Historical Nations Hockey Concepts 2.0

[UnclearInitial]

WOW. That is awesome. Best concept yet!

[IceCap]

Thank you.

[gojetsgo]

Neat-o idea. Great concepts so far. How about Christiania?

[IceCap]

Hehe

Maybe if I decide to do a micronations spin-off project.

[Evil Doctor]

The German Empire, 1871-1918

I'm surprised you went with this. They participated in the European Championship from 1910-1914. One interesting tidbit, the 1911 tournament champion was (get this) Bohemia!

You might also want to skip Austria-Hungary, just did a quick check, first participation was in 1913 (actually 1912 but apparently their participation annulled the tourney because they weren't IIHF members at that time.)

Wish I could dredge up an old photo of Germany, Bohemia and Austria-Hungary uniforms. I'm sure they're nowhere as nice as your concepts...

[Evil Doctor]

Best. Concept. Ever.

I want one, I want one...(and I'm not even Roman)

[IceCap]

The German Empire, 1871-1918

I'm surprised you went with this. They participated in the European Championship from 1910-1914. One interesting tidbit, the 1911 tournament champion was (get this) Bohemia!

You might also want to skip Austria-Hungary, just did a quick check, first participation was in 1913 (actually 1912 but apparently their participation annulled the tourney because they weren't IIHF members at that time.)

Wish I could dredge up an old photo of Germany, Bohemia and Austria-Hungary uniforms. I'm sure they're nowhere as nice as your concepts...

Hmmm, both the German Empire and Austria-Hungary fielding teams are news to me. Oh well. Austria-Hungary's out, and I guess the German Empire's just a bonus.

[IceCap]

The Byzantine Empire, 330-1453

So lets backtrack, shall we? Before the western Roman Empire crumbled to dust Constantine won the crown and converted to Christianity, believing his victory was sign of Christ's divinity. This was after the Roman Empire had been split between east and west, and Constantine was only the Emperor in the western half. Lincinius was Emperor in the east. Lincinius opposed Constantine's conversion to Christianity and began persecuting Christians in his half of the Empire. He was defeated by Constantine and final blow to pagan polytheism in the Greek world was struck, as Christianity could move into the region uninhibited. To celebrate this great victory for Christianity Constantine built a new Imperial city for the east. Constantinople was built on the sight of the old city of Byzantium.

The regions that made up the eastern Roman Empire, however, were not Latin. They were Greek. Remember Macedonia, Philip II, and Alexander the Great? Well thanks to them the eastern half of the known world was largely Hellenized (Greek-influenced). Hence the eastern Roman Empire became more and more Greek. As a result it drifted away from the Roman Catholic Church and closer to the Eastern Orthodox Church. The two churches were, at the beginning, still unified, but marked differences between them were already present.

The eastern Roman Empire survived and grew as the western Roman Empire fell apart. A stronger urban culture led to stronger finances and a greater ability to exploit natural resources. In 476 Odoacer forced the last western Roman Emperor to abdicate, ending the western Empire as a political unit. Emperor Zeno, in the east, sent Theodoric, a Gothic king, to deal with Odoacer. Theodoric won, and ruled Italy on his own, ridding the eastern Empire of a potential problem.

In 527 Justinian I assumed the throne. In 533 he sent his general Belisarius to reclaim the old Roman province of Africa. In 535 Sicily was recaptured. In 540 Belisarius captured Rome. In 551 the eastern Empire won a slice of the Iberian Peninsula. Justinian I had reconquered most of the territories of the western Roman Empire, the eastern Roman Empire/Byzantine Empire (they both refer to the same state) having reached its greatest height. During the 6th century Christian culture began to totally eclipse traditional polytheistic Greco-Roman culture. The 6th and 7th centuries also saw the Empire fall victim to numerous plagues, which would play a role in the Empire's decline.

Justinian I was succeeded by Justin II. Under Justin II's reign the Goths reconquered 2/3 of Italy. Emperor Maurice saw the Empire come under attack by Slavic tribes making inroads into the Balkans for the first time. After settling disputes with the Persian Empire, which had been reborn. Maurice was then able to beat the Slavic tribes back across the Danube River.

Maurice was murdered, and a period of political instability followed, only settled after Heraclius took the crown. During Heraclius' reign the Holy Land was conquered by the Persian Empire, who brought many of the Christian relics back to their strongholds in present day Iraq and Iran. Heraclius embarked on a holy war that exhausted both Empires. The Persian Empire was, at this point, Zoroastrian. The war left both it and the Christian eastern Roman Empire weak to growing strength of the Arab Muslim forces. The Arabs crushed the eastern Roman forces at the Battle of Yarmuk in 636.

The Muslim conquest of Syria led to Arab raids on Asia Minor (present day Turkey). Muslim armies besieged Constantinople itself between 674 and 678. Finally the Empire broke the siege with Greek fire, a primitive form of flame thrower technology. After the siege the Empire signed a thirty year peace treaty with the new Muslim Caliphate, though Arab raids on Imperial territory continued. This had the effect of weakening the Empire's urban culture, as citizens fled larger cities to fortify themselves in smaller, easily defensible towns. In 642 Muslims conquered Egypt from the Empire.

The Empire had to dedicate large amounts of troops to combat the Arab incursion, which led to the Slavic tribes breaking past the Danube River in the Balkans. The Bulgarians, the leading Slavic tribe, conquered most of the Balkan territory from the Empire, and Constantine IV signed a peace treaty which established an independent Bulgarian Slavic empire in the Balkans. This is what led to the present-day Slavic state of Macedonia.

Emperors Leo III and Constantine V would push back the Muslim assault, with Constantine V pushing into Syria itself at points. In 820 the Arabs successfully captured Crete and launched an attack on Sicily. This latest Muslim incursion was stopped by the Byzantine general Petronas.

In 867 the Empire attempted to reconquer territory lost to the Arab Muslim Caliphate. At first this did not go well. While the Empire won back Crete it lost Bosporus, and in 902 it lost Sicily. Basil I, however, would also see success. In 865 the Empire re-asserted its authority over coastal Egypt and Imperial control was re-asserted over parts of the Balkans and Mesopotamia. Bail I would also take actions to stop the Muslim conquest of Italy, keeping them confined to Sicily. Nikephoros II and John I extended Imperial control back into Syria. At one point John I even pushed the Empire's boundaries south enough that they threatened Jerusalem. Basil II finally ended the Arab threat to the Empire when he solidified Imperial holdings in Syria.

The Bulgarian Empire, meanwhile, had just become Christian. The conflict between the eastern and western branches of Christianity flared up again as both sides jostled for influence in the new Christian state. Tsar Simeon I of Bulgaria resented the eastern Roman Empire's attempts at influencing his nation and invaded in 894. Byzantine was able to push back the invasion due to their alliance with the Hungarians. The Bulgarians would emerge victorious at the Battle of Bulgarophygon in 896, and the Byzantines were forced to pay annual tributes to the Bulgarians. The eastern Roman Empire was again defeated in 917 at the Battle of Achelous, which allowed the Bulgarians to raid northern Greece unopposed. In 924 a Bulgarian army laid siege to Constantinople. In 972, however, Simeon I of Bulgaria died. This weakened Bulgaria politically, and it was overrun by the Slavic Rus tribes. This chaos allowed Emperor John I to reconquer the Balkans and subdue the Bulgarian Slavs. In 1014 the last major Bulgarian army was defeated at the Battle of Kleidion. The Byzantines plucked out the eyes of 99 out of 100 men. The 1 remaining man was allowed to keep one eye so he could lead his men home. In 1018 what remained of the Bulgarian resistance had been crushed.

In 1054 the first major schism in Christianity occurred. The eastern and western branches of Christianity had been in conflict with each other for centuries, though they had remained united as a single Church. In fact the east-west relationship was pretty good leading up to 1954, with the Byzantine Emperor Constantine IX allied with Pope Leo IX. Patriarch of Constantinople Michael I (head of the eastern Christian Church), however, wrote a scathing letter attacking the western Catholic Church, accusing it of adopting to many Judaic religious practices. The Catholic Church's use of unleavened bread at mass seemed to be what really ticked him off. Patriarch Michael I thought was just going to start a debate on the matter, but instead he managed to piss off just enough people in the Catholic church to make things worse. Pope Leo IX refused to concede to any of Michael I's points and sent a Catholic delegation to Constantinople to "settle" (force) the issue with (on) the eastern Roman Empire. Patriarch Michael I refused to recognize the delegation's spiritual authority in the Empire. The Catholic delegation thus excommunicated the eastern Christian Church. The problem was that Pope Leo IX

had died before they could do so, and when he died the delegation technically lost the right to do such things. Regardless the Catholic Church upheld the excommunication. Patriarch Michael I then, with the blessing of Emperor Michael VI, excommunicated the western Catholic Church. Since then the western Roman Catholic Church and eastern Orthodox Church have remained separate.

The Empire would continue to crumble at a slow pace. Andronikos II and his grandson Andronikos III attempted to revive the Empire's glory days, but things really got bad following Andronikos III's death. A six year long civil war devastated the Empire and the Slavic ruler Stefan IV overran most of the Balkan holdings to establish the Serbian Empire. In 1354 the Ottoman Turks swept into Europe and defeated the Serbs, establishing themselves as a European power. The Ottomans had converted to Islam and decimated the Arab Caliphate. This established the Ottomans, not the Arabs, as the leading force in the Muslim world.

The Ottomans then turned their attention to the Byzantine Empire. The Empire pleaded for aid from the west, but the Pope would only allow if if the Orthodox Church agreed to reunite with the Roman Church. Though the Emperors tried to force reunification the Orthodox clergy and the Byzantine people resisted and reunification was never accomplished. Western Catholic rulers thus sat back as Ottomans picked off Byzantine territories one by one. In 1453 the Ottomans laid siege to Constantinople itself. Sultan Mehmed II offered Emperor Constantine XI his life if he surrendered the city. Constantine XI replied "[t]o surrender the city to you is beyond my authority or anyone else's who lives in it, for all of us, after taking the mutual decision, shall die out of free will without sparing our lives."

The siege lasted between Friday, 6 April 1until Tuesday, 29 May. The Ottomans finally broke through the city gates. Constantine XI ripped off his Imperial armour and charged at the Ottomans alongside the last of his soldiers and died in battle.

In 1453 the Roman Empire finally fell.

Being a continuation of the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire's uniforms carry over many of the same elements. The dark red and gold colouring remain. The triple stripe motif has been retained. The Imperial Eagle crest is also retained. The idea of featuring a motto as the alternate mark is also carried over from the Roman Empire concept.

The differences come in how these elements are executed. The red and gold have been adjusted to more Byzantine-appropriate shades. The stripes have been added to the shoulders and pants, eliminating the most obvious New York Rangers allusions. White was also droped as I felt the shades of red and gold I went with could stand on their own. The Imperial eagle is now the double-headed variety first used by the Byzantine Empire, replacing the single headed Roman version. The double headed eagle represented east and west. East for the Empire's nature as the eastern Roman Empire, and west as a reflection of the Empire's roots in Rome. The shoulder patches are the tetragrammic cross, a device used to identify the Empire. It consists of four B's, each placed in a corner of a cross. The four B's stood for Basileus Basileon Basileuon Basileuonton/Basileusi (King of Kings, ruling over Kings). This alludes to both Jesus Christ and the manner in how the Byzantine Emperors saw themselves, as the chief monarchs of the Christian world, carrying on the legacy of the Roman Empire.

The Ottoman Empire is up next.

[IceCap]

The Ottoman Empire, 1299-1923

By 1300 the Byzantine Empire had lost control of most of its provinces in Asia Minor, which was then divided amongst the native Turks in a collection of small emirates (Muslim kingdom). One of these states was ruled by Emir Osman I, who established the Ottoman state within his emirate. He pushed the boundaries of the new Ottoman Empire to the boundaries of the weakened Byzantine Empire and united most of the Turkish emirates under his rule. It was under Osman I that the Ottoman state was developed, including the legal entity known as the millet, which proved to be key in future Ottoman successes. The millet granted religious minorities the right to conduct their own affairs within the Empire, allowing them to worship freely. This encouraged loyalty among many religious minorities that would fall under the control of the Ottomans, in start contrast to the oppression seen in medieval Christian Europe.

In the centuries following Osman I the Ottoman Empire bypassed the Byzantine capital of Constantinople and swept through the Balkans. The region had been weakened when Serbian Slavic tribes had unified as a Serbian Empire, throwing off Byzantine control. The new Serbian Empire was weak, however, and the Ottomans quickly conquered the region. The Battle of Nicopolis in 1396 marked the last ditch attempt of western European powers to stop the Ottoman advance in the Balkans. It failed.

With the Balkans under their control Constantinople remained the last of the Byzantine Empire's holdings. The Ottomans committed themselves to its capture. In 1453, at the age of 21, Sultan Mehmed II captured Constantinople, his forces killing the last Roman Emperor, Constantine XI. After his conquest of Constantinople Mehmed II met with Orthodox Church leaders and allowed them to retain their religious autonomy. Many Orthodox Christian leaders felt Ottoman rule was preferable to reunifying the Church with the Roman Catholic Church.

Mehmed II made Constantinople his new capital and tried to claim the title of Roman Emperor. Everyone else, from the Greeks to the western Europeans, however, rejected this claim. Especially in light of the Russian Tsars claiming to be the successors, as well as the Germanic Holy Roman Empire. If Christians wanted a successor to the Roman Empire they had more palatable choices then the Muslim Ottoman Empire. Mehmed II believed he could solidify his claim as the successor to the Roman Emperors by capturing Rome, and Ottoman forces invaded parts of southern Italy. The Italian campaign stalled, however, and Ottoman forces were recalled when Mehmed II died and his successor Murad II renounced claims to be the successor of Imperial Rome.

The Italian campaign aside, the conquest of the Byzantine Empire established the Ottomans as a primary power in Europe and the Mediterranean. The Ottoman Empire experienced a long period of growth and territorial expansion, pushing into Europe and northern Africa. These conquests brought key trading routes in Europe and Asia under Ottoman control, which aided their economic growth along with their territorial gains. It's believed that the Ottoman stranglehold on land-based European trade to Asia was a motivator in Queen Isabella I of Spain's decision to fund Christopher Columbus' attempt to find an alternate route to India and Asia, a voyage which resulted in the re-discovery of the American continents and kicked off the age of European colonial exploration.

Sultan Selim I expanded the Empire's eastern borders by defeating the now-Muslim Persian Empire, and conquered Egypt for the Ottomans. Suleiman I conquered Belgrade in 1521 and at the Battle of Mohacs in 1526 he defeated the Kingdom of Hungary, pushing the borders of the Empire deep into Christian Europe. In 1529 he laid siege to Vienna, capital of the Holy Roman Empire. The siege, however, had to be called off when the onset of winter forced the Ottomans to retreat. In 1532 Suleiman I attacked Vienna again, but was pushed back and defeated in the siege of Koszeg by Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand I. This victory for the Holy Roman Empire marked the end of the Ottoman Empire's advances into central Europe. Suleiman I was able, however, to get Ferdinand I to recognize Ottoman supremacy within Hungary. Suleiman I's rule saw Transylvania, Wallachia, and Moldavia become tributary states of the Empire, and in 1535 Suleiman I's forces took Mesopotamia from the Persians. Suleiman I also oversaw the Empire's rise as a naval power, capturing key ports Spanish holdings Tunis and Algeria. These would be used as bases to help evacuate Jews and Muslims from Spain following the Spanish Inquisition.

The Ottomans cemented their status as a key player in European politics by allying themselves with the Kingdom of France, Kingdom of England, and the Dutch Republic against the Holy Roman Empire and the Kingdom of Spain, both ruled by the Hapsburg dynasty.

In 1683 the Ottomans again attacked the Holy Roman Imperial capital of Vienna. The Battle of Vienna resulted in a major victory for the Holy Roman Empire and put an and to Ottoman expansion in Europe. This Ottoman defeat coincided with the growth of European naval strength. With European navies now securing trade to the Americas, India, and Asia the Ottoman Empire lost a good deal of the income gained by their monopoly on land-based trade between Europe and Asia. The influx of Spanish silver from the Americas significantly undercut the value of Ottoman currency.

The new Russian Empire, under Tsar Ivan IV, began expanding south, pushing on the northern borders of the Empire. Selim II oversaw an attempted military invasion of the new Russian Empire's territories to curtail its expansion, but the onset of winter forced the Ottomans to abandon their plans after their attack on Astrakhan failed. In 1572 the Ottomans invaded Russia again, but were defeated at the Battle of Molodi. Philip II of Spain, meanwhile, forged an alliance to break Ottoman naval supremacy in the Mediterranean. The Battle of Lepanto, though not significant militarily, was a fatal blow to the perception that the Ottoman Navy was invincible.

The military revolution in Europe, spurred by the development of hand held gunpowder weapons and pikemen led to the decline of cavalry as the primary military force. The Ottomans, late to recognize the importance of gunpowder weapons, fell behind the Europeans militarily. Their cavalry-based army, once feared, became a major source of weakness. The Long War with the Holy Roman Empire between 1593 and 1606 led to a massive influx of under-trained soldiers into the Ottoman ranks, as the Ottomans attempted to catch up with the military revolution in Europe. This led to problems of discipline, ineffectiveness on the battlefield, and in some cases outright rebellion. The Ottomans also fell behind the Europeans in the realm of writing. The printing press had been introduced to Christian Europe in 1450, but this invention didn't make its way into the Ottoman Empire until Jews fleeing the Spanish Inquisition brought it with them.

This was followed by two eras that significantly weakened the Ottoman Sultanate. The Sultanate of Women, between 1648 and 1656, saw the mothers of minority (ie to young to rule) Sultans control the political course of the nation. This was followed by the Koprulu Era, between 1656 and 1703. This era saw the Grand Viziers (Prime Ministers) all come from the Koprulu family, who exerted their control over a string of weak Sultans.

Much of the Balkans were lost to the Holy Roman Empire, which reformed into the Austrian Empire (later the Austro-Hungarian Empire). France won Algeria from the Ottoman Empire, and the British forced the independence of Egypt as a British puppet state. The Empire attempted to reform itself. Educational reform was the top priority, as no major advancements in Ottoman education and science had been made since the medieval age. Ottoman tax reforms attempted to revive the image of the state in the eyes of the citizenry, and Ottoman defeats at the hands of Peter the Great of Russia convinced the Ottomans of the need to modernize to keep up with the west. Selim III attempted to reform the Ottoman military along western lines, but reactionary forces within the Ottoman government and military stifled the effectiveness of these measures.

The Serbian Revolution between 1804 and 1815 saw a rise is Balkan nationalism. Serbia won its independence at an independent kingdom in in 1830. In 1821 the Greeks revolted and won independence in 1829. Wallachia, Moldavia and Montenegro all achieved independence through the later half of the 1800s.

In 1853 the Crimean War broke out with Britain, France, and Sardinia allied with the Ottomans against the Russian Empire, Bulgaria, Greece, Serbia, and Montenegro. The war was fought over Russia and their allies attempting to finish off the Ottoman Empire and gain territory for itself. Greece wanted to add to the territory it had won in independence and Russia wanted to push into Asia Minor to gain a port on the Mediterranean. The western European allies, fearing the Ottomans would collapse, intervened on their behalf to preserve the status quo.

Between 1839 and 1876 the Ottoman Empire went through a second series of reforms. The medieval guilds were replaced with modern factories, modern banking was introduced, and a modern European style conscript army on the Prussian/German model was established. Religious minorities were also granted complete equality with Muslims. In 1876 a coup led by young Ottomans educated in the west resulted in Sultan Abdulaziz I consenting to a constitution that established a constitutional monarchy. Two years later, however, Abdulhamid II abolished the Parliament and the autocratic government re-established.

The Russo-Turkish War between 1877-78 led to the loss of even more Balkan territory for the Ottomans. In 1878 the Austro-Hungarian Empire unilaterally occupied the Ottoman province of Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Ottomans and Austo-Hungarians both stationed troops in the region until 1908 when political turmoil in the Ottoman Empire forced them to pull out, leaving the region to be annexed by the Austo-Hungarians.

In 1908 the Young Turk Revolution led to the re-establishment of the constitutional monarchy. The Balkan Wars between 1912-13 further weakened the Ottoman Empire's hold on the region. By the onset of World War I in 1914 the Ottomans had lost most of their European territory. The Young Turks had, upon assuming power in the Ottoman government, signed a treaty with the German Empire to protect themselves against their mutual enemy of Russia. The Ottomans entered the war on the side of Germany and their traditional enemies, the Austo-Hungarian Empire. The Ottomans faired decently in the war, winning the Gallipoli Campaign against a British Imperial force, as well as emerging victorious from the siege of siege of Kut Al Amara. They also suffered setbacks, however, as their attempt to invade Russia via the Caucasian mountains ended in disaster. The Arab provinces revolted in 1916, backed by the British and French. This significantly undercut Ottoman military success in the region, which it had been enjoying up until then. Fearing the disloyalty of its Armenian subjects on the Ottoman/Russian border, the Ottoman government ordered the deportation of ethnic Armenians to Mesopotamia, where they were left to die in a heinous crime against humanity known as the Armenian Genocide.

Despite holding their own, the Ottoman regime collapsed at the end of the war. Like the Russian Empire the state's infrastructure was just to outdated to handle the demands of total war that WWI forced upon its participants. Being on the losing side also left the Empire at the mercy of the victorious Allied powers. The Treaty of Sevres confirmed the partition of the Empire, with most of its holdings gaining independence or transferring to British and French colonial control. The Ottoman regime was finally done away with in 1923 when the monarchy was abolished and the Republic of Turkey declared.

Like the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire proved difficult in that the state that succeeds it today uses similar imagery, flags, and colours. Making an Ottoman concept that stood out from a Republic of Turkey concept was the primary challenge. I decided to get around this problem by relegating the crescent/moon emblem, present on the flags of both modern Turkey and the Ottoman Empire, to the shoulders. I used a modified version of the crescent/moon emblem, unique to the Ottoman Empire, as the crest. The crest itself was the emblem of the Ottoman Sultans.

The Holy Roman Empire is up next.

[Hoopskid]

Interesting to read the descriptions, and the concepts are all very good.

Look forward to seeing more.

[knnhrvy16]

These last few have been flawless. Your concepts keep getting better and better! Really, really great work here. The Byzantine Empire especially has become my new favorite, I think. Keep it up!

[tvko]

The last three concepts have been outstanding! Although with the Byzantines I don't know about the shoulder stripes, everything else is great.

[GeauxColonels]

As a big history buff, I'm greatly enjoying this series. Can't wait to see the next one.

Also, once you're done with the scheduled teams, maybe you could move into the Americas to tackle those indigenous populations: Incas, Mayans, Aztecs, Iroquois to name a few. I would love to see what you could do with those.

[SP00]

Your designs are obviously great but your accounts of history are so inaccurate. This is a logo forum, not a place to spread propaganda and false history and yet you even wonder and get all butthurt why your posts spark discussions and debates in this thread, as soon as someone else gives you other opinions. What's even more disturbing is the fact that you copy this from wikipedia.

You should just stick to designing and to what this forum is all about, designing. You shouldn't mess history and politics into this.

[IceCap]

Your designs are obviously great

Thank you.

but your accounts of history are so inaccurate.

No, they're not. They're very accurate. Not to toot my own horn, but I have a degree in history. I know what I'm talking about.

This is a logo forum, not a place to spread propaganda and false history

That is exactly what you've been doing.

and yet you even wonder and get all butthurt why your posts spark discussions and debates in this thread, as soon as someone else gives you other opinions.

I welcome true historical discussion and debate. What you have posted in the past does not qualify as a different historical perspective. What you've posted in the past is an outright lie, a politicization of history created by a modern state to justify their theft of another nation's past. Trying to claim that the ancient Macedonians were not Greek isn't engaging in a historical debate, it's an outright lie, a betrayal of the historical record.

If someone wants to engage in a true historical debate, I'll not only tolerate it, I'll welcome it and engage in it. You have not done this. You've ranted and raved, spewing political lies passed off as history.

What's even more disturbing is the fact that you copy this from wikipedia.

What role does Wikipedia play in this project? First and foremost I use it to get high-resolution images of the crests, emblems, and flags that are vital in the creation of these concepts. Years ago, when I did this the first time, I used the Flags of the World site. Which while extensive, doesn't have the best quality. Wikipedia, meanwhile, has a ton of talented artists who have done some really great work creating high resolution images of flags, coat of arms, crests, and badges throughout history. As a resource for this project's visual component, it has been invaluable. I was planning on thanking the folks over at Wikipedia, as well as LEWJ for putting together a STELLAR MS Paint-friendly database of templates and numbers, but I was saving it for the end.

As for the information? The foundation of it comes from my own base of historical knowledge. I flesh it out with information from my notes from high school and university and my books I have on hand. Wikipedia is used to confirm dates and check the spelling of names, places, and battles.

You should just stick to designing and to what this forum is all about, designing. You shouldn't mess history and politics into this.

Never, in this thread, have I pushed a political agenda. My commitment has always been to represent the historical record as accurately as possible. If, by doing so, I fall on one side or another on some political debate, then that side must have something to it, because they're supported by the historical facts.

I don't really care one way or another about the pissing contest between the Republic of Greece and the Republic of Macedonia. I just care about what the historical record says. What the evidence on the ground says, what the remains discovered by archaeologists say. All of that, the stuff I do care about, says that Alexander the Great and the rest of the ancient Macedonians were Greek. That is a basic historical fact.

Anything else is a political agenda disguised as history.

[fumbler]

Your designs are obviously great but your accounts of history are so inaccurate. This is a logo forum, not a place to spread propaganda and false history and yet you even wonder and get all butthurt why your posts spark discussions and debates in this thread, as soon as someone else gives you other opinions. What's even more disturbing is the fact that you copy this from wikipedia.

You should just stick to designing and to what this forum is all about, designing. You shouldn't mess history and politics into this.

Instead of doing this SPOO maybe you should just not enter this thread, i find it laughable that you would try to belittle a poster on these boards that is only doing what the poster enjoys doing.

GTFO SPOO if you don't like it.

[SP00]

No, they're not. They're very accurate. Not to toot my own horn, but I have a degree in history. I know what I'm talking about.

This is exactly what I meant. You claim you are a historian. If someone normal uses wikipedia, fine. But it's disturbing for a historian to use or base his information from a source like wikipedia. Being a 'historian', you should certainly know that.

That is exactly what you've been doing.

Well, not really. You started about history and I just responded.

I welcome true historical discussion and debate. What you have posted in the past does not qualify as a different historical perspective. What you've posted in the past is an outright lie, a politicization of history created by a modern state to justify their theft of another nation's past. Trying to claim that the ancient Macedonians were not Greek isn't engaging in a historical debate, it's an outright lie, a betrayal of the historical record.

If someone wants to engage in a true historical debate, I'll not only tolerate it, I'll welcome it and engage in it. You have not done this. You've ranted and raved, spewing political lies passed off as history.

No you don't. You don't welcome debate. You denegrate. You don't want to hear other opinions. You imediately marked it as biased and propaganda. You even told a member to 'develop higher level brain functions' and that you have 'more historical knowledge in my pinky then you do in your entire pea-brained head'. And you reported something to two mods, whatever that means.

Do you think thats welcoming and being polite?

What role does Wikipedia play in this project? First and foremost I use it to get high-resolution images of the crests, emblems, and flags that are vital in the creation of these concepts. Years ago, when I did this the first time, I used the Flags of the World site. Which while extensive, doesn't have the best quality. Wikipedia, meanwhile, has a ton of talented artists who have done some really great work creating high resolution images of flags, coat of arms, crests, and badges throughout history. As a resource for this project's visual component, it has been invaluable. I was planning on thanking the folks over at Wikipedia, as well as LEWJ for putting together a STELLAR MS Paint-friendly database of templates and numbers, but I was saving it for the end.

As for the information? The foundation of it comes from my own base of historical knowledge. I flesh it out with information from my notes from high school and university and my books I have on hand. Wikipedia is used to confirm dates and check the spelling of names, places, and battles.

See above...

Never, in this thread, have I pushed a political agenda in this thread. My commitment has always been to represent the historical record as accurately as possible. If, by doing so, I fall on one side or another on some political debate, then that side must have something to it, because they're supported by the historical facts.

I don't really care one way or another about the pissing contest between the Republic of Greece and the Republic of Macedonia. I just care about what the historical record says. What the evidence on the ground says, what the remains discovered by archaeologists say. All of that, the stuff I do care about, says that Alexander the Great and the rest of the ancient Macedonians were Greek. That is a basic historical fact.

Anything else is a political agenda disguised as history.

Yes you did. I don't really care about the pissing contest between Greece and Macedonia either, but I do care seeing someone claiming Alexander the Great of Macedon, to be Greek. I do care if someone claims that Macedonians are Slavs and Bulgarians. I do care that someone claims Macedonian symbols to be Greek. So excuse me sir if I respond to that and state my opinion, because its simply not true.

Now, if you don't want to see debates, then don't post these controversial topics on the forum. This is a sports forum, but when you post about these historical political controversial topics, then please don't be suprised if someone responds to that and gives you different opinions on the matter. Don't get mad, don't label it as propaganda. That's why I think you should just stick to sports. Because if you post these controversial topics, then you will get debates.

[SP00]

Your designs are obviously great but your accounts of history are so inaccurate. This is a logo forum, not a place to spread propaganda and false history and yet you even wonder and get all butthurt why your posts spark discussions and debates in this thread, as soon as someone else gives you other opinions. What's even more disturbing is the fact that you copy this from wikipedia.

You should just stick to designing and to what this forum is all about, designing. You shouldn't mess history and politics into this.

Instead of doing this SPOO maybe you should just not enter this thread, i find it laughable that you would try to belittle a poster on these boards that is only doing what the poster enjoys doing.

GTFO SPOO if you don't like it.

I will 'GTFO', don't worry.

It was not me who started to belittle. Where do you see me belittling, kind sir? Yes, we have different opinions, but I am and was all the time very polite. It was Ice_cap some days ago and another user who were in fact belitling me and philadelphia flyers, just because we have different opinions.

Besides, if you post controversial topics on a message board, then dont be surprised to see other peoples opinions on the matter. Clearly, these other opinions are not accepted. That's why I think you shouldn't post these controversial things in the first place on a sports forum. You should just stick it to designs. And if you do post these controversial things, then please dont be surprised if someone does not agree with you or that someone has a different opinion.

now have a nice weekend fellas

[Hoopskid]

I've been reading the constant arguing between SP00 and Ice_Cap and I think it's time for you guys to both stop spamming this thread with it, just take it to PM or something.

Ice_Cap has done several nice concepts, and intriguing articles to go along with them. From what I can tell his articles have been pretty accurate.. history does belong to those that write it and perhaps people in Macedonia have a different interpretation of it than others, but in general it is accepted that Alexander the Great was Greek. With that said, his Greek blood probably differs immensily from any of the people living it that region now.

As for SP00, more or less I respected your views and attempted to understand your side of the story, but by claiming that today's Macedonians are not even slightly Slavs (Serbs) or Bulgarians completely decredibilizes you.

From what I've read, today's Macedonian national sentiment was spread on a large scale by Tito's government, but that's a whole other story. All in all, let's please get back to focusing on the asthetics of the design. Thanks

[IceCap]

This is exactly what I meant. You claim you are a historian. If someone normal uses wikipedia, fine. But it's disturbing for a historian to use or base his information from a source like wikipedia. Being a 'historian', you should certainly know that.

Learn to read. The historical information I post comes from my own knowledge, my notes, and my books. Wikipedia is mainly used to get the symbols and flags needed to do the concepts themselves. Wikepeida isn't the basis of my historical knowledge, my years of schooling and research are.

Well, not really. You started about history and I just responded.

Everything I've posted has been unbiased historical fact. I could very easily insert a political slant here and there, but I haven't. You're the one who brought politics into this.

No you don't. You don't welcome debate. You denegrate. You don't want to hear other opinions. You imediately marked it as biased and propaganda. You even told a member to 'develop higher level brain functions' and that you have 'more historical knowledge in my pinky then you do in your entire pea-brained head'.

I want to hear other opinions that matter. Other interpretations that are grounded in historic fact. Not lies passed off as history. I told PHILADELPHIAFLYERS that he was an idiot because he was. He failed to get the al-Qaeda concept was a joke meant to celebrate Osama bin Laden's death, and he claimed that because I'm Canadian I don't have a full understanding of American history. Well sorry, that's an idiotic argument. I spent a year of high school in the states to study American history at the college level, and I've taken American history classes throughout my university career. If he's going to insult me and imply my lack of intelligence I'll do the same to him.

And you reported something to two mods, whatever that means.

I reported both you and PHILADELPHIAFLYERS for spamming a thread that, until you two started, was going pretty well. PHILADELPHIAFLYERS has his own thread for, and I thank him for having the courtesy to take his concepts elsewhere where they can receive their due evaluation (and they are pretty good, if I must say so). Sadly you have not stopped, and if you continue to clog this thread up with your nonsense I will report you again.

Yes you did. I don't really care about the pissing contest between Greece and Macedonia either,

Obviously you do.

but I do care seeing someone claiming Alexander the Great of Macedon, to be Greek. I do care if someone claims that Macedonians are Slavs and Bulgarians. I do care that someone claims Macedonian symbols to be Greek. So excuse me sir if I respond to that and state my opinion, because its simply not true.

Ancient Macedonians were Greek. The Macedonia sun emblem was a Greek symbol. It's been found on Greek poetry, in Macedonia, for crying out loud. Ask any ancient history historian outside of the Repiblic of Macedonia and they'll tell you Alexander the Great was Greek. Modern day Macedonians are descendents from Slavic tribes, mostly Bulgarians, that entered the region when the Byzantine Empire weakened. Again, this is historic fact.

Now, if you don't want to see debates, then don't post these controversial topics on the forum.

Nothing I've posted in controversial. Alexander the Great was Greek. This is as controversial a statement as saying Julius Caesar was Roman.

This is a sports forum, but when you post about these historical political controversial topics, then please don't be suprised if someone responds to that and gives you different opinions on the matter. Don't get mad, don't label it as propaganda. That's why I think you should just stick to sports. Because if you post these controversial topics, then you will get debates.

Listen sparky. I am well aware of the controversy that history can cause. That's why I left out certain states. To avoid such controversy. I have taken painstaking efforts to make sure the historical recaps I post are as free of political bias as humanly possible. I've been very careful to present only the historical facts. Alexander the Great and the ancient Macedonians being Greek isn't an opinion, it's a fact. That's why I posted it, not because I have some kind of political agenda.