Is Denmark historically underrated?

Is Denmark historically underrated?

There's a Swedish conspiracy to marginalize Denmark because Denmark is more cosmopolitan and hip.

They were the overlords of Scandinavia before the Swedish and Tycho Brahe was a pretty cool guy. Did they also politically facilitat the colonisation of the North Sea Isles? Also, the Jutes and Angles came from mainland Denmark, though I'm not sure how Danish they were.

For such a tiny, unendowed, faraway place, Denmark has done a lot.

>faraway
far away from what?

We're probably just underrated because 1864 gave us such a massive inferiority complex that we forgot how influential we used to be. That is, we've been a moderately successful country historically

But at the end of the day, they are still Danes (and 1000 years later still aren't able to speak properly).

France.

Viking period: Vastly overrated
Literally anything else: Underrated

So in the end it balances out.

It doesn't have the benefit of facing the Atlantic like the Spanish, Portuguese, or English. It isn't at the centre of other great powers like France, Italy, or Germany. It's at the southern end of Scandinavia, a place that has been irrelevant to the world for basically all of it's history.

I just think of its location as inopportune and it doesn't have the historical population to make itself opportune.

It's not like it's at the other end of the world, but it isn't exactly a Mediterranean island.

>Viking period: Vastly overrated

Are you saying that Vikings are overrated or that Danish vikings are overrated compared to other vikings?

Whilst vikings are overrated most people think about Swedes and Norwegians when they hear the word "Viking" even though the majority of impressive viking deeds were done by the Danes.

Even with the overrated vikings the Danes get shafted.

>Whilst vikings are overrated most people think about Swedes and Norwegians when they hear the word "Viking"

True enough, I forgot about that. I guess Danes really did just get the shaft.

Of course Denmark is a nice enough place these days so I think they can deal.

>Whilst vikings are overrated most people think about Swedes and Norwegians when they hear the word "Viking"

Who are "most people"? I'm Swedish and even we acknowledge that the Danes are the "true vikings" as the proto-Swedish tribes went viking in a different way.

Americans mostly, when I was in high school and thought vikings were cool I assumed they were all Swedish.

What did they do that was relevant and, more important, unforgettable or at least memorable outside of their geocultural region?

Danes were the lords of Scandinavia for most of their history, but in the time Sweden was lord of Scandinavia it also heavily intervened in central and eastern Europe.

Can Denmark compare? They actually intervened in the baltic area in the northern crusades, too, but nobody knows about those events and from the few who do most are only teutonic fanboys.

>Whilst vikings are overrated most people think about Swedes and Norwegians when they hear the word "Viking" even though the majority of impressive viking deeds were done by the Danes.

I actually was heavily surprized that the vikings corresponded to any modern country at all and even more to the whole scandinavian region. By the time I got informed I already came to know that the whole nordic region had them, although I'll concede that Norway (not sweden, what the fuck) is the first country that comes to my mind when thinking about the vikings.

Although I'll could accept that Scandinavia is a place that has been irrelevant to the world for basically all of it's history (not entirely true but well), inside Scandinavia Denmark has the better position you could have. They have control over the straits that lead to the Baltic, nobody enters or leaves without your permission if you have a strong enough navy.

That's very true, but the Baltic hasn't usually been much of a desired waterway. When things were going well for Russia, it would have been nice to have a point of access for St. Petersburg, but I think most of that trade went through Lübeck anyway.

I count Rus as vikings.

>It's at the southern end of Scandinavia, a place that has been irrelevant to the world for basically all of it's history.
It's at the northern end of Germany, and the western end of the Baltic, and the eastern end of the North Sea. Wow, it's almost like Denmark is at the center of a major trading route.

>a tiny, unendowed, faraway place
You are so wrong it's not even funny.

>I know literally nothing about history, the post.

Angles came from Holstein, although all
of this really happened before the Danish as a people came into existence

You must be retarded.
Your own post contradicts itself.
If someone was to trade from Lübeck of St. Petersburg or basically anywhere in the Baltic coast to anywhere outside the Baltic sea (before the Kiel canal) they must go through danish waters.
Plus the Hanseatic league made that area a very profitable place to trade.