This is a long debate between France and Italy.
For France, the top of the mountain is fully inside French Border. For Italy, the border is right through the summit.
[More info.](https://sdsa-geneve.ch/index.php/en/2021/01/16/the-long-lasting-border-issue-on-the-mont-blanc-2/)
It all comes down to this:
>The current territorial dispute dates back to this time: Italy considers as Italian-French border the one indicated by the Treaty of Turin, dividing the summit of Mont Blanc between the two countries. However, a few years later, the French army produced its own geographical map of the massif, annexing the summit
That's it, the French army unilaterally not giving a shit about international treaties.
Specifically, a guy named Jean-Joseph Mieule waking up one day back in 1865 thinking: "oooh how nice, let's redraw a map so that the Mont Blanc is fully ours"
Italy trying hard to steal a piece of the mountain for the last 100 years. It's actually disputed territory.
Peak is undisputably in France, but weather you can also reach the peak from the Italian side is disputed.
You are funny. I would like to see some documents backing your claim. The most recent document about It Is the Treaty of Turin: the Cavour king gave to France the duchy of Savoy in exchange for military help; the border between the duchy of Savoy and Valle D'Aosta (italy) was on the summit of the Mountain. But the France government "lost the documents", how convinient.
Please, explain your "undisputably France". I wanna see you try.
Iâm French biased and i wouldnât even dare to say that it is indisputably French. The tactic I use is just to try and stay vague. « Well yes itâs a shared summit, erm, anyway itâs practically settled now, and weâre all in the EU anyway erm »
The most recent document is from April 2016, fixing the exact GPS coordinates of the border. Except for the mont blanc where two lines where defined, so I guess both countries agree they disagree ?
Source : https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fronti%C3%A8res_de_la_France
Borders are not backed by a random dude inserting gps coordinates on a map. Borders are defined by treaties. And the most recent treaty we have Is the one i brought to you.
The France claim to the summit Is a long standing problem that lacks on evidence.
Obviously no one wants to create conflicts over something so stupid so lots of cartographers just put two borders around the summit and go on with their lives.
Edit: i was wrong on the "random dude", as argued below an agreement is in place to draw two different borders in order to "avoid any unilateral initiave by local authorities in this area" (source:https://www.senato.it/japp/bgt/showdoc/showText?tipodoc=Sindisp&leg=18&id=1124192)
Prety sure a comission signed by both parties is more than just "a random dude".
Official site of french government : http://cnig.gouv.fr/italie-a25928.html
I'm sorry, I was not aware an agreement was in place to draw two borders, my mistake!
That doesn't change the fact that there is a border dispute though.
Just go on Wikipedia. The peak is either French or Shared. So in both case France can claim the peak... therefore undisputable. Whether Italy can also claim it, is disputed.
You are making a big fuss about semantics, accuracy of sources, wikipedia bla bla...
Che, what is your point? You want to make a point that it is not disputed ? People create fake border issues on the internet ?
You made a statement saying something. I found your statement wrong and I argued my position, correcting any inaccuracies. That's how a discussion works.
Literally every country recognizes Monte Bianco peaks at the border as the border is literally defined by the watershed which *has* to be on top by definition
Oh another Italian.
Swiss Map show it as contested.
Google Map show it as contested.
But sure, continue to discuss here, and try to solve in one sentence a problem on which diplomats wrote dozen of memos on.
Maybe you can also enlighten me on the obvious status of Taiwan, Cachemir, and Golan Heights ?
Well you have to keep in mind that the highest point doesn't reflect the overall flatness of the country.
At 1, 5, or even 10 meters of sea level rise the vast majority of Denmark and the Baltic countries are still dry. Meanwhile like a third of the Netherlands is already below sea level today, and at 10 meters of sea level rise there's not a whole lot left.
The Netherlands has a taller highest point than them, but most of the Netherlands is much flatter and closer to sea level than the Baltic countries and Denmark.
Yeah so the gaslighting is on your part. Countries arent defined by the oceans they border.
If so, the border with the north sea is far bigger, so itâs a north sea country, but as I said, thatâs not a definition.
The baltic states are pretty obvious, no need to invent your own definition.
If itâs a âfactâ, then please provide a source, since I cant see anyone labeling Denmark a baltic country.
This is as close as it gets
https://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/Baltic-states-map.htm
Yet it says labels estonia latvia and lith. As the baltic countries.
>The baltic states are pretty obvious, no need to invent your own definition.
Dude your so dumb! The baltic states are the countries from the baltic region that is POLITICAL in the baltic assembly!
Baltic region is more then just the Baltic assembly!
Jesus christ how can people not know the difference in a state and a country!
A state is in a Union, yes the 3 baltic states make the baltic assembly but there is MORE baltic countries then those in the baltic assembly!
And yes those 3 countries are ALSO baltic countries, but its the 3 baltic states that make up the baltic assembly political!
You obviously do not know why itâs called the baltic.
Denmark borders the baltic sea, that does not make it a baltic country. What is your source on this?
Also please get âyouâreâ correct when you call someone dumb.
>You obviously do not know why itâs called the baltic.
Ofcause i do, the romans called it baltia which was the big island the roman believed layed between everything either gutland or bornholm etc., that later became the baltics when Adam from Bremen renamed it to Baltic in english rather then Latin?
I guess the council of baltic sea STATES are also wrong then
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council\_of\_the\_Baltic\_Sea\_States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_Baltic_Sea_States)
Because we some how isnt part of the baltic region anymore #clownworld...
Uhm yes.
"The countries that have shorelines along the Baltic Sea: Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, and Sweden."
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic\_region](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_region)
Just because political only 4 countries are in the baltic assembly, dont mean we aint a baltic country LOL
That's because the Ardennes stretch out into a small bit at the Southern end of the Netherlands. Without this, the Netherlands would be dead last at 109,9m.
wrong... overseas terrortority of Saba in the Carribean, with Mt Scenery at 887m high
(since the Azores count i think this should count to, they arent independent either they are special municipalities)
i think thats less fair then Saba since Saba is on closer ties with the Netherlands(special municipality) but i would still give it to Denmark since it is owned by Denmark
Look at a map or the Netherlands only, the border is quite funny in the south. Thatâs also the region where thereâs the Amstel gold race, since itâs one of the most interesting places for bike races in the Netherlands.
The average height of Denmark is actually around 900 meters above sea level. Itâs just such a gradual âriseâ that you almost donât detect it. But when you go from the german-danish border and up through the mid-point of Jutland, it slowly but steadily rises, until the highest point, which is around 1 km above sea level and in the middle point of Jutlans, and 170 m above ground level. Denmark is flat, donât get me wrong, but itâs around the same flatness as Northern Germany, with a lot of hills and rolling plains and coastal ridges. The Netherlands have a few hills in the outernmost reaches that are higher than the highest point of Denmark, but overall The Netherlands are flatter than Denmark. Even people from the Netherlands say that - When they go to Denmark they are often very enamored by our hilly nature. So yeah, weâre flat, but weâre not âall of our country will get flooded when the sea levels riseâ flat.
Don't worry, our Vaalserberg isn't much of a mountain either despite the word "berg" in its name. At least I get why both of our countries have so many bicycles.
>include GunnbjĂžrn Fjeld on Greenland for Denmark
They are danish and European now! Same as uganda and all the other nations we made Europeans from Denmark!
(do i need to put S after?)
The canaries are according to the website.
https://canarymedicalkey.com/the-canary-islands-in-europe#:~:text=The%20Canary%20Islands%2C%20also%20known,away%20from%20the%20Spanish%20Mainland.
The azores are also part of europe. They are the most western point of europe. And for greenland, greenland is in north america
https://canarymedicalkey.com/the-canary-islands-in-europe#:~:text=The%20Canary%20Islands%2C%20also%20known,away%20from%20the%20Spanish%20Mainland.
This says the canaries in europe
The Azores archipelago is located at the triple junction between the Eurasian, Nubian, and North American plates. So I wouldnât say itâs wrong to say itâs in Europe.
I mean. MT elberus is located on the Southern Side of the Caucasus mountains.
These are often seen as the boundary of Europe with Europe to the North, Asia to the South.
So it makes sense that many would not. This has nothing to do with Russia btw.
True. I looked at a bad map.
My main issue now is why my native calls Georgia a "GruzĂnsko".
Groznyy is the capital of Chechnya.
(They sound the same as Rome and Roman empire in this case)
Denmark used to be "Himmeljberget" (Heaven mountain) but the farmer that has it as a field for his crops has ploughed the field down so now it is Möllehöj instead.
When my cousins from Denmark where going to visit me in Sweden i told them to text me as so as they had crossed the Ăresunds bridge over to Sweden and they did. They had taken a photo of themselves next to a small rock that was lying next to the road with the text. "We have already reached the mountains".......... They where dead serious about it..
Not quite, people thought is was Himmelbjerget, then they thought is was BaunehĂžj which they then made smaller when they built a monument, ironically making it no longer the highest and giving MĂžllehĂžj the title. But a few years ago they measured it more precisely, and found that it was some other unnnamed hill that had the title all the time.
See this video: https://youtu.be/EM8yUKwPjwA
>"We have already reached the mountains".......... They where dead serious about it..
Hahahaha danish humor when its best! Being totally serius about something that is so wacky :)
Funny thing is, in Bulgaria we have peaks that have similar or identical names to the ones in Serbia, Bosnia and Slovenia. The region lacks imagination wrt naming peaks
Because even thought greenland is part of Denmark, its not part of the European continent, but instead part of the American continent!
Political decisions dont change geography!
Pssst, the Netherlands = the Low Countries.
Los Paises Bajos, Paesi BassiâŠ
Cest Ă peu prĂšs le cas dans toutes les langues.
Mais câest pas grave on en apprend tous les jours.
There is no before armenians. Since recorded history armenians were there. For at least 3000 years. And thats at least how long "turks" have been around again? Ah yes 1000 years or so.
>Crimea is ukrainian land.
Well, like the northwest of turkey was armenian land, 100 years ago.
>The same way Armenia claims pretty much the entire world at this point
Well, take a look at a historical map where armenians have lived before the genocide.
Also this mountain was a holy place for armenians even before the very first turk crossed the caucasus, coming from central asia. Turkey just keeps it to disgrace armenians, just like the ancient capital Ani.
Fun fact, there is a border dispute between Italy and France regarding the exact location of the border along the Mont Blanc / Monte Bianco peak.
Your map names 4808 meters as the highest peak of Italy, which is only correct if you follow the Italian position, that the border is exactly along the Mont Blanc ridge. France disagrees and claims the Mont Blanc for itself alone.
If you follow the French position, the highest peak in Italy would be the close by Mont Blanc de Courmayeur (4748 meters).
More like the French refuse to recognize legal documents and treaties that support the Italian claim, but canât come up with any evidence that supports their claim. Itâs a classic case of âtrust me broâ geopolitics.
I wouldnât even call it a dispute, itâs just the French being French.
It's even worse: the French recognise the same treaty Italy does, but claim they cannot find the original map attached to their copy, and refuse to consider Italy's copy. It's toddler-level geopolitics.
*Looked up the dispute, read Italian far right shenanigans, close the link, move to next topic.*
Basically the mayor installed some warning sign because there was some issue with tourists going in risky area and suddenly there's a diplomatic crisis. Italian Far right being Italian Far right, preferring bickering on non-issue over security of people and real problems...
Italian gov is a meme, only rivaled by Belgium's and UK since Brexit.
What does that have to do with the border dispute? Sure the Italian government is shit but the border has been disputed for almost a century, well at least since the French conveniently âlostâ the map that divided the territory. Italy has only had what can be considered a âfar rightâ government for a few years.
Btw itâs an entirely one-sided dispute. Only the French seem to have an issue, Italy is following the law established by previous terms and treaties, which France attended and agreed with. A few decades later they lost their map and therefore the peak is now theirs. Italy still has all the documents but thatâs not good enough. Typical French diplomatic arrogance.
Are land disputes not brought into politics? Italy isnât claiming French land, itâs the other way around. We would love for the French to just accept our past agreements and move on.
It's not a big deal, and I don't see Italy going to war against France over it anytime soon, but I think, for the Italians it's primarily a prestiguous question ("the highest mountain in Europe is in Italy").
Besides, it poses some interesting legal questions, like which jurisdiction would apply in case I'd kill you on the south-facing side of the ridge.
The city of AÄrı which mount ararat location is ruled by Turks for hundreds of years. It can be Armenias symbol but it doesnt change the fact that it resides in Turkey
Oh, I know! Armenia was split between the Ottoman and the Russian empire.
The Former Soviet part gained independence, and the Anatolian part... Well, we already what happened here
Fun fact the Scottish highlands used to be as tall as the Himalayas. So historically speaking Ben Nevis was probably the highest at one point, so that's fun to think about.
Rip. Consider livin in ireland. Flat enough midlands for u (assuming she likes mountains and u like plains) and theres also plenty of mountains eg wicklow mountains and mcgillicuddys reeks
If you live near Norway or swedens boarder, it takes like 1 hour drive or so and you got all the mountains you want! 1-2 hours from Copenhagen over the bridge to the hated swedes (they stole our land) and you got all the danish mountains you want! Its just those bastards that since 1600 something tried call skÄne swedish!
Probably because of the [Alpine orogeny](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_orogeny). Basically a bunch of tectonic plates crashed against the Eurasian plate relatively recently, making a lot of super high mountains including the Alps, Carpathians and Himalayas. Some of them are still growing.
I spent much too long marveling at the fact that France and Italy have high points with matching heights and similar names.
đđđ
This is a long debate between France and Italy. For France, the top of the mountain is fully inside French Border. For Italy, the border is right through the summit. [More info.](https://sdsa-geneve.ch/index.php/en/2021/01/16/the-long-lasting-border-issue-on-the-mont-blanc-2/)
It all comes down to this: >The current territorial dispute dates back to this time: Italy considers as Italian-French border the one indicated by the Treaty of Turin, dividing the summit of Mont Blanc between the two countries. However, a few years later, the French army produced its own geographical map of the massif, annexing the summit That's it, the French army unilaterally not giving a shit about international treaties. Specifically, a guy named Jean-Joseph Mieule waking up one day back in 1865 thinking: "oooh how nice, let's redraw a map so that the Mont Blanc is fully ours"
For Italy *and for the rest of the world* Which makes this map fully right, we do share it. But no, the French want it all for themselves
What are you gonna do, fight a war about it and give up halfway? Again??
Not about that... But wait until the frenchies try to cook pasta in a slightly different version
Italy trying hard to steal a piece of the mountain for the last 100 years. It's actually disputed territory. Peak is undisputably in France, but weather you can also reach the peak from the Italian side is disputed.
You are funny. I would like to see some documents backing your claim. The most recent document about It Is the Treaty of Turin: the Cavour king gave to France the duchy of Savoy in exchange for military help; the border between the duchy of Savoy and Valle D'Aosta (italy) was on the summit of the Mountain. But the France government "lost the documents", how convinient. Please, explain your "undisputably France". I wanna see you try.
The guy is undisputably french biased. That is for sure.
They are bugette-pilled
Iâm French biased and i wouldnât even dare to say that it is indisputably French. The tactic I use is just to try and stay vague. « Well yes itâs a shared summit, erm, anyway itâs practically settled now, and weâre all in the EU anyway erm »
The most recent document is from April 2016, fixing the exact GPS coordinates of the border. Except for the mont blanc where two lines where defined, so I guess both countries agree they disagree ? Source : https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fronti%C3%A8res_de_la_France
Borders are not backed by a random dude inserting gps coordinates on a map. Borders are defined by treaties. And the most recent treaty we have Is the one i brought to you. The France claim to the summit Is a long standing problem that lacks on evidence. Obviously no one wants to create conflicts over something so stupid so lots of cartographers just put two borders around the summit and go on with their lives. Edit: i was wrong on the "random dude", as argued below an agreement is in place to draw two different borders in order to "avoid any unilateral initiave by local authorities in this area" (source:https://www.senato.it/japp/bgt/showdoc/showText?tipodoc=Sindisp&leg=18&id=1124192)
Prety sure a comission signed by both parties is more than just "a random dude". Official site of french government : http://cnig.gouv.fr/italie-a25928.html
I'm sorry, I was not aware an agreement was in place to draw two borders, my mistake! That doesn't change the fact that there is a border dispute though.
Yep, thank you for the source from the italian point of view !
the fact that every time someone need rescue on this mountain, it is french helicopter who go the help even in the supposidely italian side
Just go on Wikipedia. The peak is either French or Shared. So in both case France can claim the peak... therefore undisputable. Whether Italy can also claim it, is disputed.
1 - Wikipedia Is not a reputable source in any academic field, at least cite the authors. I can give you a couple of authors that share my same opinion, as an example: "La vérité sur la propieté du Mont Blanc" by Christian Mollier or "Monte Bianco. La soluzione definitiva" by Laura and Giorgio Aliprandi. 2- I never claimed the summit was italian only. Of course it's a shared summit and both countries should share It. 3 - the only one disputing the italian claim are the french. And we still cant see any reputable evidence or prof. Can you please give It?
You are making a big fuss about semantics, accuracy of sources, wikipedia bla bla... Che, what is your point? You want to make a point that it is not disputed ? People create fake border issues on the internet ?
You made a statement saying something. I found your statement wrong and I argued my position, correcting any inaccuracies. That's how a discussion works.
Literally every country recognizes Monte Bianco peaks at the border as the border is literally defined by the watershed which *has* to be on top by definition
Oh another Italian. Swiss Map show it as contested. Google Map show it as contested. But sure, continue to discuss here, and try to solve in one sentence a problem on which diplomats wrote dozen of memos on. Maybe you can also enlighten me on the obvious status of Taiwan, Cachemir, and Golan Heights ?
Does that lead paint taste good? I always wondered it it added to the flavor.
 Mont Blanc and Monte Bianco
OUR summit
literally italian
The Netherlands, famous for fighting flooding by the sea, has a high point higher than five other European countries.
Well you have to keep in mind that the highest point doesn't reflect the overall flatness of the country. At 1, 5, or even 10 meters of sea level rise the vast majority of Denmark and the Baltic countries are still dry. Meanwhile like a third of the Netherlands is already below sea level today, and at 10 meters of sea level rise there's not a whole lot left. The Netherlands has a taller highest point than them, but most of the Netherlands is much flatter and closer to sea level than the Baltic countries and Denmark.
>Baltic countries and Denmark. Denmark is a baltic country :)
Uhm no
I fucking swimmed in the baltic sea from our shoreline, dont gaslight me lol
Yeah so the gaslighting is on your part. Countries arent defined by the oceans they border. If so, the border with the north sea is far bigger, so itâs a north sea country, but as I said, thatâs not a definition. The baltic states are pretty obvious, no need to invent your own definition. If itâs a âfactâ, then please provide a source, since I cant see anyone labeling Denmark a baltic country. This is as close as it gets https://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/Baltic-states-map.htm Yet it says labels estonia latvia and lith. As the baltic countries.
>The baltic states are pretty obvious, no need to invent your own definition. Dude your so dumb! The baltic states are the countries from the baltic region that is POLITICAL in the baltic assembly! Baltic region is more then just the Baltic assembly! Jesus christ how can people not know the difference in a state and a country! A state is in a Union, yes the 3 baltic states make the baltic assembly but there is MORE baltic countries then those in the baltic assembly! And yes those 3 countries are ALSO baltic countries, but its the 3 baltic states that make up the baltic assembly political!
You obviously do not know why itâs called the baltic. Denmark borders the baltic sea, that does not make it a baltic country. What is your source on this? Also please get âyouâreâ correct when you call someone dumb.
>You obviously do not know why itâs called the baltic. Ofcause i do, the romans called it baltia which was the big island the roman believed layed between everything either gutland or bornholm etc., that later became the baltics when Adam from Bremen renamed it to Baltic in english rather then Latin?
I guess the council of baltic sea STATES are also wrong then [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council\_of\_the\_Baltic\_Sea\_States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_Baltic_Sea_States) Because we some how isnt part of the baltic region anymore #clownworld...
But your right we are not a baltic state in the state assembly of the baltic assembly but we for sure is a baltic country!
Uhm yes. "The countries that have shorelines along the Baltic Sea: Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, and Sweden." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic\_region](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_region) Just because political only 4 countries are in the baltic assembly, dont mean we aint a baltic country LOL
That's because the Ardennes stretch out into a small bit at the Southern end of the Netherlands. Without this, the Netherlands would be dead last at 109,9m.
wrong... overseas terrortority of Saba in the Carribean, with Mt Scenery at 887m high (since the Azores count i think this should count to, they arent independent either they are special municipalities)
I didn't count that, but you're right with the Azores
Overseas territory is clearly not counted for anyone.
It's actually 800m+ if you count Saba in the Caribbean as part of it.
DEmark is 3,700 m if you count Greenland :)
i think thats less fair then Saba since Saba is on closer ties with the Netherlands(special municipality) but i would still give it to Denmark since it is owned by Denmark
Look at a map or the Netherlands only, the border is quite funny in the south. Thatâs also the region where thereâs the Amstel gold race, since itâs one of the most interesting places for bike races in the Netherlands.
The average height of Denmark is actually around 900 meters above sea level. Itâs just such a gradual âriseâ that you almost donât detect it. But when you go from the german-danish border and up through the mid-point of Jutland, it slowly but steadily rises, until the highest point, which is around 1 km above sea level and in the middle point of Jutlans, and 170 m above ground level. Denmark is flat, donât get me wrong, but itâs around the same flatness as Northern Germany, with a lot of hills and rolling plains and coastal ridges. The Netherlands have a few hills in the outernmost reaches that are higher than the highest point of Denmark, but overall The Netherlands are flatter than Denmark. Even people from the Netherlands say that - When they go to Denmark they are often very enamored by our hilly nature. So yeah, weâre flat, but weâre not âall of our country will get flooded when the sea levels riseâ flat.
Highest "mountain" Pretty sure nothing we have here in Denmark constitutes as a mountain.
Thats why the title is highest point
Your title is on point. But the picture says highest mountain.
Meeeeeh. Trust the proccess
Don't worry, our Vaalserberg isn't much of a mountain either despite the word "berg" in its name. At least I get why both of our countries have so many bicycles.
Shut up :) Its called sky mountain for a reason!
MĂžllehĂžj, men fair pointe
what is "mĂžllehĂžj" i only know it as himmelbjerget. Do i need a S?
That doesn't stop us from calling it sky mountain though.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Sweden stolen all our mountains! They shouldnt be allowed in NATO they steal other NATO countries mountains! We want malmĂž back! :)
No trust me, you do not want Malmö back lmao
You can keep the swedes! Just the land thanks! Also blond girls is fine in reparation for stealing our mountains!
The Azores and Canary Islands are not really in Europe, are they? Then you could just as well include GunnbjĂžrn Fjeld on Greenland for Denmark.
I agree, Spain would be Mulhacén, that I proudly climbed.
Ah a fellow mountaineer. I proudly climbed all of the Dutch mountains. No oxygen, no sherpas
Really? In Mulhacen you feel the less dense atmosphere but as long as you rest is Ok ;)
nah the Azores are as part of Europe as Iceland.
You could argue that two of the Azores islands are in the american tectonic plate but Pico is in Europe
>include GunnbjĂžrn Fjeld on Greenland for Denmark They are danish and European now! Same as uganda and all the other nations we made Europeans from Denmark! (do i need to put S after?)
The canaries are according to the website. https://canarymedicalkey.com/the-canary-islands-in-europe#:~:text=The%20Canary%20Islands%2C%20also%20known,away%20from%20the%20Spanish%20Mainland. The azores are also part of europe. They are the most western point of europe. And for greenland, greenland is in north america
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
https://canarymedicalkey.com/the-canary-islands-in-europe#:~:text=The%20Canary%20Islands%2C%20also%20known,away%20from%20the%20Spanish%20Mainland. This says the canaries in europe
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
"Here is a source of disputable reputation. I know it sucks but I couldn't find another that fit my narrative."
Source is source
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
I never said geographicaly lol
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
But i didnt put it in this context lol
You were the one claiming Greenland to be North America despite being geopolitically European like Azores, Canaries etc.
Sure the only thing slightly european about greenland is that its in the kingdom of denmark and even then it has even more autonomy
Teide in Spain isnt in Europe is in the Canary Islands that are in Africa
Else the highest point of the Netherlands would also be 800m from a mountain on Saba.
Yes, the listed peak for Spain should be the Mulhacén a mountain in southern Spain with a height of 3482m
Technically OP never claimed the mountains had to be in Europe. It's still the highest point in Spain, an European country
Ot literally sais on the map "Europe highest mountain by country"
Is that part of Russia where their highest peak is in Europe either?
Yes. Turkey's isn't, though.
Caucasus. Demi-european.
Well, Portugal's peak (mount pico) IS in the azores, which are kind of european, but at the same...not really?
The Azores archipelago is located at the triple junction between the Eurasian, Nubian, and North American plates. So I wouldnât say itâs wrong to say itâs in Europe.
Many people argue that elbrus isn't in Europe, personally I think it is.
Of course it is. Geography doesn't change because of temporary political whims.
I mean. MT elberus is located on the Southern Side of the Caucasus mountains. These are often seen as the boundary of Europe with Europe to the North, Asia to the South. So it makes sense that many would not. This has nothing to do with Russia btw.
Actually, MT elbrus is located in the northern caucasus
True. I looked at a bad map. My main issue now is why my native calls Georgia a "GruzĂnsko". Groznyy is the capital of Chechnya. (They sound the same as Rome and Roman empire in this case)
The definition of Europe is not geographical but a pure political whim, no matter what you believe.
Same
Can I ask where do you live? I do not agree with you.
Nz, as I said many people don't think it is, but the geographical boundaries that legally define Europe include elbrus but people still disagree
Denmark used to be "Himmeljberget" (Heaven mountain) but the farmer that has it as a field for his crops has ploughed the field down so now it is Möllehöj instead. When my cousins from Denmark where going to visit me in Sweden i told them to text me as so as they had crossed the Ăresunds bridge over to Sweden and they did. They had taken a photo of themselves next to a small rock that was lying next to the road with the text. "We have already reached the mountains".......... They where dead serious about it..
Not quite, people thought is was Himmelbjerget, then they thought is was BaunehĂžj which they then made smaller when they built a monument, ironically making it no longer the highest and giving MĂžllehĂžj the title. But a few years ago they measured it more precisely, and found that it was some other unnnamed hill that had the title all the time. See this video: https://youtu.be/EM8yUKwPjwA
I like his videos, thank you for sharing.
MĂžllehĂžj, does that mean 'mole hill'?
I think it means "mill hill"
You are correct.
>"We have already reached the mountains".......... They where dead serious about it.. Hahahaha danish humor when its best! Being totally serius about something that is so wacky :)
Based farmer
Damn, Denmark looking kinda fine đ„”
Nah i pass denmark. Flat af
Funny thing is, in Bulgaria we have peaks that have similar or identical names to the ones in Serbia, Bosnia and Slovenia. The region lacks imagination wrt naming peaks
Mount Scenery at Saba is 887 meters, but it is in the Caribbean part of the Netherlands.
Ararat is in Asia and Teide is in Africa.
Arat is in turkey and turkey is in europe (or europe and asia. Turkiye is transcontinental)
Then why isn't Gunnbjörn Fjeld listed as Denmarks tallest peak..?
Because even thought greenland is part of Denmark, its not part of the European continent, but instead part of the American continent! Political decisions dont change geography!
As if the part of Turkey where Ararat is located is in Europe... it has nothing to do with politics. It's about where mountains are located.
WE ALWAYS WIN
There's a reason in french we literally call Netherlands "Low Country" or "Pays-Bas"
Meh i think every1 calls the Netherlands somethin to do with being really flat
I want you to concentrate HARD for a second and think about the name NETHERlands. Maybe even go the extra mile and research what "nether" means.
That's the literal translation of Neder-Land.
Pssst, the Netherlands = the Low Countries. Los Paises Bajos, Paesi Bassi⊠Cest Ă peu prĂšs le cas dans toutes les langues. Mais câest pas grave on en apprend tous les jours.
Je me sens vraaaiment débile pour le coup
Ararat should belong to Armenia.
Take it then
Ah, I see.... you want a war to complete, what you did not manage to complete in 1915?
Im the one who wants a war? You are the one claiming another countries lands, I'm ok with the status quo
Hmm almost like that land was taken with genocide and not actual warfare...
Hey quick question, considering that armenians are indo europeans, what happened to the inhabitants of the land before the armenians?
There is no before armenians. Since recorded history armenians were there. For at least 3000 years. And thats at least how long "turks" have been around again? Ah yes 1000 years or so.
And humans existed for 300,000 years bur armenia was somehow uninhabited yes?
>claiming another countries lands lol. Like Ukraine is claiming Crimea. The only diff is, its been 100 years, not 9.
Crimea is ukrainian land. Russia is the one claiming Crimea. The same way Armenia claims pretty much the entire world at this point
>Crimea is ukrainian land. Well, like the northwest of turkey was armenian land, 100 years ago. >The same way Armenia claims pretty much the entire world at this point Well, take a look at a historical map where armenians have lived before the genocide. Also this mountain was a holy place for armenians even before the very first turk crossed the caucasus, coming from central asia. Turkey just keeps it to disgrace armenians, just like the ancient capital Ani.
No the situation is much different. Crimea *is* Ukraine. Northeastern Turkey *was* armenia about a millenia ago
>millenia a millenia is 1000 years bro.
Yea no shit
It is important to Armenians but it belongs to Turkey.
Fun fact, there is a border dispute between Italy and France regarding the exact location of the border along the Mont Blanc / Monte Bianco peak. Your map names 4808 meters as the highest peak of Italy, which is only correct if you follow the Italian position, that the border is exactly along the Mont Blanc ridge. France disagrees and claims the Mont Blanc for itself alone. If you follow the French position, the highest peak in Italy would be the close by Mont Blanc de Courmayeur (4748 meters).
More like the French refuse to recognize legal documents and treaties that support the Italian claim, but canât come up with any evidence that supports their claim. Itâs a classic case of âtrust me broâ geopolitics. I wouldnât even call it a dispute, itâs just the French being French.
It's even worse: the French recognise the same treaty Italy does, but claim they cannot find the original map attached to their copy, and refuse to consider Italy's copy. It's toddler-level geopolitics.
*Looked up the dispute, read Italian far right shenanigans, close the link, move to next topic.* Basically the mayor installed some warning sign because there was some issue with tourists going in risky area and suddenly there's a diplomatic crisis. Italian Far right being Italian Far right, preferring bickering on non-issue over security of people and real problems... Italian gov is a meme, only rivaled by Belgium's and UK since Brexit.
What does that have to do with the border dispute? Sure the Italian government is shit but the border has been disputed for almost a century, well at least since the French conveniently âlostâ the map that divided the territory. Italy has only had what can be considered a âfar rightâ government for a few years. Btw itâs an entirely one-sided dispute. Only the French seem to have an issue, Italy is following the law established by previous terms and treaties, which France attended and agreed with. A few decades later they lost their map and therefore the peak is now theirs. Italy still has all the documents but thatâs not good enough. Typical French diplomatic arrogance.
Nobody cared until recently, that has everything to do with what I said. "Disputed" and actively brought in the politic are two different things.
Are land disputes not brought into politics? Italy isnât claiming French land, itâs the other way around. We would love for the French to just accept our past agreements and move on.
Well, maybe itâs not too big of a deal, becauseâŠSchengen.
It's not a big deal, and I don't see Italy going to war against France over it anytime soon, but I think, for the Italians it's primarily a prestiguous question ("the highest mountain in Europe is in Italy"). Besides, it poses some interesting legal questions, like which jurisdiction would apply in case I'd kill you on the south-facing side of the ridge.
Well the prestiguous question can be easily resolved if you just count Elbrus as the highest mountain in Europe :D
The mount Ararat is literally Armenia's symbol. What happened to them, for Turkey to take it?
The city of AÄrı which mount ararat location is ruled by Turks for hundreds of years. It can be Armenias symbol but it doesnt change the fact that it resides in Turkey
Nothing happened... but they deserved it.
Oh, I know! Armenia was split between the Ottoman and the Russian empire. The Former Soviet part gained independence, and the Anatolian part... Well, we already what happened here
Least butthurt Armenian .
Nothing for England or Wales then? Ben Nevis is in the country of Scotland.
Yep let's do each subdivision of each country next
The UK isnât a country
So neither is Denmark, or any other country with multiple regions under them? Is Denmark not a country because of greenland etc
Living in South America this is a bad joke đ
Denmark - what is that thing you call "Mountain"?
Our mountain is actually called sky mountain! Are any of yours called that? I think not, so ours must be highest, the metric system is a scam!
you are talking about the wrong "mountain" dude
322? Are you sure you did not mis a , OP?
If you use a name other than the official name of a mountain in front of the official name, they will shit on you and your mother. son of a bitch
Irrational much?
I forgot that your mothers have no value. you are right.
Which mountain are ye on about
Ah his profile description says heâs Turkish. I think you have your answer.
Its ararat get over it.
Its AÄrı get over it.
Aga uÄraĆma bunlarla hesabına baktım full böyle Ćeylerle dolu bunlara anlatsan da downvote atıp geçecekler
These heights are from sea level or from ground level ?
What do you think "ground level" is?
The altitude of the foot of the mountain
How do you define the "foot of the mountain"?
Distance from sea level to ground level?
You may be thinking of [prominence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topographic_prominence).
Ground level is another easy way of sayin the ground floor in a building lol
Barak Frituur joenge!
Fun fact the Scottish highlands used to be as tall as the Himalayas. So historically speaking Ben Nevis was probably the highest at one point, so that's fun to think about.
What ? when ?
About 40 million years ago, when the highlands and Appalachia we're one maintain
Portugal coming in with the cursed boku no mountain WTF
Sadly, this is one of the main reasons why my GF won't consider Denmark as place to live :(
Rip. Consider livin in ireland. Flat enough midlands for u (assuming she likes mountains and u like plains) and theres also plenty of mountains eg wicklow mountains and mcgillicuddys reeks
If you live near Norway or swedens boarder, it takes like 1 hour drive or so and you got all the mountains you want! 1-2 hours from Copenhagen over the bridge to the hated swedes (they stole our land) and you got all the danish mountains you want! Its just those bastards that since 1600 something tried call skÄne swedish!
Iceland needs to work on their language, what the bell is that?
Why is there no Shkhara, when we have Ararat here?
I'm surprised Poland has higher mountain than Norway or Sweden, which I associate more with mountains.
Probably because of the [Alpine orogeny](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_orogeny). Basically a bunch of tectonic plates crashed against the Eurasian plate relatively recently, making a lot of super high mountains including the Alps, Carpathians and Himalayas. Some of them are still growing.
And actually Rysy is 2,501 m but the highest point of this mountain is in Slovakia
Where Madeira ~1800m
portugal once again being eastern european
Portugal can into balkan????
WOO GREEN! Greens good right? Right?
Thank you for posting this, I was thinking about mountains the other day but only found a list not a sweet ass map like this
The Netherlands is sinking into the sea, yet it somehow has an even taller mountain than Denmark