Advice needed

[rem1967]

I've got an idea for an alternate history that I'd appreciate help with. Basically, the idea is a world where the American Revolution fails, the French Revolution and the Bolshevik Revolution never occur, and the world of 2005 is a world made up of 14 monarchies of varying degrees of autocracy, their colonies, and Switzerland. My questions are these:

1. Can anyone think of a rational way the Netherlands would still be in control of New Amsterdam? How could they have held of the British, or why would Britain allow the Dutch control of a strategic port?

2. Similarly, is there any way Sweden would still control Delaware?

3. If the French Revolution never occured, and the Napoleonic Empire never existed, how would this affect later German or Italian unification? Would unification have been slowed or even prevented?

[wkwillis]

The POD would have to be one where the Dutch and British were still united under one crown. If the Dutch still held New Amsterdam then New York, New Jersey, and Pensylvania would be Dutch speaking. New England would be English Speaking, and possibly Quebec would still be French. POD around maybe 1600s?

[rem1967]

Good idea, but how about the Sweedes? Though that does tell me how to keep Quebec French; thanks.

[wkwillis]

The alliance with the Netherlands through the union of the monarchy gives a hostage to the land powers of Europe. Sweden was a land power through her German lands at the time of the colonisation of what is now the United States. Maybe Sweden is an ally of the Netherlands half of the Vereigneited Kingdom?
They were both Protestant powers. How were New Jersey and Delaware acquired by the British? I don't recall hearing about a war.

[rem1967]

The Brits seized NYC in the 1660's I think. I'll need to look up when they got Delaware.

[rem1967]

How's this for an alternative? POD ~1000 A.D. Instead of colonizing New Sweden (Delaware), what if the Viking settlrments in Great Vinland don't collapse? Then Sweden would hold Newfoundland and Labrador. Plausible?

[Jared]

How's this for an alternative? POD ~1000 A.D. Instead of colonizing New Sweden (Delaware), what if the Viking settlrments in Great Vinland don't collapse? Then Sweden would hold Newfoundland and Labrador. Plausible?

Plausible in the sense that the Vikings could settle Vinland in numbers; less plausible in that the changes in European history would make things near-unrecognisable long before the *American Revolution. Likewise for having the Netherlands keep New Amsterdam or Sweden keeping Delaware. Neither of those is impossible in itself, given the right PoD, but it means that the knock-on effects will be _huge_, since anything big enough to make them keep it will also change a lot elsewhere.

I guess it depends how badly you want New Amsterdam and Delaware to remain out of British hands. If you can live with those being British and part of a failed American Revolution, then the rest of your scenario falls into place much more readily.

The French Revolution is murkier. The underlying pressures were all there: absolutist monarchy, going broke with or without the intervention in the American Revolution. Of course, absent Napoleon it's also possible that a French Revolution occurs but that there is then a counter-revolution a few years later, giving you back your monarchy. Absent Napoleon, I'd also expect German and Italian unification to be delayed, but this alone wouldn't prevent their eventual unification in some form, although it may change some of the details. (With an earlier POD, of course, you might get it).

Or, to put it another way, see the world of "The Two Georges", by Harry Turtledove, for a world broadly similar to yours. It should give you a few ideas, at least... :)

[rem1967]

Thanks. I haven's read that one. Had no idea Turtledove beat me to it, although I"m not surprised. Ok, so maybe Sweden doesn't keep Delaware. Would the French have trouble holding Quebec? Is it conceivable they could get it back?

[Jared]

Thanks. I haven's read that one. Had no idea Turtledove beat me to it, although I"m not surprised. Ok, so maybe Sweden doesn't keep Delaware. Would the French have trouble holding Quebec? Is it conceivable they could get it back?

Hmm, how's this for a PoD? At the end of the Seven Years War (1763), Britain has just won, more or less, and are considering what to give back to France in the peace settlement. In OTL, they gave back Guadeloupe, Martinique and various other Caribbean islands, and kept New France (Quebec). But there was serious discussion about reversing that policy and keeping the sugar islands, since those islands generated _more_ money than Quebec. (Yes, sugar was that profitable).

Result: Britain keeps Guadeloupe, Martinique, the smaller islands (I forget all their names). It would also keep Cuba from Spain, since any change which weakened the sugar lobby in Britain (they were the ones who scuppered the deal for keeping Guadeloupe et al in the first place) will mean that Cuba stays in British hands. France, on the other hand, has Quebec. This has immediate knock-on effects with the American Revolution - the thirteen colonies will be _much_ more reluctant to push for independence with French Canada still looking threatening, and Britain may also be more reluctant to tax the colonies.

For a convenient butterfly, have Genoa not sell Corsica to France to pay off a debt in 1768. (They were reluctant OTL, but did it). In 1769, Napoleon is born... as a Corsican/Genoan. It might be fun to have him create his own wars of Italian unification, while France goes its own way.

Could have all sorts of effects from here...

[rem1967]

This a lot more comples than I expected, and I wasn't expecting it to be simple. Can anyone suggest good research material? I'd hate to hang around here and look like an idiot indefinitely.

[JHPier]

As to keep New Netherlands Dutch let the (opening stages of the) Second Anglo-Dutch War go better for us, so we get to keep New Netherlands AND acquire Surinam. (In OTL we swapped them).
Then after 1688 keep the anti-French alliance alive.

It may be necessary to have Huguenots colonize the east bank of the Delaware, to serve as buffer against encroaching English colonists.

The Swedish settlements on the Delaware were swallowed by New Netherlands in 1655. I don't know how to keep that from happening.