Alternate capitals?

[Kammada]

Regarding France, Paris isn't necessarily a given - sure, it was an important dynastic centre under the Merovingians and the high Carolingians, but so was Metz, and that ended up as a border city. There are several possible ideas about other French capitals:

1) Laon has already been mentioned, and deserves a thought. The problem with Laon as a capital is the same as the OTL problem with Laon as a university town - sure, it's very defensible, but at some point you run into problems with the water supply... Even if an ATL Carolingian dynasty stays there for a few centuries, I imagine they'd change it to somewhere easier to supply - Rheims, perhaps, or Compiegne.

2) Somewhere like Sens or Dijon. If Ralph of Burgundy has some heirs, then you could get a dynasty of Bosonid kings whose power-base is in Burgundy rather than the north, and in that case the *French capital would presumably end up there. Given it's a wealthy, well-connected region which is already the home of Cluniac monasticism by Ralph's time even if it doesn't end up being home of an *Cistercian movement, this might well stick.

3) Even under the Capetians, Orleans is as viable as Paris - if the Normans can at any point in the tenth or eleventh centuries grab the Vexin earlier or make their hold on it stick harder, then Orleans has the distinct advantage of not being a day's march away from a well-organised and potential hostile rival potentate...

Either these, or Tours - its location is just as good as that of Paris or Orléans, and it actually served as a royal residence for a century after the Hundred Years war (so if you keep the Valois dynasty alive and in power, it becomes a possibility).

 

[Gloss]

Cagliari was arguably their first capital.

1324: Kingdom of Sardinia formed; Cagliari is the capital.
1720: Capital is moved to Turin.
1798: Capital is moved to Cagliari again.
1814: Capital is moved to Turin again.
1861: Kingdom of Sardinia changes its name to Kingdom of Italy.
1865: Capital is moved to Florence.
1871: Capital is moved to Rome.

the kingdom of Sardinia was clearly not the same country as any actual Sardinian monarchy/republic/whatever, and the only ties are in the name as the core of the country was in Piedmont and Liguria outside the Napoleonic war.

 

[Jurgen Wullenwever]

I can think of one other possibility in the form of Goteborg. If I am not mistaken, it was founded by royal charter in 1621 by Gustaf II Adolf. The only issue that I could foresee is that it was quite exposed until the Treaty of Roskilde in 1658.

There was the idea at that time of Gothenburg as capital, if Sweden conquered Denmark (with Norway), but as that campaign failed it did not come to pass.

 

[kasumigenx]

This is a good topic. I will try to cover the more important European countries.

Russia: Its pretty easy to get another capital than Moscow, as what became the Grand Dukes of Moscow were originally the Grand Dukes of Vladimir, with the capital of course of Vladimir. You really just have to get the Mongols destroy a different set of cities. Depending on what happens with the Mongols, the capital could wind up being Kiev after all. Novgorod, the runner up in the unify Russia contest, could have won instead. And of course the Communists could have just kept it at Petograd/ St. Petersburg.

France: Very unlikely to be anything other than Paris, as it was the Dukes of France/ Counts of Paris who essentially created France as it exists in the first place. The best POD is no French revolution, and the Court stays at Versailles, and if they wind up with an assembly after all but keep their heads, the assembly is at Versailles as well. Otherwise you have to do something like maintain the Merovingian dynasty and have them settle in someplace like Reims.

England: Even more unlikely to have a different capital than with France. London is the first place where you can cross the Thames after landing from the Continent. It was the capital for the Romans as well. It is always going to be the largest and most important city in England regardless. Though technically, the capital was never in the City of London, Westminster was a separate place until the creation of Greater London.

Germany: Have the place united by anyone other than the Hohenollerns. One obvious POD is that the 1848 Parliament succeeds in uniting Gemrany and the capital stays in Frankfurt. As late as 1990, there was some sentiment for keeping it in Bonn. If the Cold War doesn't end and the DDR contines to exist, tha capital of Federal Republic stays in Bonn.

Italy: If the Papal States survive or in some other way don't get absorbed into either the Kingdom or the Republic of Italy, then the capital is in Florence

Spain: Easy to change because it was Filipe II who picked Madrid, and he could have picked pretty much any other location.

Poland: Krakow is the obvious alternative

Turkey: Istanbul is the obvious alternative

Smaller places: Ireland (Armagh), Scotland (Dunbarton), Norway (Bergen), Belgium (Antwerp), Netherlands (Utrecht), Lithuania (Kaunas), Switzerland (Zurich), Hungary (Estzergom), Serbia (Nis), Bulgaria (Trnovo), Greece (Naiplion). For countries not listed, I can't see plausible alternatives to their OTL capitals

Wroclaw/Breslau is also an alternative..

 

[imperial empire]

What about Stettin for Germany. When the Hohezollerns get Pomermania in the 1600s they decide that Stettin is a better city for a capital then Berlin and move it there?

 

[Falecius]

Paris IS France to extent that is unlike any other nation really.

Lyon was seemingly considered at some point, though. Marginal chance actually.
For Italy, if it does not get Rome somehow, historically lorence was chosen. Otherwise, assuming a Savoy-led unification, Turin has a possbility, despite the geographical disadvantage.
But yes, Rome is by far the most likely.

 

[Gloss]

What about Stettin for Germany. When the Hohezollerns get Pomermania in the 1600s they decide that Stettin is a better city for a capital then Berlin and move it there?

It would be moved if this Brandenburg ends up forming Germany, you can´t simply put your capital so far from the demographic center, is like asking what if the British capital was in Plymouth, it just doesn´t work.

 

[Alon]

Somewhat similarly, keep the capitals in Philadelphia/ Montreal/ Melbourne/ Rio de Janeiro instead of moving them to the planned cities, and you have a decent chance of these cities becoming as large and important as New York/ Toronto/ Sydney/ Brasilia.

I dislike this phrasing. Montreal was historically larger than Toronto. Toronto only overtook it after WW2, upon which the finance industry decamped to Toronto as well. Rio is still larger than Brasilia, by a factor of about 3. Melbourne is smaller than Sydney, but not by a large margin. Only in Philly vs. New York does it make sense to talk about "becoming as large and important."

 

[Galba Otho Vitelius]

Re # 68, the comparison was between the pre pre-planned capital and what became the largest city in the country. So the analogy is between Rio and Sao Paulo, not Rio and Brasilia.

Rio and Sao Paulo is an interesting case because Sao Paulo is the older city, the place where Brazilian independence was decided on, and having the capital there was seriously considered in 1822. If the capital had been there from the start, there is a good chance that the constitutional promise to move it to the interior would have never been made or never implemented.

Only in the case of Sydney and Melbourne, and that is very arguable, are these pairs of cities even close in size and importance.

 

[Dementor]

Bulgaria: Tarnovo, Plovdiv.

Plovdiv was actually made the capital of the temporary Russian administration in 1878, but was moved to Sofia after Eastern Rumelia was split from Bulgaria. Avoid the creation of Eastern Rumelia and it quite likely will become the capital, being the largest city in the country and already the capital of the Russian administration.

 

[Fed]

For Colombia, the only possible option is to move it to the coast - Medellín and Cali were too isolated until air travel became commonplace, and Bogotá is just way too dominant amongst the Central Range for anything else to make sense. Although Tunja was briefly the capital of the United Provinces...

I'd wager on Bolívar wanting to change New Granada's local capital from Bogotá to either Cartagena or Panamá (Santa Marta was a loyalist stronghold). XIX century leaders of the Conservative Party might want to move the capital to Tunja or Santa Fe de Antioquia, far more conservative. But really, Bogotá is too dominant for me to see any change from it.

 

[Behemoth]

There was the idea at that time of Gothenburg as capital, if Sweden conquered Denmark (with Norway), but as that campaign failed it did not come to pass.

Do you have a source for that? I have not been able to find anything on it. Maybe I am just looking in the wrong place...