When I sent the original to Ian, he very kindly suggested that I had indeed raised some new points, and the discussion would benefit from their presentation here. So, with that in mind, here goes (dates refer to the dates in Ian's essay, available elsewhere through this site):
1784 Tarleton's specific position would be, I think "Commander-in-Chief of the Forces in Drakeia". As such, he would have command authority over not only whatever British troops were there but also the colonial militia. None of this rot about armed slaves, women soldiers, what what?
1783-4 It's been pointed out about the Iceland eruption. At that time, Iceland was a possession of Denmark-Norway -- wouldn't they get first choice of the refugees?
1790-6 A law that grants all freemen powers of life and death over all slaves (i.e., Jeffrey is driving down the street, he says "I'll shoot me that nigger over there," and proceeds to do so) and the formation of an army unit of armed slaves? Which of these things don't go together?
1800 Conquest of Egypt: there was a force from India that landed at Elephantine, crossed the desert, and went downriver to Cairo. It arrived too late. In any case, the Drakeian Expeditionary Force would be under the command of the Commander of the Forces -- General Abercrombie's successor. When he says "frog" they are bloody well supposed to say "How high, sah?"
1803 "Prominent inventors" -- and all of them seem to have suppressed any religious, liberal, etc. feelings they might have had.
"Dr. Sakharov, of course you believe that only the strong survive."
"Well . . . ."
"*BZZT* You are the weakest link, goodbye!"
1815 I believe Portugual was pretty much broke by the end of the Napoleonic Wars. Admittedly it may not be the same as in OTL. But then, the African Empire was part of their self image (i.e., the Inqusition of Lisbon would exile people to Angola).
1800-40 "Conquest of North Africa:" which should antagonize the French, which should therefore have HMG wanting to rein in its disobedient colony. As Ian points out, Stirling has the other countries of the world brain-fried by the Orbiting Space Weasels' mind-control lasers.
1854 "Drakeian Expeditionary Forces", again, as they would have been in 1800, as Ian points out, under homeland command.
1854 I can understand the US grabbing off all the territory it can; with such an expansionistic power in the world, they certainly don't want a Drakeia bordering on the Rio Grande!
1879-82: From what I recall of the efficiency of zeppelins, launching a thousand-dirigible raid would get between 100-200 on target in time. Almost any rotten time-line (e.g., L. Neil Smith's NAC) seems to rely on dirigibles. After the crashes of the R-101, Akron, Macon, and Shenandoah, one wonders why.
1914-1919 The Dominion is now bordering the Soviet Union. It is impossible that there is not a Communist Party of Draka (probably two, a revolutionary one among the serfs and an elite one a la Donald Maclean among the Citizens).
Also, they are controling the Holy Land. What would Theodor Herzl say about that? Socialist Zionists dumped into the Dominion are going to have very severe problems with the local ideology. Religous Zionists, even more so.
Everyone has pointed out the gross implausibilities. Stirling says he wanted to write a great dystopia. I'm reminded of Herman Wouk's SF novel, The "Lomokome" Papers, which is written mostly to be a satire on the Cold War. (The two Lunarian nations are rather crude parodies of the Soviet Bloc and the West.) Wouk skitters away from any scientific explanation, which admittedly may have been beyond his powers, and from several potential points of interest, such as the origins of his Lunarian people. Sitting down to explain this might have enabled him to write a stronger novel but then the entire concept was shaky.
1784 Tarleton's specific position would be, I think "Commander-in-Chief of the Forces in Drakeia". As such, he would have command authority over not only whatever British troops were there but also the colonial militia. None of this rot about armed slaves, women soldiers, what what?
1783-4 It's been pointed out about the Iceland eruption. At that time, Iceland was a possession of Denmark-Norway -- wouldn't they get first choice of the refugees?
1790-6 A law that grants all freemen powers of life and death over all slaves (i.e., Jeffrey is driving down the street, he says "I'll shoot me that nigger over there," and proceeds to do so) and the formation of an army unit of armed slaves? Which of these things don't go together?
1800 Conquest of Egypt: there was a force from India that landed at Elephantine, crossed the desert, and went downriver to Cairo. It arrived too late. In any case, the Drakeian Expeditionary Force would be under the command of the Commander of the Forces -- General Abercrombie's successor. When he says "frog" they are bloody well supposed to say "How high, sah?"
1803 "Prominent inventors" -- and all of them seem to have suppressed any religious, liberal, etc. feelings they might have had.
"Dr. Sakharov, of course you believe that only the strong survive."
"Well . . . ."
"*BZZT* You are the weakest link, goodbye!"
1815 I believe Portugual was pretty much broke by the end of the Napoleonic Wars. Admittedly it may not be the same as in OTL. But then, the African Empire was part of their self image (i.e., the Inqusition of Lisbon would exile people to Angola).
1800-40 "Conquest of North Africa:" which should antagonize the French, which should therefore have HMG wanting to rein in its disobedient colony. As Ian points out, Stirling has the other countries of the world brain-fried by the Orbiting Space Weasels' mind-control lasers.
1854 "Drakeian Expeditionary Forces", again, as they would have been in 1800, as Ian points out, under homeland command.
1854 I can understand the US grabbing off all the territory it can; with such an expansionistic power in the world, they certainly don't want a Drakeia bordering on the Rio Grande!
1879-82: From what I recall of the efficiency of zeppelins, launching a thousand-dirigible raid would get between 100-200 on target in time. Almost any rotten time-line (e.g., L. Neil Smith's NAC) seems to rely on dirigibles. After the crashes of the R-101, Akron, Macon, and Shenandoah, one wonders why.
1914-1919 The Dominion is now bordering the Soviet Union. It is impossible that there is not a Communist Party of Draka (probably two, a revolutionary one among the serfs and an elite one a la Donald Maclean among the Citizens).
Also, they are controling the Holy Land. What would Theodor Herzl say about that? Socialist Zionists dumped into the Dominion are going to have very severe problems with the local ideology. Religous Zionists, even more so.
Everyone has pointed out the gross implausibilities. Stirling says he wanted to write a great dystopia. I'm reminded of Herman Wouk's SF novel, The "Lomokome" Papers, which is written mostly to be a satire on the Cold War. (The two Lunarian nations are rather crude parodies of the Soviet Bloc and the West.) Wouk skitters away from any scientific explanation, which admittedly may have been beyond his powers, and from several potential points of interest, such as the origins of his Lunarian people. Sitting down to explain this might have enabled him to write a stronger novel but then the entire concept was shaky.
