The Holy Roman Empire: The Rise of Medieval Europe

The Holy Roman Empire is a powerful state that emerged from the ruins of the Frankish Empire, once created by Charlemagne. But what was it actually? Known for its federal system, it united not only the scattered Germanic tribes, but also the inhabitants of modern Italy, France, the Netherlands and other European countries. Its "holiness" was ensured thanks to a close alliance with the Pope. It was then that the German kingdom was proclaimed the Holy Roman Empire.
It has been argued that this is where the history of Germany as a united state begins. Also, the roots of the idea of ​​the supremacy of the German peoples, which was reflected much later in history, come from here. It was here that the concepts of "duke" and "burg" appeared, quickly spreading throughout Europe. The history of the Holy Roman Empire is the history of medieval Europe itself and in this video we explore it in detail.

[@SinsGamingChannel]

You kind of skipped the part, that Otto I. didn't just beat the Hungarians, but that he beat them so bad (in the aftermath of Augsburg), they turned Christians, stopped raiding, and over time became among the most staunch defenders of Europe and Christendom, lol.

[@Ultima-Signa]

Also they modeled their state of Hungary on the Ottonian style and called for German immigration into their kingdom (Transylvania Saxons) and secured them with special privileges. Later these German immigrants would be part of the first line of defense against the Mongols and Ottomans respectively.

[@chrisb4003]

Your free to make your own video of the parts he skipped, or just enjoy what he puts out and don't complain about something that you can't do

[@SinsGamingChannel]

​@@chrisb4003 don't ever go full re...

[@chrisb4003]

@@SinsGamingChannel haha good one, can tell your as sharp as tack

[@SinsGamingChannel]

​​@chrisb4003 sharper than someone who thinks he needs to white Knight a channel against someone adding a entertaining side note to the subject of the video... but to each his own, right.

[@isaacgriffin5690]

This is probably the best video on the HRE I've ever watched. Well done!

[@AFMO1428]

What does it mean (HRE)

[@paprskomet]

@@AFMO1428 obviously shortcut for Holy Roman Empire.

[@AFMO1428]

@@paprskomet Thanks.

[@Koelebig]

However...

[@ChampagneDrama]

@AFMO1428 Holy Roman Empire

[@aliquewilliams3080]

Dude, come on. I’m busy at work. Why did you have to come out with such a banger of a video? 😢

[@Gosudar]

A few things: Czechia has been called Bohemia since the time the Celtic Boii inhabited the area, i.e. log before the Czechs arrived and founded their state. The Czechs has always called their county Czechia (Czechy), while the Latin and Germanic Europe kept calling it Bohemia. Also, the German settlement in Czechia started much later during the 13th century and was initiated by the Czech kings themselves. It was done solely for the economic reasons and had nothing to do with the imperial influence or controll over the territory.

[@Kinho88]

My god ! What a wonderful finding! This channel is awesome! How do you do your maps ?

[@mikehunt9884]

The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been. - Romance of the Three Kingdoms.

[@CommonSwindler]

Mischaracterized at the end, rather greatly actually. The empire didn’t “decline” after Henry III. It reached its zenith of imperial grandeur under the great Hohenstaufen emperors, Barbarossa, Henry VI, and the brilliant Frederick II. That deserves a video to fix this mischaracterization.

[@Siegbert85]

In terms of actual power wielded by the office of emperor he would be right. Henry IV famously had to deal with a vassal revolt and an anti-king and begged the pope for forgiveness. Barbarossa was a great politician but by his time the empire was torn between the houses of Welf and Hohenstaufen. He couldn't simply rely on his authority but instead chose diplomacy. Frederick II, interesting character indeed, but hardly present in Germany and got himself excommunicated.

[@CommonSwindler]

@@Siegbert85 Again, mischaracterizations that rely on the assumptions which remain from 19th century German nationalist historiography. The office of Holy Roman Emperor along with the empire itself is perhaps the most misunderstood political entity in European history. For instance, let’s focus inductively on Frederick II. He did not neglect his responsibilities in Germany, as you suggest, and his administration saw the recovery of much of Hohenstaufen power during Frederick II Hohenstaufen’s reign, which was still considerable. No state, until quite recent times, could command obedience, especially in outlying lands, by force, without consent: ‘Institutional minimalism ... could be as effective as more purposeful or more creative statecraft’ (Fernandez-Armesto, Before Columbus, 41.) In Germany, Frederick II was a ‘strong’ king without the organs of institutionalized central government; his aim was to rule in concert with his princes in the traditional organological mode of imperial politics (See Tilman Struve, Die Entwicklung der organologischen Staatsauffassung im Mittelalter, Monographien zur Geschichte des Mittelalters, vol. 16.) Since the later reign of Frederick Barbarossa, Hohenstaufen policy in Germany was to increase its own ‘hausmacht, in order to enforce a workable stasis of cooperation among the German princes. After the years of instability following the death of Henry VI, this meant that Frederick II could only feasibly rule in Germany as a kind of primus inter pares. Frederick II himself recognized the utility of this policy as a means to ensure his status and power in Germany. In this vein, a study by Andreas Christoph Schlunk reveals that by 1240 the crown was almost as rich in fiscal resources, towns, castles, enfeoffed retinues, monasteries, ecclesiastical advocacies, manors, tolls, and all other rights, revenues, and jurisdictions as it had ever been at any time since Frederick Barbarossa began a forceful new programme of enriching the crown in the 1160s (Schlunk, Königsmacht und Krongut. Die Machtgrundlage des deutschen Königtums im 13. Jahrhundert - und eine neue historische Methode). Therefore, even Frederick II’s long absence from Germany after 1220 to 1235, and afterwards from 1236, did not denude royal power nor did it imperial royal officials to enforce his prerogatives (Benjamin Arnold, Emperor Frederick II (1194-1250) and the political particularism of the German princes, p. 246).

[@CommonSwindler]

@@Siegbert85 Again, mischaracterization going here as well. This relies heavily on assumptions rooted in German nationalist historiography of the 19th century which is decidedly narrative driven. Regarding Frederick II’s absence in Germany the supposed loss of imperial power, this simply isn’t true. Frederick II did not neglect his responsibilities in Germany and his administration saw the recovery of much of Hohenstaufen power during Frederick II Hohenstaufen’s reign, which was still considerable. No state, until quite recent times, could command obedience, especially in outlying lands, by force, without consent: ‘Institutional minimalism ... could be as effective as more purposeful or more creative statecraft’ (Fernandez-Armesto, Before Columbus, 41.) In Germany, Frederick II was a ‘strong’ king without the organs of institutionalized central government; his aim was to rule in concert with his princes in the traditional organological mode of imperial politics (See Tilman Struve, Die Entwicklung der organologischen Staatsauffassung im Mittelalter, Monographien zur Geschichte des Mittelalters, vol. 16.) Since the later reign of Frederick Barbarossa, Hohenstaufen policy in Germany was to increase its own ‘hausmacht, in order to enforce a workable stasis of cooperation among the German princes. After the years of instability following the death of Henry VI, this meant that Frederick II could only feasibly rule in Germany as a kind of primus inter pares. Frederick II himself recognized the utility of this policy as a means to ensure his status and power in Germany. In this vein, a study by Andreas Christoph Schlunk reveals that by 1240 the crown was almost as rich in fiscal resources, towns, castles, enfeoffed retinues, monasteries, ecclesiastical advocacies, manors, tolls, and all other rights, revenues, and jurisdictions as it had ever been at any time since Frederick Barbarossa began a forceful new programme of enriching the crown in the 1160s (Schlunk, Königsmacht und Krongut. Die Machtgrundlage des deutschen Königtums im 13. Jahrhundert - und eine neue historische Methode). Therefore, even Frederick II’s long absence from Germany after 1220 to 1235, and afterwards from 1236, did not denude royal power nor did it imperial royal officials to enforce his prerogatives (Benjamin Arnold, Emperor Frederick II (1194-1250) and the political particularism of the German princes, p. 246).

[@arx3516]

Barbarossa didn't do great, as he was forced to give autonomy to local authorities in Italy.

[@Philipp.of.Swabia]

Agree

[@GrandNoble]

Great video quality! Can I first say, I comment on most history videos saying When you Say YEARS, can you please visually put them on screen. Most just rattle off Years in their script with no visual and it makes it hard to follow sometimes. But you did it! So amazing. My suggestion for you is to leave them on screen the whole time. It would make cycling through the video super easy to always know what year it is s things are happening. Thumbs up. I'll definitely be searching thru your Videos page now and adding a bunch to my watch later. Thanks and great job again 🎉

[@jensfiehler4716]

The best video I have seen 0n the subject. ❤ Summarizing the formation of central Europe more than 1000 y ago in high speed. Ramifications until today like the German federalism and tolerance to complicated government structures.

[@DutchJDoe]

THX for the concise and clear storytelling

[@kingslayer1073]

This channel is so fucking underrated its insane man such good videos deserves millions of subs

[@AllofHistory-3105]

The division of the Frankish Empire (843): The division of the Frankish Empire by the Treaty of Verdun resulted in three separate kingdoms, including West Francia, East Francia, and Lotharingia. This marked a turning point in the formation of modern nations like France and Germany. The rise of the East Frankish Kingdom: The East Frankish Kingdom experienced significant growth under rulers like Charles III, Louis III, and notably, Otto I. The role of Otto I: Otto I played a pivotal role in the formation of the Holy Roman Empire. He defeated the Hungarians, consolidated his power, and was crowned emperor in Rome in 962, marking the beginning of the Holy Roman Empire. Feudalism and the Duchies: The empire was structured with a system of duchies (Duchies), with powerful duchies like Saxony, Franconia, Swabia, and Bavaria. This system exemplified feudalism, where power was shared among lords. Challenges from the Hungarians and other forces: The Hungarians posed a significant threat to the East Frankish Kingdom. Additionally, the empire faced challenges from other forces, such as the Slavs in the east, the Vikings in the north, and small kingdoms in southern Italy. The role of the Church: The relationship between the empire and the Church was significant. Otto I relied on the Church's support to solidify his power and was even crowned emperor by the Pope.

[@1987MartinT]

Have you considered making follow-up videos covering the rest of the Holy Roman Empire's history?

[@arthurmorgan3180]

Best HRE video I’ve ever seen, well explained, well-set map with correct boundaries🔥🔥keep it up brother!

[@simenonhonore]

Clear explanation of a complex series of events - many thanks.

[@surters]

Hey, that is where Fields of Glory: Kingdoms begin, thanks for the nice intro to the HRE.

[@lellamas2778]

This portrays a game of Crusader Kings II perfectly

[@someonesilence3731]

Nah, CK2 has more incest. They would also have appointed a horse as chancellor.

[@Ultima-Signa]

The Holy Roman Empire was Holy ✅ Roman ✅ and an Empire ✅ Holy: (backed by the Pope who literally crowned Emperors and both parties were supposed to work as a team, Catholic Church having major control within the empire’s lands, while the Empire was a guarantee and protector of the faith and Christians outside of the Vatican, even making other peoples such as Poland convert to the Catholic faith or ultimately defeating the Huns who brought the downfall of the Roman Empire and made even them convert to Roman-Catholicism as well) Roman: (Rome literally was a part of it for much of its history, kept Roman state traditions, was Roman-Catholic, had a mixed Germanic-Roman population, had Latin as its official language) Empire: (no idea why this is being questioned. The HRE literally fits the exact definition of an empire and they had an emperor. You would have it much easier to dismiss the British or French Empires as Empires. But no one is ever doing that. So what the..) The anti-HRE phrase of Voltaire was about the HRE when it was in time of internal struggle during Voltaire’s lifetime and the HRE’s last century to exist. Also Voltaire literally was literally a Prussian propagandist (and made those comments while residing in Prussia) and the Prussians were keen on weakening and most likely even on dissolving the whole HRE system all together. Voltaire lived in a time after the HRE was still devastated because of 30 years‘ and religious war (and then literally the Turkish invasions right after which the HRE stell fend off despite all the 30 years war devastation). So yes, during that time the HRE most likely didn’t fit the description of the HRE anymore, but the HRE did exist for centuries prior and Voltaire wasn’t referring to history but instead making a witty remark a out the present. It’s also historically disingenuous to keep on pointing to he map of a fractured HRE when it was literally during the 30 years war, as if it would have always been like that. Not to mention that subdivisions (as in provinces, states or in a monarchy little kingdoms or semi-kingdoms) are completely normal. That’s like pointing at a map of the USA with it‘s 50 states and saying the USA wouldn’t be a country in its own right because of it. Funnily the HRE could be considered more of a united country than the USA considering that the HRE did have a single state religion and all that + the US states have more autonomy than the subdivisions of the HRE had during its prime.

[@Siegbert85]

Whether or not it was, the reason for the naming has mostly to do with religion. According to Biblical prophecy the Roman Empire would be the last one before the end of days and according to the theory of translatio imperii the ownership of said empire could move from one people to another, so from the original Romans, to the Greeks, to the Franks and Germans. There was quite a bit of prestige connected to the title, no matter how justified it was. The "holy" part funnily enough is quite clearly a propaganda tool against the papacy. It goes back to an incident in the 12th century where the pope made it sound like he was the feudal overlord over the emperor (Frederick Barbarossa at the time) which caused some outrage. The imperial chancellory began using the term "sacrum imperium" to show that it was an office installed by god and had nothing to do with the pope.

[@Ultima-Signa]

@@Siegbert85 Would you share your sources please

[@Siegbert85]

@@Ultima-Signa ​ The Biblical prophecy I was refering to is known as the 4 kingdoms of Daniel. Daniel was tasked to interpret a reoccuring dream of king Nebuchadnezzar in which 4 beasts appear which he interpreted as 4 kingdoms before the last one which would be the kingdom of god. There had been various interpretations of which kingdoms those was supposed to be, but one is: 1. Babylon 2. Medo-Persia 3. Macedon Greece 4. Rome Rome would be especially significant because it's both the place were Jesus was born and lived and where Christianity rose to power. "Translatio Imperii" as a concept was quite typical during the middle ages as they generally didn't regard themselves as the start of something new but rather the continuation of everything that came before. Various scholars linked the theory to their own kingdom and why they thought it was important. One example for the German perspective can be seen in the song of Anno from 1070 which describes how the ancient Germans helped out Julius Cesar against his enemies and would thusly be favored of inheriting the Roman empire many centuries later. The incident with the pope happened during the diet of Besancon in 1157. The then papal legate Roland (later pope Alexander III) read a letter from the pope that could be interpreted either way. The imperial chancellor Rainald of Dassel chose to translate the word "beneficium" as "fief" rather than "benefit" and sparked immediate outrage among the bystanders. The legate almost got murdered right then and there. In a response letter to the pope the phrase "sacrum imperium" was first used.

[@Ultima-Signa]

@@Siegbert85 Thanks! Tbh I don’t even care about this whole HRE title and I even think it’s quite silly arguing about it. But I also get annoyed of these boring people repeating the same old Voltaire quote (without any context) over and over again, thinking that they perhaps would have made a very smart comment or would have informed people. It’s a worn-out, wannabe witty-comment based on false assumptions and misinformation. And those comments basically just destroy the fun for the people interested in history, instead of contributing to the topic. Not to mention it’s a historically inaccurate and childish comment as well. So I thought I might type a comment about before others do to engage them in a discussion, or at least inform them on some things and how the title actually very well could have made sense for the people back then. I mean, it wasn’t for no reason that the HRE title was accepted by most of Europe.

[@Siegbert85]

@@Ultima-Signa Absolutely agree there!

[@Light-at-Dawn]

It is very interesting and follows a chronological order. good video

[@jakerupp3840]

We need more videos about this topic

[@embreis2257]

one very important aspect was completely ignored in this clip: the long and bitter conflict between emperor and pope about who has the right to appoint church princes [bishops] in Germany. it was so intense it nearly brought down the emperor. the famous *_Walk to Canossa_* during the _investiture controversy_ should certainly get mentioned if not featured in this video.

[@varana]

That came after the time covered in this video.

[@badisheffey4550]

Excellent video! Please keep them up!!

[@historyrhymes1701]

Sick video mate. The motion design and animation are sick! I wonder if you would be interested in a collaboration sometime?

[@Bruh-cg2fk]

by sick you mean good or bad?

[@CatInBag2763]

​@@Bruh-cg2fkTake a guess.

[@Siegbert85]

10:18 "Thus the German kingdom became the Holy Roman Empire" That's not technically correct. "Holy Roman Empire" describes the entirety of the lands under imperial rule, so Germany, Italy, Burgundy, Bohemia. Germany itself stayed a kingdom although very closely associated with the empire at large. That's why becoming emperor was always a multipronged process during the middle ages. You would be elected and later crowned king of Germany first which in theory but not always praxis made you king over all of the empire (shown by the title "king of the Romans" that was used since the late 11th century), then you would go down to Italy, get crowned king there and continue to travel to Rome where you get finally be crowned emperor. After the middle ages the non German lands were largely lost and the kings would call themselves emperor immediately after their coronation. By that time there is no real use differentiating between the kingdoms and the empire anymore, although the titles were kept until the very end.

[@Ultima-Signa]

Was probably a way for them to say: German Kingdom created the Holy Roman Empire. And that’s correct. And let’s not forget that Burgundy and Italy were also basically German kingdoms at that time.

[@Siegbert85]

@@Ultima-Signa Were they? Afaik they did speak Romance languages for the most part. They were founded by Germanic people, if that's what you mean... the Burgundians and the Lombards.

[@Ultima-Signa]

@@Siegbert85 Yes, exactly. Though the Kingdom of Italy was founded by the Franks with basis on the earlier Lombard kingdom. They were founded by Germanic tribes and were being ruled German royal families ever since. That’s most likely even a main reason for the close connections with the Kingdom of Germany, which at the end then even resulted in the subsequent ˋmerger‘ of those kingdoms in the form of the HRE, as we know. Burgundy even is the name of some Germanic tribe who have given their name to that region. And yes, even though they were closer to the Latin origins they spoke Romance on the administrative level instead of Latin. Romance is vulgar Latin with Germanic and Celtic influences (but mainly Germanic in the case of Italian) due to immigration + Roman conquest, while ironically the Kingdom of Germany tried to keep it straight Latin on the administrative level. So the Kingdom of Italy basically spoke in a language that‘s been closer to German than the Kingdom of Germany did (or at least tried to. I know that actually they basically also just spoke a broken Latin with German influences, but still not as much broken).

[@Ultima-Signa]

@@Siegbert85 The history of the Kingdom of Italy is quite multi-faceted, that’s for sure! It’s a very intriguing read.

[@Siegbert85]

@@Ultima-Signa I don't know that they gave much about them all being Germanic kingdoms. They were much more interested in restoring the Roman empire and the Lombard kingdom of Italy was closer to the heart of the Roman empire. In fact every time a German king came down they were seen as foreigners who dared to interfere in their internal politics.

[@youareiamurim]

Good job! Very informative! I appreciate the effort! New subscriber!! 😊👌

[@lucasrichter5193]

Just a note: Charles III lost West Francia not because of his death but because he was deposed and considered too weak. He definitely was not the strong and powerful ruler the video seems to depict.

[@samamv9893]

Amazing video

[@Senovitj]

10:33 Roman Empire, not byzantine. The Empire was dubbed the byzantine empire 105 years after it felt by a German cartographer, in an attempt to diminish its legacy.

[@Roshini-q5d]

Can you make a video about 3rd crusade😇

[@proatnothing4263]

Do the history of the Italian peninsula

[@arkan4072]

All cool but Bohemia was always Bohemia start with Bohemian tribes, then Dutchy of Bohemia and them Kingdom of Bohemia before that all it was part of Great Moravia

[@kimberleyfung-loy9772]

I was wondering about this for so long ahahah thanks for doing the research

[@prussiaboi707]

Conrad the red looks like Thomas shelby

[@joshpam23]

I was ready to watch the entire HRE history

[@typaul4859]

This solidified my opinion that history should be called dead people gossip

[@Ultima-Signa]

The formation of the Holy Roman Empire was not the rise of medieval Europe. Medieval Europe started with the fall of Western Rome. The formation of the Holy Roman Empire was actually a renaissance era for Europe during the dark times of the Middle Ages/medieval era. And from what I know the HRE also didn’t really decline until the 1400s/1500s. Sure, it suffered setbacks due the mongols (who they ultimately defeated) but the HRE was still the most powerful state in all of Europe for centuries to come after the 1000s, and even launched wars as far back as Eastern Rome and the Levant. The HRE was a consistent and clear top 3 global power from the 1000s until perhaps the mid 1400s.

[@Siegbert85]

The HRE always had problems with inner wars but during the high middleages at least there were quite powerful dynasties and the power of the vassals wasn't as large as during later times. I would say the HRE decline began in 1250 with the death of the Hohenstaufen dynasty and the begin of the great interregnum. The Luxembourgs and Habsburgs were also powerful players later on but more on the level of their own domains (Bohemia, Austria) rather than the empire at large.

[@e33d90]

It’s just a video title and you are reading way too much in to it, it’s perfectly fine to include this in the rise of medieval europe

[@jcornell9944]

Nerd. Not wrong

[@sebastianstammer9265]

in reality it was the rise of the historic middle ages. Most of records start from the late 700s early 800s. Mostly all the things we asociate with medieval europe its from that times

[@Drayran]

- Czech principality is a misleading, modern way to describe the historical territories of Boehmia and Moravia - Henry annexing Bohemia is plain out wrong. After the fall of Great Moravia both duchies already entered a situation of semi-vassalage under Frankia. As duke of Bavaria Henry II. had the closest ties to its Přemyslid rulers and helped duke Jaromír campaign against Polish backed pretenders. The video derails in terms of historical accuracy in the last 5 minutes

[@lao-shang2326]

This video is the best video about political history of HRE I watched so far

[@Stepbrorose]

nice vid

[@danielsantiagourtado3430]

Love your content! Thanks For this ❤❤❤

[@eggstinater]

Do you think you could do a video on the Kingdom/Principality of Hungary? I never realized that the Hungarians were such a hassle for the Franks. Theres hardly any content about Hungary before their union with Austria.

[@sebastianstammer9265]

Basiclly they are like the poles steppe tribe migration, chistianized and became respectful small militar states cause they holding the lines vs the ottomans and the mongols. Also based cavalries

[@donaldwhittaker7987]

James Bryce wrote a good book on the HRE. Plus a good 2-volume book on the US back around 1930 or earlier.

[@natheriver8910]

Very interesting

[@Drayran]

Ah, an HRE video *Thousands of unoriginal paraphrasations of a Voltaire quote incoming*

[@SolarpunkEnjoyer]

Name a more iconic duo than Holy Roman Emperors and malaria 🦟

[@CatInBag2763]

Me and your mom.

[@SolarpunkEnjoyer]

@@CatInBag2763 Joke's on you

[@Drayran]

Roman emperors and the praetorian guard?

[@wallrider4194]

14:58 1024?! That was a thousand years ago! (The year I made this comment is 2024)

[@mrgopnik5964]

3:02 fun fact: In Hungary they call this time period “the age of adventures”

[@BigGino_]

This channel is too perfect to exist👏👏👏

[@jumpbro1]

great video's

[@Benito-lr8mz]

One of my best paintings is Charles l of Spain and V of HRE on horseback in Muhlberg battle by Titian in Prado museum the painting inspired the Napoleon crossing the Alps painting of Jacques Louis David

[@benqurayza7872]

You should display the year of each event in a corner of the screen as you lecture.

[@someonesilence3731]

Pretty good video, would be even better if you site your sources moving forward.

[@Leif-yv5ql]

It may not have been Holy, it may have been only partly Roman, but it was definitely an Empire.

[@andreasschwarz1532]

In Spain, the Church was able to establish the Holy Roman Empire first. And then it was propagated everywhere. The Church wanted to transform the Roman Empire into the Holy Roman Empire.

[@cyfix7295]

Very Nice Video On HRE :)))

[@TacoMedic]

Why does the thumbnail look like Linus Sebastian from LinusTechTips?

[@dahugart1860]

12:00 the position of Prague is pretty sus :D in reality it is further 200 km to west

[@Drayran]

I lIke the maps for the most part but there are some glaring inconsistencies :D

[@pz9mo1221]

pls can you make video on great moravia and or polabian slavs?

[@Bootlegger4]

Otto wasn't the first ruler to receive the crown and title "Emperor of the Romans" from the pope, Charlemagne was over 150 years earlier.

[@ericanthonyjones2131]

good content; but we are listening to this text and you are reading it. Better to display dates in prnt. Also -- very tedious diction. Oddo? OTTo! Iduly? ITaly !! Baddle? Battle!

[@danielsantiagourtado3430]

Can't wait For you to get to the Habsburgs ruling it! AEIOU

[@karlkarlos3545]

Yuck, so much incest.

[@232xw60q]

faltou legenda em portugyes e mais datas.

[@YarPirates-vy7iv]

When do we get the the part where a troublesome Duke rebels, loses ... and is NOT forgiven? *dramatic music*

[@craftingcameron8636]

Wonder if he was related to Otto Von Bismark

[@stefanogattoCH]

Why is it the "Principality" of Hungary? I think Hungarians call it a Kingdom..?

[@Siegbert85]

That's right

[@gabork5055]

Yes it was from around the turn of the millennia. Before that 'principality' is about accurate though the title has a slightly different name in Hungarian, basically it was a semi-nomadic state back then with seven chieftains (called vezérek, similar to Turkish viziers)each representing a different tribe/nation led by a warlord-king. Honestly i would rather call it a confederation than a principality. The exact name it had was fejedelemség and it existed as a state from around 895 before it became 'officially' a kingdom later on. Fejedelemség can be roughly translated as the holdings of the head of the state, fej means head in Hungarian.

[@grzegorzk5149]

the holy romam empire was as roman as it was holy

[@jiritichy7967]

In the 955 battle defeating Hungarians, Oto was helped by the Czech duke Boleslav I.

[@julien8629]

Thank you for not using AI

[@vojtechnology]

Hungary was a kingdom from 1000 AD. Also kinda skipped the battle of Pressburg. Where the hungarians stopped and brutally defeated and killed duke Luitpold and basically deleted the bavarian nobility in 907. This win secured the western borders of the hungarians till 1030.

[@fehervari98]

No it didn't, considering that Hungary's Westernmost frontiers used to be on the Enns.

[@moosimwald]

Imagine the HRE would exist today. It would be one of the most powerful countries in the world. From the north- and east sea over forests, the alps to the mediteranian sea.

[@user-bl7em8sx6o]

Lmao they'd be powerful, but definitely not the most powerful in the world

[@sebastianstammer9265]

Bro just see how germany was in the late 1800s after Bissmarck unified it + put the austrohungarian empire there

[@overworlder]

Great vid. Sub'd!

[@ehd.f4269]

Is that an AI voice or is it just a history buff without a soul?

[@aleksandertanchev8148]

Man i don't know if anyone else has pointed it out, but probably every 10th word you say is "However". It gets really annoying. Great video overall, but please find a way to avoid parasite words like this.

[@creepy_pasta_lore]

Lets go new videoooo

[@Rynewulf]

Eugh the thumbnail. Its like we some kind of weird thing against the Medieval Germans, so we ignore most of France being subletted to England and Aragon and the semi independent Brittany, Burgundy, and Provence.

[@evtimstefanov8377]

Gemany was plunged in a civil war for several years??? Are you serious??? What is Germany and when was it formed as such??

[@khiemk9962]

The title "king of germany" existed alongside the title "holy roman emperor"

[@LG-bs1rs]

Good video

[@ps4games164]

Meanwhile the pope of Rome eating popcorn.

[@SoNonWoo]

Seems more likely that the Suebi, not the Alemanni, would later become the Schwäbish

[@Siegbert85]

The Suebi weren't around by that point anymore but the name somehow stuck.

[@Unavailable_Username.]

*Eastern Roman Empire. Stop calling it the Byzantine Empire. If your name is John, I’m not going to write Paul on your tombstone

[@golgumbazguide...4113]

Explore Golgumbaz

[@ZS-rw4qq]

Bloody rise of Europe

[@TheFearsomePredator]

Still a kingdom of France victim

[@ariksan]

However,...

[@Love78787]

Eastern germany should be given to the Czesh Republic or Poland 😇

[@priatalat]

I love how the Germans went from raiding the Romans to getting raided by the Hungarians.

[@Siegbert85]

I think raiding was a general constant in ancient times

[@ekesandras1481]

and than the Hungarians got raided by the Cumans and Pechenegs and than the Mongols

[@Drayran]

Moral of the story: don't choose a sedentary lifestyle (?)

[@SpartacusSPQ]

False! As clearly shown in the annals of Crusader Kings III, it was the Kings of Bulgaria who decided to forge a lasting alliance with Byzantium. With one front secured, both managed to expand further. Bulgaria formed the Carpathian Empire and later brought entire Western Europe under their rule, while Byzantium brought the Arab conquests to an end and one by one crushed the Muslim nations.

[@kamikazestryker]

Later times would simply banish the other sons into a monastary, the beginning of the real reason why the christian church still today practice celibacy. Simply to lessen the ever returning succession fights amongst the many noble clans in europe.

[@LondonPower]

German romans like the greek romans of the byzantine empire

[@arthur-yq4ic]

they have great nicknames

[@theo-dr2dz]

This is not a very good video. It wastes a lot of time on all these rebellions that went nowhere, but doesn't explain the really important bits. The Frankish Empire was theoretically the restored Western Roman Empire, and it was this from the moment of the crowning of Charlemagne as Emperor. After the death of Charlemagne's son Louis the Pious, the inheritance was devided among his three surviving sons. Lothaire got the middle kingdom and the Imperial crown. He was to rule the _entire_ Empire. His brothers Louis and Charles got the Eastern resp the Western kingdoms as subkings. This seems to moderns as a really bad deal for Lothaire, but he did get the bulk of Carolingian landed property, and the capitals Aachen and Rome. The problem was that the two subkingdoms were so outsized (this was the result of a civil war that was won by the younger brothers) that they were from the start effectively independent. After Lothaire's death. his kingdom was devided among his sons. Lothaire II got Lotharingia, Louis II got Italy and the Imperial crown. After Lothaire II, Lotharingia got devided between the Western and the Eastern kingdoms but was not effectively ruled by either. After some short reunifications, the Imperial crown went to the kingdom of Italy, which gradually fragmented. The crown came to second-tier Italian rulers and became effectively meaningless. This was the low water mark of Imperial prestige. However, theoretically the Emperor still ruled ALL the Frankish states. When the Eastern Carolingians died out, the dynastic successor was the Western king, Charles the Simple. However, as his name suggests, Charles was not an effective ruler and the Eastern kingdom had big problems with Hungarian and Viking raids. The Eastern dukes elected Conrad of Franconia as king. This was huge: they skipped the legal heir in favour of a duke that had a very weak dynastic claim at best. This marks the beginning of the elective nature of the German crown. Conrad was not a strong ruler. Lotharingia joined the Western kingdom and he fought all his life to assert authority. When he died, the duke skipped again the legal heir and elected Henry the Fowler. Henry really didn't have any kind of claim to the throne. The crown became more elective. The story that Conrad asked the dukes to elect Henry might well have been constructed to improve Henry's shaky legitimacy. Henry was a strong ruler and restored royal prestige. His successor Otto the Great crushed the Hungarians, conquered Italy, got the Imperial crown (although he didn't have a dynastic claim) and forced Arelate to make his son heir to the throne of that state. The Ottonians were very successful rulers. When the dynasty died out, the dukes elected Conrad II, duke of Franconia. Under the Salian dynasty, Imperial authority in Germany reached it's high water mark. However, the Salians were quite heavy handed and alienated the dukes. In Rome meanwhile, the Gregorian reform began. The Pope claimed more influence over the appointment of bishops. The Ottonian/Salian system of government relied on bishops and the royal authority to appoint at least the most important ones. Bishops were educated men, and could not have legal successors. Therefor, prince-bishoprics could not become heriditary. Now the Emperor was also in conflict with the Pope. When Henry iV insulted the Pope rather arrogantly, the Pope excommunicated him and incited a revolt of the dukes (that didn't like him either). Henry was forced to beg forgiveness to the Pope and lost a lot of prestige. Nevertheless the Salians came close to make the Imeperial crown hereditary, but that failed because of premature extinction of the dynasty. Now the logical successor was the head of the Hohenstaufen dynasty, however this man was such a bad personality that the dukes elected Lothair of Supplinburg instead. Lothair was rich, but also elderly and without a heir. A typical in-between man. This arrangement weakend Imperial authority. After Lothair, the new Hohenstaufen leader was not as arrogant as his dad and was elected. The Hohenstaufen inherited the kingdom of Sicily (that went all the way to Naples). Sicily was the richest and best organised state in Europe at the time and had a strong tradition of hereditary succession. The Hohenstaufen concentrated on Sicily and gave their German vassals more authonomy in order to keep them loyal. Their great project was the attempt to link the German and Imperial crowns to the Sicilian crown, and by that eliminate the elective character of the Empire. This all brought them into conflict with the Pope. The Pope was now surrounded by Imperial lands to the north and Sicilian lands to the south. By clever dipllomacy the Popes managed to frustrate the Hohenstaufens. Their asset was that the Hohenstaufen were not popular in Germany because of their absenteism. Frederick II was probably one of the most intelligent Emperors, but he was not a great politician. He managed to antagonise basically everyone, got himself excommunicated multiple times and diverted his energy to adventures in Greece and a claim on the throne of Jerusalem, which he never could hope to rule effectively. When his intended heir Philip of Swabia died, civil war broke out in Germany. Shortly after, Frederick died and his successor was an infant. The Germans elected Otto IV, of the Welf dynasty, the archrivals of the Hohenstaufen. Otto managed to kill his chances in a war with France. Sicily also got itself another ruler. Frederick's son Manfred came of age and tried to reconquer Sicily, but was defeated and killed. End of the Hohenstaufen. Now, Germany was in chaos, because of the civil war and the long absence of the Hohenstaufen. Also, the ancient stemduchies had gradually fragmented, so it was not so obvious who had the right to elect a successor. The Interregnum started, a couple of centuries without an Emperor. This caused a sharp decline in Imperial authority. The HRE effectively ceased to be a real state, but became a kind of confederation. The system with the 7 prince-electors appeared after the Interregnum. The key points: - election of Conrad of Franconia. The obvious dynastic heir is passed over in favour of a local noble with a very shaky claim - election of Henry the Fowler. The obvious heir is passed over in favour of a noble with no dynastic claim at all - investiture controversy. The Pope humbles the Emperor, the Emperor gradually loses influence over the bishops. - attempts to make the crown heriditary fail - the Hohenstaufen give the German vassals more authonomy. Also, their absenteism weakens Imperial power in Germany. - chaos at the end of the Hohenstaufen dynasty, and fragmentation of the German duchies cause the Interregnum. The Interregnum weakens Imperial power even more, to the extent that the Empire isn't a real state anymore.

[@Nouserforthemoment]

Wrong we were called Bohemia in 9th century as we became Duchy in that century

[@tomasamari1234]

however

[@delgraven3624]

You should count the times you said "however", and revise your script.

[@jimfloyd4563]

Hoy Roman Empire ... an absurdly presumptuous name

[@anthonylewis9030]

Charlemagne is widely recognized as the first Holy Roman Emperor.

[@varana]

Wrongly, though. ;) He did call himself "Emperor of the Romans" but never used "Holy" (as mentioned in the video, that didn't get used until several centuries after Charlemagne), and there were _many_ differences between his Frankish kingdom and what was later the HRE, so counting them as the same kind of entity is really very misleading.

[@Siegbert85]

@@varana None of the HR emperors called themselves "Holy". That's just modern English convention. Charlemagne started a tradition that all later emperors would continue, being a German(ic) king getting crowned emperor by the pope in Rome. Everything else is details

[@ps4games164]

​@@Siegbert85 Tell me some more. Huge disinformation nowdays.

[@thibaultsardet7399]

It's a modern statement. He was King of the Franks in the first place. Otto I is the first Emperor of the HRE.

[@Siegbert85]

@@thibaultsardet7399 This is more of a modern statement. Medieval chroniclers always included Charlemagne among their emperors and would say it started with him. That's what's written on the frame of that famous Dürer depiction of him: "This is a depiction of Charles who brought the Roman Empire onto the Germans"

[@janrudnicki6111]

In This time Slovenia was Hungary no Czech .

[@mmaphilosophy]

❤ it

[@HarrySatchelWhatsThatSmell]

The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, Roman or an Empire.

[@BlackHaloO]

other words you can use instead of "however": Nevertheless Nonetheless Yet Still Even so On the other hand On the contrary Though Although But