French India and longterm effects thereof

[Flocculencio]

. It's my favorite food at Malaysian restaurants, so I'm dissapointed you're not familiar with it. I can only assume it's a psuedo-American invention.

Well we do have chicken curry noodles in Singapore. I suppose it's reasonably authentic

I'm not sure that there would be that much Francification, though. Sure, there were efforts to create a Francified elite, but look at how this sort of died out in the 20th century, as the locals' support for French culture went beyond Voltaire towards wondering when they were going to get the Rights of Man.

Yes but if we're positing French dominance in India starting from before the Revolution this gives time for all sorts of ideals to start fermenting in India itself. Perhaps France itself might not approve but the local elites might well be French in all but name. Also the more relaxed attitude towards intermarriage is going to be a major factor. Under the Raj Eurasians were favoured in certain ways but still looked down on. ITTL there are going to be a lot more Eurasians and a lot more opportunities for them to rise in rank.

 

[Flocculencio]

What would the effects on Hinduism be?

Not much different than in OTL. Hinduism has impressive inertia. Jesus gets added as an ancillary deity, is about all.

 

[Valdemar II]

Still, I don't think the French would have been quite as insensitive- even as hegemons the fact that through education it will be possible for Indians to be seen as equals will moderate a lot of tensions. You might even see Francophone native officers for native regiments. The fact that the French were alright with intermarriage means that you could well have a large intermediate class to buffer attitudes, as you say below:



One assumes that the Eurasians would be raised Catholic, yes. This means that after a generation you have a homegrown French-speaking Eurasian middle class, augmented with Francophone Indians.

Interesting point- if there's still a *Revolution how does that go down in India? Could we see this Francophone class going Republican as well?

Will the Revolution happen, India is something of a gold treasure, it could push the revolution decades out in the future (and in best case make in something more like 1830/48 than 1789). Beside with French India, they may not support the American Revolution, because of the weaker British position.

 

[fhaessig]

3. Not as far as I know, but then I'm not exactly an expert on French colonial history. I do know that certain colonies, such as Tunisia, Morocco and bits of Indochina, kept native rulers as French protectorates, but I can't recall them ever revoking a rulers' rights, and this was under the Republic.

Well, there's Pomare V, who was convinced to deed his realms to France in his will, which turned the protectorate into a colony.

 

[EvolvedSaurian]

What would the effects on Hinduism be?

Honestly, probably not all that much.

Yes but if we're positing French dominance in India starting from before the Revolution this gives time for all sorts of ideals to start fermenting in India itself. Perhaps France itself might not approve but the local elites might well be French in all but name. Also the more relaxed attitude towards intermarriage is going to be a major factor. Under the Raj Eurasians were favoured in certain ways but still looked down on. ITTL there are going to be a lot more Eurasians and a lot more opportunities for them to rise in rank.

Mm, definitely. In the military sphere, I could see Eurasians occupying positions in the NCO and maybe lower officer ranks. Eurasians as intermediaries in trade and diplomacy... Many possibilities.

Not much different than in OTL. Hinduism has impressive inertia. Jesus gets added as an ancillary deity, is about all.

I doubt that much, even given the greater French and part-French population.

Will the Revolution happen, India is something of a gold treasure, it could push the revolution decades out in the future (and in best case make in something more like 1830/48 than 1789). Beside with French India, they may not support the American Revolution, because of the weaker British position.

Well, Britain and France are still going to be enemies, and the French are not going to miss a chance to knock les rosbifs down a peg.

Well, there's Pomare V, who was convinced to deed his realms to France in his will, which turned the protectorate into a colony.

Hmm, I must say, that's quite interesting. However, in the final run, India is not Tahiti and I'm not sure how many Rajas, Maharanas, Nawabs and etc are going to be willing to give up their realms voluntarily, or even with great cajoling. Perhaps some without blood heirs could designate/adopt the Company as its heir? Hmm, how would that work?

 

[Keenir]

Also the more relaxed attitude towards intermarriage is going to be a major factor. Under the Raj Eurasians were favoured in certain ways but still looked down on. ITTL there are going to be a lot more Eurasians and a lot more opportunities for them to rise in rank.

...which makes me wonder this: would a French India change its attitudes towards the caste system?
(or would it be only rising in Western society, not rising in anything else)

Hmm, I must say, that's quite interesting. However, in the final run, India is not Tahiti and I'm not sure how many Rajas, Maharanas, Nawabs and etc are going to be willing to give up their realms voluntarily, or even with great cajoling. Perhaps some without blood heirs could designate/adopt the Company as its heir? Hmm, how would that work?

maybe some would say "I'll deed it to the Crown Prince of France" (which would make life...interesting if it's deeded a few years before any *French Revolution.

 

[Jaded_Railman]

Why are you all so convinced this completely reverses the British/French system of the 19th century? The British were dominant in India because they were the dominant European power, they weren't the dominant European power because they were dominant in India. As long as Continental France's economy is still partially feudal it will never be able to compete with the far more modern Home Island British economy, even if they win in India.

 

[Flocculencio]

...which makes me wonder this: would a French India change its attitudes towards the caste system?
(or would it be only rising in Western society, not rising in anything else)

eurasians would most likely be Catholic. The caste system would be irrelevant since stricter Hindus would see them as lacking caste anyway. Changing the caste system is a very tough job- I remember reading a collection of oral history recounts of the Raj. Many Brahmins were cooks since food cooked by a Brahmin was edible by any of the other castes. A memsahib recalls being told by her husband that she should never ever pass anything directly to the cook as this would pollute and outrage him since even though he was working for these white people, they were still outcastes and therefore unclean. I always took that anecdote as a reminder that people shouldn't conflate caste and class.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Well we do have chicken curry noodles in Singapore. I suppose it's reasonably authentic



Yes but if we're positing French dominance in India starting from before the Revolution this gives time for all sorts of ideals to start fermenting in India itself. Perhaps France itself might not approve but the local elites might well be French in all but name. Also the more relaxed attitude towards intermarriage is going to be a major factor. Under the Raj Eurasians were favoured in certain ways but still looked down on. ITTL there are going to be a lot more Eurasians and a lot more opportunities for them to rise in rank.

I don't think it would make that big a difference - French Revolutionary ideals pretty much percolated throughout the entire world - they certainly made a massive impact on the Ottomans, for example.

I think what really makes the difference is that a lot of French personnel in India are going to support the Revolution, and THAT would have serious impact. I'm guessing Royalists will be stronger in India, not being exposed to the same social forces present at home, but a serious ideological split, even conflict, among the French in India could make a large difference to the development of India, possibly negative, if there are French factions battling for princely support.

But back to the main topic, how would the French conceive of their rule in India? Would they reinvigorate the Mughals and rule through them through a Resident, like Tunis? Would they proclaim an Indian Empire ala post-Mutiny British India? Leave it as a collection of separately governed states and colonies? I really don't know, and I don't think this can be predicted.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

eurasians would most likely be Catholic. The caste system would be irrelevant since stricter Hindus would see them as lacking caste anyway. Changing the caste system is a very tough job- I remember reading a collection of oral history recounts of the Raj. Many Brahmins were cooks since food cooked by a Brahmin was edible by any of the other castes. A memsahib recalls being told by her husband that she should never ever pass anything directly to the cook as this would pollute and outrage him since even though he was working for these white people, they were still outcastes and therefore unclean. I always took that anecdote as a reminder that people shouldn't conflate caste and class.

Didn't the British reinvigorate and insitutionalize the caste system as it had never been before? Would the French take the same approach, especially given earlier hegemony (as opposed to by the EIC)?

 

[Dure]

1) He who controls India controls the gunpowder.
2) He who controls the gunpower controls war in Europe.
3) Can the British now afford a large enough Royal Navy to threaten the French Navy? Almost certainly not.
4) French dominance is assured until the arrival of guano and nitrate mining in the Pacific and South America at least.

 

[The Sandman]

I don't think it would make that big a difference - French Revolutionary ideals pretty much percolated throughout the entire world - they certainly made a massive impact on the Ottomans, for example.

I think what really makes the difference is that a lot of French personnel in India are going to support the Revolution, and THAT would have serious impact. I'm guessing Royalists will be stronger in India, not being exposed to the same social forces present at home, but a serious ideological split, even conflict, among the French in India could make a large difference to the development of India, possibly negative, if there are French factions battling for princely support.

But back to the main topic, how would the French conceive of their rule in India? Would they reinvigorate the Mughals and rule through them through a Resident, like Tunis? Would they proclaim an Indian Empire ala post-Mutiny British India? Leave it as a collection of separately governed states and colonies? I really don't know, and I don't think this can be predicted.

It would also be interesting to see India become the French Royalist bastion during the Revolutionary period, by dint of it being a massive and obvious target for those fleeing the Terror while still having room to absorb more Frenchmen (as opposed to the Caribbean islands, which IIRC had a native aristocracy or the equivalent thereof firmly in place by that point, were not quite as lucrative, and are probably British in this TL anyway).

For that matter, exile Nappy to India instead. If the French already are the predominant force there anyway, then why not keep him occupied by giving him something to conquer (the bits of India that France doesn't directly control yet) that isn't anywhere near Europe?

 

[Flocculencio]

I think what really makes the difference is that a lot of French personnel in India are going to support the Revolution, and THAT would have serious impact. I'm guessing Royalists will be stronger in India, not being exposed to the same social forces present at home, but a serious ideological split, even conflict, among the French in India could make a large difference to the development of India, possibly negative, if there are French factions battling for princely support.

This is also going to lead to a massive change in the psychology of colonial rule in India. The British always made sure to try to present a powerful and united front to the Indians- this was, in a way, meant to subtly intimidate the natives. If the French are fighting among themselves then there's no chance to build up this mythos of the powerful and united colonisers. If French factions court Indian assistance then Indians will know that the balance of power is ultimately theirs.

But back to the main topic, how would the French conceive of their rule in India? Would they reinvigorate the Mughals and rule through them through a Resident, like Tunis? Would they proclaim an Indian Empire ala post-Mutiny British India? Leave it as a collection of separately governed states and colonies? I really don't know, and I don't think this can be predicted.

Yes that's a bit of a toss up.

 

[fhaessig]

Hmm, I must say, that's quite interesting. However, in the final run, India is not Tahiti and I'm not sure how many Rajas, Maharanas, Nawabs and etc are going to be willing to give up their realms voluntarily, or even with great cajoling. Perhaps some without blood heirs could designate/adopt the Company as its heir? Hmm, how would that work?

Or any with blood heir they think are bastards or distand blood heir they cannot stand.

 

[ninebucks]

Perhaps viticulture would be more well established in India. In OTL the British supported it, but post-independence, as prohibitionism grew in popularity, vineyards were converted en masse to producing fruit grapes and raisins. Surely with a greater French influence, such sacrilege would not be allowed, and who knows, Indian wine could come to be some of the most famous in the world.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Perhaps viticulture would be more well established in India. In OTL the British supported it, but post-independence, as prohibitionism grew in popularity, vineyards were converted en masse to producing fruit grapes and raisins. Surely with a greater French influence, such sacrilege would not be allowed, and who knows, Indian wine could come to be some of the most famous in the world.

India is not very well suited climatically for viticulture.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

It would also be interesting to see India become the French Royalist bastion during the Revolutionary period, by dint of it being a massive and obvious target for those fleeing the Terror while still having room to absorb more Frenchmen (as opposed to the Caribbean islands, which IIRC had a native aristocracy or the equivalent thereof firmly in place by that point, were not quite as lucrative, and are probably British in this TL anyway).

For that matter, exile Nappy to India instead. If the French already are the predominant force there anyway, then why not keep him occupied by giving him something to conquer (the bits of India that France doesn't directly control yet) that isn't anywhere near Europe?

If India is a Royalist bastion and the Revolution is successful in France, it doesn't seem likely the French will be able to hold onto India. You'd essentially have a very small number of French trying to hold onto 300 million people with no hope of reinforcement.

 

[Flocculencio]

India is not very well suited climatically for viticulture.

There are a few regions where vines can prosper though, notably the highlands of South India. I've had an Indian red of some sort before and it was quite decent.

 

[EvolvedSaurian]

Why are you all so convinced this completely reverses the British/French system of the 19th century? The British were dominant in India because they were the dominant European power, they weren't the dominant European power because they were dominant in India. As long as Continental France's economy is still partially feudal it will never be able to compete with the far more modern Home Island British economy, even if they win in India.

Possession of and trade with Indian territories would have great economic, and eventually, social changes within France proper. Meanwhile, there are still parts of the Isles with a very feudalistic set-up, such as Ireland and the Scottish Highlands.

For that matter, exile Nappy to India instead. If the French already are the predominant force there anyway, then why not keep him occupied by giving him something to conquer (the bits of India that France doesn't directly control yet) that isn't anywhere near Europe?

France didn't purchase rights to Corsica until after the Seven Years' War. Perhaps France wouldn't wish to bother with it if it had India to consolidate control of, perhaps Genoa wouldn't wish to sell it to folks who just won so big, if at all. In which case, we could see either an independent Corsica or a British Corsica. I don't know about the rest of you, but I like the idea of Napoleone Buonaparte, King of Italy.

Or any with blood heir they think are bastards or distand blood heir they cannot stand.

Quite right, but then you'd get the heirs trying to reclaim possessions through war. Could make for interesting, as well as bloody, times.

Perhaps viticulture would be more well established in India. In OTL the British supported it, but post-independence, as prohibitionism grew in popularity, vineyards were converted en masse to producing fruit grapes and raisins. Surely with a greater French influence, such sacrilege would not be allowed, and who knows, Indian wine could come to be some of the most famous in the world.

That's quite an interesting and good idea.

 

[The Sandman]

If India is a Royalist bastion and the Revolution is successful in France, it doesn't seem likely the French will be able to hold onto India. You'd essentially have a very small number of French trying to hold onto 300 million people with no hope of reinforcement.

How many Indians lived in the areas directly controlled by the BEIC and FEIC prior to the Seven Years War? It'll admittedly still be a large number, but it's definitely not quite the same as trying to control the entire subcontinent.

Also, part of what would be happening here is that many of the people who were scheduled for the guillotine in OTL instead either get packed off to India or flee there before the revolutionaries get to them. Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette still have their date with the executioners, of course, and ditto for those revolutionary leaders who were executed (such as Danton and Robespierre). The revolutionaries do this in order to keep at least some level of tacit communication and trade open with French India; the royalists there need the population influx from home, and the revolutionaries in continental France need the money from the trade goods. It eventually breaks down, of course, probably when the general wars start in 1793 and the British inevitably blockade France, but you might get a respectable exodus to Madras in the four years of Revolution prior to that.

France didn't purchase rights to Corsica until after the Seven Years' War. Perhaps France wouldn't wish to bother with it if it had India to consolidate control of, perhaps Genoa wouldn't wish to sell it to folks who just won so big, if at all. In which case, we could see either an independent Corsica or a British Corsica. I don't know about the rest of you, but I like the idea of Napoleone Buonaparte, King of Italy.

I don't know; while that's a fun one, I think I prefer the idea of Napoleon Bonaparte, Padishah of the Farangi Raj.