A Russian Empire in America.

We all know Alaska had been in Russian hands since around the 1730s. It was sold to the USA in 1867 larger due to the fact it was never profitable for the Russians because of excessive transportation costs of people and material, hence ending any significant Russian presence on the American continent forever. But say if, in the 1730s Russia made a more concerted push to colonise western Canada or what is now the NW United States. More appropriation of funds by Tsarist Russia and a more structured policy from St. Petersburg, may have altered the history of North America.

There was a fledging population in Alaska, up to 30,000 to 40,000 colonists and they made incursions into British Columbia forging trade links with local Indian tribes and indulging in the fur trade. Also, the Russians established a trading post in California which existed for around 40 years or so. Incidentally, by 1765 Spanish colonial authorities feared a Russian invasion so much they established expensive outposts in remote areas of California.

In the 1730s, the future of Canada was by no means settled. The Seven Years War was yet to happen and Canada's position as largely a British possession within her American empire was not yet finalised. If the Russians had a presence on the west coast, would the Seven Years War (in America) have turned out differently? And what effect would it have on the development of Canada and for that matter the USA?
 
Last edited:
There was a fledging population in Alaska, up to 30,000 to 40,000 colonists
What???:eek:
Russian population of Alaska never exceeded 2000, and most of time was lower than 1000. Your figure is Russian estimate of all Alaskan population, the Indians and Inuits included. Majority of the Natives lived far from Russian forts, and were almost completely independent from the Russian-American Company (the Tlingits, for example, bought weapons and ammunition from the Yankee and British traders, without having to ask the Russians to sell them; the Inuits of Northern Alaska didn't even know of existence of Russian America, because the Company, before 1840-ies, didn't bother itself with exploration of far interior lands).
We all know Alaska had been in Russian hands since around the 1730s.
The Russians (firstly different private companies, later (after 1799) - semi-nationalized Russian-American Company) had some sort of sustained presence in Alaska (Kodiak Island, where they enslaved and almost exterminated the Inuits) after 1741. However, before 1805, mainland territories were completely off-limits to the Company, because Indian tribes were too strong for them, and the Russian Imperial Navy didn't participate (till 1805) in the Russian-Indian conflicts.
After 1805, the Company became more confident, and was able to establish some settlements on Alaskan coast
Also, the Russians established a trading post in California which existed for around 40 years or so
Thirty years, actually (between 1812 and 1841). Fort Ross, near Frisco. It was even less of a colony that Alaska was, being mostly the base for the Russian sea otter-hunters, with rudimentary agriculture and without any industry, so that Russian Californians bought almost all necessities from the Mexicans or Yankees.
But say if, in the 1730s Russia made a more concerted push to colonise western Canada or what is now the NW United States. More appropriation of funds by Tsarist Russia and a more structured policy from St. Petersburg, may have altered the history of North America.
Government funds in 1730-40-ies were spent in the Siberia and Russian Far East (so-called Siberian and Kamchatka expeditions, resulting in the re-discovery of Bering Strait, discoveries of Alaska, Cape Chelyuskin, mapping of the Russian Pacific coast, and so on). The Imperial Government, hard-pressed by needs of the European wars, was hardly able to spend even more.
However, it could, in all probability, spend more money after 1740-ies, and lend early support to the Russian adventurers in America (which in OTL it did only in 1799). What could be done with more money, but with same number of men available? Not much. Of course, Russian fur-traders/hunters could establish their presence on the Amercan Pacific coast furter south, maybe, even all the way to California. But several thousand of the Russians, scattered in this vast country, selling their furs to any European/American captain willing to sell them in turn weapons, ammunition and food, wouldn't be able to forestall not only American/British, but even Mexican expansion in the region.
Russian America needed tens of thousands of pesant colonists and strong Russian merchant marine on the Pacific. However, all peasants in the Empire were bound to their villages (before 1861, they were either privately-owned (serfs), with obvious consequences for their (im)mobility, or government-owned, in which case their migration would hurt taxes' collection, recruit drafting, and so be unacceptable for the Goverment). At the same time, Russian merchant marine didn't exist as noticeable power. All that Russia had were Greek-owned grain-carriers of the Black Sea/Mediterranean route and Finnish-owned fishery/general purpose fleet on the Baltic.
Consequently, large scale Russian colonization of America could be implemented only after abolition of serfdom and development of the Russian merchant marine. First condition was met in OTL only in 1861, while second one was partly met only at the end of 19th century (parastatal ROPiT - 'Russian society for shipping and trade').
 
One factor that could have improved Russia's NA holdings would have been the RNRC sending more farmers to the Fort Ross colony. If Fort Ross had been developed into a viable agricultural operation, it would have found markets in Alaska and the Russian Far East.
 

Germaniac

Donor
My timeline, which Ive only gotten the first chapter out, Will have Russia holding onto Alaska for quite some time.
 
Top