WI: Basque America

so I've heard a lot about Basque and English fishermen fishing off of the Maritimes and Maine before Christopher Columbus got to the New World, if Columbus never makes it do they slowly start to settle North America?
 

Cook

Banned
There were Basque whalers operating off New England within thirty years of Columbus’s first voyage. Any settlements by them in the absence of Columbus’s voyage would probably have been in the form of fishing/whaling settlements that developed into centres of trade with the natives rather than major colonisation projects.

Things would change of course if a native made the mistake of wandering into a settlement with some gold rather than just furs to trade.
 
There were Basque whalers operating off New England within thirty years of Columbus’s first voyage. Any settlements by them in the absence of Columbus’s voyage would probably have been in the form of fishing/whaling settlements that developed into centres of trade with the natives rather than major colonisation projects.

thats more or less what I was going for
 
so I've heard a lot about Basque and English fishermen fishing off of the Maritimes and Maine before Christopher Columbus got to the New World, if Columbus never makes it do they slowly start to settle North America?


I'd say no. As I must regularly point out in the far too many threads on this topic, settlement requires a mechanism to either lure or force people across the Atlantic.

Kurlansky makes a pretty good case in his book Cod that the Basque had been fishing off North America for a century or more before Columbus. They sailing to the Maritimes for a century or more, over wintering oftentimes, went ashore to lumber and hunt, even traded with the locals, and not one permanent settlement resulted. Supplying salted fish for Friday meals in an almost wholly Catholic Europe made the Basque money, but it still wasn't enough to stay in North America.

When you look at the kind of colonization that occurred during the first century or so after Columbus it in no way resembles the livestock, fields, and long cabin model too many people automatically and incorrectly assume when they hear the term colonization. Instead, colonization was a bunch of men storming ashore looking to rape a fast buck out of the continent by any means available and then sailing home with their fortune.

You went to the Americas intending to boss natives working in mines, to boss slaves growing sugar, to explore and get in a little "conquistadoring" of your own, to grow tobacco, to trade for furs, or to sell things to the men doing all those things. You went to the Americas planning to stay just long enough to make yourself a pile of money. If you failed, and enough of them did, you ended up staying in the Americas, but you hadn't planned on it. Planning on staying, planning on your kids and grandkids staying, was something that came much later.

So, without something that either lures people across the Atlantic, forces people across the Atlantic, or perhaps several somethings that combine to do both, the Basque aren't going to begin settling the Americas.
 
Last edited:

Thande

Donor
Don Lardo said:
You went to the Americas intending to boss natives working in mines, to boss slaves growing sugar, to explore and get in a little "conquistadoring" of your own, to grow tobacco, to trade for furs, or to sell things to the men doing all those things. You went to the Americas planning to stay just long enough to make yourself a pile of money. If you failed, and enough of them did, you ended up staying in the Americas, but you hadn't planned on it. Planning on staying, planning on your kids and grandkids staying, was something that came much later.

And ultimately because you think you might find a shortcut to the Indies, a northwest passage or a short overland transit across North America. While all the things you mention are certainly factors, that was the primary factor behind the establishment of at least the English colonies that would eventually become the United States.
 
And ultimately because you think you might find a shortcut to the Indies, a northwest passage or a short overland transit across North America.


That's one lure.

While all the things you mention are certainly factors, that was the primary factor behind the establishment of at least the English colonies that would eventually become the United States.

No. The search for the Northwest passage was not a spur for settlement. It spurred exploration only.

Yes, those explorations did chart regions that were eventually settled, but no one said "I'm founding this settlement in order to search for the Northwest passage".

Instead, first gold, then tobacco, and finally furs lured a limited number English explorers/planters/settlers across the Atlantic to North America. (Sugar had already done the same job in the Caribbean) After that religious issues forced many more settlers across and, once permanent mostly self sustainable communities had developed, the prospect of free land lured even more settlers across.
 

Thande

Donor
No. The search for the Northwest passage was not a spur for settlement. It spurred exploration only.

Yes, those explorations did chart regions that were eventually settled, but no one said "I'm founding this settlement in order to search for the Northwest passage".

Instead, first gold, then tobacco, and finally furs lured a limited number English explorers/planters/settlers across the Atlantic to North America. (Sugar had already done the same job in the Caribbean) After that religious issues forced many more settlers across and, once permanent mostly self sustainable communities had developed, the prospect of free land lured even more settlers across.

Not the Northwest Passage, no, but the assumption that North America was much narrower than it is. The early English colonies, though certainly spurred along by the lure of Spanish gold and eventually tobacco, were based on the idea that it was only about twelve days' march from sea to shining sea, and therefore a North American colony spanning the continent was a realistic short-term proposition that would allow the construction of a Pacific port for East Asian trade. Hence the relevance of Drake's claim on "New Albion".
 
Not the Northwest Passage, no, but the assumption that North America was much narrower than it is.


No one chose the location for their farm or village solely on the premise that North America was only 12 days march wide.

Explorers were messing about hiking, canoeing, and sailing hither and yon, traders set up posts in places that are still isolated in the 21st Century, but settlers had far different concerns.
 

Cook

Banned
So a replenishment station?

Something similar to Cape Town, growing extremely slowly until a source of real profit prompts serious growth?
 
So a replenishment station? Something similar to Cape Town, growing extremely slowly until a source of real profit prompts serious growth?


A very good example.

Now, how long is that station just a station supplied from the outside and when does it cross a certain level of self-sustainability?
 
Last edited:
how long would that take? would it at some point just end up getting major power's attention and end up like Plymouth Vis-à-vis Massachusetts Bay?
 
how long would that take? would it at some point just end up getting major power's attention and end up like Plymouth Vis-à-vis Massachusetts Bay?


How long did the Dutch settlement on the Cape last?

And when Britain seized it, did they seize it because they truly wanted it or because of reasons related to a war in another hemisphere?
 

Cook

Banned
Which goes back to my point that things would go slow until some native makes the mistake of wandering in with some gold to trade.
 
I see, so what happens when they tap into the fur trade, or will that never take off in a North America first TL?


First, you'll need European Russia and other closer sources of furs to become scarce or trapped out. The OTL North American fur trade didn't really take off until that occurred.

Second, look at how the HBC and other companies engaged in that trade. Because the trade was seasonal, they founded very few permanent settlements with relatively small populations. Instead, they'd send out missions to tap into the seasonal market.

HBC sent ships into it's namesake bay to reinforce and resupply the few employees who overwintered in company forts. Over a period of a month or so, those vessels would land goods, pack up the furs which were waiting, do a little direct trading, and then leave. The employees left behind would be split up between the coastal fort(s) and interior factories trading European goods for furs to both Amerinds and Europeans who'd gone "native".

There was no "settlement" in the sense so many people automatically assume. Lots of traders and factory employees went "native", but they live much like the people they traded with rather than like Europeans. They did not farm, set up forges, build permanent villages, or anything of the like. Eventually those things did spring up, but decades and centuries after Europeans had plugged into the trade networks, shaped them to their needs, and followed the networks deeper into the interior.
 
There was no "settlement" in the sense so many people automatically assume. Lots of traders and factory employees went "native", but they live much like the people they traded with rather than like Europeans. They did not farm, set up forges, build permanent villages, or anything of the like. Eventually those things did spring up, but decades and centuries after Europeans had plugged into the trade networks, shaped them to their needs, and followed the networks deeper into the interior.

I get it, I've taken 3 whole college courses on early North America, my question is largely to do with "North American way first" the idea of trading out posts, small numbers of people coming over, maybe a hand full of trading towns.
 
I would think there simply wouldn't be the numbers for it. They might have a couple of small settlements here and there, but if you're looking for something like an actual colony, you'd need a pretty massive proportion of the Basque Country to set sail for the new world.
 
I get it, I've taken 3 whole college courses on early North America, my question is largely to do with "North American way first" the idea of trading out posts, small numbers of people coming over, maybe a hand full of trading towns.


Exactly.

However, sooner or later, something or a combination of somethings is going to lure/force enough people across the Atlantic and the tipping point will be reached.

After that, settlement will follow a pattern more like the OTL's with the self-sufficient or nearly nearly self-sufficient communities settled earlier supporting waves settlement away from the coasts, navigable rivers, and other easily reached locations.
 
Top