MapPorn
Percentage of pre war ethnic native speakers lost after WW1 peace treaties.
Discussion
I tried mapping how many native speakers each Central Powers country lost after their respective peace treaty.
For Germany the two data points are:
Native German speakers in the German Empire pre WW1, and native German speakers in the Weimar Republic after WW1
For Austria:
Native German speakers in the Austro-Hungarian Empire pre WW1, and native German speakers in the First Austrian Republic after WW1
For Hungary:
Native Hungarian speakers in the Austro-Hungarian Empire pre WW1, and native Hungarian speakers in the Kingdom of Hungary after WW1
For Bulgaria:
Native Bulgarian speakers in Bulgaria pre WW1, and native Bulgarian speakers in Bulgaria after WW1
For Turkey:
Native Turkish speakers in the Ottoman Empire pre WW1, and native Turkish speakers in Turkey after WW1
couldn't a lot of this be losses from the war tho?
I dont think this includes casualties since 1 in 3 ottoman males died in ww1. This map is probably depicting land losses. Ottoman empire lost most of its native lands and population in balkan wars.
Not really in those cases, population growth was still rapid during these days, and kept up with the depicted countries here.
Turkey one looks wrong Izmır, Thrace, Eastern Anatolia, Middle east definitely had a bigger percentage than %2. Maybe because of lack of data
Lack of data can be a fact, yes. Regarding Greece though there was a significant population exchange between Greece and Turkey, which was mandated by the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne.
Oh you mean after 1923 ? Than why show treaty of Sevr looking map instead of after 1923
I know, That’s my bad, the website I used did only have this one available.
Bulgaria deserved better after being betrayed in the first balkan war
And they still picked wrong again next time, lmao
Was it mainly the Sudetenland for Austria?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudeten_Germans
Three million Germans were living in Czechia before the Second World War.
How do you get those numbers for Austria? The "Austrian" part of the Austria-Hungary wasnt considered just Austria, but a group of crown dependencies.
The only "Austrias" before WW1 were "Archduchy of Lower Austria" and "Archduchy of Upper Austria" whose entire territories became part of the new Republic of Austria after WW1.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_and_religious_composition_of_Austria-Hungary
It’s not about land, but about language: Austria-Hungary had around 12 million native German speakers in 1910, by 1918 that was a bit more. The first Austrian republic had around 6.2 million German speakers.
The rest is simple maths.
Oh, so you are counting the whole Austria-Hungary for Austria?
Yes, I used the whole dual monarchy, for both Hungary and Austria.
Wouldn't it be a bit more correct to rather divide by Cis- and Transleithenia?
Legally speaking (Regarding successor states) yes this is an argument to be made
Obviously, the only 'Austrian' parts of AH were Bohemia-Moravia, Austria & Tyrol and Galicia-Bukovina clearly. This is an enormous mistake
Sudetenland and Tyrol, alongside many other German majority pockets in former Austrian Empire pre ww1
Yes the/2 count towards the Germans that did not end up in Austria after WW1
Our beloved Trianon treaty, the best treaty ❤️❤️❤️
Many families fell apart, many people lost ther civil or even human rights in the consequences of Trianon treaty, because borders weren't drawn close to the ethnic borders. It's something like if you said Holocaust was a good thing.
Very interesting idea. I don't think many looked at the matter from that direction before.
Thanks!