Grasping the Thistle: A Scottish Series
- Thread starter Ghazghkull
- Start date
Hello, I realise I am late to the party, but I have really enjoyed this so far.
I do have a question though for Ghazghkull though. Could possibly outline what some of these political groups believe in? I assume the Cavaliers are High Church Tories, probably Jacobite early on. I presume one side are some variety of Whigs, they are more moderate Tories and there's some more radical Whigs, but who is who? It would help a bit.
I do have a question though for Ghazghkull though. Could possibly outline what some of these political groups believe in? I assume the Cavaliers are High Church Tories, probably Jacobite early on. I presume one side are some variety of Whigs, they are more moderate Tories and there's some more radical Whigs, but who is who? It would help a bit.
Glad you enjoyed it, there will be more updates coming soon (I hope). Just been on a little break with other things, been planning out this TL for a while so lots to come.
In terms of the political groupings, there's information in each election post about the groupings. The main reason I haven't done a big post on the Scottish political groups is because they keep changing due to Scotland's politics right now being heavily facitonalised. Right now there aren't really parties with coherrent platforms just indiviuals grouped around powerful figures/families.
Broadly though, Scotland's political factions can be described as either pro-Argathelian or anti-Argathelian. The Argathelians are a reference to the powerful Argyll Family who control a huge amount of patronage and financial power in Scotland, with the key figures right now being the Duke of Argyll and his brother, the Earl of Ilay (who is currently Tànaiste). Scotland politics will become a little more structured with the rise of Henry Dundas and then become a lot more structured after a particular event occurs in the early part 19th century.
In terms of some of the other factions mentioned by you and in past posts here's a quick summary:
Argathelian - Whig-Tory hybrid when considering them from an English political lense. Meritocrats but only in terms of the lower and merchant classes. They very much support maintaining the aristocracy's iron grip on political power and serve as the bulwark behind the growing Scottish ideals of "Enlightened Despotism" mixed with "Constitutional Monarchism". They are the original Hamiltonians - supporters of the Douglas-Hamilton Monarchs - and are deeply wedded to the current monarchy, a presbyterian Church of Scotland, and Scotland's domestic independence, however are much more willing to play second-fiddle to England on the international stage.
Country Party/Tron's Gentlemen/Citizens\Queensberrians - These are the Anti-Argathelians. The name of this faction fluctuates in order to show just how fractured and ever changing Scotland's current political landscape is, but the Anti-Argathelians always exist in some form. In terms of their political outlooks, they are closer to the Tories in England than the Whigs but aren't a copy of either - in truth they are fairly similar to the Argathelians. They are aristocratic, presbyterian, supportive of little political reform and dedicated Hamiltonians - the main point of disagreements are simply their desire to oust the Argyll Family from power. When they do disagree it tends to be on anti-English sentiment. The Anti-Argathelians tend to lean more towards a pro-French outlook and seek more opportunities for Scottish colonial expanision regardless of English foreign policy, whereas the Argathelians advocate a more collegiate approach with England.
Cavaliers - The Cavaliers were Jacobite Protestants - generally episcopalian from the North East of Scotland - but are all but finished as a political force. In the early days of the Dissolution they were the strongest advocates for the Stuart Monarchs and the preservation of episcopalianism in Scotland, however over the years they have lost power and influence and most have now joined with the Argathelians. They are effectively High Church Tories when compared with England but their number also included a large amount of Catholic sympathisers. What remains of their number is pretty much part of the jacobite underground hoping to remerge one day should the Stuart's ever seek the crown again.
Brees - The Brees are a generally pro-Argathelian faction made up of many former Cavailers and Country Party men. However they do, from time to time, fluctuate between the Argathelians and the opposition which is how they got the name Brees - a Scottish word referring to a watery or weak broth. They are mostly aligned with the Argathelians on all issues but are seen as being more pro-expansionist. And while they are generally mixed on the French/English question, they are fervently anti-Spanish.
Revolution Men - This faction is now extinct and had no real coherrent ideology or English comparison. They were the men that supported the Hannoverian Monarchs' claim in Scotland and hoped to maintain of 1689 Revolution settlement that The Dissolution dismantled. Most now are Anti-Argathelians although some have made peace with the Argylls and now support them.
Last edited:
Suppose the answer to that question is yes and no.
The reason I'm going chronologically with this TL, rather than jumping around time periods posting stuff like most other TL's of this kind do, is because I don't want to have to retcon huge sections of the TL as we get further in.
So I have planned out lots of key events, major inflection points, historical moments, the list of Scottish Tànaistes, etc but it's an evolving process. Every post I make locks stuff in and then I need to figure out the effect (or lack of effect) these decision have on the wide world. And when those effects are interesting I plan on sharing them - but the major focus will remain on Scotland.
Thank you for your response @Ghazghkull.
Ironically, I am very familiar with the Queensberry Estate, Drumlanrig Castle (the main Queensberry residence) and Dumfriesshire more generally, so naturally the presence of Charles Douglas, 3rd Duke of Queensberry in this timeline got my attention. It’s a great pity both of his sons predeceased him and he was followed by a rogue cousin William Douglas, 3rd Earl of March and Ruglen who as the 4th Duke of Queensberry, financially crippled his Dumfriesshire Estate before dying without heirs and passing it off cousin to Henry Scott, 3rd Duke of Buccleuch whose English wife, the great Northamptonshire heiress Elizabeth Montagu's money was saved the Estate.
The Scott inheritance got me thinking. Scott’s mother was the daughter of the John Campbell, 2nd Duke of Argyll, so he will be less anti-Argyll instinctively than Charles, 3rd Duke was in this timeline, so the Citizens party would then be without a leader unless you had someone else in-mind for the job. Additionally how active William, 4th Duke will be in-between all his Regency nonsense (I'm being polite) is a question. Clearly then, some Scotland’s politics will have to change some time between the death of Charles, 3rd Duke in 1778 and Henry Scott’s ascension to his second Dukedom in 1810 to account for this alone.
My guess is that the Argylls will remain deeply significant to this story since the 3rd and 4th Dukes of Argyll (the Earl of Ilay and his brother) were Whigs and Ilay was involved in the founding of the Royal Bank of Scotland (now subsumed into NatWest Group) but technically still headquartered at Dundas House on St Andrew's Square, New Town in Edinburgh. It seems plausible to me that John, 5th Duke (1723-1806; irl at Culloden) and George, 6th Duke (1768-1839) draw closer to Scottish bankers and merchants to form a political group that is principly pro-business, pro-constitutional reform and relatively pro-English a la the English Whigs and later Liberals.
Those who derive much incomes from the land such as the Earls of Ancrum, the Dukes of Gordon, the Earls of Perth etc, ally with those yeoman farmers, professionals and landowners in the regions and market towns of Scotland to represent those interests and try and restrict Glasgow’s disproportionate growth and spread some of the benefits around to other ports like Ayr, Oban, Arbroath etc that could get passed over in favour of Glasgow and Leith. I can see these guys being at the heart of spreading railway technology out of the main Glasgow-Edinburgh axis around which all life in Scotland is often artificially focused (hopefully that means we in the South-West eventually get to keep our Carlisle to Stranraer route we've been wanting back for the last 30 years. I assume these guys end up forming something akin to a Conservative-Agrarian-Church alliance more akin to say politics on the continent such as the Christian Social Union in Bavaria and maybe some of these agrarian parties in Poland, the Baltic and Scandinavia today. After restrictions are lifted on Catholics in Scotland, probably later than in England, this group would become the natural place for Catholic and potentially, later than that, more observant Jewish voters, even though the Jewish population is likely to remain small (according to the 2011 Census there were 5,887 Jewish people in Scotland though that obviously doesn't count everyone with Jewish ancestry). I'd assume strong ties with France and investing in the Army to contain England would be natural to this group.
I'm presuming here that the 19th and the first half of the 20th century in Scottish politics is marked by something akin to the Federalist vs Democratic-Republican debate where the Federalists have a more favourable position because they control the main Atlantic port at Glasgow and were able to obtain power and keep it early on.
I'd also consider it very likely that the presence of a national capital of an independent nation state would have a strong impact on the development of Edinburgh itself (the establishment of the New Town for example from the 1760s, completing in 1830 with the formation of the Mound) and when that happens. An expansion of the City into neighbouring fields had been under discussion when James VII (he of the Glorious Revolution) was in Scotland representing his brother Charles II in the 1670s, so its possible that this gets prioritised earlier than that under the Hamilton monarchy, which makes sense given the Old Town was bursting at the seams, the great have to mix with the poor, the Nor Loch is little better than a giant cesspit by this point and overall it was not really suitable as a national capital. Its possible the New Town takes a different shape given that bringing it forward does mean that the 26 year old James Craig is too young to win the design competition but something is getting built with names like St Margaret's Square, Anne Street, Hamilton Street, Douglas Street, Cadzow Street replacing the pro-Union, pro-Hanoverian choices of Charlotte Square, George Street, Frederick Street, Princes Street, Hanover Street, Rose Street etc. The development of Moray Place and other developments behind New Town might be affected too. Thinking about it, I wonder whether the Court of Session and the Signet's library moves as the Parliament developed potentially taking over much of the Parliament Square with Ministers desiring offices such as the Táinste, the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, the Lord High Admiral of Scotland, the Lord Marshal of Scotland etc. Edinburgh will also need a central bank and a proper stock exchange, so my guess is that a significant stretch of the High Street around St Giles's Cathedral and the real world Edinburgh City Chambers (then the Royal Exchange) is redeveloped and people moved from the Closes around there (Advocate's, Roxburgh's, Writer's, Mary King's, Stewart's, Warriston's, Anchor etc) to support this. This is a major undertaking by any stretch of the imagination and will require considerable financial and political capital and consensus amongst the political elite. Given that they are not going to want to live amongst the poor forever (they are human), my guess is that there will be consensus around change, just that what we eventually get will be different, potentially a separate mini-city as almost a gated community with the mansion houses of the First Estate and the very wealthiest businessmen and gentry a different name sitting where the New Town is now, perhaps with a cold weather Bath complexion.
However this plays out, I think its important to remember that though Scotland is likely to run by a relatively limited group of people, Scotland is not a monolith. The interests of the Scots speaking, Anglicised south and the Gaelic speaking Highlands and Islands can be quite different even now and are often different from the highly urbanised core running west to east between Greenock to Musselburgh, through Fife, Dundee and to Montrose. Often times the rest of us feel left behind and irrelevant. The ability of the Parliament to actually represent anyone will be complicated for a reason I doubt most people will think about, language. Scotland has two indigenous language which aren't English, three if you count Norn, which should still be spoken in the 18th century in the Orkneys and Shetlands. Potentially there might be an educated elite that can speak at least two plus the obvious French and Latin and politics might take some kind of multi-lingual form where MPs can give speeches in the Parliament in either Scots or Gaelic and expect to be understood. Nevertheless, power is inevitably going to be wielded through a degree of bribery and temporary alliances which may hinder coherent policy.
I can see an obvious potential fall out being between the merchant class of Glasgow wanting more funds assigned to the Navy to support market expansion and colonies abroad (supported by representatives from Nova Scotia for example) but the South feels insecure so close to England and heavily indebted Highland lairds feel less secure amongst their people as Clearances inevitably occur and want those funds assigned to Army Militia units instead. It’s possible that regional interests in the East might gang up with MPs in the East and favour the Navy leaving the South and the North feeling less protected and even betrayed with potential consequences. I can also see a form of politics arrising until well into the 20th century where policy is decided at the country houses and shooting estates of the landed class. There is no House of Lords to simply erase unlike in England, they are part of the Estates and will likely be a core part of one of the two main political groupings of the country. Targetting people with titles won't get very far if their sons and sons-in-law are sitting for places like Caithness, the Linlithgow Burghs and Peeblesshire.
My guess is that the country will probably breakdown something like this:
1) West Scotland (modern day Strathclyde plus Wigtownshire) – trade and industrially focused, dominated by families such as the Campbells of Argyll, the Kennedys of Cassilis, the Dalrymples of Stair and the Douglas-Hamiltons of Hamilton. Focused on expanding business interests and colonial enterprises and as such more Anglicised in their language and potentially more broad based in religion. Importer of raw materials from North America and exporter of finished goods back, very sensitive to its relationship with what becomes the United States.
2) South Scotland (the Lothians, Borders, Dumfriesshire, Kirkcudbright) - mostly agricultural and fishing but with some minerals and dominated by the Montagu Douglas Scotts of Buccleuch and Queensberry, the Kerrs of Lothian and Ancrum, the Innes-Kers of Roxburghe, the Douglas-Homes of Home, the Hopes of Linlithgow. Very focused on maintaining good relations with England and trading there, Scots speaking and quite Episocapalian relgiously.
3) East Scotland (Tayside, Grampian, Central Scotland and Fife) – mixed economy with agriculture, fishing and coal and ore extraction and dominated by the Gordons of Gordon, the Murrays of Atholl, the Grahams of Montrose, the Drummonds of Perth and the Erskines of Kellie. Very interested in steel and iron works and as well as trade with the Baltic and Germany. A strong thread of Dissenting religion present and the main user of Doric.
4) North Scotland (Highland Council and the Islands) – dominated by the Sutherlands of Sutherland, the Sinclairs of Caithness and the FitzMaurices of Orkney. Mostly agricultural and fishing industry, marked by more traditional religious practices including native Catholicism and the main area of Gaelic language use as well as quite a bit of Clan activity still present.
I find it highly likely that Scottish politics is dominated by the sons or sons-in-law of the families mentioned above. This may retard institutional reform such as re-appropriation of seats as industrial towns and cities like Glasgow, Paisley and Dundee grow and the countryside populations like Nairn or Kelso declines, particularly if there is a constitutionally set total. No one likes to lose a seat and elites of all kinds don’t like to lose the potential for vote harvesting. This may also prove particularly sensitive should Nova Scotia for example seek Parliamentary representation in a replay of the “No Taxation without Representation” argument in the USA. This may also mean the regularisation of Ministerial Conduct and Responsibility, the job descriptions makeup of the Cabinet, the relationship of the Armed Forces and the Courts to the Government, reform of major institutions and other constitutional norms may take longer than is the case irl.
Much to consider here….
Ironically, I am very familiar with the Queensberry Estate, Drumlanrig Castle (the main Queensberry residence) and Dumfriesshire more generally, so naturally the presence of Charles Douglas, 3rd Duke of Queensberry in this timeline got my attention. It’s a great pity both of his sons predeceased him and he was followed by a rogue cousin William Douglas, 3rd Earl of March and Ruglen who as the 4th Duke of Queensberry, financially crippled his Dumfriesshire Estate before dying without heirs and passing it off cousin to Henry Scott, 3rd Duke of Buccleuch whose English wife, the great Northamptonshire heiress Elizabeth Montagu's money was saved the Estate.
The Scott inheritance got me thinking. Scott’s mother was the daughter of the John Campbell, 2nd Duke of Argyll, so he will be less anti-Argyll instinctively than Charles, 3rd Duke was in this timeline, so the Citizens party would then be without a leader unless you had someone else in-mind for the job. Additionally how active William, 4th Duke will be in-between all his Regency nonsense (I'm being polite) is a question. Clearly then, some Scotland’s politics will have to change some time between the death of Charles, 3rd Duke in 1778 and Henry Scott’s ascension to his second Dukedom in 1810 to account for this alone.
My guess is that the Argylls will remain deeply significant to this story since the 3rd and 4th Dukes of Argyll (the Earl of Ilay and his brother) were Whigs and Ilay was involved in the founding of the Royal Bank of Scotland (now subsumed into NatWest Group) but technically still headquartered at Dundas House on St Andrew's Square, New Town in Edinburgh. It seems plausible to me that John, 5th Duke (1723-1806; irl at Culloden) and George, 6th Duke (1768-1839) draw closer to Scottish bankers and merchants to form a political group that is principly pro-business, pro-constitutional reform and relatively pro-English a la the English Whigs and later Liberals.
Those who derive much incomes from the land such as the Earls of Ancrum, the Dukes of Gordon, the Earls of Perth etc, ally with those yeoman farmers, professionals and landowners in the regions and market towns of Scotland to represent those interests and try and restrict Glasgow’s disproportionate growth and spread some of the benefits around to other ports like Ayr, Oban, Arbroath etc that could get passed over in favour of Glasgow and Leith. I can see these guys being at the heart of spreading railway technology out of the main Glasgow-Edinburgh axis around which all life in Scotland is often artificially focused (hopefully that means we in the South-West eventually get to keep our Carlisle to Stranraer route we've been wanting back for the last 30 years. I assume these guys end up forming something akin to a Conservative-Agrarian-Church alliance more akin to say politics on the continent such as the Christian Social Union in Bavaria and maybe some of these agrarian parties in Poland, the Baltic and Scandinavia today. After restrictions are lifted on Catholics in Scotland, probably later than in England, this group would become the natural place for Catholic and potentially, later than that, more observant Jewish voters, even though the Jewish population is likely to remain small (according to the 2011 Census there were 5,887 Jewish people in Scotland though that obviously doesn't count everyone with Jewish ancestry). I'd assume strong ties with France and investing in the Army to contain England would be natural to this group.
I'm presuming here that the 19th and the first half of the 20th century in Scottish politics is marked by something akin to the Federalist vs Democratic-Republican debate where the Federalists have a more favourable position because they control the main Atlantic port at Glasgow and were able to obtain power and keep it early on.
I'd also consider it very likely that the presence of a national capital of an independent nation state would have a strong impact on the development of Edinburgh itself (the establishment of the New Town for example from the 1760s, completing in 1830 with the formation of the Mound) and when that happens. An expansion of the City into neighbouring fields had been under discussion when James VII (he of the Glorious Revolution) was in Scotland representing his brother Charles II in the 1670s, so its possible that this gets prioritised earlier than that under the Hamilton monarchy, which makes sense given the Old Town was bursting at the seams, the great have to mix with the poor, the Nor Loch is little better than a giant cesspit by this point and overall it was not really suitable as a national capital. Its possible the New Town takes a different shape given that bringing it forward does mean that the 26 year old James Craig is too young to win the design competition but something is getting built with names like St Margaret's Square, Anne Street, Hamilton Street, Douglas Street, Cadzow Street replacing the pro-Union, pro-Hanoverian choices of Charlotte Square, George Street, Frederick Street, Princes Street, Hanover Street, Rose Street etc. The development of Moray Place and other developments behind New Town might be affected too. Thinking about it, I wonder whether the Court of Session and the Signet's library moves as the Parliament developed potentially taking over much of the Parliament Square with Ministers desiring offices such as the Táinste, the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, the Lord High Admiral of Scotland, the Lord Marshal of Scotland etc. Edinburgh will also need a central bank and a proper stock exchange, so my guess is that a significant stretch of the High Street around St Giles's Cathedral and the real world Edinburgh City Chambers (then the Royal Exchange) is redeveloped and people moved from the Closes around there (Advocate's, Roxburgh's, Writer's, Mary King's, Stewart's, Warriston's, Anchor etc) to support this. This is a major undertaking by any stretch of the imagination and will require considerable financial and political capital and consensus amongst the political elite. Given that they are not going to want to live amongst the poor forever (they are human), my guess is that there will be consensus around change, just that what we eventually get will be different, potentially a separate mini-city as almost a gated community with the mansion houses of the First Estate and the very wealthiest businessmen and gentry a different name sitting where the New Town is now, perhaps with a cold weather Bath complexion.
However this plays out, I think its important to remember that though Scotland is likely to run by a relatively limited group of people, Scotland is not a monolith. The interests of the Scots speaking, Anglicised south and the Gaelic speaking Highlands and Islands can be quite different even now and are often different from the highly urbanised core running west to east between Greenock to Musselburgh, through Fife, Dundee and to Montrose. Often times the rest of us feel left behind and irrelevant. The ability of the Parliament to actually represent anyone will be complicated for a reason I doubt most people will think about, language. Scotland has two indigenous language which aren't English, three if you count Norn, which should still be spoken in the 18th century in the Orkneys and Shetlands. Potentially there might be an educated elite that can speak at least two plus the obvious French and Latin and politics might take some kind of multi-lingual form where MPs can give speeches in the Parliament in either Scots or Gaelic and expect to be understood. Nevertheless, power is inevitably going to be wielded through a degree of bribery and temporary alliances which may hinder coherent policy.
I can see an obvious potential fall out being between the merchant class of Glasgow wanting more funds assigned to the Navy to support market expansion and colonies abroad (supported by representatives from Nova Scotia for example) but the South feels insecure so close to England and heavily indebted Highland lairds feel less secure amongst their people as Clearances inevitably occur and want those funds assigned to Army Militia units instead. It’s possible that regional interests in the East might gang up with MPs in the East and favour the Navy leaving the South and the North feeling less protected and even betrayed with potential consequences. I can also see a form of politics arrising until well into the 20th century where policy is decided at the country houses and shooting estates of the landed class. There is no House of Lords to simply erase unlike in England, they are part of the Estates and will likely be a core part of one of the two main political groupings of the country. Targetting people with titles won't get very far if their sons and sons-in-law are sitting for places like Caithness, the Linlithgow Burghs and Peeblesshire.
My guess is that the country will probably breakdown something like this:
1) West Scotland (modern day Strathclyde plus Wigtownshire) – trade and industrially focused, dominated by families such as the Campbells of Argyll, the Kennedys of Cassilis, the Dalrymples of Stair and the Douglas-Hamiltons of Hamilton. Focused on expanding business interests and colonial enterprises and as such more Anglicised in their language and potentially more broad based in religion. Importer of raw materials from North America and exporter of finished goods back, very sensitive to its relationship with what becomes the United States.
2) South Scotland (the Lothians, Borders, Dumfriesshire, Kirkcudbright) - mostly agricultural and fishing but with some minerals and dominated by the Montagu Douglas Scotts of Buccleuch and Queensberry, the Kerrs of Lothian and Ancrum, the Innes-Kers of Roxburghe, the Douglas-Homes of Home, the Hopes of Linlithgow. Very focused on maintaining good relations with England and trading there, Scots speaking and quite Episocapalian relgiously.
3) East Scotland (Tayside, Grampian, Central Scotland and Fife) – mixed economy with agriculture, fishing and coal and ore extraction and dominated by the Gordons of Gordon, the Murrays of Atholl, the Grahams of Montrose, the Drummonds of Perth and the Erskines of Kellie. Very interested in steel and iron works and as well as trade with the Baltic and Germany. A strong thread of Dissenting religion present and the main user of Doric.
4) North Scotland (Highland Council and the Islands) – dominated by the Sutherlands of Sutherland, the Sinclairs of Caithness and the FitzMaurices of Orkney. Mostly agricultural and fishing industry, marked by more traditional religious practices including native Catholicism and the main area of Gaelic language use as well as quite a bit of Clan activity still present.
I find it highly likely that Scottish politics is dominated by the sons or sons-in-law of the families mentioned above. This may retard institutional reform such as re-appropriation of seats as industrial towns and cities like Glasgow, Paisley and Dundee grow and the countryside populations like Nairn or Kelso declines, particularly if there is a constitutionally set total. No one likes to lose a seat and elites of all kinds don’t like to lose the potential for vote harvesting. This may also prove particularly sensitive should Nova Scotia for example seek Parliamentary representation in a replay of the “No Taxation without Representation” argument in the USA. This may also mean the regularisation of Ministerial Conduct and Responsibility, the job descriptions makeup of the Cabinet, the relationship of the Armed Forces and the Courts to the Government, reform of major institutions and other constitutional norms may take longer than is the case irl.
Much to consider here….
so I assume given the pod there was no attempt at south american colonisation at any point?
As it currently stands - as of around 1743 - no, Scotland's not attempted any sort of colonisation efforts in South America. In the very first wiki box on the Dissolution, you can read a bit about Scotland's decision not to undertake the OTL Darien Scheme and instead invest in Scotland's Canadian colony and its stake in the fur trade.
Scotland's farthest southwards colonial possessions in the "New World" would be the outposts Scotland maintains on Crab Isle and Saint Croix. These colonial postings are held under the Royal New Guinea Company and are part of Scotland's involvement in the Atlantic Slave Trade.
Scotland's control over Crab Isle is fairly tenuous, they've claimed control since the early 1700s but constantly have issues with the Spanish in Puerto Rico. A large part of Scotland's reasoning for pushing for the War of Jenkins' Ear - and later becoming involved in the War of the Austrian Succession - is the dream some Scots colonialists have of wrestling control of Puerto Rico away from Spain and giving Scotland a major Caribbean possession. Although many think the chances of winning such a colonial prize is fanciful.
Scotland's holding on Saint Croix was originally leased from the French Government, now is leased from the Danish West India–Guinea Company, after the Danish recently bought the Island from the French in 1733. It is Scotland's major port for its slave trading vessels that come from Sierra Leona and the Gold Cost.
Scotland's main "New World" colonial possession is its colony in Nova Scotia, and the burgeoning control Scotland has over the North America Fur trade in James Bay and Ungava Bay.
Last edited:
@Ghazghkull
Given that this timeline seems alive, can I ask you about when we can see an update?
And I am sorry if it is an annoying question.
Given that this timeline seems alive, can I ask you about when we can see an update?
And I am sorry if it is an annoying question.
Very much alive - just on a longer than intended hiatus 😬. Totally vaild question! I'll admit I've kinda been using people's questions to periodically keep the thread alive rather than focusing on producing the next section of updates.
Couple of real world things have delayed me publishing stuff, but also because I'm trying to logically plot out the TL and do this chronologically - in order that I'm not doing lots of retcons - I sometimes find myself working on stuff that's ages away because I want there to be some sort of logical cohension to the many bufferflies that are occuring.
As an example - yesterday I was spending time working out the Scottish effects on the Congress of Vienna, which obviously is nearly a century away in the Timeline. But a decision that appears in what is likely to be the next post led me to A to B to C etc. And rather than finishing the post, it made me make lots of little changes to the current structure I have for the TL.
I would like to say we're talking days - rather than weeks - till the next postings but I've said this before and not delivered. I'm certainly hoping to have a long string of content coming out on the TL soon concerning the War of the Austrian Succession, the Toom Tabard Ministry and the outcomes of the Jacobite Rising of 1745.
Last edited:
That's actually pretty cool that you're thinking so far ahead. One thing a lot of TLs struggle with are long term effects, which lead to many abandoned TLs. I'll happily wait if it means the story will continue, especially if we can see the Congress of Vienna! I'm curious just how different the French Revolution will be as it could have gone so many different ways in OTL.
Anyway, glad to see you plan to continue this. Looking forward to where you take things. 👍🏻
Anyway, glad to see you plan to continue this. Looking forward to where you take things. 👍🏻
I love this timeline so far! Followed. I look forward to more. Take all the time you need, though! Art takes time 