AHC: Earliest possible ARW

Royalists are winning English Civil War and troops of Parliament flee to Americas. There is some battles between Royalists and troops of Parliament but Parliament wiin in America and Royalists win in England.
 
Royalists are winning English Civil War and troops of Parliament flee to Americas. There is some battles between Royalists and troops of Parliament but Parliament wiin in America and Royalists win in England.

Super plausible. The hardest part is getting Cromwell to admit defeat, but maybe he can be made to see reason, or die in such a manner that the Parliamentarians cleave together instead of falling apart.

New England is 115% Roundhead (probably moreso than old England); invading and taking the Royalist southern colonies might happen later rather than sooner, but it will happen - though the New Netherlands might be assimilated peacefully. That would be pretty interesting; probably you'll get a huge influx of Parliamentarian-minded folks, and a Puritan state might be very appealing to Huguenots when *Fontainebleau happens (and it will).
 
I don't think America was developed enough in 1650 or so (Cromwell time) to break away. It had only a population of c. 100000 then, (for comparison, North Dakota doesn't have any city with population >100k the last time I checked.). Not to mention that apart from some tobacco plants, there isn't a lot happening there yet. If it did break away, I wonder how long it would take the French to jump on it.

Realistically, I think the end of the 7 years war, when France has been beaten down and aren't likely to challenge the fledgling country.

- BNC
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
If not the ECW, what about if the Stuart's defeat the Glorious Revolution? New England has had another generation to grow.

Or, if u can tolerate multi-PODdage than say the POD is the kirkes never have to give back Quebec in the 1620s aborting New France and the threat from there. Then, a generation later, the roundheads lose the civil war.
 
Last edited:
If not the ECW, what about if the Stuart's defeat the Glorious Revolution? New England has had another generation to grow.

Or, if u can tolerate multi-postage than say the POD is the kirkes never have to give back Quebec in the 1620s aborting New France and the threat from there. Then, a generation later, the roundheads lose the civil war.

That would be an improvement. What was the state of France, especially regarding America, around 1688?

- BNC
 
Here's a question what was the difference in national identity of the average american colonial in that year vs let's say 1770?

English, bluntly. By then 'New England' as a concept existed but as a region of England, no different than Wessex or East Anglia, that happened to be overseas.

Granted the Dominion of NE was such a bungle you could indeed play with it to make independence feel feasible.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
That would be an improvement. What was the state of France, especially regarding America, around 1688?

- BNC


France and Britain were about to get in to the first intercolonial war, King William's War. If Britain is Stuart, there won't be a French war with Britain right away. Louis XIV would probably not see America as an especially relevant theater in this context. But if a war did start, the French would do so from anti-Dutch, anti-William motives, and their main approach may be to provide basing for Stuart Loyalists trying to reclaim the colonies for the Stuarts.

In the 1650s there wasn't much fighting between French and British in America. They were mainly operating in different areas. Prior to the 4 French and Indian Wars beginning in 1689, the only French-British fight in America was when the Kirke brothers of Scotland occupied Quebec (and Acadia I think) from 1627-1629 and sent Champlain and the French settlers packing for France for the duration.
 
Royalists are winning English Civil War and troops of Parliament flee to Americas. There is some battles between Royalists and troops of Parliament but Parliament wiin in America and Royalists win in England.

A cool scenario. What about the converse? A bunch of Royalists flee to the colonies and defeat the roundheads there?
 
France and Britain were about to get in to the first intercolonial war, King William's War. If Britain is Stuart, there won't be a French war with Britain right away. Louis XIV would probably not see America as an especially relevant theater in this context. But if a war did start, the French would do so from anti-Dutch, anti-William motives, and their main approach may be to provide basing for Stuart Loyalists trying to reclaim the colonies for the Stuarts.

In the 1650s there wasn't much fighting between French and British in America. They were mainly operating in different areas. Prior to the 4 French and Indian Wars beginning in 1689, the only French-British fight in America was when the Kirke brothers of Scotland occupied Quebec (and Acadia I think) from 1627-1629 and sent Champlain and the French settlers packing for France for the duration.

But if America declares independence, isn't there a chance that France, traditionally Britain's rival, will want to take the land for itself?

- BNC
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
But if America declares independence, isn't there a chance that France, traditionally Britain's rival, will want to take the land for itself?

- BNC

Perhaps, but its dependent on the PoD.

If it is during the English Civil War, France was also pretty busy fighting Spain. Also, in 1640s, 1650s, from the perspective of New France, New Netherlands might have been a higher priority target, to capture the other terminus of the fur trade and crush the Dutch-Iroquois coalition that faced the Franco-Algonquin coalition.

I suppose they could hold down independent English colonies with deployed troops and Amerindian auxiliaries, though it wouldn't be easy. French colonial population was small. Although New Netherlands could benefit from external (Dutch) support it could probably be kept under occupation more easily than New England, or possibly Virginia.

If America rebels in favor of William in 1688, but William loses in the British Isles to the Stuarts, the French might be interested in grabbing the English colonies on the seaboard for plantations and to eliminate an area allied with William and the Dutch. The Stuarts could be angry enough at New England to give the French carte blanche to conquer those colonies. However, by this point the English colonies would be even more populous and troublesome to occupy.

A cool scenario. What about the converse? A bunch of Royalists flee to the colonies and defeat the roundheads there?

This has been discussed before, with the consensus that it is largely unlikely. The King fleeing to America is much further from home and from help than if he's in France or elsewhere in Europe. By fleeing this far he's admitting he's not likely to come back, he's living in a rough frontier at a lower standard of living than if entertained by a European monarch and is still open to being overcome killed and captured by a revolt by colonists and a pursuing parliamentary army from Britain.

Do the same considerations apply in reverse? That is would fleeing parliamentarians in America be in danger of a pursuing royalist force? Perhaps, but there's a greater chance that roundhead types or other anti-Stuarts could better stomach living in the austere conditions of America.
 
Top