Alternate History Ideas and Discussion

PsihoKekec said:

So the unification of Germany would be a three way fight between Thicc Netherlands, Bavaria and Prussia, supported by those who wish to counter TN, just like most of Europe united to counter the Sun King.

Click to expand...

Love the expression Thicc Netherlands
Unification of Germany is not a given. Nor need it be by those players. Also - what date are we talking about?
1 - Brandenburg becoming Brandenburg-Prussia was decided c.1580. So it might not be in the running at all.
2 - Have the OTL last duke of Julich-Kleves-Mark-Berg a/not be bonkers and b/ have a child. This leaves you a state containing half if not more of the territory of today's Nordrhein-Westfallen. This last duke died 1612 - have his son (son in law if he had daughters) be ambitious and gobble up the Bishopric of Cologne at the Peace of Westfalia. Or some other descendant be a ruthless, greedy, treaty breaking warlord like OTL Frederick II of Prussia. So here is a candidate for German unification. And which can exist in parallel to TN.

A very good question asked on AH-com in a "wank the Dutch" thread - how much of Rheinland can the Netherlands take and still remain Netherlands, a distinct entity with a separate identity (fully formed in 17th century?), without becoming submerged into Germanness?

Your question about Netherlands unifying Germany points this out - why should they care to do so in the first place? If the TN are distinct then they subsidise a few German Princes to be their bullyboys against France and Austria, just like France and Britain did.

If the Netherlands did unify the rest of the Low Countries, wouldn't they be vulnerable to invasions from both the French and the rest of the HRE? In that case, security and commerce would be legitimate reasons why the Netherlands expanding into the Rhineland would be more sensible.

TheRomanSlayer said:

If the Netherlands did unify the rest of the Low Countries, wouldn't they be vulnerable to invasions from both the French and the rest of the HRE? In that case, security and commerce would be legitimate reasons why the Netherlands expanding into the Rhineland would be more sensible.

Click to expand...

That would be likely to be the problem. Unless and until you have security for overseas expansion, whether commerical or military, you will have to look very carefully about the threats to your home territories. Expansion into the Rhineland would be very useful for them but is also likely to worsen their relations relative to Germany/HRE. Apart from any issues of when the state ceases to become Dutch simply because there are so many 'foreigners' in the expanded state.

Being caught between the two more recognised states of France and Germany goes back to ~871 with the failure of the original state under Lothir and then again with the failure of Burgundy to maintain its identity - albeit that wasn't helped by rash leadership. Unless both France and 'Germany' basically devolve into chaos or much smaller states, in which case your likely to be drawn into multiple smaller conflict between those states and you might also have issues of nations further afield [Spain if/when it forms, Poland or Hungary say encroaching on those lands and possibly becoming a threat themselves.

Zyobot said:

Thanks for the comments, @stevep. Was tired when I posted my scenario, which limited my ability to think carefully. Late-night posting, you know.

Anyhow, anything on the PoD? Like I said, the HRE strikes me as unlikely to conquer as much land abroad as Great Britain at its prime, again due to its decentralized nature and continental position. In which case, I suppose expansion is predicated on it knocking out its neighbors and integrating their peoples and territory, though what PoD(s) work best for this, I can’t say at the moment.

Click to expand...

No problem as I think I was feeling a bit tired when I posted myself.

I think the big question is how long can the HRE survive while it stays decentralized? It did last quite a while but for most of its latter centuries that was because a single family had a dominant position in charge of it and was as such somewhat a protector of it. Even so its control in areas such as the Low Countries, Italy and then the territories bordering France were gradually consumed by either states becoming independent or being conquered by France.

As such the obvious conclusion is that some emperor manages to establish a more centralised empire, rather than the fragmented state we're more familiar with. Of course there are two problems to overcome here.
a) Its size in a period of very poor communications, especially if it seeks to maintain control of areas such as N Italy, Burgundy and the Low Counties. Later communications improve but maintaining such a state in the face of the rise of national identity could be an issue.
b) Probably more importantly a unified HRE would be opposed by multiple foes. Internally by the electors and other lords who would see their liberties and security threatened and externally by other powers who don't want a strong centralised state that could threaten them. Of course the papacy, which falls into both categories in a way would also oppose this as it doesn't want a powerful emperor to challenge their own political power.

Please note I'm not saying a unified HRE, at any stage from its early origins to within a century or so of its end is impossible but there are a lot of factors that would make it difficult to achieve, and possibly also to maintain once established.

Zyobot said:

Thanks for the write-up, man.

I don't have many other comments to add right now, though I do wonder what a map of the Dutch Empire at its greatest territorial extent might look like? Surely, the fact that its fate emulates OTL Britain's will make it the greatest empire to walk the earth here, but spanning a quarter of the world and land on all inhabited continents is a damned hard feat to match--let alone surpass, if we're feeling particularly ambitious.

Netherlands Proper is also on the edge of the European mainland rather than a collection of islands off the coast, which makes it easier for future adversaries to march onto the Dutch doorstep. As such, I imagine the Dutch would do well to stanch or obviate the rise of hostile, next-door neighbors (looking at you, France and Holy Roman Empire). Maybe if the going gets tough, the Dutch will create a contingency plan(s) that draws all their colonies into the fray to ensure that its empire survives elsewhere, should the mainland be taken or suborned by beefy local powers?

Click to expand...

Maybe the Dutch would have greater control in Africa & Asia, less in North America? I imagine the French clinging to New France while the mega-Netherlands focuses on expanding their hold from the Cape & East Indies would be one of the more interesting possible outcomes.

Zyobot said:

‘Largest Possible HRE’.

Honestly, it strikes me as more of a continental power even at its largest potential size, rather than a global colonizer in the same mold as Britain, France, or Spain. Especially with its exceedingly decentralized structure, which I imagine would limit its ability to maintain a central, full-time, blue-water navy under the control of the HRE leadership and no one else. Ditto with outsourcing the job to private explorers and conquerors, who’d also demand much.

Click to expand...

Adding to what's been discussed already - other than the Carolingian Empire not falling apart, I think the Hohenstaufens got the closest to making the HRE a lasting powerhouse with Frederick II, 'Wonder of the World'. Remarkable character who tried hard to turn the HRE into a centralized Caesaropapist empire under his hold, gained Jerusalem back for Christendom for the last time, and managed to not fail horribly during the small window of time between Mohi and Ogedei Khan's death when it seemed like the Mongols were seriously menacing Germany, but who I haven't seen being brought up very often in AH discussions despite his major role in European politics while he was alive. I don't think there was any Holy Roman Emperor after him who came close to having the same level of power he managed to concentrate into his hands, although the Habsburgs certainly tried. He would have to face the tall order of decisively subduing the Papacy and his magnates to secure his dynasty's power permanently as others have said before, though.

Speaking of the Habsburgs, them winning a total victory in the various European religious wars building up to & including Thirty Years' War is probably your next best bet for a huge and unified HRE. If they can install a consistently friendly & reliable Guise regime in France in that country's wars of religion, thereby adding France to their sphere of influence, that likely solves a lot of their geopolitical problems on the spot and brings them closer to restoring the Carolingian Empire than basically anyone else before them (Frederick II included). From there it's a matter of using French support to bolster their various attempts to crush the Dutch, English, their own Protestant magnates in the HRE proper and anyone else who might stand in their way.

Largest possible HRE in my view would have replicated the bit of the scenario I wrote for the more influential Dutch Empire, but instead of rebelling, the Austrian Netherlands remain loyal to the Empire. Or:

Mary of Burgundy doesn't die from the horse riding accident that she got involved in IOTL. This means that she and Maximillian of Austria would have plenty more children, of which one of them will inherit the Austrian Netherlands, while another one will become Holy Roman Emperor. Down the road, the Hapsburgs would be down to the last surviving member, who happens to be a woman, and she becomes the most sought after bride for various princes around Europe. Eventually, a Danish prince would marry this aforementioned Last Hapsburg, and becomes both Holy Roman Emperor and King of Denmark, plus Prince of Norway, but not before losing Sweden, Finland and the Baltic lands. Eventually, this buff HRE would stretch from Svalbard to the border with Croatia.

‘Gene Roddenberry Lives Longer'.

He died of sudden cardiac arrest in 1991 and his health suffered from a nasty mix of drugs, blood pressure, and antidepressants in the years beforehand, if that helps some.

TheRomanSlayer said:

Mary of Burgundy doesn't die from the horse riding accident that she got involved in IOTL. This means that she and Maximillian of Austria would have plenty more children, of which one of them will inherit the Austrian Netherlands, while another one will become Holy Roman Emperor.

Click to expand...

Even simply her son Francis living messes things up. Phillipe and his brood (Charles and Ferdinand) get the Spanish Kingdoms, Francis gets the Habsburg lands, Netherlands and HRE.

TheRomanSlayer said:

Down the road, the Hapsburgs would be down to the last surviving member, who happens to be a woman, and she becomes the most sought after bride for various princes around Europe. Eventually, a Danish prince

Click to expand...

I demand the Prince to be named Hamlet.

Zyobot said:

‘Gene Roddenberry Lives Longer'.

He died of sudden cardiac arrest in 1991 and his health suffered from a nasty mix of drugs, blood pressure, and antidepressants in the years beforehand, if that helps some.

Click to expand...

Star Trek gets fucked, since DS9 probably wouldn't get greenlit.

Then again, he was already side-lined after he helped turn season 1 into a clusterfuck behind the scenes, so maybe things won't change that much.

bullethead said:

Star Trek gets fucked, since DS9 probably wouldn't get greenlit.

Then again, he was already side-lined after he helped turn season 1 into a clusterfuck behind the scenes, so maybe things won't change that much.

Click to expand...

Alright, then. Thanks for the input, though seeing as I haven't closely followed Deep Space 9, I may have to watch more episodes and behind-the-scenes commentary there.

'Adolf Hitler Develops Heinrich Himmler's Beliefs'. Which can basically be summed up as an unhealthy fascination with the occult and even more loony racial theories than IOTL (e.g., the Aryan race originating from Atlantis). He doesn't need to be so squeamish about blood and gore, though (personal hang-ups that affect his political views are beyond the scope of my PoD).

stevep said:

OK thanks for clarifying. There is a lot of obvious inaccuracies in the bible, even without the logical and moral flaws involved.

Click to expand...

2.Kingdom of France which change regime in Spain change nothing till WW1.But,if they do not finish commies in 1920,they would do that in 1931.
So,another possibility is finishing commies in 1920,made few states there,and made free Bavaria and other normal states in 1921.Result would be the same.[/QUOTE]

That assumes that the same alliances and economic developments occur. Which is far from certain. Let alone a communist 'elite' managing to seize power in Russia and its empire.

As you know I disagree with the idea of autocratic dictatorships as the ideal form of government, especially with the totalitarian religious element so we will have the differ there.
[/QUOTE]

Catholisc naver was totalitarian.Compare victims of 2 Inquisitions/Spain and papal/ to Stalin - he killed averagely more in 3 days of his reign then them in 600 years.
Not mention,that only 3% of Inquisition victim was tortured,under Stalin - 100%.

And kings,as long as they rule under the law,are not dictators.All monarchs who are not absolute all good one.


monarchist France would do basically the same till 1918 as french Republic/except supporting carlists in 1878/.Which mean Spain could support France during WW1,- which change nothing.

Main differencies would be supporting polish monarchist,which mean Kingdom of Poland instead of Republic in 1918.
And they would finish soviets,either in 1920 or 1931.Which mean no commies in any other country.
If they would wait till 1931 and expose how much Wall Street supported soviets,it change things in USA,too.

Supporting german catholic and let them be free again in their own states is obvious,too.
After that - from Dniepr/stronger Poland/ to Atlantic we would have catholic allied kingdoms.
Which mean right-wing Europe.

stevep said:

With that background and if there is a revival of Catholic political power its likely that the alliance blocs could be radically different.

Click to expand...

I've seen opinions - in dead tree books! - that the Third Republic was
a/ rabidly anticlerical
and
b/ thus with a hateboner towards A-H.

But depending on how far we go back to have that "conservative French Monarchy" we might not even have an A-H, let alone WWI.

‘USSR Well-Prepared For Operation: Barbarossa’.

Preferably without Stalin first being sacked and replaced with someone more level-headed. However, given how blinded he was by his ego and misdirected paranoia until the last minute IOTL, replacing him well in advance is a solution I’m still willing to get behind.

Zyobot said:

‘USSR Well-Prepared For Operation: Barbarossa’.

Preferably without Stalin first being sacked and replaced with someone more level-headed. However, given how blinded he was by his ego and misdirected paranoia until the last minute IOTL, replacing him well in advance is a solution I’m still willing to get behind.

Click to expand...

Hmmm - for Barbarossa to happen you first need the Stalin-Pact of 1939, and then the USSR supporting Germany in 1940. So, Stalin gets murdered in the summer or autumn '40? As longer term aftermath of the Winter War exposing how rank the Red Army is? Preemptive strike before another purge?
This gives about a year for changes to be made, officers released from gulags and getting their bearings at their new posts etc.
No "German heavy tank" scare making the Soviets make some dumb decisions, like e.g. no AT rifles, the long barreled 57mm gun, etc.

‘What If The US Also Spanned Canada And Mexico?’.

Too tired to search for it at the moment, but I believe there was something about the British planning to cede a massive chunk of Canada to the Americans early on. Which never materialized, but even if it did, it’s probably fair to say that the US would have its hands full settling in that direction, rather than also seizing land down south.

Per the scenario, though, I’m wondering if there’s a plausible way to ensure US control both of those lands by the twenty-first century, with the otherwise-Canadian and Mexican regions being considered every bit as American as the lands spanned by OTL America? Granted, there may be certain affects on US culture that gives “being American” a different meaning here (e.g. Spanish being even more prominent, in the case of swallowing up Mexico or what would’ve been Mexico).

As more of a far-back biological PoD: 'Vegetarian Humans'.

Whether I'm talking about Homo sapiens or all hominids in general is pretty free-form, so people are free to discuss either scenario. I would, however, advise making clear note of which one you're responding to, since both cases will have different outcomes.

I also imagine that, even as vegetarians, humans would still have critical use for domesticated animals. Aside from heavy labor and transportation, there's also breeding and slaughtering them for purposes other than food (i.e. for their hides). Perhaps also for dairy products, seeing as said "vegetarian" rather than "vegan."

We'd still eat meat.

While predators lack enzymes and metabolic processes that herbivores need to eat plants, the opposite is not true. Meat is simply easier to digest than plants. What herbivores lack is the immune system that predators have to protect themselves from bacteria and parasites in the meat. Despite this, nearly every herbivore will opportunistically eat meat.

Here is the clincher. Humans lack the immune system to eat meat, and the enzymes to eat plants, despite needing nutrients found in both. However, both become edible to humans once we roast them on a fire. Humans are not predators nor herbivores, we are ignivores.

Buba said:

Even simply her son Francis living messes things up. Phillipe and his brood (Charles and Ferdinand) get the Spanish Kingdoms, Francis gets the Habsburg lands, Netherlands and HRE.


I demand the Prince to be named Hamlet.

Click to expand...

Maybe an Oldenburg, a Wurttemberg, or some random Norwegian noble house could become Holy Roman Emperor.

Zyobot said:

As more of a far-back biological PoD: 'Vegetarian Humans'.

Click to expand...

On a similar note, what if humans were obligate carnivores?

‘Surviving Mongol Empire’.

Maybe Mongke Khan doesn’t die in 1259 and lives long enough to pronounce a successor?