Alternate North American colonizers?
- Thread starter Zioneer
- Start date
Based on who landed here (and who landed here according to certain theories I don't know how much credence I've give to), you have the Celts, Norse, and Templars.
The problem is those who weren't huge colonizers were generally those who had circumstances to explain it. The German attempts were underfunded from what I recall, the Ottoman's didn't have any impetus like the Europeans did (they had vast resources under them), and others were not powerful enough.
And then there were nations like the Dutch and I think even Swedes who got a foothold but lost control. Their American holdings could perhaps be maintained and expanded.
The problem is those who weren't huge colonizers were generally those who had circumstances to explain it. The German attempts were underfunded from what I recall, the Ottoman's didn't have any impetus like the Europeans did (they had vast resources under them), and others were not powerful enough.
And then there were nations like the Dutch and I think even Swedes who got a foothold but lost control. Their American holdings could perhaps be maintained and expanded.
Last edited:
Wolfpaw
Banned
I suppose the Spanish might be able to pull it off, though I myself think the Norse had the best chance pre-1492. The Dutch always seemed plausible to me if they did better in the various Anglo-Dutch Wars. Then there're the Scots, but they really only had an ill-fated colony in (surprise!) Nova Scotia.
DISSIDENT
Banned
China is the most documented ATL alternate colonizer for the New World. In OTL, obviously they came as traders or immigrants after the British/Spanish/French/Portuguese showed up and may or may not have been here on their own before that, depending on who you ask.
There are a few TLs and threads on the topic on the board. I tried one but it never quite came together. Hendryk has an excellent TL on the subject.
But China is not the only nation on Earth, though some day it may well rule it and there are other possibilities.
Polynesia: There is confirmed archeological evidence they visited the New World and traded with Andean cultures as a type of Polynesian game bird was adopted by the Inca and a type of Peruvian sweet potato was adopted by the Polynesians and they may have also visited California as well.
More Polynesian colonization and cultural influence is both plausible and ignored in AH.
Denmark: They had some islands, but never really did anything with them. Considering Denmark was a considerable power in Europe for a long time, they probably could have had more of a presence in The New World.
Korea: Someone did this as a timeline at some point and it was very good. But Korea was an advanced and powerful state and could have colonized the New World probably.
Morocco: Usually only considered when trying to figure out a way to have Grenada or the Ottoman Empire colonize the Americas, Morocco was a sophisticated and advanced state that probably could have done so on its own.
Russia: Russia had Alaska, largely ignored it and eventually sold it and had a fort in California they eventually abandoned. For such a large and powerful empire, and considering that many Aleut tribes are still Russian orthodox today, they probably could have expanded more. There is a novel somewhere set in a world where the New World was more heavily colonized by Russia.
Japan: Prime candidate. Could have. Had the organized society and maritime tradition. Had experience with hostile natives with the Ainu. But they went isolationist. Keep Japan open by having the Tokugawa not get spooked by Christianity or some other means or have the wako pirates colonize America the illegal way and you could have something very interesting on your hands.
There are a few TLs and threads on the topic on the board. I tried one but it never quite came together. Hendryk has an excellent TL on the subject.
But China is not the only nation on Earth, though some day it may well rule it and there are other possibilities.
Polynesia: There is confirmed archeological evidence they visited the New World and traded with Andean cultures as a type of Polynesian game bird was adopted by the Inca and a type of Peruvian sweet potato was adopted by the Polynesians and they may have also visited California as well.
More Polynesian colonization and cultural influence is both plausible and ignored in AH.
Denmark: They had some islands, but never really did anything with them. Considering Denmark was a considerable power in Europe for a long time, they probably could have had more of a presence in The New World.
Korea: Someone did this as a timeline at some point and it was very good. But Korea was an advanced and powerful state and could have colonized the New World probably.
Morocco: Usually only considered when trying to figure out a way to have Grenada or the Ottoman Empire colonize the Americas, Morocco was a sophisticated and advanced state that probably could have done so on its own.
Russia: Russia had Alaska, largely ignored it and eventually sold it and had a fort in California they eventually abandoned. For such a large and powerful empire, and considering that many Aleut tribes are still Russian orthodox today, they probably could have expanded more. There is a novel somewhere set in a world where the New World was more heavily colonized by Russia.
Japan: Prime candidate. Could have. Had the organized society and maritime tradition. Had experience with hostile natives with the Ainu. But they went isolationist. Keep Japan open by having the Tokugawa not get spooked by Christianity or some other means or have the wako pirates colonize America the illegal way and you could have something very interesting on your hands.
Cuāuhtemōc
Banned
A united Scandinavian kingdom would have the capacity to send ships island-hopping across their dominions in Iceland and Greenland and easily have access to colonizing the New World, especially around the St. Lawrence.
1. United Scandinavia, provided they control Finland (tar, wood, sailors and settlers) and maybe Pomerania (excess people) and are on good terms with the Dutch (early mercenary expertise).
2. Russia and Denmark under one King, or Russia/Holstein and a puppet/ally Denmark, or any kind of Western-oriented Russia with an Atlantic port, over the Atlantic. Denmark itself has too few people.
3. Russia itself with a different set of rulers, with a late 18th-early 19th c. window when Spain is weak, on the Pacific.
4. The HRE if the Low Countries remain under its control.
5. Burgundy, for the same reason, provided it can becomes more than personal posessions.
6. Morocco, or the Ottomans through Morocco, have been mentioned, but I imagine it will be more about trade than colonies as such.
2. Russia and Denmark under one King, or Russia/Holstein and a puppet/ally Denmark, or any kind of Western-oriented Russia with an Atlantic port, over the Atlantic. Denmark itself has too few people.
3. Russia itself with a different set of rulers, with a late 18th-early 19th c. window when Spain is weak, on the Pacific.
4. The HRE if the Low Countries remain under its control.
5. Burgundy, for the same reason, provided it can becomes more than personal posessions.
6. Morocco, or the Ottomans through Morocco, have been mentioned, but I imagine it will be more about trade than colonies as such.
In reality? Some polynesians probably made it to South America. I mean, if they found Easter Island out in the middle of nowhere, surely some must have missed islands and found a continent.
As for Morocco. Seems to me the Antilles or northeastern South America would be the easiest parts for them to colonize. Holding those little islands sounds like the easiest task.
As for Morocco. Seems to me the Antilles or northeastern South America would be the easiest parts for them to colonize. Holding those little islands sounds like the easiest task.
Moroccans might follow the Portuguese and Spanish ships to north america in order to pirate them. Then to create a series of pirate bases.
This might be more plausible if Ceuta is never captured and Morocco stays united and stable.
The problem is for the Moroccans to really be able to match the sailing ability of the Iberians I think they would need to invest in some bigger ships like the Caravels. In OTL all they had was galleys, which couldn't do very well in open waters like the Atlantic. That being said, galleys would do very well in the shallows of the Caribbean. Around the time that they could have started an bi-continental pirating operation, they were involved in the fight for control of the Saharran slave/salt/gold trade.
Zioneer
Banned
Hmm... Could the Portuguese and Moroccans become rivals for domination of all the Americas, instead of the Spanish and British?
As for the Portuguese settling in Canada, perhaps they could.
Well, IMO they'd need a much bigger population base to rule the Americas like the Spanish and English did.
Of course they did.
they landed in South America and Brought the Sweet Potato back with them in about 700-1000 AD.
the main Alternate Theory about how the Potato got to Polynesia are not Supported by Evidence.
and Now there's your POD. some Polynesian Settlers Decide to explore Upwards from South america.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
Looking at it from a population perspective (only from 1750, because that's about as early as numbers are available - this shouldn't be too bad proportionately, because it's before the Industrial Revolution caused England to skyrocket):
Portugal 2.37M
Spain 8M
United Scandinavia: 3.85M
England 5.74M
Netherlands 1.89M
France 22M
Population is not necessarily an indicator of colonial success. It's also about location, and a large Scandinavian state can be quite a factor, provided it has Norway - otherwise, the geographic problem is pretty large. France's population was about equal to all the other Atlantic states combined, but ended up with almost nothing.
Morocco's population is unknown, but it was certainly smaller than Portugal's. I don't think there's much chance of a Moroccan America, although as we've covered before, Islam tends to spread more easily than Christianity, so you could see converted Aztecs or something.
Portugal 2.37M
Spain 8M
United Scandinavia: 3.85M
England 5.74M
Netherlands 1.89M
France 22M
Population is not necessarily an indicator of colonial success. It's also about location, and a large Scandinavian state can be quite a factor, provided it has Norway - otherwise, the geographic problem is pretty large. France's population was about equal to all the other Atlantic states combined, but ended up with almost nothing.
Morocco's population is unknown, but it was certainly smaller than Portugal's. I don't think there's much chance of a Moroccan America, although as we've covered before, Islam tends to spread more easily than Christianity, so you could see converted Aztecs or something.
Anyone got links for these? I'm curious and the search function makes me angry.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
Most of these are problematic due to sailing technology. Did Japan have vessels that could have reached America before the modern era? Did China? I find that dubious.
Valdemar II
Banned
The problem with Scandinavia are "why bother", what can Scandinavia gain from a colony in Canada which they can't produce at home? "Nya Sverige" at the Delaware rivers delta on the other hand has potential, it could produce tobacco to the North Europe market, the problem was that it would get conquered the moment the Swedes came in conflict with the English or Dutch. Ironic the best way to make the colony survive, are to ensure that Sweden are less succesful in Europe, so Sweden avoid conflict with the main colony powers. If the colony can survive to 1700, the colonist position would likely be strong enough to secure permanent survival as a ethnic-linguistic group in America.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
Canada isn't really a very good arena for colonization, but the Caribbean or S. USA is, for the reasons you mentioned. A united Scandinavia changes all the calculations as it totally controls Baltic trade (critical for British shipbuilding) and is more powerful as a state than the Netherlands.