Challenge: European reaction to Carthaginian Carribean Empire

[Mr.Wigglemunch]

Ok, I know its kinda sad, but the idea of the Carthaginians reaching the Americas absolutely fascinates me. Now i'll try to give abit of a background for you to work on, ok so around 300 BC Carthage discovers land across the great ocean either by accidant or by expidition ( maybe cause they are pissed off with having to vye with the Greeks over land on their doorstep ). And shortly a permanent population of 1000 establishes a settlement on Cuba, and quickly establishes Hegemony over that area of the island. With the advent of the Punic wars Carthage virtually loses contact although small fleets of people do sail across the ocean occasionaly up til 200 BC although most are lost to storms or land on other islands in the Carribean or go off course completely. European history now continues as it did OTL.

Ok so in 1492 Christopher Colombus trots along into the Carribean and is greated by a suprisingly advanced Civilisation. Now I can imagine the Carthaginians would most likely swell their empire to contain a majority of the islands in the Carribean, the Carib and Arawaks providing a population loyal to Little Carthage ( now a City of 50,000 and the most grand of both the Americas ). Now ofcourse this Carthaginian Empire would ofcourse of absorbed many customs from the Americas, but I also believe they would of given just as many such as Bronze and Iron work, Social structure, there is proof the Carthaginians themselves meddled in Human sacrifice, good sailing knowledge + shipbuilding and most importantly THE WHEEL. Now I believe the Carthaginians would most likely by this point may have outposts as far as southern Brazil ( helped by the fact Arawaks had tribes down that way so easing the process ) and maybe of ventured as far as New England but ofcourse their bulk is on the islands of the Carribean, although I find it likely they push their dominance and influence upon the Maya and the Aztecs ( or the equivelent nations since technological and social advancement may have greatly changed the land )




Now, how would Europe react to this large and powerful empire and its client states of Maya and Aztecs? Would nations fight over alliances with them or simply try to conquer and possibly lose.

 

[Horgus]

The fact that this rich and affluent civilization lacks Catholic Christianity would make it a target for continuous aggression from westward moving European adventurers.

Would likely collapse and end up being ridden with plague and sacked/destroyed/enslaved as the natives had been.

 

[Saepe Fidelis]

Well I reckon that if such a civilisation grew up (although I personally doubt the Carthaginians had the technology to built ocean-going ships) it would be fairly prosperous- the Carthagianians would bring the diseas of Europe early on so the Mesoamericans could become accustomed ot them (or destroyed as OTL). Either way, I reckon that if left to stew without Rome etc. it could evolve some form of monotheism (centred aroudn Ba'al) and embrace human sacrifice (it existed and was widespread but was only carried out grudgingy). Or indeed, the Romans could copy Carthaginian designs (as they did in the 1st Punic War) and follow them. Now there's an idea, Rome and Carthage in the New World. Slightly ASB but a great idea!

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

Historians are in dispute over whether or not Carthaginians and their Punic brethren sacrificed their offspring. Surviving records in the Punic language make no mention of it. And this one fella called Sergio Ribichini seems convinced that the Tophet was simply a cemetary for children whom died of natural causes.

And the Carthaginians would need sturdier ships than Triremes and Quinqueremes to navigate the Atlantic.

 

[Dante]

It would be possible Hawaii is the most isolated island in the world and its "natives" got there on canoes.

 

[Leo Caesius]

Historians are in dispute over whether or not Carthaginians and their Punic brethren sacrificed their offspring. Surviving records in the Punic language make no mention of it. And this one fella called Sergio Ribichini seems convinced that the Tophet was simply a cemetary for children whom died of natural causes.

It's not entirely true that Punic texts don't mention it, since there is a corpus of late Punic inscriptions from the Carthage tophet among other places that mention different types of sacrificial offerings, including blood offerings. I'm not a fan of Ribichini's thesis, I tend to agree more with Paul Mosca on this issue.

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

Carthage was the most powerful state between the Seventh Century BCE until the First Punic War. For all their prospects, I can't see why they would frequently sacrifice their own children, or anyone elses.

 

[Strategos' Risk]

This is a really cool idea.

 

[Leo Caesius]

Carthage was the most powerful state between the Seventh Century BCE until the First Punic War. For all their prospects, I can't see why they would frequently sacrifice their own children, or anyone elses.

But that's not a logical response. You personally may not be able to understand why they do that, but that doesn't mean they didn't.

I actually spent several years cataloging and drawing grave goods from the Carthage Tophet, among other places, so I have some personal experience with this subject. My old boss, Larry Stager, found more than four hundred earns containing human and animal bones buried between 700 and 146 BCE, with the majority from the 4th century. Within the confines of the entire Tophet, which stretches to the edge of the port area, he estimated roughly 20,000 urns were buried, equivalent to about 100 urn burials a year or one every three or four days. According to the classical sources, though, these sacrifices would not have occurred regularly but rather at times of peril.

In the earliest period, 70% of the bones came from extremely young infants; by the 4th century, that number increased to 90%. Most of the urns contain a single child; 30% of these were newborns, and 68% were between the ages of 1-3 years. 32% contained two or more sacrifices, usually the remains of stillborn or premature child and an older child. Stager believes that the stillborn was considered an unacceptable offering and so a second child was offered to fulfill the vow of the dedicant.

The funerary stele that accompany these sacrifices allude to three categories: molchomor or sacrifice of a lamb or kid, molk baal or sacrifice of a child from a wealthy family, and molk adam, or sacrifice of a commoner.

The archaeological evidence is pretty conclusive, and it confirms what the classical and biblical sources have to say about the Phoenicians and the Carthaginians.

 

[Anaxagoras]

Ok so in 1492 Christopher Colombus trots along into the Carribean

There would be so many butterflies in this TL that Christoper Columbus would have never been born and the history of Europe after 200 B.C. would be radically different that it was IOTL.

Aside from that quibble, this is a very interesting idea.

 

[Mr.Wigglemunch]

There would be so many butterflies in this TL that Christoper Columbus would have never been born and the history of Europe after 200 B.C. would be radically different that it was IOTL.

Aside from that quibble, this is a very interesting idea.

Ok there would be butterflies, but as implied the Romans never take up on moving into the Carribean with Carthage at home defeated and the venture deemed not worth it ( and not recorded for arguments sake ) and I think we can assume that Europe would develop quite similarly minus 2000 or so people, with the land across the great Atlantic Ocean quite forgotton apart from perhaps a myth or two.

 

[ninebucks]

What 'Europe'? The idea of any kind of pan-continental consciousness didn't emerge until the later days of the Roman Empire, and it wasn't until Charlemagne's time that sophisticated states started to emerge in Europe that didn't gravitate solely around the Mediterranean.

If Carthage maintains western hegemony, then its not certain that the centre of geo-political gravity will ever drift north into Europe. Southern Europe will probably become heavily Punicised, and the rest of Europe will probably remain much more tribal for much longer than in OTL.

It would be possible Hawaii is the most isolated island in the world and its "natives" got there on canoes.

The Pacific Ocean is generally much less choppy than the Atlantic, hence the name. But yes, I do think that it would be possible for the Carthaginians to eventually develop a reliable method of crossing the Atlantic.

 

[Helios Ra]

There would be so many butterflies in this TL that Christoper Columbus would have never been born and the history of Europe after 200 B.C. would be radically different that it was IOTL.

Aside from that quibble, this is a very interesting idea.

Of course, you could use a line of reasoning that says the settlers in OTL did attempt to sail across the ocean, but failed, so those 1000+ people did indeed disappear effetively, and the only reason we are unaware of the existence of such expeditions is the general wear and tear of two millenia. Along with this, we could assume that no contact occurs between the Western Hemisphere and Eastern, thus isolating the changes in society in the propsed New Carthage. With Vinland and the Viking expeditions/colonizing, we could say that nothing significant from the Carthaginians reached the northern area of North America. It's a stretch, but not completely ASB.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Assuming an initial set of 1000 people from (probably) a single exodus.

Assuming a doubling time of 25 years (what you see in Québec and New England into the 1800s), and a time span of 1700 years then the population of the neo-Carthaginians could reach 1000*2^(17*4)=1/4 septillion people. OK, so we reach carrying capacity first. So, that empire could cover both Americas and be densely populated....

They'd likely have iron, even if not e.g. guns, so the Europeans could have a real problem conquering them...

 

[Typo]

Without constant contact with their homeland, there's a significant chance that even a sizable colonizing population will "go native", when Columbus-analogue comes along, they might just be another tribe with supposely mystical origins from a far-away land.

That been said, it is possible the whole region's technology level gets boosted up to that of iron age Europe in some areas, that might have some effect on conquest of the area. But overall, the Carribean probably still fall to European invasions.

Assuming a doubling time of 25 years (what you see in Québec and New England into the 1800s), and a time span of 1700 years then the population of the neo-Carthaginians could reach 1000*2^(17*4)=1/4 septillion people. OK, so we reach carrying capacity first. So, that empire could cover both Americas and be densely populated....

I'm not even sure if you are serious or not

 

[Mr.Wigglemunch]

Well with the problem of going native doesn't it beg the question of how large was the Arawak population of Cuba in 200BC? If it is immensly more than the Carthaginians then yes ofcourse its very likely and the Arawaks would likely just absorb a few customs and technologies of convenience ( such as the wheel ).

However we could easily change the island since ofcourse crossing the atlantic can spew you anywhere in reality, so they could land on a smaller island, quickly conquer or assimilate the people if there are a few hundred a thousand or two ( I prefer assimilate, it expands the "Carthaginian" population ) and im sure they can establish a base city/town and over time expand to a Carribean sized empire which I believe is doable with Iron and the shipbuilding technology they had. The most important factor is that they maintain Carthaginian society at the start atleast, and the forementioned technologies.

 

[Julius Vogel]

Well with the problem of going native doesn't it beg the question of how large was the Arawak population of Cuba in 200BC? If it is immensly more than the Carthaginians then yes ofcourse its very likely and the Arawaks would likely just absorb a few customs and technologies of convenience ( such as the wheel ).

However we could easily change the island since ofcourse crossing the atlantic can spew you anywhere in reality, so they could land on a smaller island, quickly conquer or assimilate the people if there are a few hundred a thousand or two ( I prefer assimilate, it expands the "Carthaginian" population ) and im sure they can establish a base city/town and over time expand to a Carribean sized empire which I believe is doable with Iron and the shipbuilding technology they had. The most important factor is that they maintain Carthaginian society at the start atleast, and the forementioned technologies.

On that note - can anyone think of examples of stable societies formed by very small groups of settlers that have 1) managed to not go too native (in that the long term culture/regime is largely that of the original settlers) and 2) managed to at least maintain a similar level of technological achievement as the source society?

I've seen it bandied about that there is a rough minimum number of people to form a viable, continuous society that doesn't decline in technology, assuming no two way communication or exchange. E.g Tasmania, some of the smaller isolated Pacific Islands and New Zealand pre British conquest. I find this theory kind of believable in a pre literate or even pre mass educated society. Perhaps if a small colony was able to travel with a huge library (waterproof of course!) of the collected wisdom of their society, things might be different

 

[Condottiero]

Why not make them visigoths instead of Carthaginians? Just make the spanish explorers find something they expected: the seven cities of Zibola or the Island of Antilla. Some catholic bishops gather several hundreds of catholic hispanorromans and visigoths and flee to the west after the islamic invasion of Hispania. They arrive to a small caribbean island and build a city. They have iron, wheels, cattle and they are christians.

When Columbus arrive they have expanded conquering some islands, even Cuba, Puerto Rico or Jamaica. They are christians (although probably heretics to a XVI century catholic) and descendants (although intermarried with natives) from the Goths...

 

[Mr.Wigglemunch]

On that note - can anyone think of examples of stable societies formed by very small groups of settlers that have 1) managed to not go too native (in that the long term culture/regime is largely that of the original settlers) and 2) managed to at least maintain a similar level of technological achievement as the source society?

I've seen it bandied about that there is a rough minimum number of people to form a viable, continuous society that doesn't decline in technology, assuming no two way communication or exchange. E.g Tasmania, some of the smaller isolated Pacific Islands and New Zealand pre British conquest. I find this theory kind of believable in a pre literate or even pre mass educated society. Perhaps if a small colony was able to travel with a huge library (waterproof of course!) of the collected wisdom of their society, things might be different

Ofcourse, but the idea as mentioned in my original post is that a small settlement has been created likely in a natural harbour, if this is the case on a small island where the Carthaginians are the primary culture I believe this is quite capable. Now the Carthaginians have brought with them several hugely revolutionary technologies the natives lack. 1) The Wheel 2) Ship Construction techniques 3) Social Structure 4) Bronze and Iron work. Now with these technologically superior aspects they could quite easily dominate the surrounding islands, and then, as the Carthaginians did so well ( and sometimes not so well ) they could get the locals to fight their wars. Now im not saying that Europe will discover the Classical Carthage of ancient times we know ( and I love ), but they probably will find an amusingly andvanced civilisation amongst the Mesoamericans of whome they likely dominate.

 

[DjBaraca]

Personal I think that European (Spanish) would simply conquer it using their technologic superiority. Guns vs Swords. But I think that there by a massive culture shock in Europe