I totally agree with that. The problem is whether those non-native (of which I am one) English language users accept my usage advice. They don't have to.
The Legacy of Saint Brendan: A History of the Western Hemisphere, 512 to 1400
- Thread starter Rognvald
- Start date
-
- Tags
- americas dark ages exploration
I totally agree with that. The problem is whether those non-native (of which I am one) English language users accept my usage advice. They don't have to.
I always liked the historian's comment that the difference between a Viking raid and a trading mission was whether the destination had sentries posted.
Quiver: The Four Righteous Campaigns
UNIVERSITY OF EOFRIC TERMINAL 4 ASKS:
What were the Four Righteous Campaigns? What was their significance?
SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY AT THE COLLEGE OF SAINT LIDWINA TERMINAL 1 ANSWERS:
The Four Righteous Campaigns are the term given by Ismaili scholars to the four military actions that took place in the early days of their religion. Another term used by them is the "Four Cardinal Campaigns", referring to the idea that each campaign was launched towards a different "cardinal direction".
The Northern Campaign, perhaps the most famous in Western circles, was the campaign launched against Rhomania in the late 8th Century A.D.. It saw all but the Anatolian reaches of that Empire fall to the Ismailis.
The Western Campaign took place five years after, after an insult sent by the ruler of the Kingdom of Carthage (Vandal), which encouraged the Ismailis to take ride West, conquering much of North Africa before being halted by the Italo-Gotho-Frankish expedition under the auspices of Pope Sabinian II (one of the first major instances of the Pope taking action beyond the control of the Rhomanian Emperor).
The Southern Campaign was the one that the Ismailis had always wanted to launch. Their religion had been born out of the fires of the Abyssinian attacks against Mecca and the conquest of Himyar. This was an act of vengeance against the Abyssinians for all the fire they had visited upon the Arabs. Launched in the 740s A.D., the Ismailis ground South through Nubia and made a daring crossing of the Red Sea. After nearly thirty years of violence, the Ismailis succeeded in their vengeance and had burned Abyssinia to the ground.
The Eastern Campaign was launched almost as an afterthought, in 820 A.D., after the Mihranid Persians launched an illfated attempt to retake Mesopotamia. Easily brushed aside, the Ismaili counterattack was brutal and resulted in the incorporation of Eastern Persia in the Ismaili sphere.
The significance of the Four Righteous Campaigns was that it expanded the reach of the Ismaili Domain to much of the Near East, and brushed aside the old order, forcing rulers to adapt and change.
Last edited:
So the Arabs in this timeline don't control Western Persia. That's interesting! Might we see a Zoroastrian rump-state emerge, because that could have interesting effects on the religious cauldron that is Central Asia. Also, where did the Ismali conquests in North Africa stop? Due to Frankish and Gothic control over the region, I could definitely see the Christian forces managing to hold Cartage or, at least, reclaim the region.
Not that any of this has too much to do with the focus of your timeline, of course, and I don't mean to bog you down in non-focused issues.
No they do control Western Persia as well, sorry if that is confusing. They do not have any major footholds in Central Asia, however, and likely will not for some time.
The Christians managed to retake Carthage, but that marked the extent of their campaign. The Ismailis had accomplished their main goal of punishing the Vandals, and so were willing to make terms to focus on the real enemy- Abyssinia. “Christian” North Africa is a mess. Technically a Vandal rules out of Carthage, but various Amazigh petty kingdoms exist de facto.
Yells angrily in BasqueWho? The only Iberians I know are the Suebi and Visigoths
So Ismailism is like ATL Islam, right? What causes things to unfold differently here?
So, Christian Carthage, but in exchange Ismaili Abyssinia. Hmmm.
Christian Carthage means the region continues to be a breadbasket to Italy, making the Lombards/Greeks (?) slightly stronger.
Ismaili Abyssinia means that East African Christianity dies more quickly than IOTL (unless you’re planning some sort of crazy Makuria wank). It also means that Ismaili direct conquest into East Africa is plausible, which could be very, very interesting for the whole continent...
Christian Carthage means the region continues to be a breadbasket to Italy, making the Lombards/Greeks (?) slightly stronger.
Ismaili Abyssinia means that East African Christianity dies more quickly than IOTL (unless you’re planning some sort of crazy Makuria wank). It also means that Ismaili direct conquest into East Africa is plausible, which could be very, very interesting for the whole continent...
On the other hand if western North Africa remain Christian then probably so does southern Spain. Al-Andalus was one of the richest medieval kingdoms and it now remains in Visigoth hands. And as the climate changes (as you pointed out) there will still be cross cultural adoption of north African crops and agricultural practices like hardier Durum wheat and improved irrigation. Southern Spain may or may not be as rich as in our history but it will still be a jewel in the Christian crown.
And Christians now control some of the major trade routes across the Sahara and from North Africa into Europe which is going to be a big economic boon. It seems the west African empires are now much more likely to be Christian than Muslim. Africa might be split right down the middle when it comes to religion.
Fascinating. So if Ismalism hasn't made her way into Central Asia, I suppose the region remains largely Buddhist without an alternate battle of Talas?
Just throwing out an idea, but: would it be on the cards to have Sassanid/Zoroastrian communities take hold in Transoxiana, where they try (perhaps in vain) to reconquer Eranshar? An ironic twist on the Shahanmeh where Transoxiana becomes the new Persian homeland?
Fascinating. So if Ismalism hasn't made her way into Central Asia, I suppose the region remains largely Buddhist without an alternate battle of Talas?
Just throwing out an idea, but: would it be on the cards to have Sassanid/Zoroastrian communities take hold in Transoxiana, where they try (perhaps in vain) to reconquer Eranshar? An ironic twist on the Shahanmeh where Transoxiana becomes the new Persian homeland?
Things will have to transpire differently in Persia proper for this to work. Maybe the *Caliphate (what’s the term ITTL?) retains direct, centralized control over the region, making it more Arabized but more peripheral to the Ismaili domains. Then Khorasan and beyond can stay independent...