The Legacy of Saint Brendan: A History of the Western Hemisphere, 512 to 1400
- Thread starter Rognvald
- Start date
-
- Tags
- americas dark ages exploration
The proper place name would have been Wabanahkik, while Wabanaki meant "people of the dawn".
Note that the Algonquian groups in New England didn't just speak dialects of a single language, they spoke completely different tongues, so there was plenty of variance. For example, Wabanahkik is only the Mi'kmaq (first to diverge yet simultaneously archaic, the language is grouped alone as a single older branch of Eastern Algonquian), term for "dawn land", in no way universal, same with Wabanaki, while having a less clear etymology as to what specific group, it seems to be an exonym, with clear cognates found in Ojibwe-Potawatomi affiliated languages, such as Algonquin (not Algonquian, an overall ethnolinguistic term, just Algonquin, as in the singular tribe), Wàbanaki and Ojibwe, Waabanaki.
In all, whatever term is chosen, remember that there's plenty of variance and that it'll most likely be determined by which group the Europeans came into contact with first.
CIF: South Asia, Oceania, Africa
So here’s the thing- the Ismaili were never as “missionary” as OTL Islam. This comes from its more Jewish roots. By 1400, it is THE religion in the Middle East and East Africa, but it’s never advanced much farther along the traditional vectors. So this means the history of South Asia is dramatically different... and so removed from Talbeah that I only have some general notes, haha.
The subcontinent has mostly been under various Dharmic regimes, save for the Turco-Persian Yabghu Empire pushing to the Indus. This all changes with the Khitan Khaganate, whose Red Flag Horde came thundering into the region after the Green Flag Horde broke the Yabghu. The Red Flag Horde eventually carved out the Khaishan Empire, adopting Indian culture and generally being polite to those who pay tribute (those who don’t pay tribute, well...). South India is mostly independent of the Khaishan, and made up of various small Tamil-ish realms. In 1400, the Khaishan still maintain their Empire, but are definitely more Indian than Khitan at this point.
If I can decipher my jotted note from March of 2019, Indochina was dominated by the Khmer, but their Empire collapsed in 1320 it seems. Various smaller states of different ethnicities have established their own patrimonies by 1400.
Indonesia is a mess of petty mostly Hindu kingdoms, though a lot of it came close to being unified in the 14th Century- the conquerer died, though, and it collapsed.
Oceania... I have no real notes on. I’ll have to get back to you on that.
Africa... Africa is fun. So the Ismaili’s were stopped by the BattlePope at the gates of Carthage, so much of North Africa remained Berber and Christian. The Ismaili, however, turned their attention south towards Ethiopia, which they smashed. So for the most part, West Africa is becoming like syncretic Christian, especially helped by the Gaellecians sailing along the coast, and East Africa is gradually becoming Ismaili. A Mansa from West Africa pulled a Mansa Musa and traveled to Rome for pilgramage, though he didn’t quite devalue gold. But it is much more connected with Europe than OTL, thanks in part to the shipbuilding advances from the Atlantic trade.
Last edited:
No, it’s me watching Bannerlord videos and forgetting how to spell Khitan
Zek Sora
Donor
Ha, fair enough.
Unrelated, but what's the level of Papal/central Catholic power in this world, and what happened with the Great Schism?
CIF: Papal power and the Schism
The Pope and Catholic hierarchy have a pretty high power level in 1400, enough for the Cinguettists to be uncomfortable about it. The Second Empire (though its more an Empire in name only) is still defender of the faith and has an intensely close relationship with the Pope, which extends to much of Western Christendom.
The Great Schism OTL was facilitated by more secular affairs, perhaps, than ours. Pope Sabinian II (#BattlePope) led the Western Christian armies to save Carthage’s bacon, not Constantinoples, and that made the Emperor pissed. This led to the relationship becoming more strained, until the Pope crowned the Over-King of the Franks Emperor in direct defiance of the Rhomanian Emperor.
What are the borders of the various polities in the Americas? I know that this question is kind of difficult to answer for anything besides modern nation-states, as even the Roman Empire's maps were more aspirational than factual at the edges, but I'd like to at least get an idea of how big the main European colony has gotten. Perhaps Labrador and OTL's Atlantic provinces, following the St. Laurence River and ending a bit west of Toronto, and extending south to Maine? I assume the northern reaches aren't as far as Hudson's Bay, though, especially since the poor soil of the Canadian Shield puts a kibosh on agriculturalist expansion.
Has anything happened in South America, or is it too far away for events in North America to affect it?
That will be the first post of the new thread!
That one is actually a trade secret for the new thread.
Two questions this time, though one is closely related to the first one.
Are there any strong contenders to rebuild the Yabghu Empire?
And has Japan caught the butterflies? If so, what's going on there?
Are there any strong contenders to rebuild the Yabghu Empire?
And has Japan caught the butterflies? If so, what's going on there?
1. The two strongest of the Yabghu successor states are the Kianian Shahs and the Atlasi Shahs. The Kianian’s have their base of support on the Gulf, the Atlasi more close to the Afghan hinterlands.
2. YES... but I have very limited notes on its current state. I know more what it’ll be like in the present, haha
What exactly does it mean to be a non-Arab Ismaili? If they are named in reference to the idea of the desert tribes being the sons of Ishmael, and are articulating their religion as the spirituality of Ishmael, a sort of companion-piece to/spinoff of the spirituality of Israel... how does a non-Arab lay claim to that? Are the Ismailis still claiming to be a universal faith, just one evolving out of the Ishmaelite understanding instead of the Israelite understanding like Christianity? Is it more restricted based on descent, and if so was it always meant to be that way or did it just turn out that way after the generally Arab-particularist character of the Four Great Campaigns and their targets? And might its presence in places like Persia prove ephemeral, especially as Zoroastrian-friendly elements regroup in the east?
And leading off that, if Setraland interacts with Europe through the maple and fur trade, the Ismailis kinda have the same niche: animal products from Africa, and sugarcane plantations in southern Iraq. If those plantations are worked by slaves from Africa obtained from/after the destruction of Axum, then how do those slaves fit into the Ismaili understanding? Do they get to join the faith or are they frozen out by the Ismailis' attitudes toward the continent?
And leading off that, if Setraland interacts with Europe through the maple and fur trade, the Ismailis kinda have the same niche: animal products from Africa, and sugarcane plantations in southern Iraq. If those plantations are worked by slaves from Africa obtained from/after the destruction of Axum, then how do those slaves fit into the Ismaili understanding? Do they get to join the faith or are they frozen out by the Ismailis' attitudes toward the continent?
I actually have a huge documet somewhere about Ismaili religious policy... I’ll have to find it, but it should answer many of your questions.
I finally found my notes! Thank the quarantine, haha.
There are like three classes in Ismaili thought- the mubarak, or “blessed”, that are the full-on-Arab Ismailis. They’re the ones who get all the cool stuff promised in Ismaili scripture and run the Ismaili governments. Below them are the mutabanana, or “adopted”, that are either assimilated conquered peoples or children of Ismaili and non-Ismaili parents. They get all the blessings promised to the mubarak, though they don’t quite have the same ability to move up in society. Below all of these are the maleun, or “cursed”, who CANNOT get into paradise. The best they are promised is a bizarre sort of “half-heaven”, only if they are completely obedient to their overlords. This is, in many respects, a slave class to those above them. Most Axumites and Nubians fall into this category, though also several Persian and Syriac family groups were also roped in. These are people who are viewed as having rejected God by virtue of their birthright.
And then there is the amorphus category of non-Ismailis, mostly in Egypt, who are too large of a population to assimilate as much of the Levant has been. They generally pay a protection tax and enjoy some measure of autonomy, as well as promotion of Coptic Christianity ad an alternative to that pushed by Rome or Constantinople. Most Christians in the Ismaili Tayifa are Copts by this point.
At the muta (muta), mutabanana (mutabanana), the hottest spot north of Havana...
So even if you're not formally a slave you can still get held back by chauvinism-- like all the negatives of Umayyad governance with none of the positives. I do hope the Africans find a way out of this system, but the monasteries/highland tribal formations that could be expected to lead a revolt or maintain an Axumite/Makurian consciousness must have been destroyed by now...
Last edited:
