The French monarchy is restored in 1873

[futurist]

What if Henri, Count of Chambord would have died at least a decade earlier that he did in real life (he died in 1883 in real life) and thus the French monarchy would have been restored in 1873 as a result of the Orleanists (who'd be the new heirs after Henri's death) being more willing to compromise than Henri was?

Would French republicans try to abolish the French monarchy if/after they will gain political power?

What role would the French monarchy play in World War I if such a war occurs in this TL?

If WWII still has the same course as in our TL (extremely unlikely due to the butterfly effect), does cooperating with the Germans discredit the French monarchy and result in France becoming a republic after the war?

Would the Muslims in Algeria and in the French Empire have been even more demanding of decolonization if remaining under French rule would have meant being ruled by a Christian monarch?

Any thoughts on all of this?

[futurist]

Also, if France has a Catholic monarch, is secularism (laicite) going to be as potent of a political force in France in the late 19th and 20th centuries?

[steve59]

   Don't know a lot about the circumstances here but the Orleanists are generally considered more liberal than the 'traditional' Bourbons of which their an off-shoot so the changes of a restoration would seem to be higher. There are likely to be tensions between royalists/Catholics and republicans/secularists but how bad I don't know.

   Presuming WWI occurs similarly to OTL the monarch would seek to rally the nation but you could see a more divided nation which might be a bit weaker as a result. If France suffers as badly as OTL even if still on the winning side you could see the issue of the monarchy being questioned in the 1920's and possibly even some revolution then. It all depends as to whether it can set down secure roots as since 1815 neither Bourbons nor Bonaparte's have been able to really do that.  In the longer term I suspect France would be a republic again but there's no real way of knowing.  A successful monarch might manage to seal over some of the cracks in French society better than the republicans and even result in a significantly better French performance in WWI.  A lot depends on the details of how things develop.

  If the state is clearly Catholic, which it tended to be under the Bourbons - not sure what the stance of the Orleanists was and whether it might change - then the Muslim elements of the empire are likely to be less happy.  Unless because its religious its more tolerant of other religions than a more secular republican France might be, as that could be seen as more threatening to many conservative elements in Muslim and other colonial communities.

[mcnutt]

Could the King use his influence to keep France in the war in 1940?

[steve59]

Nov 21, 2018 23:44:36 GMT mcnutt said:

Could the King use his influence to keep France in the war in 1940?

  That's a possibility, although it would depend on the king and state of the country.  France fighting on from N Africa and withdrawing what forces it could to there might well drastically change the war.  Libya could possibly fall fairly quickly, ending the conflict in N Africa but does Germany still go for Russia in 1941 or concentrate on finishing off the allies?  The French fleet and colonial possessions would make the naval war and movement of forces somewhat easier while does Japan still try and occupy FIC?  If not the Pacific war may not happen, at least on the same timescale.

[futurist]

Nov 21, 2018 10:23:33 GMT steve59 said:

   1. Don't know a lot about the circumstances here but the Orleanists are generally considered more liberal than the 'traditional' Bourbons of which their an off-shoot so the changes of a restoration would seem to be higher. There are likely to be tensions between royalists/Catholics and republicans/secularists but how bad I don't know.

   2. Presuming WWI occurs similarly to OTL the monarch would seek to rally the nation but you could see a more divided nation which might be a bit weaker as a result. If France suffers as badly as OTL even if still on the winning side you could see the issue of the monarchy being questioned in the 1920's and possibly even some revolution then. It all depends as to whether it can set down secure roots as since 1815 neither Bourbons nor Bonaparte's have been able to really do that.  In the longer term I suspect France would be a republic again but there's no real way of knowing.  A successful monarch might manage to seal over some of the cracks in French society better than the republicans and even result in a significantly better French performance in WWI.  A lot depends on the details of how things develop.

  3. If the state is clearly Catholic, which it tended to be under the Bourbons - not sure what the stance of the Orleanists was and whether it might change - then the Muslim elements of the empire are likely to be less happy.  Unless because its religious its more tolerant of other religions than a more secular republican France might be, as that could be seen as more threatening to many conservative elements in Muslim and other colonial communities.

1. Agreed with all of this. Also, personally, I would think that, as a British-style constitutional monarch, the Orleanist King of France is going to be neutral in internal French disputes such as the Catholic vs. secular rivalry. Of course, what is true for the King of France isn't necessarily going to be true for his royalist followers.

2. I don't think that a victorious France--even an extremely weakened one--would have opted for revolution after the end of World War I. After all, unlike the Bourbons and the Bonapartes, the Orleanists would probably be content to remain figureheads. Of course, this could change if there is a WWII-style war in this TL (unlikely due to the butterfly effect, but not completely impossible) and France is overrun by the Germans. In such a scenario, the Orleanist King of France (whomever he will be in this TL; after all, there are butterflies) might take the role that Petain took in 1940 in real life and be the Nazis' man in France. Of course, if this happens, the French monarchy is almost certainly going to be abolished at the end of the war if the Allies still win this war.

Hopefully France is lucky in this TL and avoids a WWII-style war to begin with, though.

3. I suspect that the Orleanists would support whatever the French politicians decided to support in regards to the Catholicism vs. secularism debate. I don't know if Muslims would have viewed a secular France as being more threatening than a Catholic France, though. After all, a secular France could be perceived as being one which doesn't privilege its Catholic inhabitants--though of course a lot will depend on the attitude of France towards Islam. If France is openly Catholic, though, then I wonder if France's Muslims are going to demand an exception from Army service like Central Asians initially got from Russia during World War I. I mean, I doubt it since the Muslims in Britain's Empire were forced to fight in World War I and Britain had a Christian monarchy during this time. That said, though, it shouldn't be viewed as being completely out of the question.

[steve59]

Nov 24, 2018 5:30:15 GMT futurist said:

Nov 21, 2018 10:23:33 GMT steve59 said:

   1. Don't know a lot about the circumstances here but the Orleanists are generally considered more liberal than the 'traditional' Bourbons of which their an off-shoot so the changes of a restoration would seem to be higher. There are likely to be tensions between royalists/Catholics and republicans/secularists but how bad I don't know.

   2. Presuming WWI occurs similarly to OTL the monarch would seek to rally the nation but you could see a more divided nation which might be a bit weaker as a result. If France suffers as badly as OTL even if still on the winning side you could see the issue of the monarchy being questioned in the 1920's and possibly even some revolution then. It all depends as to whether it can set down secure roots as since 1815 neither Bourbons nor Bonaparte's have been able to really do that.  In the longer term I suspect France would be a republic again but there's no real way of knowing.  A successful monarch might manage to seal over some of the cracks in French society better than the republicans and even result in a significantly better French performance in WWI.  A lot depends on the details of how things develop.

  3. If the state is clearly Catholic, which it tended to be under the Bourbons - not sure what the stance of the Orleanists was and whether it might change - then the Muslim elements of the empire are likely to be less happy.  Unless because its religious its more tolerant of other religions than a more secular republican France might be, as that could be seen as more threatening to many conservative elements in Muslim and other colonial communities.

1. Agreed with all of this. Also, personally, I would think that, as a British-style constitutional monarch, the Orleanist King of France is going to be neutral in internal French disputes such as the Catholic vs. secular rivalry. Of course, what is true for the King of France isn't necessarily going to be true for his royalist followers.

2. I don't think that a victorious France--even an extremely weakened one--would have opted for revolution after the end of World War I. After all, unlike the Bourbons and the Bonapartes, the Orleanists would probably be content to remain figureheads. Of course, this could change if there is a WWII-style war in this TL (unlikely due to the butterfly effect, but not completely impossible) and France is overrun by the Germans. In such a scenario, the Orleanist King of France (whomever he will be in this TL; after all, there are butterflies) might take the role that Petain took in 1940 in real life and be the Nazis' man in France. Of course, if this happens, the French monarchy is almost certainly going to be abolished at the end of the war if the Allies still win this war.

Hopefully France is lucky in this TL and avoids a WWII-style war to begin with, though.

3. I suspect that the Orleanists would support whatever the French politicians decided to support in regards to the Catholicism vs. secularism debate. I don't know if Muslims would have viewed a secular France as being more threatening than a Catholic France, though. After all, a secular France could be perceived as being one which doesn't privilege its Catholic inhabitants--though of course a lot will depend on the attitude of France towards Islam. If France is openly Catholic, though, then I wonder if France's Muslims are going to demand an exception from Army service like Central Asians initially got from Russia during World War I. I mean, I doubt it since the Muslims in Britain's Empire were forced to fight in World War I and Britain had a Christian monarchy during this time. That said, though, it shouldn't be viewed as being completely out of the question.

2)  I was thinking less of a revolution than possibly a prolonged political campaign for the constitutional abolition of the monarchy.  Not saying it would happen but if France went through an ordeal like OTL and the monarchy had been associated with the war effort it could either gain or lose public support.  Thinking possibly of the referendum in Italy after WWII that deposed the dynasty there.  Suspect that in the short run at least its more likely to strength the monarchy but it might go the other way.

  In terms of WWII a lot would depend, presuming things went as OTL, on what the monarch does.  The Belgium king lost a lot of support in his country for staying under German occupation while others, such as the Norwegian and Dutch stayed popular.  [On the other hand the Danish monarch also stayed in Denmark during the occupation but was more clearly oppose to the Nazis].  If a French monarch stays in France and especially if he's involved in any degree with teh Vichy government his position and likely that of the dynasty could be very weak after liberation.  However if he fled to N Africa to fight on its likely a collaborationist regime would be far less popular and most of the French colonial forces would rally to the Free French, which in this case would have the king as the titular head.  In that case, while communists and hard line socialists would still be hostile the bulk of the population is likely to support the dynasty.

3)  It would depend on the nature of the religious identity.  For instance Britain was formally Anglican but with a number of other Christian groups and while some were persecuted to a degree for historical reasons, most noticeable Catholics, it was tolerant of other religions in the empire.  It actually restricted, at least under EIC rule, Christian attempts to convert people to Christianity in India.  Similarly the Indian army was always a volenteer force under British rule and the religions of it troops, whether Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Buddhist or whatever was generally carefully respected.

  With France it might be different, especially if a Catholic monarchy/establishment sought to strengthen its position not only in France but also overseas, by conversions, bias towards such converts or local Christians and steps like that.  However if reasonably tolerant then it might seem a better option, as another 'religion of the book' to many Muslims than a purely secular government that viewed all religions with distrust/disbelief.  Not saying that would be the case and the secular/Catholic conflict inside France seems to have been bitter at times at least but its a possibility, especially with an Orleanist monarchy.

  Steve