You might think that, although the idea that Britain was destined for naval greatness doesn't really hold up to scrutiny, IMHO. None of the British countries had a particularly stellar naval tradition until Elizabethan England, and that was more because the English leaders wanted to get rich quick from the Americas than anything else. Meanwhile, Japan, which was another island nation, wasn't much more given to naval affairs than other countries of comparable rank. Being an island nation undoubtedly helped British naval prowess once it had already developed (because there was less need to divert resources towards the army), but it didn't make its development inevitable.
Alternative European Powers?
- Thread starter KingOnTheEdge
- Start date
You might think that, although the idea that Britain was destined for naval greatness doesn't really hold up to scrutiny, IMHO. None of the British countries had a particularly stellar naval tradition until Elizabethan England, and that was more because the English leaders wanted to get rich quick from the Americas than anything else. Meanwhile, Japan, which was another island nation, wasn't much more given to naval affairs than other countries of comparable rank. Being an island nation undoubtedly helped British naval prowess once it had already developed (because there was less need to divert resources towards the army), but it didn't make its development inevitable.
So could continental countries, though. There's nothing special about England's pre-sixteenth century fleet-building activities.
I took this
to mean you were saying they were never much good? If you simply mean they were never dominant, then I am confused.
Elizabethan England was hardly dominant - its successes were hard-fought against a powerful naval enemy. It had greater reach than before due to technology so was able to seize Cadiz or power project into the Caribbean.
It's not that they weren't good, it's just that they weren't noticeably better than their competitors. Nor does their strategy seem to have relied on naval dominance the way it would it the 18th and 19th centuries -- England in the Middle Ages mostly seems to have used sea power as a means of transporting its army to France, rather than as a force in its own right.
A question what about British policy focusing on Hanover? Have Brittan focus on strengthen it's hold over Hanover and strengthen it's holding's in the HRE. Have Hanover take a position as the third power within the HRE. During the Congress of Vienna Brittan looks to expand Hannover. When Victoria loses Hanover maybe make some sort of deal where her son is heir.
My Five Powers are determined from a POD where the Byzantines successfully reconquer Anatolia after 1176 under Manuel Komemnos and he is succeed by Bela-Alexios of Hungary after 1180 creating a PU between Hungary and Rhomania. This Hungarian Dynasty last a few generations and is relatively stable, the sacking of 1204 is avoided, the Mongol and Timurid invasions are rough but ultimately the Greeks are able to reconstitute Anatolia culturally back into their sphere after the 1400s.
Through the following centuries the Five major powers of Europe (more specifically those parts affected) have been:
1) Rhomania/Romania: OC the continuation of the Roman Empire has continued to be the primary power of the East Mediterranean, influential in Italy, the Adriatic, the Levant and Egypt.
2) Austria: A major power from the 1400s to the 1800s despite it NOT acquiring Hungary and those eastern lands due to Roman survival. Austria turns attention west into the HRE and culturally similar German lands without sinking resources east. Still vulnerable to Napoleon and ultimately succumbs to his armies but Prussia has been nerfed due to centuries of Austrian hegemony. After 1800 this power is replaced by...
3) France: My reuse. Largely as you were until Napoleon, who I consider a true military mastermind and great leader despite his flaws. I can still see him trouncing the Austrians and without Prussian help of any major decisiveness, Britain and her remaining Allies are at a great disadvantage. On top of this the Polish Commonwealth and Hungary could be sympathetic allies of France...
4) The PLC: This guys won out good in this turn of events. Poland gobbled all the lands of the Teutonic Order along with Lithuania and due to a near perfect balance of power between Poland, Hungary and the HRE was mostly secure on her western front and thus was able beat Russia back in the East. It could potentially usurp Russia's position and reach the Pacific.
and 5) ... not Hungary actually, they were influential sure but a secondary, regional power at best and were contained by Great Powers on all sides which incidentally along with natural barriers and competent defence kept them sovereign following their release from the PU with Romania.
No. 5 is a hard one to discern, I haven't really left much room for it since France and Poland have frogmarched across continental Europe establishing two liberal, meritocratic superpowers, ironic for an Autocratic Byzantine POD!
Maybe others can suggest me a No. 5 for this scenario?
Not withstanding that Great Britain still exists and probably still grabbing clay on every other continent....
Last edited:
Perhaps Denmark/Scandinavia dominates the north sea and broader Atlantic sphere? And it and the Byzantines are largely dictatorial to provide political diversity?
I was thinking a Scandinavian power would be possible and a viable colonial power. As for political diversity, this scenario isn't beholden to arbitrary patterns. A Scandinavia Union would likely be a Constitutional Monarchy and tend liberal I'd expect, like the UK or contemporary Nordic Monarchies. The Roman Empire could retain absolutist elements and it's possible France, despite it's ideals, under a Napoleonic system would be politically beholden to an 'Enlightened Despotism'.
The Papal State and Two Sicilies may well exist but I wouldn't rate them major powers. This scenario would be particularly rough on Muslim regimes I feel, at least those in the vicinity of Europe. If the Berbers get uppity and go a-slaving I'm afraid the combined might of Romania in the East and the likes of Spain and Sicily would have words. Imagine a Holy League + ERE.
This is if North Africa is not either already subsumed by these powers in a fit of conquest, crusading zeal or just caves in and converts to save themselves the trouble...
Poland, or the commonwealth somehow manages to conquer Russia and include them in some sort of dual monarchy possibly.
We had a discussion about the Polish-Lithuanian-Muscovite Commonwealth on here a while back. The verdict was that had Muscovy joined the commonwealth its Siberian possessions would most likely cut loose and become independent.
Starforce
Banned
Well, I'd like to believe that its Siberian possessions would still be in the commonwealth, just for the sake of it looking better.
Well, here's my list:
1. Iberia - Spain snapped Portugal for itself in OTL. Let's say it sticks. Also, let's say that either Spain or Portugal is successful in reconquering Morocco, so we have a big, minerally rich state encompassing the entirety of Iberia, Morocco whole, parts of modern Algeria and choice pieces of Languedoc and Aquitania + Gascony.
2. Italy - the whole peninsula, plus the entire Rhone valley and all the other stuffs till the Iberian border plus Trent, Styria, Carinthia, Carniola and the other Adriatic stuff till wherever it meets Greece and Tunisia atleast in North Africa as well. Italy was a real missed opportunity in OTL IMHO. Let's say the Lombards retake all Italy from the Byzantines, or the heir to the HRE decides to go independent and chooses Italy as his kingdom or whatever.
3. Franco-Burgundian mix - A France-Germany mishmash centred on the Rhine. 'Nuff said.
4. Britain - My reuse.
5. Hungary - Another missed opportunity IMHO. Let's say the Ottomans are a bit late to the party and the Hungarians manage to hold them off... Hungary would have OTL Kingdom + Austria + some of the lands south of the Danube too (Hungary and Croatia troll Serbia). Maybe the rest of Romania too?
6. Poland - Yup. A hereditary PLC. The Russia of Europe. Maybe it becomes a Commonwealth of Three Nations...
So, Germany and Russia are definitively screwed. Thoughts?
1. Iberia - Spain snapped Portugal for itself in OTL. Let's say it sticks. Also, let's say that either Spain or Portugal is successful in reconquering Morocco, so we have a big, minerally rich state encompassing the entirety of Iberia, Morocco whole, parts of modern Algeria and choice pieces of Languedoc and Aquitania + Gascony.
2. Italy - the whole peninsula, plus the entire Rhone valley and all the other stuffs till the Iberian border plus Trent, Styria, Carinthia, Carniola and the other Adriatic stuff till wherever it meets Greece and Tunisia atleast in North Africa as well. Italy was a real missed opportunity in OTL IMHO. Let's say the Lombards retake all Italy from the Byzantines, or the heir to the HRE decides to go independent and chooses Italy as his kingdom or whatever.
3. Franco-Burgundian mix - A France-Germany mishmash centred on the Rhine. 'Nuff said.
4. Britain - My reuse.
5. Hungary - Another missed opportunity IMHO. Let's say the Ottomans are a bit late to the party and the Hungarians manage to hold them off... Hungary would have OTL Kingdom + Austria + some of the lands south of the Danube too (Hungary and Croatia troll Serbia). Maybe the rest of Romania too?
6. Poland - Yup. A hereditary PLC. The Russia of Europe. Maybe it becomes a Commonwealth of Three Nations...
So, Germany and Russia are definitively screwed. Thoughts?
Hungary
Without the Ottomans taking advantage of the chaos in the Balkans, they had a good shot in dominating the Northern Balkans and incorporating it (Bosnia, Serbia etc.). Bulgaria would become a vassal and be annexed later on. Walachia and Moldova in best case scenario as well. Both are Christian and could be turned to Catholicism... East Roman Empire would be a vassal and pressured to convert to Catholicism. Eastern Orthodoxy would lose rapidly in the Balkans for the Roman Church. Hungary dominates the land between Thessaly and Slovakia.
Without the Ottomans taking advantage of the chaos in the Balkans, they had a good shot in dominating the Northern Balkans and incorporating it (Bosnia, Serbia etc.). Bulgaria would become a vassal and be annexed later on. Walachia and Moldova in best case scenario as well. Both are Christian and could be turned to Catholicism... East Roman Empire would be a vassal and pressured to convert to Catholicism. Eastern Orthodoxy would lose rapidly in the Balkans for the Roman Church. Hungary dominates the land between Thessaly and Slovakia.
Persia had potential to hold Afghanistan, all of Baluchistan and Central Asia to Tian Shan mountains. The area is not wealthy anymore but they offer a lot of tax base and manpower Persia could use as well as directly controlling new trade routes to China. They even had this chance as a Shia state ruling over Sunnis. The requirement would be of course tolerating them rather than pressuring to convert them as happened in Afghanistan which resulted in the fall of the Safavids. If war was avoided while the military was quickly adapting to Austrian and Russian style in the 18th century this Persia would not be a punching bag for the Ottomans nor the British later on.
I am aware of Naders success but he was merely one good commander. Hardly enough for Persia for a longer time.
Given this thread, is a political federated union of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, south of the Greater Caucasian Mountain ranges?
