What if sir Thomas Dale destroyed dutch in 1618.

[ATP]

England and Dutch fought over spice trade,and in 1618 Thomas Dale defeated dutch near Jakarta,but let them run.
Some plague killed him and part of his forces,dutch come back ,burn Jakarta,and take over all spicy islands.
They take much money from it in next 200 years.

British do not forget taking of island Run which was under their protection,and in 1664 take Manhattan in retaliation.In 1667 islands was officially exchanged.

But,let assume,tat british win,and take all spicy islands.And,also,do not have grudge against dutch and do not take New Amsterdam.

So,how Stuarts with more money would fare? Would they take New Amsterdam later,or not?
@Skallagrim ,maybe you have some ideas?

 

[Skallagrim]

Generally speaking, it's a great deal for Britain. Those islands are money-makers, and if Britain (already in a good position in the region) gets Jakarta under its control... well, then basically they have all of Indonesia (maybe excepting some odds and ends, maybe Portugal still gets an island or something, but who cares).

For the Dutch, this sucks, although it may in turn force the Dutch to develop their native economy more, as they have fewer colonial prospects. The Dutch would be a bit more like Germany in this regard; developed, but not big in the colonial game. (Note that losing serious prospects in the East means that the economic motivation behind the Dutch Cape Colony falls away, too.)

The British would have to consolidate their ATL holdings, and they can't be everywhere at once. They might wish to conquer Nieuw-Nederland at some point, but it won't exactly be their first priority. Meanwhile, the Dutchmen who in OTL settled in South Africa will instead go to Nieuw-Nederland, which will make it harder for the British to ever absorb the region -- even if they do conquer it.

I think that the Dutch will instead be more likely to lose other "money-making" colonies, and that in the long term, "Nieuw-Nederland" can easily become an overseas part of the Netherlands proper (compare France-outre-Mer).

 

[ATP]

Generally speaking, it's a great deal for Britain. Those islands are money-makers, and if Britain (already in a good position in the region) gets Jakarta under its control... well, then basically they have all of Indonesia (maybe excepting some odds and ends, maybe Portugal still gets an island or somethingt, but who cares).

For the Dutch, this sucks, although it may in turn force the Dutch to develop their native economy more, as they have fewer colonial prospects. The Dutch would be a bit more like Germany in this regard; developed, but not big in the colonial game. (Note that losing serious prospects in the East means that the economic motivation behind the Dutch Cape Colony falls away, too.)

The British would have to consolidate their ATL holdings, and they can't be everywhere at once. They might wish to conuer Nieuw-Nederland at some point, but it won't exactly be their first priority. Meanwhile, the Dutchmen who in OTL settled in South Africa will instead go to Nieuw-Nederland, which will make i harder for the British to ever absorb the region -- even if they do conquer it.

I think that the Dutch will instead be more likely to lose other "money-making" colonies, and that in the long term, "Nieuw-Nederland" can easily become an overseas part of the Netherlands proper (compare France-outre-Mer).

So,we would have "New Holland" ruling North America instead of USA ?
Becouse british in this scenario could be just not interested in gaining anything more there.Spices was as important as gold in those times.Spain would be too weak to do anything,and France naver have enough settlers to send there.

Could England with more money become Empire faster?

P.S People in those times even belived that spices help against plague.

 

[Skallagrim]

So,we would have "New Holland" ruling North America instead of USA ?
Becouse british in this scenario could be just not interested in gaining anything more there.Spices was as important as gold in those times.Spain would be too weak to do anything,and France naver have enough settlers to send there.

Could England with more money become Empire faster?

I think the British would still have coastal colonies to the North of Nieuw-Nederland (namely New England) and to the South as well (Maryland and regions Southward from there). Their inland expansion would presumably be slowed, compared to OTL, because they'd have more strategic interests elsewhere. (They'd control the East Indies, but the presence of the Dutch in that direction getting aborted also means earlier British opportunities to grab the Cape and Ceylon, for instance.)

The Dutch would plausibly end up in control the general area of OTL New York state, New Jersey, and parts of OTL Delaware and Pennsylvania. Nieuw-Nederland may end up expanding West eventually, at the expense of Nouvelle-France, but that remains to be seen.

The British, if they take much else in any place in the Americas, will presumably prioritise the Caribbean. I can easily see the Dutch being resticted to just Nieuw-Nederland, colony-wise, but ATL Nieuw-Nederland will have the potential to be a real power-house. We should note that I can easily see Nieuw-Nederland being the colony where German and Scandinavian migrants want to settle, which would boost the population significantly.

Over time, the Anglo-French enmity is far more of a priority than any Anglo-Dutch resentment, so the Brits and the Dutch may end up allied, teaming up to fight France (and, presumably, Spain). This could end with the Dutch getting OTL 'Ohio Country' (Northwest Territory), Ontario, and Prince Rupert's Land -- thus, Nieuw-Nederland would gain a vast back-yard. Meanwhile, Britain would get everything South of there (the great expanse of 'La Louisiane', and Florida). And France would be reduced to Québec and Acadie.

New England would be a pretty poor, out-of-the-way colonial holding for Britain. The bulk of British North America would be the South-Western and South-Central USA of OTL.

 

[stevep]

I think the British would still have coastal colonies to the North of Nieuw-Nederland (namely New England) and to the South as well (Maryland and regions Southward from there). Their inland expansion would presumably be slowed, compared to OTL, because they'd have more strategic interests elsewhere. (They'd control the East Indies, but the presence of the Dutch in that direction getting aborted also means earlier British opportunities to grab the Cape and Ceylon, for instance.)

The Dutch would plausibly end up in control the general area of OTL New York state, New Jersey, and parts of OTL Delaware and Pennsylvania. Nieuw-Nederland may end up expanding West eventually, at the expense of Nouvelle-France, but that remains to be seen.

The British, if they take much else in any place in the Americas, will presumably prioritise the Caribbean. I can easily see the Dutch being resticted to just Nieuw-Nederland, colony-wise, but ATL Nieuw-Nederland will have the potential to be a real power-house. We should note that I can easily see Nieuw-Nederland being the colony where German and Scandinavian migrants want to settle, which would boost the population significantly.

Over time, the Anglo-French enmity is far more of a priority than any Anglo-Dutch resentment, so the Brits and the Dutch may end up allied, teaming up to fight France (and, presumably, Spain). This could end with the Dutch getting OTL 'Ohio Country' (Northwest Territory), Ontario, and Prince Rupert's Land -- thus, Nieuw-Nederland would gain a vast back-yard. Meanwhile, Britain would get everything South of there (the great expanse of 'La Louisiane', and Florida). And France would be reduced to Québec and Acadie.

New England would be a pretty poor, out-of-the-way colonial holding for Britain. The bulk of British North America would be the South-Western and South-Central USA of OTL.

Quite possible and also if England/Britain is controlling the spice islands and possibly clashing with Spain over the region and trade with China would it get around to much activity in India? It was defeat against the Dutch that prompted the eastern company to switch its attention to India which was largely united under the Mughals at that state. The latter will fade at some point even if they don't self-destruct as OTL with Aurangzeb and if so and no new dynasty quickly replaces it could France or the Dutch become a dominant power there. [Assuming that by ~1700 Spain is in clear decline as OTL].

 

[ATP]

Quite possible and also if England/Britain is controlling the spice islands and possibly clashing with Spain over the region and trade with China would it get around to much activity in India? It was defeat against the Dutch that prompted the eastern company to switch its attention to India which was largely united under the Mughals at that state. The latter will fade at some point even if they don't self-destruct as OTL with Aurangzeb and if so and no new dynasty quickly replaces it could France or the Dutch become a dominant power there. [Assuming that by ~1700 Spain is in clear decline as OTL].

Spain would be still in decline,becouse of economy.
India - in this scenario,France would take it.

Dutch would probably end with Nieuv-Netherland - and gradually taking almost all emigrants from germany.

But,more important - no American Revolution supported by France,which mean no french revolution supported till 1791 by England.Which mean no soviet and cultural revolutions.

We woud have more or less immoral elites,but ruling over people who would remain normal.

 

[Skallagrim]

Quite possible and also if England/Britain is controlling the spice islands and possibly clashing with Spain over the region and trade with China would it get around to much activity in India? It was defeat against the Dutch that prompted the eastern company to switch its attention to India which was largely united under the Mughals at that state. The latter will fade at some point even if they don't self-destruct as OTL with Aurangzeb and if so and no new dynasty quickly replaces it could France or the Dutch become a dominant power there. [Assuming that by ~1700 Spain is in clear decline as OTL].

I think the Dutch would pretty much be "out of the game", in those parts. It's plausible that British interest in India will be delayed, allowing opportunities for (I'd expect) the French and the Portuguese. Since the British overlordship over India was a bit of a lucky sequence of events in OTL, we may well see a more modest set-up in this case. Coastal colonial outposts (centred on trade ports), and inland clientism.

Britain may well get in on it, too, albeit later than in OTL -- but would only be one of the players, not the "master of the game" for all of India.

 

[stevep]

I think the Dutch would pretty much be "out of the game", in those parts. It's plausible that British interest in India will be delayed, allowing opportunities for (I'd expect) the French and the Portuguese. Since the British overlordship over India was a bit of a lucky sequence of events in OTL, we may well see a more modest set-up in this case. Coastal colonial outposts (centred on trade ports), and inland clientism.

Britain may well get in on it, too, albeit later than in OTL -- but would only be one of the players, not the "master of the game" for all of India.

It could be that India has a European hegemony period more like that of China, which would have advantages and disadvantages. In which case would there be one player in the British role, dominating the region and preventing any large scale partition? One issue here of course is that India is prone to invasion from the NW by assorted groups which complicates matters.

Or it ends up partitioned between a number of powers. I think Portugal, apart from being annexted to Spain 1580-1640, was a spent power by this time, at least for the Far East. However France and a Netherlands that stays a powerful player for another couple of centuries could become major players there.

 

[Skallagrim]

It could be that India has a European hegemony period more like that of China, which would have advantages and disadvantages. In which case would there be one player in the British role, dominating the region and preventing any large scale partition? One issue here of course is that India is prone to invasion from the NW by assorted groups which complicates matters.

Or it ends up partitioned between a number of powers. I think Portugal, apart from being annexted to Spain 1580-1640, was a spent power by this time, at least for the Far East. However France and a Netherlands that stays a powerful player for another couple of centuries could become major players there.

Portugal, at least, already had holdings in India. I could see Portugal still playing a role as of the second half of the 17th century, specifically as ever more of a British ally/proxy, in rivalry with the Franco-Spanish alliance. With Britain occupied elsewhere for the time being, the Mughals (as you noted) may stagger on for a bit longer than they did in OTL. As such, the various European powers making a play for India could conceivably be doing so at a time when Portugal would at least be able to play some role in the proceedings.

The French may end up where they did in OTL, but since their first establishment of French factories in India is decades after the POD, they may also end up elsewhere (for instance, conquering Bengal and expanding their influence in a salient that covers the Gangetic Plain). Either way, I could see the British taking Ceylon -- and in due time, establishing a foothold in whichever part of Eastern India the French don't hold.

(Alternatively, the British could leave India by the way-side enterely, and instead use their presence in Malaysia and Indonesia to make a play for Burma and Indo-China instead. This would have the side-effect of almost entirely cutting off all rivals from the Far East; a scenario that could well entail wresting the -- now very hard to supply & support -- Philippines away from Spain, too.)

 

[gral]

(Alternatively, the British could leave India by the way-side enterely, and instead use their presence in Malaysia and Indonesia to make a play for Burma and Indo-China instead. This would have the side-effect of almost entirely cutting off all rivals from the Far East; a scenario that could well entail wresting the -- now very hard to supply & support -- Philippines away from Spain, too.)

Isn't the Phillipines supported from Mexico, though? Things wouldn't change too much, then(it was already hard to supply and support them). The British would also be at the end of a long logistic line in this scenario.

 

[Skallagrim]

Isn't the Phillipines supported from Mexico, though? Things wouldn't change too much, then(it was already hard to supply and support them). The British would also be at the end of a long logistic line in this scenario.

British (exclusive) control over Indonesia and South-East Asia would mainly serve to exclude the possibility of meaningful allied (read: French) support for the Spanish. It would also provide an enhanced staging base (and source of re-supply) for the British, which would give them an overwhelming advantage compared to Spanish support having to come from across the Pacific.

In OTL, the British did capture Manila in the Seven Years' War, but later returned it to Spain. I think that given the ATL premise, it would be quite feasible for them to do it considerably earlier -- with the realistic outcome of keeping control over the Philippines permanently. I does depend on overall strategy, though: going for Indo-China and the Philippines means leaving French hegemony over (much of) India uncontested, and going for a sizable presence in India means abandoning the designs on Indo-China and the Philippines. After all, you can't de everything, everywhere, all at once.

Choices, choices...

 

[Buba]

Would the English have the funding, the managerial and financial know-how to replicate the VOC's success?

 

[Skallagrim]

Would the English have the funding, the managerial and financial know-how to replicate the VOC's success?

Not necessarily. The Glorious Revolution did wonders in OTL, since it basically initiated the tranfer of the "financial capital" of Europe from Amsterdam to the City of London. With a POD this early, that whole situation can easily be butterflied. I think there will still be a lot of issues surrounding the inheritance of the British kingdoms and the strained relationship between monarch and parliament, but these may well take a different shape -- and be resolved differently, too.

If the Dutch are deprived of the OTL colonial empire, their own incentives (and thus, development) will be different, too. The VOC will be an abortive enterprise. The English won't even have the example of it to copy from a greater 'distance', then. Let alone basically getting the blue-prints for all the good ideas tossed in their lap, as in OTL.

Nonetheless, some ideas really are obvious, and even without an analogue for the VOC, exploitation of the East Indies would still be enormously lucrative.

 

[ATP]

Isn't the Phillipines supported from Mexico, though? Things wouldn't change too much, then(it was already hard to supply and support them). The British would also be at the end of a long logistic line in this scenario.

It probably mean abadonning India to french.And keeping India would gave them more money.
Empires conqered becouse of money or important position,not for show.

P.S All my info is from excellent book "Nathaniels nutmeg" by Giles Milton.
Read,if you can.
Many interesting information - for example,Manhattan was discovered accidentally by dudes who wanted found shorter searoad to spice islands.it exist,but only submarines could use it!