Altered Maps 2: Uber-Yugoslavia FTW

[Tee Kay]

Balkanized Australia!


Australia in 1900:




Australia in 2009:




The Timeline

 

[plarq]

I was just asking When someone says "minority" + "Israel" I imagine the Russian Jews

It might be a majority perhaps?
AFAIK David Ben-Gurion is from Russia.

 

[flyingchicken]

It might be a majority perhaps?
AFAIK David Ben-Gurion is from Russia.

And Obama's ancestry's from Kenya.

 

[Masada]

Nit picks. The Dutch wouldn't have settled Australia under any circumstances - it was to dry at the time, they couldn't have mustered the settlers required; the VOC was reduced to recruiting criminals and Germans, there was no economic rationale whatsoever to settle Northern Australia and there was much richer land for them to trade with, occupy and then tax. Australia offered them nothing. Historically coastal Aboriginals of northern Australia were not all that badly affected by epidemics they had year on year contact with the Makkasans, Bugis and Orang Laut (although the last is debatable it appears that they did indeed reach Australia probably alongside the other groups). The exception to the rule was syphilis - which did cause significant damage. Contact with Sulawesi continued up till the 19th century. In addition it is unlikely that the Dutch in ~ 1650 would have seen any of the aforementioned groups they didn't reach Australia till some decades later ~ 1700.

Historically the Dutch were loathe to leave their ships when they did it was only to replenish water something they did badly. That was a major historical reason for their supreme lack of interest in Australia. It was also established early on that there was absolutely nothing of interest to them. The VOC had the spice trade and the inter island trade to dominate. Even had they established a colony I can see no reason for them wanting to take control over anything except a string of coastal possessions, you could probably count these "forts" with maybe a hundred people on one hand. There is no reason to go inland.

The French did explore Western Australia and express interest in the area around modern day Perth. Even more interestingly the French were only beaten to claiming the South Island of New Zealand by around six months. That helps explain why a pocket of the South Island has French names, French settlers were amongst the first to open up the South Island. French sealing and whaling colonies also provide an even earlier date to try and force a claim on the southern half of the North Island and the South Island. You've also forgotten the Germans who opened up South Australia, Barrosa Valley? They actually turned up uninvited if I remember correctly.

 

[Camikaze]

You've also forgotten the Germans who opened up South Australia, Barrosa Valley? They actually turned up uninvited if I remember correctly.

IIRC, the British still founded the Barossa Valley, and the Germans just came later to the area in dribs and drabs, creating little townships everywhere. So, yeah, I think they were uninvited, but it wasn't some sort of organised migration, just a sort of German ghetto.

 

[Masada]

IIRC, the British still founded the Barossa Valley, and the Germans just came later to the area in dribs and drabs, creating little townships everywhere. So, yeah, I think they were uninvited, but it wasn't some sort of organised migration, just a sort of German ghetto.

The South Australia Colonisation Act was passed in 1834. The first Germans in South Australia arrived in 1838. So your partially right. However, the first German settlers from memory settled outside the initial boundaries of the colonies, they expanded the borders at a later date to get rid of the risk of the German groups proclaiming themselves a colony under someone else. Again from memory it was feared that the French would manage to use the Germans as placeholders for a colony of their own

IRRC your right about Barossa it was named by the British, it was only subsequently colonized by Germans.

 

[Tee Kay]

Well, the challenge was to split Australia into five countries using a PoD no earlier than 1601 IIRC. The Netherlands was one country which could potentially have colonised part of Australia, if there was ever any incentive to.

According to my timeline, in the north the Dutch were pretty much limited to the trading post at Utrecht until the 19th century, when scramble for territories by other European powers caused the Dutch to make their own claims. In the south (Tasmania and Victoria) there were Dutch and other European settlers (descendants of whom were subsequently Dutch-ified) but in small numbers. It's like the Boer situation in South Africa but on a smaller scale.

And yeah, I could've included the Germans, and give them an independent state. A German state in Australia would be interesting, especially if it exists during the World Wars.

 

[Masada]

Your actually better off with an attempt like this: The Portuguese don't manage to be as succesful as they were with the Molucca's they are forced to come to terms with the Sultans, they do however manage to restrict supply going to Europe by controlling Malacca at the Indian end. They manage to get a foothold in Timor but don't end up controlling or even being able to traverse the full length of Malacca stopped for whatever reason by a Muslim Sultanate there are a few floating around - maybe with weapons provided by the Ottomans or whatever. Instead they go for the southerly route around Java, around Sumatra going past the Sunda Strait before they reach safety at the Indian end of the Malacca Straits. At some stage they are going to accidentally hit Australia, probably more than once, so at some stage they figure out they should probably have some means of resupplying their ships situated on the Australian mainland. They don't need to colonize per say, they can just forciably export Timorese, Chinese, or other labor to Australia to work with a nominal force of colonial overseers.

The Muslim Sultanates are therefore stronger because of Portugal's failure to cause trouble and upset the balance. So when the VOC and EIC come along they run into the same problems. They can't gain a solid foothold. The VOC might be able to eject the Iberian's but not in there early stage - they will probably still make some serious cash buying and reselling from Javanese markets or other peripheral markets and therefore have a reason to continue to trade [historically they didn't make as much money as they could with cloves bought from Java but it was still a significant profit]. The Portuguese of course haven't managed to conquer the Moluccas so everyone is forced to trade on a voluntary basis with them. But Malacca is still shut to European trade at the Indonesian side. So the VOC is at some stage forced to setup factories, it can't use Timor, it can't muscle in on Java or Bali this early except for the occasional outpost which isn't suited to what they want... so they opt for the Australian option as well. The VOC learns the winds better than the Portuguese and probably settle further west more towards the northern tip of WA or in a little bit towards some of the year round rivers. The EIC will likely follow the same path only it will be forced to completely rely on Australia because its resources are less than all of the above.

That gives you three solid links in the Australian chain. Spain is a distinct possibility if the Portuguese can't force its outposts in the Moluccas like they did IIRC. It would likely settle eastern Australia with Chinese or some such; I'm sure a valid reason could be made... but an alternative route to the silver mines in the Andes might make sense (assuming a few things). That's really quite tangential. But even Germany is a possibility given how crappy large parts of Australia are for settlement

Any of the Malay groups could earlier find Australia and colonize it as well... it wouldn't be hard for them to be accidentally venture into somewhere worth settling, European invasions could prompt a shift of an already maritime focused people into Australia (not on a grand scale but on a scale large enough to provide a population basis to revolt at a later date).

 

[dutchfire]

the VOC was reduced to recruiting criminals and Germans,

what's the difference?

 

[RalofTyr]

I'm currently working on a 1900's map of Ireland, using Civ 3 graphics (Rhye's terrain); it one of a feudal Ireland, ruled by British lords. Basically, the Irish are chattel for the English. I've got the base worked out, along with roads and rails; I now have to add the buildings using city-view's graphics.

what's the difference?

The Racist Tomato strikes again!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS_pN_rzej8

 

[Masada]

what's the difference?

The soul sellers didn't know

 

[Mad Man]

I made a map of South America.

 

[Antilogic]

I made a map of South America.View attachment 213097

So a return of Gran Columbia, an uber-Peru, a new state made out of the mess of European-controlled territories in the North East, and Argentina and Brazil swallowing up other small countries?

(I'm just bumping too...I was thinking about making a map on Google Earth after Mangxema showed me how to do it, but it's really time-consuming).

 

[Rocko_el_loco]

I made a map of South America.View attachment 213097

Is that an independent Puerto Rico?

 

[Dachs]

Is that an independent Puerto Rico?

Looks like it's federated to the Lesser Antilles.

 

[Mad Man]

So a return of Gran Columbia, an uber-Peru, a new state made out of the mess of European-controlled territories in the North East, and Argentina and Brazil swallowing up other small countries?

(I'm just bumping too...I was thinking about making a map on Google Earth after Mangxema showed me how to do it, but it's really time-consuming).

Something like that the map is as followed: The US annexes the Bahamas and Baja California, Yucatan leaves Mexico and joins the new UPA(United Provinces of Central America), Jamaica annexes the Cayman Islands, The Dominican Republic annexes Haiti, Puerto Rico and the Lessor Antilles unify in to a larger country, Venezuela and Columbia unify and annex the the islands of its coast, The Guyanas unify, Chile and Argentina unify and annex Uruguay and the Falklands.

 

[TheLastOne36]

I never understand why people group up Colombia and Venezuela. They are very different countries. Might as well group up them with Peru, Bolivia, and Ecuador while we are at it.

 

[Dachs]

I never understand why people group up Colombia and Venezuela. They are very different countries. Might as well group up them with Peru, Bolivia, and Ecuador while we are at it.

People do that a lot. Apparently nationalism isn't allowed in pissant little South American countries.

 

[Mad Man]

I never understand why people group up Colombia and Venezuela. They are very different countries

Because it looks cool on a map

 

[TheLastOne36]

I'm not sure if Venezuela would be happy sponsoring Colombia, and adopting it's drug problems for nothing in return.