Malê Rising

[Julius Vogel]

I forget how Italy stands IATL (I really should reread), but would they wish to stand in as a patron for Romania? I know they were pretty weak OTL at this point, but any port in a storm is better than a bird in the hand, right?

[chr92]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Edelstein

The Crimean Khanate isn't very big -- basically, it only includes the areas that the Ottomans actually occupied at the end of the war. I'll do a map over the weekend, but if you look at the darker-shaded areas on the southern portion of this map, you'll have an idea of its borders. The Russians will still have Sevastopol, and the Khanate will be a relatively weak state - its Ottoman vassalage, and the fact that it was created by treaty, will help it stay independent in the short term, but it still won't be able to anger the Russians very much.

The naval balance: I'd thought that the capabilities of the Ottoman navy and the Russian Black Sea fleet were more evenly matched, but I might also suppose that many of the Ottoman warships were tied up intercepting Russian attempts to resupply the Balkan front.

Thanks for this terrific, and convincing, update! Love the Crimean Khanate. Are they modernising, too? How are such minorities as the Armenians doing in this healthier OE?

Also, your maps are just fine.

[Kaiphranos]

Good stuff, good stuff!

Originally Posted by Jonathan Edelstein

I don't dislike making maps - it's just that my maps aren't works of art the way Kaiphranos' are. I'll try to do maps of the postwar Balkans and Caucasus over the weekend.

That's very kind of you! I'd be delighted to do more maps for this timeline at some point in the future once my life has settled down a bit, but that might be a moth or more...

I'd mentioned that one of the campaigns of the Great War will involve Lawrence of Arabia-style stirring-up of Central Asian nationalism, and the outcome of the Caucasian theater will be one of the things that makes this possible. Of course, the Russians will be doing the same thing in the Ottoman hinterland. The Great War isn't going to be a fun time.

Well, except for us readers! Alt-Lawrence of Uzbekistan, eh? Color me intrigued...

[Jonathan Edelstein]

Originally Posted by Julius Vogel

I forget how Italy stands IATL (I really should reread), but would they wish to stand in as a patron for Romania? I know they were pretty weak OTL at this point, but any port in a storm is better than a bird in the hand, right?

Italy is united (with the probable exception of the Papal States), but I'm not sure what it could do for the Romanians: it's a weak state, it doesn't border Romania, and it isn't an enemy of Romania's enemies. If Romania has a falling-out with Austria, it might try to build ties with Italy, but other than that, Italian relations probably won't be a priority. On the other hand, they might seek patronage from France - the Romanian aristocracy was francophilic, and France might be able to run interference for them with the Tsar.

Originally Posted by chr92

Thanks for this terrific, and convincing, update! Love the Crimean Khanate.

I'll admit to being amused by the idea of khans in the twentieth century. The Rule of Cool did play a part in the outcome of this war, although I think I kept it plausible.

Originally Posted by chr92

Are they modernising, too? How are such minorities as the Armenians doing in this healthier OE?

The khanates are starting behind the curve, but the Crimean Tatar exiles will have picked up ideas from their sojourn in the Ottoman Empire, and they'll want to modernize if only to keep pace with Russia.

It's going to be tricky for the Armenians - Russia is still their patron, and the Tsar will actively promote Armenian irredentism in Anatolia as a form of proxy warfare. Some Armenians will assimilate and find their way into the elite much like the (non-Polish) Christian minorities did in Russia - the Ottoman army in the Great War will have Armenian generals - but there will be a lot of mutual suspicion and some repression: as in the Balkans, clashing nationalisms are never pretty.

This Ottoman Empire, though, will have less of a sense of siege than its OTL counterpart: it will be generally more tolerant of minorities, and will be able to mediate the tensions by means short of massacre. It'll turn out all right eventually: note who wrote the book on the Young Ottomans that's quoted in the update, and where it was published.

Anyway, some rough and ready maps:

[chr92]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Edelstein

The khanates are starting behind the curve, but the Crimean Tatar exiles will have picked up ideas from their sojourn in the Ottoman Empire, and they'll want to modernize if only to keep pace with Russia.

It's going to be tricky for the Armenians - Russia is still their patron, and the Tsar will actively promote Armenian irredentism in Anatolia as a form of proxy warfare. Some Armenians will assimilate and find their way into the elite much like the (non-Polish) Christian minorities did in Russia - the Ottoman army in the Great War will have Armenian generals - but there will be a lot of mutual suspicion and some repression: as in the Balkans, clashing nationalisms are never pretty.

This Ottoman Empire, though, will have less of a sense of siege than its OTL counterpart: it will be generally more tolerant of minorities, and will be able to mediate the tensions by means short of massacre. It'll turn out all right eventually: note who wrote the book on the Young Ottomans that's quoted in the update, and where it was published.

Thanks, and also for the maps.

Another one looking forward to Lawrence of Uzbekistan!

[Iori]

So is the Khanate of the Crimea going to remain as is, or will it ever control all of the Crimean peninsula?

[Hnau]

I was very pleased to see the maps produced. They are rather well-done! Thanks.

[Julius Vogel]

I like the idea of a Salonikia Free Port that has a chance to establish itself. This was an option mooted later on IOTL right, without any success?

[wolf_brother]

My point about Austria was that even IOTL Alexander II and Franz-Joseph had (tentatively) agreed for the Austrians to occupy Bosnia-Herzegovina while the Russians were to take Bessarabia, and Romanian independence was to be recognized. Also during the war the Hapsburgs prevented the Ottomans from making a strong offensive against the Serbian principality. Now ITTL however we have the war started, nominally, due to a Turkish cross-border raid, and yet the Hapsburgs do nothing. Then all of their plans and agreements are over-turned by the sudden reversal of the war effort and the Turkish victory.

So I'm surprised that the Hapsburgs don't take a more pro-active effort throughout the entire affair. You have the North Germans taking part in forcing the peace settlement between the Turks and the Russians, so perhaps the Austrians are too preoccupied with German matters to directly intervene militarily in the closing months of the war, but surely they'd put their noses into the drawing up of the post-war treaties.

[Ganesha]

Originally Posted by Iori

So is the Khanate of the Crimea going to remain as is, or will it ever control all of the Crimean peninsula?

I don't think it stands much of a chance, personally. In the next war (and there will almost certainly be a next war), reconquering it and protecting Sevastapol will be Priority #1 for the Russians. And the Ottomans can't effectively defend it by moving troops and ships there without causing a massive provocation. At best, the Khanate can try and hold out until Ottoman reinforcements arrive. I doubt they'll ever really be able to go on the offensive.

Originally Posted by Hnau

I was very pleased to see the maps produced. They are rather well-done! Thanks.

Yeah, the maps are great. We don't need anything fancy - these rough sketches are plenty to get the idea across!

Originally Posted by Julius Vogel

I like the idea of a Salonikia Free Port that has a chance to establish itself. This was an option mooted later on IOTL right, without any success?

How is the Salonika Free City organized? As a republic? As a oligarchy? Is it controlled by the Jewish/Turkish traders who lived there? Is it a limited democracy? I don't know how these things usually worked (my European history is limited once the Romans are out of the picture). What about the Duchies and khanates? Do they have governing councils? Are they absolute monarchies?

Cheers,
Ganesha

[Jonathan Edelstein]

Originally Posted by Iori

So is the Khanate of the Crimea going to remain as is, or will it ever control all of the Crimean peninsula?

Originally Posted by Ganesha

I don't think it stands much of a chance, personally. In the next war (and there will almost certainly be a next war), reconquering it and protecting Sevastapol will be Priority #1 for the Russians. And the Ottomans can't effectively defend it by moving troops and ships there without causing a massive provocation. At best, the Khanate can try and hold out until Ottoman reinforcements arrive. I doubt they'll ever really be able to go on the offensive

What Ganesha said, pretty much. The Khanate is a weak state; only the Ottoman umbrella will keep it from being reconquered as soon as Russia gets its house in order. It may survive the Great War, depending on who wins, but going on the offensive would be out of the question (unless, of course, the Crimea becomes a great-power theater and the Khanate is along for the ride).

Originally Posted by Hnau

I was very pleased to see the maps produced. They are rather well-done! Thanks.

Thank you! I'll try to include one as a matter of course whenever there are significant territorial changes.

Originally Posted by Julius Vogel

I like the idea of a Salonikia Free Port that has a chance to establish itself. This was an option mooted later on IOTL right, without any success?

I'm not sure, to be honest. At one time during WW1, there were rival Greek governments in Athens and Salonika/Thessaloniki, but the northern government wasn't separatist. I wouldn't be surprised if someone mooted the idea of a free Salonika at some point during the Balkan Wars, in order to sort out all the conflicting claims, but if anyone did, I haven't been able to find out about it.

Originally Posted by wolf_brother

My point about Austria was that even IOTL Alexander II and Franz-Joseph had (tentatively) agreed for the Austrians to occupy Bosnia-Herzegovina while the Russians were to take Bessarabia, and Romanian independence was to be recognized. Also during the war the Hapsburgs prevented the Ottomans from making a strong offensive against the Serbian principality. Now ITTL however we have the war started, nominally, due to a Turkish cross-border raid, and yet the Hapsburgs do nothing. Then all of their plans and agreements are over-turned by the sudden reversal of the war effort and the Turkish victory.

So I'm surprised that the Hapsburgs don't take a more pro-active effort throughout the entire affair. You have the North Germans taking part in forcing the peace settlement between the Turks and the Russians, so perhaps the Austrians are too preoccupied with German matters to directly intervene militarily in the closing months of the war, but surely they'd put their noses into the drawing up of the post-war treaties.

Fair point. In OTL, Austria-Hungary promised "benevolent neutrality" to Russia before hostilities started, but didn't get involved in the war even when Russia was clearly winning. I assume there was some reason for this, involving either Austrian domestic politics, a lack of self-confidence after the 1866 defeat, or maybe something else entirely. In this timeline, where the Russians lose (and where, even before that, it's clear that the war is turning into a meat-grinder), I'd imagine that the Austrians would also avoid jumping in.

On the other hand, they would definitely get involved in the peace - after all, they've got interests to protect. Let's say that they were present at Rome, and they were the ones who spoke up for the Serbs, in the anticipation of bringing Serbia under their patronage and using the Serbs as their proxies in Bosnia. They'll be looking ahead to the next war and hoping that conditions will be right to grab Bosnia and Herzegovina, especially if the Bosnian peasants continue to be restive.

There will be a great deal going on in the Balkans between the wars - most of it offstage, because I want to keep the focus on Africa and Islamic reformism, but we'll visit the region again before the Great War, and your insights are always welcome.

Originally Posted by Ganesha

How is the Salonika Free City organized? As a republic? As a oligarchy? Is it controlled by the Jewish/Turkish traders who lived there? Is it a limited democracy? I don't know how these things usually worked (my European history is limited once the Romans are out of the picture). What about the Duchies and khanates? Do they have governing councils? Are they absolute monarchies

Salonika has an elected legislature and a commissioner appointed by the great powers, something like Danzig or Kraków in OTL; it isn't fully sovereign but has internal self-government and authority over the port. The duchies actually have fairly progressive constitutions, with safeguards of minority rights and considerable power given to the elected legislatures, although the Greek and Ottoman commissioners function as effective proconsuls.

The Crimean Khanate, which is dominated by exiles influenced by their years in the Ottoman Empire, has a constitution and a legislature of limited powers, but many of its members are appointed and the government is responsible to the khan rather than the parliament. The Caucasian khanates are feudal - not absolute, but not democratic either.

The Tsar is king of both Armenia and Georgia, but the Rome Treaty requires that each have a locally elected legislature. The legislators' powers are limited - Georgia and Armenia, like the Crimea, don't have responsible governments - but the Tsar has to tolerate a lot more democracy there than in Russia proper. This may have interesting effects, down the line, on the Caucasian communities in Moscow and St. Petersburg.

Now I'll have to figure out what to do with the Principality of Samos. It would be interesting if some of the Ottomans' feudal vassals survived to the present as democratic feudal vassals, but I'm not sure it would be practical. And this guy too - I'll definitely have to find a role for him.

[wolf_brother]

Hmm, that does sound ominous for the Sublime Porte. Tough, even if they lose the Balkans, Caucuses, Crimea, and the Arab territories, as long as they hold on to Anatolia and Rumelia they'll be doing much better than IOTL.

[Unknown]

At least the Ottomans are going to fare better in this TL.

The Great War is going to be...bloody.

What was the death toll from TTL's Russo-Ottoman War?

[Admiral Matt]

Unfortunately I suspect that this outcome is going to lead to some real unpleasantness within Russia's new borders. It's been established that Muslim minorities and particularly those near the border represent a fifth column and direct threat to the security of the country.

Consider that this was a period when the remaining parts of European Russia's Muslim possessions were experiencing substantial Slavic immigration. Often this movement was accompanied by the loss of land rights by the native peoples and their displacement, many of whom in turn ended up emigrating to Anatolia.

In TTL, I'd expect the existing trend to be exacerbated by deliberate ethnic cleansing, especially north of the Caucasus Mountains and in the Crimea. It's the natural reaction of a state to losing its border territories because of the minorities therein. Historically, we saw the Ottomans reacting with increased severity to minority issues - here I expect it of the Russians. Even if the state altered its policies not at all, there are a greater number of available Russian/Ukrainian immigrants to split between the remaining Islamic border territories, more places for Russian Muslims to emigrate to, and a massively different cultural perception of the religion's adherents. In OTL the view was neutral to condescending - the Muslims were victims. Here, they would be viewed as an existential threat to the Motherland.

Not pretty, so.

In other news, I'm finally up to date.

[Ganesha]

Originally Posted by Admiral Matt

Unfortunately I suspect that this outcome is going to lead to some real unpleasantness within Russia's new borders. It's been established that Muslim minorities and particularly those near the border represent a fifth column and direct threat to the security of the country.

Consider that this was a period when the remaining parts of European Russia's Muslim possessions were experiencing substantial Slavic immigration. Often this movement was accompanied by the loss of land rights by the native peoples and their displacement, many of whom in turn ended up emigrating to Anatolia.

In TTL, I'd expect the existing trend to be exacerbated by deliberate ethnic cleansing, especially north of the Caucasus Mountains and in the Crimea. It's the natural reaction of a state to losing its border territories because of the minorities therein. Historically, we saw the Ottomans reacting with increased severity to minority issues - here I expect it of the Russians. Even if the state altered its policies not at all, there are a greater number of available Russian/Ukrainian immigrants to split between the remaining Islamic border territories, more places for Russian Muslims to emigrate to, and a massively different cultural perception of the religion's adherents. In OTL the view was neutral to condescending - the Muslims were victims. Here, they would be viewed as an existential threat to the Motherland.

Not pretty, so.

In other news, I'm finally up to date.

Sad and sadly accurate analysis, Admiral Matt, as far as I know. And this brings up another question: what will happen to Russia's Kalmyk Buddhists? During this time IOTL, they were settling down and abandoning their nomadic lifestyle. The Russians generally viewed them as a potential security threat, but IOTL were fairly tolerant provided the Kalmyks didn't do anything too extreme. ITTL, they will probably be persecuted by the more paranoid Russian authorities. But who will they turn to for help? The Ottomans might not be interested - Buddhists are not People of the Book. What are your thoughts, Jonathan? I'd love to see an independent Kalmyk Republic, but that seems unlikely in any scenario.

Cheers,
Ganesha

[Jonathan Edelstein]

Originally Posted by Unknown

At least the Ottomans are going to fare better in this TL.

The Great War is going to be...bloody.

Yes indeed. The Great War will be WW1 with machine guns, quick-firing artillery and gas but without armor, meaning that there will be no magic bullet to break the trench-warfare stalemate. The war in the densely populated European and Asian theaters will be a slugfest - the steppe, savanna, desert and jungle theaters will be different, and the fronts will be more fluid, but in central Europe and Korea/Manchuria it will be trench warfare until one side breaks. I have a rough outline of how things will go: it won't be pretty, and the political consequences will be profound.

Originally Posted by Unknown

What was the death toll from TTL's Russo-Ottoman War?

In OTL, according to Wikipedia (which is usually pretty accurate about casualty figures), the Ottomans lost 30,000 dead in battle and 90,000 from disease, Russia suffered about 22,000 killed or died from wounds and 81,000 died from disease, and reading between the lines, another 10,000 or so of the Russian allies were killed.

The casualties in TTL will be higher, because of (a) the trench warfare in front of Edirne and Varna, and (b) the Turkish offensives in the Caucasus and Crimea. Say 35,000 to 40,000 Ottoman battle deaths, about 50,000 Russians (half of them at Edirne - 100,000 casualties with wounded outnumbering dead by three to one) and 5000 to 10,000 Serbs and Greeks.

Originally Posted by Admiral Matt

Unfortunately I suspect that this outcome is going to lead to some real unpleasantness within Russia's new borders. It's been established that Muslim minorities and particularly those near the border represent a fifth column and direct threat to the security of the country.

Consider that this was a period when the remaining parts of European Russia's Muslim possessions were experiencing substantial Slavic immigration. Often this movement was accompanied by the loss of land rights by the native peoples and their displacement, many of whom in turn ended up emigrating to Anatolia.

In TTL, I'd expect the existing trend to be exacerbated by deliberate ethnic cleansing, especially north of the Caucasus Mountains and in the Crimea. It's the natural reaction of a state to losing its border territories because of the minorities therein. Historically, we saw the Ottomans reacting with increased severity to minority issues - here I expect it of the Russians. Even if the state altered its policies not at all, there are a greater number of available Russian/Ukrainian immigrants to split between the remaining Islamic border territories, more places for Russian Muslims to emigrate to, and a massively different cultural perception of the religion's adherents. In OTL the view was neutral to condescending - the Muslims were victims. Here, they would be viewed as an existential threat to the Motherland.

Unfortunately, yes. The prevailing narrative in official Russia was that the war was lost due to treachery - the Romanians stabbing their natural Slavic allies in the back, the rebellious peasants refusing to fight for the rodina, and the Turkic minorities acting as a fifth column for the Ottomans. Reaction will be strong in the 1880s (and not only in Russia; some historians in TTL will refer to the 1880s as "the decade of reaction") and it will go hard for the remaining Muslims of the Caucasus and the Crimea. I'd expect that many Crimean Tatars in the northern part of the peninsula will be forced to move to the Khanate, and that the Caucasian Muslims will be pushed into the Ottoman Empire or the Caucasian khanates.

The policies won't be uniform: in central Asia, the Muslims will be treated as third-class subjects but not ethnically cleansed, and in Georgia and Armenia, which are separate (and largely feudal) kingdoms, many of the Muslim landholders will hang on. But this will be an unpleasant period for Muslims throughout the empire.

At the same time, this means that unlike OTL, the Muslims in Russia will have an incentive to join revolutionary movements - and, in this timeline, Islamic thought has quite a few revolutionary currents running through it. There might be some bottom-up narodnikism among the Muslims, and who knows where that might lead?

Originally Posted by Ganesha

And this brings up another question: what will happen to Russia's Kalmyk Buddhists? During this time IOTL, they were settling down and abandoning their nomadic lifestyle. The Russians generally viewed them as a potential security threat, but IOTL were fairly tolerant provided the Kalmyks didn't do anything too extreme. ITTL, they will probably be persecuted by the more paranoid Russian authorities. But who will they turn to for help? The Ottomans might not be interested - Buddhists are not People of the Book. What are your thoughts, Jonathan? I'd love to see an independent Kalmyk Republic, but that seems unlikely in any scenario.

I don't think the Kalmyks will be treated as badly as the Muslims. What makes the Muslim minorities (especially the Turkic ones) uniquely dangerous in Russia's eyes is not only that they're rebellious - lots of Russian minorities were - but that they have an enemy great power as their patron. The Kalmyks won't be seen as a fifth column for a Buddhist great power: they'll just be a troublesome minority and, like the Cossacks, one that makes good soldiers.

I'm guessing that Russian policy toward the Buddhist minorities (both Kalmyks and Buryats) during the interwar period will be one of benign neglect as long as said minorities do their military service and don't make trouble. What happens to them during and after the Great War will depend in large part on what ideology comes out on top in the Russian Empire; independence probably won't happen, but some form of autonomy might.

The Brazil/Grão Pará update should appear soon: maybe today but more likely tomorrow.

[Daztur]

Trench warfare in Korea would be deeply unpleasant due to there being hills/small mountains EVERYWHERE. Cold winters and a monsoon season certainly won't help matters... Just look at how badly things bogged down in the second half of the Korean War with much more modern technology than in your *WW I.

For the Russo-Turkish War, I've really got to question the intelligence of the Turkish negotiators. The Crimean state they've set up is basically a casus belli with a coat of arms.

As other people have mentioned the narodniki are going to be going nuts ITTL. They had their hearts pinned on peasant rebellions that kept on getting stymied by the peasants not really wanting to have anything to do with them. With these peasant revolts (especially with a cause the narodniki would approve of) you'll probably see more of those populists and perhaps some actual links between them and the peasantry. IOTL they assassinated the Tsar in 1880 so expect a few tankers of blood (I'm sure Sergey Nechayev is up to something colorful...). I assume they're a slice of what you're referring too about internal problems in Russia brewing. If the narodniki are more successful ITTL that might butterfly away more urban/Marxist ideas about revolution catching on quite so much with the Russian left.

[The Sandman]

Korea is likely to end up going to whoever can gain naval superiority around the peninsula; once that occurs, the trench lines can be outflanked by amphibious descents (I hesitate to call them "invasions" because that to me implies an opposed landing, something that should be avoided if at all possible at the tech level of this Great War).

I also assume that Crimea probably was a matter of what the Ottomans could get, rather than what they actually wanted. I think that repression of the Tatars might be a little less heavy than of the Caucasian and Central Asian Muslims, though, because it would be very easy for the Ottomans to supply the Tatars with weaponry. And also because some sort of "Protector of the Tatars" thing seems a likely part of the peace deal, assuming Russia is unwilling to surrender its "Protector of the Slavs" thing.

I suspect the Russian Black Sea Fleet is going to move to a new base, though; in any future war, Sevastopol is just too exposed for the week or so it might take the Russians to relieve it.

[Unknown]

Jonathan, in 1893, the Sea Islands were hit by a hurricane that killed over 2,000 people in Georgia and South Carolina.

Do you plan on having a similar event occur in TTL?

Man, I hope you win a Turtledove.

You deserve it.

[Jonathan Edelstein]

Originally Posted by Daztur

For the Russo-Turkish War, I've really got to question the intelligence of the Turkish negotiators. The Crimean state they've set up is basically a casus belli with a coat of arms.

Granted, but to be fair, the Turkish diplomats were in a tight spot. The Ottoman Empire had launched its winter offensive in the hope of crushing Russia's morale and knocking it out of the war, and also in the hope of shoring up the government's domestic support. They succeeded in destroying Russia's political will to fight, but the military offensive didn't go as well as they wanted, and they were unable to accomplish many of their objectives in the Crimea and Caucasus. That meant they had less to work with at the negotiating table - but on the other hand, they couldn't throw their Tatar and Caucasian allies under the bus without major loss of face, and they needed some territorial gains to make up for the losses in the southern Balkans. As the Sandman says, they had to take what they could get rather than what they wanted.

But yes, the Crimean Khanate will be dry tinder.

Originally Posted by Daztur

As other people have mentioned the narodniki are going to be going nuts ITTL. They had their hearts pinned on peasant rebellions that kept on getting stymied by the peasants not really wanting to have anything to do with them. With these peasant revolts (especially with a cause the narodniki would approve of) you'll probably see more of those populists and perhaps some actual links between them and the peasantry.

The peasant rebellion was a Jacquerie, not a revolution. They had no social demands; they just didn't want to get fed into the Balkan meat-grinder. On the other hand, now that the narodniki have seen an actual peasant revolt, they might get a better idea of how to connect with the peasants - among other things, they might organize the peasants against specific local injustices rather than trying to turn them against the Tsar. The narodnik ideology isn't going to be quite the same in this timeline, especially since it may have a dash of revolutionary Islamic influence in it.

Originally Posted by Daztur

If the narodniki are more successful ITTL that might butterfly away more urban/Marxist ideas about revolution catching on quite so much with the Russian left.

It's safe to say that there will be several competing populist/socialist ideologies in this Russia, running the gamut from left to right, and that the *narodniki will be one of the more successful left-wing ideologies.

Originally Posted by The Sandman

I think that repression of the Tatars might be a little less heavy than of the Caucasian and Central Asian Muslims, though, because it would be very easy for the Ottomans to supply the Tatars with weaponry. And also because some sort of "Protector of the Tatars" thing seems a likely part of the peace deal, assuming Russia is unwilling to surrender its "Protector of the Slavs" thing.

The Sultan is already Caliph, and as the only Muslim country with a claim to great-power status, the Ottomans will see themselves as protectors of all the Russian Muslims. That will naturally include the Tatars.

The ability to smuggle weapons to the Tatars still in Russia, though, will be a two-edged sword - if they make too much trouble, the Russians might decide to simply expel them all to the Khanate and populate the remainder of the Crimea with loyal settlers.

Originally Posted by The Sandman

I suspect the Russian Black Sea Fleet is going to move to a new base, though; in any future war, Sevastopol is just too exposed for the week or so it might take the Russians to relieve it.

Odessa will get a boost. It's closer to those treacherous Romanians, too.

Originally Posted by Unknown

Jonathan, in 1893, the Sea Islands were hit by a hurricane that killed over 2,000 people in Georgia and South Carolina.

Do you plan on having a similar event occur in TTL?

I'm never quite sure what to do with weather events. I've been told, by people wiser than me, that the weather is a highly chaotic system which is vulnerable to small changes. On the other hand, there's no real way to extrapolate the effect of human conduct on the weather (other than on the macro scale such as global warming), so any changes in big weather events look a bit too much like handwaving for my taste. For this timeline, I'm going on the default assumption that the butterflies cancel each other out and that major storms, droughts or earthquakes will happen at more or less the same time as OTL, which means that there almost certainly will be a Sea Island hurricane in 1893.

By coincidence, 1892-93 will be the date of the next visit to the United States.