Comments by "" (@sebe2255) on "UsefulCharts" channel.

  1. They enforced male only succession specifically to avoid having an English king inhereting France though.
    2
  2. It wasn’t, they officially left the HRE in 1648, but functionally they had left when their independence war started
    2
  3.  @OogaBooga-tq7jc  Maybe, but they aren’t lords of those towns if that is the case. And that is like what, 3 places?
    2
  4.  @Ramen.4.life0  mostly post 1066, at least in my experience
    2
  5.  @Edmonton-of2ec  No the law abolished titles, they just let them keep the larp
    2
  6.  @Edmonton-of2ec  Sure it is their last name, but it is still larp. Larping as nobles they aren’t anymore. Because it isn’t just a last name they held for 100s of years. Their last name was never Prinz von Preussen lmao
    2
  7.  @thibautnarme6402 Except those kings did change their name from Franks to France. The French identity started to come into existence in the north of West Francia. On top of that the French state is directly descended from West Francia, and not any Merovingian kingdom (they had many)
    2
  8. Wales is beautiful, but in terms of dynastic relevance, it isn’t really important
    2
  9. Also the south (Flemish and Brabtine cities) were more so centers of the reformation than the North, and many people from cities like Antwerp fled North
    2
  10. And the Batavii have very little to do with the Dutch people to begin with
    2
  11.  @ruyfernandez  But you do actually have influence, and I fail to see how going from indirect influence to no influence is a good thing when what you seem to want is more influence. Weird argument
    2
  12.  @rwolfheart6580  This whole process favors men tbf. It is also why some people keep insisting that Charles is actually not a Winsdor
    2
  13. Lothar was a non German king for the simple reason that neither a German identity nor a German kingdom existed at this point. He was a Frankish king and emperor though, and directly ruled Middle Frankia, which would later be split between Burgundy, Lotharingia and Italy (with Italy retaining the Imperial title) on his death
    2
  14.  @dukeofwestphalia  No he absolutely didn’t. Lothar has almost nothing to do with Germany or German identity. German identity only started developing after the Karolingian kings lost power in East Frankia. This statted happening around the very early 11th century, so well after Lothar lived. As a side note, the region of Franken probably got its name the same way France did, through conquest. The Frankish Empire only integrated the region between in the 6th century, and it wasn’t where their power center was nor where the Franks lived. The Franks lived in what is now Flanders, Brabant and parts of Northern France (the original Merovingian region) and in what is now Limburg (in Belgium and the Netherlands) and in NRW primarily centered around cologne. Dutch itself is directly descended from various old Frankish dialects. And yet neither Charlemagne nor Lothar were Dutch, or German or French, in any sense. He was Germanic yes, and Frankish, and as all Karolingian kings he would his heritage would have been closely tied to the Region around Maastrich-Liege-Aachen, but calling him a German or Dutch king is anachronistic. Representing him as emperor of Middle Francia (which was dissolved and isn’t the direct predecessor to Germany anyway) is the only correct way
    2
  15. He shouldn’t be named clovis at all, that wasn’t his name. His actual name was probably Hlodowig
    1
  16. The nickname charles the fat was not contemporary. It comes from the 12th century
    1
  17.  @Arjonko  Willem-Alexander is incredibly bad at pr, but these poll numbers mean nothing. They will probably go up again, and there is absolutely no political nor popular desire to get rid of those leeches
    1
  18.  @AviationAddict69  Yeah sure?
    1
  19.  @pedanticradiator  Yes that is what I said
    1
  20.  @EuIenspiegel  But no one cares about the houses and where some ancestor 1000 years ago who gave it the name came from. That doesn’t make you German, or not And you can make the argument that people like Victoria were culturally German. Hell King George I actually was German. But Queen Elizabeth and King Charles are definitely not German, regardless of their paternal ancestor’s name
    1
  21. >not having outdated rules >parliament approved royal marriages 🤡
    1
  22.  @apveening  I recommend you read again what I said. Non-religious is not a religious group.
    1
  23. Istanbul alone has a bigger population than all of Greece lmao They aint gettin nothing back
    1
  24.  @gijsv8419  We should just also have labor day, fucking right wing governments
    1
  25. The constitution that limits the power of the king was created after the establishment of the monarchy though. It was taken on in 1848 to stave off the threat of revolution. But King William I had much more power than his son did
    1
  26.  @EintagsFliegenTV  you ok?
    1
  27.  @EintagsFliegenTV  I think so
    1
  28.  @DutchSimmer1  The Low Countries were just as much a part of the HRE as the rest of them, he just spent most of his time there, as he was also raised there.
    1
  29.  @Vaelor.B  For Louis you are talking the 9th century, but not for every emperor obviously. I didn’t dispute that he wasn’t king of Germany, he wasn’t. But there are contemporary sources starting in the 10th century that refer to some of them as German kings (be that as Teutonic or Tuisch) or to a broader German (Tuische or Teutonic again) realm. I wasn’t talking about anything referencing Germania as yes, those are different concepts So yes it was actually directly referred to as a German realm in multiple contemporary sources and documents. Hence why I said it definitely at least existed as a cultural concept.
    1
  30. The Turks didn’t seize all of Anatolia and certainly not Istanbul in 1071, go back to your palace Erdogan
    1
  31.  @lucabarbanti8211  Not like it matters
    1
  32.  @ruyfernandez They don’t, no one has that
    1
  33.  @aureltoniniimperatorecomun4029  Even the origins of the Robertians are unsure. You say it yourself “probably” Eariest they can prove is late 9th century. Anything else is speculation and unable to be proven
    1
  34.  @KarabauPlay  So not the HRE. There isn’t even a direct continuity between him and Otto
    1
  35.  @KarabauPlay  True, but it is a bit of a simplification
    1
  36. The Merovingian dynasty was of Salian Frankish origin, wh came from what is now Flanders and parts of Wallonia (that were still Germanic by this point). And it is a complete misconception to believe that the Franks all just moved and assimilated into the Gaulic population. This can be easily shown by the Karolingian dynasty still being a primarily Germanic dynasty hundreds of years after the Merovingian invasion of Soissons.
    1
  37.  @kes1709  Purple on this chaty clearlt represents Germanic. It includes the Franks, Dutch, Germans (broadly) and even the Visegoths for example
    1
  38. Dutch, Luxemburgish and various German dialects along the lower Rhine. Dutch is the most relevant language descended from the Franks though, and the Low Countries are the only region where the Franks formed a majority and the dominant force in the creation of modern identities and peoples. But Charlemagne probably spoke the ancestor to modern day Limburgish, which also extends into Germany
    1
  39. More so stopped by the HRE helped by the kingdom of Poland.
    1
  40.  @alekm5646  Because Poles didn’t eveb make up a majority of the relief army, most were troops from the Empire. And they weren’t even the first in the charge
    1
  41.  @kaloarepo288 They aren’t really words though, they are names.
    1
  42.  @kaloarepo288  Eh names aren’t really the same as words that are used in a language. Or at least they don’t really tell you much about the development of a language
    1
  43. Clovis being labeled as the first king of France is pure French nationalist anachronism, with a dash of Catholic propaganda thrown in. The point when French identity as such starts is blurry, but it certainly wasn’t as early as Clovis and it was definitely post Charlemagne
    1
  44.  @antonius3745  Just because they weren’t a kingdom doesn’t mean they were in the HRE, they weren’t. And the HRE had a Kingdom as a constituent member, Bohemia. So being a kingdom didn’t even mean you can’t be in the HRE They weren’t an autonomous part of the HRE, they weren’t in it. They paid no homage to the Emperor and had no obligations to an Emperor either. They just had nothing to do with it, and the Netherlands existed for centuries before the HRE was dissolved. In 1815 the southern Low Countries were added though, as they had remained part of the HRE
    1
  45.  @antonius3745  Lmao Are these documents in the room with us right now?
    1
  46.  @reineh3477  How does connecting their ruling class to a different region matter that much? It is not like the Rus were majority Scandinavian, or that the Normans were majority Norwegian
    1
  47. Given that the only mention of him comes from one source written centuries later it is basically speculation
    1
  48. Bias in favor of what? A period we actually have sources for?
    1
  49.  @katherinegilks3880  Yeah it is better, because then they can’t larp as fake princess anymore Habsburg-Lotharingen is fine as a lastname and it reflects the history of the family well enough. It just doesn’t make them seem like weird pretentious people clinging onto dead titles
    1
  50. Sure but it by the point they renamed the city Istanbul had also been in use for centuries
    1