DBWI: Explain This Map

I was browsing through a few timelines recently and I came across a bizarre map posted in the Map Thread, with no context given. Here it is:

namerica.gif


I'm at a total loss to explain it. I mean, how can any border be as straight and neat as the one between the two big countries? And neither of these countries seem to conform to any of the boundaries associated with any of the existing languages. It's like someone just came in and randomly drew some lines on a map. I can't think of any way in hell that you'd get borders like this. They've completely cut the Haudenosaunee in half with some arbitrary line, for the Great Spirit's sake! And that bordergore in the south just seems totally inexplicable.

The image itself is called northamerica.jpg. Well, what's an America? I don't think that's even a word.

I couldn't find the timeline the map came from; the author seems to mostly be a lurker, who doesn't seem to have given us any explanation of why the borders look like this. Any ideas? I hope so; I can't even begin to figure this one out.
 
I was able find that TL with copying file name of that map. This TL is indeed ridicolous. Angloland is overrun by someone Norman warlord? And some centuries later this colonise some parts of Silvania (OTL North America). Then these settlers revolt and found some nation called as "United States of America". And most unbelieveable thing is that it expands from East side of Missappa (Mississippi) to West coast in fewer than 100 years and even defeat Mexico. How Mexico can even lost war? In this TL Mexico is some poor third class power. Come on! And Russian Empire (yes, there is unified Russia which conquers Siberia) sells Alaska. Mongol Empire wouldn't had ever done that (OOC: There is surviving Mongol Empire). And guess what? This USA becomes world power.
 
Wow, if the big straight line was north-south instead of west-east, I'd say everything north of some sort of bizarro mega-Aztek empire must have been conquered/colonized by a way to OP Chinese empire and some sort of cliched Mega France stretching to the Elbe, or other Trans-Atlantic power, and they just decided to make a straight line border as part of some compromise (as once happened during the colonization of Japan).

But a North/South division, even if some sort Mega-Finland ended up owning all of Siberia and somehow colonized the north through the frigging Arctic Sea, the borders of the southern Colony wouldn't still make any sense. That the Aleutians are part of it suggests a colonization by the Japanese but how the hell can they reach the Atlantic, it defies all logic (and logistics).

(OOC: ninja'd)
 
Yeah, see, I thought for sure that the Aleuts had to be the subject of either some sort of mega-Nihon or some sort of monstrous Ulus which romped across the strait at some point after steamrolling through the northern peoples. But it's the same shade of purple as that big central country, and both of them are separated from each other by the big yellow one. How do you end up with a country that weirdly divided up if it's based on colonization? Wouldn't you logically see the west coast being one big colony?

I didn't think Nihon would even care that much about seafaring. They didn't historically, anyway. But then, the Mongols aren't great candidates either considering they know even less about boats.
 

ben0628

Banned
I'm curious how the yellow country failed to control the purple in the Northwest and the green in the Northeast
 
What's with the Hawai'ian Islands in that box on the bottom left? Are they not independent? It wouldn't make sense to lump wthen with this "North America" if it wasn't part of one of those countries. It looks yellow on the map so I guess it's part of the yellow country. But it wouldn't make sense for Hawai'i home islands, which has resisted every single attempt at invasion, to be taken over by that mostly-frozen nation. On the flip side I don't think the Hawai'ian Empire would be able to conquer that much land, and they generally ignored Silvania anyway. Very confused by this...
 
I'm going to assume this is some wank of a people in 'North America' (If I had to bet, they probably started with one of the Misi River civilizations) that conquered nearly the entire continent, but a civil war caused a division that split it along that line of latitude.

I'm not sure why even a wanked empire would desire to control so much territory, especially when there's not much there in the very northernmost places.

Speaking of which, why is Hawaii here and why is it controlled by the northernmost yellow country? Do they need warm water ports that badly?
 
I thought it was a wank of one of the Turtle Island Peoples too, but those land borders don't make sense. Surely a local power wouldn't just draw a straight line clean across the continent. There'd be a more logical border based on actual distribution of peoples, not arbitrarily drawn in based on nothing.

Someone up there said something about a weird Anglo-Norse-Saxon Silvania wank. It just seems ridiculous. Settlement from Europa never got that far in Silvania aside from the Icelandic Norse and the Francian colonies in the east. By the time Breton and Basque whalers and Andalusi traders got here, Christendom was already too preoccupied with its own internal divisions to deem large-scale settlement worth it.
 
I thought it was a wank of one of the Turtle Island Peoples too, but those land borders don't make sense. Surely a local power wouldn't just draw a straight line clean across the continent. There'd be a more logical border based on actual distribution of peoples, not arbitrarily drawn in based on nothing.

Someone up there said something about a weird Anglo-Norse-Saxon Silvania wank. It just seems ridiculous. Settlement from Europa never got that far in Silvania aside from the Icelandic Norse and the Francian colonies in the east. By the time Breton and Basque whalers and Andalusi traders got here, Christendom was already too preoccupied with its own internal divisions to deem large-scale settlement worth it.
That's why I think the split is relatively recent, when global geography starts becoming more of a thing and they start thinking in terms of meridians and parallels.
 
It is also obvious from the map that there was a peaceful division between the two largest nations. 2 large straight lines, indicate that peaceful division. However, note that in the eastern sectors more complicated borders, including ones that do not follow natural boundaries, and then west from there borders that follow more or less around large lakes. This indicates that both were settled east to west, and had conflict in their earlier times of settlement, and borders that might have been based upon cease fire lines.
 
It is also obvious from the map that there was a peaceful division between the two largest nations
Not necessarily so. Remember the War for Cuba? That armistice was eventually settled with help from the outside by the Coastal League by assigning the eastern 2/5 of the island to Canul.

Of course I don't think the conditions would be the same for such a massive empire, but perhaps a more globalized league of countries around the world could get together to arbitrate it for whatever reason. I still think the likeliest reason is a post-civil war division.

Where did you say you found this, OP?
 
How would you explain the difference between east and west? A cease fire line in the east, but an arbitrary negotiated settlement in the west?
I assume the Great Lakes and area around them are centers of trade, industry and culture in that TL the same as ours, so there would be a lot of infrastructure, factories and areas of cultural significance or most importantly allegiance in that area they'd have to try to finagle their way around, but all in all the division still looks rather clear.

West is different. OTL way it's a whole lotta nothing as far as infrastructure goes, just ranchers and a few traditionalist nomads. My biggest curiosity is why the Salish territories to the west get this treatment -- surely it would be as equally convoluted as the east. Of course you can't expect every TL author to be omniscient.
 
My biggest curiosity is why the Salish territories to the west get this treatment -- surely it would be as equally convoluted as the east. Of course you can't expect every TL author to be omniscient.

In that map, Salish Island (OOC Vancouver Island) is missing. Maybe this is an alternate timeline with a change of geography causing huge changes?
 
In that map, Salish Island (OOC Vancouver Island) is missing. Maybe this is an alternate timeline with a change of geography causing huge changes?

Come to think of it, it would explain the enormous lake in the middle of the Innu Peninsula. But why such minor changes?
 
This is probably not a map of international boundaries. Probably some weird religious jurisdictions.

It could be the map for catholic church dioceses or archdioceses in a timeline with a small amount of Catholics in most of Northern America.
Probably a catholic power colonized the south, while some Protestants colonized the North. As a result few Catholics emigrated into Northern America.
The odd exception is Greenland. Probably Denmark remained Catholic in this timeline and converted the Inuit.
 
Not necessarily so. Remember the War for Cuba? That armistice was eventually settled with help from the outside by the Coastal League by assigning the eastern 2/5 of the island to Canul.

Of course I don't think the conditions would be the same for such a massive empire, but perhaps a more globalized league of countries around the world could get together to arbitrate it for whatever reason. I still think the likeliest reason is a post-civil war division.

Where did you say you found this, OP?
Someone tossed it up in the Map Thread with no context given. I think there might've been a language barrier on the original poster's part, especially if they're Anglish. It's not like that's a common language.
 
Someone tossed it up in the Map Thread with no context given. I think there might've been a language barrier on the original poster's part, especially if they're Anglish. It's not like that's a common language.
Interesting implications. Considering the recent surge of Iuroban nationalism (or europeo as the movement is called) among indigenous groups, I wouldn't be surprised if this bled into the AH world on various foreign language forums. I remember browsing a Saktic* forum (with the help of Alda Translate, I don't know that much) and finding a TL about a unified Iuroba under a politically powerful Pope that resists Mongolian colonial spread, dominates China and eventually the rest of the world. I think the author described himself as a native Totts*, which explains the drive (though really, anyone ought to enjoy a good, fleshed-out 'underdog' timeline).

It looked different from this, though. By 'different' I mean 'the entirety of Hanuna* and adjacent islands are a single color' different. And everyone dresses, acts and builds like ancient Romyns instead of some kind of logical cultural evolution, but I doubt the guy had much to work with anyway, what with how hard it is to find good material on pre-Dasakan Iuroba.

*Mongolian-derived language of Europe from the days of control by a khanate. Though politically balkanized now, it serves as the official language of many Iuroban countries -- though the Europeos try to push for Latin.
*OTL Dutch or German; the line is very blurry ITTL.
*North America, coming from its original 'Turtle Island' root
 
Top