I doubt so as in the era of the 1800s, European governments couldn't conquer their neighbors just for the fun, they needed a casus belli; without Prussia having a casus belli over Iceland, they'd be getting side eyed by all other European powers if they attempted to conquer it.
Miscellaneous <1900 (Alternate) History Thread
- Thread starter RMcD94
- Start date
Has anyone ever done a timeline for a Kingdom of Jerusalem that manages to survive for a fair while longer, possibly even into the revolutionary era and or beyond?
At the time Iceland was a possession of the Danish crown, the question is basically if Prussia could have taken some Danish colonies at the same time as they took some Danish territory in Europe in the 1860s.
I dont think that they would have, and maybe could not have. The Danish fleet was a bit bigger than the Prussian one in the period, and the Prussian warships which were available were busy trying to protect the flanks of the army. Not to mention that they would have had to sail over and grab the island, and even if they succeeded then at the wars end Prussia would own Iceland.
Maybe the Danes could trade the islands for some concessions in the peace negotiations? Not sure what exactly, but that may not be too out of possibility.
A bigger Vatican maybe getting Leonine City would this be possible could the Vatican be bigger some other way?
This "catch-all" type of thread can be incredibly beneficial in larger online communities, especially when certain niche topics or ideas might not warrant an entire thread or topic of their own. Let's break down the concept a bit:
Concept: "The Idea and Query Nexus"
Purpose:
- To provide a platform for users to ask minor, alternative, or frivolous questions which might not be easily answered elsewhere.
- To allow users to share miscellaneous or lighter ideas, challenges, or scenarios they've encountered but don't think it merits a standalone thread.
Rules & Guidelines:
- Relevance: Even though this is a catch-all thread, the questions or ideas should be somewhat relevant to the overarching theme of the forum. For instance, if it's a history forum, then even the miscellaneous topics should pertain to history in some form.
- Search Before Posting: Before posing a question, a quick search within the thread should be done to avoid repetitions.
- Be Respectful: Given that the nature of topics here might be varied and subjective, users should maintain a respectful tone and avoid putting down others' ideas or queries.
- Limitations on Length: To prevent any single post from overshadowing others, there might be a word or character limit.
Cricket used to be really popular in the US what if... a US entrepreneur invented, marketed and made popular the Twenty20 version of the game which takes off and eclipses baseball?
en.wikipedia.org
Twenty20 - Wikipedia
I dont think that version of cricket came about until the 21st century. But as for what about a shortened version of cricket being popularized? That I could see taking off in the US during the same period baseball took off. Maybe American cricket becomes popular in the US before making its way across the Atlantic and from there penetrating the rest of the British empire.Cricket used to be really popular in the US what if... a US entrepreneur invented, marketed and made popular the Twenty20 version of the game which takes off and eclipses baseball?
Twenty20 - Wikipedia
If the Spanish Empire gets partitioned in the late 17th century in the following manner: Crown of Castile and the colonies inherited by the Bourbons, everything else by the Danubian Habsburgs; then how long could the division of Spain (Castile and Aragon) persist? Could it become permanent?
2nd Mexican empire exchanges north mexico for full American support and not interfering with invasion of central America up to panama but gets north panama after canal is built could this happen?
I suspect contestants include Tamerlane, the Khmer Rouge, Congo Free State, and Zhang Xianzhong (assuming the things they say about him, like the Seven Kill Stele, are not exaggerations made by his enemies). Anybody I forgot?
Not to mention how to define subjects.
For example after Nazi-Germany annexed Poland, did that mean that the Poles now were 'subjects' and all atrocities the Germans committed against them fulfil the criteria?
Finally, I believe Sparta certainly deserves a mention. Excluding territories part of larger states, no country ever had such a large part of its population consisting out of slaves. And the things written about Sparta's treatment of the Helots (like the Cryptia) suggest they were treated even worse than usual for slaves.
Maybe such a bad defeat is inflicted that the Crown ceded its territory to the Hohenzollerns directly, and abdicate? Maybe Denmark gets to keep the specifically majority Dane part of Schleswig but loses the Faroes, Iceland, and Greenland to Prussia?
Problem is that this betrays the entire justification of the war, i.e defending German-minded people of the duchies and keeping Schleswig-Holstein unified. Also Bismarck's general lack of interest in colonization is an issue.
Britain would be none to happy about Prussian influence in the North Atlantic.
I was just throwing out ideas and you taught me something that I didn't know about history so thank you kind sir c: