Colonised Europe

[Charles EP M.]

There's a map/article/meme that goes around of Colonised Europe, which is meant as a provocative 'ah, but what if Europe was colonised/treated like the Middle East' - but didn't seem quite going far enough for it. I saw it again yesterday and it struck me Ireland is a unified state with no odd name, so a colonised Europe means Ireland is better off, and that seemed a bit Wrong.

So I had a rough go at my own!

- As few places as possible should be able to say "well we've won cos we're bigger". You might be but you also might be a completely different country or being bombed by the Norwegian People's Front

- This is more-or-less the result of a "scramble for Europe" in the 16th century. This means for a chunk of Europe, it's more "what if you stayed colonised longer", "what if the coloniser came back and won again", and "what if the coloniser changed".

- Some bits were never colonised because nobody could be bothered (in Switzerland's case, ala Abyssinia, it also fought too hard). Some bits, as with Europe's overseas territories, stay under foreign control for Reasons. (As Turkey IS the coloniser, it's larger)

- The names of the new nations are a mix of existing country names (not always the right ones), regional/geographic ones (same), and very nationalist names, chosen post-independence. These are not just the old colonial borders as places were conquered, split, or unified over the years. Some rich city-states are now independent.

- Some 'ethnic homelands' were created - based on imperial fiat and overlooking who else lived there, or whether you wanted to be there.
https://twitter.com/cepmurphy
- Protestantism was spread about because imperial powers weren't putting up with some guy in Rome saying he was talking to God.

 

[Yokai Man]

C

Crimea and Transylvania



Holy shit that’s wonderfully mental

I love this

 

[Artaxerxes]

My. Eyes.

 

[Venocara]

There's a map/article/meme that goes around of Colonised Europe, which is meant as a provocative 'ah, but what if Europe was colonised/treated like the Middle East' - but didn't seem quite going far enough for it. I saw it again yesterday and it struck me Ireland is a unified state with no odd name, so a colonised Europe means Ireland is better off, and that seemed a bit Wrong.

So I had a rough go at my own!

- As few places as possible should be able to say "well we've won cos we're bigger". You might be but you also might be a completely different country or being bombed by the Norwegian People's Front

- This is more-or-less the result of a "scramble for Europe" in the 16th century. This means for a chunk of Europe, it's more "what if you stayed colonised longer", "what if the coloniser came back and won again", and "what if the coloniser changed".

- Some bits were never colonised because nobody could be bothered (in Switzerland's case, ala Abyssinia, it also fought too hard). Some bits, as with Europe's overseas territories, stay under foreign control for Reasons. (As Turkey IS the coloniser, it's larger)

- The names of the new nations are a mix of existing country names (not always the right ones), regional/geographic ones (same), and very nationalist names, chosen post-independence. These are not just the old colonial borders as places were conquered, split, or unified over the years. Some rich city-states are now independent.

- Some 'ethnic homelands' were created - based on imperial fiat and overlooking who else lived there, or whether you wanted to be there.
- Protestantism was spread about because imperial powers weren't putting up with some guy in Rome saying he was talking to God.

At the very least you can take from this that your map design is excellent.

 

[Alex Richards]

It's better than the other one for actually having more natural borders (which is a more realistic manner- the Rhine probably should be a border in a colonised Europe for example).

 

[Charles EP M.]

At the very least you can take from this that your map design is excellent.

It's better than the other one for actually having more natural borders (which is a more realistic manner- the Rhine probably should be a border in a colonised Europe for example).

I cannot tell a lie, I cheated a bit by leaving a bunch of existing borders in place on the map template

 

[Venocara]

I cannot tell a lie, I cheated a bit by leaving a bunch of existing borders in place on the map template

Nevertheless, it's still a very good map. Do you make maps often?

 

[Charles EP M.]

Nope, first time! (I have seen a lot of them so I know I'm violating the canon by the colours mostly meaning nothing)

 

[Venocara]

Nope, first time! (I have seen a lot of them so I know I'm violating the canon by the colours mostly meaning nothing)

It's a very good first attempt. My first attempt was positively dreadful...

What did you use to make this map?

 

[Coiler]

I know this is me probably overthinking it, but if I had to give one piece of criticism, I'd say there's a few too many overly straight borders in (comparably) populated areas. Yes, I understand the arbitrariness is the point, but a lot of OTL overly straight borders are in the middle of barren regions. The ones in the middle of the eastern steppes are better, the ones in western Europe a little less so.

Still, a very good first map.

 

[Alex Richards]

Nope, first time! (I have seen a lot of them so I know I'm violating the canon by the colours mostly meaning nothing)

Colours don't necessarily need to mean anything other than what you've used them for.

 

[Charles EP M.]

What did you use to make this map?

Google Image for a blank map and then MS Paint

I know this is me probably overthinking it, but if I had to give one piece of criticism, I'd say there's a few too many overly straight borders in (comparably) populated areas. Yes, I understand the arbitrariness is the point, but a lot of OTL overly straight borders are in the middle of barren regions. The ones in the middle of the eastern steppes are better, the ones in western Europe a little less so.

Yeah, more of them are straighter than I'd want (hundreds of buildings must technically be split across two countries!)

 

[Makemakean]

Colours don't necessarily need to mean anything other than what you've used them for.

While I can appreciate certain conventions for map making when it comes to conveying specific information, I've long been of the opinion that you should be open to letting each map defines its own colours. It would be quite absurd if only Britain could be pink and only France could be blue.

 

[Venocara]

Google Image for a blank map and then MS Paint

It's genuinely excellent. I would urge you to continue on your mapmaking journey.

 

[Charles EP M.]

Using same template and for a laugh, the map circa 2015 of 2000AD's Invasion!/Savage strips:

- I've only marked out nations that have undergone some political/naming change. Yugoslavia is a guess because the invasion was early 1999 and you know Milosovic would go "YEAH"

- The comics refer to Volgan occupation forces but not if they're everywhere. I've made some assumptions that some places have had troops reduced/ended

- Sweden is neutral in the original Invasion! and we can assume Switzerland is too in the Savage-verse because Banks. Iran is my invention, cos wouldn't you want to be VERY NEUTRAL if you were them in this world?