|
Post by mongoose on Jan 14, 2009 15:25:51 GMT -5
At the beginning of Mel Gibson's movie, "Apocalypto," someone states that no nation can be overcome by foreign foes until it is already collapsing from within, or something to that effect. So, if the Americas were Christianized, and the church held political sway as in Western Europe, They probably would have booted Europeans back across the pond ASAP, right? I mean, historically, what nation that could repel invaders welcomed them in? I think America may have been the first, and I'm not sure what the Indigenous peoples were thinking. That would be a matter of interest to me. Why didn't they try to beat off the first explorers and colonists, or if they did try, why didn't they succeed? I know it's extremely un-popular or politically incorrect to say that any group is superior to any other group, in any way, but then how DO you explain the historical . . . conquest or imperialism of one group over that of others?
|
|
|
Post by seraphim on Jan 14, 2009 18:28:50 GMT -5
Well, Cortez had the help of a lot of the Aztec neighbors who didn't like them very much (not real keen on supplying their sacrafice machine) plus he took advantage of their cultural mythos to keep them off balance long enough to entrench himself in power.
Pizzaro just got lucky. The Incas knew what had been done by the Spaniards to the Aztec and had their guard up. But they were also embroiled in a dynastic squabble that exposed Atahulpa to being kidnapped and held "at ransom" by the Spanish. At that point the political structure of the Inca's worked against them since no one would dare risk the Inca's life in an attempt at rescue. When Pizarro finally had Atahulpa executed he took the Inca's wife as his own and "assumed" his office in a sense and used that position to solidify the conquest.
At one point Pizzaro tried to overawe the Incas with his horses. His men would run them right up to the gathered nobles and warriors face to face and rein back hard at the last second. Atahulpa had given orders that anyone who so much as flinched was to be put to death. The total lack of being impressed greatly unnerved the Pizzaro. They thought they were at the verge of loosing control...and they probably were.
In North America there were four significant European attempts at colonization. First came St. Brendan around the year 600. He apparently preached in West Virginia area and there are sites still extant that make for hard explaination without the his presence or those of his fellows. Indeed an outdoor altar has been found with human remains beneath it that date to his time and whose genetic assay places the person as being of likely Irish descent rather than any of the know Native American groups in the region. Anyway local N.A. legends identify the place where these archological finds are found as being a forbidden zone, a dead land of white giants. Those who entered it often died and so they stayed clear even to hunt.
Then there was Leif Ericson who found a short lived settlement on the coast of present day Labrador around the year 1000.
In 1170 or so Prince Madoc of the Welsh Kingdom of Gynnedd let a colonizing expedition into Mobile bay and up the Hiwahase. They settled in the area of Old Stone Fort Alabama having intermarried with locals. But they got into a loosing fight with the Cherokee and moved west across the Mississippi. Some believe they are the ancestors of the Mandan, a tribe whose members sometimes had notable European features including fair skin, light colored eyes and occasionally red or blond hair even in the earliest days of contact. Others dispute the story entirely...though it is worth noting that the ruins of Old Stone fort has exactly the same footprint as did Madoc's home castle of Dolwydelln.
What became of St. Brendan's efforts are very likely revealed by the next major visitor De Soto, who traveled throughout the southeast of North America and described vast cities of Native Americans along the trails and rivers. The next generation of explorers though found nothing like this. The land seemed strangly empty contrary to the earlier reports, and those who were left of those lost great cultures (like the mound builders) had only the tattered remains and remembrance of their former glories. According to them, pestilance had swept the land, everyone so sick they could not even attend to help each other. Whole villages and towns were wiped out to a man or here and there to a few scattered survivors. It was a biological apocolypse that left much of the North American Continent east of the MS wide open for the English Colonists when they came. The numbers and the strength to resist were no longer there once European colonies were rooted.
The final problem was that the Native Americans saw themselves as a number of independent peoples and cultures, some friendly, some not, some indifferent. European colonists just saw them as one essential group...Indians and played their divisions against each other to displace and dominated them generation to generation. In short they were defeated in large part by being defined (and hence manipulated) from outside themselves. Add to that the flood of immigration and what was to come was easy to see. Had they learned to unite as one against us sooner than they did, the story of North America might be very different today. By the time they did figure out they needed to band together it was almost if not already too late. The determining factor was the civil war. Many Southeastern tribes aligned themselves with the Confederacy and fought hard on their side. The indian wars and Custer's outrages of the 1870s were in large part Union payback for the Indian's loyalties during the war...and all Tribes paid for it whether they were participants or not.
|
|
|
Post by scintor on Jan 15, 2009 17:32:29 GMT -5
You also need to remember that laege numbers of natives in North America were simply "Christianized" and assimilated into our own culture. We are their descendants as much as we are descendants of Europeans.
If you don't believe me then why can you tell a group of Americans from a similar group of Europeans at a glance? The main reason is the mixed blood.
Scincerely,
Scintor@aol.com
|
|
asinus
New Member
A Fish Dinner
Posts: 29
|
Post by asinus on Dec 18, 2009 9:20:10 GMT -5
Sorry to weigh into this thread after all the hue and cry had died down. The truth is that Christianity expanded both Eastward and Westward. Missionary activity often preceded Russian expansion across Siberia and Northern Asia, much as did Western missionary activity precede Western imperialism in the 19th and early 20th Centuries. Anyone interested in Orthodox missions in Russian Alaska should go here: www.amazon.com/Alaskan-Missionary-Spirituality-Sources-American/dp/0809103869. The Western and eastern expressions of Christianity met at Ft. Ross, California, an area considered by local Native Americans as a nexus of power, a medicine spot, as it were. Things like this can't be made up, unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by newburydave on Dec 29, 2009 20:47:57 GMT -5
It seems that this thread has wandered pretty far afield from the original goal of imagineering a world where the Eastern thrust of Christianity (the Nestorian version that took hold in Afganistan, India and China) had become the dominant strain in the world.
With all due respect I don't think the actual progress of Orthodox missions is relevant. Russian Orthodoxy is so traditional that it inhibited technological innovation until Peter the Great forced the Russians into the 19th century with typical Czarist brutality.
It did not make the Christian center of the world move east. The Christianity that would have siezed the ascendency in the East would not have been one of the Western brands (Roman or "Eastern" Orthodox).
What we need is the event that would have made the East into the Christian and Techonological center.
That would have happened if:
Tammelane's Christian son had won the dynastic succession battle with his Islamic brother and established a Christian center in Persia to counter Rome and Constantinople.
or if The Christian Kingdoms of India had formed a military confederacy and risen to ascendency in the Indian Subcontinent.
Or if
the Christians in China had somehow gained the ascendency and created a Christian Middle Kingdom (which almost happened in the 19th century until the American general Bradley brounght American arms to defeat the rising Christian dynasty to keep the corrupt Mings in power.)
Chinese techonolgy was every bit as inventive as Roman and actually was considerably advanced. The catalyst that created the modern age was the reformation in Europe. Similar movements have happened in China and India as well.
Let's pick some Critical Divergences and build a Christian East.
|
|
|
Post by isabeau on Dec 31, 2009 18:46:21 GMT -5
Something else perhaps to consider.... if Christianity went east instead of west, the gospel would probably have spread worldwide more quickly. China invented movable type nearly 500 years before Gutenberg. If Christianity had a foothold in China, imagine all the Christian writing and Bible translations that would have been in print while Europe was still in the Dark Ages.
|
|
|
Post by newburydave on Jan 8, 2010 20:14:47 GMT -5
Amen to that. With a Christian society to free the Chinese people from pagan superstition and shamanism (let's just forget for a minute the constant struggle to keep that out of the church) I expect that the "modern age" of technology and relative freedom would have come at least a century earlier, perhaps several centuries; maybe a millennium earlier.
I also suspect that the Gospel would have spread East to the Americas before the Europeans got it together to invade them.
Without the effects of the Gospel triumphant the Europeans probably wouldn't have gotten to the New World at all. So there is the likelihood of the Christian North American (native american) Nations mounting a massive missionary campaign to Heathen Europe. How about evangelizing in the Pagan western Roman Empire?
Think of it, this is an alternative history project that dozens of authors could work on and never even get close to stepping on each others toes. And we wouldn't be bound by familiar the historical figures from European history like so many Alt-Hist projects are. We'd be in Sf Hog-heaven with wide open spaces.
So. Who's gonna' write it?
|
|
|
Post by devilwarrior on Nov 19, 2010 15:58:23 GMT -5
My ideas surrounding it: Islam: I believe Islam would start in the Arabian Pennisula however not able to expand as well to the North and East as it had originally it would have expanded to the West even more. With the Aztecs/Incas coming in to take Western Africa I can see them unifing the smaller kingdoms of Eastern Africa against them. Europe: I am guessing that there would be a very small Roman Empire still there maybe controling from the danube River to the North where they might have been able to hold off the barbarians south to the Sea. Other then that I see a lot of small Barbarian kingdoms, however I would like to point out that perhaps the Vikings and the Celts might have flourished without Christianity dividing them from thier old Pagan beliefs. North America: Mostly likely Nativa American tribes in the North and parts of the west (the rest taken up by Vikings and Celts). In the South there would be the Aztec Empire and on the East would be The Khmer or the Chinese driven by the missionary spirit. Australia: With the great Navy they had I am sure that a Christian China or Khmer could have maintained a lot of the island. However they may run into the same problems the British Empire had when they tried to colonize it with the natives. If the Aztecs are against them they probably would have tried to secretly (unless they are already at war) help the rebellion succeed. Antarctica: With the advancement of technology going quicker nt only would the space race have come sooner but perhaps so would attempts to colonize Antarctica. There is some evidence to believe the Templar Knights knew of Antarctica's existence but I am not sure if the Templars are still around or not. Isreal: Two possibillities: either they are heavily divided in war by the Armenian Union and the Arabs (Like the crusades however both are very near it, both are attacking and defending) or perhaps Christianity, being more peaceful with the infusion of Asian beliefs might make peace with Islam and Israel would become a very powerful nation as they both help to rebuild it (seeing as how they both think it is holy) By the way the Aztec's moon god was not one of thier more important gods, thier Sun god however, Huitzilapochtli, was very important, most likely second only to Quetzalcoatle, the featherd Serpent who was basically thier savior, according to them. The Incan sun god Inti was even more important as he was thier chief god and ruler of all other gods.
|
|