HUB.MN — The humble – and geographically inaccurate – beginnings of the Micras map have caught up with it this week as individuals began to question whether its depicted rivers should be called such.
Under the microscope in particular is the river in eastern Keltia, the northeastern-most continent of the Micras map, which drains into two different seas and is, using the specified map scale, tens of kilometres wide at its most narrow points. The river is a by-product of the early drawing of the Micras map by the Micronational Cartography Society at a time when realistic geographic detail was not a primary concern.
In the more than decade since the river was drawn, the map has more and more been used as a basis for realistic geofiction undertakings, leading to geographical improbabilities inherent in the map raising concerns for simulationist micronations who wish to make realistic maps for their micronations. The issue of the Keltian river was thus raised by Shyriath Bukolos who is the developer of the popular Gloria Mundi presentation of the Micras map.
On the Gloria Mundi map, Bukolos had divided the river into two distinct bodies separated by a large tract of land (see image at the end of this article for comparison). “I made the decision not to follow [the MCS depiction of the river] in the name of geographic reality; rivers, by and large, do not behave like that, and in my soul I felt uneasy about portraying one as doing so,” explained Bukolos in seeking public input on whether his map should be changed to reflect the official MCS depiction.
In a poll on the matter, the large majority of individuals agreed that Bukolos’ map should accurately portray the official depiction, but offered support to re-classify the river to be a narrow sea to resolve lingering questions regarding the improbable nature of the river.
A former member of the Society’s Administrative Council, Ailin of Uantir, agreed with the reclassification. “Calling it a river is nonsense,” stated Ailin, explaining that the narrow sea option would be more realistic and explainable using plate tectonics, for example. He suggested that the Council address the issue officially as “unless that’s explained somehow or somewhere, we will always and forever deal with new people eventually noticing that the ‘river’ … is topographically ‘wrong’ and bring up the subject of ‘fixing’ it.”
If the decision is made by the Council to treat the river as a narrow sea, Ailin suggested that the map be re-drawn to make the feature wider and therefore reduce any potential confusion as to whether it is a river or a narrow sea when viewed against other rivers on the map.
As of press time, the Council has yet to undertake any formal discussion of the matter.