France annexes Belgium in 1748

I'm not saying that they wouldn't try to expand beyond the Rhine. However, from the French history I studied the objective from Richelieu to Napoleon and even into the 19th Century was to get a secure North Eastern border by advancing to the Rhine, which on a map looks like the natural border. If they keep what is now Belgium and Luxembourg after 1748 they've achieved what they set out to do.
Indeed. But manpower-wise, France was also striving to take control of Piemont. If there is no Revolution, France might end up with Piemont as well in the XIXth century before an Italian unification occurs.
 
Indeed. But manpower-wise, France was also striving to take control of Piemont. If there is no Revolution, France might end up with Piemont as well in the XIXth century before an Italian unification occurs.
In that case how about Catalonia including the Balearic Islands too? AFAIK Catalan is much closer to French than Castilian. AFAIK France occupied Catalonia at the end of several of the wars of the 17th and 18th Centuries but had to give them back to Spain in the peace treaty. Were there any after 1748 where this was the situation?

But if France does keep what is now Belgium and Luxembourg after 1748 that changes the European balance of power significantly. Might countries that were allies of France IOTL after 1748 become enemies out of fear of a stronger France?

If France annexes Piedmont that also changes the way Italy unifies. With no House of Savoy is it unified under the Bourbons of Sicily?
 
In that case how about Catalonia including the Balearic Islands too? AFAIK Catalan is much closer to French than Castilian. AFAIK France occupied Catalonia at the end of several of the wars of the 17th and 18th Centuries but had to give them back to Spain in the peace treaty. Were there any after 1748 where this was the situation?

But if France does keep what is now Belgium and Luxembourg after 1748 that changes the European balance of power significantly. Might countries that were allies of France IOTL after 1748 become enemies out of fear of a stronger France?

If France annexes Piedmont that also changes the way Italy unifies. With no House of Savoy is it unified under the Bourbons of Sicily?
France is already quite a juggernaut in Europe. But if they tried to take Piémont and Catalonia as well, there will a immense coalition against it. Most it can do is to take/annex the french-speaking parts of Piémont (so savoy, Nice and the Val d'Aoste maybe). As for Catalonia? Well Spain is somewhat of an ally, why losing it for a piece of land which rather be independant than french anyway.
As for those you think France would have a better navy, that's not entirely true. Buiding ships is fine but you need sailors and France was quite limited on that. With Belgium, she can have 80000 sailors at most. Plus the french navy is pitiful in the 1740's, you need to build the 74 cannons model but it will take years if not decades to have a modern fleet again (the Royale back then was old, some ships were built during the War of 1700-1713) and to teach a new doctrine in naval schools (because french officers were not very competent -not a disaster either but still). Sure with the Low countries, she has the money to expand her army and navy but it would take time for the latter. I'm not even sure her navy would be ready for the SYW (if there is one).
 
In that case how about Catalonia including the Balearic Islands too? AFAIK Catalan is much closer to French than Castilian. AFAIK France occupied Catalonia at the end of several of the wars of the 17th and 18th Centuries but had to give them back to Spain in the peace treaty. Were there any after 1748 where this was the situation?

But if France does keep what is now Belgium and Luxembourg after 1748 that changes the European balance of power significantly. Might countries that were allies of France IOTL after 1748 become enemies out of fear of a stronger France?

If France annexes Piedmont that also changes the way Italy unifies. With no House of Savoy is it unified under the Bourbons of Sicily?
There is a nice TL I have going with a BIG France. Might interest you.
 
France is already quite a juggernaut in Europe. But if they tried to take Piémont and Catalonia as well, there will a immense coalition against it. Most it can do is to take/annex the french-speaking parts of Piémont (so savoy, Nice and the Val d'Aoste maybe). As for Catalonia? Well Spain is somewhat of an ally, why losing it for a piece of land which rather be independant than french anyway.
As for those you think France would have a better navy, that's not entirely true. Buiding ships is fine but you need sailors and France was quite limited on that. With Belgium, she can have 80000 sailors at most. Plus the french navy is pitiful in the 1740's, you need to build the 74 cannons model but it will take years if not decades to have a modern fleet again (the Royale back then was old, some ships were built during the War of 1700-1713) and to teach a new doctrine in naval schools (because french officers were not very competent -not a disaster either but still). Sure with the Low countries, she has the money to expand her army and navy but it would take time for the latter. I'm not even sure her navy would be ready for the SYW (if there is one).
Personally, I'm skeptic that even with Belgium and Luxembourg, France may not have enough force to take on England.

However, a coalition with a beefed-up Spain and Prussia might very well put the Brits on a hard place. Maybe... Take back Jamaica for Spain, or even Secure at least Part of India for themselves?
 
Personally, I'm skeptic that even with Belgium and Luxembourg, France may not have enough force to take on England.

However, a coalition with a beefed-up Spain and Prussia might very well put the Brits on a hard place. Maybe... Take back Jamaica for Spain, or even Secure at least Part of India for themselves?
I have always wondered what Britain would've done if France had been dropping big rocks in the Channel between Calais and Dover between 1799 and 1811 to make a land bridge.
 
I have always wondered what Britain would've done if France had been dropping big rocks in the Channel between Calais and Dover between 1799 and 1811 to make a land bridge.
Good question, but if the British are worrying long enough without acting they don't need to. Bridging the Channel isn't easy ;)
 

longsword14

Banned
I have always wondered what Britain would've done if France had been dropping big rocks in the Channel between Calais and Dover between 1799 and 1811 to make a land bridge.
:biggrin:
What was the reason that France lagged behind in the earlier part of the century (after 1815)? Technologically the gap between rival European nations has not been so severe as to make progress in just one nation possible.
 
France is already quite a juggernaut in Europe. But if they tried to take Piémont and Catalonia as well, there will a immense coalition against it. Most it can do is to take/annex the French-speaking parts of Piémont (so savoy, Nice and the Val d'Aoste maybe).As for Catalonia? Well Spain is somewhat of an ally, why losing it for a piece of land which rather be independent than French anyway.
Your grand coalition against Greater France is the sort of thing I was thinking of. Although Bourbon Spain was a natural ally of France before the Revolution IOTL the Spanish Bourbons might be fearful instead of friendly towards their French cousins after 1748.
 
Personally, I'm skeptic that even with Belgium and Luxembourg, France may not have enough force to take on England.

However, a coalition with a beefed-up Spain and Prussia might very well put the Brits on a hard place. Maybe... Take back Jamaica for Spain, or even Secure at least Part of India for themselves?
If France manages to take Hannover during an alternate SYW, he can negociate the return of New France and a white peace. But he will not have supremacy over Nothern America. As for India, if Louis XV is smart, he could negociate with England some balance of powers. In exchange for Ceylon and Tamil Nadu (Pondichéry, Madras, he left the rest of India to England influence). Netherlands would have some parts of the Low Countries (Antwerp notably) in exchange and it would reassure England. As for America, the only solution is to negociate. New France created the impression of encirclement for the 13 colonies and England, that's why they had to take Québec according to them. Louis XV should negociate a line with two spheres of influence. Acadia, Quebec and everything north and West of the Great Lakes would be French (so basically Canada, perhaps a little more to the South). The rest would be left to english conquest (Except a reduced Louisiana -OTL Louisiana/Missouri/ plus western Alabama). Here the FRENCH would give the English some guaranties and would keep their most populated colonies in America. For me, it's the only solution. The Royal Navy is too strong until the mid 1770's.
 
As for those you think France would have a better navy, that's not entirely true. Buiding ships is fine but you need sailors and France was quite limited on that. With Belgium, she can have 80000 sailors at most. Plus the french navy is pitiful in the 1740's, you need to build the 74 cannons model but it will take years if not decades to have a modern fleet again (the Royale back then was old, some ships were built during the War of 1700-1713) and to teach a new doctrine in naval schools (because french officers were not very competent -not a disaster either but still). Sure with the Low countries, she has the money to expand her army and navy but it would take time for the latter. I'm not even sure her navy would be ready for the SYW (if there is one).
I agree the SYW is not enough time for the effects of the extra spending to be felt on the French Navy but the 1770s if the ARW still happens and the early 1790s if the French Revolution still happens. AFAIK the 1750s to the 1790s were a period of expansion for the OTL French Navy and an improvement in the quality of its personnel.
 
I'm not saying that they wouldn't try to expand beyond the Rhine. However, from the French history I studied the objective from Richelieu to Napoleon and even into the 19th Century was to get a secure North Eastern border by advancing to the Rhine, which on a map looks like the natural border. If they keep what is now Belgium and Luxembourg after 1748 they've achieved what they set out to do.

Precisely, annexation of the ANL is not enough for the Rhine border, you need a bug chunk of german lands in the Sarre, the Palatinate and some parts of Prussia Julich and ecclesiastical electorates.
 
In that case how about Catalonia including the Balearic Islands too? AFAIK Catalan is much closer to French than Castilian. AFAIK France occupied Catalonia at the end of several of the wars of the 17th and 18th Centuries but had to give them back to Spain in the peace treaty. Were there any after 1748 where this was the situation?

But if France does keep what is now Belgium and Luxembourg after 1748 that changes the European balance of power significantly. Might countries that were allies of France IOTL after 1748 become enemies out of fear of a stronger France?

If France annexes Piedmont that also changes the way Italy unifies. With no House of Savoy is it unified under the Bourbons of Sicily?

There were plans to unite Catalonia to France in the 1640', when the revolted Catalans called Louis XIII to protect them from Spain. But Mazarin kinda backstabbed them when he made peace with Spain in 1659, stripping Catalonia from its northern lands while letting the south under spanish control. So when the Catalans revolted once again during the WSS, they chose the austrian candidate and not Louis XIV's. The population would probably be more hostile to french rule than in the Netherlands. Not including the war with Spain, which is France main ally.
 
I got my copy of Command of the Ocean out because it had an appendix listing the strengths of the fleets of the European naval powers from 1650 to 1815. The first column is the number of French ships of the line in OTL. The second column is the possible number if the Austrian Netherlands were part of France and assuming that it increased the population and wealth of France by 20% as it did in the second half of the 20th century. I have only done the increase from 1765 as I thought it would take some time for the increase to kick in.

1745 - 45
1750 - 45
1755 - 57
1760 - 54
1765 - 59 - 71
1770 - 68 - 82
1775 - 59 - 71
1780 - 70 - 84
1785 - 62 - 74
1790 - 73 - 88
1795 - 56 - 67

However, they would still be well behind the Royal Navy

1745 - 104
1750 - 115
1755 - 117
1760 - 135
1765 - 139
1770 - 126
1775 - 117
1780 - 117
1785 - 137
1790 - 145
1795 - 123
 
Good question, but if the British are worrying long enough without acting they don't need to. Bridging the Channel isn't easy ;)

We examined that a few years ago on this very same forum and the conclusion was that it was probably the most feasible of all of Napoléon's schemes to cross the Channel without coming by sea. Probably possible with 1830ish technology (you need to move all this earth), at the price of extreme effort.
 
We examined that a few years ago on this very same forum and the conclusion was that it was probably the most feasible of all of Napoléon's schemes to cross the Channel without coming by sea. Probably possible with 1830ish technology (you need to move all this earth), at the price of extreme effort.
Step 1: create land bridge
Step 2: invade England
Step 3: make a canal in the middle of the bridge and charge for passage
Step 4: Profits
 
Some men proposed to invade England with hot air balloons in 1797 and 1808. Napoléon asked a report to the scientist Monge, who wrote a very negative assessment of the project, as the balloons were way too big for sustained flight. Now if the Rozière-type balloon was successfully tested in the 1780', a massive amount of investment in these could allow for an airborne raid. But the French would have needed to land somewhere in Kent, regroup, and attack on the major port of the Royal Navy, while a coordinated attack of the French navy occurred. The communication technologies of the time simply did not allow for such a complex plan.
 
Top