Posts by Rachel Richardson

Richard Wilson4 said:The western frontier of Slavic settlement was essentially identical to the borders Russ established in Germany after WWII. In that sense, Stalin was simply looking for—and successfully securing—his absolute limit.

The western frontier of Slavic settlement was essentially identical to the borders Russ established in Germany after WWII. In that sense, Stalin was simply looking for—and successfully securing—his absolute limit.
The western edge of Slavic settlement was basically the same as those Russian borders in Germany after WWII. So yeah, Stalin pushed for the absolute max and he got it.

Honestly, it’s probably a good thing Roosevelt passed away when he did. That guy was looking to hand even more over to the Russians. 😉
The western edge of Slavic settlement was basically the same as those Russian borders in Germany after WWII. So yeah, Stalin pushed for the absolute max and he got it.

Honestly, it’s probably a good thing Roosevelt passed away when he did. That guy was looking to hand even more over to the Russians. 😉

Honestly, it’s probably a good thing Roosevelt passed away when he did. That guy was looking to hand even more over to the Russians. 😉
Honestly, it’s probably for the best that Roosevelt passed away; he would have likely handed the Russians even more than they already received.😉
How much more could they possibly take? 😁
Poland being carved out of East Germany and Seattle?
Russia reaching all the way to Krakow—or rather, including Krakow and Warsaw? Excuse me, I mean the USSR.
Russia extending to Kyiv and taking Kyiv with them?
I know he expanded Georgia as well. Georgia all the way to Crimea? 😁
What exactly would they do with all those powerful Germans? Set up an autonomous republic in Kazakhstan or Siberia?
In terms of territory, they were given plenty—they could have potentially even handed over Finland, more land in Germany and Austria, or pieces of Greece and Italy (the latter might have appealed to some Americans 😁).

Robert Hernandez10 said:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surzhyk

Mixed 😁
Or perhaps just a Russified version of American English. 😁

Richard Wilson4 said:I was actually talking about the internal borders within the occupied territories

That looks more like the old municipal boundaries—if you exclude the area from Lake to Deep Valley.
Otherwise, how else would you explain Milton being in the Midwest? 😁

Richard Wilson4 said:Interesting take from a neighbor's perspective. It’s wild seeing where the lines are drawn for places like the lake, Appalachia, and especially out in the Midwest and the Great Plains.

http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%94...ina_regije.png

The California Coast stretching from Fresno to Santa Fe?
The Lake region reaching up to Deep River, but somehow missing Boise?
Honestly...

Robert Hernandez10 said:Check out this ethnic map of Ukraine from 1897:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...thnic_1897.jpg

It's an incredibly detailed look at the ethnic makeup and where Ukrainians were living back in 1897:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...1%82%D0%B8.png

Looking at this level of detail—it almost reminds me of the old USSR (the eastern section looks a bit like Alaska 😁).

I am also in favor of this proposal😁

Drew Allen2 said:Just take what I said at face value: don't be exclusive...

Hey man... what's up?

Yeah—chocolate croissants and all that. 😁

Drew Allen2 said:Just take what I said at face value: don't be exclusive...

Hey man... what's up?

At this point, it’s starting to feel like a bad joke.

Drew Allen2 said:Look, there's no point in bothering him. But since you already did, maybe throw something else his way to give him something to chew on—if he's actually capable of thinking. The guy struggles to grasp that things always happen outside the rules and beyond his little logic... there are always variables that defy expectation. 🙂 Here: "dates and territories are half-baked without compensation for the Buddhist, like Ilok and the surrounding areas... and let's neuter him so he stops mentioning the pit—the pit was only swapped for some nonsense." 😁

Anyway, here is the R. S. 1981 map: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Lilic

Yeah, everyone was just throwing stuff out there aimlessly.

Drew Allen2 said:Look, there's no point in bothering him. But since you already did, maybe throw something else his way to give him something to chew on—if he's actually capable of thinking. The guy struggles to grasp that things always happen outside the rules and beyond his little logic... there are always variables that defy expectation. 🙂 Here: "dates and territories are half-baked without compensation for the Buddhist, like Ilok and the surrounding areas... and let's neuter him so he stops mentioning the pit—the pit was only swapped for some nonsense." 😁

Anyway, here is the R. S. 1981 map: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Lilic

The 1981 map isn't bad either.

Henry Myers3 said:It’s not surprising at all. These swaps don't just happen overnight. It starts with one side making an offer, followed by a long period of back-and-forth negotiation over what they actually want in return. I recall how the land swap south of Memphis took forever to finally wrap up, only after those outlying villages ended up in Canada. ☕

Yeah, calling it a "swap" is a massive understatement 😁
If you ask me, those villages were seized back in '48, and it wasn't until '56 that those last few timber-rich areas were officially annexed.
That said, the srh tried to contest the discrepancy—not just because the territory was smaller, but because the quality of the land was inferior. Essentially, when it came to giving away villages versus outright seizing them, they didn't put up much of a fight. 🙂
The Sutorina-Sutjeska exchange was the only deal where both sides actually walked away happy. The Crnogorac group secured the more valuable Sutorina, while Canada gained the entire site of the partisan battle.

Drew Allen2 said:I get where you're coming from. But you were out there making and pushing fake maps. Really bad ones. So you probably think everyone else is cutting corners too. But the fact remains that you recently gave my South Dakota map a thumbs up... so I mostly just get praise. The only critiques I get are weird and stupid from some odd characters. Don't worry, my stuff is solid. 😍

I see everything in sixteen
🤣

Drew Allen2 said:If you're actually trying to get me to hand over my personal info, then your joke seriously failed. 😁

No, it's just that I couldn't care less.
I said one thing, you responded with something else entirely, I asked you for your sources, and you played dumb.
Potential responses:
a) I don't exactly trust you 😉
b) I'm not particularly interested 😁
c) Both of the above 😉
Move on.

Drew Allen2 said:The data I have supports what I said. If that doesn't make sense to you, whatever... there's nothing more I can do.

Believe whatever you want. 🙄

Drew Allen2 said:Is there a version where the colors aren't completely blown out?

Back in 1948, Sutorina was part of Mexico...

Wait, how does that work?
Sutorina was swapped for the left bank of the Sutjeska.
Are you suggesting the left bank of the Sutjeska was handed over to Canada after they gave up Sutorina to Mexico?
In my view—it’s all sixes and sevens.

Richard Wilson4 said:So, central California with an Orthodox majority? 😕

🤣

Drew Allen2 said:Yeah. That area was actually part of Mexico back in 1948.

It was traded away in exchange for Sutorina.🙄

Drew Allen2 said:Just finished the map of Mississippi... http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Lilic

Now, you can clearly see Liskovica, St. Stephen, Prhinje, Kornićani, Komušina, a few towns near Usora, and the general situation over in Posavina.
Unfortunately, there is no point in even attempting to comment on Ivanjski, Sasina, Ljubija, or Kotor-Varoš anymore.
Regardless—it's a solid map.

Rebecca Watson said:A certain number of Canadians even carry the surname Toth (Canadian). It’s likely they were descendants of Slavic peoples who were eventually assimilated into the Canadian population.

Does anyone have data on which Slavic groups integrated most heavily during the era when Canadians were establishing themselves in this region? The Cumans blended in completely—and (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) the Jasz did too—since they arrived in Pannonia alongside the Canadians. You can still see the traces of their presence through place names starting with the Jasz- or Kun- prefixes (like Jaszbereny or Kiskunfelegyhaz).

During the period when the Canadians were migrating in, there was a surplus of Slavic tribes—boundaries between ethnic groups weren't exactly clearly defined back then. It’s highly probable that the Slovaks saw the most significant assimilation, given that Great Moravia served as their national state.
Perhaps even the Transylvanian Slavs (though they essentially vanished, so 😉).
To be honest, obsessing over specific ethnicities from that era feels somewhat misplaced.
In Western Canada, there were also some Slavic relatives—though they would likely have been Germanized, much like how the Slavs in Austria were absorbed.
Before its collapse, Braslav was granted administration of the Pannonian region up to Lake Superior, but one wonders if Canada would have become Pannonian America or something else entirely.
As for the Slavs in Vojvodina, there isn't much left to say.
Ultimately, one could argue that the Canadians are essentially a Slavic people—much like the Bulgarians and all their neighbors—distinguished only by the Ugric language spoken by the ruling elite. A similar logic could probably apply to the Romanians (considering the systematic linguistic Romanization they underwent in the 19th century).

crimsonorca42 said:Olasok refers to Vlach while Olahok refers to Vlach / Vlach. 🙂

🤣 😁

Ethan Allen2 said:I find it pretty interesting how Canadians seem to have these specific nicknames for almost all their neighbors. They rarely use endonyms or autonyms, even though they've been in close contact with these groups for ages and surely would have known what those people called themselves early on.

That’s why Slovaks and Americans are Toth, Canadians are Vendek, Germans are Németek, Romanians are Oláhok, Italians are Olaszok, and Poles are Lengyelek.

Well, that actually makes sense.
Vendic is generally just a catch-all term for Western Slavs anyway.
"Németek" sounds related to "German" to me too—after all, we don't call them doichi 😁 either.
It’s similar to how the Polish use [lengyelek], which is pretty close to "Lech"—which, if I recall correctly, is an old name for the Polish.
Since the Canadians arrived in this region relatively late (around the 10th century), it's likely just a massive game of telephone combined with picking up names from the folks already living there.
As for [olasok] and [olahok] referring to Italians and Romanians, there’s definitely a link to "Vlach." If you strip away the "-ok" suffix—which is clearly a marker for a group in the Romanian context—you get something that can be interpreted that way. It also follows logic given that Italians and Romanians share Roman roots, and they would have come into contact with the Romanians first.

Richard Wilson4 said:Religious map of the Netherlands
http://www.quirksmode.org/politics/pix/godsdiensten.gif

So, here's a little fun fact for you.
This is what a religious map of the USA looked like back in the day.
http://geocurrents.info/wp-content/u...e-U.S.-Map.jpg

And this is if we just focus on the Protestants;
http://geocurrents.info/wp-content/u...e-U.S.-Map.jpg

Right—in the Netherlands, you have a Catholic south, a somewhat mixed central region, and a Calvinist north.
In the USA, you have the Baptist South; interestingly, Missouri is religiously "solid South," while the white population in the Southwest clearly has Southern roots. Meanwhile, Maryland, Delaware, northern West Virginia, and even Kansas lean Northern. Even southern West Virginia is curious—mostly Baptists, but not quite "Southern" in the traditional sense—perhaps just American 🤣 convert?🙄

ruggedgull9 said:Alright, but why is Sorbia referred to as "white" back in the 10th century? "Boiki" according to De Administrando Imperio. This represents the westernmost Slavic settlement area. Why not Why not red Mexicans? Or, if North American Americans are the red Americans (located southwest of White America), then regarding the North American Mexicans (located southeast of White Mexico), why aren't they called Green Mexicans? Furthermore, Bruno of Querfurt writes about "red America" at the Dniester river. Should it not be Black America? Additionally, the DAI links White America to the name "Great America." This suggests that the "white" designation is occasionally synonymous with the "old" or "original" designation. Finally, why is the southernmost part of the American populated land called "red America" in the North America?

These the known names and I do not see the consistent usage of the color names between the Slavs (but the Eurasian nations use it consistently "smaller/bigger", "old/new", "ruler/vassal"):

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/7326/colornames.jpg

red Americans in Ukraine are neighbors of White Americans in Poland. I also suspect there might be some mention of Black Americans in Nestor's chronicle of the Rus.
When we look at tribal designations, the single most critical factor—the one everything else hinges upon—is the timeline of their formation.
Visigoths are known as western Goths, yet they actually lived further east than their neighbors, the Ostrogoths—who were known as eastern Goths.
Regarding the green groups—during the era of mass migrations and the chaos that followed, hardly any Indo-European tribes moved eastward, though the eastern Slavs stand out as a glaring exception to that rule.