h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

For me, this one is ready to go.

sprout

Me too.

I'm happy with it.

Jimster - you suggested I should for this one and the Brussels update.

Consider it ed...

sprout

Editorial Note: This conversation has been moved from 'update - Belgium' to 'Belgium'.

Interesting page - thanks. However:

You say that the Belgian revolution was the only one started by an opera. Didn't opera play some part (appropriately) in the Italian Risorgiamento?

You describe NATO as having a big base in Brussels. It's the administrative HQ. Is that the same as a base?

You say of the Flemings and Walloons that the "two groups never had much in common". Being part of the same polity for centuries on end doesn't count? Historic Flanders itself was a bilingual county. You might say that Luik (can't do accents - sorry) was anomalous in having been a prince-bishopric, and thus never properly part of the 17 provinces, but which country do you think has been within its present boundaries for as long as Belgium?

You describe Belgium as being "created mainly by the British". The only parts that Britain insisted on, I think, were (1) that Belgium should be neutral, and (2) that a junior branch of the (then) French royal family couldn't take the throne. That's why they ended up with the Saxe-Coburg-Gothas, just like us. That's nothing like 'mainly creating' it, in my book.

You clearly know this subject very well Xenophile, so thanks for your interesting comments. Unfortunately this subject was updated about a week ago (along with the Brussels one) but small errors could perhaps be corrected speedily. I'll have a look at your points one by one:

italian opera - I'll have to have a look - I don't remember anything from my A level studies, but that was a few years ago...

NATO - it's a type of base, I reckon. But I see what you mean.

By not much in common, I meant language, diet, economy, politics, attitude to religion... As for the frontiers, I thought they've moved around quite a bit as 'Belgium' was invaded by various people?

I had thought the Brits saw it as a bit of a buffer state to keep the French in place? I agree my text is an exaggeration though.

sprout

"You clearly know this subject very well Xenophile, so thanks for your interesting comments."

I'm a British Belgophile living in Brussels. And you're welcome of course. You could perfectly well feel that I'm being too picky - are many other people that interested, after all?

"italian opera - I'll have to have a look - I don't remember anything from my A level studies, but that was a few years ago..."

I'm not sure any more. I remember reading that Italian nationalists would shout "Viva Verdi", because Verdi was an acronym for Victor Emanuel, King of Italy, and I had a notion that something started in an opera house.

"By not much in common, I meant language, diet, economy, politics, attitude to religion..."

Even then, to an outsider, the things in common are more obvious than the diffences (apart from language, of course).

"As for the frontiers, I thought they've moved around quite a bit as 'Belgium' was invaded by various people?"

The frontiers have certainly moved, but I think that everything that's currently withing Belgium was already among Charles V's 17 provinces at the beginning of the 16th century, and that's a hundred years before James VI of Scotland became king of England. The Prince-Bishopric of Luik being the obvious exception, but even then it was under more subtle Habsburg domination and - you may quote me - Vatican irridentism is generally seen as a spent force in 21st century Europe.

"I had thought the Brits saw it as a bit of a buffer state to keep the French in place?"

Yes, the Brits were certainly happy about its creation for that very reason. But they weren't unhappy with the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, and would presumably have been just as happy for that to have survived.

There are two or three Belgians on the BBC history message boards, it might be as well to consult them. I'm busy reading a book about Belgian history at the moment - I'll come back to you if I find anything definite on these subjects.

Xeno

I'm still subscribed to this thread, so if you guys can come up with a consensus on any additions / corrections, I'll pop them into the updated entry

I really must protest to the title of this entry and its frequent use. Do you people not know what this "word" implies? The mere mention of it sends chills down my spine!!! Please choose your titles with a little more tact! <SMILEY TYPE="yuk"/>

Just kidding!<SMILEY TYPE="biggrin"/>

Blast it!!!
Why do these bloddy smilies never seem to work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Blast it!!!
Why do these bloody smilies never seem to work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In the forum and your personal space you only need to write < smiley > (without the spaces of course). It's only in a guide entry you need the other bit.

cheers!
chiefaberach

OK - updating the update on Belgium:

1) Footnote 1 - Please delete the second sentence.

2) Linguistic regionalisation, para 3, last sentence - please replace by "To be fair, the two groups did (and do) have some significant differences - the country was created as a buffer state and imposed on them, and they have at least been able to avoid coming to blows."

Note the deletion of footnote 3.

3) Belgian beer third bullet last sentence: "On the subject of beers, if a barman or passing acquaintance asks you if you would like a 'bollocking'(keep footnote) they are in fact referring to a bolleke>/I>, a beer from Antwerp with a pleasing glass goblet".

Jimster

sprout

And the famous belgians external link is knackered - can we replace it with http://www.famousbelgians.net/categories.htm please?

sprout