The Axamallan Revolt

Timeframe: 1837-1838.
Belligerents: The G.P. of Mexico vs. the Pomeranos, supported by the UCNA.
Outcome: The independency of Axamalla.

In the 19th century,  was the dominant power of the New World; its only rival was  staggering from the loss of, well, Mexico - the historic heart of the Moorish New World. In no small part, this dominance was because of its Baltic diaspora; Mexico had an impressive amount of military talent at its disposal, most of which spoke Pommersch at home.

Then, in the 1830s, it all started going terribly wrong.

New World beer styles

When I want to waste time writing about Andalusada, I don't write about wars, or countries, or heroes; I write about food, guns, and theology. This particular article, about New World beer, is one that I've been meaning to write for quite some time.

Beer isn't beer isn't beer. Czech beer is different from Austrian beer is different from German beer is different from Dutch beer is different from English beer. And those styles are going to
As a basic rule of thumb, the taxonomy looks something like this:

• Latin American beer styles (and this includes those of Hispano-Baltic Texas) are based primarily on north German/Polish beer styles, with some later adjustments in Mexico and Brazil based on royal marriages and the like.
• North American beer styles are based primarily on Scottish styles, with some crossovers from Scandinavia and other parts of the British Isles (due in no small part to the presence of New Ireland.)
• Atlantic coastal beer styles are primarily Anglo-Dutch, with a bit of crossover from Scottish and Irish styles from North America.
• The UCNA's beer styles are a melting pot of its neighbors, with the exact details varying by region.

Having said that, let's unpack how this stuff plays out.

Hispano-Baltic Texas

At the start, the USA still existed; greatly reduced, but far more of it, and more recognizable, than it had any right to be. (It was my first alt history. Sue me.) As I wrote the world, it gave way to many countries in the continent called, very simply, "America." The UCNA, obviously, is the dominant one.

Due south of the UCNA lies the G.P. of Mexico, which is now a quirky miniboss antagonist - but used to be an existential threat. In between Mexico and the UCNA lies a swathe of land with at least one recognizable border, painted (on the B_Munro map) in what the Expanded Universal Colour Scheme would call the Lone Star Republic. I'm going to call it by its working name: Hispano-Baltic Texas.

Hispano-Baltic Texas 101

Why? Rule of Cool, of course; but more to it than that. Andalusada is a world that has not been good to the cause of republicanism; by establishing HBT as a republic, it offset the fact that a lot of (often dysfunctional) monarchies prevail in the timeline. (And it's still "Texan"; it has a very different attitude and style from the Atlantic confederacy that broke away from England-Scotland.)

• Who? Originally it was mostly Moorish mestizos; after about 1750, it was run by Prussians and Pomeranians. Since then it's attracted a few waves of refugees from these two old-stock ethnicities (originally Balts, more recently a lot of Mexicans), as well as a fair number of republican Moors from the UCNA.
• What? A quirky, plucky republic synthesizing Moorish dissent with Baltic republicanism, supported by the UCNA as a buffer state against Sansinger Mexico.
• Where? Corresponding with IRL Texas, with some parts of Oklahoma and Arizona included and the eastern borders a little pushed back. (The northwestern borders I'm not clear about, but the Rio Grande provides an obvious geographic boundary anyways.)
• When? It started becoming Baltic in the 1750s; it became formally independent in I think the late 1830s. From that point, it's continued to the present day.

The question, of course, is "how."