Good King George - A Republican Britain and a Monarchist America
- Thread starter Lewie
- Start date
I'm also wondering about Georgetown. The populations of Maryland and Massachusetts are close to each other, which is what it is in our Universe, but Georgetown is almost as large. DC is about 1/10th of that. iTTL Georgetown is about 3/4 of Maryland. So even if it includes the Virginia portion, it is still about 3 times larger in population than OTL.
Last edited:
So, there are a few reasons for it. The parcel of land is larger, and the Virginia side had no retrocession. But the main reasons for the larger population are
A - With Hamilton creating a larger, more centralized government from the outset, the city was far more active year-round in managing the various departments. A larger government workforce led to a large increase in the city's population from 1801 onward.
B - The Monarchy itself. With the King living in Georgetown, once the palace was completed, the city became a centre of the cultural scene, meaning more people had to live there to be close to the centre of power. Meaning more estates and townhouses, meaning more people to provide services, and so on and so forth. This was added to by the seat of the Archbishop being just west of the city.
With that in mind, the city started to grow a lot earlier. Oh, and there was no building height cap, so there's quite a large number of apartment blocks. I'll do a map of the city at some point. When I was writing out the history of the American government, it became clear to me that Georgetown would end up with a larger population.
OK. I get both of those. But if the comparison is with the OTL City of London, the problem is that OTL London metropolitan area is 8.7M over about *600* sq mi. Washington DC without retrocession is 100 sq mi. (one sixth of the size!) And DC does have some areas especially down on the DC mall , and down toward where the Potomac and Anacostia meet, and across the Potomac in the port of Alexandria where the land simply won't support Manhattan height buildings. (Manhattan is basically a large piece of bedrock and as such can support 100 story buildings and subway stations 50 feet below ground)
(I live less than 20 miles north of the Capitol (about 5 miles north of the northern corner) and work about 5 miles northwest of what would be northwest side of DC without Retrocession. )
Which reminds me, what happened to members of the Church of England who didn't go to America?
Last edited:
Good argument, although the N to W section (that corresponds to the lower Appalachians) offers some stability to heavier structures.
Georgetown being the royal seat makes sense, a religious centre close to Arlington makes sense and a cultural centre, therefore makes sense. If NY or its TTL equivalent is the economic centre, then it's slightly balanced out. Also, Gt could be spread out in a way that the population density would be below average, although I'm not sure if this is the case.
Georgetown being the royal seat makes sense, a religious centre close to Arlington makes sense and a cultural centre, therefore makes sense. If NY or its TTL equivalent is the economic centre, then it's slightly balanced out. Also, Gt could be spread out in a way that the population density would be below average, although I'm not sure if this is the case.
Sure. Anything farther upriver from Georgetown or the Rosslyn heights across the river (basically upstream of the OTL Teddy Roosevelt Island) is capable of supporting tall buildings. But that's half of the (original) diamond. You can split the diamond among a line from the middle of the NE side to the middle of the SW side , and *most* of what is NW of that line is OK. But most of what is SE of that line isn't.
The problem is that if it is more spread out, it would have to be about three times larger in each direction and that seriously takes population away from Maryland which (like OTL is the same size as Massachusetts. Sure it is doable, but I'm still curious on the OP's ideas for the higher density city.
Right! Those are excellent points. And thank you for the input! That all have me a lot to think about for the map I'm working on of the city!
I should mention something I forgot to add. The parcel of land handed over was 20x20 miles rather than 10x10. At least, that's what I had in mind. I went back and forth on it, but as I was writing the early years of the Provinces, it seemed to make the most sense. Virginia wanted to secure the capital for the south, and the Maryland land was used to settle the Calvert Families remaining debts, allowing them to retain their status in the Province without selling the Proprietorship. I suppose then you really would be living inside DC!
The King favoured a larger parcel of land for the capital; after what had happened in London and a few messes as the Government was being established, he sought to secure a strong capital and build a model city. If you think that doesn't work, I'd be happy to reduce the population. While I'm familiar enough with the geography of the region, I'll always accept the advice of those more knowledgeable.
One thing I did forget to do, is reduce the population of Maryland; I'll make a few adjustments now. Thanks for reminding me of that!
Watched closely and then left alone.
Though a large segment of the clergy went over, around 1/10 would leave over about a decade and change, England was still a predominantly Anglican state. And those clergy that remained were either neutral, supporters of the Whigs or accepted the new status quo.
The Church of England was officially disestablished in 1920. at the same time as the Church of Wales during a series of reforms. I'll probably do a tour of world regions if anyone's interested in that.
Last edited:
20x20 with the same southern point or 20x20 still centered in the same point (or some other orientation)?
I took a brief skim and scan here, and I am quite curious about the world wars.
Centred at the same point had been my thought, though I have been giving some thought to moving it north, with the southern point remaining in place.
More coming on that very soon!
Public Holidays in the United Provinces
Public Holidays in the United Provinces
"Remember Remember the 5th of November, Gunpowder, Treason and Plot, I know of no reason why Gunpowder Treason should ever be forgot"
"Remember Remember the 5th of November, Gunpowder, Treason and Plot, I know of no reason why Gunpowder Treason should ever be forgot"
Since I've been away. Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!
Based in part on the Wikipedia Page for US Holidays.
Last edited:
Don't they celebrate Easter in the United Provinces? Or is it just not a national holiday?
I guess it's already a holiday by the virtue of it being a Sunday. Would be my guess based off of Easter Monday being included.
Sioux Border Crisis
Sioux Border Crisis
"This isn't real money. It's printed by the United Militia."
"It'll be Real Soon Enough!"
"This isn't real money. It's printed by the United Militia."
"It'll be Real Soon Enough!"
The election would prove to be focused almost entirely on the issue of illegal immigration into Sioux territory. While this has been an issue since the formation of the Autonomous Nation under the Royal Charter of 1868. it had historically taken the form of so-called "Spill-over towns" communities centred on neighbouring provinces that had spread into the Great Sioux Nation as they expanded. However, starting in the 90s and intensifying in the mid-2000s, a new wave of illegal immigration into the Sioux territory began, mainly in the form of squatters and a loose coalition of sovereign citizens, nationalists, and Kaczynskites, seizing unused land for various reasons, some economic, other politically. The discovery that, in 2019, more than 60,000 settlers were living outside of the spill-over towns would be the start of broader public debate on the matter.
Incumbent Prime Minister Ryan Wilson, who has been in office since 2012, had reacted rather passively to this issue, as had been the policy of his predecessors. However, controversy would arise in late 2020 with the founding of New Progress, an illegal settlement 100 kilometres inside Sioux territory that, over the next two years, expanded to a population of 1,329 and began demanding the right to form a local city council; when this was denied, the city formed a local militia in response, claiming it was a "precaution". 2 weeks later, Royal Sioux Police officers were fired upon by the town militia while conducting a patrol, for still disputed reasons. Wilson's failure to respond only weeks before the election would prove his downfall.
The National Party, which made clear it would continue the policy of negotiated removals, would see the worst result in its history, going from 79 seats to 15 and suffering a catastrophic decline in its popular vote/. Ryan Wilson resigned from the party's leadership once the results were announced in the early hours of February 27th, taking full responsibility for the collapse.
The Socialist Party, under Chase Iron Eyes, would see the best result in its history and would soon form a government. They ran on a platform of removing all illegal settlers from Sioux territory outside the "Border zone", which they intended to define as being only 10 Kilometers inside Sioux territory, and enacting a series of economic land reforms, pledging to reform the Nation.
The Independence Party, under Zumila Wobaga, would nearly quadruple its voter share and pick up 11 seats. A nationalist party, it advocated for what it saw as s simple solution to the crisis, total independence from the United Provinces of America and the establishment of a harder border. It also demanded the return of Sioux land, seized in the 1868 Royal Charter, before forming an independent state, which it claimed had been annexed illegally.
In the aftermath of the election, the Baker Government made clear that the settler issue was to be resolved by the Provinces from which they entered Sioux territory and the Autonomous Nation in accordance with Article 9 of the New York Agreement on Relations between the United Provinces and Her Majesty Most Loyal Autonomous Indian Nations through the viability of this response has been called into question, with the start of the Border Crisis after the Eyes Government began to enact its campaign promises.
--------------------------------------------
This action was taken on March 12th 2022, and resulted in casualties on both sides, including the death of a Border Security officer and two members of the town militia. Since then, the Eyes Government has moved to fulfil its campaign promises and remove all illegal settlers outside of the border zone established under new legislation passed in April 2022. This has thus far resulted in over 15,000 deportations.
These actions have proven incredibly controversial, with neighbouring provinces moving to either support settlers or the Sioux Government. Evan Paker, Mayor of Jefferson, was appointed Commander of the United Militia in the settler community and promised to defend American citizens' rights and liberties, and has found alleged support from several provincial governments. The nature of this support does vary, with much of it seemingly derived from a preference to keep the settlers where they are rather than ideological support for their cause.
Growing criticism has mounted toward the Baker government's lack of a response. Though, with the federal government forbidden to act on Indian land, except in legally outlined exceptions or when invited in, Baker has had limited room to maneuver. However, he has deployed FEMA to assist in relocating and housing those deported from Sioux territory and has opened dialogue with the Eyes government since January 3rd 2023.
Queen Victoria has announced she intends to hold a meeting of the Privy Council in the Sioux capital, Sioux Falls, on March 29th, after her return from her world tour, to end the matter. It is widely assumed she will announce support for the Sioux government and attempt to find a neglected solution to the mounting crisis.
Do the other Indian Nations have similar problems with settlers just not giving a single f*** about the border treaties?
I have to ask: why are the Five Civilized Tribes located in Sequoyah, if the Haudenosaunee still control most of their native heartland? Why were they removed from Alabama (the province)? And either way, why are they not an autonomous nation?
Oh, they are less than pleased! The Haudenosaunee have sent considerable aid toward the Sioux and have heightened security on their own border in a show of solidarity; Hawaii is using the whole matter to drum up support for an independence referendum. But Hawaiian politics is... complicated. Without giving to much away, only around 40% of the island's population is eligible to vote.
Thank you!
Correct! And there is mounting pressure for others to be formed in the remaining northern territories or even to have Sequoyah granted the same status. Still, as that would mean a loss of representation in the Commons, that is rather... unpopular.
The long and the short of it was they were removed due to Southern demands and a lack of will from both the Crown and the North to oppose the efforts of Van Buren and his government actions. There were a few reasons for this, which I'll cover soon.
As for the Haudenosaunee, they were granted enormous support from the Crown from King George III due to their loyalty during the civil war, though that nation had a far higher percentage of non-indigenous living inside its borders than the Sioux. By the time the King died, for the most part, the Northern Provinces and the Haudenosaunee had worked out a deal.
As for Sequoyah. At the time, the Parliament was hoping to do away with the autonomous nations altogether and didn't want to form another, so Sequoyah joined the Union as an ordinary Province, much to the anger of many native leaders there.