What would have happened if the Teutonic order won the battle

>>939377
It's importance is overplayed by Russian nationalists. The order had already more or less reached its limits with prussia and livonia. It simply didn't have a realistic chance of expanding into Russia

>>939377
Battle on the Ice was a small skirmish which wasn't even on the ice.

>>939377
>Teutonic Order
>Controlling all the Rus'
What meme is this?

>>939401
This pretty much.

The order wasn't that big in terms of manpower to begin with. Essentially a few walled cities and a network of castles, tons of native allies and knights allowed them to control a population more numerous than them. On some occasions seasonal crusader help arrived for a big push but the position of the teutonic order was not tall that different from the crusader kingdoms in the Levant.

File: swordbrethren.png (63KB, 400x447px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 400x447px

>>939401
>>939425
This.

Not to mention that according to historical chronicles only 30 men were actual Teutonic Knights, each of them accompanied by 5 - 6 mounted men-at-arms, most of them not from the main branch but from the Livonian Brotherhood of the Sword (Swordbrethren/Schwertbrüder), which had completely different insignia (pic) - making such idealistic depictions of vast armies of heavily armoured knights with their iconic black crosses far from historically accurate.

>tons of native allies and knights allowed them to control a population more numerous than them
This was pretty much the modus operandi in most feudal societies though, where very often the ruling elite was not of the same nationality as their subjects.

It would be like disney on ice

>>939464
>This was pretty much the modus operandi in most feudal societies though, where very often the ruling elite was not of the same nationality as their subjects.

Nationality is a rather moot concept in feudal Europe isn't it?

Care to give any examples outside of Iberia and England?

>>939530
Germans were cucked for centuries under the Austrian BBC.

>>939565
Austrians are German...
I would wager modern day bavarians got more in common with people from Austria than people from Saxen.

>>939579
Yes. They're the two fruity Germans who like nice things and frilly stuff.

>>939530
>Nationality is a rather moot concept in feudal Europe isn't it?

THIS
MEME
NEEDS
TO
DIE

File: Continental_West_Germanic_languages.png (107KB, 1028x1196px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1028x1196px

>>939592
Austro-bavarion union when?

>>939530
Lithuania where most of the population was Ruthenian and the dukes were Balts.
Kievan Rus' where the rulers were initially Norsemen.

>>939599
>>939592
Daily reminder that Austria should have united Germany, not prussia

>>939598
"Well hello I am from Belgium"

>>939601
I was thinking of western and central Europe desu. Weren't balts tribal though?

>>939614
Avars ruled by Hungarians
Although did the opposite of get subsumed

>>939617
Fair enough, I admit my focus on medieval Europe has chiefly been western Europe rather than frontier regions.

>>939611
There was a clear distinction between Britons, Frenchmen, Germans, Italian,etc.

>>939652
What about Gascons, Normans, Navarrese, Argonnese, lombards, Napelese, Burgundians, Flemish, Picardians etc.

All the above mentioned appear with such "nationalities" in English garrison rolls in France. For that matter the French were reluctant to admit Gascons were French until the 1600s.

>>939699
I've never heard about Navarrese and Aragones cultures being distinct enough to not be considered Spanish

>>939714
They had their own nation until the union of Isabella and Ferdinad.
Missed out on that big independence movement they got?

>>939699
Regional identities were stronger, but there were definitely national identities as well. For example Italians in the HRE despised being under German leadership, and after a period of time Englishmen wouldn't accept their kings being too French

>>939714
What >>939717 says the Iberian peninsula had four or even five distinct groups.

>>939722
Well if the regional identities were stronger and those identities were listed in official government documents then why should we instead grasp for more modern concept of nation. I'd say go with say the Kingdom of France or french speaking instead, both terms are more useful i'd say.

>>939722
What did German mean back then and what does it mean now? Did they mean someone of the Germanic race, a Saxon like Otto or did they mean a German speaking person?

What you say is actually a rather funny contradiction because those people you call Italians would've been called Germans if we use modern day nationalities :^)

Alright maybe that last bit is just advanced sophistry but I think it gets the point across rather well.

>after a period of time Englishmen wouldn't accept their kings being too French

I am afraid I missed that, care to give an example? My knowledge of English kings before Edward I is a bit fuzzy.

>>939744
PS,

Maybe the term ethnicity is a more well rounded concept than say nationalities.

>>939744
>I am afraid I missed that, care to give an example? My knowledge of English kings before Edward I is a bit fuzzy.

Henry iii's barons got mad at him for having too many French advisors. They had developed an island identity by this point
>
What you say is actually a rather funny contradiction because those people you call Italians would've been called Germans if we use modern day nationalities

Not at all. The Italian city states and papacy both hated German speakers who they viewed as more or less barbarians. Do you not recall Frederick I and II fighting ruinous wars there against fierce resistance?

>>939765
But said "Italian" city states were actually Holy Roman city states were they not? I mean at the time they made the complaint.

>Do you not recall Frederick I and II fighting ruinous wars there against fierce resistance?

A civil war against fellow holy romans.


*I am not trolling but just pushing the idea of nationalities to the logical extreme. Ethnic Italians viewed ethnic Germans as barbarians but both belonged to the same nationality if we have to apply that concept.

>>939781
Holy Roman was not a nationality because the holy Roman empire was not a real nation. It was a loose confederation of highly autonomous polities

>>939799
What does that make George Washington?

>>939808
English with american nationality.

>>939815
Which of the two is it and why isn't it Virginian?

>>939808
The American colonies were all a lot more similar than the states of the holy Roman empire were. Bad false equivalency

>>939826
Id say english then.

>>939765
>Do you not recall Frederick I and II fighting ruinous wars there against fierce resistance?
Frederick I might have, but reasons for Frederick II's wars were much different, having more to do with his attempts at centralizing power. He was raised in Italy from birth, his seat of power was in Sicilia, he visited Germany very rarely, delegating the power to his son and considered it an appendage to his main domains in Italy.

>>939799
That's true for almost every medieval state. Even if some have become nationalities in modern era, it's because they happened to be ethnically homogenous.

>>939799
Empires are rarely "nations", in fact, that's one of the things that make them Empires.

>>939833
The electorate of Cologne is quite similar to Duchy of Brandenburg though yet you would not say they belong to a sort of Holy Roman nationality?

Gascons were quite similar to say people from Poitou but Gascons were loyal to the English king and scarcely considered themselves French, the French in turn didn't consider them French.

>>939834
He wasn't born there and neither were his parents if I recall correctly. Not many countries would grant you their nationality because your grandparents originally hailed from there, well except maybe Israel and some other non-western states.

>>939530
There's that >>936583.

>>939860
Virginia was founded for Englishmen by englishmen.

>>939579

>Austrians are German...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ztOV2wrrkY

>>939860
>Holy Roman nationality
There was no "Holy Roman" nationality, there was only a German nationality shared by the majority of the subjects of the Holy Roman Empire, who among others were also Italian, Bohemian, etc.

>>939857
Bad. HRE = multiple different languages and ethnicities. Other European kingdoms = generally just one language

>>939892
>Other European kingdoms = generally just one language
With the exception of the ruling class. The rulers were usually lot more cosmopolitan due to conquest or political marriages.

>>939862
Ethnicity, race or culture does not equal nationality.

The very fact that people can be without nationality should clarify that. You cannot be born without some sort of race, culture or ethnicity you can be born stateless and stay in that condition until you die.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statelessness

>In law, statelessness is the lack of nationality, or the absence of a recognized link between an individual and any state.

>A stateless person is someone who is "not considered as a national by any state under the operation of its law";[1] he or she has no citizenship or nationality.

>>939885
Yeah I think the idea of calling HRE a nationality is idiotic too but that is because the whole concept is rather idiotic when you apply it to pre-nation states Europe.

You say German or Italian nationality but wouldn't you say ethnicity is a more apt term? Did the people from Florence consider people from Venice people of the same nationality or did they consider them to be the same ethnicity? What would you call a bohemian? A slavic Czech or a wend is Bohemian but what about the Silesian miner whose parents hail from Poland?

>>939530

Poles vs. Russians
Finns vs Russians and Swedes
Russians vs. Steppes
Russians vs. Everyone who wasn't Russian, actually.

>>939919
Nah. The court was generally speaking in vernacular. French court spoke French, imperial court spoke German, regional courts spoke regional languages. England was more of an exception than the rule, and that's only because it was something of a French colony. But even England was speaking vernacular from top to bottom by the 14th century

>>939927
>Swedes and Finn allies vs Russians and Finn allies vs Finns
Fixed that for you.

>>939892
>Other European kingdoms = generally just one language

>Kingdom of Poland

Polish, German and possible some Baltic language

>Kingdom of France

Flemish, Occitan and "normal" French. Mutually unintelligible of course

>Kingdom of Scotland

English, Scottish English and Gaelish

>Kingdom of England

Norman French, English, Welsh

>>939927
>>939530
>where very often the ruling elite was not of the same nationality as their subjects.
>Poles vs. Russians
>Finns vs Russians and Swedes
>Russians vs. Steppes
>Russians vs. Everyone who wasn't Russian, actually.

???

>>939942
>this nigger acting as if people weren't bilingual

JESUS FUCK THIS MEME AGAIN?

Battle of the ice was an irrelevant skirmish that was bloated up by Russian and later, Soviet propaganda.

File: bald-eagle.jpg (166KB, 1594x1196px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1594x1196px

>>939955
Bilingual cuck speaking

>>939955
Some were, most probably weren't

>>939892
>Other European kingdoms = generally just one language

Hungary:

Hungarians
Germans
Slovaks
Croats
Romanians
Jews
Gypsies
Serbs
Ruthenians
Slovenes

And to top it off, the official language was Latin.

>>939949

Oh. Thought you were talking about nationality in general being moot.

Still sort of applies though; Mongols ruled over Russkis, Nords ruled over the Rus (briefly), southern Italy was Arabs/Mahgreb over the Italians, parts of Greece were Venetians ruling over Greeks, Large parts of Turkey were of course Turks ruling over the natives including Armenians and Greeks, the Bulgars (of modern day Bulgaria) were formerly Turkics ruling over the native population, as mentioned earlier Hungarians ruled over Avars, Germans ruled over Sorbs and Slavs in Prussia/western Poland for a long time, Hungarians also ruled over Croats,Slovenes, Slovaks, Romanians etc.

>>940012
>Hungarians ruled over Avars

Nigger what? Avars were largely gone by the time Hungarians arrived.

>>940012
You're grossly oversimplifying shit.

>>940012
Yes but are they ethnic Russians. Russia proper didn't really exist until Ivan the Terrible expanded his Princedom of Moscow to encompass the lands in which most ethnic Russians lived, he called himself Tsar of all Russians instead of Tsar of Russia.

The concept of a french nation didnt exist until the 1700s. Before that it was france a region in europe with a king. During the revolution only a quarter of the people spoke french.

>>940045
Actually it was ruler of all RUSSIAS (Гocyдapь вceя Pycи), not of all RUSSIANS. Two very different things.

>>940040

What you want to give me a really fucking specific rundown of how the Mongols gave the Russians autonomy largely to do as they please within their empire in return for tribute and loyalty and thus were 'ruled' to a much lesser degree than say Iberian Christians, or how the Russians came together and elected a Nord to rule them even if there was no large Nordic migration, or how all of these differences between in groups and out groups were based on religion as well as nationality, language and culture, I mean what the fuck do you want? Of course it's going to be grossly oversimplified or else I would just direct you to a book.

>>940030

Avars were still present when the Magyars arrived, mostly as mixed breeds. They didn't disappear until after Hungary was established.

>>940082
I was mostly talking about Hungary, it wasn't "ethnic Hungarians ruling over everyone else" as the Hungarian aristocracy came from a shitload of ethnic backgrounds. German, Croat, Polish, you name it.

When people say shit like nationalism wasn't really a thing, they don't mean that the concept of ethnicity didn't exist, just that it didn't matter one bit. A German or Croatian nobleman was worth more than a Hungarian peasant.

>>940089

Ah I see.

I'm not super familiar with Hungary between the Avars and the wars with the Turks.

>>940118
Hungarian nationalism pretty much started by the end of 17th and beginning of 18th century. The protestant lower nobility was largely oppressed and poor whereas the catholic magnates got extremely wealthy thanks to brown-nosing the counter-reforming Habsburgs. The magnates slowly germanized and intermarried to the point there was barely anything Hungarian about them anymore and it caused resentment among the protestant gentry that was much more numerous. By Joseph II's reign it pretty much blossomed from a religious conflict into an ethnic one.

Before that, hardly anyone gave a fuck, as the ancient Magyar tribalism died off when Stephen I. BTFO of Koppany's pagan hordes and embraced a multiethnic Christian kingdom.

>>939401
Had the knights won the battle it would've had major changes. For example Christianity would've expanded far beyond Peipus meaning the entire Russian border would be shifted towards East, possible not even in contact with the Baltic Sea.

>The order had already more or less reached its limits with prussia and livonia.
You got it the other way around. It's not that the order reached its limits in Livonia. It's that the full capacity of knights Livonia could sustain was reached. Had they expanded beyond Peipus there would've been a revival of interest and effort meaning and more knights from Germany would've taken the opportunity. We may have seen new orders formed.

>>939464
>Not to mention that according to historical chronicles only 30 men were actual Teutonic Knights
About 100.

>most of them not from the main branch but from the Livonian Brotherhood of the Sword
The battle occurred in 1242 by which point the Brothers of the Sword already merged into Teutonic Order forming a branch Livonian Order, who also wore the black cross.

>making such idealistic depictions of vast armies of heavily armoured knights with their iconic black crosses far from historically accurate.
All in all there were about a thousand knights present from Germany and Denmark. The depictions aren't inaccurate.

>>939404
>small
By no means in medieval standards.

It was one of the many irrelevant shit battles/skirmish. There were many such battles of this scale in Baltic lands.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kr%C3%BCcken

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Garoza

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Saule

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Karuse

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Durbe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Skuodas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Aizkraukle

>>939744
>nations can only exist as states

wew lad