# Mapmaking Discussion & Philosophy (WIP/Critique) > Regional/World Mapping >  Reprojected world map (from Alexis Jaillot 1708 atlas)

## Ashtagon

Full-size version: https://www.deviantart.com/ashtagon/...llot-757676232



Some questions for further development:

1: I want to make a modern world development of this map, imagining that this was a 100% accurate map (well, to the extent that coastlines were completed anyway) and extrapolating to present day. I need to understand the climate better. Given the geography, would Australia's climate and/or vegetation be radically different? How so?

2: Same question for NW America. In particular, that inland sea is troubling for geology purposes. It looks like the southern and possibly eastern coast should generally be unsuitable for harbours, possibly mostly cliff-like. Does that make sense given everything else? How would the radically different coastline affect vegetation and climate?

3: Should I use this Antarctica, or a different one? In particular, I'm tempted to replace that Antarctica with this one: https://www.deviantart.com/ashtagon/...tica-732141382

4: Anything else I missed that should change greatly as a result of the changed geography?

----------


## Azélor

1 the impact would be minor

2 I don't understand why they could not have a harbor in that region. If you look at Vancouver or Hong Kong, they are right next too mountains (or steep hills) and they have great waterfront. 

The Rockies are supposed to go right throught the sea, or is it not the case? 

3 His version of Antartica is not continious, there are large missing parts. Maybe they were there in the original before the conversion?
You can replace it but that depend what your goal is. 

4 the huge landmass between Asia and America. Would have a large impact. Is it suposed to be flat or montaneous?

----------


## Ashtagon

Here's a north polar map, with possible coastlines.

Pink lines indicate the halfway point between known land and known sea (defined as the last known coastline points and text of labels that indicate land/sea).

The green line indicates the halfway point between the pink line and the nearest land coast or land text label.

The blue line indicates the halfway point between the pink line and the nearest land coast. This line (or something similar) will probably be my final choice for northern coastline.

Regarding the Greenland/Arctica landmass, I envision the Rockies extending to follow the not-Alaska coastline along the southern coast of western Arctica. They would logically have a break in the Anian Strait (aka the northwest passage), but otherwise the Arctican portion is generally as high as the real-world central Rockies. The terrain of eastern Arctica and the area north of the Rockies would generally be similar to that of northern Canada and Greenland, albeit probably a bit harsher due to being more continental.



Regarding Antarctica, the main reason for dropping this version of the continent is that it is so incomplete that I would be improvising most of the total coastline, at which point it becomes more fantasy than re-projection. As such, I'd rather use an Antartcia map that, while still not our "modern" Antartica, was still made by someone following closely in his mapmaking school. The map I linked to in the top post (Philklipe Buache's map of 1754) fulfils those criteria.

----------

