Another factor to consider is if the Dutch retain the Cape Colony, or if it's still seized by the British as IOTL.
English Canada/French Carolina: A Timeline
- Thread starter Gabingston
- Start date
If the French go Constitutional monarchy then the Dutch will most likely keep the Cape Colony as Napoleon will not invade the Netherlands.
That'd be the least of the butterflies from No Napoleonic Wars, this is gonna be a challenge.
If there are no Napoleonic wars, the Netherlands will almost certainly keep the Cape colony. Even with the Napoleonic wars it is possible. In the treaty of Amiens the Cape colony is returned to the Netherlands. There are even more Dutch colonies whose fate would/could change, Just like the Cape Colony the British took Ceylon and "British" Guyana from the Dutch after the Napoleonic wars. Dutch Malacca and Dutch India were traded with the British for British Indonesia a couple of years after the Napoleonic wars (1824). This too could easily be butterflied away, or possibly changed. Actualy I think Dutch India might be even bigger than OTL in 1824. The Dutch lost part of it during the fourth Anglo-Dutch war, which was caused by Dutch support for the American Revolution. So, maybe with a larger more valueable Dutch India, it could be traded for British Indonesia and British Malaysia (especialy if British Singapore was butterflied away, which was founded in 1819 if I can believe wikipedia).
Also interesting, without the Napoleonic wars, therecould still be a Dutch Republic, instead of a Kingdom of the Netherlands. Not sure if that is a good thing or not. The Republic was quite corrupt and inefficient in the later days. With a lot of civil unrest.
There is still going to be a major European war at the turn of the 19th century regardless of the French Revolution or Napoleon, Europe was due for another war around that time.
Here's my hunch on what happens to India:
- The British control the Ganges Valley, as well as much of India's West Coast.
- The French control the Deccan Plateau, along with the Southern Tip and East Coast of India, excluding Bengal.
- To simplify, Northern India is British, while Southern India is French.
- However, the Portuguese have trading posts around India, such as Goa and Diu, while the Dutch have Ceylon/Sri Lanka and some trading posts on the mainland.
- Most of the European control in the Indian Subcontinent is indirect, often times being autonomous from the country they were de jure subject to.
Probably true, wars in the 17th-18th century happened basicly once every couple of years. Only after the Napoleonic wars Europe had enough of them.
That said, it would be interesting what kind of war we see. Britain was basicly isolating itself diplmaticaly. Basicly around the time of the American revolution it had no allies left, except minor German powers.
In the French and Indian war the UK took all of French India except for Pondicherry
Here is a map of Europe in 1789.
https://www.themaparchive.com/europe-in-1789.html
As you can see, the map of Europe in 1789 was a convoluted mess. Germany is divided into countless little duchies and kingdoms that look like puzzle pieces, Italy is slightly less ridiculous but still quite divided, Austria controls much of modern Belgium and Prussia, Saxony and Bavaria have little exclaves across Germany.
I'm planning on having a major European war around the turn of the 19th Century (something from the Mid-Late 1790s to the Early-Mid 1800s Decade), and I don't know quite what the sides of the war would be, nor who'd win. I'm no expert on Napoleonic Era European geopolitics, and I'm sure that there are people here that know far more than I do, so any information about European geopolitics in the Late 1700s would be welcome.
https://www.themaparchive.com/europe-in-1789.html
As you can see, the map of Europe in 1789 was a convoluted mess. Germany is divided into countless little duchies and kingdoms that look like puzzle pieces, Italy is slightly less ridiculous but still quite divided, Austria controls much of modern Belgium and Prussia, Saxony and Bavaria have little exclaves across Germany.
I'm planning on having a major European war around the turn of the 19th Century (something from the Mid-Late 1790s to the Early-Mid 1800s Decade), and I don't know quite what the sides of the war would be, nor who'd win. I'm no expert on Napoleonic Era European geopolitics, and I'm sure that there are people here that know far more than I do, so any information about European geopolitics in the Late 1700s would be welcome.
Sunshine State and Golden State
Part 17: Sunshine State and Golden State
During the difficult times of the 1770s and 1780s in France, migration to La Floride surged, with the largest amount arriving in the Late 1780s. While a large amount went to the Atlantic Colonies, expansion in peripheral territories like the Gulf Coast and the Mississippi were encouraged, with French reach in those areas expanding after the seven years war. Expansion to the Baie de Tampa was finally undertaken, with the colony of Havre D’Esprit being founded in the 1770s. The Gulf Coast itself already had a decent amount of French settlement, but further inland, with the exception of some forts, it was still more Indigenous.
French settlement along in La Louisiane was mainly centered along the Lower Mississippi River (mainly for plantations), Riviѐre Rouge (more small-scale farms) and the Coastal Plain, with major centers of settlement being Post du Rapides, Opelousas, Petit Manchac and Calcasieu, with civilian settlement going as far as Rondinville and Pinѐde. Other areas saw settlement as well, such as the region between Saint-Esprit (the Fort part of the name had been dropped by then) and Fort Toulouse, with the towns of Dubreil and Bienville being the main two settlements between the two aforementioned locales. Expansion east of the mountains occured as well, but I’ll get to that in another post.
Of course, French military installations and trading posts either existed or were set up far beyond there, with outposts existing far up the Acansa and Pekitanoui Rivers, as well as other rivers west of the Mississippi Basin. This was useful both to trade with and evangelize to the Natives, solidify French influence against the Spanish and British, and for exploring the North American continent. Notable examples of this was Saint-Louis, located at the confluence of the Pekitanoui and Mississippi rivers and Fort Padoucas at the confluence of the Caquinampo and Ohio rivers. Once again, this is something for another post, as I’ve got other things to get to now…
On the other side of North America lies the mysterious land of California. While California had been known of since the Mid 16th Century, it remained untouched by European powers up until the Mid-Late 18th Century, when the Spanish began to found Missions in California. Starting with the Mission San Diego de Alcalá, the Spaniards established missions along the California coast as far north as San Francisco de Asis, totaling 18 Missions in California by the close of the 18th Century. The primary motivations of the Missions were to convert the Natives to Christianity and to integrate them into Spanish culture. The missions had… mixed results. On the one hand, the Missions provided education and health services to the natives, but on the other hand, often used cruel treatment and coerced labor. Regardless of what one thinks of the Spanish Missions in California, this was the beginning of the settlement of California, as over time more settlers, whether they be Peninsulares, Criollos or Mestizos would move to California, and over time the area would become more Hispanicized. California was not the only region of New Spain that would see increased settlement, though, as Hispanic settlers established more missions and settlements in New Mexico and across the Rio Bravo, the mission of San Antonio de Valero being an example. While Europeans, whether they be Spanish, French or British continued to expand across North America, new lands Down Under were coming onto their radar...
So, how does this sound for Australia?
- Portugal colonizes the Northern Territory and Northern Queensland (presumably north of the Tropic of Capricorn)
- Britain still sends convicts Down Under, and New South Wales, Southern Queensland and possibly Victoria and/or Tasmania are British.
- France colonizes South Australia and possibly Victoria/Tasmania.
- The Netherlands colonizes Western Australia, or at least the useful parts.
- Spain colonizes New Guinea and some Pacific Islands like New Caledonia.
- New Zealand is TBD
How about some sort of "Berlin conference" in which Australia is divided? For example both France and Britain create colonies on Australia. To avoid conflict they decide to divide it among themselves and to avoid their rival to gain the largest part and benifit more than the other, they invite neutral nations, like Portugal and the Netherlands to take part of Australia, although the less desirable parts (the north and the west).
You know what?
The South Island will be a Scandinavian Colony, possibly a Condominium between Sweden and Denmark.
Is a German colony in Patagonia plausible? We already have a Swedish/Danish colony in New Zealand, and I don't want this to become too implausible (even though I do have a butterfly net up), but Patagonia was uncolonized up until the 1870s, so there could be time for a more powerful German state (Prussia maybe) to take a stab at a Patagonian colony. I don't put things in my TL just because I want it to be in it, so I'm checking if it's something that could realistically happen.
OTL? Absolutely not. In your timeline? I would say no, but it realy depends on both the status in Europe and in Argentina. Not only do you need a Germany (or a German state like Prussia) be strong enough to colonise anything, (which OTl was only in the late 19th century), you need to make sure that whoever controls Argentina is not able to colonise/occupy Patagonia. And you must make sure no other colonial power is able to snatch it away before Germany can. The last part seems no problem, with France and Britain both busy in north America and Australia, I think they won't care that much about Patagonia.
Spain likely keeps their American colonies ITTL, and that includes La Plata.
Then no Prussian Patagonia Spain is stronger than Prussia and Spain's ally is France due to the Bourbon family compact.