France Wank!!!!!!!
- Thread starter Pericles
- Start date
Maybe with an earlier POD - Du Guesclin was sent to the first Castilian Civil War, if France had kept stronger ties with Spain... Columbus sponsored by the French Crown?
A Valois rather than a Habsburg in the Spanish throne, then an Act of Union with the childless widow marrying the French King?
Francis I had signed an alliance with Suleiman the Magnificent, "the sacrilegious union of the Lily and the Crescent", but... I hardly imagine France absorbing an Italy conquered with the help of the janissaries; and, except for the suppression of piracy, what a co-dominion over the Regencies of Algiers and Tunis could have brought? No El Dorado there...
A Valois rather than a Habsburg in the Spanish throne, then an Act of Union with the childless widow marrying the French King?Francis I had signed an alliance with Suleiman the Magnificent, "the sacrilegious union of the Lily and the Crescent", but... I hardly imagine France absorbing an Italy conquered with the help of the janissaries; and, except for the suppression of piracy, what a co-dominion over the Regencies of Algiers and Tunis could have brought? No El Dorado there...
Last edited:
Not that difficult, actually. Ferdinand and Isabella initially turned down Columbus's overtures and he was on his way to France when he got the news that they'd changed their mind and approved his plans. Just have them never change their mind, while France's Charles VIII agrees to support Columbus.
funnyhat said:
Perfectly possible.
(Does this put Columbus ashore at Raleigh, NC? Virginia Beach?)So what other effects does it have? KO the HRE? Successfully invade Britain?
Control most of North America?Perfectly possible.
So what other effects does it have? KO the HRE? Successfully invade Britain?
That would be interesting. From our perspective, Virginia and the Carolinas are good land (or can be turned into such). But when you're looking for a route to the Indies, or short term gold to cover your ass, I'm not sure they're half as promising. Even if France later goes into settler colonies more than OTL, that's a disappointing start from the perspective of Columbus's backers.
Just a thought to chew on.
It does offer a better start than Quebec, I'd agree. IMO, tho, France was not terribly good at settler colonies (again, if OTL Quebec is any guide). This seems to lead to much the same outcome as OTL: Britain takes it over & expels the French.Elfwine said:
It does suggest no persistence of *Quebec, which is good for Canada's future.
I wonder, tho, if Columbus would simply sail south looking for islands, & find the Keys. Or Bermuda. Or the Bahamas. Or Puerto Rico...
Was there not a proposal to marry Mary of Burgundy to the Dauphin ? (I'm just going on memory here , but).
Possession of the Netherlands might make France more exploration aware.
Possession of the Netherlands might make France more exploration aware.
It does offer a better start than Quebec, I'd agree. IMO, tho, France was not terribly good at settler colonies (again, if OTL Quebec is any guide). This seems to lead to much the same outcome as OTL: Britain takes it over & expels the French.
It does suggest no persistence of *Quebec, which is good for Canada's future.
I wonder, tho, if Columbus would simply sail south looking for islands, & find the Keys. Or Bermuda. Or the Bahamas. Or Puerto Rico...
There (Columbus sailing south) we get into details I'm not sure what to answer - but it would be interesting.
Well a proposal at the end of a cannon but yes. If France can do what they did to Brittany in Burgundy (by that I mean overwhelm the country before the heiress can be officially married) then it could happen.
Although the question comes up how well the Low Countries react. They may not be particularly fond of the duchess, but they're not necessarily going to welcome France (which is not necessarily their overlord for what that's worth - some are imperial fiefs, some are French).
oh you mean 16th century, since IOTL the 17th and 18th century pretty much were what you requested.
@JedidiahStott: France will have to force Burgundy to accept this. There are a few reasons for this, like house of Valois-Burgundy and the main Valois branch being estranged, the king of France was a sworn rival of Charles the Bold, Mary's father, the duchess and estates (general) of Burgundy did not like the prospect of losing their independence to France, the Dauphin was IIRC quite young and Mary couldn't afford to wait too long to have a heir etc.
I consider that a rather substantial understatement.Elfwine said:
As said in the thread I linked to, this seems to mean France will have an enormous amount of money to spend, which has equally large impact on her ability to fight wars. Does it encourage her to be more aggressive, & end up as bankrupt as OTL, perhaps earlier? Or does it just tip the balance in crucial wars?
Last edited:
I consider that a rather substantial understatement.
No kidding. Even
It's a good question. OTL most of Habsburg Spain's royal revenue came from the taxes on Castilean peasants and merchants (4 to 1), not the New World - but that doesn't take away from the fact we're talking enormous amounts of specie.
Given France's OTL early modern troubles, I think this might end worse in the long run - France failing to develop internally would be very costly, and an aggressive France fueled by New World gold and silver would be able to fight until it dropped dead the same way OTL Spain kinda did.
Elfwine said:
That's counting the regular treasure ships? Indeed.Elfwine said:
It seems inevitable to me this France is going to kick over the Holy Roman Empire in pretty short order. It also seems likely there's going to be major conflict with Spain--& serious, ongoing conflict with Britain.
More equal conflict, too, given a rich France could actually have a navy able to match Britain's. (And ). That, alone, has all manner of butterflies.I find myself thinking of a France controlling a very substantial overseas empire: much of the Caribbean, part/all India, part/all of *IndoChina (& *DEI?), perhaps the southeast part of the *U.S. I'm seeing this lasting from Columbus until, IDK, mid-1700s, when you get an *American Revolution (or one in metro France, either way) when the house of cards crashes.
Metro France OTL ends up split between Germany, Spain, & Italy. The OTL SE U.S. traded to Britain (or maybe Spain, to pay bills & avoid a crash at home a few years longer?). The Caribbean possessions (Bermuda, Puerto Rico, Jamaica, Cuba at least) to the Dutch, after losing the Revolution?This could put Boers in Haiti. Or Florida.
Does this also mean the Brit America amounts to "SuperCanada", & earlier?
(Does it rebel, too? Or just quietly sneak off & smoke a couple of joints & make out with Mexico? )
Last edited:
PoeFacedKilla
Banned
i thought that with currents and whatnot it was likely columbus would still land in the carribean? I may be wrong but I've definitely heard that before.
It's the crown's share, at least. I don't know if its counting all the treasures involved in overseas empire.
Indeed.
It seems inevitable to me this France is going to kick over the Holy Roman Empire in pretty short order. It also seems likely there's going to be major conflict with Spain--& serious, ongoing conflict with Britain.
I think so. Although we should be careful about assuming "treasure = royal income = power", it would certainly allow France to mess with things mightily.
As for a navy to match Britain's, that gets more complicated (still have to get the timber, the sailors, etc.) - I'm not saying it can't be done but I refuse to commit to agreeing without us fleshing out French policy more. France didn't really -try- to fund a navy fully equal to Britain's OTL, after all, except in the brief period that sees the American Revolution.
I find myself thinking of a France controlling a very substantial overseas empire: much of the Caribbean, part/all India, part/all of *IndoChina (& *DEI?), perhaps the southeast part of the *U.S. I'm seeing this lasting from Columbus until, IDK, mid-1700s, when you get an *American Revolution (or one in metro France, either way) when the house of cards crashes.
This could put Boers in Haiti. Or Florida.
Does this also mean the Brit America amounts to "SuperCanada", & earlier?
Not sure about this "Germany' and "Italy" dividing things (so many possible outcomes to try sorting through to get there), but I think the general trend seems reasonable - doing extremely well until the system's exhaustion catches up with it with a vengeance. Spain by the point that occurred was not Britain's big enemy, but France will be everyone's big enemy by that point.
Poefacedkilla: Depends on where he's sailing from, though.
True, but if you discover lands where gold is found (as Columbus did), you'll probably end up establishing an empire. The English and French expeditions to North America in the 15th/16th centuries did not find gold or a route to Asia, which left their rulers not particularly motivated to launch colonization for awhile.
I find myself thinking of a France controlling a very substantial overseas empire: much of the Caribbean, part/all India, part/all of *IndoChina (& *DEI?), perhaps the southeast part of the *U.S. I'm seeing this lasting from Columbus until, IDK, mid-1700s, when you get an *American Revolution (or one in metro France, either way) when the house of cards crashes.
I don't know about all this. You seem to be assuming that all the bad things that happened to Spain and all the bad things that happened to France in OTL would be replicated and combined.
France in this timeline is not guaranteed to be everyone's enemy. Spain had lands all over Europe, held the HRE position for awhile, and was obsessed with fighting Protestantism everywhere. Those may not be true of France. Moreover, France may choose not to worry so much about natural borders, or feel as threatened by the Hapsburgs (which fueled much of its expansionist tendencies) and just focus on its empire. This can go in a lot of directions.
Last edited: