Dominion of Southern America - Updated July 1, 2018

I hope Texas remains a country for a while, maybe have California become its own country too if Texas is unable to attain it.

Though if the British South does get boxed in maybe they will just expand more in Central America, or more likely the Caribbean, the South always seems to be interested in getting Cuba.
 
Not really. Ever read Turtledove's TL-191 books? Whether you love them or hate them, it does give an example of how winning doesn't always mean anything is really resolved.

I haven't. He's virtually unheard of on this side of the Atlantic, I only know of him because of this website. In addition, call it personal bias (because it blatantly is) but I don't like the way he sacrifices British territory to make up for the fact that the USA needs land to compensate for the CSA existing and for being an enemy of the USA. I can understand why he did it - if I were to write a novel I'm sure my own biases would annoy foreign readers - but personally he's just not quite peaked my interest. Also I've seen his historical accuracy slated by a few posters on this forum, but that's by the by. I take your point though. Again, I was pondering commenting on that issue, but I generally view TLs as trying to accomplish their planned final state of affairs sufficiently quickly that you can usually tell who's going to be the dominant power after a number of updates. My mistake entirely, and it is refreshing to see the ponderous approach (even if it does make me more desperate for updates ;)
 

Glen

Moderator
I hope Texas remains a country for a while, maybe have California become its own country too if Texas is unable to attain it.

Nice thoughts.

Though if the British South does get boxed in maybe they will just expand more in Central America,

A distinct possibility.

or more likely the Caribbean,

British already basically have the Caribbean as a British Lake.

the South always seems to be interested in getting Cuba.

The reason being that it is increadibly close (only about 90 miles between Key West and Cuba), it's the biggest land close by outside of the continent itself, and its appropriate for plantation agriculture.
 

Glen

Moderator
I haven't. He's virtually unheard of on this side of the Atlantic, I only know of him because of this website. In addition, call it personal bias (because it blatantly is) but I don't like the way he sacrifices British territory to make up for the fact that the USA needs land to compensate for the CSA existing and for being an enemy of the USA. I can understand why he did it - if I were to write a novel I'm sure my own biases would annoy foreign readers -

Well, there is that, but now that I think about it, in a way he's been quite forebearing. Rather than simply having the US immediately and miraculously annexing huge chunks of Canada, he has them 'liberate' Quebec and occupy (but not annex) Canada, and that not until the 1910s. Compared to most timelines where the US loses the Civil War, its downright reasonable. Course, that's not saying much....

but personally he's just not quite peaked my interest. Also I've seen his historical accuracy slated by a few posters on this forum, but that's by the by.

More his interpretation I think than his actual accuracy, as well as an irritating habit of late to parallel OTL history too closely.

I take your point though. Again, I was pondering commenting on that issue, but I generally view TLs as trying to accomplish their planned final state of affairs sufficiently quickly that you can usually tell who's going to be the dominant power after a number of updates. My mistake entirely, and it is refreshing to see the ponderous approach (even if it does make me more desperate for updates ;)

And here I thought I was going at a breakneck pace.:) I find that the history shapes up best if it can be built from the beginning to the end with layer upon layer, otherwise it is too much like you just took the present and rewrote a few facts. The thing is there is a logic to why things are the way they are, and while the starting conditions are changed, you need to follow through on your logic to its second and third order effects and add them to the shape of things. After a certain point you have enough degrees of freedom to go anywhere when looking from the very beginning, but if you take a stepwise approach each step forward also influences the direction the next step should take. I have a trajectory, but the history makes more sense and is more realistic if I go through step by step and at least outline how we got there. In this case its taking decades and decades to get there from an initial POD.:)
 

Glen

Moderator
A flag of France after the restored Bourbon monarchy when Louis Napoleon I ascended the throne following the death of his adopted father Napoleon Boneparte and the Congress of Vienna in 1815.

Flag of Restored Bourbon France.PNG
 

Glen

Moderator
Or on argent is metal on metal.... Heraldic rules don't HAVE to be followed by flags, but I'd change the colour of the fleur-de-lys.

I'll see your heraldic pedantry and raise you a historical precedent.

The white flag of France, lousy with gold fleur-de-lis on a white field, the battle flag of French nobility and the King, and the flag of Restored Bourbon France in 1815, as noted on Flags of the World (not just wikipedia)!

500px-Pavillon_royal_de_France.svg.png


The funny thing is, you're the second person to challenge me on flag items that had real world precedent. Sometimes OTL really is stranger than ATL!!:D
 
Is your description of the settlement of Spanish/Mexican Texas, purposely vague? It seems you have set up an independent Texas for a huge fall when free soilers and slaveowners end up plunging the Rupublic into civil war. What is interesting though, is that if such a civil war were to occur in your time line it really would be fought neighbor against neighbor, since throughout most areas of the Republic we would probably find a mixture of slaveowners living near free soilers. Plus, even with lots of encouragement, free land, etc., the empressarios in OTL had a very hard time recruiting potential settlers for the Texas land grants, and OTL's growth in population of Anglo Texas was ardously slow. Is TTL's settlement patters similar or different? Plus, while several of the empressarios in OTL Mexican Texas came from Northern States in the US, they were fairly ambivalent towards slavery, and went looking for settlers whereever they could find them. Nevertheless, in OTL, on the eve of the revolution, Texas had a slave population of less than 20%, which made it demographically similar to Missouri and Kentucky, and not the deep South. Of course after statehood, the influx of settlers from the deep South changed the demographics such that Texas looked alot more like the deep South by the Civil War.

Frankly, in your TL, the settlement patterns should be different as empressarios from the US, with free soli anti slavery beliefs compete to bring in settlers and fill up the land with citizens of the US, while empressarios from the British southern colonies would be pro Britain, to a certain extent, pro slavery and platation aristocracy to a great extent, and would seek to get land grants of the best lands and fill them with slave owners settlers from the South. (Sorry for disagreeing with you about how Andrew Jackson would think and feel - and how he would go about recruiting settlers). But with such divergent interests among the various empressarios and their settlers, you may have created a tinderbox just waiting to be ignited.
 

Glen

Moderator
Is your description of the settlement of Spanish/Mexican Texas, purposely vague?

Yes. We're getting further and further out from the POD so butterflies are fluttering. By being a little vague, I avoid having to write a lot of backstory, especially if it isn't absolutely necessary to the timeline. On the other hand, if you have specific questions, I will answer them to the best of my ability (assuming it's up to the point the timeline has gotten to....the future I leave purposely vague so I can have fun revealing it).

It seems you have set up an independent Texas for a huge fall when free soilers and slaveowners end up plunging the Republic into civil war.

Possibly. Here I am being vague to keep some suspense for future posts.

What is interesting though, is that if such a civil war were to occur in your time line it really would be fought neighbor against neighbor, since throughout most areas of the Republic we would probably find a mixture of slaveowners living near free soilers.

Indeed. It would be more like Bosnia than the ACW.

Plus, even with lots of encouragement, free land, etc., the empresarios in OTL had a very hard time recruiting potential settlers for the Texas land grants, and OTL's growth in population of Anglo Texas was arduously slow. Is TTL's settlement patters similar or different?

Similar though ahead of schedule. If anything, Texas is more sparsely populated at the start of TTL's Texas Revolution than OTL, however it attracts a lot of people to come and fight, also like OTL did.

Plus, while several of the empresarios in OTL Mexican Texas came from Northern States in the US, they were fairly ambivalent towards slavery, and went looking for settlers wherever they could find them.

Same here.

Nevertheless, in OTL, on the eve of the revolution, Texas had a slave population of less than 20%, which made it demographically similar to Missouri and Kentucky, and not the deep South.

Also true here.

Of course after statehood, the influx of settlers from the deep South changed the demographics such that Texas looked alot more like the deep South by the Civil War.

We haven't gotten to that part yet.

Frankly, in your TL, the settlement patterns should be different as empresarios from the US, with free soil anti slavery beliefs compete to bring in settlers and fill up the land with citizens of the US, while empresarios from the British southern colonies would be pro Britain, to a certain extent, pro slavery and plantation aristocracy to a great extent, and would seek to get land grants of the best lands and fill them with slave owners settlers from the South.

While what you state might be the preferences of some empresarios, you are thinking of the people going to Texas in too monolithic a way. There are as many reasons for people to go to Texas as there are people. Some are Americans who don't care about slavery (thus why they're more willing to associate with the Southerners down there. Some of the British Southerners are actually seeking to get away from the slaveocracy. Of course, there are others who think just like you say. What I am saying is that the politics in Texas are complex and there are a lot of combinations of views that make for shifting political alliances.

(Sorry for disagreeing with you

Hey, differing opinions are welcome! Helps give me perspective.

about how Andrew Jackson would think and feel - and how he would go about recruiting settlers).

Jackson ITTL doesn't have any use for the British government, mostly recruited himself from the north, but also isn't an abolitionist and has no problems with British Southerners as individuals. This is actually fairly close to OTL Jackson's views. So how do you differ?

But with such divergent interests among the various empresarios and their settlers, you may have created a tinderbox just waiting to be ignited.

Indeed, that is entirely possible. Or there may be so many different shades of opinion that they all just converge on their common interest to pull together. I'm being vague this time because I haven't posted that part yet (suspense, don't cha know?).:D
 
Since the British have such a strong position in the Caribbean they aside from what they do in Texas there are other opportunities for territorial expansion in Costa Rica and the Yucatan with the unrest there and the overall weakness in the Mexican government. Just a thought.
 

Glen

Moderator
Since the British have such a strong position in the Caribbean they aside from what they do in Texas there are other opportunities for territorial expansion in Costa Rica and the Yucatan with the unrest there and the overall weakness in the Mexican government. Just a thought.

And a very reasonable one.
 
When the British took Cuba in 1762, they encouraged the local merchants and Craftsmen to increase trade with the British Troops and Fleet.
The Cuban economy boomed, till the Spanish took back over and immediately took steps to rein in the Trade & Craftsmen.

In the book - 9 Nations of NAmerica -the author points out that pre Castro, Havana was considered the Capital of the Caribbean [includes CAmerica ]
ITTL I can see this happening sooner, and to a greater degree.

?How much Influence is British Cuba having over the non Spanish/British Islands in the lesser Antillies?

?What happened to the Creek & The Semimole Wars ITTL.?

I am thinking The Railroad Building Era will be Fun ITTL.
 

Glen

Moderator
When the British took Cuba in 1762, they encouraged the local merchants and Craftsmen to increase trade with the British Troops and Fleet.
The Cuban economy boomed, till the Spanish took back over and immediately took steps to rein in the Trade & Craftsmen.

That's quite useful to know.

In the book - 9 Nations of NAmerica -the author points out that pre Castro, Havana was considered the Capital of the Caribbean [includes
ITTL I can see this happening sooner, and to a greater degree.

I agree that Havana is an up and coming city in the 1800s. I probably should have mentioned it previously in the discussion of major cities in Southern America, but I was concentrating on the mainland at that point.

?How much Influence is British Cuba having over the non Spanish/British Islands in the lesser Antillies?

In the lesser Antillies? Not much, but that is just because of the distances involved. Where Cuban influence (and vice versa) is mostly being felt is the Floridas, Bahamas, and Greater Antillies.

?What happened to the Creek & The Semimole Wars ITTL.?

I'll get to those. I will say that they are much diminished compared to OTL up to this point in the timeline, and the Seminole Wars are pretty much gone entirely as Florida isn't a border state anymore to cross raid. There's been much more action on the British North Carolina/American Kentucky border (both ways).

I am thinking The Railroad Building Era will be Fun ITTL.

Oh, me too, but what in particular were you thinking?
 
While what you state might be the preferences of some empresarios, you are thinking of the people going to Texas in too monolithic a way. There are as many reasons for people to go to Texas as there are people. Some are Americans who don't care about slavery (thus why they're more willing to associate with the Southerners down there. Some of the British Southerners are actually seeking to get away from the slaveocracy. Of course, there are others who think just like you say. What I am saying is that the politics in Texas are complex and there are a lot of combinations of views that make for shifting political alliances.

I agree that TTL will have created even more separate and distinct cultures of people than what occurred in OTL. But in the United States of TTL, an entire generation has come of age since slavery was abolished throughout the country. Add to that the general animosity and competition that Americans (US citizens) will have with British Americans, and how much different they will see each other, I would expect to see those same attitudes and feelings come out in the empressarios and settlers who came to Texas from both the US and BSA. I just think there will be much less ambivalence on the part of Americans toward slavery than what Northerners felt toward it in OTL. Furthermore settlers from BSA will feel more British, more loyal, more superior, more civilized, I think, to the Americans who they would see as low bred, traitors, and general no goods. And when you mix these groups in Texas, I think yoo will end up with something like a Bosnia. :eek:

But its your TL so I won't try to change anything, just giving you something to think about. :cool:
 

Glen

Moderator
I agree that TTL will have created even more separate and distinct cultures of people than what occurred in OTL. But in the United States of TTL, an entire generation has come of age since slavery was abolished throughout the country.

This is true. On the other hand, people in the US haven't had to choose a side on the issue since it isn't in the US. I think what this means is that the whole of US public opinion ITTL is shifted closer to the abolitionist side than OTL, but that means that there are still plenty of Americans in the ambiguous center (we don't do that here, but when in Rome....).

Add to that the general animosity and competition that Americans (US citizens) will have with British Americans,

And this would be similar to OTL America's burning animosity towards Canadians?;) Or those vile slaving Jamaicans!;);)

Truth is, the Federalist/Pro-British faction has actually been stronger ITTL than in OTL, and the Accord of 1804 has done a lot to calm tensions between the two regions (though not all). While the British South is seen in some quarters as evil for their slaving ways, and in some as competition (mostly in the west), most Americans see them as trade partners. Southern Cotton isn't just going to British textile plants, but also to American ones.

and how much different they will see each other,

Most Americans see Southerners as Royalty loving, nobility-aping pseudo-Virginians. Most Southerners see Americans as godless (or papist) radical Yankees who worship the almighty buck, except those Frenchies up north and those pseudo-Southern Viriginians who aren't that bad.;);)

I would expect to see those same attitudes and feelings come out in the empresarios

Maybe, but by their very nature they are a bit of an odd bunch.

and settlers who came to Texas from both the US and BSA.

Much more so here, though, you're right.

I just think there will be much less ambivalence on the part of Americans toward slavery than what Northerners felt toward it in OTL.

Human nature being what it is, I actually disagree. You will get more Northerners ITTL to knee-jerk agree with the statement that slavery is wrong. However, if you could rate their level of passion about the issue, it would be less so because it's not their problem. Now then, if someone were to come along and try to get slavery legalized in the US, that would be a dead issue and the proposer would likely get beaten up for his trouble, but as long as them British Southerners keep South of the 36-30, they're not going to go out of their way about it (except TTL's version of the Underground Railroad....).

Furthermore settlers from BSA will feel more British, more loyal, more superior, more civilized, I think, to the Americans who they would see as low bred, traitors,

The ones who come from the slaveocracy, yep.

and general no goods. And when you mix these groups in Texas,

However, not all the settlers coming from the British South are from the slavocrats. A lot of them are poor whites looking to set up independent claims, and trying to get away from the stiffling plantation system. They are pretty loyal to the crown, but not necessarily to the plantation system.

I think yoo will end up with something like a Bosnia. :eek:

I mentioned somewhat that if a Texas Civil War occurs, it would be more like that, yes.

But its your TL so I won't try to change anything, just giving you something to think about. :cool:

Indeed you have. Much of it I had already thought of, and I won't say that your interpretation of how things would go is wrong, just that things took a slightly different tack ITTL.
 
I am thinking The Railroad Building Era will be Fun ITTL.
Oh, me too, but what in particular were you thinking?
OTL the building of the Erie canal integrated a boom in Canal building, especially in the South. [much easier to move 500 pound bales of Cotton by Water]
However by the late 30's the canals were overbuilt, and many of the Canal Companies went Bankrupt, taking most of the south's ready capital with it.
So when the RR building started in the 1840's there was no capital available. and it wouldn't be till the '50's, that the south recovered enuff to start major Railroad building.

However in this TL, there is only minor Canal Building in the South while the North seems to be on a Canal Frenzy, [C&O ??? excepted on map]

So when the 1840's start this South will [backed by GB] have the necessary capital to build. while the north will have the Canal Companies using their political power to delay the Railroads.

?What happened to the Creek & The Seminole Wars ITTL.?
I'll get to those. I will say that they are much diminished compared to OTL up to this point in the timeline, and the Seminole Wars are pretty much gone entirely as Florida isn't a border state anymore to cross raid. There's been much more action on the British North Carolina/American Kentucky border (both ways).
I was thinking more of the 1830's Trail of Tears, and Zachary Taylor v Osceola.
Which rises the Question of Sam Houston, and the Southern Indian Relations.
 
Last edited:

Glen

Moderator
OTL the building of the Erie canal integrated a boom in Canal building, especially in the South. [much easier to move 500 pound bales of Cotton by Water]

However by the late 30's the canals were overbuilt, and many of the Canal Companies went Bankrupt, taking most of the south's ready capital with it.
So when the RR building started in the 1840's there was no capital available. and it wouldn't be till the '50's, that the south recovered enuff to start major Railroad building.

Ah, interesting to know. Well, I may have to review that part of the canals history, as the same forces at work on Southern canal building OTL would likely be at work ITTL unless you think otherwise.

However in this TL, there is only minor Canal Building in the South while the North seems to be on a Canal Frenzy,

That map of canals is almost entirely OTL, so take that into account when judging relative north/south building.

[C&O ??? excepted on map]

C&O being?

So when the 1840's start this South will [backed by GB] have the necessary capital to build.

Definitely. Though we've got to get through the 1830s first!

while the north will have the Canal Companies using their political power to delay the Railroads.

Some of that may occur, but you will also see canal companies becoming rail companies as they have a lot of the necessary right of ways already in their pocket, so they can start building sooner than competitors.

I was thinking more of the 1830's Trail of Tears, and

Haven't gotten to that part yet. It will be different from OTL, I'll tell you that for nothing.:D

Zachary Taylor v Osceola

Never happens ITTL. While Richard Taylor may have some important descendants ITTL, it won't be exactly the Zachary Taylor of OTL. The wars in the Northwest Territories will have been fought and mostly won by the whites before he is old enough to distinguish himself in them. Of course, there's always the lands west of the Mississippi to tame.;)

However, the Taylors are from American Virginia, so his descendants have no reason to encounter an analogue of Osceola from the British Province of Georgia.
 

Glen

Moderator
Settlement of the American Northwest Territory continued throughout the first third of the 19th century. After the admission of Wabash and Ontario, there was a steady flow of states -

The State of Illinois continued using the 42nd parallel as a northern border, the State of Wabash border as its eastern boundary, the juncture of the Ohio and Mississippi as its southern extent, and the Mississippi as its Western boundary.

The State of Huron comprised the peninsula between Lakes Huron and Michigan above the 42nd parallel north.

The State of Michigan also had the 42nd parallel as it's southern border, but Lake Michigan was its eastern border, Lake Superior its northern border, and a line running south from the westernmost point of Lake Superior to the Mississippi and continuing south along the Mississippi to the 42nd parallel comprised its western border.

States derived from the Northwest Territory and their neighbors:

US Midwest Larger.png
 
C&O being?
Chesapeake & Ohio - Starts at DC and heads pass Hagerstown and Frostburg in Western Marysland.
However in this TL, there is only minor Canal Building in the South while the North seems to be on a Canal Frenzy,
That map of canals is almost entirely OTL, so take that into account when judging relative north/south building.
Oops --- so if Canal Building is the same as OTL, then it would be British investments that builds a Rail net in the South, at the same time as the Northern Net.
Zachary Taylor v Osceola
I wouldn't expect the same Generals, Butterflies have 60 years here --But the tensions of Whites moving South would be about the same.
I was thinking more of the 1830's Trail of Tears
Haven't gotten to that part yet. It will be different from OTL, I'll tell you that for nothing

Join the two problems and push the Civilized tribes into Indian Territory -- IE. -- Central/South Florida. Let John Ross and Sam Houston fight the Seminoles.
 

Glen

Moderator
Chesapeake & Ohio - Starts at DC and heads pass Hagerstown and Frostburg in Western Marysland.

Ah yes. It wasn't on the OTL map; I don't know why.

It was probably still built, but perhaps later than OTL as one of its chief proponents IIRC was Washington and he's a bit out of touch up in OTL Kingston, NY (TTL's Washington, DC). Probably still gets built in some fashion, though.

Oops --- so if Canal Building is the same as OTL,

Similar, a bit earlier than OTL.

then it would be British investments that builds a Rail net in the South, at the same time as the Northern Net.

Probably.

I wouldn't expect the same Generals, Butterflies have 60 years here --But the tensions of Whites moving South would be about the same.

Don't you mean whites moving West in Osceola's case? There are Indians in East Florida, to be sure, but it won't be the haven for natives and escaped slaves that it was IOTL when it was Spanish Florida, and in fact there are more British/Loyalists who stay in northern East Florida ITTL, so they're sorta cut off from going further south. The main action for Indian/British Southerner interactions will remain west of the Chatahoochee/Appalachians ITTL. But I'm getting ahead of myself here....:eek:

Join the two problems and push the Civilized tribes into Indian Territory -- IE. -- Central/South Florida. Let John Ross and Sam Houston fight the Seminoles.

Hmmm, interesting concept. However, what we knew as the Seminoles IOTL is really somewhat different ITTL. Don't you worry, though. Those Civilized Tribes are going to get some action!:cool:
 
Top