lack of social advancing among German peasantry, Danish and French peasant had to establish themself before their marriages even if they was only a tenant, with no hope for that among the poor Germans, they could just as well marry early. Ironic after the farming Danish farm reform in the late 18th century, which give the tenants ownership of their farms, we see the landless peasants and rural workers adopt earlier marriages and getting bigger families. Some of it are result in some level of rural stagnation in social advancement, where before a landless farmer or rural worker could hope to gain a tenantship, he lose it after the reforms. In France on the other hand Napoleon establish equal inherience between a mans childrens, which mean that the farm can't be left to the oldest son alone, creating a incentiment for few children to keep the farm together.

*Through Danes still tended to have a higher birth rate than the French.
 
Equuleus said:
I: The Rhineland and Belgium become Frenchified with new workers moving to the factories.

Since the French always wanted (or at least considered) having the Rhine as an Eastern Natural Border, it is not impossible for those area to be frenchified. But it's going to be hard given the non-french speaking populations.

In Belgium, Wallonia will probably get easily incorporated into the French Core. The problem is Flanders : the Flemish are dutch-speaker and their language is nowhere close to French. It will be hard to Frenchify Flanders.

As for the Rhineland, there are a lot of Germans but they are generally friendly to the French at the time : if French policies are good, they could very well fit in. When I'm thinking of this, I don't know why but I see the Rhineland becoming something like Alsace.

Equuleus said:
II. The Brith rate goes up, iirc one of the historical reasons the French birth rate was so low in the 1800s was due to lack of mass industrialization. Potentially this might mean a France with much more manpower long term.

Possibly. However, the French will have to compensate the death toll of the Napoleonic War. Remember that in OTL France was drained of its population because of the wars. Napoleon is partially to blame as he waged war, but he was in a defensive position in every war he fought (meaning he didn't make the first offensive : the only exception I see is Russia).
A victorious Napoleon will still need to compensate the deaths of his campaigns, even if he never went against Spain or Russia.

Equuleus said:
Would this additional coal fuel much stronger industrialization than historical, or were French shortcomings due to other factors?

I'm not an expert regarding Industrialization, but given how the Rhineland, Belgium and the North of France developped, it is highly possible that French Industrialization is stronger.
 
I am not sure but I suspect the French industrial core would be around the Rhineland/Belgium/North Western France due to the massive amounts of coal from Limburg, the Rhineland, and Belgium.

Historically France lagged in terms of industrialization, I think you would likely see much more industrialization than historical.

A few thoughts. One, why did France lag behind? This is somewhat unclear, but there were a few things:

1) The impact of the Napoleonic Wars, and the loss. So this is mitigated.

2) More interestingly, 1789 and the aftermath made labor relations much more... tense in France than in England. It's been suggested industrialization was hindered in part because the government of France was more assertive in protecting workers' rights.

(I'm simplifying because I'm at work, if anyone is curious I can dig it up later).

3) There's nothing automatically profitable about industrialization; for much of the 19th century the Netherlands was richer than Belgium, despite the fact that Belgium industrialized first.

4) The demographics of France are... interesting. France started langging behind in the 18th century, and the napoleonic Wars only had a slight effect (on long term demographic trends; obviously lots of people dying in Russia was not good). It had a lot to do with the French property system, so I don't see this changing.

But, industrialization in general...

5) Belgium, the Rhineland, and Northern Frnce were the heart of industrialization in OTL; it was recognized for decades that they'd profit from freer trade and movement between then. Indeed, Belgium boomed under the Empire in part because it was tied to France.


To some extent, but the Germans also had a higher birthrate, from the 1650ties*. Honestly I don't see a Frenchification of the most Germanic areas, more likely any workers moving in will adopt the German language. More likely Greater France will turn into giant Belgium, we will see a split between a Dutch/German north and French south.

Hrmm. I could see this, but I'd note French success in assimilating immigrants from across Europe in OTL.

in the 18th century we see Austria, Denmark and many German minor states reforming their agriculture toward a more french structure, with more more self ownership and removal of serfhood.

And yet this led to a population boom in Germany that you didn't see in France.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Hrmm. I could see this, but I'd note French success in assimilating immigrants from across Europe in OTL.

They were, but so was the Danes, Dutch and English, most immigration was to urban areas, where they tended to be assimilated quite fast. Zealand as example had significant German, Dutch, Scotish, Swedish, Polish and Jewish immigration over the last 400 years, most of urban immigrants was assimilated in three generations, the Jews was the only exception, but even they only upkept their population through continued population waves.
As long as the immigrant doesn't receive discrimination from the state they tend to assimilate fast.

And yet this led to a population boom in Germany that you didn't see in France.

We saw it, in the 18th century, where French population more or less doubled from 1650 to 1789. From the inherience reform under Napoleon we see a incentiment to small families, together with the creation of a large rural middle class by the revolution, while the reforms in the other countries resulted in a split between a rural petit-bourgeois and a rural proletariat, and inherience rules which didn't reward small families*.

*To some extent in Prussia we see element of equal inherience, but the lack of a strong rural middle class result in it only affecting the Junkers, which tend to be in deep debts from having to buy the younger sons out their estates, and incentiment to marry rich non-noble heiresses (which are why we saw marriage between rich Jews and Junkers).
 
Last edited:
They were, but so was the Danes, Dutch and English, most immigration was to urban areas, where they tended to be assimilated quite fast. Zealand as example had significant German, Dutch, Scotish, Swedish, Polish and Jewish immigration over the last 400 years, most of urban immigrants was assimilated in three generations, the Jews was the only exception, but even they only upkept their population through continued population waves.

As long as the immigrant doesn't receive discrimination from the state they tend to assimilate fast.

True, but the French also assimilated non-French border regions with dramatic success.
 
Did they? When did Alsace become Francophone?

Seriously?

The process was well on its way by 1870, partially reversed under German rule, and completed within a generation of World War Two. Today less than half the adult population even knows Alsatian, and it's much less with the next generation.
 
Did they? When did Alsace become Francophone?

I can't give you a precise date but Alsacians were Francophone by Napoleon's time (as the subject of the thread is a Napoleonic Victory scenario). As a proof, General Kleber, who took command in Egypt after Napoleon left, was Alsacian and spoke French although with a little Germanic accent.
To be fair and more exact, Alascians have always been bilingual : they spoke and still speak both French and German. Hell, even an old dialect of the Frankish language, the Francique (don't know if it's called the same in English), survived in Alsace nowadays, although it is spoken by only a few.
 
Seriously?

The process was well on its way by 1870, partially reversed under German rule, and completed within a generation of World War Two. Today less than half the adult population even knows Alsatian, and it's much less with the next generation.


I was actually seriously asking. I know that Alsace, the Rhineland, and Belgium were all very loyal to Napoleon up until the end, but I don't know if German would die out in Cologne and Aachen.
 
You mean Aix-la-Chapelle? :)

But yeah, probably not. I'd expect areas that deep within the Rhineland to merely become bilingual, with French the dominant language. Most people would grow up speaking German, but learn French very early. The trends would be two: German spoken in the home, French in business and government, with intermarriage with non-Germans in the cities gradually shaving away at the local tongue. Periodically, reaction against this would see people learning German late in life.
 
Top