Search results

That's true. And if the Hephthalites don't move their capital to Persia they may not hang onto it for more than a few decades. But then again, maybe not. Maybe their empire breaks up into pieces still ruled by hephthalites (a father dividing into three pieces; the steppe, Persia, and northern...

Are you sure about that? I thought the Sassanids were very aggressive about spreading Zoroastrianism, with some Emperors going as far as to persecute Christians and Jews. Judging by the fact that the White Huns held it together as an empire for around a century and a half, I think it is safe...

Aw, no ideas?

/facepalm It was the weirdest thing too. Every time I minimized GIMP to look up the name of the papal bull for the file name to save the map, GIMP disappeared (I'm on Linux...). So I just said fuck it, drew a line, and saved it. No worries about that, I'm mainly worried about fitting...

I think we should think a little more about the "Northwest Passage" voyages. First are the Corte-Real brothers'. In OTL, there were two voyages because Gaspar went looking for Miguel, who had disappeared. Gaspar then disappeared himself, and Vasco wanted to lead a third voyage but the King...

Can anyone help me find a map of the world in 500 C.E? I see the 475 and 565 maps here but I'm looking for the year 500 specifically.

This is a very interesting scenario. One important question is when exactly do the Hephthalites conquer Persia. Before speculating, I want to lay out the historical scenario (as I understand it, some of this could be wrong). In 483 the Hephthalites invaded Persia and went on a two year rampage...

Ah, so this is what you were working on. Very interesting....

The resumption of hostilities between the Byzantines and Sassanids were a significant blow to the recovery of the western empire. If Belisarius was allowed the 540s to solidify Justinian's rule in Italy, I think that part of the empire could have been held.

Ok, the first two entries have been included in the timeline. Someone really ought to go over those with a fine comb before I continue. Oh, and we should come up with some dates for the Italian Wars; "date unknown" is unsatisfying.

Sounds like a good deal. I should read 1493 at some point (or maybe finish 1491, which I never did). Would you mind if me (and anyone else) worked on this in your absence?

Below is a timeline of events taken from the "Timeline Index" posts, which I'm considering as cannon, along with events which have been grandfathered in by the POD or allowed to happen as OTL. Italicized events are either things discussed in those posts or elsewhere in the thread that didn't...

And here is the map I made, the link to which is no longer working in that first page. So, anybody else want to return to this?

Here is that index I promised last October. Sorry about disappearing; my computer died. What is and isn't a "substantial post" is obviously subjective, and I'm sure I missed a lot, but I wanted links to some of the big posts in one place so that I (we) won't have to search through the thread so...

This sounds about right to me. In that case, the Brittons have three to four decades to themselves. Though I have to wonder if losing Britain would alter the politics in Rome at all.

Drawing the Roman and Han empires as they were in 1 AD onto this Peters Projection map really gave me a sense of scale. Obviously its just a crude drawing, but if anyone wanted to make a professional one on this projection that would be really cool.

And you contributed nothing. To the OP, how about if Wilson doesn't have his stroke and the US joins the League of Nations immediately after WWI? If that body had some teeth, perhaps we could have avoided WWII and the Cold War. Imagine that.

Good to know! Yeah, prosecuting such a war would be difficult. I just can't imagine the US not trying to make a play for all of that gold. As you point out, the British will likely involve themselves also, considering how weak Mexican control of California was. What I really want to...

I like this. What I take away is that the American military doctrine was not necessarily leap and bounds ahead of Mexico's, and that different decisions could leave the author (me) lots of wiggle room. I'm writing an alternate history where Clay beats Polk in 1844, and so no war breaks out over...

I don't have anything else to add to the title, so give me your thoughts. Could Santa Anna have beaten the Yankees?