Hail, Britannia
- Thread starter LeinadB93
- Start date
Do TTL Nova Scotians speak English with an accent like OTL Maritime Canadians, or do they sound more Scottish?
I’d love to see them
Drop me a PM with them in, as I’ve got a few already pencilled in...
I know it's 2-years old now, but have there been some evolution about it?
Also, I noticed the infobox for the 2015 British Imperial Election lacks 15 seats in total. The map shows there are 2 seats for the Republicans and 5 for the Populists, but what about the 8 proportional seats that are left?
Deleted member 107125
Alright, my final guess is that YOU appointed yourself leader.She definitely doesn't. We're still figuring out who is the current leader. There is one name we're leaning towards, though. Not telling you it just yet.
LeinadB93
Monthly Donor
Their accent is similar to OTL Maritme Canadians, but with some more Scottish characteristics. Definitely distinct from OTL.
I have one somewhere - might dust it off and post it.
I had a list for early 2018, but it was superseded by the 2018 election...
I believe they were Populist list seats. Will have to check my notes. The reason the Populists aren't shown is that they got a smaller share of the popular vote than the Socialist Labour.
Haha
nope
LeinadB93
Monthly Donor
So as I've been working through updating the old maps and posts to come into line with new canon changes, I've been thinking about an area of TTL where I have always been a bit vague in my own mind...
At times I've variously called it - "Italy", the "Italian Republic", "Lazio", "Latzio", the "State of Latzio" - but I really want to settle on it right now. For all time.
A bit like with Vietnam and the South Pacific I would like you all, with your wide and varying knowledge, to vote on the following four options. These will determine the territorial arrangement, and then next week I will ask you about the constitutional status of the chosen borders.
1) A unified central Italian state (Teveria? Named after Latin name for the Tiber)
2) Romagna/Umbria in the northeast; Teveria in the southwest. Vatican either separate or part of Teveria.
3) Romagna in the northeast; Teveria in the southwest; Vatican City as OTL
4) Romagna/Teveria/Umbria; City-state of Rome
Additionally, I've been reading up about the Republic of Ragusa and Benevento, and feel they would be quirky additions to the world in the form of European micro-states.
I would you like to vote for whether to incorporate both of them, or one or the other, or neither.
The Papal States / Central Italy
At times I've variously called it - "Italy", the "Italian Republic", "Lazio", "Latzio", the "State of Latzio" - but I really want to settle on it right now. For all time.
A bit like with Vietnam and the South Pacific I would like you all, with your wide and varying knowledge, to vote on the following four options. These will determine the territorial arrangement, and then next week I will ask you about the constitutional status of the chosen borders.
1) A unified central Italian state (Teveria? Named after Latin name for the Tiber)
2) Romagna/Umbria in the northeast; Teveria in the southwest. Vatican either separate or part of Teveria.
3) Romagna in the northeast; Teveria in the southwest; Vatican City as OTL
4) Romagna/Teveria/Umbria; City-state of Rome
Additionally, I've been reading up about the Republic of Ragusa and Benevento, and feel they would be quirky additions to the world in the form of European micro-states.
I would you like to vote for whether to incorporate both of them, or one or the other, or neither.
Last edited:
Voted.
However, I would suggest the Roman Republic or the Republic of Lazio/Latium as an option for the prospective central Italian state.
However, I would suggest the Roman Republic or the Republic of Lazio/Latium as an option for the prospective central Italian state.
I imagine it wouldn't be too easy managing the airspace of a multicontinental empire after the attacks.
Bay Islands
LeinadB93
Monthly Donor
So to take a break from my retconning, and the New England series, here's something a bit different - an alternate overseas territory:
The Bay Islands is an autonomous British Overseas Territory in the western Caribbean Sea off the northern coast of the Mexican state of Honduras. The 249-square-kilometre (96-square-mile) territory comprises eight island and 53 small cays divided into three separate groups; the Swan Islands in the north, the main islands Roatan, Utila and Guanaja in the south, and the Cayos Cochinos further south. The Bays Islands is located between 15 and 60 kilometres off the northern coast of Honduras, not far east of the entrance to the Gulf of Honduras. As of the 2011 census, the population of the Bay Islands was 54,355 making it the third-most populous British overseas territory in the Americas. The capital city is Coxen Hole, situated on Roatan, by far the most populous of the islands, while the northern Swan Islands are home to a British naval and resupply base.
Originally named “Las Guanajas” when Christopher Columbus sighted them in 1502, at which time the islands were occupied by the advanced Pech Indian civilisation, who traded with the mainland of Honduras and Yucatan. Labelled as cannibals and hostile to Christianity, the Spanish Crown granted a license to Cuban colonists to capture and sell the islanders into slavery. For nearly 20 years, the islands were subjected to repeated Spanish raids which rapidly reduced the native population, until Hernán Cortés established the islands as dependencies of the colonial province of Honduras. For nearly a century the islands were ignored by colonial authorities, as the Spanish focused their attention on the resource rich mainland.
In 1638, the first non-Spanish attempt at settling the islands came under the leading of William Claibourne, an English colonist from Virginia who was granted a patent by the Providence Company to establish a colony on the island of Roatan. This marked the beginning of English interest in Central America, with settlements established in what is now Belize and a protectorate over the Miskito Coast. During this time, a number of pirates of various nationalities launched raids on settlements in the Bay of Honduras, using the islands as a base, although the English colony was spared. From 1638 to 1650, the islands were inhabited by Spanish-aligned Indians and English colonists, the latter linking the islands to the logwood cutting settlements in what is now Belize. In 1650, the Spanish dislodged the buccaneers and English colonists from the islands and removed the Indians to the mainland, leaving the island uninhabited for the next century.
Records indicate the islands were again under British control by the 1740s, when they re-established the settlement and rebuilt the old fort on Roatan. The islands have been permanently inhabited by an English-speaking population since this period, although the population remained small and the settlement was subjected to repeated Spanish raids, and in 1797, the British forcibly settled some 5,000 “Black Caribs” on the islands. Prior to the 1830s, the status of the islands was unclear, with control disputed between New Spain, later Mexico, and Britain, although they were de facto under British control. In 1838, a group of ex-slaves from the Cayman Islands migrated and settled on the Bay Islands, the mixed African and English population are the ancestors of the Caracol people who inhabit the islands to this day. The instability of Central America during the early 19th century allowed British control to continue uninhibited.
During the Mexican War, the islands were raided by Central Americans, but the attacks were repelled by the British defences. Under the 1848 Treaty of Toluca, the colonial status of British Honduras and the Miskito Coast was left deliberately vague, while the Bay Islands were ceded to Great Britain in perpetuity. On 20 March 1852, a royal warrant was issued and the islands were constituted as a crown colony, under the title of the “Colony of the Bay Islands”, but under the colonial governor of Jamaica. Politically, the islands were an internally self-governing territory of Jamaica from 1953 to 1972, however they voted to revert to direct British rule following the admission of Jamaica to the union in 1972. A large degree of internal autonomy was granted by a constitution on 14 March 1982.
In the 21st century, the Bay Islands is a highly developed territory, with a strong economy centred on the three sectors of tourism, fisheries, and off-shore finance. Fishing had always been a mainstay of the economy, while tourism began to take off in the 1950s with the opening of the airport, several hotels, and the beginning of scheduled flights and cruise stop-overs. The Bay Islands have historically been a tax-exempt destination, and the government has focused on boosting the economy by exploiting this, and the islands are a major world offshore financial haven for international businesses and many wealthy individuals.
Originally named “Las Guanajas” when Christopher Columbus sighted them in 1502, at which time the islands were occupied by the advanced Pech Indian civilisation, who traded with the mainland of Honduras and Yucatan. Labelled as cannibals and hostile to Christianity, the Spanish Crown granted a license to Cuban colonists to capture and sell the islanders into slavery. For nearly 20 years, the islands were subjected to repeated Spanish raids which rapidly reduced the native population, until Hernán Cortés established the islands as dependencies of the colonial province of Honduras. For nearly a century the islands were ignored by colonial authorities, as the Spanish focused their attention on the resource rich mainland.
In 1638, the first non-Spanish attempt at settling the islands came under the leading of William Claibourne, an English colonist from Virginia who was granted a patent by the Providence Company to establish a colony on the island of Roatan. This marked the beginning of English interest in Central America, with settlements established in what is now Belize and a protectorate over the Miskito Coast. During this time, a number of pirates of various nationalities launched raids on settlements in the Bay of Honduras, using the islands as a base, although the English colony was spared. From 1638 to 1650, the islands were inhabited by Spanish-aligned Indians and English colonists, the latter linking the islands to the logwood cutting settlements in what is now Belize. In 1650, the Spanish dislodged the buccaneers and English colonists from the islands and removed the Indians to the mainland, leaving the island uninhabited for the next century.
Records indicate the islands were again under British control by the 1740s, when they re-established the settlement and rebuilt the old fort on Roatan. The islands have been permanently inhabited by an English-speaking population since this period, although the population remained small and the settlement was subjected to repeated Spanish raids, and in 1797, the British forcibly settled some 5,000 “Black Caribs” on the islands. Prior to the 1830s, the status of the islands was unclear, with control disputed between New Spain, later Mexico, and Britain, although they were de facto under British control. In 1838, a group of ex-slaves from the Cayman Islands migrated and settled on the Bay Islands, the mixed African and English population are the ancestors of the Caracol people who inhabit the islands to this day. The instability of Central America during the early 19th century allowed British control to continue uninhibited.
During the Mexican War, the islands were raided by Central Americans, but the attacks were repelled by the British defences. Under the 1848 Treaty of Toluca, the colonial status of British Honduras and the Miskito Coast was left deliberately vague, while the Bay Islands were ceded to Great Britain in perpetuity. On 20 March 1852, a royal warrant was issued and the islands were constituted as a crown colony, under the title of the “Colony of the Bay Islands”, but under the colonial governor of Jamaica. Politically, the islands were an internally self-governing territory of Jamaica from 1953 to 1972, however they voted to revert to direct British rule following the admission of Jamaica to the union in 1972. A large degree of internal autonomy was granted by a constitution on 14 March 1982.
In the 21st century, the Bay Islands is a highly developed territory, with a strong economy centred on the three sectors of tourism, fisheries, and off-shore finance. Fishing had always been a mainstay of the economy, while tourism began to take off in the 1950s with the opening of the airport, several hotels, and the beginning of scheduled flights and cruise stop-overs. The Bay Islands have historically been a tax-exempt destination, and the government has focused on boosting the economy by exploiting this, and the islands are a major world offshore financial haven for international businesses and many wealthy individuals.
Last edited:
LeinadB93
Monthly Donor
Thanks
and thanks for the suggestion!It seems option 4 is winning, so those names may not be the most appropriate... However reading the origins of the name "Romagna" it might be feasible to extend it to the state in option 4? In contrast to the City of Rome... So we'd have the Romagnolans from Romagna and the Romans from Rome
True, but unfortunately I know very little about music and pop-culture.
I tend to focus on what I like, or what I'm interested in, or what I actually have some knowledge about...
Indeed it wasn't...
Notes on the size of the Royal Navy
Interesting look at the Bay Islands, a region I feel gets rather overlooked in AH contexts.
As an aside, I worked with @LeinadB93 to determine the size of the Royal Navy by roughly modern-day, and thought I'd post the work done here, going off of the basis of a Pound that is 2.5-3x stronger than OTL. My process was as follows:
1) Establish baseline GDP equivalent with your 12.508 million pounds, then convert x3 for OTL comparisons/calculations
2) Determine percentage of that GDP for Defence purposes (using the above, that's £1,182,006 million at 3.15% of GDP)
3) Calculate naval budget proportion (U.S. standard is 23.4% of now-established Defence budget), which is now £276,589.404 million
4) Figure out cost of per-item in OTL dollars/pounds (how many millions for a carrier, or a submarine, etc.), then convert as needed to pounds
5) Compare total numbers to ensure that the 33% operating cost wasn't exceeded; the basis for this is budget proportions for a modern navy being broken down to 33% operating/maintenance costs (i.e. using the things in the field), 30% procurement (bidding for designs, construction, out-fitting), 25% personnel (salaries, uniform allowances, medical), 10% R&D (upgrades, studies for new/improved equipment), and 2% infrastructure (upkeep of ports and dry docks, telecommunications)
I'll copy and paste my work below (the eagle-eyed among you may determine just what the fleet's composition is), but the bottom line is, after re-running the numbers above AND dividing the per-item buy (which isn't always one ship, but often a bulk purchase of 2-4 ships, linky for source here) by a third, a 3x stronger-than-OTL Pound will work without making substantial cuts to established and estimated fleet size; in fact, the below numbers indicate a fleet expenditure of only 32%, so there's still about £2,753 million left over to spend that wasn't used up in the indicated fleet count.
1/3 OTL £ VAL (3x ECON) Millions of £
CV/Ns (21 Nimitz/4 KitHawks/2 GR Fords): (£38,556)
CGs (36 Ticos): (£8,256)
DDGs (62 Type 43 super-Dukes): (£3,290)
FFGs (70 OHPs): (£2,375)
SSNs (30 688I/10 Virginias): (£13,473)
SSBN (18 Ohios): (£6,325)
LPD (11 San Antones): (£4,831)
TOTALS: £88,521
GDP (3x OTL): TTL £12.508 trillion -> OTL £37.524 trillion -> £1,182,006 million @ 3.15% GDP (Navy @ 23.4%; £276,589.404 million)
Now if the Defence budget proportion of the OTL UK (which is 1.8% GDP instead of 3.15%) were to be followed, then that'd be a different story. However, a 3x more powerful Pound would still yield a 12-18 carrier and company fleet with associated surpluses elsewhere, so there's that. I should point out also that the DDGs and CGs would likely be getting long in the tooth by the 2000s, so a replacement (I was thinking a Sejong the Great-type super-destroyer) at 1:1 for both at the same time crossed my mind.
As an aside, I worked with @LeinadB93 to determine the size of the Royal Navy by roughly modern-day, and thought I'd post the work done here, going off of the basis of a Pound that is 2.5-3x stronger than OTL. My process was as follows:
1) Establish baseline GDP equivalent with your 12.508 million pounds, then convert x3 for OTL comparisons/calculations
2) Determine percentage of that GDP for Defence purposes (using the above, that's £1,182,006 million at 3.15% of GDP)
3) Calculate naval budget proportion (U.S. standard is 23.4% of now-established Defence budget), which is now £276,589.404 million
4) Figure out cost of per-item in OTL dollars/pounds (how many millions for a carrier, or a submarine, etc.), then convert as needed to pounds
5) Compare total numbers to ensure that the 33% operating cost wasn't exceeded; the basis for this is budget proportions for a modern navy being broken down to 33% operating/maintenance costs (i.e. using the things in the field), 30% procurement (bidding for designs, construction, out-fitting), 25% personnel (salaries, uniform allowances, medical), 10% R&D (upgrades, studies for new/improved equipment), and 2% infrastructure (upkeep of ports and dry docks, telecommunications)
I'll copy and paste my work below (the eagle-eyed among you may determine just what the fleet's composition is), but the bottom line is, after re-running the numbers above AND dividing the per-item buy (which isn't always one ship, but often a bulk purchase of 2-4 ships, linky for source here) by a third, a 3x stronger-than-OTL Pound will work without making substantial cuts to established and estimated fleet size; in fact, the below numbers indicate a fleet expenditure of only 32%, so there's still about £2,753 million left over to spend that wasn't used up in the indicated fleet count.
1/3 OTL £ VAL (3x ECON) Millions of £
CV/Ns (21 Nimitz/4 KitHawks/2 GR Fords): (£38,556)
CGs (36 Ticos): (£8,256)
DDGs (62 Type 43 super-Dukes): (£3,290)
FFGs (70 OHPs): (£2,375)
SSNs (30 688I/10 Virginias): (£13,473)
SSBN (18 Ohios): (£6,325)
LPD (11 San Antones): (£4,831)
TOTALS: £88,521
GDP (3x OTL): TTL £12.508 trillion -> OTL £37.524 trillion -> £1,182,006 million @ 3.15% GDP (Navy @ 23.4%; £276,589.404 million)
Now if the Defence budget proportion of the OTL UK (which is 1.8% GDP instead of 3.15%) were to be followed, then that'd be a different story. However, a 3x more powerful Pound would still yield a 12-18 carrier and company fleet with associated surpluses elsewhere, so there's that. I should point out also that the DDGs and CGs would likely be getting long in the tooth by the 2000s, so a replacement (I was thinking a Sejong the Great-type super-destroyer) at 1:1 for both at the same time crossed my mind.
Last edited:
It seems option 4 is winning, so those names may not be the most appropriate... However reading the origins of the name "Romagna" it might be feasible to extend it to the state in option 4? In contrast to the City of Rome... So we'd have the Romagnolans from Romagna and the Romans from Rome
"Naming a country something that has nothing to do with where it is" is used IOTL - see Ghana & Benin.
As of the 2011 census, the population of the Bay Islands was 54,355 making it the least populous British overseas territory in the Americas.
I know you said you are still retconning things (still no Tierra del Fuego in the constituent countries...), but so far there are no other overseas territories in the Americas... unless you count Bermuda?
Any other areas in the Caribbean Sea being made into territories? Miskito Coast?
What happened to Belize/British Honduras? was it handed to Mexico at some point?
btw, nice update, always nice to learn about areas of the empire where the sun still shines! also nice to find, when wikipedia-ing them, that some of the people on OTL bay islands want them to be British ruled again...
Would be nice to have a wikibox for each of the overseas possessions, maybe even including ones for Falklands and Tierra del Fuego as they only recently became a constituent country (or as part of the country post with a wikibox about them as a country)
keep up the good work anyway Lei
LeinadB93
Monthly Donor
Brilliant work as always
Nice to see the strength of TTL's Royal Navy!!Fair point
The retconning and updating is gong to be a long process I'm afraid...
The only other area that may become a territory is Saint Andrew and Providence. At the moment it's part of Jamaica, along with the Cayman Islands, with devolved administration. But reading the history I think it might work better as an overseas territory.
The Galápagos Islands may be transferred to British control, as I'm toying with the idea of them becoming British territory following the collapse of New Granada in the 1860s...
As outlined before:
Indeed, I was surprised to discover that when I was researching them.
There are a few other overseas possessions I plan to look at; Labuan, Socotra, Vanuatu, and the Mariana Islands. But most of the others are as OTL. Wake Island might get a post, along with the associated states in the Pacific - Micronesia and the South Sea Islands.
Thanks
When it's ready.
Last edited:
LeinadB93
Monthly Donor
So in the spirit of democracy, I'd like to ask your vote on whether Saint Andrew and Providence and the Galápagos Islands should become separate British overseas territories.
As I outlined earlier, Saint Andrew and Providnece is currently part of Jamaica, along with the Cayman Islands, with a devolved administration, but reading the history of the islands I think they might have become a separate colony in the early-20th century. The Galapagos Islands are currently part of Ecuador, but I was thinking they would have been transferred to British control after British intervention the collapse of New Granada in the 1850s and 1860s to ensure Ecuadorian independence.
Also some flags:
As I outlined earlier, Saint Andrew and Providnece is currently part of Jamaica, along with the Cayman Islands, with a devolved administration, but reading the history of the islands I think they might have become a separate colony in the early-20th century. The Galapagos Islands are currently part of Ecuador, but I was thinking they would have been transferred to British control after British intervention the collapse of New Granada in the 1850s and 1860s to ensure Ecuadorian independence.
Also some flags:
Galapagos Islands
Saint Andrew and Providence
Saint Andrew and Providence
Last edited:
LeinadB93
Monthly Donor
The Papal States / Central Italy
4) Romagna/Teveria/Umbria; City-state of Rome
Additionally, I've been reading up about the Republic of Ragusa and Benevento, and feel they would be quirky additions to the world in the form of European micro-states.
So the results seem to be conclusive. You've selected Option 4; an independent Central Italian state, with Rome as a sovereign city-state.
My thoughts are as follows:
1) The Kingdom of Romagna covers OTL eastern Emilia-Romagna, Marche, Umbria and northern Lazio. It is a constitutional monarchy under Eugene IV of the House of Beauharnais. The country saw the birth of Futurism under Mussolini and became the core of the Nazi-aligned Italian State (later the Italian Republic), which conquered all of the Italian states except San Marino and Benevento, before collapsing in the late Second World War.
2) The Sovereign City of Rome covers much of OTL Rome and its surrounding area. Originating in the Papal States, the 1870s crisis led to the secession of most territory to Romagna and the Two Sicilies, the city remained independent due to an agreement between the Romagnans and the Two Sicilians. Its a parliamentary state, effectively a diarchy with the Pope (presently Adrian VII) serving as a pseudo constitutional monarch, with a President as the elected head of state, and a Prime Minister as the elected head of government. The city was "peacefully" annexed to Romagna under the 1929 Lateran Treaty, with the Pope withdrawing to the Vatican, before being restored after the Second World War.
2) The Sovereign City of Rome covers much of OTL Rome and its surrounding area. Originating in the Papal States, the 1870s crisis led to the secession of most territory to Romagna and the Two Sicilies, the city remained independent due to an agreement between the Romagnans and the Two Sicilians. Its a parliamentary state, effectively a diarchy with the Pope (presently Adrian VII) serving as a pseudo constitutional monarch, with a President as the elected head of state, and a Prime Minister as the elected head of government. The city was "peacefully" annexed to Romagna under the 1929 Lateran Treaty, with the Pope withdrawing to the Vatican, before being restored after the Second World War.
Also, you've opted for Ragusa and Benevento to exist to the present day. I have some ideas for both, and hope to have something for both of them in the next couple of weeks. I really hope you like them
Last edited: