Ironically, the rise of Western Europe came after the fall of Constantinople. It marks a very important point in world history. The exodus of many Greek scholars into the already prosperous Italian states fueled their economical, cultural and political rise even more. Many ancient scriptures that had been conserved by the byzantians for over 1000 years were translated and led to the Renaissance in italy. From there the rediscovered knowledge found its way into in Western Europe and became known as the era of enlightenment.

Interesting side note: Same goes for the Arabic world, it was a place of knowledge and enlightenment. The libraby of Cordoba had around 400.000 books.

Intersting side note 2: The fall of Constantinople gave birth to the discovery of the Americas. With the Silk Road falling into Ottoman hands, land trade for valuable good from beyond the orient was no longer possible, which led discoverers like Colombus and Magellan search for a new sea route to India to resume that trade.

I think he is a drug primarily holy cities and large
Though I think Baghdad was the center of Islam more than Damascus.

Abuse

Edited 11/2/2014 19:05:48

Yeah, it's kind of hard to make a map of a desert, that's why the Almohad Caliphate doesn't have a high territory density.

The territories on this aren't supposed to reflect the population density of the regions, if they were, I'd say

As far as the rest of your comment goes, I'm perfectly aware of the economic and demographic centres of the time, but I am limited to modern maps with which to draw them. If you can find an accurate and detailed map of 12th Century Baghdad or whichever you suggest I use, then be my guest, but if not, then there's nothing that can be done.

No need, it does not have to be perfect, has been structurally Damascus, so no need to change.

One thing I just noticed about this map: In Denmark, Nordtyland was still connected to the mainland; it separated in 1815, I think.

Really? I'l look into that when I can.

This should give you an overview about the size and importance of cities of that period:

One thing I just noticed about this map: In Denmark, Nordtyland was still connected to the mainland; it separated in 1815, I think.

During the Viking Age a passage existed. It closed in 1200 and in 1825 the north Sea broke through again. So, no need for a change.

What year map about?

It's not bound to any single year, but it's the late 12th Century.

I do not think that the Kingdom of Galicia-Volhynia belongs there. You're really stretching it if you're trying to make your map in the late 12th century because it was created in 1199. I think Volhynia and Halych should go instead.

Oh okay. The base map I'm using is actually the year 1200, so there are a few errors like that, although I've corrected the more obvious ones.

Also, I expect the Kievan Rus' can be viewed as powerless after Mstislav's death in 1132, but it lived on until 1240, when the Mongols invaded. I think it can be compared to the German confederation as to how bound it was. Anyhow, I think that you should make it something like the Holy Roman Empire on your map, where the principality of Kiev/Kievan Rus' properties is the actual control and everything else on this map https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1a/Principalities_of_Kievan_Rus%27_%281054-1132%29_ru2.svg?uselang=ru. Principality of Kiev is banana-yellow and says КИЕВ, and south of it is the Kievan Rus' properties (blue), and everything else coloured is part of the Kievan Rus'. Anyhow, do what you want.

Nice map zxctycxz :D. I can't wait for it to be finished.

Anyway, I'm currently making a map on Kievan Rus Principalities so I wanted to share some maps that may be usefull.

Outremer

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/mladjov/files/nsyria1143.jpg
http://sitemaker.umich.edu/mladjov/files/ssyria1143.jpg

while the it's a bit earlier, it has quite accurate names of cities and fortifications.

Kievan Rus

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/mladjov/files/rus1200.jpg

there are tons of detailed maps on his site mostly from Ancient Greece till the Late Middle Ages.

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/mladjov/maps&

Жұқтыру

No map can be accurate for a single year or even a span of 10 years. Especially in an turbulent period like the medieval rus principalities. The borders were constantly changing, princes and grand princes ( never understood why they are called princes in english, when they are knjaz in russian, maybe it has something to do with sovereignty ) were evicted, killed and replaced. Some adjustments and freedom have to be used. I believe catching the general feel of the era is good enough.

Yes, I realise that, though I think you are a bit exaggerating how turblent it was. However, I've looked at other maps of the Kievan Rus' in the 1100s and it's generally correct.

According to the map taken these steps towards http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1200/index.html
The map he built a highly accurate, and besides not to trust Wikipedia it is not a reliable source.

Thanks for the advice, Incaman, I have a map for making the actual territories already, but it looks like that one could be useful for naming them.

à Elroi:

What makes your internet source better than my internet source?

Also, I've seen some books that have maps similar to the image I showed.

à zxctycxz:

What are you going to about Kievan Rus'? Will you just leave it as seperate states?

Edited 11/8/2014 23:47:11

I say that Wikipedia is not a reliable source, anyone with an account can change information.
What year your map? And regardless can not really know which map more accurate,,,
And I think the idea of princesses Ross, connected as the Holy Roman Empire, it's an interesting idea

Edited 11/9/2014 08:27:48