Altered maps VIII: World borders just got garbage-dayed

Dachs said:

There's just about as much evidence for the Welsh being migratory Irish as there is for them being Romano-British. The truth probably lies somewhere in between

Click to expand...

Traitorfish said:

Wait, what? Who said that?

Click to expand...

Guy Halsall said:

Ireland's relationships with the Roman world were changing in the later fourth and fifth centuries. The church's interest in Ireland is another sign of Rome's impact, which nevertheless, remained less than in other regions bordering the Empire and its role in explaining the period's changes is debatable. However, political and cultural contacts doubtless helped provide a context for the movement of the Irish to Britain. This is a thorny topic. The date and scale of migration are difficult to determine. There are no reliable written sources and archaeological evidence, such as the pottery sometimes adduced as evidence for migration to Cornwall, is often questionable. Some cultural traits supposedly diagnostic of popular movement did not appear, either in Ireland or in western Britain, until after the presumed period of migration. The Irish figures found in Welsh genealogies are difficult to pin down chronologically, although surely representing authentic traditions about Irish settlement. Place-names, similarly demonstrating population movement, are impossible to date precisely. Irish people moved to what is now Wales and Argyll, becoming a significant element in the politics of some regions, most notably in the west of what became Scotland and in Dyfed, but the precise date at which they did so is vexed.

One evidential form manifesting close cultural relations across the Irish Sea and the movement of peoples is epigraphy. Stone monuments inscribed with the names of individuals and, at this date, generally set upright are known especially from west Wales and in other regions of probable settlement, like Cornwall. Many of those commemorated bear Irish names and a number of stones have parallel inscriptions in Latin and in Ogam. The latter, wherein letters were denoted by straight lines perpendicular or at an angle to the edge of the stone (or to a long incised line), was an Irish alphabet derived from Latin at some point in the late Roman period: another index of possibly increasing socio-cultural (if not necessarily economic) interaction between Ireland and the Empire. The Ogam series is believed to commence around 400 or perhaps in the late fourth century. This might suggest that, as often mooted, Irish military colonists were given responsibility for the defence of stretches of the west coast in the late fourth century, perhaps under Magnus Maximus. This would be a further aspect of his defensive reorganisation of the British diocese. In south Wales, these settlers might have formed a first wave, which became a focus for a later, sixth-century migratory phase.

Click to expand...

Dachs said:

Guy Halsall said:

Ireland's relationships with the Roman world were changing in the later fourth and fifth centuries. The church's interest in Ireland is another sign of Rome's impact, which nevertheless, remained less than in other regions bordering the Empire and its role in explaining the period's changes is debatable. However, political and cultural contacts doubtless helped provide a context for the movement of the Irish to Britain. This is a thorny topic. The date and scale of migration are difficult to determine. There are no reliable written sources and archaeological evidence, such as the pottery sometimes adduced as evidence for migration to Cornwall, is often questionable. Some cultural traits supposedly diagnostic of popular movement did not appear, either in Ireland or in western Britain, until after the presumed period of migration. The Irish figures found in Welsh genealogies are difficult to pin down chronologically, although surely representing authentic traditions about Irish settlement. Place-names, similarly demonstrating population movement, are impossible to date precisely. Irish people moved to what is now Wales and Argyll, becoming a significant element in the politics of some regions, most notably in the west of what became Scotland and in Dyfed, but the precise date at which they did so is vexed.

One evidential form manifesting close cultural relations across the Irish Sea and the movement of peoples is epigraphy. Stone monuments inscribed with the names of individuals and, at this date, generally set upright are known especially from west Wales and in other regions of probable settlement, like Cornwall. Many of those commemorated bear Irish names and a number of stones have parallel inscriptions in Latin and in Ogam. The latter, wherein letters were denoted by straight lines perpendicular or at an angle to the edge of the stone (or to a long incised line), was an Irish alphabet derived from Latin at some point in the late Roman period: another index of possibly increasing socio-cultural (if not necessarily economic) interaction between Ireland and the Empire. The Ogam series is believed to commence around 400 or perhaps in the late fourth century. This might suggest that, as often mooted, Irish military colonists were given responsibility for the defence of stretches of the west coast in the late fourth century, perhaps under Magnus Maximus. This would be a further aspect of his defensive reorganisation of the British diocese. In south Wales, these settlers might have formed a first wave, which became a focus for a later, sixth-century migratory phase.

Click to expand...

I can provide his cited sources and footnotes for you, but I forgot how to do superscripts in BBcode.

Click to expand...

Dachs said:

Or perhaps the Bretons came from Wales

Click to expand...

Traitorfish said:

Huh. Queer.

Click to expand...

Traitorfish said:

I'm told that the Bretons were immigrants from the South of what is now England, fleeing Germanic incursion. (Which, of course, doesn't imply that the Bretons are entirely and exclusively descended from Britons, simply that their dominant cultural group were primarily descended from Britons.)

Click to expand...

Gruekiller said:

I went to Mexico this summer and had Mexican Coca-Cola. I spent a large portion of that vacation bouncing off of walls like a particle of hydrogen. Any way, I was screwing around with paint.net, and decided to make a generic "Native Americans colonize Old World" map. All borders are hastily and arbitrarily drawn to maximize ethnic conflict. I call it "Reverse Columbus". Thanks to some person on AH.com, who made the base-map for this.

Dark Green: Mexika (Aztec) Empire
Lavender: Maya Empire (See what I did there?)
Yellow: Inka Empire
Maroon: Mississippian Empire
Orange: Haida Empire (Look 'em up on Wiki.)
1. Sioux Kingdoms
2. OTL North American Atlantic Coast (Mayan Colony)
3. OTL Brazil (Mexika Colony)
4. OTL Patagonia & Tierra del Fuego (Mississippian Colony)
5. OTL Quebec (Mexika Colony)
6. OTL Greenland (Mexika Colony)
7. OTL Iceland (Mexika Colony)
8. Svalbard (Mexika Protectorate)
9. Scotland and Ireland (Mexika Satellite)
10. Scandinavia (Mexika Satellite)
11. Iberia (Mexika Satellite)
12. North Africa (Mexika Protectorates)
13. Gaul, Brittany, Wales & Cornwall (Mayan Satellites)
14. Federation of Free Europe
15. England and the Low Countries (Mississippian Satellite)
16. Warring Mongol successor states
17. Kanem-Bornu
18. Swahili and Somali Kingdoms

Absolutely no aspect of this map is supposed to make any plausible sense whatsoever. It is designed to be the only map that can throw someone into conniptions without including the modern Kazakh border.

Click to expand...

Why is there such an extensive Mayan empire? The Maya had all but destroyed themselves before Europeans arrived. The idea that they would have expanded to rule the eastern seaboard of north America ad much of Africa is just silly.

Click to expand...

Spoiler :

Spoiler :

Karalysia said:

True, true, other than minor things like lack of population, lack of wealth, lack of technology, insufficiently sophisticated socio-economic structures, lack of push pressures, poor strategic position, and lack of natural resources combined with environmental degradation nothing is inhibiting the Maya. The world is their oyster.

Click to expand...

Gruekiller said:

A wizard did it.

Click to expand...

Masada said:

... which one? I'm not sure even Merlin could fix those problems.

Click to expand...

bombshoo said:

If lactose intolerance is so high in Mongolia, why do they eat so much dairy there?

Click to expand...

Danielion said:

Early Humans used to be lactose intolerant, but some have evolved so it seems. Actually, there are more ways Whites seem to have evolved for the good.

Click to expand...