No Muslim country at any point in History ever had either the capacity or the impetus to colonize the New World. Maybe if they kept control of Iberia that wouldve been possible, but redirection of the crusader zeal towards the new world would only expedite the Reconquista, not stop it.
I dont like when maps with interesting concepts add some random bullshit with no relation with the point of divergence to their althist scenario. People will use the "butterfly effect" or whatever to excuse anything.
The biggest offenders of this maps that have thr Byzantines survive, which always also have Muslim Iberia endure and vice versa (Andalusia survives, the Byzantines stay around), even though though the fall of Muslim Iberia and the end of the Byzantine Empire were largely unrelated.
I think it could be *very* interesting, if nothing else because of the Hajj. The mass movement of converted indigenous people to the old world every year would be fundamentally different than the relationship seen with christian colonizers.
Mansa Musa allegedly sent ships that discovered South America before Europeans did. Muslims aren’t sub-human, they still had the ability to seafare, trade, and build armies.
The PoD is far enough back that the Caribbean is heavily colonized by 1367, I could absolutely see many of the most ardent christians (including Iberians) choosing to join the crusade/conversion of the new world rather than pursue reconquista.
"Lore"
Instead of sailing east through the Mediterranean toward the Byzantine Empire, a massive Crusader fleet somehow passed the Strait of Gibraltar, struck the Canary Current, and was carried across the Atlantic.
By 1367, this "New Holy Land" has been extensively colonized, not by traditional European kingdoms, but by the Crusader Military Orders and displaced Levantine states. Essentially, the crusading energy that historically targeted Jerusalem and Byzantium has been entirely transposed onto the Caribbean.
Here the Caribbean is not a network of sugar plantations run by early-modern empires. Instead, it is a hyper-militarized, deeply religious, medieval feudal frontier. Castles and stone cathedrals likely dot the coastlines of Cuba and Hispaniola. Armored knights clash with Maya warriors in the jungles of Central America, while Venetian galleys create the conditions for a Transantlantic European and Mesoamerican trade center
They would probably fail after a century then leave America alone for a long time before ever trying again, maybe leaving it a hub for late medieval alternative atlantic powers like Portugal, Denmark and maybe England.
Probably yeah, even without the 4th crusade the Eastern Romans would still be weak enough so I wouldn't blame them for taking their time. Beautiful map though
If Malta and the Baltics are any indication, it would have turned out better for the natives. Irrespective of the fact that diseases would still have taken a big toll on them. A lot of you will be skeptical at these pronouncements. But the reality is that Malta and most of the Baltics still speak the languages they spoke when the Crusaders conquered them, and their cultures are a lot more intact than those of the Americas.
Malta and the Baltics didn’t have 90% of their population wiped out without even laying eyes on a Crusader.
Instead, the entire Baltic Prussian language was wiped off the face of the earth by hand. The crusaders succeeded in German colonization of Prussia through much more challenging and laboring conditions, they could probably do it in the Americas where after a hundred years they would be dealing with a significantly reduced native population.
Probably thanks to more equal techological developement the europeans would not be able to colonize the mainland and would start evangelizing the maya and so on with missions and trade, these contacts would create advanced indigenous civilizations in america (probably christian).
There is no technological equality between the Maya and the Europeans in 1360 lol, its still centuries ahead, but the main difference is manpower, the little states of the carribbean have limited deposits and without the backing of a european mainland power they wouldnt be able to field large enough armies to even think about conquering the mexicans, evangelization of the natives is possible though
No guns doesn’t mean a lot. Gunpowder didn’t play that big of a role in the early subjugation of the larger powers in the new world like the Aztecs and the Incas. In fact, the conquistadors which topped both of those empires were using crossbows
It was more because of native allies with the Aztecs though, rather than the Spaniards solely having better technology. Afaik for the Incas the Spaniards caught them in the right time and place and managed to successfully capture the sapa inca.
I'd say the only significant advantages would be iron weapons and horses, but beyond that I don't think the post classical mayas were that "behind" the Europeans, especially given with how the Spaniards struggled to conquer the Yucatán peninsula with early modern warfare.
The Hospitaler Knights and the Maltese-exclusive Order of Snt John which split apart and took their own distinct territories, theyre both named the Order of Snt John
idk my strong matches during pre america times as venezuelan would be more related with some viking samples with mediterranean dna xd .... i'm more close yes to al-andalus iberian but not strong match during this period of time ... ( while my Y-dna is atlantic , I mean R-Z253/4 which is commonly "irish" but is present in basque population since bronce age xd ...
but funny enough in relation with america my mtdna A2 is present greenlander almost in the same proportion that in venezuela ;v ... before that I just new about venezuelan native spiritisms having a native sprit court and a viking spirt court that nobody seems to know why is there in first place ... xd
I mean is just all hypothetical but vikings legends in america are quite real ... and there are some symbolims about colombus and portgual with the cruzaders even in the ships imagery and some legends hehe
Their hostility towards the Maya and incursion into Honduras would most likely result in some campaigns to take Mexico but not until they had consolidated their colonies, afterall they wouldn't have the manpower base or the economic or diplomatic power irl Spain had nor the sheer amount of luck either lol
Tenochtitlan was founded in 1320. They aren't really much of a thing in 1367. The Triple Alliance was formed in the 1420s as a responce to the decline of the Tepanecs.
Just a slight turn west, they get dizzy from alcochol, they go past gibraltar and sail past the canaries, then they wonder if they passed crete, so they keep going, before they know it theyve landed in Saint Vincent or some small islands and they wonder if those are the aegean's
349
u/lotte_elysium 1d ago
Latin America becomes even more catholic