Do you consider Greece and Romania part of the Balkans?

Do you consider Greece and Romania part of the Balkans?

  • Yes, both Greece and Romania

  • Only Greece

  • Only Romania

  • No, neither Greece nor Romania


Results are only viewable after voting.
Sep 2012
3,844
Bulgaria
#41
You impress me, I assume you're learning Greek?

Good call on epimachia, I admit I wasn't familiar with the term.
I indeed trying to, but this is more connected to etymology of the words, their origin and evolution through centuries / the history of the words. The distinction between epimachia and symmachia belongs to Thucydides, but even ancients didnt care much about it and probably that's why you indirectly classified epymachia in the Modern Greek as obsolete.
 
Likes: Solidaire
Mar 2013
997
Breakdancing on the Moon.
#42
Romania = Yes.
Greece = Sort of?

The change in orientation from Mediterranean to Med + Balkans which started under the Romans is very much in evidence. E.g Greek being part of a wider Balkans sprachbund, the movement of Arvanites, Vlachs, Slavs etc. But...Greece is also quite a bit different from its neighbours. Maybe that's my prejudice, but I certainly think Greece is on another level cf Romania et al. By nature of its ancient and medieval culture, the transformative fight against the Ottomans and the establishment of a state as far back as 1820s.
 
Dec 2017
293
Regnum Teutonicum
#43
I am astonished people consider Romania as part of the Balkans and I have never met anybody who thought Romania (except for Dobruja) was not Central or Eastern Europe, but Balkans. For me the Balkans borders are the Mediterranean Sea to the West and South, the Black Sea to the East and the Danube, Drava and alpine Region to the North.

Countries completely in the Balkans:
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Montenegro
Kosovo
Albania
Macedonia
Bulgaria

Balkan countries with territories outside the Balkans:
Croatia except for Istria and territories north of the Drava
Serbia except for Banat
Greece except the asian part (Dodecanese and Eastern Aegean Islands)

Non-balkan countries with territory on the Balkans:
Turkey with Thrace
Romania with Dobruja
 
Mar 2019
39
Europe
#44
I am astonished people consider Romania as part of the Balkans and I have never met anybody who thought Romania (except for Dobruja) was not Central or Eastern Europe, but Balkans. For me the Balkans borders are the Mediterranean Sea to the West and South, the Black Sea to the East and the Danube, Drava and alpine Region to the North.

Countries completely in the Balkans:
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Montenegro
Kosovo
Albania
Macedonia
Bulgaria

Balkan countries with territories outside the Balkans:
Croatia except for Istria and territories north of the Drava
Serbia except for Banat
Greece except the asian part (Dodecanese and Eastern Aegean Islands)

Non-balkan countries with territory on the Balkans:
Turkey with Thrace
Romania with Dobruja
I'm astonished you don't use google.
 
Likes: Futurist
Sep 2012
3,844
Bulgaria
#45
I'm astonished you don't use google.
The peninsula is named after a mountain range with the same name, Balkan mountains known as Haemus during antiquity. It is situated mainly in Bulgaria, very western part of the range is in Serbia, so in the very centre of the peninsula. The matter is open for interpretations which is the goal of the OP. This straight line of your map cuts partly Romania (and some other countries) and it is logical (for this country), because north of the line is Transylvania, religiously different from the lands south of this line. Anyway i still regard the whole of Romania situated in the Balkans. Other historomites might agree or disagree with me on the matter.
 
Likes: Futurist
Mar 2019
39
Europe
#46
The peninsula is named after a mountain range with the same name, Balkan mountains known as Haemus during antiquity. It is situated mainly in Bulgaria, very western part of the range is in Serbia, so in the very centre of the peninsula. The matter is open for interpretations which is the goal of the OP. This straight line of your map cuts partly Romania (and some other countries) and it is logical (for this country), because north of the line is Transylvania, religiously different from the lands south of this line. Anyway i still regard the whole of Romania situated in the Balkans. Other historomites might agree or disagree with me on the matter.
I don't see any other interpretations on the maps whatsoever.

The same thing over and over again.
I don't see how you can look it from different angles.
 
Last edited:

Offspring

Ad Honorem
Mar 2013
7,897
România
#47
The peninsula is named after a mountain range with the same name, Balkan mountains known as Haemus during antiquity. It is situated mainly in Bulgaria, very western part of the range is in Serbia, so in the very centre of the peninsula. The matter is open for interpretations which is the goal of the OP. This straight line of your map cuts partly Romania (and some other countries) and it is logical (for this country), because north of the line is Transylvania, religiously different from the lands south of this line. Anyway i still regard the whole of Romania situated in the Balkans. Other historomites might agree or disagree with me on the matter.
2/3s of Transylvanians are Eastern Orthodox, but it's a religiously diverse region: Transylvania - Wikipedia

Croatia is 86.2% Catholic, Bosnia and Herzegovina is 51% Muslim, Albania is 58.7% Muslim, Kosovo is 95.6% Muslim.
 

Tulun

Ad Honorem
Nov 2010
3,807
Western Eurasia
#48
Romania = Yes.
Greece = Sort of?

The change in orientation from Mediterranean to Med + Balkans which started under the Romans is very much in evidence. E.g Greek being part of a wider Balkans sprachbund, the movement of Arvanites, Vlachs, Slavs etc. But...Greece is also quite a bit different from its neighbours. Maybe that's my prejudice, but I certainly think Greece is on another level cf Romania et al. By nature of its ancient and medieval culture, the transformative fight against the Ottomans and the establishment of a state as far back as 1820s.
IMO what really makes it stand apart is only their post ww2 history, not turning commie after 1945. If they also had that 40 years commie rule, they wouldn't be much different from Bulgaria, North Macedonia, Romania etc.
 

Offspring

Ad Honorem
Mar 2013
7,897
România
#49
I think they are both in the Balkans. It's makes more sense to have Hungary, Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova as the border in the north, instead of Romania, for cultural reasons.

Throughout this article Norman uses "Near East" to mean the countries where "the eastern question" applied; that is, to all of the Balkans. The countries and regions mentioned are Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina (which was Muslim and needed, in his view, to be suppressed), Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Romania. The rest of the Ottomandomain is demoted to just "the east".
Near East - Wikipedia

Iirc, A. J. P. Taylor in The Struggle for Mastery in Europe 1848–1918 (1954) used either "Near East" or something similar to also refer to Romania.

Romania participated in the Second Balkan War and was sometimes considered to be part of the: "Eastern Question".
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
19,944
SoCal
#50
I think they are both in the Balkans. It's makes more sense to have Hungary, Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova as the border in the north, instead of Romania, for cultural reasons.

Near East - Wikipedia

Iirc, A. J. P. Taylor in The Struggle for Mastery in Europe 1848–1918 (1954) used either "Near East" or something similar to also refer to Romania.

Romania participated in the Second Balkan War and was sometimes considered to be part of the: "Eastern Question".
Why not also include Moldova, though? After all, Moldovans and Romanians are essentially one people and Moldovans also have a history of living under Ottoman rule. For that matter, so do the Hungarians.