Hello,
Sorry for my absence lately, I keep getting real life stuffed down my neck. All my stories have grown out of date and never seem to get finished. crap
In trying to make sense of my 'inheritance' (and a bit of conversing in PMs) I have been trying to assemble a History/Timeline for the UNK. Any information or opinions on this would be appreciated.
What is your take on 'Norman' England. The history I have found so far is:
1066: Normans fail to take England
1780(?): France takes Normandy(and don't give it back).
1790(?): Normans goto 'UKN'(?England?) and colonies(UKA+CSA)
1804-5: American 'Civil War'(France and CSA take UKA-but apparantly give it back).
?: Some normans flee to australia(this part confuses me to no end)
?: Ireland lost to the stuarts(?see more below).
?: Other colonies lost to others or revolutions.
1900(?): War with eastern kingdom in northern canada/alaska-they no longer exist
1901(?): Prince assassinated
1905(?): 'Red Terror' or socialist revolution succeeds in england, UKA somehow retakes England giving it back to the throne
1905(?): take bahamas
1905(?): take azores
1905(?): take newfoundland(?-maybe earlier-this somehow gets returned?).
Wow, that was nuts! In 120 years every territory currently 'owned' by UNK has been defeated and taken over(except Sierra Leone-for which I have no info). In the last 6 years only the UKA has been untouched(plus SL). Earl gave no assistance in figuring this out- I had to look through the histories of others and old posts or glean bits from PMs and posts. Alot of work.
In the creation of the new Nverse these territories were given up/never owned/changed owner:
Highlands: At first had them, then not
Liberia: freed
Iceland:swapped with Scotland/then goes baltic
S. Atlantic Islands: Claim dropped
E. Africa:claim dropped-New Zion/Kenya begs for protection from DKB
Azores: 1905? taken at end of N2-GC distracted by Island Commonwealth
treaty with mars, dec 15 Habsburg to attack, UK takes ACM assets
Bahamas: 1905 Taken at end of N2/Sold to CSA 1H-1908/Mars retreat to.. annexed by UK
Ireland: claim dropped/spanish-catholic protectorate-france objects/ then 'Ireland rebels against Norman overlords and brings the descendents of the Stuarts to the throne - the Wittelsbachs'
Red Terror:1905 regain England
orkneys-faroes: baltic
Scotland:'unfeasible' to not have/william conqueror failed in 1066?/ asked Wilhelmina of Orange to the throne-confused-goes to wilhelm/ ended up with most of it
bermuda: mistakenly given to UK-back to BC
gibralter:? uka went for ceuta/tangiers before/Had a claim when ithmus
Commenwealth of Islands: ? somehow tied to UK or UKA?/taken by GC
"I see the Norman Empire shown here as, as you say the remnants of a greater empire split up by Civil Wars, what is left is totally loyal to the Crown." Earl said this in a post when you folks were creating 'the new Nverse'. Nothing I have seen would suggest this level of unity he desired. Unless massive pogroms 'in the name of the king' were instituted.
Any idea of what was in this 'greater empire' suggested?
Nowhere does it really explain how England became 'Norman'. many Normans apparantly went there after the defeat by France, but I personally doubt they could take it over from whoever was in power. It took a stable(relatively) Normandy a long time to assimilate England(IRL), a defeated norman aristocracy could not have been able to do that. It just doesn't make sense to me. Any take you may have on the matter would be appreciated.
Hopefully this will be a long and informative series of posts where others can include or invent their dealings with the UNK.
Best of wishes. Thanks for any info and time. Sorry if this is double posted I seem to be having problems getting it to send.
orkneys-faroes: baltic?????????
Dont they belong to the Netherlands?????
Quote from: ledeper on February 13, 2008, 10:49:15 AM
orkneys-faroes: baltic?????????
Dont they belong to the Netherlands?????
Färöarna is baltic, Orkneys belong to the Kingdom.
As for the parts of modern scotland that belongs to the Kingdom, IRL they only came under the throne od scotland in the late 13th century, and was de facto fully independent untill the late 15th century, here neither of those things happend.
thanks :)
The United Kingdom has the insufferable task of piecing together what was before two different countries and a mess of history that changed as players swapped what they owned from one version of the sim to another. Also there was a nasty habit of breaking up countries whose player retired from the sim, throwing more confusion on the fire.
N2 started with there being no England. That was one of the primary corner stones. There was instead some celtic-roman based nation in the isles that desfeated the Normans in 1066. However as we had a large section of "English" speaking nations rather than French speaking, the Normans were kept as an originator for these colonies and rebellous places.
The Island Commonwealth is based on the English Civil War of 1642. Here Cromwell is defeated at some point but moves to the colonies to reform his government.
The American half o the UKN and the CSA are the 13 colonies and Hudson Bay Colony anolog. With a likely lose in the Seven Years War, Quebec stays French. The weakened Normandy is then later taken in the aftermath of the French Revolution. The King of Normany moves to the Americas but the southern colonies have enjoyed running things on there own for years and protest. The resulting Revolution-Civil War divides the remaining bulk of the Norman Kingdoms in the the UKA and CSA around 1801. Note: the UKA does not loss the northern half, only the southern half breaks away.
The Normans in Austalia would be from when it was a early colony before the fall of Normandy. There is a chance that some of the settlers would have been refugees from Normandy or the Americas that didn't want to settle in the Americas (prehaps during the Civil War). These found protection and kindred spirits with the Swiss.
Kenya was a Norman colony (likely on the route to Australia and India for the spice trade). It seems to have been absorbed by Brandenburg during the 1880s.
At some point the Normans did manage to gain a foothold in what we call the British Isles. This is a retcon since the change to N3 (where the celtic-romans were removed from the sim, but too much history was in place). The "Indian Lands" seems to have been territories/disputed territory between Rohan and the UKA. When the Isles became avalible the trade was to make the Indian Lands, neutral and give the Normans the isles. This was an OOC choice. A suggestion is to pick a good European War for the Normans to gain there foothold in the Isles and spread slowly north until they hit the Scots and Pikes.
Gibralter is in Russian hands.
The war with the Eastern Kingdom was one of those things that didn't sit well with the Rohirrim who more of less forced a treaty to stop the war on there northern borders. (The original war was between the Eastern Kingdom and the Swiss in Anchorage, the UKA moved in to attempt to help follow Europeans. they seem to have not forgiven the Swiss for this embarrassment yet.) This followed with the Eastern Kingdom's rash use of airships to try too take the Island Commonwealth. A short rebellion of the natives and a charge of the Rohirrim later, the Eastern Kingdom is reduced to a Chinese-Japanese fishing country in the Ice Bay with Rohan as a protector of the native in the north.
I'll assume that in the 1905 period "England" came into its own after many years, with London finally surpassing New York as the center of Norman culture. The Royalty moved to "England" (or whatever you chose to call it), to be closer to there Norman-European roots, rather than with the colonials they've been with for only a hundred years.
Don't recall the Normans taking Newfoundland.
There was a crude map I did of Norman France some time ago. This is based on the 100 Years War I think.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v514/ithekro/Normandy.gif)
I forget what all the colors were, but Red was Normandy while green was France. The others I think were Dutch and Swiss, or perhaps Norman allies and French allies.
Yes, that was nuts.
I see Ithekro has written a lengthy response since I began typing this. I don't believe I am contradicting him here.
Quote"I see the Norman Empire shown here as, as you say the remnants of a greater empire split up by Civil Wars, what is left is totally loyal to the Crown." Earl said this in a post when you folks were creating 'the new Nverse'. Nothing I have seen would suggest this level of unity he desired. Unless massive pogroms 'in the name of the king' were instituted.
Earl's vision is somewhat at odds of my actions as the first sim moderator; in drafting the first sim history, with its various flaws, I made the decision to hobble Great Britain and instead have France as the global superpower.
Our board "owner" of the time wished to use much of the British Isles for a home-brewed nation of his own design. It was assumed that this came at the expense of England, the aristocracy of which fled to Normandy, an English possession of the time (as it was for some time historically). Normandy - essentially a relocated British Crown - inherited what existed of the British empire of the time - footholds in the Americas and in a few other places.
This left a power vacuum around the world which resulted in historical British colonies remaining independent (India, etc.) or under previous ownership (Orange, which remained Dutch until independence).
Eventually, France squashed Normandy. The Norman/British colonies in the Americas were left on their own, and fractured into two nations, the United Kingdom of America, and the CSA. It was assumed that the British/Norman Crown shifted to the UKA, which Earl played.
When we migrated to this board, Earl wanted something more than just the UKA. It was agreed that he'd regain part of the British Isles, since the previous board owner was not coming over here with us and there was no reason to retain his home-brewed state. England was quietly ret-conned to a rump English state, and the "Red Terror" was Earl's way to have the UKA make friends with it, then amalgamate with it as the United Norman Kingdom.
There was a lot of Red Terror stuff going on at the time, and the Baltic Confederation flirted with it for a while - Earl's move on Newfoundland was a reaction to this; I assume he returned it to the Baltic Confederation after that nation's reversion to a more acceptable government.
Now, a few specific incidents:
Quote1900(?): War with eastern kingdom in northern canada/alaska-they no longer exist
The Eastern Kingdom was a small player-nation in the Alaska/Yukon area. As its player did not join us in the current iteration of the sim, it was quietly determined that Rohan absorbed it for its own good.
Quote
1905(?): take bahamas
1905(?): take azores
When the sim began, these were claimed by a transnational company, the ACM. When the ACM broke up (as a result of its player bailing out) it fragmented into small independent states. Various players snatched up various fragments; Earl moved to gobble up the Azores in particular.
QuoteCommenwealth of Islands: ? somehow tied to UK or UKA?/taken by GC
The Commonwealth was another player nation in the old board whose player barely lasted long enough to set it up. It consisted of Jamaica, the Caymans, and Antigua, and was established by the losing side of the historical English civil war. The Commonwealth was walloped by the CSA in 1901, costing it Antigua. It was then bushwhacked again in 1904 by the aforementioned Eastern Kingdom, with Swiss help; I made a play for it and managed to bring it into the Gran Colombian fold.
I hope that helps somewhat.
Hello,
I'm babysitting at the moment but I wanted to thank you folks for the great wealth of information coming forth. Man, I should have done this sooner.
I have really wanted to include this in the World History section for awhile, but the gaps were large and inconsistent/unknown.
I believe all of us will benefit from discourse of this sort and hope others will contribute as they can. Perhaps, all of our nations could do similar studies at some point.
I have also been working on fairly detailed maps for the eastern half of the US and the larger N3 azores(suggested as about 10x(?) larger by borys i think- looks as big as the UK on the overall map-which it was said it should not be that big). For the Azores should I stick with using the actual names(portugese or Spanish?) of towns and such? I believe the ACM was using Spanish? Or should I attempt to anglicize them?
Once again thanks for the time you have spent.
The ACM was a Portuguese company before it became transnational, so Portuguese is probably your best choice for language.
Nice Rocky. I was not a mod in N2, so I have to go with what I remember.
Pinning down the Swiss and Japan history would be a nice step, but contradictory information and saber rattling always seems to stall that process.
Brandenburg's history is "known" though odd with such a large empire (but fairly weak when set next to there originator Prussia/Second Reich Germany).
Rohan's history is a mess of sorts, but fortunately its contratictions don't break anything (also its been more or less consistant from day one).
An a related note: Piracy seems to have increased after the fall of the ACM. Its fleet was mainly built as an international trade protection force (of sorts). Some of there ships still exists in various navies (all those Tuna and Cod-class cruisers). With the ACM gone trade protection became and issue for other navies that hadn't bothered. This seems to have placed the UKN as the protector of the French Merchant Marine, while Rohan, Brandenburg, and the Swiss were taking that job in the Pacific. With all the new up and comng naval powers, we will see how things develop.
Some info as to the Swiss aspect of the UNK. As I saw it, it began with William and Mary. Instead of suceeding they are defeated and flee to America, from there they are forced to flee to Australia, begining that colony. Hence the Pacific Norman colonies began as a refugee for Norman Protestants fleeing from persecution in England. They are soon joined by other refugees starting the nation of New Switzerland.
Quote from: Desertfox on February 13, 2008, 05:38:17 PM
Some info as to the Swiss aspect of the UNK. As I saw it, it began with William and Mary. Instead of suceeding they are defeated and flee to America, from there they are forced to flee to Australia, begining that colony. Hence the Pacific Norman colonies began as a refugee for Norman Protestants fleeing from persecution in England. They are soon joined by other refugees starting the nation of New Switzerland.
Why would they sail round the world and simply not sail home?
I think this thread point out one thing; the history of Nverse is full of inconsistencies and a LOT of silliness.
Well this is Navalism. While it is not quite Wesworld, where one is recommended to leaves one's sanity at the door, it is close to that. He we have Alternate history, mixed with fantasy and fiction. While the attempt is to keep things grounded in reality (more or less), we still have a lot of things that just don't make sense logically.
The history is far from perfect; that was a consequence of trying to incorporate various people's ideas, without spending an excessive amount of time up front on the set-up. The idea was, at first, to concentrate on the present and not so much on the past. That hasn't turned out so well, it seems, but we'll muddle through.
The skeletons are not buried deep enough, rains flush out some bones regularly. We just collect and ignore them.
When we switched, it was voted on to continue N2verse despite all the inconsistencies.
all true (im runing a full on Roman Italy ffs LOL)
Hello,
This gets a bump for ctwaterman.
Thanks for the Bump I think I see a plan I need to pull out some history books.....
Charles