Implications of a more powerful French Navy

[phx1138]

IMO, "focus even more on what they were doing OTL, because France's kings didn't get how valuable commercial-naval power was."

But for thread's sake, I'm ignoring that - as France demonstrated in the American Revolution after building between the Seven Years War and entering the Revolution, they most certainly could have chosen otherwise and could have manned and made ships.

That didn't end so well (the Battle of the Saints is more relevant than Yorktown here), but it indicates that given the resources, the French navy could be a significant force.

And France was neither as prosperous or as well administered as it could have been, so money and things related to money could be fixed (so this what if can go forward).

No argument with that at all, but that's another thread. It's perfectly possible, with more money, more would just be squandered.

Even if France -does- develop more sea power, and does use it - I think ultimately France will see its colonies as valuable to the extent they contribute to its continental aims. Benign neglect of its settler colonies seems unlikely, and it does seem at least reasonably possible that regiments (possibly officered by Metropolitan France, possibly not) will be raised there for regular service - or at least that'll be tried.

Not sure that's going to be a good idea, but that's not the point.

My understanding of France's attitude to colonies is extremely incomplete, but I get the sense the indifference was deep, & any change seems to need a very serious reform. Since it appears France was very Continentally inclined, a move off that will take quite a bit of doing.

If (some of) those colonies are wealthier, or better able to generate wealth for France, that might do it. (That said, didn't France OTL have Caribbean colonies able to produce sugar & use slaves? Which were staples of the "triangle trade".)

 

[Elfwine]

No argument with that at all, but that's another thread. It's perfectly possible, with more money, more would just be squandered.

Yeah. Other than mentioning that it's my real opinion I don't think it merits being discussed - this is about what would happen if France could and did do more here, which has no obstacle except a lack of effort to make things work so it would happen.

My understanding of France's attitude to colonies is extremely incomplete, but I get the sense the indifference was deep, & any change seems to need a very serious reform. Since it appears France was very Continentally inclined, a move off that will take quite a bit of doing.

If (some of) those colonies are wealthier, or better able to generate wealth for France, that might do it. (That said, didn't France OTL have Caribbean colonies able to produce sugar & use slaves? Which were staples of the "triangle trade".)

It did have such colonies, but for some reason those don't seem to have lead France in the direction - even within the area it was doing overseas stuff - of a Britain or Netherlands like approach to the world.

Some thread, might not be this one, I posted a quote on France's bad commercial policies in regards to the triangle trade - in brief, La Rochelle could have thrived, but it didn't.

And not because of some inherent anti-commercial attitude but because of policies that hurt that in search of immediate revenue. If we're assuming France the polity is richer because of better administration, that probably doesn't happen - which would naturally benefit said city and its peers, which would lead to more prosperity with overseas trade, which leads to ?

 

[phx1138]

Yeah. Other than mentioning that it's my real opinion I don't think it merits being discussed - this is about what would happen if France could and did do more here, which has no obstacle except a lack of effort to make things work so it would happen.

I wasn't taking that as an effort to derail. I do think it might make a worthwhile discussion thread, tho.

It did have such colonies, but for some reason those don't seem to have lead France in the direction - even within the area it was doing overseas stuff - of a Britain or Netherlands like approach to the world.

I got the same sense. And we're back to Continentalism.

Some thread, might not be this one, I posted a quote on France's bad commercial policies in regards to the triangle trade - in brief, La Rochelle could have thrived, but it didn't.

And not because of some inherent anti-commercial attitude but because of policies that hurt that in search of immediate revenue. If we're assuming France the polity is richer because of better administration, that probably doesn't happen - which would naturally benefit said city and its peers, which would lead to more prosperity with overseas trade, which leads to ?

Except, by appearances, you need the better administration first, & absent setting a POD further back than the posited sponsorship of Columbus (whence this thread originated), I don't see that changing.

Which actually works for me. It means the scale of changes to French history is much reduced: more likely victories on the Continent, & more of them, but not a naval revolution, nor deep changes in French politics--a higher high, a deeper crash in the Revolution, with more money in play, but not drastic changes.

 

[Elfwine]

I wasn't taking that as an effort to derail. I do think it might make a worthwhile discussion thread, tho.

Yeah. Just a new one from this thread.

I got the same sense. And we're back to Continentalism.

Yep. I don't think it would be impossible to change this, but that really would take a dramatic POD - unlike Britain and the Netherlands, France can play on land.

Except, by appearances, you need the better administration first, & absent setting a POD further back than the posited sponsorship of Columbus (whence this thread originated), I don't see that changing.

Which actually works for me. It means the scale of changes to French history is much reduced: more likely victories on the Continent, & more of them, but not a naval revolution, nor deep changes in French politics--a higher high, a deeper crash in the Revolution, with more money in play, but not drastic changes.

Yeah, without the better administration, sooner or latter the reason why La Rochelle suffered - need ready cash, and how its acquired doesn't matter - comes back.

 

[phx1138]

Yep. I don't think it would be impossible to change this, but that really would take a dramatic POD - unlike Britain and the Netherlands, France can play on land.

Agreed. I don't see turning France into a genuinely maritime power, any more than turning Germany or Russia into one.

Yeah, without the better administration, sooner or latter the reason why La Rochelle suffered - need ready cash, and how its acquired doesn't matter - comes back.

Yeah. Even allowing some OTL problems are pure lack of money, which a richer France helps deal with, it looks like all it does is put her credit limit higher.

So, while I learned less than I might have hoped, there are some irreducibles. I've now got to go look for the administrators & see if there are any I can push under a carriage. (Tho, as noted, I'm mostly happy, for my own purposes, to leave them alone.)

Thx for the comments, everyone. (If anybody has anything to add, don't be shy. Unlike so far