WI Dutch colonized Hudson Bay and set up Hudson Bay Company

Lusitania

Donor
A Dutch Hudson Bay could become a beneficial revenue source for the Netherlands. After the loss of New Amsterdam and Fort Nassau, they owned no source of furs. Sourcing them directly from their own Hudson Bay colony would have saved a lot of money on importation of unprocessed furs, and allowed the Netherlands to profit by exporting manufactured clothing to Germany and Southern European countries. At the same time, the Hudson Bay would be a small enough segment of the total market (producing about a tenth of fur sales at the time) that the English wouldn't feel very threatened.

With additional production and a new area of investment, the decline of the Dutch empire would occur more gradually, although it would still probably decline due to competition with England. When industrialization begins in the 19th century, the Netherlands will have an easier time rising from whatever occurs in lieu of the French Revolutionary Wars, and they might end up returning to great power status.

As for the development of Hudson Bay itself, it would probably be much the same as under English rule, as its governance would be solely based on maximizing fur profits. Interactions with natives will be similar and the European settler population was never very high. The prairie provinces will be difficult to settle from Hudson Bay, and the territory will remain company ruled for some time.

Exactly, in 1815 lord Nelson tried to setup a Scottish colony but that failed due to long distance to get to habitable areas (Winnipeg) plus animosity between Metis and company administrators who wanted the area to stay based on fur trade not settler.

So the company faced with pressure from British colonies and USA would in the 2nd half of the 19th century sell either to britais Canada or USA or to both.

Unfortunately due to geography it could never function as regular colony. If the company did not sell it it would be over run by people from either of those two counties as prairies are discovered to be good for agriculture and resources are found. If dutchvtry to hold it they would suffer same fate the Mexicans did with California.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
How about if we replay the OP a couple different ways:

(1)
What if disillusioned French fur trappers Radisson & Grossiliers went to Copenhagen instead of Boston after running afoul of the Governor of New France?

Say the result is a successful expedition by 1662.

If the English are not committed enough to seize or hold the bay in the late 18th century, what would the subsequent history of the Danish Hudson's Bay look like through the 18th and 19th centuries?


(2)
What if disillusioned French fur trappers Radisson & Grossiliers went to Stockholm instead of Boston after running afoul of the Governor of New France?

Say the result is a successful expedition by 1662.

If the English are not committed enough to seize or hold the bay in the late 18th century, what would the subsequent history of the Swedish Hudson's Bay look like through the 18th and 19th centuries?

(3)
What if disillusioned French fur trappers Radisson & Grossiliers went to the Duchy of Courland instead of Boston after running afoul of the Governor of New France?

Say the result is a successful expedition by 1662.

If the English are not committed enough to seize or hold the bay in the late 18th century, what would the subsequent history of the Polish-Courlandish Hudson's Bay look like through the 18th and 19th centuries?

(4)
What if disillusioned French fur trappers Radisson & Grossiliers went to Moscow instead of Boston after running afoul of the Governor of New France?

Say the result is a successful expedition by 1662.

If the English are not committed enough to seize or hold the bay in the late 18th century, what would the subsequent history of the Russian Hudson's Bay look like through the 18th and 19th centuries?

(5)
What if disillusioned French fur trappers Radisson & Grossiliers went to Antwerp instead of Boston after running afoul of the Governor of New France?

Say the result is a successful expedition by 1662.

If the English are not committed enough to seize or hold the bay in the late 18th century, what would the subsequent history of the Spanish Netherlands (and later Austrian Netherlands) Hudson's Bay look like through the 18th and 19th centuries?

Think the results are about the same as with the Dutch in all the cases above?
 
Danish or Swedish Hudson Bay would follow the pattern I described earlier. The Danes will be more active in converting the locals after the 17th century than any non-Catholic power. But we won't see significant new European settlement before the 19tn century.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Danish or Swedish Hudson Bay would follow the pattern I described earlier. The Danes will be more active in converting the locals after the 17th century than any non-Catholic power. But we won't see significant new European settlement before the 19tn century.

Well in OTL didn't Scandinavian emigration to America only come on a massive scale (3 million Norwegians in Norway, 3 million in Wisconsin) in the second half of the 19th century? So maybe much of OTL's Scandinavian emigration to the US midwest and prairies is diverted to the Canadian prairie? Maybe beyond to Oregon-Columbia country?
 
Well in OTL didn't Scandinavian emigration to America only come on a massive scale (3 million Norwegians in Norway, 3 million in Wisconsin) in the second half of the 19th century? So maybe much of OTL's Scandinavian emigration to the US midwest and prairies is diverted to the Canadian prairie? Maybe beyond to Oregon-Columbia country?

If there exist a Scandinavian speaking country offering cheap land that will end up a favored destination.
 

Lusitania

Donor
People forget that there was no access to the Hudson Bay unless it is through Canada or through USA. There is also no railway to Minneapolis area till the secound half of 19th century.

The Hudson Bay company be in located in London, Copenhagen or Amsterdam is a private company interested in making $$$$. It makes money in fur trade. It is not interested in settlers who will not provide it with any profit.

The company will make more $$ selling its land to either Britain or USA then to settlers. If we had people even wanting to get there what are they going to produce and how they getting it to market. Who going to spend millions of $ to build a railway? Canada ran an deficit for over two decades to repay the CP railway.

Settlement of the southern part (praries) will only be feasible in the 1870 onward. Remember that people thought praries were not good for agriculture. If the land is sitting empty and people realize it is good for agriculture then tens of thousands of American settlers are going to stream through and setup their claims regardless of national territory. They did this in California, Oregon and Texas. And where Americans settle and form majority they demand the territory join the USA.

Settling in Wisconsin or even Minnesota is far more attractive than the remote praries.

Some of you think I am being negative. As someone who lives in the Canadian praries I can tell you that the any scenario of anyone else other than USA or Britain taking control of the Hudson Bay territory is not possible. You are talking about land that is 90% forest and bush. No agriculture value. Only in the praries can people farm. To get there you need to go through Canada or USA.

So till 1850 the Hudson Bay company in any specific country take your pick can control it (fur trade only). From then on agriculture and settlement can only happen if the land is part of a country who can spend millions of $ to develop and you need acess year round to sea port.

So please tell me how Dutch or Danish going to accomplish that.
 
Remember that people thought praries were not good for agriculture. If the land is sitting empty and people realize it is good for agriculture then tens of thousands of American settlers are going to stream through and setup their claims regardless of national territory. They did this in California, Oregon and Texas. And where Americans settle and form majority they demand the territory join the USA.
I agree with the rest of your post except for this part. Hundreds of thousands of Americans did settle in Canada in the 19th and early 20th centuries, without breaking off the Prairie Provinces.
 

Lusitania

Donor
I agree with the rest of your post except for this part. Hundreds of thousands of Americans did settle in Canada in the 19th and early 20th centuries, without breaking off the Prairie Provinces.

But they did not form the majority of the population. Canada had bought the land from the company and built a railway that provided them acess to it from both east and west coast. Canada has ability to send security forces to maintain control of area. How would these countries send troops or administrators through foreign country.
 
To change thr subject a little - I think that the biggest result of a non-British HBC will be on the cultures of the indigenous peoples of the Canadian West. This will happen in two ways:

1) Depending on the methods of fur trading (whether the non-British HBC sends Europeans to do the trapping themselves or, like the the British HBC, expects the Natives to come to them) you could have a Metis-like population speaking Dutch or Danish or some other language.

2) In OTL the HBC was instrumental as an authority in the Canadian West to whom Native Nations could turn to to mediate dusputes between different Nations because they did business with all Nations. This is largely what led to most nations submitting to treaties with Canada rather than fighting the settlers (an overgeneralization of course). There are many cultural elements of Western Native culturw which can be traced back to HBC origins (e.g. i've seen photod of 19th century Natives wearing dresses made from the iconic HBC blankets). A different HBC could affect this culture in intetesting ways.
 

HJ Tulp

Donor
Hmm, at some point I guess the end of the fur trade will make the Hudson Bay colony not worth the hassle. The same thing happened with the West-African fortresses. In the end they were traded away. If the colony isn't very developed (and given the fact that the region is still not very developed right now IIRC) the same thing can happen. What will it be traded for though?
 
Top