That sounds very interesting, if you're willing I'd read it.i was actually thinking about writing a TL in which the Nizari Ismaili state in Masyaf survives, and slowly conquers the Levant.
For those who do not know, the Nizari Ismaili State of Masyaf is the direct historical inspiration for the Assassins Creed.
Yes, chase after Peter the Great at Narva.TL;DR: Could Charles XII won the Great Northern War without giving up Northern Livonia to Peter the Great?
Not sure if this is relevant, but is there any way that Charles XII could have won the Great Northern War (1700-1721)? I’ve thought that maybe if he had pursued Russia instead of the PLC after the Russian army was crushed in the battle of Narva that Peter would have surrendered and, well, be honest, Augustus II wouldn’t stand a chance at Charles XII in his prime and no allies, or would he have had to agreed to the peace that Peter the Great presented to him where he got to keep Northern Livonia to be able to win. Just a question that’s been rattling in my brain for a while.
Slaves are your problemMore pro-scientific Ancient Rome? (Ancient Rome wasn't as pro-scientific as Ancient Greece was. Why? Could this have been avoided?)
Slavery was also in Ancient Greece...Slaves are your problem
The great estates became worked by slaves, leading to the landowning peasants flocking to the cities as cheap labour. So you have something of a double whammy against the need or impetus for technological solutions to problems as both country and city have masses of cheap labour available.Slavery was also a in Ancient Greece...
But the problem was far worse in Ancient Rome?
This sounds like something that could have been discovered centuries before by medieval science in the Islamic world or elsewhere. Urea's main use is as a fertiliser or ingredient in fertiliser, but it's also used as an ingredient in a variety of soaps, skin medicine, etc. I believe it is also useful as a precursor chemical so a variety of other discoveries might be made earlier OTL, human and animal urine was of course used for a variety of purposes such as tanning or night soil, but early urea production would presumably be better as it offers a more concentrated (and hygenic) form of one of the active ingredients.
- Boiled off water, resulting in a substance similar to fresh cream
- Used filter paper to squeeze out remaining liquid
- Waited a year for solid to form under an oily liquid
- Removed the oily liquid
- Dissolved the solid in water
- Used recrystallization to tease out the urea
It varied from country to country and from regency to regency. Either 18 or 21 were common ages, though 19 was used a few times (apparently as a compromise between 18 and 21, in some cases). But the last proper regency in France, for the under-age Louis XV, lasted only until he was 13.General monarchy question. I know young would-be kings, queens, emperors, and empresses would have a regent rule in their stead until they came of age. What, generally speaking, was that age, especially in the West circa the nineteenth century? Would it have been 18, or was a different age generally considered to mark adulthood and thus the ability to rule on their own? I'm specifically curious about France, if that changes anything, but I know there was never a time in the nineteenth century when one emperor took over directly from another, so I don't know how much precedent there is.