Some might say Northern Germans are culturally closer to the Dutch than Southern Germans and Dutch even used to be considered a german dialect a few hundred years ago
@@Thanadeez Nederlands isnt a language, its the dutch word for Netherlands. The dutch still speak dutch edit: ok I was wrong Nederlands is the dutch word for dutch
As a German living close to the Dutch border I can get behind the second scenario. I still see the Dutch as our brothers and wish we had even closer ties to them than we have currently.
I live east of the Rhein, in the middle of Rolling Hills and Forests, my local Dialect - which sadly I never fully learned - is so close to Dutch that I understand written Dutch and spoken Dutch; if it's not rushed. Eventhough the Dutch border - from here - is roughly the distance from Paris to England. The similiarities are intense, and the further you go back in history, the more fluent to transition from Dutch and German becomes. Then there are some words which I just find fascinating because of just how plainly you can derive them in both Languages, like Snelheid for "Schnellheit" as an alternate version of Geschwindigkeit meaning Velocity/ Speed.
As a dutchman i fully stand by this idea, the low saxon north east of the country is the same as the rest of low saxon germany. We in the south share alot with the people in Noordrijn-Westfalen and and the Rheinland-Pfalz. We share most of our history, same tribes, same empires and a culture that is 90% the same only the west is different then most of germany, but to be honest, they're different then most of the rest of the country
Dude we speak the same language (English), use the same currency, and can live work and travel freely in each others nation. I don't know how much closer you want to get.
To be honest for most of history of low countries they were part of HRE, not too dissimilar to other german states. So this could absolutely happen much earlier
To be fair as was Bohemia and other majority Czech states in what is now Czechia, but there is always an odd one out in almost if not all groups as big as the HRE
I was thinking that the Dutch-formed Deutschland would appear in the 1700’s for that reason. Not only was it the Dutch golden age, but the Netherlands were also the only major protestant nation outside of Scandinavia making them an ideal candidate for a North German confederation, especially if the Treaty of Westfalia never occurs at the end of the Religious League Wars.
I do think the Netherlands in this timeline would get something in Africa, even if it’s not South Africa. They are simply too powerful to ignore, especially colonially with the Dutch East Indies
@@ryannathaniel9296 possible, and that would work since Belgium didn’t exist, but the thing is it would be heavily opposed by France and Austria who both saw the Netherlands as a threat
No, the time of empire building is pretty much gone. That was necessary when the economy was 60-80% agriculture and the more land you had, the bigger your economy was. Today that's simply not the case anymore coz agriculture has become so efficient that it only consists of 3% of the entire economy. As for the ridiculous question of the Netherlands being part of Germany... yeah we were for about 10 years last century and that didn't work out that well. I also personally don't like the Germans and their dictatorial nature.... not just talking about the nazi time, also what the Stasi did to their own citizens. The old people in east Germany don't trust anyone coz after the Berlin Wall came down, they found out that their closest friends and family talked openly to the Stasi about even the most private stuff that's not meant for government's Big Brother is watching you. If you want to know to what ridiculous heights the Germans went to undermine the privacy of their own citizens, look up smelling jars, where the Stasi broke into citizens house, stole their underwear in case people went 'missing'. Yeah I don't want to share a nationality with those communist creeps!
@@stijnvdv2their “dictatorial nature”. This is just unfair. Imagine if your goverment was first taken over by the Nazis and then the soviets (both completely evil) and I was sitting in Spain with my moral highground: “the Dutch are of dictatorial nature. I am not even talking about the time Artur Seys Incuart attacked half of Europe, but when he was defeated, their secret police opatseg attacked their own civilians! Could you imagine?!😮” Hope you understood my analogy.
As an German i lover our Brothers to the west grew up close to the Border and spend a lot of time in the Netherlands. Youll never have more fun as with them and Brits. They are kind and very welcoming and i hope we keep growing together.
This video was great, I enjoyed how you could go more in detail despite your hesitations. I think it's really fun to go wild with an idea instead of accepting the truth that "we can't know for sure". It makes for some really cool stories and maps that are oddly beautiful to look at. I think I would enjoy it even more if you'd go all in and theorise about minor nations' allegiances in the war. That way there are no "blank spaces" on the map, and it gives a sense of completeness. For example, I'd imagine the Balkans dynamic being similar yet different, with Bulgaria and the Ottomans fighting whatever the Russians' side is, against Serbia, Greece and Romania.
Regarding the alliance between Austria, France and Russia and peace at 11:30: I can't believe the Austrians ever signing up to such a miserable deal, considering, that they literally handed some of the most valuable land (the Rhineland, all of Belgium and the southern Netherlands), including like 10 million Germans, to France, moved the Russian border with Germany like 500 km westwards, while making themselves a sitting duck, wedged between them completely defencelessly. Honestly, if France and Russia wanted to, they could just march across the North German plain, take control of Westphalia, Hanover, Silesia, Brandenburg and Saxony with basically no resistence. And when considering, that basically all coal and iron ore mines and most industrial capacity of this new Austrian state lie right across the border (Upper Silesia, Ruhr Area), and most of the major cities and agglomerations lie just a few hundred kilometers away (Frankfurt: ~20 km, Stuttgart & Breslau: 80 km, Berlin: ~100 km, Dresden & Hamburg: ~200 km, Hanover and Munich: ~250 km, Vienna: ~300 km) they would be militarily incapacitated before they could react. Considering also, that both France and Russia have a vested interest in the destruction of your state (France for more influence in Germany and full hegemony over Italy, Russia for more influence in the Balkans) and your state is in of itself mostly made up by non-German elements, ripe to be exploited by Russian or French influence by them or their puppets (for example in Venetia, Galicia, Transylvania, Bosnia etc.) to make them break away and join the Russian or French sphere. Given that it is highly unlikely, that the supernational state of the Austrian Empire, which had been in decline basically from its inception, even before the defeat in 1866, is going to survive the age of nationalism fully intact, they would probably lose half of their empire just via independence movements and have the rest of it invaded by France and Russia within a sphere of weeks. Through this peace thusly, they did nothing else, than to massively strengthen their greatest geopolitical enemies, while completely disarming any potential Central European counterweight against the aggressive expansion from East and West. They basically created for themselves a situation not unlike the old Middle Francian state in the 9th century, which was similarly ethnically and geographically divided and overextended, wedged between the way more compact, centralized and capable neighbors and just like this state, it's basically doomed to fall victim to them sooner or later.
In a similar vein, I definitly don't see Frisia becoming a French puppet rather than an Austrian for starters. Same with the ceeding of Indonesia, although the Austrians would struggle to reinforce and power project so far. They would still look for a better deal, it doesn't make sense for France to extend over the Rhine, that should be the border (it being both a natural and historical one making the process much easier). More continental Austrian gains makes more sense. Although as you yourself point out, Austria would be in a bad state if they didn't work out a cordial deal with those two powers before or after the war. Support or neutrality being key conditions for the armed conflict to begin.
You say that the Austrians were in decline since its inception and I want to know what you are on in saying this. Austria was such a power player that they survived all of Napoleon while being effectively across the border from France. Even with all of the defeats in that war, even during the 7 years war, they were still completely intact. I don't see a reason why they should fall in the age of nationalism given that the reason for their collapse into the territories we see today is not a true result of internal conflict, but instead inflicted upon them by the peace deal after the end of WW1. The age of nationalism, for all of the damage it may be able to cause for the Austrians, really only made sense in the context of Austrian defeat. However, an Austria who won victory, after victory, really has no reason for the age of nationalism to destroy them. Everyone looks for way out in the bad times, but no-one revolts in the good times. And unlike our WW1, this would be a rather quick war where the 3 great powers dog piled an incredibly exposed Northern Germany, with relatively little losses meaning that the winners didn't simply get an empty victory. Btw, to add on to the Austrian gains issue that you spoke about, those are both river borders on each side of the plain, and a mountain range between Hungary and Russia. That's difficult to cross even if a bit sandwiched. It's no defense in depth, but it's certainly far from indefensible.
@@buddermonger2000 Starting with the last point: The French could attack through the militarily aligned Netherlands, where there is no river and the Russians could freely waltz into Silesia (including the industrial area) and from there into Saxony, where the Neiße is barely a couple meters wide. The Ruhr area is also completely exposed to French artillery and the entirety of Western Germany is dependent on the French-controlled Rhine for im- and exports, similarly with Silesia and the Oder. Hungary and the rest of the Empire doesn't matter in the slightest here, if we're thinking about a long war, what matters is securing your centers of industrial production and communication. And regarding Austria(-Hungary): Austria in our timeline was already politically unstable, with pretty much every nationality slowly but surely encroaching on the by this point outdated idea of the universal empire, which then also resulted in the Germans within the empire moving to more and more nationalist positions as well. Examples for this are numerous, just naming the ongoings and conflicts in regards to Bohemia such as: 1871: Demand for an Ausgleich with Bohemia 1882: Conflict around Charles University in Prague 1883: First Czech majority in the Bohemian Landtag 1897: Badeni-Crisis 1900-01: Foundation of the Alldeutsche Vereinigung an Away-from-Rome movement 1905: Moravian Ausgleich 1906: Publishing of the United States of Greater Austria proposal, which was favored by Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the aging Franz-Joseph 1908: Bosnian Crisis and subsequent riots in Czech towns and cities Many of the nationalities, like the Croatians, Slovaks and Romanians were by the turn of the century having their own national awakening and the formation of national activist groups. The Empire by this point was well on the way on becoming a loose federation of different nationalities at best and falling apart at worst. In this timeline, with Austria being this multinational empire and the German "empire" at the same time, I don't see them being able to balance the conflict between the German states and their interests and the different nationalities and their interests at all, especially not with both France and Russia, who are far more united, being able to exploit those internal conflicts.
same guess and i also think that there would be an axis of france and austria, and the other axis of north germany, uk, russia, italy, and possibly america.
One of the questions which could be quite important for that is how the Low German Union is ruled in this timeline. Would there be a dual monarchy with both an Wilhelmina van Oranje *and* Wilhelm II von Preussen (or even possibly a marriage between them?!)? Then you get the situation, with George V of England already being on their side, Wilhelm could petition their shared cousin Tzar Nicholas II of Russia to join their side and make it a family affair...
Same for the USA. They couldnt join a side without the British Empire, simply because they would be completely unable to do anything with Britannia ruling the waves.
As a Dutch person myself I can't see this scenario work at all. The Dutch generally managed to flourish because they stayed out of continental wars after William the 3rd died. The other North German states prefered to unite with Prussia despite it's warlike posture because of their unified culture. Austrian and Dutch cultures are both related to the overall German cultures but they'd definately prefered Prussia. The Dutch never wanted to risk continental conquests as their army would never be able to stand up to major European countries in an offensive setting. The British did not want any changes to the status quo and the Dutch would have lost their protection while the French would immediately make the Netherlands their primary target. A more likely but still very improbable scenario would have required the Dutch to become a united people before protestantism. The current Netherlands like it's German counterpart was a mix of smaller states and cities and the only thing that united it would have been a massive much stronger enemy that united them all. Only a united Netherlands in say around the year 1200 would have been able to become a major player within the HRE in a similar way that eventually Saxony, Bavaria and Brandenburg would have been able to become enough of a serious force to later become and elector and perhaps emperor of the HRE.
Easily achievable by splitting the Carolingian Empire differently. Middle Francia was destined to be carved up by the other two due to it's position, unifying North-French plain, the lowland and the Northern German plain as North Fancia would unite the French Flanders, the Lowlands, Saxony & Austraïse already back in the 9th century, eventually linking up with the Prussians in the East.
@@rey_nemaattori There was little to no centralisation in your Northern Francia as you suggested it. You can take West Francia/France as an example which had very weak central powers until the French kings managed to rein in the nobles (the Angevins for starters) and branch houses (like the Burgundians) which basically only happened after the end of the end of the 100 years war. After the end of that war, the French kings still had to estabilish authority over Brittany and Savoy to complete the unification of current France. East Francia of course never really resembled a real state with any reliable central powers. East Francia basically turned into an eternal powerstruggle between the emperor, the pope and the many many princes until it was disbanded in the 19th century. The Netherlands, even if united under a pseudostate, it would have been a federation of minor states that all pursue their own interest similar as in the HRE next door and Northern Italy after it managed to secede. It's not like there wasn't any conflict between Dutch minor states in our timeline either.
My instant guess before even watching the video was that German would have gradually split into two separate languages (akin to High and Low German today, but with stronger differences).
@@Idkpleasejustletmechangeit as a german it's actually kinda sad to see frisian and similar languages die out - cuz only old ppl use it as primary lanuage
@@Idkpleasejustletmechangeit That is inaccurate. Low German was not "killed off". Neither was High German. What instead happend is that a standardized, almost engineered Dialect took over. That was also called High German in English. The German Names: "Oberdeutsch" = High German Dialects, "Niederdeutsch" = Low German Dialects, "(Standard)hochdeutsch" = High German. There are also the middle German (Mitteldeutsch) dialects, mine. And I speak my dialect and Standardgerman. I neither understand Bavarian and Frisian dialects. Almost all people I know use Standard German as a Bussines and Communication Language, whilest privatly and with friends using their dialect. I asume it is a source of "pride".
@@feli-the-sunfairy where I'm from the Low German dialect has completely died out(except for maybe some really old people that may still be speaking it). The only remnants are some small differences in the way people speak High German. I'm aware that that hasn't happened to every dialect, but Low German is definitely not spoken as much as it used to be. What I meant with "killed off" was High German taking over. It's cool that in your area a (Middle German) dialect is still being spoken, but that doesn't mean that Low German isn't dying. I have never learned the dialect that used to be spoken and I have never even heard anyone speak it(only heard people talk about someone else having spoken it in the past). There are definitely still areas were people speak it and people that have it as their first language, but it's getting less.
@@prohacker5086 are you saying they wanted to take the Slavs land? am pretty share they just wanted puppets are at least counters that are strongly inflected by them not annexation.
@@jameslight4391 I'm not so sure about that after seeing what they've tried to do in Poland. I think they just wanted to assimilate other slavs into the empire.
That's some vicky 2 tier history lmao. Jokes aside, you're one of the few alternate history channels who go straight to the point and not getting into politics or other bullshit, i think that makes your content very good! I really like your videos, keep up with it!
@@accountthatillusetocomment3041 He is so far off in every, but every pre-1800 video. It's obviously much easier to know modern history than to take your time to study real one. He's just a lazy late modern milker stan. His post-1800 are ok with bad exceptions like this one. His pre-1800 maps are disgusting.
@@genovayork2468Modern history is “real” history and you aren’t better than people for liking earlier one. People more into modern history aren’t inherently “casuals”. Especially when you aren’t a professional. This video is fine. It’s an inherently unrealistic idea that this movement would ever catch in the Dutch leadership.
@@HW-sw5gb That's what you understood? Lol. His problem isn't he's interested in late modern history. His problem is he highly sucks at any history before. How possibly could you understand that lmfao? 😂🤣 No, this video is bad. It assumes: 1. Austria would've formed a federation immediately after the war. 2. The Netherlands would've effortlessly formed their federation immediately after the war. 3. The northern states, especially Hanover, giving their sovereignty for nothing. 4. WWI would've always taken place. 5. France would have always allied with Austria. 6. UK would've always allied the North German Confederation. 7. Peace treaties.
Another interesting aspect: the German language would officially split in two, Plattdüütsch (Low German) which, in our timeline, was spoken by a majority of the population from the Dutch border to Pommern until 1945, and would probably become the official language of "Nederpruijssen" and Hochdeutsch (Standard German) which would remain the official language of the South Germanic Confederation. Denn man tau!
I think you'd have a better chance achieving a realistic Dutch-German unification scenario if you start it with an early decisive Protestant victory in the 30 Years War, leading to a more sustained involvement of neighboring Protestant powers with HRE internal politics. There's obviously a number of other factors which would have to somehow go right for this, but that strikes me as a promising starting point for the concept. My idea would be to start with a Protestant victory ideally in the 1620s in the 30 Years War, ideally before the Swedish Intervention, followed by an Ottoman victory in a Seige of Vienna in 1683 - assuming that they still invade on a similar timeline, for some reason, 60 years after the butterflies have started taking effect. This removes the largest Catholic power center within the HRE, shifting the balance of power even further towards Protestant powers, and (hopefully) reducing Dutch concerns about their involvement with the HRE leaving them more influenced in return by larger Catholic powers. This would be a slightly less Dutch-centric scenario, since there's be a much larger portion of Germany uniting with the Netherlands and what is now Belgium, but I think that it sets up a Holy Roman Empire with borders and economic linkages which could shift more smoothly into a united Germany, again assuming that an era of nationalism still ends up rising in the world, similarly to our own timeline. Would it? Possibly not. Without the devastation of a long 30 Years War wrecking Germany and killing a third of the population, you might not have the same impetus to move towards the "cabinet wars" approach to enacting foreign policy. This kind of removes the "Courtly Quadrile" mechanic of how great power politics functioned in Europe from 1648 to 1789 or so. I have no idea if the borders or national aims would've looked remotely similar in this alternate 1789. Yes, the terrible harvest of 1788 would still occur, since that was due to climactic events as well as the increasing spread of agricultural diseases since the 1760s. However, it was massively exacerbated by the French debt crisis which had in large part from their ambitious foreign policy, military misadventures, and funding of temporary war allies. Though it must be said that the extremely unequal structure of the French state was an equal partner with their foreign policy expenditures. I'd be surprised if the Ancien Regime would've been substantially less corrupt and greedy in this scenario, but the foreign policy could've potentially been much less ruinous. The revolution was a critical stage in the development of nationalist philosophy, and it might not have even gotten off the ground, if not for the fragile state of the French economy when several crises struck at once. What I'm saying is that you'd need to hope for some specific results from a few different questions which realistically would not have such obvious answers, WELL after the initial point of divergence in the 1620s. It's not the most straightforward and clinically-realistic depiction of an alternative history, assuming that the objective of alternative history is to depict a likely flow of history in accordance with the highest probability. But it's at least a plausible-enough scenario if you were to use it as a background for a story where the alternate history is not the main focus of the narrative.
Quality post. Another good argument is: suppose France fully won the war of the Spanish succession, and one of Louis' descendants would rule over both France and Spain in a personal union. Such a France-Spain personal union superblock would be so threatening to the rest of Europe that I could see the Dutch and Germans joining into one block too to counterbalance it. Maybe the Germans get so smashed up in a war against France - Spain that it's the Dutch who then form the block.
This was really great! It reminds me of the best alternate history timelines on that website, which start out with something little and develop a totally different world yet seems so plausible when looked at from Viewpoint of that world. This seemed really possible and also was very well done and intricate.
These weekly videos are awesome. The only thing I would add - a few more visuals when discussing geography. Just pictures of the landscape would add a lot to these vids
But we WERE German, from the Treaty of Meersen in 870 onwards, when Lotharingen was added to the East-Frankish Kingdom (later H.R.E. of the German Nation) till 1648 for northern Netherlands, and until around 1800 for the southern low countries (Belgium), when Napoleon broke up the H.R.E (capital Vienna). For us Belgians, Franz II was our last Emperor. He put down his German crown in 1806. Also in the Kingdom of the NL, our mothertongue was called (Neder)Duyts till 1870, as the English actually still do when they call it Dutch. "Ben ik van duytsen bloede" in the present day Dutch national anthem is b.t.w. an expression of principal loyalty to the emperor. Here in Flanders, the "Dietse" movement later harked back to a then rather recent past.
More videos like this please! I love these sorts of "what if this random forgotten movement succeeded" more than the generic "what if X won war Y" stuff
9:31 The Russian Empire would side with the Dutch, due to The Russian Empire wanting influence in the baltics, and a war is perfect enough to stop it, German states on Austria's side would most likely turn on Austria somehow due to the fact that an Austro French Alliance is allowing France to Expand to their natural borders, like they did in the napoleonic wars so clear outrage, I would say the Dutch would be victorious. The Austrians did not fair well against the Russians on their own, Romania would join in, Serbia would Join in, italy being another factor, Spain would see France's Expansionism as a threat, I think this would be a great napoleonic wars reboot.
I think the reason for Prussian defeat by the Austrians would be really important though, considering Prussia's stance on learning from their mistakes. It isn't entirely impossible that they'd change and improve their military based on this experience, becoming stronger militarily, while the Habsburgs might be more complacent. I think a Dutch-north german federation is likely also more active on the scramble for Africa, considering they'd have the already existing Dutch colonies and mentalities and the Dutch naval prowess + the wealth and strength from industrialisation. Personally I can see France taking a more neutral stance in a conflict between the north and south germans. I don't even think it will devolve into something like WW1, rather more a conflict between The powerfull habsburg (in this timeline, though potentially a paper tiger imo) and the north German-Italian alliance, likely influencing the peace treaty to ensure no big swing in power either way. The British likely take a similar stance and Russia might have too many internal problems or unwillingness to ge involved (they didn't even necessarily wanted WW1 but had no choice I think). The war likely would also happen sooner, somewhere around 1880-90. I think they still might take the south German states into their federation essentially forming Germany+the lowlands, probably angering the French causing them to become more of a rival and also antagonizing the British who fear a shift in the balance of power on the continent. The Habsburg would be pretty weakened similarly to our timeline, but even a bit more. Potentially doing the same and looking for an Austro-German alliance against Russia+Balkans on one side and the Italians on the other. This then might lead to a more WW1 style conflict, but maybe set back a decade or so. This imo could end up in a rather quick German-Austrian win though contrary to our history, due to the bufferstate of Belgium not existing and slowing down a German advance and Germany overall more powerfull and having more recent war experience than the French.
If u wanted to make the Netherlands unite Germany I would start it in the 17th century, maybe after the Swedish king dies in the 30 years war the Dutch take their place or maybe they are successful and conquer Belgium and then lead their own campaign into Germany, defeating the Catholics and becoming the dominant power of north Germany
Least crazy Dutch wet dream. I won't go into the fact all this is impossible. Just to let you know, Belgium didn't exist, not even as a concept, and the Netherlands were part of Germany.
Least challenged Dutch wet dream. I won't go into the fact all this is impossible. Just to let you know, Belgium didn't exist, not even as a concept, and the Netherlands were part of Germany.
Sanest Dutch dream. I won't go into the fact all this is impossible. Just to let you know, Belgium didn't exist, not even as a concept, and the Netherlands were part of Germany.
@@pietervanderzwaan4295 I just hope you didn't mean that as a counter to the point that in the 17th century Belgium didn't even exist as a concept since at that time the Habsburg Netherlands included almost the entirety of the BeNeLux. Perhaps you're confused with the Austrian Netherlands (which is actually a different thing) in the 18th century which consisted of the Counties of Flanders, Hainaut and Namur, the territories of West-Flanders and Tournai and the Dutchies of Brabant and Luxembourg?
So France has no rivalrys at all over, they could be pissed of the belgians being integrated into the netherlands, but thats nothing to great russia, preventing that is the highest priority for france pretty surely. I could imagine that france builds an continental alliance, cry out against the russians getting stronger and preventing a war between the germans by all costs. Russia just looks at this map and knows, that this is perfect. Central europe is divided and there is nothing long term stopping them from dominating. And france must know that too. So France WILL try to diplomaticly unite these two german stats to fire it against russia, while Russia tries to sow discord between these two stats to conquer them easier and creating its great empire.
I read the comments, and it seems that northern and southern German dialects are not so different, the real border is between eastern and western dialects.
Well, the consonantal differences between the north and south are the one thing that separate them linguistically. If you'd make those basic consonants the same in all German dialects, there wouldn't be a division between the north and the south. That being said, there is no such apparent difference (boundary) between eastern and western dialects, so what you read is incorrect.
I was surprised to see this bc this happened in a civ 6 game I was playing. Ludwig II’s Germany failed to conquer all German lands so as France I helped the Dutch unify Germany
It's quite interesting. When I was in Hamburg last week it almost feels like the Netherlands, the only thing giving it away being the road markings and names of companies. I feel if this were to happen the entire Hansa region could unite
Here is what I came up with: In this scenario, the Dutch Republic, also known as the United Provinces, played a more active and influential role in European politics and wars in the 17th and 18th centuries. The Dutch Republic was a confederation of seven provinces, each with its own government and sovereignty, but united by a common foreign policy and military. The Dutch Republic was one of the most prosperous and powerful states in Europe, with a global trade network, a formidable navy, and a culture of innovation and tolerance. The Dutch Republic had close ties with many German states, especially those in the Lower Rhine region, such as Cleves, Mark, Berg, Jülich, and Gelderland. The Dutch Republic also had interests in the Baltic Sea region, where it competed with Sweden and Denmark for trade and influence. The Dutch Republic supported the Protestant cause in the Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648), which devastated much of Germany and weakened the Holy Roman Empire. The Dutch Republic also fought against France and Spain in several wars, such as the Franco-Dutch War (1672-1678) and the War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1714). In this scenario, the Dutch Republic pursued a more aggressive and expansionist policy towards its neighbors, especially Germany. The Dutch Republic annexed or gained influence over several German states, such as Cleves, Mark, Berg, Jülich, Gelderland, Bremen, Verden, East Frisia, Münster, Osnabrück, Paderborn, Minden, Lingen, Bentheim, Tecklenburg, Lübeck, Hamburg, Holstein-Gottorp, Oldenburg, and Hanover. The Dutch Republic also intervened in the succession disputes of other German states, such as Brandenburg-Prussia, Saxony, Bavaria, Württemberg, Baden, Hesse-Kassel, Hesse-Darmstadt, Palatinate-Zweibrücken, and Nassau. The Dutch Republic used its diplomatic and military power to form alliances with these states or to install pro-Dutch rulers on their thrones. By the end of the 18th century, the Dutch Republic had become the dominant power in Germany. The Holy Roman Empire was reduced to a nominal entity that had no real authority or legitimacy. The Dutch Republic had effectively created a confederation of German states under its leadership and protection. The Dutch Republic also had strong relations with other European powers, such as Britain, Sweden, Denmark-Norway, Russia, Poland-Lithuania, and Austria. The Dutch Republic was respected and feared by its rivals, such as France and Spain. The alternative history of the world where the Dutch united Germany would be very different from the actual history. Some possible consequences are: The French Revolution (1789-1799) would have faced a stronger opposition from the Dutch-German coalition. The French Revolution would have been more violent and radicalized by the external threat. The French Revolution would have also inspired more nationalist and democratic movements in other parts of Europe. The Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815) would have been more difficult for Napoleon to win. Napoleon would have faced a formidable enemy in the Dutch-German coalition. Napoleon would have also faced more resistance from other European powers that were allied or influenced by the Dutch-German coalition. Napoleon would have been less successful in conquering or subjugating other countries. The Industrial Revolution (1760-1840) would have been more advanced and widespread in the Dutch-German coalition. The Dutch-German coalition would have benefited from its economic prosperity, trade network, scientific innovation, and cultural diversity. The Dutch-German coalition would have been a leader in industrialization and modernization. The German Unification (1866-1871) would not have happened as it did in actual history. The German Unification was achieved by Prussia under Otto von Bismarck’s leadership1. In this scenario, Prussia would have been a weaker and smaller state that was subordinate to the Dutch-German coalition. The German Unification would have been either delayed or prevented by the Dutch-German coalition. The World Wars (1914-1918 and 1939-1945) would not have happened as they did in actual history. The World Wars were largely caused by the rise of German nationalism and militarism2. In this scenario, Germany would not have existed as a unified nation-state that challenged the existing world order. Germany would have been part of a larger and more stable confederation that maintained peace and balance in Europe. I hope you enjoyed this hyper realistic scenario
I'm not so sure that WW1 wouldn't happen in this scenario. This 'Hansa" alliance ( let's call it this for the sake of argument) would be an enormous industrial powerhouse and trade center that would need a strong navy and a powerful army to secure their trade routes. This Hansa alliance would rapid build an armed force( they have the manpower, money and technical know how to do so) to be a rival at sea in the Baltic, North Sea and further. On land it will have a large superior armed army. This rapid expansion would raise an eyebrow or two by the established powers like France and Great Britain. It would also put the weaker players like Austro-Hunganians and Russia under pressure.... This scenario would sure make a nice board game to play1
I think by the time around 1850s the dutch and the majority or germany must have united into the german confederation or something like that and ww1 might occur in the same period thus much earlier due to a chance that the french revolution might not kick off thus forming early communism or protonationalism in france with austria trying to regain its german territories it lost years earlier. With the dutch highly bent on innovation i can guess that the atomic era might kick off at least a decade earlier or maybe all the way back to 1890s as the dutch have more people now and more universities. I can guess by now all of germany the lowlands and austria might be one single entity. By the 2020s they might have skyrocked the technology worldwide into the space era and who knows if they won the space race.
Many cuddos to the very brief invitation to subscribe and like. Like that; in one short sentence. Bravo!! And to the interesting point of view upon history, of course.
Could you explore the alternate history if the Flahaut proposal went through after the Napoleonic Wars? Namely instead of forming the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, it would create the Free State of Antwerp and cede the rest to France, the Netherlands, and "Germany". How would this impact on WWI and WWII, would it be a shortlived state quickly reintegrated by others, or would a smaller neutral state focussed on industry and trade be of more use being independent while major powers focus on each other?
Compared to what we’re used to on this channel I feel like this one is highly unrealistic, especially regarding the two peace deals. Conditions imposed on Italy in the first one and and France in the second one are extremely harsh, plus Russia and France gaining so much in the first one. The Northern Germans ceasing to exist in the first scenario is also radical.
@@genovayork2468 also not all alternate history has to be so realistic that it could have easily happened IRL, that is not the point of alternate history. the point is to explore scenarios which didnt happen IRL.
@@maltancrusader 1. Being "not totally realistic" is an understatement. It's not realistic almost at all, but _at all_ . He's a bad channel in general but with this he outdid himself. 2. Regarding your second comment: the point of alternate history is to determine one path that could happen. Realistic does not mean mirroring actual events, it means it is verisimilar. Good alternate history is realistic.
Alternate history ideas: What if Al Capone became president of the USA? What if the patriots beat the orangists? What if Henri of Chambourd accepted the French throne? What if Napoleon won the napoleonic wars? What if the Carlists won the carlist wars? What if Two Sicilies united Italy? What if Hitler became a successful painter? What if Trotsky took power instead of Stalin? Perfect timeline: Britain Perfect timeline: CSA Perfect timeline: 3rd French Empire What if the league of three Emperors succeeded? What if the Paris Commune succeeded? What if the Republic of Ezo took over Japan? What if the sounderbound won the sounderbound war? Perfect timeline: Denmark-Norway Perfect timeline: Sweden Perfect timeline: Mexico What if the Sykes-Picot agreement never happened? What if the 1848 revolutions succeeded? What if the 1525 German peasants revolt succeeded? What if George Bush and Tony Blair where a gay couple? I love your videos here are just some ideas I thought of
Team A: England/UK, (the new)Dutch empire, Italy, Portugal, Naples, den mark, Sweden. Team B: France, Austria, Spain, Sardinia. Team C: Ottoman empire, Persia(although its not in Europe it would still support the war), Serbia, Bulgaria. Team D (aka wildcards but its fun if they team up) Russia, Greece, remaining parts of Persia/Persian rebels, Sweden(might as well), Romania. it will be a weird battle. where in the first few months/years the teams C and D will be working together(or just not declaring war on each other yet. this team up as an coalition the: общая земля Остравы. in English: common land of Ostrava.(a area in now Czech Republic at that time austrian territory. Team A would be suffering mass losses. but for Team B it would be way worse. after Team B falls the French territory will go to Britain and the Netherlands. the Spanish territory will go to the Portuguese. making it an great kingdom. now with the new strength of Team A the: common land of Ostrava coalition would fall and total war would break out. the content of Africa would mostly be owned by Britain but the dutchies would get a lot of land to. after the great war Italy would almost be a new roman empire again because of the fall of the ottomans and the Greece the British would be the new biggest country on earth. the Portuguese would own a lot of south America and the Russians/swedes would be massively reduced. al with al. although I’m a Dutch guy my self I’m happy this didn’t happen. the end.
Y’know what would be a fun alternate history scenario? WW1, but everyone is on their 7 Years War sides. So Britain, Germany, and Portugal (maybe Brazil and the USA) on one side. And France, Austria, Russia, Spain, and Sweden (maybe some other Spanish states) on the other. Maybe Russia could switch sides due to revolution, if that even happens in this timeline. What would happen? Who would win? What would be the results? I think that this scenario is very interesting.
Britain and Germany would win imo. Germany already were by far the most powerfull of the central powers, repeatedly having to bail out Austria. I think you'd likely see Germany just holding France at bay in the Alsace bottleneck region with Britain threatening their coastal centers and trade. Germany would focus on quickly taking out the weaker Austro-Hungarian empire, which imo will not last long considering the huge difference in their quality and mobilisation speed. However Russia in the meanwhile would make gains in the east, but get pushed back in the same way it was in reality or otherwise later on after Germany took out the Habsburg fast (they should be able to take Vienna very swiftly imo). Sweden would be a non-factor with the (at that moment) incredibly strong German fleet dominating the baltic. So in the end it would be Germany vs France and Russia on the land (with some british support) without a blockade, while France would get blockaded by the British and its important colonies likely taken out by the British. If the Russia also suffers from a revolution and switches sides/signs a peace, it is essentially over. But even without that Germany would still defeat Russia and afterwards France (if France doesn't fall first from internal turmoil and German-British pressure).
@@MDP1702 Lol Chat GPT quality strikes again. There's no way Germany maintains a front of 6000 km while having a successful capture of Vienna AND losing only minimally in the meantime.
@@genovayork2468 Lol another troll, the front with Russia and Austria would be around 1500-2000km long and Germany historically maintained a longer front in both France and the Russian theater, as well as helping out eg. Austria in certain theaters. A 6000km front would span from Italy to Los Angeles. Vienna is only around 200-300km from the German border, not further than the Germans historically pushed forward with the Von Schlieffenplan or less than the Russian pushed into Austro-Hungaria initially. Learn some history before talking like you have knowledge and others don't.
I would like you to create a possible history in which interwar Czechoslovakia was able not only to defend itself against Nazi Germany, but at the same time to defeat it with the help of France and the United Kingdom. I am convinced that if the young Czechoslovak state cared more about national minorities and became a confederation on the model of Switzerland, the Sudeten Germans, but also the Hungarians in the south of Slovakia and the Poles in Zaolzie, would have no reason to want to join Germany, Hungary, or Poland. If the French and the British were convinced that Czechoslovakia takes perfect care of all its citizens, including the Germans there, they would have no reason to betray their ally.
Nice video. Another very realistic scenario could be if Prussia had territorial ambitions in the Netherlands (as any European power did) they would invade and add the Netherlands to the North German confederation, like they tried to do with Denmark after the Prussians won the Second Schleswig war. In time when Bismarck sought to unite all German regions the Netherlands would also be absorbed as easily, with a Dutch king (like the Saxons, Bavarians etc had) under a Hohenzollern emperor. The Dutch throne is of German descent anyway so that would also work in their favor.
UK and France would oppose it with, almost no question. UK would embargo Prussia and France might even declare war. Lol, the North German Confederation did not exist in the Second Schleswig War.
@@genovayork2468 Depends, France might be given the industrial south of Belgium as part of the partition and the UK might not want to face both the France and Germans for just the low countries. Then again would France prefer a buffer state or the industrial might of Wallonia.
@@MDP1702 You have no idea what you're talking about. An unprovoked war against the Netherlands would make all, and I mean all the European international community turn its back on Prussia. The Netherlands were not even in the German Confederation. And, funny funny, Prussia wouldn't do it anyway. They would just create themselves a new front when they were not sure of victory. Not to talk about how it would be diplomatic suicide. Please leave history to the knowers.
And they would have absorbed Denmark like their king offered (illegally) in peace negotiations, but Bismark and the Prussian king (not emperor yet, brother war was afterwards) didn't see them as Germans.
@@genovayork2468 *An unprovoked war against the Netherlands would make all, and I mean all the European international community turn its back on Prussia.* Like I said, depends. If France works with them, it isn't unlikely all the others will do is complain. Austria wouldn't want to lose its alliance with Prussia/get beaten again, Italy shouldn't care, the British are unlikely to want to go up against Germany AND France and Russia is likely more worried about their own problems than fighting both Prussia AND France. *The Netherlands were not even in the German Confederation* That is the entire point? And they were historically a part of the German region, so that could be used as a claim. Everything you just said ignores what I initially said, namely that France might be in on the partition and in that case the entire calculation changes. The main reason Germany likely didn't do/try it in our timeline is that the dutch were not really worth the potential trouble (only their colonies really) and they were a usefull bufferstate. *Please leave history to the knowers.* Right, so follow your own advise and shut up.
Interesting there was a King of Germany from the House of Nassau, Adolf Von Nassau. However, he only ruled for 6 years (1292-1998) and he only got the crown by lying through his teeth. When he couldn't fulfill on those insane promises then he was deposed by Albert von Habsburg. However, the Stadtholders of the Netherlands are not a descendant of Adolf Von Nassau. Instead, Adolf's grandfather, Henry II, Count of Nassau is a male line ancestor of the Stadholders of the Netherlands.
The netherlands are a german kingdom/state , just like austria, bavaria, prussia, bohemia etc..Prussia or rather Brandenburg under the name of Prussia united Germany in real history, but it could've been anyone
@@AlertConsument-py6te open your history books then. The Netherlands(including Belgium and Luxembourg) were part of the HRE, later they were personal possession of the Habsburg Spanish King, who was again German, more precisely Austrian. Plus the Dutch speak a derivation of Lower German, which was used in most of the northern german countries.
@@RmRoyalflush Your statement reflects an overly simplistic and frankly arrogant view of historical and linguistic complexities, leaning on stereotypical and denigrating assumptions. Here is why: The Holy Roman Empire Wasn't a Unified State The regions that make up modern-day Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg were indeed part of the Holy Roman Empire (HRE), but the HRE was not a centralized state. It was a decentralized collection of principalities, counties, and independent cities, many of which had significant autonomy. The Low Countries were far from just a uniform part of the Empire and operated with considerable self-governance. "Personal Possession" is a Misleading Characterization While the Low Countries did come under the Habsburgs, particularly Charles V and later his son Philip II, calling them merely "personal possessions" of the Spanish king ignores the complex institutional structure that governed them. The Netherlands had its own political traditions and autonomy, which eventually led to conflicts with Philip II and the subsequent Eighty Years' War (1568-1648). Philip II as "German, Precisely Austrian" Although the Habsburgs originated from Austria and had deep ties to the Holy Roman Empire, it is misleading to label Philip II as "German" or "Austrian." He was born in Spain and identified as a Spanish monarch. His connection to Austria was historical and ancestral, not political or cultural. The Habsburg family did indeed have German roots, but Philip II's identity and power were primarily Spanish. Dutch Language as a "Derivation of Lower German" The notion that Dutch is merely a derivation of Low German oversimplifies and undermines the unique development of the Dutch language. Dutch has a common Germanic origin with Low German dialects, but centuries of cultural, geographical, and political evolution led to its emergence as an independent language. The Dutch language underwent a significant process of standardization in the 16th and 17th centuries, distinguishing it from both High and Low German. Your perspective lacks the nuance needed to appreciate the historical, political, and cultural complexities of the Low Countries, opting instead for a narrow, condescending view that reduces these regions and their unique identities to mere extensions of Germanic influences. It’s a reductive and dismissive take on a rich history.
Tbh, I don't see Russia joining the Habsburg side, assuming the annexation of Bosnia still happens. But even if it doesn't, Russia would still play the role of "protector of all Slavs and all Orthodox", and since Romania and Serbia had territorial claims on Habsburg territories (not to mention Galicia which could enlarge Russia itself), I could only see Russia siding with the Low Germans to gain more influence in the Balkans. Also I don't see the Russian Revolution happening, maybe the February Revolution but not the Bolsheviks. Although, I can see socialist revolutions happening in the South German Confederation (as it happened in our timeline in Bavaria) and the Hungarian part of the Habsburg Empire, tho I don't know how long they would last. This was a very interesting scenario and video, I really loved it! 😊 Greetings from Hungary, keep up the good work!
You should make a video of "what is there was one world language". EX) 1. A common language developed when humans were leaving Africa. 2. Humans were not given different languages at the tower of babble. This could lead to a more interconnected word at a much earlier date as well as wars happening differently due to a common identity.
1. That language would've gone extinct a long time ago with millions of different languages having evolved from it. This proposal shows a lack of understanding of how languages work. 2. The Tower of Babble isn't an actual historical thing. There is no evidence for its existance outside of the bible(which should not be taken as historical evidence because of its clear biases). It would not be a good alternate history video if it was based off of religious believes instead of proven historical events. This scenario would require a complete disregard of anything we know about the formation of languages. The second version of this scenario would also require a disregard for actually following proven historical events.
The starting point for quite a bunch of dystopian movies has been put here. A whole different universe to film. Just like "The Man In The High Castle" is, where both Germany and Japan won WWII. Imagine this
Würde mir auch gefallen, die Niederlande ist wunderschön, aber mal eine Frage an jemanden der in Belgien (Wallonienregion) wohnt, ist wirklich in der Ecke die Infrastruktur Straßen etc so Kaputt? Man hört ja viel schlechtes über Belgien also Wallonien, war mal kurz bei euch über die Eifel reingefahren als wir über die Grenze kamen waren direkt überall Schlaglöcher oder ist es nur eine Teilstrecke und in Wahrheit nicht so schlimm?
Some might say Northern Germans are culturally closer to the Dutch than Southern Germans and Dutch even used to be considered a german dialect a few hundred years ago
if the dutch didn't change the language to Nederlands they'd likely have been taken by prussia too
@@Thanadeez Nederlands isnt a language, its the dutch word for Netherlands. The dutch still speak dutch
edit: ok I was wrong Nederlands is the dutch word for dutch
@@jimmothy3012 what is bro saying
Nederlands is a language, it's dutch for dutch, i speak it
@@jimmothy3012 Nederlands is the dutch word for the language, just as "Deutsch" is the german word for german
@@Thanadeez But isnt it also the word for the Netherlands in dutch?
As a German living close to the Dutch border I can get behind the second scenario. I still see the Dutch as our brothers and wish we had even closer ties to them than we have currently.
I live east of the Rhein, in the middle of Rolling Hills and Forests, my local Dialect - which sadly I never fully learned - is so close to Dutch that I understand written Dutch and spoken Dutch; if it's not rushed. Eventhough the Dutch border - from here - is roughly the distance from Paris to England. The similiarities are intense, and the further you go back in history, the more fluent to transition from Dutch and German becomes.
Then there are some words which I just find fascinating because of just how plainly you can derive them in both Languages, like Snelheid for "Schnellheit" as an alternate version of Geschwindigkeit meaning Velocity/ Speed.
As a dutchman i fully stand by this idea, the low saxon north east of the country is the same as the rest of low saxon germany. We in the south share alot with the people in Noordrijn-Westfalen and and the Rheinland-Pfalz. We share most of our history, same tribes, same empires and a culture that is 90% the same only the west is different then most of germany, but to be honest, they're different then most of the rest of the country
@@Bln-f9udat is mooi, wij begrijpen ook Duits 😂
Yup, brothers in the way that we occasionally heckle and make fun of one another. But we know you can take it :P
Dude we speak the same language (English), use the same currency, and can live work and travel freely in each others nation. I don't know how much closer you want to get.
To be honest for most of history of low countries they were part of HRE, not too dissimilar to other german states. So this could absolutely happen much earlier
To be fair as was Bohemia and other majority Czech states in what is now Czechia, but there is always an odd one out in almost if not all groups as big as the HRE
@@rotomfan63half the Bohemian population was german, also they even were a Kingdom influential enough to be able to vote for the Emperor of the HRE
I was thinking that the Dutch-formed Deutschland would appear in the 1700’s for that reason. Not only was it the Dutch golden age, but the Netherlands were also the only major protestant nation outside of Scandinavia making them an ideal candidate for a North German confederation, especially if the Treaty of Westfalia never occurs at the end of the Religious League Wars.
@@christophershell7564 "[...]the only major protestant nation besides Scandinavia"
Prussia??
@@christophershell7564 Frederick the Great reading this rn:
I do think the Netherlands in this timeline would get something in Africa, even if it’s not South Africa. They are simply too powerful to ignore, especially colonially with the Dutch East Indies
They could probably be given the Congo, since neither the British nor the French wanted the other to have it
@@ryannathaniel9296 possible, and that would work since Belgium didn’t exist, but the thing is it would be heavily opposed by France and Austria who both saw the Netherlands as a threat
No, the time of empire building is pretty much gone. That was necessary when the economy was 60-80% agriculture and the more land you had, the bigger your economy was. Today that's simply not the case anymore coz agriculture has become so efficient that it only consists of 3% of the entire economy. As for the ridiculous question of the Netherlands being part of Germany... yeah we were for about 10 years last century and that didn't work out that well. I also personally don't like the Germans and their dictatorial nature.... not just talking about the nazi time, also what the Stasi did to their own citizens. The old people in east Germany don't trust anyone coz after the Berlin Wall came down, they found out that their closest friends and family talked openly to the Stasi about even the most private stuff that's not meant for government's Big Brother is watching you. If you want to know to what ridiculous heights the Germans went to undermine the privacy of their own citizens, look up smelling jars, where the Stasi broke into citizens house, stole their underwear in case people went 'missing'. Yeah I don't want to share a nationality with those communist creeps!
@@stijnvdv2their “dictatorial nature”. This is just unfair. Imagine if your goverment was first taken over by the Nazis and then the soviets (both completely evil) and I was sitting in Spain with my moral highground: “the Dutch are of dictatorial nature. I am not even talking about the time Artur Seys Incuart attacked half of Europe, but when he was defeated, their secret police opatseg attacked their own civilians! Could you imagine?!😮”
Hope you understood my analogy.
@@barsukascool maybe not more dictatorial, but definitely less culturally and economically liberal than the Dutch
As an German i lover our Brothers to the west grew up close to the Border and spend a lot of time in the Netherlands. Youll never have more fun as with them and Brits. They are kind and very welcoming and i hope we keep growing together.
❤
This video was great, I enjoyed how you could go more in detail despite your hesitations. I think it's really fun to go wild with an idea instead of accepting the truth that "we can't know for sure".
It makes for some really cool stories and maps that are oddly beautiful to look at.
I think I would enjoy it even more if you'd go all in and theorise about minor nations' allegiances in the war. That way there are no "blank spaces" on the map, and it gives a sense of completeness.
For example, I'd imagine the Balkans dynamic being similar yet different, with Bulgaria and the Ottomans fighting whatever the Russians' side is, against Serbia, Greece and Romania.
😂What are you talking about? The video was very bad.
@@genovayork2468 weak bait
Regarding the alliance between Austria, France and Russia and peace at 11:30: I can't believe the Austrians ever signing up to such a miserable deal, considering, that they literally handed some of the most valuable land (the Rhineland, all of Belgium and the southern Netherlands), including like 10 million Germans, to France, moved the Russian border with Germany like 500 km westwards, while making themselves a sitting duck, wedged between them completely defencelessly. Honestly, if France and Russia wanted to, they could just march across the North German plain, take control of Westphalia, Hanover, Silesia, Brandenburg and Saxony with basically no resistence. And when considering, that basically all coal and iron ore mines and most industrial capacity of this new Austrian state lie right across the border (Upper Silesia, Ruhr Area), and most of the major cities and agglomerations lie just a few hundred kilometers away (Frankfurt: ~20 km, Stuttgart & Breslau: 80 km, Berlin: ~100 km, Dresden & Hamburg: ~200 km, Hanover and Munich: ~250 km, Vienna: ~300 km) they would be militarily incapacitated before they could react. Considering also, that both France and Russia have a vested interest in the destruction of your state (France for more influence in Germany and full hegemony over Italy, Russia for more influence in the Balkans) and your state is in of itself mostly made up by non-German elements, ripe to be exploited by Russian or French influence by them or their puppets (for example in Venetia, Galicia, Transylvania, Bosnia etc.) to make them break away and join the Russian or French sphere. Given that it is highly unlikely, that the supernational state of the Austrian Empire, which had been in decline basically from its inception, even before the defeat in 1866, is going to survive the age of nationalism fully intact, they would probably lose half of their empire just via independence movements and have the rest of it invaded by France and Russia within a sphere of weeks. Through this peace thusly, they did nothing else, than to massively strengthen their greatest geopolitical enemies, while completely disarming any potential Central European counterweight against the aggressive expansion from East and West. They basically created for themselves a situation not unlike the old Middle Francian state in the 9th century, which was similarly ethnically and geographically divided and overextended, wedged between the way more compact, centralized and capable neighbors and just like this state, it's basically doomed to fall victim to them sooner or later.
I agree
In a similar vein, I definitly don't see Frisia becoming a French puppet rather than an Austrian for starters.
Same with the ceeding of Indonesia, although the Austrians would struggle to reinforce and power project so far. They would still look for a better deal, it doesn't make sense for France to extend over the Rhine, that should be the border (it being both a natural and historical one making the process much easier).
More continental Austrian gains makes more sense. Although as you yourself point out, Austria would be in a bad state if they didn't work out a cordial deal with those two powers before or after the war. Support or neutrality being key conditions for the armed conflict to begin.
You say that the Austrians were in decline since its inception and I want to know what you are on in saying this. Austria was such a power player that they survived all of Napoleon while being effectively across the border from France. Even with all of the defeats in that war, even during the 7 years war, they were still completely intact. I don't see a reason why they should fall in the age of nationalism given that the reason for their collapse into the territories we see today is not a true result of internal conflict, but instead inflicted upon them by the peace deal after the end of WW1. The age of nationalism, for all of the damage it may be able to cause for the Austrians, really only made sense in the context of Austrian defeat. However, an Austria who won victory, after victory, really has no reason for the age of nationalism to destroy them. Everyone looks for way out in the bad times, but no-one revolts in the good times. And unlike our WW1, this would be a rather quick war where the 3 great powers dog piled an incredibly exposed Northern Germany, with relatively little losses meaning that the winners didn't simply get an empty victory.
Btw, to add on to the Austrian gains issue that you spoke about, those are both river borders on each side of the plain, and a mountain range between Hungary and Russia. That's difficult to cross even if a bit sandwiched. It's no defense in depth, but it's certainly far from indefensible.
@@buddermonger2000
Starting with the last point: The French could attack through the militarily aligned Netherlands, where there is no river and the Russians could freely waltz into Silesia (including the industrial area) and from there into Saxony, where the Neiße is barely a couple meters wide. The Ruhr area is also completely exposed to French artillery and the entirety of Western Germany is dependent on the French-controlled Rhine for im- and exports, similarly with Silesia and the Oder. Hungary and the rest of the Empire doesn't matter in the slightest here, if we're thinking about a long war, what matters is securing your centers of industrial production and communication.
And regarding Austria(-Hungary): Austria in our timeline was already politically unstable, with pretty much every nationality slowly but surely encroaching on the by this point outdated idea of the universal empire, which then also resulted in the Germans within the empire moving to more and more nationalist positions as well. Examples for this are numerous, just naming the ongoings and conflicts in regards to Bohemia such as:
1871: Demand for an Ausgleich with Bohemia
1882: Conflict around Charles University in Prague
1883: First Czech majority in the Bohemian Landtag
1897: Badeni-Crisis
1900-01: Foundation of the Alldeutsche Vereinigung an Away-from-Rome movement
1905: Moravian Ausgleich
1906: Publishing of the United States of Greater Austria proposal, which was favored by Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the aging Franz-Joseph
1908: Bosnian Crisis and subsequent riots in Czech towns and cities
Many of the nationalities, like the Croatians, Slovaks and Romanians were by the turn of the century having their own national awakening and the formation of national activist groups. The Empire by this point was well on the way on becoming a loose federation of different nationalities at best and falling apart at worst.
In this timeline, with Austria being this multinational empire and the German "empire" at the same time, I don't see them being able to balance the conflict between the German states and their interests and the different nationalities and their interests at all, especially not with both France and Russia, who are far more united, being able to exploit those internal conflicts.
A german mad man
honestly russia would probably join the low germans in the scenario, competing balkan ambitions, austro-turkish relations etc.
I agree and the fact of Family Britain and the low germans have George V and Wilhelm II being the cousins of tsar Nicolaus II.
That is my guess as well
same guess and i also think that there would be an axis of france and austria, and the other axis of north germany, uk, russia, italy, and possibly america.
One of the questions which could be quite important for that is how the Low German Union is ruled in this timeline. Would there be a dual monarchy with both an Wilhelmina van Oranje *and* Wilhelm II von Preussen (or even possibly a marriage between them?!)? Then you get the situation, with George V of England already being on their side, Wilhelm could petition their shared cousin Tzar Nicholas II of Russia to join their side and make it a family affair...
Same for the USA. They couldnt join a side without the British Empire, simply because they would be completely unable to do anything with Britannia ruling the waves.
As a Dutch person myself I can't see this scenario work at all. The Dutch generally managed to flourish because they stayed out of continental wars after William the 3rd died. The other North German states prefered to unite with Prussia despite it's warlike posture because of their unified culture. Austrian and Dutch cultures are both related to the overall German cultures but they'd definately prefered Prussia. The Dutch never wanted to risk continental conquests as their army would never be able to stand up to major European countries in an offensive setting. The British did not want any changes to the status quo and the Dutch would have lost their protection while the French would immediately make the Netherlands their primary target.
A more likely but still very improbable scenario would have required the Dutch to become a united people before protestantism. The current Netherlands like it's German counterpart was a mix of smaller states and cities and the only thing that united it would have been a massive much stronger enemy that united them all. Only a united Netherlands in say around the year 1200 would have been able to become a major player within the HRE in a similar way that eventually Saxony, Bavaria and Brandenburg would have been able to become enough of a serious force to later become and elector and perhaps emperor of the HRE.
Easily achievable by splitting the Carolingian Empire differently. Middle Francia was destined to be carved up by the other two due to it's position, unifying North-French plain, the lowland and the Northern German plain as North Fancia would unite the French Flanders, the Lowlands, Saxony & Austraïse already back in the 9th century, eventually linking up with the Prussians in the East.
@@rey_nemaattori There was little to no centralisation in your Northern Francia as you suggested it. You can take West Francia/France as an example which had very weak central powers until the French kings managed to rein in the nobles (the Angevins for starters) and branch houses (like the Burgundians) which basically only happened after the end of the end of the 100 years war. After the end of that war, the French kings still had to estabilish authority over Brittany and Savoy to complete the unification of current France.
East Francia of course never really resembled a real state with any reliable central powers. East Francia basically turned into an eternal powerstruggle between the emperor, the pope and the many many princes until it was disbanded in the 19th century.
The Netherlands, even if united under a pseudostate, it would have been a federation of minor states that all pursue their own interest similar as in the HRE next door and Northern Italy after it managed to secede. It's not like there wasn't any conflict between Dutch minor states in our timeline either.
Fr the best history channel out there. Its crazy how much you can learn by locking at history that could have toke place
The best history channel? Lol no, it's not even the best alternate history channel, let alone history.
One of the higher quality ones for sure, but I wouldn't say the best. That would go to AlternativeHistoryPT
As a German who loves the Dutch, I see this as a absolute win. 🇩🇪🧡🇳🇱
As a Dutchmen, we can be a state of Germany.
Maybe we can be world champions football to 😂😂😂
You do the craziest video ideas so well bro!
Idea: what if charlotte of wales survives and rules britain with leopold?
You misspelt "so badly".
@@genovayork2468I smell a Russian bot.
Dude this is crazy and amazing! Keep up that great work!
My instant guess before even watching the video was that German would have gradually split into two separate languages (akin to High and Low German today, but with stronger differences).
It was already that way. It's just that over time Low German was kind of killed off. Low German is pretty much closer to Dutch than to High German.
@@Idkpleasejustletmechangeit as a german it's actually kinda sad to see frisian and similar languages die out - cuz only old ppl use it as primary lanuage
@@Idkpleasejustletmechangeit That is inaccurate. Low German was not "killed off". Neither was High German. What instead happend is that a standardized, almost engineered Dialect took over. That was also called High German in English.
The German Names: "Oberdeutsch" = High German Dialects, "Niederdeutsch" = Low German Dialects, "(Standard)hochdeutsch" = High German. There are also the middle German (Mitteldeutsch) dialects, mine. And I speak my dialect and Standardgerman. I neither understand Bavarian and Frisian dialects. Almost all people I know use Standard German as a Bussines and Communication Language, whilest privatly and with friends using their dialect. I asume it is a source of "pride".
@@feli-the-sunfairy where I'm from the Low German dialect has completely died out(except for maybe some really old people that may still be speaking it). The only remnants are some small differences in the way people speak High German. I'm aware that that hasn't happened to every dialect, but Low German is definitely not spoken as much as it used to be. What I meant with "killed off" was High German taking over. It's cool that in your area a (Middle German) dialect is still being spoken, but that doesn't mean that Low German isn't dying. I have never learned the dialect that used to be spoken and I have never even heard anyone speak it(only heard people talk about someone else having spoken it in the past). There are definitely still areas were people speak it and people that have it as their first language, but it's getting less.
@@Smeiksmeiksmeik why though? I dont get this nostalgia for regional dialects. Oh boy i sure love not being able to talk with my countrymen.
As a German, I think I would like this a lot. We'd have good public transportation and bike infrastructure now. 🤩
To translate that politically correctly.
The Dutch infrastructure is more Germanic than in Germany.
This and among a lot of other things..
@@RedbadvanRijn-ft3vvman unfortunately tho. here in sg i hate bicycles, they can come from anywhere
@@wtz_under
So you would like it if your whole ancient city center,become a parking place for cars?
We got the harbor Germany always wanted.. and Germany provides us with everything we need (like food 😂)
I generally think that Russia would side with Prussia since there were still alot of slavs in the Austrian Empire
The Russians didn't care about the Slavs they like everyone else cared about their own interest
@@jameslight4391 Their interest was Slavs and the land that Slavs own
The slavs were a excuse.
@@prohacker5086 are you saying they wanted to take the Slavs land? am pretty share they just wanted puppets are at least counters that are strongly inflected by them not annexation.
@@jameslight4391 I'm not so sure about that after seeing what they've tried to do in Poland. I think they just wanted to assimilate other slavs into the empire.
That's some vicky 2 tier history lmao. Jokes aside, you're one of the few alternate history channels who go straight to the point and not getting into politics or other bullshit, i think that makes your content very good! I really like your videos, keep up with it!
His content is very bad, lol😂.
@@genovayork2468You say a lot of things but don't explain why you think so. Why do you think his content is so bad?
@@accountthatillusetocomment3041 He is so far off in every, but every pre-1800 video. It's obviously much easier to know modern history than to take your time to study real one. He's just a lazy late modern milker stan. His post-1800 are ok with bad exceptions like this one. His pre-1800 maps are disgusting.
@@genovayork2468Modern history is “real” history and you aren’t better than people for liking earlier one. People more into modern history aren’t inherently “casuals”. Especially when you aren’t a professional. This video is fine. It’s an inherently unrealistic idea that this movement would ever catch in the Dutch leadership.
@@HW-sw5gb That's what you understood? Lol. His problem isn't he's interested in late modern history. His problem is he highly sucks at any history before. How possibly could you understand that lmfao? 😂🤣
No, this video is bad. It assumes:
1. Austria would've formed a federation immediately after the war.
2. The Netherlands would've effortlessly formed their federation immediately after the war.
3. The northern states, especially Hanover, giving their sovereignty for nothing.
4. WWI would've always taken place.
5. France would have always allied with Austria.
6. UK would've always allied the North German Confederation.
7. Peace treaties.
A timeline where the Netherlands never reclaimed land from the ocean but rather the land from the land.
That would be cursed
(Omg I started a comment war)
But it would mean more land. (Im from the Netherlands if not obvious)
@@aidenfolmerno one asked
@@dude926I ask
yes
@@ichwilllebensran2199 why?
This is one of the more unique scenarios i've seen in a while
Tot nu heb ik nooit van sit gehoord.
Dankjewel voor de video, de laatse paar zijn heel goed!
I reflexively started screaming with fear when I saw this.
fr
Another interesting aspect: the German language would officially split in two, Plattdüütsch (Low German) which, in our timeline, was spoken by a majority of the population from the Dutch border to Pommern until 1945, and would probably become the official language of "Nederpruijssen" and Hochdeutsch (Standard German) which would remain the official language of the South Germanic Confederation. Denn man tau!
3:10 - Never were more sweeter (seven) words spoken. Tonight, I can sleep peacefully. Thank you very much, Possible History.
12:50 - Oh no, not again!
I think you'd have a better chance achieving a realistic Dutch-German unification scenario if you start it with an early decisive Protestant victory in the 30 Years War, leading to a more sustained involvement of neighboring Protestant powers with HRE internal politics. There's obviously a number of other factors which would have to somehow go right for this, but that strikes me as a promising starting point for the concept.
My idea would be to start with a Protestant victory ideally in the 1620s in the 30 Years War, ideally before the Swedish Intervention, followed by an Ottoman victory in a Seige of Vienna in 1683 - assuming that they still invade on a similar timeline, for some reason, 60 years after the butterflies have started taking effect. This removes the largest Catholic power center within the HRE, shifting the balance of power even further towards Protestant powers, and (hopefully) reducing Dutch concerns about their involvement with the HRE leaving them more influenced in return by larger Catholic powers.
This would be a slightly less Dutch-centric scenario, since there's be a much larger portion of Germany uniting with the Netherlands and what is now Belgium, but I think that it sets up a Holy Roman Empire with borders and economic linkages which could shift more smoothly into a united Germany, again assuming that an era of nationalism still ends up rising in the world, similarly to our own timeline.
Would it? Possibly not. Without the devastation of a long 30 Years War wrecking Germany and killing a third of the population, you might not have the same impetus to move towards the "cabinet wars" approach to enacting foreign policy. This kind of removes the "Courtly Quadrile" mechanic of how great power politics functioned in Europe from 1648 to 1789 or so. I have no idea if the borders or national aims would've looked remotely similar in this alternate 1789.
Yes, the terrible harvest of 1788 would still occur, since that was due to climactic events as well as the increasing spread of agricultural diseases since the 1760s. However, it was massively exacerbated by the French debt crisis which had in large part from their ambitious foreign policy, military misadventures, and funding of temporary war allies. Though it must be said that the extremely unequal structure of the French state was an equal partner with their foreign policy expenditures. I'd be surprised if the Ancien Regime would've been substantially less corrupt and greedy in this scenario, but the foreign policy could've potentially been much less ruinous. The revolution was a critical stage in the development of nationalist philosophy, and it might not have even gotten off the ground, if not for the fragile state of the French economy when several crises struck at once.
What I'm saying is that you'd need to hope for some specific results from a few different questions which realistically would not have such obvious answers, WELL after the initial point of divergence in the 1620s. It's not the most straightforward and clinically-realistic depiction of an alternative history, assuming that the objective of alternative history is to depict a likely flow of history in accordance with the highest probability. But it's at least a plausible-enough scenario if you were to use it as a background for a story where the alternate history is not the main focus of the narrative.
Frankenstein! Chat GPT strikes again.
Quality post.
Another good argument is: suppose France fully won the war of the Spanish succession, and one of Louis' descendants would rule over both France and Spain in a personal union.
Such a France-Spain personal union superblock would be so threatening to the rest of Europe that I could see the Dutch and Germans joining into one block too to counterbalance it. Maybe the Germans get so smashed up in a war against France - Spain that it's the Dutch who then form the block.
This was really great! It reminds me of the best alternate history timelines on that website, which start out with something little and develop a totally different world yet seems so plausible when looked at from Viewpoint of that world. This seemed really possible and also was very well done and intricate.
Lol, no, it was bad. And the pre-XIXth century maps are bad.
Rude
Lovely video as always! By far the best alt history channel!
Pity it's not good. Wizards and Warriors is the best by a long, long shot.
These weekly videos are awesome. The only thing I would add - a few more visuals when discussing geography. Just pictures of the landscape would add a lot to these vids
I think "What if Austria Hungary was stable" will be good video.
Stable is a better word to use tbh.
After the Augsleich it was, the dismemberment of the empire was heavily influenced by exiled nationalists and Woodrow Wilson
@@DonPedromangod I hate Woodrow Wilson
@@Moonl55Everyone hates Woodrow Wilson
Impossible
4:24 Looking forward to the perfect Habsburgs man! AEIOU!
Same
But we WERE German, from the Treaty of Meersen in 870 onwards, when Lotharingen was added to the East-Frankish Kingdom (later H.R.E. of the German Nation) till 1648 for northern Netherlands, and until around 1800 for the southern low countries (Belgium), when Napoleon broke up the H.R.E (capital Vienna). For us Belgians, Franz II was our last Emperor. He put down his German crown in 1806. Also in the Kingdom of the NL, our mothertongue was called (Neder)Duyts till 1870, as the English actually still do when they call it Dutch. "Ben ik van duytsen bloede" in the present day Dutch national anthem is b.t.w. an expression of principal loyalty to the emperor. Here in Flanders, the "Dietse" movement later harked back to a then rather recent past.
We are almost one nation. We are working together a lot and most of the Dutch people do speak German. I think we have a good relationship.
As the Person who requested this and send you the article about the Aldietse Beweging I have but one thing to say: Wij zijn bereid!
More videos like this please! I love these sorts of "what if this random forgotten movement succeeded" more than the generic "what if X won war Y" stuff
9:31 The Russian Empire would side with the Dutch, due to The Russian Empire wanting influence in the baltics, and a war is perfect enough to stop it, German states on Austria's side would most likely turn on Austria somehow due to the fact that an Austro French Alliance is allowing France to Expand to their natural borders, like they did in the napoleonic wars so clear outrage, I would say the Dutch would be victorious. The Austrians did not fair well against the Russians on their own, Romania would join in, Serbia would Join in, italy being another factor, Spain would see France's Expansionism as a threat, I think this would be a great napoleonic wars reboot.
What is the song that plays at 6:20
As someone from middle germany, this was quite interesting to watch.
Now This Is One Hell Of A Scenario
What if Richard III won the Battle of Bosworth ?
What if Mary I gave birth to A son ?
What if Henry V never died so early ?
This videos great and the music really adds a hell of a lot :D
Bro, you make the goofiest video ideas, but you do them so well.
Lol, no, it's a very bad video.
I think the reason for Prussian defeat by the Austrians would be really important though, considering Prussia's stance on learning from their mistakes. It isn't entirely impossible that they'd change and improve their military based on this experience, becoming stronger militarily, while the Habsburgs might be more complacent.
I think a Dutch-north german federation is likely also more active on the scramble for Africa, considering they'd have the already existing Dutch colonies and mentalities and the Dutch naval prowess + the wealth and strength from industrialisation.
Personally I can see France taking a more neutral stance in a conflict between the north and south germans. I don't even think it will devolve into something like WW1, rather more a conflict between The powerfull habsburg (in this timeline, though potentially a paper tiger imo) and the north German-Italian alliance, likely influencing the peace treaty to ensure no big swing in power either way. The British likely take a similar stance and Russia might have too many internal problems or unwillingness to ge involved (they didn't even necessarily wanted WW1 but had no choice I think). The war likely would also happen sooner, somewhere around 1880-90.
I think they still might take the south German states into their federation essentially forming Germany+the lowlands, probably angering the French causing them to become more of a rival and also antagonizing the British who fear a shift in the balance of power on the continent. The Habsburg would be pretty weakened similarly to our timeline, but even a bit more. Potentially doing the same and looking for an Austro-German alliance against Russia+Balkans on one side and the Italians on the other. This then might lead to a more WW1 style conflict, but maybe set back a decade or so. This imo could end up in a rather quick German-Austrian win though contrary to our history, due to the bufferstate of Belgium not existing and slowing down a German advance and Germany overall more powerfull and having more recent war experience than the French.
a prussian and a dutch unification sounds pretty cool
it's called the EU ;)
@@Jan-ss9tm prussia dont exist so, you're wrong
@@anonkig the majority of what used to be Prussia, certainly the core lands, is now a part of the EU, just like the Netherlands is.
but prussia itself isnt @@Jan-ss9tm
@@anonkig define 'itself' ?
Now we need Liechtenstein forming Germany
If u wanted to make the Netherlands unite Germany I would start it in the 17th century, maybe after the Swedish king dies in the 30 years war the Dutch take their place or maybe they are successful and conquer Belgium and then lead their own campaign into Germany, defeating the Catholics and becoming the dominant power of north Germany
Least crazy Dutch wet dream. I won't go into the fact all this is impossible. Just to let you know, Belgium didn't exist, not even as a concept, and the Netherlands were part of Germany.
Least challenged Dutch wet dream. I won't go into the fact all this is impossible. Just to let you know, Belgium didn't exist, not even as a concept, and the Netherlands were part of Germany.
Sanest Dutch dream. I won't go into the fact all this is impossible. Just to let you know, Belgium didn't exist, not even as a concept, and the Netherlands were part of Germany.
@@genovayork2468habsburg Netherlands.
@@pietervanderzwaan4295 I just hope you didn't mean that as a counter to the point that in the 17th century Belgium didn't even exist as a concept since at that time the Habsburg Netherlands included almost the entirety of the BeNeLux.
Perhaps you're confused with the Austrian Netherlands (which is actually a different thing) in the 18th century which consisted of the Counties of Flanders, Hainaut and Namur, the territories of West-Flanders and Tournai and the Dutchies of Brabant and Luxembourg?
This man shows up on my feed, drops nothing but banger videos, with not even 100k subs? Nah. Take another sub man. Great content.
What if Napoleon III won the franco-prussian war?
Already Done
Wait who gets the Congo
You do
Sweden
@@gamingflorisnl1874that would be cool
7:49 why is Congo a belgian colony despite it not existing (Belgium is still part of the netherlands in this timeline)?
He's just lazy.
Dank je, voor deze prachtige video die mij zeer blij maakt, want ik ben enorm patriotisch en ik hou van mijn land.
Lang leve Nederland.
Ja je hebt gelijk Nederland is de beste alles wat de zee aanraakt is onze Koninkrijk
Lang leeve Dietsland!
Jaa ik gelijk da Nederland ist de beste allies mijn land Amerikas (US) danke Nederland!
Viva hollandia!
Dutch is not a real language
So France has no rivalrys at all over, they could be pissed of the belgians being integrated into the netherlands, but thats nothing to great russia, preventing that is the highest priority for france pretty surely. I could imagine that france builds an continental alliance, cry out against the russians getting stronger and preventing a war between the germans by all costs. Russia just looks at this map and knows, that this is perfect. Central europe is divided and there is nothing long term stopping them from dominating. And france must know that too. So France WILL try to diplomaticly unite these two german stats to fire it against russia, while Russia tries to sow discord between these two stats to conquer them easier and creating its great empire.
loved the video, thanks for making histoy possible
I read the comments, and it seems that northern and southern German dialects are not so different, the real border is between eastern and western dialects.
Well, the consonantal differences between the north and south are the one thing that separate them linguistically. If you'd make those basic consonants the same in all German dialects, there wouldn't be a division between the north and the south. That being said, there is no such apparent difference (boundary) between eastern and western dialects, so what you read is incorrect.
I was surprised to see this bc this happened in a civ 6 game I was playing. Ludwig II’s Germany failed to conquer all German lands so as France I helped the Dutch unify Germany
Dutch identity didn't exist.
Watching alternate-history videos like this one gives me ideas for Hearts of Iron 4 mods😅😂
I know this is another German one but with this map it got me thinking, What If The Hasiatic League Either United Or just Persisted in some way.
It's quite interesting. When I was in Hamburg last week it almost feels like the Netherlands, the only thing giving it away being the road markings and names of companies.
I feel if this were to happen the entire Hansa region could unite
As a Dutch person, judging by pictures of Hamburg it looks nothing like what I’m used to in the Netherlands
@@Nicky_TM you'd be quite surprised driving through it, i sure was
The Duchy of Holland was never in the Hansa. In fact the Duchy waged a serious sea war against the Hansa (which ended in a draw).
He appreciate that he called it a "somewhat though obviously not totally realistic scenario", because to me that describes most of actual history.
Here is what I came up with:
In this scenario, the Dutch Republic, also known as the United Provinces, played a more active and influential role in European politics and wars in the 17th and 18th centuries. The Dutch Republic was a confederation of seven provinces, each with its own government and sovereignty, but united by a common foreign policy and military. The Dutch Republic was one of the most prosperous and powerful states in Europe, with a global trade network, a formidable navy, and a culture of innovation and tolerance.
The Dutch Republic had close ties with many German states, especially those in the Lower Rhine region, such as Cleves, Mark, Berg, Jülich, and Gelderland. The Dutch Republic also had interests in the Baltic Sea region, where it competed with Sweden and Denmark for trade and influence. The Dutch Republic supported the Protestant cause in the Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648), which devastated much of Germany and weakened the Holy Roman Empire. The Dutch Republic also fought against France and Spain in several wars, such as the Franco-Dutch War (1672-1678) and the War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1714).
In this scenario, the Dutch Republic pursued a more aggressive and expansionist policy towards its neighbors, especially Germany. The Dutch Republic annexed or gained influence over several German states, such as Cleves, Mark, Berg, Jülich, Gelderland, Bremen, Verden, East Frisia, Münster, Osnabrück, Paderborn, Minden, Lingen, Bentheim, Tecklenburg, Lübeck, Hamburg, Holstein-Gottorp, Oldenburg, and Hanover. The Dutch Republic also intervened in the succession disputes of other German states, such as Brandenburg-Prussia, Saxony, Bavaria, Württemberg, Baden, Hesse-Kassel, Hesse-Darmstadt, Palatinate-Zweibrücken, and Nassau. The Dutch Republic used its diplomatic and military power to form alliances with these states or to install pro-Dutch rulers on their thrones.
By the end of the 18th century, the Dutch Republic had become the dominant power in Germany. The Holy Roman Empire was reduced to a nominal entity that had no real authority or legitimacy. The Dutch Republic had effectively created a confederation of German states under its leadership and protection. The Dutch Republic also had strong relations with other European powers, such as Britain, Sweden, Denmark-Norway, Russia, Poland-Lithuania, and Austria. The Dutch Republic was respected and feared by its rivals, such as France and Spain.
The alternative history of the world where the Dutch united Germany would be very different from the actual history. Some possible consequences are:
The French Revolution (1789-1799) would have faced a stronger opposition from the Dutch-German coalition. The French Revolution would have been more violent and radicalized by the external threat. The French Revolution would have also inspired more nationalist and democratic movements in other parts of Europe.
The Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815) would have been more difficult for Napoleon to win. Napoleon would have faced a formidable enemy in the Dutch-German coalition. Napoleon would have also faced more resistance from other European powers that were allied or influenced by the Dutch-German coalition. Napoleon would have been less successful in conquering or subjugating other countries.
The Industrial Revolution (1760-1840) would have been more advanced and widespread in the Dutch-German coalition. The Dutch-German coalition would have benefited from its economic prosperity, trade network, scientific innovation, and cultural diversity. The Dutch-German coalition would have been a leader in industrialization and modernization.
The German Unification (1866-1871) would not have happened as it did in actual history. The German Unification was achieved by Prussia under Otto von Bismarck’s leadership1. In this scenario, Prussia would have been a weaker and smaller state that was subordinate to the Dutch-German coalition. The German Unification would have been either delayed or prevented by the Dutch-German coalition.
The World Wars (1914-1918 and 1939-1945) would not have happened as they did in actual history. The World Wars were largely caused by the rise of German nationalism and militarism2. In this scenario, Germany would not have existed as a unified nation-state that challenged the existing world order. Germany would have been part of a larger and more stable confederation that maintained peace and balance in Europe.
I hope you enjoyed this hyper realistic scenario
Cool
I'm not so sure that WW1 wouldn't happen in this scenario. This 'Hansa" alliance ( let's call it this for the sake of argument) would be an enormous industrial powerhouse and trade center that would need a strong navy and a powerful army to secure their trade routes. This Hansa alliance would rapid build an armed force( they have the manpower, money and technical know how to do so) to be a rival at sea in the Baltic, North Sea and further. On land it will have a large superior armed army. This rapid expansion would raise an eyebrow or two by the established powers like France and Great Britain. It would also put the weaker players like Austro-Hunganians and Russia under pressure.... This scenario would sure make a nice board game to play1
Not during ww1 btw
I think by the time around 1850s the dutch and the majority or germany must have united into the german confederation or something like that and ww1 might occur in the same period thus much earlier due to a chance that the french revolution might not kick off thus forming early communism or protonationalism in france with austria trying to regain its german territories it lost years earlier.
With the dutch highly bent on innovation i can guess that the atomic era might kick off at least a decade earlier or maybe all the way back to 1890s as the dutch have more people now and more universities.
I can guess by now all of germany the lowlands and austria might be one single entity.
By the 2020s they might have skyrocked the technology worldwide into the space era and who knows if they won the space race.
Many cuddos to the very brief invitation to subscribe and like. Like that; in one short sentence. Bravo!!
And to the interesting point of view upon history, of course.
whats the music starting at 6:20?
That's what I'm trying to find out
Pretty cool and wacky vid idea! I really like this!
Can you do a video of San Marino restoring the Roman Empire?
Very realistic scenario ya got there
@@Moonl55 Yours about the French invasion of Russia isn'tmuch different.
As a Belgian, can we make this second scenario come true?
any chance you could do a video on with everything went well for Romania or Thailand
Now you've peaked my Intrest ❤🍿
Could you explore the alternate history if the Flahaut proposal went through after the Napoleonic Wars? Namely instead of forming the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, it would create the Free State of Antwerp and cede the rest to France, the Netherlands, and "Germany". How would this impact on WWI and WWII, would it be a shortlived state quickly reintegrated by others, or would a smaller neutral state focussed on industry and trade be of more use being independent while major powers focus on each other?
what's the song at 6:21? Guys I need to know
What if Bavaria united Germany?
rare timeline where the Austrian Empire is a juggernaut in an European great war
Compared to what we’re used to on this channel I feel like this one is highly unrealistic, especially regarding the two peace deals. Conditions imposed on Italy in the first one and and France in the second one are extremely harsh, plus Russia and France gaining so much in the first one. The Northern Germans ceasing to exist in the first scenario is also radical.
yeah?? he literally said it is unrealistic and he did it since his viewers requested it???? lmfao
@@maltancrusader Where does he say it? I only see commenters praising how realistic it is, which is hilariously wrong.
@@genovayork2468 0:48 "obviously not totally realistic"
@@genovayork2468 also not all alternate history has to be so realistic that it could have easily happened IRL, that is not the point of alternate history. the point is to explore scenarios which didnt happen IRL.
@@maltancrusader 1. Being "not totally realistic" is an understatement. It's not realistic almost at all, but _at all_ . He's a bad channel in general but with this he outdid himself.
2. Regarding your second comment: the point of alternate history is to determine one path that could happen. Realistic does not mean mirroring actual events, it means it is verisimilar. Good alternate history is realistic.
Another brilliant video
“Germany and Italy would be very thick ally’s”
💀
Alternate history ideas:
What if Al Capone became president of the USA?
What if the patriots beat the orangists?
What if Henri of Chambourd accepted the French throne?
What if Napoleon won the napoleonic wars?
What if the Carlists won the carlist wars?
What if Two Sicilies united Italy?
What if Hitler became a successful painter?
What if Trotsky took power instead of Stalin?
Perfect timeline: Britain
Perfect timeline: CSA
Perfect timeline: 3rd French Empire
What if the league of three Emperors succeeded?
What if the Paris Commune succeeded?
What if the Republic of Ezo took over Japan?
What if the sounderbound won the sounderbound war?
Perfect timeline: Denmark-Norway
Perfect timeline: Sweden
Perfect timeline: Mexico
What if the Sykes-Picot agreement never happened?
What if the 1848 revolutions succeeded?
What if the 1525 German peasants revolt succeeded?
What if George Bush and Tony Blair where a gay couple?
I love your videos here are just some ideas I thought of
What if in 1688 the Dutch didn't invade England to put a Dutchman on the throne of England, Scotland and Ireland????
Team A: England/UK, (the new)Dutch empire, Italy, Portugal, Naples, den mark, Sweden.
Team B: France, Austria, Spain, Sardinia.
Team C: Ottoman empire, Persia(although its not in Europe it would still support the war), Serbia, Bulgaria.
Team D (aka wildcards but its fun if they team up) Russia, Greece, remaining parts of Persia/Persian rebels, Sweden(might as well), Romania.
it will be a weird battle. where in the first few months/years the teams C and D will be working together(or just not declaring war on each other yet. this team up as an coalition the: общая земля Остравы. in English: common land of Ostrava.(a area in now Czech Republic at that time austrian territory. Team A would be suffering mass losses. but for Team B it would be way worse. after Team B falls the French territory will go to Britain and the Netherlands. the Spanish territory will go to the Portuguese. making it an great kingdom. now with the new strength of Team A the: common land of Ostrava coalition would fall and total war would break out. the content of Africa would mostly be owned by Britain but the dutchies would get a lot of land to. after the great war Italy would almost be a new roman empire again because of the fall of the ottomans and the Greece the British would be the new biggest country on earth. the Portuguese would own a lot of south America and the Russians/swedes would be massively reduced. al with al. although I’m a Dutch guy my self I’m happy this didn’t happen. the end.
This content is good, keep it up
Y’know what would be a fun alternate history scenario? WW1, but everyone is on their 7 Years War sides. So Britain, Germany, and Portugal (maybe Brazil and the USA) on one side. And France, Austria, Russia, Spain, and Sweden (maybe some other Spanish states) on the other. Maybe Russia could switch sides due to revolution, if that even happens in this timeline. What would happen? Who would win? What would be the results? I think that this scenario is very interesting.
I thought about this exact scenario almost one year ago. I have in a chat.
Britain and Germany would win imo. Germany already were by far the most powerfull of the central powers, repeatedly having to bail out Austria. I think you'd likely see Germany just holding France at bay in the Alsace bottleneck region with Britain threatening their coastal centers and trade. Germany would focus on quickly taking out the weaker Austro-Hungarian empire, which imo will not last long considering the huge difference in their quality and mobilisation speed. However Russia in the meanwhile would make gains in the east, but get pushed back in the same way it was in reality or otherwise later on after Germany took out the Habsburg fast (they should be able to take Vienna very swiftly imo). Sweden would be a non-factor with the (at that moment) incredibly strong German fleet dominating the baltic.
So in the end it would be Germany vs France and Russia on the land (with some british support) without a blockade, while France would get blockaded by the British and its important colonies likely taken out by the British. If the Russia also suffers from a revolution and switches sides/signs a peace, it is essentially over. But even without that Germany would still defeat Russia and afterwards France (if France doesn't fall first from internal turmoil and German-British pressure).
@@MDP1702 Nice! I always had a feeling that Germany and Britain would win.
@@MDP1702 Lol Chat GPT quality strikes again. There's no way Germany maintains a front of 6000 km while having a successful capture of Vienna AND losing only minimally in the meantime.
@@genovayork2468 Lol another troll, the front with Russia and Austria would be around 1500-2000km long and Germany historically maintained a longer front in both France and the Russian theater, as well as helping out eg. Austria in certain theaters. A 6000km front would span from Italy to Los Angeles.
Vienna is only around 200-300km from the German border, not further than the Germans historically pushed forward with the Von Schlieffenplan or less than the Russian pushed into Austro-Hungaria initially.
Learn some history before talking like you have knowledge and others don't.
Really good video!
Utterly cursed tbh
I would like you to create a possible history in which interwar Czechoslovakia was able not only to defend itself against Nazi Germany, but at the same time to defeat it with the help of France and the United Kingdom. I am convinced that if the young Czechoslovak state cared more about national minorities and became a confederation on the model of Switzerland, the Sudeten Germans, but also the Hungarians in the south of Slovakia and the Poles in Zaolzie, would have no reason to want to join Germany, Hungary, or Poland. If the French and the British were convinced that Czechoslovakia takes perfect care of all its citizens, including the Germans there, they would have no reason to betray their ally.
Babe. New hoi4 scenario just dropped
Dass wäre ein sehr Gutes Idee 💡 👍🏻
Why 🤔
Nice video. Another very realistic scenario could be if Prussia had territorial ambitions in the Netherlands (as any European power did) they would invade and add the Netherlands to the North German confederation, like they tried to do with Denmark after the Prussians won the Second Schleswig war. In time when Bismarck sought to unite all German regions the Netherlands would also be absorbed as easily, with a Dutch king (like the Saxons, Bavarians etc had) under a Hohenzollern emperor. The Dutch throne is of German descent anyway so that would also work in their favor.
UK and France would oppose it with, almost no question. UK would embargo Prussia and France might even declare war.
Lol, the North German Confederation did not exist in the Second Schleswig War.
@@genovayork2468 Depends, France might be given the industrial south of Belgium as part of the partition and the UK might not want to face both the France and Germans for just the low countries.
Then again would France prefer a buffer state or the industrial might of Wallonia.
@@MDP1702 You have no idea what you're talking about. An unprovoked war against the Netherlands would make all, and I mean all the European international community turn its back on Prussia. The Netherlands were not even in the German Confederation. And, funny funny, Prussia wouldn't do it anyway. They would just create themselves a new front when they were not sure of victory. Not to talk about how it would be diplomatic suicide. Please leave history to the knowers.
And they would have absorbed Denmark like their king offered (illegally) in peace negotiations, but Bismark and the Prussian king (not emperor yet, brother war was afterwards) didn't see them as Germans.
@@genovayork2468
*An unprovoked war against the Netherlands would make all, and I mean all the European international community turn its back on Prussia.*
Like I said, depends. If France works with them, it isn't unlikely all the others will do is complain. Austria wouldn't want to lose its alliance with Prussia/get beaten again, Italy shouldn't care, the British are unlikely to want to go up against Germany AND France and Russia is likely more worried about their own problems than fighting both Prussia AND France.
*The Netherlands were not even in the German Confederation*
That is the entire point? And they were historically a part of the German region, so that could be used as a claim.
Everything you just said ignores what I initially said, namely that France might be in on the partition and in that case the entire calculation changes.
The main reason Germany likely didn't do/try it in our timeline is that the dutch were not really worth the potential trouble (only their colonies really) and they were a usefull bufferstate.
*Please leave history to the knowers.*
Right, so follow your own advise and shut up.
Its wild thats its only because of the habsburgs that the Netherlands ended up seperate from germany
Bro can you please make what if lndia was free in 1914 or 18
No
Interesting there was a King of Germany from the House of Nassau, Adolf Von Nassau. However, he only ruled for 6 years (1292-1998) and he only got the crown by lying through his teeth. When he couldn't fulfill on those insane promises then he was deposed by Albert von Habsburg. However, the Stadtholders of the Netherlands are not a descendant of Adolf Von Nassau. Instead, Adolf's grandfather, Henry II, Count of Nassau is a male line ancestor of the Stadholders of the Netherlands.
The netherlands are a german kingdom/state , just like austria, bavaria, prussia, bohemia etc..Prussia or rather Brandenburg under the name of Prussia united Germany in real history, but it could've been anyone
Huh?
Never heard so much BS in just a few senses. The Netherlands was never ever a German state. LMFAO
@@AlertConsument-py6te open your history books then. The Netherlands(including Belgium and Luxembourg) were part of the HRE, later they were personal possession of the Habsburg Spanish King, who was again German, more precisely Austrian. Plus the Dutch speak a derivation of Lower German, which was used in most of the northern german countries.
@@RmRoyalflushblud wants to bring back the holy Roman empire 🇩🇪🇦🇹🇳🇱🇮🇹🇧🇪🇱🇺🇨🇭🇩🇰 ✝️🗣️
@@RmRoyalflush Your statement reflects an overly simplistic and frankly arrogant view of historical and linguistic complexities, leaning on stereotypical and denigrating assumptions. Here is why:
The Holy Roman Empire Wasn't a Unified State
The regions that make up modern-day Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg were indeed part of the Holy Roman Empire (HRE), but the HRE was not a centralized state. It was a decentralized collection of principalities, counties, and independent cities, many of which had significant autonomy. The Low Countries were far from just a uniform part of the Empire and operated with considerable self-governance.
"Personal Possession" is a Misleading Characterization
While the Low Countries did come under the Habsburgs, particularly Charles V and later his son Philip II, calling them merely "personal possessions" of the Spanish king ignores the complex institutional structure that governed them. The Netherlands had its own political traditions and autonomy, which eventually led to conflicts with Philip II and the subsequent Eighty Years' War (1568-1648).
Philip II as "German, Precisely Austrian"
Although the Habsburgs originated from Austria and had deep ties to the Holy Roman Empire, it is misleading to label Philip II as "German" or "Austrian." He was born in Spain and identified as a Spanish monarch. His connection to Austria was historical and ancestral, not political or cultural. The Habsburg family did indeed have German roots, but Philip II's identity and power were primarily Spanish.
Dutch Language as a "Derivation of Lower German"
The notion that Dutch is merely a derivation of Low German oversimplifies and undermines the unique development of the Dutch language. Dutch has a common Germanic origin with Low German dialects, but centuries of cultural, geographical, and political evolution led to its emergence as an independent language. The Dutch language underwent a significant process of standardization in the 16th and 17th centuries, distinguishing it from both High and Low German.
Your perspective lacks the nuance needed to appreciate the historical, political, and cultural complexities of the Low Countries, opting instead for a narrow, condescending view that reduces these regions and their unique identities to mere extensions of Germanic influences. It’s a reductive and dismissive take on a rich history.
Tbh, I don't see Russia joining the Habsburg side, assuming the annexation of Bosnia still happens. But even if it doesn't, Russia would still play the role of "protector of all Slavs and all Orthodox", and since Romania and Serbia had territorial claims on Habsburg territories (not to mention Galicia which could enlarge Russia itself), I could only see Russia siding with the Low Germans to gain more influence in the Balkans.
Also I don't see the Russian Revolution happening, maybe the February Revolution but not the Bolsheviks. Although, I can see socialist revolutions happening in the South German Confederation (as it happened in our timeline in Bavaria) and the Hungarian part of the Habsburg Empire, tho I don't know how long they would last.
This was a very interesting scenario and video, I really loved it! 😊
Greetings from Hungary, keep up the good work!
You should make a video of "what is there was one world language".
EX)
1. A common language developed when humans were leaving Africa.
2. Humans were not given different languages at the tower of babble.
This could lead to a more interconnected word at a much earlier date as well as wars happening differently due to a common identity.
Might as well just start a new world then
idk what bros on....
1. That language would've gone extinct a long time ago with millions of different languages having evolved from it. This proposal shows a lack of understanding of how languages work.
2. The Tower of Babble isn't an actual historical thing. There is no evidence for its existance outside of the bible(which should not be taken as historical evidence because of its clear biases). It would not be a good alternate history video if it was based off of religious believes instead of proven historical events.
This scenario would require a complete disregard of anything we know about the formation of languages. The second version of this scenario would also require a disregard for actually following proven historical events.
@AzureWolf168 that does not mean that we should portray an unproven event from a religion as a historical fact.
@@Idkpleasejustletmechangeit It is alternate history for a reason. Did the scenario in this video happen? Could it have ever happened?
Belgium still having congo while they don't exist. Nice one
What if the philippines united germany
Cursed
Lol very cursed
@@alexusasuncion9783this would be more cursed the Russo ottoman Union😂
@@theememe7161this is more cursed the Russo ottoman Union
I hope @possiblehistory does a video about philippines uniting germany
Really nice video
The starting point for quite a bunch of dystopian movies has been put here. A whole different universe to film. Just like "The Man In The High Castle" is, where both Germany and Japan won WWII. Imagine this
Can you do a “What if the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Denmark joined the German Empire”?
Prussia would probably be much weaker within the Empire
EU
What if Luxemburg united Germany?!?!?!
Honestly, the combination of the great land power of Germany and the great naval skills of the Dutch would have been a sight to see back in the day.
Okay, that's enough Possible History. Let's go back and get your meds lmao
Video idea: What if the British didn't develop the idea of "balance of power" and focus on itself?
What if Sweden won the great northern war.
I'm Belgian-German. I like living in Belgium, but this state looks quite fun as well.
Würde mir auch gefallen, die Niederlande ist wunderschön, aber mal eine Frage an jemanden der in Belgien (Wallonienregion) wohnt, ist wirklich in der Ecke die Infrastruktur Straßen etc so Kaputt? Man hört ja viel schlechtes über Belgien also Wallonien, war mal kurz bei euch über die Eifel reingefahren als wir über die Grenze kamen waren direkt überall Schlaglöcher oder ist es nur eine Teilstrecke und in Wahrheit nicht so schlimm?