US breaks apart after independence

I'm back after a long period away from the board, so I offer the beginning of a basic timeline based on a theme I've explored before - the fragmentation of the United States after the American Revolution. I'll admit I have a slight obsession with this theme for timelines.


1783 – Treaty of Paris establishes the United States of America (the "Old USA" or "original USA" as an independent nation

1785 – Death of George Washington after a sudden illness

1787, 1789 – Two attempts to create a modified constitution for the US fail. The ineffective Articles of Confederation remain in place.

1789 – Beginning of French Revolution

1792 – 1794 – Old USA breaks into 3 separate nations. New York and the New England states form the Federal States of America (FSA); Pennsylvania and New Jersey form the United States of America ("new USA", "small USA", or "final USA"); other states further south form the Independent States of America (ISA)

1795 – Old USA territories between Appalachians and Mississippi form Western Confederation

1800 – FSA declares gradual emancipation for the states that still have slavery (New York and Connecticut)

1801 – Retrocession of Louisiana to France by Spain (secret)

1802 – Cotton gin invented in South Carolina
- Napoleon sends troops to Haiti and Louisiana

1804 – Haitian rebels defeat French forces and establish an independent republic. Defeat of French squadron by Royal Navy off the coast of Cuba. Louisiana effectively cut off from France. French military governor of Louisiana gives generous land grants to Anglo-American settlers in return for assistance in fighting any British invasion.

1805 – Eli Whitney of the FSA joins with several partners to found a company to manufacture muskets and rifles using interchangeable parts.

1807 – British expedition against New Orleans is repulsed.

1807 – 1812 – British fur traders supported by a few soldiers move into most of the northern and western Louisiana territory and stake Britain's claim to the entire region.

1808 – First commercially successful steamboat run by Fulton on Hudson River (there had been earlier working prototypes in Britain, the USA, and the FSA)

1810 – First steamboat on Ohio/Mississippi River system.

1812 – Disastrous failure in Russia turns tide against Napoleon

1813 – Second British attempt to capture New Orleans fails
- Militia from ISA seize West Florida

1814 – Final defeat of Napoleon, who is killed in Battle not far from Paris

1815 – Peace of Vienna is close to OTL in Europe, though the boundaries between Prussia, Russia, and some of the small German states are slightly different. In North America, Louisiana is recognized as an independent republic, consisting roughly of OTL states of Louisiana, Arkansas, and about 2/3 of Missouri. The rest of the old Louisiana territory goes to Britain, except for a small piece along the southwestern edge that goes to Spain.

1815 – 1825 – A significant number of ex-Napoleonic officers, soldiers, and officials move to Louisiana, which partly balances the influx of Anglo-Americans and helps to keep the two languages and cultures on an even basis instead of having the French speaking population overwhelmed in numbers by English speakers.

1817 – USA begins gradual emancipation.

1821 – Mexico becomes an independent nation, under the leadership of Augustin Iturbide, who like in OTL declares himself Emperor the next year, and unlike in OTL keeps power for many years and founds a dynasty.

1824 – All former Spanish colonies in South and Central America achieve independence with the final defeat of Spanish colonial forces.

1825 – Tsar Alexander I of Russia recovers from the serious illness that killed him in OTL. He will reign for almost 25 more years.

1826 – Britain purchases East Florida from Spain.

1827 – 1828 – First Egyptian-Ottoman war.

1828 – 1829 – Major slave uprising in South Carolina in the ISA, suppressed after a year with assistance from army and militias of other ISA states after much bloodshed and atrocities on both sides. Smaller slave rebellions flare in other parts of the ISA, in the southern part of the Western Confederation, and in Louisiana, but are quickly suppressed. Most states of the ISA and Western Confederation expel free blacks, while Louisiana deprives them of voting and most citizenship rights.

1830 – French King Charles X overthrown and replaced by Louis Philippe.
- Revolt in the southern part of the Netherlands fails. In the coming years, the region will be given more autonomy, which will end significant popular support for independence. (This uprising succeeded in OTL and established Belgium as an independent country.)

Completion of the Erie Canal in the FSA (later than in OTL, and the first railroads are appearing in the FSA and USA at this time)

1830 – Emperor Agustin I Iturbide of Mexico offers free black refugees land north of the Rio Grande in Mexico's thinly-populated province of Tejas. Some runaway slaves and refugees who participated in the revolt also come, since Mexican authorities ask few questions. Some refugees also go to British Florida.

1832 – Slavery abolished throughout the British Empire. Florida soon becomes a major destination for runaway slaves, increasing tension between Britain and the slaveholding republics of North America.

1834 – Whitney Firearms introduces the world's first practical revolver.

1835 – Uprising by French speaking population of Lower Canada against British rule is suppressed. Britain encourages more English speakers to immigrate to Lower Canada, both from Britain itself and the FSA, which has become quite friendly with Britain. Substantial numbers of French-speaking Canadians move to Louisiana, Texas, and even Mexico in the years to come.

1835-1838 – The Tejas War. English and French-speaking settlers in northern Tejas province revolt against Mexican rule. The Mexicans send regular troops and two volunteer regiments of free blacks against them, and encourage the slaves of the rebels to desert their masters and join the Mexican forces. Volunteers from Louisiana, the Western Confederation, and the ISA come to back the rebels. The war takes on strong racial tones – white rebels vs. mestizo and black soldiers fighting under the Mexican banner. In the end, northern Tejas becomes independent as the Republic of Tejas, but Mexico keeps southern Tejas, which has fairly large numbers of well-armed blacks with military training.

1838 – 1844 – Construction of railroad running from Upper Canada through Toronto, Kingston, and Montreal to Quebec. This allows the Canadian ports to compete with New York City as centers for exporting grain and other goods from the interior of North America.

1842 – France seizes Tunis after a quarrel with its ruler (Tunis will be the center of French expansion instead of OTL Algeria)

1843-45 – Mormons move en masse from the Western Confederation, USA, and FSA into territory west of the Mississippi (OTL parts of Iowa, northern Missouri, southern Minnesota, and Nebraska) that is very thinly settled by whites. They do this to escape hostility from non-Mormon neighbors and to set up their own community run according to their own principles. The British authorities generally disapprove of the Mormon beliefs, but they want settlers for the territory as a buffer against other settlers who might be unfriendly to Britain. The Mormon leaders agree to support Britain's claims in any border dispute in return for the British leaving them alone to practice their religion and turning a blind eye to controversial practices, especially polygamy.

1847 – King Louis Philippe of France makes some political concessions which win more support from the middle class of France.

1848 – Famines in Europe cause rioting, but no organized revolutions. (No successful revolution against Louis Philippe in France means there is no galvanizing example to inspire organized uprisings elsewhere.)
 
Why would the United States fall apart within 7 years of the PoD? Certainly, the Articles of Confederation were pretty bad (just a Federal legislative branch? ugh.), but would that lead to the USA splitting into three seperate nations? Why would PA and NJ decide to go off on their own, instead of sticking with the other northern states?
 
A breakup was far from inevitable under the Articles of Confederation, but it was considered to be a distinct possibility at the time. The different states and regions had a number of serious disagreements about claims to western territory, tariffs and trade policy, economic policy, slavery, and other issues. The Articles of Confederation government minimized these disputes by not giving the central government much authority, but many people and leaders in the various states wanted a government that could more actively promote their interests. If they could not agree on the framework of a stronger national government, it's quite possible that different groups of states would try to go it alone by forming smaller governments that would have the authority to pursue policies that favored the interests of the majority of voters.

The settlers west of the Appalachians likewise had their own interests, and if the established states broke apart it is likely that they would go their own way. Some eastern states might try to keep control over their western territories, but the odds were against them being successful.

A breakup along these lines is not necessarily the most likely scenario, or even a very likely one, but I think it's quite possible.

There were several ways that the US could have broken up. The different colonies all had different histories and traditions, but some had more cultural and economic ties than others. My 3-way breakup is, I think, one of several possibilities. There could have been a simple 2-way split between northern and southern colonies, or something even messier with 4 or 5 or more countries emerging.
 
Haven't finished reading the timeline yet (like it so far!) but would all the successor states really go with blank States of America?

Especially when you have stuff like New England already existing. The Commonwealth of New England say? The Federal Republic of America? Just seems odd that they'd all keep States of America in their name.

Maybe it's just me.
 
Last edited:
Interesting TL... I once wrote one with a similar premise- my basis for the dissolution of the US was states being less willing to give up land claims- open conflict breaks out between the states...
 

Thande

Donor
Interesting so far. Big butterfly net re the Napoleonic Wars, but that's the way (uh huh uh huh) I like it (uh huh uh huh).

Any particular reason why the British Empire abolishes slavery a few years earlier than OTL?

Welcome back, Paul.
 
Comments on the world at mid-century

So far, the greatest changes from OTL have been in North America, but major changes are starting to pile up in Europe as well.

By the mid-19th century, the 4 successor republics to the old USA have each developed their own very distinctive identity. The Federal States of America and the United States of America have both industrialized and become fairly prosperous. Both of these republics have received steady inflows of immigrants, but by the late 1840s the largest group of immigrants has become Irish Catholics, fleeing from the potato famine that happened pretty much as in OTL. For two societies that are fiercely and self-consciously Protestant, this is going to prove to be a huge social issue. How they deal with this issue will have a profound impact on the future of both.

The Independent States of America is a major exporter of cotton, tobacco, rice, and indigo, but it is still feeling the severe aftereffects of the great slave rebellion of 20 years before. Free blacks are virtually gone, except for a few left in Maryland and Delaware. The punishments for infractions by slaves are harsher than ever before, and in some regions masters are given full power of life and death over slaves. In response to rising foreign condemnation of slavery, many residents of the ISA have moved from apologizing for slavery as a necessary evil to vigorously defending it as a positive good. There is some limited industrial and railroad development, but nothing matching that further north.

The Western Confederation is prospering, but there is ever-rising tension between its northern and southern states. The regions south of the Great Lakes are focused largely on grain farming, and the traditional trade route down the Mississippi is facing more and more competition from railroads going east to the USA, FSA, and Canada. The regions from the Ohio River Valley southward have an economy based more on plantations with slaves growing tobacco, cotton, and some rice along the Gulf coast. These slaveholding regions are also vigilant against the possibility of slave uprisings, and have adopted similar measures to what is seen in the ISA. The fact that slaveholding areas get to count their slaves as people for the purpose of apportioning representatives is cause for increasing complaint in the non-slaveholding regions further north.

Louisiana is a bilingual society where tensions between the French and English speaking populations are gradually fading as the two groups become more accustomed to living together. It is also heavily slaveholding, especially in the southern portion that centers on New Orleans and Baton Rouge. Its population has the same heightened fear of slave uprisings, and support the same harsh codes, as the slaveholding areas further east do. Its government is more centralized than that of the other republics in North America, reflecting French influence. It is also receiving a growing amount of investment from France itself.

The Republic of Tejas is not doing as well as the Texas of OTL. It is smaller, and faces a stronger Mexico that has supported the growth of free black communities south of the border. These free black communities are well-armed and serve as a both a military buffer and a constant temptation that encourages slaves in Tejas to risk brutal punishment by attempting to escape to the "promised land" to the south. Unlike OTL Texas, Tejas has a considerable French-speaking contingent, which has come mainly from Louisiana with a smaller number from Quebec after the British suppressed an uprising there.

Mexico is stronger and more stable than OTL, with its first ruler Agustin I Iturbide managing to maintain power and found a dynasty. Agustin I faced a number of plots and revolts, but was able to survive them all. His son Agustin II is now emperor, but unlike his father he is prepared to share authority with a national legislature and give more local autonomy to provinces. Mexico has been developing friendly ties with England, has successfully drawn free blacks and ex-slaves to southern Tejas to shore up its northeastern border, and has been trying with limited success to encourage more settlement in California, which is attracting a small but significant number of English speaking immigrants from British territories and from the English-speaking republics.

Britain has a much stronger presence in North America than in OTL. It has no nation with the power of OTL United States to contend with, and has become adroit at influencing the various republics and playing them off against each other. Upper and lower Canada have received more immigrants than in OTL, both from Britain itself and from the Federal States, which led to fear and resentment on the part of French-speaking inhabitants of Lower Canada (Quebec). After their uprisings failed, however, the British simply expelled those suspected of supporting these rebellions, and encouraged more English-speakers to immigrate, and parts of Quebec are well on their way to becoming predominantly English-speaking. The new railroad running through much of Upper and Lower Canada promises to make Montreal and Quebec more competitive as ports with New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore for the purpose of shipping grain and other agricultural products from the interior, although the cities on the St. Lawrence will still be handicapped by the fact that they are frozen in during the winter.

Further west, the majority of the land controlled by Britain is still quite thinly populated, although parts of the Oregon territory near the coast and along the rivers are starting to get more settlers, some coming overland and some by very long ship voyages. The one exception to this pattern is in the eastern part of Britain's Missouri colony, where large numbers of Mormons are settling. Most British officials privately dislike the Mormon religion and are appalled by rumors that polygamy is practiced by the senior church leadership, but the fact of the matter is that non-Mormon settlers are also starting to move into the area from the republics to the east, and the Mormons are a fairly large and exceptionally well-disciplined group that has reasons to be unfriendly to these non-Mormon settlers. Therefore, they have a good reason to work with the British to keep these settlers from becoming too numerous, and to keep the area as part of Britain's empire.
 
Paul

On the Mexican use of black settlers on the Texas border. I think for most of the period since slavery was abolished the various Caribbean islands have exported a lot of people as they suffered heavily from over population and economic depression. In OTL they generally went to the US I believe. In yours I suspect this could be a big source of settlers for Mexican Texas. [Only problem might be that those from the British colonies would be predominantly Protestant, which might be less popular in Mexico.

Quite possibly you already know all the above but just in case its useful.

Steve
 
The western states would not break off this early as they have absolutly no industry more complex than blanket weaving,add to that a low population that needs assitance from Virginia to fight off a little group of people known as the American Indian. Now if the Old Northwest was not a part of PA but VA they might leave/attempt to leave about 1830. The states south of the Ohio will stay with the ISA as they had cultural as well as economic ties.
 
I truly couldn't help myself :rolleyes:

We were all thinking it so I made it:

Timeline2.GIF
 
1826 – Britain purchases East Florida from Spain.

IOTL as early as 1806, Spain realized it couldn't keep Florida if the US wanted it.

A Large part of the Greek/Cherokee war of 1812, was involed with Control of the land along the Georgia/Florida Border. to prevent runaway Slaves. I think it much more likely that your ISA would grab Florida in the 1818~1820 period just like the US did OTL.

nore would Your Florida have the same borders as OTL, those border were part of a elaborate Comprimise, where Georgia gave up its northern claim reaching to the mississippi, in return for Federal help, with it's bankruptcy. and the claims division between Alabama, and Mississippi in return for allow Flordia, to keep part of the Panhandle [otl extented to the border of Lousisiana] , instead of the panhandle being divided to allow Miss, & Alb, more gulf coast.
 
stevep - good suggestion, it makes sense that southern Tejas might also draw quite a few ex-slaves and free blacks from the Caribbean after slavery was ended there.

Ghost 88 - In an earlier version of this, I had the western territories partitioned between the eastern republics (FSA, USA, ISA). I kind of figured, though, that none of these smaller republics would be able to effectively maintain control over their western territories even if the people there wanted them to. Even in OTL, with the United States still united, there was a lot of talk of the western territories breaking away because the US couldn't effectively support them against the Indians or against the Spanish and French who held New Orleans for a while.

Brandonazz - That's very, very close to the boundaries I had in my mind. The only difference is that Tejas might not have quite that much territory to the west, and that most of the Florida panhandle would have been seized by the Western Confederation (not the ISA as I mistakenly said in my timeline).

DuQuesne - British Florida is actually somewhat smaller than OTL state of Florida. Most of what is now called the Florida panhandle was seized by militia and volunteers from the Western Confederation. Spain was able to hold eastern Florida against the ISA and the Western Confederation because neither of those powers had effective professional armies, just lots of volunteers and militia who weren't good at sieges. They sold the territory to Britain because it was of no use to them and they didn't want it to fall to the ISA or Western Confederation.
 
pretty interesting timeline nice work. Multination(well more at least) North Americas make some interesting timelines, and maps.
 
Alright, I made some comprimises. The Panhandle gets claimed by the american nations, and a comprimise is made a little ways down the peninsula. I also took some land from western tejas.

Timeline4.GIF
 
Ahh, who lives in the Western Confederation? I was sure it was just maybe small, widley seperated towns at most with a major Native American population. correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not sure.
 
I think he intended it to be really diverse, french and british in the north, more french in the south, plenty of africans.
 
One of the most serious fault lines in the nascent USA was the dispute between New York and New Hampshire over Vermont, which could easily have escalated into war. If Ethan Allen had lived past 1789 (he died at the relatively young age of 51), that might have happened. War would have made a union of New York and the New England states very difficult to bring about (in both OTL and the ATL). On the other hand, patching up their quarrel with an amicable settlement would have strengthened relations. In the OTL, with a more fractious United States, it could have gone either way.
On another aspect of the TL: I cannot see Iturbide staying in power long enough to establish a Mexican dynasty. An opportunist, tyrannical and incompetent, he betrayed the revolution and alienated everyone. He would surely have been deposed in any TL.
 
Top