France annexes Belgium in 1748

It did not "integrate quite nicely", some of the people enjoyed the revolutionaries ideas and reform, some other resented the attack on Catholicism. You could say the area was a bit apathetic to nationalism than Lombardo-Venetia was but to think that would stay the case in later decades(I don´t know if nationalism is inevitable, but even if it isn´t they are not going to become neither Frenchmen nor loyal to whatever king rules France in mere decades). The whole of Rhineland even after the conquest was more connected to Germany than to France, like I said still apathetic to Nationalism to either side.

By Germany I meant the HRE.

By 1870, most of France still was speaking more local languages than standard French(that might have been true till modern broadcast), plus the area they did have were ruled for either half a millennium(Britanny,Occitania) or were small(French Flanders, Perpignan, Nice and maybe Alsace), Rhineland is a totally different thing.



A problem is the Austo-Prussian rivalry, if either of them is with France it would block any help for England coming from them, is it possible for them to resolve the question or have them just not fight for France? I mean I find weird that the Austrian just accept to lose such important piece of territory and fight for either of them, so I think neutrality would be chosen by the Hapsburg.

What would Russia and Spain do? I think the later would follow as OTL.

In this scenario both Austria and Prussia would be more scared of France than each other.
 
I don't know why people think the Southern Netherlands were given back for nothing. It was done to get Louisbourg back, which was a crucial base for the French fisheries, which provided two thirds of the manpower for the French navy.
No, Louisbourg was traded for Madras, Louis XV got nothing for the SN.
 
In this scenario both Austria and Prussia would be more scared of France than each other.
As for a map, there's this one from another thread here on this topic:
g10041-png.174435
Yeah given the situation of the map, I can´t see Austria just helping France bully Netherlands and annex more of Western HRE, after the Rhineland there is really nothing left in term of cities or important land, with Bavaria also being sporadically pro French. But if France doesn´t go after the HRE anymore(unlikely) I can see Austria going after Silesia.

I think Britain, Netherlands and Prussia would be a solid block.

Spain probably still pro French, Bavaria not sure. But I think Austria is a really wild card, I can see them fighting for either side given either can give them a reason to.

Sardinia is going to be anti French, Russia don´t know.
 
No, Louisbourg was traded for Madras, Louis XV got nothing for the SN.

"In the end... Britain was forced to bite the bullet. At the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle in October 1748, she exchanged Louisbourg for a French withdrawal from the low countries."

Brendan Simms, Three Victories and a Defeat, page 350.
 
Yeah given the situation of the map, I can´t see Austria just helping France bully Netherlands and annex more of Western HRE, after the Rhineland there is really nothing left in term of cities or important land, with Bavaria also being sporadically pro French. But if France doesn´t go after the HRE anymore(unlikely) I can see Austria going after Silesia.

I think Britain, Netherlands and Prussia would be a solid block.

Spain probably still pro French, Bavaria not sure. But I think Austria is a really wild card, I can see them fighting for either side given either can give them a reason to.

Sardinia is going to be anti French, Russia don´t know.

Actually, the Dutch are the one side that might stay neutral. The "Barrier" to the low countries now sits entirely in French hands, and they can invade at will.

The Austrians would be anti-French at this point. The SN were millstone round her neck, but she has been humiliated to have them taken by force. The Bourbon-Habsburg alliance was bitterly opposed at court in OTL and the anti-Bourbon faction is strengthened further here. In addition, France now truly is in a position to project force into the Holy Roman Empire, which the Habsburgs, with the imperial dignity, are duty bound to defend.
 
Last edited:
"In the end... Britain was forced to bite the bullet. At the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle in October 1748, she exchanged Louisbourg for a French withdrawal from the low countries."

Brendan Simms, Three Victories and a Defeat, page 350.

I think he is mistaken; there are many sources for a Madras/Louisbourg exchange. Here is one example.

As for the Austrian Netherlands, I believe they were returned in exchange for Austria withdrawing from Italy.
 
So Austria will stay in Modena,Parma and Genoa? That creates a strong base given they also have Milan and Tuscany.
 
Largely agree with Admiral Matt.

Cool.

No doubt there will be a sort of "Seven Years war" since this war is more or less a prolongation of the "War of the Austrian Succession " and again ignited by Frederick of Prussia.
Question is how the alliances are running when France did not have a "stupid peace" as in OTL the French citizens called the peace of Aix la Chapelle. Louis XV had all cards to hold to his gains but for some reasons he give them away.

There will be a diplomatic revolution, but to what extend?

The UK will no doubt leave the alliance they had with Austria, since it did not benefit them, and UK parliament was in the impression it was only benefiting the dynastic policies of their German King of Hanover.

Agreed.

The United Provinces might be not coming under the influence of Austria as it did OTL but looking more to be part of an alliance with the UK. This highly depend on the domestic policies in the Dutch Republic. Simply said if the power was at the side of the Orangist (as in OTL) then the Dutch will be no more than a vassal of Austria and stay neutral in the next conflict at best. If the Republicans or even an earlier emerge of the Patriots are in charge then it would likely side with the UK. But both would prefer to stay neutral. The State finances of the Dutch Republic were ruined by 1748, due to an inefficient tax system, a huge debt origination from the Spanish succession war and a complete locked political system, which was defacto and oligarchy with two rivaling factions, Republicans and Orangist. No money means no army. It would be also unclear what gains it could have, only new trade post at the expense of other powers like the most important reason for the British was.

Some thoughts:

I don't know enough about domestic Dutch politics in any era, but assuming that's the case, what happens if the Orangists are in power and seem to be selling the country's future? A France that successfully digests the Austrian Netherlands will either run the Netherlands as a satellite, or regularly invade the place. So alignment with France or France's allies at this point would seem to be a serious political risk. Could power change hands over the question?

Regarding the state finances, that's not insoluble. Or it might not look insoluble. The OTL Prussian war effort was paid for by Britain, after all. Even if in a long war that would be insufficient and a very poor crutch to depend on, the Dutch might not necessarily see the situation that way. People tend to get unrealistically optimistic when the alternative is accepting that their proud tradition of nationhood and international significance should logically be given up. I mean, look at the last two centuries and make a list.

Finally, what gains? The United Provinces' best case scenario would be displacing France back out of the former Austrian Netherlands. That would be a tremendous gain. Perhaps the Dutch could annex some of the north of it themselves, whether in combination with or instead of recreating the southern buffer. And perhaps they could grab a little something from France or Spain while those powers were more focused on the English.
 
Britain and United Provinces best option in the alt-7 Years War is essentially to run and hide their heads in the sand. Hannover is indefensible against France or Prussia so whether they keep the alliance with Austria or change it to Prussia they will be almost guaranteed to lose it. OTL result was exceptional and really was only achieved by Britain reneging on a Treaty commitment after France had occupied Hannover.

Prussia lose Silesia, Austria gets it back. No change for UP and GB

It won't really work like that, though. No change for UP and GB requires dramatic change for UP and GB.

Great Britain would eventually be dragged into war with France by the situation in North America, unless it diverges surprisingly, or failing that - India. They were aware that war would be difficult to avoid - might as well do it when allies can be had. If the war with France breaks out properly after France has digested OTL Belgium, participated in crushing Prussia, allied with Austria, gained the tacit compliance of the Dutch, and strengthened its position in northwest Germany.... That's a national disaster.

If the United Provinces wait out the war with "no change", where do they find themselves? The same goes for them as for Great Britain, except France now shares a border with them and will probably never leave it. Game over.
 
Question. By the 1740's, was there already a divide between the Walloons and the Flemish over language and ethnicity?

I ask this because such a thing could impact how each accommodates to France's Anschluss.
 
Question. By the 1740's, was there already a divide between the Walloons and the Flemish over language and ethnicity?

I ask this because such a thing could impact how each accommodates to France's Anschluss.
What do you mean by "already"? The linguistic divide was there for centuries if not a millennium by now(with about the same borders), I don´t think there was any national identity for both though (local yes)
 
What do you mean by "already"? The linguistic divide was there for centuries if not a millennium by now(with about the same borders), I don´t think there was any national identity for both though (local yes)
Thanks for the info. So... How might this affect the assimilation of each province?
 
Thanks for the info. So... How might this affect the assimilation of each province?
Well Wallonia is going to be one of the most distinctive region of Oil France, but that´s about it(with that I mean is not going to be that different). Flanders I don´t know, it depends on how well France goes beyond Belgium.
 
Last edited:
Well Wallonia is going to be one of the most distinctive region of Oil France, but that´s about it(with that I mean is not going to be that different). Flanders I don´t know, it depends on how well France goes beyond Belgium.

If France goes the same way in the 19th c., Flemish would most probably disappear as a first language. Historically, the divisions of the Belgian Netherlands was County of Flanders (French fiefdom), County of Hainaut, Duchy of Brabant, County of Namur, Principality of Liège, Duchy of Limburg, Duchy of Luxembourg, plus some petty fiefdoms. The only homogenous principalities were Hainaut and Namur, but in every other one there were both flemish- and walloon-speaking areas. However, the french administration of the 17th and 18th c. was quite willing to break the ancient provinces. The important thing was the control of the local élites. If the local princes and dukes are wiling to play ball with the French, the assimilation will be quite facilitated. OTL, the duke of Arenberg, the Prince of Ligne, the Prince of Croy d'Havré, the Prince of Merode, the Prince of Chimay were all french-speaking and some even went in the french service.
 
If France goes the same way in the 19th c., Flemish would most probably disappear as a first language. Historically, the divisions of the Belgian Netherlands was County of Flanders (French fiefdom), County of Hainaut, Duchy of Brabant, County of Namur, Principality of Liège, Duchy of Limburg, Duchy of Luxembourg, plus some petty fiefdoms. The only homogenous principalities were Hainaut and Namur, but in every other one there were both flemish- and walloon-speaking areas. However, the french administration of the 17th and 18th c. was quite willing to break the ancient provinces. The important thing was the control of the local élites. If the local princes and dukes are wiling to play ball with the French, the assimilation will be quite facilitated. OTL, the duke of Arenberg, the Prince of Ligne, the Prince of Croy d'Havré, the Prince of Merode, the Prince of Chimay were all french-speaking and some even went in the french service.
In the 19th century? That´s a century too early, not even French Flanders lost his primary Flemish language status in the 19th century, I doubt we would see anything more than maybe more bigger French area around Brussels and around the southern border(and that´s already a lot).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Flemish#/media/File:FlemishinDunkirkdistrict.PNG
 
In the 19th century? That´s a century too early, not even French Flanders lost his primary Flemish language status in the 19th century, I doubt we would see anything more than maybe more bigger French area around Brussels and around the southern border(and that´s already a lot).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Flemish#/media/File:FlemishinDunkirkdistrict.PNG

Yes, the process is a long one and terminates at the end of the 20th c., but its foundations lie in the political and intellectual culture of the 19th c. (including the Revolution). To be more clear, I should have written "if France follows the same path in regard to local languages and schooling as OTL in the 19th c., the Flemish language will loose its primary language status in the 20th c." The Occitan, who had more native talkers than the Flemish in France/Belgium, is all but extinguished nowadays.
 
Yes, the process is a long one and terminates at the end of the 20th c., but its foundations lie in the political and intellectual culture of the 19th c. (including the Revolution). To be more clear, I should have written "if France follows the same path in regard to local languages and schooling as OTL in the 19th c., the Flemish language will loose its primary language status in the 20th c." The Occitan, who had more native talkers than the Flemish in France/Belgium, is all but extinguished nowadays.
Occitania was under French rule for(not considering the pre HYW era when Occitan was an important language of Europe) 5 centuries(11 centuries starting from East Francia), and it´s more similar to French. Flemish is not.
 
Top