Talk:The British Ain't Coming

Welcome to the talk page for The British Ain't Coming.

Current Proposals
See the Proposal Archive for previous proposals.

This article will explain the world map of this timeline, including the repositioning the Prime Meridian and the International Date Line. It begins with a brief explanation of exploration and ends with a history of the establishment of the standard lines of longitude and accompanying time zones. --SouthWriter (talk) 03:36, June 19, 2016 (UTC)

General Discussion
I have a few suggestions for nations. I think there should be Quebec(Quebec and Ontario minus Ungava and Thunder Bay),Alyeska(Alaska,British Columbia, and Yukon),Acadia(New Brunswick,Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia),Borealia(Ungava,Thunder Bay,Manitoba,Sasketchewan,and Alberta),The Vinnish-Inuit Union(North-West Territories and Nunavut),Newfoundland,California(California + Baja California + Baja California Sur + Sonora + Arizona + New Mexico),Cascadia (Washington,Idaho,Montana,Oregon,and Nevada),Yucatan,Central America (Central America minus Panama),Gran Columbia(Columbia,Venezuela,Ecuador,Panama and West Guyana),United Guyana (Suriname,French Guyana,and East Guyana),Cape Republic (South Africa minus the Orange Free State and Walvis Bay),Boer Republic(Orange Free State),West African Union(French West Africa),Ethiopia(Ethiopia,Eritrea, and Djibouti),Ottomans(Turkey minus East Thrace,Mysia,Bythnia,and Cilcia),Byzantines (East Thrace,Mysia,Greece minus Morea and Epirus, and Bythnia),Morea,Epirus, Austrian Union(Austria,Bavaria, and Bosnia),France(France minus Aquintaine, Normandy,Alasace,Burgundy and Brittany + Wallonia,Burgundy,Alasace-Lorraine, Brittany, and Normandy.Few that is a lot. The Epic Dragon (talk) 00:45, April 12, 2016 (UTC)

Reconsidering and doing some research, I may be able to use quite a few of these nations.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 19:21, April 26, 2016 (UTC)

Ok The Epic Dragon (talk) 22:35, April 26, 2016 (UTC)

I've made two maps for the alternate South America.

Countries: Red - Gran Colombia; Gold - United Guyana  (both proposed by The Epic Dragon) ; Lime-Green - Gran Pará (Pará and Amapá; brazilian states); Light-Green - Eldorado (Roraima, Amazonas and Rondonia); Black - St. Louis or Maragnon (Maranhão and Piauí); Orange - Mauritian States (Ceará, Rio Grande do Norte, Paraíba, Pernambuco and Alagoas); Dark Green - Bahia (Bahia, Sergipe, Espírito Santo and Rio de Janeiro); "Sea-Green" - Cerrado (Mato Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul, Goiás and Brasilia); Blue - Minas Gerais (Minas Gerais state); Yellow - Parana (São Paulo, Paraná, Santa Catarina, Part of Rio Grande do Sul); Light Blue - La Plata (Northern Argentina, Uruguay, Part of Rio Grande do Sul, Paraguay minus Chaco, Uruguay); Dark Blue - Patagonia (Patagonian region); Brown - Chile (Chile minus Chilean Patagonia); Dark Yellow - Bolivia (Bolivia plus Chaco and parts of Chile); Dark Red - Peru.

Some of these territories (like São Paulo, Minas Gerais) are brazilian states.

Massacote (talk)

Looks good. Right now I'm trying to determine European effects on the absence of Britain, but this is a good start as colonization is where the major changes begin.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 17:32, April 28, 2016 (UTC)

Maybe the Roman Empire will create some settlements on Iceland, passing where should have the British Isles.

Massacote (talk)

Interesting. Maybe later on clashes between Neo-Rome (non-invaded Roman Iceland) and the Vikings.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 04:35, April 29, 2016 (UTC)

Additionally, I think present-day Guyana would be part of Suriname rather than Colombia, since Dutch Suriname lost Guyana to the British.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 18:23, April 29, 2016 (UTC)

For now, can I make the South American nations profiles?

Massacote (talk)

I shall permit you to add these nations to the list. Perhaps I can develop the nations (like the New Orange page) once I get into the timeline more; medieval and Renaissance stuff I'm pretty stumped about...

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 02:50, May 11, 2016 (UTC)

Lucky for you,I'm an expert on Renaissance and Medieval stuff. --The Epic Dragon (talk) 02:59, May 11, 2016 (UTC)

I don't think the Romans couldn't reach that far, not even with there technology, and if they could, they would probably find it to hard and give up so the Romans wouldn't have any influence on Iceland. I would think they would look for more alternative lands if the British Isles wasn't their, due to the wish of expansionism. Maybe like more in Africa or in Eastern Europe.

Also, the British didn't have hardly any influence over South America so it wouldn't effect South America that much. However, with the Dutch having more colonies because of the absence of the British, they would probably leave South America and let the others scramble over it.

On another subject, am I aloud to do sports on this TL or share doing it with Hawk Aussie because he likes doing sports?

Thanks,

Awesome history 28

Perhaps save sports to when the nations and politics are better developed into the TL, but I'm sure both of you can find room to develop sports. I'm still working on colonial nations in the TL, and when and how they gain independence.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 05:51, May 15, 2016 (UTC)

I don't think so. Maurice of Nassau had a great influence in South America, being governor of the Dutch colony in Brazil. I think the Dutch would have their colonies in South America. (Guyana and part of Brazil).

Massacote.01

At the time Dutch were colonizing America they were having a South African colony, so wouldnt they eventually switch their effort to that region eventually, cause I feel they had more to gain there and that France or another nation would had taken their North American colony eventually. And even there, wasnt the 100 year war that get rid of feudalism in France and allow the formation of a strong and stable French empire, just thinking.

Rdv65 (talk) 16:01, May 15, 2016 (UTC)

The French probably wouldn't be able to take New Netherland, as Louisiana was constantly being pressured by the Spanish in Texas and Florida. However, South Africa would indeed be a Dutch colony. Without Britain, the Dutch Empire would be stronger, and may be like this TL's British empire with colonies in the Americas, South Africa, and Oceania.

The question of the Roman Empire is a large one; how would Europe change without the Isles and the kingdom?

A timeline usch as this, as the firsst of its kind, is a very hard to answer. Taking away one of the most powerful influences on the globe has drastic, unforeseen consequences...

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 18:55, May 15, 2016 (UTC)

Well the Picts were a bad thing for Rome which lose an entire legion out there and lose a lot of men and money trying to defend the Hadrian Wall, would thgose men and money would has been use elsewhere, that the only question i see worth in this era

Feudal Lord would reign longer i think as British government has alway influence the continent with year ahead administration and push France to centralize a lot, even without the 100 year war, France would eventually centralize but feudalism would have keep going for at least an hundred year, maybe pushing the date of French colonization a little later and giving the Dutch a chance to establish a strong influence that would challenge Britain.

I really wonder about Spain as I tend to think that the Anglo-Spanish war and the subsequent destruction of the Spanish America did not help Spain keep their imperial statut neither (I equally talk about the Spanish Netherlands and what outside of Europe),

A good point but the money to defend Hadrian's Wall wasn't massive and probably wouldn't affect the future Roman Empire. They could of used that money to invade somewhere else possibly or doing other things. As I said before I would think that the Romans would expand somewhere else instead of Britain due to the emperor who conquered England wanting to expand his empire. I think Holland will be able to keep New Netherland but might let it go as a commonwealth nation to make the country stable.

I think everybody does need to do some research about British history to get a more plausible TL.

Awesome history 28 (talk) 15:58, May 16, 2016 (UTC)

Right now, I'm having a hard time looking at the affects on German unification. Without an American Revolution there would be no French revolution, so no Napoleonic Wars most likely, so no German nationalism, so no German Empire... But which tiny German nations would survive to 2016?

Additionally, with regards to New Netherland, I think that the Dutch may want to have a hold on North America. Beaver fur was very popular in Europe, so they would want to keep the fur trade there. With trade competition with the French, it is likely the French would support the New Orangite Revolution the same way they did with the Belgian Revolution to get the Dutch out of North America. After the Vermont War, the Dutch may find themselves in a similar economic situation the British did after the Seven Years War. This may lead to taxes; hidden support from the French would make matters worse for the government in Amsterdam.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 18:20, May 16, 2016 (UTC)

I think some of us can start creating articles; I've started to create North American country articles; Massacote can probably start developing South America. Europe may require some more debating.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 21:52, May 16, 2016 (UTC)

I think I would be good with Europe and/or Asia. The Epic Dragon (talk) 23:02, May 16, 2016 (UTC)

What about the Ocenaia countries because from I am saying is that the Dutch would probably colonize Indonesia (same as OTL) and possibily Australia as Frederick de Houtman did went pass Australia around 1616 and then maybe Abel Tasman would go on a second expedition which would discover the east coast of Australia. HawkAussie (Talk) 05:41, May 28, 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it is likely the Dutch would have a large presence in Australia. Since the Dutch had discovered it, there being no British to compete with, Australia would indeed be a Dutch colony. Perhaps the nation would be merged with Indonesia later on.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 06:47, May 28, 2016 (UTC)

The Greater Loss -- the Irish
My being part Irish, I undoubtedly would not exist in my present incarnation. My Nordic ancestors would have been redirected to other parts of Europe, so that's that.

But my existence is unconsequential. Though debated by scholars, the thesis of the book How the Irish Saved Civiliazation should be taken seriously. Isolated by Britain from the Chaos of the "dark ages," the Irish monks worked at preserving the ancient manuscripts -- both sacred and secular -- to later reintroduce Roman and Greek history to Europe.

I don't know what the fate of the Roman Empire would be in TTL, but its fall and the restructuring of Europe after that fall would be subject to the feudal system that arose in OTL. Would the weakened Church at Rome be able to make up for the task left undone by the absent Irish? SouthWriter (talk) 20:13, May 19, 2016 (UTC)

Something interesting to consider. The Renaissance may still occur, but it and the Enlightenment may be greatly slowed down.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 02:49, May 20, 2016 (UTC)

The Church may contribute some, but Muslim scholars may also play a role; Scandinavian Shetlanders would be isolated from the war, although it is unlikely they would be very interested in what the OTL Irish had done. This would be something important to consider; in this TL, I seem to have already figured out technology, and now perhaps ideals, would be most likely behind OTL. -- Orange


 * Well, that is a thought. The Muslims did preserve some of what they found among those that they conquered. However, they treated a lot of that stuff as heathen and unworthy of Allah. The Shetlanders, on the other hand, may have been influenced by the same migrants that would have NOT found anything south of them (see below)! --SouthWriter (talk) 19:16, May 20, 2016 (UTC)

Concerning Immigration
Okay here is the Wikipedia article concerning the proposed and "recorded" immigration (quotes mine) of the islands. The article characteristically dismisses human records as "myth" in favor of bits of pottery and ancient bones. But, seeing that the article starts with an ASB collision that didn't happen that way in OTL, I can go with either one. The important thing is that the later migration is the one that made a lasting difference.

The "myth" has a population of giants (thus being enough to throw archeologists into denial) that were displaced by Trojeans and Celtic peoples from far away Greece and Ukraine. These peoples would have settled in Spain and France, from which they migrated anyway. In my opinion, it is probable that the "giants" may have been powerful Africans (ancestors of the Zulus of today?). Whatever the case, thes populations would have been settled elsewhere.

Perhaps many of these folk ended up off shore of Africa in the Azores, Madeira and Canary Islands. Or perhaps, they influenced the development of France and Spain.--SouthWriter (talk) 19:16, May 20, 2016 (UTC)

Whoever these "giants are," they would probaby end up in the western Mediterranean region as predicted. I wonder if this influence of Africans in Iberia and France may possibly have some kind of butterfly effect of the slave trade in colonial days...

After seeing that the Celts were from around Austria-Bavara (as seen here), perhaps isolation in Crimea or elsewhere in the Black Sea may take the job of the Irish, helped along by the Papal states and Muslim scholars. Maybe isolation high up in the Alpine monasteries could work, since medieval Switzerland was largely in the plateaus and valleys.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 21:18, May 20, 2016 (UTC)


 * Further investigation reveals that most Britions have genetic ties to the aboriginal population which was cut off from the continent after the Ice Age when the ice melted:


 * These nomadic tribespeople followed herds of reindeer and wild horses northward to Britain as the climate warmed.


 * "Numbers were probably quite small—just a few thousand people," Miles added.


 * These earliest settlers were later cut off as rising sea levels isolated Britain from mainland Europe.


 * New evidence for the genetic ancestry of modern Britons comes from analysis of blood groups, oxygen traces in teeth, and DNA samples taken from skeletal remains.


 * Ice Age hunter-gathers also colonized the rest of northwest Europe, spreading through what are now the Netherlands, Germany, and France.


 * National Geographic News, July 2005


 * Judging from this, the population would not have been isolated if the islands were not there.  Later "invasions" and occupations would have assimilated this population.  Later the Celts, Norse and others would have possibly met the same fate. This lends credence to your premise that the British truely never "existed" as such in such an altered earth.


 * SouthWriter (talk) 19:31, May 22, 2016 (UTC)

Germany
Can I do the German States? --The Epic Dragon (talk) 20:00, May 22, 2016 (UTC)

I'm doing the German States. The Epic Dragon (talk) 21:45, May 22, 2016 (UTC)

I responded on my talk page if you haven't seen yet. Thanks again!

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 22:12, May 22, 2016 (UTC)

Things to Consider
I would just like to point out a few issues that I have with this TL. Basically for this TL you guys didn't look far back enough, starting with the actual effects of the POD in the 17-1800s.
 * 1) A lot of the wars wars involving Europe would go differntly. ,
 * 2) Normandy and the Vikings would be messed up.
 * 3) Hannover would defiantly be more powerful.
 * 4) Roman imperial conquests would go differently.

Doesn't even seem like Hannover would even exist. The Napoleonic Wars would be far less likely, so the Congress of Vienna would never meet or set up the Kingdom of Hanover.

There would certainly be cultural differences in Normandy, Brittany, and possibly Belgium. English would still develop in the isolated Channel Islands. The Vikings would probably take their conquests and settlements to elsewhere, perhaps even the Netherlands or OTL Poland.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 03:06, June 3, 2016 (UTC)

But Belgium would never exist as the Austrians would keep the Austrian Netherlands. Prussia and Austria would never lose lands from the Partitions of Poland.If there was WW1 the Central Powers would win but Germany would be replaced by Prussia.Maybe a South German Alliance would be established with the independent states of Germany and Austria but not Saxony or Hamburg. Prussia STILL owns Hannover also with no Britain the House of Hannover wouldn't be as powerful do to not owning Britain. Colonization would be drastically different.The War of the Austrian Succession would probably have terms dictated by Austria.These would be like status quo except Silesia is recognized as Prussian and Genoa and Modena occupied by Austria would be annexed.There would also be NO 100 years war or it would be fought with somebody else. --The Epic Dragon (talk) 03:20, June 3, 2016 (UTC)


 * Octivian, I agree, the effects start way back into the first century AD, if not further.  Without the occupation and control of England, the Romans would have been stronger in Gaul (France), altering the development of both France and Germany.  Rome would still fall more or less "on schedule" but not before changing the character of western Europe.


 * However, to make this time line a bit easier to work with, we have to waive the butterfly effect just a little.  Let us assume that the Roman influence on its western frontier stays about the same.  Then we gain about 800 years until the days of Charlemagne. As contact with the British Isles is out of the picture, the influence of France and Germany in their "infancy" will be greater. Also, the Norwegian (that is, Viking) advance south will be along the coast, meaning what was to be Normandie would be stronger. By the time of William "the Conqueror," his attention would not be divided. His dynasty may very well have controlled France (and to some extent Germany) for centuries.


 * The butterflies start to flutter wildly because of this. How much we wish to speculate will determine if we bog down on the details or use some suspension of disbelief and write a good story. By the way, Orange, "Brittany" gets it name from its association with Britain. That, too, goes back to the Roman occupation. Later, there would be reverse immigration back to the mainland to change the character of the peninsular. It would probably be safe to say that "Brittany," no matter what it is called, would have been a Roman stronghold. --SouthWriter (talk) 15:47, June 3, 2016 (UTC)

Exploring ATL People
Hello. I've recently begun researching possible Dutch Americans for potential New Orangites. My most recent finding was (OTL actor) Humphrey Bogart; his son, Stephen H. Bogart, may end up incumbent New Orange president rather than my current fictional president. It turns out even the Roosevelts were of Dutch descent, originating in New Netherland; Theodore Roosevelt and FDR could be key figures in shaping modern New Orange.

On the topic of Qing China, Jin Yuzhang would be the incumbent Emperor. As described by South, Napoleon could go into politics in a divided Italy. There may even be some Alaskan people similar to those in Russian America, depending on the direction and extent of Russian expansion in the Americas.

If you happen to find any more possible people affected by the butterfly effect you find worthy of noting or debating, post it here. Thanks again!

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 00:42, June 5, 2016 (UTC)

Mixed Heritage
With the nature of the "melting pot" nature of most of America, it is almost impossible to have anyone on the continent appear as themselves in TTL. The best we can do is use "analogues" based on non-British ancestors from the continent. Given the Dutch and Swedish majorities, people very much like the Bogarts and the Roosevelts of today might arise. We can probably use the "modern" names for analogous individuals in New Orange. Like I said, the Butterfly effect can be huge!

"Belmont and Maud [Bogart] married in June 1898, he was Presbyterian of English and Dutch descent, she an Episcopalian of English heritage. Young Humphrey was raised in the Episcopal faith, but was non-practicing for most of his adult life." "Humphrey Bogart"  By the way, Theodore Roosevelt was a decendant of a Bogart.

"Nicholas was the last common ancestor of the Oyster Bay Roosevelts (including Theodore and Eleanor Roosevelt), founded by his son Johannes, and the Hyde Park Roosevelts (including Franklin Delano Roosevelt), founded by his son Jacobus." "Nicholas Roosevelt"

From the family tree, I see that Jacobus' grandson (also named Jacobus) was the first in the FDR branch to marry a British woman, Catherine Welles. In this he was apparently the last "full-blooded" Dutch/European Roosevelt in that line. The other line (that of TR) lasted one more generation. "James Roosevelt (1760--1847"

"[Cornelius] Roosevelt was born in New York City, the son of Maria Helen (Van Schaack) and James Jacobus Roosevelt, and was the last full-blooded Dutch Roosevelt of his line. Through his mother Roosevelt was a descendant of the Schuyler family through his great great grandmother Maria Schuyler." "Cornelius Roosevelt"

SouthWriter (talk) 21:06, June 5, 2016 (UTC)

Immigration to America
For further discussion in "nation building" in New Orange, here are immigration facts in OTL.

Here is a link toimmigration into the colonies before 1790 and at the first census. The large majority of the non-British during this time were German. Here is a link to the numbers of immigration into America from 1830 to 2000. Historically, it appears Germans provide far more than anyone that would make their way to the US without having had British ancestry. Canadian immigration would be largely British in OTL and Mexicans would not have the border so close (though the southern border in TTL might be worse!)  Italy, Poland and Russia have large numbers as well (mostly in the 20th century.

Just something to think about. It all depends on how Europe develops in the ALT. SouthWriter (talk) 02:28, June 6, 2016 (UTC)

I can see the continued immigration to America from Eastern Europe; policies in early 20th century Prussia, East Poland, Ruthenia, and Russia probably wouldn't be so different from OTL. This would lead to a similar emigration to nations like New Orange, Canada, and Louisiana (perhaps Florida, though standard of living may be comparable to the Dommincan Republic; it depends on how the butterfly effect works on Mexico and Florida). Looking at the US immigration data from 1830 to 2000, it surprised me to find that one of the largest immigrations was in 1930: around the time Fascism was on the rise. I'll have to do some more research to see if this was any direct effect of World War I or II.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 05:49, June 6, 2016 (UTC)

I finally found Martin van Buren. An American born in New York with pure Dutch ancestry, he is the first major Dutch-American figure in politics I could find without any sort of British ancestry. Since the New Orangite Revolution could be a sort of equivalent of a (perhaps smaller-scale?) American Revolution, Van Buren could still have a chance of going into politics, and even become one of the early presidents of New Orange. See here.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 19:23, June 6, 2016 (UTC)


 * He was the second on my list of US presidents, the first was .  The list of Dutch Americans was useful, but tedious to go through.  Luckily, many put "distant" or "partial" ancestry beside the names.  John Jay was of French (Huguenot) and Dutch descent with no discernable English heritage. Consider all politicians and not just presidents in building a history of the USNO. --SouthWriter (talk) 21:00, June 6, 2016 (UTC)

My current issue is finding living politicians with considerable Dutch heritage without any from the British Isles, to find a more plausible New Orangite president than the fictional de Haven. I seem to have found one plausible candidate, but my research had turned up no information on his heritage line (let alone sufficient evidence to prove there was no English or Celtic blood in him). Perhaps if I can find a good lead on him having no British parentage, he could act as a plausible incumbent president. -- Orange (→My wall!←) 22:44, June 6, 2016 (UTC)

Scientific Revolution
Avoiding the complication of Eurocentrism, especially the British influence and application of discoveries, perhaps we can expand on contrarian "continuity" theses when postulating the Scientific revolution and the "Enlightenment" that followed. Europeans had independent influence that could have easily moved along without the likes of Newton, Gilbert and Harvey.

My previous comments about Ireland notwithstanding, it looks like the state of western Europe (France, Germany and Italy mostly) was not quite as "dark" as we make it out to be. Though slowed, by the 12th and 13th centuries, life was coming back on its own. The renaissance and "enlightenment" grew out of the scientific advances that came ahead of them. Though the discoveries of the thinkers in the British Isles were important, none of them came without influence from the continent.

That being said, given the lack of British influence on France, I still think we can assume Napoleon Bonaparte remained Corsican and Italian. --SouthWriter (talk) 20:45, June 6, 2016 (UTC)

There Seems to be a problem with your scenario
Today, I discovered that the crater from the asteroid wouldn't be big enough to destroy the british island. The crater is 180 kilometers long whereas Great britain is wider than that. Although you could separate great britain from scotland where the narrowest point is 130 kilometers long.

Darksith66 (talk) 05:51, June 8, 2016 (UTC)

I suppose I could make the meteor larger or the velocity even greater. The timeline's PoD is an ASB collision is what sets the TL in motion, but I'll have to find an impact large enough to wipe out Britain completely yet not cause such a cataclysm to wipe out mammals (or all life on Earth for that matter). No mammals = no humans, which in turn = not such a fascinating timeline.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 19:39, June 8, 2016 (UTC)

Exploring ATL People II
I have recently looked at Marco Rubio, with no British ancestry, and would probably exist without the "melting pot" nature of OTL America. Since his parents were economic refugees from OTL Cuba, I am trying to figure out if the Rubios would immigrate to New Orange or Louisiana, or remain in Florida (since Florida's standard of living would probably be comparable to, say, the Dominican Republic). As an OTL political figure, I find he could be a good asset in North American politics, and possibly the incumbent president of any of the aforementioned countries.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 04:42, June 14, 2016 (UTC)


 * Cuba is part of Florida in TTL, so it is assumed that Spanish America has achieved independance before the 20th century.  The Rubios would be citizens of Florida and may have moved to the mainland at any time.  Why is it assumed that the standard of living of all of Florida is like that of OTL Dominican Republic?  At any rate, as a Florida raised and educated lawyer, Marco would rise in influence and power in the Legislature in his home nation.  He would by now be on course to become its president. SouthWriter (talk) 16:05, June 15, 2016 (UTC)

I have been making some assumptions about Florida's economy, as these former Spanish countries for the most part still have developing economies OTL. Mainland Florida doesn't seem to have much hope either: OTL states in Florida like Mississippi, Alabama, and South Carolina are among the poorest in the United States. OTL Florida seems to be quite fine thanks to (mostly) tourism; orange; and aerospace industries, but Georgia's economy may be very different without the existence of Atlanta. Peninsular Florida may not be as economically prosperous without the "Americanization" of the region, but tourism would still be a large industry in the nation.

On another note, the pages on Wikipedia for Cuban Americans and Puerto Ricans provide countless people that could exist in ATL Florida.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 18:15, June 16, 2016 (UTC)


 * You are projecting the Anglo/Black history of the south.  You need to consider the Hispanic and French development without the British, but perhaps with considerable influence of a larger Dutch presense.  With the Spanish Amada intact (barring the Dutch doing battle in the open sea), Spain would have been much stronger.  The Roman Catholic mindset in much of Hispanic America may have persisted though, reproducing much of what we see in OTL in TTL.


 * By the way, Being poor in OTL does not reflect a "developing" economy.  My heritage is in Mississippi, Alabama and Florida, and call claim southwest Georgia as "home" though I am now a proud South Carolinian.  OTL demographics, especially the historically black and emerging hispanic populations, have held back average income, but the economy is great.  Righ to work laws allow lower wages but also provide a lower cost of living. I guess that shows I am a bit biased.  lol  SouthWriter (talk) 19:31, June 16, 2016 (UTC)

UTC
I've noticed that in infoboxes the time zone is given in reference to the UTC. In Our Time Line that is the 0 degree longitude as it passes through a section of London, England. Without that landmark, all coordinates will be off in TTL by however many degrees the analogous port city that establishes itself as the chief port in the world. Or, perhaps, in TTL some other longitude becomes the "center of the world" for travel (maps) and time (clocks). --SouthWriter (talk) 18:52, June 18, 2016 (UTC)



I made some maps showing the altered meridian and Date line. The one to the left is the Prime Meridian, going through the west end of Amsterdam (OTL 5 degrees E). All of Europe would probably be in the same time zone or at +1 UTC. It would change as nations decide which time zone worked best for them. To the right is the International dateline. This line is flexable, changing according to the nations on either side of it. In OTL it was standardized after Alaska was acquired by the Americans. In TTL, if Russia maintains possession of Alaska, their far east may be retained as being in the same day. That would be interesting in the Pacific northwest. SouthWriter (talk) 20:10, June 18, 2016 (UTC)

I can see the Dutch meridian as the globally accepted prime meridian. As for the International Date Line, things get trickier. Russia may possibly keep Alaska under the same day, but the International Date Line would probably still be west of the Alaskan peninsula, pushed back by other members of the mostly western-colonized North American Confederation. Otherwise, most of Louisiana and Mexico would be in the previous day, unlike their close neighbors New Orange and Florida. The International Date Line OTL seems strategically positioned in sparesly populated ocean, so the separation of days is not geographically close to different countries. The best way to move the IDL would probably be east into Kamchatka; east of Australia and Japan, but west of Hawai'i Aotearoa.

I would like to see a proposed article on the matter.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 20:52, June 18, 2016 (UTC)


 * RussiaDateLine(TBAC).png

The dateline is not tied to a time zone, so the date line could bend way over to Oregon and then back out to the anti-meridian. They would probably the area at least twice (probably 3 times). The full-size shows Russia with its empire taking in Yukon and most of "British" Columbia with Oregon  (all OTL).


 * West would meet East at the Russian Border.  When midnight comes to the border, Russia would be in the next day.  Further west in Russia, time zones would bring new hours in a convenient way.  It would be their business as to what day to "date" their events.  Internationally, the world be on UT based on the Prime meridian at Amsterdam (the principle timezone taking in all (or most) of Europe.


 * So do you want this article to be something like "World Map (The British Ain't Coming)" or individual articles on the Prime Meridian and the Dateline?  Maybe also "Time Zones"? SouthWriter (talk) 00:01, June 19, 2016 (UTC)



The Earth at Impact
I found a graphic showing the continents at the proposed time of the impact. The islands were apparently already about where they are now. However, there was a whole lot of water, so coastlines were different. Anyway the impact's immediate results on Europe would hav been greater, but the extinction event would proceed as in OTL.

SouthWriter (talk) 21:07, June 18, 2016 (UTC)

Technically, an impact of this magnitude and so close to what would become Europe might have changed far more than just erasing the British Isles. However, since it was a global extinction event, and enough time is supposed to have past, we can let it slide anyway. SouthWriter (talk) 03:40, June 19, 2016 (UTC)

Yes, this is why the collision is listed as ASB to erase the British Isles, but not have any greater effects. An impact to erase the isles from existence, without even any remnants, would probably even cause such a cataclysm that mammals would go extinct, and therefore humans wouldn't evolve. Without humans, probably not a very interesting timeline.

-- Orange (→My wall!←) 06:48, June 19, 2016 (UTC)