What if no Belgium?

[Vnix]

I don't know. I was thinking of adding Brussels to the freestate, but Brussels was a Fench speaking city; at least the upper and probably the middle class considred themselves that way. So in the end I decided to add it to the french areas. Still i could see it different in a negotiated Talleyrand division. Although to be fair, I don't think the Netherlands would care that much. They are losing a big part of their country anyway and wether Brussels was French, Antwerpian, Dutch or Prussian wouldn't realy matter for them.


Personally I prefer a Flanders-Walloon split between the Netherlands and France, which I think would be better for the Netherlands, the Flemish, France and probably even the Walloons (they will be a very important part of a much stronger country). I am perfectly willing to give up the Walloon industrial base for a lack of linguistic problems. Also the Catholic-Protestant divide will not be as unbalanced as when Wallonia would be part of the Netherlands. If Flanders would be part of the Netherlands, it would be 40% protestant/60% catholic. If the Walloon areas were included the catholics would totaly dominate the country, which would probably cause problems in the traditional protestant Netherlands (OTL was 60% protestant/40% catholic).

brussels at the time was not yet uniformly french, the earlier the POD the more likely the Dutch language can be maintained. If a United Kingdom of the Netherlands were to remain the most important party to not hate Dutch would be the Church. The Catholic Church saw Dutch as a heretical language of the equally heretical protestant faith, IF Willem I would allow religious schools to be paid for by the government this could prevent a lot of problems from arising.

Perhaps the law could state something like:
"Scholen in het Verenigd Koninkrijk der Nederlanden zullen onderwijs geven gebaseerd op Protestants-Christelijke normen en waarden en religieuze opzattingen danwel in Katholiek-Christelijke normen en waarden en religieuze opvattingen. Aldus zonder haatzaaing jegens eenander."

(in English: "Schools in the United Kingdom of the Netherlands will teach based upon Protestant-Christian norms and values and religious beliefs or in Catholic-Christian norms and values and religious beliefs. This without causing hatred against one another.")

This in conjunction with the removal of the ban on a Catholic becoming the Monarch and perhaps allowing the provinces to determine if they are Catholic or Protestant. Add to that the more liberal constitution Thorbecke has in OTL created and the United Kingdom of the Netherlands may actually survive.

Now if you guys want me to go into more about the various versions of the Dutch constitutions I can do so, but then I will need to go to the library and do a bit more research.

Then as to the Taalbesluit of 1823, I suggest Willem is to be more lenient, allowing French to be used still, but stimulating the populace to learn Dutch via tax benefits and have the schools teach Dutch as the primary language and French as the first foreign language.

Getting the frenchified Flemish notables to start speaking Dutch get them to be invited to the Royal Court and allow the King to grant noble titles, but have the Royal Court use DUTCH, not French, forcing those nobles to learn Dutch to get those nice titles. Ofcourse those notables would be granted an official translator so they can understand what's being said, while at the same time making sure they are outnumbered by the Dutch speakers.

I think this may help to enhance the prestige of the Dutch language and as such help the Dutch language to advance.

 

[wietze]

how about connecting the right to vote to the ability to speak dutch?

 

[Wendell]

Perhaps this should be a separate topic, but how realistic is it to partition Belhium among its neighbors after first having been established?

 

[pompejus]

Perhaps this should be a separate topic, but how realistic is it to partition Belhium among its neighbors after first having been established?

Unlikely, but not impossible. The bigest problem is that part of the creation of Belgium included protection from the major powers in Europe, including Britain and France. So in theory an attack on Belgium would mean an attack on all those powers; Britain used this in the First World war to declare war on Germany. There are basicly two ways to get around it.

First Belgium breaks on its own and Flanders joijns the Netherlands, while Wallonia joins France (I assume this is the way you want it divided). This is possible; there were after all tensions between the Flemish and Walloon. They never were so bad Belgium would split (not even now). So you have to increase those tensions and this must happen at a point before a seperate (from Dutch) Flemish identity has formed. So 19th century or early 20th century. Currently if belgium would split (something I doubt), Flanders would become an independent nation.

Secondly Belgium must screw up so big, no other country wants to protect its neutrality. Belgium must do something immensly stupid. There was a discovery a couple of years back that Leo II wanted to attack the netherlands, hoping to conquer the catholic parts. This is the kind of screw up that would work. Have Belgium do it, the Netherlands manages to beat Belgium (with the help of Prussia and France perhaps) and nobody is going to defends the Belgian neutrality. At this poit it suddenly becomes easier to attack belgium and divide it at some point in the future.

 

[Wendell]

Unlikely, but not impossible. The bigest problem is that part of the creation of Belgium included protection from the major powers in Europe, including Britain and France. So in theory an attack on Belgium would mean an attack on all those powers; Britain used this in the First World war to declare war on Germany. There are basicly two ways to get around it.

First Belgium breaks on its own and Flanders joijns the Netherlands, while Wallonia joins France (I assume this is the way you want it divided). This is possible; there were after all tensions between the Flemish and Walloon. They never were so bad Belgium would split (not even now). So you have to increase those tensions and this must happen at a point before a seperate (from Dutch) Flemish identity has formed. So 19th century or early 20th century. Currently if belgium would split (something I doubt), Flanders would become an independent nation.

Secondly Belgium must screw up so big, no other country wants to protect its neutrality. Belgium must do something immensly stupid. There was a discovery a couple of years back that Leo II wanted to attack the netherlands, hoping to conquer the catholic parts. This is the kind of screw up that would work. Have Belgium do it, the Netherlands manages to beat Belgium (with the help of Prussia and France perhaps) and nobody is going to defends the Belgian neutrality. At this poit it suddenly becomes easier to attack belgium and divide it at some point in the future.

Any idea around what year it was that this Dutch-Belgian war might have been able to occur?

 

[pompejus]

Any idea around what year it was that this Dutch-Belgian war might have been able to occur?

Around the Krimean war. Leopold II wanted to use it as a distraction. It never happened because he asked France if it would be a good idea and when Napoleon III stopped laughing at him, he told him it wasn't. I believe the Belgians members on this board are convinced that Leo II would never been able to convince the Belgian parliament for it to happen.

 

[Wendell]

Around the Krimean war. Leopold II wanted to use it as a distraction. It never happened because he asked France if it would be a good idea and when Napoleon III stopped laughing at him, he told him it wasn't. I believe the Belgians members on this board are convinced that Leo II would never been able to convince the Belgian parliament for it to happen.

Nappy III passed over an opportunity to grow his empire?

 

[pompejus]

Nappy III passed over an opportunity to grow his empire?

It was not a plan to expand Nappy III's empire. It was an idea to expand Leo II's empire. Nappy wasn't interested in that.

 

[Vnix]

how about connecting the right to vote to the ability to speak dutch?

that would really cause a lot of problems, that would make the "belgians" really explode

 

[Wendell]

It was not a plan to expand Nappy III's empire. It was an idea to expand Leo II's empire. Nappy wasn't interested in that.

True, but the end result might have meant gains for France.

 

[Xgentis]

Around the Krimean war. Leopold II wanted to use it as a distraction. It never happened because he asked France if it would be a good idea and when Napoleon III stopped laughing at him, he told him it wasn't. I believe the Belgians members on this board are convinced that Leo II would never been able to convince the Belgian parliament for it to happen.

I wouldn't go that far at that time anti-dutch feeling where still pretty much alive. But war is bad for business.

 

[ingemann]

It depends on the Dutch relationship with the Great powers and who want's what they have. Look at Portugal, it was forced to give up claims to the center of southern Africa by the UK so the same could happen to the Dutch.

Yes but a united Netherlands are not portugal, it's in a entirely different weight class. By the great power it will be seen in the same category as Spain, de facto it will be in the same category as Italy.

 

[ingemann]

Before I made some calculations based on OTL growth in Netherlands, so I decide to look into the population growth of Prussia also, and here without including the conquered territories, Prussia grew with 300% in the periode where Netherlands grew with 250%, and it seem to have been quite spread out over Prussia (from the German to the Polish areas). This was surprisingly high, especially as the average growth of the Germanic state was 250% (UK excepted with 400% growth). My explanation would be economy of scale, the bigger size of Prussia and it economy allowed a higher growth rate thanks to specialisation and greater urbanisation. Here Netherlands will have many of the same benefits.

So let us try increasing their growth to 1900.
So the Dutch and Flemish population increase to 6 million each: 12 all in all.
The Wallon growth rate was comparative with the French one, but here internal migration can help. So let put this at 100% growth: That give us 4 million.
Also let put Luxembourg and immigration at plus 1 million

This give us 17 million at 1900, around half the population of France or UK. Again Netherlands do not become a superpower but suddenly it can't be ignored, it will likely be treated as least among the great powers, or the greatest among the medium powers, through I think with the Dutch empire the former is more likely.

Wallons have gone from a third of the population to less than a quarter, not small enough to be ignored, but neither big enough to sabotage the stability of the state.

 

[pompejus]

This give us 17 million at 1900, around half the population of France or UK. Again Netherlands do not become a superpower but suddenly it can't be ignored, it will likely be treated as least among the great powers, or the greatest among the medium powers, through I think with the Dutch empire the former is more likely.

The United Kingdom of the Netherlands will be a power on par with Spain or Italy, or even above it. Still behind countries like France, Britain, Germany, Austria and Russia.

 

[ingemann]

The United Kingdom of the Netherlands will be a power on par with Spain or Italy, or even above it. Still behind countries like France, Britain, Germany, Austria and Russia.

Yes if we reach 17 million, it will be ahead of Spain both in reality and in the general perspective. Italy is another history, until WW1 people really didn't have any idea how weak Italy were, and on paper it will look stronger than the Netherlands. De facto it's a different story, Italy was in many way a modern state with around 20 million people in the north, while the south were a colony which could vote. This showed the weaknesses of Italy later. But until Italy have shown its own weakness, it will be treated like any other European national state with 30 million people. As such it will be treated as a better potential ally than Netherlands, ironic the English and Germans may be only ones treating the Netherlands better, the English out of a fear of a united German-Dutch navy (which would be a real treat to UK), while the German out of the real affection the Germans seem to have had for the Dutch. Also the fact that the Dutch real and clear enemy will be France, will make the Dutch lean toward Germany.

 

[Parma]

Before I made some calculations based on OTL growth in Netherlands, so I decide to look into the population growth of Prussia also, and here without including the conquered territories, Prussia grew with 300% in the periode where Netherlands grew with 250%, and it seem to have been quite spread out over Prussia (from the German to the Polish areas). This was surprisingly high, especially as the average growth of the Germanic state was 250% (UK excepted with 400% growth). My explanation would be economy of scale, the bigger size of Prussia and it economy allowed a higher growth rate thanks to specialisation and greater urbanisation. Here Netherlands will have many of the same benefits.

So let us try increasing their growth to 1900.
So the Dutch and Flemish population increase to 6 million each: 12 all in all.
The Wallon growth rate was comparative with the French one, but here internal migration can help. So let put this at 100% growth: That give us 4 million.
Also let put Luxembourg and immigration at plus 1 million

This give us 17 million at 1900, around half the population of France or UK. Again Netherlands do not become a superpower but suddenly it can't be ignored, it will likely be treated as least among the great powers, or the greatest among the medium powers, through I think with the Dutch empire the former is more likely.

Wallons have gone from a third of the population to less than a quarter, not small enough to be ignored, but neither big enough to sabotage the stability of the state.

Very interesting demographic information. If the United Kingdom of the Netherlands be intact, would the language question be that sharp as we know it?
Despite the demographic figures the industrial gravity of this nation would be in ( a small) part of Walloon and in Flemish cities as Ghent. The upperclass, aslo in the North tend to speak French. Would there be a language question, since the Belgium revolt was a kind of conspiraty of French revolutionairs, or would the sting taken out due do some sort of Federal system. ( might be after some disruption in the 1830ties
I think you are correct with you estimation that Antwerp will be the largest city of the Nehterlands and might be the centre of gouvernment.
For colonies I for see, an increase of the Gold coast setlements, since it will be recognized as a lucrative marked for industrial products, and might be due to finaly some succes of plantations. Any expansion in Africa would sooner or later interfere iwht Franche and of the UK. Resulitn in different London treaty of 1870. Indonesia would probably faster ''pacified'. Althoug not a Great Power, it would be chalanged by the UK and Germany since it would have a considrable fleet. A fleet, not only to protect their trade lanes and colonie but also there own heavy industry makes it possible.

 

[Opunium]

Unlikely, but not impossible. The bigest problem is that part of the creation of Belgium included protection from the major powers in Europe, including Britain and France. So in theory an attack on Belgium would mean an attack on all those powers; Britain used this in the First World war to declare war on Germany. There are basicly two ways to get around it.

First Belgium breaks on its own and Flanders joijns the Netherlands, while Wallonia joins France (I assume this is the way you want it divided). This is possible; there were after all tensions between the Flemish and Walloon. They never were so bad Belgium would split (not even now). So you have to increase those tensions and this must happen at a point before a seperate (from Dutch) Flemish identity has formed. So 19th century or early 20th century. Currently if belgium would split (something I doubt), Flanders would become an independent nation.

Secondly Belgium must screw up so big, no other country wants to protect its neutrality. Belgium must do something immensly stupid. There was a discovery a couple of years back that Leo II wanted to attack the netherlands, hoping to conquer the catholic parts. This is the kind of screw up that would work. Have Belgium do it, the Netherlands manages to beat Belgium (with the help of Prussia and France perhaps) and nobody is going to defends the Belgian neutrality. At this poit it suddenly becomes easier to attack belgium and divide it at some point in the future.

I would love to read a TL about Leo II screwing up the invasion of the Netherlands and thus ending the short lived country of Belgium, which is divded by the Dutch, French and possibly Germans.

 

[pompejus]

I would love to read a TL about Leo II screwing up the invasion of the Netherlands and thus ending the short lived country of Belgium, which is divded by the Dutch, French and possibly Germans.

Actualy i don't think that would happen if he screwed up. My guess would be that the netherlands would just gain Belgian Limburg and perhaps Belgian Luxemburg (or even just Arlon, which spoke a Luxemburgian dialect. While France would gain a small part of southern Wallonia and Prussia a small part of Liege. The danget for belgium would be the next round. At this point it loses its protection. Nobody can claim to be neutral if you attack your neighbours.