Alternate History Thread IV: The Sequel

[Luckymoose]

Chuck Berry dies at age 11 and by 2009 we have robot overlords.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I just want to put forth an opinion for the thought of people in alternative history. Basicallly the influence of the decisions made upon literature, music, and religion. For example, anyone who'd look at the history of modern popular music has to look at slavery in the United States as its origins. A lot of NESers in alternative history NESes seem to ignore this, cause a lot of changes could be made even in the short time span of the twentieth century.

Therefore i put before you a challenge to consider music and literary effects in alternative history as well as the usual political implications. Culture often dictates society's choices, and cannot be ignored.

John Lennon and Paul McCartney get their hands badly broken in a bar fight in Hamburg in 1961 and give up music. No Beatles; no British invasion; no Rolling Stones, no Who, but lots of Gene Pitney and Frankie Avalon. No rallying cry for change, no anthems for peace, no hippies, no Woodstock, no drug culture, no women's movement, just the 1950s stretching into the future.

"Paint it black"​

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

What about Elvis then?

 

[bombshoo]

I still think the Civil Rights Movement was getting to the point where it couldn't be stopped. And I still think there still would be sex, drugs and rock and roll...just with a lot more Jazz, Rhythm and Blues, and Country influence.

While I think artistic, musical, and other cultural influences do have a major impact on history, I find the main way where they seem to make a difference is by drawing the attention of the general population to certain subjects. An example being Uncle Tom's Cabin. If it hadn't been written would slavery still have ended and the American Civil War still taken place? Probably...Maybe a bit later though. It's worth thinking about I suppose.

Another thing you didn't mention that's importance is often missed is of philosophers. While I think we have had a couple of "A World Without Karl Marx" Neses done, I am not sure any concerning an absence Voltaire, Locke, Machiavelli, Kant, Nietzsche or hundreds of other influential ones have been considered.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Indeed, I had forgotten philosophers, that would also make an incredible difference.

 

[Dachs]

I tried out alternate philosophy with ma boy Nietzsche in part of the Meade at Gettysburg TL. It worked out okay, I think, but mostly cause I have a special interest in him.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Well one of the thoughts I had towards the whole culture business was sort of the reverse of what we've been doing. I was wondering how the culture would be affected by the more conventional points of departure.

Example I've been tossing around would be the cultural changes in my A Brave New World NES. Without a United States (and now a British Empire) what will music look like or literature for that matter.

 

[bombshoo]

Well one of the thoughts I had towards the whole culture business was sort of the reverse of what we've been doing. I was wondering how the culture would be affected by the more conventional points of departure.

Example I've been tossing around would be the cultural changes in my A Brave New World NES. Without a United States (and now a British Empire) what will music look like or literature for that matter.

Well one of the things I remember from TWTUD specifically was Luckymoose's Muslim country having television sitcoms about bumbling Christians and such. In a world like TWTUD, with five or so Super Powers I suppose we would see a stronger influence of their cultural traits on music and literature and such.

So to look a world without USA, we really have to break down who the major powers were and most importantly, how they would see themselves to find their music, literature, artwork and other things of that nature.

For example when a world power is authoritarian and/or large parts of the population are being oppressed, (Say France around 1700) You would likely end up with literature being written that expresses discontent (like Candide from Voltaire for example) or when we have a country (The USA in the 1950s) that is more conservative and nationalistic, we seem to end up with movies, books and music that reflects this.

I am not sure you can say EXACTLY how anything will develop considering we have no way of knowing the artists and writers that would be alive and working in an alternative time line; the creativity of these people are probably the biggest factors in what significant cultural developments are made.

I actually have thought of trying to develop unique cultures in NESes before. In my NES that I ran briefly, I did have a couple of techs that were meant to eventually spread out into cultural tech trees for art/movies/journalism.

EDIT: Another factor which seems to be important for cultural development is cultural diversity. If in ABNW you want to know which countries would be the cultural hot spots, I suggest examining which ones have the largest and most diverse cities. Cosmopolitan cities such as Paris in the 1800s, Vienna in the 1600s, New York from 1850 onwards seem to where most art, music, and literature is developed.

 

[Yui108]

A Sunset over Switzerland

1845 – A coalition of far right Protestant and Catholic cantons in Switzerland is formed including Lucerne, Fribourg, Valais, Uri, Schwyz, Unterwalden and Zug. They formed to protect each other’s interests against a radicalist anti-catholic centralization of power in Switzerland. They call themselves the Sonderbund.
1846 – In a celebrated coup, conservative forces take power in Ticino. Ticino joins the Sonderbund
1846 – Following Ticino both Solothurn and Appenzell Inerrhoden join the growing Sonderbund pact.
1847 – The radical majority in the Tagsatzung decides to crush the Sonderbund as unconstitutional
Late 1847-1848 – The war in Switzerland continues to grind on as the Swiss Federal Army led by acclamed general Guillaume-Henri Dufour fought the forces of the Sonderbund led by Johann-Ulrich von Salis-Soglio. The Federal forces were clearly superior, and scored victories inTocerno and Valais, but were unable to deliver a crushing blow devestating enough to destroy the Sonderbund.
1848 – the king of France becomes aware of the Swiss Rebellion. He threatens French intervention in Switzerland if the Sonderbund is not allowed to exist, and if the Jesuits are not recalled.
1848 – The Swiss Federalists are forced to agree, and the status quo is retored in Switzerland
1848 - An empowerd France quells the rebellions in Itally


A Papal confederation led by the Pope is formed.


As you can tell I didn't have time to end it.

 

[BananaLee]

I've been searching for this but apparently "War" is too short a term for searching even when combined with "Korean".

Now, we know MacArthur advocated using the atomic bomb during the Korean War after the stalemate set in. We also know most Americans really CBFed about the war at that point in time (In Jan 51, a survey showed 61% of Americans reckoned the US should withdraw - Henretta, America's History) and Truman had the last word after all the shouting died down.

Of course, the question would be, what if some comedy of errors culminated in the usage of the A-bomb in the Korean War? What would happen? We've got loads of althists about nuclear war thanks to Kennedy and Kruschchev making a cup of Horlicks. But what about Korea?

 

[bombshoo]

I've been searching for this but apparently "War" is too short a term for searching even when combined with "Korean".

Now, we know MacArthur advocated using the atomic bomb during the Korean War after the stalemate set in. We also know most Americans really CBFed about the war at that point in time (In Jan 51, a survey showed 61% of Americans reckoned the US should withdraw - Henretta, America's History) and Truman had the last word after all the shouting died down.

Of course, the question would be, what if some comedy of errors culminated in the usage of the A-bomb in the Korean War? What would happen? We've got loads of althists about nuclear war thanks to Kennedy and Kruschchev making a cup of Horlicks. But what about Korea?

I've thought about this before. Obviously China would enter the war and Chaing ke Sheck might have attempted to retake the mainland for starters. I'll dig through some of my old notes to try find some of the other possibilities I came up with.

 

[Masada]

Frivolity. All those little Communist insurgencies just got a major supporter openly on side. Those alone would tie down alot of troops... Malaya most assuredly did on its own. Indonesia and Thailand's communists were all in a position to make a move if they had the arms and support in both cases they would likely have won without outside support which conceivably would be tied up in China and Korea. As to the rest of South East Asia I'm honestly not sure.

 

[Dachs]

A Sunset over Switzerland

You know, that has a good chance to screw the whole 1848 Revolutions thing up. You know, get the Great Powers fighting over Switzerland...could turn it into a rallying cry for German nationalism, and if the French intervene properly it could unite the Prussian and other conservative forces behind the Liberals who want a nationalistic Kleindeutsche Lösung. (Or, if the Habsburgs end up collapsing, a Grossdeutschland instead. ) Did you look at das' Cavaignac "Guess-the-PoD"?

Of course, the question would be, what if some comedy of errors culminated in the usage of the A-bomb in the Korean War? What would happen? We've got loads of althists about nuclear war thanks to Kennedy and Kruschchev making a cup of Horlicks. But what about Korea?

Fröhliche Weihnachten.

 

[das]

Some of the stuff I had PMed about this earlier probably merits reposting:

No, I doubt it would be similar [to the Cavaignac thing... though that too is an option]. The first connection between the Sonderbund and the events elsewhere in Europe that comes to mind is the foreign support for the Sonderbund, and especially the French plans to intervene in its favour; however, historically the Sonderbund was defeated before such an intervention could be arranged; presumably if it were to hold out for longer, the French monarchy might be able to use this occasion to intervene on its behalf, which could lead to a variety of outcomes (up to a general European war if Austria and Britain decide to start supporting the government instead), but is probably most likely to end in some kind of compromise, possibly intermediated by the Great Powers, between the two Swiss factions. A militarily successful intervention might go a long way towards bolstering the French monarchy's prestige, possibly allowing it to weather the storm. Ofcourse, a failure - and there is quite enough room for a failure, whether because of France being diplomatically outmaneuvered or thanks to a successful Swiss government defense, or a combination of both - will be catastrophic and might lead to a more radical and rushed revolution. There are many different ways to go about this, but I think that the French intervention has the most potential as far as possible consequences of a more successful Sonderbund are concerned.

The problem with a [proposed] Bonapartist intervention [in Switzerland after a drawn-out civil war] is that the war in Switzerland probably won't last that long; and if it would, then I think that if historically the Bourbons were on the brink of the intervention and were literally stopped only by the rebel council self-disbanding before it could be contacted about this, they definitely would intervene in this case. Another matter entirely is that this might result in Britain, Prussia and Austria forcing France to back down or fight them all, both outcomes being likely disastrous for the monarchy (one of the possible scenarios: the hardliner right-wing elements take over the desperate royal government when the Swiss Crisis begins, press on despite British threats, war begins and goes badly, the government puts down the more moderate uprisings with force but after the initial defeats nonetheless gets overthrown by an union of radical republican and proto-socialist elements, the new government begins mass reprisals and left-wing reforms and scares the hell out of the other Great Powers, and then we have the French Revolutionary Wars all over again with Nicholas I at the forefront of the rapidly revived Holy Alliance; just one possibility, ofcourse).

The consequences elsewhere ofcourse greatly depend on the exact resolution of the crisis in Switzerland and on the fate of the July Monarchy, but I think a revolution in Italy for one is inevitable; a left-wing republic in France would support it, possibly driving Sardinia into Austria's arms in the process, whereas a surviving monarchy might try to repeat the Swiss success and intervene on the other side (though there are other options, like trying to work with the moderate elements and Sardinia, especially in case of a war with Austria). A war or even the mere threat of a newly-assertive France might be enough to stifle/redirect much of the dissent in Germany, though it's not guaranteed. The Greater Poland Uprising would probably happen no matter what and court whoever will help. Hungary and other troubles in the Austrian Empire are more tricky; the factors behind all that would not be greatly influenced by western events, but a war might force the Austrian government to come to terms with the domestic malcontents, as, once again, might a greater French threat. Then again: both Austria and Prussia had also supported the Sonderbund, though not as blatantly, but while I doubt it's success will be enough to significantly bolster their governments' authority, it might grant them greater confidence in their position and cause them to act more firmly, which can be good for them in Germany if they don't overdo it (the "revolution" there does not seem to have had much of a backbone even in OTL), but on the other hand quite disastrous elsewhere.

Lots of opportunities here, actually; good find, Yui.

 

[Yui108]

Thank Das and Dachs.

Dachs- I'm planning on having the Borboun support of the Sonderbund prop up their monarchy allowing for no 1848 revolution in France. I haven't decided how it should influence Germany yet.

 

[Yui108]

Here is my newly revamped timeline. I am fairly satisfied with it, but I still know I have to establish some greater ripple consequences in Italy.

EDIT 1: Now includes Italy

A Sunset over Switzerland

1845 – A coalition of far right Protestant and Catholic cantons in Switzerland is formed including Lucerne, Fribourg, Valais, Uri, Schwyz, Unterwalden and Zug. They formed to protect each other’s interests against a radicalist anti-catholic centralization of power in Switzerland. They call themselves the Sonderbund.
1846 – In a celebrated coup, conservative forces take power in Ticino. Ticino joins the Sonderbund
1846 – Following Ticino both Solothurn and Appenzell Inerrhoden join the growing Sonderbund pact.
1847 – The radical majority in the Tagsatzung decides to crush the Sonderbund as unconstitutional
Late 1847-1848 – The war in Switzerland continues to grind on as the Swiss Federal Army led by acclamed general Guillaume-Henri Dufour fought the forces of the Sonderbund led by Johann-Ulrich von Salis-Soglio. The Federal forces were clearly superior, and scored victories inTocerno and Valais, but were unable to deliver a crushing blow devestating enough to destroy the Sonderbund.
1848 – Louis-Philippe the I threatens to bash heads together in Switzerland if the Sonderbund is not allowed to continue its existence. He sends an expedition of 200,000 Frenchmen in typical fashion to show the Swiss he meant business. This show of French authority greatly stabilizes his position among the critical petite bourgeoisie. The French monarchy successfully weathers the storm of 1848, and endures.
1848 – The Swiss Federalists are forced to agree to a settlement , and the general status quo is retored in Switzerland.
1848 – Flexing it’s new continentialist muscles, the France of Louis-Philippe the I sucessfuly and quite violently intervenes against the newly formed Roman Republic in Italy. It is crushed by French regulars and the Pope is empowered as the ruler of a newly revived Papal States.
1848 – A tide of revolution sweeps Europe. Greater Germany is hugely frightened by the sight of a newly assertive France.
September 1848 – Believing greater unity is required if Austria-Hungary is to protect its interests against France the Austro-Hungarian Empire refuses the 12 points of Hungarian Revolutionaries of 1848. This sparks an even earlier Hungarian revolution. This obvious non-accomodation on the part of Austria had allowed the various Hungarian minorities to reunite in the face of a clearly militant Austria.
October 1848 – The forces led by Windishcgratz are repulsed. The Hungarians had been able to establish a stabler government in face of greater unification.
November 1848 – The establishment of the Republic of Hungary is made official.
November 1848 – The Austro-Hungarian government collapses in the face of 3 separate revolutions.
December 1848 – The oppurtunistic Prussian government rapidly pushes through a series of laws into the Frankfurt convention, riding a massive wave of militancy in the face of the new “Threat to the West”. Austria, Bohemia-Moravia-Silesia, Austrian Slovenia are annexed by the Kingdom of Prussia, and the old order muscles through a kingdom under the guidance of Frederick William IV as the grandiose new “Emperor of Germany”
December 1848 – In the face of this massive new Großdeutschland both the new Republic of Hungary and Kingdom of Denmark cede both the contested territories of Croatia and Schleswig-Holstein.
January 1849 – Bolstered by extra German forces, a devestating offensive is launched, oblitering the Piedmontese forces in the so-called First Italian war for Independence. The Sardinian-Piedmontese government collapses.
January 1849 – A french engineered Papal Confederacy is established, encompassing the states of Modena, Parma, Tuscany, Piedmont, and Sardinia.
Febraury 1849 – Independent city-states of Milan and Venice are established. Reluctant to join the French supported Papal confederacy, they become protectorates of Germany in all but name.

 

[The Strategos]

Faded Glory
​

Prelude

No one wanted war. Not Britain, where it was one of the few things the deeply divided cabinet agreed on. Nor France, who truly had no stake in the issue save for trying to win favor with Britain. Of course Austria, the traditional ally of Russia didn’t, perhaps remembering the debt they owed Russia for their support during the recent unpleasantness of the ’48 revolution. As for Russia, despite making the highly aggressive move of sending troops into the Danubian Principalities on July 2, 1853, the move seemed to be intended more to drive the various powers to the bargaining table rather than precipitate a war.

If this was the intent of the move, it worked, as Britain, France, Austria, and Prussia met in Vienna, intent on negotiating a peace between Russia and the Ottomans. The result of this conference was the so-called “Vienna Note,” finalized on July 31. The Vienna Note sought to keep the status quo of the region; Russia would withdraw its troops and the Ottomans would agree not to change its policy with regards to Christians in their realm without the consent of Russia and France.

Obstinately, this note solved the crisis that had provoked the Vienna Conference. Though deeply rooted in debate over the viability of the Ottoman Empire, with its obvious decay and need for reform, the immediate causes of the crisis was over the Christian holy places in the Ottoman Empire. In 1690, the Ottoman’s granted the Roman Catholic Church the dominant authority in all the churches in Nazareth, Bethlehem, and Jerusalem. A later treaty of 1740 further stipulated that Roman Catholic monks should protect these holy places. However, the Roman Catholic Church’s influence in the region steadily decreased do to a combination of demographics and indifference, until the formerly Roman Catholic jobs were mostly handled by the Eastern Orthodox Church, which boasted the majority of Christians in Ottoman lands.

Accompanying this increase of Eastern Orthodox responsibility was an increased interest of Russia in the Ottoman Empire. Czar Nicholas I, especially, seemed to think that he had been ordained by God as the leader of the Orthodox Church and the protector of Orthodox Christians. Combined with the drastic increase of Russian pilgrims to the holy sites, this caused Russia to believe that it had a natural right to protect Eastern Orthodox living in the Ottoman Empire. The Roman Catholics, however, began combating this increased Orthodox presence in the late 1840s. The Catholic Patriarch of Jerusalem, who had for many years lived in Rome, went to live in Jerusalem in 1847. Louis Napoleon also decided to champion the cause of Roman Catholics after he became Emperor of France. These competing interests soon clashed, and the late 1840s bore witness to many scuffles, fights, and allegations of theft between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox clergy.

In 1850, the Sultan decided to end this conflict by sending the keys to the Church of the Nativity to France. At the same time, he assured the Orthodox church that the keys wouldn’t fit the locks on the doors. Yet despite these assurances, by 1852, the French had seized control of the holy places, to the outrage of Russia. This provoked Russia sending the militaristic Menschikov to Constantinople. By this diplomatic mission, Russia was clearly attempting to threaten the Sultan with future force if their demands were not met. However, the Sultan did feel confident enough to refuse these demands thanks to the presence of the British diplomat Stratford. Stratford saw his duty in Constantinople to oppose Russia, and in absence of any orders from the British Foreign Office, promised British support to the Ottomans if war would come.

The failure of this diplomatic mission provoked the Czar into the show of force of invading Turkish Moldavia and Wallachia, which itself led to the Vienna Conference and the Vienna Note. Russia was quick to agree to the Vienna Note, at the worst, the note allowed them to save prestige and at least allow them to claim diplomatic victory, at best, its vague language gave Russia free reign to interfere with the affairs of the Ottomans whenever they wished. The Ottomans, as could be imagined, were less than pleased with the results of the conference, believing that their very national sovereignty was at stake. The European Powers who had drafted the note, however, were not about to let the Ottoman’s complaints threaten European peace. Britain immediately recalled Stratford, who many saw as fanning the flames of the controversy by insinuating to the Sultan that Britain would support him in any war. Meanwhile the French and British Mediterranean fleets were moved away from Turkish waters. The threat was clear, either the Ottomans agree to the peace treaty, or the European powers would leave them at the mercy of the Russians. Humiliated, but unwilling to fight Russia without allies, the Ottomans agreed to abide by the Vienna Note.

 

[The Strategos]

Faded Glory
​

Chapter 1: When nothing happens, foreshadow


Everyone was happy that there was peace…except for the ones who were not. Chief among the latter groups, understandably enough, were the Ottomans. The Sultan at this time was Abdulmecid I, a man who had inherited his father’s reformer tendencies. Those who opposed these reforms, which included the Muslim governing classes and the religious authorities saw justification for their opposition in the peace. Abdulmecid’s faith in Western Europe, especially France and Britain was shown to be misled and the Ottomans were reduced, in the eyes of the extremists, to a Russian lapdog.

Even before the most recent foreign troubles, there had been a sizable portion of the Ottoman Empire who resented their Sultan. His 1839 edict of reforms had been only partially put in force and had been virtually ignored in the more remote parts of the empire. In addition, conspiracies and assassination plots swirled around. Thus, if the latest peace did cause an increase in disturbance, it was not immediately recognized as such. The Ottomans even appeared to continue down the path of modernization with their Religious Freedom Edict of 1856, which among other reforms, guaranteed a measure of religious freedom, abolished the capitation tax on non-Muslims, and allowed non-Muslims to become soldiers. Looking back, however, one could not help but realize that instead of a dawning of a new day for a reformed Ottoman Empire, it rather represented the high tide of the reformation movement.

*********************

In Russia, the peace of Vienna was seen as a great triumph of the Slavophile movement, who interpreted Russia’s diplomatic triumph as a triumph of Slavic values over Western Europe. This triumph, however, in their view did not extend far enough. The militant branch of the Slavophile movement envisioned the day when the Russian Czar would rule over all Slavic people, including the ones currently residing in the Ottoman Empire. However, beneath the outward show of strength the peace gave them, Russia seethed with unrest.

Russia was at its core fractured ideologically, politically, religiously, economically, and socially. Pro-Westernizers and Slavophiles; Anarchists, socialists, republicans, and authoritarians; Catholics and Eastern Orthodox; land owners, serfs, and the middle class; Russians, Ukrainians, Belarussians, and Poles; all these groups and more struggled with and against each other. In the midst of all these competing forces stood the Czar, sometimes violently repressing one of these groups, such as the bloody repression of the Poles during the November Uprising; sometimes he sympathized but took no action, such as with the plight of the serfs. For now, however, these problems were ignored in light of the prestigious diplomatic victory over the Turks. For now.

*********************

In Britain, peace brought about turmoil. Lord Palmerston, disgusted at the British foreign policy, which had done virtually the opposite of what he had recommended at every turn, resigned from his post as Home Secretary. This action was followed soon after by Lord Russell’s resignation, together which caused the government to collapse. The Queen then requested Lord Derby to form a government, which he did with great difficulty. The government he formed followed in its foreign policy the policy set out by the former Lord Aberdeen’s government, in favoring peace and isolation. This stance proved to be incredibly unpopular among the populace at large, who had overwhelmingly supported Lord Palmerston’s position on the Ottoman crisis. After a short reign of a few months, this government also collapsed. In desperation, the Queen appealed to the aged Lansdowne, who reluctantly took up the task. Optimists hoped that his experience and level head would cool passions and provide some measure of stability. Pessimists, or realists as they preferred to refer to themselves, figured that old age would bring ineffective leadership, which could only further the government’s instability.

*********************

Of all the major powers, the newly confirmed peace meant the least to France. Press censorship, combined with the fact that France had a minimal stake, if any, in the eastern Mediterranean, ensured that the Vienna Conference was seen as a foreign policy triumph of the regime. The crisis thus resolved, Napoleon III turned his attention to domestic affairs, specifically, his own domestic situation and its lack of a wife to provide him with heirs. This deficiency was remedied, first by his marriage to the Spanish Countess of Teba in 1855, and then with the birth of his son Napoleon Louis in 1856. Unfortunately for Napoleon, the birth of the Prince Imperial would be one of the few remaining joyful events.

 

[Dachs]

Theodoros Rshtuni: full of fail or did he have something going for him? I'm somewhat interested in the possibilities he has for messing with Muawiyah and Konstas II Pogonatos. Thoughts?

 

[Yui108]

Constans II and Theodoros were allies? But it seems possible he could have halted the arab advance with greater numbers.