Because that would put Santa Fe on the American side.If the Texas Colorado River is used, why not draw a latitudinal line west from its source?
I don't think the French claim extended to the Pacific.If the Texas Colorado River is used, why not draw a latitudinal line west from its source?
Do the Spanish know that in 1819?Because that would put Santa Fe on the American side.
It did not extend to the Colorado River in Texas either.I don't think the French claim extended to the Pacific.
This thread is predicated on the premise of the French claim extending beyond the Colorado, and Spain being willing to settle at giving up east of the Colorado. Do you think differently?It did not extend to the Colorado River in Texas either.I don't think the French claim extended to the Pacific.If the Texas Colorado River is used, why not draw a latitudinal line west from its source?
I thin that if the French claim extends that far, then the western border should be more divergent from OTL further up too.This thread is predicated on the premise of the French claim extending beyond the Colorado, and Spain being willing to settle at giving up east of the Colorado. Do you think differently?
Because nobody knew where that is. Could have been south of San Francisco as far as anyone could have known at the time.If the Texas Colorado River is used, why not draw a latitudinal line west from its source?
Santa Fe would be on the US side regardless. It is east of the Colorado River. Not north. Latitude is an east-west line.Because that would put Santa Fe on the American side.
The POD is to draw the border along this river (west of the OTL Texas-Louisiana border, but not as far as the Rio Grande), not this river.Santa Fe would be on the US side regardless. It is east of the Colorado River. Not north. Latitude is an east-west line.
Which was my point regarding Santa Fe.Because nobody knew where that is. Could have been south of San Francisco as far as anyone could have known at the time.
Because nobody knew where that is. Could have been south of San Francisco as far as anyone could have known at the time.
I think this will speed up American settlement of Texas and Tejas (Ciscolorado and Transcolorado), and the Texas Revolution will become a Mexican-American War. Treaty of New Echota fails ratification so Georgia likely goes to war against the Cherokee. The Second Seminole War will basically be abandoned by the US Army also. Jackson may run for a third term, which puts him into the thick of the Panic of 1837. The preceding events could be different though due to various knock on effects.
I'm not sure the US is as capable of as complete a victory at this point in time as it had OTL a decade later. How much land would Jackson and Van Buren try to obtain? I am partial to US expansion into the northern tier of Mexican states, but it seems implausible here. Maybe there would be a second war in the 40s to 70s? Any of these wars could actually go to Mexico if fortune plays poor for the Americans.
Because the Colorado River in Texas doesn't run only north/south, some of what I call Transcolorado will be in the coastal portion of OTL Texas. My phrasing isn't elegant, I know and apologize. Perhaps it would help if you had a map showing the settlements of anglos at the start of their Texas Revolution.I'm not quite sure why there'd be a fight over transcolorado however. Most American settlers lived in the eastern portion of Spanish Texas and it wasn't until the 1840s that the Texas Republic started encouraging settlement beyond the Colorado. Indeed, with the exception of San Antonio (the first capital due to it having been the capital of Mexican Texas) all of the capitals of the Texas Republic were east of the Colorado River.
Plus, west of the Colorado is where the Comanche ruled. The good land is to the east, with the exception of San Antonio and the Nueces Valley which were already somewhat settled at this point IIRC.
This is an interesting timeline. One potential change is that he Republic of the Rio Grande survived and would eventually be annex by the USA.
"The Republic of the Rio Grande (Spanish: República del Río Grande) was an independent nation that insurgents against the Central Mexican Republic sought to establish in northern Mexico. The Republic of the Rio Grande was just one of a series of independence movements in Mexico under the unitary government dominated by Santa Anna's, including the Republic of Texas, the Republic of Zacatecas, and the Republic of Yucatán. The rebellion lasted from January 17 to November 6, 1840."
If you look at the maps, the USA ends at the Colorado river in this timeline. The Republic of Rio Grande ended at the Nueces in the original timeline. Maybe the Republic of the Rio Grande in this time line claims up to the Colorado River. Assuming that American settlers are coming into the American Texas, it is possible for them to support the Republic of the Rio Grande. The logic is that this pushes the Mexican border further away and creates a weak border state. Eventually enough American settle in the Republic of the Rio Grande to vote to join the USA. I can see this if Mexico is viewed as a threat to the leaders in the the Republic of the Rio Grande. As long as their lands and political positions are recognized, this would be a good deal. It is my understanding that the USA recognized the French legal and property rights in Louisiana when they purchased the Louisiana territory. As long as the USA does the same here, the US-Mexican border is pushed further south.
View attachment 431900 View attachment 431901
East Texas probably gets statehood by the mid 1820s, this might make butterflies with Arkansas and Missouri statehood. I doubt Mexico even cares because they still own most of the towns worth noting post-treaty (mostly Corpus Christi) and don't have the resources to dispute it anyways. They care more about America supporting their independence.
An earlier Texas might take the southwest corner of Louisiana due to the old claims.
I would put the northern border at the Red River running from the 100th Meridian until it becomes the eastern border, and following that down to the confluence of the Aroyo Honda with the Red River. Then I would drop the eastern border due south until the Calcasieu River, and follow that into the Gulf of Mexico. The western border would be the 100th meridian from the Red River until the Colorado River. The southern border would be the Colorado River from the 100th meridian until it flows into the Gulf of Mexico.
These borders could be modified with the addition of later territory from New Spain/Mexico. I would shrink them to create new states based around hydrolaulic watersheds, but that's just one of my hang ups.