A Modern World [AMW] Applications Centre

[Iansisle]

Aye, application looks good to me too. On a related note, welcome to the world of sharing a "border" with Cass. You'll never figure out what you own and what you don't.

[Chrinthania]

Heh......

[Cassanos]

Lies! Lies and slander! Everything west of the Vistula is mine, apart from that bit of the Czech Republic. It's not *my* fault that Poland and Germany have decided not to use natural borders for their districts!

*Goes off to plan taking over Thortraia.*

[Thudanhulm]

Its more of a draft, than a decent app, but I would like to get some feedback before further fleshing it out.

Name: Shahdom of Italy
Capital: Rome
Ultra-short history:
Then Sassanids were defeated in , Shahanshah Yazdgerd with 10 000 raiders, still loyal to him moved westwards and invaded Byzantian Armenia. After Greeks attempts to repulse Persians failed, Emperor proposed save passage to Europe. Proposal was accepted and in late 7th century horde of Persians entered Iliria and moved further to Italy taking fractured and decentralized Longobards by surprise. In few fallowing decades, Persians took over entire peninsula and reestablished Sassanid empire.

Note: I wrote this introduction based on history of RW. IF AMW time line has no such things as Rashinud conquest of Persia, Byzantine Empire, Longobards or Sassanids, story will have to be reworked.
I'm not clinging to Sassanids or Italy (it simply not mentioned in list). My idea is: Zoroastrianism avoided destruction and reestablished itself somewhere else. If Italy unavailable, any point in Eurasia/Africa will do.
Also I restrain from building more detailed history before I know my neighbors.

Peoples and culture
As there was only few thousands of Persian invaders, they legacy in language, cuisine and mundane customs is rather humble. Mostly notable is Persian loanwords related with titles and governmental positions (Dabiran, Bozorgan, Shahanshah etc.) and offcource
But Persians also bring they religion-Zoroastrianism- witch become dominant in peninsula and effected most aspects of nation. For example, traditionally society is divided not in to three estates, as customary in Europe, but in to four: asronih (the priesthood), ratheshtarih (soldiers and civil servants), vastaryoshih (farmers and herdsmen) and hutokshih (artisans and laborers).
Italians fallows Zaroastrian calendar and have temples of fire in all more significant settlements, but most shocking (for outsider) custom in Italy is Dakhmag, known in English as "Tower of Silence".
In essence it is a round structure, usually from bricks or stone, rarely more than two meters high. They are located in safe distance, but not to far from settlements. Traditionally Towers a build atop of a hill and such hill always can be noticed from afar because of number of vultures patrolling around it at any given time.
Zaroastrian believe, that after death body become habitat for demons (daevas), thus putting body in to water, fire or earth is sacrilege. For that reason, body is kept in tower till birds dispose of flesh (and- more importantly- demons). Remaining bones are then collected and put in to ossuary (astodan).

While Persian language disappeared from daily usage in late 8th century, it remained in liturgy, next to more archaic Avestan language. Bout this languages are more or less (usually less) understandable only by priesthood.
Italian Zoroastrianism employed Catholic legacy in forming own structure and by late 9th century centralized church with Dastūrshach (literally: king-priest) on top emerged.

Italian culture is very much militaristic. Zaroastrians for centuries lived surrounded by hostile nations- Catholics in Europe and Muslims in Africa and they always had to be prepared for war. To this day it is a matter of honor to finish military trainings. More conservative families will not allow they children to marry person who can not re-assemble rifle. Often such demonstration is part of marriage ceremony conducted publicly.

Politics
Italy remains monarchy with uncodified constitution. Closest thing to normal constitution is "Provisional Basic Law" written in 1851. Together with constantly shifting consensus and political tradition "Provisional Law" is cornerstone of political stability. Document states that Shahanshah (Emperor) is the head of state, cabinet is responsible only to him etc.- in general it's constitution for absolute monarchy.
Consensus is that Cabinet members must be selected from with parliamentary approval and all laws and treaties also must be approved in Parliament.
However, Parliament itself is instable and often have hard time to came to the decision. Politics are dominated by 4 major parliamentary parties (Monarchists, Social Democrats, Zaroastran Democrats and Liberals) and none of them had a strong majority for decades, thus executive branch (Emperor and Cabinet) must often bypass parliament in order to get something done.
Crown usually gets away with it, because Monarchists tends to undermine Parliament attempts to react and Emperor also have support of military, who plays large role behind curtains.
In sum up politics in Italy is a mess with chaotic indecisive parliament, authoritarian generals behind scene and ministers with sole intention to survive term of office.

[Chemaki]

Damn... on this note, I'm going to have to actually get a factbook up, my nation being modern-day Persia (Adim).

I love your history idea, but I don't have a clue how you'd fit in. Greece has always historically mounted a stern resistance to influence from the East, and a lot of the Middle East is pretty heavily Christianized and (dare I say it) Europeanized. Though, I guess we do have an Islamic Avarga (Portugal) with some small degree of Middle Eastern influence, so maybe some sort of phenomenon led to waves of Persian (and later, Islamic) immigrants into Southern Europe. Talking to Maxen (he plays Areopagatican) and whoever controls Alexandria would be your best bet in establishing history - I'd imagine the most feasible idea for a Persian Italy would first be a Persian conquest of North Africa before the Greeks and the Romans dominated it. Though, working out your history in a world where the rest of Europe is more or less staunchly Christian is a whole different matter.

Still, I like the idea of giving a nice (little) OOC slap to all the Christian players - They'll have to find a new Vatican if Italy ends up being controlled by pagans!

[Thudanhulm]

I love your history idea, but I don't have a clue how you'd fit in. Greece has always historically mounted a stern resistance to influence from the East, and a lot of the Middle East is pretty heavily Christianized and (dare I say it) Europeanized. Though, I guess we do have an Islamic Avarga (Portugal), so maybe some sort of phenomenon led to waves of Persian (and later, Islamic) immigrants into Southern Europe. Talking to Maxen (he plays Areopagatican) and whoever controls Alexandria would be your best bet in establishing history - I'd imagine the most feasible idea for a Persian Italy would first be a Persian conquest of North Africa before the Greeks and the Romans dominated it. Though, working out your history in a world where the rest of Europe is more or less staunchly Christian is a whole different matter.

Talking about Middle East- maybe its possible that Sassanids controlled Levant at a time, and under pressure of Arabs (or AMW equivalent) they simply took all the ships available and sailed to Italy?

[The Amyclae]

We have usually kept something of a blind eye to LRR's/Avarga's/Spain's Muslims (even the ones that have, somehow, expanded more successfully into mainland Europe rather than North Africa) and in my mind, at least, I figure we can do something of the same if needed.

It this case, however, I don't think we need to. This point of departure, thankfully, doesn't require much alteration to my current history. I've written in something along the lines of a foreign expansion/conquest of North Africa. Currently the generals in question have Muslim sounding names, if not Persian, but I think we can overlook that (or I can simply change them). Since Areopagitican, essentially, composes most of if not all of the territory needed for the Persians to transverse that aren't already explained by Avarga (whose Muslim existence is, I think we can all agree, an explanation itself) we only have to explain the 'hop' over Alexandria, if at all. I believe Acadzia has made his 7th and 8th century history deliberately vague just in case there arose a need for a migratory period.

On the off chance he's oppossed to the idea we can always have a march northwards through the Balkans. I'm sure the Celts would not need too much selling to direct a violent group of nomads towards Rome.

A final option is to put off the Persian movement until the 15th or 16th Century, when the ability to move truly massive amounts of men and material became a real possibility. Or possibly earlier, such as the 11th or 12th, with the added caveat that the territory is more culturally Persian rather than ethnically.

Again, however, we can just set you guys up in Italy and worry about how the mainland's faint hearts were never able to push the infidels from their shores whereas valiant North Africa (read: Areopagitican) was able to do it in only a few short centuries.

[Thudanhulm]

On the off chance he's oppossed to the idea we can always have a march northwards through the Balkans. I'm sure the Celts would not need too much selling to direct a violent group of nomads towards Rome.

A final option is to put off the Persian movement until the 15th or 16th Century, when the ability to move truly massive amounts of men and material became a real possibility.

This final option do not leave much time to convert Italy in to Zoroastrian state. I prefer Balkans option as it requires least water-crossing and is most realistic (Galatians did it third century BC). If only Celtic nation (Beddgelert I believe) is O.K. with it, of course.
And about Areopag: I believe its natural to presume, that there is constant Cold Ward between Exarchate and Italy in Mediterranean Sea?

[The Amyclae]

On the off chance he's oppossed to the idea we can always have a march northwards through the Balkans. I'm sure the Celts would not need too much selling to direct a violent group of nomads towards Rome.

A final option is to put off the Persian movement until the 15th or 16th Century, when the ability to move truly massive amounts of men and material became a real possibility.

This final option do not leave much time to convert Italy in to Zoroastrian state. I prefer Balkans option as it requires least water-crossing and is most realistic (Galatians did it third century BC). If only Celtic nation (Beddgelert I believe) is O.K. with it, of course.
And about Areopag: I believe its natural to presume, that there is constant Cold Ward between Exarchate and Italy in Mediterranean Sea?

Yes! Areopagitican has something of a siege mentality, which has been only partially explained by reality so far. I need all the historic enemies I can gather, and if you want to join the club then by all means join in.

I would shy away from the 'Cold' label, however, and perhaps the conjunction altogether. I doubt either of us would have force projection to do much of anything other than snipe at each other in diplomatic meet ups or perhaps have a few saber waving engagements off, say, Sicily. But frostiness is an adjective I can get behind.

[Thudanhulm]

I would shy away from the 'Cold' label, however, and perhaps the conjunction altogether. I doubt either of us would have force projection to do much of anything other than snipe at each other in diplomatic meet ups or perhaps have a few saber waving engagements off, say, Sicily. But frostiness is an adjective I can get behind.

Does someone controls Malta? Its perfect "disputed territory" in this case.

[The Amyclae]

I would shy away from the 'Cold' label, however, and perhaps the conjunction altogether. I doubt either of us would have force projection to do much of anything other than snipe at each other in diplomatic meet ups or perhaps have a few saber waving engagements off, say, Sicily. But frostiness is an adjective I can get behind.

Does someone controls Malta? Its perfect "disputed territory" in this case.

I would be open to the idea, but seeing as the Med' is hedged by a variety of bellicose powerblocs it's hard to imagine that either of us (who seem to be the odd men out as particularly clerical, belligerent and fundamentalist) would be allowed to acquire such a territory of strategic import for very long. Without oil-rich Nigeria, and rare earth metal producers in Western Africa, the area is a vital lifelink between some of our poorer/mineral rich countries and our richer tier.

Of course, perhaps we can arrange something suitably international with a Cyprus-like situation (or, perhaps more accurately, a St. Martin arrangement) beginning in the 20th century as the importance of international trade outweighed the moral qualms of intervening in the area.

A lot of this, I think, needs some community input but I don't have any problem with it specifically.

[Beddgelert]

Thudanhulm-

I'm not necessarily opposed, but I suppose there's a few key things for you to know, in relation to this proposal.

In short, the Crusades succeeded, and (Saudi) Arabia and Jordan have been Christian for centuries.

The Byzantine Empire still stands, largely Greek and secondarily Roman polytheist, controlling most of Turkey, the Greek Islands and Peloponnese, Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon.

Italy is free, but we have an understanding that the Roman Empire did exist, with somewhat modified borders, and was replaced by the Papacy, which for now is loosely assumed to be based in the Holy See under NPC-status.

The Balkans aren't called the Balkans, as that name has Turkish roots and the Turks never reached the region (actually they came close, but from the north, over the steppe, and were called Depkazis!), but rather the Saimonas, a name presumably having Thracian roots, the Thracians having been over-run and/or driven-out by the Gauls descending from the Danube basin in 279 BCE.

Now, I'm sure we can make Italy work, if you really want it, and I only say this because you mentioned that any part of Africa/Eurasia might work for you as well... Most of southern Arabia is still free, including Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, Oman, and most of Yemen. Obviously that territory is a lot close to where the Sassanids would presumably originate, and even IRL parts of it were at one stage within their empire. Could they not simply have evacuated to those territories and spread-out across Southern Arabia when things went wrong at home? Or does that not really work for what you want to do?

(Actually, having said that, half of Pakistan is still free, too, if they'd rather go east.)

Now, this is going to come off as pretty rude, and I'm not sure of any way around it, but... is English a second language, to you? If so, I'm impressed. If not, maybe more proof-reading is required in future.

nb. I haven't actually proof-read this, but it's mostly because I drank quite a lot of wine while watching the ISS fly over, and I don't think re-reading will do me/us any good =P

[Chrinthania]

I'm more inclined to follow Beddgelert's lead in this. I'm not opposed to the idea as put forth, but there are things that are in place in AMW shared history that might make your history a bit hard to fit in. All in all, I would rather have you as a member because you seem interested and willing to work with us. So, that's my two cents

[Thudanhulm]

Now, I'm sure we can make Italy work, if you really want it, and I only say this because you mentioned that any part of Africa/Eurasia might work for you as well... Most of southern Arabia is still free, including Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, Oman, and most of Yemen. Obviously that territory is a lot close to where the Sassanids would presumably originate, and even IRL parts of it were at one stage within their empire. Could they not simply have evacuated to those territories and spread-out across Southern Arabia when things went wrong at home? Or does that not really work for what you want to do?

South Arabia is definitely not working: Sassanids were ousted from Persia by Rashidun Caliphate and South Arabia is anot only closer to Rashidun power base but already under Muslim control by 651 AD.

I took Italy because its looked as a cool idea at a moment, but I indeed not clinging on to it.
In fact, I'm not much fancy of Sassanids either. My focus is on Zoroastrianism. Sassanid migration is simple the only vaguely realistic way to make that happen. Other thing to mention, I would prefer Europe-ish nation, leaving Pakistan and Somalia as last resort. I want to take Zoroastrianism and drop on some other culture to create a mix with fire temples in Neoclassical and Neo-Gothic styles and Zaroastran Democrats arguing with Adam Smith inspired Liberals etc.
Ireland would be perfect, but totally almost impossible.
For this reasons I'm quite sticked with Italy.
Probably easiest way to solve this is to limit Shahdom to territory of Two Sicilies or North Italy.
I actually have idea how to move Shahdom in to British Isles, but that ask some cooperation of Valendia.

Now, this is going to come off as pretty rude, and I'm not sure of any way around it, but... is English a second language, to you?

It is indeed my second language. Sorry 'bout that.

[The Amyclae]

Most members of AMW were certain that English was my second, or third, language when I first started. That it was my first language shows how far ahead you are.

Would you be willing to give up a specifically Persian influence if that meant you had a Zoroastrian background? Because I don't see why you couldn't have that scenerio.

[Thudanhulm]

Most members of AMW were certain that English was my second, or third, language when I first started. That it was my first language shows how far ahead you are.

Would you be willing to give up a specifically Persian influence if that meant you had a Zoroastrian background? Because I don't see why you couldn't have that scenerio.

General problem with South Arabia that it is on the doorstep of Abu Bakr's power center, and Yazdegerd (last Sassanid ruler) would have only a fracture of manpower he had in Persia.
To make an analogy its like Hitler escaping Berlin to hide in Courland.

[The Amyclae]

Most members of AMW were certain that English was my second, or third, language when I first started. That it was my first language shows how far ahead you are.

Would you be willing to give up a specifically Persian influence if that meant you had a Zoroastrian background? Because I don't see why you couldn't have that scenerio.

General problem with South Arabia that it is on the doorstep of Abu Bakr's power center, and Yazdegerd (last Sassanid ruler) would have only a fracture of manpower he had in Persia.
To make an analogy its like Hitler escaping Berlin to hide in Courland.

Oh, my mistake. I meant in Italy.

[Walmington on Sea]

One possible concern would presumably be in asking why the Crusades were launched against Muslims in the Middle East while Rome lay under Zoroastrian control, and why, after their success in Arabia, they didn't turn their attention back to the heart of Europe. Unless the Zoroastrians struck a perhaps unlikely alliance of convenience with the Druidic Celts by which to defend both against Christendom? And going for the territory of the Two Sicilies, thus leaving Rome independent, may help the Christians take a view of containment over conversion, I suppose, provided that the potential Crusading nations agree with that.

[The Amyclae]

Or perhaps, more simply, if Rome is nothing but the rump of a stillborn state, eclipsed by rising powers a relatively short time after it converts to Christianity, perhaps Christendom as a whole simply doesn't care what happens on the penisula? Defeated by Celts, burned once or twice to the ground it's sort of become our boogeyman that we all love to get a few free punches on. It's a geopolitical flyweight. The only reason it could matter would be if it had some overwhelming theological or spiritual importance. Yet without a Muslim conquest and incorporation of early Christian hotspots, be them in Hippo or Asia Minor or Alexandria (assuming the last continues to be with us) there's no reason for it to adopt much importance at all. At the time of the Crusades and this new invasion Rome shouldn't be the hub of 'Christendom triumphant,' it's probably in Valendia. Likely, spiritual and theological debate is south and in the eastern Med'.When these vagrants arive it's the (part-time?) residence of the Cardinal of Rome, whatever small amount of power he holds, and that's about it. Let them have the ruins!

[Cassanos]

Your application certainly looks promising, though I agree that a non-Christian Rome poses some problems for Arabia and possibly other nations, too. Maybe Sicily would be a better idea. If you simply want to have a Zoroastrian nation, I would have no problem with a portion of the Nibelung populace turning Zoroastrian, maybe after coming home from one crusade or another. In, say, the C14h or C15th, they could well decide to leave for Ireland to evade persecution. Just my .02 Thalers.

As for language, no problem, you're not the only one for whom English isn't his native language . Out of sheer curiosity, where are you from?

[Iansisle]

I personally don't know if the physical location of Rome as the center of Catholicism is all that important to modern AMW. For the Shield, it doesn't really matter if the Pope lives in Rome or Jerusalem or Riyadh or Avignon or Damascus or Frankfurt, just so long as the concept of a powerful empire in antiquity (covering area X near the Mediterranean) that slowly converted to Christianity persists. Is there anything about the physical location that truly matters to the core of someone else's claim?

[Walmington on Sea]

While that's probably true, Ian, I think, given that the applicant proposed having the territory of the Two Sicilies, which does not include Rome in any case, and that the player holding the Holy Land has just CTE'd, efforts to resolve perceived problems with the seat of Roman Catholicism by moving it out of Rome make little sense. Just leave it where it is and let him have the approximate Two Sicilies territory, presumably the modern divisions of Sicily, Calabria, Basilicata, Apulia, Campania, Molise, and Abruzzo, for some 14.9 million people (about the size of Israel and Serbia combined), and there shouldn't be a problem, right?

[Iansisle]

Seems reasonable, aye.

[Thudanhulm]

If you simply want to have a Zoroastrian nation, I would have no problem with a portion of the Nibelung populace turning Zoroastrian, maybe after coming home from one crusade or another. In, say, the C14h or C15th, they could well decide to leave for Ireland to evade persecution. Just my .02 Thalers.

I fell that I should go with this idea, because Two Sicilies conception is on the borderline of impossibility. As Walmington on Sea pointed, nation should have been under massive pressure from Christendom.
Withstanding such pressure is somewhat closer to reality having such a defensive line as Alps and manpower of entire Italy (also taking Rome in 7th century would not make rest of Christians much angry), Kingdom of Naples hardly can be defended from Papacy-fueled invasions. Island of Sicily can't stand alone, too: even Muslims couldn't do that- and they had much better conditions and back-up.
In sum up: if Rome remains center of Catholicism, its impossible to maintain Shahdom in Italy.
Therefore I'm much in favor of Cassanos idea and that is what I made of it:

History
After the Muslims conquests Zoroastrianism began to shrink, but due to fairly tolerant politics of Caliphate it was still very alive among lower classes in Persia and communities of Zoroastrians existed in most major cities thorough Middle East.
Participant of Second Crusade Nibeluncan knight Pier von Gerlof came in to close contacts with these peoples. It remains unclear what was exact extent of Zoroastrian influence on Pier, but when he returned from Crusade, he brought back few hundreds Persians as serfs. Among them were was at least three priest who took entire corpus of Zoroastrianism with them.
While formally baptized, in secret Persians maintained they religion and with time it began to spread among local population.
It did not attract much attention at first (except local church) because Zoroastrianism was located in relatively isolated Frisian coastal communities. But by early 14th century religion began to spread among local nobility and bourgeoisie, culminating in conversion of count Edzard von Gerlof, remote relative of Pier.
Soon Zoroastrians found themselves under strong pressure that reached its peak in 1357 with papal bull calling fro Crusade against Frisian infidels. Threatened by open war Edzard asked for permission to allow his peoples to leave Nibelunc. Government of Nibelunc*, unwilling to enter war against Frisians(for any reason- maybe they were involved in war with someone else) accepted and despite Church opposition, in 1360 agreement was made between Government of Nibelunc giving five years for Zoroastrians to leave Nibelunc.
Edzard's brother Hinrich at the time was in Ireland as mercenary commanding Thomond's army in war with Connacht. Hinrich, secret Zoroastrian at a time, promised his army support and in Juno of 1361 Edzard with small navy entered Limerick from sea, while Hinrich troops did so from land. By the end of year brothers controlled entire territory of Thomond and began preparations for new campaign against Connacht.
Meantime navy was moving between Limerick and Frisia. The last voyages were made in mid 1363 taking the last of leaving.
Having fulfilled they agreement with Nibelunc, Edzard and Hinrich established Shahdom of West-Fryslân, taking title from Scriptures to underline nature of they new realm.
In fallowing decades Fryslân successfully expanded over island, taking advantage of inner conflicts between Celts. The greatest challenge was two decades long war with Conchoba Uí Néill.
At the eve of war West-Fryslân controlled large part of South Ireland and most of Ireland coast. in 1378 Conchoba Uí Néill of Ulster was elected as High King of Ireland and began to rally Irish to resist Fryslân expansion. War broke out in 1380 with Irish invasion and unsuccessful siege of Limerick. Shah Dieter I responded in fallowing years by landing in Ulster and sacking the province, but without any clear gain too.
War continued for 15 indecisive years till battle of Kildalkey (1405) were Fryslân army surrounded and slaughtered bulk of Conchoba troops, including himself. From there, Dieter I held initiative and in a matter of few fallowing years most Irish clans payed allegiance to him. Conchoba's son and heir Donnchad continue to resist Fryslân advance and despite loosing lands and supporters he gain an important victory in 1409, taking town of Slingo by surprise. Bulk of Shahdom was located in there at a time, thus Fryslân not only lost the tool of they initial success, but also Donnchad got chance to move (with his last supporters) to islands of St. Aidan and Thula.
This two large nordic islands were discovered by Irish monks in 8th century and at first was home for hermit monks, later- small monasteries ans small fisher towns and by beginning of 15th islands become theocratic republics ruled by councils of abbots. Now Donnchad toke control of this islands and began naval raiding campaign against Fryslân.

Papacy was not happy with Nibelunc position and become even more angry, then Shahdom took over Catholic nation. But without moral support, few things Rome could do, because none European nation was interested in campaign in Ireland. That changed with outcome of battle of Kildalkey. King of Wales Gruffudd II had close dynastic relations with Irish nobility and thus maintained claim to High Kingship of Ireland.
He remained neutral in war, waiting till bout sides will weaken each other and his hopes were fulfilled: Irish were eradicated as fighting force and Shahdom also suffered heavy losses and now had lost bulk of its navy leaving island open for invasion.
Gruffudd began preparations in early 1406 and then news about Donnchad victory in Slingo came he fasten evens launching invasion in late 1409. Welsh troops took Dublin in early November and number of Ulster clans openly joined his side. Shah Dieter laid siege on town, while Fryslân cavalry made bloody ride over rebellious Irish settlements. Rebelion was put down, but situation in Dublin come to a halt: Welsh failed to broke siege, but managed to defend town wall, while navy maintained supply. Remains of Fryslân navy were locked in north, patrolling against Donnchad raids.
Siege lasted for two years, till Gruffudd lost hope to make brake here and made surprise landing near Waterford and besieged town. Shah Dieter was forced to make a fast march south leaving only skeleton army to maintain siege. Gruffudd was counting on that: he send only minimal army in Waterford and major landing began in Dublin at the time Dieter reached Waterford only to see Welsh sailing away.
Gruffudd easily broke siege of Dublin and began march inland, splitting Fryslân forces in two isolated parts: mainly infantry forces under Shah in South and cavalry group under Donnchad mac Arailt in north. Welsh hoped to defeat them by one, thus encamped near lake Lough Ree, in center of island. While effectively splinting Fryslân forces, Gruffudd himself was separated from Dublin and mac Arailt jumped on the chance: on early February of 1413 his riders suddenly appeared near Dublin, riding in before Welsh organized defense.
Dieter meanwhile let his troops to take so much needed rest and allow Gruffudd's forces, now isolated in center of island to deteriorate. The final battle of Welsh invasion was fought in Carnagh East and ended in predictable Fryslân victory and capture of king Gruffudd.
He was released on exchange for 10-years peace treaty. Having that, Dieter and his successor Wijard could concentrate on Donnchad and his raiders.

Fryslân began building new navy and in 1522 Shah Wijard launched invasion in to Island of St. Aidan (Iceland). Forces suffered heavy losses in naval battle, but successfully landed. Newer before attacked island had no real army or defensive structures and soon fell. Donnchad again escaped in to
the Thula this time (Greenland). This island, while much larger was more hostile to people and thus had smaller population. Neither Donnchad neither his heirs tried again to assault Fryslân and Fryslânians did not see any value in Thula, thus the line of the High Kings of Ireland continued for few more centuries.
Abbot-rulers of St. Aidan were ardent supporters of Donnchad and then island was captured, monasteries were sacked and monks slaughtered with unseen cruelty. Wijard's actions created much anti-Fryslânian feeling in Europe, but only power interested in war with Shahdom- Wales- was bounded by the treaty.

In 22 July of 1424, exactly next day treaty expired, Fryslânian forces landed in Gwynedd and besieged Welsh capital Abergwyngregyn.
Wales at a time was under civil war between sons of Gruffudd: Rhirid, Cynan and Owain. Cynan controlled largest north of the country, while Rhirid had Powys and Owain- Cornwall. Seeing Cynan's troubles, Rhirid attacked southern part of his domain and proposed alliance to Wijard. Surprisingly, proposal was rejected, and while siege of Abergwyngregyn continued, Wijard marched south with bulk of his forces to meet Rhirid. In battle of Merthyr Tydfil, December 2, 1424 Rhirid was crushed and Fryslânian army marched over country taking town after town. When Abergwyngregyn capitulated after starving population overthrow Cynan and open the gates in July 1425, entire mainland of Wales was under Fryslânian control. Owain resisted for few fallowing years but eventually, in 1428 recognized Wijard's suzerainty.
About religion
In first few centuries Fryslân rules promoted tolerance. Were was no other way: it was only way to control Catholic majority, thus only thing Shahdom demanded was political loyalty, and whose Irish nobles, that agreed to recognize Fryslân were excepted to top levels of power, Donnchad mac Arailt beeing one of most prominet example.
Till mid 17th century Frisians, as ethical group melted into Irish, leaving only few surnames, but Zoroastrianism become dominant religion in Ireland and St. Aidan, so suppression of Catholicism began in 1630's. Catholic were stripped of nobility and right to participate in any level of administration, many churches were closed and active anti-Catholic propaganda ensued.
Then most of discriminational laws were recalled in mid 19th century, number of Catholic in Ireland were less that one percent, but in Wales they number is still about 20 %, majority of them lives in Cornwall due to fact, that it for a long time was autonomous duchy under native dynasty.
Catholicism remains dominant in south Thula, among Thulan Irish, as island was conquered only in 1735 and repressions newer come in to full extent there.
*Cassanos Fb does not details who was ruling Nibelunc at that point

[Chemaki]

For the small snippet of history that involves myself, I'm happy with the original Caliphate accepting Zoroastrianism, the religion being an old root kept alive amongst the lower classes, clans and ethnic groups who wished to retain their identity.

On a related note, Thudanholm's application has inspired me to think hard about the possibility of modern-day Zoroastrianism in Adim. I'd say that after the huge cultural and social propogation of the Islamist movement in the late 17th century, Zoroastrians were persecuted alongside Christians. As themonarchy was overthrown and became a socialist dictatorship circa the Great War, the small minority of Zoroastrians were ignored. At present, Zoroastrians are an interesting complication to the once clear-cut idea of Islamism and Islamic Socialism that Adim is built up upon - Whilst Greeks are outright persecuted by the common populace and distrusted by the government, and Christian-Muslim relations are civil at best, Zoroastrians are regarded much the same as other local ethnic minorities - Like the Afghans and the Pashtuns, Zoroastrians are a sliver of an old civilization whose profile is deep-rooted in Adimian nationalism - This causes a huge social dilemma - The very anicient culture looked on proudly by Islamic Adimians is, in its modern-day itineration, a heathen religion with strange, unfamiliar beliefs. I'd say then, like the Afghans and Pashtuns, the Zoroastrians are on the whole, openly accepted as an integral part of Adimian national identity and culture, but also deeply frowned upon.