Patch for Haiti's internals during the Unification of Hispaniola
pretty good, all things considered. if i could suggest any edits, they'd be:
- transylvania and the serbian banat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Transylvania_(1711–1867) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banat...erbia_and_Banat_of_Temeschwar_(1849-1860).png
- the military frontiers in slavonia, dalmatia, banat and transylvania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavonian_Military_Frontier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transylvanian_Military_Frontier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banat_Military_Frontier
- the serbian voivodeship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voivodeship_of_Serbia_and_Banat_of_Temeschwar
View attachment 587886
Patch for Arabia in 1925, Iraq internals are tbd as I haven't yet found a source.
Used Histatlas, and Omniatlas as sources. Small polity in centre of Nejd is the Sultanate of Ghatgat (mentioned in a French Wikipedia article and on worldstatesmen, can't actually confirm its existence)
Thanks a bunch for that, I'm gonna get to work on Iraq. I'll take out Ghatgat from the map as while some research may have led to something I don't see it as substantial. An ethnia page (http://1900.ethnia.org/polity.php?ASK_CODE=QQ__&ASK_YY=1918 &ASK_MM=07&ASK_DD=08&SL=en) led me to the town of Al-Ghat, which does have a royal palace which is no longer occupied, but I couldn't find much more than that.
https://gulf2000.columbia.edu/maps.shtml - I got it from this source which may come in handy, however, i don't know how early these administrative divisions date back to, or even if they existed before 1953.
As for the Arab states like Ghatgat that may or may not exist, if you can find their ruling family, you might be able to confirm its existence.
Also, worldstatesmen is considered by Wikipedia's consensus to be unreliable and was deprecated. So that what you find from it with the smallest grain of salt possible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources (under peerage websites)
The Salinas Confederation makes perfect sense, yes, but the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia on the other hand... Not only was it a totally unrecognized state, but showing it on a map would be worse than depicting all of China as being actually controlled by Taiwan. Like, the guy who created it barely made it to the region a couple of times and was aprehended by the Argentinian and Chilean authorities every time, and it would have the same legitimacy as me saying I'm the successor of Genghis Khan and attempting to travel to Mongolia to reclaim "my" land.That plus Calfucura’s Salinas Confederation inbetween A&P and Argentina.
The Salinas Confederation makes perfect sense, yes, but the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia on the other hand... Not only was it a totally unrecognized state, but showing it on a map would be worse than depicting all of China as being actually controlled by Taiwan. Like, the guy who created it barely made it to the region a couple of times and was aprehended by the Argentinian and Chilean authorities every time, and it would have the same legitimacy as me saying I'm the successor of Genghis Khan and attempting to travel to Mongolia to reclaim "my" land.
In short, sorry for the rant but yeah, the Kingdom shouldn't be included in any historical map.
This is an extract from Spanish Wikipedia:From what I can tell, Orelie-Antoine was present in the area from 1860-1862, acknowledged as king by Mapuche loncos, and effectively held control of at least some of his claimed territory, which is good enough for me to include the kingdom, regardless of whether or not it was recognized by foreign powers (I never go by recognition anyways, if an unrecognized state de facto exists, I always include it)
And my rough translation:Las escasas fuentes históricas aseguran que tuvo contacto con algunas autoridades del pueblo mapuche, sin embargo, el rey nunca tuvo el control de ningún punto del territorio. Las autoridades tradicionales mapuches continuaron en sus funciones, no se alteraron las costumbres y el estado nunca llegó a establecerse. Tounens fue aceptado por la comunidad, en especial por Quilapán, como un extranjero capaz de lograr el apoyo de una potencia europea; no hay indicios de que lo reconociera como soberano, si bien Quilapán siguió algunos de sus consejos y le permitió usar el título de rey. Los mapuches conocidos como abajinos, gente de los llanos del Valle Central, entre los ríos Biobío y Toltén, nunca reconocieron a Tounens y lo denunciaron ante Saavedra.