So I had a poll with people answering where on the image diffrent nations belong

So I had a poll with people answering where on the image diffrent nations belong.

These people knew nearly nothing of history (I'm not insulting, I just ansked random people unrelated of their history knowledge).

This is the result:

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ancrum_Moor
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darien_scheme
scotsman.com/lifestyle/the-opium-wars-how-scottish-traders-fed-the-habit-1-465743
books.google.co.uk/books?id=0ql7CqEV6d4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=jardine matheson&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjBss2AtNTRAhVH1BoKHbCTASUQ6AEIJTAA#v=onepage&q=jardine matheson&f=false
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Jardine_(merchant)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoti
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

what are they placing them based on? Culture, military history, architecture?

History

What history? Literary history, military history?

England was shit-tier until Britain unified.

Everyting, I couldn't complicate the quiz too much as these people didn't even know of some nations on the list

Well then it's a retarded list and serves no purpose, as national achievements vary.

i.e. Britain has a very prestigious navy history, but no a weak philosophical and architectural history.

It's a dumb list as you can't quantify an entire country's achievements.

>a weak philosophical history.
You fucking what?

Sure, English philosophy is generally shit-tier in content, but it's massive in content and massively influential.

You mixed things up a bit there lad.

Wheres Scotland? Stopped Roman Empire, Vikings, England... Despite having very low population. Also there is a battle between england and scotland and scotland suffered 4 deaths while england 800

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ancrum_Moor

Stop going off topic. The point is, national achievements vary in subject to subject. A general 'history list' is retarded.

>casualties 200

>Stop going off topic.
is this autism

Been modified it used to say 2 I have a pic saved from last year

Sure it dosen't surve any purpose. I just wanted to see the results on the quiz. But you can can expect that they voted based on:
How long the nation existed
The nation's military history
Material inventions
How many very famous leaders the nation had

The topic is your list. Stop trying to change the subject when people point out its trash.

You even prove my point in your response by admitting english philosophy is shit. That topics vary.

Well I couldn't inculde every single nation on the list either. Just live with that some of the nations you whished were there, were not

I also agree that Scotland should be mentioned somewhere. High Tier atleast !!

That dude is not me (the maker)

I will but you're a fucking fool my man

My point still stands, the list is dumb.

>Robert the BRUCE
>MIGHTY SCOTTISH KING
>DIED IN GLORIOUS BATTLE
killed
It was autism.
>The topic is your list
I am not OP you dongle.

I just wanted to see their answers. I just thought it would be intresting for people here on Veeky Forums to see it.

>tfw you stop Rome, The Pagans and England and get no historical recognition, ever except some non-realistic adaption of your countries hero
yes because Scottish Nobles were the only nobles to ever go on foot instead of their mounts into battle that's why we are called Scotland the Brave

The list looks like the people were answering based on historical relevance. If they are, it's mostly correct, though Russia, Rome and Egypt should be higher.

Well the problem with stuff like this is at one point or another each of these countries were shit, but on the other hand everyone of these countries were god tier

English history is boring as fuck

Opinion.

Literally is Scots built their empire and got nothing

Haha how many buttmad scots are there in this thread?

I hail from Andorra

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darien_scheme

Please tell me how scots built the empire, lol.

Jardine Mathesons

scotsman.com/lifestyle/the-opium-wars-how-scottish-traders-fed-the-habit-1-465743

books.google.co.uk/books?id=0ql7CqEV6d4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=jardine matheson&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjBss2AtNTRAhVH1BoKHbCTASUQ6AEIJTAA#v=onepage&q=jardine matheson&f=false
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Jardine_(merchant)

They funded a considerable amount of the Empire. I have a source that said 1/3 at one time in an official BBC documentary it's called OPIUM addicted to pleasure

holy shit this is sad

Actually, no he didn't. Britain is the island. England is the sub country consisting of the southern, central and eastern parts of said island. Until Scotland and Wales unified with England to make a united British government called the United Kingdom, it was shit tier. And that is only somewhat accurate. Shit tier was Northumbria, Mercia and the like. England would have been at least one above that.

Nice rebuke

sub-saharan country* sorry typo

You're beyond hope. A scotsman founding a private business in the empire does not mean scots built it.

Why is Brazil there but not Portugal?

Are you an American? You seem to know very little of Angle England.

Northumbria was massive, both militarily and culturally. It was the first kingdom to unify England as England. And it was the first to adopt Christianity and hence produced the first works of art and literature, such as the Lindisfarne Gospels and the Codex Amiatinus.

Lol mate you're superiority complex is bigger than your own Mother's dildo

Howcome Scotland split from it?

Let's go through this mess.

>Britain is the island

No. GREAT Britain is the island, Britain is england and wales. Great Britain literally means Greater Britain.

>Until Scotland and Wales unified with England to make a united British government

Wales had already been united with England for centuries.

>it was shit tier
No. it was shit tier until the Civil war. Cromwell's reforms made England a great power in europe again. They were already important in European affairs prior to 1707, unifying with a country with a tenth of its population changed nothing.

I am superiority complex?

A person from Andorra wouldn't make a mistake like that, if English were his second language.

It is my third we learn swiss, german, french, english

It didn't. The Scots didn't even arrive in Scotland until well into the 10th century.

dont forget the Scottish Enlightenment

Are you REALLY from andorra?

Say something in spanish or french.

psuedo-history

We're discussing England prior to Great Britain's unification. The Scottish Enlightenment was 1790's to early 1800's.

No, no.

Britain is the island. ('Great Britain' means this island. 'Great' means 'large', and this is to distinguish is from 'small Britain', i.e. Brittany.)

You're right about the rest.

> psuedo-history
What?

The Scots were an Irish tribe, dipshit.

>swiss
Wut. You mean romanche? Why the fuck would anyone learn such an irrelevant language?

Nope! it's actually a common misconception. Great Britain is the island. Though the 2 are used so interchangeably it's pointless.

Britain is used to refer to
i) Britanny
ii) England and Wales.

The Romans referred to the land they owned on the island as 'Britannia' and the extended northern territories as 'Greater Britannia'.

Source?

All Roman readings I've seen refer to 'insula Britannia', 'the island of Britain'. There is also the 'province of Britain', of course, 'provincia Britannia', which did not (mostly) include Scotland, but still Britannia was the island.

I got this from 2 sources

i) A Youtube vid from a genuinely well credited historian, though I can't find it now.
ii) A Geography textbook I had in uni

That's kinda shit, isn't it? Sorry. I guess I can't prove it.

lmao idiot irish nationalist

Why are Scots called British if they aren't part of Britain? Genuine question

Simply epic.

wheres your citation?

They are part of GREATER Britain. The Romans didn't feel the Britannia they owned was all of what is Britannia.

Scotti aren't Picts
They didn't stop Vikings
They sometimes stopped England.

> ex adverso huius situs britannia insula, clara graecis nostrisque monimentis, inter septentrionem et occidentem iacet, germaniae, galliae, hispaniae, multo maximis europae partibus, magno intervallo adversa

This is from Pliny.

Apparently, he (they? Romans?) referred to Britain and all the accompanying islands as 'Britains' ('Britanniae').

citation for scotti not being native scots please
They did, notice how we own all of our land now?
Notice how England have never controlled us? Not counting The Act of Union which was a Scottish proposal

I'm a roman.

Got it. I read a scholar saying a Viking rune was found about the Scots saying they were too violent to deal with, and this is coming from the fucking vikings

They did, hence the British isles. However, the Britain beyond the Antonine wall was the Greater territories of Britain, still British, just not the central lands the romans inhabited.

Aye romani traveller

Mate, it's literally the first thing anyone learns about the Scoti.

> Scoti or Scotti was a name used by Late Roman authors for the Irish. Scotland was named after Irish settlers from the 5th century on.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoti

Honestly man, I'm not able to source myself, don't quote me on this, this is just what my geography class told me.

You have no citation but still you are using classical period terms for modern terms

>Scotland was named after Irish settlers from the 5th century on.
Doesn't say that the inhabitants shared the genes in fact look at the haplogroups and you're far off

Marxist indoctrination but I get you bud and believe you

LOL

...

Completely wrong infograph.

Scots are Brythonnic, Irish are Goedelic, some of the Alt Clut and Dal Riada was Goedelic and the Nobles but the rest of the pop wasn't.

Simply the Irish Nobles assimilated the picts

Britain is derived from Britannia. 'Greater' derived from 'Magna' also has latin origins. The linguistic barrier is irrelevant.

The border area between England and Scotland was for centuries inhabited by the Border Reivers: peoples neither English nor Scottish, but somewhere in between, and which couldn't be conquered by either.

The Scots and English kept them as a kind of buffer zone.

Much of the north-east of England is descended from them.

All I see is some ill-informed contrarian opinion against sourced, scientific research. You're wrong, my man.

>listing nation-states instead of geographical regions
nigga what the fuck do you think you're doing

>Prussia
>Germany
>Austria
>HRE
>all thrown together in one diagramm/quiz

What?

The Scotti are Gaelic invaders from Ireland that pushed out the Picts.
The Norse made Danelaw out of lowland Scotland, and the Kingdom of the Isles on all the islands.
The English typically had the upper hand in the fighting, but I submit that Scots did well by them all said and told.

>Doesn't say that the inhabitants shared the genes in fact look at the haplogroups and you're far off
Geneology isn't ethnology, fuck off with this

>Fucking SWEDEN is on the chart but Portugal and the Netherlands are not
Drown yourself

English nobles did this too for all the 14th and 15th century

>Northumbria
>Shit tier

Confirmed to know nothing of English history, Northumbria during the 8th century was a top tier kingdom, producing loads of artistic and theological works, helped spread Christianity through Britain, decent military power that held large parts of whats now Scotland, had excellent links with the Irish who at the 7th/8th century were probably more culturally advanced than the rest of the British Isles.

Northumbria may have gone to shit later on with the Vikings coming, but still large parts of it managed to shrug off the Danelaw and go independent whilst everywhere else on the British Isles except for Wessex was getting their shit pushed in by Norse invaders

/int/ thread, on my Veeky Forums ?

>God-tier England
>Austria isn't God-tier
>Rome isn't God-tier
>Prussia isn't shit-tier
At least they got Germany, Mongols and the USA right.