Hmm, don't see why would problems with Columbian taxes cause a revolution in Britain?
TL: Children of the Plains of Abraham Revised (A New France & more timeline)
It didn't directly:
The people I mentioned in the chapter were already advocating republicanism in Britain prior to this in OTL.
Those people took advantage of Britain's crackdown on the Columbians for not paying their taxes. Saying, "look the monarch took away their rights you are next."
While republicanism was still novel to most people in Britain at the time in ATL, they didn't have the same revulsion to as they did in OTL because the French Civil War was less about republicanism than the OTL French Revolution.
So the added propaganda about monarchies being inherently tyrannical ( even though Britain was only responding to Columbia not following the deal) was enough to move the OTL riots about discontent with the government that happened in Britain in around the 1830s earlier.
All of the does not automatically mean successful revolution in Britain though. The linchpin is George III himself. As mentioned, George III had considered abdicating in OTL in the wake of the America Revolution and even drafted his abdication letter. Riots in Britain would only take a greater toll on him. Especially since by this date in OTL he was already beginning to show signs of his mental illness.
On the other hand, you HAD a French Republic ITTL with terror ( mostly in Paris, yes, but Paris counts more than some small city ) too, so that don't seem as very likely, at least to me. Also, these republicans in the UK were mostly very fringe figures, plus, if George III didn't abdicate after a real setback ( maybe even a disaster ) of loosing American colonies, I really don't see him abdicating after sucessfully keeping them under British ( even more direct ) rule. Same thing for rebellion in Britain. If they didn't rebel in 1783 after loosing the colonies, I really doubt that they would rebel here.
The Terror did happen but it was significantly smaller. Paris only had around 600,000 people so while it probably did kill a thousand maybe 2 thousand people or so that's still not the 30 execution a day average OTL France pulled off (and that is not even including those that died in prison) .
The riots in Britain in ATL weren't actually about loosing the colonies. They were about the fear that the monarchy would soon treat them like the monarchy is treating the colonists.
For George III, I think watching riots from your bedroom window, so to speak, would be more effective especially compounded on hearing about yet another revolution begining in the Americas. Does this mean it's a definite no, there is no way of knowing exactly what would happen. (I'm also not a determinist anyway. So I believe there is always a small chance of something less likely to happen, even in OTL.)
As far as republicanism in Britain those individuals were quite influential in their time. And all I can say is if used at the right time, propaganda is very persuasive. Especially if Britain is actually taking rights they gave to the Columbians away, which they did.
Just saying that if in TTL France managed to up to an extent avoid the revolution (or at least 25 years of uphevals and wars), that doesn't means that now Britain has to have one.
Last edited:
You are right, just because the French Revolution failed doesn't mean Britain "has" to have one.
I chose to do this because there would still be a lot of republican sentiment hanging around that I want to address.
A suprising amount of early republican thinking was British (think John Locke & Thomas Paine).
And I just plain like keeping the French vs, English dichotomy.
I do honestly enjoy our discussions ☺️.
(I also predict that next chapter will involve more discussion.
I do love statecraft. Even isn't exactly designed the "nicest way".)
If you wanted to create problems for Britain, then IMHO American Revolution 2.0 ( or is it 1.0? ) is much more plausible.
Not saying that the British didn't have this or that republican philosopher, but there's a reason Britain didn't become a republic and had no revolution in OTL ( when things were arguably worse for them with loosing ARW ) while France did. And even then, in France, the republic was just a short period between various forms of monarchies.
More plausible, probably. (It would still be 2.0 the loyalist won the first one, like OTL there was a point where Britain was open to compromise. In ATL the Americans took advantage of it.)
The ATL the English Revolution does start in America. And I would say that have the revolution bleed over to England is only slightly more unlikely (but comparable to) if a bunch of rich French lawyers decided to overthrow their king in the name of the common people, who they had nothing in common with, didn't even respect, and against many of the commoner's wishes. They proceed to gut the military of anyone with experience for not being ideologically pure enough. Then declare a war on Austria, knowing that Austria would bring allies. And these rich French lawyers manged to stay in power for any length of time. (Oversimplified I know.)
I reserve the right to waste days designing graphics, government, ideology, and culture of a country that a fully plan on killing horribly in a few chapters. (Not confirming or denying that this will happen to England. It could happen to any of them 🙂.)
It's your prerogative as writer to write whatever you want, I'm just trying to be of assistance, to offer my thoughts and ideas, to make this TL even better.
Lucky we a focused on two different things. I'm more focused on the narrative, while you are on the plausibility. It forces me to triple check my reasonings.
(Which is why I know next chapter [tentative on Sunday] will be interesting.)
Narrative is a nice thing and I like it too, but without plausability it's either pure literature ( not bad, but not an alt-hist ) or wank/screw. Neither should belong here IMHO. OK, I know that various persons do have different ideas about what is plausible and what not, of course.
Mind you, I don't consider myself of any sort of authority about this subject, just saying my opinion.
Many writers here write by principle: if I avoided this in France, than it must happen in Spain/England or Russia. As you can see, it goes on my nerves, because it ruins a perfectly good stories.
I would say as long as there is a chance that it could happen, even if it is not the most likely, then it is alternate history. It's just soft alternate history as apposed to hard alternate history.
Restraining to only the most plausible option is great especially for discussions, but it's more akin to a math problem and, as a writer, less fun for me to make.
Since it's only a few days before I post the relevant chapter anyway, I'll do a very very minor spoiler.
Despite how quickly the revolution happened.
This is not that type of republic.
It is a bit cliche, yes. But usually when I see England undergo a revolution "normally" it is an idealized wish-fulfillment revolution and republic. The only absolutist bullies support the monarchy, the republicans don't always agree but a reasonable compromise is always found, unless one side is obvious leaning back towards monarchism. And everyone's rights are respected. All like England is immune to how the majority of republican revolutions actually play out.
Despite how quickly the revolution happened.
This is not that type of republic.
I kind of like a balance between plausibility and creativity. While it’s nice for everything to be generally plausible, a writer’s vision has the same level of importance. Hence I appreciate the plot twist with the British in your TL.
For the official language, I notice that you have "London." Is this a typo? Also, what geographic areas do the states represent (and why the name change)?
The format messed up when I copied and pasted it. It will be back up later tonight.
They thought that if the state continued to use the same name some people might feel more inclined to patriotic to the state rather than England. OTL revolutionary France did the same thing when they renamed their divisions.
Last edited:
No, they redrew the lines for the same reason. It'll be in the chapter when I get it posted properly.
No problem, take your time.No, they redrew the lines for the same reason. It'll be in the chapter when I get it posted properly.