Best historian guy ever. Only one that ever said "Whatever. Who cares." in a history lecture. And we can understand the guy when he talks. Big plus there.
@@gandalfthegrey2592 , sorry dude , but Tolkien took it from general Nivelle "they shall not pass" about the germans at the battle of Verdun, Tolkien fought on the continent during WW1... ;=)
22:33 I come from the region where Pepin and Charlemagne were born, it is in the region of Liège (Belgium) on the border with Germany. Even today, we take the road which is built on the historic Roman road to go from Liège to Aachen. It takes about 10 hours to walk to Aachen. We can see how the Carolingians used the ruins of the Roman Empire to build their own.
Time passed , these 3 countries have nothing in common today except language for France and south Belgium , France have nothing to do with these countries .
@@rachelsombo9045 Wrong. First of the BeNeLux only split 190 years ago which is like nothing in the grand scope of history and secondly even parts of Northern France were historically always considered part of the 'Netherlands' (as in low lying lands, not the modern country of the same name). Genetically Northern French people have a significant amount of Frankish DNA which the other regions mentioned by MDE do as well but Southern French do not. The genetic difference between people from Northern France and Southern France is way bigger than the genetic difference between Northern French and Dutch people.
I live in Tournai and the "pont des trous" you showed at the begining got partially destroyed , the central arche got destroy to be re-built in order to have bigger boat traveling across. notice that the brige was already a modified version made in the 40's after ww2 and they didn't broke the two medieval tower so far but still a shame to touch something that old. thx for your work and especially your byzantin emperor playlist !
The Franks are some of the most interesting peoples in history. Clovis for example split one of his own soldiers head open with his axe because the guy was ordered to return a holy relic/extremely valuable object to a church he had stolen from, and this guy got pissed and smashed it to pieces with his axe instead; Clovis couldnt do anything a the moment besides apologize to the Priest that can come to get the relic back(they only asked for this relic back, none of the other treasures that the Franks had stolen in their raid); but a little later on, he still brooded over this of course; during an inspection he throw this same guy(who destroyed the holy relic) axe on the ground, then when he went to pick it up, split the dudes skull open with his own axe. Dan Carlin describes them as like a super extreme version of an outlaw biker gang in how they operated. Esp during Clovis' time this is true from what Ive seen. And the Franks, its a good thing they converted to the RIGHT kind of Christianity - this would lead to them being accepted by the Pope and therefore being accepted by all of Western Europe; the Franks, because of their conversion to orthodox Christianity instead of Arianism(which most Germanic barbarians had converted to), the Franks had an air of real legitimacy that all other Barbarian tribes lacked....its part of why they ruled so long and so well, as the clergy were their close allies and the population would trust an orthodox Christian King and aristocrats far more than they would a bunch of Arian heretics who persecute them - like the Vandals for example. The Franks are great. I esp wanna see a video on the equipment, even theoretical, of what Charlemagnes army was equipped with, and how he usually arranged his army for battle.
I would like to know how the differences living under Arian Christian rule vs. Orthodox/proto-Catholic rule. To a peasant in the countryside, did it make a difference? I think its less about "faith" and more about administrative beauracracy. The Catholics were better administrative bureaucrats (and diplomats) then the Arian chruch.
The legend of Saintes-Maries-de-la-mer is from at least the 9th century. The three Mary’s fled Palestine to the Rhône and Marie Salomé, Marie Jacobé and their servant Sarah according to the legend stayed in France. Later the village became a destination for pilgrims.
If we remember that "ferengi" literaly comes from the ethiopian type of "frank" and that a ferengi was active in Deep Space 9 business (Quark) and another ferengi was a starfleet officer stationed there (Nog) so yea...
@@Peristerygr The term Ferengi, or something similar (edit:was)used throughout Asia for Europeans or white people. A Thai boxer from Europe or the US competing in Thailand is still often called a Farang.
I thought you were never going to mention one of the coolest nicknames in History. Charles 'The Hammer' Martel. Its Hammer Time!! As in Hammer of God for defeating the Muslims. BTW I saw something where the Frankish hand axe was rated highest in one analysis. They had a way of throwing multiple axes and bouncing them off the ground in front of the enemy. They would bounce around in weird directions like a football making them hard to dodge. Native Americans' tomahawk was close in design.
@@gandalfthegrey2592 Very simple. They were one of the major tribes of Germans. The name refers to their battle axe "Franziska". Under Charlemagne they were the Name giving ethnicity of his empire and parted East/ West which became a language border. France is named after them and half of today Bavaria is also named Franken with the capital Nuremberg. I don't know what you looked up but if you have difficulties please ask.
@@gandalfthegrey2592 Not exactly. In the HRE there were like 3 parts, one in Germany, one in Italy and one in today France. The emperor had to be crowned as German King in Aachen and then as Emperor by the Pope in Rome. The construction goes back to Charlemagne who was named as the protector of the Pope and constructed his empire as the new Roman empire.
A good read of this era is The Inheritance of Rome ( illuminating the dark ages 400-1000) by Chris Wickham published by Penguin Books 2009. Especially relevant is Part IV The Carolingians and Post-Carolingian West, 750-1000.
Well, I ordered the book, and am attempting to read it, but I'm finding that the writing style of the book is *extremely* dry. I love history and reading, but the writing style of this book is really a kind of extreme. It's a bone dry listing of facts, facts, facts, seemingly with no attempt at identifying general historical trends. Another thing is that I'm getting the impression that the author views things very much from the perspective of a bureaucrat, and that his message in the book seems to be that bureaucrats are the true heroes in the world and the ones that create civilization. (And as a less important thing, the author also seems to subscribe to modern hypes like global warming.) I'm hugely interested in this period of history with its change from the culture and mores of the Roman Empire towards those of Christianity, which seems to me a hugely interesting thing (the changing perspectives on things), but the book is doing a good job of eliminating my enthusiasm. The book does have a chapter (chapter 3) that discusses Christianity (which is what I saw in the amazon preview and what made me order the book), but it turns out that this is a rather short chapter, that almost exclusively discusses only *organizational* aspects of the Church (as if Christianity was exclusively only a matter of bureaucracy and organization), and seemingly doesn't address any discussion of changing worldviews. My impression is that the book seems to willfully suppress these "cultural" and "worldview" aspects of the history of this period (which are the things I am interested in).
Visigoth = WestGoth / Astrogoth = Eastgoth. That were Germanic tribes just like the Franks (which were a Germanic tribe confederation) ... it was more helpful if all youtubers start to use names which are better understood instead of just copy-paste. Apropos: there was no Clovis. The name was Chlodwig which is a cognate of Ludwig (just like with Ludwig van Beethoven or King Ludwig who created Neuschwanstein etc. - apropos, Louis also is just a later localized version of Ludwig). A guy with the name Charlemagne also never existed. His name was Carl or Karl -der Grosse (latinized 'Carolus Magnus'). He spoke a Germanic/Frankish dialect and could only read Latin. His latinized name was usually used by chronologist of that time in written text (kind of slightly Germanized medivial Latin btw.) ... the reason why is is named 'der Grosse/the Great' is unclear. Might be due to what he archived, might be due to his size (1.84m, which was really huge at that time) or both. And no, Paris was not the capital of the Franks all the time. Karl der Grosse (Charles the Great) chose Aachen (just like many Kings later from the Holy Roman Empire) if they chose a capital in the first place. Aachen/Germany is also where Carl created the Cathedral and other stuff - and where his Shrine is, if you want visit him (or what he might be him). He is mummified btw, and there are text about ppl who investigated later a bit and noticed that he was still in a good shape due to that. Many Frankish ruler just wandered around without an explicit capital ...
You're correct that Charlemagne/Karl der Große/Karl de Grote/Carl the Great's mother tongue was a Germanic Frankish language/dialect. But if we're going to be hyper-specific, then there are a few things that should be pointed out. (1) He may not have been a native speaker, but many historians believe he was capable of speaking Latin and Gallic Romance, not just reading it. His friend Einhard wrote of him: "And not being satisfied with his native language alone, [Karl] also gave much attention to the learning of foreign tongues, among which was Latin, which he learned so perfectly that he was accustomed to pray indifferently in that language or in his own. Greek, however, he learned to understand better than to pronounce. He was in truth so eloquent, that he seemed like a professional rhetorician." Einhard is a bit of a biased source, but it's not strange to believe that Charlemagne would have been able to speak Latin. It wasn't that rare at the time and it was the language of the Frankish court (2) It's not entirely certain if Charlemagne's native Frankish dialect was one of the ones affected by the High German Consonant Shift (HGCS for short). The HGCS began in the southern dialects and spread northward from there, stopping along what is now called the Benrath line. A lot of the dialects spoken in Northern Gaul were almost certainly unaffected by it during the time of Charlemagne, meaning that the shift from "Grot" >> "Groz" (later "Große", derived from Proto-Germanic *grautaz) would not have occurred in them. However, we're not certain where Charlemagne was born. It might have been near Aachen, it might have been near Liège. It's also not clear how far the HGCS had spread at this point. To add to this, different dialects used different forms of the masculine definite article at this time, not necessarily "der/ther". So, his title could have been "ther Grot(e)/Groz(e)", "th(i)e Grot(e)/Groz(e)", "then Grot(e)/Groz(e)", etc in his native dialect. Of course, we don't know if the "magnus"/"the Great" title was used during his lifetime or if it was posthumous There are a lot of details from this period that aren't entirely clear, especially among the Germanic peoples, and different languages will naturally have different names for important historical figures. In light of that, I don't see anything wrong with calling him Charlemagne or whichever other option you prefer. The main point is making sure other people understand who you're talking about. The same goes for Clovis and the Visigoths and Ostrogoths. If using the terms "Westgoths"/"Westerngoths" and "Eastgoths"/"Easterngoths" makes you more understood, then go for it. But make no mistake, the terms "Visigoths" and "Ostrogoths" are well established and many people are already familiar with them. It's a great thing to be interested in these details and educate others on them, but let's not get too upset if people skip over them
@@bhavjotsingh5820Also, a tiny addition, Karl could not read or write! Einhard talks about how he tried to learn later in life but his inability to comprehend the teachings frustrated him and he eventually quit.
the name "Franci" in Latin means: "loyals" or "Honest-Ones". The name was given by the Romans to German Tribes which wanted to turn into "the Roman way of life". (There where also Celtic Gauls named "Franks") After the withdrawal of the Romans these "Franks" kept calling themselfs "Franks", although the tribal names like Salians, Sugambre or Ripuarian (Chatti) also remain used. The Salii were Irminonic (river Saale), the Sugambre (South-Cimbri) Ingvaeones, while the Chatti thought to be Istvaeones.
Interesting theory and 'frankly' sounding convincing to me. Most linguists do believe the name Frank means free or honest, similar to your honest ones. Like 'being frank'. This way the Franks set themselves apart from the people they enslaved or conquered. Besides the theory you mention there is also the theory that the word frank is derived from their trademark weapon, the 'frakka' or throwing spear, which also is the main weapon of Wodan/Odin.
@@leonhendriks wow. Dus liegen zit in het dna van mensen? Als je een Franse baby zou opvoeden in Nederland, zou die later meer liegen dan een baby met Nederlands dna?
Very murky origin I think some Romans were called franks like aegidius is called king of the franks by Gregory of tours about 100 years after his death but is called master of legions in contemporary Roman documents
Speculating a bit here, but I think the Edict of 614 banned Jews from royal office - and before, Jews often served in Merovingian office for two reasons: (1) they could read (Torah, of course) and write, and (2) their service avoided bringing into a royal administration barbarian religious disputes, such as Arianism v. Catholicism (for example; "early official Christianity" or "barbarian Dark Ages Christianity" had lots of these). The driver of such a change need not necessarily be Christian bigotry against Jews, though in 582 Chilperic ordered all Jews in Neustria to convert to Christianity (that absurd edict was ignored). Making literacy a Church monopoly makes "logical Dark Ages sense" if Christian disputes are no longer a big risk because Catholicism has won out, and a Catholic ruler wants to strengthen the kingdom by upgrading the quality of such "public education" as the age afforded (by monopoly) and also by changing who eligibly administers the kingdom. Landowning, troop-leading Christian nobles (or their school-aged sons) rather than effectively Jewish rabbis or merchants maybe had come to be of more value to the king as patronage appointees, and such Christians to qualify for such important jobs could not be illiterate. Again, I'm speculating and welcome those more qualified in this history to comment. 🙂
I actually looked into Charlemagne’s name and it appears that his name was probably Karl. A decent piece of evidence for this is that in every Germanic language I looked through his name is almost always a translation of Karl the Magnus so I think Charlemagne is just a combination of the French translation Charl le magne but I could be wrong.
During Charles' time, the name was both Karl in Early Old French (with declensions, so Karlus/Karlo/Karle) and the Germanic speeches from Eastern Austrasia as attested by the Oath of Strasbourg. Charlemagne is indeed a contraction of the nickname with the name, he's also Charles the First in French succession lists (the notion that the Franks and the French, or that the Frankish Kingdoms and France, are two different things is a very modern one)
The name "Karl" or "Charles" is related to the Anglo-Saxon word "ceorl" which just meant "an ordinary man" -the English word "churlish" derives from this word.
Yes -reminds me of Alexander the great and his mother olympias -she probably hired someone to kill king Phillip the Second as Alexander would lose his rights to succeed if phillip lived.They both pretended to be deeply shocked by the death but they put on an act.Pausanias the killer was killed almost immediately so he wouldn't talk and divulge information.
Fun facts about Charlemagne, Martel and Portuguese: 1) Hammer in portuguese is still "martelo". 2) Magne is "magno", wich is a somewhat archaic term but still in use in some situations.
Don’t cheese out. It was still a pretty essential period in terms of Roman cultural collapse and the shoring up of post-Roman culture and Christianity in the west. history has no vacuums!
Why didn't (apparently) anything happen in the 7th century? There are the Merowingian conquests to the east and south in the 6th century; and then there are the Karolingian conquests to northern and south-eastern Germania and also southern "France" (plus fighting off the Moorish invasion in the south, in the 8th and early 9th century. But no action in the 7th?
You mean Doornik probably or Dornick in English, Dor comes from "Tree". in Low Franconian..why use the French town names, they spoke old Dutch, or old low Franconian, very similar to old English.. I live in Salland on the river IJssel, now Low-Saxon land... Salland, hence salien..
Well Christianity back then seemed a decentralized religion. It was Justinian in the 6th century who centralized, it seems to me by making them Orthodox. I guess it could be called “catholic” in the sense of a “universal” Christianity.
I've heard on Ryan Reeves' church history podcsdt that Clovis converted to 'Catholicism' specifically because his wife repeatedly tried to nag him to her faith. Perhaps this came after the battle he fought, before which he prayed to God. :-)
Religion was a form of geopolitical strategy back then, and to some extent still is today. Bedside "at death's door" conversion stories are fairy tales for the dumb masses.
I speculate that those nicknames were given by the history-makers in the Frankish bureaucracy as rewards for being complacent puppets. As Roman history shows, rulers who asserted power at the detriment of the aristocracy tend to get slandered by historians (such as Caligula) where the more docile rulers don't.
Btw....the Deep Space Nine Odo jokes were fucking great hahahaha. "He put aside his prejudice against solids long enough to defeat the muslims" hahahahaha.
I recently found out my ancestors are the Frank, Douglas and Macbean families... mahalo for sharing with more I been looking for more about who they were...aloha
I always mix up Netherlands with Netherworld. 🤔 I'd never been in either. It's really not like Disneyland versus Disney World. I'd like to visit Netherlands and visit France again! 😃
So these gothic tribes are the kodeshim of the book of Daniel, they are described in Daniel as taking on the fourth beast of iron which is rome. The gothic tribes are mentioned as conquering all the Roman lands as they did.
I've read the holy blood and the holy grail a few times. I like you don't agree with the authors conclusions. But to say it was based on no evidence whatsoever is misleading. Their historical narrative is highly detailed and factual, places, people, etc
Please do a video about the brutal and bloody invasion of Charlemagne to northern Germany. Imo that is a very much overlooked fact of European history. The city of Aachen even hands out a "peace prize" in the honour of Charlemagne every year, which totally denies the ways of conquest of Charlemagne.
@@stulora3172 Surprisingly enough I am not sarcastic, Saxons were a big problem for the Franks due to their raids so conquering and Christianizing them was a good choice. It also laid the foundation for the creation of modern day Germany, as later Otto the Great (a Christian Saxon) would create Holy Roman Empire based in Germany and on German culture.
@@aleksandersokal5279 I don't know.... Invading another people's territory and destroying culture and killing the population is never the right thing to do, in my opinion. And even from a standpoint of hundreds of years later, I don't see how the christian religion was better, or more peaceful than the germanic beliefs. I guess it comes down to one of those "what if" questions.... But I think it is safe to say that the phrase "Charlemagne united Europe" somehow misses the reality of what happened between 772 and 804 in the regions east of the Rhine.
@@stulora3172 "Peaceful Germanic beliefs"? Are you serious, human sacrifice and all that stuff is peaceful? Not only this it was also backwards, Christianity brought social stability and learning in contrast, Charlemagne preserved ancient texts and promote learning and thanks to him Europe is what it is today.
Their Germanic brothers hated them, Gallo Romans hated them, Bretons and Basques fought against them, only the Roman church liked them and used them to further their aims.
so you mentioned how this is pre-fuedal, but you also use the term "duke" how was this unlike fuedalism? How were things run? Was it similar to Rome's slave economy? Was it a cheifdom? What does cheifdom even mean? Was it some early absolutist?
@Arpad Jones Laughing is no option. Research is better! Do your homework and research instead of becoming provokative. And in case if you continue provoking me, then my option will be to block you.
Sounds to me like the Frankish "Catholics" weren't all that in line with Rome. Delaying Baptism and practicing Polygamy were not start practice in Cachledonian Christianity.
transylvanian He defended Europeans - the most important to defend. The Romans betrayed their own with the citizen-laws of 212 AD. Rome could not stand up to a few 'barbarians', hence was not worth defending. New Europen blood from the north had to come in to bring new life to the southern half of Europe. The Franks defended the Indo-European peoples on the European peninsula in the west, while the Bavarians and Slavs would perform their duty in southeastern Europe. From the south came the Semites and Turks - either plundering their way through, even destroying whole cities in Iberia, with the Barbary pirates enslaving and leaving the Spanish coast vacant. After all, why did the scholars from Constantinople flee when the muslims came? Were the muslims not kind and civil, as you claim? Or did they proselytise by the sword? And that golden age you believe in was short and added very little. Perhaps too much cultural marxism has sipped through to you? Might want to drop that left-wing bias, before our community pays the ultimate price for our altruism and Gutmensch-behaviour. The ongoing conquest of western Europe by the muslims is spelling disaster; slums and no go areas are popping up in all the big cities - poverty and crime are rampant. Yet we are forced celebrate diversity and other races. You look at history through a religious lens, either "Christian" or "Muslim" - yet both are a form of oriental mysticism. Religion - as with the rest of culture - is only the expression of a people's genes. Such a view would be labbeled 'racist', even though it explains the world to a 'T'. As a Germanic I can say with ease that when Rome fell in the south, it was predominantly Germanic martiality that kept both the Semitic ideas, as well as the Semites and Turks, at bay. That is, unless you want to live in a fully semitised Europe. As a Transylvanian you should know who helped you out defending those mountain passes, bringing new life to the region. You can view history all you like, but next time do some research into 'Medieval' history.
"Europeans - the most important to defend." I laughed at this so fuckin' hard, mate. Don't let everyone see your hand like that, right when people might've been ready to take you seriously. lmao +transylvanian - You've the patients of a saint, my friend. Keep fighting the good fight.
The failed Arab Sieges of Constantinople did far more to defend Europe against Arab conquest than the Battle of Tours, which was simply an Umayyad Raid. And the "Byzantines" actually had a civilization, unlike the Germanic kingdoms of the west which at best attempted to emulate Latin culture.
@@ofallmyintention9496 Original name? The original name was probably a couple of clicks and grunts. As far as I know, the land is called Burgundy and the people Burgundians. And I don’t really care, but if the intent is to be informative, in the context of this subject matter it’s Burgundy.
@@ofallmyintention9496 burgundia isn't a newer adaption, it doesn't exist whatsoever lol. burgundy is convention in anglophone and la bourgogne francophone
FRANKS Could “pax franca-romana” have been established throughout the entire space of the Roman Empire and its sphere of influence if General Arbogast, a valiant Frank, had managed to defeat the emperor Theodosius the Great in 394? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-MLn_zwm3YXM.html