Wrapped in Flames: The Great American War and Beyond

[MonarchistCanuck]

Man, that does bring back memories. I remember reading those arguments and feeling simultaneously entertained and incredibly annoyed. I never even bothered to read BROS because of the author's attitude in those arguments, I can only imagine how that TL reads like.

Now regarding Canadian British Alaska I did forget how... opposed the Russian Empire was to the British. I'm rather curious then if the Americans don't buy it then who are the other potential buyers? It can't be the Japanese, they're still pre-Meiji and under the Tokugawa Shogunate and I don't think they would have the capability to support an Alaskan colony. Neither Prussia or Austria would have any interest or even capacity at this point. I don't see France being interested, besides they've got their Mexican project ongoing. So who does that leave? Only candidates I can think of will be either Meiji Japan (if the restoration hasn't been butterflied) or less likely post-1871 Germany.

 

[HMS St.Lawrence]

Man, that does bring back memories. I remember reading those arguments and feeling simultaneously entertained and incredibly annoyed. I never even bothered to read BROS because of the author's attitude in those arguments, I can only imagine how that TL reads like.

Oh it was something! Back then, I clearly remember reading BROS mainly for the comments section. That guys in action was something to behold.

As for Alaska, might it be that it simply stays Russian... Until annexed by Canada?
Our author as repeatedly teased a late 19th-early 20th century "world war" and the more things progress, the more I get the impression this version of WW1 will basically be the cold war between the British and Russian empires going hot.

 

[Kurd Gossemer]

Oh it was something! Back then, I clearly remember reading BROS mainly for the comments section. That guys in action was something to behold.

As for Alaska, might it be that it simply stays Russian... Until annexed by Canada?
Our author as repeatedly teased a late 19th-early 20th century "world war" and the more things progress, the more I get the impression this version of WW1 will basically be the cold war between the British and Russian empires going hot.

I do wonder who would be their allies, maybe France ends up still aligned with England, especially if France doesn't get trashed as bad during the Franco-Prussian War while Germany goes towards Russia's side, although given butterflies we might still see France aligned with Russia. Either way depending on how that world war goes, it could just end up with a status quo antebellum

 

[Gentleman Johnny]

Same here. This story is what made me want to make an account so that I could keep track of when an update was made. So many good stories have come & gone over the years, yet this one remains and continues on. It has been and still remains my favorite TL on this site.​

You just made me realise that God forsaken story is turning 10 years old. And I was reading it years before making my account on the board.

I guess I'm old now...

 

[MonarchistCanuck]

Oh it was something! Back then, I clearly remember reading BROS mainly for the comments section. That guys in action was something to behold.

As for Alaska, might it be that it simply stays Russian... Until annexed by Canada?
Our author as repeatedly teased a late 19th-early 20th century "world war" and the more things progress, the more I get the impression this version of WW1 will basically be the cold war between the British and Russian empires going hot.

So tempted to go and risk a stroke by reading BROS now...

Always a possibility that Russia holds it until forced to relinquish it, EC has teased drastic changes to the North American map. But I wonder if they could hold it until the alt-Great War? IIRC they were pretty eager if not desperate to sell it off. Makes me wonder if it's viable as an independent state though, not now but later when gold is discovered

I do wonder who would be their allies, maybe France ends up still aligned with England, especially if France doesn't get trashed as bad during the Franco-Prussian War while Germany goes towards Russia's side, although given butterflies we might still see France aligned with Russia. Either way depending on how that world war goes, it could just end up with a status quo antebellum

I think a lot will depend if Napoleon III can keep his throne and successfully pass it off to his heir, maybe he doesn't get captured at Sedan and subsequently throw the government into a major crisis? Also have to wonder if Nappy does keep his throne, does the Paris Commune still happen? 1871 ITTL might ultimately tell us what the alliances will look like...

 

[TimTurner]

Always a possibility that Russia holds it until forced to relinquish it, EC has teased drastic changes to the North American map. But I wonder if they could hold it until the alt-Great War? IIRC they were pretty eager if not desperate to sell it off. Makes me wonder if it's viable as an independent state though, not now but later when gold is discovered

Could always keep it simply as a bargaining chip even if they don't think it's necessarily viable long term.

 

[AlexanderDragon]

Russia selling Alaska in say, 1907 or some weird year around then would be probably more sensible then what happened in RL

 

[EnglishCanuck]

I assume this emergent canadian identity will be much more wrapped in the union flag and the empire then what happened post world war one.

Most immigrants to Canada prior to WWI were British, which certainly solidified the identity with the Mother Country. Here, you are right that a successful war against an invader, where British redcoats fought and died alongside Canadians (French and English) certainly will cement a certain loyalty to the empire. Even though that loyalty may be tested in the aftermath...

That got me thinking, the decade of confederation was the time Canada fully switched from pound sterling over to what would become the Canadian dollar; but the specie circulating from British soldiers would go a long way in fixing the shortage of that. So with that and the anti americanism is Canada going to be using the pound or some variation of it?

Spot on! The Canadian market is flooded with pounds sterling, and with the general disdain for American currency brought on by the war, Canadians will be looking to using their own version of the pound since so much will be in free flowing circulation for the time being.

 

[EnglishCanuck]

Well that has me hoping for independent Cascadia in the future in this TL. I don't think I've ever pop up in alternate histories.
It could also be really cool to see the confederacy pop in the future and just explode in a bunch of new states like Texas, new Africa, or even Carolina.

I keep my cards close to the chest, but I will say hint that one of these speculations is correct, and no I won't say which one(s) there may be small hints in the text of TTL.

What was the migration from the Great Britain to the US like during and after the civil war? Could we see the migration to Canada and other colonies expand at the cost of US immigration?

While I can't track specific numbers from specific countries (if I went digging I probably could, but I alas don't have that kind of time!) but roughly 1.5 million immigrants came to the US between 1860-1870 if my math is correct, that reaches about 150,000 a year. During 1862-64 the blockade deterred a lot of immigrants, some of whom took their chances elsewhere (roughly 100,000 going to Canada between 1862-64) and others taking their chances in places abroad. There has been more migration to other British colonies, but that may change with peace coming upon North America.

However, expect Canada's population to be larger come 1870.

 

[EnglishCanuck]

They say that pride goes before the fall. And the Americans were arrogant enough to believe that they could fight, and defeat, the British empire while while in the midst of a bitter civil war. I strongly suspect that the US that emerges from this series of self-inflicted disasters will be far humbler than the US was at any point in OTL.

I looked back at the very first posts and I don't see any indication that the Lincoln Administration thought they could beat the British, only to defend themselves enough until the British think "enough" and come to terms to end the war (which does sound like arrogance now that I think about it, or is it the delusion we call 'hope'). Either way, I don't think it is as simple as pride and arrogance in their belief.

Regarding the US being humbler because of this war, I am not so sure whether that is the end result. With the feeling of being surrounded by enemies and the passing of time, I suspect they would go the opposite, maybe more so than OTL because they need to defend themselves a lot more. The very first post states that the US became a great power come the turn of the 20th century. That's still a long way to go and I am not sure what that entails, but it does not seem to indicate they are far humbler than OTL in the long run. And not to mention that William Lincoln became a general, which I estimate would be around 30 - 40 years down the road, and I doubt he made general by sitting behind a desk given how much more contentious North America and the world became by the time the Great War kicks off.

There are some who will be humbler (no prizes for guessing that there's going to be those who want to make the US insular in the post-war world, 1868 calling). Prudence is also a form of humbleness, and caution will be high on the list of policies for people in Washington after they couldn't best the British. Lincoln was, at the least, a realist who saw the aftermath of the 1863 campaigning season as the time for throwing in the towel. However, going forward there are also going to be those who think the US needs to take a larger role on the world stage to "take her place in the sun" as it were. The knock on effects from the war are going to be interesting foreign policy wise, but the US is going to be a mess internally from 1864 and to the end of the 1860s in general as it enters "The Era of Hard Feelings" I've mentioned once or twice as the next political era.

I've also mentioned sparingly a group called the New Men who will enter onto the stage of US politics and thought in the post-war world. They're people we've seen, but not yet met, who will play increasingly important roles in the future of WiF. General William Lincoln is one of them, but their esteemed ranks include men like Henry Adams and John Hay.

 

[EnglishCanuck]

Burnished Rows of Steel is still on this site. Just search for it and it'll pop up. I reread it a few years ago to compare it to this TL. I honestly completely forgot how insane the TL was until I reread it. Anyway, I think most people agree this TL is better is just about every way.​

Yikes. Yeah, even any support I'd have for "America f*ck yeah" would probably have gone out the window at some point if that thread was really that bad.

By contrast I feel like this thread is fairly balanced and not biased towards one side or the other, at least as far as I can tell. (I'm not a military buff by any means but I'd like to think I could tell if someone was going off the rails.)

Thank you! I'm glad people do still enjoy this.

I haven't aimed for balance exactly, but I am glad its not coming off as me jamming my thumb on the scales in any particular direction!

Many thanks to all readers!

 

[EnglishCanuck]

The problem is that 1860-1930 is the age of steel. A rump united States even under the most restrictive treaty that could be imagined in the 19th century leaves whatever nation includes Pennsylvania with Iron, Coal and the intellectual/industrial support to keep up with Europe. (It might be a relatively minor power like Italy though).
Even if a victorious Confederacy grabs all of the states that had Slavery plus Kansas, Arizona/New Mexico and Southern California, and the UK grabs Maine and down to the 48th beyond the Mississippi, the rump US is *still* capable of out producing *Europe* in Steel by 1900.

To have a "Bring the Jubilee" situation, the CSA, UK, and France have to remain *focused* on North America, to the point where a United Germany would be able to stroll to Andorra.

Even if I stripped off almost every "peripheral" region of the US, geography alone means it is probably going to end up as a decent player on the Atlantic stage, even just based on borders pre-Louisiana Purchase. A US which controls the resources of New England, the West, and its Pacific coast is still going to be on track to become a great power to an extent. The wealth of resources located there is so much that it would have to very much try not to become one. There is a wealth of "lessons learned" politicians and military theorists will take away from this war and try to put into practice.

There's no powers who are devoted to that kind if repression across the Atlantic. Humbling the US in a fight is one thing, but keeping their boot on the neck of the nascent US would be an insurmountable challenge.

 

[HMS St.Lawrence]

I haven't aimed for balance exactly, but I am glad its not coming off as me jamming my thumb on the scales in any particular direction!

Well, I will say this: history is not particularly balanced either. Your story on the other hand is coherent, documented and grounded in realism.

Combined with your great storytelling, it's an alternate history recipe for success!

 

[Urubis]

Russia selling Alaska in say, 1907 or some weird year around then would be probably more sensible then what happened in RL

Nah. Russian population of the area is increasingly diminished by the Americans coming in from the gold rushes and the Canadians as well.

Though longer Russian control means that a lot of cultural aspects of Alaska will be solidified further under Russian reign if it lasts past the 80s, simply because there will be a slightly larger Russian population and possibly larger Anti-American population in this TL. For example the longer Russia rules the territory the less likely the capital is to be renamed or changed.

 

[sarahz]

Burnished Rows of Steel is still on this site. Just search for it and it'll pop up. I reread it a few years ago to compare it to this TL. I honestly completely forgot how insane the TL was until I reread it. Anyway, I think most people agree this TL is better is just about every way.​

That story is about the only one that compares in absurdity with Harry Harrison's infamous Civil War novel

 

[EnglishCanuck]

Now regarding Canadian British Alaska I did forget how... opposed the Russian Empire was to the British. I'm rather curious then if the Americans don't buy it then who are the other potential buyers? It can't be the Japanese, they're still pre-Meiji and under the Tokugawa Shogunate and I don't think they would have the capability to support an Alaskan colony. Neither Prussia or Austria would have any interest or even capacity at this point. I don't see France being interested, besides they've got their Mexican project ongoing. So who does that leave? Only candidates I can think of will be either Meiji Japan (if the restoration hasn't been butterflied) or less likely post-1871 Germany.

The Russians were reluctant to sell to Britain because it would have been 1) tantamount to saying "we lost the Crimean War badly" which the tsar was eager to avoid and 2) because they saw it as potential strategic threat if Britain based ships there.

Post Crimean War they were eager to sell it to the US so it acted as a buffer between British North America and Russian Siberia, but with the US coming on so strapped for cash there's not too many powers with the desire to buy it as you note. Perhaps later in the 19th century more will take an interest, but for now its being regarded as something of a white elephant to most.

As for Alaska, might it be that it simply stays Russian... Until annexed by Canada?
Our author as repeatedly teased a late 19th-early 20th century "world war" and the more things progress, the more I get the impression this version of WW1 will basically be the cold war between the British and Russian empires going hot.

Stranger things could happen

The relations between Russia and Great Britain are not great circa 1865 here, and they're destined to keep deteriorating over the 1860s for reasons I'll be exploring in the not too distant future as I wrap up 1865 and get into 1866.

 

[naraht]

Even if I stripped off almost every "peripheral" region of the US, geography alone means it is probably going to end up as a decent player on the Atlantic stage, even just based on borders pre-Louisiana Purchase. A US which controls the resources of New England, the West, and its Pacific coast is still going to be on track to become a great power to an extent. The wealth of resources located there is so much that it would have to very much try not to become one. There is a wealth of "lessons learned" politicians and military theorists will take away from this war and try to put into practice.

There's no powers who are devoted to that kind if repression across the Atlantic. Humbling the US in a fight is one thing, but keeping their boot on the neck of the nascent US would be an insurmountable challenge.

Even borders pre-Lousiana Purchase with the free states of 1860. (That would include the Mesabi Iron Range and the Pennsylvania Coal) gives a country with the ability to be a decent player on the Atlantic Stage and add San Francisco (and a land connection for a Railroad) and they would become a decent player on the Pacific coast as well. Now that maximal CSA (with the prewar slave states plus connection to the Pacific) will probably be as well, but *definitely* not with the ability to keep a boot on the neck of the USA.

 

[EnglishCanuck]

Even borders pre-Lousiana Purchase with the free states of 1860. (That would include the Mesabi Iron Range and the Pennsylvania Coal) gives a country with the ability to be a decent player on the Atlantic Stage and add San Francisco (and a land connection for a Railroad) and they would become a decent player on the Pacific coast as well. Now that maximal CSA (with the prewar slave states plus connection to the Pacific) will probably be as well, but *definitely* not with the ability to keep a boot on the neck of the USA.

All true here. From the 1840s on the US was angling to be a huge player in the Pacific, and some acquisitions up to now (Midway Atoll for instance) show the US was moving in that direction, much like their desire that China remain open for free trade.

The US had only not been a huge player in the Atlantic/Caribbean post 1815 partially because of an unwillingness to spend large sums on the military, huge tracts of land in the interior to conquer/develop and a public that was way more focused on the sectional divides. The slave holding South was way more expansionist than much of the North even early on (many War Hawks in 1812 for instance were from Kentucky and Tennessee). Though the US attitude about Imperialism may change in WiF as the years roll by in response to recent European encroachment. Hell, a lot of attitudes post war are likely to change thanks to the New Men.

And an independent Confederacy would be a strategic threat to the US, but never one like in Bring the Jubilee. You can't keep the US down like that.

 

[Nenshou Yuuki]

Of course you can have all the geographical and population advantages you want and still squander those resources due to political misteps and instability, just look at Brazil and honestly most of South America, many of those countries had the capability to be great powers but failed due to poor circumstances, mass corruption and just plain old bad luck. America could easily fall down that path.

 

[EnglishCanuck]

Of course you can have all the geographical and population advantages you want and still squander those resources due to political misteps and instability, just look at Brazil and honestly most of South America, many of those countries had the capability to be great powers but failed due to poor circumstances, mass corruption and just plain old bad luck. America could easily fall down that path.

Also true! The US came dangerously close to doing so more than once, the Civil War merely being a prime example of how there was an unstable political balance that knocked the US on its heels between 1861 and (arguably) 1876 forcing it to focus inwards and see quite a bit of political dysfunction despite the moral triumph of freeing the slaves and building the transcontinental-railroad.

The bitter feelings of a lost civil war (or even an uneven treaty) can have some less than salutary effects on a nation. There's a reason that in WiF the post-war period is known as "The Era of Hard Feelings" as opposed to the post 1815 "Era of Good Feelings" which defined the lead up to the sectional crisis.