Puritan Question

At what stage? Some 20,000 colonists, most of them Puritans, immigrated to the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the 1630s.
 
Possibly have the Pilgrims of New Plymouth successfully get to OTL New York and settle there, pre-empting New Netherland's existence - as the Dutch took over New Sweden in real life, you've just given all the old-school northern states' area to the Puritans when the Yankees inevitably do. Then have the Puritans absorb Pilgrim culture as in OTL. The resulting land will allow for a hell of a natural population increase.
 
The Putirtans already had more than enough land for expansion, both of settlements and populations, although giving them New York/Manhattan would substantially increase their political influence and trading capabilities. Pushing the Dutch out might butterfly away one or two of the later conflicts with the Native Americans, given that the Puritans enjoyed relatively good relations with the locals and the Dutch didn't.

Barring some ASB revelation that cleanliness is next to godliness, the best way to increase the population is through increased immigration. With both Massachusetts Bay and New York in their control, as well as the unparalleled food source of the cod offshore Maine, the region would be highly attractive to other Puritans looking to flee England and Europe.
 
The English Civil War going against parliament, perhaps being shorter with a measure of increased persecution of puritans by Laud leading to a greater immigration from England.
 
Have the Royalists win the Civil War and push Laudianism down the countries throat. A lot of Puritans will want to leave England for a "Godly Commonwealth" and New England would fit the bill.
 
I would take a slightly different approach- given the way that immigration to the colonies fell off a cliff at the beginning of the Long Parliament and actually went into reverse in 1642 as colonists went home to fight for Parliament, I don't think you need the Civil War being a Royalist victory so much as the unstable situation preceding the war to drag on for longer.

So, have Pym die of cancer a decade earlier, weaken the parliamentary leadership a bit and then allow Strafford to survive and continue assisting the King, but with Charles still too tangled up to actually impose his will on anything. This should give an extra decade or so of emigration to the new world on the same level as OTL during the 1630s, putting the colonies in a much stronger position.
 
I would take a slightly different approach- given the way that immigration to the colonies fell off a cliff at the beginning of the Long Parliament and actually went into reverse in 1642 as colonists went home to fight for Parliament, I don't think you need the Civil War being a Royalist victory so much as the unstable situation preceding the war to drag on for longer.

So, have Pym die of cancer a decade earlier, weaken the parliamentary leadership a bit and then allow Strafford to survive and continue assisting the King, but with Charles still too tangled up to actually impose his will on anything. This should give an extra decade or so of emigration to the new world on the same level as OTL during the 1630s, putting the colonies in a much stronger position.
^^^This works. A surprising number of Colonial Puritans returned to England in that era. Create an unstable situation where Puritanism is socially and politically unwelcome and immigration would increase substantially.
 
Top