Who was in control at the time?
A bit of project philosophy
Warning: What you are about to read is a best effort and utilizes particular strategies. There is no universal or correct answer. If you have strongly held beliefs on political geography and are easily offended, consider skipping this Methods!
In most cases, this project and the political world represents 'states'
More precisely (and probably more boring) this project seeks to represent governing bodies.
When in doubt, the question we ultimately ask is: "Who was in control at the time?"
The answer is usually a state.
There are exceptions to state control, however.
As civilizations matured, the concept of political control over a region matured with their governing bodies
A common example in early history, we see is the 'state' was often akin to a fuedal or tribal body.
Consider an occupation. An occupation can hardly be called a new state, but more correctly (and perhaps controversially) a temporary extention of the occupying state.
In some cases however, the region or territory or country is governed by a collaboration of states or entities.
Take, for example, a condominium, a neutral zone, a scientific research zone or mandated territory with uncertain future.
Apart from exceptions (a few mentioned above), there is the state.
It's hard to say what's a state, nation, country and what's not.
This is actually a classic question, and it's harder to answer than you might think.
If you go by Constitutive theory, only one other entity (presumably state) must recognize a state
If you go by Declarative theory, the state only needs to define it's territory, have a permanent population, have a government and be able to enter into relations with other states
If that sounds vague, it is!
What about micronations? What about Proto-states? When does a state become official?
What about unions, vassals, dependencies, etc.?
What about government in exile as in times of war?
And again, we have occupations. That's tricky.
Our Methods
For the purposes of this project, we will take a Declarative theory slant following the Montevideo convention, with a few possible differences for ease of the project and visualization.
Fine. I may have made your blood boil already by not using Constitutive Theory. But, I've chosen one of the definitions. Satisfied?
The next natural question may be, "so how and when do we put this 'nation' on a map?"
Let's try to answer that one too.
We will try to recognize when proto-states become states and likewise try to consider proto states, rebellions and movements that seem to not have fully become states on a case-by-case basis for this project.
Let's revisit occupations.
We will also consider occupations where state diplomatic ties, foreign policy remain intact. Note this is often difficult to research.
Most people would agree troop movements that quickly pass from point A to point B do not result in a change in state or government.
However, a quick troop movement turned into occupation can quickly establish a local governing body if occupiers choose.
Keep in mind prolonged occupations are often different as they naturally are often followed by occupying governments which themselves may become proto states.
See? It's complicated at best. Please keep in mind, these distiguishments are quite difficult. We know we cannot please everyone but try to strive for a valuable educational tool while keeping complexity reduced.
For the purposes of this project, a protectorate or vassal is considered the territory of its protector where an occupier is not. In the case where history disagrees upon protectorate or vassal status, I'll likely defer to popular cited opinion with USA status breaking ties.
If further grey area exists, we may defer to the established 'state' since this overarching project is to map states.
As an example, british protectorate is considered 'British' as the obligations placed upon the dependant country extend into diplomatic ties. E.g. South Arabia Protectorate in 1967
As another example, occupied Poland in 1939 is considered for this project "Germany" as it no longer retains it's rights to Polish foreign affairs
As for small micronations, while I respect their cultures and decisions leading to independence, we likely won't include them due to a combination of lack of other international organization geographic dificulty of mapping smaller tiny areas. Again, a grey area. No offense, Sealand.
See, this stuff is complicated! Have I upset you yet?
Keep in mind, this can be a controversial and delicate topic. Let us use care and consideration when discussing amongst ourselves.
But mistakes also happen and feedback is welcomed! Let us know if you see a mistake and offer some sources and arguments to your point. We are just humans, after all.
Lastly, as an important note, I likely have a USA and English based bias.
Confused yet?
Over simplified TL;DR?
Diplomatic and defensible 'Countries' and their dependancies are probably mapped together as a state.
Short lived rebellions, troop movements may not be not included.
Prolonged occupations will probably be included.
When all else fails, we just use our best citations and guess.
You read that correctly. Sometimes we have do some best guesses. We hope you'll forgive the lack of concreteness in lieu of creating educational content.
