HOME | DD

DaemonofDecay — AltHist Europe Map 1933

Published: 2008-10-13 03:32:43 +0000 UTC; Views: 74321; Favourites: 238; Downloads: 8878
Redirect to original
Description Continuing my obsession with maps (anyone else ever take a sharpie to a map in grade school? Anyone?), here is one of the situation in Europe in 1933 (same universe as my other map, so all that still applies).

Europe was a place of radical change coming into the 19th century. The French Revolution, the rise and fall of Napoleon, the Liberal Revolutions in the mid-1800s, the rise of nationalism, and the rush to colonize the world would help drive Europe to the heights of its power.

In Italy, the Liberal and nationalistic movement was at its fever pitch. In the north-east Sardinia-Piedmont, led by the House of Savoy, held dreams of unifying the peninsula under their banner while in the south Garibaldi controlled the Kingdom of Two Sicilies. The two nations were unable to reach any sort of an agreement about the details of a unified Italy before Garibaldi’s death in 1869, and this came to a head in the 1874 War of Rome. Both hoped to gain control over the central region of Italy and claim Rome for themselves, but the Austro-Hungarian Empire, still angry over its defeats in Northern Italy years before intervened, dealing a major blow to the Sardinian army. Realizing that directly controlling more of the rebellious Italian lands would be counterproductive, Austria instead created the state of Venice as a semi-autonomous nation.

The Two-Sicilies was also defeated with Austrian and French forces landed near Rome “on behalf” of the Pope, who was the de facto leader of the Papal States at that time. In the Treaty of Pisa, the borders of the Italian states were laid down by France and Austro-Hungary at bayonet point. They had no desire to see a unified Italy that could resist their influence, and instead solidified the many smaller independent regions and city-states in the central regions into the Papal States, which was guarded by garrisons of Austrian and French soldiers to help prevent any attempt to unify the peninsula. Nationalism in Italy was still running hot though, and these garrisons would be plagued by frequent attacks by angry locals.

France and England both intervened in the American Civil War in the 1860s, but the UK was dealt a severe blow when the Union armies were able to seize Canada. While they were successful in helping the Confederate States of America retain their independence, for England the loss of most of Canada to the Americans and Quebec nation was a painful loss of prestige. France on the other hand came out well by getting the USA to acknowledge the Hapsburg Maximilian I as Emperor of Mexico, but were unable to regain their lost colonies in the New World who instead swore allegiance to Bourbon to protect their independence.

The Swedish-Norwegian Kingdom, often referred to as the Kingdoms of Scandinavia, were another victory for nationalism in Europe. Pan-Scandinavianism had swept the Nordic countries, and Norway and Sweden were driven even closer together. Negotiations with Denmark, however, were stymied by Scandinavia’s refusal to come to Denmark’s aide in its war with Prussia.

Germany was also a hotbed of Liberal nationalism in the 1800s. Prussia, under the skilled leadership of Otto von Bismarck, the ‘Iron Chancellor’, was able to unify Germany under their leadership. The victory over France in 1870 created Germany as a power to be reckoned with, and Prussian troops were seen as the finest in Europe. Many nations began to change their tactics and modernize their forces in recognition of this new power. An arms raced developed between the major powers, and it led to a rapid advance in military technology.

The quest for colonial dominance, the rise of modern military technology, and hundreds of other factors create a powder keg amongst the European nations, where one spark might set it off. In Austro-Hungary, the problem associated with so many different ethnicities living so close together was very acute. Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne new this well. He had surrounded himself with a group of scholars like Aurel Popovici who were proponents of giving the many different ethnicities and cultures within Austrian borders semi-autonomous statehood, establishing in effect a constitutional monarchy. The seeds for the creation of The United States of Greater Austria (Vereinigte Staaten von Groß-Österreich) were layed.

On the 28th of June, 1914, a Serbian assassin attempted to kill the Archduke in Sarajevo. The assassins failed to kill the Archduke, but the Duchess Sophie did not escape unharmed. A bullet struck her in her arm, which had to be amputated. This despicable act sent shockwaves across the world, and soon the world was engaged in a war the likes of which had never been seen before. Nations began to call up reserves as treaties were invoked, and The Great War had begun.

In North America the British and French called upon their ally the CSA to aid them in the war, but the Confederate economy was still in a shambles. Fearing what would happen if the USA joined the German side, they made secret entreaties to the CSA that they would intervene if the US and Germany became allies. The Confederacy agreed, knowing that it still relied heavily on England and France to keep is economy going. When news of this got out, there was an uproar in the US. Cries for war against the UK were risen, but in the end the US resorted to a complete naval embargo to the UK and France instead of directly declaring war. US Navy warships sat off Canadian waters to prevent any more Canadian soldiers from heading to Europe and searched every Confederate vessel for ‘contraband’, similar to what had occurred during the Civil War. The CSA was infuriated with this breach of sovereignty, but knew they could not risk a war with their more powerful northern neighbor. Instead both Canadians and Confederates began to smuggle ammunition and small groups of soldiers to Europe to help the war their. But it was too little, too late.

Already, Ottoman army units had managed to push the British out of Palestine, aided as they were by Austrian and Bulgarian units freed from the conquest of Serbia and Greece. In Italy, the smaller nations there refused to take sides, instead enjoying great profit supplying both sides with needed foods and materials. Scandinavia likewise refrained from entering the conflict, although many were supportive of joining the Central Powers to fight Russia and bring Finland into the Scandinavian fold. Japan, hoping to flex its international muscle, decided to take sides on the conflict by declaring war on France and Great Britain, seizing Hong Kong, Singapore and French Indo-China within a few months.

By 1916, the German armies had soundly defeated the Russians, and the Tsar was forced to sign a humiliating peace by handing over large chunks of territory. The Ukraine and Latvia became “independent” nations, while Germany gobbled up Russia’s Polish and Belorussian lands. The British, suffering under the strain of Germany’s U-Boats and the USA’s economic blockade, began to suffer starvation in the major cities. It came to a head when a whole division of British conscripts, veterans of the French trenches, refused to embark to head back to France. They were soon joined by Merchant Navy sailors who refused to set sail against Germany’s U-Boats and even plain civilians who were hungry and looking for food. Rioting and widespread unrest swept the nation, a culmination of dissatisfaction with the current government over everything from the current war to the loss of Canadian soil 50 years earlier.

The Army was forced to come in to restore order, and the London Riots saw hundreds of civilians and soldiers killed before order was restored. Lacking the popular support to continue, the UK offered peace to the Germans, who agreed immediately. Without British support, France quickly fell to the German army, now swelled with the soldiers returning victorious from the Eastern front. Germany forced an even harsher treaty on France, stripping it of all of its colonies, demilitarizing a large portion of its eastern border, restricting their army to a bare minimum, claiming most of the fleet as spoils, and forcing France to shoulder the blame for the war.

The Great War came to an end, with Germany as the clear victor. It now possessed a massive colonial empire, consisting as it did of France’s holdings in Africa and Asia along with Germany’s previously held colonies (sans those taken by Japan). Most of the French navy scuttled their ships rather than let them fall into German hands, but German still was now the undisputed world power. The UK had managed to escape the war with most of its Empire intact, but the social unrest had only just begun. The loss of Egypt to the Ottomans and the Asian territories in Singapore and Hong Kong to Japan were open wounds. France was torn apart, with a huge swath of its northern lands covered in the scars of war. Even Paris had suffered deeply when the German army captured it. Belgium lost territory too, a large chunk of its eastern lands falling into German hands.

In the aftermath of the war, the world seemed to take a deep breath. The riots in England died down as people tried to return to normalcy after the war, and in Russia the outcries for revolution slowly died down as food began to make its way to the peasants again. The Tsar, who had spent a week trapped in his palace by the angry mobs, realized that he had to attempt some form of liberalization of his government. In 1918, Russia created a new constitution and a bill of rights for its people, along with a parliamentary government (that was still subservient to the Tsar’s will, of course).

As the 20s came around, those nations not decimated by the war enjoyed a remarkable economic boom. Germany and the USA enjoyed a profitable relationship, while Austro-Hungary was able to use the economic prosperity and relative stability of the post-war era to implement the Archduke Franz Ferdinand‘s (now Emperor) ideas to help prevent the Austro-Hungarian nation from splitting apart. The USGA, was born on 1922 with sweeping changes in the government. A new constitution (party inspired by the American one) was created, and Austro-Hungary made the transition to a Constitutional-Monarchy with surprising ease. Ferdinand still retained control over the military, but most of the domestic and economic issues of the “states” were left to their respective leaders.

Some conservatives and Hungarians grumbled about the changes, but the USGA saw great prosperity over the next few years. The USA President made a visit to Vienna to celebrate another liberal democracy and meet with Ferdinand, but Germany watched with a small amount of concern. The more reactionary Junker politicians and leaders of Germany were worried about what the political changes in Russia and the USGA foretold for the future. Even the Ottoman Empire, with its more than 600 years of history, was undergoing political changes. After the war, the Ottomans had been able to reclaim much of its lost territory in Africa and the Middle East. For the first time in almost thirty years an Ottoman Flag flew in Egypt and Libya, while the Ottomans had also been able to gain control over Malta from the British. Having utilized German help in modernizing its military before and during the war, now the Ottomans worked on improving their industry. German engineers help the OE construct railroads to connect its distant garrisons, while factories began to spring up in Anatolia. The “Sick Man of Europe” was feeling much better.

But the economic miracle could not last, and the economic crash in 1928 was felt across the world. In the Ukraine, suffering from two years of famine, Communist revolutionaries, many who had escaped the Tsar’s retribution in Russia by fleeing to the Ukraine, managed to seize control over the government. They had feared that Germany and other nations would intervene against the ‘Reds’ like they had in Russia a decade earlier, but they were too busy with their own economic problems to deal with someone else’s too.

In 1929, Italian nationalists, socialists, communists, and other radicals/revolutionaries were inspired by the events in Ukraine and rose up against the rulers of what was still called the Papal States. The French and Austrian garrisons had been removed for duty in the war, and very quickly they gained control over the central regions of Italy. However, the large and diverse group almost immediately began to tear itself apart as the different factions vied for power. In the end the National Fascist Party, headed by Benito Mussolini., and his “Black Shirts” came out on top. The Communists and more radical groups had been favored to win, but that winter after taking control over Rome Pope Pius XI had been shot to death by a member of the Roman Communist Party. This quickly alienated the Communists from most of the Catholic Italians, and the Fascists were able to sweep into power by utilizing the event with great skill. The Papal States were renamed the Italian Social Republic, but unlike the Ukraine (now called the Soviet Socialist Republic of the Ukraine) the Italian Fascists did not scare any of their neighbors, and indeed their prosecution of communists was viewed favorably by most of the major powers.

As 1933 roles around, France and England are suffering from growing political instability. Sir Oswald Mosley’s ‘British Union of Fascists’ were beginning to draw members away from Britain’s Conservative party with jingoistic messages about improving the UK’s military might to help stave off any more military defeats. While he is still in the minority, many are beginning to listen to him with more belief that perhaps the Fascists are the answer to Britain’s troubles and loss of prestige.

In France, an undeclared war exists between radicals on both sides of the political spectrum. Rampant inflation, high unemployment, and the shame of loosing two wars to Germany and being stripped of its colonies has given radicals great power in France. The Communists and Fascists there often clash in the streets, and the world still waits to see who will stand victorious.


...

My fingers hurt.
Related content
Comments: 128

DaemonofDecay In reply to ??? [2010-11-05 19:46:34 +0000 UTC]

Oh its no problem at all. I love learning new things, and while these are just my amateur efforts to have a little fun, I always appreciate real corrections and things to consider if I ever return to them at a later date.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ItsukoWolf In reply to ??? [2010-09-07 04:50:34 +0000 UTC]

WTH?
Where is Poland?! =_=
Poland is the STRONGEST of all contries in Europa =_=
(Soryy for my english ;_

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to ItsukoWolf [2010-09-21 13:34:08 +0000 UTC]

"You forgot about Poland."

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ItsukoWolf In reply to DaemonofDecay [2010-09-21 15:08:34 +0000 UTC]

Me?
No, YOU!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to ItsukoWolf [2010-09-28 13:01:06 +0000 UTC]

I just like quoting Dubya from time to time. ( www.youtube.com/watch?v=mahTGNIk4q4 )

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SirAlucard19 In reply to ??? [2010-07-12 09:54:31 +0000 UTC]

Uh good as long is there is no nazism and communism but Romania is not full Transilvania, ROmanian ground, ios under the Autrian rule :-q

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to SirAlucard19 [2010-08-08 22:27:45 +0000 UTC]

Without Austro-Hungary imploding after WW1, and with Russia no longer able to project influence into South-East Europe, AND with a Communist state on its borders, Romania stands little chance of uniting all the territory it considers hers. Of course, you might see Romania start to slide to the right when faced with Liberals in the USGA and Communists in the SSRU.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

AmongTheSatanic [2010-06-25 19:52:46 +0000 UTC]

Yeah, I went to school with a sharpy and messed with maps

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to AmongTheSatanic [2010-08-08 22:28:11 +0000 UTC]

God I used to do that so much. I never missed a chance to re-draw the borders.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AmongTheSatanic In reply to DaemonofDecay [2010-08-08 22:38:29 +0000 UTC]

Hehe, whenever I make borders on my maps I always make them fit together O.o

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to AmongTheSatanic [2010-08-08 22:44:12 +0000 UTC]

I left them looking incredible messy as my mind wandered.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

sullobog [2010-05-30 07:11:57 +0000 UTC]

AMAZING MAP

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to sullobog [2010-08-08 22:28:16 +0000 UTC]

Thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

suzi9mm [2010-04-02 16:22:41 +0000 UTC]

hmm, i dont know the history of your map project so i have to ask what is the background of it, in short? this is some sort of fantasy version of things...? "if"...?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to suzi9mm [2010-04-03 00:43:53 +0000 UTC]

I have a number of maps I've done, which are all of the same sort of timeline I made up. If you check my gallery I have the other ones that describe the evolution of the timeline.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

PlagueDoctorMurdoch [2010-01-30 12:00:41 +0000 UTC]

Why not call it the "Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic"? That's what it was called in RL at least.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to PlagueDoctorMurdoch [2010-02-08 04:12:11 +0000 UTC]

First off, you have one of the best names I have seen in a long, long time. Kudos for matching it up with an avatar too!

Also, yes I probably should have. I think at the time I was just trying to avoid confusion by having a "USSR" on the map when Imperial Russia was still around.

I will just chalk up the error to poor translation skills of the western Europeans who made the map. Yep.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

historiakanman [2009-12-16 15:43:32 +0000 UTC]

this map is a mix of different periods in the late 1900th and early 2000th (hope i got it right because we don´t have the same system of count year)

For example, dissolution of the union between Sweden and Norway in 1905 and Italy was unified in 1861

but I like it its show a grater Europe like before ww1 but perhaps Norwegian don like the map
sorry for my bad English

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to historiakanman [2010-01-03 05:28:07 +0000 UTC]

Yeah, its an alternate history map showing a "What if?" of the world.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Composition94 In reply to ??? [2009-12-06 06:02:55 +0000 UTC]

You wouldn't happen to have played two PC games entitled Victoria, or the WWII-era Hearts of Iron?

(Oh wow, I had no way to properly format that sentence.)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to Composition94 [2009-12-06 08:02:45 +0000 UTC]

Oh yes, played them both. Alot, as a matter of fact.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Composition94 In reply to DaemonofDecay [2009-12-07 04:40:44 +0000 UTC]

Nice. Who do you go to play as most often? Personally I try taking under-developed or small nations in those time periods and try to develop them (ie. Brazil, Ireland, Greece). Or create continental empires out of larger nations. Y'know, whatever catches my fancy at the moments.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to Composition94 [2009-12-07 09:48:42 +0000 UTC]

It depends. In EUIII I usually play whatever seems fun at the time (from the Ottoman Empire to Milan).

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Composition94 In reply to DaemonofDecay [2009-12-12 19:29:53 +0000 UTC]

Have you tried the Byzatantine mod for Vicky?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to Composition94 [2009-12-14 00:53:56 +0000 UTC]

I havn't played Vicky in a while. I think the last mod I played for it was VIP.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

kommit [2009-11-13 07:48:46 +0000 UTC]

admire!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to kommit [2009-12-02 06:11:59 +0000 UTC]

Thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ZhaneAugustine In reply to ??? [2009-10-25 17:33:05 +0000 UTC]

well done what happened to the papacy after this?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to ZhaneAugustine [2009-12-02 06:15:08 +0000 UTC]

Much like it was in our life, the Papacy was given sovereignty over Vatican City but excluded from holding direct political power outside its walls. The murder of a Pope also did much to diminish the Papacy as a political power as others realized that the days of Popes leading wars was long gone.

The Italian Fascists might support religion as a means of uniting the people, but they don't enjoy the thought of anyone else having real sway over the people besides themselves.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ZhaneAugustine In reply to DaemonofDecay [2009-12-02 06:43:12 +0000 UTC]

ahhhhhh good points thus creating a more controlled puppet faction aka like china

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

limitlessflight [2009-10-18 18:08:05 +0000 UTC]

wow, quite an alternate history u got there. Would be alot better if it were like that probably cause if Germany didn't lose WWI like in this alternate history Hitler wouldn't have the ability to take over Germany and the holocaust would never have taken place and everyone would be happy, except the U.S., U.K. and Russia.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to limitlessflight [2009-12-02 06:16:49 +0000 UTC]

I don't know if "better" would be a better word, but I understand what you mean.

Its just that in the scenario I created over many long, boring university classes, there was still widespread bloodshed and murder. Don't expect this timeline's fascists to be any nicer towards Jews, Gypsies, and other "undesirables".

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Iron-Confederate [2009-07-09 20:01:30 +0000 UTC]

How would this affect other third-party entities such as the Secular Zionist Movement?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to Iron-Confederate [2009-07-18 04:54:40 +0000 UTC]

It would be different, thats for sure. Instead of England having Palestine under their contron as in OTL, it would be the Ottoman Empire.

The Ottomans would not be supportive at all of an independent Jewish nation, but the Ottomans were historically tolerant of religious groups within their borders. Well, except for the Armenians...

But the Jews would be given alot of freedom and leeway within the Palestine area to do what they wanted, as long as they paid their taxes to the Ottoman authorities.

But you would still have the movement, what with Jews fleeing pogroms in Russia and elsewhere.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Iron-Confederate In reply to DaemonofDecay [2009-07-18 06:36:51 +0000 UTC]

Since the "Sick man of Europe" is getting better through modernization, is it possible that the Ottoman Empire be secularized as well? I've discovered the history of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk who is the founder of the real-time modern day Turkey by establishing secularism and women's rights. Would he play a role in the alt-time or possibly his successors?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to Iron-Confederate [2009-07-19 23:58:29 +0000 UTC]

I really havnt decided about Kemal. Without the War of Independence giving Kemal a chance to rise up, I dont think he would have been as influential in Ottoman Politics as he was historically. But at the same time, the desire to modernize would be a very strong influence on Ottoman politics, what with all the Balkan territory lost and the danger from revolts in their Arab territory.

Secularization would be difficult under the Sultans, but at the same time the Ottoman's would not be running a theocracy. Yet over time is it not to difficult to forsee the OE having to adopt a more constitutional monarchy or face widespread resistance from the Turkish population, and that could lead to a more Kemalist Ottoman Republic.

You are bringing up some very interesting questions, and I love to see how other people think things would/should go! ^_^

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

virtuoso-pianist-3 In reply to ??? [2009-06-21 20:41:13 +0000 UTC]

I applaud your map though, as a historian, I would mention that Gavrilo Princip was not a Serbian assassin. It's a misleading fact in current historiography, yet he was born in Austro-Hungarian occupied Bosnia; ergo, he was an Austro-Hungarian citizen of Serbian nationality.

I suppose you know that the murder of Archduke Franz Ferdinand was more of a boon to Austria-Hungary, than a grievance. He was a proponent of "Trialism," i.e. dividing the Austrian Empire into three entities: Austria, Hungary and the Slavic lands.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to virtuoso-pianist-3 [2009-06-22 19:50:46 +0000 UTC]

Franz had also supported the idea of the United States of Greater Austria. Or at least, a few of the learned men around him supported the idea. I think that Austro-Hungary, at least as it was at the turn of the century, was too unstable to last very long. It was already a backwards nation (much like the Ottoman Empire and Russia were) in regards to industrialization and technology, and with so many ethnic and religious divisions the dual-monarchy would be hard pressed to last.

In my mind Franz was a mix of modernist/realist for seeing the threat the lack of political power the Czechs and Serbs possessed for the long term health of the empire, but I also would argue that he would be a monarchist as well for being raised in the royal family. So one of the things I changed in my Alternate History take on things was a) Franz would support the USGA idea because it would keep the empire together while giving more power to different groups and b) would allow a monarch to still reign, although in a limited manner like in the UK.

This, much like the three-state solution, would have given much of the power to the individual states and could possibly have resulted in their breaking away later. Thus I approached this scenario from the view that the USGA would hold together by making actual progress towards pluralism in the government: the Serbs, Czechs, Croats, etc. would need to have a sense that they truly did matter in the USGA government for it to last more than a decade.

As for the assassin: yeah, I was just using the more simpler definition of his ethnicity and loyalties. Not to mention I didn't do alot of editing to double check everything.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

virtuoso-pianist-3 In reply to DaemonofDecay [2009-06-23 08:38:56 +0000 UTC]

The Ottoman Empire held out as long as it did thanks to British and French support (read: Crimean War), otherwise it would have fallen apart considerably earlier. As to Russia, the last attempt to reform the ailing empire was during the ministry of Peter Stolypin. Had his agrarian reforms succeeded, Russia would have been able to amend its difficulties in due time.

Concerning Austria-Hungary, Franz Ferdinand's plan was doomed to failure; a similar plan had been tried for the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth before the Chmielnicki uprising of 1651-1654. It called for the establishment of a third, Ruthenian and Orthodox Christian entity inside the dual Commonwealth. Of course, the majority of the nobility and the Catholic Church were staunchly opposed to such an idea.

I admire your historical knowledge; it's a rarity knowadays.

David

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to virtuoso-pianist-3 [2009-06-23 21:27:29 +0000 UTC]

The UK and French approach to the Ottoman Empire was interesting: on the one hand they supported it to prevent further Russian expansion into the Black Sea, but on the other they were supportive of reducing Ottoman territory (the British supporting an "independent" *wink wink* Egypt).

And I agree in part with your oppinion on the Austro-Hungarian empire: any efforts to change the government to give more power to the minorities would have been a very difficult process. Groups like the Germans and Hungarians wouldn't be very supportive of sharing power with other ethnicities/religions. I do feel that the plan (as it existed historically) was not the best idea, so in my map and alternate history scenario I decided that if Franz Ferdinand had survived he would have changed the plan to a more realistic and plausible one that would hold the Empire together.

But this is still a very unlikely and difficult thing to accomplish. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was in some ways more unstable than the Ottoman Empire around the turn of the century: the Ottomans had lost most of their Balkan territory during the earlier wars and just had to try and hold onto their Arab lands, while the Dual Monarchy had a variety of ethnic groups that were all in the midst of the nationalism wave that had swept accross Europe during the later 19th century.

And thanks: I love to debate history, so its great to find someone interested in history as much as myself! ^_^

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Stik0n3 [2009-06-05 07:39:02 +0000 UTC]

The map is awesome!!! Here Bulgaria is a lot larger!!! Now it's smaller i want yet again Bulgaria to be on The Three seas that it use to be

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to Stik0n3 [2009-06-08 06:03:10 +0000 UTC]

Well Bulgaria did win some territory from the collapse of Ottoman territory in Europe, which also saw the independence of Greece and the other Balkan states.

And I am happy that you like the map so much!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Sovietmaster In reply to ??? [2009-05-20 02:41:05 +0000 UTC]

This is good but I want the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics with Joseph Stalin, or Vladimir Lenin, for the USSR would make it a clear Communist victoru and we know the Czar was a idiot and coward.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to Sovietmaster [2009-05-26 21:25:00 +0000 UTC]

Lenin was most certainly involved, but by the 30s he was dead and gone.

Stalin, well, I havn't really hammered out what the Soviet leadership looks like. Especially considering that the Ukrainians were not the most dedicated communists, I think that this brand of Soviet nation had to tie the Workers Revolution into Ukrainian nationism to get the full support of the people.

Most of the peasants were initial supporters of the Bolsheviks due to their desire to own more land. And within Ukraine there has been no collectivisation due to resistance from the peasantry, which the ruling party can ill-afford at this time.

It would only take a sign of weakness and Russia might try to take the land back.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sovietmaster In reply to DaemonofDecay [2009-05-28 21:43:28 +0000 UTC]

ah.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to Sovietmaster [2009-05-30 20:44:01 +0000 UTC]

Don't worry though. With Imperial Russia so unstable, there are many in the SSRU who are waiting for the moment to bring the 'Glorious Workers Revolution' to their brothers to the north.

Unless Russia tries to invade first I guess.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sovietmaster In reply to DaemonofDecay [2009-05-30 20:46:15 +0000 UTC]

yeah.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Orichd [2009-05-04 19:01:37 +0000 UTC]

Nicely drawn map, and while I'm glad it didn't work out this way, it could be a lot worse...like it really was.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DaemonofDecay In reply to Orichd [2009-05-06 20:55:46 +0000 UTC]

Thank you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Raakone In reply to ??? [2009-04-05 18:42:38 +0000 UTC]

I like your explanations of how things happened.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1


| Next =>