We already have a little of Indo-European in the north of Iraq. From that, it should expand somewhat to the rest of Mesopotamia.
And potentially from then, to Egypt.
Miscellaneous <1900 (Alternate) History Thread
- Thread starter RMcD94
- Start date
We already have a little of Indo-European in the north of Iraq. From that, it should expand somewhat to the rest of Mesopotamia.
And potentially from then, to Egypt.
Nubians.
Even though I don't know much about them. Other than that they defeated Acheamenids, Romans, Muslims.
They seem Badass.
Earlier/Classical Rome that would be decides/able to focus on Atlantic North Africa and on Upper Egypt.
The Indo-Europeans were probably the second culture to acquire horses (after the Botai culture) but I'm not sure how big of a military advantage this was. These were early horses, plus no saddles or stirrups, not even war-chariots until the late 3rd millennium BCE, well after Sumerian and Egyptian states had been established. If we look at historical Indo-European expansion, in their original stateless tribal societies, while they were able to establish dominance against heavily populated agricultural regions (Neolithic Europe and post-Harappan collapse North India), they were stopped when they met actual state structures like in Mesopotamia.
I don't see a Indo-European expansion into Egypt and Mesopotamia before 1000 BCE, unless the Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations undergo a collapse like the Indus valley civilization did, allowing waves of Indo-European migrants to flow in. The Hittites and Mitanni controlled northern Mesopotamia for a few centuries before the Assyrians rallied and crushed them.
I don't see a Indo-European expansion into Egypt and Mesopotamia before 1000 BCE, unless the Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations undergo a collapse like the Indus valley civilization did, allowing waves of Indo-European migrants to flow in. The Hittites and Mitanni controlled northern Mesopotamia for a few centuries before the Assyrians rallied and crushed them.
Otto Kretschmer
Banned
PC: a Balto Slavic group splits from the rest of Balto Slavs, heads east and reaches Sakhalin around 800-500 BC
'No French Academy'.
As I understand it, the French language has long been centrally regulated by this body. In addition to streamlining grammar and "proper usage" of the language, it also seems to be known for railing against loanwords and other foreign expressions that have made inroads into the speech patterns of everyday Francophones. Given its distaste for Anglicisms, I imagine that there's quite a contrast with the open, laissez-faire lexical hodgepodge that is English (though I personally wonder if there's considerable "enrichment" it missed out on, by discouraging the incorporation of foreign vocabulary). Hence, this proposed PoD.
As I understand it, the French language has long been centrally regulated by this body. In addition to streamlining grammar and "proper usage" of the language, it also seems to be known for railing against loanwords and other foreign expressions that have made inroads into the speech patterns of everyday Francophones. Given its distaste for Anglicisms, I imagine that there's quite a contrast with the open, laissez-faire lexical hodgepodge that is English (though I personally wonder if there's considerable "enrichment" it missed out on, by discouraging the incorporation of foreign vocabulary). Hence, this proposed PoD.
I mean the French Academy became shitty after WW2, before that they just didn't do their job at all really, apart from being a big circle of politicians, philosophers and writers (instead of linguists, which would seem more logical to put at the head of a language)
Wasn't aware of that, but thanks for the tip-off.
Since you mentioned its decline, it also brought a number of related PoDs to my mind that get rid of the French Academy down the line (rather than aborting its existence altogether). Aside from having Napoleon ditch it completely after the Jacobins first suppressed it, I wonder if France could somehow do away with it after World War II?
after nope, it basically became a tool for political relevance and wealth for politicians, so no president would ditch it, as they'll most likely be assured to enter it (if they wish) when they be old, granting them actually tremendous wealth and real estate. Real estate as in fckin protected castles and manors n shite.
Alright, then. In that case, perhaps I'll pursue the pre-1900 routes to rending (or at least, reducing) the influence of the Académie Française, if doing so in the twentieth century is too implausible.
Doing the opposite with a universal Germanic language now, how about a 'State-Sponsored English Academy'? Checking Wiki, there seems to have been a number of possible, widely dispersed PoDs that might allow for this if done right. The most recent of these serious proposals, it seems, emerged in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. John Adams, for example, once penned a letter to the Second Continental Congress that floated the idea of a federally backed English Academy once the war was won. Judging by the wording of the corresponding transcript I found, I've a feeling that its blatant support for Anglophone centralism may have contributed to their liberty-minded OTL decision to reject Adams' proposal. As such, I wonder if having him word it with much less proud centralist appraisal, as well as acquiesce to official protection of minority languages--and, perhaps, (reluctantly) agree that such an academy merely set "guidelines" rather than hard-and-fast rules, in possible follow-up discussions--would make the PoD more likely. There's a risk of it fading over time before being dissolved completely, of course, but an English Academy that exists briefly before dissipating is still more influential than an English Academy that doesn't exist at all.
'Less Agrarian Post-War South'.
My understanding being that, even after the Civil War, the South remained agrarian and dismissive of business interests, with industrialization only catching it up with the rest of the country in recent decades. Having this happen sooner would even out the balance of power between it and the North, which will probably butterfly what I understand to be their more left-wing economic leanings accordingly. Maybe swatting aside William Jennings Bryan and having the Bourbon Democrats remain a viable force in American politics for longer might do it?
My understanding being that, even after the Civil War, the South remained agrarian and dismissive of business interests, with industrialization only catching it up with the rest of the country in recent decades. Having this happen sooner would even out the balance of power between it and the North, which will probably butterfly what I understand to be their more left-wing economic leanings accordingly. Maybe swatting aside William Jennings Bryan and having the Bourbon Democrats remain a viable force in American politics for longer might do it?
Why hasn't there ever been a Trireme wreck (Ancient Greece)? (Or why haven't archeologists ever found an Ancient Greek Trireme wreck? Triremes were not that rare in Ancient Greek naval battles? Is it because of the erosion or decay rates in the Mediterranean? )
A couple of factors
1) very lightly built so they broke up quickly
2) usually sunk on shallow coastal waters where they would be pushed ashore, broken apart by wave action, and salvaged
3) were difficult to sink due to their light construction. When hit they would break apart and be abandoned. But afterwards drift about.
4) such ships are very old
In addition to the previous reply by @Count of Crisco (and to back up his points), here's a couple of links which explain why ancient shipwrecks are so rare:
Shipwrecks Lost to Time That Archaeologists Would Love to Get Their Hands On
These wrecks carried everything from Bronze Age explorers to a lost Egyptian sarcophagus.
www.nationalgeographic.com
Both good articles, I hadnt read the first one but was thinking of the second. Just didnt want to attempt to link anything on my phone.In addition to the previous reply by @Count of Crisco (and to back up his points), here's a couple of links which explain why ancient shipwrecks are so rare:
Shipwrecks Lost to Time That Archaeologists Would Love to Get Their Hands On
These wrecks carried everything from Bronze Age explorers to a lost Egyptian sarcophagus.
I also think that most triremes were salvaged, at least to an extent. They carried alot of valuable stuff a city state or empire would have wanted to keep. And also as was mentioned sunk in shallow waters more often than not.
Is it particularly plausible for Aztec (or general Mesoamerican) or Inca modernization to be fed by the introduction of various sorts of mills, water wheels, and windmills? There's a clear economic incentive given the depopulation, lack of labor, and huge shift in the economy (which will become "send gold/silver to Europe, import horses, steel, and weapons).
To me it seems like this idea would come to any anti-Spanish community that finds itself there to increase yields from the mines (stamp mill), of course shaving off some of the increased yield for themselves, and from there stamp mills could evolve into other sorts of mills like in Europe or Asia. The later mills might be built with foreign aid but would be a local outgrowth of the stamp mills. The high mountains of Mexico and the Andes should have at least a few decent streams for water wheels and good areas to put a windmill.
Thoughts?
To me it seems like this idea would come to any anti-Spanish community that finds itself there to increase yields from the mines (stamp mill), of course shaving off some of the increased yield for themselves, and from there stamp mills could evolve into other sorts of mills like in Europe or Asia. The later mills might be built with foreign aid but would be a local outgrowth of the stamp mills. The high mountains of Mexico and the Andes should have at least a few decent streams for water wheels and good areas to put a windmill.
Thoughts?
I think is plausible in the Aztec case, but you would need some changes in their culture and government.
In the Inca case, I am not sure.
Just a little scenario for fun and thought for anyone interested in a Christian Mesoamerica. ITTL, Cortes fails at conquest but succeeds at collapsing the Aztec Empire and Mesoamerica into a host of warring states. Christianity gains a foothold in Mesoamerica, but as priests with more zeal than knowledge seek to spread the new faith, much syncreticism develops.
Decades later, a bishop sent from Europe visits a native city and is appalled as he sees a man dressed in the garb of a Christian priest supervising a human sacrifice where the victim is screaming prayers to God as flesh is cut from his body and blood drained into a chalice from a wound in his side. The man is covered in blood from being flogged and he wears a crown of thorns and he hangs from a wooden cross. He visits a local church to partake in the Eucharist and notices something horrifying about the host and the altar wine. The host is dark and red and appears to be baked from a mix of cornmeal and dried meat which the bishop quickly realises is human flesh. The bishop's face turns pale as he notices the sacramental wine offered to him is unusually thick and dark and appears almost like blood.
Upon further questioning, the native priest confirms the bishop's suspicion. He is puzzled by the bishop's horror at the communion service, since he could not imagine why a Christian might take issue at being asked to consume the flesh and blood of their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The native priest doesn't understand the concepts the bishop is trying to explain like transubstantiation. How could unleavened bread or wine possibly suffice for such a sacred ceremony? After all, the Holy Spirit itself comes into the man fortunate enough to be sacrificed. The bishop recoils in horror at this absolute misinterpretation of such a fundamental doctrine and resolves that he will see it corrected lest the people of Mexico find themselves in utter damnation...
Decades later, a bishop sent from Europe visits a native city and is appalled as he sees a man dressed in the garb of a Christian priest supervising a human sacrifice where the victim is screaming prayers to God as flesh is cut from his body and blood drained into a chalice from a wound in his side. The man is covered in blood from being flogged and he wears a crown of thorns and he hangs from a wooden cross. He visits a local church to partake in the Eucharist and notices something horrifying about the host and the altar wine. The host is dark and red and appears to be baked from a mix of cornmeal and dried meat which the bishop quickly realises is human flesh. The bishop's face turns pale as he notices the sacramental wine offered to him is unusually thick and dark and appears almost like blood.
Upon further questioning, the native priest confirms the bishop's suspicion. He is puzzled by the bishop's horror at the communion service, since he could not imagine why a Christian might take issue at being asked to consume the flesh and blood of their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The native priest doesn't understand the concepts the bishop is trying to explain like transubstantiation. How could unleavened bread or wine possibly suffice for such a sacred ceremony? After all, the Holy Spirit itself comes into the man fortunate enough to be sacrificed. The bishop recoils in horror at this absolute misinterpretation of such a fundamental doctrine and resolves that he will see it corrected lest the people of Mexico find themselves in utter damnation...
As a concept, I love this.
As execution, I am not sure if it is fine
.Violence was the day to day of many Native American tribes, true.
But that doesn't mean their syncretism of native religion with christianity will develop in this.