AHC: Amerindian civilization survives (Early POD)

Something I am writing begins with a POD in 602 AD in the Old World, but I am using multiple PODs so that several things change. Ergo I would like a POD in 602 or after (but not too late) that allows

A) The Amerindians to maintain control of most of South and Central America
B) To somehow survive the diseases the Old Worlders eventually bring over and develop a better immune system to handle them
C) The Europeans colonize the eastern of what is OTL the United States and Canada along with the Caribbean
D) Perhaps (they don't have to, up to you) the Chinese or other East Asian powers colonize the west?

In the timeline there are no Islamic conquests, so keep that in mind (what reasons would Europeans have for going across the Atlantic?)

What are the best ways to delay Old World discovery of the Americas, but still have Europeans arrive first.

Finally, is there a way to have non-Scandinavian Europeans arrive on the east coast just before the Chinese arrive in the west?
 
Getting China into the race would probably need a earlier Zheng He given more support, and his exploration succes leading to more exploration instead of being sidelined by a isolationalist bent and more pressing issues from the Mongolians to the north. Now if Ming China (or whoever you might instead make it with an earlier Zheng He) has the capabilities to focus on this as well as whatever else they're forced to focus on by their surroundings, is an open question that i'm not qualified to guess at.
 
Something I am writing begins with a POD in 602 AD in the Old World, but I am using multiple PODs so that several things change. Ergo I would like a POD in 602 or after (but not too late) that allows

A) The Amerindians to maintain control of most of South and Central America
B) To somehow survive the diseases the Old Worlders eventually bring over and develop a better immune system to handle them
C) The Europeans colonize the eastern of what is OTL the United States and Canada along with the Caribbean
D) Perhaps (they don't have to, up to you) the Chinese or other East Asian powers colonize the west?

In the timeline there are no Islamic conquests, so keep that in mind (what reasons would Europeans have for going across the Atlantic?)

What are the best ways to delay Old World discovery of the Americas, but still have Europeans arrive first.

Finally, is there a way to have non-Scandinavian Europeans arrive on the east coast just before the Chinese arrive in the west?

As in no Islamic conquests do you mean no Islam or Islam is still around and there is just no dominant Islamic empire covering the in entire Mid East?

If you answer that, I will try to give you a possible scenario.
 
I remember reading that when a Muslim leader conquered a territory, only nonmuslims paid taxes, but because things were run relatively well and/or there was less corruption, often the tax burden was less than it had been before the conquest!

Now, I suspect this is generalization true in many instances but not all, for there were many different Muslim leaders just like there were many Christian leaders.

But it may be somewhat similar to Rome when they were conquering peoples on the peninsula during their republic phase: a remarkably liberal arrangement for the time.
 
I remember reading that when a Muslim leader conquered a territory, only nonmuslims paid taxes, but because things were run relatively well and/or there was less corruption, often the tax burden was less than it had been before the conquest!

Now, I suspect this is generalization true in many instances but not all, for there were many different Muslim leaders just like there were many Christian leaders.

But it may be somewhat similar to Rome when they were conquering peoples on the peninsula during their republic phase: a remarkably liberal arrangement for the time.


You are correct that in many cases (Egypt and Levant) the tax burden on the new subjects was less than that of Byzantium. However the People of the book (Christians and Jews) were not equal by any long shot to the Muslim subjects, especially during the Umayyad period and later periods. Initially the Christians were apart of Dar al- Dawah (house of invitation) and were treated better so that they might convert. However as time moved on that belief stretched and in some cases Christian subjects were lumped into Dar al Harb (house of war) this was the case in the conquests of the Seljuks and Timurids. Also Muslims do pay the Zakat (pillar of Islam) which is a levied tax to the local mosque similar to a tithe that Dhimmis were not allowed to pay.

Also, according to conservative readings of Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) only people of the book are allowed to make a Dhimmi treaty. This would account for the extinction of Buddhists throughout land that became under the sway of Islam. As well Manichaens were especially persecuted leading to their complete extinction in the Middle East. Only Zoroastrians (considered people of the book by some Shia scholars) and Hindus were kept without being Dhimmis mainly due to the immense size of their adherents.

Also we cannot disregard the massive sectarian violence characterizing the Middle East until the Mongol invasion. Such as the Zanj rebellion, other Khawarij revolts, The Hashashin, The Qarmatians, The famous Fitnas and various Shia revolts claiming relation to Ali ibn Talib.

Let's not make things romantic.

That being said I speak mainly based on conservative Sunni Hanbali school of jurisprudence. I would need to read more into the other schools to see their views on the topic.
 
A) The Amerindians to maintain control of most of South and Central America

ASB. Most of South America and Central America was inhabited by hunter-gatherers, only a small part of the Andes had a complex society. Also, some of the most important Pre-Columbian societies, such as the Aztecs, are in North America.
 
ASB. Most of South America and Central America was inhabited by hunter-gatherers, only a small part of the Andes had a complex society. Also, some of the most important Pre-Columbian societies, such as the Aztecs, are in North America.

Whether the Aztecs are in North or Central America is debatable, especially since we're trying to apply modern terms to an ancient people. Certainly many of the Mayan kingdoms and cities are indisputably part of what is now Central America, and were in the same cultural zone as the Valley of Mexico even if you count Mexico as "North American".

The Andes had farmers and part-time farmers ranging from the Caribbean down to the Chiloe archipelago, and the Amazon and much of tropical South America had at least part-time farmers. Giving Native American farmers resources such as more domesticates or metal hoes would make a lot of territory in tropical savannah environments more exploitable, greatly increasing the range of farming and the populations it could support.
 
Have Vinland be a bit more successful. Viking settlers take smallpox and other diseases over to America, there's a population crash due to the disease, around 1000-1150 AD. By the time European colonisation begins in the 1500, the native population has bounced back and is more resistant to Old World diseases. More natives=better survival for them.

Even in OTL there are Native countries (Bolivia etc)
 
Also, according to conservative readings of Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) only people of the book are allowed to make a Dhimmi treaty. This would account for the extinction of Buddhists throughout land that became under the sway of Islam. As well Manichaens were especially persecuted leading to their complete extinction in the Middle East.
Ouch. yeah, not so cool at all. And I like some aspects of the Buddhist faith. And I might even like some aspects of Manichaenism if the followers had been allowed to live on. I think majority Christian countries also did a fair amount of persecution of Manichaens.

I remember in Columbus's oft-cited letter to the Spanish official, he seemed to draw a distinction between monotheists and pagans. It was something like that. And of course, this was used to justify much of what followed.

And please understand, although I might occasionally romanticize, I usually don't. I am quite aware that human history has been wars, oppression, invasion. you might get relatively lucky and live during a 20 year period of peace and prosperity, but usually not. And we continue building a world in spite of all this, actually fairly successful most of the time, that's perhaps the most remarkable thing of all.
 
Last edited:
ASB. Most of South America and Central America was inhabited by hunter-gatherers, only a small part of the Andes had a complex society. Also, some of the most important Pre-Columbian societies, such as the Aztecs, are in North America.

It seem more.....

"Amazonian savannah’ supported ancient civilizations before rainforest took over. Large parts of the Amazon basin may have supported farming communities and looked more like open savannah than rainforest, prior to the arrival of Europeans in South America, scientists have found.It has been thought that the rainforest was an ancient, pristine wilderness. However, modern rainforest clearance has unearthed hundreds of ancient human-formed earthworks, previously hidden beneath dense jungle.
Their existence has led to the suggestion that people may have cleared parts of the forest for human habitation many centuries ago.Now researchers have found strong evidence of a third scenario. Working in a remote part of modern-day Bolivia, the scientists dug out ‘mud cores’ – samples of sediments from varying depths – from the bottom of two lakes close to known ancient earthwork structures. By analysing pollen and other particles trapped in the mud, the group was able to build up a picture of how the ecosystem has changed, on both local and regional scales, over the previous 6,000 years. Their findings suggest that rather than being rainforest hunter-gatherers, or large-scale forest clearers, the people of the Amazon from 2,500 to 500 years ago were farmers who made use of the naturally open landscape to grow crops and to build monumental-scale earthworks.As the climate became wetter between about 0-300 AD, allowing the rainforest to spread further south, people held onto their settlements by suppressing the incursion of the jungle and keeping areas open for farming. This continued until around 1500, when much of the indigenous population was wiped out, largely as a result of disease spread by European settlers, and dense vegetation soon took over."
http://www.exeter.ac.uk/news/featurednews/title_393435_en.html

......or less recent.....

"The Spanish explorer Francisco de Orellana, the 16th century explorer who was the first European to traverse the Amazon River, reported densely populated regions running hundreds of kilometers along the river, suggesting population levels exceeding even those of today Terra preta (Portuguese pronunciation "black earth" ) is a type of very dark, fertile anthropogenic soil found in the Amazon Basin. Terra preta owes its name to its very high charcoal content, and was made by adding a mixture of charcoal, bone, and manure to the otherwise relatively infertile Amazonian soil. It is very stable and remains in the soil for thousands of years.[ It is also known as "Amazonian dark earth" or "Indian black earth". Terra preta soils are of pre-Columbian nature and were created by humans between 450 BC and AD 950."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_preta#History

.......evidence seems to paint another picture.
 
Whether the Aztecs are in North or Central America is debatable, especially since we're trying to apply modern terms to an ancient people. Certainly many of the Mayan kingdoms and cities are indisputably part of what is now Central America, and were in the same cultural zone as the Valley of Mexico even if you count Mexico as "North American".

The Andes had farmers and part-time farmers ranging from the Caribbean down to the Chiloe archipelago, and the Amazon and much of tropical South America had at least part-time farmers. Giving Native American farmers resources such as more domesticates or metal hoes would make a lot of territory in tropical savannah environments more exploitable, greatly increasing the range of farming and the populations it could support.

Indeed, my mistake. Some of the groups were already in the neolithic. However, this is still far from a complex society.

It seem more.....

"Amazonian savannah’ supported ancient civilizations before rainforest took over. Large parts of the Amazon basin may have supported farming communities and looked more like open savannah than rainforest, prior to the arrival of Europeans in South America, scientists have found.It has been thought that the rainforest was an ancient, pristine wilderness. However, modern rainforest clearance has unearthed hundreds of ancient human-formed earthworks, previously hidden beneath dense jungle.
Their existence has led to the suggestion that people may have cleared parts of the forest for human habitation many centuries ago.Now researchers have found strong evidence of a third scenario. Working in a remote part of modern-day Bolivia, the scientists dug out ‘mud cores’ – samples of sediments from varying depths – from the bottom of two lakes close to known ancient earthwork structures. By analysing pollen and other particles trapped in the mud, the group was able to build up a picture of how the ecosystem has changed, on both local and regional scales, over the previous 6,000 years. Their findings suggest that rather than being rainforest hunter-gatherers, or large-scale forest clearers, the people of the Amazon from 2,500 to 500 years ago were farmers who made use of the naturally open landscape to grow crops and to build monumental-scale earthworks.As the climate became wetter between about 0-300 AD, allowing the rainforest to spread further south, people held onto their settlements by suppressing the incursion of the jungle and keeping areas open for farming. This continued until around 1500, when much of the indigenous population was wiped out, largely as a result of disease spread by European settlers, and dense vegetation soon took over."
http://www.exeter.ac.uk/news/featurednews/title_393435_en.html

......or less recent.....

"The Spanish explorer Francisco de Orellana, the 16th century explorer who was the first European to traverse the Amazon River, reported densely populated regions running hundreds of kilometers along the river, suggesting population levels exceeding even those of today Terra preta (Portuguese pronunciation "black earth" ) is a type of very dark, fertile anthropogenic soil found in the Amazon Basin. Terra preta owes its name to its very high charcoal content, and was made by adding a mixture of charcoal, bone, and manure to the otherwise relatively infertile Amazonian soil. It is very stable and remains in the soil for thousands of years.[ It is also known as "Amazonian dark earth" or "Indian black earth". Terra preta soils are of pre-Columbian nature and were created by humans between 450 BC and AD 950."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_preta#History

.......evidence seems to paint another picture.

This is quite a controversial topic. There's still no way to say if this soil was intentionally created or not. Still, this culture disappeared centuries before 1492 and they were most possibly in the neolithic as well.
 
Indeed, my mistake. Some of the groups were already in the neolithic. However, this is still far from a complex society.

Oh certainly, I don't claim that all of this is the truth, but at least the whole idea seems to have some serious academical backing. Provided the first source is correct, than all of this ended with the arrival of the Europeans and their disease and not centuries before 1492. On the off chance that I simply stumbled on some conspiracy nonsense like Zheng He visited South America, without realizing it feel free to ignore my comment.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zheng_He
 
Oh certainly, I don't claim that all of this is the truth, but at least the whole idea seems to have some serious academical backing. Provided the first source is correct, than all of this ended with the arrival of the Europeans and their disease and not centuries before 1492. On the off chance that I simply stumbled on some conspiracy nonsense like Zheng He visited South America, without realizing it feel free to ignore my comment.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zheng_He

For the sake of argument, let's assume that there was more people there when the Europeans came. It still doesn't prove that a complex agrarian society existed. Scientists only foud this black earth with some cracked pottery, this matches a neolithic society.
 

NothingNow

Banned
The Andes had farmers and part-time farmers ranging from the Caribbean down to the Chiloe archipelago, and the Amazon and much of tropical South America had at least part-time farmers. Giving Native American farmers resources such as more domesticates or metal hoes would make a lot of territory in tropical savannah environments more exploitable, greatly increasing the range of farming and the populations it could support.

Yeah. problem is each of those is a massively disruptive technology, and would introduce new problems, like epidemic disease. That said, developing the idea of quarantines and having something other than syphilis going back to europe would be a nice change, and would reduce pressures at home.

Also, getting rice to the Valley of Mexico would be a massive improvement, since the pre columbian diet there was pretty bad actually.

For the sake of argument, let's assume that there was more people there when the Europeans came. It still doesn't prove that a complex agrarian society existed. Scientists only foud this black earth with some cracked pottery, this matches a neolithic society.

But we've also got Francisco de Orellana's first hand reports of the amazon expeditions, which include first hand reports of settled, complex civilizations. Which combined with statistically unusual concentrations of fruit trees, and the distribution of two types of intentionally created anthropogenic soils in the Amazon basin suggest a very large, decently well integrated civilization that has some very advanced agricultural technologies.

Also, it's a bad idea to just call something neolitihic. It's a rather eurocentric system, and misses out on a lot of complexity, especially from technologies that don't survive in places like the Amazon.
 
Also, it's a bad idea to just call something neolitihic. It's a rather eurocentric system, and misses out on a lot of complexity, especially from technologies that don't survive in places like the Amazon.

I'll second this. What you make tools out of is only one aspect of technology and social development. The Mayans, for example, had a numerical zero-a mathematical concept which was not discovered in Eurasia until well after the 'neolithic' was over. Without writing, the Inca had a level of governmental control over a vast empire that would have made some of their European contemporaries green with envy, and the conquistadors were constantly impressed with the wealth and power of many Native civilizations.
 
Top