What's the biggest plausible country-wank?

xsampa

Banned
The US somehow adopts an ideology that does _not_ emphasize race, which was the crucial factor for not annexing Latin American and Carribean possessions. Combine this with a slightly outward looking US that is willing to participate in a *Scramble for Africa and a *Scramble for China, plus whatever possessions the US is willing to pick up along the way (e.g Marquesas in 1813), and allies itself with Germany or a Central European power, allowing it to pick up former French, Dutch and British possessions after a *World War.
 
An Andean state other than the Kingdom of Cusco manages the OTL achievement of a massive Andean empire. As an added bonus, this might butterfly the Spanish conquest, given how much luck was involved in it.
Depending on which state, it might be significantly less centralized and imperial than the Inca Empire was as we know it, perhaps more like the Classical Maya or Ancient Greek hegemonies.
 
By one possible definition of a "wank", one of the strongest contenders by far could be the Principality of Liechtenstein. Apparently, prior to the sale of Russian Alaska to the U.S., an offer was made by the Imperial Russian government to the House of Liechtenstein over ownership of the territory. While the ability to finance and/or administer the colony are some challenges towards Liechtenstein going ahead with the purchase, in terms of potential land gain - an increase of over one million percent - a Liechtensteiner acquisition of Alaska is a top contender for the largest country wank within the bounds of plausibility.
 

Anawrahta

Banned
Chinese empire from the volga to hawaii?
Land/maritime Indian empire from Anatolia to Formosa(taiwan)?
Iranian empire from Italian peninsula/Carthage to the Kucha(tarim basin); and from Scythia(russia) to the north to Aksum(ethiopia) in the south.
bronze age egyptian empire that colonizes the entire eastern Mediterranean. Pretty huge.
 
The US somehow adopts an ideology that does _not_ emphasize race, which was the crucial factor for not annexing Latin American and Carribean possessions. Combine this with a slightly outward looking US that is willing to participate in a *Scramble for Africa and a *Scramble for China, plus whatever possessions the US is willing to pick up along the way (e.g Marquesas in 1813), and allies itself with Germany or a Central European power, allowing it to pick up former French, Dutch and British possessions after a *World War.

I don't actually think this is that far-fetched, if we can change Europe a bit before the American Revolution. Have the Seven Years War end with mixed results - Prussia is humbled (but not outright wrecked) and the French-Hapsburg alliance is victorious in Europe and India, but the British win decisively in the Americas. In the aftermath, bungled diplomacy drives a wedge between Spain and France, and the British move in, leading to a shaky British-Spanish alliance of convenience.

When the American Revolution breaks out, the Spanish support their British allies, partially out of concern that the revolution could spread to their colonies. The French do everything in their power to bring these fears to life, and are successful in sparking an early Mexican Revolution. Both American and Mexican revolutions eventually succeed, and both new nations are informally in the French orbit.

With weaker post-war ties to Britain and a sense of fellow-feeling with the Mexicans, the *USA draws the distinction more as "We aren't Europe" rather than "We're former British." If they have the opportunity to buy the Louisiana Territory at some point - and French debts are going to be ruinous, so that's plausible enough - they are also going to eventually become the dominant power in the Americas, and not so adverse to mass expansion, carrying American ideals of freedom and opportunity to more and more peoples.
 
Successful Polish/Swedish/Danish colonial empires

The House of Stuart continues to rule the British empire to this day (Either no glorious revolution or successful jacobite uprisings)

Successful Gallic empire
 

xsampa

Banned
I don't actually think this is that far-fetched, if we can change Europe a bit before the American Revolution. Have the Seven Years War end with mixed results - Prussia is humbled (but not outright wrecked) and the French-Hapsburg alliance is victorious in Europe and India, but the British win decisively in the Americas. In the aftermath, bungled diplomacy drives a wedge between Spain and France, and the British move in, leading to a shaky British-Spanish alliance of convenience.

When the American Revolution breaks out, the Spanish support their British allies, partially out of concern that the revolution could spread to their colonies. The French do everything in their power to bring these fears to life, and are successful in sparking an early Mexican Revolution. Both American and Mexican revolutions eventually succeed, and both new nations are informally in the French orbit.

With weaker post-war ties to Britain and a sense of fellow-feeling with the Mexicans, the *USA draws the distinction more as "We aren't Europe" rather than "We're former British." If they have the opportunity to buy the Louisiana Territory at some point - and French debts are going to be ruinous, so that's plausible enough - they are also going to eventually become the dominant power in the Americas, and not so adverse to mass expansion, carrying American ideals of freedom and opportunity to more and more peoples.

This sounds like it could be the basis of a TL. What happens to French India during the Revolution?
 
This sounds like it could be the basis of a TL. What happens to French India during the Revolution?

What revolution?

The French have just won the Seven Years War, then backed the winning side in the American and Mexican Wars of Independence, so the crown has prestige. They'll be able to reclaim some of the Caribbean Islands during the latter, they can probably reclaim New Orleans (and the Louisiana Territory, but really New Orleans is the important bit), and they control, either directly or through allies, much of India, so they have profitable colonies to help with finances, even if it's likely not enough. They're allied with Austria and either friendly or allied with Russia, providing security in Europe to deter future British revenge.

Yes, France has severe issues, but the House of Bourbon should be able to weather needed reforms.
 

xsampa

Banned
Wouldn't Britain receive a shock due to losing its Indian Empire in '63 and its American one in '76? I think that the response to reform in Britain will be far more heavy-handed and the resulting republican movements (see There will always be an England ) will have more power.
 
Maybe a surviving independent Kingdom of Galicia keeps its Portuguese holdings and expands south to the Algarve and maybe Leon and forms a mighty colonial empire like the OTL Portuguese did.

Portugal with Galicia and Leon (the two latters made the source of most of spain's oversea migrants) would have an insanely large settler population more than double that of portugal's IRL, it could simultaneously settle brazil, south africa and north america. Thanks to the colder, drier climate of the two latters compared to Brazil (where more than half of settlers died from illness in the first years of arrival), as well as the near limitless amount of land that would limit urbanisation the population will skyrocket, and all of this could happen in the early 16th century, a century before any succesful colonisation attempt were made in north america, a century at this time represented hundred of thousands of aditional settlers and 3-4 population doubling time in temperate, non tropical areas.

This has the potential to be much more than the portuguese, or spanish colonial empire ever where, this has the potential to have an entirely "portuguese-galician" Norht America, Brazil, Argentina, and, with time and lots of mixing, large part of subsaharian africa (at the very least below the congo). A country of 200,000 km² could have an empire controlling over 40 Millions km², and that today could have, together, population rivalling with china.

Actually a kingdom of galicia that just has galicia + portugal north of the tejo would have a lot of population pressure in the 15th century that could push many to further explore the atlantic until they discover and start fishing in north america, this small galicia+portugal (without the important early ports in algarve) may not be able to establish an empire in asia, and because of the fertile land in the azores and fishing ground in america the exploration could be more centered in the north atlantic rather than the south atlantic - african coast.
Portugal actually did settler colonies in madeira and the azores in the 15th century IRL, there if they do the same in north america, considering that most portugese migrant came from the north and galicia also was a huge source of oversea migrants, with a headstart in the mid 15th century the population cto ould eventually grow to tremendous size, by the time the french and english come in the early 17th century there would already be a few millions Galician-portuguese in norht america, and with this population they would quickly start expending west by the middle of the 17th century.

Population wise it would be equivalent to the early USA's by 1600 which wouldn't reach this population until 180 years later IRL. While it wouldn't get as much immigration as the USA got in the 19th century, pure natural growth along with the near endless farmland available would quickly make the population surpass portugal-galicia by the mid 17th century, and surpass that of any other european country by the mid 18th century, at this point they would likely have reached the west coast and you can expect additional portuguese-galician emigration thanks to a gold rush similar to the one in brazil IRL.

The result would be an entirely luso-galician speaking north america with a population of above 100 millions BEFORE the demogrpahic transition, it's unlikely it would have a significant industrial base, after all it's still portugal that colonized it, but by the modern days it could very easily have half a billion people maybe up to a billion, and control all of north america. All from a small kingdom of galicia that is even smaller than our portugal.
 
Last edited:
To start: The Bulgarian empires were only ever regional powers, but if a few things had gone differently for the Byzantines/Ottomans, I can see them dominating the Eastern Mediterranean.

Really any of the Balkan powers on the rise when Byzantium was collapsing could plausibly have "replaced" the Ottomans (so could other Anatolian Beyliks, but they weren't too interested in taking Constantinople from what I know).

For example, if Czar Stefan Dušan of Serbia had taken Constantinople (he died just before reaching the city, so we can't know how effective his siege would have been, but overall he was an excellent general), and then destroyed the Ottos to take back western Anatolia, Serbia ends up a lot bigger than OTL and is essentially a continuation of the Byzantine empire under Serbian leadership. It could have expanded to all sorts of places. Southern Greece, Bosnia, parts of Hungary (and Croatia), Wallachia and Moldavia, Crimea, more of Anatolia, the Levant, even Cyprus and the Caucasus, are all possibilities. All this is a lot bigger than both Yugoslavia and the OTL Serbian Empire. Bulgaria could have done the same sort of thing a bit earlier of course.

I don't have an adequate map despite this being the main part of this post, and I have no time to make one. Sorry about that.

Sticking with the South Slavs, Bosnia could have stayed/gotten pretty big under the Kotromanićs if the Ottomans didn't come and ruin everything. I mean, the personal union with Serbia as a junior partner could see Bosnia controlling all of this:

kotromanic.jpg


Croatia with a successful Illyrian movement could have had all of Bosnia, Slovenia, Sanjak (Raška), Srem, and it could end up uniting the South Slavs instead of Serbia. While this isn't a lot larger than the Nazi puppet "Independent State of Croatia", that state was unsustainable and would not remain independent (the plan was that Italy would take it post-war). This "Illyrian" state would be a stable, significantly larger than OTL Croatian state. See map below:

Illyrian Republic.jpg
 
Last edited:
I don't actually think this is that far-fetched, if we can change Europe a bit before the American Revolution. Have the Seven Years War end with mixed results - Prussia is humbled (but not outright wrecked) and the French-Hapsburg alliance is victorious in Europe and India, but the British win decisively in the Americas. In the aftermath, bungled diplomacy drives a wedge between Spain and France, and the British move in, leading to a shaky British-Spanish alliance of convenience.

When the American Revolution breaks out, the Spanish support their British allies, partially out of concern that the revolution could spread to their colonies. The French do everything in their power to bring these fears to life, and are successful in sparking an early Mexican Revolution. Both American and Mexican revolutions eventually succeed, and both new nations are informally in the French orbit.

With weaker post-war ties to Britain and a sense of fellow-feeling with the Mexicans, the *USA draws the distinction more as "We aren't Europe" rather than "We're former British." If they have the opportunity to buy the Louisiana Territory at some point - and French debts are going to be ruinous, so that's plausible enough - they are also going to eventually become the dominant power in the Americas, and not so adverse to mass expansion, carrying American ideals of freedom and opportunity to more and more peoples.

How are the French going to provoke a Mexican Revolution. There is no support for revolution in Mexico at this time. In fact, even when Mexico got independence 50 years later it was a very near run affair and the first thing Iturbide did was offer the crown of Mexico to the Spanish.
 
  • Maurya/Gupta India
  • Greek/Roman Middle East, North Africa, Balkans and Western Europe
  • A Modernized and a stable Ottomon Empire in Eastern Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.
  • An Alternate American country encompassing Canada, USA and Mexico.
 
Perhaps a Tibet wank of some kind. Imagine a Tibet without the Tang invasion of the Celestial Turks. Instead for the period between 600-900, Tibet has near constant success on all borders. We may imagine a Tibetan polity ruling the following:

Tibet
Kashmir
Kabul Shahis/Bactria
Tocharia
Zabulistan
Sogdia
Nepal
Bengal
Assam
Kwarezm
———-
Then to make it a true wank; see the Tibet devastate the Tang more than otl and succeed in a conquest of China and establish a rule over most of China in a light sense.
A Tibetean Manchu-like wank for China would be interesting. Tibeteans ruling China.Lamaism in China gains influence.
 
As to answer the question and topic of this thread, I'm thinking a few nation ideas which make biggest plausible wank:

  • A Modernized and a stable Qing Dynasty in East Asia and Central Asia.
  • One of the South-East Asian nations rose to be an wank empire, particularly Burma, Ayuthayya and Vietnam.
  • Mataram Sultanate (Indonesia) comprised of Malay Archipelago, Papua New Guinea and the Phillipines. And perhaps Austrialia and New Zealand. Indonesia-wank in other words.
  • A bigger Ethiopian Empire, comprised of Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan and perhaps parts of Kenya
  • A modernized and a stable Safavid Iran in Middle-East and Central Asia.
  • A resurrected Mongol Empire in 18th century
A Tibetean Manchu-like wank for China would be interesting. Tibeteans ruling China.Lamaism in China gains influence.
Same here. A Tibetan Dynasty of China like the Mongol Yuan and the Manchu Qing. It would be interesting to see.
 
Top