Lands of Ice and Mice: An Alternate History of the Thule

Status
Not open for further replies.
That's an amazing post. A quick check shows at least some of the Arctic seals have freshwater sub-populations. So it seems possible.

There's some pretty big lakes out in the arctic, notably Great Bear and Great Slave Lakes, both of which are comparable in size to Lake Baikal, which hosts a population of 60,000 freswater seals.

It would take some doing to getting seals there, but if the Baikal Seals are any precedent they would thrive. Smaller lakes are more of a concern, but there's still plenty of rivers and medium sized lakes.

A couple of concerns - basically, seals need to breath. If the lake surface freezes over completely, then that's not good. Fresh water freezes more quickly than salt water. Possibly that can be remedied by making breathing holes, possibly building shelters over them. I dunno.

Secondly, seals survive by eating fish. So if the lake is producing valued fish species, then that's probably not a good trade off. You'd get more productive edible biomass by harvesting the Fish species yourself, rather than harvesting seals.

If the Lake is producing a sufficient surplus of fish, then you could support a population of seals, and a Thule fishery. The trouble is that seals are voracious eaters and reproduce fast. So you'd have to constantly harvest the population, and manage it very carefully.

On the other hand, if the Lake contained mostly inedible fish species or had been fished out, then possibly, there'd be much less downside to introducing seals.

Would walrus tolerate fresh water. Might be a struggle to get them there, but if there is a population of benthic mollusks and bottom dwellers, then there might be some net benefit, since that's biomass not normally harvested by humans.

On the other hand, the likely victims would be lake sturgeon, which are harvested, so maybe a net negative there.

And lake bottom life might not be able to sustain the sort of feeding that Walrus do.

I would also be concerned about collateral effects - notably the seals ending up with freshwater parasites that they had no defenses to, and possibly diseases.

Still, a very intriguing idea.
 
I find myself wondering if Norse contact will spread to Iceland.

Basically, Iceland was in bad straits in this time period. The local tree cover was being entirely denuded, turning much of the region into a wasteland. Crop returns dropped dramatically as well, with many farms abandoned entirely.

But ITTL, the Thule package will be, for the most part, easily transplanted, particularly to the highlands where the climate is fully Tundra-like. I can't imagine that the Icelanders will develop the earthen works themselves without importing some Thule to do the work however - or if they were forced to do so after the Thule conquered them.
 
A general issue with early European contact (not with the Norse, but the later cycle) is that European Christendom, during the Reformation/Counterreformation conflict) was obsessed with "witchcraft" as a, um, "burning" issue. The rulers took it much more seriously than in the Middle Ages actually; King James was very concerned about it. Well, the shaman-based worldview of the Thule is an open and shut case of pagan witchcraft by any straightforward Bible thumper's view; all their painstakingly accumulated knowledge of how to make crops and domesticates work in the Arctic is framed in pagan religious terms. The more sophisticated and empirically clever this corpus is, the more it will look like Renaissance/Early Modern sorcery.

One thing that will likely go on with the Thule is that Christianity is going to find it very tough going. The Shamanic traditions are going to be very deeply rooted, and worst of all, they're going to be very very effective. They produce empirical results. That's going to be very hard for Christian missionaries to counter.
 
I find myself wondering if Norse contact will spread to Iceland.

I'm pretty certain that in this ATL, the Norse will reach Iceland. ;)

The thing I'm toying with is whether the Thule will follow them back there. I'm kind of tinkering with the notion of the Thule colonizing the arctic islands - Svalbard, Franz Josef, Novaya Zemla, etc. Svalbard was never colonized by humans, but if the Thule ever got there, they've got enough cards in their deck, that they might be able to make a go of it. Svalbard is fairly cold in the summer (ocean cooling, higher temperatures inland, but not much higher, on the other hand, more water), and likely relatively marginal, even for Thule agriculture, you might see Ellesmere agriculture in some areas, working on a four year cycle. But it does sustain Reindeer and Fox, and its terrific for whaling and fishing. On the other hand, efforts to transplant Arctic Hare and Musk Ox failed, which shows how tough it is. Franz Josef would be tough going, even for the Thule, only Fox and Polar Bear survive there now, used to be Reindeer, but they didn't make it.

Basically, Iceland was in bad straits in this time period. The local tree cover was being entirely denuded, turning much of the region into a wasteland. Crop returns dropped dramatically as well, with many farms abandoned entirely.

But ITTL, the Thule package will be, for the most part, easily transplanted, particularly to the highlands where the climate is fully Tundra-like. I can't imagine that the Icelanders will develop the earthen works themselves without importing some Thule to do the work however - or if they were forced to do so after the Thule conquered them.

Interesting notions there. I don't think that the Thule could conquer the Icelanders, but they might be able to carve a big chunk of the Island. You could have a situation of North Iceland, ruled by Thule, and South Iceland, ruled by Norse. Could make for a pretty stirring saga as the Iceland Norse fight for their lives against an invading horde. Caribou Knights versus Horsemen, Musk Ox vs Cattle, Skin boats vs Longboats, literally an entire invading ecology of domesticated plants and animals.
 
Last edited:
One thing that will likely go on with the Thule is that Christianity is going to find it very tough going. The Shamanic traditions are going to be very deeply rooted, and worst of all, they're going to be very very effective. They produce empirical results. That's going to be very hard for Christian missionaries to counter.

Oh, good. The Jesuits or analogs might make more progress, eventually, the way they did for a while in China, by trying to convince the leadership and themselves of the commonalities of the two traditions, and by sophisticated use of Catholicism's aptitude for syncretism. But I'd expect even them to produce only a small cadre of converts, and they'd be politically vulnerable both among Thule and back in Rome.

At that, Thule shamanism would be much less amenable to being portrayed as a "virtuous Pagan" approach to true Christianity than Confucianism; despite centuries of political progress I don't think even a powerful, shrewd and ruthless Inuit high king would approach anything like a Chinese Emperor's unquestioned authority; the shamans will be a diverse bunch and the majority of them would simply reject Christianity. So, very tough sledding for the missionaries and for the sake of cultural diversity, that's good.

I wasn't thinking of the Europeans talking the Thule into starving as good Christians; I was thinking of them going on zealous rampages and wiping out perfectly good settlements and leaving a wasteland.

Be nice to avoid this but its the sort of thing I fear early modern Europeans were capable of. If they do this their name is frozen mud in the remaining Thule territories (unless they are allied with some Thule faction that was mortal enemies with the ruined one) but it might happen if some power--England, say--knows they are being forced out of the Arctic and wants to scorch the earth as much as possible as revenge on the Thule and a barrier to their European rivals. The religious angle gives them some political cover for the atrocity back in Europe.

Generations later, if politics shifts and the people who did this have new opportunities in the Arctic, they can apologize by blaming their ancestors' religious fanaticism, and point out that modern sensibilities frown on such "enthusiasm."
 
I'm pretty certain that in this ATL, the Norse will reach Iceland. ;)

The thing I'm toying with is whether the Thule will follow them back there. I'm kind of tinkering with the notion of the Thule colonizing the arctic islands...

Isn't Iceland rather far across open sea? The Thule are good at crossing the frozen Arctic ocean, and I know they had good skin boats, but how would they be at navigating long distances out of sight of land on waters that aren't Arctic? Would the North Atlantic actually be easier than what they are used to? How far out of sight of land were they used to going?

These are questions, note the question marks, I honestly don't know. I'd think they could reach all the places we've mentioned them canonically being in so far by coastwise navigation; to reach these other Arctic Ocean islands they'd have to strike out across open waters.

If they can reach Svalbard at all, I'd say that makes Iceland clearly attainable; if they can reach Iceland I don't know it proves they can reach the other islands or not.

Another thing--Iceland was marginal, but still a part of the European world from its Norse settlement on. Communications may have been minimal, but they were involved in European society, so if they got invaded by Thule, the Europeans in general would know something about the Thule.

European culture and the dynasties and so forth would be somewhat butterflied by the conflict--for instance, if any Scandinavian king wants to claim overlordship of Iceland he'd better send some forces to help the Nordic part he claims defeat the Thule, or at least make a treaty with them. That latter would put the Thule on the European political map for sure.

I've been assuming that Europe in 1500 was essentially the same in this timeline as OTL, but of course that assumption isn't proven!

I'm just pointing out, while the butterflies of contact in Greenland can be contained, contact in Iceland means committing the timeline to a much earlier effective POD in Europe. OTL Medieval Europe knew Greenland existed and also that it was very marginal; even vague traveler's tales of some fabled city of ice and silver in Greenland or beyond would draw much attention in that direction much earlier than 1492; in the mid 15th century at the latest, someone with a better globe than Columbus preferred to credit would realize here might be the Northwest Passage, long before anyone tries to circumnavigate Africa.
 
Isn't Iceland rather far across open sea? The Thule are good at crossing the frozen Arctic ocean, and I know they had good skin boats, but how would they be at navigating long distances out of sight of land on waters that aren't Arctic? Would the North Atlantic actually be easier than what they are used to? How far out of sight of land were they used to going?

Svalbard and Iceland are roughly 500 to 600 miles from their closest points to Greenland, so its a big leap.

As nearly as I can determine, I don't think that they had to cross more than 100 km of open water or sea ice to reach any point within their territory. The Greenland to Ellesmere crossings were at their closest about 20 or 30 km. The crossing to Quebec/Labrador, no more than 50 to 100 km. Alaska to Siberia, less than 100.

On the other hand, the Thule and Dorset before them hunted Bowhead whales, fifty or sixty foot monsters coming in at huge tonnages. Which suggests that they went quite a ways into open water.

These are questions, note the question marks, I honestly don't know.

You and me both. I've been wondering, but I can't really say.

I'd think they could reach all the places we've mentioned them canonically being in so far by coastwise navigation; to reach these other Arctic Ocean islands they'd have to strike out across open waters.

Svalbard was apparently accessible to Arctic Fox, Polar Bear and Caribou. Obviously, these are pretty isolated visits, and the local populations are probably genetically distinct. But it seems somewhat reasonable to assume that if critters could get out there, probably travelling across Winter Ice, then the Thule might manage it. Of course, how would they know where it is, or how to find their way to it. The most likely outcome is starving to death lost on sea ice.

On the other hand, if the Thule did get into deep water whaling, then they might well skirt the arctic ocean, and might find their way to Svalbard.

If they can reach Svalbard at all, I'd say that makes Iceland clearly attainable; if they can reach Iceland I don't know it proves they can reach the other islands or not.

Maybe not. Svalbard tends to be locked in sea ice for a lot of the year. Iceland is mostly in open waters. Depends on how the Thule travel. A lot of the 19th and early 20th century arctic expeditions basically used Inuit technology, dogs and sleds over sea ice to try and reach the pole. If the Thule were taking similar means - Caribou or Dog powered sleds, they could probably reach Svalard in approximately a week, with a lot of luck.

If they're going by Skin boats, I just don't know. We might assume that ATL Thule boatbuilding becomes much more sophisticated, pulled along by the increasing technical complexity and sophistication of other aspects of Thule culture. But it's really tough to say.

Another thing--Iceland was marginal, but still a part of the European world from its Norse settlement on. Communications may have been minimal, but they were involved in European society, so if they got invaded by Thule, the Europeans in general would know something about the Thule.

Yep. The Butterflies might just be too big to manage. On the other hand, maybe it would be fun to have a split off Timeline, hiving from this one.

I've been assuming that Europe in 1500 was essentially the same in this timeline as OTL, but of course that assumption isn't proven!

Simpler if it was, definitely.

I'm just pointing out, while the butterflies of contact in Greenland can be contained, contact in Iceland means committing the timeline to a much earlier effective POD in Europe. OTL Medieval Europe knew Greenland existed and also that it was very marginal; even vague traveler's tales of some fabled city of ice and silver in Greenland or beyond would draw much attention in that direction much earlier than 1492; in the mid 15th century at the latest, someone with a better globe than Columbus preferred to credit would realize here might be the Northwest Passage, long before anyone tries to circumnavigate Africa.

It might confuse Europeans. The Thule might be mistaken for Asians, which might imply that they're some sort of North-Chinese tribe. Perhaps Mongols.

But I'd rather steer clear of that.
 
It would take some doing to getting seals there, but if the Baikal Seals are any precedent they would thrive. Smaller lakes are more of a concern, but there's still plenty of rivers and medium sized lakes.

Smaller lakes are probably possible, considering there is a subspecies of the Ringed Seal in Lake Saimaa in Finland, which is only around 1,700 square miles. Considering this is a wild population, ones managed by humans could probably subsist in even smaller areas.

A couple of concerns - basically, seals need to breath. If the lake surface freezes over completely, then that's not good. Fresh water freezes more quickly than salt water. Possibly that can be remedied by making breathing holes, possibly building shelters over them. I dunno.

I think it depends upon the species. Ringed seals (from which all the OTL freshwater populations descend) make their own breathing holes. Considering they can do this even in lakes in the Baltic, (roughly on the latitude of the southern tip of Greenland) I don't think it's a big step for them to do so in the so in the Northwest Territories, despite the ice being a bit thicker.

More generally, although they're perceived to freeze over entirely, I don't think even the Great Bear Lake, which is the furthest north, freezes over at its river outlet.

Secondly, seals survive by eating fish. So if the lake is producing valued fish species, then that's probably not a good trade off. You'd get more productive edible biomass by harvesting the Fish species yourself, rather than harvesting seals.

The way I'm looking at it, seals hunting efficiency makes up the difference. Thule have probably given up on ice fishing, because it's time consuming and really only makes sense for a hunter gatherer. However, it's pretty easy for a seal to continue to feed during the months the lake is iced over, which could be quite long. In the summer months, hopefully providing offal would convince seals to fish less in the water. Overall, it probably means lower fish yields, but it's also much easier to grab a seal if you need one in the winter than salt, dry, and store a large number of fish.

Would walrus tolerate fresh water. Might be a struggle to get them there, but if there is a population of benthic mollusks and bottom dwellers, then there might be some net benefit, since that's biomass not normally harvested by humans.

I don't think any marine mammal has an actual biological need for salt water. Whales and pinnipeds avoid drinking entirely, and get all the water they need from their food. They do excrete extra salts that aren't needed through their kidneys, but their body can regulate its electrolytes, so that the salt level won't fall if it is eating less salty food.

There certainly are a number of freshwater mussel species in North America, but I'm fairly sure in general freshwater bivalves don't form the huge stands they do in the ocean, so I'm not sure that a Walrus would find enough to eat.

Interesting notions there. I don't think that the Thule could conquer the Icelanders, but they might be able to carve a big chunk of the Island. You could have a situation of North Iceland, ruled by Thule, and South Iceland, ruled by Norse. Could make for a pretty stirring saga as the Iceland Norse fight for their lives against an invading horde. Caribou Knights versus Horsemen, Musk Ox vs Cattle, Skin boats vs Longboats, literally an entire invading ecology of domesticated plants and animals.

I think the Thule might be able to conquer Iceland if the invasion came at an inopportune time when Norway (or later Denmark) wouldn't be able to help. I'm unsure of the total population of Iceland then, but by 1900 it was only 78,000, so it clearly wasn't large 500 years before. Admittedly, this would be an unlikely happenstance.

More likely, I think, would be the Thule get invited to settle some areas that the Icelanders think are barren wastelands, and within a few centuries, given the superior crop package for the environment, the Thule become numerically dominant.

Isn't Iceland rather far across open sea? The Thule are good at crossing the frozen Arctic ocean, and I know they had good skin boats, but how would they be at navigating long distances out of sight of land on waters that aren't Arctic? Would the North Atlantic actually be easier than what they are used to? How far out of sight of land were they used to going?

My assumption is the Norse will tell them roughly where Iceland is. They may or may not choose to explore, but surely they have reason to do so, given what we know about their history ITTL.
 
Just posting to say, great TL, can't wait for more!

My assumption is the Norse will tell them roughly where Iceland is. They may or may not choose to explore, but surely they have reason to do so, given what we know about their history ITTL.

You know, this makes me wonder... the Thule know there are lands south of Greenland, correct? After all, if they're hooked into the greater North American trading network they know there's lands down there. The Norse are still going to want to expand, but, finding Greenland occupied, they may move further south if the Thule tell them there's land there... Norse Quebec perhaps? They'd certainly find the climate more to their liking.
 
Smaller lakes are probably possible, considering there is a subspecies of the Ringed Seal in Lake Saimaa in Finland, which is only around 1,700 square miles. Considering this is a wild population, ones managed by humans could probably subsist in even smaller areas.

Going by the Lake Baikal example, which is a siberian lake - it's about 12,000 square miles, supports 60,000 seals. That's a population density of 5 seals per square mile. Now, Baikal is an extremely deep lake, but my impression is that probably the vast majority of biological activity is within the first 50 or 100 feet.

Looking for comparable figures on Caribou and Reindeer population density, I find an estimate of 2.4 reindeer per square mile in Lapland and 2.1 humans. Likely humans are taking up some of the territory, so a realistic maximum reindeer/population density would probably be 3.0 to 3.5 animals.

An average 5.0 Seal population density per lake square mile wouldn't be too bad. Even a 4.0 would be okay. The Baikal seals are among the smallest breeds, but for now, we'll just set that aside.

I think it depends upon the species. Ringed seals (from which all the OTL freshwater populations descend) make their own breathing holes. Considering they can do this even in lakes in the Baltic, (roughly on the latitude of the southern tip of Greenland) I don't think it's a big step for them to do so in the so in the Northwest Territories, despite the ice being a bit thicker.

Questionable. Fresh water freezes faster than sea water, and worse, lake currents are not nearly as strong as ocean currents. So the farther into the Arctic you get, the worse freeze ups are.

More generally, although they're perceived to freeze over entirely, I don't think even the Great Bear Lake, which is the furthest north, freezes over at its river outlet.

Possible. I'll check into that.

The way I'm looking at it, seals hunting efficiency makes up the difference. Thule have probably given up on ice fishing, because it's time consuming and really only makes sense for a hunter gatherer. However, it's pretty easy for a seal to continue to feed during the months the lake is iced over, which could be quite long. In the summer months, hopefully providing offal would convince seals to fish less in the water. Overall, it probably means lower fish yields, but it's also much easier to grab a seal if you need one in the winter than salt, dry, and store a large number of fish.

Possibly. But there's net fishing and fish traps. Even if the Thule don't have it, it's likely that they could acquire it from southern aboriginal groups. I believe that both the Cree and Dene practiced forms of net fishing even before European contact.

Seals would not only be fish-competitors, but they'd also be tough on nets. Lots of chance of the creatures getting caught in nets, and worse, of tearing up the nets.

An there's a huge difference in biomass. Taking the fish directly is a lot more productive. Going by Lake Baikal's seal population some 60,000 seals are eating 700,000 lbs of fish. That works out to roughly 1200 pounds of fish per animal. Assuming three years for a seal harvest, then a 360 lb seal would take roughly 3600 lbs of edible fish. Human food requirements are about 700 a year. So one seal represents feeding one man for half a year, and foregoing enough fish food to feed five men.

Obviously, my numbers are very very loose ballpark. I'm just trying to work out the subsistence economics.

By the way, in terms of feeding seals offal? Are you talking shit or faeces? Garbage? Or the usual blood and guts, internal organs, etc. from animal harvest that would normally be fed to dogs? You'd need an awful lot of it to maintain a population of seals. You'd probably get a better pay off feeding it to dogs, or low status humans. Or ensuring a stable population of verminators.

A lot would depend on the edibility of the fish population. Inedible scrap fish wouldn't be appealing, and there'd be a preference for seal. On the other hand, if the lake has productive species, then seal become a poor choice. It would be like growing lion steaks.

It's an interesting idea, but I think it would be pretty hard to fly.


There certainly are a number of freshwater mussel species in North America, but I'm fairly sure in general freshwater bivalves don't form the huge stands they do in the ocean, so I'm not sure that a Walrus would find enough to eat.

Most likely they'd be hell on sturgeon. Yeah, scratch that. Riverine or lake Walrus, not a good idea.


I think the Thule might be able to conquer Iceland if the invasion came at an inopportune time when Norway (or later Denmark) wouldn't be able to help. I'm unsure of the total population of Iceland then, but by 1900 it was only 78,000, so it clearly wasn't large 500 years before. Admittedly, this would be an unlikely happenstance.

Iceland's population reached a peak of about 70,000, around 1100. The Little Ice Age was pretty brutal, halving the population, but that's still 35,000.

I think that you'd probably need a force of some 2000 to 5000 thule to conquer Iceland, even at its lowest population ebb. I figure in a population of 35,000, let's assume 18,000 males, assuming cohorts of 25%/50%/25%, ie, 25 % between zero and 12, and 25% over 50, with the remainder running the gammut but relatively battle worthy... that's 9000 male defenders. Throw in another 3000 female shield maidens. 12,000 defenders. But scattered over the whole of the island, disorganized, and likely fought in smaller groups, and heavily engaged in subsistence activities.

So assuming the force is organized and centralized, the Norse don't mass up but can be divided and overcome, then... maybe a group of 2000 to 5000 can make it. It would be tough though, tough as hell.

http://academic.emporia.edu/aberjame/ice/lec19/holocene.htm


More likely, I think, would be the Thule get invited to settle some areas that the Icelanders think are barren wastelands, and within a few centuries, given the superior crop package for the environment, the Thule become numerically dominant.

Interesting but unlikely, at least not during the medieval period. I could imagine this perhaps taking place in the later era of European contact, perhaps around or after 1800. During this time, the European powers were getting into population relocations. Still, long shot.


My assumption is the Norse will tell them roughly where Iceland is. They may or may not choose to explore, but surely they have reason to do so, given what we know about their history ITTL.

Check out the map. A five hundred mile sea voyage with only a rough idea of Iceland's location? I think that the Thule seagoing package is debateable. The navigation package is going to be tough though. Maybe they'd acquire a navigation package from the Greenland Norse.

I think though, that I'm still skeptical. And Thule in Iceland or Svalbard may be guilding the lilly.
 
Just posting to say, great TL, can't wait for more!

Thanks muchly!

You know, this makes me wonder... the Thule know there are lands south of Greenland, correct? After all, if they're hooked into the greater North American trading network they know there's lands down there. The Norse are still going to want to expand, but, finding Greenland occupied, they may move further south if the Thule tell them there's land there... Norse Quebec perhaps? They'd certainly find the climate more to their liking.

Well a couple of thoughts. I'm not so clear that the Thule were hooked into the trading network. They didn't get along well with the southern peoples who were ethnically unrelated and whose languages were quite alien.

But even if they were, it's not like that gave them any idea of how extensive the world was. The way the old trading networks worked was like a game of telephone, a series of chains of local exchanges working their way back and forth. The border thule would know the groups closest to them, and no more. The inner Thule would know the border Thule, but not the neighboring groups. The coastal Thule would know the inner Thule but not the border Thule. The Island Thle would know the coastal Thule, but not the border Thule.

At best, you'd have extremely vague tales and rumors growing more imprecise and useless with every step. The Greenland Thule, maybe not much more than that there are Ellesmere Thule, and Thule south of Ellesmere, and maybe some strange peoples much further down.

It wouldn't be until the Ellesmere diaspora that you'd start to have an organized large scale trading network across Thule lands that slipped a tentacle down to Greenland. By that time, the Greenland Norse were clearly in decline.

You'd have to wait till the era of literacy and the exchange of notes from great distances before the Thule start to have any organized concept of how big their world is or who else exists in it.
 
They called it Bruce!

The Thule of the hunter/gatherer era were relatively healthy, due mainly to a thin population density, cold temperatures which often inhibited the spread of parasites and diseases, and general lack of diseases.

Not completely healthy of course, the animals that they fed upon, particularly caribou were often afflicted with parasites, there were icky things like tapeworms and flukes. Illnesses did come and go. Malnutrition stunted growth, vitamin deficiencies lead to sickness. Life was often hard and unforgiving.

But on the whole, not a lot of infectious disease. What there was had a lot of trouble spreading from community to communty. Anything virulent tended to burn itself out.

But that world was changing, agriculture increased population density, communication between groups made for greater pools of potential infection. Domestication of animals brought the Thule into contact with the diseases of other species, and long contact increased the chance that some of these diseases would evolve and adapt to human hosts.

For animals like the Musk Ox and Ptarmigan, that risk was minimal. These creatures lived in small groups, were not migratory, but tended to hang around the same neighborhoods. They were fairly low risk for infection and disease themselves, and unlikely to host diverse and evolving colonies of bacteria and virus ready to mutate to new hosts.

Caribou were a different story. Caribou lived in dense herds of hundreds, even thousands of members. That was a huge pool of infection, for diseases to pass back and forth between animals, always evolving and adapting.

Moreover, Caribou travelled. Migratory animals, they could cross a thousand miles in a year, which constantly exposed them to new environments, new bacterial and biological landscapes, new opportunities for infection and cross infection. The bacterial landscape of the Caribou was far more lively, there were more bacteria, more infections and cross infections, more transmission, and more varieties.

This posed difficulties for Musk Ox, which often sickened or died when associated too closely with Caribou. Musk Ox farmers and breeders learned to make sure that the animals did not get too close, and separated their stock at the first sign of illness.

It was from Caribou that the Thule acquired their three great plagues.

The first of these we'll call Bruce, for Brucellosis.

Brucellosis is a bacterial disease which is endemic in most Caribou herds in Alaska and Northern Canada. It's actually quite widespread and well known under a number of names, including in the mediteranean and central asia. Varieties of Brucellosis affect cattle and bison, sheep and goats, caribou and reindeer, and even seals. A longstanding disease, it seems to have divided into its own animal friendly species.

The variety that concerns us here is Brucella suis, endemic to the Caribou of North America.

In OTL Brucellosis is a reportable disease in Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) veterinarians require the testing of reindeer prior to importation into Canada and 2 years thereafter for all cervid herds.

The major impacts of brucellosis in caribou are abortion and sterility. Retained placentas, swollen joints, enlarged testicles and abscesses are signs of possible infection. It is believed that brucellosis is primarily spread through contact with infectious uterine discharges following abortion.

Abortion in caribou usually occurs 1 to 2 months before normal calving. Calves may be born alive but are weak and die within a few days. Other calves born to infected females can survive but remain infected as carriers of the disease. Typically, females abort the first calf following infection. Although they may abort the next year, they can produce viable calves in future years.

Wide varieties of wild animals can be infected with brucellosis. These also include elk, bison, caribou, reindeer, wolves, fox and bears. It can jump to dogs. And in OTL, we have about 100 people a year who may be infected with the animal brucellosis strains.

All right, danger characteristics - it's a known species jumper, moving caribou to elk, bison, moose, and to quite different species, wolves, foxes, and bears. It's pretty common in northern herds, that's another risk factor.

Now, it doesn't normally strike humans in OTL. Why? Probably cause the usual form of transmission is contact with infected uterine discharges and abortions. We wouldn't touch that stuff with a ten foot pole in the wild normally, hunter gatherers would have to be desperate to go near a fresh caribou abortion, or uterine discharge. On the other hand, bears, foxes and wolves are scavengers and probably making meals or closely examining that stuff, which explains why it crosses over to them. In OTL of course, the Inuit and other hunter gatherers don't go near that crap and don't get infected.

But... start domesticating caribou, and you might have people coming into contact with infected animals and particularly the uterine discharges and aborted birth. Almost certainly they'll be in proximity, and I can imagine circumstances of contact.

At which point, Brucellosis infections start to jump to humans. Given how prevalent Brucellosis is in Caribou, and how easily it moves to infecting humans, foxes, wolves, bear, bison, etc., we can expect cross infections to begin occurring from time to time almost immediately.

Actually, we can anticipate a number of infection events taking place before a form of Brucellosis adapts to human residence. Brucella homo.

So let’s say that Brucellosis adapted to human residence, a human specific and human transmissible form of the disease happens within the first 50 to 100 years of Caribou domestication. Say, roughly 1300 to 1350.

The human specific Brucellosis will resemble the animal form, but it will probably develop its own specific, though similar, pathology. What does it do there? Going by the Caribou, we can assume glandular swelling and dysfunction - testicles, thyroid, lymph nodes etc., reproductive malfunction, sterility, abcesses and swollen joints which suggests inflammation of cartilage, some neurological impairment.

Immediately fatal? Probably not. Or at least, a decent survival rate. I think the trajectory probably runs a few months at least. I'm not seeing anything here which would move straight to respiratory failure or organ shutdown. Your systems would keep on operating. You'd keep on breathing just fine, heart would keep on operating, food and water would pass through your system. Most people infected, say 85%, will survive the first month or so.

What you might get instead would be a slow death as continuing wear and tear and malfunction tore you down. Also, you'd have cumulative function impairment as cartilage inflammation slowly criples you, you can't move, your ankles and knees can't bear weight, hands so inflamed you can't pick things up, etc. You'd probably see inflammation of the nose and ears, all swollen and puffy. Some respiratory distress as cartilage inflammation in the nose messes with the sinuses. Lymph glands, thyroids and testicles visibly swollen, probably pain and inflammation in the urethra and cumulative kidney malfunction. You'd get weaker and weaker, more twisted up, more in cumulative pain until you died. You'd die faster if there was no one taking care of you, you could last a while if you had some really good nurses to look after you.

Or, you wouldn't die at all. Let's say less than 15% mortality in the first two months of infection. The other 85% get better. Sort of.

There are long term effects. Severe inflammations of cartilage, that's likely to leave some traces. Survivors are probably not moving around too good, though level of impairment would vary from a mild limp to being a near full cripple.

However, survivors are likely not going to be popular, as a result of fear of contagion, and as a result of movement and glandular impairment. And I assume that survivors may be left with enlarged or malformed noses or ears, so they're not going to win beauty contests. That will be the visible mark of survivors.

Note the description said that Caribou born from mothers with Brucellosis are likely to be carriers. So let’s assume that it doesn’t really die, it just subsides, maybe flares up from time to time, and while its in the system, the victim becomes a carrier. They may or may not be fully infectious, the infectiousness may vary depending on flare ups of the disease.

Perhaps like malaria or some other diseases, it takes up long term residence, slowly degrading the system, but flaring up virulently from time to time. Mortality rate over two to four years may be as high as 30%.

Anyway, something like this, well its not enough to just jump species. It's got to find a way to propagate among humans. And frankly, we're even less enthusiastic about our own abortions and uterine discharges than we are about Caribous. So that method of transmission is out. Brucellosis definitely seems to be a fluid transmitted disease though.

I think that what we'd see, particularly among humans, given our randy ways, is that Brucellosis is going to be an STD. And the window of infection and transmission is probably going to be in the ramping up stage of the disease.

As noted, it doesn't interfere with respiration, cardiac, muscle, so in the early stages, the disease will be unnoticeable. Even as it progresses, its probably going to be easy to overlook. You wake up in the morning, feeling creeky, well, doesn't everyone at some point or another. Who checks to see if their testicles feel bigger today? So, while it's taking its toll and slowing you down, its jumping to the next candidates.

Now, that means that transmissions are probably going to be roundabout, to husbands and wives, lovers, affairs, travellers, but it'll get around. But it'll probably be a self-limiting ailment. Let's face it, survivors, even if they continue to be infectious, will probably be out of the dating pool. And there's a limited opportunity to spread, and once it works its way through the sexual partners pool thats it. Yeah right.

But the Thule community will probably learn to limit it. Once there's an outbreak, legs will close, architecture will wilt. And people are probably going to learn to make the connection between awful things happening in Caribou vaginas and sickness, and gather up the wherewithal to stay clear of that stuff. It's not going to be a hard link to figure out, the likeliest earliest victims will usually be the caribou herder, his wife, son or daughter.

Still, even with reasonable consciousness of what to do about it, the disease will probably still hang about in the background, through asymptotic carriers, slow transmission, and recurrent crossovers.

Nevertheless, the Inuit/Thule are most likely to be able to figure it out early and deal with it appropriately, so while it may hurt a bit, they're in a position to limit that damage and keep limiting it in the future.

Not so much with other populations though.

One consequence of Brucellosis might be when the Inuit/Thule meet the Euros. Euros got some honkers on them. So the Inuit may default into a belief that the Euros are diseased perverts. I mean, they all have big noses!

Or, if the Thule have a nasty streak to them, they may give Brucellosis sufferers to Europeans as slaves or concubines. Giving them the gift that keeps on giving. There may be some element of biological warfare going on at some points.

And Brucellosis might well get introduced into the European traders and sailors. If so, the relatively slow progress of the disease will mean that it makes its way back to Europe, live and infectious, and into the European sexual mainstream.

In particular, Brucellosis is probably going to be feared as the sailor’s disease. And it may actually have an impact on seafaring and shipping. Basically, fewer sailors and less able sailors.

A reluctance to go to ports where the disease is widespread. Basically think of it as syphilis kid brother.

One side effect is that Brucellosis may well inhibit the travel of pathogens to the new world, because any weakening of the system will cause it to flare up and disable the victim.

Brucellosis may also move south, though its hard to say how virulently. Low population densities and relatively stable clan and family structures should slow it down or stop it. But remember that this is a disease that slows down the sufferers.

I can see raiding parties capturing females, particularly the slower ones who for some reason don’t seem to run away as fast or as easily, raiding parties turn into raping parties, or captured females get taken back as slaves and have to ... erm... perform services. Next thing you know, a lot of the males have it, and have passed it on to the females. Suddenly, they're not moving around so well, vulnerable to raids from rivals, slow moving types get taken as slaves, and the gift keeps on giving. Or they try and get rid of the now lesser performing individuals through outmarriages, and it spreads that way.

Away from the original sources of infection, the nature and means of transmission are much less clearcut, and so its more difficult to take steps to stop the spread. It'll take a little while to figure out this is an STD and what its trajectory is.

It won't move like wildfire, but it'll amble around pretty steadily I think, and it'll slowly build up a body count. It'll probably also leave a bit of sterility in its wake, though lets face it, the victims are not going to be high on the list of potential friends with benefits. So in addition to casualties, there'll be some degree of second generation absences - sterile individuals producing children not born.

There might be a fairly long learning curve down among the southern peoples, because to properly suss this disease out, you need a bit of social stability, and this is the sort of thing that propagates best in social instability, and likes to do its part to encourage instability.

Anyway, I present you the first of probably not very many Inuit plagues.
 
Two obvious ways
A Caribou herder having to help one give birth, and needing to move the afterbirth/abortion away from the herd to keep predators away.

Will it lead to caribou herders in general being ostracized from other communities?
 
Two obvious ways
A Caribou herder having to help one give birth, and needing to move the afterbirth/abortion away from the herd to keep predators away.

Will it lead to caribou herders in general being ostracized from other communities?

There might be some unsavoury connotations. I suspect that will fade a little, once the disease establishes its human variant.
 
Of Ice and Men

As we head into global warming, we’re becoming increasingly aware of the way that changing climates have shifted the fortunes of past civilizations on a global basis.

From roughly 800 to 1200, the world saw the medieval warm period. A boon time for Europe, when crops thrived, grapes were grown in England, and population grew. European populations and crops in places as far north as Iceland and Estonia thrived, and a successful colonly was planted in Greenland.

Warmer weather was a mixed blessing in many areas though. Increased temperature changed rainfall patterns, stealing water away. In the new world, the medieval warm period saw prolongued droughts in the American great planes. Droughts during this period plagued both the Mayan civilization, bringing about its collapse, and the Tiwanaku civilization of the Andean altiplano.

For the Dorset culture of the Arctic, not so great. The climate shifts along the north destabilized their culture, made traditional livelihood more difficult and triggered the outbreak of the Thule who would sweep them away.

The end of the medieval warm period marked changes in the world. Starting with the 1200's, glaciers began to advance in Iceland, in Europe, in Alaska and Greenland and among the Arctic islands. In 1215 an irrigation canal in germany was overrun by a glacier. Sea ice began to thicken. Temperatures were dropping, across the north.

This drop in temperature, the end of the warm period and the bounty it provided, brought about the First Agricultural period of the Thule.

The end of the warm period was followed by a cooler era. Sometimes this is collectively known as the Little Ice Age. When the Little Ice Age begins and ends is a matter of opinion. Some consider an epoch running from roughly 1200-1300 to 1800-1850. This may be a little too general in my opinion.

A better description might be a general decline in temperatures between 1200 to 1350, between the warm and cold periods. An era we might term Medieval Glaciation, between roughly 1300-1350 and 1460. A century long warm spell between 1460 and 1560. And then the sharp ferocious cold of the genuine Little Ice Age, from 1560 to as 1850-1890.

For our purposes, the period from 1350 to 1550 is often described as the Second Thule agricultural period. Some experts prefer to divide it into two eras - 1350 to 1450 as the Second Period. And 1450 to 1550 is referrred to as the Norse Interchange, although arguably, the Norse had vanished early on in this period.

So what was going on in the world during the Second Thule agricultural period?

Major shifts in agriculture were taking place as the world was getting cooler. Grapes vanished from England and declined in Germany. Barley and cereal crops declined in Iceland, and fishing replaced them as the main food source. Glaciers continued to grow, and sea ice expanded. Greenland was often cut off as the old sea route from Iceland directly west to Greenland became impassable. The decline in the Greenland settlements begins during this time. Central Asia saw a cold wet interval, while in the Pueblo cultures of the American desert, drought caused their collapse.

For the Thule, the advance of glaciers, the drop in temperature, stalemated the advance of their Agricultural complex. The first phase had been one of almost continuous expansion. The core crops were planted, microclimate engineering developed, secondary crops emerged, a suite of domesticated animals emerged. Each new innovation had marked a substantial advance in production and productivity. Thule Agriculture was literally outrunning its climate. The climate slowly worsened, but the Thule kept pulling new rabbits out of the hat.

By 1350, pretty much all the rabbits were out of the hat. The package was there, the toolkit was there, and now there was little to do but incrementally refine what had been achieved. This was not insubstantial. Microclimate engineering became increasingly subtle and sophisticated, the mound and trench networks grew from year to year, domesticated plants were bred to be larger and more productive, new secondary plants were added, social complexity increased, the Thule became more expert not only at growing and domesticating, but arranging their economies for greater efficiency. But there were no more great leaps, at least not until the Norse interchange. Just steady accumulating progress.

Unfortunately, old man winter was also steadily accumulating, and old man winter was moving with increasing speed. Without great leaps forward, Thule agriculture could only give way. After a hundred and fifty years of winning, Thule Agriculture was beginning to lose. But it would not give up without a fight.

The effects were first seen in the Archipelago. Along the Arctic Corderilla, from Ellesmere Island, through Axel Heidberg, and Devon, down to Baffin Island, the glaciers of the Eastern Islands swelled. Growing seasons grew shorter, summer temperatures dropped.

In Ellesmere, many areas planted as cropland reverted to animal fodder. Even in those areas which sustained crops, yields declined. The Ellesmere adapted, caribou and musk ox herding rose in prominence, fishing both freshwater and seacoast increased, microlivestock proliferated. Agriculture shifted from a three year cycle to four or even five. Despite this, it was not enough. In the northern islands - Devon, Axel Heidberg and Ellesmere, more than half the population were driven out, with migrations to both of Greenland’s coasts, and down through Baffin Island to the mainland territories as far as Alaska.

Baffin Island experienced similar disruptions, though not nearly as bad. Not nearly as much cropland was given over to animal fodder, herding and microlivestock proliferated, but it came closer to making up shortfalls, agriculture maintained a three year cycle in many areas, though productivity declined. Baffin Island too saw outward migration, into Quebec and Labrador, and into the mainlands. But there were more critical changes. The Baffin Islanders responded to harsher conditions with more effort, mound complexes grew larger and more ambitious, trenches longer, irrigation and fertilizers were pushed. All of these required more labour, more social organization. Something resembling modern states began to emerge as the Baffin Island cultures fought to survive.

In the western Islands, Agriculture, a much dodgier proposition, failed almost completely. Most agricultural settlements were abandoned, their mound networks being given over to Caribou and Musk Ox, who themselves desperately needed the additional forage as their own pastures declined. The western islands had always been dry, for a time, this had been compensated by harvesting permafrost, exposing it to the sun and running it to irrigate. But after a hundred and fifty years, that was getting harder and harder to do effectively.

Instead, the western Islands were given over almost entirely to herders, supplementing their diets with fernweed and occasional relic oases where remnant crops struggled on. Overpopulated with humans and beasts, there was a small but steady stream of migration south.

On the mainland, accumulating efficiencies and productivity tended to mask the effects of declining temperatures. Population continued to grow dramatically, fueled by natural growth and by immigration from the south.

As conditions worsened, production decisions shifted. Thule population tended to move towards the areas of greatest productivity, basically the Hudson Bay inlets and the McKenzie valley basin. Regional frictions increased. There were fierce disputes over crop lands, the usage of fields, over water rights, grazing rights, over herds and wild game, and sea access.

Disputes turned into feuds, feuds became massacres, communities formed alliances, alliances became coalitions and coalitions evolved into confederations. Irregular wars broke out throughout Thule territories. Individuals and populations were evicted and displaced.

Ultimately, the Thule pushed south, down into the McKenzie valley, along the Hudson Bay coastline and throughout the line of territory, moving from Arctic deeper into sub-arctic lands and crossing the tree lines.

This was a new world to the Thule. The tundra gave way to grasslands, rivers and stands of scrub trees and bush so thick that it was impassible. The fields of bare rock and gravel vanished, green carpeted everything. Snow and rain fell more heavily. Musk Ox gave way to Wood Bison. Moose appeared along the rivers, Elk in the forests. Energy in the form of burnable vegetation was almost everywhere. Wood, a precious scarcity scavenged from the drift that piled up on seashores.... Wood grew on trees!

It was also a world that had its own inhabitants, the Cree, the Dene, the Salish and Innu peoples who lived to the south of the Thule. The Thule had emerged in an impoverished environment, and they’d perfected the art of living in it. As hunter gatherers, they had evolved technology and techniques to survive and prosper. But the hunter/gatherer Thule who had swept the Dorset aside made no headway south.

The southern nations of the Subarctic inhabited a much richer environment, and were skilled in its use. They avoided the Brush, travelling by waterways in birch canoes. They used the energy of vegetation for winter warmth, harvested the changing species through the year. They had wealth to spare, and could resist the Thule easily.

The First Agricultural period had not changed that equation dramatically. The slow three year cycle of Thule Agriculture did not transport easily to new lands. Incremental Thule settlers made very slow progress against Cree or Dene clans or tribes inclined to slaughter these strangers who intruded on their territory. Most Thule found it preferable to concentrate on their own lands, becoming more productive year by year. Why go to strange alien lands and get a spear in your guts from strange people? Life at home kept getting better.

The second agricultural period was different. Life was not getting better at home any more. It was getting worse. There were too many people, and less and less food. Crops were poorer. To make up for poor crops, you raised ptarmigan or caribou or hunted more seals. But that didn’t quite make up for things, and there were more people every day, born, growing up, travelling from other areas. People were getting hungry, and violent. There was murder in the night, and armies forming on the horizon.

You wanted a way out. You wanted a new start. You wanted not to be in the army, and not to be in the way of an army, you wanted to be able to trust your neighbor, you wanted a full belly, and a warm husband or wife, and children that you could watch grow. There were a lot of of Thule like you, and together, you possessed an impressive suite of packages, ranging from warriors and hunter gatherers, to herders and horticulturalists, to farmers of crops and raisers of livestock, to travellers capable of moving fast and carrying loads.

At the same time as this was going on, the peoples to the south, the Cree and Dene, found themselves in trouble. The Medieval Glacial period was affecting them too. Winters were becoming harsh, winter food was harder to find, summers were not as productive. Hunger was setting in. The northern Sub-Arctic tribes were in trouble, under stress, some of them were pushing south, imposing on their less stressed relatives, or dying on their spear points. They were vulnerable.

The Thule in vast numbers pushed south along their frontiers. The desperate refugees from a stressed agricultural society far outnumbered the hunter gatherers.

The Thule expansion southward had no ideology and no master plan, but it did have a consistent syndrome. The Thule, moving in numbers, slaughtered or drove off every other human it found, exterminating tribes and clans. Sometimes the defenders fled south, sometimes they fought, occasionally they won, but ultimately numbers told the tale. The Thule ruled.

This was followed by the hunger years, many reverted to hunter gathering, a bereft agricultural level population, slaughtered every animal they could find - wood buffalo, elk, moose, bears were extirpated, rabbits, otters, weasels, were trapped, even mice and voles were sought and consumed. Fish were taken from rivers and lakes, desperation brought about the adoption of nets and weirs and traps, the fishing practices of the people they evicted.

And it wasn’t enough.

Caribou, Ptarmigan and Hare were bred and slaughtered. Domesticated animals were cultivated intensively for meat. Entire herds vanished. Crops were planted, despite the knowledge they would not mature for years. Wild plants were found to be edible, either through occasionally lethal trial and error, or from the lore of displaced peoples, and harvested to the maximum. Pycrete bunkers and drying racks were hastily constructed to preserve any kind of food against the winter.

And it wasn’t enough.

Come winter, entire villages starved. In the summer, more people came down, pushed by wars or their own hunger, replacing those who had died already, bringing their herds, planting their crops, pushing even further south, hunting, gathering, fishing, harvesting, growing with a desperation driven by the will to survive. Three year crops were sometimes harvested in the first or second year. Dogs and foxes and owl were eaten.

And it was just enough.

After three or four years, the Thule crops began to come on line. Mounds and trenches were constructed. Herds of domesticated animals were swelling. The nature and idiosyncrasies of the land were learned, its resources defined and understood. The Thule Agricultural package was beginning to consolidate in the new land.

Oddly, the Thule took only limited advantage of the new resources. There was no real effort to domesticate Wood Bison, Elk or Moose. The existing domesticates of Caribou and Musk Ox were preferred, and the Thule actually invested heavily in shelters to protect the few Musk Ox that came south. The Thule experimented with beaver and muskrat as small livestock, but these efforts had at best mixed success, and were abandoned for traditional harvesting. Little in the way of new plants were added to the Thule harvest and none were domesticated. The most obvious potential candidate, wild rice, was too different from Thule traditional agriculture to be readily adopted. The big ticket item was wood, and trading networks evolved shipping wood to the coasts, and seal skins and oil inland.

After a decade, half the Thule people who had come into a particular region were dead. But the survivors had found stablity, they no longer feared hunger, the cycles of Thule life had reasserted themselves, and their agricultural and herding cultures had taken root. Over the next century, from 1350 to 1450, the Thule had effectively doubled their territory.

This begs the question, of course, as to why the Thule did not keep pushing south. Why they didn’t make their way to the Great Plains of the Prairie, to the St. Laurence and Great Lakes in the east, or to the Salish coasts of the wast.

There were a number of reasons for this. One was that resistance stiffened exponentially as they pushed further and further south. The Cree, the Dene, the Salish and Innu were all sophisticated cultures, and they knew their environments much better than the Thule did. They travelled through it on birch canoes far more effectively, had the use of dogs, they had home ground advantage and knew the terrain. They were warlike peoples in their own right. As the Thule pushed refugees south, they plowed their enemies up before them like a wall. At the southern reaches, starving Thule found themselves facing small armies or fierce guerilla campaigns. Scorched earth stole the big wildlife, and midnight raids burned their fields and slaughtered their livestock.

The Thule were coming to the limits of their technology. The pycrete silos that were essential for food storage and time shifting resources from periods of plenty to periods of scarcity were harder to build and maintain, less reliable. With less and less effective storage, it was harder to organize a society. Crops might grow faster and more abundant in richer soils with more water, but often there was too much water, and too many competing species. Musk Ox fared more and more poorly in southern rainy districts, and Ptarmigan sickened more easily.

And finally, there were the population limitations of the Thule themselves. The great southern push was from displaced surplus population. Most Thule stayed home, survived, warred or starved. Only a portion moved south. As the second agricultural period wore on, the Arctic Thule in most areas adapted to the worsening conditions, birthrates stabilized and declined, populations contracted, and greater efficiencies and productivity cushioned the worsening conditions. There were fewer and fewer displaced to push south. Only in Alaska did the Thule population continue to grow throughout the era. The Thule expanded as far as their population allowed.

The stabilization of the new Thule frontier was not the end of troubles for the Subarctic peoples. Even had there been no Thule expansion, the worsening conditions of the medieval glacial period, and the subsequent little ice age, would have pushed many south. In turn, these peoples pushing south would have come into conflict with the plains cree, the dakota and ojibwa, the agonquin and huron and iroquois, who in turn would have pushed their southern neighbors. The result would have been a series of wars and bush conflicts, population adjustments, as tribe after tribe intruded on its neighbors. Eventually attrition and resistance would blunt the effects until in the deeper south, very little effect at all was felt.

The Thule expansion only exacerbated this event. The Thule pushed hard, larger numbers of refugees pushed south more quickly, the wars were fierce. More desperation and displacement meant that the interlopers pushed south harder, producing more displacement. The ripples and dominos fell more strongly. The effects pushed further, lasted longer.

Bruce crossed from the Thule population, into the southern peoples, wreaking havoc and weakening them as their societies struggled to cope with invasion and worsening climate. This made Thule expansion easier. The effects of Bruce were worst in the subarctic. As societies further south stabilized, they learned to cope with or limit the disease quickly.

In the east, the Innu suffered most. Comparatively small in number, they had difficulty either resisting the Thule invasions, or pushing south against the much more numerous Cree. The Innu were almost wiped out, populations moving south along the coast, into newfoundland, or finding niches within Cree territory.

In the west, the Dene got the worst of it. In many areas, they were pushed to oblivion. Less numerous than the Cree, their southern borders often faced significantly different ecological zones that they were unprepared to cope with, the Dene had very little room to flee south in the face of the Thule onslought. The Dene territories became non-contiguous, their northern ranges vanished, their southern ranges pushed south only marginally. Instead of a band of territory from Hudson Bay to Alaska, the Dene were reduced to a necklace of islands of population between northern and southern enemies.

Surprisingly, there was very little adoption of the Inuit package. Partly this was because of the hatred and hostility that emerged among the Southern peoples for the Thule. Everyone in the northern ranges of the Cree, or in the remains of Innu or Dene territory, had horror and atrocity stories about the alien invaders from the north. Their language was incomprehensible. Their tactics were ruthless. Whatever they saw, they simply took. Although there was trade and exchange at times, it was very limited.

Another part of it was that the more sophisticated aspects of the Thule package, such as agriculture, tended to emerge and consolidate only after the neighbors had been killed off or displaced. There was a three to ten year period before the agricultural package really came together in a region. By that time, there wasn’t really anyone left to observe and take notes.

The Dene, readily adopted Caribou herding for instance, and very limited horticulture, from the Thule, but did not embrace agriculture or crop cultivation, although they were very well suited to take advantage of it. The Cree, whose range mostly encompassed thick bush and river pathways found very little in their territory conducive to either herding or Thule agriculture, and held to their traditional ways.

For their part, having acquired lands of trees and fish and new fur bearing animals, the Thule had little interest in the Barbarians of the south. Their society again turned inward, exploring the ramifications of their social upheavals, embracing increasing complexity and political and social consolidation.
 
A most plausible set of butterfly nets, first of all!

We see how the Thule fail, for the most part, to come into direct contact with any Native American established agricultural peoples of OTL; the remnant of the Subarctic peoples who ITTL are squeezed southward are disrupted and decimated and there is no inclination on either side for contacts, nor will the rumor of the Thule filtering southward impress anyone there to seek it out.

The spread of Bruce, and presumably other (one or two more?) Inuit-developed diseases will not, I fear, inoculate any of the Subarctic and southward peoples against the witches' brew of Eurasian diseases coming their way soon. It may foster a few cultural practices that help them a bit. The medical science of disease resistance is not something I have any expert knowledge in; my impression is that there is no such thing as across-the-board immunity genes that a good thrashing by some given disease brings forth by natural selection; rather there are specific immunities each disease winnows up. Cultural practices would I think basically amount to learning to avoid disease, which works against communications in general. Decimation of population will slow down the rate of disease spread by limiting contacts and suitable pools for infections to establish themselves, but delay does nothing to pre-prepare a vulnerable population, only postpones their dark days of reckoning. Generally speaking if I want a timeline where Native peoples do better versus the Europeans, I want one where civilizations have developed more and are more widespread, and trade networks and so forth are so well established that disease invades fast and spreads far, and terrible decimation happens earlier rather than later, so they hit bottom and start recovering earlier, while European development has had less time to pull even farther ahead and the numbers of European colonists have not yet ramped up toward the deluge of the OTL 19th century. None of that is happening here; for subarctic Native people's we've just added a few more straws to the native camel's back.:(

The butterflies are flying south, but in a subdued form; peoples who OTL become major historical actors in the larger world have had their populations decimated and their range thinned. But this won't matter outside their immediate neighborhood until someone like the New France colonists and fur trade entrepreneurs show up; they'll find their potential contacts shifted around somewhat. But that's post 1500, when we expect serious butterflies to start flocking anyway due to changes in basic European early knowledge and impressions of the New World. New France in its OTL form may be butterflied away anyway as the French turn attention northward, or if someone else (Portuguese, English) gets there first, they may go ahead seeing what they can accomplish in their OTL stomping grounds, that being left open as it were.

South of the cordon of slightly displaced and much decimated subarctic peoples, I think even the spread of Bruce will be limited to negligible levels; Dene and others infected will tend to be weakened and die; the refugees more or less accepted by their southern neighbors will not be the very sick ones. We can expect that whatever permutations of this tier of Native peoples, overlapping onto agricultural peoples who do have trade networks, will come out in the wash of general devastation by Eurasian diseases when they arrive. The effect on the more highly developed Mississippian complex and farther south should be completely undetectable.

The only alternative agricultural civilization they have contact with yet are the Norse.

Here the butterfly net works a bit differently; we can be pretty sure the Greenland settlers will have frequent contacts with Thule. Given the Thule lack of inclination to open up relations and to simply kill or be killed on sight, most of the effective contact except in the sense of senseless body counts will be in the form of Norse captives among Thule.

I'm not sure why DValdron has in the past dismissed the likelihood of Thule people getting captured and dealt with by the Norse. Perhaps this happens but as the first cold snap sets in, the Norse Greenland colony is cut off from communications with Iceland, which writes Greenland off, and then as a separate organized society collapses, survivors if any being those taken in by Inuit as OTL. Unlike OTL, there is a lot more room in the larger Thule world to disperse them into, and more Thule who might pick up this or that piece of esoteric knowledge--writing and ironworking are two that have been mentioned. But these people or their descendants would only find their way east if the Thule as a whole do; they'd be perhaps involved in a hypothetical invasion of Iceland.

So, the main difference from a European point of view would be if some actual Thule were brought east before worsening weather cuts Greenland off from Iceland, or if rather detailed reports of them were brought there.
OTL of course it was well known in Iceland there were troublesome natives in America, that they called "skraelings," and the Greenland Inuit got the same label. The details may differ but not the bottom line message, which is that the Skraelings added to the already severe challenges the Norse of Greenland faced at last report. So if there is no subsequent (or earlier!) Inuit invasion of Greenland itself, the Thule fall to the status of tales of nasty neighbors and probably are let go at that.

At this point then there are two ways to go, one way where Inuit invade Iceland and another where they don't; a priori I think such an invasion is unlikely, and if it never happens we can have European history staying on an unbutterflied known track up to just before 1500 and maybe even some years beyond, until news of Thule finds its way back from expeditions sent in that very direction from Europe.

Now in the interim, I still think there is a channel for the Inuit to learn some other mode of interaction with other peoples, and that is in southern Alaska; going coastwise southward there, they will run into fairly sophisticated Pacific Northwest natives, some of whom may be in a position to check Thule advances and offer mutual trade, political alliances and so forth instead; if the Thule can learn to partner with some of these peoples somewhat, they can move farther south along the coast, where they won't meet truly agricultural people but will meet fishing peoples who fish such rich schools of fish they might be considered proto-cultivators and anyway to have surpluses comparable with those available to early agriculturalists.

Assuming such cultural adaptations, if they happen at all, happen only west of the Rockies on the Pacific coast, then the eastern Inuit might only know of them through cultural lore and traveler's tales and still be on their own to follow their own inclinations when European ships show up. Their first impulse would be to capture them if they can; if this happens butterflying begins with the disappearance of ships that OTL made it back to Europe. Or the Euros may be too wary, and the Inuit soon learn they can't easily capture these people, and alternate history in Europe begins with the different reports these ships carry back, including prospects for future alliances and trade markets.
 
We see how the Thule fail, for the most part, to come into direct contact with any Native American established agricultural peoples of OTL; the remnant of the Subarctic peoples who ITTL are squeezed southward are disrupted and decimated and there is no inclination on either side for contacts, nor will the rumor of the Thule filtering southward impress anyone there to seek it out.

The Thule will definitely not be well regarded by their neighbors. There may be some tobacco/Roseroot trade around Hudson Bay, and possibly some Pacific Coast trade. But generally no. No real contact with the Agricultural societies of the south. It is possible that the Southern civilizations may hear rumours of the Thule.

At some point, if someone wants to do a Green Antarctica style riff, and diverge their own timeline where the Thule and Meso-Americans make significant contact and have useful cultural interchange, probably through travel up and down the pacific coast, they'll be welcome to jump on it.

The spread of Bruce, and presumably other (one or two more?)

Two. Mona and Joan.

Inuit-developed diseases will not, I fear, inoculate any of the Subarctic and southward peoples against the witches' brew of Eurasian diseases coming their way soon.

Correct.

It may foster a few cultural practices that help them a bit.

Among the Thule perhaps. They'll at least recognize the trajectories of epidemics, have some notions about transmission and quarantines.

But low population densities will tend to slow the spread of the Thule diseases into southern populations. They'll be fairly erratic in making their way south. So its unlikely that southern peoples will evolve useful cultural practice.

The medical science of disease resistance is not something I have any expert knowledge in; my impression is that there is no such thing as across-the-board immunity genes that a good thrashing by some given disease brings forth by natural selection; rather there are specific immunities each disease winnows up. Cultural practices would I think basically amount to learning to avoid disease, which works against communications in general. Decimation of population will slow down the rate of disease spread by limiting contacts and suitable pools for infections to establish themselves, but delay does nothing to pre-prepare a vulnerable population, only postpones their dark days of reckoning.

I generally agree, with some caveats. I think that some cultural practices - medicine or treatment, can assist by keeping the victim's system going long enough for immune reactions to eventually fight off the disease in some cases. An illness which causes fever and diarhea can be coped with, with rehydration - but let dehydration run its course, and the result is fatal. Traditional remedies which alleviate symptoms, such as respiratory distress can make a difference. Depends on how virulent, not a huge difference, but a difference.

And there's quirks - cowpox for instance, provided some degree of resistance to smallpox. I haven't found a caribou pox. But arguably, a weaker smallpox relative might make a difference. Or a variety of phneumonia from local species might be sufficient to trigger an immune capacity that might handle new phneumonia strains. All of this is somewhat academic.

Generally speaking if I want a timeline where Native peoples do better versus the Europeans, I want one where civilizations have developed more and are more widespread, and trade networks and so forth are so well established that disease invades fast and spreads far, and terrible decimation happens earlier rather than later, so they hit bottom and start recovering earlier, while European development has had less time to pull even farther ahead and the numbers of European colonists have not yet ramped up toward the deluge of the OTL 19th century. None of that is happening here; for subarctic Native people's we've just added a few more straws to the native camel's back.:(

Yep. You might try General Finlay, Twovultures or NineFangedHummingbird, or C********, among others.


The butterflies are flying south, but in a subdued form; peoples who OTL become major historical actors in the larger world have had their populations decimated and their range thinned. But this won't matter outside their immediate neighborhood until someone like the New France colonists and fur trade entrepreneurs show up; they'll find their potential contacts shifted around somewhat.

Subdued butterflies. A lot of the coastline of Hudson Bay is now contested territory. But the Cree, although they've been pushed a bit, still hold most of the fur trading areas, and their trade networks to the south are intact.

The ripples have spread to the St. Laurence and Great Lakes peoples, and they've had a push, but by and large, they're holding steady, as are the Mississippi Basin

But that's post 1500, when we expect serious butterflies to start flocking anyway due to changes in basic European early knowledge and impressions of the New World. New France in its OTL form may be butterflied away anyway as the French turn attention northward,

Maybe, maybe not. The French went down the St. Laurence for the fur trade, and later settled, that may not change too much.

The British went above them, to Hudson Bay, where they made contact with the Cree, and tapped into the north/south trade routes, where they reversed the direction of flow. The Cree will still be there, but both British and Cree will have to deal with the Thule. The Hudson Bay company will be very different.

For their part, the Thule are going to make the north very interesting to everyone.

or if someone else (Portuguese, English) gets there first, they may go ahead seeing what they can accomplish in their OTL stomping grounds, that being left open as it were.

South of the cordon of slightly displaced and much decimated subarctic peoples, I think even the spread of Bruce will be limited to negligible levels; Dene and others infected will tend to be weakened and die; the refugees more or less accepted by their southern neighbors will not be the very sick ones. We can expect that whatever permutations of this tier of Native peoples, overlapping onto agricultural peoples who do have trade networks, will come out in the wash of general devastation by Eurasian diseases when they arrive. The effect on the more highly developed Mississippian complex and farther south should be completely undetectable.

Basically correct. It'll show up once in a while, particularly during wars and social disruption, when there's a lot of rape and gratuitous bloodletting going on, when conditions are optimum for an outbreak.

The only alternative agricultural civilization they have contact with yet are the Norse.

For all practical purposes.

Here the butterfly net works a bit differently; we can be pretty sure the Greenland settlers will have frequent contacts with Thule. Given the Thule lack of inclination to open up relations and to simply kill or be killed on sight, most of the effective contact except in the sense of senseless body counts will be in the form of Norse captives among Thule.

The Norse in Greenland didn't have a high opinion of the local Dorset or the Thule Hunter-Gatherers, calling them 'Skraelings' or 'wretches.' They seem to have had very little contact, the two groups avoiding each other. There's a report that the OTL Thule wiped out the smaller western settlement, but no one really knows. There may have been some minimal trade or contact. There seems to have been very little that either one had that interested the other.

The Agricultural Thule, particularly the Shamans, would be very interested in another Agricultural society. But when they show up, the Greenland Norse are under a lot of stress.

I'm not sure why DValdron has in the past dismissed the likelihood of Thule people getting captured and dealt with by the Norse.

By this time, the Greenland Norse are shifting heavily towards fish protein, barley crops, if they ever grew, have failed, and they're very dependent on their domesticates, who are seeing shortages of fodder and not coping well with harsh winters. The Greenland Norse are having hungry winters, they don't have the luxury or the intent to keep a prisoner, who only represents a useless and dangerous mouth to feed.

Perhaps this happens but as the first cold snap sets in, the Norse Greenland colony is cut off from communications with Iceland, which writes Greenland off, and then as a separate organized society collapses, survivors if any being those taken in by Inuit as OTL.

We don't have a complete picture of events. But it seems that the increase of sea ice made it a lot harder and more difficult to travel from Iceland to Greenland At the same time, the demand for Greenland products, particularly Ivory, its most valuable item, waned when African ivory came on the market in Europe. Finally, when Greenland and Iceland became part of the Kingdom of Norway, mercantile decrees forbade direct trade between the two, but only direct trade with Norway. Iceland could manage this. Norway was beyond the hinterland. so at the time that the Agricultural Thule are making their way, Greenland's becoming quite isolated.

One way or another, the Greenland Norse are done for. But it may be interesting to see what sort of contacts come about, and whether any survivors are incorporated into Thule.

So, the main difference from a European point of view would be if some actual Thule were brought east before worsening weather cuts Greenland off from Iceland, or if rather detailed reports of them were brought there.

At this point, it would be an extremely extremely close thing. The door is shutting fast.

OTL of course it was well known in Iceland there were troublesome natives in America, that they called "skraelings," and the Greenland Inuit got the same label. The details may differ but not the bottom line message, which is that the Skraelings added to the already severe challenges the Norse of Greenland faced at last report. So if there is no subsequent (or earlier!) Inuit invasion of Greenland itself, the Thule fall to the status of tales of nasty neighbors and probably are let go at that.

Likely.
 
Posting from my nook, so forgive no quotes, typos.


You mention plains cree, ?lakota?, Ojibwa

None are on the plains yet. Otl, they moved out into the plains after white man showed up. Cause they got guns first. Cree, anyway.
 
Anyway, beyond that, I want to work out the metallurgical subcultures of the Thule (yes, plural), and I want to develop the Norse Interchange which should be fun.

All of which means that actual contact with modern Europeans from the 17th century on is going to take a while to come about.

And I note I haven't paid too much attention to Thule society overall. Some random thoughts. They're probably not terribly PC, not Tsalal scale evil or anything, but roughly what you'd expect from a neolithic culture making its big break.

We've seen the emergence of some of the subcultures - the competing Reindeer and Musk Ox herding subcultures on the western islands where lack of water makes agriculture infeasible. The Ellesmere subculture has diverged. Beyond that, there are allusions to Baffin Island, Alaska, and the McKenzie delta as subcultures, power centers. We've seen Ellesmere people form the basis of large scale trading networks, and the Shamanic tradition emerging. It occurs to me that the Thule may well be on their way to the sort of linguistic and cultural centrifugalism that we saw in OTL Inuit, or in pre-medieval Europe.

As a random thought, the larger territory needed for Thule agriculture probably makes dominating urban centres or city states less probable. Way too much landscape is needed. So probably, what we'll see are smaller localized cities and towns.

The result is probably coalitions and confederations rather than centralized Empires. Thule may well form states, but they may generally avoid the 'Robber Baron Empire' model - ie, a powerful central state rules over and loots a vast hinterland which has no positive stake in the Empire and lots of resentment (which is probably a recipe for regular collapse, once the peons and oppressed all find someone to rise up behind).

Thinking out loud, the closest parallel I can think of to the situation of the Thule might be Europe and its organization of warlike invading tribes into agricultural landholders through a feudal system.

Will the Thule evolve something analogous to Euro-feudalism as a social organizing principle? Possible, although the presence of a universal Shamanic class, the not-yet-discussed sea economy, and the comparatively lower population density/greater required farming territory will probably make it quite different. The 18th century Thule Empires might be a lot closer to the Holy Roman Empire or Charlemagne's Empire in structure.

Thank Marx, here's the class. Much as I want more animal and plant data, I feel the need for some class society.

Euro-feudalism is a many and varied thing. Also it depends on cultural tools the Thule do not yet have.

I think you need to look at earlier societies. The Thule are a "pre-slave" society, and are likely to remain that way.

The form of social property is family lineal within group lineal behaviour. Much of the trade is totemic and culturally evaluated. The politics of this are more like the Celtic or Germanic tribal structures—again pre-Slave and pre-Feudal. There are some excellent reviews on the varied structure of class society in these "barbarians."

Except of course here they'll be civilised and with an oral record.

Or consider the Greek myths as a "template" for a slave society's understanding of archaic pre-slave "hydrological/Asiatic" society.

And apart from the earth works, there is the centralised extraction of social surplus as corvee labour and direct use goods. Except with the Thule this will be resisted by a 70:30 male:female (or even better!) Shamanic class. And the Shamans are going to be unwilling to let the hydrological monarchs claim divine status.

Asiatic society with internal contest within the cities? I think it is time to look at the Mesopotamian cultures. Asiatic society without a centralised and homogenous Priest caste? EVEN MORE AWESOME.

So for a day in the life of a hare-carer, she or he might expect future (multi-year) tax extractions that will be contested in person from an ecological perspective by multiple Shaman who gather for the purpose; but, the extraction being made and the "grander" works ordered for the next period (under Shamanic guidance), the temporary King retires to the next town or village who are required to put him up in the big structure and feed him meat.

yours,
Sam R.
 
Posting from my nook, so forgive no quotes, typos.


You mention plains cree, ?lakota?, Ojibwa

None are on the plains yet. Otl, they moved out into the plains after white man showed up. Cause they got guns first. Cree, anyway.

I stand corrected. I do think that there were plains Cree. Who was living on the Plains circa 1200 - 1600? Was anyone out there? It was pretty inhospitable, if you couldn't reliably follow the bison, I suppose.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top