Europe History Interactive Map
Intersting --what do you have that shows the development of Islam from 622A.D. forward?
#1 - Paul - 09/14/2010 - 18:25
pretty cool site for the history impaired like me
#2 - rob - 11/20/2010 - 19:37
Some correct facts would be nice. The Act of Union 1707 - England did not annex Scotland (nor Ireland for that matter), and Scotland was not "technically" part of England, (whatever that means). The act was to unite the Parliaments of Scotland and England. The countries already had a common monarch and were not at war. Ireland was not part of this Union as it was a subordinate to Great Britain.
Please get your facts right.
#3 - Steve - 11/21/2010 - 11:07
Hey you guys shouldn't complain about every little thing that is incorrect.Why don't you make your own interactive history map and let us complain about it.I truly believe this is packed with details and there shouldn't be complaints.Casey did an awesome job and though there may be a few things wrong there is nothing to get caught up on.I believe in nationalism,but not to the point of critisizing anything that is wrong.Casey used internationally accepted history to make this and not your nation's accepted history. So stop being jerks or leave.
#4 - William - 03/17/2011 - 22:57
@William: Getting the facts right is important when portraying history. And, many times what is \'accepted\' and what is true do not always agree, so it is very important to bring to light disagreements; otherwise, we perpetuate the legend and the myth and not the history.
@Steve: As you can see, being snarky doesn\'t win you supporters. While it may not have been your intention, your comment reads as a slap in the face to the author. Also, when bringing facts into question, providing links to credible source material goes a long way to support your opinion.
#5 - Jefferson - 06/02/2011 - 14:05
Venice did not become a vassal state of the Ottoman Empire in any time during her history.
#6 - peterv - 10/11/2011 - 10:37
this was really helpful for me
#7 - email@example.com - 10/18/2011 - 18:34
Very nice site, good job!
I've found only one mistake at first glance - Polish Interwar Period border should look like this: http://www.rymaszewski.iinet.net.au/images/polcut.jpg
Nevertheless, congratulations on awesome work!
#8 - Maciej - 12/14/2011 - 04:28
Wow, England \"annexed\" Scottland huh? Is the author aware that the King of Scottland James VI BECAME James I of England? They were independent kingdoms governed by the same monarch; Scottland was never \"a part of England\". The maps are cool and everything is well written, but it makes me wonder what else is wrong. It seems there is a lot of bias in lot of the writing as well.
#9 - Jay - 01/20/2012 - 19:23
In Lithuania's demographics says Latvian 83% (giggle) somebody needs to fix that
#10 - Paul - 01/29/2012 - 05:10
#11 - Albert - 03/13/2012 - 09:03
It is for history impaired people,
Pity some people will get wrong picture of the European past, to me is more political than historical work.
Please see the map of Europe in 814 the link provided.
Moreover, Albanians have match with Illyrians as they do with the rest of European people, they have been brought with Ottomans to Europe.
#12 - Jass - 03/22/2012 - 06:13
As I can see from the site and te comments of others there are little lapses in detailing the certain regions.
I would just like to supplement few things in Balkan area about slavs \"caught\" in to the middle ground not decisively part of Croats or Serbs. It is only vaguely implied that on this teritory it emergs new identity, language and culture. And it is not menchioned at all that in 9th century the Bosnia exist as the state. For this there are the written proof in \"De administrando imperio\", written in 949-955 by the Konstantin VII Porfirogenet Bisantin emperor, in which he mentions Bosnia as a state.
And this part of the ground calld Bosnia in those days has never been part of Serbia or Croatia as it is implied in some explanations in the interactiv maps.
Unfortunatly this little mix up can led to a lots of others misunderstandings and have lots of misapplication in the present.
And people do take things for granted and don
#13 - Melina - 04/12/2012 - 10:32
I think this is amazing!
One tiny correction that you are free to ignore... Italy "almost" completed its growth by 1870, but areas such as the whole region of Trentino-SudTirol and the eastern half of the region Friuli-Venezia-Giulia were still parts of the Austrian Empire until 1918. Actually, the main reason why Italy betrayed its allies was the British promise to receive such areas as a reward at the end of the war. The maps don't show or mention this :(
But nevermind, still amazing stuff!
#14 - Mitteleuropean - 07/19/2012 - 16:00
THIS IS EXCELLENT!! :)
I have always loved looking at history through geography and this is a great tool that all students (especially studying History or Geography in school) should use!
One of the greatest things I have seen on the INTERNET :)
However I do see one flaw that is something I specialize in.
The Cold War section states that the United States withdrew from Vietnam in 1975.
That is actually wrong, and a common misconception many people make.
The United States withdrew from Vietnam in 1973 (all combat troops left by March of that year, and all combat operations were largely finished since Operation Jefferson Glen in 1971). This is be because of the signing of the Paris Peace Accords by all side "Establishing Peace" in Vietnam (I put quotations around that, because it becomes obvious that neither the South of North care to sign it, and the North only signed it to get the Americans out of Vietnam, due to the USA being a stone wall the Communists were unable to pass while they were involved)
The United States in 1973 passed the Case-Church Amendment prohibiting the United States from militarily intervening in Indochina (largely because of the heavy anti-war movement that had massive impact on American policies)
among other things that were passed that year.
From mid 73 to the fall of Saigon in 75, the USA had no military involvement in Vietnam.. and the only Americans in Vietnam were civilians (with the exception of those protecting the Embassy) something around 7,000 aid workers made up the bulk of Americans in Indochina.
1975 was not a "Withdrawal" of Americans from Vietnam, in a military sense (considering we were already finished with the war by that point) Operations such as Frequent Wind, Babylift, New Lift etc. were the evacuation of American civilians (and other Foreigners) from Vietnam as well as 100s of thousands of Vietnamese.
It might also be important to add the Withdrawal of Soviets from Afghanistan through the Geneva Accords, considering its viewed as the Soviet "Vietnam".. because of how it was carried out and how it was ended.. MEANING.. all though the Soviets had complete military supremacy, rarely ever losing engagements and also being a "stone wall" preventing the overthrow of the Afghan government (just as the USA was for South Vietnam), Social issues back home (Glasnost for example for the Soviets and the Anti-War protests/Social Movements for the Americans) as well as financial problems (largely for Soviets, not for the Americans) caused both sides policies to change.. All though I would hold that both the Soviets and Americans were successful in their operations during the war... the only true failures of the Soviet conflict in Afghanistan and American conflict in Vietnam came from the political aftermath of their involvements.. which lead to both nations being unable to continue supporting their allies again (thus the South Vietnamese and Afghan Government fall) During this time period it was largely because of Social Reforms and Financial issues for the Soviets, as well as Social issues, scandals and financial problems for the USA (1973 oil crisis for example).
None the less I believe these are VERY important to add to this presentation.
They are conflicts many people know about... especially Vietnam I feel.. movies are made about it on a constant basis... However very few people actually know what the conflicts were about let a lone how they were carried out or ended.. .Vietnam for one has dozens of myths that HOLD VERY VERY VERYYYYYYY STRONGGGGGG in our socities.
:) Just figured I would give you my input :)
either way, this is very amazing :)
#15 - Christopher - 08/25/2012 - 08:02
when I say "both north and south dont want to sign it"
I meant they did not want to follow it :)
and instead continued to carry on war with each other when the USA left.
#16 - Christopher - 08/25/2012 - 08:04
THE BEST WAY TO LOSE A WAR IS TO ONLY PUT GUITARS ON THE TIPS OF YOUR WEAPONS AND TO SPIN COTTEN CANDY ON A STICK!↨↓♀F3-
#17 - B-MAN HAS COOL NIPPLES - 08/27/2012 - 15:50
Christopher Columbus was Italian not Portuguese. He was born in Republic of Genoa in 1451. C'mon man, we got wikipedia now a days, so when you get your facts wrong, you just look lazy, or just plain stupid for not getting it right.
#18 - Pain in ur ass - 09/19/2012 - 16:56
A peace agreement was reached, signed on Jan. 27, 1973, by the United States, North Vietnam, South Vietnam, and the NLF's provisional revolutionary government. However the U.S. did not fully withdraw until 1975.
Source: Vietnam Historical reference database VDB#15924365-001200543
#19 - M.Boreman - 09/20/2012 - 20:39
Others might nit-pick, and indeed it seems that often that is what historians are best at, but I consider this a really solid effort. It\'s a great primer. Obviously, whatever I find is on here I will double check with a more scholarly source that I can cite but as a first cut for basic historical information from centuries that I know little about I find it very helpful. Thanks!
#20 - G. Wins - 11/13/2012 - 10:41
Amazing!!! It\'s very interesting... it shows a global and interative view of Europe story. Thanks
#21 - Rodrigo CS - 12/10/2012 - 10:02
Very interesting source of information. Thanks
#22 - Lamarana - 01/08/2013 - 14:02
Christopher god how much words and imfomation thanks for all of that cool imfomation
#23 - lewis - 01/14/2013 - 16:17
Very useful website!!
#24 - Tom - 01/23/2013 - 19:09
Slavs in the wester extremities of Bulgarian empire break away and form Serbia? Jutes and Saxons break away from Denmark, or Germany respectively to form England?? I mean, thats also plausible.
#25 - xcuse me - 01/31/2013 - 10:32
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~THIS WEBSITE ROCKS!!!!!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I LOVE IT!!!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~BEST WEBSITE EVER!!!!!!!!!!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~YA TA~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~WWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
#26 - ROCK ON - 02/27/2013 - 09:27
Hard work, excellent job, some mistakes !
Of course that history is little bit more complex then site shows, so every time when we trying to make presentation of it in short and clear as possible manner, it's imperative that we avoid definitive statements and claims which could lead reader/listener to wrong conclusions.
Despite some flaws this work and website are very interesting and no one should think of it as ultimate source of information and/or knowledge, for that you need some prominent historians and their works available in many books written on the subject (J.A.Fine, Marko A.Hoare and Noel Malcolm for our restless fellow readers interested in or from turbulent Balkans).
#27 - Santa - 03/29/2013 - 06:06
I will correct myself, I said some mistakes but more I browse and read through this amazing website I find less and less of these mistakes !
I apologize to hard working admin and owners, although I expressed my admiration for their hard work and their excellent portal in my first comment too.
Cheers and thank you, especially to Casey !
#28 - Santa - 04/02/2013 - 22:48
this is very nice work and i cant find anything like it on google so.... yeah.
#29 - Jose S. - 07/19/2013 - 04:53
#30 - ilovecheese - 07/31/2013 - 23:39
The Scanddinavian map is wrong. Simply wrong.
Present day southern Sweden (Scania, Halland and Blekinge) were not ceeded to Sweden before 1658, except Halland.
The showing of this map from 1650 is therefore wrong.
#31 - stig w - 10/06/2013 - 10:36
this map sux
#32 - braden hudak - 10/15/2013 - 11:55
#33 - BRADEN IS FAT - 10/15/2013 - 14:01
#34 - person - 10/18/2013 - 12:15
I like trains.
#35 - PoopLoser_69 - 10/18/2013 - 13:50
No way Poop.
#36 - FartGarfunkel - 10/18/2013 - 13:52
hi my name poop
#37 - my - 10/18/2013 - 13:54
Colton shut up before I punch you in the face.
#38 - LOLCATS - 10/18/2013 - 13:54
I like trains even more.
#39 - MyButtSmellsLikeFlowers - 10/18/2013 - 13:55
#40 - my - 10/18/2013 - 13:55
Kyler jackson and colton doofus reatard
#41 - Name - 10/18/2013 - 13:56
#42 - Jose - 10/18/2013 - 15:40
Fie on the nitpickers! For the first time in my life I can study European history without falling asleep. And, I don\'t care if there is some insignificant dating discrepancy. Great resource that I visit often. Many Thanks.
#43 - Kendan - 10/24/2013 - 19:24
What was the reason to draw sketch like borders? Most of the details on the Carpathian Basin are wrong or inaccurate. All who is trying to learn European history based on these maps be aware of the comments.
#44 - Laszlo Gyula - 11/20/2013 - 05:24
I really liked this map. I think you need to update it so that it matches 2013 on because a rather lots happened in those years.
#45 - Saketh - 11/24/2013 - 16:10