Historische Regionen Europas [v1.2]

Cool map. Too many colors used IMHO

I don’t want to download unknown files.

Are there not local names for much of Norway? The eastern/western/southern thing seems arbitrary.

It’s a total mess with wrong names and meaningless regions.

Most of what you chose to represent German regions are quite recent creations, the actual historic regions are usually much, much smaller. One example: Württemberg (two T) in the borders shown only existed from 1806ish (when ignoring the Prussian lands within) and included lots of former territories with different dialects, cultures and religions.

I think you need to take a step back here to redefine your work. One of the first thing that appears to be missing from my first reading of the map is a date or at least a century.

Because, in addition to the various valid points made by others, I wonder if these “historical” regions existed all, together, at the same time. I think it relates to what you define as an historical region as well.

I don’t know much about Europe’s regions, but North Africa (Maghreb) is kind of wrong and under divided.

There’s more to Maghreb than Fez, there’s Merrakesh, the city that quite literally gave Morroco’s name, and the Rif

Same for Algeria, i mean pretty sure there are plenty more regions of historical significance beyond the majority berber regions of Kabylia and Aurès, like Algiers/Icoseum and Oran.

And how can you forget CARTHAGE!!!

As a Portuguese, I gotta say that Douro Is a wine region, but not a cultural/territorial/administrative region

Where are we the Turks? Are we still in Siberia back then?

Crazy hodgepodge. Your Baden is a Napoleon era creation, so ~1800 and strictly a nobility/political entity. Mercia on the other hand stopped being a thing in the 9th century and was probably forgotten even in the perception of the locals by 1100. Your Kurdistan never existed in these borders politically, culturally or by any other metric. The lower palatinate to my knowledge has always been just “the” Palatinate. Angria is a seriously weird choice. We barely have any sources about it really existing and German Wikipedia doesn’t even have an article on it. If it ever was a proper region it was forgotten and irrelevant by 1000AD. It’s just Saxony.

Shout-out to Upper Austria for just not changing at all (I’m from there lol)

[Here](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bd/Ancient_Estonian_counties.png/1280px-Ancient_Estonian_counties.png) is a map of ancient Estonian counties vs. foreign imperial arbitrary divisions of the country

They are relevant at the very least in an international context because from the Ugandi county, Latvia got its name for Estonia (Igaunija), from Virumaa Finland got its name for Estonia (Viro)

Edit: and [here](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Estonia) you can read about the history of Ancient Estonia including about our vikings from Saaremaa 🙂

For Denmark: “Jutland”/”Jylland” generally refers to the peninsula as a whole, and thus generally also includes Sønderjylland/Schleswig, historically. The area depicted on the map is historically referred to as “Nørrejylland”. Bornholm is considered its own historic region. Lolland-Falster historically was NOT paired with Sjælland prior to the 1970 administrative reforms.. historically it was seen as its own province, or was even paired with Fyn.

for v1.3:
Kur-Aras region of Azerbaijan seem to be a bit south than it should be. pls correct that

When? What do you mean by historical in this context? I think your problem is that you try to cram multiple millennia’s worth of history and context into one map. How regions are used and defined has changed and might also not be the same depending on who you ask.

What you have set out to do might be impossible but I wish you luck.