PC: Large-Scale Christian Immigration Into France Starting From the Late 19th Century

CaliGuy

Banned
I've got a question--would it have been realistic for France to allow large-scale Christian immigration from both other parts of Europe and the Middle East starting from the late 19th century in order to stimulate larger population growth in France?
 
Would they have jobs for them if they did? And wouldn't France rather those immigrants go to Algeria or some other colony to help secure their hold?
 
Last edited:
This is basically OTL. France received very substantial immigration from Italy, Spain, Portugal and Poland, as well as Armenia and a few other countries. The biggest wave came in the 1920s but there was some immigration in the pre-war period as well.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Would they have jobs for them if they did?

Depends on how good their economy is and how much these immigrants help with economic growth.

And wouldn't France rather those immigrants go to Algeria or some other colony to help secure their hold?

Maybe; indeed, I'll let someone who is more of an expert on French history than I am answer that question.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
This is basically OTL. France received very substantial immigration from Italy, Spain, Portugal and Poland, as well as Armenia and a few other countries. The biggest wave came in the 1920s but there was some immigration in the pre-war period as well.
Based on the data here:

http://focus-migration.hwwi.de/typo...e/bilder/Country-profiles/cp-2/grafik4-gr.gif

grafik4-gr.gif


The percentage of immigrants among the total population in France in the pre-World War I years and even in the post-World War I years is much lower than I would like to see; indeed, I am thinking of 13-25% here--in other words, percentages similar to the U.S.'s and Canada's percentages for this during this time.
 
Would they have jobs for them if they did? And wouldn't France rather those immigrants go to Algeria or some other colony to help secure their hold?

Much of the pied-noir population were descended from Spanish and Italian immigrants. Now the question is what would prompt them to go to Algeria as opposed to the metropole?
 
Much of the pied-noir population were descended from Spanish and Italian immigrants. Now the question is what would prompt them to go to Algeria as opposed to the metropole?

Large amounts of fertile land, as well as modelling their colonization strategy on the Ottomans (who also sent settlers into their territories).
 
There was a certain amount of immigration into rural areas--Italians in Gascony come to mind as a case study--but French immigration was overwhelmingly concentrated in urban areas, in Paris and the North and in Provence with Marseilles. Immigrants went to where the jobs were.

Could France attract more migrants? This would depend on France having a substantially stronger economy, I would think.
 
Based on the data here:

http://focus-migration.hwwi.de/typo...e/bilder/Country-profiles/cp-2/grafik4-gr.gif

The percentage of immigrants among the total population in France in the pre-World War I years and even in the post-World War I years is much lower than I would like to see; indeed, I am thinking of 13-25% here--in other words, percentages similar to the U.S.'s and Canada's percentages for this during this time.

Well, I don't know if that is plausible. In North America, in addition to the growing cities, there were vast territories that were thinly populated, which the governments wanted to fill with European settlers. While France has a relatively low population density for Europe, it didn't have any regions (in the metropole) that were like that.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Well, I don't know if that is plausible. In North America, in addition to the growing cities, there were vast territories that were thinly populated, which the governments wanted to fill with European settlers. While France has a relatively low population density for Europe, it didn't have any regions (in the metropole) that were like that.
Actually, even right now (with a population 1.5+ times greater than in the late 19th and early 20th centuries), France still has a lot of areas with an extremely low population density:

france_population_density_map.png


Plus, don't many immigrants to the U.S. nowadays move to cities and suburbs? (For the record, the current U.S. percentage of immigrants is about the same as what it was in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.)
 
Actually, even right now (with a population 1.5+ times greater than in the late 19th and early 20th centuries), France still has a lot of areas with an extremely low population density:

Plus, don't many immigrants to the U.S. nowadays move to cities and suburbs? (For the record, the current U.S. percentage of immigrants is about the same as what it was in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.)

Well yes, the overseas possessions are another story. New Caledonia in particular could have received more settlers than it did - it could probably support a larger population. (Guiana could, too, but its climate isn't very hospitable.) Maybe in a timeline in which France conquers the island sooner, it can establish a larger population that attracts more immigrants. But non-French immigrants might just as well go to Australia or New Zealand.

It's true that now, immigrants tend to settle in cities. But 100 years ago, many were seeking farmland, which was readily available in North America but not nearly as much so in Metropolitan France.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Well yes, the overseas possessions are another story. New Caledonia in particular could have received more settlers than it did - it could probably support a larger population. (Guiana could, too, but its climate isn't very hospitable.) Maybe in a timeline in which France conquers the island sooner, it can establish a larger population that attracts more immigrants. But non-French immigrants might just as well go to Australia or New Zealand.

Actually, I was talking about metropolitan France here.

It's true that now, immigrants tend to settle in cities. But 100 years ago, many were seeking farmland, which was readily available in North America but not nearly as much so in Metropolitan France.

So, in other words, France needs more farmland to attract more immigrants during this time? If so, it would be a bit strange that a country which is so concerned about its tiny population growth is incapable of sustaining more immigrants!
 
Actually, I was talking about metropolitan France here.

So, in other words, France needs more farmland to attract more immigrants during this time? If so, it would be a bit strange that a country which is so concerned about its tiny population growth is incapable of sustaining more immigrants!

It's not that France was incapable of sustaining more immigrants, but that for immigrants seeking to establish their own homesteads, North America was more attractive. Land was more available and cheaper. France certainly had (and has) a rich agricultural economy, but that most of its cultivated land was already in someone's possession.

If you are a prospective immigrant in 1900 looking to establish a farm, maybe you can get a piece of land in say Limousin, but for the same price you can probably get a piece of land in say Nebraska that's three times its size. So you'd probably go to Nebraska.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
It's not that France was incapable of sustaining more immigrants, but that for immigrants seeking to establish their own homesteads, North America was more attractive. Land was more available and cheaper. France certainly had (and has) a rich agricultural economy, but that most of its cultivated land was already in someone's possession.
OK; understood.

Also, out of curiosity--would European countries with cheap land (such as Russia if its leadership would have actually been willing to both engage in land reform and allow large-scale immigration) have been more attractive to immigrants during this time than France was?
 
France was really not encouraging migrants to the colonies as it would deplete the ligne bleue des Vosges , the Prussian frontier basically. They were quite traumatized by the 1870 war.

Algeria also has limited farmland available, especially without antagonizing too much the Arabs... The other colonies are basically death traps for colonists.
The best place to go would probably be Indochina. Fertile and rich and all but fevers are a notch.

For people to go to France, problem was France was in an economic slump for most of the 1870/80's, which limits how many immigrants you can attract.
You need some growth to get migrants even if all are not absorbed (Grapes of Wrath type of situation)
 
Top