What if Africa teleported 100 miles west and south in 262 AD, opening up the Mediterranean to the oc

[raharris1973]

What if Africa teleported 100 miles west and south in 262 AD, opening up the Mediterranean to the oceans?

262 is the second year of the reign of Julian, aka Julian the Apostate, and the year he announced the end of official favor for Christianity, and began renewed imperial patronage of a new pagan priesthood and pagan temples.

The significant widening of the strait of Gibraltar should allow greater scale interactions of Atlantic and Mediterranean marine organizations, and more significantly, unimpeded interactions of sea currents and storm systems that I would imagine would intensify storms, waves, and tidal effects in the Mediterranean. The biological and climatological changes should be even more severe on the eastern end of the Mediterranean, where, formerly separated from the Red Sea and Indian Ocean by land, the Mediterranean is now connected to the Red Sea by a wide 100 mile strait between mainland Egypt just east of the Nile delta, to the Sinai peninsula, Palestine, and Arabia. This allows the marine ecosystems of the Mediterranean and Red Sea/Indian Ocean for the first time in millions of years and for invasive species to spread, and for ocean currents to mix with each other or collide later with fewer obstacles. The Red Sea is widened as Africa's southward, and especially westward movement from Arabia makes the Bab al Mandeb strait substantially wider.

Changes to the landscape will be regarded as awesome, not in the positive, California surfer sense, but in the - this is a big deal sense, at least as frightening as amazing. And since it will ruin plans for provisioning fishing trips and and to unexpected and rough storms, and cause be to be lost at sea or lost to storm surges, the change will be associated with disasters. Nevertheless, the distances Africa is displaced are certainly not so great and the seamanship skills and technology of these 4th century Romans are not so poor that the African coast would lose contact with the European and Asian coasts and trade would be seriously depleted for any length of time.

Additionally, diversion, dilution, and alternation of ocean currents should not drastic change temperature scales such as to drain all the warming water from the North Atlantic, to end up freezing down Northern European shores. The role of the Gulf Stream and North Atlantic drift as a super novel, fragile, delicate almost accidental thing whose absence means northern latitudes default to ice is probably overrated anyway. Especially if we compare to matching latitudes off the western coast of, say, British Columbia and southern Alaska.

Anyhow. How does world civilizational development proceed with a very wide, natural Suez Canal in place from 362 AD onward. Populations in the Roman Empire had already been declining, forcing a reduction in economic specialization, and plagues were going to spread, but would greater ease of trade connections with India and East Africa by sea, help reinvigorate trade and economic activity, even while contributing to the common disease pool? What about changes for greater cultural interchange and religious proselytizing between the Roman world, India, and China?

www.flickr.com/photos/22187058@N03/53317499698/in/dateposted/

[575]

Acutally the two Romans should be able to hold onto their African lands. Even grain shipments from Egypt would keep going. With a wide Suez the trade on India should benefit that no special ports and overland routes would be necessary to build/plan. Read on some defunct AH-site that the spice/luxuries trade with India could have more than financed a Suez Canal during antiquity. So it would be some economical boost to the Byzantines who would probably do whats necessary to keep competition out.

[stevep]

Nov 10, 2023 3:16:19 GMT raharris1973 said:

What if Africa teleported 100 miles west and south in 262 AD, opening up the Mediterranean to the oceans?

262 is the second year of the reign of Julian, aka Julian the Apostate, and the year he announced the end of official favor for Christianity, and began renewed imperial patronage of a new pagan priesthood and pagan temples.

The significant widening of the strait of Gibraltar should allow greater scale interactions of Atlantic and Mediterranean marine organizations, and more significantly, unimpeded interactions of sea currents and storm systems that I would imagine would intensify storms, waves, and tidal effects in the Mediterranean. The biological and climatological changes should be even more severe on the eastern end of the Mediterranean, where, formerly separated from the Red Sea and Indian Ocean by land, the Mediterranean is now connected to the Red Sea by a wide 100 mile strait between mainland Egypt just east of the Nile delta, to the Sinai peninsula, Palestine, and Arabia. This allows the marine ecosystems of the Mediterranean and Red Sea/Indian Ocean for the first time in millions of years and for invasive species to spread, and for ocean currents to mix with each other or collide later with fewer obstacles. The Red Sea is widened as Africa's southward, and especially westward movement from Arabia makes the Bab al Mandeb strait substantially wider.

Changes to the landscape will be regarded as awesome, not in the positive, California surfer sense, but in the - this is a big deal sense, at least as frightening as amazing. And since it will ruin plans for provisioning fishing trips and and to unexpected and rough storms, and cause be to be lost at sea or lost to storm surges, the change will be associated with disasters. Nevertheless, the distances Africa is displaced are certainly not so great and the seamanship skills and technology of these 4th century Romans are not so poor that the African coast would lose contact with the European and Asian coasts and trade would be seriously depleted for any length of time.

Additionally, diversion, dilution, and alternation of ocean currents should not drastic change temperature scales such as to drain all the warming water from the North Atlantic, to end up freezing down Northern European shores. The role of the Gulf Stream and North Atlantic drift as a super novel, fragile, delicate almost accidental thing whose absence means northern latitudes default to ice is probably overrated anyway. Especially if we compare to matching latitudes off the western coast of, say, British Columbia and southern Alaska.

Anyhow. How does world civilizational development proceed with a very wide, natural Suez Canal in place from 362 AD onward. Populations in the Roman Empire had already been declining, forcing a reduction in economic specialization, and plagues were going to spread, but would greater ease of trade connections with India and East Africa by sea, help reinvigorate trade and economic activity, even while contributing to the common disease pool? What about changes for greater cultural interchange and religious proselytizing between the Roman world, India, and China?

www.flickr.com/photos/22187058@N03/53317499698/in/dateposted/

  Well overall its going to be very bad, for Julian, the non-Christians and the empire as a whole.  There's going to be a lot of death, destruction and disruption of trade in an already struggling empire and its going to be seen as a divine act.  The Christians will claim its a sign of god's displeasure at the loss of many of their privileges and the pagans will be hard pressed not to see it as a similar sign of their deities anger and that would make it difficult for Julian.  Your likely to see a lot of unrest and probably outright revolts with probably also attempts at assassination and a lot of attacks on non-Christians.

  Also you may be underestimating the problems that the chance will cause.  As I understand it much sea travel in the Med was coastal to avoid storms or deep water and even as late as the 4thC this is likely to be the case.  Even for cross Med trips the distances are now considerably greater which will cause fear and confusion even when they and the stormier waters don't cause actual loss of ships.  Until enough people discover that the Med is wider what are sailors going to think when they reach the distance where the south coast of Europe - or north of Africa going the other way - and there's no land in site.  Do they push on in the hope of finding something or turn back?  Although experienced sailors south of the expanded sea would possibly pick up on their new location as the stars will be in the wrong position.

  The movement of Africa south is especially serious as both great capitals, Rome and Constantinople depended very much on food imports from Africa, especially Egypt but also the Carthage region.  Even once enough is known and the great grain ships were secure enough to travel the longer distance reliably its going to take longer so there will be losses of efficiency even when the network is in full running order again and too that time there are likely to be serious shortages especially in the big cities and a lot of unrest.  This is going to make the current regime of emperor Julian even more unpopular.

  This assumes that those great geographical changes don't cause immediate geological impacts like tidal waves and earthquakes.  I assume that the ASB is preventing that else everything does go to hell in a hand-basket.

  Its possible that Julian and his government could not only survive but also win through.  He's a good general with a loyal army behind him and wanted to make major reforms, not just religious ones, but greatly reducing the bureaucracy and the tax burden on the population and his care for the ordinary Roman if he can express it in this period of chaos and disorder could win him support.  There will be no invasion of Sassanid Persia in this scenario, which ended up disastrously with his death in battle and then the fatal lack of leadership by Jovian the new compromise emperor.  However expect Persian attacks on the weakened empire and that could actually help him as it would distract the eastern provinces, which are the most heavily Christianized.  Furthermore with the wide Suez passage its unlikely that any Persian invasion of Egypt, even if they overran Syria and Palestine would be possible.  Christian revolts could be painted by him as divisive and destructive as well as treacherous - assuming of course he puts them down successfully.  If he is forced to flee the Constantinople region then you could see a rival eastern empire established but that could give him time to secure the western empire and Egypt before putting down the rebel state.  All this would be difficult and he would have to be both well organised and lucky.

  Its unclear how things would develop in northern Europe.  The barbarians were bloodied by Julian in 361 along the Rhine but imperial weakness could tempt them to try again and invasions across the Danube and the Black Sea are very likely which could see chaos in much of the Balkans.  

  In the longer term, assuming the empire survives, whether pagan or Christian it could have some advantages.  The greater distances to Africa and more stormy Med would really force development of more seaworthy ships and I suspect they would have some lessons from their shipping in the northern ocean.  Coupled with easier access to the Indian Ocean that could drastically change aspects of the empire's social and economic structure as could the chaos and disorder that would result from the disruption.

  I have read that until the development of steam engines two way traffic up and down the Red Sea was difficult because by sailing ship winds were weak and the currents were overwhelmingly in one way - can't remember which.  However do know that Roman merchants traded with India via the Red Sea so there must be some way for them to do it.  However with a wider sea it might be easier once suitable designs are developed to increase the scale of traffic and there will no longer be a need for trans-shipping across Egypt and reloading onto ships again.  This might also open up travel down the east coast of Africa although what trade options other than possibly slaves and wild animals for the arenas I don't know.

  One effect of greater sea travel is that this could cause earlier problems for the overland caravans along the western side of Arabia which could cause earlier problems for places like Mecca.  Could possibly seen an earlier version of Islam developing or such being totally butterflied.  [Again this might depend on what happens religiously further north].  The Yemen region, which was quite fertile could still do well but the regions further north be bypassed.

  It may not be the Romans but someone is going to fill in the role later taken on by the Arabs - possibly Axum emerging as a major player in the eastern trade route that opens up between Europe and at least India.  Although again I think Axum was Christian by this point so that could be a source of tensions with a successfully revived pagan Rome.

 

[stevep]

Nov 10, 2023 13:31:41 GMT 575 said:

Acutally the two Romans should be able to hold onto their African lands. Even grain shipments from Egypt would keep going. With a wide Suez the trade on India should benefit that no special ports and overland routes would be necessary to build/plan. Read on some defunct AH-site that the spice/luxuries trade with India could have more than financed a Suez Canal during antiquity. So it would be some economical boost to the Byzantines who would probably do whats necessary to keep competition out.

  Actually I think there was a canal but it was between the Red Sea and the Nile.  Possibly because the ancients seem to have thought that there was a difference in sea level between the Med and the Indian Ocean.  A direct sea route would be more efficient.

  As I noted I'm less confident that the normal trade and especially the grain supplies from Africa won't be disrupted at least for a while.  Its going to need some changes to shipping routes and possibly designs for efficiency but at the least there's likely to be some disruption why people discover what's happened and the greater distances and rougher seas. 

[575]

Nov 10, 2023 14:30:50 GMT stevep said:

Nov 10, 2023 13:31:41 GMT 575 said:

Acutally the two Romans should be able to hold onto their African lands. Even grain shipments from Egypt would keep going. With a wide Suez the trade on India should benefit that no special ports and overland routes would be necessary to build/plan. Read on some defunct AH-site that the spice/luxuries trade with India could have more than financed a Suez Canal during antiquity. So it would be some economical boost to the Byzantines who would probably do whats necessary to keep competition out.

  Actually I think there was a canal but it was between the Red Sea and the Nile.  Possibly because the ancients seem to have thought that there was a difference in sea level between the Med and the Indian Ocean.  A direct sea route would be more efficient.

  As I noted I'm less confident that the normal trade and especially the grain supplies from Africa won't be disrupted at least for a while.  Its going to need some changes to shipping routes and possibly designs for efficiency but at the least there's likely to be some disruption why people discover what's happened and the greater distances and rougher seas. 

There was a canal but it had to be maintained and dredged and went to the Nile.

Correct about the grainships - both Rome and Byzantium/Constantinoble dependant upon these. Miss it and the cities will riot.

Good point about Axum - with holdings on both sides of the Red Sea - even if wider

it's in a good position to benefit from increased trade.

[raharris1973]

Great points across the broad.

A couple things - although his pantheon was getting a bit passe, among pagans, there's gonna be people Lord Neptune is showing he's hella powerful.

I think in the short term, disruption and the like, will work against Julian, he will get scapegoated, at least posthumously, even if his actual reign is a little longer, and the Christians will come out triumphant in the empire, and dominate with their interprepation that calamities and changes were God's wrath Julian was provoking with his reforms, and this will encourage a hard version of something pretty much like the Theodosian, Christian-hegemonic reforms.

In the medium and longer term- The prospects of a surviving Roman regime regime, or regime at least with a direct, continuous Roman lineage, will be best within Northern Africa under these circumstances, because of the area's comparative agricultural richness, and its lesser defensive liabilities compared to Roman Europe, and Roman West Asia. That said, the Eastern Empire/Byzantium, could still enjoy its historic long life or 9 lives.

The greater distance of Africa is likely to encourage greater improvements in Roman civil and military maritime shipping technology. Ultimately, even if there's a barbarian breakthrough across the Rhine and Danube rivers, I think it makes the Vandal conquest of North Africa, in the west, much less likely. Carthage should remain a durable imperial center. Likewise, while the Persians under the resurgent Sassanids will be a growing threat for centuries to the Levant, and at times, to Anatolia, Egypt will be out of their range. And if things develop similarly enough to OTL that the Arabs become an overwhelming threat in Western Asia (or do so earlier, as stevep creatively suggests), Egypt is likely to remain beyond their range.

This scenario also, by easing direct seaborne trade from the Mediterranean sphere with the Indian Ocean, East Africa, India, and Southeast Asia, and by extension, China, will have a world integrating effect over the medium and longer term. It creates great potential for a global, or at least eastern hemispheric, Christianity boom.

The widened Red Sea channel becoming an extension of the Mediterranean, open to the Mediterranean world, will be even more exposed to constant Christian proselytization efforts. We cannot rule out an Islam or an alt-Islam, but I think this all makes the Hijaz and Yemen becoming predominantly Christian a century or two before Mohammed's time, and resistant to a brand new revelation distinct from Christianity, likely.

Greater continuous trade between the Mediterranean area and India, and the probable absence of Islam, will support continuous proselytization over the centuries in India, at least enough to provide a base to support further trade and proselytization so Christianity can be one of the competitors when various Southeast Asian peoples like Malays of Java and the Khmer are reaching a certainly level of development and integration, and developing an interest in religions with a bigger philosophical/ethical/scriptural package, like Hinduism, Buddhism, or Christianity.

There should be potentially Byzantine or Italian-based, but if not them, Egypt or Arabia or India based, Christian traders more continuously active in China practicing and sharing info on their religion, from an earlier point. And in this case, Christian contact and proselytization should be reaching China more contemporaneously with Buddhism compared with OTL, and in greater volume and continuity than in OTL. And to the extent communities or churches are established in China, it could compete with Buddhism on a more even footing in Korea and Japan by entering about the same time, and seeming no more foreign.