WI: Haitian Revolution fails?

Then genocide is worked upon the black population of Haiti, and hundreds of thousands of new slaves are brought from Africa, or from other French possessions in the Caribbean.

Of course, the Napoleanic wars are going on, around this time. So it's unknown and unlikely that they'll be able to import slaves in vast quantities. Haiti will end up being a lightly defended, ruined, land. So the British might scoop it up.

Or they might let the French have it back. It's basically all wreckage, with a near psychopathic remainder population.

Or the Spanish might take it and the whole of the thing will eventually become the Dominican Republic.
 
France had Louisiana as a feeder colony for Haiti. If Haiti remains French, there would be no reason for them to sell it to the US. Note that this does not necessarily mean Louisiana(or parts of it) will not become parts of the US.
 

Redhand

Banned
Louisiana might be sold anyways as it was not really all that profitable and Napoleon needed the money. The French had hardly settled it either. Still, a failed revolution simply means the French replace the slave labor lost before the British inevitably take the island as the French Navy will be stuck in blockaded ports. Maybe, the island ends up in US hands down the road depending on how the War of 1812 is resolved. I can't imagine a Jeffersonian Democrat passing up the chance to get the US a profitable new territory.
 
I don't think it would butterfly away the Louisiana Purchase, but it would certainly mean an increase in the slave trade to replace the slaves lost in the failed revolution. In the future, it might make the French more (or, assuming Napoleon goes down like in OTL, less) sympathetic to the Confederate cause.
 
Several slave revolts that were inspired by the Haitian Revolution are butterflied away. Zombie apocalypse movies and voodoo dolls never enter America, and Southern plantation owners may be more sympathetic towards their slaves. OTL there was a huge backlash against the Haitian Revolution in the South. I don't think the French would keep Saint-Domingue in the scenario, as they could not really project power into the Caribbean due to the Napoleonic Wars. I think that even if the Spanish are driven out, the British will just move in. I don't think that the slave trade would increase. The abolition movement was too strong in 1804 Britain, not to mention that (assuming the Haitians did the same stuff they did OTL before defeat) a bunch of revolting slaves just massacred huge numbers of white colonists, which is a huge deterrent to bringing more slaves.
 
Several slave revolts that were inspired by the Haitian Revolution are butterflied away. Zombie apocalypse movies and voodoo dolls never enter America, and Southern plantation owners may be more sympathetic towards their slaves. OTL there was a huge backlash against the Haitian Revolution in the South. I don't think the French would keep Saint-Domingue in the scenario, as they could not really project power into the Caribbean due to the Napoleonic Wars. I think that even if the Spanish are driven out, the British will just move in.

Maybe it returns to Spain after the war
 
Then genocide is worked upon the black population of Haiti, and hundreds of thousands of new slaves are brought from Africa, or from other French possessions in the Caribbean.
Firt's it's assuming the Haitian Revolution fail by outright conquest, something that Revolutionary France would be unable to press on.
Georges Biassou ongoing fight against Toussaint Louverture could be a more plausible reason for that, making the latter more disposed to lower his terms (rather than blunt autonomy).

Or Napoléon not allowing the re-establishment of slavery in territories where it wasn't applied (Haiti not being concerned) : with Louverture in France and Pétion without a good sparking cause, it's possible that the Saint Domingue expedition being "victorious" (as in, military victorious, but with a very troubled country).

Rather than repression against blacks themselves, the metissed and free black population is going to be the main focus of the repression.

Furthermore, I don't think the government will side entierly with colons : everytime it get involved before, it tried to concily free black and metissed interests with white population. Of course, crushing in blood the very base of the revolt would be an obvious consequence, but that's not the former slaves that are going to be the most targeted group.

Bringing new slaves, while Royal Navy basically own Atlantic would be at best wishful thinking.
 
I may be a bit off on my TL but more troops for Napoleon's European campaigns? His sister Pauline's husband lives? He died of yellow fever. Napoleon keeps whatever small honor he may have had rather than selling it cheap in seizing L'Overture? A more prosperous French economy? Haiti was tremendously profitable.
 
I may be a bit off on my TL but more troops for Napoleon's European campaigns? His sister Pauline's husband lives? He died of yellow fever. Napoleon keeps whatever small honor he may have had rather than selling it cheap in seizing L'Overture? A more prosperous French economy? Haiti was tremendously profitable.

Except for the part where Britain has a superior navy
 
I may be a bit off on my TL but more troops for Napoleon's European campaigns? His sister Pauline's husband lives? He died of yellow fever. Napoleon keeps whatever small honor he may have had rather than selling it cheap in seizing L'Overture? A more prosperous French economy? Haiti was tremendously profitable.

You can't really profit off of Haiti when Britain blocks all attempts to send money home and half of the sugar plantations are burned to the ground.
 
Assuming Haiti remains a sort of no man's land until after the Napoleonic Wars are settled, and Napoleon bundelled off to final exile, most likely it remains French. Of course by this time the slave trade is in the process of being suppressed by the RN so getting a large number of slaves to Haiti is problematic at best.

I can see southerners wanting to acquire Haiti as a territory to add to slave states eventually, and the north opposing it. You might see a weak Haiti being the object of southern "filibusters" during the 1840s or 1850s. I don't see the USA wanting to acquire Haiti after the Civil War, no desire to acquire a large population of non-whites (acquisition of the Dominican Republic was turned down for that reason..0.
 
Well if it fails then the french would have to wipe out every black person on the island. Napoleon gave orders to Leclerc to kill all blacks over the age of 8. Because these newly freed slaves will remeber freedom and will continue to resist. My guess mass genocide of blacks and new slaves ariving on the island.
 
Well if it fails then the french would have to wipe out every black person on the island. Napoleon gave orders to Leclerc to kill all blacks over the age of 8. Because these newly freed slaves will remeber freedom and will continue to resist.

Never heard or read that. Would you mind giving me a source?

I didn't found anything there, for exemple.

My guess mass genocide of blacks and new slaves ariving on the island.
With RN in Atlantic, it's not going to happen. That would be another reason to not have mass killings : there wouldn't be any way to replace slaves.
 
Never heard or read that. Would you mind giving me a source?

I didn't found anything there, for exemple.


With RN in Atlantic, it's not going to happen. That would be another reason to not have mass killings : there wouldn't be any way to replace slaves.

I read in on a book on Haiti called "Written in Blood: The Story of the Haitian People 1492-1995". In that book it gives the brutal details of how french troops used to try beat the rebels. Rochambeau is a villan in haitian history. Listening to my family describe him is like comparing him to Hitler and Stalin. He was brutal in his tactics and would kill black prisoners for the hell of it. At least he fought an adversary that was more brutal then he was in Dessalines.

On your second point if they try not to genocide the blacks they will never control the island. It will become mini afghanistan. The blacks are free and know what freedom is. It will be dificult to just reinslave them. Also they have alot of experinced fighters. The phase that many people are familiar with the Haitian revolution is the 1801-1804. Remeber the revolt started in 1791. The black rebels fought and defeated a English experditionary force led by Maitland. Many defected against the Spanish and took the Spanish eastern part of the island. And also they fought the french as well as the mini civil war against the mullatoes. In all many of the fighters were seasoned veterans from 10 years of fighting. Even if they kill the leadership there will still be armed resistance and a partisan war would last for a very long time. So if they do not go through ethnic cleansing they will never control the island. I doubt Nappy and pals would have patience with this.
 
I read in on a book on Haiti called "Written in Blood: The Story of the Haitian People 1492-1995". In that book it gives the brutal details of how french troops used to try beat the rebels.
But could you give it at least the part where it mention this, and if possible from which this indication came from?
As I said, it's no part of the secret instruction (they go as far than enforcing slavery re-establishment, so I don't think they would have made manners about mass killing), or the official ones of course.

To be honest, I found this nowhere else, so I hope you'd understand me there : it must have been seen or accounted somewhere in contemporaries documents, but which ones?

On your second point if they try not to genocide the blacks they will never control the island. It will become mini afghanistan. The blacks are free and know what freedom is. It will be dificult to just reinslave them.
I agree, it's why I think they would go first for their leadership, that was mainly metissed or free blacks (as in, free before the Revolution), rather than former slaves.
Without these (and that would be clearly a brutal slaughter), re-establishment of slavery would be certainly more easy, if they don't eventually try some half-measured remplacement, as a compensated slavery in facts.

So if they do not go through ethnic cleansing they will never control the island. I doubt Nappy and pals would have patience with this.
Thing is, they can't do that without loosing the alliance, even if it was a plan in first place (it's not like the brief reconquest launched an immediate genocide).
Killing all slaves, when you can't bring other slaves would be insanely stupid. It would defeat the purpose of taking back the island, and make it more costly with absolutly 0 benefit.

Giving Napoleon personality, it's more probably that if they are in such situation they can't do shit about it safe genocide, they would just call it a quit and racket independence as IOTL.
 
How are we qualifying failure here? Do we mean a restoration of slavery, or just continued French rule after 1803?

The former would be tough, though perhaps not impossible. France did manage to re-establish slavery on Guadeloupe after it had been abolished, but doing the same on Saint-Domingue, a much larger, more populous place, would be very difficult.

The latter on the other hand could have been achieved pretty easily: Napoleon just needed to leave Toussaint L'Ouverture in place as the de facto authority in Saint-Domingue. Under Toussaint, it could have remained an economically functional colony - he introduced a forced-labor system in which the ex-slaves were paid, but otherwise largely performed the same tasks as before. My guess is that the UK would have tried to take over the colony at some point after 1803, although it would have had to fight a difficult war of conquest to do so. Even if conquered, it probably would have been returned to France after the war. At some point though, white rule is probably going to be restored, and that could lead to renewed tensions.
 
Last edited:
You can't really profit off of Haiti when Britain blocks all attempts to send money home and half of the sugar plantations are burned to the ground.

Was Haiti not operating fully as a colony producing sugar during this time period? Did large numbers of French troops under the command of Napoleon's own brother in law not go to unsuccessfully combat the rebellious slaves? Did Napoleon not find it necessary to seize L'Overture by use of the most vile deception?

Also note that L'Overture did battle the British at one point and severely drubbed them. The British officers took him aboard ship and paid him high compliments.

This is OTL. The RN Navy prevented none of it. To say that these things were impossible is to ignore OTL for an ATL. But it has been a long time since I read about this. What was the actual TL?
 
Last edited:
Was Haiti not operating fully as a colony producing sugar during this time period? Did large numbers of French troops under the command of Napoleon's own brother in law not go to unsuccessfully combat the rebellious slaves? Did Napoleon not find it necessary to seize L'Overture by use of the most vile deception?

This is OTL. The RN Navy prevented none of it.

Leclerc's expedition took place in 1802-03, while the Peace of Amiens was in effect, so the British were not at war with France at this time.
 
Leclerc's expedition took place in 1802-03, while the Peace of Amiens was in effect, so the British were not at war with France at this time.

Ok, fair enough. I was just remembering details from a book from long ago. Leclerc actually died in late 1802. War broke out with Britain in May of 1803 after which the RN did extablish an effective blockade.

The Haitian revolution is an incredibly heroic tale. No need for AH. The original is good enough.
 
Top