Uneducated pleb writes bad TL, seeks council

Hello! I posted a different version of this post in the help forum not long ago, and the very helpful fdas and Md139115 provided me with alternative ideas and steered me towards this section of the forum, respectively. Tl;dr at the bottom for those who appreciate them.
As a warning and foreword to this post, I feel it pertinent to mention that I am NOT a history buff(although I do find history fascinating and love to read about it, I rarely get far due to the lack of a "starting" point or reliable access to a library) nor am I versed in or even wholly familiar with either alternate history fiction or the seemingly lovely community you all have.
A few years ago, I had a fun little idea to design a pretend country. I made decisions based entirely on how fun they would be and did a few cursory Wikipedia searches to "fact-check". For a long time, I was satisfied, and left it at that.
Naturally, I got older(rapidly, as I am still a teenager) and remembered my own project with mixed sentimental attachment, and abject horror. It was poorly researched and had no concept of how densely interconnected global politics are. However, due to the sentiment long stewing in my subconscious, this resulted in a long list of potential darlings that I am willing to kill, but struggle to pull the trigger on.

Anyway, here is the meat of my post.

The following description will be the bulk of my... idea...as I left it upon its creation. I am aware of how stupid it sounds, but I can't seem to parse rot from viable points. Please forgive my vagueness on many points.

My fictional country, which I will hereafter refer to under the pseudonym of "Fauxland"*, is a province created around the early 13th century** in western Europe as... well... social experiment, puppet state, elaborate political psychological warfare device, take your pick. I sure wasn't clear about it when I wrote it down, although my gut tells me "puppet state" is the most realistic option.
Fauxland begins as an utterly tiny territory sandwiched somewhere between borders in northern france. The idea was that it was a military province, but was also immediately targeted by land-hungry foreign powers and, after some difficulty, it is disbanded and the entire identity of the province is effectively an enclave and preserved in name only. Eventually the idea is recycled as a colonization effort for a relatively small island chain(which I have also wholly fabricated for the sake of simplicity) and, much like early Australia, is used as a dumping ground for "unsavory types".
Everything after this point is "easy" in my eyes, since it doesn't strictly require the consideration of every European power simultaneously.

So. My end goal with all this is essentially to create a dense analytical "history textbook"-like document for my fictional country, making it seem as believable as I can to our modern idea of history, as if it could really exist.
And this is where it begins to go south.
I know now that the idea of an entire country existing in the middle of central Europe where there was none previously is going to change many, many things. I've been considering it, off and on, for the past few hours, and I believe my stance on the suspension of disbelief principle is something along the lines of, "I want something stronger than a house of cards, but I'm still willing to sacrifice some realism if necessary, so plywood will do in the absence of solid oak."

Any tips or suggestions, questions, or criticisms are welcome. Thank you very much for reading.

*I am admittedly quite embarrassed about the whole idea as it is very clearly a hackshot mess held together with duct tape and general idiocy.
**If I could travel back in time and punch myself in the face for trying to establish a French-devised military state in what is one of the most prosperous and artistically rich periods in French history, I would. Sigh...

Tl;dr, I want to write a passably convincing document that mimics a modern history book on a country that I have completely made up, where it bears as close of a resemblance to our timeline's history as possible. The serpent eats its own tail, and distress ensues.
 
Tl;dr, I want to write a passably convincing document that mimics a modern history book on a country that I have completely made up, where it bears as close of a resemblance to our timeline's history as possible. The serpent eats its own tail, and distress ensues.

So when you say you want your alternate country to resemble our timeline's history, do you mean that you want there to be a lot of parallelism in your story (i.e., that things end up going pretty much the same way as they did in OTL), or that you want your fictional country to develop along the same lines as OTL's western European countries did?
 
So when you say you want your alternate country to resemble our timeline's history, do you mean that you want there to be a lot of parallelism in your story (i.e., that things end up going pretty much the same way as they did in OTL), or that you want your fictional country to develop along the same lines as OTL's western European countries did?

Parallelism, if at all possible. I do feel a little silly for suggesting it, but you can't go anywhere if you don't try, so!
 
Parallelism, if at all possible. I do feel a little silly for suggesting it, but you can't go anywhere if you don't try, so!
Don't feel silly. As you say, you can't go anywhere if you don't try!

So you want lots of parallelism. One thing we need to figure out is how much parallelism you want. Do you want the same exact historical figures to be in the same exact positions as they were in OTL, as in this alternate history project? If that's the direction you're looking, then Faux-land would need to maintain a very small profile on the international stage over the course of its history, so that the alternate country can plausibly avoid affecting too much of the outside world.

Or, are you more interested in something like the Draka route*, which has some cursory differences (e.g., Al Smith becoming President of the United States, different names for certain conflicts) but history broadly follows the same contours?

*By the way, don't use the Draka as a model for Faux-land. It's an entertaining series but highly dubious as a work of alternate history. It essentially takes your idea of Fauxland but tries to have its cake and eat it too: it has its alternate country (Draka) become incredibly influential on the world stage (taking over the entirety of Africa by the end of the 19th century) while affecting the external geopolitical situation so little that by the 1930s, there is still Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.
 
Last edited:
So you want lots of parallelism. One thing we need to figure out is how much parallelism you want. Do you want the same exact historical figures to be in the same exact positions as they were in OTL, as in this alternate history project? If that's the direction you're looking, then Faux-land would need to maintain a very small profile on the international stage over the course of its history, so that the alternate country can plausibly avoid affecting too much of the outside world.

The going idea is that Fauxland goes through some conflict in regards to other powers during the early years of its existence, as it would be viewed as a weak country, although it proves that it can defend itself well. It generally amounts to attempts at foreign capture, some successful, but mostly it stands its ground.
However, outside of this, it's mostly quiet and keeps to itself as a nation. The most active prominence I can think of is a fair piracy presence during the naval boom, but outside of trade and the aforementioned criminal underbelly, the country is pretty isolated.

Mostly my biggest issues revolve around its conception and the effects it may have on foreign powers if they devote any time or attention to trying to conquer it, which I figure is bound to be attempted as the archipelago is very close to Europe.
 

Md139115

Banned
Well the good news is that the proposed area where Fauxland supposedly is happens to be one of the most volatile areas in Western Europe historically, with the modern borders only really getting nailed down with the creation of Belgium in 1830. And the 13th and 14th Century is probably the best time possible to nail down something, since the region is frequently changing hands between the states of the Holy Roman Empire to the northeast, the English to the northwest, the French to the southwest, and the Duchy of Burgundy (the very powerful nominal vassal of the King of France who frequently flipped between recognizing the King of England or the Valois as the rightful King of France when useful) to the southeast. So plenty of opportunities for a chaotic creation.

There is also some opportunity for a criminal element to be worked into this.
Historically, the town of Dunkirk, located right in your area, had a bit of history that bordered on piracy.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunkirkers
 
The going idea is that Fauxland goes through some conflict in regards to other powers during the early years of its existence, as it would be viewed as a weak country, although it proves that it can defend itself well. It generally amounts to attempts at foreign capture, some successful, but mostly it stands its ground.
However, outside of this, it's mostly quiet and keeps to itself as a nation. The most active prominence I can think of is a fair piracy presence during the naval boom, but outside of trade and the aforementioned criminal underbelly, the country is pretty isolated.

Mostly my biggest issues revolve around its conception and the effects it may have on foreign powers if they devote any time or attention to trying to conquer it, which I figure is bound to be attempted as the archipelago is very close to Europe.
I don't know much about the 13th century, so I don't think I'll be able to help much with the actual historical content of the country's creation. Where in relation to Europe is the archipelago to be? That'll be important in determining which culture settles the islands, and therefore how they will develop. If you want to realistically stipulate that the islands not be discovered by Europeans until the 13th century, put enough of a distance between the mainland and the islands that they can't be spotted from shore and no commonly-used trade routes will go near it. Oh, and don't put it in the Mediterranean or the Baltic.

Edit: Never mind about my question, I just re-read the original post. The above poster's advice seems sound to me, and I can reasonably imagine no one being that interested in Fauxland until the centralizing monarchs take power.
 
The going idea is that Fauxland goes through some conflict in regards to other powers during the early years of its existence, as it would be viewed as a weak country, although it proves that it can defend itself well. It generally amounts to attempts at foreign capture, some successful, but mostly it stands its ground.
However, outside of this, it's mostly quiet and keeps to itself as a nation. The most active prominence I can think of is a fair piracy presence during the naval boom, but outside of trade and the aforementioned criminal underbelly, the country is pretty isolated.

Mostly my biggest issues revolve around its conception and the effects it may have on foreign powers if they devote any time or attention to trying to conquer it, which I figure is bound to be attempted as the archipelago is very close to Europe.

Why not make it an autonomous dependency of an already existing nation? Like it technically belongs to someone—say, England—but is unimportant and autonomous enough that it’s not worth fighting over.
 
I don't know much about the 13th century, so I don't think I'll be able to help much with the actual historical content of the country's creation. Where in relation to Europe is the archipelago to be? That'll be important in determining which culture settles the islands, and therefore how they will develop. If you want to realistically stipulate that the islands not be discovered by Europeans until the 13th century, put enough of a distance between the mainland and the islands that they can't be spotted from shore and no commonly-used trade routes will go near it. Oh, and don't put it in the Mediterranean or the Baltic.

I always imagined it to be around the space between western Europe and Greenland, and a bit to the south, as it is a cold climate that's nearby, but since Greenland was discovered in the 10th century or so, even by accident, that may not be the best plan?
 
I always imagined it to be around the space between western Europe and Greenland, and a bit to the south, as it is a cold climate that's nearby, but since Greenland was discovered in the 10th century or so, even by accident, that may not be the best plan?
That could work alright. The less-than-balmy climate could discourage settlement to the new islands. A problem may be that if you put them to close to the British isles, they may end up becoming part-and-parcel of the United Kingdom, and thus not very independent.
 
That could work alright. The less-than-balmy climate could discourage settlement to the new islands. A problem may be that if you put them to close to the British isles, they may end up becoming part-and-parcel of the United Kingdom, and thus not very independent.
I did plan ahead for that, actually.
The idea is that Fauxland and England have a lot of tension and only begrudgingly leave eachother alone due to Fauxland being just barely too defensible and England being just barely too busy with larger matters to fry that proverbial fish. A lot of the tension also comes from Fauxland being a formerly French-controlled(and originating) power, so there would be a bit of spite mixed in as well, I would imagine.
The British Isles WOULD still definitely have on-and-off control over it for a smattering, I believe.
 
I did plan ahead for that, actually.
The idea is that Fauxland and England have a lot of tension and only begrudgingly leave eachother alone due to Fauxland being just barely too defensible and England being just barely too busy with larger matters to fry that proverbial fish. A lot of the tension also comes from Fauxland being a formerly French-controlled(and originating) power, so there would be a bit of spite mixed in as well, I would imagine.
The British Isles WOULD still definitely have on-and-off control over it for a smattering, I believe.
Oh, I see. So you already intend for Fauxland to be occupied by foreign powers. This would probably result in an interesting meshing of French, English and other European cultures (a bit like OTL Britain for quite a long time after the Norman invasion, but enduring for longer). Perhaps its own language or dialect of French/English?
 
Oh, I see. So you already intend for Fauxland to be occupied by foreign powers. This would probably result in an interesting meshing of French, English and other European cultures (a bit like OTL Britain for quite a long time after the Norman invasion, but enduring for longer). Perhaps its own language or dialect of French/English?
Yes! Its language is a mixture between French, German(due to the area of its origin being very close to some aggressive German-speaking powers), and English, with some other tiny spackles of other languages here and there. I... suppose I thought about this a bit more thoroughly than I originally believed, ahaha.
 
By the way, is "Fauxland" to be the permanent name for the country? If, yes, it might harm the suspension of disbelief (especially among French-speakers) to constantly be reminded that your country does not really exist. Unless you devise some cheeky way for the islands to be called Fauxland...
 
By the way, is "Fauxland" to be the permanent name for the country? If, yes, it might harm the suspension of disbelief (especially among French-speakers) to constantly be reminded that your country does not really exist. Unless you devise some cheeky way for the islands to be called Fauxland...

Oh! No, no, it's a pseudonym. The actual name is an actual phrase in french that got sort of gradually crushed and blurred together into an entirely new "word", as the country would be about 800 years old by now.
 
Oh! No, no, it's a pseudonym. The actual name is an actual phrase in french that got sort of gradually crushed and blurred together into an entirely new "word", as the country would be about 800 years old by now.
What’s the name? I speak French as a second language, so I want to see if I can guess the phrase ;)
 
What’s the name? I speak French as a second language, so I want to see if I can guess the phrase ;)
"Socolinia."
I mostly used google translate and had the phrase vetted by a semi-fluent relative, so it may not be terribly accurate, I warn you.
(I do my ancestors shame! XP)
 

Md139115

Banned
Alright... I think I may have an idea here...

Actual History:
The County of Boulogne is an ancient and much fought over piece of land in Northern France, partially because it has two cities, Boulogne and Calais, that are highly defensible seaports.

Between 1216 and 1259, it was ruled by Matilda II of Boulogne. However, something happened between her and her only son Alberic, and he renounced his succession rights and ran away to England. He apparently died after his mother in 1284, but had no children. Her daughter having predeceased her, on Matilda’s death in 1259, the throne started to migrate through a bunch of female lines before finally becoming part of the French crown holdings through marriage in 1549. Long before that though, England captured Calais in 1348 in the opening stages of the Hundred Years War, biting off the northern part of the county. Even though it technically ruled it as part of its claim to the French throne, in practice it was treated as an English town, even getting seats in Parliament. Calais was recaptured by the French during the chaos of Queen Mary I’s reign in 1558, reuniting it with the rest of Boulogne.

Now...

Idea:
Alberic (no idea when he was born but it would have been around ~1230 plus or minus a few years based on his mother’s marriage) never renounces his claim, he just flees. As the heir to a strategic county, he would have been welcomed with open arms by the English court, and could easily have become a mentor or older brother figure to the future King Edward I (born 1237). His arrival could also cause a butterfly that results in King Henry III and his wife having a daughter, who, unlike the historical Katherine, is healthy and would have been prime bride material for Alberic (no, the age difference doesn’t matter). After Matilda’s death, Alberic sails back and becomes count, establishing a pro-English dynasty. He may even go on crusade with Edward and last a couple years longer than his death in 1284. Either way, his son or grandson, when the Hundred Years War kicks off in 1337, declares for England, and the gates of both Calais and Boulogne are thrown open for the English army. The French can easily occupy much of the countryside when things start to go south for England, but unlike OTL, where they could isolate Calais to the city and two outlying hamlets, they can’t really do the same without Boulogne, meaning that in any peace settlement, the English and their loyal count keep most, of not all, the county.

Now it’s one thing to hold a city captured in war, it’s quite another to hold an entire county that has a ruler with a record of loyalty to you. The kings of England would have to treat the Counts of Boulogne as fully autonomous - a one count and county manifestation of their claim to the French throne. It cannot be incorporated into England (except through marriage, but that’s easily avoidable), but it cannot be gotten rid of either.

Now then, the situation would be highly unstable once you start getting heavier and more reliable cannon that can take down the toughest walls and a more stable French kingdom that really, really hates the Boulogne affair. I cannot see the independent county surviving past 1603 (Queen Elizabeth I’s death) if not much earlier.

But... there is no reason why the very rich (from all the revenue of the trade between England and the continent) Counts of Boulogne cannot decide before that to launch a colonial expedition to the New World, and found a new Calais or new Boulogne in the Caribbean...
 
Top