I remember looking up Memphis history extensively for a while, and I think it was really just luck of the draw which specific bluff would be the major downtown for Memphis/*Memphis - the specific downtown/city site happened to have everything roll for it, and that's that.
I remember looking up Memphis history extensively for a while, and I think it was really just luck of the draw which specific bluff would be the major downtown for Memphis/*Memphis - the specific downtown/city site happened to have everything roll for it, and that's that.
Shelby/Meeman was, and still is, heavily forested with a lot of hollers and Fulton is much the same. Randolph and Memphis are less so and closer to the Hatchie and Wolf Rivers respectively.
Here are my selections:
1. Alternative sites for capitols that were passed over, or had been capitols but the capitol was re-located.
2. Places very close to existing cities and it was pretty much the luck of the draw that the downtown and railroad terminal wound up on that particular ridge or that side of the river.
3. Cities that were great in the past but declined because of developments that could have been altered.
4. Capitols or large cities in countries that could have been great powers but didn't quite make it.
5. Places that could have been one industry boomtowns (thnik of Hollywood, San Jose, or Detroit) if the industry had concentrated there and there was a chance that it might have done so.
You could probably come up with an exemplar of each of these situations.
1. Alternative sites for capitols that were passed over, or had been capitols but the capitol was re-located.
2. Places very close to existing cities and it was pretty much the luck of the draw that the downtown and railroad terminal wound up on that particular ridge or that side of the river.
3. Cities that were great in the past but declined because of developments that could have been altered.
4. Capitols or large cities in countries that could have been great powers but didn't quite make it.
5. Places that could have been one industry boomtowns (thnik of Hollywood, San Jose, or Detroit) if the industry had concentrated there and there was a chance that it might have done so.
You could probably come up with an exemplar of each of these situations.
Now what I wonder is if in some scenario the Mississippi River becomes an international border (admittedly difficult since the Mississippi is not a good border), what about the transnational cities? For sanity's sake, we'll assume that each country is roughly equal in wealth or at worst somewhat less disparate than Mexico and the US. The obvious choice is St. Louis and...something. Probably East St. Louis, which would not be a decayed husk of a ghetto as in OTL but instead an important city of transnational commerce. Unless there's a better location in Illinois regarding flood protection. Minneapolis-St. Paul is an obvious option too. I bet the Quad Cities might be a bit more important as well.
But what about in the South? Look at a map, and you'll notice there aren't a lot of major cities on the west bank of the Mississippi, thanks to the issue of floods. As noted above, you have the Chickasaw Bluffs for Memphis which give it some manner of flood protection, and other cities like Greenville, Vicksburg, and Natchez also sit on natural elevations (hence why they are regional centers). Are there any comparable elevations on the west bank of the Mississippi, south of Cape Girardeau which would be suitable for a transnational city and the related commerce? Would we just get a bigger version of West Memphis serving as the largest city on the west bank of the river between St. Louis and Baton Rouge? Is there any chance for a city on the west bank south of St. Louis/north of Baton Rouge (aside from Cape Girardeau) to be bigger than its east bank counterpart (outside of political shenanigans)? Or is it more likely that the more important city on the western side of the river would be a bit further back, like along Crowley's Ridge and thus have more protection from flooding?
But what about in the South? Look at a map, and you'll notice there aren't a lot of major cities on the west bank of the Mississippi, thanks to the issue of floods. As noted above, you have the Chickasaw Bluffs for Memphis which give it some manner of flood protection, and other cities like Greenville, Vicksburg, and Natchez also sit on natural elevations (hence why they are regional centers). Are there any comparable elevations on the west bank of the Mississippi, south of Cape Girardeau which would be suitable for a transnational city and the related commerce? Would we just get a bigger version of West Memphis serving as the largest city on the west bank of the river between St. Louis and Baton Rouge? Is there any chance for a city on the west bank south of St. Louis/north of Baton Rouge (aside from Cape Girardeau) to be bigger than its east bank counterpart (outside of political shenanigans)? Or is it more likely that the more important city on the western side of the river would be a bit further back, like along Crowley's Ridge and thus have more protection from flooding?
Probably the latter, for what you said re: protection from flooding, but also potential invasion with how easily crossed (aside from sheer distance) the Mississippi floodplain can be.
Isaac Beach
Banned
Launceston! It's a commonly held belief in Tasmania as a whole but especially the north that Launceston would be a much larger and more important city if either Melbourne had the Victorian Gold Rush later or, better yet, the Tasmanian Beaconsfield Gold Rush had occurred earlier. There was a lot of immigration from Tasmania to NSW and Victoria during the Victorian Gold Rush which really stunted the colony's growth; and that of course lay the bedrock for Melbourne as a major city, where it boomed from a population of 29'000 in 1851 to 123'000 in 1854. Imagine if that had been to Launceston instead, perhaps becoming the primary port on the Bass Strait.
There's no way Launceston could be the size of Melbourne with 4.6 million people, mind, but there could certainly be a more equitable distribution than 4.6 million to 90'000. Say, 3.5 million to a million.
I've wanted to do a TL to that effect, but I don't think I have the knowledge or time to really do it as well as I'd like.
There's no way Launceston could be the size of Melbourne with 4.6 million people, mind, but there could certainly be a more equitable distribution than 4.6 million to 90'000. Say, 3.5 million to a million.
I've wanted to do a TL to that effect, but I don't think I have the knowledge or time to really do it as well as I'd like.
Mostly the flooding, spring and early summer still sees a lot of East Arkansas under water. Maybe the Jonesboro area?
What's so special about it? Seems like any city atop Crowley's Ridge would be good. Especially Helena, Arkansas, on the very south end of the ridge. It's at the confluence of the St. Francis (which is navigable a decent ways inland) and Mississippi. It's a decent bit away from Memphis though, but it doesn't seem like there's a lot of options if you want a Memphis (probably a bit smaller)-sized city on the western bank of the Mississippi (or nearby).
Auckland is already great, but I'm sure it could have been even greater as well.
History Learner
Banned
According to Wikipedia, concerning the Rio Grande River:
If such is true, then a Rio Grande open to oceanic shipping would definitely make cities like El Paso and Brownsville much bigger.
If such is true, then a Rio Grande open to oceanic shipping would definitely make cities like El Paso and Brownsville much bigger.
But you have the remember that farmers will need the water for irrigation and people will need the water for drinking. There's also the problem that it's an international river, meaning you need to negotiate with Mexico about how the water will be used. And in that time period, Mexico isn't necessarily always in the position to have people only use the allotted amount of water. Although OTOH, the Mexican north was pretty empty until the 20th century so that might not be too much of a problem until later on down the road.
History Learner
Banned
I would presume any projects that could raise the Rio Grande's water levels sufficiently for mass shipping would also de-facto make it large enough to sustain other water needs. As for the international bit, I think this would mainly only come about in the event of a larger American annexation of Mexican territory.
Cities which could indeniably have been greater now than their current size include Antioch, Troy, Babylon, Merv, Susa, or even Pripyat... (but yes I am cheating). A few exclaves could also grow if reunified with the hinterland, e.g. Ceuta.
Maybe Hangzhou? Situated in China's 4th richest province, and within the wealthy Jiangnan region, it has great potential due to its geographical position. However, as of now, it is eclipsed economically by Shanghai, a much younger city (people of the region even call Shanghai Benbang--roughly translating to "centerpiece city"). This is a far cry from Hangzhou's status of China's largest city during the Southern Song Dynasty, and that is very impressive when you note that the Song comprised of 80% of the world's GDP in its heyday. Later on, Hangzhou was eclipsed politically by Nanjing in the early Ming Dynasty, during which Nanjing served for a time as China's capital, and was of course overtaken by Shanghai during the Qing Dynasty.
As of now however, Hangzhou still has one asset--tourism. It is also one of China's most modern, automated cities and has absolutely beautiful scenery. If China was to be more Southern-oriented than OTL, and also historically focused more on the economy, Hangzhou could very likely have remained China's number 1 city to this very day.
As of now however, Hangzhou still has one asset--tourism. It is also one of China's most modern, automated cities and has absolutely beautiful scenery. If China was to be more Southern-oriented than OTL, and also historically focused more on the economy, Hangzhou could very likely have remained China's number 1 city to this very day.
CatalanKing
Banned
If inhabited by the Nabateans and a vast system of canals was created, I could see Damascus be either a small kingdom or an average empire for a short time until either an Alexander-like figure invades them or the actual BAC. I might actually consider that the topic for my next TL.
Koprulu Mustafa Pasha
Gone Fishin'
Kirkuk. A lot of people fled the city since 1918. Turkmens, Kurds, Christians and Arabs alike when different rulers took the city.
Last edited:
Could Anchorage, or some other city in Alaska, be larger if the territory is connected with one of the other larger polities on the continent? Either being part of Canada, or the Yukon and British Columbia being part of the US, giving a direct route to Alaska.
Also, on the topic of Cairo, Illinois, I can't help but wonder if you could have moved that potential hub eastward, to Metropolis, Illinois, such that Superman may gallivant about in a real city.
Also, on the topic of Cairo, Illinois, I can't help but wonder if you could have moved that potential hub eastward, to Metropolis, Illinois, such that Superman may gallivant about in a real city.