Consequences of Earlier Texas Annexation

So in 1812 there was a rebellion in Texas that was put down by a Royalist Army. But WI instead of the US declaring war on Britain choose instead to declare war of Spain and support the rebels with an idea to annexing the land for America. I'm assuming the US gets clowned for the first year or two but by 1814 puts together a force that could seize Florida and Texas. So with an earlier American Texas could we see an earlier drive into California or into Mexico proper itself?
 
Interesting thought. But what would the impetus be for America to want Texas in 1812 so much that it would got to war with Spain. Not sure that there was any concept of manifest destiny at that time, nor any such thing as the Monroe Doctrine.

In 1812 Texas, you had a few thousand (4-5 thousand) Spanish colonists most of whom were either clergy or soldiers who lived scattered across hundreds of miles at the various missions. Although I think I have read that there were a few (very few) Anglos living in Texas at the time who had ideas of filibustering and taking control of parts of the territory. But these few Anglos were either driven out or killed during the rebellion.

The 1812 rebellion was the percursor to the Mexican revolution that occurred almost a decade later and wasn't simply confined to Texas. However, in crushing the rebellion, Spain pretty much depopulated all of Texas of any Spanish/Mexican people.

And Spain, despite being able to crush the rebellion, had grown very weak, and it was just a matter of time before it lost its grip on Mexico and most of its New World possessions.

So I guess if you could come up with a plausible POD that would make the Texas area much more attractive from a strategic or military standpoint to America, you might see more of an effort to join the rebellion of 1812 and gain possession of the territory.
 
in 1812 it depends on which Spain you go to war with. Napoleon had put his brother on the throne and chased the old King out. The British were helping the old King. Since we did go to war with Great Britain in 1812, I guess that gives us an excuse to take over Texas. If Andrew Jackson had taken an army into Texas he would have won. If he can beat the British in New Orleans he could secure Texas.
 
Interesting thought. But what would the impetus be for America to want Texas in 1812 so much that it would got to war with Spain. Not sure that there was any concept of manifest destiny at that time, nor any such thing as the Monroe Doctrine.

In 1812 Texas, you had a few thousand (4-5 thousand) Spanish colonists most of whom were either clergy or soldiers who lived scattered across hundreds of miles at the various missions. Although I think I have read that there were a few (very few) Anglos living in Texas at the time who had ideas of filibustering and taking control of parts of the territory. But these few Anglos were either driven out or killed during the rebellion.

The 1812 rebellion was the percursor to the Mexican revolution that occurred almost a decade later and wasn't simply confined to Texas. However, in crushing the rebellion, Spain pretty much depopulated all of Texas of any Spanish/Mexican people.

And Spain, despite being able to crush the rebellion, had grown very weak, and it was just a matter of time before it lost its grip on Mexico and most of its New World possessions.

So I guess if you could come up with a plausible POD that would make the Texas area much more attractive from a strategic or military standpoint to America, you might see more of an effort to join the rebellion of 1812 and gain possession of the territory.

The first was three decades in the future, the second about a decade away. But there had been US filibusters since the 1790s, and the warhawks were a strong enough faction.

I agree though, that it's unlikely Spain would be the main target. There's still so much anti-English sentiment in the US at the time, and Canada seemed a better fit for conquest from a cultural standpoint than Texas. It seems to me such an effort to go after TX and FL would likely lead to the US being badly beaten by both Britain and Spain, rather than just Britain as IOTL.

Perhaps that might head off any appeal of enticing US colonists to TX later on. Instead either Spain or an independent Mexico sends more colonists from within MX.
 
Aaron Burr

Aaron Burr was putting together a Filibuster into Texas from Arkansas around this time period (1804-1808, Jefferson's 2nd term). If it wasn't for his trumped treason trial he probably would have mounted it. Burr had bought the land in Arkansas, was getting men together, had the guns; he even had the backing of several prominent men including a Tennessee planter named Andrew Jackson. Perhaps this is a plausible attempt at annexation.
 
Okay so lets say the US got Canada in the ARW, eliminating Canada as a target in 1812. In OTL the hope of getting Florida and possibly Texas was key in driving southern support for the War of 1812. The US had its eye on Florida in OTL so much so that an invasion was planned for early 1813 but was voted down by Congress. Americans had already been trying to move into Texas, and Andrew Jackson had already bought land in Texas.

Now if such an invasion takes place in either Florida or Texas the US probably gets beat at least the first time and maybe the second but by the third time say in 1814 the army would be better prepared and led, like in 1814 in Canada at Chippawa and Lundy's Lane.
 
Okay so lets say the US got Canada in the ARW, eliminating Canada as a target in 1812.

Well now that will create a few butterflies.

[/QUOTE] In OTL the hope of getting Florida and possibly Texas was key in driving southern support for the War of 1812. The US had its eye on Florida in OTL so much so that an invasion was planned for early 1813 but was voted down by Congress. Americans had already been trying to move into Texas, and Andrew Jackson had already bought land in Texas.[/QUOTE]

Wanting Florida, certainly makes sense, being that it shared a border with Georgia, as well as the territories of Mississippi and Alabama. But the area that made up the current state of Texas was extremely remote in terms of US territories and actual population centers. There weren't too many Americans living west of the orignal 13 states in 1810, except for Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, with a few living in outposts such as Saint Louis. Well I guess New Orleans was already a decent size place, but how many of its residents thought of themselves as Americans in 1810. So just saying I am not sure enough people really had any interest in Texas at that time. I read that Aaron Burr leased land in Texas from Spain, but did not know about Andrew Jackson. Are you sure about that?
 
Couldn't find the Jackson link I was looking for but here's a couple of different ones.

William Shaler

I'm pretty sure this is the site where I got the Jackson info but they've changed things around and I can't find it anymore.

Link
 
Well now that will create a few butterflies.
In OTL the hope of getting Florida and possibly Texas was key in driving southern support for the War of 1812. The US had its eye on Florida in OTL so much so that an invasion was planned for early 1813 but was voted down by Congress. Americans had already been trying to move into Texas, and Andrew Jackson had already bought land in Texas.[/QUOTE]

Wanting Florida, certainly makes sense, being that it shared a border with Georgia, as well as the territories of Mississippi and Alabama. But the area that made up the current state of Texas was extremely remote in terms of US territories and actual population centers. There weren't too many Americans living west of the orignal 13 states in 1810, except for Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, with a few living in outposts such as Saint Louis. Well I guess New Orleans was already a decent size place, but how many of its residents thought of themselves as Americans in 1810. So just saying I am not sure enough people really had any interest in Texas at that time. I read that Aaron Burr leased land in Texas from Spain, but did not know about Andrew Jackson. Are you sure about that?[/QUOTE]

110%, Jackson and a few Tennessee planters withdrew support after he was arrested for treason. It is in Nancy Isenberg's book "Burr." It wasn't some big thing, they met a few times; Jackson liked the idea and helped secure funding and manpower. When it came down the pipe that he was under arrest for treason, jackson ever the rational politician simply pulled the plug on something that was most likely a bad idea to begin with. The land he leased was in modern SW Arkansas, not Texas, and he got it not from Spain but as part of one of his many land speculation companies.

I agree with your deduction of Florida. As for New Orleans, I don't think they thought of themselves as Americans or anything but probably Spainiards (or whatever a Spainard in NA called themselves).

Its funny you bring St. Louis because that was one of the few Spanish garrisons outside of OTL SW and California. The Spanish usually went out once a year and rode around to show they owned the place. When it came to the Great Plains no except Indians were there.
 
Top