What would a Francoized England look like?

[MNP]

Inspired by this quote by kasumigenx about France's troubles in Pro-Byzantium timelines.

I think they like the Plantagenets to succeed but having the Plantagenets succeed will Frenchify England for good.

I've heard this often here, if England won the 100 Years War then France would dominate by virtue of economic and demographic strength. Well what would an England with more influences from France starting in the middle-ages end up as? Would there be population movement across the channel? Would it be a backwater? Culturally how could it differ? Would an odd dialect of French eventually become the dominant language?

I find stronger France TLs more interesting than stronger England, so I'm very curious.

The two PoDs that spring to mind for me are of course, the 100 Years War, but also the "crowning" of Louis VIII during the Barons Revolt.

 

[twovultures]

Culturally how could it differ? Would an odd dialect of French eventually become the dominant language?

I think Normandy and Brittany would be the two regions with the most contact with England, so if England grows culturally closer to France it will probably adopt linguistic traits from these regions.

EDIT: As an example for what that would look like, I believe that Canadian French is mostly descended from Norman French and evolved surrounded by an Anglophone majority, so perhaps "English French" would end up like OTL's Quebecois.

 

[Remicas]

Oh my god, I hope they won't have the same accent

 

[Deleted member 36284]

There might be a lot of subtle things like various games and foods moving north to England.

 

[Dunois]

There might be a lot of subtle things like various games and foods moving north to England.

As it stands food mainly moved in a north to south direction in Franco-British history, to the extent that two French "national dishes" are British in origin.

 

[Marc Pasquin]

Oh my god, I hope they won't have the same accent

HEY ! we're not the ones who sound like our mouth have never been depuckered !

 

[twovultures]

As it stands food mainly moved in a north to south direction in Franco-British history, to the extent that two French "national dishes" are British in origin.

Please don't tell me that my precious daube is a product of the vile English

 

[EdM]

Jumping ahead several centuries, I'd say the British Motorways would be called Autoroutes, and would share a lot more more characteristics with the French version, particularly in signage.

OTL British Motorway M-25 - Credit: UK Mail Online (Congestion)

What an ATL British Autoroute would look like - Credit: UK Mail Online (Holiday)

 

[MNP]

Jumping ahead several centuries, I'd say the British Motorways would be called Autoroutes, and would share a lot more more characteristics with the French version, particularly in signage.

What an ATL British Autoroute would look like - Credit: UK Mail Online (Holiday)

That one looks a bit more like what we have in the US

I like the idea of something like Quebec French being the dominant language (well not like but I find it interesting.) Any other ideas on how government would evolve? Would mainland nobility be granted lands in England and the same for the English? The medieval governments of England/France don't seem THAT different, but any union seems like it would start as a personal union and then evolve from there if it didn't fall apart.

 

[LSCatilina]

As it stands food mainly moved in a north to south direction in Franco-British history, to the extent that two French "national dishes" are British in origin.

In fact, many "french" national food that came from British Islands came from occitan culture first, as the recipes based on wine, or garlic that was praised here first, then in England before going in North France.

 

[Xgentis]

It would be a fascinating timeline a franco-british united kingdom has a huge potential seeing what thoses two coutries did separatly I wonder what they could achieve together. More frightening is mixing the huge ego both french and british have.

 

[Dunois]

In fact, many "french" national food that came from British Islands came from occitan culture first, as the recipes based on wine, or garlic that was praised here first, then in England before going in North France.

I was mainly referring to beef and sheep based recipe here, the entrecôte frites and the gigot d'agneau more precisely.

I am not surprised by what you say either, considering that there were very strong trade links between western France and England during the Middle Ages with wine going north and wool going south.

This just goes to show how interlinked the French and British cultures really are actually, a lot more than most people think.

Occitan culture also influenced the wider French/British culture with the troubadours stories I believe too?

 

[Marc Pasquin]

Inspired by this quote by kasumigenx about France's troubles in Pro-Byzantium timelines.I've heard this often here, if England won the 100 Years War then France would dominate by virtue of economic and demographic strength. Well what would an England with more influences from France starting in the middle-ages end up as? Would there be population movement across the channel? Would it be a backwater? Culturally how could it differ? Would an odd dialect of French eventually become the dominant language?

I find stronger France TLs more interesting than stronger England, so I'm very curious.

The two PoDs that spring to mind for me are of course, the 100 Years War, but also the "crowning" of Louis VIII during the Barons Revolt.

I think the relationship between england and france within the the union might be similar to that of england-scotland in OTL. both might retain their tradition (and is some cases try to overemphasise them) while at the same time some pan-union ones might spring up. Depending if they go through something similar to the english civil war or french reovlution, a parliement might spring up in Paris with limited or full powers and later a separate one could be created in england with devolved powers.

In term of the language, while I enjoy the creation of conlangs, I doubt this would happen at the government level. english might absorb more french vocabulary (though parisian instead of norman) but the language spoken in France would probably have no more words of english origins then in OTL at the begining of the 20th century.

One interesting aspect would be its relationship to the rest of europe. In OTL, england then the UK often bankrolled opposition to France on the continent and fought with it in its colonies. In this ATL, some ennemies in OTL might make common cause against the Union to prevent its hegemony. Whether they are succesfull or not could create some interesting stories with, in the later case, a Franco-English Union having an empire that cover both of its counterpart in OTL at its peak, the first true superpower, unchallengeable. A world at peace, at least for some.

 

[LSCatilina]

I am not surprised by what you say either, considering that there were very strong trade links between western France and England during the Middle Ages with wine going north and wool going south.

There's an interesting anecdote at this subject : in 1300's, the most popular drink in Scotland was Bordeu's wine.

Occitan culture also influenced the wider French/British culture with the troubadours stories I believe too?

Yes, and the fact that the kings of England were dukes of Aquitaine too helped really.
By exemple, Richard Lionheart is known as a good trobador (not a great one tough), and his nickname was "Oc e Non" (Yes and No)

But even todays, we have words in common, as "rave" party (rèva : delirium), "jump" (jumpar), "record" (recordar), that the french don't have, at least not directly common (but with some coming from occitan).

 

[Dunois]

It would be a fascinating timeline a franco-british united kingdom has a huge potential seeing what thoses two coutries did separatly I wonder what they could achieve together. More frightening is mixing the huge ego both french and british have.

On paper the potential for a United Kingdom of France, Great Britain and Ireland is huge indeed. But paper potential does not necessarily translate into usable potential, whether demographic, economic or military.

After all during the 18th century, France had a better potential on paper for creating a world spanning Empire. It however did not came to be, since the French political institutions and the wider economy of France had huge issues which the Revolution only partially solved (and that what cost!).

Creating strong institutions will be the first hurdle of a united Anglo-French kingdom. Said institutions will inevitably become an hybrid of what institutions previously existed in both kingdoms. This could be a good thing, but it could also open a huge can of worms and lead to compromises which no one wants.

With regards to the languages more specifically, a "pluralist" attitude to language might be more prevalent in said united kingdom. Ie some kind of French/English creole mix would become the national language, while regional language retain their potency and influence.

What we also have to bear in mind is that the current territory owned by France may not be included in said united kingdom. I have my doubts as to whether Provence will ever be under the control of an Anglo-French kingdom, same for Toulouse as well and the same for Lorraine and eastern France. On the other hand, Flanders could very well remain under Anglo-French control, due to proximity and preexisting links.

 

[Falecius]

On paper the potential for a United Kingdom of France, Great Britain and Ireland is huge indeed. But paper potential does not necessarily translate into usable potential, whether demographic, economic or military.

After all during the 18th century, France had a better potential on paper for creating a world spanning Empire. It however did not came to be, since the French political institutions and the wider economy of France had huge issues which the Revolution only partially solved (and that what cost!).

Creating strong institutions will be the first hurdle of a united Anglo-French kingdom. Said institutions will inevitably become an hybrid of what institutions previously existed in both kingdoms. This could be a good thing, but it could also open a huge can of worms and lead to compromises which no one wants.

With regards to the languages more specifically, a "pluralist" attitude to language might be more prevalent in said united kingdom. Ie some kind of French/English creole mix would become the national language, while regional language retain their potency and influence.

What we also have to bear in mind is that the current territory owned by France may not be included in said united kingdom. I have my doubts as to whether Provence will ever be under the control of an Anglo-French kingdom, same for Toulouse as well and the same for Lorraine and eastern France. On the other hand, Flanders could very well remain under Anglo-French control, due to proximity and preexisting links.

A problem with France it that she had to focus on continental hegemony, i.e. land power, at the same time she tried to build her overseas empire, that required significant sea power. Pursuing both policies at the same time is in general not easy, especially in the "empire building" phase. And there were a lot of other issues of course. Not to mention the tendecy of everybody else to gang up against the most threating power, that was, from after Westphalia down to the 19th century, France. Being an island, Britain could focus much more on sea power, having much less to worry about land security and seeing no point in pursuing an expansionist policy on the continent, despite personal union Hannover (we can imagine that without it, Britain would be even less concerned about continental matters, as long as no single great power held the whole Low Countries posing a threat to the English coast). Not being a strong land power meant that most power did not see Britain as a top priority threat, except in the colonies, and only Spain had so vital interests in the colonies to defend (well, Portugal too, but Britain was a long standing ally and there was no major conflict for most time).

 

[Socrates]

A problem with France it that she had to focus on continental hegemony, i.e. land power, at the same time she tried to build her overseas empire, that required significant sea power. Pursuing both policies at the same time is in general not easy, especially in the "empire building" phase. And there were a lot of other issues of course. Not to mention the tendecy of everybody else to gang up against the most threating power, that was, from after Westphalia down to the 19th century, France. Being an island, Britain could focus much more on sea power, having much less to worry about land security and seeing no point in pursuing an expansionist policy on the continent, despite personal union Hannover (we can imagine that without it, Britain would be even less concerned about continental matters, as long as no single great power held the whole Low Countries posing a threat to the English coast). Not being a strong land power meant that most power did not see Britain as a top priority threat, except in the colonies, and only Spain had so vital interests in the colonies to defend (well, Portugal too, but Britain was a long standing ally and there was no major conflict for most time).

This. The Channel broke up unions with places (Hannover and the Netherlands), that became cemented with a land border (Scotland). Also, Britain is bound to become a merchant-dominated economy due to its lengthy coastline for its size, which is likely to cause further tensions. It would only take so long before someone in Britain gets in control of London and declares independence from Frame.

There would be lasting cultural effects, however, French would likely become the language of Britain, and, as others have said, the cuisine would migrate across more. Whether or not the British become cheese-eating surrender monkeys is to be determined.

 

[Faeelin]

This. The Channel broke up unions with places (Hannover and the Netherlands), that became cemented with a land border (Scotland). .

Both of these unions ended due to marriages ending and dynastic succession laws, no?