Continued from Thread:4314.
Mr.Robbo wrote: "Mosiac world". I like it! Perhaps that will be the final name of the universe, if we decide not to use Atra Mors? I can't decide whether the Incans would colonise Africa or not; would it be 'too European', something you have been so careful to avoid up until now? Nevertheless, interaction between continents is good, because it means the world isn't 'compartmentalised' as if they had no contact with each other. If the Incans followed the ocean currents, they would probably reach South Africa; I guess what we need to do is work out by what year the Incans would spread to Patagonia, develop advanced sailing and cross the Atlantic, then see what they would find in Africa by that time.
Good ideas. Should I develop a map of the Inca in South America first?
Mr.Robbo wrote: Technological progression would be by no means even. Both the Islamic nations and China were at the forefront of technology for much of their existences, while the lifestyles of other cultures hadn't changed for thousands of years. Also, leaps, revolutions and renaissances aren't solely European affairs; other places can have them, too.
OK, I'm a bit confused by this. Earlier, you were saying technology would be less advanced because the Renaissance and technological revolutions never happened, and now you're saying they happened anyway? And I know technological progression would be uneven, but saying Islamic nations and China were at the forefront of technology seems to defeat that statement. Actually, I've noted you seem to be repeatedly switching between different paradigms regarding this universe. Am I just misreading you?
Mr.Robbo wrote: Majoras: Remember that the modern day for the alternate history is AD2350, which is still hundreds of years after Europeans started getting substantially involved in Asian affairs. This leaves plenty of time for divergence. Anyway, didn't we say that Russia would have been victim of Yersinia Pestis Atra as well?
At the time, Russia was pretty much a European nation and east of the Urals was territory of various Siberian peoples.
Mr.Robbo wrote: All: What do you think? Does the Australia map need a rethink, as per some of the problems pointed out by TheReturnOfTheKing?
I thought you'd defeated all my points regarding the Australia map? Indeed, what were the points I made? To be specific, which ones are you referring to?
More replies forthcoming.
Nevertheless, there are problems with the Asia map, primarily caused by god syndrome. It seems to me that you have a certain outcome in mind, and are deliberately steering history to follow that path, rather than following the consequences of the wipeout of Europe to a plausible alternate history. The fact that you have a West Asian Union, but don't yet know what empire it originated from, shows that you are working backwards, not forwards. I also think it would be better to start with a blank map of Asia, rather than a modern real world map, as it appears you have done.
Even if there are reasons behind the map, I kind of feel it misses out on some distinctive peoples and cultures that we don't see on real world maps, such as the Tibetans, Persians or Uyghurs. However, those kinds of decisions are to your discretion, as I'm sure you will know Asian history better than I do.
I'm just saying because I thought it would be better to say what my base problems with the map are, rather than just keep criticising it, which I'm sure would get annoying.
"Good ideas. Should I develop a map of the Inca in South America first?"
It's your choice; whatever you're most comfortable with.
"Earlier, you were saying technology would be less advanced because the Renaissance and technological revolutions never happened, and now you're saying they happened anyway?"
Technology would be slower to develop because the European technological revolutions would not take place. As other nations did not have their own revolutions independently of Europe, and eventually had to 'catch up' with the rest of the world by importing Western technologies, it seems that they are less likely to have technological revolutions with as much impact as the European ones. However, this does not preclude them from having their own revolutions as a consequence of the knock-on effects of Europe being wiped out, but, as I said before, it would seem that these would be less likely and have less impact, amounting in slower overall technological advancement.
For example (these are not suggestions, just examples), the Ottoman Empire might have some sort of technological revolution as part of the economic boost from colonising Europe, but the Ottoman Empire at the time did not have all of the prerequisites that led up to the Renaissance in Italy or the Industrial Revolution in Britain, so such a revolution would have less of an impact. Because of the different technological, political and social background, they would also be of a different nature from these European revolutions, and have different consequences.
"And I know technological progression would be uneven, but saying Islamic nations and China were at the forefront of technology seems to defeat that statement."
I said they were at the forefront of technology for much of their existences. In the real world they fell behind for various (mainly internal) reasons and were eventually overtaken technologically by Europe. It's sometimes said that, if you look at the world in AD1500, with medieval Europe fragmented into lots of tiny kingdoms, then the great Ottoman and Chinese empires to the east, the last place you'd expect to host even one superpower (let alone several of them) in a few centuries' time is Europe.
However, if we take Europe out of the picture, the Islamic nations and China will still be ahead (because most other civilisations were still much less advanced than them), but they will also still be less advanced than Europe in the real world at the same time (because of those internal problems causing their progress to slow).
"At the time, Russia was pretty much a European nation and east of the Urals was territory of various Siberian peoples."
Thanks for clearing that up for us. In fact, maybe these Siberian peoples could work as Majoras' Zemneria? The Sibir Khanate is a superpower perfectly placed in history for these purposes (a century or so after the Black Death). In the real world, it was even destroyed when it was conquered by the Russia (which gets wiped out by the Black Death in Atra Mors). The place is practically calling out to be made use of!
"I thought you'd defeated all my points regarding the Australia map? Indeed, what were the points I made? To be specific, which ones are you referring to?"
I just wanted to keep everyone in the loop in case my points weren't convincing enough. I wouldn't want to be in a situation where I go "Right! We've made all the maps. Let's do this thing!" then you go "Er... Rob, you never changed Australia." then I go "Doh!".
Hopefully I've got all those replies right and my biran i'nst tnruing to msuh...
Majoras: Just done some more reasearch. Though I'm not keen on the West Asian Union myself, because it seems to walk over a lot of interesting cultures in the region, if you're really committed to making a West Asian superpower, perhaps this guy could be involved (just read the intro paragraphs)?
For a second I thought you were speaking in Klingon. Then I realized you'd just jumbled all the letters :)
Also, this Timur character is amazing :D
Thanks for clarifying that paragraph which confused me. It makes more sense now.
As for the Inca, I think the South America map can wait. Probably the best way to figure out when they'd reach South Africa would be to determine the rate at which their empire expanded in territory, if there was one, and use it to project their growth from OTL European contact to the point when they get access to the Atlantic. Then, we find out when they start taking to the high seas and have them colonize South Africa around that point. Or am I getting too technical? After all, a lot would be pretty much up to chance, but we can get a time range, then choose the most interesting time for them to land and make contact with local powers.
Very technical, I like it. However, resorting to intuition isn't that bad every now and again. We could spend years compiling research and performing plausibility analyses to create a super-accurate alternate history (some people actually do), but I'm sure everyone wants Atra Mors off the ground sooner than that.
Great thinking! I guess I'll give them 100-200 years to reach Rio de la Plata and start sailing the seven seas. That puts it at around 1720 in Gregorian years, which means the 1140s using the Hijrii calendar. Which of your African powers existed in the 1140s in South Africa?
Btw, this thread is getting a bit long for my iPad, so it's lagging and becoming agonizing to scroll. Maybe we should switch to a new thread and sum up what we've got so far in the first post so we don't need to constantly switch between the two for information?
I agree with Majoras.
TheReturnOfTheKing: As for the Incans moving to Rio de la Plata and developing sailing, I would have said about 300 years. Then again, the Inca War of Succession began when Sapa Inca Huayna Capac (possibly my favourite historical leader) died of smallpox (at just 34) brought over by Europeans. Capac was responsible for significant expansion and economic development of the Inca Empire, which we could assume would continue if he hadn't died so early.
As the Atra Mors Inca Empire looks set for a lot of expansion, I guess your figure is more accurate anyway. The biggest time lag is the time that it would take for them to develop advanced sailing (they were not a seafaring empire to start with); I guess it just depends how much interaction they have with the Aztecs, and how economically important the Rio de la Plata and the Atlantic Ocean becomes.
Another factor to consider is how long it takes them to decide to sail so far east; after all, the New World was discovered thousands of years after sailing began in Europe (though there is a small possibility that Phonecian sailers may have reached North America around 1000BC). I have no idea how to work that out. They might travel to Africa straight away, or sail the shores of South America for centuries before they finally decide to cross the Atlantic.
By AD1720 in Atra Mors, south Africa would still be primarily tribal, apart from a few Tswana states inland. Incidentally, Europeans began colonising south Africa around this time, so the real world could provide a useful precedent for Inca colonisation of the region. However, the Incans didn't have guns, so the emergence of the Zulu Empire shortly after could have turned out a lot differently.
Continued on Thread:4450.
What do you think?