If an Eastern Orthodox country colonized the new world, how would its policies differ from Catholic and Protestant colonization of the Americas?

Is it any better or worse for the native empires and confederations?

Some scenarios for Orthodox colonizers:
  • Surviving Byzantine empire retains or reconquers Baetica as a buffer zone for Mauretania and Africa.
  • A large army of Magyars resettles in Iberia, slowly building a kingdom that takes the whole peninsula. Although assimilated by the native Spanish and Moors, they enter communion with Constantinople to oppose the Pope, who is a Holy Roman puppet.
  • Cnut's Northern empire survives or is recreated by his descendants. The Norse, remaining obsessed with Russia and Constantinople, and to oppose the Holy Roman Empire, enter communion with Constantinople and slowly adapt Greek/Russian rites.
  • Byzantine mercenaries, like a reverse Catalan Company, take over parts of Iberia and eventually the full peninsula, creating a Spanish kingdom with Greek rulers and Orthodox faith.

The new world is discovered at around the same time.
 
Russian America wank is probably your best bet. We can guess a bit what it might look like based on what Russia actually did there (as well as maybe what they did in Siberia too). It's also interesting that to this day, there are American Indian groups in Alaska which are Orthodox in faith.

Another good one would be a surviving Greek state in Southern Italy (the modern Grikos) that because of some reason is separated from the Byzantine Empire but also never itself falls to a Catholic power. Although them colonising the New World is pretty out there, I could see them trying to grab some Caribbean Islands at some point.
 
Lets put it this way: A Byzantine Empore strong enough to colonize the Americas is also probably strong enough to pre-empt the Schism.
 
Even so, they'd be more like 1500s Orthodoxy than 1500s Catholicism.

I'm not sure of that. There were many things that contributed to the character of Orthodoxy, and many things that contributed to the character of Catholicism, in 1500. For example, lets take Iconoclasm, a response to the existential threats faced by the Empire, and the backlash to that. Icons are much more important in Othodoxy than Catholicism (though, one of the few bits from Catholic school religion class I remember is reading about the papal opposition to Iconoclasm). With an Empire that is stronger and includes more territory that we would consider Catholic, would Iconoclasm ever become a thing? Further, even before the Schism, the two regions had different approaches to and techniques for proselytizing. In a more unified whole, with fewer jurisdictional squabbles, the approach to missionary work might lean closer to the Catholic model. Its simply nearly impossible to guess how this Catholic Orthodox church would look, compared to the two branches of our history.
 
I'm not sure of that. There were many things that contributed to the character of Orthodoxy, and many things that contributed to the character of Catholicism, in 1500. For example, lets take Iconoclasm, a response to the existential threats faced by the Empire, and the backlash to that. Icons are much more important in Othodoxy than Catholicism (though, one of the few bits from Catholic school religion class I remember is reading about the papal opposition to Iconoclasm). With an Empire that is stronger and includes more territory that we would consider Catholic, would Iconoclasm ever become a thing? Further, even before the Schism, the two regions had different approaches to and techniques for proselytizing. In a more unified whole, with fewer jurisdictional squabbles, the approach to missionary work might lean closer to the Catholic model. Its simply nearly impossible to guess how this Catholic Orthodox church would look, compared to the two branches of our history.
The fate of the Byzantine Empire wasn't sealed until 1204 at the earliest, though. There are plenty of PODs after the end of the first iconoclasm which could have brought the Byzantine Empire to Mediterranean hegemony once again, including any PODs involving the Macedonians or Komnenids. And Orthodoxy had already split with Nestorianism, Miaphysitism, Monophysitism, and Arianism, and had Greek culture and Byzantine perspective as its influence, shaping the way it would evolve in the coming centuries.
 
The fate of the Byzantine Empire wasn't sealed until 1204 at the earliest, though. There are plenty of PODs after the end of the first iconoclasm which could have brought the Byzantine Empire to Mediterranean hegemony once again, including any PODs involving the Macedonians or Komnenids. And Orthodoxy had already split with Nestorianism, Miaphysitism, Monophysitism, and Arianism, and had Greek culture and Byzantine perspective as its influence, shaping the way it would evolve in the coming centuries.

Even without 1204, I don't see the Byzantine's going on to both hold enough land in Western Europe to maintain a colonial presence and simultaneously being able to interfere in the religious structure of the region.
 
Even without 1204, I don't see the Byzantine's going on to both hold enough land in Western Europe to maintain a colonial presence and simultaneously being able to interfere in the religious structure of the region.
Well my point is that you can go back farther than 1204 and find a Greek church that has already gone through many of the crises shaping Eastern Orthodoxy. In the 900s, Arianism and Nestorianism had already come and gone, the Oriental Orthodox church broke away, the Miaphysites and Monophysites were deemed heretics, and Iconoclasm had been defeated. By that point, regardless of the politics with Rome, you have the foundations for the religion that Eastern Orthodoxy would become by the 1500s.

But even if the POD is simply no Fourth Crusade, I think there's still a chance for the Byzantines to colonize, though unlikely. There are over 300 years between 1204 and the conquest of the Aztec Empire, and an additional 150 years from the conquest of the Aztecs to the time the entire eastern seaboard is taken. In that time, anything can happen.
 
Russian America wank is probably your best bet. We can guess a bit what it might look like based on what Russia actually did there (as well as maybe what they did in Siberia too). It's also interesting that to this day, there are American Indian groups in Alaska which are Orthodox in faith.

I think its completely plausible to have a Russian-colonized Pacific Northwest-maybe with some POD that causes Russia's expansion eastward to be faster. A lot of the coastal Pacific Northwest, and the Columbia river watershed, are rather fertile IIRC, and the area would be very isolated from other European powers. Its very easy to imagine several thousand Russians settling in *Washington and *Oregon in the early 1700's, and not being bothered for a good 100 years-even if, after that, the colony gets absorbed into Canada or the US, it will leave a very permanent mark on the area's culture.
 
I think its completely plausible to have a Russian-colonized Pacific Northwest-maybe with some POD that causes Russia's expansion eastward to be faster. A lot of the coastal Pacific Northwest, and the Columbia river watershed, are rather fertile IIRC, and the area would be very isolated from other European powers. Its very easy to imagine several thousand Russians settling in *Washington and *Oregon in the early 1700's, and not being bothered for a good 100 years-even if, after that, the colony gets absorbed into Canada or the US, it will leave a very permanent mark on the area's culture.

It's plausible, but it's pushing it, hence why I call it a wank (unless your POD is pre-1500 or something). There's no need to go all the way across Siberia to the literal middle of nowhere (Okhotsk Coast is massively bleak, and was Russia's only real outlet to the Pacific for centuries), get on a ship and cross stormy seas, to a land where the natives are notorious for enslaving foreigners and also potentially violent. You can get all that and more in Siberia, where agents of the Russian government are more able to protect you.

But there could always be Old Believers or other schismatics hanging out in Russian America/Pacific Northwest. But then again, they also had Siberia to go live in. And since the Pacific Northwest is far more fertile than the spots in Siberia the Old Believers tended to colonise, they could actually end up with a lot more power. Or alternatively, they might do what the actual OTL Old Believers did when they moved to Alaska (seems to be post-1917) and pick the usual remote spots to live in.
 
the problem is by 1492 Russia is the only Orthodox country that could even come close to having an overseas empire. Much of what was Orthodox got eaten by the Ottoman empire. Russia itself could only do so much as well, the fact that they even got as far as they did in the Pacific is remarkable given how unforgiving Siberia is.
 
Top