In The Name of the King: Mk 2
- Thread starter Mumby
- Start date
#36: A Change In Priorities
In the aftermath of the Revolutionary Wars, and colonies were largely returned or reapportioned, those who had colonies considered their positions around the world and decided what course of action would benefit them most. The choices made would impact upon them, and their overseas territories for decades to come.
Most obviously, Britain reconcentrated her efforts in the Americas. The strain of governing the French AND Dutch colonial empires had put enormous strain on the Treasury, and while Britain was now equipped with the world's largest navy by a long way, she also had an impressively massive National Debt, hardly helped by the financier and manufacturer position she had taken in the Revolutionary Wars. While she profitted from selling arms to the Coalition, those profits were lost in paying for the war effort. A streamlining was needed. And with the extra weight of American Britons in Parliament, it was obvious where would lose funding. The British factories in the East Indies were sold to the Dutch, though these factories would become more North German than the other Dutch colonies. They also purchased the other Dutch Caribbean colonies (but notably not Guyana and colonies adjacent to it which had expanded enormously since the addition of French and later Spanish territories). The Caribbean was now divided between Britain, France and Spain, along with a small Danish presence. Another avenue for British expansion was Africa. The rapid industrialisation which characterised the Pitt, and then Hamilton administrations required an influx of Labour which was met in Great Britain by internal migration, but in more sparsely populated Britain-in-America, slaves served the purpose. And during the Revolutionary Wars and the West African jihads, Britain gained a virtual monopoly over the West African slave trade. At this point, British control in West Africa was tenuous and notional at best, but the secure influx of slaves into North America at low prices throughout the Revolutionary Wars (as well as a limited trade into Great Britain despite its supposed illegality) helped fuel the growing profitability of plantation agriculture. This postponed the abolition of the slave trade until the early 1820s, but it secured the Atlantic focus of British colonial policy. In India, a nightwatchman state emerged. The abolition of the East India Company was not replaced with a comparable responsible government and the result was that Indian rulers were left largely to their own devices. Thats not to say British military power was impotent or that there weren't those who wanted to focus on India, as can be seen in the Third Maratha War, but the British turn away from India as the centre of Imperial policy was crucial to the development of the British Empire in the 19th century. There were other avenues of British expansion like Australia and the Pacific but they weren't enormously important until later in the century.
The flight of the Portuguese royal family to Brazil during the Revolutionary Wars led to a major reassessment of imperial policy. First of all, as Brazil became the centre of the Portuguese Empire, they became more democratic (a more dramatic version of what occurred in Britain). But more importantly, the empire now came to serve Brazilian interests as much as it did Portuguese. A monopoly on the slave trade in the Congo basin was obtained, which unlike Britain, Portugal exploited to sell slaves at inflated prices to wherever there was demand, in particular to the Spanish and their descendant republics. As Britain turned inwards under Hamilton, and pursued a policy of national reconstruction and a certain level of self-sufficiency, the Portuguese found their colonial empire was small enough not to stretch expense, but widely distributed enough to facilitate a crucial position in global trade. In particular, they began a policy of asserting themselves more readily in the Indian trade. The rise of Persia, a long time Portuguese ally was also crucial to this, as a useful Portuguese power broker in the region, as well as in East Africa, which via Oman the Persians exercised a degree of influence over.
For the Dutch, the cost of colonial expansion was avoided as their homeland had been ruined by being in the frontline of the Revolutionary Wars for most of its long course, and the reflooding of the country early on was only addressed after hostilities ended. They now focussed on extracting the maximum profit from what they had and using it to rebuild their homeland as opposed to spending money in expensive wars. The one exception were the border concessions they received from Colombia during the war of independence of that country. The association with the North German states proved invaluable as the extra manpower could pick up a bit of slack from the Dutch. The idea of a common 'North German' identity emerged at this point as all the states of the Confederacy theoretically contributed to the running and maintenance of the Dutch colonies and received a slice of the profits in time. Like the Portuguese, the Dutch saw themselves as a trade empire built around the Asian-American trade with Africa as a chunk of land in between the two more valuable continents, and without the slaves which made it valuable to the Portuguese. North German involvement would eventually drive another period of expansion in the Dutch colonies but that wouldn't come until later
The French probably had the biggest reassessments to make. They had abolished the slave trade, and indeed slavery itself while under the Jacobins. While there were those who simply wanted to turn the clock back to before the Revolution, the authorities of the Restoration knew that wasn't possible. And most of the nobles coming back to France had spent time in Louisiana under British rule, and when the British conquered Saint-Dominique and other French Caribbean colonies, and had let the locals keep their freedom, the system that the noble emigres and the freed slaves had built had secured peace in the French Caribbean. They had no desire to re-enslave men they had made friends with. They wanted to make them good Frenchmen. The French let their Caribbean colonies basically slip into decay, retaining them merely for expedience, and to stop the British nabbing them. The autonomous status of the Caribbean colonies was recognised and the French refocussed their energies on a new opening market. Via the colony of Nouvelle-Belgie (now being populated with Jacobins and convicts), they sought to reassert French power in Asia and in particular, China. This was an avenue mostly ignored during the Revolutionary Wars and the French would profit enormously given time.
The Spanish also had to majorly reconsider their options. For centuries, it had been all about the Americas. Now, they had been reduced to their North American and Caribbean territories. They had also retained the Phillipines and had gained Algiers. But they had no or very few colonies proper as via the Kingdoms of New Spain and Algiers, the local policy of ostensibly Spanish colonies was out of Madrid's hands. Instead, the foreign policy of the 'Empire of the Two Spains[1]' was now directed by the one thing they had in common. The King-Emperor. And he saw a great deal of potential in Africa, seeing the importance of British and Portuguese control of conventional trade routes as key to their success. If Spain wanted to reclaim glory for herself, she would have to pursue it in Africa. There was also the suggestion that Algiers could also be expanded.
Of course, other colonial powers would emerge after the Revolutionary Wars, most notably Austrasia, the Swedes to a certain extent the Four Sicilies and Russia, and arguably the Osmanids and Persians would eventually accede to that level...
In the aftermath of the Revolutionary Wars, and colonies were largely returned or reapportioned, those who had colonies considered their positions around the world and decided what course of action would benefit them most. The choices made would impact upon them, and their overseas territories for decades to come.
Most obviously, Britain reconcentrated her efforts in the Americas. The strain of governing the French AND Dutch colonial empires had put enormous strain on the Treasury, and while Britain was now equipped with the world's largest navy by a long way, she also had an impressively massive National Debt, hardly helped by the financier and manufacturer position she had taken in the Revolutionary Wars. While she profitted from selling arms to the Coalition, those profits were lost in paying for the war effort. A streamlining was needed. And with the extra weight of American Britons in Parliament, it was obvious where would lose funding. The British factories in the East Indies were sold to the Dutch, though these factories would become more North German than the other Dutch colonies. They also purchased the other Dutch Caribbean colonies (but notably not Guyana and colonies adjacent to it which had expanded enormously since the addition of French and later Spanish territories). The Caribbean was now divided between Britain, France and Spain, along with a small Danish presence. Another avenue for British expansion was Africa. The rapid industrialisation which characterised the Pitt, and then Hamilton administrations required an influx of Labour which was met in Great Britain by internal migration, but in more sparsely populated Britain-in-America, slaves served the purpose. And during the Revolutionary Wars and the West African jihads, Britain gained a virtual monopoly over the West African slave trade. At this point, British control in West Africa was tenuous and notional at best, but the secure influx of slaves into North America at low prices throughout the Revolutionary Wars (as well as a limited trade into Great Britain despite its supposed illegality) helped fuel the growing profitability of plantation agriculture. This postponed the abolition of the slave trade until the early 1820s, but it secured the Atlantic focus of British colonial policy. In India, a nightwatchman state emerged. The abolition of the East India Company was not replaced with a comparable responsible government and the result was that Indian rulers were left largely to their own devices. Thats not to say British military power was impotent or that there weren't those who wanted to focus on India, as can be seen in the Third Maratha War, but the British turn away from India as the centre of Imperial policy was crucial to the development of the British Empire in the 19th century. There were other avenues of British expansion like Australia and the Pacific but they weren't enormously important until later in the century.
The flight of the Portuguese royal family to Brazil during the Revolutionary Wars led to a major reassessment of imperial policy. First of all, as Brazil became the centre of the Portuguese Empire, they became more democratic (a more dramatic version of what occurred in Britain). But more importantly, the empire now came to serve Brazilian interests as much as it did Portuguese. A monopoly on the slave trade in the Congo basin was obtained, which unlike Britain, Portugal exploited to sell slaves at inflated prices to wherever there was demand, in particular to the Spanish and their descendant republics. As Britain turned inwards under Hamilton, and pursued a policy of national reconstruction and a certain level of self-sufficiency, the Portuguese found their colonial empire was small enough not to stretch expense, but widely distributed enough to facilitate a crucial position in global trade. In particular, they began a policy of asserting themselves more readily in the Indian trade. The rise of Persia, a long time Portuguese ally was also crucial to this, as a useful Portuguese power broker in the region, as well as in East Africa, which via Oman the Persians exercised a degree of influence over.
For the Dutch, the cost of colonial expansion was avoided as their homeland had been ruined by being in the frontline of the Revolutionary Wars for most of its long course, and the reflooding of the country early on was only addressed after hostilities ended. They now focussed on extracting the maximum profit from what they had and using it to rebuild their homeland as opposed to spending money in expensive wars. The one exception were the border concessions they received from Colombia during the war of independence of that country. The association with the North German states proved invaluable as the extra manpower could pick up a bit of slack from the Dutch. The idea of a common 'North German' identity emerged at this point as all the states of the Confederacy theoretically contributed to the running and maintenance of the Dutch colonies and received a slice of the profits in time. Like the Portuguese, the Dutch saw themselves as a trade empire built around the Asian-American trade with Africa as a chunk of land in between the two more valuable continents, and without the slaves which made it valuable to the Portuguese. North German involvement would eventually drive another period of expansion in the Dutch colonies but that wouldn't come until later
The French probably had the biggest reassessments to make. They had abolished the slave trade, and indeed slavery itself while under the Jacobins. While there were those who simply wanted to turn the clock back to before the Revolution, the authorities of the Restoration knew that wasn't possible. And most of the nobles coming back to France had spent time in Louisiana under British rule, and when the British conquered Saint-Dominique and other French Caribbean colonies, and had let the locals keep their freedom, the system that the noble emigres and the freed slaves had built had secured peace in the French Caribbean. They had no desire to re-enslave men they had made friends with. They wanted to make them good Frenchmen. The French let their Caribbean colonies basically slip into decay, retaining them merely for expedience, and to stop the British nabbing them. The autonomous status of the Caribbean colonies was recognised and the French refocussed their energies on a new opening market. Via the colony of Nouvelle-Belgie (now being populated with Jacobins and convicts), they sought to reassert French power in Asia and in particular, China. This was an avenue mostly ignored during the Revolutionary Wars and the French would profit enormously given time.
The Spanish also had to majorly reconsider their options. For centuries, it had been all about the Americas. Now, they had been reduced to their North American and Caribbean territories. They had also retained the Phillipines and had gained Algiers. But they had no or very few colonies proper as via the Kingdoms of New Spain and Algiers, the local policy of ostensibly Spanish colonies was out of Madrid's hands. Instead, the foreign policy of the 'Empire of the Two Spains[1]' was now directed by the one thing they had in common. The King-Emperor. And he saw a great deal of potential in Africa, seeing the importance of British and Portuguese control of conventional trade routes as key to their success. If Spain wanted to reclaim glory for herself, she would have to pursue it in Africa. There was also the suggestion that Algiers could also be expanded.
Of course, other colonial powers would emerge after the Revolutionary Wars, most notably Austrasia, the Swedes to a certain extent the Four Sicilies and Russia, and arguably the Osmanids and Persians would eventually accede to that level...
Last edited:
British Political Parties Prior To 1820
Reform Whigs- The moderate reforming party of British politics, has enjoyed a domineering role due to their central role in fighting and beating the French and enjoy deep support from a broad section of interests. However, their protectionist economic policy, support for industrialisation, and perceived reduction of British prestige since the end of the Revolutionary Wars, as well as a rather bungled attempt at electoral reform poises them for defeat at the election. They are considering changing the name, but what to, they aren't sure.
Radical Whigs- The second party of reform, they are rather more radical (duh) and want to expand the electorate, open up Britain to international trade, and generally destroy the iniquities of the old system. Most popular amongst middle class voters who have lost out from Reform economic policies, and are more popular in the countryside for similar reasons. There is a move to dropping the Whig moniker entirely and devoting themselves to their new Radical label.
Tories- Emblematic of the iniquities of the old system. Are broadly supportive of the Reform Whigs economic policies but brutally oppose any prospect of voter reform. Certainly dislike the abolition of the slave trade as it takes the African from his proper place. Are popular in the countryside, and among aspects of urban America.
Old Whigs- Increasingly irrelevant, they are seen as an archaic remnant of the anti-Rockinghamite Whigs, clinging feebly to the 18th century. Many members are defecting to either the Tories or the Reform Whigs. There is a thread within the party however which believes Physiocrat ideas may be the future and they draw on Luddite tendencies in parts of the countryside. This group thinks the label 'Old Whig' alone sets them back in the public's eyes.
Reform Whigs- The moderate reforming party of British politics, has enjoyed a domineering role due to their central role in fighting and beating the French and enjoy deep support from a broad section of interests. However, their protectionist economic policy, support for industrialisation, and perceived reduction of British prestige since the end of the Revolutionary Wars, as well as a rather bungled attempt at electoral reform poises them for defeat at the election. They are considering changing the name, but what to, they aren't sure.
Radical Whigs- The second party of reform, they are rather more radical (duh) and want to expand the electorate, open up Britain to international trade, and generally destroy the iniquities of the old system. Most popular amongst middle class voters who have lost out from Reform economic policies, and are more popular in the countryside for similar reasons. There is a move to dropping the Whig moniker entirely and devoting themselves to their new Radical label.
Tories- Emblematic of the iniquities of the old system. Are broadly supportive of the Reform Whigs economic policies but brutally oppose any prospect of voter reform. Certainly dislike the abolition of the slave trade as it takes the African from his proper place. Are popular in the countryside, and among aspects of urban America.
Old Whigs- Increasingly irrelevant, they are seen as an archaic remnant of the anti-Rockinghamite Whigs, clinging feebly to the 18th century. Many members are defecting to either the Tories or the Reform Whigs. There is a thread within the party however which believes Physiocrat ideas may be the future and they draw on Luddite tendencies in parts of the countryside. This group thinks the label 'Old Whig' alone sets them back in the public's eyes.
#37: You Gotta Have Faith
One of the main casualties of the Revolutionary Wars was Catholicism. Under Hebert, the Catholic faith had been banned, rooted out and extirpated, replaced with the atheist-deist Faith of Reason. It proved popular, appealing to French peasant traditions and in many ways imitating Catholicism with its own Revolutionary Saints, special feast days, public worship and so on. Under the Biumvirate of Sieyes and Fouche, religious toleration was restored and many other cults emerged and Catholicism was relegalised.
After the Revolutionary Wars ended and the monarchy was restored, there was an attempt to stamp out the Faith of Reason. It had planted itself wherever the French had gone, but had not lain down strong roots anywhere except France herself, to a certain extent in former Belgica, and in Corsica where it was a minority religion and tolerated by the Republican government. While political Jacobins could be identified as a threat to the State and exiled to Nouvelle-Belgie, those who followed Reason could not be so easily identified as a real threat. While there were those who followed a Hebertiste line of purging all superstition in flame, most had adapted the Faith to their own purposes and in the years immediately following the Restoration, as the centralised Radical Faith was purged, it devolved to a departement level, and turned into a pastoral faith of peasants with little interest in bathing aristocrat and priest in cleansing fire.
While most of the French population returned to their Catholic roots, a substantial minority continued to follow the Faith of Reason, although it could no longer be described as a united Faith. In urban areas, there was more emphasis on the atheistic elements, whereas in the countryside it was more like a Christianity with Christian liturgy and iconography removed. Ultimately, most of the rural population still following the Faith absorbed the Theophilanthropic ideals of a deistic faith founded in morals. The concern with the natural world and its beauty also appealed to a rural peasant mind.
In Corsica, the Faith was even more closely associated with Catholic imagery. The official Head of State of the Republic was still the Virgin Mary and the Cult of the Virgin had been popular before the Revolution. Under the Jacobins, it had been no major leap of imagination to go from this to a Faith of Reason with Reason personified as a woman.
In other areas, the Faith more closely mirrored that of urban Frenchmen, with its concern with atheism, and recognition of Reason as a metaphor rather than as a literal deity. This form was popular in parts of Germany, Britain, Austrasia and Italy. It was an even smaller faith, approximate in size to one of the small Dissenting Churches and was treated similarly.
In reaction to the radical forward looking Faith of Reason, there was something of a resurgence of paganism in opposition. It drew on similar sources of dissatisfaction with the corruption associated with the established Church, but took it in the other direction, harking back to a forgotten Golden Age. This group was the smallest really, popular only among wealthy men who had the time to meet in stone circles and chant at midnight. This was linked to the Romantic movement, which was mostly composed of religious conservatives, but a small minority decided that Christianity itself was the corrupting influence that had led to the Revolution. This was a bizarre opinion but it didn't stop a Slavic pagan resurgence in Lithuania and Russia, or something or a resurgence of Nordic faith in Sweden. The strangest was in Austrasia where Christianity was fused with an attempt to resurrect Germanic and Frankish paganism in an unconvincing but noisy cult.
One of the main casualties of the Revolutionary Wars was Catholicism. Under Hebert, the Catholic faith had been banned, rooted out and extirpated, replaced with the atheist-deist Faith of Reason. It proved popular, appealing to French peasant traditions and in many ways imitating Catholicism with its own Revolutionary Saints, special feast days, public worship and so on. Under the Biumvirate of Sieyes and Fouche, religious toleration was restored and many other cults emerged and Catholicism was relegalised.
After the Revolutionary Wars ended and the monarchy was restored, there was an attempt to stamp out the Faith of Reason. It had planted itself wherever the French had gone, but had not lain down strong roots anywhere except France herself, to a certain extent in former Belgica, and in Corsica where it was a minority religion and tolerated by the Republican government. While political Jacobins could be identified as a threat to the State and exiled to Nouvelle-Belgie, those who followed Reason could not be so easily identified as a real threat. While there were those who followed a Hebertiste line of purging all superstition in flame, most had adapted the Faith to their own purposes and in the years immediately following the Restoration, as the centralised Radical Faith was purged, it devolved to a departement level, and turned into a pastoral faith of peasants with little interest in bathing aristocrat and priest in cleansing fire.
While most of the French population returned to their Catholic roots, a substantial minority continued to follow the Faith of Reason, although it could no longer be described as a united Faith. In urban areas, there was more emphasis on the atheistic elements, whereas in the countryside it was more like a Christianity with Christian liturgy and iconography removed. Ultimately, most of the rural population still following the Faith absorbed the Theophilanthropic ideals of a deistic faith founded in morals. The concern with the natural world and its beauty also appealed to a rural peasant mind.
In Corsica, the Faith was even more closely associated with Catholic imagery. The official Head of State of the Republic was still the Virgin Mary and the Cult of the Virgin had been popular before the Revolution. Under the Jacobins, it had been no major leap of imagination to go from this to a Faith of Reason with Reason personified as a woman.
In other areas, the Faith more closely mirrored that of urban Frenchmen, with its concern with atheism, and recognition of Reason as a metaphor rather than as a literal deity. This form was popular in parts of Germany, Britain, Austrasia and Italy. It was an even smaller faith, approximate in size to one of the small Dissenting Churches and was treated similarly.
In reaction to the radical forward looking Faith of Reason, there was something of a resurgence of paganism in opposition. It drew on similar sources of dissatisfaction with the corruption associated with the established Church, but took it in the other direction, harking back to a forgotten Golden Age. This group was the smallest really, popular only among wealthy men who had the time to meet in stone circles and chant at midnight. This was linked to the Romantic movement, which was mostly composed of religious conservatives, but a small minority decided that Christianity itself was the corrupting influence that had led to the Revolution. This was a bizarre opinion but it didn't stop a Slavic pagan resurgence in Lithuania and Russia, or something or a resurgence of Nordic faith in Sweden. The strangest was in Austrasia where Christianity was fused with an attempt to resurrect Germanic and Frankish paganism in an unconvincing but noisy cult.
#38: Down Under
The colonisation of Australia and to a lesser extent, the islands of New Zealand really started after the Revolutionary Wars, as Jacobins, seditious elements, rioters, and other malcontents abounded both in post-Restoration France and in Britain. Unemployment was rife, poverty was growing as rural populations moved to grimy, poorly planned cities, the industrialisation of traditional cottage industries like weaving was leaving skilled workers by the wayside leading to the Luddite backlash, and it was easier to find somewhere to dump them than build prisons to house them.
For Britain it was simple. The option of sending criminals to penal colonies in North America had been eliminated with the integration of the first new shires to Great Britain. It was no longer tolerable. Australia was perfect, as a continent where the interior was harsh enough that they could easily be observed and kept in line. The Eastern side of the continent became the Colony of New South Wales, and would be chopped up as populations increased over the following century. New Zealand would be governed as part of New South Wales until later. Ironically in the virgin land of Australia, the penal colonists had the freedom to set up the Luddite society they desired and the second generation of Australians would contribute significantly to the new thread in British politics that was emerging from the decaying Old Whigs.
For France they had Nouvelle-Belgie in Western Australia, but they also had Louisiana. While in Nouvelle-Belgie penal colonists were given a certain measure of freedom, their main punishment being the difficulty of setting up a new life, and being surrounded by criminals who may have been there for something worse than pick-pocketing or writing an inflammatory pamphlet, the colonists in Louisiana and Saint-Dominique discovered a new understanding of hardship. Since the abolition of slavery, the plantations of the French colonies had reduced in productivity. Death rates among the black poor remained high, and a new influx of workers was needed. The new penal workers became indentured workers, working on the plantations until they had served their debt to society and to the plantation owner who had purchased their debt. It wasn't chattel slavery as there was a pittance wage, but they could only buy food, clothing and rent accomodation from the plantation which was often inflated to make life more expensive and keep them indentured. The irony of the situation in which black plantation owners now employed white penal servitors in a situation akin to slavery was not lost on many writers of the time.
The French reserved penal servitude for the worst transgressors, murderers, rapists and the like, whereas smaller crimes and political crimes were punished with transportation.
The division of the continent was reasonably amicable. Most of it hadn't been explored yet, and drawing a line in the sand seemed a good starting point (neatly forgetting how well that had worked in South America between the Portuguese and Spanish. A straight line carved the continent in two basically confirming the claims that both countries had already made.
The colonisation of Australia and to a lesser extent, the islands of New Zealand really started after the Revolutionary Wars, as Jacobins, seditious elements, rioters, and other malcontents abounded both in post-Restoration France and in Britain. Unemployment was rife, poverty was growing as rural populations moved to grimy, poorly planned cities, the industrialisation of traditional cottage industries like weaving was leaving skilled workers by the wayside leading to the Luddite backlash, and it was easier to find somewhere to dump them than build prisons to house them.
For Britain it was simple. The option of sending criminals to penal colonies in North America had been eliminated with the integration of the first new shires to Great Britain. It was no longer tolerable. Australia was perfect, as a continent where the interior was harsh enough that they could easily be observed and kept in line. The Eastern side of the continent became the Colony of New South Wales, and would be chopped up as populations increased over the following century. New Zealand would be governed as part of New South Wales until later. Ironically in the virgin land of Australia, the penal colonists had the freedom to set up the Luddite society they desired and the second generation of Australians would contribute significantly to the new thread in British politics that was emerging from the decaying Old Whigs.
For France they had Nouvelle-Belgie in Western Australia, but they also had Louisiana. While in Nouvelle-Belgie penal colonists were given a certain measure of freedom, their main punishment being the difficulty of setting up a new life, and being surrounded by criminals who may have been there for something worse than pick-pocketing or writing an inflammatory pamphlet, the colonists in Louisiana and Saint-Dominique discovered a new understanding of hardship. Since the abolition of slavery, the plantations of the French colonies had reduced in productivity. Death rates among the black poor remained high, and a new influx of workers was needed. The new penal workers became indentured workers, working on the plantations until they had served their debt to society and to the plantation owner who had purchased their debt. It wasn't chattel slavery as there was a pittance wage, but they could only buy food, clothing and rent accomodation from the plantation which was often inflated to make life more expensive and keep them indentured. The irony of the situation in which black plantation owners now employed white penal servitors in a situation akin to slavery was not lost on many writers of the time.
The French reserved penal servitude for the worst transgressors, murderers, rapists and the like, whereas smaller crimes and political crimes were punished with transportation.
The division of the continent was reasonably amicable. Most of it hadn't been explored yet, and drawing a line in the sand seemed a good starting point (neatly forgetting how well that had worked in South America between the Portuguese and Spanish. A straight line carved the continent in two basically confirming the claims that both countries had already made.
Last edited:
#39: Love Is The Opiate
Qing China had begun its slide into decline into the Qianlong Emperor, and while the Empire had grown to its great height, corruption was endemic, finances were riddled with holes, the extent of Chinese influence beyond her borders was piteous, she was isolated and rebellions were breaking out by Ming restorationists.
But over the period of the Revolutionary Wars in Europe, and in the years immediately following, China enjoyed something of a renewal. Under the harsh Qianlong and Jiaqing, the European advances were turned back, Christianity persecuted, foreign trade reduced and trade domination reversed, enriching the coffers of the Empire. Notably, the British East India Company's abolition during the Revolutionary Wars substantially halted the advance of British trade in the region, as Asian trade was subordinated to the Atlantic trade. British control of the most substantial Asian colonies during the Revolutionary Wars led to a general decline in European trade and after the Revolutionary Wars, the Dutch, Portuguese and Spanish all had substantially reduced roles in Chinese affairs.
In France however, China represented an enormous opportunity. While the Caribbean colonies had in fact grown, and Louisiana had been restored and was stronger than ever, government was carried out very much by the locals, and since slavery had been abolished, profits had been reduced and Africa was no longer as attractive as it had once been. British monopolies and protected markets didn't help. China on the other hand had been virtually purged of competitors with only the Portuguese as a substantial challenger.
The main problem for France when it came to China was what to trade. The French wanted commodities from China, but there was little that France could offer that the Chinese wanted other than silver which would not enrich France. Until innovative French merchants (some would say amoral and greedy) created a market. In opium. By selling opium in China, they could circumvent demand for silver in China and turn a substantial profit. The French came to dominate European trade, and through opium created a stable, reliable market for themselves. Opium was grown alongside cotton in Louisiana and became an effective cash-crop. Rather sinisterly, this was also the period where opium began to be used to subdue penal servitors and spread to slave-owning plantations as a form of 'soft control'.
Silver was now flowing out of China rather than in, financing the grandeur of Restoration Era France, and resecuring the country's position as one of the Great Powers of Europe. The China trade also encouraged the growth of the Nouvelle-Belgie colony as a useful site for trade relatively near the Asian continent. From here, the French began competing in the East Indies trade, something which reignited the vigour of the Dutch and their North German partners.
The Chinese eventually grew tired of the situation as French Catholic priests began to infiltrate the country (along with a few Reason parsons), opium addiction became a serious problem across a swathe of southern China, and the economy faltered as silver was sucked out. By the 1830s, tension was taut between the Chinese government and French traders and missionaries. War was only just around the corner...
Qing China had begun its slide into decline into the Qianlong Emperor, and while the Empire had grown to its great height, corruption was endemic, finances were riddled with holes, the extent of Chinese influence beyond her borders was piteous, she was isolated and rebellions were breaking out by Ming restorationists.
But over the period of the Revolutionary Wars in Europe, and in the years immediately following, China enjoyed something of a renewal. Under the harsh Qianlong and Jiaqing, the European advances were turned back, Christianity persecuted, foreign trade reduced and trade domination reversed, enriching the coffers of the Empire. Notably, the British East India Company's abolition during the Revolutionary Wars substantially halted the advance of British trade in the region, as Asian trade was subordinated to the Atlantic trade. British control of the most substantial Asian colonies during the Revolutionary Wars led to a general decline in European trade and after the Revolutionary Wars, the Dutch, Portuguese and Spanish all had substantially reduced roles in Chinese affairs.
In France however, China represented an enormous opportunity. While the Caribbean colonies had in fact grown, and Louisiana had been restored and was stronger than ever, government was carried out very much by the locals, and since slavery had been abolished, profits had been reduced and Africa was no longer as attractive as it had once been. British monopolies and protected markets didn't help. China on the other hand had been virtually purged of competitors with only the Portuguese as a substantial challenger.
The main problem for France when it came to China was what to trade. The French wanted commodities from China, but there was little that France could offer that the Chinese wanted other than silver which would not enrich France. Until innovative French merchants (some would say amoral and greedy) created a market. In opium. By selling opium in China, they could circumvent demand for silver in China and turn a substantial profit. The French came to dominate European trade, and through opium created a stable, reliable market for themselves. Opium was grown alongside cotton in Louisiana and became an effective cash-crop. Rather sinisterly, this was also the period where opium began to be used to subdue penal servitors and spread to slave-owning plantations as a form of 'soft control'.
Silver was now flowing out of China rather than in, financing the grandeur of Restoration Era France, and resecuring the country's position as one of the Great Powers of Europe. The China trade also encouraged the growth of the Nouvelle-Belgie colony as a useful site for trade relatively near the Asian continent. From here, the French began competing in the East Indies trade, something which reignited the vigour of the Dutch and their North German partners.
The Chinese eventually grew tired of the situation as French Catholic priests began to infiltrate the country (along with a few Reason parsons), opium addiction became a serious problem across a swathe of southern China, and the economy faltered as silver was sucked out. By the 1830s, tension was taut between the Chinese government and French traders and missionaries. War was only just around the corner...
#40: Whats The Maratha With You?
Tensions had been building between Britain and the Marathas ever since the last war. The Marathas had become even more determined to force the British from the subcontinent, not fully realising how extraneous India was becoming to the more settler-oriented, Atlantic empire. What they did know was that since the abolition of the East India Company, defence and administration had become confused and stagnant. British administrators in the area continued to operate independently of London, and the Marathas had failed to properly modernised.
As was to be expected, the Marathas suffered loss after loss. However, what wasn't expected was for Portugal to intervene on the British side. The Marathas collapsed like a castle of cards, and the realm divided into two procectorates. The Pindari Marathas came under British protection, and they agreed that the Peshwa would come under Portuguese protection. The Maratha Confederacy, the last best hope of a united Hindu India was dead.
The upshot of this was enormous military spending, so very shortly after the end of the Revolutionary Wars, spending which Britain couldn't really afford. Not only that but it actually cost more in the long run as other Indian states worked to avoid the mistakes the Marathas had made, and Portugal made major inroads into the continent, challenging British supremacy. The British also received the poorest parts of the Maratha realm, the Pindaris having collapsed through desertification. Their allies in Hyderabad became an unofficial enforcer in the area, something they would come to rue in the long-run as it strengthened the perception that Britain was Muslim friendly and hostile to Hindus.
The removal of Maratha overlordship from northern India also further destabilised the situation. The Sikh empire continued to move from strength to strength, occupying the rump Mughal empire and putting Delhi under their protection. The Mughal Emperors were still held in high regard, and it lent legitimacy to Sikh aims.
Tensions had been building between Britain and the Marathas ever since the last war. The Marathas had become even more determined to force the British from the subcontinent, not fully realising how extraneous India was becoming to the more settler-oriented, Atlantic empire. What they did know was that since the abolition of the East India Company, defence and administration had become confused and stagnant. British administrators in the area continued to operate independently of London, and the Marathas had failed to properly modernised.
As was to be expected, the Marathas suffered loss after loss. However, what wasn't expected was for Portugal to intervene on the British side. The Marathas collapsed like a castle of cards, and the realm divided into two procectorates. The Pindari Marathas came under British protection, and they agreed that the Peshwa would come under Portuguese protection. The Maratha Confederacy, the last best hope of a united Hindu India was dead.
The upshot of this was enormous military spending, so very shortly after the end of the Revolutionary Wars, spending which Britain couldn't really afford. Not only that but it actually cost more in the long run as other Indian states worked to avoid the mistakes the Marathas had made, and Portugal made major inroads into the continent, challenging British supremacy. The British also received the poorest parts of the Maratha realm, the Pindaris having collapsed through desertification. Their allies in Hyderabad became an unofficial enforcer in the area, something they would come to rue in the long-run as it strengthened the perception that Britain was Muslim friendly and hostile to Hindus.
The removal of Maratha overlordship from northern India also further destabilised the situation. The Sikh empire continued to move from strength to strength, occupying the rump Mughal empire and putting Delhi under their protection. The Mughal Emperors were still held in high regard, and it lent legitimacy to Sikh aims.
#41: The King Is Dead...
George III had always struggled with his health, and as he grew old, the stresses of his work only seemed to grow. The demands of Parliament grew louder, France descended into Revolution, Europe was dragged into long, expensive bloody wars. It was a miracle he didn't go mad during the Revolutionary Wars. But in 1816, very shortly after the King Louis XVIII who had dwelt in London throughout the war was restored as King of the French (not of France) in Paris, George III slipped into madness. It has now been diagnosed as porphyria, and it is a miracle he did not succumb sooner.
Unfortunately for the King, mental disorders were not well understood in those days. The stresses of complex and incompetent procedures took their toll on the King's life, his mental problems worsened by acute physical ailments. Alexander Hamilton was able to force through many of his reforms in part due to the King's incoherency. There were some who wanted to create a Regency to rule in the ill king's stead but the complexity of such an Act meant that discussions got overtaken by events.
The king passed away in his sleep in 1818, and was succeeded by the Prince of Wales, now crowned as George IV. The coronation was preceded by something of an aura of dread. The new king had a reputation for decadence, and he had a scandalously bad relationship with his wife, Caroline of Brunswick. Also, the coronation would make him King of Hanover, a more complex position within the North German Confederacy than the Electorate within the Holy Roman Empire had been. The coronation would also be attended by a great deal of American Britons, and there was an expectation that George IV would repeat the act of his father by investing suitable American Britons as peers and knights, which could lead to problems.
There was also a sort of optimism. The mental collapse of George III had depressed and somewhat embarassed the British public. The ascent of at least vaguely mentally capable king led to a flourishing of the British mood. And the king's daughter, Princess Charlotte, was seen as the Great Hope of Britannia. Her progressive and Enlightened outlook on the world was seen as possibly a true heir to Queen Elizabeth.
George III had always struggled with his health, and as he grew old, the stresses of his work only seemed to grow. The demands of Parliament grew louder, France descended into Revolution, Europe was dragged into long, expensive bloody wars. It was a miracle he didn't go mad during the Revolutionary Wars. But in 1816, very shortly after the King Louis XVIII who had dwelt in London throughout the war was restored as King of the French (not of France) in Paris, George III slipped into madness. It has now been diagnosed as porphyria, and it is a miracle he did not succumb sooner.
Unfortunately for the King, mental disorders were not well understood in those days. The stresses of complex and incompetent procedures took their toll on the King's life, his mental problems worsened by acute physical ailments. Alexander Hamilton was able to force through many of his reforms in part due to the King's incoherency. There were some who wanted to create a Regency to rule in the ill king's stead but the complexity of such an Act meant that discussions got overtaken by events.
The king passed away in his sleep in 1818, and was succeeded by the Prince of Wales, now crowned as George IV. The coronation was preceded by something of an aura of dread. The new king had a reputation for decadence, and he had a scandalously bad relationship with his wife, Caroline of Brunswick. Also, the coronation would make him King of Hanover, a more complex position within the North German Confederacy than the Electorate within the Holy Roman Empire had been. The coronation would also be attended by a great deal of American Britons, and there was an expectation that George IV would repeat the act of his father by investing suitable American Britons as peers and knights, which could lead to problems.
There was also a sort of optimism. The mental collapse of George III had depressed and somewhat embarassed the British public. The ascent of at least vaguely mentally capable king led to a flourishing of the British mood. And the king's daughter, Princess Charlotte, was seen as the Great Hope of Britannia. Her progressive and Enlightened outlook on the world was seen as possibly a true heir to Queen Elizabeth.
Thanks for the update. It's interesting to see the way things are diverging. I especially like the Faith of Reason becoming a sort of second Reformation, complete with High Church elements and 'purer' elements (those recognising that Reason is a metaphorical figure), the development of Austrasia/Belgium as an increasingly odd place (semi-pagan revivalist, semi-Christian, romanticist colonial empire?) and the change of power in East Asia. Also, poor George III; it would have been better if he'd been able to have more dignity.
Thanks.
I wanted to have a more long-lived Cult of Reason and by splitting it up into different forms, and absorbing more Christian elements it could survive.
Austrasia (formerly Belgium in its republican form) is majority Christian, but the tiny pagan revivalist minority do have a disproportional impact on the country's art, music, literature etc. which evokes pagan traditions or even the gods in some ways. Its not too different to OTL, but the paintings depicting Greek or Germanic gods are drawn to actually evoke something of a lost pre-Christian Golden Age.
And George III. It is very sad about him, but his madness was postponed in this world due to the retention of the American colonies, a generally better British late 18th century and other factors. Because his descent is swifter and more sudden, the less effective cures are inflicted on him when he is far more physically delicate meaning we only have a Regency of two years, and George III dies two years earlier than in OTL.
#42: Austrian Death Machine
The events of the Revolutionary Wars had secured Austria as one of the real Great Powers of Europe, with few challengers who could truly match her one on one. Not to mention that the wider Hapsburg dynasty had no laid down roots from Italy to Greece and everything in between. While the Greeks under the Hapsburg-Romanovs were more independent and were considering changing the name of their house to remodel themselves as native Greeks, the Austrians had either put a relative on the throne or intermarried into the royal family of every kingdom in the Adriatic, and had bound them all together in a Hapsburg Family Compact.
The Empire of Austria was undergoing some dramatic reforms, altering the country from a wide array of personal possessions of the Archduke of Austria into a single cohesive Empire. In order to satisfy the Magyars, a federal system was adopted in which the Empire was divided into small provinces each with a Diet, partially elected, and an overall Imperial Diet, later called the Reichstag which had members appointed from the provincial Diets, as well as hereditary members and a few elected members.
All of this was to facilitate centralisation of concentration of traditional feudal powers into the hands of the Emperor, turning him into a true absolute monarch or Enlightened Despot. Mirroring these policies of political reform were reforms to the military. The Austrian army became more regimented, disciplined and modernised but the Military Frontier was abolished. A limited form of national service was imposed intended to encourage a sense of Austrian nationalism as opposed to German, Hungarian or any other nationalism.
What the Austrians realised was that the French had opened the Pandora’s box of republicanism and nationalism, and that could not be simply ignored. Better to adapt and take advantage of the changes and make themselves stronger, than look blindly to the past and decay. This lesson was learned by most of Europe, though the Austrasians, Sicilians, Swedes and Russians remained rather backward and hostile to anything that smacked of ‘French innovation’.
The most emblematic of the reforms made in Austria was the Austrian Standard Code, a kind of absolutist monarchist version of the Declaration of the Rights of Man, making clear the rights and obligations afforded to the subject-citizen, and demanding certain standards of the legislatures of the Empire. It also made the supremacy of the Emperor clear, and set out a new standard of Imperial governance. The Emperor was not a king who ruled merely by Divine Right, he ruled by the sacred acclamation of the State.
It also removed the explicitly Catholic nature of the State. While cardinals and bishops remained important in the functioning of the state, having seats in diets and monks forming an important part of the bureaucracy, the functioning and purpose of the state was put in the service of the Emperor and of the 'nation-empire' of Austria. This caused some controversy in Rome, but since the rise of the Four Sicilies, the rulings of the Pope were considered increasingly notional and the various Catholic countries were taking a Jansenist path.
The events of the Revolutionary Wars had secured Austria as one of the real Great Powers of Europe, with few challengers who could truly match her one on one. Not to mention that the wider Hapsburg dynasty had no laid down roots from Italy to Greece and everything in between. While the Greeks under the Hapsburg-Romanovs were more independent and were considering changing the name of their house to remodel themselves as native Greeks, the Austrians had either put a relative on the throne or intermarried into the royal family of every kingdom in the Adriatic, and had bound them all together in a Hapsburg Family Compact.
The Empire of Austria was undergoing some dramatic reforms, altering the country from a wide array of personal possessions of the Archduke of Austria into a single cohesive Empire. In order to satisfy the Magyars, a federal system was adopted in which the Empire was divided into small provinces each with a Diet, partially elected, and an overall Imperial Diet, later called the Reichstag which had members appointed from the provincial Diets, as well as hereditary members and a few elected members.
All of this was to facilitate centralisation of concentration of traditional feudal powers into the hands of the Emperor, turning him into a true absolute monarch or Enlightened Despot. Mirroring these policies of political reform were reforms to the military. The Austrian army became more regimented, disciplined and modernised but the Military Frontier was abolished. A limited form of national service was imposed intended to encourage a sense of Austrian nationalism as opposed to German, Hungarian or any other nationalism.
What the Austrians realised was that the French had opened the Pandora’s box of republicanism and nationalism, and that could not be simply ignored. Better to adapt and take advantage of the changes and make themselves stronger, than look blindly to the past and decay. This lesson was learned by most of Europe, though the Austrasians, Sicilians, Swedes and Russians remained rather backward and hostile to anything that smacked of ‘French innovation’.
The most emblematic of the reforms made in Austria was the Austrian Standard Code, a kind of absolutist monarchist version of the Declaration of the Rights of Man, making clear the rights and obligations afforded to the subject-citizen, and demanding certain standards of the legislatures of the Empire. It also made the supremacy of the Emperor clear, and set out a new standard of Imperial governance. The Emperor was not a king who ruled merely by Divine Right, he ruled by the sacred acclamation of the State.
It also removed the explicitly Catholic nature of the State. While cardinals and bishops remained important in the functioning of the state, having seats in diets and monks forming an important part of the bureaucracy, the functioning and purpose of the state was put in the service of the Emperor and of the 'nation-empire' of Austria. This caused some controversy in Rome, but since the rise of the Four Sicilies, the rulings of the Pope were considered increasingly notional and the various Catholic countries were taking a Jansenist path.
#43: Serb-U-Like
Ever since the collapse of the Neo-Byzantine Empire, the Serbs had languished under the so-called Janissary Sultanate, basically a military dictatorship which pledged nominal fealty to the Ottoman (now Osmanid) Empire. But over the course of the Revolutionary Wars as Selim and then Mahmud had radically reformed the Caliphate, with the help of the Buonapartes, the Janissaries felt isolated and that the Osmanids did not properly align with their interests.
This isolation bred paranoia, and paranoia bred cruelty. Any sign of rebellion amongst the Serbs led to brutal crackdowns. And the tighter they clenched their fist of iron, more Serbs became radicalised and fled over the borders, making hit and run raids at the fringes of the Sultanate. The Austrians and Russians were paying a lot of interest. The recapture of Constantinople by the Osmanids and the insult of renaming it Islambol meant that the two countries had lost face. They could not claim to have truly driven the Turk from Europe. If they could crush the Janissaries and build a Christian kingdom of Serbia in its place, they could reclaim some of the lost face.
When the rebellion took place, the Janissaries were overthrown with relative ease. They had no ability to gain aid, being entirely surrounded by hostile powers, and the Osmanids had no interest in helping such a dangerous throwback. The rebels also received significant support from various countries. But the point of ultimate failure was when the Greeks invaded. Under Emmanuel, the son of the Co-Imperators of Constantine and Caroline, the Greeks had significantly reformed and asserted their independence from either Vienna or Moscow. Emmanuel had even renamed his house, from Hapsburg-Romanov, to Istros, the old Greek name for the Danube, the northern border of the old Greek Empire and north of which came both of his parents. It neatly united his origins with the future of Greece.
The Austrians and Russians were outraged. The Greeks could not stand before a joint invasion, but that would cost their prestige even more. It would also cost them a great symbol of the successes of their respective reforms. The two powers also didn't along well enough for either to agree who should sit the throne of Serbia. They agreed to let the Greeks be.
Emmanuel put his younger brother, Alexios, upon the throne of Serbia as King Alexander I of Serbia. Similarly to Greece, the Catholic faith was tolerated in a largely Orthodox country. Muslims on the other hand were marginalised. While Greece was too weak to truly dominate Serbia, Alexander did nominally recognise the suzerainty of his brother.
Ever since the collapse of the Neo-Byzantine Empire, the Serbs had languished under the so-called Janissary Sultanate, basically a military dictatorship which pledged nominal fealty to the Ottoman (now Osmanid) Empire. But over the course of the Revolutionary Wars as Selim and then Mahmud had radically reformed the Caliphate, with the help of the Buonapartes, the Janissaries felt isolated and that the Osmanids did not properly align with their interests.
This isolation bred paranoia, and paranoia bred cruelty. Any sign of rebellion amongst the Serbs led to brutal crackdowns. And the tighter they clenched their fist of iron, more Serbs became radicalised and fled over the borders, making hit and run raids at the fringes of the Sultanate. The Austrians and Russians were paying a lot of interest. The recapture of Constantinople by the Osmanids and the insult of renaming it Islambol meant that the two countries had lost face. They could not claim to have truly driven the Turk from Europe. If they could crush the Janissaries and build a Christian kingdom of Serbia in its place, they could reclaim some of the lost face.
When the rebellion took place, the Janissaries were overthrown with relative ease. They had no ability to gain aid, being entirely surrounded by hostile powers, and the Osmanids had no interest in helping such a dangerous throwback. The rebels also received significant support from various countries. But the point of ultimate failure was when the Greeks invaded. Under Emmanuel, the son of the Co-Imperators of Constantine and Caroline, the Greeks had significantly reformed and asserted their independence from either Vienna or Moscow. Emmanuel had even renamed his house, from Hapsburg-Romanov, to Istros, the old Greek name for the Danube, the northern border of the old Greek Empire and north of which came both of his parents. It neatly united his origins with the future of Greece.
The Austrians and Russians were outraged. The Greeks could not stand before a joint invasion, but that would cost their prestige even more. It would also cost them a great symbol of the successes of their respective reforms. The two powers also didn't along well enough for either to agree who should sit the throne of Serbia. They agreed to let the Greeks be.
Emmanuel put his younger brother, Alexios, upon the throne of Serbia as King Alexander I of Serbia. Similarly to Greece, the Catholic faith was tolerated in a largely Orthodox country. Muslims on the other hand were marginalised. While Greece was too weak to truly dominate Serbia, Alexander did nominally recognise the suzerainty of his brother.
There's something really wonderful about a TL with a caliphate run by Ali son of Napoleon, a resurgent-then-defeated-then-resurgent-again Byzantine/Greek Empire, a strongly nationalist and pro-enlightenment Habsburg empire, a semi-pagan revivalist Belgium and a bizarre Luddite Australia. I don't have anything more to say than that, it's just I love it.
#44: Lashback Is A Dash Back
While Britain, Austria and some other states in Europe embraced the ideals of the Enlightenment, albeit for their own reasons, others did not. Instead, they looked toward the Russian model of a new or rather a modernised old form of government. Romantic ideas were based around an aversion to Enlightenment ideals of rationality, democracy, centralised totalitarianism, hatred of superstition, anti-traditionalism, and deism. Instead, they turned these ideas on their head, building an ideology couched in traditional religion, reverance for authority and history, local governance, and preferance for powerful monarchs. While Enlightened Despotism shares many aspects with this, they were still seen as overtly founded on individual reason, and too optimistic about human nature. The British form of Parliamentary Enlightenment was pessimistic about human nature and didn't necessarily hold that every individual's opinion was welcome. But there was a certain atmosphere of deism, anti-traditionalism, free speech, and belief that power ought to be in the hands of elected officials not the monarchy.
Where these ideas caught on most was in the German states, and especially in North Germany and Austrasia. The various states of Germany, aside from Austria made a pact to pursue and crush liberals and nationalists within their borders, and regulate their borders, aiding others. It was an alliance made by monarchs, who wanted to remain monarchs of their domain. At the time, the idea of a United Germany was still repugnant even in North Germany. The North German Confederation essentially existed as an economic and military alliance nothing more. The presence of several major military powers, as well as Britain's interests via Hanover meant that North German government remained localised and weak.
The Baltics became the stronghold of political Romanticism, with the exception of Poland. Poland remained a moderate Enlightened monarchy in the British style but with an elective monarchy. There was a natural desire to avoid war in Europe after the long agony of the Revolutionary Wars, but tensions were emerging, both within and without the states of Europe. These wouldn't explode until late, but for now an uneasy peace prevailed.
The tensions between Russia and Austria over the Balkans exemplified the division between Enlightenment and Romantic states. The Greeks and the Osmanids as secondary players were neutrals in growing war of ideas that played out in lieu of actual conflict. The Greeks represented a syncretism of Romantic and Enlightenment ideas, whereas the Osmanids represented a different ideal of absolutist monarchy but with a degree of representative monarchy and couched as a theocracy.
While Britain, Austria and some other states in Europe embraced the ideals of the Enlightenment, albeit for their own reasons, others did not. Instead, they looked toward the Russian model of a new or rather a modernised old form of government. Romantic ideas were based around an aversion to Enlightenment ideals of rationality, democracy, centralised totalitarianism, hatred of superstition, anti-traditionalism, and deism. Instead, they turned these ideas on their head, building an ideology couched in traditional religion, reverance for authority and history, local governance, and preferance for powerful monarchs. While Enlightened Despotism shares many aspects with this, they were still seen as overtly founded on individual reason, and too optimistic about human nature. The British form of Parliamentary Enlightenment was pessimistic about human nature and didn't necessarily hold that every individual's opinion was welcome. But there was a certain atmosphere of deism, anti-traditionalism, free speech, and belief that power ought to be in the hands of elected officials not the monarchy.
Where these ideas caught on most was in the German states, and especially in North Germany and Austrasia. The various states of Germany, aside from Austria made a pact to pursue and crush liberals and nationalists within their borders, and regulate their borders, aiding others. It was an alliance made by monarchs, who wanted to remain monarchs of their domain. At the time, the idea of a United Germany was still repugnant even in North Germany. The North German Confederation essentially existed as an economic and military alliance nothing more. The presence of several major military powers, as well as Britain's interests via Hanover meant that North German government remained localised and weak.
The Baltics became the stronghold of political Romanticism, with the exception of Poland. Poland remained a moderate Enlightened monarchy in the British style but with an elective monarchy. There was a natural desire to avoid war in Europe after the long agony of the Revolutionary Wars, but tensions were emerging, both within and without the states of Europe. These wouldn't explode until late, but for now an uneasy peace prevailed.
The tensions between Russia and Austria over the Balkans exemplified the division between Enlightenment and Romantic states. The Greeks and the Osmanids as secondary players were neutrals in growing war of ideas that played out in lieu of actual conflict. The Greeks represented a syncretism of Romantic and Enlightenment ideas, whereas the Osmanids represented a different ideal of absolutist monarchy but with a degree of representative monarchy and couched as a theocracy.
#45: The Revolution Will Be Industrialised
One of the subtler impacts of the Enlightenment, and thence the French Revolutionary Wars, was the Industrial Revolution. With Britain embracing Parliamentary Enlightenment, there was a contingent of support for industrialisation. This had been occurring before the Revolutionary Wars but was merely accelerated by the pressures of conflict. At the height of the wars, Britain had administered both the French and Dutch colonial empires. Her navy was placed under enormous pressure, so a rapid expansion of the Navy was required. This led to the growth of her port cities, and thence to an increased rate of urbanisation as poor rural workers flocked to coastal cities hungry for builders, dock-workers, sailors, and workers in the growing factories which fed on the produce that Empire brought to her shores.
On the back of this, opportunistic, ruthless, clever men could become enormously rich. This new class of un-aristocratic, ambitious, wealthy individuals sought more money outside the grubby world of dockwork. They bought plantations in North America and the Caribbean, they invested in the extractive ventures in West Africa. They excavated mines all of the British Isles. The hunger for wealth drove on innovation and lack of trade with a Europe dominated by Revolutionary France, spurred on industrial self-sufficiency.
Immediately after the war there was an enormous economic crisis. Soldiers came home without a job to go to. The return of the French and Dutch colonies meant a big swathe of the Navy and the Merchant Marine was now essentially useless. The debt had also grown enormously during the war. Hamilton's reforms reversed much of the decline and reversed the fate of a party tarred with the brush of increasing the debt to a colossal margin. However it also left Britain isolated from the continent, focussed on trade around the Atlantic with her colonies in North America and West Africa.
In the rest of Europe, it was more slow to adapt to the changes starting in Britain. The vast Hapsburg domains could see the value in more speed, to connect a sprawling continental empire and were in fact quicker to adopt steam transport (though some would say their haste in doing so would cost them in the long run). North Germany, while moving in a Romantic direction politically and socially, was influenced enough by Britain to also take advantage of the new technologies that were arising.
The French, Austrasians and Russians remained suspiscious largely due to their own concerns of purity, or fear of revolutionary thought even in such a hard-nosed form as in the Industrial Revolution. The Russians thought the steely, steaming new age distinctly un-Russian, the Austrasians feared the new technology was a blasphemous imitation of God, and the French simply wanted to avoid anything revolutionary. But the demands of returning to their former greatness caused a similar pressure to that which had existed in Britain and intentionally or not produced a situation in which France was thrown into the furnace of industrialism.
In Britain and other areas where industrialism was really taking off, a new opposition emerged. As textiles and other industries became mechanised, it became less labour intensive, it caused the livelihood of many textile workers and others to be lost. The artisan skills that were once extremely valuable were now rendered obsolete. Angry workers lashed back, harking back to a pre-industrial era of egality and nobility. In Britain these protestors became known as Luddites. They merged some of their anti-industrial ideas with the Amish and Mennonite communities which lived in North America and set up isolated rural communes, which were grounded in vague religiosity (as opposed to the stricter and very clear faith of the Amish). In time British Luddites would become a distinct community, their faith evolving into something like the Theophilanthropic ideas first propagated in France.
In Europe however, Luddites became far more problematic. In the more absolutist structures, they became violent more quickly and posed a not insignificant threat to the post-Revolutionary peace. North Germany especially had problems putting down Luddites, as they crossed borders and caused ructions over jurisdiction. In the Romantic states, the Luddites were used as artisan support for the reactionary policies of the governments. Austrasia was particularly deft at this, securing its post-war status quo by promising every Austrasian would be safe from the 'unholy ravages of the mechanical menace'.
One of the subtler impacts of the Enlightenment, and thence the French Revolutionary Wars, was the Industrial Revolution. With Britain embracing Parliamentary Enlightenment, there was a contingent of support for industrialisation. This had been occurring before the Revolutionary Wars but was merely accelerated by the pressures of conflict. At the height of the wars, Britain had administered both the French and Dutch colonial empires. Her navy was placed under enormous pressure, so a rapid expansion of the Navy was required. This led to the growth of her port cities, and thence to an increased rate of urbanisation as poor rural workers flocked to coastal cities hungry for builders, dock-workers, sailors, and workers in the growing factories which fed on the produce that Empire brought to her shores.
On the back of this, opportunistic, ruthless, clever men could become enormously rich. This new class of un-aristocratic, ambitious, wealthy individuals sought more money outside the grubby world of dockwork. They bought plantations in North America and the Caribbean, they invested in the extractive ventures in West Africa. They excavated mines all of the British Isles. The hunger for wealth drove on innovation and lack of trade with a Europe dominated by Revolutionary France, spurred on industrial self-sufficiency.
Immediately after the war there was an enormous economic crisis. Soldiers came home without a job to go to. The return of the French and Dutch colonies meant a big swathe of the Navy and the Merchant Marine was now essentially useless. The debt had also grown enormously during the war. Hamilton's reforms reversed much of the decline and reversed the fate of a party tarred with the brush of increasing the debt to a colossal margin. However it also left Britain isolated from the continent, focussed on trade around the Atlantic with her colonies in North America and West Africa.
In the rest of Europe, it was more slow to adapt to the changes starting in Britain. The vast Hapsburg domains could see the value in more speed, to connect a sprawling continental empire and were in fact quicker to adopt steam transport (though some would say their haste in doing so would cost them in the long run). North Germany, while moving in a Romantic direction politically and socially, was influenced enough by Britain to also take advantage of the new technologies that were arising.
The French, Austrasians and Russians remained suspiscious largely due to their own concerns of purity, or fear of revolutionary thought even in such a hard-nosed form as in the Industrial Revolution. The Russians thought the steely, steaming new age distinctly un-Russian, the Austrasians feared the new technology was a blasphemous imitation of God, and the French simply wanted to avoid anything revolutionary. But the demands of returning to their former greatness caused a similar pressure to that which had existed in Britain and intentionally or not produced a situation in which France was thrown into the furnace of industrialism.
In Britain and other areas where industrialism was really taking off, a new opposition emerged. As textiles and other industries became mechanised, it became less labour intensive, it caused the livelihood of many textile workers and others to be lost. The artisan skills that were once extremely valuable were now rendered obsolete. Angry workers lashed back, harking back to a pre-industrial era of egality and nobility. In Britain these protestors became known as Luddites. They merged some of their anti-industrial ideas with the Amish and Mennonite communities which lived in North America and set up isolated rural communes, which were grounded in vague religiosity (as opposed to the stricter and very clear faith of the Amish). In time British Luddites would become a distinct community, their faith evolving into something like the Theophilanthropic ideas first propagated in France.
In Europe however, Luddites became far more problematic. In the more absolutist structures, they became violent more quickly and posed a not insignificant threat to the post-Revolutionary peace. North Germany especially had problems putting down Luddites, as they crossed borders and caused ructions over jurisdiction. In the Romantic states, the Luddites were used as artisan support for the reactionary policies of the governments. Austrasia was particularly deft at this, securing its post-war status quo by promising every Austrasian would be safe from the 'unholy ravages of the mechanical menace'.
#46: Mamma Mia
Sweden had been a great power in the 17th century and under Gustavus Adolphus had taken on all comers, and if he had lived may have created a great Northern European empire. As it was, he died, and Sweden's time passed. By the end of the 18th century, she was relatively ignored. But not for much longer.
During the Revolutionary Wars, Finland had been annexed to Sweden. Gustav IV saw himself as a reincarnation of his illustrious ancestor, and though he was nowhere near the equal of the great former king, he had an advantage in years. He also had less argument from the direction of his Estates.
In the 1820s, two huge deals were negotiated, with the Russians and the Swedes respectively. With Russia, they traded Courland in return for all of Karelia. To both sides it may have seemed an odd trade off, but it carried symbolic importance. For Sweden, it ended the threat of the Finnish frontier and reduced the cost of maintaining a large navy to defend Courland. For Russia, it did away with a distracting frontier province, in return for a valuable bulwark on the Baltic that let them secure Lithuania as a vassal. The second deal was the Norway Purchase. Sweden trades Swedish Pomerania to Denmark in return for Norway which was undergoing one of its phases of sporadic nationalism.
Gustav IV had attained one of his most important aims. He had turned Sweden from an empire of scattered realms into a contiguous one, more easily united. He had also obtained an easy outlet onto the Atlantic, for him to pursue his vision. For his vision of a Swedish Empire was not the Baltic Lake, the Swede dominated Holy Roman Empire of Gustavus Adolphus. He recognised that Sweden had declined since those heady days and instead sought an empire overseas.
Two colonies were set up by Gustav IV, one in Africa and one in the East Indies. On the island of Borneo, there was a port belonging to the Kingdom of Hanover but in practice administered by the Netherlands and the North Germans. The expense of running the empire had increased in recent years and the purchase of British ports had proved profitable but had rendered some outposts obsolete. They agreed to sell the port to Sweden for a good price. The port was renamed Gustavshaven and became the capitol of the Swedish East Indies. The second colony was in East Africa, on the island of Madagascar. They had to compete with the French and others, but the Swedish toehold proved profitable.
At the time, Gustav's colonies were decried as expensive vanity projects. But as his reign continued and profits began to pour in, the rulers of Sweden began to pay more interest...
Sweden had been a great power in the 17th century and under Gustavus Adolphus had taken on all comers, and if he had lived may have created a great Northern European empire. As it was, he died, and Sweden's time passed. By the end of the 18th century, she was relatively ignored. But not for much longer.
During the Revolutionary Wars, Finland had been annexed to Sweden. Gustav IV saw himself as a reincarnation of his illustrious ancestor, and though he was nowhere near the equal of the great former king, he had an advantage in years. He also had less argument from the direction of his Estates.
In the 1820s, two huge deals were negotiated, with the Russians and the Swedes respectively. With Russia, they traded Courland in return for all of Karelia. To both sides it may have seemed an odd trade off, but it carried symbolic importance. For Sweden, it ended the threat of the Finnish frontier and reduced the cost of maintaining a large navy to defend Courland. For Russia, it did away with a distracting frontier province, in return for a valuable bulwark on the Baltic that let them secure Lithuania as a vassal. The second deal was the Norway Purchase. Sweden trades Swedish Pomerania to Denmark in return for Norway which was undergoing one of its phases of sporadic nationalism.
Gustav IV had attained one of his most important aims. He had turned Sweden from an empire of scattered realms into a contiguous one, more easily united. He had also obtained an easy outlet onto the Atlantic, for him to pursue his vision. For his vision of a Swedish Empire was not the Baltic Lake, the Swede dominated Holy Roman Empire of Gustavus Adolphus. He recognised that Sweden had declined since those heady days and instead sought an empire overseas.
Two colonies were set up by Gustav IV, one in Africa and one in the East Indies. On the island of Borneo, there was a port belonging to the Kingdom of Hanover but in practice administered by the Netherlands and the North Germans. The expense of running the empire had increased in recent years and the purchase of British ports had proved profitable but had rendered some outposts obsolete. They agreed to sell the port to Sweden for a good price. The port was renamed Gustavshaven and became the capitol of the Swedish East Indies. The second colony was in East Africa, on the island of Madagascar. They had to compete with the French and others, but the Swedish toehold proved profitable.
At the time, Gustav's colonies were decried as expensive vanity projects. But as his reign continued and profits began to pour in, the rulers of Sweden began to pay more interest...
#47: More Trek
In the aftermath of the Revolutionary Wars and the Netherlands' joining the North German Confederacy, many people wanted to leave the place which had been ravaged by invaders, Jacobins and bandits. North German colonists went to Guyana, and they went to the East Indies. But by far the greatest number went to the Cape. Thousands upon thousands went there, lured by promises of wealth, land and freedom. But there were already people there.
The local whites were largely of Dutch descent. They had resented the period of British rule during the Revolutionary Wars, and a few Britons had found a home there. But if they had found these settlers problematic, the new ones were a whole different ball game. The British settlers were usually of rural origin and took to the agrarian lifestyle with ease. The North German ones on the other hand were from towns and cities which had suffered from invasion. Their cosmopolitan views and foreign origin clashed substantially with the very conservative view of the locals. It didn't help that many of the new colonists were fleeing from the reactionary government in North Germany. Their progressive views were considerably at odds with those of the locals.
The result was that many of the local whites emigrated into the interior. Here they became known as Boers, and lived beyond the authority in Kaapstadt. They were entirely different from any other kind of colonial government. Most were centralised bureaucratic authorities. Here they were anarchic, community based republic often no larger than a few towns. Kaapstadt was willing to ignore the Boer republics for as long as they weren't a problem, and they got rid of the bulk of the areas difficult populace. The government of the Cape became a bulwark of Enlightened government. However, the movement of very conservative Dutch-speakers into the African interior brought them into conflict with the natives. The demands of agrarian settlers to have farms of their own, and a growing idea of 'Manifest Destiny' made the Boers inherently expansionists. In reaction to the aggressive white settlers, the Zulus centralised and united other Africans in the southeast under their rule. After killing his brothers for attempting to assassinate him, Shaka secured and consolidated a considerable empire. For this, he is sometimes referred to as the 'African Genghis'. The Zulu Empire would stand in opposition to the Boers for decades to come.
In the aftermath of the Revolutionary Wars and the Netherlands' joining the North German Confederacy, many people wanted to leave the place which had been ravaged by invaders, Jacobins and bandits. North German colonists went to Guyana, and they went to the East Indies. But by far the greatest number went to the Cape. Thousands upon thousands went there, lured by promises of wealth, land and freedom. But there were already people there.
The local whites were largely of Dutch descent. They had resented the period of British rule during the Revolutionary Wars, and a few Britons had found a home there. But if they had found these settlers problematic, the new ones were a whole different ball game. The British settlers were usually of rural origin and took to the agrarian lifestyle with ease. The North German ones on the other hand were from towns and cities which had suffered from invasion. Their cosmopolitan views and foreign origin clashed substantially with the very conservative view of the locals. It didn't help that many of the new colonists were fleeing from the reactionary government in North Germany. Their progressive views were considerably at odds with those of the locals.
The result was that many of the local whites emigrated into the interior. Here they became known as Boers, and lived beyond the authority in Kaapstadt. They were entirely different from any other kind of colonial government. Most were centralised bureaucratic authorities. Here they were anarchic, community based republic often no larger than a few towns. Kaapstadt was willing to ignore the Boer republics for as long as they weren't a problem, and they got rid of the bulk of the areas difficult populace. The government of the Cape became a bulwark of Enlightened government. However, the movement of very conservative Dutch-speakers into the African interior brought them into conflict with the natives. The demands of agrarian settlers to have farms of their own, and a growing idea of 'Manifest Destiny' made the Boers inherently expansionists. In reaction to the aggressive white settlers, the Zulus centralised and united other Africans in the southeast under their rule. After killing his brothers for attempting to assassinate him, Shaka secured and consolidated a considerable empire. For this, he is sometimes referred to as the 'African Genghis'. The Zulu Empire would stand in opposition to the Boers for decades to come.
Last edited:
Liking the references in the chapter titles, and also the way *Romanticism is happening, becoming explicitly intertwined with conservatism. Austrasia continues to interest me a lot, perhaps because it's so different from OTL's Belgium.
Denmark's sale seems to indicate ambitions of becoming a great land power in Northern Europe, which is an interesting path for Denmark to take. But I'd think that the North German Confederacy might well be interested in Danish Pomerania, which sounds like a recipe for trouble in the future.
Swedish colonialism is an ominous sign. I suspect that they, like other European powers, might start off with a few strategically placed colonies for profit and end up colonising vast amounts of the world for ideology and prestige. My only real objection is on that point—that it seems odd for Russia to be so obliging to Sweden, in particular to give up a long-fought Russian land in exchange for Courland but also to give any accommodation at all to a declining power rather than take whatever it could—but that's a minor thing really.
Looking at South Africa, the surviving Zulus are a good sign, though I fear that they won't last if a major European power—even the likes of Portugal, let alone France or the mega-British Empire—gets greedy, as they probably will in time (an awful lot of diamonds and gold there for the taking). The Boers, North Germans and Britons make up an interesting dynamic, though I fear that North Germany and/or Britain will be tempted to use the presence of their people as an excuse to do some land-grabbing within the next century or so.
In any case, thanks for the updates.
Denmark's sale seems to indicate ambitions of becoming a great land power in Northern Europe, which is an interesting path for Denmark to take. But I'd think that the North German Confederacy might well be interested in Danish Pomerania, which sounds like a recipe for trouble in the future.
Swedish colonialism is an ominous sign. I suspect that they, like other European powers, might start off with a few strategically placed colonies for profit and end up colonising vast amounts of the world for ideology and prestige. My only real objection is on that point—that it seems odd for Russia to be so obliging to Sweden, in particular to give up a long-fought Russian land in exchange for Courland but also to give any accommodation at all to a declining power rather than take whatever it could—but that's a minor thing really.
Looking at South Africa, the surviving Zulus are a good sign, though I fear that they won't last if a major European power—even the likes of Portugal, let alone France or the mega-British Empire—gets greedy, as they probably will in time (an awful lot of diamonds and gold there for the taking). The Boers, North Germans and Britons make up an interesting dynamic, though I fear that North Germany and/or Britain will be tempted to use the presence of their people as an excuse to do some land-grabbing within the next century or so.
In any case, thanks for the updates.