Landmass Placement and Migration Questions

Discussions about constructed worlds, cultures and any topics related to constructed societies.
Post Reply
Davush
greek
greek
Posts: 678
Joined: 10 Jan 2015 14:10

Landmass Placement and Migration Questions

Post by Davush »

Hello,

I have a few questions regarding landmass placement, migration and 'connectedness'. Basically, there are two large landmasses (one in the West, one in the East), which more or less 'connected' by a long chain of habitable islands encircling the two landmasses. This essentially means that it is possible to navigate across the globe in coastal waters. The main impediment to migration are two large deserts.

At the minute, I think the most advanced civilisation will have medieval levels of urbanization/development, but I was wondering how this land placement would effect migration and travel? Does it mean that the world would be more accessible and known? I.e. would civilisations have more knowledge of people on the other side of the planet? Would there likely be more interaction between the two continents?

Any thoughts/ideas/comments/criticism welcome. Thanks!
User avatar
Creyeditor
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5121
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

Re: Landmass Placement and Migration Questions

Post by Creyeditor »

You might want to look up Polynesian and Melanesian. The first people 'connecting' the two landmasses might have similar routes and timings.
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3026
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Landmass Placement and Migration Questions

Post by sangi39 »

Creyeditor wrote:You might want to look up Polynesian and Melanesian. The first people 'connecting' the two landmasses might have similar routes and timings.
This also raises a pretty good point in that, from what I can remember, as isolated as Hawai'i is, the native population was still aware of other more distant island groups in the Pacific [citation needed].

I think generally it depends on what the "peak travel distance" of a given society is at a given time. For example, the Romans knew China existed, but generally speaking contact between the two was trade-based and often indirect, and similarly Roman-produced goods have been found in areas like Kenya. The Helgö Buddha was discovered in southern Sweden, but originally came from northern India, but again the actually Norse understanding of northern India was probably nothing more than "oh, that's a place".

Your particular world might be easier to traverse earlier on than Earth, but it still might be the case that for a long time, far off places are generally only known through something similar to legend or rumour. Those places definitely exist because their stuff makes it to other parts of the world, but what exactly people know about those places will depend a lot on how far and how regularly people can travel.
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
Post Reply