|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Sept 22, 2022 3:02:55 GMT
So, William and Mary's England, Scotland and Ireland, and the other parts of England's overseas empire, including the 12 Colonies (sans Georgia) on eastern seaboard of North America, Hudson's Bay, Newfoundland settlements, Caribbean possessions including Jamaica, Barbados, St. Kitts and some others, and multiple trading posts in Africa, India, and the East Indies, are sent back in time, to the summer of Columbus's first return from the Americas, about 200 years before.
William & Mary's Britain has a 200 year head start on technology and "news from the future" on everybody else in Europe. England, Scotland, and their colonies are actually the world's only Protestant countries. That might change in a generation or two however. Ambassadors and merchants of uptime versions of nearly all the nations of Europe are also present in England, and especially cities like London and Bristol and are other sources of diffusion of future knowledge, of Britain's monopoly won't be forever.
How do things develop from here, with European great power politics, religious affairs like the Reformation, Counter-Reformation and Inquisition, and world trade and colonization of the Americas?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856 
Likes: 13,235
|
Post by stevep on Sept 22, 2022 17:07:52 GMT
So, William and Mary's England, Scotland and Ireland, and the other parts of England's overseas empire, including the 12 Colonies (sans Georgia) on eastern seaboard of North America, Hudson's Bay, Newfoundland settlements, Caribbean possessions including Jamaica, Barbados, St. Kitts and some others, and multiple trading posts in Africa, India, and the East Indies, are sent back in time, to the summer of Columbus's first return from the Americas, about 200 years before. William & Mary's Britain has a 200 year head start on technology and "news from the future" on everybody else in Europe. England, Scotland, and their colonies are actually the world's only Protestant countries. That might change in a generation or two however. Ambassadors and merchants of uptime versions of nearly all the nations of Europe are also present in England, and especially cities like London and Bristol and are other sources of diffusion of future knowledge, of Britain's monopoly won't be forever. How do things develop from here, with European great power politics, religious affairs like the Reformation, Counter-Reformation and Inquisition, and world trade and colonization of the Americas?
I suspect that the Papacy would want a word with Martin Luther, albeit that he's only 10 at the time.
Britain has a head start on knowledge of the Americas and hence of the wealth of the Aztec and Inca empires so you could see some missions to 'liberate' them, which is likely to go badly for the natives between disease, gold-lust and abhorrence at the local religious. They will also have a lot of knowledge of the eastern route to Asia and hence the trade of India and the spice islands which the mercantile classes are likely to seek to gain control over so expect a mission to secure Cape Horn [The Cape of Good Hope] and hence easiest access to the Indian Ocean. Of course here Britain runs into the potential problems that Spain did OTL with too much dependence on American gold and imperial overstretch possibly causing the sort of decline that Spain suffered OTL.
Of course, apart from any religious issues, which might cause conflict William is William of Orange so he might desire to liberate the Netherlands, which have just come under Hapsburg control after the death of Mary_of_Burgundy the previous year. However that would add political clashes with the Hapsburg's to the religious problems and also at this point with the Reformation still a generation away from starting the population is Catholic. Hence that might be unpopular with everybody.
As a result I suspect that while he would seek to establish trade links with his 'old' lands and probably allowing/encouraging the supply of books that mention both the Reformation and the Netherlands OTL success to encourage the region to become less happy with Catholicism and Hapsburg rule for possible support of a later action.
The pope at the time was Alexander VI, from August 1492 until his death in 1503. - the notorious Borgia pope famed for his corruption and lust for power. Coupled with that he had only months before in the inter caetera on the 4th May 1493 that resolved disputes over new lands discovered outside Europe between Spain and Portugal - leading to the more famous Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494. As such hearing that the UK has territories and settlements in lands claimed by Spain is likely to cause tension. However there are also concerns at this time across much of Europe about the power of Charles VIII of France who is shortly to launch a successful but short lived invasion of the kingdom of Naples and that would further complicate matters.
In the short term and baring major internal unrest, which isn't totally certain but is unlikely to occur we're largely untouchable due to the technologically and organizational advantages. In the longer run as knowledge spread weight of numbers could prove fatal although that would assume that Protestantism won't spread to any part of Europe and that someone can unite enough of Catholic Europe against the newcomers.
|
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Sept 23, 2022 0:51:44 GMT
One detail I would note about 1693 England is that the presence of Jews in the country had been legalized in the Commonwealth days. If sent back to 1493, some share of the quite recently expelled Spanish Jews might end up moving on to England instead of the Islamic countries they predominantly moved to. They could be a useful source of knowledge on 1490s Spain.
|
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Sept 23, 2022 1:15:14 GMT
Britain has a head start on knowledge of the Americas and hence of the wealth of the Aztec and Inca empires so you could see some missions to 'liberate' them, which is likely to go badly for the natives between disease, gold-lust and abhorrence at the local religious. They will also have a lot of knowledge of the eastern route to Asia and hence the trade of India and the spice islands which the mercantile classes are likely to seek to gain control over so expect a mission to secure Cape Horn and hence easiest access to the Indian Ocean. Cape Horn for the Indian Ocean? Or Cape of Good Hope? Or both? I basically agree with everything you say here. Possibly the English of nearly 200 years later would take a larger scientific contingent with them and take down more detailed observations of the native empires and everything about them. They won't really know anything more about the germ theory of disease, so disease spread should still be massive. This England had already built up a "Black Legend" about the Spanish so there may be particular instances where they will try to be, or try to portray themselves as less cruel to the Amerindians than the Spanish, and they have picked up the habit of African slavery, so may do more displacement and heavy taxation of conquered Indians rather than trying to heavily use them for mine or plantation labor. But diseases will still spread people will still be cruel out of greed and mean-spiritedness. Of course here Britain runs into the potential problems that Spain did OTL with too much dependence on American gold and imperial overstretch possibly causing the sort of decline that Spain suffered OTL. England-Scotland-Ireland do get a precious metals bonanza that can fuel inflation here. But, their domestic economy is 200 years more advanced and sophisticated than the 1493 Spanish economy. Plus, these metals can also spread around a larger trading area onto British global trading posts and the sizable North American colonies. Also, especially with the recent Dutch conquest (cough, cough, Glorious Revolution) England-Scotland-Ireland now have much more sophisticated financial management than Spain had in 1493 or the 1500s or 1600s. So these could be mitigating factors, although inflation would still be a problem and precious metal sources could become a source of economic and administrative laziness or a new thing for Crown and Parliament to fight over unless they agree up front. Even if the 1688 oligarchic settlement of parliamentary supremacy remains pretty solid as Britain taps into the gold and silver el dorado, secure British possession of erstwhile Spanish America could give the British parliamentary oligarchy a 100 or more year holiday from having to raise taxes or further innovate on credit instruments, and, in so doing, allow it to ignore any pressures for expanding representation or the franchise over that time. However, over 100 years time, not to mention 150 years tor 200, the American colonies, even just North America (and then add erstwhile Spanish, now British, America) are going to be growing into a demographic behemoth, particularly with the American 12 colonies likely to move into Canada and Florida long before the French or Spanish find either of those places. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,235
|
Post by stevep on Sept 23, 2022 15:14:50 GMT
Britain has a head start on knowledge of the Americas and hence of the wealth of the Aztec and Inca empires so you could see some missions to 'liberate' them, which is likely to go badly for the natives between disease, gold-lust and abhorrence at the local religious. They will also have a lot of knowledge of the eastern route to Asia and hence the trade of India and the spice islands which the mercantile classes are likely to seek to gain control over so expect a mission to secure Cape Horn and hence easiest access to the Indian Ocean. Cape Horn for the Indian Ocean? Or Cape of Good Hope? Or both? I basically agree with everything you say here. Possibly the English of nearly 200 years later would take a larger scientific contingent with them and take down more detailed observations of the native empires and everything about them. They won't really know anything more about the germ theory of disease, so disease spread should still be massive. This England had already built up a "Black Legend" about the Spanish so there may be particular instances where they will try to be, or try to portray themselves as less cruel to the Amerindians than the Spanish, and they have picked up the habit of African slavery, so may do more displacement and heavy taxation of conquered Indians rather than trying to heavily use them for mine or plantation labor. But diseases will still spread people will still be cruel out of greed and mean-spiritedness. Of course here Britain runs into the potential problems that Spain did OTL with too much dependence on American gold and imperial overstretch possibly causing the sort of decline that Spain suffered OTL. England-Scotland-Ireland do get a precious metals bonanza that can fuel inflation here. But, their domestic economy is 200 years more advanced and sophisticated than the 1493 Spanish economy. Plus, these metals can also spread around a larger trading area onto British global trading posts and the sizable North American colonies. Also, especially with the recent Dutch conquest (cough, cough, Glorious Revolution) England-Scotland-Ireland now have much more sophisticated financial management than Spain had in 1493 or the 1500s or 1600s. So these could be mitigating factors, although inflation would still be a problem and precious metal sources could become a source of economic and administrative laziness or a new thing for Crown and Parliament to fight over unless they agree up front. Even if the 1688 oligarchic settlement of parliamentary supremacy remains pretty solid as Britain taps into the gold and silver el dorado, secure British possession of erstwhile Spanish America could give the British parliamentary oligarchy a 100 or more year holiday from having to raise taxes or further innovate on credit instruments, and, in so doing, allow it to ignore any pressures for expanding representation or the franchise over that time. However, over 100 years time, not to mention 150 years tor 200, the American colonies, even just North America (and then add erstwhile Spanish, now British, America) are going to be growing into a demographic behemoth, particularly with the American 12 colonies likely to move into Canada and Florida long before the French or Spanish find either of those places.
Duh, sorry. Meant Cape of Good Hope. 
Its going to be messy in the Americas with a massive death toll still but possibly not quite as bad as OTL. The late 17thC Brits aren't going to be as religiously fanatical as early 16thC Spanish. However disease, abhorrence at Aztec especially levels of human sacrifice and sheer greed are going to cause a lot of deaths. I don't know if Britain is going to have the resources to preempt both the Spanish in the west and the Portuguese - then later the Dutch in the east but there is a hell of a lot of money to be made.
In India the dominant power is the Delhi Sultanate, which currently is under its last strong emperor, Sikandar Khan, who ruled from 1489 and 1517. This state had declined from its earlier, more successful dynasties, see here for the empire at its fall to the Mughals in 1526. As such the EIC will have a more complex relationship than with the still powerful Mughul empire they were familiar with. It could be that they stay predominantly a trading bloc, especially since there are currently no French or Dutch rivals or they could be drawn into territorial expansion to protect their outposts and trade. I'm not sure what outposts it had in 1693 although it does say:
and
This latter episode suggests that the fort was powerful enough to resist the Mughul empire at its military peak for about a year but how much they might have been forced to reduce defences and garrisons as part of the deal I don't know. Their likely to be fairly secure against local forces but probably going to be a lot of confusion and also local mistrust/hostility at the way those foreigners have suddenly [to them] appeared and claim the forts as their property.
As you say the down side of such massive revenue could be that the need to respect Parliament and its slow expansion of power could be delayed or even curtailed if the monarchy - in a few years when those new resources are being extracted. Which would be potentially very bad for Britain.
In the longer term there will be issues with the empire, especially if Britain itself is more autocratic. Not sure how places with large populations such as Mexico, the Andean region and Java will be governed but its likely that much of N America is going to be overwhelmingly British in population. Since the 1693 Britain knows of the locations of the St Lawrence and Mississippi delta's and with the Caribbean lands will have bases near the latter it should be possible to secure them and hence control of the interior against rival European powers. This would mean the colonies are going to be a lot more secure once their strong enough to be certain of crushing the Indian tribes so a rebellion could well come earlier. If that succeeded and also the settler colonies are as land hungry as OTL their going to be very hostile to local populations which could ironically mean that areas such as Mexico could stay loyal to the crown longer because they rely on it for protection against a successful rebel state.
Unfortunately I can see slavery being extended in this world with the existing British colonies forming a base.  Its also likely to be overwhelmingly dominated by Britain because they will have the necessary knowledge as well as those bases. Will have to find new connections to buy slaves from and at least some of the African states could struggle with the sheer size of the annual demand for slaves which could [hopefully] be an issue. Also will have to find a market for the sugar and other productions. Ironically in the face of British pre-emenence in the slave trade and the extra-European world Catholic Europe might argue for opposing slavery and also imports such as tobacco. |
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Sept 23, 2022 23:20:27 GMT
As you say the down side of such massive revenue could be that the need to respect Parliament and its slow expansion of power could be delayed or even curtailed if the monarchy - in a few years when those new resources are being extracted. Which would be potentially very bad for Britain. Well, hadn't the Glorious Revolution of 1688 baked parliamentary supremacy over the Crown into the British cake? So wouldn't Parliament have equal control of these new wealth sources along with the Crown, or supreme control, from the beginning. The issue with representation and democracy though is that the oligarchically designed parliament of the day, with its minuscule franchise, would be able to give itself a hefty tax cut for a long time, and be under no pressure to expand its representativeness. Distribution of the spoils of America by the connected, while incidentally providing some positive lubrication and stimulus for the economy, would also fuel corruption and special influence by those with the most or preferred access to it. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,235
|
Post by stevep on Sept 24, 2022 12:28:58 GMT
As you say the down side of such massive revenue could be that the need to respect Parliament and its slow expansion of power could be delayed or even curtailed if the monarchy - in a few years when those new resources are being extracted. Which would be potentially very bad for Britain. Well, hadn't the Glorious Revolution of 1688 baked parliamentary supremacy over the Crown into the British cake? So wouldn't Parliament have equal control of these new wealth sources along with the Crown, or supreme control, from the beginning. The issue with representation and democracy though is that the oligarchically designed parliament of the day, with its minuscule franchise, would be able to give itself a hefty tax cut for a long time, and be under no pressure to expand its representativeness. Distribution of the spoils of America by the connected, while incidentally providing some positive lubrication and stimulus for the economy, would also fuel corruption and special influence by those with the most or preferred access to it.
True although to a degree the monarchy was still powerful, especially with a skilled supporter and as late as the young George III, echoing the ideas of enlightened absolutism on the continent there was an attempt to increase its political power again. Also for quite a while even with the largest party in Parliament a leader could only take the role of PM if the monarch couldn't find another leader able to cobble together a coalition that could win enough support.
However your overall correct in terms that a coalition between the monarchy and the oligarchy are going to dominate parliament and power unless and until either they split or make a big enough disaster for change to be forced one way or another. Well into the 19thC there was a lot of corruption and cronyism and power was very highly concentrated. Success in such colonial operations would have spread this power somewhat as a lot of merchants would have gathered a lot of wealth and hence influence but many are likely to buy their way into the establishment. [As OTL a fair number of the early industrialists]. Your still likely to have local interests represented to a degree at lower levels but very little influence on broader policies. We have had Charles I and Cromwell so there is likely to be pressure for a small standing army to avoid anyone establishing another military dictatorship.
How much power might be spread in the colonies, both those of settlement like N America and those of rule like say Mexico or Java I don't know while specialist groups like the Caribbean planters and the EIC will have influence as well but lower levels of the population, other than those who manage to scramble up the greasy pole to power are going to have relatively little say.
Of course a lot would depend on philosophy and ideas that come to dominate the country as well. It could be a strong religious movement that emphasis the needs of the poor or something negative like the ideas of laissez faire that would hurt them very badly.
|
|
|
|
Post by shadow007 on Oct 16, 2022 5:10:52 GMT
A much earlier Industrial Revolution would start the decline of both Slavery and Serfdom
The Ottomans and Tartars/Mongols are screwd as their enemies now have a technological and information advantage over them
Ming China experiences the Century of Humiliation and maybe the Qing start China's Industrialization
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,235
|
Post by stevep on Oct 17, 2022 13:23:48 GMT
A much earlier Industrial Revolution would start the decline of both Slavery and Serfdom
Possibly although they could be replaced by new ideas that are little better for many poorer people.
That assumes that a Protestant Britain, isolated from a Catholic Europe depending on how a modified Reformation spreads or not, is willing to help their Catholic rivals against their Muslim enemies. A lot would also depend on how relations with the Sublime Porte are as there's a lot of money to be made with a friendly Ottoman empire. Of course if England is hostile its likely to support the Mamulks against them to secure the latter's independence and hence denying the Ottomans a clear domination of the overland trade routes - although in the longer run sea trade will come to dominate those markets anyway.
A lot depends on how hostile or not the Ming are to trade with England. At times they were quite open to foreign trade although their arrogance could be an issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by shadow007 on Nov 5, 2022 14:13:00 GMT
A much earlier Industrial Revolution would start the decline of both Slavery and Serfdom
Possibly although they could be replaced by new ideas that are little better for many poorer people.
That assumes that a Protestant Britain, isolated from a Catholic Europe depending on how a modified Reformation spreads or not, is willing to help their Catholic rivals against their Muslim enemies. A lot would also depend on how relations with the Sublime Porte are as there's a lot of money to be made with a friendly Ottoman empire. Of course if England is hostile its likely to support the Mamulks against them to secure the latter's independence and hence denying the Ottomans a clear domination of the overland trade routes - although in the longer run sea trade will come to dominate those markets anyway.
A lot depends on how hostile or not the Ming are to trade with England. At times they were quite open to foreign trade although their arrogance could be an issue.
Slavery only ended thanks to the Industrial Revolution in our world. Machines and more efficient labor techniques vastly increase human productivity so that slaves were obsolete and ineffecient. The Brits colonize much more of the world which is ironically a goid thing as they know it or not forster more productivity and liberal thought in their colonies compared to Spanish or French colonization. The Major Powers realize just how important having a technological advantage is thus invest huge funds into specialize education and research. A musket or cannon from 1693 is much better than one from 1493. Sadly WW1 will occur much earlier due to the military weapons becoming much deadlier and population growth allowing nations to mobilize millions to fight and die. I bet more nations are involved in this very early alt-WW1. |
|
Its also likely to be overwhelmingly dominated by Britain because they will have the necessary knowledge as well as those bases. Will have to find new connections to buy slaves from and at least some of the African states could struggle with the sheer size of the annual demand for slaves which could [hopefully] be an issue. Also will have to find a market for the sugar and other productions. Ironically in the face of British pre-emenence in the slave trade and the extra-European world Catholic Europe might argue for opposing slavery and also imports such as tobacco.