Discussion in 'Alternate History Maps and Graphics' started by B-29_Bomber, Jun 1, 2017.
Starting to do a world cover of @Xianfeng Emperor 's Superpower Iran...
I can't thank you enough for working on the project--very interested in your take on the scenario.
Though as a bit of a shameless plug:
If you have any ideas or suggestions, I'm all ears. I may change north America, for one thing: upon rechecking your post it looks like you intended the US to be reunited (mostly) by the NE rather than permanently losing the NE and SW.
Another alt-Iran? Lovely.
No idea what I'm doing with this but here's a wip:
Well, it's been quite some time since I worked on this scenario, so I've pretty much forgotten about any ideas for the world beyod Iran. Here's a couple suggestions though:
There's a Turko-Iranian rivalry following the Saudi-Iranian one. Iran systematically dismantles the idea of Pan-Arabism or Pan-Turkism--prime threats to their hold on Mesopotamia and Azerbaijan. Instead, Tehran promotes Pan-Persianism which unites all Iranic (plus the odd Arabic and Turkic) peoples under one banner.
Given the world's history, the contemporary view is that there's a revolving door of history where successive powers become the planetary hegemon, much like Chinese beliefs regarding dissolution and unification. States grow, reach their apex, then grow decadent and are overthrown in an asabiyyah cycle.
Iran might need a bigger sphere of influence than I depicted in the original map--that's rather small for what is supposed to be a domineering global empire.
I'm looking forward to your interpretation of the world!
Globe maps best maps
This sounds very interesting. Do you have a link to the original map?
Here you go!
Never could get used to Worlda, so I decided to go the distance and make a QBAM map of the world in 1914 for my timeline, the Lion, the Eagle, and the Rooster. Still need to tweak a few borders and add some, but that needs to wait until I get better base maps. I also need to actually get started on Antarctica, but am looking for better bases as well.
Barring those, this is the complete map. Feel free to ask questions, I am more than happy to answer them!
I am unsure the wisdom of using some of those borders between the US and Canada. Some are straight lines, some are in the middles of rivers, and others are drainage basins. I feel there would have been a lot of confusion over where a border really was. You can think of it like the Lake of the Woods from IOTL. A border I don't think you have used here. I am unsure if that is wise, as while I think was based on incorrect information on where the source of the Mississippi was, it was the best guess they had at the time. I also think the borders on Hispaniola are bizarre. Yes, they were used in the past, but I think seems to suggest no Haitian Revolution. I find the idea almost astounding (given the repeated emancipation and reenslavement of the population), especially since it still seems to be in France's orbit here. also, why is Colombia swallowing up so much land everywhere? I don't see why the British would give up the Mosquito Coast to them, for starters. And then there is the border with Brazil. If they were all focused about gaining land then the border with Peru, which involved them keeping a small slice while handing over enormous swathes of land they got from Ecuador, to Peru. And do the Germans have a small grey port or peninsula on Hispaniola?
Did Chile grab land here that IOTL Argentina took from Bolivia? Why are you splitting Baja the way you did? Why attach Bermuda and the Bahamas to Canada, but not combine the Turks and Cacios as well? I cannot see, but do you have Tangiers colored international? Does the coloring of Norway suggest they are not in a loose personal union, but are mostly subversent to Sweden? By the way, how did German Unification go here? Any changes in the various rulers or the terms of admittance? I bring this up partially because there are no internal borders to suggest what the arrangement is, and partially because the deposed Duke of Nassau ended up Grand Duke of Luxembourg when the Dutch Monarch was a female. Does the coloring of the borders between Russia and Tuva, Mongolia, etc no being the same as those of Khiva and Bhukara, does that mean they solidified dominance? Did the Chinese accept it? Why aren't there some areas on the border where the Russians have settled Cossacks or something, like they did with many of their other conquests and acquisitions. Shouldn't Finland be given a bit of a different color or border with Russia than Poland?
I feel you should also show the borders within French Indochina, as they did have many monarchs subversent (however you spell it) to them. They would also need a lot of help in the interior, given how far from the coast they got. I also think this would lead the remainder of Siam to move into the British camp, or whoever can offer them the most protection. Probably looks bad on Catholic missionaries and Frenchmen abroad, if they took a chunk of land from a country trying to modernize to a degree. I expect the British, Germans, Italians, Spanish, Haitians, Americans, Brazilians, Chinese, and a number of others hold them in scorn or sheer and utter loathing.
Liberia annexed to the US here? Seems like it would have been best to that have that colored light blue, though of course everything here mostly comes done to whatever is in your story. Ahhh, and you can remove the box around the Aleutions in the upper right of the map. No need to make them stand out. I also don't see the British getting all they claimed for Guiana, which they pushed mostly when it came to the issue of gold. No reason for Venezuela to accept such borders. And why would the US only buy one of the Virgin Islands from Denmark? I think the Americans turned down a chance once IOTL, and only ended up buying them right before entering WWI to better fortify the area.
Why does Germany still have that area around Kenya? They gave it up IOTL in exchange for the British supporting their claim for Tangykia, which the Germans had no real influence in. How did the Philippines end up the way it did? The Spanish have a fire sale, but didn't think to only sell the majority of the Philippines where they held no real control? You would think they would try to get colonies elsewhere to make up for it. Think that was part of their reasons for going for Morocco, though their were historical reasons as well, of sort. Was there some sort of horse trading, where the Germans, Americans, Japanese, and British accepted the French disembowling Thailand in exchange for them all getting a cut of the Spanish empire?
Is Mozambique colored differently than Angola? What is the primary language of the state north of Uruguay? Is that striped area in southern Chile supposed to be a area of autonomy for their own Natives, or is it a sort of codominion to let the Mapuche get to the Pacific? I don't see Jan Mayen getting Swedish blue at this point. Depends on the autonomy Norway has. They had rather more wriggle room when independent, and able to do horsetrading with their claims to Ellesmere Island they gave up for recognition by the British to the island. That, and it was partially to make up for all the sunk Norwegian ships during WWI.
I know you probably had a reason for giving northern Bohemia to Germany here, but I don't think they are good enough, no matter the circumstances, Bohemia and Moravia have each been whole units for nearly a thousand years. If they are taken then I am guessing this Germany would basically by a Prussian enterprise that also annexed all of Saxony, like it repeatedly attempted to do earlier. I expect it would have all been called the Kingdom of Prussia for years, just like Italy was ruled by the King of Sardinia loooong after it called for a name change.
Naples run by a German cadet branch here, or is that just the regular color for when it is independent? And who runs Rhodes? If it is an autonomous area for Turkey, I think they would have garrisoned it and made sure control was solid. Don't see why the British would swipe new islands around there, anyways. They might as well have kept the Ionians.
And looking over to India, not sure who well it shows the situation. I have seen plenty of maps of the area, and I recall the Presidencies having quite a few subdivisions. Perhaps bring back the darker grey for the borders of Princely-States. Maybe even make a third shade of pink, to better differentiate everything. Might also want borders for the Trucial States. While it may seem minor, those areas were independent enough that some of them held off temporarily or entirely from joining the UAE IOTL. And back to Denmark and Sweden, I wonder if the Russians would be happy about the Swedes holding Svalbard. I expect Sweden is still veeeeery wary of the Russians.
Paragraphs would be helpful.
I'll get to that. Unfortunately I had to originally write it on a word doc, because my typing was going at a snails pace and I didn't want the site to shut done yet again, like had happened with many different post s in the past.
Before I get to replying to your wall of text, I did want to say thanks for asking questions! I'm saying this now, because some of my explanations might come off as petty or rude and I don't want you to think that. I appreciate the feedback, in fact this one comment makes up the majority of all feedback I've received, and you did raise up many issues/errors/general good points about the timeline. Now to the questions, which I separated as best I could.
The borders for Canada were the first done ITTL, as the POD is a severely harsh Treaty of Ghent. The border was redrawn from the Maumee River until hitting the 42nd Parallel North, going west until hitting the Mississippi and following it until reaching the established US-Canada border. In this timeline, the British do not give away the Red River Valley to a recent enemy and as a result, there is no Treaty of 1818. The Oregon Border is a little more complicated; it consists of parts of the Snakes and Columbia rivers, as well as the height of land between the established border, that one isn't too great, but I couldn't think of a different border that didn't look terrible or make especially more sense.
I tend to be inconsistent with Butterflies, if it makes for a cool timeline, I'll ignore them. If it makes for a cool timeline, I'll heighten them. ITTL, the man sending the message from Gran Colombia to the Republic of Spanish Haiti confirming the annexation is quicker. Since Haiti had good relations with Gran Colombia, unification never happens. When Gran Colombia collapses, the Dominican Republic stays with Colombia. Also Haiti isn't with the French, the Color scheme just has their colors similar, I have plans to make it more clear.
This one needs a little context, with in OTL and ITTL. The British essentially gave away the Mosquito Coast to the Nicaraguans, for one; the Colombians had long since had a claim on the region as well. ITTL, the Mosquito Coast is given to Colombia as a protectorate in the late 1880's in exchange for a chunk of Panama to build a canal to rival the ones the Americans were building. Twenty years later, they annex the protectorate into Colombia. As for their southern border, I have no idea what you are referring to, as that is the border in OTL; in my reading I failed to find any information to warrant changing the border.
Yes, Chile at that point is more powerful and able to worm their way into that land.
ITTL, there is a mini "Scramble for Patagonia" and due to Argentina getting a slow start(I can expand more on the cause of this if you wish), Chile is able to establish a sort of Native buffer state. The British get involved to mediate the conflict and get a few things for themselves. Following the Mexican-American War, California (at least the southern half) was given independence as admitting as a slave state would upset the balance; however after that sweet sweet gold rush ends, the republic falls into bad times; to solve the problem, they sell the Southern half of Baja California to North Mexico.
It's not separate, rather they are different parts of Canada; the line between them just means that they are not one single entity; in hindsight, if I don't include subdivisions for the mainland, I shouldn't include them in the sea.
No, that's just an error from the base map that I didn't pick up on.
No, that's just the way QBAM does personal unions to my knowledge; the borders between the countries, each with the same color as the leading partner. In this timeline, Sweden adopts liberties earlier, so that Norway doesn't end up leaving until the 20's.
German unification goes fairly similar to OTL, however, the Dutch do not get a Queen until after they remove Salic Law. As a result, Luxembourg remains under union.
I don't really know what you mean here as Khiva, Bhukara, Mongolia, etc are the same color. They are all essentially Russian protectorates, some might have more autonomy, but they are the same in theory. China didn't like it, but the Russians had British Support [basically the Great Game goes a little further to include Tibet and East Turkestan]. I don't really see why the Cossacks should be specially marked, since my rule doing the maps was no subdivisions except for special exceptions [those being Finland, Poland, Norway, Lombardy-Venetia, etc]. Why would Finland be given a bit of a different color than Poland, they both essentially are under Russian control.
Fair enough, I agree. I haven't
Basically the French expansion was them annexing their zone of influence within Siam. They do this in response to the British and Russian gains in China.
Yeah, you're likely thinking the post-independence Liberia returns to the fold. ITTL when the American Colonization Society goes broke, they sell all their assets [including land] to the federal government. Within Liberia, there are various sub-colonies [Like the Ivory Coast within French West Africa] such as Mississippi in Africa and Maryland in Africa.
Fair enough, another issue I failed to notice.
ITTL, the British and Venezuelans go to war over the issues. Originally the British only wanted minor concessions, but after the Americans joined the war, things spiraled out of control and the British made a few nice colonial gains.
You are correct, the Danish did offer to sell the Danish West Indies to the US in the 1860's. However, they did not offer St. Croix; so since the US accepted that offer, the Danish keep St. Croix.
ITTL, the Germans never control Southwest Africa, so instead of gaining the Caprivi Strip, their claims to Wituland are recognized.
Basically the Spanish had just lost Cuba, which is met with a sharp rise in Filipino rebellions lead to the Germans attempting to "help suppress" the Philippines. This was after the British started worrying about the Germans more than the French, leading to Japan and the UK getting in on the action as well. At the end of the day, the three nations divided the nation, but German forces had already established themselves in the center and in Manila.
No, Portuguese West Africa is just more complex colonially speaking, with various vassals, colonies, and protectorates alongside Angola.
That State is the Piratini Confederation, a protectorate of the French Empire; they speak Portuguese.
Your second guess is accurate; the Protectorate to their east in Patagonia and the striped region is its own protectorate, Araucania; a Condominium between Chile and Patagonia. Though de facto it's a province of Patagonia under Chilean administration.
Fair enough, I just didn't want to leave it terra nullius, so I gave it the power who claimed it.
Basically the idea was to annex the ethnic German areas of Bohemia and Austrian Silesia following the Austro-Prussian War.
No, that's just the color for Naples, there was another color, but it's color for protectorates was too close to France's.
The Sicilians own Rhodes; ITTL, they received Austrian support in the Turko-Italian War. Austria took minor border regions with the Ottomans.
That's basically a British protectorate over Free State of Icaria just as further protection to the Suez and the path to India. I decided to include it after reading that the fate of all the Ottoman Islands in the Aegean Sea [besides Crete] were to be decided by the great powers.
Just like all colonial borders, only the primary colony is shown. I don't show the Trucial States for the same reason I don't show the Ivory Coast, or Niger, or Dahomey.
See my point on Jan Mayen
@damein fisher For the stuff with Russia, I was partially wondering if and why for a lot of the thighs, due to the differing level of autonomy and influence Russia had over them over the years. Finland got away with a lot more than Poland for instance. I also can't zoom in far enough in places, so I am sometimes unsure when areas like the Russian Chinese territories have international or subnational levels. I suppose that even with Cossack settlers, if there were any, they wouldn't bother putting them on the map. They would be dumping them in the middle of nowhere, anyways. Though it would be interesting, considering that Russia is now wrapping around the Muslim Hui portion of China.
On a side note, you mention France annexing land form Siam because of the Russians and British. What where their motives to annex essentially worthless lands? And was the French annexation seen as a betrayal of previous treaties of protection? I also think that annexing Hainan might have been seen as a step too far. Reminds me of the Opium Wars, where the British (according to some sources) didn't want to annex much land from China, as their own laws said they couldn't then sell opium to them. Unsure if that is true. Still, if France basically giving up on trading with China and is now just trying to get everything from Indochina?
And does that thing with the American Colonization Society really hold up? It was made up of multiple groups, many charitable, and I don't believe they held title to much land, if any. Most importantly, I don't think the US would want to give it statehood. Making it an eternal Puerto Rico might be another matter, though. And what are the 'minor concessions' the British wanted from Venezuela? The rights for British settlers and mining companies who ran in a couple years earlier to have ownership of the land they claimed by right of saying they did?
@Osk as the map isn't complete and there is no scenario yet I can only say that your map, up to this point, is a good map and that your Spanish is mostly correct, except for the fact that the word República uses a tilde on the "u". Sorry if you are native speaker and this seems patronizing, but it's likel that you aren't and so I can help you.
Ah, the answer to the borders in Russia isn't as interesting as you might hope; I didn't realize I using different colors. The Reason why Russia and Britain annex land from China is the same as to why Russia expanded into Mongolia; The Great Game. They basically were obsessed with out-doing the other.
France takes Hainan and the Pescadores because in the Sino-French war, France was able to receive support from Japan. France IOTL wanted those areas but were unable to because they weren't powerful enough, but with Japanese support, they are able to.
Oh, Liberia isn't a state. It is a colony, it's just that the colors for colonies are the same as colors for the mainland. Liberia isn't even the only colony, it's actually just part of American West Africa, which includes the colonies of: Liberia, New Georgia, Bassa Cove Colony, Mississippi in Africa, and Maryland in Africa.
I actually got my wars mixed up about Venezuela; sorry. The War actually ends with the British forgiving the Venezuelan debt [which could not pay] in exchange for acceptance of their claims to Guyana.
This is an unfinished QBAM my friend (who is not on this site (yet)) made, it's supposed to be the world in OTL 2018.
ASB one-off map idea where, for whatever reason, Russia decides to ally up with Egypt and dismantle the Ottoman Empire in the 1840s, leading to Egyptian and Russian hegemony. I've only put down most of Russia at this point, and one puppet of Egypt (Kurdistan)
Purposely distorted borders?
Separate names with a comma.