This is a sorely needed video. The HRE is one of the most criminally misunderstood and complex political entities in history and it’s imperial conception is consistently mischaracterized even by credible historians much less amateurs who read one quip by Voltaire and discard a thousand years of labyrinthine political complexity with a phrase. Arguably under some emperors such as the brilliant Frederick II Hohenstaufen, all of Europe was the ‘Empire’ and this speaks volumes to its medieval notion, as understood by contemporaries.
Frederick der Große invited Voltaire to come live at Sans Souci. Soon thereafter Voltaire was asked to leave the Palace. Great Authors should be read NOT MET.
I actually don’t think the crusades are something to be celebrated. I’m more interested in our country forming a relationship with Muslim countries as we have a lot more in common than people believe. I want Muslim countries to be places where Muslims want to live.
You speak so beautifully. I envy your manners and way of conveying your ideas. As a fan of history, I would be blessed to capture even a fraction of the emphasis you convey, EFFORTLESSLY.
I remember Terilien’s similar video on the topic. I always found it humorous that the people who regurgitated the phrase could not define the term Empire beyond a nation that has an Emperor.
As long as you are alive and healthy that is all that matters to your dutiful subscribers. A video every now and again is worth it for the gold that comes from the guests and your mouth.
HRE was an extension of the roman empire, lead by the pope, the new emperor, who lorded over the kingdoms of europe. it was in fact holy, roman and an empire.
When you mentioned Otto vetoing Papal Elections my mind wandered immediately to 1903 and I was wondering whether it truly was a continuation. Thank You for confirming it. I cannot believe that happened Edit: "almost" a century later too.
Is there any reason to believe Irene was not sincerely seeking unity and had some sort of intention to subvert Rome? That marriage was a brilliant proposal and it seems like the ultimate tragedy that it was rejected. Why would they throw away the opportunity to heal the budding schism and form a properly united Christian empire? Imagine what horrors the world might’ve been spared if they had a cooperative marriage.
Hi! Would you care to link some sources/books? Thanks! I really liked hearing about the Roman Empire, east and west, and the late antique/early medieval stuff.
@@jonathanadams8835 Not possible. “Emperor” or “Imperator” at this point in history ONLY referred to the Roman Empire, as this was the title of their head of state. The term “empire” only referred to the Romans. It didn’t have the same meaning as it does today.
Maybe Charlemagne’s issue was that the Pope did not specify that whether Charlemagne was only Imperator in the West or if he was also responsible for Eastern Rome.
Listening to this with great delight. A small correction: the Filioque controversy concerns not the nature of Christ, but the order of eternal procession of the Third Person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit. The Western Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed states the belief in the "Spiritum Sanctum [...] qui ex Patri FILIOQUE procedit" (Holy Spirit [...] Who proceeds from the Father AND THE SON".
AM are you familiar with Otto III’s idea of a Imperial Renovation (renovatio imperii Romanorum)? I heard it was supposed to be akin to a federation with Kingdoms like Poland & Hungary.
Germans doing historical revisionism is like a hobby for them at this point. They do it with every bloody period and every bloody thing possible, sometimes due to them having master propagandists and educators on their side, with an agenda, but sometimes just out of pretention or supreme insecurity about their own origins and history. And the HRE is still a product of that enterprize. The point was never to autistically analyze and decontextualize the words "Holy. Roman. Empire.", and lawyer your way into justifying them (whilst even the results of that are debatable). The point, in fact, is to disabuse anyone of the pretentious notion that such a german state had any meaningful relationship or cause whatsoever to that empire of Augustus, Aurelian, Trajan, etc. That empire, popularly known as the Roman Empire. The one from which we attribute the legacy of Rome, the legal, philosophical and artistic legacy that has no meaningful commonality with the political legacy strictly of the germanic people. The Roman Empire was, in fact, some would argue, still alive during the time of the HRE, in Constantinople. Even so, the forementioned "revisionism", in this case, could be said to have started with the HRE itself: with that german polity was born the claim that what lied at Constantinople was not Rome, but the "kingdom of the greeks". Theres an obvious reason as to why things like the Corpus Iuris Civilis came from Byzantium, and not the HRE. Constantinople had a legitimate claim and the cultural descendancy that the germans did not. Another example of this is neoclassical art and literature, and the renaissance itself: a phenomenon more closely related or at least correlated to the fall of Byzantium and the exodus it created (which in turn reinvigorated classical antiquity - and Rome - in the western european mind), rather than the creation or continuation of the HRE. And a similar criticism can be cast onto the Turkish Sultan or the Russian Tzar, and many other pretenders. The western roman empire falling doesnt give you the right to create your own larp of it. The pope had no right, no authority, to proclaim Charlemagne as the emperor of the romans, and you saying he did requires the same ammount of legalistic juggling as to, allegorically speaking, say that the USA 14th Amendment protects abortion (funny how some people still say it does). In the same manner, Napoleon's France or nowadays USA could not seriously claim to be Rome, despite their economic and military dominance of the western world. The mental gymnastics you have to do, to creatively interpret the HRE as a special continuation of Rome (whilst simultaneously excluding all other equally dubious claims of other peoples, such as the french or the turks, amongst many others), is not convincing, and reeks of favoritism. In fact, I dont even seriously believe that people who say it believe the HRE was Rome or a meaningful continuation of it. People who subscribe to that idea believe in the same thing that motivated the creation of the name "HRE" in the first place: the prestige, the authority that the name brings/feigns, but not in the authenticity of it. And as you can tell I'm a bit salty. "
Germanics took over Rome. Founded not only HRE but also England, France, and Spain. From which the globe was conquered. On a scale making the Roman look puny. The HRE from its very core Germnaic federalist conception, never made this leap, but still was at the core of the post Roman world. A core not really consisting of imperialism, eastern europe aside, but rather the Volksgeist which brought forward feudalism instead of slave labor, federalism, etc. Even the italian renaissance statelets come from this. It was indeed the core of western civilization and all its empires, but in a rather default federalist northmen manner...a whole new way of empire, away from magi mid east med ways of empire.
@@SuperMrFriendly Claiming the achievements of people of incredibly diverse ethnic, cultural and religious backgrounds hundreads of years in the future to be the product of the post-roman german tribes is a high level of mental gymnastics. Might as well give that merit to the Africans since humanity probably originated from there. But I agree with the person we're responding to: It's useless lawyering aimed at what basically was an erudite shitposter of the 18th century whom most people know just as "that one french enlightened guy"
@@giuseppefazio9313 Im not saying they looked in to the future. Im saying the basis of this post roman world was germanic. and as such its structures where more germanic. structures that proved over time to have its very own merits. also regarding this whole "empire wank festival" it had its own ultra succesful merits. but at the same time these germanics wouldnt have survived without roman style centralism i.e the catholic church. its pools of intellectualism, kingship, empire building etc. hence why it was a continuation of the roman empire in many respects. hence the roman part in the title.
@@SuperMrFriendly The roman part of the title was just a matter of prestige. Much like the Turks claimed to be "The Sultanate of Rome" and later the Russians did the same. It had a reason to be there at the start when it was named but by the time Voltaire came around, it was way past its prime. Same thing for the Holy part. His objection in his time was justified. As for my original objection, my point still stands. It was not the germanization of the post-roman western europe that decreed the success of european ways in the future. It was not the establishment of a Vandal kingdom, nor a Visigoth one, in the Iberian Peninsula that established the future creation of Spain. The key to the success of the west was the giving away of such decentralized policies, the birth of nationalism, proper geopolitical thought and the encouragement of bourgeois entrepreneurship that gave the west the edge over the east. Saying all of this was thanks to the Franks and their Ostrogoths buddies is literally stealing history away from the people who actually achieved such feats and it is just a gross anglo-saxon nationalistic attempt at distorting history.
@@just_addd_water_to_your_ramen but Augustus is not a Greek. The succession of "Byzantine" Emperors trace directly back to Augustus. And even if the "Byzantine" Emperors were Greeks, they are Roman citizens and hence Roman. Please, stop coping
Here is my reply to that comment you left: Patricius von Kempen, I know it means the perpetrator (referring to the allied bombing). That's kind of of the point. Stop repeating the lie that this channel is anti-German or I will ban you. P.S. Unless this comment was a joke you meant to say: "You ('ve) committed a grave grammatical atrocity (I would say error) in its (the) title, I might add.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
If you enjoyed this video, please like and leave a comment. It helps the channel a lot. Many thanks.
This is a sorely needed video. The HRE is one of the most criminally misunderstood and complex political entities in history and it’s imperial conception is consistently mischaracterized even by credible historians much less amateurs who read one quip by Voltaire and discard a thousand years of labyrinthine political complexity with a phrase. Arguably under some emperors such as the brilliant Frederick II Hohenstaufen, all of Europe was the ‘Empire’ and this speaks volumes to its medieval notion, as understood by contemporaries.
Finally! “We are the sons of the crusaders and we shall not bow before the sons of Voltaire”
Frederick der Große invited Voltaire to come live at Sans Souci. Soon thereafter Voltaire was asked to leave the Palace. Great Authors should be read NOT MET.
But crusaders are literally losers and criminals lmao
Put that on a t-shirt NOW
I actually don’t think the crusades are something to be celebrated. I’m more interested in our country forming a relationship with Muslim countries as we have a lot more in common than people believe. I want Muslim countries to be places where Muslims want to live.
@@martgatz75The crusades are not only events to be celebrated, but also the Islamic heresy is a plague to be prevented.
Irene and Charlemagne joining their realms is one of the fun alternative history scenarios.
This channel is the only one I am a channel member for, it is simply a tier of its own.
You speak so beautifully. I envy your manners and way of conveying your ideas. As a fan of history, I would be blessed to capture even a fraction of the emphasis you convey, EFFORTLESSLY.
I remember Terilien’s similar video on the topic. I always found it humorous that the people who regurgitated the phrase could not define the term Empire beyond a nation that has an Emperor.
You've got to beat the Voltaire out of people repeatedly, with verve and vigor.
More conviction!!!
As long as you are alive and healthy that is all that matters to your dutiful subscribers. A video every now and again is worth it for the gold that comes from the guests and your mouth.
Thanks for the angelic fineness of this treatment.
I love these little surprises, cheers AM. Hope all is well with you.
Every Friday you say? Best news I've heard all week!
Summon the elector counts!!!
Very important historical topic
Need much more AM content in my life.
As much as possible, please. Thanks, cheers & God Bless!
Finally something to look forward to on yt.See you Friday.
Best history podcast on internet, Bravo 👏
Excellent video
This was excellent- thank you.
Masterclass, welcome back
Wonderful talk on the HRE, AM!
HRE was an extension of the roman empire, lead by the pope, the new emperor, who lorded over the kingdoms of europe. it was in fact holy, roman and an empire.
The zased Holy Roman Empire understander
YES. I have been listening to the audiobook Heart of Europe.
When you mentioned Otto vetoing Papal Elections my mind wandered immediately to 1903 and I was wondering whether it truly was a continuation. Thank You for confirming it. I cannot believe that happened Edit: "almost" a century later too.
Excellent lecture AM, cheers.
Brilliant video AM 👍🏻
Is there any reason to believe Irene was not sincerely seeking unity and had some sort of intention to subvert Rome? That marriage was a brilliant proposal and it seems like the ultimate tragedy that it was rejected. Why would they throw away the opportunity to heal the budding schism and form a properly united Christian empire? Imagine what horrors the world might’ve been spared if they had a cooperative marriage.
Great video AM! 👍
Great to see another video from you
I havent heard that phrase for a while. I do like his quips, he quipped well.
Hi! Would you care to link some sources/books? Thanks! I really liked hearing about the Roman Empire, east and west, and the late antique/early medieval stuff.
Welcome back boss😢😢❤
16:57 Perhaps Charlemagne simply wanted to be crowned Emperor of the Franks rather than Emperor of the Romans.
@@jonathanadams8835 Not possible. “Emperor” or “Imperator” at this point in history ONLY referred to the Roman Empire, as this was the title of their head of state. The term “empire” only referred to the Romans. It didn’t have the same meaning as it does today.
Maybe Charlemagne’s issue was that the Pope did not specify that whether Charlemagne was only Imperator in the West or if he was also responsible for Eastern Rome.
I love this history videos, they are much better than the streams
Listening to this with great delight. A small correction: the Filioque controversy concerns not the nature of Christ, but the order of eternal procession of the Third Person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit. The Western Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed states the belief in the "Spiritum Sanctum [...] qui ex Patri FILIOQUE procedit" (Holy Spirit [...] Who proceeds from the Father AND THE SON".
It also is mainly about the authority, or rather the lack of, to add to the creed
very interesting video
Excellent stream
Excellent video as always. What timezone did you mean when you said 9 o'clock
Well done Apostolic!
AM are you familiar with Otto III’s idea of a Imperial Renovation (renovatio imperii Romanorum)? I heard it was supposed to be akin to a federation with Kingdoms like Poland & Hungary.
Will another Christendom ever will arise outside of Europe?
Russia?
Possibly China if they convert.
At this rate Africa.
This issue is it can't arise in the American protectorates as liberalism will destroy it.
intro is way too loud
Not loud enough imo
Wow, good afternoon! First comment. No livestream?
Lore of The Holy Roman Empire: Neither Holy, Nor Roman, Nor an Empire? Momentum 100
Thank you
This is riding the tiger.
My favourite history RUclipsr returns. Today is a good day 🙏🏻
💎
Whoa I'm here early
Germans doing historical revisionism is like a hobby for them at this point. They do it with every bloody period and every bloody thing possible, sometimes due to them having master propagandists and educators on their side, with an agenda, but sometimes just out of pretention or supreme insecurity about their own origins and history.
And the HRE is still a product of that enterprize.
The point was never to autistically analyze and decontextualize the words "Holy. Roman. Empire.", and lawyer your way into justifying them (whilst even the results of that are debatable).
The point, in fact, is to disabuse anyone of the pretentious notion that such a german state had any meaningful relationship or cause whatsoever to that empire of Augustus, Aurelian, Trajan, etc. That empire, popularly known as the Roman Empire. The one from which we attribute the legacy of Rome, the legal, philosophical and artistic legacy that has no meaningful commonality with the political legacy strictly of the germanic people.
The Roman Empire was, in fact, some would argue, still alive during the time of the HRE, in Constantinople. Even so, the forementioned "revisionism", in this case, could be said to have started with the HRE itself: with that german polity was born the claim that what lied at Constantinople was not Rome, but the "kingdom of the greeks".
Theres an obvious reason as to why things like the Corpus Iuris Civilis came from Byzantium, and not the HRE. Constantinople had a legitimate claim and the cultural descendancy that the germans did not. Another example of this is neoclassical art and literature, and the renaissance itself: a phenomenon more closely related or at least correlated to the fall of Byzantium and the exodus it created (which in turn reinvigorated classical antiquity - and Rome - in the western european mind), rather than the creation or continuation of the HRE.
And a similar criticism can be cast onto the Turkish Sultan or the Russian Tzar, and many other pretenders.
The western roman empire falling doesnt give you the right to create your own larp of it. The pope had no right, no authority, to proclaim Charlemagne as the emperor of the romans, and you saying he did requires the same ammount of legalistic juggling as to, allegorically speaking, say that the USA 14th Amendment protects abortion (funny how some people still say it does).
In the same manner, Napoleon's France or nowadays USA could not seriously claim to be Rome, despite their economic and military dominance of the western world.
The mental gymnastics you have to do, to creatively interpret the HRE as a special continuation of Rome (whilst simultaneously excluding all other equally dubious claims of other peoples, such as the french or the turks, amongst many others), is not convincing, and reeks of favoritism.
In fact, I dont even seriously believe that people who say it believe the HRE was Rome or a meaningful continuation of it. People who subscribe to that idea believe in the same thing that motivated the creation of the name "HRE" in the first place: the prestige, the authority that the name brings/feigns, but not in the authenticity of it.
And as you can tell I'm a bit salty.
"
Rent free
Germanics took over Rome. Founded not only HRE but also England, France, and Spain. From which the globe was conquered. On a scale making the Roman look puny. The HRE from its very core Germnaic federalist conception, never made this leap, but still was at the core of the post Roman world. A core not really consisting of imperialism, eastern europe aside, but rather the Volksgeist which brought forward feudalism instead of slave labor, federalism, etc. Even the italian renaissance statelets come from this. It was indeed the core of western civilization and all its empires, but in a rather default federalist northmen manner...a whole new way of empire, away from magi mid east med ways of empire.
@@SuperMrFriendly Claiming the achievements of people of incredibly diverse ethnic, cultural and religious backgrounds hundreads of years in the future to be the product of the post-roman german tribes is a high level of mental gymnastics. Might as well give that merit to the Africans since humanity probably originated from there.
But I agree with the person we're responding to: It's useless lawyering aimed at what basically was an erudite shitposter of the 18th century whom most people know just as "that one french enlightened guy"
@@giuseppefazio9313 Im not saying they looked in to the future. Im saying the basis of this post roman world was germanic. and as such its structures where more germanic. structures that proved over time to have its very own merits. also regarding this whole "empire wank festival" it had its own ultra succesful merits. but at the same time these germanics wouldnt have survived without roman style centralism i.e the catholic church. its pools of intellectualism, kingship, empire building etc. hence why it was a continuation of the roman empire in many respects. hence the roman part in the title.
@@SuperMrFriendly The roman part of the title was just a matter of prestige. Much like the Turks claimed to be "The Sultanate of Rome" and later the Russians did the same. It had a reason to be there at the start when it was named but by the time Voltaire came around, it was way past its prime. Same thing for the Holy part. His objection in his time was justified.
As for my original objection, my point still stands. It was not the germanization of the post-roman western europe that decreed the success of european ways in the future. It was not the establishment of a Vandal kingdom, nor a Visigoth one, in the Iberian Peninsula that established the future creation of Spain.
The key to the success of the west was the giving away of such decentralized policies, the birth of nationalism, proper geopolitical thought and the encouragement of bourgeois entrepreneurship that gave the west the edge over the east. Saying all of this was thanks to the Franks and their Ostrogoths buddies is literally stealing history away from the people who actually achieved such feats and it is just a gross anglo-saxon nationalistic attempt at distorting history.
An Empire founded by a Frankish King is not Roman and it will never be Roman
Agreed
A kingdom founded by a Greek isn't Roman and never will be.
@@just_addd_water_to_your_ramen but Augustus is not a Greek. The succession of "Byzantine" Emperors trace directly back to Augustus. And even if the "Byzantine" Emperors were Greeks, they are Roman citizens and hence Roman. Please, stop coping
As always anti german Propaganda
Wow you got me! it's not as if I'm about to host a discussion on Germany's lost heritage during WWII
Also for someone who thinks I'm a Germanophobe you sure have stuck around for a long time.
@@ApostolicMajesty Always will Mate. It's all for The Show.
@@ApostolicMajesty and you committed a grave grammatical atrocity in it's title, i might ads.
Here is my reply to that comment you left: Patricius von Kempen, I know it means the perpetrator (referring to the allied bombing). That's kind of of the point. Stop repeating the lie that this channel is anti-German or I will ban you.
P.S. Unless this comment was a joke you meant to say: "You ('ve) committed a grave grammatical atrocity (I would say error) in its (the) title, I might add.
I believe in German its "Heiliges Römisches Reich"