Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
So, France gave the US a LOT of help during the American Revolution, to the point where it put France in debt. France also used to control the land west of the Proclamation Line of 1763, as part of New France. So let's say as a sort of repayment, the US gives it back, effectively limiting...
First, given the influx of emigres from France and perhaps immigrants from other countries, I imagine that the population of New France in 1800 would be about 13,000,000 and set to expand rapidly. This is the population of the US in around 1835.
One of the differences between New France and the English colonies was how the colonists were treated. The English colonies were largely ignored, and free men were allowed to run their own lives - set up their own farm, become a merchant, whatever. New France kept a much tighter grip on her people, so it wasn't nearly as attractive to emigrate.
The best New France could hope for, in similar OTL conditions was to hold on as a colony (s) greatly reduced in claimed size. If we stipulate a greater populated New France, they may be able to hold out a stalemate long enough to come out of the fray battered, but still holding on to sizeable territory.
New France's main problem was always that it was severely underpopulated compared to the English colonies to their south; in 1754 there were 70,000 people in New France, compared to nearly 1 million in the Englilsh colonies, a disparity of 15 to 1.
Most of the people who were refused permission to settle were not 100% happy with the French monarchy so France would have gotten rid of a lot of potential trouble makers. Unfortunately Louis XVI was still Louis XVI he might just start a revolution in New France around the time of OTL French Revolution.
Possible. New France will export a lot of wheat across the Atlantic. The valley of the St. Lawrence River was extremely fertile in the 18th century because it hadn't be farmed very intensely before European colonization. Even with the Canadian winter, the lands were much more productive than anywhere in Europe in the same period.
Prussia didn't win the 7YW because Britain came out on top. A France that loses territory in a war cannot be said to win a war, especially if the territory lost is the entire reason the war started. I would call it a loss for France if they lost New France, but managed to hold on to everything else.
In 1900, Brazil's mortality rate was similar to that of colonial New France or New England, only coming down to the levels of 1900 in those countries by 1940 (a 40-year-lag). Looking at the causes of death in 1900, around 30% of deaths in the Federal District were due to dysentery, diphtheria, typhoid, meningitis, measles, whooping cough ...
This is really cool. My feeling that Boulanger making France a sticking-up-nail will mean that the UK hammers them down within a generation. Either that, or a less complacent Germany courts France and this results in a France, Germany, Russia and possibly US anti-UK alliance that results in the British Empire being the one that's hammered down.