|
|
Post by La Rouge Beret on Aug 12, 2021 0:38:09 GMT
Ever since I read Sharpe's Devil which has Richard Sharpe travelling to Chile to search for his friend Blas Vivar in 1820 during the country's war of independence against Spain. I have been intrigued as to what PODs would be required for the new Chilean state to have a monarch and, given the timeframe are there any likely candidates?
A couple of ideas that I've been toying with is to have the Americans 'liberate' / conquer all of British North America, which given their poor finances leads to revolutionary France. Whether Napoleon takes power ITTL or not, I don't know, but my notes had the continental system taking shape with Britain controlling the peripheries (Portugal). With Spain ensconced within revolutionary France control I think the Brits would sponsor / support the independence movements of the former Spanish colonies, which leads to me a British noble being offered the Chilean throne. I actually toyed with the idea that a less well known Arthur Wellesley takes the Chilean throne, following his success in leading a small British force in Chile against Spanish regulars.
Open to thoughts and ideas.
|
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Aug 12, 2021 2:19:02 GMT
You’d probably see a bigger chancer than Wellesley going for a South American throne, as it would take a certain type of desire and lower status to go for it. Perhaps the chap with the best timing would be Admiral Cochrane.
Argentina did go monarch shopping, so the notion is reasonable.
|
|
|
|
Post by La Rouge Beret on Aug 12, 2021 2:36:45 GMT
Yes Thomas Cochrane that old rogue and God he'd be fun to write into the story as a monarch. I always thought he was like Prince Harry, after a few beers  . |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856 
Likes: 13,237
|
Post by stevep on Aug 12, 2021 15:55:59 GMT
Ever since I read Sharpe's Devil which has Richard Sharpe travelling to Chile to search for his friend Blas Vivar in 1820 during the country's war of independence against Spain. I have been intrigued as to what PODs would be required for the new Chilean state to have a monarch and, given the timeframe are there any likely candidates? A couple of ideas that I've been toying with is to have the Americans 'liberate' / conquer all of British North America, which given their poor finances leads to revolutionary France. Whether Napoleon takes power ITTL or not, I don't know, but my notes had the continental system taking shape with Britain controlling the peripheries (Portugal). With Spain ensconced within revolutionary France control I think the Brits would sponsor / support the independence movements of the former Spanish colonies, which leads to me a British noble being offered the Chilean throne. I actually toyed with the idea that a less well known Arthur Wellesley takes the Chilean throne, following his success in leading a small British force in Chile against Spanish regulars. Open to thoughts and ideas.
What difference would that actually make to events in France or Latin America? Other than possibly, having somehow conquered all of BNA the yanks would probably be looking for other areas to overrun but might find their already overstretched. Difficult to see them doing this anyway given their limited resources and the opposition they were facing.
If Napoleon, rather than seeking to replace the Bourbons leaves one of them as a puppet - or some similar situation in a scenario where he never rises to power - then I could see Britain seeking to separate the colonies from Spain for a variety of reasons. Not sure that the region would be that welcoming to a non-Catholic monarch, at least in areas where Spain had the most demographic and cultural influence. However given his actions OTL I could see Cochrane being a very willing player in creating havoc for the Spanish royalists and he would have probably got on well with the more radical elements among the rebels.
|
|
James G
Squadron vice admiral
Posts: 7,608
Likes: 8,833
|
Post by James G on Aug 12, 2021 16:08:38 GMT
Ever since I read Sharpe's Devil which has Richard Sharpe travelling to Chile to search for his friend Blas Vivar in 1820 during the country's war of independence against Spain. I have been intrigued as to what PODs would be required for the new Chilean state to have a monarch and, given the timeframe are there any likely candidates? A couple of ideas that I've been toying with is to have the Americans 'liberate' / conquer all of British North America, which given their poor finances leads to revolutionary France. Whether Napoleon takes power ITTL or not, I don't know, but my notes had the continental system taking shape with Britain controlling the peripheries (Portugal). With Spain ensconced within revolutionary France control I think the Brits would sponsor / support the independence movements of the former Spanish colonies, which leads to me a British noble being offered the Chilean throne. I actually toyed with the idea that a less well known Arthur Wellesley takes the Chilean throne, following his success in leading a small British force in Chile against Spanish regulars. Open to thoughts and ideas. The moment I read the thread title, I thought Sharpe's Devil. Years ago, I toyed with the idea of writing something about a British Expeditionary Force going to South Africa to fight that fight. I never moved beyond the concept stage but had some ideas: one was not Boney himself but a relative. |
|
|
|
Post by La Rouge Beret on Aug 13, 2021 1:46:37 GMT
The moment I read the thread title, I thought Sharpe's Devil. Years ago, I toyed with the idea of writing something about a British Expeditionary Force going to South Africa to fight that fight. I never moved beyond the concept stage but had some ideas: one was not Boney himself but a relative. Yeah it's an interesting POD to explore as to how the Brits would respond to a Boney relative assuming a South American throne, particularly if one of his relatives proves just as talented as his more famous namesake. Within the Sharpe series of books I always loved two characters, outside of Richard Sharpe, being Patrick Harper and Blas Vivar. So adding either of those men to a story would just make it all the more enjoyable to me. |
|
|
|
Post by La Rouge Beret on Aug 13, 2021 1:52:03 GMT
What difference would that actually make to events in France or Latin America? Other than possibly, having somehow conquered all of BNA the yanks would probably be looking for other areas to overrun but might find their already overstretched. Difficult to see them doing this anyway given their limited resources and the opposition they were facing.
If Napoleon, rather than seeking to replace the Bourbons leaves one of them as a puppet - or some similar situation in a scenario where he never rises to power - then I could see Britain seeking to separate the colonies from Spain for a variety of reasons. Not sure that the region would be that welcoming to a non-Catholic monarch, at least in areas where Spain had the most demographic and cultural influence. However given his actions OTL I could see Cochrane being a very willing player in creating havoc for the Spanish royalists and he would have probably got on well with the more radical elements among the rebels.
I agree with you that the forces led by Washington were at the end of their logistical chain and unlikely to acquire more territory than they did IOTL. However, I'm writing a fanfiction loosely based on the Red Son universe involving Superman landing in the Soviet Union as opposed to the USA, which in time leads to the democratic countries comprising the USA, the Panama canal & Chile. Thinking it over I wanted to ensure that the USA was in a strong position, so their territorial boundaries encompassing all of NAFTA would seem to be a good start. If that is the case then making Chile into a constitutional monarchy and having the Americans opt for a Nicaraguan canal just seemed like a good option to take in order to show how similar yet different this world is to the reader. One of your points reminds me of the old adage about 'there being enough land for a Mass.' That if you can make a man rich enough than he is more inclined to change his religion, well at least nominally anyway. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,237
|
Post by stevep on Aug 13, 2021 11:03:02 GMT
What difference would that actually make to events in France or Latin America? Other than possibly, having somehow conquered all of BNA the yanks would probably be looking for other areas to overrun but might find their already overstretched. Difficult to see them doing this anyway given their limited resources and the opposition they were facing.
If Napoleon, rather than seeking to replace the Bourbons leaves one of them as a puppet - or some similar situation in a scenario where he never rises to power - then I could see Britain seeking to separate the colonies from Spain for a variety of reasons. Not sure that the region would be that welcoming to a non-Catholic monarch, at least in areas where Spain had the most demographic and cultural influence. However given his actions OTL I could see Cochrane being a very willing player in creating havoc for the Spanish royalists and he would have probably got on well with the more radical elements among the rebels.
I agree with you that the forces led by Washington were at the end of their logistical chain and unlikely to acquire more territory than they did IOTL. However, I'm writing a fanfiction loosely based on the Red Son universe involving Superman landing in the Soviet Union as opposed to the USA, which in time leads to the democratic countries comprising the USA, the Panama canal & Chile. Thinking it over I wanted to ensure that the USA was in a strong position, so their territorial boundaries encompassing all of NAFTA would seem to be a good start. If that is the case then making Chile into a constitutional monarchy and having the Americans opt for a Nicaraguan canal just seemed like a good option to take in order to show how similar yet different this world is to the reader. One of your points reminds me of the old adage about ' there being enough land for a Mass.' That if you can make a man rich enough than he is more inclined to change his religion, well at least nominally anyway.
Might do on the last point although from a quick skim through his wiki details Cochrane seems a distinctly cantankerous character who made enemies just about everywhere. However he might just be angry enough consider such a change of religion if he was in Chile or elsewhere and at odds with London - that latter being pretty much certain by the sound of it.
Is that the version in France? Presumably more accurate but Henri's comment is normally presented as "Paris is worth a mass" this side of the channel. Plus rather than personal wealth it's presented as a question of that being necessary for him to be accepted by the Catholic majority and end the bloody religious wars. Interesting how the take on such events can vary and probably tells us something about different cultural interpretations of such events.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,237
|
Post by stevep on Aug 13, 2021 11:09:51 GMT
Ever since I read Sharpe's Devil which has Richard Sharpe travelling to Chile to search for his friend Blas Vivar in 1820 during the country's war of independence against Spain. I have been intrigued as to what PODs would be required for the new Chilean state to have a monarch and, given the timeframe are there any likely candidates? A couple of ideas that I've been toying with is to have the Americans 'liberate' / conquer all of British North America, which given their poor finances leads to revolutionary France. Whether Napoleon takes power ITTL or not, I don't know, but my notes had the continental system taking shape with Britain controlling the peripheries (Portugal). With Spain ensconced within revolutionary France control I think the Brits would sponsor / support the independence movements of the former Spanish colonies, which leads to me a British noble being offered the Chilean throne. I actually toyed with the idea that a less well known Arthur Wellesley takes the Chilean throne, following his success in leading a small British force in Chile against Spanish regulars. Open to thoughts and ideas. The moment I read the thread title, I thought Sharpe's Devil. Years ago, I toyed with the idea of writing something about a British Expeditionary Force going to South Africa to fight that fight. I never moved beyond the concept stage but had some ideas: one was not Boney himself but a relative.
Just to check. I assume you meant America? Also out of curiosity which relative were you thinking of? Most of his brothers seems to have been distinctly non-entities, although that could be partly because he dominated the family so much.
Know its been suggested before with the idea of Napoleon leading the pro-independent forces to a quick victory and uniting most of Spanish America under a single state. Doubt that would hold together given the cultural differences and sheer size of the area with the limited communications and transport of the time. Also I suspect that it wouldn't be a popular event, at least if it was Boney himself, with any of the European great powers let alone Britain. In that case whether or not we intervene we could well stand aside and not oppose the French proposal that the conservative powers aid Spain in regaining control of its colonies.
|
|
James G
Squadron vice admiral
Posts: 7,608
Likes: 8,833
|
Post by James G on Aug 13, 2021 13:21:29 GMT
The moment I read the thread title, I thought Sharpe's Devil. Years ago, I toyed with the idea of writing something about a British Expeditionary Force going to South Africa to fight that fight. I never moved beyond the concept stage but had some ideas: one was not Boney himself but a relative.
Just to check. I assume you meant America? Also out of curiosity which relative were you thinking of? Most of his brothers seems to have been distinctly non-entities, although that could be partly because he dominated the family so much.
Know its been suggested before with the idea of Napoleon leading the pro-independent forces to a quick victory and uniting most of Spanish America under a single state. Doubt that would hold together given the cultural differences and sheer size of the area with the limited communications and transport of the time. Also I suspect that it wouldn't be a popular event, at least if it was Boney himself, with any of the European great powers let alone Britain. In that case whether or not we intervene we could well stand aside and not oppose the French proposal that the conservative powers aid Spain in regaining control of its colonies.
Oh, yep, I meant South America. No idea on which king. I was thinking the Southern Cone - Chile, Peru, Bolivia, Argentina- rather than the whole continent, but still, the distances! |
|
|
|
Post by halferking on Aug 13, 2021 18:35:19 GMT
I don't know much about Chilean history but from what I understand Bernardo O'Higgins, the Liberator of Chile and Father of the Nation, was the man who could be the closest to being a King. www.thoughtco.com/bernardo-ohiggins-2136599 |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,033
Likes: 49,431
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 13, 2021 18:45:35 GMT
I don't know much about Chilean history but from what I understand Bernardo O'Higgins, the Liberator of Chile and Father of the Nation, was the man who could be the closest to being a King. www.thoughtco.com/bernardo-ohiggins-2136599King O'Higgins of Chili, sounds nice, we have seen before with man with great power comes the temptation to rule forever, Agustín de Iturbide and Napoléon Bonaparte are two exmaples i can think of. |
|
|
|
Post by halferking on Aug 13, 2021 21:50:57 GMT
I don't know much about Chilean history but from what I understand Bernardo O'Higgins, the Liberator of Chile and Father of the Nation, was the man who could be the closest to being a King. www.thoughtco.com/bernardo-ohiggins-2136599King O'Higgins of Chili, sounds nice, we have seen before with man with great power comes the temptation to rule forever, Agustín de Iturbide and Napoléon Bonaparte are two exmaples i can think of. Bernardo O'Higgins was the illegitimate son of Ambrosio O'Higgins a Spanish Officer of Irish heritage. Ambrosio rose from Officer to Governor of Chile and further elevated to Viceroy of Perú. his mother Isabel Riquelme, a prominent lady of the city of Chillán. In 1808 Empereur Napoléon Bonaparte entered the Kingdom of Spain on the pretext of reinforcing French troops in occupied Portugal. The invasion swept Rey Carlos IV of the Royal House of Bourbon aside, but in doing so Napoléon had committed a fatal error... As Castilian Spain was preoccupied with trying to expel French forces from the Iberian Peninsula the imperial territories were effectively left to fend for themselves. O'Higgins, as a young man, had been imbued with a sense of nationalism. He studied in London and came in to contact with Francisco de Miranda, a Venezuelan gentleman who went on to establish a Masonic Lodge in the British capital. Señor Miranda envisioned a Latin American Empire stretching from the Mississippi to Cape Horn ruled over by descendants of Inca Atahualpa. Señor Miranda sought help from the British Prime Minister, William Pitt 'The Younger'. Prime Minister Pitt was aware that Miranda could be an opportunity to good to miss so he provided him with limited support. But what if Miranda's vision for El imperio de américa came to fruition? It is conceivable that the Inca would need strong leaders to govern his vast provinces. O'Higgins would be such a man. The Empire of the Quechua speaking peoples was divided in to four quarters or suyu: Chinchay Suyu [North West], Antisuyu [North East], Kuntisuyu [South West] and; Qullasuyu [South East]. The quarters converged on the ancient city of Qosqo or Cusco (a breath-taking, and I do mean quite literally breath taking, city built in the shape of a Puma deep in the Amazon). It stands to reason that if El imperio de américa is successful then the Inca may reorganise his lands in a similar manner creating a federal Empire echoing that of his ancestors. The Inca may choose to relocate the capital to somewhere else, either a pre-existing city or a purpose built city, if he thought that Cusco was too remote from his northern provinces. |
|
|
|
Post by La Rouge Beret on Aug 14, 2021 23:53:59 GMT
I agree with you that the forces led by Washington were at the end of their logistical chain and unlikely to acquire more territory than they did IOTL. However, I'm writing a fanfiction loosely based on the Red Son universe involving Superman landing in the Soviet Union as opposed to the USA, which in time leads to the democratic countries comprising the USA, the Panama canal & Chile. Thinking it over I wanted to ensure that the USA was in a strong position, so their territorial boundaries encompassing all of NAFTA would seem to be a good start. If that is the case then making Chile into a constitutional monarchy and having the Americans opt for a Nicaraguan canal just seemed like a good option to take in order to show how similar yet different this world is to the reader. One of your points reminds me of the old adage about ' there being enough land for a Mass.' That if you can make a man rich enough than he is more inclined to change his religion, well at least nominally anyway.
Might do on the last point although from a quick skim through his wiki details Cochrane seems a distinctly cantankerous character who made enemies just about everywhere. However he might just be angry enough consider such a change of religion if he was in Chile or elsewhere and at odds with London - that latter being pretty much certain by the sound of it.
Is that the version in France? Presumably more accurate but Henri's comment is normally presented as "Paris is worth a mass" this side of the channel. Plus rather than personal wealth it's presented as a question of that being necessary for him to be accepted by the Catholic majority and end the bloody religious wars. Interesting how the take on such events can vary and probably tells us something about different cultural interpretations of such events.
I never knew the origins of the quote, but I heard it used by a few Americans a couple of years ago. Apparently, for them it referred to the American settlers in the then Mexican Texas that due to the paucity of available Protestant females would convert to Catholicism upon marrying a local senorita that also had significant claim to property as part of her dowry. Like you I've always enjoyed seeing how anecdotes change through different cultural lens. Yeah Cochrane always seemed to be at odds with London and, I could almost see an audible sigh of relief from the Admiralty and the other Lords if he accepted the crown. Something along the lines of thank the Lord, he is their problem now and not ours. |
|
|
|
Post by La Rouge Beret on Aug 14, 2021 23:57:33 GMT
Just to check. I assume you meant America? Also out of curiosity which relative were you thinking of? Most of his brothers seems to have been distinctly non-entities, although that could be partly because he dominated the family so much.
Know its been suggested before with the idea of Napoleon leading the pro-independent forces to a quick victory and uniting most of Spanish America under a single state. Doubt that would hold together given the cultural differences and sheer size of the area with the limited communications and transport of the time. Also I suspect that it wouldn't be a popular event, at least if it was Boney himself, with any of the European great powers let alone Britain. In that case whether or not we intervene we could well stand aside and not oppose the French proposal that the conservative powers aid Spain in regaining control of its colonies.
Oh, yep, I meant South America. No idea on which king. I was thinking the Southern Cone - Chile, Peru, Bolivia, Argentina- rather than the whole continent, but still, the distances! That sounds like an utterly amazing set up & I'd add Paraguay and Uruguay into that mix for good measure. With those countries welded together into a single state, I suspect Gran Colombia would still be a thing as would Greater Mexico leading to all types of regional Power dynamics within Southern America. I don't have the foggiest as to how the respective political cultures could evolve and, what that would mean for international allies. Would the four powers be large enough (Greater Chile, Mexico, Gran Colombia and Imperial Brasil) to stop the Monroe doctrine in it's tracks? |
|
.
