History is Not Boring discussion
What if scenarios
date
newest »
newest »
hudson bay company would be my guess
At least part of the reason was that Canada was heavily Catholic and America was heavily Protestant. King George was fairly liberal with religion. So from their perspective England was not quite as bad. They did not think America would be so liberal.
Mod
Considering all the resources the French poured into fighting the British; I would have thought they would have pushed to get their old colony (Quebec) returned, if only to help pay for their investment and expense in the 13 colonies.Their fleet was already here. It would have been just a matter of retaking Nova Scotia and the St Lawrence (The British Fleet was blockaded in Chesapeake Bay)
Mod
Some rambling thoughts:I think one of the reasons that French Canada didn't look at the whole idea of independence was that this idea was new even to the American colonies...to anyone at that. The initial stages of the war were that of a Civil War and not necessarily a revolution, and the French had problems of their own recovering from the 7 Years War and all the pre-revolutionary rumblings that were going on.
All the states were seperate entities until this point, hence the idea of a United States being so powerful.
Also a whole bunch of "loyalists" from the colonies fled North to Canada rather than stay in the new US.
As stated above by Susanna, the US and Canada were small fish to the European powers compared with the West Indian spice and sugar islands which were major money makers at the time. One of the reasons often given for the Brit failures during the War Of Independance/Revolutionary War/2nd British Civil War was this lack of Parliamentary commitment to what they viewed in comparison to the Carribean cash cows as a backwater.
Aye, and don't forget the French were fairly busy with the "military advisors" and naval blockades in the colonies to worry about the whole Quebec issue.
My point is, that even though France had eyes for the Carribean spice islands.I would have thought the French Canadians would have done more to rejoin France or at least get rid of the British?
It had only been a few years since the British had moved into French Canada, I cant imagine the people of Quebec forgetting or forgiving the forced relocation of their compatriots from Nova Scotia by British troops.
There is a book I haven't read -- but which comes well-reviewed -- that was written in the 1960s and might shed some light on the topic.Canada and the American Revolution, 1774-1783
I was looking at the globe on my desk the other night. I happened to be looking at the Pacific ocean.It occured to me that Hawaii is almost in a direct path between the Philipines and Mexico. For hundreds of years the Spanish sent ships between their two colonies, yet they never discoved Hawaii.
Interesting to speculate what might have happened if Hawaii had been discoverd by Europeans two hundred years earlier than Cook.
Perhaps a Catholic and Spanish speaking republic in the middle of the Pacific. Inhabited by Hispano-Hawaiian decendents?
I've been reading a lot about Hawaii recently and there are definitely theories that Cook wasn't the first European to reach Hawaii.When Cook got there, the Hawaiians evidently already had a word for "iron nails," even though they had no iron or nails in their own culture.
But its likely that no Spanish (or Dutch) explorers stayed in Hawaii because it is simply too remote. (Indeed, the Hawaiian islands are the most remote inhabited spot on earth.)
I didnt know that James: Thank you.Still,
there was already a regular sailing schedule between the Spanish colonies in the far East and Mexico. The treasure fleet would leave Manila and make its way to Acapulco at least once a year.
I imagine if the Spanish knew of Hawaii, they would have been thrilled for the opportunity to replenish their ships.
I dont know much about sailing, so I imagine it was'nt a direct route across the Pacific. Im sure they probably followed the currents and wind directions.
I definitely wasn't the direct route. So, even if some Spanish ships stumbled on Hawaii, they would have had to wonder if it is was worth their while to go that far out of their way for provisions.
They might have seen it as an opportunity to look for treasure and then as new territory to convert to "Christianity"In the end, I suspect the natives would have been exploited worse by the Spanish than by the British.
Manuel, based on other colonies I agree that the Spanish would probably been harsher colonisers. Interesting "What If" though.
I read an interesting comparison regarding the European colonizers:The British generally stayed aloof from the natives.
The French would share their meals and toilets with them.
The Spanish would'nt mind marrying them.
A Voyage Long and Strange: Rediscovering the New World is a great account of Tony Horwitz's first-person exploration into the Spanish forays in North America. I highly recommend it.
Ive always been intrigued by people with absolutue power to change their societies.One question I sometimes think about is what would have happened if Catherine of Aragon had been able to give birth to a healthy baby boy?
Would King Henry VIII still have broken with Rome?
Mod
On the contrary, I believe that a split between the Church of Rome and the Church of England was inevitable. In actuality, the separation of the Church of England did not occur only because Henry could not get a divorce. Instead, there were other matters of ecclesiastical authority at hand. I will allow that perhaps the split would not have occurred during Henry's reign, but that the Reformation on the continent, the influence of the Reformed Church in Scotland, and the ecclesiastical disagreements between Canterbury and Rome would have eventually caused separation.
I think Jabbot has a point.I should have asked my original question differently.
I should have asked :
Would England would still have broken with Rome despite the fact that Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon had been able to produce healthy baby boys to continue the Tudor dynasty?
At this point in history, the church was already a huge owner of prime property in England.
History is Not Boring
Books mentioned in this topic
A Voyage Long and Strange: Rediscovering the New World (other topics)Canada and the American Revolution, 1774-1783 (other topics)
This was only a few years since the British had humiliated the French Canadians in Quebec City during the French and Indian War. I would have thought the American revolution would have been a perfect time to rejoin France or join the Americans or possibly declaring independence for themselves?