Speculation: Greatest City or Nation that Never Was

It depends how you measure it.

If it's about administrative measurement, then
London : 8,538,689
Paris : 2,240,621

If it's about metropolitain zone
London : 13,879,757
Paris : 12,341,418

You have to keep in mind that the city of Paris is only a part of Paris as a city, and really smaller compared to Greater London, which explains why (for comparable populations) Paris have greater densities.

Well Metro area is of questionable usefulness because it doesn't have a clear definition across borders or even within countries.

I've seen British estimates for London as low as 8.5 million and as high as 20 million. And that's just on the Wikipedia page.
 
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Colombia. Grand Colombia had the population and resources to be an industrial power by 1900. Best chances in all of South America.

Also I guess South America in general. It's gone through many periods of great wealth but it doesn't seem to get invested properly.
 
Well Metro area is of questionable usefulness because it doesn't have a clear definition across borders or even within countries.
Problem is that administrative delimitation aren't comparable units*, and basing yourself on these gives flawed results.

Between something that certainly can't be used, and something else whom use is questionable...

*Parisian administrative limits didn't change since 1860's.


Of course, we could go for urban areas but there again, the difference is meager.

I've seen British estimates for London as low as 8.5 million and as high as 20 million. And that's just on the Wikipedia page.

Using the page Demographics of London, there what I have.

8,615,246 as total population (Greater London) in 2015.

I didn't saw any mention of 20 millions, I'm afraid, even on the main Armenian Genocide page, but "12 and 14 million depending on the definition used [of wider metropolitain area".
 

Driftless

Donor
Cairo. And no, I'm not talking about the one in Egypt.

I'm talking about the one in Illinois.

By any sort of sense this should have been an incredibly powerful and influential city, coming at the fork of the freaking Ohio and Mississippi Rivers. It goes against all historical geopolitcal sense.

And yet, it never became anything. It boggles the mind.

Saint Louis has the advantage of being on high ground and thus rarely floods. Cairo doesn't have that advantage. Its position on the junction of the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers helps a lot too. River steamers were really important on the Missouri, they could get all they way to North Dakota and Montana during the high water season, and that mattered a lot in the late 19th Century as a lot of cargo and passengers used them before the railroads expanded into that region. With the Corps of Engineers projects in the 20th Century river barge traffic is still very important and again Saint Louis benefits from that Missouri / Mississippi junction.

Its all about the flood years on the Mississippi. Also Saint Louis had a lot of political power in the 19th and early 20th Century (was pro North in the Civil War, which helped a lot)

But you would think that position advantage on the Ohio/Mississippi junction would have helped Cairo rate more than glorified small town status now

You probably need modern dredging technology, without the environmental limitations. Dredge the river(s) and the pumped spoil is used to create higher ground for Cairo. The Corps of Engineers has had the task of keeping the upper river navigable, and so they near continuously dredge stretches of the main channel and in the process accumulate enormous volumes of silt that need to be deposited .... somewhere....(one small example)
 

Deleted member 67076

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Colombia. Grand Colombia had the population and resources to be an industrial power by 1900. Best chances in all of South America.

Also I guess South America in general. It's gone through many periods of great wealth but it doesn't seem to get invested properly.
Very much agree. Peru-Bolivia is another one that has massive potential.
 
Yeah, and there's also the fact that there's going to be more hurricanes with greater threats to Galveston than Houston.

Though I'm speaking with Houstonian bias ;)

having lived in both places I would cheerfully and easily choose Houston over Galveston

although having rush hour that was 5-10 minutes long was pretty nice
 
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Colombia. Grand Colombia had the population and resources to be an industrial power by 1900. Best chances in all of South America.

Also I guess South America in general. It's gone through many periods of great wealth but it doesn't seem to get invested properly.

Argentina already was one, it just decayed.
 
South Vietnam in my opinion was a missed opportunity. I believe that if there had been a permanent cease fire in 1956, Vietnam could have risen from poverty like South Korea and become rich, and there could have been a successful democracy, since movements like those Buddhist monks who set themselves on fire were already getting international attention.

What people forget about Vietnam is that the Vietnamese weren't fighting for communism, but because they saw America as they did the French, just another colonial power. Ho Chi Minh seemed to be the only one standing up to America.

Also, there was Ngo Dinh Diem alienating the majority Buddhist population with his corruption and nepotism.

Remember, that South Korea was at one point poorer than North. My dad, who spent the seventies stationed in South Korea talks about how people back then were still transported their human waste with a wheelbarrow.

But I do wonder if there ever was a scenario where South Vietnam could have become an Asian Tiger in the 70s and 80s.
 
London and Paris are both about the size of Los Angeles. Berlin is closer to the size of Philadelphia, less than half as big, basically. Considering Germany's bigger than Britain or France, I feel like they got screwed by the wars.

London and Paris both have the advantage that they have been capital cities of large united nations for much longer, meaning they had far more company headquarters and educated talent flocking there at the place to be. Germany was distributed between a lot of states, so as a result had a lot of cities getting some of this effect. Come the 20th century, Germany economic sectors were grouped around different hubs: Munich, Berlin, Frankfurt etc, whereas the economies of UK and France are all grouped around their capital cities.
 
To make Oman much better than it is now or what it is heading to, is ASB and would require ecological changes to the the land and long history of population growth with a highly urbanized society.

Then how about Oman starting to focus on Tanzania earlier, with moving the capital city before Sa'id ibn Sultan does so OTL in 1837? Could a possibly earlier focus on colonising the African continent improve their maritime and military capabilities?
South Vietnam in my opinion was a missed opportunity. I believe that if there had been a permanent cease fire in 1956, Vietnam could have risen from poverty like South Korea and become rich, and there could have been a successful democracy, since movements like those Buddhist monks who set themselves on fire were already getting international attention.
Indeed, I think a major Buddhism-based economic power would be interesting.
Remember, that South Korea was at one point poorer than North. My dad, who spent the seventies stationed in South Korea talks about how people back then were still transported their human waste with a wheelbarrow.
Wouldnt've a lot of countries done that back then? Doesn't sound like a very good measurement of economic development to me.
 
South Vietnam in my opinion was a missed opportunity. I believe that if there had been a permanent cease fire in 1956, Vietnam could have risen from poverty like South Korea and become rich, and there could have been a successful democracy, since movements like those Buddhist monks who set themselves on fire were already getting international attention.

What people forget about Vietnam is that the Vietnamese weren't fighting for communism, but because they saw America as they did the French, just another colonial power. Ho Chi Minh seemed to be the only one standing up to America.

Also, there was Ngo Dinh Diem alienating the majority Buddhist population with his corruption and nepotism.

Remember, that South Korea was at one point poorer than North. My dad, who spent the seventies stationed in South Korea talks about how people back then were still transported their human waste with a wheelbarrow.

But I do wonder if there ever was a scenario where South Vietnam could have become an Asian Tiger in the 70s and 80s.

That said, the Philippines in that period also could have prospered. But along came Marcos, who ruined everything.

My country's history is a series of missed opportunities for greatness.
 
The State of Counani. If the claim had held, it would have doubled the size of French guyana and attracted a lot of capital to exploit the minerals and agricultural potential.
 
I think Hungary is the easy layup here. They displayed power obviously during the reign of Matthias Corvinus, and the population of the territories his kingdom controlled rivaled France. Perhaps Magyarization to some extent could have occurred if it maintained its independence.

I would add Hungary would pose an interesting replacement for Austria in some aspects (in terms of primary Ottoman bulwark), but also a new eastern challenge for the Habsburgs/Holy Roman Empire, the former of which now has significantly decreased power base and might need to turn elsewhere (I would imagine being less powerful would probably open some marriage options up for Habsburgs/OTL rivals - then again, it depends on the POD, plus whether or not Philip and Joanna's betrothal would be affected by the POD. The Habsburgs might try to build a stronger base in Spain).
 
It's been a while then I didn't posted here. ^^;

There was lots of threads in the past about it, wouls South Africa would had been much bigger and greater nation if Rhodesia had voted yes at the 1922 Referendum to join the Union of South Africa?

In Quebec, if we had elected another party instead of the PQ like the Creditists in 1976. Would Montreal had kept some of the companies like SunLife a bit longer which might delay the moving to Toronto and allowing Montreal to keep its title of Canadian's metropole a bit longer?
 
Greatest cities that never were


Europe: 19th century Vienna, 17th century Lisbon;

South America: Lima and Cuzco;

North America: Montreal in the US;

Africa: Djibouti, strategic location and a possible major port for Meiji Egypt or Ethiopia; Maputo as the most important South African port;

Asia: British-occupied Macau and Goa.
 
Then how about Oman starting to focus on Tanzania earlier, with moving the capital city before Sa'id ibn Sultan does so OTL in 1837? Could a possibly earlier focus on colonising the African continent improve their maritime and military capabilities?
Indeed, I think a major Buddhism-based economic power would be interesting.
Wouldnt've a lot of countries done that back then? Doesn't sound like a very good measurement of economic development to me.



They might do a little better, but the population base they had is just to small to even put a dent in the colonial powers to come. It is doubtful Oman could achieve anything beyond an alliance with another colonial power against a mutual foe. Perhaps they with this, could keep some power. However the tide of abolition will reach Oman indefinitely and would Oman be able to hold on without it? Seriously doubtful.
 
On the Inca:

If the Spanish are stalled or get their asses handed by the Incans early on, then I see it as likely that the Spanish crown puts a halt on military adventures aimed at the Inca and starts trying to trade with them. As information diffuses back to Europe about a faraway land that has abundant gold, I imagine some countries are going to try and send trade missions, which would quickly result in trade between the Inca and whatever European power(my bet's Portugal) exchanging gold for useful resources such as steel and horses. This trade could potentially be profitable enough that Europeans begin to see the Inca much like India and settle restocking stations in OTL southern Brazil and Argentina or alternatively, the Inca sail downriver and establish themselves at Buenos Aires which quickly booms into one of the most important cities in the Incan Empire. Thanks to it's trade with Europe, the Incan armies are more than capable of dealing with any potential Spanish expeditions and has seen a large diffusion of crops and animals, as well as hosting individual Europeans, primarily missionaries, who seek either wealth or to their gospel resulting in an even greater spread of European technologies to the Inca state.

The Inca, seeking further trade with Europe as well as to continue their traditions of mummy worship by securing more riches crush the Mapuche, secure the land surrounding the Rio de La Plata, and begin tentative expeditions down the Amazon river over the course of the Early Modern Period, as well as try their hand at seeking out the wealth of China that they've learned about from European traders, resulting in their establishing small outposts in New Zealand and Australia, as well as a major trading post in the East Indies in Java/the Moluccas/insert important spice island here. With access to abundant natural resources and a thirst for technological advancement, the Inca are poised to develop into a powerful player as the industrial era rolls on.


Pretty sure I've written something along these lines before. So whatever that TL's version of Buenos Aires is, plus Cuzco.
 
Last edited:
Modernized, Secularized, Constitutional Monarchy version of the Ottoman Empire (Imagine the First Constitutional Period continues and is successfully expanded).
Would have been an oil-rich, cosmopolitan, civilized superpower. Rather than what the Middle East and North Africa look like now.
 
I think a whole load of today's African nations/states/cities etc could have been so much greater than they are. Poor handling of colonial issues by the powers themselves in the run up to decolonisation, American (and other powers') meddling in decolonisation, the impact of the World Wars, and actions of the colonial peoples themselves all combined to completely wreck a whole bunch of countries' chances to fulfill their potential. Africa has remained just about the poorest region of the world since and is only very slowly improving. If decolonisation had just be delayed, things could have been so much better.

EDIT: Please bear in mind, by saying 'Africa' I'm aware I am generalising horribly. Of course it varies greatly from one country to the next, and I really ought to include some ex-colonial nations outside of Africa as well.
 
I think a whole load of today's African nations/states/cities etc could have been so much greater than they are. Poor handling of colonial issues by the powers themselves in the run up to decolonisation, American (and other powers') meddling in decolonisation, the impact of the World Wars, and actions of the colonial peoples themselves all combined to completely wreck a whole bunch of countries' chances to fulfill their potential. Africa has remained just about the poorest region of the world since and is only very slowly improving. If decolonisation had just be delayed, things could have been so much better.

EDIT: Please bear in mind, by saying 'Africa' I am generalising horribly. Of course it varies greatly from one country to the next, and I really ought to include some ex-colonial nations outside of Africa as well.

I'd say West Africa was screwed over, East Africa equally if not moreso if only because they were better integrated into the Eastern trade, (no good reason for why they shouldn't have been better off OTL) but for whatever reason I don't see any scenario where the Congo and anything south of there to be anything resembling a happy situation.

Maybe that's historical bias, but for the most part you're dealing with insular cultures with very low political sophistication that doesn't fit into a modern state and that would be their only defense against exploitation and abuse from an outside world lusting after their material wealth.
 
Top