My laziness as an author? Lol

In seriousness to post facto justify, keeping Confederate ports bottled up entirely from European shipping was probably the priority, a lot of naval assets needed to be repaired after Hilton Head even as new ships were produced, and by late 1915 it was clear Brazil was on the verge of exiting the war with Argentina I guess?
"Laziness" as an author is a perfectly fine answer lol, especially considering the hundreds (thousands?) of updates so far. You are more than allowed to be "lazy" this close to the finish line.

There were a ton of ships with nothing to do, especially in summer of 1916. Instead of just sitting around, send a few to at least threaten one of the northern Brazilian cities. History is littered with leaders realizing the war is almost over and launching attacks to get themselves better positions at the peace table[1] - not like a raid on say Belem in order to spook the Brazilians would be unprecedented.

[1] This was more or less the reason Mussolini declared war on France in June 1940 after all, and that's just one example off the top of my head
 
Thank you!

My laziness as an author? Lol

In seriousness to post facto justify, keeping Confederate ports bottled up entirely from European shipping was probably the priority, a lot of naval assets needed to be repaired after Hilton Head even as new ships were produced, and by late 1915 it was clear Brazil was on the verge of exiting the war with Argentina I guess?
From what I can tell, Brazil iOTL didn't have *that* many large non-Atlantic coast cities, at least iOTL 1916. I guess Belo Horizonte was the largest. I'm not sure when the US got past that point, I guess the rise of cities like Pittsburgh and whenever North Carolina's largest city wasn't New Bern or Wilmington any more.
 
Muller never ceased to be insulted, however, and the Protocol engendered a fair deal of ill will in Brazil for years to come. Not only had their victory in Uruguay been mutilated, but they had not even been given the courtesy of all the other powers in the Great American War of signing a treaty formalizing the conflict's end with the United States because they would not allow Philadelphia to dictate domestic policy to them. Anti-American sentiment, fairly limited during the war despite the formal hostilities, erupted upon the Protocol's promulgation as opportunist politicians denounced "Americanism" in all its forms, regarding it as an even more insidious, radical form of Alemism. The phantoms of the war in the Cisplatine had not vanished with its end - indeed, the same impulses that had driven it were perhaps suddenly stronger than ever..."

- O Imperio do Futuro: The Rise of Brazil

In short, Brazil could have stayed out of the war, signed a treaty after its first advance to the Parana or waited until now in the story and they would have ended up in the same place. The best comparison here, I think is Italy in World War I. Stay out entirely or get in the war, the post war situation is more or less the same.

The other members of BS ended the war *much* more changed than Brazil, with the Confederacy and Chile mutilated beyond measure and Mexico deciding that the relationship with the USA *has* to change.

(And honestly Centro hasn't as much been taken over by the Americans as simply turned into a war zone for everyone for the next few decades)
 
And I wonder how much of a spoiler to find out that the US and Brazil *actually* signed a peace treaty (to pick a random year) 1947 (with Secretary of State George Wallace signing the treaty in Rome)
Honestly, I expect that as of 1926 that Brazil's most significant ally in the Americas is Colombia, (looking for allies after the loss of the French connection).
 
That must be where i'm going wrong - I assumed it was all one palace complex. Having walked through the Tuileries Gardens to the Louvre, I hadn't really wrapped my head until I was there how massive it is, so I can see how it is split into two separate uses.

Speaking of - what was Versailles used for during the Second Empire?
I don't think so.
Versailles was possibly too much associated with the ancient regime. It did not become used again before the Commune of Paris I. 1871 resuscitated the interest of having a "safe place" away from Paris' mobish and riotous atmosphere, though after the mid 1870s, when the parliament moved back to Paris, it only served to gather the parliament in joint session to either elect the president or to amend the constitutional laws.

In Paris's région, Napoléon III would use either Saint Cloud (burned during the war of 1870 and never rebuilt), Fontainebleau or Compiègnes, where you had the most famous parties of the reign of Napoléon III, the place to be for anyone who wished to be anyone in the upper society. Inside Paris, besides the Tuileries which served as the main imperial, and royal, residence since Louis XVI forced move to Paris, the Elysee palace, formerly the presidential palace in the days of the 2nd Republic, served as residence for the most prominent foreign, royal dignitaries visiting, like the khedive of Egypt in 1867. The Palais Royal, which now hosts the constitutional council, was the residence of Prince Napoléon, and would probably pass to Victor after him.

That said, Versailles' interest was also the vast space it offered, so if you need to host a large number of people...
 
"Laziness" as an author is a perfectly fine answer lol, especially considering the hundreds (thousands?) of updates so far. You are more than allowed to be "lazy" this close to the finish line.

There were a ton of ships with nothing to do, especially in summer of 1916. Instead of just sitting around, send a few to at least threaten one of the northern Brazilian cities. History is littered with leaders realizing the war is almost over and launching attacks to get themselves better positions at the peace table[1] - not like a raid on say Belem in order to spook the Brazilians would be unprecedented.

[1] This was more or less the reason Mussolini declared war on France in June 1940 after all, and that's just one example off the top of my head
I think we’re closing in on 1900 total threaded updates or something absurd like that between the two threads. The GAW wrapping does indeed feel like a bit of a finish line, especially since it’s dominated the last year of content (and buildup before that) - I had not planned to make its conclusion the end of a “Part,” but perhaps I should.
In short, Brazil could have stayed out of the war, signed a treaty after its first advance to the Parana or waited until now in the story and they would have ended up in the same place. The best comparison here, I think is Italy in World War I. Stay out entirely or get in the war, the post war situation is more or less the same.

The other members of BS ended the war *much* more changed than Brazil, with the Confederacy and Chile mutilated beyond measure and Mexico deciding that the relationship with the USA *has* to change.

(And honestly Centro hasn't as much been taken over by the Americans as simply turned into a war zone for everyone for the next few decades)
Correct, I’d say
I don't think so.
Versailles was possibly too much associated with the ancient regime. It did not become used again before the Commune of Paris I. 1871 resuscitated the interest of having a "safe place" away from Paris' mobish and riotous atmosphere, though after the mid 1870s, when the parliament moved back to Paris, it only served to gather the parliament in joint session to either elect the president or to amend the constitutional laws.

In Paris's région, Napoléon III would use either Saint Cloud (burned during the war of 1870 and never rebuilt), Fontainebleau or Compiègnes, where you had the most famous parties of the reign of Napoléon III, the place to be for anyone who wished to be anyone in the upper society. Inside Paris, besides the Tuileries which served as the main imperial, and royal, residence since Louis XVI forced move to Paris, the Elysee palace, formerly the presidential palace in the days of the 2nd Republic, served as residence for the most prominent foreign, royal dignitaries visiting, like the khedive of Egypt in 1867. The Palais Royal, which now hosts the constitutional council, was the residence of Prince Napoléon, and would probably pass to Victor after him.

That said, Versailles' interest was also the vast space it offered, so if you need to host a large number of people...
Interesting! Is never even heard of a few of those.

And, yes, Versailles is vast. Hard to describe how gigantic it is in mere words
So the "peace" with Brazil is Korean war style armistice kind of situation I imagine. Right?
Kinda sorta, I guess?
 
You may also add Malmaison to the lot. It did not have any notable use iotl during the second empire, but that has been Empress Josephine residence after her divorce, and had a strong place in the Napoleonic legend from it I think.
Perhaps if Eugénie needed her own château after Napoléon III's death, or if Napoléon IV needed her not all the time around the Tuileries, then Malmaison would fit nicely.
 
You may also add Malmaison to the lot. It did not have any notable use iotl during the second empire, but that has been Empress Josephine residence after her divorce, and had a strong place in the Napoleonic legend from it I think.
Perhaps if Eugénie needed her own château after Napoléon III's death, or if Napoléon IV needed her not all the time around the Tuileries, then Malmaison would fit nicely.
That’d work, though she spends a lot of her time in Biarritz
 
That’d work, though she spends a lot of her time in Biarritz
Biarritz was the vacation time. If she was wishing to influence politics, she'd have to be at Paris to keep the watch around her son then her grandson, lest she becomes irrelevant.
Though, there was also Vichy for the thermal sources. Eugénie and Napoléon III popularized it, and until WW2, it was another place to be if you counted in the upper circles of French society.
 
"...rejection of France as a mediator and Paris as the place to sign a treaty. It did not get better from there.

The British, naturally, stepped in, and Muller traveled to the Canadian port city of Halifax on London's invitation with the Foreign Secretary, Sir Ian Malcolm, personally in attendance to resolve the issue. Despite the proximity to Philadelphia, the United States sent a gaggle of junior diplomats as well as a justice of their Supreme Court, Julian Mack - a liberal Jew - to treat with Muller rather than President Hughes or Secretary of State Root, both of whom described themselves as far too busy to make the journey what with the impending collapse of the Confederacy. Muller, insulted, announced he would not meet with the Americans until he was met by somebody of "proper station;" three weeks later, on October 24th, the Vice President, Herbert Hadley, arrived as the head of the American delegation, the first Vice President to travel on a diplomatic mission outside of the United States.

While this mollified Muller to a point, it still did not solve the fact that the slight from Philadelphia had not been accidental. He learned quickly, from a British spy in the American delegation, that while the Americans had no intention of prosecuting the still-extant war in the South Atlantic or Caribbean any longer, there was considerable pressure in Congress, especially with a looming election in just two weeks, to take as hard a line as possible on the "slave powers," and that influential abolitionists who had the ear of the Hughes administration were pushing to demand that the price of a peace treaty with Brazil, much as the price of formal recognition of the rebellious Republic of Texas, would have to be total, unqualified, and uncompensated manumission of Brazil's slaves.

As a practical matter, this was not a huge issue; Brazil's youngest slaves were in their mid-forties and estimates suggested there were fewer than ten thousand enslaved persons remaining in the entire country, and the government was expected to pass some sort of abolition in the next two years anyways. The issue was that Brazil was entirely disinterested in being ordered by the United States to do anything; Muller, by any reasonable definition a political moderate in the Brazilian government, took the view that Philadelphia and Rio had essentially fought their part of the war to a draw, taking one dreadnought off the other and with no remaining issues standing in the way of peace. Indeed, harsher men had the notion that as the United States was fighting purely to defend Argentina, and that peace was settled at Asuncion, any agreement was a mere formality dictating status quo ante.

The Halifax Protocol was thus a grotesque compromise which had to satisfy two matters: American domestic political realities, and Brazil's refusal to regard its campaigns against the Americans as anything less than a stalemate. A formal treaty required a two-thirds Senate majority to pass, which a "light peace" against any Bloc Sud member was unlikely to carry; a "protocol," however, had no constitutional weight whatsoever. Hadley, who would along with Hughes be leaving office by March and was simply spent, proposed to Muller the terms of the Halifax Protocol: both countries acknowledged that hostilities were "permanently suspended" and "that no state of war exists," while falling short of a binding peace treaty "until such terms can be negotiated and resolved favorably to both parties." Muller begrudgingly agreed, partly at Malcolm's behest - the Foreign Secretary now had his fingerprints on the documents signed both in Asuncion and in Halifax - and thus the Protocol was promulgated.

For the United States, the Halifax Protocol delivered them the best of both worlds: it allowed the Hughes administration to declare that the war was over on November 11th when the Confederate government surrendered and asked for an armistice before his single term ended, but also allowed them to defer the ideological question of "eradicating slave power from the Hemisphere" to the incoming Root administration and indeed inadvertently formalized the practice that the United States did not treat with countries that allowed legal slavery. Neither side formally revoked their declarations of war but the Protocol was an informal enforcement of peace that, while shaky from the standpoint of international law, nonetheless guided the actions of each government. [1]

Muller never ceased to be insulted, however, and the Protocol engendered a fair deal of ill will in Brazil for years to come. Not only had their victory in Uruguay been mutilated, but they had not even been given the courtesy of all the other powers in the Great American War of signing a treaty formalizing the conflict's end with the United States because they would not allow Philadelphia to dictate domestic policy to them. Anti-American sentiment, fairly limited during the war despite the formal hostilities, erupted upon the Protocol's promulgation as opportunist politicians denounced "Americanism" in all its forms, regarding it as an even more insidious, radical form of Alemism. The phantoms of the war in the Cisplatine had not vanished with its end - indeed, the same impulses that had driven it were perhaps suddenly stronger than ever..."

- O Imperio do Futuro: The Rise of Brazil

[1] In case its not clear from the text, this half-loaf, have-your-cake-and-eat-it bullshit from the US is not going to work long term as far as US-Brazil relations go. While this chapter is specific to Brazil, this is one of our first iterations of the victory disease that's going to start setting in regarding Latin American relations for the US soon
Fantastic chapter! Really hope the US gets taken down a peg in the future. It seems in most timelines, the USA either reigns supreme over literally everyone, or gets utterly obliterated in a series of ASB situations. I'm glad you've got them strong (as they would realistically be) but not OP as fuck, and victory here is objectively a good thing, and yet I'm still hoping that now that the war is over and legal slavery is either mostly or entirely eradicated, that another force in the Americas (Latin, preferably) can start to become a sort of major economic and political rival over the coming decades, and that it isn't another world where the USA can flatten the entire Americas with so much as a sneeze.
 
Hello KingSweden24! I've been reading your timeline for quite some prior to joining AH.com. Let me just say that your timeline known as the Cincoverse is perhaps the best Mexican Empire/Confederate victory timeline ever written with a great deal of worldbuilding incorporated into the setting and characters. Though there are a few slipups in my opinion which is shared with a few others, the Cincoverse is great and I hope you do well along with potential assistance from me like your loyal followers.
 
Last edited:
Fantastic chapter! Really hope the US gets taken down a peg in the future. It seems in most timelines, the USA either reigns supreme over literally everyone, or gets utterly obliterated in a series of ASB situations. I'm glad you've got them strong (as they would realistically be) but not OP as fuck, and victory here is objectively a good thing, and yet I'm still hoping that now that the war is over and legal slavery is either mostly or entirely eradicated, that another force in the Americas (Latin, preferably) can start to become a sort of major economic and political rival over the coming decades, and that it isn't another world where the USA can flatten the entire Americas with so much as a sneeze.
Well for starters, the US lacks the ability to direct things as closely (due to lack of Gulf/Southern Ports, so any look south has to go from Baltimore, not Miami. We know Mexico is a significant power iTTL, greater than any non-US power in the Americas iOTL. Brazil, OTOH, is going to take a step backwards in power (though not as far as France). The Confederacy will *naturally* end up as the fifth strongest power in the Americas after US/Mexico/Brazil/Argentina, but we'll see if it ever locks in that place.


I do wonder where Nicaraguan Loyalty to the US compares to Panamanian Loyalty iOTL. On the one hand, the US has had far, far more casualties defending Nicara
gua than the US ever did defending Panama, On the other hand, If the US hadn't built the Canal there, not sure whether Nicaragua would end up as rich as it does with the Canal.
With Panama being less interesting than OTL, running a Pan American Highway from one end of the Americas is probably even less likely than OTL. (All of the TL that I've seen where the Darien Gap is bridged are TL with the US (or some approximation) steamrollering over Mexico/Central America and continuing Conquest in South America.)
 
Well for starters, the US lacks the ability to direct things as closely (due to lack of Gulf/Southern Ports, so any look south has to go from Baltimore, not Miami. We know Mexico is a significant power iTTL, greater than any non-US power in the Americas iOTL. Brazil, OTOH, is going to take a step backwards in power (though not as far as France). The Confederacy will *naturally* end up as the fifth strongest power in the Americas after US/Mexico/Brazil/Argentina, but we'll see if it ever locks in that place.


I do wonder where Nicaraguan Loyalty to the US compares to Panamanian Loyalty iOTL. On the one hand, the US has had far, far more casualties defending Nicara
gua than the US ever did defending Panama, On the other hand, If the US hadn't built the Canal there, not sure whether Nicaragua would end up as rich as it does with the Canal.
With Panama being less interesting than OTL, running a Pan American Highway from one end of the Americas is probably even less likely than OTL. (All of the TL that I've seen where the Darien Gap is bridged are TL with the US (or some approximation) steamrollering over Mexico/Central America and continuing Conquest in South America.)
Building the Darien Gap is honestly borderline ASB - I think the best way to define how thoroughly difficult that is is to point that technically, all of Panama is a rainforest, but it's pretty easy to forget that west of Chepo, pretty much impossible east of it.

As for Nicaragua, I don't know if loyalty is the word I'd use (I think compliance is more accurate to it - Nicaragua would cooperate with US out of self-interest), although the population's opinion of the Canal Zone (is there one? I don't remember) could be big part of the whole dynamic - if there is indeed one, there is a whole host of issues that would emanate from that, including smuggling, sovereignty disputes, and of course, interactions with a dreaded Zonian colonial population.
 
Fantastic chapter! Really hope the US gets taken down a peg in the future. It seems in most timelines, the USA either reigns supreme over literally everyone, or gets utterly obliterated in a series of ASB situations. I'm glad you've got them strong (as they would realistically be) but not OP as fuck, and victory here is objectively a good thing, and yet I'm still hoping that now that the war is over and legal slavery is either mostly or entirely eradicated, that another force in the Americas (Latin, preferably) can start to become a sort of major economic and political rival over the coming decades, and that it isn't another world where the USA can flatten the entire Americas with so much as a sneeze.
Thanks! That’s sort of one of the ideas behind the TL. Do bear in mind, though, that despite being a few pegs lower, the US not having much presence in Asia (Port Hamilton and Chusan are not Hawaii and the Philippines) means it has much more attention to focus on hemispheric hegemony
Well for starters, the US lacks the ability to direct things as closely (due to lack of Gulf/Southern Ports, so any look south has to go from Baltimore, not Miami. We know Mexico is a significant power iTTL, greater than any non-US power in the Americas iOTL. Brazil, OTOH, is going to take a step backwards in power (though not as far as France). The Confederacy will *naturally* end up as the fifth strongest power in the Americas after US/Mexico/Brazil/Argentina, but we'll see if it ever locks in that place.


I do wonder where Nicaraguan Loyalty to the US compares to Panamanian Loyalty iOTL. On the one hand, the US has had far, far more casualties defending Nicara
gua than the US ever did defending Panama, On the other hand, If the US hadn't built the Canal there, not sure whether Nicaragua would end up as rich as it does with the Canal.
With Panama being less interesting than OTL, running a Pan American Highway from one end of the Americas is probably even less likely than OTL. (All of the TL that I've seen where the Darien Gap is bridged are TL with the US (or some approximation) steamrollering over Mexico/Central America and continuing Conquest in South America.)
This is a good point - lack of naval bases on the Gulf with land connections is a big change.
Building the Darien Gap is honestly borderline ASB - I think the best way to define how thoroughly difficult that is is to point that technically, all of Panama is a rainforest, but it's pretty easy to forget that west of Chepo, pretty much impossible east of it.

As for Nicaragua, I don't know if loyalty is the word I'd use (I think compliance is more accurate to it - Nicaragua would cooperate with US out of self-interest), although the population's opinion of the Canal Zone (is there one? I don't remember) could be big part of the whole dynamic - if there is indeed one, there is a whole host of issues that would emanate from that, including smuggling, sovereignty disputes, and of course, interactions with a dreaded Zonian colonial population.
I don’t think there was a Zone proper 1 rather than the American-German-Dutch consortium draws its revenues and the US Military protects it. So Nicaraguan politics will definitely be colored by an expectation that pols bend the knee to Philadelphia

(Though some kind of Torrijos/Nasser figure at some point seems inevitable to me)
 
(Though some kind of Torrijos/Nasser figure at some point seems inevitable to me)
Yeah, such a canal holds a bit too much geostrategic and economic importance to not be nationalized eventually.

Will be interesting to see when Nicaragua's Nasser (since the situation there seems more similar to the Egyptian one than the Panamanian one) shows up and how Philadelphia reacts to him/her.
 
Yeah, such a canal holds a bit too much geostrategic and economic importance to not be nationalized eventually.

Will be interesting to see when Nicaragua's Nasser (since the situation there seems more similar to the Egyptian one than the Panamanian one) shows up and how Philadelphia reacts to him/her.
🎶 it ain’t me… it ain’t meeeee - i ain’t no fortunate sonnnnnn… 🎶
 
Top