• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

What if Cromwell's 'Western Design' campaign in the Caribbean conquered Cuba, Santo Domingo, or Puerto Rico?

raharris1973

Well-known member
Instead of Jamaica, as happened historically?

In OTL, Cromwell, during this war with the Spanish which occurred circa 1655, tried at least to attack Santo Domingo and hoped to seize the island of Hispaniola, and possibly Cuba. The English forces failed to hold either of those objectives, but did end up conquering Jamaica, and holding it until the 20th century.

What if the English succeeded in conquering Santo Domingo, or Cuba, or Puerto Rico instead, and Jamaica remained Spanish?

What knock-on effects would this have for the colonial era?

I would note that in English colonial history, 1655 is after all the New England colonies, Virginia and Maryland were set up, but before Carolina and Pennsylvania were set up, and before the English takeover of New Netherlands.

I think an English conquest of Cuba would be particularly interesting at this early date. Would Spanish Florida remain tenable in subsequent decades, once the English were established in control of Cuba, or would Florida tend to fall to English control? Would the English still bother with Carolina, or neglect that region awhile, while taking advantage of plantation agricultural opportunities on Cuba? Were independent Maya still holding out in the Yucatan as of the 1650s? Would they be interested in English help fighting the Spanish?
 
Instead of Jamaica, as happened historically?

In OTL, Cromwell, during this war with the Spanish which occurred circa 1655, tried at least to attack Santo Domingo and hoped to seize the island of Hispaniola, and possibly Cuba. The English forces failed to hold either of those objectives, but did end up conquering Jamaica, and holding it until the 20th century.

What if the English succeeded in conquering Santo Domingo, or Cuba, or Puerto Rico instead, and Jamaica remained Spanish?

What knock-on effects would this have for the colonial era?

I would note that in English colonial history, 1655 is after all the New England colonies, Virginia and Maryland were set up, but before Carolina and Pennsylvania were set up, and before the English takeover of New Netherlands.

I think an English conquest of Cuba would be particularly interesting at this early date. Would Spanish Florida remain tenable in subsequent decades, once the English were established in control of Cuba, or would Florida tend to fall to English control? Would the English still bother with Carolina, or neglect that region awhile, while taking advantage of plantation agricultural opportunities on Cuba? Were independent Maya still holding out in the Yucatan as of the 1650s? Would they be interested in English help fighting the Spanish?

Assmuing they can do it (it's a pretty tough nut to crack), I think the biggest consequences is for slavery. You need to figure out if the conquest left the institution in a workable state for the british or if it broke down. Things like too many slaves escaping or uncooperative white Spanish population could both make it quite awkward but otherwise it's likely to lead to greater British commitment to the institution.
 
Does feel like Florida becomes too difficult for the Spanish to hold, so that ends up a British interest. Then you have a long-term impact on the US Revolution, assuming it's not butterflied: do Cuba and Florida join in, or like Canada and the West Indies do they stay in the empire? If the former, the US now has different geography, politics, and prominent figures. It'll impact on the Native Americans too, you don't have the Seminole as we know them or at all if refugees can't migrate into Spanish Florida to escape British American colonies; they have to go somewhere else. (If Carolina isn't founded or founded late, did refugees go there and boost the numbers if the Tuscarora and Yamasee?)

@Nyvis is right that slavery gets affected. Lot of slaves going to Cuba and a lot of wealthy British interests with Cuban plantations, all concentrated in one big place which I guess could make the slavers mord unified as a block? Also Jamaica is now ruled by a weaker empire so when slaves rebel in force, do they win? Does Jamaica win victory before Haiti ITTL and does that change anything? Do both Jamaica and Haiti rebel and win, giving you two black republics in the same area and really messing up slavery?
 
You'd really need different choices in the expedition. A different leader, more supplies, better troops, less spanish warning.

The OTL expedition was a debacle and still comfortably took Jamaica and held it against two Cuban counter attacks, I don't think it's unreasonable for a better organised one to take Hispaniola and Puerto Rico, though Cuba might be an Island too far.

Actually an interesting POD is on the Barbados, wherein the English recruited thousands of poorly trained troops from their existing settlers before launching their attack. They had joined on the basis that they were going to loot and plunder the Spanish islands only to be told by the English leaders that they needed to keep the Spanish infrastructure intact. Perhaps they could be used up on attacks on Cuba first, just to disrupt the Spanish attempt to reinforce their other islands from it and plunder, before the main assault is then launched on Hispaniola where hopefully there'd be more discipline as a result.

English Hispaniola, almost certainly sees more commitment than Spanish Hispaniola and so avoids French Haiti which is huge.

It'd be a huge change in a lot of ways.

For a start just to zoom in on Jamaica, the Jamaican maroons date to the Spanish freeing their slaves upon English invasion, without that, you don't get the Maroons kick off, which is huge for the history of slavery in the British Empire.
 
Does feel like Florida becomes too difficult for the Spanish to hold, so that ends up a British interest. Then you have a long-term impact on the US Revolution, assuming it's not butterflied: do Cuba and Florida join in, or like Canada and the West Indies do they stay in the empire? If the former, the US now has different geography, politics, and prominent figures. It'll impact on the Native Americans too, you don't have the Seminole as we know them or at all if refugees can't migrate into Spanish Florida to escape British American colonies; they have to go somewhere else. (If Carolina isn't founded or founded late, did refugees go there and boost the numbers if the Tuscarora and Yamasee?)

@Nyvis is right that slavery gets affected. Lot of slaves going to Cuba and a lot of wealthy British interests with Cuban plantations, all concentrated in one big place which I guess could make the slavers mord unified as a block? Also Jamaica is now ruled by a weaker empire so when slaves rebel in force, do they win? Does Jamaica win victory before Haiti ITTL and does that change anything? Do both Jamaica and Haiti rebel and win, giving you two black republics in the same area and really messing up slavery?

Spain and France turning abolitionist due to Jaimaica and Haiti while Britain doesn't due to being the ones with the big plantation islands would be an interesting turn. Though as pointed out above it's likely there's a split, Britain get some but Spain retain Cuba because that's a bit big.

A more pro slavery Britain might have better relations with the slave colonies and split a future US?
 
From the official Protectoral document commissioning General Robert Venables, commander of the troops sent on the Western Design, late 1654, written as dictated by Oliver Cromwell (the fleet being commanded by Admiral William Penn, father of the later founder of Pennsylvania) (State Papers of OC's Secretary of State, John Thurloe, vol 2, pp. 28-9, as quoted by me in my book 'Cromwellian Foreign Policy' pub. Palgrave Macmilan 1995:

1. The choice of islands for the intended invasion, either Hispaniola or Puerto Rico - Jamaica being the second choice by Penn and Venables after their failure to capture Santo Domingo, capital of Hispaniola, and not even mentioned by OC. 'Many Englishmen will come thither from other parts and so become magazines (ie storeage-depots) of men and provisions for carrying on the Design on the Mainland'. Cromwell only intended the milit expedition from England as stage 1 of a grand campaign to move on, helped by the existing English colonists in the Caribbean (mainly on the Bahamas, Bermuda and Barbados at this point) , to invade the mainland of South America, ie modern Venezuela and N Colombia - and in 1655-8 he sent envoys round these colonies and to New England to get as many colonists there as possible to move to the new English base (in fact Jamaica) to back his plan, saying that it was their godly duty to help defeat the 'Papist' Spaniards. He had a rude shock to find that most would not leave their existing homes for a new, hot, and insecure island base with few houses and little agric land ready so they would mostly have to start from scratch again - even the 'Puritan' colonists of New England, who he had great hopes from and sent locally well-known preacher and pro-Cromwellian Vincent Gookin to recruit, did not move except for a few younger men with no or poor homes and jobs plus a few women chafing at parental authority. The, often pro-Royalist and less religious, colonists of the southern N American states (only Maryland and Virginia at this date) and Barbados were even less enthusiastic.

As a result the Cromwellian reliance on having this help for a series of expansionist new colonial outposts in the Caribbean and later the S American mainland flopped badly - and it was unrealistic to expect people in settled homes to uproot themselves, esp when some Spaniards and runaway African 'maroon' ex-slaves on J were still resisting in the hills, ie until 1658. This would have faced OC even if he had lived into the 1660s and had the security at home to keep sending men to the area. The reliance on local settlers help also aided the decision of the Protectoral Council to send a smallish force, with men collected from several regiments not sending full regiments who were used to fighting together - and with Charles II still at large in France and at this date France not having signed peace with the Protectorate to stop their help to the Royalists (they did this in Nov 6155, after the Design) OC could not risk sending out first-rate troops from top regiments. Often the men chosen were ones who their commanders wanted to be rid of, and numbers were later added to for reinforcements and for civilian settlers in the same way ie a bureaucratic policy of 'make up the numbers to carry out our orders and please the govt and hope for the best' (sounds familiar). Prisoners, including Royalists and deported Irish Catholics, and even arrested London prostitutes were sent too as settlers to get rid of them. The whole episode was a typical mixture of an ideological leader who wanted to carry out an 'easy' foreign expedition against an ' ungodly Papist menace', ie the Spanish empire, to stimulate national unity and emulate the legendary 'successes' (magnified by myth) of Drake and Raleigh, plus incompetent and bumbling implementation and a govt lack of understanding of the situation on the ground, least of all of the risk of disease (cf overconfidence in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2000s??). One or two of the Council, led by sensible Yorkshire officer General John Lambert, did warn OC of the risks and the overconfidence in discussions in 1654 (and what the govt would have to face from family and friends of officers and men who died in a badly waged war with no clearly useful purpose) and were ignored. The govt media (pamphlets written by spindoctors) cheerfully presented the resulting war and the situation in Jamaica as far better than it really was, to the point of distortion - nothing new there.

Cromwell also suggested moving on to take Havana in these instructions, section 1: 'it is so considerable that we have thoughts of beginning the attempt on Cuna and still judge it worthy of consideration'. The choice of Santo Domingo was that of Venables and Penn on reaching the Caribbean, probably as it was less populated and had fewer troops and towns to take than Cuba . Their attack on SD was partly foiled due to poor maps, which left out rivers which they had to ford en route to the main town, partly due to lack of martial spirit and determination from troops and officers alike when they found the town prepared to resist, and partly due to poor weapons and inadequate ammunition sent from GB and less than expected in the hands of the local settlers in Barbados to ad to their supplies.

Section 2 of the Instructions makes it clear that the Design was then to move on from taking a major island to Cartagena on the (modern Colombian) mainland - 'aiming chiefly at Cartagena, the seat of the intended Design (ie its main objective), securing some places by the way thereto that the Spaniards might not be to the windward of us'. The plan was to keep the Spanish troops on the S American mainland from attacking the English, by securing the ports East of Cartagena into modern Venezuela - the Easterly winds meant that a seaward attack would be virtually impossible from the West (ie Central America where most Sp troops and ships were) , but would have to come from the less populated and easier to overrun lands to the East (ie around Caracas). Taking this section of coast would stop this happening . The plan was strategically well thought out, and the official docts which I studied for my doctorate show that it probably came from Cromwell's (ex-Royalist) Barbados planter ally, Colonel Thomas Modyford - later governor of Jamaica in the 1660s - and some other locals with knowledge who were in London in 1654 helping Cromwell. These included one of the Winthrops (Stephen) and some New England captains, who knew the local seas - and probably were starting slaving too around this time. So OC did have 'professional' advice - it was luck, poor leadership and over-confidence that wrecked the plan. But it could have a reasonable chance to take Cuba or Puerto Rico or Hispaniola if it had been larger and luckier. (Cuba also nearly fell in 1762, when the British attacked - but by this date jealous and well-connected W Indies sugar planters probably did not want an English Cuba as a rival and would have asked the govt to hand it back in the next treaty with Spain.)

As a note, the Eng govt also explored setting up a colony in Florida in 1655-8 to intercept Sp treasure galleons en route from Havana to Spain and cripple the Sp supply of money to Europe to run their army there - and OC received a Native American chief in London with this in mind. On of the enthusiasts for this was Secretary Thurloe's merchant adventurer brother in law Martin Noell of the East India Company, another was New Englander Vincent Gookin. Another potential 'What if' had the Protectorate lasted longer?
 
Maybe if it's still heavily pro-slavery during the civil war, and the colonies go "Lincoln might march on Cuba next!" If Britain backs the CSA and the US wins anyway, uh oh!

I'm not convinced we get an US recognizable enough for this to happen?

For example, if the British elites get more involved in the slave trade, they might be more amenable to enfranchising the southern colonial elites they have a lot in common with, while still passing over the northern elites who are betting on new businesses. And the UK's trade policy is likely to remain quite good for the planters' exports for the same reason. You could get a situation where the US south is a lot more ambivalent about revolt and the American revolution is largely a northern affair.
 
Britain was not uninvolved in the slave trade in OTL.

During the time of the Atlantic slave trade, you had around 37% of the slaves going to Portuguese Brazil, around 33% going to the British colonies, (Carolina, Jamaica, Barbados etc) and around 30% going to everyone else (the Danes, the Dutch, the Spanish and the French, of which the big one was French Haiti).

I'm not that convinced a British Hispaniola but no British Jamaica is going to change the numbers that much.

The French are still going to be looking for their own Sugar Island, it might well be Jamaica in this scenario, for that matter.

Obviously the slave trade will be different, but I think fundamentally OTL had the UK heavily involved in slave trading without it dominating their economy so assuming their economics will shift towards it in this scenario is I think not a given.
 
Last edited:
This would have a huge butterfly into the golden age of piracy. Henry Morgan was a soldier in the invasion force. And part of the letters of marques being distributed like candy was because of Jamaica's vulnerable position in a sea of Spanish which wanted to see it captured and lack of direct fleet investment from the British themselves. I don't know enough but that's also something I'd like to see discussed.
 
Britain was not uninvolved in the slave trade in OTL.

During the time of the Atlantic slave trade, you had around 37% of the slaves going to Portuguese Brazil, around 33% going to the British colonies, (Carolina, Jamaica, Barbados etc) and around 30% going to everyone else (the Danes, the Dutch, the Spanish and the French, of which the big one was French Haiti).

I'm not that convinced a British Hispaniola but no British Jamaica is going to change the numbers that much.

The French are still going to be looking for their own Sugar Island, it might well be Jamaica in this scenario, for that matter.

Obviously the slave trade will be different, but I think fundamentally OTL had the UK heavily involved in slave trading without it dominating their economy so assuming their economics will shift towards it in this scenario is I think not a given.

It's true that I might be overestimating the importance of Hispaniola in the slave trade and underestimating Jamaica due to later developments.
 
It's true that I might be overestimating the importance of Hispaniola in the slave trade and underestimating Jamaica due to later developments.

Yeah, like Jamaica was a major slave state for the same reason Saint-Domingue was and for the same reason the Spanish colonies weren't, it was the big colony of that state and that state was willing to put a lot into protecting it. During the seven years war 16 British naval ships were sent to protect Jamaica compared to 19 sent to protect the continental North American colonies.

In 1791, British Jamaica had 300,000 slaves and 15,000 free men whereas French Saint-Domingue had 450,000 slaves and 70,000 free men. The French imported 20,000 new slaves a year into Saint-Domingue and Britain imported 15,000 a year into Jamaica. It's similar numbers.

And both are huge contrasts to the Spanish Greater Antilles or the Continental colonies where Slaves never outnumbered by freemen by anything like that. Most other slave states such as Cuba, Brazil or the Southern USA had more free citizens than slaves or at worse an equal number.

Like it is a change, but it's not a seismic one.
 
Last edited:
Is it more likely to work out for Scotland, at least for a bit, if it's done to Jamaica, or will the cost still be too much?

Doubt it will be any better. It's closer but also there's more Spanish so instead of the scots not being able to build a colony and then the Spanish driving them out, it'll just be the Spanish driving them out.

Things like too many slaves escaping or uncooperative white Spanish population could both make it quite awkward but otherwise it's likely to lead to greater British commitment to the institution.

Which, for the record, is what happened in OTL. The Spanish land owners in Jamaica took to the hills with most of their slaves, creating the Jamaican Maroons of free slaves which the British didn't really conquer until the early 1800s where they ended up being deported to Sierra Leone where they were hugely influential.

The British Army betraying the Maroons after agreeing a peace was one of the radicalising moments of the British abolition movement.

Something like that would be my guess, whichever island the English grab and obviously the bigger the island the tougher the British will find it.
 
Which, for the record, is what happened in OTL. The Spanish land owners in Jamaica took to the hills with most of their slaves, creating the Jamaican Maroons of free slaves why the British didn't really conquer until the early 1800s where they ended up being deported to Sierra Leone where they were hugely influential.

The British Army betraying the Maroons after agreeing a peace was one of the radicalising moments of the British abolition movement.

Something like that would be my guess, whichever Island the English grab and obviously the bigger Island the tougher the British will find it.

Isn't Jamaica's geography a facilitating factor in this, though? I'm not sure it'll be as easy with other islands.
 
Is it more likely to work out for Scotland, at least for a bit, if it's done to Jamaica, or will the cost still be too much?
I think it would be better. The Darién region was about the worst place in the Americas to set up a colony. Even the Spaniards mostly ignored the region. Even today, the region is the Darién Gap in the Pan American Highway.
 
Isn't Jamaica's geography a facilitating factor in this, though? I'm not sure it'll be as easy with other islands.

Hispaniola and Puerto Rico are also pretty mountainous though. Cuba less so, admittedly, but it's also bigger. Like there were also quite a few Haitian Maroon bands in Saint-Domingue who evaded capture for decades.

You're probably right about Puerto Rico, it's too small, I got carried away with that but the other two islands might see the same issues.
 
I gotta say, I'm impressed by the enthusiasm of response for this idea, and the number and depth of responses. Thanks all.
 
Britain was not uninvolved in the slave trade in OTL.

During the time of the Atlantic slave trade, you had around 37% of the slaves going to Portuguese Brazil, around 33% going to the British colonies, (Carolina, Jamaica, Barbados etc) and around 30% going to everyone else (the Danes, the Dutch, the Spanish and the French, of which the big one was French Haiti).

I'm not that convinced a British Hispaniola but no British Jamaica is going to change the numbers that much.

The French are still going to be looking for their own Sugar Island, it might well be Jamaica in this scenario, for that matter.

Obviously the slave trade will be different, but I think fundamentally OTL had the UK heavily involved in slave trading without it dominating their economy so assuming their economics will shift towards it in this scenario is I think not a given.
The total numbers of slaves transported by country can be seen at this chart at .
 
Back
Top