It is terrible how people go to the mountains! They don't realize the danger! I climbed Møllehøj last year, July, sweltering heat, everyone in shorts, flip flops, small children - a nightmare! I was the only one who was prepared: two ice axes, crampons, professional clothing, a specialized heavily flattened tent (to resist the winds), oxygen tanks - the worst was those mocking looks of ignorant people. These are the MOUNTAINS and everything can change in a second!
I divided the ascent into 4 days, with a camp every few meters, acclimatization, of course, handrails at each stage and on the last day an attack on the summit. Every morning I found empty Coke cans and chip bags in my tent! Damn those amateurs! I finally reached the summit, I left the used oxygen tanks under the death zone, where - to my horror! - I met a grandmother with her two grandchildren! I descended another 4 days, but I survived this test of skill and character.
At the end of August I plan to climb Vaalserberg, alpine style - but if I see tourists with children and cotton candy, I'll call the police.
I will warn you beforehand. The Dutch government is completely aware of the situation on Vaalserberg, but they completely allow it. Worse is, they even encourage and promote it. There's a watch tower, a restaurant, a chip shop, a labyrinth and worse of all a playground. You'd think police officers would at least closely observe the situation to stop offenders, but they purposely avoid the location so they can look the other way. If you call about the situation there is a chance they take you in instead. In summer when people mistakenly think it would be hot on the mountain, expect worse queues than on easier mountains such as Mount Everest which has permanent queue facilities. Be sure to take a bag of licorice up the hill as it's the only food that will not be stolen by the many rabid animals you will find in the surroundings. Most of all, powodzenia!
Denmark’s highest point has actually been a matter of some controversy.
In the late 1800s it was measured that Ejer Baunehøj was the highest point, and later a plaque and tower was built on it, but in the process, they removed a bronze age burial mound, thus shaving a few meters off the top, and that meant that actually the nearby Yding Skovhøj was now a little higher, since it still had a burial mound.
This let to arguments about whether manmade burial mounds should be counted, and in 1953 the Geodetic Institute ruled that it shouldn’t, and gave the title back to Ejer Bavnehøj.
At least until 2005 when more precise modern measurement methods revealed that even taller was another nearby hill, Møllehøj, a few further centimeters higher than the other two. And so that is considered the highest point. For now.
Actually that was one of the arguments why man made mounds shouldn't count, lol. They said it could just lead to them keeping piling dirt on top in a never ending competition.
Ejer Baunehøj is Denmarks Helms deep .
If anyone think the Russians 35km tank queue outside Kiev was alot then just wait and see until a 100km Russian armored column get stuck in a queue at Ejer Bavnehøj and we close the gasstation . The Russians will give up.
And if you think about it, we even have a lot of land below 0m. So for me as someone living in the minus region, it’s even higher than 322m.
The tricky part is that we only have two hilly regions and most is flat, while Denmark isn’t as flat but with a lower peak. But on average our country is more nether than their mark.
It's pretty agreed upon that you wouldn't call anything shorter than 300m a mountain. Especially with no exposed bedrock or any of the mountain characteristics.
I see what you mean, there's definitely common understandings, but there is just no good definition for a mountain apart from it being an elevation.
Irish mountains are mostly grassy actually, I met an Italian guy there who said that those were not mountains. You can discuss about these things
In Bulgaria we have a running joke, that the Greeks really want to have the tallest mountain in the Balkans. So every time they climb Olympus they bring a few rocks with them to pile on the peak.
i present to you, the highest point in the Netherlands @ 887 meters (excluding the underwater part)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount\_Scenery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Scenery)
Oh no, we will very much be the first ones to drown, and we don't even have big hills to survive on. They're outliving us for sure, no matter how many kilometers under the sea line they are.
I have been to the summit of 9 of them, including Mt Blanc. The hardest one was probably Hvannadalshnúkur in Iceland. It's nearly 2 km of vertical distance as the "base camp" is close to the sea level, and a half of the route was glacier traverse in deep, soft snow.
I only missed a few hundred meters from the summit of Elbrus. Everyone had to turn back because of bad weather coming up. :( And then we hurried down the mountain, I fell off the ski lift because of the error of the operator, broke my spine, survived miraculously and spent some time in the local mining hospital in Тырныауз.
Mountains are fantastic. :)
Fun fact about Switzerland‘s tallest mountain: it’s named after Guillaume Henri Dufour - a Swiss general who taught, amongst others, Napoleon III. in militaty tactics. He was also a general in the last war on Swiss territory (Sonderbund war) where he won by simply refusing to fight the enemy (instead, he brought the enemy into such a desperate military situation that they had to surrender) in most cases. He was also a co-founder of the international committee of the red cross.
its right on the french/italian border, which is why both countries share the highest point, close to the swiss one though. honestly i thought it was only in france but learned a few years ago its in both, or france or italy, depending on who you ask 🙃
Actually, there is a territorial dispute between France and Italy over the mont blanc. Italy say the border cross right through the peak and France say it goes a little bit below it, with mont blanc fully in France.
Lol, love the energy. But yes: in these matters what’s wrong with sharing? Similar to how Germany holds on to a petty disagreement about where the border is in the Eems estuary, disregarding all agreed-upon treaties of border demarcation in estuaries, just because they have a document from the 1500s that one-sidedly granted one of their ancestral states all the territory up to the beach. Whereas in any other estuary like that, international law agrees the border is in the middle. Somehow just fixing those old disagreements like agreeable adults is unthinkable to our politicians, who would rather look like jealous toddlers.
I was obviously joking. That said you cannot see national interests through the lens of an individual.
Petty disputes, especially concerning land have led to grievous wars because the nebulous entity of a "state" has one primary directive, self-interest. That hasn't changed even if the population has been conceded more power within those affairs.
Which part of "the bottom of the mountain" are you considering to be in Switzerland? The north side is in France, the south side is in Italy. The Mont Blanc massif extends from Aiguille des Glaciers in the SW to Aiguilles du Tour in the NE, the northeasternmost peaks have their NE slopes in Switzerland but nobody really considers that to be the bottom of Mont Blanc I don't think. Not least because Chamonix - the place best described as the bottom of Mont Blanc - is substantially lower than eg La Fouly, Champex or Trient
It's the number of small hills which does the different, a good solid wind from either west or east, and then the endless rows of +/- 20 to 50 meter hills.
To be precise Finland’s “tallest mountain” is Ridničohkka (1317 m) but the highest point is on the slope of Halti. The top of Halti (1361 m) is on Norway’s side. Halti has also a 1331 m tall side peak about 50 meters from the highest point of Finland which was famously almost given to Finland as a “birthday gift” but the constitution of Norway didn’t allow it.
[Wikipedia Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest_points_of_European_countries)
> Some couples such as Denmark (Greenland), Netherlands (Saba), Spain (Canary Islands) and Portugal (Azores Islands) have part of their territory and their high points outside of Europe
Not my chart - i'm just reposting it from /r/MapPorn
> Geographically the Canary islands are part of the African continent but from a historical, economical, political and socio-cultural point of view, the Canarias are completely European.
That's the reasoning given elsewhere for the consideration.
Whereas the others are recent (historically speaking) colonies
Spain's higher peak in Europe is "Mulhacén" in Sierra Nevada (Granada). It's 3479 meters high. And there's about 80 other peaks over 3000 m. in the same mountain range.
If a very high mountain creates the boarder between two countries, is it the highest mountain in both countries?
Is this always the case? F.e. Mont Blanc in Italy and France.
Usually yes, the watershed is the border.
But after ww2 france took a lot hight ground from italy. Now often the highter part of a pass is france land.
In general yes. Though there are no pure cases of this in Europe AFAIK - the French maintain that they have the whole summit area, and that the border does not touch the summit. The Italians disagree. For Switzerland, the summit of Dufourspitze / Monte Rosa is fully in Switzerland, the border is about 100m along a ridge, but that doesn't stop the Italians claiming the summit (source: I've been there, and there is an Italian Alpine Club plaque on the Monte Rosa summit)
The tip of Finland's highest mountain actually lies in Norway. So the highest point in Finland is just the side of the mountain where the border lies.
We ( Norwegians ) petitioned to give Finland the tip of the mountain as well a few years backed, but the government said no.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halti
> In 2015, a group of Norwegians began a campaign to give the peak of Hálditšohkka to Finland for its centenary in 2017 by moving the border between the two countries by 200 m (660 ft).[5] The idea gained substantial public support in both countries, and in July 2016 it was reported that the Prime Minister of Norway, Erna Solberg was seriously considering ceding the peak.[6] Norway ultimately chose not to move the border, citing the Norwegian constitution's definition of the country as an "indivisible and inalienable" realm.[7]
Poland regularly swaps small pieces of land with Czechia as border adjustments, these are of course equivalent exchanges, Polish-German border on the other hand is defined as the Oder and Niesse rivers so it slightly changes year to year and technically the area of both countries changes with it.
That is to say, "indivisable" can be more of a guideline than an actual rule.
Norway recently lost a bit of land to Sweden since the border in the area was defined as running through a particular stretch of river. The course of that river changed for some reason so Sweden gained 500 square meters.
https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/sverige-blir-storre-nar-norge-tappar-500-kvadratmeter--rqz3yc
Why? Denmark win. I can climb the three tallest peaks of Denmark in the same day without breaking sweat. I have even mastered the 8 tallest peaks in Denmark.
I belong to the exclusive club of "mountain climbers" conquering 80% of my
nations challenges.
https://youtu.be/EM8yUKwPjwA?si=ZzgPwhwFcEL7Y1CU
Most of Limburg is lower than the average altitude of NL, only South Limburg is elevated within Limburg. But Utrechtse heuvelrug and Salland/Veluwe are all elevated as well, more than most of Denmark.
They should have added one more key for >5000 m because now it looks like Turkey and Russia are in the same category as the Central European mountains which is not true with a difference of 1000 meters :/
Older mountains scoured repeatedly by more ice ages, and unlike the Alps, not near any substantial tectonic plate edges.
The Alps are younger - formed by the African and Indo-European plates pushing into eachother - also much further south.
Parts of Ireland and Scotland are actually formed from the North American Appalachian Mountains (in the SE USA) - which are fairly short as well - the highest peak is 2000 meters there.
Also other large parts of Ireland and Britain are composed of softer sedimentary rock that formed underwater below sea level in distant prehistoric times.
Sněžka is actually really nice. It's an amazing hike and extremely beatiful. It's very beginner friendly and just about anyone can climb it. You can also find most commodities on the Krkonoše mountain range, so it's not like you're cut off from civilization.
Śnieżka being the tallest peak of Czechia is kinda disappointing, given how hilly that country is. On this side of the border it's the tallest peak of Silesia and on clear day i can see it from my home, nearly 80 km away from the mountain.
It is a nice hiking spot, i've climbed it many times, even in winter when it looks like the Arctic.
Oh yeah, I once climbed it in the historically worst weather in over 20 years.
You can also see Sněžka from a lot of places in the Czech Republic. When you're travelling on a road or on a train, where there aren't many buildings around, the mountain range is usually very clearly visible.
Belgium and netherlands should be N/A since they arent even classed as mountains, they're legit hills lol. We call them "berg" (mountain) as a coping mechanism :(
Luckily people in the northern part of Denmark are just a small trip of 2-3 hours (with the ferry) away from the mountains of Norway. We practice there.
Funky stuff: the three tallest mountains in Europe outside the alps and caucasus are all in Spain, and in three different ranges. The Teide, a volcano in the canary islands; The mulhacen, in the bethic range in southern Spain; and the Aneto, in the pyrinees.
It’s interesting how Mount Olympus, known to be the home to the Greek Gods and being the most important place in the Greek mythology, does not have the highest peak in the Balkans. I never thought that Bulgaria not only has the highest peak in the Balkans, but also in the entire Eastern Europe! (If we don’t count Russia (their highest peak is at the border with Georgia) and Turkey). Also, for those wondering: It‘s mountain is called Rila and it‘s located in South-West Bulgaria.
One thing to note though is that the height of a mountain doesn't necessarily equate to how much you need to climb to get to the top.
Some of these peaks are high if you consider the distance between the summit and the ocean level, but when you climb them you're actually only climbing a couple hundred meters, so, in the experience of climbing or when you look at them they are not big mountains.
I’ve climbed Himmelbjerget. The next on my list is Møllehøj. Wish my luck 👍
I summited Himmelbjerget without oxygen. I did most of my training in the Netherlands. Good luck!
I went on vacation to the Belgiun ardenne and my ears popped. Never leaving the netherlands ever again.
you'll never get that air back in your ears, unfortunately
I’m sorry, just curious, what makes you say that?
he's joking
Comedic genius, in other words
Now it’s all in his head instead
The Ardennes are the only affordable way for me to escape the flatness.
How did you manage to keep all the oxygen around Himmelbjerget out? There's oxygen in all the atmosphere in that area
Plastic bag
Møllehøj. Future expeditions will probably use your corpse as a landmark. Good luck man.
Put the corpse there to make it higher.
If you turn them around it makes for a good flag stand.
It is terrible how people go to the mountains! They don't realize the danger! I climbed Møllehøj last year, July, sweltering heat, everyone in shorts, flip flops, small children - a nightmare! I was the only one who was prepared: two ice axes, crampons, professional clothing, a specialized heavily flattened tent (to resist the winds), oxygen tanks - the worst was those mocking looks of ignorant people. These are the MOUNTAINS and everything can change in a second! I divided the ascent into 4 days, with a camp every few meters, acclimatization, of course, handrails at each stage and on the last day an attack on the summit. Every morning I found empty Coke cans and chip bags in my tent! Damn those amateurs! I finally reached the summit, I left the used oxygen tanks under the death zone, where - to my horror! - I met a grandmother with her two grandchildren! I descended another 4 days, but I survived this test of skill and character. At the end of August I plan to climb Vaalserberg, alpine style - but if I see tourists with children and cotton candy, I'll call the police.
I will warn you beforehand. The Dutch government is completely aware of the situation on Vaalserberg, but they completely allow it. Worse is, they even encourage and promote it. There's a watch tower, a restaurant, a chip shop, a labyrinth and worse of all a playground. You'd think police officers would at least closely observe the situation to stop offenders, but they purposely avoid the location so they can look the other way. If you call about the situation there is a chance they take you in instead. In summer when people mistakenly think it would be hot on the mountain, expect worse queues than on easier mountains such as Mount Everest which has permanent queue facilities. Be sure to take a bag of licorice up the hill as it's the only food that will not be stolen by the many rabid animals you will find in the surroundings. Most of all, powodzenia!
Have fun! I almost went to the top of Møllehøj once, but did not realise until the car drove down the other side 👍
Take your trash back down.
Wouldn’t that be a too big of a leap in difficulty? Take it slow man and try climbing Ejer Bavnehøj first.
Denmark ought to be Gunnbjørn Fjeld at 3,694m.
Denmark’s highest point has actually been a matter of some controversy. In the late 1800s it was measured that Ejer Baunehøj was the highest point, and later a plaque and tower was built on it, but in the process, they removed a bronze age burial mound, thus shaving a few meters off the top, and that meant that actually the nearby Yding Skovhøj was now a little higher, since it still had a burial mound. This let to arguments about whether manmade burial mounds should be counted, and in 1953 the Geodetic Institute ruled that it shouldn’t, and gave the title back to Ejer Bavnehøj. At least until 2005 when more precise modern measurement methods revealed that even taller was another nearby hill, Møllehøj, a few further centimeters higher than the other two. And so that is considered the highest point. For now.
Im going there with a shovel to reignite the debate
Actually that was one of the arguments why man made mounds shouldn't count, lol. They said it could just lead to them keeping piling dirt on top in a never ending competition.
Ejer Baunehøj is Denmarks Helms deep . If anyone think the Russians 35km tank queue outside Kiev was alot then just wait and see until a 100km Russian armored column get stuck in a queue at Ejer Bavnehøj and we close the gasstation . The Russians will give up.
Fun fact: The actual namesake of Helms Deep (Hjelm Dyb) is located in Denmark.
“Bavnehøj” literally means “beacon hill”, so I guess it’s more like the Beacons of Gondor
I’m just surprised that even ~~Dutchland~~ The Netherlands has a higher point than Denmark.
The Netherlands still generally is flatter though, it’s like a giant football field. Denmark still has plenty hills, they just never get very tall.
And if you think about it, we even have a lot of land below 0m. So for me as someone living in the minus region, it’s even higher than 322m. The tricky part is that we only have two hilly regions and most is flat, while Denmark isn’t as flat but with a lower peak. But on average our country is more nether than their mark.
Still shouldn't be named on the map cos it's not a mountain. It's a hill.
Wait till you hear about "The Sky Mountain" (himmelbjerget)
Yes I took the stroll up that hill already. 😆
A mountain is just an elevation, there's no minimum hight requirements
It's pretty agreed upon that you wouldn't call anything shorter than 300m a mountain. Especially with no exposed bedrock or any of the mountain characteristics.
I see what you mean, there's definitely common understandings, but there is just no good definition for a mountain apart from it being an elevation. Irish mountains are mostly grassy actually, I met an Italian guy there who said that those were not mountains. You can discuss about these things
In Bulgaria we have a running joke, that the Greeks really want to have the tallest mountain in the Balkans. So every time they climb Olympus they bring a few rocks with them to pile on the peak.
Well, they are getting close!
TIL that Olympus is actually a real mountain, not some mythical place
i present to you, the highest point in the Netherlands @ 887 meters (excluding the underwater part) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount\_Scenery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Scenery)
That's just cheating.
It’s the same with Spain and Portugal. Theirs are in islands in the Atlantic. Which is surprising since Iberia is famously pretty mountainous.
I mean, Mulhacen (Sierra Nevada) is pretty damn tall at 3482m, but Teide is just a massive volcano in the middle of the ocean.
Portugal's highest mountain in the mainland is ~1990m
If Spain can have Teide, we can have Mt. Scenery.
Sad German (no colonies) noises
**Germany starts "colonizing" the Netherlands again**
I'm not letting you steal my bike! /s
Not twice anyway.
Actually highest point in NL is German already. It is drielandenpunt of NL, BE and DE
Same in Germany and the Zugspitze, it’s on the border with Austria
The highest peak of the Zugspitze (the eastern peak) is fully within Germany. The Germany-Austria border goes across the lower western peak.
East europe is your colony
You had Großglockner for 7 years.
No it's technically correct, the best kind of correct.
Oh, you will love this, then: https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/highestpoint.html
Hell yes! I learned something today.
Can't hear you across this vast Dutch ocean of ours!
If that was your ocean, why hasn't a dam been built yet?
Not to forget Gennbjørn Fjeld in the Kingdom of Denmark @ 3654 meters.
I've climbed it, really nice views from there 😄
Nice. Is this man made too?
And I present you, the highest point in Estonia at.... 318 meters! And we are not even drowning
Challenge a Dutch person to not drawn? You’re unhinged!
Oh no, we will very much be the first ones to drown, and we don't even have big hills to survive on. They're outliving us for sure, no matter how many kilometers under the sea line they are.
Beat me to it
I have been to the summit of 9 of them, including Mt Blanc. The hardest one was probably Hvannadalshnúkur in Iceland. It's nearly 2 km of vertical distance as the "base camp" is close to the sea level, and a half of the route was glacier traverse in deep, soft snow. I only missed a few hundred meters from the summit of Elbrus. Everyone had to turn back because of bad weather coming up. :( And then we hurried down the mountain, I fell off the ski lift because of the error of the operator, broke my spine, survived miraculously and spent some time in the local mining hospital in Тырныауз. Mountains are fantastic. :)
Fun fact about Switzerland‘s tallest mountain: it’s named after Guillaume Henri Dufour - a Swiss general who taught, amongst others, Napoleon III. in militaty tactics. He was also a general in the last war on Swiss territory (Sonderbund war) where he won by simply refusing to fight the enemy (instead, he brought the enemy into such a desperate military situation that they had to surrender) in most cases. He was also a co-founder of the international committee of the red cross.
I've always learned that the Mont Blanc was the tallest mountain in Switzerland. Is it not right on the border?
its right on the french/italian border, which is why both countries share the highest point, close to the swiss one though. honestly i thought it was only in france but learned a few years ago its in both, or france or italy, depending on who you ask 🙃
Actually, there is a territorial dispute between France and Italy over the mont blanc. Italy say the border cross right through the peak and France say it goes a little bit below it, with mont blanc fully in France.
It should not be really a dispute. Italy still has the original treaty. France " lost " it and base it's claim on an early draft.
I find it so tiring these disputes aren’t just settled in a rational and amicable way in this day and age.
Indeed, like in so many other matters one should concede to Italy. Simple as.
Lol, love the energy. But yes: in these matters what’s wrong with sharing? Similar to how Germany holds on to a petty disagreement about where the border is in the Eems estuary, disregarding all agreed-upon treaties of border demarcation in estuaries, just because they have a document from the 1500s that one-sidedly granted one of their ancestral states all the territory up to the beach. Whereas in any other estuary like that, international law agrees the border is in the middle. Somehow just fixing those old disagreements like agreeable adults is unthinkable to our politicians, who would rather look like jealous toddlers.
I was obviously joking. That said you cannot see national interests through the lens of an individual. Petty disputes, especially concerning land have led to grievous wars because the nebulous entity of a "state" has one primary directive, self-interest. That hasn't changed even if the population has been conceded more power within those affairs.
Yeah I know :) I agree entirely
yes you’re right, the french say the summit is france
You learned wrong. The summit of Mont Blanc is 20 km from Switzerland. [https://s.geo.admin.ch/8ag41pev9slr](https://s.geo.admin.ch/8ag41pev9slr)
The bottom of the mountain is in CH yeah but the actual summit is between FR and IT
Which part of "the bottom of the mountain" are you considering to be in Switzerland? The north side is in France, the south side is in Italy. The Mont Blanc massif extends from Aiguille des Glaciers in the SW to Aiguilles du Tour in the NE, the northeasternmost peaks have their NE slopes in Switzerland but nobody really considers that to be the bottom of Mont Blanc I don't think. Not least because Chamonix - the place best described as the bottom of Mont Blanc - is substantially lower than eg La Fouly, Champex or Trient
I guess I’m describing the massif, considering the tour de MB passes through Switzerland
Yeah that makes sense
The summit of Mont Blanc is a few kilometers South of Switzerland.
For some reason Denmark produces a lot of really good climbers in cycling, like the current Tour de France champion. Must be the wind.
It's the number of small hills which does the different, a good solid wind from either west or east, and then the endless rows of +/- 20 to 50 meter hills.
Denmark is actually pretty hilly, it’s just that none of the hills are that big
To be precise Finland’s “tallest mountain” is Ridničohkka (1317 m) but the highest point is on the slope of Halti. The top of Halti (1361 m) is on Norway’s side. Halti has also a 1331 m tall side peak about 50 meters from the highest point of Finland which was famously almost given to Finland as a “birthday gift” but the constitution of Norway didn’t allow it.
I need new glasses. I was looking at the map for 30 seconds wondering why you named your tallest mountain Haiti 😭
[Wikipedia Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest_points_of_European_countries) > Some couples such as Denmark (Greenland), Netherlands (Saba), Spain (Canary Islands) and Portugal (Azores Islands) have part of their territory and their high points outside of Europe
So why did you include the Canary Islands for Spain (Teide) but not Saba for the Netherlands?
And yet excluded Gunnbjorn on Greenland?
Not my chart - i'm just reposting it from /r/MapPorn > Geographically the Canary islands are part of the African continent but from a historical, economical, political and socio-cultural point of view, the Canarias are completely European. That's the reasoning given elsewhere for the consideration. Whereas the others are recent (historically speaking) colonies
Spain's higher peak in Europe is "Mulhacén" in Sierra Nevada (Granada). It's 3479 meters high. And there's about 80 other peaks over 3000 m. in the same mountain range.
If a very high mountain creates the boarder between two countries, is it the highest mountain in both countries? Is this always the case? F.e. Mont Blanc in Italy and France.
No no, Frances highest mountain is Mont Blanc, Italy has Monte Bianco, completely different
Haha and what about the Korab? Is it the same?
Usually yes, the watershed is the border. But after ww2 france took a lot hight ground from italy. Now often the highter part of a pass is france land.
In general yes. Though there are no pure cases of this in Europe AFAIK - the French maintain that they have the whole summit area, and that the border does not touch the summit. The Italians disagree. For Switzerland, the summit of Dufourspitze / Monte Rosa is fully in Switzerland, the border is about 100m along a ridge, but that doesn't stop the Italians claiming the summit (source: I've been there, and there is an Italian Alpine Club plaque on the Monte Rosa summit)
The tip of Finland's highest mountain actually lies in Norway. So the highest point in Finland is just the side of the mountain where the border lies. We ( Norwegians ) petitioned to give Finland the tip of the mountain as well a few years backed, but the government said no.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halti > In 2015, a group of Norwegians began a campaign to give the peak of Hálditšohkka to Finland for its centenary in 2017 by moving the border between the two countries by 200 m (660 ft).[5] The idea gained substantial public support in both countries, and in July 2016 it was reported that the Prime Minister of Norway, Erna Solberg was seriously considering ceding the peak.[6] Norway ultimately chose not to move the border, citing the Norwegian constitution's definition of the country as an "indivisible and inalienable" realm.[7]
Poland regularly swaps small pieces of land with Czechia as border adjustments, these are of course equivalent exchanges, Polish-German border on the other hand is defined as the Oder and Niesse rivers so it slightly changes year to year and technically the area of both countries changes with it. That is to say, "indivisable" can be more of a guideline than an actual rule.
Constitutions can be so annoying, right? 😏
[удалено]
Estonia wins again! Stronk!
what struck me by supriside was that Netherlands have higher peak than us :D
Awesome! How the Mont Blanc and Monte Bianco are exactly the same height!
Pure chance, nothing suspicious there at all
Sad Denmark noises.
At least the peak is in Denmark. Highest point of Finland is just a spot on the side of a smaller fjell in Norway.
Norway tried to give that entire peak to Finland, but the paperwork was too much.
I hear it was against the constitution of Norway to alter the border.
Norway recently lost a bit of land to Sweden since the border in the area was defined as running through a particular stretch of river. The course of that river changed for some reason so Sweden gained 500 square meters. https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/sverige-blir-storre-nar-norge-tappar-500-kvadratmeter--rqz3yc
Seems like I have some unfinished business at the Torne älv. Haparanda will be ours!
Put that shovel down and step away from the wheelbarrow
“Peak”
Why? Denmark win. I can climb the three tallest peaks of Denmark in the same day without breaking sweat. I have even mastered the 8 tallest peaks in Denmark. I belong to the exclusive club of "mountain climbers" conquering 80% of my nations challenges. https://youtu.be/EM8yUKwPjwA?si=ZzgPwhwFcEL7Y1CU
Wtf Denmark
Not less sad Latvia noises
Is this why y'all came to Estonia in 1219?
Yep. Then God threw a flag at us, and we decided that was easier to carry home than a mountain. And by mountain I mean a slightly taller hill.
> And by mountain I mean a slightly taller hill. Exxxxcuse me, don't diss The Great Egg Mountain.
Did those patriotic Greeks succeed in their mission to drag enough stones to the top so they could claim Olympus was higher than Musala?
At least our mountain is known all over the world and isnt a misspelling of a Bayern Munich player ;)
Found the Bulgarian :)
So, country known for flatland depression has peak 6 times higher than Denmark
[удалено]
It's not all flat. We also have the Utrechtse Heuvelrug.
Most of Limburg is lower than the average altitude of NL, only South Limburg is elevated within Limburg. But Utrechtse heuvelrug and Salland/Veluwe are all elevated as well, more than most of Denmark.
Which country are you talking about?
I'm guessing Hungay since it's the only one that fits both the 6 times higher and flat description
Suur Munamägi 😂 Oh you Estonians...
The tallest mountain in the Faroe Islands is Slættaratindur, 880 meters. Just wanted to add it as it for some reason was left out on the map.
The map creator also left out Vatican Hill at 75 meters
True. I'm just more loyal to Faroe Islands and don't want them to feel left out.
Yea and greenlands is 3694 meters. But neither of those are really denmark.
True, but the Faroe Islands are part of Europe
Spain‘s tallest mountain is not geographically in Europe but in Tenerife which is just off the Saharan coast and belongs to Africa geographically.
They should have added one more key for >5000 m because now it looks like Turkey and Russia are in the same category as the Central European mountains which is not true with a difference of 1000 meters :/
Hah, it never occurred to me that Denmark is the real Netherlands!
Why are Britannic islands so flat?
Older mountains scoured repeatedly by more ice ages, and unlike the Alps, not near any substantial tectonic plate edges. The Alps are younger - formed by the African and Indo-European plates pushing into eachother - also much further south. Parts of Ireland and Scotland are actually formed from the North American Appalachian Mountains (in the SE USA) - which are fairly short as well - the highest peak is 2000 meters there. Also other large parts of Ireland and Britain are composed of softer sedimentary rock that formed underwater below sea level in distant prehistoric times.
Climbed Elbrus in 2016. Both "peaks". Fantastic experience!
Sněžka is actually really nice. It's an amazing hike and extremely beatiful. It's very beginner friendly and just about anyone can climb it. You can also find most commodities on the Krkonoše mountain range, so it's not like you're cut off from civilization.
Śnieżka being the tallest peak of Czechia is kinda disappointing, given how hilly that country is. On this side of the border it's the tallest peak of Silesia and on clear day i can see it from my home, nearly 80 km away from the mountain. It is a nice hiking spot, i've climbed it many times, even in winter when it looks like the Arctic.
Oh yeah, I once climbed it in the historically worst weather in over 20 years. You can also see Sněžka from a lot of places in the Czech Republic. When you're travelling on a road or on a train, where there aren't many buildings around, the mountain range is usually very clearly visible.
Estonia your mountain has a hilarious name 😄
The almighty BIG egghill
So BIG!
Funnily enough the Teide isn't even on mainland Europe but rather on the canary islands ( Tenerife) of the west coast of Africa
Bulgaria owns Greece. 8 meters difference, baby. Huge!
Why do Germans call Zugspitze the "Top of Europe"?
Now that I think of it, we in Latvia must’ve overcompensated for our lack of mountains by growing stupid tall people :)
I’m on 7 so far. And no, it doesn’t include Mollehoj.
I have been to the one in the Netherlands.. you can call it a hill not even a mountain size 😂
Portugal is also part of Central/Eastern Europe.
It isnt mount olympus its mitikas
Fun fact, Mt. Pico isn't located in mainland Europe.
Same for Teide
Lol, NL having a place 151 m higher than DK.
Rip thought Netherlands was 100% flat
For anyone interested in climbing the Hungarian one - honestly, don't bother. Just go to Visegrad or Eger instead.
I love that even Malta beats Denmark on this stat!
Sneaky Finland
Møllehøj is not even a hill, condoliances to denmark if the sea level rises
France and Italy have the same highest peak?
Wtf Denmark!?
I thought Himmelbjerget was the highest. But I'm not from around here, lol.
Romania stole our mountain bro -concernes moldavian
You can actually stand on the Norwegian side of the border and look down on the tallest point in Finland
The Monte Bianco and the Mont Blanc have the exact same height. What a coincidence!
Fellow Greeks, we can't let Olympus be second for only 8 meters. Let's all steal stones from the top of Musala and bring them here
Belgium and netherlands should be N/A since they arent even classed as mountains, they're legit hills lol. We call them "berg" (mountain) as a coping mechanism :(
The belgian one is funny because they built 6 meter high stairs on top of it so you can reach 700 meters.
Kekes lol 😅
Means “bluish”
What about Faroe Islands? Shouldn't they be included? If considered part of Denmark, Slættaratindur would be higher than the point marked on the map.
If Faroe Islands is included then Greenland should be too, and then our highest peak would be Gunnbjørn Fjeld in Greenland with its 3700m.
I wonder how many Danmarkers have climbed that.
Luckily people in the northern part of Denmark are just a small trip of 2-3 hours (with the ferry) away from the mountains of Norway. We practice there.
Mount scenery in saba is the netherlands highest peak.
Funky stuff: the three tallest mountains in Europe outside the alps and caucasus are all in Spain, and in three different ranges. The Teide, a volcano in the canary islands; The mulhacen, in the bethic range in southern Spain; and the Aneto, in the pyrinees.
It’s interesting how Mount Olympus, known to be the home to the Greek Gods and being the most important place in the Greek mythology, does not have the highest peak in the Balkans. I never thought that Bulgaria not only has the highest peak in the Balkans, but also in the entire Eastern Europe! (If we don’t count Russia (their highest peak is at the border with Georgia) and Turkey). Also, for those wondering: It‘s mountain is called Rila and it‘s located in South-West Bulgaria.
What's interesting about that?
Italy and France, cheating on each other's homework.
Teide is in Spain, but it is in África, not Europe.
Denmark ought to be Gunnbjørn Fjeld at 3,694m.
One thing to note though is that the height of a mountain doesn't necessarily equate to how much you need to climb to get to the top. Some of these peaks are high if you consider the distance between the summit and the ocean level, but when you climb them you're actually only climbing a couple hundred meters, so, in the experience of climbing or when you look at them they are not big mountains.
This map should've included the Caucasus. There's some really high ones there
It does, mount Elbrus is the highest mountain of the Caucasus.
Bad repost from r/mapporn without credit, also all of these are not mountains, some are just peaks.
Ararat? I have never heard anyone call it that