WI Brazilian settler colony in modern Namibia?

Lusitania

Donor
Those countries add up to a pretty gigantic area to police. While I can see Britain claiming some of it and letting local African Kingdoms rule the rest, once the Scramble for Africa begins among the European Powers, Britain would accede part of the area to a minor European Power, perhaps the Dutch? That way Britain won't have to police the whole area themselves while not feeling threatened by a major power in the area, which was the exact purpose Portugal served.
But While I initially ignored the part about Britain taking over all of Southern Africa, I am trying to determine why it would do so. The reason Portuguese were left controlling Angola and Mozambique was for balance of power as the Portuguese control meant that the British controlled it economically. Why would there of been a desire on Britain part to capture it? The fact that a "neutral" country controlled it meant that it was not being fought over by Germany and Britain.
 
But while I initially ignored the part about Britain taking over all of Southern Africa, I am trying to determine why it would do so.
The idea was it might be a result of clamping down on the Atlantic Slave Trade when Brazil (as opposed to Portugal) holds lands in Africa while not formally abolishing the slave trade; OTL (AIUI), they managed to avoid it getting to this point when the Portuguese king relocated back to Portugal, and the British could make sure that continental Portugal got their African possessions.
 
The idea was it might be a result of clamping down on the Atlantic Slave Trade when Brazil (as opposed to Portugal) holds lands in Africa while not formally abolishing the slave trade; OTL (AIUI), they managed to avoid it getting to this point when the Portuguese king relocated back to Portugal, and the British could make sure that continental Portugal got their African possessions.

While I could see the British putting economic pressure on Brazil to get rid of slavery if they had territory in Africa, I doubt they would take over a colony and start a crisis over it.
 

Lusitania

Donor
@damein fisher Yeah, I’ll admit that a lot of this was me seeing how close to plausibility we could get to a Portuguese equivalent to the Trekboers; turns out, not that close.
Well remember the idea I had with Cisplatine leaders and supporters fleeing to Africa resulted in Brazil establishing a fort in Walvis Bay. What if those cisplan people become Brazil version of trekboers? They flee into the sparsely populated arid areas stretching all the way to Botswana by 19th century. They might be intermarriage with some natives but they be a distinct group.
 
Last edited:
Well remember the idea I had with cisplan leaders and supporters fleeing to Africa resulted in Brazil establishing a fort in Walvis Bay. What if those cisplan people become Brazil version of trekboers? They flee into the sparsely populated arid areas stretching all the way to Botswana by 19th century. They might be intermarriage with some natives but they be a distinct group.

I assume you mean the Cisplatine War right?
 

That just gave the British the right to search ships suspected of being a slave ship and arrest the slave traders. It says nothing about Britain being free to take these ships, and even if it did, taking material and taking territory are two vastly different things. Further more, for this timeline to even work, this "colony" wouldn't even really count as such until the 1860's, before that it would be primarily forts and missionaries; and in 1850 Brazil got rid of the Slave trade and though slavery continued, the Aberdeen Act was against the Slave Trade, not Slavery itself necessarily.
 
It would be difficult to avoid some sort of Scramble with a POD after 1800. It is just a natural outcome of technological improvement on Europe's part. That and pre-existing rivalries.
Thinking about this, I'm not sure I buy this -- if nothing else, it's extremely possible with a post-1800 PoD to avoid the rise of powerful nation states like Germany and Italy, to say nothing of our discussions on the extent to which Portugal-Brazil can maintain African possessions, or the non-existence of Belgium. A very different Europe would have obvious implications for the nature of Europe's interest in Africa, even assuming similar technological progress and "exploration" to OTL.
 

Lusitania

Donor
Thinking about this, I'm not sure I buy this -- if nothing else, it's extremely possible with a post-1800 PoD to avoid the rise of powerful nation states like Germany and Italy, to say nothing of our discussions on the extent to which Portugal-Brazil can maintain African possessions, or the non-existence of Belgium. A very different Europe would have obvious implications for the nature of Europe's interest in Africa, even assuming similar technological progress and "exploration" to OTL.

In the 1960s the Americas were either independent or all spoken for, same with majority of Asia, only Africa was devoid of colonies (granted the majority of the coast was already spoken for. Germany and France had different reasons to increase the number of colonies and repaint the map with their national flag. The Berlin conference or as we know it was the Europeans way of dividing up the African continent without having to resort to fighting each other.

The German's desire to have a colonial empire as well as the French need to color the map blue to make up for the loses during the 19th century. Those requirements would not be eliminated or swept away with the arrival of a few hundred Brazilian troops and missionaries. The only requirement would be for the Brazilians to be invited to the table and that the "big boys" recognize Brazil existing claims.
 
The German's desire to have a colonial empire as well as the French need to color the map blue to make up for the loses during the 19th century. Those requirements would not be eliminated or swept away with the arrival of a few hundred Brazilian troops and missionaries. The only requirement would be for the Brazilians to be invited to the table and that the "big boys" recognize Brazil existing claims.

If Brazil does establish a significant presence in Africa [even if only minorly compared to the grown ups], they will almost certainly be invited to the conference.
 
That just gave the British the right to search ships suspected of being a slave ship and arrest the slave traders. It says nothing about Britain being free to take these ships, and even if it did, taking material and taking territory are two vastly different things. Further more, for this timeline to even work, this "colony" wouldn't even really count as such until the 1860's, before that it would be primarily forts and missionaries; and in 1850 Brazil got rid of the Slave trade and though slavery continued, the Aberdeen Act was against the Slave Trade, not Slavery itself necessarily.
It was still a serious act of war against Brazil, which included British naval raids of the Brazilian coast and British trial of Brazilian citizens. It’s not too hard to imagine Britain taking the thing to the next logical step if Brazil had had African colonies.
 
It was still a serious act of war against Brazil, which included British naval raids of the Brazilian coast and British trial of Brazilian citizens. It’s not too hard to imagine Britain taking the thing to the next logical step if Brazil had had African colonies.

I just don't see it, by the time Brazilian Namibia would be an actual colony and not just a collections of forts and missionaries, Brazil would have abolished the Slave Trade, which is what pissed the UK off. For this to make sense, we need a Britain willing to make "serious acts of war" over the practice of Slavery period, not just the slave trade, and I don't see it happening.
 

Lusitania

Donor
I just don't see it, by the time Brazilian Namibia would be an actual colony and not just a collections of forts and missionaries, Brazil would have abolished the Slave Trade, which is what pissed the UK off. For this to make sense, we need a Britain willing to make "serious acts of war" over the practice of Slavery period, not just the slave trade, and I don't see it happening.
Brazil could also follow the American lead and ban the importation of slaves. Therefore stopping the slave trade while like US continue slavery
 
Brazil could also follow the American lead and ban the importation of slaves. Therefore stopping the slave trade while like US continue slavery

I'm pretty sure Brazil did do that in the 1850's kind of because of the British blockade from the slave trade
 
Top