Nouvelle France

Here is my very long POD for a successful New France. I tried to use as many primary documents as possible instead of relying on secondary sources including newspapers, treaties, censuses and other documents that I found at my university library. I tried to avoid using basic textbooks or the internet as authoritative sources (especially wikipedia which is not a good source for history). I'll be posting this in seperate parts since it is long.

EARLY HISTORY

In 1541 when Cartier was on his third trip to the New World he was not as warmly greeted by the Iroqouis as he had been on his previous voyages. He had ruined relations with the local Iroquois by kidnapping their chief Donnacona and taking him and his sons back to France on his second voyage. This led to a winter where Cartier's group of 300 men was constantly under siege by the Iroquois. Meanwhile, the Francis I had sent five ships carrying hundreds of colonists under the command of Jean-François de la Rocquer de Roberval to meet up with Cartier in 1542 and set up the first colony at Charlesbourg Royal (outside of Quebec). However, Cartier abandoned them and returned to France instead, and the colony failed basically having to abandon the New World. This stalled French settlement for another century.

So what if the settlement had not failed because Cartier had not kidnapped Donnacona? Instead Cartier guided the settlers and stayed behind with his men. The settlement was to have over 1,000 people including men and women. This settlement would have led to the French establishing other colonies including one on Île Saint-Jean (Prince Edward Island), where the French had noted that there were plentiful birds to be eaten and the land was very fertile making it an optimal place for colonisation. A colony could have been founded here by Breton and Basques, who already spent half of their year fishing cod in the grand banks south of Newfoundland. By 1600 I estimate that there can be around 15,000 French in settlements along the St. Lawrence River and in the Maritimes as well as Newfoundland, in addition there will probably be another few thousand Métis and an equal number of converted Iroquois under French protection. I arrived at this number by estimating the rate of natural increase of the French in America in the mid-17th century (much higher than in France) and by adding on average 100 permanent settlers each year.

At the dawn of the 17th century, the French in OTL established settlements in Acadia, including one in Sainte-Croix (Maine) and at Port Royal in Acadia in 1604/1605. Initially I estimate these areas will be settled earlier with perhaps 1,000 colonists and they will increase with contact with the already established areas along the St. Lawrence making them much more viable than they were in the beginning. Not having been as isolated as they were settlement will proceed faster. So by 1630 there are about 45,000 French in North America. In this TL I have the French having more contact with the Iroquois and therefore using boiled white birch leaves as a cure for scurvy. Cartier learned of this but left too early so in this TL he stays on to guide Robertval's group and this becomes a common cure reducing the death rate of early colonists.

After 1620 there was a huge demand for beaver pelts in Europe will bring the population to increase with many men seeking fortune going to New France. In OTL many Frenchmen arrived in New France but did not stay since after 1632 the French Crown prohibited the establishment of new seigneuries west of the Montréal. The reason being that the settlements were minuscule and white settlement could not be pushed further west and south since they crown did not want to have to defend all of these settlers. Instead the crown pushed for European-village style settlements, but these proved unpopular in this where despite the dangers settlers preferred large farms with detached homes. So, with a population of 40,000 instead of 400 the crown will probably keep granting seigneuries since the colonists can readilly defend themselves. This was actually the plan of Intendant Jean Talon at the time. So with the increase in the demand for beaver pelts the French would have already be as far south as Detroit by 1650. However, slowly hunting grounds will be taken over by agriculture, pushing hunting further south and basically this will be a cycle.

With the arrival of the English and Dutch in North America, Cardinal Richelieu and Louis XIV (at least in the early part of his reign) did in OTL take an interest in the North American colonies and wanted them to grow. This led to the formation of the Compagnie des Cent-Associés. This company was granted a monopoly on trade and had to pay for the passage of 160 settlers every year for twenty-five years. In this TL I have this company being entrusted with the great lakes region instead of the St. Lawrence valley since that area is already settled. In OTL it was hard to get many French offciers to stay in this area permanently because the seigneuries dried up and the poor climate and native attacks greatly hurt the reputation of the colony. However, by this time New France is not as remote or unsafe as it was in OTL. Plus with the fertile lands of modern Michigan and Southern Ontario they have more incentive to stay. Also land is being given to the coureurs des bois whom in OTL were not allowed to settle these areas permanently even though many petitioned the crown do be able to. In OTL 2/3 of them returned to France. Here they would have been likely to remain on the land. Also with Louis XIV having created the Filles du Roi, where young women had their passage sponsored to America, I estimate the European population would have reached 120,000 by 1680. Again this takes into account not much more net immigration than New France, but is based on most of the soldiers and coureurs des bois remaining in the Americas and a few more immigrating. This population growth is mostly based on natural increase. By that time Acadia has around 25,000 settlers and they are living much the way the Acadians lived using European-style village settlements instead of large seigneuries as in Canada. By the time of the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713 there would have been over 50,000 French in Acadie, again taking into account the high birthrate of the time. So instead of the British taking Acadia, in this TL they simply acquire a bit of Maine, Newfoundland and have their settlements on Hudson Bay returned.
 
SETTLEMENT OF LOUISIANA

By the late 17th century, French settlement would be pushing further south along the Mississippi. The reason for this is by the late 17th century there was a glut of beaver fur on the market and much of it had become of poorer quality. The further south you go, the worse the quality of the beaver pelts because the fur is not as thick in warmer areas. So the coureurs de bois in OTL simply become seigneurs and common settlers along the Mississippi and the La Belle (Ohio). This region was called Illinois by the French and there were around 1,000 French in Illinois by 1763 but very few were engaged in agriculture (with the exception of those around Sainte-Geneviève, in moder MO).

The fur trade would have continued, but north of the great lakes, where forts such as Sault Saint-Marie. The settlement further south would have La Salle explore claim the mouth of the Mississippi for the French and name the region Louisiana (Louisianne) much as in OTL. As in OTL the settlement of this region will be spurred by the Canadians, but by 1710 there is a population of over 270,000 Europeans in New France (Canada, Acadia and Illinois). This means that there will be far more settlers to entice into the basin of the Mississippi.

Under Pierre Le Moyne d'Iberville (a Canadian) settlements would have been built along the lower Mississippi and by 1720 there would be 15,000 Europeans and 40,000 African slaves in this region. A plantation economy based on the cultivation of sugar, tobacco, indigo and rice would develop in the area and attract more settlers than in OTL. I have many more French being attracted to immigrate here than in OTL, because with a larger population it is not as unsafe or remote in the popular psyche. In OTL very few French were attracted to Louisiana because it was so remote and had a poor reputation. However, with more people already there, I estimate that at this time around 1,000 French can settle Louisianne annually. Coupled with the high rate of natural increase at this time, this would increse the population greatly, plus most settlers would come from the north (Canada and Illinois). In New France by the early 18th century the average family had around 8 children and the mortality rate was much lower than in France, this led to the population doubling every 25 years. In all that is why it is so remarkable that there were 65,000 French in New France in 1759 even though throughout history only 5,000 permament settlers had remained.

Settlement along both banks of the Mississippi and the La Belle rivers would have increased in the early parts of the 18th century due to the expansion of the population. Again seigneuries continue being granted and this stimulates a a pattern of settlement unique to French North America. Settlement in New France does vary by region in this TL much as it did in OTL. In Louisiana, the settlement pattern would be one where large plantations dependent on slave labour due to the labour-intensive crops. In Illinois there are remote settlements where wheat and other staple crops are grown. Here the early settlement pattern would mirror those of Fort de Chartres, St. Genevieve and Kaskaskia from OTL where the colonists would created European-style villages with farmed land existing outside of the fortifications. This is mainly to protect from themselves from hostile attacts from natives. In these fronteir settlements, the seigneur is in command and they share more resemblances to the feudal system of old Europe than the seigneuries in Canada.

In Acadia too communal land tenure was prevalent with a strong village communities existing especially around the Baie des François (Bay of Fundy) where maintenance of the dykes essential for farming was a communal event. Also the threat from the English along the coast during wartime means that the people would have been able to take refuge in fortresses like Louisbourg on Île-Royale (Cape Breton Island), that in this ATL would be much more prevalent (albeit on a smaller scale). This coupled with a much larger population would have made conquering Acadia a much more difficult task than when the British did it in 1713 (there were only 2,000 Acadians in OTL then).

Beginning in the early 1700s, French settlement would have begun slowly pushing east and heading for an eventual collision with the British. At the confluence of the Mississippi, Missouri and La Belle (Ohio) Rivers tobacco cultivation begins and Saint-Germain (Paducah) is founded. Within twenty years the area south of the Ohio is flooded with settlers due the government partitioning this area off into seigneuries and the increase of the price of tobacco as well as its popularity in Europe during this period. After the 1720s the French begin encouraging Catholic Germans and Swiss to settle in Louisiana as they did in OTL. The German-speakers were eager settlers and in OTL only the Spanish take over in 1765 really stopped more from coming in. In this period religion was seen as a far more important to a king than language (note the abundance of Catholic Irish and Scots serving the French and Spanish crowns and French Huguenots serving the British and Dutch). In this ATL they number 30,000 by 1740 (out of 1,180,000 Europeans). These settlers helped would have helped push French settlement as far east as Fort Toulouse (Wetumpka, AL). By the time of the war of Austrian Succession and the Seven Years War the French in North America are in a much better position to face the British. They have more settlers than the British due to a higher birth-rate and longer settlement. By 1760 the French in North America number nearly 2 million. Because the area east of the Mississippi (modern OH, TN, KY, eastern PA, eastern NY, IN, IL, etc.) has been densely settled, these conflicts are going to resemble more European ones, where small pieces of territory rather than large areas of land only inhabited by natives are exchanged after peace treaties. Also France is able to defend these areas much better especially with the large fortress-villages on the frontier. Although the British do well after the 1763 they don't do as well in this ATL. Here they gain small strips of land along the frontier and they gain Fort Niagara, everything East of the Ohio River in Virginia and the Chattahoochee in Georgia. For the most part however, the Appalachians remain the border between the British and French colonies. British settlement has not yet reached these areas so the French have the upper hand. Also in this TL the French captured many of the small British settlements in Newfoundland, however the island is returned to the British. Although the French captured most of the forts along Hudson's Bay, this area was also returned to the British under the peace treaty in this TL.
 
THE FRENCH REVOLUTION

In this ATL there is no American Revolution because the British Colonists need Great Britain and especially the Royal Navy to protect them from French who by 1789 number nearly 4 million (10% are African slaves). Also during the Seven Years War the French had crossed into British territory and attacked many settlements are the sparsely populated frontier regions of the British colonies. Also there there is no Quebec Act which was a major grievance for the British settlers against the crown, as well there is no proclamation line since in effect that is the border. So there is more compromise and basically the American Revolution is butterflied away.

However, the French Revolution happens right on schedule in 1789. Mainly because of the poor harvests in France as well as the crown being bankrupt still forces Louis XVI to convene the States General. Also the enlightenment still takes place in France putting many radicals into power after 1789. Although it may seem that this strong New France would make the crown much wealthier, in reality it would not. Mostly because it is a huge costly enterprise that unfortunately does not generate much profit. Small proxy wars with the natives, wars with the British, large fortifications like Louisbourg make New France just as profitable for the French as the thirteen British colonies were for the British at the time, that is less profitable than a single island in the West Indies. So Louis XVI convenes the States-General on schedule and the chaos ensues in France.

In New France the events are watched with great suspicion by the people. I decided to go look at French-speaking and English-speaking media from Quebec and Montreal around this time to see what was said about the revolution. Early on the English-speakers and indeed the English parliament praised the revolution as perhaps leading to a more enlightened rule but soon turned critical. In the French-speaking newspapers the attitude is one of repugnance right from the beginning. The people of New France were generally very wary of the calling of assemblies because they knew that it meant one thing only: an increase in taxes. Also many were very critical of the offences against the king and the clergy. The people of New France in my ATL will be much like those of Quebec at the time. That is only around 30% will be able to read (compared to 70% in France and over 95% in British North America), in Acadia illiteracy was almost 100% with only the church and officials being literate. This means that many people got their news from the church which was highly critical of the events in France. Also the seigneurs were critical as well. Sympathy for the peasants in France was really non-existent because most of the people in New France were actually quite prosperous because of the abundance of land. In OTL there were agents sent out from revolutionary France to Quebec but they had little success in fomenting a revolt against the British and people as was hoped. The people of New France here will be staunchly Catholic and generally loyal to the king that many colonists saw as almost mythical (up until the conquest in OTL many thought the king would never abandon his subjects to the British heretics). Also the Roman Catholic Church will increase its power over the people of New France just as it did after 1791 when it saw what was happening in France.

The events in France were watched closely, however the news was late reaching most parts of New France because of the great distance. In 1790 the French National Assembly demanded that the sovereign councils of French North America be disolved and that the civil constitution of the clergy be implemented. The governors and intendants of the four provinces (Acadie, Canada, Illinois and Louisianne) refused orders to resign from their posts since the orders were not from the king himself. In the summer of 1791 when New France was asked to sent representatives to the Legislative Assembly in Paris, however none were sent. Instead the Sovereign Council of Quebec declared that that the National Assembly did not have any authority in New France. The other three provinces followed suit. New France was now in open rebellion against the National Assembly. However all of the members of the government declared their loyalty to King Louis XVI. The Bishop of Quebec also issued a statement condemning the actions against the clergy in France and especially the Civil Constitution for the Clergy.

Throughout 1792 the news of the atrocities in France were spread throughout the New France by members of the clergy. The treatment of the clergy was especially abhorrent to the society in New France where in most settlements the parish priest was the highest authority. Agents of the revolutionary government as well as some sympathisers were put on trial and imprisoned. Also a small number of émigrés begin arriving from France and swayed the public even more against the revolutionary government. By March of 1793 news reached Quebec that the king had been executed. In OTL this made front news headlines in the newspapers of Quebec constantly condemned this act. The Sovereign Councils declared the Dauphin King Louis XVII. The new government in France attempted to impose authority on the rebellious colony but was blocked by the Royal Navy. In May of 1793 the Sovereign Council began to organise a regency council to be the unified government of New France, each of the four councils sent representatives to the regency council in Quebec. Beginning in 1792, the government of New France had maintained secret contacts with the government of Great Britain through proxies in Philadelphia and Boston. The British had agreed that they would protect New France from the French government in return for being able to trade openly with New France. Meanwhile, the Count of Provence sent emissaries to New France in May of 1793 in his capacity as regent praising the loyalty of King's American subjects.

Meanwhile the Sovereign Council of Louisiana was afraid of the slave revolt in Saint Domingue spreading and along with the Council of Illinois 30,000 troops were sent to the island with the assistance of the British and Spanish to quell the revolt. Unlike in OTL, the revolt is actually successfully suppressed because there are many more British troops including colonials from British North America intent on supressing a slave revolt and in addition reinforcements from France and Poland are kept out. The slave revolt is brutally crushed by 1794 and many of the slaves from the island as well as free persons of colour are brought to Louisiana to work on the booming cotton plantations. Saint-Domingue is put under the temporary authority of the Sovereign of Louisiana. Guadeloupe, Martinique and Cayenne are occupied the following year by the small but growing French Royalist Navy.

By the early 1790s a slow stream of émigrés began to trickle into New France with many settling in Québec and New Orleans, among them the Duke of Orléans. There they filled the populace with stories of the horrors in France and the general anarchy and especially the treatment of the church. However it was after 1795 that the royalist trickle turned into a flood with 10,000 émigrés arriving in New France. In 1796 after fleeing Verona Louis XVIII arrived in Québec with other members of the royal family and members of the court. The King was crowned King of France and Navarre in a solemn ceremony at Notre Dame Cathedral in May of 1797 amid jubilation of the city's 80,000 inhabitants. The crown itself was made from gold donated by many of the wealthy of New France. The king himself took up residence in the Intendant's Palace which was greatly expanded and became known as "Le Palais Royal". The city began to change greatly as it was now the capital of the Kingdom of France. Foreign ambassadors whom regarded Louis XVIII as legitmate ruler of France arrived city transforming the small provincial town into a cosmopolitan city.

Economically the 1790s would have been a boom time for the economy of New France. The liberalisation of trade meant that New France could trade freely with all friendly nations. Also, the protection of French industry was no longer a factor and industrialisation commenced. Shipbuilding in Baie François, Acadia became a major economic activity as well as the silk industry in Louisiana. However, the major boost to the economy after 1790 was cotton. The insatiable appetite for cotton in Liverpool, England made it so that the amount of cotton produced rose from 200,000 livres (pounds) in 1790 to more than 75 million livres by 1810. This increased the appetite for slaves greatly and with British help, the French settlements in Senegal were captured and occupied in 1800. However, the British put pressure on the French to abolish the slave trade and in 1809 Louis XVIII concluded a treaty with the British agreeing to abolish the trade.

In OTL the British colonists, later American citizens kept pushing west but in this TL they are kept east of the Appalachian Mountains and remain British subjects. Some may ask if it is plausible that they wouldn't begin settling into the French lands. However, here I had the French begin settling the land immeadiately east of the Appalachians. By the late 18th century most of this land has all been subdivided into seigneuries. Unlike what happened in Texas though the British-Americans are not going to come flooding in because the land is occupied for the most part, and secondly for the same reason they did not flood Quebec after the conquest because of the seigneurial system, even the loyalist who wanted farms chose to settle west of Montreal (eventually creating Upper Canada). The British-Americans could not understand the seigneurial system and saw settling on a seigneur's land as a form of feudal servitude. Also, New France was governed by the Coutumes de Paris (Paris civil law), many of these laws were seen as peculiar to the British (especially the inheritance laws). Which is why in post-conquest Quebec the few British who arrived were mainly merchants that went to Montreal. In this TL there will be British-Americans going to New France after 1792, but they will be mostly merchants who see an opportunity to make money particularly since New France lacked a merchant class. Also the industries in New France are not protected from competing with British industry as in the British colonies, this means that those with capital will often chose to set up industries in Montreal, Quebec, etc. Also, in this TL the British Americans are simply going to have to start settling in other British colonies.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Very, very good. This is the kind of detailed, well thought out timeline I enjoy reading.

THe only major problem I see is your contention that the French Revolution would still take place as it did IOTL. One of the main reasons the French government was backrupt in 1788 was because of their funding of the American Revolution, which did not take place ITTL.

Also, with well-established colonies in the New World, could they not serve as a "steam valve" where disaffected young men could go if they were not happy with the way things were in France? Many historians contend that British colonies served such a need for the British, which is why they escaped the revolutionary chaos that swept France in 1789, 1830 and 1848.
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
Really very good, well reasoned and with just about all eventualities covered. Also clearly written.

The Mississippi Bubble did not happen here, yes? However, wasn't it a major cause of the French government's bankruptcy, or at least a big contributor? Also, wasn't the seigneurial system itself one of the factors leading to less settlement in the French areas?
 

Glen

Moderator
Anaxagoras said:
Very, very good. This is the kind of detailed, well thought out timeline I enjoy reading.

THe only major problem I see is your contention that the French Revolution would still take place as it did IOTL. One of the main reasons the French government was backrupt in 1788 was because of their funding of the American Revolution, which did not take place ITTL.

Also, with well-established colonies in the New World, could they not serve as a "steam valve" where disaffected young men could go if they were not happy with the way things were in France? Many historians contend that British colonies served such a need for the British, which is why they escaped the revolutionary chaos that swept France in 1789, 1830 and 1848.

I doubt that the omission of the ARW would save the French from bankruptcy entirely. Perhaps a delay in the calling of the assembly by a few years, though.

I agree, it is a nicely reasoned timeline. However, I question the expansion somewhat into the Caribbean before the establishment of the monarchy in America. It would seem more plausible if done after the arrival of a king who could then make a claim to all of that territory, and thus perhaps be more attractive for the British to support to spite the French Republic.

BTW, does anyone know why the British didn't strip the French of all their Caribbean possessions during the Napoleonic Wars? Just seems odd that they managed to hold onto those after Trafalgar....
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Glen Finney said:
BTW, does anyone know why the British didn't strip the French of all their Caribbean possessions during the Napoleonic Wars? Just seems odd that they managed to hold onto those after Trafalgar....

IIRC, it just took them a little while to root out the French garrisons. In the early 19th Century, launching an amphibious expedition was quit a logistical feat.

Disease was a major problem, too. Again IIRC, more British soldiers died of disease in the West Indies during the Napoleonic Wars than died from all causes in the Peninsular War.
 
I think this is the most well written and excellent and plausible timeline I've read, ever. I highly enjoyed reading this, and would very much like to read more. Please! Continue!

-Austin
 
My reasoning for the crushing of the rebellion in Saint-Domingue was because in OTL refugees began arriving in Spanish Louisiana and spreading the stories of the horrors. In my TL Louisiana is much more populated however slaves outnumber whites 2:1. Fearful of their own slave rebellion or the example of a successful slave rebellion the soldiers in Louisiana go to Saint-Domingue. In OTL, British and Spanish troops joined because again many were afraid of the effects of a successful slave revolt. Although the Americans did not take part in OTL, those in the South were also fearful of the effects of a successful slave rebellion. In this TL I have British-Americans and soldiers from Louisana who would be more used to the terrain as well as the climate providing the bulk of the force to quell the rebellion. Another reason for Louisiana to want to annex the area would be because at the time it was by far the most valuable colony in the French empire and was an important trading partner with Louisiana.

Also the government in New France is not a monarchy in its own right, rather in this ATL they are the legitimate representatives of the French Crown and the government in France is illegitimate (akin to modern Taiwan). Under the protection of the British Navy they occupy French territory in the Western hemisphere because the white planters in the islands are against the abolition of slavery enacted by the republican government. The British did occupy the French islands in 1794-1795, but they were returned to the French in 1802 under the Treaty of Amiens. I should have added that St. Lucia was another French posssession that would be put under the rule of the legitimate government of France.

About the seigneuries they only limited settlement because early on the crown refused to grant any west of Montreal because of not wanting to defend so few people over such a vast area. Here I have them slowly treking south and the granting of new seigneuries occurring. Habitants were not tied to their seigneuries as they were in France and were not required to give military service. It was quite common for habitants to move from seigneurie to seigneurie and the seigneuries themselves were sold and many women owned them.

As for New France providing a safety valve, I'm not so sure. Most of the settlers here are going to be Bretons, Basques, and others from coastal France, not really having much impact on the occurrences in the Paris region. Also the immigration here is very low, only around a few thousand per year, though this is more than enough to increase the population into the millions due to the extremely high birthrate. France has 28 million people by 1789, in this TL they may have 1 million less or so not much of an overall difference.

I'm having trouble with the years after the arrival of Louis XVIII in New France though. I'm toying with different ideas. For instance the opening of trade to Great Britain and the British colonies will have a huge impact on New France. The cotton boom after 1790 as well as the sale of timber to the UK will provide a great deal of revenue for New France. I expect that once Louis XVIII arrives him and the other émigrés will start building up a navy because many of the French sailors fled after 1791 since many were royalists. Here they begin organising a navy being built after 1796 with capital for shipbuilding being provided by New Englanders (shipbuilding takes place in Acadia). By 1805 I can see there being around 54 front line ships and many smaller frigates etc, making the French Royal Navy a formidable force.

I also expect with the British and French royalists being such a big threat in the Americas that Carlos IV will act differently than he did in OTL. Would the Spanish ally themselves with the French Republic after 1795 considering there is a Bourbon in control of a vast powerful territory next to New Spain? I was extending my TL and thinking that although Spain could sue for peace in 1795 but somehow remain neutral instead of going to war with Britain.

By 1806 I have Spain remaining neutral and avoiding Trafalgar all together. The reason being that Louis XVIII's government sent representatives to Spain and warned Carlos IV that should he ally himself with Napoleon that forces from New France and British North America would invade Spanish possessions (New Spain, Cuba, Hispaniola, Puerto Rico etc). So in this TL Napoleon not only has the Continental System be a blockade on Britain but also a threat to any European state that maintains relations with the French Bourbons in North America.

Spain and Portugal are the two countries that are forced into war with Napoleonic France. Here there is more resistance from the start, but I have the Spanish royal family fleeing to Cadiz and then to New Spain and setting up their court at Mexico City. Now two Bourbon monarchies rule from the New World. By 1807 the French Royalist forces are sufficiently strong enough to send 40,000 or so troops to the Iberian Peninsula and join a British force of over 100,000 (British-Americans double the size of the force). So how would this effect the Peninsular Wars? I know that the Anglo-Portuguese forces did quite well against the French and there was the convention of Cintra which I have butterflied away here with the 21,000 troops being forced to be taken prisoner or joining the French Royalist Armies and I have many joining the latter.

With additional reinforcements from New France and British America, the allied forces in the Peninsula could be much larger than in OTL. Napoleon personally went to Spain in 1809 to route the attack and did quite well with the British forced to fall behind the Torres Vedras around Lisbon. Could an allied force that is four times as large in this TL actually hold its ground better? Perhaps even leading to an earlier defeat of Napoleon? Or at least I could see the French Royal Navy destroying the remaining French fleet in the Mediterranean and occupying Corsica.

One of the side effects I can see is that Carlos IV stays on the throne until his death in 1819. There is no Cortes meeting in Cadiz in 1812 since the government of Spain has not allied itself with the French in this ATL, meaning that certain areas of Spain remain under the control of the Spanish government. In Spanish America no juntas form, meaning that the revolutions can at the very least be delayed. The Spanish navy can send some forces to defend Spain from places like Cuba. By 1809 I envision a giant force in the Iberian peninsula that can perhaps alleviate the situation of the Austrians and proceed with an invasion of France from the Pyrennees and an invasion from Corsica via Provence (a heavilly royalist area).

I also have British North America being united as a quasi-dominion during or just after the Napoleonic Wars. The British government sees how confusing it is to have to deal with 15 different colonial governments during a time of war.

So hopefully some of you who are more knowledgeable about the Napoleonic Wars can offer some critiques.
 
Viriato said:
Here is my very long POD for a successful New France. I tried to use as many primary documents as possible instead of relying on secondary sources including newspapers, treaties, censuses and other documents that I found at my university library. I tried to avoid using basic textbooks or the internet as authoritative sources (especially wikipedia which is not a good source for history). I'll be posting this in seperate parts since it is long.

Oi! My taxes don't pay for students to sit dicking about designing alternative history. Do some proper work you scrounging sod, and get a hair cut while your about it.
 
Ah the Cap Rouge settlement

also a POD that I have thought might allow for a surviving Nouvelle France and enduring Amerique Francaise.....

I do need some clarifications though...as I think your population numbers are probably a bit generous. There is a reason the siegnieuries were not extended past Montreal. It has to do with treading on the lands of the French Indian Allies the Algonquins and the Hurons and such settlement would
expose such French settlers to more direct attacks by the Iroquois. Then there is the interminable intertribal warfare between the Hurons and the Iroquois. Until this is dealt with..It is doubtful you will be able to entice anyone to settle to the west until the Indian Wars have been dealt with and the Iroquois threat eliminated or neutralized.

You have some scope for this in the early years of course for the French to impose some kind of Pax Francaise among the Indians, but this will no doubt be upset as soon as the Dutch and English arrive on the scene and start paying Iroquois to obtain better quality pelts. So I need to know how you have had these particular events, which is very important in our OTL for the developement of Nouvelle France, play out. I see the Hurons for instance perhaps surviving as a major Indian force in what is Ontario. Then there are the people of the penninsula call them the Wendat...they would be what we know as the Neutrals...though they were hardly neutral in terms of the Indian conflicts.

You also have another element that needs to be fleshed out.....the Huguenots. With a successful Cap Rouge, you will have settlement occurring when Henry the IV is on the throne and the Edict of Nantes is in effect. There were a number of Huguenot attempts to establish colonies in Brasil and Florida...which were all repulsed or they failed. IF there is an established presence already on the St. Lawrence it is likely they the Huguenots will go to Henry for permission to establish their own colony in proximity to that already on the St. Lawrence (perhaps Acadie).. The problem of course will come when the Edict is recinded. It depends on how many Huguenots actually settled in French America. If substantial, I think even Cardinal Richelieu and the 2 Louis's will be pragmatic enough to leave the Edict in place for the colonies even if it is recinded in France itself. This brings up the interesting prospect that the Crown may very well need to sponsor settlement of Catholics to simply balance out the numbers. Lets face it during this time, France is not over populated to any great extent. The standard of living compared to the rest of Europe is very good. The economic incentive for voluntary emmigration is simply not going to be present. You will need Crown sponsored emmigration if you want to get anywhere near the numbers you are proposing. The only reasonable reason to emmigrate would be political or religious.

Personally...I think your numbers will probably be more along the lines of Half what you propose. But that is still substantial compared to the English they are likely to face.

I agree that the wars will probably result in small exchanges of terr. as per conflicts in Europe. though the French may very well need to cede the east bank of the Mississippi and south bank of the Ohio to Britain. Two reasons...to buy peace from the English for generation or more...perhaps done to obtain concessions somewhere else...say...in the north along James Bay...or other colonial holding around the globe....India perhaps. Acadia will probably not fall, but agree that French interests in NFLD will probably be ceded. I doubt the Fr. Revelution will occur on schedule. No ARW....and the presence of Fr. America will act as a release valve for the poor and dissaffected. Enough that your timeline for the revolution is at least delayed..and perhaps some useful reforms are actually enacted that allows the Bourbons to continue muddling through as it were. Thus no Napoleonic Wars...though you might see another round of the interminable Anglo-French colonial Wars, which could drive the proverbial nail in the French financial coffin instead. Depends on how badly they lose or win that conflict. What the future holds for one Corsican corporal I am not sure in this ATL. He could very well be posted to a command in French America, where he might very well distinguish himself in a Colonial conflict with Britain there that allows him to rise to prominence, at least within the confines of the French Royal Army.

If you do have the Fr. Rev and the Nap. Wars. Then I would agree that it is doubtful that Bourbon Spain, even perhaps under Godoy, would move into the French camp. They were part of the 1st coalition after all and it would be the first instinct of the Spanish Bourbons to follow the anti revolutionary forces.. especially if there was a strong presence of the French Bourbons overseas to counter the influence of Jacobin France.
 
Last edited:
Top