Map Continuation 3 - Map 5 - Mediccia (South America)
- Thread starter Krall
- Start date
Well, the problem with this timeline is that it still doesn't explain why Pampas didn't push its borders all the way to the Patagonia, if Chile had no way of enforcing its authority on the lands beyond the mountain.
(Sorry about being such an ass about this, I had an exam about geography last week so I can't get these kinds of things out of my head for some reason >_<)
So, a revised timeline:
Step 1: Pre-colonial.
Step 2: Imperial Colonies. Development mainly on coast, little inland infrastructure.
Step 3: Colonial Revolution. Unified Revolter Nation Present.
Step 4: Internal Conflict: Developed Coast vs. Inner 'Frontier', Gaels vs. Italians, liberals/republicans vs. monarchists.
Step 5: 1st Division: Chile and inland Pampas, the Mediccian frontier, secede from the aristocratic, civilized south. Aristocratic, well-populated Patagonia and Frontier Chile/Pampas.
Step 6: 2nd Division: Chile and the Pampas come to conflict. Redux of step 4, as the population of the Pampas, inland and coastal, swells with new immigrants and new ideas. Pampas Radical Republicans overthrow Chilean rule east of the Andes, but are unable to establish control to the west. Conservative Chile, revolutionary, multicultural Pampas.
Thoughts? This way, we have three degrees of radicalism present: Independence, Home Rule, Republicanism.
Krall
Banned
I'm afraid I'm vetoing this, it makes no real sense.
Trinidad is the big(ger) island to the south. We could just leave that island free and have it as part of N. America.
As for the history (and present condition) of southernmost Mediccia, I could veto Patagonia (for its unrealistic name), then we could divide Tschilie (or however it's being spelt) and Pampas roughly along the Andes.
Bah, I must agree. It it was a larger island it could make some sense, but just now I noticed that Itaquera island is just too small.
Should it belong to Costa Santa?
Ok for me.
Patagonia's name would have been butterflied alway. Its name comes from Patagão, as Margellan described the native people of this region as giants.
--
If Tschillie had Patagonia, it could have been able to keep this "Cisandine" region. The division along the Andes is more sensible, though.
--
Wasn't there going to be a military and expansionist nation in Mediccia?
Krall
Banned
Hey, er, I suppose this request will immediately be rejected, but I was on a thirteen hour car ride to Minnesota, and missed all of Mediccia!Is there any way I could sneak a country in?
Only if the other player(s) whose land you claim agree to it.
The area that would most logically be a new nation instead of being in the nation that it's in a the moment would either be Mediccia (not the continent, the country that it owns the Galapagos islands) east of the Andes, or the northern part of Panthera (the first country to be claimed) which I think was mentioned to be hard to administrate as the area is very densely forested.
Well, with the Pampas available, Patagonia would never become the major population center, it's simply not hospitable enough, and settling the pampas is a lot easier.
That may actually work in your favor (although the border would still have to be readjusted slightly...), since in this case, Chile/Patagonia rebels from Pampas, and subsequently Chile loses control of Patagonia, remaining a tenuous hold on their territories beyond the mountains.
Also, I propose a name change for Patagonia instead of a veto. While Patagonia might be unrealistic, the actual tribes living their would still exist; maybe Neuquén (actual province but name derived from the natives) or Chubut (ibid)
As hardly administred as the interior of Brazil is.
It was explored by the Apertenni, wich excplored the inner regions of the continent seeking for precious metals, diamonds and indians.
Even if densely forested, the large rivers of this region (Paraguay specially) allowed this further exploration. (someone said that controlling the Amazon Basin is a must, but it's not true: the Amazon river and the inner parts of Brazil was explored bny the bandeirantes that left São Paulo, not the oposite.]
I'm open to negotiations if he has a good idea, but I would like to at least keep the Paraguay river.
Oh, never mind, I guess I don't need a country in Mediccia. I'll just wait until NA to have a country in America. But then...who controls Easter Island?
Krall
Banned
Provided it's dominated by the native peoples I'm okay with that. I'd like a few border changes,though, so it looks like it was actually part of another nation instead of just looking like someone drew a rough line across S. America.
Also, since its original owner has disappeared, I'll transfer control of the country to Maharajah, since he missed S. America.
Well, how about [Patagonia] being the administrative centre of the colony, at a time when the fertile interior was yet undiscovered, and the primary mode of transportation was by sea? The idea is that the Pampas are unknown beyond the coast, so that they aren't settled until well into the colonial period.
Really unlikely. First of all, this colony would be almost useless, as the Patagonian climate is too cold and dry for most of the cultures. Second, even if they knew just the coast, they would probably start to colonize in the southern side of La Plata (Madre Fiume, the Mother River ITTL), wich is fertile.
If Patagonia had more rich/fertile lands, i.e., extending a little more into Pampas, it could have splitted due to a political civil war: the federalist aristocracy of Southern Pampas was unhappy as they were marginalized politically and economically, so they tried to seceed. This new nation kept the rebellious (marginalized) cities and the southern lands, while the central and northern Pampas continued loyal to the capital and the unionists.
Here's my suggestion.
[Krall, do you really want the red landlocked nation? It would be so nicer if it was incorpored into Pampas, as it would still have a nice amount of land, specially Pampas, an uniform border with the Paraguay(Madr'Oveste, the western mother river) and would not be too damaged by losing this lands that are being taken from it.]
EDIT: now the map is correct
Last edited:
Pampas, though small, has the best land and the best position. They don't need the red country's territory, and they'll control it pretty effectively anyway since they control the mouth of the River Plate (Madre Fiume?).
EDIT: Patagonia would not extend that far north though. It would stop at either Viedma or Bahia Blanca.
EDIT: Patagonia would not extend that far north though. It would stop at either Viedma or Bahia Blanca.
Kazakhstan, Norway and India all have ugly borders, but they are here IOTL
But, seriously, some borders can be ugly, it happens in history. We can avoid them, but it isn't a must.
And Pampas is quite small, I agree. It has, though, almost all the important and productive parts of OTL Argentina, wich is pretty interesting. If you don't mind in giving a little of land from Caterina to Pampas, I think that every one will be happy.
--
And, Pampas (and the other lands) will be a former italian colony, gaelic one or what?