Many Nations have lost more than one war. It took the whole world twice to beat Germany. (Or Germany was silly enought to challenge the whole world twice. [The second time because Wilson did not keep his promises.])
I thought Alsace Lorraine could have gotten a mention about the part where King Louis annexed it in the 30 years war, as it was a possession of the Holy roman empire before, which explains the linguistic situation.
Well, the bishopric of Cologne had a lot of territories in The Netherlands in his domain until not so long ago. The church of 'Grave' (North-Brabant, close to the border with today Gelderland) was long in hands of the Bishopric in Cologne. Also were many other places. The bond only got cut off in the French age by reorganising religion and some other German owned castles and holdings in the region by 1945. So in short: you started it!😂 There is a Dutch proverb: 'Alsof ze het in Keulen horen donderen.' 'As if they hear thundering in Cologne.' Meaning that hey hear something quite new and unbbelievable. So that would be a new angle for this verb...
That's kind of an oversimplification that's less relevant than you might think. There has been a decently powerful Polish polity west of the Vistula since 1000 AD. Same goes for Bohemia/Czechia. The very identities of the Dutch and Belgians were formed by their "subcultures" being wedged between German and French hegemonies. After the Migration Era and the Slavic Migrations the only huge waves of ethnic change have come from steppes peoples who mostly integrated into the local cultures; that is to say that 1000 years of wars have done little in the face of sedentary ethno-national identities at the core of each of the states in Central Europe. As the lines are drawn today most of the German citizens are German ethnically, and the same with their neighbors. Statecraft, language and ethnic identity have been tightly interwoven. Germany looks this way because it has always kind of looked this way. (Or at least for the past thousand years it has retained this relative core and that relative core took shape in the thousand years before that. Even the Carolingians and HRE couldn't do anything but project their power from that core.)
@@Bern_il_CinqI mean, Silesia and Pomerania were in German hands for awhile, same with east Prussia and to an extent Sudetenland, which all lost German ethnicity from one nation, the USSR which forced them out
@@Bern_il_Cinq You’d actually be more correct _earlier_ in German history than the last millennium. For most of the past thousand years (1100s-1945) “Germany” has extended further east (and south). It is the early medieval Kingdom of Germany that most closely matches modern Germany on the east, but not at all on the western border (mainly due to the incorporation of Lotharingia as two duchies after the last partition treaty in 880 finalized borders). You mention the ancient migrations, but forget there _were_ waves of migrations in the medieval period from non-steppe peoples as well. And by were, I mean was because the Ostsiedlung is really the only example I know of (but I have heard that, when they could, peasants often migrated to Iberia or the crusader states).
@@Bobertthecoolkid Actually the Czechs forced them of the Sudetenland after that WW2 proved coexistence impossible in the eyes of Czechoslovak government.
I really enjoyed this, fantastic concept for a video, I'm for sure interested in seeing the video on Poland and then any more followups in this new series.
Maybe it was a bad idea to choose germanys border for the first such video. The concept is good, the border of my fatherland is one of the most complex ones neighboring 9 countries. This explaines my dissatisfaction because of mistakes and inaccuracies. Examples: 1. If you argue that the border to Austria dates to 1945 as highlighted in the map, thats also true for the border to Czechia, as Sudetenland was also annexed. Either this or that, no mixture please! 2. There is a remaining part of Silesia, part of northern Saxony today. So its untrue all of Silesia was lost. premodern territories raraly had borders at rivers so thats no surprise. Its no small piece, it contains Görlitz. 3. The Alsace-Lorraine / Esaß-Lothringen Region is mixed in Language. It was part of the HRR before 1648. Just to mention that despite all the bla-bla of german-french friendship the country of France is the only neighbor without any minority rights for german speakers or culture. 4. It is debated if Belgium needs to give back the Vennbahn-territory. The treaty gives them the right over the railway. But the railway is gone. germany posseses bridges over the railway for example, because the treaty only states the railway, not the territory per se. 5. The referendum on the border to denmark was biased. It was not counted by village etc, but in two regions. Denmark gerrymandered this regions this way, that germany was disadvantaged. Otherwise they would have lost Tondern. As this referendum was forced upon germany after WW1 where denmark did not even participate it is seen as Denmark being a vulture. Not fighting, but afterwards stealing from the looser. Same was true for the referendums in Upper Silesia after WW1, but that did not play an important role in your video of course. 6. The border to the Netherlands is disputed where the Ems flows into the north sea. There are other videos about such borders on youtube, which i would advice to watch and rethink before covering the same topic. This way you could simplify by purpose if necessary, without getting critique for poor knowledge.
I feel that a mention of Szczecin/Stettin which is on the wrong side of the Oder river, as well as Usedom, the Island split between Germany and Poland. They obviously have the same origin as the rest of the border, but a sentence or two explaining why the map your are showing doesn't agree with what you are saying (that the Oder and Neisse define the border), would have been good in my opinion
map makers were really upset when the border didn't follow the river fully.... such a strange border... and i cant find any real sources why that is the case when the river is just fine
Hi, Seb here, Austria-born writer for HiB. I was anticipating this input and think it is also valid. What I would use as argumentation FOR our decision to put Austria‘s border as 1945 in the end is that 1) the Anschluss was voted for (and supported, which is important to stress due to the problematic circumstances of the vote) by a majority of the Austrian people, 2) the majority of international actors legally accepted the annexation (with the famous exception of the Soviet Union and Mexico, which is why we have a Mexikoplatz in Vienna) Also, even if we didn‘t count this peaceful annexation and therefore consider the border to be „new“ after WW2, the borders of Czechia to most of Germany would still be considerably older
Okay, 1648, but these borders were already older. How did the various Dutch provinces of the time get their borders: Groningen, Gelre, Drenthe (which was for a long time a possession of the Bishopric of Utrecht).
I always find it so ironic that the region where the nation that unified Germany due to expansionism and nationalism, is no longer part of it due to the same reasons.
@@GÓRAL-o2jbut Brandenburg was German and Prussia and Brandenburg entered a personal union and took the name Prussia to be able to have a "King in Prussia"
8:42 when talking about the 'infamously contested region of Alsace-Lorraine' it would help to understand this topic much better than to begin with the 1871 swap. France has been pushing its border eastwards for centuries and the way it finally acquired all of the region in the 18th century is crucial in understanding what let to the 1871 decision of taking it back. 😔
Very interesting, very informative. I assume there wasn't much more available but I would've loved more information on how the late medieval Bohemian border came to be!
@@historyinbits well, the drawing of the modern borders of Europe at around 00:21 in the video. It immediatly stood out to me because I know that the border looks kind of horizontal on average when looking at a map of Europe (mercator, north up).
A very good and informative video, my feedback would be that it can sometimes be hard to follow the borders you're referencing when using old maps. I found it difficult to pick them out when you were going quite quickly through old maps of the borders with France and Luxembourg. My reccomendation would be to trace an outline of the modern border and superimpose it over the old maps to really highlight how it has, or has not, changed.
The part about the northern border lacks in regard to the role of danish nationalism in the matter of how Schleswig ended up inside the german empire in the first place. 😂
Hello! I really loved the Ck3 series and i wonder is it possible to show some love to Finland and make a video of it? It is never spoken about and in the game or videos. many things including the name of the faith "ukonusko" is wrongly made.
We agreed to keep the current border so it isnt illegal, you could argue that thereare inconsistencies, like the previous polish government saying the previous agreements arent valid due to being signed by the communist polish government, if you follow this logic then the border would still be as it is today, it just wouldnt be recognised by Germany, which wouldnt really change anything in practice.
@@Hubabe008 Colony?? The reason Poland was patitioned was because they wuld not stop comiting genocides to there nabors!! and All of the land exept Posen was clearely German majority! Stop spreding Allied Propaganda the only "German" gouvernament that miss treated the Poles were the NSDAP!
I'm surprised there was no reminder of the earliest historical German-Polish border, documented in 992's Dagome Iudex. During the reign of the 1st Polish historical duke, Mieszko I, Poland's western border looked roughly the same with minor adjustments here and there. Though I'm pretty sure that some parts of the border, like the region around Cedynia was laying on the Oder even then.
@u.s.1974 My emphasis is not on whether Germania or Vendia or the heckin Apes should hold these lands, but that a very similiar border between the two countries existed much earlier than 1945.
@@u.s.1974 first of all, those Germanics fled the Huns and didn't return and Germans today are not them. Only north - western Germany remained Germanic. The rest is Slavs and Celts.
North Sea, Alpes, Rhine, lost two wars.
Very good summary!
Many Nations have lost more than one war. It took the whole world twice to beat Germany. (Or Germany was silly enought to challenge the whole world twice. [The second time because Wilson did not keep his promises.])
“You wanna know how I got these borders? My father was a Hohenzollern, and a state builder. One night, Europe goes off crazier than usual.”
I like that meme where it’s the jokers face in Germany saying you wanna know how I got these borders.
I thought Alsace Lorraine could have gotten a mention about the part where King Louis annexed it in the 30 years war, as it was a possession of the Holy roman empire before, which explains the linguistic situation.
Imagine the ludicrous world where Köln is Dutch
Well, the bishopric of Cologne had a lot of territories in The Netherlands in his domain until not so long ago. The church of 'Grave' (North-Brabant, close to the border with today Gelderland) was long in hands of the Bishopric in Cologne. Also were many other places. The bond only got cut off in the French age by reorganising religion and some other German owned castles and holdings in the region by 1945. So in short: you started it!😂
There is a Dutch proverb: 'Alsof ze het in Keulen horen donderen.' 'As if they hear thundering in Cologne.' Meaning that hey hear something quite new and unbbelievable. So that would be a new angle for this verb...
Because they lost two world wars.
That's kind of an oversimplification that's less relevant than you might think. There has been a decently powerful Polish polity west of the Vistula since 1000 AD. Same goes for Bohemia/Czechia. The very identities of the Dutch and Belgians were formed by their "subcultures" being wedged between German and French hegemonies. After the Migration Era and the Slavic Migrations the only huge waves of ethnic change have come from steppes peoples who mostly integrated into the local cultures; that is to say that 1000 years of wars have done little in the face of sedentary ethno-national identities at the core of each of the states in Central Europe. As the lines are drawn today most of the German citizens are German ethnically, and the same with their neighbors. Statecraft, language and ethnic identity have been tightly interwoven.
Germany looks this way because it has always kind of looked this way. (Or at least for the past thousand years it has retained this relative core and that relative core took shape in the thousand years before that. Even the Carolingians and HRE couldn't do anything but project their power from that core.)
@@Bern_il_CinqI mean, Silesia and Pomerania were in German hands for awhile, same with east Prussia and to an extent Sudetenland, which all lost German ethnicity from one nation, the USSR which forced them out
@@Bern_il_Cinq You’d actually be more correct _earlier_ in German history than the last millennium. For most of the past thousand years (1100s-1945) “Germany” has extended further east (and south). It is the early medieval Kingdom of Germany that most closely matches modern Germany on the east, but not at all on the western border (mainly due to the incorporation of Lotharingia as two duchies after the last partition treaty in 880 finalized borders). You mention the ancient migrations, but forget there _were_ waves of migrations in the medieval period from non-steppe peoples as well. And by were, I mean was because the Ostsiedlung is really the only example I know of (but I have heard that, when they could, peasants often migrated to Iberia or the crusader states).
@@Bobertthecoolkid Actually the Czechs forced them of the Sudetenland after that WW2 proved coexistence impossible in the eyes of Czechoslovak government.
I really enjoyed this, fantastic concept for a video, I'm for sure interested in seeing the video on Poland and then any more followups in this new series.
Glad you liked it :)
Maybe it was a bad idea to choose germanys border for the first such video. The concept is good, the border of my fatherland is one of the most complex ones neighboring 9 countries. This explaines my dissatisfaction because of mistakes and inaccuracies.
Examples:
1. If you argue that the border to Austria dates to 1945 as highlighted in the map, thats also true for the border to Czechia, as Sudetenland was also annexed. Either this or that, no mixture please!
2. There is a remaining part of Silesia, part of northern Saxony today. So its untrue all of Silesia was lost. premodern territories raraly had borders at rivers so thats no surprise. Its no small piece, it contains Görlitz.
3. The Alsace-Lorraine / Esaß-Lothringen Region is mixed in Language. It was part of the HRR before 1648. Just to mention that despite all the bla-bla of german-french friendship the country of France is the only neighbor without any minority rights for german speakers or culture.
4. It is debated if Belgium needs to give back the Vennbahn-territory. The treaty gives them the right over the railway. But the railway is gone. germany posseses bridges over the railway for example, because the treaty only states the railway, not the territory per se.
5. The referendum on the border to denmark was biased. It was not counted by village etc, but in two regions. Denmark gerrymandered this regions this way, that germany was disadvantaged. Otherwise they would have lost Tondern. As this referendum was forced upon germany after WW1 where denmark did not even participate it is seen as Denmark being a vulture. Not fighting, but afterwards stealing from the looser. Same was true for the referendums in Upper Silesia after WW1, but that did not play an important role in your video of course.
6. The border to the Netherlands is disputed where the Ems flows into the north sea. There are other videos about such borders on youtube, which i would advice to watch and rethink before covering the same topic. This way you could simplify by purpose if necessary, without getting critique for poor knowledge.
I feel that a mention of Szczecin/Stettin which is on the wrong side of the Oder river, as well as Usedom, the Island split between Germany and Poland. They obviously have the same origin as the rest of the border, but a sentence or two explaining why the map your are showing doesn't agree with what you are saying (that the Oder and Neisse define the border), would have been good in my opinion
Thank you for the feedback! We‘ll partly cover this in our next video on Poland
This !! As someone that lives on usedom I was low-key hyped to hear about the silly little part and it’s silly history that I call home
map makers were really upset when the border didn't follow the river fully.... such a strange border... and i cant find any real sources why that is the case when the river is just fine
Polish-German border is roughly a return of how it was in 10th-12th century.
Alsace is Swabian, and nothing will ever change that.
But we (czechs) had those exact borders even before 1526, with only small changes in the areas bordering Saxony.
The border also changed in 1938/1939 and was restored in 1945
Isn't it kinda weird to put Austria's border at 1945 but not Czechia's?
Hi, Seb here, Austria-born writer for HiB. I was anticipating this input and think it is also valid. What I would use as argumentation FOR our decision to put Austria‘s border as 1945 in the end is that 1) the Anschluss was voted for (and supported, which is important to stress due to the problematic circumstances of the vote) by a majority of the Austrian people, 2) the majority of international actors legally accepted the annexation (with the famous exception of the Soviet Union and Mexico, which is why we have a Mexikoplatz in Vienna)
Also, even if we didn‘t count this peaceful annexation and therefore consider the border to be „new“ after WW2, the borders of Czechia to most of Germany would still be considerably older
Okay, 1648, but these borders were already older. How did the various Dutch provinces of the time get their borders: Groningen, Gelre, Drenthe (which was for a long time a possession of the Bishopric of Utrecht).
I always find it so ironic that the region where the nation that unified Germany due to expansionism and nationalism, is no longer part of it due to the same reasons.
Prussia was a country not a region. And they were Baltic people not Germans. Also, western Prussian lands belonged to Polish Kingdom.
@@GÓRAL-o2jbut Brandenburg was German and Prussia and Brandenburg entered a personal union and took the name Prussia to be able to have a "King in Prussia"
Love the new format.
8:42 when talking about the 'infamously contested region of Alsace-Lorraine' it would help to understand this topic much better than to begin with the 1871 swap. France has been pushing its border eastwards for centuries and the way it finally acquired all of the region in the 18th century is crucial in understanding what let to the 1871 decision of taking it back. 😔
This video was really good hope you make more like this one
Very interesting, very informative. I assume there wasn't much more available but I would've loved more information on how the late medieval Bohemian border came to be!
Staring a talk about Germany's eastern border with the year of our Lord 1914 is genuinely misinformation.
I was a little irritated by the Dutch-Belgian border in the map animation, lol. It gives a part of the Netherlands, I think it's Zeeland, to Belgium.
Which animation are you referring to? :)
@@historyinbits well, the drawing of the modern borders of Europe at around 00:21 in the video. It immediatly stood out to me because I know that the border looks kind of horizontal on average when looking at a map of Europe (mercator, north up).
@ you are right, our bad!
Good work! Please show the plan while you speak; otherwise, we're lost. Many thanks!
A very good and informative video, my feedback would be that it can sometimes be hard to follow the borders you're referencing when using old maps. I found it difficult to pick them out when you were going quite quickly through old maps of the borders with France and Luxembourg. My reccomendation would be to trace an outline of the modern border and superimpose it over the old maps to really highlight how it has, or has not, changed.
Great viedeo, keep doing great
8:56 such a obscure writer, I wonder what he wrote about?
I would really like a video on the deluge in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and how they lost their territory over time and ceased to exist.
The part about the northern border lacks in regard to the role of danish nationalism in the matter of how Schleswig ended up inside the german empire in the first place. 😂
Make a video about the physical geography of Georgia and its boundaries
I think it'll make for an interesting topic
Hello! I really loved the Ck3 series and i wonder is it possible to show some love to Finland and make a video of it? It is never spoken about and in the game or videos. many things including the name of the faith "ukonusko" is wrongly made.
I thought you abandoned your channel
3:55 OMG, a Florryworry reference!!!
Very cool!
Glad you liked it!
Should have listened to marx and Bismarck
Yup
5:44, je bedoelt, remains a part of the Netherlands untill this day.
Make one of these amazing videos for china 🇨🇳
You mean West Taiwan?
You wanna know how i got these borders?
Not so fun fact, the German-Polish border is parchally illegal, The City of Stettin was ilegally annexed by Poland.
We agreed to keep the current border so it isnt illegal, you could argue that thereare inconsistencies, like the previous polish government saying the previous agreements arent valid due to being signed by the communist polish government, if you follow this logic then the border would still be as it is today, it just wouldnt be recognised by Germany, which wouldnt really change anything in practice.
Was it legal when Prussia annexed nearly half of Poland during the partitions and treated it like a colony?
@@Hubabe008 Colony?? The reason Poland was patitioned was because they wuld not stop comiting genocides to there nabors!! and All of the land exept Posen was clearely German majority! Stop spreding Allied Propaganda the only "German" gouvernament that miss treated the Poles were the NSDAP!
@@Hubabe008 Definetly not, but two wrongs still don't make one right.
I'm surprised there was no reminder of the earliest historical German-Polish border, documented in 992's Dagome Iudex. During the reign of the 1st Polish historical duke, Mieszko I, Poland's western border looked roughly the same with minor adjustments here and there. Though I'm pretty sure that some parts of the border, like the region around Cedynia was laying on the Oder even then.
Be careful, if we start there, one can go back further and claim that Germania was defined as going up to the Vistula river.
@u.s.1974 My emphasis is not on whether Germania or Vendia or the heckin Apes should hold these lands, but that a very similiar border between the two countries existed much earlier than 1945.
@@u.s.1974 first of all, those Germanics fled the Huns and didn't return and Germans today are not them. Only north - western Germany remained Germanic. The rest is Slavs and Celts.
@@KedAR_48 Still no basis for the border that Stalin drew after WWII.
Belgium forever neutral, ha, tell that to rhe Congolese..
Poor Germany :(