AHC, make the Netherlands a major power for longer.

The Netherlands had been a massive naval and economic power during the sixteen and seventeen hundreds before declining rapidly into the minor power position.
But what would be required for the Netherlands to remain a major power for longer than OTL?
 
The Netherlands had been a massive naval and economic power during the sixteen and seventeen hundreds before declining rapidly into the minor power position.
But what would be required for the Netherlands to remain a major power for longer than OTL?

Taking the rest of the Low Countries would help a great deal as it would turn the country into an industrial powerhouse with all the Belgian coal mixed with Dutch capitalists. Money + coal = industry and it could help the expanded Netherlands become an economic centre not just because of their colonial goods.

You could also have the Netherlands win a few more wars against the English and see them lose less colonies. If they keep South Africa and the New Netherlands they will be a globe spanning empire rather than just resigned to their core in Europe, a few Caribbean Islands, and Indonesia. Instead they could additionally have Ceylon, Taiwan, Rhode Island to Maryland, and a few other scattered colonies across the world that would make them spread out and less reliant on port access from other nations.
 
I think that if they had held on to Belgium it would have made the Netherlands a more important power. They would have had access to Belgium's coalfields, giving it a better industrial economical basis. Perhaps if the Netherlands had acquired the Austrian Netherlands (future Belgium) in the 1600s or 1700s they would be more integrated with the rest of the Netherlands, so they wouldn't rebel. This could make the Netherlands a major European power. If they had kept more of their colonial empire- New Netherlands, Cape Colony, Dutch India, maybe even Dutch Brazil- they could have been a world power.
 
It'd require more drastic measures than 'avoiding decline'. The Netherlands was already punching way above its weight in the 17th century, and already by the 18th it was clear that it simply lacked the size to compete for great powers status directly.

Take the Glorious Revolution and its aftermath; what's often forgotten is that part of why William won so easily is that he brought a gigantic army with him in an invasion the size of which Europe hadn't ever seen before; else the King might've just as well rallied his armies against parliament; it was very much a singular event that was a culmination of years of preparations, all part of a plan to weaken the position of France in Europe. However, decades later during the War of the Spanish Succession, the Dutch standing army was at it's largest and still couldn't effectively wage war with France, and it ruined the treasury. Much the same but worse for the Austrian Succession, and in both cases only strong British supported prevented total collapse.

This all might have been avoided with a strong central figure to manage affairs (since the regents tended to neglect the armed forces), but avoiding the Second Stadholdterless Period comes with its own problems, and it still would be almost miraculous. The Netherlands needs to be much bigger, much more politically stable decades earlier for a continued Golden Age.
 
True.

And for union with Belgium to work, you need no religious divide.
And for that, you'd need to go back all the way to the Dutch Revolt (or make Frederick Henry an even better general), and there's where it gets tricky. William the Silent was himself a very religiously tolerant person (almost the stereotypical politique), but many of the people in his coalition (especially the urban middles class) were extreme Calvinists, and William had to tolerate them or lose out on their support.

It was only in the early 1580's that the idea of making William the Silent the actual undisputed ruler of the country (which wasn't a Republic yet, just states unified under the Union of Utrecht) was brought up mostly out of desperation, and William was assassinated before that could happen. The States of Holland were literally about the make him Count. It almost happened to his descendants as well a few times (William III had to practically refuse the Dukedom of Gelre in 1672), so having the House of Orange be in power directly could be a way out for a somewhat more centralised, militaristic/expansionist* Netherlands.

*Not to say that William the Silent wanted to conquer the world, it's just that as a 'Burgundian' noble raised at the Brussels court, he believed very strongly in a unitary Netherlands, including the South and if possible even the Walloon regions. Of course, this being the 16th century, there couldn't have been more than a hundred people, all high nobles or administrators, who shared that goal.
 
This came up in the Greater French Kingdom? thread a few days ago. I think their best chance may have been to keep the alliance with France, which could have potentially allowed them to concentrate on their navy, instead of being forced to spend large sums on their army as well.
 
This came up in the Greater French Kingdom? thread a few days ago. I think their best chance may have been to keep the alliance with France, which could have potentially allowed them to concentrate on their navy, instead of being forced to spend large sums on their army as well.

Thanks for the link I had not really considered a continues alliance with France but I can certainly see advantages to it.Maybe the Spanish Netherlands is partitioned between France and the Netherlands based on language and then later the Dutch could take the French speaking Wallonia during a later war?
 
Thanks for the link I had not really considered a continues alliance with France but I can certainly see advantages to it.Maybe the Spanish Netherlands is partitioned between France and the Netherlands based on language and then later the Dutch could take the French speaking Wallonia during a later war?

Conquering Wallonia might be tricky, since it would probably mean war with France. It might perhaps be easier to expand eastward into parts of the Empire. But I think their primary focus should be overseas and maintaining their naval supremacy.
 
Conquering Wallonia might be tricky, since it would probably mean war with France. It might perhaps be easier to expand eastward into parts of the Empire. But I think their primary focus should be overseas and maintaining their naval supremacy.

Yes but if they managed to get Wallonia they would have access to coal veins which would come in handy after the 1840`s.
 
Top