South Florida in a Confederate Victory TL

NothingNow

Banned
I always liked the name Boca Raton, but apparently it didn't even exist as a settlement for most of the 19th century!

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

Yeah, most of the State's like that. While settlement in general here might be old, most of the state only developed in the last century, durring and following the Land Boom of the 1920s, and then the development of HVAC systems.
 
I agree regarding the viability of a south Florida siezure, especially after a "guided" popular vote".

In a confederate victory scenario, however, there would be fewer deserters and being a confederate deserter was not always synonomous with being "zealously pro union". The union would be wise to be content with far south Florida sans Tampa.

An 1864-1865 "victory" scenario would be more like an Armistice and negotatiated settlement.

The Union would likely settle retiring soldiers and settlers in the southern florida area in larger numbers than in OTL. I figure the union is unlikely to return escaped slaves and because the confederacy is now a separate country any idea of a fugitive slave law is out the window.

"editor of the Gainesville Cotton States declared that "East Florida must make up its mind whether to Fight or submit to the deserters."
 
An 1864-1865 "victory" scenario would be more like an Armistice and negotatiated settlement.
I understand, and I can see the union taking far south Florida, the most pro union WV counties under union control, keeping Kentucky and Missouri etc. Like Arnhem, however, Tampa and all points south, may be "a city too far".
 

NothingNow

Banned
I understand, and I can see the union taking far south Florida, the most pro union WV counties under union control, keeping Kentucky and Missouri etc. Like Arnhem, however, Tampa and all points south, may be "a city too far".

That might be true. Since it's the only actual town between Duval county and Key West, and was traditionally ignored by North Florida at best.

If the Union holds the fort, and maintains the stations on both Egmont Key and Mullet Key, (which the local Militia, or what's left of it anyway, cannot contest, and likely would have a hard enough time trying to re-take Fort Brooke anyway) and we're talking a negotiated settlement, the Union probably could walk away with it without any real issues save a moderately disgruntled population.

EDIT: And even then, while there was no love lost for Tallahassee at the time in Tampa and Hillsborough, most residents really just thought the Federal Government utterly irrelevant to their lives, which it honestly was. Most of the actual opposition to the union in the area during the war had more to do with more pressing local disputes, like Union troops stealing livestock, or otherwise making a nuisance of themselves.
 
Last edited:
That is Civil War 2 in the making, right there. I doubt a separate CSA will withstand foreign domination given all the border shit going on...

Only if the CSA'S leadership is stupid enough to not realize that they got away by the skin of their teeth and that going to war again with the USA would mean the immediate end of their independence and way of life.

But then again, going to war because Lincoln was elected was stupid already, so who knows.

NothingNow said:
You are aware that Pensacola is not only on the ass end of the state from key west, but that it's also in a region that was massively pro-confederate, far, far less defensible, and held the Majority of the population of the state? Pensacola's not even that good of a Harbor compared to what they did hold.

Yes. The "whole region" here means the coast of Florida. The USA would be aiming at keeping its share of trade in the Caribbean/Mexican Gulf and to achieve that control of the seas would be enough. Developing and populating the Everglades and committing ground troops to defend it looks like an unnecessary money sucker to me.
 

NothingNow

Banned
Yes. The "whole region" here means the coast of Florida. The USA would be aiming at keeping its share of trade in the Caribbean/Mexican Gulf and to achieve that control of the seas would be enough. Developing and populating the Everglades and committing ground troops to defend it looks like an unnecessary money sucker to me.

But they really don't have to commit much at all, given the Big Cypress/Everglades and the Green Swamp isolating pretty much everything (there's a reason Tampa was originally named Mosquito, and the already extant requirements for homesteading in Florida. A Regular Army or Marine brigade in Fort Brooke, and a couple companies holding down Coastal Artillery Batteries on Egmont and Mullet keys would be enough to secure Tampa, and maybe a Company each at Fort Dallas and Fort Myers could secure most of the state, while Fort Jefferson and Fort Zachary Taylor would also require significant numbers of troops, since they're essential stations in the region.

EDIT:With everything else, the militia should be enough, and all of this should pay for itself once trade develops, until then, Key West ought to make enough in tax revenue to pay for everything. The Navy would likely be running the show anyway, since securing trade would be priority #1, while protecting homesteaders would be a fairly low priority. It'd be more like a weird mix of Alaska and Gibraltar than a proper settler colony/territory.
 
Last edited:
Give it a few years

Even in OTL settlement between jupiter and Miami was starting in the 1880s, My family settled in the area in the 1870s...they had to get there by boat anyway even in an intact union.

With additional union troops on permanent garrison and lots of good land, soldiers communities would likely form. A population pf 40-50,000 by 1900 Trade with Cuba and the bahamas would likely be far more active than even in OTL.

Also you have a reconstructed "New florida" without having to pander to the "old south". Marriage between "New Florida" soldier settlers and cuban brides might be quite common.
 
Top