0
I've created a new thread as continuation of this discussion (which was off-topic there):
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...=1#post7415999
Yes but the French would likely not displace the Natives from their lands and force into reservations:
https://ancestralfindings.com/the-fr...can-relations/ - "French and Native relations"
^^^ Quote:
"The French enjoyed much better relations with Native Americans than other European groups when they first came to American shores. Here are the reasons why. There are all kinds of stories of hostilities between early American colonists and the Native people who were already there. However, these hostilities did not occur with every European group who came. The French are a notable exception to this, and in fact, enjoyed excellent relations with the Natives almost from the very beginning. The French did not displace any Natives in the establishment of their settlement and continued to work closely with them in the fur trade. They respected Native territories, their ways, and treated them as the human beings they were. The Natives, in turn, treated the French as trusted friends. (...) The English treated the Natives as inferior, believed they stood in the way of their God-given right to the land in America and tried to subject the Natives to their laws as they established their colonies. The Spanish didn’t have any better relations with the Natives, as they tried to enslave them when they first came to America, and later established missions where they tried to force them to convert from their traditional religions to Catholicism. The Natives did not appreciate any of this. The key to the friendly relations the French enjoyed with the Natives was all in the way they treated them when they first encountered them, and how they continued to treat them afterward. As long as the French maintained settlements in America, they enjoyed excellent relations with each other. For those who have early American French ancestry, or French settler ancestors who married Native Americans, the vast majority of those records can be found in the provincial archives of Quebec (some records there might lead back to France if the settler returned there with his Native American bride). These records provide a fascinating look at relations between Natives and Europeans and show just how different things could have been if all the European people who came to America had been as progressive in their treatment of the Natives as the French were."
=====
So most probably much less land would have been available to white settlers than in our timeline.
This would maybe also even discourage European immigration at least in case of rural immigrants. Even if there was high European immigration, the situation would still be different because Native population would not decline as much as it did when facing English and later American expansion/rule.
I agree with this fully.
And also the fact that Indians were pushed into very small reservations, contributed to their decline. Not only diseases and war.
When a tribe of for example 15,000 people inhabited a huge territory, it obviously had higher fertility rate, than on reservation.
BTW, but how do you explain Bangladesh (or the Netherlands)?
Bookmarks