WI no diamonds/gold in Transvaal? Possible survival of independent Boer republics?

So what if there was no discovery of diamonds or gold in the Transvaal? What are the political and demographic repercussions? Would the Transvaal still be an attractive location for British immigration in the late 19th century?
 
Transvaal would still block the access of the British cape colony to central Southern Africa. That alone guarantees that the British will sooner or later want it IMHO.

To keep the Boer republics independent, they must be able to defend their independence. That requires a much larger demographic basis for themselves, allowing for more men and better supplies in war, and alliances to other European countries that actually can challenge Britain.
 
Was the Cape Town to Cairo railway going to go through the Transvaal? Maybe that could be an alternate spark for conflict between the British and the Boers.
 

katchen

Banned
Try an alternative Boer Republic around what is now Windhoek, Namibia. The Boers might have a tough time defeating the Hereros, but if they beat them, they would be in an area the British would not want.
Or have the Boers keep going across the Limpopo to the area around what is now Harare, Zimbabwe. Much of it is high up enough to be Tsetse fly free and once again, it is away from major gold and diamond deposits (or was until fairly recently) and safely behind Portuguese Nova Sofala and Tete. They would have some breathing room and quite possibly could become part of Portuguese Mozambique and get protection from the British that way.
 
quite possibly could become part of Portuguese Mozambique and get protection from the British that way.
Potential for protection or not, I am rather dubious about idea of the Boers voluntarily accepting the suzerainty of a Roman Catholic government.
 
during the first Boer War, the English decided that war wasn't worth it. A decade or so later, they decided it was. What changed? Gold.

Take away the diamonds, you diminish Cecil Rhodes to a sickly nobody (diamonds made him his money, which he then used to buy influence, which he then used to be the big player in South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe, and who dreamed of the cape to cairo railway). He's the founding father of SA, and Z, and Z. Keep the resources, but send Rhodes elsewhere for his youth health issues and you radically change history in that part of the world. Getting rid of the resources, keeps Rhodes, and also radically changes history in that part of the world, with ripples affecting many corners of the globe.

Most likely, the British are happy to control the coast, and let the Boers farm in peace.

Would Bush the elder have defended Kuwait if all they produced was brocoli? Nope. Would England have spent so much coin to dominate southern Africa if all it had was farm crops? Nope.

And, the Portuguese were lucky to manage a wet dream, let alone an African empire, so count them out of the equation.
 
Top