Honor through Blood

[God-Eater of the Marshes]

Honor through Blood
A World War I timeline

Emperor Wilhelm II the Victorious of the German Empire, King of Prussia and Grand Duke of Ösel.​

Day One, the Battle of the Somme.

Sir Douglas Haig, standing on a tall hill overseeing the battle below, hears gunfire, screams and the sound of boot tramping through mud. He feels a cold, whispering breeze gently blowing against him. He sees young British, French and Newfoundlander men being chopped to death by German machinegun fire. Surrounding the hill, a vast network of trenches stuffed with cold, miserable men. Pawns on a chessboard.

He breathes calmly, and he feels a slight warmth in his chest. He curiously pats his chest, and a sudden pain grips him. He gasps, struggling for air. "Ach!" he barks involuntarily, "H-help", a man nearby, Winfred Smith, his aide, dashes over,
"Sir!" he says, anxiety lacing his words, "Sir!"
"Winfred, I'm h-having -" his speech is cut off by a cough, "I'm h-having a-a I-I'm having a h-heart -"
"Sir! I'll get help" says Winfred, "Stay here, Sir, breath slowly"

But Winfred's help is too late. Alas, when he returns, only a dead General Haig remains, one incapable of leading anything to battle except an ambulance.

----------------

With their commanding officer down, the BEF command falls into the hands of Lieutenant General Launcelot Kiggell, who is quickly named the leader of the BEF until the Battle of the Somme is over. Lieutenant General Kiggell holds the line, carrying with the plans that Haig left and the first day goes on as normal. However, unlike General Haig, Lieutenant General Kiggell becomes extremely disheartened by the traumatizing losses on the first day (Having much the same response to the carnage at the Somme as he would later have in OTL at the Third Battle of Ypres) and resolves to end the battle quickly through a "decisive blow" (Haig's original plan anyway), in contrary to General Rawlinson who wishes to protract the battle as the British numbers make a war of attrition a viable option.

As the battle grows longer and more intense, a "decisive blow" becomes less and less tactically viable. However Lieutenant General Kiggell stubbornly refuses to deviate from Haig's original plan, even though Rawlinson and Joffre disagree. The Lieutenant General's stubbornness is owing to a deep disheartenment by the losses, a personal insecurity that if he deviates from Haig's original plans, he could single-handedly lose the battle and a personal advocation for outdated breakthrough tactics.

After an inconclusive meeting with Joffre and Rawlinson, in which all three generals faff about without deciding on anything, Kiggell's opportunity for a "decisive blow" came into effect. It was the beginning of August and the fighting had mainly petered down to a standstill. Misinterpreting this as a sign that the German's morale was broken, Kiggell mustered the BEF and sent as many divisions as he could into a massive, head-on, "over-the-top" style attack directly on the German front lines. Hoping this show of strength would break the Germans and rout them.

However, it was not to be so. The German's morale was not broken, far from it. The standstill in fighting was due to a change in the defensive doctrine rather than unwillingness. And although General Paul von Hindenburg was taken aback by the sudden assault, he nor his men would go down quietly. Rather, they'd go down the true Prussian way: All guns blazing.

As soon as the Brits started the assault, the Germans opened fire. While the British did make important tactical territorial gains, It was otherwise simple carnage. Across all the ground the BEF commanded, machine-gun fire, mortars and small artillery decimated the British numbers, shredding them. However, it was not the loss in numbers that did the real damage, but the psychological damage. Most of the remaining men under Kiggell's command mutinied, still bitter from the losses on the first day, simply refusing to follow orders.

The mutinies of Kiggell's forces quickly erupts into a large-scale mutiny that spreads like the Spanish Flu across the Entente forces in the Battle of the Somme. It not only hits British forces - but the French forces as well, and (to a lesser extent) to the French armies outside of the Battle of the Somme. Whole divisions simply sit in trenches idly, only raising there guns when a German actually came into the trench (which happens very rarely, considering the Germans are in no position for a counterattack). Some more disobedient soldiers left the front line trenches to reside in the reserve trenches. The generals are distraught. At a time when the soldiers should have been the most attentive, they simply smoke and play cards all day. And as for punishment: well, there simply wasn't very much. The group mentality coupled with the anger at the generals meant that you'd be hard pressed finding a soldier willing to execute another soldier.

Meanwhile on the German side of the trench, after the assault by the British, von Hindenburg beings preparations for a complete, front-wide push. Unlike the British attack, von Hindenburg intends his assault to be methodical yet "lightening-quick". He begins his attack two weeks after the disastrous British assault.

Unfortunately for the Entente, this also just happens to be in the high of their mutiny. The Germans unleash a quick, intense barrage on the French that last for about an hour and then the Germans begin storming the trenches. The barrage not only surprises and damages the mutinous Entente forces, but when the Germans come storming in, they have no opportunity to bring up reinforcements. Those who were left in the front lines weren't enough to withstand the blow. The Germans, having broken the Entente front lines engage in a bloody onslaught against the surprised reserve trenches. Some of the Entente forces begin to trust the generals and follow orders whilst others still refuse to follow the generals entrusted to "protect France", instead calling for a tactical retreat, claiming that the Somme is useless. Large numbers of desertions are made, with soldiers simply leaving the reserve trenches.

Eventually, it is the mutinies in the Entente forces that cause their downfall. As the Germans breakthrough the front line, the disorganized Entente forces begin to rout a week into the attack. By two weeks after the attack, whole divisions desert or surrender en masse. Eventually, the Germans claim victory on the 15th of November, 1916.

A distraught Kiggell, already traumatized by the carnage of the first day of the Somme, breaks down completely and commits suicide by a gunshot to the head, leaving the BEF leaderless. General Joseph Joffre, unable to bring himself to report the defeat to the French high command/government, surrenders to the German army.

The battle is a complete strategic and tactical victory for the German army.
Final score:

• Germany: 494,000 casualties
• France and Britain: 656,400 casualties

After the Somme is lost, the retreating armies fall apart in disarray. Soldiers head for Calais and Dunkirk, opting for the first boat back to England. Others entrench themselves wherever they fancy, often so far behind the front line that they make no contribution whatsoever. Only in early December is control fully returned to the BEF, under the command of General George Montague Harper.

Meanwhile, in the Eastern Front, the Brusilov Offensive begins as in OTL, with the attack on the Austrian armies at the Battle of Kostiuchnówka in June 4th, however, in the height of the Russian offensive on the 5th, the Germans bring in 6 divisions of fresh soldiers which had been stationed in East Prussia. Commanded by Max Hoffman, the divisions quickly flank and strike the Russians at their exposed flank east of Optowa. Max Hoffman's superior flanking tactics surprised the Russians and they found themselves fighting two fronts. The sudden flank on the part of Hoffman prevents the disastrous Austrian retreat as in OTL. What Brusilov intended to be a quick, effective attack turns into slow, protracted fighting. Eventually, the Russians come out as victors, inflicting 667,000 deaths upon the Central Powers versus a 603,000 deaths on their own forces. While the Russians claim victory, it is a tired and hardly-cheerful. They are unable to exploit their victory by pushing forwards and the Russian people view it with remorse.

After the the Somme ends significantly earlier than in OTL, the Battle of Verdun is commencing as usual, except for two crucial differences: The Germans assault on Souville is much better planned, and rather then pack together the road and get decimated by French artillery and machineguns, the Germans make their way through the shrub in five main regiments, attacking at different angles, which means that French firepower isn't concentrated on one particular group. The Germans are also able to commit 10 more divisions and some artillery to the battle in early October. This tactic dramatically lessens damage done the French artillery and machinegun fire. Once the fort is captured (parallel to in OTL) the Germans are actually able to keep a hold of it, unlike in OTL when they were forced to retreat. With the Fort of Souville in their control, the Germans bring up the aforementioned 10 divisions from the Somme and use the (relatively) fresh troops to create a defensive perimeter stretching from the Fort of Vaux to the town of Fleury. When the French begins their counter-attack in mid-October (which in our OTL succeed because the German divisions were too exhausted to resist such an organized assault as the French counter-attack was, the divisions from the Somme significantly soften the blow of the French), and the French counter-offensive, while it is successful in gaining ground and recapturing the Fort of Souville, it was not the success it was in OTL.

Three weeks after the lackluster French offensive, the Germans make a swift, controlled attack on the batteries east of Tavannes. Three divisions mobilize and strike the batteries, however they are met with swift resistance. French defenses proved to be quite tough, landing the Germans quite a lot of casualties. The French then bring four divisions from the frontline over to destroy the Germans, hoping the complete destruction of the divisions would damage the German morale, preventing further attacks. While it does completely wipe out the divisions, it also overextends the French defenses, to which von Hindenburg responds by ordering a massive offensive upon the French front line. The offensive is long, hard and bloody. The Germans constantly assault the overextended French front line, and in November 1916, they finally achieve a breakthrough when several French divisions mutiny and desert to the reserve trenches. As soon as the breakthrough is achieved, von Hindenburg, using the encirclement strategy taught to him by Max Hoffman in the Battle of Tannenberg, encircles the French armies and engages them. The battle is fought tooth-and-nail, and the French nor the Germans never give up. But eventually, in early February the next year, the Germans achieve victory over the French, who are either routed or killed, leaving a road open to Verdun. The Germans claim victory on the 23rd of December, 1916.

Final Score:

• Germany: 284,000 dead
• France: 340,000 dead

The loss of the Verdun does nothing to ease the burden of the mutinies of the French. It intensifies it extremely. It explodes into a nation-wide phenomenon , French troops can be seen simply refusing to follow any kind of order, and the remaining British troops find themselves fighting for a country that won't fight for itself. French Officers are ousted from their posts in rapid succession by their own troops who claim that the French high command is throwing away lives to no effect. The French government responds to by reshuffling the remaining generals: putting cruel generals like Major General George Mireau in charge, hoping these draconian generals will be able to rally the remaining soldiers under the threat of death.

Of course, adding more death to the mix doesn't help the situation at all.

The French and BEF continue to make last-minute offensives well into early 1917, but their morale is already broken. Every loss they experience at the hands of the Germans further depletes their morale, making it easier for the Germans to win the next engagement.

The British public views the war as wasting money and men to no avail, and demands are made to sue for peace. The British realize that a land war cannot be won with battleships (Britain's only success) and so eventually, on the 16th of February 1917, the House of Commons vote to sue for a white peace (a slim majority though) and the House of Lords ratify the decision. With many of the war's more devout supporters either being replaced or resigning in disgrace, the peace offering isn't met with any major opposition. The peace offering is sent to the Kaiser, who promptly agrees.

With the Verdun and the Somme won, the Germans look like they will have an easy push to Paris. The French public are heavily demoralized over the loss of Verdun and the subsequent, which was a massive propaganda loss, as von Falkenhayn intended it to be. The Kaiser is jubilant, however he realizes that a war of attrition over France is both foolish and extremely dangerous. So he proposes peace to the French government under the following terms:

• France demilitarizes everything east of the Hindenburg-Ebert line.
• a war indemnity bill of 7 billion Reichmarks

The French government, tired of war and with any allies to help her, agrees to the demands reluctantly. Making peace on the 13th March 1917.

The Hindenburg-Ebert line.

The Russians never make the Kerensky Offensive, as losses from the Brusilov Offensive causes an earlier Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in the 19th of March, 1917.

In the Balkans, the Kingdom of Bulgaria annexes Dobruja from Romania and a good portion of Macedonia from Greece (including Thessalonika) in the Treaty of Missolonghi, which leaves Chalkidiki as an exclave accessible only by boat.

As for Austria, they temporarily annex Serbia with the intention as rebuilding Serbia as more "Hapsburg Friendly". They plan to release Serbia as a Duchy ruled by an Austrian noble within ten years.

Italy escapes relatively unscathed, except for a 300 million Reichmark war indemnity, with 20% to Germany, 75% to Austria and 5% to Bulgaria.

Romania is divided into two separate satellites, with Moldava being in suzerainty to Austria and Wallachia being in suzerainty to the Ottomans.

----------------

This is the world by 1918: (excuse the bad map, but you get the point.)

• 1. The Kingdom of Poland, ruled by Friedrich Ferdinand of the House of Glücksburg, crowned King Paweł Fryderyk I
• 2. The Grand Duchy of Byelorussia, ruled by Hugo von Fennigberg, crowned Grand Duke Stanisłaŭ I
• 3. The Kingdom of Bulgaria, ruled King Ferdinand I
• 4. The Principality of Moldova, currently ruled by Benedikt von Gorlitberg, crowned Prince George I
• 5. The Duchy of Wallachia, ruled by Duke Constantin V, a minor Wallachian noble
• 6. The Kingdom of Italy, ruled by Victor Emmanuel III
• 7. The Third French Republic, ruled by Raymond Poincaré
• 8. The United Baltic Duchy, ruled by Adolf Friedrich, crowned Duke Adolf Friedrich I
• 9. The Free Lands of Lithuania, ruled by President Peterlis Grybauskaite, a German-educated Lithuanian
• 10. The Wallonian Federation, ruled by Federal President André Coëme.
• 11. The Kingdom of Greece, ruled by King Alexander
• 12. Switzerland, ruled by the Swiss Federal Council
• 13. The Kingdom of Denmark, ruled by King Christian X
• 14. The Principality of Albania, ruled by William I
• 15. The Kingdom of Montenegro, ruled by Nicholas I
• 16. The Free Kingdom of the Netherlands, ruled by Queen Wilhelmina I
• 17. The Duchy of Flanders, ruled by Ernest von Swinemunde, crowned Duke Bartholomeus I
• 18. The Kingdom of Serbia. Currently under military occupation by the Austrians. Position for king is vacant.
• 19. The Khanate of Crimea, ruled by Mustafa Gül, a minor Turkish aristocrat with Tatar heritage, crowned Khan Ğazı IV

The Crown of Ukraine is ruled by Pavlo Skoropadskyi, crowned the Hetman Pavlo I.

A tired and dogged Germany gleefully claims victory (if only a close one) over the French. Their situation looks reasonably optimistic, owing to the satellite states they have brought under their wing. The Austrians are a wounded, stumbling empire, humiliated by their losses on the Eastern front. Rebellion is brewing within, and the troublesome Serbian peoples do not seem quite pacified. The Ottoman's economy is nearly destroyed by the war and, like the Austrians, they face rebellion as well, only by the Pontic Greeks and those Greeks in Asia Minor. The French, although humiliated by the Germans, are not broken, and their largely homogenous populations bears a fiery desire for revenge against the Germans. The Russians are neck-deep in revolution already, with factions vying for control. The Brits are ashamed to have left the French, but they are largely untouched. The Americans sit across the Atlantic, biding their time.

The future looks uncertain.


(this is my first TL so be kind)


----------------
Opening Chapter: The German Victory on page 1
A Guide to the New States on page 3
Chapter II: Birth of the Mitteleuropa Community on page 3
Chapter III: The One-Armed Revolutionary of Kamianske on page 3
Chapter IV: Żytomierz not Zhytomyr on page 3

 

[Elfwine]

Interesting POD, but would that be possible? And if Haig was killed, would it really have that effect?

Solid writing skills, so that's promising.

I assume areas in white on the map are as OTL.

 

[Bartholome de Fonte]

Hello and welcome to AH.com! (lovely name as well ) I however have some nitpicks about the premise of the post War settlement.

1. There is simply no way for Hindenburg to become the King of Poland. He may be given some paper-titles but that is it. Depending on how A-H faired ITTL, they could cry about the candidate to the Polish throne like in OTL, but the King of Poland would none-the-less be from a German (as in the Language) Royal Family most likely.

2. Who is "Hugo von Fennigberg"?

3. ITTL, it only makes sense that the Russians would make peace sooner as the Germans could commit their more of forces to the East. As you did not say the exact date of when the POD is, there is the slight chance that it happened before Romania joined the war. If that is so, then they would perhaps think twice before joining ITTL. Regardless, the treaty of Bucharest IOTL was harsh enough, I am quiet suspicious that there could be an even harder variant of it for no stated reason.

4. The creation of 'Sardinia-Corsica' makes simply no sense, it is what is called ASB or Alien Space Bat since something that silly would be needed for the situation to happen. ITTL it would be more likely that the Italians would have to give up their North African holdings to the Ottomans or Venice to the Austrian-Hungarians.

5. To keep myself from writing a wall of text, your setup in France is completely ASB. Brittany would not be cut off, nor would Franche-Comte be annexed (Why would the Germans want even more French speakers in their nation, let alone a repeat conflict over it?) nor would Nice be removed and most importantly France would not be ruled by the Germans and use the German currency. It would not happen, ever.

6. I also do not see the Germans cutting Belgium in half based off of their languages, perhaps they would just force a new King who is loyal to Germany along with an indemnity bill.

7. Serbia would most certainly not be devoured by the Austro-Hungarians, they were having a hard enough time with the Slavs already within the Empire, why add even more? A more plausible scenario is for Serbia to merely have an occupation as per OTL, an indemnity bill and a loyal government installed.

8. It would make sense for Pavlo Skoropadskyi to at least have some title in the Ukraine....

9. I understand you are an apsiring writer, but bad spelling has no excuse. You can easily spell check your work beforehand and I encourage it.

Do not let criticism stop you from writing, rather, I encourage you to merely research the related eras more so, and perhaps read some of the TLs out there that cover the same time.

Cheers

 

[Elfwine]

9. I understand you are an apsiring writer, but bad spelling has no excuse. You can easily spell check your work beforehand and I encourage it.

I shouldn't feel this gleeful at pointing out the irony here, but it has to be said.

Also: fared, not faired.

 

[Bartholome de Fonte]

I had to let in some humor as I don't want to come off as an ass, sorry.

 

[Elfwine]

I had to let in some humor as I don't want to come off as an ass, sorry.

One should never be sorry for being humorous.

Especially when one succeeds.

Was it really intentional?

 

[God-Eater of the Marshes]

Hello and welcome to AH.com! (lovely name as well ) I however have some nitpicks about the premise of the post War settlement.

1. There is simply no way for Hindenburg to become the King of Poland. He may be given some paper-titles but that is it. Depending on how A-H faired ITTL, they could cry about the candidate to the Polish throne like in OTL, but the King of Poland would none-the-less be from a German (as in the Language) Royal Family most likely.

When creating the United Baltic Duchy, the guy the Germans wanted to put in place, Adolf Friedrich, who was an elected Duke was not terribly "noble". I thought that with the absence of a Polish (or Lithuanian as far as I know) royal family, it would make sense to do the same thing but with Paul von Hindenburg, who is considerably more prominent.

2. Who is "Hugo von Fennigberg"?

I could not find a complete list of German nobles 1914-1918, so I made some up, which I have seen in multiple TLs here.

3. ITTL, it only makes sense that the Russians would make peace sooner as the Germans could commit their more of forces to the East. As you did not say the exact date of when the POD is, there is the slight chance that it happened before Romania joined the war. If that is so, then they would perhaps think twice before joining ITTL. Regardless, the treaty of Bucharest IOTL was harsh enough, I am quiet suspicious that there could be an even harder variant of it for no stated reason.

The POD is the Battle of the Somme. I stated that.
One of the German war goals was the creation of various satellites. As they wanted to do with the territory gained through Brest-Litovsk, I thought I would make sense that they would do the same thing with Romania.

4. The creation of 'Sardinia-Corsica' makes simply no sense, it is what is called ASB or Alien Space Bat since something that silly would be needed for the situation to happen. ITTL it would be more likely that the Italians would have to give up their North African holdings to the Ottomans or Venice to the Austrian-Hungarians.

Many "ASB" has happened in OTL. For example, during the Napoleonic Wars, France annexed Dalmatia, a province that simply has nothing to do with France. Corsica-Sardinia allows Austria a naval foothold in the Mediterranean.

5. To keep myself from writing a wall of text, your setup in France is completely ASB. Brittany would not be cut off, nor would Franche-Comte be annexed (Why would the Germans want even more French speakers in their nation, let alone a repeat conflict over it?) nor would Nice be removed and most importantly France would not be ruled by the Germans and use the German currency. It would not happen, ever.

In the German Septemberprogramm, which outlined the German war goals, they stated they wanted: "Disabling of France. A crippling war indemnity of 10 billion Reichsmarks for France, with further payments to cover veterans' funds and to pay off all Germany's existing national debt. The ceding of some northern territory such as steel producing Briey, and a coastal strip running from Dunkirk to Boulogne-sur-Mer. The French economy will be dependent on Germany and all trade with the British Empire will cease. France will partially disarm by demolishing its northern forts."
Briey is dead-set in Franche-Comte, so it only makes sense that these "Northern Territories" be the Franche-Comte. As for Brittany, I filed that under the "Disabling of France", Brittany is a major Atlantic trading hub, and putting it under German suzerainty would "disable France". As for Nice, the Entente made Danzig independent, so it would make sense if the Germans did the same thing to Nice.
Making the French currency the Reichmark would make it "economically dependent" on Germany. The Germans also wanted a German-dominated Mitteleuropa economic community (like the EU) and in a German-dominated economic community it would make sense to have the Reichsmark as the currency. Also the "rulership of France" is not permanent, it is just temporary as Germany rebuilds France's government. (not unlike Allied-occupied Germany after WW2)

6. I also do not see the Germans cutting Belgium in half based off of their languages, perhaps they would just force a new King who is loyal to Germany along with an indemnity bill.

Actually in the Septemberprogramm, the Germans state that the annexation of Belgium was desirable. I thought that a bit extreme so I reduced it too Germany slicing Belgium in half and forcing suzerainty over them.

7. Serbia would most certainly not be devoured by the Austro-Hungarians, they were having a hard enough time with the Slavs already within the Empire, why add even more? A more plausible scenario is for Serbia to merely have an occupation as per OTL, an indemnity bill and a loyal government installed.

Austria doesn't exactly have a good track record with not annexing stuff. I thought it was likely.

8. It would make sense for Pavlo Skoropadskyi to at least have some title in the Ukraine....

Good point. I'll amend immediately.

9. I understand you are an apsiring writer, but bad spelling has no excuse. You can easily spell check your work beforehand and I encourage it.

Which spelling mistakes?

Do not let criticism stop you from writing, rather, I encourage you to merely research the related eras more so, and perhaps read some of the TLs out there that cover the same time.

I have read a couple TLs, but if we all wrote the same TLs then it would quite boring, no?

 

[Elfwine]

Oh dear. He's already fallen into one of the bad habits of poor researchers.

Many "ASB" has happened in OTL. For example, during the Napoleonic Wars, France annexed Dalmatia, a province that simply has nothing to do with France. Corsica-Sardinia allows Austria a naval foothold in the Mediterranean.

Which was done for supposedly good reason, but ended for good reason.

It isn't an ASB scenario. It was a scenario that happened because of an ambitious guy wanting a base to take Constantinople.

And Austria has a border along the Adriatic, why does it need Corsica-Sardinia to reach the Mediterranean if for some reason it wants to? Austria having a naval foothold in the Mediterranean is pointless.

Novak can/should address the rest on his own, but as one of the Bocagists (people who are very, very particular about plausibility in alt-history), I want to address this.

 

[Bartholome de Fonte]

When creating the United Baltic Duchy, the Germans wanted to put in place, Adolf Friedrich, who was an elected Duke. I thought that with the absence of a Polish royal family, it would make sense to do the same thing but with Paul von Hindenburg, who is considerably higher-up.

There were plenty of Polish noble families, and as I said, if that wouldn't work then a German speaking Noble related to a Royal Family would. Otto von Bismark was not given a nation for being boss, neither would Hindenburg.

I could not find a complete list of German nobles 1914-1918, so I made some up, which I have seen in multiple TLs here.

That's fine, just curious.

The POD is the Battle of the Somme. I stated that.

And you never gave a specific date, so it doesn't help much.

One of the German war goals was the creation of various satellites. As they wanted to do with the territory gained through Brest-Litovsk, I thought I would make sense that they would do the same thing with Romania.

Except they did not OTL so I do not see the reasoning why they would ITTL.

Many "ASB" has happened in OTL. For example, during the Napoleonic Wars, France annexed Dalmatia, a province that simply has nothing to do with France. Corsica-Sardinia allows Austria a naval foothold in the Mediterranean.

Except that doesn't explain the reasoning as to why it was created, the Austro-Hungarian Empire has a long coastline on the Mediterranean already. Corsica and Sardinia are if I am not mistaken, not terribly important economically and I really doubt they would be given up easily.

-snip-

This is entirely dependent on the rational that the German Government was in fact guided completely upon the basis of the Septemberprogramm, which it was not. A nice quote via Wikipedia best sums up the reality on it, "The government, finally, never committed itself to anything. It had ordered the September Program as an informal hearing in order to learn about the opinion of the economic and military elites."

Making the French currency the Reichmark would make it "economically dependent" on Germany. The Germans also wanted a German-dominated Mitteleuropa economic community (like the EU) and in a German-dominated economic community it would make sense to have the Reichsmark as the currency. Also the "rulership of France" is not permanent, it is just temporary as Germany rebuilds France's government. (not unlike Allied-occupied Germany after WW2)

So Germany literally invades France down to Marseille and Toulouse, which would be necessary to even dare try a complete military occupation ala Post WWII Germany?

Austria doesn't exactly have a good track record with not annexing stuff. I thought it was likely.

Uh, what?

Which spelling mistakes?

The main I kept seeing was 'independant'.

I have read a couple TLs, but if we all wrote the same TLs then it would quite boring, no?

I never meant that. I meant that you could merely get a good idea of what to do with regards to realism.

 

[Bernard Woolley]

Interesting POD, but would that be possible? And if Haig was killed, would it really have that effect?

In a word 'no'.
The BAF in 1916 was not a one man band. Someone else would have taken over as Acting CinC until a new commander, probably Plummer, was appointed.

 

[God-Eater of the Marshes]

Oh dear. He's already fallen into one of the bad habits of poor researchers.



Which was done for supposedly good reason, but ended for good reason.

It isn't an ASB scenario. It was a scenario that happened because of an ambitious guy wanting a base to take Constantinople.

And Austria has a border along the Adriatic, why does it need Corsica-Sardinia to reach the Mediterranean if for some reason it wants to? Austria having a naval foothold in the Mediterranean is pointless.

Novak can/should address the rest on his own, but as one of the Bocagists (people who are very, very particular about plausibility in alt-history), I want to address this.

Look, it was a small sploch on the map, and many of the TLs I have read aren't completely 100% accurate.

But because it concerned you so much I removed it.

This is entirely dependent on the rational that the German Government was in fact guided completely upon the basis of the Septemberprogramm, which it was not. A nice quote via Wikipedia best sums up the reality on it, "The government, finally, never committed itself to anything. It had ordered the September Program as an informal hearing in order to learn about the opinion of the economic and military elites."

Considering they won the war, wouldn't they implement the war goals their economic and military leaders thought would be good?
I mean when you win a war against your archrival and your economic and military leaders want x and y done, wouldn't you do it?

So Germany literally invades France down to Marseille and Toulouse, which would be necessary to even dare try a complete military occupation ala Post WWII Germany?

Yes. Why, is that totally "ASB"?

Except they did not OTL so I do not see the reasoning why they would ITTL.

In my timeline, they do for the reasons which I already mentioned earlier. If this was OTL it would be called "A Complete Look at How and Why the Central Powers lost the First World War" or something akin to that.

Oh dear. He's already fallen into one of the bad habits of poor researchers.

Charming.

In a word 'no'.
The BAF in 1916 was not a one man band. Someone else would have taken over as Acting CinC until a new commander, probably Plummer, was appointed.

Historically, the death of one of the most senior leaders on the battlefield can cause quite a kerfuffle. I personally think it is plausible that Haig's death could cause a chain reaction that leads to the BAF's destruction.

 

[Bartholome de Fonte]

I see this isn't going to go anywhere constructive, cheers!

 

[Elfwine]

Look, it was a small sploch on the map, and many of the TLs I have read aren't completely 100% accurate.

But because it concerned you so much I removed it.

It is a small sploch. But its also a matter of "Is this person trying to do this as plausibly as possible, or not?"

And in that regard, there's not a whole lot of difference between a big sploch and a small sploch - both reflect poor research.

You appear to be a solid writer, you are interested in this era, you have some interesting ideas...it would be a shame to see more "CP powers win, issues in the way of post-war map ignored." timelines. We have enough of those. Something modest but optimistic would be a nice change.

Charming.

See above.

 

[God-Eater of the Marshes]

It is a small sploch. But its also a matter of "Is this person trying to do this as plausibly as possible, or not?"

And in that regard, there's not a whole lot of difference between a big sploch and a small sploch - both reflect poor research.

You appear to be a solid writer, you are interested in this era, you have some interesting ideas...it would be a shame to see more "CP powers win, issues in the way of post-war map ignored." timelines. We have enough of those. Something modest but optimistic would be a nice change.

Actually I wasn't finished with this timeline. I wasn't exactly trying to achieve a "Germanwank" in your AHspeek. I was going to have lots more stuff happen and explore the effects of a German victory in Europe. (think Post-World War One Germany reversal on France or something akin to that)

Also I changed the rulers of Poland to the House of Glücksburg. Better?

As for "poor research" I am not exactly a PhD. in Modern History, so bear with me.

"CP powers win, issues in the way of post-war map ignored."

I'm not sure what you mean...

I see this isn't going to go anywhere constructive, cheers!

That was an incredibly sarcastic "cheers".

 

[Bernard Woolley]

Historically, the death of one of the most senior leaders on the battlefield can cause quite a kerfuffle. I personally think it is plausible that Haig's death could cause a chain reaction that leads to the BAF's destruction.

He was so remote from the ordinary Tommy because he was so far up the chain of command that it would take days for the news to percolate down. I don't think that in 1916 the death of a commander could lead to an army's destruction, maybe in 1815, but not in the 20th Century.

Still it's your TL and who am I to criticise.

 

[Hendryk]

OK, since this is your first TL, the first thing I'll say is that you shouldn't let criticism, even if sometimes harshly worded, discourage you from writing AH. Keep in mind that on this board we tend to be bluntly honest with one another, so don't take it personally; in fact, take it as evidence that you're a club member with fully paid dues, and treated just the same as everyone else.

The counterpart is that, when criticism is offered, the best attitude is to take it into account. It may or may not turn out to be justified, but it's usually worth thinking it over rather than dismiss it out of hand. Remember that others have written TLs similar to yours before, so there is a fount of collective experience which people are drawing from when approaching your work.

I think I can now safely offer my own take on your TL. As others have said, you have good writing skills, which is more than can be said of many beginners. However your TL stretches plausibility in places, and that's something we take very seriously here, much more so than in commercially published AH. Your main problem is that you take the September Program as a definite statement of policy, rather than the vague wish list that it actually was; and enforcing it, even in the case of a German victory in 1916, would lead to no end of trouble.

Many "ASB" has happened in OTL.

OTL doesn't have to be plausible, because it's OTL, but an ATL has to.

In the German Septemberprogramm, which outlined the German war goals, they stated they wanted: "Disabling of France. A crippling war indemnity of 10 billion Reichsmarks for France, with further payments to cover veterans' funds and to pay off all Germany's existing national debt. The ceding of some northern territory such as steel producing Briey, and a coastal strip running from Dunkirk to Boulogne-sur-Mer. The French economy will be dependent on Germany and all trade with the British Empire will cease. France will partially disarm by demolishing its northern forts."
Briey is dead-set in Franche-Comte, so it only makes sense that these "Northern Territories" be the Franche-Comte. As for Brittany, I filed that under the "Disabling of France", Brittany is a major Atlantic trading hub, and putting it under German suzerainty would "disable France".

You basically want France to be treated even more harshly than post-1918 Turkey was in OTL, and Turkey, despite being in worse shape and having few modern infrastructures, was able to bounce back with a vengeance. What you're suggesting is a recipe for bitter French counterattack, and I must remind you that in 1916 French fighting spirit was far from broken (nor was it in 1917, contrary to popular opinion, but that's another story). There would be no surrender at such a cost.

It's common in counterfactual circles to overestimate the strength of Wilhelmine Germany and underestimate that of France. The reasons for that would warrant a discussion in their own right, but be that as it may, your TL suffers from just that problem. It's something you're going to have to correct, and my suggestion, since so far you've only posted the opening chapter, is to start over with a revised version.

As for Nice, the Entente made Danzig independent, so it would make sense if the Germans did the same thing to Nice.

That's a false parallelism. Danzig was made independent because of Poland. It would make absolutely no sense for the Germans to do anything to Nice, which, in any case, is not a major harbor.

 

[Elfwine]

Actually I wasn't finished with this timeline. I wasn't exactly trying to achieve a "Germanwank" in your AHspeek. I was going to have lots more stuff happen and explore the effects of a German victory in Europe. (think Post-World War One Germany reversal on France or something akin to that)

I'm sure you were, but it did get off to a wankish start.

Also I changed the rulers of Poland to the House of Glücksburg. Better?

As for "poor research" I am not exactly a PhD. in Modern History, so bear with me.

Someone else will have to address the rulers of Poland, because I can't.

Neither am I, but - and I'm using this to illustrate an example of the problem below as well - why does Austria expand? Austria having enough trouble with what it had. This sort of thing needs to be addressed.

I'm not sure what you mean...

Basically, people having Germans (and other CP powers) maintain control of large areas effortlessly. Its very encouraging that you don't have that in mind.

 

[J. de Vos]

Interesting first chapter. One question, why did you add "Free" into the name of The Kingdom of the Netherlands? Nothing changed for them as far as borders and goverments are concerned, right?

 

[Deckhand]

Historically, the death of one of the most senior leaders on the battlefield can cause quite a kerfuffle. I personally think it is plausible that Haig's death could cause a chain reaction that leads to the BAF's destruction.

That was when leaders on the battlefield were personally leading their men, and their inspiration could be make or break. That kind of leadership was still in play in the Great war, but only goes up the command chain to the middling level, say colonel at most. Most of Haig's men didn't know what he looked like, as he was the commander of millions, and they wouldn't even know he was dead til days or even weeks after the event. Nor would they care, as orders would still come down the chain of command. All the officers who are in operational and tactical command are still in place, so how does the British army come apart?

All they need is one man, likely Brigadier Kiggell, Haig's chief of staff, to to hold the BEF staff together in the short term, and that is that. "Carry on men, all army commanders will follow the plan, wot." Someone is promoted to take over within a day or two, and on we go.

This kind of collapse in the early modern age is extremely implausible.

 

[God-Eater of the Marshes]

In response to the (immense) criticism I received, I heavily edited the original chapter.

It would be appreciated if you guys took a look at it told me what you thought.

I hope this addresses your criticisms and clears some things up.

One question, why did you add "Free" into the name of The Kingdom of the Netherlands? Nothing changed for them as far as borders and goverments are concerned, right?

In order to distinguish it from the Wilhelmine satellites.

But no, otherwise it remains unchanged.

Brigadier Kiggell

Takin into account. Although in my opinion, Kiggell seems the most likely candidate.

From the research I did, I found Kiggell as a Lieutenant General. Correct me if I am wrong.