New Madrid quakes delayed by 50-100 years..

During the winter of 1811-1812, the worst earthquakes in US history occurred in what was then the Louisiana territory, now southern Missouri, near the town of New Madrid.

What would have been the results of these same quakes happening 50, 75, and 100 years later than they did OTL?

That would be Winter of 1861-1862, the winter of 1886-1887, or the winter of 1911-1912.

Back in 1811, the whole region was sparsely populated. But by the 1860s, 80s, and turn of the century? what chaos would have ensued? How serious would the damage be to the country as a whole. St. Louis, the "gateway to the west", isn't all that far from New Madrid, and if these tremors rang church bells in Charleston and rattled the china in the White House (as I've heard it said), imagine the disruption four 8.0 earthquakes in the span of 3 months would have done to mid-to-late 19th century America, when the very flow of the mississippi was changed.

What do you all think?
 

mowque

Banned
Still, the region is one of the poorest in the Union, in any period. And most of the wealth isn't factories but farms (which, I assume, would weather the earthquake untouched?). That said, biggest natural disaster in American history?
 
Still, the region is one of the poorest in the Union, in any period. And most of the wealth isn't factories but farms (which, I assume, would weather the earthquake untouched?). That said, biggest natural disaster in American history?

True, BUT....if this quake was felt on the EAST COAST....surely it could cause minor damage in say...Chicago? at the very least, having the Mississippi river disrupted would be problematic.

And imagine turn of the century St. Louis getting rocked by 4 mag 8 quakes in that time span. Could the city even recover? and I'm sure it could cause problems for Memphis, Kansas City....
 

mowque

Banned
And imagine turn of the century St. Louis getting rocked by 4 mag 8 quakes in that time span. Could the city even recover? and I'm sure it could cause problems for Memphis, Kansas City....

Oh, you can always rebuild. Outside of anicet times, has any city actually been destroyed, never to return after a natural disaster? American easily has the funds to rebuild.
 
Oh, you can always rebuild. Outside of anicet times, has any city actually been destroyed, never to return after a natural disaster? American easily has the funds to rebuild.

Okay, so it would rebuild, but would it become a MAJOR city like it was/is? and obviously this would disrupt the economy and could cause problems for early rebuilding.
 

mowque

Banned
Okay, so it would rebuild, but would it become a MAJOR city like it was/is? and obviously this would disrupt the economy and could cause problems for early rebuilding.

Sure. The drive for the city is still there. Good location, biggest port and all that. The geographical advantage is too big. Look at New Orleans, San Francisco. Heck, look at my hometown, Johnstown PA.
 
Sure. The drive for the city is still there. Good location, biggest port and all that. The geographical advantage is too big. Look at New Orleans, San Francisco. Heck, look at my hometown, Johnstown PA.

Or Chicago which happened to burn down in OTL...
 
True true. Would probably change how the city developed significantly. Maybe, while "old St. Louis" is in ruins, "new St. Louis" would develop on the opposite shore?

Another thing to think about is the fact that if it's just 50 years later than OTL, this occurs right at the outbreak of the civil war....could this have changed, delayed, averted (doubtful), the conflict?
 
True true. Would probably change how the city developed significantly. Maybe, while "old St. Louis" is in ruins, "new St. Louis" would develop on the opposite shore?

Another thing to think about is the fact that if it's just 50 years later than OTL, this occurs right at the outbreak of the civil war....could this have changed, delayed, averted (doubtful), the conflict?

Given the religiosity of the time, the 1861 quakes would pobably be interpreted as a sign of divine disfavor with current events. I can definitely see Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson laying down arms and heading off to be a farmer or minister somewhere. Of course, both sides would spin it as being directed at the other - but the epicenter is in a secessionist state, how easily would that be determined in 1861?

1886 - I'm thinking it wrecks an awful lot of rail lines, especially at what is basically the rail junction of the nation. Railways probably get rebuilt to the north and south faster simply because they're less damaged...so St. Louis might not fully recover from that one. Reconstruction will be in private, for-profit hands, and rebuilding St. Louis is unlikely to be a priority.

1911 - 5 years after an earthquake basically leveled San Francisco? The USA turns a lot of its available scientific resources towards geology. Possibly a bit of apocalyptic "the earth is tearing itself apart" twaddle. Becomes a major issue in 1912, I wonder how Taft, TR and maybe-Wilson address the matter?
 
All good questions. In the Civil War, these religious interpretations would definitely would occur. Would be very interesting if one of the South's major generals were to walk away from the fight...what would this do to the South's war morale?

Could the two sides stop fighting, seeing, as suggested, that God was displeased with what was going on and that it must stop?
 
Not sure of the 1881 Quake -- But the 1911 Quake would take out New Orleans when the Mouth Moves to the Red River outlet.

IIRC the Fault has a 170 Year Cycle [Average]. So the Next One is slightly over due.
 
And yes, in the 1880s, a quake in and around the New Madrid area would destroy the railroad links in St. Louis and Memphis, and both these cities would be devastated, especially Memphis, and as has been said the rail lines would be rebuilt first south and north of the afflicted area.

Both cities would rebuild, but would in many cases be mere shadows of their former selves for a generation or two.

And yes, in 1911, on the heals of the San Francisco quake, there would be a greater fear of quakes and more interest in geology as suggested. The rail lines would be disrupted again as well, but not as bad as in 1881 or 1861. And again, St. Louis & Memphis would be diminished cities for some time to come. Not sure how the 1911 quake would effect the election of 1912 (though, as a fan of TR...would be SWEET if the quake somehow put him back in the White House)
 
I wonder if this would speed up the theories of continental drift and plate tectonics.

I was wondering the same thing. Anyone know what the scientific explanation for earthquakes was at the time? Wegener originally proposed the idea of continental drift in 1912...
 
I wonder if this would speed up the theories of continental drift and plate tectonics.

I was wondering the same thing. Anyone know what the scientific explanation for earthquakes was at the time? Wegener originally proposed the idea of continental drift in 1912...

I could see it bringing about the theory earlier. I *could* also see the theory being skewed by the New Madrid events....a fear that the North American continent could be on the verge of slowly pulling itself apart. And if such ideas were widely published...this could lead to a greater pull for some to resettle in areas away from this "future rift valley".
 
Top