Ricardolindo
Well-known member
- Location
- Portugal
Let's say Italy doesn't colonize Eritrea and Somalia. Who gets them? I am pretty sure the UK would get Somalia but what about Eritrea? Would France or Ethiopia get it?
-
Hi Guest!
The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Italy doesn't colonize Eritrea and Somalia
- Thread starter Ricardolindo
- Start date
- Pronouns
- he/him
It would be Ethiopia.
Eritrea was an Egyptian possession and when the British asked for Ethiopian help in evacuating the Egyptian garrison from the Sudan, bringing Ethiopia into war with the Mahdists, one of the conditions of that was Eritrea becoming Ethiopian. Instead the UK backstabbed Yohannes by giving it to Italy. Without Italy requesting it, that deal would go ahead as promised.
Honestly the most expansive power in the region at that time was Ethiopia, they're not a bad bet on extending power into Italian Somaliland either. Though alternatively if they get Eritrea, they might be tied up there and so the Ogaden doesn't become Ethiopian and Somalia is united by the British (Menelik's cb for attacking Harar was Harar attacking Italy, Menelik's allies, after all).
In that case, without the British selling out Harar to the Ethiopians, you might even see the Mad Mullah not revolt at all, in which case Somalia is unrecognizable.
The biggest change to no Italian rule in Eritrea and Somalia has nothing to do with the horn of Africa, though.
You might not see the rinderpest epizootic of late 19th century Africa if it doesn't happen. That killed huge amounts of cattle in Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and all the way to South Africa and Namibia, impoverishing the Zulu, Xhosa and Herero and driving the Maasai to near extinction, allowing the opening up of Kenya to white and indian settlement. It also encouraged the growth of thorn brush through the lack of grazing, leading to a huge increase of tsetse fly numbers, which prevented quick bounce back due to the sleeping sickness. This impoverished parts of Africa for decades.
That epizootic was caused by the Italian use of cattle in their campaigns in Somalia. You might still see it happen with other colonial powers, but honestly the chances are smaller, because they have pre-existing colonies with cattle, whereas Italy had to bring in their herds from further away.
Eritrea was an Egyptian possession and when the British asked for Ethiopian help in evacuating the Egyptian garrison from the Sudan, bringing Ethiopia into war with the Mahdists, one of the conditions of that was Eritrea becoming Ethiopian. Instead the UK backstabbed Yohannes by giving it to Italy. Without Italy requesting it, that deal would go ahead as promised.
Honestly the most expansive power in the region at that time was Ethiopia, they're not a bad bet on extending power into Italian Somaliland either. Though alternatively if they get Eritrea, they might be tied up there and so the Ogaden doesn't become Ethiopian and Somalia is united by the British (Menelik's cb for attacking Harar was Harar attacking Italy, Menelik's allies, after all).
In that case, without the British selling out Harar to the Ethiopians, you might even see the Mad Mullah not revolt at all, in which case Somalia is unrecognizable.
The biggest change to no Italian rule in Eritrea and Somalia has nothing to do with the horn of Africa, though.
You might not see the rinderpest epizootic of late 19th century Africa if it doesn't happen. That killed huge amounts of cattle in Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and all the way to South Africa and Namibia, impoverishing the Zulu, Xhosa and Herero and driving the Maasai to near extinction, allowing the opening up of Kenya to white and indian settlement. It also encouraged the growth of thorn brush through the lack of grazing, leading to a huge increase of tsetse fly numbers, which prevented quick bounce back due to the sleeping sickness. This impoverished parts of Africa for decades.
That epizootic was caused by the Italian use of cattle in their campaigns in Somalia. You might still see it happen with other colonial powers, but honestly the chances are smaller, because they have pre-existing colonies with cattle, whereas Italy had to bring in their herds from further away.
Jackson Lennock
Well-known member
No Rinderpest means a heck of a lot more Ethiopians. A third of of Ethiopia died.
Bigger population might mean more Amhara/Oromo/Tigrinya migration to lowlands.
The Jews of Ethiopia might migrate in sizable numbers to Mandatory Palestine. Half or 2/3 of Ethiopia's Jews died during the famine.
Bigger population might mean more Amhara/Oromo/Tigrinya migration to lowlands.
The Jews of Ethiopia might migrate in sizable numbers to Mandatory Palestine. Half or 2/3 of Ethiopia's Jews died during the famine.
Ricardolindo
Well-known member
- Location
- Portugal
Ethiopia would benefit greatly from a coast. On the other hand, incorporating Eritrea and especially Somalia means they have more Muslims that would clash with the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The Somalis especially have very bad historic relations with Ethiopia.
Jackson Lennock
Well-known member
Ethiopia would benefit greatly from a coast. On the other hand, incorporating Eritrea and especially Somalia means they have more Muslims that would clash with the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The Somalis especially have very bad historic relations with Ethiopia.
Eritrea is 50-50 Muslim-Christian, so it wouldn't actually change much.
If Italy doesn't target East Africa, do they go for Libya sooner?
I mean, Eritrea was part of Ethiopia from 1945-1990, including a rather bloody war of independence, so we can look at that for some precedence.Eritrea is 50-50 Muslim-Christian, so it wouldn't actually change much.
If Italy doesn't target East Africa, do they go for Libya sooner?
But Italian colonisation of East Africa was partly driven by their failure to get Tunisia. If they move to annex it faster and are thus able to get a major interest without it all going to France, there'd be less pressure to get East Africa (thus enabling our PoD) - but they'd now already have lands across the Med, and Libya is right next door, and they've already annoyed the Ottomans by taking Tunisia; so yes, you could see earlier pressure for Libya.
Ricardolindo
Well-known member
- Location
- Portugal
I mean, Eritrea was part of Ethiopia from 1945-1990, including a rather bloody war of independence, so we can look at that for some precedence.
But Italian colonisation of East Africa was partly driven by their failure to get Tunisia. If they move to annex it faster and are thus able to get a major interest without it all going to France, there'd be less pressure to get East Africa (thus enabling our PoD) - but they'd now already have lands across the Med, and Libya is right next door, and they've already annoyed the Ottomans by taking Tunisia; so yes, you could see earlier pressure for Libya.
The problem with Italy getting Tunisia is that both France and the UK were strongly opposed to it as they didn't want Italy to control the Strait of Sicily.
Jackson Lennock
Well-known member
I mean, Eritrea was part of Ethiopia from 1945-1990, including a rather bloody war of independence, so we can look at that for some precedence.
But Italian colonisation of East Africa was partly driven by their failure to get Tunisia. If they move to annex it faster and are thus able to get a major interest without it all going to France, there'd be less pressure to get East Africa (thus enabling our PoD) - but they'd now already have lands across the Med, and Libya is right next door, and they've already annoyed the Ottomans by taking Tunisia; so yes, you could see earlier pressure for Libya.
A separate Eritrean identity was a result of having a separate history from the rest of Ethiopia for half a century by that point. What prompted a lot of Eritrea resistance was also that they were promised political autonomy after being politically separate for almost a half century and didn't get it.
Absent Italian colonization, a distinct Eritrean identity doesn't emerge. Ethiopia and Eritrea are both multiethnic countries without a clear ethnic line (most of Eritrea is Tigrinya or Tigre, not that dissimilar from the Tigrayans just over the border in Ethiopia) and I'm not sure tensions would be all that different from, say, Oroma vs Amhara vs Tigrayan tensions in Ethiopia itself.
Is Libya such a sub-par alternate prize for not receiving Tunisia?
The problem with Italy getting Tunisia is that both France and the UK were strongly opposed to it as they didn't want Italy to control the Strait of Sicily.
So the Italians get Libya instead, two decades early. My guess is they get a similar deal as France in Tunisia or Britain in Egypt - it's theirs in all but name, but without expending a single bullet. On the other hand, the Ottomans offered that OTL just before the Italo-Turkish war and the Ottomans said no dice.
A war between Italy and the Ottoman Empire in the late 1890s would be around the same time as the Greco-Ottoman War which saw Greece get Thessaly and Crete become autonomous. Maybe Italy grabs more Aegean lands instead.
Jackson Lennock
Well-known member
Italy was invited by the British to participate in the Egypt intervention after France said no. If Italy cannot get Tunisia, joint authority with the British over Egypt might be a plausible substitute which would keep them too distracted to fiddle around in East Africa.