I stole the basic idea from a Google Group soc.history.what-if thread.

The folks on that group are usually very good but the format is such that ideas pop up and then are never seen again. It seemed to me that the answer to the "What if" depends a lot on exactly where the new islands were located. What the heck; I own a copy of Photoshop and was bored, so I looked at some maps of the floor of the Atlantic Ocean, pushed up some sea mounts and see ridges up in elevation so they became islands and made a new map. AirshipArmada 07:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, not so much butterflies as albatrosses in this case, I think. When exactly did these islands appear *there*? --Sikulu 13:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I happen to be one of the folks on that group (I call myself Analytical Engine on the google groups, if you should ever see me around there.) --Sikulu 13:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
The islands drawn are where sea mounts exist in OTL, some of which come very close to the surface. Deep sea currents should be the same as in OTL but surface currents may be altered (at least effected) and so on. This could arguably effect the shape of shore lines and weather. Also fish populations would be effected. Of course, for the islands to exist at all there would need to have been greater volcanic action in areas, which would also spawn butterflies, or albatrosses, of its own. So this timeline can not be accurately mapped (as if any ALT is ever really accurately mapped!) but it still may be fun to explore.
To proceed I'll assume that currents, weather, and geography is the same as OTL with the exception of the new Islands themselves.
In OTL the Canary Islands didn't effect the course of history until relatively late, and the Azores Islands even later. The islands in this ATL factor in sooner because: the Ampere Islands are well place for early use, and the Greater Azores Islands would be discovered sooner (because they are more numerous and because the Amperes could be used as stepping stones). AirshipArmada 17:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Out of curiousity, when you say "very close to the surface" do you mean to the point that you could easily build a platform on it (such as the one built by the japanese and british during WW2) or "very close" relative to the sea bed ? If the former, could make for another althistory where a nation decide to *build* itself some "oversea colonies" --Marcpasquin 02:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
The POD is: long, long ago plate tectonics and other geological forces were a little bit different so some sea mounts were a bit bigger than OTL. In OTL the Ampere Seamont raises 4000 meters but then stops 57 meters below the surface of the ocean. If it was 2% bigger we would have a nice island there. The Mid Atlantic Ridge pokes above sea level in a couple of places, in this ATL it pokes above sea level in a lot more places. I'm not interested in the geology so much as how such islands might have effected human history. AirshipArmada 20:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

When I first saw the POD the naive part of me briefly fantasized about Phoenicians in the New World. With just a moment's reflection, however, I realized that would be well neigh impossible. The mid Atlantic Islands would not be discovered until European ship technology was up to the task. The islands, as I've placed them, are too far south for the Norse to stumble across them. So we have to wait for the Basque. The Basque don't have the boats necessary until about the 12th century. In OTL they may started fishing in Newfoundland by 1372; the new islands might move this up by a century. But the Basque had a discrete culture and language, so information about the islands would not easily leak out to other peoples. Also the Basque didn't seem to be great empire builders, so all we get in this timeline are some fishing settlements which are perhaps temporary.

Serious settlement of the New World is still dependent on the course of events in Europe. Do we still have to wait for the late 15th century Spain for such a surge? Maybe Philip the Fair of France could have sponsored something at the end of the 13th century. Or maybe people fleeing the Black Death or the 100 Years War could have headed across the ocean in mid 14th century. AirshipArmada 20:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


Could the Romans have managed some measure of colonisation? After all, their shipbuilding technology was only reached by Europeans again in the late Middle Ages. --Sikulu 11:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

From what I could glean, Roman rudder and sail technologies weren't really that bad, but their ships nonetheless were not very sea worthy. The Romans also had a short "sailing season" - late May to early September. They are unlikely to colonize the Greater Azores. Prevailing winds and currents in the band of the islands actually goes from west to east. If anyone were to accidentally make it to the islands then they should be able to return to Europe without much trouble. So in ancient times there may have been legends of the existence of the Azores islands but they are too difficult to reach to be of use. AirshipArmada 22:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
The Ampere Islands are well placed though. Where are the Madeira Islands *there*. --Sikulu 08:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
And remember: the Romans feared the ocean. They only used their ships for sailing along the coast, so if nothing else, superstition would probably have kept them from going west.
And @Sikulu: Only reached again in the late Middle Ages? Not true. Look at the Vikings. --Michael riber 16:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I meant with hulking-great-big ships. Viking technology was good, but nowhere as advanced as that of the Romans. --Sikulu 10:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be more probable that the Carthaginians set up some colonies there. It would be strange to have the Carthies island hopping their way to America. The Roman Empire was mainly focused the east and the greek areas. Iberia was taken to oppose the Carthaginians but I don't think they would have gone any further. - GiantMonkeyMan

Idirisids & Berbers

Don't forget Morroco. Easy access to North America might involve the Berbers and lead to a Muslim North America by the 13th Century.

I think the Idrisids were too early to have the technology to reach the Greater Azores but the Ampere Islands would have spent much of their history under muslim rule. Maybe the Almohads (12th & 13th centurey) could sail the Atlantic. Looks like I need to do some more reading : cool. AirshipArmada 21:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
To me, the Berber scenario seems more probable, and would also be more interesting (after all, althists aren't always completely truthful). -- 02:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I like this idea quite a bit... I'm new to the Althistory wiki, but I may be making my first alt soon about a Muslim colonization of North America. Atinoda 22:23, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Cold war crises, submarines

Lets say the islands are claimed by the following countries in the 20th century

Kelvin, Greater Bermuda, and Corner Islands = USA, 51st state of the Bermuda triangle Greater Azores, Ampere islands= Spain.

They are both NATO members. these islands would be lands of these countries. There exist treaties which ban warsaw pact submarines from approaching 500 miles of a NATO member coastline, (this is to avoid a submarine killing the entire chain of command in Russia or the US and help stop a nuclear holocaust caused by less senior military leaders). these islands look close enough together that the south atlantic would be closed to Soviet Subs, but the north atlantic open to NATO subs. This could impose a sense of superiority in the NATO navies. this could be in part transfered to the NATO leaders. the opposite would be true for the Soviets. this could;

(a)Lead to the breakup of the USSR sooner due to increased pressure of nuclear surprise attack and complete NATO dominance of the atlantic.

(b)Lead to a war over the islands between NATO and the Warsaw Pact.

(c)A first strike attack by NATO against Russia, because they believe of their complete dominance of the oceans and the inability of Russia to retaliate.

(d)A Strike by Russia against the US to end once and for all the imperialist arrogance.

I will adopt this

however any editor who wants to stay and edit is more then welcome--Owen1983 16:54, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

I have done a few edits to this timeline. I'm not sure that these Islands would have made too much difference to the course of history, but they would have made life easier for the countries of North West Europe. I will do some more thinking and edits. Probus888

I will take this

Since the Owen 1983 drunkyard has been kicked off for months, I will take this project

I am open to any ideas on this article,

If you are intrested in this page then contact me

Alexanders 03:01, April 28, 2011 (UTC)



A proposal (click to enlarge).

Okay, so so far this timeline only touches on the archipelagos in the Atlantic but not actually about the countries in those archipelagos, so I decided we have a map of nations. I have created a basemap for the island nations and even oversea territories that countries may have. I would doubt that each country would be composed of one whole archipelago, similar to the Caribbean.

Looking at the timeline, I assume only the Kelvin Islands would remain a territory/state and the other three archipelagos would either become independent or a dependency of another country (like Greater Bermuda might choose to become a territory of the UK again) but these are just suggestions. Since there are sure to be a lot of island nations in the Greater Azores archipelago, I suggest colouring the nations in different colours for detail, and once everyone who wants to contribute is finished with their country, I will make the final detailed map. ChrisL123 00:49, July 2, 2011 (UTC)


The basemap (click to enlarge).

I don't think we need to rush about drawing country borders. This ATL is so full of possibilities that there will probably be thousands of changes in the posessions, indigenous people coming and going, colonial powers, both ancient and modern... If the POD dates back to our entire history, consider how many people may have found the islands, maybe as early as 2500 years ago or more. I'd rather enjoy the way ("them weird historians"! lol) and create as many plotlines as possible - I'd think onwards, not backwards, if you know what I mean. Parsifal br 23:54, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

What about South Atlantic?

Hmm, very interesting ATL. And yes, first thing that comes to mind is, "Phoenicians in America!", and I don't think it is absurd to consider such a thing. Maybe they did not have the necessary naval technology to cross the seas, maybe they did... but considering that people got to Australia and Southeast Asia many thousand years ago, or to Polynesia for that matter, this is not at all absurd.

Anyway, I believe a few things might be taken into consideration:

1. If indeed some people has sailed across the ocean way before modern European nations, all would change. These nation names seem too OTL-like, considering the aburdly strategical position of these islands. They would probably be the site for countless wars, and could change hands very often. It is even possible that a civilization settled there could subsist way after it was wiped out in its original place. So, if Phoenicians did get there, they would likely be still there after Romans.

2. Even if that did not happen, and the Portuguese or Spanish were the first ones to reach these islands, a whole part of colonialism would be focused in taking control and keeping these islands. They would be considered to be almost like a small continent, and a very valuable one.

3. What about South Atlantic? There are a few undersea mountains that could follow the same rule. Namely, there are a few mountain chains that might be over water:

  • A chain that starts at mid-Brazil coast and goes east until Trindade Island;
  • A chain that surrounds Brazilian coast, from Salvador up north to Sao Luis;
  • A chain that starts at the border of Angola and Namibia and goes southwest until Gough Island - and then it turns southeast and reaches almost as far as Bouvet Island;
  • A smaller chain between Sao Tome and Saint Helen islands;
  • Maybe a small chain by the coast of Sierra Leone.

These islands would make colonization very different in scenario 2 because they could be occupied much like Sao Tome island - it was both a production site and an outpost for delivering slaves. In scenario 1, they could be the starting point for some African colonialism.

Anyway, a thriving idea. Parsifal br 18:25, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

Wow, I don't think anyone's considered the South Atlantic idea. The colonization of the islands, etc. are all dealt with in the timeline page, which is open to editing. The nation names and borders are also open for change. I think all the editors will need to discuss this timeline's history and colonialism so we can determine the modern-day borders. But if it's alright with the other editors, I will start on the South Atlantic Islands map. ChrisL123 18:45, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

Who's to draw the South Atlantic islands? Anyway, there are a few nice maps around that may help:
There will probably be a relatively large landmass close to southern Brazil and Uruguay, if we consider high tectonic activity to be as old as it takes. It would be a nice thing, actually.
One more thing: how far does this "higher volcanic activity" go, worldwise? Is it only in Atlantic Ocean? There are other places where it would be interesting for it to have happened, such as Indian Ocean. Parsifal br 23:13, July 6, 2011 (UTC)</p>
I'll draw up the maps if that's alright with everyone. And thank you for the maps! I've been trying to find maps like these but I've been calling them "topographic" instead of "bathymetric." Heh.
And I think the timeline will just deal with the higher volcanic activity in the Atlantic Islands, what the original creator AirshipArmada had in mind. It would be interesting though, wouldn't it. ChrisL123 00:05, July 7, 2011 (UTC)

Indigenous Peoples of the (North) Atlantic Islands

There's been so many ideas for "indigenous peoples" living in the Atlantic Islands that I finally decided we need to sort them out. So with information on OTL Atlantic Indigenous peoples in the islands and what people have discussed throughout the timeline I've come up with this list below. If anyone wants to add on to the list, just do it. By the end of the week or so I hope we can finally establish who these people were. The South Atlantic Islands will have to be done later. ChrisL123 03:03, July 7, 2011 (UTC)

(List of people are in order of when they settled on the islands.)

I was thinking that given the number of islands, maybe a new group of indigenous people along the lines of the Polynesians or Taínos might form. Currently none of the listed civilizations could be considered "seafaring" or anything of the sort, except the Phoenicians, Greeks, Norsemen, and Carthaginians, and those came much later, so this doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Generally every large archipelago in the world has had some sort of seafaring civilization. But unlike Polynesia, it might actually be the intersection of two such civilizations: the American and the European. Maybe we might see the rise of great native empires as a result? Think Srivijaya. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 04:27, July 7, 2011 (UTC)

Islands are small

Islands are small: When we plan the civilizations that will settle in the islands, we have to keep this in mind: although they may be numerous, the islands are pretty small and distant. Of course they can be larger than in OTL, since volcanic activity is greater, but they probably will not be large enough to support millions of inhabitants. Most of the islands in OTL are too small to support any inhabitants at all, and this will be so too in this ATL. Most of them even lack sufficient water sources! Take, for instance, these examples:

Name of the islands Total Area Population
Azores (Portugal) 2,346 km² (906 sq. mi) 245,374
Cape Verde (Independent country) 4,033 km² (1,557 sq.mi.) 499,796
Canary Islands (Spain) 7,447 km² (2,875 sq.mi.) 2,098,593
Rhode Island (USA inland State)¹ 3,140 km² (1,214 sq.mi.) 1,053,209

¹ The State of Rhode Island was placed here only for comparison purposes, since it's the smallest state in USA; and, despite its name, it's not even an island, anyway... :P

So the islands will be more of strategical interest than as centers of civilization. In modern times, they will probably be too small to accomodate entire independent, powerful countries. They will probably be colonies or poor countries. Of course this needs not be the case in ancient times, when colonies were as large as a small town. So, Greeks and Phoenicians could build powerful colonies there; British and French, not quite... Parsifal br 05:38, July 7, 2011 (UTC)

I see your point, but the fact that colonial powers won't want colonies in the islands as bad as the ancient empires isn't as true as you think. Colonial powers like Spain, Portugal, Britain, France, etc. wanted all they could get. Just take the Caribbean as an example; however insignificant and small the islands were, the colonial powers were fighting over them for years, changing hands until the countries' independence, and almost all of them are independent countries today, however powerful. Most of these islands are bigger than the Caribbean countries so they should have populations in the 100,000s, at least. ChrisL123 06:07, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
Very true, but actually I didn't mean to say they wouldn't be interesting for modern colonial powers, only that these islands are too small to hold strong and powerful independent countries. But as for plantation colonies, they are not only interesting, they are probably perfect, if climate conditions help. In fact, these islands would likely remain as colonies for much longer than American countries. They are closer to Europe, and they would certainly change hands very often. This might even lead to very interesting mixes of cultures, since some islands could have had 3 or even 4 owners in its history, and a mix of ancient cultures, European influence and African traditions. Parsifal br 13:07, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
I'm guessing that the sovreign nation of Nova Roma would remain somewhat independant. And given how the Romans were Christians long before Nova Roma was colonized I would guess that the colonial powers of Europe would leave them alone. They might end up being the semi-independant protectorate of one of the nations for a while, but they would become independant in the end.
Yank 11:15, July 8, 2011 (UTC)


Thought I'd jot a few notes down here:

  • The existence of the Atlantic Islands and the undersea mount would weaken the Gulf Stream north of them.
  • The islands would have almost tropical climates due to the Gulf Stream.
  • Northern Europe would have a much colder climate due to the Gulf Stream.
  • The North Atlantic Gyre would be split in half.

I have a map although it probably is not totally accurate, because I don't know much about climate:

Ocean Currents Proposal AI Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 07:16, July 7, 2011 (UTC)

I don't know much about climate myself either, but I've noticed there's a very interesting thing about Gulf Stream: it does cross all major islands in North Atlantic, "bigger islands" and Antilles included. In this map , by the way, we can see that Jamaica is on its way, but the stream is so wide that it is probably no big deal. Jamaica is probably the biggest island on the stream's way. In this other map , we can see that the stream splits in the Antilles, which makes sense, and then rejoins. Between Cuba and Florida the stream is very narrow, but it is probably faster. So the stream probably adapts to the obstacles. But yes, the climate of the bigger islands would most likely be tropical, and they would be wonderful fishing places.
An interesting thing to consider is that, since the stream is so powerful, navigation would be somewhat difficult from Amper Islands to Bermuda, but would be easier the opposite way. (At least this logic works in South Atlantic.) This might pose a few difficulties to colonization of the islands, since it would be harder to reach them from Europe. It would require a certain amount of naval technology for a civilization to reach the islands. Some of them might get it, of course, but not every one of them.
The easiest way to reach America would be, ironically, from possible bigger islands close to Sierra Leone. This coul make it easy for African colonization, as well as slave trade.
I drew a map based on the fist link I included, which shows the bigger islands and the stream:

Parsifal br 14:16, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
I see your point with the current adapting to the islands, but, it is important to note that we are not just talking about a few islands, but rather an entire undersea plateau between Spain and America. The "reef" would definitely absorb some of the current and weaken it, as well as preventing much of it from travelling north. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 17:29, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, we'll have to define how high the plateau really gets. If it's really very high, then you're right, it will probably interfere with the stream to some extent. But in the beginning of this page, Airship Armada wrote:
In OTL the Ampere Seamont raises 4000 meters but then stops 57 meters below the surface of the ocean. If it was 2% bigger we would have a nice island there. The Mid Atlantic Ridge pokes above sea level in a couple of places, in this ATL it pokes above sea level in a lot more places.
If we take this as canon (I don't know if it will be), then a 2%-higher mid-Atlantic riff won't be as high as to have a strong influence in the stream (which runs close to surface). I actually believe that having a very high mid-Atlantic riff is a different POD than having more islands than OTL. The effects are also radically different: severing the Gulf Stream versus having stepping stones between two continents. I personally prefer the idea of mountains being slightly higher (maybe 5%), but "God" here is more of a committee... :) Parsifal br 00:43, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

Map Game, anyone?

Alright, since we've established the small details like climate and island Natives, we still have the issue of colonization and the current nation borders (yes, I'm intent on finishing it once and for all.) I suggest that we play a little map game. The editors that wanted to contribute to the Atlantic Islands timeline could choose a colonial empire and colonize their own islands, you know, the usual Map Game thing. I'm still working on the blank map that we'd use but I wanted to bring it up before we actually start it or anything. Is everyone okay with the idea? ChrisL123 05:17, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

Maybe we should start around 1400, because Madeira was colonized soon after, and end around 1800, and then the islands start gaining independence. Also I think the main powers should be: Portugal, Netherlands, England, France. Spain might do the Canaries but they were technically not supposed to because of the Treaty of Tordesillas. Also, the United States would have a small say but in general should leave this to the Europeans. Also they would be more interested in the Americas (TTL when and how did they discover America?). Minor powers might be Denmark, Sweden, Scotland. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 18:24, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

Actually, for me the most interesting possibility, one I'd like to develop, is that there may have been some kind of earlier exploration of the islands, from Americas (Aztecs or others), Africa (Mali Empire) or from Arabs, not to mention ancient exploration. These are all viable conjectures, and they might influence the way colonization is developed there - unless, of course, we consider that modern Europeans would arrive and destroy everything there was there, as they did to many places. Parsifal br 23:10, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

It's possible, but we have to realize that those empires were all land-based and did not usually send major oceangoing expeditions. While it is true many coastal people would have had the technology to explore widely in the ocean, I would call it unlikely the empires would form colonies. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:17, July 9, 2011 (UTC)

It seems like you've done alot of work here, and i wouldn't want to barge in. But i'd love to join this. I'll add my name to the map game list. Marcus/Michael Villanova 23:27, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

This is an open timeline, which means anyone can join and contribute, so you won't be barging in. The map will hopefully be finished by Sunday the latest, and when that's done we can begin. ChrisL123 23:54, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

Check your sandbox i posted a comment there, can't wait for sunday! Marcus/Michael Villanova 00:00, July 9, 2011 (UTC)

Well, as I said I should be done the map in the next hour or so, so when I'm done we can start the game! ChrisL123 20:33, July 10, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah! I Hope I can be the netehrlands, and take control of a small island and all that! Marcus/Michael Villanova 22:14, July 10, 2011 (UTC)

Alright, it took a little while longer than I originally planned but now I am finally done the map. I will create the page for the map game now! ChrisL123 00:12, July 11, 2011 (UTC)


What would be the major sources of income for these nations? Are there any resources present that would make the islands valuable or were they just valued for trading? I would guess that Nova Roma's premier source of income is tourism. After all, who wouldn't want to experience living in a long-extinct culture?

Yank 11:09, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, tourism would be a major source of income, especially for Nova Roma. Fishing would also be a good. As discussed above, the ocean currents being cut off by the islands would mean the islands would be most likely tropical. The tropical-ness of the islands could mean tropical fruits, vegetables, etc. could be exported. ChrisL123 17:22, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

Two questions on the timeline

First, I'm really excited to see this idea resurrected. I loved Airship Armada's original idea and I'm glad someone is taking it up. Now I see that a map game has already started along a few certain lines, so maybe it's too late to be asking these kinds of questions. But here I go.

  1. If Euro/African stone age hunters crossed to America, could not there have been some crossing back? If that were the case, I guess, the butterflies would be enormous (albatrosses, someone called them) and the resulting world would be totally unrecognizable and therefore less fun. So forget that question, but let's move on to
  2. Why did the Roman Empire- and medieval-era contact with the Amperes seem to stop? I would think someone would be interested in them. I'm thinking the Andalusians here. Even cultures that did not explore much would go to them, since they would be well known and well attested.

I have never done any map game stuff, but I might be interested in doing something with Andalusians/Moroccans. Benkarnell 14:28, July 12, 2011 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't like the idea of the Romans reaching Azores. The Romans weren't really the sea-bearing type, the farthest they went to was to the Canaries in OTL. Also, see what AirshipArmada originally said:
"From what I could glean, Roman rudder and sail technologies weren't really that bad, but their ships nonetheless were not very sea worthy. The Romans also had a short "sailing season" - late May to early September. They are unlikely to colonize the Greater Azores. Prevailing winds and currents in the band of the islands actually goes from west to east. If anyone were to accidentally make it to the islands then they should be able to return to Europe without much trouble. So in ancient times there may have been legends of the existence of the Azores islands but they are too difficult to reach to be of use." Also, I think that the Moroccans may have been too far behind in time for the map game, but if you think they explored islands and created a nation there, you are certainly welcome to add it to the Nations page. ChrisL123 16:46, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
Not the Azores, the Amperes - Nova Roma, I believe it's been renamed. The timeline says it was part of the Roman Empire and raided by Vikings. Or has that been thrown out? Benkarnell 18:04, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
Oh, gosh, I'm sorry, I read way too fast. But according go the timeline the islands (then the Province of Amper) had regular contact with the Roman Empire until Visogoths started attacking the Roman Empire, and that's why Amper became independent. ChrisL123 18:16, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
Right right, but if it was a Roman province, then the rest of Europe/North Africa would not have forgotten about it just because it was independent. (Nobody forgot about Britain! :)) It would have been part of the overall sweep of history at that point.
Now I'm a little skeptical about that overall timeline in the later years (it's got an identical World War II and identical USA, for heaven's sake), and I don't know whether it's set in stone or not, but I love this concept and would love the opportunity to explore what happened to Ampere after the Romans and Vikings. A Muslim conquest of some kind would be really interesting - or not, either way. Benkarnell 18:22, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
Yes, buddy, for me, too, having a bazillion of islands in the middle of Atlantic Ocean would make things quite different, and it makes no real sense to talk about WWII and Cold War in this context. I like the idea of everything changing so much that our world would be hardly recognizable. If you like to think about the early settlers of these islands, you are most welcome to help us with that. Actually, the idea of a Muslim conquest or sub-Saharan settlers, or whatever makes sense, feels very compelling to me. Parsifal br 02:48, July 13, 2011 (UTC)

Well, it was Yank who created the concept and the nation and I'm sure he'll let you help out with the article (it's blank except for the infobox so far anyway.) You may be able to introduce some history on the talk page. ChrisL123 18:31, July 12, 2011 (UTC)

Change of America


Map of eastern North America, 1775. Light and dark purple is most likely where the colony would have been located, and the light green line is my proposed final border.

Okay, now a few people think that with the new Atlantic Islands in the world, they might lead to colonial powers using the islands to colonize North America. But through the process of elimination, I have come to realize that the most likely country to colonize North America out of OTL is Portugal. As I mentioned, perhaps in the 1540s or 50s, Portuguese sailors, searching for more Atlantic Islands, reaches the Corner Islands, only to find French settlers, and continue to search, going south-west until finally finding OTL-Florida and settle there. This avoids Portugal going clear across the Atlantic, discovering and claiming all of the Atlantic Islands (which would render the map game useless.) Colonization would probably be slow, since Brazil was probably more important, but once France and the UK came in I'm sure they started speeding up the colonization process.


The country, in green.

This new country might cause a different US history. Since this Portuguese colony is in the location of most of the OTL-Confederate States, and it might be possible only a small civil war may have taken place (between Texas and Louisiana,) or maybe no CSA at all, since it started with South Carolina which would be in this new colony. Also, without a CSA, there would be no need for Virginia to lose West Virginia.

Just an idea, nothing final yet, and I wanted to hear everyone's feedback. ChrisL123 20:33, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

I kinda like this. I'm a little ify Marcus/Michael Villanova 21:32, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

I am not to sure of this. I know Ponce de Leon discovered for Spain Florida in 1513 and in the 1560s made San Agustin and other setlements. Granero 22:28, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant to say 1540 or 1550. Ponce de Leon discovered the peninsula, but he didn't claim it or anything. Florida was free from colonization until around 1559, and San Agustin was founded in 1565. However, if Portugal were to colonize it in the 40s or 50s, these settlements couldn't exist. ChrisL123 22:48, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
I think that this is unlikely by OTL logic. In mid-1500s, Portugal was too focused on trade with India, and by 1540 this trade was still profitable. Florida would not appear to be a very compelling region in comparison, for there was nothing really interesting to be extracted from there. Maybe the same reason why Ponce de Leon did not claim Florida would be valid for Portugal. Rumors say that the first modern Europeans to arrive to Newfoundland were the Portuguese, but they wouldn't claim it. Moreover, North America falls entirely under Spanish share by the Treaty of Tordesillas. Parsifal br 20:19, July 26, 2011 (UTC)

What I just said doesn't mean, of course, that I think things should be kept as they are in OTL. Quite the contrary, I think tropical islands in the middle of Atlantic would change everything! One of the most interesting things that could happen would be many other smaller countries being able to conquer a few islands and develop some profitable plantation system there, such as sugar or cotton, with abundant slave labor force, and using mainland colonies as a supply source for their plantation colonies. So, the Swedish could, say, occupy Delaware and be more eager to defend it, or less likely to just drop it dead. That could be the case for any country: Sweden, Danmark, Brandenburg, Poland, and even Courland or any other country that might be interested in it. Parsifal br 20:26, July 26, 2011 (UTC)

Starting the timeline


My idea of the Corner Islands after the Napoleonic Wars

It seems like there's less and less interest in this timeline, and it's upsetting, mostly because I see big things for this timeline. Anyone out there?

But anyway, as I mentioned on the map game, I think we're ready to grow the timeline and flesh out all the details. But an issue I have is the control over the Corner Islands after the Napoleonic Wars.

Beside, I have a possible rendering of the nations that would control the islands, whereby the greatest contributing coalition against France get an island (I'd love the idea of a Russian Atlantic Island). However, Austria was also apart of the coalition and would get an island, but I don't know what its fate could be. It's possible they could make their own nation, however.

I hope everyone gets back on this project. ChrisL123 23:46, August 13, 2011 (UTC)

If the Russians gain control of one of the Coroner Islands maybe they will offer it to the Americans as part of the Alaska purchase for some extra money.
Yes, it seems interest on the timeline has faded, but hopefully it will grow back again. I, too, have a lot of very interesting ideas on this. If I were not too busy with other issues, I would be eager to work hard on this. But soon it will change. Parsifal br 18:33, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

I am still following this timeline. Do you mind if I add a few events to the timeline involving a Kelvin islander World War Two hero’s actions in the Philippines?

We'll all have to sit down to discuss the World Wars, but it is a possibility. So far we're still trying to develop the nations and early events but when we get to that stage just bring it up. ChrisL123 00:54, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
Since this is alternated history there might not even be a Napoleonic wars (I had no plans for Napoleon to take command of France) Granero 04:49, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
No, it probably still will happen, considering the major differences really only being in North America. It is possible for France to claim Austria-Hungary's island after WWI. ChrisL123 15:40, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
If there are changes in North America there might not be a Seven Year's war and France migt not lose New France. This could help keep the French monarchy and be no need of Napoleon. Also Austria and Russia have little interested in colonisation's. Granero 03:18, August 16, 2011 (UTC)
The Seven Years' War was a global war, but I think you're talking about the French and Indian War that made France lose its colony. The only major colonies in TTL would be France, UK and Sweden. While Sweden was on the side France was on, Sweden only fought with Prussia (from what I read) and did not help France in any way. New Netherland and New Sweden would thus remain neutral in the French and Indian War, the war would likely end the same way, New France would be lost, you get the idea.
Also, you're right about Austria not being that interested in colonialism (however Russia was), so I think that France could be able to keep one island in the Corner Islands. ChrisL123 03:31, August 16, 2011 (UTC)
That was in the Pacific. Russia had no interests in the Atlantic ocean colonisation and trade, only in the Mediteranean, Dardenelles and acces to the Persian gulf. Granero 03:32, August 16, 2011 (UTC)
Also because in the really Napoleonic wars King Louis was returned to power (an ally of the coalition) the islands would all returned to French control. Granero 03:33, August 16, 2011 (UTC)
While that may be true in OTL, I'm sure the Russians would have taken the island if given the chance. But you do make a good point; perhaps the islands would have been occupied by the four nations and returned to France by Louis XVIII or Charles X. ChrisL123 05:36, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

North America


Map of North America, 1660?
Pink: New Netherland
Blue: New Sweden
Yellow: British America
Light blue: France
Red: Spain

Alright, I'm glad to see the slightest bit of interest coming back to this timeline. Now, I think I'm finally open to the different colonization of the Americas. I've noticed that Fedelede has expanded New Sweden, and I believe that Parsifal is right; colonies will want to keep their American colonies even more with these new islands. So, a new accurate map of North America I've made, I think this is the best time to decide, if these colonies survive, what North America would look like. We could make it a mini map game, but it won't take as long. ChrisL123 21:09, August 14, 2011 (UTC)


Pink: New Netherland
Blue: Christinia
Green: US
Light blue:Canada

Edit: I drew up a possible map of North America in present time. For Maine, I assume with New Sweden and New Netherland would get in the way of the other British colonies and it would fight for independence as its own nation. What do you guys think? ChrisL123 04:42, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

C 78 sanson map 1020

I I think that Franch and English and Spanish territories would be larger in 1660. Granero 04:53, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

US Superpower?

I thought about this for a while, and I realized it'd be far more unlikely for the US to be a superpower in TTL than what it was in OTL. Although I do believe they might have expanded past the Mississipi, I don't believe they'd spread as far west as in OTL. The reasons are as following:

  • First, we have to remember that, before the California Gold Rush in the 1850's, the industrial heart of the US was in New England and the Middle Colonies, which are almost totally taken by New Netherland and Christinia. That means that the US has no industrial or economic center.
  • At the same time, the South was the agricultural heart of the US, and a lot of the US' money came from the productive cotton-and-tobacco farming that went on back then. I doubt, even without an important industrial center, that the British would destroy the cotton's productiveness by building large-scaled industry.
  • Henceforth, if the US was ever to gain independence, it would probably be more like the Confederate States in OTL than the OTL US; it'd be weaker, more conservative, and more farmer-oriented.

Also, another question: Why would Massachussets be part of New Netherlands? I think that, since the second functioning English colony in North America was New Plymouth in Massachussets, all of OTL New England should've been an English colony and evolved into being a part of Maine. Especially since the westernmost Kelvins and Greater Bermuda are British. Fed (talk) 22:13, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

That's very true. And about the map, I forgot about New Plymouth, I'll fix it. ChrisL123 22:34, August 16,
2011 (UTC)

My thoughts about Dutch and Swedish Colonies

I agree that Sweden would keep New Sweden because of their fortresses on the nearby islands that they control. However, I don’t believe the Dutch would hold on to their colonies longer than they did in the OTL.

I have several points to back up my view on the subject. First, the Dutch Azores are far away from the New Netherlands and won’t be able to send aid to New Amsterdam very quickly. Also, the British probably would use the nearby Kelvin islands as a base for their invasion of the New Netherlands. According to one of my old history teacher, the governor of the New Netherlands was the only man in New Amsterdam willing to fight the British. Consequently, the colony fell without even a small fight in real life. I doubt that the remote possibility of help coming from the Dutch Azores would encourage enough Dutchmen to result in a significant push against the British invasion.

I also believe that New Sweden would only cover the Delmarva Peninsula resulting in the northern and southern British colonies being linked by land like they were in the OTL.Goldwind1 00:13, February 5, 2012 (UTC)

The thing you fail to grasp is the butterfly effect; the peopñle living in NN will be very different from those in OTL, and might be hostile towards the Brits.

Plus, the thing most people don't get is a larger trade due to safer stops in the route will aid the Swedish and Dutch colonies to have a larger population.

Plus, why exactly would Christinia only hold Demlarva? They were dounded at the NORTH of the peninsula, and would've expanded both north and south, plus they are actually earlier there than Jamestown is. So they would have a few years of undisputed colonial expansion with a larger pop than OTL. Fed (talk) 14:50, February 5, 2012 (UTC)

German North Atlantic Colony?


German Azores, in black?

Now, I've been researching a little more on German colonialism in Africa to find out where Germany colonized to find which South Atlantic islands they would colonize, but I read recently that Germany actually tried to colonize several failed areas in the Americas, and I thought, well, a German Northern Atlantic island would help a lot with fighting the other islands in World War I and II. This will, of course, give another user who's interested in the timeline grow this island's history (perhaps Alexanders, poor him hasn't had his own nation yet). What do you guys think?

Sounds intresting.. but why dose WWI and WWII have to be like OTL?

[¶1/2] Sounds interesting indeed, and every country is welcome in this colonization if they manage to explain how they would do this. German duchy of Brandenburg is surely one to do so. But I wouldn't name it Germany, though; Germany, as a political entity, was created in late 19th century in OTL, and although things might be a little different in this TL, it is unlikely the German princes might be willing to unite. Actually, attempts on creating colonies were from Brandenburg-Prussia, and thus so the colonial power could be named. They managed to establish a colony in Africa (Gold Coast, now Ghanan shoreline) and attempted to settle a colony in the Caribbean. This can be a nice starting point. But I'd rather see they focus there or in North America, instead of the Atlantic Islands, which seem to me a little less attractive for tropical goods (especially Greater Azores).
[¶2/2] And by the way... please, fellas, no World War whatsoever. At least not after a long, long run. Things would be so much different with the islands that there would be no room for these wars the way they came about in OTL. Actually, I think this could be set as a timeline policy: focus should be in the Modern Era, say from 1600 to 1800, maybe up to 1900.... but no further. Parsifal br 02:54, August 31, 2011 (UTC)

How are the 20th and 21st centuries not considered as part of the timeline? I dislike partial timelines, as the concept means leaving a fascinating timeline half-finished.

Yank 02:08, December 31, 2011 (UTC)

I think the point is not avoiding entering 20th and 21st centuries simply for the sake of it, but for at least two good reasons:
1. The main reason is: there is sooo much that can be developed before 1900 - it is a fascinating timeline indeed - that there is no reason for us to rush into our present days. It's better to have a solid, slow developing timeline than a poor one that quickly reaches 2012 for no good results. So, let's take our time in the former centuries before we even consider what those centuries' history would make of our present time. This would make the ATL more complex, more credible and WAY more interesting.
(In the long run, by the way, in every ATL where things change dramatically, such as this one, the actual duration of long time spans is of little importance: we could have high technology as early as 1800, or not having it as late as 2500, if at all. Adding 200+ years to the TL without proper planning would only make it run fast and shallow.)
2. There is a big cliché of poorly-designed timelines that we should avoid at all costs... this is not negotiable whatsoever: "all roads lead to World War II", or to 9/11, or both, in each and every case. What if the Roman Empire lasted till our days, who would Rome ally with in WWII? And whose planes would crash the Centrum Commercia Mundi in Novum Eboracum in the date of Quintus Idus Septembris MMDCCLIV Ab Urbe Condita? Had the Conferderacy won, which side would they join in WWII? Or, had the Egyptian Empire lasted until today, who would the Pharaohs team up with in WWII? Would the planes reaching the Twin Towers have been sent by fanatic Osiris worshippers? And what if Cathage defeated the Romans in the Punic Wars, who would they fight in WWII? Still, had Neanderthals lived up till today, would they be enslaved by Nazis in Auschwitz from 1934-1939? Worse, if dinosaurs existed today, would the USA throw the bomb over Hiroshima from a Pterodactylus, in August 6, 1945? I mean, we are not going that way, right? 06:56, December 31, 2011 (UTC)
Sorry guys, I was not logged in when I posted the latest comment. It's me, Parsifal br 06:58, December 31, 2011 (UTC)

I think this failed?

Too bad i liked it :I Marcus/Michael Villanova 23:15, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.