the reason the map at the beginning is impressive, is because it's wrong, azerbaijan was named after Atropates a persian nobleman, eswatini was named after their 19th century king Mswati II, the Marshall Islands after the 18th century navy officer John Marshall , Uzbekistan after Oz beg Khan the longest reigning khan of the golden horde, Romania from the legendary Romulus, Italy from the legendary Italus, as well as many other that were not counted.
I'd argue against Romania and Italy (and there's a bunch of other legendary founders that appear to have been made up to explain the names rather than vice versa), but Azerbaijan and the Marshall Islands are correct and good points. There really was a khan called Uzbek but offhand I'm not sure if Uzbekistan was named after him (even indirectly). I don't know enough about Eswatini to have an idea one way or another. Georgia likes to _pretend_ it's named after Saint George but it's actually not.
Tribes did also come together like Iroquois. Also some tribes did join/create unions as well. The Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole nations joined the confederacy in order to go to war with the union and also protect their special interests as each of those respective nations operated and owned large scale slave plantations
I really don’t understand how he knows so little about Indigenous American groups given that he can probably name some more obscure little countries. And the fact that he’s in Las Vegas now and he said he did a U.S road trip around there with all of the different reservations that are there he never mentions them. Even in this video when he was talking about Europeans not discovering the Americas but bringing all of them together like the Aztecs and Incas weren’t expanding empires themselves. He also says that unifying them is better than having a bunch of small tribes but he’d probably be against a federalised Europe instead of having all those little countries
I think its really more fair to say that European interests triggered global connections on a much larger scale, rather than "discovering" all the places typically attributed to them (other than all these random archipelagos which truly were European discovered). Even saying that they brought together all those tribes is just... ehh... definitely misses the mark pretty hard. They had all sorts of governance and confederations and the like. And yes, there was some pretty impressive trade routes along the Indian ocean and Indonesia due to monsoons. But it can definitely be said that global connection, trade, and knowledge really kicked up a few notches after the age of exploration suddenly had people going to the most remote and difficult to access parts of the world on the regular.
But you also have to remember these people were fairly isolated not being aware they were on one of many continents. Their entire world view assumed they were it. They saw land and they saw water, and those on islands new about other islands that were within a short distance, no open ocean travel thousands of miles away.
@@gerardcote8391 I assume you're not taking into account the Austronesians here? Because the Austronesians already had a seafaring network that stretched from Madagascar to arguably the Americas, centuries before the Europeans starting sailing all over the place.
It also has to be said that long before the European powers were even a twinkle in the eye of Rome, the western half of the Old World already had plenty of contact with the eastern half, so much so that there's one town in Northern Europe with Veitnamese ancestry and there are Roman coinage being found in Japan. The biggest impact truly was the linking of the Far East with Europe via the Americas, but even there one might want to consider possible, albeit uncommon, links between South Americans and Austronesians.
Azores comes from açor, which is the Portuguese name for a bird that was spotted in big flocks when the island was discovered. So it's pretty funny that you mentioned the geese discovered the island, close but wrong bird
The 'discovered by Europeans' map does not include Iceland or the Faroe Islands , which were both clearly discovered by Nordic Vikings around the 10th century. Perhaps anything discovered before the 15th century doesn't count?
It says on the map that it is all European discoveries during the Age of Exploration and after which started a few hundred years after those discoveries.
I feel bad for the other channels in Project Exploration, they worked so hard on their videos and then they're getting upended by some minecraft youtuber with a computer and a greenscreen
Discovering requires 3 things, 1 something must be currently and generally unknown. 2 you have to find out about it. 3 most importantly you have to tell everyone else about it. For example, there is lithium in large amounts in the Congo. It was there but people didn't know it was there, except the locals who didn't know what those stones were. Therefor finding it and going to mine it is a discovery. Same thing goes with the discovery that lighting was electric discharge. Every one knew there was lighting, and some people would have noticed static electricity when they had wool and linen rubbing into each other creating electric shock, but realizing they were the same thing then telling people is a discovery.
Exactly. Yes, natives lived in discovered places, but they didnt really contribute to humanities collective knowledge. Only when explorers discovered the places and connected them to the world were they discovered.
@@thorthewolf8801 natives contributed to humanities collective knowledge the same way europeans did, by teaching other tribes they came in contact with the knowledge they had
@@RoarofdalioN curious how we dont learn anything about native explorers. Unless you want to suggest some conspiracy here, I chalk that up to the fact that natives didnt really contribute to the collective knowledge. Especially when it comes to people living on islands, who had no way of traversing the oceans. Whats the name of that isolated tribe, the sentenelese, or something like that?
@@thorthewolf8801 Perhaps we don't have records of Native American knowledge in the Americas because many of them were brutally killed and their records burned in the case of of the Aztecs
@thorthewolf8801 Natives first cultivated both corn and tobacco. I'd say both of those things contributed to the collective knowledge. Plus with potatoes and tomatoes, European cuisine wouldn't exist without Native contributions. Again, I would say that contributed greatly to collective knowledge. Hell, some Natives first made rubber. Think about how much rubber is used now, and maybe you'd see how Natives contributed to collective knowledge. The Inca were able to make longer bridges, the Inuit developed Kayaks, and I could go on, but I hope you see the point.
"Discover" is such a controversial term because it is obviously from a European perspective, as they were the only ones going out trying to discover places unknown to them at the time. It implies a kind arrogant belief that these places weren't important until they were "discovered" by Europeans. I think that's wrong though, as we still use the word 'discover' in phrases like 'I discover a new band at the weekend', or 'I discovered a great little restaurant'. The personal nature of that discovery is implied, and I think the same can be said of these voyages of discovery.
It's the collective european application of discovery in european society, we speak of our experience! :D I see you have a hard time with european society, but that doesn't mean we must change to accommodate you, you have a plethora of global options, just choose your favorite society and "discover" it! but don't ask them to change it. (my humble advice)
Russia has 49 national parks and 103 nature serves, and the map in the video has just a few of both types. Those are protected nature areas, so do you really need those in the middle of nowhere if civilization isn't threatening them (directly at least)? It makes sense to me to establish them where people live. The map is from 2017, but in 2018 Russia did officially set up 1 national park and 5 nature reserves in Crimea, which actually existed way before the annexation, they just weren't integrated.
would be interesting to see how remote your most remote viewers live. like just ask in a video where your viewers live so they can type it in the comments and then make a video where you look up these places
Probably not me, but driving to the nearest "big" town (more than 25.000 inhabitants) is for me a 4+ hour car drive across a mountain with a glacier visible from the road. A town of 15.000 is 1 hour away.
oof, showing the map of the first nations' tribes... Being in Alberta, I'm sure that the Cree, Blackfoot, and Crow tribes will be a bit aggravated being labeled as 'small tribes' :P
At the risk of pedantry, Crows don't tend to find themselves north of the Missouri often. As such, they're not really a nation that's played much of a role in Alberta since the 1750s
That said, I 100% agree with you that the Cree and Blackfoot cannot be characterized as "small tribes" Blackfoot territory historically covered a landmass the size of Germany, while Cree spanned from the Upper Peace basin in BC to northern Quebec (or Labrador, if we include the Innu) and everywhere in between. Including some of the lands in northern Manitoba marked as Inuit on this map.
@@Giaayokaats they don't generally make it too far into Canada, but they're quite huge in Montana. I was only naming them because of the general area on the map there, that included Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, etc.
@@killianobrien2007 there are at least two answers, first: Exploration was slow back then, so the first people settled at the edge of Europe, became Europeans and then discovered the rest Or second: you count it as Europeans because they never left
Actually no , neolithic farmers (from anatolia) and others discovered europe before the the ancestors of modern europeans showed up,modern sardinians are pretty much the only modern european population who share genetical similarity to the pre-indoeuropean people, these people were still around in the times of imperial rome ,so their existence cant be put in doubt.
@@AMR_k400 that's not true and only a little bit true The modern European is related to ALL those groups. Definitely through their mothers but not the y chromesone replacement with Indo-European or early-ish European farmer mixed to hunter gathers It's a merger of all 3
Discovering requires 3 thing, 1 something must be currently snd generally unknown. 2 you have to find out about it. 3 may importantly you have to tell everyone else about it. For example, there is lithium in large amounts in the Congo. It was there but people didn't know it was rgere, except the locals who didn't know what those stones were. Therefor finding it and going to mine it is a discovery. Same thing goes with the discovery that lighting was electric discharge. Every one knew there was lighting, and some people would have noticed static electricity when they had wool and linen rubbing into each other creating electric shock, but realizing they were the same thing then telling people is a discovery.
Mount Kosciuszko in Australia discovered by Polish migrant-traveler-scientist-writer-adventurer Edmund Strzelecki. Polish diaspora in the world let's reunite. btw. Mauritius is the most beatiful place on Earth. Change my mind:)
I thought I knew every country and territory and island and even most of the states or regions of countries. What the heck is Franz Josef Land?? Lol I've never heard of that place. Svalbard Island sure, Severny Island, that long skinny one north of Russia, ok, but Franz Josef Land?
Out by elko is the ruby mountains check out pics of it and especially Lamoille canyon. Very different from the other empty areas in NV. Also please remember to check out petroglyphs when you visit northern Nevada
Rottnest Island in Australia hadn't been settled for at least 5000 years when Europeans arrived. There was a land Bridge that flooded. The indigenous had a name for it, but only as a thing on the horizon.
The islands above Russia listed as "Many Islands" which says it was discovered by "Russia" is incorrect. The DeLong islands north of Russia were discovered by the USA during the Jeannette Expedition. So it should be dash colored as USA and Russia.
Actually we have somewhat recently discovered evidence of at least some vikings making it to the Azores. Because *OF COURSE* the vikings made it there...
That Mercator map makes you to think Russia is the place with the most remote areas, but in fact, The Amazon is bigger than what that map shows and it’s more mysterious than Siberia.
Pretty crazy how we’re taught about the age of exploration and the new world so much in western countries. It’s really a complete anglicization of history
I remember the first time I was told that Columbus didn’t discover America first, I was like yeah you’re stupid. Then I later I learned that I was the stupid one
I live in a very isolated city lol it's apparently the most isolated city in the world or sometimes the 2nd or 3rd on two lists anyway for me to drive to another city it takes a day or just under 2700 km
The American way of saying France always reminds me of "female friends". Cause Friends without the D is just France (American pronunciation). Also the British "France" sounds more fancy and thus fitting for the so called snobby French people.
Portuguese discovered Australia in 1522, they were sailing all around Oceania all the way to Hawai, and remember it was a portuguese sailor that made the 1st circumnavigation.
Norway didn't do too much? We were sledging dogs to the south pole and deliberately freezing ships into the polar ice to let them drift with crew over the artic ice in the north pole while you guys were sipping drinks on tropical beaches while exploiting the locals. And when you did try for a pole, what happened? That's right, you died there didn't you. Lousy Brits. Just kidding, it's pretty accurate. Our exploration and colonial past is relatively mild.
@@3rdwrst386 "unified" is not the world I would use to describe what colonizators did to native Americans, I actually don't even understand what he meant by that
BTW the Inuit and the Eskaleut people in general (Inuit, Yupik, Aleut) are very interesting, they still exist both in North America and in Siberia to this day
Who discovered Europe if not Europeans? This map seems sus. For some reason I don't believe that Europeans discovered only islands. Lets for example take like a middle of a dessert or really dense jungles. I don't believe that everywhere except islands there were humans already. Nor that they had documented all of it. If human is on a piece of land it does not mean that he has knowledge about all of it and he knows how big it is. You wouldn't say that some random tribe in a jungle really discovered all of amazon forest. They might discovered a small portion of it. But there is no collective knowledge about whole continent so in fact they did not discovered it. If European went to China they could communicate with local people and I'm pretty sure that he could get a description of land over there. And in that sense this land was discovered by Chinese people. But if European went to Australia I doubt that they could get a description of the whole continent. There surely was a part of the continent that wasn't part of a local knowledge and maybe refereed as "great unknown".
I would say the tribes in south america have discovered the Amazon, and nothing else. All they know is a world of jungle and they can probably navigate pretty far.
Europe “discovered” America, because Europeans sailed to there, and not the other way around. If the Indians got to Europe first, they would have discovered Europe, and things would be turned around. Same if aliens come to us / find us, they have discovered earth. If we travel to them, or find them, before they find us, we will have discovered them…. That’s how I see it anyway
You know Europeans would NOT be cool with Native Americans claiming they "discovered" Europe. Same with aliens. The point is that Europeans didn't ACTUALLY discover the Americas, Australia, etc.
Still impressive that there was some land that was unknown to humans before GPS
Its neat that the last little bits of land in the ocean were discovered in my lifetime.
Wat??
All unknown land to humans was before gps
I think he meant satellite imaging. GPS tells you where you are. It doesn't tell you what exists where you aren't.
@@olivernt2667 no it wasn't, some places where only discovered with satellite images
Franz Joseph wasn't just the last emperor and king of Austria-Hungary, but also the only one. He was on trone for 68 years.
He was succeeded by Karl, so he wasn't the only one. But Karl was on the throne only two years until Austria-Hungary was dissolved after WWI.
@@peterholzer4481 Ok, you're right.
the reason the map at the beginning is impressive, is because it's wrong, azerbaijan was named after Atropates a persian nobleman, eswatini was named after their 19th century king Mswati II, the Marshall Islands after the 18th century navy officer John Marshall , Uzbekistan after Oz beg Khan the longest reigning khan of the golden horde, Romania from the legendary Romulus, Italy from the legendary Italus, as well as many other that were not counted.
I'd argue against Romania and Italy (and there's a bunch of other legendary founders that appear to have been made up to explain the names rather than vice versa), but Azerbaijan and the Marshall Islands are correct and good points. There really was a khan called Uzbek but offhand I'm not sure if Uzbekistan was named after him (even indirectly). I don't know enough about Eswatini to have an idea one way or another.
Georgia likes to _pretend_ it's named after Saint George but it's actually not.
Tribes did also come together like Iroquois.
Also some tribes did join/create unions as well. The Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole nations joined the confederacy in order to go to war with the union and also protect their special interests as each of those respective nations operated and owned large scale slave plantations
I really don’t understand how he knows so little about Indigenous American groups given that he can probably name some more obscure little countries. And the fact that he’s in Las Vegas now and he said he did a U.S road trip around there with all of the different reservations that are there he never mentions them. Even in this video when he was talking about Europeans not discovering the Americas but bringing all of them together like the Aztecs and Incas weren’t expanding empires themselves. He also says that unifying them is better than having a bunch of small tribes but he’d probably be against a federalised Europe instead of having all those little countries
I think its really more fair to say that European interests triggered global connections on a much larger scale, rather than "discovering" all the places typically attributed to them (other than all these random archipelagos which truly were European discovered). Even saying that they brought together all those tribes is just... ehh... definitely misses the mark pretty hard. They had all sorts of governance and confederations and the like. And yes, there was some pretty impressive trade routes along the Indian ocean and Indonesia due to monsoons. But it can definitely be said that global connection, trade, and knowledge really kicked up a few notches after the age of exploration suddenly had people going to the most remote and difficult to access parts of the world on the regular.
But you also have to remember these people were fairly isolated not being aware they were on one of many continents. Their entire world view assumed they were it. They saw land and they saw water, and those on islands new about other islands that were within a short distance, no open ocean travel thousands of miles away.
yeah tldr europeans masterrace
@@gerardcote8391 I assume you're not taking into account the Austronesians here? Because the Austronesians already had a seafaring network that stretched from Madagascar to arguably the Americas, centuries before the Europeans starting sailing all over the place.
It also has to be said that long before the European powers were even a twinkle in the eye of Rome, the western half of the Old World already had plenty of contact with the eastern half, so much so that there's one town in Northern Europe with Veitnamese ancestry and there are Roman coinage being found in Japan. The biggest impact truly was the linking of the Far East with Europe via the Americas, but even there one might want to consider possible, albeit uncommon, links between South Americans and Austronesians.
@@sixthcairn yeah, but they didn't connect the continents the same way the Europeans did.
Azores comes from açor, which is the Portuguese name for a bird that was spotted in big flocks when the island was discovered. So it's pretty funny that you mentioned the geese discovered the island, close but wrong bird
The 'discovered by Europeans' map does not include Iceland or the Faroe Islands , which were both clearly discovered by Nordic Vikings around the 10th century. Perhaps anything discovered before the 15th century doesn't count?
It says on the map that it is all European discoveries during the Age of Exploration and after which started a few hundred years after those discoveries.
Toycat, you can't cover the distance of the Burke Wills expedition in an hour by plane, its just over 3 hours (because Australia is not small)
Laughs in the Concorde
completely irrelevant to the point, literally nothing changed
Best geography channel ever
is RealLifeLore *in my opinion*
@@Moiaija hah! This is where he gets his ideas from
I had never even noticed Franz Josef Land on a map
I feel bad for the other channels in Project Exploration, they worked so hard on their videos and then they're getting upended by some minecraft youtuber with a computer and a greenscreen
Discovering requires 3 things, 1 something must be currently and generally unknown. 2 you have to find out about it. 3 most importantly you have to tell everyone else about it.
For example, there is lithium in large amounts in the Congo.
It was there but people didn't know it was there, except the locals who didn't know what those stones were. Therefor finding it and going to mine it is a discovery.
Same thing goes with the discovery that lighting was electric discharge. Every one knew there was lighting, and some people would have noticed static electricity when they had wool and linen rubbing into each other creating electric shock, but realizing they were the same thing then telling people is a discovery.
Exactly. Yes, natives lived in discovered places, but they didnt really contribute to humanities collective knowledge. Only when explorers discovered the places and connected them to the world were they discovered.
@@thorthewolf8801 natives contributed to humanities collective knowledge the same way europeans did, by teaching other tribes they came in contact with the knowledge they had
@@RoarofdalioN curious how we dont learn anything about native explorers. Unless you want to suggest some conspiracy here, I chalk that up to the fact that natives didnt really contribute to the collective knowledge. Especially when it comes to people living on islands, who had no way of traversing the oceans. Whats the name of that isolated tribe, the sentenelese, or something like that?
@@thorthewolf8801 Perhaps we don't have records of Native American knowledge in the Americas because many of them were brutally killed and their records burned in the case of of the Aztecs
@thorthewolf8801 Natives first cultivated both corn and tobacco. I'd say both of those things contributed to the collective knowledge. Plus with potatoes and tomatoes, European cuisine wouldn't exist without Native contributions. Again, I would say that contributed greatly to collective knowledge. Hell, some Natives first made rubber. Think about how much rubber is used now, and maybe you'd see how Natives contributed to collective knowledge. The Inca were able to make longer bridges, the Inuit developed Kayaks, and I could go on, but I hope you see the point.
The indigenous Australians did have tribes with elders and different language and borders
this is a very interesting topic, thanks for the great vids minecraft man
"Discover" is such a controversial term because it is obviously from a European perspective, as they were the only ones going out trying to discover places unknown to them at the time. It implies a kind arrogant belief that these places weren't important until they were "discovered" by Europeans. I think that's wrong though, as we still use the word 'discover' in phrases like 'I discover a new band at the weekend', or 'I discovered a great little restaurant'. The personal nature of that discovery is implied, and I think the same can be said of these voyages of discovery.
It's the collective european application of discovery in european society, we speak of our experience! :D I see you have a hard time with european society, but that doesn't mean we must change to accommodate you, you have a plethora of global options, just choose your favorite society and "discover" it! but don't ask them to change it. (my humble advice)
Russia has 49 national parks and 103 nature serves, and the map in the video has just a few of both types. Those are protected nature areas, so do you really need those in the middle of nowhere if civilization isn't threatening them (directly at least)? It makes sense to me to establish them where people live.
The map is from 2017, but in 2018 Russia did officially set up 1 national park and 5 nature reserves in Crimea, which actually existed way before the annexation, they just weren't integrated.
Check out the project exploration playlist here:
ruclips.net/p/PLfp1VB3Lm4InaTdeUqvTr0_gUvhJuoZIF
Why are half of the Philippine islands gone on the thumbnail?
Need a map showing the first sapians to each part of the world to finally put it to rest
Day 1 of telling ibx2cat to wash his hair
would be interesting to see how remote your most remote viewers live. like just ask in a video where your viewers live so they can type it in the comments and then make a video where you look up these places
Probably not me, but driving to the nearest "big" town (more than 25.000 inhabitants) is for me a 4+ hour car drive across a mountain with a glacier visible from the road. A town of 15.000 is 1 hour away.
@@Spacemongerr hm, lemme guess, do you live in Iceland?
@@kohZeei Pretty good guess, but not quite. Unlike Iceland, we have lots of trees :)
@@Spacemongerr okay, i give up. Where are you? :)
@@kohZeei Aww, I thought for sure you'd get it with that hint. :P Go directly east from your guess! (And a little bit north for my area)
oof, showing the map of the first nations' tribes... Being in Alberta, I'm sure that the Cree, Blackfoot, and Crow tribes will be a bit aggravated being labeled as 'small tribes' :P
At the risk of pedantry, Crows don't tend to find themselves north of the Missouri often. As such, they're not really a nation that's played much of a role in Alberta since the 1750s
That said, I 100% agree with you that the Cree and Blackfoot cannot be characterized as "small tribes" Blackfoot territory historically covered a landmass the size of Germany, while Cree spanned from the Upper Peace basin in BC to northern Quebec (or Labrador, if we include the Innu) and everywhere in between. Including some of the lands in northern Manitoba marked as Inuit on this map.
@@Giaayokaats they don't generally make it too far into Canada, but they're quite huge in Montana. I was only naming them because of the general area on the map there, that included Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, etc.
1:10 That map is clearly wrong. It doesn't show Europe, even though europeans discovered Europe
@@killianobrien2007 there are at least two answers, first: Exploration was slow back then, so the first people settled at the edge of Europe, became Europeans and then discovered the rest
Or second: you count it as Europeans because they never left
Actually no , neolithic farmers (from anatolia) and others discovered europe before the the ancestors of modern europeans showed up,modern sardinians are pretty much the only modern european population who share genetical similarity to the pre-indoeuropean people, these people were still around in the times of imperial rome ,so their existence cant be put in doubt.
@@AMR_k400 that's not true and only a little bit true
The modern European is related to ALL those groups. Definitely through their mothers but not the y chromesone replacement with Indo-European or early-ish European farmer mixed to hunter gathers
It's a merger of all 3
11:14 didnt most of them die ?
Discovering requires 3 thing, 1 something must be currently snd generally unknown. 2 you have to find out about it. 3 may importantly you have to tell everyone else about it.
For example, there is lithium in large amounts in the Congo.
It was there but people didn't know it was rgere, except the locals who didn't know what those stones were. Therefor finding it and going to mine it is a discovery.
Same thing goes with the discovery that lighting was electric discharge. Every one knew there was lighting, and some people would have noticed static electricity when they had wool and linen rubbing into each other creating electric shock, but realizing they were the same thing then telling people is a discovery.
When I discovered Thai food, just means it's new to me 🤷♀️
Mount Kosciuszko in Australia discovered by Polish migrant-traveler-scientist-writer-adventurer Edmund Strzelecki.
Polish diaspora in the world let's reunite.
btw. Mauritius is the most beatiful place on Earth. Change my mind:)
I thought I knew every country and territory and island and even most of the states or regions of countries.
What the heck is Franz Josef Land?? Lol
I've never heard of that place. Svalbard Island sure, Severny Island, that long skinny one north of Russia, ok, but Franz Josef Land?
ToyCat please put the playlist link to project exploration
It is in the description
HOW THE FRIK DID AUSTRIA-HUNGARY DISCOVER ANYTHING
I think Iceland and Faroes should count for this
I know this map is about the age of exploration and that's why they aren't
you should explore Nevada on Google maps for part of a video
there's alot of weird little towns here
0:00 you forgot Marshall Islands who are named after some British dude called John Marshall
did you play in the WSOP? you seem like a poker nerd?
The thumbnail is just painful to look at. Why is the caspian see connected to the black see?
15:46 he shows Gold Coast instead of Cairns
Ayyyyyy shoutout to my hometown Cairns! 🙌
Out by elko is the ruby mountains check out pics of it and especially Lamoille canyon. Very different from the other empty areas in NV. Also please remember to check out petroglyphs when you visit northern Nevada
Rottnest Island in Australia hadn't been settled for at least 5000 years when Europeans arrived. There was a land Bridge that flooded.
The indigenous had a name for it, but only as a thing on the horizon.
The islands above Russia listed as "Many Islands" which says it was discovered by "Russia" is incorrect. The DeLong islands north of Russia were discovered by the USA during the Jeannette Expedition. So it should be dash colored as USA and Russia.
if this is the second channel, what is the first one?
Austronesians:
*amateurs*
How can Norway have 14 square miles of area discovered and austria hungary so much? Svalbard looks as big as Franz Joseph land.
“Uhmmmm Christopher Columbus didn’t discover America, I’m pretty sure there were people there already”-🤓
Actually we have somewhat recently discovered evidence of at least some vikings making it to the Azores. Because *OF COURSE* the vikings made it there...
Line Islands are marked in grey, I wonder if Kiribati doscovered them?
I noticed that the map at the beginning isn't showing Alaska as part of the US. Bad design lol
Does this graph really include the US within Europe??
The US isn't in Europe, but culturally and ethnically, the US is European
Another wonderfully great episode. Andrew, where do you find the time for exquisitely done vids?
That Mercator map makes you to think Russia is the place with the most remote areas, but in fact, The Amazon is bigger than what that map shows and it’s more mysterious than Siberia.
:D mine is bigger than your nhanhanhanhanha
Pretty crazy how we’re taught about the age of exploration and the new world so much in western countries. It’s really a complete anglicization of history
that trip through australia wouldve been 3 hours
@ibx2cat you should look into the piri reis map
love these vids about maps and stuff from this channel
ibxtoycat
My great great grandfather was alive at the time of the Burke and Wills expedition. His daughter was still alive when I was a child.....
In 1860 no one had even walked on Antarctica yet
Thank you for this video
I'm visiting Cairns soon, I'll find out what it's like...
*Europeans exploring and accidentally spreading disease*
the american left: this is clearly the work of Columbus
Autogas is the trade name of LPG which you can put in specially prepared cars
“I like maps.”
Me: British much?
Who is your favorite explorer?
Dora
Dora
Dora
Christopher
Internet
Commenting in case someone has not called out the picture of “Cairns”
You piss me off sometimes apologist
This is a very interesting topic.
I remember the first time I was told that Columbus didn’t discover America first, I was like yeah you’re stupid. Then I later I learned that I was the stupid one
Why would it show Estonia being discovered by the Russian Empire. They were there long before that discovered by the Finno-Hungarians
Yooooo my tribe made the map
I live in a very isolated city lol it's apparently the most isolated city in the world or sometimes the 2nd or 3rd on two lists anyway for me to drive to another city it takes a day or just under 2700 km
Australia?
I wonder if Allays spawn on atolls
Iceland was Setteled by Norwegians/Irish Monks not Danish
Crimea is Ukraine ....
The Netherland discovered Australia. It was call New Holland.
Tasmania was discovered Abel Tasman (dutch)
People were there for 10000 years
@@olympicegg6853 bit longer than 10,000... more like 80,000!
@@coolburgois1629 i meant to type 100000 but the Liberals cut public school funding
Toycat about to get removed from the playlist lmao
Fun fact: Where ibx is currently used to be a part of Arizona.
You should try playing rise of nations
I prefer fall of georgraphies
@@InvadersDie funny
0:33 Occupation is not colonisation! Italian is an equally beautiful language but they don’t deserve undue credit/blame.
I live in the painted desert you should come check it out.
I think this whole channel is just built on how you say "FrAHnce". It brings such joy to my basic bitch American heart.
The American way of saying France always reminds me of "female friends".
Cause Friends without the D is just France (American pronunciation).
Also the British "France" sounds more fancy and thus fitting for the so called snobby French people.
toycat thinks that animals spawn like in minecraft 9:55
RIP Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan in the thumbnail
Anyone talking about how Australia was discovered by the Dutch way before the British
Portuguese discovered Australia in 1522, they were sailing all around Oceania all the way to Hawai, and remember it was a portuguese sailor that made the 1st circumnavigation.
Norway didn't do too much? We were sledging dogs to the south pole and deliberately freezing ships into the polar ice to let them drift with crew over the artic ice in the north pole while you guys were sipping drinks on tropical beaches while exploiting the locals. And when you did try for a pole, what happened? That's right, you died there didn't you. Lousy Brits.
Just kidding, it's pretty accurate. Our exploration and colonial past is relatively mild.
the US is a european country now?
smol tribes
No, actually prehistoric fish discovered all land because they evolved to go on land first
What about bacteria? Should we ban the word discovery so that people don't cry to death?
Cool video but I would've been a lot more careful with my words at 11:00
why?
I agree, it made me uncomfortable
@@3rdwrst386 "unified" is not the world I would use to describe what colonizators did to native Americans, I actually don't even understand what he meant by that
Greenland has Indigenous People! The Inuit have been there thousands of years
Y tho
The Icelandic vikings actually arrived before the Inuit
BTW the Inuit and the Eskaleut people in general (Inuit, Yupik, Aleut) are very interesting, they still exist both in North America and in Siberia to this day
@@gamermapper Unlikely.
@@AholeAtheist that's actually true. The Inuit (and Yupik and Aleut, all Eskaleut people) are a people that arrived in America relatively recently.
A goati is so 90's
Thats it. Im moving to Frans Josef-land. The most based country.
Could we all agree that the person who decided to not label The Netherlands in Orange should be punched?
6 months later....crickets
Who discovered Europe if not Europeans?
This map seems sus. For some reason I don't believe that Europeans discovered only islands. Lets for example take like a middle of a dessert or really dense jungles. I don't believe that everywhere except islands there were humans already. Nor that they had documented all of it.
If human is on a piece of land it does not mean that he has knowledge about all of it and he knows how big it is. You wouldn't say that some random tribe in a jungle really discovered all of amazon forest. They might discovered a small portion of it. But there is no collective knowledge about whole continent so in fact they did not discovered it.
If European went to China they could communicate with local people and I'm pretty sure that he could get a description of land over there. And in that sense this land was discovered by Chinese people. But if European went to Australia I doubt that they could get a description of the whole continent. There surely was a part of the continent that wasn't part of a local knowledge and maybe refereed as "great unknown".
I would say the tribes in south america have discovered the Amazon, and nothing else. All they know is a world of jungle and they can probably navigate pretty far.
10:01
Sorry I just gotta say it...
P O R T U G A L
C A R A L H O ! ! !
Those Islands (Josefs land) didn't exist there before, CERN changed it
God damn marmots
Europeans discovered these places…..everyone else living there where have you been Mr European?? 😆
Didn't Greenland already have natives, though? Why is it included in the map?
I thought all land was discovered first by animals?
Unless you have hair 💀🤣
Europe “discovered” America, because Europeans sailed to there, and not the other way around. If the Indians got to Europe first, they would have discovered Europe, and things would be turned around.
Same if aliens come to us / find us, they have discovered earth. If we travel to them, or find them, before they find us, we will have discovered them….
That’s how I see it anyway
You know Europeans would NOT be cool with Native Americans claiming they "discovered" Europe. Same with aliens. The point is that Europeans didn't ACTUALLY discover the Americas, Australia, etc.
Europe discovered the americas for Europeans would be a better way to say it
@@RoarofdalioN And the entire world except the natives .
@@xviper2k Of course not, imagine Europe loosing 10.000 years of evolution, back to the stone age!! That would be impossible!
@@RoarofdalioN But that's exactly what discovery means silly! How can you say you discovered something than? :D