Dutch? Given his name is German, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Lüderitz states he's German and he's born in Bremen.... I'd go the Duck route and he quacks German to me.
No GNW (or “Peter goes South”)
- Thread starter alexmilman
- Start date
Nice to see France doing good for itself. But it's also nice to know that France will be focus of British paranoia and forgein policy as well. Expanded France with Dutch vassal state and alliance with Spain, plus clear colonial ambitions (not necessarily conflicting with the British ATM , but still a rival colonial empire, it also makes sense for France to go for colonial empire as trying to expand in Europe would just lead it into the conflict against other GP).
So yea by all accounts it's good to see France doing great for itself and looking scarier than Russian empire.
So yea by all accounts it's good to see France doing great for itself and looking scarier than Russian empire.
Last edited:
Of course, in OTL he was German but how would I put him into the picture? Well, of course he could be a German captain on the French service but not too many Germans had been sailing to these regions in the early XIX while the Dutch could know the coast quite well. Anyway, I don’t want to invent a new geographic name so you may consider him an untypical duck (German family immigrated to the Netherlands, etc.). After all, I did not notice you objecting to the Russian generals with the German names. 😜
Many Germans actually served in VOC (at high positions actually) ,so it isn't out of the realm of possibility.
To be honest, I have some problems with the growing French colonial empire because in OTL they had been facing a serious resistance in Indo-China and Africa even in the later times when their technological advantage was bigger. Probably will need to invent a better model than in OTL.
In Algeria they would be almost doomed to fight endless war conquering a lot of sand. It was the same situation as Russia had in the Caucasus: a lot of bellicose tribes and no clear defensible border. But other than that, perhaps they’ll chose quality over quantity and end up with few profitable places which, by whatever reason, will not resist too hard?
I generally agree with the later sentiment, generally until scrabble for Africa there wasn't really a high drive for colonization of clay for clay's sake in Africa.
Plus in this TL France has sphere of influence in Europe and influence over Batavia and Spain, so it should probably be more focused on colonizing strategic territories for itself and maybe trying to explore markets within Batavian and Spanish colonies if possible? In exchange for propping those empire's of course, generally idea is that France really shouldn't have to high drive for colonial expansion given it's existing gains.
Otherwise what of Louisiana ? Will it sell it to USA?
Last edited:
I’m trying to figure out the “profitable” parts of it. Madagascar would allow to corner the vanilla market. What else? Coast of the Gulf of Guinea? The Brits did not start seriously getting there until second half of the XIX so it is ….er… “free”.
This sounds as a good line of action: minimal expenses with maximum financial gain. Providing both “clients” are willing to be more open.
Still, owning in one form or another (protectorate?) pieces of Indo-China can be profitable.
IMO in its OTL geographic shape Louisiana was unsustainable and the same goes about demographic aspect: the French were not going there in the numbers needed to provide a meaningful settlement preventing one from the US. So it pretty much had to go and getting some money out of that situation was the best option because otherwise it simply will be lost one way or another.
OTOH, unless the French stop breeding, wouldn’t they need some new regions to settle sooner or later and what could it be? A much greater presence in the North Africa but what about the locals? I’m not fond of the genocidal activities.
Lol, true, but you'd have the Teutonic Knights to thank for that lack of objections (edit: Wait, most of that is Swedish right now, darn). Plus there was a lot of precedent for foreign military service if I recall correctly (which you used for Nappy as well). It was just as a Dutch I found it a German name and i wanted to know more, hence the discovery of a German, not a Dutch with a German name.
Works for me.
Well, neither am I , but I'm not sure the colonising powers were in the scramble for Africa. Displacement would probably be one of the lesser evils by the standards of the day. Though Wiki (FWIW) seems to indicate the French were not quite as harsh as some of the others:
Another thought: There might be more settlers (less deaths to war and the consequences of war like hunger and disease), but there will not be millions. If the sources I read are to believed like this and wiki, France was growing with about 170,000 per year. There is a lot of room in France and the Colonies you already mentioned (Madagascar is huge, so is Indo-China) that even 20,000-30,000 extra are not hugely upsetting IMHO.
Last edited:
I don't know about Area's of colonization, Algeria is there, then there's entire western part of Australia? At the time it was known as New Holland and French even claimed it via Louis Aleno de St Aloüarn , there were even further expeditions (Antonie Bruni 1792 named St Alouran Islands and Nicolas Baudin mapped western coast and part of southern coast ), nothing came from it though as they never managed to establish formal settlement (they were kinda busy with war and aftermath, plus British preempted them) , but as of now it's open game, they just need formal settlement (maybe at the King George's sound).
Batavia is client while Spain is more of an ally, but otherwise if the deal is mutually beneficial something could be made of it?
Last edited:
I was under the impression that in OTL there were a lot of the locals and not too much of a free agricultural land. The French, judging by wiki, were engaged in rather nasty practices toward the locals, something close to the genocide (wiki’s articles are not always a good source and I’m not writing a TL about the French colonial empire so this is just a superficial impression). Something moderately nasty would fit into the contemporary style of a colonization but nothing like AII’s mass expulsion from Circassia.
As long as it does not require from me any serious knowledge of Australia, it may work. How about a coastal part of Louisiana selling the rest to the US? Will they be interested in such a purchase to start with? What about squeezing between the Cape Colony and Portuguese or just squeeze the Portuguese out? In the early XIX they did not consolidate their holdings in Angola and, anyway, who do they think they are? 😜
With the Dutch this should be relatively easy: they simply would have to be slightly more open in their policies on Java getting in exchange an assurance of the French (moral?) support in their territorial disputes with the Brits or the French can just start expansion on the islands which are not yet grabbed by the Dutch or Brits.
With Spain it is more problematic because situation in the Latin America is getting unstable.
There was the OTL Gustav III plans to colonize Western Australia, but then New Zealand was brought up as more realistic Swedish colony destination,
Yes it is and BTW, most of them did not descent from the Teutonic knights (them being the monks 😜) but this is easy: the opportunities of all types in Russia are much greater than in the Baltic provinces, especially for the landless and impoverished families. For example, the wealthy branch of Barclay family still stays in Riga where it provided more than one burgomaster while the moneyless branch went on the Russian service (for which I don’t have to change OTL). With Michelson it is pretty much the same or even more so if, as per some Estonian source(s), he was just an Estonian serf who fled to the Russian service and, after rising in the ranks, invented himself a more presentable ancestry and much later, when he became “The Michelson” CII ordered to add him to the list of the local nobility (there was a well-written novel on this subject), etc.
Not just military but administrative as well.
The name was German and, as I said, there can be various options as long as the geographic name is intact.
Yes. As I said, I don’t want to deviate too much into the issues of French or anybody else’s colonialism so pretty much anything plausible and giving France more benefits than possession of a lot of sand and jungles (and making it more balanced vs. Britain) is fine by me.
Good idea. The islands are already discovered but the Brits are not there, yet, and there are some valuable goodies including gold.
Not wholly true , the proper permeant knights were monks but they had a lot of normal knights that just fought with them for a set period ( due to them feeling a calling as crusaders , penitents, plain bored or a wanting to leave home for a time ). Some of these did end up settling.
The normal knights were not the Teutonic knights (aka, members of the Order) and considered themselves underprivileged with the resulting disturbances and support of the Polish claims.
And little climate issues for colonists (Maori OTOH are the pain in the ass).
Think you are taking the later period and spreading it over the whole. The future Henry IV of England for instance considered himself a crusader and talked positively of his time. The HalbBrudern were classed as members of the Order and their vows were not for life.
Well area was unsuitable for agriculture if it helps? So beside potential French ambitions there shouldn't be to much of the initiative , beside wool and wheat (but then again British drive was mostly paranoia, soo ambition should do). But there is gold as well.
Otherwise if you go with it most reasonable action would be to divide the land along longitude 129° East as per otl. between New Wale's and Swan colony.
But then again there is also gold in Western Australia... If Gustav wants to strike it big then he should try to do both, otl Gustav III planned to do it in 1780,but he got distracted by little war with Russia, something that didn't happen here so i don't see why not do both given relative peace Sweden expirienced.
Plus Swedish presence on the continent probably won't be as disturbing as French one, for example British were operating under orders that in case they meet French they are to land troops to remind them who owns the land (it was the route to New Wale's).
Last edited:
I hope you don't fall into the cliché "Spain is doomed and irreformable no matter what it does".