WI France a sea power?

NapoleonXIV

Banned
How would Europe have developed differently if France had a tradition/policy of being a sea power equivalent to England? I realize this is against cultural determinism since France is geographically a land power, but there is no real reason it cannot be a sea power as well.
 

Hendryk

Banned
I realize this is against cultural determinism since France is geographically a land power, but there is no real reason it cannot be a sea power as well.
I don't see why it would be against cultural determinism: France has a long coastline along four different seas, and a long history of overseas expansion. Victory in the Seven Year War, implying that France gets to keep its North American and East Indian possessions, would almost certainly lead to the development of a French Navy on a par with England's.
 
What would this do to Trafalgar? A french Navy on par with England might have different results, that is if a powerful navy survives the Revolution.
 

Hendryk

Banned
What would this do to Trafalgar? A french Navy on par with England might have different results, that is if a powerful navy survives the Revolution.
Well, if you posit that the POD is a French victory in the Seven Year War, then there likely won't be a French revolution (or an American one for that matter), let alone a battle of Trafalgar. There probably would be another war against England, though.
 

MrP

Banned
Well, just to go back to basics for a moment, the Brits could spend proportionately more on their navy because they faced no major land threats. The French did have major threats from land (requiring a significant army) and the need to keep the routes to the colonies safe (ditto navy). Provided the French have more cash in absolute terms, they can outspend the British, thus naval supremacy. France already has a larger population, so - barring repeated disasters - she can man the fleet and the army.
 

67th Tigers

Banned
What would this do to Trafalgar? A french Navy on par with England might have different results, that is if a powerful navy survives the Revolution.

Trafalgar's a rather overrated WI. Napoleon's invasion is already aborted.

More to the point, Trafalgar is simply two squadrons (well three) mashing it up. It can still go Jones for the British even if they win....
 
Well, if you posit that the POD is a French victory in the Seven Year War, then there likely won't be a French revolution (or an American one for that matter), let alone a battle of Trafalgar. There probably would be another war against England, though.

Very true, didn't even think about that
 
if you go for a POD far enough back, such as the French crushing the English even more so in the HYW than in our timeline. at that point the French navy was larger than the English, so from there you could extrapolate the French navy getting stronger and stronger, over centuries dominating the English navy like the reverse IOTL. by the 18th century La Royale is the most powerful naval force in Europe.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
How would Europe have developed differently if France had a tradition/policy of being a sea power equivalent to England? I realize this is against cultural determinism since France is geographically a land power, but there is no real reason it cannot be a sea power as well.


France WAS a sea power. It's ships were consistantly better in design and construction than comparable RN designs and it would generally give a good account of itself when in action (frex: Virginia Capes, where the French defeated the RN leaving Yorktown untenable).

The problem wasn't French tradition or power, although it was not as tactically sound as the RN, the problem was Nelson. If things went according to Hoyle, the RN would have lost Trafalger; of course they didn't thanks to the tactical brillance and audacity of Nelson and his captains.
 
Last edited:
It's not impossible for a country in continental Europe to be a major naval power: look at the Dutch Republic in the 17th century.

Now, what would happen if France somehow gets the entire Burgundian inheritance in 1477...
 
It's not impossible for a country in continental Europe to be a major naval power: look at the Dutch Republic in the 17th century.

But it is hard to be a major naval power and a major land power at the same time... few nations really managed to pull that off...

You need to be a large country with a long coastline with good access to major seas and oceans; somewhere like France or Spain is ideal... Austria, on the other hand isn't, since it only really had Trieste as a port...

Now, what would happen if France somehow gets the entire Burgundian inheritance in 1477...

Urk...:eek:
 
But it is hard to be a major naval power and a major land power at the same time... few nations really managed to pull that off...
The Spanish managed nicely in the 16th century.

And the Dutch in the 17th could thanks to a lot of trade income afford a decent army when necessary.

Russia in the 18th century amassed a very large and quite capable fleet, which was used to effect against the Ottomans and Swedes. They were of course hampered by their geography.
You need to be a large country with a long coastline with good access to major seas and oceans; somewhere like France or Spain is ideal... Austria, on the other hand isn't, since it only really had Trieste as a port...
True
It would give France the resources to maintain both an army and a fleet.
And the Low Countries historically had an intensive trade with the Baltic and later all over the globe, leading to the navy that served as an insurance policy for that trade.

So this gives both the resources and the reason for a large French fleet.
 
Looking at the POD given (Seven Years War, or as we Yanks arrogantly call it, the French and Indian War :D), then we'd probably see, in the end, a powerful French fleet and a much weaker Britain, that would probably see the Thirteen Colonies break away...and the much more powerful France, and it's supernavy, prevent them from effectively contesting it. This version of the U.S. would probably be totally pro-France, and would also be unable to expand beyond it's coastal borders, while Louisiana would like develop along the course of the British Domnions OTL, although I think the Indians would play a much bigger role, since France never seemed to populate its colonies as heavily as Britain, for whatever reason.

Oh, and Germany is f*cked. Probably a weak North German Confederation, and an annexation of the South by the Hapsburgs.

Of course, I could be wrong. You ask some people on this board, I apparently can't ever be right:D
 
Looking at the POD given (Seven Years War, or as we Yanks arrogantly call it, the French and Indian War :D), then we'd probably see, in the end, a powerful French fleet and a much weaker Britain, that would probably see the Thirteen Colonies break away...and the much more powerful France, and it's supernavy, prevent them from effectively contesting it. This version of the U.S. would probably be totally pro-France, and would also be unable to expand beyond it's coastal borders, while Louisiana would like develop along the course of the British Domnions OTL, although I think the Indians would play a much bigger role, since France never seemed to populate its colonies as heavily as Britain, for whatever reason.

Oh, and Germany is f*cked. Probably a weak North German Confederation, and an annexation of the South by the Hapsburgs.

Of course, I could be wrong. You ask some people on this board, I apparently can't ever be right:D

All Maria Theresa wanted was Silesia back in the Seven Years War. I doubt that they annex the South German states. Maria Theresa was a fairly honorable person, she disapproved of the Partition of Poland, only participating in it to prevent the balance of power from shifting completely to Prussia and Russia at Austria's expense. In her eyes, the Seven Years War was to avenge the unlawful aggression of Prussia, not for Austria to repeat such aggression against other states.

As to the rest of Germany, it really depends on how exactly the Seven Years War ends. If the French win or stalemate in North America, keeping or possibly expanding their possessions there, they may not necessarily have made any gains in Europe. France may still build up a stronger navy due to the retained large possessions in NA, but Europe would remain largely on an OTL track.
 
I thought France had a reasonable navy until the Revolution executed all its officer class which is why it ended up much less useful than the British ?

It certainly rebuilt strongly both under Louis Philippe, and under Napoleon III. Arguably it was only after the establishment of the Third Republic that France stopped being a premier naval power, and a lot of the reason for that was due to competing naval theories being backed by different political cliques so that getting any sort of coherency eventually went out of the window

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Logically to get this you'd need to weaken Spain and Germany (whilst keeping Italy and the low countries down) a lot so neither can threaten France and they can concentrate on competition with England...
But then the only trouble there is that Europe is just such a better place to control land. A weak divided Iberia and Germany with no continental competition would only tempt France into invading them even more.

Perhaps if you cut France up a bit?
It wouldn't be unreasonable to assume a independant Brittany which is permanently friendly with France-proper becoming a big trading power. But this would be cheating...
 
Actually IIRC it was after 1840 or so that Orleanist France realised it should refocus on the navy, after it had had to stand by and watch Britain and Austria humble its Egyptian ally

But that doesn't negate my argument that both Louis Philippe's France and Napoleon III's WERE seapowers

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Logically to get this you'd need to weaken Spain and Germany (whilst keeping Italy and the low countries down) a lot so neither can threaten France and they can concentrate on competition with England...
But then the only trouble there is that Europe is just such a better place to control land. A weak divided Iberia and Germany with no continental competition would only tempt France into invading them even more.

Perhaps if you cut France up a bit?
It wouldn't be unreasonable to assume a independant Brittany which is permanently friendly with France-proper becoming a big trading power. But this would be cheating...

That reminds me of a EUIII game where I (as France) annexed all of Burgundy and captured the Low Countries, but kept Brittany as an independent vassal so I could leech off of its massive trade empire. I took Sicily, Malta, the Baleares, and Bercelona during a war with Aragon later, and dominated the Mediterranean for centuries.

EUIII isn't completely accurate, but is France managed what I described, could they forseeably end up a major sea power?
 
Top