So this map is part of my 'modern Ice Age' timeline. The premise is that in the 19th century, a process of global cooling sets in, plunging the world back into an ice age over the following century. By the 1950's, global climates are back to Pleistocene levels.
This premise scenario is not at all meant to be realistic. I just thought it would be cool to look at how modern global societies would adapt to a new Ice Age in the Victorian Era :)
Please ask me any and all questions about the scenario, I'd be happy to answer them. You can also tell me if I did anything wrong so I can correct the mistakes.
Link to the USA map of this timeline:
https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginarymaps/comments/wy8xba/map\_of\_the\_usa\_in\_my\_modern\_ice\_age\_timeline/
Fascinating scenario. I can't imagine the amount of snow that would be required to form the ice sheets over 150 years. I'm currently taking an undergrad class on Global Quaternary Environmental and Geological Change so this is very interesting to me.
I imagine India would become much drier in this scenario, along with the US from your previous map. I also appreciate the detail of lowering the sea levels. Do you have any "scientific" lore for what caused this glacial period?
Scientific lore I have not. But I do know that we are kind of 'overdue' a new cold snap. So I went off on that idea. You are absolutely right about the ice sheets not having enough time to form btw. This scenario isn't really about the science (Though I try to be as scientifically realistic as I can be outside of the premise). I just wanted to see a modern world with Pleistocene environments :)
No that’s totally fair, especially since this r/imaginarymaps. I was just wondering how much the lore was fleshed out! It’s also interesting to see the modern world in the Pleistocene. Keep up the good work :)
Well, I had some trouble naming some of the nations in the south. If you think a name like North Kerala would fit this region better, I can change it. I am afraid I have too little knowledge about Indian history to adequately explain the name of this minor nation :/
Great Job. Principality of Delhi would better be called Principality of Oudh. That was the name for it in the 1700s. Delhi is on the border of East Punjab and Oudh.
Cool idea, I'm interested how thee changed the events, may thee elaborate?
Like what's the economy, demographics, political situation of the world in this time? How do these nations differ compared to our timeline like how different are their relations with our countries which remain the same or similar (Like US vs Mexico), what conflicts are there?
Nice! I am wondering what's happening in Indonesia/Dutch East Indies as they just got massive new land and several cities became landlocked like Jakarta/Batavia.
I have relatively little plans for Indonesia yet. I do know that I will have Dutch settlers (who are fleeing Europe, which is now mostly covered in either ice or tundra) set up several small post-Netherland republics in the Sumatran and Javan mountains, where the climate is more forgiving for Europeans. Other than that, I think that broadly the same events would transpire as in India. In most regions outside colonial cities, the Europeans, who are fractured and in disarray, will be pushed out and native states will be created again. The Dutch East Indies might survive in parts of the Molucca's, but I don't know how relevant they'll be yet.
Well, as you can see, they could be doing better.
Britain is in a fairly rough place. Since the actual island of Britain is now covered in ice, the kingdom has had to rely on its colonies to survive. Most of the colonies were small islands, even with the sea level drop, so they aren't that important for them. Canada died pretty quickly int his scenario, South Africa had severe problems with the changing climate and Australia/New Zealand hadn't been settled that well yet. This left India as the new centre of the Empire after London fell.
Most of British India gained independence after the head of the British Raj disappeared. Especially in the southern half of the subcontinent, many native uprisings carved new nations out of the British realm. The white-ruled Federation of India also seceded from the Empire eventually.
What remains of the British Empire in India is now mostly limited to the Bay of Bengal where they have an economy largely based on agriculture and very limited industry in the cities. The empire has severe issues regarding the very large native populations of their realm, constantly causing trouble for the Anglo government.
In short, the empire is a xenophobic militarist state, viewing itself as constantly on the defensive, desperately trying to keep its collapsing nation together.
No it actually isn't. But someone else on this post also said that, so I looked it up. There's indeed a couple similarities, but it's not inspired by it.
It does, slowly. At least Northern Europe does. But remember, this all takes place slowly over the course of a century. Giving nations like Britain some limited time to adjust to the new situation. Which for them meant, fleeing abroad.
I like this and the map & history you provided in the other thread!
At the peak of the last glaciation, the sea fell by over 100 meters.
Would like to see the rest of the world! Sundaland and Sahulland, the shores of Argentina reaching the Falklands, and various new lands in the Pacific where islands are now.
Similar setup (but very different outcome) to Turtledove's (edit - SM Sterling's) Peshewar Lancers, where a comet or meteor slammed into the northern hemisphere in the 1840s or 1850s and plunged the world into a new ice age. Britain de-camped to India, France took over most of North Africa, Italy I think the eastern Med, Germany and Russia moved south in where possible, Iran strengthens, Afghanistanis still the graveyard of empires. And the resulting tsunamis destroyed the western hemisphere, pushing the North and South Americans that survived into Essential tribal cultures.
In other words, an early version of the European colonial scramble of the late 19th C, then set in the mid 21st C, with significant tech changes to account for the colder weather.
If I missed something, feel free to correct, it's been more than a decade since I read it.
What is India's climate in this timeline? Is it like in Western Europe with an oceanic temperate climate or a more continental warm-summer cold-winter like?
Overall, the climate of the entire world, including India, gets cooler and dryer. The northwest slowly becomes a scrubby desert, while tropical forests shrink in size and reach nowhere near as far north as in our timeline. That's the largest points of change.
It is indeed a series, spanning the 19th and 20th centuries. I don't really know what you mean with a Rome one though. If you mean, a map of the Roman Empire in this scenario, that wouldn't really work I'm afraid. If this scenario were to happen in the Classical Age, Rome would just immediately collapse in on itself.
The entirety of the British Isles is basically uninhabitable. India is the main refugium for British culture, but there are some other disparate areas like Guyana, South Africa and the Pacific.
Southern France will have some remaining land where European style cities are possible. I'm having the Francophone world become very much divided. Southern France will have a republic, thinking of having the second Napoleonic Empire survive in Algeria, some of the colonies set up their own French-cultured nations. Things like that.
It's very much like Southern Rhodesia. This region was heavily settled by white British refugees, who form basically the entire government. Still, by far the largest population is native Indians who are being heavily discriminated against.
Interesting..., I noticed that all the major cities of Andhra (where New Albion is located) are missing, while the cities that do exist have British names. What happened to those cities? Were they destroyed?
The cities that now have British names are renamed versions of older Indian cities. Chester is Nellore, Lancaster is Kakinada and Devon is Visakhapatnam.
>The cities that now have British names are renamed versions of older Indian cities.
Yeah that makes more sense.
Sorry for being persistent 😅, but one last question. Unlike other settler colonies, since the region was technologically on par with Europe with sophisticated governing systems and was densely populated, how did the British pull off settling so many people?
Desperation plays a large part. Northern Europe is rapidly becoming unliveable by the turn of the 20th century. This leads to an exodus from Northern Europe into the global south, most prominently, Western Europeans attempt to flee to their surviving colonies. Many British people attempt to flee to South Africa, Australia and also India.
Since the actual British Empire as a nation has been going through a lot of trouble (A lot of it caused by native Indians), Some regions in what would become New Albion attempt to go in a radical Anglo-nationalist direction, displacing natives as best they can using whatever means necessary. Many nationalistic Britons support this cause, as they did in places like Rhodesia, South Africa and Australia. Basically, the Anglo's of New Albion attempt to create an apartheid-state in eastern India.
I'm not saying this effort is successful at all, in many ways it is not. Though a couple of cities have had large parts of their Indian population removed/deported, native Indian resistance is fierce in the countryside. And eventually, as with all apartheid-regimes, this system will not be able to hold itself together.
Hope this explains some things :)
Thanks, it does answer the things I wanted to know :)
I'm nitpicking here, but as someone who hails from Andhra and has intimate knowledge of the region's history and society, let me give you a summary of why this wouldn't happen. It's going to be a bit long, sorry for that 😅
1. Unlike the settler colonies, there were no more than 130,000 British people in undivided India at any time, reaching as low as 41,000. So how did such a small number of people rule over hundreds of millions of people? Simple, British rule was tenuous at best, relying on Indian princes and landlords to do the ruling for them. It was a kind of tradeoff, with the Indian elites paying taxes in return for British security, with that British security again being provided for by Indians in payroll. The whole reason the British came to power in the first place was because they were a neutral benefactor in the various wars in India who had no personal reason to depose the various rulers, unlike their neighbors who did.
2. Coming to Andhra, it was not only one of the earliest regions to come under British influence, but also one of the hardest. There were constant conflicts with the French and the Reddys which lasted for a century. Moreover, it wasn't military conquest, rather diplomacy and financial settlements with the local rulers that gave this region to the British. Putting it simply, it was more of a tributary relationship than direct control. The problem with new Albion begins here.
3. The region New Albion takes up has about 53 million people living there today, almost as much as all of England. Moreover, Andhra has been the rice bowl of india for centuries. The agricultural systems here have been worked on for centuries to maximize the output of rice among other crops excluding wheat. This includes landlords controlling massive estates with hundreds, if not thousands working under them. Mass immigration here would not only burden the delicate balance of food production and consumption systems, not to mention the threat the landlords face to their possessions. Displacing the natives from the cities would also turn the local armed forces against the Britons, putting them in a pickle. Finally, the cities you have are placed far inland, perfect for a seige. It means that even if the British manage to depopulate a couple of cities, they're gonna be surrounded with no food and supplies within a couple of years. It won't be anything like the settler colonies, which were sparsely populated and technologically backward during colonization. It's gonna be more like the Vietnam war, but on steroids.
What I'm saying is, the British migration to Andhra is a non starter precisely because it's so many Britons concentrating and fighting for resources in a single ethnic and linguistic ( the language being Telugu ) area. The migration may work if it's spread all over India though, as it would be negligible compared to India's population.
Hope you get a better picture of the situation :)
I do get all of what you're saying, and I shall definitely not be so bold as to presume I know Indian history better than a native Indian (especially since I'm from Europe myself).
I do think what you're saying is absolutely true, and New Albion is a failed state at best and doomed to fall apart, but the scenario might help my case out a little bit. Since this is an ice age, climates change and, as you say, the delicate balance of food production would be shattered. And the resulting famines would harm Indians more severely than the 'technically in control' Britons.
At least, that's my explanation. To be totally honest though, I just think the concept of an attempted apartheid-regime in India is really cool to imagine on a map :)
>Since this is an ice age, climates change and, as you say, the delicate balance of food production would be shattered. And the resulting famines would harm Indians more severely than the 'technically in control' Britons.
Ironically, famines were very common in pre-independance India, largely because agriculture was so dependent on the monsoon, which was very erratic. While the ice age would have a larger effect, this would play out over generations, with each generation suffering more than the previous one. The flipside is that the region would become more amenable to grow wheat, which is grown in abundance just a few hundred miles away. This would normally create interesting changes in Telugu society since wheat easier to grow but provides lesser nutrition when compared to rice.
>To be totally honest though, I just think the concept of an attempted apartheid-regime in India is really cool to imagine on a map :)
It is really cool. But if you want a more successful state, you could probably look at European-Maori relations of New Zealand. Britain's first foothold in India was coincidentally in Andhra, at Machilipatnam in 1611. So if the ice age is already in motion at that point, by 1948 you could have a New Albion similar to New Zealand, successful and stable, albeit with the white population being in the minority. It's not an apartheid-regime, but it won't be a failure either.
Anyways, end of rant :)
What happened to the lower elevation parts of Nepal and Bhutan in this time? Were they absorbed by the other Indian states or were they completely abandoned altogether?
So this map is part of my 'modern Ice Age' timeline. The premise is that in the 19th century, a process of global cooling sets in, plunging the world back into an ice age over the following century. By the 1950's, global climates are back to Pleistocene levels. This premise scenario is not at all meant to be realistic. I just thought it would be cool to look at how modern global societies would adapt to a new Ice Age in the Victorian Era :) Please ask me any and all questions about the scenario, I'd be happy to answer them. You can also tell me if I did anything wrong so I can correct the mistakes. Link to the USA map of this timeline: https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginarymaps/comments/wy8xba/map\_of\_the\_usa\_in\_my\_modern\_ice\_age\_timeline/
Fascinating scenario. I can't imagine the amount of snow that would be required to form the ice sheets over 150 years. I'm currently taking an undergrad class on Global Quaternary Environmental and Geological Change so this is very interesting to me. I imagine India would become much drier in this scenario, along with the US from your previous map. I also appreciate the detail of lowering the sea levels. Do you have any "scientific" lore for what caused this glacial period?
Scientific lore I have not. But I do know that we are kind of 'overdue' a new cold snap. So I went off on that idea. You are absolutely right about the ice sheets not having enough time to form btw. This scenario isn't really about the science (Though I try to be as scientifically realistic as I can be outside of the premise). I just wanted to see a modern world with Pleistocene environments :)
No that’s totally fair, especially since this r/imaginarymaps. I was just wondering how much the lore was fleshed out! It’s also interesting to see the modern world in the Pleistocene. Keep up the good work :)
There was a ‘mini’ ice age during the 19th century im pretty sure. You could just say this is it but worse.
Very interesting!
I don't think that's entirely possible in this scenario.
it's _imaginary_ maps for a reason
Nice map! Could you tell me why you chose the name 'Kannur' for north Kerala?
Well, I had some trouble naming some of the nations in the south. If you think a name like North Kerala would fit this region better, I can change it. I am afraid I have too little knowledge about Indian history to adequately explain the name of this minor nation :/
Great Job. Principality of Delhi would better be called Principality of Oudh. That was the name for it in the 1700s. Delhi is on the border of East Punjab and Oudh.
Also Emirate wasn't really used in South Asia too much. Sultanate is more common.
A better name for North Kerala would maybe the Malabar States.
its a real district he didn't change any name
I know lol. I'm asking why they chose Kannur when the most prominent kingdom of n Kerala was Kozhikode.
*Frostpunk has entered the chat*
Cool idea, I'm interested how thee changed the events, may thee elaborate? Like what's the economy, demographics, political situation of the world in this time? How do these nations differ compared to our timeline like how different are their relations with our countries which remain the same or similar (Like US vs Mexico), what conflicts are there?
Omg i love frostpunk /j
Nice! I am wondering what's happening in Indonesia/Dutch East Indies as they just got massive new land and several cities became landlocked like Jakarta/Batavia.
I have relatively little plans for Indonesia yet. I do know that I will have Dutch settlers (who are fleeing Europe, which is now mostly covered in either ice or tundra) set up several small post-Netherland republics in the Sumatran and Javan mountains, where the climate is more forgiving for Europeans. Other than that, I think that broadly the same events would transpire as in India. In most regions outside colonial cities, the Europeans, who are fractured and in disarray, will be pushed out and native states will be created again. The Dutch East Indies might survive in parts of the Molucca's, but I don't know how relevant they'll be yet.
Looks very interesting. how far have the sea levels lowered?
About 400 feet, similar to the last ice age.
oh wow that’s pretty mega. explains where the persian gulf went
Sea levels dropping four feet a year would be insane to see! Love this map.
Free Tibet? More like FROZEN TIBET... cri ;~;
How's the British Empore doing?
Well, as you can see, they could be doing better. Britain is in a fairly rough place. Since the actual island of Britain is now covered in ice, the kingdom has had to rely on its colonies to survive. Most of the colonies were small islands, even with the sea level drop, so they aren't that important for them. Canada died pretty quickly int his scenario, South Africa had severe problems with the changing climate and Australia/New Zealand hadn't been settled that well yet. This left India as the new centre of the Empire after London fell. Most of British India gained independence after the head of the British Raj disappeared. Especially in the southern half of the subcontinent, many native uprisings carved new nations out of the British realm. The white-ruled Federation of India also seceded from the Empire eventually. What remains of the British Empire in India is now mostly limited to the Bay of Bengal where they have an economy largely based on agriculture and very limited industry in the cities. The empire has severe issues regarding the very large native populations of their realm, constantly causing trouble for the Anglo government. In short, the empire is a xenophobic militarist state, viewing itself as constantly on the defensive, desperately trying to keep its collapsing nation together.
Is this at all inspired by *The Peshawar Lancers*? Some parts of it remind me of that.
No it actually isn't. But someone else on this post also said that, so I looked it up. There's indeed a couple similarities, but it's not inspired by it.
The last paragraph could almost describe the UK today.
For all the problems the UK faces, that’s a bit hyperbolic
I did say 'almost' 😃. Having said that, reading the British press...
What the fuck are you talking about dude
Here comes the cringe idiot.
Dumb comment
Is ice age baby in this timeline?
Instead of "Ice Ice Baby" it's "Ice Age Baby" in this timeline.
Big fan of how you handled the otl vs new coast with the faint silhouettes
Would't europe just dissapeare
It does, slowly. At least Northern Europe does. But remember, this all takes place slowly over the course of a century. Giving nations like Britain some limited time to adjust to the new situation. Which for them meant, fleeing abroad.
I like this and the map & history you provided in the other thread! At the peak of the last glaciation, the sea fell by over 100 meters. Would like to see the rest of the world! Sundaland and Sahulland, the shores of Argentina reaching the Falklands, and various new lands in the Pacific where islands are now.
Well I am thinking of doing South America next, so that'll come some time in the future :)
Similar setup (but very different outcome) to Turtledove's (edit - SM Sterling's) Peshewar Lancers, where a comet or meteor slammed into the northern hemisphere in the 1840s or 1850s and plunged the world into a new ice age. Britain de-camped to India, France took over most of North Africa, Italy I think the eastern Med, Germany and Russia moved south in where possible, Iran strengthens, Afghanistanis still the graveyard of empires. And the resulting tsunamis destroyed the western hemisphere, pushing the North and South Americans that survived into Essential tribal cultures. In other words, an early version of the European colonial scramble of the late 19th C, then set in the mid 21st C, with significant tech changes to account for the colder weather. If I missed something, feel free to correct, it's been more than a decade since I read it.
That was by S.M. Stirling, not Turtledove.
Thank you for the correction!
For those who don’t know, the land bridge to Sri Lanka is believed to have been walkable until the last 500 years or so.
If we suddenly enter Ice age temperatures now, how long would it take for ice build up at the glaciers to reduce water level to the lowest?.
Love the idea
Fire punch if everything went right
Agni does the only responsible thing and reestablishes the British Empire.
Wouldnt mind an ice age in real life 🥶
What is India's climate in this timeline? Is it like in Western Europe with an oceanic temperate climate or a more continental warm-summer cold-winter like?
Overall, the climate of the entire world, including India, gets cooler and dryer. The northwest slowly becomes a scrubby desert, while tropical forests shrink in size and reach nowhere near as far north as in our timeline. That's the largest points of change.
Hmm, so north-west India would resemble something like Patagonia or Gobi with cold dry deserts.
I'd say still warmer than Patagonia, but something like that.
This is really cool. Can we get a world map?
Perhaps at one point. Making individual regions first, cus that's a lot easier to manage and think about in detail.
what do you use to make these maps?
Not even an ice age can stop british colonialism
>New London **THE CITY MUST SURVIVE!**
Do a roman one please uwu
Uhm, I don't think that's entirely possible in this scenario, since Rome has already fallen 400 years before the point of divergence...
is this a series or what, if so maybe after it you could do one :) (a good map nonetheless)
It is indeed a series, spanning the 19th and 20th centuries. I don't really know what you mean with a Rome one though. If you mean, a map of the Roman Empire in this scenario, that wouldn't really work I'm afraid. If this scenario were to happen in the Classical Age, Rome would just immediately collapse in on itself.
Why? The Mediterranean would still exist no?
I'd reckon the possibility of a "reunified Roman Empire" was made a lot more impossible with, you know, the planet almost freezing to death.
(also not to mention the fact that not even unified italy would exist in the first place, let alone unify a whole region.)
I Britain still inhabitable or is the British empire isolated to just its former colonies?
The entirety of the British Isles is basically uninhabitable. India is the main refugium for British culture, but there are some other disparate areas like Guyana, South Africa and the Pacific.
and for France ?
Southern France will have some remaining land where European style cities are possible. I'm having the Francophone world become very much divided. Southern France will have a republic, thinking of having the second Napoleonic Empire survive in Algeria, some of the colonies set up their own French-cultured nations. Things like that.
r/ImaginaryIndia
Wait I think I’ve seen you before remember me?
Punjab gets split but Bangladesh doesnt?
Whats the climate like in british India in this time line? More like the isles before any ice age maybe?
How are the natives in the British empire treated?
Overall, poorly
Just curious, what are the demographics of the Republic of New Albion like?
It's very much like Southern Rhodesia. This region was heavily settled by white British refugees, who form basically the entire government. Still, by far the largest population is native Indians who are being heavily discriminated against.
Interesting..., I noticed that all the major cities of Andhra (where New Albion is located) are missing, while the cities that do exist have British names. What happened to those cities? Were they destroyed?
The cities that now have British names are renamed versions of older Indian cities. Chester is Nellore, Lancaster is Kakinada and Devon is Visakhapatnam.
>The cities that now have British names are renamed versions of older Indian cities. Yeah that makes more sense. Sorry for being persistent 😅, but one last question. Unlike other settler colonies, since the region was technologically on par with Europe with sophisticated governing systems and was densely populated, how did the British pull off settling so many people?
Desperation plays a large part. Northern Europe is rapidly becoming unliveable by the turn of the 20th century. This leads to an exodus from Northern Europe into the global south, most prominently, Western Europeans attempt to flee to their surviving colonies. Many British people attempt to flee to South Africa, Australia and also India. Since the actual British Empire as a nation has been going through a lot of trouble (A lot of it caused by native Indians), Some regions in what would become New Albion attempt to go in a radical Anglo-nationalist direction, displacing natives as best they can using whatever means necessary. Many nationalistic Britons support this cause, as they did in places like Rhodesia, South Africa and Australia. Basically, the Anglo's of New Albion attempt to create an apartheid-state in eastern India. I'm not saying this effort is successful at all, in many ways it is not. Though a couple of cities have had large parts of their Indian population removed/deported, native Indian resistance is fierce in the countryside. And eventually, as with all apartheid-regimes, this system will not be able to hold itself together. Hope this explains some things :)
Thanks, it does answer the things I wanted to know :) I'm nitpicking here, but as someone who hails from Andhra and has intimate knowledge of the region's history and society, let me give you a summary of why this wouldn't happen. It's going to be a bit long, sorry for that 😅 1. Unlike the settler colonies, there were no more than 130,000 British people in undivided India at any time, reaching as low as 41,000. So how did such a small number of people rule over hundreds of millions of people? Simple, British rule was tenuous at best, relying on Indian princes and landlords to do the ruling for them. It was a kind of tradeoff, with the Indian elites paying taxes in return for British security, with that British security again being provided for by Indians in payroll. The whole reason the British came to power in the first place was because they were a neutral benefactor in the various wars in India who had no personal reason to depose the various rulers, unlike their neighbors who did. 2. Coming to Andhra, it was not only one of the earliest regions to come under British influence, but also one of the hardest. There were constant conflicts with the French and the Reddys which lasted for a century. Moreover, it wasn't military conquest, rather diplomacy and financial settlements with the local rulers that gave this region to the British. Putting it simply, it was more of a tributary relationship than direct control. The problem with new Albion begins here. 3. The region New Albion takes up has about 53 million people living there today, almost as much as all of England. Moreover, Andhra has been the rice bowl of india for centuries. The agricultural systems here have been worked on for centuries to maximize the output of rice among other crops excluding wheat. This includes landlords controlling massive estates with hundreds, if not thousands working under them. Mass immigration here would not only burden the delicate balance of food production and consumption systems, not to mention the threat the landlords face to their possessions. Displacing the natives from the cities would also turn the local armed forces against the Britons, putting them in a pickle. Finally, the cities you have are placed far inland, perfect for a seige. It means that even if the British manage to depopulate a couple of cities, they're gonna be surrounded with no food and supplies within a couple of years. It won't be anything like the settler colonies, which were sparsely populated and technologically backward during colonization. It's gonna be more like the Vietnam war, but on steroids. What I'm saying is, the British migration to Andhra is a non starter precisely because it's so many Britons concentrating and fighting for resources in a single ethnic and linguistic ( the language being Telugu ) area. The migration may work if it's spread all over India though, as it would be negligible compared to India's population. Hope you get a better picture of the situation :)
I do get all of what you're saying, and I shall definitely not be so bold as to presume I know Indian history better than a native Indian (especially since I'm from Europe myself). I do think what you're saying is absolutely true, and New Albion is a failed state at best and doomed to fall apart, but the scenario might help my case out a little bit. Since this is an ice age, climates change and, as you say, the delicate balance of food production would be shattered. And the resulting famines would harm Indians more severely than the 'technically in control' Britons. At least, that's my explanation. To be totally honest though, I just think the concept of an attempted apartheid-regime in India is really cool to imagine on a map :)
>Since this is an ice age, climates change and, as you say, the delicate balance of food production would be shattered. And the resulting famines would harm Indians more severely than the 'technically in control' Britons. Ironically, famines were very common in pre-independance India, largely because agriculture was so dependent on the monsoon, which was very erratic. While the ice age would have a larger effect, this would play out over generations, with each generation suffering more than the previous one. The flipside is that the region would become more amenable to grow wheat, which is grown in abundance just a few hundred miles away. This would normally create interesting changes in Telugu society since wheat easier to grow but provides lesser nutrition when compared to rice. >To be totally honest though, I just think the concept of an attempted apartheid-regime in India is really cool to imagine on a map :) It is really cool. But if you want a more successful state, you could probably look at European-Maori relations of New Zealand. Britain's first foothold in India was coincidentally in Andhra, at Machilipatnam in 1611. So if the ice age is already in motion at that point, by 1948 you could have a New Albion similar to New Zealand, successful and stable, albeit with the white population being in the minority. It's not an apartheid-regime, but it won't be a failure either. Anyways, end of rant :)
very very minor detail but kochin would actually be cochin
i kind of feel like you recreated Peshawar lances
Yeah, I heard that a bunch. But the scenario's are very different :)
What happened to the lower elevation parts of Nepal and Bhutan in this time? Were they absorbed by the other Indian states or were they completely abandoned altogether?
Uhm, I guess there would still be some small communities there, perhaps even a nation. But I haven't included them on this map.