NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Bowman" data-source="post: 7472867" data-attributes="member: 6925649">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.</blockquote>

Verification