Medieval America Mark III

Yeah, personally I wouldn't be opposed to changing the name. Especially considering the Canticle for Leibowitz connection.
I'm thinking that the Knights of Kuklos would be the equivalent of the Teutonic Knights for the territory. A knightly order that turned into the power-hungry ruling class of the country. The Governor of the State of Texarkana has always been the Grand Dragon/Imperial Wizard of the Knights of Kuklos.
 
I'm thinking that the Knights of Kuklos would be the equivalent of the Teutonic Knights for the territory. A knightly order that turned into the power-hungry ruling class of the country. The Governor of the State of Texarkana has always been the Grand Dragon/Imperial Wizard of the Knights of Kuklos.
Yeah, I had similar thoughts.

I've had this theory that the United States gained it's Canadian territories during a counter-Crusade against the Quebecois, as the Quebecois Crusade was extensively discussed in the old thread. Maybe another part of that was a similar crusade launched by the Southern princes against the Louisianians and the New Israelites. Out of territory captured from Louisiana and the Andersons, they erect Texarkana / The Red River Territory.
 
Yeah, I had similar thoughts.

I've had this theory that the United States gained it's Canadian territories during a counter-Crusade against the Quebecois, as the Quebecois Crusade was extensively discussed in the old thread. Maybe another part of that was a similar crusade launched by the Southern princes against the Louisianians and the New Israelites. Out of territory captured from Louisiana and the Andersons, they erect Texarkana / The Red River Territory.
So maybe the Knights of Kuklos went from a group dedicated to protect the newly-founded "State of Texarkana" to being the region's corrupt military class. The "Governor" of the State went from a candidate installed by the Princes to the East, to a puppet of the Knights, to being the leader of the Knights outright. The original post on the Knights mentioned how they became corrupt, and maybe that's how it happened.
 
So maybe the Knights of Kuklos went from a group dedicated to protect the newly-founded "State of Texarkana" to being the region's corrupt military class. The "Governor" of the State went from a candidate installed by the Princes to the East, to a puppet of the Knights, to being the leader of the Knights outright. The original post on the Knights mentioned how they became corrupt, and maybe that's how it happened.
Well, presumably the Knights of Kuklos are or were a pretty common organization across the South, they just so happen to be the ones in control of a state here, like the Teutonic Order.
 
Yeah, I had similar thoughts.

I've had this theory that the United States gained it's Canadian territories during a counter-Crusade against the Quebecois, as the Quebecois Crusade was extensively discussed in the old thread. Maybe another part of that was a similar crusade launched by the Southern princes against the Louisianians and the New Israelites. Out of territory captured from Louisiana and the Andersons, they erect Texarkana / The Red River Territory.
It doesn't neccesarily have to be the Andersons. There could be another herdsmen tribe that conquered that area. It could have been cherokee cowboys. That'd be interesting to see. A tribe (generally indistinguishable from normal white people) that speaks cherokee and practises the cherokee faith.
 
It doesn't neccesarily have to be the Andersons. There could be another herdsmen tribe that conquered that area. It could have been cherokee cowboys. That'd be interesting to see. A tribe (generally indistinguishable from normal white people) that speaks cherokee and practises the cherokee faith.
Interestingly, @jmberry said in his New Age post that the Oklahomans had adopted New Age - presumably with a significant degree of the Cherokee faith, since New Age already contains elements of the Ghost Dance and Dineh faiths, in addition to the original "Noble Savage" view that the original New Agers
 
Well, presumably the Knights of Kuklos are or were a pretty common organization across the South, they just so happen to be the ones in control of a state here, like the Teutonic Order.
So there are branches of the Knights of Kuklos all across the south, it's just that the one in Texarkana is the only one with official power in the state government. The entire organization became just as corrupt. It's just that only one is in control of a government. They're the bulwark between the Coyboys and the East.
 
So there are branches of the Knights of Kuklos all across the south, it's just that the one in Texarkana is the only one with official power in the state government. The entire organization became just as corrupt. It's just that only one is in control of a government. They're the bulwark between the Coyboys and the East.
Maybe in the South. I don't see them having much influence in the midwest or anywhere outside of the deep south like Iowa or Wisconsin. Iowa because it's founded by cowboys who civilized and Wisconsin because they live in a totally different cultural setting. Maybe an equivalent organization for the midwesterners or maybe their governments are more centralize and there is less need for a crusader organization
 
Maybe in the South. I don't see them having much influence in the midwest or anywhere outside of the deep south like Iowa or Wisconsin. Iowa because it's founded by cowboys who civilized and Wisconsin because they live in a totally different cultural setting. Maybe an equivalent organization for the midwesterners or maybe their governments are more centralize and there is less need for a crusader organization
Of course it's a purely Southern organization. The situation in Texarkana, and possibly Arkansas, is different. They were taken from Cowboy tribes. So there was no central government to speak of. They'd take advantage of their status as the only armed group in the country to take more and more power until they seized control of the country altogether.

What's the situation in Wiscobsin?
 
Of course it's a purely Southern organization. The situation in Texarkana, and possibly Arkansas, is different. They were taken from Cowboy tribes. So there was no central government to speak of. They'd take advantage of their status as the only armed group in the country to take more and more power until they seized control of the country altogether.

What's the situation in Wiscobsin?
It's certainly a polity, and appears to have quite a large hinterland. That inclines me to think that it is under nomadic or formerly nomadic control. Maybe the "Canucks" discussed in the first thread?
 
Of course it's a purely Southern organization. The situation in Texarkana, and possibly Arkansas, is different. They were taken from Cowboy tribes. So there was no central government to speak of. They'd take advantage of their status as the only armed group in the country to take more and more power until they seized control of the country altogether.

What's the situation in Wiscobsin?
In wisconsin they bribe cowboys to stay away from them and have eaten up minnesota east of the missisippi. I personally don't think that cowboys have taken over because it retains it's "State" title. Generally Cowboy established entities begin with "Territory".
 
In wisconsin they bribe cowboys to stay away from them and have eaten up minnesota east of the missisippi. I personally don't think that cowboys have taken over because it retains it's "State" title. Generally Cowboy established entities begin with "Territory".
An interesting thought, but I don't see how a Madison-based polity would be able to hold on to so much marginal territory.
 
It's certainly a polity, and appears to have quite a large hinterland. That inclines me to think that it is under nomadic or formerly nomadic control. Maybe the "Canucks" discussed in the first thread?
You know what'd be interesting? If the Canucks acted like stereotypical Canadaians. Friendly and polite but will defend themselves if attacked. They've settled down but they're just as capable of fighting. The cowboys being who they are they'd mistake the kindness for weakness and pay the price when they go too far for even this semi-pacifistic people. The presence of Milwaukee implies that they've left their nomadic lifestyle behind them.

An interesting thought, but I don't see how a Madison-based polity would be able to hold on to so much marginal territory.
Them being former nomads would explain it. They'd use the things they learned as nomads to set up mounted patrols to protect their territory from interlopers. It only stands to reason that they'd call these patrols "Mounties".
 
An interesting thought, but I don't see how a Madison-based polity would be able to hold on to so much marginal territory.
It probably doesnt control half as much territory as is shown on the map. Like the bulk of the population lives in the east, close to Lake Michigan. As shown here.

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/medvam/images/pop-west.gif
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/medvam/images/pop-east.gif

Control over the western part (which is going to be pretty forested) and the upper peninsula is going to be marginal.

The sparseness of the west is probably why the cowboys haven't taken over. The buffer distance between the nice parts of Wisconsin and cowboy territory is too great. It's probably just easier to raid/extort southern nations.

Also it's not based out of madison. That was taken by Iowa. It's probably based out of Green Bay or milkwaukee
 
Western History Maps
Here's something interesting:

I was looking through White's image cache, and he sketches out the entire history of the West.



Here, we see something that more or less resembles the present day of the scenario, with two notable exceptions: first, California is divided between four states, the southernmost of which is the largest, and presumably Scientologist. This suggests that unity in California was not quite as constant as we may have suggested.

Second, New Mexico and Arizona are independent of one another, though this is likely a common occurrence.



Now, we see the Columbian expansion. Rather than first conquering Idaho and Deseret, as I had suggested, it first conquered Cascadia. This should radically change the history of Columbia.

Idaho seem to have become independent of Deseret. Perhaps due to Yaeger Raids putting a strain on resources?

California has been unified by San Francisco, while Socal has broken down into a three-way civil war.

New Mexico is totally unified.



Columbia has overrun the Snake River, Deseret is a rump state with Wyoming captured by the Jaegers. New Mexico is split again, this time with Arizona taking El Paso. California is totally united.



Finally, we see the Columbians at their maximum extent. The Free Zone has declared independence, and New Mexico is now split between three dynasties - Arizona, El Paso and Albuquerque.

I'll need to rethink a few things. Ironically, the disunified California comports exactly with some personal ideas I'd been toying with - when I applied White's method of state-placing by circle, I found Nocal should hold three states.
 
I know that we are working east-west but do you think that there will be contact in Newfoundland and Labrador between Norsemen and Americans. That would be interesting. The very tenous connection between North America and Europe. A thin line of isolated outposts and villages stretching across the North Atlantic
 
I found this thread, and it seems interesting. However, it seems that the SouthEast is sadly never mentioned, so does anyone want to do some more worldbuilding for that region?
 
Top