Unblighted Americas - What if England never colonized the Americas?

How do you figure the native Americans will fare better? The Spanish, Russians, and French will most likely divide North America between themselves. By the time the English came on the scene the Indian Empires of Central, and South America had already been destroyed, and most of the natives of the Caribbean had been wiped out. The natives of the central regions of NA might survive longer into the 19th Century, but the natives of the coastal regions would probably suffer the same fate as in the OTL.
Well they fare better then OTL, but still not well. Main thing is that other than Britain there wasn’t really any other settler colony in North America. The other ones had much looser control. French rule was only in the core regions like Quebec and New Orleans and some forts. The Spanish never managed to exert their control that far north.
 
Love the premise, looking forward to see where you'll take this.

But just to ask a few clarifying questions:
1) I presume France owns Abaco and the Turks and Caicos Islands in the Lucayan archipelago?
2) You seem to have mislabeled some of the islands of the Lesser Antilles, having marked Martinique as Grenada and Grenada as St. Lucia... Still, I presume that while Britain/England may have attempted to settle some of the islands south of the Leeward Islands, they failed to establish any permanent foothold on any, right? If so, what's the fate of Barbados in this timeline? Is it still Portuguese?
3) What's the fate of Anguilla, Nevis, Barbuda, and Montserrat, the other Leeward Islands Britain owned IOTL? Is Barbuda just lumped in with Antigua like IOTL? Was there still an independent attempt by Irish colonists to settle Montserrat? Were Nevis and Anguilla settled by the Dutch, like they half-heartedly attemted IOTL?
 
Well they fare better then OTL, but still not well. Main thing is that other than Britain there wasn’t really any other settler colony in North America. The other ones had much looser control. French rule was only in the core regions like Quebec and New Orleans and some forts. The Spanish never managed to exert their control that far north.
Yes, but if the English hadn't taken Canada the French would have settled the interior instead of them. The Spanish would have moved up into what is now the American South, and the Dutch would have settled the NE. The Spanish & Russians would have divided the West Coast of NA between them.
 
Yes, but if the English hadn't taken Canada the French would have settled the interior instead of them.
The French were not that interested in settlements beyond trading posts.
The Spanish would have moved up into what is now the American South,
Why is there gold or silver there?
and the Dutch would have settled the NE. The Spanish & Russians would have divided the West Coast of NA between them.
Again none of them were that interested in settlement.
 
Last edited:
The French were not that interested in settlements beyond trading posts.

Why there is gold or silver there?

Again none of them were that interested in settlement.
That's not really true. The French population in Canada was growing and would eventually spread out like the English did. The Dutch settled in NYC, and spread up the Hudson to Albany, east into Long Island, and west into NJ, and fought the Sweds in the Delaware Valley. The Spanish didn't find gold in Florida, but went on to push against the English in Georgia, and the Carolina Coast. Spain settled in Texas, the SW, and California before gold was found there. It's hard to know how far the Russians would have gone in developing Alaska, but without pressure from the English they wouldn't have had much incentive to give it up.
 
I agree, French Canadians started to have very large families, 7 or 8 children per family, my guess is that by the 19th century the Canadian population would be around 7 million (not counting immigrants)
 
Love the premise, looking forward to see where you'll take this.

But just to ask a few clarifying questions:
1) I presume France owns Abaco and the Turks and Caicos Islands in the Lucayan archipelago?
2) You seem to have mislabeled some of the islands of the Lesser Antilles, having marked Martinique as Grenada and Grenada as St. Lucia... Still, I presume that while Britain/England may have attempted to settle some of the islands south of the Leeward Islands, they failed to establish any permanent foothold on any, right? If so, what's the fate of Barbados in this timeline? Is it still Portuguese?
3) What's the fate of Anguilla, Nevis, Barbuda, and Montserrat, the other Leeward Islands Britain owned IOTL? Is Barbuda just lumped in with Antigua like IOTL? Was there still an independent attempt by Irish colonists to settle Montserrat? Were Nevis and Anguilla settled by the Dutch, like they half-heartedly attemted IOTL?

Also I just remembered that IOTL the English (through the privateer Henry Morgan) destroyed the port of Panama in 1671, which at the time was a concession given to the Republic of Genoa by their Spanish allies... Could this timeline feature Genoa snagging a handful of Caribbean islands, like St. Vincent, Barbados, or Dominica, that IOTL were not that interesting to the colonial powers besides Britain?
 
The other ones had much looser control. French rule was only in the core regions like Quebec and New Orleans and some forts. The Spanish never managed to exert their control that far north.
My understanding is that while resource extraction was a primary goal for many European colonies, the British were unique in that a large number of colonists made the trip to flee persecution back in Britain. Where will these people go? Will Britain cement it's control on other extant territory instead?

Also, colonies were used as bargaining chips in European wars to prevent handing over 'important' lands. Any of these current colonizers could get unlucky in a war and throw out some American land to not lose core territory. Partially why Britain was so successful, they didn't have to worry about losing the isles.

Interesting idea though, I'm curious how other Native American groups are doing as the Confederacy is doing very well for itself right now.
 
My understanding is that while resource extraction was a primary goal for many European colonies, the British were unique in that a large number of colonists made the trip to flee persecution back in Britain. Where will these people go? Will Britain cement it's control on other extant territory instead?

I don't think that those populations would make much of a difference, take a look at the numbers that @Viriato brought to us years ago:

Before starting the TL I had done extensive studies of demographics in settler societies, comparing English (later British), French, Dutch, Portuguese and Spanish possessions around the globe. I used these to try to formulate a timeline that would be plausible. What I meant by a "small" number is when one compares the numbers of Portuguese heading for the East Indies during the 16th century (around 300-350,000). Here a net of around 15,000 Europeans settle the territory during the 16th century. However, due to a much shorter voyage, and proximity to home (the Azores), death rates are somewhat lower, but they are high during the first decades of settlement.

Climatically speaking this region of North America possessed qualities allowing it to be relatively free from diseases plaguing the tropical and even subtropical climates well into the 19th century. Because most are most familiar with the English colonies, it is important to look at them during their early period of colonisation. To illustrate the point, below are three separate regions being colonised by the English between with the net migration of Europeans for the 1630-1680 period shown below:

NET MIGRATION OF EUROPEANS 1630-1680
New England 28,000
Southern Colonies 75,000
West Indies 141,000

WHITE POPULATION IN 1630
New England 2,300
Southern Colonies 11,000
West Indies 4,800

WHITE POPULATION IN 1680
New England 68,000
Southern Colonies 63,000
West Indies 43,000
The quantity of people that Britain sent to North America was quite small compared to what they sent to their tropical and subtropical colonies, it was natural growth and not immigration that inflated the British numbers in North America.
 
Love the premise, looking forward to see where you'll take this.

But just to ask a few clarifying questions:
1) I presume France owns Abaco and the Turks and Caicos Islands in the Lucayan archipelago?
2) You seem to have mislabeled some of the islands of the Lesser Antilles, having marked Martinique as Grenada and Grenada as St. Lucia... Still, I presume that while Britain/England may have attempted to settle some of the islands south of the Leeward Islands, they failed to establish any permanent foothold on any, right? If so, what's the fate of Barbados in this timeline? Is it still Portuguese?
3) What's the fate of Anguilla, Nevis, Barbuda, and Montserrat, the other Leeward Islands Britain owned IOTL? Is Barbuda just lumped in with Antigua like IOTL? Was there still an independent attempt by Irish colonists to settle Montserrat? Were Nevis and Anguilla settled by the Dutch, like they half-heartedly attemted IOTL?
Thank you!
1) They do
2) I did, the text is correct, the location is just wrong. The Portuguese didn't really establish any sort of control over the island, probably the French get it.
3) I will cover the Caribbean in a future chapter

The quantity of people that Britain sent to North America was quite small compared to what they sent to their tropical and subtropical colonies, it was natural growth and not immigration that inflated the British numbers in North America.
That large natural growth was due to the American colonists being families, while in other colonies it was often just men, with a high gender imbalance.
That's not really true. The French population in Canada was growing and would eventually spread out like the English did. The Dutch settled in NYC, and spread up the Hudson to Albany, east into Long Island, and west into NJ, and fought the Sweds in the Delaware Valley. The Spanish didn't find gold in Florida, but went on to push against the English in Georgia, and the Carolina Coast. Spain settled in Texas, the SW, and California before gold was found there. It's hard to know how far the Russians would have gone in developing Alaska, but without pressure from the English they wouldn't have had much incentive to give it up.
Still, at its end, New France had a population of just 80,000, compared to the Thirteen Colonies with over a million. That's not even considering the fact that French settlement was accelerated due to competition from the British, and the fact that New France was more tolerant of native cultures. Spain/Mexico meanwhile, despite having a large headstart and a large population too, only had a few thousand people in its Northernmost territories. Gold would accelerate things sure, but it'd still be slow. Russia meanwhile probably would keep Alaska it'd be hard to expand that further considering it's on the opposite side of the earth from Moscow. Even with gold.
 
Part 4: The 2nd Intercolonial War
Part 4: The Second Intercolonial War

By the Dawn of the 1700s European colonies in Northern America had expanded significantly. The farthest North of these was the two French fur trading outposts on the Hudson, Fort Bourbon, and Fort Sainte-Louis. To the South of that was Terreneuve, an island that was disputed between French and English fishermen who had established settlements on the island. An uneasy peace existed between the two, until the Nine Year's War. Since France and England were at war with each other, the French governor of the island attacked the English, burning their settlements and forcing them off the island. The bountiful cod deposits on the coast were now French. Acadia was a growing French colony closely allied to the Wabanaki Confederacy. This alliance was acknowledged several times, such as during the First Intercolonial War. The colony was very briefly occupied by the Dutch during the Franco-Dutch war but that lasted less than a year.

Canada, however, was the beating heart of New France. The settlements of Montréal and Québec were growing into cities, as more settlers arrived in the region. The gender imbalance of the colony was improved when a group of female settlers known as the King’s Daughters arrived. Past the around the St. Laurent core, the rest of the land claimed by France was very loosely controlled by them. A few forts dotted the land but the rest was under native control. Within these forts and throughout Canada there was a large amount of interconnectedness between the French and the Natives, leading to a mixed-race population known as the Métis. French forts went deep inland towards the Mississippi River in what was known as Pays d'en Haut.

This French control, however, was being constantly contested by Haudenosaunee. In a series of century-long wars, they had conquered a vast swath of the North-East, creating an empire. They were backed by their allies the Dutch, who from their base in New Amsterdam had expanded along the coast. Outposts were established from Hovestad in Conittikock to Poyt Hoop on the Cheasapeak. However, the colony had a major problem of internal instability. The Dutch West India Company ruled over the colony, and the quite authoritarian nature of their rule was resented by the settlers. Still, with their strategic position and powerful allies in the Haudenosaunee, New Netherland stood as a powerful player in Northern America. To their west was a unique colony.

New Sweden was established as a small fur trading outpost but Sweden was more focused on affairs back in Europe. Due to this, the colony got very little attention from the motherland. The number of settlers in the colony was relatively small. Still, they survived by playing the Dutch and the French off against each other and trying to be a buffer state between the two. But due to their unique position, and the lack of women in the colony, Swedish men began to marry native women. This would be the origin of an ethnic group known as the Blandfolk, from the Swedish word for mixed race. They began to make up an increasingly large amount of the population. Despite their increasing ties to the Wabanaki, they didn’t join the Confederacy, however, since their whole thing was staying neutral.

In Florida, the Spanish controlled loosely controlled the coastal parts of the region with several missions set up. They had destroyed the brief French colonies in the region, claiming the coast further North that they didn’t control. Mostly though it was a backwater in Spain’s vast American Empire.

Finally to the West of Florida was the mouth of the Mississippi River. Both the French and Dutch had laid claim to the area, yet both were yet to establish any sort of control there. The Dutch tried to establish a fort there but failed. [1]

Anyways time for war.

The Spanish Empire was a massive thing, with a total land area larger than Europe, and stretching from the Philippines to Argentina. So who controlled that Empire gained a ton of power. At the moment, it was the very inbred Charles II. However he was about to die, and he didn’t have an heir. Charles declared the grandson of the French king the heir, essentially making it so France controlled the Spanish Empire after his death. This would lopside the balance of power in the French favor and no one (other than the French) wanted that, so war inevitably began. It was France, Spain, and a few other countries against pretty much everyone else.

In the Northern American section of the war, called the Second Intercolonial War, that meant France, their native allies, and Spain vs the Netherlands, Haudenosaunee, and England.

The war in Northern America started in May of 1702 with a French militia from Maine in Acadia attacking the Dutch outpost of Hovestad. The Wabanaki Confederacy joined the war, launching a few raids against the Dutch. The Haudenosaunee joined around this time too. The French continued West, trying to take Goede Hoop [2]. The Dutch fort put up stiff resistance, and while it fell it was a phyric victory with high casualties. By October a Dutch counterattack retook it. After this winter would start preventing any further French actions. The French would hold on to Goede Hoop with neither side taking any actions for a few years.

Meanwhile, the French and their allies were fighting a brutal war against the Haudenosaunee. The Wabanaki faced several raids from the Haudenosaunee. In previous wars, the Wabanaki were able to resist the Five Nations' conquest but here it seemed that they wouldn't. By 1705 the lands of the Abenaki were under Haudenosaunee. In the West, they had destroyed several French forts, the largest of them being Détroit. The French counterattacked in the Spring of 1706 with a large militia from Canada. They had success, capturing several Haudenosaunee warchiefs. Seeing the success of the French, the Shawnee, long subjugated by the Five Nations saw an opportunity. Under the leadership of Chief Nimwha [2], they rose up in what would be known as the First Shawnee Rebellion. [3] Other minor rebellions also began. They began to lose control of the edges of their empire.

The Dutch, of course, were concerned about this, especially as Dutch forts were threatened. In 1707, The French troops occupying Hovestad launched a surprise attack on Fort Orange and sieged it. The Dutch took back the fort as well as Hovestad in a few months, but after this, they sent more support to the Haudenosaunee. Even with the Dutch support, they were facing an uphill battle. They were pushed out of the Abenaki land. In 1708, A French and Wabanaki army faced off against the Dutch and Haudenosaunee in the Battle of Sainte Marie [4]. It was a major French victory and the New Netherland militia took heavy casualties.

Previous internal tensions between the GWC and the colonists started to increase. The Director, Adriaan van Coevorden, was an unpopular man. Many didn’t like how he was running things, and generally wanted more choice over government. Many of the colonists believed that “Their sons were being sent to die to help some savages.” Economic problems caused by the war accentuated these tensions.

In 1709, a Dutch militia, accompanied by their Haudenosaunee allies was passing through Wabanaki lands to attempt to take Fort Saint-Pierre. They stopped at what they thought was a Wabanaki village and burned it down. However, it was actually a Blandfolk village. One of the people killed in the village was the Niece of the current governor. As such, the New Sweden found itself at war with New Netherland. This conflict stayed restricted to the New World, however, as Sweden was at war with half of Europe already so let the colony fight by itself.

The Haudenosaunee meanwhile were being pushed back and losing their Shawnee lands, the French from Acadia retook Hovestad. With all this, the Van Coevorden was becoming increasingly unpopular. Things hit a boiling point when another Dutch militia helping the Haudenosaunee was almost wiped out by a Shawnee force. In the winter of 1710, a riot started, one thing led to another and Van Coevorden was ousted and the new Directors sued for peace. (Without permission from Amsterdam) The Haudenosaunee fought on for a bit longer but they eventually sued for peace. The terms of the Grand Peace of Montréal would damage but not destroy the Haudenosaunee Empire. They were forced to convert to Christianity, allow France to build forts on their land, and give up their control of the Shawnee, Illinois, Mississaugas, and Odawa.

RIP.png

The Second Intercolonial War would have a major effect on Northern America. The power of New Netherland and the Haudenosaunee were curtailed, in favor of French power. The war also led to a revolution in New Netherlands, which would in the short term lead to a civil war in the colony. In the long term, it gave the colony a more democratic government and more self-rule from the Netherlands. It would mark the start of the decline of the Haudenosaunee. The Shawnee, having asserted their independence, would become a major player in resisting European encroachment.

[1] Louisiana was established as part of a plan to limit British influence in North America. It will still be colonized of course due to it being a very important spot geostrategically but delayed somewhat.
[2] Not the OTL guy, just needed a name.
[3] A slight bit of foreshadowing
[4] OTL Syracuse, Named after the failed mission in that area

Map of the North-East before the 2nd Intercolonial War

unknown.png
 

Attachments

  • RIP.png
    RIP.png
    52.9 KB · Views: 131
Last edited:
Also as a side thing, here's the map that inspired the scenario. I had the idea for the map itself and worked backward to make the lore for it after. From there came the idea of the English not colonizing the Americas possibly allowing Native Americans to not be entirely conquered. This map is likely going to become non-canon though.

1gcor8wla6r81.png
 
Britain would get its naval stores from Russia, and the Baltic, as in the OTL.
Naval stores came from Alabama and were not the same as lumber. The British needed high quilty oak to build ships.

Naval stores are all products derived from pine resin, which are used to manufacture soap, paint, varnish, shoe polish, lubricants, linoleum, and roofing materials.
The term naval stores originally applied to the resin-based components used in building and maintaining wooden sailing ships, a category which includes cordage, mask, turpentine, rosin, pitch and tar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_stores
 
Last edited:
Also as a side thing, here's the map that inspired the scenario. I had the idea for the map itself and worked backward to make the lore for it after. From there came the idea of the English not colonizing the Americas possibly allowing Native Americans to not be entirely conquered. This map is likely going to become non-canon though.

1gcor8wla6r81.png
Beautiful map. What's the time period? It looks like before the Beaver Wars.

Also, Lake Simcoe was named after Lt-Gov John Graves Simcoe, Colonial Governor of Upper Canada. Don't know if that name would still be used

Edit: its indigenous name is Zhooniyang-zaaga'igan. "Silver Lake"
 
Last edited:
the British were unique in that a large number of colonists made the trip to flee persecution back in Britain. Where will these people go?
I am not saying this is the intention of the writer of the timeline, probably not. But those British you mentioned could actualy go to Dutch colonies, or colonies from other powers. For example the pilgrims OTL lived in the Netherlands before they decided to move to America. It is possible that instead of asking England if the could settle in America to be part of the English colonies, they make a deal with the Dutch to settle a colony in America. Basicly, leave us alone and we pay taxes to make it worth your while. They are technicaly part of the Dutch colony, but keep their English and puritan customs. I think I have seen it in a timeline once years ago. It is kind of a situation comparable to Hugenots moving to the Dutch Cape colony. Many Boers were actualy of Hugenot descent.

I could easily see British catholics who originaly went to Maryland going to the French colonies, etc.
 
Beautiful map. What's the time period? It looks like before the Beaver Wars.

Also, Lake Simcoe was named after Lt-Gov John Graves Simcoe, Colonial Governor of Upper Canada. Don't know if that name would still be used

Edit: its indigenous name is Zhooniyang-zaaga'igan. "Silver Lake"
The time period was meant to be set in the mid 1800s. Lake Simcoe yeah it wouldn’t be called that, I think I thought that name was of native origin so kept the OTL name.


I am not saying this is the intention of the writer of the timeline, probably not. But those British you mentioned could actualy go to Dutch colonies, or colonies from other powers. For example the pilgrims OTL lived in the Netherlands before they decided to move to America. It is possible that instead of asking England if the could settle in America to be part of the English colonies, they make a deal with the Dutch to settle a colony in America. Basicly, leave us alone and we pay taxes to make it worth your while. They are technicaly part of the Dutch colony, but keep their English and puritan customs. I think I have seen it in a timeline once years ago. It is kind of a situation comparable to Hugenots moving to the Dutch Cape colony. Many Boers were actualy of Hugenot descent.

I could easily see British catholics who originaly went to Maryland going to the French colonies, etc.

Yeah, some British people still end up in North America anyways. New Netherland due to its relative tolerance had a lot of people from outside the Netherlands move there. And events in Europe that’ll be discussed in the next chapter result in some British Catholics moving to New France.
 
Top