actually, that is quite inaccurate, considering how the Kalmar Union was formed in 1389 and consisted of Sweden, Norway and Denmark. Which, in turn, would mean that all these were born before this union. I suppose you might be refeering to at what point the country in question became indepandant, but if that were the case, i have no choice but to say that the wording chosen was rather poor. And on that note, exactly what time do you consider a country to be "born"? When they choose a name? When they design a flag? Depending on what you think, Sweden could be said to have been born in 12 000 BC, when the first settelers came to sweden. Or at about 1000, when the name "Sweden" (Swēorice) was first written and kept. And in terms of dependancy, well... Sweden has never really been occupied.
16
actually, that is quite inaccurate, considering how the Kalmar Union was formed in 1389 and consisted of Sweden, Norway and Denmark. Which, in turn, would mean that all these were born before this union. I suppose you might be refeering to at what point the country in question became indepandant, but if that were the case, i have no choice but to say that the wording chosen was rather poor. And on that note, exactly what time do you consider a country to be "born"? When they choose a name? When they design a flag? Depending on what you think, Sweden could be said to have been born in 12 000 BC, when the first settelers came to sweden. Or at about 1000, when the name "Sweden" (Swēorice) was first written and kept. And in terms of dependancy, well... Sweden has never really been occupied.
All and all, i call this horse-apple.