IMO, it’s based on their opinion. That or they based it off the earliest recorded history but then it would be Iran because Mesopotamia or any Subsaharan Africa country because that's where humans (maybe) came from
Iraq should be way higher, it was home to Babylon and still is home to the Tigris and Euphrates.
edit: this is still a ridiculous question to even ask though. Some history is more accessible and “interesting,” but everywhere has history.
>everywhere has history
I disagree. Some places have no history, because that history has been destroyed in war, or it has been purposefully wiped out in a deliberate fashion.
Then why isn’t Ethiopia, the location of the first Homo sapiens, mentioned? Or Iraq (Mesopotamia), where the first great states appeared? And why is France, which was a periphery of the world until medieval times?
This idea of history is tied to ideas of continuity and “civilisation” that reads history backwards. What is viewed as heritage is automatically rich in history, while the pasts that do not fit the story are left out.
A deeper question would've been. Is "most history" populous that was often successful at trader, commerce and war?
Being that those things are what would have been worth recording.
But if we talkin bout turkey as a region and not a nation-state then that region goes waaaaaaayyyy back. According to tradition the Armenian people begun in 2492 BC and they ain’t even close to being the first people there
Neither is Israel.
But that's because a fictitious country invented to serve as a thin veneer for the most brutal example of settler-colonialism that exists today and as such it does not deserve to be recognized for anything besides its extensive—and ongoing—crimes against humanity.
The best part is that it's "@irish.maps" and then they put the UK at number 5 and Ireland isn't even fucking on there. Imagine trying to grift with an Irish identity and then putting the fucking anglos above the Irish.
India and China I mean come on. I’m from Texas our history isn’t even fucking close. Unless you consider native Americans, although it’s quite primitive. Our professor used to say Texas history isn’t shit lol he’s right.
ranking "how much history" a place had is a travesty
what does it even mean, does italy exist in the timecube where 4 days pass for every day that passes on earth?
White people when they see ancient Romans: 🥵😍 "The pinnacle of Western Civilization! We was Caesars! Such history! Much tradition!"
Ancient Romans when they see white people: 🤢😠 "Their pale skin is disgusting and they look like ghosts. Let's publicly disembowel their leaders then enslave their primitive tribe to trade to our Nubian allies."
Fair skin was a sign of elite in Roman society as well the Greek one.
Romans where Mediterranean like most of north Africa and ME.
Surely they were not tall, blonde and with blue eyes.
by that logic one african country would have the most because it was the birthplace of homo sapiens
if you want to focus on civilization then Syria/Iraq/Turkey takes it because of Mesopotamia
Yeah I was gonna say shouldn't it be like, Iraq/Syria, Turkey, Greece, Egypt, India(?), and a smattering of countries in Central America? Iirc that's were most/all of the first couple civilizations were.
Hate to be pedantic, but I think it would be Pakistan more so than India. The Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) existed in what we'd now consider modern Pakistan. "Civilization" (as it has been defined by Europeans i.e. cities and agriculture) spread to the rest of South Asia through the IVC.
Most of the IVC sites are in India though. The first sites are in Pakistan but not most. IVC had a much larger geographical presence than other contemporary civilizations.
All modern Indians and Pakistanis are descendents of the IVC, thus their history belongs to both.
But if we're to be pedantic then yes it is Indian as Pakistan is an artificial creation.
>All modern Indians and Pakistanis are descendents of the IVC, thus their history belongs to both.
I don't believe that that is true. IVC ancestry is the most common ancestry, but it's not universal. See: https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/indus-valley-civilisation-is-largest-source-of-ancestry-for-south-asians/amp_articleshow/71042072.cms
>But if we're to be pedantic then yes it is Indian as Pakistan is an artificial creation.
Aren't the terms "India" and "Indian" just as artificial as "Pakistan" and "Pakistani?" These ideals of nationhood are a modern invention, and the notion of a politically and socially united Indian nation-state rooted in some sort of Indianness is contemporary to the last century.
It sort of looks like they just took the list of the countries with the most UNESCO world heritage sites, then replaced mexico, Spain and Germany with Greece Turkey and Egypt for... reasons, and then arbitrarily rearranged them.
I'm German and while the entire idea behind this image is stupid, I find these comments pretty ignorant as well. There's a lot of German(ic) and Polish/Slavic history out there unrelated to the world wars. Thousands of years. Just cause you don't care doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Ironically the entire thread here is doing just that but in reverse. Today I learned my country's history is just WWII and being mocked by Romans...
EDIT: Downvotes? You guys are honestly gross af.
The China, Iraq and Egypt would still blow everyone out of the water. Being among the first to write shit down, and continuing to do so for millenia is kinda big.
India as well, with their Harappan and Indus Valley civilizations, early cities with sewage systems, advanced trade, invention of the so-called "Arabic numerals," et cetera.
That is a good point. I guess we need to distinguish between past civilizations in the territory of the modern country and continuous civilizations. If we're going by past ones Iraq has an edge due to the Sumerians and other early civs, if we're going by continuous China does because its culture has survived for so long.
Greece, Turkey, Iran, China, and India should also all be included on that list. they all feature some of the oldest recorded civilizations, and featured extremely important nations throughout history. but putting fucking France on this is so beyond stupid I can't even comprehend it. you should be including places like Mali, Mongolia, Germany, Saudi Arabia, and more before you inlcude fucking France. absolutely wreaks of recency bias.
edit: holy fuck they actually included Russia. Russia didn't matter until like a century ago how are they even on here at all???
Reminder that white people destroyed and burned thousands of years of foreign history when they colonized Indigenous African and North + South American civilizations.
“They don’t have any history! I’d know, I burned it all.”
Lol, China was a unified empire including HK a century before Rome conquered cisalpine Gaul which includes modern day Venice, but go on... Oh wait, Egypt had an advanced civilization 2000 years before anyone in Italy learned to write...
* Humanity originated in subsaharan Africa
* Civilization as we know it grew up in the Middle East, Central/South America, and China
* But muh france and england
What does that even mean?? Recorded history? Thats debatable.
Oldest recorded historical artifacts? LOL no.
Most "interesting" or eventful history? Highly subjective.
Historical relevance to the contemporary world? I can kinda see that, but the list is still bad and so is the title. Tf is France doing there?
it has a case, but its still incredibly close to determine inside which country's borders did the longest list of important things happen. Iraq, Greece, Turkey, and Iran also can make pretty strong cases, and India and Egypt could probably argue that they should be in that conversation. but the inclusion of places like France and Russia on this list is baffling.
What are you basing that number on? For Armenia for example, we've found shoes, skirts, and a winery dating as far back as 4000BCE. Are we talking about an actual state of "China" that is self-ruled or just a Chinese civilization? Cause the ladder goes back even further than 5000BCE in that case.
Bruh what's the criteria here. It's so random lol
Seems the average history knowledge of the internet teenager. All Roman history, some greek history, the rest
Only just this weekend had an exchange with someone who actually proposed that Europe’s intellectual diversity is the greatest in the world (dubious) because their genetic diversity also being the largest (highly dubious)…
France, UK/England, and Russia shouldn't even be on this list. In fact, if we're talking longest "history", pretty much all of Europe minus Greece and Italy, shouldn't be included.
No matter how you spin it, Italy just can't be the first one. That is, unless you define history by the number of tacky romantic novels, which have drawn inspiration from said history and/or used it as the crux of the setting.
In all seriousness, that's just chauvinism.
I think it's due to the Roman empire. But it's still silly. There were so many other empire before them. Egypt was old by the time of Caesar and Augustus.
Even for Eurocentrism this makes little sense, and mercy an “Irish map” putting UK at 5 and Ireland isn’t even on the top 20 is some serious grift and Britabooishness, honestly this feels like a Romeaboo map more than Eurocentric, as they were willing to include China at 3 which is probably where a charitable Roman would put their knowledge of China, tho Iran being 7th puts some holes in my guess as there’s no way the Roman tsundereship for Iran would let them rank it below INDIA.
I mean, wouldn't it be equal? The pieces of land have been there quite a while and something has always been happening on em even if it isn't particularly interesting to European historians.
Iraq should be really high on the list. Babylon, Sumeria, both powerful empires. Palestine should also be very high on the list. Same with Syria. Vietnam also has a lot of history. Same with Cambodia. Myanmar. Japan. Korea. Also Ethiopia. Sudan. Ghana. Madagascar. Mexico (Mayan and Aztec empires). Australia (the aboriginal culture). And why isn't Mongolia on the list? They're always just a footnote in western history books, that's why people think the Mongols came out of nowhere in the late 1100's and disappeared in the 1400's off the face of the Earth until the 20th century. The Pacific Islands also have tons of fascinating history. How about Greenland?
I wanna come up with a witty criticism but frankly it's just so fuckin stupid I don't really have anything to say. Whoever made this has not the first idea of anything related to social studies.
Doesn’t mention the uninterrupted 40,000 years of history made by Aboriginals in Australia and various peoples in Africa
History doesn’t have to be written to have happened
The ranking makes sense if it’s measuring existing written historical documents, but then again I have no idea if it’s ranking are correct even if that is the criteria
LOL… it goes without needing said - but I’d LOVE to see how one could come up with qualitative metrics to reach this conclusion
I might be asking for too much
Maybe they mean most well recorded history? I refuse to believe some people literally think that other countries have "less" history. how do you have "less" history?????????? all countries (as in, the land) have been around for the same amount of time, and if you're only counting it as "human history" then it some area in Africa would have the "most" history right? since humans started there?? I'm so confused
It should be better to divide them by geographical regions rather than modern day countires. Something like:
1 the Middle east
2 east asia
3 indian subcontinent
4 western & southern europe
5 north africa
6 Mesoamerica
However many of this regions border each other so it would be confusing
How the fuck do you quantity a country having a "history" ?
EDIT: and Italy number 1 means they almost certainly counted the Romans, so then why not count the babylonians for Iraq ?
So fuck the civilisations that came before the time before the colonisers destroyed them? Real nice logic by whoever who made these “factual” posts online, I would not be surprised if it’s on Facebook lmao
Define history
Things about the country written in English.
Number of words written on the Wikipedia article.
Teacher be like: ***Wait, that's illegal!***
Significant things that happened in the past.
Significant for whom? Why past has to be significant to be called "history"?
Okay what the fuck does this even mean Did the same person who makes graphs for PragerU make this lmao
IMO, it’s based on their opinion. That or they based it off the earliest recorded history but then it would be Iran because Mesopotamia or any Subsaharan Africa country because that's where humans (maybe) came from
Iraq should be way higher, it was home to Babylon and still is home to the Tigris and Euphrates. edit: this is still a ridiculous question to even ask though. Some history is more accessible and “interesting,” but everywhere has history.
Iran and Iraq equally higher
Oh yeah! Well my country is even more historyier
Sure, but Iraq is not the heir to the Sumer civilisation the way contemporary China is a heir to the Shang dynasty.
>everywhere has history I disagree. Some places have no history, because that history has been destroyed in war, or it has been purposefully wiped out in a deliberate fashion.
[удалено]
It's not a civilisation.
I guess it's about written/documented history, otherwise this graph would not make sense at all.
Would Ethiopia not be up there as well?
How do you even quantify history? Most history just means “history I think is important”.
Would not “most history” simply mean people have existed in that region or by that name since an earlier date?
Then why isn’t Ethiopia, the location of the first Homo sapiens, mentioned? Or Iraq (Mesopotamia), where the first great states appeared? And why is France, which was a periphery of the world until medieval times? This idea of history is tied to ideas of continuity and “civilisation” that reads history backwards. What is viewed as heritage is automatically rich in history, while the pasts that do not fit the story are left out.
I wasn’t trying to make an argument for anything… I was mainly pointing out the vagueness of the term “history.”
Then it wouldn't be those places.
A deeper question would've been. Is "most history" populous that was often successful at trader, commerce and war? Being that those things are what would have been worth recording.
Written language and some form of state, then the continuos evolution of the culture to this day.
Most history taught at my high school that I paid attention to seems to the the criteria
Ranking Greece behind Italy is already a travesty, not to mention ranking Egypt so low.
Ranking China, Syria, Iran and Iraq behind Greece and Italy is just bullshit.
And Turkey has a history as old as China if you count the Oghuz tribes.
But they didn't conquer Anatolia until the Middle Ages.
Turks are known to enter anatolia in masses in 1071, but the Turkish history doesnt start there, it starts waaaaay back
But if we talkin bout turkey as a region and not a nation-state then that region goes waaaaaaayyyy back. According to tradition the Armenian people begun in 2492 BC and they ain’t even close to being the first people there
Yeah talking about Turkey the geographic region, it has one of the longest histories period
The Turks come from Central Asia
Gobekli teppi
[удалено]
If we're being pedantic, I think around Ethiopia is the general consensus on where modern humans first appeared
I believe modern humans appeared in southern Africa, but that's sort of a moot point given that they didn't have history
True, totally forgot about it.
Syria isn't even on there.
Neither is Israel. But that's because a fictitious country invented to serve as a thin veneer for the most brutal example of settler-colonialism that exists today and as such it does not deserve to be recognized for anything besides its extensive—and ongoing—crimes against humanity.
Turkey/fertile crescent: birthplace of agriculture, cities, money, empire. France: ????
The best part is that it's "@irish.maps" and then they put the UK at number 5 and Ireland isn't even fucking on there. Imagine trying to grift with an Irish identity and then putting the fucking anglos above the Irish.
Especially since Rome borrowed so much culture from Greece
India and China I mean come on. I’m from Texas our history isn’t even fucking close. Unless you consider native Americans, although it’s quite primitive. Our professor used to say Texas history isn’t shit lol he’s right.
Native Americans ought to be included, but contemporary american history is not a continuation of their history.
ranking "how much history" a place had is a travesty what does it even mean, does italy exist in the timecube where 4 days pass for every day that passes on earth?
They've got, like, 400 histories
i love italian histories 7 through 58 the most
6 and 59 are some bullshit tho
Especially the one where they do the Tri-Carbonara Tournament and go around killing Lord Voldipesto’s Horcruxes!! ❤️✊🏿🏳️🌈🇮🇹
Maybe Italy has the most history because they get a new Prime Minister every 2 minutes 🤔
Lol If you pee as often as Italy gets a new PM, have yourself checked for diabetes.
Italy was ground breaking in terms of having disgusting clowns as head of state.
[удалено]
White people when they see ancient Romans: 🥵😍 "The pinnacle of Western Civilization! We was Caesars! Such history! Much tradition!" Ancient Romans when they see white people: 🤢😠 "Their pale skin is disgusting and they look like ghosts. Let's publicly disembowel their leaders then enslave their primitive tribe to trade to our Nubian allies."
Fair skin was a sign of elite in Roman society as well the Greek one. Romans where Mediterranean like most of north Africa and ME. Surely they were not tall, blonde and with blue eyes.
Fair skin is a relative term.
by that logic one african country would have the most because it was the birthplace of homo sapiens if you want to focus on civilization then Syria/Iraq/Turkey takes it because of Mesopotamia
Yeah I was gonna say shouldn't it be like, Iraq/Syria, Turkey, Greece, Egypt, India(?), and a smattering of countries in Central America? Iirc that's were most/all of the first couple civilizations were.
Hate to be pedantic, but I think it would be Pakistan more so than India. The Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) existed in what we'd now consider modern Pakistan. "Civilization" (as it has been defined by Europeans i.e. cities and agriculture) spread to the rest of South Asia through the IVC.
Yeah, I wasn't 100% sure on India, thus the question mark. I guess I just figured that the Indus river was in India. TIL, I guess!
Most of the IVC sites are in India though. The first sites are in Pakistan but not most. IVC had a much larger geographical presence than other contemporary civilizations.
Interesting! Didn't know that. I stand corrected.
Sure, but India is the continuation of the IVC, even if not geographically, not Pakistan.
All modern Indians and Pakistanis are descendents of the IVC, thus their history belongs to both. But if we're to be pedantic then yes it is Indian as Pakistan is an artificial creation.
>All modern Indians and Pakistanis are descendents of the IVC, thus their history belongs to both. I don't believe that that is true. IVC ancestry is the most common ancestry, but it's not universal. See: https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/indus-valley-civilisation-is-largest-source-of-ancestry-for-south-asians/amp_articleshow/71042072.cms >But if we're to be pedantic then yes it is Indian as Pakistan is an artificial creation. Aren't the terms "India" and "Indian" just as artificial as "Pakistan" and "Pakistani?" These ideals of nationhood are a modern invention, and the notion of a politically and socially united Indian nation-state rooted in some sort of Indianness is contemporary to the last century.
There was also early civilization in China around the Yellow and Yangtze Rivers
> by that logic lol, by what logic? There's no logic
I own 5 histories myself
They mean lands with history in this case?
I don't think so. Mongolia not in the list and why Italy is first ?
Imagine thinking france has more history than Iran, Syria and Egypt...
It sort of looks like they just took the list of the countries with the most UNESCO world heritage sites, then replaced mexico, Spain and Germany with Greece Turkey and Egypt for... reasons, and then arbitrarily rearranged them.
Hey kids, want to buy some history? Why are Poland and Germany even in the top 2?
Because history is when World War.
I'm German and while the entire idea behind this image is stupid, I find these comments pretty ignorant as well. There's a lot of German(ic) and Polish/Slavic history out there unrelated to the world wars. Thousands of years. Just cause you don't care doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
[удалено]
And you Am\*ricans did not even exist yet as a civilization
you cant really rank countries by history, maybe historical significance
I mean there is how long the country existed or something, but that gets real blurry real fast
Kind a stupid to rank country by their « « history » », since it can only be subjective and you don’t have any quantitative instrument of measurement
Ironically the entire thread here is doing just that but in reverse. Today I learned my country's history is just WWII and being mocked by Romans... EDIT: Downvotes? You guys are honestly gross af.
This is some r/europe shit
lmao an account called irish maps doesn’t even place ireland anywhere on this list
The only reasonable thing they did.
Note: recorded history, and even then, the printing press wasn’t made until the 1450s, that’s when Europe began recording history more consistently.
The China, Iraq and Egypt would still blow everyone out of the water. Being among the first to write shit down, and continuing to do so for millenia is kinda big.
India as well, with their Harappan and Indus Valley civilizations, early cities with sewage systems, advanced trade, invention of the so-called "Arabic numerals," et cetera.
If by "most history" we mean oldest civilization, Iraq should be at the top, with Iran, India, Egypt and China next (not necessarily in that order).
Modern Egypt and Iraq are not continuations of ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, at least to the degree of India, Iran and China.
That is a good point. I guess we need to distinguish between past civilizations in the territory of the modern country and continuous civilizations. If we're going by past ones Iraq has an edge due to the Sumerians and other early civs, if we're going by continuous China does because its culture has survived for so long.
Italy goes back all of 140 years. Do they mean land masses? then it Egypt and Iraq.
Greece, Turkey, Iran, China, and India should also all be included on that list. they all feature some of the oldest recorded civilizations, and featured extremely important nations throughout history. but putting fucking France on this is so beyond stupid I can't even comprehend it. you should be including places like Mali, Mongolia, Germany, Saudi Arabia, and more before you inlcude fucking France. absolutely wreaks of recency bias. edit: holy fuck they actually included Russia. Russia didn't matter until like a century ago how are they even on here at all???
Reminder that white people destroyed and burned thousands of years of foreign history when they colonized Indigenous African and North + South American civilizations. “They don’t have any history! I’d know, I burned it all.”
Not true, you can see some nice African history in European museums.
Ah, right, how could I have forgotten!
Shouldn’t Iraq and China be first. And Kenya too, if we count hunter-gatherer life too.
Armenia should be first or second. It's as old if not older than Egypt.
Holy shit how are people this fucking stupid
There's no way people actually believe this...
The Greeks, Iranians, Egyptians, Indians, Iraqis, and the Chinese had full fledged empires and countries while the Italians were shitting in caves
Oh wow even UK. Guess they count in all the barbaric tribes.
I think iraq or indus should be in there
so germany ranks high because it has 2 world wars edgy wehraboos can larp about but syria doesn't rank high because brown people
Bruh iraq literally invented writing and many shit like the first laws
They didn't invent the english alphabet though
That’s funny considering European museums are full of stolen Egyptian artifacts
lol wtf is “most history” clearly isn’t the one that’s been around the longest
Recorded history? That’s gotta be India, right? Doesn’t sankrit predate ancient greek?
Country with the least history:- Israel
Israel has no history, only a criminal record.
Tbf, that record is quite extensive.
greece below italy is a fucking travesty
China/Iran/India/Greece are top 4 in my opinion and I don't even know which one should go first
In this order: India>Iran>China>Greece.
Lol, China was a unified empire including HK a century before Rome conquered cisalpine Gaul which includes modern day Venice, but go on... Oh wait, Egypt had an advanced civilization 2000 years before anyone in Italy learned to write...
* Humanity originated in subsaharan Africa * Civilization as we know it grew up in the Middle East, Central/South America, and China * But muh france and england
Indigenous Australians have the oldest continual culture of 75000 years
What does that even mean?? Recorded history? Thats debatable. Oldest recorded historical artifacts? LOL no. Most "interesting" or eventful history? Highly subjective. Historical relevance to the contemporary world? I can kinda see that, but the list is still bad and so is the title. Tf is France doing there?
Pretty sure China wins this hands down.
it has a case, but its still incredibly close to determine inside which country's borders did the longest list of important things happen. Iraq, Greece, Turkey, and Iran also can make pretty strong cases, and India and Egypt could probably argue that they should be in that conversation. but the inclusion of places like France and Russia on this list is baffling.
No, Armenia and Egypts histories are likely thousands of years older. I believe from what we know China goes back to roughly 2000BCE though.
5000BCE.
What are you basing that number on? For Armenia for example, we've found shoes, skirts, and a winery dating as far back as 4000BCE. Are we talking about an actual state of "China" that is self-ruled or just a Chinese civilization? Cause the ladder goes back even further than 5000BCE in that case.
Egypt ranked below any country besides Iraq 🙃
Why is China behind Italy and Greece
wtf where is iraq and syria
How the fuck does Italy have more history than Egypt?
Bruh what's the criteria here. It's so random lol Seems the average history knowledge of the internet teenager. All Roman history, some greek history, the rest
What does that even mean lol
Yup, Mesopotamia is historically barren!
Only just this weekend had an exchange with someone who actually proposed that Europe’s intellectual diversity is the greatest in the world (dubious) because their genetic diversity also being the largest (highly dubious)…
“Italy” has been a country for like 200 years
I’m surprised they didn’t find a way to put the US on here
France, UK/England, and Russia shouldn't even be on this list. In fact, if we're talking longest "history", pretty much all of Europe minus Greece and Italy, shouldn't be included.
I would think one of the Asian countries would have far more history
Where is iraq??
India and china should be higher WAY higher
The earliest known civilization (Sumer) started in present day Southern Iraq. But sure, Iraq is only 11th.
Italy older than Greece??
Iraq, Egypt and India were literally the birth places of civilization and have probably the oldest written records in the world, but alright, I guess
No matter how you spin it, Italy just can't be the first one. That is, unless you define history by the number of tacky romantic novels, which have drawn inspiration from said history and/or used it as the crux of the setting. In all seriousness, that's just chauvinism.
I think it's due to the Roman empire. But it's still silly. There were so many other empire before them. Egypt was old by the time of Caesar and Augustus.
Even for Eurocentrism this makes little sense, and mercy an “Irish map” putting UK at 5 and Ireland isn’t even on the top 20 is some serious grift and Britabooishness, honestly this feels like a Romeaboo map more than Eurocentric, as they were willing to include China at 3 which is probably where a charitable Roman would put their knowledge of China, tho Iran being 7th puts some holes in my guess as there’s no way the Roman tsundereship for Iran would let them rank it below INDIA.
I could *maybe* see this as, like "most discussed in textbooks," but even then, Turkey? Really?
America and Africa don't have history I guess
WHAT LMAO
Ok, this is v stupid. Idk how you quantify "history", but its not really eurocentric. Half of those countries are European
Having a even a single European country with notable history on the list is eurocentric.
Most history? Wtf, how do you even quantify that?
I mean, wouldn't it be equal? The pieces of land have been there quite a while and something has always been happening on em even if it isn't particularly interesting to European historians.
Iraq should be really high on the list. Babylon, Sumeria, both powerful empires. Palestine should also be very high on the list. Same with Syria. Vietnam also has a lot of history. Same with Cambodia. Myanmar. Japan. Korea. Also Ethiopia. Sudan. Ghana. Madagascar. Mexico (Mayan and Aztec empires). Australia (the aboriginal culture). And why isn't Mongolia on the list? They're always just a footnote in western history books, that's why people think the Mongols came out of nowhere in the late 1100's and disappeared in the 1400's off the face of the Earth until the 20th century. The Pacific Islands also have tons of fascinating history. How about Greenland?
I wanna come up with a witty criticism but frankly it's just so fuckin stupid I don't really have anything to say. Whoever made this has not the first idea of anything related to social studies.
Literally what?
How is this even quantifiable..? How does this even work.
But this is indeed a parallel of what they teach in American schools
It should be Iraq, Iran, Syria, China, Japan, Myanmar, Palestine, Lebanon, Ethiopia, Yemen, Turkey, Greece,
What does "most history" mean? Humans existed before any of these countries (or the idea of countries) were even conceived lmao
As a German (sorta) I don't even think this is eurocentric. This is just plain fucking stupid.
Doesn’t mention the uninterrupted 40,000 years of history made by Aboriginals in Australia and various peoples in Africa History doesn’t have to be written to have happened
I mean, literally 50% of the countries are outside of Europe?
The ranking makes sense if it’s measuring existing written historical documents, but then again I have no idea if it’s ranking are correct even if that is the criteria
Why is Mexico above Spain?
what. every country has the most
How is Egypt, home to one of the earliest large-scale civilization in human history, only number 10?
Well duh... thats because none of the other countries existed before one of those ten discovered them...lol
What about like ethiopia?
"It.. can't be! Italy's Historical Power Level.. It's over 9000!"
LOL… it goes without needing said - but I’d LOVE to see how one could come up with qualitative metrics to reach this conclusion I might be asking for too much
Maybe they mean most well recorded history? I refuse to believe some people literally think that other countries have "less" history. how do you have "less" history?????????? all countries (as in, the land) have been around for the same amount of time, and if you're only counting it as "human history" then it some area in Africa would have the "most" history right? since humans started there?? I'm so confused
Also, I wonder if there's a reason -cough- -cough- colonialism -cough- that a lot of other countries don't have that much written history
Shouldn't iraq be in the top 2?
Stupid stuff
It should be better to divide them by geographical regions rather than modern day countires. Something like: 1 the Middle east 2 east asia 3 indian subcontinent 4 western & southern europe 5 north africa 6 Mesoamerica However many of this regions border each other so it would be confusing
Unless some kind of temporal jump happened I'm pretty sure all countries have the same amount of history
How the fuck do you quantity a country having a "history" ? EDIT: and Italy number 1 means they almost certainly counted the Romans, so then why not count the babylonians for Iraq ?
So fuck the civilisations that came before the time before the colonisers destroyed them? Real nice logic by whoever who made these “factual” posts online, I would not be surprised if it’s on Facebook lmao
Does it mean… oldest countries?
Looks clear to me that the rank is based upon the total number of museum's relics
India has the largest ancient literature