So why did Peru join the war in the first place? Were they declared upon for the same reasons as Bolivia?
Chile declared war on Peru because Peru was already in a defensive alliance with Bolivia; declaring war on Bolivia meant that war with Peru was not far behind, so they just kind of cut to the chase and directly declared war on them.So why did Peru join the war in the first place? Were they declared upon for the same reasons as Bolivia?
Can we have Italy unify even a few years earlier? If so, what events (probably to do with Austria) could preceed this to cause this? Would it necessarily have to be as a result of the 1848 Revolutions (a done to death POD?)?
I thought Nappy III was an advocate of Italian unification? Or was this only when Austria was getting beat up by Prussia?
Hmm... It could still get Venice later though. Better yet, have a second Hungarian Revolution, have Prussia preoccupied with France, giving Italy a free hand to support the Hungarians and in this case France can't do jack shit. Of course, this is all after Italy has already more or less unified after the death of Nappy III in 1855. So without Nappy III, are the Papal States completely without an ally?
Slightly perplexing thread since I'm reading answers to questions that aren't here anymore.
Regarding Mongolia, its a Chinese vassal akin to Tibet, so its becoming independent is moot without external impetus - its happy enough being autonomous, and note that Tibet even had its own vassals.
Britain's role in the War of the Pacific needs to be looked at as the best way to get an alternative outcome - British business basically backed Chile.
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
The solutions to Africa are not all just other countries colonizing it. There are plenty of African states that could have made it. The Lozi, Bornu, Bunyoro, Buganda, Zanzibar, Samori's state, the Sokoto Empire, Madagascar, etc.
If Britain hadn't occupied Egypt and instead maintained a system of indirect influence and free trade, there could have been more independent African states, with the capability to maintain their independence.
Indeed. But if the POD is, say, in 1850, can these states be truly saved? I'm trying to do some hardcore study on African colonialism actually (for some reason it really interests me). I suspect with all the information I'm gathering I'd need more than one POD (sadly not for a timeline. If I started that it would never be finished. More for a mini-timeline). I often enjoy an independent Morocco as well (as a British ally, Morocco could have been a good way for Britain to have even more security over the Mediterranean).
As for the issues with colonial Africa, I'm thinking near-full colonisation, but more evenly divided (and more protectorates, so a lot more degrees of independence). My original idea was to have a less intense Anglo-French colonial rivalr in Africa, but I think a more intense rivalry is a lot more interesting. So busy trying to win over tribes and African states, Britain and France miss the boat when it comes to the Scramble. While they still pick up massive slices (i.e. France still gets Algeria, the Sahara and Dahomey), areas like the Congo and Madagascar are gobbled up by alternative powers.