Throughout much of post-Roman European history, France was Europe's largest country by population and as late as the early 1800s it had a larger population than the combined German-speaking states. Its population was four times the size of England's.
One of the chief reasons behind France's relative decline in power during the second half of the 19th Century was France's demographic stagnation. The French population gained just over 10 million people, growing from about 30 million in 1800 to about 40 million in 1900.
This may have been a major cause of France's weakness in the First World War, and a major factor in their loss in WW2.
According to Wikipedia...
(Note: if Wikipedia's figures are wrong, please correct me.)
This leads to a few questions. Historically, why did France not grow similarly to other European countries? Was it lack of industrial development?
Second, from an alternate history perspective, (a) what are some realistic points of divergence that could have lead to France keeping pace demographically, say, from 1800 on, and (b) what would the effects of a MUCH larger France have been?
I'll assume that a change this major would doubtless have altered much of European history over the past two centuries in enormous ways, so much so that I'm not even going to speculate as to the effects of the world wars because it's not at all clear they would have occurred or that they would have occurred in the same fashion. Rather, I'll simply state some broad trends that I think may have emerged.
Had France industrialized more strongly, had its population urbanized, and had it grown at a faster rate - let's say, between the rates experienced by Germany and the UK - a few things would have been clear. For one thing, it would likely mean the historic rivalry with the UK remains, and the UK continues to ally with Germany.
If European integration occurs in some fashion in the 20th Century, it may well occur in a way that limits French participation - perhaps a common market, free trade, but very little political integration between France and the rest of Europe; rather, other European countries, perhaps Central European countries lead by Germany, might band together in a stronger union to achieve some rough parity with France. Alternately, smaller nations on the continent, including Germany, might try to involve Russia and even Turkey in more European affairs in order to provide a better counterbalance to France. Or maybe you get a Europe of "blocs" - France and a couple client states, Russia, a few central European states lead by Germany, and a set of secondary countries such as Italy, Spain and the UK.
France would also punch far higher above its present weight in global affairs. (Indeed, if French population growth had stayed constant earlier on, from Louis XIV's time, France might well be a superpower.)
Much faster French population growth probably results in substantial French out-migration which in OTL was relatively little compared to Germany, Italy, and the UK. So you might have substantial French populations in the Americas, and French emigration to Algeria would have been substantially higher. With the white population of Algeria much larger than in OTL (maybe 1/3-1/2 of the population?), perhaps the French hold onto Algeria (albeit with full rights for the Arab/Berber population?).
The French language might also have a far higher place internationally. Since I'm mostly looking at post-1800 PODs, perhaps the British still have a larger empire and the U.S. would likely still become a major power, so English might still be preeminent. But French imperial influence might be higher and that could well lead to French becoming the international lingua franca.
Any thoughts or disagreements?
One of the chief reasons behind France's relative decline in power during the second half of the 19th Century was France's demographic stagnation. The French population gained just over 10 million people, growing from about 30 million in 1800 to about 40 million in 1900.
This may have been a major cause of France's weakness in the First World War, and a major factor in their loss in WW2.
According to Wikipedia...
(Note: if Wikipedia's figures are wrong, please correct me.)
This leads to a few questions. Historically, why did France not grow similarly to other European countries? Was it lack of industrial development?
Second, from an alternate history perspective, (a) what are some realistic points of divergence that could have lead to France keeping pace demographically, say, from 1800 on, and (b) what would the effects of a MUCH larger France have been?
I'll assume that a change this major would doubtless have altered much of European history over the past two centuries in enormous ways, so much so that I'm not even going to speculate as to the effects of the world wars because it's not at all clear they would have occurred or that they would have occurred in the same fashion. Rather, I'll simply state some broad trends that I think may have emerged.
Had France industrialized more strongly, had its population urbanized, and had it grown at a faster rate - let's say, between the rates experienced by Germany and the UK - a few things would have been clear. For one thing, it would likely mean the historic rivalry with the UK remains, and the UK continues to ally with Germany.
If European integration occurs in some fashion in the 20th Century, it may well occur in a way that limits French participation - perhaps a common market, free trade, but very little political integration between France and the rest of Europe; rather, other European countries, perhaps Central European countries lead by Germany, might band together in a stronger union to achieve some rough parity with France. Alternately, smaller nations on the continent, including Germany, might try to involve Russia and even Turkey in more European affairs in order to provide a better counterbalance to France. Or maybe you get a Europe of "blocs" - France and a couple client states, Russia, a few central European states lead by Germany, and a set of secondary countries such as Italy, Spain and the UK.
France would also punch far higher above its present weight in global affairs. (Indeed, if French population growth had stayed constant earlier on, from Louis XIV's time, France might well be a superpower.)
Much faster French population growth probably results in substantial French out-migration which in OTL was relatively little compared to Germany, Italy, and the UK. So you might have substantial French populations in the Americas, and French emigration to Algeria would have been substantially higher. With the white population of Algeria much larger than in OTL (maybe 1/3-1/2 of the population?), perhaps the French hold onto Algeria (albeit with full rights for the Arab/Berber population?).
The French language might also have a far higher place internationally. Since I'm mostly looking at post-1800 PODs, perhaps the British still have a larger empire and the U.S. would likely still become a major power, so English might still be preeminent. But French imperial influence might be higher and that could well lead to French becoming the international lingua franca.
Any thoughts or disagreements?
