HOME | DD

Description
What if Brittany had still been independent when America was discovered?
Here is that story!
------------------------
Map 64

PREV - FIRST - NEXT

Dynasties and rulers

----------------------

Brazil from our Time Line (OTL):

OTL the colonization of Portuguese Brazil began in 1534 with the concession of captaincies, vast strips of land given to lords. It was a failure because in 15 years only 3 small colonies succeeded: Olinda, Ilhéus and Sao Vicente.
The Portuguese crown took control of colonization and invested heavily from 1549 until the 1570s.
In 1600, Portuguese Brazil had 60,000 inhabitants. (including 40,000 white and mixed race people).
In the 17th century there was chaos with the Dutch invasion which ravaged the colony. But from 1660 the situation was restored.
In 1700 there were 300,000 inhabitants. in Brazil (x5 in 100 years).
At this date gold was discovered with a significant population influx. In 1800 there were 3 million inhabitants (x10 in 100 years).

Population growth differential during the colonial period:

The demographic growth of white and mixed-race populations in Portuguese and Spanish America is approximately 1.7% per year, or x 5.39 in 100 years (1.017^100).
In comparison, the demographic growth of English and French settlers in North America is 3% per year, or x 19.2 in 100 years (1.03^100). It is much more, due to a more educated and less unequal society. The USA goes from 0 in 1600, to 220,000 in 1700 and to 3.9 million in 1790.

For the Bretons I chose 2% per year or x 7.2 in 100 years (1.02^100). I could have moved closer to the USA but I took into account a climate more conducive to tropical diseases.

Calculation for my Uchronie:

For my Brazil, colonization began in 1500, 40 years earlier and massively. 40 years at 2% per year is x 2.2 (1.02^40).
By adding the demographic differential (1.7 vs 2%) over 40 years we add x 1.12 (1.02^40 / 1.017^40).
So if Brittany had made the same effort as Portugal (a country of the same population size, around 1,5 million), we would be 60,000 x 2.2 x 1.12 = 147,000 inhabitants. in 1600.
But I am at 245,000. Brittany therefore provided an effort 66% higher (245,000 / 147,000) than Portugal OTL which remains reasonable. We must not forget that Portugal was also in Africa, in India and as far as Japan with trading posts, forts, garrisons, almost everywhere. In addition, Brittany called on traders and settlers from neighboring France, which was very much more populous.
Finally, of the 245,000 inhabitants, 113,400 are white (46%). The others are mixed race or Indian and therefore a good part of their ancestors did not travel to Europe. While in the US, white people are around 90%.

Furthermore, in my history, the Portuguese also settled in Brazil from 1530 and invested massively and especially earlier to try to catch up with the Bretons. In vain because there were 100,000 of them in 1600.

But Breton Brazil + Portuguese = 345,000 or x 5.75 compared to OTL.

Subsequently, we have an earlier gold rush, a century in advance, since the country reached 300,000 inhabitants a century before. But that doesn't actually change anything. We do x10 in the 17th century and x5 in the 18th century.

We must add the differential in population growth over 200 years, from 1600 to 1800: (1.02^200) / (1.017^200) = x1.8
So I do Brazil OTL = 3 million x 5.75 (difference in 1600) x 1.8 (growth differential) = 31 million. In my history I am at 28 million in 1800.

Description
What if Brittany had still been independent when America was discovered?
Here is that story!
------------------------
Map 64

PREV - FIRST - NEXT

Dynasties and rulers

----------------------

Brazil from our Time Line (OTL):

OTL the colonization of Portuguese Brazil began in 1534 with the concession of captaincies, vast strips of land given to lords. It was a failure because in 15 years only 3 small colonies succeeded: Olinda, Ilhéus and Sao Vicente.
The Portuguese crown took control of colonization and invested heavily from 1549 until the 1570s.
In 1600, Portuguese Brazil had 60,000 inhabitants. (including 40,000 white and mixed race people).
In the 17th century there was chaos with the Dutch invasion which ravaged the colony. But from 1660 the situation was restored.
In 1700 there were 300,000 inhabitants. in Brazil (x5 in 100 years).
At this date gold was discovered with a significant population influx. In 1800 there were 3 million inhabitants (x10 in 100 years).

Population growth differential during the colonial period:

The demographic growth of white and mixed-race populations in Portuguese and Spanish America is approximately 1.7% per year, or x 5.39 in 100 years (1.017^100).
In comparison, the demographic growth of English and French settlers in North America is 3% per year, or x 19.2 in 100 years (1.03^100). It is much more, due to a more educated and less unequal society. The USA goes from 0 in 1600, to 220,000 in 1700 and to 3.9 million in 1790.

For the Bretons I chose 2% per year or x 7.2 in 100 years (1.02^100). I could have moved closer to the USA but I took into account a climate more conducive to tropical diseases.

Calculation for my Uchronie:

For my Brazil, colonization began in 1500, 40 years earlier and massively. 40 years at 2% per year is x 2.2 (1.02^40).
By adding the demographic differential (1.7 vs 2%) over 40 years we add x 1.12 (1.02^40 / 1.017^40).
So if Brittany had made the same effort as Portugal (a country of the same population size, around 1,5 million), we would be 60,000 x 2.2 x 1.12 = 147,000 inhabitants. in 1600.
But I am at 245,000. Brittany therefore provided an effort 66% higher (245,000 / 147,000) than Portugal OTL which remains reasonable. We must not forget that Portugal was also in Africa, in India and as far as Japan with trading posts, forts, garrisons, almost everywhere. In addition, Brittany called on traders and settlers from neighboring France, which was very much more populous.
Finally, of the 245,000 inhabitants, 113,400 are white (46%). The others are mixed race or Indian and therefore a good part of their ancestors did not travel to Europe. While in the US, white people are around 90%.

Furthermore, in my history, the Portuguese also settled in Brazil from 1530 and invested massively and especially earlier to try to catch up with the Bretons. In vain because there were 100,000 of them in 1600.

But Breton Brazil + Portuguese = 345,000 or x 5.75 compared to OTL.

Subsequently, we have an earlier gold rush, a century in advance, since the country reached 300,000 inhabitants a century before. But that doesn't actually change anything. We do x10 in the 17th century and x5 in the 18th century.

We must add the differential in population growth over 200 years, from 1600 to 1800: (1.02^200) / (1.017^200) = x1.8
So I do Brazil OTL = 3 million x 5.75 (difference in 1600) x 1.8 (growth differential) = 31 million. In my history I am at 28 million in 1800.