Since Christmas time is approaching, I wonder how Rhomania celebrates Christmas. Apparently, according to this site, lots of modern Christmas things like caroling and putting up trees were steeped in Ancient Greece, and in Rhomania in the 12th century, you actually could find kids caroling outside.
An Age of Miracles Continues: The Empire of Rhomania
- Thread starter Basileus444
- Start date
I really don’t see Spain helping Rhomania take the Triunes Cape Colony. If anything Spain would help the Triunes defend the Cape because Rhomania in control of the Cape would than control all access to the Indian Ocean from Europe.
If Rhomania ever does try to seize it I foresee a coalition against Rome of every Western Euro power that has interests in the Indian Ocean as a Rhomania that controls the Suez and Cape would be unacceptable to every power west of them.
I believe it suffered from a rampaging Corsican when it took the former. The latter was built by a Franco-British company, so... not exactly.
Good thing that Corsican is Roman in TTL.
With that Franco-British company building Suez, if for example UK and France were at war when Suez was up, can French battleships pass thru or will the British not allow them to?
Few differences between the 2...
1) We are talking about Rome getting it in the late 17th century not the mid-19 when Britain did. A whole lot of development in ship building and colonial development in those 2 centuries that meant control of the Cape wasn't as vital as it would have been. In the time period we are talking about control was split; Ottomans in Egypt and Dutch in Cape. The Ottomans did not participate in Eastern Trade and never developed any navy in the Red Sea/Indian Ocean.
2) By the time Britain did gain control of both there was no peer power to Britain on the ocean. Rome will not have this advantage.
3) Britain was committed to free-trade. Rome is dead set against it. So long as British Merchants made money they didn't care about whose ships they were so long as they were friendly.
4) When it looked like Britain could gain control of a monopoly on territory in North America there was a coalition against it at the first viable opportunity. We call it the revolutionary war. If memory serves this is also when Britain seized the Cape Colony from the Dutch. So to answer your question..yes a good chunk of Britain's rivals ganged up on her.
Last edited:
I think a quick history lesson on the Suez canal is in order. When it was built Britain's share of the canal was precisely 0%. It was a French and Egyptian canal. France was the majority shareholder with approx. 55%, Egypt had 40%, and the Ottoman government approx. 5%. Sadly for Egypt traffic was only about 20% of projections and they quickly fell behind on debt payments. Needing money to stave off bankruptcy they sold their shares to the British government who by the end of 1875; 5 years after the canal was finished; had 44% and was the single largest shareholder but still not the majority. The majority of shares remained in the hands of French investors.
In 1888 the canal zone was declared a neutral area under the protection of the British navy. This treaty came about as a result of the Anglo-Egyptian war where Britain seized physical control of the canal. It came about as a result of pressure from France, Ottomans, Austria, Russia, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands (so pretty much the whole of Europe) who made Britain guarantee passage to all vessels in war and peace (Article 1 of Treaty of Constantinople). The treaty was signed only with great reluctance by Britain who feared a coalition war against her if she didn't sign it.
So yes, I would expect Spain to help the Triunes to prevent a Roman takeover and I wouldn't be surprised if anyone with interests in the Far East joined as well. Whether they would be successful is another story. Rome could count on Ethiopia and as a result would have significantly shorter supply lines. Would it be enough to balance against the coalitions greater numbers I couldn't say.
TLDR of both comments....Britain had to contend with coalitions in acquiring both the Cape and Suez. One in war and one in diplomacy. Rome has already secured where the Suez canal will be; there will definitely be another 3 Johns meeting at the minimum and rapid declaration of war if Rome tries to seize the Cape.
I just had the vision of Greek Boers and it made me happy.
We need a Roman South Africa. Western Bulwark of the Indian Ocean. (The other being New Zealand and Australia ofc)
So by your own admission or statement of history, it is still possible as long as Rome in TTL signs a treaty assuring neutrality in Pharaohs canal or Cape.
There is no reason why Rome cannot hold both if conditions are met.
We are talking about possibility of Rome holding both Suez/Pharaohs canal and Cape not bias against Rome not holding both territories.
1) Britain was fine with free-trade. Rome is not ITTL, it has been a frequent theme. They have literally knee-capped their Caribbean territories by not turning them into free-ports so don't see them suddenly turning the Cape into one.
2) The ONLY reason Rome would try to take the Cape would be to deny commercial rivals easy access to the Indian Ocean. Fighting a war to take it only to make it neutral defeats the purpose. Now Rome is running a colony full of English/French speaking heretics and it doesn't even serve Roman strategic interests. So why fight the war in the first place? The colony itself at this point is useless except as a port and transshipment point. They don't know about the gold and diamonds and won't for a couple centuries.
So yes it is possible...it is also possible that through a series of events Rome ends up in a personal Union with Mexico ITTL. Doesn't mean its probable or even likely.
Last edited:
Maybe a small Abyssinian colony/mission in Natal to keep an eye on the Triunes and act as a possible springboard for anti-triune activity without being quite as threatening to the European powers
There is no conceivable reason to put Chinese in that post except to try and troll me.
Cut that shit out.
I just tried to use google translate on your use of Chinese and no English Translation turned up. None of the results were in English for that matter. So the whole 'just Google it, wah" business is not a viable argument.
I imagine that they're going to start screaming at the Triunes to send help ASAP, only to get told that all Triune assets and credit are tied up in Germany.
Plus I think the Ottomans are going to focus too much on the Mesopotamian front and get rolled over on the Aras and Transoxiana fronts, by Georgia and Khazaria respectively.
Plus I think the Ottomans are going to focus too much on the Mesopotamian front and get rolled over on the Aras and Transoxiana fronts, by Georgia and Khazaria respectively.
Last edited:
Deleted member 94708
Having been warned, I'm going to bow out after this, but it took less than 15 seconds to accomplish this and I didn't even have to specify Chinese as the input language:
speaking of - where is the proper "Russian" border at this point? Have "Russians" (whom I assume would be under "Trans-Volga" until the reunification) reached the Pacific? With an Orthodox Japan far eastern politics are going to be interesting. Hopefully Japan and Russia will be much more amicable. I'm also wondering if with OTL's Southern Ukraine already settled, and the area beneath the Don & Volga under Georgia, if there will be more Russian settlers available for Russian Amerika (possibly joined by Georgians?). Maybe ITTL we'll see Russian settlements as far south as OTL Oregon or California AND maybe this more outward-looking and Christian Japan might get in the game in the Americas as well.
On top of all that, China is soon be surrounded by Orthodox Russia, Orthodox Japan and Orthodox Rome (in the Philippines). It would be surprising is Orthodox Christianity is not more widespread there as well in this timeline. I wouldn't put it out of the question that the Korea dynasty might even convert.