File talk:Map catholic provinces 2.JPG

From IBWiki

Nice map. Ok, a few questions: 1) Are those diocies or archdiocies?

These are "provinces", areas greater than diocese. Many dioceses would be too small for such a wide are map.

2) Why two A's in "New Amsterdam"?

'S Batavian?

3) Why is Ontario's main RC Province called "Ontario", and not something like "Toronto"?

Like "The Caribbean", it is relatively new and carved out of other provinces. changed

4) Why aren't the provinces in Louisianne named?

I don't know the names. ;) Dan will have to help me with chief cities of those areas.

The orange one would probably be Lyons-sur-Mizouri, while the yellow one would probably be Paris-sur-Mizouri Nik 21:51, 16 December 2006 (PST)

Ta.Elemtilas need names for a few, now

5) Surely there would be a province of "Frankfort", centred in Kentucky and also covering Tenisi, Miami and Illinoise?

Those areas are mostly British Catholic (settled by Scots, Kemrese and Irish). Not enough of a Roman Catholic presence to subdivide.

Kentucky and Illinoise are English provinces of the NAL, and, as such, would be mostly Roman Catholic. There would probably be some Roman Catholics in Tenisi and Miami too. (Ok, so maybe Tenisi would be a part of Mobile or Atlanta.) --Sikulu 03:08, 18 December 2006 (PST)

English, perhaps, but settled by non Romans, by in large. English-speaking Kemrese Rite Catholics. Whoda thunkit?

Well, inferring from the timeline, the king of Northumbria became British-rite Catholic (i.e. following the Synod of Whitby). I'm not sure how many (English-speaking) British-rite Catholics there are in England now, however, but the number would probably have reduced (at least proportionatly) following the Norman Conquest at least. I still think that Kentucky and Illinoise would be mostly Roman-rite Catholic, or at least be mostly RC. I'm not saying that there aren't any British-rite Catholics there (there are probably quite a few), but the RC's would probably be the majoraty. From this article, there are a lot of British-rite Catholics in Ouisconsin, but there is no such information about either Kentucky (not that I've actually written much about it yet) or Illinoise. Since the settlers mostly came from Virginia (as far as I'm aware), the catholics would probably be mostly Roman-rite. --Sikulu 02:48, 21 December 2006 (PST)

I'm not making myself clear. Much of that region was settled by Scots and Kemrese - not Englishmen. Let's not assume that "settled by X" means that "X's motherland rules that province"! All it means is that people of Scottish and Kemrese descent live in what are now Anglo-oriented provinces. Nothing strange there at all. Consider the overwhelming population of New Sweden are people of Kemrese and English descent! I very much hope that the NAL isn't seen as a snapshot of the Old World... Elemtilas 18:26, 22 December 2006 (PST)

* I would agree about the Ontario/Toronto Province. I would also suggest that maybe Savannah would be the name of the Jacobia Province (because it is older). But that is only a suggestion. Zahir 08:26, 16 December 2006 (PST)

Why Savannah? Atlanta is the capital of Jacobia; Charleston is the capital of Carolina. If Savannah was the capital at an earlier time, then I certainly have no problem with that being the province's name.

Elemtilas 16:02, 16 December 2006 (PST)

Well, Atlanta wasn't founded until around 1835, whereas Savannah existed at least a century before that. And yeah, Savannah was once the capital. Zahir 16:54, 16 December 2006 (PST) changed

Were the Floridas formerly under Miami before the Florida War? Nik 21:49, 16 December 2006 (PST)

I would think that before 1898, the whole Caribbean would be in the province of Habana; Florida would probably be St. Augustine; and of course it would all come under the umbrella of the "patriarchy" of the West Indies. Whichever bishop happened to have been granted that title, as it was movable. I think immediately after 1898 and perhaps until the 1950s, the situation would remain the same. Probably sometime thereafter, and recognising the political reality of the region, the whole region would have been transfered to Miami or Habana. I would lean towards Habana, since it had long been the chief city of the Caribbean region, and don't forget it was one of the capital cities of F-C. Thus, the province of St. Augustine would have been absorbed into the province of Habana.

Of course, after the war, a new political reality has and continues to emerge. Clearly, Cuba and Porto Rico simply disentangled themselves from the ruins of F-C, and the rest of the Caribbean states (those pertaining to the Commonwealth, the French and the Batavians) were liberated, so it makes sense for a redrawing of the borders again. The old province of St. Augustine, being in the NAL's provinces of East and West Florida, got transferred to Mobile. This time the province of Habana is reduced to the country of Cuba; a new province of San Juan is created; and a new temporary province of Miami is created to oversee the European ZOC in Occupied Florida. It is unlikely that all the new countries springing up in the Irish ZOC will become provinces unto themselves. If anything, they would be transferred to Mobile as well or else Habana. The wreckage of the RTC's ZOC might end up going the same way. Another possibility is the unification of all of Florida under a newly recreated province of St. Augustine. Will remain to be seen.

Elemtilas 08:24, 17 December 2006 (PST)

Don't forget, though, that the Floridas would be Isidorian Rite Roman Catholics. East and West Florida would probably have some Latin (i.e. Anglo-use) Rite Roman Catholics too. Therefore, shouldn't East and West Florida be in their own Province of "St. Augustine"? --Sikulu 03:08, 18 December 2006 (PST)

Indeed it is! The Isidorian Rite is not a Uniate church though. Like the Ambrosian and English and various other rites, it is part of the Roman Catholic Church. There is no separate structure or hierarchy. Indeed, there will almost certainly be some Latin Rite folks in Florida. Elemtilas 10:43, 18 December 2006 (PST)

Fair enough. --Sikulu 03:32, 20 December 2006 (PST)

about provinces' number

If the provinces on the list are meant to be equivalent to what we have *here*, there probably should be more: Quebec has 5. --Marc Pasquin 16:31, 19 December 2006 (PST)

Realy? If you look here[[1]] you'll see that there are only eight Anglican Provinces in the whole of the US. Of course, thats the Anglicans, so that might not be a fair comparison. --Sikulu 03:32, 20 December 2006 (PST)

Indeed, Canada has only four Anglican provinces, QC being part of the "Province of Canada".

The (RC) province of Quebec is what's left of the once very large Vicariate of New France. It makes sense that what remains, after having lost LA and much other territory to the British, of that larger ancient territory is the modern state of New France. It is undoubtedly divided into several dioceses, but as I said, this is not a diocesan map. This province of Quebec does have the prestige of being the oldest Roman Catholic ecclesiastical territory north of Mejico. *Here*, the bishop of Quebec is styled "Primate of Canada"; *there*, there's not much of "Canada" for him to be primate of. There might be a traditional cardinalcy or similar. One other reason why NF is not divided into several provinces is that it is relatively small (area and population) and its population is centered in the southern third or so (like *here*). There could be other historical and / or political reasons for this situation. Elemtilas 11:09, 20 December 2006 (PST)

I wasn't talking about dioceses but indeed about roman catholic ecclesiastical provinces (an archdioceses + a bunch of dioceses) and there are 5 in Quebec: Quebec (city), Rimouski, Montreal, Sherbrooke & Gatineau.

Since provinces are all headed by a metropolitan archidoceses, here a list *here* of them all:

http://www.gcatholic.com/dioceses/data/typemetr.htm

Why would you use the anglican provinces as basis for a roman catholic map ? --Marc Pasquin 16:03, 20 December 2006 (PST)

And I wasn't talking about Anglican provinces, either, but *there*'s RC provinces. Anglican provinces got thrown into the mix. Elemtilas 16:49, 20 December 2006 (PST)

I should also say that this map is not based on any map from *here*, except that I had a shufty at a map of RC provinces in the US to get an idea for how things might work out *there*. Elemtilas 11:05, 21 December 2006 (PST)

That still doesn't explain the difference in number. *here* there are over 500 provinces which considering the number of countries that exist and especialy the number of them that have a sizeable catholic population means that you would have on average more then 2 provinces a country unless they happen to have little to no catholics.

Note that the size of NF in relation to Quebec would have no impact on the number of its provinces. None of the five are centered in the north and in any case, Nunavik (*here* and I would assume *there*) has a population of about 10,000 meaning less then 0.1 % of the population of either NF or QC.

All things being the same then, I think you should only fiddle around with these things if IB's counterpart of a given province is obviously of a different rite: *here* texas has 2 RC provinces but since *there* the tejan are probably mostly isidorian, then 1 province would probablyt be sufficient. --Marc Pasquin 15:48, 22 December 2006 (PST)

Let's see -- do you have a map of (*here*'s) QC's provinces I can look at? Elemtilas 18:26, 22 December 2006 (PST)

Not of the provinces themselves but the dioceses can be seen here:

http://www.eveques.qc.ca/carte3.JPG

And this wikipedia list will tell you which dioceses belong are linked with which archdioceses:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholicism_in_Canada

Note that the 2 dioceses in what is Nunavik are part *here* of an ecclesiatical province which metropolitan see is in manitoba so there they would probably be part of one centered in the unincorporated territory. --Marc Pasquin 08:16, 23 December 2006 (PST)

About the new map

The new map is great and all, but some of those numbers are rather hard to read, since their background colour is rather dark. --Sikulu 02:58, 21 December 2006 (PST)

Better? PB

Much. Thanks. --Sikulu 02:39, 22 December 2006 (PST)

Unnamed Louisiannan Provinces

Of the list the following changes should be made:

ij. Le Caillou

iij. Saint-Louis

v. Chambéon

vj. Omaha

iiix. Brest

--BoArthur 20:11, 26 May 2009 (UTC)