Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New France Colonisation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Carl Schwamberg
    replied
    I was curious about book titles as I recall a book from years ago. Described the economic and social condition In England Wales & Scotland just as the great wave of emmigration started. Cant recall the details tho the author descibed the economic pressures as the common land medival farm system finally disappeared and the large estates that were comercially farmed evicted the surplus labor.

    Leave a comment:


  • PGT Beauregard
    replied
    Originally posted by Carl Schwamberg View Post
    Theres been a few brief remarks in this thread about French emmigration policy for New France, and the pressure, or lack of to immigrate from France. I wonder what the books are (in French or English) that describe the populations movements in Europe during the 17th & 18th Centuries, and dynamics of emmigration to the Americas. The details of the reasons for the massive migration to the British Colonys, and the smaller movement to the French or others woudl be a interesting read.
    Dear Carl, I think one of the main reason of massive emmigration to the english colonies was the religious one (that's since the mayflower).
    All protestants who were persecuted in Europe could take refuge in the 13 colonies. The last ones but not the least, the huguenots did the same.
    (francis Marion the Swamp Fox of Paul Revere, were one of them)

    Leave a comment:


  • PGT Beauregard
    replied
    Originally posted by Carl Schwamberg View Post
    Theres been a few brief remarks in this thread about French emmigration policy for New France, and the pressure, or lack of to immigrate from France. I wonder what the books are (in French or English) that describe the populations movements in Europe during the 17th & 18th Centuries, and dynamics of emmigration to the Americas. The details of the reasons for the massive migration to the British Colonys, and the smaller movement to the French or others woudl be a interesting read.
    Dear Carl, I think one of the main reason of emmigration of population to the english colonies was the religious one (since the mayflower).
    All protestants who were persecuted in Europe could take refuge in the 13 colonies, the last ones but not the least, the huguenots did the same.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carl Schwamberg
    replied
    Theres been a few brief remarks in this thread about French emmigration policy for New France, and the pressure, or lack of to immigrate from France. I wonder what the books are (in French or English) that describe the populations movements in Europe during the 17th & 18th Centuries, and dynamics of emmigration to the Americas. The details of the reasons for the massive migration to the British Colonys, and the smaller movement to the French or others woudl be a interesting read.

    Leave a comment:


  • PGT Beauregard
    replied
    Originally posted by Carl Schwamberg View Post
    More likely I'd not exist since my Irish ancestored mother would not have met my second generation American father. But then again the French might have encouraged onter nationalities to emigrate to New France, so in that case it would be possible.
    They did with German and Swiss German, I think It's Law the minister of

    Louis XV who encourage this immigration, a lot of my Cajuns friends have

    German And Swiss german Ancestors. Between Lafayette And New Orleans

    You have a lake called "lac des Allemands" which you call translate by Lake of the German

    Leave a comment:


  • Carl Schwamberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Psyhcoward View Post
    Now that really is interesting. If the French had been able to keep from going to war with the tribes and used a relationship to allie and integrate them into New France. Pontiac, Tecumseh later given good support by French troops. Giving that Tecumseh would have been dealing with French instead of Brits at Detroit. You might be speaking French right now.
    More likely I'd not exist since my Irish ancestored mother would not have met my second generation American father. But then again the French might have encouraged onter nationalities to emigrate to New France, so in that case it would be possible.

    Leave a comment:


  • piero1971
    replied
    in 1706, there was a Swiss regiment at the seervice of France with over 12'800 men. there was also a Swiss elite guard regiment in the king's personal guard (a company of about a hundred of which was massacred at the Tuileries by the paris mob on july 10 1792 - their officers refused to give the order to shoot on the civilians....).

    but I am no expert in this time...

    I dont' know if parts of the swiss regiment served in the americas. for sure there were swiss mercenaries probably on both sides as either officers or normal soldiers as this was a big business for catholic cantons at the time and switzerland had a great reputation (like prussia or hesse) for disciplined men and well trained officers...

    if you have an oob of the french expedionary force, you probably will see iof there are parts of the swiss regiment (in french: régiment suisse or more likely in the french of the time: régiment des suissess)

    Leave a comment:


  • PGT Beauregard
    replied
    Originally posted by piero1971 View Post
    actually when I first read the title I thought it was about what if:

    - france restarts colonisation (unlikely)

    or

    - france beeing colonized by africans and arabs (ongoing)

    lol...
    No comment about the second remark
    By the way my dear Helvete, I have heard that during the American revolution, Louis XVI sent Swiss guards (they were one of the elite troop of the french Army) with general de Rochambeau army, do you have any information about it?

    Leave a comment:


  • Psyhcoward
    replied
    Originally posted by Carl Schwamberg View Post
    There may have been a third way. With skilled government, diplomacy, hefty bribes or rewards, and a carefull settlement pattern the French might have incorporated the native nations into New France with less bloodshed. In the US some groups were reaching a stable accomodation, until Jacksons 'Removal' policy was instituted. By the Removal the Cherokee were printing books, had a functional bank and credit system suitable for their agricultural economy and were transitioning from subsistance farming to comercial farming. In Indiana here and other states there were a number of small groups that had 'civilized' to the point where they were able to avoid the Removal and remain.

    Long odds, and certainly not every tribe or nation would have survived, but it is not impossible the French could have reached an accomodation. After all the French were also then assimilating the varied groups of France.

    Now that really is interesting. If the French had been able to keep from going to war with the tribes and used a relationship to allie and integrate them into New France. Pontiac, Tecumseh later given good support by French troops. Giving that Tecumseh would have been dealing with French instead of Brits at Detroit. You might be speaking French right now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carl Schwamberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Psyhcoward View Post
    Put it down to Ohio bias



    I think the large numbers of workers needed to build such a canal in the 1700's would have soured French and Indian relations a bit too. One reason the French got on so well with the Indians was that they were not seen to be as much of a threat to the natives as the English were turning out to be. The French didn't have near the number of settlers as the English.
    There may have been a third way. With skilled government, diplomacy, hefty bribes or rewards, and a carefull settlement pattern the French might have incorporated the native nations into New France with less bloodshed. In the US some groups were reaching a stable accomodation, until Jacksons 'Removal' policy was instituted. By the Removal the Cherokee were printing books, had a functional bank and credit system suitable for their agricultural economy and were transitioning from subsistance farming to comercial farming. In Indiana here and other states there were a number of small groups that had 'civilized' to the point where they were able to avoid the Removal and remain.

    Long odds, and certainly not every tribe or nation would have survived, but it is not impossible the French could have reached an accomodation. After all the French were also then assimilating the varied groups of France.

    Leave a comment:


  • piero1971
    replied
    actually when I first read the title I thought it was about what if:

    - france restarts colonisation (unlikely)

    or

    - france beeing colonized by africans and arabs (ongoing)

    lol...

    Leave a comment:


  • Psyhcoward
    replied
    Put it down to Ohio bias



    I think the large numbers of workers needed to build such a canal in the 1700's would have soured French and Indian relations a bit too. One reason the French got on so well with the Indians was that they were not seen to be as much of a threat to the natives as the English were turning out to be. The French didn't have near the number of settlers as the English.

    I think they may have been in a catch 22. If they increase the number of imigrants to have the labor force needed to build a canal system to link the Great Lakes and the Gulf, they risk doing what the English did which is take over more native lands and turn the Indians against them.
    The French trade with the Indians would have increased probably, but unless they were able to offer better deals than the English (which they were unable to do historicaly) the Indians would have turned against them as another invader.
    If they don't bring enough people to build the canals or create enough settlements then you wind up having a repeat of history.

    I wonder what the outcome of things would have been considering a certain short fellow was coming into the picture later on down the road.
    If France had been able to keep it's holdings would they have lost them anyway after the Napolean wars?

    Leave a comment:


  • Carl Schwamberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Psyhcoward View Post
    In the early 1800s the Ohio Erie canal was built. (started 1825) that linked Lake Erie to the Ohio river. A lot of people and goods were moved along the canals. Given the French had better relations with the indian tribes they may have been able to build such a canal well before then. By 1825 there were barely any indians left in Ohio to fight such a construction.
    Actually this cannal was in New York State, not Ohio. But it is ok. I used to think Duisenberg Automobiles were made in Germany

    Originally posted by Psyhcoward View Post
    If the French were to have built a canal system similar to that in the mid 1700s they may have had a better chance of holding the area. Provided the indians didn't mind, but a canal would allow for more trade goods to enrich the tribes and have solidified relations even more.
    Laborers would have to emmigrate en mass. Constructing the Eire, and other, cannals required a constant stream of arriving laborers. Who had to be willing to do brutal work. After a season or two of cannal digging they had enough coins in their pocket to leave for better prospects in the frontier towns or pioneer farms. Fresh shiploads of Irish & other impovrished Europeans were required weekly to keep up the rapid construction of the cannals, and all the other structure of the industry emerging in North America.

    To create the same level of construction of cannals or other structure needed to establish a strong agricultural economy and the early cities of the industrial era a immigration of several hundred thousand persons a year would be necessary. This population was available across Europe, how France might obtain it and govern it in New France is a interesting question.

    Originally posted by Psyhcoward View Post
    Parts of the canal still exist today.
    Parts of another cannal, the Wabash & Erie Cannal, still exist a few hundred meters from where I sit. Unlike the Ohio & Erie Cannal this venture was never profitable. Two sets of investors lost everything in two bankruptcys, and the State government was caught holding guarantees for the second round of investment The steam railroad put a end to the cannal and by the time my German ancenstors arrived in the 1860s it was a stagnant ditch of rotting boats and garbage.

    Leave a comment:


  • Psyhcoward
    replied
    Originally posted by von Panzerfaust View Post
    Map says it all in 15 seconds:
    France controlled the two waterways leading deep into the North American continent: both the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Mississippi. These two waterways are almost in touch. My knowledge of American topography is a bit hazy, but I'm sure someone here can tell how far it is from Lake Erie to a navigable river that waters into the Mississippi.

    In the meanwhile the English and Dutch and Swedes and who else were busy in their 'corners' all hemmed in by the Alleghenies. Only the French through their waterways had access to all the vast expanses with its furs in the north, cotton in the south, its gold and ... and what not.
    'If only' ... France had shipped more people who could start to populate this new continent 'New France' over the Atlantic Ocean on a scale the English did.
    In the early 1800s the Ohio Erie canal was built. (started 1825) that linked Lake Erie to the Ohio river. A lot of people and goods were moved along the canals. Given the French had better relations with the indian tribes they may have been able to build such a canal well before then. By 1825 there were barely any indians left in Ohio to fight such a construction.

    If the French were to have built a canal system similar to that in the mid 1700s they may have had a better chance of holding the area. Provided the indians didn't mind, but a canal would allow for more trade goods to enrich the tribes and have solidified relations even more.

    Parts of the canal still exist today.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carl Schwamberg
    replied
    Originally posted by PGT Beauregard View Post
    Thanks for your comments Panzerfaust, I just wanted to add that when France lost all her colonies after the seven years wars, Voltaire said something like "we are not going to regret this few Acres of Canada".
    And After the American Revolution, Louis XVI refused to take back Canada
    which proposed to him.
    I wonder what the reasoning was? Too many English settlers arriving during the interm?

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X