Q-Bam Historical Map Thread

A huge mistake I made while making a map of mine was using the modern Q-BAM map which included reservoirs and my borders were a bit inaccurate too... (mostly concerning the Kebbi and Liptako Emirates, Liptako wasn't even IN the patch.)

The Sokoto wasn't one full empire, it was a blend. These decedents of the Quraysh, or so they claim. Every Emirate was different.

Enjoy!

1632789838128.png
 
Last edited:
Patch for the Carolingian Kingdom of Italy? Preferably at 867, when Lothringia was still a thing
Sadly, the best thing I have is 843 (Treaty of Verdun), maybe you can make something out of it, I suggest looking at the Wikipedia maps as a guide:
1632792262578.png

Is there a map in this thread of the world at either 1520 or 1529?
Sadly the only thing I could find is a series of outdated patches. Do whatever you want with these:
1632792373536.png

1632792380311.png

1632792385650.png

Also Aztecs (1519) in a more updated map:
1632792415013.png
 
Thanks, but they're not particularly helpful as i'm looking at the Siege of Vienna rather than Western Europe.
How do they make Q-Bam maps if you know?
Well you usually find a bunch of reference maps for the various regions of the world. Then you check if any of the borders are the same as those of a year that already has a QBam, if so, you can just copy them. For the unique borders, I suggest looking at topography (especially rivers) as a reference, as well as being careful at mapping to make sure you keep good proportions and shapes, otherwise you can end up with very wonky borders.
 
Well you usually find a bunch of reference maps for the various regions of the world. Then you check if any of the borders are the same as those of a year that already has a QBam, if so, you can just copy them. For the unique borders, I suggest looking at topography (especially rivers) as a reference, as well as being careful at mapping to make sure you keep good proportions and shapes, otherwise you can end up with very wonky borders.
thanks :)
 
unknown.png


June 20, 451: Battle of the Catalaunian Plains
Dumb question du jour here:
How are we certain that the Huns controlled so much territory? I keep seeing these maps (not this one of course) which show the Huns controlling almost all of central and eastern Europe, without anything to back it up.
 
Dumb question du jour here:
How are we certain that the Huns controlled so much territory? I keep seeing these maps (not this one of course) which show the Huns controlling almost all of central and eastern Europe, without anything to back it up.

Honestly, we don’t. hardly anything of the Huns has survived, including indications of their territorial extent. I’ve seen maps of the Hunnic empire stretching as far as the Aral Sea and all of Jutland or shrunk down to just Pannonia and the lower Danube. I tried to go for a middle ground approach here based on what maps seemed to agree on and the locations of tribes living under Hunnic rule.
 
Maps that show a giant Hunnic Empire spanning half of Europe always make me think of this map of the Magyar invasions of Europe. Like, if you took "places where the Magyars defeated a local military" as your guideline for how large the "Magyar Empire" was, you'd quickly get a Hungary that stretches from Britanny to Constantinople.
Kalandozasok.jpg

I think showing the Huns controlling the Carpathian Basin area with a bunch of tributaries in the rest of Europe would be preferable, but that would also imply a level of detail of understanding of the territorial situation that we (afaik) just don't really have.
 
Dumb question du jour here:
How are we certain that the Huns controlled so much territory? I keep seeing these maps (not this one of course) which show the Huns controlling almost all of central and eastern Europe, without anything to back it up.
The borders of nomadic empires were, in practice, non-existant, and are only limited by geography and the occasional settled state(s) they may come across. They move around a lot and have a general area where they reside, and thereby rule. In terms of having and controlling land, they either subjugated or forced groups to flee from their land, but the groups they subjugated were vassals within their empire, and usually settled a certain area of land, and in Europe, the Pannonian basin is excellent for their lifestyle and so formed the core of almost all nomadic groups who came to Europe up until the Hungarians. Their vassals, whatever that may look like in a nomadic empire, had territory and the borders of that vassal would also be the borders of that Nomadic Empire who reigned above them. Also, steppe-dwellers are extremely good horsemen/cavalrymen, and they can much more easily move an army of fast-moving horsemen from one place to another, which is why groups such as the Gokturks, Cumans, and the Mongols, could extend themselves very far very quickly. Of course, the drawbacks to having a nomadic Empire is over extension as a result of a lack of governing structure, and those aforementioned vassals/subjugated peoples may rise up, as was the case for the Huns with their German vassals and the Rourans and their Gokturk vassals.
 
The borders of nomadic empires were, in practice, non-existant, and are only limited by geography and the occasional settled state(s) they may come across. They move around a lot and have a general area where they reside, and thereby rule. In terms of having and controlling land, they either subjugated or forced groups to flee from their land, but the groups they subjugated were vassals within their empire, and usually settled a certain area of land, and in Europe, the Pannonian basin is excellent for their lifestyle and so formed the core of almost all nomadic groups who came to Europe up until the Hungarians. Their vassals, whatever that may look like in a nomadic empire, had territory and the borders of that vassal would also be the borders of that Nomadic Empire who reigned above them. Also, steppe-dwellers are extremely good horsemen/cavalrymen, and they can much more easily move an army of fast-moving horsemen from one place to another, which is why groups such as the Gokturks, Cumans, and the Mongols, could extend themselves very far very quickly. Of course, the drawbacks to having a nomadic Empire is over extension as a result of a lack of governing structure, and those aforementioned vassals/subjugated peoples may rise up, as was the case for the Huns with their German vassals and the Rourans and their Gokturk vassals.
So, would you say that nomadic empires, as a general rule, would be very much extensive geographically, but they would be fragile, overdependent of their ruler or ruling dynasty, so they would tend to be very short-lived and disappear quickly when no direct heir is present?
 
So, would you say that nomadic empires, as a general rule, would be very much extensive geographically, but they would be fragile, overdependent of their ruler or ruling dynasty, so they would tend to be very short-lived and disappear quickly when no direct heir is present?
That seems to be the general pattern, unless they stop being nomads and become more settled like the Manchus did

That said though, there may be some exceptions. I just finished reading a book about the Scythians, and there was apparently a Scythian kingdom or kingdoms (not 100% sure, the book was more focused on cultural aspects and interactions with other societies) that managed to last centuries.
 
The borders of nomadic empires were, in practice, non-existant, and are only limited by geography and the occasional settled state(s) they may come across.
So maybe we shouldn't use black borders to outline nomadic entities in our basemaps (except when a settled state has a fixed border with nomads).
Instead maybe use a darker color for the core and more autonomous colors for areas which might have been influenced?

It would be more accurate to show our lack of knowlege and the inaccuracy of fixed borders of nomadic empires.
 
So maybe we shouldn't use black borders to outline nomadic entities in our basemaps (except when a settled state has a fixed border with nomads).
Instead maybe use a darker color for the core and more autonomous colors for areas which might have been influenced?

It would be more accurate to show our lack of knowlege and the inaccuracy of fixed borders of nomadic empires.
Nah, cause we're not showing a lack of knowledge on maps, we're just making the best guestimate on who/what's where, what do states look like, with the knowledge we do have, nor would that neccesarily depit it accurately, since there's still going to be a color difference between Terra Nullis and any organized entity. But we've all got different ways of how we like to make the maps and how we want it to be anyway, and borderless groups have been done before, so if anyone wants to they can.
 
Finished a History of Hakkari: Every Year video that's been in the works for about two months, it covers a large section of Kurdistan and could be useful as a source to someone here.
 
Well, finally, here's 1756:

kz4RSWS.png


Not gonna lie, I ended fed up with making this one, and so I stopped for a few months to do anything with it. I know there will be some minor mistakes, I tried to be the most accurate possible, but nothing is perfect.
I hope you enjoy and like it.
 
Well, finally, here's 1756:

kz4RSWS.png


Not gonna lie, I ended fed up with making this one, and so I stopped for a few months to do anything with it. I know there will be some minor mistakes, I tried to be the most accurate possible, but nothing is perfect.
I hope you enjoy and like it.
The only bad thing I can say about this map is that the Oceans' blue is hurting my eyes. Otherwise, it's good.
 
The only bad thing I can say about this map is that the Oceans' blue is hurting my eyes. Otherwise, it's good.
I would add a small nitpick that the subdivision boundary colour for Great Britain is a little too close to the base colour, making it difficult to see easily.

That's the only complaint I have.
 
Top