What if Habsburg New France?

Charles VI being a claimant to the Spanish throne had a birthright to the Spanish Empire. In the end, he had to give up his dream of ruling the Spanish Empire. But what if Charles got New France as compensation of renouncing his claim to the Spanish throne? An Empire for an Empire. New France didn't have much value to France so it likely wouldn't be that much of a problem for them. Britain might agree because having an ally who depends on you as a neighbor is better than having an enemy as neighbor. The Habsburgs getting New France would be more preferable to the British than France keeping it. Border issues might be resolved in a more amicable manner. In addition to that, the British know the Habsburg would rely entirely on Britains good will in order to not lose their colony.

Let's assume butterflies make his son Leopold Johann survive so Charles doesn't trade New France away the first opportunity he gets in exchange for recognition of the pragmatic sanction. POD is Charles making peace with his allies at the Peace of Utrecht and ending up with New France in addition to OTL gains.
 
Charles VI being a claimant to the Spanish throne had a birthright to the Spanish Empire. In the end, he had to give up his dream of ruling the Spanish Empire. But what if Charles got New France as compensation of renouncing his claim to the Spanish throne? An Empire for an Empire. New France didn't have much value to France so it likely wouldn't be that much of a problem for them. Britain might agree because having an ally who depends on you as a neighbor is better than having an enemy as neighbor. The Habsburgs getting New France would be more preferable to the British than France keeping it. Border issues might be resolved in a more amicable manner. In addition to that, the British know the Habsburg would rely entirely on Britains good will in order to not lose their colony.

Let's assume butterflies make his son Leopold Johann survive so Charles doesn't trade New France away the first opportunity he gets in exchange for recognition of the pragmatic sanction. POD is Charles making peace with his allies at the Peace of Utrecht and ending up with New France in addition to OTL gains.
New France would develop strong relations with the indigenous peoples and survive until the Seven Years' War, when England annexes it after the treaty due to fighting and losing on the side of France.
 
The Austrian Netherlands suddenly become much more important to the dynasty- Charles isn’t going to bow to British pressure ittl and disband the Austrian East India company.
 
New France would develop strong relations with the indigenous peoples and survive until the Seven Years' War, when England annexes it after the treaty due to fighting and losing on the side of France.
There's a surviving son, meaning the War of Austrian Succession is likely butterflied, or goes much differently. The 30's may go quite differently, too. Change up those, and it is likely France and Austria are in different shape, possibly even better shape. No WoAS means likely no Diplomatic Revolution.

TTL may bear little resemblance to OTL. Talk of 7YW and/or it ending as OTL is way premature.
 
The son surviving has far more consequences than New France becoming New Austria. But, if we limit discussion to North America....
Austria has to first secure the territories (plural, if we're talking the Louisiana part of it, as well). Canada doesn't have much European population, but what it has is rabidly anti-Austrian. Austria is broke, and has minimal means of projecting power that far. They have no experience in this sort of colonial empire. But, they might be able to achieve it, especially if Britain helps, in return for generous border settlement.

Louisiana (now Charlesvania?) is almost completely void of European presence.

I would guess the region is nothing but a headache for Austria. Maybe the French population will accept Austrian rule. Maybe not. They might hate the English so much, they'll accept fellow Catholic rule. Active fighting depends on where a surviving Leopold Johann takes Europe. Doubtful either territory is developed/settled any more than under the French.
 
New France had around 20.000 French people in 1713, of which 1/4 lived in Louisiana, 1/8 in Acadia, and 5/8 in Quebec. Austria also had a long tradition to settle frontier land. So I expect a significant influx of population, and the new settlers will be loyal to Vienna. But the question is where do the settlers come from, if significant amount of the settlers are from the Austrian Netherlands and Lorraine (which historically was a source a settlers in Hungary), New France (New Flanders) will stay French speaking, through cultural it will likely be more South German. But we could also see the settlers come from Swabia and the Catholic regions of the Rhineland, which could result German settlers overtaking the French one. We could also see an English model with Lower Canada (and without the Acadian expulsion) Acadia stay French speaking while Upper Canada and Louisiana becomes German (or Flemish/Dutch speaking in case of Lower Louisiana), I think this scenario is the most likely.

Of course a good question is what does this mean for the British colonies, Austria is a British ally and the American colonies are not important enough to change that. So we will likely see negotiation about the precise borders between the two territories, but we will likely see the Ohio Valley ending up Austrian.

Cultural I expect New Flanders will be split in three region. in the south we have Lower Louisiana which is mostly dominated by major landowners and a lot of slaves, racial mixing will be common and there will be a class of free people of color, cultural it’s very similar to the Dutch Caribbean expect Catholic and the Lingua Franca is Flemish/Dutch, through the elite language is French. Upper Canada and Upper Louisiana is the same region, let’s call it American Swabia this is a pretty similar region to the Hungarian frontier with German settlements and military districts. Cultural it’s very similar to South Germany and Austria. In the north we have Lower Canada and Acadia which is pretty similar to OTL Quebec, just more cultural South German… so beer drinking, lederhosen wearing, Tyrolean hat wearing, schlager singing, schnitzel eating French speakers, and the French they speak will be full of German loanwords :winkytongue: .
 
Last edited:
New France had around 20.000 French people in 1713, of which 1/4 lived in Louisiana, 1/8 in Acadia, and 5/8 in Quebec. Austria also had a long tradition to settle frontier land. So I expect a significant influx of population, and the new settlers will be loyal to Vienna. But the question is where do the settlers come from, if significant amount of the settlers are from the Austrian Netherlands and Lorraine (which historically was a source a settlers in Hungary), New France (New Flanders) will stay French speaking, through cultural it will likely be more South German. But we could also see the settlers come from Swabia and the Catholic regions of the Rhineland, which could result German settlers overtaking the French one. We could also see an English model with Lower Canada (and without the Acadian expulsion) Acadia stay French speaking while Upper Canada and Louisiana becomes German (or Flemish/Dutch speaking in case of Lower Louisiana), I think this scenario is the most likely.

Of course a good question is what does this mean for the British colonies, Austria is a British ally and the American colonies are not important enough to change that. So we will likely see negotiation about the precise borders between the two territories, but we will likely see the Ohio Valley ending up Austrian.

Cultural I expect New Flanders will be split in three region. in the south we have Lower Louisiana which is mostly dominated by major landowners and a lot of slaves, racial mixing will be common and there will be a class of free people of color, cultural it’s very similar to the Dutch Caribbean expect Catholic and the Lingua Franca is Flemish/Dutch, through the elite language is French. Upper Canada and Upper Louisiana is the same region, let’s call it American Swabia this is a pretty similar region to the Hungarian frontier with German settlements and military districts. Cultural it’s very similar to South Germany and Austria. In the north we have Lower Canada and Acadia which is pretty similar to OTL Quebec, just more cultural South German… so beer drinking, lederhosen wearing, Tyrolean hat wearing, schlager singing, schnitzel eating French speakers, and the French they speak will be full of German loanwords :winkytongue: .
I don't really see that reasoning.

Settling frontier lands that are next to you is far different than settling far distant lands on the other side of the world.

Not that the Habsburgs couldn't do it, but comparing what they did in the past to this is apples & oranges.
 
I don't really see that reasoning.

Settling frontier lands that are next to you is far different than settling far distant lands on the other side of the world.

Not that the Habsburgs couldn't do it, but comparing what they did in the past to this is apples & oranges.
Also for 18th century European states, attracting people to the places they wanted to invest in was a pretty competitive sport and Austria will always prioritise settling Germans in Hungary and their eastern possessions to the Americas.
 
I don't really see that reasoning.

Settling frontier lands that are next to you is far different than settling far distant lands on the other side of the world.

Not that the Habsburgs couldn't do it, but comparing what they did in the past to this is apples & oranges.

Point is that Austria had a tradition of settling frontier territory which France lacked, but more important they also need far fewer settlers to make a difference in North America and have access to a greater pool of settlers. Also it’s not necessary so much harder to move from the Rhineland to Canada than to Hungary, and it’s far easier than migrating to Russia, which tens of thousands Germans did in the 18th century. I also expect that Austria would recruit heavily among the Catholic states of the Lower Rhine and Lower Saxony.
 
This is very interesting and would make a great TL. I've got my hands full, but if someone else wants to do it I'd definitely read it.
 
The son surviving has far more consequences than New France becoming New Austria. But, if we limit discussion to North America....
Austria has to first secure the territories (plural, if we're talking the Louisiana part of it, as well). Canada doesn't have much European population, but what it has is rabidly anti-Austrian. Austria is broke, and has minimal means of projecting power that far. They have no experience in this sort of colonial empire. But, they might be able to achieve it, especially if Britain helps, in return for generous border settlement.

Louisiana (now Charlesvania?) is almost completely void of European presence.

I would guess the region is nothing but a headache for Austria. Maybe the French population will accept Austrian rule. Maybe not. They might hate the English so much, they'll accept fellow Catholic rule. Active fighting depends on where a surviving Leopold Johann takes Europe. Doubtful either territory is developed/settled any more than under the French.

You are absolutely right. I probably should have done a seperate thread for the question of the Habsburgs surviving as this alone would entail massive changes for 18th century European politics but for the sake of this thread not to end in a single, though correct, answer being "the Habsburgs trade it away for recognition of the pragmatic sanction".

New France had around 20.000 French people in 1713, of which 1/4 lived in Louisiana, 1/8 in Acadia, and 5/8 in Quebec. Austria also had a long tradition to settle frontier land. So I expect a significant influx of population, and the new settlers will be loyal to Vienna. But the question is where do the settlers come from, if significant amount of the settlers are from the Austrian Netherlands and Lorraine (which historically was a source a settlers in Hungary), New France (New Flanders) will stay French speaking, through cultural it will likely be more South German. But we could also see the settlers come from Swabia and the Catholic regions of the Rhineland, which could result German settlers overtaking the French one. We could also see an English model with Lower Canada (and without the Acadian expulsion) Acadia stay French speaking while Upper Canada and Louisiana becomes German (or Flemish/Dutch speaking in case of Lower Louisiana), I think this scenario is the most likely.

Of course a good question is what does this mean for the British colonies, Austria is a British ally and the American colonies are not important enough to change that. So we will likely see negotiation about the precise borders between the two territories, but we will likely see the Ohio Valley ending up Austrian.

Cultural I expect New Flanders will be split in three region. in the south we have Lower Louisiana which is mostly dominated by major landowners and a lot of slaves, racial mixing will be common and there will be a class of free people of color, cultural it’s very similar to the Dutch Caribbean expect Catholic and the Lingua Franca is Flemish/Dutch, through the elite language is French. Upper Canada and Upper Louisiana is the same region, let’s call it American Swabia this is a pretty similar region to the Hungarian frontier with German settlements and military districts. Cultural it’s very similar to South Germany and Austria. In the north we have Lower Canada and Acadia which is pretty similar to OTL Quebec, just more cultural South German… so beer drinking, lederhosen wearing, Tyrolean hat wearing, schlager singing, schnitzel eating French speakers, and the French they speak will be full of German loanwords :winkytongue: .

I'd imagine Palatines would be among the first immigrants as IOTL some 85k moved to Pennsylvania by 1775 soley because their lands were devastated during Frances incursions into the HRE in the WoSS and 9 years war. With a Habsburg regime that is more proactive about settling New France/New HRE?, we'd likely see even more. Odds are we would also see other protestants since the Habsburgs were no strangers of deporting protestants to Hungary.
If Leopold Johann is enlightened ruler as Maria Theresa and subsequent "Habsburg" rulers were, religion will not play that big of a role when it comes to attracting immigrants. By granting religious freedom, tax exemptions, military exemptions, a lot of immigrants could be attracted.
One such group of potential settlers are the mennonites who IOTL went to settle the frontiers of Russia. Other groups would likely come from whichever place of the HRE has been devastated by war.
Charles and Maria Theresa are known for their repression and expelling of the Jews in (some) of their lands. So there's a chance we'd get to see a part of New Austria being predominantly Yiddish speaking.

The Habsburgs could give Louisiana a monopoly on rice, tea, cotton, indigo, ect thereby fostering economic development. Both Charles and Maria Theresa were huge proponents of mercantilism so there is growth potential. While those are labor intensive crops, do they have to resort to slavery? I figured there'd be plenty of German settlers willing to go to the US for better opportunities.
I don't really see that reasoning.

Settling frontier lands that are next to you is far different than settling far distant lands on the other side of the world.

Not that the Habsburgs couldn't do it, but comparing what they did in the past to this is apples & oranges.
They would find North America a whole lot more welcoming than they found the steppes of Eurasia. Some 30k Germans set out to settle at the Volga, thousands died en route, thousands got killed and abducted by Kazakh raids, thousands got depression after seeing the land that has been promised to them had a different climate/soil and didn't even have trees yet they were still able thrive and multiply to 165k in 77 years.
 
Would the Habsburgs be able to get Acadia and Newfoundland, after granting the British generous fishing concessions of course, in exchange for Florida and Georgia or will they want to keep the Spanish in the South as to avoid having even more of a border with the British?

What would the relationship between the German colonists and the natives look like? Reading about how well the Palatines interacted with the natives gives me hope that it would not turn out as OTL with ethnic cleansing and the trail of tears but more of a coexisting and forming a hybrid culture with elements of peoples.
 
While those are labor intensive crops, do they have to resort to slavery?
They don't have to, but it typically is the go-to solution in those days. From a modern day perspective, we want to avoid the use of slave labor, but back then, it was a practical, and accepted, solution.

In general, simply changing up the restrictive governance of the French will open a lot of migration. If they allow some local manufacture/trades, business will open, and satisfy their labor needs similar to what the British North American colonies did: indentured servitude (typically white), whereby business would pay for transit in return for employment for a set number of years. As addressed by others, religious and places of origin are likely to be less restrictive.
 
Would the Habsburgs be able to get Acadia and Newfoundland, after granting the British generous fishing concessions of course, in exchange for Florida and Georgia or will they want to keep the Spanish in the South as to avoid having even more of a border with the British?

What would the relationship between the German colonists and the natives look like? Reading about how well the Palatines interacted with the natives gives me hope that it would not turn out as OTL with ethnic cleansing and the trail of tears but more of a coexisting and forming a hybrid culture with elements of peoples.
I doubt Britain wants Florida (presuming this colony gets added to the spoils of New France) more than Acadia/Newfoundland. Florida doesn't hold much value. Britain would simply press an aggressive claim of Georgia, as they did OTL, as well as the northern boundaries of the British colonies. Austria really doesn't have much choice, as they don't have any power projection capability.
 
You are absolutely right. I probably should have done a seperate thread for the question of the Habsburgs surviving as this alone would entail massive changes for 18th century European politics but for the sake of this thread not to end in a single, though correct, answer being "the Habsburgs trade it away for recognition of the pragmatic sanction".

Honestly I could easily see the British not caring about it enough to not being the case. But in case of the access to Antwerp being closed down as part of Pragmatic Sanction, we will see a short period of growth in Louisiana and after 1732, it will be left mostly fallow with the existing population simply being left to natural increase itself. Which honestly is interesting enough on it own, and share some similarity to the Dutch Cape and Spanish period Louisiana. Using Danish st. Croix (1745-61) as model (minor colonial power and some existing infrastructure). We could expect to see a population of 15000 by 1732, in case of St.Croix 80% of the population were slaves, I would likely lower it in case of Austrian Louisiana simply because it’s worse territory for sugar plantation. So 1/3-1/2 free men, with it being left fallow the slave population will decrease both dying off and some becoming free. In general this will likely mean rather low population growth early on.

I'd imagine Palatines would be among the first immigrants as IOTL some 85k moved to Pennsylvania by 1775 soley because their lands were devastated during Frances incursions into the HRE in the WoSS and 9 years war. With a Habsburg regime that is more proactive about settling New France/New HRE?, we'd likely see even more. Odds are we would also see other protestants since the Habsburgs were no strangers of deporting protestants to Hungary.

No I do’t expect many Palatines, the migration of Germans depended on two factors, religion and the local laws. The Palatines migrated to America because as Reformed they had few other choice and the local princes allowed them to migrate, we see the same with army Russian Germans who outside the Mennonite (who originated in Frisia, but had first migrated to the Royal Prussia before migrating to Russia), they mainly came from the Hessian states because these state allowed them to migrate, and as Protestant they didn’t want to migrate to Hungary. As such I expect migrants to America coming from western Austrian territories and from minor Catholic states which are Austrian aligned (like the ecclesial states of Western Germany; Trier, Cologne, Mainz, Munster).

If Leopold Johann is enlightened ruler as Maria Theresa and subsequent "Habsburg" rulers were, religion will not play that big of a role when it comes to attracting immigrants. By granting religious freedom, tax exemptions, military exemptions, a lot of immigrants could be attracted.

This will likely be something which will happen later (after 1750) at this point in time religion is still to important issue. The exception may be Louisiana, in plantation region the colonial powers tended to be more religious tolerant.

One such group of potential settlers are the mennonites who IOTL went to settle the frontiers of Russia. Other groups would likely come from whichever place of the HRE has been devastated by war.

Mennonites at this point lived happily in the Vistula Delta it was only with the Prussian takeover they migrated to avoid military service.

Charles and Maria Theresa are known for their repression and expelling of the Jews in (some) of their lands. So there's a chance we'd get to see a part of New Austria being predominantly Yiddish speaking.

Unlikely, any Jewish migration will likely happen relative late, and will mostly be to towns. I could see an early Jewish population in New Orleans, but it will likely be Portuguese speaking Jews from Netherlands, who have know-how in how to run plantations, which the Austrians lack. I also expect a Dutch Reformed population in the same town.

The Habsburgs could give Louisiana a monopoly on rice, tea, cotton, indigo, ect thereby fostering economic development. Both Charles and Maria Theresa were huge proponents of mercantilism so there is growth potential. While those are labor intensive crops, do they have to resort to slavery? I figured there'd be plenty of German settlers willing to go to the US for better opportunities.

Yes, they will use slaves in Louisiana and the primary early product will be sugar.

They would find North America a whole lot more welcoming than they found the steppes of Eurasia. Some 30k Germans set out to settle at the Volga, thousands died en route, thousands got killed and abducted by Kazakh raids, thousands got depression after seeing the land that has been promised to them had a different climate/soil and didn't even have trees yet they were still able thrive and multiply to 165k in 77 years.

Yes, I agree, through as I said earlier the Austrians will likely recruit their settlers elsewhere. The early Russian settlers were mostly Hessians.
 
You are absolutely right. I probably should have done a seperate thread for the question of the Habsburgs surviving as this alone would entail massive changes for 18th century European politics but for the sake of this thread not to end in a single, though correct, answer being "the Habsburgs trade it away for recognition of the pragmatic sanction".



I'd imagine Palatines would be among the first immigrants as IOTL some 85k moved to Pennsylvania by 1775 soley because their lands were devastated during Frances incursions into the HRE in the WoSS and 9 years war. With a Habsburg regime that is more proactive about settling New France/New HRE?, we'd likely see even more. Odds are we would also see other protestants since the Habsburgs were no strangers of deporting protestants to Hungary.
If Leopold Johann is enlightened ruler as Maria Theresa and subsequent "Habsburg" rulers were, religion will not play that big of a role when it comes to attracting immigrants. By granting religious freedom, tax exemptions, military exemptions, a lot of immigrants could be attracted.
One such group of potential settlers are the mennonites who IOTL went to settle the frontiers of Russia. Other groups would likely come from whichever place of the HRE has been devastated by war.
Charles and Maria Theresa are known for their repression and expelling of the Jews in (some) of their lands. So there's a chance we'd get to see a part of New Austria being predominantly Yiddish speaking.

The Habsburgs could give Louisiana a monopoly on rice, tea, cotton, indigo, ect thereby fostering economic development. Both Charles and Maria Theresa were huge proponents of mercantilism so there is growth potential. While those are labor intensive crops, do they have to resort to slavery? I figured there'd be plenty of German settlers willing to go to the US for better opportunities.

They would find North America a whole lot more welcoming than they found the steppes of Eurasia. Some 30k Germans set out to settle at the Volga, thousands died en route, thousands got killed and abducted by Kazakh raids, thousands got depression after seeing the land that has been promised to them had a different climate/soil and didn't even have trees yet they were still able thrive and multiply to 165k in 77 years.
It's not the "friendliness" of the land. It's the transportation and administration. Those are an entirely different animal than what they are using to.

I am not saying they couldn't do it, but they would be just as green as it as the French at first.
 
Top