I am slightly confused by how the media and our government has been portraying the territory that ISIL controls, I'm wondering if there are any other maps, or if there is any historical precedence for how the control of territory is shown in areas where there is conflict, or if drawing in this way is completely new. It seems as if it is being drawn in a way that would down play their territory.
I think what you're seeing is the effect of an unorganized force operating in an area where we have a lot of current information, which is something that may be unique in history. You're also seeing the development of mapmaking techniques and habits. If you look at modern maps of the Vietnam War, you can find maps that look a lot like the ones being produced to document the ISIL conflict.
But what about maps created farther back to document contemporaneous events?
If the event involved an organized force, you'd probably see something like this map documenting the situation at Khe Sanh, Vietnam, in 1968. You can see the North Vietnamese units labeled in a situation that was very much fluid at the time. The NVA had organized units because they were an organized military, and you could pick out specific groups without much effort.
Now, if you look at the Vietcong situation, it's much closer to ISIL in that it's operating in small units over a geographically wide area. This map of the 1970 U.S. incursion into Cambodia Is the closest thing I've been able to come up with that compares to what you're talking about.
hi all. Just a quick mod reminder that the question is about maps in the past, not these ones nor this conflict. Respect the sub's "20-year rule" and keep all discussion about events prior to 1995 only. Thanks!
