Ferry dies early

Hi all,

Ferry was THE proponent of French colonisation, using underhanded tactics to push the effort, to the extent he was nicknamed Ferry-Tonkin.

What would be the consequences iif he died early, say 1880?

Would colonisation stay on the same pace?
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Didn't late 19th century France have one major avowed colonialist, with most other PMs supporting clemenceau's focus on Europe and anti colonialism?

Yet at the same time since ferry only had two brief ministries, and the colonial empire kept expanding through the whole Belle Époque, does it mean that regardless of stated emphasis and intentions, France had its fingers in enough situations that the empire would grow to Otl's size "absentmindedly" and step by step?

After all, even the anti colonial Gladstone occupied Egypt.
 
This is Jules Ferry, right? Because if you can kill him off before the push for his education laws begin, then France's minority languages (especially and most notably Breton and Occitan) might be in a hugely better place since I've often seen Ferry's education policies blamed for their decline.

That's in addition to colonialism, which Ferry as you said helped set the pace for. Could Madagascar survive as an independent state without France colonialism? Especially since it was doing quite well on its own (a modernising state akin to Thailand) and is a natural place to have a holdout against colonialism as a unified island state. And if colonialism in West Africa/Sahel goes slower, then there's a strong chance for powers to hold out until the Great War. I guess it depends if there's anyone to take up his mantle after his death.
 
This is Jules Ferry, right? Because if you can kill him off before the push for his education laws begin, then France's minority languages (especially and most notably Breton and Occitan) might be in a hugely better place since I've often seen Ferry's education policies blamed for their decline.

That's in addition to colonialism, which Ferry as you said helped set the pace for. Could Madagascar survive as an independent state without France colonialism? Especially since it was doing quite well on its own (a modernising state akin to Thailand) and is a natural place to have a holdout against colonialism as a unified island state. And if colonialism in West Africa/Sahel goes slower, then there's a strong chance for powers to hold out until the Great War. I guess it depends if there's anyone to take up his mantle after his death.

Ferry was a figurehead, one of the most important leaders of his party, but his points of view were widely shared in the french political elites. The colonial expansion was already booming during the Second Empire (3x colonies ; for example heavy french influence in Madagascar 1853-1863). Many leaders, even in left-wing parties, shared the creed of "civilization brought to the inferior races", save for few exceptions such as Clemenceau. The death of Ferry could have consequences in the rythme of colonization, as he was a proponent of a maximalist, deliberate policy of expansion, while others, such as Gambetta, advocated an opportunist, reaction-only colonial expansion. So maybe a less extended french colonial empire, but a colonial empire nonetheless.

On the local culture thing, Ferry's reforms of free and mandatory schooling were not as influent as it is commonly thought of. Before Ferry, there was no minority language schooling, so he did not destroy an existent system, but rather enhanced the literacy levels, which can be used also for minority languages. The Third Republic early years were in fact the very summit of minority languages literature in France (Mistral, Nobel prize 1904). The use of the minority languages was killed by the rural-urban shift of the 1930', which cut off young people from the rural, minority-languages speaking, parents and grandparents. The villages spoke occitan/breton/catalan, the city french. The best example is Alsace-Lorraine : the Alsatian cities spoke alsatian in the 19th c., and the german annexation enforced this cultural preeminence, so the rural-urban shift did not bring a disappearance of the alsatian language. In nearby Moselle, Metz was a french-speaking city already in the 19th c., so, even with the german schooling of 1870-1918, the rural-urban shift made the francic languages very minor ones.
 
Ferry was a figurehead, one of the most important leaders of his party, but his points of view were widely shared in the french political elites. The colonial expansion was already booming during the Second Empire (3x colonies ; for example heavy french influence in Madagascar 1853-1863). Many leaders, even in left-wing parties, shared the creed of "civilization brought to the inferior races", save for few exceptions such as Clemenceau. The death of Ferry could have consequences in the rythme of colonization, as he was a proponent of a maximalist, deliberate policy of expansion, while others, such as Gambetta, advocated an opportunist, reaction-only colonial expansion. So maybe a less extended french colonial empire, but a colonial empire nonetheless.
There would be some empire. Cochinchina was there, bits and pieces in Africa as well...
However, Ferry pushed more than anybody else by acting first and asking for funds after, like in Tonkin. Would any other politician be as bold, while staying in power?

Could that butterfly the Scramble for Africa?
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Maybe a slower going French colonial expansion means that in West Africa instead of having the whole Sahara the Germans end up with enough of the Sahara to create a land link between their Togo and Kamerun colonies? Morocco remains independent continuously. Siam never loses Laos.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
French West Africa still provides a Saharan land link between Algeria, Senegal and guinea however. Maybe Madagascar is not fully absorbed
 
This is Jules Ferry, right? Because if you can kill him off before the push for his education laws begin, then France's minority languages (especially and most notably Breton and Occitan) might be in a hugely better place since I've often seen Ferry's education policies blamed for their decline.

The perceived need to destroy the regional languages went back (at least) to Abbé Grégoire's report in the 1790s.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
bump - Tanc49, where else did you want to take this? Could be interesting if you fleshed it out.
 
bump - Tanc49, where else did you want to take this? Could be interesting if you fleshed it out.
I actually haven't had much mindshare to think about it since, unfortunately...

My take would be a big slowdown of the colonisation effort. In my view, the Scramble was francobritish game of one upmanship. If the French don't start the game, the English will not follow. We might not see a colonized Africa as it had very little real value.

I know the parti colonial wasn't just Ferry, but he was the most efficient member. But the fact he had to ask for post-war funding like in Tonkin shows colonisation wasn't particularly popular. Everything should be done for the ligne bleue des Vosges instead!
 
This may cause an earlier WWI.

In late XIXth century France, the Left was pushing colonialism as a way to get people away from revanchism while the Right opposed it as a waste of ressources which should be targeted to prepare the next war against Germany.
 
This may cause an earlier WWI.

In late XIXth century France, the Left was pushing colonialism as a way to get people away from revanchism while the Right opposed it as a waste of ressources which should be targeted to prepare the next war against Germany.

True, the colonisation process did absorb many men and material. On the other hand, it did create a constant push to improve and train. We know Bismarck pushed France to get more African colonies, would a less colonialist France be indeed a bigger threat to Germany?

Would Germany want to preemptively attack again? We should also not forget that colonialism actually helped the Franco-british relations and almost caused war with Germany a few times (in Morocco for example) or Italy (Tunisia).

There is a massive debate to be had on the effect of colonialism, with the war of conquest on one side and the benefits from medicine and education on the other of course, and I don't wanna be eurocentric but the impact on European affairs would be humongous to begin with.

Could anybody else take the mantle? Without it, you'd see a more continentally oriented France, with better relations with Italy but also far more to the right and way more religious. What a world it'd be
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Could anybody else take the mantle?
"Leave it to Leopold" ;)

Without it, you'd see a more continentally oriented France, with better relations with Italy but also far more to the right and way more religious. What a world it'd be

This requires some explanation for the non-French savvy. A continental orientation is what the right wants but I don't know for sure it would reinforce right-wing success.

Better relations with Italy I get, assuming no grab for Tunisia. A more religious France I guess, if Ferry was personally very associated with secularization of education.
 
Top