English Louisiana...Erm, Carolana.

In 1698 a one Daniel Coxe gained a patent for the Mississippi Valley to settle a colony there, a 'Province of Carolana'. He set a group of colonists over to the mouth of the Mississippi under one William Banks/Bond but this captain was turned back by Louisiana's founder, Iberville, who successfully bluffed that a large French fleet was already in the area. The point where this happened and Banks/Bond turned back is known as English Turn and a part of New Orleans today.

What if Coxe and Banks/Bond called Iberville's bluff and settled anyways? Not even Biloxi has yet to be settled, nor Port Bayou St. Jean in the New Orleans to-be limits, and so the Europeans in the area would be overwhelmingly English. France's claim to the area would be contended but have to eventually be dropped. And Florida would probably be captured sooner in one of the colonial wars due to being hemmed in by Carolana, the Bahamas, South Carolina and Georgia.

I wonder how such a settlement would even take the Revolution, if it got that far. It need not be said even during the mere twenty years of British rule Mobile, Natchez and the Mississippi Valley had a large number of Anglo-American settlers come in without any previous English presence in the area; and having an even longer amount of time than the rebelling Georgia for Carolana to develop its own identity (about an extra thirty-five years) makes me ponder on its response...

I propose also due to the vast amount of colonial American cities sharing the name of the town with home county, that the primary city/town in the colony that would probably be on the site of OTL New Orleans would be known as 'Pembroke'. A map: http://i213.photobucket.com/albums/cc245/umbricman/Carolana.gif
 
First twitch thought is that settlement will be very different up the Mississippi. I think the Northwest Territory area will be settled earlier. Puts more pressure on Quebec. Maybe France will concentrate more on other areas, like India.
 
The French came down the Mississippi though, through the Great Lakes region from the Saint Lawrence. So even without New Orleans / Louisiana, they still will be settling the upper Mississippi. Which makes sense, because it is easier to travel downriver rather than up. England would not claim all the land France did in OTL, because they do not have Quebec and the north to provide easier access to the northwest. I don't see why the French claim would have to be dropped. OTOH, English Carolana would face more pressure from French Quebec expanding down the Mississippi. And I think that British Louisiana is more vunerable to the Spanish from Mexico, Florida, and the Caribbean than Florida. Lastly, I don't think that control of the mouth of the Mississippi gives you automatic control of the entire valley, far from it.
 
The French came down the Mississippi though, through the Great Lakes region from the Saint Lawrence. So even without New Orleans / Louisiana, they still will be settling the upper Mississippi. Which makes sense, because it is easier to travel downriver rather than up. England would not claim all the land France did in OTL, because they do not have Quebec and the north to provide easier access to the northwest. I don't see why the French claim would have to be dropped. OTOH, English Carolana would face more pressure from French Quebec expanding down the Mississippi. And I think that British Louisiana is more vunerable to the Spanish from Mexico, Florida, and the Caribbean than Florida. Lastly, I don't think that control of the mouth of the Mississippi gives you automatic control of the entire valley, far from it.

True points.

But it took the Spanish a couple dozen years to found Pensacola and strengthen their Texan claims even when New Orleans had already been established for a long time. Even ceding the upper Mississippi to France, control of the river delta has to be a very valuable asset...especially with the English slave trade to the Spanish colonies coming in due to the War of Jenkins' Ear as a port stop. When one considers England took Florida in 1763 to have control of the entrance of the Gulf of Mexico, and Florida's relative isolation and sparse population compared to Cuba and New Mexico, I would feel keeping TTL New Orleans and St. Augustine in English hands would be a very attractive and high priority.
 
I don't see why the French claim would have to be dropped.
<snip>
Lastly, I don't think that control of the mouth of the Mississippi gives you automatic control of the entire valley, far from it.
I didn't mean that the French would be totally out of the running, but the Northwest was a stiffly contested area OTL, this PoD gives the English an edge. If the English have a little more edge, they'll probably get effective control of more area, which gives the French less area to turn profit, and less profit means they'd probably put more effort elsewhere.
 
Bienville

Just for the record, it was not Iberville, but BIENVILLE that met the English at a place now known appropriately as English Turn. Specifically, Jean-Baptiste Le Moyne, Sieur de Bienville.

The problem with the theory of Carolana was that there were French outposts at the time as far East as Mobile and as far north as Nachotiches (in today's Central Louisiana).

It would have taken a large influx of English settlers from the East Coast to overcome the French foothold. It is possible, but would require the issuance of a Royal Charter and funding. That was hard to find in the late 1720s, as most English focus was on Georgia.
 
Can you put the image in the thread please? The online filter thing is blocking it where I am

I would imagine such Carolana would have two problems
-1- Rivalry with Georgia which claims jurisdiction over all land West of it
-2- Indians

The latter are hardly a throwaway problem, since it will include the Seminole and the Creeks, and probably the Choctaw, depending on how far North you go (as I said, I can't see the map)

OTL the land West of the Appalachians developed into what was supposed to be an Indian Reserve - without the ability to do this, relations between Britain and the Indians might deteriorate even more

Just some ideas

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Control of the Mississppi mouth doesn't automatically confer control of the entire heart of NorAm, but it does provide very strong leverage over the economy of anyone upstream who could be cut-off from sea-borne trade quite easily. I would imagine if this did occur, the French would concentrate on the Great Lakes region, and the upper Upper Mississippi where it comes so conveniently close to Lake Michigan (or to Lake Illinouei in the excellent map). Maybe as far south as St. Louis (founded 25 years before) but not much further. It might become a thriving broder town...

untitled.jpg
 
Can you put the image in the thread please? The online filter thing is blocking it where I am

I would imagine such Carolana would have two problems
-1- Rivalry with Georgia which claims jurisdiction over all land West of it
-2- Indians

The latter are hardly a throwaway problem, since it will include the Seminole and the Creeks, and probably the Choctaw, depending on how far North you go (as I said, I can't see the map)

OTL the land West of the Appalachians developed into what was supposed to be an Indian Reserve - without the ability to do this, relations between Britain and the Indians might deteriorate even more

Just some ideas

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Here is the image:
Carolana.gif
 
Here is the image:
Carolana.gif

LOL, no it isn't - you're remote-linking so the same software that blocks me looking at the image at photobucket also prevents it being pulled into the page. Of course, no one can see that except me

Don't worry, tho, for after tomorrow I won't be in this place putting up with this filtering except once a week

I did mean, tho, upload the image here using the Manage Attachments command, but no worries and thanks for trying

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
LOL, no it isn't - you're remote-linking so the same software that blocks me looking at the image at photobucket also prevents it being pulled into the page. Of course, no one can see that except me

Don't worry, tho, for after tomorrow I won't be in this place putting up with this filtering except once a week

I did mean, tho, upload the image here using the Manage Attachments command, but no worries and thanks for trying

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Hows this then:
Carolana.gif

Carolana.gif
 
Control of the Mississppi mouth doesn't automatically confer control of the entire heart of NorAm, but it does provide very strong leverage over the economy of anyone upstream who could be cut-off from sea-borne trade quite easily. I would imagine if this did occur, the French would concentrate on the Great Lakes region, and the upper Upper Mississippi where it comes so conveniently close to Lake Michigan (or to Lake Illinouei in the excellent map). Maybe as far south as St. Louis (founded 25 years before) but not much further. It might become a thriving broder town...
This map doesn't quite work. No way would the Brits have Northern Lake Superior, and no way would the French have the Canadian prairies. Actually the French COULD have the prairies - but then they'd need most of Lake Winnipeg. Remember, communication is by water way, so the Brits will own most of the lands draining into Hudson's Bay, the French would control the Great Lakes and much of the land draining into them. Whoever controls Lake Winnipeg controls the Saskatchewan River(s), and possibly the Churchill, as well. Those two rivers are the only feasible way into the prairies in an early era.
 
Top