Why the Chinese play cricket (an Imperial Federation timeline)
- Thread starter Miss Construction
- Start date
China as at October 1901
Base maps from Free SVG Maps and used under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial 4.0 Intentional
Base maps from Free SVG Maps and used under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial 4.0 Intentional
China as at December 1901
Base maps from Free SVG Maps and used under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial 4.0 Intentional
Base maps from Free SVG Maps and used under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial 4.0 Intentional
Last edited:
Hopeful these maps will show the magnitude of the disaster suffered by the Nanjing Chinese Government due to the defection of Xu Yingkai. Basically, they lost half the territory they controlled, including the most resource rich areas they had previously controlled. However it's also important to remember Southern China is far more economically and industrially developed than the north. So don't count them out quite yet.
Sun Yat-sen is part of the Nanjing Grand Council as is Hang Xing. So the republicans will gravitate toward the Southern Dynasty. Not sure about the Communists, in the 3rd iteration Zhou Enlai played a very major role with the Southern Dynasty.
TBH Mao was a repulsive little man and more of a cult leader as well as a dictator I could see him blending in with the Northern Regime as one of their bully boys maybe a chief enforcer.
Yes, with one exception on the Northern side.
I have no love for him either, and likewise I see him more in the North than South. However the CCP is tricky. Some of it's earliest leaders were involved in the overthrow of the Qing Dynasty. But there's a huge issue with the radical left ITTL. The massive rise of communism in the OTL is very closely tied with success of the Bolsheviks in Russia. ITTL the is a very strong split in the radical left between the anarchists and communists, with neither being truly ascendant.
A lot is dependent on how the Great War and it's aftermath play out. While I know the GW is very likely to happen ITTL, it will play out differently to the OTL and I don't know how. I know what happened in the 3rd Iteration, but this iteration is different. Things are currently looking like the alliances may fall in a similar pattern to the 3I (the Entente of France, US, Japan, Russia Vs the Central Powers ofGermany and A-H) a lot of important pieces haven't fallen into place yet.
ForEx, the Ottomans are drifting toward the CP, but far from certain. Britain is still in it's splendid isolation, but there are signs of the Brits moving toward the Entente (the 4th Q 1901 colonial understand between them is a definite sign, as is the birth of Anglo-German naval rivalry). It's way too early to say how things will go down. And the rise of communism is tied to the GW. Guess just watch this space lol.
Another thing to remember about the CCP, is in 1902, the oldest of the founders are in their mid 20s, most aren't even teenagers yet. Mao was only born in 1897.
Just waiting for the bodyline tour to disrupt negotiations for the imperial federation. I can imagine a cartoon of Larwood bowling and smashing the table the diplomats are at
Last edited:
In the 3rd Iteration it was a major crisis which seriously threatened Imperial unity.
How long before the Imperial Federation get a Cleansing the Heresy CB on the followers of false cricket? 
Harold larwood.....my mums uncle.
Only time my family has made it to The pages here
A great player who was horribly mistreated by the MCC after the tour. At least he gets the recognition he deserves nowadays.
The next update may be delayed. I'm going back and reworking the period 1901-1906to incorporate a number of new ideas. Hopefully nothing major. These are the only two changes to 1901.
====
August 1901: Acutely aware how the Dreyfus Affair has weakened France and seeking to capitalise on the increase in hostility toward German in Britain due to the Second Naval Law, French Emperor Napoleon IV suggests a conference aimed at reducing colonial tensions between Britain and France. Lord Salisbury, himself aware of the shortcomings in Imperial defence revealed by the recent wars, eagerly agrees. The conference is scheduled for mid December in London, with Prime Minister Pierre Waldeck-Rousseau representing France and Lord Salisbury Britain.
December 1901: The Anglo-French conference on colonial affairs is held in London. The two nations however see the conference in very different lights. French Prime Minister Waldeck-Rousseau views it as the first step in bringing the British into their Entente with Russia, while Lord Salisbury regards it simply as an opportunity to reduce the number of threats to Imperial security. Lord Salisbury's refusal to make any Imperial commitment regarding Europe results in the conference focusing solely on colonial matters. The conference is however successful in reducing colonial tensions between the two Great Powers. France agrees to support the Anglo-US 'Open Door' policy in China, recognise Siam as an independent buffer state between British India and French Indochina, and acknowledges British control of Egypt. In return the British agree to support French claims in North Africa, as well as dropping their reservation which has prevented the Suez Convention from taking legal effect.
=McUpdate=
====
August 1901: Acutely aware how the Dreyfus Affair has weakened France and seeking to capitalise on the increase in hostility toward German in Britain due to the Second Naval Law, French Emperor Napoleon IV suggests a conference aimed at reducing colonial tensions between Britain and France. Lord Salisbury, himself aware of the shortcomings in Imperial defence revealed by the recent wars, eagerly agrees. The conference is scheduled for mid December in London, with Prime Minister Pierre Waldeck-Rousseau representing France and Lord Salisbury Britain.
December 1901: The Anglo-French conference on colonial affairs is held in London. The two nations however see the conference in very different lights. French Prime Minister Waldeck-Rousseau views it as the first step in bringing the British into their Entente with Russia, while Lord Salisbury regards it simply as an opportunity to reduce the number of threats to Imperial security. Lord Salisbury's refusal to make any Imperial commitment regarding Europe results in the conference focusing solely on colonial matters. The conference is however successful in reducing colonial tensions between the two Great Powers. France agrees to support the Anglo-US 'Open Door' policy in China, recognise Siam as an independent buffer state between British India and French Indochina, and acknowledges British control of Egypt. In return the British agree to support French claims in North Africa, as well as dropping their reservation which has prevented the Suez Convention from taking legal effect.
=McUpdate=
Given the UKs committement to defend Belgium I can't see anyway they wouldn't get dragged into WW1 especially if the German ambassador makes the same remarks he does OTL to the UK government at the time.
Though with Russia I can't see any way it doesn't end in revolution for them or at least a low intensity brushfire .
While the British definitely have a commitment to guaranteeing Belgium neutrality under the 1839 Treaty of London. and such things were taken serious at the time, sadly at the end of the day it is actually "just a scrap of paper." The British entry into the First World War in the OTL had far more to do with fears of German hegemony than the legal niceties of the Treaty of London. Any government worth their salt could find a loophole. A lot depends on how Anglo-French and Anglo-German relations go over the next ten years.
However when it comes to Russia, yes it is almost certain something will give due to the Great War. However again, it's impossible at this point for me to make any assumptions about how or when that will happen. The nature of this TL is everything disappear into a haze past around 1910 at the moment. There really are too many butterflies in flight. Knowing what I know of what I've worked out, there is actually a chance Germany will adopt a Russia first strategy and not attack Belgium at all.
Last edited: