Board Thread:Timeline Discussions/@comment-99.230.251.18-20130220051009/@comment-141.99.46.165-20140127121609

I really love this timeline, too! It should definitely be continued!

What I think is great is, on the one hand, the quality of narration, the liveliness and yet systematicity of descriptions. Individual events, without which a timeline becomes boring theory, are described beautifully, without the whole thing turning into a semi-literary saga or novel thing, the web of interdependent continental processes is always felt. This analytic view, without which a timeline becomes un-discussable literature, includes many factors, without losing its focus on North America and the Haudenois.

On the other hand, I personally enjoyed this timeline more than other Native American ATLs (and I have a penchant for ATLs where Native Americans resist colonization) also because it chooses, with the Haudenosaunee instead of, say, the Maya, Aztecs or Inca, a culture that is shaped by totems not ranks, shamans not priests, villages not cities, consensus not institutionalised coercion. This contains seeds of plausibility for theories of an economic, social and military "modernization" that is not just a copy of the atrocious developments in Western Europe-led OTL 16th-20th century and which, at the same time, can observe, analyse and avoid said problems because developments are still catalysed mainly by contact with European influences.

The great potential that lies here is to have a context for thinking outside the box when it comes to all questions of industrial wealth vs. sustainability, self-defence vs. the military-industrial complex etc.

So, once again, I think this timeline should definitely be continued.

Some questions that might spark discussions for categories that flesh out this possible world:

- Tribal character vs. "nation-building": At the beginning, a lot of continuity to the ATL Confederacy is sought, you talk about the encouragement of linguistic and cultural plurality etc. Does a unique development path rest on this, and can it? For example, 1.) when the Haudenois take back the Atlantic coast in 1717, and I´m not talking about the treatment of European settlers, which you dealt with to some extent, but about Haudenois resettlers. Tribality is perceived to require territorial proximity and some extent of homogeneity. The Haudenois resettling New York, Delaware etc. are composed from all kinds of backgrounds, I suppose? Also, 2.) urban development hasn`t been working well together with pre-urban-defined tribality.

In both cases, it suggests itself that at least Coast re-settlers and city dwellers see themselves and the communities they live in as "Haudenois" and no longer tribally defined, in other words, they likely engage in some kind of nation-building.

Where will this take the Haudenois? How can aspects like consensus-orientation, confederality and other cultural characteristics be successfully transformed and survive the process? Where and how is it likely not to succeed, and how could arising conflicts develop and be dealt with?

- Animism, totems, shamans and ecological awareness vs. science and related kinds of division of labour: At several points, the Haudenois are described as ecologically more aware than the European settlers, with development paths being "greener" and more with the nature they live in instead of against it. If animist culture/religion is what makes this difference, then one must ask how it can transform successfully. I´ll take the example of totems. To me, it makes sense to say that a person, who sees the kind of daily work they pursue - e.g. the manufacturing of weaponry - as defined by which mythical animal creature they consider themselves to stem from, will pursue their profession with greater awareness for its consequences on animals and nature in general (e.g. build light weapons that fit into a military strategy relying on specially bred and trained fighter-animals rather than build weaponry whose raw material extraction damages the environment and whose use damages it even more). Totems can be a reason which would explain the difference in the Haudenois path of economic development.

On the other hand, totems are rather inflexible. They tie people to a specific professional domain, however re-defined in cultural modernization processes, thus reducing individual career choice suited to talents and interests. Then again, early career determination might result in early individual development support. But again, inflexibility of the workforce might prove disastrous when rapid major changes require economic re-orientation (wartime and peacetime production, external trade shocks etc.). Also, totems and animism in general may be quite a flexible "religion" that could adapt to social developments maybe even better than scriptural religions, but these developments don`t happen by themselves. I can imagine a lot of contradictions between traditions and modern-day-society requirements here, and it is an interesting challenge to describe them and how an interesting and unique outcome could result from the transformation processes.

- Something else has already been briefly touched upon by an earlier commenter: How should we envisage the Lakota run to the Pacific? To answer this question, one should go further back: How did their super-quick modernization process around 1700 really happen? To what extent would modernization experiences / recipes from a formerly agriculture-based society like the Haudenois work for a formerly nomad society like the Lakota-Dakota-Nakota? How could military strategies that Haudenois thinkers designed with special care for the specific (mountainous, forested) environment they fought in be helpful for a Native American country who must defend itself and expand in the environment of the Great Plains?

If answers are found to these questions, they might shed some light onto how the Westward race of the Lakota should be conceived of. If it`s a quick building of a loose alliance, one must bear the looseness of the alliance in mind for further developments (and both the great numbers of Dené in the Western plains and mountains as well as the rather elaborate societies of the Coastal Salish might prove important independent actors). If it´s an imperial expansion, does this lead to conflicts between Haudenois and Lakota? What social mechanisms would drive imperial expansion internally? What problems would be caused and how would they be dealt with or develop into imperial crises?