The Hohenzollern Chronicles 5: Reborn Phoenix - The Roman Story in New World Order

[CaptainAlvious]

Since this is an alternate history, I could have an equivalent of him join forces with Mindaugas against Ocuil Acatl and Genghis Khan.

Sounds reasonable. Adding onto this disscussion, I assume "Baybars" would be enslaved by either the Mexica or Mongol armies and then end up in Egypt and become eparch through merchants either freeing him or Siegfried's armies freeing him.

I wonder how something like Magnus Hirschfeld's Institute of Sexology would fare in the Reich?

 

[zenphoenix]

Sounds reasonable. Adding onto this disscussion, I assume "Baybars" would be enslaved by either the Mexica or Mongol armies and then end up in Egypt and become eparch through merchants either freeing him or Siegfried's armies freeing him.

Makes sense.

I wonder how something like Magnus Hirschfeld's Institute of Sexology would fare in the Reich?

It and the Indian counterpart would progress along roughly the same path and are then suppressed by the Angeloi and Rasas.

 

[CaptainAlvious]

It and the Indian counterpart would progress along roughly the same path and are then suppressed by the Angeloi and Rasas.

I assume the hijra and other LGBT/Third Gender groups would be persecuted then. Also I think it would make more sense for an Indian version of Hirschfeld's Institute to emerge in Puradaradasa‘s Pascimabhumi than Dutt/Gandi’s India.

For that matter, I’m assuming the Weimar style election the Rasas gained power in would be retconned given the already authoritarian regime of Dutt.

 

[GhostRider124]

The two would try their usual tactics of psychological warfare, intimidation, and raw brutality, but they realize their enemy uses the same tactics, which results in an ever escalating cycle of brutality and reprisals that result in large parts of Lithuania, Poland, and western Rus’ being razed to the ground.

Makes me wonder if Han and Julian continued their fight if it would have ended up like this?

Also, while I was looking up the Wikipedia pages for this, I decided to revamp the Reich’s early currency. Most of these names are from long after the 11th century, so I’ll just say Wilhelm introduced them through Friedrich the Great. So here are the denominations:

Pfennig: Basic and only unit of silver currency in the 11th-12th centuries. Starting from the later years of Saint Wilhelmina’s reign, new denominations were introduced to standardize currency values across the Reich. Eventually becomes the “cent” denomination in the 21st century.

Groschen: Silver coin starting in Saint Wilhelmina’s reign as the value of the pfennig was being inflated. Medieval value set at 4-6 pfennige. Modern value set at 10 pfennige. Eventually phased out as a denomination due to decimalization favoring the pfennig and thaler, though the name persists as a nickname for the 10 pfennige coin.

Thaler/Hyperpyron: Initially a gold coin introduced on the suggestion of Alexios Komnenos. Later currency reforms result in the creation of a silver coin, named thaler after its silver coming from the Joachimsthal mine, with its value equal to that of the hyperpyron. Medieval value set at 60-72 groschen. Modern value set at 100 pfennige.

Denominations for 5, 25, and 50 pfennige emerged in the early modern and modern era. The names in my previous post on this subject should still apply.

I know that this is based off of real life currency reforms but I wonder if it was also inspired on the fact that in every Paradox game from CK2 to NWO the currency is called something different and this is a way to have a realistic currency reform but again still reference the games?

 

[zenphoenix]

I assume the hijra and other LGBT/Third Gender groups would be persecuted then. Also I think it would make more sense for an Indian version of Hirschfeld's Institute to emerge in Puradaradasa‘s Pascimabhumi than Dutt/Gandi’s India.

I guess. Though something like the institute might not be able to emerge and do what it did with the resources of a colony.

For that matter, I’m assuming the Weimar style election the Rasas gained power in would be retconned given the already authoritarian regime of Dutt.

Probably will.

Makes me wonder if Han and Julian continued their fight if it would have ended up like this?

I think Julian would have hit a limit at some point.

I know that this is based off of real life currency reforms but I wonder if it was also inspired on the fact that in every Paradox game from CK2 to NWO the currency is called something different and this is a way to have a realistic currency reform but again still reference the games?

It’s my way of making sense of the “pieces of gold” to “ducats” reform I mentioned in the CK2 to EU4 conversion, since Europe outside of the Byzantine Empire primarily minted silver coins and ducats aren’t a German thing.

 

[CaptainAlvious]

I guess. Though something like the institute might not be able to emerge and do what it did with the resources of a colony.

I guess it could be more of a Roman-Chinese thing then. Weimar parallels might overlap nicely with the Taisho era parallels you were going with for China before "Wang Jingwei" and "Chaing Kai-Shek" subverted democracy.

It’s my way of making sense of the “pieces of gold” to “ducats” reform I mentioned in the CK2 to EU4 conversion, since Europe outside of the Byzantine Empire primarily minted silver coins and ducats aren’t a German thing.

Since we talked about paper money before, I know you'll probably keep referring paper as, well, "paper" for reader convivence, but I wonder if the Reich would still call it bagdatikos here in universe on account of getting it from the Islamic world?

Since you decided to keep Zheng He, I wonder if you're planning on retconning Marco Polo? Maybe you could replace him with another explorer like Ibn Battuta or an original character all together.

Going back to the Jianwen Emperor/Zhu Yunwen, it seems that keeping Zhu Biao and Lan Yu alive would better his odds against Zhu Di, since from what I can tell Zhu Yunwen and his OTL advisers lacked the political experience of his father and there were no capable generals to stop Zhu Di from overthrowing him.

 

[GhostRider124]

I guess it could be more of a Roman-Chinese thing then. Weimar parallels might overlap nicely with the Taisho era parallels you were going with for China before "Wang Jingwei" and "Chaing Kai-Shek" subverted democracy.

That along with the situation in the Reich during the lead-up to Markos Angelos seizure of power?

 

[zenphoenix]

I think I've figured out a way to "naturally" justify the Zoroastrian Seljuks.

I was originally going to have the founder of the Samanid dynasty remain Zoroastrian, but I found his conversion to Islam took place in the 720s. I could still change it, since I already have stuff like the ancient humans, but I feel like a soft POD in 769 (the POD between the Annionaverse and Hohenzollernverse) is already pushing it. In any case, the OTL Samanids were already pretty tolerant of Zoroastrianism, so there'd be substantial Zoroastrian populations in northern Persia and Central Asia under their rule. They are indirectly responsible for converting the Turks to Islam and laying the groundwork for Islam to persist in Central Asia after the 11th century. In the late 10th century, Samanid power is on the decline due to civil wars, rebellions, and court intrigue. Eventually, the Samanids themselves are rendered puppets of their Turkic slave soldiers, one of whom, Sabuktugin, declares the Ghaznavid Empire in Ghazna at the end of the century.

In 935, Mardavij isn't assassinated, so he can continue his ambitions of a Sassanian restoration. This means that Ali ibn Buya, the founder of the Buyid dynasty, would be forced to remain subservient to Mardavij (in OTL he was a Muslim, became a rival, and broke away as soon as Mardavij was assassinated). I can also have him and his brothers remain Zoroastrian through his father not converting to Islam. Him and Mardavij both being Zoroastrians might improve relations between them, especially because Ali claimed descent from a Sassanian king, and an alliance would both present a united front against the Abbasids and their allies and boost Mardavij's legitimacy among Zoroastrian Persians. The two of them take Ray and Isfahan from the Abbasids but are unable to march on the Abbasid capital of Baghdad due to Samanid attacks from Central Asia. Mardavij takes a pragmatic approach to religion, tolerating the worship of Islam and incorporating many Islamic elements into Zoroastrianism (the syncretic Islam-Zoroastrianism I brainstormed before). Towards the end of the 10th century, Ziyarid/Buyid power begins waning due to rivalries between the Ziyarids and Buyids and succession disputes within both dynasties splintering their empire. In the early 11th century, the Ghaznavids begin expanding into Ziyarid-Buyid territory in northeastern Persia and Central Asia, while Islamic emirates expand east from Iraq. Then the Seljuks arrive.

In 985, the dynastic founder Seljuk and his clan do not convert to Islam. I'm going to drop the crypto-Muslim thing entirely since that was a creation of me using a hard 1066 POD. Since there is a stronger Zoroastrian presence in Central Asia and powerful Zoroastrian rulers in northern Persia, he instead converts to Zoroastrianism or is Zoroastrian from birth. They initially fight on behalf of the Samanids against the Ghaznavids and other rebels, but the Samanids still fall apart. After Seljuk's death, his sons serve as nomadic mercenaries in the wars between the Ghaznavids and other Central Asian powers. In the early 11th century, they begin migrating into Persia, initially invited by local Ziyarid and Buyid rulers to fight their wars while also escaping Ghaznavid attempts to subjugate them. Under Tughril I, they take Ghaznavid-controlled Khorasan, then Merv and Nishapur, and finally expel the Ghaznavids from Persia entirely. Tughril forms an alliance with one of the Buyid claimants and marries his sons to Buyid daughters, allowing the Seljuks to claim descent from the Sassanians. Persia soon falls under his rule, but he dies before he can conquer Baghdad. After his death, Alp Arslan consolidates power, proclaiming the restoration of a Zoroastrian Persia and Sassanid successor. He then finishes Tughril's ambitions and takes Baghdad around 1067-70, setting in motion the decline of Islam in the Middle East and the beginning of the crusades (as the Papacy sees a moment of weakness in the Islamic world and begins calling for and theologically justifying the reconquest of Jerusalem 25 years earlier, before the Investiture Controversy is "settled' with the Walk to Canossa).

I suppose this means that Nizam al-Mulk can either be a Muslim who was supportive of the Seljuks (for continuing the Ziyarid/Buyid religious tolerance) or a Zoroastrian.

I guess it could be more of a Roman-Chinese thing then. Weimar parallels might overlap nicely with the Taisho era parallels you were going with for China before "Wang Jingwei" and "Chaing Kai-Shek" subverted democracy.

That along with the situation in the Reich during the lead-up to Markos Angelos seizure of power?

Not sure about China. An equivalent might exist, but in a distinctly Chinese/Asian way, as opposed to a straight up "Institute of Sexology but Chinese" analogue, that I don't know about yet.

The Taisho parallels do work with my revised lore about Asian military dictatorships, since the OTL Taisho era still saw brutal Japanese imperialism overseas and rising ultranationalist/militarist political violence at home, despite innovations in democracy.

Since we talked about paper money before, I know you'll probably keep referring paper as, well, "paper" for reader convivence, but I wonder if the Reich would still call it bagdatikos here in universe on account of getting it from the Islamic world?

Probably both that and pápūros, from the Greek for papyrus, which also gives us "paper" in the end.

Since you decided to keep Zheng He, I wonder if you're planning on retconning Marco Polo? Maybe you could replace him with another explorer like Ibn Battuta or an original character all together.

No, I'll keep him too, although I want to change his itinerary to see different parts of this different Mongol Empire. Specifically Japan under the Yuan shogunate and before the Korean invasion, but maybe I'll have him go north into the Golden Horde too.

Going back to the Jianwen Emperor/Zhu Yunwen, it seems that keeping Zhu Biao and Lan Yu alive would better his odds against Zhu Di, since from what I can tell Zhu Yunwen and his OTL advisers lacked the political experience of his father and there were no capable generals to stop Zhu Di from overthrowing him.

Good point. Since I'm already going to have Zhu Biao survive, he'll take the throne and defeat Zhu Di's coup, then pass the throne to Zhu Yunwen after his death.

 

[zenphoenix]

I think I've figured out a way to "naturally" justify the Zoroastrian Seljuks.

Building onto this, I can make the position of Zoroastrians even stronger by slightly changing the progression of certain events in the 9th century.

First, the chaos caused by the Fourth Fitna/Abbasid civil war lasts much longer, especially in the Mediterranean and Iraq, drawing away Abbasid armies from Persia. Second, the Abbasid general Haydar ibn Kawus/al-Afshin is accused of treason and apostasy (renouncing Islam for Zoroastrianism ironically enough) several years earlier, while suppressing some of the western rebellions mentioned above.

This results in no capable Abbasid leadership being available to suppress the rebellion of Babak Khorramdin and the Khurramites, which successfully carves out a Mazdakite Zoroastrian kingdom in Azerbaijan and northwest Persia. While the Abbasids eventually take back the rest of Persia (and probably that Khurramite kingdom after a few decades, since it's pretty close to Baghdad), it significantly slows down the rate of conversion to Islam in northern Persia, meaning there are more Zoroastrians—especially those with political and religious authority—around a hundred years later for Mardavij and Ali ibn Buya to call upon.

To preserve history in the surrounding regions, most importantly the Byzantine Empire, I'll still have some Khurramites, led by Theophobos, defect to the Byzantine Empire, presumably due to theological disagreements.

 

[CaptainAlvious]

I think I've figured out a way to "naturally" justify the Zoroastrian Seljuks.

I was originally going to have the founder of the Samanid dynasty remain Zoroastrian, but I found his conversion to Islam took place in the 720s. I could still change it, since I already have stuff like the ancient humans, but I feel like a soft POD in 769 (the POD between the Annionaverse and Hohenzollernverse) is already pushing it. In any case, the OTL Samanids were already pretty tolerant of Zoroastrianism, so there'd be substantial Zoroastrian populations in northern Persia and Central Asia under their rule. They are indirectly responsible for converting the Turks to Islam and laying the groundwork for Islam to persist in Central Asia after the 11th century. In the late 10th century, Samanid power is on the decline due to civil wars, rebellions, and court intrigue. Eventually, the Samanids themselves are rendered puppets of their Turkic slave soldiers, one of whom, Sabuktugin, declares the Ghaznavid Empire in Ghazna at the end of the century.

In 935, Mardavij isn't assassinated, so he can continue his ambitions of a Sassanian restoration. This means that Ali ibn Buya, the founder of the Buyid dynasty, would be forced to remain subservient to Mardavij (in OTL he was a Muslim, became a rival, and broke away as soon as Mardavij was assassinated). I can also have him and his brothers remain Zoroastrian through his father not converting to Islam. Him and Mardavij both being Zoroastrians might improve relations between them, especially because Ali claimed descent from a Sassanian king, and an alliance would both present a united front against the Abbasids and their allies and boost Mardavij's legitimacy among Zoroastrian Persians. The two of them take Ray and Isfahan from the Abbasids but are unable to march on the Abbasid capital of Baghdad due to Samanid attacks from Central Asia. Mardavij takes a pragmatic approach to religion, tolerating the worship of Islam and incorporating many Islamic elements into Zoroastrianism (the syncretic Islam-Zoroastrianism I brainstormed before). Towards the end of the 10th century, Ziyarid/Buyid power begins waning due to rivalries between the Ziyarids and Buyids and succession disputes within both dynasties splintering their empire. In the early 11th century, the Ghaznavids begin expanding into Ziyarid-Buyid territory in northeastern Persia and Central Asia, while Islamic emirates expand east from Iraq. Then the Seljuks arrive.

In 985, the dynastic founder Seljuk and his clan do not convert to Islam. I'm going to drop the crypto-Muslim thing entirely since that was a creation of me using a hard 1066 POD. Since there is a stronger Zoroastrian presence in Central Asia and powerful Zoroastrian rulers in northern Persia, he instead converts to Zoroastrianism or is Zoroastrian from birth. They initially fight on behalf of the Samanids against the Ghaznavids and other rebels, but the Samanids still fall apart. After Seljuk's death, his sons serve as nomadic mercenaries in the wars between the Ghaznavids and other Central Asian powers. In the early 11th century, they begin migrating into Persia, initially invited by local Ziyarid and Buyid rulers to fight their wars while also escaping Ghaznavid attempts to subjugate them. Under Tughril I, they take Ghaznavid-controlled Khorasan, then Merv and Nishapur, and finally expel the Ghaznavids from Persia entirely. Tughril forms an alliance with one of the Buyid claimants and marries his sons to Buyid daughters, allowing the Seljuks to claim descent from the Sassanians. Persia soon falls under his rule, but he dies before he can conquer Baghdad. After his death, Alp Arslan consolidates power, proclaiming the restoration of a Zoroastrian Persia and Sassanid successor. He then finishes Tughril's ambitions and takes Baghdad around 1067-70, setting in motion the decline of Islam in the Middle East and the beginning of the crusades (as the Papacy sees a moment of weakness in the Islamic world and begins calling for and theologically justifying the reconquest of Jerusalem 25 years earlier, before the Investiture Controversy is "settled' with the Walk to Canossa).

I suppose this means that Nizam al-Mulk can either be a Muslim who was supportive of the Seljuks (for continuing the Ziyarid/Buyid religious tolerance) or a Zoroastrian.

Building onto this, I can make the position of Zoroastrians even stronger by slightly changing the progression of certain events in the 9th century.

First, the chaos caused by the Fourth Fitna/Abbasid civil war lasts much longer, especially in the Mediterranean and Iraq, drawing away Abbasid armies from Persia. Second, the Abbasid general Haydar ibn Kawus/al-Afshin is accused of treason and apostasy (renouncing Islam for Zoroastrianism ironically enough) several years earlier, while suppressing some of the western rebellions mentioned above.

This results in no capable Abbasid leadership being available to suppress the rebellion of Babak Khorramdin and the Khurramites, which successfully carves out a Mazdakite Zoroastrian kingdom in Azerbaijan and northwest Persia. While the Abbasids eventually take back the rest of Persia (and probably that Khurramite kingdom after a few decades, since it's pretty close to Baghdad), it significantly slows down the rate of conversion to Islam in northern Persia, meaning there are more Zoroastrians—especially those with political and religious authority—around a hundred years later for Mardavij and Ali ibn Buya to call upon.

To preserve history in the surrounding regions, most importantly the Byzantine Empire, I'll still have some Khurramites, led by Theophobos, defect to the Byzantine Empire, presumably due to theological disagreements.

I wonder how the Ghaznavid-Persian wars would shake out until the Mongol Invasions, since I assume the Ghaznavids conquering Persia and vice versa like in these two screenshots would be uncanon in DE? I imagine these conflicts being like the Byzantine-Sassanian wars that weakened both empires, in that such conflicts would leave them vulnerable to the Mongol invasion, with the Ghaznavids sharing the fate of the Sassanids. I could see Reich helping the Seljuks against the Ghaznavids and the Hashshashin in exchange for a marriage alliance, and maybe even Saint Gunhilda dying in the intervention to adjust an old idea.

Also it looks like the Fatmids retook Mesopotamia from the Seljuks in the first screenshots below, shortly before the Romans finished them off I assume.

I'm now wondering how the Anarchy at Samarra would effect things in Persia?

I also wonder how you'd update the Assassin's Creed scenarios with your new lore, aside from shifting Assassin's Creed 4 from a Caribbean to a Pacific setting, and the first game following its source material more closely?

It also looks like there were some big pretty rebellions in Eastern Europe and the Middle East in the original gameplay scenario, which actually seems to overlap pretty well with discussions about Saint Wilhelmina's paranoia and purges being fueled by events like the Kirill/Papacy conflict.

 

[zenphoenix]

I wonder how the Ghaznavid-Persian wars would shake out until the Mongol Invasions, since I assume the Ghaznavids conquering Persia and vice versa like in these two screenshots would be uncanon in DE? I imagine these conflicts being like the Byzantine-Sassanian wars that weakened both empires, in that such conflicts would leave them vulnerable to the Mongol invasion, with the Ghaznavids sharing the fate of the Sassanids.

I won’t keep the whole wars as the game depicts them as, but I’ll keep the general idea. The Seljuks are the first Zoroastrian power to control all of the Persian heartland in centuries, having integrated or defeated the last of the Ziyarids, Buyids, and Khurramites. Naturally, the rest of the Islamic world won’t take kindly to that. The Abbasids lost all power, and their puppetmasters in Iraq are more focused on the Mediterranean for now due to the Fatimid threat. So it falls to the Ghaznavids, as the leading Islamic power in Central Asia, to liberate the faithful of Persia. In 1104, the Ghaznavids would have advanced as far west as Shiraz while the Fatimids, having reclaimed Arabia, proceed to take back Baghdad and Iraq. Before they can advance on western Persia, Friedrich the Glorious invades in his first military campaign and the first of a unified Reich (Friedrich the Great having died after his England campaign). The Fatimids are defeated and the Reich takes Iraq instead of returning it to Persia, which angers the Seljuk shah, but he can’t do anything because the Roman elimination of the Fatimids allows him to focus on the Ghaznavids. The next few decades see the Seljuks gradually making gains against the Ghaznavids, though the major ones are Yunus’ conquests of Khiva, Merv, and Balkh and pledges of fealty from the lords of the Fergana Valley. The Ghaznavid core in Afghanistan remains unconquered, though, and after Yunus’ death the Fergana Valley and Transoxiana quickly defect back to the Ghaznavids. The fighting continues until the Mongol invasion, when the Ghaznavids get Khwarazmid’d and the Seljuks barely surviving due to careful diplomacy and help from the Reich.

I just realized, since I’ve now committed to a soft POD in 769, that means I can save the actual Zunbils, Hindus and Buddhists of Afghanistan, and Greek pagan Maniots, at least to an extent.

The Zunbils still get conquered, because one of their capitals was Ghazna, but much later than in OTL. The Saffarids don’t conquer them in 870 because Ya’qub ibn al-Layth al-Saffar isn’t as lucky during his campaigns against them and is busy fighting the Khurramites in the west. The Zunbils remain in Ghazna for another hundred years and are eventually subjugated by the Samanids, who also take out the weakened Saffarids in northeastern Persia and Central Asia. Samanid policies of religious tolerance allow the Zunbils and Buddhists to persist a little longer, while the Hindu Shahis continue resisting in the east around Gandhara. When the Ghaznavids rebel against the Samanids, they engage in heavy proselytization of the regions around Ghazna, leading to the Zunbils gradually being converted. However, after Ghazna and the surrounding areas are sufficiently Islamized, most of their efforts are focused on the larger Zoroastrian populations of Central Asia. Most of the remaining Zunbils migrate to the Shahi territories, which after the 12th century are incorporated into India.

When the Mongols invade, Genghis Khan directs most of his fury against Muslims. The Buddhists within his army convince him to spare the Buddhists of Afghanistan, and the Hindus and Zunbils quickly ally with the Mongols against the Ghaznavids oppressing them. So they are spared annihilation like the rest of the Ghaznavid empire. Under Mongol rule, the Zunbils meet adherents of Zorya and Dazhbog coming from Rus’. The disillusioned and devastated peoples of Central Asia, seeking a new way of living and something to oppose the Mongols with, become particularly receptive to the syncretic religions that emerge. The cult of Zorya is brought with Ghaznavid remnants through the Fergana Valley to the Tarim Basin, while the cult of Dazhbog spreads through the rest of Central Asia where Muslims used to dominate. I can’t really make Zunism itself the religion that catches on (unless a Zunbil king became independent and then went on a conquering spree), because from what I’ve researched it seems very region-based and already syncretized with Hinduism and Buddhism if not Zoroastrianism. But elements of their iconography and beliefs may be passed on to Central Asian worshippers of Dazhbog and Zorya.

I can do something similar to the Maniots. For whatever reason, the Byzantine Empire doesn’t successfully convert them, so they remain pagan into the era of Friedrich the Great.

I could see Reich helping the Seljuks against the Ghaznavids and the Hashshashin in exchange for a marriage alliance, and maybe even Saint Gunhilda dying in the intervention to adjust an old idea.

It could explain how Saint Wilhelmina negotiated a marriage between a Seljuk and her son.

Also it looks like the Fatmids retook Mesopotamia from the Seljuks in the first screenshots below, shortly before the Romans finished them off I assume.

Presumably after the Seljuks took Baghdad and expelled the Abbasids, putting an end to their caliphate.

I'm now wondering how the Anarchy at Samarra would effect things in Persia?

It’s the reason why the Khurramite state could last so long and other Zoroastrian leaders could consolidate power and start rebuilding their religious institutions. Though since it’s been centuries since the fall of the Sassanian Empire, they would have to either invent new ones or coopt Islamic ones.

I also wonder how you'd update the Assassin's Creed scenarios with your new lore, aside from shifting Assassin's Creed 4 from a Caribbean to a Pacific setting, and the first game following its source material more closely?

The AC2 trilogy could be set in Constantinople during the height of Saint Wilhelmina’s reign, with various scientific inventors and the Pirate King Kyrillos making appearances.

Since AC4 was moved to a Pacific and Asian setting, that means AC3, Liberation, and Unity ought to also be in Asia. 3 would have a descendant of the protagonist of 4, caught up in the chaos of the Persian Revolution. Unity, in turn, is about the Chinese unification wars. Liberation is about Fusang in the 1860s, shortly before the unification wars begin, and has an indigenous protagonist.

Syndicate is Berlin in the 19th century.

Origins and Odyssey can be exactly the same. Valhalla and Mirage can be largely the same with minor changes.

The real life game isn’t out yet, but Shadows woild be about the final fall of the Yuan shogunate, the rise of the Later Jin, and then the Korean invasion. The logical choice would have been a game about fighting the Mongol invasion and then the Yuan shogunate, but that was done by a 2020 game called “Ghost of Itsukushima.”

It also looks like there were some big pretty rebellions in Eastern Europe and the Middle East in the original gameplay scenario, which actually seems to overlap pretty well with discussions about Saint Wilhelmina's paranoia and purges being fueled by events like Kirill's death.
View attachment 1251925

Yeah, there’s also a lot of kings attempting to reassert independence, which would have worsened her paranoia and resulted in measures to break local power, including that of cultural and religious minorities she didn’t approve of.

 

[zenphoenix]

Building onto this, I can make the position of Zoroastrians even stronger by slightly changing the progression of certain events in the 9th century.

Building a little more on this, I can strengthen the Zoroastrians even more with a couple additions.

The Qarinvand dynasty, claiming descent from a Sassanid-era noble family, remains allied with the Bavand dynasty, which claimed descent from a Sassanid prince, against Muslim rule. Around 815, the Bavandid ruler Shahriyar I, along with the Qaranvand ruler Qarin ibn Vindadhhurmuzd, both accept a request from the caliph to support him in the Arab-Byzantine wars. The two of them equally distinguish themselves on the battlefield, though the campaigns go roughly the same as in OTL. However, since Shahriyar I participated and won honors from the caliph, he doesn't grow jealous of Qarin's successes, leading to a Bavandid invasion and deposing of Qarin's son Mazyar, who then doesn't flee to the caliph's court, convert to Islam, and then return to conquer the Bavandid lands, eventually resulting in Shahriyar's son Qarin converting to Islam and overthrowing Mazyar with Abbasid backing. Islam, which gained a major foothold in Tabarestan in this century in OTL, is delayed, and a larger and more independent-minded Zoroastrian community would be something that the later rebels mentioned above can make use of.

My original idea was to get a post-769 descendant of Peroz III or Bahram VII get involved in these 9th-10th century events somehow, but their families disappeared from known Chinese records after the 730s, though I did figure out that many of them intermarried with the Tang imperial family. So instead I'll tie it in with the reason why the Mongols decided not to continue their invasion of Persia. The Seljuks submit to Mongol suzerainty and pay tribute after years of resistance, similar to what OTL Korea and Vietnam did, but resistance from the Roman-backed Hashshashin in the border regions prevents a Mongol invasion of Mesopotamia (Genghis Khan instead decides to invade the Reich via Rus', Taurica, and the Caucasus). In return, the shah marries a descendant of Peroz or Bahram via Tang cadet branches (which were still around and influential in at least the Song era), allowing them to claim direct descent from the last Sassanid shah Yazdegerd III. In the 14th century, Persia declares independence with Rus' and Yavdi.

While I was looking this up, I learned that Zhao Bing (the Song prince captured by the Mongols) actually had a son of his own, though he was last reported being exiled to Gansu in the west during the Red Turban Rebellion. I don't know what to do with him, and having him successfully join the Red Turbans would completely derail the rise of the Ming. Maybe I can have the Ming install his descendants as the colonial rulers of Penglai.

 

[CaptainAlvious]

I wonder if this screenshot is more or less accurate to the religious makeup of the Mongol Empire after Cumania and the Ghaznavids' destruction, minus the big Jewish demographic?

Also would Persia's pre Saltuk/Furuzan strategy of Islamic-Zoroastrian syncretism still be canon?

Since we're delving into 769-1066 history, I assume you want to keep Henrich IV and the Salians as the rulers of the HRE, and I'm guessing you won't have Charlemagne marry Irene of Athens, but I wonder if wonder if there's a way to keep the Ottonian dynasty around as another ally of Fredrich against the Papacy? I ask because unlike Charlemagne, it seems Otto II married a Byzantine princess, which could be handy with Fredrich's quest to bring the HRE and ERE together. Same question applies to the Macedonian dynasty's chances of avoiding extinction.

 

[zenphoenix]

Did some quick research on what titles Harald Hardrada might have used, and from what I can gather, fylkir has been attested to in the Norse sagas as a word for king or chief in a territorial context. I guess I can use that as the title that is only claimed by the best Norse rulers or in times of military crisis. As for the emperor title, I’ll go with einváldskonungr, or “absolute/one king,” a title attributed to Harald Fairhair in a saga from the 13th century. It negatively depicts him and is from 200 years after Harald Hardrada, but I suppose the title could be coined by him upon the creation of the unified Norse empire.

Decided to revamp how Harald Hardrada unified Scandinavia, since it never sat well with me that he just showed up in Norway and Sweden, declared he was a Yngling heir, and then overthrew both of their kings. Also, he was born in 1015, so a lot of the following

Saint Olaf remains pagan here as his family was baptized by Olaf Tryggvason. He still rebels, claiming descent from Harald Fairhair, but is defeated, and his half-brother Harald Hardrada goes into exile. Sweyn deepens ties with Sweden (through his marriage ties with Olof), Denmark (his suzerain), and England (through Erik serving under Cnut).

doesn’t make sense.

Instead, I'll just have Saint Olaf (as a pagan) do what he does in OTL and overthrow Sweyn Haakonson, then suppress the Norwegian nobility to strengthen his power. In 1029, Cnut invades with the backing of some of those nobles and overthrows him. Instead of heading to Rus' like in OTL, he stops in Sweden and attempts to get Swedish support to take back the throne.

Yaroslav aligns with Olof Skötkonung of Sweden by marrying his daughter. Relations are strained when Harald Hardrada takes over Sweden, but he eventually builds an alliance with him by marrying him to his daughter.

I’m changing Olof Skötkonung’s family and their marriages (since, you know, alternate history). His first three children are exactly the same. His son Emund the Old is his successor when he dies in 1031 (nine years after his OTL death) and reigns until his death. Olaf (the Norwegian) has been married to Olof (the Swede)’s daughter Astrid since 1019, but they didn’t have any surviving sons (Magnus the Good dies premature) before Olaf is killed in battle in 1030. I’m not going to figure out his third daughter Holmfrid, who was married to Sweyn Haakonson in OTL, because it’s unclear if she was Olof’s sister or daughter. Olof’s second son Anund Jacob doesn’t exist, and his daughter Ingegerd is born the year of his birth (1008) instead. She is married off to Harald (instead of Harald in OTL marrying her daughter with Yaroslav, but I adjusted the years so it isn’t too weird). This is the important bit, as it both secures an alliance with Sweden and brings him into the Swedish royal family.

After Olof (the Swede)’s death, Harald leaves Sweden with Olaf (the Norwegian)’s remaining men to seek glory abroad like OTL. He first offers his service to Yaroslav, helping him suppress troublesome nobles and rebellious tribal regions, then joins the Varangian Guard and participates in many Byzantine campaigns, gaining valuable experience, reputation, and war loot. He returns to Sweden around 1042. King Emund dies childless later that year, and the nobles support Harald’s claim to the throne on account of his reputation and wealth.

In Norway, the unpopular reign of Cnut’s son Sweyn (who remains in power past 1035 because Magnus the Good doesn’t survive to depose him) results in the nobility inviting Harald to invade and take the throne instead, so he does.

Cnut’s other son Harold, king of both England and Denmark, dies in 1045. In England the nobles elect Edward the Confessor to succeed him, while in Denmark they elect Harald in the absence of other acceptable candidates. Cnut’s nephew (also named) Sweyn, a grandson of Sweyn Forkbeard (why are there three of them with the same name), raises a challenge. Harald fights him for 17 years before eventually defeating him, using a battle-axe named Hel (something attributed to Magnus in some OTL sources) to kill him.

In 1062, Harald now reigns over all of Scandinavia, establishing his capital at Sigtuna near the Temple of Uppsala, and with resistance at home firmly stamped out over the last 20 years, he declares himself einváldskonungr, the sole ruler of all of the Norse and the northern lands and the successor to the legendary kings and Cnut. To direct his vassals’ desire for battle and glory away from himself and to kill off any particularly troublesome nobles, assembles a mighty army to take back England, the last crown in his empire.

I finally found a historical name I can use other than the modern and Latin-based “Scandinavia.” Apparently medieval scholars and the people of Scandinavia called the place Norden, akin to “the North.” It’s currently used in the Nordics in the context of “the Nordic countries.” In the medieval era, the Old Norse Norðan would be used, as in “Empire of Norðan” or “Empire of the North.” In the early modern period, since writing “(Empire of) the North” every time would get old and “Norðan”/Norden sounds too close to “Northern” (and it can double as an adverb meaning exactly that for further confusion), I’ll have it changed to “Nordenland.” The Romans would probably call it the Fykirate until then for lack of a better term.

I wonder if this screenshot is more or less accurate to the religious makeup of the Mongol Empire after Cumania and the Ghaznavids' destruction, minus the big Jewish demographic?

Yes, roughly the same. Mongol raids into northwestern India (more specifically the border regions at the Hindu Kush, where India holds them off) bring back Hindu prisoners, slaves, and concubines to Karakorum. But Zoroastrians would be slightly expanded to the east and north, specifically to the regions around Merv and Balkh. There would be a mix of Buddhists, Hindus, original Zunists, and surviving Muslims in Afghanistan. The cult of Zorya is predominant in the Tarim Basin, while it contests the Buddhists, Zoroastrians, and cult of Dazhbog for dominance in the rest of Central Asia. The Finns are still where Yavdi is, as the Mongols left them alone after they submitted.

I’d like to keep the Jews in the steppes, actually, solely so I can brainstorm what a Jewish Jochi/Jochi’s descendants might be like. Probably that a few Jewish Cuman clan leaders defected to the Mongols before the annihilation of the others happened, so Judaism survives in many regions of the old tribal confederation and is passed on to some of the Mongol successor khanates and then Yavdi (where various rulers would be Buddhist/Finnish pagan or Jewish).

Also would Persia's pre Saltuk/Furuzan strategy of Islamic-Zoroastrian syncretism still be canon?

Definitely. I left a lot of room in the previous posts for it due to Samanid tolerance, the Khurramites being Mazdakites instead of “mainstream” Zoroastrian, the rebel Zoroastrian kingdoms being forced to be tolerant of Muslims and incorporating Islamic theology to survive, and the Seljuks following the Zoroastrianism of Central Asia instead of Persia. Saltuk and Furuzan would have standardized and reformed Zoroastrianism to reestablish a Sassanid-style state religion that is “purified” of Islamic influences.

Since we're delving into 769-1066 history, I assume you want to keep Henrich IV and the Salians as the rulers of the HRE, and I'm guessing you won't have Charlemagne marry Irene of Athens, but I wonder if wonder if there's a way to keep the Ottonian dynasty around as another ally of Fredrich against the Papacy? I ask because unlike Charlemagne, it seems Otto II married a Byzantine princess, which could be handy with Fredrich's quest to bring the HRE and ERE together. Same question applies to the Macedonian dynasty's chances of avoiding extinction.

Initially I wanted to just have Heinrich II continue the policies of Otto III, but after looking at how he was a major opponent of Otto, I’ll just have Otto and his mother Theophanu live longer and shorten Heinrich II’s reign. He is still alive to marry Zoe Porphyrogenita, but they only have a daughter together before Otto dies. To preserve Byzantine history, I’ll have Zoe have a twin who does what she did historically (seriously, this era of Byzantine history is a mess to research and untangle, so I’m not going to even bother).

Without a male heir, the nobles elect Heinrich II as the next king of Germany. In OTL he already strengthened the HRE’s control over the Catholic Church and centralized the empire, but on the other hand he also laid the groundwork for the reformist faction of the Church that eventually became championed by Gregory VII and was responsible for adding the filoque clause. I could easily have had him die at an early age, but then there wouldn’t be a schism to mend, at least in the same way, and the Investiture Controversy wouldn’t have an easy way to permanently end (like OTL where the HRE and Papacy continued fighting for supremacy after the Walk to Canossa). So I’ll leave him around but with a shorter reign. Most importantly, he continues many of Otto III’s ambitions for Roman restoration, particularly not separating the crowns of Germany and Italy (officially, though in practice Italy still gains significant autonomy under his reign) and dropping Renovatio imperii Romanorum in favor of Renovatio regni Francorum. This leads to a lot of Byzantine institutions continuing to filter into the HRE and Italy. Zoe, still alive, spearheads these efforts. Heinrich II still dies in 1024 and is succeeded by Conrad II, beginning the Salian dynasty.

Conrad’s reign is mostly the same as OTL barring the changes due to Otto III’s policies continuing. Same with Heinrich III, only instead of marrying Agnes of Poitou he marries the daughter of Otto III, who passes on Otto’s dream of Roman restoration to her son Heinrich IV. However, German nobles opposed to the increasing Greek influence in the realm (she and Theophanu had been influential for decades) move against her during her regency, weakening her authority in favor of the Church and local nobility. She is supported by Lothar Udo II (who distinguished himself by averting a coup led by Otto, Margrave of the Nordmark, that had gotten his father killed), Werner von Habsburg, and Burkhard von Zollern (there is almost no information on this guy so I used the records of his son/grandson Friedrich and decided he would be in this faction), among others. The Coup of Kaiserswerth in 1062 results in the temporary weakness of the pro-imperial faction in favor of the pro-Church and anti-centralization faction of Archbishop Anno II of Cologne and his allies in the nobility. However, it is also a defining moment for the young Heinrich, the two Friedrichs von Zollern, and Ida von Habsburg. Speaking of Ida, I will retcon her into being Heinrich’s youngest sister, so Friedrich can claim descent from both the Ottonians and Macedonian line. This would boost his legitimacy in both the HRE imperial elections to choose Heinrich’s successor (his only brother also died very young in OTL so they have to pull a Conrad II, and I killed him off before he had any children) and to the Doukai court. Also, the OTL Werner was born in 1030, making him a bit young if he is still Ida’s father (though not unprecedented by medieval standards). Most importantly, the OTL Werner didn’t marry until 1057, while Ida’s birth year is 1048. This does present a conflict with Heinrich III’s OTL children, since he already had a daughter in 1048, but I’ll go with the sources that suggest that daughter was born in 1045.

Since the end of the Macedonian dynasty and the rise of the Doukai is so messy and attempting to change one thing messes up how the Doukai can rise to power, I decided to leave it be, with a consolation that they live on through Otto III’s daughter (name pending).

While researching this, I learned that apparently the HRE claimed to have the Holy Lance, so I guess Friedrich had that to begin with instead of finding it in the Middle East.

Speaking of which, I just remembered that last Umayyad descendant who was still alive as of 1066. I could have her have children to continue the line into Friedrich’s era.

 

[CaptainAlvious]

Yes, roughly the same. Mongol raids into northwestern India (more specifically the border regions at the Hindu Kush, where India holds them off) bring back Hindu prisoners, slaves, and concubines to Karakorum. But Zoroastrians would be slightly expanded to the east and north, specifically to the regions around Merv and Balkh. There would be a mix of Buddhists, Hindus, original Zunists, and surviving Muslims in Afghanistan. The cult of Zorya is predominant in the Tarim Basin, while it contests the Buddhists, Zoroastrians, and cult of Dazhbog for dominance in the rest of Central Asia. The Finns are still where Yavdi is, as the Mongols left them alone after they submitted.

I’d like to keep the Jews in the steppes, actually, solely so I can brainstorm what a Jewish Jochi/Jochi’s descendants might be like. Probably that a few Jewish Cuman clan leaders defected to the Mongols before the annihilation of the others happened, so Judaism survives in many regions of the old tribal confederation and is passed on to some of the Mongol successor khanates and then Yavdi (where various rulers would be Buddhist/Finnish pagan or Jewish).

Is there a chance for the Norse khans to survive the Mongol invasions? As you said, there’s potential for animal deity based syncretism with Tengriism or cults of Tyr and Baldr taking off, through probably not to the same extent as Dazhbog and Zorya. I could see the Mexica and Mongols taking a lot of slaves from each other during their war and bringing them to nearby Scandinavia or Yavdi, hence Kanatan cossacks.

Speaking of Ida, I will retcon her into being Heinrich’s youngest sister, so Friedrich can claim descent from both the Ottonians and Macedonian line. This would boost his legitimacy in both the HRE imperial elections to choose Heinrich’s successor (his only brother also died very young in OTL so they have to pull a Conrad II, and I killed him off before he had any children) and to the Doukai court. Also, the OTL Werner was born in 1030, making him a bit young if he is still Ida’s father (though not unprecedented by medieval standards). Most importantly, the OTL Werner didn’t marry until 1057, while Ida’s birth year is 1048

Could Werner serve as a surrogate father figure for Ida and Heinrich, sorta like Lothar and Fredrich or Gunhilda and Wihelmina’s relationships?

I was initially going to ask how the Karling line could go on since Osterhild married one, but it seems like they continued on through the Capet line.

Out of curiosity, what events would make it easier for the Paramaras to unite India? So far it seems like preventing their capital from being sacked and having the wars of Bhoja and Jayashima (not the Jayashima from Saint Wilhelmina’s era) go better would be a start.

 

[zenphoenix]

Is there a chance for the Norse khans to survive the Mongol invasions? As you said, there’s potential for animal deity based syncretism with Tengriism or cults of Tyr and Baldr taking off, through probably not to the same extent as Dazhbog and Zorya. I could see the Mexica and Mongols taking a lot of slaves from each other during their war and bringing them to nearby Scandinavia or Yavdi, hence Kanatan cossacks.

I suppose I can keep them around, since I remember the steppes briefly flipping to Norse a couple of times. We did talk about cults of Tyr and Baldr being spread outside Scandinavia, presumably by merchants and mercenaries.

Could Werner serve as a surrogate father figure for Ida and Heinrich, sorta like Lothar and Fredrich or Gunhilda and Wihelmina’s relationships?

That works.

I was initially going to ask how the Karling line could go on since Osterhild married one, but it seems like they continued on through the Capet line.

I won’t talk much about the Carolingian line other than they exist, solely because of the meme.

Out of curiosity, what events would make it easier for the Paramaras to unite India? So far it seems like preventing their capital from being sacked and having the wars of Bhoja and Jayashima (not the Jayashima from Saint Wilhelmina’s era) go better would be a start.

The first thing I think of is having Bhoja be more successful, particularly holding off Kuntala’s invasion in 1048. Jayasimha I would be left in a stronger position, which he uses to launch further conquests. But to figure out the rest of it, I have to figure out a viable route towards a stable political unification of India in the 11th century. I decided to slightly edit my Ghaznavid scenario so that Mahmud of Ghazni still defeats the Hindu Shahis and breaks through into Punjab. Due to not expanding as much into Persia, he has more resources and troops for fighting in India. For whatever reason, he doesn't get malaria and then the tuberculosis that kills him in 1030, so he can continue his invasion beyond Gujarat. After sacking the temple at Somnath, Mahmud decisively crushes the Chaulukyas of Gujarat. In response, Bhoja enters into an alliance with the Chola emperor Rajendra I and the Dahala king Ganeyadeva and marches on Gujarat to avenge Somnath. In OTL, Mahmud avoids Bhoja's army and takes a more dangerous route to his next target, getting much of his army killed by attrition, but here he fights his way past Bhoja, though neither side can claim victory. Avoiding the heavily defended Paramara territories, he instead targets the Western Chalukyas (not to be confused with the Chaulukyas) to the south and after destroying them raids even further into southern India. At this point, Bhoja catches up to him and attacks him from behind, cutting off his route of retreat and forcing him into a direct engagement. Mahmud is killed here. His death results in a power vacuum in the Ghaznavid empire that Bhoja further takes advantage of to seize nearly all of Mahmud's conquests south of Gujarat. Eventually, the Ghaznavids withdraw to northwestern India as Mahmud's sons instead focus on fighting the Seljuks in Persia.

Bhoja spends the next few years carving up southern India with his Chola allies. With the Western Chalukyas defeated (instead of being a major Chola rival for the next few decades), there is little stopping Bhoja and Rajendra. Their thrones are united when Amangai Devi, daughter of Rajendra I, marries Bhoja (instead of Rajaraja Narendra of the Eastern Chalukyas; I can't find concrete ages for all three of them, but since Rajaraja and Bhoja's reigns roughly overlapped with each other, and Amangai Devi's OTL son Kulottunga was supposed to be born around 1025, I think this should work). The demise of the main line of the Chola happens as in OTL with Rajendra I's sons taking the throne and dying in battle or being assassinated without surviving heirs. As a result, the son of Amangai Devi and Bhoja takes the throne. Instead of being named Kulottunga, he is named Jayasimha. Unlike Kulottunga, he puts down the Pandya rebellion, averting an inter-Pandya civil war, and maintains control over Sri Lanka. Once the south is pacified, Jayasimha gradually begins expanding north. The capital is moved to Dharanagara to reflect these new priorities, although India's maritime presence abroad continues for a while. Jayasimha's conquests first move north towards Rajasthan, taking advantage of Mahmud of Ghazni weakening local rulers and then not setting up much in the way of civilian administrations. He takes the long coveted Kannauj and then pushes the Ghaznavids back across the Hindu Kush, restoring the Hindu Shahis (later he would take back Gandhara itself). Finally, he marches on the weakening Pala Empire. After the defeat of the Pala and the capture of the region of Magadha, he claims the title of emperor of India.

Technically they would still call themselves Chola to claim the Chola legacy and derive legitimacy from them, but they would still be Paramaras.

 

[GhostRider124]

Mardavij takes a pragmatic approach to religion, tolerating the worship of Islam and incorporating many Islamic elements into Zoroastrianism (the syncretic Islam-Zoroastrianism I brainstormed before).

I'm going to drop the crypto-Muslim thing entirely since that was a creation of me using a hard 1066 POD.

Definitely. I left a lot of room in the previous posts for it due to Samanid tolerance, the Khurramites being Mazdakites instead of “mainstream” Zoroastrian, the rebel Zoroastrian kingdoms being forced to be tolerant of Muslims and incorporating Islamic theology to survive, and the Seljuks following the Zoroastrianism of Central Asia instead of Persia. Saltuk and Furuzan would have standardized and reformed Zoroastrianism to reestablish a Sassanid-style state religion that is “purified” of Islamic influences.

I was originally confused by your two statements in were the first one you say that you are going to syncretic Islam and Zoroastrianism but in the second you made it sound like you weren't so thank you for clearing up that confusion in the third post. Also it dose make more sense for you to combine Islam and Zoroastrianism since in the original lore combining Islam and the Norse Pantheon did not make that that much sense.

The Qarinvand dynasty, claiming descent from a Sassanid-era noble family, remains allied with the Bavand dynasty, which claimed descent from a Sassanid prince, against Muslim rule.

Makes me wonder what the Dabuyid's are doing in all of this?

While I was looking this up, I learned that Zhao Bing (the Song prince captured by the Mongols) actually had a son of his own, though he was last reported being exiled to Gansu in the west during the Red Turban Rebellion. I don't know what to do with him, and having him successfully join the Red Turbans would completely derail the rise of the Ming. Maybe I can have the Ming install his descendants as the colonial rulers of Penglai.

Sounds interesting. This way this sons rule over Pengali can be a double edged sword. On one hand his actual family and their supporters hates him and has to rely on the Ming who might be wary of him due to him being of the Song Dynasty?

Olof’s second son Anund Jacob doesn’t exist, and his daughter Ingegerd is born the year of his birth (1008) instead. She is married off to Harald (instead of Harald in OTL marrying her daughter with Yaroslav, but I adjusted the years so it isn’t too weird). This is the important bit, as it both secures an alliance with Sweden and brings him into the Swedish royal family.

Well this solves the problem of how to get Sweden into Scandinavia but I do wonder about the comment that @CaptainAlvious made about the Norse in Iberia and how it could potently be an independent kingdom instead of part of the Norse Empire. One idea that I have is that I know that in my Hanseatic League and Jomsvikings update for Tianxia I mention that the Jomsvikings made the region of Pomerania home but maybe a band of them or some other Norse warband could have made thair way their and became independent. Mabey claiming legitimacy from Cnut?

I finally found a historical name I can use other than the modern and Latin-based “Scandinavia.” Apparently medieval scholars and the people of Scandinavia called the place Norden, akin to “the North.” It’s currently used in the Nordics in the context of “the Nordic countries.” In the medieval era, the Old Norse Norðan would be used, as in “Empire of Norðan” or “Empire of the North.” In the early modern period, since writing “(Empire of) the North” every time would get old and “Norðan”/Norden sounds too close to “Northern” (and it can double as an adverb meaning exactly that for further confusion), I’ll have it changed to “Nordenland.” The Romans would probably call it the Fykirate until then for lack of a better term.

You could still name the modern (post-2000 era) of Nordland as Scandinavia. This could be done as a way to try and tie the Norse more closely with the Reich and distance itself from it's Tianxia past?

(seriously, this era of Byzantine history is a mess to research and untangle, so I’m not going to even bother).

One possible source that you could use is the History of Byzantium Podcast by Robin Pierson for some information?

Technically they would still call themselves Chola to claim the Chola legacy and derive legitimacy from them, but they would still be Paramaras.

So would this allow the Paramaras to keep the Chola's navy allowing them to get a head start on colonization?

 

[CaptainAlvious]

Well this solves the problem of how to get Sweden into Scandinavia but I do wonder about the comment that @CaptainAlvious made about the Norse in Iberia and how it could potently be an independent kingdom instead of part of the Norse Empire. One idea that I have is that I know that in my Hanseatic League and Jomsvikings update for Tianxia I mention that the Jomsvikings made the region of Pomerania home but maybe a band of them or some other Norse warband could have made thair way their and became independent. Mabey claiming legitimacy from Cnut?

I think my initial question was about England, but I could see that happening based on previous discussions about the anti-Almoravid jarls.

So would this allow the Paramaras to keep the Chola's navy allowing them to get a head start on colonization?

I myself wonder if India would keep the Chola's overseas conquests in Srivijaya, since some of them are in what would be in the Roman Bosporus Nova rather than Indian Nusantara, even if old lore India had colonies in southern Sumatra? I also wonder if the Pamarras would inherit the Palas relationship with Southeast Asia and Tibet?

Also Zen, I think there was also a big Indian civil war you overlooked in the 12th century based on gameplay screenshots, so maybe Saint Wilhelmina's alliances with India allows Jayasimha to reform his army and administration along Roman lines and also purge troublesome dissidents, allowing him to centralize India. We could also reduce the scale of that rebellion from most of India in CK2 to something more manageable, like the former Pala Empire, or just make it a succession crisis after Jayasimha's death.

 

[zenphoenix]

I was originally confused by your two statements in were the first one you say that you are going to syncretic Islam and Zoroastrianism but in the second you made it sound like you weren't so thank you for clearing up that confusion in the third post. Also it dose make more sense for you to combine Islam and Zoroastrianism since in the original lore combining Islam and the Norse Pantheon did not make that that much sense.

It’s more in the vein of syncretism, since it is really hard to convert people away from a non-Abrahamic religion and for non-Abrahamic political and religious institutions to establish themselves over a majority Abrahamic population. Zoroastrianism is forced to adopt Islamic influences out of pragmatism, since not only do the Sassanid era institutions no longer exist, but attempting to fully impose Zoroastrianism over a population with a large Muslim minority (if not majority) that has positions of power is political suicide.

A “reformed” Norse religion patterning itself after Islam and caliphates also doesn’t quite make sense because Islam was only that way in reaction to Judeo-Christian philosophy out of a sense of building on and "perfecting" the same Abrahamic God's message. The only similarity with Norse pagan religious practices is superficial: Vikings were militant and raided their neighbors, early Muslims spread the faith through military conquest, so "Norse Islam" makes sense, right? No, it doesn't since Norse culture and religion are rooted in a different philosophy and political context. You're not going to get a Viking caliph who spreads the worship of Odin and Thor at the tip of his sword, as cool as that sounds.

Makes me wonder what the Dabuyid's are doing in all of this?

I initially considered them, but they were fully conquered by 760 (the entire family committed suicide too), and 769 is the absolute earliest I am significantly changing things.

Sounds interesting. This way this sons rule over Pengali can be a double edged sword. On one hand his actual family and their supporters hates him and has to rely on the Ming who might be wary of him due to him being of the Song Dynasty?

That’s the thing, they’re both Song heirs, so it confuses independence and anti-Ming movements. They don't know how to deal with the Ming-installed imperial line because it's not like the dynasty changed (though their title most certainly did).

Well this solves the problem of how to get Sweden into Scandinavia but I do wonder about the comment that @CaptainAlvious made about the Norse in Iberia and how it could potently be an independent kingdom instead of part of the Norse Empire. One idea that I have is that I know that in my Hanseatic League and Jomsvikings update for Tianxia I mention that the Jomsvikings made the region of Pomerania home but maybe a band of them or some other Norse warband could have made thair way their and became independent. Mabey claiming legitimacy from Cnut?

In OTL, the Jomsvikings were said to have been destroyed in 1043 when Magnus the Good sacked their fortress of Jomsborg and wiped them out. Jomsborg's location, and really any details on the actual Jomsvikings, are still up for debate. It is said that it was established somewhere on the Pomeranian coast by Harald Bluetooth around the 960s during his son Sweyn Forkbeard’s rebellion against him. That would largely remain here. Since Sweyn is now a pagan, he wouldn’t have any problems with the Jomsvikings and hiring their services. In OTL, they opposed Olaf Tryggvason, perhaps because of his aggressive Christianization efforts, so that would continue here. They specifically betrayed him at the Battle of Svolder, which caused his death, but I’m moving it up four years. After Svolder, they find service in various Norwegian, Swedish, and Danish armies, as well as Cnut’s army when he invades England. A large number of them go with Harald Hardrada, so when he takes power in Sweden and then Norway and Denmark, they become tied to his crown. However, Jomsborg and its Jomsvikings ally with the rival Danish claimant Sweyn Estridsson, so Harald sacks Jomsborg and slaughters its inhabitants, using the battle-axe Hel. He then reestablishes the Jomsvikings as the Norse equivalent of the Varangian Guard (even accepting foreign volunteers like Slavs and Balts, since medieval sources and sagas implied as much), with a new Jomsborg fortress built somewhere in Denmark or Norway to project Harald’s political and military power west and south from Sigtuna. The Reich eventually asserts control over the region where the original Jomsborg was, though its exact location is lost due to rising sea levels, storm flooding, and Harald being particularly thorough.

You could still name the modern (post-2000 era) of Nordland as Scandinavia. This could be done as a way to try and tie the Norse more closely with the Reich and distance itself from it's Tianxia past?

Scandinavia would be a name that is popular in the Reich from the early modern era, but by then “Nordenland” would be been established and soon overtakes it in usage. By the 20th century, it’s just a vestigial name, similar to usage of “Ruthenia” to refer to all of the old Kyivan Rus’ territories instead of various smaller regions with Slav populations.

One possible source that you could use is the History of Byzantium Podcast by Robin Pierson for some information?

I already have a lot of sources like several volumes of the Cambridge History of the Byzantine Empire.

So would this allow the Paramaras to keep the Chola's navy allowing them to get a head start on colonization?

Specifically trade and overseas diplomatic relations at first. The colonization comes later.

I think my initial question was about England, but I could see that happening based on previous discussions about the anti-Almoravid jarls.

For England, Friedrich the Great restores Christianity and maintains Anglo-Saxon institutions. In the absence of other valid heirs to the throne, the nobles elect Friedrich as their king, and Friedrich establishes the elective eparch system to rule on behalf of the king of England.

For Iberia, I ended up reworking the timeline to accommodate the new Harald Hardrada lore.

Harald spends the period from 1066-1072 suppressing the Welsh (though resistance continues until Friedrich the Great's invasion) and preparing to subjugate the Irish, who had taken in many Anglo-Saxon leaders who refused to submit to him. He arranges for Tostig to have an "accident" in such a way that would make the guy look like a tyrant and Harald as a hero for defeating him. However, this draws the ire of Tostig's ally, Malcolm III of Scotland, who threatens war. Harald moves first and attacks Scotland, killing Malcolm in battle. Malcolm's brother Donald and son Duncan flee to Ireland after their attempt to retake the throne fails. Harald's army pursues them there and gradually takes over the island through playing off local lords against each other.

In Iberia, the first Norse soldiers arrive in Leon around 1072. Many of them are Jomsvikings—the survivors of the anti-Harald faction, now wandering Europe offering their services to anybody, both pagan and Christian, in exchange for payment. Sancho hires both them and Harald's own troops in large numbers to back him up. As Harald's control over the British Isles becomes firmer, more troops from there arrive in Iberia—including refugees fleeing Harald (many of whom eventually migrate to Roman Anatolia and Taurica), ex-soldiers from defeated regions turning to mercenary work, and eventually those conscripted into Harald's armies. Over time, most of Sancho's armies becomes Norse, and he is forced to give them extra privileges and concessions. A rift emerges between his papal allies, who hate seeing pagans given that much power, and the pagans, who increasingly want to cut out the middleman. This proves fatal to Sancho's cause and the papal faction in Iberia. The rift explodes after the Walk to Canossa/Battle of Cannae. Sancho is assassinated and the Catholics and Norse turn on each other. Harald eventually intervenes and assembles an invasion force to claim a fifth crown in his empire, easily establishing a foothold in Leon. Friedrich and Alfonso VI form a temporary alliance with Harald against the Almoravids. Iberia in the 1080s-90s becomes a mess. In the east, Alfonso VI and his successors begin aligning closer to the HRE. Castile becomes a battlefield between Christians and Norse adventurers striking out from Harald's conquest in Leon. Portugal is divided between the Almoravids in the west and a remaining Christian kingdom in the northwest. The south is a patchwork of surviving post-Cordoba taifas, Almoravid domains, and Norse jarldoms carved out by Harald's troops and adventurers striking out on their own. A grand temple to Frey, the ancestor of the Ynglings, is built in Cordoba to rival the one in Uppsala. So Norse control over Andalusia isn't absolute and complete—it's generally limited to Cordoba, Toledo, and the northwestern areas where Andalusia meets Leon, while the independent jarldoms compete with Christian kingdoms, taifas, and Almoravid allies.

I'll retcon my post on page 507 and say Harald lives until 1104, holding onto his conquests outside the Nordics through sheer force of will and his own military talent (his son Olaf still founds Bergen and encourages the establishment of English-Nordic trade routes). While Olaf is a capable king, he is not a soldier like his father, and so Friedrich and Alfonso strike. Friedrich invades England after the Anglo-Saxon nobles elect him instead of Olaf, while Alfonso invades Norse-controlled Iberia after assembling a massive coalition of Christian and even Muslim Iberians via his title of "Emperor of All Spain." I'm going to move up the date of the Reich's conquest of Iberia from 1124 (because that was only due to the randomness of the old CK2 crusade mechanic) to 1106, when Friedrich the Glorious, Saint Gunhilda, and an elderly El Cid join Alfonso's campaign. The Iberian campaign is followed up by the liberation of Ireland and Scotland from the Norse, bringing the Reich to its modern borders. Initially, the Iberian conquests are bestowed upon Alfonso VI. However, his only son died in battle against the Norse (similar to OTL), so when Alfonso dies not long afterward, he wills his kingdoms to another son of Friedrich the Great, who married his daughter Urraca (not the other Urraca I previously mentioned), and the title of Emperor of All Spain to Friedrich the Glorious. As a result, Friedrich the Glorious claims the titles of King of England, King of Scotland, High King of Ireland, and Emperor of All Spain. Olaf retains the rest of the Nordics as the loss of England is blamed on the local nobles, while Scotland, Ireland, and Iberia were acknowledged as lost causes that could not be held after Harald's death. Any disgruntled Norse nobles and remaining Christians who attempt to rise up are then suppressed. Olaf still controls Iceland, Greenland, and Vinland though.

Saint Wilhelmina, who is born the following year as Friedrich the Glorious' first child (she's born in 1110 extrapolating back from being 16 in 1126), is given the middle name Alfonso in his memory. Part of me wants her to be Gunhilda's actual daughter. I can change it so that Konstantia Gavras, Friedrich the Glorious' first wife, was married to him to secure Theodoros Gavras' loyalty during his regency, but they don't have any children. She dies from illness in 1104, and Friedrich the Great, shortly before leaving for England, approves of his grandson's remarriage to Gunhilda (they all ignore the incident with Sbyslava and are unaware of Kirill).

I myself wonder if India would keep the Chola's overseas conquests in Srivijaya, since some of them are in what would be in the Roman Bosporus Nova rather than Indian Nusantara, even if old lore India had colonies in southern Sumatra? I also wonder if the Pamarras would inherit the Palas relationship with Southeast Asia and Tibet?

The Paramaras kept the Chola's market structure and economic policies. Since their power base started in southern India, they had to continue relying on maritime trade, prospering on Maritime Silk Road trade routes between China and the Middle East. However, while their culture was exported to much of Southeast Asia, a lot of their direct conquests outside of India never existed, as Rajendra instead committed his troops to fighting off an even more powerful Mahmud of Ghazni. The Paramaras continued committing most of their military forces towards Indian unification and then consolidating the empire, but they would still export their culture and religion to their neighbors.

Also Zen, I think there was also a big Indian civil war you overlooked in the 12th century based on gameplay screenshots, so maybe Saint Wilhelmina's alliances with India allows Jayasimha to reform his army and administration along Roman lines and also purge troublesome dissidents, allowing him to centralize India. We could also reduce the scale of that rebellion from most of India in CK2 to something more manageable, like the former Pala Empire, or just make it a succession crisis after Jayasimha's death.

I think a succession crisis mixed with some rebellions from independence-minded nobles makes sense, building on the example of how the Maurya and Gupta empires declined.

 

[zenphoenix]

This did get me thinking about who exactly besides the Almoravids would be escaping across the Atlantic, which made me think about the situation as of 1066 because I need to know what I meant by Andalusians. The Caliphate of Cordoba had just fallen 35 years ago and fractured into taifas. In OTL, this shifted the balance of power in favor of the Christian kings as various taifas formed alliances with or paid tribute to Christians for help against their rivals. The Almoravids enter the scene in 1085 when the taifas ask them for help against the Christians, only for the Almoravids to begin taking the land for themselves and the taifas to again work with Christians. I’d say the Taifa of Seville is our best candidate for an Andalusian exile group due to its patronage of the arts and sciences, willingness to work with Christian rulers like Alfonso VI and hire Christian mercenaries, continuation of the Caliphate’s more lenient policies towards Jews…and also because it was the taifa that invited the Almoravids into Iberia and was their first conquest. While much of the court itself surrendered at Seville like in OTL, one faction could have taken several soldiers, intellectuals, and artisans of various faiths with them on a voyage into the Atlantic due to disagreements with the Almoravids’ religious conservatism. I want retcon the Iberia situation so that the Almoravids remain a serious threat for several more decades, as in OTL. Quickly unifying the lands of al-Andalus under its banner, the Almoravids stop the advance of the Christian kings and reverse the situation, pushing further north against them.

Looming quickly, I think I can add in further justification for the anti-Almoravid Taifa of Seville exiles leaving for the New World after 1085. Maybe they heard rumors that the caliph Hisham II, who most likely died in 1013 during a sack of Cordoba, is still alive. These rumors were popular in OTL and used by the first taifa leaders to legitimize their rule with the excuse that they were just governing autonomously until his return. I could have the rumors take a different path specifically in Seville, where some of them allege that Hisham II and his supporters managed to escape Cordoba, get to Seville, and then sail away in a fleet somewhere, either to Mali or a land across the ocean (drawing more from local Andalusian folk legends of phantom islands than anything to do with Vinland). There, Hisham is gathering an army of the faithful to take back his throne and restore the caliphate to greatness. I’ll leave it ambiguous as to if Hisham actually did any of this (and if he did, he’d probably be dead by then), because it doesn’t matter, as the exiles decide to act on those legends.

Now while most of them would end up in Mayapan, I actually want to resurrect my original idea by having some of them to get blown off course and establish a small Muslim settlement in South Eimerica that is eventually absorbed by Neurhomania. But there aren’t any spare Umayyads to send with them, since by 1085 the only Umayyad I can find is Wallada bint al-Mustakfi, that “last Umayyad” we’ve discussed before. Creating any original male Umayyads at any point after 1031 risks stalling out the collapse of the Caliphate of Cordoba and affecting the development of the taifa period, which would mess up the later Iberian stuff. As a consolation, I might have the Reich install a grandson of al-Mustakfi (or maybe a great-nephew of an original sister of hers, to avoid having to figure out her sexual orientation) as a figurehead caliph for the remaining Muslims of Iberia (making there eventually 4 caliphs subservient to the Reich).