What happens to Louisiana if there's no USA?

I did some brainstorming for a balkanised American TL and ran into the same problem with Louisiana. Eventually I decided to have Britain invade it and add it to Canada, but when the people in and around New Orleans found out that Napoleon wasn't even going to try to defend them, they rebelled and created the Kingdom of New Orleans (finding some minor Bourbon to be king). The British recognized this new nation, and took the rest of Louisiana for themselves. So Britain (and eventually Canada) gets all of Louisiana minus New Orleans.

That is a likely scenario except for Canada being a single country. Without the US British North America has little need to confederate. The Maritimes and Lower Canada will likely seek autonomy fast.
So you might see a Maritime Confederation (likely to include Maine since Massachusetts will not hold of the British), a Canada (mainly OTL's Quebec) and a Large British Central North American Territory encompassing Louisiana, the Hudson Basin and chunks of the Great Lakes.

I am still not sure how New York manages to keep land that is not attached to it across the Great lakes.
 
Napoleon extorted it out of Spain with the dream of a grand empire, but sold it to the US when France was bankrupt and used the money to raise what was to become the Grande Armee.

Giving it up rather than selling it means no conquest in Germany in 1805...

Eh. The money mattered, but I don't think it was pivotal and irreplaceable.
 
I'm curious about something. What are the odds of American unification in the same vein of German and Italian unification?
 
I'm curious about something. What are the odds of American unification in the same vein of German and Italian unification?


Depends on the particular circumstances.
Of course, your comparison to Germany or Italy only makes sense if the states were united once during the ARW at least; and now quarrel who continues the "real" tradition of the US.
However, even in this scenario with a lucid figure like Washington in joint remembrance, I'd say the desire to unite is much weaker than in the European nations. Germany and Italy were relatively easy to define in terms of language and culture. How large is the cultural gap between Maine and New Brunsvik? Affiliation with the US was very much a political issue in its younger days; and this is hard to turn into attractive forces if split between several countries.
 
How large is the cultural gap between Maine and New Brunsvik? Affiliation with the US was very much a political issue in its younger days; and this is hard to turn into attractive forces if split between several countries.
Between Maine and New Brunswick? not that big. Between Massachusetts and Virginia, pretty big.

Even as late as the US Civil War, people like Robert E Lee considered themselves loyal primarily to their state, then to the federal union. One certainly COULD see a German/Italian style unification 100 years later, but I don't think it's probable.

The Germans wanted to unite all Germans (German speakers), the Italians, all Italians (Italian speakers). The equivalent would be to unite all English speakers, perhaps, not all 'Americans' whatever, if anything, that last word would mean in such a history.
 
As a PA native I'm always saddened when the Commonwealth gets the short end of the stick in these "No Constitution = No United States" timelines. While this assumption is possible its not as likely as you may think. Until the completion of the Erie Canal in 1825, Pittsburgh was the gateway to the west. So long as PA keeps Pittsburgh the settlers moving in to the Ohio River Valley will in large part have come by way of PA.

This may not ensure that the Northwest remained loyal to PA but it will mean that the people living in the Appalachians and Ohio River Valley have little loyalty to the plantation society of the south eastern seaboard (case in point...West Virginia in our timeline). Given that without a central government the Pennamite Wars will be a bit worse and also given that PA is almost guaranteed to win (demographics and geography both work to help PA) we can assume that PA will occupy the Western Reserve claimed by Connecticut. Without the "Erie Chimney" PA will need this territory to give them access to the Great Lakes. So with access to both the Ohio and the Great Lakes PA will be in a good position to dominate settlement of OTL states of Ohio, West Virginia, Indiana and perhaps further west.

This leaves the possibility of two future conflicts over the old Northwest. New York is in a good position to settle the upper Northwest and will probably reach an agreement with PA. Once the Erie Canal is completed, which may take longer given the lack of a central government, settlement along the Great Lakes will once again favor New York. Further south the Pennsylvania / Virginia disagreement will most likely get worse. Washington and Franklin almost certainly will try to find a negotiated settlement, but once they pass on the final bonds that prevent war will be gone. By 1800, a year after Washington's death (though admittedly he may have lived a bit longer in this TL), Pennsylvania and Virginia will face off over the Ohio River Valley.

Assuming equality in military leadership, the war will come down to a contest of population and industry. Virginia has a lead in population but PA has more industry. If we assume that PA is allied to NJ (which I could easily be split along the old East / West Jersey lines and divided between PA and NY), MD and DE than the advantage would go to PA, especially if many of the settlers in western Virginia feel no loyalty to Virginia. Most likely the border would be set along the Ohio River. This would mean PA could easily extend to the Mississippi. Together NY and PA could easily purchase the Louisiana Territory and peacefully divide the regio allowing the river to remain an open international water way and New Orleans as a free city.

Just my thoughts on the matter.
Benjamib
 

The Vulture

Banned
Benjamin has some pretty good ideas.

This may have been brought up already (I was kinda skimming), but what would be the legal status of the Mississippi River in this scenario, being as it is a vital artery of trade?
 
Top