Two new posts that I didn't notice, and on my birthday besides.
Glad you two liked it. Any suggestions for improvement and/or filling in the blanks?
Glad you two liked it. Any suggestions for improvement and/or filling in the blanks?
The Rise and Fall of the Afrikaner Confederation: 1575-2004
- Thread starter MerryPrankster
- Start date
<i>Said constitution limits suffrage to male heads of household, establishes the Dutch Reformed Church as the only legal religious body, and guarantees the rights of property, freedom of speech and press (except for heresy), and some other things.</i>
Given the time period, I don't think <i>limit</i> is the right word. For the time period this program is radically progressive, almost revolutionary.
Given the time period, I don't think <i>limit</i> is the right word. For the time period this program is radically progressive, almost revolutionary.
I think the male heads of household rule was how the Puritans in New England did it. I don't recall if there were any property qualifications.
Do you think I should include some?
Given both of them are colonial societies where natives were initially not a problem (most of the New England Indians were dead of European diseases at this point and in South Africa, there were only a small number of San/Khoi living in the area at the time), they might have existed, but due to the ease of getting land, they might as well not exist.
Do you think I should include some?
Given both of them are colonial societies where natives were initially not a problem (most of the New England Indians were dead of European diseases at this point and in South Africa, there were only a small number of San/Khoi living in the area at the time), they might have existed, but due to the ease of getting land, they might as well not exist.
About the property qualification, hmm, dunno. Universal white male suffrage is pretty radical for the time, but then for the time the protestant fringes were the radical progressives, though those fringes tended to be mainly in England and Germany, not Holland. I wonder if you might get a situation where who can vote is undefined, but its tacitly assumed to be 'the elect,' which is to say, calvinist heads of household. Later historians might characterize the proto-Afrikaner state as Patriarchal Democracy. Of course, if you do this you get some of the same problems that the Puritans in New England had--the struggle to decide if one was elect or not--which led to all sorts of wild religious deviations.
I like your attention to Christian and Protestant variance very much. Your account of the conflicts between the Campbellites, the old-line Calvinists, and so on rang very true, as did some of the later controversies in Confederation society (over theonomy and rehabilitating Catholicism). Same with the controversy about supporting the Taiping. This stuff rings pretty true and shows an attention to detail.
A few thoughts:
(1) I'm not sure about the Irish Catholic deportation, especially to New England. Cromwell's Republic was a much more efficient and organized state than the royal government that preceded it, but I doubt that it still had the resources to deport 150,000 people, even over a period of years. I could be wrong about this, though. But I am more certain that if they were going to export Irish Catholics, they wouldn't export them to the Puritan colonies in New England. The Roundheads deeply, deeply admired those colonies and wouldn't be about to flood them with a horde of dirty papists (so to speak). Indeed, is it possible or even likely that this kind of forced deportation would violate colonial charters which the deeply legalistic English government would hesitate to violate?
2) The ideology of the government is too 'Afrikaner.' In OTL the Afrikaners remained frozen into their racist version of Calvinism because of isolation, parochial/rural populations, and a siege mentality. But your Afrikaner state is an international power as of the early 19th century. Its cities are going to be self-confident, cosmopolitan places and its citizens are going to have to grapple with Indian culture, Chinese culture, Arab/Muslim culture and ideas in a way that didn't happen in OTL. The inevitable result is going to be much more ideological drift than happened in OTL, especially given that your Confederation is going to attract some of the more religiously fervent, which is an ideologically volatile subset of mankind. In the late 19th Century West, you're seeing the rise of scientific, racist, eugenicist scepticism. I could see this having a big impact in your ATL confederation. In fact, one of the themes that might underlie your Confederations 20th century history might be the cultural conflict between narrow-minded, religious, populist/localist, somewhat racially progressive, and morally strict, and, ultimately, theonomist calvinism agaisnt intellectual, scientific, racist, eugenicist, dirigiste, morally permissive, and non-expansionist elements (the non-expansionism perhaps because these folks are quietly confident that miscegenation and the breeding of the lower classes will bring down their competitors).
I like your attention to Christian and Protestant variance very much. Your account of the conflicts between the Campbellites, the old-line Calvinists, and so on rang very true, as did some of the later controversies in Confederation society (over theonomy and rehabilitating Catholicism). Same with the controversy about supporting the Taiping. This stuff rings pretty true and shows an attention to detail.
A few thoughts:
(1) I'm not sure about the Irish Catholic deportation, especially to New England. Cromwell's Republic was a much more efficient and organized state than the royal government that preceded it, but I doubt that it still had the resources to deport 150,000 people, even over a period of years. I could be wrong about this, though. But I am more certain that if they were going to export Irish Catholics, they wouldn't export them to the Puritan colonies in New England. The Roundheads deeply, deeply admired those colonies and wouldn't be about to flood them with a horde of dirty papists (so to speak). Indeed, is it possible or even likely that this kind of forced deportation would violate colonial charters which the deeply legalistic English government would hesitate to violate?
2) The ideology of the government is too 'Afrikaner.' In OTL the Afrikaners remained frozen into their racist version of Calvinism because of isolation, parochial/rural populations, and a siege mentality. But your Afrikaner state is an international power as of the early 19th century. Its cities are going to be self-confident, cosmopolitan places and its citizens are going to have to grapple with Indian culture, Chinese culture, Arab/Muslim culture and ideas in a way that didn't happen in OTL. The inevitable result is going to be much more ideological drift than happened in OTL, especially given that your Confederation is going to attract some of the more religiously fervent, which is an ideologically volatile subset of mankind. In the late 19th Century West, you're seeing the rise of scientific, racist, eugenicist scepticism. I could see this having a big impact in your ATL confederation. In fact, one of the themes that might underlie your Confederations 20th century history might be the cultural conflict between narrow-minded, religious, populist/localist, somewhat racially progressive, and morally strict, and, ultimately, theonomist calvinism agaisnt intellectual, scientific, racist, eugenicist, dirigiste, morally permissive, and non-expansionist elements (the non-expansionism perhaps because these folks are quietly confident that miscegenation and the breeding of the lower classes will bring down their competitors).
At work now, so I can't make a lot of comments.
I will think about your quibbles. Thanks for those, and the compliments.
I will think about your quibbles. Thanks for those, and the compliments.
Okay...
1. Could they deport them to the Southern colonies then? I've heard the southern colonies described as "cavalier" at one point, and that term was also used to describe Royalists. Perhaps, rather than contaminate their ideological kin with filthy papists, they dump them on the colonies they think are likely to cause trouble?
There's also Maryland (Catholic) and Rhode Island (free to all) to dump them...
2. Some of those ideas may be butterflied away, although there will be Darwinism/evolution. About the less religious, I figured they would be the least likely to be imperialistic than the more religious, as they would not be devoted to the "the Indian Ocean is our Canaan, everyone else will be hewers of wood and drawers of water" ideology.
But how do you think the Confederation's political scene would be affected by your ideas?
1. Could they deport them to the Southern colonies then? I've heard the southern colonies described as "cavalier" at one point, and that term was also used to describe Royalists. Perhaps, rather than contaminate their ideological kin with filthy papists, they dump them on the colonies they think are likely to cause trouble?
There's also Maryland (Catholic) and Rhode Island (free to all) to dump them...
2. Some of those ideas may be butterflied away, although there will be Darwinism/evolution. About the less religious, I figured they would be the least likely to be imperialistic than the more religious, as they would not be devoted to the "the Indian Ocean is our Canaan, everyone else will be hewers of wood and drawers of water" ideology.
But how do you think the Confederation's political scene would be affected by your ideas?
Based on some comments by Flocc, here's a revised map.
Apparently, OTL's Sikh empire (prior to its conquest by the Raj) corresponded roughly to OTL Pakistan, complete with a capital in Lahore.
I've adjusted the borders accordingly.
Apparently, OTL's Sikh empire (prior to its conquest by the Raj) corresponded roughly to OTL Pakistan, complete with a capital in Lahore.
I've adjusted the borders accordingly.
I can't remember, since I never really calculated just how large the total population of the Confederation was, let alone which areas were more heavily populated.
(India is probably the largest in terms of raw numbers, but I don't think it was as high as OTL's prior to the nuclear exchange. The "deathrate drops, birthrate stays the same, birthrate drops" period took already took place in the Afrikaner domains due to the internal peace and development they imposed.)
Given how the Afrikaner Confederation is more "European" than OTL's South Africa, I'm thinking of having them introduce UHC for whites and for non-whites who've served in the military at some point.
Would after WWII be a good time? In OTL, that's when Britain introduced the NHS and, since the aftermath of WWI provoked the Great Revolt, the Afrikaner leadership could fear the same thing happening again, especially with Communism thrown into the mix.
Would after WWII be a good time? In OTL, that's when Britain introduced the NHS and, since the aftermath of WWI provoked the Great Revolt, the Afrikaner leadership could fear the same thing happening again, especially with Communism thrown into the mix.
terence
Banned
I have only just found this post, having seen the link as the tag on other posts.
Some observations and I am sorry to be a nitpicker--but this is my territory!
I am not sure that Cape Town could support a population of 30,000 at the cusp of the 16th/17th C. The problem is a lack of arable land for farming and really rough seas for fishing. The English American colonies were only 50,000 strong in 1650 with all that fertile land and friendly river mouths.
One reason that the Dutch never had any extensive colonial settlements on the scale of the English, Spanish and Portugese is that exploration was specifically mercantile. The VOC did not just want to control trade--it also placed a beach towel on hearts, minds, souls and freedom of action.
They actively tried to prevent any settlement outside of the tiny area around Cape Town for decades. The crooks, ne'er-do-wells, deserters etc. who legged it beyond the hedge of bitter thorns were effectively outlaws. Their descendents who populated (in a gypsylike way) the Boland and the Karoo were Trekboers--itinerant farmers. In OTL they only started to move East and North in the mid and late 18th C when VOC control relaxed and the Khoi-Khoi had been sufficiently reduced by smallpox.
Interestingly, the Groot-Trekkers of the 19th C (OTL) only expanded into areas already depopulated by the Mfecane.
OK, you have created a different Dutchman--but...................
Communications in pre-19th C Africa were REALLY BAD. Keeping control of the Cape and the hinterland...? The VOC couldn't develop cohesive control 200 miles inland in the 18th C and the British struggled in the mid 19th C.
Trekboers-Voortrekkers-Afrikaaners were and are characterised by their LACK of territorial ambition: they just want to be left alone and divorce themselves from the rest of the world---who do think coined the expression laager-mentality. (Not the drink).
Allowing for a more expansionary and visionary Afrikaaner ( I think that you have to allow at least a couple of generations) there could be some problems on reaching the Highveld in the early 17th C.
The Mfecane only occurred in the early 19th C and was linked to the introduction of Maize by the Portugese in the 16th C that allowed a population explosion. Mizikali probably bumped off a third to a half of the population between the Vaal and the Limpopo from 1815 and the Arab slave trade did the same for the Zambezi valley after 1700. In 1600 the Rozwi empire still existed and they gave the (firearmed equipped) Portugese a jolly good pasting as late as 1690.
On the subject of firearms--1600 is a bit early to propose any great power over edge weapons. Even European armies of this period would have only a small number of musketeers compared to pikemen or Halberdiers. In Stellenbosch there is a place called the VOC Kruithouse: the old armoury, one can actually play with genuine period weapons. Try hefting a Roer, (musket) from the 1660s--the damn thing is four and a half feet long and weighs a ton. I have seen in the UK, but not tried out, earlier versions c. 1580 and they are bigger and clumsier--forget shooting without a support or tripod or hitting anything more than 50 metres out. Being exclusively matchlock, the rate of fire could be measured in days. The 'Brown-Bess' style musket only appeared in the 1720s and shorter, rifled, weapons suitable for horseback only arrived in the early 1800s.
Powder becomes a problem too. You can make powder in the bush if you find the sulphur, but preparing the saltpetre means staying in one place for several weeks to allow the animal poo, urine etc. to ferment and then you have to dry it, corn it and granulate it. Hand-made powder has a short shelf life and doesn't like to travel and will be VERY susceptible to the humidity of the lowveld.
Travel (see communication above) would be an absolute bastard. One of the reasons for the slow occupation of the Southern African interior is that it is not a happy country for horses. There is very little fodder (In the Boer War the British had to import fodder from Argentina) and scant water. Rinderpest and Foot & Mouth was also endemic until the 1820s. So there is jolly good reason why Ox-wagons were the preferred form of transport.
Gold
Gold has been mined from Malawi to Pilgrim's Rest since antiquity but in very small quantities before the 19th C. (I have panned for gold myself in Graskop, just for fun, and found TWO flecks!) The placer gold in the Barberton area ( your de kaap valley) as well as the Witwatersrand disappeared very fast. Most Southern African gold is reef gold in conglomorate and can only be mined with the type of machinery only developed towards the middle of the 19th C and extracted with 19th C chemistry. Although there was some surface gold on the Witwatersrand when George Harrison made the first strike, for some reason the original tribes never seemed to have mined it. (There was so little surface gold that Harrison sold his claim for Twenty-pounds and moved on!)
Health and disease.
OK, you have discovered Quinine, what about Blackwater fever (that's a reaction to quinine resistant malaria), Sleeping Sickness, Bilhazia, blackfly fever, sandfy fever--maybe those 17th Century guys were tough-what with plenty of plague, smallpox etc. back in Europe.
Potatoes
You can only grow them at altitude (1000 ft plus) with any success.
They must have used the cable car to get them up there. For sure- no one is going to lug guns up that slope. If the 'heavy' guns were demi-cannon or culverin they would weigh 2500Kg and with a range of 500M tops, their shot would fall short of the old town (OTL) or the harbour by four kilometres.
On enslaving the San (Bushmen)--could never happen. The poor buggers just die. It was tried by both Bantu and Dutch. Khoi, San and Strandloopers were from the same basic ethnic stock but radically separated by language and culture and are nothing to do with Bantu (Black Africans). When confronted by the Khoi, Bantu or Europeans, the San just moved somewhere more inhospitable. They did not plant, did not herd, did not even understand the concept of land ownership, tenure or 'their' territory.
As far as 'Open Range' is concerned--rather think Chapparal. The Karoo is a semi-desert.
Ahem. This is the 17th C. The population of London in 1600 is 150,000 and Amsterdam 60,000.
Um. Where is the wood for a 17th C Navy to come from? Imported from Sweden perhaps?
What is a Xhosa chief (Prince) doing North of the Witwatersrand? In 1739 the people here would be Tsonga or Shangaan or most likely the original Shona (Karanga)-all non-Nguni people.
Last edited:
Ouch. Looks like I might need to revise some things.
If Table Mountain is too far away to bombard the Spanish from using the type of cannon they might have available, are there any sites in/around Cape Town that would work?
Re: enslaving the Bushmen, okay. I guess I'll just have them all die.
Re: 90,000, at this point, we're talking about Calvinists from all over Europe. A lot of them probably wouldn't be Dutch.
Re: King Thomas' African name, I'm not familiar with the tribes you're discussing. What might a better name be?
If Table Mountain is too far away to bombard the Spanish from using the type of cannon they might have available, are there any sites in/around Cape Town that would work?
Re: enslaving the Bushmen, okay. I guess I'll just have them all die.
Re: 90,000, at this point, we're talking about Calvinists from all over Europe. A lot of them probably wouldn't be Dutch.
Re: King Thomas' African name, I'm not familiar with the tribes you're discussing. What might a better name be?
terence
Banned
Soory for late reply--missed this one.
Not really, using the artillery of the day. There is also the problem of getting anything heavy onto high ground. I must admit that's its a nice idea of raining down fire from above but not practical. However the old Town was right on the beach once Strand Street where the 17th Castle stands was the beach itself once. Table Bay is too wide for a boom--how about a couple of ships to bombard the Town/Fort from the sea?
Presumably a 16th C Spanish Fort would look more like the Spanish Forts in the Carribean and not like the present Cape Town castle that is designed like West Point.
That's a lot of ships and if the vessels went on to the East to make some profit on the voyage, they would be away for a year and a half at least.
n.b. The Spanish Armada, the greatest fleet of vessels put together in European history by the richest, strongest power in 1558 comprised 22 warships and 108 transports--every ship the Spanish and their allies could muster.
Not really, using the artillery of the day. There is also the problem of getting anything heavy onto high ground. I must admit that's its a nice idea of raining down fire from above but not practical. However the old Town was right on the beach once Strand Street where the 17th Castle stands was the beach itself once. Table Bay is too wide for a boom--how about a couple of ships to bombard the Town/Fort from the sea?
Presumably a 16th C Spanish Fort would look more like the Spanish Forts in the Carribean and not like the present Cape Town castle that is designed like West Point.
Just a whiff of plague or smallpox
Lets be realistic. A 30 Metre Caravelle-- crew and passengers--160-200? At a ratio of 1 to 3. A three month voyage and a 90% survival rate for those on board ( and a 75% survival rate for the ships themselves--it ain't called the Cape of Storms for nothing)- what, 1800 ship voyages? You cannot sail all-year round and a ship could at best make a voyage a year.
That's a lot of ships and if the vessels went on to the East to make some profit on the voyage, they would be away for a year and a half at least.
n.b. The Spanish Armada, the greatest fleet of vessels put together in European history by the richest, strongest power in 1558 comprised 22 warships and 108 transports--every ship the Spanish and their allies could muster.
Are you ready for this---the King of the Rozwi around 1670 was Tombolaikonachimwango (whew!)---the 'T' is pronounced as a plosive so it's often written T'ch--- sometimes called Changamire Dombo by the Portugese. So you are not far if with Thomas. Why not call him King Tom?
Last edited:
Instead of gunfire down from Table Mountain, perhaps the Afrikaners slip some people into the city, hijack a couple of ships, sail out into the bay, and start blasting while the main body of the Afrikaners pour down onto the fleet.
If I pushed the gold rush forward a century, would the transportation situation be improved? If the land beyond the Cape isn't suitable for an "Open Range" environment, that would delay things a bit.
Looks like I'll go with King Tom, then.
If I pushed the gold rush forward a century, would the transportation situation be improved? If the land beyond the Cape isn't suitable for an "Open Range" environment, that would delay things a bit.
Looks like I'll go with King Tom, then.