What was the Holy Roman Empire?

Fig.1: Where to begin with this madness?

The 18th century French philosopher Voltaire (you know, that guy that snug people pretend to understand) once said, "This agglomeration which was called and which still calls itself the Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire." And like most things Voltaire said that I totally understand, he definitely had a point. The Holy Roman Empire, which officially existed between 962 and 1806, is certainly difficult to characterize in such simple terms. It may have been "Holy" in the beginning, but centuries of conflicts with the Catholic Church should have probably forced them to discontinue use of that adjective. It really wasn't all that "Roman," since it was mostly centered around present-day Germany and only controlled the city of Rome for a fraction of its existence. And, yes, while the big boss of the Holy Roman Empire was called an emperor, he came to possess so little power that using the word "Empire" to describe it is practically akin to calling Waffle House a 5-star restaurant. Nevertheless, as the political, military, religious, and geographic center of Europe for much of the second millennium After Doughnuts (AD), it's hard to ignore this confusing monstrosity when discussing world history. I guess that's my job or something.

Brian Boru

Fig.1: Unlike Saint Patrick, Brian Boru thankfully doesn't
have a day where it is acceptable for people dress as
ugly, hairy leprechauns.

Ireland has been a notoriously difficult place to rule over, what with the constant rebellions and the parades to commemorate the rebellions (fig.1). Early on, it was even difficult for the Irish themselves to take charge over their own Emerald Isle! Irish politics in the first millennium After Doughnuts (AD) was reduced to families ruling over their own little parcel of land. Indeed, the only hope of advancement was to challenge other clans to bar fights, which typically ended with disembodied heads everywhere (thus why they introduced those unbreakable beer bottles). Things changed when a man known as Brian Boru rose to prominence. He began the process of uniting Ireland by, yes, cutting some heads, but also by forging a national identity and culture. He was also able to bring Irishmen together through their hatred of those blasted Vikings, who always cheated by bringing axes into the pub. While his accomplishments faded after his death faster than a college student's liver on St. Patrick's Day, he is revered as one of the first rulers of a united Ireland, a goal which some people are still trying to get even today! (History doesn't end, people.)

The Seventh Crusade

Fig.1: The fedora fad of the 1920s would only be outdone
by the one of the 1220s.

For all intents and purposes, the Sixth Crusade did its job and brought the holy city of Jerusalem back into Christian control. Nevermind the fact that the Crusaders were not allowed to build a wall to defend their kingdom, or that Muslims were still allowed to rule certain areas in and around the city, or that the guy who won the city was excommunicated by the Pope and was no better than the Antichrist (who really isn't that bad of a guy once you get to know him). As such, many people in Europe saw the Sixth Crusade as not really a crusade at all, but some sneaky deal made in a smoke-filled room (fig.1). Of course, once rumors of a Seventh Crusade started swirling about, people were just so scarred from the last few that many Europeans wanted nothing to do with it. (On a related note, I hope Star Wars: Episode 7 will be at least halfway decent! It has to be better than the prequels, right? Right?!)

The Sixth Crusade

Fig.1: Most of the world's reaction
to the calling of a sixth crusade.

By this point in the early 13th century, Europeans had seen five crusading forces make their way to the Holy Land, only to watch as one by one turned into a bunch of Holy... well... something else. The Fifth Crusade was especially disappointing, as a constant revolving door of troops, squabbling within the leadership, and the ignoring of "flood watch" alerts from the National Weather Service caused the largest force in crusading history to meet its end within the rising currents of the Nile River. So do you think that discouraged anyone from trying to send off yet another crusade? Don't be ridiculous, we're barely halfway through these things! Even though the Christian populous was becoming tired not succeeding, the kings and clergy of Europe felt the need to try try again. Besides, there was one ruler in particular who was well overdue to pickup the crusading tab.

The Fifth Crusade

Oh yeah, Crusades Month is back, and better than ever! Well the scope and overall effectiveness of the Crusades covered this month aren't better than ever (believe it or not, they're even worse), but that doesn't mean we still can't have fun at the expense of trivial religious warfare! This month I will be covering Crusades 5-7, which, if they were movie sequels, would be well past the tipping point of enthusiasm for even the most beloved film franchises (unless you're The Fast and the Furious, for reasons I dare not comprehend).

Fig.1: Europe just couldn't wait to add another one of these to its list of "Reasons Why the Rest of the World Thinks We're Jerks."

By the year 1213, the Crusades have had over a century to build up their reputation of suckiness. The First Crusade (1096-1099) allowed the Christians from Europe to conquer the holy city of Jerusalem from the various Muslim groups that previously controlled it, only to undermine their victory by bringing their typical European pettiness along with them. The fall of one of their possessions led to the Second Crusade (1145-1149), which not only attacked the wrong Muslims, but also lost against them! The fall of Jerusalem to Saladin led to the Third Crusade (1189-1192), which started out pretty promising for the Christians under the leadership of Richard the Lionheart, only to have it all end with a dud in the name of peace (yawn). And then there was the Fourth Crusade (1202-1204), which didn't even make it to the Holy Land and only led to the destruction of the Christian city of Constantinople (granted, they totally deserved it for leavening their communion bread). Instead of just cutting their losses and focusing on other things, like, I don't know, feeding their starving peasants or something, Europeans decided to call for yet another crusade. And so the franchise regretfully continued (a quote that would be repeated ever since Transformers got a sequel).

Ivan the Terrible

Fig.1: If anything's terrible,
it's that robe.

Back in the day, epithets really defined what people were all about. Sure, there have been plenty of "the Great"s, but let's not forget awesome ones like Richard the Lionheart, Suleiman the Magnificent, and the attractive uncle-nephew duo of Charles the Bald and Charles the Fat (until they morphed and became Charles the Danny-DeVito-Doppelganger). But my favorite epithet was given to Tsar Ivan IV Vasilyevich of Russia: the Terrible. Granted, the word terrible is being used here in its original sense (as in one who strikes terror in people, which can be seen as a good thing if you're always at war with your neighbors like Russia is), but its modern definition as bad, unpleasant, and just downright jerkish also would apply to Ivan. Examples of his terribleness include imprisoning people for no reason, destroying cities within his own kingdom, taking over indigenous peoples in Siberia, and killing his own successor so that his kingdom would fall into chaos within 15 years of his own death. If anything, maybe Ivan should be called something worse than "terrible," since that merely puts him on par with your average Adam Sandler movie.

Marco Polo

Marco?

Marco?!

Fig.1: "Okay, fine: POLO! What do you 
want from me?"

MARCO?! Oh, there you are. Sometimes I have trouble finding my audience for this blog. Thank goodness someone like Marco Polo (fig.1) once lived so we can annoy the crap out of people by repeating his name! Of course, the man had other achievements outside his delightfully rhyming moniker. For 24 years, this Venetian merchant traveled across Asia with this father and uncle, mostly under the employ of the famous Mongol ruler, Kublai Khan. While he was hardly the first European man to visit China, he achieved fame by describing his journey in his book commonly known as The Travels of Marco Polo, which was essentially one long Christmas letter bragging about his family vacation (everyone has that friend, don't they?). Though his outrageous stories were disputed even back then, many found the tales of mystical lands beyond their reach to be extremely fascinating, and might just have helped kick of the Age of Exploration that Europeans so love (and everyone else rues) to this day.

The Wives of Henry VIII (video)

Hey folks, I'm still on hiatus, and probably will be until the end of September. I know, I know, save your rotten tomatoes. But I thought I'd make it up to you by putting out another video! This is Canned History #4, which looks into the man who had six more wives than I'll probably ever have in my lifetime. The stories surrounding the marital history of King Henry VIII of England, and the women who were lucky and/or doomed enough to hold the position as his wife, have fascinated scholars and drama-obsessed weirdos for centuries. Join me as I explore each wife's rise and fall, from Catherine of Aragon to Catherine Parr, as well as the rise and not fall of Henry's waist size. It's good to be the king!

Canned Histories: The Wives of Henry VIII

The Fourth Crusade

Fig.1: "Why did I come in here again?"

You know when you walk into a room and forget why you got up in the first place? So then you decide to smash the nice china cabinet with a baseball bat for no good reason? That's sort of like what the Fourth Crusade was like. Like the previous crusades, its propose was to make the pilgrimage to the Holy Land and wrest control of it from the Muslims. The Third Crusade did this pretty well, except that Christians failed to recover the super holy city of Jerusalem (having the Holy Land without Jerusalem was like eating fried chicken without the skin...or the guilt). Luckily for them, a Fourth Crusade was called in 1198 for this exact purpose. Unfortunately, it got a little distracted and spent all of its time attacking Christian cities, most notably the Byzantine capital of Constantinople. While the Catholics did manage to absorb territory that had been out of their fold for centuries, they essentially weakened the position of Christianity in Eastern Europe, and allowed Islam to dominate the region within the next two hundred years. But at least they got lots of loot out of it in the short run! (Sadly, the crusaders never took Macroeconomics 101.)

The Third Crusade

Fig.1: Tripoli and Antioch didn't 
appreciate the Dominions of Saladin 
being all up in their business.

Typically, the third chapter of a story leaves more to be desired. The "Part Threes" of Star Wars, Back to the Future, The Godfather, and that Keanu Reeves alternate-reality thing (whose third movie was so bad I dare not mention it) all fell flat in adequately wrapping up the story. The Third Crusade would follow much of the same pattern. After the Blues Brothers 2000-like debacle that was the Second Crusade, the state of Christianity was one of disunion. The Crusader States continued to squabble against each other and within themselves when the throne or the TV remote was up for grabs. The kings of Europe became too distracted with petty wars over land, titles, and how many peasants they'd like to rule over. No one in their right mind trusted the Byzantine Empire anymore (in fairness, those guys were more two-faced than Harvey Dent). All this was almost slightly excusable since the Islamic world was just as divided; the only thing that the Seljuqs in Turkey, the Fatimids in Egypt, and the Zengids in Syria and Iraq could agree on was that Muhammad is the messenger of God (which is a great thing, don't get me wrong, guys!). This changed with the rise of Ṣalāḥ ad-Dīn Yūsuf ibn Ayyūb (called Saladin by me and my fellow lazy historians), who united much of the Islamic dominions, stole territory from the Crusader states (fig.1), and forced the Christians in both Europe and the Holy Land to at least consider fighting some on else for once.

The Second Crusade

Fig.1: The Crusader States of Edessa, 
Antioch, Tripoli, and Jerusalem might as 
well have been renamed Grumpy, Dopey, 
Bashful and Doc based on their actions 
between the First and Second Crusades.

As far as the Crusaders' goal of pilgriming to Jerusalem, taking back the Holy Land from the ruling Muslims, and annoying the crap out of everyone with their backstabbing ways, the First Crusade was a total success. As for the rest of the Crusades, don't get used to it. The Second Crusade, called nearly fifty years after the First, began the pattern of the European invaders having a goal in their heads, and then getting completely distracted on the way there. This strategy might work on a Saturday night-out with your friends, but had devastating consequences for all the money, manpower, and Mapquesting needed for your typical crusade. Add in the shifting alliances, political intrigue, and huffy overreactions typical of European relations at this time (or really anytime), and the Second Crusade was basically a drama-ridden train-wreck of a Spanish soap opera, without those spicy senoritas. I know, I wouldn't blame you if you stopped reading either.

The First Crusade

It is written in the Holy Scrolls of Acre that June shall be Crusades month! Okay, maybe I jotted that down on a Wendy's napkin last week at lunch, but it is written nonetheless! All this month, I will be covering the first four Crusades, which were honestly the only really effective Crusades (the words "effective" and "Crusades" aren't used too often together, but we're grading on a curve here). So sit back on your horse, get your chain mail on, and let's get ready to add a little more bloodshed to the tumultuous history of the Holy Land (more like the Bloody Land, if you ask me).

Fig.1: A sandbox next to the twirly 
slide is worth fighting for.

Remember when you were six-years-old, and some bully kicked you out of your favorite sandbox at the playground? Well what if, twenty-some years later, your cousins went back to that sandbox and beat up the random kids playing in it, just for revenge? That's sort of like how the Crusades went. Orthodox Christians lost control of the Levant (the "Holy Land" region now chiefly shared by the uncomically grumpy roommates: Israel and Palestine) during the Islamic conquests of the Middle East in the 7th century. Over four hundred years later, Catholic Christians went on a temper tantrum about it and decided to "take back" the region, even though it hadn't been under Western control since Ancient Roman days. Of course the people ruling there were a different group of Muslims than the ones who took it over in the first place, but they were making castles in the wrong sandbox nonetheless. What resulted was the beginning of religious and political strife that covered the Levant in blood for the next two hundred years...and then all the hundreds of years after that (not to mention the hundreds of years before). But hey, at least Europeans learned some maths and acquired a taste for spices! That makes up for it, right?

Vlad the Impaler, the Real Dracula

Before vampires did stupid things like sparkle and impregnate high schoolers, they were among the most terrifying creatures of legend, right alongside witches, werewolves, and koalas. The classic vampire that everyone recognizes is Count Dracula; based on Irish author Bram Stoker's classic 1897 novel, the character has been popularized in the storied performances of Béla Lugosi in the 1931 film, Christopher Lee in the 1958 version, and Zale Kessler's fantastic voice acting in 1988's Scooby-Doo and the Ghoul School. But the real Dracula was not so much interested in ingesting people's blood as he was killing invading Turks and sticking their rotting corpses on spikes for everyone to see. Not nearly as bad!

Fig.1: What Vlad III Dracula 
lacked in fangs and a thirst 
for blood, he made up for 
with awesome hair!

This man was Vlad III, Prince (or Voivode) of Wallachia. Wallachia was a principality in Eastern Europe located in present-day Romania, just to the south of a little place called Transylvania! Dramatic noise! Vlad III was born in 1431 to Vlad II, whose nickname was Dracul ("the dragon"). Thus his son became known as Dracula, meaning "son of the dragon," implying that Vlad's great-great-great-great grandsons could have been called Draculaaaaaa. Anyway, this was a very precarious time to live in Wallachia, as those darn Ottomans were beginning their surge into Europe, and Vlad's kingdom was right on the front lines. Wallachia needed a strong, ruthless ruler to defend their territory and way of life, and a prince whose nickname would later be used for a blood-sucking monster was exactly what the doctor ordered.

Fall of Constantinople

Fig.1: No, you can't go back to Constantinople! So stop asking!

Wise men once said that, "Istanbul was Constantinople; now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople." And they would be right! The city in Turkey that straddles the border of Europe and Asia is now known as Istanbul, but way back when it was called Constantinople. But that's been a long time gone...over five-and-a-half centuries to be more precise. So even though that's apparently nobody's business but the Turks', let's look into the reason why if you have a date in Constantinople, she'll be waiting in Istanbul.

Constantinople was technically founded in 330 Anno Doughnutty by the Roman Emperor Constantine (who, in all his narcissism, named it after himself), but it was really the site of the Ancient Greek city of Byzantium. That's like me going to Pittsburgh and saying, "I'm going to build an even better city here!" Which wouldn't be hard, cause it's Pittsburgh, but still, not cool. Anyway, Constantinople served as the capital of the eastern half of the Roman Empire, but then it became the only capital when Rome itself was bombarded with barbaric barbarians. Historians like to refer to the empire that Constantinople was centered around as the Byzantine Empire, to distinguish it from the Roman Empire and make it less confusing. But the Byzantines saw themselves as the Roman Empire, and in a sense, they were a continuation of the Roman Empire. So good job making things more confusing, you stupid historians! The nerve of those people (present company excluded, of course)!