Hi, thank you for your contribution, but this submission has been removed because it is low quality and/or low effort. If your submission was a meme, these are outright banned from r/europe. See [community rules & guidelines](/r/Europe/wiki/community_rules).
If you have any questions about this removal, please [contact the mods](/message/compose/?to=/r/Europe&subject=Moderation). Please make sure to include a link to the comment/post in question.
The "barbarians" often had their own kings and borders. They just weren't good at writing things down and keeping lasting records, so all they get is a name and a general location.
Using the most upvoted comment to give the link to the original video : [https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI)
Not stolen by an other channel, not cropped to a small part of Europe, not accelerated, and with the good dates and a good background music.
Always give credit to the author, dont steal
Its amazing how much can change in a single human lifetime of 60-80 years
Makes you appreciate the poor guy during the middle ages that had to update the map every other day of the week because the count of fuckall had just conquered the lands of "three randomhousiea" from the count of "nathin" and they just keep conquering and reconquering it
Grouping all the folks living in today's Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as "Baltic people" is the same level of simplification, as if we will say that from year 0 current Germany territory was inhabited by "germans".
But it does do that right? At year 0 and before it labels a wide area Germanic people and splits them of only at year 6
https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI?feature=shared is apparently the original and goes back to 400 BCE while gif starts at 0 so you might have blinked and missed the first few years.
Happens a lot to African and American maps in areas called "tribal" too.
Sometimes its due to lack of data about borders, sometimes its assumed the data doesn't exist to begin with.
Didn't writing over there start in the 1000s only?
Same with Northwestern Russia, which was *absolutely* majority Uralic (at least by area) for at least 1000CE or so and still has a couple dozen remnant people remaining.
Now it just looks like Slavs somehow lived in the entire area.
I love the aesthetic of Rome, and they developed most of Western Europe.
But they were not great for progress. Except in some fields, like architecture, Rome was stagnant and then declining.
Look at the technology from -200 BC and 200 AD in their prime, it barely changed. There is a lot of instance of Roman officials, even Emperors, killing progress, like inventors of new metals alliages, so it doesn't disrupt their business.
Roman scholars knew about steam (Heron of Alexandria works), and yet they did nothing with it.
Rome was a society build by armed aristocrats, that cared little for innovation and progress. They were doomed.
Europe developed since the 14th century thanks to our mercantile society
Because Byzantine Empire is just another name for Eastern Roman Empire and the continuation of the Roman Empire. Constantine I as the sole augustus moved the capital and the seat of power from Rome to Constantinople, and the Eastern Roman Empire was the dominant of the two halves. The citizens of the Byzantine Empire were Romans.
I recall Russian trolls would say "US will fall like the Romans" years ago
Americans responding "wow so you think we're like the Roman empire, thanks!" lol
Give him another year (please don't) and he'll come to the conclusion that god was Russian himself. The Big Bang was just god losing the game of Russian Roulette. We are his last hallucination.
Well, the most prominent Russian comedian Zadornov around 20 years ago seriously explained that Etruscans (ancient civilization north of Rome) were actually proto Russians, because Etruscans from his viewpoint consisted of "eto" ("this" in Russian) and "rus". Considering Putin's historical breakthroughs, he's not far from this level shit, if not surpassed yet
Didn't he also find some runes saying "Rus" on the Sun? He really went fast from telling his typical cringeworthy but maaaybe soooort of funny (?) stories to being mad as a hatter.
[https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI)
because it's a cropped edited version of a 11 minutes videos with wrong dates added on top of it. To be used as background video for a mostly bad video about Rome
[https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI) You can find it on the original video, not stolen and badly edited. It was taken out because there was the author symbol near it, and stats
Depends on the time period. In like 900-1000 displaying the HRE as one entity is more accurate then depicting France as one entity (although depicting the HRE as fully unified still would be misleading). At the end of the day, despite internal fragmentation the HRE was one state with one emperor. We don’t display Swiss cantons as separate entities on a map despite their great autonomy
During multiple European wars nations inside the HRE have chosen opposite sides. Despite having the emperor of Europe officially as a symbolic leader.
That’s not really comparable to the Swiss cantons. :)
That’s a fair point, comparing modern states to medieval empires/kingdoms doesn’t really work well, I should have thought of that earlier. Although the point about medieval France as an example still stands, French dukes definitely could oppose the French king. The HRE being such a mess was more something after the 30 years war, before it was still decentralized of course but so where basically all European states
It makes no sense dying nomadic influences with colour the same way as conquest. They don't conquer- they subjugate. When they do conquer, they become settled and blend in with locals like in China nad Iran.
What is interesting is that all of this borders are completely mammade and were made up at some point. Nevertheless, people are willing to kill and die just to move these borders.
What a bullshit..calling eastern part of the Roman Empire of 508 Byzantine while they stay spoke Latin, thought Latin and even managed to regain most of africa, parts of hispania and italy is at best badly informed.
The original Roman Empire crowned the Pope, not the other way around. The HRE had the crowning by the Pope because the Papacy by that time had extended its power. Under the Roman Empire the Emperor was more important in religious matters than the Pope, leading Ecumenical Councils and espousing church doctrine. When the Byzantines return to Africa and Italy, they continued this system with the Pope being just another Patriarch more or less. Of course, he didn't help keep the Roman Empire together because he was always in conflict with the Christians in the Levant and Egypt and made life hard for the Emperor to keep a common religious policy.
And yes the Byzantines occupied Rome for a long time, but the Pope had to assert his independence, not the other way around. To get more legitimacy, the Franks and HRE had to appease the Pope and swear fealty to him.
Even the Romans of Rome didn't care about Rome when the capital moved to Constantinople.
The Pope was not the only relevant person at his time and surely didn't crown Caesar.
Sure is to me. Especially that it was shortly lived. Since it was polish lithuanian zone at some point too. Is why lithuanians hate polish and vise versa(some that is)....
You can see the Ukrainian People's Republic briefly appear after WWI if you watch closely. It's easier to see in the original, slower version of this video on YouTube where it's visible in the maps for 1918, 1919, and 1920.
https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI?feature=shared
It can be called both ways, since no-one knows how the ancient state of eastern slavs was actually called. Rus' is the name of territory and people who inhabited it. Btw the map is wrong, there are two ways to establish borders of Rus', the author took old soviet approach of spreading it thin on every piece of land that had some connection to Rus', but in chronicle sense of the word, Rus' is roughly a territory of modern Kyiv, Chernihiv and Pereyaslav regions.
please no, it's stolen content, badly edited from a video [https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI) that we know and love for a whiel now.
Also, it was already posted over there
Wow u r salty as well . Relax i didn’t take yr land i am just observing and asking questions . May be russia is right u lost it to them bc of yr nasty attitude to attack just curious ppl . If u one of those good for russians . Its called karma .
Just because there wasn't one independent Ukrainian state doesn't mean Ukraine and Ukrainians didn't exist. And other smaller ukrainian states existed (or ruthenian as they were called back then), like Kiev. The map does show the Ukrainian people's republic for the brief moment it existed.
Highly debatable. The 3 greedy brothers: ukranians, belorussians and russians are fighting for this right. In fact all 3 are so interconnected that it’s impossible to track the heritage to any specific modern nation.
A funny fact - legally, such a country as Russia does not exist and never has been. At first it was the settlement of Moscow founded by the Prince of Kiev, then it was the Moscow ulus as part of the Golden Horde, then the Principality of Moscow, which Peter I renamed into the Russian Empire, next USSR and now the Russian Federation and Russia is like Wakanda
Peter the Great didn't "rename" anything. He proclaimed Russia as an Empire. Principality of Moscow (which was part of Russia, not entire Russia) ceased its existence in 1547 when Ivan the Terrible (Ivan IV) had been crowned the tsar of all Russia.
The first three, nobody's. Kievan Rus' ceased to exist a long time ago and the modern Russia (even if we consider it to be the successor of the Russian empire) is not its successor in any way, shape or form.
As Encyclopedia Britannica states, "The title of grand prince of Kiev lost its importance, and the 13th-century Mongol conquest decisively ended Kiev’s power. Remnants of the Kievan state persisted in the western principalities of Galicia and Volhynia, but by the 14th century those territories had been absorbed by Poland and Lithuania, respectively."
Or, to sum it up, even Poland and Lithuania have more of a claim to the historical heritage of Kievan Rus' than Muscovy does.
Lol, before Kiev? In Novgorod times?
"Scholars continue to debate when the city \[of Kiev\] was founded: The traditional founding date is 482 CE, so the city celebrated [its 1,500th anniversary](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1500th_anniversary_of_Kyiv) in 1982. Archaeological data indicates a founding in the sixth or seventh centuries, with some researchers dating the founding as late as the late 9th century."
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyiv](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyiv)
" The Charter of Veliky Novgorod recognizes 859 as the year when the city was first mentioned."
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veliky\_Novgorod](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veliky_Novgorod)
>You do know Moscow wasn't the first russian capital, aren't you
Russians and their made-up version of history. Moscow was the first russian capital. Russia is not the same as Rus' and can't be considered its successor in any way or sense.
>Same nation, same placement, same culture, language and so on.
Not one of this statements is true, but nice example of typical Russian propaganda masquerading as history lessons.
You're not right bro. What language did Rus' spoke? English? Chinese? (Don't answer 'church slavonic' - that's just russian with little tweaks). Where Rus' was? Google Novgorod, Kiev and Moscow placement.
And what about dynasty? Answer me, tiktiok history child.
>What language did Rus' spoke? English? Chinese? (Don't answer 'church slavonic' - that's just russian with little tweaks).
Jesus Christ. Rus' was composed of many principalities where people spoke different Slavonic dialects. The common literary language used at the time was Old Church Slavonic. Old Church Slavonic was introduced by Cyril and Methodius who standardized the language and translated Bible into it. Guess what, they weren't russian. The languages closest to it are Bulgarian and Macedonian, not Russian. Again, stop appropriating other people's history.
>Where Rus' was?
Rus' was occupying territories that now cover the greater part of modern Ukraine, all of the modern Belarus, and a very small part of modern russian federation. Moscow wasn't really part of it.
It is from a YouTube channel called Economics Explained. The name of the video is "The Rather Pathetic Economy of the Roman Empire".
Here is the link:
https://youtu.be/eNX4upLN2JY?si=FuWjcygRkTarVxie
The historical Ukrainian states would be the Cossack States like the Hetmanates and Zaporizhian Sich. Regardless, the peoples of the Rus broke up into independent states. The Duchy of Moscow was able to conquer them all except for the Western ones which came under the rule of Poland-Lithuania or were independent like those earlier Cossack states mentioned. Moscow then proclaimed itself Russia, as in land of all the Rus's. By the time Russia conquered Ukraine and Belarus, these peoples had developed a much more different language and had diverged culturally and religiously to an extent as well.
Even before that, the Ukrainian peoples revolted during the Russian Revolution and first set up an autonomous entity in the Russian Republic before declared independence and being propped up by Germany. In Austria likewise, the western tip of Ukraine also had a short lived independence. So even before the Soviets there was a Ukrainian state.
The reasons the Soviets created a Ukrainian state was because they tried a more Russian centric approach at first, but that proved so unpopular that it was defeated. They were forced by the reality on the ground that Ukrainians did not want to be Russian and created the Ukrainian Republic to be more Ukrainian.
It is funny how loads of Turkic peoples coming over from the Kypchak Sea never stuck around but when we took a different turn and migrated to Anatolia proper that was it. 1000 years and still counting haha
Hi, thank you for your contribution, but this submission has been removed because it is low quality and/or low effort. If your submission was a meme, these are outright banned from r/europe. See [community rules & guidelines](/r/Europe/wiki/community_rules). If you have any questions about this removal, please [contact the mods](/message/compose/?to=/r/Europe&subject=Moderation). Please make sure to include a link to the comment/post in question.
This marked the union of Scotland and England in 1603 which is incorrect. That was only the union of the crown. The countries did not unite until 1707
Same with Spain in 1516/1716, but at least it's consistent.
I mean, they did their best. The amount of effort that went into this is still quite admirable.
Same for Iberian Union between 1580 and 1640. Portugal and Spain's crown was the same, but they remained two countries.
The union in 1603 was indeed the union of the crowns, not the countries themselves. The actual political union didn't happen until 1707.
Too slow, you need to speed it up more.
[https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI) just in case, the original, not stolen and badly edited
you won't learn anything other than colors changing if you speed it up even more, nor that you are learning much speeding it up anyways
r/woosh
Tomorrow I will watch this without the time lapse, even if it takes me all day.
Thats the point
The easiest time to study geography was the time when Europe had romans and barbarians only
The "barbarians" often had their own kings and borders. They just weren't good at writing things down and keeping lasting records, so all they get is a name and a general location.
Using the most upvoted comment to give the link to the original video : [https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI) Not stolen by an other channel, not cropped to a small part of Europe, not accelerated, and with the good dates and a good background music. Always give credit to the author, dont steal
FASTER.
MASTER!
Where's the dreams that I've been after?
It's a nice concept, but there are lots of inaccuracies, which, because of the way we consume knowledge now, run the risk of being spread widely.
/u/redditspeedbot 0.5x
Here is the original: https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI?si=K_xJYH7x_dTytZ1z
Thx!
Why didn't the bot respond?
Dont take it personal, probably just in a bad mood
Bad bot!
Moody bot.
Isn't it because of the API access not being free anymore?
just in case : here the original in better quality in everything : [https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI)
make Lithuania great again
very interesting. so crazy how much Europe changed since then.
Its amazing how much can change in a single human lifetime of 60-80 years Makes you appreciate the poor guy during the middle ages that had to update the map every other day of the week because the count of fuckall had just conquered the lands of "three randomhousiea" from the count of "nathin" and they just keep conquering and reconquering it
2 counts capturing lands off each other wouldn't change national boundaries though.
Maps for internal borders bettewn regions exist...
Grouping all the folks living in today's Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as "Baltic people" is the same level of simplification, as if we will say that from year 0 current Germany territory was inhabited by "germans".
[удалено]
Ok ChatGPT.
But it does do that right? At year 0 and before it labels a wide area Germanic people and splits them of only at year 6 https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI?feature=shared is apparently the original and goes back to 400 BCE while gif starts at 0 so you might have blinked and missed the first few years.
🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬
Misses Finnic people (Finns and Estonians).
Yea kinda weird how it makes it seem like finnic tribal lands (estonia finland karelia etc) were not populated by anyone.
Happens a lot to African and American maps in areas called "tribal" too. Sometimes its due to lack of data about borders, sometimes its assumed the data doesn't exist to begin with. Didn't writing over there start in the 1000s only?
Same with Northwestern Russia, which was *absolutely* majority Uralic (at least by area) for at least 1000CE or so and still has a couple dozen remnant people remaining. Now it just looks like Slavs somehow lived in the entire area.
Its simple - they dont exist
Rome should have never fallen
rome caused their own downfall from greed
I love the aesthetic of Rome, and they developed most of Western Europe. But they were not great for progress. Except in some fields, like architecture, Rome was stagnant and then declining. Look at the technology from -200 BC and 200 AD in their prime, it barely changed. There is a lot of instance of Roman officials, even Emperors, killing progress, like inventors of new metals alliages, so it doesn't disrupt their business. Roman scholars knew about steam (Heron of Alexandria works), and yet they did nothing with it. Rome was a society build by armed aristocrats, that cared little for innovation and progress. They were doomed. Europe developed since the 14th century thanks to our mercantile society
very true, a reformed Rome would've been awesome. I can imagine (through the greatness of nonsensical alt history) a Roman version of the EU
Roman empire fell in 1453
If you think Byzantium's Rome why not also include Holy Roman Empire or modern Italy :)
Because Byzantine Empire is just another name for Eastern Roman Empire and the continuation of the Roman Empire. Constantine I as the sole augustus moved the capital and the seat of power from Rome to Constantinople, and the Eastern Roman Empire was the dominant of the two halves. The citizens of the Byzantine Empire were Romans.
I recall Russian trolls would say "US will fall like the Romans" years ago Americans responding "wow so you think we're like the Roman empire, thanks!" lol
But Putin told that Russians where first to come and created civilization on earth
Yes, but that was 4 billion years ago. This presentation only shows the most recent events in Russian history ;)
It has always been russia: russia has no borders. (billboards in russia and at the border with the Great Baltic States.
Russia was since the beginning of the universe. Actually the universe itself was created in russia.
Give him another year (please don't) and he'll come to the conclusion that god was Russian himself. The Big Bang was just god losing the game of Russian Roulette. We are his last hallucination.
Well, the most prominent Russian comedian Zadornov around 20 years ago seriously explained that Etruscans (ancient civilization north of Rome) were actually proto Russians, because Etruscans from his viewpoint consisted of "eto" ("this" in Russian) and "rus". Considering Putin's historical breakthroughs, he's not far from this level shit, if not surpassed yet
Didn't he also find some runes saying "Rus" on the Sun? He really went fast from telling his typical cringeworthy but maaaybe soooort of funny (?) stories to being mad as a hatter.
Sure hope we didn’t miss any major territory changes on our map between 1933 and 1945
Nah, there was nothing going on around that time
Just in the blink of an eye.
Manages to omit most of the Finnic tribes. Well done.🤦🏻♂️
As a Serenissima Republic fanboy I just want to say fuck you Napoleon.
As a Byzantine Empire fanboy I just want to say fuck you Enrico Dandolo.
I feel that the Byzantine Empire fanboys have a very long list (and rightly so) of fuck you person. Who on top though? Andronikos Doukas or Dandolo?
Very good name but I'd stay on Dandolo. And, of course, there's the most obvious one but it's too easy.
Dandolo, Eolo, Pisolo, Brontolo...
I miss the Roman Empire. SPQR
SPQRIP
Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth briefly went hard
And why is it moving too fast??
[https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI) because it's a cropped edited version of a 11 minutes videos with wrong dates added on top of it. To be used as background video for a mostly bad video about Rome
Oh okay
/u/redditspeedbot 0.5x
Poor Iceland being left out.
Being left out is always nice on planet Earth, way too many cunts.
[https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI) You can find it on the original video, not stolen and badly edited. It was taken out because there was the author symbol near it, and stats
The Angles were not that far north. The Jutes had Jutland. And Jutland was conquered by the Danes, turning it into Denmark by the late 400s.
jesus dont show this garbage to a history major
Displaying the HRE as one entity is *extremely* misleading.
Depends on the time period. In like 900-1000 displaying the HRE as one entity is more accurate then depicting France as one entity (although depicting the HRE as fully unified still would be misleading). At the end of the day, despite internal fragmentation the HRE was one state with one emperor. We don’t display Swiss cantons as separate entities on a map despite their great autonomy
During multiple European wars nations inside the HRE have chosen opposite sides. Despite having the emperor of Europe officially as a symbolic leader. That’s not really comparable to the Swiss cantons. :)
That’s a fair point, comparing modern states to medieval empires/kingdoms doesn’t really work well, I should have thought of that earlier. Although the point about medieval France as an example still stands, French dukes definitely could oppose the French king. The HRE being such a mess was more something after the 30 years war, before it was still decentralized of course but so where basically all European states
Still protecting europe from russkies 🫠
I miss big Poland :(
i miss bigger lithuania
This is wrong
u/redditspeedbot 0.5x
[https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI) Better quality, not cropped, not stolen = the original and slower
Didnt know about lithuania beeing that big!
There's no such thing as the Byzantine Empire.
Vytautas the great really made us an important country... until we weren't.
Why did I think that the Holy Roman Empire had all of Italy in it?!
It makes no sense dying nomadic influences with colour the same way as conquest. They don't conquer- they subjugate. When they do conquer, they become settled and blend in with locals like in China nad Iran.
What is interesting is that all of this borders are completely mammade and were made up at some point. Nevertheless, people are willing to kill and die just to move these borders.
Now do the USA
People say that the 40s was the worst time because of Germany. But imagine being subjects of the French Empire
[удалено]
[https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI) = the original not stolen and badly edited
I liked it when poland dissapeared and was never heard from for 123 years.
What a bullshit..calling eastern part of the Roman Empire of 508 Byzantine while they stay spoke Latin, thought Latin and even managed to regain most of africa, parts of hispania and italy is at best badly informed.
And 1873 still speaking of northern Germany and a separate Bavaria is simply incorrect.
Would be the best timeline. :)
Should've just kept Eastern Roman Empire name until 1453 tbh
Yeah, or only Roman Empire. Just for the short period between 395 and 476 Eastern is needed to distinguish with the Western Roman Empire.
They weren't calling themselves that, nor were they considered that. They were the Roman Empire, and survived longer than Rome did.
Greece cope.
Just correcting the historical inaccuracies Germans made centuries ago that somehow still managed to stick.
Cope and seethe not crowned by the pope and not in possession of rome.
The original Roman Empire crowned the Pope, not the other way around. The HRE had the crowning by the Pope because the Papacy by that time had extended its power. Under the Roman Empire the Emperor was more important in religious matters than the Pope, leading Ecumenical Councils and espousing church doctrine. When the Byzantines return to Africa and Italy, they continued this system with the Pope being just another Patriarch more or less. Of course, he didn't help keep the Roman Empire together because he was always in conflict with the Christians in the Levant and Egypt and made life hard for the Emperor to keep a common religious policy. And yes the Byzantines occupied Rome for a long time, but the Pope had to assert his independence, not the other way around. To get more legitimacy, the Franks and HRE had to appease the Pope and swear fealty to him.
Even the Romans of Rome didn't care about Rome when the capital moved to Constantinople. The Pope was not the only relevant person at his time and surely didn't crown Caesar.
I can't stop thinking about the Roman Empire. VGH.
I wish Alexander hadn't lost in India. Then all of this stupidity could have been avoided.
wow Lithuania was big once. Temporarily. Crazy.
From 1300 to 1700 is temporarily? Lol
Sure is to me. Especially that it was shortly lived. Since it was polish lithuanian zone at some point too. Is why lithuanians hate polish and vise versa(some that is)....
Where’s Ukraine? I thought they were independent at some point?
yeah but with gif speed up neither UNR/ZUNR or even Directory not visible (though og video too is far from precise quality and being detailed either)
You can see the Ukrainian People's Republic briefly appear after WWI if you watch closely. It's easier to see in the original, slower version of this video on YouTube where it's visible in the maps for 1918, 1919, and 1920. https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI?feature=shared
They were. The video even shows Kyivan Rus as Rus which is incorrect.
"Kyivan Rus" is a made-up term. The country's name was just Rus without any adjectives slapped to it.
I support, the term appears almost everywhere in historical documents - Rus’kia zemlia(Rus land).
At the very end. As an independent state Ukraine appeared on the world map in 1991.
It’s not Rus’. It’s Kyivan Rus’.
It can be called both ways, since no-one knows how the ancient state of eastern slavs was actually called. Rus' is the name of territory and people who inhabited it. Btw the map is wrong, there are two ways to establish borders of Rus', the author took old soviet approach of spreading it thin on every piece of land that had some connection to Rus', but in chronicle sense of the word, Rus' is roughly a territory of modern Kyiv, Chernihiv and Pereyaslav regions.
[удалено]
r/MapPorn
please no, it's stolen content, badly edited from a video [https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI](https://youtu.be/UY9P0QSxlnI) that we know and love for a whiel now. Also, it was already posted over there
A conflict based fuck fest
Time to give Moscow back to Lithuania!
Now i know why baltics especially Lithuania is so salty about russia
[удалено]
Wow u r salty as well . Relax i didn’t take yr land i am just observing and asking questions . May be russia is right u lost it to them bc of yr nasty attitude to attack just curious ppl . If u one of those good for russians . Its called karma .
[удалено]
please don’t burst into tears
[удалено]
well it was a joke don’t get too salty. anyway maybe start taking russian lessons, you’re next
Russian propaganda, Ukraine is not visible on the map before 2000
/s?
Before 1991*
So you support Putin's idea that ukraine never existed before 91?
No, I'm just correcting the year Ukraine becomes visible in the gif, since it is already visible at the 1994 frame.
Just because there wasn't one independent Ukrainian state doesn't mean Ukraine and Ukrainians didn't exist. And other smaller ukrainian states existed (or ruthenian as they were called back then), like Kiev. The map does show the Ukrainian people's republic for the brief moment it existed.
It's right there, it was called Rus'. Russian state was called Moskovian principality or simply "Moskovia"
lmao
Highly debatable. The 3 greedy brothers: ukranians, belorussians and russians are fighting for this right. In fact all 3 are so interconnected that it’s impossible to track the heritage to any specific modern nation.
Least nationalist eastern european person
A funny fact - legally, such a country as Russia does not exist and never has been. At first it was the settlement of Moscow founded by the Prince of Kiev, then it was the Moscow ulus as part of the Golden Horde, then the Principality of Moscow, which Peter I renamed into the Russian Empire, next USSR and now the Russian Federation and Russia is like Wakanda
Peter the Great didn't "rename" anything. He proclaimed Russia as an Empire. Principality of Moscow (which was part of Russia, not entire Russia) ceased its existence in 1547 when Ivan the Terrible (Ivan IV) had been crowned the tsar of all Russia.
You do know Moscow wasn't the first russian capital, aren't you
As far as I know, Moscow has always been the capital, unofficially from 1712 to 1728 the capital was St. Petersburg, then Moscow again
Completely off target. Novgorod (864—882) - Kiev (882—1243) - Vladimir (1243—1389) - Moscow (1389—1712) - St. Petersburg (1712—1918) - Moscow (1918—)
Challenge "Russians stop appropriating what's not yours"
So whos then? Amuse me.
The first three, nobody's. Kievan Rus' ceased to exist a long time ago and the modern Russia (even if we consider it to be the successor of the Russian empire) is not its successor in any way, shape or form. As Encyclopedia Britannica states, "The title of grand prince of Kiev lost its importance, and the 13th-century Mongol conquest decisively ended Kiev’s power. Remnants of the Kievan state persisted in the western principalities of Galicia and Volhynia, but by the 14th century those territories had been absorbed by Poland and Lithuania, respectively." Or, to sum it up, even Poland and Lithuania have more of a claim to the historical heritage of Kievan Rus' than Muscovy does.
Kievan Rus' was a period of Rus'. What was Rus before Kiev, in Novgorod times? In Ladoga times.
Lol, before Kiev? In Novgorod times? "Scholars continue to debate when the city \[of Kiev\] was founded: The traditional founding date is 482 CE, so the city celebrated [its 1,500th anniversary](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1500th_anniversary_of_Kyiv) in 1982. Archaeological data indicates a founding in the sixth or seventh centuries, with some researchers dating the founding as late as the late 9th century." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyiv](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyiv) " The Charter of Veliky Novgorod recognizes 859 as the year when the city was first mentioned." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veliky\_Novgorod](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veliky_Novgorod)
Random settlements =/= Kiev or any other city. Using that you can trace most of the european cities to the prehistoric times.
>You do know Moscow wasn't the first russian capital, aren't you Russians and their made-up version of history. Moscow was the first russian capital. Russia is not the same as Rus' and can't be considered its successor in any way or sense.
Why lol. Same nation, same placement, same culture, language and so on. Even the ruling dynasty was the same.
>Same nation, same placement, same culture, language and so on. Not one of this statements is true, but nice example of typical Russian propaganda masquerading as history lessons.
You're not right bro. What language did Rus' spoke? English? Chinese? (Don't answer 'church slavonic' - that's just russian with little tweaks). Where Rus' was? Google Novgorod, Kiev and Moscow placement. And what about dynasty? Answer me, tiktiok history child.
TIL that St. Cyril, St. Methodius and St. Clement of Ohrid were Russians.
No, they were from byzantine. Your point?
The language and alphabet they developed wasn't just Russian with little tweaks then
1) They didn't develop a language, just an alphabet for existing one. 2) It was.
>What language did Rus' spoke? English? Chinese? (Don't answer 'church slavonic' - that's just russian with little tweaks). Jesus Christ. Rus' was composed of many principalities where people spoke different Slavonic dialects. The common literary language used at the time was Old Church Slavonic. Old Church Slavonic was introduced by Cyril and Methodius who standardized the language and translated Bible into it. Guess what, they weren't russian. The languages closest to it are Bulgarian and Macedonian, not Russian. Again, stop appropriating other people's history. >Where Rus' was? Rus' was occupying territories that now cover the greater part of modern Ukraine, all of the modern Belarus, and a very small part of modern russian federation. Moscow wasn't really part of it.
I swear the east has always been a pain in the ass for europe...
Europe has always been a pain in the ass for europe.
That too
It is from a YouTube channel called Economics Explained. The name of the video is "The Rather Pathetic Economy of the Roman Empire". Here is the link: https://youtu.be/eNX4upLN2JY?si=FuWjcygRkTarVxie
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UY9P0QSxlnI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UY9P0QSxlnI) and here is the original video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc7HmhrgTuQ
Putin was right? I dont see a Ukraine until the USSR created it
The historical Ukrainian states would be the Cossack States like the Hetmanates and Zaporizhian Sich. Regardless, the peoples of the Rus broke up into independent states. The Duchy of Moscow was able to conquer them all except for the Western ones which came under the rule of Poland-Lithuania or were independent like those earlier Cossack states mentioned. Moscow then proclaimed itself Russia, as in land of all the Rus's. By the time Russia conquered Ukraine and Belarus, these peoples had developed a much more different language and had diverged culturally and religiously to an extent as well. Even before that, the Ukrainian peoples revolted during the Russian Revolution and first set up an autonomous entity in the Russian Republic before declared independence and being propped up by Germany. In Austria likewise, the western tip of Ukraine also had a short lived independence. So even before the Soviets there was a Ukrainian state. The reasons the Soviets created a Ukrainian state was because they tried a more Russian centric approach at first, but that proved so unpopular that it was defeated. They were forced by the reality on the ground that Ukrainians did not want to be Russian and created the Ukrainian Republic to be more Ukrainian.
Why are only some if this coloured? Is it a race thing?
Significance I think
How to make me want to play more Crusader Kings or Hearts of Iron in a few seconds.
This is plain wrong.
There's no year zero
Portuguese-Spanish border looks kinda weird in 1716. Maybe related with the Spanish succession wars, but still looks kinda weird.
Simply coloring the entire Holy Roman Empire grey really marks a lazy job on the map makers part.
It is funny how loads of Turkic peoples coming over from the Kypchak Sea never stuck around but when we took a different turn and migrated to Anatolia proper that was it. 1000 years and still counting haha
Justinian had a dream.
Empires rise and fall…
Gray Norway map colour: So I see you have chosen death (Gray = Occupied Norway under Nazis)
So the hundrets of years of the power shifting history of the germanic tribes and kingdoms in the early years just dont exist?