Miscellaneous <1900 (Alternate) History Thread
- Thread starter RMcD94
- Start date
Not often, but personal unions were also not the norm, except internally.
Since Spain fighting with France and America during the American Revolution was through the initiative of France and not Spain, the most likely result would be France getting Spain to fight with France and America in the American Revolution in exchange for Spain getting back Minorca and Louisiana from France in the American Revolution. Plus, if the French intervention in the American Revolution were butterflied, the Spanish intervention in the American Revolution would be butterflied.
Last edited:
I think the best bet outside of a Portugal wank would be doing something with the prazeiros, the colonial landowners in Portuguese Mozambique who were mixed-race people and defacto autonomous from Portugal. Some of them would fight with local African kingdoms to gain additional wealth.
As for why it didn't happen? I'd assume that it's because the prazeiros had little real advantage over their African adversaries and because their relation with Portugal was fine as it was--Portugal doesn't bother them or ask why they aren't submitting the required taxes from their estates, but Portugal still will trade with them, send priests, and act as a legitimiser in disputes.
I was wondering if something could prompt the Maravi state in that direction.
What if Napoleon died in battle in March of 1814?
How does this change subsequent events well past the impossibility of the Hundred Days?
What if Henry VIII got his annulment in 1530?
Let's say someone impresses upon the pope that Henry is seriously about the break with the church over the Great Matter, leading the pope to finally concede the issue of the annulment in late 1530. Let's say the news arrives in England during the fall parliament that year. Henry weds Anne, has Elizabeth and then ... Anne miscarries a number of times.
So, the problems that plagued OTL Henry and Anne still exist, but he is not the head of the church and can't just unilaterally annul his second marriage as he did in OTL. How does he go about uncoupling from his second wife in a world where he's still obedient to Rome? Does he attempt another annulment through Rome when the first one took so many years? Does he stick it out and hope for the best? Or does he just end up doing the English Reformation a few years later in ATL? Or something else entirely?
cc: @isabella @RedKing and all other Tudorphiles. (I know there's a million of you.)
Let's say someone impresses upon the pope that Henry is seriously about the break with the church over the Great Matter, leading the pope to finally concede the issue of the annulment in late 1530. Let's say the news arrives in England during the fall parliament that year. Henry weds Anne, has Elizabeth and then ... Anne miscarries a number of times.
So, the problems that plagued OTL Henry and Anne still exist, but he is not the head of the church and can't just unilaterally annul his second marriage as he did in OTL. How does he go about uncoupling from his second wife in a world where he's still obedient to Rome? Does he attempt another annulment through Rome when the first one took so many years? Does he stick it out and hope for the best? Or does he just end up doing the English Reformation a few years later in ATL? Or something else entirely?
cc: @isabella @RedKing and all other Tudorphiles. (I know there's a million of you.)
If Anne is given three more years and is Henry's rightful wife throughout Christendom, then I honestly don't see her not giving him a son. But if you insist on that, then I'd probably have her die in something like a riding accident. And of course, if Henry doesn't kill Anne, that frees him up to marry more prestigiously after her, so perhaps to Christina of Denmark or Marie de Guise...
An Anne married to Henry in 1531 and universally recognized as his wife and Queen is unlikely to have only Elizabeth and miscarriages.
Still she would have no way to fight Henry so she would accept an annulment with some excuse if Elizabeth remained legitimate and she was compensated with a good settlement (like Anne of Cleves in OTL).
Point taken, but still, let's say that if she produces another healthy child or two then they're girls. So the situation is still functionally equivalent.
As Isabella says, Anne would probably accept reverting to Marquis of Pembroke in exchange for her daughters remaining legitimate.
Would Henry have any say over their legitimacy, though? Would that power not reside with Rome?
Rome usually agreed who the kids were legitimate unless specifically asked to disinherit them
The church usually erred on the side of allowing the children of any marriage to remain legitimate, as long as one of their parents could claim to have made their marriage in good faith, so I can't see them NOT accepting the legitimacy of Anne's daughters, given they agreed to the annulment in the first place!
This may border on ASB, but I'd kinda like to see a timeline exploring an alternate Civil War where the British back the Confederacy but the French back the Union. It'd be an interesting development because I still see a Union victory here, but it would permanently sour the Anglo-American relations I feel.
Any book recs which analyze religions from the rise of agriculture to the present that look at not only the main religions, eg hinduism, islam, christianity, etc, but also the minute religions/cults which've played a major role in shaping the modern day like Sikhism, the cult of Isis, Mithraism, & Dionysius, the transformation of Bronze age (in particular the religion(s) of Egypt) religions, etc
She'd have had to have killed everyone remotely linked to the Tang dynasty and allowed one of her cousins to succeed her, not any of her children who were legally members of the Tang dynasty.