WI/AHC: Viceroyalty of Rio Grande

What if, between the 16th Century to 18th Century, Viceroyalty of New Spain was split in two? The Viceroyalty of New Spain in the South, with it's capital at Mexico City, and the Viceroyalty of Rio Grande, with it's capital in Monterrey.

1617890815637.png

(Map is inaccurate, a bit late 1821, but this is the general gist of the borders. Map belongs to @Sharklord1)

How would this Viceroyalty function?
What would be it's economy?
What it's people be like? What settlers could come?
 
Mmmmh, I doubt this is viable. The gigantic north is very underpopulated (with europeans that is) and even worse controlled. I think it's possible to create a new vice royalty in Texas and notheast Mexico but you probably need Louisiana for that. The bourbons controlled Louisiana for a good time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_(New_Spain) so maybe just like they created the new viceroyalties of Nueva Granada and Río de la Plata they could Create a Tejas viceroyalty to effectively rule that area? I thing adding the southern part of Louisiana (roughtly otl State of Louisiana) to the new Texan viceyolty is necessary to make it work. When creating the new vicerolties in southamerica the Bourbons added rich peruvian provinces to them in order to make those new realms economically viable. Early on, most of the territories of Nueva Granada and Río de la Plata well economically undeveloped and baldy controlled, that's why they added Ecuador and Bolivia to the 2, so the mines of those regions would bankroll the development of the new territories. And the creation of those new administrative units was caused by the spanish fear of portuguese advance over their underpopulated and uncontrolled territories.
My guess is that a funtional Texas Viceroyalty would include otl Louisiana state, the texas province marked in that map and otl northeast mexico:
1617893613059.png

Or the northern parts of these.
The new Viceroyalty would be probably a one based on plantation slavery and cashcrops. Basically extending the economy and society of Louisiana to Texas. Lousiana will likely remain mostly french while Texas and otl NE Mexico would likely go spanish. In both cases early on most of the population will be either black slaves or mulattos. TTL Luoisiana will be like a southern Quebec to spanish Texas.
 
IIRC correctly early on, Mexico demanded the Arkansas River as the northern limit of their border with the US. They only partially achieved this, and later on they lost anything close to that river.
1617894045045.png

My guess is that TTL Texas Viceroyalty will extend north to the Arkansas and west until the rockies. More land for plantations. And a more populated border with the US.
 
California is Could be made something similar to Río de la Plata. I mean a settler colony based with a ranch export economy.
"The Spanish and later Mexican governments rewarded retired soldados de cuera with large land grants, known as ranchos, for the raising of cattle and sheep. Hides and tallow from the livestock were the primary exports of California until the mid-19th century. The construction, ranching and domestic work on these vast estates was primarily done by Native Americans, who had learned to speak Spanish and ride horses. Unfortunately, a large percentage of the population of Native Californians died from European diseases. Under Spanish and Mexican rule the ranchos prospered and grew. Rancheros (cattle ranchers) and pobladores (townspeople) evolved into the unique Californio culture. "
The franciscans initially aided the early settlement but they protected the local natives from the rancheros so they need to be removed a lot earlier for more settlers to arrive. The church lands need to be privatized. And this is hard bc the spanish crown struggle with this aspect of modern capitalism even in Spain until well into the 20th century.
"The Spanish and Mexican governments made many concessions and land grants in Alta California (now known as California and Baja California) from 1785 to 1846. The Spanish Concessions of land were made to retired soldiers as an inducement for them to remain in the frontier. These Concessions reverted to the Spanish crown upon the death of the recipient. The Mexican government later encouraged settlement by issuing much larger land grants to both native-born and naturalized Mexican citizens. The grants were usually two or more square leagues, or 35 square kilometres (14 sq mi) in size. Unlike Spanish Concessions, Mexican land grants provided permanent, unencumbered ownership rights. Most ranchos granted by Mexico were located along the California coast around San Francisco Bay, inland along the Sacramento River, and within the San Joaquin Valley.

When the government secularized the Mission churches in 1833, they required that land be set aside for each Neophyte family. But the Native Americans were quickly brushed aside by Californios who, with the help of those in power, acquired the church lands as grants. The indigenous peoples of the Americas ("Indians") instead became virtual slaves of the rancheros.

Spain made about 30 concessions between 1784 and 1821, and Mexico issued about 270 land grants between 1833 and 1846
. The ranchos established permanent land-use patterns. The rancho boundaries became the basis for California's land survey system, and are found on modern maps and land titles. The "rancheros" (rancho owners) patterned themselves after the landed gentry of New Spain, and were primarily devoted to raising cattle and sheep. Their workers included Native Americans who had learned Spanish while living at one of the former Missions. The ranchos were often based on access to the resources necessary for raising cattle, such as grazing lands and water. Land development from that time forward has often followed the boundaries of the ranchos, and many of their names are still in use."

Compared to Río de la Plata there is also a lot of potencial for wool export industry too here. This will probably help bc its easier to industralize wool into textile industry then compared to Argentina were cattle was almost excliusively cows.
My guess is Baja california will be added to this region as in otl
1617908771148.png

and also otl northwest mexico to make better rule those areas
1617908810094.png

. Also the capital of the viceroyalty needs to be moved from monterrey to San francisco bay area. Its a better port.
Also while a lot whiter and spanish then slave plantation eastern texas and louisiana they will have a working class mestizo minority, specially in the rural rancho areas.
Otl north mexico tho will be the whitest part of the coutry bc it will be settled last. Its the most arid. Altho in otl its the richest and most developed part of Mexico here they will be the periphery of this 2 new viceroyalties.
 
Forgot to mention this

"Spanish interest in colonizing Alta California was revived under the visita of José de Gálvez as part of his plans to completely reorganize the governance of the Interior Provinces and push Spanish settlement further north.[11] In subsequent decades, news of Russian colonization and maritime fur trading in Alaska, and the 1768 naval expedition of Pyotr Krenitsyn and Mikhail Levashev, in particular, alarmed the Spanish government and served to justify Gálvez's vision.[12] To ascertain the Russian threat, a number of Spanish expeditions to the Pacific Northwest were launched. In preparation for settlement of Alta California, the northern, mainland region of Las Californias was granted to Franciscan missionaries to convert the Native population to Catholicism, following a model that had been used for over a century in Baja California. The Spanish Crown funded the construction and subsidized the operation of the missions, with the goal that the relocation, conversion and enforced labor of Native people would bolster Spanish rule. "

It seems spanish interest in the region was sparkled by russian presence to the north, maybe a stronger russian presence even all the way to oregon would work to make the bourbons accelerate the development of the region? Also maybe a natural border instead of a paralell straigh line will be better .
 
Another thing, both regions will have strongly pro independence criollo elites. Why? Lets look at Nueva Granada and Río de la Plata. In Gran Colombia you had a pro independence criollo elite bc of the the plantation slave owners dispissed spanish comerical monopoly also the fact they were excluded from the administration of their own colony bc only peninsulares (mainland spaniards) could occupy public positions. This is why french and english enlightened writers were appealing to the slaveocrats, in their positions in favour of political rights (for wealthy white people) and property rights (inclusing slaves, as a way to keep wealthy criollo elites down the spanish crown would sometimes do small policies in favour of indians and black slaves like for example during their short rule over Louisiana they introduced a law that allowed slaves to buy their own freedom) and free trade. So a situation similar to that of Bolivar's Gran Colombia could happen in the Texan viceroyalty.
In California you would have something similar to the Río de la Plata. Just like the hacienda owners down south, the calofornian rancheros would recent the spanish trade monopoly (illegal trade with the UK would be rampant) and also their exclusion from public administration dispate their wealth and influence. Altho in Río de la Plata you had the added spanish weakness that the capital city was invaded by the UK and Spain wasnt able to respond at the time, leaving the locals alone in repelling the english. Revealing to the people in Buenos Aires both their own strenght but also spanish weakness.
 
Another thing about Texas. I compared them to Gran Colombia but they have some advantages and disadvatages at the time of the independence wars.
OOH they are a lot closer to Mexico, a stronghold for the spanish crown as long the rulers of Madrid arent liberals. The rebelion in Mexico was a lot weaker then in other viceroyalties bc, just like in Peru, the criollo elite supported the crown. So Mexico would be able to send reinforcements to the royalists in California and Texas.
But OTOH the "enlightened" slaveocrats of texas and louisiana will enjoy a lot of support not only from the UK but also from their neighbors in the USA. The southern states will absolutely see themselves in this revolutionaries. And they just east of the border.
 
Wow, @EnvarKadri, you certainly thought this through, and I’m thankful for that

To answer one of your questions, about the elites of Rio Grande, it’s mostly Criolle descendent population. The more north into Arizona and Neveda and Texas, lots of natives like the Apache, Navajo and Comanche

But the rest (Northern Mexico and California) does have a lot of Criolle elites
 
IIRC correctly early on, Mexico demanded the Arkansas River as the northern limit of their border with the US. They only partially achieved this, and later on they lost anything close to that river.
View attachment 640405
My guess is that TTL Texas Viceroyalty will extend north to the Arkansas and west until the rockies. More land for plantations. And a more populated border with the US.
HAHA. I found it.
"Internal Provinces of Nueva España 1817" Texas border is clearly at the Arkansas River
 
Wow, @EnvarKadri, you certainly thought this through, and I’m thankful for that

To answer one of your questions, about the elites of Rio Grande, it’s mostly Criolle descendent population. The more north into Arizona and Neveda and Texas, lots of natives like the Apache, Navajo and Comanche

But the rest (Northern Mexico and California) does have a lot of Criolle elites
Haha, yeah, I did some reading some time ago about how Mexico could have keepen their pre 1848 borders. As you can imagine is a lot easier with colonial PODs.
Regarding the indian controlled lands in mountains and the arid lands between western california and eastern texas my guess is that just like in otl they wont be conquered until the later part of the 19th century. Probably by the independent republics. The terrain is big, harsh and not that productive. Also not very good for the bussiness model of either the californio or tejano elite. My guess the comanche will only be subjugated to stop their raids and as a landgrab to secure the area from Mexican or american encroachment. Well the texans will want to stop the indian raids. I dont think those were that strong in california and arizona and . I think California will be more worried about mormon illegal settlements in their not actually controlled territories of otl Nevada, Utah and Arizona. Unless Calofornia keeps a vigilant eye Deseret couldd become a reality in ttl. Hell probably even south california (around San Diego and LA) could be threathened.
 
Mmmmh, there is a lot of good material here for a timeline. I dont have the time tho.
Man, colonial PODs are so good. There is much stuff you can change.
 
Mmmmh, there is a lot of good material here for a timeline. I dont have the time tho.
Man, colonial PODs are so good. There is much stuff you can change.
I did ask this question because I am writing a timeline with a pod like this. Although it isn’t this particular scenario, it has this Northern Mexican Viceroyalty idea
 
I did ask this question because I am writing a timeline with a pod like this. Although it isn’t this particular scenario, it has this Northern Mexican Viceroyalty idea
Cool. I still cant see California and texas united unless they are part of a much wider and populous entity. The north of otl Mexico is too sparcely populated. And California and texas are separated by a lot of land and also kinda equal. They cant reality dominate each other. Granted a lot can change depending which place gets settled first.
 
Earlier discovery of gold in California during Spanish rule and the subsequent population growth might also prompt the Spanish to create a new viceroyalty out of these territories.
 
Earlier discovery of gold in California during Spanish rule and the subsequent population growth might also prompt the Spanish to create a new viceroyalty out of these territories.
Ah, yes, I forgot about that. Gold rushes were really helpful in kickstarting regional colonization. Of course you will need to develop industries there before the rush is over and the people who came for gold leave. Following otl treand early on they will produce and export cattle and sheep leather, fat and wool. My guess is developing some textile industry out of the wool and also probably some kind of cashcrop for export. IS there any cashcrop California is good for? Besides nuts I mean, I know nuts are big there right now but I am not sure that can be applied 2 or 3 centuries ago.
 
Earlier discovery of gold in California during Spanish rule and the subsequent population growth might also prompt the Spanish to create a new viceroyalty out of these territories.
Or Colorado, or other post-19th century strikes in northern Mexico or places like Silver City, New Mexico. This would give the area more people, more defense against native raids, and the impetus to carve off the northern part of Mexico into its own territory. They never much liked Mexico City's rule anyway.
Ah, yes, I forgot about that. Gold rushes were really helpful in kickstarting regional colonization. Of course you will need to develop industries there before the rush is over and the people who came for gold leave. Following otl treand early on they will produce and export cattle and sheep leather, fat and wool. My guess is developing some textile industry out of the wool and also probably some kind of cashcrop for export. IS there any cashcrop California is good for? Besides nuts I mean, I know nuts are big there right now but I am not sure that can be applied 2 or 3 centuries ago.
Cotton, of course, the Central Valley grows a lot of cotton but that's with irrigation you'd need to find a way to finance.
 
Or Colorado, or other post-19th century strikes in northern Mexico or places like Silver City, New Mexico. This would give the area more people, more defense against native raids, and the impetus to carve off the northern part of Mexico into its own territory. They never much liked Mexico City's rule anyway.

Cotton, of course, the Central Valley grows a lot of cotton but that's with irrigation you'd need to find a way to finance.
Cotton is good but before the latter part of the 19th century cotton was quite dependant on slavery. I guess California is getting a black minority.
 
Top