American Indians Colonize the Old world in 1250 BC

[tomBitonti]

A lot of additional culture would have to be invented for the Indians, as we're assuming 2225 years of additional history for them. I don't think many Indians would be much offended about the assumptions we're making about them. Most of these assumptions are positive, that they can invent and advance if given a chance, and why shouldn't they? usually when two cultures meet and one is way more advanced than the other, then there would be trouble. the only part of this that is historical is the Old World people's, we know of their culture and traditions. how would they react to these invaders from across the sea. Would they learn to smith their own firearms, would they learn to work steel? The Egyptians would have a lot of catching up to do.

I was thinking that one would need to advance technology (or add in enough magic) to enable "sufficiently" reliable crossings of the Atlantic. (Which becomes an interesting side question: What level of technology would be sufficient?)

What seems problematic is putting the same motivations on New World to Old World explorers as we ascribe to the historical explorers. My understanding of actual history is that explorations were driven by the appetites of the machinery of Empire, that appearing as a desire for profit and influence.

Thx!
TomB

 

[TheCosmicKid]

What seems problematic is putting the same motivations on New World to Old World explorers as we ascribe to the historical explorers. My understanding of actual history is that explorations were driven by the appetites of the machinery of Empire, that appearing as a desire for profit and influence.

Empire is not exactly a unique phenomenon, though. People have been imperializing all over the world for as long as there has been agriculture to sustain it. Even during the brief window we have on pre-Columbian cultures as Europeans made contact with them, there were at least two unambiguous centralized, neighbor-conquering, tribute-taking empires in the Americas. To be sure, there were also lots more cultures that weren't empires. Imperialism is, by its intrinsic nature, a minority cultural strategy. But - again, assuming the wild premise of an industrial revolution in the Americas by 1250 BC - it's hardly implausible that at least one of the cultures in this timeline started playing the paint-the-whole-map-my-color game.

 

[Thomas Bowman]

I was thinking that one would need to advance technology (or add in enough magic) to enable "sufficiently" reliable crossings of the Atlantic. (Which becomes an interesting side question: What level of technology would be sufficient?)

What seems problematic is putting the same motivations on New World to Old World explorers as we ascribe to the historical explorers. My understanding of actual history is that explorations were driven by the appetites of the machinery of Empire, that appearing as a desire for profit and influence.

Thx!
TomB

Why would the American Indian be any different? When Europeans encountered them, they were at a disadvantage, they are human beings and have the same base motivations that other people do. American Indians have had their own empires, the Aztec Empire was one of them, who's to say what new empires would have formed in another 2250 years? I would say the possibilities are wide open, the main difference is that the "Frontier" and the "Savages" are different in this case. Does it really make a difference on who has the upper hand? I would say not! American Indians have been cruel in their victories over the white interlopers as often as when it was those interlopers that have had their victories. People often tend to be selfish and look after their own interests, that is true of Native Americans and European interlopers.

I would say that is the "shoe was on the other foot" then the European tribesmen and other natives of the Old World would be fighting for their homes against foreign invaders, just like the Indians were in our history. I think it would be more interesting in this case as the scales would be more evenly balanced. The Indians would have less trouble conquering the uncivilized areas, such as Western and Northern Europe. Africa would give them problems because of all the diseases there, organized enemies such as the Egyptians would make a tough foe as well, they are not about to give up their homes and become slaves without a fight. The victor would enslave the vanquished, as this was a standard practice in the ancient world, and it would go both ways.

 

[Yaarel]

I think 'North America discovers the Old World' would work out about how the Viking explorations did.

There is a brief period of strategic surprise. Based on how the contacts went (trade vs plunder), the residents decide to assimilate / exploit / exterminate the outsiders. When the death-and-disappearance rate exceeds the replenishment rate, the outpost is gone. And in the Europeans' case, they now KNOW that something is out there. So they go looking, perhaps back-tracking any map they found.

Instead of travelling to far Cathay tracking down silk, Marco Polo discovers a New World !

There was also intermarrying going on too.

 

[Thomas Bowman]

I was thinking that one would need to advance technology (or add in enough magic) to enable "sufficiently" reliable crossings of the Atlantic. (Which becomes an interesting side question: What level of technology would be sufficient?)

What seems problematic is putting the same motivations on New World to Old World explorers as we ascribe to the historical explorers. My understanding of actual history is that explorations were driven by the appetites of the machinery of Empire, that appearing as a desire for profit and influence.

Thx!
TomB

What level of technology did Columbus have? I believe Columbus lived in the late Renaissance, that is the technology he had at his disposal, his troops had armor, but also carried guns.

This is what they looked like, after about 100 years they dispensed with the armor and wore uniforms, the Indians got guns, and they mastered ambush tactics against the Colonials. Armor would do some good against the Egyptians for example, but once they got some guns, they could just shoot holes in it, and Armor was on its way out anyway when Columbus sailed the ocean blue, the new weapon was the musket and the cannon. So I'm assuming the Indians have this technology as well as the recently acquired ability to sail the world's deep oceans, as opposed to the early generation of coastal huggers that they previously had.

 

[Yaarel]

1250 BCE is moreorless prehistorical for both the Americas and NW Europe. Depictions of respective cultures would be speculative at best.

I would go with a historical period such as 1000 CE Viking Era, when, at least Viking and NE North America are somewhat understood.

 

[Thomas Bowman]

1250 BCE is moreorless prehistorical for both the Americas and NW Europe. Depictions of respective cultures would be speculative at best.

I would go with a historical period such as 1000 CE Viking Era, when, at least Viking and NE North America are somewhat understood.

You can go less wrong if there is less to know. Most of the Indian's culture would be fictional and speculative, after 2250 years, there is no real wrong answer as to what they would be, as we just don't know, we have to make it up as we go along. 1000 CE is only 500 years before Columbus, and it would be much harder for the Indians to conquer, they would have to deal with medieval kingdoms and knights on horseback, and of course the Catholic Church, and I'm pretty sure you don't want to deal with the Catholic Church, as that is a real world religion that exists today. At least if we go into ancient pagan times, we don't have a problem with that. Maybe Moses, but that's about it!

 

[Yaarel]

You can go less wrong if there is less to know. Most of the Indian's culture would be fictional and speculative, after 2250 years, there is no real wrong answer as to what they would be, as we just don't know, we have to make it up as we go along. 1000 CE is only 500 years before Columbus, and it would be much harder for the Indians to conquer, they would have to deal with medieval kingdoms and knights on horseback, and of course the Catholic Church, and I'm pretty sure you don't want to deal with the Catholic Church, as that is a real world religion that exists today. At least if we go into ancient pagan times, we don't have a problem with that. Maybe Moses, but that's about it!

People can and do have D&D settings that include the Catholic Church − especially for a historical medieval Europe setting. As long as the DM is neither trying to push the religion nor demonize the religion, there are alot of colorful customs and events to explore. Be compassionate toward humans who lived in the past, just like toward humans who live now in the present, and setting can be alot of fun.



I think the concept of What If, the American Indians colonized Europe is an interesting speculative scenario to explore. The thought experiment of how they might achieve it is an intriguing challenge.

For me, the hardest question is, why would one or more Native American tribes want to?

If you go with Viking Era, I would go with reallife names of places and ethnic groups − and do the research.

If you go with Bronze Age (1250 BCE), I would make up fantasy versions with fantasy names − just to make it clear I wasnt even trying to be realistic, and was simply letting all of my prejudices run amok.

 

[Thomas Bowman]

I'm not sure they would still have tribes if they were as technically advanced as Columbus. What tribe did Columbus belong to? The minute someone says the word "tribe" I imagine someone wearing animal skins, face paint, and feathers and moccasins. Columbus didn't wear those things, I'm not sure the hypothetical Indians would be wearing them either. The best example of what they might be like is if you can imagine this, Edgar Rice Burrows, "Red Martians", they were basically humanoid enough for John Carter to fall in love with one of them Deja Thoris.

Deja Thoris was basically very much like an American Indian, it is interesting that John Carter has an encounter with a real Indian, that tried to kill him, right before he teleported to Mars. The Red Martians he described as looking very much like American Indians, only they built cities carried swords and pistols and operated machinery, this might be something like the Indians in the setting I'm talking about here. They certainly do have swords and pistols, not your typical image of a stereotypical Indian now is it! You have to get that idea out of your head, these are not those Indians, they don't live in teepees any more.

 

[Umbran]

This has nothing to do with racism, the fact that a few detractors on this board decided to bring in the issue of racism in a what-if fantasy game is on them. So @Derren is 100% right - the OP should pretty much ignore them.

Yes. Well, go ask Monte Cook if he should have ignored such warnings. He did a poorly researched depiction of Native American cultures in The Strange, back a couple of years ago, and it led to significant headaches.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?2465-Monte-Cook-Games-Thunder-Plains-A-Petition

So, sure, go ahead. Make the same mistakes others made. Don't learn from what others have already done. See how that works out for you.