Alt colonies in In the Name of the King!

OK, I'm pretty poor at this period which is why I'm asking for help. The era we're dealing with is the period 1776 to 1836. The American Revolution never happened and other stuff did. Look at the TL to see what. My issue is where empires would have gone from there. I already have some ideas, from French Australia, to Dutch Vietnam to Russian Hawaii. But I have no idea whether these make sense, or when they will be established. And Africa is a dead space currently, with only Dutch South Africa and Pink Map
 
Possible different Dutch colonies in that area are:
Dutch Ceylon, as it had been (partly) Dutch before 1815.
Dutch Cape colony (as you mentioned)
Dutch Ghana, as the Dutch had various trading posts in Ghana, before selling it to Britain.
Dutch Malaysia, in those days the Dutch controlled Malacca, but sold it to Britain in th early 19th century.
Dutch India, the Dutch had various trading posts in India (even more without the 4th Anglo-Dutch war), they could keep them, or possibly exchange them for the Benkulu (a British colony on Sumatra) and Penang. Certainly possible if you butterfly away Singapore.

Other ideas are a Danish Ghana. They too had outposts on the goldcoast they sold to Britain. Maybe they keep it and buy the British and Dutch outposts there (or exchange them for Danish India).

With a Dutch Cape colony, it seems likely that the British want some halfway station in southern Africa, so maybe a British Natal or British madagaskar.
 
If the American colonies are still part of the British Empire, there's no need for transportation to a place as remote as Australia. It's plausible that the British might have let France have the place. (In which case, it would probably be called Perousia or Pérousie, after La Pérouse. The fact that Cook actually saw the place first would be a historical footnote.)
 
If the American colonies are still part of the British Empire, there's no need for transportation to a place as remote as Australia. It's plausible that the British might have let France have the place. (In which case, it would probably be called Perousia or Pérousie, after La Pérouse. The fact that Cook actually saw the place first would be a historical footnote.)

He didn't actually see the place first, that lies with a Dutchman.
 
Other things I forgot:
No British Guyana, as that was Dutch in those days.

Possibly a Portuguese Congo, which seems the most likely option, certainly if the Portuguese manage to connect Angola and Mozambique.
 
French Brazil isn't going to happen. I like the suggestions for Africa and Asia, but I want dates. I am planning an Anglo-Dutch Great Game in East Asia, which will leave the Mughals relatively intact. Other plans is a Hispanian Algeria/North Africa. I'm hoping to create a triangle of mixed Hispanian identity, mixing Southern Italian, Spanish and Moorish/Algerian. I wanted countries like Britain and France to have smaller territories in this world.
 
In sub-Saharan Africa almost anything is possible; it's first come, first served.

Most of the Americas are already spoken for, so changes are likely to be brought about by purchase or seizure. The same is true to a lesser extent in India, China, and East Asia.

Australia, New Zealand, and Tasmania are blank pages; nobody is really interested in them yet. Anything is possible there.

In this era colonies are being established either to trade with the natives, to exploit some natural resource(s), or both; the nationalistic dick-waving claiming-a-worthless-piece-of-dirt-just-because-the-neighbors-have-one attitude isn't until the latter half of the nineteenth century. So if a nation grabs a piece of territory it expects to profit by that; otherwise it won't bother.

To butterfly away the American Revolution requires more sensible attitudes on both sides of the Atlantic; less arrogance on the British side, less intransigence on the colonial side. Good luck with that, as Spongebob would say.
 
Top