spanish and french match british population colonial north america

[NATO1949]

what if Spanish and french match British in north America settler population in late 18 century

if France dint get french war of religion it will have 3 million extra population in late 16 century to settle New France.

if Spanish exile moriscos to Spanish north America that will match British settler population in late 18 century

 

[ennobee]

Seeing how good the original 13 colonies even before independence were in assimilating the Dutch and Swedish settlements in New York/New Jersey I don't think that there would be that much of an effect in the long run. As long as the settlers don't bring along a large homeland military presence to make sure their new colonies stay loyal and dependent to their respective mother countries, they will eventually borrow ideas and lifestyles from each other, the other colonies and the original population until there are less differences between New York State and Louisiana territory then between New York and Yorkshire. Depending on how large the populations and cultural influxes might be, we might end up with the US speaking French or Spanish today, but apart of that the main difference would be that there would be less Roosefelts and more Bouviers, Rubios and Cruzes

 

[funnyhat]

Seeing how good the original 13 colonies even before independence were in assimilating the Dutch and Swedish settlements in New York/New Jersey I don't think that there would be that much of an effect in the long run. As long as the settlers don't bring along a large homeland military presence to make sure their new colonies stay loyal and dependent to their respective mother countries, they will eventually borrow ideas and lifestyles from each other, the other colonies and the original population until there are less differences between New York State and Louisiana territory then between New York and Yorkshire. Depending on how large the populations and cultural influxes might be, we might end up with the US speaking French or Spanish today, but apart of that the main difference would be that there would be less Roosefelts and more Bouviers, Rubios and Cruzes

I don't think the OP is talking about them settling in the 13 colonies, but in the Spanish/French colonies instead. That would radically change the colonial wars - Britain might not be able to expand beyond the 13 colonies at all, and may risk them being invaded.

 

[galanx]

A very detailed TL on the French side by Variato

https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...settlement-of-new-france.311666/#post-8947863

 

[Arkenfolm]

France might have been able to if they had the will, but they'd have had to exile Huguenots. Spain also, assuming the political will was there, but the settlers would be scattered across all of modern-day Latin America, and I'm just guessing the vast majority of the settlers wouldn't go to borderland areas like New Mexico, Tejas, or Florida, for many, many reasons, but rather mostly stick in the core regions of Spanish America.

Also, Spain had the remnants of the Mesoamerican and Andean Indian population after smallpox and other diseases decimated them (along with horrifying forced labour in places like Potosi), so Spain might have an easier time than France at this.

 

[Matteo]

It is not a matter of religion. Most french huguenots stayed in France. And most of those who immigrated prefered OTL going to an other european country.

Now if there was 3 million french in north America by the late 18th century, it means parity with the 13 colonies. It also implies that there were parity before. So, since in America the french showed themselves more skillful in land military matters than the english, the y will probably have retained control of Acadia, even possibly retained control or populated most of current Maine, Vermont and Acadia, and blocked the english colonies west of the Appalachians.

Concerning the spanish, I am less sure how this would be achieved because the spanish migrants were more attracted to other areas than greater California and Texas. Either to the other already populated areas of the spanish empire, or to more attractive lands such as Argentina.

You see, the most attractive places were the ones initially conquered by the spanish/castilan because they had the most easily exploitable resources, having been quite densely populated by amerindians.

 

[Fredrick II Barbarossa]

prevent buccaneering in the Caribbean. OTL the plundering of the buccaneers weakened Spanish america significantly. All the major towns were raided multiple times, flourishing centers of trade became abandoned, places such as Cartagena or Panama never recovered and as a result population dropped and Spanish america became much less than the brits since Spanish power was concentrated in the Caribbean and Latin america at a time where the majority of Spanish settlements came under raid form pirates and the loss of gold, settlers, infrastructure and costs to rebuild everything and decline of mines further contributed to spanish american decline. Prevent buccaneering and I can easily see Spanish america rivaling in population by the 1700s the British north america given how rich pre-plundering spanish cities in latin america and the Caribbean were. How to do this, i dont really know.

For France comes down to hugenot settlement.

 

[Alt History Buff]

I'm pretty sure that Spanish America vastly exceeded British North America in population if you count all Mestizos and Indians.

I think Brazil also exceeded all of the 13 colonies I 1776.

 

[Joseph Solis in Australia]

For Spain, they need to open other ports, aside from Sevilla and Cadiz, like Malaga, Murcia, Valencia, Barcelona, La Coroña, and Bilbao, to entice more Spaniards (not just mostly Andalusians) to settle Latin America and Philippines. They should at least allow any Catholic Europeans like Italians or Portuguese to settle colonies and be considered as equals as Spaniards. Spain should develop Rio de la Plata and be a prime settler colony of Spain for Catholic Europeans in Latin America.

 

[funnyhat]

I'm pretty sure that Spanish America vastly exceeded British North America in population if you count all Mestizos and Indians.

I think Brazil also exceeded all of the 13 colonies I 1776.

But in North America, or at least north of modern-day Mexico, their settler population was small.

 

[Matteo]

But having more spanish settlers does not imply that they will not mix with amerindians and africans as they did OTL.

 

[Lampiao]

But in North America, or at least north of modern-day Mexico, their settler population was small.

At the turn of the century the US, New Spain, Peru and Brazil had roughly the same population with very little difference (5-7 million souls). Probably, a half of Brazilian population and a quarter (maybe more) of the American population were slaves; the number of Native Americans would be hard to guess, so I think that most of the estimated Spanish American population would be made of Criollos, Mestizos and "civilized" Indians.