Vreleksá Forum Index Vreleksá
The Alurhsa Word for Constructed: Creativity in both scripts and languages
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Althist?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vreleksá Forum Index -> Conworlds
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm sure France, Spain, and England would be more prevalent (IDK if the Netherlands would be under Spanish rule at the time like they were OTL), but some Dutch would be nice. Also, if we can pull it off, Scandinavian, and maybe some other more obscure ones (German? Polish? some flavor of Italian?).

One of the interesting things to note in OTL is that before 1950, the only non-Western nations who had competent Western-style militaries at any time were Japan and the Ottoman Empire. I'd like to see many more in our althist.

An althist idea I had a while ago involved an Imperial Japan coupled with a victorious CSA, for a North America consisting of the USA, CSA, Texas, and something I called 日終 (Nisshuu), though if anyone has a better antonym to Nippon we should use that for our Japanese-USA-idea. (Texas split off because of slave revolts causing utter anarchy through most of the CSA except Texas, the issue that drove Nisshuu to secession (like the USA's taxation) was factory workers' job conditions in the 1870's).

While we wait for Hemi's friend to get back to us, I guess we are free to speculate about the future of whatever.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kyonides



Joined: 28 Aug 2008
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
However, for now let's focus on ERA 1: 516 BC - (say) 450 BC.

Suggestions:
516 BC - Themistokles contracts some disease at age 8 and dies.
490 BC - The Athenians and Plataians defeat the Persians at Marathon.
483 BC - The money generated by the discovery of a new vein of silver at Laurion is distributed to private citizens at the suggestion of the archon Aristides. Athens continues a stalemate with Aigina (which had already sided with the Persians).
480 BC - Suggestions?: What strategy would the Greeks have adopted if Themistokles hadn't been there to suggest fighting at Thermopylai? Would someone else have suggested it, or would they have gone with something entirely different?

Let's say Carthage or Carthagus or whatever you wanna call it took control of Rome after the Roman asked them to help them fight against the Persian. Thus the Roman heritage would still survive...

Maybe there was a landslide at Thermopylai right before the Persian could get there, so the Greek army posted there were still waiting for them while they actually moved to another location... and blah blah blah
_________________
Seos nivo adgene Kizne tikelke

The Internet might be either your best friend or your worst enemy. It just depends on whether or not she has a bad hair day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kyonides wrote:
Quote:
However, for now let's focus on ERA 1: 516 BC - (say) 450 BC.

Suggestions:
516 BC - Themistokles contracts some disease at age 8 and dies.
490 BC - The Athenians and Plataians defeat the Persians at Marathon.
483 BC - The money generated by the discovery of a new vein of silver at Laurion is distributed to private citizens at the suggestion of the archon Aristides. Athens continues a stalemate with Aigina (which had already sided with the Persians).
480 BC - Suggestions?: What strategy would the Greeks have adopted if Themistokles hadn't been there to suggest fighting at Thermopylai? Would someone else have suggested it, or would they have gone with something entirely different?

Let's say Carthage or Carthagus or whatever you wanna call it took control of Rome after the Roman asked them to help them fight against the Persian. Thus the Roman heritage would still survive...

When would the Persians invade Rome? AFAIK, they probably wouldn't even know who Rome was for quite some time (they'd probably know by 300 BC, but not too much earlier), and after that IDK if Carthage (if you want to use the endonym, it's Qart-Hadasht) would win.

What I see is Carthage seeking help from Persia in the Punic Wars, probably late in the 2nd Punic War. IDK if Persia would do anything, but for me the most likely scenario is Carthage losing and Rome invading Persia, not Persia invading Rome and Rome asking for Carthaginian help, and then Carthage backstabbing Rome (if I understand you correctly).
What's an interesting question is which way former Greek refugees in southern Italy would side in the Punic Wars. (Another question is how much of it would be one state in the first place.)
If the Persians do keep moving after conquering Greece, either they'd go after the Greek refugees in southern Italy, or they'd have to march all the way through Illyricum and Northern Italy (which was then effectively Gaul) to get to Rome. If they invaded the Greek refugees, I bet Rome's growth would be stunted significantly, and if Persia were to invade them they might not even know to ask for help from Carthage.


Quote:
Maybe there was a landslide at Thermopylai right before the Persian could get there, so the Greek army posted there were still waiting for them while they actually moved to another location... and blah blah blah

Would that be necessary? They might end up picking somewhere else anyway, and even if they didn't I'm fine with Thermopylai going the way it did OTL. Artemision would likely go different (no Themistokles, far fewer Athenian ships), so perhaps the Persians would just land forces on the other side of the pass instead of waiting to find the way around. It would probably be more of a massacre than it already was OTL.

Off-topic: Still can't access that 'Quotes' thread.

EDIT: Do we want to keep calling Persia Persia? It's a Latinization of a Hellenization of the name for the specific tribe that Cyrus the Great (Kūruš) came from. The Persians in general have always referred to themselves by some descendant of the word Aryānām, which eventually became Iran. Suggestions?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hemicomputer



Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 610
Location: Calgary, Alberta

PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tolkien_Freak wrote:

EDIT: Do we want to keep calling Persia Persia? It's a Latinization of a Hellenization of the name for the specific tribe that Cyrus the Great (Kūruš) came from. The Persians in general have always referred to themselves by some descendant of the word Aryānām, which eventually became Iran. Suggestions?
We could just call it Iran or Aryanam. Maybe if we wanted some sort of Latinization we could use Aria or Arinia or something. Personally, my vote goes for Iran or Arinia.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I also vote Iran, I hate Latinizations. (I dislike all exonyms.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aeetlrcreejl



Joined: 08 Jun 2007
Posts: 839
Location: Over yonder

PostPosted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Exonyms are bad bad bad.
_________________
Iwocwá ĵọṭãsák.
/iwotSwa_H d`Z`Ot`~asa_Hk/
[iocwa_H d`Z`Ot`_h~a_Hk]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
achemel



Joined: 29 Mar 2009
Posts: 555
Location: up for debate

PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shocked
This looks interesting. (^_^) Can I be a bystander? I don't know enough history to participate but I'd like permission to make useless comments if I feel like it, haha.
_________________
I have some small knowledge of:
English, Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Spanish, French
I would like to learn:
(more) Chinese, Swedish, Italian, German, Indonesian, Tagalog, Gaelic
Main conlangs:
ddamachel, tadvaradcel, ra cel, lashel, hemnalg, nomah
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

^_^
Feel free, maybe someone with little history background can keep us from...
from...
...something...
IDK, just feels useful.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
achemel



Joined: 29 Mar 2009
Posts: 555
Location: up for debate

PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well thank you very much. (^_^) Perhaps I'll eventually have something to contribute, but likely not.
_________________
I have some small knowledge of:
English, Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Spanish, French
I would like to learn:
(more) Chinese, Swedish, Italian, German, Indonesian, Tagalog, Gaelic
Main conlangs:
ddamachel, tadvaradcel, ra cel, lashel, hemnalg, nomah
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hemicomputer wrote:
Tolkien_Freak wrote:
480 BC - Suggestions?: What strategy would the Greeks have adopted if Themistokles hadn't been there to suggest fighting at Thermopylai? Would someone else have suggested it, or would they have gone with something entirely different?
Actually, I happen to know someone who is studying ancient Greek battles and war tactics. If you want, I could seek her opinion on that.


Any word on this? This seems to be our roadblock for the moment.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hemicomputer



Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 610
Location: Calgary, Alberta

PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
Hemicomputer wrote:
Tolkien_Freak wrote:
480 BC - Suggestions?: What strategy would the Greeks have adopted if Themistokles hadn't been there to suggest fighting at Thermopylai? Would someone else have suggested it, or would they have gone with something entirely different?
Actually, I happen to know someone who is studying ancient Greek battles and war tactics. If you want, I could seek her opinion on that.


Any word on this? This seems to be our roadblock for the moment.
I've e-mailed her with the question and she has come up with something, which she tried tell me by phone but could not due to terrible reception. Currently I'm waiting for a reply e-mail, which should be in soon with any luck.
_________________
Bakram uso, mi abila, / del us bakrat, dahud bakrita!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Alright, quick recap based on some more research I've been doing:

518 BC: Themistokles is killed by illness in his youth.
Aftermath: Persians conquer Greece, we'll see what else happens.

June 30, 1520 AD: Cristóbal de Olea is chosen by the Aztecs to be beheaded, and thus fails to save Cortés's life.
Aftermath: Cortés's expedition fails, the Aztecs are left with European weapons and cavalry, Spain reverts to Governor Velazquez's strategy of trading with the Aztecs, Spain's attention focuses back on the Mediterranean and Pizarro is never sent to Perú (but North Africa becomes strong Spanish territory).
(Note on the story: The Aztecs captured 68 Spaniards, and beheaded 10 of them and threw the heads back at the rest of the Spaniards. De Olea sacrificed himself by breaking free of his Aztec guards and freeing Cortés, allowing the conquest to continue instead of being interrupted here as it is with this POD.)

June 18-24, 1582 AD: Mitsuhide Akechi is temporarily immobilized by a brief illness, and misses his opportunity to kill an unguarded Oda Nobunaga at Honnou-ji.
Aftermath: Oda Nobunaga is left to finish unifying Japan, Sakoku is never implemented so Japan remains open to foreign influences, Japan slowly converts to Catholicism, Japan becomes a colonial empire.

EDIT: Just wanted to note that after that initial POD, there will be vast swaths of history where most of the stuff that happens will probably look like a slightly modified version of OTL, so I'm fairly confident that the other two PODs can happen on their OTL dates.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baldash



Joined: 19 May 2009
Posts: 86
Location: Sweden

PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

First: Don't forget the butterfly effect. Secondly: Don't underestimate the impact of the butterfly effect. While I think that the history will be somewhat similar to OTL for a while, I don't think "slightly modified" is the right phrase for more than a very short period. I don't think two PODs is realistic. I give you two centuries tops for the events that then occur to be completely different from OTL. Well, the events will probably not surprise a time-travelling historian from OTL (they will be similar as far as the likelihood of a different ruler to make similar decisions in similar situations), but they will not be predictable either.

That's my two cents.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 2:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, we'll see what happens. That's why we're taking it in small segments ^_^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hemicomputer



Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 610
Location: Calgary, Alberta

PostPosted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 2:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The info is finally in! Here's what she had to say:

Quote:
Ok. So. At the time of the discovery of silver at Laurium, Athens was split in what should be done with the silver. There were two main factions, led by two main people. There were those who voted for the silver being used to build a strong navy for Athens, who were led by Themistocles, and there were those led by Aristides, who voted the silver be distributed among Athenian citizens. The issue was decided when Aristides was ostracized in 482. Thus, Themistocles won.

So had he not been there, things could easily have gone differently. There may well have been no battle at Salamis. Things also may have gone badly if Aristides had not been ostracized.

As well, it was Themistocles who interpreted the words of the oracle in a way that played to Athens' strengths. The oracle had said Athens could be saved from the Persians by a "wooden wall". Themistocles was the man who argued that this wall was in fact the Athenian navy, not an actual wall. The others had thought that the wall meant the wall of the Acropolis, and that they should all just hole up in Athens, and the wall would keep them safe. Things could still have gone badly for the Greeks, however, if the Athenians had not been willing to completely abandon their home.

In order to make their stand at Salamis, the Athenians left Athens behind them, knowing full well that it would become a target for the Persians. They put everything they had, their entire chance of success, behind the last naval battle of Salamis. In the process, Athens was burned to the ground. After the Persian wars it had to be completely rebuilt. If the Athenians had not been willing to abandon their home, they may well have lost the war. If they had taken the wooden wall to be the wall of the Acropolis, likely they would have been destroyed with their home.

As well, during the actual battle of Salamis, Xerxes was tricked into deploying his forces idiotically, being tricked by information from a supposed traitor. If he had not listened to this info, he may have won. However, he was tricked and lost the majority of his fleet. This meant the army had to retreat, as the navy was keeping them supplied.

So that's the rough version, although there are more complexities to it. If you have any questions, please ask!!!!

_________________
Bakram uso, mi abila, / del us bakrat, dahud bakrita!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 2:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Awesome, thank her for us ^_^

So they wouldn't have gone to Salamis in the first place, and likely would have been slaughtered there and never go on to found anything anywhere else. (Which makes the Romans the world's only hope for democracy, luckily they already had their Republic by now.)

One more quick question for her: where would the Greeks have decided to make their stand if not Thermopylai? I know that they were initially aiming for a pass farther north, but the king of Makedonia informed them of a route around, so they gave up that idea and picked Thermopylai. Also AFAIK Thermopylai was Themistokles's suggestion - so would someone else have suggested Thermopylai, or would they have gone somewhere else - Korinthos even?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kiri



Joined: 13 Jun 2009
Posts: 471
Location: Latvia/Italy

PostPosted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 2:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have to say, I've lost it already (sorry, I'm not too bright Very Happy ), and that, I think Greece being invaded is a POD big enough to let us erase all the other history of OTL and do whatever we want Smile - the marvelousness of the Butterfly Effect Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aert



Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 354

PostPosted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi, I'd love to be part of this althist as well (though I too can't comment much on the early history). I might be able to help with the 1500-present althist, especially the Americas and Japan etc.

I have to wonder where Africa and India come into this, I know they were both invaded/conquered by various armies (French, Belgian, (Persian?), British), but if some of those didn't exist, I wonder what would have happened...

Anyways, I'll be back in a while (I've almost read the entire thread Very Happy)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Feel free to be a part ^_^

@Hemicomputer: Did you ever ask those follow-up questions? They're kind of what's stalling the althist ATM.

Either that or we could drop the Greece POD and just go for the 1500s two. What do people think?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hemicomputer



Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 610
Location: Calgary, Alberta

PostPosted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
@Hemicomputer: Did you ever ask those follow-up questions? They're kind of what's stalling the althist ATM.
Sorry! I forgot about those. I'll likely be seeing her soon, so you can expect some answers fairly soon.

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
Either that or we could drop the Greece POD and just go for the 1500s two. What do people think?
I think the Greece one works well on its own. If Greece was conquered by Aryanam, then Europeans would likely have an easyer time getting access to Asian silk and spice. Perhaps then they would not have to try to find the Northwest Passage, and the Americas would not have been invaded as soon or for the same reasons. Perhaps then Nippon might reach it first. Or coastal North American civilizations would have time develop seafaring technology and go invade Africa or Scandinavia or something.
_________________
Bakram uso, mi abila, / del us bakrat, dahud bakrita!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vreleksá Forum Index -> Conworlds
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Theme ACID © 2003 par HEDONISM Web Hosting Directory


Start Your Own Video Sharing Site

Free Web Hosting | Free Forum Hosting | FlashWebHost.com | Image Hosting | Photo Gallery | FreeMarriage.com

Powered by PhpBBweb.com, setup your forum now!
For Support, visit Forums.BizHat.com