Here you can speculate on the game’s plot, discuss its characters, and compare notes with other players.
A question of history
Isaiah Hazardway
Posts: 39
7/2/2015
|
Hello,
Strictly speaking, this isn't related to the game itself or matters of the Neath and the Bazaar. But it is related to the Game's plot, so I chose to post it here.
Now, without giving away too much, the new EF content about July has revealed, among many other things, that in the alternate universe where London fell, France retained its monarchy--it has an Emperor in 1908, when in the real world it became a republic in 1871 (or 1870, I'm not sure of the exact year). Clearly, the disappearance of the seat of power of the British Empire has had some very important consequences for Great Power politics on the Surface, as is to be expected. The total disappearance of the largest city on Earth along with the near-total power structure of its largest Empire isn't exactly a butterfly beating its wings to create a hurricane, it is a hurricane of itself.
Now, I have been thinking about what might have been triggered by London's lapse that the Second Empire would have survived. Speculative history is by definition not very tangible, or intellectually acceptable perhaps, but it is fun and the question is interesting. Is there any among you who has any ideas as to what role was played in the real course of history by the British in the buildup to the Franco-Prussian War, and how exactly its disappearance may have altered the fate of these two continental powers (I know that the British chiefly followed an isolationist policy which continued on until the First World War)? Any who would like to speculate how Surface politics might have changed otherwise, in Europe and elsewhere? I never questioned how the world might come to terms with a whole city disappearing overnight, it is a question that must simply be given over to suspension of disbelief, but the latest content has clearly shown that London's fall has had some effects, unless the writers have made a quite colossal error and will promptly replace 'emperor' with 'president'. I am not an EF myself, but I've seen echoes and I am intrigued. If I am mistaken in some of my assumptions, do correct me.
edited by Isaiah Hazardway on 7/2/2015
--
http://fallenlondon.storynexus.com/Profile/Isaiah~Hazardway
|
|
|
+2
link
|
Fishburne
Posts: 5
7/12/2015
|
Isaiah Hazardway wrote:
That is a very good theory. Considering how closely the Republic survived the Affair, a little interference could quickly lead to a coup. I was tempted to think the new Emperor might've been Boulanger, but he's already dead at this point. But so is Napoleon IV, in fact, he apparently died in 1879. So I guess we have no leads on that one either.
Far from it! Napoleon IV died in 1879 in battle with the Zulu during the Anglo-Zulu war. Without a British Empire, presumably that affair remained in the hands of the Boers. He also would not have been tutored in London, instead likely getting educated in Austria-Hungary or Russia (as neither France nor Prussia would be options). Either way, if he were able to garner similar political and popular support to our timeline, simply not dying to Zulu spears would probably lead to him founding the Fourth Empire.
|
|
|
+3
link
|
Kade Carrion (an_ocelot)
Posts: 1372
7/2/2015
|
If you mean, does the text confirm it's the Third Empire, yes. I don't see anything that jumps out about causes in the rest, though my history of this era is nill so I may be missing some subtle clue.
--
Social Actions: send them to Kade Carrion (she/her; no Tournament of Lilies, please). an_ocelot has gone NORTH and cannot benefit from social actions!
Possibly-Useful Things: Spreadsheets and hints and link collections, oh my.
|
|
|
+1
link
|