Spanish-American War of 1820

So I've been fiddling around with the idea of a Spanish-American war that takes place somewhere between 1819-1820. The Adam-Onis treaty was very tense and it was close to breaking down with no concrete provisions being agreed upon. The main issue stemmed from the American inheritance of French Louisiana's claims to Texas (I believe it was all the way up to the Rio Grande if I'm not mistaken?) In otl, Adams consistently asked for territory up to the Colorado River (Texas) though Onis was heavily against giving even an inch of Texas to the United States. Even after Onis was ordered to give up the land if it meant that the treaty could be agreed upon, he never made the offer to the Americans.

I do think in the end, Onis would give in realistically. This, coupled with Andrew Jackson's incursions in Florida made Onis was very wary of a possible war and the possibility there is more to lose with a war with the United States. While most of the revolutionaries in New Spain were almost entirely dealt with by this time, there was still a lot of troubles in South America. But for the sake of the post, let us assume Onis doesn't give in and refuses to cede an inch of Texas. Jackson continues his attacks in Florida which ultimately sparks the war with Spain declaring war. Alternately the US could be the one to declare the war, though I can't really think of anything realistic for Congress to unanimously get behind? Maybe Spain fights back Jackson's attacks and kills some Americans? Who knows, though the war has started.

As for the logistics of the war, the US is in a much nicer place in this conflict. It has direct access to occupy both Florida and Texas, while Spain either has to relocate troops in New Spain or send the armies being gather to shipped to fight the independence wars in South America to North America to fight the United States. The US Navy is the complete opposite of the Spanish: small but capable. It was able to occasionally harass the British in 1812 and capture/sink several of their ships. The Spanish navy is no British, it's inefficient, old, and its only upside is it's large. I doubt the US could mount any kind of invasion of Cuba, the navy just doesn't have the capabilities of maintaining the Straits of Florida for this to happen. The other issue the American army faces is Spain's New World allies: the Comanche; which would harass the US soldiers making their advance a lot more difficult.

So based on the stuff I laid out the questions are:
  1. Who'd be more likely to win this war?
  2. And what would the peace deal entail?
 
One complication for this is Spain had a revolution in 1820. If the war starts in 1819, the US may be able to take advantage of Spain's domestic troubles if the war lasts into 1820.
On the other hand, if the war starts in mid to late 1820, after the Spanish Liberals come to power, losing a war to the US could discredit the Liberals for a long time. A further degeneration of the Spanish domestic scene could even cause an earlier French intervention as a worst case scenario. In this case, I think the US would win by default.
 
One complication for this is Spain had a revolution in 1820. If the war starts in 1819, the US may be able to take advantage of Spain's domestic troubles if the war lasts into 1820.
On the other hand, if the war starts in mid to late 1820, after the Spanish Liberals come to power, losing a war to the US could discredit the Liberals for a long time. A further degeneration of the Spanish domestic scene could even cause an earlier French intervention as a worst case scenario. In this case, I think the US would win by default.
I guess this poses the question if del Riego's mutiny and subsequent pronouncement would even happen if a war occurred in 1819. Obviously, there was discontent, especially within the ranks of the military over absolutism, and much of the mutiny had to do with fighting the colonies as it did the constitution of 1812. Though I'm not very convinced that troubles on the continent will really hinder Spain's military efforts against the US. Spain logically wasn't going to ship tons of troops to fight the Americans and they would've used the troops already in New Spain and Cuba. I doubt the Trienio Liberal would be any less capable of fighting than the Sexenio Absolutista regardless.
 
Last edited:
Quincy-Adams is the only man who supported Jackson and his actions in Florida so this might make him even more brazen if anything.

Iirc, a lot of the tension in the Monroe cabinet at this time was exacerbated because of Jacksons actions and also because Monroe himself was sick and incapacitated- so no one was really steering the ship of state. If Monroe dies you have thompkins????? Ascend to the Presidency, and given his depression and alcoholism it could make matters worse.
 
  1. Who'd be more likely to win this war?
  2. And what would the peace deal entail?

If America keeps to North America alone - especially its stickler points in the treaty proposals - it'd likely win. The territory annexed would likely be Jefferson's would-be purchase proposals in 1805-1807 and Adams's 1818-1819 border suggestions: Texas above the TX-Colorado River to its source (at the 103rd meridian/OTL west Texas border line, convenient!), then a straight line northward to the Canadian River, up that to the Sangre de Cristo Mountains, then their divide to the Rockies; and the Floridas. Their biggest boon would be to detach Cuba as a protectorate, but Spain would absolutely concentrate forces in it versus the aforementioned territories, and even expansionist southerners would be very aware Cuba's a hellish nut to crack when they could just secure their flanks (as they wanted since the Louisiana Purchase) with the empty, giant, and very accessible lands of northern Texas and Florida. That's what the common southerners (versus aristocrats who had a different view of expansionism) wanted anyway, land to settle, versus a populated over-hot-as-hell island you can't even just ride a horse to.

At this point America's just got out of the War of 1812 and is now in another war win-or-lose, so assuming victory it'd want to breath and consolidate its lands existing and acquired and has no particular desire for the *Southwest. It's only just blazed the Santa Fe Trail and all throughout the 1800s-1830s in attempts to buy Texas it tried to avoid any significant Hispanic settlements - hence focusing north of the TX-Colorado River that was more-or-less devoid of any European colonists, where most of the future Texian settlements were given land grants at, and where Non-Hispanic Whites today concentrate in.
 
Last edited:
If America keeps to North America alone - especially its stickler points in the treaty proposals - it'd likely win. The territory annexed would likely be Jefferson's would-be purchase proposals in 1805-1807 and Adams's 1818-1819 border suggestions: Texas above the TX-Colorado River to its source (at the 103rd meridian/OTL west Texas border line, convenient!), then a straight line northward to the Canadian River, up that to the Sangre de Cristo Mountains, then their divide to the Rockies; and the Floridas. Their biggest boon would be to detach Cuba as a protectorate, but Spain would absolutely concentrate forces in it versus the aforementioned territories, and even expansionist southerners would be very aware Cuba's a hellish nut to crack when they could just secure their flanks (as they wanted since the Louisiana Purchase) with the empty, giant, and very accessible lands of northern Texas and Florida. That's what the common southerners (versus aristocrats who had a different view of expansionism) wanted anyway, land to settle, versus a populated over-hot-as-hell island you can't even just ride a horse to.

At this point America's just got out of the War of 1812 and is now in another war win-or-lose, so assuming victory it'd want to breath and consolidate its lands existing and acquired and has no particular desire for the *Southwest. It's only just blazed the Santa Fe Trail and all throughout the 1800s-1830s in attempts to buy Texas it tried to avoid any significant Hispanic settlements - hence focusing north of the TX-Colorado River that was more-or-less devoid of any European colonists, where most of the future Texian settlements were given land grants at, and where Non-Hispanic Whites today concentrate in.
It should be noted how victorious the US was in this scenario. If it was a decisive victory, why would they settle for the Colorado over the Rio Grande? I would also mention that the Spanish nor Americans knew where the source of the Colorado was at this point, it could've very well been to the Great Salt Lake for all we knew? Would the Americans have asked for a larger Pacific coast ittl, maybe expanding into Alta California?

Cuba is always a tricky situation in regards to American expansion because the US both wants it and doesn't. It certainly doesn't want Britain nor France to own the territory and if the French invasion to pacify the Liberals in Spain happens ittl as it did iotl, there be much fear of Spain losing Cuba to a power that isn't the US. Cuba would probably be in some eternal limbo where Southerners want to make it a slave state to increase their control in the Senate but also keep it a territory because of the racist implications of giving Hispanics the same rights as Anglos.
 
The U.S. gets the Mexican Cession more than twenty years early. Mexico is more stable from the outset, and, potentially, the rest of the Spanish Empire becomes independent sooner. Maybe we can get a monarchist independent Philippines from this POD?
 
As far as navies go, the US Navy is not only small but capable, but also growing. They had 7 ships of the line in 1820, three from the War of 1812 and the first four of nine authorized in 1816. Three more of those were laid down and in some state of completion, though with OTL priorities they weren't completed until 1825 and most were then left on the building ways for preservation until launched, some as late as the Civil War. The other three and the three under construction probably could have been accelerated.

On the flip side, the Spanish Armada hadn't built anything new since 1796. They had 16 ships of the line in commission, including five 68-gun ships of the line built between 1810 and 1814 by Russia that Spain acquired in 1818, but within five years were broken up historically. Apparently they were in bad shape or otherwise expensive, they got rid of them while retaining several older, smaller ships.
 
Because there are no Anglo-American settlers there, and the ideas of Manifest Destiny haven't flourished yet in American society. I can't imagine the US seizing all of Alta California and New Mexico despite having little to no interest in the region. Unless I'm mistaken here?
 
The U.S. gets the Mexican Cession more than twenty years early. Mexico is more stable from the outset, and, potentially, the rest of the Spanish Empire becomes independent sooner. Maybe we can get a monarchist independent Philippines from this POD?
It might come to that, but I don't think the U.S. was ready for a major campaign in Alto California in 1820. The USN could have sent a small squadron to the Pacific, that could capture Monterey, and some other ports, but it would take longer to send an army then it did in 1846, they'd have a lot farther to go.
 
It might come to that, but I don't think the U.S. was ready for a major campaign in Alto California in 1820. The USN could have sent a small squadron to the Pacific, that could capture Monterey, and some other ports, but it would take longer to send an army then it did in 1846, they'd have a lot farther to go.
The U.S. Army also has to do considerably less work with Latin America already in rebellion. The Santa Fe Trail is already a thing. Using it to take Santa Fe, Plus the Long Expedition in Texas, plus shelling/taking Monterrey, and Alta California, Nuevo Mexico, and Tejas all fall.
 
As far as navies go, the US Navy is not only small but capable, but also growing. They had 7 ships of the line in 1820, three from the War of 1812 and the first four of nine authorized in 1816. Three more of those were laid down and in some state of completion, though with OTL priorities they weren't completed until 1825 and most were then left on the building ways for preservation until launched, some as late as the Civil War. The other three and the three under construction probably could have been accelerated.

On the flip side, the Spanish Armada hadn't built anything new since 1796. They had 16 ships of the line in commission, including five 68-gun ships of the line built between 1810 and 1814 by Russia that Spain acquired in 1818, but within five years were broken up historically. Apparently they were in bad shape or otherwise expensive, they got rid of them while retaining several older, smaller ships.
Thanks for the Naval breakdown. Interesting that Spain bought these ships from Russians without inspecting them first. Russia got the better end of that deal. Russian ship designs of this period might be questionable. Others on the board could speak about that. For all their faults it would seem the USN SOL had the advantage over the Spanish Ships, and their 44 & 50 gun Frigates outclassed their Spanish counterparts as well.

The American Ships of the Line, all seemed to be good sailors, with more firepower then their direct counterparts in other navies. On the down side they all lacked freeboard, which could've been a problem with the lower gun decks during action in a high sea state. They all needed to have their lower gundecks raised by at least a foot, which could have unbalanced their design. As a rule the RN thought the gun ports should be 7ft above the water, most of these were only 4. One of them was Razeed, becoming a very fast sailing super frigate.
 
Because there are no Anglo-American settlers there, and the ideas of Manifest Destiny haven't flourished yet in American society. I can't imagine the US seizing all of Alta California and New Mexico despite having little to no interest in the region. Unless I'm mistaken here?
I agree it would have been harder in 1820 then 1846, but it could have been done. The phrase Manifest Destiny may not have been coined yet, but the idea was already strongly held. Thomas Jefferson intended for Americans to settle the West Coast. There were no American Settlements west of Texas in 1846, and the Americans grabbed California in a hot minute. I do agree that a Spanish American War in 1819-20 probable wouldn't end up with Alto California being in U.S. Hands. The Americans would probable make a deal with the Newly Independent Mexico for Americans to have the right to settle in Texas, and to use the Santa Fe Trail. Like Spanish Louisiana the United States could afford to be patient, and wait for Texas, and the SW to fall into it's hands.
 
I agree it would have been harder in 1820 then 1846, but it could have been done. The phrase Manifest Destiny may not have been coined yet, but the idea was already strongly held. Thomas Jefferson intended for Americans to settle the West Coast. There were no American Settlements west of Texas in 1846, and the Americans grabbed California in a hot minute. I do agree that a Spanish American War in 1819-20 probable wouldn't end up with Alto California being in U.S. Hands. The Americans would probable make a deal with the Newly Independent Mexico for Americans to have the right to settle in Texas, and to use the Santa Fe Trail. Like Spanish Louisiana the United States could afford to be patient, and wait for Texas, and the SW to fall into it's hands.
Texas would most certainly fall into American hands had they've been victorious in this war so there wouldn't be a need to make any treaty with the Mexicans. How far they go is up in the air. Decisive would probably be the RioGrande, partial victory would probably be the Colorado. If they go up to the Rio Grande, Santa Fe would be American; and if it wasn't, I doubt the Americans would care so much for it. After all, it was the Mexicans trying to open up the Santa Fe trail for trade, not the Americans.
 
Texas would most certainly fall into American hands had they've been victorious in this war so there wouldn't be a need to make any treaty with the Mexicans. How far they go is up in the air. Decisive would probably be the RioGrande, partial victory would probably be the Colorado. If they go up to the Rio Grande, Santa Fe would be American; and if it wasn't, I doubt the Americans would care so much for it. After all, it was the Mexicans trying to open up the Santa Fe trail for trade, not the Americans.
I agree with your main points, but all wars need to end with some agreement, to settle the new status quo. In 1848 with Scott occupying Mexico City representatives still had to negotiate the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. For what it's worth I would imagine Mexico would gain it's independence during this Spanish American War, and come to terms with the United States. Acquiring the use of the Santa Fe Trail, and working out the right for Americans to settle in Texas, and have their rights secured there would've been a big success, but not much different then what happened in the OTL.
 
The bigger obstacle here I think than the U.S. winning the war is getting the U.S. to war again formally so soon after 1812.
 
The bigger obstacle here I think than the U.S. winning the war is getting the U.S. to war again formally so soon after 1812.
Depending on the circumstances why is that a problem? In this POD it looks like Jackson's occupation of the Florida's provoked a Spanish declaration of war. Besides the American Public didn't come out of the War of 1812 in a post Vietnam mood, it was the Era of Good Feelings. The 19th Century was a more warlike age, then the more introspective post WWI world we now live in. In the years between 1800-1820 the United States fought the French, North African Pirates, the British, the Spanish, and numerous Indian Tribes. After going though some harrowing moments in the War of 1812 they could take a war with Spain in stride.
 
Depending on the circumstances why is that a problem? In this POD it looks like Jackson's occupation of the Florida's provoked a Spanish declaration of war. Besides the American Public didn't come out of the War of 1812 in a post Vietnam mood, it was the Era of Good Feelings. The 19th Century was a more warlike age, then the more introspective post WWI world we now live in. In the years between 1800-1820 the United States fought the French, North African Pirates, the British, the Spanish, and numerous Indian Tribes. After going though some harrowing moments in the War of 1812 they could take a war with Spain in stride.
That's a fair point. If the war is in any way victorious, whatever that means, one wonders if we could be looking at a vastly different 1824 election. One wonders also if there will be an antiwar movement similar to 1812. I doubt there would be anything on tha scale, especially if the war is going well, but it could be interesting nonetheless.
 
Top