What if Louis XIV/XV used gas warfare?

Sometime long ago, Louis XIV and XV were presented options by chemists to use poison gas. Despite their high ambitions for big empires, they made humble decisions by declining their use, I do not know about XV, but XIV did pay one a yearly income to prevent him for spreading the discovery.

Now, what if either one used it? Would it benefit France and the obvious expense of Europe and the environment?
 
Sometime long ago, Louis XIV and XV were presented options by chemists to use poison gas. Despite their high ambitions for big empires, they made humble decisions by declining their use, I do not know about XV, but XIV did pay one a yearly income to prevent him for spreading the discovery.

Now, what if either one used it? Would it benefit France and the obvious expense of Europe and the environment?

An obivous question would be, what kind of poisonous gas?
 
Can I see a source for this?

I'd have to wonder how much his decision had to do with things like L'affaire des poisons which took place in France until Louis XIV's reign. Apparently, the use of poison among the aristocracy for political jockeying/etc. ('inheritance powders') was so prevalent that even the king was in fear of his life for a time.
 
THe idea of using noxious gases is very old. IIRC it was seriously proposed by Cochrane, and he didn't get it out of thin air. Devioces to produce aggressive, poisonous smoke are mentioned in gunners' books dating back to the sixteenth century and apparently were used by the Royal Navy, and presumably others. Chinese technical manuals for siege warfare going back to the Ming dynasty also list pretty inventive ways of using chemical weaponry.

The question is, if the king had agreed to use these weapons, what would they have done? My guess is, not much. Chemists tend to overestimate the effectiveness and underestimate the difficulty of delivering chemical agents. I can't think of any substance that in, say, 1690 any nation would have been able to produce in sufficient quantities, deliver to the battlefield, and safely and effectively deploy.
 
You may probably confuse poisonous gases with the claim made by Pierre-Vincent Chalvet, that Dupré would have re-discovered the secret of greek fire and would have proposed Louis XV to give it the possibility of using such incendiary weapon.
Louis XV would have allegedly refused this by humanity, and would have gave a pension to Dupré.

That said, Pierre-Vincent Chevalet is considered, at best, as a really bad historian even for his era, and his claims (that aren't backed by any kind of source, such as proof of a pension for this) shoudln't be taken seriously.

Such history regularly re-emerges, with different protagonists (Louis XIV, Louis XV, Louis XVI, etc.) and different inventions (machinegun, by exemple).
 
This isn't entirely implausible. It's believed that the Sassanian Persians used chemical warfare against the Romans.

However, I'm going to have to see a source for this.
 
assuming this was true, even by WW1 the methods of dispersal were hafhazard so I would imagine back in those days it would be just as bad or worst.

The fact that warfare at the time wasn't based on trenches but on large armies going toward one another would also limit it's use: letting the gas drifted toward the enemy would mean you would have to wait until following and even if they managed to find a safe method of delivery via mortars, this would create pockets of no-go zone on the battlefield you would have to constantly monitor to make sure your own troops are not pushed toward them.

Ultimatly, I think that if it was developed, it's use might be limited to siege warfare: put the agent in a two parts container that is lobbed within the fortifications with a catapult or trebuchet then wait for the people to try and escape as the 2 parts mix and the gas is released.
 
Top