No French Revolution -- Industrial Revolution effects

okay, say that there was no French revolution -- it was avoided in the early stages, and there's still a (constitutional) monarch on the French throne

how would the industrial revolution happen in this time line? would other nations be more well off in comparison to Britain? etc etc
 
okay, say that there was no French revolution -- it was avoided in the early stages, and there's still a (constitutional) monarch on the French throne

how would the industrial revolution happen in this time line? would other nations be more well off in comparison to Britain? etc etc

The industrial revolution had already started by that point...

France might industrialise sooner... but that's not certain.
 
okay, say that there was no French revolution -- it was avoided in the early stages, and there's still a (constitutional) monarch on the French throne

how would the industrial revolution happen in this time line? would other nations be more well off in comparison to Britain? etc etc

If there's no Revolution, the DuPonts won't flee France or set up a gunpowder mill in the Colonies. The U.S. may lose the War of 1812 because of this.
 

Thande

Donor
I was thinking about this the other day. I think that if France had remained fairly stable as a constitutional monarchy (the "Kingdom of the French") then it's bad news for everyone else. Most of the tactical innovations that Revolutionary France used to such great effect were in fact developed in the dying days of the ancien regime, a great period of experimentation and development in France. If we avoid the revolutionary purges and still have officers who know what they're doing in command, then France could be even more militarily successful than OTL. The same goes for science and technology - and yes, I would expect France to industrialise earlier, though probably still a bit behind Britain.
 
If there's no Revolution, the DuPonts won't flee France or set up a gunpowder mill in the Colonies. The U.S. may lose the War of 1812 because of this.
I thought Whe lost it anyway. :p:p

Without the Revolution, the [remains of] Guilds would maintain power longer.
IIRC it was the power of the Guilds that prevented several earlier attemps to modernize the French Ecomony.
 
This hinges on how the French avoided the Revolution. I think that the best thing for the French may be having a very scary couple of months, maybe even a year or two, before the radicals in the Revolution are crushed and the moderates and the King come to some kind of agreement. So what-if we have King Louis XVI assassinated in 1789, just before the storming of the Bastille? The regency for his young son is dominated by his youngest brother, the ultra-royalist Artois, who uses military force to crush the rioting Parisian and suppress the uppity Third Estate. The country nearly comes to civil war, but Artois' strong handling of the crisis, particularly his willingness to use force to put down "rebels and republicans" carries the day. In the aftermath of the "Crisis of '89" Artois makes some changes, chiefly he favored ending the nobility's financial privileges, and does so, putting France on a more stable financial footing. Throughout the rest of the 1790's Artois rules France, avoiding foreign adventures, and dealing with several more rebellions with military force.

Louis XVII declares his majority in 1798, as the country faces yet another financial crisis. Once again the Estates-General is called, and the nobility is opposed to reform. Louis XVII considers himself an enlightened monarch, and makes an alliance with Third Estate moderates against the other Estates. The alliance calls for a constitution that follows the outlines of Turgot's plan. The nobility reacts against this plan violently, and Artois attempts to get the King to rescind the alliance. He will not and there is an attempted palace coup, which fails. This gives Louis XVII his opportunity and he moves to crush the power of the nobles, firmly entrenching his new reforms.

The result of these reforms is economic growth and massive economic dislocation. In 1805 a group of army officers, calling themselves the Republican Brotherhood, attempts a coup in support of radical elements of the new National Assembly. In response the republicans are once again driven underground, although army reforms are passed to keep another coup from happening. Basically, Louis XVII is able to orchestrate a "White Revolution," reforming the country while keeping both the ultra-royalists and the republicans at bay.

The economic dislocation caused by land-reform creates larger and larger numbers of urban residents, swelling slums and creating serious problems for the authorities. The response is two-fold. Businessmen, responding to the increasing demand of France's now growing middle-class (internal tariff walls torn down, bad trade treaties cancelled) begin industrializing, tapping into the large numbers of now landless urban residents. Army leaders, attempting to clean the reputation of the French army, proposes to invade the Barbary Coast, and Louis goes along with the plan. From 1809 to 1815 the French Army and Navy take Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli, and immediately the royal government establishes a bounty system to encourage French immigration to the new territory. These colonies are envisioned to supply France with needed raw materials, and to provide a new market for French products.

As industrialization begins in France a problem is soon found. The fuel necessary to continued growth lies beyond France's borders. A reformed and strong France now begins to speak of "natural borders" that happen to include coal-producing regions inside the Holy Roman Empire . . .
 
I thought Whe lost it anyway. :p:p

Without the Revolution, the [remains of] Guilds would maintain power longer.
IIRC it was the power of the Guilds that prevented several earlier attemps to modernize the French Ecomony.

I thought it was the power of the Physiocrats... :confused:
 
Top