Dutch South Africa

I've recently became interested in studying South African history, but I'm just at the beginning so pls. excuse my less-then-well-informed approach, if you think it's the case.

I was wondering if there was ANY chance of South Africa remaining a Dutch Colony and evolving towards independence as such, instead of being incorporated into the British empire.

The Anglo-Dutch treaty of 1814 returned all Dutch colonial possessions as they were before the Napoleonic wars, except for a very few, among them the Cape Colony. Cape Colony has in fact already been occupied once before by the British(between 1795-1803) and was subsequently returned to the Dutch. So it seems to me it was just a matter of petty political negotiations that this did not happen for the second time as well.

If it had happened, Cape Colony would have likely been left to its own matters, without further attempts at occupation. After all, during the Scramble for Africa, disputes were about not-yet-colonised territories and not about those where a certain colonial power had already been entrenched for centuries. Portugal, for instance, maintained a vast colonial empire, although it was far from anything like a Great Power status, being probably much closer to a British semi-colony. I imagine the Netherlands had a somewhat analogous situation.

I am very uncertain about what would a likely course of events be from this on. Focusing on the Afrikaners, for instance, who would virtually be interchangeable with white South Africans: would there still be an incentive for something like the Great Trek? Would they spread to the rest of present South Africa's regions? I couldn't find demographic data for the 19th century- I wonder if there is any- about the distribution of whites and the impact of British colonists. Today roughly a third of South African whites live in what used to be Cape Province. What was the situation in the 19th century? Did the white communities in Transvaal or the Orange Free State become established solely through a British-evading migration? Or would the agricultural lands and the mineral riches have attracted settlers anyway?

It is unlikely, I think, for the Dutch to expand their colony to the entire South Africa. The British would have probably done something about it. Then again, think of how tiny Belgium received the whole basin of Congo, because the Great Powers couldn't agree with each other. The mineral wealth of South Africa was discovered only in the second half of the 19th century, anyway. What if, by that time Boer Republics had already controlled the areas, under some sort of Dutch blessing/suzerainty? Or if the Dutch had colonised the interior, just like the Portuguese did in neighbouring Angola & Mozambique?

Then South Africa would have been granted independence from the Netherlands instead of the British sometime after World War 2, to become...? An apartheid regime, just like in OTL? The British, as I understood, were more on the progressive side, abolishing slavery, for instance, in 1833, to the anger of many Afrikaners, then voting mostly against the National Party in the 20th century. Without the significant proportion(~40%) of British whites in the South African white community- of course this is a just rough generalisation- the political orientation would have likely been even more inclined towards apartheid. Then again, the number of whites would have been much smaller too.

Finally: suppose the Dutch expand to what was roughly Cape Province, but the British take the rest of the lands plus Botswana, Rhodesia and beyond. With most of the Afrikaners remaining in the west there would be a largely coloured and white Western South Africa, which could become an independent country and then evolve much more smoothly towards a racially equal society.

Here are some numbers, which although not historical(mainly 2010 estimates) and also wiki, still provide a good general image:

Afrikaners: ~3 million, or 60% of white South Africans
Population of Northern, Western and Eastern Cape added together:~13 million, of which 60% Black, 30% Coloured and 10% White
BUT
Considering only Northern and Western Cape, and not the +80% Xhosa Eastern Cape we get 32% Black, 50% Coloured and 17% White, which is far more balanced.
Now, assuming that of the 3 million Afrikaners, say, 2 million instead of well under 1 million live in this area there would be about equal ~28% Blacks and Whites and the rest mostly Coloureds- also an overwhelming majority would speak Afrikaans, as it is the case in real-life, too.

(This is obviously a very approximate and rough count)

So, what do you think?
 
The Great Trek was in response to British rule, I can't remember all the details these days but had to do with British reforms (ie that Britain was changing the way it did things itself, everywhere) affecting settled Boer norms. May have had something to do with slavery?

Whether anything similar happens would depend on how the Kingdom of the Netherlands acts in a similar fashion, IMHO, tho as for the issues in question most of my brain has faded away

One might note that historically the Boers after trekking and setting up a couple of republics continued to spread somewhat and take bites out of neighbouring African states. Thus, its most probable they will settle the Orange River area anyway given time

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
I've actually done quite a bit of research on this for my various (failed) tl's and if South Africa is returned to the Dutch you are going to see a return to the status quo, which was instability.
The Cape Colony was essentially a dictatorship run out of Cape Town and the nature of the government depended entirely on who was sent to run it. Some Governors had really good relations with the locals, others had terrible relations.
And every time a "nasty" Governor (i.e. one who made them pay taxes and respect the law rather than mob justice) came along every Afrikaner who was pissed off would up sticks and take their livestock to the frontier. They could get away with this because Afrikaner agriculture was mostly extensive grazing of livestock rather than intensive arable farming. You can move a herd of cattle, you can't move a field of wheat. Those who were wheat farmers were stuck behind and did what they were told. This essential split between Trekboers who would later go on the Great Trek and Cape Dutch who would stay put already existed before the British took over and is going to effect events.
This status quo of the frontier advancing in occasional spurts is probably going to last till the 1830's but not much longer. Modern communications means the Dutch are going to start taking a more active role (they did in the East Indies about this time) and they are about to start bumping into the British in Natal (assuming they still want a Southern African base, which in the absence of Suez and holding India they will) and the Zulu's in what is now the Eastern Cape who will put up more of a fight than other natives.
With a closed frontier to the East, continued trickle immigration (and a very high birthrate) and variable government events in the 1830-50 period will be very interesting, as I see it you have three paths:

1. You could see the direction of settlement changed from East along the Coast to North and Inland (i.e. today's Northern Cape which wasn't settled in OTL till the 1860's/70's) and the continued existence of lawless frontier areas where Boers can be Boers followed by a gradually advanced "civilised" zone where Cape Town exerts it authority. The long term consequences would be interesting but the Afrikaners are only going to be happy living under the rule of far away Europeans who they don't vote for as long as they foot the bill and don't stop them from doing whatever they want (starting wars, slavery etc.).

Most likely

2. Revolt which is crushed by the Dutch. The surviving Trekboers trek. As this is probably happening in the 1840's when the British are in Natal they probably head for the Transvaal like OTL. The Northern Cape while empty is too close to Cape Town and the South Eastern Coast is full of Zulu's and Brits. The probably result is OTL, i.e. unstable, undemocratic states always on the verge of failing only held together by the sheer cussedness of its inhabitants.

Less Likely

3. Successful revolt and a Afrikaner Republic on the Cape, its weak and has little Democratic tradition (the Boer Republics weren't very Democratic) but might be more successful than the Dutch at attracting immigrants, however it would lack the back-up that the Dutch and British gave white settlers when dealing with Natives, slowing the advance of the frontier. Also the British would be much more likely to push it around and restrict its growth.

Least Likely

4. Draka!!!

ASB
 
Last edited:
1. You could see the direction of settlement changed from East along the Coast to North and Inland

I guess you're right; but I don't know if the region of what is now Northern Cape could support larger populations. The Great Karoo is a semi-desert area, and is very sparsely inhabited to this day with less than 3 people/sqkm.

I really like the scenario where Dutch Colonial rule plays the part of OTL Britain, triggering the same sort of responses, such as the Great Trek, but I don't know if they would be able to maintain the same kind of policies that Britain had in the longer term. In a hypothetical Dutch-Boer Republics war it is doubtful that the Dutch would even have the capacity to initiate the conflict; I mean at the time the British were the greatest colonial power in the world and even they had to fight long and hard, with one of their largest armies ever deployed to subdue the Boers.

Then maybe the British would create a colony of their own in Natal and the rest of the eastern coast from which to expand against the unstable Boer Republics when diamonds are eventually discovered, so the Boer Wars would take place in roughly the same way, only without the British rule of Cape Colony.

There's also the question of the vast areas that today make up Botswana, Zimbabwe & Zambia and which were colonised by Cecil Rhodes & co from the south; if Britain is hypothetically shut down from these lands either by a Dutch South African colony, or a string of Boer Republics, what then?

1. The Pink Map plan of Portugal, connecting Angola and Mozambique. In OTL it was a main objective of Portuguese colonial policy, only prevented by a British ultimatum. I doubt, however, that Portugal would have been able to bring all the territories under its organised rule; still it was one of the most stubborn colonialist powers, granting independence to its African possessions as late as 1975.

2. Could the Dutch have nevertheless mustered enough strength to bring all of South Africa and these lands also under their rule?

3. Is it realistic to conceive at all a South Africa not dominated by the British? Maybe the Cape Colony could have evolved separately, either as a Dutch colony or maybe independently, but would the British have tolerated a Dutch rule, or a free Boer rule in all of Transvaal, Orange Free State & Natal?
 
I guess you're right; but I don't know if the region of what is now Northern Cape could support larger populations. The Great Karoo is a semi-desert area, and is very sparsely inhabited to this day with less than 3 people/sqkm.

Yes but the Boers practised extensive livestock grazing agriculture rather than intensive arable agriculture. While you aren't going to be growing wheat or olives up there you can graze sheep and cattle with great ease. Really the Northern Cape is the perfect place for the Boers (as opposed to Afrikaners); their type of agriculture is the only practical one and its so sparsely populated they can take over with ease. Add to that the fact that there would be little demand for black labour you might well have a white majority Northern Cape if enough Boers trek there and they are mean enough to the Bushmen.

In a hypothetical Dutch-Boer Republics war it is doubtful that the Dutch would even have the capacity to initiate the conflict; I mean at the time the British were the greatest colonial power in the world and even they had to fight long and hard, with one of their largest armies ever deployed to subdue the Boers.

The British had trouble controlling the massive sprawling veld, they had no trouble holding Cape Town. In the event of a Boer revolt the Dutch are going to be able to hold the Cape and the (more) densely settled arable areas around it. The inland areas where most of the Boers are is another thing but the Dutch are unlikely to be entirely expelled.

Then maybe the British would create a colony of their own in Natal and the rest of the eastern coast from which to expand against the unstable Boer Republics when diamonds are eventually discovered, so the Boer Wars would take place in roughly the same way, only without the British rule of Cape Colony.

The British are going to want a base in Southern Africa due to India and Australia until the Suez Canal opens so I think in the absence of the Cape Natal is going to get colonised earlier than otl, i.e. in the 1820's. In the event that the Boers end up treking to the Transvaal they are definitely going to bump into the British coming north-west out of Natal and that could be very interesting.

There's also the question of the vast areas that today make up Botswana, Zimbabwe & Zambia and which were colonised by Cecil Rhodes & co from the south; if Britain is hypothetically shut down from these lands either by a Dutch South African colony, or a string of Boer Republics, what then?

I would suspect that with a weaker British presence in Southern Africa (and without the Cape it will be weaker) Zambia is probably going to be dived between whoever gets Tanganyika and the Congo with an eastern bit going to the Portuguese out of Angola. Zimbabwe is either going to be added to Mozambique or will go to whoever gets the Transvaal, probably the British. Botswana is a desert so I think it'll be left on its own like OTL but if not then it'll get tagged on to Namibia.
 
Botswana is a desert so I think it'll be left on its own like OTL but if not then it'll get tagged on to Namibia.

Botswana is not cohesive. Didn't the Boers attempt to colonise the Southern portion but were driven out by the British?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Top