British invasions of the Rio de la Plata succeed

Aug 2019
291
United States
If the British succeeded in colonizing Argentina and Uruguay then I think they would have a large South Asian origin population due to the British importing a lot of indentured labor from the subcontinent and there would be a significantly smaller Italian and Spanish population than there is today as I think most of them wouldn't have considered migrating to a British run colony.
 
Nov 2010
108
If the British succeeded in colonizing Argentina and Uruguay then I think they would have a large South Asian origin population due to the British importing a lot of indentured labor from the subcontinent and there would be a significantly smaller Italian and Spanish population than there is today as I think most of them wouldn't have considered migrating to a British run colony.
Read post #26 re the Italians and Spanish.

As for South Asians, Argentina/Uruguay doesn't have nearly enough sugar to attract South Asian indentured servants the way that Natal, Trinidad, Guyana, Mauritius, Fiji, etc. all have. Even the Tucuman area doesn't have quite so much sugar, and the Argentine government had to throw in subsidies to keep the sugar industry flowing there. I don't necessarily think that even the rice and cotton plantations of the upper Parana River would attract all that many South Asian indentured servants; the labour would come from within Paraguay and the Argentine north, as did the labour for Tucuman sugar even in OTL. What I might see happening is a large Sikh/Punjabi immigration to the Tucuman area (and some areas to the north and south, in the interior) around the turn of the 20th century, for occupations other than sugarcane cultivation and what not (such as in the railroads).
 
Aug 2019
291
United States
Read post #26 re the Italians and Spanish.

As for South Asians, Argentina/Uruguay doesn't have nearly enough sugar to attract South Asian indentured servants the way that Natal, Trinidad, Guyana, Mauritius, Fiji, etc. all have. Even the Tucuman area doesn't have quite so much sugar, and the Argentine government had to throw in subsidies to keep the sugar industry flowing there. I don't necessarily think that even the rice and cotton plantations of the upper Parana River would attract all that many South Asian indentured servants; the labour would come from within Paraguay and the Argentine north, as did the labour for Tucuman sugar even in OTL. What I might see happening is a large Sikh/Punjabi immigration to the Tucuman area (and some areas to the north and south, in the interior) around the turn of the 20th century, for occupations other than sugarcane cultivation and what not (such as in the railroads)..
Oh okay, I see your point, I wasn't aware that south asian labor was mainly used on sugar plantations.

Btw Sikh & Punjabi aren't interchangeable, most Punjabis are Muslim
 
Oct 2019
79
Near the dogbowl
Oh okay, I see your point, I wasn't aware that south asian labor was mainly used on sugar plantations.

Btw Sikh & Punjabi aren't interchangeable, most Punjabis are Muslim
How do the British keep them from becoming independent when the Spanish couldn't? We are forgetting the entire Central and South Americas fought and won independence around this time.
 
Nov 2010
108
That doesn't support why the British would be better than the Spanish. Plus the South American patriots might have support from the USA.
In such a case, the British can press their case for fair governance, liberalism, etc. for which they have been famous, plus that they grant the Spanish-speakers in the now-British-ruled areas like the Banda Oriental the equivalent of the Quebec Act, which preserves their Catholic religion, legal system, etc. while ensuring loyalty to British rule. As for US-American support of the Spanish American patriots, the USA might cooperate with the British that are now on the patriots' (and not the Spanish Royalists') side, although memories from the War of 1812 might still be fresh.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
23,547
SoCal
Read post #26 re the Italians and Spanish.

As for South Asians, Argentina/Uruguay doesn't have nearly enough sugar to attract South Asian indentured servants the way that Natal, Trinidad, Guyana, Mauritius, Fiji, etc. all have. Even the Tucuman area doesn't have quite so much sugar, and the Argentine government had to throw in subsidies to keep the sugar industry flowing there. I don't necessarily think that even the rice and cotton plantations of the upper Parana River would attract all that many South Asian indentured servants; the labour would come from within Paraguay and the Argentine north, as did the labour for Tucuman sugar even in OTL. What I might see happening is a large Sikh/Punjabi immigration to the Tucuman area (and some areas to the north and south, in the interior) around the turn of the 20th century, for occupations other than sugarcane cultivation and what not (such as in the railroads).
What drove South Asians to settle in some British African colonies, such as Kenya, Uganda, and South Africa? Was it the business opportunities? If so, could the business opportunities in Argentina and Uruguay have attracted some Indians in this scenario?
 

Edric Streona

Ad Honorem
Feb 2016
4,542
Japan
Well. The initial invasion was illegal and not sanctioned by government. Just the local commander taking initiative.

It is highly unlikely they would have stayed as British possessions. Had they been captured they would have been occupied and opened up for trade. Then once Spain made peace with GB they’d have been returned, UNLESS GB had some real strong hand with which to force Spain to give them up. Which I don’t see happening, GB would want peace with Spain ASAP so it can concentrate on Napoleon. It might even offer them as an incentive for Spain to make peace...
Britain itself didn’t know what to do, some thought they’d make colonies, others semi independent protectorates...

As it happens, Spain becomes an ally so GB would almost certainly have to return them.
 
Nov 2010
108
What drove South Asians to settle in some British African colonies, such as Kenya, Uganda, and South Africa? Was it the business opportunities? If so, could the business opportunities in Argentina and Uruguay have attracted some Indians in this scenario?
In East Africa and - to some extent - in South Africa, it was business opportunities from trading, building railroads, etc. Also on the West Coast of North America, including in British Columbia, Indians (mainly Sikhs) came in not insignificant numbers to work in the forestry, agricultural, and railroad industries.

I envision there being a large Indian community in the alternate Argentina, probably larger than in Australia but smaller than in Canada (let alone the US and the UK). Many of those Indians would be Sikh, in that sense being like the Indian community in Canada. The Sikhs would be concentrated in sugar-rich Tucuman as well as in Cordoba and other interior locations, with a considerable spillover (though in its own right much much larger than in OTL) in Salta, Rosario de la Frontera, San Pedro de Jujuy, etc., all of which would comprise the southernmost part of Bolivia in the alternate world. (With some Sikhs in Buenos Aires and a few in other urban centres like Montevideo and Rosario.) The much much bigger British presence, complete with even more (and earlier-developing) railroads as well as opportunities for trading, agriculture, etc., would be very enticing for groups like the Sikhs. Sikh-Argentines and other Indo-Argentines would be firmly on the Anglophone side as opposed to the Hispanophone side.

Well. The initial invasion was illegal and not sanctioned by government. Just the local commander taking initiative.

It is highly unlikely they would have stayed as British possessions. Had they been captured they would have been occupied and opened up for trade. Then once Spain made peace with GB they’d have been returned, UNLESS GB had some real strong hand with which to force Spain to give them up. Which I don’t see happening, GB would want peace with Spain ASAP so it can concentrate on Napoleon. It might even offer them as an incentive for Spain to make peace...
Britain itself didn’t know what to do, some thought they’d make colonies, others semi independent protectorates...

As it happens, Spain becomes an ally so GB would almost certainly have to return them.
I highly recommend that you take a look at posts #5, part of #7, and #11-12. The Spanish Empire was quite weak in that period and thereafter, from mismanagement, the stresses of the Napoleonic Wars and Joseph Bonaparte's invasion of Spain, the subsequent breakup of the Spanish Empire in mainland Latin America, etc. It would not have been in a position to force the return of newly-British territories to Spain, even if it wanted to at heart. Besides which, all or parts of the Rio de la Plata region would have been strategic to the British to at least some degree, as mentioned in part in post #12.

While it is true that during the invasions themselves Britain itself didn't know what to do, right afterwards it's highly likely - partly as a compromise between the two options that the British dithered over (emancipation vs. annexation) and partly as a response to local realities - that the British grant independence (for a few decades) to Buenos Aires and directly control Montevideo/the Uruguayan coast to start with (soon thereafter, ever more areas), as I mentioned in some earlier posts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist