Miscellaneous <1900 (Alternate) History Thread

Let's say Noble House A begat a cadet branch Noble House B, but Noble House A became extinct in the male line, such that the cadet branch became the most senior branch. Would Noble House B ceased to be known by its cadet name and revoke to the title of Noble House A.
If the Valois and the Bourbons are anything to go by, Noble House B will still be known as Noble House B.
I agree with CaptainShadow, but with a slight proviso:
If the houses are distinguished by having locations appended to their names then when the main branch died out, the cadet branch could just stop using the location identifier, such that it appeared to be a continuation.
Here's what I mean:
Noble House A ('Nobbs') begets Noble House B ('Nobbs of Smallplace'). Noble House A is normally just referred to as 'Nobbs' though sometimes as 'Nobbs of Bigplace' where a risk of confusion exists. Noble House B is always referred to with the location identifier: 'Nobbs of Smallplace.'​
Noble House A (Nobbs (of Bigplace)) dies out.​
Noble House B (Nobbs of Smallplace) is now the only bearer of the name (Nobbs) so the location is normally dropped: 'Nobbs' now refers to Noble House B.​

Where there are lots and lots of different names, this is less likely; it'll happen more when multiple families are descended from one 'original' family. (For example: MacDonald of Glencoe vs MacDonald of Glengarry, both members of Clan Donald). Once you get into the age of emigration, you might find families where the main family is in one country and the cadet branch in another, so both are just referred to by their name, without location, except in formal circumstances (for example the Swintons of Kimmerghame, in the Scottish borders, are a cadet branch of the Swintons, with the chief branch (Swinton of that ilk - meaning Swinton of Swinton) now living in Canada, I think).

Sorry, that was longer than I thought it would be when I started typing!
 
If the British somehow kept southern us, would there be a lot of Indians there? I know that some British colonies on the Carribbean substituted their slaves for Indian indentured servants, but I think transporting Indians en masse to the US is not that cheap, so would they just make an exception?
 
I think it depends on how much settlement does go into that area. I think an Indian removal is going to happen when there is more settlement of the "British Deep South" and more hunger for land. Indian removal did occur in Canada in the expansion/frontier area, even thought it was to a lesser extent than in the US.
But would there be many Indians to settle the land?
I mean, more land generally means more demmand for slaves in the south, but would that demand be big enough to support thousands of Indian indentured servants in the us? I mean, it's a big trip from India to the US, it's harder to transport Hindustanis than it is to transport African slaves, etc.
So, after slaves got their freedom in the British colonies, they were normally substituted by Indian indentured servants, but most of those colonies were small an sparsely populated, do the demand for slaves wasn't that big. But southern US is big and has a huge demand for slaves, which means much more money goes into transporting Hindustanis.
But I don't understand why they would want to remove the Indians. They were cheap enough to be indentured servants, and they didn't die fast like native Americans. Maybe if anti Hindu sentiment grows in the south, since most of the black slaves were Christians, and most Hindustanis were Muslim or Hindu
 
Is this scenario feasible?
Leonardo da Vinci with more funding causes a much earlier Age of Aviation? (He had prototype aircraft and a helicopter, both of which were never built, but the schematics were there).
 
Is this scenario feasible?
Leonardo da Vinci with more funding causes a much earlier Age of Aviation? (He had prototype aircraft and a helicopter, both of which were never built, but the schematics were there).
They would also need to find/discover an acceptable form of fuel...
 
I need an obscure House that would have existed c. 1000, as part of a possible thread that would see this obscure House sit on the TTL English throne ie The Little House that Could (Rule).

Does anyone have any suggestions?
 
I need an obscure House that would have existed c. 1000, as part of a possible thread that would see this obscure House sit on the TTL English throne ie The Little House that Could (Rule).

Does anyone have any suggestions?

A Welsh one? Maybe the King of Deheubarth finds allies in the Anglo-Saxons and takes the English throne as well as his own
 
I need an obscure House that would have existed c. 1000, as part of a possible thread that would see this obscure House sit on the TTL English throne ie The Little House that Could (Rule).

Does anyone have any suggestions?
Have a look at some of the earls who ruled various parts of England around then - Mercia, etc. With a few tweaks here and there, almost any of them could end up as king.
 
Is this scenario feasible?
Leonardo da Vinci with more funding causes a much earlier Age of Aviation? (He had prototype aircraft and a helicopter, both of which were never built, but the schematics were there).

He might have been able to have developed workable hang-gliders or even proper gliders if he worked from the basis that no actual basis of propulsion will be available other than gravity
 
'Free-Market Bronze Age Civilizations'.

Hmmm, are you implying they were not free markets?

The Uluburun ship has goods circling the Mediteranean, they would be landed and traded for their merchants.

If you look at riverine trade in Mesopotamia, down into the Gulf, there were insurance markets for the ships to protect the value of the cargoes.
 
The Mongol Crusade: Rabban Sawma has just accidentally a crusade.

What if the arrival of Rabban Sawma's embassy to Europe and his wish to discuss 'the matter of Jerusalem' brought about a crusade.
 
Linguistic question, if Germany was called "Almain" in English as it was at times in the Middle Ages, what would Germans (the ethnicity) be called? Almains (I've seen "Almain" refer to both the country and its people) maybe? Or Almans? Almands (like French)? Almanish?
 
Linguistic question, if Germany was called "Almain" in English as it was at times in the Middle Ages, what would Germans (the ethnicity) be called? Almains (I've seen "Almain" refer to both the country and its people) maybe? Or Almans? Almands (like French)? Almanish?
Almainians? Alemands? This has a multiplicy of answers depending on language drift.
 
Top