What is the smallest USA possible after the ARW?

Often we see threads about a big USA after the American revolutionary war, including all of Canada; somethimes it is less ambitious and only includes the Maritimes or part of Ontario.
Another often seen scenario is America losing the the war and becoming a British Dominion.
Hardly ever we seen the other possibility of the USA gaining independence while the British do better, so we get a smaller USA. So what is the smallest USA possible after the ARW without balkanising it. So is it possible for the British to keep a large part of Maine, keeping the south etc? Or is the OTL USA the smallest possible independent USA?
 
A bit of a hard one.
Non-existant is of course the smallest possible with all the states going independant... But then you say no balkanising...I can't see you shrinking the US without a little balkanising at least.
 
Well, assuming the original 13 all gain independence and stay united, we could assume the US is never able to keep or gain control of the land past the Appalachians (a worse Treaty of Paris, etc.). So, potentially only the pink below:

File:Nouvelle-France_map-en.svg
 
You can have them hit the mississippi and have the Union lose the Revolutionary war. That way it's just the Northeast. I believe for the longest time many Americans thought that they would not need to cross the mississippi for more land.
 
George Rodgers Clark's expedition went a long ways toward securing the claim on the Northwest Territory. Had the expedition failed, is it possible that the British retain all or most of the Northwest? (Virginia had already made some inroads in present-day western Virginia and in Kentucky.)
 
The French gain at least a tie in the French & Indian War. They do not lose their hold over the Ohio country. The future USA is hemmed in by British Canada, Canada, Spanish Florida and the French and Native controled territories to the west. IMO we will see the French help to create a Native American nation state out of the Iriquios Confederation as a buffer to the Americans. Basically the East Coast to the foothills
 
We win the ARW, but the other powers in North America keep their grip on their territories; America doesn't develop the urge to expand across the Appalachian Mt. or into Spanish Florida...so we just stay with the original 13 states.
 
We win the ARW, but the other powers in North America keep their grip on their territories; America doesn't develop the urge to expand across the Appalachian Mt. or into Spanish Florida...so we just stay with the original 13 states.
It would be fine except for the fact that American colonists were already pushing their way over the Appalachians during the ARW

That said how bout something like this:

The British offensive on Albany goes somewhat according to plan following the deaths of both Arnold and Montgomery at Quebec. There is no American rally on lake Champlain.
The Clark expedition fails, but it does not change the fact that the Americans will still likely dominate West Penn. and the upper Ohio even at the peace in some form. The Southern campaign is more defensive in nature. Georgia leaves the Continental Congress in 1881 following collapse of initial peace feelers, and Spain drops its support for the rebels. Peace is in 1883 instead. The French will push for it. Britain has retained its perimeter in the south around Charleston and dominates the largest part of that state.

All this butterflies to an fourth Nootka convention that partitions Oregon between Spain and Britain at the Columbia River. Russia is of course cut out as neither consults them.

Alternate state after an alternate Jay treaty.

AltNAm1796.gif
 

Thande

Donor
I think Aurora's is the most plausible so far. H'lander's done a map or two around the concept but I don't think he's given a TL behind them.

The problem is basically holding back westward settlement, unless you have the settlers set up states firmly independent from the USA for some reason.
 

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
A more hard line Britain

Does not recognise the validity of the Louisiana Purchase and cedes it from France. Insists on the Red River colony. Does not recognise the validity of the Alaskan Purchase and cedes during the Crimean War. Takes the western United States and Texas by claim and conquest.

Or you could just say Canada is marked in grey:
United_States_direct_successor_states_from_original_Thirteen_Colonies.png
New York still has too much claim on the St Lawrence seaway. A border dispute or two will knock that back level with Massachusetts .

Palmerston's-U.K._Territorial_Acquisitions.PNG
 
Last edited:
It would be fine except for the fact that American colonists were already pushing their way over the Appalachians during the ARW

That said how bout something like this:

<big map>

I like it, but one query: If the British held the south, surely they'd be less inclined to ditch Florida in the Treaty of Paris?
 
The problem is basically holding back westward settlement, unless you have the settlers set up states firmly independent from the USA for some reason.
Possibly have American expansion westwards resemble Boer expansion northwards in the 19th century- a central state that's home to a fairly sizeable population, but settlers continually leave and attempt to form small, city-sized "republics" on the frontier independent of the central state. In this case, the frontier republics aren't absorbed by the US to contribute to its growth, but are instead dealt with by Britain et al by some means (simple absorbtion into colonial lands, military force, I dunno).

Plausible at all?
 
Of course the smallest possible USA after the revolutionary war would be...No USA.

Presuming a war which the USA wins, but which also leaves the USA in a weaker position, considering itself fortunate just to secure independence, the original USA could be limited to the Atlantic fringe largely east of the Appalachian uplift. Britain would maintain a presence to the west, between the USA and the Mississippi River, possibly supporting native clients. The USA might eventually manage to obtain Florida from Spain, and perhaps move later elsewhere into the Carribbean by buying or begging Islands from France and Spain.

A USA which had no opportunity for westward expansion would not adopt anything like the NW ordinance allowing for growth of a large federal republic. Probably one of two things would happen: (1) the former colonies would remain essentially independent states in a very loose confederation in name only, or (2) the perceived threat from powerful European colonies in North America would lead to formation of a unitary state as the big and wealthy states absorbed the smaller.

Perhaps within 50 years of so, this group of small english-speaking states might see the folly of independence and seek some for of reunion (in whole or in part) with the British Empire.
 
Perhaps within 50 years of so, this group of small english-speaking states might see the folly of independence and seek some for of reunion (in whole or in part) with the British Empire.
When has any independent former colony willingly rejoined its former masters? I can't think of any examples in Africa at all, and the only possible case may be the Dominican Republic in the mid-1800s. Who ever admits to "the folly of independence"?
 
I have often proposed a scenario where the french used
the Lousiana as the British would later use Australia, that is:
As a dumping ground for malcontents. That way, many of those
who would lay the ideological bases for the french revolution (OTL)
would get instead deported to the Lousiana. As a result, the
Lousiana would get much more populated...
 
I like it, but one query: If the British held the south, surely they'd be less inclined to ditch Florida in the Treaty of Paris?
A prid pro quo for the Spanish ditching their support The revolutionaries. I am assuming they are still able to occupy parts of the West Florida coast as with OTL. East Florida is closer to their main possessions in the Caribbean and they still hold New Orleans to control Luisiana. thus for evacuating the West Florida coast and leaving the War against Britain they regain East Florida. This prompt slightly settled Georgia to leave the C.C. shortly after which helps to bolster the British in the south centred in Charleston. Tarleton has been reigned in and is not ranging high and low all over the south after Green or another Patriot leader.

Stalemated in the south the Patriot forces concentrate on re-linking up New England and Virginia and the mid-Atlantic states. Which were separated after the successful three pronged attack on Albany this time around. By 1882 though the revolutionaries have finally been able to recapture it and reduce the control of the British in NY to the Champlain valley. New York and lOng Island and the lands of the Iroquois in the west. The Iroquois (all of the six nations)in this TL have rallied to the British. Hence the reason for the "Niagara region" still being in shared control between the US and Britain.

The initial disposition of the entire NW beyond the Ohio River, south of the Lakes and west of the treaty line of Fort Stanwix with the natives is an area of Joint occupancy at the peace. Something in the long term that is untenable but suffices for that time period...1783. The harsher terms and the harsher political climate in the lead up to the the declaration of independence ( which is the POD in Nth Am that I am working on for now) leads to a stronger loyalist migration settling in the south in Georgia and West Florida and in the North in Vermont/N.S. Quebec and Newfoundland.

With the initial successful campaign of the Brits in the north securing NY. loyalist regiments that form do not base along the St. Lawrence They are in the Mohawk and Upper Hudson/Champlain Valleys instead. Fr. Cdn militias instead are used to secure the St. Lawrence West of Montreal to L. Ontario and at Detroit. Hence the Ethnic line in Quebec in the aftermath is somewhat further west than OTL to the valleys of the South Nation river and the Upper Rideau in what is Eastern Ont OTL.

By the mid '90's Britain is preoccupied with the French revolutionary threat and a compromise with the US is necessary. While they have not been pouring into the lands of the Iroquois they have been spilling over to the lands of the upper Ohio and those beyond the Appalachians in Virginia and North Carolina building upon the fledgling settlements established during the ARW. A compromise is necessary as conflicts between American settlers and the natives ( mostly Shawnees and Miamis )is growing. Blue Jacket is actually offered protection in this TL in the aftermath of an alternate Fallen timbers because of the more entrenched Br. position in the NW. With War threatening, and Britain not wanting a War in Nth Am given the concern over the continent The Jay treaty compromise results. the Ohio district becomes an area of exclusive US influence, and Britain Michigan as a prid pro quo. Both would have liked the Niagara but neither would like the other to have it and the further districts are not of immediate interest in the '90's for the US and the Brits still want to preserve them for the Natives. Both districts are still integral to the "NW area of Joint occupany" there is no annexation by either, jhust a recognition that these districts should considering circumstances on the ground be areas of pre-eminent influence for each respectively.

Eventually this is going to lead to unilateral annexation of the Upper Ohio by the US in the '00's. It will be this TL's version of the War of 1812. I am thinking that it would not go overly well for Britain given its likely pre-occupation on the Continent....then again I haven't decided how things go on the Continent yet and how Pre-occupied the Brits will be.

Initially I think that such a conflict will likely end with a final partition of the NW to avoid such a disaster again. the US obtaining Illinois and the Niagara and annexing the largest part of Vt and SC.. reconstructing them as US states..and leading to a second loyalist migration. Obviously the annexation of Ohio is recognized. This assumes that the US concentrates on Militias as OTL but they are larger in the south as well as the North. Britain with the aid of the Natives does well in the West and of course in Maine. The disruption of trade leads to disaffection in NE for the War Effort despite its gains but it does not gain enough momentum to become significant force until the aftermath of the, for lack of a better name..."The Ohio War" or "2nd war of Independence" . I figure this will give the US a significant win and boost to its prestige and will force the Brits to re-evaluate the needs for defence in its western territories ( namely the lack of settlers to formalize their presence) They are also going to want to tred lightly with the natives. The Iroquois Nations will migrate with the 2nd loyalist migration. Settling in the Grand river Valley of Michigan in TTL instead of the Grand River Valley of Ontario in OTL (these areas having already been settled by loyalists instead in the wake of the 1st ARW.

thats as far as I'm at until Europe shakes out.

In short even if the US was restricted in the aftermath of the ARW to something less..It is still likely to grow in some measure from those beginnings. Its all a matter of when or if they meet an impenetrable force. Either military or political.
 
No balkinazation he said! But pretty map!
I think the smallest would be without Maine, New Hampshire, Geroigia, Missisipi, Vermont and Rhode Island. Maybe Connecut, and NJ.
 
Top