Talk:Batavian Kingdom

From IBWiki

Jump to: navigation, search


The Brzhona

Much of what's below is of course obsolete and dates back from the discussion in Lla Sessiwn about the Brzhona, a Celto-Romance nation invented by Frank G. Valoczy. I hope to update all this to make it fit with the current state of Ill Bethisad. Same goes, to some extent, for the language Brzhonegh.

Dhystorja kwrta Brzhoni Ghenwrys

[History short Brzhona-GEN Nation-GEN]
A Brief History of the Brzhona Nation==

The history of the Brzhona begins when the Roman legions arrived in the northwestern part of today's France. The inhabitants there were originally speakers of a Celtic language called Brezhoneg. Over time the Latin language became the lingua france, but the local speech was very heavily influenced by Brezhoneg phonology, and a fair number of words were retained as well. After the fall of the Roman Empire, the Brzhona created a kingdom. The first king, Karrlws, reigned for three years before his death, and having left no heir, the Senotu (Senate) assumed power and the kingdom was declared the "Rrwspwvlyka Brzhonorwm", or Republic of the Brzhona. The Rrwspwvlyka was conquered by French forces of the Capetingians in the 10th century. In the 11th and 12th centuries, most of the Brzhona left Brittany and settled along the coast of the Low Countries [Belgium, Nederland].

<Insert Dutch history to 1566>

In 1566, the populace of the Low Countries revolted against Spanish rule, and in 1581 the Republic of the Netherlands was formed. The Brzhona became citizens of the Netherlands.

<insert Dutch history to 1868>

In 1868 the Dutch section of the 1st Communist International was formed, and as most of the Brzhona could be considered to be part of the proletarian class, many of them joined.

<Dutch to 1918>

In 1918 on March 19th, the Brzhona revolted against the Dutch monarchy and created the "Sobjeta Rrwspwvlyka Brzhonorwm" (Soviet Republic of the Brzhona). After much fierce fighting, the Dutch Army conquered the Soviet Republic on 9. April 1918, and the leaders of the revolution and other prominent communists were executed.

The situation did not improve for the Brzhona. In 1932, Villwm wz Aghro [By this time, the Brzhona used Dutch-style names, hence Villwm wz Aghro = Willem van der Veldt. -ed.] formed the Brzhona National Party, modelled along the lines of Mussolini's fascisti in Italy. Their primary objective was to establish an independent Brzhona state. When hitlerist forces occupied the Netherlands, a Brzhona Nazi puppet state was formed with Villwm wz Aghro as Dwzh, or "leader". The majority of the Brzhona nation, however, did not support wz Aghro's puppet state, and joined forces with Dutch and Belgian resistance forces fighting against German and BNP forces. In May of 1945 Allied forces liberated the low countries, and wz Aghro was captured by Brzhona partisans and was beheaded in front of a large audience in the stadium of Kalkars Bazterrei (Hoek van Holland) [Kalkars Bazterrei has the largest Brzhona population of any city in the Netherlands, about 80%]

This is Brzhona history (roughly) to 1945. I've yet to work out '45 to date, but I have an idea that it will consist of a laot of struggle by the Brzhona to achieve, if not total independence, then recognition as a distinct society and an autonomous area.


Andrew: Very interesting little potted history. I like the idea of the lowland Brzhona, I'm wondering if they might actually be Belgae, the Fir Bolg. Are there Walloons in the low countries or just Friesians, Dutch and Brzhona?

Ferko: In the low countries (if it is my domain to say so), there are Dutch, Frisians, Brzhona, Walloons, Platt-speakers and some Letzebuergers.

Andrew: It also reminds me of the Spanish Civil War period. After 1945 what happens to Brzhona left-wing radicalism. Did it survive the Cold War? Is there an emergence of violent political movements among the Brzhona? If they do exist, what effect do they have on other European minorities? What relation do they have with the interests of the Soviet Bloc and the West?

Ferko: I have yet to work that out in detail, but there are several factions of freedom fighters similar to the IRA or the Basque ETA who operate in the Netherlands and against Dutch interests elsewhere, since around the early 50's. One is extremely left, called, like it's German mother org, Red Army Fraction, but they are the least Brzhona-independence oriented, and could be considered to be cells of the German RAF. There is a moderate left group (supported by the USSR until it's death) and an ultra-Brzhona-nationalist group (it operates throughout the EU (if it exists *there*), and overseas against EU interests, as well as against US interests in Europe) who are both still active. The Brzhona RAF went down though at the same time as the German RAF was broken. The moderate left group could be called Eurocommunists; they are since the collapse of the USSR less active than previously, and much less active than the ultranationalists. The ultranationalist group does, however, occasionally work/train together with Euskadi ta Askatasuna (ETA), with Kosovo Liberation Army, Action Directe and Islamic Jihad (assuming, again, that the rest of the world *there* is more or less as it is *here*).
Padraic: I need some help understanding some of the things that are happening / have happened in the history of *there*, especially regarding Frank's post on post1945 Brzhona history and Andrew's reply thereto. I'd also like to rant a bit on why I think it's unlikely. Mind you, I liked Frank's history up to and including the 1918 section -- it was an innovative and, quite frankly, unnexpected turn of events.
[...] I also am not convinced by the argument that History has a particular "script" that will be played out regardless of the universe we peek into. That is; we have changed a _vital_ ingredient in world history (keeping the British British). The effects upon later world history _must_ be farther-reaching than simply having some nice folk west of the Pennines who speak Romance instead of Celtic or English.
You can try to convince me otherwise, but I really don't see how you can justify a world like ours *here* existing *there*.
Do you see my reasoning? No Britain = no USA = no WWII = no Bomb = no Cold War, etc.
There are (nearly) endless possibilities for what could happen *there*; I just don't see how nearly carbon-copy events could transpire in two reminds one of too many 'Captain Kirk finds yet another Parallel Earth' episodes on Star Trek.
Ferko: I understand and would have to agree with much of what Padraic says, But: Were there not some war second war in Europe, and hence no Cold War, there wouldn't be a cold war, because what the founders of the Sobjeta Rrwspwvlyka wanted would have come true, and Europe would all be Soviet states. [...]

Padraic: That was quite an interesting history! Do I assume aright that the Brzhona are direct descendants of the Gauls of that area? If so, you may want to look into a source on the Gaulish language, as well as Latin, for the early phonology upon which your language would be based; and some Celtic substrate vocabulary.

Ferko: Well. I used Breton as the Celtic base; wheter this is Brithonic or Gaulish, I don't know. I'd figure the former (Brezhoneg). I might have made a rather large blunder, if the Bretons weren't there when the Romans were. In that case.... :-(
Ray: No you haven't. Breton is most definitely Brythonic/Brittonic, being closely related to Cornish.
The only controversial question is why they fled SW Britain to settle in Armorica; it used to be claimed that they were fleeing the nasty Saxons, but modern scholars think the activities of Irish pirates & raiders is a far more like cause. There is no evidence that the Gallic language survived the Roman period at all.
Padraic: That would seem to provide a more immament explanation for the emmigrations. I think they were operating at around the same time as the Saxons, though (5th - 6th cen. or so), being after the Romans 'officially' left the island. I would take _my_ tribe elsewhere with bloody Saxons on one side and bloody Irish on the other!
Wouldn't the Franks (or whatever other invading Germans) have been responsible for the ultimate demise of Gaulish, and also the Gauls themselves?
Ray: The Germanic invaders of Gaul & Spain seems to have had little effect on the language other than providing some military vocab, colors of horses &c. The evidence is very much that vulgar Latin had totally replaced the native Celtic languages of these areas (and, indeed, of northern Italy) well before the end of the Empire. I think you're right about the Gauls themselves, however. It was a question of learning the language of the conqueror to further your own interests.
One finds that the same attitude prevailed in certain parts of south Wales into the early years of this century where Welsh speakers deliberately prevented their children aquiring their native language because English was the language of progress & advancement. Thankfully, that attitude has largely, I believe, disappeared.

Padraic: What impelled them to leave Brittany for the nascent Low Countries? You said _most_ of them left; what about those that stayed behind?

Ferko: Having had that little taste of self-rule, they didn't particularly like being ruled over by the French, who didn't really treat them all that well either, so they took off to somewhere new. The ones that stayed behind, most were assimilated into French, although there are a few villages where Old Brzhonegh evolved in a different way (ie. no Germanic/Netherlandic influence) from the other. (i guess we could distinguish them by calling one Netherlandic Brzhonegh and the other Breton Brzhonegh?)
Ray: I must confess I haven't read the 'alternate history' closely, but *here* Britanny wasn't finally brought under centralized French control until the Revolutionaries closed down the Breton parliament.
Padraic: Of course, this may not be the case *there*, as the Revolution must undoubtedly take a different course (no US model, for one and no Merkian influence); perhaps Kemran intervention previous to this time (i.e., perhaps the ties between the two (Kemr and Britanny) are 'more' than just cultural and linguistic).
Ferko: Shall we say that that had happened?
Padraic: If the French Revolution *there* unfolded with the same particulars as *here* and with the same ideologies, etc.; then this scenario seems possible. I put forward the possibility of a union between Britany and Kemr -- the one _is_ a colony after all! -- which would dampen things a bit for the French. [If this becomes official!] In any event, the Brzhona should have moved off to the Low Countries long before the French could grasp them with their greedy little claws. This would leave them at the mercy of the nascent Dutch; leaving those that remain in Britany to contend with the French, whichever way they may be oriented with respect to the Motherland.
Ferko: I do like the idea of said union, but how would that affect the Netherlandic Brzhona? The rising Dutch wouldn't having just won independence from the Spanish, want to give up part of their Vaderland to yet another invader, now would they? But the Brzhona who left left in the 11th/12th centuries, well before the revolution in France, and well before the Dutch revolution. Perhaps their presence in the low countries would alter in some way the direction and outcome of the Dutch revolution. As for the Brzhona who did not leave, I would assume that by the time of the French revolution they had been assimilated into French or whatever culture/linguistic group was the majority in the area.
Padraic: Of course, the Transbritannic Union wouldn't affect the Netherlandic Brzhona at all...they're on their own. The only effects would be on the stay-at-home Brzhona; and they would probably be assimilated to or heavily influenced by the larger Breotow population. They would also very likely inject some of their cultural "stuff" into the larger Breotow culture.
I know nothing of Dutch history, so I can't speak at all for the effects of the Nederlandic Brzhona. They should, I believe, have quite an interesting effect.

Padraic: Also, if I may ask, why do they call themselves Brzhona rather than something based upon "Gaul"; as I assume the root Brzh- is ultimately descended from Britan-. *Here*, at least, (and *there* as far as the Breotow are concerned) that particular name was exported from Great Britain along with the various emigrant peoples. I suppose I'm asking why native Gauls would call themselves Britons?

Ferko: Well, see the bit above about Bretons. If I did make a blunder that's too big, I can fix it (I think)

Padraic: Respecting the name Brzhona -- *here*, the Gauls were in Britany first, then Mr Caesar came and they all liked his toga so much that they became Gallo-Romans. Then the Franks moved in and compelled everyone to cease eating cows and pigs and learn how to have cuisine with beef and porc, thus becomming French. Somewhen in that mix, some Britons left Britain, thus ceasing to be British, but upon landing in France, refused to eat cuisine (and thus become French) and they became Brezhoneg instead.
*There*, if the Brzhona are native Gauls, then their name would probably have to change, unless they associated themselves with the immigrant Britons before moving off to the Low Countries. Otherwise, their place of origin could change, and they would be one of the emigrant British groups fleeing the Perditious Saxon.

Ferko: Well, if it fits, I'd go with the second option, because I like the sound of "Brzhonegh".
Padraic: I thought that might be the case! There were emmigrations from Komrow (Kernow in particular) during the Irish Troubles, and as a result of the Saxon Troubles. The earliest migration would probably come at a time before the complete Romanisation of that part of the country or from the West (historically the least Romanised part of the country), resulting in a small Celtic speaking population in Britanny. [This satisfies my desire (and I think Ray's desire as well) to have some surviving Brythonic Celtic in the wide world.] The latter migrations came some time afterward, and from more Romanised folk, resulting in the Breotow kingdoms in Britany. The Celtic speakers, sadly, being so few in number must eventually be absorbed into the Romance populations (but not before leaving us some written testament to their existence; and therefore fodder for some conlinguist in Castreleon to ponder the possibilities of Cymraeg survival). One of these Romance populations could very well contain the protoBrzhona. From here they could part ways with their Breotow cousins and muddle on over to the Low Countries.
Ferko: Well then, the ancient history of the Brzhona has been struck by more light.

Who's And are we to assume that every day is independence day in the Batavian Kingdom ;o) Deiniol 12:35, 5 Aug 2005 (PDT)

Don't be surprised about the sudden increase in the number of visitors of the Batavian page: a link to it was placed tonight in the equivalent of Lla Dafern in our Dutch wikipedia. --IJzeren Jan 14:53, 5 Aug 2005 (PDT)

Hold on a minute

I've just been talking about Luxembourg in the HRE talk page, and I was told that Luxembourg wasn't a part of BK anymore. Any reason why it appears on the map of the BK instead of having condominium status with France? And what about the rest of Limburg anyway? Is it a part of Rhineland-Palatinate, an independent (or condominium) part of the HRE or is it still a part of the BK? --Sikulu 16 December 2005, 15:41 (GMT)

This map is obsolete as well. And the reason that Luxemburg appears on it is simply under the motto Two for the price of one. ;) Nobody has really worked on Luxemburg yet, but like I said there, it's still one country. It actually cóuld be in a situation similar to that of Schleswig-Holstein and Jervaine: one entity, but the western part being also part of France and the eastern part of the HRE. --IJzeren Jan 07:53, 16 December 2005 (PST)

It seams that Gronigen has part of Limburg (*here*'s Netherlands Limburg). By the way, shouldn't the entire flemish part of *here*'s Belgium be part of the BK. Only, I've seen that Batavia's southern border is almost flat. --Sikulu 3 January 2006, 15:24 (GMT)

The more parts of the maps out there have been made with the map I've found showing the division between flemish and french-speaking belgium, which, again, per the map I've found, seem to be on a nearly straight east-to-west line. BoArthur 10:01, 3 January 2006 (PST)

German occupation

The Waddeneilanden Project, as well as creating a new map of the BK, inspired me to thinking a bit about politics in the BK. One thing I can't really figure out is what happened during the Second Great War. *Here*, political life was pretty much terminated during those five years, both in Belgium and the Netherlands; to such an extent, that most prewar political parties didn't come back, while new parties (only partly based on the prewar ones) emerged. But Hessler was no Hitler, and I wonder whether the same would apply *there*. Were parties forbidden under German rule? What did German occupation look like, in general? —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 18:49, 17 January 2006 (PST)

Was part of the oppressiveness *here* due to Nazism? If so, between a more lax policy and the lack of a "Final Solution," I would think that so long as political parties toed the line set by Hessler, they might've survived better than *here*. My completely uninformed opinion, mind. BoArthur
I'd guess so. But what about the parties that worked with him? They probably wouldn't be allowed to return after the war. Now that we're at it: given the absence of an ideology, who would be the collaborators? —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 19:04, 17 January 2006 (PST)
Power mongers? Those that wanted to be part of Germany and the HRE to begin with? Anti-royalist groups? BoArthur 19:37, 17 January 2006 (PST)
Could the Batavian Kingdom have been forced into union with the HRE as a constituent kingdom? Then the collaborationists could've been a combination of opportunists and perhaps pan-Germanists? Nik 20:05, 17 January 2006 (PST)
I'm sure that if there was a SNORist styled party in BaK at the time, they would've probably been all for Pan-Germania. BoArthur 20:08, 17 January 2006 (PST)
All interesting ideas indeed! Well, frankly, I can't really think of anyone who'd like to be part of the HRE for other reasons than ideological pan-Germanism. Power mongers? Certainly! That kind of events always attracts all kinds of opportunists. Anti-royalists? Possibly, but the HRE would hardly be the ideal solution for them!
Hey, but how about this? Snorism itself is pretty unlikely to emerge on Batavian soil, as it is purely Slavic thing, and we also established that there are no nazis *there*. But nobody ever said that some SNOR-styled pan-Germanism couldn't have existed. That would also cast a different light on Mussolini, who díd exist in IB and presumably was involved in pan-Romanism somehow.
Such pan-Germanic nationalism would indeed be similar to nazism, but not without the necessary differences: no antisemitism (at least not by definition); it should not necessarily include ideas about the superiority of one race over all others; and it should not necessarily be as militant as nazism was. It would basically advocate the unification of the HRE, Austria, the SR, the Batavian Kingdom, the Bohemian Kingdom, Danzig and parts of the RTC into one huge Germanic empire!
Pan-Germanism could also have played a role in the Anschluß and in the events in Bohemia. That leaves open the question if Germany had some pan-Germanic party itself, and if Hessler was somehow connected with it; and if not, what role that party played in the HRE.
Ideas? —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 03:49, 18 January 2006 (PST)

Pan Germanism?

I don't know that Hessler was necessarily involved in the party, but having them be part of the reason that the Anschluss occured between Austria and the HRE would be good. BoArthur 09:23, 18 January 2006 (PST)


Does/Did this exist ever in IB? --Quentin 06:01, 9 December 2006 (PST)

Concerning Languages

I once read that Flemish=Dutch - is this true, or are they more isolated there? And would French ever have a position provicially e.g. in Brabant? --Quentin 06:04, 9 December 2006 (PST)

Just my opinion (not a statement of cannonicity) but if there was a community near the border speaking a Galo-romance language, it would logicaly be Walloon, not Francian. --Marc Pasquin 07:11, 9 December 2006 (PST)
I second the matter. BoArthur 10:04, 9 December 2006 (PST)

Overseas possessions

I was wondering if Batavian Kingdom would have *there* Deshima island as a colony or concession in Japan.--Pedromoderno 10:15, 17 January 2008 (PST)

Not that I know of. Is there any reason why it should? —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 10:58, 22 January 2008 (PST)
It was just something I was wondering, as japanese historical isolationism also occured *there* until the mid-19th century. Perhaps Batavian traders could had some previleges in Xogunate's Japan like Dutch had in real world.--Pedromoderno 17:26, 22 January 2008 (PST)


I'm sure that Jan van Steenbergen or Charlie quite deliberately had it Brabants. Feel free to Ping Jan in the Facebook group about it, if you're so inclined. BoArthur 07:57, 16 September 2015 (PDT)

That's quite right indeeed. The funny thing is, there's much about the BK that is not on this wiki, but on my personal computer. Let me explain: most of what I have cooked up about it was born long before IB ever existed, all during the 1980s and early 1990s. It was a kind of political science-fiction project, including governments, political parties and the like. None of these things were predictions of any kind, it was merely my own fantasy. Still, some of the things I imagined have actually happened, including some things that were considered impossible or at least very improbable at the time. One thing in particular has come true in a way that was almost scary: in my timeline a far-right group, led by a certain Wildschut, split off from the liberal VVV on 6 September 2004 (see Political Parties in the Batavian Kingdom#LL). *Here* almost exactly the same thing happened on 3 September 2004, only the leader of the new party is named Wilders. In my timeline, this party become bigger and more powerful than I actually believed would be possible, and *here* it is leading in the polls!
Anyway, when I joined IB, it was for the RTC and Russia. The BK was pretty much a terra incognita, and as a side project I decide to use my old stuff. Of course I had to IB-ify it, make it fit with the rest of the world and comply with what few things were already known about it (QSS).
The idea of the BK consisting of less and larger provinces than *here*, and of these provinces having a far higher degree of autonomy, is something that rather came up within IB. In part, this is meant to match the way things work in IB, in part it is also rooted in Dutch history. Along with that came also the idea of each province having its own co-official language(s). That goes for Brabant, too. Mind, "Dutch" should actually be called "Hollandish" and is not necessarily the same thing as *here*. Although none of the languages and regiolects have been worked out, this is not something that can simply be undone (see QSS). Cheers, IJzeren Jan 15:08, 16 September 2015 (PDT)
I take it as a yes that Brabantian exists then? Alright then. So there really isn't Standard Dutch as we know it *there*? (i.e. hollandic and brabantic dialects are self-contained, never mixed to produce Standard Dutch) Juan Martin Velez Linares 21:14, 16 September 2015 (CDT)
Yes, thus Brabant is co-official with Hollandisch. Hollandisch seems to me the de facto Lingual Franca, even though it's only the primary language of Holland. BoArthur 19:55, 16 September 2015 (PDT)
Personal tools