Canada Wank (YACW)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yay!

Ask and someone will at least be forced to consider your request.

:)
Well, to be fair, there's been a fair bit of time pass since the last map. I'm still figuring out how to us Photoshop, so it's pretty primitive, but ... it's a learning experience. And learning is fun, right? [write on the blackboard 100 times, 'Learning is fun'...]
 
Okay question here, why if the United States takes over the continent of North America in a timeline it is still considered the United States (and not another entity) but if Canada does the same, it is not considered Canada. Yes I know there is a population component in the definition, but what if you give greater immigration to Canada so that before it separates from Britain it has a greater population then at least the States on the Eastern Seaboard? But that also asks what is Canada? or what makes it different from the States?

To my mind, it's largely a matter of cultural continuity. If *Canada conquered the USA and absorbed it, the resulting entity would be a greater USA in all but name - the population disparity is too great. If Canada, the US, Mexico (?and the Caribbean) united in a 'North American Federation', that, too, would be a 'greater USA'.

If OTL's Canada in 1849 received the entire 1M Irish emmigrants from the Potato famine, even if the country didn't become 'New Ireland', the areas they settled in would.

When Mexico invited settlers into its northern province of Texas, there were so many American settlers that the province seceded and joined the US (slight over-simplification).

One of the things I'm trying to balance in the post-1812 era is how to get enough immigration without wrenching the essential flavour of the country. Just as with OTL, the country will cease to be dominated by French speakers, but again, like OTL, they will be a 'founding nation' and a significant minority.
 
To my mind, it's largely a matter of cultural continuity. If *Canada conquered the USA and absorbed it, the resulting entity would be a greater USA in all but name - the population disparity is too great. If Canada, the US, Mexico (?and the Caribbean) united in a 'North American Federation', that, too, would be a 'greater USA'.

If OTL's Canada in 1849 received the entire 1M Irish emmigrants from the Potato famine, even if the country didn't become 'New Ireland', the areas they settled in would.

When Mexico invited settlers into its northern province of Texas, there were so many American settlers that the province seceded and joined the US (slight over-simplification).

One of the things I'm trying to balance in the post-1812 era is how to get enough immigration without wrenching the essential flavour of the country. Just as with OTL, the country will cease to be dominated by French speakers, but again, like OTL, they will be a 'founding nation' and a significant minority.

Okay (and for the record I understand your problem) but what at this point in history, makes Americans different from Canadians? Most of southern Ontario about the time of the war of 1812 was being settled by a mix of Loyalists and your basic "American" who drifted north from the states along the eastern seaboard, and who just wanted land. The major patriots stayed in the States but those individuals who didn't care who ruled them did drift north (having dug through the archival records of Waterdown Ontario, I can attest to this fact. You'd be surprised as to how many settlers came from the States in the early 1800's). Basically I'm asking the question (and this is not aimed at you Dathi, its basically rhetorical) what separates a Canadian from an American culturally speaking? I'm liking the revamped war of 1812, and you're doing great so far, but I'm wondering if there can't be a something in between an Uber-American federation that is spread across North America and a Revived British Empire that rules North America. This is a question that I've been thinking about for a while so feel free to shoot holes in my ideas, and keep up the good work.
 
Attack at Niagara, December 1813.

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Attack at Niagara, December 1813.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]When the invasion was planned, Colonel Cecil Bisshop requested, and was granted, 500 men to probe the frontier on the Lake Ontario side. With 500 picked British soldiers and 200 Indians, he crossed quietly in the middle of the night of December 26 (the night before the main invasion), and made the American shore without being detected. Actually, they were detected, but the sentries got off only the briefest of warnings before being silenced. But it confirmed in Izard's mind that the full attack was coming here. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Knowing that they were no match for the regular army, they go to ground. The US army sends several parties out to find the 'invaders', but they move in patrols of a couple of hundred (to avoid defeat in detail if they DO run into the British invasion), and Bisshop's men, with their Indian allies' help, manage to avoid the patrols. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The next morning, word comes early that the REAL invasion is by Buffalo. Izard and Scott swear at themselves for being taken in by an obvious British misdirection, and given the apparent lack of British forces here, and the size of the invasion by Buffalo, they march out of Fort Niagara with almost the entire contingent, as quickly as they may be mustered, and do a forced march to Buffalo.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]However, in the rush and commotion to get ready, hundreds of men are pouring in and out of the fort, and passwords are occasionally exchanged loudly (and profanely). Since the Bisshop had some individual Indian scouts snuck in close to the fort, they were able to hear the sign/countersign challenges. When the 2000 men of the US army march out to the relief of Buffalo, leaving about 200 to man the fort, the scouts return with the information. Bisshop sneaks his men around to the inland side of the fort, and in the early afternoon, marches his men in military array upto the fort. Note that the weather is around 0°F (-15 or -20°C), and EVERYONE is wearing heavy coats, not visible uniforms. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Bisshop had brought along a US flag for possible use as a ruse de guerre, and has one of his men (a Nova Scotian who had done a lot of trading in New England) wears Bisshop's colonel's hat, and announce loudly “New England volunteah militiar foa reinfoacements”. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The Americans have been feeling kind of isolated, and are only too happy to accept reinforcements. They do wonder why they hadn't been told of possible reinforcements, but the faux-colonel says “That's odd, General Izard knew, our advance scouts met his. Didn't he send a messenger back?” (this also explains how they would know the day's password.)[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]So the Americans throw open the gates and let the “reinforcements” in. At which point, they throw down the US flag, unfurl the British one, and rush in. Taken totally by surprise and outnumbered, the Americans have to surrender. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]A couple of Americans make it over the wall, and escape to tell Izard, but the British get a messenger to and reinforcements from Fort George on the Canadian side before Izard can return. Izard also has only a handful of light cannon (the couple stationed at Buffalo, and the couple the Brits succeeded in getting across the river. While Izard does return to Fort Niagara after getting everything dealt with in Buffalo, it's now the afternoon of the 28th, and the British have scraped up another 500 men, so there's over 1000 inside the fort. While Izard has a 2-1 advantage in numbers, he is facing a fort that has cannon, and he has no heavy cannon of his own. He does make a trial attack, but the defence is as strong as he feared, and gives up.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Unfortunately for Izard, most of the US Army supplies were in the fort, so they are now short on food, ammunition, spare clothing, etc. Fortunately, however, it is winter, and sleighs on snow on bad roads are somewhat more efficient than carts on the same roads, and the most important things (clothing and ammunition) can be replaced fairly easily. [/FONT]
 
Okay (and for the record I understand your problem) but what at this point in history, makes Americans different from Canadians? Most of southern Ontario about the time of the war of 1812 was being settled by a mix of Loyalists and your basic "American" who drifted north from the states along the eastern seaboard, and who just wanted land. The major patriots stayed in the States but those individuals who didn't care who ruled them did drift north (having dug through the archival records of Waterdown Ontario, I can attest to this fact. You'd be surprised as to how many settlers came from the States in the early 1800's). Basically I'm asking the question (and this is not aimed at you Dathi, its basically rhetorical) what separates a Canadian from an American culturally speaking? I'm liking the revamped war of 1812, and you're doing great so far, but I'm wondering if there can't be a something in between an Uber-American federation that is spread across North America and a Revived British Empire that rules North America. This is a question that I've been thinking about for a while so feel free to shoot holes in my ideas, and keep up the good work.

Several things. One, the Anglo matrix in Ontario was established by UELs, who had specifically fled because of their British loyalty. Two, the Americans who came north for land were, as you say, mostly ones who DIDN'T care as much about system of government. Three, OTL, there's only 70k Anglos in Ontario vs 250k Canadiens in Quebec.

Anglo-Canada was British and monarchical (often avidly so), the US were Republican (often avidly so).

In many ways, Canada and (especially the northern) US have exceedingly similar culture, language, even currency. I don't doubt that if the US had taken and kept Ontario in the War of 1812, that a generation later it would be as American as Louisiana, at least.

It's probably a lot easier for the US to take over Canada any time after about 1790 than it is for the Brits to take over the US (by ~1790 or so the whole mythology about the revolt against tyranny etc., and the superiority of Republicanism have sunk deep roots into the American psyche).

Loyalty to King and Crown is a very powerful force. The US replaced it with the Constitution and The Flag, and got an equivalently powerful myth or icon to use.


I haven't actually decided what ultimately happens with New England iTTL. If I can get them to join *Canada, it will be a large step up in the process of equalizing the powers of the countries, but at this stage a Canada/New England merger would be a 'Greater New England' (although a very strange one). I suspect STRONGLY that IF any such merger were to happen under British auspices, that there would be some MAJOR accommodation to Republicanism - e.g. the Provinces of Quebec and Ontario have Lieutenant-Governors appointed by the Crown, the Republic of Massachussetts has an elected Governor.... Probably no knighthoods in New England... It would really be a stretch.
 
Yeah you're right on all those points, and they do make it hard for a Canadian wank to realistically happen. I'm not questioning your premise, I'm just questioning my own sense of national identity so to speak, wondering a loud based upon what I've seen here and my own research into the matter. I do think that in the long run (ie in OTL in the future) that if Canada and the U.S. ever do merge on anything close to even terms, what the resulting nation will look like. My own opinion as you might have surmised is that while remaining similar Canadians and Americans have drifted far enough a part to remain separate cultures (excluding the devotion to Queen and Country, as I know a few ardent Canadian Nationalists who can't stand the monarchy) even in the advent of a merger, but I'm at a loss as to explain why I feel this way.
 
Yeah you're right on all those points, and they do make it hard for a Canadian wank to realistically happen. I'm not questioning your premise, I'm just questioning my own sense of national identity so to speak, wondering a loud based upon what I've seen here and my own research into the matter. I do think that in the long run (ie in OTL in the future) that if Canada and the U.S. ever do merge on anything close to even terms, what the resulting nation will look like. My own opinion as you might have surmised is that while remaining similar Canadians and Americans have drifted far enough a part to remain separate cultures (excluding the devotion to Queen and Country, as I know a few ardent Canadian Nationalists who can't stand the monarchy) even in the advent of a merger, but I'm at a loss as to explain why I feel this way.

Oh, yes, 'King and Crown' and 'being British' and 'Imperial connexion' were hugely powerful ideas, and very real through at least WWII. Not at all today. (My granddad never took out Canadian citizenship and legally voted in every Federal election in his lifetime. I think if he had lived like 2 years longer that wouldn't have been the case.)

Today, Canada has a self-identity which is a result of different evolution of the culture the US, largely since WWII. Canada has always been more social/socialist/communalist than the US, and that difference has increased since the 50s and 60s, I think. The US has a hard core of right-wing, socially conservative, often evangelical Christian that is only fringe in Canada (well, outside of Alberta:)). Things like massive immigration, with the attendant increase in other religions, things like gay marriage, things like National Healthcare, are all things that Canadians, in general, say 'duh, of course' to, and many Americans go 'teh Evol!!!'.

In my day, I used to claim that Canada's most right wing party (the then PC's) occupied about the same political space as the US left wing party (the Democrats). That's not quite so true today, but while the Democrats sloughed off much of their dixiecrat right wing, the Republicans have drifted even further right, and someone like Huckabee or Sarah Palin would be totally a fringe candidate in Canada.

So, while Canadianism is most easily described in terms of 'anti-Americanism', it is more than that, and I think that there is a real difference, even if it is a little subtle.

Americans don't see in Canada the 'flag-waving' 'my country right or wrong' raucous patriotism, so they doubt Canadians are patriotic, but they're wrong. Canadian patriotism is very strong, just not loud, obnoxious and 'in your face' (mostly), it's quieter and more subtle.

I liked the campaign that ?Macleans? ran a few years ago to come up with the completion of the phrase 'As Canadian as...', and the winning answer was 'As Canadian as ... possible under the circumstances'.
 
First of all...excellent work on the financial side of things. Learned alot about that part of it from your post.

Although Niagra is key terrain how will the loss of the troops at Buffalo stand up...that's a large number gone in a battle where 500 make a big difference. I did like the explanation for why troops fell into the ice...major consideration we run into when building winter roads is whose standards are going to be applied. That being said I do find it tough to belive that some testing wasnt' done as anyone who works with ice bridges only makes that mistake once...with the militia there I'm surprised it happened but if they weren't told what ice level was needed then c'est la vie..

In regards to logistics...adding in the new troops at buffalo due to Izard's forces that is going to really stress the supplies. Although sledges can be very efficent for moving supplies it's winter, caloric intake is way up, and your winter clothing is a neccessity. I forsee alot of frostbite problems in the americans future if their troops don't have the energy to keep good blood circulation while doing winter work. One bad snowstorm to cover the trails and drift things in and you're shut down for a long period till you can shovel it all out.

In regards to settlement...Canadian settlement basically meant filling up eastern canada (east of NW ontario at least) and a little of Vancouver until the railway came and allowed reasonable access into the west. If settlement was expanded to make Vancouver, Prince Rupert and maybe Churchill all major immigration ports like Montreal and Halifax then you get a much more evenly spread population which assists in creating a greater common framework. This is happening to an extent in Canada currently with the population movement west and how the house of Commons will be adjusted for the population changes but it means a very different Canada than what we know now.

Alot of what I see in Canada comes down to logistics. If you have a population in the central plains that is able to have even seasonal access to large centers/ports then you have fill alot of land up fast as proven in the late 1800's. Not sure how feasible it is to have rail traffic in eastern Canada, port at North Bay?, port at Thunder Bay, Rail to Calgary. Followed by Rail development linking Vancouver to Calgary over time... Due to the distances involved and sheer scale of projects the cultural differences that have developed in different parts of provinces, let alone regions seem to me to be an integral part of being Canadian...pride in being different than our neighbors due to heritage but also pride in a country that lets us be that different.

Anywho..morning ramblings over it's time for my coffee.

Keep it up!
 
Illinois and Missouri, fall/winter 1814

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Illinois and Missouri, fall/winter 1814[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]As mentioned above, the British were building a forward base at Fort Gourock on the Illinois river north of St. Louis. They made good use of their Indian allies under Black Hawk, who provided covering support, and prevented much news of the fort from getting back too quickly to US bases in the south.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]However, it is soon obvious that the British are up to something, and rumours and reports suggest a fort, possibly with a sizeable number of men. Governor Benjamin Howard of Missouri starts organizing his militia to march north and take the fort, as it is a direct threat to St. Louis in his Territory. Governor Ninian Edwards of Illinois has also started to pull together a militia force, and when he hears about Howard's move, protests it strongly, as the fort is in Illinois Territory. If Howard wants to raise men and place them under Edwards, he will cheerfully accept the help, but this is an Illinois problem, the problem will be dealt with under Illinois leadership. Howard replies that it is an AMERICAN problem, that he's closer and his men are almost assembled. Finally, it is decided that the Missouri men will travel up the Mississippi, and cut across country, attacking from the west, while the Illinois men head up the Illinois river and attack from the south. Each militia will be commanded by its own governor. The two arms of the pincer will send messengers back and forth to coordinate their attack. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]However, by the time that this has all been decided and the Illinois militia reaches St. Louis (actually the Illinois side), a couple of weeks have passed, and the British have now got their basic fort up, the reinforcements have arrived, cannon are placed and a supply of ammunition laid in. They are busily improving their fort, making a dirt glacis in front of the log walls, etc.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Howard and his Missouri militia have about 1500 men (not quite half of the existing militia in Missouri, but not all were in the St. Louis area, and many were needed to be left behind for defence.) Edwards, with a smaller population and possibly less urgency, has a bit under 1000 men (including about 100 Kentucky militia and a group of about 100 Rangers, both on horseback). The two groups of militia start up their respective rivers. Howard gets to his landing spot, unloads his men and starts marching across country. However, the land is very hilly, they are harassed by Indians and its slow going. Dragging cannon up and down hills is very difficult, and they leave their heavier pieces behind. Even the light pieces slow them. Meanwhile, Edwards heads up the Illinois. While the Illinois is pretty winding, so there are more miles to cover, it's still faster than overland. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Almost at once, the plan starts to break down. As it was not immediately obvious how long it was going to take for each pincer to reach its destination, the plan was for messengers to ride back and forth and coordinate the two arms. Well, the Indians under Black Hawk know the terrain, and are able to keep most of the messengers from getting through. Either they have to send armed bands of 50 or 100, which would rather wear out a significant chunk of their mounted force, or they give up on the idea of coordination. Since neither Governor really wants to subordinate himself to the other one, and since, at this early date, the advances are going as expected, the coordination withers and then dies. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Edwards arrives first. He attacks, not waiting for the arrival of Howard, partly because he sees what looks to him to be a part of the fortification still under construction[1]. He believes it's a weak point, and if he waits, the Brits will have finished it. He also doesn't give credence to the rumours of British strength, and believes he must have an advantage in cannon, as how could the British have hauled any sizeable number of cannon across land from Lake Erie?[2][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]However, the British outnumber him, having about 1200 men inside the fort, and they have more cannon than Edwards does, and ample ammunition. Edwards has less than 1000 men, and mounted men aren't as effective at attacking a fortification, as some have to be told off to deal with the horses – and their training isn't for siege work. (Not, mind you, that any of these militia were particularly trained for siege work.) Not only that, but there are Indians on all sides so men have to be told off to defend the sides of the force/camp. Edwards is repulsed bloodily, with few casualties on the British side. He retreats back down the Illinois, leaving behind some 300 causalties (~200 dead and ~100 too heavily wounded to move), and most of his cannon. He has to carry back some 150 wounded who are in good enough state that they might survive the trip. The wounded take up most of the space in the boats, so most of the survivors who are healthy enough have to walk along the river bank, which is more difficult and takes longer. Indians harass his force all the back to the Mississippi, but don't really do much damage as the mounted troops come in very useful (for the first time on this expedition) in keeping the Indians off. Of course, there aren't that many Indians after them, as most have better things to do. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The British cheerfully grab the cannon that Edwards left behind and start hauling them into the fort, starting with the ones in best shape.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Now Howard shows up at Fort Gourock. He sees the evidence of the fight, sees that little visible damage has been done to the fort and swears at Edwards for having not waited for him. He also swears at him for not having stuck around to add his surviving force to Howards for a second attack. He suspects that Edwards attacked alone to gain all the glory, or to spite him (Howard), which was not Edwards (conscious) motive, much. He also doesn't realize Edwards' predicament – he was stuck in hostile territory, with many wounded, and his effectives were outnumbered 2-1 or more by the British. (The British had convinced him that they had more troops than they did, but they would probably have been able to shatter his force, anyway, if they had sortied.) Moreover, he had no clue where Howard was, or when he would arrive, so he felt, possibly wrongly, that his only choice was to withdraw. He even specifically left behind messages with the seriously wounded, explaining his reasoning to Howard, if and when he arrived. Why he expected the British to let Howard talk to those wounded men before battle, or to pass on the messages, is something no one seems to know today, but his memoirs and reports to Washington clearly state that Howard was told, so he must at least have convinced himself that the message would get through.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Howard consults with his officers about what to do, and decides to attack. Their reasoning is 1) that if they came all this way, and just turned around, the men would probably mutiny anyway [true], 2) that, however strong the fort is now, it's likely only to get stronger [true, but not as true as they think], 3) that Edwards' force must have done SOME damage, and better to strike while the British are still licking their wounds [not very true], 4) that they must significantly outnumber the British (again, especially with their losses from Edwards' attack) [not true, at least the 'significantly' part.][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Howard doesn't underestimate the initial number of British quite as badly as Edwards did, but has more men, and does overestimate the British losses from the initial attack (which were, in fact, pretty minimal). Also, neither he nor Edwards had ever attacked a strongly fortified position before. They may have attacked Indian villages with some sort of palisade, but a properly build fort, well manned and with cannon? Those, they have always been on the INSIDE of, defending, not the outside, attacking.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Howard arranges his light cannon, and both of Edwards' cannon left out, in a battery and starts pounding the wall. Since he is low on cannon power and on ammunition, he decides to double shot his cannon. Some of the first shots hit the dirt mounded in front of the wall, and so he stops and raises the aim of the cannon that fired low. The few that hit, didn't hit hard enough to do any visible damage, so he orders that more powder be used, so the shot will hit harder. His men argue, but he wants to do something, and there are no artillerists with real training or experience in his group. On the second volley, both of Edwards' cannon explode (remember the British took the ones in better shape first), killing several men.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Since the bombardment wasn't going to take down the walls, he sends his men in to scale them, figuring the dirt in front will make it easier. The men attack, but they are trying climb up on makeshift ladders, no one is experienced in siege warfare, and the defenders have the advantage of height and cannon. Grapeshot from corner bastions wreaks havoc in the attackers and the few that make it to the top of the wall can't get a foot hold.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Howard pulls his men back and reconsiders. He's just lost a couple of hundred dead, more wounded, and few are unscathed. Just then the British open the gate and sortie. Here's his chance. He pulls men together in a line, well outside the forts guns, and wait. The British hope the Americans will come to them, as the two forces are of similar size, now, but they don't. The Americans bind up flesh wounds, reorganise themselves a bit, and wait. The British advance. It's almost a classical European battle thousands of miles from the battlefields of Europe. The British (in the field) are slightly out numbered by the Americans able to stand in line of battle, but the British are mostly unwounded, they are much better trained, and they can fire 4 volleys to the American 3. The Americans try to retreat, but they don't really want to abandon their wounded and their supplies, but the British keep coming. The Americans give up and quick march off the battlefield, turning their backs on the British, taking multiple volleys without response, but finally getting out of range. If the British had had a significant cavalry force, they could have routed the Missouri force completely, but they didn't. A few Indians on ponies and a few officers on horseback don't constitute a squadron of heavy cavalry, and as long as the Americans are prepared to quick march back along their route without returning fire, every volley the British take lets the Americans get further ahead. Moreover, the Americans do have some rifles, so every once in a while, the riflemen stop, aim, fire and take out a handful of British soldiers far beyond musket range. While British troops can march into much denser fire, that's with the prospect of closing to musket and bayonet range. Here, that's just not possible. Besides, the Americans left a rearguard of walking wounded to delay the British. So the British give up the chase, and Howard and his surviving Missouri forces escape. They still face a long walk over the hills, without provisions, and facing Indian harassment the whole way back to the river where they left their boats.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Unfortunately for the Missourians, a couple of hundred Indians had swung ahead of them, surprised the men defending the boats and landing site, and destroyed the boats. So when Howard and his men finally came in site of the river, they were faced with more disaster, and the prospect of either trying to build boats without tools or walk the entire distance back to St. Louis, without food, and continually harassed by Indians. Using a couple of axes that hadn't been left behind, and knives and bayonets, they fashioned some crude rafts and paddles and floated down the Mississippi to St. Louis. Of the 1500 men, 300 were killed outright storming the fort, 400 were left as wounded, another 100 dead in the field battle, 100 lost on the trip back (sentries ambushed, deserters, men who just collapsed and fell behind), so only only 700 men made onto the rafts. All were on the verge of starvation, most wounded, all exhausted. Fever and gangrene carried off another 100, some after they returned, so of the 1500 that went north, only 600 men survived. Note that the huge number (400) of wounded left at Fort Gourock was because walking wounded, men who normally could have retreated, could not possibly undergo either the forced march off the battlefield or the miles of rough terrain with no supplies. If Howard had had the opportunity to regroup and float his wounded home on (real) boats as Edwards did, he probably would have saved as many as 300 more of his men.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Still, they did far more damage to the British than Edwards' men had done. Moreover, his heroic retreat over rough terrain conducted in good order, followed by the voyage on makeshift rafts made a much better story (both militarily and journalistically) than Edwards' tale of not bothering to wait for Howard and then running off and abandoning him. While the truth was somewhere in the middle, and Edwards actually brought (barely) half of his force home alive (as opposed to the 40% surviving ratio of Howard), Howard's story was the one generally accepted both in Washington and by the US public. Thus, when time came to appoint a westerner in charge of the 8th Military District (after the debacle in Ohio in October), there was no question it would be Howard, not Edwards that got the job. However, the appointment of Howard was the last straw for Edwards, and he left Illinois, 'on vacation, to visit family' for the remainder of the war.[3] [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Meanwhile, the British are left with hundreds of wounded American prisoners that they really don't know what to do with or how to feed – the supply lines weren't really set up for feeding an extra 500 mouths that are not only unproductive, but take care and medical supplies! While the officers involved never seriously consider getting rid of their unwelcome guests, they do suddenly understand far better the Indian tradition of killing a wounded enemy on the field, rather than taking him prisoner and feeding him food that should go to your own people....[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]When things have settled down some, the British send a messenger to parley with Howard, and arrange for an unarmed Missouri party to come up river with enough boats to take those wounded who survived (and were prepared to give parole not to fight the British again, which most were only too glad to). The British get an unaccustomed moment of praise in the US press for this, when it was purely practical![/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]There are various Indian raids (some to be described later), but snow starts falling and the Americans in the West breathe a sigh of relief that the war is over until spring. [/FONT]



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]1 What Howard had believed was an uncompleted section of the wall, was actually a finished section undergoing some strengthening and reinforcement. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]2 they didn't of course, they shipped them around Lakes Huron and Michigan, and then floated them down the Illinois. Not easy, but possible.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]3 He actually did this OTL when Howard was appointed in charge of the 8th Military District (in the summer of 1814). [/FONT]
 
First of all...excellent work on the financial side of things. Learned alot about that part of it from your post.
thanks

Although Niagra is key terrain how will the loss of the troops at Buffalo stand up...that's a large number gone in a battle where 500 make a big difference. I did like the explanation for why troops fell into the ice...major consideration we run into when building winter roads is whose standards are going to be applied. That being said I do find it tough to belive that some testing wasnt' done as anyone who works with ice bridges only makes that mistake once...with the militia there I'm surprised it happened but if they weren't told what ice level was needed then c'est la vie..
Vincent wasn't the sharpest crayon in the box, from what I can tell. He is VERY anxious to get a victory, and so doesn't wait for the ice to get really hard and thick. It is my thought that he asked a local who knew the local conditions, but not what is needed for cannon, rather than an engineer who moved cannon across frozen rivers the year before. (With the better control of the lakes, there has been less worry about moving stuff over ice than OTL).

The local might even have said 'but I don't know about those cannon', and Vincent didn't hear the qualification, but more likely, I think, the local just never had any experience with something that heavy, and more to the point, dense.

In regards to logistics...adding in the new troops at buffalo due to Izard's forces that is going to really stress the supplies. Although sledges can be very efficent for moving supplies it's winter, caloric intake is way up, and your winter clothing is a neccessity. I forsee alot of frostbite problems in the americans future if their troops don't have the energy to keep good blood circulation while doing winter work. One bad snowstorm to cover the trails and drift things in and you're shut down for a long period till you can shovel it all out.
Remember the post where Monroe comes to visit? It's decided that 2000 regulars/militia from elsewhere can be fed from the local farms. Izard doesn't bring any troops, he just replaces Duncan MacArthur who has gone to take command in Ohio. There may have been a few more troops, but it's still 2000 paid troops or so, plus the civilians of the area. Mind you, given the rape and pillage that happened last time, every person who can carry a gun is in the local militia, including some older men, teenage boys and women. Not all were available for the battle, as not all the settlement was near Buffalo, but that battle at the abattis was almost all civilians, most of whom escaped and reformed in a line in front of Buffalo, together with new arrivals.

In regards to settlement...Canadian settlement basically meant filling up eastern canada (east of NW ontario at least) and a little of Vancouver until the railway came and allowed reasonable access into the west. If settlement was expanded to make Vancouver, Prince Rupert and maybe Churchill all major immigration ports like Montreal and Halifax then you get a much more evenly spread population which assists in creating a greater common framework. This is happening to an extent in Canada currently with the population movement west and how the house of Commons will be adjusted for the population changes but it means a very different Canada than what we know now.

Alot of what I see in Canada comes down to logistics. If you have a population in the central plains that is able to have even seasonal access to large centers/ports then you have fill alot of land up fast as proven in the late 1800's. Not sure how feasible it is to have rail traffic in eastern Canada, port at North Bay?, port at Thunder Bay, Rail to Calgary. Followed by Rail development linking Vancouver to Calgary over time... Due to the distances involved and sheer scale of projects the cultural differences that have developed in different parts of provinces, let alone regions seem to me to be an integral part of being Canadian...pride in being different than our neighbors due to heritage but also pride in a country that lets us be that different.

Anywho..morning ramblings over it's time for my coffee.

Keep it up!

Don't forget that Wisconsin, Minnesota and Iowa will end up as *Canada
 
This is good stuff, Dathi. Are we getting an update soon?
thanks.

Umm... Most people get MORE posting done on the weekend, I get less, as my wife is off work and wants to use the computer:) (I'm a somewhat disabled househusband...) The other delay, is the next post will involve a contribution by foresterab (no, I didn't forget you Stephen), and I have to edit it and make it fit the TL, which is a bit more work than just sitting down and typing an episode.

I'm also spending WAY too much time on this, and may need to back off a bit...

But, yes, there should be another post tomorrow. Failing that, the next day.
 
I've been quietly following this TL, and I have to ask: what do you see as the essential Canada-ness of Canada that you want to preserve?

ED: What photoshop do you have? I use PS7 so it's a bit old but I might be able to help in some way.
 
The Gathering of the Nations

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif](this post started as a guest contribution by foresterab. I have modified and expanded it, partly because he wrote it before I had some of the timeline worked out. Personally, I think his different style strengthens this TL, and I'm glad to have it. Please credit him with the inspiration and strengths of the post, and blame me for the errors.)[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Most of the USE of the gathered nations will actually happen in the next post. Ya, I said that it would happen now, but you guys will just have to wait until tomorrow. (I HOPE tommorrow.)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]--[/FONT]


The Gathering of the Nations



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Guns...Thundersticks...call them what you will. The moonias (whiteman) have finally succumbed to the wishes of the people. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]- Cree elder, name not recorded.[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]

[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]If a chief warrants a coat, a hat, and a medal what does a warrior of renown receive...a gun. That device we were prevented from getting or had to pay outrageous prices for from the others lesser tribes that controlled their spread...no longer will our young men work a year to get a stack of beaver pelts for a single gun. Now our best and bravest will go to battle against the enemies of our friends the fur traders and our family the metis halfbreeds.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]- Cree Oral history.[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]

[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]In the hallways of London the governors of the honourable Hudson Bay Company met to review the appeal for native forces issued by Governor General Prevost and General Brock. "Sirs...all available forces have been called up and regulars deployed and yet it is not enough. To establish the buffer between our settled lands in Canada and new conquests I need forces for scouting, for garrison duties, and most importantly to fight. I appeal for your organization to assist our endeavours by mobilizing the Indians of the back country. His Majesty's government is behind this proposal, and your rewards will be great. We have already secured the agreement of your rivals the North West Company, and we doubt you would wish to be of less service in defence of His Majesty's lands than they. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]...[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The prospects of access to vast new territories may also encourage your spirits as you deliberate lending aid, should loyalty not be a strong enough appeal.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]...[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Raise as many Orkneymen and other servants of the Company as you see fit. Extra men can be enrolled as auxiliaries in His Majesties forces. We especially need men to build and man York boats to travel from Fort Douglas [OTL Winnipeg] south along the Red River.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]- excerpts from the appeal from Canada to the Hudson's Bay Company[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]

[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]And so the word was spread…by runner and dog team the word spread through the woods of the north. And with each passing of the word elders gathered to discuss and plan over the winter fires and a trickle of support became a flood as voices gathered and the word of the people became united as the Great White Father approached the people as equals. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]- Ojibwa Oral History.[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
When the ice broke and the spring flood subsided the people of the woods began to move. The Ojibwa of the near north came from their lands around the Great Lakes while their rivals and neighbours Cree, flying the red flag of peace, came from the treeline and west. This first wave arrived at Mackinac and Detroit, and were sent south with tokens of friendship to join the forces of Tecumseh in Indiana and Black Hawk in Illinois, and greatly aided their summer raids.
[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]At this season, too, the great flotillas of canoes went out throughout the North country, the Pays d'en Haut, laden with trade goods for the fur trade, and the Great White Father's request for aid from his scattered peoples. This message spread along the fur trade routes as far as the Rocky Mountains. So, too, did the word spread across the prairies, that warriors of every tribe would be welcomed with friendship and gifts by the servants of King George.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Each nation pondered the message, and most sent young men off to the distant east. Some elders feared sending their young men off, but feared more that if they kept them home, then when their enemies returned they would covered in glory – and carrying guns. Cree from the woods and the plains poured into Fort Douglas by canoe and horseback, as did the Stoney, Saulteaux and Ojibwa who had not heard the word earlier. Then came Chipewyan, more Cree, even some Beaver and other tribes from the further northwest. All groups flying the red flag of peace as they passed through Cree territory.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The people of the plains, Blackfoot and Stoney, Sioux and Piegan, Blood and Cree came with a herd of horses that filled the prairie as old grudges and wars were put aside as the young men came to gain honour and respect for their people. With lance and bow, pony after pony, a display of wealth was presented that surpassed any expectations of the fur trade with many a doubt over the power of these people dispelled. For this was not just a battle of the Great White Father and his people the redcoats but also a demonstration of the pride of nations united against the American forces. Games of skill occupied the time while bands gathered until the time came when the Great White Father’s redcoat came to the gathering and professed his pleasure at their prowess and pride in his trust in his friends. In a wide weaving band, like Genghis Khan and his horde across the steppe, the people of the Plains set off united in purpose with much coup* anticipated.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]- As recorded in the Hudson Bay Company history
[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]With a gathering of hundreds, with many languages and peoples, and with blood feuds between men and tribes only suspended, not forgotten, organization was a challenge. But gradually war bands were gathered together who could work effectively together not having feuds and sharing some language, each leavened with few fur traders and soldiers. Then came the appointed time. The warriors and hunters came together and asked for the peace and blessing of the Great Spirit. Gifts of tobacco for wisdom and sweats to purify the spirit occurred as those present sought a blessing, a blessing needed as the US was a powerful foe no single nation could stand against. As they stood in supplication, the golden sun broke through the white clouds above highlighting the red flag of peace and the green grass. A symbol of the four holy colours of Red, White, Yellow, and Green was not to be ignored and the force broke into their warband groups and headed up the Red River to win glory. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]- As recorded in the North West Company records[/FONT]




[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]From further south across the plains came Sioux (of many groups), Iowa, even Crow and small groups from several other nations, who gathered at Prairie du Chien or Saukenuk.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Even some Montaignais and Naskapi made the journey from the East to arrive at Detroit, although many viewed them as crazy given the distance covered and time of travel. [/FONT]



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]* (Note….counting coup was to touch an armed foe without injuring him. Successful warriors were deemed to be brave men and were so well respected that wars were fought to earn this honour)
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
 
I've been quietly following this TL, and I have to ask: what do you see as the essential Canada-ness of Canada that you want to preserve?

ED: What photoshop do you have? I use PS7 so it's a bit old but I might be able to help in some way.

I'm not trying to 'preserve' any specific 'essential Canada-ness', per se, so much as to create a nation that rivals or overmatches the United States, that is a direct descendant of and can legitimately be called 'Canada'. Probably the only essentials, in order of importance, are 1)that evolution, 2) that it's British in loyalty, and 3) that French and English/British are both founding nations.

My wife has Photoshop Elements on this computer, so that's what I'm using. She's the family photographer and, to the extent we have one, graphic designer.
 
I'm not trying to 'preserve' any specific 'essential Canada-ness', per se, so much as to create a nation that rivals or overmatches the United States, that is a direct descendant of and can legitimately be called 'Canada'. Probably the only essentials, in order of importance, are 1)that evolution, 2) that it's British in loyalty, and 3) that French and English/British are both founding nations.

My wife has Photoshop Elements on this computer, so that's what I'm using. She's the family photographer and, to the extent we have one, graphic designer.
That's what I was wondering: what do you see as making Canada, Canada. I have my own opinion living on a southern border state as I do, but now I know. Thanks.

....and I see you don't need my help then! Withdrawn :D
 
Know what you mean about weekends being busy...

Looking forward to seeing how our ideas match up.
I tried to use as much of your stuff as possible, but time frames required some shifting. One quote got re-attributed, the impetus came FROM the NWC to Prevost, so the address to the HBC is only to them. And I did a bit of expanding. I removed the 'black' reference, as, while it could well have been used, I think the alternate fear I used is even more valid, and doesn't muck up future possibilities. I WILL keep it in mind for later.

Oh, and your concentration was, understandably, a bit heavy on areas you've been, especially Alberta.

I do hope I kept the essential spirit...
 
Nice work David,

I threw that out there before things had developed as far as they have so it's definately understandable if it's changed :). In fact I'm glad you did as a writer I'm not but work has exposed me to many of the first nations mentioned and some of their customs..

It may have been Alberta focused originally as you've got a good handle on the Upper Canada portion (bravo by the way..you're better at it than many proffessionals who work with the groups today) but Alberta in many regards was the crossroads...end of the line for the boat brigades, entrence to the Athabasca fur regions and it was the site of some of the older settlements.

Understandable as we talked about the black reference (black is bad luck for some groups if people are following this and wondering what we are talking about).

Will probably send some more via PM tonight.
foresterab
 
Dathi

Back from hols and catching up on my favourite threads. Most definitively including this one.:)

Sounds to be developing well. Hadn't realised how rough the US economy was by the end of the war OTL although knew it would be vulnerable once the blockage tightened.

Rather a bloody nose at Buffalo, which does balance things out a bit and gives the US some encouragement to fight on. Although that could make it worse for them in the longer run. As stated however the problems of continuing the siege of Niagara without stockpiled supplies could be a problem for the Americans. Possibly, although the distances will be a problem the American wounded from the Gourock attack can be swapped with some of the British prisoners from Buffalo?

Going to be interesting the potential political and social effects of the assembly of tribal warriors. Might just be the trigger for some more lasting success for Tecumseh's plans for Indian unity? Or at least some lessons learned. Possibly also the warriors who return westwards will not only have better weapons but also a lot of new ideas.

One small quibble with the statement about the naval ratings. I think a 1st rater was a ship from about 98guns up to some of the 120 gun giants. 2nd raters were about 80-95 guns and 3rd raters were 64-72 gunned ships. [Although they frequently carried more guns than their ratings]. Surprised how big some of the ships being built on the Lakes were but Victory was definitely a 1st rater.

Steve



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][/FONT]
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top