Assuming such a continent* exists. Would it be close enough that it would affect the development of Europe?

No fun allowed faggot, pls go and stay go.

But you are the no fun allowed faggot, user

Shouldn't it increase humidity in Iberian Peninsula and Western Africa and provide better trade opportunities for them. Portugal would become the largest trading center between inner and outer seas.

This here.
But i guess UK has enough ressources to be interesting for mining.

Guess Atlantis would be like england and Uk would be like scandinavian?

>impliying they wouldn't be conquered and genocided by spaniards like everything east of europe

>like everything east of europe
You mean west of europe?

Looking at the mini-map in the corner I want to know what effect the multiple smaller continents would have.

For one thing this arguing about the Gulf Stream becomes pointless. This world doesn't have one.

it'd also raise sea levels pretty dramatically.

The equatorial current being uninterrupted by the americas would be interesting.
The El nino and lL nina system would be utterly fucked though.

>no 13 colonies
Spain an Portugal
>no American revolution
It's the same but they speak beaner

That is roughly the size of Greenland. So no, it's not a continent. Continents are determined solely by size.

Then how come India gets called the sub-continent?

Because it's contiguous with Asia.

Unlike, let's say, Europe.

Which is bigger, and not so immediately dwarfed by Asia, and more easily defined as separate from Asia.

Though I've certainly heard the continent referred to as "Eurasia".

This man is wrong.

An idiot Spaniard would land there and think it was the Indies.

Is it reasonable to assume it's populated by technology advanced Neanderthals?

>and more easily defined as separate from Asia
I don't know, the Himalayas seem like a pretty good place to draw the line.

East and west?

There is no clear definition of what a continent is exactly, the answer you'll get depends on where the person you ask it comes from.

Though I guess most geographers will give similar answers

A Britain that is less developed would most likely not be conquered by the Romans, freeing up legions for use elsewhere, perhaps conquering Germania?

So we have a possibility of a longer lasting Rome. Possibly even to current year.

What would the climate of the middle-east be like?

Okay, let's think about this.

The gulf stream is completely fucked by such a large landmass at its northern curve. Chances are if it still exists, it rounds off south of the island.

This makes for a much colder northern Europe, including France and the UK. South West Europe, such as Spain, would get subject to much more extreme weather as the hot air from the Saharan meets cold air over that region, rather than further north in France and England. On the plus side, it also means more rain for them.

Given this, I suspect the balance of power would shift from France/England to the Southern and Eastern European states. Ukraine and Hungary especially would benefit, as their agricultural bases don't rely on the gulf stream and they're ridiculously fertile in comparison to the colder Western Europe.

As for the island itself... It's approximately the size of the entire Western/Central European nations, so it'd probably have its own set of warring nations and borders. They'd likely be maritime nations as it'd be fairly easy to island hop from Atlantis to the mainland, but they'd also get much more powerful storms than the Brits ever did. Hurricanes might even be an occasional problem. The Saharan dust stream could make the southern half of the island into one of the most highly fertile regions on the planet, too.

So all in all, the island would probably end up playing the same role England/Britain did in real life history.

That thing's so far west it's pratically an extension of continental North America just south of Newfoundland

Only if they use GEICO.

Aside from majorly fucking up the climate as other have pointed out, assuming there would be no well developed natives, it would have probably been settled quite early, since vikings started settling in Iceland before the year 1000. Even in the scenario where it conceivably changes the least - just giving more space for medieval Europe to expand - it would have changed the historical balances of power immensely

WHY WOULD YOU PUT A CONTINENT THERE user?

>mfw when we're all wearing overalls and waiting in line for a slice of old bread

>Guess Atlantis would be like england and Uk would be like scandinavian?
Normans decide not to stop in northern France or bother with england. Keep on going until they reach Atlantis.

Youre all ignoring the bigger impact.

You have a fertile continent at a midpoint between Europe and North America. Chances are Roman era seafaring technology would be sufficient to cross the Atlantic over a millennia before Columbus.

The entire Colombian exchange happens over a thousand years earlier. The plagues that decimate native populations are far weaker and they gain horses and iron working technology far earlier, jumpstarting North American development. At the same time Europe gets corn, beans and potatoes a thousand years earlier which accellerates their development.

Human population would explode far earlier and see trans Atlantic rivalry between Mesoamerican and European empires.

Native American coalition vs. Roman Empire war when?

Wouldn't that also remove the Sargasso Sea and make an earlier discovery of the Americas much more likely?

Yup. Chances are we'd see Roman or North African colonies in Brazil as soon as seafaring technology became sufficient to make it to Atlantis.

You also have to think about what a island/continent/subcontinent/whatthefuckever of that size would do to sea levels worldwide, especially on the Atlantic coastlines.

Isn't that literally Atlantis?

Good point, though I doubt it would be much difference on the global scale. Probably have higher sea levels on the European/American/African coasts facing Atlantis, but otherwise it'd be same old, same old.

I was assuming this meant deleting an equivalent amount of water but if not that would be a big effect too.

Not really, North Sea naval experience was not a strong suit of the Romans.

On the other hand, England would probably be the new Viking power.

But without a native population on the mystery continent whose artifacts would wash up on the european shore, there is no reason for the romans to go against the jetstream to push that far west.

If there ARE natives on that island, that changes the world immeasurably.

If not, it owuldn't be discovered until centuries later.

I imagine Iberians colonies the Island fairly early, because those fucks colonised the entire Atlantic coast.

>They colonized the entire Atlantic coast
And their descendants are now colonizing both American continents.

>Romans
>Not any of the Seafaring champs of the Mediterranean like the Phoenicians
>Rome's face when they go west and find ANOTHER Carthage

>Desendants

So the Celtic-Britons and Spanish then? Hell, Atlantis would probably make Rome BTFO out of Western Europe and never form as big as it did.

We'd have a Nordic-like England, Iberian dominated Western Europe and probably a Persian themed Eastern Europe.

Instead of running east, Hannibal runs westword to a little known (but probably documented lets be fair its kinda big) island of impressive size off of the coast of (his childhood home) Spain. Rebuilds a new Carthage but has to name it something else since I think there's another New Carthage in Spain. Lays low long enough to become a major Mediterranean player and Hannibal's great great great grandsons lead the new Atlantean army to retake the western coast of Europe and crush armies lead by Caesar and Pompey.

This is a good idea user.

Dude. A landmass that size would be a massive superpower, probably Iberian to begin with, Carthage would probably never exist.

That's just out of reach for celts, but well within range for Iberian ancestors.

Goddamit, we have another Spain don't we?

But, would it be conquered by the Moors like Spain, or would it be what Spain could have been if they didn't invade? Hell, could the Iberians migrate over when the Moors came in?

>There would be no Germans. History will be completely unrecognizable. If PoD for this continent is far enough in the past, humans might not even evolve at all.

THIS. You've completely changed weather patterns, climate, the ranges of different flora and fauna, even things like erosion and the course of rivers. Points of divergence this "deep" in time are impossible to honestly follow though.

Anyone asking about how the Romans or French or whatever would change is completely missing the picture.

The Iberian Peninsula has a surface area of 600,000 square km and Atlantis looks about five times as big, or 3 million km^2. Let's assume Atlantis is just west of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, the depth of the ocean was about 4km in our original timeline in that area, and that the undersea parts of the continental plate take and extra Iberia or two of space. We've now arrived at roughly 15 million cubic km of water. The surface area of all oceans is 360 million km^2, therefore the oceans would rise about 4cm.

Thermal expansion effects would not be much higher; rather, I think blocking the gulf stream would prolong glacial periods, binding much of the oceans to continental glaciers.

This, the Carthaginians or Greeks would make a better civilization to sail over the ocean if we want to use real life cultures instead of just deciding that a massive continent in the middle of the Atlantic wouldn't completely fuck up the timeline millions of years in the past.

And if we want to go full "Barcids rule Atlantis" conspiracy theory crazy, there's always this curious find to support it...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthaginian_coins_of_Corvo

It would completely fuck up climate in Europe. And it's a massive piece of land where Azores are IRL, so go fucking figure if it wouldn't be settled by Phenicians (assuming it would be fertile)

Oh wait, I probably fucked the math up. A depth of 15/360 km, not meters, so a 40 meter rise. It's a big rise, unless there's an ice age and the sea level is 120 meters below modern times.

I apologize, it's like 5am. Somebody with a clear mind should really double check that.

>I apologize, it's like 5am.
Look at the minimap in the OP when you wake up.

Carthage may actually stand a chance if atlantis exist
Also europes climate is completely BTFO

Jesus fuck not him but shit, the whole of Earth's history is going to be rewritten.

>Continents are determined solely by size
Interesting. Do you consider Australia a continent, island, or country?

I consider it an island country, and part of the continent Oceania.

I'm more concerned with what the fuck has happened to the New World. It's been split into three continents with assorted islands of varying size.

Vikings would have had that shit settled first.

I'm a vikingaboo and I'll admit that Phoenicians would likely have beaten them to the punch. Norse seafaring didn't really take off until 800 AD and onward.

I guess it was split into Lemuria, Mu and Greenland

Do Ultima Thule and Hyperborea exist as well? I really want those crazy ancient lost knowledge history stuff like that to be true

Atlantis would probably have limited contact with Europe until the late middle ages. Those waters are pretty intense in RL and will only get worse when you factor in reefs and shit from a new continent.

It's not a midpoint. It's right fucking next to North America and pretty far from Europe.

Early morning bump. This thread is giving me a mental boner.

Why Persian themed eastern europe?

Not that guy, but I'd say that after thinking about it for a while that you're probably right ... although if it didn't have a bunch of other islands in relatively close proximity it would be it's own country. as much as my American Education is screaming at me to call it a continent.

I'd say that the 3 lesser continents out west are far enough apart to be as alien/unknown to each other as they are to Europe.

There is no Gulf Stream and as such Britain gets actual distinct seasons and less rain.

The date on the OP screen cap shows it as 1444.

I'm going to suggest that there is a Rome, or Rome equivalent, that rules much of the Mediterranean coastline from Gibraltar to Constantinople on both the north and south shores. Except for the much contested Nile delta, that's still Egypt. Egypt has spread and amalgamated damn near everything along the length of that river from it's source to it's end. Capital of Egypt keeps varying between Axom, Cairo and a few other of the big/ancient cities in that long valley. Extremely stratified society, extremely ritualized and with at least 3 or 4 conflicting cosmologies/religions. Also extremely insular. They don't often leave their river lands, you don't generally get invited to stay.

Scandinavia and the British Isles are more than a dozen major nations and a bunch of independent islands. Mostly exist in a state of angry inter-tribal skirmish until some dipshit outsider (usually German) sticks their dick into the mix. Then they all unite to fucking overkill the interloper. They own the coats of the North, Baltic and North Atlantic seas from Novgorod to Britney to Iceland and the north coast of Atlantis.

I think I could agree that Australia would be its own country if it was more isolated. I consider Antarctica to be a full fledged continent, mostly because it's nearly twice Australia's size.

Meh, the tin is in southern England.

>At the same time Africa gets corn, beans and potatoes a thousand years earlier which accellerates their development.

BLACKENED

The atlantic coast had enough shipping for Cesar to casually ferry an army across the dover straits though.

There actually was a land there long ago.

This Atlantis is definitely isolated enough to be a Continent, being in the center of the Atlantic between America and Europe, but do you think it is big enough? Due to its isolation from other it would probably be considered one at first.

>>At the same time Africa gets corn, beans and potatoes a thousand years earlier which accellerates their development
user, at this point Western Africa would've been long conquered by Atlantis

I personally just see it as a large island country, like Greenland.

To ancient and medieval peoples, though, then yeah, they'd probably think it's like a brand new continent to explore en masse like the Americas and later Africa were.

Would the Atlantians be more technologically advanced than the Europeans and thus find the Europeans first. We should probably assume that there are people there somehow. also what about going in the opposite direction to the americas that would probably be significantly easier.

>Would the Atlantians be more technologically advanced than the Europeans
Their position would benefit trade and technology on both continents so it depends on climate changes in Europe.

This post explains the climate changes that would probably happen in Europe. Atlantians would thus have more advanced technology than both Europe and America.

yeah, they got conquered by bankers.

The problem is how would the Atlanteans have contact with Asia? Unless they develop their own version of gunpowder, they would either have to go the long way around the globe or through Europe.

I'd assume that the Atlantians would have discovered Europe due to proximity and currents before we discovered them. Also typically Atlantis is depicted as more technologically advanced than others around them.

Also they are hogging all the good weather, so they may have a considerable head start because of this. Although western side of the landmass will get horrific storms given the lack of the Americas.

Possibly, assuming they aren't naturally imperialistic, they will still have merged/subsumed the eastern side of Iberia and north Africa.

So, what kind of people are the Atlantean?
Numenorean like?

Probably through Europe.
Americas are still possible in Op's pic and probably exist.

They'd probably be a combination of Iberian and Germanic peoples.

Whiter people in the north and darker people in the south.

If they went through Europe, we'd probably be on the same level of technology. It'd just turn into a non-european power that could keep even with the european technology advance. Maybe.

Not according to the minimap in the corner of OP's pic.

There are 3 big non-connected landmasses and a few smaller islands.

The effects from a geological change like that will impact humanity's social and cultural development from the first, yet you fuckwits are still talking about Rome, Carthage, etc?

How stupid are you people?

Yes. Sadly the spanish plan to invade China along with Japan wasn't approved because spaniards couldn't pay it .

Oops I missed that but is it possible that the minimap isn't fully filled out?

This.

This seems to be the type of thread to ask, but what if the world was like pic related? Where the whole world was flipped upside down? What changes?

Weather patterns and geography are so different that you might as well stop with alternate history and just use it as a springboard for your fantasy novel