WI: Swedish settle in OTL Quebec instead of OTL new sweden and vice versa?

[HolyNicolas]

As the thread says, what if the settlement of New France and New Sweden were swapped with the French ending up in the Delaware and the Swedish in the Saint Laurence? Would New France have fallen more quickly than it did in OTL? Would the new Sweden have lasted longer and have become powerful? Would we have seen a Swedish dialect spoken in Canada and eventually create a English/Swedish bilingual Canada?

 

[Sevarics]

Well for one, if the French settled at the site of Delaware instead of New France, their earlier attempts at founding towns would probably have been more successful do to the more agreeable weather. Thus, we see New France beginning in the latter half of the 1500s... So likely soon after, they found something near OTL Philadelphia. Probably leads to a more lasting French presence in North America.

 

[Hvalrossen]

As the thread says, what if the settlement of New France and New Sweden were swapped with the French ending up in the Delaware and the Swedish in the Saint Laurence? Would New France have fallen more quickly than it did in OTL? Would the new Sweden have lasted longer and have become powerful? Would we have seen a Swedish dialect spoken in Canada and eventually created ad English/Swedish bilingual Canada?

Britian might not have the same intrest in Swedish Canada as they had OTL in French Canada. Therefore Sweden might keep Canada for a longer period as an extension of Scandinavia.

 

[Hvalrossen]

Well for one, if the French settled at the site of Delaware instead of New France, their earlier attempts at founding towns would probably have been more successful do to the more agreeable weather. Thus, we see New France beginning in the latter half of the 1500s... So likely soon after, they found something near OTL Philadelphia. Probably leads to a more lasting French presence in North America.

The Swedish presence would likely also be more lasting due to less compition for more poor land.

 

[HolyNicolas]

Well for one, if the French settled at the site of Delaware instead of New France, their earlier attempts at founding towns would probably have been more successful do to the more agreeable weather. Thus, we see New France beginning in the latter half of the 1500s... So likely soon after, they found something near OTL Philadelphia. Probably leads to a more lasting French presence in North America.

Wouldn't British and Dutch have tried really hard to conquer the French colony? Since they were master Naval power

 

[HolyNicolas]

Britian might not have the same intrest in Swedish Canada as they had OTL in French Canada. Therefore Sweden might keep Canada for a longer period as an extension of Scandinavia.

But Sweden would have still sided with French during 7 years war? British empire would still be the world naval power later on and Britain would eventually have conquered entire North America.

 

[Sevarics]

Wouldn't British and Dutch have tried really hard to conquer the French colony? Since they were master Naval power

If France settles the Delaware peninsula in the 1500s, they probably will be entrenched in the Mid-Atlantic and maybe even the South by the time the English or Dutch are trying to kick them out.

 

[Umbric Man]

But Sweden would have still sided with French during 7 years war? British empire would still be the world naval power later on and Britain would eventually have conquered entire North America.

Well, if we're assuming history roughly plays out the same besides the colony area switcharoos, we may see *Quebec far easier to assimilate, being both Germanic and Protestant. IE, a New Netherland situation just a century later.

 

[HolyNicolas]

Well, if we're assuming history roughly plays out the same besides the colony area switcharoos, we may see *Quebec far easier to assimilate, being both Germanic and Protestant. IE, a New Netherland situation just a century later.

Well if the new sweden population is far larger than new netherland. Would it still be easy to assimilate? We are assuming that the Political situation is still the same. British united empire loyalists flee to Canada after the American revolution and British would try to appease the Swedish Canadian and allow them to keep their language?
Since US is extremely assimilationist! wouldn't Tory and Liberal still try to advocate a "Multiculturalism" in Canada? I think Swedish would still be more difficult to assimilate than German or Dutch?
And a Scandinavian version of Canada would be the extreme progressive version? and Secular?

 

[Sevarics]

So many butterflies

 

[Hvalrossen]

But Sweden would have still sided with French during 7 years war? British empire would still be the world naval power later on and Britain would eventually have conquered entire North America.

I forgot about the 7 year war.

 

[Makemakean]

Honestly, I very much doubt that New Sweden really could have survived that long, regardless of where in the New World it was located. While there certainly existed Swedish-speaking communities in the Delaware and New Jersey all the way into the early 1800s, the interests of the Swedish government was always on continental European affairs first and foremost, with colonization in the New World more or less "something you had to do as part of the uniform if you wanted to call yourself a Great Power". I would believe that within a hundred years, New Sweden would either have been conquered, or it would have been sold off.

It is an interesting scenario though. If you want to write a timeline based on this, you're going to need to either have to address how it could possibly have survived in detail, or, you're going to have to say as little about it as possible and allow the reader to themselves come up with an explanation for how it survived.

 

[AJNolte]

How active will the Swedish be in mission work? Part of the expansion of French influence into Huronia, just for example, was a result of the Jesuits. Would Swedish Lutherans try to convert the Hurons? It's very interesting if they do.

How far and fast would France try to expand? They almost certainly go north into Pennsylvania and west into the Ohio country. If New Netherland and England still get settled, expect Franco-Dutch and later Franco-British competition over northern Pennsylvania and/or western New York. Naval battles on lake Eerie are possible. Southward, the French would likely expand into Maryland, with the English still establishing themselves in at least southern Virginia. The border's likely to be either the Potomac or Rapahannock.

Sweden likely gets most of the OTL Lutheran immigration from Germany into New Sweden, leading them to expand into the great lakes water-shed. OTOH the fate of the anibaptist and/or reformed Germans is uncertain, but I'll discuss my thoughts below.

So you have the English firmly in New England, the Dutch probably still in New York until at least the 1660s, the French in PA/DE/MD/northern VA, and I'm going to go ahead and say the British still get Georgia and the Carolinas. For fun, let's have Penn's noble experiment in Georgia--which he will rename Jacobia after Charles' brother James. A bunch of anibaptists and other dissenters go there, and Oglethorp still decides to put his debtor colony there, recruiting some less pacifist folks to guard the Spanish border. And he renames it Georgia, because nothing says "yes, sir, you can have a charter" like changing a colony's name to reflect the new king. Now, with the anibaptists and quakers already there, South Carolina probably can't do that whole "make Georgia our cloan" thing they did OTL. I could also see the tidewater Virginians and North Carolinians growing closer, with the eventual absorption of North Carolina into Virginia. This pushes South Carolina to look more toward the Caribbean colonies, and their political leadership grows closer to that of the islands. New England, OTOH, has good relations with the Swedes because, hey, why not? I mean, they're both Protestants and neither has stuff the other wants.

The big question, IMO, is whether the British keep the New Netherland colony as a buffer against the French, or absorb them. Probably the latter. In which case, they could favor an alliance with Sweden against the Catholic powers of France and Spain. Sweden, France and England would all eventually have interests in the great lakes.

I see fragmentation as the likely result, with at least some of the colonies eventually becoming independent, slavery not penetrating as much into the deep south due to Georgia--Georgians would likely settle West Florida once the Brits got it--and some sort of union between Carolina and various British Caribbean colonies. New England and New Sweden either do their own thing or possibly vote to join together later on. New France is going to be interesting; siegneurial/plantation system is likely, and if/when there's a French revolution, strong pro-monarchist sentiment. A lot more like a Latin American country perhaps, maybe a North American Brazil with worse food and beaches?

Anyway, that kind of got away from me, but those are my thoughts.

 

[cmakk1012]

Probably leads to a more lasting French presence in North America.

You wouldn’t call Quebec a lasting French presence?

 

[The Professor]

A more fragmented British North America probably means no equivalent of ARW and several Dominions there rather than independent republics.

 

[Jürgen]

Here's what I think. First the Swedes need to decide to settle another place than Quebec, then it needs to saty empty until the late 1630ties when Sweden establish New Sweden. Let's say that it end up succesful.

So let's look at history, France likely keep their colony in Delaware until either the Nine Year or the Spanish Succession War. At that point it's lost. The population will likely be expelled and after a few years end up in Lousiana. We can go into greater detail if that's important.

New Netherlands will likely end up as in OTL.

So let's look at New Sweden's history. Well we will likely see the same amount of settlers. But a important difference are that OTL New Sweden lay in a borderline subtropical area in a wet delta. So here we likely see a higher survival rate. From what I can read Sweden send a little over 1000 people to New Sweden and the population at the Dutch takeover was 400. Here we may see a growth over the period. So I expect the colony to have around 1200-1500 inhabitants in 1655. This together with the different region they have settled in makes a Dutch expedition unlikely. The Dutch may still take it, but in that case it's unlikely that English will take it together with New Netherlands and in that case we will see the Dutch own a Swedish speaking Lutheran Quebec. But that leaves two roads out of Second Northen War either a Dutch Quebec or a Swedish one.

I will continue with the Swedish one (I can make a short summary of the Dutch one if people are interested)

New Sweden stay in Swedish hands. The colony see continued immigration through the Swedish Imperial era, and through immigration and natural increase the colony have 3000 people by 1670. The Dutch War result in a slump in immigration and we only see a increase in 1780ties again. All in all I expect around 6000 inhabitants by 1690. The colony likely see a continue influx of criminals including Scanian freedom fighters, who may be end up avoiding being executed through impalement. Beside that we likely see some of the Swedes who colonised the Bothnian Bay and some of the Livonian Finns end up in New Sweden instead. The colony are not a money machine, but neither do it give any real loss, the majority of the population are farmers along the Hudson, through they also have a significant production of timber and tar, but the money maker are the fur hunting and trade. But as we comes up the Great Northen War the migration to New Sweden goes into another slump, but the population by 1710 are 15.000 people plus some allied local tribes of unknown numbers. The colony have pretty much run itself from the start of Great Northern War, but it have kept some contact with Sweden to 1709 and all contact are lost by 1712 as Bremen-Verden are occupied by Denmark. From 1712 to 1721 the colony run itself, it open itself to Dutch merchants and survive through the war. At the peace treaty it can go two ways, either Sweden keep it or Denmark gain it. Again I will run with continued Swedish rule.

In the 1720ties the Swedish government return with a vengeance the Swedish monopoly are reestablished, but Sweden lack the surplus population to send many settlers. So by 1730 the colony are home to 30.000 people, but from the 1730ties New Sweden see a new influx of Swedish migrants and the Swedish states do it best to expand its settlements around the Great lakes and making treaties with the local native, they also send missionaries inland mostly Moravians. The relative friendly relationship result in a influx of Danes and Norwegians. It also become a popular destination for Germans, especially Hessians. So by 1750 the colony are home to 70.000 people. At this point British American history have changed enough that I can't make any new prediction. But I suspect that New Sweden will end up made up by Hudson Lake and the Great Lakes Region (minus New York and Pennsylvania of course), while France will likely keep Lousinana or it will turn into a hotter Quebec.

New Sweden (it may rename itself the Kingdom of Markland or Vinland in the 18th century) will be a popular target for European Lutherans and British American may end up with relative few German immigrants. It will stay Swedish speaking and will like Brazil became the centre of the Portuguese language become the centre of the Swedish language. The dominance of New Sweden may push Danish (and Norwegian if the language become independent) toward a mor Swedish friendly spelling. Of course New Swedish will likely be more archaic than European Swedish, which will keep it closer to other Scandinavian languages.

 

[Sevarics]

Why do we assume that the English take New Netherlands? If France has been settling New France on the Delaware since the late 1500s, they’re likely to capture New Amsterdam shortly after it’s founded for being in their claimed territory.

 

[cmakk1012]

pretty cool snip

You oughta write a TL on this!

The only thing I’d wonder about would be the butterfly effect—by the time of the Great Northern War, for example, the existence of New Sweden may be enough to change the outcome or at least the details of such a war.

 

[Avrorrange]

Honestly, I very much doubt that New Sweden really could have survived that long, regardless of where in the New World it was located. While there certainly existed Swedish-speaking communities in the Delaware and New Jersey all the way into the early 1800s, the interests of the Swedish government was always on continental European affairs first and foremost, with colonization in the New World more or less "something you had to do as part of the uniform if you wanted to call yourself a Great Power". I would believe that within a hundred years, New Sweden would either have been conquered, or it would have been sold off.

It is an interesting scenario though. If you want to write a timeline based on this, you're going to need to either have to address how it could possibly have survived in detail, or, you're going to have to say as little about it as possible and allow the reader to themselves come up with an explanation for how it survived.

I can say the say thing in regards to France as well.New France was highly neglected in terms of being a colony by France.

 

[Jürgen]

You oughta write a TL on this!

I have already two lying around I would like to finish off before I start another.

The only thing I’d wonder about would be the butterfly effect—by the time of the Great Northern War, for example, the existence of New Sweden may be enough to change the outcome or at least the details of such a war.

I honestly can't see New Sweden along the St. Lawrence River would change much in Europe before sometime in the 18th century. It won't cost Sweden anything significant, but neither would it produce any money for them. It's only after their loss of their empire I could see it having a effect.