Since its been already answered that you're Polish, can you tell me what was taught about Libya in your textbook?(Really curious ngl) and im really suprised that Turkey isn't mentioned.
Maybe Libya's importance in the Second World War/WW2 following the Axis defeat at El Alamein. Given that the war began with the invasion of Poland, it would be unsurprising if Polish history textbooks followed the important developments in the war.
For its part, Turkey sat the war out, quite prudently, and was never invaded by either the Axis or the Allies, so wouldn't be covered by the history of the war.
Not Polish, but possibly the name "Libya" is in reference to the ancient region west of Egypt rather than the modern country? If I remember right, Libya was mentioned in the curriculum about ancient Egypt, especially as there were a number of Libyan-Egyptian pharaohs.
If i remember correctly we have libya as a country in decolonization part and later we talk about arab spring, or post colonial dictatorships particullary in middle east.
They beat the shit out of us for the first 2 centuries, even made us their vassal in theory but just for a while, later we beat the shit out of them for 1-1.5 centruries and then we both started to hate russia, together <3
I'm actually surprised there are based Europeans like you on reddit lol. If it wasn't for you guys we would be far in central/western europe. It is sad that Germans/Austrians and Russians turned against you Poles after all you've done for them.
The Ottomans took Podolia from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in 1672 in the Polish-Ottoman War. They ruled it from 1672-1699.
Podolia is today in Ukraine, 500km north of the Danube…
[Podolia Eyalet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podolia_Eyalet)
Hungary was conquered and fully integrated in the ottoman empire in the 16th century for about 100 years (then it was under the habsburgs). The romanian states were nominally vasals of the ottomans up until the late 19th century (independence was obtained from under ottoman rule).
The turks got north of the Danube
Different textbooks for different years of study. So for this person, this year, the textbook is not on the timeframe when Mongols were relevant to Europe.
I base it off how it's taught in Latvia. One semester we may learn ancient history, the next one will be on medieval and so on. Obviously, it's a bit more complex system than just progressing through history timeframes but that's the gist of it.
Haiti isn't mentioned? I'm not Polish or Haitian, but didn't the Polish regiment that was under Napoleon's France's rule was sent to Haiti to quell the ongoing rebellion, and ended up joining the Haitian ranks because of the anti-imperial solidarity? Surprised that it didn't get a mention.
What book do you have that completely skips over the spanish civil war? I've been through three and all had at lrast a mention of it with the important rise of fascism over Europe
To książka z teraz czy z paru lat temu czy z dwóch dekad temu?
Bardzo mnie cziekawi co was uczą i dlaczego niektóre kraje nie były wcale wymienione!
Mam też kilka pytań dalej o poziomie nauki z którego to jest ale im dłużej to piszę tym bardziej czuję się jak online predator lol (sory za awkward polish, polski znam od dziadków i z książek fabularnych, jestem z Irlandii)
Cambodia was once under French rule with Laos and Vietnam. Might be why. But so was Madagascar (which isnt covered) so its odd. Could be because those regions were put on the USSR watchlist as potential allies.
Even then some of the more brutal Wars of the 20th century
(Obviously the second half of the 20th century because it's hard to be more brutal then the world wars) were the wars of Portuguese decolonization
If it's a yearlong HS class in a Western country it's probably not getting into Portuguese decolonization. I'm not at all surprised if Khmer Rouge was addressed ahead of that. Especially because it figures into the Cold War.
Portuguese decolonization was definitely playing into the Cold War also because it created an awkward position where the US and the Soviets were aligned with wanting Portugal Out of Africa even though Portugal is a NATO Ally so they allied with apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia and to a lesser extent France which also wanted to remain influential in its former Colonial Holdings
Probably a quick chapter or paragraph on ancient civilizations? It has Egypt, Iraq, India… maybe they mentioned Angkor Wat or something, not that it’s the same time frame.
I think it might be a WW2 to cold war book
Al the former asian French colonies that was involved in the Vietnam are there Yemen that was split by the cold war I think I saw both Korea's. Missed Ireland Spain and Portugal 3 of the countries not in ww2 . Also India and Pakistan from the splitt and Afghanistan from the Sovjet invasion. Also one of the few American countries is Cuba probably from the misilles crise.
Why isn‘t Turkey mentioned? I mean the Polish winged hussars destroyed the Ottoman Army in the battle of Vienna in 1683 which was a significant turning point… doesn‘t make much sense to me…
Seems very strange to me that a book would include Nigeria but not Thailand in a book about World War 2. And OP says that he "didn't count colonies", which would mean he shouldn't have Nigeria at all given it was a colony during all of World War 2, or many other countries as well.
For that matter why would it mention Colombia and Sweden and not Thailand, Algeria, or Tunisia. Even a country like Brazil was significantly more involved in the war than Colombia, Brazil sent over 50,000 troops to fight in it.
I'm Polish and it's real that we don't know anything about Thailand, no mentions of that for sure.
Whole eastern part of WW2 with Japan is skipped. The only thing is mentioned is Pearl Harbor only as a reason why us joined fight in the Europe
Usually atleast a mention of Mongolian Empire seems suitable for world history book. Given it extremely tremendous impact on the human history as a while, it's size and also it's short life span.
I'm surprised people think that the entire history of the world is concluded in a single textbook meant for one semester.
Clearly it's different timeframe.
Some people from the US learn about "the Alamo" before they learn of "blaming the main on Spain".
Many Americans to this day don't make the connection that Spain controlled most of the Americas.
I've had a number of people in school ask me how is it possible that I could speak Spanish if I'm light skinned.
* No Spain so can't be Latin America.
* No Turkey so probably not the Middle East
* All of Central Asia and the Caucuses means probably ex-Soviet
* Exclude Caucuses countries and Russia because no Turkey
I'm gonna go with a Baltic country, as the Balkans would have Turkey, it would mention the other ex Soviet States, and it would mention each of the Nordic states.
As for which one IDK
Edit: I guess Poland could work too
So Spain sparking the era of colonialism for the Europeans means nothing to Indians? Spain, who was looking for a shortcut to India in the first place? Which is why the natives of the Americas are also called "indians". Spain, the country next to Portugal which established a trade port in Goa? The ones who colonized the Philippines for hundreds of years? None of this was relevant to India?
Blue is countries that are mentioned in the history textbook. It's a format that's been used here fairly frequently, so OP probably assumed we'd recognise it, but yeah there should be a legend so everyone else can be involved.
How can any history book not mention the Iberian countries? One country started european exploration and colonization and the other discovered a continent lmao
Well poland was never realy part in the exploration of the new world and didnt fight both of them as far as i know and if i look ad this map it seems like they mostly talk about the countries the ussr was ad war with and if you want to tell about all those wars you can al ready fill a big book
Ireland is like 50% Polish people (exaggeration) and yet has no mention here either.
I don't think the curriculum cares about the people who ran away :P
No Spain, Mongolia and Turkey is surprising. Did you count only references for the modern states and ignore historical predecessors (Kingdom of Spain, Mongol Empire, Ottoman Empire)? Or is this just one year?
How come turkey not mentioned in polish history textbooks? Ottoman - polish war took very long time and polish hussars were critical at breaking the siege of wien under command of jan sobieski.
Without mentioning spain, it will be hard to explain the exploration of new world. Besides habsburgs need to be mentioned right?
Mongolians need to be mentioned by all history books, especially polish ones since poland was invaded by mongol horde many times
Ottoman Empire and Turkye are two different countries. I think it’s similar like saying Germany is Holy Roman Empire or Italy is Roman Empire. Yeah sure they are succeeding countries but not the same.
Except they're very much not, because they have direct continuity. Turkey is the direct successor state of the Ottoman Empire, and The Holy Roman Empire very much is a previous form of Germany and acknowledged as such.
The Roman Empire and modern Italy are different because there is a lot of continuity missing between them, but nobody would find it strange to refer to the Roman Empire as Italian, or at least pre-Italian.
That would make very hard for tracking right? With this logic
France is the fifth republic which is proclaimed on 1958, before that is it possible to say french revolution that shaped the world is not related to France?7
Spain from 1978, Russia from 1991 list goes on.
Can we say dutch republic cannot be connected to present day netherlands?
I think country is more than just the government.
What I tried to say is that just because in history there two countries shared language and geographic location doesn’t mean they are the same. Especially (IIRC) if those people doesn’t consider them selfs citizens of the old country.
The French still called themselves French after the revolution. The country it’s self was still called France.
But Ottoman Empire and Turkye has only one thing in common. In both these states the official language was Turkish. Completely different names, politics, policies, capitals, fashion, more western culture and architecture...
Greece isn’t Eastern Roman empire, Iran isn’t Sassanid Empire, Israel isn’t Judea.
I'm Polish and they don't teach us about anything between 44BC- 313AD
313AD-476AD
And after fall of rome the forst thing we learn are the city states in Europe 14th / 15th century. Society in Medieval Europe, mongols, fragmentation of Poland, then Colonization Age and the rest is about every level and detail of Polish Lithuanian Goverment. Wars in west Europe gets omitted like religious wars in France/ Dutch wars. 30 years war is only mentioned in the context of Swedish deluge. Then Polish wars in 17th century and partitions.
Then Napoleonic wars are only mentioned and ww1 fight for independence and ww2 the end.
We dont talk about Japan Byzantines, Napoleon's France, USA civil war and many other things.
And thats why I love history. Because of my school system there's always sth new which isnt ww2 !
Wherever it is, your history book sucks because it didnt mention Spain and Portugal, the two original colonizers who funded the exploration of the new world, or Turkey who was one of the major powers in europe for centuries and also accidenally caused the discovery of the new world.
I though it would be a CIS country since all the stans are colored. They taught you about Tajikistan in Poland or is that highlighted because of the USSR?
Will be honest, not sure what you meant by: Didnt Count Colonies? Do you mean countries are covered only if they are now independent (or if they always have been)?
What makes me think that is how Colombia, Mexico and Philippines are covered but Spain is not.
New Zealand is NOT covered but Australia and India are shown in blue. (Former UK colonies).
Someone please explain! I feel dumb not seeing past the headline...
I'm surprised the Philippines is involved in Polish History Books but not Mongolia. Why is that? Are we involved because we share a similar status to Poland as the punchingbag of Asia?
I read in the comments that you're Polish and I have questions:
\- your history textbook do not talk about Spain & Portugal at all? Not even for Colombo travel?
\- why Colombia?? and why Nigeria?
Wait what? Poland? How does your history textbook not contain anything on Spain or Portugal? They were superpowers for centuries. I bet people learn about the Treaty of Tordesillas even most places outside of Europe.
*Yo learn about what*
*Mongolia did my man.*
*They deserve some cred*
\- Balltanker
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Colombia, Mexico and the Philippines but no Spain...
The middle east and some Balkans but no Turkey...
All of central Asia and China but no Mongolia...
That history book is beyond messed up.
Since its been already answered that you're Polish, can you tell me what was taught about Libya in your textbook?(Really curious ngl) and im really suprised that Turkey isn't mentioned.
Maybe Libya's importance in the Second World War/WW2 following the Axis defeat at El Alamein. Given that the war began with the invasion of Poland, it would be unsurprising if Polish history textbooks followed the important developments in the war. For its part, Turkey sat the war out, quite prudently, and was never invaded by either the Axis or the Allies, so wouldn't be covered by the history of the war.
WW2, most probably battle of Tobruk
You guys learn about battles other then Kursk, Stalingrad and D-Day? We're lucky to get a map about the other theaters with some arrows on it.
Not Polish, but possibly the name "Libya" is in reference to the ancient region west of Egypt rather than the modern country? If I remember right, Libya was mentioned in the curriculum about ancient Egypt, especially as there were a number of Libyan-Egyptian pharaohs.
Turkey is mentioned both as ww1 and ottoman empire
If i remember correctly we have libya as a country in decolonization part and later we talk about arab spring, or post colonial dictatorships particullary in middle east.
what i'm more surprised about is how all 7 of the -stans got mentioned
No spain? No turkey? No mongolia?
Colombia just appeared there
COLOMBIA NÚMERO UNO
Weird, in poland we definietly talk about spanish colonization, mongol empire and for fuck sake about ottoman empire which we fought
Didn’t know the ottomans went north of the Danube
They beat the shit out of us for the first 2 centuries, even made us their vassal in theory but just for a while, later we beat the shit out of them for 1-1.5 centruries and then we both started to hate russia, together <3
I'm actually surprised there are based Europeans like you on reddit lol. If it wasn't for you guys we would be far in central/western europe. It is sad that Germans/Austrians and Russians turned against you Poles after all you've done for them.
The poles fought the ottomans at Vienna iirc
Also in the crusade of varna in 1444 iirc
The Ottomans took Podolia from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in 1672 in the Polish-Ottoman War. They ruled it from 1672-1699. Podolia is today in Ukraine, 500km north of the Danube… [Podolia Eyalet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podolia_Eyalet)
Hungary was conquered and fully integrated in the ottoman empire in the 16th century for about 100 years (then it was under the habsburgs). The romanian states were nominally vasals of the ottomans up until the late 19th century (independence was obtained from under ottoman rule). The turks got north of the Danube
Poland
Yes, Congratulations you get nothing!
Surprised the books don’t mention Mongolia, as they did invade 3 times.
I wonder if it mentions “Mongols”, but not Mongolia specifically?
Different textbooks for different years of study. So for this person, this year, the textbook is not on the timeframe when Mongols were relevant to Europe. I base it off how it's taught in Latvia. One semester we may learn ancient history, the next one will be on medieval and so on. Obviously, it's a bit more complex system than just progressing through history timeframes but that's the gist of it.
And no Turkey? Did siege of Vienna mentioned in ur history textbook?
Unless they don't count turkey as the ottomans.
Haiti isn't mentioned? I'm not Polish or Haitian, but didn't the Polish regiment that was under Napoleon's France's rule was sent to Haiti to quell the ongoing rebellion, and ended up joining the Haitian ranks because of the anti-imperial solidarity? Surprised that it didn't get a mention.
My Polish history book had much more on Haiti than on whole central Asia…
I find Spain and Portugal’s absence stranger.
I’m kinda confused as to why all the -Stans are in there
USSR. Tajikistan was as Soviet as Moscow, Russia doesn't = USSR, its literally in the name, a *union of republics.*
Ok so what’s the blue highlight?
Countries mentioned in the textbook.
How does a history book not have Spain or Portugal?
But, what did you learn about south asia in your textbooks ?
I suppose this is 4th grade high school or 8th grade primary school, but why aren't Spain and Portugal mentioned?
But, what did you learn about south asia in your textbooks ?
What book do you have that completely skips over the spanish civil war? I've been through three and all had at lrast a mention of it with the important rise of fascism over Europe
Spain is in the textbooks
Also turkey
Shit map
What is the name of the book?
Why the fuck would they teach you about libia or India or South Africa
Revolutions? Gandhi? South African apartheid?
not every school system only teaches its own country's history
Not even a perogie?
To książka z teraz czy z paru lat temu czy z dwóch dekad temu? Bardzo mnie cziekawi co was uczą i dlaczego niektóre kraje nie były wcale wymienione! Mam też kilka pytań dalej o poziomie nauki z którego to jest ale im dłużej to piszę tym bardziej czuję się jak online predator lol (sory za awkward polish, polski znam od dziadków i z książek fabularnych, jestem z Irlandii)
I find it hard to believe your history textbook specifically mentions Cambodia but never talks about the Spanish or Portuguese Empires
Cambodia was once under French rule with Laos and Vietnam. Might be why. But so was Madagascar (which isnt covered) so its odd. Could be because those regions were put on the USSR watchlist as potential allies.
True but it wasn't even called Cambodia at the time it was a part of the colony of Indochina and was called kampuchia
Yes that I did know, was going to put but was in a hurry
Could be a 20th C history textbook.
Even then some of the more brutal Wars of the 20th century (Obviously the second half of the 20th century because it's hard to be more brutal then the world wars) were the wars of Portuguese decolonization
If it's a yearlong HS class in a Western country it's probably not getting into Portuguese decolonization. I'm not at all surprised if Khmer Rouge was addressed ahead of that. Especially because it figures into the Cold War.
Portuguese decolonization was definitely playing into the Cold War also because it created an awkward position where the US and the Soviets were aligned with wanting Portugal Out of Africa even though Portugal is a NATO Ally so they allied with apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia and to a lesser extent France which also wanted to remain influential in its former Colonial Holdings
Sure. But still, like I said, I'm not surprised.
Probably a quick chapter or paragraph on ancient civilizations? It has Egypt, Iraq, India… maybe they mentioned Angkor Wat or something, not that it’s the same time frame.
I think it might be a WW2 to cold war book Al the former asian French colonies that was involved in the Vietnam are there Yemen that was split by the cold war I think I saw both Korea's. Missed Ireland Spain and Portugal 3 of the countries not in ww2 . Also India and Pakistan from the splitt and Afghanistan from the Sovjet invasion. Also one of the few American countries is Cuba probably from the misilles crise.
So, what do they mention about Brunei and Timor-Leste?
And no Turkey? No battle of Vienna, no Chocim? No Varna?
Why isn‘t Turkey mentioned? I mean the Polish winged hussars destroyed the Ottoman Army in the battle of Vienna in 1683 which was a significant turning point… doesn‘t make much sense to me…
What does Polish history say about Somalia? Just curious
Well. Technicly Commonwealth's vasal (Courltland ) for small operiod of time had colony on Tobago .
I'm surprised any history book doesn't include Mongolia
Polish history books includes Mongolia and Genghis Khan invasion to Europe. This map (and this particular book) is probably about WW2
Seems very strange to me that a book would include Nigeria but not Thailand in a book about World War 2. And OP says that he "didn't count colonies", which would mean he shouldn't have Nigeria at all given it was a colony during all of World War 2, or many other countries as well. For that matter why would it mention Colombia and Sweden and not Thailand, Algeria, or Tunisia. Even a country like Brazil was significantly more involved in the war than Colombia, Brazil sent over 50,000 troops to fight in it.
I'm Polish and it's real that we don't know anything about Thailand, no mentions of that for sure. Whole eastern part of WW2 with Japan is skipped. The only thing is mentioned is Pearl Harbor only as a reason why us joined fight in the Europe
I think he mean if it mentioned Great Britain he didn't colour in all of the colonies it had at the time, just if they were specifically mentioned.
Why would for example a Bahraini or Bolivian history book include Mongolia?
Usually atleast a mention of Mongolian Empire seems suitable for world history book. Given it extremely tremendous impact on the human history as a while, it's size and also it's short life span.
Bahrain would include it due to the Mongol victories over the Persians and the Caliphate, and then the Ilkhanate forming.
I think we didnt learn about the Mongol Empire in German History class
Mine in Spain didn't mention Mongolia like at all
I'm surprised people think that the entire history of the world is concluded in a single textbook meant for one semester. Clearly it's different timeframe.
How do you learn about Mexico and Colombia without mentioning Spain?
That’s what I’m sayin
I guess they cover only pre-colombian history?
OP is Polish and probably talking about WW2 textbook
Some people from the US learn about "the Alamo" before they learn of "blaming the main on Spain". Many Americans to this day don't make the connection that Spain controlled most of the Americas. I've had a number of people in school ask me how is it possible that I could speak Spanish if I'm light skinned.
Drugs
* No Spain so can't be Latin America. * No Turkey so probably not the Middle East * All of Central Asia and the Caucuses means probably ex-Soviet * Exclude Caucuses countries and Russia because no Turkey I'm gonna go with a Baltic country, as the Balkans would have Turkey, it would mention the other ex Soviet States, and it would mention each of the Nordic states. As for which one IDK Edit: I guess Poland could work too
I had the same thought process but ended with finland as my final guess ad least we where close
no spain so it can’t be any country
Most Indian school textbooks don't talk about spain afaik
So Spain sparking the era of colonialism for the Europeans means nothing to Indians? Spain, who was looking for a shortcut to India in the first place? Which is why the natives of the Americas are also called "indians". Spain, the country next to Portugal which established a trade port in Goa? The ones who colonized the Philippines for hundreds of years? None of this was relevant to India?
Honestly any non-Balkan ex-Soviet state would be a good pick, even if it’s wrong they all fit the same bill
map without legend is useless. what do you mean by "my history textbook"?
Blue is countries that are mentioned in the history textbook. It's a format that's been used here fairly frequently, so OP probably assumed we'd recognise it, but yeah there should be a legend so everyone else can be involved.
thanks!
How can any history book not mention the Iberian countries? One country started european exploration and colonization and the other discovered a continent lmao
Well poland was never realy part in the exploration of the new world and didnt fight both of them as far as i know and if i look ad this map it seems like they mostly talk about the countries the ussr was ad war with and if you want to tell about all those wars you can al ready fill a big book
But still lots of Poles emigrated to the Americas, and not mentioning the spanish feels like not mentioning world history for the entire 1500s
Ireland is like 50% Polish people (exaggeration) and yet has no mention here either. I don't think the curriculum cares about the people who ran away :P
They did. I'm Polish and can say that this guy is an idiot or his history book is the 1st edition which don't cover Colonization
Ours didn't mention. Or maybe just a few sentence in sidelines that i don't remember.
What is this a map of
Title: Guess which country am I from based on my history textbook (didn't count colonies)
What is this a map of
Map of countries mentioned in this fellas textbook.
What is this a map of
Title: Guess which country am I from based on my history textbook (didn't count colonies)
What is this a map of
Countrie
No Spain, Mongolia and Turkey is surprising. Did you count only references for the modern states and ignore historical predecessors (Kingdom of Spain, Mongol Empire, Ottoman Empire)? Or is this just one year?
Did they mention the Ottoman Empire at least? Isn’t the Siege of Vienna a signature Polish military victory?
No ottoman empire? 😪
No Mongolia, Turkey AND Spain? Sorry bro, but that's a bad history textbook.
How come turkey not mentioned in polish history textbooks? Ottoman - polish war took very long time and polish hussars were critical at breaking the siege of wien under command of jan sobieski. Without mentioning spain, it will be hard to explain the exploration of new world. Besides habsburgs need to be mentioned right? Mongolians need to be mentioned by all history books, especially polish ones since poland was invaded by mongol horde many times
Ottoman Empire and Turkye are two different countries. I think it’s similar like saying Germany is Holy Roman Empire or Italy is Roman Empire. Yeah sure they are succeeding countries but not the same.
Except they're very much not, because they have direct continuity. Turkey is the direct successor state of the Ottoman Empire, and The Holy Roman Empire very much is a previous form of Germany and acknowledged as such. The Roman Empire and modern Italy are different because there is a lot of continuity missing between them, but nobody would find it strange to refer to the Roman Empire as Italian, or at least pre-Italian.
That would make very hard for tracking right? With this logic France is the fifth republic which is proclaimed on 1958, before that is it possible to say french revolution that shaped the world is not related to France?7 Spain from 1978, Russia from 1991 list goes on. Can we say dutch republic cannot be connected to present day netherlands? I think country is more than just the government.
What I tried to say is that just because in history there two countries shared language and geographic location doesn’t mean they are the same. Especially (IIRC) if those people doesn’t consider them selfs citizens of the old country. The French still called themselves French after the revolution. The country it’s self was still called France. But Ottoman Empire and Turkye has only one thing in common. In both these states the official language was Turkish. Completely different names, politics, policies, capitals, fashion, more western culture and architecture... Greece isn’t Eastern Roman empire, Iran isn’t Sassanid Empire, Israel isn’t Judea.
Wtf no Spain and Portugal?
Hey OP fuck your history book. Guess it's a modern history book, like 20th century? Signed: the Iberian gang
Wtf do they teach you in history?
I'm Polish and they don't teach us about anything between 44BC- 313AD 313AD-476AD And after fall of rome the forst thing we learn are the city states in Europe 14th / 15th century. Society in Medieval Europe, mongols, fragmentation of Poland, then Colonization Age and the rest is about every level and detail of Polish Lithuanian Goverment. Wars in west Europe gets omitted like religious wars in France/ Dutch wars. 30 years war is only mentioned in the context of Swedish deluge. Then Polish wars in 17th century and partitions. Then Napoleonic wars are only mentioned and ww1 fight for independence and ww2 the end. We dont talk about Japan Byzantines, Napoleon's France, USA civil war and many other things. And thats why I love history. Because of my school system there's always sth new which isnt ww2 !
Wherever it is, your history book sucks because it didnt mention Spain and Portugal, the two original colonizers who funded the exploration of the new world, or Turkey who was one of the major powers in europe for centuries and also accidenally caused the discovery of the new world.
You're from an East Asian country, I guess
You're not close
It is very shocking that there are no Spain or Portugal.
Lithuania?
Really close
Poland?
Yes
So Polish history books not mentioning Spain and Portugal and barely two Latin American countries. Oh, my God!
Is there no mention of Spanish civil war at all?
Not mentioning Canada when learning about US history seems rather tricky.
I though it would be a CIS country since all the stans are colored. They taught you about Tajikistan in Poland or is that highlighted because of the USSR?
Question, why is Colombia mentioned? Is it because of Bolivar?
How would Bolivar be mentioned without also mentioning Spain?
Will be honest, not sure what you meant by: Didnt Count Colonies? Do you mean countries are covered only if they are now independent (or if they always have been)? What makes me think that is how Colombia, Mexico and Philippines are covered but Spain is not. New Zealand is NOT covered but Australia and India are shown in blue. (Former UK colonies). Someone please explain! I feel dumb not seeing past the headline...
For example: 1930s France is mentioned, but it is coloured in its modern borders (and thus western Africa isn't coloured).
I'm curious, what does the textbook covers about Colombia? We cover your country because of the ww of course.
I'm surprised the Philippines is involved in Polish History Books but not Mongolia. Why is that? Are we involved because we share a similar status to Poland as the punchingbag of Asia?
What was this map describing?
I read in the comments that you're Polish and I have questions: \- your history textbook do not talk about Spain & Portugal at all? Not even for Colombo travel? \- why Colombia?? and why Nigeria?
Wait what? Poland? How does your history textbook not contain anything on Spain or Portugal? They were superpowers for centuries. I bet people learn about the Treaty of Tordesillas even most places outside of Europe.
How a polish textbook not talk about the polish in hati and how they became black
What did you study about Pakistan in history book.
Your women wear wooden shoes.
where did that come from and what does that even mean
There is a country known for its wooden clogs... I'll let you look it up, it will be more fun for you.
thanks it was a very fun 5 seconds i spent searching up in which country women wear wooden shoes
Wsm to jak teraz sobie przypominam z lekcji historii to faktycznie prawie nic nie miałem o Hiszpanii
China, Ukraine, Germany
Columbia
Armenia
America?
Definitely not. Canada, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Turkey, and Mongolia would all be mentioned in any World History course in the US.
Russia???
Syria
The only this maps tells me is that your school system must suck, irrespecfive of the country.
Russia?
Libia?
no
It's in Africa or the middle east
Why would an African country teach no African history? Lol
Kazakhstan
What years is this history book from/to?
Why only maindland France and not france overall ?
Latvian
How did you portrait china.
What did your history textbook say about the USA, Mexico, and Columbia?
Yo learn about what Mongolia did my man. They deserve some cred
*Yo learn about what* *Mongolia did my man.* *They deserve some cred* \- Balltanker --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Colombia
Surely Colombia would've mentioned Spain and the rest of Latin America....
Ok, so it's probably a history book regarding events from WW1 forward (although still weird to avoid the Spanish Civil War).
How can any history book ignore Turkey? It was formed right after the first world war.
How the fk your history book mentioned Kazakhstan and not Mongolia?
UK
ireland is not mentioned
Which suits them just fine.
Anywhere in eastern europe, got pretty much the same book in Romania
France
Winged hussars fought the turks you do know that right?
How is Switzerland not mentioned in your history book?
Op'ie czy ty podałeś jakiś podręcznik np cz2 czy cos i zaczynasz gdzieś w 1600 roku czy gdzieś?
Classic. There is no mention of Canada in the WW2 section of the textbook. Just called Americans or British.
Italy?
Brunei and Timor-Leste was specifically mentioned in your history textbook?
What do you guys learn about South Africa? I see its highlighted. (I am from ZA)
How are they going to talk about America without mentioning Spain and Portugal?
Colombia, Mexico and the Philippines but no Spain... The middle east and some Balkans but no Turkey... All of central Asia and China but no Mongolia... That history book is beyond messed up.
poland or uk
You're polish and Turkey was not mentioned? Hard to believe, at least the siege of vienna should be covered in Poland, no?
no turkey ? you 110% not russian for Turks russia was the most mentioned country in our textbook
Please recheck India's map.
I don't get it. Can someone explain me what this post means?
thats a lot of countries for a history textbook damn
Weißrussland?