WorldRaj tribute thread

[Bob Hope]

This thread is to celebrate the WorldRaj created by Alex Richards.
It is on this 1900 QBAM base-map.

I am inviting all contributions to be placed here.
I am not prepared to change the original WorldRaj but will consider replacing any other area if the work blends better.

Base

Base with WorldRaj

 

[Bob Hope]

My initial additions [happy to over-write them if something better comes along]

@Drex China in the WorldRaj

 

[Bob Hope]

now combined

 

[Analytical Engine]

Some of those borders need a little tweaking.

Otherwise, maximal awesomeness.

 

[Bob Hope]

Some of those borders need a little tweaking.

Otherwise, maximal awesomeness.

That's why I'm opening it up

 

[TheKutKu]

This is definitely an interesting project

Is there a more up to date key than this?

Also I'd like to know what template/rule Alex Richards followed when making this, and which we should ideally follow? Also is the "colonisation" of the worldRaj supposed to be have happened at a particular period?

I'll try to make something for Southern africa (tho I'll probably let South Africa itself to someone more knowledgeable than me)

 

[Drex]

Also I'd like to know what template/rule Alex Richards followed when making this, and which we should ideally follow? Also is the "colonisation" of the worldRaj supposed to be have happened at a particular period?

From what I can gather from the map key (yours is the latest version), the main idea behind this map is that of a world where England got control of the whole planet from medieval times up to the 20th century (note Iceland being a national park, those are very recent), as borders and polities tend to fit historical borders (Burgundy, Catalan Counties...) however there are more modern states (South Arabia) and references to settlement that happened in the modern ages (Russian toponyms in Central Asia and "Nova Anglia"). Nova Anglia further points at this being an English Empire, if the colour didn't make it obvious, but also points at some form of colonization, albeit I see no English toponyms outside England. So, judging from this, I guess colonizatio happened at roughly the same pace, or at least population migrations did, so it would make some sense to have America not be entirely settled by England.
As for any rule when map-making, I guess he intercalates "settled" provinces with native states, so for example, New York could be a province of America where there is an Iroquois Protesctorate further subdivided in tribes.

 

[TheKutKu]

Here's what Alex Richards said about the WorldRaj on the map threads:

On Portugal:

"I'm using that as an indication for the 'federal Kingdoms'- effectively states which have representation in the Imperial Parliament along with Britain but aren't actually ruled from London. Note that the Crown of Castille is actually in direct union with London due to John of Gaunt's claims to the Kingdom, with Madrid as an autonomous city, Urgell as an autonomous Bishopric and Gibraltar and Minorca as autonomous military provinces."

"Well, in some respect the Autonomous Kingdoms are playing that role- they have voting rights in the Imperial Parliament but are fully independent domestically, but I had been pondering what to do with Scandinavia..."

On Gibraltar

" Autonomous military district (albeit with full voting rights). Probably larger than OTL but not by enough to show up."

On France:

"
In all honestly, I'm merely doing a slight expansion to Switzerland, because it's not as if it's really possible to make the Old Swiss Confederacy more complicated than OTL. (Well, unless you brought in 4th Dimensional administrative borders).

Brittany and Corsica are autonomous entities (along with Madrid, Drenthe etc.) It usually denotes that for some particular reason the local government has special functions as well as being represented in whatever 'Crown Parliament' it's part of (e.g. an incorporated Prince-Bishopric, a noble family who retain some rights of government, a military district etc.)

Burgundy is all one nation, apart from the bits which are Prince-Bishoprics operating as Burgundian seconditures.

Crown Colonies

I wonder, though: how will you represent colonial territory? Seems you've used a lot of colors already.

If it's a Crown Colony, it's the same as 'directly ruled/royal demense' and just indicated as such in the key.

Other colonies might be protectorates, have representative government etc. and have various other combinations of those colours.

Britain's in control (well, it's actually the United Kingdom of the 7 Crowns [England, Scotland, Ireland, France, Castile, Bohemia and Sicily, with the Great Electorate and United Provinces being integral territories but not Kingdoms), and there's an Imperial Parliament as a top level thing. Burgundy and Portugal are Autonomous Kingdoms which have representation in that Parliament and a representative of the Westminster Government with a degree of influence but are essentially allowed to run themselves.

I'm presuming Britain took over the globe at whatever damn point gives me the most division to work with. This is entirely about artistic sensibility, not plausibility.

I'm trying to base things on historical divisions rather than being completely made up from whole-cloth- it's more of a challenge and more interesting that way.

Colony: an area considered to be subject to the metropole (as opposed to the various Crowns of Europe which are considered to be in Personal Union and in some sort of equal or subservient position depending). Usually a grouping of various subunits here.

Crown Colony: An area (either a separate colony or part of a larger colony) under direct rule from London- though the name may be retained even after the colony has some form of responsible government.

Presidency: A collection of territories under direct and indirect rule reporting to a single figure, usually as a sort of wider subdivision of a whole (so for example: 'Worldraj->Near East Region (not much in the way of administrative function) -> Presidencies of Anatolia, Caucasia, Persia (formerly including Mesopotamia and Syria, but not the various groupings of Arabia).

For the write-up-that-almost-certainly-won't-happen, I'm considering this a region currently in flux and moving towards something more along the lines of a collection of Dominions.

"how you decide who gets to be a province, protectorate, or autonomous vassal"

A lot of it is based on what I can find for what protectorates might actually exist, then working backwards. So for example in Central Asia I'd found the information on the Kazakh divisions and the southern Khanates, then it's a pretty logical thing to go 'well these were the areas in Kazakhstan that were settled by non Kazakhs, so lets have those as a set of garrison towns, and Samarkhand and the Ferghana was both the most fertile area and the area that tends to have ended up being fought over and was a direct Russian province, so lets have that as a full province, and then the Tajiks and Kyrgyz aren't organised enough for full protectorates, but a degree of autonomy makes sense.'

 

[Gokbay]

I'll try to make something for Southern africa (tho I'll probably let South Africa itself to someone more knowledgeable than me)

For South Africa an easy idea is that the Bantustans are Protectorates/Princely States while Cape and Natal are provinces.
The Boer states could be either.

 

[Analytical Engine]

For South Africa an easy idea is that the Bantustans are Protectorates/Princely States while Cape and Natal are provinces.
The Boer states could be either.

I would suggest that Xhosaland probably be a States Agency.

I also propose no unified Transvaal - it was formed from multiple smaller Boer states.

 

[Bob Hope]

This is definitely an interesting project

Is there a more up to date key than this?

View attachment 747146

Also I'd like to know what template/rule Alex Richards followed when making this, and which we should ideally follow? Also is the "colonisation" of the worldRaj supposed to be have happened at a particular period?

I'll try to make something for Southern africa (tho I'll probably let South Africa itself to someone more knowledgeable than me)

I dont know of any other keys than this.
Maybe @Alex Richards can clarify for us?

 

[Atzyn]

Here's a contribution to this project. Hope I did this right, but feel free to yell at me if I got something wrong. I was thinking the Miskito Coast and nearby islands would be under Colombia.

The Captaincy of Guatemala:

Labeled:

 

[Bob Hope]

Okay,
I replaced the combined map because I realized there were colours @Drex was showing that I had obliterated, if you are working from that, I'm sorry but please replace with the new one.

I took the data that @TheKutKu trawled for {thank you} and boiled it down to this.
There are a couple of decisions need to be made from it, any input would be good.

@Analytical Engine , @Gokbay

Would you mind making a copy of the combined map, but with gray landmass and without the rivers?

I'd be happy to make the landmass grey but deleting the rivers would create too much work adding in single pixels here there and everywhere

Here's a contribution to this project. Hope I did this right, but feel free to yell at me if I got something wrong. I was thinking the Miskito Coast and nearby islands would be under Colombia.

The Captaincy of Guatemala:
View attachment 747188
Labeled:
View attachment 747189

This is excellent, and you even did the labelling, something I'd not even contemplated starting!

 

[Analytical Engine]

I am just imagining all the Maya city states and Mesoamerican principalities.

EDIT: And, IMO. that "shade of pink that Bob hasn't decided what to do with yet" would need to be some kind of "area with special privileges, but not fully self ruling".

 

[TheBeanieBaron]

I know this isn’t related to the map, but I was wondering what would the origins of the United Kingdoms of the 7 Crowns be?

 

[Gokbay]

I know this isn’t related to the map, but I was wondering what would the origins of the United Kingdoms of the 7 Crowns be?

England: England

Scotland: Elizabeth I and then the Stuarts as OTL

France: Potentially Hundred Years War?

Bohemia: Well, Bohemia was elective. Maybe via the Winter Queen?

Castile: John of Gaunt, I think

Ireland: as OTL

Sicily: not sure, tbh

United Province: William of Orange as OTL

Great Electorate: Hanoverians as OTL

I think the Wales post had some historical mentions about the origins in its write-up.

 

[Spamavalanche]

One idea I had is this: the Amazonas (save from the Amazon River, that would probably be direct rule) would be a kind of tribal confederation that each of the larger tribes is represented at a grand council of the tribes or something. IDK this is probably dumb

 

[Analytical Engine]

One idea I had is this: the Amazonas (save from the Amazon River, that would probably be direct rule) would be a kind of tribal confederation that each of the larger tribes is represented at a grand council of the tribes or something. IDK this is probably dumb

No - this map is supposed to have a ton of ethnic states crammed in between colonies, self-governing areas etc.

 

[TheBeanieBaron]

England: England

Scotland: Elizabeth I and then the Stuarts as OTL

France: Potentially Hundred Years War?

Bohemia: Well, Bohemia was elective. Maybe via the Winter Queen?

Castile: John of Gaunt, I think

Ireland: as OTL

Sicily: not sure, tbh

United Province: William of Orange as OTL

Great Electorate: Hanoverians as OTL

I think the Wales post had some historical mentions about the origins in its write-up.

I've checked the Wales post and found some interesting finds:

• The United Kingdoms was formed in 1749.
• When Henry VIII ascended to the throne of the United Kingdoms, it was known as the Triple Crown.
• An event called the Castilian Union is mentioned, which probably means that John of Gaunt is able to become King of Castile and passes the title to his eldest son Henry.
• The House of Stuart experiences a succession crisis in the early 18th century.
• The War of the French Succession gets a mention, could this be this timeline's equivalent of the Hundred Years War?

 

[Drex]

I replaced the combined map because I realized there were colours @Drex was showing that I had obliterated, if you are working from that, I'm sorry but please replace with the new one.

I intended to remove the border colours once I finished the map, I kept them because they allowed me to know who controlled what, especially when referring to enclaves.