Le Grand Empire Français: A French Empire Timeline

[Dylanperr]

Latin American Dominions​

Like Britain and France, Spain also had New World colonies but they were mostly in Central and South America unlike the British and French colonies which almost all of them were located in North America. Spain also had North American colonies such as Mexico and technically Central America could count as North America as well, many of the Spanish colonies were colonized during the 16th and 17th centuries when Spain was the most powerful empire.

The Spanish New World colonies remain apart of Spain because there is no French revolution which means no Napoleonic wars and that would mean with no Napoleonic wars the Spanish colonies remain apart of the Spanish Empire. The Spanish colonies remaining apart of the Spanish Empire would actually be surprisingly better for them because the Spanish were reforming their empire in the late 18th century to give their colonies more autonomy. One of the reason why the British colonies were so successful (Eg. Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and USA) is because the British gave them more autonomy than the Spanish.

These Spanish New World colonies would be a bit better of than they would be in this timeline with the Spanish giving them more and more autonomy with the Spanish New World colonies likely being economically a lot like the American South or Southern and Eastern Europe (Most Latin American countries have a gdp per capita lower than those 3 regions), which would mean they would be developed and rich with lots of manufacturing but not wealthy and as industrialized like the economic and industrial cities that are based in the British and French North American colonies.

Geography which is a subject that I love a lot, but it would divide many of these Spanish colonies when they become dominions of the Spanish Empire, Mexico would have similar borders to that of our timeline if not the same, but what would be different is that central America would likely be one country without the civil war that made it into many different countries, the borders would be a bit different since there isn’t as much if any revolutions and civil wars which split many latin American countries. For example Argentina being more powerful would hold onto Uruguay, Peru and Bolivia would be one country, but Gran Columbia would not survive because of geographic and cultural differences, The Caribbean countries are mostly islands so the borders would be the same since they are natural borders for the most part.

For Brazil it would develop very similarly to the Spanish Latin American colonies in this timeline, but without the overthrow of the monarchy, this would mean Brazil would be a more stable and prosperous nations without a lot of the dictatorships that came after the monarchy. But the monarchy in Brazil which was the Portuguese monarchy that came after the Napoleonic wars to Brazil built up a lot of its infrastructure and the Empire of Brazil did show a lot of promise under the monarchy particularly Pedro II (One of the best monarchs in history), but Brazil even without the Empire of Brazil which was a byproduct of the Napoleonic Wars would still be better off because the Portuguese government would reform over time and immigrants would come and develop Brazil over time as well.

 

[Dylanperr]

1890 North America​

French North America: 37,550,000.
British North America: 68,850,000.

 

[Comte de Dordogne]

Latin American Dominions​

Like Britain and France, Spain also had New World colonies but they were mostly in Central and South America unlike the British and French colonies which almost all of them were located in North America. Spain also had North American colonies such as Mexico and technically Central America could count as North America as well, many of the Spanish colonies were colonized during the 16th and 17th centuries when Spain was the most powerful empire.

The Spanish New World colonies remain apart of Spain because there is no French revolution which means no Napoleonic wars and that would mean with no Napoleonic wars the Spanish colonies remain apart of the Spanish Empire. The Spanish colonies remaining apart of the Spanish Empire would actually be surprisingly better for them because the Spanish were reforming their empire in the late 18th century to give their colonies more autonomy. One of the reason why the British colonies were so successful (Eg. Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and USA) is because the British gave them more autonomy than the Spanish.

These Spanish New World colonies would be a bit better of than they would be in this timeline with the Spanish giving them more and more autonomy with the Spanish New World colonies likely being economically a lot like the American South or Southern and Eastern Europe (Most Latin American countries have a gdp per capita lower than those 3 regions), which would mean they would be developed and rich with lots of manufacturing but not wealthy and as industrialized like the economic and industrial cities that are based in the British and French North American colonies.

Geography which is a subject that I love a lot, but it would divide many of these Spanish colonies when they become dominions of the Spanish Empire, Mexico would have similar borders to that of our timeline if not the same, but what would be different is that central America would likely be one country without the civil war that made it into many different countries, the borders would be a bit different since there isn’t as much if any revolutions and civil wars which split many latin American countries. For example Argentina being more powerful would hold onto Uruguay, Peru and Bolivia would be one country, but Gran Columbia would not survive because of geographic and cultural differences, The Caribbean countries are mostly islands so the borders would be the same since they are natural borders for the most part.

For Brazil it would develop very similarly to the Spanish Latin American colonies in this timeline, but without the overthrow of the monarchy, this would mean Brazil would be a more stable and prosperous nations without a lot of the dictatorships that came after the monarchy. But the monarchy in Brazil which was the Portuguese monarchy that came after the Napoleonic wars to Brazil built up a lot of its infrastructure and the Empire of Brazil did show a lot of promise under the monarchy particularly Pedro II (One of the best monarchs in history), but Brazil even without the Empire of Brazil which was a byproduct of the Napoleonic Wars would still be better off because the Portuguese government would reform over time and immigrants would come and develop Brazil over time as well.

View attachment 605736

A question I ask myself: Without Bolivar, why does Bolivia have this name?

 

[Dylanperr]

A question I ask myself: Without Bolivar, why does Bolivia have this name?

I guess I have to make some changes, I didn't realize that, and I would say it would be called Peru because I heard Peru and Bolivia almost could of became one unified nation. Bolivar would still technically exist, but he would be far less important than he is in our timeline.

 

[Dylanperr]

Trade With China And The Boxer Rebellion​

When the European countries are industrializing, and industrialization creates even more goods, which means Europeans need more places to sell them to, and where do you think the place where you want to sell goods at would be the most populous nation for over 2500 years or just keeping the goods to yourself and trading it with no-one. You would most definitely be wrong if you chose just keeping the goods to yourself and letting them rot away but if you picked the country with the most population for 2500 years straight, you are correct, and that very very large nation on the map is known as China. The Chinese were very reluctant to allow outsiders to trade with them and this is the same thing that went for Japan before they had to modernize.

The Europeans have been having interest in China since long before the 1890s-1900s when the Boxer rebellion had begun and there was European interactions with China since the early 16th century in 1517 during the age of exploration with the Portuguese. There would likely be no Opium Wars because the French had a different economic and colonial style and system than the British because the French mostly had government ran companies while the British companies tended to be privately owned so there was more of a profit motive. But without the Opium wars the Europeans would still want to trade their goods with China even if China was very reluctant to allow the European powers and Japan to do so.

China refusing to allow European powers and Japan to trade with them and due to its massive size there will be all of the major European powers forming into an alliance very much like our timeline to come establish spheres of influence and ports where they will like to trade. The major powers would be the British Empire, French Empire, Spanish Empire, Portuguese Empire, Russian Empire, Japanese Empire, Austro-German Empire, and the Dutch Empire, and yes there will still be 8 powers but they are a little bit different than our timeline they would also have a lot of support by other powers as well such as the many of the Italian states as well.

Many of the Boxers who were rebelling against the European powers, Japan, and other foreigners occupying parts of China though that their Calisthenic rituals and Martial arts could give them almost superpower abilities like to block bullets and shield them from the oncoming European armies and that is why it is named the name Boxer Rebellion. The what you would call conflict with China which was also known as the Qing Empire that the European powers are having would end in 1901, just like it did in our timeline, with the British Empire, French Empire, Spanish Empire, Portuguese Empire, Russian Empire, Japanese Empire, Austro-German Empire, and the Dutch Empire. This would be known as the Boxer Protocol where the Chinese tried to expel all foreigners from their nation and they were unsuccessful at it and it ended with both the European powers and Japan forcing China to trade with them and the establishment of what would be known as an Open Door Policy.

 

[Dylanperr]

Ellis Island And New Arrivals​

It is the 1890s, which is the start of a second wave of immigration, but this immigration is mainly coming from the Southern and Eastern parts of Europe, which was the poorest parts of Europe at the time, many Southern and Eastern Europeans are coming to escape many different things but especially poverty, persecution, overpopulation (by the way unsustainable population growth can be connected with a lot if not most problems in society along with climate change), and opportunity because industrialization kicked off in the early 19th century in North America while it was in its infancy in Southern and Eastern Europe or stagnated completely.

In this immigration station called Ellis Island millions of immigrants came through the immigration station to be checked and deemed worthy of citizenship in British North America. French North America will have something similar to an Ellis Island (likely a lot like Pier 21, which is basically Ellis Island’s Canadian cousin of our timeline) of their own where many new arrivals would start to come from many countries in Europe, especially Southern and Eastern Europe with immigrants such as Italians, Russians, etc.

These Southern and Eastern European immigrants will start to come to North America (Both British and French North America) to get more opportunity and to work in jobs and move to big cities such as Chicago, Detroit, and New York in British North America and big cities in French North America such as Montreal, Quebec City, and Chicago (and yes Chicago is part of both British and French North America in this timeline since the border is at the 42nd parallel as Chicago goes right through the 42nd parallel). Many of these immigrants would be extremely mobile and so they would move from place to place (city to city) as well.

 

[Dylanperr]

Hawaii​

Oh, Hawaii, a tropical paradise (unless if your me and prefer dark, foggy, and cold weather as opposed to warm weather) in the Pacific, it is known as being a place where people go on vacation and get their what you would call aloha on. But looking back in history it wasn’t always like that, it was originally a land settled by Polynesians and than it was taken and explored by the British in 1776 but no really colonized until the Americans and American interests showed an interest in Hawaii and took Hawaii in 1893 and overthrew the Hawaiian monarchy in a coup d’etat and was later annexed by the United States in 1898.

In this timeline Hawaii has a similar history and is explored by the British in 1776 but they don’t really conquer it and settle it. The British would explore Hawaii in the same time they did in our timeline but wouldn’t really get into colonizing Hawaii until later in the late 19th century mostly for the fruit producing plantations such as those that produced Bananas and they would import foreign workers (mostly Chinese, Japanese, Filipinos, etc) as basically pseudo slave labor which definitely happened in our timeline in Hawaii.

So in this timeline Hawaiian history likely wouldn’t be very different because the monarchy would likely still be overthrown by American business interests for the same exact reasons it happened in our timeline and Hawaii would likely be its own independent country rather than apart of British North America for the same exact reasons that Barbados and the Bahamas aren’t apart of Canada.

 

[TimTurner]

Hawaii​

Oh, Hawaii, a tropical paradise (unless if your me and prefer dark, foggy, and cold weather as opposed to warm weather) in the Pacific, it is known as being a place where people go on vacation and get their what you would call aloha on. But looking back in history it wasn’t always like that, it was originally a land settled by Polynesians and than it was taken and explored by the British in 1776 but no really colonized until the Americans and American interests showed an interest in Hawaii and took Hawaii in 1893 and overthrew the Hawaiian monarchy in a coup d’etat and was later annexed by the United States in 1898.

In this timeline Hawaii has a similar history and is explored by the British in 1776 but they don’t really conquer it and settle it. The British would explore Hawaii in the same time they did in our timeline but wouldn’t really get into colonizing Hawaii until later in the late 19th century mostly for the fruit producing plantations such as those that produced Bananas and they would import foreign workers (mostly Chinese, Japanese, Filipinos, etc) as basically pseudo slave labor which definitely happened in our timeline in Hawaii.

So in this timeline Hawaiian history likely wouldn’t be very different because the monarchy would likely still be overthrown by American business interests for the same exact reasons it happened in our timeline and Hawaii would likely be its own independent country rather than apart of British North America for the same exact reasons that Barbados and the Bahamas aren’t apart of Canada.

Could see a violent revolution happening later, launched by Asian workers aided by foreign elements.

 

[Dylanperr]

Could see a violent revolution happening later, launched by Asian workers aided by foreign elements.

Yes, that to.

 

[Gabingston]

I just got back into reading this TL, and I've got a few questions:

1. You had an update on French Western Australia, and yet you also showed later on that the British had the whole continent. Did the British take it in a war or something, or did you just forget about the French colony in Western Australia?
2. What happened to Dutch South Africa? I thought they would've kept it with the absence of the Napoleonic Wars.
3. Why is the border between the French and British in North America the 42nd Parallel? I'd think it would be a bit further north, considering the demographic advantage the Anglo-Americans had and the need for a North/South balance within British North America.

Other than that, I'm enjoying this TL, and I'm interested in seeing where it goes from here.

 

[Dylanperr]

I just got back into reading this TL, and I've got a few questions:

1. You had an update on French Western Australia, and yet you also showed later on that the British had the whole continent. Did the British take it in a war or something, or did you just forget about the French colony in Western Australia?
2. What happened to Dutch South Africa? I thought they would've kept it with the absence of the Napoleonic Wars.
3. Why is the border between the French and British in North America the 42nd Parallel? I'd think it would be a bit further north, considering the demographic advantage the Anglo-Americans had and the need for a North/South balance within British North America.

Other than that, I'm enjoying this TL, and I'm interested in seeing where it goes from here.

That's a really good question.

French Western Australia was overrun by settlers and France no longer saw the point in keeping it as they had to populate North America and besides North America is closer and has better land as well.

Dutch South Africa was taken by the British similar to what they did in New York in 1661 in order to counterbalance the French influence in the Indian Ocean.

The border isn't entirely at the 42nd parallel but a good amount of the border is at the 42nd parallel because not much Anglos settled that land in our timeline and the French had the ability to militarily hold on to it.

 

[Dylanperr]

1900 North America Census​

New France population: 55,280,000.
British North America population: 84,250,000.

 

[PGSBHurricane]

Following this timeline. The idea of France beating the British in the Seven Years War and becoming the premier power of the world is fascinating.

 

[Dylanperr]

Following this timeline. The idea of France beating the British in the Seven Years War and becoming the premier power of the world is fascinating.

Yes it sure is. I will be continuing my what if the American Revolutionary war timeline after this I'm done with this one, I'm guessing this will be around 80 to 90 pages long and I am currently working on page 55.

 

[TimTurner]

French will never stop being main language of diplomacy ITTL.

 

[Dylanperr]

The song I am listening to.

 

[TimTurner]

The song I am listening to.

that is a great song. Highly recommended.

 

[Dylanperr]

Progressive Era​

It is the late 19th century going on to be the 20th century, this era in history is going through a process of a great amount of change and process. Things such as workers rights and child labour are starting to be exposed and many people are taking action against it, there are people known as muckrakers who exposed the exploitation and corruption of many practices such as working conditions in factories, a perfect example of one of these people is a men of the names of Jim Sinclair and Lewis Hine, and they weren’t the only ones there were also many others were also doing the same as well.

For nations in Europe especially the ones with monarchies they are undergoing a process of democratization and becoming constitutional monarchies and parliamentary monarchies (which are basically democracies where monarchs are head of state) which are a lot like that of the modern day Britain and Belgium. Many of these nations are becoming more liberal and secular as well with enlightenment ideas from the 18th century mixing with the industrial revolution in the 19th century. The main cause of these reforms and changes in society are largely due to the effects of industrialization as people start to settle in cities (urban areas are more liberal) for opportunities such as jobs in factories.

Many achievements of the Progressive Era include the breakup of many monopolies, improved working conditions in factories so things such as safety and sanitation regulations are put in place, and many different immigration policies based on where in Europe immigrants came from for example Southern and Eastern European mainly Catholic immigration would be more limited in British North America, and maybe protestant immigration to French North America would likely be limited as well.

 

[Dylanperr]

Invention Of Aircraft And Automobiles​

In the 20th century an age known for many inventions and innovations, and we are talking about specifically the aircraft and automobile. The aircraft would be invented in 1900s at around 1903 when the Wright Brothers (or whoever else if you want to butterfly their existence away) and the aircraft would be innovated with the first flight not being very long at only a quarter mile at most launched from a catapult. The invention of the aircraft would result in another invention, the aircraft carrier which was almost just as old as aircraft themselves, they like aircraft would undergo many trial and errors as well.

Another invention because aircrafts aren’t the only mode of transportation that was popularized in the 20th century and the other one is the automobile which will start off as fast as a horse on something that looked like an open wagon and it would soon devolve into an enclosed frame that you drive from point a to point b. The automobile when it is popularized and made affordable by Henry Ford (or whoever else if you want to butterfly his existence, someone else would of done it instead) with his Model T and later cars would result in the growth of suburbs and suburban sprawl in the 1920s-1950s.

The aircraft and automobile would result in the growth of jobs in automotive cities such as Detroit, Windsor, Flint, Lansing, etc. This would draw many people to move to these cities for the new economic opportunities as people in both French and British North America start to move out of rural areas to urban areas.

 

[Sébastien]

You are forgetting another invention, the cinema! Paris before the Great War or WWI was the leading city for the new art. With the actual situation, I can't imagine the war being the same, in fact, it should be very very different. So... Will you butterfly Hollywood?