Question on an alternate British Empire

JJohnson

Banned
For the sake of discussion, let's say the British Empire evolved this way:

-1783: Lost Quebec/Canada, and the Maritimes, kept Newfoundland Island
-1784: claimed New Caledonia, begin settling it within a decade
-1806: successfully captured Rio de la Plata
-1815: gained the southern cone (gray part in this map)

19th century: Settled South America, South Africa, New Caledonia with those who would've settled in OTL Canada. Rupert's Land is sold to the US either in the 19th or 20th century due to low immigration, war debts, or other reasons.

If those territorial changes had happened, which parts of this altered British Empire would've stayed as British territories, or would they each have become independent like OTL South Africa, New Zealand, and Australia did?
 
I doubt that any of them would have stayed part of the Kingdom of Great Britain itself. I'm guessing they would have all ended up as Dominions of some sort. There's certainly no way they could have stayed any closer to Britain than say Canada, as they were geographically much more distant. The only distant colonies that Britain has been able to retain are those which are sparely populated and serve mostly as military bases: Gibraltar, the Falklands, etc.
 
Top