One Thousand Years - A Collabrative TL

I'd like you to reconsider. I don't see why it had to wait for centuries more, and we can have a slower but more naval minded (note they're hugging coasts) group of nations. I'd like to get as many people in the game as possible before the Little Ice Age sets in, at which time there will be a definite slow-down.
I've considered and reconsidered it, and my answer remains the same.

1. There is simply no reason why they would want to go to the New World.
2. They lack the resources to set up colonies (in fact, I'm not even sure how Ireland has been able to pull off what's happened so far).
3. I don't want cliches in ths timeline, and Vinland causing early colonialism is perhaps the biggest medieval AH cliche there is, right up there with Anglo-Saxon wank. In fact, my plan was to have Vinland fade away in the 1020s.
4. It's already been done in Empty America.

I hope you can understand, but my main argument is that this TL shouldn't turn into a cliche storm.
 
Last edited:
Now, for the First Crusade.

1072: Hisham III is assassinated by the rival Hammudid family, leaving no real heir. The Caliphate of Cordoba fractures into feuding domains called Taifas.

1074: Pope Gregory VI speaks in his hometown of Pavia, calling for Christians to march and liberate the pilgrimage site of Santiago de Compostella from the Moors.

1075: Beginning of the First Crusade. Noblemen from France, England, Italy, Germany, and even an army of peasants from Central Europe travel to Sapin, led by Drogo of Hauteville, his nephew Ranulph Borsa, William FitzRobert, and Michel the Hermit.

1077: William FitzRobert conquers Valencia and crowns himself king of the city.

1078: The Crusaders take Santiago, leading to the creation of the kingdom of Galicia and the Knights of the Shining Stars.

1079: Toledo is conquered by the Crusaders, leading to the creation of the principality of the same name. The First Crusade officially draws to a close.


A map will come up shortly to show who got what.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Okay here's the map

Crusaders (Blue):
1. Kingdom of Navarre - King Robert IV of France, rules as Robert I
2. County of Barcelona - Count Ranulph Borsa de Hauteville
3. Duchy of Zaragoza - Duke Berthold Billung of Saxony
4. Kingdom of Valencia - King William FitzRobert, brother to the King of France
5. County of Castille - Count Renaud de Vermandois
6. Principality of Toledo - Prince Walcher Siwardson
7. Kingdom of Galicia - Regent Michel the Hermit
8. Kingdom of Leon - King Raymond Robert de Toulouse
9. Order of Saint James of the Shining Stars - Grandmaster Richard de le Mans
Not Shown: Sardinia and Corsica, conquered and held by Margrave Joachim of Tuscany

Taifas (Green):
1. Taifa of Al-Adna
2. Taifa of Al-Garb (includes Cinet Islands)
3. Kingdom of the al-Muratibids
4. Taifa of Al-Mariyya (Muria - vassaled to Zenata)
5. Republic of Qurtuba

CrusadeTaifa.png
 
Damn I thought this thread was dead and now look at it. I going to resurrect it but that's no longer nesessary:). My intention in Spain was for an earlier united Spainish Kingdom not a complete collapse:(. Oh well. I don't want to step on anyone's toes so I'll do some work in Asia:

1020-1050: A fervent Nestorian cleric manages to convert several more mongol tribes to Nestorianism then in OTL, including the Kiyad tribe, from which OTL Genghis Khan came from(and who most likely will be butterflied away).
 
Now, for the First Crusade.

[...]

1074: Pope Gregory VI speaks in his hometown of Pavia, calling for Christians to march and liberate the pilgrimage site of Santiago de Compostella from the Moors.


It took me some time to read and digest all the information in this thread.
I wanted to add some events in the HRE, but the crusade topic was more important.
Now I'm a couple hours late, but here's my comment anyway:


As far as I aware, we don't have a explicit schism between Eastern and Western Church.
We didn't even go through the Schism of the Two Sergioi.

What's more important here: We did not have any Investiture Controversy.
While there is plenty of room for sacral-secular conflict, we haven't worked it out yet.
The IC, however, was a main reason for the Pope to make such a funny thing as to call people to fight for God's sake and promise indulgence to them.
Moreover, it did work IOTL, among other things, because the alleged bad treatment of the holy places in Palestine by the Muslims raised religious indignation.
The wars in Spain and "Germania Slavica" needed some argument before they were accepted as equal to a crusade.

So I don't think a crusade fits into this timeline so far.
 

Glen

Moderator
I've considered and reconsidered it, and my answer remains the same.

1. There is simply no reason why they would want to go to the New World.
2. They lack the resources to set up colonies (in fact, I'm not even sure how Ireland has been able to pull off what's happened so far).
3. I don't want cliches in ths timeline, and Vinland causing early colonialism is perhaps the biggest medieval AH cliche there is, right up there with Anglo-Saxon wank. In fact, my plan was to have Vinland fade away in the 1020s.
4. It's already been done in Empty America.

I hope you can understand, but my main argument is that this TL shouldn't turn into a cliche storm.

Hey, your project and your call.

Feel free to avoid things you think overdone. However, there is sometimes a reason why they are 'overdone'....
 
Damn I thought this thread was dead and now look at it. I going to resurrect it but that's no longer nesessary:). My intention in Spain was for an earlier united Spainish Kingdom not a complete collapse:(. Oh well. I don't want to step on anyone's toes so I'll do some work in Asia:

1020-1050: A fervent Nestorian cleric manages to convert several more mongol tribes to Nestorianism then in OTL, including the Kiyad tribe, from which OTL Genghis Khan came from(and who most likely will be butterflied away).

Sorry about Spain, but events sort of didn't work out for it. That said, your Mongol event is added.

It took me some time to read and digest all the information in this thread.
I wanted to add some events in the HRE, but the crusade topic was more important.
Now I'm a couple hours late, but here's my comment anyway:


As far as I aware, we don't have a explicit schism between Eastern and Western Church.
We didn't even go through the Schism of the Two Sergioi.

What's more important here: We did not have any Investiture Controversy.
While there is plenty of room for sacral-secular conflict, we haven't worked it out yet.
The IC, however, was a main reason for the Pope to make such a funny thing as to call people to fight for God's sake and promise indulgence to them.
Moreover, it did work IOTL, among other things, because the alleged bad treatment of the holy places in Palestine by the Muslims raised religious indignation.
The wars in Spain and "Germania Slavica" needed some argument before they were accepted as equal to a crusade.

So I don't think a crusade fits into this timeline so far.

OTL didn't have all of Spain falling to the Moors. And the Eastern and Western Churches have split, though I don't recall of the exact details. That said, I see your point. If you would like to add in events for a IC equivalent, by all means go ahead. :cool:
 
Sorry about letting this slide so much. To get it back on track, here's the investure controversy.

1047 - Otto IV dies. He is succeded to the HRE by Otto the White, but this is contested by Otto IV's son-in-law, Otto of Nordheim. This begins the War of the Two Ottos

1052 - The more powerful Otto the White is able to defeat his same-named rival and has Otto of Nordheim executed. Otto the white officially becomes Emperor Otto V

1057 - Otto V dies. Henry of the Palatine is elected the new emperor, as Henry II, later to be known as Henry the Mad

1058 - Emperor Henry II begins to show signs of madness

1060 - Emperor Henry II kills his wife with an axe. Pope Augustine excommunicates Henry and appoints Wilhelm of Meissen as Emperor.

1061 - Both Henry II and Wilhelm of Meissen fall ill and die, leaving the Imperial throne empty. Dedi, Margrave of the Saxon Ostmark, declares himself emperor, in opposition to Bernard III, Duke of Saxony.

1063 - Bernard defeats Dedi and drives into exile in Hungary, beginning the Billung Dynasty. Emperor Bernard I starts appoint Billung loyalists to episcopal positions.

1066 - Pope Leo IX demands Bernard I cease royal investure. Bernard, afraid to lose any control over the fractious Empire, refuses, and is excommunicated. His Italian holdins are ceased by Leo's ally, Joachim of Canossa.

1069 - Bernard I, Joachim of Canossa, and Leo IX meet at Milan. Bernard is made to do penance, and Pope and Emperor reconcile.

1071 - Bernard I dies and is succeded by his son Hermann to the Emperorship, and his brother Berthold to the Duchy of Saxony.
 
Is anybody interested in restarting this thread? Things obviously got out of hand, so there would have to be more ground rules before we start again, but I need to know if there is interest first.
 
I thought this project a very nice idea in general.
And I would like to contribute to a restart.

Maybe you're right we a couple of rules (but not too many). Let's discuss that here.

In short: I have no idea of suitable rules.
But I know what I would like to try to avoid:
It's only natural that we all have special interests, a certain focus when having a certain idea, and put a limited amount of effort into our contributions.
This implies that we only cover part of the world ourselves, and ignore others.
When someone else notices that there should be an addendum about an state/people/individual/disease/technology ... originating from outside the considered scope, but interfering with it, then it might be already to late to fit them in (e.g. "and then the Mongols got lost on their way West; 50 years later, they arrived at the target of their raid ...").
I am sure if we really need a rule for that. But we should be aware of it.
Or perhaps we should encourage to take time x aspect pieces rather than just time intervals?


Second point:
We should agree on whether we let the TL develop as it does, or if we follow a certain framework with some fixed points in it (e.g. the First Crusade). This, of course, has some implications on what happens otherwise ...
While the first option seems to be the more typical for such a game, the latter one might help avoiding an inconsistent world. Perhaps a given framework also encourages more people to fill it than to build everything from scratch ..,


Just my 2 lepta.
 
I thought this project a very nice idea in general.
And I would like to contribute to a restart.

Maybe you're right we a couple of rules (but not too many). Let's discuss that here.

In short: I have no idea of suitable rules.
But I know what I would like to try to avoid:
It's only natural that we all have special interests, a certain focus when having a certain idea, and put a limited amount of effort into our contributions.
This implies that we only cover part of the world ourselves, and ignore others.
When someone else notices that there should be an addendum about an state/people/individual/disease/technology ... originating from outside the considered scope, but interfering with it, then it might be already to late to fit them in (e.g. "and then the Mongols got lost on their way West; 50 years later, they arrived at the target of their raid ...").
I am sure if we really need a rule for that. But we should be aware of it.
Or perhaps we should encourage to take time x aspect pieces rather than just time intervals?


Second point:
We should agree on whether we let the TL develop as it does, or if we follow a certain framework with some fixed points in it (e.g. the First Crusade). This, of course, has some implications on what happens otherwise ...
While the first option seems to be the more typical for such a game, the latter one might help avoiding an inconsistent world. Perhaps a given framework also encourages more people to fill it than to build everything from scratch ..,


Just my 2 lepta.
My main rule would be to avoid the big four cliches of Medieval Alternate History - Surviving Vinland, Anglo-Saxons win at Hastings, Byzantines win at Manzikert, and technological innovations speed up for no reason. We managed to prevent the second and third from even occuring, and the fourth was ignored, but Vinland quickly became a problem. So I guess a first rule would be "The Americas are offlimits to colonization until stated otherwise" to prevent ASB level 12th century colonial empires. So Vinland will fade away on schedule in the next version.

The second rule would probably be "No wanking". For the most part we avoided this, but one kingdom was just getting ridiculous - Ireland. Almost out of nowhere Ireland annexed Scotland, Iceland, Greenland, and Vinland, and, after getting the majority of their army wiped out by the English, were able to rebound in less than two years and defeat the very nation that defeated them previously, which is impossible with a feudal society. And with no reason to do so, beyond 20th century revanchism. I would have vetoed most of those events, but my desire to increase interest in this won out, which probably backfired because I'm now convinced many people avoided this TL because Ireland was so ASBishly powerful. So, no more wanking.

I think those rules are good to start with, but I'd like a second opinion.
 
My main rule would be to avoid the big four cliches of Medieval Alternate History - Surviving Vinland, Anglo-Saxons win at Hastings, Byzantines win at Manzikert, and technological innovations speed up for no reason.

Yes, cliches aren't really good for such a project.
No, the four you mention are not the deadly sins.

There are plenty of wild and popular effects which do no good for the motivation of others.
But you will never catch all of them by writing down a list of them.

Moreover, I didn't miss Hastings or Manzikert. With Hastings, it would have been a mistake to introduce it, as that would have been a contaminant from OTL.
And if we agree and it's plausible, why bother? Battles can often go either way. Completely different populations/cultures (e.g. Vinland) and severe cultural revolutions (e.g. a new religion) are much worse.


How about that:
After a posting, other posters have a certain timeframe (e.g. 24hrs) to utter objections (in a polite and constructive way). And we all should be open to discuss modifications of our contributions. Basically, we should come up with a compromise in the end.

This does not only serve for the avoidance of spoiling wanks or cliches, but also for accidental implausibilities. If there the TL doesn't make sense in 1100, I'm not likely to contribute in 1500.

Of course it takes more time to do it that way, but then we will have done it as a team! :D
__________________________________________________________

Second:
The TL here suffered from the specific interests and moods of us.
The result was a TL where a lot happened in the extreme Northwest and Southeast of Europe, and the rest of the word basically sat still ...

This is what we have to avoid. Therefore, we should oblige ourselves to give an overview over all parts of the world including all important entities, on a regular basis - let's say, every 10 years. This needn't come from one player alone, nor necessarily from the latest poster.
But we should put this together before moving on. This reminds all players of other countries than the previous posters have focussed on.

And: We should start with such an overview in 1000 (or whenever you would like to start).
Although I am not completely illiterate in that era, I have to admit I had no idea what your PoD means. Without a accompanying overview, such specialties may choke other people's interest ...
 
Last edited:
Yes, cliches aren't really good for such a project.
No, the four you mention are not the deadly sins.

There are plenty of wild and popular effects which do no good for the motivation of others.
But you will never catch all of them by writing down a list of them.

Moreover, I didn't miss Hastings or Manzikert. With Hastings, it would have been a mistake to introduce it, as that would have been a contaminant from OTL.
And if we agree and it's plausible, why bother? Battles can often go either way. Completely different populations/cultures (e.g. Vinland) and severe cultural revolutions (e.g. a new religion) are much worse.


How about that:
After a posting, other posters have a certain timeframe (e.g. 24hrs) to utter objections (in a polite and constructive way). And we all should be open to discuss modifications of our contributions. Basically, we should come up with a compromise in the end.

This does not only serve for the avoidance of spoiling wanks or cliches, but also for accidental implausibilities. If there the TL doesn't make sense in 1100, I'm not likely to contribute in 1500.

Of course it takes more time to do it that way, but then we will have done it as a team! :D
__________________________________________________________

Second:
The TL here suffered from the specific interests and moods of us.
The result was a TL where a lot happened in the extreme Northwest and Southeast of Europe, and the rest of the word basically sat still ...

This is what we have to avoid. Therefore, we should oblige ourselves to give an overview over all parts of the world including all important entities, on a regular basis - let's say, every 10 years. This needn't come from one player alone, nor necessarily from the latest poster.
But we should put this together before moving on. This reminds all players of other countries than the previous posters have focussed on.

And: We should start with such an overview in 1000 (or whenever you would like to start).
Although I am not completely illiterate in that era, I have to admit I had no idea what your PoD means. Without a accompanying overview, such specialties may choke other people's interest ...
You raise some good points, though an overview every ten years might be a bit much for a TL supposed to last a millenium.

Very well, here's what appears to be the prelimanry rules for 1KY 2.0:
1. A post will not be considered canon until 24 hours have passed, during which another poster (myself included) could voice an objection. In the interest of fairness, my own posts will be subjected to this rule.
2. At yet to be determined intervals, an overview of the world will be posted, with requests for updates in regions or fields that are lacking.
3. In the interest of originality, Vinland cannot survive. This is to ensure that our TL does not become just another "Vinland TL."
4. Nothing ASB - no aliens, magic, time travel, et cetera.
5. No foreshadowing - ex. If your post is in 1037, don't reference 1076 unless 1076 has already been laid out. Otherwise you restrict other posters.

How do these rules look?
 
Looks good to me :)

And you're right that every ten years might be a bit often.
However, in most cases we would only need to edit the previous one ...

And as rules alone cannot guarantee a good TL, I'd say common sense (of the majority of posters) should be the most important principle.
 
I would be down to restart the timeline. though i disagree with the Manzikert and Hasting limits cause battle can go either way. That and they are likely to be butterflied away. The rules look quite reasonable. So are we going to create a new thread or keep it here.
 
I would be down to restart the timeline. though i disagree with the Manzikert and Hasting limits cause battle can go either way. That and they are likely to be butterflied away. The rules look quite reasonable. So are we going to create a new thread or keep it here.
The only POD I'm putting limits on is Vinland - Hastings and Manzikert were just used as other examples and shouldn't be a problem in the restart (They weren't here, but Vinland was, hence why it's being forbidden). I'll probably start a new thread sometime next week - I want to focus on End of an Age for a few days first. The new thread should be up sometime Monday.
 
Top