Map Thread XVII

Status
Not open for further replies.

Luminous

damein fisher said:
Ooh, I like New Rhineland, it makes sense with a heightened German population and matches the appearance of the region. Since Adelsverein is out for a name due to geographical reasons, any ideas for a different name?
Click to expand...

Perhaps based on a Latinized form of Ruhr, from the Ruhr valley? (granted, a corrupted version, but close enough)

Ruhr -> Ruhrland -> Ruhria/Ruhrvia -> Ruria/Ruvia/Rurivia

Or, instead, if you want a New Ruhr:

New Ruhr -> New Ruhrland -> New Ruhria/Ruhrvia -> Nururia/Nuruvia/Nururivia.

Just a thought. Was thinking of the Anglicization of Wachovia (which I believe comes from the Wachau valley, but I might be mistaken).
 
Zaffre

Zaffre

Luminous said:
Perhaps based on a Latinized form of Ruhr, from the Ruhr valley? (granted, a corrupted version, but close enough)

Ruhr -> Ruhrland -> Ruhria/Ruhrvia -> Ruria/Ruvia/Rurivia

Or, instead, if you want a New Ruhr:

New Ruhr -> New Ruhrland -> New Ruhria/Ruhrvia -> Nururia/Nuruvia/Nururivia.

Just a thought. Was thinking of the Anglicization of Wachovia (which I believe comes from the Wachau valley, but I might be mistaken).
Click to expand...

One could almost call it Ruritania?
 

Serafim

WIP
PoD - In 1911, an attempt to assassin Stolypin failed. Six years later he persuades Nicolai to abdicate and receives the full authority for the next 20 years.
twenty_years_of_stolypin_by_sera_fim-dbveo26.png
 

Arkenfolm

islander said:
View attachment 357950
Click to expand...

I like how the state of Fertility includes/is near land which has some of the least fertile soil on the planet IOTL.

Luminous said:
Perhaps based on a Latinized form of Ruhr, from the Ruhr valley? (granted, a corrupted version, but close enough)

Ruhr -> Ruhrland -> Ruhria/Ruhrvia -> Ruria/Ruvia/Rurivia

Or, instead, if you want a New Ruhr:

New Ruhr -> New Ruhrland -> New Ruhria/Ruhrvia -> Nururia/Nuruvia/Nururivia.

Just a thought. Was thinking of the Anglicization of Wachovia (which I believe comes from the Wachau valley, but I might be mistaken).
Click to expand...

The Latinisation of Ruhr is Rura, I suppose leading to Rurania but I don't speak Latin.
 

Tsar of New Zealand

Faeelin said:
Why not?
Click to expand...

First off, the carrying capacity of Northern Australia is far lower than the southern half, hence the north having only one-third the population of the south. To quote Wikipedia on the fertility of the area north of 26 south:

Except in the Lake Eyre Basin and adjacent areas to the east, the soils of Northern Australia are quite remarkable in global terms for their low fertility and difficulty of working. Most of them consist chiefly of hard laterite developed during period of climate much more humid than even that of Darwin today. Since there has been no mountain building in the region since the Precambrian and no glaciation since the Carboniferous, the region's soils have generally been under continuous weathering without renewal for over 250 million years, as against less than ten thousand for most soils in Europe, Asia, North America and New Zealand which have been formed from recent mountain building or glacial scouring of the land.

This immensely long weathering time means that nutrient levels in Northern Australian soils are exceptionally low because practically all soluble minerals have long been weathered out.
Click to expand...

Shortly put: extreme soil poverty, and erratic weather. Neither is particularly conducive to stable, long-term agriculture.
 

Pischinovski

Mostly a proof of concept.

The Christian League and Royal Protectorate of the two Saxonies, Franconia, Swabia, Westphalia and the Rhineland.
also known as THE CHRISTIAN PROTECTORATE
​
The Christian Protectorate was established in the middle of the 17th century after Sweden and several German principalities defeated the Holy Roman Emperor with the help of the French.
At first the Christian Protectorate existed inside the Holy Roman Empire as a loose alliance of several lutheran and calvinist principalities under the protection of the Swedish king Gustav II Adolf, but in 1662 after the death of the king the Habsburg emperor tried to break the Swedish dominance in the north of Germany. With the help of France the disunited protestants were saved and the Habsburgs were forced to accept the total loss of the northern share of the Holy Roman Empire. The Protectorate was transformed into a stronger federation under the Houseof Vasa.

Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar, the eleventh son of a minor prince, had been one of Gustav II Adolf most loyal generals and was awarded with the Duchy of Franconia. He was a remarkable men and quickly established Franconia as one of the leading powers of the HRE and later the Protectorate. Following the second war with the Habsburg Bernhard became the mightiest man of the Protectorate and de-facto regent for the young King Charles X of Sweden. Bernhard's decendens would buildupon his succes and unite most of the land House Wettin/House Saxe under their rule. His grandson John II Ernest later made the office of "Councelor of the Realm" (Reichsrat/riksråd) a heridary position and centralised the army of the Protectorate. John's son, Bernhard II was rather unremarkable but his ambitious wife, Christina of Hessen would make sure that their offspring would one day rule the Protectorate in their own right. After Bernhard's death she acted as regent for their young son John. John was married to princess Hedvig the only child of the Swedish king and Protector Eric XV.

King Eric's eventual death would lead to the War of Swedish Succession and the fracturing of the Protectorate in 1769. The two pretenders were:
Princess Hedvig (initially backed by Franconia-Saxony and Poland)
Duke Gustav of Dalcarlia (uncle of Eric XV; initially backed by Denmark, England and France)

Duke Gustav died early in the war and his two sons, Charles and Magnus, were killed during a disastrous campaign in Poland. Hedvig and John were hated by the the Swedish Council of the Realm, which instead invited prince David of Scotland to take the throne, as he was an in-law of the Vasas. Hedvig and John in the meantime had to deal with their own peers as a Guelf led coalition was trying to break the dominance of the House of Saxe in the Protectorate, but after coronation of David I England switched sides and invaded their Scotish cousins to stop the formation of a mighty empire controlling both the Baltic and the North Sea. The Guelfs lost their English backers and fell victim to revolts of their own. The Guelfs were disposed and banished and their lands were taken by the house of Saxe. John and Hedvig defeated the last internal opposition in 1781 with the help of Poland and France. England in the meantime took the fight to Sweden, but had to accept the David as king in the end a few years later. After 15 years of fighting the Treaty of Liege ended the seemingly endless carnage of the war of Succesion. The mighty realm of Gustav II Adolf was no more. The male-line of the House of Vasa was eradicated. David I ruled Sweden. John and Hedvid ruled the Protectorate.

In 1791 John would gratiously accept the title King of Saxony, Protector of the Faith.


THE PROTECTORATE IN 1768 (before the outbreak of the war):

christian_protectorate_by_pischinovski-dbvg0mx.png


EDIT:

QUICK BONUS

Kings of Sweden and Protectors of the League:
-Gustav II Adolf (-1662)
-Charles X (1662-1682; son of the former)
-Gustav III August (1682-1700; brother of the former)
-August I (1700-1707, son of the former)
-Charles XI (1707-1731; brother of the former)
-Louis I (1731-1733; brother of the former)
-Erik XV (1733-1768; brother of the former)
-Gustav IV (1768-1770; brother of the former)
-Charles XII (1770-1779; son of the former)
-Magnus IV (1779; brother of the former)
-David I (1780-1787; uncle-in-law of the former)
-David II (1787-1801; grandson of the former)
 
Last edited:
Used-to-be Song Chinese

Used-to-be Song Chinese

Serafim said:
WIP
PoD - In 1911, an attempt to assassin Stolypin failed. Six years later he persuades Nicolai to abdicate and receives the full authority for the next 20 years.
Click to expand...

I see it was a usual World-War-Cold-War routine with a twist on the victory of the Russian side that was non-communist? From its white colouring, Japan probably had escaped the militarist period and became a full member of the international community that could be much less liberal than OTL. China should had suffered much worse than OTL considering she faced a much stronger Russia that managed to absorb all of her outer territories, yet her previous regime seemed to be able to recover all her treaty ports and concessions despite all the heavier chaos and incursions she suffered, also it makes one wonder as why "Democrats" were not on the same camp as the "Nationalists".
 
Skallagrim

Skallagrim

Banned
wtw said:
rivers are a terrible way to base borders on, they move
Click to expand...

Usually they change course on a time-scale that renders the whole issue moot. The average polity doesn't last long enough for it to matter. Consider the Rubicon, so famous for serving as very important (if somewhat symbolic) border. During the Middle Ages, the coastal plain where it was situated flooded repeatedly, and the course of the river was changed time and again. But so what? It had long since stopped being relevant as a border. For the duration of the time that it was relevant as a border, its course was fixed enough to be utterly unproblematic.

Rivers can be great borders, although obviously not all rivers would actually be great as borders. Really, the biggest problem with rivers-as-borders is that their deltas tend to change shape quite often. Which is why river borders often follow a river up to the delta, and then 'bend off' to a fixed line on one side of the delta. (Which handily solves the problem.)

That said, the Ural River in particular is a very poor choice to base a long-term border on, since it is considered one of the most "living" water courses of all Europe (i.e. it changes its exact course quite frequently compared to most other rivers). Then again, the changes are minimal. There's just a whole lot of old riverbeds, resulting from countless historical course changes, and once in a while, the Ural changes its exact course in a particular area from one established river bed to another. The area ending up on the other side of the river due to such a change would usually cover a few square miles on the very outside. We're not talking about world-shocking swerves here.


tl;dr -- rivers in general can work just fine as borders, but the Ural specifically is probably not the smartest choice.
 
Last edited:

fashbasher

Banned
Skallagrim said:
Usually they change course on a time-scale that renders the whole issue moot. The average polity doesn't last long enough for it to matter. Consider the Rubicon, so famous for serving as very important (if somewhat symbolic) border. During the Middle Ages, the coastal plain where it was situated flooded repeatedly, and the course of the river was changed time and again. But so what? It had long since stopped being relevant as a border. For the duration of the time that it was relevant as a border, its course was fixed enough to be utterly unproblematic.

Rivers can be great borders, although obviously not all rivers would actually be great as borders. Really, the biggest problem with rivers-as-borders is that their deltas tend to change shape quite often. Which is why river borders often follow a river up to the delta, and then 'bend off' to a fixed line on one side of the delta. (Which handily solves the problem.)

That said, the Ural River in particular is a very poor choice to base a long-term border on, since it is considered one of the most "living" water courses of all Europe (i.e. it changes its exact course quite frequently compared to most other rivers). Then again, the changes are minimal. There's just a whole lot of old riverbeds, resulting from countless historical course changes, and once in a while, the Ural changes its exact course in a particular area from one established river bed to another. The area ending up on the other side of the river due to such a change would usually cover a few square miles on the very outside. We're not talking about world-shocking swerves here.


tl;dr -- rivers in general can work just fine as borders, but the Ural specifically is probably not the smartest choice.
Click to expand...

The Europe/Asia division as a firm geographical law in general doesn't make sense outside of the Turkish context where there's a hard border. Batumi, Famagusta, or Baku are less European geographically than the west side of Atyrau but nobody in their right mind considers the west side of Atyrau to be more European than them.
 

Serafim

Used-to-be Song Chinese said:
I see it was a usual World-War-Cold-War routine with a twist on the victory of the Russian side that was non-communist? From its white colouring, Japan probably had escaped the militarist period and became a full member of the international community that could be much less liberal than OTL. China should had suffered much worse than OTL considering she faced a much stronger Russia that managed to absorb all of her outer territories, yet her previous regime seemed to be able to recover all her treaty ports and concessions despite all the heavier chaos and incursions she suffered, also it makes one wonder as why "Democrats" were not on the same camp as the "Nationalists".
Click to expand...
You're right. But Japan was an ally of the United States in the Cold War. Democratic and corrupt China has long been Russia's backyard, but in the early 21st century, there was a revolution. Moscow has lost almost all its influence on China and is trying to keep at least the northern areas under its control.

Historyman 14 said:
Cool, but so ASB.
Click to expand...
Thanks, NOT TRUE!!!!1111
 

Fed

Crossposting my MotF post!
Fed said:
ou2my0l.png


Following near collapse in the early VII Century, the Sassanid Empire was blessed with a series of decent rulers and great weakness from potential enemies. The Gökturks had proven unable to actually take down the Iranian fortresses to the east, and the rising Malikate, weakened after succession wars posterior to the death of the empire's founder, Muhammad (who did not manage to get the same amount of followers as iOTL). Succession wars deeply weakened the Malikate and resulted in the creation of an extremely weak confederal structure. The religion wars, of course, continued anyway, and Iran was deeply destroyed: the Zagros, a natural point of defense, was the end of the strength of Islamic advances. The Sinai and Cicilia were the limits of the expansion of Islam within the Byzantine Empire's borders. Weakened and torn apart from Egypt, Rome soon lost all but its heartland in Greece and Anatolia: Egypt became an independent state - the Coptic "XXXIII Dynasty" which ruled Egypt until the late 800s.

All states in the Middle East, even Byzantium, have, for differing periods of time, been occupied by other States or annexed into largest empires. Even the proud Roman Empire was annexed in the mid-900s by a short-lived Avar Empire, and then usurped by Slavonic-Viking warriors in the early 1000s. Only Iran has remained unoccupied, and under the rule of the same Sassanid dynasty (and after the extinction of its main line in 1237, by the Sassan-Mihranid cadet branch). The collapse of the Malikate made Iran a dominant power in the Middle East.

Today, Iran has evolved into a parliamentary monarchy and the world's wealthiest country. The Iranian government, originally Zoroastrian (until Shapur VIII's conversion to Mazdakism in 912 AD) managed to defeat the political interests of rival dynasties and the clergy by emphasising radical economic redistribution and democratic ownership of the economy. Its main regional rivals today are not the Roman and Arab enemies of old, but rather new powers: the multiethnic United States of Turan up north, and the Republic of India. Iran's old enemies, especially Rome, are now, ironically, strategic allies: economically allied with Asorestan, Makan and the Mubarakkiyah (also deeply communistic, although fully democratic), are by far the world's greatest producers of oil and deeply dominant within the international stage.
Click to expand...
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top