Map Thread XIX

Status
Not open for further replies.
"Awesome map. I also love the idea of these circles that ISOT areas from further back as they expand from the initial point." Thanosaekk, 2019
(I couldn't get the 'quote' thing to work properly)
Ditto! I have an excellent idea for a ISOT- states of America from when they first joined the union. eg like, Delaware from 1776 up to Hawaii from 1959...

There was a thread on that. The most populous state is Oklahoma by a fair margin, followed IIRC by Virginia
 
Wait, I did the top twelve, just to get the Empire of Japan in the mix.

From wikipedia, with the land area in millions of square kilometers, millions of square miles, and percentage of world, and the year in which they peaked.

British Empire 35.5 - 13.71 - 26.35% - 1920
Mongol Empire 24.0 - 9.27 - 17.81% - 1270 or 1309
Russian Empire 22.8 - 8.80 - 16.92% - 1895
Spanish Empire 13.7 - 5.29 - 10.17% - 1810
Qing Dynasty 12.16 / 14.7 - 4.70 / 5.68 - 9.02% / 10.91% - 1820 or 1790
Second French Empire 11.5 - 4.44 - 8.53% - 1920
Abbasid Caliphate 11.1 - 4.29 - 8.24% - 750
Umayyad Caliphate 11.1 - 4.29 - 8.24% - 720
Yuan Dynasty 11.0 / 13.72 - 4.25 / 5.30 - 8.16% / 10.18% - 1310 or 1330
Xiongnu Empire 9.0 - 3.47 - 6.68% - 176 BC
Empire of Brazil 8.337 - 3.22 - 6.19% - 1889
Empire of Japan 7.4 / 8.51 2.86 / 3.285 - 5.49% / 6.32% 1938 or 1942

This is just a matter of getting wiki's maps and overlaying them, so I'll get on that later today when I'm at my computer that has image software on it.
 

Aurantiacis

Gone Fishin'
I have a similar idea like that for an ISOT, where each country's biggest expansion is ISOTed into a world with modern borders. Now, because some countrys will overlap each other due to each country's biggest extent being in different eras, each country will only be retaining their homeland. This would have things like Italy in the Roman Empire time period, Egypt in the Mameluk period, the US in the 1940s(?, would that be the height of American imperialism), etc.
States whose landmass hasn't changed would be stuck in the present day, countries like sub-saharan Africa whose borders hadn't changed.
Now, there are many exceptions, and this is just a half baked idea, but it would be interesting to see how these different time periods all interact with each other, especially since the world is looking at a new height of nationalism, etc.
 
Wait, I did the top twelve, just to get the Empire of Japan in the mix.

From wikipedia, with the land area in millions of square kilometers, millions of square miles, and percentage of world, and the year in which they peaked.

British Empire 35.5 - 13.71 - 26.35% - 1920
Mongol Empire 24.0 - 9.27 - 17.81% - 1270 or 1309
Russian Empire 22.8 - 8.80 - 16.92% - 1895
Spanish Empire 13.7 - 5.29 - 10.17% - 1810
Qing Dynasty 12.16 / 14.7 - 4.70 / 5.68 - 9.02% / 10.91% - 1820 or 1790
Second French Empire 11.5 - 4.44 - 8.53% - 1920
Abbasid Caliphate 11.1 - 4.29 - 8.24% - 750
Umayyad Caliphate 11.1 - 4.29 - 8.24% - 720
Yuan Dynasty 11.0 / 13.72 - 4.25 / 5.30 - 8.16% / 10.18% - 1310 or 1330
Xiongnu Empire 9.0 - 3.47 - 6.68% - 176 BC
Empire of Brazil 8.337 - 3.22 - 6.19% - 1889
Empire of Japan 7.4 / 8.51 2.86 / 3.285 - 5.49% / 6.32% 1938 or 1942

This is just a matter of getting wiki's maps and overlaying them, so I'll get on that later today when I'm at my computer that has image software on it.

The Yuan _were_ the Mongols.
 
The Yuan _were_ the Mongols.

In a sense, but that's kind of like saying the Seleukid Empire was Alexander's empire. There's an obvious relation there, but it's not really the same thing.

This ISOT did have a lot of overlapping in China. The Qing were limited to a few border regions, since the rule I was using was that the older empires are laid over the newer ones, and a lot of the ones listed included all or most of China.
 
There was a thread on that. The most populous state is Oklahoma by a fair margin, followed IIRC by Virginia

A variation on this theme would be XX years after statehood. 60 is a good number.

Alaska and Hawaii end up at present-day 2019. And you end up with a lot of just pre- and post- ACW, WWI, and WWII. Oddly only two states fall within those wars: Ohio (1863) and Minnesota (1918).

Though Idaho and Utah (1950) get a Korean War setting, and Oklahoma (1967), and New Mexico Arizona and (1972) end up with Vietnam.

Plus populations are much higher.
.
 
Hi, good idea for an ISOT.
Can I ask what happens to the minorities- do they get left behind?
Seems to me that a majority religion [no matter which one] will persecute the minorities; Massacre, forced conversion, deportation etc.

If the minorities get left behind, I assume their Religious buildings and personal property stay with them. Would not want to live in a tower block in a mixed area when part disappears!

Lastly, Embassies are considered part of their parent country so, presumably would go to that specific world?
If not what would their status be in the new ISOT world?
Regarding minorities: No special provisions are made for minority populations in my scenario. Everything and anyone within the borders of the country is ISOT’d to the new world. Indeed there will be persecution but the presence of vast uninhabited lands will act as something of a valve to let of steam so the situation won’t be as bad as it could otherwise become.

Embassies are kept with the host country. Ex: The American embassy in Cairo goes with Egypt to the Islamic world.

On a related note any ships in international waters go or stay based on where they are owned. Space is the same, satellites and space junk go or stay with whoever put it there. The ISS is shared but will go with the christian world because the largest source of funding was from the US.

Your previous post about ISOT’s raised a lot of good points as well. I’ll try to address them in the write up of the finished version.
 

Deleted member 108228

Could you please explain to the uneducated (aka me) how this is different from OTL?

So the main divrgence is that in this map, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi lives, and through a chain of events, he is able to capitalize on the situation in Syria and push into Iraq. Zarqawi was a lot more skillful than Baghdadi, due to the latter initiating an offensive into Iraqi Kurdistan which stressed resources, while Zarqawi took advantage of the situation in 2000s Iraq by blowing up the al-Askari mosque, thus allowing for sectarian violence to spread in the West. In this world, he is never killed via drone strike, and so he continues to reign terror throughout the country.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Born of Fire, raised in Revolution, triumphant in Freedom and hallowed in Liberty, this is the best America could be. This is...
A More Perfect Union

DoUA9Iu.png

Map of the World in 1916
The League:

The "Big Four"

  • The United States of America
  • Republic of Brazil
  • German Empire
  • Great Qing
Other Members
  • Republican Kingdom of the Two Sicilies
  • Republic of Greece
  • Kingdom of Belgium
  • Empire of Korea
  • Republic of Venice
  • Kingdom of Hungary
  • Republic of Haiti
  • Dominican Republic
  • Republic of the Rio Grande
  • El Salvador
  • Republic of Nicaragua
  • Republic of Honduras
  • Costa Rica
  • Nuevo Granada
  • Peruvian Republic
  • Republic of Argentina
  • Republic of Chile
  • Free Republic of Uruguay
  • Independent State of Paraguay
  • Kingdom of Sweden
  • Republican Kingdom of Bulgaria
  • Kingdom of Rumania
  • Kingdom of Serbia
  • Democratic Republic of Albania
  • Republican Kingdom of Montenegro
  • Republic of Bosnia
  • Kingdom of Dalmatia
  • Empire of Ethiopia
  • Sultanate of Oman
  • Shahdom of Persia
---

The Entente

The Grand Alliance
  • The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Ireland
  • Kingdom of France
  • Russian Empire
  • Empire of Japan
  • Kingdom of Spain
  • Kingdom of Portugal
  • Kingdom of the Netherlands
Other Members
  • Ottoman Empire
  • Kingdom of Sardinia
  • Grand Duchy of Tuscany
  • Duchy of Modena
  • Duchy of Parma
  • Free Republic of Mexico
  • Democratic Republic of Bolivia

Neutrals

  • Swiss Confederation
  • Kingdom of Denmark
  • Papal States

  1. Delaware (1787)
  2. Pennsylvania (1787)
  3. New Jersey (1787)
  4. Georgia (1788)
  5. Connecticut (1788)
  6. Massachusetts (1788)
  7. Maryland (1788)
  8. South Carolina (1788)
  9. New Hampshire (1788)
  10. Virginia (1788)
  11. New York (1788)
  12. North Carolina (1789)
  13. Rhode Island (1790)
  14. Vermont (1791)
  15. Kentucky (1792)
  16. Tennessee (1796)
  17. Ohio (1803)
  18. Louisiana (1812)
  19. Indiana (1816)
  20. Illinois (1818)
  21. Maine (1820)
  22. Missouri (1821)
  23. Mississippi (1824)
  24. West Florida (1825)
  25. Arkansas (1826)
  26. Texas (1833)
  27. Michigan (1835)
  28. Cuba (1839)
  29. East Florida (1844)
  30. Iowa (1846)
  31. California (1846)
  32. Pecos (1846)
  33. Wisconsin (1848)
  34. Lakota (1853)
  35. Hawai'i (1854)
  36. Oregon (1856)
  37. Kansas (1859)
  38. Superior (1860)
  39. Colorado (1861)
  40. Sequoyah (1862)
  41. Tsalagi (1862)
  42. Ozark (1863)
  43. Sierra (1864)
  44. Nebraska (1864)
  45. Washington (1869)
  46. Hamilton (1876)
  47. Columbia (1879)
  48. Vancouver (1880)
  49. Jamaica (1883)
  50. Liberia (1883)
  51. Dakota (1889)
  52. Montana (1890)
  53. Shoshone (1890)
  54. Belize (1892)
  55. Arizona (1894)
  56. Utah (1896)
  57. Cimarron (1896)
  58. Sierra Leone Territory (1899)
  59. Akania (1899)
  60. Volta (1899)
  61. Ghana (1899)
  62. Togo (1899)
  63. Sonora (1912)
  64. Jefferson (1912)
  65. Bermuda Territory
  66. Yucatán Territory
  67. Panamá Territory
  68. Polynesia Territory

In 1776, the United States of America was founded. Originally a weak union binding thirteen colonies together to throw off the yoke of British imperialism, America soon evolved into the first of many new nations that embraced the ideals of the Enlightnenment. It was these ideals, alongside the belief that "all men are created equal," that America held dear. The flame of Revolution never really died, for the Revolutionary Spirit movement--sparked by Founding Father and former President Alexander Hamilton--carried the torch of liberty into the decades and centuries to come.

At almost every step of expanding freedoms to all, the United States was either ahead or not far behind every other major power of the era. The poisonous concept of nativism was strangled in its cradle by Hamilton. Slavery was abolished in 1839, after years of the South's "peculiar institution" withering on the vine. In 1865, after four long years of terrible civil war, equality for people of any race, color, creed, and sex was established, and the Redemption swept the South to anchor these ideals and weed out the prejudices of yesterday. Conflict with the native peoples of the continent ended in 1878, as deals were struck and friendships were forged to destroy the centuries-old battle. And from George Washington to Alexander Hamilton, Henry Clay to Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass to Victoria Woodhull, and William Jennings Bryan to Theodore Roosevelt, the presidents of this fair nation are every bit as idealistic as the Union for which they stand.

The United States of America remained a shining beacon to the world throughout its history, whether it be stabilizing the South American republics, bringing the revolution to Europe in 1848, aiding the ancient realms of Asia, and sponsoring or intervening directly in countless popular democratic rebellions the world over. But in doing this, America has made her fair share of enemies. As the Union ascended, the British and her allies did the opposite, sliding down the slippery slope of racism, colonialism, eugenics, and brutality. The world as it stands is a snapshot, frozen in time as the divergent paths of America and Britannia collide in the war to end all wars...

...the Grand War.
 
Last edited:
In a sense, but that's kind of like saying the Seleukid Empire was Alexander's empire. There's an obvious relation there, but it's not really the same thing.

It's not quite the same as that - the Mongol Empire outlasted Genghis Khan. It was last formally unified in 1309, so you can call the Yuan Empire separate after that, but before then it is still considered a single empire with interruptions, with the Mongol Khan holding the Chinese throne usually acknowledged as Top Khan.

But I shan't quibble further. (Although I will note this really screws Russia over. :biggrin: )
 
So on a scale of 1983 to fallout, how fecked is the central usa?

It depends if there was a nuclear war or not. Unfortunately, one of the few systems that would pretty much have survived such an event are nuclear silos, and in such a situation, I could see countries nuking each other just to deny each other the ability.

If there was no nuclear war, it would look very much like the Wild West With AR-15s. State and the US goverment could have survived and be restoring electricity if slowly. The urban centers would have fallen into chaos, though, especially those far from food and water supplies.

After ten years, wouldn't the great dying be pretty much over? For instance, in North America, with most urbanites and most of everyone living too far North dead, the more rural/agricultural regions would be expected to rebound. We see in South America that deep-seated left-right divisions are a source for major problems, but in the USA, that would be a... self-solving problem: most lefties are urban and near the coasts, and nearly all of them are fucking dead by 2022 in this scenario. Even in the agrarian heartland, the cities (which are mostly fucked) are the nuclei for left-wing/progressive politics.

I could see major ethnic strife in the South-West and the South-East as groups compete for scarce resources, but the mostly agrarian, mostly ethnically homogeneous and mostly conservative heartland of the USA ought to be primed to stay relatively coherent.

Likewise, see India and China. Huge numbers would die, and all those sprawling cities would become vast pyres or mass graves-- but those countries have enormous expanses of agrarian hinterland. Even there, many would die. But just like the Black Death in Europe, the die-off would mean: arable land available for anyone ready to work it. Land a-plenty, in fact. Whoever owned it before is dead!

And then there's places like Mongolia, for which all of this would be a big shrug.


...Don't get me wrong, I think the scenario is fascinating, but I don't really buy the idea that -- given this situation -- South America would really be one of the better-off places after ten years.

I did add that "the rest of the world is WORSE!" mostly for the dramatic tension, but keep in mind that that more than half of the population dying from famine and virtually all technology gone is not a small thing that just can be brushed over after 10 years. Entire societies, especially those as dependent on technology in the First World, would have been thrown back to a level of living not seen since centuries, and direct goverment control on who lives and who dies as something seldom seen outside of military occupations. Pyres and mass graves just don't go away from memory; people don't go easily from cushy office jobs to being pre-industrial farmers. The near death of all major urban centers (just imagine New York or Los Angeles with no power for elevators, water, refrigeration, sewers... for years...) is not something any country can take without either implementing a dictatorship or dissolving into anarchy.

This is particulary true in places who are net importers of food (or have highly industrialized agriculture), have little water, and a high population. Places like India and China fit there, the US too. I think the big survivors here would be centralized, food producing countries who are far away from any possible nukes; of course, I might be baised :p

In the US case, the very individualist and highly armed culture would also hinder attempts at consolidating such a transition from the state level, so it would lead to further chaos: that's just my interpretation though, it could very easily go the other way. In the South America scenario, some nations had earlier luck and organization than others, for example. I very much doubt emergency measures would be implemented as quickly and as efficiently. People would be still dealing with the death of communications as the deaths from say, people trapped in high-rise buildings and electrodependent patients mounted. And then the water would be gone...

I do agree that some places like say, Bhutan, would remain mostly unaffected.

Thanks for the comment! I'm glad you enjoyed the scenario!

Well, at least Argentina finally got the Falklands.

Stop, I can't nut during No Nut November

-Che, the Corte De Luz sucks. We have to spend all summer working the fields, my rations barely last the week, there's no air conditioning or fútbol in TV... there's no TV actually, and oh yeah, like half my family is dead.
-We have the Malvinas back though.
-AR-GEN-TINA! AR-GEN-TINA!

Please tell me you will make a great, exciting TL out of that. :D

This is very cool and what I was actually looking for on the thread. You thinking about making maps for the rest of the world?

Unfortunately I don't think so, I have too many forgotten TLs already :coldsweat:; I planned this as a one-shot. However, it could be an amazing collaborative project or TL. If anyone wants to do another continents or add to the scenario, I give full permission!
 
It depends if there was a nuclear war or not. Unfortunately, one of the few systems that would pretty much have survived such an event are nuclear silos, and in such a situation, I could see countries nuking each other just to deny each other the ability.
dear god, imagine if after the blackout, the nukes and every WMDs in the world were unleashed in the end, that would make the situation even worse.
 
dear god, imagine if after the blackout, the nukes and every WMDs in the world were unleashed in the end, that would make the situation even worse.

"I don't want to set the world on fire..."

Would be very grim. I of course assume only the most hardened silos and bunkers would survive unscatched such an event (which would be a good number of them, but many would be off the grid... I'm not sure what's the exact power supply for nuclear bases...) and that they would have both the will and means to launch. It probably wouldn't be the case everywhere.

I'm pretty sure some would do it just out of confused orders, rather than a full-out nuclear exchange out of nowhere. Still, would be like throwing gas into the fire.

Honestly I'm kinda hoping we get a nuclear apocalypse so we get a Mongol Empire III: Tokyo Drift

15i3fsxtxzs21.jpg


"I'm the Totally Sick Scourge of God. Had you been as cool as me, God wouldn't have sent me as punishment, bro."
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top