Why didn't the Kingdom of Hungary have a king? (Short Animated Documentary)

[@DualTheEggist]

My favourite quote from Horthy is when Mussolini asked why Horthy was still called the admiral horthy even though his country was landlocked, to which Horthy responded "Why does Italy still have a finance minister".

[@131alexa]

Touché!

[@kemarisite]

Woah, sick burn.

[@Fsast9707]

The large coastline of Italy must have helped Mussolini extinguish that burn

[@Sewblon]

I don't get it.

[@dominicguye8058]

@@Sewblon Italy's economy was in shambles

[@TheDarthbinky]

In case you're wondering, Horthy was an admiral in a landlocked country because he had been an admiral in the navy of the Austro-Hungarian Empire (which did control coastlines in what's now Italy and Croatia); towards the end of WW1, he was promoted to overall commander of the navy. When the empire dissolved in the final weeks of WW1, Hungary was left without a coast or a navy, and Horthy resigned. When he got involved in politics, people still referred to him as an admiral, as we often do with former military officers in the English-speaking world. Another point - that "last king of Hungary" was Charles Habsburg... that's not a mistake. The Austrian (and previously the Holy Roman) Habsburg Emperors also happened to be the Kings of Hungary going back for like 400 years or so (a story for another time). That's why everything in the Austro-Hungarian military is listed as "k.u.k.", which comes from the German "kaiserlich und königlich", or "imperial and royal". So as WW1 was ending and the empire was collapsing, Emperor (and King) Charles issued a proclamation that said (paraphrasing) "I'm firing my entire Imperial government and I'm not going to have a political role anymore". He was careful to word it so that it wasn't an abdication... but everyone just basically took it as an abdication anyway. Austria immediately became a Republic and abolished its aristocracy, but as this video notes, Hungary (eventually) decided to remain a kingdom. Charles insisted that since he hadn't abdicated, he should still be the king, but as this video explains, that didn't quite work out for him. He eventually went into exile in Portugal and died of pneumonia in 1922. His son and heir Otto died about a decade ago, and Otto's son and heir is James Bissonnette. Just kidding, his name is Karl and he's a politician in Austria.

[@potatogod975]

bosnia also has a bit of coastline too

[@Zachomara]

Was the Captain in the Sound of Music based off Horthy? (I know the Sound of Music was Austrian, but there are tons of similarities)

[@hydrationboi8861]

@@potatogod975 also montenegro

[@gavinjones3933]

And Slovenia…

[@gavinjones3933]

And Slovenia…

[@Quin_Ram]

The Kingdom of Hungary, an admiral without a navy and a kingdom without a king.

[@dimamatat5548]

Horthy simply got promoted before Hungary lost its coast.

[@thomasdevries8628]

And a part of the EU without sharing it's values

[@whateverbro6818]

@@thomasdevries8628 good

[@G0TIMAN]

@@thomasdevries8628 good

[@ulfskinn1458]

A truth without a voice, one song left to sing.

[@mrterp04]

Three suggestions from a loyal Patreon supporter: 1.) Why does Monaco exist? 2.) How did Thailand avoid being colonized? 3.) How did Portugal hold on to Goa and Macau so long?

[@nilsp9426]

Not a Patreon supporter (sorry) but I have another one I would love: Why does the US have an electoral college?

[@redkraken6516]

Tapakapa did a pretty good video on the first topic.

[@Unknowngfyjoh]

Why did Britain decide to hold on to the colonies it still has? Bermuda, Grand Cayman, etc.

[@jmwh9654]

@@nilsp9426 already made

[@ArthurCSchaperMR]

And two more suggestions: Why were the Revolutions of 1848 unsuccessful in Germany and Spain? Why do people drive on the left or the right side in different countries?

[@christurner6330]

As a Hungarian myself, I never learned about these candidates, like that British prince, who wanted to be named Béla V. apparently? And then the king of Romania? Truly forces you to think about those 'what-if' situations. Interesting!

[@peternemeth4073]

You don't heard is beacuse "history matters" made many mistakes in this video. The post ww1 borders of Hungary were made in the dictate of trianon 1920. Before that romanians, czesks, serbs occupied large parts of Hungary 1918-1920. There was an option is some hungarian politicans in 1919 Hungary and Romania made a personal union style monarchy but it reamained a plan.

[@christurner6330]

@@peternemeth4073 Doesn't explain why it's not talked about. Sure, he made mistakes on the treaty and the wars that preceeded it, but it's a complicated story anyway. One that doesn't have much to do with the fact that the plan was still laid out.

[@ReaperCH90]

@@peternemeth4073 found the Orban voter

[@rca4788]

It's ironic how both Hungary and Bulgaria wanted a romanian king as monarch and an union

[@deutschermichel5807]

Sadly, Orban aint no Horthy （◞‸◟）

[@douglasboyle6544]

Fun fact: because it had wound up in Austria at that point, when WWII ended the US Army took the actual Hungarian Crown (bent cross and all) back to the US to keep the Soviets from getting their hands on it. The crown and other related regalia were stored in the Fort Knox Bullion Depository until 1978 when they were repatriated to Hungary. This was only done with a guarantee that they were to be returned as property of the Hungarian people and not the government, fortunately that promise was kept and they have been displayed in the Hungarian parliament building ever since.

[@justcallmehaterik]

It's funny cause in older Hungarian history books this event was described as "the greedy Americans ofc took the treasures from Hungary as mean of war reparation just like the Soviets" and it's never explained from the US side of the story.

[@domsjuk]

That fun fact is fun indeed, well done, thanks!

[@humorpalanta]

Yeah, no. Correction: The crown was kept in the National Museum because the communists/socialists thought it cannot be stored in the Parliament since the power is from the people while the crown actually represents power from a greater power (God) and since socialists don't support the latter idea (for obvious reasons) the crown and other symbols of the kingdom were kept in the National Museum where they were guarded by crown guards. Then after the end of socialism a certain Viktor Orbán emerged to power and spent a shitton of money to get them out of the museum, put them on a boat, ake them up to the Parliament and store it there ever since... Because... reasons... So in the old times they could be easily visited by anyone meanwhile now you have to enter the Parliament to see it. Ofc it is only possible in small groups in certain times. Cause f*ck the people. Also there is a legend floating around that Orbán actually did try it on when it arrived to the Parliament. Another fun fact: Orbán also renovated a building in the Castle on the Buda Hill so that he would move there to rule over the land. This building is called the Sándor Palace and the renovation finished just after Orbán lost the race to renew his position as the PM. So the socialist government took over and handed the building to the president of the state as they thought it was a place for formal meetings and it wasn't optimal for the entire government to move into the Castle. However after Orbán won again he renovated the building next to the Sándor Palace and moved in there to rule over the country.

[@febopennyficari8716]

@@justcallmehaterik it’s told like that because that’s what happened

[@jeffbenton6183]

@@febopennyficari8716 That doesn't make any sense. Fort Knox is a secure facility where few people are allowed in. The US probably lost significant amounts of money taking and storing the artifacts. If the US took them only because they were "greedy", then Fort Knox is one of the last places on Earth that they would've taken them (it'd be like taking them to Area 51 or Antartica). They clearly didn't expect to profit off of them, otherwise they would've put it in some kind of museum.

[@ygma1460]

This man had a bunch of adventures worthy of episodes of their own. Sailing around the world, saving British diplomat from Ottomans, his naval action during WWI, the political turmoil during civil war years, the gamble on marching to Budapest despite what Little Entente had said would happen if he did, allowing Poles to escape through Hungary when Germany invaded, helping jews escape German persecution, etc. Granted, they're not always tales of epic overcoming of great difficulty with absolute triumph, it was amazing how many times he was in a situation of "pick your poison".

[@Jeznyve]

Horthy had 13000 Jews exterminated in Kamenetz-Podolsk by the Germans, and the Hungarian army massacred 3500 Jews in Novi Sad in 1942. Don't talk about Horthy's protection of the Jews, you anti-Semite.

[@duskpede5146]

i mean he was definitly not pro jew, given how many Hungarian jews were killed during the white terror by his followers

[@ISCARIOTSHIELD]

@@duskpede5146 that is because 90% of the communist Ieaders in Hungary were jewish

[@furerorban_1488]

The Fascist elements in Hungary enjoyed broad popular support and Miklos Horthy’s dictatorial government concluded an alliance with Nazi Germany. Antisemitic legislation was passed and more than 100,000 Jewish men were mobilized for forced labor, in which approximately 40,000 perished. After several years of preparation and planning, from May 15 to July 9, 1944, Hungarian gendarmerie officials hdeported around 440,000 Jews from Hungary. Most were deported to Auschwitz-Birkenau, where, upon arrival and after selection, SS functionaries killed the majority of them in gas chambers. Thousands were also sent to the border with Austria to be deployed at digging fortification trenches. By the end of July 1944, the only Jewish community left in Hungary was that of Budapest, the capital. When Hungary joined the war against the Allies, nearly 20,000 Jews from Kamenetz-Podolsk who held Polish or Soviet citizenship were turned over to the Germans and murdered. The extermination phase in Hungary began in March 1944. At this time there were more than 800,000 Jews living in Hungary, as a result of annexations of regions from Slovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia. In May 1944 the deportations to Auschwitz began. In just eight weeks, some 424,000 Jews were deported to Auschwitz-Birkenau. After October 1944, when the Arrow Cross party came to power, thousands of Jews from Budapest were murdered on the banks of the Danube and tens of thousands were marched hundreds of miles towards the Austrian border. In all, some 565,000 Hungarian Jews were murdered.

[@vorynrosethorn903]

He wasn't personally involved in that which meant his subordinate largely picked who to target himself, with those largely being communists and socialists. It should however be mentioned that the reason he wasn't personally involved was almost certainly for the sake of plausible deniability and not out of any screamishness over the methods or sympathies for the victims.

[@Snoflakes_1]

If anybody's wondering: the cross on the Hungarian crown is bent because it's also bent irl. When I went to Budapest, I saw the old crown jewels and our guide told us some story about it being looted and not handled with a lot of care (idk the entire story anymore). Nice attention to detail

[@barni695]

Kossuth buried it in Transylvania after Hungary lost the 1848-49 war of independence to Austria and Russia, it was in the ground for like a decade without much harm. Incredible historical artifact

[@nematolvajkergetok5104]

Actually, the cross isn't bent, but the arches of the crown are broken. It was ruined sometime in the 16th century, when it was hastily buried to hide it.

[@RedXlV]

I was looking it up, and apparently the cross got bent in the 17th century, due to somebody being careless when putting it into storage and slamming the iron lid of its box against the cross. When this was discovered the next time the crown was taken out of storage, the Hungarian king of the time decided to keep it that way rather than repairing it, as a symbol of their "miraculous" defeat of a Turkish invasion.

[@christopheraliaga-kelly6254]

I heard that there was another story. When the Mongols under Batu Khan defeated the Hungarians at Mohacs, they entered Uj-Pest and demanded entrance to the Royal Castle. But when Batu took the crown of St Iztvan to crown himself, he had a seizure and dropped it, causing the bent cross. Taking this as a sign from God, Batu and his men left the castle and camped nearby, trying to forget the incident. The Hungarians did not, and decided not to repair the cross, so as to keep it as a permanent reminder.

[@nematolvajkergetok5104]

@@christopheraliaga-kelly6254 Well, it's not called the "Sacred" Crown for nothing! Anyway, it was the Ottomans who defeated the Hungarian army at Mohacs in 1526. The Mongols won at Muhi in 1241. Also, the Crown was not left behind, it was taken to the island of Trau, Croatia where King Bela IV found refuge. I never heard of this legend about Batu, it's likely not the Sacred Crown he touched.

[@matik0701]

Fun fact: Charles (Von Habsburg), the last emperor of Austria (which he became after his uncle Franz Ferdinand was assassinated (heir) and his grand-uncle Franz Josef died) had a son named Otto, who has a son named Karl, which is technically the heir to the Habsburg monarchy and the Austrian- Hungarian empire is still alive and is a politician in Austria. Although he can't call himself Karl von Habsburg, he is now known as Karl Habsburg-Lothringen.

[@RedXlV]

It's kinda crazy how desperate the Entente was to erase the Habsburgs, to the point that they weren't even allowed to call themselves "von Habsburg" anymore.

[@eljanrimsa5843]

@@RedXlV While there was a specific law for dealing with the Habsburgs, the loss of the "von" was not part of it. That was a general reform. All priviliges of the nobility and the use of such naming particles were abolished in 1919.

[@hc8719]

Given that the Entente promised “self-determination” to the former lands of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the Hungarians wanted to keep the Hapsburgs as their kings, it’s pretty cruddy that the Entente then turned around and was like “Ohh no, only self-determination that we approve of”

[@mohdadeeb1829]

@@eljanrimsa5843 Is it true to have ‘von’ title is now outlawed and illegal in Austria? I see Germany still have people with ‘von’ title but not Austria.

[@javieraravena5345]

And Karl has a son, the next in line. He is a relatively famous race car driver. So, at one point, the Heir to the Habsburg throne will be racer

[@aidanfedorochko3728]

You should do a video about the coup against Miklos Horthy by the Germans. It was such a crazy story.

[@deutschermichel5807]

Well it was not this crazy, considering that most axis states betrayed Hitler when realizing, that the war was lost. When king Victor Emanuel III. of Italy dismissed Benito Mussolini as Prime Minister and inprisioned him, the Germans freed him from captivity and installed him as leader of a new Italien Republic. As the Italiand ruled Albania, the Germans even re-installed king Zog. of Albania instead of Victor Emanuel III.

[@VoxHispania]

@Charlie yes

[@danielgorog2646]

@@deutschermichel5807 Well, Horthy was abducted and taken out screwed into a carpet at the age of 70. This is something crazy.

[@deutschermichel5807]

@@danielgorog2646 oh I newer knew the Details

[@varana]

@Charlie He didn't "work in the Israeli military", he _probably_ had some contact with Israeli secret services, but nothing substantial (like most of Skorzeny's exploits, it got massively blown out of proportion).

[@ferencjenoerdei2893]

As a Hungarian, I appreciate that you used the interior of the Hungarian Parliament at 1:07

[@LMB222]

Why is there an eagle?

[@ferencjenoerdei2893]

@@LMB222 that is the coat of arms of the House Jagellion. The coats of arms of the most important former royal houses of Hungary are all presented on the wall behind cartoon Horthy.

[@kamilgesikiewicz8223]

@@ferencjenoerdei2893 I could have sworn that it was the Polish emblem from 1920. Anyway I'm glad that the Jagiellon dynasty is what we Poles and Hungarians shared.

[@neonach3885]

@Morer R I think is a Wittelsbach coat of arms(Bavarian Monarchy) It's still present in modern Bavaria. Also Fun Fact:The Bavarian royal fammily after it was forced to abdicate, started making beer.

[@kapitanfoxy2762]

​@@kamilgesikiewicz8223 Well, It was

[@nickmacarius3012]

Its impressive that the land-locked Hungary was able to exile Charles Habsburg by sailing him to an island with a dreadnaught. Most impressive, Hungary. 👍

[@danielgorog2646]

You know, he left the country on the Danube river...

[@nickmacarius3012]

@@danielgorog2646 The Joke------- (You) ------>* Let's not be pedantic about such things. My comment was merely in reference to the animation.

[@Clone-up2ge]

@@nickmacarius3012 woah, the joke fucking stabbed him?

[@LightgreenLP]

The Hungarians detained him, the British later came up the danube and collected him (the Hungarians didn't request this as far as I'm aware)

[@nematolvajkergetok5104]

A monitor, not a dreadnought.

[@notsoawake1915]

The casual reference to the civil unrest in Ireland in this video is one of many reasons why I love this channel so much! 😂😂😂

[@cloud_ship_9]

So glad I wasn't the only one who noticed!

[@Jer2010]

@@secretname4190 Nope it would be Scandinavia only tbh, Spain was in the mist of a soon to be civil war and i believe their economy wasn’t all that great, Britain wasn’t doing too hot with all the debt and losses it took. Portugal was mostly fine i think except the losses in africa

[@Jotari]

@@cloud_ship_9 It's not that hard to notice. We're talking literal animated flames.

[@Jotari]

@@secretname4190 Ireland being on fire wouldn't count as unrest for Britain?

[@firstpersonwinner7404]

Lol, I'm glad I wasn't the only one to notice. It is a great little detail.

[@michaelman957]

Actually, Karl's army WAS willing to fight, but he wasn't willing to cause another civil war, so when it became clear that there would be serious resistance he called it off.

[@9wowable]

It was also because Czechoslovakia literally started to mobilise their army when they heard he had returned with an army and threatened swift and immediate action.

[@VoxHispania]

@@9wowable the eternal czechs

[@mnxs]

@@9wowable if I heard a Habsburg was mucking about in my backyard, I think I would too

[@LightgreenLP]

@@mnxs If I heard a Habsburg had returned, I would send my congratulations, a volunteer army to fight for him, food and shelter, and give him any territory of mine that he wants.

[@knezmislav04]

@@mnxs I would just say to those Czechs to remember what Wilson said. Selfdetermination. So if Hungarians want a king, they get a king.

[@jesseberg3271]

Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute! If the Brits had sent their second Prince to Hungary in 1918, that would have been Albert, the future George VI, and Queen Elizabeth's father! The Prince of Wales was Edward, later Edward VIII. He was the one who abdicated. That means he wouldn't have been sent, as Crown Prince. So Albert could have been sent to Hungary, and Elizabeth could have been Queen of Hungary (presumably Queen in exile for 45 years) instead?

[@balazszsinkai9665]

As a Hungarian, I'm so happy you made a video about Hungary too! Great work as always!

[@afdalridwan3813]

You should taken back Vojvodina and North Transylvania

[@ded93x66]

@@afdalridwan3813 they are on it

[@porphyry17]

@@afdalridwan3813 Voivodina, Slovakia and Croatia yes. assimilating the slavs. but leave Tisza to the Romanians. they apready moved from their homes in Urals. what bad does calling the Szeklers back to Pannonia and relocating to other areas?

[@richard-li1ll]

@@porphyry17 they moved from urals before settling in pannonia and transylvania for nearly 1000 years. transylvania was a core part of hungary for centuries, and the only reason romania owns it is because france was the scourge of the earth. furthermore, after years of szekler mistreatment by the hands of the romanian government in more recent history, it becomes even harder to simply forget and move on. the fact that hungary remains an EU and NATO member despite all of this is proof that the hungarian people did not deserve to be carved up and displaced like they were.

[@porphyry17]

@@richard-li1ll the Eastern Carpathians were not a "core part" to Hungary. you just liked the mountain range protection. the Szekler settlement was created in the 12th-13th century with s tribe of magyarised turkic people moving from Slovakia to Bihor to where they are today. they were named after their role-occupation: "szekely" that is "frontier guards". we did not mistreat them. at least half their numbers are magyarised romanians anyway. "the only reason Romania owns it" yeah. so if a bunch of people on horses that surpress you and keep you weak for 1100 years can only be defeated with the help of European powers/superpowers... well... i do not see a problem with that.

[@Trofusky]

I’d love to see a video about Spain’s reaction to the French Revolution seeing how both Spain and France had the same royal family

[@hc8719]

Yeah we don’t hear about the Spanish reacting to the revolution, just the Austrians (presumably because Marie Antoinette was Austrian)

[@talltroll7092]

In the kinging business, family aren't friends; they are competitors, because they might have pretty legit claims... The Spanish royal family and aristocracy in general were horrified by the French Revolution. Spain was pretty Catholic, and pretty conservative at the time (and arguably still is both of those things to some extent), and they certainly didn't like the trouble they had with the more radical elements of Spanish society. Although quite a lot of Spaniards fought the French when they invaded, there was a small but quite devoted pro-French movement too, partly because the Spanish upper classes were doing a truly appalling job of running the Empire (not that there was that much of it left at that time), and partly because they genuinely believed in liberte, egalite, fraternite

[@SirVic42]

Personally, I think James Bissonette would have been an excellent King of Hungary. He is certainly well versed in the finer points of patronage.

[@qr8440]

He could've funded the Hungarian war machine to defeat the little ententé as well.

[@kenziemostyn8395]

Sub to unmaskedwolf

[@kenziemostyn8395]

@@qr8440 sub to unmaskedwolf

[@AnaIvanovic4ever]

Personally I support Boggeli Woggeli's claim to the crown of Saint Stephen.

[@olayemichayah466]

@@AnaIvanovic4ever why are so many tennis fans crazy about Ivanovic?

[@joec9693]

"A very well respected Admiral named regent of the landlocked country" Is a line I did not expect to ever hear lol.

[@gunnarw34]

Suggestion: why wasn’t the Kingdom of Asturias conquered by the Umayyad caliphate?

[@AlicevonHindenburg]

If I remember correctly, it’s more of they can’t reach Asturias in the first place, and the fact the they’re just a tiny kingdom makes them think they can just ignore Asturias, which of course a big mistake on their part.

[@tkraccoon1368]

The north part of spain id very cold witch the muslims werent used to, also mountains

[@dominicguye8058]

Look at a topographical map of the Iberian Peninsula and you'll discover why

[@SocratesAth]

The fact that all the above replies are different shows that this is a good idea for a video.

[@alexandrub8786]

Look at topography,mountains have the tendency of not being very fertile (low output) and hard to conquer. Basically each war for gaining that part would have been like Verdun in WW1 or maybe Vietnam for America or rather Afghanistan for USSR.

[@carador9286]

1:27 - Promising your army to be greeted with cheers but then actually be greeted with bullets. Damn... what does that remind me of?!

[@slurky3992]

history matters today is my bday and the fact i’m hungarian and you posted a video about hungary just made my bday even better. i thank the universe for willing you into existence

[@131alexa]

Happy birthday!

[@LebaneseAtHeart]

Happy Birthday 🥳!!!!! 🇱🇧 💖 🇭🇺

[@tepesobrejac4360]

1:55 "Romania now controlled Transilvania which was mostly Hungarian" The Romanians were 60% of the region's population.

[@georgeamesfort3408]

Just about to comment that, thank you for pointing that out🇷🇴

[@georgejudge6437]

Well... no. Mostly was Hungarian. Romanians falsified population data to lay legitim claim to Transylvania. I know. My ancestors lived there until the Romanian Authorities decided they should pack up and move to Hungary. I wouldn't be born if they didn't do that , but still. My grandparents were robbed of their land by Romania. That is why I really dislike comments like this.🇹🇯🇹🇯🇹🇯🇹🇯🇹🇯 🤮🇷🇴🤮🇷🇴💩

[@mr.metamovies2419]

Sékés would disagree.

[@numedecanal1]

@@mr.metamovies2419 tf is a sekes? At leas call them correctly

[@mr.metamovies2419]

@@numedecanal1 Székely Land: Hungarians form a large majority of the population in the counties of Harghita (85.21%) and Covasna (73.74%)

[@CDXL_Clutchbox]

0:00 i loved how you added your blocky characters instead of the angels

[@BossVolt]

I knew about Miklos and the whole situation surrounding his regency, but I had no clue whatsoever that Prince Albert (later King George VI) was considered as a potential King of Hungary!

[@nematolvajkergetok5104]

There was a time when Russian prince Paskievich almost became King of Hungary, in 1849.

[@andrashorvath6300]

There are several inaccuracies in this video, so I try to sum up the topic. 1. Transylvania wasn't majority Hungarian. According to the last Hungarian census, about 54% of the population was Romanian, 35% Hungarian (incl. Jewish-Hungarians), and the remainder was mainly German. Northern Transylvania might have been majority Hungarian (or at least having Hungarian as the largest population group), though this is up for debate because surely the Hungarian censuses show a slight Hungarian majority and the Romanian censuses show a slight Romanian majority. 2. Making Ferdinand of Romania the King of Hungary was mainly a Romanian idea and it didn't have much of a support in Hungary. Horthy himself was very much opposed to it. 3. Nobody except for Charles and later Otto von Habsburg was seriously considered to be elected king, they were also the only ones who had some actual support amongst the population, though Hungarians were still divided on the issue. 4. Horthy couldn't be a king for several reasons but power was none of them. Initially he had less power than the kings before him. He gradually gained more or less the same power as the kings during Austria-Hungary had except for giving out nobility titles but his power never exceeded the power held by the last Habsburg kings. 5. So why did Horthy never become a king? There were two problems. Firstly, he was protestant, so the catholic church (who held serious informal power and also carried out the coronation ceremony) wouldn't support him. Secondly, he had a lower nobility background, so neither would the aristocracy (who also held great informal power) support him. 6. So why did interwar Hungary never have a king? Because as the video said, Horthy didn't want to give up power, the population was fine with him being in charge and because there was no serious candidate for the throne except for the Habsburgs (who couldn't return to the throne because of the Little Entente and also because a lot of Hungarians didn't want their return).

[@Bob-ck4dl]

The annoying thing about the population oercentages is that the germans were invited into transylvania by the hungarians to populate lands that nobody lived. These germans were notorious for adopting hungarian culture (swabs) and assimilating into hungarian. They were essentially first gen immigrants, however a modern day census would count them as hungarian (if citizenship existed)

[@xerxen100]

Az nem volt hiteles népszámlálás... Nem is kérdeztek benne nemzetiséget sem... Egyébként meg Románia kétszer akkora területet kapott, mint erdély amekkora. alig 30% volt román a lakosságnak....

[@peopledepp6531]

@@xerxen100 I see that you guys are buthurt all the way

[@Theopops.]

🤓🤓🤓🤓

[@michakoniecpolski5677]

cope and seethe

[@sergeanttentacles1359]

Transylvania was not majority Hungarian in the early 20th century, but around 30% Hungarian.

[@valentin9826]

1:56 Transilvanya was majority Romanian but Hungarians were and still are the biggest minority there tho i agree a union between the two countries would have been cool.

[@riziq30]

Also Budapest and Bucharest being in the same country because of the union

[@nematolvajkergetok5104]

Tell me, if Transylvania is majorly Romanian, then why doesn't it have a Romanian name? "Ardeal" is merely a bastardization of the Hungarian name "Erdély", Land of Forests.

[@D.A.R.89]

@Nem a Tolvajkergetők How about you give us some numbers then?

[@wallachia4797]

​​​​​@@nematolvajkergetok5104 Because before Hungarians arrived, the lands of modern Romania were collectively called Dacia by everybody from the Byzantines to the Franks. We had no need for a specific name for Transylvania because it was just a normal piece of land we lived in with no special political importance. Macedonia used to be part of Bulgaria before the Ottomans arrived and was just another normal piece of Bulgaria. Later on it was called "Sanjak" because that was the unit of administration installed there. Turks were never the majority in Macedonia, but they were the ruling class and so the specific region took their name. The Sudetenland also didn't have a name until it became politically important. You THINK you're smart but you're really not.

[@nematolvajkergetok5104]

@@wallachia4797 Ah, you and your fabricated history. Descendants of the Roman Empire, huh? Make me laugh.

[@MMerlyn91]

1:56... Umm, no it wasn't. It was a majority of ethnic Romanians. What you wanted to say was that up until that point it was always part of Hungary/Austro-Hungarian Empire/Habsburg Empire.

[@norberthiz9318]

it still had a large amount of ethnic hungarians and I'm pretty sure that is what he meant to say

[@foodcom13]

LIAR

[@danieleyre8913]

This is probably the most interesting video this channel has put out for a while.

[@simple.citizen4013]

One big mistake at 1:57. In 1910 the majority in transylvania was romanian with 53%. In 1919 the romanian population was 57%.

[@deciboo189]

And due to magyarisation romanian were forced to adopt Hungarian and the census was based on spoken language.

[@gergelyhangodi9008]

The only way Romanians could ever make themselves look like the majority was painting all the vast, uninhabited mountain ranges covered with steep forests as inhabited by Romanians. It's the trick they used on the Entente.

[@numedecanal1]

@@gergelyhangodi9008 the fun part of your comment is that usually 19th century hungarian maps of Transylvania labeled romanian-inhabited zones as unhabited wilderness to lower the percentage. Ironic, right?

[@AntoniuDraculea]

@@deciboo189 According to the language census 53.8% of transylvanians spoke romanian and 31.6% hungarian. Last I checked, 53.8% > 31.6% so no, hungarians were not the majority based on any census, ever. Not to mention that when asked about ethnicity (not commonly spoken language), 57.8% of transylvanians answered they identify as romanians and only 24.4% as hungarians. Why the big difference between 31.6% and 24.4%? As you said, because of magyarization. Loads of romanians, germans, slavs, etc spoke hungarian but did not identify as hungarians, similarly to how the scots and irish spoke english but did not identify as ethnic englishmen. So yes the video is totally off.

[@AntoniuDraculea]

@@gergelyhangodi9008 According to the hungarian official census itself, romanians were the absolute, uncontested majority with 53.8%. Please tell me more about how the hungarian authorithies used tricks to make the romanians look like the majority. No. No tricks were used. Romanians simply were the absolute majority, and together with the transylvanian germans, slavs, gypsies, etc they had had enough of Hungary's malice and oppression and decided to take the alternative, Romania,

[@remrem8503]

0:00 loved the detail of the angels holding up the seal in your artstyle thats cool

[@addemup8645]

I love how Ireland is on fire at 0:53.

[@yankee3875]

Horthy: I’ve installed myself as regent and brought back the monarchy Charles: so I can reclaim my title as king right? Horthy:… Karl: right??….

[@Iruth27]

1:56, Transylvania WAS NOT MAJORITY HUNGARIAN, it was majority Romanian, over 2 thirds of people living there were ethnically Romanian, with Hungarians making up a majority only within the Szeklerland.

[@foodcom13]

yeah of course DONT SPREAD LIES

[@sido-1706]

Fun to know that the Habsburg took refuge in Switzerland, because of it’s independence and neutrality, while the Habsburg family tried many times in the past to keep control on it as part of their territory.

[@KengCo7]

The flames in Ireland are a great attention to detail, given that Trianon was signed contemporary to the Irish War for Independence in 1920. As an Irishman who loves history it's fulfilling to receive the nod.

[@nematolvajkergetok5104]

00:29 The Kingdom of Hungary was not "reborn" after the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy. It simply ended being part of a dualist state. It never went anywhere and never ceased to exist. 00:35 Hungary never invaded Romania. It was Romania who invaded Transylvania in 1916. Hungarian and German troops pushed the invasion back to Romanian territory and took Bucharest. But this was two years before the declaration of the illegitimate People's Republic of Hungary and the Soviet Republic. 00:42 It's pronounced "Miklosh". He never signed any instrument of surrender as Hungary never formally surrendered to anyone. The Treaty of Trianon was signed by Count Albert Apponyi, the official delegate of the Hungarian government to the peace talks. It can be interpreted as the Regent's approval, but it's incorrect to say that he signed it. 1:30 Charles the IV never reached Budapest with his army. He was stopped at Budaörs, today a suburb of the capital by the army and gendarmerie troops in a minor firefight. Earlier, Admiral Horthy met him and literally begged him to go away, as his presence was a danger to the nation, regardless his legitimacy as monarch. So, in a strange twist of history, the Regent, who was supposed to reign in the absence of the monarch, prevented the return of the monarch, but not out of free will. 1:50 I don't know where you got the idea that Ferdinand I. had any support in Hungary. In fact, Hungarians would've preferred burning down their own country and all emigrating to Siberia instead of having a Romanian king. Ferdinand may have entertained such dreams, but it's entirely nonsense. 2:15 The map is wrong: Romanian troops also occupied Budapest, and some of them even reached as far as the Austrian border.

[@floppypancakes9509]

I love watching the Mongol Hungarians cope over Trianon 😂🤣 keep crying

[@9wowable]

1:55 He also said Transylvania was majority Hungarian, which it hasn’t been since like the 17/18th century 🤦🏻‍♂️ Honestly an absolute shocker from History Matters here 🤨😬

[@LMB222]

We've found the angry Magyar.

[@nolianpazac8440]

Ferdinand was not romanian but german and only out for power, he didnt give two shits about romanians or hungarians either lol

[@nolianpazac8440]

@@9wowable It was probably 50-50 since both sides claim numerical superiority.

[@archerdark7524]

2:30 Actually there was a third reason. According to the tradition, an apostolic king of Hungary must be a Catholic Christian. . . Horthy was lutheran. . .

[@adamus1342]

He was Calvinist.

[@thinkandthank7406]

1:57 The majority of the Transylvanian population are Romanians, was marginalized under the Austro-Hungarian (Catholic) rule, and there is a German Protestant minority who was exiled by Maria Theresa to Transylvania.

[@foodcom13]

nope you are wrong

[@InAeternumRomaMater]

Not going to start a war in the comments (hopefully) but at that time Hungarians "1:58" was a Minority and not a Majority in Transylvania. The Majority was Romanians and then Hungarians and the rest was German Saxons, Jews, Gypsies, Ukrainians and etc.

[@justahobbiest]

I love that every time he says "as you all will know" I usually do not.. ..but indeed, soon will.

[@GuildsmanPirate]

If only they had chosen the Swedish king path, they still might have a king today

[@MajorMlgNoob]

Kings suck smh (though so does Orbán)

[@downfall9830]

Except for the whole Soviet takeover and forced installation of communism thing

[@MajorMlgNoob]

@iMakz if selling out Hungary to China is what you called based than sure

[@MajorMlgNoob]

@iMakz or killing Democracy in the country and attacking the LGBTQ+ Community

[@reichtangleanschluss509]

​@@downfall9830 If Hungary would have become constitutional monarchy, they would most likely joined Allies, which could have saved them from communist takeover. (Edit): I never said that Hungary joining Allies would have 100% saved them from communist takeover. While Soviets installing puppet goverment right after war is still the most likely scenario, there is still option that after the war, Hungary's (democratic) government-in-exile returned and maybe if they were lucky (and/or competent), would have avoided the same fate as Czechoslovakia, which got couped by communists in 1948.

[@natyalim]

Somehow it feels like I've seldom heard about a country and a certain time period where so little worked out in a good way, like it did for Hungary in this case.

[@icemachinebeast8342]

Basically the entire history of Hungary after 1000 AD.

[@19Szabolcs91]

@@icemachinebeast8342 Nah, Hungary had many good times. But 1914-1989 was a continuous, terrible shitshow. Which we should have behind us now and look to the future, but Orbán and 53% of the population who support him make sure that the suffering is back and will continue.

[@dominicguye8058]

@@icemachinebeast8342 that's basically the entire history of Hungary since it became Christian. As the other commenter stated, it had some very good times after that Christianization (read up on Louis the Great and Mattias Corvinus for example)

[@icemachinebeast8342]

@@dominicguye8058Yes I know, they teach that in our schools. It was just a meme comment. We like to make fun of our own history.

[@salakiadam24]

Hungary was a regional power for most of the time before 1500,several big campaigns against the Ottomans,Matthias Corvinus etc.I think that period is underrated as I rarely see that period covered or people talking about it. After that it went downhill mostly.

[@VonMisesinarabic]

00:42 The most respected military figure in the landlocked country is an Admiral This guy can spot the irony like a trained police dog spots drugs

[@DarthHoosier3038]

It’s like the Stewards taking control of Gondor after the King disappeared. And it just stayed like that for 1,000 years.

[@Edmonton-of2ec]

There was actually a third reason Horthy never became King, and it’s because his wife Magdolna was implacably opposed. She wasn’t even thrilled at being the “First Lady” of Hungary, an rarely appeared in public before 1935

[@MLaserHistory]

The most glaring mistake, and one I am sure many Romanians will get quite angry about, is that Transylvania never had a Hungarian majority.

[@PumpedSmartass]

Well yeah, only Székelyföld ( Ținutul Secuiesc ) had the strong majority. Still, i think probably a Union would have resolved a lot of issues due to lot of mixed regions and shared history.

[@PumpedSmartass]

@SuperduperobergruppenstuppentruppensturmStuka said by the guy who “can’t believe Romania is still gay” 🐒

[@per4n]

@SuperduperobergruppenstuppentruppensturmStuka He lives in the UK, he is definitely not a Slovakian nationalist. 🤣

[@D.A.R.89]

@SuperduperobergruppenstuppentruppensturmStuka Ok then give us some numbers

[@Medvelelet]

@@PumpedSmartass +Partium

[@eluc_s2510]

1:56 this is wrong, Hungarians are/were the largest minority but Romanians still make/made up the majority.

[@papianto1]

Romanians were/are the majority in transylvania

[@eluc_s2510]

@@papianto1 that is what i said

[@floydandrew123]

1:53 Transylvania WAS NOT majority Hungarian. In 1930 the Romanians were 57.8% while the Hungarians were 24.4%.

[@MrAlexandru1997]

At 1:56 you made a huge mistake. Transilvania never had a Hungarian majority. People of Romanian etnicitywere always the most populous in Transilvania. While it may seem small, it's a very important detail when disscusing the politics in the region.

[@ded93x66]

Look, there is a hairly foot with full bloody eyes LMFAO

[@gigikontra7023]

@TenMinuteHistory People are tell you you made big mistake and you are also contradicting your previous video in Trianon!! Transylvania always had ROMANIAN MAJORITY POPULATION! Check 1910 Austro-Hungarian referendum, which, despite defining Hungarian as anyone that could speak Hungarian, still only arrives at 30% Hungarians (including Hungarian-speaking Jews etc.). According to that, Romanians were ~55% (!!) FIX IT!

[@tarkosnokedli]

Not never

[@alexandrupopa1570]

One thing I would like to mention is that Transylvania was majority Romanian during this time period.

[@mrrecordaa6564]

Agreed, this is very important

[@williamxii4343]

Pretty sure he was a royalist so taking the crown from his king was pretty bad. He was for a Habsburg to the throne. Although they were impossible thanks to the political situation around

[@psychokinese]

Hello HM I just have one simple question that you could answer to : At the end of WWI, why did the first austrian Republic kicked their monarchy despite not beeing order of the Entente ?

[@psychokinese]

@Morer R But why did it became a republic

[@Leo-uu8du]

@@psychokinese It's because the country that emerged out of the German speaking parts of the Austro-Hungarian Empire did not see itself as the successor of Austria-Hungary, but rather as a new country (hence the original name German-Austria, as a shortening for German-speaking Austro-Hungary). It was a similar situation to Czechoslovakia, which also wasn't a continuation of the Kingdom of Bohemia, the Kingdom of Hungary or the Empire of Austria, but something new. It just so happened that the Entente had to force the name "Austria" onto one of the new countries in order to have someone to blame and get reparations. "German-Austria" was the best option for that since southern Tyrol, a piece of land promised to Italy, as well as the area of the old Archduchy of Austria / Vienna (the capital city of Austria-Hungary) were claimed by it. So in conclusion: The Republic of (German-)Austria was not a continuation of the Empire of Austria and hence didn't really consider using a monarch as their leader, but instead any form of nobility got even forbidden by law.

[@solsunman383]

@@Leo-uu8du In addition, German Austria didn't even see itself as a country. Rather, it saw itself as a temporarily independent piece of the new Weimar Republic. It was always their intention to unify with Germany to try to mitigate some of the devastating effects that the loss of resources and internal trade that the fall of Austria-Hungary had caused. Having a monarch was unnecessary, as the plan was for Austria to cease to exist very soon (and would eventually happen in 1936).

[@PopeLando]

A real live "Steward of Gondor". Good call on the famous crooked-crossed crown of Hungary, as seen in the Useful Charts video about the crowns of Europe.

[@galatheumbreon6862]

I like the little moment in the video that showed Ireland on fire in reference to their civil war, I really do enjoy those small details

[@hunyadijanos2353]

"Transylvania majority Magyars". Good one.

[@gergelyhangodi9008]

He says while having a Hungarian as his avatar.

[@oliversherman2414]

I love your channel keep up the great stuff!!

[@zyracxes9333]

Wait WHAT, 1:55, Transylvania was not in majority Hungarian never, this is why they lost it after WW1 because the majority population that was Romanian voted to unite with Kingdom of Romania, Hungarians made up to 20% of the population in that region! Now I start to doubt the quality of some of those videos.

[@tarkosnokedli]

Not never,and never was an election

[@lucius_cursor]

"Habēmus regem” slayed me. Golden! And well done as always!

[@sergiocd6]

A short video answering why Brazil is no longer an empire would be nice since many people didn't know it was once an empire and many brazilians don't understand/care how we become a republic.

[@ricardokowalski1579]

Plus a full length video on Barão do rio Branco. The man left quite an imprint in geopolitics.👍

[@dominicguye8058]

The princess imperial abolished slavery and the slaveowning class overthrew the empire in retaliation

[@sergiocd6]

@@ricardokowalski1579 and gave us a land with dinossaurs

[@sergiocd6]

@@dominicguye8058 Well there is more than that like the rising power of the army after the paraguyan war but it's pretty much what you've said

[@timothychivers7324]

Thank you for your efforts on your videos I enjoy each one that you produce or create excellent work

[@sskuk1095]

1:19 Props for coloring 3 out of 4 nations blue!

[@BuzzinVideography]

Thank you. I have severe memory loss and constantly learning something is a great way to help with it. Your channel is great!

[@kevinboros7427]

1:57 though there was a large minority of Hungarians in Transylvania, they were always vastly outnumbered by the Romanians living there.

[@tarkosnokedli]

Not always

[@largezo7567]

Two kingdoms of Hungary! This channel keeps getting better and better.

[@mysteriousDSF]

I can't even imagine what it was like to just get out of world war I after losing it, losing 2/3 of your territory and have three bloody civil wars. I'm Hungarian but I feel like the horrors of this period are vastly underestimated in retrospect

[@ginjordom6065]

Welp,that's what you get when you try to keep nations within you silent. If Hungary wasn't such a douche towards Croats,Slovaks and Romanians maybe today you would still have an admiral with an actual job.

[@hgr_countryballs4114]

There is a conversation which is believed to have taken place when Hungary declared war on the USA in December 1941 between the two ambassadors of the countries: “(US) - Hungary is a republic, right? - No, it’s a kingdom. - Then do you have a king? - No, we have an admiral. - Do you have a navy then? - No, because we don’t have sea. - Do you have territorial claims? - Yes. - Against America? - No. - Against England? - No. - Against Russia? - No. - Then against whom? - Against Romania. - Are you going to declare war on Romania too then? - No, sir, we’re allies.”

[@catalinmarius3985]

1:58 "Romania now controlled Transylvanai which was majority Hungarian". Not sure if typo or History Matters truly believes this, but: 1910 Austro-Hungarian census: 5,262,495 population, 53.8% Romanians, 31.6% Hungarians & Szekely, 10.7% Germans. 1919 Romanian census: 5,208,345 population, 57.3% Romanians, 25.5% Hungarians & Szekely, 10.6% Germans. In fact, Transylvania was likely almost always a Romanian majority since the 8th century: - In 1574, Pierre Lescalopier, relating his voyage from Venice to Constantinople, notes that those inhabiting Wallachia, Moldavia and the most part of Transylvania say to be descendants of the Romans, calling their language "romanechte". - Francesco della Valle writes in 1532 that Romanians are calling themselves Romans in their own language, and he subsequently quotes the expression: "Sti Rominest?" for "Știi Românește?" (Do you know Romanian?) - The Transylvanian Saxon Johann Lebel writes in 1542 that "Vlachi" call themselves "Romuini" - According to Andreas Freyberger's writings in 1702, the Romanians are the most numerous people in Transylvania and "are spread in all of Transylvania and even in this Szekelyland, even on the lands of the Saxons. There is no village, no city, no suburb that doesn't have Romanians". - The first official census in Transylvania in which a distinction was made between nationalities (distinction made on the basis of mother tongue) was made by the Austro-Hungarian authorities in 1869, counting 59,0% Romanians, 24,9% Hungarians and 11,9% Germans out of a total population of 4.224.436 people. - For the period before this year there are only estimates of the proportions of various ethnic groups in Transylvania. Thus, Fényes Elek, a Hungarian statistician from the 19th century, estimated in 1842 that the population of Transylvania in the years 1830-1840 was composed of 62.3% Romanians and 23.3% Hungarians. Every single official census & estimations of contemporaries state a Romanian majority in Transylvania. The only place where a Hungarian majority is advocated are estimations of modern Hungarian historians like Tamás Lajos or Károly Nyárády. But non-Hungarian non-Romanian historians tend to agree with the Romanians. - According to American Jean W. Sedlar, the Romanians may have comprised 66% of Transylvania's population in 1241 on the eve of the Mongol invasion. - According to George W. White, in 1600 the Romanian inhabitants were primarily peasants, comprising more than 60% of the population. Hungarian histography argues that the Hungarians were a majority because the Romanians arrived in Transylvania in the 13th century. As there are no doccuments to say otherwise. There are doccuments, but Hungarian histography always assign the "Vlachs" to other people, despite "Vlach" being the traditional medieval name for Romanian. - The Romanians called themselves Romanians and Wallachia "the Romanian land" since forever. Much like Germans are called Germans by others but they don't call themselves Germans, the Romanians were called "Vlachs" (meaning "stranger" in old Germanic) but they never called themselves Vlachs. - Medieval Romanian texts themselves: In Palia de la Orăștie (1582) stands written ".[...] Pentru aceia cu mare muncă scoasem de limba jidovească si grecească si srâbească pre limba românească 5 cărți ale lui Moisi prorocul si patru cărți și le dăruim voo frați rumâni și le-au scris în cheltuială multă... și le-au dăruit voo fraților români,... și le-au scris voo fraților români". Notice "romani" not "valahi". There is this Hungarian myth that claims Hungary ruled Transylvania since 895 and the word Romanian only appeared in 1859, mostly for revanchist reasons. - Transylvania was not part of Hungary from 895 up to 1920. The Hungarians conquered Transylvania somewhere around 1000 - 1200 (uncertain date), what is known based on archelogical evidence is that first they conquered Pannonia and then expanded to Transylvania from the West. And the word "Romania" did not appear in 1859. I already explained how the word "Romanian" existed long since 1859, it's how Romanians called themselves, while they were called Vlachs by other people. As for what happened before the 13th century in Transylvania: - The oldest extant documents from Transylvania, dating from the 12th and 13th centuries, make passing references to both Hungarians and Vlachs. (Hungarian histography argues that this is way too late, the 13th century, but at the same time, it's the oldest extant documents from Transylvania, meaning the first Transylvanian doccuments made reference to both Romanians and Hungarians, there simply didn't exist other Transylvanian doccuments before that). - There's Gesta Hungaroum, the Hellenic Chronicle, the Tales of Bygone Years and plenty of other sources of medieval historians that talk about Romanians being in Transylvania when the Hungarians arrived. - As for population, as mentioned, Jean W. Sedlar argues that in 1241 66% of the population was Romanian. - In the 1366 decima list from the Kingdom of Hungary, in Transylvania there was a total of about 2600 out of which only 1000 Catholic parishes. The 1600 villages without Catholic parishes were Orthodox. - And the first population census ever from 1842 taken in Transylvania shows a Romanian majority. - On the other hand, there is no evidence that the Hungarians were the first or the majority at anytime in history. Literally every contemporary who talked about the ethnic background of Transylvania says there was a Romanian majority. And the first official census also shows a Romanian majority.

[@catalinmarius3985]

- I really don't understand Hungary's greviances with Transylvania. - They see it as a tragedy that they lost Transylvania in the 20th century. But what about the time they conquered Transylvania in the 12th century? You conquered territory (weren't the indigenous population) and then that territory was coquered back. How is the latter an injustice but the former perfectly okay? - Conquering land is pefrectly okay but losing land that you conquered is a big no no. - Medieval Hungarian chroniclers like Simion of Keza, Istvan Szanto and Nicholaus Olahus wrote that the Romanians are the descendents of Roman colonists. - And I also see a lot of Hungarians saying "out of all people, Hitler drew the most correct borders in 1940", really, how? - Romanian 1940 estimations before the second vienna award: 50% Romanains, 37% Hungarians; Hungarian estimations in 1940 after the second award: 49% Romanians and 38% Hungarians. - How is this fair to give a region with Romanian majority to Hungary? - In fact, out of all the territory Hungary took in 1940, only South Slovakia had a Hungarian majority, but somehow this seems fair to a lot of Hungarians. "Hungary, supported by the Axis Powers, was successful temporarily in gaining some regions of the former Kingdom by the First Vienna Award in 1938 (South Czechoslovakia with 84% Hungarians) and the Second Vienna Award in 1940 (Northern Transylvania with 37% Hungarians), and through military campaign gained regions of Carpathian Ruthenia in 1939 (15% Hungarians) and Bačka, Baranja, Međimurje, and Prekmurje in 1941 (27% Hungarians)" - The Hungarians became 53% in 1941 but that was after 150.000 Romanians were forcefully deported. 100.000 Hungarians came in from South Transylvania. And 80.000 further Hungarians came in from Hungary proper. Still, even with that shift, the situation was far from solved. - I'm all against hating people for their history and nationalistic crap. But this doesn't mean we should rewrite history. - How all major cities in Transilvania, have in their center a lot of buildings, that have the sigils of hungarian or german noble houses? Short answer: racism. Long answer: The Romanian loss of status began in 1366 and lasted up until the 19th century. They were deprived of their rights and subject to segregation (just like black people in America). Amongst other things, they were not allowed to live in or purchase houses in the cities, build stone churches or receive justice. (see Union of the Three nations doccument) - The Romanian could not appeal for justice against Hungarians and Saxons, but the latter could turn in the Romanian (1552); the Hungarian (Hungarus) accused of robbery could be defended by the oath of the village judge and three honest men, while the Romanian (Valachus) needed the oath of the village knez, four Romanians and three Hungarians (1542); the Hungarian peasant could be punished after being accused by seven trustworthy people, while the Romanian was punished after accusations by only three (1554). - Nobody denies that Transylvania was part of Hungary for 1.000 years (you could make the case with Austria but these are details), but at the same time, that doesn't contradict/disprove anything I said above. - Some Hungarians take issue with the Dacians or early Daco-Romans, arguing that they did nothing with the land and Hungary developed Transylvania. This logic is like "Hey, they did nothing on their land, so I stole their land and build castles on their land, the land deserves to be mine now" this logic doesn't work in any civilized country. - In Hungarian histography, somehow Romanians came to Transylvania in the 13th - 14th century (Hungarian historgraphy doesn't have a definitive answer on how that happened) and when they came they were the minority is the theory that legitimizes Hungary's claim to Transylvania. Despite contemporaries mentioning Romanians in Transylvania as early as the 6th century - Gesta Hungaroum, the Hellenic Chronicle, the Tales of Bygone Years, etc. And Romanians being the majority in Transylvania - Pierre Lescalopier, Antun Vrančić. - The Hellenic chronicle could possibly qualify to the first testimony of Romanians in Pannonia and Eastern Europe during the time of Attila, implying that the formation of Proto-Romanian (or Common Romanian) from Vulgar Latin started in the 5th century. The poem Nibelungenlied from the early 1200s mentions one "duke Ramunc of Wallachia" in the retinue of Attila the Hun. The words "torna, torna fratre" (return, return brother) recorded in connection with a Roman campaign across the Balkan Mountains by Theophylact Simocatta and Theophanes the Confessor evidence the development of a Romance language in the late 6th century. The words were shouted "in native parlance" by a local soldier in 587 or 588. The 11th-century Persian writer, Gardizi, wrote about a Christian people "from the Roman Empire" called N.n.d.r, inhabiting the lands along the Danube. He describes them as "more numerous than the Hungarians, but weaker". Historian Adolf Armbruster identified this people as the Romanians. Hungarian historiography identifies this people as the Bulgarians.

[@catalinmarius3985]

- Another Hungarian claim is that "we ruled it for 1000 years, therefore it's ours". Hungary did not rule Transylvania for 1000 years. The Kingdom of Hungary existed 1000 - 1526. Then it was part of the Austria until the 1867 compromise. So at best, Hungary ruled Transylvania for 1918 - 1867 = 51 ; 1526 - 1000 = 526 ; 526 + 51 = 572. - Hungary ruled Transylvania for 572 years. From here to 1000 years is a long way. It's like saying that pre-Trianon Hungary was full of Hungarians, but in reality according to the 1910 census only 48.1% of the total population of Hungary was Hungarian, making the minorities actual majorities. Seriously, Hungay's "greatest and most legitimate claim" is that they ruled Transylvania for 572 years? It doesn't matter to them at they weren't the natives or the ethnic majority but a minoritiy oppressing a majority? Sounds kind of bad. - If that's your issue, that's an easy solution for it. Romania owend Transylvania for 103 as it stands right now. 573 - 103 = 470. Just wait 470 more years. Then Romania would have ruled Transylvania for longer then Hungary. - Hungarians like to dissassociate Romanains from the Dacians, except there are the words of medieval historians who linked the Romanians with the Dacians. And the Romanian traditional costume being the same as the Dacian one. And the fact that, well, they lived in the same territory as us, kind of obvious. - I don't believe in "pure races", but I think originally the Romanians were the descendents of Dacians and of Roman colonists. So it makes sense to be proud of the Romans. What county isn't descendants of the Romans? Germans, English, Egyptians, those who don't speak a latin-based language. It's more about cultural heritage. - It strikes to me that Hungarians always had a superiority complex, they always think they are the exception, that they deserve special treatment, this is why Trianon is so shocking for them but normal for the other nations, they can't see past their own arrogant nose. They always think themselves better while being worse, and they think they are the exception to the rule. - Hungarians sometimes claim about Romanains being a "mixed race". Genetically, according to DNA study, only 6% of worlds population are a "pure race" and those 6% are found mostly in remote places like Norway or Finland. 100 years of intense Romanisation, due to gold in the Carpathians. There's a reason the Romans wanted the hugely undefendable Dacia so bad. And if you talk about blood. We know from sources that Hungarians invaded Pannonia with 20.000 soldiers, and Genghis Khan invaded outside Mongolia with 138.000 soldiers at a time when Mongolia's total population was 800.000 people. Hungarian historians estimate that the number of Hungarian population alongside those 20.000 warriors was about 500.000, but that doesn't really add up, does it? Most non-Hungarian historians estimate the total number of Hungarians to about 100.000 - 150.000, so how did you get from 100.000 to 10 million? - Hungarian historian Nicholaus Olahus explains it: "Hungary was populated by different nations: Hungarians, Germans, Bohemians, Slavs, Croats, Saxons, Szekelers, Romanains, Serbs, Cumans, Iaziges, Ruthenians and Turks". - The irony is, Romanians are more likely to be the genetic descendents of the Romans than Hungarians the genetic descendents of old Hungarians. - The vast majority of "Hungarian ancestors" were actually non-Hungarians conquered by the Hungarians and forced to learn Hungarian and adopt the Hungarian costums. - At least the Romans brought actual Romans in Dacia who then inter-married with the local Dacians forming the Romanains. - According to DNA studies: On the basis of 361 samples, Haplogroup I occurs at 32% in Romanians. The highest frequency of I2a1 (I-P37) in the Balkans today was present before the Slavic expansion and is owed to indigenous tribes, and is particularly suggested to have been common among the ancient Thracians and Dacians in Romania. - According to an autosomal analysis of eastern Europeans and adjacent peoples, the group of Bulgarians and Macedonians is located together with Romanians. Most West Slavs, Hungarians, and Austrians tend to share as many identical by-descent segments with South Slavs as with Romanians, Torbeshi and Gagauzes. We're all mixed. - So there's a reason why I'm saying "cultural descendence" and not "generic descendance", because generically, we are all a mix of other people. - The Hungarians, started out as steppe nomads from Asia, and came to own all of the Pannonian basin? how did they took it? through conquest. An event literally called "the Hungarian conquest" in modern histography. - The treatment of minorities in Hungary was one of the main reasons for their desire of separation from Hungary. Magyarization policies. You may take this as Romanian nationalism, but at the same time look at the facts. It can be Romanian nationalism and correct at the same time.

[@rixorobert]

​@@catalinmarius3985 You my friend are 100% right!

[@gigikontra7023]

@TenMinuteHistory People are tell you you made big mistake and you are also contradicting your previous video in Trianon!! Transylvania always had ROMANIAN MAJORITY POPULATION! Check 1910 Austro-Hungarian referendum, which, despite defining Hungarian as anyone that could speak Hungarian, still only arrives at 30% Hungarians (including Hungarian-speaking Jews etc.). According to that, Romanians were ~55% (!!) FIX IT!

[@ricardokowalski1579]

2:44 "Everybody loves power" Otherwise known as the Bissonette's historic constant

[@savagedarksider5934]

I feel so sorry for poor Karl;He would have made A great Emperor in A different time.

[@AntoniuDraculea]

The Habsburgs had plenty of changes to turn their empire around and make it less-hated-by-the-majority-of-its-inhabitants. They should have taken the romanian suggestion of turning A-H into the United States of Austria where each people had its own state/autonomous region. Instead, they allowed themselves to be bullied by the hungarians and what happened we all know.

[@savagedarksider5934]

@@AntoniuDraculea This comment was related to Karl;Not his Habsburg ancestors.

[@LightgreenLP]

@@AntoniuDraculea But the comment was about Karl, not the family as a whole. And Karl definitely did NOT have plenty of chances, he basically had no chances at all. Karl did plan to federalize as soon as the war was won. Btw, many people didn't mind living in the empire, especially Hungarians and Croatians. It was better than it could've been if they were independent (for the smaller ethnicities like Slovakians). Many Croation soldiers had "fallen in service of the king" engraved on their tombstones.

[@AntoniuDraculea]

@Morer R Tried =/= did it.

[@AntoniuDraculea]

@@LightgreenLP I refered to the Habsburg dynasty of which Karl was a member. Yeah Karl couldn't have done much at all at this point, I agree.

[@bg1052]

Even more questions answered that I never knew I had before hand. Thank you History Matters.

[@kingbowserii3029]

2:14 who is the one on the right? Is he British?

[@LayllasLocker]

I LoVE the way you are narrating these videos and the lil people and their animations. XD 🤍

[@historyforlife1019]

I wish That Treaty wasn’t so harsh, Hungary did play a Huge part in Running the Austro-HUNGARIAN Empire so honestly, Hungary should have been Allowed to keep what I like to call its „Natural Borders“ meaning they should have gotten to keep Southern Slovakia, Koiče, Northern Transylvania, Szekeszland, Vojvodina, Banat, And Carpathian Ruthenia. That’s just my Opinion, Hungarians were a Majority in those places. As an American, I believe in the right to Self-determination. Austria was severely damaged, they should have been allowed to keep Slovenia, Tyrol, Istria, and the Sudetenland, Honestly if any Czechs, Slovaks, Romanians, Croatians, Slovenians, Serbs, and Ukrainians get mad at me, that’s just my Opinion, and I’m going off an Ethnic map I saw from the 1910 Austro-Hungarian Census. So, I have reputable sources to support my View.

[@qwerty3-zt1oo]

North Transylvania and Banat were majority romanian.

[@stevemc01]

Kingdom of the Two Siciles: "You are an interesting specimen..." Kingdom of Hungary: "So are you."

[@hosseinramez3293]

I was literally searching this a week ago👌

[@laurentiuvalentin9118]

In WWII, Hungary had finally declared war on the USA. An envoy is sent to the US embassy, where they handed over the formal declaration, after which the following conversation took place: - What is your form of government? -Kingdom. -Who's your king? - We don't have a king, but a regent. - Okay, then who's the regent? - Admiral Miklós Horthy. - Admiral? So do you have access to the ocean? - No. - Okay. Do you have any territorial claims against the USA? - No, we do not. - Do you have territorial claims against other countries? - Yes, against Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Romania... - And are you waging war against them as well? - No, they are our allies.

[@zacksung11]

Future topics: - Why was Burma part of India and why didn't the two reunite? - Why did The Netherlands and Sweden lose their American colonies? - Why was Indonesia Dutch and not Portuguese when Lisbon was the first one to get there?

[@cm275]

The Dutch ceded their claims to their North American colonies to England as part of the Treaty of Breda after the British had seized them in 1664.

[@mojewjewjew4420]

At 1:20 there is a mistake, Romania had Basarabia too at the time, even if some try to say he meant the 1941 borders that would be wrong too since it had Northern Bucovina but not Basarabia. 1:50 Transilvania never had a hungarian majority even with the magyarization policies.

[@gigikontra7023]

The guy just told 300 THOUSAND people (!) A huge lie. Transylvania HAD ROMANIAN MAJORITY, NOT HUNGARIAN MAJORITY. Is this pre-invasion propaganda?

[@mojewjewjew4420]

@@gigikontra7023 Probabil are multi abonati ungurii si a fost nevoit sa i pupe n cur.

[@tarkosnokedli]

Not never

[@unwarym1190]

Suggestion: How was life different in Polish-speaking regions of Austria, Germany, and Russia? (1814-1917)

[@furerorban_1488]

“We [Hungarians] are not a mixed race, and we do not want to become a mixed race either” This was half Roma Fűrer Orban at Baile Tusnad just now, tearing into Western Europeans for “mixing with non-Europeans” To all the Orban-fans out there: *this* is what you’re supporting When talking about the energy crisis, Orban said-- "the EU wants everyone to reduce their gas consumption by 15 percent. I don't see how they can enforce it, but there is German know-how for this... From a long time ago, I mean." Yes, that's a joke about gas and Nazi Germany. Speaking about Western Europe, Orban said countries where Europeans & non-Europeans mingle “can no longer be called nations”

[@timspring2757]

James Bisonett was offered the crown but refused on the grounds he had too many financial commitments abroad to focus his attention on Hungary's post ww1 recovery.

[@xJungz]

As a Hungarian speaker, for further reference, the letter is is actually pronounced like a 'sh' sound so its pronounced Miklosh. The English 'ess' sound is produced through the letters sz together. Hence why Hungarians say budape'sh't, hope this helps

[@gbow6182]

Cheeseburgers

[@raulpetrascu2696]

Sean Connery is a true Hungarian

[@Fugazinome]

😂

[@antodessin5679]

Questions: Why does Lebanon 🇱🇧 exist? Why Italy 🇮🇹 wanted the Dodecanese islands? Why didn’t Portugal 🇵🇹 try to keep Brazil 🇧🇷? Why didn’t it fight for it? Why Brazil became independent peacefully? Why Didn’t the Portuguese try to claim Morocco 🇲🇦 since it was in their zone according to the treaty of Tordesilias?

[@Tom-2142]

What? You think Portugal didn’t fight for Brazil? They didn’t accept independence immediately, there were battles on land on sea before they accepted defeat.

[@antodessin5679]

@@Tom-2142 Oh I didn’t know that. In my history book though they say that Brazil 🇧🇷 became independent peacefully

[@Baello999]

My question is less about history, although I do love it, or the sarcastic humor, also lovely, but is something else entirely. Is there any topic that is "too recent"? I would love to see videos about the collapse of the USSR, but would you consider covering topics that recent? A lot of post-Soviet Conflicts are still ongoing, so would you be willing to make videos on them? Places like South Ossetia and Abkhazia, or the First Nagorno-Karabakh War. I love your channel, and I am fine if you don't, I have just been wondering.

[@michaelsinger4638]

Horthy was a fascinating guy in his own right.

[@27Games23]

Transylvania was NOT majority hungarian. It did however have a significant minority of Hungarians in the region

[@dopo8333]

I wonder where the author got his info for this video. First of all, Hungarian monarchy did have periods, but not just two. After the battle of Mohacs (1526) Hungary disappeared. The Habsburgs claimed the crown, but given that the Ottomans sieged Vienna in 1529, this is more a pretence title. One should also consider that in 1540 the Hungarian nobility elected a Zapolya as king (a title recognized by the Ottoman emperor, provided he remained a vassal). Some time after, Habsburg conquest made the Habsburg claim real. But, all in all, 1527 saw one Hungary end and another one starting to be built, in a transformation of the same magnitude, if not greater, than the one in 1918. The apostolic kingdom that peaked under Matthias Corvinus and was the basis for most of the Hungarian constitutional construct (the crown of St. Stephen) was no more after this date. The second false claim here is that in 1919 Transylvania was majority Hungarian. It's funny, even Hungarian ethnic maps and published census (just before WWI) show that Hungarians were not even a plurality. Even after the magyarization efforts that took place, mostly after the Ausgleich (1870).

[@gigikontra7023]

These are not innocent mistakes ... Thy are meant to create the impression of a strong, ancient and brave Hungary, an honorable nation that deserves to rule over those Romanians that are just "invented people". Also Hungary "had some injustice done to it". Do you already see where things are going? Is there so similarity between this and Putin's ideas about Ukrainiane?

[@norberthiz9318]

@@gigikontra7023 Your ideas about hungary and transylvania could be compared the putin just as much mate. Hungary IS a 1000 years old country and transylvania was always an integral part of it. Hungary also had injustice done to it, we lost 2/3 of our territory and 1/3 of our ethnic hungarian population. Many parts of the lost territories were completely hungarian and had no connection in any way to romania or the other new nation states. You can't possible think that after that treaty the hungarians should have just shut up. Also what gives the romanian people more right to rule over the hungarian people. Romania don't have any more legitimacy to transylvania then Hungary, there was a large number of romanians living there for centuries, but transylvania was always a historic integral part of Hungary and the romanians living there had more rights then any other ethnicity in any other country in europe. Also the magyarization is mostly a myth, even if it is real it was useless, because assimilation only happened in big cities and the ratio of hungarians to other ethinicites barely changed between 1848 and 1914, and what changed was mostly becasue of emigration(which effected hungarians less then the slovaks for example) and the passive assimilation of the jews and germans in big cities. Stop faslifying history just because you think that threatens your country

[@tomatoheadfd]

1:18 Why did a habsburg on the throne mean war?

[@bbenjoe]

The Habsburgs were the rulers of the Austrian, later Austro-Hungarian Empire up until it's dissolution in 1918. The entente powers were afraid if the Habsburgs return they would somehow restore the empire eventually. Even a smaller Austria-Hungary with the new borders were a big no-no for them, beause of you know: "divide and conquer". The French wanted hegemony in Central Europe and small countries were the way to that.

[@tomatoheadfd]

@@bbenjoe Oh got ya! Thank you so much for awnsering! I apreciate you taking the time. This question was still bothering me a month later and I couldn't find a precise enough answer online.

[@savagedarksider2147]

​@@bbenjoe Charles would have been A great emperor.

[@xerxen100]

"Why did a habsburg on the throne mean war?" Because the citizens of the old empire really hate this new nationalist and poor "nation states". Their lives became miserable. The first rebellion was among the Serbians in 1919 against Serbia, the second was in 1922 amongs the Transylvanian romanians against romania. The Slovaks also hated the czechs from the bottom of their hearts. Not to mention Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia....

[@Blaqjaqshellaq]

Technically, Maria Theresa couldn't inherit the Holy Roman Empire crown because she was a woman. Her official title was just Queen of Hungary!

[@Ilyes137-i3f]

Extremely exciting, thank you

[@dellpcgamer6093]

They don’t have a king because someone accidentally chose “economic intervention” instead of “balanced budget” and got stuck on the wrong path of their focus tree.

[@animalanimal7939]

Really pumping them out

[@awc6007]

“What was Vietnam like after the Vietnam War?” For a future video come on.

[@Unknowngfyjoh]

I'll let you know I'm going there in 2 weeks

[@quanghuyvo6112]

get invade by china and pol pot, stay in cambodia in 10 years to root out the genocidal pol pot regime back by us and china, get hit hard by the soviet collapse the economy down the toilet suffer inflation, pull out of cambodia and enact reform, open up to the west and have chinese level of grow and basically capitalist now

[@charlierashi100]

James Bisonet was actually crowned King of Hungary in the years 1923 and secretly remained in power for 5 years, which is where he got his extreme wealth from.

[@BirdotYT]

Wow I never knew that it didn't have a king even though it was a "kingdom"!

[@aleksapetrovic6519]

Suggestions: 1. Why was King Alexander of Yugoslavia assassinated 2. Why does Saudi Arabia hate Tailand 3. That time American kid hacked into Pantagon 4. That time kid flew over Berlin wall by accident 5. Why Bolivia has no sea

[@glassychap1141]

It’s kinda like Gondor from LOTR. They didn’t have a king for like 3000 years

[@131alexa]

"Gondor has no king. Gondor needs no king."

[@sskuk1095]

Charles the first is a fitting patron for this episode!