Netherlands keeps South Africa

Status
Not open for further replies.

Darth Nederland

What if the Netherlands kept control of the Cape Colony instead of the British possessing it when the French invaded?
Would it be a less stable or more stable nation today, or would it still be a part of the Netherlands?:)
 

pompejus

Ok, lets assume some kind of POD during the French revolutionairy wars and late Napoleon that causes a modern Netherlands to appear (so modern borders, kingdom, same constitution etc), while keeping the Cape colony. Personaly I think this is possible, although there are many who disagree.

Anyway, major changes:
A smaller Boer Trek. Since one major reason for the Boers to leave was the British occupation of the Cape Colony, I think there will be less of a need for them to leave. Still, since another major reason was overcrowding, I believe we will still see a minor Boer Trek and the areas they settle in will probably become Dutch, instead of an independent country. This means that Dutch South Africa will be a lot smaller than OTL South Africa.

Afrikaans will be the only language spoken by the white and coloured people (as in of mixed heritage) in the Cape colony. Actualy I would even say that they won't speak Afrikaans, but they would speak a Dutch dialect, which would be even closer to Dutch than Afrikaans, since it will have less/no English loanwords).

Britain will still want some kind of halfway station between Europe and India and will probably settle Natal, or else Madagascar.

South Africa will remain a Dutch colony for a while, but it will get a dominionlike status, which will lead to independence later, just like how Australia and Canada will be independent.

Racism in the Cape colony will exist (although apartheid might be butterflied away). Racism existed in all settler colonies towards the native population (see Australia and the aboriginals, America and the Indians and black people). Without Natal, Transvaal, the Oranje Vrijstaat and British settlers the ethnic composition of South Africa will be different though.

Last point, if the Cape colony remains Dutch, I suspect that a large number of immigrants that left the Netherlands for the USA, would go to South Africa instead. The same might be true for some other settlers, especialy protestants. I could see various Germans and Scandinavians choosing South Africa over the USA (although the majority probably would still go to the USA). Although this will depend on the immigration policy of the Netherlands/South Africa.
 

Parma

pompejus said:
Ok, lets assume some kind of POD during the French revolutionairy wars and late Napoleon that causes a modern Netherlands to appear (so modern borders, kingdom, same constitution etc), while keeping the Cape colony. Personaly I think this is possible, although there are many who disagree.

Anyway, major changes:
A smaller Boer Trek. Since one major reason for the Boers to leave was the British occupation of the Cape Colony, I think there will be less of a need for them to leave. Still, since another major reason was overcrowding, I believe we will still see a minor Boer Trek and the areas they settle in will probably become Dutch, instead of an independent country. This means that Dutch South Africa will be a lot smaller than OTL South Africa.

Afrikaans will be the only language spoken by the white and coloured people (as in of mixed heritage) in the Cape colony. Actualy I would even say that they won't speak Afrikaans, but they would speak a Dutch dialect, which would be even closer to Dutch than Afrikaans, since it will have less/no English loanwords).

Britain will still want some kind of halfway station between Europe and India and will probably settle Natal, or else Madagascar.

South Africa will remain a Dutch colony for a while, but it will get a dominionlike status, which will lead to independence later, just like how Australia and Canada will be independent.

Racism in the Cape colony will exist (although apartheid might be butterflied away). Racism existed in all settler colonies towards the native population (see Australia and the aboriginals, America and the Indians and black people). Without Natal, Transvaal, the Oranje Vrijstaat and British settlers the ethnic composition of South Africa will be different though.

Last point, if the Cape colony remains Dutch, I suspect that a large number of immigrants that left the Netherlands for the USA, would go to South Africa instead. The same might be true for some other settlers, especialy protestants. I could see various Germans and Scandinavians choosing South Africa over the USA (although the majority probably would still go to the USA). Although this will depend on the immigration policy of the Netherlands/South Africa.
Click to expand...

Add to this probably some wars with the Xhosa in the first half of the 19th century ending up in 'pacified' Xhosa and their lands annexed.
On top of this, slavery will remain legal until 1870(?) as in OTL Dutch Colonies, which remove also a trigger for the Great Trek. How ever there could be a Trek of some kind of "bitter einders' who think the colonial government having too much influence on their way of living.
 

dovibear

pompejus said:
Ok, lets assume some kind of POD during the French revolutionairy wars and late Napoleon that causes a modern Netherlands to appear (so modern borders, kingdom, same constitution etc), while keeping the Cape colony. Personaly I think this is possible, although there are many who disagree.

Anyway, major changes:
A smaller Boer Trek. Since one major reason for the Boers to leave was the British occupation of the Cape Colony, I think there will be less of a need for them to leave. Still, since another major reason was overcrowding, I believe we will still see a minor Boer Trek and the areas they settle in will probably become Dutch, instead of an independent country. This means that Dutch South Africa will be a lot smaller than OTL South Africa.

Afrikaans will be the only language spoken by the white and coloured people (as in of mixed heritage) in the Cape colony. Actualy I would even say that they won't speak Afrikaans, but they would speak a Dutch dialect, which would be even closer to Dutch than Afrikaans, since it will have less/no English loanwords).

Britain will still want some kind of halfway station between Europe and India and will probably settle Natal, or else Madagascar.

South Africa will remain a Dutch colony for a while, but it will get a dominionlike status, which will lead to independence later, just like how Australia and Canada will be independent.

Racism in the Cape colony will exist (although apartheid might be butterflied away). Racism existed in all settler colonies towards the native population (see Australia and the aboriginals, America and the Indians and black people). Without Natal, Transvaal, the Oranje Vrijstaat and British settlers the ethnic composition of South Africa will be different though.

Last point, if the Cape colony remains Dutch, I suspect that a large number of immigrants that left the Netherlands for the USA, would go to South Africa instead. The same might be true for some other settlers, especialy protestants. I could see various Germans and Scandinavians choosing South Africa over the USA (although the majority probably would still go to the USA). Although this will depend on the immigration policy of the Netherlands/South Africa.
Click to expand...

I guess that the mineral discoveries at least in the Rand (and maybe also in Kimberley) would have been made by the British with their base in Natal, and the British would have expanded control over OTL Transvaal and Orange Free State without the Afrikaners being there first? It might just be that at least most of the OTL Cape Colony would be the Dutch equivalent of a dominion and the rest of OTL South Africa would be a British dominion and what not. In other words, a Dutch west and a British east.
 

pompejus

Parma said:
Add to this probably some wars with the Xhosa in the first half of the 19th century ending up in 'pacified' Xhosa and their lands annexed.
On top of this, slavery will remain legal until 1870(?) as in OTL Dutch Colonies, which remove also a trigger for the Great Trek. How ever there could be a Trek of some kind of "bitter einders' who think the colonial government having too much influence on their way of living.
Click to expand...
I could see that because of South African influence slavery could persist in the Netherlands longer than OTL and the Netherlands was one of the last countries to abolish slavery. To be fair, I know little about slavery in the Cape Colony and South Africa. The VOC practiced a lot less slavery than the WIC (assuming you don't call forced labour by the natives, while not technicaly owning them, slavery). I even read somewhere that many or most of the trek boers didn't practice slavery, generaly being too poor for it.

Anyway, I am uncertain about Dutch expansion in South Africa. The problem is that the Netherlands is only a small country that can easily outstrecht itself and that expansion in Indonesia is more profitable and more useful to the Dutch. How far can the inhabitants of the Cape colony itself expand without Dutch help? Would they be able to defeat the Xhosa alone? Maybe the nearby English will help them and devide the territory (taking most and the best lands for themselves of course)? Or the English could be preemptively annex it, before the Dutch can do anything about it.

dovibear said:
I guess that the mineral discoveries at least in the Rand (and maybe also in Kimberley) would have been made by the British with their base in Natal, and the British would have expanded control over OTL Transvaal and Orange Free State without the Afrikaners being there first? It might just be that at least most of the OTL Cape Colony would be the Dutch equivalent of a dominion and the rest of OTL South Africa would be a British dominion and what not. In other words, a Dutch west and a British east.
Click to expand...
I certainly consider that possible.
 
Julius Vogel

Julius Vogel

There has to be some sort of Trek like happening I think. Not because Boers like to trek, more just that people want land and to get more land, they have to progressively enroach on others. I suspect also, whilst a Dutch owned Cape might be more sympathetic to Boer interests, the government of the Netherlands will pressure the Cape to follow its lead (so abolition, liberalism etc, as these things arise, if they do). Farmers often tend to be more conservative and they may not like these things and combine that with land lust, I think we'll see expansion.

I wonder whether or not migration will be much different if the Dutch run things? IIRC there was not a lot of migration outside of the 5000 or so British. Now they likely will not come, but will there be alternatives?
 

pompejus

Julius Vogel said:
There has to be some sort of Trek like happening I think. Not because Boers like to trek, more just that people want land and to get more land, they have to progressively enroach on others. I suspect also, whilst a Dutch owned Cape might be more sympathetic to Boer interests, the government of the Netherlands will pressure the Cape to follow its lead (so abolition, liberalism etc, as these things arise, if they do). Farmers often tend to be more conservative and they may not like these things and combine that with land lust, I think we'll see expansion.

I wonder whether or not migration will be much different if the Dutch run things? IIRC there was not a lot of migration outside of the 5000 or so British. Now they likely will not come, but will there be alternatives?
Click to expand...
The Boer Trek was mainly, but certainly not solely, a reaction of the "Dutch" Boers against impopulair British influences. So I believe that there probably will some sort of Trek, but it will be on a much smaller scale and it will be more or less in cooperation with the Dutch government. Kind of like the trek west by the Americans.

Also it wouldn't surprise me if they were blocked at some point by British expansion from natal, especialy of gold or diamonds are found.
 
Opunium

Opunium

Julius Vogel said:
I wonder whether or not migration will be much different if the Dutch run things? IIRC there was not a lot of migration outside of the 5000 or so British. Now they likely will not come, but will there be alternatives?
Click to expand...

I think immigration policy would be different. The Dutch had a small populaion and historically a lot of the 'Dutch' immigrants came from Germany (To OTL cape colony and the New Netherlands for example). If the Dutch want control of the Cape Colony they will need people... Attracting poor famers in Europe to go and farm in South Africa wont be that difficult if you can encourage them to come. Maybe they can even ship the rebelling Walloons off to SA.
 
Julius Vogel

Julius Vogel

pompejus said:
The Boer Trek was mainly, but certainly not solely, a reaction of the "Dutch" Boers against impopulair British influences. So I believe that there probably will some sort of Trek, but it will be on a much smaller scale and it will be more or less in cooperation with the Dutch government. Kind of like the trek west by the Americans.

Also it wouldn't surprise me if they were blocked at some point by British expansion from natal, especialy of gold or diamonds are found.
Click to expand...

Hmm, sure, but the immigration would happen in any event. Maybe not a trek, but something. People push out for land, then call for help (military, money, settlers etc) from the metropole.

This is the story of NZ, Australian, American and Canadian settlement anyway. I believe it was true for South Africa too, alongside the treks.
 

Parma

A certain form of 'Trek' will happen, due to various reasons as mentioned above.
This could influence, foreign relations of the Netherlands, and not necessarily to the good.
On the other hand , government will have little or no influence on this trek' of individuals or groups. Over stretch will not occur, wars of empire where fought on the cheap and by the time this wars erupted, 2nd half of the 19th century, the organisational skill and technological advancement of the Europeans/North Americans out classed nearly every other people on the globe which means , relative small number of men could 'pacify' large amount of land and populations. As happen in OTL colonialism.
Things could be tricky for a small country as the Netherlands if their interest will cross the national interest of one of the Great Powers.
But again in case of a larger Dutch Cape colony, with enlargements into OTL Transvaal, the Dutch/Cape originated population base will also prevent an assault on a Dutch Cape colony since it will be regarded as an attack on European country and will not taken lightly in diplomatic circles as did the OTL Boer wars.
 

Parma

Opunium said:
I think immigration policy would be different. The Dutch had a small populaion and historically a lot of the 'Dutch' immigrants came from Germany (To OTL cape colony and the New Netherlands for example). If the Dutch want control of the Cape Colony they will need people... Attracting poor famers in Europe to go and farm in South Africa wont be that difficult if you can encourage them to come. Maybe they can even ship the rebelling Walloons off to SA.
Click to expand...

You do not need a large population form the 'motherland' OTL Boer Republics were founded by a surprising low number of people.
Most of the Cape colony population were descendants of barely 1000 to 2000 soles which arrived over decades.
In the 19th century population growth will be faster due to immigration, and there will be more reason to leave the Netherlands since 19th century Netherlands was a country suffering from economic stagnation, economic crises and in some area's even hunger but despite this the population increased.
 

wietze

pompejus said:
I could see that because of South African influence slavery could persist in the Netherlands longer than OTL and the Netherlands was one of the last countries to abolish slavery. To be fair, I know little about slavery in the Cape Colony and South Africa. The VOC practiced a lot less slavery than the WIC (assuming you don't call forced labour by the natives, while not technicaly owning them, slavery). I even read somewhere that many or most of the trek boers didn't practice slavery, generaly being too poor for it.
Click to expand...

and not to forget that slavery in VOC territory is not like chattel slavery, the VOC (since dutch law it used was based on roman law) implemented all the same laws regarding protection of slaves as the romans did, plus a few extra to restrict it. and the slavery that existed was mostly limited to owning a few slaves(with exeption as usual), because they were too valuable. forced labour was used by everyone in that era the french called it the corvee system. slavery was more because of labour shortage, so with enough immigration the necessity of it might go away.

Parma said:
You do not need a large population form the 'motherland' OTL Boer Republics were founded by a surprising low number of people.
Most of the Cape colony population were descendants of barely 1000 to 2000 soles which arrived over decades.
Click to expand...


[grammar nazi mode] i take it you mean Souls
 

pompejus

Dave Howery said:
Why was that? At what time did they finally abolish it?
Click to expand...

They abolished it in 1863* **, one of the last countries in Europe (and after the USA). Why? Money I suppose and because the Netherlands was a backwards country in which changes took a long time to happen.

*well 1863, slaves were still forced to work in the plantations for 10 years after slavery was abolished, but they weren't slaves anymore, sort of.
** oh and slavery in the Dutch East Indies in the local ruled areas was abolished even later. 20th century I believe
 

Dave Howery

pompejus said:
They abolished it in 1863, one of the last countries in Europe (and after the USA). Why? Money I suppose and because the Netherlands was a backwards country in which changes took a long time to happen.
Click to expand...

money? Did they have sugar plantations in the Caribbean or something like that?

edit: Nevermind, read your post further, explains it well
 

dovibear

I mentioned earlier about a Dutch equivalent of a dominion for the Cape Colony, but another possibility could be a successful Cape Colony rebellion for independence not unlike the American Revolution or the Latin American revolutions. The thing is that in the late 1700s, there were a couple of short-lived republics on the fringes of the Cape Colony (i.e. Graaff-Reinet and Swellendam) that were the result of rebellions of Cape Town-based VOC rule.
 

Viriato

Dutch South Africa's greatest source of wealth was cattle farming. The economy was essentially pastoral and the Trek Boers had greatly expanded the colony's size due to their ever expanding need for new land to graze on. By 1754 the colony's Eastern Boundaries had reached Algoa Bay, and by 1801 the first settlements north of the Orange River had commenced.

As for a successful rebellion against Dutch rule, that depends on the circumstances. VOC rule was harsh, but for the most part the Boers welcomed the reinstatement of Dutch rule in 1803. Direct rule by the Dutch government proved to be far more liberal and accommodating to the settler's needs.

Without British rule, the Trek Boers are going to continue to expand their grazing lands, especially into the more fertile areas of the East (Free State and Ntal). Without Cape Colony, the British will most likely not establish a settlement at Durban. So this area can easily become Dutch by the mid-19th century.

During the 19th and early 20th centuries, the Dutch put down rebellions and extended their control over large areas of Indonesia. So, I can see them doing the same in Southern Africa. They would have to pacify the Xhosa and the Zulu, but most likely with the assistance of the colonists.

To the North, the Portuguese had been claiming the territory between Angola and Mozambique. In OTL, the Portuguese and South African Republic agreed on the border in 1869, and it is possible that if the trekkers go along the same routes they did in OTL, that the Portuguese may be able to secure their "Pink Map" colony (Angola, Mozambique combined with present-day Zimbabwe, Zambia and Malawi).

As for immigration, there would probably be more Dutch immigration especially during the 1875-1970 period. However, this would probably be limited to no more than 5,000 per year during peak years, as peak emigration from the Netherlands to the U.S. was 52,715 during 1880-89 period. However, this could be enough to raise the Dutch population to 1 million by 1900 (due to a high birthrate).

By the 1870s, the Boers had begun settling in present-day Namibia and reached as far north as Otavi, Tsumeb and Grootfonetin. So, perhaps the Dutch could preemptively take over most of present-day Namibia and Botswana (for cattle grazing). However, the Portuguese claimed Cape Fria as the Southern Boundary of Angola, and only moved it to the Kunene River in 1886 in return for the German recognition over Portuguese rule of central Africa. In OTL that would not be needed, and in essence it would leave today's Namibia an area with very few native Africans since 3/4 of the Africans lived in this Northern Strip of Namibia.

Finally, I assume that some sort of self-rule would be granted by the 19th century, perhaps no outright independence, but becoming a part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Also, the cultural divergence between South Africa and the Netherlands won't be so great as it was. Standard Dutch remains the language of instruction as it was until 1925, and fewer loan words from English are used. However, South African Dutch could be akin to American English or Brazilian Portuguese. Continued Dutch immigration, even in small numbers will have an impact in keeping the cultures closer together too.

Gold was discovered during the 1870s by the Boers, so I'm assuming a gold rush would still ensue. This could be the moment that attracts the most new immigrants from the Netherlands. Historically this was the beginning of greater Dutch emigration. In OTL, this led to British merchants setting up shop in South Africa and the British dominating the cities and towns. However, unlike in OTL, I imagine a Dutch South Africa being overwhelmingly rural with little heavy industry or large commerce. In OTL the urban economy in South Africa was overwhelmingly controlled by English-speaking whites, without them you would have a different sort of economy.
 

pompejus

I believe that the biggest disagreement is about the Boer Trek. Some believe it will happen just like OTL, while others (me) believe it won't. So let me restate why I think that the Boer Trek will be not as large as OTL.

The main reason for the Boer Trek was that they were unhappy about the way the British ruled the Cape Colony. They were unhappy about the new British settlers and the Anglicisation attempts and finaly abolition of Slavery. These things will not be an issue when the Dutch take over the colony.

Another major reason was overcrowding, partly because of new migrations. Since the Netherlands is a lot smaller than Britain, there will be a lot less imigrants from the Netherlands, so there will be less overcrowding.

In short, there will be less incentive for the Boers to leave. Still there are some other reasons for the Boers to leave, but since they don't wish to split themselves of from the Dutch government, they won't go as far as OTL and won't create new lands.

In short, the Boer Trek will be smaller and more contained, keeping closer to the Cape.

Also, the British still want a halfway colony between Britain and India, so it is likely they build one at Natal. This will limit any Trek Boers too. Especialy since the British have more resources to explore and expand into Southern Africa. The moment someone finds gold or diamonds the British will try to get them for themselves.

Basicly I believe that Transvaal and Natal will end up British and there is a good chance a part of the Eastern Cape and the Free State will end up British too. So South Africa will be split with a western Dutch colony and an Eastern British colony.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top