While you were focusing on one part of Europe, I was focusing on another. There is just too much history to cover in one video, and you could watch it multiple times just to cover it. Great video.
Same, I was watching events in south and eastern Europe spiral in and out control. Chris is talking about Germany uniting and im over here going and there's Victor Emmanuel taking Italy. Did the same for the great Northern War and Charles X.
It's not exactly appropriate to keep using a post-antiquity and western centred perspective to describe worldly affairs. He misses so many major events such as Justinian, who was undoubtedly the most powerful man in Eurasia at that time. I think it's best to focus on the most important events, instead of constantly talking about nations which are going to rise later, yet do not play a significant role in that particular period, such as Roman Britain, which was perhaps the most insignificant province out of all.
It's so funny how your eyes are glued on western europe and mine are still glued onto the Romans, getting the full history experience watching this video lol
Mine too. The Eastern Roman Empire history is more interesting than the west. Constantinople lasted 1.000 years more than Rome City it is something Roman Greeks must be proud about.
We really are so lucky to be living in such a time where information is so easily available. This video 50 years ago would have been unthinkable! It would have taken hours and hours in a library to even learn the names of a fraction of these rulers!
21:47, if I'm not mistaken, Portugal is one of the oldest nations and has one of the oldest (uninterrupted) borders in Europe, pretty cool for such a small country
@@angelcamachodelsolar What do you mean "returned" Olivença to Spain? Spanish troops literally took Olivença with the help of Napoleon, before that Olivença was portuguese for 500+ years. After Napoleon was defeated, every country signed the Congress of Vienna, inclunding Spain, a document that said Olivença was to be returned to Portugal. Spain to this day still hasn't.
@@danieldol.1930 Olivenza was reconquered from the Moors by the Leonese king Alfonso IX in 1230, not by Portugal. Already a territory of Castile, Portugal takes advantage of weakened Castile in civil war, and queen regent María de Molina must cede Olivenza to Portugal so that it ceases its support for the other Castilian claimant to the throne. Since then, the return of the cities that the Portuguese had to the east of the Guadiana River, seen by Castile and later by Spain as the natural border between the two countries, had been demanded. Spanish troops recovered it in 1801 during the Orange War and through the Treaty of Amiens of 1801 Olivenza became Spanish. The Portuguese-English troops recovered it in 1811, with the Portuguese demanding its return to Portugal, but Wellington decided to hand it over to Spain. At the Congress of Vienna in 1815, Portugal managed to ask Spain "in a friendly manner" to return Olivenza, without any obligation to do so, since the Treaty of Amiens of 1801 in force recognized Spain's sovereignty over Olivenza and that of Great Britain over the Caribbean island of Trinidad, and Great Britain did not want to annul the Treaty. Both Spain and Portugal signed the Treaty of Vienna as victorious countries and without any territorial obligation. To date, there is no official claim from Portugal about Olivenza in any international organization.
Just wow… This video just gave me such a good clarifaction of how skilled and intelligent you are in history. Even though map is pretty fastpaced you manage to explain so well what’s happening in Europe at a specific year and throughout the years. Keep it up. Love these kinds of videos where you explain/react to a specific event or period!
In the 800s-1300s, the Holy Roman Empire being that big is rather misleading in terms of how powerful the ruler was. The Holy Roman Empire was feudal to the extreme, where the individual princes, counts, etc. in Germany and the other areas under it were quite independent, making the Holy Roman Emperor not nearly as powerful as one would think.
There were some exceptions, for example historians consider Barbarossa as the most powerful ruler in Europe at the time, but for the most part you're totally right.
Exactly. A great way to understand more about the geopolitical mess that was the HRE is to play EU4. Its a great game that attempts to simulate aspects of the empire and of course colonialism, trade, conquest, and other things.
I'd argue that for the 800s-1300s timeframe that's actually a fair way to show the HRE, presuming you show France and England in similar ways, all of these were highly Feudal, the distinction comes from when Feudalism started to break down in France and England, meanwhile the HRE stagnated and later on decentralized even further
@@ClawedAsh Several things: - In the 800s it was a more or less a different entity than during the 960s-1300s, that some don't even call the HRE, but yes the power was reasonably centralized (comparatively) in the Carolingian empire. - Regarding the comparison between the HRE in the 1000s-1300s and France/England, I'd disagree for England. England was a far smaller and less populated entity than the HRE or France, but was more centralized in terms of the actual power of the king. Despite being a feudal kingdom. In short, I think you're only right for a comparison between France and the HRE during the 960s-1300s: France centralized in each passing generation, while the HRE stagnated or even worsened. In average though, I'd say France had kings with more power over their feudal lords. But yeah sometimes it was a blurry distinction, and the opposite happened. Note that in the video the divisions inside France are sometimes shown (very selectively though I admit): it shows Britanny, Normandy, shortly Anjou, the Angevin's realm, and Burgundy (during the 100 Years War).
The "loss" of gaul/spain/britain by the romans in 260-274 is actually a very interesting short-lived creation called the "Gallic Empire" - it's more of a splinter state (still ruled in the roman style), created by a roman general (of germanic descent) called Postumus. There's a fascinating history behind the entire thing - and it's one of many lost parts of the empire reconquered by emperor Aurelian, who was given the title "Restitutor Orbis" (restorer of the world) for these achievements. You mentioned Henry IV (HRE) at around 1070 as a powerful player not much talked about. He's actually quite famous in Germany (part of our schoolbooks) because he got into a huge conflict with the pope, ending (for a time - it was truly solved later on) in a famous, very evocative and dramatic event called the Road to Canossa or "Humiliation of Canossa" (1077), where the emperor, dressed as a supplicant, waited in front of the closed gates of a castle in a blizzard for three days and three nights, calling on the pope to end his excommunication - it marked maybe the high point of the power of the papacy, but was also a brilliant move by Henry, because under these circumstances, the pope was forced to forgive him, otherwise he would look very unchristian (and Henry would go on to regain much of his power).
There was no more resilient empire than the Eastern Romans. Disappears from the map and reappears, almost every year are invaded by muslim and slavs and still push back and survive. I also love the difference between the west and east empire. While one was extremely agressive the other was extremely defensive.
Alexander's empire wasn't up in rebellion the moment he died. It is really complicated and I still don't completely understand it but for a decade and a half I would say, Alexander's empire was still up with a regency for his son. Regents shifted with the first and second wars of the diadochi, satraps ruled regions as regional rulers, with more intrigue, treachery, tactical marriages and betrayal that it would make Game of Thrones appear like a child's show. The thing that you do mention, which is that Alexander's empire was split in ''four ways'' is such an overgeneralization of a period of 10 years that it can't describe the whole wars of the diadochi. Most people know about these four empires because they would come to survive a lot later up to the roman conquest(Even Antigonus in the form of his dynasty ruling Macedon till its end). It is something so fascinating that I have discovered these past few months that makes me want to learn more and more, even though some things I cannot understand due to a lot of complication with the whole family trees and betrayals, and who is with who at what point in time.
@@condha1044 Agreed, I think it is most likely because it wouldn't seem that appealing to so many people at first glance because it is a period in history that no so many people know about. Sad to see what marketing does, truly one of the most underrated conflicts in history. (Note that I said conflicts because it isn't 1 singular war, but rather a series of wars and conflicts that last 50 or something years depending on where you decide to put it)
I think one thing that’s important to note is that though europe seemed so centralized and unified in some parts of the medieval era, within many kingdoms there were dukes who had significant autonomy. Case-to-point normandy, a French duchy who decided to conquer England and could do so without problem from the French king. The feudal system was very complex and this map doesn’t quite do it justice at some parts. Some people have this idea that dukes and vassals worked like modern day states, but that’s not true at all, they were 10x more autonomous, and would often have major wars with each other and foreign powers without any involvement from their liege
Interesting thing is the Holy Roman Empire and Spain was highly tied with Isabel I's descendants, since her daughter Juana married the son of the the Emperor. I'm doing a group and individual project covering the Franks and Carolingians, so it was nice to see when you got to the 600s-800s. My topic covers all the way to the Treaty of Verdun (the name of the treaty that split Francia into three with Charlemagne's grandsons.
Technically speaking, Italy was already united by 1865 with it's capital city in Turin. They're not planning yet on making Rome the capital, because there's French troops occupying the city. It was after the Franco-Prussian War that the Italians took Rome and made it its new capital.
It was interesting to watch, and I was surprised they did not start up in the Norway and Sweden area earlier due to my family history being Norman. And as you go back, it leads to the old lands of Kerviland, which is the southern part of Noway and Sweden, and both governments have the records going back to around 110 AD or CE or whatever the heck its called now. Still, a great video loved how they did it all.
Everytime I watch the Eastern Roman Empire on one of these maps or go through its history I'm sitting there tearing up hoping I've woken up in an alternate universe where they don't fall and some how come all the way back from 1453 just to see em disappear from the map again :c
Me too. It was the saddest day in Human History. They had to fight everyone. Persians, Arabs, Lombards, Mongols, Bulgarian, Turks and Crussaders even tho they were also Christians. It was everyone against Constantinople they had not allies but they lasted 1.000 years 🇬🇷☦️ one day Constantinople is gonna be Greek and Christian again.
Mr. Terry suggested that you react to "The History of the Entire Bible, I Guess" in his newest video. He reacted to it and thought you might have a better theological take on it.
5:00 As soon as you see Gaius Marius show up in Rome start the countdown clock on the Republic. Just watched an interview with Mary Beard and she said something that really resonated with me; the Emperors didn't create the Empire, the Empire created the Emperors. And its so true.
Hey, I think you should maybe start looking into more of the Eastern European history, I suggest maybe looking into Bulgaria (I am of course biased as a Bulgarian) because it's some very interesting stuff!
Theoretically Margaret 1. didn't rule over Scandinavia, at least not officially. First her own son Olaf ruled and then Eric of Pomerania (her sisters grandson and her foster son ). Margeret couldn't rule herself, because she was a woman. The evidence show, that she did a fantastic job, nonetheless. In later years she was given the title.
I've always found Switzerland not being controlled since napoleon being crazy. That to me is incredible that they stayed the same since after napoleon for so long. Especially during both world wars.
Hey Chris, speaking of Rome, you should totally watch the miniseries I, Claudius. It does a really good dive into Rome during and immediately after Augustus, even until the early reign of Nero. It has superb acting - including the likes of Derek Jacobi, Patrick Stewart, Brian Blessed, and John Hurt - and many critics have ranked it as one of the best miniseries of all time.
Proud of my country Portugal, since 1249 we haven't changed (kinda we had Olivença which Spain stole from us during the Napoleonic wars). Much love from Portugal 🇵🇹❤️🇺🇸
15:22 Actually, this is where bulgarian ruler Tervel (who was already the first foreign ruler to receive the title ceaser, which later became known as tsar) helps the Eastern Roman Empire/Byzantine empire fight off a 100k arab army at the siege of Constantinoples, thus preventing further spread of islam in Europe. It's a lesser known fact, of course, since it happens in eastern Europe. I remember my history books saying Tervel, among other reasons, prefered a known enemy to an unknown one.
I recommend "100 Greatest Generals in History" and "100 Most Powerful Militaries of All Time" from the "Cottereau" channel. nice content to react would gladly see those two videos.
Mostly accurate at around the 8 minute mark for being the peak. Trajan was the emperor under which Rome was at it’s peak in terms of territory. That small sliver that it shows towards Iraq doesn’t really do it justice for how much territory he took from Parthia in order to get it. Basically ALL of Mesopotamia was under Roman rule for a short period of time. Also, I know the video is completely about Europe but it would’ve been pretty interesting to see the colonies established eventually just to show how much territory the monarchs of the time really controlled as well.
One thing to keep in mind is that it was never really Trajan's intention to maintain Mesopotamia as Roman territory.. This was the blueprint for making the Parthians back down in the East: Threaten Babylon, and they'll have to protect it at all costs. Later emperors would do similar attacks, but once the Parthians gave way to the Iranian Sasanians, this ceased to work. And then the trouble really starts for Rome. You always have to remember, it is the Empire to Rome's East that is always its biggest threat. Those provinces produce the food and money that makes the whole thing run. They have to be kept at all costs.
28:25 "Austro-Hungarian empire" - That's a mistake, at that time it's only the Austrian Empire. Austria-Hungary was formed in 1867. Also one might argue that Franz Joseph was not the ruler of Hungary in 1848 since there was the Hungarian revolution taking place which lasted well into 1849.
It's shameful of me being half french half english to know all the british mornarchs but today I learnt about 90% of France's leaders. Need to brush up on French history me thinks !
Charles V ruled as Charles I over in Spain. Also, the map showed castle + Aragon being united de facto under him, while he only ruled both in a mere personal union. Castille + Aragon were not de jure united until the reign of Philip V
I wonder if the legendary town of Château-Thierry, one of 64 towns of France to receive the Legion of Honour (Ordre national de la Légion d'honneur) for its role in its defense (along with the Americans) on July 18, 1918 during the latter stages of the Kaiserslacht, is named for Thierry I of the 6th Century, Château-Thierry is in that area that he controlled
Something I just realized The Founding of Venice as a city is closer to Alexander the Great at 960 years than it is to us today 1400 years That's crazy
It was kinda funny watching the Soviet Union and seeing Gorbachev's name pop up and then suddenly BOOM the red turned to white and yellow with a lot more borders and only a tiny thing that is the Russia of today. Seriously, good on Gorbachev to back off and completely remove the Iron Curtain.
Interesting how under Charles V, they split in different colours Spain from the Burgundian territories and the Holy Roman Empire (it's hard to see how powerful he was within Europe) but they keep calling him Charles V on Spain even if he's Charles I of Spain.
So many empires some of the people living in them probably don't even know they're supposed to be in them. Then they quickly disappear because they were spoils of war rather than a real lasting state.
a note for Prof Chris: the correct pronunciation of "Charlemagne" is not "Charlemaign" but CharlemAgne (same A as in garAge or homAge). Or, we can use Charles The Great, Karl der Grosse, or Carolus Magnus.
It isn’t even an actual name anyway. Who cares how it is pronounced. And back then they would have either said it in Frankish or written it in Latin anyway
I'm kind 32:35 sad you didn't stop and point out Emperor Charles V. It was different colors but he had that great HRE for a time with Spain among other places.
I know you meant Africa as in Egypt. But the actual African provinces were given to Lepidus to govern not Anthony (by far the least lucrative). Egypt was deemed as part of the Eastern Provinces (modern day Turkey, Egypt, Palestine etc). Which were given to Anthony. And offcourse Octavian got the Northern or western provinces.
The original video has so many significant things happening, sometimes at the same time, it would really be impossible to cover close to all of them, unless you stopped it every couple seconds. I spent well over an hour just watching the original video, and I didn't have to think of things to comment on. For example, at one point you stopped the video just before the Norman conquest of England. Then you started the video and mentioned the Norman conquest, and the Reconquista gaining ground in Iberia. These events happened in 10 seconds of the original video, and you spent about 18 seconds discussing them. These are historically significant events, and you absolutely should have been talking about them. However, only a few seconds of video after the Norman conquest, an event that could legitimately be considered even MORE historically important occurred. That would be the loss of Anatolia by the Byzantine Empire to the Seljuk Turks, after their defeat at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071. It would be pretty difficult to overstate the importance of this. First, it was essentially the end of the Eastern Roman Empire as a great power. It never really recovered. It was already a shell of itself at the time of the 4th Crusade, it was just a shell of a shell afterwords. Which reminds me of the second thing, the aftermath of the defeat at Manzikert, and the occupation of most of Anatolia by the Turks, lead to a request by the Emperor for military assistance from the Western Christians. Yes this lead directly to the Crusades. Third, it lead to the rise of a Turkish empire on the doorstep of Europe, which has had obvious significance. Fourth, the breakup of that Empire after WW1, lead to a final horrible reckoning between the ethnic descendants of the forces represented in that ancient battle. The Greeks attempting to get back as much of what they had lost as they could, the Turks attempting to keep what they had won, which in the end they did. A war with all the horrors that ancient grudges bring, culminating in a huge population exchange which was perilous for both countries and everyone involved. Finally, the modern nation in Anatolia today is obviously Turkiye. If not for the Turkish victory at Manzikert and it's immediate aftermath, particularly the complete failure of Byzantine leadership, there's a very good chance that there wouldn't be a Turkish state in Anatolia today. There'd almost certainly be one SOMEWHERE, as there already was at that time, it just might be in a different location. The Eastern Roman Empire was still one of the most powerful and wealthy states in Europe at that time. However, it was riven with intrigue and disunity at that moment, and so was incapable of of the immediate response that was needed. If the Turks couldn't win the day at that time, who knows when, or if, they would've gotten that great of an opportunity again. Anyway, it was a very big deal, which I know you're aware of. It certainly felt to me that you would have wanted to talk more about a lot more events, but the speed of the video, and the density of events depicted in it made that impossible within this format. I mean we're talking about a 10 second segment of the original video, covering a 20 year period in the 11th century, and there're at least 3 major events(not ruling out the idea that I could look at it again and find another one). Many other sections of the video have an even higher density of important events. Hell, WW1 is like 2 seconds long in the original video. Pretty difficult to even see, let alone react to a lot of stuff in real time, when there are constantly multiple events occurring simultaneously, or almost simultaneously, in completely different parts of the map. Basically what I'm suggesting is doing a more detailed reaction to a video like this. It would take a lot longer to do it, so I don't know if that would work okay for you. Like maybe break it up into 4 or 5 half hour segments, or do an extended live stream where you can react in more detail. Something like that maybe? Just a thought. I know you don't have unlimited time to react to a specific video, and that's fine. I just want to hear more of what you might want to say, if you had the time, in a video where there's just a ridiculous number of events to react to.
Little Funfact. Austria-Hungary didn´t exist until 1867 28:53 . It was after the 48 Revolution that the Austrian Emperor considered to give the hungariens some rights
all the French names are wrong. There was no Charlemagne. His name was Karl/Carl (and thats exactly all historians, all documents (usually latin but not only) of that time, all architecture of that time, all cultures of that time refers to. Charles/Charlemagne was created much later and was then just a localized name (the English got it due to the Norman invasion later - but also still have Karls/Carls) and is also based on Carl. Also 'Carolingians/Karolingians' refer to Carl/Karl. Europe was overrun by Germanic tribes and they created different kingdoms and empires. The Frankish tribe dynasty had all the time Germanic names and also Germanic laws combined with some Roman left overs. Thats important to get, because one reaso why the Frankish Empire was split WAS due to such laws (to split it among the children). Karl the Greats bury is also in Aachen/Germany (if it is authentic or not is discussed but btw, he was also like egypth mummies conservated - actually not jus the egyptians did that). and if he was called 'the great' due to his impact or because he was tall (or both) is still uncertain. And you understand that then its clear why its 'Karolus/Carolus Magnus' in Latin or Carlo Mago in Italian or Karl der Grosse in German (similar in the Neverlands, Scandinavia etc.) or Carlos in Spanish or Karol in Polish or similar in Turkey, in the entire Islam world back then. 'Charlemagne' is WRONG! get it, now! its just misleading for everyone with more interest in history, because all the written text, architecture etc. is based on Karl/Carl. Same is btw. true for the other 'france' names. There was no Lois. His name was Ludwig. There was also no one with the name 'Hentry'. Thats 'Heinrich' - and so on. French itself (name also comes from the Germanic tribe confederation 'die Franken' - just like 'Frankfurt' etc.) grew later as a kind of Germanized Vulgar Latin (with a bit Celtic/Gaul). 10%-15% of French is of Germanic influence. And again. To get that is important beause only then you understand ALL the history of that time with all the written texts and so on ...
Nice video, you missed the entire nordic region though! Swedish Empire and Russia deserves to be noted :( Sweden ruled like half of modern Germany/Poland for a while
@@VloggingThroughHistory True, but the conflict between between protestantism and cathoholicism played a big part of Europes history. Worth mentioning in this type of video imo. Really good video otherwise :)
The Anglo-Saxons have their own centrist world, for it is important that England is there, they are not interested in Sweden and Russia. Russia is the largestt country. She also owned Alaska and California (the US owes a lot of money for these regions), but the author says that they didn't show anything on the map. The author is a propagandist of the Anglo-Saxon world, that's all you need to know about his videos.
Are you Jocking Right? Cause the "Byzantines" had to fight EVERYONE ! They had to fight the Persians then the Arabs, the Lombards, the Bulgarians and Slavs, the Crussaders that robbed Constantinople's Holy treasures and the Turks. It is a MIRACLE the Empire survived 1.000 years cause they had not allies it was everyone against Constantinople, Greeks must be Proud for lasting so much i wish they recover Constantinople soon. 🇬🇷☦️
The Holy Roman Empire was actually not very powerful despite covering so much of Europe. It was extremely decentralized, and the emperor usually only ruled a small part of the empire directly. For most of the medieval and early modern periods the Kingdom of France was the most powerful and influential kingdom in Europe by far. France was the only power which had the military and economic might to challenge all of Europe at once, multiple times.
Not in the Early and high middle ages. France was just as much of a mess as the HRE would have been. In fact most kingdoms would have been very decentralized. Only in the late middle ages and beyond is when the hre starts seriously falling behind France in terms of its ability to unify
@@sebe2255 Yeah very true. You could definitely make the claim that the Kingdom of France in the early-high middle ages was basically like the HRE clusterfuck but on a smaller scale. The later middle ages when France centralized their power they were by far the strongest country on the continent. Not only in military but in population, economy, cultural influence. The only true rivals to France were the Habsburgs when they controlled all of Spain, the low countries, Burgundy, North Italy, etc, but even then, they were only strong enough to just contain France.
@@digiorno1142 I think you are exaggerating the situation here a bit. Spain (if we don’t count the Ottomans) was more so the main power in the Late Middle ages. And even there that doesn’t mean that were just able to enforce their will on everyone around them. That isn’t to say France wasn’t powerful. I’d say that France’s real period of dominance happens after the middle ages. Basically the period that is often called the era of enlightenment and absolutism (especially for France). So that would be the 16-18th century. In the 19th century France of course gets replaced by Britain as not just a European power, but the strongest global power. And later even by a united Germany within Europe
So many significant leaders missed or glossed over. Would of liked to of seen this broken down in to maybe a few hundred years at a time and multiple videos to discuss more. Catherine the Great never got a mention for example. Too much history for one video.
Chris, I have subscribed to your channels since the very beginning. Why can't you upload more Hearts of Iron (HOI4) content on your gaming channel? That's what your subscribers want to see the most! To be honest, most, if not all of your recent gaming uploads were not very interesting. Please go back to what has worked for you in the past... Please bring back HOI4!
While you were focusing on one part of Europe, I was focusing on another. There is just too much history to cover in one video, and you could watch it multiple times just to cover it. Great video.
right? hes talking about the names changing in britain, i'm watching the Romans slowly losing Italy again
he was talking about the map looking like modern times and portugal's outline, and im just looking at mongols charging in through the east xd
I was doing the same thing. It's fascinating.
Same, I was watching events in south and eastern Europe spiral in and out control. Chris is talking about Germany uniting and im over here going and there's Victor Emmanuel taking Italy. Did the same for the great Northern War and Charles X.
It's not exactly appropriate to keep using a post-antiquity and western centred perspective to describe worldly affairs. He misses so many major events such as Justinian, who was undoubtedly the most powerful man in Eurasia at that time. I think it's best to focus on the most important events, instead of constantly talking about nations which are going to rise later, yet do not play a significant role in that particular period, such as Roman Britain, which was perhaps the most insignificant province out of all.
It's so funny how your eyes are glued on western europe and mine are still glued onto the Romans, getting the full history experience watching this video lol
Mine too. The Eastern Roman Empire history is more interesting than the west. Constantinople lasted 1.000 years more than Rome City it is something Roman Greeks must be proud about.
We really are so lucky to be living in such a time where information is so easily available. This video 50 years ago would have been unthinkable! It would have taken hours and hours in a library to even learn the names of a fraction of these rulers!
21:47, if I'm not mistaken, Portugal is one of the oldest nations and has one of the oldest (uninterrupted) borders in Europe, pretty cool for such a small country
Indeed, it is one of the oldest countries in Europe, but its border changed in 1801 after the Orange War in which Portugal returned Olivenza to Spain.
It is one of the oldest countries in Europe but, as we can see on the map, England, France, Denmark, Sweden, Hungary and Bulgaria started before.
San Marino: Am I a joke to you?
@@angelcamachodelsolar What do you mean "returned" Olivença to Spain? Spanish troops literally took Olivença with the help of Napoleon, before that Olivença was portuguese for 500+ years. After Napoleon was defeated, every country signed the Congress of Vienna, inclunding Spain, a document that said Olivença was to be returned to Portugal. Spain to this day still hasn't.
@@danieldol.1930 Olivenza was reconquered from the Moors by the Leonese king Alfonso IX in 1230, not by Portugal.
Already a territory of Castile, Portugal takes advantage of weakened Castile in civil war, and queen regent María de Molina must cede Olivenza to Portugal so that it ceases its support for the other Castilian claimant to the throne.
Since then, the return of the cities that the Portuguese had to the east of the Guadiana River, seen by Castile and later by Spain as the natural border between the two countries, had been demanded.
Spanish troops recovered it in 1801 during the Orange War and through the Treaty of Amiens of 1801 Olivenza became Spanish.
The Portuguese-English troops recovered it in 1811, with the Portuguese demanding its return to Portugal, but Wellington decided to hand it over to Spain.
At the Congress of Vienna in 1815, Portugal managed to ask Spain "in a friendly manner" to return Olivenza, without any obligation to do so, since the Treaty of Amiens of 1801 in force recognized Spain's sovereignty over Olivenza and that of Great Britain over the Caribbean island of Trinidad, and Great Britain did not want to annul the Treaty.
Both Spain and Portugal signed the Treaty of Vienna as victorious countries and without any territorial obligation.
To date, there is no official claim from Portugal about Olivenza in any international organization.
Just wow… This video just gave me such a good clarifaction of how skilled and intelligent you are in history. Even though map is pretty fastpaced you manage to explain so well what’s happening in Europe at a specific year and throughout the years. Keep it up. Love these kinds of videos where you explain/react to a specific event or period!
In the 800s-1300s, the Holy Roman Empire being that big is rather misleading in terms of how powerful the ruler was. The Holy Roman Empire was feudal to the extreme, where the individual princes, counts, etc. in Germany and the other areas under it were quite independent, making the Holy Roman Emperor not nearly as powerful as one would think.
Excellent point.
There were some exceptions, for example historians consider Barbarossa as the most powerful ruler in Europe at the time, but for the most part you're totally right.
Exactly. A great way to understand more about the geopolitical mess that was the HRE is to play EU4. Its a great game that attempts to simulate aspects of the empire and of course colonialism, trade, conquest, and other things.
I'd argue that for the 800s-1300s timeframe that's actually a fair way to show the HRE, presuming you show France and England in similar ways, all of these were highly Feudal, the distinction comes from when Feudalism started to break down in France and England, meanwhile the HRE stagnated and later on decentralized even further
@@ClawedAsh Several things:
- In the 800s it was a more or less a different entity than during the 960s-1300s, that some don't even call the HRE, but yes the power was reasonably centralized (comparatively) in the Carolingian empire.
- Regarding the comparison between the HRE in the 1000s-1300s and France/England, I'd disagree for England. England was a far smaller and less populated entity than the HRE or France, but was more centralized in terms of the actual power of the king. Despite being a feudal kingdom.
In short, I think you're only right for a comparison between France and the HRE during the 960s-1300s: France centralized in each passing generation, while the HRE stagnated or even worsened. In average though, I'd say France had kings with more power over their feudal lords. But yeah sometimes it was a blurry distinction, and the opposite happened.
Note that in the video the divisions inside France are sometimes shown (very selectively though I admit): it shows Britanny, Normandy, shortly Anjou, the Angevin's realm, and Burgundy (during the 100 Years War).
The "loss" of gaul/spain/britain by the romans in 260-274 is actually a very interesting short-lived creation called the "Gallic Empire" - it's more of a splinter state (still ruled in the roman style), created by a roman general (of germanic descent) called Postumus. There's a fascinating history behind the entire thing - and it's one of many lost parts of the empire reconquered by emperor Aurelian, who was given the title "Restitutor Orbis" (restorer of the world) for these achievements.
You mentioned Henry IV (HRE) at around 1070 as a powerful player not much talked about. He's actually quite famous in Germany (part of our schoolbooks) because he got into a huge conflict with the pope, ending (for a time - it was truly solved later on) in a famous, very evocative and dramatic event called the Road to Canossa or "Humiliation of Canossa" (1077), where the emperor, dressed as a supplicant, waited in front of the closed gates of a castle in a blizzard for three days and three nights, calling on the pope to end his excommunication - it marked maybe the high point of the power of the papacy, but was also a brilliant move by Henry, because under these circumstances, the pope was forced to forgive him, otherwise he would look very unchristian (and Henry would go on to regain much of his power).
Aurelian is probably the best roman emperor that isn't ubiquitous in pop culture.
There was no more resilient empire than the Eastern Romans. Disappears from the map and reappears, almost every year are invaded by muslim and slavs and still push back and survive.
I also love the difference between the west and east empire. While one was extremely agressive the other was extremely defensive.
Alexander's empire wasn't up in rebellion the moment he died. It is really complicated and I still don't completely understand it but for a decade and a half I would say, Alexander's empire was still up with a regency for his son. Regents shifted with the first and second wars of the diadochi, satraps ruled regions as regional rulers, with more intrigue, treachery, tactical marriages and betrayal that it would make Game of Thrones appear like a child's show.
The thing that you do mention, which is that Alexander's empire was split in ''four ways'' is such an overgeneralization of a period of 10 years that it can't describe the whole wars of the diadochi. Most people know about these four empires because they would come to survive a lot later up to the roman conquest(Even Antigonus in the form of his dynasty ruling Macedon till its end). It is something so fascinating that I have discovered these past few months that makes me want to learn more and more, even though some things I cannot understand due to a lot of complication with the whole family trees and betrayals, and who is with who at what point in time.
Sounds like that would make for a very interesting history video...
@@adude20 I am sure it would, Kings and Generals have posted a series where they go over the wars of the diadochi up to the battle of Ipsus.
I've still never understood why that hasn't got a show; it's filled with violence,sex and drama
@@condha1044 Agreed, I think it is most likely because it wouldn't seem that appealing to so many people at first glance because it is a period in history that no so many people know about. Sad to see what marketing does, truly one of the most underrated conflicts in history. (Note that I said conflicts because it isn't 1 singular war, but rather a series of wars and conflicts that last 50 or something years depending on where you decide to put it)
I think one thing that’s important to note is that though europe seemed so centralized and unified in some parts of the medieval era, within many kingdoms there were dukes who had significant autonomy. Case-to-point normandy, a French duchy who decided to conquer England and could do so without problem from the French king.
The feudal system was very complex and this map doesn’t quite do it justice at some parts. Some people have this idea that dukes and vassals worked like modern day states, but that’s not true at all, they were 10x more autonomous, and would often have major wars with each other and foreign powers without any involvement from their liege
Interesting thing is the Holy Roman Empire and Spain was highly tied with Isabel I's descendants, since her daughter Juana married the son of the the Emperor. I'm doing a group and individual project covering the Franks and Carolingians, so it was nice to see when you got to the 600s-800s. My topic covers all the way to the Treaty of Verdun (the name of the treaty that split Francia into three with Charlemagne's grandsons.
Technically speaking, Italy was already united by 1865 with it's capital city in Turin. They're not planning yet on making Rome the capital, because there's French troops occupying the city. It was after the Franco-Prussian War that the Italians took Rome and made it its new capital.
you've definitely got to react to some more of their vids, they're great!
I appreciate that they included the rulers of Tunisia in this, and their accuracy with the names
Hey VTH! Just wanted to tell you that you’ve made the long drives for my job more bearable! Ty for being awesome
Good reaction! Went ahead and watched the original before watching this. It was interesting to see what you prioritized talking about!
It was interesting to watch, and I was surprised they did not start up in the Norway and Sweden area earlier due to my family history being Norman. And as you go back, it leads to the old lands of Kerviland, which is the southern part of Noway and Sweden, and both governments have the records going back to around 110 AD or CE or whatever the heck its called now. Still, a great video loved how they did it all.
Everytime I watch the Eastern Roman Empire on one of these maps or go through its history I'm sitting there tearing up hoping I've woken up in an alternate universe where they don't fall and some how come all the way back from 1453 just to see em disappear from the map again :c
Me too. It was the saddest day in Human History. They had to fight everyone. Persians, Arabs, Lombards, Mongols, Bulgarian, Turks and Crussaders even tho they were also Christians. It was everyone against Constantinople they had not allies but they lasted 1.000 years 🇬🇷☦️ one day Constantinople is gonna be Greek and Christian again.
Mr. Terry suggested that you react to "The History of the Entire Bible, I Guess" in his newest video. He reacted to it and thought you might have a better theological take on it.
I remember yakko Warner taught me about the European countries it helped a lot.
spartacus pops into view just before the 5 minute range or around there. for a few seconds.
5:00 As soon as you see Gaius Marius show up in Rome start the countdown clock on the Republic. Just watched an interview with Mary Beard and she said something that really resonated with me; the Emperors didn't create the Empire, the Empire created the Emperors. And its so true.
Love you channel man keep up the great work educating us!!!!
Hey, I think you should maybe start looking into more of the Eastern European history, I suggest maybe looking into Bulgaria (I am of course biased as a Bulgarian) because it's some very interesting stuff!
also Romania(and Rep Moldova)
He only cares about England, France and Germany.
Theoretically Margaret 1. didn't rule over Scandinavia, at least not officially. First her own son Olaf ruled and then Eric of Pomerania (her sisters grandson and her foster son ). Margeret couldn't rule herself, because she was a woman. The evidence show, that she did a fantastic job, nonetheless. In later years she was given the title.
Fun fact: Boleslas in Czechia is the nephew of Wenceslas from the carol Good King Wenceslas. He wasn't a king he was a duke.
24:00 that 3 Sigismund is the same person.
I've always found Switzerland not being controlled since napoleon being crazy. That to me is incredible that they stayed the same since after napoleon for so long. Especially during both world wars.
Because who needs a mountain fortress
Cause they were helping the Germans all the time. They are Germanic too
Hey Chris, speaking of Rome, you should totally watch the miniseries I, Claudius. It does a really good dive into Rome during and immediately after Augustus, even until the early reign of Nero. It has superb acting - including the likes of Derek Jacobi, Patrick Stewart, Brian Blessed, and John Hurt - and many critics have ranked it as one of the best miniseries of all time.
Never thought I'd see old Erik Segersäll (Eric the Victorious) of Sweden mentioned on this channel, but there you are
You really have to watch the video several times and concentrate on one particular part every time to take it all in.
Hoffenheim jersey, very interesting as a person from germany :D
17:49
We can thank Utred of Bebbanburg for being the backbone for Alfred, Edward, and Athelstan and the creation of England. 😉😂
Exactly! I love the Last Kingdom!
Loved this video! Thanks chris😊😊😊❤❤
Proud of my country Portugal, since 1249 we haven't changed (kinda we had Olivença which Spain stole from us during the Napoleonic wars). Much love from Portugal 🇵🇹❤️🇺🇸
Much love to the Portuguese from UK. Anglo-Portuguese is the oldest alliance in history 🇬🇧🤝🇵🇹
15:22 Actually, this is where bulgarian ruler Tervel (who was already the first foreign ruler to receive the title ceaser, which later became known as tsar) helps the Eastern Roman Empire/Byzantine empire fight off a 100k arab army at the siege of Constantinoples, thus preventing further spread of islam in Europe. It's a lesser known fact, of course, since it happens in eastern Europe. I remember my history books saying Tervel, among other reasons, prefered a known enemy to an unknown one.
Congratulations, on 1000 videos!!!
I recommend "100 Greatest Generals in History" and "100 Most Powerful Militaries of All Time" from the "Cottereau" channel. nice content to react would gladly see those two videos.
Mostly accurate at around the 8 minute mark for being the peak. Trajan was the emperor under which Rome was at it’s peak in terms of territory. That small sliver that it shows towards Iraq doesn’t really do it justice for how much territory he took from Parthia in order to get it. Basically ALL of Mesopotamia was under Roman rule for a short period of time. Also, I know the video is completely about Europe but it would’ve been pretty interesting to see the colonies established eventually just to show how much territory the monarchs of the time really controlled as well.
One thing to keep in mind is that it was never really Trajan's intention to maintain Mesopotamia as Roman territory.. This was the blueprint for making the Parthians back down in the East: Threaten Babylon, and they'll have to protect it at all costs. Later emperors would do similar attacks, but once the Parthians gave way to the Iranian Sasanians, this ceased to work. And then the trouble really starts for Rome.
You always have to remember, it is the Empire to Rome's East that is always its biggest threat. Those provinces produce the food and money that makes the whole thing run. They have to be kept at all costs.
Portugal has it's borders since 1297...probably the oldest borders in europe I would say...
Indeed, it is one of the oldest countries in Europe, but its border changed in 1801 after the Orange War in which Portugal returned Olivenza to Spain.
I read somewhere that if the Pyramids could be hoisted onto a ship, they would be in the British Museum by now.
Nice Hoffenheim t-shirt..great content a always!
Funny thing. In germany the map was showing the chancelor and not the president while in Austria it was showing the president but not the chancelor
28:25 "Austro-Hungarian empire" - That's a mistake, at that time it's only the Austrian Empire. Austria-Hungary was formed in 1867.
Also one might argue that Franz Joseph was not the ruler of Hungary in 1848 since there was the Hungarian revolution taking place which lasted well into 1849.
It's shameful of me being half french half english to know all the british mornarchs but today I learnt about 90% of France's leaders. Need to brush up on French history me thinks !
Weird to see the Nordic countries and UK still represented by constitutional monarchs
Cottereau's videos are great my favorite is 100 Greatest Generals in History or the entire 500 Greatest Generals in History video
From 1580 until 1640 Portugal and Spain were ruled by the same monarch during the Iberian union, after the king of Portugal died without heirs.
yes, that's why Portugal is colored yellow during that time
Charles V ruled as Charles I over in Spain. Also, the map showed castle + Aragon being united de facto under him, while he only ruled both in a mere personal union. Castille + Aragon were not de jure united until the reign of Philip V
My Dad side of my family in Germany was lords before coming to USA.
I wonder if the legendary town of Château-Thierry, one of 64 towns of France to receive the Legion of Honour (Ordre national de la Légion d'honneur) for its role in its defense (along with the Americans) on July 18, 1918 during the latter stages of the Kaiserslacht, is named for Thierry I of the 6th Century, Château-Thierry is in that area that he controlled
Something I just realized
The Founding of Venice as a city is closer to Alexander the Great at 960 years than it is to us today 1400 years
That's crazy
It was kinda funny watching the Soviet Union and seeing Gorbachev's name pop up and then suddenly BOOM the red turned to white and yellow with a lot more borders and only a tiny thing that is the Russia of today. Seriously, good on Gorbachev to back off and completely remove the Iron Curtain.
Interesting how under Charles V, they split in different colours Spain from the Burgundian territories and the Holy Roman Empire (it's hard to see how powerful he was within Europe) but they keep calling him Charles V on Spain even if he's Charles I of Spain.
exactly
because the Burgundian territories + the HRE territories although bored ruled by Charles, were legally separate, so colored separately
So many empires some of the people living in them probably don't even know they're supposed to be in them. Then they quickly disappear because they were spoils of war rather than a real lasting state.
a note for Prof Chris: the correct pronunciation of "Charlemagne" is not "Charlemaign" but CharlemAgne (same A as in garAge or homAge). Or, we can use Charles The Great, Karl der Grosse, or Carolus Magnus.
Karol Wielki
It isn’t even an actual name anyway. Who cares how it is pronounced.
And back then they would have either said it in Frankish or written it in Latin anyway
I'm kind 32:35 sad you didn't stop and point out Emperor Charles V. It was different colors but he had that great HRE for a time with Spain among other places.
24:30 vlad the impaler in modern day Romania, inspiration for Count Dracula 🧛♂
They should show the unification of Europe at the end but still a good vid
14:30 we also basically se the papal state. also 20:15 in Spain we have Afonso gang
I know you meant Africa as in Egypt. But the actual African provinces were given to Lepidus to govern not Anthony (by far the least lucrative). Egypt was deemed as part of the Eastern Provinces (modern day Turkey, Egypt, Palestine etc). Which were given to Anthony. And offcourse Octavian got the Northern or western provinces.
Anatolia is the name of the land turks invaded until today
why the hoffenheim jersey?😂
Closest Bundesliga team to my family's hometown in Germany.
Wow, thats so cool, greetings from Dachau, Germany@@VloggingThroughHistory
I really be watching theses videos high as fuck
The original video has so many significant things happening, sometimes at the same time, it would really be impossible to cover close to all of them, unless you stopped it every couple seconds. I spent well over an hour just watching the original video, and I didn't have to think of things to comment on.
For example, at one point you stopped the video just before the Norman conquest of England. Then you started the video and mentioned the Norman conquest, and the Reconquista gaining ground in Iberia. These events happened in 10 seconds of the original video, and you spent about 18 seconds discussing them. These are historically significant events, and you absolutely should have been talking about them. However, only a few seconds of video after the Norman conquest, an event that could legitimately be considered even MORE historically important occurred. That would be the loss of Anatolia by the Byzantine Empire to the Seljuk Turks, after their defeat at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071. It would be pretty difficult to overstate the importance of this.
First, it was essentially the end of the Eastern Roman Empire as a great power. It never really recovered. It was already a shell of itself at the time of the 4th Crusade, it was just a shell of a shell afterwords. Which reminds me of the second thing, the aftermath of the defeat at Manzikert, and the occupation of most of Anatolia by the Turks, lead to a request by the Emperor for military assistance from the Western Christians. Yes this lead directly to the Crusades. Third, it lead to the rise of a Turkish empire on the doorstep of Europe, which has had obvious significance. Fourth, the breakup of that Empire after WW1, lead to a final horrible reckoning between the ethnic descendants of the forces represented in that ancient battle. The Greeks attempting to get back as much of what they had lost as they could, the Turks attempting to keep what they had won, which in the end they did. A war with all the horrors that ancient grudges bring, culminating in a huge population exchange which was perilous for both countries and everyone involved. Finally, the modern nation in Anatolia today is obviously Turkiye. If not for the Turkish victory at Manzikert and it's immediate aftermath, particularly the complete failure of Byzantine leadership, there's a very good chance that there wouldn't be a Turkish state in Anatolia today. There'd almost certainly be one SOMEWHERE, as there already was at that time, it just might be in a different location. The Eastern Roman Empire was still one of the most powerful and wealthy states in Europe at that time. However, it was riven with intrigue and disunity at that moment, and so was incapable of of the immediate response that was needed. If the Turks couldn't win the day at that time, who knows when, or if, they would've gotten that great of an opportunity again.
Anyway, it was a very big deal, which I know you're aware of. It certainly felt to me that you would have wanted to talk more about a lot more events, but the speed of the video, and the density of events depicted in it made that impossible within this format. I mean we're talking about a 10 second segment of the original video, covering a 20 year period in the 11th century, and there're at least 3 major events(not ruling out the idea that I could look at it again and find another one). Many other sections of the video have an even higher density of important events. Hell, WW1 is like 2 seconds long in the original video. Pretty difficult to even see, let alone react to a lot of stuff in real time, when there are constantly multiple events occurring simultaneously, or almost simultaneously, in completely different parts of the map. Basically what I'm suggesting is doing a more detailed reaction to a video like this. It would take a lot longer to do it, so I don't know if that would work okay for you. Like maybe break it up into 4 or 5 half hour segments, or do an extended live stream where you can react in more detail. Something like that maybe? Just a thought. I know you don't have unlimited time to react to a specific video, and that's fine. I just want to hear more of what you might want to say, if you had the time, in a video where there's just a ridiculous number of events to react to.
16:00 Crusader Kings intensifies!
Little Funfact. Austria-Hungary didn´t exist until 1867 28:53 . It was after the 48 Revolution that the Austrian Emperor considered to give the hungariens some rights
Lol your wearing the TSG Hoffenheim. Germany ftw. im from germany btw. and your coming.
I miss when Austria was huge
You look like what an older Ted Mosby would look like in How I met your Mother.
if you havent already, id like a reaction video on charlamagne
Hey VTH your should check a video about brazilian indepedence here our ruler was an emperor pedro i.
Rus isn't russia.
Old joke: why is the Great pyramid not in the British Museum?
It wouldn't fit.
Man you glossed over the collapse of the USSR!😅
Loved this! Very informative as always!
I don't mind since Finland is barely visible on that map. :D
I feel like you'd appreciate the channel Overly Sarcastic.. moreso Blue's stuff admittedly.
Are u realy wearing a Hoffenheim Trikot?Thats so funny i cant believe my eyes.
Looking at your jersey, is it safe to say you are... hoffenheimer? •~•
Extra history haitian revolution please
My name is Anthony so I instantly caught the Mark Antony mistake in Rome lol
Nice one! But unfortunately you did not mention the collapse of the USSR (Soviet Union), which is a turning point in history.
Antonius I meant
It’s funny to see just a straight blue line in Russia going to Moscow in 1812 for a split second then it disappears lol
Brick by brick, my citizens.
Brick by brick.
These types of videos are really helpful for someone like me who needs to visualize it to understand it
all the French names are wrong. There was no Charlemagne. His name was Karl/Carl (and thats exactly all historians, all documents (usually latin but not only) of that time, all architecture of that time, all cultures of that time refers to. Charles/Charlemagne was created much later and was then just a localized name (the English got it due to the Norman invasion later - but also still have Karls/Carls) and is also based on Carl. Also 'Carolingians/Karolingians' refer to Carl/Karl. Europe was overrun by Germanic tribes and they created different kingdoms and empires. The Frankish tribe dynasty had all the time Germanic names and also Germanic laws combined with some Roman left overs. Thats important to get, because one reaso why the Frankish Empire was split WAS due to such laws (to split it among the children). Karl the Greats bury is also in Aachen/Germany (if it is authentic or not is discussed but btw, he was also like egypth mummies conservated - actually not jus the egyptians did that). and if he was called 'the great' due to his impact or because he was tall (or both) is still uncertain. And you understand that then its clear why its 'Karolus/Carolus Magnus' in Latin or Carlo Mago in Italian or Karl der Grosse in German (similar in the Neverlands, Scandinavia etc.) or Carlos in Spanish or Karol in Polish or similar in Turkey, in the entire Islam world back then. 'Charlemagne' is WRONG! get it, now! its just misleading for everyone with more interest in history, because all the written text, architecture etc. is based on Karl/Carl. Same is btw. true for the other 'france' names. There was no Lois. His name was Ludwig. There was also no one with the name 'Hentry'. Thats 'Heinrich' - and so on. French itself (name also comes from the Germanic tribe confederation 'die Franken' - just like 'Frankfurt' etc.) grew later as a kind of Germanized Vulgar Latin (with a bit Celtic/Gaul). 10%-15% of French is of Germanic influence. And again. To get that is important beause only then you understand ALL the history of that time with all the written texts and so on ...
Rome also welcomed culture from those they annexed they were a melting pot. That helped sustain them.
19:26 that pronunciation was good. Did you practice?
Edit: time mark
Nice video, you missed the entire nordic region though! Swedish Empire and Russia deserves to be noted :( Sweden ruled like half of modern Germany/Poland for a while
They didn't show much of it on the map.
@@VloggingThroughHistory True, but the conflict between between protestantism and cathoholicism played a big part of Europes history. Worth mentioning in this type of video imo. Really good video otherwise :)
The Anglo-Saxons have their own centrist world, for it is important that England is there, they are not interested in Sweden and Russia. Russia is the largestt country. She also owned Alaska and California (the US owes a lot of money for these regions), but the author says that they didn't show anything on the map. The author is a propagandist of the Anglo-Saxon world, that's all you need to know about his videos.
- Louis XIV or Napoleon to Macron.
- Barbarossa to Merkel
- Bolesław I to Duda.
Oh dear, how low the mighty have fallen...
But the nazis insisted Ukraine is the oldest civilization, yet I don't see it until the very end!
Are you Jocking Right? Cause the "Byzantines" had to fight EVERYONE ! They had to fight the Persians then the Arabs, the Lombards, the Bulgarians and Slavs, the Crussaders that robbed Constantinople's Holy treasures and the Turks. It is a MIRACLE the Empire survived 1.000 years cause they had not allies it was everyone against Constantinople, Greeks must be Proud for lasting so much i wish they recover Constantinople soon. 🇬🇷☦️
The Holy Roman Empire was actually not very powerful despite covering so much of Europe. It was extremely decentralized, and the emperor usually only ruled a small part of the empire directly. For most of the medieval and early modern periods the Kingdom of France was the most powerful and influential kingdom in Europe by far. France was the only power which had the military and economic might to challenge all of Europe at once, multiple times.
Not in the Early and high middle ages. France was just as much of a mess as the HRE would have been. In fact most kingdoms would have been very decentralized.
Only in the late middle ages and beyond is when the hre starts seriously falling behind France in terms of its ability to unify
@@sebe2255 Yeah very true. You could definitely make the claim that the Kingdom of France in the early-high middle ages was basically like the HRE clusterfuck but on a smaller scale. The later middle ages when France centralized their power they were by far the strongest country on the continent. Not only in military but in population, economy, cultural influence. The only true rivals to France were the Habsburgs when they controlled all of Spain, the low countries, Burgundy, North Italy, etc, but even then, they were only strong enough to just contain France.
@@digiorno1142 I think you are exaggerating the situation here a bit. Spain (if we don’t count the Ottomans) was more so the main power in the Late Middle ages. And even there that doesn’t mean that were just able to enforce their will on everyone around them. That isn’t to say France wasn’t powerful. I’d say that France’s real period of dominance happens after the middle ages. Basically the period that is often called the era of enlightenment and absolutism (especially for France). So that would be the 16-18th century.
In the 19th century France of course gets replaced by Britain as not just a European power, but the strongest global power. And later even by a united Germany within Europe
@@digiorno1142 In the 16th century Spain was clearly superior to France, defeating it on every occasion in the Italian Wars (1494-1559).
@@angelcamachodelsolar
spain didnt exist it was the HRE + austria + spain vs a much smaller france
Bulgaria still there after more than 13 centuries ☦
So many significant leaders missed or glossed over. Would of liked to of seen this broken down in to maybe a few hundred years at a time and multiple videos to discuss more.
Catherine the Great never got a mention for example. Too much history for one video.
Chris, I have subscribed to your channels since the very beginning. Why can't you upload more Hearts of Iron (HOI4) content on your gaming channel? That's what your subscribers want to see the most! To be honest, most, if not all of your recent gaming uploads were not very interesting. Please go back to what has worked for you in the past... Please bring back HOI4!
“You see what happened? Islam happened!”😂
25:08 the front line was Hungary, Romania doesn't even exist at this time.
Rus isn’t russia
But Russia is Rus