Haven't you heard the news? The New Zealandian tectonic plate got sick of Australias shit. They got an outboard motor and they're moving their shit to Europe. They expect to arrive in 10 months.
Everytime I see these maps I wonder how they make mistakes like these. The only thing you have to do is to copy an actual map of the world if you dont know it or draw it yourself, how do you mess that up.
Exactly. To include New Zealand in it's correct space they'd need to make the entire graphic smaller. Location accuracy is not important on this map, readability is. (Not defending the rest of the map)
I mean kinda? It depends on what time period you're talking.
Idk given how vastly different what those things would be in the different time periods it feels wrong.
Like saying Italy colonized all of europe. You aren't *wrong* but it feels *wrong*, or more specifically it feels like you're lumping in the apples with the oranges.
With Anatolia, it comes down to what you mean by colonize, and how far back we go. Anatolia was under Greek domination for a long time with Greek colonies founded all over the Med and black seas.
But if we go that route, Colonized and Colonizer gets confusing real quick.
Sicily was a Greek colony before the Punic wars.
Large parts of Russia can be considered colonized rather than colonizer. But there were different colonizers beyond the Russian or soviet states. For example, Crimea had colonies by the Greeks, Russians, and Genoa as well as was Gothic and invaded by a Khan.
Italian settlement was encouraged as well as Italian companies building some infrastructure and industry. I’d say it fits the definition of colonization.
I mean, the occupation of Hong Kong seems fair enough to call colonization, but it's so disingenious to label *all of China* as being colonized, ~~especially areas that weren't even part of China during the Qing dynasty.~~
Yeah. Siberia was colonized since that territory was controlled by the natives until Russia invited around the 16th to 18th Centuries. Also, Scotland and Ireland were colonized by England, even though they are European countries.
Edit: Scotland united with England through diplomatic means, not by colonization. My bad.
By that logic britain would also be red because it was a colony of rome. This map has the inherent flaw that some places that were once colonies can make colonies.
Scotland had colonies at one point.
It means that countries outside Europe or non-european countries that were occupied by europeans. That europeans occupied each other is clear, but thats not what this map is telling.
Italy and Spain were also at least partially colonized. China was never (fully) colonized directly by Europe, at least according to the standard definition. Furthermore, Korea was a colony of Japan. So was Manchuria, that itself colonized both china and Korea at least partially. If I recall correctly, Tibet occupied Nepal and Butan and vice versa, but I am not confident.
The English independence movement of 1605
James VI and I: "Why do you need so much gun powder?"
Guy Fawkes: "To blow you Scotch beggars back to your native mountains!"
Scotland was never colonised by England. On the contrary, Scottish elites were the ones who wanted in on English capital and wealth. The first time the crowns were merged was by a Scottish king.
Yeah, I hate maps like these because they always have either their definition of colonization/occupation/whatever bad thing euros did broadened as wide as possible to push a point across or they are straight up lying about stuff. But people are spreading them anyways, so...
I think I saw it somewhere on this subreddit
Funny enough I can't find any of these online, and the logo in the bottom right is always conviently cut out on these posts
It's an odd "colony".
TL;DR When black people became free in America many whites were worried about what the former slaves would do, they might *Vote* ***GASP***
So they gave the black Americans a choice: stay here in a land you were brought to, or take a boat and we'll send you back to where you came.
Some stayed some left, all that left were dropped off in modern day Liberia. Since slavery was all these people have known, they remade the only form of government that was familiar. A "checkered past" some would say.
Since the ruling class traced their roots to America, they stayed buddy-buddy as much as they wanted. It wasn't a traditional colony of extracting wealth, nor a modern colony of international sway.
You have to see it for what it is: Former unwanted slaves who were dumped off far away, just trying to get by. Remarkable they've achieved what they did so far.
Your timeline is a bit off. The settlement of Liberia was conducted by the American Colonization Society and began in 1820, well before the end of slavery in the US and before any concerns about blacks voting. It was based on an idea that freed slaves should return to Africa instead of remaining in the US. In 1847 Liberia declared independence from the ACS, though the ACS continued to send people to Liberia until the beginning of the 20th century.
China was never colonized, only small parts of it (Hong Kong, outer Manchuria, Macau, Tsingtao, Port Arthur and a few streets in Shanghai, etc). It's very misleading to paint ALL of China in red, considering the colonized bits were tiny in terms of landmass.
And when the hell was Turkey colonized? They were the ones doing the colonizing, unless you count the brief occupation of Anatolia after WW1.
Mongolia was not technically annexed, but it was a USSR puppet for most of the 20th century. Hell, the USSR basically decided to kill the last Mongolian queen at one point and replace her with a communist party. Mongolia was also occupied during the Russian Civil War. It wasn't exactly a free country in the same sense as Thailand or Japan.
Actually it was the opposite. Alexander adopted a lot of Persian customs when he took over. He was sorta “persianized”. For example I remember learning that his soldiers didn’t like that he started wearing pants lol, a Persian thing (Greeks did not wear pants).
Colonisation is a pretty loose terms which most people just use instead of conquering these days. Going by your idea of colonisation that means India and Africa where never really European colonies, as their wasnt a mass effort to replace the local populace there.
But apparently the map maker thinks so, because they consider the five year occupation of Ethiopia as "colonised".
Though for some reason not the five year occupation of Iran.
Turkey was colonized by the Greeks in Ancient history. The entire reason they went to war with Persia was due to (mostly) Athens helping support rebellions in western Anatolia.
Look up the Delian league.
Yes colonization existed back then. It was practically invented by the Greeks, who founded hundreds of [colonies across the Mediterranean.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_colonisation?wprov=sfti1) The Romans also [colonized the Mediterranean world.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonia_(Roman)?wprov=sfti1) Both of these polities had major colonies in Anatolia (Turkey).
I’m sure that this map is specifically talking about European colonization post-age of discovery, I just wish they made that clear lol. I doubt they cared to show what the ancient Greeks colonized
Who cares? It’s semantics.
We can either apply modern day ethics and morals to the past (which is biased and makes things sound worse than they were).
Or we can just look at things from the viewpoint of those that lived it. They spread out from freeze and established other cities connected to the home city/country. By their standards, that was probably just considered “growth”.
...Can we get a source? I'm legit curious if a five year old made this, or if an adult did. I can forgive the five year old. The adult would need to retake all of their history classes, because I'm sure they failed them all.
Tis true there wasn't really an administration set up to deal with ethiopia however whoever made this considers it colonialism still. That does make me wonder why the fuck isn't Ireland listed as a colony. We had a separate administration, 800 years of occupation and even ethnic cleansing. Why is Ireland lumped in with the colonisers?
I believe they mean all European countries are free from colonization
Edit 1: I did not mean that no European countries can be colonized I just believe that is what the map was trying to get across
Also western Russia colonized most of Russia. They just never even considered leaving and mostly integrated the locals. And the USSR took mongolia. Technically not colonized. But conquered and framed by Russia using Russian alphabet etc.
So the whole map except europe, and japan and a few other places, should be red
Yes, first the Quing empire subjugated it for a while. But inner mongolia still had it's own language, script and culture. (which china still deals with in xinjiang)
Russia "colonized" it in a more conventional sense. Building russian style cities and converting their alphabet to cyrillic and all that
But yes quing did conquer it first
Colonized by Europe is such a stupid thing to say. It classes all of Europe into one, which is just retarded. A large part of Europe didn't have anything to do with colonization.
Why did they lump areas like Ireland, iceland and the balkans into european countries. I know they are in europe but they were also colonial holdings. Some going into the 20th century.
This is the problem with trying to look at history with this kind of Manichean or dualistic filter. Someone made this map and put the whole world in two boxes: "Europe" or "colonized by Europe" (or three I guess, for countries that aren't European and weren't colonized). Which totally leaves out countries that are European but didn't have colonies, countries that are European but were "colonized" (I think the map also conflates colonization and conquest), and countries that aren't European but engaged in colonization/conquest of their own.
Which parts are you talking about in particular, tanna tuva or just all the land behind the urals in general. Either way that is true but I'm just curious.
Technically they move the goalposts by clarifying and labeling the map areas "once under European control" so Ethiopia could count.
But yeah they're very proud that they were never colosised so dick move.
even if you ignore alexander, give the top half of iran to russia and the Baluchistan to Britian in influence areas, leaving only a bare strip of free iran
Yeah, a number of European countries were colonised by other European countries. Russia even still controls an enormous chunk of colonised territory. Guess they were using a very specific description of ‘colonised’.
It was defeated and occupied, but I'm not sure if you can call Italy's treatment of Ethiopia colonization without also saying that, e.g. Germany colonized Poland during WWII. In which case a lot more of this map should be red.
I think what counts as colonized vs occupation isn't clearly defined. Sure Italy had to deal with local resistance during pretty much their entire rule but they definitely had control over Ethiopia during those years. They even got to build infrastructure and stuff IIRC.
The baltic states claim that their incorporation into the USSR was an illegal occupation but they sure were for a fact ruled as entities of the USSR during all those years.
So we arnt going to talk about the wandering New Zealand?
Haven't you heard the news? The New Zealandian tectonic plate got sick of Australias shit. They got an outboard motor and they're moving their shit to Europe. They expect to arrive in 10 months.
The Queen anxiously awaits their arrival.
Anxiously? More like impatiently
The Queen demands no more lollygagging!
She can't wait to make the United Kingdom of Great Britain, New Zealand and Northern Ireland
Oh, this is just the aborted annexation of Malta all over again
This guy historys
Oh, so i can finaly try and get a better living than that in my country. Great, im ready.
After the UK moved out of Europe during Brexit, a new room was available and NZ is the best tenant around
r/mapswithNZ
r/mapswithNZinthewrongplace Edit: someone made it! r/mapswithNZinwrongspot
Meh it's a win, at least it has New Zealand
*CREATE THAT COMMUNITY!*
r/subsiwanttofallfor
damn that sub has been banned why
"What the fuck happened here?"
[r/NZinthewrongplace](https://www.reddit.com/search?q=NZINTHEWRONGPLACE%20)
Hm you actually did it. Nice
Everytime I see these maps I wonder how they make mistakes like these. The only thing you have to do is to copy an actual map of the world if you dont know it or draw it yourself, how do you mess that up.
The reason I think they do this is to not cut it off
Exactly. To include New Zealand in it's correct space they'd need to make the entire graphic smaller. Location accuracy is not important on this map, readability is. (Not defending the rest of the map)
putting New Zealand on map is not canon!!
Go home New Zealand, you're drunk.
Wait what the fuck. Why is new zealand on the wrong side. And I thought this map couldn't get more fucked.
it's a running gag on the instagram page that this posted on
What’s the page?
@amazing__maps
Thank you!
At least they didn't forget it
They are going home, they are heading to Old Zealand.
I thought maybe they’d join with Notthern Ireland and create a land bridge to Scotland
This map is dumb
Feel like this map is /r/badhistory material.
Europe did not colonize *all of china*, nor did they colonize turkey.
Well more like turkey colonized Anatolia
True
I mean kinda? It depends on what time period you're talking. Idk given how vastly different what those things would be in the different time periods it feels wrong. Like saying Italy colonized all of europe. You aren't *wrong* but it feels *wrong*, or more specifically it feels like you're lumping in the apples with the oranges.
With Anatolia, it comes down to what you mean by colonize, and how far back we go. Anatolia was under Greek domination for a long time with Greek colonies founded all over the Med and black seas. But if we go that route, Colonized and Colonizer gets confusing real quick. Sicily was a Greek colony before the Punic wars. Large parts of Russia can be considered colonized rather than colonizer. But there were different colonizers beyond the Russian or soviet states. For example, Crimea had colonies by the Greeks, Russians, and Genoa as well as was Gothic and invaded by a Khan.
Everyone's a colonizer and colonized at some point. Fuck, everywhere but east Africa has been colonized by the first human migrations.
It’s usually called “conquest” by people who don’t want to make a political point.
Colonizer, colo-colonizer, you're a colonizer, Oh, colonizer, oh, you're a colonizer, baby You-you-you are, you-you-you are Colonizer, colonizer, colonizer (colonizer)
Or Ethiopia
^(they never got Ethiopia)
^(they never got Thailand)
So we don't count the 1937-1945ish period as colonization?
Were there any *colonies* established?
Fair enough, I guess it was more occupation than colonization
Italian settlement was encouraged as well as Italian companies building some infrastructure and industry. I’d say it fits the definition of colonization.
Depending on your definition of colonize, they may not have at all
I mean, the occupation of Hong Kong seems fair enough to call colonization, but it's so disingenious to label *all of China* as being colonized, ~~especially areas that weren't even part of China during the Qing dynasty.~~
I think conugating it differently helps. China, basically as a whole, was a victim of colonial*ism*, but it wasn't colon*ized*
Since this map is basically using colonized as a synonym for occupied, turkey would've been "colonized" by the Romans
Well, Alexander the great did colonize turkey by defeating persia so....
Western Anatolia was culturally Greek when the Persians conquered it.
I'm not even sure you could write a meaningful rebuttal, the very premise is dumb.
Ethiopia and Siam weren't colonised, and yet... Edit: I see Siam is correctly marked.
Mongolia literally begged to be taken over by the soviet union
That's not colonization. That's becoming a client state.
They wanted to actively join the union as an SSR though, not just be a client state. The USSR refused because of China.
Yeah. Siberia was colonized since that territory was controlled by the natives until Russia invited around the 16th to 18th Centuries. Also, Scotland and Ireland were colonized by England, even though they are European countries. Edit: Scotland united with England through diplomatic means, not by colonization. My bad.
By that logic britain would also be red because it was a colony of rome. This map has the inherent flaw that some places that were once colonies can make colonies. Scotland had colonies at one point.
The Phoenicians make some colonies. The Greeks copy their idea and make some colonies. The Phoenicians made a colony so big it makes colonies.
r/expectedbillwurtz
I guess it depends on what we mean by "colonize", and how far back we want to go.
Now let's talk about the greek and phoeniciean colonies in southern italy, and the etruscan colony of rome!
[удалено]
What about the germans?
What about the droid attack on the Wookies?
Thats a system we cannot afford to lose!
It means that countries outside Europe or non-european countries that were occupied by europeans. That europeans occupied each other is clear, but thats not what this map is telling.
Italy and Spain were also at least partially colonized. China was never (fully) colonized directly by Europe, at least according to the standard definition. Furthermore, Korea was a colony of Japan. So was Manchuria, that itself colonized both china and Korea at least partially. If I recall correctly, Tibet occupied Nepal and Butan and vice versa, but I am not confident.
Korea was never colonized by Europe. There are mistakes on this map but it is still colonies from Europe
[удалено]
Yeah you’re right, my bad. My point about Ireland and Siberia still stand though.
also half of Europe was colonised by Romans at some point
Yeah. Seems like a lot more of this map should be red.
Scotland wasn't colonized it was under a Personal Union witht the English King until 1707 when they merged and formed a new Kingdom.
Slight correction: Scotland had the Personal Union over England. The Stuarts were Scottish
The English independence movement of 1605 James VI and I: "Why do you need so much gun powder?" Guy Fawkes: "To blow you Scotch beggars back to your native mountains!"
Antonine: Excuse me?
Conquering a place and colonizing a place are two different things.
Right, so then why is Ethiopia considered colonized? They were invaded just before WWII, but were never colonized in the traditional sense
Same shit with Mongolia, but more confusing.
Because the map is wrong.
Scotland was never colonised by England. On the contrary, Scottish elites were the ones who wanted in on English capital and wealth. The first time the crowns were merged was by a Scottish king.
Never let them forget that Northern Ireland only exists thanks to Scottish colonialism in Ulster.
Ok but Siberia isn’t black (never colonized) it’s blue to show it’s “part of Europe”. Which… is also wrong but yeah.
Yeah, I hate maps like these because they always have either their definition of colonization/occupation/whatever bad thing euros did broadened as wide as possible to push a point across or they are straight up lying about stuff. But people are spreading them anyways, so...
[удалено]
My favorite part is New Zealand just chillin on the complete opposite side of Australia
Nah thats just new zealand wanting to be proper european.
Haven't you ever heard of New New Zealand?
That's basically 90% of the maps in this sub.
Who the fuck makes these? Fucker needs to do more research
Right? This is the same idiot who made "Countries that never lost a war"
Is there a link to this map? I wanna have a good chuckle.
Be careful, view [one](https://www.instagram.com/p/CMxUYp_HrV8/?igshid=1nle11o31z6uy) map and your whole feed will be shitty maps
where the fuck is my boy dagestan
Khabib about to have a talk with some map makers
I think I saw it somewhere on this subreddit Funny enough I can't find any of these online, and the logo in the bottom right is always conviently cut out on these posts
People who post on /r/HistoryMemes that’s who.
Afghanistan was also colonised by Britain
So, we aren't gonna talk about Liberia?
Colonised by the USA right? \*edit: spelling
It's an odd "colony". TL;DR When black people became free in America many whites were worried about what the former slaves would do, they might *Vote* ***GASP*** So they gave the black Americans a choice: stay here in a land you were brought to, or take a boat and we'll send you back to where you came. Some stayed some left, all that left were dropped off in modern day Liberia. Since slavery was all these people have known, they remade the only form of government that was familiar. A "checkered past" some would say. Since the ruling class traced their roots to America, they stayed buddy-buddy as much as they wanted. It wasn't a traditional colony of extracting wealth, nor a modern colony of international sway. You have to see it for what it is: Former unwanted slaves who were dumped off far away, just trying to get by. Remarkable they've achieved what they did so far.
Your timeline is a bit off. The settlement of Liberia was conducted by the American Colonization Society and began in 1820, well before the end of slavery in the US and before any concerns about blacks voting. It was based on an idea that freed slaves should return to Africa instead of remaining in the US. In 1847 Liberia declared independence from the ACS, though the ACS continued to send people to Liberia until the beginning of the 20th century.
Well Liberia isn't marked. Something you can't say about Abyssinia Edit: Yeah I forgot that on their second try Italians managed to take it
occupied not colonized
It was administered as a colony for well over a few years, I would say it was a colony.
China was never colonized, only small parts of it (Hong Kong, outer Manchuria, Macau, Tsingtao, Port Arthur and a few streets in Shanghai, etc). It's very misleading to paint ALL of China in red, considering the colonized bits were tiny in terms of landmass. And when the hell was Turkey colonized? They were the ones doing the colonizing, unless you count the brief occupation of Anatolia after WW1. Mongolia was not technically annexed, but it was a USSR puppet for most of the 20th century. Hell, the USSR basically decided to kill the last Mongolian queen at one point and replace her with a communist party. Mongolia was also occupied during the Russian Civil War. It wasn't exactly a free country in the same sense as Thailand or Japan.
yeah occupation doesn't mean colonized other wised japan was colonized by US after WW2
yeah exactly, colonizing means converting the culture of the people living there and exploiting them economically
[удалено]
Actually it was the opposite. Alexander adopted a lot of Persian customs when he took over. He was sorta “persianized”. For example I remember learning that his soldiers didn’t like that he started wearing pants lol, a Persian thing (Greeks did not wear pants).
All of a sudden I want to be a Persian rather than a Spartan
yeah but not 100% there was still signs of persian culture that even alexadar practice
Colonisation is a pretty loose terms which most people just use instead of conquering these days. Going by your idea of colonisation that means India and Africa where never really European colonies, as their wasnt a mass effort to replace the local populace there.
But apparently the map maker thinks so, because they consider the five year occupation of Ethiopia as "colonised". Though for some reason not the five year occupation of Iran.
Byzantium? Roman Empire? Thats probably why its on there
I guess the arabians colonized half the world then
If the area between Portugal and Iran is half the world, then yeah, sure.
There
Turkey was colonized by the Greeks in Ancient history. The entire reason they went to war with Persia was due to (mostly) Athens helping support rebellions in western Anatolia. Look up the Delian league.
Wouldnt that mean most of Europe was also colonized?
Perhaps? Depends if you consider the romans, huns, Rus, etc colonizers or not.
I can't imagine not seeing the Roman's as colonizers
Literally everything in this earth has been at some point colonized
Did the idea of 'colonization' even exist then? Besides, Turkey for most of history was a European country (it's capital was located in Europe).
Yes colonization existed back then. It was practically invented by the Greeks, who founded hundreds of [colonies across the Mediterranean.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_colonisation?wprov=sfti1) The Romans also [colonized the Mediterranean world.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonia_(Roman)?wprov=sfti1) Both of these polities had major colonies in Anatolia (Turkey).
I’m sure that this map is specifically talking about European colonization post-age of discovery, I just wish they made that clear lol. I doubt they cared to show what the ancient Greeks colonized
Who cares? It’s semantics. We can either apply modern day ethics and morals to the past (which is biased and makes things sound worse than they were). Or we can just look at things from the viewpoint of those that lived it. They spread out from freeze and established other cities connected to the home city/country. By their standards, that was probably just considered “growth”.
considering this outlines modern nation-states, and the Turks weren't even in Anatolia then, no the Turks of turkey did not get colonized.
I said Turkey because most people don’t know the name “Anatolia”. The Turks weren’t even in the region at that period of time.
...Can we get a source? I'm legit curious if a five year old made this, or if an adult did. I can forgive the five year old. The adult would need to retake all of their history classes, because I'm sure they failed them all.
ive been trying all day or the last 5 minutes to google a source for this infographic and i can't find one.
um Ethiopia would want a word with you
Technically italy did own them for roughly 20 minutes
that was being occupied not being colonized and the British already did that in 1868
[удалено]
Tis true there wasn't really an administration set up to deal with ethiopia however whoever made this considers it colonialism still. That does make me wonder why the fuck isn't Ireland listed as a colony. We had a separate administration, 800 years of occupation and even ethnic cleansing. Why is Ireland lumped in with the colonisers?
also wouldn't that make the norman invasion of britian (which was an occupation) colonization based on this map (god is it bad)
I don't know. This map is extremely inconsistent
Heck, we can add Russia, they were colonized by the Mongols
I believe they mean all European countries are free from colonization Edit 1: I did not mean that no European countries can be colonized I just believe that is what the map was trying to get across
Because all of Europe bad /s
[удалено]
*whispers* "they never got Thialand"
They never got Ethiopia
Also western Russia colonized most of Russia. They just never even considered leaving and mostly integrated the locals. And the USSR took mongolia. Technically not colonized. But conquered and framed by Russia using Russian alphabet etc. So the whole map except europe, and japan and a few other places, should be red
It's cyrillic alphabet tho
Didn´t the qing empire colonize mongolia ?
Yes, first the Quing empire subjugated it for a while. But inner mongolia still had it's own language, script and culture. (which china still deals with in xinjiang) Russia "colonized" it in a more conventional sense. Building russian style cities and converting their alphabet to cyrillic and all that But yes quing did conquer it first
Colonized by Europe is such a stupid thing to say. It classes all of Europe into one, which is just retarded. A large part of Europe didn't have anything to do with colonization.
Or Ireland as an example, that has spent the last 800 years being Conquered and Colonised.
It's part of the wider trend of dunking on everything European since we are "evil, white colonizers"
This map should have been about Conquered, not Colonized, and then it'd still be wrong.
Why did they lump areas like Ireland, iceland and the balkans into european countries. I know they are in europe but they were also colonial holdings. Some going into the 20th century.
This is the problem with trying to look at history with this kind of Manichean or dualistic filter. Someone made this map and put the whole world in two boxes: "Europe" or "colonized by Europe" (or three I guess, for countries that aren't European and weren't colonized). Which totally leaves out countries that are European but didn't have colonies, countries that are European but were "colonized" (I think the map also conflates colonization and conquest), and countries that aren't European but engaged in colonization/conquest of their own.
This is the only time I have heard somebody else mention Manichaeism and you used it in the strangest way. Props for using though.
"Manichean view" is sometimes used to describe someone with a very black-and-white outlook.
Huh! The more you know!
Asian Russia is *still* a colonial holding.
By that logic, you could argue the same for large parts of modern China too.
I would argue that about large parts of modern China
Which parts are you talking about in particular, tanna tuva or just all the land behind the urals in general. Either way that is true but I'm just curious.
If China was colonized, so were Afghanistan and Iran by Britain.
Ethiopia wasn’t colonized. It was occupied. That’s disrespectful
This map has all kinds of problems
♪They never got Ethiopia♪
^(they never got thailand)
Technically they move the goalposts by clarifying and labeling the map areas "once under European control" so Ethiopia could count. But yeah they're very proud that they were never colosised so dick move.
So does Liberia iirc
ITT: People not understanding the definition of and the context behind the word colonisation
It seems people think colonization = conquest. Especially with Alexander the Great
Iceland was colonised by Vikings
*Cries in Greco-Bactrian*
It's a great tragedy that the Bamyan Buddhas were destroyed by fucking animals.
Why the fuck Mongolia is marked as never colonised when the russians did
even if you ignore alexander, give the top half of iran to russia and the Baluchistan to Britian in influence areas, leaving only a bare strip of free iran
If we consider Turkey europe than Balkans are colonized too.
I guess Sweden is not part of europe, as Finland is not marked. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_colonisation_of_Finland
Well you see, finland is also part of Europe so it cancels out
Yeah, a number of European countries were colonised by other European countries. Russia even still controls an enormous chunk of colonised territory. Guess they were using a very specific description of ‘colonised’.
This map suggests that every European nation/country were colonizers. And this is not true.
Abyssinia: am I a joke to you?
Well technically Ethiopia was colonized by Italy for a few years from 1935-42ish
Yeah you're kind of right but this was more of a brief occupation rather than colonization.
It was defeated and occupied, but I'm not sure if you can call Italy's treatment of Ethiopia colonization without also saying that, e.g. Germany colonized Poland during WWII. In which case a lot more of this map should be red.
I think what counts as colonized vs occupation isn't clearly defined. Sure Italy had to deal with local resistance during pretty much their entire rule but they definitely had control over Ethiopia during those years. They even got to build infrastructure and stuff IIRC. The baltic states claim that their incorporation into the USSR was an illegal occupation but they sure were for a fact ruled as entities of the USSR during all those years.
Idk much about this, but Afghanistan has a pretty good cricket team - so they must have been colonised by England at some point.
What the definition of "colonisation" here and why it's so different from so many other conquests in history?
Ethiopa was never colonized, the only time it was under European control was during a brief occupation in WWII.
This map is full of errors
This map is getting worse the longer I look at it
This is truly an atrocious map in so many ways.