War of the Roses and British Empire

[Alex Zetsu]

Can someone explain to me why a POD during or 10 years before the War of the Roses means no 1800s British Empire?

Obviously there are a lot of butterflies that can easily remove the British Empire with such an early POD.

But someone insisted that a POD that early means there must be neither a British or English empire or Australia colonization. If someone wants to look at his post, PM me.

 

[Emperor-of-New-Zealand]

Can someone explain to me why a POD during or 10 years before the War of the Roses means no 1800s British Empire?

Obviously there are a lot of butterflies that can easily remove the British Empire with such an early POD.

But someone insisted that a POD that early means there must be neither a British or English empire or Australia colonization. If someone wants to look at his post, PM me.

Australia is oddly specific. It also depends on what the POD is in the War of the Roses. One that significantly weakens England in the long-run would go hand-in-hand with diminishing English attempts at Empire. Your premise is lacking in significant details.

I guess if you're talking about Australia, then in OTL there was always a chance the French would get there first, or even the Dutch with the right conditions met. In an ATL, this doesn't necessarily change.

 

[M. Adolphe Thiers]

Probably in reference to the Butterfly Effect, but I think people sometimes take that too far. Maybe back in earlier years when you'd have weird TLs with PODs from say, the Crusades, yet Napoleon Bonaparte somehow becomes Emperor of France it made sense.

I don't see how a Yorkist/Lancastrian England is going to change radically in terms of its foreign policy and desire to establish colonies to be honest. Obviously it may not necessarily be the same Empire as we know it, but it's still highly probably they'ed pursue them.

 

[Alex Zetsu]

Australia is oddly specific. It also depends on what the POD is in the War of the Roses. One that significantly weakens England in the long-run would go hand-in-hand with diminishing English attempts at Empire. Your premise is lacking in significant details.

I guess if you're talking about Australia, then in OTL there was always a chance the French would get there first, or even the Dutch with the right conditions met. In an ATL, this doesn't necessarily change.

I agree that in an ATL the Dutch might poke around Australia like in OTL and there is a good chance someone else might have grabbed it.

But that guy claimed any War of the Roses POD would butterfly away both the British and an English empire, even though I failed to specify what my POD is. I only decided either the War of the Roses doesn't happen, or the Lancasters win the battle of Barnet and quickly establish a sane Lancaster monarchy (which means a short civil war that doesn't devastate the peasants), or make some other POD that still results in a Lancaster/Tudor victory (most of the Tudors are not from the House of Lancaster, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Beaufort,_1st_Earl_of_Somerset is an ancestor of Henry VII).

My point being is that early PODs can certainly butterfly events down the line, but why can't similar acquisitions be made in different event chains if the mother country has the resources?

 

[Indicus]

It doesn't necessarily mean no British Empire, but it means that it'll look tremendously different. For instance, with a POD that early, India could be independent or French, and a British Empire without India would be radically different.

 

[Alex Zetsu]

It doesn't necessarily mean no British Empire, but it means that it'll look tremendously different. For instance, with a POD that early, India could be independent of French, and a British Empire without India would be radically different.

Oh I agree it could certainly look very different. In fact, even if they still establish boarders similar to geographical OTL British Empire by coincidence, the personalities inside it and the events that lead to the land acquisitions would be very different.

But someone was like "no, it's butterflied away."

 

[M. Adolphe Thiers]

I agree that in an ATL the Dutch might poke around Australia like in OTL and there is a good chance someone else might have grabbed it.

But that guy claimed any War of the Roses POD would butterfly away both the British and an English empire, even though I failed to specify what my POD is. I only decided either the War of the Roses doesn't happen, or the Lancasters win the battle of Barnet and quickly establish a sane Lancaster monarchy (which means a short civil war that doesn't devastate the peasants), or make some other POD that still results in a Lancaster/Tudor victory (most of the Tudors are not from the House of Lancaster, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Beaufort,_1st_Earl_of_Somerset is an ancestor of Henry VII).

My point being is that early PODs can certainly butterfly events down the line, but why can't similar acquisitions be made in different event chains if the mother country has the resources?

I don't think anything like that is necessarily wrong, other than people are wary of homing butterflies where people just assume that things would be mostly static otherwise and write such. For exemple, having a Lancastrian colony in the New World being named Virginia and Carolina inexplicably.

Besides, there's plenty of popular TLs that have handwaving and homing butterflies, as long as it's enjoyable to read who really cares?

 

[Alex Zetsu]

Huh, the OTL Plantagenets never seemed fond of "Charles" as a name...

 

[M. Adolphe Thiers]

Huh, the OTL Plantagenets never seemed fond of "Charles" as a name...

That's the point, there'd be no reason for such a colony to have the name other than lazy writers make things congruent with OTL. Which is why IMO people harp on things being butterflied away so much because it used to be fairly common.

 

[Alex Zetsu]

That's the point, there'd be no reason for such a colony to have the name other than lazy writers make things congruent with OTL. Which is why IMO people harp on things being butterflied away so much because it used to be fairly common.

Yeah I understand that.

I suppose one way it could end up "Carolina" is one nobleman named Charles (anyone worth giving a name would either be born a noble or be made nobility like Robert Carr when he did the awesome thing for the monarch) did something that helped the monarchy. He could win be a battlefield hero, or perhaps be the one to save his king's life from drowning. And then he ends up settling there with a few thousand "assistants" and maybe the crown names it after him.

But in a Lancaster England, if that place is going to be named after a king, it would be "Carolina" 0% of the time, because Charles is not a name Plantagenets used. If it was named after a non-monarch person, it would be "Carolina" maybe 1/3000 of the time simply due to all the non-Charles around.

So if it is going to be named "Carolina" in a Lancaster monarchy, it better come with a story why that got its OTL name when that family doesn't like calling their sons "Charles"

What made me scratch my head was when I was told "nope, the British Empire got butterflied away" and I was like... "but... I didn't even decide on my POD yet"