Belgian revolt averted, implications on 19th century events

aenigma

Banned
Kick
rasism is becoming a very hollow concept if people abuse it everytime somebody says something bad about certain groups or says something that isnt political correct

as for brussels i just say it how it is
and brussels is viewed as a dirty, dangerous and unpleasent city in general from a flemish point of view
the only city with a worse rep in belgium asfar as i know is charleroi widely viewed as a gangstercity

in my opinion if the dutch remained united then brussels would look more like ghent or antwerp today and majority of the walloons would slowly become flemish/dutch or bilingual and i suspect we would have fewer flemish that are able to speak both languages
in te present day its reverse brussels and walloons are mostly only french speaking and dutch often capable of both (or 3 with english)
 
A crude map of The United Kingdom of the Netherlands around 1868. After the German Unification war with Austria. And after pursuing a risk policy to acquire a part of the Kingdom of Han over. Let assume this is achieved by, Dutch politicians and of Protestant origin who tried to increase the Calvinist population.
1867.gif
 
It does not matter where the first rail way is being build. No doubt the first will be build by Cockerill in the first half of the 1830-ties. After the first line no doubt that in the next decades the largest cities from North to South and from West to East are connected by private owned railway companies with some of them State participation (as was done in OTL Netherlands. In OTL Belgium most lines were funded by the State as mentioned in post from Lord Kalvan)
 
The United Netherlands would have a large effect of the Balance of Power in North west Europe during the 2nd half of the 19th century. It would be a mid sized country with a population smaller than the Great Powers as France, Prussia and UK, but heavily industrialized and with a large, and gradually increasing overseas Empire. ( Which is larger than that of France pre- 1870 and for Prussia non existent)
If the United Netherlands decide to build a fleet in being to protect it's overseas possessions and trade then it could have relative large leverage in the Balance of Power between the Great Powers.
 
I don't see Bismarck allowing the Dutch annex German territory, that would harm his position with the nationalists.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
rasism is becoming a very hollow concept if people abuse it everytime somebody says something bad about certain groups or says something that isnt political correct

as for brussels i just say it how it is
and brussels is viewed as a dirty, dangerous and unpleasent city in general from a flemish point of view
the only city with a worse rep in belgium asfar as i know is charleroi widely viewed as a gangstercity

in my opinion if the dutch remained united then brussels would look more like ghent or antwerp today and majority of the walloons would slowly become flemish/dutch or bilingual and i suspect we would have fewer flemish that are able to speak both languages
in te present day its reverse brussels and walloons are mostly only french speaking and dutch often capable of both (or 3 with english)
Racism/bigotry is anything but a hollow concept. Unfortunate you chose to ignore good advice

Take some time, make it a week, to look it up and do some quality research on the issue.

See ya in 7.
 
I don't see Bismarck allowing the Dutch annex German territory, that would harm his position with the nationalists.
Not German territory, but there's a bunch of territories (Lingen, Bentheim, the rest of Gelre, Luxemburg) that are of dubious Germanness that I could almost see being shifted to the Netherlands, if they really wanted to, without German nationalists caring too much; they might even think it ties the Netherlands, controlling a large chunk of the land to the Maas claimed in the Lied der Deutschen, closer to Germany - though realistically that's never going anywhere (neat timelines where the Dutch join a uniting Germany are fun and all, but on that point IMO unrealistic).
 
Thoughts about this:

The area they got from Germany today are home to almost 1 million people, not many but a significant group. My guess are that the population are something like 1/3 Reformed, 1/3 Catholic and 1/3 Lutheran. Of course the Lutherans will aligned with the Dutch Calvinists. It will likely join Netherlands as two provinces the Lutheran majority East Frisia and the Catholic majority Arenberg-Bentheim each which have a Reformed minority. Making a qualified guess the area had around half a million people in 1900.

Netherlands had a much higher birthrate than Belgium, as Netherlands (2 million) only had half the population of Belgium (4 million including Belgian Luxembourg) in 1814. By 1900 Belgium had 7 million and Netherlands 6 million people. Much of Belgian increase was among the Flemish. The Francophones of Belgian likely made up around 2,5 million in 1900. So the Francophone fell from being around 1/3 of the population in 1814 to slightly above 1/6 by 1900.

But will the population develop in the same way, I doubt it. The union between the two states are interesting from a economic POV, the Belgium was a major industrial centre with coal and iron, but a relative low population growth. Netherlands on the other hand had large population growth, well developed financial sector, a big and valuable colonial empire and important trade ports, but limited potential for industrial growth. So the Dutch have the population, captured markets and capital to fuel the Belgian industrialisation. So we may see large migration of Dutch and Flemish industrial workers to Wallonia and Limburg. This could result in linguistic changes with Hainut and Liege gaining a Dutch speaking majority. We will likely also see a greater population increase in Belgium. Let's say that only the Flemish have a high birth rate as the Dutch the result would be 1,5 million extra people. Togetther with the two new provinces, that give us a Greater Netherlands with 15 million people not impressive, but together with its industry it would pretty much make it a strong second tier power, behind Italy (at least in the perspective of powers of Europe) but ahead of Spain. But I would say 1,5 million extra people would be conservative estimate, with the influx of industrial workers including German and East European immigrants I would say 3,5 million would not be unlikely giving the state a population of 17 million of which something like +2 million would likely be French speakers.
Of course this ignore whether Netherlands gain land in France if it ally with Germany in a alternate Franco-Prussian War.

Colonial we will likely see the Dutch do better in the East Indies, will they take Borneo and New Guinea before anyone else will? I could also see them keep their possession on the Gold Coast, maybe buying the Danes out instead of the British, or both the British and Dutch could veto the Danish sale, simply because neither wished for it to end up in the other's hands.
 
Nor do I think the Dutch would even want it.
Assume it is arranged as an agreement with Bismark to secure the West, in the unlikely event France was called for aid by the Austrians. This United Netherlands have more influence than the two insignificant countries in OTL. The German nationalist would not care, in the buzz of the more important events, than about the loss of this outer ranges of the German lands. Counties who were hardly German any how. For the Netherlands it would only increase the non Catholic population slightly, economic the new territories were mainly agricultural whiteout mineral deposits.
 
Thoughts about this:

The area they got from Germany today are home to almost 1 million people, not many but a significant group. My guess are that the population are something like 1/3 Reformed, 1/3 Catholic and 1/3 Lutheran. Of course the Lutherans will aligned with the Dutch Calvinists. It will likely join Netherlands as two provinces the Lutheran majority East Frisia and the Catholic majority Arenberg-Bentheim each which have a Reformed minority. Making a qualified guess the area had around half a million people in 1900.

Netherlands had a much higher birthrate than Belgium, as Netherlands (2 million) only had half the population of Belgium (4 million including Belgian Luxembourg) in 1814. By 1900 Belgium had 7 million and Netherlands 6 million people. Much of Belgian increase was among the Flemish. The Francophones of Belgian likely made up around 2,5 million in 1900. So the Francophone fell from being around 1/3 of the population in 1814 to slightly above 1/6 by 1900.

But will the population develop in the same way, I doubt it. The union between the two states are interesting from a economic POV, the Belgium was a major industrial centre with coal and iron, but a relative low population growth. Netherlands on the other hand had large population growth, well developed financial sector, a big and valuable colonial empire and important trade ports, but limited potential for industrial growth. So the Dutch have the population, captured markets and capital to fuel the Belgian industrialisation. So we may see large migration of Dutch and Flemish industrial workers to Wallonia and Limburg. This could result in linguistic changes with Hainut and Liege gaining a Dutch speaking majority. We will likely also see a greater population increase in Belgium. Let's say that only the Flemish have a high birth rate as the Dutch the result would be 1,5 million extra people. Togetther with the two new provinces, that give us a Greater Netherlands with 15 million people not impressive, but together with its industry it would pretty much make it a strong second tier power, behind Italy (at least in the perspective of powers of Europe) but ahead of Spain. But I would say 1,5 million extra people would be conservative estimate, with the influx of industrial workers including German and East European immigrants I would say 3,5 million would not be unlikely giving the state a population of 17 million of which something like +2 million would likely be French speakers.
Of course this ignore whether Netherlands gain land in France if it ally with Germany in a alternate Franco-Prussian War.

Colonial we will likely see the Dutch do better in the East Indies, will they take Borneo and New Guinea before anyone else will? I could also see them keep their possession on the Gold Coast, maybe buying the Danes out instead of the British, or both the British and Dutch could veto the Danish sale, simply because neither wished for it to end up in the other's hands.


This is the input I like


The French language will be more and more associated with the upper class and the people who wanted to be part of it, which as in OTL will run out of fashion gradually.
The development of a urban labor class many Dutch speaking and from various back grounds, i.e. Catholic or Protestant could lead to an earlier Socialist movement, non religious, and mainly Dutch speaking ) regarding French as the language of the upper class)
 
This is the input I like

Thank you I hope it helps
The French language will be more and more associated with the upper class and the people who wanted to be part of it, which as in OTL will run out of fashion gradually.
The development of a urban labor class many Dutch speaking and from various back grounds, i.e. Catholic or Protestant could lead to an earlier Socialist movement, non religious, and mainly Dutch speaking ) regarding French as the language of the upper class)

A interesting aspect is the effect Dutch dominance will have on the French dialects in Wallonia. I could see the Picard dialect die out in Belgium as it lies in one of the main industrial areas. Walloon on the other hand may do much better outside Liege it's spoken in relative isolated areas, and if the state push Dutch, it may limit education in French (at least outside private schools). In fact the state may create a standardised Walloon and Picard dialects, which Walloon and Picard children would educated in. The Catholic would likely support it, as it would cut some of the connection between French literature and the Walloon people. In fact the Catholic Church was a major support of Flemish for the same reason. This may be as major reason Picard disappear, because Dutch simply become a lingua franca for them to communicate with both Flemish and Walloon industrial workers migrating into Hainaut. But with the disappearance of the Picard, the Walloon may create their own national identity separate from French.

Other thoughts.

My best estimate for religion. The United Netherlands was something like 4/5 Catholic in 1815 by 1900 this had fallen to 2/3. Reformed increased to 1/4 from 1/5, while other Christians made up 2-3% of the population and Jews 1% the rest was atheists. With the stronger position of the Catholic Church we likely see socialism being more anti-Catholic and we may see Catholics only make up 60% of the population, I doubt reformed will increase much, but I could see the Dutch favouring Protestant immigrants from Germany, so together with East Frisia, I could see Lutherans and other Christians make up 5% of the population. Jews will likely still make up 1%, which give use around 1/10 of the population being atheists.

Second is the Christian missionaries in the East Indies. I could see them do much better. Reformed Church in general do quite badly as missionaries, because they work on individual plan. You can see it in Indonesia where 1/4 of the Christians are Lutherans and 1/3 Catholics. The Catholics have the benefit of having been earlier on the scene with the Portuguese. But the Lutherans did well because they did mass conversions. They baptised entire villages, you can especially see it with the Batak, which German missionaries converted the majority of to the Lutheran faith, because they focused on mass conversion. With the much stronger position of Catholics in Netherlands and a Lutheran Dutch province, we will likely see more a stronger Christian mission in the East Indies.

Another aspect I expect the Dutch to being less "nice" in Indonesia. They're a medium power bordering on a great power, so they can get away with more. Even if the Dutch East Indies aren't bigger, I expect fewer princely states and more direct control. I also expect more Dutch "settlers", a bigger Eurasian (Indo) community and a much bigger KNIL. In OTL these people made up 0,5% of the Dutch East Indies population, here I could see without any changes in Dutch policies 1-2% of the population. Changes in policies could increase their population size, but I think 5% are the highest we can expect. The influx of a bigger Dutch administration class and more Dutch soldiers, could also result in the Dutch promote the use of Dutch and turn into the lingua franca of the Dutch East Indies, maybe even with a significant native population in important cities (like Jakarta) speaking it or a Dutch creole as first language.

We will likely also see the Dutch continue to "hire" African "volunteers" on the Gold Coast to the KNIL, if the Dutch are strong enough that the British accept the legal fig leaf the Dutch set up. Their descendants will likely join the Indo community in the Dutch East Indies.
 
This is more based on my opinion so I'm sure that I'm repeating what other people have said. Sorry bout that.

The upheavals of 1848 would almost certainly affect them as would the resulting French 2nd Republic and 2nd Empire, both of whom were interested in the idea of France's "Natural Borders" which assumed an annexation of Belgium. Napoleon III might be especially interested given his constant homage to his famous namesake. Europe was hit with two main revolution waves in the 19th century. The first in 1830, and the second in 1848. In OTL, the Netherlands weren't hit with the revolution during 1848, but Belgium was, King William had altered the Dutch constitution to reform the elections and reduce the power that the monarchy held. Something that would need to occur in TTL during 1830, along with other social and political reforms, to give the southerners a greater voice within the assembly. Assuming that Belgium doesn't ever gain it's independence. Massive changes would occur. One major change would be how Germany would be formed. The most important factor a unified Netherlands would have on the unification process of Germany is Luxemburg. Luxemburg was part of the German confederation and had been garrisoned by thousands of Prussian troops since the Congress of Vienna that ended the Napoleonic Wars. When Napoleon the third tried to buy Luxemburg in 1867, Prussia threatened war. The Netherlands would have wanted to integrate Luxemburg fully into the Netherlands just like it did with Limburg since the Belgian markets would still be thriving within Luxembourg. If we assume equal rights for Walloons which would need to occur for a united Netherlands to prevail, I am certain the people of Luxemburg would want that as well and I don't see anyone objecting, they were relatively satisfied with the Dutch rule. The question is then arises, would Germany or Prussia accept such a act? When Denmark tried to do something similar with Schleswick, it did not, and Prussia was able to incorporate Schleswick and Holstein following a short war. The problem is that attacking the Netherlands would have certainly driving the Netherlands into the hands of the French, creating another obstacle in the path of unification. The Netherlands had always been friendly towards Prussia, and Prussia wouldn't want to anger the other nations that had good ties with the Dutch, such as the Russians and the English. The key to Unification was to have France be isolated in the diplomatic sense, which was achieved through careful diplomacy and Napoleon the third, being very aggressive with his foreign policy.

On a colonial note this would have a rather large effect, The Congo was only acquired by Leopold of Belgium because of his scheming. He convinced the various European powers that the Congo would be open to traders and missionaries from all countries, and played all of them off of each other. He also convinced missionaries, explorers, and human rights advocates that he would end the slave trade and bring "civilization" to the Congo. It was also used much like a buffer between British and French colonial zones. While this likely would have meant that the Congo as a whole would be heavily divided but the populace and land would have almost certainly been less abused. The lack of a neutral border could have easily created colonial skirmishes that would have soured relations back in Europe. During the Berlin Conference, the Congo region was given to the Belgians as a way to keep the area from becoming a point of contention, if you are to remove that then you would likely see the region carved up between the French, British, and Portuguese. Possibly even given to a "weak" neutral power. (Danish Congo anyone?)
 
This is more based on my opinion so I'm sure that I'm repeating what other people have said. Sorry bout that.

The upheavals of 1848 would almost certainly affect them as would the resulting French 2nd Republic and 2nd Empire, both of whom were interested in the idea of France's "Natural Borders" which assumed an annexation of Belgium. Napoleon III might be especially interested given his constant homage to his famous namesake. Europe was hit with two main revolution waves in the 19th century. The first in 1830, and the second in 1848. In OTL, the Netherlands weren't hit with the revolution during 1848, but Belgium was, King William had altered the Dutch constitution to reform the elections and reduce the power that the monarchy held. Something that would need to occur in TTL during 1830, along with other social and political reforms, to give the southerners a greater voice within the assembly. Assuming that Belgium doesn't ever gain it's independence. Massive changes would occur. One major change would be how Germany would be formed. The most important factor a unified Netherlands would have on the unification process of Germany is Luxemburg. Luxemburg was part of the German confederation and had been garrisoned by thousands of Prussian troops since the Congress of Vienna that ended the Napoleonic Wars. When Napoleon the third tried to buy Luxemburg in 1867, Prussia threatened war. The Netherlands would have wanted to integrate Luxemburg fully into the Netherlands just like it did with Limburg since the Belgian markets would still be thriving within Luxembourg. If we assume equal rights for Walloons which would need to occur for a united Netherlands to prevail, I am certain the people of Luxemburg would want that as well and I don't see anyone objecting, they were relatively satisfied with the Dutch rule. The question is then arises, would Germany or Prussia accept such a act? When Denmark tried to do something similar with Schleswick, it did not, and Prussia was able to incorporate Schleswick and Holstein following a short war. The problem is that attacking the Netherlands would have certainly driving the Netherlands into the hands of the French, creating another obstacle in the path of unification. The Netherlands had always been friendly towards Prussia, and Prussia wouldn't want to anger the other nations that had good ties with the Dutch, such as the Russians and the English. The key to Unification was to have France be isolated in the diplomatic sense, which was achieved through careful diplomacy and Napoleon the third, being very aggressive with his foreign policy.

On a colonial note this would have a rather large effect, The Congo was only acquired by Leopold of Belgium because of his scheming. He convinced the various European powers that the Congo would be open to traders and missionaries from all countries, and played all of them off of each other. He also convinced missionaries, explorers, and human rights advocates that he would end the slave trade and bring "civilization" to the Congo. It was also used much like a buffer between British and French colonial zones. While this likely would have meant that the Congo as a whole would be heavily divided but the populace and land would have almost certainly been less abused. The lack of a neutral border could have easily created colonial skirmishes that would have soured relations back in Europe. During the Berlin Conference, the Congo region was given to the Belgians as a way to keep the area from becoming a point of contention, if you are to remove that then you would likely see the region carved up between the French, British, and Portuguese. Possibly even given to a "weak" neutral power. (Danish Congo anyone?)

I would say there's major differences between Netherlands and Denmark, for one Dutch and Germans are much closer to each other cultural and linguistic. Holstein had a strong German unification movement. The Danes and Prussians while not hostile to each other, lacked the close friendship between Prussia and Netherlands. Also the Danes was pretty crazy and with the use of some common sense have avoided the second war (by choosing the Augustenburg candidate).

As for Congo, Denmark won't take it. I think it's more likely that it end up split between Portugal and France.
 
In OTL around the 1850-ties in the Netherlands a protest movement emerged from the low middle class and low class Calvinist, who were disgruntled with he (conservative-) Liberal governments. The protest movement reached critical mass when the Catholic church was allowed to restore church provinces in the Netherlands. This movement will evolve more likely in the 2nd halve of the 1840-ties.
Both in the Netherlands as in Belgium OTL there was a very hard and long debate ( battle is a better word) of the funding of schools. In short the governments wanted to fund and control the schools while the churches, both Catholic as Protestants wanted to erect their own schools and wanted to have subsidies for this form the governments. In both countries this ended at the end of the 19th century is compromises with the religious had the better part of it. No doubt this school debate will be a large part of the domestic politics in the United Netherlands.
 
Thank you for your input

This is more based on my opinion so I'm sure that I'm repeating what other people have said. Sorry bout that.

The upheavals of 1848 would almost certainly affect them as would the resulting French 2nd Republic and 2nd Empire, both of whom were interested in the idea of France's "Natural Borders" which assumed an annexation of Belgium. Napoleon III might be especially interested given his constant homage to his famous namesake. Europe was hit with two main revolution waves in the 19th century. The first in 1830, and the second in 1848. In OTL, the Netherlands weren't hit with the revolution during 1848, but Belgium was, King William had altered the Dutch constitution to reform the elections and reduce the power that the monarchy held. Something that would need to occur in TTL during 1830, along with other social and political reforms, to give the southerners a greater voice within the assembly. Assuming that Belgium doesn't ever gain it's independence. Massive changes would occur.

Partly correct, the revolutions of 1848 were mainly Liberal, (upper-) middle class who wanted to have a voice. In the United Netherlands it might also happen how ever it might be more socialist and religious as in Protestant low and middle class people who dislike the, by then economic and political, influence.
Let assume William II will be in power for nearly 20 years, there will gradual shift in dominance of power from the North to the South. This shift in power will be evolve due to the fact that William II no doubt will spent most of his time in Brussels instead of the Hague. William II will be not as involved in state affairs as his father was, who ruled on his own, but be more relying on is Ministers. Let assume William II came to power due to the early sudden death of his father, an event clouded in mistery. He might be forced to made several concession or amendment on the constitution in favor of the Liberals.

[/QUOTE]
One major change would be how Germany would be formed. The most important factor a unified Netherlands would have on the unification process of Germany is Luxemburg. Luxemburg was part of the German confederation and had been garrisoned by thousands of Prussian troops since the Congress of Vienna that ended the Napoleonic Wars. When Napoleon the third tried to buy Luxemburg in 1867, Prussia threatened war. [/QUOTE]

The Luxembourg affair of 1867 will not occur when there is no Belgian revolt. Luxembourg will remain twice as large as it is now. The Luxembourg affair was caused by OTL Willam III and a Dutch secretary of foreign affairs without communication between Cabinet and played out by the Great Powers of France and Prussia.
But it could be a 'casus belli' for a conflict between France and Prussia.

[/QUOTE]
If we assume equal rights for Walloons which would need to occur for a united Netherlands to prevail, I am certain the people of Luxemburg would want that as well and I don't see anyone objecting, they were relatively satisfied with the Dutch rule. The question is then arises, would Germany or Prussia accept such a act? When Denmark tried to do something similar with Schleswick, it did not, and Prussia was able to incorporate Schleswick and Holstein following a short war. The key to Unification was to have France be isolated in the diplomatic sense, which was achieved through careful diplomacy and Napoleon the third, being very aggressive with his foreign policy.[/QUOTE]

The Walloon will not be a marginalized minority. First during the 19th century French was the language of the upper class in nearly all of Europe. Second a large part of the industrial boom will happen in Walloon.
Further the 2nd Schleswick and Holstein war was mainly caused by completly inresponsible behaviour of certian Danish politicians and handy used by Bismarck.

[/QUOTE]
On a colonial note this would have a rather large effect, The Congo was only acquired by Leopold of Belgium because of his scheming. He convinced the various European powers that the Congo would be open to traders and missionaries from all countries, and played all of them off of each other. He also convinced missionaries, explorers, and human rights advocates that he would end the slave trade and bring "civilization" to the Congo. It was also used much like a buffer between British and French colonial zones. While this likely would have meant that the Congo as a whole would be heavily divided but the populace and land would have almost certainly been less abused. The lack of a neutral border could have easily created colonial skirmishes that would have soured relations back in Europe. During the Berlin Conference, the Congo region was given to the Belgians as a way to keep the area from becoming a point of contention, if you are to remove that then you would likely see the region carved up between the French, British, and Portuguese. Possibly even given to a "weak" neutral power. (Danish Congo anyone?)[/QUOTE]

The colonization or better, called the increase of influence will be gradual as it was in OTL, but no doubt faster. The Netherlands had overseas possession which need to have economic value. Overseas possessions were not acquired or conquered for prestige while costing a fortune, like France and Germany did in OTL with lots of 'colonies' at the end of the 19th century
 
A-1901. NL.gif

The United Netherlands and her overseas empire around 1901. Colonial pursuit is nearly equal as in OTL only a bit more self confident which means:
Southern border claims of Suriname are lager.
No change of trade forts with the British in 1850 on the Gold coast and subsequent no selling of this post to the British in 1870. Possible buy out of the Danish Gold coast or a mutual division of them by the Netherlands and the UK.
Likely faster 'pacification of the Indonesian archipelago, but with similar territory swaps with the UK arranged with several London treaties as in OTL.
No diplomatic adventures in Europe.

Congo Basis is divided between France and the UK. The UK no doubt will gain the much prized, copper rich Katanga province this time and might be connect all their African Sub-Sahara possesion. Portugal is allowed to increase their Angola territory.
 
A-1901. NL XL.gif
View attachment 293319

The United Netherlands overseas Empire, around 1901 after a much more ambitions and self confident 19th century with several Cabinets which were not afraid for some diplomatic adventures and muscle flexing.
Not much changes in South America and East Asia except Formosa was gained after participation in an opium war with China.
Gold Coast no change of trade post, dividing of the Gold Coast between the Netherlands and the UK
Southern Africa: Merchant from Amsterdam establish trade contact with the various Boer and Griekwa republics in the 1840-ties ( happened iin OTL) resulting in Boer republic become sort of Protectorate and personal union with the king William II as constitutional monarch.
Purchase from the Portuguese of Delagoa Bay end 1840-ties ( serious attempts were made in OTL during the 2nd half of the 19th century)
Free movement of trader, explorers and adventurres in Dutch service will open Africa North of the Boer Republics. Congo Basin will be divided by France and the UK
 
Top