After facing a huge setback, I put together the second version of the famous Trumanvese map. I’ll write more later when the map is complete, but as I introduce Arapaho, I wanted people to become familiar with its location and the surrounding states. Fortunately, while there are still some states to be named later, I’m pretty solid on the regions that I’ve lived and talked about. States that I am still working on naming are left blank.
Map 1: Trumanverse
Map 2: Trumanverse overlaid on the regular states. Some of the midwestern states are a touch off-kilter. Long story.
If you think any of the state names are way off-base or think I may have overlooked a much more obvious name, now is a pretty good time to chime in.
Update: The second map had the same link as the first. It’s been corrected to show the second map.
Update II: Here is the near-final map (click below for full-size):
The state bordering California, Shasta, and Deseret looks like Sierra to me. Sierra is kind of obvious so maybe you might look back to its Gold Rush boom days origins and call it Calaveras, which has the benefit of being fun to say.
California’s southeastern neighbor would be Diné but that might be a pain in the butt online because you’d have to be looking up the HTML code for the e with the acute accent all the time. So you could go to the alternate name for the same people, the Navajo. Solaria for the lack of rain or Saguaro for the distinctive vegetation would also be right.
The one north of that would be Anasazi, which also has the benefit of being fun to say. Alternatively, you could call it Kaibab, which is a Piute name for the region south of the Grand Canyon that recurs everywhere you travel there.
The state corresponding to the peninsula of Florida could be either Oakachobee (fun to say, and a corruption of a real-life name) or Seminole, but Manatee might be fun too and a subtle and vicious joke about the real-life inhabitants of the region.
Why did you make the Trumanverse state of Tennasee mostly in real-life Alabama? Are you following the river when you do that? Or do you know something about the native peoples from that region that I do not?
Comment by Transplanted Lawyer — January 26, 2010 @ 7:45 am
Thanks a lot for your input, TL. Great minds think alike.
The Nevada state actually was called Sierra. The only reason I stripped it was because I was debating the name Sevierra for the next state over and if I used that one I would have to come up with something else for that one (Newe Sogobia was the alternate). I’ve been having a bugger of a time naming the state you might name Kaibab or Anasazi. Those are good names to consider.
The leading contender for the Arizona state is Navadina, a corruption and combination of the two names of that tribe. Also under consideration are New Biscay (what the Spanish called it) or it joining Texass, California, and a few others as a non-pseudonymmed state.
Florida is the same as Arizona. I’m debating whether or not to use a pseudonym (Tegeste, a historic name for the region) or just use Florida.
Tennassee is mostly about the river. I sort of wrote myself into a corner there because on the old map Tennassee bordered Delosa and I wanted to keep it that way. That meant that I couldn’t put it in its most obvious location (where I put Tundawa). I might just say “screw it” and forget Tennessee altogether and find some pseudonym for it.
Comment by trumwill — January 26, 2010 @ 8:59 am
For some reason, I’m cringing at your remapping of the Northeast. Given our colonial heritage, I’d argue that I’d draw New Troy into a Hudson River based state composed of what’s essentially “Eastern” New Jersey, New York’s Hudson Valley and Long Island with the name of “New Netherlands”. Connecticut should probably stay close to its real-life version, but you could get away with splitting Massachusetts in half calling the western half “Berkshire” and the eastern half Plymouth. Delaware could have been “New Sweden”, and I’d split PA (and hell, Maryland) in half as well using the Appalachians as a guiding line.
Of course, this is from my personal perspective.
Comment by David Alexander — January 26, 2010 @ 10:34 am
May want to be careful about adding that extra “S” to the name of Texas. As I understand it that’s a pejorative left-wing term used by those who want to denigrate the state and the people who live there.
Comment by web — January 26, 2010 @ 11:27 am
Connecticut should probably stay close to its real-life version
Connecticut could easily be split. To some extent this already happens on a de facto basis, with Fairfield County being a bit different from the rest of the state in an economic and cultural sense. Connecticut also could be split more evenly using the river as the dividing point; were this to happen, the eastern portion could appropriately be called “Casinoland”:)
Comment by Peter — January 26, 2010 @ 3:36 pm
Peter and David,
I can’t go splitting up eastern statelets into more statelets. Connecticut is already too small
. I wanted to use the Hudson as a border, but the map didn’t really work out that way without making New England larger than I would prefer. Back when NT/NE/Wab were four states, I did use the Hudson as the dividing line. But I had one too many states.
I actually gave some thought into using names like New Amsterdam and New Sweden and the like due to the history, but my main thought was that the colonial attitude at the time these states were named would have given them more English names. So Hanover was named after the House of Hanover, Kingsland was named because of the royal nature of The Old Dominion, and Queensland was named to match (I’m open to renaming that one, since there is already one in Australia).
The two names that are unEnglish, Wabakani and Madawaska, were not original colonies (they were breakaways, like real-life Vermont) and so were renamed later without any need to flatter the royals.
Comment by trumwill — January 26, 2010 @ 4:08 pm
Web,
It was purely a typo. I actually went to some pains for Texas on the map. Though I cut their overall landmass, I made sure that they were still the largest continental state by overlaying it with the competing states (Pseudoarizona being the next largest). In Trumanverse history, the full Republic of Texas included both Estacado and some of the state north of it, but to repay debts and to settle the border disputes between the RoT and the US, it was divided into three states with the implicit understanding that no states larger than Texas would be admitted into the union, which remained in place until Alaska was admitted. It doesn’t match up exactly with the old RoT maps, but close enough.
Comment by trumwill — January 26, 2010 @ 4:15 pm
Sheer abomination.
Comment by Sheila Tone — January 26, 2010 @ 8:04 pm
Hey, I left southern California as California just for you!
Comment by trumwill — January 26, 2010 @ 8:11 pm