Guess the map 11: New map at least once per year

[cardgame]

Infant mortality has already been guessed and as I already said is definitely related

Another big clue is how that graph kyr posted uses almost the same exact style and gradient and everything (not that you should reverse-lookup based on that, but take it into account)

 

[Takhisis]

Something about school enrollment?

Some places and people used to literally beat the left-handedness out of pupils. It happened to my own father. This would help explain why the rates of left-handedness shot up all of a sudden.

In the 18th-19th centuries the notion arose that children were ‘meant’ to be as some sort of mythical national identity commanded and that nothing should stand in the way of this. So beating children with a stick (or, for repeat offenders, making them kneel on dried maize or other grains) was not only acceptable but necessary. The offences included skipping class, throwing dungbombs, speaking the wrong dialect/language/accent/register, writing with one's left hand, not sitting up ‘properly’ at table, failing to memorise who-knows-what for class, et al.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

You guys are forgetting the map is not about contemporary data. I think it is about level of development, maybe gni index but 50 or 100 years ago.

 

[Kyriakos]

ξενοφοβία

Δις.
(this)

 

[Hrothbern]

What development do we see here ?

Some countries I left out although I would like to have them added, but they missed older data (like Greece, Egypt, the UK as a whole, Habsburgian areas, etc)

 

[inthesomeday]

Why exactly does the England and Wales figure cut off like that?

 

[Hrothbern]

Why exactly does the England and Wales figure cut off like that?

There are no data (used by that source) for the UK starting in 1500 until 2016.
But there are data for England + Wales for the first 400 years, which help most to guess what the graph shows.
My estimate would be that England + Wales would end up in 2016 somewhere between 80%-90%.

 

[inthesomeday]

As far as I can tell this resembles urbanization figures. Coincidentally I was just poring over the figures for urbanization in the UK and Russia/USSR in the late 19-early 20 century for a paper, and I recall the main source I found on jstor used “England and Wales” rather than the UK.

But it was slightly higher for England and Wales at the turn of the century, near 75%, so it might not be just “urbanization”, but some highly correlated statistic instead.

 

[Hrothbern]

As far as I can tell this resembles urbanization figures. Coincidentally I was just poring over the figures for urbanization in the UK and Russia/USSR in the late 19-early 20 century for a paper, and I recall the main source I found on jstor used “England and Wales” rather than the UK.

But it was slightly higher for England and Wales at the turn of the century, near 75%, so it might not be just “urbanization”, but some highly correlated statistic instead.

What a coincidence...

Chapeau !

It is urbanisation rate from this source: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/...IND+ITA+JPN+NLD+RUS+USA+England and Wales+GBR

 

[Hrothbern]

Here another one, now as a map, that shows per region an average of the period 1500-1800
It is not GDP per Capita, it is not the urbanisation rate.
Darker is higher.

 

[Hrothbern]

Anyway. What's happenin'? Are we still guessing Cardgame's map? Is Hrothbern's the new one?
I'm confused.

I am happy to help continuing this thread

 

[Hrothbern]

I'm really just asking. I kinda lost track.

I had to dig deep to find the thread back again.

But up to @cardgame ofc to agree to continue with some puzzles on this thread.

 

[inthesomeday]

Hm... the new map looks like a per capita map but I can’t think of something that could exist negatively per capita

 

[Lohrenswald]

is hrothberns map about economicks in some way

 

[Thorgalaeg]

I think it shows evolution from medieval times to contemporary times. The lighter ones are regions that were the most developed and advanced in medieval times but went downhill in modern times, and vice versa for the darker ones.

So must be something related to population or economical growth in that period.

 

[Hrothbern]

Hm... the new map looks like a per capita map but I can’t think of something that could exist negatively per capita

The numbers you see are normalised so that 0 is average (with dark brown high and yellow low)

I think it shows evolution from medieval times to contemporary times. The lighter ones are regions that were the most developed and advanced in medieval times but went downhill in modern times, and vice versa for the darker ones.

So must be something related to population or economical growth in that period.

It does indicate something of the early-modern period that evolved in something that remains today

And that the darker ones are today mostly more advanced/developed is also correct

the rest not.

 

[Hrothbern]

is hrothberns map about economicks in some way

yes
in some counter-intuitive way it ended up there
but not at that time

 

[Thorgalaeg]

The numbers you see are normalised so that 0 is average (with dark brown high and yellow low)



It does indicate something of the early-modern period that evolved in something that remains today

And that the darker ones are today mostly more advanced/developed is also correct

the rest not.

What is nor correct exactly?

 

[Hrothbern]

I think it shows evolution from medieval times to contemporary times. The lighter ones are regions that were the most developed and advanced in medieval times but went downhill in modern times, and vice versa for the darker ones.

So must be something related to population or economical growth in that period.

What is nor correct exactly?

What you see on that map is there and then. Nothing else than that. And guessing that indicator is the puzzle.

What you spot is that there are many regions with a high value for the 1500-1800 indicator that have today a higher, advanced level of economy.
That is correct.

But very many of those regions had also in 1500-1800 a higher level of economny.
So the rest is not correct.

 

[inthesomeday]

Something like iron/steel production?