Medieval America Mark III

Personally, I'm still unsure what should happen to the Amazon and Guyana and South America in general. On the one hand, rainforests in the old world did have states. Indonesia, Indochina and India all had powerful states. On the other hand, the central amazon seems pretty hostile to civilization.

So writing this out, I'd say that the southern amazon (where evidence of human civilization exists) would be able to host jungle states, who grow rice would be possible similar to the jungle civilizations of Thailand and Cambodia. Pretty much only the Central Amazon, Atacama, and Guyanan Highlands would lack civilization. The coasts of Guyana might have some sort of civilization. Also unsure what happens to the Brazillian interior, are there going to be Guanchos/Cowboys roaming the tropical plains?
I hope so. I love the idea of Brazilian nomads in the interior, menacing the eastern cities.
 
Personally, I'm still unsure what should happen to the Amazon and Guyana and South America in general. On the one hand, rainforests in the old world did have states. Indonesia, Indochina and India all had powerful states. On the other hand, the central amazon seems pretty hostile to civilization.

So writing this out, I'd say that the southern amazon (where evidence of human civilization exists) would be able to host jungle states, who grow rice would be possible similar to the jungle civilizations of Thailand and Cambodia. Pretty much only the Central Amazon, Atacama, and Guyanan Highlands would lack civilization. The coasts of Guyana might have some sort of civilization. Also unsure what happens to the Brazillian interior, are there going to be Guanchos/Cowboys roaming the tropical plains?
Personally for South America, I'd like to see a bunch of nations on the Guyanese coast (in previous threads they were very fanatical Christians) with Hindus, Muslims and other religious minorities fleeing to the central hills where they form an interesting blend of different religions and cultures as tribes who stop the coastal people from expanding further inland. Belem could be the site of a major trade hub and though I don't think civilization could be maintained in the Amazon (Pre-Columbian Amazon didn't have the diseases the modern Amazon imported from Africa's jungles), Belemite colonies could definetly exist along the Amazon and its tributaries with these colonies capturing slaves and cutting down trees whilst also maybe growing rice. The rest of the Amazon is just tribesmen trying to not get themselves enslaved.

Central America will be jungle with civilization along the coasts whilst Colombia and Venezuela would be a collection of kingdoms, city-states and duchies. In a previous thread they were united by a Venezuelan from Cartagena called Alejandro and I think we should go with that. Ecuador and the rest of the Andes would be divided with Amerindian kingdoms in the interior and Hispanic kingdoms on the coasts. In 3000 we could have an Andean kingdom based in Quito, a Catholic Peruvian kingdom and a Quechuchua mystic kingdom in the interior. Brazil could have many kingdoms whilst in the interior there are nomads who raid the Amazon for slaves sold to the eastern kingdoms. Argentina and La Plata are a Hispanophone zone and to their south (south of Buenos Aires) are nomads who spread to the very tip of South America.
 
Personally for South America, I'd like to see a bunch of nations on the Guyanese coast (in previous threads they were very fanatical Christians) with Hindus, Muslims and other religious minorities fleeing to the central hills where they form an interesting blend of different religions and cultures as tribes who stop the coastal people from expanding further inland. Belem could be the site of a major trade hub and though I don't think civilization could be maintained in the Amazon (Pre-Columbian Amazon didn't have the diseases the modern Amazon imported from Africa's jungles), Belemite colonies could definetly exist along the Amazon and its tributaries with these colonies capturing slaves and cutting down trees whilst also maybe growing rice. The rest of the Amazon is just tribesmen trying to not get themselves enslaved.

Central America will be jungle with civilization along the coasts whilst Colombia and Venezuela would be a collection of kingdoms, city-states and duchies. In a previous thread they were united by a Venezuelan from Cartagena called Alejandro and I think we should go with that. Ecuador and the rest of the Andes would be divided with Amerindian kingdoms in the interior and Hispanic kingdoms on the coasts. In 3000 we could have an Andean kingdom based in Quito, a Catholic Peruvian kingdom and a Quechuchua mystic kingdom in the interior. Brazil could have many kingdoms whilst in the interior there are nomads who raid the Amazon for slaves sold to the eastern kingdoms. Argentina and La Plata are a Hispanophone zone and to their south (south of Buenos Aires) are nomads who spread to the very tip of South America.
I dont think we have to be constrained by what other threads did before us.

Dropping these maps https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/americas.html

Addressing individual regions: Central America is not constrained by coast vs non-coastal regions. Like Indonesia, Central America is dominated more by the fertility of the soil than anything else. So proximity to Volcanoes is important. So you'd get a line of small kingdoms (dominated by Mexico) along the Pacific Coast until Panama. In addition, weathering from the Mountains of Honduras and Guatemala should also allow agriculture in the valleys. There wouldn't be civilization along the Atlantic coast in Nicaragua, that area is pure swamp and even today doesn't host agriculture. Same thing with Panama.

It'd look something like this

upload_2019-12-6_16-54-40.png


I agree with your assessment of Colombia and Venezuela, I'd add that the interior plain of Venezuela is savanna and would probably host some cowboys/agriculture

I don't think that the Andes would be split between Amerindians and Hispanics. Largely because the Amerindian groups have interbred into the larger Hispanic population. IMO, Peru & Bolivia have become like Persia which expands along the mountains complete with it's own wacky Inca/Catholic hybrid.

For the Amazon, I did not consider that the modern Amazon is more inhospitable than the pre-Columbian Amazon but that is interesting. IDK if a state centered around Belem (Para), would be colonizing the Amazon as much as it would be expanding outwards radially and possibly fighting the State of Maranhao.

I agree with how you think of Brazil, same with the La plata region
 
SNIP
I agree with your assessment of Colombia and Venezuela, I'd add that the interior plain of Venezuela is savanna and would probably host some cowboys/agriculture

I don't think that the Andes would be split between Amerindians and Hispanics. Largely because the Amerindian groups have interbred into the larger Hispanic population. IMO, Peru & Bolivia have become like Persia which expands along the mountains complete with it's own wacky Inca/Catholic hybrid.

For the Amazon, I did not consider that the modern Amazon is more inhospitable than the pre-Columbian Amazon but that is interesting. IDK if a state centered around Belem (Para), would be colonizing the Amazon as much as it would be expanding outwards radially and possibly fighting the State of Maranhao.

I agree with how you think of Brazil, same with the La plata region
I agree we don't need to be constrained but personally I wouldn't mind following in the previous thread's footsteps. Of course, we should change stuff if we want our own ideas.

In regards to Central America, I would agree with you. A coast vs inland view is a very simplistic one.

Perhaps the interior plan of Venezuela could be to the coastal regions and mountains what Columbia is to Cascadia. I do believe the inhabitants of this plain would be semi-nomadic or they would rule over a farmer population as nomadic elites.

I should have been more clear. When I say Hispanic and Amerindian, I mean linguistically because IIRC there are still many Amerindian speakers in Peru. Physically, there would be little to no difference between the two groups but the linguistics and even culture would be different. I like the idea that the entire Latin world is similar to the Islamic world in how they perceive themselves and the Andes being like Persia is indeed an interesting comparison.

Perhaps Belem could have a massive business of capturing Amazonian slaves and selling them to work in ships and the islands which are constantly being depopulated by warfare, disease and environment. It uses this wealth made from its colonies (nothing more than outposts which produce their own rice and capture slaves) to then expand its influence outwards and ends up fighting the State of Maranhao.

It would be interesting seeing how the Portuguese-speakers and Spanish-speakers would interact in La Plata and who would come out on top.
 
I agree we don't need to be constrained but personally I wouldn't mind following in the previous thread's footsteps. Of course, we should change stuff if we want our own ideas.

In regards to Central America, I would agree with you. A coast vs inland view is a very simplistic one.

Perhaps the interior plan of Venezuela could be to the coastal regions and mountains what Columbia is to Cascadia. I do believe the inhabitants of this plain would be semi-nomadic or they would rule over a farmer population as nomadic elites.

I should have been more clear. When I say Hispanic and Amerindian, I mean linguistically because IIRC there are still many Amerindian speakers in Peru. Physically, there would be little to no difference between the two groups but the linguistics and even culture would be different. I like the idea that the entire Latin world is similar to the Islamic world in how they perceive themselves and the Andes being like Persia is indeed an interesting comparison.

Perhaps Belem could have a massive business of capturing Amazonian slaves and selling them to work in ships and the islands which are constantly being depopulated by warfare, disease and environment. It uses this wealth made from its colonies (nothing more than outposts which produce their own rice and capture slaves) to then expand its influence outwards and ends up fighting the State of Maranhao.

It would be interesting seeing how the Portuguese-speakers and Spanish-speakers would interact in La Plata and who would come out on top.
I think because the nature of Peru is similar to Persia, you'd have a multi-ethnic neo-Incan empire emerge after a while. In such a scenario, gradually, I'd say that Quecha would be dissolved into and subsumed by Spanish, influencing the vocab and grammar of the new Peruvian language kinda like how the different pre-Han languages have influenced the Chinese languages that were established later. The emergence of a neo-Incan empire is also why I think there'd some sort of wacky Incan-Catholic theocracy, similar to the Zoroastrian kings.

Also, I think an interesting place to explore would be Paraguay. Their language would have to be some mix of Guarani and Spanish and who know how'd they get along with their neighbors.

The La Plata would mostly be Spanish speaking. Brazil doesn't border it, thought with the State of Rio de Janeiro becoming a naval empire, they might contend.
 
I think because the nature of Peru is similar to Persia, you'd have a multi-ethnic neo-Incan empire emerge after a while. In such a scenario, gradually, I'd say that Quecha would be dissolved into and subsumed by Spanish, influencing the vocab and grammar of the new Peruvian language kinda like how the different pre-Han languages have influenced the Chinese languages that were established later. The emergence of a neo-Incan empire is also why I think there'd some sort of wacky Incan-Catholic theocracy, similar to the Zoroastrian kings.

Also, I think an interesting place to explore would be Paraguay. Their language would have to be some mix of Guarani and Spanish and who know how'd they get along with their neighbors.

The La Plata would mostly be Spanish speaking. Brazil doesn't border it, thought with the State of Rio de Janeiro becoming a naval empire, they might contend.
I really like the ideas about the Peruvians. That would make a very interesting nation.

In regards to Paraguay, I would love to see them have an empire or two since 2000. Perhaps they are a semi-nomadic people who form confederations wit Gaucho vassals to conquer La Plata. Maybe they are the South American version of the Kushan. In regards to Brazil, Rio Grande do Sul is right next to Argentina so we have an area where Spanish speakers are touching shoulders with Portuguese speakers.

Rio de Janeiro could definitely become a naval empire. Perhaps they are the USA of South America.
 
I had imagined that Brazil would become an imperial monarchy, but the nation would be divided further into feudal plantations and economically powerful free cities. Meanwhile, the Amazon and it's indigenous tribes would remain relatively unchanged.
 
I had imagined that Brazil would become an imperial monarchy, but the nation would be divided further into feudal plantations and economically powerful free cities. Meanwhile, the Amazon and it's indigenous tribes would remain relatively unchanged.
I think a Brazil should be divided between warring states like India whilst the coasts have a mercantile state here and there. The interior is inhabited by semi-nomadic people and the Amazonians are subject to slave raiders.
 
I think a Brazil should be divided between warring states like India whilst the coasts have a mercantile state here and there. The interior is inhabited by semi-nomadic people and the Amazonians are subject to slave raiders.
Realistically, you don't need slave raiders to go so far, (unless religious reasons but even then just declare the Andeans as heretics). I think raiding the Amazon for slaves is much harder than simply raiding cowboys or making prisoners of war slaves.
 
Realistically, you don't need slave raiders to go so far, (unless religious reasons but even then just declare the Andeans as heretics). I think raiding the Amazon for slaves is much harder than simply raiding cowboys or making prisoners of war slaves.
I see Belem as being the prominent slave traders in the Amazon as they would have easy access to the river and they could use the slaves to work in their merchant ships.
 
I see Belem as being the prominent slave traders in the Amazon as they would have easy access to the river and they could use the slaves to work in their merchant ships.
I don't think that you know how the historical slave trade worked. Historically, African slaves for both the Transatlantic and Arab slave trades were prisoners of war that agricultural tribes would wage against each other.

There isn't that scenario in the Amazon. Also, why go out and capture slaves, when your serfs are basically slaves. Just because Belem is next to the river doesn't mean its worth going out looking for them.

E: Though, doing more reading, if the Belem Slave trade is more like the Arab Slave trade, then raiding parties might occur. Though I don't think that the Amazon is nearly as dense as East Africa
 
Last edited:
I don't think that you know how the historical slave trade worked. Historically, African slaves for both the Transatlantic and Arab slave trades were prisoners of war that agricultural tribes would wage against each other.

There isn't that scenario in the Amazon. Also, why go out and capture slaves, when your serfs are basically slaves. Just because Belem is next to the river doesn't mean its worth going out looking for them.

E: Though, doing more reading, if the Belem Slave trade is more like the Arab Slave trade, then raiding parties might occur. Though I don't think that the Amazon is nearly as dense as East Africa
I am aware of how the historical slave trade worked which is why I also believe the Gaucho should engage in the slave trade. In regards to the Amazon, what I see is Belem establishing outposts along the Amazon from where they exploit the natural resources but also engage in skirmishes and conflicts with the natives every now and then and thus capture tribesmen to serve as slaves in the ships. Sometimes, adventurous men would form a band of soldiers and march into the jungle to fight natives and capture slaves to sell.

In regards to population density, perhaps the Amazonians could develop a mutation or adaptation that allows them to better survive in the Amazon (due to resistance to certain diseases) and although they won't have civilizations in the jungle, they would have at least a higher density then might be expected.
 
How much of Brazil would be "civilized," and how much would be tribesmen? Would, for example Minas Gerais be a part of the Brazilian Empire? Would Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul be cowboy/pataneiro land, or would it be reclaimed by selva?
 
How much of Brazil would be "civilized," and how much would be tribesmen? Would, for example Minas Gerais be a part of the Brazilian Empire? Would Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul be cowboy/pataneiro land, or would it be reclaimed by selva?
Amazon: Tribesmen

Cerrado: Gauchos/Cowboys, apparently it is not fit for pre-industrial agriculture

Mato Grosso would probably become jungle in the north and west. Cowboys in the east

Mato Grosso do Sul would be all Cowboys

In my mind, Rio Grande do Sul is split. Northern part is its own state, southern is either independent or taken over by Uruguay, Porto Alegro is part of the Brazillian Empire

The Brazillian Empire is Coastal Brazil, so Porto Allegro and the coastal cities, and controlling the coast up to Natal and maybe beyond. The capital has moved back to Rio. Its more contiguous because the Serra do Mar blocks interior warlords

Santa Catarina is broken into little states, the coast is dominated by Brazil

Western Paranal is its own state, Eastern is a bunch of little states, dominated by Brazil

State of Sao Paulo is indepedent, Sao Paulo is fought over between the Brazillian Empire and the state of Sao Paulo.

Southern Minas Gerais is a state, Central Minas Gerais along the San Francisco river is a state, Eastern part is part of an enlarged Espirito Santo.

The North western states are small hydraulic fiefdoms in the interior and the Brazillian Empire along the Coast.

Goais and Tocantins are cowboys b/c cerrado.

Para around Belem and Maranhao are rice states. Ceara is probably its own little thing, idk how fertile it's interior is.
 
Amazon: Makes sense

Cerrado:
This makes a great deal of sense. Depending on what we do with Argentina and Paraguay, we could have a nomadic culture split between the northern Gauchos and the southern ones. It won't be to dissimilar to the Western and Eastern Steppe of the Old World. However, it is likely that there are sedentary states in Paraguay and northwestern Argentina though this does not mean that perhaps these regions are nomadic empires that rule over a sedentary population. Unfortunately, trade routes won't allow for the region to have its own 'Samarkand'. Nevertheless, even if non nomadic sedentary states existed in the region, I imagine Gauchos would often cross their territories from Brazil to Patagonia.

Mato Grosso: Again, reasonable.

Mato Grosso do Sul: No complaint except that it might be subject to influence from a possible Paraguayan sedentary state.

Rio Grande do Sul: I imagine southern Uruguay would be separate to northern Uruguay so we could have a northern Uruguayan Hispanic state conquer southern Rio Grande do Sul. I like the idea of northern Rio Grande do Sul being independent and Brazil controlling Porto Alegre, however, I find it hard to imagine that Brazil would have an undisrupted line of territory. I prefer something like the USA though personally I'd rather we just have no Brazilian Empire with it instead being something that exists every now and then like in India you occasionally get large empires that unite much of the subcontinent. If we were to go with this, Porto Alegre could be a city-state. I do, however, agree that a Brazilian rump state should be located in Rio and be protected by the Serra do Mar which I do accept would probably give Brazil a maritime tradition as they focus more on the sea.

Santa Catarina: I don't see why Santa Catarina should be divided amongst multiple little states but similar things have been seen in history so I have no issue with it. If we do go with the Brazilian maritime empire idea, it makes sense for the Brazilians to directly rule the state's coastlines.

Parana: Western Parana being its own state makes sense; it would be a terrestrial state with some influence from Paraguay or maybe they themselves would influence Paraguay. I like the idea of the East being a bnch of little states under Brazilian influence but not directly owned by Brazil.

Sao Paulo: A regional terrestrial power in the region is something I like. There is a constant fight between them and the Brazilians for control over the city of Sao Paulo.

Minas Gerais: The two inland kingdoms make sense and the enlarged Espirito Santo could play a role very similar to Sao Paulo.

Northwestern States: What region do you mean by this? I am going to assume you mean the Northeast. There should be several somewhat isolationist kingdoms in the interior with Brazilian influence going up to Natal which is a city they control. The other coasts are controlled by other kingdoms.

Goais and Tocantins: Makes sense

Para and Maranhao: Makes sense for the two to be rice states which have mercantile states and compete with one other in the Caribbean. Ceara can be similar but weaker then either Belem or Maranhao.
 
Amazon: Makes sense

Cerrado:
This makes a great deal of sense. Depending on what we do with Argentina and Paraguay, we could have a nomadic culture split between the northern Gauchos and the southern ones. It won't be to dissimilar to the Western and Eastern Steppe of the Old World. However, it is likely that there are sedentary states in Paraguay and northwestern Argentina though this does not mean that perhaps these regions are nomadic empires that rule over a sedentary population. Unfortunately, trade routes won't allow for the region to have its own 'Samarkand'. Nevertheless, even if non nomadic sedentary states existed in the region, I imagine Gauchos would often cross their territories from Brazil to Patagonia.

Mato Grosso: Again, reasonable.

Mato Grosso do Sul: No complaint except that it might be subject to influence from a possible Paraguayan sedentary state.

Rio Grande do Sul: I imagine southern Uruguay would be separate to northern Uruguay so we could have a northern Uruguayan Hispanic state conquer southern Rio Grande do Sul. I like the idea of northern Rio Grande do Sul being independent and Brazil controlling Porto Alegre, however, I find it hard to imagine that Brazil would have an undisrupted line of territory. I prefer something like the USA though personally I'd rather we just have no Brazilian Empire with it instead being something that exists every now and then like in India you occasionally get large empires that unite much of the subcontinent. If we were to go with this, Porto Alegre could be a city-state. I do, however, agree that a Brazilian rump state should be located in Rio and be protected by the Serra do Mar which I do accept would probably give Brazil a maritime tradition as they focus more on the sea.
Western Paraguay is mostly swamp, Eastern Paraguay is probably an agricultural state. Northern Argentina I am unsure about. I think that it's generally too swampy for agriculture.

If you look at the geography, the Serra do Mar consists of escarpments 50m from to Porto Allegro to Rio.

Thus, Rio could have an undisputed line of control along the coast.
Santa Catarina: I don't see why Santa Catarina should be divided amongst multiple little states but similar things have been seen in history so I have no issue with it. If we do go with the Brazilian maritime empire idea, it makes sense for the Brazilians to directly rule the state's coastlines.
Eastern Santa Catarina is one state and the west is very hilly, leading to smaller hill-states
Parana: Western Parana being its own state makes sense; it would be a terrestrial state with some influence from Paraguay or maybe they themselves would influence Paraguay. I like the idea of the East being a bnch of little states under Brazilian influence but not directly owned by Brazil.

Sao Paulo: A regional terrestrial power in the region is something I like. There is a constant fight between them and the Brazilians for control over the city of Sao Paulo.

Minas Gerais: The two inland kingdoms make sense and the enlarged Espirito Santo could play a role very similar to Sao Paulo.

Northwestern States: What region do you mean by this? I am going to assume you mean the Northeast. There should be several somewhat isolationist kingdoms in the interior with Brazilian influence going up to Natal which is a city they control. The other coasts are controlled by other kingdoms.

Goais and Tocantins: Makes sense

Para and Maranhao: Makes sense for the two to be rice states which have mercantile states and compete with one other in the Caribbean. Ceara can be similar but weaker then either Belem or Maranhao.
I don't think Para and Maranhao are competing in the Caribbean, they're too far. They are effectively the end of the Brazillian world. There are merchants who travel along the Guyanas to Trinidad but the journey is poorly populated. Even now, the Guyanas are incredibly sparsely populated. Im not even sure that there are coastal kingdoms. Maybe some ports along the coast at the mouths of rivers.
 
Western Paraguay is mostly swamp, Eastern Paraguay is probably an agricultural state. Northern Argentina I am unsure about. I think that it's generally too swampy for agriculture.

If you look at the geography, the Serra do Mar consists of escarpments 50m from to Porto Allegro to Rio.

Thus, Rio could have an undisputed line of control along the coast.


Eastern Santa Catarina is one state and the west is very hilly, leading to smaller hill-states


I don't think Para and Maranhao are competing in the Caribbean, they're too far. They are effectively the end of the Brazillian world. There are merchants who travel along the Guyanas to Trinidad but the journey is poorly populated. Even now, the Guyanas are incredibly sparsely populated. Im not even sure that there are coastal kingdoms. Maybe some ports along the coast at the mouths of rivers.
Your points do make some good sense. In regards to Para and Maranhao, I would agree with you on that. They can be minor outside 'powers' I suppose who export products to Trinidadian merchants. The Guyanas would be mostly tribal with weak coastal regimes.
 
Top