IRL? I prefer the idea of a monarchy with constitutional powers and restrictions but I also like what's been done with the British monarchy in it's made a cultural uniter that surpasses national identities and politics. In writing? I like elective monarchies. Partly due to the constant jockying for power, fears of one king solidifying too much power in their family, the potential for king-makers, and (this was especially a German thing) "anti-kings"
Glad you talked about the backers behind Monarchy! In the later Renaissance, many Monarchies tried to instate "Absolutism" by reducing the power of the Nobility and Clergy. In theory, this meant the King held more power, but all it did was weaken the very foundation that their own power was built on, and allowed Merchants to take more power, eventually leading to Capitalism and the rise of modern Republican states.
Love your videos! This is another great one; you raise so many interesting aspects that it just inspires thought and creativity - it doesn't even matter if it's a topic I actually write about at the moment I'm watching. It's like: 'Hm, maybe back to worldbuilding and change this or that remote thing that might never be adressed in the story' - simply because it's a lot of fun :D Other topics are pretty central and relevant in most settings. This is one of those. About the HRE not being holy, Roman and/or an empire: I think that's the English perspective - or is it an international thing? Because the thought doesn't really work out from a German perspective. 'Holy' is a subjective attribute to us, something can be holy to one and unholy to another (of course the HRE meant to be THE state recognized by God so in that sense, granted, maybe it wasn't that holy just as the US might not be that 'chosen' by God... at least nobody bothered to ask Him). The other two points I don't get. The HRE was a successor state to the Roman state. As such, it called itself '(Holy) Roman Empire'. Why was it not Roman? It even encompassed the city of Rome (which Byzantium, the 'Rome of the East' didn't) and a number of powerful and important Italian states. A good portion of the Empire was traditional Roman lands - not just in Italy, but in France and Germany too. The term 'empire' is just a very weird one to me and doesn't really have a corresponding word in German. We have the Roman word Imperium, which would mean 'command', if I'm not mistaken, and 'Reich' (which is the term used in 'Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation' - Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation). 'Reich' just means 'realm'. All these conditions that must be met for an Englishmen to call a country an empire are pretty foreign to us. Sorry for the long, uncalled for excursion :P
It's more me gently poking fun at our giant southern neighbours :) (I'm Finnish) and every European country that has at some point claimed to be the successor of Rome. Even the Russian Empire claimed that mantle. Of course, Rome did dominate the continent so most countries were certainly influenced by it. In a way, all those successor state claims are true. But it's not going to stop me teasing, since we can never make that claim (the Romans took one look at our winters noped out of conquering Finland. No olive trees, no wine? You gotta be kidding me...). Doesn't Kaiser mean Emperor in German? It's like Tsar in Russian isn't it? Derived from Ceasar's name?
@@JustInTimeWorlds Yes, Kaiser is derived from Caesar. Our kings simply had the pope pronounce them Caesar as a way to show the world that we are the 'only real' successor to Rome and thus the Kaiser stands above the other petty kings and dukes in rank. The word then over the time became part of the German language. I guess it is much the same for the Tsars of Russia. Yeah, Germany wasn't really what the Romans hoped for too (and the part that they managed to hold on to for a longer while is the mildest one, in regards to the weather). It's a far cry from Finland I guess :D but for the Romans it was a logistical challange. Which they overcame, in true Roman fashion by building bridges and roads everywhere and regularily importing vital supplies such as olive oil from as far as Spain to the border at the Rhine. It's pretty fascinating what they were willing and able to do.
When you mention special interest groups it makes me think of a steampunk type setting where all the king cares about is keeping the mage/engineering guild happy
In Tergaenae I hahve several sorts of monarchies. I have the inherited monarch (many kingdoms and queendoms all over the world), a combination of skilled + elective (the King of the Dragon Companions) and the Elective monarch (only a few kingdoms). I find it always interesting to have a variety of monarchies in a world 😃
I like the idea of a king that pretends to be elected but he's actually a tyrant his father was King his grandfather was also King but for some reason the electors decide not to put his son in the throne and that's the source of conflict
My Elven Kingdom is a succession based Monarchy, but the eldest prince is trying to abdicate. Before he flees the castle, Prince Kalamon steals an amulet which contains all the crystals needed to perform the different types of magic (evocation, abjuration, necrotic, etc.) These amulets are priceless tokens bestowed by the King to only the most studied, talented, & elite members of Elven society.
@@JustInTimeWorlds His parents are strict, religious zealots that use barbaric and magical means of "conversion therapy" to try to mold him into the man/King they want him to be. He's my idea of a stereotypical pansexual & polyamorous Bard, mashed with Princess Jasmine from Aladdin, but with a really dark twist. He's terrified of the responsibility of the throne/governing, and refuses to conform to the heteronormative lifestyle his parents expect of him.
Thanks again for another informative video. Some thoughts (based on memory, could be inaccurate): While not strictly a monarchy, the Medici were a de facto monarchy. The Borgias tried to be but were less successful. There were weird interactions with the papal power, with members of the Medici and Borgias sometimes being pope. Venice had a system where only members of registered noble families could be elected Doge. Hans Hermann Hoppe (Democracy the God that Died) argued that monarchies are better than democracies because they encourage long term thinking and sustainment of the country. Whereas democracy encourages short term thinking and a loot-the-treasury-while-we-can in the temporary elected leader. The Magna Carta was important not so much for its details but that it established that there were limits to a king's power. It came about because the king was broke from wars and had to go begging the nobles for money. So they said, okay, but sign the Magna Carta. The feudal system was based on the king allowing nobles to hold land in exchange for the nobles providing knights and other fighting men for a few weeks each year. Basically, it helps to read history. Lots of strange variations and details to monarchy.
I'd definitely count the Medici as a monarchy with regards the papacy. I considered it as a talking point, but in the end, decided to go with the fiction example based on the brehon system of the celts as being something people might not have heard of :) I'm glad you enjoyed the video!
What kind of succession model do you like best for monarchies?
IRL? I prefer the idea of a monarchy with constitutional powers and restrictions but I also like what's been done with the British monarchy in it's made a cultural uniter that surpasses national identities and politics.
In writing? I like elective monarchies. Partly due to the constant jockying for power, fears of one king solidifying too much power in their family, the potential for king-makers, and (this was especially a German thing) "anti-kings"
Glad you talked about the backers behind Monarchy! In the later Renaissance, many Monarchies tried to instate "Absolutism" by reducing the power of the Nobility and Clergy. In theory, this meant the King held more power, but all it did was weaken the very foundation that their own power was built on, and allowed Merchants to take more power, eventually leading to Capitalism and the rise of modern Republican states.
No man is an island 😅
I ran out of info cards, so all referenced videos are in the description. Did you like this iceberg format? Should I make more of these?
There are various massive topics, so iceberg videos like this are inevitable, I think.
Go for it! I, for one, would gladly give them a watch.
Love your videos! This is another great one; you raise so many interesting aspects that it just inspires thought and creativity - it doesn't even matter if it's a topic I actually write about at the moment I'm watching. It's like: 'Hm, maybe back to worldbuilding and change this or that remote thing that might never be adressed in the story' - simply because it's a lot of fun :D Other topics are pretty central and relevant in most settings. This is one of those.
About the HRE not being holy, Roman and/or an empire:
I think that's the English perspective - or is it an international thing? Because the thought doesn't really work out from a German perspective. 'Holy' is a subjective attribute to us, something can be holy to one and unholy to another (of course the HRE meant to be THE state recognized by God so in that sense, granted, maybe it wasn't that holy just as the US might not be that 'chosen' by God... at least nobody bothered to ask Him).
The other two points I don't get. The HRE was a successor state to the Roman state. As such, it called itself '(Holy) Roman Empire'. Why was it not Roman? It even encompassed the city of Rome (which Byzantium, the 'Rome of the East' didn't) and a number of powerful and important Italian states. A good portion of the Empire was traditional Roman lands - not just in Italy, but in France and Germany too.
The term 'empire' is just a very weird one to me and doesn't really have a corresponding word in German. We have the Roman word Imperium, which would mean 'command', if I'm not mistaken, and 'Reich' (which is the term used in 'Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation' - Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation). 'Reich' just means 'realm'. All these conditions that must be met for an Englishmen to call a country an empire are pretty foreign to us.
Sorry for the long, uncalled for excursion :P
It's more me gently poking fun at our giant southern neighbours :) (I'm Finnish) and every European country that has at some point claimed to be the successor of Rome. Even the Russian Empire claimed that mantle.
Of course, Rome did dominate the continent so most countries were certainly influenced by it. In a way, all those successor state claims are true. But it's not going to stop me teasing, since we can never make that claim (the Romans took one look at our winters noped out of conquering Finland. No olive trees, no wine? You gotta be kidding me...).
Doesn't Kaiser mean Emperor in German? It's like Tsar in Russian isn't it? Derived from Ceasar's name?
@@JustInTimeWorlds Yes, Kaiser is derived from Caesar. Our kings simply had the pope pronounce them Caesar as a way to show the world that we are the 'only real' successor to Rome and thus the Kaiser stands above the other petty kings and dukes in rank. The word then over the time became part of the German language. I guess it is much the same for the Tsars of Russia.
Yeah, Germany wasn't really what the Romans hoped for too (and the part that they managed to hold on to for a longer while is the mildest one, in regards to the weather). It's a far cry from Finland I guess :D but for the Romans it was a logistical challange. Which they overcame, in true Roman fashion by building bridges and roads everywhere and regularily importing vital supplies such as olive oil from as far as Spain to the border at the Rhine. It's pretty fascinating what they were willing and able to do.
@@abcdef-cs1jj I really enjoy roman history. I'm more familiar and enjoy the republic more than the empire, but I do love them both.
When you mention special interest groups it makes me think of a steampunk type setting where all the king cares about is keeping the mage/engineering guild happy
Could also work in science fantasy like war hammer 40k. Keeping the machine cult happy for example 😉
In Tergaenae I hahve several sorts of monarchies. I have the inherited monarch (many kingdoms and queendoms all over the world), a combination of skilled + elective (the King of the Dragon Companions) and the Elective monarch (only a few kingdoms). I find it always interesting to have a variety of monarchies in a world 😃
Yeah, like with governments in general, it's more fun when there are different styles of governance and monarchy across the world :D
I like the idea of a king that pretends to be elected but he's actually a tyrant his father was King his grandfather was also King but for some reason the electors decide not to put his son in the throne and that's the source of conflict
My Elven Kingdom is a succession based Monarchy, but the eldest prince is trying to abdicate. Before he flees the castle, Prince Kalamon steals an amulet which contains all the crystals needed to perform the different types of magic (evocation, abjuration, necrotic, etc.) These amulets are priceless tokens bestowed by the King to only the most studied, talented, & elite members of Elven society.
Why is he trying to abdicate?
@@JustInTimeWorlds His parents are strict, religious zealots that use barbaric and magical means of "conversion therapy" to try to mold him into the man/King they want him to be. He's my idea of a stereotypical pansexual & polyamorous Bard, mashed with Princess Jasmine from Aladdin, but with a really dark twist. He's terrified of the responsibility of the throne/governing, and refuses to conform to the heteronormative lifestyle his parents expect of him.
Thanks again for another informative video. Some thoughts (based on memory, could be inaccurate):
While not strictly a monarchy, the Medici were a de facto monarchy. The Borgias tried to be but were less successful. There were weird interactions with the papal power, with members of the Medici and Borgias sometimes being pope.
Venice had a system where only members of registered noble families could be elected Doge.
Hans Hermann Hoppe (Democracy the God that Died) argued that monarchies are better than democracies because they encourage long term thinking and sustainment of the country. Whereas democracy encourages short term thinking and a loot-the-treasury-while-we-can in the temporary elected leader.
The Magna Carta was important not so much for its details but that it established that there were limits to a king's power. It came about because the king was broke from wars and had to go begging the nobles for money. So they said, okay, but sign the Magna Carta.
The feudal system was based on the king allowing nobles to hold land in exchange for the nobles providing knights and other fighting men for a few weeks each year.
Basically, it helps to read history. Lots of strange variations and details to monarchy.
I'd definitely count the Medici as a monarchy with regards the papacy. I considered it as a talking point, but in the end, decided to go with the fiction example based on the brehon system of the celts as being something people might not have heard of :)
I'm glad you enjoyed the video!
Good video, i would also like to see you discuss parliamentary monarchies
Heh. Very topical in the real world right now. I might delve a little deeper into that aspect.