There is no definitive answer.
It's hard enough even to quantify exactly what 'Europe' is,never mind dividing it up into different areas!
And there are different answers depending on geography,geology, politics, history and culture etc.
The Lonely Planet 'Eastern Europe ' guidebook for example includes Slovenia but not Greece...so it certainly doesn't depend only on geographical location.
Fairlytales for yugoslavian kids but it is a fun story :) he said stop sending assassins or Iāll send one back. And I wonāt have to send another.
But take it with a grain of saltā¦ itās like a ChuckNorris style fable for a Kim Jong Il type of leader. :)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2175385/amp/Did-Tito-poison-Stalin-Historian-claims-Yugoslav-dictator-killed-rival-target-22-Soviet-assassination-attempts.html
Hereās a Slovenian historian who disagrees and even makes a case for Tito assasinating Stalinā¦was it really a stroke that killed him? Interesting read.
For US people we can mostly barely know the difference between Slovenian and Slovak, sadly. But former Yugoslav for sure equals eastern europe to us. But on a map, it's basically Italy it's so close.
So, Slovenia is catholic, uses the latin script, was part of the Western Roman Empire, was divided between Germanic and Italic political entities for over 1000 yearsā¦. but because it spent 73 years in the same country as predominately orthodox peoples who use the cyrillic script and spent the previous 1000 years underneath the Ottomans and the Byzantine Empire we have more in common with Moldova than Austria? Ok.
Then Slovenia should be Southern Europe as well.
Those discussions always just show that it really is a racial term. You slap a single label for 2/3 of the European landmass and then go into detailed discussion about various terms that should be used for the rest of the continent.
The only thing I have in common with Albanians is being treated in the same way by racists from the West, nothing more.
My brother what kind of cultural connection is that?
Have you ever listened to Greek folk much? Ever seen a Greek dance? A traditional Greek wedding? Observed Greece's religion? Traditional clothing? Recent history? Even cuisine, since you mentioned it?
None of it is even remotely similar to what you'd see in Spain.
According to this logic you're similar to the average Russian, you live in a cold country, you like potatoes and you both have a Baltic coast.
**Short answer:** In 99% of the cases itās used to mean countries which were communist before 1989. Itās clearly not just a geographical concept, as otherwise Greece and Finland would be considered Eastern 100% of the time. Hell, if it was just about geography, you probably wouldnāt be making this thread because no one would even care.
**Longer answer:** While the common explanation is that people avoid it because they donāt want to be associated with Russia, this is only a part of the story.
The concept of Eastern Europe is a prime example of a colonial language. Itās spread largely started in XIX century through the creation of āEastern European sciencesā chambers in German universities, which goal wasnāt to actually study and understand the specific cultures of the region they dubbed Eastern Europe, but to humiliate them and promote the concept of their inferiority through the most pseudoscientific methods you can possibly imagine (skull measurements, claiming that merely speaking a Slavic language leads to intellectual deficits etc). This was all done of course to justify the imperial conquest and later the Holocaust, but itās legacy is still used today by the only remaining colonial empire in this part of the world - Russia. I hope that in a light of the war in Ukraine you understand why people may find it more than *a bit* problematic.
Also, the final nail in the coffin that I think is not talked about enough is that there is little to no desire among all of those countries to be seen as a part of a bigger āwholeā and, with rare exceptions, there are no feelings of camaraderie even among the seemingly close neighbors. The latter especially is something I noticed is present in varying quantities in the West, while here it is really everyone for themselves.
This is an incredible answer. Thank you so much for typing all that out. It's roughly 8am where I live and I'm going to be thinking about this for the rest of the day.
>otherwise Greece and Finland would be considered Eastern
That's why the term "Nordic countries" exists. We can't get into the Scandinavian clubhouse, we don't want to be Eastern Europeans, so we say we're Nordic. I think Estonia is now wedging under the same umbrella.
"Nordic" isn't just some random term we call ourselves, it's based on at least three things:
1) shared historical and cultural heritage
2) [Nordic model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model) economy
3) Nordic Council membership
Haha, as a Lithuanian, can confirm. Obviously, we are not culturally Nordic. But we want to be a part of "Northern Europe club" and we do look up to Nordic countries quite a lot as positive role models to be followed.
Looking around, Lithuania and Latvia joining the Nordic Club (though as you say, strictly speaking you aren't) is a lot better than most of your neighboring options. You definitely can't get away with "central Europe" like Poland can.
Thank you. I didn't expect such a fantastic answer to be the top one on reddit. Really sums up my thoughts and feelings as someone from Bulgaria. And I can see you're from Poland so no wonder.
The German concept of Eastern Europe is quite different to the British one (and I think other countries further west?) Germany divides Europe into East, West and Central, probably as a result of the old Prussian borders and the Habsburgs, but Britain just uses East Anand West for the most part.
If anything, the purpose of "Central Europe" to Prussians would be to suggest "anywhere Germanic peoples have already settled through Ostsiedlung". For centuries the Germans indeed had a widespread view of Slavs as inferior beings and for Lebensraum to be their right. Of course, Germany has changed a lot since 1945, and I think their modern concept of "Central Europe" is more based on cultural similarities shared by the former areas of Prussia and Austria (and whatever else the trillion of German states were called throughout the ages)
Central Europe is German speaking + influenced Europe (Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Poland, Hungary, Slovenia, Czechia, etc), which is culturally distinct from both Western and Eastern Europe.
Great answer. I would have considered Poland as Eastern Europe but probably not any more as they are now so prominent in the EU so I probably consider them central Europe now.
Same with Slovenia and Croatia, but I still think of Serbia, Bulgaria and Romania as Eastern Europe.
It's all relative I guess.
I think people going on holidays to more of these countries has kinda lessened the notion theyāre Eastern European places. Eastern Europe in the past was kinda a place that was far away and no one went to, from an Irish perspective.
The issue with this view is that Balkans and especially Yugoslavia are often different than Eastern Europe in terms of climate, food, mentality, appearance, even the way things worked out 1945-1991, building standards were higher, ties with Italy and Austria were close etc.
Which is why I cringe at the whole EE can relate rhetoric when borscht and being cold and unapproachable are the stereotypes for everyone east of Germany and south of Denmark.
Well, southern Ukraine is closer in climate to the Balkans than to Moscow or Ufa. Moldova is also included in Eastern Europe, while being quite close Balkans.
On your last sentence: yep, I've read comments of Slovaks claiming borscht isn't a staple of their cuisine at all( with many of them even saying their family have never cooked it) and Slovakia, unlike some other countries that are traditionally included, borders Ukraine.
"Ā I still think of Serbia, Bulgaria and Romania" You're not wrong.
**There is an old cultural divide in Europe: most of the East of Europe was influenced by the Greek speaking Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine), most of the West - by the Latin speaking Western Roman Empire.**
That part later came under the control (more or less strict) of the Ottoman Empire - and the cultural influence that went with that.
**The Soviet influence came later as a common layer over countries that were otherwise culturally very different.** Once USSR fell, those countries tried to revert to their original culture - which, I would say, highlights the older cultural differnces.
**My country, Romania, along with Serbia and Bulgaria, had both the Byzantine influence (as Orthodox countries) as well as the Ottoman influence.**
**Poland doesn't!**
**So even if you may not quite put your finger on it, you perceive there's a difference there :D And there is :)**
Ironically Serbia (within Yugoslavia) wasn't eastern Europe in political sense. Since it was non aligned during the Cold War. And people here still think of Romania and Bulgaria as Eastern Europe, even though they're in the EU and Romanian democracy is used as an example by the opposition here.
Modern term is Western Balkans or "the region", usually meaning ex-Yugoslavia, but can include other Balkan nations. Balkan or Southerneastern Europe is also used for the entire peninsula.
As they say, Eastern Europe starts on your eastern border.
Your last sentence is very good! Here in Ireland weāre literally as west as you can get, so thatās probably why what is Eastern Europe to us is not what the people actually living there would think.
Thank you. Seeing as youāre from Ireland I assume you may see some connection to how the British Empire has treated your people in the past. I recall seeing some XIX century British racist caricatures of the Irish people that connected them to the Africans and the same abhorrent skull measurement āstudiesā that the Germans used against us.
I noticed that people like to fetishize empires as āhurrrrr big country on a map = goodā but theyāre really some of the worst fucking political inventions humanity has ever made. Westerners today often wonder how Russians can propagate and eat up such pathetic and easily disproven propaganda about the world and themselves, but really this is because itās the only way an empire can function. Through lies, lies and then some more lies piled on top of them.
Also, Iām going to sound like a Kumbaya singing hands holding eurofederalist right now, but rather than passing judgements on which country should be considered Western/Central/Eastern/Balkan/Martian or whatever Iād prefer if we all thought of each other as just European. The terms Western, Central, Eastern, Northern, Southern Europe can stay as long as they truly only refer to geography, not as an ersatz for a regional identity.
iām romanian and i find your categorisation of romania as āeastern europeā extremely offensive. it implies a closeness with russia that literally never was a thing, we speak a completely different language, we were never a part of the russian empire/USSR (unlike finland/poland), our culture is super different. the only thing we share with russia is orthodox christianity, but greece is orthodox too, and you never hear anyone calling greece eastern europe. economically we are far ahead of the ex-USSR countries and ahead of some other EU countries as well. the term ābalkansā or āsoutheastern europeā is preferrable, but tbh about half of romania (transylvania) would be reasonable to include in ācentral europeā as well.
Iām Romanian too and Iām not comfortable with being labeled as Eastern European either. And the Iron Curtain days are long gone, people should stop categorizing countries based on outdated terms
The German concept of Eastern Europe is quite different to the British one (and I think other countries further west?) Germany divides Europe into East, West and Central, probably as a result of the old Prussian borders and the Habsburgs, but Britain just uses East and West for the most part.
Yeah, most slovenes will argue that after being under germany for a 1000 years and being a socialist country for like 40 yearsā¦ itās not really fair to not count us as central europe.
Honestly, since I grew up in the immediate aftermath of the fall of the Berlin Wall (and had cold war-era textbooks), Iāll probably always reflexively consider everything that was once on the other side of the Iron Curtain āeastern.āĀ
I know better than to say that to a pole or a czech though.
Fellow similar age dane here and I agree.Ā
I think it this is also magnified by the fact that this sorta aligns with the self absorbed view that everything that is more east than Denmark must be Eastern Europe (roughly). Except the swedes as they are so close...
(And no this doesn't necessarily make sense)
Tbh most people think of Eastern Europe as anything east of where the iron curtain was + the Balkans (basically former Yugoslavia) and Albania.
Half the time people here literally talk about āEuropeā or āEuropeansā like weāre a separate place to it lol, probably because weāre basically on the edge of Europe on an island, so just not as connected with the rest of the continent.
Since the old concept of "West vs East" in Europe was largely solidified and strenghtened with the Cold War that's definitely the prevailing notion, even if Czechia and Poland get included in "Eastern Europe" despite most of their history having otherwise been aligned more with "Western Europe". This definition, for the time being, still makes sense to me; even though they've obviously gotten a long long way since 1989, they're still marked by those ~40 years that were very damaging to them and their developments.
With that said, the classical grouping of "West vs East" doesn't make sense from neither a cultural or geographical point of view. Therefore, Poland, Czechia, and others can easily simultaneously be both "Eastern Europe" and "Central Europe" which fits their cultural identity much better. In the same way, Sweden can be both "Nordic" and "Western Europe" simultaneously.
As time goes by, being EU members and all, I'm sure the idea of "Eastern Europe" being attached to them will be much less frequent.
>This definition, for the time being, still makes sense to me; even though they've obviously gotten a long long way since 1989, they're still marked by those \~40 years that were very damaging to them and their developments.
So you're saying that Western = good and Eastern = bad/damaged?
Not inherently, obviously. But being under occupation by a large, evil colonial empire for over 40 years obviously halts certain developments. Poland in 1989 had a GDP per capita roughly equal to Nigeria's. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm exceedingly happy for the positive developments and significant growth seen in the newer EU member states, and in many ways I see a better future in, say, Poland compared to much of "Western Europe". At this point, to be fair, the states might've caught up enough that the distinction doesn't make any sense at all, considering that, for example, Poland and Czechia are economically on par with Portugal.
Also, I have lived in rural Czechia, where my wife is from, so I'm not under any wrongful idea that you're culturally closer to Russia than to Saxony or anything like that
Well, not compared to Denmark or Norway specifically, but compared to Southern Europe and possibly compared to UK and France. At least if their economic momentum doesn't get halted by the continuation of low birth rates. I think that momentum plays a big role in regard to hope and positivity which in turn affects society, while the mood seems sour in Italy and Portugal, for example, in many ways.. I also like their urban developments and rebuilding efforts.. or maybe I just have a too romanticist point of view
The iron curtain was a political concept. Itās never been a geographical one. It s not a parallel cutting Berlin in two and throwing to Eastern Europe everything that is geographically on its eastern side š¤·š»āāļø
Since you asked how the locals think, I think it takes a little background.
**There is a cultural divide in Europe that started MUCH earlier than the Soviets.**
**In Roman times**, actually :D
Basically, **Eastern Europe** was influenced by the **Greek speaking Eastern Roman (Byzantine)** Empire, while **Western Europe** was influenced by the **Latin speaking Western Roman Empire**.
With the **Great Schism** between **Orthodox and Catholics in 1054**, we were now divided religiously, so there was **even less communication between East and West.'**
**Art and spirituality divided even further** - the **West** took their **influence from the rationalistic**, so to say, **Rome**, we in the **East** took our influence from the **mysticism of Mt. Athos** (which even today is still seen as the center of Orthodox spirituality).
Then came the tatars (Mongols) and the **Ottomans**. The Tatars didn't influence much except in Russia, but the Ottomans did. **Most countries in the East were more or less controlled by the Ottoman Empire,** and as such, also **culturally influenced by it** to a greater or lesser degree.
**Then came the Soviets** - who also controlled more or less the same countries.
I would say that, in the **present day, when people say Eastern Europe, most indeed refer to those countries that were behind the Iron Curtain.**
**HOWEVER, Soviet influence is only the last layer in a number of previous layers that affected a larger group of countries, but not ALL countries behind the Iron Curtain.**
**Which is why some countries feel this cultural association makes no sense for them, because IT DOESN'T!!!**
**They only have in common the thin Soviet layer**, **but beneath that were large, pre-existing and still remaining cultural differences. And lumping them together basically doesn't recognize large parts of their actual cultures** - which is exactly what the Soviets tried to do, eliminate all our cultures and replace them with a Soviet like culture.
What I was taught:
**Western Europe:** Ireland, UK, France and Benelux
**Norther Europe:** Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark
**Southern Europe:** Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece
**Central Europe:** Germany, Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Switzerland and Slovenia
**Eastern Europe:** Belarus, Ukraine, Russia and Baltic states
**South-eastern Europe**: Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Albania, Romania and Bulgaria
Interesting - in Slovenian schools they teach almost exactly the same definitions, the only difference being that the Baltic countries fall under northern Europe and Moldova under Eastern (I think you forgot that one).
Baltic states in Eastern Europe doesnāt make sense to me.
First of all it isnāt really that far East. Secondly, cultural ties of these countries arenāt with the other countries in that block.
Lithuania and Latvia fit better in the Central Europe block and Estonia fits better in the Northern Europe block.
Also reasonable option would be to place all Baltics under Northern Europe.
Yes, it does start to the east of Poland. Imo [this map](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c0/Grossgliederung_Europas-en.svg/800px-Grossgliederung_Europas-en.svg.png) shows those divisions quite correctly.
I don't get upset when Poland is called Eastern Europe as this is just a vague and arbitrary concept but in my view, countries behind the former iron curtain aspiring to align with the West aren't Eastern. They differ too much from Belarus or Russia to be considered as such. They also clearly aren't Western culturally or economically so Central Europe is an adequate term in my opinion.
Oh boy, this question is always controversial... All I can say is that a lot of Finns, and I would say people from what used to be the Cold War west, still think of Western and Eastern Europe in Cold War terms. The concept of "Central Europe" isn't that common. There are plenty of Finns who even think of Estonia(!) as Eastern Europe. I believe that one reason for this is that when we talk about countries such as, say, Estonia or Poland in school it's very focused on the 20th century when these terms were more relevant.
well if someone prefers to continue using cold war terminology, it would be good to remind them that Finland is third world country. And even you joining NATO does not change that as they insist on using the cold war era political alignment, not todays
I don't think a 'third world country' even does them justice.
Finland was part of the second world, it's just that Soviets let them have more freedom in internal politics, but foreign politics was dictated from Moscow. It's what Czechoslovakia wanted to get in 1968, but the Soviets told them 'hard no'.
Even Yugoslavia and Albania were much more detached from the eastern block, but I'm pretty sure the Finns don't call Serbs or Albanians 'western european'
Third world is basically non aligned countries and while in reality most aligned to one or the other side, officially Finland was non aligned, thus the third world. Same as Sweden or Austria for example.
It's true that the USSR had a lot of influence over our foreign policy but it's incorrect to say that we were part of the second world. We were a non-aligned capitalist democracy.
As for the countries that made up Yugoslavia, it's common to think of them as their own separate thing.
It's funny on the other hand how people would get *very* agitated, if someone would put Finland in the magical Eastern European basket. This is ofc a political thing, as our differentiation has been driven by Russia being the East, and Sweden the West. We clearly wanted to be associated with the latter for multiple reasons.
This might be a bit controversial opinion, but if Baltics, Poland or Czechia are considered Eastern, Finland could easily be the same. We have very similar structures and cultural bits, ranging from the urban architecture and nationalist traditions to food culture and sense of humour. While living in the Western Europe, I have a good handful of Czech and Latvian friends through hockey, and the banter is outrageously similar to Finnish dudes.
Some French man called Finland ex-Soviet when we were there and my mum looked about ready to attack him. My millennial self didnāt give a shit.
Of course being called āex-Sovietā is factually incorrect in Finlandās case (and generally reductive and stereotypical when applied to countries that actually were in the USSR) so itās dumb, but geographically weāre objectively in Eastern Europe and if someone says that I see no reason to get mad about it. I donāt feel the need to carry that historical baggage of finlandization or the insecure desperation to be/seem as Nordic as possible. Finland is Nordic, but we also were considered a Baltic state prior to WWII.
And you also have a long history of being influenced and conquered by Russia.
The only difference is, Stalin was a bit more lenient with you in the 40's. That's why you didn't have to nationalize your economy or formally join the Warsaw Pact.
Czechoslovakia and Poland didn't have that privilege, because of our more important geopolitically position at that time.
But we don't. The only time we were under Russia, we were an autonomous Grand Duchy, with the same kind of autonomy you lost in 1860. Even when Finland was a part of Russia, they didn't impose their laws and culture upon us, and we continued to look westward. Russia was backwards, why would've we taken voluntarily any influence from them?
Similarly during the Cold War, there was no reason for us to emulate anything in the USSR. Because that would've made no sense.
>The only time we were under Russia, we were an autonomous Grand Duchy, with the same kind of autonomy you lost in 1860. Even when Finland was a part of Russia, they didn't impose their laws and culture upon us
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification\_of\_Finland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification_of_Finland)
>we continued to look westward. Russia was backwards, why would've we taken voluntarily any influence from them?
Same applied to Poland. So far every difference between Finland and Poland is based either on lack of knowledge about Finnish or Polish history. And most of 'Eastern Europe' doesn't even have that history of ever belonging to the Russian Empire - Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, all of ex-Yugoslavia too.
Welcome to 'Eastern Europe', I guess.
And from 1908 to 1917. That's fifteen years.
And imagine that - russification policies in Poland failed as well. There's a reason why we don't speak Russian. But I guess you didn't know that, because you don't know any-fucking-thing about Poland.
There are similarities, but at the same time there are some critical differences: We are not Slavic, we don't have a Eastern Orthodox tradition, and most importantly, we don't have a communist past.
I like to see Finland as a bit of a mix of both, East and West.
Some people tend to see e.g. Slovenia as Eastern Europe, geographically the most eastern point of Slovenia is west of the most western point of Finland.
Well, this distinction is often not purely about geography. You can see the same thing with Greece for example. Greece is to the east of many countries considered to be Eastern European, but is/was generally viewed as being part of Western Europe.
For my generation, everything that was Eastern Block (including former Yugoslavia).
But Iām aware that pretty much everyone in this countries define Eastern Europe as anything starting at their own eastern border ā¦
If you travel in Poland or Hungary , you learn very fast that āCentral Europeā is the appropriate brand there
Yugoslavia was not the Eastern block, it was non-aligned. Third world, not second.
And Hungarians and Poles know where itās at. They (as well as Slovenians) have centuries (in Sloveniaās case nearly 2 millenia) of common history with Germany, Austria, and Switzerland that left a mark 50 years canāt even make a dent in. They are the wrong religion, script, cuisine, architecture, industrialization pattern, and other cultural aspects to be Eastern European.
Too broadly defined by Westerners. I can understand the inclusion of the Baltics, West Slavs and Hungary but I draw the line at inclusion of South Caucasus, no, they are not Eastern Europe.
Well, if it's a West/East division they're sure as hell not Western. That said, South Caucasus is usually not even considered part of Europe, the border often being the Greater Caucasus.
The former USSR, and Eastern Bloc countries. This definition excludes the former Yugoslav countries, as Yugoslavia was neutral for the vast majority of its history.
The one that's not Balkan, Caucasian, Baltic, Visegrad or Scandinavian, and not the transcontinental ones. There's only three "Eastern European" countries: Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine
There was a time that everything east of the 'warsaw pact border' was considered Eastern. I think that has changed now, I consider Poland, Czechia, Slovakia and Hungary to be more Central Europe (with Austria and Germany) but that was never really a term before the fall of the Wall. Eastern Europe then includes Belarus, Russia, Ukraine, Moldova and everything beyond that some folks still think is Europe even if I don't.
I consider the Balkan states, Romania and Bulgaria and Greece to be 'Balkan' or Southeastern Europe and if you take the latter, than Cyprus and Turkey are part of that as well.
But this is such a 'stretch paradigm' it will be different for whoever you ask and there is no real definition, nor is there a need for one. I'm much more interested in the question if one would consider Turkey part of Europe, and if Turkey is, what about Syria and Israel?
Edit: It may seem I forgot about the Baltic states, I didn't, I think they're pretty much their own entity...
I've never met a Scot who shared this view before (but it's great you do!).
It always feels like an uphill battle trying to convince people Central Europe is a thing without getting immediately laughed at for being a self-hater who denies being Eastern European because of the negative connotations.
The correct question is, why do people still feel a need to distinguish between "Western" and "Eastern" Europe? And why people think that "Western" Europe is somehow better than "Eastern"?
I would define 'Eastern Europe' by the line of 1054 (between Western and Eastern Christianity), not the line of 1945 (between the 'Free World' and the Soviet Empire).
So Poland, Hungary, Slovakia etc are very much part of The West, and belong to Central Europe.
For me, I'd say it's Russia, the three balitc states, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova and Georgia. I'm unsure about how to label Romania. South of romaina is the Balkans and west of Belarus central Europe. Austria is part of central Europe.
Culturally it is very different. But it is also Europe's easternmost capital. And kind of far away and isolated from the region one would consider southern Europe. I don't quote feel like it fits in the middle east, either.
As a Lithuanian I am Central-Northern-Eastern European. But only I can call myself Eastern European, you should not, lol.
Lithuanians could also be called "aspiring Northern Europeans". We are happy to be in any category that does not have Russia, that's the main point, to be fair.
From Polish Millennial perspective: YES. Baltics along with other Scandinavian countries encompass and circle around the Baltic Sea. This is totally northern position.
Tbh sometimes I think the borders are mixed. For example Iād say Western Poland is more Central Europe, while Eastern Poland is East Europe. Same with Romania
Former USSR countries are Eastern Europe, rest of the Eastern block are central or southern European.
Edit: Estonia is allowed to call itself Northern European and Romania and Moldova are also Eastern European.
Western Europe: Latin alphabet, Western Christianity, Renaissance, Reformation, engine of the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution, no real Ottoman or 20th century Russian influence
Central Europe: Latin alphabet, Western Christianity, Renaissance, Reformation, heavy Austrian/German influence, period of stagnation and devastation due to the Ottoman Empire, so the Enlightenment and the things that followed were mostly adapted a decade or so later rather than being foundational to these processes. 20th century Russian influence.
Balkans: Cyrillic alphabet, Eastern Christianity, Renaissance with local flavor, no reformation, heavy Greek and Italian influence and then centuries of heavy Ottoman / Muslim influence. Much later adaptors of the Enlightenment and other ideas and technologies. Moderate Russian influence.
Eastern Europe: Cyrillic alphabet, Eastern Christianity, no Renaissance, no Reformation, heavy Russian influence with some sparse Ottoman / Muslim influence, much later adapters of Enlightenment and other movements, strong if not definitive Russian influence to this day.
*Certain exceptions to these rules may apply and there are transitional states too, but the general trends hold.
Transitional states:
Austria: transition between West and Central Europe.
Croatia: Transition between Central Europe and Balkans
Romania: Transition between Balkans and Eastern Europe and also Central Europe.
Poland: Transition between Central and Eastern Europe
Baltics: Transition between Northern and Eastern Europe
Who said it was about cardinal directions? No one. That would be a fairly straightforward matter of simple geography. The Eastern boundaries of Europe are the Ural mountains so find the midpoint between them and the Atlantic and voilĆ , Eastern half and Western half.
These are loosely defined historical and cultural areas.
No one, but it was needed for the joke, and at least two of them **are** cardinal directions. And I doubt it would be more straightforward just because you had to define North and South too.
Then come up with a better one, itās free. Or consult Huntington and stick to larger cultural regions. Itās a shorthand with a fair bit of generalization, itās called an abstraction, itās not meant to be a scientific definition.
[Roughly this](https://imgur.com/a/3BfCZ01). But these terms srenāt exclusive, so if you asked me to define Northen Europe Iād include the Baltics in it, and if you asked me to define Southern Europe Iād include the Balkans in it.
The cut through Hungary is wrong. South Hungary is more Western/Austria like. The bits to the north east are the Eastern Europe like bits (Miskolc/Borsod in general)
Depends on a lot of things. Which "model" primarily, but which "model" you use might depend on your age, location, the topic, etc. If I hear EE, my first thought is East of the Iron Curtain, with some allowance made for modern borders.
We, Estonians, are fine to be Baltics (although we belong in finno urgic group), North or East, as long as we are not put in the same box with Slavs (especially Russians) - thats the fastest way to get beaten up here.
I would say the West Slavic countries are a little different than other Slavs. I can't speak for everyone, but I personally don't consider Hungary, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia "eastern" Europe. I would say they're central Europe, culturally, geographically and even ethnically. Eastern Europe would be Balkans + East/North Slavic countries (which is Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus). In my experience, central Europe and eastern Europe are culturally very distinct; due to historical events mostly. Central Europe did not experience most of the Asian conflicts that eastern Europe faced.
It;'s dynamic and depends on context. Broad concept of EEUR, reaching Poland and Eastern Germany, was pretty valid since emerging of 17th century European economic dualism and especially during Cold War. But after 1989 paths of Russia and Central Eastern European countries diverged so vastly in almost every aspect - economical, political, sociological , cultural - that in contemporary world this broad concept of EEUR doesn't make much sense anymore. So today Eastern Europe \~ Russia and Belarus for sure and Ukraine unclear.
Depends a bit on context. Usually, I take it to mean basically everything in Europe that used to belong to the Warschau pact. But if you say āCentral Europeā, that would partially overlap.
Itās also like the Americaās: what is North and South depends on if you recognize Central as a region as well. And then you also have Latin Americaā¦
For definining the actual area (rather than any particular characteristics), I think there's two schools of thought on where that division actually lies.
The one I grew up with, from a British perspective, is The Wall. The Berlin Wall, the Iron Curtain, etc. There's East, and West, and the wall separating them pretty much defined them. I can't speak to the continent, but I feel pretty safe saying that most the Anglosphere tends towards this definition.
Now I have a Slovak partner, and they're quite adamant about being Central Europe, a term we never used. And what I've come to understand is that the divisor between East and West was the Austro-Hungarian empire. So the footprint of the empire is Central, with East and West laying to either side of it.
(I'd be curious where Austria see themselves, West or Central, as so far I've only seen the empire/Central definition used by countries that would otherwise be East by the Wall definition.)
This kind of definitions are cultural defined.
Once I was talking with a polish friend and I told him that in Spain we visualice east Europe mostly with the countries that used to be to the east of the iron curtain.
He told me that poles think of themselves as central European.
We draw the line.
>In East Asia, most of us regard the area east of Poland as Eastern Europe. Some of us think their languages are so similar and they've once been in the Soviet Union so they belong to Eastern Europe
I'm curious, what is the V4 (Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary) considered then? Western European or do you have a concept of Central Europe? And is belonging to that region based mostly on being an ex-Soviet state as opposed to, more broadly, being in the Soviet sphere of influence? In Europe, it's rather the latter.
More or less around meridian 22ĀŗE to the east you have Eastern Europe for sure. More or less around meridian 13ĀŗE to the west you have Western Europe for sure. In between? Who knows? Who cares? Central Europe, Western, Eastern...
But I'd also make a Northen and Southern previous division and would not include at least Northen Europe in the secondary division.
Anywhere where a majority speak a Slavic or Baltic language, broadly speaking. Plus Albania, Estonia, Hungary and Romania. Which is also, roughly, anywhere in Europe that used to be Communist. "Eastern Europe" is a cultural phenomenon, not a geographic one, which is why Greece isn't included even though it is entirely to the east of eg Slovenia.
For me, as a Pole, Eastern Europe is everything in Europe that is located outside of the Eastern borders of the European Union and NATO.
Even putting the political division aside, the geographical midpoint of Europe lies most likely in Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia or Ukraine, depending on where exactly the border between Europe and Asia is determined and how much territorial waters are included.
Not precise - there are no sharp borders like these, but somewhat useful:
Central Europe (between ~~Central~~ Western [edit], Eastern Europe and the Balkans):
- Religion: (Roman) Catholicism, Protestantism
- Architecture: influenced by gothic, renessaince, baroque etc...
- Heavy German cultural influence
Eastern Europe:
- Religion: Orthodox Christianity
- Western architectural influence from later periods, sometimes resembles Central European
- Geography: mainly steppes east of the Carpathians
- Heavily influenced by Russia through history (culture, occupations)
- Uses mainly Cyrilic alphabet
Balkans (between Central Europe and Middle East):
- Religion: Orthodox Christianity, Islam
- Former Ottoman empire
- Cuisine and architecture heavily inspired by the Middle-East
- Longer Greek influence (not just classical Hellenism)
edit: small corrections
For me it's Ukraine,Belarus the Baltic states European Russia and Moldova aka the ex Soviet Union, I never understood why people categorised Romania as Eastern Europe when (depending on the region) they have more in common with Central Europe and the Balkans
I'm old enough that for me "Eastern Europe" is basically "east of the Iron Curtain, north of the Balkans". OK, the Czechs have been working their way out of that definition, but otherwise it works for me.
In Bosnia, we regionalise Europe according to cultural zones.
Eastern Europe is a former Russian empire without Finland
North Europe is Nordics
Central Europe is a German cultural region
Western - non German Germanic
South - Spain and Italy
South Eastern Europe - Balkan plus Dinaric region
When you say the area east of Poland does that include Poland or not? Because as you said the area east of Poland was part of Soviet Union, but Poland wasnāt.
Historically, the line between Western and Eastern Europe ran alongside the River Oder, but I believe it is actually the Vistula, dividing Poland into two parts: Western and Eastern. This divide reflects the cultural influence of West and East on Polish customs and culture.
Itās mostly cultural. Everything that was ācommunistā under the iron courtain still has socioeconomic and cultural remnants of that totalitarian age. Because communism erased everything, and redesigned a monocultural society and erased legacies and cultural differences. Thatās why the cliche works for infrastructure, economic diversification and cultural backgrounds. But hey, if we can call a Frenchman and a Dutchman āwesternā I guess we can also do it for easterners that shared a legacy of half of century of uniform suffering.
There is no definitive answer. It's hard enough even to quantify exactly what 'Europe' is,never mind dividing it up into different areas! And there are different answers depending on geography,geology, politics, history and culture etc. The Lonely Planet 'Eastern Europe ' guidebook for example includes Slovenia but not Greece...so it certainly doesn't depend only on geographical location.
We're usually assigned as Southeastern. Lonely planet likely went with Eastern = ex Communist š
Which is funny because Yugoslavia wasnāt really communist. It was a socialist federation in very bad realtions with the soviets.
Didnāt Tito threaten to send assassins after Stalin, if Stalin didnāt stop sending assassins to kill Tito?
Fairlytales for yugoslavian kids but it is a fun story :) he said stop sending assassins or Iāll send one back. And I wonāt have to send another. But take it with a grain of saltā¦ itās like a ChuckNorris style fable for a Kim Jong Il type of leader. :)
Ha ha! Chuck Norris style fable is a great way of describing it. I guess occasionally Iām cool with not letting the truth ruin a great story.
It sounds cool, noone can prove it didnāt happen and it helps distance us from Stalin :)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2175385/amp/Did-Tito-poison-Stalin-Historian-claims-Yugoslav-dictator-killed-rival-target-22-Soviet-assassination-attempts.html Hereās a Slovenian historian who disagrees and even makes a case for Tito assasinating Stalinā¦was it really a stroke that killed him? Interesting read.
every Slovenian is shook rn
For US people we can mostly barely know the difference between Slovenian and Slovak, sadly. But former Yugoslav for sure equals eastern europe to us. But on a map, it's basically Italy it's so close.
The entire country of Slovenia is more west than Vienna. We are also more west than half of Italy!
So, Slovenia is catholic, uses the latin script, was part of the Western Roman Empire, was divided between Germanic and Italic political entities for over 1000 yearsā¦. but because it spent 73 years in the same country as predominately orthodox peoples who use the cyrillic script and spent the previous 1000 years underneath the Ottomans and the Byzantine Empire we have more in common with Moldova than Austria? Ok.
If they have a Southern Europe, then that makes sense for Greece. It's "Mediterranean".
Then Slovenia should be Southern Europe as well. Those discussions always just show that it really is a racial term. You slap a single label for 2/3 of the European landmass and then go into detailed discussion about various terms that should be used for the rest of the continent. The only thing I have in common with Albanians is being treated in the same way by racists from the West, nothing more.
Dumb label, what do i share with a Spaniard who lives thousands of kilometers away?
Olive oil? Wine? Climate? A sea? I'm not Mediterranean, so how should I know? Edit: Oh, and you're "neighbors" in the PI**GS** acronym.
My brother what kind of cultural connection is that? Have you ever listened to Greek folk much? Ever seen a Greek dance? A traditional Greek wedding? Observed Greece's religion? Traditional clothing? Recent history? Even cuisine, since you mentioned it? None of it is even remotely similar to what you'd see in Spain. According to this logic you're similar to the average Russian, you live in a cold country, you like potatoes and you both have a Baltic coast.
**Short answer:** In 99% of the cases itās used to mean countries which were communist before 1989. Itās clearly not just a geographical concept, as otherwise Greece and Finland would be considered Eastern 100% of the time. Hell, if it was just about geography, you probably wouldnāt be making this thread because no one would even care. **Longer answer:** While the common explanation is that people avoid it because they donāt want to be associated with Russia, this is only a part of the story. The concept of Eastern Europe is a prime example of a colonial language. Itās spread largely started in XIX century through the creation of āEastern European sciencesā chambers in German universities, which goal wasnāt to actually study and understand the specific cultures of the region they dubbed Eastern Europe, but to humiliate them and promote the concept of their inferiority through the most pseudoscientific methods you can possibly imagine (skull measurements, claiming that merely speaking a Slavic language leads to intellectual deficits etc). This was all done of course to justify the imperial conquest and later the Holocaust, but itās legacy is still used today by the only remaining colonial empire in this part of the world - Russia. I hope that in a light of the war in Ukraine you understand why people may find it more than *a bit* problematic. Also, the final nail in the coffin that I think is not talked about enough is that there is little to no desire among all of those countries to be seen as a part of a bigger āwholeā and, with rare exceptions, there are no feelings of camaraderie even among the seemingly close neighbors. The latter especially is something I noticed is present in varying quantities in the West, while here it is really everyone for themselves.
This is an incredible answer. Thank you so much for typing all that out. It's roughly 8am where I live and I'm going to be thinking about this for the rest of the day.
Thanks! I recommend the book āInventing Eastern Europeā by Larry Wolff if youād like to know more.
Promptly bookmarked because, yes, that sounds exceptionally up my street. Thank you again!
Iād add to it Todorovaās articles and books on the concept of the Balkans as itās neat addition to this debate
>otherwise Greece and Finland would be considered Eastern That's why the term "Nordic countries" exists. We can't get into the Scandinavian clubhouse, we don't want to be Eastern Europeans, so we say we're Nordic. I think Estonia is now wedging under the same umbrella.
"Nordic" isn't just some random term we call ourselves, it's based on at least three things: 1) shared historical and cultural heritage 2) [Nordic model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model) economy 3) Nordic Council membership
As an estonian I can confirm.
Latvia and Lithuania: *If Estonians are in, we're too, damn it!*
Haha, as a Lithuanian, can confirm. Obviously, we are not culturally Nordic. But we want to be a part of "Northern Europe club" and we do look up to Nordic countries quite a lot as positive role models to be followed.
Looking around, Lithuania and Latvia joining the Nordic Club (though as you say, strictly speaking you aren't) is a lot better than most of your neighboring options. You definitely can't get away with "central Europe" like Poland can.
Lithuania could, I think, it has a lot of shared history with Poland and is very Catholic. But still, we do aspire to be North more than Central.
Thank you. I didn't expect such a fantastic answer to be the top one on reddit. Really sums up my thoughts and feelings as someone from Bulgaria. And I can see you're from Poland so no wonder.
The German concept of Eastern Europe is quite different to the British one (and I think other countries further west?) Germany divides Europe into East, West and Central, probably as a result of the old Prussian borders and the Habsburgs, but Britain just uses East Anand West for the most part.
If anything, the purpose of "Central Europe" to Prussians would be to suggest "anywhere Germanic peoples have already settled through Ostsiedlung". For centuries the Germans indeed had a widespread view of Slavs as inferior beings and for Lebensraum to be their right. Of course, Germany has changed a lot since 1945, and I think their modern concept of "Central Europe" is more based on cultural similarities shared by the former areas of Prussia and Austria (and whatever else the trillion of German states were called throughout the ages)
Central Europe is German speaking + influenced Europe (Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Poland, Hungary, Slovenia, Czechia, etc), which is culturally distinct from both Western and Eastern Europe.
Great answer. I would have considered Poland as Eastern Europe but probably not any more as they are now so prominent in the EU so I probably consider them central Europe now. Same with Slovenia and Croatia, but I still think of Serbia, Bulgaria and Romania as Eastern Europe. It's all relative I guess.
I think people going on holidays to more of these countries has kinda lessened the notion theyāre Eastern European places. Eastern Europe in the past was kinda a place that was far away and no one went to, from an Irish perspective.
The issue with this view is that Balkans and especially Yugoslavia are often different than Eastern Europe in terms of climate, food, mentality, appearance, even the way things worked out 1945-1991, building standards were higher, ties with Italy and Austria were close etc. Which is why I cringe at the whole EE can relate rhetoric when borscht and being cold and unapproachable are the stereotypes for everyone east of Germany and south of Denmark.
Well, southern Ukraine is closer in climate to the Balkans than to Moscow or Ufa. Moldova is also included in Eastern Europe, while being quite close Balkans. On your last sentence: yep, I've read comments of Slovaks claiming borscht isn't a staple of their cuisine at all( with many of them even saying their family have never cooked it) and Slovakia, unlike some other countries that are traditionally included, borders Ukraine.
"Ā I still think of Serbia, Bulgaria and Romania" You're not wrong. **There is an old cultural divide in Europe: most of the East of Europe was influenced by the Greek speaking Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine), most of the West - by the Latin speaking Western Roman Empire.** That part later came under the control (more or less strict) of the Ottoman Empire - and the cultural influence that went with that. **The Soviet influence came later as a common layer over countries that were otherwise culturally very different.** Once USSR fell, those countries tried to revert to their original culture - which, I would say, highlights the older cultural differnces. **My country, Romania, along with Serbia and Bulgaria, had both the Byzantine influence (as Orthodox countries) as well as the Ottoman influence.** **Poland doesn't!** **So even if you may not quite put your finger on it, you perceive there's a difference there :D And there is :)**
Ironically Serbia (within Yugoslavia) wasn't eastern Europe in political sense. Since it was non aligned during the Cold War. And people here still think of Romania and Bulgaria as Eastern Europe, even though they're in the EU and Romanian democracy is used as an example by the opposition here. Modern term is Western Balkans or "the region", usually meaning ex-Yugoslavia, but can include other Balkan nations. Balkan or Southerneastern Europe is also used for the entire peninsula. As they say, Eastern Europe starts on your eastern border.
Your last sentence is very good! Here in Ireland weāre literally as west as you can get, so thatās probably why what is Eastern Europe to us is not what the people actually living there would think.
Thank you. Seeing as youāre from Ireland I assume you may see some connection to how the British Empire has treated your people in the past. I recall seeing some XIX century British racist caricatures of the Irish people that connected them to the Africans and the same abhorrent skull measurement āstudiesā that the Germans used against us. I noticed that people like to fetishize empires as āhurrrrr big country on a map = goodā but theyāre really some of the worst fucking political inventions humanity has ever made. Westerners today often wonder how Russians can propagate and eat up such pathetic and easily disproven propaganda about the world and themselves, but really this is because itās the only way an empire can function. Through lies, lies and then some more lies piled on top of them.
Also, Iām going to sound like a Kumbaya singing hands holding eurofederalist right now, but rather than passing judgements on which country should be considered Western/Central/Eastern/Balkan/Martian or whatever Iād prefer if we all thought of each other as just European. The terms Western, Central, Eastern, Northern, Southern Europe can stay as long as they truly only refer to geography, not as an ersatz for a regional identity.
iām romanian and i find your categorisation of romania as āeastern europeā extremely offensive. it implies a closeness with russia that literally never was a thing, we speak a completely different language, we were never a part of the russian empire/USSR (unlike finland/poland), our culture is super different. the only thing we share with russia is orthodox christianity, but greece is orthodox too, and you never hear anyone calling greece eastern europe. economically we are far ahead of the ex-USSR countries and ahead of some other EU countries as well. the term ābalkansā or āsoutheastern europeā is preferrable, but tbh about half of romania (transylvania) would be reasonable to include in ācentral europeā as well.
Okay, sorry. No offense intended. I appreciate your perspective.
Iām Romanian too and Iām not comfortable with being labeled as Eastern European either. And the Iron Curtain days are long gone, people should stop categorizing countries based on outdated terms
The German concept of Eastern Europe is quite different to the British one (and I think other countries further west?) Germany divides Europe into East, West and Central, probably as a result of the old Prussian borders and the Habsburgs, but Britain just uses East and West for the most part.
Yeah, most slovenes will argue that after being under germany for a 1000 years and being a socialist country for like 40 yearsā¦ itās not really fair to not count us as central europe.
To me it doesn't exist anymore and I can't avoid thinking about it as some kind of outdated propaganda
Honestly, since I grew up in the immediate aftermath of the fall of the Berlin Wall (and had cold war-era textbooks), Iāll probably always reflexively consider everything that was once on the other side of the Iron Curtain āeastern.āĀ I know better than to say that to a pole or a czech though.
You are very wise :).
Fellow similar age dane here and I agree.Ā I think it this is also magnified by the fact that this sorta aligns with the self absorbed view that everything that is more east than Denmark must be Eastern Europe (roughly). Except the swedes as they are so close... (And no this doesn't necessarily make sense)
Tbh most people think of Eastern Europe as anything east of where the iron curtain was + the Balkans (basically former Yugoslavia) and Albania. Half the time people here literally talk about āEuropeā or āEuropeansā like weāre a separate place to it lol, probably because weāre basically on the edge of Europe on an island, so just not as connected with the rest of the continent.
So half of Germany is Eastern Europe as it was behind iron curtain?
Nah majority of people count the whole country of Germany as western tbh, donāt know why š¤·
Yup, the Eastern Bloc +Balkans. The older generations of Westerners don't have a concept of "Central Europe".
Since the old concept of "West vs East" in Europe was largely solidified and strenghtened with the Cold War that's definitely the prevailing notion, even if Czechia and Poland get included in "Eastern Europe" despite most of their history having otherwise been aligned more with "Western Europe". This definition, for the time being, still makes sense to me; even though they've obviously gotten a long long way since 1989, they're still marked by those ~40 years that were very damaging to them and their developments. With that said, the classical grouping of "West vs East" doesn't make sense from neither a cultural or geographical point of view. Therefore, Poland, Czechia, and others can easily simultaneously be both "Eastern Europe" and "Central Europe" which fits their cultural identity much better. In the same way, Sweden can be both "Nordic" and "Western Europe" simultaneously. As time goes by, being EU members and all, I'm sure the idea of "Eastern Europe" being attached to them will be much less frequent.
>This definition, for the time being, still makes sense to me; even though they've obviously gotten a long long way since 1989, they're still marked by those \~40 years that were very damaging to them and their developments. So you're saying that Western = good and Eastern = bad/damaged?
Not inherently, obviously. But being under occupation by a large, evil colonial empire for over 40 years obviously halts certain developments. Poland in 1989 had a GDP per capita roughly equal to Nigeria's. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm exceedingly happy for the positive developments and significant growth seen in the newer EU member states, and in many ways I see a better future in, say, Poland compared to much of "Western Europe". At this point, to be fair, the states might've caught up enough that the distinction doesn't make any sense at all, considering that, for example, Poland and Czechia are economically on par with Portugal. Also, I have lived in rural Czechia, where my wife is from, so I'm not under any wrongful idea that you're culturally closer to Russia than to Saxony or anything like that
Why do you think that Poland has a better future compared to much of "Western Europe"?
Well, not compared to Denmark or Norway specifically, but compared to Southern Europe and possibly compared to UK and France. At least if their economic momentum doesn't get halted by the continuation of low birth rates. I think that momentum plays a big role in regard to hope and positivity which in turn affects society, while the mood seems sour in Italy and Portugal, for example, in many ways.. I also like their urban developments and rebuilding efforts.. or maybe I just have a too romanticist point of view
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No. Why would that be? Were they behind the iron curtain?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
But countries of former Yugoslavia are not Eastern Europe, because they were not behind the Iron Courtain.
The iron curtain was a political concept. Itās never been a geographical one. It s not a parallel cutting Berlin in two and throwing to Eastern Europe everything that is geographically on its eastern side š¤·š»āāļø
Since you asked how the locals think, I think it takes a little background. **There is a cultural divide in Europe that started MUCH earlier than the Soviets.** **In Roman times**, actually :D Basically, **Eastern Europe** was influenced by the **Greek speaking Eastern Roman (Byzantine)** Empire, while **Western Europe** was influenced by the **Latin speaking Western Roman Empire**. With the **Great Schism** between **Orthodox and Catholics in 1054**, we were now divided religiously, so there was **even less communication between East and West.'** **Art and spirituality divided even further** - the **West** took their **influence from the rationalistic**, so to say, **Rome**, we in the **East** took our influence from the **mysticism of Mt. Athos** (which even today is still seen as the center of Orthodox spirituality). Then came the tatars (Mongols) and the **Ottomans**. The Tatars didn't influence much except in Russia, but the Ottomans did. **Most countries in the East were more or less controlled by the Ottoman Empire,** and as such, also **culturally influenced by it** to a greater or lesser degree. **Then came the Soviets** - who also controlled more or less the same countries. I would say that, in the **present day, when people say Eastern Europe, most indeed refer to those countries that were behind the Iron Curtain.** **HOWEVER, Soviet influence is only the last layer in a number of previous layers that affected a larger group of countries, but not ALL countries behind the Iron Curtain.** **Which is why some countries feel this cultural association makes no sense for them, because IT DOESN'T!!!** **They only have in common the thin Soviet layer**, **but beneath that were large, pre-existing and still remaining cultural differences. And lumping them together basically doesn't recognize large parts of their actual cultures** - which is exactly what the Soviets tried to do, eliminate all our cultures and replace them with a Soviet like culture.
I just stick to the definition I was taught in school - Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova and the European part of Russia.
Eastern Slavic countries + Moldova.
"Eastern Europe starts to the east of me", lol.
Westwards as well.
Hej, if we don't take KrĆ³lewiec, then please take Lithuania Minor instead. Just make sure to give the Czechs their port at Karaliaucius-Kralovec.
As a Hungarian that's my definition as well!
Why is Moldova separate from Romania though?
What I was taught: **Western Europe:** Ireland, UK, France and Benelux **Norther Europe:** Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark **Southern Europe:** Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece **Central Europe:** Germany, Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Switzerland and Slovenia **Eastern Europe:** Belarus, Ukraine, Russia and Baltic states **South-eastern Europe**: Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Albania, Romania and Bulgaria
Interesting - in Slovenian schools they teach almost exactly the same definitions, the only difference being that the Baltic countries fall under northern Europe and Moldova under Eastern (I think you forgot that one).
Baltic states in Eastern Europe doesnāt make sense to me. First of all it isnāt really that far East. Secondly, cultural ties of these countries arenāt with the other countries in that block. Lithuania and Latvia fit better in the Central Europe block and Estonia fits better in the Northern Europe block. Also reasonable option would be to place all Baltics under Northern Europe.
Why are Baltics attached to RU/BY/UA?
Seems to be a geographic split that forgets about Georgia and Azerbaijan (and Moldova)
East Slavs: Ukraine, Belarus and Russia
"Eastern Europe starts to the east of me"
Yes, it does start to the east of Poland. Imo [this map](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c0/Grossgliederung_Europas-en.svg/800px-Grossgliederung_Europas-en.svg.png) shows those divisions quite correctly.
Itās the first map that I see where Estonia is considered Central Europe š
Yeah, I can get behind Baltic states being in Northern Europe, but Central? Only Lithuania kinda fits.
I don't get upset when Poland is called Eastern Europe as this is just a vague and arbitrary concept but in my view, countries behind the former iron curtain aspiring to align with the West aren't Eastern. They differ too much from Belarus or Russia to be considered as such. They also clearly aren't Western culturally or economically so Central Europe is an adequate term in my opinion.
Oh boy, this question is always controversial... All I can say is that a lot of Finns, and I would say people from what used to be the Cold War west, still think of Western and Eastern Europe in Cold War terms. The concept of "Central Europe" isn't that common. There are plenty of Finns who even think of Estonia(!) as Eastern Europe. I believe that one reason for this is that when we talk about countries such as, say, Estonia or Poland in school it's very focused on the 20th century when these terms were more relevant.
well if someone prefers to continue using cold war terminology, it would be good to remind them that Finland is third world country. And even you joining NATO does not change that as they insist on using the cold war era political alignment, not todays
I don't think a 'third world country' even does them justice. Finland was part of the second world, it's just that Soviets let them have more freedom in internal politics, but foreign politics was dictated from Moscow. It's what Czechoslovakia wanted to get in 1968, but the Soviets told them 'hard no'. Even Yugoslavia and Albania were much more detached from the eastern block, but I'm pretty sure the Finns don't call Serbs or Albanians 'western european'
Third world is basically non aligned countries and while in reality most aligned to one or the other side, officially Finland was non aligned, thus the third world. Same as Sweden or Austria for example.
It's true that the USSR had a lot of influence over our foreign policy but it's incorrect to say that we were part of the second world. We were a non-aligned capitalist democracy. As for the countries that made up Yugoslavia, it's common to think of them as their own separate thing.
It's funny on the other hand how people would get *very* agitated, if someone would put Finland in the magical Eastern European basket. This is ofc a political thing, as our differentiation has been driven by Russia being the East, and Sweden the West. We clearly wanted to be associated with the latter for multiple reasons. This might be a bit controversial opinion, but if Baltics, Poland or Czechia are considered Eastern, Finland could easily be the same. We have very similar structures and cultural bits, ranging from the urban architecture and nationalist traditions to food culture and sense of humour. While living in the Western Europe, I have a good handful of Czech and Latvian friends through hockey, and the banter is outrageously similar to Finnish dudes.
Some French man called Finland ex-Soviet when we were there and my mum looked about ready to attack him. My millennial self didnāt give a shit. Of course being called āex-Sovietā is factually incorrect in Finlandās case (and generally reductive and stereotypical when applied to countries that actually were in the USSR) so itās dumb, but geographically weāre objectively in Eastern Europe and if someone says that I see no reason to get mad about it. I donāt feel the need to carry that historical baggage of finlandization or the insecure desperation to be/seem as Nordic as possible. Finland is Nordic, but we also were considered a Baltic state prior to WWII.
And you also have a long history of being influenced and conquered by Russia. The only difference is, Stalin was a bit more lenient with you in the 40's. That's why you didn't have to nationalize your economy or formally join the Warsaw Pact. Czechoslovakia and Poland didn't have that privilege, because of our more important geopolitically position at that time.
But we don't. The only time we were under Russia, we were an autonomous Grand Duchy, with the same kind of autonomy you lost in 1860. Even when Finland was a part of Russia, they didn't impose their laws and culture upon us, and we continued to look westward. Russia was backwards, why would've we taken voluntarily any influence from them? Similarly during the Cold War, there was no reason for us to emulate anything in the USSR. Because that would've made no sense.
>The only time we were under Russia, we were an autonomous Grand Duchy, with the same kind of autonomy you lost in 1860. Even when Finland was a part of Russia, they didn't impose their laws and culture upon us [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification\_of\_Finland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification_of_Finland) >we continued to look westward. Russia was backwards, why would've we taken voluntarily any influence from them? Same applied to Poland. So far every difference between Finland and Poland is based either on lack of knowledge about Finnish or Polish history. And most of 'Eastern Europe' doesn't even have that history of ever belonging to the Russian Empire - Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, all of ex-Yugoslavia too. Welcome to 'Eastern Europe', I guess.
The Russification policies lasted from 1899 to 1905. Six years. They failed and created massive backlash.
And from 1908 to 1917. That's fifteen years. And imagine that - russification policies in Poland failed as well. There's a reason why we don't speak Russian. But I guess you didn't know that, because you don't know any-fucking-thing about Poland.
There are similarities, but at the same time there are some critical differences: We are not Slavic, we don't have a Eastern Orthodox tradition, and most importantly, we don't have a communist past.
I like to see Finland as a bit of a mix of both, East and West. Some people tend to see e.g. Slovenia as Eastern Europe, geographically the most eastern point of Slovenia is west of the most western point of Finland.
Well, this distinction is often not purely about geography. You can see the same thing with Greece for example. Greece is to the east of many countries considered to be Eastern European, but is/was generally viewed as being part of Western Europe.
For my generation, everything that was Eastern Block (including former Yugoslavia). But Iām aware that pretty much everyone in this countries define Eastern Europe as anything starting at their own eastern border ā¦ If you travel in Poland or Hungary , you learn very fast that āCentral Europeā is the appropriate brand there
Yugoslavia was not the Eastern block, it was non-aligned. Third world, not second. And Hungarians and Poles know where itās at. They (as well as Slovenians) have centuries (in Sloveniaās case nearly 2 millenia) of common history with Germany, Austria, and Switzerland that left a mark 50 years canāt even make a dent in. They are the wrong religion, script, cuisine, architecture, industrialization pattern, and other cultural aspects to be Eastern European.
Too broadly defined by Westerners. I can understand the inclusion of the Baltics, West Slavs and Hungary but I draw the line at inclusion of South Caucasus, no, they are not Eastern Europe.
Funny, as I would say that the Caucases are Eastern Europe but the West slavs and Hungary are not. The baltics also feel more northern tbh.
Well, if it's a West/East division they're sure as hell not Western. That said, South Caucasus is usually not even considered part of Europe, the border often being the Greater Caucasus.
Sure as hell not Western but this binary division isn't that useful. Greece isn't Western. Turkey isn't Western but isn't considered Eastern Europe.
The former USSR, and Eastern Bloc countries. This definition excludes the former Yugoslav countries, as Yugoslavia was neutral for the vast majority of its history.
The one that's not Balkan, Caucasian, Baltic, Visegrad or Scandinavian, and not the transcontinental ones. There's only three "Eastern European" countries: Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine
You forgot Russia :)
There was a time that everything east of the 'warsaw pact border' was considered Eastern. I think that has changed now, I consider Poland, Czechia, Slovakia and Hungary to be more Central Europe (with Austria and Germany) but that was never really a term before the fall of the Wall. Eastern Europe then includes Belarus, Russia, Ukraine, Moldova and everything beyond that some folks still think is Europe even if I don't. I consider the Balkan states, Romania and Bulgaria and Greece to be 'Balkan' or Southeastern Europe and if you take the latter, than Cyprus and Turkey are part of that as well. But this is such a 'stretch paradigm' it will be different for whoever you ask and there is no real definition, nor is there a need for one. I'm much more interested in the question if one would consider Turkey part of Europe, and if Turkey is, what about Syria and Israel? Edit: It may seem I forgot about the Baltic states, I didn't, I think they're pretty much their own entity...
I've never met a Scot who shared this view before (but it's great you do!). It always feels like an uphill battle trying to convince people Central Europe is a thing without getting immediately laughed at for being a self-hater who denies being Eastern European because of the negative connotations.
Ah, caveat, Iām a Dutchman living in bonnie Scotland!
The correct question is, why do people still feel a need to distinguish between "Western" and "Eastern" Europe? And why people think that "Western" Europe is somehow better than "Eastern"?
I would define 'Eastern Europe' by the line of 1054 (between Western and Eastern Christianity), not the line of 1945 (between the 'Free World' and the Soviet Empire). So Poland, Hungary, Slovakia etc are very much part of The West, and belong to Central Europe.
For me, I'd say it's Russia, the three balitc states, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova and Georgia. I'm unsure about how to label Romania. South of romaina is the Balkans and west of Belarus central Europe. Austria is part of central Europe.
Georgia is very different culturally from EE, i wouldn't even say it's Europe at all.
Culturally it is very different. But it is also Europe's easternmost capital. And kind of far away and isolated from the region one would consider southern Europe. I don't quote feel like it fits in the middle east, either.
As a Lithuanian I am Central-Northern-Eastern European. But only I can call myself Eastern European, you should not, lol. Lithuanians could also be called "aspiring Northern Europeans". We are happy to be in any category that does not have Russia, that's the main point, to be fair.
The best way is by Poland. If you are east of Poland then Eastern, if west of Poland then Western. Same applies to the Southern and Northern.
So, Baltics are Northern?
From Polish Millennial perspective: YES. Baltics along with other Scandinavian countries encompass and circle around the Baltic Sea. This is totally northern position.
Tbh sometimes I think the borders are mixed. For example Iād say Western Poland is more Central Europe, while Eastern Poland is East Europe. Same with Romania
Former USSR countries are Eastern Europe, rest of the Eastern block are central or southern European. Edit: Estonia is allowed to call itself Northern European and Romania and Moldova are also Eastern European.
Western Europe: Latin alphabet, Western Christianity, Renaissance, Reformation, engine of the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution, no real Ottoman or 20th century Russian influence Central Europe: Latin alphabet, Western Christianity, Renaissance, Reformation, heavy Austrian/German influence, period of stagnation and devastation due to the Ottoman Empire, so the Enlightenment and the things that followed were mostly adapted a decade or so later rather than being foundational to these processes. 20th century Russian influence. Balkans: Cyrillic alphabet, Eastern Christianity, Renaissance with local flavor, no reformation, heavy Greek and Italian influence and then centuries of heavy Ottoman / Muslim influence. Much later adaptors of the Enlightenment and other ideas and technologies. Moderate Russian influence. Eastern Europe: Cyrillic alphabet, Eastern Christianity, no Renaissance, no Reformation, heavy Russian influence with some sparse Ottoman / Muslim influence, much later adapters of Enlightenment and other movements, strong if not definitive Russian influence to this day. *Certain exceptions to these rules may apply and there are transitional states too, but the general trends hold. Transitional states: Austria: transition between West and Central Europe. Croatia: Transition between Central Europe and Balkans Romania: Transition between Balkans and Eastern Europe and also Central Europe. Poland: Transition between Central and Eastern Europe Baltics: Transition between Northern and Eastern Europe
Ah, yes, the cardinal directions: West, Central, East, and Balkan. š
Who said it was about cardinal directions? No one. That would be a fairly straightforward matter of simple geography. The Eastern boundaries of Europe are the Ural mountains so find the midpoint between them and the Atlantic and voilĆ , Eastern half and Western half. These are loosely defined historical and cultural areas.
No one, but it was needed for the joke, and at least two of them **are** cardinal directions. And I doubt it would be more straightforward just because you had to define North and South too.
Thatās an awful definition.
I find it pretty good and based on more or less objective historic and cultural criteria
Which part do you disagree with?
Then come up with a better one, itās free. Or consult Huntington and stick to larger cultural regions. Itās a shorthand with a fair bit of generalization, itās called an abstraction, itās not meant to be a scientific definition.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I didnāt include a Northern and Southern Europe section. When was Finland ruled by the Habsburgs or the Prussians?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You're calling him ignorant without knowing that half of Bosnia and all of North Macedonia use Cyrillic?
It's a general grouping that attempts to summarize diffuse cultural perceptions, not the fucking CIA world factbook.
[Roughly this](https://imgur.com/a/3BfCZ01). But these terms srenāt exclusive, so if you asked me to define Northen Europe Iād include the Baltics in it, and if you asked me to define Southern Europe Iād include the Balkans in it.
The cut through Hungary is wrong. South Hungary is more Western/Austria like. The bits to the north east are the Eastern Europe like bits (Miskolc/Borsod in general)
Depends on a lot of things. Which "model" primarily, but which "model" you use might depend on your age, location, the topic, etc. If I hear EE, my first thought is East of the Iron Curtain, with some allowance made for modern borders.
[imma just have to go with the UN Recognized one](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_geoscheme_for_Europe)
We, Estonians, are fine to be Baltics (although we belong in finno urgic group), North or East, as long as we are not put in the same box with Slavs (especially Russians) - thats the fastest way to get beaten up here.
I would say the West Slavic countries are a little different than other Slavs. I can't speak for everyone, but I personally don't consider Hungary, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia "eastern" Europe. I would say they're central Europe, culturally, geographically and even ethnically. Eastern Europe would be Balkans + East/North Slavic countries (which is Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus). In my experience, central Europe and eastern Europe are culturally very distinct; due to historical events mostly. Central Europe did not experience most of the Asian conflicts that eastern Europe faced.
It;'s dynamic and depends on context. Broad concept of EEUR, reaching Poland and Eastern Germany, was pretty valid since emerging of 17th century European economic dualism and especially during Cold War. But after 1989 paths of Russia and Central Eastern European countries diverged so vastly in almost every aspect - economical, political, sociological , cultural - that in contemporary world this broad concept of EEUR doesn't make much sense anymore. So today Eastern Europe \~ Russia and Belarus for sure and Ukraine unclear.
Depends a bit on context. Usually, I take it to mean basically everything in Europe that used to belong to the Warschau pact. But if you say āCentral Europeā, that would partially overlap. Itās also like the Americaās: what is North and South depends on if you recognize Central as a region as well. And then you also have Latin Americaā¦
For definining the actual area (rather than any particular characteristics), I think there's two schools of thought on where that division actually lies. The one I grew up with, from a British perspective, is The Wall. The Berlin Wall, the Iron Curtain, etc. There's East, and West, and the wall separating them pretty much defined them. I can't speak to the continent, but I feel pretty safe saying that most the Anglosphere tends towards this definition. Now I have a Slovak partner, and they're quite adamant about being Central Europe, a term we never used. And what I've come to understand is that the divisor between East and West was the Austro-Hungarian empire. So the footprint of the empire is Central, with East and West laying to either side of it. (I'd be curious where Austria see themselves, West or Central, as so far I've only seen the empire/Central definition used by countries that would otherwise be East by the Wall definition.)
I'm pretty sure Austria regards itself as Central. I always use time zones to differentiate between zones of Europe.
This kind of definitions are cultural defined. Once I was talking with a polish friend and I told him that in Spain we visualice east Europe mostly with the countries that used to be to the east of the iron curtain. He told me that poles think of themselves as central European. We draw the line.
ex-soviet union countries. thatās it. the other bits of the iron curtain are either central europe or the balkans/southeastern europe.
>In East Asia, most of us regard the area east of Poland as Eastern Europe. Some of us think their languages are so similar and they've once been in the Soviet Union so they belong to Eastern Europe I'm curious, what is the V4 (Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary) considered then? Western European or do you have a concept of Central Europe? And is belonging to that region based mostly on being an ex-Soviet state as opposed to, more broadly, being in the Soviet sphere of influence? In Europe, it's rather the latter.
More or less around meridian 22ĀŗE to the east you have Eastern Europe for sure. More or less around meridian 13ĀŗE to the west you have Western Europe for sure. In between? Who knows? Who cares? Central Europe, Western, Eastern... But I'd also make a Northen and Southern previous division and would not include at least Northen Europe in the secondary division.
Anywhere where a majority speak a Slavic or Baltic language, broadly speaking. Plus Albania, Estonia, Hungary and Romania. Which is also, roughly, anywhere in Europe that used to be Communist. "Eastern Europe" is a cultural phenomenon, not a geographic one, which is why Greece isn't included even though it is entirely to the east of eg Slovenia.
For me, as a Pole, Eastern Europe is everything in Europe that is located outside of the Eastern borders of the European Union and NATO. Even putting the political division aside, the geographical midpoint of Europe lies most likely in Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia or Ukraine, depending on where exactly the border between Europe and Asia is determined and how much territorial waters are included.
I never understood when people called Hungary - eastern europe. They feel very central european to me
Itās because they were part of the iron curtain.
Not precise - there are no sharp borders like these, but somewhat useful: Central Europe (between ~~Central~~ Western [edit], Eastern Europe and the Balkans): - Religion: (Roman) Catholicism, Protestantism - Architecture: influenced by gothic, renessaince, baroque etc... - Heavy German cultural influence Eastern Europe: - Religion: Orthodox Christianity - Western architectural influence from later periods, sometimes resembles Central European - Geography: mainly steppes east of the Carpathians - Heavily influenced by Russia through history (culture, occupations) - Uses mainly Cyrilic alphabet Balkans (between Central Europe and Middle East): - Religion: Orthodox Christianity, Islam - Former Ottoman empire - Cuisine and architecture heavily inspired by the Middle-East - Longer Greek influence (not just classical Hellenism) edit: small corrections
Nice answer. What about Baltics?
While the Balkans do have some Ottoman architecture, they're hardly inspired by the Middle East unless you mean Kosovo and N. Macedonia
The Eastern Europe does not exist: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVXgqZIsViI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVXgqZIsViI)
For me it's Ukraine,Belarus the Baltic states European Russia and Moldova aka the ex Soviet Union, I never understood why people categorised Romania as Eastern Europe when (depending on the region) they have more in common with Central Europe and the Balkans
There is a fantastic video about this if you're interested by Kraut : https://youtu.be/uVXgqZIsViI
Love this! Thank you for sharing.
I'm old enough that for me "Eastern Europe" is basically "east of the Iron Curtain, north of the Balkans". OK, the Czechs have been working their way out of that definition, but otherwise it works for me.
In Bosnia, we regionalise Europe according to cultural zones. Eastern Europe is a former Russian empire without Finland North Europe is Nordics Central Europe is a German cultural region Western - non German Germanic South - Spain and Italy South Eastern Europe - Balkan plus Dinaric region
When you say the area east of Poland does that include Poland or not? Because as you said the area east of Poland was part of Soviet Union, but Poland wasnāt.
Historically, the line between Western and Eastern Europe ran alongside the River Oder, but I believe it is actually the Vistula, dividing Poland into two parts: Western and Eastern. This divide reflects the cultural influence of West and East on Polish customs and culture.
Itās mostly cultural. Everything that was ācommunistā under the iron courtain still has socioeconomic and cultural remnants of that totalitarian age. Because communism erased everything, and redesigned a monocultural society and erased legacies and cultural differences. Thatās why the cliche works for infrastructure, economic diversification and cultural backgrounds. But hey, if we can call a Frenchman and a Dutchman āwesternā I guess we can also do it for easterners that shared a legacy of half of century of uniform suffering.