Cities that could've been or could have been even greater

SpicyJuan

Active member
As everyone already knows, the Nazis had some grand plans for places:
- Germania (Berlin): Although there were many architectural projects planned, the most notable is the new "Volkshalle" which was supposedly so large that it would have had problems with self-generating rain inside.
- Linz: was supposed to be a new German "Budapest" to eclipse Vienna
- Nuremberg
- Munich
- Hamburg: was supposed to have a huge Elbe bridge constructed which would have been extremely impressive.
- Nordstern (Trondheim): was supposed to be a huge German naval and military base with a corresponding city of 300,000
- Helgoland: was supposed to become the largest port in Europe
 
Last edited:

History Learner

Well-known member
Does the Greenwood District of Tulsa, OK count ? They've never really recovered from the violent race riots of 1921.

I think any city that burned down would count, given the need to rebuild and population exodus that occurs after such events. For some others in this vein, I'd point out Waco, Texas (Yes, that Waco) in the 1950s had a terrible setback when a tornado destroyed its downtown areas. Had that not happened, I'd suspect they'd be even better off compared to OTL.
 

SpicyJuan

Active member
- Helgoland: was supposed to become the largest port in Europe
Here's a simple plan if anyone is interested, it was called Projekt Hummerschere (Project Lobsterclaw). I also have a much more detailed one if anyone wants it.

800px-Project_Hummerschere.png
 

Culsu

Agent of the Central Plasma
Founder
Rungholt. When it was destroyed in a massive flood it was a settlement larger than Hamburg. Would have been interesting to see what a large port city at that location would have meant for the Hansa, the German states, and Denmark.
 
Last edited:

SpicyJuan

Active member
Rungholt. When it was destroyed in a massive flood it was a settlement larger than Hamburg. Would have been interesting to see what a large port city at that location would have meant for the Hansa, the German states, and Denmark.
I wonder what the limit was to the port's growth. I have been to that area many times and it is somewhat shallow and has the most extreme tides in the world to the point that you can even walk from island to island during low tide.
 

Buba

A total creep
I wonder what the limit was to the port's growth. [...] it is somewhat shallow and has the most extreme tides in the world to the point that you can even walk from island to island during low tide.
This very same hydrology applies to many North Sea ports.
However, I imagine the glass ceiling to be rather low - like Javer or Emden or Norwich.
Reason?
Not being at the mouth of a large river basin.
Hamburg - a stone's throw away - shares the same water regime, same as London or the ARA ports, but it is "fed" by a large hinterland, reaching up to Prague.
Hence my belief is that even had Rungholt been larger than Hamburg at the time of its demise (not a sure thing), it still would had been overtaken by Hamburg. Or Altona. Or some other settlement on the Elbe estuary.
 
Last edited:

Lord Sovereign

Well-known member
Cusco. The beating heart of the Inca Empire.

That city was on track to become the Rome of South America, if not the Americas in general.
 

Lord Sovereign

Well-known member
More like the Memphis - Incan Empire had a lot of resemblances to ancient Egypt in being essentially a proto-communist state.

Still not a bad equivalent. The Egypt of the Pharaoh's was the most glorious civilisation of its era.

On that topic, a huge problem with the proto-commie comparison there is that the Egyptians were actually good farmers. Commies and farming don't go together.
 

Navarro

Well-known member
On that topic, a huge problem with the proto-commie comparison there is that the Egyptians were actually good farmers. Commies and farming don't go together.

Size of the country and lack of technology limited the amount the Pharaohs could screw up the country, plus they had the Nile inundation. Still, Egypt was essentially a bronze age palace economy (i.e. proto-communism) right up until the Roman conquest:



Incas were even more statist.
 

Lord Sovereign

Well-known member
Size of the country and lack of technology limited the amount the Pharaohs could screw up the country, plus they had the Nile inundation. Still, Egypt was essentially a bronze age palace economy (i.e. proto-communism) right up until the Roman conquest:



Incas were even more statist.


The Bronze Age palace economies, whilst centrally planned to an extent, lack the necessary "utopian" vision to be truly proto-commie in my view. No Pharaoh ever wanted to create a classless utopia and when he didn't want them for building monuments, he mostly left his workers to their own devices. And I doubt the Assyrians gave two fucks about redistributing the means.

As for the Inca, however, I do see what you're driving at. They had a massive welfare state as I understand it.
 

Navarro

Well-known member
The Bronze Age palace economies, whilst centrally planned to an extent, lack the necessary "utopian" vision to be truly proto-commie in my view. No Pharaoh ever wanted to create a classless utopia and when he didn't want them for building monuments, he mostly left his workers to their own devices. And I doubt the Assyrians gave two fucks about redistributing the means.

Heh, you might see it in that sense as a non-ideological communism. Which would make communists the biggest reactionaries of them all, as they want to go back to a hypothetical classless society that existed in the paleolithic.

As for the Inca, however, I do see what you're driving at. They had a massive welfare state as I understand it.

Not only that, everything in their society was regimented in an uber-strict fashion. And I do mean EVERYTHING.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
What some towns or locations that could've developed into cities but failed to, for whatever reason? How about cities that did develop, but could've have been even greater, be it in wealth, importance, size, etc? How would such effect history?

St. Petersburg, Russia: It currently has only five million people but in the absence of the extreme demographic devastation that Russia suffered during the 20th century, it could have had as many as 25 million people right now. Russia itself would have two times more people (based on its current borders) without its 20th century demographic devastation or even four times as many people if we're talking about the borders of the former Soviet Union without its 20th century demographic devastation.

In such a scenario, you could see 25 million people in St. Petersburg and around, say, five additional million people in St. Petersburg's suburbs, assuming of course that St. Petersburg would remain Russia's capital up to the present-day and that Russia would avoid the 1917 Bolshevik coup and subsequent civil war in this scenario. Moscow and its metropolitan area would probably be more-or-less the same size as in real life in this scenario.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
You'd have to change some stuff with the automakers as well as avoid the Race Riots, but it's certainly doable.
Avoid the Great Migration and you'll also avoid the race riots. Of course, this would require no World War I and a later end to mass European immigration into the US. The Great Migration really picked up when the door to European immigrants was becoming closed after 1914.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Trieste, Italy - in 1900 it was the main commercial port of Austro-Hungary and emerging financial and education center. In 1919 it became peripheral Italian port and in 1945 the border cut it off from the hinterland, leaving it barely connected to Italy. If AH survives the war, Trieste could be twice the size it is now.

Give it to Yugoslavia after the end of World War II?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top