DBWI(?) - Europe in the Year 2000

IMO the authro wanted to draw (surely for the fun we could easily see that the map was not realistic and is full of inconsistency) but the purpose is to show
an apocalyptic future where the great colonial powers went into a terrifying wars a sort of worldwide war that (maybe) lasted during decades, after this war the victors destroyed their opponent carved their empire, but unfortunately for them this war was so terryfing so destructive that their own empire collapsed right after.

Maybe the map was made for a pacifist purpose ?
I think so.. Given the situation in china, i hope that a war doesn't start.
 
Is it perhaps possible that some of these countries are not fully separate countries but rather different monarchies in some wider sphere, like the petty kingdoms and states of Germany with their own dynasties and independence under the Hohenzollern umbrella?

The problem with this map is that the author seems to be working from confused motives.

On the one hand, the ethnic principle seems to determine many polities and their boundaries, with nations as large as the Romanians and as small as the Slovenes and Albanians achieving something close to their maximal goals. If you look at the space now occupied by Austria-Hungary, for instance, it seems that the empire has been divided roughly on ethnic lines.

On the other hand, the author has established borders which blatantly defy the ethnic principle. The case of Poland comes particularly to mind. I can imagine a Poland that becomes independent, perhaps as a buffer state. The borders that are established for this Poland, though, do not make particular sense, with traditionally Polish lands like Lithuania and this "Belarus" staying outside of Poland but decidedly German territories like most of Silesia and Pomerania being assigned to Poland. It makes no sense that Germany, in establishing a satellite Poland, would give up so many of its own territories, not only Polish ones but indisputably German ones. By the same measure, it makes no sense that Russia would be able to impose these borders on Poland, given the number of independent states ("Belarus"?) which separate Russia from Poland and Germany indicating profound Russian weakness. Poles themselves would not want these borders, including so many Germans and excluding so many Poles.

(The exclave of "Kaliningrad", what seems to be the north of East Prussia, makes absolutely no sense. How is a Russia that is apparently so weak able to acquire the core of East Prussia?)
 
I BEG YOUR PARDON?
The Irish question seems to have been answered int he most idiotic way possible! You mean to tell me a partioning of Ireland was the solution? Honestly, the nerve of this map maker! Everyone would be dissatisfied with this compromise, especially the radicals, not to mention the sudden endless ethnic and religious questions!
 
OOC: I'm not sure Ireland would be massively surprising to someone in 1900. Remember Home Rule was very much a thing and this after Randolph Churchill played the Orange Card. It would be disappointing to both Nationalists and Unionists (whether in Ireland or Britain) but it would be less shocking than republican Germany sans East Prussia or Silesia or the imploded Austria-Hungary. If the map had said the 'Republic of Ireland' that would have been much more shocking but 'Ireland' by itself would likely to be taken to mean a dominion.
 
The six.counties carved off from Ireland in the north have Protestant majorities, IIRC. It makes more sense than Kaliningrad, if nothing else.
 
The two Germanic empir
I think so.. Given the situation in china, i hope that a war doesn't start.

Whatever war happened seems to have seen the Germanic empires of central Europe collapse, Germany not only losing vast territories to reborn Poland but France regaining Alsace-Lorraine, and Austria-Hungary falling apart completely.

I wonder if one explanations for this scenario might like in the breakdown of the Franco-Russian empire and a realignment of Russia with Germany. This might explain much: In a major war, these three allied empires crack apart utterly, with not just major nations like the Poles and Czechs gaining freedom but even unlikely ones like the Slovenes and the White Russians making their own state. Perhaps this France was opposed to them, explaining how it regained Alsace-Lorraine. (Was the UK a French ally?)
 
But then how did Russia take control over the historic birthplace of Prussia? I mean, there is no way the German Empire would give that up with out a fight. A very hard fight.
 
Russia losing Belarus, but getting (and keeping!) part of East Prussia is really bizzare, seems that Russia was wanked and screwed at the same time.
 
Here's hoping the Okhrana don't find whoever is responsible for this map, I don't think they have that sort of sense of humor. I'm guessing this was made by a Polish or Ukrainian expatriate of Russia with a love of all things Commonwealth. Austria-Hungary falling apart? Ok, plausible. Republic of Turkey and Middle East looking like a broken dinner plate? Sure - although I have no idea what 'Saudi' means, hopefully it's not a curse word. France regains Lorraine with Denmark getting northern Schlesweig back and some other border adjustments with Belgium, which is surprisingly still intact, while Prussia is all but folded into a new Poland that is missing much of its eastern territories to post-Russian states - I guess Germany lost a *major* war or two - and that is hard to believe unless the *planet* was against them. Scandinavia is still disparate, which is plausible I guess, but I agree that Ireland is a war waiting only on a justification to start firing. Granted the Irish don't like London much - who can blame them - but either the whole island goes or it smacks of fantasy. And why do Scotland and Wales seem to enjoy the same status as 'Northern Ireland'?

Did France also get its butt kicked a few times given that so many of its colonies are now apparently independent? Who runs the Israel colony/country/something next to Egypt and Syria and why is it separate from the other likely tribal kingdoms there? Is it a neo-Templar state of some sort?
 
The months before and after the start of the twentieth century has provided a new focus on the 'long term view' of the energies of members of the Counterfactual History Society, the second millennium since Christ now in its final, hopefully uneventful, stretch. Imagining the world the Millennium Folk with find themselves in a hundred years from now has seen an upsurge in popularity by writers and mapmakers alike, though in the latter case the job of shifting through all the utopian visions, rarely little more than fronts for revanchist politicking, of this or that nation or empire fulfilling all their territorial desires is an odious if necessary one for any man hoping to editorialize a counterfactual paper.

On occasion, a submitted map for publishing is so bizarre, so illogical, and so universally offensive, that one cannot resist the desire to use it to provoke discussion.

2000big.jpg


The submitter of this map, though anonymous, is matched in his mechanical talent only by his perverse imagination and presumably his sense of humour. France reverses her losses to Prussia thirty years ago, only to then lose her empire in North Africa, this 'Algeria' having a true flourish of a name. The Kaiser is nowhere to be seen in Germany, now squashed in borders that have no historical precedent, though Germany must be admitted to be far better off than the empires of Austria and Russia. I'd call the situation in the Balkans the work of a Romanian nationalist if it were not for the excess in 'imagination' in other places in the map. 'Yugoslavia'? 'Macedonia', in a place that seems to share very little ground with the homeland of Alexander? And the less said about the remnants of the Ottomans, the better.

I readily anticipate the comments this map is sure to generate, with all its little eccentricites and unlikelihoods from Independentish Ireland to 'Belarus' to a Poland that seems to have reversed her fortunes regarding her old Prussian/Russian masters.

(OCC - Write from the perspective of an onlooker from the year 1900.)

This border looks like some Pan-Slavic ideal. I mean, look at Germany for Christ sake. The border is back to the Oder. And Hungary fragmented? Austria Hungary might not look stable enough but Hungary like that? I have to call this ASB...

Other than that, how did all the Great Powers fragment? Germany lost half, Austria-Hungary is gone, Russia is gone as well. Do we have to assume France beat both Austria-Hungary as well as Germany. This... this is ASB tho.

And Serbia moved North? I'd never expect them moving North... and why is the Macedonia region half independent when both Serbs and Bulgars want it?

This map is complete ASB...
 
Seems like they can't make up their minds. They took some ancient names (Israel which is an interesting choice instead of Judah, Syria, Egypt) but then they come up with Iraq and Iran and Lebanon. Why not Babylon, Persia, and Phoenicia?

Plus they drew up Iraq so you have Sunnis and Shiites in the same country. Whoever made that map didn't do their homework.
Remember, the French call the area the Lebanon. And the Persians already call their country Iran.

As for Hungary, I think part pf what seems disconcerting to people is due to the gains Romania appears to have made in securing majority-Romanian lands (though oddly not Cernauti). Perhaps Romania became the Italy of the Balkans?

The names of the Balkan and East European states make sense if you keep in mindca lot of those names for nations and people have a considerably favorable reception amongst the Greek Catholic clergy. Perhaps Russia won a crushing victory over the Hun, only to find she had bitten off more than she could chew?

What is odd to me arevthe following:

1. Macedonia as its own country. Ast the map says it is Formerly Yugoslav, perhaps it is a buffer state between the Yugoslavs/Serbs and the Bulgarians? But surely partitioning the place between Albania, Servia and Bulgaria?

2. Algiers as its own independent country. We all know that the French would never yield at losing something they legally consider as French as Marseilles.

3. The plethora of republics. Republican Germany, sure. Republican Russia, of course. But why are there so few constitutional monarchies east of the Weser?
 
Last edited:
Whatever war happened seems to have seen the Germanic empires of central Europe collapse, Germany not only losing vast territories to reborn Poland but France regaining Alsace-Lorraine, and Austria-Hungary falling apart completely.
Currently, germany, Austria and italy is under alliance. Which bismarck made go keep france isolated. In order to counter this, france is negotiating for alliance with UK and russia.. I hope this won't start a war..
 
Remember, the French call the area the Lebanon. And the Persians already call their country Iran.

But Israel—is this a _Jewish_ state? How can that possibly work? Why would any significant number of Jews leave Europe for the Ottoman Emoire?

As for Hungary, I think part pf what seems disconcerting to people is due to the gains Romania appears to have made in securing majority-Romanian lands (though oddly not Cernauti). Perhaps Romania became the Italy of the Balkans?

That is an interesting idea, but then why is "Moldova" separate from Romania? If Romania is a major power and if Russia has collapsed, then why on Earth hasn't it taken Moldavia?

The names of the Balkan and East European states make sense if you keep in mindca lot of those names for nations and people have a considerably favorable reception amongst the Greek Catholic clergy. Perhaps Russia won a crushing victory over the Hun, only to find she had bitten off more than she could chew?

The three empires go to a war with a Turkey backed by France, France somehow wins while Turkey and all of the attacking empires are wrecked?

Macedonia as its own country. Ast the map says it is Formerly Yugoslav, perhaps it is a buffer state between the Yugoslavs/Serbs and the Bulgarians? But surely partitioning the place between Albania, Servia and Bulgaria?

If it was all of Macedonia kaybe, but why only part of the north?

Algiers as its own independent country. We all know that the French would never yield at losing something they legally consider as French as Marseilles.

And the name ... It sounds like a radical left-wing country. How do you get a France that defeats most of Europe and take Alsace-Lorrainr but loses Alferia?

For that matter, why doesn't France take more territory? The frontier seems to be that of 1870. Germany loses half of Prussia to Poland but it does not even lose the Saar to France?

The plethora of republics. Republican Germany, sure. Republican Russia, of course. But why are there so few constitutional monarchies east of the Weser?

It makes some sense if you assume that all of the old empires and kingdoms east of France (but not Denmark that gained north Schleswig?) got badly damaged.

Currently, germany, Austria and italy is under alliance. Which bismarck made go keep france isolated. In order to counter this, france is negotiating for alliance with UK and russia.. I hope this won't start a war..

Same here.

And let us talk about Italy. It seems to take Trieste, and it even seems to take the indisputably German Tyrol, but it somehow does not gain Istria and Dalmatia even though Austria-Hungary is wrecked and it has only weak neighbours across the Adriatic? How does _that_ happen?
 
And let us talk about Italy. It seems to take Trieste, and it even seems to take the indisputably German Tyrol, but it somehow does not gain Istria and Dalmatia even though Austria-Hungary is wrecked and it has only weak neighbours across the Adriatic? How does _that_ happen?
I guess that they got screwed over in peace treaties.
 
But then how did Russia take control over the historic birthplace of Prussia? I mean, there is no way the German Empire would give that up with out a fight. A very hard fight.


Look at how much they lost to Poland, maybe this came after a war in which Poland freed itself from their rule and they somehow became allies.

I don't see how they'd keep that and loose White Russia and the Ukraine.
 
But Israel—is this a _Jewish_ state? How can that possibly work? Why would any significant number of Jews leave Europe for the Ottoman Em[p]ire?

Given the pogroms against the Jewish peoples under the Tsar and other nations I would not fault them for fleeing. Making the Ottomans relinquish so much land would be impossible without a major war though, even then they showed more strength in the last few decades than thought possible. Obviously the 'sick man of Europe' trend continued until the Sublime Porte was no more. Yet somehow Greece has failed to take the City of Men's Dreams despite its impressive expansion elsewhere. And why is Cyprus labelled as divided?
 
Top