Just a question for those better informed on economic history than myself.
Working on a map/scenario, and one bit has (no Zulu Mfecane) the most important gold-bearing areas in South Africa still under native control in 1911. Sure, there are some concessions by this point, but overall the amount of south African gold in circulation is considerably lower than OTL 1911. Now I think I've read something to the effect that South African, Australian, etc. gold finds in the second half of the 19th century were important for the world economy in that the gold-based international economy greatly benefited from the resultant increase in liquidity, but how important was the south African contribution, and with, say, 80% less South African gold in the global economy, is that going to cause constricted economic growth and perhaps more political turmoil in the 1890-1913 period? Or is this not enough to really change things, save in the "random butterfly" sense of things.
Working on a map/scenario, and one bit has (no Zulu Mfecane) the most important gold-bearing areas in South Africa still under native control in 1911. Sure, there are some concessions by this point, but overall the amount of south African gold in circulation is considerably lower than OTL 1911. Now I think I've read something to the effect that South African, Australian, etc. gold finds in the second half of the 19th century were important for the world economy in that the gold-based international economy greatly benefited from the resultant increase in liquidity, but how important was the south African contribution, and with, say, 80% less South African gold in the global economy, is that going to cause constricted economic growth and perhaps more political turmoil in the 1890-1913 period? Or is this not enough to really change things, save in the "random butterfly" sense of things.
