Without the Napoleonic Wars, it's very plausible the Dutch would've kept South Africa (the Cape Colony) as there is no Napoleon to occupy the Netherlands for France. So, in the event that this plays out, what would be the effects on the Cape Colony and ultimately modern South Africa?
WI: South Africa remains Dutch
- Thread starter PGSBHurricane
- Start date
the Boer Republics still wouldve existed and mightve survive, Balkanized south africa, In a nutshell. As Boers hated the dutch and english IOTL, so they went inland to create their own states. , More Boer Republics, I believe as the dutch seem to not care about that colony, their top priority is DEI and if some valuable resource was found on that, A dutch boer conflict is possible
Last edited:
Yes, There are many several Boer republics established before the trek. If the dutch continue to ignore them,
Portugal or Balkanized between the Boer Republics.
I think the Dutch could keep The Cape, although I think they would need to shift control from the VOC to the Dutch Government and give the Boers more autonomy. If they play their cards right, the Trekkers would be like the Pioneers in OTL's U.S., settling outwards to expand the Dutch domain rather than to escape VOC rule.
I think this would be more or less unavoidable. The VOC was basicly on the brink of bankrupcy, until it actualy went bankrupt. Assuming we avoid/change the French revolution I think it would be inevitabe the VOC would go bankrupt and like happened OTL the Dutch governement would take over the VOC colonies. I believe the Dutch republic would give quite some amount of autonomy to the Capecolony and let them rule themselves for most matters.
The biggest problem would probably be that it would open up the Cape to other immigrants, especialy if they look at the succesof the English North American (and Australian) colonies. This would annoy the Boers, even if the settlers are calvinist Dutch, instead of English. So I expect some kind of Boer trek will happen. But I think like you said more in the sense of the American pioneers, thus still somewhat loyal to the country than theBoer treks where they founded seperate countries.
I think that the Dutch might even keep it/get it back after Napoleonic Wars, if they: a) give Cape peninsula to the British as a Naval base and b) are willing to make concessions elsewhere.
Or even if they allow the British to access the port of Cape Town (or Kaapstad as the Dutch called it). Hey, the Brits buying food and supplies for the journey to India would bring in some money.
A very interesting scenario with so mamny ramifications to explore:
- For how long Netherlands and Dutch Cape/South Africa would have been linked?
- How far inland Dutch settlers would get?
- How many Europeans would be living there, more or less than in OTL?
- Provided butterflies remained limited, how this Dutch South Africa, would alter the Scramble for Africa, other imperial powers and even European affairs?
I guess the Netherlands and Dutch South Africa could get as long as it would be regarded ok to consider Bantu population foreigners or on how this Dutch South African state would be organized, maybe relying heavily on indigenous reservations as American countries did to keep natives at bay from the civic life for a while.
Regarding the Trek, it would take another spirit, but it would exist and depending on how big the settlers flow would be, it could go beyond OTL South African borders. That also depends on the next question, which is the total population: Netherlands had a very succesful 20th century, with its population jumping from 5 million to 16 million, compared to France (40m to 60m) or Germany (54m to 80m).
Turning South Africa into a Dutch Australia/NZ/Canada, we could easily envisioned 10 million Europeans/Whites living in Southern Africa by the end of the 20th century, which would make the local history and politics even more complicated than it was in OTL. Also, as Dutch colonial attitudes were in general more regressive than the British, we can see on how that would play.
Scramble of Africa would be very different, as the Dutch would be occupying what was the core of the British expansion. They would probably go for the Congo Basin and we wouldn't see British settlers in Africa as it happened in OTL.
South African gold mines that once produced 2/3 of world demand, would make Netherlands much wealthier and powerful than in OTL, having a stronger presence in the world affairs. Keeping butterflies at minimum, they would be an active voice in European affairs throughout the 20th century, would probably have annexed Flanders, kept more colonies and holding them longer, taking concessions at China, etc.
- For how long Netherlands and Dutch Cape/South Africa would have been linked?
- How far inland Dutch settlers would get?
- How many Europeans would be living there, more or less than in OTL?
- Provided butterflies remained limited, how this Dutch South Africa, would alter the Scramble for Africa, other imperial powers and even European affairs?
I guess the Netherlands and Dutch South Africa could get as long as it would be regarded ok to consider Bantu population foreigners or on how this Dutch South African state would be organized, maybe relying heavily on indigenous reservations as American countries did to keep natives at bay from the civic life for a while.
Regarding the Trek, it would take another spirit, but it would exist and depending on how big the settlers flow would be, it could go beyond OTL South African borders. That also depends on the next question, which is the total population: Netherlands had a very succesful 20th century, with its population jumping from 5 million to 16 million, compared to France (40m to 60m) or Germany (54m to 80m).
Turning South Africa into a Dutch Australia/NZ/Canada, we could easily envisioned 10 million Europeans/Whites living in Southern Africa by the end of the 20th century, which would make the local history and politics even more complicated than it was in OTL. Also, as Dutch colonial attitudes were in general more regressive than the British, we can see on how that would play.
Scramble of Africa would be very different, as the Dutch would be occupying what was the core of the British expansion. They would probably go for the Congo Basin and we wouldn't see British settlers in Africa as it happened in OTL.
South African gold mines that once produced 2/3 of world demand, would make Netherlands much wealthier and powerful than in OTL, having a stronger presence in the world affairs. Keeping butterflies at minimum, they would be an active voice in European affairs throughout the 20th century, would probably have annexed Flanders, kept more colonies and holding them longer, taking concessions at China, etc.
No way that the British would allow such mineral-rich areas remain under Dutch/Kaap rule. Only way they can keep their independence is if all ( or most ) of the mineral-rich areas ( meaning Orange and Transvaal ) belong to the British. With the little bit of diamonds in Cape and other minerals, but that's it. Kaap must remain mostly agricultural state.
The problem is that if France never conquers the Netherlands, then how could the British make the Dutch to hand over Orange and Transvaal to them?
The only way I see is for the British to found a colony in southern Africa for themselves (Natal is often suggested) and then beat the Dutch to those areas.
Natal is far away from minefields and it might most likely be butterflied away in such scenario. Goldmines would be well inside Dutch South Africa and British could very well participate on profits as much as they did in let's say South America, Persia or China.
The first major discovery of minerals was in 1866, that is way past the POD. The English must have had hindsight to have this motivation.
Emperor-of-New-Zealand
Kicked
In theory, could the British "invest" in the VOC and become shareholders?
No point - it was nationalised by the Batavian Republic on 1st March 1796, and dissolved on 31st December 1799 IOTL. It had been in trouble for decades - I don't see it lasting that much longer ITTL.
