While our national history discussions have been pretty quiet, as some of you have noticed I've been sandboxing a rough overall concept for a potential FSA historic civil war for the past few months. While the initial intent was to set up a civil war idea, it quickly snowballed into a more thorough history of the FSA from the nation's founding to the late 19th Century. After ongoing drafts, edits, and collaboration with some stateowners, and given the ongoing observation that there hasn't been much activity in regards to any other discussions regarding FSA history lately, I'd like to offer it up for discussion and consideration of the rest of the FSA as a whole.
The full draft is located here, and while it is a pretty lengthy read here's a very abridged version:
- The three primary colonial powers in the pre-FSA were the Castellanese, who settled the north and west coasts and part of the east coast; the Ingerish, who settled parts of Alormen and the southwest (with some spillover into the Castellanese east coast colonies); and the Franquese, who settled Ardencia and most of the interior of the country.
- The Ingerish and the Castellanese eastern colonies declared their independence from both Castellan and Ingerland, with the assistance of the Franquese in exchange for not expanding into what is now Ardencia.
- The FSA steadily expands further west, gaining Alormen and the Lakes.
- With Alormen as part of the FSA, a plan is developed to build a railway from Massodeya City through Alormen to Puerto Eloisa, which would open up the eastern FSA to the Asperic Ocean. The railroad is quickly completed as far as Andreapolis, but crossing the Alormen River and passing through the mountains remains challenging given the engineering technology available in the mid-1800s.
- As the Alormen railroad is being constructed, Castellanese claims in the west collapse. Like in the Ingerish rebellion, the Franquese assist the southern Castellanese colonists create a new independent nation (Deodeca). In the northwest, the FSA intervenes at the request of the colonists, annexing the northwestern territories (Cosperica Territory, Sierra Territory, and Tauhon Territory) into the FSA and establishing a military governorship to oversee the new territories.
- With the new territories joining the FSA, the Lakes region surveys a new rail line through part of Deodeca that would allow for fast, cheap construction that would link the Lakes to the Asperic Ocean west of the mountains. The East refuses to negotiate with the Deodecans, fearing possible retaliation from the Castellanese for officially recognizing Deodeca (and to prevent competition with the planned Alormen rail line).
- The western states circumvent the FSA government and negotiate the Wahauja Purchase directly from the Deodecan government to build the rail line. The FSA government sees this as an act of sedition, and in retaliation refuses to ratify any new trade agreements with countries on the Asperic Ocean until the Alormen rail line is completed.
- The western states go further and directly negotiate trade deals with Asperic nations anyway. The FSA central government now considers this an official act of rebellion, and expels western state representatives from the national legislature and dispatches military units to blockade the Alormen River and the new western railway. While the blockade of the Alormen River goes into effect, the unit dispatched to disrupt the railroad is intercepted by western militias and defeated, which officially begins the war.
- While no foreign nations officially interfere with the war itself, both sides receive assistance from a variety of nations. The West pushes the front line as far east as the eastern mountains, but the conflict settles into a stalemate and a war of attrition for many months.
- Both sides eventually understand that it is in everyone's best interest to cease hostilities, with the war providing the technological and engineering advances needed to design and complete the bridge over the Alormen River and build the rest of the line through the mountains to Puerto Eloisa. The eastern states recall the expelled western representatives to the national legislature, where new treaties and legislation giving states more autonomy is overwhelmingly approved, preserving the Federation. The West declares victory, while the East refers to the arrangement as a truce.
Eventually we'll have a full vote on "canonizing" whatever the FSA community as a whole comes up with and agrees on, but in the meantime if this sounds good to you or if there are just a few minor tweaks you'd recommend that don't change anything significant in the above framework, please let me know. If there are any stateowners -- or better yet, any groups of stateowners -- who feel compelled to come up with a significantly different framework that they feel should be considered, by all means please do put something together (ideally in a wiki sandbox) to present an alternate vision we can discuss and consider. Feel free to use this thread to discuss and collaborate.
|Posted by TheMayor on 30 November 2020 at 02:42.|
One minor thing about the northeast: I understand the whole point is that the Castellanese let the Ingerish into their eastern colonies as long as they paid taxes. But outside of Laine and Elway there's barely any evidence of Castellanese presence.
In Eustacia, I know Infrarojo's open to Castellanese influence in the South, and I'll certainly plop a few Spanish names in my county.
|Posted by Fluffr Nuttr on 30 November 2020 at 03:50.|
i could place some spanish names within OSAQ too since it's in close proximity to riopod, tejoma, and sierra as well, although they'd be concentrated in the north and west
|Posted by David F on 30 November 2020 at 04:20.|
My idea for a hands-off Castellanese presence that spans beyond Laine and Elway was to give more flexibility to the northeastern states to choose their own history that also creates some sort of logical backstory behind (1) that straight east-west border that cuts across the historic first colonies from Gilliad/Wilthamshire to Oakhill/Natrinia that would also (2) try to explain why Huntington is located right on it. Having some sort of “north vs. south” tension that would lead to something like that could explain those things without inventing a new cultural wedge issue for the early colonists (and without using slavery as a copy of the U.S.). Having more Ingerish along the southern boundary of a former Castellanese colony would also make sense as the Ingerish would’ve originally spilled over from Ingerland’s colonies, tapering off as one moves further away from the Ingerish claim. Just explaining my thought process.
Posted by Fluffr Nuttr on 30 November 2020 at 03:50.»One minor thing about the northeast: I understand the whole point is that the Castellanese let the Ingerish into their eastern colonies as long as they paid taxes. But outside of Laine and Elway there's barely any evidence of Castellanese presence.
In Eustacia, I know Infrarojo's open to Castellanese influence in the South, and I'll certainly plop a few Spanish names in my county.«
|Posted by TheMayor on 30 November 2020 at 05:53.|
Most of it seems fine, for some reason I thought the civil war took place before expansion into the Castellanese West. But on the intervention point you mention, I always figured that it was armed expansion and not "at the request of the colonists". In some parts there would be diehard loyalists to the king (probably more populated coastal areas) and in some indifference but not sure if open welcoming of FSA is widespread.
|Posted by Brunanter on 30 November 2020 at 12:41.|
A previous draft had the northwest expansion occurring post-war, but changes in Clamash necessitated a change and from a larger perspective this makes more sense: without Tauhon there’s no good reason for the West to pursue purchasing Clamash and Wahauja (a more direct route west to the sea that divided Deodeca would’ve been preferred). I agree that there would be some loyalists in the northwest that would have fought to stay a Castellan colony, but there would be plenty more who would’ve preferred independence or annexation that would welcome and encourage FSA intervention. Even in more meta OGF terms the northwest is still pretty new to the FSA (with the Cosperica project finding its footing and recent new stateowners nearby) so I am very interested in what the rest of the northwest has in mind.
|Posted by TheMayor on 30 November 2020 at 15:06.|
I just came across TheMayor's recent additions to the Civil War sandbox. First thing, I think it's a good idea to provide an alternative to outright civil war for those who think it's too derivative from United States history. But part of me just doesn't like the idea of an early super strong Federal government...? The Federal States, like the United States, would probably have been founded as a union of several colonies, and I feel like that will involve heavy state power from the get-go. It's still completely possible to switch from an Eastern-dominated government to a few competing Regional coalitions.
Here's a question that's been on my mind recently: When it comes to the map, what does a FSA historically split upon regional lines do for us? Yes, the East and West have different styles of mapping, but that doesn't exactly require a political explanation. Even with the civil war setup providing for interesting battlefield mapping, if I'm interpreting things correctly the bulk of these opportunities would be in the Lakes and Old Taviani.
|Posted by Fluffr Nuttr on 14 December 2020 at 04:05.|
Whether intentional or not, the fact that that the FSA is called the "Federal States of Archanta" to me implies that the founders jumped straight to a federation form of government, which by definition leans on a stronger central government. If we started as something with a less-powerful central government, the name of the nation probably would have been different following independence. (Starting with a state-centric system with a weaker central government is what actually happened in the United States with the Articles of Confederation before the Constitution was drafted a decade after independence, so if there is a concern about copying the U.S. too much, starting with a stronger central government would be a good chance to be different.)
How the regions historically interacted with each other (or not) should be an important guide to historic development patterns and where things like major trails and railroads were built, which directly influences what the map looks like and how states are integrated (or not) with each other. Of course, given how our collective mapping has evolved in the nearly-three-year duration of the project, coming up with some sort of a cohesive history is more an exercise in retconning what's been mapped so far rather than providing a blueprint for future mapping in existing states.
|Posted by TheMayor on 14 December 2020 at 04:27.|