The Legacy of Saint Brendan: A History of the Western Hemisphere, 512 to 1400
- Thread starter Rognvald
- Start date
-
- Tags
- americas dark ages exploration
Woah, the developments in Terra Ursus are one thing, but the vastly changed situation in the East are something else!
Okay, so there’s no Arab invasion until the 8th century and they don’t actually invade Anatolia (yet at least), meaning that compared to IOTL the Byzantines are actually better off! What exactly happened to Persia?
I’m deeply curious about these Ismailis as well...
Last but not least, how far did those alt-Bulgars get?
Okay, so there’s no Arab invasion until the 8th century and they don’t actually invade Anatolia (yet at least), meaning that compared to IOTL the Byzantines are actually better off! What exactly happened to Persia?
I’m deeply curious about these Ismailis as well...
Last but not least, how far did those alt-Bulgars get?
CIF: Byzantium, Ismailis, and Onogurs
I thought that would get some attention.
Canonical Info Follows:
Persia and the Byzantines fought a series of wars in the late 6th and 7th centuries, and in this world the Byzantines managed to score several victories and snowballed from there until they took Ctesiphon. The Byzantines would get as far as Rasht until they were forced to stop to focus on processing these gains. The rump of Persia collapsed into fighting between the leading noble families, and were capable of doing little more than raids into Byzantine lands.
The Ismailis are... interesting. They have a very Jewish feel when compared to the Muslims of OTL, and identify as “Ishmaelites”- descendants of Abraham, etc.. In many ways, they are the inheritors of the Jewish kingdoms in Yemen. I’ll reveal a bit more about them as time goes on.
The Onogurs broke the Moesian lines, and managed to have similar success to our own Bulgars.
Also I fixed a word that I didn’t realize had an Ottoman etymology. See if you can spot it.
Last edited:
This is all interesting, but I'm not sure how plausible a Byzantine conquest of Persia would be. Of course, considering the quality of the timeline so far, I'm sure you'll be able to explain how the conquest was able to succeed.
Out of curiosity, is Zoroastrianism still followed significantly in parts of the world, or has it been phased out by Christianity and Ismaili worship (Ismailism?)?
Is it a conquest or just a high water mark that collapses within a few years? Because I could see a new Belisarius pull off the military victories necessary to pull this off...
The Ismailis (yeah Ismailism, or just Ismaili) haven’t taken the areas controlled by the rump Persian nobility, so Zoroastrianism is still practiced widely there.
Basically this. The Byzantines took Ctesiphon in 680, controlled it for about 15 years, then got swept out by the Ismailis.
Wait, this implies that Ismailism doesn’t have the same “global Ummah” philosophy as OTL Islam, unless the Ismailis just haven’t gotten around to conquering Khorasan and environs yet
I’d suggest having the Vikings join in the colonization game as a later participant, but it’s just under two centuries before they do anything of consequence. Maybe the Franks could send colonists to the New World eventually?
Have not had much time to comment lately, but boy is this TL impressive. The most curious thing is that you have managed to create a version of joint stock companies centuries in advance of when they happen OTL. My main question for you is based on what you have written, the Irish kingdoms have the early adapter advantage and are getting a head start in colonizing areas of North America that are among the most difficult. How come a group like the Franks or some Britannia kingdom has made a concerted effort to try and get a colony of their own?
The Franks are occupied with their powerful neighbors in Spain and Italy, and have not achieved the level of dominance enjoyed by them in OTL. They also have to deal with their own chaotic system of inheritance, which throws curveballs every time a major King dies.
The British are of course in similar petty polities to the Irish, but are faced with the slow-moving meatgrinder that are the Anglo-Saxon-Jutes. This, by need, takes away time that could be sent sending expeditions to the West.
markus meecham
Banned
i guess there is just no drive, on top of all those reasons.
why would them risk going to a place they only know via hearsay, and just for furs, on top of that?
the franks have the riches of iberia and italy at their reach, the visigoths can daydream of storming north africa, the byzantines are busy getting curbstomped by some weird jewish sect (or so they think), the ismailis want constantinople...that leaves out the northmen, the britons, the picts? the malinese? okay this one is a joke but a man can dream, no?