Allohistorical convergence pet peeves

[Grey Wolf]

Japan is of course ethnically, culturally and linguistically homogeneus, an archipelago with few geographial features that could act to divide different states, and no state in history has ever want to be separated until the Ezo Republic, which was more or less the first state to not to want to be THE government of Japan. Powers in the archipelago have always wanted to BE JAPAN rather than being apart. They always recognized the same religion (more or less, it's more complicated than that) and the Emperor, and they always saw themselves as one people. Warlords acting independently is not even balkanization, as that was also the case before the Sengoku Period and to a degree, after during the Edo period.

Well, Japan remained feudal quite late which kept it unified since the daimyos were in many respects rulers of their own independent little realms under the shogunate. If any became too powerful they would get squashed, usually IIRC by a federation of other daimyo acting as the shogunate armed forces.

Hokkaido however was of a different ethnicity originally, IIRC, which lasted longer and still lingers in part. Only its relative remoteness from anywhere else with a population means that in TLs its almost bound to end up Japanese

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[MNP]

The Indians too had two very nice, well connected and arguably closer river-beds (Indus and Ganges) that are extremely fertile- yet they remain disunited. And they don't have mountains between them (though they do have a desert).

That was because of religion. They were essentially the same (in a geographic unit sense) until the Muslim conquests.

 

[Grey Wolf]

Chile seems to often own its entire coast-line, including Litoral Province from Bolivia. Likewise, Paraguay's borders seem to constantly reflect it's pre-War of the Triple Alliance.
.

Thats a good point about Chile - it could easily be about a third of its size. Its two Northern provinces were PERUVIAN, then there's the coast it stole from Bolivia as you mention, and Araucania could have gone a number of ways - independent (the Mapuche did try), Argentine, or even colonised from Europe

On a reverse note, though, Chile originally had claims on ALL of Patagonia so you could see a situation where they defeat Argentina and annex the whole region giving them an Atlantic shoreline.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Grey Wolf]

That is more of a philosophical debate relying upon whether one believes in chaos theory. This is about trackable consequences that are basically inarguable (to use my robot example above, if that Czech playwright is killed in 1918 before he can write his play in 1921, it is almost 100% certain that the word robot will never be used in English to describe a mechanical automaton).

You've also got the whole pseudo-latin-greek thing with naming stuff like telegraph, telephone, television, gramophone, phonograph, video, audio, etc

Science of another TL may well not go down that route, which route when you step outside of it begins to look a little crazy!

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Gwalchy]

The iberian coast is another example. Tortosa in the course of Ebro river is now 30 km inland. In roman times it was a maritime port

 

[Grey Wolf]

The iberian coast is another example. Tortosa in the course of Ebro river is now 30 km inland. In roman times it was a maritime port

Ports are very good examples! Its the same with Narbonne, I remember researching it for "A Feast of Eagles" and discovered that they had had to build a NEW port something like 20 miles down river from where the old port was.

Also, one of the Cinq Ports is inland these days, but I can't remember which

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Hendryk]

8. Geography is not static. Particularly noticeable with the Netherlands, as many historical maps use the modern coastline when the Dutch have constantly reclaimed land over the years.

Not to mention China. The bloody Yellow River changes course as it sees fit. Imagine if the Thames decided to flow through Bristol every other century.

 

[Thande]

Not to mention China. The bloody Yellow River changes course as it sees fit. Imagine if the Thames decided to flow through Bristol every other century.

I suspect I'm guilty of that one as I was unaware of that. Still, that's what this thread is for.

 

[Stateless]

TLs with pre-Hunnic invasion PODs having a Venetian city state (or even a Venice at all). Venice used to be a marshy, barely settled piece of land before refugees from Aquileia and some other towns settled there to escape the Huns and Visigoths.

 

[Grey Wolf]

Not to mention China. The bloody Yellow River changes course as it sees fit. Imagine if the Thames decided to flow through Bristol every other century.

I'm intrigued and confused. When it went from being brown to blue (1853) did the previous course continue as a smaller river, or did it dry up completely? And was the new course suddenly inundated, or had it been a smaller river previously?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Emperor Qianlong]

This.

To be fair, nobody expected Islamic explosion out of Arabia.

Well, that really depends. There's a few reasons that certainly promoted the Islamic expansion:

- depopulation of the Mediterranean region about a century earlier by the Plague of Justinian (which struck the Byzantine Empire in the very critical moment it attempted a reconquest of the West).

- exhaustion of both the Byzantine and Sassanid Empires from continous warfare with each other.

- civil war inside the Visigothic Kingdom.

- in the area that was immediately conquered by the Arabs, presence of religious groups (Manicheans, Monophysite Christians, both religions which, unless you literally believe the Quran genuinely fell from the heavens, probably served as an inspiration for Islam ) that by themselves had a affinity towards Islam. Especially the Monophysite Christians in Egypt viewed the Muslims as liberators from the Byzantine Church.

So, I wouldn't say that the emergence of Islam per se was inevitable, but the Islamic conquests filled a relative power vacuum that was created by the factors described above.

 

[archaeogeek]

That was because of religion. They were essentially the same (in a geographic unit sense) until the Muslim conquests.

And yet they had multiple states and two completely different cultural groups (even ignoring the fact that the eastern aryan, western aryan and indian languages within indo-european are certainly different enough to provide a divide); that makes about as much sense as stating that Europe should have been united all along because it was majority catholic and indo-european.
(And France, Germany and the Low Countries don't exactly have unpassable borders between them)
(Also Brunei used to control the Sarawak; and at some point was supposedly most of Borneo, the name of the island is supposedly from the name of the state - the Sarawak was only british in 1946, but it had been split from Borneo for almost a century)

 

[Tyr]

I'm intrigued and confused. When it went from being brown to blue (1853) did the previous course continue as a smaller river, or did it dry up completely? And was the new course suddenly inundated, or had it been a smaller river previously?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

Yeah I'm really surprised too, that brown to the others is a hell of a leap!

 

[mrmandias]

3. The word "robot". This was an import into English from Czech, in which it means 'slave', due to a popular Czech science fiction play from 1921. When you think about it, this is a very unlikely circumstance that shouldn't be repeated in most timelines with a POD before that time. Therefore, terms like 'robot' or 'robotic' should be avoided in, for example, nineteenth-century steampunk timelines with mechanical marvels.

.

This one doesn't bug me so much. I just think of it as a translation for the convenience of the reader, just as a TL might mention 'vaseline' so I know what they're talking about, even if the actual ATL term is 'oil ointment' or whatever.

 

[Susano]

2. Switzerland. Despite its reputation for staying exactly the same, Switzerland in fact added several additional cantons in OTL at the Congress of Vienna in 1815. Maps with PODs before the Napoleonic Wars should bear this in mind.

Err, what? All new cantons were formed out of Swiss territory, or the added associated states (and those are usually shown as part of Switzerland even before). If you dont count the associated states becoming regular cantons, then Switzerland gained no land whatsoever at the Congress, and even lost Mühlhausen (heh) and Sondrio. The former is neglectable, and the latter appears as divergence now and then I think.

Japan. Always unified.

Andreas

Well, except for that period of two courts it always was in its history since its beginning. Of course, it doesnt say how centralised or stable Japan will be, but even if its not it should certainly appear as one state on maps.

On china, see here

China is a way less clear-cut case. Historically, it has been divided into a southern and a northenr part, and also a southern and northern identity numoorus times (the Mongols exploited that most effectively, but it also happened elsewhen). It is therefore entirely possible to have Cathay and Mangi, or whatever the two nations would be called in Europe, not even as temporary dynastical division but as permanently different nations. It doesnt need to happen, of course, but it can - Chinas unity is hardly geographcially mandates. Hell, how many river valleys are divided between nations in Europe?

Actually, all things considered the Kazkh border in general (not the exact ittle juts and watnot, the overall shape) does reflect the ethnic make-up of the region, as seen in the below map showing the lands of major Kazakh tribes.

And it doesnt fit the border. The border is roughly at the right spot, but its course doesnt fit at all. And thats the problem - its always the exact same border!

 

[Lord Insane]

And it doesnt fit the border. The border is roughly at the right spot, but its course doesnt fit at all. And thats the problem - its always the exact same border!

Nah, only almost always the exact same border.

 

[RGB]

That's the modern day demographcs though, a result of the late Russian Empire and Soviet policies.

...whereas that last map you posted implies a strong Kazakh identity before there was a strong Kazakh identity, and is hard to really evaluate for accuracy considering the names and the territories changed quite dramatically.

 

[Nugax]

@Hendryk: that map is kind of disingenious, as it shows the Yellow river moving whilst all the others remain static - the other rivers moved about a good deal as well! The whole of the Northern plains are just one big river valley pancake.

The plains had generally a normative set of rivers that people could utilise, just which one was the biggest and full of yellow mud changed each century. The changes were also more due to the build of silt rather than destructive flooding (not that the destructive flooding wasn't horrific, it just didn't lead to the river chnaging course.

 

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

If the CP win WWI post-Schlieffen, they get Poland, Lithuania, the Ukraine, and probably White Russia, the Baltics and Finland. Never mind that when the Brest-Litovsk negotiations began the CP had only demanded Poland and Lithuania (which they controlled) and that they seized the rest (except for Finland) after Trotsky's "no war, no peace."

The British never regain Calais after losing it, nor do they obtain any replacement on the coast of France or the Low Countries, in spite of several good opportunities and attempts made as late as 1672.

The same religions that appeared and thrived in OTL will appear and thrive. Manichaeism goesn't go anywhere.

The Finns, Estonians and Latvians are always eager for independence from Russia, even though before attempted Russification in the late 19th century they were far more concerned with the local Swedish/German elites and saw Russia as more of a counterbalance.

A powerful Qing or post-Qing China will control Tibet but not Korea. This makes little sense when you consider that the latter is a far more important prize and that the Chinese showed little interest in extending direct rule to Tibet until after the Younghusband Expedition.

Thank you for that map! I knew about the mid-19th century change but not the others. 1939-47 is weird - did it flow into the Yangtze or the Huai? Strange that I never heard about such a recent and radical change before.

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

I'm not sure if this will count, but there is a prevalent idea around about what I'd call "ethnic unity". It is a common thing in TL's for any large or broad group that some consider to share an ethnic identity would always be completely and totally unified, despite the lack of historical evidence for any such thing occurring. A common offender of this is the mythical "Mayan Empire." Not too common on this board, but people everywhere believe there was one, partially because it's referenced so often and partially because if they were all Mayan, they must've been an EMPIRE! Which is also why all the Scots fought together to stop the perfidious Englishmen. Riiiight... remember when the Scots banded together and won Culloden? That was something, wasn't it. This is also taken to its extreme when you get references (which I've seen plenty enough times here) to a unified Scottish-Irish-Welsh CELTIC UNION! And taken Beyond the Impossible when you the the NATIVE-AMERICAN EMPIRE!!1! Yeah, I've seen people reference that too, unfortunately.