An English Haiti?

What is now Haiti was once entirely ruled by Spain, but was seized by France thanks in large part due to the efforts of French buccaneers over the years.

So, what if it had become English, in a manner similar to Jamaica? Maybe more English buccaneers amongst the people on the then-sparsely populated western part of the island, followed by an English army routing the defenders there and seizing the place. But as in OTL, they fail to conquer the eastern half of the island. And let's also say that Jamaica is either successfully defended by the Spanish to begin with, or the Spanish recapture it soon after. Possibly Jamaica's fate TTL is to be turned over repeatedly as were many Caribbean islands.

Now we have established English Saint-Domingue. Will they give it a new name, either in the Cromwell-era or after, or will it simply be known as Saint Dominic (I'll call it that from this point forth for lack of creativity)? And let's also assume some good colonial governance turns the place into the Pearl of the Antilles as Saint-Domingue was. This means lots and lots of slavery, and lots and lots of slaves being imported under the English banner.

Aside from Haiti itself (I'll get to that), how might this affect the history of the Thirteen Colonies? The wealth of Saint Dominic will make it easily the most important colony. How will the southern colonies compete with this place? Let's assume there's gonna be an American Revolution of some form. Saint Dominic will be a major base, being so close, for operations both in North America and in the Caribbean. But let's assume the United States wins, and gains their 1783 borders anyway.

Now for Saint Dominic, if a slave rebellion happens there, and the English monumentally fail as bad as France did OTL, and the place gains independence, then what? It might get a better deal than OTL Haiti. It might be less damaged than OTL Haiti. But it's still gonna have to claw its way up in the world after the conflict. And what might it be called? The former slaves and others on the island will be speaking an English-based creole, probably akin to the many other English creoles, so it won't be called "Ayiti" nor "Haiti".

And finally, what would the relation of the US be with this English slave republic? Would it make a good place for Liberia-sort of efforts, some of which OTL were attempted on Hispaniola? Or simply a nice annexation target?
 
I trust the English would have a better time suppressing rebellions and actually conquer the eastern half of the island more easily than France considering they should have overwhelming naval advantage.
 

Deleted member 67076

An English Haiti is pointing a gun at New Spain and New Granada in a way Jamaica could only dream of. You've a number of excellent harbors in the region, its easily defensible (and easy to retreat back to) and its situated nicely in the middle of the Caribbean, allowing it to serve as an excellent launching point and trading station in a way that no other Caribbean colony could be.

Frankly I'd expect it to be a major naval base and pirate enclave for decades to come with piracy and supporting the navy being just as much important to Britain as sugar and coffee would be. I'd also expect a massive increase in smuggling with Spanish Santo Domingo in comparison to OTL, which combined with increased raids is going to force the Spanish crown to act in response to that. Wouldn't surprise me if the English attempt to raid or straight up invade Veracruz at one point.

Furthermore I'd expect the colonial balance of power to shift more south, with the Brits focusing more on Louisiana and their southern colonies as both areas would reinforce each other very well, with Saint Dominic providing defense and, say, Louisiana and the Carolinas providing raw materials and later slaves, (given that they were OTL net exporters of slaves due to natural population growth). Perhaps it might spur some proto-industry down south to supply Princeport's armada. New England in turn may or may not end up neglected, as men and money are diverted south. Which might prompt rebellion, or not. Its hard for me to say.

Dunno, the US equivalent might actually be more Brazil than America as we know it and might be incredibly lopsided, with the population and industry geared in the South. I doubt St Dominic would rebel with her northern sisters. Leaving in a rebellion doesn't really benefit St Dominic; they'd depend too much on the Royal Navy, alongside the European market and there's not much they can earn in trade with other colonies in the area.

However, this increased pressure on Spain is going to have a number of impacts, and thus the Spanish crown might be forced to do its Bourbon esque reforms earlier in the face of British pressure on their trading ports and smuggling. That means more trading ports, and perhaps Colonial wide free trade in order to divert smuggling.

I trust the English would have a better time suppressing rebellions and actually conquer the eastern half of the island more easily than France considering they should have overwhelming naval advantage.
Suppressing rebellions is not going to be easier than the French had it. Slaves will still likely had overwhelming numerical advantage (probably even more so, as English colonies always had less free men of color than comparison to the Romance Speaking ones). As well there is the same geographic pressures that made monitoring and stopping slave rebellions insanely difficult (Mountainous jungle and semiarid terrain combined with disease and lack of infrastructure in the borderlands). High population density (which is inevitable in St Dominic) only adds to slave advantages in wartime, given the ease of organization, coordination and logistics for slave armies in comparison to planning a slave rebellion in say, Brazil.

The one advantage the English had over the French I suppose is that they tended to not be picky about where they're slaves came from, and forcibly integrated the various ethnic groups of their slaves (instead of keeping them separate like the Portuguese) which tended to erode their native cultures. Of course that could backfire by creating a Pan African sentiment amongst slaves.

As for taking the entire Island, I'm eh on that. Conquering the eastern side is a lot harder than people give credit too given the mountain ranges and semi arid regions making marching an army insanely difficult even today, especially if you're doing it from a power base in the west since you have to go through the Cordillera Central and/or Sierra de Neiba. Even a naval invasion of Santo Domingo and Puerto Plata is tricky, and should those be taken then you have to deal with the northern population centers deep inland. To say nothing that the Sword of Damocles a hundred miles west of Santo Domingo prompting Spain to send more settlers immediately.
 
Without the Pearl of the West Indies, the French would be more concerned about their northern American lands. With some efforts in Quebec starting in the mid-17th c., New France could be a stronger player.
 
An English Haiti is pointing a gun at New Spain and New Granada in a way Jamaica could only dream of. You've a number of excellent harbors in the region, its easily defensible (and easy to retreat back to) and its situated nicely in the middle of the Caribbean, allowing it to serve as an excellent launching point and trading station in a way that no other Caribbean colony could be.

Frankly I'd expect it to be a major naval base and pirate enclave for decades to come with piracy and supporting the navy being just as much important to Britain as sugar and coffee would be. I'd also expect a massive increase in smuggling with Spanish Santo Domingo in comparison to OTL, which combined with increased raids is going to force the Spanish crown to act in response to that. Wouldn't surprise me if the English attempt to raid or straight up invade Veracruz at one point.

Furthermore I'd expect the colonial balance of power to shift more south, with the Brits focusing more on Louisiana and their southern colonies as both areas would reinforce each other very well, with Saint Dominic providing defense and, say, Louisiana and the Carolinas providing raw materials and later slaves, (given that they were OTL net exporters of slaves due to natural population growth). Perhaps it might spur some proto-industry down south to supply Princeport's armada. New England in turn may or may not end up neglected, as men and money are diverted south. Which might prompt rebellion, or not. Its hard for me to say.

Thank you for this detailed post.

English conquest of Louisiana? That's gonna change the dynamics of North America big time. The British might as well be able to secure southwest to the Rio Grande, and west to inland Texas, as far as relations with the Plains Indians will carry them. And certainly eastwards to the Appalachians, with river travel securing the transportation network. That might as well be the root of another potential nation in the Americas, and a Carolinas-like dynamic of settlement would produce that, along with ample amounts of slavery. That, I guess would confine any potential United States to the Applachians, with overlaps in the Appalachians themselves. Whether *Louisiana revolts is questionable. It would probably end up like Canada. Exports to the Caribbean would be comparable to what Louisiana OTL exported in the colonial era, but in greater volume. Though it isn't like the Carolinas were bereft of forests in the colonial era.

Boston, at least, will still be a major center of rum production as in OTL. Much of its rum came from Brazilian sugar, but I'd assume a healthy trade with the Caribbean was carried on as well. And that does leave out the mid-Atlantic colonies with their own issues.

Dunno, the US equivalent might actually be more Brazil than America as we know it and might be incredibly lopsided, with the population and industry geared in the South. I doubt St Dominic would rebel with her northern sisters. Leaving in a rebellion doesn't really benefit St Dominic; they'd depend too much on the Royal Navy, alongside the European market and there's not much they can earn in trade with other colonies in the area.

However, this increased pressure on Spain is going to have a number of impacts, and thus the Spanish crown might be forced to do its Bourbon esque reforms earlier in the face of British pressure on their trading ports and smuggling. That means more trading ports, and perhaps Colonial wide free trade in order to divert smuggling.

St. Dominic wouldn't revolt, I agree, no more than any of the British Caribbean leaped at the chance to join the Patriots in the Thirteen Colonies. But there's plenty of trade that can be carried on with the Thirteen Colonies. Sugar to New England for refinement, slaves to or from the South, and such. But the dynamics for a Brazil-type country do not exist north of the Mason-Dixon line. Especially not in New England. A greater focus on the South is one thing, but it isn't like the rest will necessary be ignored and neglected anymore than OTL. A three-way division seems to make sense--Maryland south (possibly including Florida if England can keep it), Pennsylvania and north (the Maritimes joining seem doubtful, and the dynamics with Quebec and the rest of the region seem too hard to predict), and the Appalachians westward to New Spain (and that's a whole different thread, I'll leave it at that for now).

Spain will definitely need to do something about this, definitely.

Suppressing rebellions is not going to be easier than the French had it. Slaves will still likely had overwhelming numerical advantage (probably even more so, as English colonies always had less free men of color than comparison to the Romance Speaking ones). As well there is the same geographic pressures that made monitoring and stopping slave rebellions insanely difficult (Mountainous jungle and semiarid terrain combined with disease and lack of infrastructure in the borderlands). High population density (which is inevitable in St Dominic) only adds to slave advantages in wartime, given the ease of organization, coordination and logistics for slave armies in comparison to planning a slave rebellion in say, Brazil.

The one advantage the English had over the French I suppose is that they tended to not be picky about where they're slaves came from, and forcibly integrated the various ethnic groups of their slaves (instead of keeping them separate like the Portuguese) which tended to erode their native cultures. Of course that could backfire by creating a Pan African sentiment amongst slaves.

As for taking the entire Island, I'm eh on that. Conquering the eastern side is a lot harder than people give credit too given the mountain ranges and semi arid regions making marching an army insanely difficult even today, especially if you're doing it from a power base in the west since you have to go through the Cordillera Central and/or Sierra de Neiba. Even a naval invasion of Santo Domingo and Puerto Plata is tricky, and should those be taken then you have to deal with the northern population centers deep inland. To say nothing that the Sword of Damocles a hundred miles west of Santo Domingo prompting Spain to send more settlers immediately.[/QUOTE]

I suppose they did defeat slave rebellions in Jamaica. But I wonder--if they face something as big as France did in Haiti, would that speed up abolition like I've seen cited the Baptist War in Jamaica did? Or is slavery on St. Dominic going to be too profitable to abandon so easily? Still, a slave republic (or even monarchy, looking at Haitian history) like Haiti is always an interesting dynamic, especially if the British ties will give it much more a link with the colonies in North America than Haiti ever had.

It definitely is difficult invading Hispaniola, but the Haitians managed to OTL, granted with lots of help from inside the eastern half of the island.

Without the Pearl of the West Indies, the French would be more concerned about their northern American lands. With some efforts in Quebec starting in the mid-17th c., New France could be a stronger player.

They still could have many sugar islands as they did OTL and perhaps focus elsewhere in the Caribbean, aimed at British islands.
 
The former slaves and others on the island will be speaking an English-based creole, probably akin to the many other English creoles, so it won't be called "Ayiti" nor "Haiti".

Haïti is not a French name, any more so than Jamaica is an English name. Both are of indigenous origin.
 

Deleted member 67076

Thank you for this detailed post.
No problem.

English conquest of Louisiana? That's gonna change the dynamics of North America big time. The British might as well be able to secure southwest to the Rio Grande, and west to inland Texas, as far as relations with the Plains Indians will carry them. And certainly eastwards to the Appalachians, with river travel securing the transportation network. That might as well be the root of another potential nation in the Americas, and a Carolinas-like dynamic of settlement would produce that, along with ample amounts of slavery.
I don't know if Britain would go and move to secure what everything to the Rio Grande. These areas are huge and would require a massive military commitment for little material gain at the time (until the mining is discovered) given the various Plains Natives that were beginning to transform into the New World equivalent of the Mongols, to say nothing of the potential for imperial overreach. Louisiana would begin as an extension of St. Dominic; more a military and trading post than a full on settler colony and thus I feel it would remain "anchored" to the Mississippi Basin and Caribbean rather than try to expand west into Texas. That said, Western Texas is sugar land, in addition to ranching so I could see moves to conquer and settle those areas.

Settlement up the Mississippi is likelier and easier, and would likely spur the creation of a vast hinterland for Louisiana. Well, when the settlers aren't clashing with the French up north.

That, I guess would confine any potential United States to the Applachians, with overlaps in the Appalachians themselves. Whether *Louisiana revolts is questionable. It would probably end up like Canada. Exports to the Caribbean would be comparable to what Louisiana OTL exported in the colonial era, but in greater volume. Though it isn't like the Carolinas were bereft of forests in the colonial era.

Boston, at least, will still be a major center of rum production as in OTL. Much of its rum came from Brazilian sugar, but I'd assume a healthy trade with the Caribbean was carried on as well. And that does leave out the mid-Atlantic colonies with their own issues.
Well Louisiana is probably going to be rather isolated from the 13 colonies and have a completely different economic system (and level of integration), which means its people would feel much less affinity towards the other colonies. Alongside that, they're much more dependent on the Metropole for everything, meaning the benefits of rebellion just aren't as big as out east.

Perhaps they might be lost in war with France who is now forced to focus most of her attention north to Canada? Or Perhaps New England becomes a marginal territory? Its difficult to say, but what I envision is the development of a vastly different colonial pattern focused from Virginia to St. Dominic to the Mosquito Coast.

St. Dominic wouldn't revolt, I agree, no more than any of the British Caribbean leaped at the chance to join the Patriots in the Thirteen Colonies. But there's plenty of trade that can be carried on with the Thirteen Colonies. Sugar to New England for refinement, slaves to or from the South, and such. But the dynamics for a Brazil-type country do not exist north of the Mason-Dixon line. Especially not in New England.
St. Dominic would be heavily dependent on imports of manufactured goods, so there's that as a potential economic connection.

Well, New England could always be the Southern Brazil to this country. :p

A greater focus on the South is one thing, but it isn't like the rest will necessary be ignored and neglected anymore than OTL. A three-way division seems to make sense--Maryland south (possibly including Florida if England can keep it), Pennsylvania and north (the Maritimes joining seem doubtful, and the dynamics with Quebec and the rest of the region seem too hard to predict), and the Appalachians westward to New Spain (and that's a whole different thread, I'll leave it at that for now).

Still, with more colonies and more (critically, richer) areas that need to be settled, that means less people for New England as a whole as the economic draw will swing south. That's what I mean by long term neglect. The money's being made south, and so the focus will be South, thus there's less incentive for England to focus on reinforcing her northern colonies. Particularly in a POD in the early 1600s, (which to my knowledge at this time New England wasn't heavily settled).

I'm not one to believe Britain is an endless source of settlers in this time period- they only had like 5 million people in 1700- and so I think that a gain elsewhere that is heavily settled means another area that will have less settlement from the metropole, unless there's a reason to prevent that. Hence why I think if the focus is more southern and settlement is geared to the south, other areas will suffer comparatively unless natural growth rate changes this. But, with investment geared in another area, population growth suffers.

As well, it'd be much easier to build sugar refinement plants in the southern colonies to reduce the cost of manufacturing, which begins a feedback loop of reinforcing the South as Britian's American powerbase rather than New England or the Mid Atlantic colonies.

I think multiple countries forming from this colonial shift is likely in the long term.

Spain will definitely need to do something about this, definitely.
Spain's going to face an insane amount of pressure once the Brits start using St Dominic as a launch pad for invasions. Two major ports are within striking distance (Veracruz and Cartagena). The Spanish response is likely going to be increasing settlement and military presence- likely through militias- in the region, alongside lessening the monopolies certain ports had in order to make their ports less of a target. Despite the rationale being primarily military in nature, these reforms would stimulate the economy of the region, particularly once the monopolies are lessened.

So in the long term, New Spain and New Granada might actually be stronger, though in the short to mid term they'd be under heavy assault.

I suppose they did defeat slave rebellions in Jamaica. But I wonder--if they face something as big as France did in Haiti, would that speed up abolition like I've seen cited the Baptist War in Jamaica did? Or is slavery on St. Dominic going to be too profitable to abandon so easily? Still, a slave republic (or even monarchy, looking at Haitian history) like Haiti is always an interesting dynamic, especially if the British ties will give it much more a link with the colonies in North America than Haiti ever had.
It really depends on how strong the slavery lobby is. I guess with more money it'd be stronger, but a major, bloody and very costly, slave revolt might change their minds and lead to earlier emancipation.

They still could have many sugar islands as they did OTL and perhaps focus elsewhere in the Caribbean, aimed at British islands.
That is certainly an option, alongside focusing more on Europe.
 
Haïti is not a French name, any more so than Jamaica is an English name. Both are of indigenous origin.

It certainly is. I more meant how it would be spelled in English, since Ayiti is from the French-influenced Haitian Creole and Haïti is the "proper" French form of that. If Wikipedia is to be believed, the Jamaican Patois form OTL is "Ieti". But it's likely that the English creole that develops will be distinct from Jamaican Patois.
 
Well supposedly Dessalines chose the name based on a native word meaning "land of the mountains", so any pod before otl revolution may bring a different name for the country, unless the natives actually called the land that word and Dessalines is being given false credit. I know the Kalinago had names for all Caribbean islands, but I can't remember the name for Haiti, nor do I necessarily think that would be the same name as the Haiti natives used because I'm pretty sure they weren't kalinago. However perhaps that train of thought propels discussion in a good way.

It's also true that the name didn't change until the revolution, so it's possible the British keep it Saint Dominic.

edit: Apparently Hayti/Haiti was the native name for the entire island, with Bohio being another alternative. Also, the natives were taino, not kalinago.
 
Last edited:
It certainly is. I more meant how it would be spelled in English, since Ayiti is from the French-influenced Haitian Creole and Haïti is the "proper" French form of that. If Wikipedia is to be believed, the Jamaican Patois form OTL is "Ieti". But it's likely that the English creole that develops will be distinct from Jamaican Patois.

OK. Well, following the rules of English spelling it would probably be like "Aheetee" or, using quasi-Latin spelling, Ahiti.
 
Haiti was richest French colony (if not the richest colony in whole New World), so France may be weakened compared to OTL without revenues from Haiti's sugar plantations.
 
Top