Page 1 of 1
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2006 9:09 pm
I vaguely remember some discussion about this before, but I have made up my own alternative Era Specific Timelines to avoid things like splitting the Napoleonic and Boer Wars into two seperate era's. Is anyone else tempted to mess around with the boundaries of history a grab a few extras decades for your period?
55BCE-450CE roman invasion of britain to end of roman empire (sort of)
450-1072 end of roman empire (sort of) to manzikert
1066-1453 hastings to fall of constantinople/end of 100yw
1702-1783 WSS to end of AWI
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 2:14 am
It's interesting how timelines can be dependent on the viewpoint. Working from (for example) a naval/maritime viewpoint different events become more or less significant.
From a purely naval point of view:
55BC - first seaborne invasion of Britain
43AD-410(ish) - Romans bring trade and sea-borne forces. Early attacks by Saxon pirates
410-1066 - The age of the raiders (around 870something Alfred forms the "first" English navy)
1066-1490 - Medieval era, most seagoing is coastal, sea-battles still fought like land battles.
1490-1560 - The development of gunnery on ships, and the real beginning of ocean-going exploration.
1560-1603 - Elizabeth's privateers put English ships, seamen, and gunnery at the top of the list. Britannia rules the waves.
1603-1648 - James the Wally screws up the naval power Elizabeth left him. Throughout the early Stuart period corruption and incompetence replace zeal and efficiency.
1649-1815 - We don't win every battle, or even every war, but English fleets, from Blake's to Nelson's undoubtedly rule the waves once more. This is the age of the broadside, and the line of battle.
1816-1860 - Britain's navy is so powerful that, to a certain extent it becomes stagnant.
1860-1906 - The age of the Iron-clad
1906-1940 - The launch of HMS Dreadnought ushers in a completely new style of warfare.
1941- - After the Battle of Taranto, and Pearl Harbour, naval tactics changed dramatically and the use of sea-borne planes and aircraft carriers became more important than big guns. The increased use of submarines during this time is also significant of things to come.
Similarly, an international maritime timeline would be different again.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 2:07 pm
Another set of bits from a different viewpoint!
2000BC (approx) use of metal tols and weaponns in Britain - balance of power and trade links shift to encompass metal producing areas.
700 BC Iron tools and weapons introduced - another set of shifts as iron ore is more accessible than tinand copper.
55 BC - short term raid by Romans into SE England - repeated in 54 BC. Not the beginning of the Roman Empire and possibly the first RECORDED seaborne invasion of Britain - who knows whether there wer any prehistoric ones?
AD 405 - traditional date of the end of the Roman admisitration of Britain. The Roman Empire didn't end until much later, arguably at the fall of Constantinople in the 15th Century.
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 1:44 am
timelines are very dependant on what byou are looking at, for a firearms display
1860s snider enfield , cartridge gun
1870-1890 martini henry
1890 bolt action rifles, long lee
1907 lee enfield mk111
the use of ? anything or the period can vary depending on what aspect or piece of history is in question so timelines often do flow, with something like the bronze-iron age transition there isnt really one year where every body uses bronze and the next they use iron its more a gradual sort of slide over hundreds of years to iron dominance, so really it all depends on context, if your talking of something specific which is within a known and established age range then there is an argument for usage for a short period after but what is a timeline other than bracketing? some things are very specific and some things arent.