Historical differences

[Haneastic]

I saw Snu posted a question about how this timeline would affect William III. Likewise, I've been researching colonies and looking into how they may be different (John Ogelthorpe who founded Georgia was English for example). I thought we could use this thread to debate. Have at it!

[TLS]

So some questions have been raised about two key generals from this time: Prince Eugene of Savoy and John Churchill (the Earl of Marlborough). After thinking things through, some thoughts:

Prince Eugene: As the affair that historically led to his family's disgrace and his exile to Austria never took place, he remains in the service of the French crown. He has yet to rise to the point of high leadership in the French armies (there was no Battle of Zenta equivalent to elevate him to generalship) but he did serve with distinction in the Second Anglo-Dutch War. He is thus one rung below being considered suitable for army command.

John Churchill: As his family were stalwart loyalists to the Stuart crown, he eventually found himself in the Stuart court in exile in France. He served the Stuarts in the war in Ireland, and played a pivotal role in winning the Battle of the Boyne for James. He is, however, a Protestant (High Church), and thus is often being boxed out of decisions and positions of influence by his Catholic peers.

[Haneastic]

I realised James II died in 1701 in real life. Should I have him die now and be replaced by his son, James III?

[Galveston Bay]

I realised James II died in 1701 in real life. Should I have him die now and be replaced by his son, James III?

remember the rule where TLS is going to decide that every year for the various monarchs ... he might just live longer

[TLS]

Yeah I actually did a bunch of rolls at the beginning of the decade to figure out who was gonna die when (of the monarchs who were on death's door). I'll let you know when the reaper comes a-knockin'

[Reddawn]

In this timeline, was the Treaty of Bakhchisarai signed?

[TLS]

In this timeline, was the Treaty of Bakhchisarai signed?

I'm going to say no, because the Zaporizhian Sich is under Ottoman suzerainty, not Russian.

[Sponsored content]