A better Dutch result at the treaty of Utrecht

As you all know, at least if you live in Utrecht as I do )it is everywhere', it has been 300 years sice the treaty of Utrecht was signed. The treaty of Utrecht ended the Spanish war of succession. Sea links if you are completely ignorant of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Utrecht
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Spanish_Succession

Anyway, one thing about the treaty is said: the only part of the Dutch republic that profitted from the treay was the city of Utrecht, as the representatives of the negotiating nations spend a lot of money in Utrecht, improving the local economy. The rest of the republic benefitted less, as in the treaty the Netherlands basicly only got Venlo. See map:

http://www.geneaknowhow.net/regel/kaarten/kaart1580-1794-overkw-gelder.htm

So is it possible for the Dutch republic to get more out of the negotiations?

To be fair, I doubt the Netherlands would be able to get all of the Southern Netherlands, but is it possible for the Netherlands to get for example at least part of the Southern Netherlands like all of Overmaas (Southern Limburg) (see http://www.hoeckmann.de/deutschland/limburgkarte.htm), or OTL Austrian Gelre/overkwartier, maybe even part of Prussian overkwartier? Could the netherlands gain part of Brabant? I think Antwerpen is going to far, but maybe Turnhout? Part of Flanders (Ghent, Ostend and Bruges probably going to far) thus strengthening Zeelandic Flanders.

Are there any colonies the Dutch could gain (my gutfeeling says no btw)?

So any ideas?
 
The Austrians did have ambitions to push back the French from Franche-Comté, Alsace & Artois, because they saw French expansion as a threat (because, obviously, it was a threat). The problem was that the British got what they wanted (gained Acadia & Saint Kitts, and French recognition of British sovereignty over Rupert's Land and Newfoundland) - so they pushed to have all France's earlier conquests guaranteed. If the Austrians can somehow get their way, and strip France of Artois, Alsace, and possibly even Franche-Comté, there will be fears that this upsets the balance. And in such a scenario, one could imagine considerable parts of the southern Netherlands going to the Dutch Republic (all of Brabant if the Austrians get Artois and Alsace, all of Flanders as well if the Austrians also get Franche-Comté).

Without such a scenario, however, I don't really see anyone being interested in giving more land to the Dutch. No-one had a real reason to do so. What you need is a reason for the British to support the Austrian claims on Artois, Alsace and Franche-Comté. Without that, the Dutch could, by sheer luck, end up with a few extra square miles and one or two extra forts in the southern Netherlands, but that's it, really.

EDIT: I only just noticed that, in a wave of absentmindedness, I consistently wrote "Lorraine", where I obviously meant to write "Franche-Comté" - since Lorraine was only annexed to France later on.
 
Last edited:
So what you are saying is that the Netherlands would not be able to get all of Brabant or Flanders, except if the Austrians would get Artois, Franche-Compte or other parts of France. That seems reasonable. Still I think that even without those the Dutch republic got realy shafted. It just got Venlo and a coupleof villages near it.

My suggestion is that the Dutch republic gets all of Austrian Gueldres (mainly Roermond and Weert), all of Austrian Overmaas (everything not coloured orange or white in the map I added. The border of Brabant is moved sllightly south, including Turnhout, but not including Antwerp and the border in Dutch Flanders is moved slightly south, including Knokke and Sint Niklaas, but not any of the major cities, like Ostend, Ghent or Bruges.

1600.png
 
I agree, the Dutch Republic did get shafted. Your proposal of a modestly better outcome for the Dutch is quite realistic. The real problem is that none of the other parties felt they had to give the Dutch anything more than they did... so they left it at the OTL pittance. The tiniest butterfly could make a difference here. A single good meal shared between some Dutch and Austrian notables in Utrecht could make for a good rapport during the negotiations, and sway the whole thing slightly more in favour of the Dutch - resulting in your proposal above. Sometimes it can be that simple.

If you want to get ambitious, and really make it a good deal for the Dutch, I think my idea could work out. But that requires a lot more changes. Perhaps there are other ways that I've completely overlooked. Who knows?
 
I agree, the Dutch Republic did get shafted. Your proposal of a modestly better outcome for the Dutch is quite realistic. The real problem is that none of the other parties felt they had to give the Dutch anything more than they did... so they left it at the OTL pittance. The tiniest butterfly could make a difference here. A single good meal shared between some Dutch and Austrian notables in Utrecht could make for a good rapport during the negotiations, and sway the whole thing slightly more in favour of the Dutch - resulting in your proposal above. Sometimes it can be that simple.

If you want to get ambitious, and really make it a good deal for the Dutch, I think my idea could work out. But that requires a lot more changes. Perhaps there are other ways that I've completely overlooked. Who knows?

Your idea included exchanging the Franche-Compte for Flanders. I can't realy see that happen, as, I think, coastal Flanders would be worth more than landlocked Franch-Compte. So Austria probably needs more (or has to lose less), Austrian Dunkirk for starters.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
I agree, the Dutch Republic did get shafted. Your proposal of a modestly better outcome for the Dutch is quite realistic. The real problem is that none of the other parties felt they had to give the Dutch anything more than they did... so they left it at the OTL pittance. The tiniest butterfly could make a difference here. A single good meal shared between some Dutch and Austrian notables in Utrecht could make for a good rapport during the negotiations, and sway the whole thing slightly more in favour of the Dutch - resulting in your proposal above. Sometimes it can be that simple.

If you want to get ambitious, and really make it a good deal for the Dutch, I think my idea could work out. But that requires a lot more changes. Perhaps there are other ways that I've completely overlooked. Who knows?

The problem is not better relations with the allies certainly not with Austria. Austria never signed the Treaty of Utrecht instead they fought on alone and concluded a separate peace with France at Rastatt that basically confirmed Utrecht because fighting France alone was insane and they had no leverage to get a better deal.

The real reason the Dutch got so little was because the British prenegotiated with France and de facto cut a deal for a separate peace leaving her allies hanging. If the Dutch hadn't been so recalcitrant earlier in the war when negotiations broke down in Gertruydensberg they could have had a more favorable peace worked out with British and Austrian support. Instead they demanded too much thinking that Britain would go to the mat to kick the Bourbons out of Spain and ensure a better barrier in the north but politics shifted in London and that didn't happen.

I would also think that the Dutch would benefit more from the commercial concessions Britain got from Spain in the Americas than bits of the southern Netherlands but that's a different discussion.
 
Your idea included exchanging the Franche-Compte for Flanders. I can't realy see that happen, as, I think, coastal Flanders would be worth more than landlocked Franch-Compte. So Austria probably needs more (or has to lose less), Austrian Dunkirk for starters.

Good point.

The problem is not better relations with the allies certainly not with Austria. Austria never signed the Treaty of Utrecht instead they fought on alone and concluded a separate peace with France at Rastatt that basically confirmed Utrecht because fighting France alone was insane and they had no leverage to get a better deal.

The real reason the Dutch got so little was because the British prenegotiated with France and de facto cut a deal for a separate peace leaving her allies hanging.

Oh, but I agree with this. My whole point is that you need to prevent the British and the French coming to an agreement. If you can prevent that, you can keep the British and the Austrians united in a desire to strip some territory from France, and then you can argue that giving those territories to the Austrians would make them too powerful - which leads to certain parts of the southern Netherlands going to the Dutch Republic instead.

Of course, if a POD that prevents negotiations breaking down in Gertruydensberg is acceptable to pompejus, that might be a much better way of handling it. I'm all for it.
 

katchen

Banned
I can think of a number of possibilities. The basic outline of the Treaty of Utrecht remains the same, but while the French leave Spain, they retain Catalonia to Barcelona, Guizpocoa and possibly Asturias. The Portuguese get Galicia, which is linguistically very different from Spain.
In return, France yields Artois and Franche-Comte to Austria giving the HRE a conduit directly to the English Channel. And the Dutch get Dutch Flanders to Oostende including the Dutch half of Brabant and Liege. This will serve them well in weaving and manufacturing and later on, in industry.
While France, besides recognizing British claims to Rupert's Land, yields Nouvelle France east of the Wabash River and Lake Michigan and north of the Tennessee River and east of theTombigbee River to the border of West Florida to the British. Leaving the Mississippi Valley to be Nouvelle France and accessed from the new city of Nouvelle Orleans. Whose colony is augumented by Tejas north and east of the Rio Grnde and the Pecos River.
While the Dutch gain East and West Florida, being in the best position of all of the victorious powers to colonize and exploit the Floridas because of their superior knowledge of reclaiming farmland out of swampland.
France lost the war and is therefore a net loser, but is in a position to recoup it's losses, especially in the New World and will no longer be in immediate conflict with the British, but now in a position to move into the virgin fur trading grounds of Louisiana. The British don't want new sugar land, so they wouldn't want Florida, but Quebec makes a good colony for them. And the Netherlands, which does want sugar to the point it goes halfway around the world to get it from Java, can produce a lot of sugar, rice, indigo and many other commodities in Florida once it starts reclaiming land.
 
Top