NationStates Jolt Archive

Due to the profound success of the Improved Map of the United States, I have decided to do Europe next!

http://www.kuattech.com/iuro.png

Purple: Ireland
Turqoise: Scotland
Blue: England
Light Blue: Greater Spain
Violet: Greater France
Red: Greater Germany
Light... Green: Italy
Yellow: Bohemia
Green: Slavia
Puke Green: Greece
Orange: Greater Romania
Dark Red: Poland
Mud Blue: Scandinavia
Dark Purple: Russia

Sorry mate. We got robbed a while ago and arent as big as you make it look we are ;)

whats the kaki green in finnland and northern russia:? greater finnland

Purple: Ireland
Turqoise: Scotland
Blue: England



You do realise that all of the British Isles are coloured blue in your map? Maybe I'm jsut not getting the joke here.

I would have preferred a greater Hungary... that would have been cool.

It is fairly accurate in that it doesn't depict the mythical country of Belgium.

You do realise that all of the British Isles are coloured blue in your map? Maybe I'm jsut not getting the joke here.

They are all different shades of blue.

Sorry mate. We got robbed a while ago and arent as big as you make it look we are

Es ist ein "Besserkarte". Deutschland, Polen, Niederlande, Schweiz, und Oesterreich sind Deutschereiche... (forgive my poor german)

Is it only me or does Bohemia actually try to penetrate Germany?

Nothing wrong with that of course, as Germany screwed the Czechs last time around. ;)

Due to the profound success of the Improved Map of the United States, I have decided to do Europe next!

http://www.kuattech.com/iuro.png

Purple: Ireland
Turqoise: Scotland
Blue: England
Light Blue: Greater Spain
Violet: Greater France
Red: Greater Germany
Light... Green: Italy
Yellow: Bohemia
Green: Slavia
Puke Green: Greece
Orange: Greater Romania
Dark Red: Poland
Mud Blue: Scandinavia
Dark Purple: Russia
What is that supposed to be?

Is it only me or does Bohemia actually try to penetrate Germany?

Nothing wrong with that of course, as Germany screwed the Czechs last time around. ;)
Actually it was the French and British that did the screwing.

Due to the profound success of the Improved Map of the United States, I have decided to do Europe next!
What kind of map is that? European borders changed a lot. But Europe never looked like that, though???

Es ist ein "Besserkarte". Deutschland, Polen, Niederlande, Schweiz, und Oesterreich sind Deutschereiche... (forgive my poor german)
Well, Switzerland broke away already in the 13 th century. And the "small German solution" was already passed in 1849 by the national assembly - which got dissolved however by the monarchs. But in 1866 Prussia kicked Austria out of German affairs. And allowing it back (via the Austrian Hitler) wasn´t such a great idea though.

Actually it was the French and British that did the screwing.

Fair point, but ruins the joke. :(

And I dare say Germany wasn't blameless either.

Well, Post WW1, the French did the screwing. The Treaty of Versailles was the most cruel treaty ever written, and set the stage for WW2. The British protested against it, and the United States refused to sign it (The treaty between the USA and Weimar Germany was signed in 1921).

Switzerland was not part of Germany at any time, unless you count the Holy Roman Empire as Germany (some do, some don't, it was majority German). After the HRE collapsed in the Napoleonic Wars, Switzerland became part of France... they won their independence... from France.

Also, my Greater Germany is imperial, btw. Hohenzollern Kaiser. I gave back their ancestral Polish lands, and unified the "Germanic" Dutch, Austrians, and Swiss (technically, by all accounts, the Dutch are are of Germanic descent, and were part of the HRE).

I extended france to include majority French-Belgium, and took Portugal and gave it to Spain (dunno why, I guess I don't like Portugal). I gave Italy some of it's former land back, and also unified the Baltic states, hopefully lending some stability to the region. I unified the Upper Slavic states (Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland). Bohemia is a more accurate term than Greater Hungary. I also contributed to stability in Ireland by unifiying it. Scotland I gave independence.

I also contributed to stability in Ireland by unifiying it. Scotland I gave independence.

Whether unifying Ireland would contirbute to its stability or not is debateable, but why are Scotland & Ireland the same colour as England on your map, but not on th legend?

Es ist ein "Besserkarte". Deutschland, Polen, Niederlande, Schweiz, und Oesterreich sind Deutschereiche... (forgive my poor german)

Oh, I'll forgive your bad knowlidge about Europe :p

You give the Netherlands to a greater Germany (because they have a Germanic language: Dutch) and you give Belgium to France while 80% of the country speaks also Dutch, the Flemish part. Wow dude, strange thinking. Won't go in the rest of the pure wishfull thinking of US(S)R's that like to see a devided concurent crap. BTW, I like to discuss that but your cart shows no factual knowedge of Europe. A cart from the middle ages would even make more sense.

is a more accurate term than Greater Hungary.

If you're going to combine Bohemia and Hungary, I would put Transylvania in there, too, as that was part of Hungary until after WWI.

One thing I don't get is the reasoning behind joining some countries that have only been joint very short times in history, while splitting the Brittish Isles into three countries. (I unlike others can see the different shades of blue, with a bit of strain to the eye.)

The Jugoslavia you have (which has annected Albania for some reason) hasn't much going for it, infact without dictatorial governing it would probably fall victim to civil war - again.

The greater Hungary, which you laughingly call Bohemia, hasn't had close to those borders without being a part of the Habsburgian empire. Actually, it would probably make more sence to make Bohemia a part of Germany.

And what's the point in having free baltic states. Do as history has done, let Russia, Sweden or even Denmark annect them.

All that is just minor points though, your utter lack of historical knowledge makes the whole idea of this being an 'improved map' a laughing matter. People want to be free - let them.

(I unlike others can see the different shades of blue, with a bit of strain to the eye.)

Obviously my eyesight is failing me in my twilight years.

Either that I or just have a crap monitor.

Germany gets screwed!

Switzerland was not part of Germany at any time, unless you count the Holy Roman Empire as Germany (some do, some don't, it was majority German). After the HRE collapsed in the Napoleonic Wars, Switzerland became part of France... they won their independence... from France. .Switzerland was never complettly conquored by Napoleon. He could have done it, but he was too lazy - or lets say he was to busy with the rest of Europe.
Historically there was the Franc Emire (tilll 843) which included France,. Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxemburg and Italy. Ironically those were also the founding members of the EEC (Today EU) in 1957.
That got divided into three parts in 843 due to dynastic disputes. The West Franc Empire developed into modern France, and the score of the East Franc Empire into Germany. In 911 the Karoligin dynasty died out in the East Franc Empire. A saxonian dynasty was elected (by the other dukes) to succeed and to get the crown of the East Franc Empire. In 920 there were the first coins which didn´t speak about an East Franc Empire but about rex teutonicum or rex teutonicorum (Deutschland - Germany). So, it can be argued that some kind of early nation building took place. In the 11 th century we can detect the existence of Middle High German as a common language of the knives, e.g. Though it was not up until Martin Luther (bible translation) and the German classic ( end of the 18 th century, Romanticism 19 th century) a common language was created by literature. In 1903 Switzerland, Austria and Germany agreed for common rules for the German language (three state commission).


Also, my Greater Germany is imperial, btw. Hohenzollern Kaiser. I gave back their ancestral Polish lands, and unified the "Germanic" Dutch, Austrians, and Swiss (technically, by all accounts, the Dutch are are of Germanic descent, and were part of the HRE)..
Well: Brits, Danes, Norwegians, Swedes, Dutch, Austrians, Swiss Germans and Germans are all "geranic" since they have germanic languages France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, parts of Switzerland and Belgium and Romania are romanic since they speak romanic languages. Should all those be unified into one country? That is rather fictionous. The Romanic unity (Roman Empire) has collapsed and a germanic unity never existed.
And the Holy Roman Empire was from the end of the Middle Ages til its end in 1806 dominated by the Habsburger ´(Austrian dynasty). Druing the 30-year war (1618-48) they were actually close to unite Central Europe again with the Counter-reformation (rolling back the Reformation). But Sweden and (catholic) France intervened in favour of the protestant dukes and prevented that. As a result the country remained divided till 1871. Though Austria played still the major role. The rise of Prussia was in the 18 th and 19 th century. They never dominated the HRE. Even the German Confederation (1815-66) was more dominated by Austria (it had the presidency in it). Though Prussia was economically stronger and established the customs union in 1834, which excluded Austria. And the revolution of 1848/49 tried to unite (customs union Germany - small Germany - excluding Austria).
Well: in 1866 the Prussians kicked the Austrians out (German war), disoved the Confederation and founded the NOrth German Federation (1866-71) which was already the basis for the Empire of 1871 (only South Germany needed to be added to it after a little war with France (1870/71).

I extended france to include majority French-Belgium, and took Portugal and gave it to Spain (dunno why, I guess I don't like Portugal). I gave Italy some of it's former land back, and also unified the Baltic states, hopefully lending some stability to the region. I unified the Upper Slavic states (Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland). Bohemia is a more accurate term than Greater Hungary. I also contributed to stability in Ireland by unifiying it. Scotland I gave independence.
Estonia is not a slavic state. It has more connections to Finnland actually. It would make more sense to untie those two. Lithuania and Poland actually formed one Kingdom onces (personal union, Middle age: after it got divided between its neighbours (Russia, Prussia, Austria) at the end of the 18 th century (end of existence of a polish state in 1795 after the third division- till 1918 - exception Napoleonic years)
Bohemias is not at all an accurate term. Bohemia is not even accurate to equal Czech Republic. It is the same as calling Britain England. It is the major part of it but not more. Hungary never dominated or ruled Bohemia. It ruled Slovakia and Croatia. Though those two split apart of course. The Czechoslovakian experiment also failed due to the fact that it was dominated by the Czechs and the Slovaks didn´t like. Europe is multi-ethnic and diverse.
Therefore it is not possible to bring stability through big Empires, but through bigger and smaller nation states who cooperate with each other. IN that sense an instituition like the EU serves a great purpose for all of Europe.

Oh, I'll forgive your bad knowlidge about Europe :p

You give the Netherlands to a greater Germany (because they have a Germanic language: Dutch) and you give Belgium to France while 80% of the country speaks also Dutch, the Flemish part. Wow dude, strange thinking. Won't go in the rest of the pure wishfull thinking of US(S)R's that like to see a devided concurent crap. BTW, I like to discuss that but your cart shows no factual knowedge of Europe. A cart from the middle ages would even make more sense.

Actually, I have extensively studied 19th and 20th century Europe. Belgium was a part of France for some time... I was under the assumption that Dutch is not widely spoken, since the CIA says that their national language is French...


Switzerland was never complettly conquored by Napoleon. He could have done it, but he was too lazy - or lets say he was to busy with the rest of Europe.
Historically there was the Franc Emire (tilll 843) which included France,. Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxemburg and Italy. Ironically those were also the founding members of the EEC (Today EU) in 1957.
That got divided into three parts in 843 due to dynastic disputes. The West Franc Empire developed into modern France, and the score of the East Franc Empire into Germany. In 911 the Karoligin dynasty died out in the East Franc Empire. A saxonian dynasty was elected (by the other dukes) to succeed and to get the crown of the East Franc Empire. In 920 there were the first coins which didn´t speak about an East Franc Empire but about rex teutonicum or rex teutonicorum (Deutschland - Germany). So, it can be argued that some kind of early nation building took place. In the 11 th century we can detect the existence of Middle High German as a common language of the knives, e.g. Though it was not up until Martin Luther (bible translation) and the German classic ( end of the 18 th century, Romanticism 19 th century) a common language was created by literature. In 1903 Switzerland, Austria and Germany agreed for common rules for the German language (three state commission).

Well: Brits, Danes, Norwegians, Swedes, Dutch, Austrians, Swiss Germans and Germans are all "geranic" since they have germanic languages France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, parts of Switzerland and Belgium and Romania are romanic since they speak romanic languages. Should all those be unified into one country? That is rather fictionous. The Romanic unity (Roman Empire) has collapsed and a germanic unity never existed.
And the Holy Roman Empire was from the end of the Middle Ages til its end in 1806 dominated by the Habsburger ´(Austrian dynasty). Druing the 30-year war (1618-48) they were actually close to unite Central Europe again with the Counter-reformation (rolling back the Reformation). But Sweden and (catholic) France intervened in favour of the protestant dukes and prevented that. As a result the country remained divided till 1871. Though Austria played still the major role. The rise of Prussia was in the 18 th and 19 th century. They never dominated the HRE. Even the German Confederation (1815-66) was more dominated by Austria (it had the presidency in it). Though Prussia was economically stronger and established the customs union in 1834, which excluded Austria. And the revolution of 1848/49 tried to unite (customs union Germany - small Germany - excluding Austria).
Well: in 1866 the Prussians kicked the Austrians out (German war), disoved the Confederation and founded the NOrth German Federation (1866-71) which was already the basis for the Empire of 1871 (only South Germany needed to be added to it after a little war with France (1870/71).

Estonia is not a slavic state. It has more connections to Finnland actually. It would make more sense to untie those two. Lithuania and Poland actually formed one Kingdom onces (personal union, Middle age: after it got divided between its neighbours (Russia, Prussia, Austria) at the end of the 18 th century (end of existence of a polish state in 1795 after the third division- till 1918 - exception Napoleonic years)
Bohemias is not at all an accurate term. Bohemia is not even accurate to equal Czech Republic. It is the same as calling Britain England. It is the major part of it but not more. Hungary never dominated or ruled Bohemia. It ruled Slovakia and Croatia. Though those two split apart of course. The Czechoslovakian experiment also failed due to the fact that it was dominated by the Czechs and the Slovaks didn´t like. Europe is multi-ethnic and diverse.
Therefore it is not possible to bring stability through big Empires, but through bigger and smaller nation states who cooperate with each other. IN that sense an instituition like the EU serves a great purpose for all of Europe.

Danke for your overview of Europe, primarily the stuff I already knew :)

I am not sure why you are calling Finland a non-slavic state. It is considered slavic by the majority of researchers. At least, when compared to the Scandinavian states (Denmark, Sweden, Norway).

Also, I could give France to Germany, if you wish, seeing as the Franks were a German tribe (Although French is most definately a Romance language).

I do not have time to address all the issues, but one major inconsistancy is that you stated the Austro-Prussian War as a "War of Germany". It was a war of domination. The Hohenzollerns wanted control of the Germanic states to be by Prussia, and not a Hapsburg (Austria). Needless to say, Prussia victored.

The North German confederation was not part of Prussia. After the Franco-Prussian war in 1871, unifying the empire was easy, especially since they coronated Wilhelm "Deutches Kaiser", or German Emperor, at Versailles, France. Apparently, this was humiliating, since German Emperor would refer to him as a "German" Emperor, and not the Emperor of "Germany".

I am not sure why you are calling Finland a non-slavic state. It is considered slavic by the majority of researchers. At least, when compared to the Scandinavian states (Denmark, Sweden, Norway).



What what what!? Majority of researchers are complitely wrong then. Finland is part of Scandinavia as are Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Iceland. Sometimes they use a term Fennoscandia which includes Finland, Sweden and Norway. Estonia has been a part of Soviet Union but there are two nationalities, Estonians who are very close to Finnish and Slavs who moved there from Russian. Finnish are not even originally Slavs but a mixture of west europeans, some wierd nation from Ural mountains and slavs. Even Hungarians are closer to Finns than slavs and the same goes with Estonians.

What what what!? Majority of researchers are complitely wrong then. Finland is part of Scandinavia as are Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Iceland. Sometimes they use a term Fennoscandia which includes Finland, Sweden and Norway. Estonia has been a part of Soviet Union but there are two nationalities, Estonians who are very close to Finnish and Slavs who moved there from Russian. Finnish are not even originally Slavs but a mixture of west europeans, some wierd nation from Ural mountains and slavs. Even Hungarians are closer to Finns than slavs and the same goes with Estonians.

actually, if you look up scandinavian countries, its only norway, sweden and denmark. I personally thought finland was part of scandinavia, but most sources say it is not.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Scandinavia

not sure, but i think your refering to finno-Ugric (sp?), whereas most europeans are indo-european. I believe that correct anyway...

I am not sure why you are calling Finland a non-slavic state. It is considered slavic by the majority of researchers. At least, when compared to the Scandinavian states (Denmark, Sweden, Norway).
Helioterra has answered that. Fins are Fins. Fins, Estonians and Hungarians are related and different from the Slaves.
Finnland and Estonia are - if at all - more related to Scandinavia than to their slavic neighbours. They once belonged to Sweden actually.

Also, I could give France to Germany, if you wish, seeing as the Franks were a German tribe (Although French is most definately a Romance language).).
It is indeed. You could of course also Germany to France as Napoleon tried to do. Didn´t work. They need to be seperate. Though a close alliance is indeed preferable for the stability of Europe.


The North German confederation was not part of Prussia. After the Franco-Prussian war in 1871, unifying the empire was easy, especially since they coronated Wilhelm "Deutches Kaiser", or German Emperor, at Versailles, France. Apparently, this was humiliating, since German Emperor would refer to him as a "German" Emperor, and not the Emperor of "Germany".
It was not part of Prussia but Prussia had hegemony within it since it even annected the Kingdom of Hannover (that dynasty by the way related to the house Windsor), Schleswig-Holstein, parts of Hesse and Frankfurt. Those anncetions were the result of the German war of 1866. Prussia actually had 90% of the population of the North German Confederation in their territory. They completly ruled it. And South Germany was already bound due to the customs union and (secret) defense alliances (the rulers were of the south were concerned about territorial ambitions of Napoleon II (1853-1870).
The war of 1870/71 was just the last step towards Prussian hegemony over Germany. The first was the customs union. The next was the attempt of the Erfurt union policy in 1850 - which followed the repression of the democratic revolution - which was however blocked by Austria and Russia. The most successful steps were during the 1860s under prime minister Bismarck. With three steps (German-Denish war 1864, German war 1866 and the Franco-German war in 1870/71).


I do not have time to address all the issues, but one major inconsistancy is that you stated the Austro-Prussian War as a "War of Germany". It was a war of domination. The Hohenzollerns wanted control of the Germanic states to be by Prussia, and not a Hapsburg (Austria). Needless to say, Prussia victored.".
It is Habsburg btw. And it in Germany called the German war because it was a war between German states. Actually, some south german states (even Saxony) sided with Austria in it - and lost. One reason for the annections (Hannover, Hesse, Frankfurt). Punishment for those who sided with the "wrong" side.


The North German confederation was not part of Prussia. After the Franco-Prussian war in 1871, unifying the empire was easy, especially since they coronated Wilhelm "Deutches Kaiser", or German Emperor, at Versailles, France. Apparently, this was humiliating, since German Emperor would refer to him as a "German" Emperor, and not the Emperor of "Germany".
The entire thing was intended as a humiliation and a revenge for 1806 were France humiliated Prussia by taking away half of its territory.
Well: and the revenge for that was in 1918 again in Versailles.
But with the policy of the 1950s (settling border disputes, return of the Saarland from France to Germany in 1957 (also called the "little reunification") things were settled and the way was opened to a special partnership, which resulted in the Elysee-treaty of 1963 (de Gaulle/Adenauer).
Without knowing the Franco-German alliance it is not possible to understand European politics in the last 40 years and today.

actually, if you look up scandinavian countries, its only norway, sweden and denmark. I personally thought finland was part of scandinavia, but most sources say it is not.
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Scandinavia
not sure, but i think your refering to finno-Ugric (sp?), whereas most europeans are indo-european. I believe that correct anyway...
It depends what definition you use. Finland is mostly counted as a part of it - thus far as I know. It was for a long part of its history a part of Sweden.
Some also Iceland as part of Scandinavia.
It is like the definition of Europe - close definition, wieder definition or widest definition. Turkey and Cyprus out -Cyprus in/Turkey out - Turkey in.

actually, if you look up scandinavian countries, its only norway, sweden and denmark. I personally thought finland was part of scandinavia, but most sources say it is not.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Scandinavia

not sure, but i think your refering to finno-Ugric (sp?), whereas most europeans are indo-european. I believe that correct anyway...

I didn't know most of people don't count Finland as a part of Scandinavia. That's one of the first things they teach you in school. And I think all five Scandinavian countries (I insist) think there are five of them. At least these countries have worked together in several issues as Scandinavia. For example the Scandinavian open borders. Scandinavians haven't needed a passport travelling around Scandinavia for decades etc
Yes Finns are Finno-Ugric unlike most of western Europeans. I just wanted to say that Finns are not slavs. Finno-Ugric is such a small minority in Europe that's no wonder people don't know we exist.

It depends what definition you use. Finland is mostly counted as a part of it - thus far as I know. It was for a long part of its history a part of Sweden.
Some also Iceland as part of Scandinavia.
It is like the definition of Europe - close definition, wieder definition or widest definition. Turkey and Cyprus out -Cyprus in/Turkey out - Turkey in.

oh true, like most such terms they are ambiguous. But the scandianvia refers to the 3 countries that formed the Kalmar Union normally. They have very similar cultures, and all 3 languages are from the same source. Whereas Finland does not. Its been conquered by sweden. But that is not the same as assimilation. In my eyes anyway

I didn't know most of people don't count Finland as a part of Scandinavia. That's one of the first things they teach you in school. And I think all five Scandinavian countries (I insist) think there are five of them. At least these countries have worked together in several issues as Scandinavia. For example the Scandinavian open borders. Scandinavians haven't needed a passport travelling around Scandinavia for decades etc
Yes Finns are Finno-Ugric unlike most of western Europeans. I just wanted to say that Finns are not slavs. Finno-Ugric is such a small minority in Europe that's no wonder people don't know we exist.
Well: I used to learn about four scandinavian countries and when I think about Scandinavia I think about the four. Iceland used to be forgotten. Well, geographically it is pretty far away from Scandinavia (or the rest of Scandinavia). Though it is the only "Scandinavian" country I´ve been.

As somebody must've stated, Finland isn't (and never has been) part of Scandinavia. Neither is Denmark. Scandinavia is the name of the peninsula in which Norway and Sweden are situated. When Finland was under Swedish rule, sweden was actually Fennoscandian state (if you want to find out why this is, i suggest you google up W. Ramsay... he has named these areas so... it's quite arbitrary really, but still).

Finland of course has much in common with Sweden, Norway and Denmark nowadays... to a certain degree i think Iceland too belongs to this group. In lack of better name, I'd use the term Nordic countries instead of Scandinavian countries - I'm silly that way.

I didn't know most of people don't count Finland as a part of Scandinavia. That's one of the first things they teach you in school. And I think all five Scandinavian countries (I insist) think there are five of them. At least these countries have worked together in several issues as Scandinavia. For example the Scandinavian open borders. Scandinavians haven't needed a passport travelling around Scandinavia for decades etc
Yes Finns are Finno-Ugric unlike most of western Europeans. I just wanted to say that Finns are not slavs. Finno-Ugric is such a small minority in Europe that's no wonder people don't know we exist.

oh i'm sure they can all be considered scandinavian. But only norway, sweden and denmark mutually recognize each other as parts of Scandinavia. The collective label "Scandinavia" reflects the cultural similarity between these countries despite their political independence.

As somebody must've stated, Finland isn't (and never has been) part of Scandinavia. Neither is Denmark. Scandinavia is the name of the peninsula in which Norway and Sweden are situated. When Finland was under Swedish rule, sweden was actually Fennoscandian state (if you want to find out why this is, i suggest you google up W. Ramsay... he has named these areas so... it's quite arbitrary really, but still).

Finland of course has much in common with Sweden, Norway and Denmark nowadays... to a certain degree i think Iceland too belongs to this group. In lack of better name, I'd use the term Nordic countries instead of Scandinavian countries - I'm silly that way.

so nordic = denmark, norway and sweden.
fair enough

+ Finland, Daroth. Here's an easy clue how to remember the nordic countries: take your euro coin, look at the map and think of man's anatomy. Finland is the balls (naturally), Sweden (and Norway) the, well you know, and finally Denmark is the cum drip attached to mainland of Europe. :D

+ Finland, Daroth. Here's an easy clue how to remember the nordic countries: take your euro coin, look at the map and think of man's anatomy. Finland is the balls (naturally), Sweden (and Norway) the, well you know, and finally Denmark is the cum drip attached to mainland of Europe. :D

are there alot of seamen in finland?

oh true, like most such terms they are ambiguous. But the scandianvia refers to the 3 countries that formed the Kalmar Union normally. They have very similar cultures, and all 3 languages are from the same source. Whereas Finland does not. Its been conquered by sweden. But that is not the same as assimilation. In my eyes anyway
And Turkey was never assimilated by Europe either. They have just conquored parts of it and were pushed out later.
And they have a complettly different cultures - which can´t be said from Finns and Swedes though. The cultural break is rather towards Russia, but not between Sweden and Finland.

As somebody must've stated, Finland isn't (and never has been) part of Scandinavia. Neither is Denmark. Scandinavia is the name of the peninsula in which Norway and Sweden are situated. When Finland was under Swedish rule, sweden was actually Fennoscandian state (if you want to find out why this is, i suggest you google up W. Ramsay... he has named these areas so... it's quite arbitrary really, but still).
Finland of course has much in common with Sweden, Norway and Denmark nowadays... to a certain degree i think Iceland too belongs to this group. In lack of better name, I'd use the term Nordic countries instead of Scandinavian countries - I'm silly that way.
That is very interesting indeed. I think however we in central Europe may be a bit careful with the use of the word nordic. That at the end boils down to the superiority of the "nordic races".
On the other hand: If we always care about political correctness we would hardly be able to open our mouths anyway.

are there alot of seamen in finland?

LOL. Funny you should ask! According to this one study... that I cannot find right now...well referred here: http://www.reutershealth.com/wellconnected/doc67.html:
Finns indeed have the highest spermcount... So, answering your question: yes, we are loaded. :)

EDIT: what comes to actual seamen, not so many.

The Northern part of Belgium should belong to Greater Germany because Belgium used to be a part of Dutch Kingdom under Wilhelm the 1st(or 2nd).

The majority of Belgium speaks Flemish, which is a Dutch dialect, although a big majority speaks French, the country is made up out of 2 'states' which are Flanders(the Dutch speaking part) and Walonie(the French speaking part) and the entire country is combined on a Federal level under the name Belgium.

Belgium has three official languages instead of one, Dutch, French and German.

That's a rather rough explenation of Belgium.

And Turkey was never assimilated by Europe either. They have just conquored parts of it and were pushed out later.
And they have a complettly different cultures - which can´t be said from Finns and Swedes though. The cultural break is rather towards Russia, but not between Sweden and Finland.

(this looks similar to the other threads we've discussed on lol). Agreed. All i was saying is that finland was not part of the countries that mutually agreed to refer to each other as part of scandinavian.

(this looks similar to the other threads we've discussed on lol). Agreed. All i was saying is that finland was not part of the countries that mutually agreed to refer to each other as part of scandinavian.
Neither is Turkey part of those countries which mutually refer to each other as Europe.
Though Finland it is a nordic country for shure.

Yeah. Scandinavia (except for geographical entity of Sc. peninsula) is largely inside people's heads. It's much like Europe. You can pretty much judge yourself which countries to include, which to exclude. There is however the political entity of Nordic Council. One could argue that members in it are the Nordic countries (my preferred term).
If you are interested about the term Scandinavia, and it's ambiguity, read here (I know, it's not very good, but best short description I could find):
http://www.fact-index.com/s/sc/scandinavia.html

All is fine to us Finns, as long as you don't count us as a part of Russia. ;)

Are you american? Do you know what happened to the "unified" Yugoslavia they made after the second world war? Simplifying isn't improving. A two party government isn't an improvement either...

wtf russia must be 10 times biger

Neither is Turkey part of those countries which mutually refer to each other as Europe.
Though it is a nordic country for shure.

Sod turkey. They're turkmen which are related to mongolians i beleive.
You know i was refering to the scandinavian countries with the whole nordic thing.

The Northern part of Belgium should belong to Greater Germany because Belgium used to be a part of Dutch Kingdom under Wilhelm the 1st(or 2nd).

The majority of Belgium speaks Flemish, which is a Dutch dialect, although a big majority speaks French, the country is made up out of 2 'states' which are Flanders(the Dutch speaking part) and Walonie(the French speaking part) and the entire country is combined on a Federal level under the name Belgium.

Belgium has three official languages instead of one, Dutch, French and German.

That's a rather rough explenation of Belgium.

We've been under France, Spain and Austria too... And we are mainly catholic (non practicing) but there is a cultural difference between mainly protestant and mainly catholic cultures. Ask Northern Ireland. This is a daft thread. Wars are over, everybody is happy, why even consider this. Where the fuck did this idea come from? Someone with an archaic vision on Europe?

(this looks similar to the other threads we've discussed on lol). Agreed. All i was saying is that finland was not part of the countries that mutually agreed to refer to each other as part of scandinavian.
When was that? Cause if I remember right Finland was part of Sweden for a long time.

Are you american? Do you know what happened to the "unified" Yugoslavia they made after the second world war? Simplifying isn't improving. A two party government isn't an improvement either...
Actually it was created first under the treaty of Versailles in 1919. And what happened to it and in it during World War II (Croats versus Serbs)? Well: and in the 1990s of course.

When was that? Cause if I remember right Finland was part of Sweden for a long time.

i beleive finland was part of sweden from the early 16th century to the first few years of the 19th.
But the denmark, sweden and norway have shared the same culture and language (old norsk) since the 8th century i believe. it was these 3 that were the norse/vikings.

Why did you get rid of Portugal? Portugal existed as a country with the same borders it has now long before Spain (1253 for Portugal, late 15th century for Spain). Aside from a short time (not even one lifetime), when they were jointly owned because of a kink in the royal heredity laws, they have always been separate.

like this map myself

http://historymedren.about.com/library/atlas/natmapeur814.htm

i beleive finland was part of sweden from the early 16th century to the first few years of the 19th.
But the denmark, sweden and norway have shared the same culture and language (old norsk) since the 8th century i believe. it was these 3 that were the norse/vikings.
Part of Sweden from at least 11th century. Yeah Witzleben, 'officially' 1323 . Lost to Russia in 1809 - status of autonymous Grand-Dutchy. Gained independence from Russia 1917. One could argue we shared language, cos swedish was the official language when F. was part of Sweden (the natives hardly spoke it though). Today swedish is the 2nd official language of Finland. Pretty much everybody speaks it to some extent.
No Finnish vikings. But the vikings didn't attack Finland much either. They valued the finnish shipmakers and blacksmiths. It was more trade than fighting. In 1050 the viking army came up the rivers with 200 longboats to Finland, and they were badly beaten and had to flee.

i beleive finland was part of sweden from the early 16th century to the first few years of the 19th.
But the denmark, sweden and norway have shared the same culture and language (old norsk) since the 8th century i believe. it was these 3 that were the norse/vikings.
1323 actually. With the exception of the eastern parts who went to Novgorod.

Part of Sweden from at least 11th century . Lost to Russia in 1809 - status of autonymous Grand-Dutchy. Gained independence from Russia 1917. One could argue we shared language, cos swedish was the official language when F. was part of Sweden (the natives hardly spoke it though). Today swedish is the 2nd official language of Finland. Pretty much everybody speaks it to some extent.
No Finnish vikings. But the vikings didn't attack Finland much either. They valued the finnish shipmakers and blacksmiths. It was more trade than fighting. In 1050 the viking army came up the rivers with 200 longboats to Finland, and they were badly beaten and had to flee.

probably getting my history mixed up. Was thinking of after sweden left the Kalmar Union, which afterwards consisted of norway and denmark until...18something

In what way is this vision of Europe an 'improved' one?
New Improved Europe, With Added Ethnic Flashpoints!

Come on, Attican Empire, we're still tryiing to sort out the problems that previous generations of politicians drawing arbitrary lines on maps have left us with, without you giving us some new ones!

If you're going to split Belgium, at least make Flanders Dutch and Wallonia French, rather than giving the whole lot to France (they won't thank you for it anyway).
Macedonia given to Greece! Eek! I know Macedonian Serbs who'll be reaching for their AK-47's already.
Northern Ireland given to the Irish Republic! Oh boy, you really don't understand Irish politics, do you? Paisley would be apoplectic. The UDF, UFF, UDA and so on will be murdering and bombing before the ink is dry on the agreement.
Independance for Scotland, sure, if they want it.
Why have you mangled Slovakia and the Czech Republic with Hungary - three countries that have mutually incomprehensible languages and very different cultures?
You gave Albania to Yugoslavia!!!! Do you have any idea how much Serbs and Albanians hate each other? Not to mention Serbs and Croats.
You gave Istria to Italy. Ouch. Just when the fuss was calming down over that. Did you give the Tirol back to Germany? I can't tell from here. Same problem.

This is not a recipe for harmonius living...
What Europe needs is arguably more countries, not less, with the EU as a framework to bind them together.

Actually, I have extensively studied 19th and 20th century Europe. Belgium was a part of France for some time... I was under the assumption that Dutch is not widely spoken, since the CIA says that their national language is French...


You have a crappy intelligence agency if they say French is our national language... we have three official languages and Dutch is most spoken. Everybody has got French or Dutch (depends on native tongue) as second language. German is less commonly spoken.

Zelfverklaarde pseudo-intellectuelen moeten zich niet moeien met dingen waar ze geen verstand van hebben. De Belgische revolutie is het product van de Julirevolutie in 1830 in Parijs. Onze grenzen werden hoofdzakelijk bepaald (vooral de noordgrens) door de grenzen van de Spaanse Nederlanden in de 17de en de 18de eeuw. We zijn enkele gebieden kwijt geraakt aan de Fransen (Artesië en Frans-Vlaanderen tss. 1648 en 1789), de Hollanders (Spaans Gelderland) en de Duitsers (ook Spaans Gelderland in 1839) en Luxemburg was onafhankelijk. Ik zet dit in het Nederlands omdat die andere niet weten waarover ze praten...

like this map myself

http://historymedren.about.com/library/atlas/natmapeur814.htm

The Frankisch Empire never was a unified country. It was a collection of violently conquered tribes held together by treaties and royal marriages. After Charlemagne died... well you all know the story.

The Frankisch Empire never was a unified country. It was a collection of violently conquered tribes held together by treaties and royal marriages. After Charlemagne died... well you all know the story.
Yes. His son Louis the piouse inheritat it all.

The Frankisch Empire never was a unified country. It was a collection of violently conquered tribes held together by treaties and royal marriages. After Charlemagne died... well you all know the story.

That map would also involve giving Spain back to Morocco, which would be... you know... quite radical, to say the least. :eek:

Mind you, he did only say that he liked the map (and it is quite pretty), not that he thought it would be a sustainable future for Europe.

Actually, I have extensively studied 19th and 20th century Europe. Belgium was a part of France for some time... I was under the assumption that Dutch is not widely spoken, since the CIA says that their national language is French...

.

Again a example of the lousy quality of the CIA world factbook, in Europe, sources are better documented.
What a joke, the national language of Belgium: French.

The vast majority in Belgium speaks Dutch (2 thirds of the country), followed by the Walloons that speak French and then followed by the 3th official language, German (about 200.000 native German speakers live in nearby Germany in a region that was German untill given to Belgium at Versailles.

Is the CIA factbook really that wrong that it says that only French is the official language? I know that it has not the class of European works but a mistake like that? :rolleyes:

And Belgium was never a part of France in the 20th century. Founded in 1830, the country was never occupied by France. Before 1830, people spoke of Flanders, the princebishop of Liege, Luxemburg aso. those parts where often occupied by the french (last time at during the Napoleon era, but he brought modernisme and it was not really an occupation) and other nations that fought their wars on the richest place of Europe: Flanders.

I studied history and graduated but I would not make such mistakes about the US. Does the factbook really says that Belgium was occupied in the 20th century? I find that hard to believe.

All the best, and nice to see that you are interested in things outside the US to.

I studied history and graduated but I would not make such mistakes about the US. Does the factbook really says that Belgium was occupied in the 20th century? I find that hard to believe.
And what about 1914-1918 or 1940-1944?

The majority of Belgium speaks Flemish, which is a Dutch dialect, .


Wrong, the official language of Flanders is Dutch and the people are called "Flemish". (wich is not a language neither a dialect).

Kijk, hier spreek ik nederlands maar ik BEN vlaams alhoewel ik nu in Frankrijk woon.
See, that is Dutch. As a Flemish I am well informed about this ;)

And what about 1914-1918 or 1940-1944?

Read the post, he says "by the French"? And no, go to your factbook, Belgium was not occupied by the French during the period you mention, nice try.

Read the post, he says "by the French"? And no, go to your factbook, Belgium was not occupied by the French during the period you mention, nice try.
No, it wasn´t. But you have stated that Belgium wasn´t occupied during the 20 th century. And that wasn´t true.

SNIP (wich is not a language neither a dialect).SNIP
Am I wrong in saying the dutch language spoken in Belgium is INFORMALLY called flemish?
EDIT: Raped Dutch as my Dutch friends call it. :D

Am I the only one who took this map as a joke?

Maybe all the Europeans getting all angry with this map can understand why so many Americans were getting mad about the revised map of the U.S.A.

I didn't even see the map Sdaeriji. I've heard it's beutiful though. Like nay discussion here revolves around the first post. :)

What kind of map is that? European borders changed a lot. But Europe never looked like that, though???
It did look a bit like that just before WW1.

Zelfverklaarde pseudo-intellectuelen moeten zich niet moeien met dingen waar ze geen verstand van hebben. De Belgische revolutie is het product van de Julirevolutie in 1830 in Parijs. Onze grenzen werden hoofdzakelijk bepaald (vooral de noordgrens) door de grenzen van de Spaanse Nederlanden in de 17de en de 18de eeuw. We zijn enkele gebieden kwijt geraakt aan de Fransen (Artesië en Frans-Vlaanderen tss. 1648 en 1789), de Hollanders (Spaans Gelderland) en de Duitsers (ook Spaans Gelderland in 1839) en Luxemburg was onafhankelijk. Ik zet dit in het Nederlands omdat die andere niet weten waarover ze praten...

ik heb nooit gezegt dat ik een belgie of nederland deskundige was, ik zei alleen maar dat belgie ooit deel uitmaakte van frankrijk, en nederland een deel van het heilige romeinse rijk

En ik kan het ook in het Duits, Pools, of Engels zeggen, als je dat wilt.

Ja moge powiedziec to po Niemiecku, Polsku, albo Angielsku, jak chcesz.

Ich kann es auf Deutsch, Polnisch oder Englisch sagen, wenn Sie möchten.

I can say it in German, Polish, or English, if you like.


Am I the only one who took this map as a joke?

Maybe all the Europeans getting all angry with this map can understand why so many Americans were getting mad about the revised map of the U.S.A.


I made both.

Please, please, please don't give Scotland independance. Things are so much more pleasant when we're ruled by Westminister. At least then we've got someone to blame who's actually worth a damn. (Anyone who's watched the Scottish Parliament in action knows exactly what I'm on about here)

I am not sure why you are calling Finland a non-slavic state. It is considered slavic by the majority of researchers. At least, when compared to the Scandinavian states (Denmark, Sweden, Norway).


Finland and Estonia slavic? Let me laugh, they both have fin-ugrian languages , are protestant chrisitians, have always had close ties to sweden, what kind of twelwe-year old experts are you referring to? And how can it be slavic compared to something? You are just ignorant and don't want to show that you know nothing of eastern european geographies and history.

Finland and Estonia slavic? Let me laugh, they both have fin-ugrian languages , are protestant chrisitians, have always had close ties to sweden, what kind of twelwe-year old experts are you referring to? And how can it be slavic compared to something? You are just ignorant and don't want to show that you know nothing of eastern european geographies and history.

Genetic descendency.

Or, I could just sink them under the ocean like I did florida on the improved US map.

And WTF does religion have to do with ethnicity?

well done...youve just started another war in ireland

oh true, like most such terms they are ambiguous. But the scandianvia refers to the 3 countries that formed the Kalmar Union normally. They have very similar cultures, and all 3 languages are from the same source. Whereas Finland does not. Its been conquered by sweden. But that is not the same as assimilation. In my eyes anyway

And Finland was counquered by sweden 200 years before the Kalmar-union, and all infrastructure was swedish until the 18:th century. 10% of the population used to refer to themselves as fin-swedes a 100 years ago I belive, and Finland is still a bilangual country, you can not say that it has not been assimilated during these 600 years of swedish occupation.

well done...youve just started another war in ireland

Give my regards.

Genetic descendency.

Or, I could just sink them under the ocean like I did florida on the improved US map.

I don't care, if i won't get passed in school when I don't know such things as I stated you should not sink them under the Baltic sea. And remember, 2/3 of the scandinvian peninsula is not scandinavian because originally there were only sames (finnish decendents by the way) living there., see why genetic descendancy is useless?

I don't care, if i won't get passed in school when I don't know such things as I stated you should not sink them under the Baltic sea. And remember, 2/3 of the scandinvian peninsula is not scandinavian because originally there were only sames (finnish decendents by the way) living there., see why genetic descendancy is useless?

So I guess the Finns and Estonians are just a wierd island, surrounded nearly entirely by Slavic countries.

Actually, The USA and The USSR should have split europe at the end of WW2 (we did save you asses, remember) and western Europe would the become the 49th through the 60th or so states in the USA. Who cares what The USSR did with their winnings.

*shrug*

So I guess the Finns and Estonians are just a wierd island, surrounded nearly entirely by Slavic countries.

And germanic to the south west, yes. And hungarians are also fin-ugrians. Glad that I could reason with you despite my lack of politeness!:)

All is fine to us Finns, as long as you don't count us as a part of Russia. ;)
isnt finnland the russian word for "parkinglot for tanks" ? :D

isnt finnland the russian word for "parkinglot for tanks" ? :D

Just like Poland is German for "Panzer Parkplatz"

Actually, The USA and The USSR should have split europe at the end of WW2 and western Europe would the become the 49th through the 60th or so states in the USA. Who cares what The USSR did with their winnings.

*shrug*
good idea. then we all would have a single big oppressor from whom all of europe wants to gain independence. imagine the gloryous struggle for independence, the endless guerillia warfane and the inevitable victory for europe!
so much great movie potential ... and the idea to shoot americans .... wonderfull, simply wonderfull :D

good idea. then we all would have a single big oppressor from whom all of europe wants to gain independence. imagine the gloryous struggle for independence, the endless guerillia warfane and the inevitable victory for europe!
so much great movie potential ... and the idea to shoot americans .... wonderfull, simply wonderfull :D

Ich bin ein Amerikaner...

good idea. then we all would have a single big oppressor from whom all of europe wants to gain independence. imagine the gloryous struggle for independence, the endless guerillia warfane and the inevitable victory for europe!
so much great movie potential ... and the idea to shoot americans .... wonderfull, simply wonderfull :D

Funn, Isn't that what we did in 1776CE?
:p :D

Just like Poland is German for "Panzer Parkplatz"
no no lets mock the finns, not the polish.
we can do that later ;)

Ich bin ein Amerikaner...

Didn't Kennedy really butcher the german language in his quote that you paraphrase?

Funn, Isn't that what we did in 1776CE?
:p :D
hehe so you noticed.
but you shouldnt say such stuff and in reality it had probably come to this had america just annexed mainland europe after ww2 sooner or later.

Due to the profound success of the Improved Map of the United States, I have decided to do Europe next!

http://www.kuattech.com/iuro.png

Purple: Ireland
Turqoise: Scotland
Blue: England
Light Blue: Greater Spain
Violet: Greater France
Red: Greater Germany
Light... Green: Italy
Yellow: Bohemia
Green: Slavia
Puke Green: Greece
Orange: Greater Romania
Dark Red: Poland
Mud Blue: Scandinavia
Dark Purple: Russia


What kind of bad joke is this? Nostalgy for Grossdeutsches Reich?

Didn't Kennedy really butcher the german language in his quote that you paraphrase?
yes he did... kind of. he messed up the grammar, and a "Berliner" is a kind of donut here and the word for people living in berlin. the difference comes from the useage of grammes, that shows what you mean. he did really say "I am a donut" ... :D

edit: its late ... :(

Didn't Kennedy really butcher the german language in his quote that you paraphrase?

Ich habe "Amerikaner" gesagt, nicht "Berliner". Ich bin ziemlich sicher dass "Amerikaner" ist nicht "Donut" meinen. (I am fairly sure I butchered the second sentence, sorry.) (Oh crap, Amerikaner is a donut too? wtf....)

Ich habe "Amerikaner" gesagt, nicht "Berliner". Ich bin ziemlich sicher dass "Amerikaner" ist nicht "Donut" meinen. (I am fairly sure I butchered the second sentence, sorry.) (Oh crap, Amerikaner is a donut too? wtf....)
*lacht* auch ein amerikaner ist eine art donut.

*laughs* an amerikaner is another kind of donut.

So enlighten us, Attican Empire. If you don't really give a toss that your map is completely unworkable for 100 different reasons [I'm inferring this from your "give them my regards" reply to the notion that you had managed to re-start the Irish civil war], what was the point? Just to annoy the fuck out of Europeans (seems to have worked). Don't we call that trolling?

thats an Amerikaner http://www.baeckerbecker.de/kuchen/sonstige/bilder/amerikaner_hell.jpg
thats an Berliner http://www.baeckerbecker.de/kuchen/siedegeb/bilder/berliner.jpg

Ja, Scheisse :(.

Do you have a donut called "Deutscher" also?

Martian Free Colonies

I am allowed to express my opinions as much as I want to, just as the stupid conservatives and christian fanatics are.

hehe so you noticed.
but you shouldnt say such stuff and in reality it had probably come to this had america just annexed mainland europe after ww2 sooner or later.

Yah, It would have come to the europeans rebelling against The USA and USSR. At the time Europe was devastated at the hands of the USSR, the USA and Nazi Germany. That would have been an easy win just to annex and make Europe part of your own nation.

Think a minute: The Axis tried to impose their will through the force of their military. We "the USA" just exported our cultural norms into europe. Be honest: it worked as the EU is immitating the USA. The world, with multi-culturalism, and globalism is doing the same.

Is this right or wrong? I do not know nor is it my place to judge. I just see.

I am allowed to express my opinions as much as I want to, just as the stupid conservatives and christian fanatics are.

Just asking. I mean you've clearly spent some time on it. I just wondered what purpose you felt it served.

this plan would work as well as uniting the new england states...
the original poster is quite slow and i figure only did this so he could limit the nations in europe to a number that his feeble brain can manage

I am allowed to express my opinions as much as I want to, just as the stupid conservatives and christian fanatics are.

I am far from stupid, and not a christian fanatic, by any definition of the term, but I am conservative.

And you are not allowed to express your opinion. You have every right to do so. Maybe not here, but you do have the right.

Europe as it indisputably should be:

I am far from stupid, and not a christian fanatic, by any definition of the term, but I am conservative.

And you are not allowed to express your opinion. You have every right to do so. Maybe not here, but you do have the right.

So get out of the thread. I am no longer interested in your opinion of you NOT being stupid or a fanatic.


Europe as it indisputably should be:

Go Byzantium!

Yah, It would have come to the europeans rebelling against The USA and USSR. At the time Europe was devastated at the hands of the USSR, the USA and Nazi Germany. That would have been an easy win just to annex and make Europe part of your own nation. hm ussr and usa ok. but nazi germany? it was crushed between both of them.
yes it would have been quite easy to just annex it. there were even plans to do this in trumans office. glad it got refused, among other far worse plans for germany.

Think a minute: The Axis tried to impose their will through the force of their military. We "the USA" just exported our cultural norms into europe. Be honest: it worked as the EU is immitating the USA. The world, with multi-culturalism, and globalism is doing the same. yes it worked to some degree. the idea of multi-culturalism is slowly but surely failing and politicans begin to realize it. europe isnt america and subcultures dont have a place here. (think of chinatown for example)
globalism (i call it super-capitalism) is also spreading through the industry here. they are going to countrys were cheap labor is to cut costs. and manager/boss salarys are in extreme hights.
you know, there was a time when the industry had not only the goal to earn money, but to improve lifestandart for all their employers and customers. this has been lost, all thats left is the greed for money for a handfull of people.
its a shame, and terrifying. and this industry bigwigs have lots of influence over the politics and that is extremly frightening.

Is this right or wrong? I do not know nor is it my place to judge. I just see.
yes i see a lot of stuff too. i do not claim what i see is what really happens. i can be wrong of cause.

No offense, but this is a terrible idea. You're throwing together a bunch of countries who absolutely hate eachother (the Balkans) which will increase violence way more than it'll decrease it - things were way worse when that area was all Yugoslavia. The Baltic countries have absolutely no cultural connection with Poland, there's no reason to lump them together. Bohemia you clearly just threw in to fill a hole, there's no similarity between the countries in its area. Finland hates Russia, if they have to be absorbed, why not Poland or "Bohemia?" Romania absorbing Bulgaria also makes no sense.

All in all, these are some terrible changes.

Ja, Scheisse :(.

Do you have a donut called "Deutscher" also?

hehe

no "Deutscher" donut. there are only amerikaner and berliner.
a "Nürnberger" is a sausage. and a Hamburger is uh... a Hamburger. (altough if you order a Hamburger in Hamburg, youll get a roll with fish and ketchup...)
maybe i forgot one or two. :confused:

Europe as it indisputably should be:
waaah! :eek:
byzantium so deep in europe? you cant let the poor italians, spanish and greece beeing ruled by a turk! :mad:

Technically the Byzantines were Romans, not Turks :)

Technically the Byzantines were Romans, not Turks :)
Technically the Byzantines were Greeks. They just kept calling themselves Roman.

Ok, if Plurality is what the Europeans want, I can do that:

http://www.kuattech.com/iuro2.png

Ok, if Plurality is what the Europeans want, I can do that:

http://www.kuattech.com/iuro2.png

Now you see, that's more like it.

Technically the Byzantines were Greeks. They just kept calling themselves Roman.
Well I almost said Hellenistic Romans but I thought I'd keep it simple. The population may have been Greek, but the state and its early rulers were Roman.

Now you see, that's more like it.
what? There's no huge empires. Where's the fun in that?

As somebody must've stated, Finland isn't (and never has been) part of Scandinavia. Neither is Denmark. Scandinavia is the name of the peninsula in which Norway and Sweden are situated.
Which in turn is because of the mountain range that runs through the middle of the peninsula. This is however only the geographic definition. Historically, Denmark is usually counted in. Finland, as you all probably know by now, was part of Sweden for so long that it kinda gets counted in too, even though it shouldn't. Iceland.... well... most of us Scandinavians don't know much about Iceland. It's kinda remote. The maps you get in school - in Sweden at least - usually squeeze in Iceland and the Faroes in small boxes, probably because there's room. After all, if we're gonna stretch things that far, we might as well include Greenland (which used to be ruled by the Danes), but that of course would require making the map a lot bigger... lazy fricken Swedes....

Am I wrong in saying the dutch language spoken in Belgium is INFORMALLY called flemish?
EDIT: Raped Dutch as my Dutch friends call it. :D

1.True
2. Well it are the dutch that have a terrible accent and rape the language by using and introducing English words where they can use Dutch words. Almost ridiculous when you hear it.

Well I almost said Hellenistic Romans but I thought I'd keep it simple. The population may have been Greek, but the state and its early rulers were Roman.
Well, maybe the early dynasties. But from the Heraclian dynasty they were Greek as well.

After all, if we're gonna stretch things that far, we might as well include Greenland (which used to be ruled by the Danes)
They are still ruled by Denamrk.

Ok, if Plurality is what the Europeans want, I can do that:

http://www.kuattech.com/iuro2.png

OMG MY EYES

Bah, I say Eurasia, Oceania and East Asia. Then let things sort themselves out. All I care about is where I can find my prolefeed.

Ok, if Plurality is what the Europeans want, I can do that:

http://www.kuattech.com/iuro2.png

If we're gonna do that, Transylvania should be separate from Romania (in my opinion, it really should belong to Hungary, but nobody listens to me anyway)

Yes. His son Louis the piouse inheritat it all.
he didn't live that long

ik heb nooit gezegt dat ik een belgie of nederland deskundige was, ik zei alleen maar dat belgie ooit deel uitmaakte van frankrijk, en nederland een deel van het heilige romeinse rijk

En ik kan het ook in het Duits, Pools, of Engels zeggen, als je dat wilt.

Ja moge powiedziec to po Niemiecku, Polsku, albo Angielsku, jak chcesz.

Ich kann es auf Deutsch, Polnisch oder Englisch sagen, wenn Sie möchten.

I can say it in German, Polish, or English, if you like.



I made both.

wow sterk... zeg het eens in pools, duits en engels? :D Je mag mijn eigen uitleg ook volledig vertalen. De kaart is idd een grap en gebaseerd op verkeerde argumenten. De huidige kaart is er een van vrede op een paar gebieden na: basken en noord-ierland.

That is very interesting indeed. I think however we in central Europe may be a bit careful with the use of the word nordic. That at the end boils down to the superiority of the "nordic races".
On the other hand: If we always care about political correctness we would hardly be able to open our mouths anyway.

All the term means is "countries of the north". It's nothing to do with race in this context. In the Scandinavian languages we have use the term "Norden" to describe our area of the world (ie Sweden, Danmark, Norway, Finland and Iceland). We tried to get this term used in English, but didn't really suceed(!)... so Nordic Countries is the best you can get.
People who have said Norway and Sweden are the only countries in Scandinavia are correct in a strict geographical definition of the word, as it's the name of the peninsular us two countries are on.
As to the debate about Finland being in or out, generally these days I consider it a part of Scandinavia in a political and even cultural (but to a lesser extent) terms. Remember, that around 7% of the Finlanders speak Swedish as their mother-tongue. And besides, they like getting pissed on vodka just as much as we do ;) .

As for the map, I don't get why Estonia is put with the Slavs... it's native culture is very similar to the Finnish. And just what alliance is Finland in on that map anyway??

he didn't live that long
778 in Chasseneuil; † 20. Juni 840 in Ingelheim at the Rhine.

Well, from my (Dutch) point of view, Europe should be one state: the European Union, subdivided into lingua, or language-states. So basically, the German-speaking, French-speaking, English-spreaking, etc. each get their own lingua.

And don't draw maps that were already drawn 300 years ago. That stinks.
For me, the EU rules, with as a capital Brussels, naturally. (They even speak Dutch there!)

Well, from my (Dutch) point of view, Europe should be one state: the European Union, subdivided into lingua, or language-states. So basically, the German-speaking, French-speaking, English-spreaking, etc. each get their own lingua.

And don't draw maps that were already drawn 300 years ago. That stinks.
For me, the EU rules, with as a capital Brussels, naturally. (They even speak Dutch there!)

Ehh? The Map of 1700 was fairly different...

Well, from my (Dutch) point of view, Europe should be one state: the European Union, subdivided into lingua, or language-states. So basically, the German-speaking, French-speaking, English-spreaking, etc. each get their own lingua.

that's just not fair. *pouts*
why does everyone want to split switzerland in 3 parts?

that's just not fair. *pouts*
why does everyone want to split switzerland in 3 parts?
Yeah. Why? It should be split in 4.

Yeah. Why? It should be split in 4.
france, germany, italy....who is nr. 4 ? :confused:

france, germany, italy....who is nr. 4 ? :confused:
Rethoramanen. (Sp)

This map discriminates against those of us who are colourblind.

Returning to Scandinavia a bit:

The origin of the name is most likely referring to the dangerous (scathing) unknown parts across the waters north of todays Germany and Denmark and has from there evolved into the Scandinavian peninsula.

The reason that Denmark is considered a part of Scandinavia and Finnland isn't (if we are going by a strict definition) is that the southern parts of todays Sweden used to be a part of Denmark. Up until 1658 if anyone cares. Hence, Denmark has claims to be a part of, or at least have been a part of, the geographical Scandinavia, something that Finnland never can claim, regarless of how long it used to be a part of Sweden for.

And returning to the discussion about Finland:

There is one other country belonging to the Finno-Ungrian language group. Turkey of course!

Plus on giving "Macedonia" to Greece: of course the area of Macedonia should be part of the Greek state in such a map. Half of MAcedonia is still part of Greece, the rest officially called the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia hardly has a national identity to speak of...
Another correction to the map would be giving Albania and Bulgaria to Greece. Thus we would reconstitute most of the Eastern Roman Empire alias Byzantium, one of the longest lived empires in European History (1000 years are enough i think).

And returning to the discussion about Finland:

There is one other country belonging to the Finno-Ungrian language group. Turkey of course!

Do some more research. You're so way off that it's frightening. :)

And returning to the discussion about Finland:

There is one other country belonging to the Finno-Ungrian language group. Turkey of course!

Do some more research. You're so way off that it's frightening. Hard to say if that was some sort of humour though... :)

And returning to the discussion about Finland:

There is one other country belonging to the Finno-Ungrian language group. Turkey of course!
No. Thats just an unproven theory. Not a fact.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ural-Altaic_languages

Weel Von, thanks for that (even it's from Wikipedia). :)
I almost began to search for sites and studies disproving the turkish connection.... I couldn't be arsed though. If somebody wants to think Finnish and Turkish are related; let em! I see no harm in it. :D

Really, thats funny.
I know a Finnish guy from Turku (coincidence right?? :-)) who has lived in Istanbul and he told me exactly that Finn and Turkish are related. Many books on linguistics tell the same story.

I do have to note, Witzleben, that in linguistics facts are almsot impossible to prove. How do you define relations between languages? Even your link does not really prove this thesis to be wrong. It says it is just a controversial theory...

PS OK Bunnyducks I was extra provocative, but I dont think this theory is completely wrong...

Coincidence? You knew I'm from Turku? Odd. :)
Well, I can't say what this Finnish fellow was on.... but considering he was in Istambul, I suspect hash.

I'm in no way expert in this area... but that certainly isn't something teached in universities here. What does "many books" mean? 20? Out of how many? The rest 2000? I do believe if you tell me my language and Turkish are related - how could I disagree (this is afterall proven by another Finn). But like I said - it's all good; nothing wrong with the Turks. I'm sure somebody more capable in the field of linguistics than I wants to discuss this further.

Finnish and Hungarian are related. i do not know of a Finnish-Turk connection, but there could be one I suppose.

Really, thats funny.
I know a Finnish guy from Turku (coincidence right?? :-)) who has lived in Istanbul and he told me exactly that Finn and Turkish are related.
I assume Turku means Finland? Theres also a Chinese word which is pronounced like Kip. Which means chicken in Dutch and something like whore or fuck in some Chinese dialect.(coincidence right??:-))

I assume Turku means Finland? Theres also a Chinese word which is pronounced like Kip. Which means chicken in Dutch and something like whore or fuck in some Chinese dialect.(coincidence right??:-))
Turku is a town in southwest Finland. It is the oldest city in Finland and It used to be the capital til 1819 (now it's Helsinki)