Mary I lost Calais in a war with the French during her reign historically, with the English never to return to France territorially. What if it had been kept, or even regained later? What is the latest time that the English could reclaim it? Could a worse Napoleonic France be punished thus, as probably the last chance they had for this, ignoring the English not caring for it?
How would Hannoverian Calais look like?
- Thread starter Euphemios
- Start date
-
- Tags
- calais england united kingdom
technically Philip II's army was recovering it immediately after the French capture, but the change of government in England and Elisabeth herself recognizing her inability to maintain it in the long term, stopped everything, so that Calais remained in in Paris, furthermore the religious division worsened the situation, preventing a possible English takeover in the following centuries, given that I hardly see Paris agreeing to the existence of a territory friendly to the Protestants, in the hands of a fairly important power, and in the vicinity of the same capital, particularly if after the bloody wars of religion, even more so if London continues to support the Huguenots like Otl, but assuming that Henry VIII's last war goes slightly better, then we find ourselves again with an enlarged pale de Calais, with Boulogne and perhaps another town annexed to it, if Henry VIII had survived until 1551, it is highly probable that the works of fortifications are not interrupted like Otl with Boulogne also returned to France before the agreed 8-year truce expired, furthermore the revolt in Cornwall of 1549 would also be avoided, which further burdened state finances ( along with the war against Scotland ), so if Mary I had managed to ascend to the throne a few years early ( that's why I suggested 1551, where Otl there was a sweating epidemic, in which both Henry and Edward could die, this also allows us to no longer have to fight on the Scottish border, allowing the treasury to breathe ) and with the works possibly completed, she would have a more resistant Calais on her hands of Otl, as well as having full imperial support in the event of war ( after all, Burgundy is literally there alongside ), this puts England in a better position than Otl, furthermore there would be greater interest in maintaining it than recovering it centuries later, when its importance as a commercial outlet for London no longer counts for anything, but rather would only represent an impediment to its consolidated " Blue Water " policy
Last edited:
vgh...
Banned
I can say for sure that if England possessed Calais during the cabinet wars of the 18th century, it would have been a real pain. It would pull them into the continent like Hanover did (which made it unpopular with even pro-war British politicians because it was a strategic dead weight on Britain) in addition to being next to France, so it will get taken every war when Maurice de Saxe or some other French general goes on a rampage through the Southern Netherlands and used as a bargaining chip in the peace negotiations to reduce British leverage.
furthermore, during the first two French wars of religion, Elizabeth herself made an agreement with the Huguenot faction led by Condè, who in exchange for her financial support against the Catholics and royalists, they would help her in recovering Calais and subsequently the they would have ceded the other ports of Normandy, such as Le Havre, Rouen, Dieppe, but it was a diplomatic gaffe on his part to jump into the alliance ( Elisabeth ) given that he said he wanted to keep the ports under his control not for religious but merely territorial reasons, since it was her hereditary right, this caused such a furore in France at the time that Catherine de Medici cleverly managed to momentarily reunite the two factions fighting under her against England, finally expelling Elizabeth's troops from Le Havre in 1564
Economically Calais would become pretty much worthless by the 18th century because its harbor silted up, almost entirely. The merchants all packed their bags and left for Boulogne and Dunkirk and even the fishing industry suffered heavily. by the end of the 18th century it had a grand total of 5.000 people still living there, down from an estimated 12.000 in the late middle ages.
Also wasn't much of Calais' revenues IOTl because of its use as a staple port to begin with? So as/if the trade in wool diminished it'd lose much of its value (from an English perspective) even before that already.
Calais would eventually become a not nearly as impressive counterpart of Gibraltar on the North Sea. Some British outpost on the mainland that gets besieged the second it gets involved in any European war. The only difference being that this one can be fully surrounded by land forces and will always capitulate, eventually.
It would probably be more useful for their neighbors in the Low Countries lol. Calais would probably be the first thing the French lay siege to in any war (as they would not want the English to be able to land troops uncontested behind their lines) so it's kind of an advance warning system.
Also wasn't much of Calais' revenues IOTl because of its use as a staple port to begin with? So as/if the trade in wool diminished it'd lose much of its value (from an English perspective) even before that already.
Calais would eventually become a not nearly as impressive counterpart of Gibraltar on the North Sea. Some British outpost on the mainland that gets besieged the second it gets involved in any European war. The only difference being that this one can be fully surrounded by land forces and will always capitulate, eventually.
It would probably be more useful for their neighbors in the Low Countries lol. Calais would probably be the first thing the French lay siege to in any war (as they would not want the English to be able to land troops uncontested behind their lines) so it's kind of an advance warning system.