I agree that rough times are likely ahead. If you think the English are pissed now after they lost Burma while the French gained the Rhine, just wait until overseas trade bound for France starts coming in via ports in the Low Countries instead of London. I'd also be surprised if we don't see some kind of conflict arise in the future over Baltic trade, which could absolutely suck in the Triunes.
An Age of Miracles Continues: The Empire of Rhomania
- Thread starter Basileus444
- Start date
I'm waiting to see what other tricks Henri has to pull. Scotland could be next, which could be his bridge too far. Then there is southern Africa. A big part of me though feels he doesn't want to antagonize Rome, even with the loss of Bengal due to their meddling. That doesn't mean he won't continue to stir the pot, South Africa is a great jumping point to screw around in the Indian ocean, and toy with their greatest source of income. IF he needed to.
It's never the size of the wand but the skill of the performer. Henri just happens to have a big wand too.
It's never the size of the wand but the skill of the performer. Henri just happens to have a big wand too.
The Comet: Yes, that is Odysseus. I’d forgotten I’d included that reference. I think the reasons why is obvious, but do note that at this time, the nature of comets and repeating orbits hasn’t been discovered yet. (Although that is one of those astronomical discoveries that should be along ITTL fairly soon.)
Black Death: As is so often is regularly the case, see @JSC’s post. This is a case where everyone gets hammered hard. There is some regional variation with some areas coming out better, but it’s a case of A losing 20% while B loses 17%, so better isn’t worth much. I will be going into much more detail with Rhomania and the plague and cities once we get to the ‘Rhomania in the Little Ice Age’ section. But here Rhomania’s urbanized nature (by standards of the day) is very much a weakness, not a strength.
Roman medicine is good, but it’s not ‘beat the plague’ good. They have no clue regarding germ theory. A Roman surgeon is your best bet if you need a kidney stone removed, but that’s different from plague management. Islamic medicine was really good by 14th century standards, and it seems to have been utterly useless for combating the plague.
The Romans have an advantage in not having armies marching all over the place handily spreading the plague, but they have the disadvantage of big urban and trade networks. Once it gets into the Aegean basin, it gets all over the Aegean basin. There’s shipping all over the place, from little tramp boats of Aegean islanders peddling their way from port to port to the big grain and spice and kaffos haulers out of Alexandria. Mountain villages and hill towns in the interior can possibly pull off a ‘we have veteran snipers from the German war and will literally kill anyone we don’t know and burn the bodies’ approach but the Aegean basin would starve if it tried that.
Another note I want to make regarding sanitation is that it typically isn’t a matter of learning. People of the past didn’t like bad smells or stepping in poop. But they didn’t the technology to easily get rid of debris and waste like we do, or the technology was expensive and so only the rich could afford it. Plus there’s the matter of needing to save the waste to use as fertilizer in the fields. You don’t want to flush it all away; you want it to go into a cesspit that you can then empty and use in your fields, gardens, and orchards. Plus draft animals are needed for any bulk hauling, which every city needs a lot, and they poop. Yes, streets are swept, but it’s a constant battle.
Two developments that contributed massively to improving urban sanitation in the modern period was the development of alternative fertilizers and of bulk haulers that don’t poop in the streets.
Constantinople does go through rounds of depopulation, but in between its population ticks upward until the next round hits. The last note I have puts Constantinople at 340,000 pre-plague, so it lost slightly less than one-fifth of its population.
Urbanization though isn’t needed at this point in history to be heavily populated. Rhomania is heavily urbanized by the standards of the day, but it’s at 25% which is measly by our standards, and that’s with including cities of just a couple of thousand people. Russia was a population powerhouse in the 1700s and 1800s but was barely urbanized at all. Given the demographic black hole nature of cities prior to modern sanitation and medicine, a heavily urbanized society is at a disadvantage for being populous compared to an equally large but less urbanized society.
Except under his beneficent and wise rule, the plague has stayed away from Persia.
Plus all his India veterans like him more than you…
I was wondering if anyone had noticed that reference.
Furthermore, ‘the Army of Suffering’ is not my name. I took it from OTL.
The Triunes and Henri: Regarding Henri, and the Triunes, the opportunism, arrogance, and avoidance of karma isn’t a bug; it’s a feature. I’ve said it a few times before, although I’m sure it’s been a while, but the presentation of the Triunes is a reaction on my part to the ‘always victorious, always righteous England/Britain’ that pops up on AH.com. They’re meant to be the England/Britain of TTL, but they’re called something else, and they’re viewed from the point of view of others on the receiving end, but they’re doing the same (or similar) things as IOTL. This is why I note when the Triunes do something like declaring themselves Sovereigns of the Sea or getting offended at the idea of treating Russians as equal, I’m pulling them direct from OTL. (What’s really weird about both of these examples is that they’re from before England was a great power. British arrogance in the 1800s at least has a lot of power behind it. English arrogance in the 1500s and 1600s does not.) The lack of karma is a continuation of that trend. OTL Britain’s humiliation of losing the American Revolutionary War ended up being a rather weak sauce in the end, for example.
This is not to say that I consider the British to be uniquely and especially perfidious and arrogant. Everyone’s shit stinks, and normally I don’t feel a need to point out the smell. But if one repeatedly asserts that one’s shit does not stink, I do feel the need. And a good way to do it is to perform the same actions but without the ‘my team’ effect.
In short, they’re meant to be annoying, and infuriating, and frustrating.
Going forward with the Triunes, there are two possible courses. What is set is that Henri II will achieve most of what he wants. Not all, but most. He’ll have to pay more for what he gets then he might have because he pushed more than he should, but at worst it’s a ‘two steps forward, one step back’ situation. After that comes the crisis, with English dissatisfaction being a major catalyst. It’s the post crisis that’s up in the air.
Option 1) The crisis is eventually surmounted. The Triunes are a bit battered and bruised, perhaps with some losses here and there, but overall they continue on their merry way. They’re still a big boy, a great power, albeit not the powerhouse that they were under Henri II. And they’re still that smug, annoying guy, publicly praying “we thank thee, O God, that we are not as other nations are: unjust, covetous, oppressive, cruel” (Orlando Figes, The Crimean War, pg. 163).
Option 2) Bit of backstory: if I were to rewrite the TL from scratch, one thing I would change is that England loses the Hundred Years War. France is a great power, but England is a second-rate power and never rises above that status.
The crisis ends up reverting to something like the above. England successfully breaks away, but while France, perhaps reuniting with Arles, goes on to be one of the great powers of the world, England never rises above the second rank. Perhaps it starts climbing via its Terranovan colonies, but then loses them via arrogance and alienation similar to OTL, and ITTL this does shove it firmly and permanently back down into the second rank, and not even industrialization changes this picture.
Black Death: As is so often is regularly the case, see @JSC’s post. This is a case where everyone gets hammered hard. There is some regional variation with some areas coming out better, but it’s a case of A losing 20% while B loses 17%, so better isn’t worth much. I will be going into much more detail with Rhomania and the plague and cities once we get to the ‘Rhomania in the Little Ice Age’ section. But here Rhomania’s urbanized nature (by standards of the day) is very much a weakness, not a strength.
Roman medicine is good, but it’s not ‘beat the plague’ good. They have no clue regarding germ theory. A Roman surgeon is your best bet if you need a kidney stone removed, but that’s different from plague management. Islamic medicine was really good by 14th century standards, and it seems to have been utterly useless for combating the plague.
The Romans have an advantage in not having armies marching all over the place handily spreading the plague, but they have the disadvantage of big urban and trade networks. Once it gets into the Aegean basin, it gets all over the Aegean basin. There’s shipping all over the place, from little tramp boats of Aegean islanders peddling their way from port to port to the big grain and spice and kaffos haulers out of Alexandria. Mountain villages and hill towns in the interior can possibly pull off a ‘we have veteran snipers from the German war and will literally kill anyone we don’t know and burn the bodies’ approach but the Aegean basin would starve if it tried that.
Another note I want to make regarding sanitation is that it typically isn’t a matter of learning. People of the past didn’t like bad smells or stepping in poop. But they didn’t the technology to easily get rid of debris and waste like we do, or the technology was expensive and so only the rich could afford it. Plus there’s the matter of needing to save the waste to use as fertilizer in the fields. You don’t want to flush it all away; you want it to go into a cesspit that you can then empty and use in your fields, gardens, and orchards. Plus draft animals are needed for any bulk hauling, which every city needs a lot, and they poop. Yes, streets are swept, but it’s a constant battle.
Two developments that contributed massively to improving urban sanitation in the modern period was the development of alternative fertilizers and of bulk haulers that don’t poop in the streets.
Constantinople does go through rounds of depopulation, but in between its population ticks upward until the next round hits. The last note I have puts Constantinople at 340,000 pre-plague, so it lost slightly less than one-fifth of its population.
Urbanization though isn’t needed at this point in history to be heavily populated. Rhomania is heavily urbanized by the standards of the day, but it’s at 25% which is measly by our standards, and that’s with including cities of just a couple of thousand people. Russia was a population powerhouse in the 1700s and 1800s but was barely urbanized at all. Given the demographic black hole nature of cities prior to modern sanitation and medicine, a heavily urbanized society is at a disadvantage for being populous compared to an equally large but less urbanized society.
Except under his beneficent and wise rule, the plague has stayed away from Persia.
Plus all his India veterans like him more than you…
I was wondering if anyone had noticed that reference.
Furthermore, ‘the Army of Suffering’ is not my name. I took it from OTL.
The Triunes and Henri: Regarding Henri, and the Triunes, the opportunism, arrogance, and avoidance of karma isn’t a bug; it’s a feature. I’ve said it a few times before, although I’m sure it’s been a while, but the presentation of the Triunes is a reaction on my part to the ‘always victorious, always righteous England/Britain’ that pops up on AH.com. They’re meant to be the England/Britain of TTL, but they’re called something else, and they’re viewed from the point of view of others on the receiving end, but they’re doing the same (or similar) things as IOTL. This is why I note when the Triunes do something like declaring themselves Sovereigns of the Sea or getting offended at the idea of treating Russians as equal, I’m pulling them direct from OTL. (What’s really weird about both of these examples is that they’re from before England was a great power. British arrogance in the 1800s at least has a lot of power behind it. English arrogance in the 1500s and 1600s does not.) The lack of karma is a continuation of that trend. OTL Britain’s humiliation of losing the American Revolutionary War ended up being a rather weak sauce in the end, for example.
This is not to say that I consider the British to be uniquely and especially perfidious and arrogant. Everyone’s shit stinks, and normally I don’t feel a need to point out the smell. But if one repeatedly asserts that one’s shit does not stink, I do feel the need. And a good way to do it is to perform the same actions but without the ‘my team’ effect.
In short, they’re meant to be annoying, and infuriating, and frustrating.
Going forward with the Triunes, there are two possible courses. What is set is that Henri II will achieve most of what he wants. Not all, but most. He’ll have to pay more for what he gets then he might have because he pushed more than he should, but at worst it’s a ‘two steps forward, one step back’ situation. After that comes the crisis, with English dissatisfaction being a major catalyst. It’s the post crisis that’s up in the air.
Option 1) The crisis is eventually surmounted. The Triunes are a bit battered and bruised, perhaps with some losses here and there, but overall they continue on their merry way. They’re still a big boy, a great power, albeit not the powerhouse that they were under Henri II. And they’re still that smug, annoying guy, publicly praying “we thank thee, O God, that we are not as other nations are: unjust, covetous, oppressive, cruel” (Orlando Figes, The Crimean War, pg. 163).
Option 2) Bit of backstory: if I were to rewrite the TL from scratch, one thing I would change is that England loses the Hundred Years War. France is a great power, but England is a second-rate power and never rises above that status.
The crisis ends up reverting to something like the above. England successfully breaks away, but while France, perhaps reuniting with Arles, goes on to be one of the great powers of the world, England never rises above the second rank. Perhaps it starts climbing via its Terranovan colonies, but then loses them via arrogance and alienation similar to OTL, and ITTL this does shove it firmly and permanently back down into the second rank, and not even industrialization changes this picture.
Lol! I like Iskander! Glory to the true ruler of the Turkish Nation and defender of Persian virtue!
...Why are those well dressed troops in fezs thumbing their powder horns?
...Why are those well dressed troops in fezs thumbing their powder horns?
I actually can't wait until we get to the little ice age arc. I've always been a big fan of the Imperial Federation idea that the Brits never put into action and RITE future here reeks of it. Plus, after that happens we finally get a stable Rome unless B444 wants to put us and them through more pain.
Option 2 sounds like a very interesting scenario, will create far more opportunities for other European powers to make their mark. With Germany gutted, there's no other power to even rival the Triunes.
Even if a small isolated village were to self-quarantine it wouldn't do much to stop flea-bearing rats from spreading the plague.
That's what makes the plague so nasty - it spreads just as easily in the country as it does in cities because rats (and fleas that live on rats) can exist just about anywhere.
That’s why you need lot’s and lots of cats. Maybe import them from Cyprus they apparently have tons.
As to the Triunes, learning that Basileus444 is portraying them in the way they are out of what sounds like spite for all those Britannia rules the waves threads is a little disappointing to be honest. By this point the two countries are very different from one another with very different histories. Part of why the English seemed so arrogant IOTL before the Empire was because they were putting up a front due to losing again the continental powers on the hundred years war. They were that annoying Chihuahua who yaps at your heals to try and prove to itself its a big dog. That Glorious Isolation shit? It was literally like they were acting Tsundere to the continental powers. Mostly due to the fact that they knew that if a power managed to unify Europe Britain would be in an extremely vulnerable posistion.
Here Britain has successfully conquered its mainland holdings and held them against all comers. it has no need be putting up such a front as they would be much more comfortable in their own power and authority. Without need for fear of a great power crossing the English channel they wouldn’t feel the need to play divide and conquer or as to use the phrase people love to use on this site play Perfidious Albion! The attitude doesn’t match the realities they’ve experienced and that is really annoying, and to be honest petty.
Ultimately it’s the OP’s choice, but I just thought I’d give my two cents.
If I had the time or, indeed, the talent, I’d like to have a go at a kind of non-imperialistic Britwank, as here. Perhaps this England or Britain could end up like, say, modern day Denmark- no arrogance or pretensions to superpowerdom but a nice place to live with no real enemies, and perhaps better off than OTL if much less “glorious”.
Nothing would happen that could lead to later nationalistic obsession with past glories, and colonialism could be limited to Danish West Indies type stuff.
Nothing would happen that could lead to later nationalistic obsession with past glories, and colonialism could be limited to Danish West Indies type stuff.
Evilprodigy
Donor
I agree with this sentiment.
It does surprise me to find that you learned it recently, as this must be perhaps the fourth or fifth time I've seen B444 bring it up. But it speaks to the timeline's writing and its persistence that new readers still pop up after literally years. And after having read this explanation so many times it rings hollow. At first when I heard this explanation I thought it was a neat contrarian position to take but as it has been repeated, reevaluated, and reinforced it seems spiteful and silly, to allow his work be dictated other people's writings. Especially given how little it seems B444 seems to care about some of them, for it does not surprise me one bit to find an English-language forum has plenty of bad timelines about the English-speaking countries in which its userbase lives fuelled by a misunderstanding of the past. This would be true on any forum in any language with any piece of media but that doesn't mean art we dislike or which seems in poor taste needs to reflect in what we create.
That being said, plenty of authors put all sorts of strange things in their works based on personal worldviews, their own personality, and pet peeves. B444 does not need to except himself from that, it is called being human and its his choice to make. From the reader perspective, however, knowing this motivation makes it so I do not see the Triunes as they are: an England who won the hundred years war and is now heavily involved in continental affairs as a result, taking a similar but different geopolitical position in the process. It makes me see them as the author was motivated to write them: an agenda or a point. This is not necessarily a bad thing in literature or any art, and indeed such things may be enriched by knowledge of authorial intent. Knowing that A Song of Ice and Fire is written with anti-war themes and perspectives rooted in the Author's experience on the American side of the Vietnam War as a Conscientious Objector changes how you engage with the series because that very knowledge will colour how you read certain lines. However, there is a fundamental difference between trying to deliver a message or moral within the story and seeking to be contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. I like that B444 has a more successful/longer living England, Bohemia, Scandinavia, Byzantium, Al-Andalus, Vijayanagar, and other states while at the same time never glossing over the reality of empire nor seeking to portray any of these states as morally good, without flaw, or lacking in a human element. It's fun to read, which is ultimately while I am still here after years. But hearing the author single out one of these states for what is, lets be honest here, special treatment makes them not mesh as well with the rest of the story and makes the grander picture less cohesive. All of course, in my opinion. So take this all with proper skepticism.
I'll put it differently. An England that won the 100 years way... making it a French dependency as a result.
Cryostorm
Monthly Donor
This is true, but now it has all the somewhat deserved arrogance of France since without the Hapsburgs and England to contain it it really has no true peer in Western Europe, demographically northern France was always the giant, and can pretty much defeat any of it's neighbors one-on-one and has among the most powerful navies. I mean, is the Triune's current arrogance any different from China's or Vijayanagara's?
Cryostorm
Monthly Donor
I also can't see France and Arles ever reuniting, not with the differences in history, culture, and religion they have at this point, especially since Arles would end up in a demographic situation similar to England.
As to an England being stuck at second tier, the hardest part is that while it isn't a big demographically as France it is similar to the other countries in Europe, and the strongest on the isles, and is near guaranteed to be in the first wave of industrialization. Though it would be possible to keep them at a Spain/Netherlands level.
As to an England being stuck at second tier, the hardest part is that while it isn't a big demographically as France it is similar to the other countries in Europe, and the strongest on the isles, and is near guaranteed to be in the first wave of industrialization. Though it would be possible to keep them at a Spain/Netherlands level.
I am planning on things quieting down eventually, and let the Romans enjoy a few generations of sleepy decadence mixed between puttering around these newfangled archaeological digs and observing the transit of Venus before the Industrial Revolution comes along and flips the table.
Still odd crisis here and there, but nothing like the ‘three decades that are three hundred years long’ phase we’re currently in.
I see attractions in both scenarios, which is why I haven’t come down for either one yet. My main argument against an independent England, even as a second-tier as opposed to a great power, is then how protect Ireland. Franco-Irish union, the Triple Monarchy becoming a Double? Maybe.
True. But humans are more long-distance travelers than rats. Rats travel long-distance, but they do it by piggybacking on human efforts, stowing away in ship holds or carts. Of course the issue is that the villagers still need grain, so even if ‘outside farmer’ delivers the cart to a quarantine post where the villagers then take it into town, that does nothing to the rats who are nestled in the bottom enjoying lunch.
I think the differences between France and Arles aren’t appreciably different from the usual between the langue d’oil and the langue d’oc, so basically OTL. Religion is the exception, albeit a rather massive exception. Reuniting would almost certainly be in the same way as the regions were united IOTL, northern armies marched south and conquered the place (see Albigensian Crusade). TTL France has a 3 to 1 population advantage over Arles, so it’s feasible assuming a quiet German frontier and a Spain that’s out of the way for whatever reason.
I think there are ways to navigate the England and industrialization bit. Given how complex the origin of the Industrial Revolution is, and the mountains of debate on it, and my awareness of how little of said debate I know, simplicity makes having it begin in England like OTL very attractive. But I think there are ways to jigger it. If the continent doesn’t have a twenty-year lag imposed by the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, alt-England can’t build up such a big lead, at least so uncontested. Also a comparatively under-capitalized alt-England might start industrializing, but just not get as far along. There would be less push to mechanize textile production if the East Indian Company isn’t hauling in bales of cotton to feed the mills. So England might start the ball rolling like OTL, but not get very far before others come and run with it too.
This is when I tell you that the out-of-continuum reason for the story being focused on Rhomania is that six-year-old me saw the phrase ‘Byzantine Empire’ in a Calvin & Hobbes comic and thought that was the coolest name ever (had no clue what it was, and when my mom looked it up in the encyclopedia for me the explanation went completely over my head), and it’s been my favorite historical civilization ever since.
And the OOC reason for Vijayanagar doing so well is I also love the name.
Not sorry.
On a more serious note, I would comment that technically everything in a story really happens for Doylist reasons. The key is to have a good Watsonian reason for what is really being inspired by said Doylist reason. The ability to which I, or any writer, succeeds in this varies.
Triunes/England: Xenophobia and exceptionalism are, if not universal, very common traits among humans. I don’t have the reference on me, but there are Native American tribes in the Amazon whose name for themselves is literally just the word ‘people’ in their language, with the absolutely-intended implication that those not part of the tribe are not quite people. Exceptionalism just becomes more noticeable when those espousing it get more powerful and influential.
The Triunes are arrogant jerks, but they are a ‘character’ that is written to be an arrogant jerk. But they are also a great power, where being an arrogant jerk is pretty much part of the territory. When you add the natural human tendency for exceptionalism to their wealth and power and also unique religious distinction (Bohmanism), ‘arrogant jerk-ness’ seems inevitable to me and an absence highly unrealistic. Naturally the Triunes don’t think they’re arrogant jerks, but nobody is the bad guy in their own book.
So I think Triune arrogance is realistic and fits in well with the ITTL storyline. It is modeled from OTL, for mentioned OOC reasons, but it’s a case of ‘different route but same destination’. Political details are different, but we’re dealing with concepts relating to human nature, and assuming competence on my part, they’re the same IOTL and ITTL. Functionally the only difference between Triune arrogance and that of any other great power ITTL, including Rhomania, is that with episodes of Triune arrogance I try to have an OTL exact-or-at-least-close template (although not always).
Now on a related but slightly different note:
I wish it was just a case of ‘oh look, another Britannia rules the waves TL, sigh’. Because I could ignore that a lot easier and would find it much more harmless. I already ignore all the threads that don’t interest me, which is probably around 97% of all threads on this forum, so a few more is not a problem for me.
But it’s uglier than that. It’s seeing people claim that Britain could’ve won either world war without allies by just throwing brown people at the Germans until the Germans ran out of bullets. It’s seeing people claim that blacks in 1800s America were better off as slaves rather than freedmen, in order to defend British popular support for the Confederacy. It’s me criticizing the forum’s tendency to whitewash British imperialism because of the ‘British’ part, and getting personally attacked and abused for it. And then when the mods kick the person responsible, multiple posters come out and protest the kick, claiming that the kick was unjustified.
I don’t think it’s petty or silly to find such takes, and the implications behind them, troublesome and meriting some kind of response. AH.com really has seemed like a place that needs to be told ‘just because Brits do it doesn’t make it okay’, and I told that by having the Triunes do something arrogant and offensive, and then endnote it with a reference showing I copied it from a piece of English/British history.
Would I tell the story differently if I were doing it now? Yes, see my last post, and I’m considering diverting to my alternate idea rather than continuing the current course. But I’m not sorry for telling it how I did, and why I did, and I don’t think it was petty or silly to do so.
Personally I feel the present course in regards to the Triunes works well as a deconstruction of the general tendency of people whitewashing the British Empire here by showing, from an outside perspective, just how actually shit it is and making it genuinely unlikeable, especially by showing it as an antagonist. The British Empire has done so much shit and yet in the Industrialized 'west' people in general either are ignorant, or worse are apologists for it, so it being properly spotlighted on I think is a net good in general on the matter.
Personally, when I read the story at the beginning, I only see an umpteenth Byzantium story with France and Venetia being screwed, and I kinda feel the English victory a little unrealistic, but it didn't bother me due to the narrative, and I must admit I kinda started to appreciate the triune when they started to form as a nation.I am planning on things quieting down eventually, and let the Romans enjoy a few generations of sleepy decadence mixed between puttering around these newfangled archaeological digs and observing the transit of Venus before the Industrial Revolution comes along and flips the table.
Still odd crisis here and there, but nothing like the ‘three decades that are three hundred years long’ phase we’re currently in.
I see attractions in both scenarios, which is why I haven’t come down for either one yet. My main argument against an independent England, even as a second-tier as opposed to a great power, is then how protect Ireland. Franco-Irish union, the Triple Monarchy becoming a Double? Maybe.
True. But humans are more long-distance travelers than rats. Rats travel long-distance, but they do it by piggybacking on human efforts, stowing away in ship holds or carts. Of course the issue is that the villagers still need grain, so even if ‘outside farmer’ delivers the cart to a quarantine post where the villagers then take it into town, that does nothing to the rats who are nestled in the bottom enjoying lunch.
I think the differences between France and Arles aren’t appreciably different from the usual between the langue d’oil and the langue d’oc, so basically OTL. Religion is the exception, albeit a rather massive exception. Reuniting would almost certainly be in the same way as the regions were united IOTL, northern armies marched south and conquered the place (see Albigensian Crusade). TTL France has a 3 to 1 population advantage over Arles, so it’s feasible assuming a quiet German frontier and a Spain that’s out of the way for whatever reason.
I think there are ways to navigate the England and industrialization bit. Given how complex the origin of the Industrial Revolution is, and the mountains of debate on it, and my awareness of how little of said debate I know, simplicity makes having it begin in England like OTL very attractive. But I think there are ways to jigger it. If the continent doesn’t have a twenty-year lag imposed by the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, alt-England can’t build up such a big lead, at least so uncontested. Also a comparatively under-capitalized alt-England might start industrializing, but just not get as far along. There would be less push to mechanize textile production if the East Indian Company isn’t hauling in bales of cotton to feed the mills. So England might start the ball rolling like OTL, but not get very far before others come and run with it too.
This is when I tell you that the out-of-continuum reason for the story being focused on Rhomania is that six-year-old me saw the phrase ‘Byzantine Empire’ in a Calvin & Hobbes comic and thought that was the coolest name ever (had no clue what it was, and when my mom looked it up in the encyclopedia for me the explanation went completely over my head), and it’s been my favorite historical civilization ever since.
And the OOC reason for Vijayanagar doing so well is I also love the name.
Not sorry.
On a more serious note, I would comment that technically everything in a story really happens for Doylist reasons. The key is to have a good Watsonian reason for what is really being inspired by said Doylist reason. The ability to which I, or any writer, succeeds in this varies.
Triunes/England: Xenophobia and exceptionalism are, if not universal, very common traits among humans. I don’t have the reference on me, but there are Native American tribes in the Amazon whose name for themselves is literally just the word ‘people’ in their language, with the absolutely-intended implication that those not part of the tribe are not quite people. Exceptionalism just becomes more noticeable when those espousing it get more powerful and influential.
The Triunes are arrogant jerks, but they are a ‘character’ that is written to be an arrogant jerk. But they are also a great power, where being an arrogant jerk is pretty much part of the territory. When you add the natural human tendency for exceptionalism to their wealth and power and also unique religious distinction (Bohmanism), ‘arrogant jerk-ness’ seems inevitable to me and an absence highly unrealistic. Naturally the Triunes don’t think they’re arrogant jerks, but nobody is the bad guy in their own book.
So I think Triune arrogance is realistic and fits in well with the ITTL storyline. It is modeled from OTL, for mentioned OOC reasons, but it’s a case of ‘different route but same destination’. Political details are different, but we’re dealing with concepts relating to human nature, and assuming competence on my part, they’re the same IOTL and ITTL. Functionally the only difference between Triune arrogance and that of any other great power ITTL, including Rhomania, is that with episodes of Triune arrogance I try to have an OTL exact-or-at-least-close template (although not always).
Now on a related but slightly different note:
I wish it was just a case of ‘oh look, another Britannia rules the waves TL, sigh’. Because I could ignore that a lot easier and would find it much more harmless. I already ignore all the threads that don’t interest me, which is probably around 97% of all threads on this forum, so a few more is not a problem for me.
But it’s uglier than that. It’s seeing people claim that Britain could’ve won either world war without allies by just throwing brown people at the Germans until the Germans ran out of bullets. It’s seeing people claim that blacks in 1800s America were better off as slaves rather than freedmen, in order to defend British popular support for the Confederacy. It’s me criticizing the forum’s tendency to whitewash British imperialism because of the ‘British’ part, and getting personally attacked and abused for it. And then when the mods kick the person responsible, multiple posters come out and protest the kick, claiming that the kick was unjustified.
I don’t think it’s petty or silly to find such takes, and the implications behind them, troublesome and meriting some kind of response. AH.com really has seemed like a place that needs to be told ‘just because Brits do it doesn’t make it okay’, and I told that by having the Triunes do something arrogant and offensive, and then endnote it with a reference showing I copied it from a piece of English/British history.
Would I tell the story differently if I were doing it now? Yes, see my last post, and I’m considering diverting to my alternate idea rather than continuing the current course. But I’m not sorry for telling it how I did, and why I did, and I don’t think it was petty or silly to do so.
For me it was not an umpteenth story about the British rules the waves, because it becomes its own nation with its own code, I share the same opinion about people's opinion on British history and AH. Here I feel it different, Triune is a nation build on sparkle, different people working together, a union of class, etc. Also, I started to play Warhammer II and I love Bretonnia (a mix between France and English culture with a little Celtic). Triune was started to be a satire of Britannia rules the waves but it becomes a very interesting nation.
I think that I start to like them because they are kinda the underdog, many people want to see them fall, but they are still here, their foundations are shackle but they are still here, they have many enemies but they are still here. Henri II and his predecessor's actions are glorious to read and see, same for their achievement Triune did commit many atrocities, and yeah but I think that here it's the opposite of OTL, everyone talks about why Triune should disappear what bad action did they commit.
But the good? why good action did they bring, what about Triune people happy to be part of this nation.
They also have a strong navy a strong army loyal to their kings, a powerful network, etc they have many reasons to fail but many to survive.
I love the idea of karma bringing justice, but the idea of Triune surviving despite everything declaring they will fall kinda funny, still with many failures due to their bad actions. And I think that the idea I love them is that they did make bad actions but at least people are aware of this and we criticize them for this. We could have them be seen as the villain by other due to their action and reverse the trope about whitewashed Britannia and have a blackwashed Triunes. Becoming the kind of nation that we love to hate, like a good antagonist for a good story (maybe not the main one but still one). You could spotlight their crime and make people revolted of them, make them have bad days, but I hope to see them survive as a nation because I think that their concept is cool and see a mix between France and England with celt could be interesting to see as a modern nation, personally, when I read timeline I never see the concept so I'm really intellectually curious to see how it could develop.
After it's your timeline you do what you want and I will continue to read it if you decide to make them fail, but congrats to make me like an timeline with English winning the war against France
Also here it's Byzantium playing the role of whitewashed empire I see on this thread people supporting the idea of Romania committing genocide,always taking Romania side even with Romania treating Latin as inferior people, making fun of other nations. But still disliking Triune for their action.
Last edited:
You know what would be absolutely hilarous? If thr Triunes become the world superpower by the ene of this TL.
Cats don't have much effect on rat populations. Mice, voles, smaller birds, baby rabbits, sure. Rats are not an animal anything smaller than a Maine Coon would mess with. Now Minks or Weasels and ferrets, totally, and as I've mentioned specific dog breeds.