Miscellaneous <1900 (Alternate) History Thread

If Aaron Burr were the victor of the 1800 election, how likely/unlikely is it that he would be the nominee in 1804? And if he wasn't, who would most likely be the choice in 1804 and 1808?
While keeping in mind that Burr was a controversial figure, he may be popular enough to keep support in 1804, if somehow elected in 1800. I believe it’d heavily depend on what happens during his first term. If his first term doesn’t turn out all that great, Burr may have to finagle to get re-election. If Burr avoids all controversy and manages a successful term, I don’t see why he wouldn’t be re-nominated. Burr forgoing his hatred for Hamilton would be a good step as well.
 
If Aaron Burr were the victor of the 1800 election, how likely/unlikely is it that he would be the nominee in 1804? And if he wasn't, who would most likely be the choice in 1804 and 1808?
If he weasals his way into victory in 1800, it would be essentially career suicide. Not only would he would have had to betray the party's head, Jefferson, to get the role, but he was also much too moderate to be the leader of the Democratic-Republicans at this time. He would have the animus of the South for both of these things, with Nathaniel Macon and John Randolph of Roanoke working against him in the House and Jefferson and Madison behind the scenes. George Clinton would likely leap at the opportunity to destroy an inter-state rival, and Albert Gallatin not only disliked Burr, but could likely see the writing on the wall about who was going to win the power struggle, so that would leave New York and Pennsylvania against Burr. Finally, John Breckinridge, the voice of the West, was a firm ally of Jefferson, so he would likely work to his utmost to limit Burr's influence and success.

By the end of his term, Burr is likely labeled as a Quasi-Federalist, and no respectable Republican would support the man who betrayed Jefferson. Burr would surely run for re-election (although finding a running-mate and a base of support would likely be difficult considering the Federalists were no friends either). He likely tries to wangle together a coalition of moderate New England Republicans and Southern Federalists, although it could likely go both ways in terms of whether or not it works (probably seriously involving the good will of Hamilton). It would be somewhat similar to DeWitt Clinton's 1812 campaign.

Obviously, Burr would not be able to win re-election on this basis sans major butterflies, luck, and massive screw-ups on the part of the Jeffersonians, but if his coalition proves successful, then it might provide the template for some sort of opposition party that is more sustainable and competitive against the Jeffersonians than the OTL Federalists.
 
Ran into a statement that during the Renaissance it was mandatory for men to wear hats in public, and you could get seriously fined for not doing so. Presumably if so this was for specific places and times, but is it broadly true? People certainly were fined for dressing "above their station", and women had to cover their sinful, sinful locks, but were men fined for exposing their pates to the public? Were hats so socially coded that by not wearing a rank-appropriate hat (at all) you were "out of uniform" and raising the grim specter of anarchy, cats living with dogs, etc?
 
Ran into a statement that during the Renaissance it was mandatory for men to wear hats in public, and you could get seriously fined for not doing so. Presumably if so this was for specific places and times, but is it broadly true? People certainly were fined for dressing "above their station", and women had to cover their sinful, sinful locks, but were men fined for exposing their pates to the public? Were hats so socially coded that by not wearing a rank-appropriate hat (at all) you were "out of uniform" and raising the grim specter of anarchy, cats living with dogs, etc?
I know this was true at times in England (and IIRC Scotland) because the government wanted to stimulate the wool industry but I'm not sure how true this was in other countries.
 
Ran into a statement that during the Renaissance it was mandatory for men to wear hats in public, and you could get seriously fined for not doing so. Presumably if so this was for specific places and times, but is it broadly true? People certainly were fined for dressing "above their station", and women had to cover their sinful, sinful locks, but were men fined for exposing their pates to the public? Were hats so socially coded that by not wearing a rank-appropriate hat (at all) you were "out of uniform" and raising the grim specter of anarchy, cats living with dogs, etc?
I know this was true at times in England (and IIRC Scotland) because the government wanted to stimulate the wool industry but I'm not sure how true this was in other countries.
If true.
F*cking amazing.
 
What if Isabella of Spain is born male? Would the Carlist Wars be butterflied? A more stable and prosperous Spain? How much power would the monarchy retain?
 
What if Isabella of Spain is born male? Would the Carlist Wars be butterflied? A more stable and prosperous Spain? How much power would the monarchy retain?
Maria Christina is in a tough spot for a bit, since she's not the regent queen protecting the Bourbon line but instead a foreign lady exerting influence on the child king. . Who will be the wife of "Isabella"? Carlos will need to be content with regency. "Isabella" will still try to modernize Spain to debatable success.
 
Did Charles VI renounce his claims on the Spanish throne after he became Holy Roman Emperor and the end of the War of the Spanish Succession? Because on his full title, he is still mentioned as "Rex Hispaniarum", which implies perhaps a sort of continued claim.
 
Maria Christina is in a tough spot for a bit, since she's not the regent queen protecting the Bourbon line but instead a foreign lady exerting influence on the child king. . Who will be the wife of "Isabella"? Carlos will need to be content with regency. "Isabella" will still try to modernize Spain to debatable success.
For what reason? She is still the Queen Regent of Spain, and her brother-in-law will not have reason for making damages around
 
Why were the Berber languages so resistant to linguistic Romanization?
The geography of Berber land?
A lot of them were farmes that lived in mountains and valleys of North Africa, and there were also nomadic Berber tribes (or merchants) that did travel in the desert.

So I suppose that geography and culture make a community difficult to become Romanized. At least without proper conditions (right policies and results, among other things).
 
What if William, the son of Henry the Young King and Princess Margaret of France (b. & d. 1177) had survived infancy? If Henry II still died in 1189, would William have become King of England, or would he have been usurped by Richard? If Richard remained Duke of Aquitaine, would he still have gone on crusade? He went IOTL with Philip II Augustus because they jointly feared that the other might usurp their territories, but now here Richard has the added fear that his nephew (or more accurately, his nephew's regents) might do the same.
 
Top