The reason they named it Virginia is because it was one of the names that was given to Elizabeth in the numerous poems written about her. Elizabeth actively supported the creation of extensive propaganda to create a mythical image of herself. Which is why it was named Virginia. They werent claiming she was a virgin, they were simply confirming an official image that Elizabeth herself wanted.
Greenland wasn't discovered or named by 19th/20th century British explorers as depicted in this sketch. It was named that by Erik the Red in the 10th century in order to entice potential settlers, having been discovered by other Vikings a century before that.
@narcissusgray You are correct sir or madam. But these are a couple of British funny guys - and I guess they just couldn't drum up a Viking for this sketch.
In Nevada, we have a town called Genoa that is nothing like Italy, a town called Manhattan whose population could fit in an average New York City apartment, and Virginia City, whose only connection to the state is that a guy FROM Virginia once lived there.
Oh, and Nevada itself means "snow-capped", despite the fact that it has the lowest annual precipitation in the country. There's a story behind each name (we have Congress to "thank" for Nevada), but still, none of them make sense.
@TBustah I was being patronizing, not condescending, you deluded fucker. Try and act less like a moron next time and perhaps you won't be deserving of being patronized.
@manaburn Same fucking thing, especially in this case.
Don't argue the semantics, the fact of the matter is, you were talking down to me. Period.
I was just contributing to the conversation, a conversation about geography and misnamed places (I'm not the only person that was talking about other places, look at some of the comments).
How the hell does that make me a "moron" or deserving of "patronization"?
I think the point the Manaburn was trying to make is that there is quite a lot of snow in parts of Nevada. Still, he didn't have to be so rude, and the rest of your comment was pretty interesting.
@fleabag500 Not sure where you're getting that he was talking about snow, (though you're right: I personally live in one of the more snowy regions), but thanks.
@ top comments: i just heared they called Iceland Iceland, and next they discovered Greenland and called it Greenland, cuz they saw how few people moved to Iceland and thought theyd make the name sound more pleasant this time.
@theForsling Colombus had a contract to find the 'Indies', and that was what he was going to find. He told his crew that he would rip the tongue out of anybody who said different. By the way, he signed the contract 'Xfer'.
@psoriaticcat This is part of a series of sketches on the Arbitary power of Captains and the curious names they sometimes come up with, but the question of 'Indies' is raised. Did it never strike you as curious that we have called the Native Americans 'Indians'?
@gamesbok No that's not what I meant. You'd explained why it was called the Indes very well (which incidently I knew before) but they are asking why its the 'west' indes, thats the part of the name which the joke is based on.
@psoriaticcat Quite, I was being boring and pedantic. I'm not sure anyone differentiated east from west Indies until there was a clear separation, after Magellan. Indies before that was a general term meaning anywhere east of the the province of Sindh (Napier and his terrible pun "Peccavi",), or the Indus river, but in practice meant the Spice Islands where a good upstanding Christian could make big money.
how did you British first sail to australia? west around south america or south/east around africa? they look roughly equidistant on a map. if you hit NSW first (or at least early on in the exploration) then i assume west around south america (?)
@texasoilfields we didn't' it was the Dutch first, hence New Zealand (Zealand being a small Kingdom in the Netherlands) They already had Islands in the Pacific and kept going' we just came along after them and nicked the whole continent. We did a lot of that.
oh i see. yes, you traded them something for manhattan as well if i remember. well thank you. but i suppose my question still stands albeit altered: how did the dutch get to australia - around africa or south america? but this may be the wrong clip to pose this question..... i need to start watching dutch tv.
@texasoilfields Manhatten (new york/new amsterdam) was traded for Suriname (south american country). The dutch found autralia first going around africa. However the dutch found the west-coast and never really settled there (prolly because there weren't any slaves to do the labour) The english were first on the east side and claimed the whole continent. Not entirely sure how accurate I am, but you can always read up on wiki's :)
Thank you! I think there was a native population there but perhaps they didn't make efficient slaves. That is what we found out in North America, the natives here did not make good slaves so we started importing them.
@texasoilfields I know this is quite old but if you're still interested, the Dutch weren't keen to stay because the part of Aus they found was entirely desert, so they weren't able to grow crops, get enough water, etc. As for your other point, the British settlers did use the Aboriginals as slaves. They were treated appallingly, displaced from their homes, had their children taken away (to make them assimilate and breed out the "black"), and weren't even considered Aus citizens until the 1960s.
@kerplookie17 That makes sense. As for the rest, necessary for empire I suppose. We had a different experience in NA, the natives refused to work for Europeans powers (Spain, GB are the two I've read about, maybe others too) so a decision was made to start importing Africans. Our native policy turned from enslavement to warfare. That was phased out at the end of the 19th century, at which point policy shifted again to assimilation, which sounds quite similar to what you describe.
@kerplookie17 And by British settler I presume you mean people who are both British settlers and AUSTRALIANS.
And let's not also forget that the treatement of aborignal people in Austrlia didn't improve one bit after governing was passed over to Australians for a very long time, hence your reference to their citizenship in the 1960s.
Forgive my knee-jerking but Australians and Americans on the internet love to phase themselves out of these atrocities.
@KonijNx2 Go speak to a bunch of American's about native Americans. You'll learn some fabricated version of history where the British wiped them out, and then these American people sprouted out of the ground like potatoes and took over.
@KonijNx2 actually our textbooks tell use that we as americans wiped out the natives for land. it even mentions the death marches and the small pox blankets.
@KonijNx2 Oh yes, I completely agree! I didn't mean the Brits treated Aboriginals horribly as opposed to the wonderful equality they received from "Australians". I'm very aware of how awfully my ancestors treated Aboriginals. When the White Australia policy passed, we'd been here for over 100 years and were certainly no longer British Settlers.
I'm sorry if I caused offence - it wasn't my intention! There are few bigger anglofiles than myself, it's just hard to fit everything in these comments.
@Kriemoon I think you will find that Manhattan was traded to the British for the very important Island of Run (Indonesia) because of its central role in the spice trade. Spices were worth their weight in gold at that time. Suriname was also part of the deal, but much less important. See the Treaty of Breda (1667).
@abkalmo That was before it became New York. After that the treaty of breda the Dutch recaptured the city in 1673. In 1674 it already got traded for Suriname.
@texasoilfields The first recorded landing of Europeans in Australia were the Dutch in 1606. They approached Australia from the north, as they were sailing from their colony in the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia). They landed in the Cape York Peninsula, mistakenly thinking it was an extension of New Guinea. Captain Cook who named New South Wales rounded Cape Horn and crossed the Pacific Ocean to Australia.
@ornitorrinco01 Thanks for the data. Well done Dutch people, impressive. And a little Dutch girl just circumnavigated the globe at age 16, they've still got it 400 years later
The argument Columbus had with the authorities wasn't about whether Earth was round (everyone knew that), but about whether the Ocean Sea could be crossed. The circumference of the Earth had been known since ancient times, and anyone looking at a map of the world without America on it would conclude that the ocean separating Europe from the Indies was vast beyond navigation. Columbus believed Earth was 1/4 its true size. Luckily he was also wrong about America or his crew would have starved.
@wratched What Columbus believed and what he said he believed were probably two different things. When Eristosthenes proved the world was round, he also calculated the radius. The University of Salamanca who opposed him knew how far China was, and knew he wasn't going to make it. Columbus had met a Portugese who had been to Dominica before, he knew a lot, but the politics and finances were complicated.
@kid43332 No it really doesn't, the closest it could look like is the cliffs of southern Victoria/South A at a very imaginative stretch, but definitely not NSW. No white cliff faces, all golden yellow and red sandstone.
The name Greenland comes from Scandinavian settlers. In the Icelandic sagas, it is said that Norwegian-born Erik the Red was exiled from Iceland for murder. He, along with his extended family and thralls, set out in ships to find the land that was rumoured to be to the northwest. After settling there, he named the land Grœnland ("Greenland") in the hope that the pleasant name would attract settlers.
@cadmium48 Well at the time Erik the Red arrived in southern Greenland the area in which he started a settlement *was* actually green in the sense that farming was possible because of the warmer global temperatures at the time. Same thing was true for L'Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland, but Experiment47's version is a more interesting story.
@Experiment47 It wasn't actually in the hope of attracting settlers, although that is the most widely reported story. Greenland actually used to have a milder climate, which was sufficient for the Norse herders and they managed to live there for several centuries. If you google it, there are more detailed explanations available.
@Experiment47 I remember reading somewhere that Greenland and Iceland were originally called by each others name, and a cartographer accidentally mixed them up whilst drawing a global map...
@Experiment47 Ive heard that reason before and itsa load of bollocks. The vikings wouldnt have given a shit about tourists. All they cared about was pillaging and raping.
New South Wales is the weirdest one of them all. Is it a new version of South Wales or a southern New Wales? Why only name it after south Wales? Where's New North Wales? It just makes no sense.
I always asked (while actually living there) whether NSW was named like that because it reminded "the captain" of South Wales, or whether it was because it reminded him of Wales, and was in the South... does anybody know the real answer to that? Seriously!!
It was named New South Wales by Captain Cook "in the Name of His Majesty King George the Third took possession of the whole Eastern coast from the above Latitude [38°S] down to this place by the Name of New Wales" He later changed it to New South Wales when it was realised the size of Australia. So basically its just Wales rather than him thinkings its similar to South Wales.
The real question is why on earth does Wales get the honorific, Cook wasn't Welsh nor did he ever live there. Was it the only English place he could think of that doesn't have a "new" version in America?
@Poultron In truth, it is unknown whether it was meant to be the new south Wales or the new Wales of the South, or if the fellow was simply in the grips of the Ocean Madness.
@cadmium48 It was originally called New Wales, not because of any similarity with Wales, but in honour of the then Prince Regent (later George IV), the Prince of Wales
I don't think it was because it 'reminded' him of South Wales. As the sketch suggests, I don't think it has too much in common. It was more because at the time South Wales was the industrial power house of the British empire, the close proximity of coal and iron having obvious benefits.
Therefore it was just naming the place after somewhere very successful in order to try to draw on the association.
That's also an interesting point--thanks! You're certainly right that "never before seen trees, and wild animals that jump around" doesn't sound that much Welsh, so the idea of making it attractive through suggesting a rich country sounds good...
Hahaha indeed, this is so true, those fucking bastards calling areas of the world any old fucking thing and then we have to live with it for the rest of our existence.
Heh, and I'm from New South Wales. I've always wondered if the 'South' came from the fact NSW was supposed to resemble the southern part of Wales, or if it was supposed to be a new Wales, in the southern hemisphere. Now I know! ... Although I somehow doubt the factual accuracy of this conversation :P
Right you are, Hobshawm, although the sketch doesn't seem to feature Erik - or any Vikings for that matter. It's more of an Amundssen/Scott/Shackleton thing, isn't it? Which looks a bit worrying considering that Mitchell is a historian, but maybe they weren't trying to be pedantic about history. Maybe Greenland and Iceland should swap names.
As far as i know Greenland was green when the vikings found it, while Icelands climate was harsher. So in the context of the sketch a Pseudo-Amundsen would make more sense than vikings . At least i think it would.
The reason they named it Virginia is because it was one of the names that was given to Elizabeth in the numerous poems written about her. Elizabeth actively supported the creation of extensive propaganda to create a mythical image of herself. Which is why it was named Virginia. They werent claiming she was a virgin, they were simply confirming an official image that Elizabeth herself wanted.
omegastar19 1 day ago
7 people live in Greenland.
duffell 1 week ago
@duffell your numbers are exaggerated
darkmater4tm 5 days ago
Greenland wasn't discovered or named by 19th/20th century British explorers as depicted in this sketch. It was named that by Erik the Red in the 10th century in order to entice potential settlers, having been discovered by other Vikings a century before that.
narcissusgray 2 weeks ago
@narcissusgray remind me again narcissusgray: who's playing the captain?
handsomebrick 2 weeks ago 12
@narcissusgray You are correct sir or madam. But these are a couple of British funny guys - and I guess they just couldn't drum up a Viking for this sketch.
Bluelunes 6 days ago
@Bluelunes Yes, there are never any vikings in british sketch comedies.
Mullahgrrl 3 days ago
@Mullahgrrl Now why is that, exactly?
Bluelunes 3 days ago
@narcissusgray Not sure if trolling, or just stupid.
LordNazgulKing 3 days ago
@narcissusgray
We were tought in school that he named it Greenland because he arived in the summer, when the south of Greenland is in fact green.
Fangs1978 2 days ago
Oh Captain My Captain
flashtek1973 1 month ago
In Nevada, we have a town called Genoa that is nothing like Italy, a town called Manhattan whose population could fit in an average New York City apartment, and Virginia City, whose only connection to the state is that a guy FROM Virginia once lived there.
Oh, and Nevada itself means "snow-capped", despite the fact that it has the lowest annual precipitation in the country. There's a story behind each name (we have Congress to "thank" for Nevada), but still, none of them make sense.
TBustah 1 month ago
@TBustah Thanks for sharing that whimsical geographic tale. Perhaps you could take this opportunity to venture outside?
manaburn 1 month ago
@manaburn Sure! Maybe while I'm "outside", you can learn some goddam manners, you condescending twat.
TBustah 1 month ago
@TBustah I was being patronizing, not condescending, you deluded fucker. Try and act less like a moron next time and perhaps you won't be deserving of being patronized.
manaburn 1 month ago
@manaburn Same fucking thing, especially in this case.
Don't argue the semantics, the fact of the matter is, you were talking down to me. Period.
I was just contributing to the conversation, a conversation about geography and misnamed places (I'm not the only person that was talking about other places, look at some of the comments).
How the hell does that make me a "moron" or deserving of "patronization"?
TBustah 1 month ago
@manaburn Actually, I take that back.
You weren't bogged down in semantics, you were just dead fucking wrong: condescending and patronizing are perfect synonyms for each other. Look it up.
Tell me: who's "deluded" again?
TBustah 1 month ago
@TBustah
I think the point the Manaburn was trying to make is that there is quite a lot of snow in parts of Nevada. Still, he didn't have to be so rude, and the rest of your comment was pretty interesting.
fleabag500 3 weeks ago
@fleabag500 Not sure where you're getting that he was talking about snow, (though you're right: I personally live in one of the more snowy regions), but thanks.
TBustah 1 week ago
Love it, 'specially the third one. So many Star Trek references. XD
PianoWizzy 1 month ago
Greenland was named by a Viking.
pimpwacker 2 months ago
Whos got the Captains hat, eh? Haha lmao fucking brits arw awesome
militaryqueen1 2 months ago
Kangaroos aren't 7 foot tall.
HELPTHEPICKLEISALIVE 3 months ago
@HELPTHEPICKLEISALIVE Except the Eastern Grey Kangaroo and the Red Kangaroo.
SAsgarters 2 months ago
@SAsgarters The tallest ever kangaroo was 6 foot 7 inches.
HELPTHEPICKLEISALIVE 2 months ago
@HELPTHEPICKLEISALIVE Tallest measured, which means jack shit.
SAsgarters 2 months ago
@SAsgarters Eastern Grey Kangaroos are not 7 feet tall.
ornitorrinco01 4 days ago
@ top comments: i just heared they called Iceland Iceland, and next they discovered Greenland and called it Greenland, cuz they saw how few people moved to Iceland and thought theyd make the name sound more pleasant this time.
AngelBiLove 5 months ago
"Bingo!" :)
biaendes 6 months ago
Like Blackadder's Queenie..."Blackadder,who's Queen?"
teufelstaub 6 months ago 24
haha the white cliffs of..... new south wales???
oogalypoogalyman 6 months ago
i dunno, i feel it should have been the other way round, with webb playing the captain
bakar12345 6 months ago
Greenland?
TWToxicity 7 months ago
@TWToxicity whatever.
chailizard 7 months ago
I love this sketch and I am especially interested in the history of Empire building in the New World and exploration.
MajBlood 7 months ago
ROFL great sketch for history lovers.
MajBlood 7 months ago
The whole 'west indies' thing always confused me.
theForsling 7 months ago
@theForsling Colombus had a contract to find the 'Indies', and that was what he was going to find. He told his crew that he would rip the tongue out of anybody who said different. By the way, he signed the contract 'Xfer'.
gamesbok 6 months ago
@gamesbok That may be true but its not so much the Indes part of the name thats in question
psoriaticcat 6 months ago
@psoriaticcat This is part of a series of sketches on the Arbitary power of Captains and the curious names they sometimes come up with, but the question of 'Indies' is raised. Did it never strike you as curious that we have called the Native Americans 'Indians'?
gamesbok 6 months ago
@gamesbok No that's not what I meant. You'd explained why it was called the Indes very well (which incidently I knew before) but they are asking why its the 'west' indes, thats the part of the name which the joke is based on.
psoriaticcat 6 months ago
@psoriaticcat Quite, I was being boring and pedantic. I'm not sure anyone differentiated east from west Indies until there was a clear separation, after Magellan. Indies before that was a general term meaning anywhere east of the the province of Sindh (Napier and his terrible pun "Peccavi",), or the Indus river, but in practice meant the Spice Islands where a good upstanding Christian could make big money.
gamesbok 6 months ago
Lol especially the end xD
80snessEj 10 months ago
"GREENLAND" "Whatever"
Thats so funny
Cujoh 10 months ago
Welcome to Virginia ! LOL
ghadabell 10 months ago
lollllllllllllll
Dn2kproductions 11 months ago
4 people are from Greenland.
Wantmiiramen 11 months ago
It's funny, because Columbus WAS an overbearing dick.
SilverFeet 1 year ago
how did you British first sail to australia? west around south america or south/east around africa? they look roughly equidistant on a map. if you hit NSW first (or at least early on in the exploration) then i assume west around south america (?)
texasoilfields 1 year ago
@texasoilfields we didn't' it was the Dutch first, hence New Zealand (Zealand being a small Kingdom in the Netherlands) They already had Islands in the Pacific and kept going' we just came along after them and nicked the whole continent. We did a lot of that.
richard31a 1 year ago
@richard31a
oh i see. yes, you traded them something for manhattan as well if i remember. well thank you. but i suppose my question still stands albeit altered: how did the dutch get to australia - around africa or south america? but this may be the wrong clip to pose this question..... i need to start watching dutch tv.
texasoilfields 11 months ago
@texasoilfields Via South America'
richard31a 11 months ago
thank you.
texasoilfields 11 months ago
@texasoilfields Manhatten (new york/new amsterdam) was traded for Suriname (south american country). The dutch found autralia first going around africa. However the dutch found the west-coast and never really settled there (prolly because there weren't any slaves to do the labour) The english were first on the east side and claimed the whole continent. Not entirely sure how accurate I am, but you can always read up on wiki's :)
Kriemoon 10 months ago
Thank you! I think there was a native population there but perhaps they didn't make efficient slaves. That is what we found out in North America, the natives here did not make good slaves so we started importing them.
texasoilfields 10 months ago
@texasoilfields I know this is quite old but if you're still interested, the Dutch weren't keen to stay because the part of Aus they found was entirely desert, so they weren't able to grow crops, get enough water, etc. As for your other point, the British settlers did use the Aboriginals as slaves. They were treated appallingly, displaced from their homes, had their children taken away (to make them assimilate and breed out the "black"), and weren't even considered Aus citizens until the 1960s.
kerplookie17 2 months ago
@kerplookie17 That makes sense. As for the rest, necessary for empire I suppose. We had a different experience in NA, the natives refused to work for Europeans powers (Spain, GB are the two I've read about, maybe others too) so a decision was made to start importing Africans. Our native policy turned from enslavement to warfare. That was phased out at the end of the 19th century, at which point policy shifted again to assimilation, which sounds quite similar to what you describe.
texasoilfields 2 months ago
@kerplookie17 And by British settler I presume you mean people who are both British settlers and AUSTRALIANS.
And let's not also forget that the treatement of aborignal people in Austrlia didn't improve one bit after governing was passed over to Australians for a very long time, hence your reference to their citizenship in the 1960s.
Forgive my knee-jerking but Australians and Americans on the internet love to phase themselves out of these atrocities.
KonijNx2 1 month ago
@KonijNx2 Go speak to a bunch of American's about native Americans. You'll learn some fabricated version of history where the British wiped them out, and then these American people sprouted out of the ground like potatoes and took over.
KonijNx2 1 month ago
@KonijNx2 actually our textbooks tell use that we as americans wiped out the natives for land. it even mentions the death marches and the small pox blankets.
CardShark989 1 month ago
@CardShark989 It's a shame I don't hear that here.
KonijNx2 1 month ago
@KonijNx2 Oh yes, I completely agree! I didn't mean the Brits treated Aboriginals horribly as opposed to the wonderful equality they received from "Australians". I'm very aware of how awfully my ancestors treated Aboriginals. When the White Australia policy passed, we'd been here for over 100 years and were certainly no longer British Settlers.
I'm sorry if I caused offence - it wasn't my intention! There are few bigger anglofiles than myself, it's just hard to fit everything in these comments.
kerplookie17 1 month ago
@KonijNx2 Not the response I was expecting. Really refreshing.
I apologise for knee-jerking. You know, internet and all that :D
KonijNx2 1 month ago
@Kriemoon I think you will find that Manhattan was traded to the British for the very important Island of Run (Indonesia) because of its central role in the spice trade. Spices were worth their weight in gold at that time. Suriname was also part of the deal, but much less important. See the Treaty of Breda (1667).
abkalmo 10 months ago
@abkalmo That was before it became New York. After that the treaty of breda the Dutch recaptured the city in 1673. In 1674 it already got traded for Suriname.
Kriemoon 9 months ago
@texasoilfields The first recorded landing of Europeans in Australia were the Dutch in 1606. They approached Australia from the north, as they were sailing from their colony in the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia). They landed in the Cape York Peninsula, mistakenly thinking it was an extension of New Guinea. Captain Cook who named New South Wales rounded Cape Horn and crossed the Pacific Ocean to Australia.
ornitorrinco01 4 days ago
@ornitorrinco01 Thanks for the data. Well done Dutch people, impressive. And a little Dutch girl just circumnavigated the globe at age 16, they've still got it 400 years later
texasoilfields 4 days ago
@texasoilfields Yes the Dutch have still got it, and they make great beef croquettes too.
ornitorrinco01 3 days ago
@texasoilfields She's is actually a New Zealander by birth. Although Able Tasman discovered New Zealand and her parents are Dutch.
philthy122 2 days ago
greenland? haha
Vsca 1 year ago
The argument Columbus had with the authorities wasn't about whether Earth was round (everyone knew that), but about whether the Ocean Sea could be crossed. The circumference of the Earth had been known since ancient times, and anyone looking at a map of the world without America on it would conclude that the ocean separating Europe from the Indies was vast beyond navigation. Columbus believed Earth was 1/4 its true size. Luckily he was also wrong about America or his crew would have starved.
wratched 1 year ago
@wratched What Columbus believed and what he said he believed were probably two different things. When Eristosthenes proved the world was round, he also calculated the radius. The University of Salamanca who opposed him knew how far China was, and knew he wasn't going to make it. Columbus had met a Portugese who had been to Dominica before, he knew a lot, but the politics and finances were complicated.
gamesbok 6 months ago
3 people aren't the captain
JasonLesser1 1 year ago 6
what´s the name of the song at the end?
MrWingman 1 year ago
@MrWingman it's the theme song for "That Mitchell and Webb Look". I think it was written specifically for the show, but I could be wrong.
shuster 1 year ago
lol what news number 1
sandwichofshadows 1 year ago
It's not green, per se, but it was supportive of agriculture several centuries ago. Farming, crops.
HRHshirley 1 year ago
They called it greenland to trick settlers not tourists.
chrisdowneaster 1 year ago
haha looks nothing like australia
burtonlover97 1 year ago
@burtonlover97 Australia's huge, it might look like a part of it.
kid43332 1 year ago
@kid43332 No it really doesn't, the closest it could look like is the cliffs of southern Victoria/South A at a very imaginative stretch, but definitely not NSW. No white cliff faces, all golden yellow and red sandstone.
subterraneanpsyche 1 year ago
@kid43332 No, it really doesn't. We don't have white cliff faces, ours are yellow/red sandstone. As for the rolling green fields? Haha not likely.
subterraneanpsyche 1 year ago
@subterraneanpsyche they went through the trouble of digitally colouring the cliff yellow.
BaileysBeads 1 year ago
My favourite bit was with "Wales"
litlemadguitarist 1 year ago
"Not North Wales. That's ridiculous. It's nothing like North Wales!"
rassilonstributer 1 year ago 13
David and his love of history- had to swallow a laugh at Webb's goofy smile as they strolled the beach of the 'West Indies'
spongiebungie 1 year ago
lol♥
blackwolfcrystal11 1 year ago
Greenland was named that by the vikings ho believed that one day the land would thaw and become green.
RowanTolley02 1 year ago
No. It was named Greenland to make settlers believe it was green - so people would move there.
Much like Iceland was named such to keep people away.
Spekingur 1 year ago 3
:-D
blackwolfcrystal11 1 year ago
Bloody brilliant XD
88Kamikaze69 1 year ago 2
they are the best...
panterv2 2 years ago
"GREENLAND?!"....
"WHATEVER!!"
pob2221 2 years ago 6
i live in south wales i can assure you the resemblance is uncanny right down to the kangroos
WasLilChrisnowbigish 2 years ago 5
very original
DoctorBimbles 2 years ago 3
There are so many great M&W sketches, but these might be the most original!
I've never seen any other comedians tackle this subject before. And, the music is perfect.
Ferdinand314 2 years ago 41
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i dont like yellow people
WKaliberr 2 years ago
The name Greenland comes from Scandinavian settlers. In the Icelandic sagas, it is said that Norwegian-born Erik the Red was exiled from Iceland for murder. He, along with his extended family and thralls, set out in ships to find the land that was rumoured to be to the northwest. After settling there, he named the land Grœnland ("Greenland") in the hope that the pleasant name would attract settlers.
Experiment47 2 years ago 87
Thanks for the comment. I never realised that was the reason I guess it makes sense seeing as Greenland is hardly green.
cadmium48 2 years ago 32
@cadmium48 Well at the time Erik the Red arrived in southern Greenland the area in which he started a settlement *was* actually green in the sense that farming was possible because of the warmer global temperatures at the time. Same thing was true for L'Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland, but Experiment47's version is a more interesting story.
icemachine79 1 year ago
@cadmium48 Actually it sort of is at the coast in summertime..
mrmadpyro 1 year ago
@cadmium48 It was green there was a micro climate at the time.
Alexonthecommisar 6 months ago
@cadmium48 Actually.. At Erik the red`s time Greenland was filled with green grass etc
kirealf91 5 months ago
Plus, it is assumed that big parts of the southern greenland was actually green at that time :)
Hjorth87 1 year ago
@Experiment47 It wasn't actually in the hope of attracting settlers, although that is the most widely reported story. Greenland actually used to have a milder climate, which was sufficient for the Norse herders and they managed to live there for several centuries. If you google it, there are more detailed explanations available.
SketchyBack 1 year ago
@Experiment47 So it was a publicity stunt then.
GoFeri 1 year ago
@Experiment47 I remember reading somewhere that Greenland and Iceland were originally called by each others name, and a cartographer accidentally mixed them up whilst drawing a global map...
Not sure how true that is though?
tishtosh 1 year ago
@Experiment47 Ive heard that reason before and itsa load of bollocks. The vikings wouldnt have given a shit about tourists. All they cared about was pillaging and raping.
Bobertron19941994 1 year ago
@Experiment47 Prove it.
kid43332 1 year ago
@Experiment47 Just false advertising though really isn't it =P
NickStedmon 1 year ago
@Experiment47 wikipedia for the win
garethkielty 1 year ago
Also where he settled in greenland is actually abundantly green during the summer. @Experiment47
Furrrrsjer44 1 year ago
Greenland?
Whatever!
WeShallBurnInHeck 2 years ago
White cliffs of dover? LOL
MessiahComing 2 years ago
- Do I? Do I really?
- Yes.
- Then welcome to Virginia.
XD So funny,so,so funny... x)
DimaBilanLove 2 years ago
New South Wales is the weirdest one of them all. Is it a new version of South Wales or a southern New Wales? Why only name it after south Wales? Where's New North Wales? It just makes no sense.
martiniisgood 2 years ago
it's a hard life, isn't it?
xaviervelastin 2 years ago
@martiniisgood Where's the original Zealand for that matter?
AndyUnwritten 2 years ago 2
@AndyUnwritten That would be in the Netherlands.
martiniisgood 2 years ago
@martiniisgood, I'm pretty sure it's in Denmark.
mrt0310 1 year ago
its not a two worded name, its Newzealand, not like New South Wales.
catatatater 2 years ago
fail
DougJokester 1 year ago
' Greenland ' ..........whatever hahahaa lol
DICKIE733 2 years ago
I always asked (while actually living there) whether NSW was named like that because it reminded "the captain" of South Wales, or whether it was because it reminded him of Wales, and was in the South... does anybody know the real answer to that? Seriously!!
fsoto1969 2 years ago 11
It was named New South Wales by Captain Cook "in the Name of His Majesty King George the Third took possession of the whole Eastern coast from the above Latitude [38°S] down to this place by the Name of New Wales" He later changed it to New South Wales when it was realised the size of Australia. So basically its just Wales rather than him thinkings its similar to South Wales.
cadmium48 2 years ago 14
Thanks a bunch mate!! That was fast, and helpful!
fsoto1969 2 years ago
The real question is why on earth does Wales get the honorific, Cook wasn't Welsh nor did he ever live there. Was it the only English place he could think of that doesn't have a "new" version in America?
jhfh3112 1 year ago
wales isn't english.
TheGwenjamin 1 year ago
@TheGwenjamin It was then.
matt137pickman 1 year ago
spaz
hordichuck 1 year ago
@jhfh3112 Wales isn't in England.....
cornishladx200 1 year ago
@cornishladx200 haha served
ggaabbee11 1 year ago
@cornishladx200 wales is officially part of great britan, though
blackwolfcrystal11 1 year ago
@blackwolfcrystal11 Your right, but Wales England and Scotland, though all part of Great Britain, are individual Countries as well.
cornishladx200 1 year ago
@cornishladx200 and orkney islands
blackwolfcrystal11 1 year ago
@jhfh3112
ha.
neomp5 1 year ago
@cadmium48 - I'm still to see the resemblance to Wales, except for the fact it's always bloody raining.
Poultron 1 year ago
@Poultron In truth, it is unknown whether it was meant to be the new south Wales or the new Wales of the South, or if the fellow was simply in the grips of the Ocean Madness.
BulletMagnetOWI 1 year ago
@cadmium48 It was originally called New Wales, not because of any similarity with Wales, but in honour of the then Prince Regent (later George IV), the Prince of Wales
Mysterymangelwurzel 1 year ago
@fsoto1969
I don't think it was because it 'reminded' him of South Wales. As the sketch suggests, I don't think it has too much in common. It was more because at the time South Wales was the industrial power house of the British empire, the close proximity of coal and iron having obvious benefits.
Therefore it was just naming the place after somewhere very successful in order to try to draw on the association.
perfacetus 1 year ago
@perfacetus
That's also an interesting point--thanks! You're certainly right that "never before seen trees, and wild animals that jump around" doesn't sound that much Welsh, so the idea of making it attractive through suggesting a rich country sounds good...
fsoto1969 1 year ago
@fsoto1969
Happy to help :-)
perfacetus 1 year ago
@perfacetus no one cares its a joke
chainsawclownsyay 1 year ago
@chainsawclownsyay
I didn't randomly just say all that, someone asked why indeed they named NSW, NSW.
perfacetus 1 year ago 2
Seriously, who did come up with the names for some of those places?
Nitocolus 2 years ago
Pork faggots are actually a type of food xD
RockyBiscuits 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Hahaha indeed, this is so true, those fucking bastards calling areas of the world any old fucking thing and then we have to live with it for the rest of our existence.
I know a road called; Faggot Lane.
Feel sorry for the poor bastards that live there.
The1stPoster 2 years ago
Well Faggot means Bundle of sticks, so you shouldn't be blaming the people who named it, but the ever changing English langauge. :)
LOLPAULISON 2 years ago 8
no you
Antonylovesyou 2 years ago
I'd fucking love to live at Faggot Lane.
Neodymium 2 years ago 7
faggot lane? where do you live, just curious? england? sounds like the english version of New York's GAY STREET XD
but I agree wil Lolpaulison, blame the people who changed the meaning of words
Brendanofthecult 2 years ago
"If these are the indies... and incidentally that's something else I'd like to talk to you about at some point..." lol
stoprainingonme 2 years ago 12
hehe, the ending is great :)
SgtMoobs 2 years ago 3
That ending was BRILLIANT.
mushthehill 2 years ago 5
Greenland?
what ever!
XD
aemon1412 2 years ago 3
genius!! "welcome to Virginia!!"
zeusosullivan 2 years ago 2
"Greenland?"
"Whatever!"
RivaJane 2 years ago 57
@RivaJane Yes, we saw the video.
kid43332 1 year ago
@kid43332 Pointless comment, pointless reply. 'Tis youtube, afterall...
RivaJane 1 year ago
Hahaha i love this, i'm from South Wales, it's soo amusing.
BekiiOxO 2 years ago 3
Heh, and I'm from New South Wales. I've always wondered if the 'South' came from the fact NSW was supposed to resemble the southern part of Wales, or if it was supposed to be a new Wales, in the southern hemisphere. Now I know! ... Although I somehow doubt the factual accuracy of this conversation :P
Buffoon1980 2 years ago
Im from south wales too :D near pontypridd and about 8 miles out of cardiff :)
snipethelevi 2 years ago
I KNEW Kangaroos were native to Wales. I wonder when they died out there?
thetictocmonkey 2 years ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
welsh people suck. its not even a country under the law.
kungfufreddy 2 years ago
so thats why...
plainbond 3 years ago
That was great, it was a slow giggle all the way through and a big laugh at the "Greenland?" at the end.
warrenlaidler 3 years ago 6
"greenland"?
hahahahahahhhhahahah
tmsOOI 3 years ago
'Yes....do you know where it reminds me of? Wales!'
One of the best sketches ever!
PinkCheekyCow 3 years ago 10
lol some great sketches there and the point made is so correct! some places do have weird names!
moloney1989 3 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
welcome to virguania
mattsta127 3 years ago
haha the greenland bit really topped it off !
zolarzyztem 3 years ago 13
lol greenland at the end.
that would have been Erik the Red though who wanted to attract peopl;e there
zaohad1 3 years ago 6
Right you are, Hobshawm, although the sketch doesn't seem to feature Erik - or any Vikings for that matter. It's more of an Amundssen/Scott/Shackleton thing, isn't it? Which looks a bit worrying considering that Mitchell is a historian, but maybe they weren't trying to be pedantic about history. Maybe Greenland and Iceland should swap names.
pallhe 3 years ago
well iceland isnt that green tbh but it would make sense to call greenland iceland instead...
03cammd79 3 years ago
The Danish.. they're bonkers.
afteq 3 years ago 2
They're also huge fans of ironic names.
SAsgarters 2 years ago
As far as i know Greenland was green when the vikings found it, while Icelands climate was harsher. So in the context of the sketch a Pseudo-Amundsen would make more sense than vikings . At least i think it would.
dxanatos2 2 years ago