Map Thread XXI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure if this is the right place to post. If I'm (completely) off topic I apologize in advance. I recently read the newest version of Guns, Germs and Steel and that got me thinking of Chris Wayan's Jaredia (from the Planetocopia series). Jaredia's world spanning corridor/belt is tropical, while Diamond focuses on the potential of a massive temperate corridor/belt. I have a hunch that by placing the South Pole on Australia (poor marsupials) one might just get a world spanning interconnected temperate belt. Is anyone aware of site or a software tool that allows you to recenter the earth's poles? Thank you!
You may also be interested in this thread, which has a large variety of maps of that type.
 
View attachment 834515
A world like this? I like how the Pacific keeps its shape weirdly. The South Pole is at 20S 133E, which in real life is in the middle of nowhere in the Northern Territory, 500 km north of Alice Springs, 800km south of Darwin, and in between them longitude-wise.

Also makes you wonder about climate. I'm not an oceanographer, but can the deep trenches/gaps in the continental shelf around the Wallace line sustain a strong circumpolar current as exists around IRL Antarctica? That current is a big part of why Antarctica is so cold and plays a big part in Earth's climate. It seems perfectly possible based on this, assuming sea levels similar to real life's. Still, it's no Drake Passage. There doesn't look like there will be much glaciation in the northern hemisphere either (in my opinion just based on the lack of land near the north pole), and Australia has a smaller land area than Antarctica, so maybe sea levels might be a bit higher anyway guaranteeing a strait for a strong circumpolar current? Because I know the Indonesian continental shelf was exposed during our ice ages.

All in all it looks (in my opinion) like the world's climate characterisation is either going to be somewhere between "a bit more maritime and balmy" and "Pliocene".

Marsupials should be fine, since we know from genetic and biogeographical evidence that Australian marsupials crossed to Australia from South America via Antarctica in the early Cenozoic. Antarctica will almost certainly have Australian-like Marsupials living there if it doesn't freeze over. Honestly, looking at its geography here, I think it could have a bunch of unique species living there in the present day. The Drake Passage isolates it from the rest of the world even after South America gets a faunal interchange, it's like 1000 kilometres. It could even be another Australia, with the only native placentals being rodents, bats and marine mammals, just bigger, more mountainous and shifted a bit north.
With higher sea levels and no ice, Antarctica might be more of a large archipelago, like OTL Indonesia, than a continent. The north/south orientation of this *Antarctic Archipelago will give it a much more varied climate than *Indonesia, perhaps leading to greater diversification and specification amongst it's marsupial population.
 
With higher sea levels and no ice, Antarctica might be more of a large archipelago, like OTL Indonesia, than a continent. The north/south orientation of this *Antarctic Archipelago will give it a much more varied climate than *Indonesia, perhaps leading to greater diversification and specification amongst it's marsupial population.
Without having been glaciated in the geologically recent past, this Antarctica wouldn't have been depressed by the weight of the ice and so would probably be high enough in elevation not to be broken up, though I guess it depends on just how high sea levels are.
 
1685394083915.png

witty remark about how this is my like 2nd map in 2 days, anyways here's the european imperial map circa 1753, right before a few hooligans start a 6 year long war that starts in a small town in Mariana named Woodbridge.
 
Currently the main reason that drives the Circumpolar Current is wind. Antarctica is pretty round and between Cape Horn and the tip of the Antarctic Peninsula there is no land anywhere within that latitude. That means wind can blow unimpeded following the Earth's rotation while sucking in extra air due to the coriolis effect. A world like that one does not fit the criteria as the Indonesian islands and New Zealand would block the flow of water. Also, Australia having its mountains around (and only in a certain part) instead of across like in Antarctica would diminish the accumulation of snow, at least in Western Australia. Oh and during an ice age most of Indonesia would be a peninsula so no circumpolar current there, the cold waters would be directed upwards along Java and Sumatra, making them Patagonia analogues, except a tad colder due to latitude.

Part of the reason why there is ice over the north pole is due to it being an almost closed off sea and being less saline than any of the other oceans, so the water can freeze at a higher temperature. With landmasses further south the continentality effect is mostly gone so temperatures in winter should be higher, leading to less ice. The Amazon would make a great Siberia analogue here, with its north-south plain and a big system of rivers. The Amazon could be dammed by ice during the ice age and create a huge lake (there's your Hudson Bay analog btw). This world also has more land on equatorial latitudes, which contributes to cooling the planet by increasing albedo. So maybe all of this cancels out, who knows, but I still bet on a warmer world.


It's still a large outcrop of precambrian igneous rock, you aren't going very far with that even in moderate temperatures. However, no glaciation also means plants have time to break down the rock unimpeded, and no glaciers means no soil destruction either. Still not the best farmland. Plus in this configuration it would be exposed to masses of cold air coming from the pole in winter, albeit not as severely as Siberia.
Thank you for clarifying, I was wondering about some of these iffy things.
 
KR_Africa.png

Just a simple idea I had, a look at Africa in a Kaiserreich cold war timeline.

The Reichspakt was able to hold out until 1945, after which the German government escaped to Africa and joined the Entente. In the following years, the International followed and mopped them up, though not without difficulties. With the new cold war with the Russian Republic, the International struggled to supply a faraway continent-sized campaign, raising objections from some portions of the military and populace (of the less authoritarian member states, like France). After all, the colonial remnants were essentially powerless on the world stage, and resources could be put to better use in opposition to Moscow. On the other hand, Russia and Japan were already beginning to interfere with the continent, and successfully spreading the revolution would be a major ideological victory.

Things got complicated quickly. Before the twice-exiled French government in Dakar even capitulated, rebellions had broken out, notably in the country now called Mali. Not wanting to commit colonization, the International chose not to intervene. Not long after, just as troops entered Kinshasa, the colonial HQ in Dar es Salaam was suddenly overthrown, and Mittelafrika collapsed. Unable and unwilling to just conquer independent territories, the International was forced to switch to less direct tactics of spreading influence.
 
So more tinkering in the Leveeverse.

I was working last night and had a thought. For context, ITTL, the UK puts Germany "in charge" of the Ottoman Empire. Keep in mind, Germany at this point ITTL is sans the southern states (including Saxony), Bismarck has been sacked, and Frederick III is kaiser, currently working to make Germany a much stronger parliamentary system on par with the UK. German advisors are sent to the Ottoman Empire to help establish order after the embarrassing defeat in the Bulgarian War of Independence (TTL's Russo-Turkish War). Unfortunately nationalist tensions within the Ottoman Empire are far too great for these advisors and the existing Ottoman system to overcome. A hardline politician takes control of the empire, assassinating Sultan Abdul Hamid II, and turning the empire into an incredibly strict Islamic theocracy with incredibly right-wing politics. This causes the dissolution of the empire. Various ethnic groups in the empire split off to form their own independent states. These are the Kurdish Republic, Syria, Lebanon, and the Mamluk Empire. Egypt and Iran both take advantage of the chaos to snatch former Ottoman territory. Meanwhile, an underground movement of left-wing Turks engages in an insurgency in the newly-established Turkish Caliphate.

This is has been true through all the various iterations of the map and my outline. What might change though is the creation of another breakaway state: Saloniki. Basically, Jewish groups in Thessaloniki declare their independence from the empire in the aftermath of the far right takeover, fearing that the religious extremism will surely lead to reprisals against Jews. As such, with Germany's help, they form an independent state centered around Thessaloniki, called Saloniki. In effect, this is a German client state, serving as a bastion of liberalism within the former empire. It comes into frequent conflict with the Turkish Caliphate. Note: I am not 100% sold on this yet. I am very willing to just scrap this idea of an independent Jewish state entirely, but figured I might as well explore it however briefly! Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated!

1685460804303.png
 
Last edited:
So more tinkering in the Leveeverse.

I was working last night and had a thought. For context, ITTL, the UK puts Germany "in charge" of the Ottoman Empire. Keep in mind, Germany at this point ITTL is sans the southern states (including Saxony), Bismarck has been sacked, and Frederick III is kaiser, currently working to make Germany a much stronger parliamentary system on par with the UK. German advisors are sent to the Ottoman Empire to help establish order after the embarrassing defeat in the Bulgarian War of Independence (TTL's Russo-Turkish War). Unfortunately nationalist tensions within the Ottoman Empire are far too great for these advisors and the existing Ottoman system to overcome. A hardline politician takes control of the empire, assassinating Sultan Abdul Hamid II, and turning the empire into an incredibly strict Islamic theocracy with incredibly right-wing politics. This causes the dissolution of the empire. Various ethnic groups in the empire split off to form their own independent states. These are the Kurdish Republic, Syria, Lebanon, and the Mamluk Empire. Egypt and Iran both take advantage of the chaos to snatch former Ottoman territory. Meanwhile, an underground movement of left-wing Turks engages in an insurgency in the newly-established Turkish Caliphate.

This is has been true through all the various iterations of the map and my outline. What might change though is the creation of another breakaway state: Saloniki. Basically, Jewish groups in Thessaloniki declare their independence from the empire in the aftermath of the far right takeover, fearing that the religious extremism will surely lead to reprisals against Jews. As such, with Germany's help, they form an independent state centered around Thessaloniki, called Saloniki. In effect, this is a German client state, serving as a bastion of liberalism within the former empire. It comes into frequent conflict with the Turkish Caliphate. Note: I am not 100% sold on this yet. I am very willing to just scrap this idea of an independent Jewish state entirely, but figured I might as well explore it however briefly! Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated!

View attachment 834800
Were there even enough slaves (i.e. Mamluks) in Iraq at that point to even form their own state? Local tribal elites were still very powerful and the slave trade was in decline by then. Incidentally, most slaves in Iraq were black/obviously mixed-race so that's a Zanj Rebellion pt. 2.

Most of that Jewish state isn't Jewish (even the cities and towns weren't too Jewish outside of Saloniki and certain parts of Constantinople and Jews are very much a minority), and Russia and Greece would never allow Mt. Athos to be controlled by Jews. Greece and Bulgaria would fight over the region, or it would just be its own independent state, I mean I could vaguely see idealistic Western Europeans trying to make a multiethnic principality/kingdom of "Macedonia" or "Thrace" in that region, especially if it's to keep it separate from Greece, Bulgaria, and Turkey.
 
A hardline politician takes control of the empire, assassinating Sultan Abdul Hamid II, and turning the empire into an incredibly strict Islamic theocracy with incredibly right-wing politics.
This doesn't make any sense, given Ottoman politics at the time.

These are the Kurdish Republic, Syria, Lebanon, and the Mamluk Empire. Egypt and Iran both take advantage of the chaos to snatch former Ottoman territory. Meanwhile, an underground movement of left-wing Turks engages in an insurgency in the newly-established Turkish Caliphate.
Kurdish nationalism was quite weak in this time period. Iran is too weak to take advantage of an Ottoman collapse. Gulf Coast was already under British influence and in the event of an Ottoman collapse Iraq would under British Influence as well. Crete should go to Greece. Lebanon only came about as a result of French colonization, without it there would no independent Lebanon especially one that big. An independent and strong Egypt would be able to take the Levant without European interference in the event of an Ottoman collapse.

This is has been true through all the various iterations of the map and my outline. What might change though is the creation of another breakaway state: Saloniki. Basically, Jewish groups in Thessaloniki declare their independence from the empire in the aftermath of the far right takeover, fearing that the religious extremism will surely lead to reprisals against Jews
Jewish community is too small, weak, and uninterested in an Independent Jewish Thessaloniki

Were there even enough slaves (i.e. Mamluks) in Iraq at that point to even form their own state? Local tribal elites were still very powerful and the slave trade was in decline by then. Incidentally, most slaves in Iraq were black/obviously mixed-race so that's a Zanj Rebellion pt. 2.
Mamluks were already crushed since 1831 and were made up Caucasians.
 
What's the Big Blue-y bits in the frontier? Can't quite tell.
Hmm... Blue-y frontier. I don't know what you're referring to. In the middle of the continent there is New-France which has rebel activity in the north (indicated by pink outline). west of that is Chistiania, Mexico and Nelson.
1685486218479.png
 
image.png


POD: House of Habsburg dies out and the line goes to the Bavarian Wittelsbachs c. ~1760. France successfully becomes a constitutional monarchy and expands ala the Revolutionary Wars hoping to be crowned Holy Roman Emperor replacing the Wittelsbachs. This leads to a new Europe after years of conflict and prevents the unanimous ascendancy of any power or the rise of agglomerate nationalism in Italy and Germany . Russia undergoes a revolution like the French Revolution as a result of a Decembrist Revolt gone to far and spreads their ideology to Poland, the Baltics, Prussia, and other states. From there, history spirals away.

EDIT: multiplied internals
 
Last edited:

HJR

Banned
image.png


POD: House of Habsburg dies out and the line goes to the Bavarian Wittelsbachs c. ~1760. France successfully becomes a constitutional monarchy and expands ala the Revolutionary Wars hoping to be crowned Holy Roman Emperor replacing the Wittelsbachs. This leads to a new Europe after years of conflict and prevents the unanimous ascendancy of any power or the rise of agglomerate nationalism in Italy and Germany . Russia undergoes a revolution like the French Revolution as a result of a Decembrist Revolt gone to far and spreads their ideology to Poland, the Baltics, Prussia, and other states. From there, history spirals away.
That's a really beautiful map. A few questions:
- Why is Indonesia balkanized so heavily? Collapse after a colonial withdrawal or no colonization in the first place?
- What's going on South Africa? It looks like it has the Apartheid color.
- What year is this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top