The historically central kingdoms of Francia, besides
These were all part of the Empire of Charlemagne. (Lorraine was only briefly a separate kingdom and then became one of the Stem Duchies of Germany.) The Periphery of Francia thus means the surrounding kingdoms. These naturally fall into six groups.
Outremer ("across the sea") was a kind of colony, and a temporary one, of Francia. Mostly Orthodox or Islâmic in faith, it is culturally part of Islam or, in so far as it is recovered from the Islamic Conquest, part of Mediaeval Romania. As such, it is peripheral even to the periphery of Francia. All the parts of it ended up conquered by the Turks. Today within Palestine, we now find the unique Jewish State of Israel, which seeks to undo, not just the Islamic Conquest, but the earlier Roman Conquest of Judaea.
Culturally, the Periphery of Francia is distinguished by the same characteristics detailed for Francia, i.e. the original jurisdiction of the 
Catholic Church, the use of the Latin language and alphabet, etc. Some of these areas seem more peripheral than others. Spain became the center of European power in the 16th century, and Britain in the 19th. All the great wars of the 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries, however, originated in the Core of Francia and then drew in the Peripheral states. An exception to all this was when Scandinavia was the center, if not of European power, certainly of the most energetic of European events. That stretched from the 9th to the 11th centuries, the "Second Dark Age." The Scandinavians of that period, Vikings (then Normans) in the West and Varangians (then Russians) in the East, were still pagan, and their raids and conquests were a threat everywhere in Francia. Christianization in the 10th and 11th centuries largely brought the threat to a close, except for the more conventional conquests of the Normans and Russians.
My sources for all these tables are often given with the specific tables. A discussion of general sources is given under Francia.
Index
Copyright (c) 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D. All Rights Reserved
 |
 |
and Portugal 
,
Spain, unlike Britain, never fell outside of history after the collapse of the Western Empire, which gives us a continuous record of rule from Rome through the Visigoths and beyond. Nevertheless, Spain underwent her own unique transformation in the trauma of the Islâmic conquest. The Visigoths were crushed and for almost three centuries a revived Christian kingdom, Asturias, could do little more than cling to the north coast and the northwest corner of Iberia. Nevertheless, more than one Christian state eventually organized and gradually reconquered the peninsula. Navarre (Navarra), Aragón, and Barcelona all began as march counties of Francia. Asturias/Galicia/León could claim direct succession from the Visigoths, while Castile (Castilla) was a march of León. There were at different times up to five different Spanish Christian kingdoms. These were all eventually consolidated. Portugal, which began as a county of León, was the only kingdom to ultimately maintain its independence of the rest of Spain. Spain was sometimes styled an "empire." Ferdinand I and Alfonso VII of Castile were sometimes styled "Emperor," but in Mediaeval Europe, the Popes regarded such a title as theirs to dispense, and no self-proclaimed emperors were going to get cooperation from the Church. In fact, Alfonso X of Castile was actually elected Holy Roman Emperor in 1257, but nothing came of it all. Alfonso never went to Germany, distracted by civil war (1275) and rebellion (1282), and it was already clear that the Pope had no intention of crowning him. When the Pope finally crowned Emperor a King of Spain, it was Charles V (Charles I of Spain), a 1/4 German Hapsburg who had been born and raised in Belgium. The Imperial crown then passed to Charles's brother Ferdinand of Austria, not to his son Philip II of Spain. [cf. J.H. Elliott, Imperial Spain, 1469-1716, Mentor, 1963; Adam Wandruszka, The House of Habsburg, Anchor Books, 1965; Denys Hay, Europe in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries, Longmans, Green and Co. Ltd., 1966; and, more recently, Henry Kamen, Empire, How Spain Became a World Power, 1492-1763, HarperCollins, 2003.]
An issue of note concerns the name "Spain" -- España. The entire peninsula can be called, in a geographical sense, without ambiguity, Iberia. Similarly calling the whole peninsula "Spain," however casually, can evoke impassioned responses. Spain now is a country that is distinct from Portugal. On the other hand, in Latin, Hispania was the whole peninsula. In the Middle Ages, when various kingdoms occupied Iberia, and none of them was España, they all collectively and reasonably were called the "Spains," Hispaniae. When the Kingdoms of León, Castile, and Aragón, and then Navarra, came under common rule, the combination began to be called, unofficially but reasonably, "España." The battle cry of 16th century Spanish troops was "Santiago, España!" (the former referring to the pilgrimage site of Santiago de Compostela in Galicia). It may have been Philip II who issued the first decree for "these realms of Spain." As it happens, this was issued from Lisbon after Philip claimed the Throne of Portugal in 1580 and occupied the Kingdom. So the official use of "Spain" seems to have initially and in fact been for the whole peninsula. When Portugal revolted and became independent again in 1640, the rest of the Kingdom simply continued, down to the present, under the common name. So what "Spain" means actually depends on what we are talking about and when. It has only really meant a political part of Iberia since 1640.
Another issue is with the names of the Kings. Since the major languages of Christendom use many of the same names, it is often possible to give translations. This was formerly the most common, so that in English one talked about "Johns" and "Peters" in the Spanish Kingdoms. This is now sometimes frowned upon, but the desire to use the "native" language of the country in question can produce some gaffs: One occasionally sees Kings of Portugal called "Juan," when this is actually just the Spanish, not the Portuguese, version of "John" -- that would be "João." Since there are other languages in the Iberian Peninsula -- Catalan, Basque, and Galician -- besides standard (Castilian) Spanish and Portuguese, it is often a good question just what vernacular language was being used in a particular time and place. There is also the complication that the Kings of Navarre marry into French Royalty and nobility and so after 1234 are all French speaking. The written langugage during much of the period, of course, would just be Latin.
"John" is "Juan" in Castilian, "Xoán" in Galician, "Ion" or "Jon" in Basque, "Joan" in Catalan, "Jean" in French, and "Johannes" in Latin (another form, "Iban," only occurs in the patronymic "Ibañez"). Simply using "John" would seem to be the least confusing and the most revealing. However, Portuguese and Spanish (Castilian) versions are given for most of the names (somewhat irregularly). Some names -- "Alfonso" and "Sancho" -- really do not have English equivalents. Sancho, the name of many Kings of Navarre, is written "Santxo" in Basque and may in fact have originally been a Basque name, though its origin in now obscure ("Santius" was the Latinized version). "Alfonso" becomes "Alphonse" in French, and this has been borrowed into English to an extent, but it is not very common, so "Alfonso," like "Sancho," is simply given in its Spanish form. Sometimes overlooked, again, is that the Portuguese, "Afonso," is different. Equally Spanish is a derivative of "Elizabeth": "Isabel" or "Ysabel." This Latinized as "Isabella," which is the form of the name usually used in English. There is a problem with the English equivalent for Castilian "Juana," the feminine form of "Juan." Although this is simply "Jeanne" in French, "Jone" in Basque, or "Johanna" in Latin, in English it could be "Joan," "Joanna," "Joanne," "Jane," or even "Jeanne." "Ferdinand" and "Fernando" are both of Spanish derivation, originally "Ferdinando." This was itself Visigothic, and the form now most familiar in English, "Ferdinand," is the version of the name as it passed into German with the marriage of Juana the Mad of Castile to Philip of Hapsburg. One of their sons was then the Emperor Ferdinand I. He was raised in Spain, speaking Spanish. His grandfather, Ferdinand II of Aragón, contemplated leaving the kingdom of Aragón to him in his will but thought better of it. Later, he was given the rule of Austria by his brother. Elected king of Hungary and Bohemia, he then succeeded his brother as Emperor.
His brother, of course, was the Emperor Charles V. It is "Charles" in French and English, "Carlos" in Spanish and Portuguese, "Carolus" in Latin, and "Karl" in German. The story about Charles is that he only spoke German to his horse. He was raised at the court of his grandfather, the Emperor Maximilian I, in the Netherlands, speaking Flemish, where his name would be, I think, "Karel," as in Dutch. There is a monument to Charles V in Guadalajara, Mexico. It actually calls him "King Charles V" ("Rey Carlos V"), which is not quite right since, as King of Spain, he was Charles I. All this seems to confuse everybody.
The colors here go with the kingdoms, but as the kingdoms combine, the color of the dominant kingdom supersedes the others. Thus yellow, the color for Castile (which started as a County of León, was detached by Sancho the Great of Navarre, and then was willed to his son Ferdinand I as a separate kingdom), is also the color for Spain as a whole, as Castile absorbs León, Aragón, and then, briefly, Portugal. A minor variation is that the red is darker for the Kingdom of the Asturias, of which León was essentially a continuation. The change in name took place after one of the characteristic divisions and then recombinations, several of which we see later, between brothers, sometimes brothers who become hostile and murderous to each other.
The Islâmic rulers of Spain, 756-1492, are listed separately from this page, with the other rulers of Islâm, linked in the table at right. The first three hundred years after the Islâmic Conquest were tough times, naturally, for Christian Spain, which took quite a while to even get organized in some areas. These years were largely those of the Omayyad Amirs and Caliphs, who may be said to have presided over the Golden Age of Islâmic Spain. The suprisingly rapid decline of the Omayyads in the 11th century quickly led to complete political fragmentation and to grave vulnerability to the rising Christian Kingdoms.
It should be noted that although Spanish Christians later referred to all Spanish, and also North African, Moslems as "Moors," this lumps together ethnically and linguistically distinct peoples, particularly those who were actually Arabs and those who were of North African Berber derivation -- Mauri, indeed, was the Roman name for Berbers (which itself is from barbari, "barbarians"), evident in the name of the Roman province of Mauretania. There was sometimes tension and conflict between these groups in Islâmic Spain. "Moors" also would mean native Spaniard converts to Islâm, the Muwalladûn. If one then considers sub-Saharan black African Moslems as "Moors," like Shakespeare's Othello, this adds another group, one that would have been noticeable in North Africa but probably of somewhat lesser significance in Spain. To many people, however, "Moor" always means "black," and this is a serious confusion. Indeed, a factor in the 11th century in Spain were slave troops, the S.aqâliba, that consisted, not of Africans, but of captives from Christian Europe. Thus, unless one is deliberately speaking of what Christian Spain called Moslems, "Moors" is not a term that is revealing of historial realities or appropriate for disinterested and objective historical discourse. Also confusing is the tradition of calling Christians in Islâmic Spain "Mozarabs."
Navarre, which is perhaps known too generally by the French version of its name, was originally a kingdom of the Basques, an apparently autochthonous people whose language has no demonstrable affinities to any other in the world, much less to any in the area. Thus, "Basque" in Basque is Euskara, and the Basque speaking country, which extends beyond Navarre, is Euskal Herria. Interesting genetic information about this is reported by Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza in Genes, Peoples, and Languages [University of California Press, 2000]. The Basque region turns out to be the center of a characteristic gene component of European populations. Cavalli-Sforza says:
...the Basques once inhabited a much larger territory than today... During the last Paleolothic period the Basque region extended over almost the entire area where ancient cave paintings have been found. There are some cues [sic, "clues"?] that Basque descends from a language spoken 35,000 to 40,000 years ago, during the first occupation of France by modern humans... The artists of these caves would have spoken a language of the first, preagricultural Europeans, from which modern Basque is derived. [pp.120-121]
Thus, neither the French nor the Spanish -- Navarra -- version of the name of the kingdom is necessarily more correct than the Basque version, Nafarroa. While Navarre was the dominant Spanish kingdom under Sancho the Great, its power and extent declined quickly and decisively. Of the seven Basque provinces in Spain and France (where only about 12,000 people speak Basque any longer), only two ended up belonging to Navarre proper. I have not noticed Basque nationalists claiming to have invented art (i.e. the cave paintings), but they apparently would have as reasonable a claim as anyone.
| Islamic Conquest of Spain, Visigoths Overthrown; Battles of Jerez de la Frontera & Ecija, Cordova captured, 711; Seville & Toledo captured, 712; Battle of Segoyuela, Saragossa (Zaragoza) captured, 713; Valencia captured, 714 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Kings of Asturias, at Oviedo | Arabs stopped in Francia, Battle of Poitiers, 732 | ||
| Pelayo, Pelagius | 718-737 | ||
| Arabs stopped, Battle of Covadonga, 718 | |||
| Favila | 737-739 | Basques, Kings of Navarre, Navarra, Nafarroa | |
| Alfonso I, the Catholic | 739-757 | ||
| Fruela I, the Cruel | 757-768 | ||
| Aurelio, Aurelius | 768-774 | Charlemagne defeated at Roncesvalles, 778 | |
| Silo | 774-783 | ||
| Mauregato, Mauregatus | 783-788 | Iñigo Jimenez | Count, d.822? |
| Vermudo/Bermudo I, the Deacon | 788-791 | Enneco, Iñigo Iniguez Arista | King, 822- c.851 |
| Alfonso II, the Chaste | 791-842 | County of Barcelona, in Francia, 801 | |
| Nepociano, Nepotian | 842 (?) (852?) | García I Iniguez | 852- 882 |
| Ramiro I | 842-850 | García (II) Jimenez | rival, d.c.885 |
| Ordoño I | 850-866 | Iñigo Garcés | c.885-? |
| Alfonso III, the Great | 866-910 | Fortuno, Fortun Garcés | 882- 905 |
| Garcia | 910-914 | Sancho I Garcés | 905-925 |
| Ordoño II | Galicia, 910-924 | ||
| 914-924 | |||
| Kings of León | |||
| Fruela II, the Cruel | 924-925 | ||
| Sancho Ordoñez | Galicia, 925-929 | Jimeno Garcés | 925-931 |
| Alfonso IV, the Monk | 925-931 | ||
| Ramiro II | Galicia, 929-951 | García II Sánchez I | 931-971 |
| 931-951 | |||
| Ordoño III | 951-955 | Count of Aragón, 922-971 | |
| Sancho I, the Fat | 955-958, 960-966 | ||
| Ordoño IV, the Wicked | 958-960 | Sancho II Gárces II Abarca | 971-994 |
| Ramiro III | 967-982, d.985 | ||
| Vermudo II | 982-999 | García III Sánchez II | 994-c.999 |
| Alfonso V, the Noble | 999-1027 | ||
The names of the early Kings of Navarre, like those of the early Basque Dukes of Gascony, display the active use of the patronymic suffix -ez/s. This later becomes conspicuous in Spanish and Portuguese surnames, but here bespeaks Basque derivation -- like the names with which it is used, viz. Sancho (Santxo) and García.
Navarre became the suzerain of Aragón in the 9th century. After some intermarriage, the county was united to Navarre in 971 (or 970). Because of this process, different events sometimes are referred to by different sources. Thus, Bruce R. Gordon says that Navarre acquired Aragón "c.850," but The New Penguin Atlas of Medieval History says 970 (p.50, note 2). The New Cambridge Medieval History, Volume III, c.900-c.1024 [Timothy Reuter, editor, Cambridge, 1999] gives the details [p.689, with the year 970, but then the year 971 on p.717]. There are other uncertainties about this period. While the picture in Gordon is that the Asturias was divided among three sons of Alfonso III, ultimately with all inherited by Alfonso IV, The New Cambridge Medieval History, Volume II, c.700-c.900 [Rosamond McKitterick, editor, Cambridge, 1995, p. 863] and Volume III [p. 716] list Ordoño II and Fruela II as successive Kings of León after Garcia. The details are given in Volume III [pp.674-675]. The independent (rebellious?) kingdoms in Galicia are the confusing factor. In this period the capital of the principal kingdom was moved from Oviedo in Asturias to Zamora and then, perhaps by Ordoño II, to León, which now gives its name to the whole.
The following genealogy was originally derived from Volume III of the Cambridge Medieval History, based on the text where the diagrams [pp.716-717] unaccountably differ. Also, the text refers to the daughter of Sancho García of Castile who marries Sancho III of Navarre as "Mayor" [p.687], even though the diagram calls her "Elvira" and "Mayor" is elsewhere given in the text as the heiress of Ribagorza [p.690]. Now, according to the Erzählende genealogische Stammtafeln zur europäischen Geschichte, Volume II, Part 1, Europäiche Kaiser-, Königs- und Fürstenhäuser I Westeuropa [Andreas Thiele, R. G. Fischer Verlag, Third Edition, 2001], "Munia Mayor"
| Counts of Aragón | |
|---|---|
| Aznar I Galindez | ? |
| García the Bad | d.858 |
| Galindo I Aznárez | 858-c.867 |
| Aznar II Galindez | c.867-c.893 |
| Galindo II Aznárez | c.893-922 |
| Andregoto | Countess, 922-972 |
| annexed by Navarre, 971 | |
The problem of the annexation of Aragón gets muddied a bit further. The heiress of Aragón, Andregoto (seen elsewhere as "Andregoro"), is shown dying in 972, which looks close (at least) to the dates given by the Cambridge History and the Penguin Atlas. However, Andregoto's husband, García II Sanchez of Navarre, already is given, without a date, as Count of Aragón because of his marriage. This is simple enough, but then García is said to have divorced (verstoßen) Andregoto circa 940. So did Andregoto remain Countess of Aragon despite the divorce? The 971 could then be the year that her son, Sancho II Abarca, inherited Navarre and so, perhaps, also Aragón.
It is notworthy that the lines of Asturias, Castile, and Navarre begin with simultaneous or alternating reigns of rival cousins or even in-laws, i.e. husbands of cousins. How this worked seems clearest in Asturias and most obscure in Castile.
In what follows, before Iberia settles down to just two Kingdoms again (Spain and Portugal), things get very complicated. This is where we get up to five independent Christian thrones -- six counting Barcelona -- not to mention the Moslem states. Thus, the table of rulers has been broken up into more convenient sections. Each section is preceded by maps of the period and followed by a family tree of the rulers. Navarre is given special treatment after the extinction of the Kingdom in Spain. It might be noted that after 1037, every ruler in Christian Spain is a descendant of Sancho III of Navarre.
It should be noted that the Kings of the Asturias, Galicia, León, Castile (Castilla), and Spain (España) share a common numbering, but that the Kings of Navarre, Aragón, and Portugal are all numbered independently. Thus, Sancho II of Navarre (970-994) is different from Sancho II of Aragón (1063-1094), Sancho II of Castile (1065-1072), and Sancho II of Portugal (1223-1245); but Alfonso IX of León (1188-1230) is numbered in succession to Alfonso VIII of Castile (1158-1214).
| Counts of Castile, Castilla, at Burgos | |
|---|---|
| Nuño Nuñez I | 899-c.909 |
| Nuño Nuñez II | 914/15 |
| Gonzalo Tellez | 903-929 |
| Munio Fernandez | c.921 |
| Fernando Ansurez | 916-920, 927-930 |
| Gonzalo Fernandez | 930-932 |
| Fernán(do) González | 932-970 |
| García I Fernandez White Hands | 970-995 |
| Sancho I García Good Laws | 995-1017 |
| García II Sanchez | 1017-1028 |
| annexed by Navarre, 1029 | |
The following period sees the beginning of the Reconquista, the reconquest of Islâmic Spain by the Christian states. It is certainly a bad period for the native Moslem states. Their weakness and divisions make it possible for Alfonso VI of León and Castile to capture Toledo in 1085, the traditional beginning of the Reconquista. However, the alarm of Islâm at this turn drew in the Almoravids (Murabits) from North Africa, who then defeated Alfonso at Zallâqa in 1086, without, however, recovering Toledo. This therefore began a new era for Islâmic Spain as well as for Christian, since native Islâmic Spain was now unable to withstand the Christians on its own and became dependent on North African powers. The confusions of the period become a source of great romance. When Alfonso, deposed by his brother, Sancho II of Castile, returned to power in Castile as well as León, he took on many of Sancho's retainers, including one Rodrigo Díaz (d. 1099). Rodrigo came to fall out of favor and in 1081 became a mercenary, fighting for both Christians and Moslems. After taking Valencia in 1094, he passed into legend as El Cid, interestingly an Arabic title, Sîd, "lord, master," and the Campeador. Díaz's daughter Christina married into the House of Navarre, and her son became King Garcia V. This means that the present King of Spain, Juan Carlos, and much of European nobility are descendants of the Cid.
Kings of  León | Kings of  Navarre | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vermudo/Bermudo III | 1027- 1037 | Sancho I of Aragón | 1000- 1035 | ||||||
Kings of Castile | Kings of Aragón | García IV Sánchez III | 1035- 1054 | ||||||
| 1037- 1065 | Ferdinand/Fernando I the Great | 1035- 1065 | Ramiro I | 1035- 1063 | |||||
| 1065- 1070, 1072- 1109 | Alfonso VI | King of Galicia | Sancho II | 1065- 1072 | Sancho IV | 1054- 1076 | |||
| García | 1065- 1071, 1072- 1073 d.1094 | ||||||||
| 1073-1109 | 1072-1109 | 1063- 1094 | Sancho II Ramirez, Sancho V of Navarre | 1076- 1094 | |||||
| captures Toledo, made capital of Castile; beginning of the Reconquista, 1085; but defeated by Almoravids, Zallâqa, 1086 | |||||||||
Counts & Kings of Portugal | Urraca (married to Alfonso I of Aragón) | 1109- 1126 | Peter/Pedro I | 1094- 1104 | |||||
| Henry, brother, Odo I of Burgundy | Count 1093- 1112 | Alfonso I el Batallador (co-ruled León & Castile, 1109-1126) | 1104- 1134 | ||||||
| Afonso I | Count 1112- 1139 | Alfonso VII | Galicia, 1112- 1126 | ||||||
| King 1139- 1185 | 1126- 1157 | occupation of Saragossa, 1118-1130 | |||||||
| Portugal | León | Castile | Aragón | Navarre | |||||
Ferdinand I's Kingdom of Castile and León was divided between his three sons: Sancho II received Castile, Alfonso VI, León, and a new Kingdom of Galicia was broken off León for García. However, Sancho II prevented García from taking up his kingdom and then proceeded to attack Alfonso VI. In 1070, Sancho actually defeated Alfonso and drove him into exile, reassembling the whole kingdom of Ferdinand I. But when Sancho was killed in 1072, the whole kingdom immediately fell to Alfonso, who maintained its unity by imprisoning García until his death. How Sancho was killed is still a matter of uncertainty. He seems to have been meeting an incursion from Alfonso in exile, but the death may have been one of betrayal than just of battle. Whether Alfonso was even present is variously represented.
Daughters of Alfonso VI married men from Burgundy, but different Burgundies. His illegitimate daughter Teresa married a brother, Henry, of the Dukes of Burgundy, Hugh I and Odo I. Their son became the first King of Portugal. Alfonso's daughter Urraca, heiress of León and Castile, married Raymond, brother of Renald II, Count of Burgundy, i.e. ruler of the Free County, Franche Comté, of Burgundy. These domains and houses were completely independent of each other, with the Duchy of Burgundy a fief of France and its Dukes Capetian members of the French Royal Family, while the County was a fief of the Kingdom of Burgundy and its Counts members of the Italian House of Ivrea. These complexities are now lost as the history of Burgundy and its divisions are forgotten.
In the following period the Almoravid state, which began to weaken, is replaced and the position of Islâmic Spain is restrengthed by a new North African force, the Almohads (Muwahids), who came to Spain in 1147. This respite turns out to be relatively brief. The Christian Kingdoms are growing and occasionally can even cooperate. The Almohads were then crushed by King Alfonso VIII of Castille at Las Navas de Tolosa in 1212. They had abandoned Spain by 1229, and St. Ferdinand III of Castile and León began to roll up the heart of Andalusia, with Cordova falling in 1235 and Seville in 1248. This would leave only the Sultânate of Granada, in the difficult Sierra Nevada, as a remnant of Islâmic Spain.
| Kings of Portugal | Kings of León | Kings of Castile | Kings of Aragón | Kings of Navarre | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sancho I | 1185- 1211 | Ferdinand II | 1157- 1188 | Sancho III | 1157- 1158 | Ramiro II | 1134- 1137 | Garcia V Ramirez | 1134- 1150 |
| Alfonso VIII | 1158- 1214 | union with County of Barcelona, 1137 | |||||||
| Queen Petronilla | 1137- 1173 | ||||||||
| capture of Saragossa, 1146, new capital of Aragón | |||||||||
| Afonso II | 1211- 1223 | Alfonso IX | 1188- 1230 | Alfonso II | 1173- 1196 | Sancho VI | 1150- 1194 | ||
| defeat by Muwahids at Alarcos, 1195; victory at Las Navas de Tolosa, 1212 | Pedro II | 1196- 1213 | Sancho VII | 1194- 1234 | |||||
| Sancho II | 1223- 1245 | Henry I | 1214- 1217 | James/ Jaime I | 1213- 1276 | ||||
| 1230- 1252 | St. Ferdinand III San Fernando Rey de España | 1217- 1252 | Thibault, Teobaldo I, of Cham- pagne | 1234- 1253 | |||||
| capture of Cordova, 1235, Seville, 1248, Murcia, 1266 | capture of Valencia, 1238 | Thibault, Teobaldo II | 1253- 1270 | ||||||
The "Chains of Navarre" are supposed to have originated at the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa. King Sancho VII of Navarre fought his way into the camp of the Almohad Caliph, Muh.ammad ibn Ya'qûb. The Caliph's tent was ringed with slaves chained together, but Sancho cut through the chains into the tent. The Caliph was able to flee, but we can imagine his alarm and humiliation. It may have been a bad sign for Islamic Spain, however, that the Caliph was hiding behind chained slaves rather than out leading his forces on the battlefield.
The marriage of Blanca of Navarre to Theobald of Champagne means that for a while the Counts of Champagne become the Kings of Navarre. Greater detail of that genealogy can be examined on the page for Champagne. What this leads to is examined further below.
In the following period the Reconquista is completed, and Spain, unified, becomes a World Power, perhaps truly the first such, as Spanish sailors circle the planet and claim most of it, with the claims sticking in much of the New World, the Philippines, and elsewhere -- even as the inheritance of the united Kingdom by the Hapsburgs made Spain a partner to the dominant political forces of Catholic Europe. 
One detail noticeable on the maps but not thoroughly indicated in the table or genealogy below (but shown at right) is the temporary Aragonese Kingdom of Majorca, conquered from the Almohads and then left to a brother, James II, of Peter III. Eventually, Peter IV disposessed his cousin and returned the islands to Aragón (1343).
Meanwhile, with the completion of the Reconquista, there was the nagging problem of the non-Christians, the Jews and Moslems, who were scooped up in the new possessions. There had already been forced conversions of Jews, both by Christians and by the Almoravids and Almohads. Some Jews, like Moses Maimonides (1135-1204), had seen the handwriting on the wall back then and left. Under Christian rule, however, many Jews had converted -- the Conversos. Christians suspected, sometimes correctly, that many Conversos were still secretly practicing Judaism. These were derisively called Marranos, perhaps derived from a Spanish word for "swine." The Spanish Inquisition, run by the Spanish Crown with little reference to the Pope, in great measure was created to test the faith of Marranos, many of whom were burned at the stake or otherwise punished for the actual or suspected practice of Judaism. In the fateful year of 1492, the religious problem was taken up a couple of notches. After a long and hard campaign, Granada surrendered, finishing the Reconquista. The last Sult.ân left for North Africa, but one condition of the surrender was religious toleration for Moslems. This was not going to last long, only until 1499. By 1502, Moslems of Granada were supposed to accept baptism or leave; and by 1526 this was the choice for the last Moslems of Valencia and Aragón. Those who remained and converted were the Moriscos, who thus joined the Marranos as suspected crypto-infidels. Meanwhile in 1492, Ferdinand and Isabella decided to expel all unconverted Jews from Spain. Portugal followed suit in 1497 and Navarre in 1498. Jews went to North Africa, distant Turkey, the Netherlands, and other places. Those who remained and converted, of course, were now open to the tender investigations of the Inquisition. The greater threat to the regime, however, seemed to be the Moriscos, who continued to speak Arabic and retained their traditional garb and customs. They were occasionally ordered to stop and assimilate. These orders were generally ignored, but as the Spanish state strengthened, the threat became more serious. The enforcement of a 1566 (or 1567) order finally provoked a Revolt at the end of 1568. With the Turkish navy contesting the Mediterranean, and crypto-Moslem Moriscos calling for help, the Revolt became part of the larger confrontation with Islâm that troubled Philip II. With much hard fighting, and even subsequent years of guerrilla actions, the Revolt was largely suppressed in 1570. Philip decided to remove the remaining Moriscos from Granada and scattered them throughout Spain. This ended their threat as a serious internal enemy, but it did not end their existence as a cultural and religious irritation. The suspicion of Marranos and Moriscos by the Church and the Crown poisoned Spain for many years. In so far as the Moriscos were concerned, however, this didn't last too long, since Philip III decided in 1609 to expel them from Spain altogether, whether they were really Christians or not. This was accomplished by 1614, after which only the persecution of Marranos would continue. Many of them, rather than fleeing Spain altogether, moved to the Spanish colonies in the New World, where their exalted status over the Indians made their disabilities back home less conspicuous and significant. Astonishingly, even today some families surivive in New Mexico with the memory, passed down the generations, that they had once been Jews. Former Jews, "New Christians," in Spain itself, whether under suspicion or not, did not achieve equality for many years. Limpieza de sangre, "purity of blood," laws kept them and their descendants excluded from universities and religious orders. These laws, which sound like nothing so much as the racial Nuremberg laws of Nazi Germany, were not repealed until 1865. They lasted longer than the Inquisition itself, which was abolished in 1834.
The deliberate destruction of the Jewish and Moslem communities in Spain was no help to Spain either culturally or economically. The Arab historian Philip Hitti has said that Spain shone for a few years with a "borrowed glory" from its creative mediaeval communites, but then sank into the status of a cultural and political backwater. Well, it is understandable that an Arab historian might say this, but no one can consider classical Spanish literature or art and think of it as "borrowed." Where Spain failed to keep up with modernity was already predicted, in a sense, by Miguel Cervantes (1547-1616). A Spain whose arms failed, as they did in 1643, henceforth would play out the tragicomic life of Don Quixote. Nevertheless, unique brilliance and creativity still shine in the art of Francisco Goya (1746-1828), one of the greatest painters of all time. Even in the early 20th century, when Spain seemed the most behind the times, the brilliant architect, Antonio Gaudí (1852-1926) produced work at once uniquely Spanish and modern -- in an area of art, architecture, where most would think traditional Spanish forms particularly derivative of Islâm. His amazing church of the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona ("melting Gothic"), still incomplete, brings Spanish Christian piety fresh into the 21th century, long after Gaudí's own death. Spain thus harmed, and shamed, itself with its intolerance, and wandered from the mainstream of modern development, but there it no doubt that its aesthetic and religious vision was powerful, autochthonous, and enduring.
For a good part of the following period the royal houses of Spain and Portugal were both illegitimate: Trastámara and Avis. Also, John of Avis had an illegitimate son, the Duke of Braganza, who leads to the Kings of Portugal after Spanish rule is overthrown in 1640. Also noteworthy is the fact that Queen Isabella of León and Castile usurped the throne of her niece, Joanna la Beltraneja. Isabella's half-brother, Henry IV, was called "the Impotent" because this is what his first wife, Blanche of Navarre, said. He cannot have been completely impotent, however, since his second wife had Joanna. Later, although Joanna the Mad (Juana la Loca) is only listed as Queen until 1516, she was actually titular Queen until her death in 1555. But since Charles I (V) was both Regent and Heir, and Emperor, he is usually simply regarded as the de facto King.
A 2001 movie, Juana la Loca, was Spain's nominee for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Film. It did not make the final list of five nominees, however. I have not seen the movie yet and cannot say whether it is of historical interest.
| Kings of Portugal | Kings of Castile | Kings of Aragón | Kings of Navarre | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Afonso III | 1245- 1279 | Alfonso X, the Emperor, the Learned, the Wise | 1252- 1284 | Peter/ Pedro III | 1276- 1285 | Henry I | 1270- 1274 | ||
| King of Sicily, 1282- 1285 | Jeanne/ Juana I | 1274- 1305 | |||||||
| Diniz/ Dinis | 1279- 1325 | Sancho IV | 1284- 1295 | Alfonso III | 1285- 1291 | ||||
| Ferdinand IV | 1295- 1312 | James II | 1291- 1327 | Luis, Louis X of France | 1305- 1314 | ||||
| Sardinia ceded by Pisa, 1326 | France, 1314- 1316 | ||||||||
| Afonso IV | 1325- 1357 | Alfonso XI | 1312- 1350 | Alfonso IV | 1327- 1336 | Philip I, V of France | 1314- 1322 | ||
| Charles I, IV of France | 1322- 1328 | ||||||||
 the Black Death arrives atValencia & Seville, 1348 | |||||||||
| Peter/ Pedro I | 1357- 1367 | Peter the Cruel | 1350- 1366, 1367- 1369 | Peter IV | 1336- 1387 | Jeanne/ Juana II | 1328- 1349 | ||
| Ferdinand/ Fernando I | 1367- 1383 | Henry/ Enrique II | 1366- 1367, 1369- 1379 | Philip II, d'Evreux | 1328- 1343 | ||||
| John/ João I of Avis | 1385- 1433 | John/ Juan I | 1379- 1390 | John/ Juan I | 1387- 1395 | Charles II, the Bad | 1349- 1387 | ||
| Henry III | 1390- 1406 | Martin I | 1395- 1410 | Charles III, the Noble | 1387- 1425 | ||||
| Edward/ Duarte I | 1433- 1438 | John II | 1406- 1454 | Ferdinand I | 1412- 1416 | Blanche/ Blanca | 1425- 1441 | ||
| Alfonso V | 1416- 1458 | ||||||||
| King of Naples, 1442- 1458 | |||||||||
| Afonso V | 1438- 1481 | Henry IV | 1454- 1474 | 1458- 1479 | John II | 1425- 1479 | |||
| John/ João II | 1481- 1495 | Isabella/ Isabel I | 1474- 1504 | 1479- 1516 | Ferdinand II; Ferdinand V of Castile / Spain; Ferdinand of Navarre | Eleanor/ Leonora | 1479 | ||
| fall of Granada, end of Reconquista, Discovery of America, 1492 | François Phébus/ Francisco Febo | 1479- 1483 | |||||||
| Emanuel/ Manuel I | 1495- 1521 | Juana the Mad (d. 1555); & Philip I, of Hapsburg (d. 1506) | 1504- 1516 | Regent of Castile, 1510- 1516 | Catherine/ Catalina | 1483- 1512, d.1517 | |||
| 1512- 1516 | |||||||||
| John/ João III | 1521- 1557 | Emperor Charles V |  1516- 1556 d. 1558 | ||||||
| Conquest of Mexico, 1521; Conquest of Peru, 1533 | |||||||||
| Sebastian/ Sebastião I | 1557- 1578 | 1556- 1598 | |||||||
| Cardinal Henry/ Henrique | 1578- 1580 | ||||||||
| 1580- 1598 | |||||||||
| Default on Crown Debt, 1557; March of the Duke of Alba, 1567; Revolt of the Netherlands, 1568; Eighty Years War, 1568-1648; "Sea Beggars" capture Brill, 1572; relief of Leiden by William of Orange, 1574; Default on Crown Debt, 1575; mutiny of Spanish Army in the Netherlands, sack of Antwerp, 1576; Default on Crown Debt, 1596 | |||||||||
| 1598- 1621 | |||||||||
| Default on Crown Debt, 1607; Thirty Years War, 1618-1648 | |||||||||
In this period Aragón grew into a Mediterranean power. The map at left summarizes the expansion of Aragón from the original Pyreneean County, a separate Kingdom in 1035, until its reach extends all the way to Naples and even Athens. The junior line of Majorca is given above. The lines for Sicily, Naples, and Athens are given on the separate pages for those realms, though the genealogy of Sicily and Naples is in the following table here. The most curious episode concerns Athens. A band of Aragonese mercenaries, the "Catalan Company," mutinied against the Roman Emperor in 1305. Duke Walter of Athens hired them in 1310. They murdered him in 1311 and took over the Duchy. Between 1312 and 1342, the Duchy was ruled by three brothers of King Peter II of Sicily. Between 1342 and 1388, it was then ruled by the Kings of Sicily themselves. Just as Sicily was about to be inherited by Aragón itself, Athens passed to the control of the Acciaiuoli family. On the other hand, the most dramatic episode was the manner in which Pedro III acquired Sicily in the first place. This was the result of the revolt in 1282 of the "Sicilian Vespers," by which the Sicilians rose up and expelled the French under Charles of Anjou. Since Pedro had married Constance, the daughter of Manfred, King of Naples and Sicily, who had been killed by Charles in 1266, he was invited in to be King of Sicily. The Pope was furious, but Realpolitik won out. Later, Alfonso V pressed a flimsy claim to Naples itself and won it by force (1442). He left the Kingdom to his illegitimate son Ferdinand (Ferrante), as Aragón passed to the legitimate heir, Alfonso's brother John. After Naples was occupied by the French, 1495-1496, John's son, Ferdinand II, ended up deposing his cousin and annexing the Kingdom to Aragón (1501).
Spanish and Portuguse Colonial Possessions
| Kings of Navarre | |
|---|---|
| Catherine/Catalina | 1483-1517 |
| John III d'Albret | 1484-1516 |
| Henry II | 1517-1555 |
| Jeanne III | 1555-1572 |
| Anthony de Bourbon Duke of Vendôme | 1555-1562 |
| Huguenot leader, dies of wounds, 1562 | |
| Henry III, Henry IV of France | 1572-1610 |
| King of France, 1589-1610 | |
The family tree, above, of the rulers of Spain ends for Navarre with the marriage of Jeanne/Juana I to King Philip IV of France. This introduces an interesting but obscure chapter in history, straddling Spain and France and consequently tending to be left by treatments of Spain to French history, and by treatments of France to Spanish history. Especially neglected is what happened when Ferdinand of Aragón annexed Navarre in 1512. Not all of it was ultimately retained by Spain, but readily accessible sources don't seem to show either the difference between the old and new boundaries or what happened to the rulers of Navarre after the annexation -- the table at right picks up at that point. This seems like a grave oversight for the history of France. Jeanne was already of the house of Champagne; female heirs of the line subsequently married four times into new houses of French nobility (Evreux, Foix, Albret, & Vendôme) and once to Spanish royalty (Aragón); and it all leads to Henry of Navarre, who founded the Bourbon dynasty of France as King Henry IV in 1589.
The history of Navarre is obscure enough that I found the full genealogy only with recourse to a succession of more serious and complete sources. The large genealogical chart, Kings & Queens of Europe, compiled by Anne Tauté [University of North Carolina Press, 1989], simply ends the line of Navarre with Jeanne I. For a long time, the only family tree I had seen of subsequent rulers was in Europe in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centures, by Denys Hay [Longmans, London, 1966, p. 404], which ends with Queen Catherine, who lost the Kingdom to Ferdinand. Family trees for the Bourbons, such as given here, almost never go back further than the father, Henry, of Henry IV's mother Jeanne. Brian Tompsett's Royal and Noble genealogy originally enabled me to fill in the gaps, but there are some obscurities and questions in the information of both Tompsett and Hay that I had to compare with other sources. The first complete list of the Kings of Navarre I have found is in the Regentenlisten und Stammtafeln zur Geschichte Europas by Michael F. Feldkamp [Philipp Reclam, Stuttgart, 2002, pp.146-148]. A complete genealogy can now be found in the Erzählende genealogische Stammtafeln zur europäischen Geschichte, Volume II Part 1, Europäische Kaiser-, Königs, und Fürstenhäuser I Westeuropa, by Andreas Thiele [R.G. Fischer Verlag, 2001, p.185-192]. A less esoteric source with a complete list of kings is in the Oxford Dynasties of the World [John E. Morby, Oxford, 1989, pp.114-115], but there are only some notes, without a diagram, on the genealogy.
The most striking thing about the succession for Navarre is that the last Capetian Kings of France, Louis X to Charles IV, were all Kings of Navarre. John I doesn't seem to get counted as a King of Navarre, but then, only reigning eight days, he is sometimes not even counted as a King of France -- 
on the other hand, it may be necessary to count him if the husband of Catherine is to be counted as John III of Navarre, which means that John II of Aragón was also John II of Navarre -- there was no earlier John (Jean/Juan) in Navarre to be John I, if not the Capetian. With the death of Charles IV (Charles I of Navarre), a curious thing happens. The succession of France jumps to the House of Valois, but, as it happened, Louis X had a surviving daughter, Jeanne. She was ignored for the French Throne because of the Salic Law, which prohibited female succession, but the Salic Law did not apply to Navarre. So while the French Thone passed to Philip VI in 1328, the Throne of Navarre passed to Jeanne/Juana (II).
Jeanne's son was Charles "the Bad." A lengthy account of his doings can be found in Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror [Ballantine, 1978], which is about the events of the 14th century. The County of Evreux, which he inherited from his father, was in Normandy, which means he spent a great deal of his life in intrigues very distant from the Pyrenees.
Two generations later, we get to Queen Blanche/Blanca, who marries Spanish rather than French, namely the future King of Aragón, John II. After Blanche's death John remarries. He then outlives all of Blanche's children but one, Eleanor/Leonora. Aragón goes to a son, Ferdinand, by his second marriage, but Navarre passes to Leonora, who does not survive the year. Her husband, Count Gaston of Foix, and her son, Gaston also, both predeceased her, so the succession passes to her grandson, Francis Phoebus (François Phébus in French; Francisco Febo in Spanish), and then her granddaughter, Catherine/Catalina. Here I had a question, because Hay shows two Gastons in between Leonora and Catherine. This seemed to be a mistake, and I followed Brian Tompsett. I have now been able to confirm this with the Erzählende genealogische Stammtafeln zur europäischen Geschichte, Volume II Part 1, Europäische Kaiser-, Königs, und Fürstenhäuser I Westeuropa, by Andreas Thiele [R.G. Fischer Verlag, 2001, p.191].
What Tompsett didn't have in his database was the young (23) Gaston (V) de Foix, Duke of Nemours, who was killed at the battle of Ravenna in 1512. Elsewhere on the Web, Gaston was listed as a son of Jean de Foix and a grandson of Gaston IV of Foix and Eleanore (Leonora) of Aragón. So I took it that Gaston and Leonora had at least two sons, though I had no sources that listed them both. Now, however, I do, since the Erzählende genealogische Stammtafeln [ibid., p.191] shows not only this, but that Gaston and Leonora had four sons and five daughters. Gaston's mother was Marie d'Orléans, a sister of King Louis XII of France.
Catherine now married French nobility again, this time John of Albret. The two of them were doomed to suffer from the ambition of her cousin, Ferdinand of Aragón, who invaded Navarre in 1512, on the pretext that the death of Gaston de Foix in 1512 made him, by virtue of his marriage to Gaston's sister, Germaine (after the death of Isabella of Castile in 1504), heir of Navarre. He got the Pope to officially dethrone Catherine and John and certify the transfer. In 1515 Ferdinand, who had joined Navarre to the Crown of Aragón, transfered it to that of Castile, lest the Navarrese claim the extra privileges enjoyed by the Aragonese. A small part of Navarre north of Pyrenees, Lower Navarre ("Basse Navarre" in French or "Nafarroa Beherea" in Basque), was retroceded by Charles V in 1530, so a landed Monarchy continued, with, of course, its growing French holdings. The table also shows an interesting alliance of the d'Albret family. John's sister Charlotte married Cesare Borgia, though he abandoned the marriage after four months.
Ferdinand's conquest of Navarre had some interesting consequences. Among Basque nobles who rebelled at Ferdinand's death in 1516 were members of the Xavier family, which was then disposessed, dislocating the young Francis Xavier. When Navarrese exiles, including Francis' brothers, tried retaking Navarre in 1521, another Basque nobleman, Ignatius Loyala, defending Pamplona against them, was wounded and had to give up a military career. Both Francis and Ignatius ended up at the University of Paris together. The latter, of course, founded the Jesuits in 1534; and Francis became one of the first Jesuit Saints, traveling as far as Japan and dying in 1552 in China near where Macao would later (in 1557) be founded -- his body, reportedly incorruptible, was returned as far as Goa in India, where it is still periodically displayed.
The succession of Navarre then passes to Henry II. Here Tompsett had a question, since he gave Henry as the grandson of Catherine but then noted obscurities over Catherine's son, named Henry also. The Encyclopaedia Britannica flatly states that Henry II himself was the son of Catherine and John d'Albret, so I followed that. This construction is confirmed by the Erzählende genealogische Stammtafeln [ibid., p.192].
Henry II marries a sister, Margaret, of King Francis I of France. She is somewhat celebrated, as Margaret (or Marquerite) of Navarre (or of Angoulême), patroness of Rabelais and author of a collection of stories, the Heptameron. Henry's daughter, Jeanne (III), then marries the senior heir of the Bourbons, Anthony (Antoine), Duke of Vendôme. 
Their son, Henry III of Navarre, becomes heir to the French Throne, claiming it, amid civil war, in 1589, as Henry IV. After 261 years, the Thrones of France and Navarre are again joined.
The map at left shows the lands that Henry brought to the French Monarchy. We have seen how Foix, Albret, and Vendôme accrued to Navarre, and how most of Navarre proper was lost to Spain. It is noteworthy that the blue territories, previously belonging to the Dukes of Bourbon, who were separate from Henry's line, had previously reverted to the French Throne. The outline of France shown is slightly unfamiliar because Savoy, Alsace, Lorraine, and the Free County of Burgundy have not yet been added to France's eastern frontier.
| The Heiresses of Navarre | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Heiress | Husband | ||
| Blanca | d.1229 | Theobald of Champagne | d.1201 |
| Jeanne I | Queen, 1274-1305 | Philip IV of France | France, 1285-1314 |
| Jeanne II | Queen, 1328-1349 | Philip of Evreux | Navarre, 1328-1343 |
| Blanca | Queen, 1425-1441 | John II of Aragón | Navarre, 1425-1479 |
| Aragón, 1459-1479 | |||
| Leonora | Queen, 1479 | Gaston IV of Foix | d.1472 |
| Catherine | Queen, 1483-1517 | John III d'Albret | Navarre, 1484-1516 |
| Jeanne III | Queen, 1555-1572 | Anthony of Bourbon | Navarre, 1555-1562 |
On the other hand, the national consciousness of the Basque people continues to trouble the unity of the nation states. Besides Spanish Navarra and French Lower Navarre, two other Basque provinces, Labourd and La Soule, exist in France, and three others, Vizcaya, Guipúzcoa, and Alava, exist in Spain. The capital of Spanish Navarra, Pamplona (from Latin Pompeiopolis or Pampaelo), Iruña in Basque, is famous for the annual running of the bulls; but Basque nationalism has a more troubling aspect in Spain, with a long and continuing campaign of terrorist attacks to the credit of the extremists. Thus, Navarre and the Basque country have a significance far beyond their size in both mediaeval and modern history.
| Portugal | Spain | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1621- 1640 | Philip III of Portugal | 1621- 1665 | |
| Loss of Atocha & other treasure ships, 1622; Siege of Breda, 1623-1624; Default on Crown Debt, 1627; Loss of Breda, 1637; Naval defeat by the Dutch at Beachy Head & the Downs, 1639; Revolt and Independence of Portugal, 1640; Revolt of Catalonia, 1640-1659 | |||
| John/João IV of Braganza/ Bragança | 1640- 1656 | Spanish army defeated by France at Rocroi, 1643 -- end of Spanish hegemony; Default on Crown Debt, 1647 | |
| Afonso VI d. 1683 | 1656-1667 | Charles/ Carlos II | 1665-1700 |
| Peter/ Pedro II | 1667-1706 | ||
| John/ João V | 1706-1750 | Philip of Anjou/Felipe V de Borbón | 1700-1746 |
| War of the Spanish Succession, 1701-1714 | |||
| Joseph Emanuel/ José Manuel | 1750-1777 | Ferdinand VI | 1746-1759 |
| Charles III | King of Sicily, 1734-1759 | ||
| 1759-1788 | |||
| Maria I | 1777-1816 | Charles IV | 1788-1808 |
| Peter/ Pedro III | 1777-1786 | ||
| John/ João VI | Regent 1799-1816 | Ferdinand/ Fernando VII | 1808 |
| French Occupy Portugal & Spain, 1807 | |||
| in Brazil 1807-1821 | Joseph Bonaparte | 1808-1814 | |
| 1816-1826 | Ferdinand VII | restored, 1814-1833 | |
| Peter/Pedro IV / Peter I of Brazil | 1826 | ||
| Emperor of Brazil 1822-1831 | |||
| Maria II | 1826-1828 1834-1853 | ||
| Peter/Pedro II Emperor of Brazil | 1831-1889 | Isabella/ Isabel II | 1833-1868, d.1904 |
| Ferdiniand/ Fernando II | 1837-1853 | ||
| Miguël | 1828-1834 | ||
| Peter/ Pedro V | 1853-1861 | ||
| Louis/Luis | 1861-1889 | First Republic, 1868-1871 | |
| Amadeo of Savoy | 1871-1873 | ||
| Alfonso XII | 1874-1885 | ||
| Charles/ Carlos | 1889-1908 | Alfonso XIII | 1886-1931, d.1941 |
| Manuel II | 1908-1910 d. 1932 | ||
| Republic, 1910-1926 | |||
| Provisional President | |||
| Theophilo Braga | 1910-1911 | ||
| President | |||
| Manoel de Arriaga | 1911-1915 | ||
| Gen. Pimenta de Castro | 1915 | ||
| Bernardino Machado | 1915-1917 | ||
| Gen. Sidonio Pães | 1917-1918 | ||
| Antoio José de Almeida | 1919-1925 | ||
| Bernardino Machado | 1925-1926 | ||
The modern period of Spanish history begins with body blows to Spanish hegemony in Europe (note that the flag of St. Andrew of Burgundy was often used by Spain in this period): the naval disaster at Beachy Head & the Downs, when the Dutch sank more than 40 Spanish ships, at the loss of over 7000 men, while losing only one ship and less than a hundred men themselves (1639), the revolts of Portugal and Catalonia (1640), and then the crushing defeat by France at Rocroi (1643), which all but decided the Thirty Years War. With these, France became the country to beat in European wars and Spain was far gone in a decline not unlike that of her erstwhile great religious enemy, Ottoman Turkey. How to recover Spanish fortunes was the key question for the next four hundred years. At first, a change of dynasty seemed like a good idea.
)
Here, in a handsome portrait of 1632 by Diego Velázquez, we see King Philip IV of Hapsburg, who presided over the collapse of Spanish hegemony. We now have an engaging series of "Captain Alatriste" novels by Arturo Pérez-Reverte on this melancholy era in Spanish history. These include El capitán Alatriste (Captain Alatriste, 1996), Limpieza de sangre (Purity of Blood, 1997), El sol de Breda (The Sun over Breda, 1998), El oro del Rey (The King's Gold, 2000), El caballero del jubón amarillo ("The Cavalier in the Yellow Doublet," 2003), and Corsarios de Levante ("Corsairs of the Levant," 2006). These are available in English only up to The Cavalier in the Yellow Doublet (2009). Future books planned in the series are El puente de los asesinos ("The Bridge of the Assassins"), La venganza de Alquézar ("Alquézar's Vengeance"), and Misión en París ("Mission in Paris"). The narrator in all these books, Iñigo Balboa, a youth at the beginning, nevertheless is apparently writing in his old age and tells us even in the first book something of his later experience at the Battle of Rocroi. The whole series thus plays out in the shadow of the ultimate failure and disaster.
Philip IV's greatest fault may have been that of marrying his own niece. The result was the sickly, deformed, and sterile Charles II, who himself decided that the succession of the French Bourbons would turn the trick for Spanish fortunes. However, all it really did was make Spain the junior partner of France, which won little for Spain except breathing room -- and the epic loss of Gibraltar. A similar alliance with Napoleon only meant that the Spanish as well as the French fleet was destroyed by Nelson at Trafalgar in 1805, followed by Napoleonic betrayal and a French invasion of Spain. 
The subsequent Peninsular War against France, with the help of Britain, and especially of the Duke of Wellington, was one of the great moments of Spanish history, memorably illustrated by Goya -- Spain has never been short of great artists. However, this proximity to the English did not spell any substantial adoption of English liberal ideas, which are the only things that could have properly pulled Spain into the 19th century, let alone the 20th.
Subsequent history is all too familiar from later "underdeveloped" countries, far too much politics and far too little of the rule of law and basic personal and property rights. This culminated in the fiasco of the Spanish Republic and then the Civil War, when socialist nonsense brought on a devastating conservative reaction. As Fascists battled Socialists, and the Socialists were often murdered by Communists, the leftist Cause Celèbre of the late 1930's represented a battle in which Spain would lose no matter which side won. The suspicion, as it happens, is that Stalin really didn't want the Spanish Left to win, since it would have been outside his control. Better that heretics be killed, even in a losing cause. Fortunately for Spain, the victorious Fascist Dictator Franco, although chummy enough with Hitler and Mussolini, was not interested in their War, even when Hilter offered him Gibraltar, free of charge, if he would let Germany attack it by land. This bit of prudent restraint earned Franco a peaceful (if protracted) death in bed in 1975 rather than the more horrible ends of the others in 1945. Now we know that Hitler's own envoy to Franco, Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, whom Hitler later executed, actually advised Franco not to join in Hitler's plans. Thus, Franco, who accepted Canaris' advice, also kept the secret of his betrayal.
| Portugal | Spain | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fascist Dictatorship, 1932-1974 | Second Republic, 1931-1939 | ||||||
| President | Prime Minister | President | |||||
| António Óscar de Fragoso Carmona | 1926-1951 | António de Oliveira Salazar | 1932-1968 | Alcalá Zamora | 1931-1936 | ||
| Manuel Azaña | 1936-1939 | ||||||
| Spanish Civil War, 1936-1939 | |||||||
| Fascist Dictatorship, 1936-1975 | |||||||
| Francisco Franco | 1936-1975 | ||||||
| Francisco Higino Craveiro Lopes | 1951-1958 | ||||||
| Américo de Deus Rodrigues Tomás | 1958-1974 | Marcelo Caetano | 1968-1974 | ||||
| Republic, 1974-present | Prime Minister | ||||||
| António de Spínola | 1974 | Adelino da Palma Carlos | 1974 | Carlos Arias Navarro | 1973-1976 | ||
| Francisco da Costa Gomes | 1974-1976 | Vasco dos Santos Gonçalves | 1974-1975 | ||||
| Monarchy Restored | |||||||
| José Batista Pinheiro de Azevedo | 1975-1976 | Juan Carlos | 1975- | ||||
| António dos Santos Ramalho Eanes | 1976-1986 | Mário Soares | 1976-1978 | Adolfo Suárez González | 1976-1981 | ||
| Alfredo Nobre da Costa | 1978 | ||||||
| Carlos Mota Pinto | 1978-1979 | ||||||
| Maria de Lurdes Pintassilgo | 1979-1980 | ||||||
| Francisco Sá Carneiro | 1980 | ||||||
| Francisco Pinto Balsemão | 1980-1983 | Leopoldo Calvo Sotelo y Bustelo | 1981-1982 | ||||
| Mário Soares | 1983-1985 | Felipe González Márquez | 1982-1996 | ||||
| Mário Soares | 1986-1996 | Aníbal Cavaço Silva | 1985-1995 | ||||
| Jorge Sampaio | 1996-2006 | António Guterres | 1995-2002 | José María Aznar Lopez | 1996-2004 | ||
| Durão Barroso | 2002-2004 | ||||||
| Santana Lopes | 2004-2005 | José Luis Rodrigues Zapatero | 2004- | ||||
| José Sócrates | 2005- | ||||||
| Aníbal Cavaco Silva | 2006- | ||||||
The deaths of both Spanish and Portugese dictators then ushered in the first real periods of democracy in the history of either country. The socialist, if not the communist, temptation was still here, but King Juan Carlos held off conservative coups in Spain, and the people of both countries came a bit more to their senses, although still burdened with the false ideals of Euro-socialist regimes like France. With a long history of trying to ignore the government, as in Italy, the Spanish economy may have been healthier, thanks to off-the-books transactions, than other statistics (like official unemployment, 22.5%) might have shown. Nevertheless, this still imposed a cultural as well as a political burden on Spain and Portugal really rising to a competitive level in the world economy. Now, however, Prime Minster Aznar has begun to be spoken of together with Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Slashing taxes in 1997, the Spanish economy kicked up quickly. Although the 2001 (official) unemployment rate, at 14%, was still virtually a Depression level, the economy was growing at over 3% a year, almost twice as quickly as France. This may be just what Spain needs to join the ranks of heathiest economies, as well as healthiest democracies.
The Economist of July 26th-August 1st 2003 reported Spanish unemployment at 11.3%. This was actually better than Belgium (11.6%), and excellent considering that French and German unemployment had increased over the previous year. Spanish growth had slowed (2.1% over the last year), but the global economy was weak at the time. In 2005, the The Economist of October 8th-14th shows Spanish unemployment down to 9.4%. This is not great compared to the better economies, but it is now better than France (9.9%) and Germany (11.7%) as well as Belgium (13.5%). Meanwhile, Spanish GDP growth was 3.4%. This is better than any of the other 15 developed economies listed by The Economist, excepting only the United States (3.6%). Indeed, Spain and the United States are the only ones with growth greater than 3%. In 2003, The Economist listed both Spain and Portugal with the same Economic Freedom Index, putting them ahead of Italy, Taiwan, and Japan, though behind Sweden, Austria, and Germany. This is, at least, a good competitive position.
Spain took a turn for the worse politically (if not economically) on March 14, 2004, with the election of a Socialist government. This seems to have happened because of a terrorist attack the previous week (3/11), when rush hour trains in Madrid were bombed, killing 200 some Spaniards. The conventional wisdom is that Prime Minister Aznar was blamed for this, because he had sided with the United States in the war on terror and sent Spanish troops to Iraq. In the days before the election, the Socialists accused the government of concealing evidence that al-Qaeda was behind the bombings. The strange meaning of all this appears to be that al-Qaeda, which many on the Left have said had nothing to do with Iraq, has attacked Spain for being in Iraq, so that Spain should get out of Iraq so that al-Qaeda will not target it again. This goes along with the leftist notion in the United States that we were attacked by fanatics just because we made them mad. If we didn't make them mad, they would stop attacking. Unfortunately, what makes Osama bin Laden mad are Western ideals of liberty and toleration, and the presence of non-Muslims in the Middle East. (When honest, the leftists add "globalization" and capitalism as the things that properly anger the Islamists.) Since the new Socialist Prime Minister, Zapatero, has promised to remove Spanish troops from Iraq, Spain will now join France on the path of appeasement and wishful thinking. Senator Joel Lieberman, Democratic Vice Presidential candidate in 2000, said that Madrid could have been the equivalent of either Pearl Harbor or Munich -- Pearl Harbor to energize resistance to terrorism, or Munich to give up and join the appeasers. Survey says: Munich.
Late in 2004, a Basque bombing campaign began again. Basque terrorists at least give warning of bombs, so there was not the loss of life of March 11. But it is hard not to think that the Basques simply hope to benefit from the spirit of appeasement for their own cause. At the same time, Spain isn't off the hook with the Islamists. Osama bin Laden has always demanded the return of Andalusia to Islâm. Since Granada fell in 1492, it is hard to imagine how the United States could be blamed for that.
In 2007 we find King Juan Carlos suddenly in the international political spotlight. At a summit meeting in Santiago, Chile, the would-be Castroite dictator of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, first called former Prime Minister of Spain Aznar a "fascist." Current Prime Minister Zapatero spoke up for Aznar, saying that he was a properly elected representative of the Spanish people. Chávez kept talking, even though he did not have the floor and his microphone was turned off. Juan Carlos, sitting back inconspicuously next to Zapatero, suddenly leans forward, popping into camera view, and tells Chávez, "¿Por qué no te callas?" "Why don't you be quiet?" This was the perfect putdown to the clownish but vicious neo-communist Chávez and is now featured as a ringtone on many Spanish cellphones -- as well as providing a slogan to anti-Chávez Venezuelans. Decades after the end of real Fascism in Spain, it is great to see the King still calling the right shots.
St. Ferdinand III was 
the King of Castile and León responsible for the conquest of the heartland of Islâmic Spain: Andalusia. "San Fernando Rey de España" was the name given to one of the Franciscan missions in California -- the King is shown, at right, in glory above the altar of the Mission. From it is derived the name of the San Fernando Valley, which is largely occupied by the City of Los Angeles, together with the independent cities of San Fernando, Burbank, Glendale, and Calabasas. Near the center of the Valley is Los Angeles Valley College, originally the home of The Proceedings of the Friesian School, Fourth Series. The San Fernando Valley is ringed by the Santa Monica, Santa Susana, San Gabriel, and Verdugo Mountains and the Chatsworth and Hollywood Hills. The Los Angeles River rises in the Valley and flows out through Burbank and Glendale. Although the River normally runs nearly dry, flash floods do occur occasionally during the winter. A flood control network consequently was constructed after devastating flooding in 1938. The most conspicuous feature in the network is the Sepulveda Dam, which has been used in countless movies, television shows, and commercials to represent, not just dams, but military fortifications or even prisons as well. It is conspicuously featured, as a dam, in the 2003 movie The Italian Job. Ferdinand's connections by marriage to other European royality, and the Comneni, can be examined in a popup.
England,
Scotland 
,
Ireland 
, and the
United Kingdom 
,
445 AD-Present
The Roman withdrawal from Britain left the island outside of history for some centuries. Three kingdoms of Angles (Northumbria, Mercia, & East Anglia), three of Saxons (Essex, Sussex, & Wessex), and one of the Jutes (Kent) eventually fell to Kings of Wessex, or to the Danes. King Egbert of Wessex, who had spent time in exile at the court of Charlemagne, came to be considered the first true King of England. Meanwhile, these invaders had converted to Christianity and become literate.
The conversion was due to the mission of St. Augustine, who was sent by Pope Gregory the Great and founded the see of Canterbury (at the capital of Kent). Meanwhile, however, the rest of the British Isles had already been converted to Christianity. Ireland, which was never Roman and 
was converted by St. Patrick in the 5th century, developed its own literate Christian culture and, in the person of St. Columba in the 6th century, proceeded to proselytize Scotland. Unfortunately, Ireland was never politically unified enough to follow cultural and religious influence with political power, or to fully resist incursions from Danes or Normans, or ambitious English dynasties, when they came. The Kings of all Ireland, as opposed to the kings of what later became counties (Munster, Connacht, etc.), were the "High Kings" (Ard Ri). 
They drew together the smaller kingdoms of the island, but a permanently unified Kingdom of Ireland was never fully established. The reign of Brian Baru, perhaps the high point of Irish unity and power, also seems to be the end of effective Irish organization. Henry II of England, whose Normans began to overrun the island, styled himself "Lord of Ireland" (c. 1172). The last High King, Rory O'Connor, deferred to Henry. In 1541 Henry VIII adopted the title "King of Ireland."
The history of Scotland began in the 5th century with an interesting 
combination of the Picts, who had never been under Roman rule, Britons, i.e. Celtic survivors of Roman Britain, and the Scots, who came over from Ireland and founded the kingdom of Dál Riata, which shared its name with their kingdom in Northern Ireland. It looks like the nobility of the Picts and Scots began to blend, and eventually the kingdoms consolidated, but with the language of the Scots gradually predominating, and then absorbing the Britons also. This phase of Scottish history is addressed on a separate Scotia webpage. The kings of Scotland ultimately succeeded to the throne of England itself. Wales, in effect the last piece of Roman Britain, was annexed by England as a principality. The heir to the throne of Britain is still styled the Prince of Wales. Some early Welsh history is addressed below.
The earliest history and dates for Ireland are legendary and speculative. Niall Noígillach "of the Nine Hostages" may have lived in the previous century, and the dates given for St. Patrick depend on identifying him with a "Palladius," who is mentioned by a contemporary chronicler as having been sent by the Pope as the first bishop of the Irish. If Patrick was not this person, he would have lived shortly thereafter. For the genealogy of the Irish High Kings, see below.
I have found an outstanding source for all British and Irish rulers, and some other royalty and nobility, in The Mammoth Book of British Kings and Queens by Mike Ashley [Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc., New York, 1998, 1999]. The treatment of Anglo-Saxon and Irish kings now has been corrected and updated using this book down to the end of the Plantagenets. The Irish (Gaelic) spelling of many of the names of the High Kings of Ireland, however, is derived from Bruce R. Gordon's Regnal Chronologies. Here I have only given two English kingdoms, Kent and Wessex, because these are the first and the last ones, respectively, because Kent contains the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
the Primate of England, and because there is no room for the parallel listing of more. Most of the other kingdoms, however, Sussex, Bernicia, Deira, Northumbria, Essex, Mercia, and East Anglia, are given on a separate Anglo-Saxon England page with other early German Kingdoms.
Although Britain was never an "empire," Queen Victoria did assume the imperial title for India, as successor to the Moghuls, in 1876. The House of York is shown in white as a reminder that York was the White Rose, as Lancaster was the Red Rose, in the War of the Roses. Since the House of Stuart was Scottish, it is shown in yellow for Scotland.
| Kings of Kent Jutes | Kings of Wessex Saxons | High Kings of Ireland | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Niall Noígillach of the Nine Hostages | 379-405, Tara | ||||
| Dathi/Nath I | 405-428 | ||||
| Hengest | c.455-488 | Lóeguire macNéill | 429-463 | ||
| St. Patrick, mission to Ireland, 432; d. 461 | |||||
| Oisc, Oeric (Aesc) | c.488-516 | Ailill Motl mac Nath I | 463-483 | ||
| Octha | c.516-540 | Cerdic | c.538-554 | Lugaid macLóeguiri O'Néill | 483-507 |
| Muirchertach macErcae O'Néill | 507-534 | ||||
| Eormenric | c.540-580 | Cynric | c.554-581 | Tuathal Máelgarb macCorpri Cáech O'Néill | 534-544 |
| Diarmait macCerbaill O'Néill | 544-565 | ||||
| St. Columba, mission to Scotland, 563; d. 597 | |||||
| St. Æthelbert I | c.580-616 | Ceawlin | c.581-588 d.c.589 | Domnall macMuirchertaig O'Néill | 565-566 |
| Forggus macMuirchertaig O'Néill | 565-566 | ||||
| Ainmere macSátnai O'Néill | 566-569 | ||||
| Báetán macMuirchertaig O'Néill | 569-572 | ||||
| Eochaid macDomnaill O'Néill | 569-572 | ||||
| Báetán macNinnedo O'Néill | 572-581 | ||||
| Ceol | 588-594 | Aed macAinmerech O'Néill | 581-598 | ||
| Ceolwulf | 594-611 | Aed Sláine macDiarmato O'Néill | 598-604 | ||
| Colmán Rímid macBáetáin O'Néill | rival, 598-604 | ||||
| Aed Uaridnach macDomnaill O'Néill | 604-612 | ||||
| St. Augustine of Canterbury, mission to England, 597; d. 605 | |||||
| Eadbald | 616-640 | Cynegils | 611-643 | Máel Cobo macAedo O'Néill | 612-615 |
| Suibne Menn macFiachnai O'Néill | 615-628 | ||||
| Domnall macAedo O'Néill | 628-642 | ||||
| Earconbert | 640-664 | Cenwealh | 643-672 | Conall Cóel macMáele Cobo O'Néill | 642-654 |
| Cellach macMáele Cobo O'Néill | jointly, 642-658 | ||||
| Diarmait macAedo Sláine O'Néill | jointly, 656-665 | ||||
| Blathmac macAedo Sláine O'Néill | jointly, 656-665 | ||||
| Sechnussach macBlathmaic O'Néill | 665-671 | ||||
| Egbert I | 664-673 | Seaxburh | Queen, 672-673 | Cenn Fáelad macBlathmaic O'Néill | 671-675 |
| Hlothhere | 673-685 | Aescwine | 674-676 | Finsnechtae Fledach macDúnchada O'Néill | 675-695 |
| Centwine | 676-685, d.? | ||||
| Eadric | 685-686 | ||||
| 686-687 | Caedwalla (Peter) | 685-687 d.688 in Rome | |||
| Mul | 686-687 | Ine | 688-726 d.728 in Rome | ||
| Sigehere | King of Essex, 687-688 | ||||
| Oswine | 688-690 | ||||
| Swaefheard | 689-692 | ||||
| Wihtred | 691-725 | Loingsech macOengus O'Néill | 695-704 | ||
| Congal Cinn Magir macFergus Fánat O'Néill | 704-710 | ||||
| Fergal macMáele Dúin O'Néill | 710-722 & Ailech | ||||
| Fogartach macNéill O'Néill | 722-724 | ||||
| Cináed mac Irgalaig | 724-728 | ||||
| Æthelbert II | 725-748, c.754-762 | Æthelheard | 728-740 | Flaithbbertach macLoingsig O'Néill | 724-734 d.765 |
| Aed Allán macFergal O'Néill | 734-743 | ||||
| Eadberht I | 725-c.762 | Domnall Midi O'Néill | 743-763 | ||
| Ealric | 725-? | ||||
| Eardwulf | c.748-754 | Cuthred | 740-756 | ||
| Sigered | 759-763 | Sigebert | 756-757 | ||
| Ealhmund | 762-764, c.784-785 | Cynewulf | 756-786 | ||
| Heaberht | 764-c.771 | Niall Frossach macFergal O'Néill | 763-770 d.778 | ||
| Egbert II | 764-c.784 | Donnchad Midi macDomnaill Midi O'Néill | 770-797 | ||
| Offa | King of Mercia, 757-796 | Beorhtric | 786-802 | ||
| c.785-796 | |||||
| Eadberht II | 796-798 | First Viking raid, sacking of Lindisfarne Monastery, 793 | Aed Oirdnide macNéill Frossach O'Néill | 797-819 | |
| Cuthred of Mercia | 798-807 | Egbert | 802-839 | Conchobar macDonnchado Midi O'Néill | 819-833 |
| Mercia, 807-823 | King of England, 829-839 | Niall Caille macAedo Oirdnide O'Néill | 833-846 | ||
| Baldred | 823-825 | ||||
| 825-839 | Æthelwulf | England, 839-855 | |||
What follows is the genealogy of the O'Néill (Uí Néill, O'Neal) High Kings of Ireland down to Máel Sechnaill (980-1002, 1014-1022). The table is based on genealogies in A New History of Ireland, Volume IX, Maps, Genealogies, Lists -- a Companion to Irish History, Part II [Oxford University Press, 1984, 2002, pp.127, 128, 130]. The very earliest dates disagree with the table above, which is from Bruce Gordon. However, we see a correspondence with the death in 463 of Lóeguire macNéill, the third King according to Gordon and the second according to the Oxford History; and we begin to get complete agreement with the death of Lugaid macLóeguiri (the fifth Oxford King) in 507. If the Oxford dates are correct, and we have the right date for St. Patrick, his mission in Ireland began before the advent of any of the High Kings -- which is reasonable when we reflect that St. Patrick's mission is probably what would have resulted in the first written chronicles.
Brian Boru follows Máel Sechnaill as High King. He was a King of Munster and Thomond and not an O'Néill. Subsequent High Kings, down to Rory O'Connor, include some O'Néills but also other families. Obviously, any kind of hereditary succession is long gone. As in Poland, this signifies grave political fragmentation. However, the O'Néills did not die out. 
The Earls of Tyrone were descendants of the High King Domnall ua Neill (956-980). Hugh (Aodh) O'Neill (d.1616), Earl of Tyrone, led a revolt against the English in 1593-1603 and fled the country with its failure. Eventually, O'Neills descended from him became peers of Portugal and Spain. Ironically, the "Red Hand of Ulster," which has become a symbol of Protestant Ireland, is from the arms of the O'Neill family. There are various legends about the origin of the Red Hand. They seem to go back to Irish mythology, as even in Roman mythology (or Star Wars) there are stories of the sacrifice of a hand by the hero. In the Irish legends some kind of race or competition is usually involved. The hero, or an Ó'Neill, of the story wins the competition by cutting off his own hand and throwing it ahead to pass the finish line or claim the goal or prize first. This seems like a lot to do to win a race, but some versions involve claiming a kingdom (like Ulster, or Ireland itself).
| Kings of Gwynedd | |
|---|---|
| Rhodri the Great | 844-878 |
| Anarawd ap Rhodri | 878-916 |
| Idwal the Bald | 916-942 |
| Hywel Dda | King of Deheubarth, 920-950 |
| 942-950 | |
| Iago ab Idwal | 950-979 |
| Ieuaf ab Idwal | 950-969 |
| Hywel ap Ieuaf | 974-985 |
| Cadwallon ap Ieuaf | 985-986 |
| Maredudd ap Owain | King of Deheubarth, 986-999 |
| 986-999 | |
| Cynan ap Hywel | 999-1005 |
| Llywelyn ap Seisyll | 1005-1023 |
| Iago ap Idwal | 1023-1039 |
| Gruffydd ap Llywelyn | 1039-1063 |
| Bleddyn ap Cynfyn | 1063-1075 |
| Rhiwallon ap Cynfyn | 1063-1070 |
| Trahern ap Caradog | 1075-1081 |
| Gruffydd ap Cynan | 1081-1137 |
| Owain Gwynedd | 1137-1170 |
| Maelgwyn ab Owain | 1170-1173 |
| Dafydd ab Owain | 1170-1195, d.1203 |
| Rhodri ab Owain | 1170-1190, d.1195 |
| Llywelyn the Great | 1195-1240 |
| Prince of Wales, 1216-1240 | |
| Dafydd ap Llywelyn | 1240-1246 |
| Llywelyn the Last ap Gryffydd | 1246-1282 |
| Prince of Wales, 1258-1282 | |
| Owain ap Gruffydd | 1246-1255, 1277-1282 |
| Dafydd ap Gruffydd | 1282-1283 |
| Conquest by England, 1283 | |
| Edward, II of England | Prince of Wales, 1301-1307 |
| King of England, 1307-1327 | |
"Wales" is a Germanic name, simply meaning non-German or Roman, used in English. Wales itself in Welsh is Cymru which is recognizable as the Roman name of the region, Cambria. Welsh belongs to the Brythonic group of Celtic languages, related to Cornish in Cornwall (now extinct), Breton in Brittany, and probably to the Pictish languages of early Scotland, but not to Scotch Gaelic itself (which is derived from Irish).
Wales consisted of a number of small kingdoms since at least the 5th century. Gwynedd and Deheubarth became the principal states, with Gwynedd eventually predominating. A united and independent Wales, however, only survived briefly, until Edward I of England definitively annexed the country in 1283. The capital of Wales now is Cardiff, in the south, but Edward built Caernarvon Castle in Gwynedd to control the country. Edward is supposed to have promised the Welsh in 1284 that he would provide a prince for them born in Wales who did not speak a word of English. He then produced his son Edward, just born at Caenarvon, who of course didn't speak a word of anything. Edward was formally invested as Prince of Wales in 1301.
The descent of the Tudors from Welsh royalty is shown, but there are some uncertainties about this. The Mammoth Book of British Kings and Queens gives it [p.331] as though unproblematic, but Brian Tompsett's Royal and Noble genealogy gives an alternate descent and discusses other uncertainties. While the Welsh derivation of the Tudors is beyond doubt, one suspects that Henry VII or others might not be above manufacturing a royal version of the descent. While the main line of the Tudors died out, it will be noted below that all subsequent British royality is descended from Henry VII through his daughter Margaret and her husband, King James IV of Scotland.
| Kings of England Saxons | Kings of Scotland, Kingdom of Alba | High Kings of Ireland | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ethelwulf/ Æðelwulf | 839-855 | Kenneth MacAlpin | 840-858 | Máel Sechnaill macMáele Ruanaid O'Néill | 846-862 Mide |
| Æthelbald | 855-860 | Donald I | 858-863 | ||
| Æthelbert | 860-865 | Constantine I | 863-877 | Aed Findliath macNéill Caille O'Néill | 862-879 Ailech |
| Æthelred I | 865-871 | Aed | 877-878 | ||
| Danish invasion, 866, establishment of the Danelaw | |||||
| Alfred/Ælfred the Great | 871-899 | Eochaid & Giric I | 878-889 | Flann Sionna macMáele Sechnaill O'Néill | 879-916 Mide |
| defeat of the Danes, 878 | |||||
| Eadweard/ Edward the Elder | 899-924 | Donald II | 899-900 | Niall Glúndubh macAedo Findliath O'Néill | 916-919 Ailech |
| recovery of East Anglia from the Danes, 917 | |||||
| Elfweard/ Æthelward | 924 | Constantine II | 900-943 | Donnchad Donn macFlann O'Néill | 919-944 |
| Æthelstan | 924-939 | ||||
| recovery of York from the Danes, 927-939 | |||||
| Edmund I | 939-946 | Malcolm I | 943-954 | Ruaidrí ua Canannáin | rival, 944-950 |
| Eadred | 946-955 | Indulf | 954-962 | Congalach Cnogba macMáel Mithig O'Néill | 944-956 |
| final recovery of York from the Danes, 954 | |||||
| Edwy/Eadwig the Fair | 955-959 | Dubh | 962-c.966 | Domnall macMuirchertaig O'Néill | 956-980 |
| Edgar | 959-975 | Cuilean Ring | c.966-971 | ||
| Edward the Martyr | 975-978 | Kenneth II | 971-995 | Máel Sechnaill macDomnaill O'Néill | 980-1002, 1014-1022 |
| Ethelred/ Æðelred II the Unready | 978-1013, 1014-1016 | Constantine III the Bald | 995-997 | ||
| Danish occupation, 1013-1014 | Kenneth III | 997-1005 | Brian Bóruma macCennétig, Brian Boru | Munster, 976-1014; High King, 1002-1014 | |
| Edmund II Ironside | 1016 | Giric II | 997-1005 | ||
| Danes | Malcolm II | 1005-1034 | |||
| Canute the Great | 1016-1035 | Killed in victory over Danes at Clontarf, 1014 | |||
| King of Denmark 1018-1035 | Donnchad MacBrian | Munster, 1022-1063; d.1064 | |||
| Harold I | 1035-1040 | Duncan I | 1034-1040 | ||
| Hardecanute | King of Denmark 1035-1042 | ||||
| 1040-1042 | |||||
The Mammoth Book of British Kings and Queens shows the descent of Godwin of Wessex from King Æthelred I as though it is not problematic [p.468]. There is no discussion of the evidence. However, nothing of the sort is mentioned in other sources, and Godwin, although the sort of person who doubtlessly would prefer royal ancestry, is usually just said to have been from an old family. Suspicion may be in order, as with the descent of the Tudors from Welsh royalty.
Anglo-Saxon England, which ends at Hastings with the death of Harold II, now seems like a different civilization, so greatly did things change under the Normans. The language, Old English, seems more like a dialect of German, and names that ought to be familiar, like Edward, are strange: Eadweard. Other names are strange indeed, like Æðelred -- which, however, gets remembered as "Ethelred." Old English literature, like Beowulf, is heavy going. Nevertheless, a little digging and affinities to Middle and Modern English are clear enough. And some major artifacts survive, like the Shrine of Edward the Confessor in Westminster Abbey. English money, in the system that survived until 1970, also began under the Saxon Kings, as recounted elsewhere.
I was long under the impression that the Coronation Chair in the Abbey was also from Edward the Confessor, but it was actually created by Edward I specifically to hold the Stone of Scone, upon which Scotish Kings were crowned. Edward had taken the Stone from Scotland during his brief possession of the country (1296-1306). When James VI of Scotland inherited the Throne of England, there didn't seem to be any reason to return it, but the sense has faded that it is the Monarchs of Scotland who rule England, and in 1996 the Stone was sent home. An exact copy of the Chair even exists, which was used for the dual Coronation of William and Mary.
It should be remembered that the early Saxon Kings of England were part of the Carolingian world. Nothing illustrates this so well as the marriage of Judith, daughter of Charles the Bald, to Æthelwulf and Æthelbald, both of whom died on her. She then ran off with Baldwin Iron Arm -- to found the historic line of the Counts of Flanders. This also corresponds to the era of Viking attacks, which began with the sacking of the monastery at Lindisfarne in 793. Eventually, these raids resulted in a period of Danish rule of England, and then, indirectly, the Norman Conquest -- though by then the Normans were more French than Norse. King Canute, among other things, contributed one classic anecdote to English history. To piously demonstrate the limited powers of his sovereignty, he had his throne placed on the beach (traditionally at Bosham) and commanded the rising tide to go back out. It didn't. To his not quite entirely Christianized Danish courtiers, this was, reportedly, a powerful and sobering demonstration.
Kenneth MacAlpin is traditionally regarded as the first King of a united Scotland, having combined the kingdoms of the Picts and of the Dál Riata Scots -- though at first this is styled the Kingdom of Alba. Soon afterwards (878) the Briton Kingdom of Strathclyde began to be absorbed also, although this was a process that continued perhaps as late as 1045. This history is treated on the separate Scotia webpage. While the Gaelic language of the Scots came to replace that Brythonic languages of the Picts and Britons, English eventually became the language the Lowlands. This seems to have been due to English involvement in Scottish politics, the sojourns of Scottish Royalty, often as hostages, at the English court, and the intermarriage of Scottish with English nobility. It is noteworthy that Malcolm IV (1153-1165) was the last Scottish King with a Scottish name. Once established in Scotland, however, English developed as a separate "Scots" dialect, with its own distinctive phonology and vocabulary, to the point where it would largely be unintelligible to speakers of metropolitan English -- thus becoming a separate language. When Scotland later became politically integrated with England (1707), educated Scots began speaking standard (i.e. Oxford) English rather than the Scots language (though usually retaining their distinctive accent, something lingering even in Sean Connery). Efforts have been made at different times to preserve or revive the Scots language. One influential case was with the poet Robert Burns (1759-1796), who wrote "Auld Lang Syne." This has become the song of New Year's Eve in the whole English speaking world, but it is a constant source of perplexity since it is actually in Scots -- even the title is mysterious ("old long ago/since"). Meanwhile, the actual Celtic Scots Gaelic has only survived on the periphery of the Highlands and in the Isles. This is sometimes confused with the Celtic Irish language, which can also be called Gaelic and to which, of course, it is closely related.
| Saxons | MacBeth | 1040-1057 | Diarmait MacMáil na mBó | 1042-1072 Leinster | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edward the Confessor | 1042-1066 | ||||
| Harold II Godwinsson | 1066 | Lulach | 1057-1058 | ||
| Defeats Harald Hårdråde, Stamford Bridge; defeated and killed by William I, Hastings, 1066 | |||||
| Edgar the Ætheling | 1066 | Malcolm III Canmore | 1058-1093 | ||
| Normans | |||||
| William I the Conqueror | the Bastard, Duke of Normandy, 1035-1087 | Toirdelbach O'Brien | 1063-1086 Munster, 1072-1086 High King | ||
| 1066-1087 | Donald Bane | 1093-1094, 1094-1097, d.1099 | |||
| William II | 1087-1100 | Edmund | 1094-1097, d.? | Domnall macArdgar O'Lochlainn O'Néill | 1090-1121 Ailech, Cenél |
| Duncan II | 1094 | Muirchertach II MacToirdelbaig O'Brien | 1086-1119 Munster | ||
| Henry I | 1100-1135 | Edgar | 1097-1107 | ||
| Alexander I | 1107-1124 | Toirrdelbach (Turlogh) macRuaidrí na Saide Buide ua Conchobair | 1106-1156 Connacht, 1121-1135, 1141-1150 High King, d.1156 | ||
| Stephen | 1135-1154 | David I the Saint | 1124-1153 | ||
| Plantagenets | |||||
| Henry II | 1154-1189 | Malcolm IV | 1153-1165 | Muirchertach (Murtagh) macNéill macLochlainn | 1136-1166 Ailech, 1150-1166 High King |
| Lord of Ireland, 1175 | |||||
| Richard I the Lionheart | 1189-1199 | William the Lion | 1165-1214 | Ruaidrí macToirrdelbaig, Rory O'Connor | 1156-1183 Connacht, 1166-1175 last High King, d.1198 |
| Third Crusade, 1189-1192 | Conchobar | 1183-1189 Connacht | |||
| John Lackland | 1199-1216 | Cathal | 1189-1200 Connacht | ||
| Henry III | 1216-1272 | Alexander II | 1214-1249 | English rule | |
| Alexander III | 1249-1286 | Brian Catha an Duin | 1258-1260 | ||
| Margaret Maid of Norway | 1286-1290 | English rule | |||
| Interregnum, 1290-1292 | |||||
| John Baliol | 1292-1296 d.1315 | ||||
| 1272-1307 | Edward I | 1296-1306 | |||
| Edward II | 1307-1327 | Robert I the Bruce | 1306-1329 | Edward de Bruce | 1316-1318 |
| Edward III | 1327-1377 | David II | 1329-1370 | English rule | |
| Hundred Years War, 1337-1453; the Black Death arrives in England, 1348 | |||||
| Richard II | 1377-1399, d.1400 | the Black Death arrives in Scotland, 1350 | the Black Death arrives in Ireland, 1348 | ||
The historian Judith Herrin begins her book Byzantium, The Surprising Life of a Medieval Empire by saying:
And so I found myself trying to explain briefly what Byzantine history is to two serious builders in hard hats and heavy boots. Many years of teaching had not prepared me for this. I tried to sum up a lifetime of study in a ten-minute visit. [Princeton U. Press, 2008, p.xiii] I would say three things to the British workmen: (1) the "Byzantine" Empire was simply the Roman Empire, the way it continued in the East, with the capital at Constantinople, even as it "fell" in the West, (2) Turkey finally conquered the Empire when Constantinople fell in 1453, and (3) after the Norman Conquest in 1066, when William the Conqueror dispossessed the Saxon nobility, many of them went looking for employment in what at the time was the famous, elite Varangian Guard The Norman Conquest of England profoundly altered the nature and direction of English, and British, history. The cultural change may now be the most conspicuous. English has a larger vocabulary than most languages because the great number of French words introduced by the Normans doubled up with original Old English words -- for example "sheep" is from Old English while "mutton" is from French; "watch" is from Old English, "hour" is from French, and, just for good measure, "clock" is from Danish -- the Vikings and Danes had made their own contributions to English vocabulary. Since there is usually not much point in having two words that mean exactly the same thing, the meaning of the doubled words varies somewhat, expanding nuance. Grammatically, English may be said to have French nouns and German verbs. Since the French noun system is simpler than the German (or Old English), and the German verb system is simpler than the French, English benefits in simplicity each way -- if, for some reason, simplicity is to be valued -- it does make the language easier to learn (if not to spell).
On the political side, the Norman Conquest unified the administration of England, preventing the kind of feudal fragmenation that troubled France for so long. The centralization of government at the same time made it the focus of efforts to limit its power, first by the nobility (resulting in the Magna Carta), later by well-to-do merchants (resulting in the English Revolution). The failure of male heirs to William the Conqueror's line resulted in some conflict, until Henry (II) of Anjou was firmly in place as the first of the Plantagenets. Henry brought with him additional French territory, and then obtained a large part of the whole Kingdom of France by marrying Eleanor, the heiress of Aquitaine and Gascony, who had recently divorced King Louis VII of France. This English "empire" in France dominated the history of both countries for some time thereafter. The incompetent King John not only was forced by the nobility into recognizing rights long honored as the origin of English constitutionalism, but his loss of English possessions in France north of the Loire (hence "Lackland") put the French Monarchy on course for the unification and centralization of political power in France -- whose success made France the predominant power in Europe in the 17th century but whose drawbacks ultimately produced the French Revolution. Meanwhile, some attention could be paid to the rest of the British Isles, where Ireland gradually came under English control, Wales was annexed by Edward I, and then Edward also briefly acquired Scotland, where he exploited offers of mediation in the succession dispute of 1290-1292. This episode is rather badly (even falsely) represented in the otherwise rather good movie Braveheart (Best Picture Oscar for 1995). There had been English interference in Scotland for some time, and the English had even blocked repeated requests by the Scots to the Pope for recognition by the Church of the Scottish Crown, so that the King could be crowned and anointed with a Christian rite. Scottish independence was finally assured when Robert the Bruce destroyed an English army, twice the size of the Scottish, at Bannockburn in 1314. The first King anointed by Papal authority was David II (1329-1370).One afternoon in 2002, two workmen knocked on my office door in King's College, London. They were doing repairs to the old buildings and had often passed my door with its notice; 'Professor of Byzantine History'. Together they decided to stop by and ask me, 'What is Byzantine history?' They thought that it had something to do with Turkey.
of the Emperor in Constantinople. The tradition of Englishmen enlisting the Guard continued for more than three hundred years (until at least 1404), probably far longer than Saxon nobility alone needed to do it. These recruits became known as the Egklinovaraggoi (Enklinobarangi in Latin), i.e. "English Varangians." We even have a letter that the Emperor Michael VIII Palaeologus wrote in 1272 to King Henry III concerning the Englishmen in his service. Thus, Professor Herrin might have said to the workmen that "Byzantium" was once an important part of English history, a place where the workmen themselves might have considered going in the 11th, 12th, 13th, or 14th centuries. Unfortunately, unlike cases such as Harald Hårdråde, we apparently do not have any accounts of individual Englishmen in the Guard; and this aspect of English history is now mostly forgotten -- although it is eerily evoked by William Butler Yeats' poem, "Sailing to Byzantium."
Constitutionally, this gave England a head start over all the rest of Europe in the evolution of modern government. The centralization of power also depoliticized land ownership, loosening the ties of feudalism, including serfdom. Something approaching private property and a free labor market soon gave England an economic advantage that grew and lasted into the 20th century (see Alan MacFarlane, The Origins of English Individualism: The Family, Property and Social Transition [Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1978]).
| Lancaster | Stuart | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Robert II Stuart | 1370-1390 | ||
| Henry IV | 1399-1413 | Robert III | 1390-1406 |
| Henry V | 1413-1422 | James I | 1406-1437 |
| gale wrecks 25 English fishing boats off Iceland, 1419 | |||
| Henry VI | 1422-1461 1470-1471 | James II | 1437-1460 |
| Wars of the Roses, 1455-1485 | |||
| York | |||
| Edward IV | 1461-1470 1471-1483 | James III | 1460-1488 |
| last vinyard in Mediaeval England, at Ely, closes, 1469 | |||
| Edward V | 1483 | ||
| Richard III | 1483-1485 | ||
| Tudor | |||
| Henry VII | 1485-1509 | James IV | 1488-1513 |
| Henry VIII | 1509-1547 | James V | 1513-1542 |
| King of Ireland, 1541 | |||
| Edward VI | 1547-1553 | Mary Queen of Scots | 1542-1567 d. 1587 |
| Mary I | 1553-1558 | ||
| Elizabeth I | 1558-1603 | ||
| Stuart | |||
| 1603-1625 | James VI of Scotland James I of England | 1567-1625 | |
The disappearance of vinyards in England, which previously had competed with France at a level that aroused concern there, is one bit of evidence for the arrival of the Little Ice Age, which would involve a colder climate until the 19th century. Most vinyards were gone by the 1440's. Warming since the 19th century, although now creating alarm in political circles, has still not quite returned to the levels of warmth that were experienced in the 11th and 12th centuries (the Mediaeval Warm Period).
Between 1200 and 1600, i.e. from the later Plantagenets to the time of the Stuarts, the English language had been changing from Middle English, the language of Chaucer, to New English. One of the most conspicuous features of this was the Great English Vowel Shift, which I have considered on a separate page through the link. It was with the later Plantagenets, of course, that the Kings of England began speaking English rather than French -- though many of them were claiming to be Kings of France as well. The language of Shakespeare is New English, though I must confess I have a great deal of difficulty understanding it. That is not a problem a century later with John Locke, who often favors us with charming archaisms, but they pose no difficulty to intelligibility.
| Stuart | |
|---|---|
| Charles I | 1625-1649 |
| Civil War, 1640-1649; Commonwealth, 1649-1653; First Dutch War, 1652-1654; Protectorate, 1653-1660 | |
| Oliver Cromwell | Lord Protector, 1653-1658 |
| Richard Cromwell | 1658-1660, d.1712 |
| Charles II | 1660-1685 |
| Second Dutch War, 1664-1667; New Amsterdam acquired, becomes New York, 1664; the Plague in London, 1665; the Great Fire of London, 1666; Third Dutch War, 1672-1674 | |
| James II | 1685-1688, d.1701 |
| Glorious Revolution, James flees to France, 1688; Bill of Rights, 1689 | |
| [interregnum] | 1688-1689 |
| Mary II | 1689-1694 |
| William III | Stadholder of the Netherlands, 1672-1702 |
| 1689-1702 | |
| War of the League of Augsburg, 1688-1697; War of the Spanish Succession, 1701-1713 | |
| Anne | 1702-1714 |
This is where the undercurrent of religion comes in, for Charles had become sympathetic to Catholicism and began to tilt towards France (with the help of a secret subsidy, including women, from Louis XIV) and against the Protestant Netherlands, which Louis had invaded (1672). Otherwise, the exuberance of the Restoration, and the infamous philandering of Charles, all look more libertine than Catholic. )
Some sense of this can be gleaned from the movie Restoration [1994]. However, actor Sam Niell did not make a very good Charles II. Charles, very tall and dark, with long black hair (click on image for larger version), not to mention productive of multiple illegitimate children, would be more like a dead ringer for "shock jock" radio personality Howard Stern. Charles did convert to Catholicism before his death, and then his openly Catholic brother, James II, became King. This produced the beginnings of modern political parties: The Tories, who were for James, and the Whigs, against him. While James talked of no more than toleration for Catholics, his actions soon were for the persecution and suppression of Protestants. This was more or less tolerable as long as James's heirs were his Protestant daughters, Mary and Anne; but when he fathered a (Catholic) son on his new (Catholic) wife, Mary of Modena, resistance began to stiffen. William of Orange, husband of Mary, landed with a Dutch Army, the British Army went over to him, and James fled -- a bloodless transaction consequently called the "Glorious Revolution." Finding Catholic sympathy and support in Ireland (and, of course, from France), James was finally defeated at the Battle of the Boyne in 1689. William could then go on to organize the great alliances against France in the War of the League of Augsburg (1688-1697) and the War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1713). Lack of heirs continued to bedevil the dynasty. With Anne, this was not from lack of trying. She had 14 children, every single one of whom predeceased her. With a sad irony, Anne was the last British Monarch who exercised what were believed to be the healing powers of the Royal Touch -- though by Anne's day this was supposed only to be effective for scrofula, tuberculosis of the lymph glands. Presumably, this is not what afflicted her children. Unwilling to countenance the Catholic Stuart Pretenders (the "Jacobites"), Parliament brought in George I of Hanover, a great-grandson of James I through his daughter Elizabeth and granddaughter Sophie.
The Union of England and Scotland in 1707 produced the "United Kingdom," with a single Parliament, and the Union Flag, at left. A separate Scottish Parliament has been recently reestablished.
Formal Union with Ireland in 1801 added the familiar diagonal red stripes to the present Union Flag. These were based on red "saltire" cross of the Fitzgerald family, now a very old Irish family (cf. John Fitzgerald Kennedy) but originally among the Normans who conquered Ireland for England in the 12th century. Thus, the cross is usually not viewed as a genuine Irish national symbol.
Subsequent Kings are listed with their Prime Ministers. There is some uncertainty here about the Party affiliations of some of the early Prime Ministers. The Encyclopaedia Britannica says, "There were no formal political parties in the 18th century...nor was there a formal opposition in Parliament, and opposition to the king's ministry was regarded as factious and even traitorous." This does seem to introduce an element of vagueness into many of the Governments. There is also some disagreement and confusion sometimes about who the Prime Ministers were, since the title wasn't used until the 20th Century. Thus, there are different versions of when William Pitt the Elder was, if ever, Prime Minister. These assignments are based on Langer's An Encyclopedia of World History, mentioned above, the Britannica descriptions, the assignments and descriptions at the Encyclopaedia Britannica (which lists Palmerston as a Tory, which he certainly was not after 1830), the Encyclopedia of World History edited by Patrick K. O'Brien [Facts on File, 2000, p.522], and The World Amanac and Books of Facts, 2001 [World Almanac Books, 2001, p.490]. The latter two sources list Coalition ministries, which were especially common in wartime. Be that as it may, Lloyd George was a Liberal, and Winston Churchill was a Conservative, and that is how they are given here.
| Hanover | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| George I | 1714-1727 | Prime Ministers | |
| Whig/Liberal | Tory/Conservative | ||
| Sir Robert Walpole | 1721-1742 | ||
| George II | 1727-1760 | ||
| War of the Austrian Succession, 1740-1748 | |||
| Lord John Carteret/
Earl of Wilmington | 1742-1743 | ||
| Henry Pelham | 1743-1754 | ||
| Duke of Newcastle | 1754-1756, 1757-1762 | ||
| Duke of Devonshire | 1756-1757 | ||
| Seven Years War, 1756-1763 | |||
| George III | 1760-1820 | Earl of Bute | 1762-1763 |
| George Grenville | 1763-1765 | ||
| Marquis of Rockingham | 1765-1766, 1782 | ||
| William Pitt the Elder | 1766-1768 | ||
| Duke of Grafton | 1768-1770 | ||
| Lord Frederick North | 1770-1782 | ||
| American Revolution, 1775-1783 | |||
| Earl of Shelburne | 1782-1783 | ||
| Duke of Portland | 1783, 1807-1809 | ||
| William Pitt the Younger | 1783-1801, 1804-1806 | ||
| Henry Addington | 1801-1804 | ||
| Lord William Grenville | 1806-1807 | ||
| Abolition of Slave Trade, 1807 | |||
| Spencer Perceval | 1809-1812 | ||
| Earl of Liverpool | 1812-1827 | ||
| George IV | 1820-1830 | ||
| George Canning | 1827 | ||
| Viscount Goderich | 1827-1828 | ||
| Duke of Wellington | 1828-1830, 1834 | ||
| Catholic Emancipation, 1829 | |||
| William IV | 1830-1837 | Earl Grey | 1830-1834 |
| First Reform Bill, 1832; Abolition of Slavery, 1833 | |||
| Viscount Melbourne | 1834, 1835-1841 | ||
| Sir Robert Peel | 1834-1835, 1841-1846 | ||
| Victoria Empress of India, 1876 | 1837-1901 | ||
| Abolition of Corn Laws, 1846 | |||
| Lord John Russell | 1846-1852, 1865-1866 | ||
| Earl of Derby | 1852, 1858-1859, 1866-1868 | ||
| Earl of Aberdeen | 1852-1855 | ||
| Crimean War, 1854-1856 | |||
| Viscount Palmerston | 1855-1858, 1859-1865 | ||
| Jewish Emancipation, 1858 | |||
| Second Reform Bill, 1867 | |||
| Benjamin Disraeli | 1868, 1874-1880 | ||
| William E. Gladstone | 1868-1874, 1880-1885, 1886, 1892-1894 | ||
| Third Reform Bill, 1884; First Home Rule Bill, 1886; Second Home Rule Bill, 1893 | |||
| Marquis of Salisbury | 1885-1886, 1886-1892, 1895-1902 | ||
| Boer War, 1899-1902 | |||
| Earl of Rosebery | 1894-1895 | ||
If the Conservatives sometimes furthered the Liberal agenda, the Liberals sometimes helped further Conservative goals. For instance, Benjamin Disraeli flattered Queen Victoria by making her Empress of India in 1876. This was regarded by Liberals as a dangerous aping of the recently (1871) created German Empire. Imperialism did not represent anything good to the Liberals, since it involved subjugating foreigners abroad and undermining civic equality at home. However, the Liberals were also particularly solicitous of the British taxpayer. These principles came into conflict in 1882. Disraeli had purchased Egypt's shares in the Suez Canal Company to help the Khedive out of debt (1875). But the Egyptian government continued to be fiscally incompetent, and domestic turmoil was beginning to endanger Britain's stake in the Canal. This put the great Liberal Prime Minister, William Gladstone, in a dilemma. Either let revolution or anarchy endanger the British investment in Egypt, or engage in a bit of Imperialist adventuring. Adventuring won out, and Gladstone put a British Army into Egypt, suppressing a nationalist revolt. The French, who had always owned the other shares in the Canal Company, got cold feet. This made Egypt a de facto part of the British Empire, but the de jure fiction of local rule and Turkish sovereignty was preserved until 1914. Meanwhile, a local revolt in the Sudan, long ruled from Egypt, had begun in 1881. Gladstone saw no reason why Britain should help preserve Egyptian rule over the Sudanese, so in 1883 he decided to withdraw the garrison and appointed Charles Gordon to manage the business. Gordon, known as "Chinese Gordon" after he helped the Chinese government suppress the Taiping Rebellion, had already been governor of the Sudan, down to 1880. He knew the country well, and this may have been Gladstone's miscalculation. Gordon did not want to abandon the Sudan to the forces of the messianic Mahdî. Gordon refused to leave Khartoum. Gladstone did not want to send help. In the face of public uproar, Gladstone gave in, but it was too late. Gordon was killed when the Mahdî stormed Khartoum in 1885. The relief force was only two days away down the Nile. Gordon's death was a sensation, one of the supreme moments in British Imperial history, and the Government fell. Readers of Sherlock Holmes will recall the picture of Gordon that hung at 221B Baker Steet. In 1899, on the high tide of Imperialism, the Sudan was reconquered by Lord Kitchener, with a young Winston Churchill along.
One of the great English political issues of the later 19th century was Irish Home Rule. The Irish Parliament had been dissolved in 1801 and Irish members elected to the British Parliament. Catholic emancipation in 1829 even meant that Irish Catholics could be elected to Parliament. However, the Parliamentary program of the Irish Members quickly became Irish independence. William Gladstone's Liberal government fell over a Home Rule Bill for Ireland in 1886 (having just returned to power after the fiasco of the Sudan), splitting the Liberal Party into Home Rule and Unionist factions. 
After a second Home Rule Bill was defeated in the House of Lords, Gladstone resigned in 1894 from his fourth and last ministry. A Home Rule Bill was finally passed in 1914, but its suspension for World War I resulted in open Irish rebellion in 1916 and years of terrorism by the Irish Republican Army (IRA). 
When Irish independence came, it was compromised by partition, as the Protestants of Ulster secured a separate regime for themselves. The "Red Hand of Ulster" flag was official until the Ulster Parliament was itself abolished in 1972, in British response to the "troubles" in Northern Ireland, which began with Catholic civil rights demonstrations in 1968 and expanded into IRA bombings and Protestant retaliation. Although several peace plans have been formally accepted by Britain, the Irish Republic, and most factions in Ulster, it is not clear that the situation is anywhere near real resolution. The recent economic awaking of the Irish Republic itself may help undercut some of the basically Marxist inspiration of the IRA (which was always illegal in the Irish Republic).
| Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (Windsor) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Edward VII | 1901-1910 | Prime Ministers | |
| Liberal | Labour | ||
| Tory/Conservative | |||
| Arthur J. Balfour | 1902-1905 | ||
| Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman | 1905-1908 | ||
| Herbert H. Asquith | 1908-1916 | ||
| George V | 1910-1936 | ||
| Third Home Rule Bill, 1914; World War I, 1914-1918 | |||
| David Lloyd George | 1916-1919/ 1919-1922 | ||
| Irish Easter Rebellion, 1916; Irish Rebellion, 1919-1921; Irish Free State, 1921 | |||
| Andrew Bonar Law | 1922-1923 | ||
| J. Ramsay MacDonald | 1924, 1929-1931/ 1931-1935 | ||
| Stanley Baldwin | 1923-1924, 1924-1929, 1935-1937 | ||
| Edward VIII | 1936 | ||
| Women's Suffrage, 1928 | |||
 | |||
| George VI | 1936-1952 | Neville Chamberlain | 1937-1940 |
| Winston S. Churchill | 1940-1945, 1951-1955 | ||
| Clement R. Attlee | 1945-1950/ 1950-1951 | ||
| Partition of India, Independence of India & Pakistan, 1947; Independence of Ceylon, 1948 | |||
| Elizabeth II | 1952-present | Sir Anthony Eden | 1955-1957 |
| Harold Macmillan | 1957-1959/ 1959-1963 | ||
| Sir Alec Douglas-Hume | 1963-1964 | ||
| Harold Wilson | 1964-1970, 1974-1976 | ||
| Edward Heath | 1970-1974 | ||
| James Callaghan | 1976-1979 | ||
| Margaret Thatcher | 1979-1983/ 1983-1987/ 1987-1990 | ||
| John Major | 1990-1992/ 1992-1997 | ||
| Tony Blair | 1997-2001/ 2001-2005/ 2005-2007 | ||
| Gordon Brown | 2007-present | ||
Queen Victoria was of the House of Hanover, which actually meant the much more ancient House of Welf. This Welf descent of Victoria can be examined on a popup. She then married Albert of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. There was nothing awkward about this at the time, since Victoria herself was from German noblity and Britain had been an ally of Prussia since the Seven Years War. The children and descendants of Victoria and Albert then married into most of (it seems) the royalty of contemporary Europe. This can be inspected in part on the genealogies above and below, but the whole story can be seen on a popup. Albert's German origin eventually became something of an embarrassment when Britain and Germany went to war in 1914. As anti-German feeling rose, George V adopted the name "Windsor" for the Royal Family. The future Queen Elizabeth II married Prince Philip of Greece, who renounced his claims to the Greek Throne and adopted his mother's family name, "Mountbatten." The Mountbattens were another German family, the Battenbergs, that had also changed its name in Britain during World War I. Charles, the present Prince of Wales, would thus be the first King of the House of Mountbatten. Charles regarded the World War II hero, Lord Mountbatten of Burma, his great-uncle, as his "honorary grandfather." Queen Elizabeth has indicated her preference that it be styled the House of "Windsor-Mountbatten"; but what Charles calls it, when and if he becomes King, is presumably up to him.
Charles's private life, like many earlier Royals (George IV, Edward VIII), has served to stain his image. His 1981 marriage to Lady Diana Spencer, a cousin of Winston Churchill, seems to have been arranged mainly to procure a virgin. They never looked quite right together and ended up with an actual divorce in 1996. Later it turned out that almost simultaneously with the wedding Charles was falling in love with someone else. This was Camilla Shand, who had married in 1973 and become Camilla Parker-Bowles. Camilla also divorced in 1996. Unfortunately, Diana, sweet and glamorous, and always a darling of the media, was killed in an auto accident in 1997. With the taudry details of the Camilla-Charles affair, and the tragedy of Diana's death, this rather cast a pall over the whole business. There was also the problem of Charles marrying a divorcée, the very thing that had cost Edward VIII the Throne. Nevertheless, people, and the Queen, got used to the idea, and Charles and Diana married in 2005. With their luck, the wedding had to be postponed a day because the funeral of Pope John Paul II. At their age, we are not likely to expect children from Charles and Camilla, so the throne will actually pass to Diana's son William, a handsome and golden boy with more the cast of his mother than his father. Some think that Charles should renounce the Throne in William's favor.
In one line, Queen Elizabeth II is in the 40th generation from Charlemagne. This can be examined in a popup. In the male line, Elizabeth is from Saxony (hence "Saxe-Coburg-Gotha"), which is the House of Wettin. Her grandfathers back to Burchard, Duke of Thuringia (907-909), can be examined on this popup. This only covers 34 generations, failing to reach back to Charlemagne by about a century. It may only be 33 generations, because of an uncertainty about whether there was a second "Thimo" at the beginning of the 12th century. Elizabeth's descent can also be traced back to the Macedonian Dynasty of Romania. This is often said to mean that she descends from the founder of the Dynasty, the Emperor Basil I. However, I can only verify a line that begins with the Imperial in-law, Constantine IX Monomachus, as can be seen on this popup. We get 31 geneations from Constantine, or 32 if we go by way of Mary Queen of Scots. Surprisingly, this line of descent also includes King Harold II of England, who was killed at Hastings by William the Conqueror. We thus do not expect Harold to be an ancestor of subsequent monarchs of England. However, Harold's daughter Gytha married Vladimir II of Kiev, through whom the descent from Constantine passes.
By the 1970's, Britain was being called by some the "Sick Man of Europe," on analogy to the 19th century Ottoman Empire (a bitter irony, since British policy in the 19th century had succeeded in preventing the Empire from being overthrown by Egypt or conquered by Russia). The main problem was the "British Disease," namely labor unions which absolutely froze innovation in industries and which perpetuated money losing government industries, like coal, which had been nationalized by the Laborites after World War II. Britain was turning into a stagnant Soviet kind of economy. 
Margaret Thatcher, the "Iron Lady," came to office and completely turned this around, actually breaking unions and privatizing state industries. What used to be the industrial heartland of England, in the North, became a Rust Belt, and the South became the center of growth, innovation, and Tory voting strength. Thatcher became the longest serving Prime Minister of the 20th century, only to be deposed through an internal Party coup. The work was left unfinished, with welfare state white elephants, like the National Health Service, left untouched, though even now British unemployment is far from the double digits familiar in Euro-socialist France and Germany. The bland and supine John Major could live off Thatcherite capital for another seven years, until well earned electoral catastrophe in 1997. The Labor Party, which had been openly and insanely pro-Soviet in the 1980's, has been transformed into a close copy of Bill Clinton's dissimulating, Trojan Horse Democratic Party, whereby socialistic goals could be masked with simple paternalism -- which means, appallingly, that paternalism now appeals to both American and British voters. Nevertheless, like Clinton, Blair has done a creditable job of keeping the British economy in reasonable shape, poised between booming Ireland and stagnant France. Despite brief furry over high gasoline prices, which in Britain cannot be blamed on private "corporate greed" (prices are fixed by the government, despite North Sea oil, at the second highest rate in the world, almost twice the world average), Blair was resoundingly reelected in 2001 and the Conservatives reduced to a rump.
The collapse of the Conservatives curiously coincides with the social consequences of decades of "progressive" policy in Britain. One aspect of this can be found in Life at the Bottom: The Worldview That Makes the Underclass by Theodore Dalrymple [Ivan R. Dee, Inc., 2001], where the irresponsibility and criminality encouraged and subsidized by the welfare state is exposed by a psychiatrist who works in a Birmingham hospital and prison. One hardly knows whether to laugh or cry at the tales of violence, folly, and hopelessness. 
Especially striking is the tale that young hoodlums who tattoo themselves with swastikas often don't even know who the Nazis were, what they did, or when -- the product of the kind of politicized but incompetent government education also familiar in the United States. The British, who once were famous for a polite, civil, and non-violent society, now are among the leaders of the industrial world in crime and are especially well known for the rude and riotous soccer fans who regularly terrorize European cities that host games. British crime now outpaces the United States in all categories except murder, though that category is growing rapidly. In tandem with the willingness of criminals to commit crimes, and the ideological disinclination of the state to punish them, has been the project of disarming the citizenry. This is examined in Guns and Violence: The English Experience by Joyce Lee Malcolm [Harvard University Press, 2002]. While before the early 20th century, when the murder rate had been declining steadily since the Middle Ages, there were really no gun control laws in England, and killing a person who was in the commission of a felony was justifiable homicide, now the British have not only been prohibited from owning guns, or even carrying "offensive" [i.e. defensive] weapons, but they have effectively been deprived altogether of the right of self-defense -- the kind of right that English law and philosophers had always said a person could not be deprived of. Yet now, there has been one case of a man sentenced to prison for having a couple of knives in his car -- which he used to cut the string on newspaper bundles as part of his job. In another case, a homeowner who held two burglars with a toy gun was arrested when the police arrived, for threatening and frightening the burglars. Guns, thoroughly prohibited, now are involved in an increasing percentage of crime, as they are apparently smuggled in from elsewhere. Australia has experienced a similar dynamic after new draconian restrictions on gun ownership. The results of these "progressive" social experiments in Britain (and Australia) stand as a cautionary tale in the face of welfare statists and gun-control advocates in the United States. Since there has been little in the way of second thoughts on the part of such advocates either in Britain or America, it becomes more obvious that their agenda follows more from a desire to render citizens helpless and the state powerful than from their own stated purposes. Now, in Britain, the response to the increase in crime has been to propose abolishing historic protections concerning double jeopardy, self-incrimination, and even habeas corpus. These unbelievably vile proposals certainly further the project of creating a police state, and so are fully consistent with the tendency of earlier attacks on rights of armed self-defense. Whether they effectively address crime is perhaps irrelevant. If that were really the concern, well, we know what the laws were like in Britain when crime was steadily declining for decades. Restoring them is not an option, not because they didn't work, but because they give too much power to citizens vis à vis the state.
Although for many years looking like the Bill Clinton of Britain (without the philandering and perjury), Tony Blair, with a moderate but pious leftism, found himself in the uncomfortable position of the loyal ally of George W. Bush in the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. After the 9/11 attacks Blair, indeed, did not want to join France (again) and Germany in appeasing what was shaping up as a new form of fascism in militant Islam -- a fascism already waging war on the cheap through international terrorism. Blair was not going to be the Neville Chamberlain of the 21st century. This was a wise thought, but as no good deed goes unpunished, it made Blair the target, along with Bush, of the fury of the Left, which has effectively become the ally of Islamic fanaticism -- the marriage of anti-globalization and the Sharî'ah. While this threatened to end Blair's career, things had been looking up since the reelection of John Howard in Australia and Bush himself in the 2004 Presidential election. The ire of the Left has not abated, but they were playing a poor hand. Now Blair has won reelection in 2005, though with a reduced majority, against muddled Conservatives and an anti-war Labour opposition some of whose members, it now appears, had been receiving money from Saddam Hussein.
Where Britain originated the Industrial Revolution and became the "workshop of the world" in the 19th century, its decline since then has been out of proportion to its decline in resources. Perhaps no one expects Britain to be a "superpower" when there are states, like America, Russia, China, etc., that are vastly larger. Yet the British economy actually is larger than that of Russia or China -- and still about three times larger than the former Imperial Crown Jewel of India. )
Where Britain suffers by comparison is with its European peers, like Germany, France, and Italy, which differ little in size and resources. It suffers by being so comparable, having lost any of the real moral, cultural, legal, and political advantage it had at the height of the Victorian Era. Well, most of the problem is that people no longer believe in the advantages of the Victorian Era, i.e. the classical liberalism -- free markets as well as social tolerance -- articulated in the course of Britain's ascendency by people like Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and Herbert Spencer. In a way, they didn't even believe it at the time. After all, being "in trade" is not something the ambitious Englishman ever really aspired to. Being a member of the "better sort," a "gentleman," meant not having a regular trade or profession and having a living off of rents or endowments. Nothing shows this more clearly than the old meanings of "amateur" and "professional," which originally signified the disinterested (good) and the mercenary (bad), respectively, rather than the incompetent (bad) and the accomplished (good) as they do now. Capitalist Britain thus always suffered from an internal struggle between utility and privilege. The British class system was not essentially a Marxist polarity of workers and capitalists, for real industrialists and financiers were themselves members of the "working class" to those who did not need to make a profit or put in a working day to make a living. A proper "living" made itself. To those who barely knew how to make a living, whether like the indigent Karl Marx or the genuinely privileged, society would be better off without the money grubbers and drudges whose motives and methods where probably neither noble nor, they imagined, really necessary. The class that made Britain so unique and powerful thus was squeezed between the disdain of the "better sort" and the resentment of those who understood neither business, production, nor finance but thought that they understood it well enough to do without. The class that made the Industrial Revolution was not squeezed out of existence, to be sure, but it lost the respect and admiration it was owed. Now one often aspires to better oneself merely through politics, the continuing poisonous modern fruit of Rousseau, the French Revolution, and Marx, or by dropping out into the uncouth, nihilistic, anarchistic riot evident among Britain's notorious soccer fans and their ilk. The bourgeois solidity and earnestness of the Victorian Era now is commonly taken as either sinister or a joke, but sadly the joke is only on modern Britain, which has lost its birthright.
The Children of Queen Victoria & Prince Albert
Descent of Queen Elizabeth from Charlemange
Male Descent of Queen Elizabeth from Burchard of Thuringia
Descent of Queen Elizabeth from the Emperor Constantine IX Monomachus
Dukes of Buccleuch, Grafton, & St. Albans, 1663-Present
Dukes of Marlborough & Earls of Spencer, 1702/1765-Present
Dukes of Berwick & Fitzjames, 1687-Present
Dukes of Devonshire, 1694-Present
Bibliography and Suggested Reading
The Sun Never Set on the British Empire
British Coins before the Florin, Compared to French Coins of the Ancien Régime
, Poland 
, and Hungary 
, 845-1795
By the year 1000, the Slavic kingdoms of Bohemia-Moravia, Poland, and Croatia and the Magyar kingdom of Hungary, had all become sufficiently organized and Christianized to enter European history. The earliest organization visible may be that of the Czechs under Samo (c.623-658), who succeeded in defeating the Franks (631). This state disintegrated with his death, however.
| Kings of Great Moravia | |
|---|---|
| Mojmir I | 830-846 |
| Rastislav | 846-870 |
| Sviatopluk | 870-894 |
| Mojmir II | 894-906 |
an alphabet to write this first attested Slavic language. The alphabet was originally the "glagolitic" script, which was, however, gradually replaced by the familiar "Cyrillic" alphabet, which was adapted from existing alphabets, mainly Greek but also Armenian. The tradition arose that the latter script was the one originated by St. Cyril -- hence the name. Before long, of course, the Czechs shifted allegiance to Rome (which brought with it the Latin alphabet), and it was Bulgaria that established Eastern Christianity and used the new alphabet. Great Moravia did not long survive Sviatopluk. The Kingdom disintegrated after a defeat by the Magyars (at the urging of the Franks) in 906 and subsequently becomes a dependency of the Dukes of Bohemia.When the Latin alphabet was adopted for the languages of Catholic Eastern Europe, there was the problem that the Slavic, Baltic, and Uralic languages of the area had phonetic systems that were not 
well represented by the alphabet. Where the Cyrillic alphabet had been created to write Slavic languages, the Latin alphabet had to be reworked to do the job. The principal challenge in the Slavic languages is the difference between "hard" and "soft," i.e. palatalized, consonants. In Russian, with the Cyrillic alphabet, two complete sets of vowels are used, one to go with the hard consonants, the other with the soft. For instance, the famous backwards "R", 
, read "ya," is simply the vowel "a" but also indicates that the preceding consonant is soft. Where a vowel doesn't come after a consonant, as at the end of a word, two unpronounced letters are used, 
to indicate a hard consonant, 
a soft one -- the former is now rarely used, a hard consonant being assumed without the use of the soft signs. In the Latin alphabet,
nothing anywhere near as elegant or systematic was formulated. Instead we get a combination of dedicated vowels, diacritics, and digraphs to indicate the varieties of consonants. The most distinctive diacritic is the 
, a wedge or upsidedown circumflex placed, in different languages, on top of a c, s, z, t, d, n, or r -- these are usually "soft" consonants. The term is from Czech, which uses the hachek the most (though the spelling in English of "Czech" uses a Polish digraph!), but it is widespread in the languages of the area. It isn't used in Hungarian, which is not even an Indo-European language, but Uralic. Surprisingly, it isn't used in Polish, which is the Slavic language with the largest number of speakers in Francia (44 million as of 2000). The chart at left is a sample of consonants with special values, diacritics, and digraphs in various Eastern European languages. Vowels in these languages are also dense with diacritics, but these are at least comparable, and often identical, with those used in French, German, and other Western and Northern European languages. A frustration of doing this webpage is that basic HTML codes, although accommodating Western European languages, even Old English, have no provision for Eastern diacritics. Also, there are many historical sources that don't bother giving full diacritics, especially for Polish. Note that Croatian is the same language as Serbian, but that Serbian is written in the Cyrillic alphabet and spoken by Serbs, who are Orthdox rather than Catholic and historically part of Romania rather than Francia.
| Dukes & Kings of Croatia | |
|---|---|
| Viseslav | Duke, c.800-c.810 |
| Borna | c.810-821 |
| Vladislav | 821-c.835 |
| Mislav | c.835-c.845 |
| Trpimir I | c.845-864 |
| Zdeslav | 864, 876-879 |
| Domagoj | 864-876 |
| Iljko | 876 |
| Branimir | 879-892 |
| Mutimir | 892-910 |
| Tomislav I | 910-924 |
| King, 924-928 | |
| Trpimir II | 928-c.935 |
| Kresimir I | c.935-c.945 |
| Miroslav | c.945-c.949 |
| Kresimir II | c.945-c.969 |
| Drzislav | c.969-997 |
| Suronja | |
| Svetoslav | 997-1000 |
| Kresimir III | 997-1030 |
| Goislav | 997-1020 |
| Stephen | 1030-1058 |
| Kresimir IV | 1058-1074 |
| Slavic | 1074-1075 |
| Dimitar Zvonimir | 1075-1089 |
| Helena | 1088-1091 |
| Stephen II | 1089-1091 |
| Almos | 1091-1093 |
| Peter | 1093-1097 |
| to Hungary, 1097 | |
The first durable state and kingdom in the East is that of Croatia, which was part of the Carolingian empire, revolting against it in 818. This contact, however, and the convenient situation for commerce on the Adriatic, enabled Croatia to develop a bit faster than the hinterland; and when Tomislav I accepted a crown from the Pope in 924, he created the first permanent Kingdom in Eastern Europe. Croatia, however, was not fated to endure on its own. Internal divisions tempted the Hungarians, who conquered the Kingdom in 1091, leaving it under the local rulers until the failure of the dynastic line. Meanwhile, Venice had conquered Dalmatia (1000), but the Hungarians retrieved it (1095-1102), beginning a long historical tug-of-war between the two states. Hungary (1001), Poland (1025), and Bohemia (1086, 1156) followed Croatia in becoming permanent Kingdoms.
Early Poland contended with the Germans for the intermediate territories (Lusatia and even Bohemia) but later steadily lost ground to the German move to the East, and to Bohemia, though in recent time much of this territory was abruptly recovered thanks to Soviet dispensation at the end of World War II. Pagan holdouts Prussia and Latvia were conquered and converted by the Teutonic Knights. By the 14th century, the last pagan holdout in Europe, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, finally converted and by a historic marriage joined its fate to Poland.
Poland, Hungary, and Bohemia form a natural unit as they often had ruling dynasties in common. Later, however, the intermarriage of these dynasties with those of Francia, and the Polish election of kings from Francia, delivered the kingdoms to external possession. The Hapsburgs ended up in permanent possession of Bohemia-Moravia and Hungary (until World War I), while Poland was surrounded and devoured by Prussia, Austria, and Russia. Bohemia, with a large German population, came to be considered part of Germany, and the King of Bohemia became an Elector of the Holy Roman Emperor. When Bohemia and Moravia then passed to the Hapsburgs, the King of Bohemia typically was also the actual Holy Roman Emperor. The Germans of Bohemia are now gone, since Hitler used them as a pretext to occupy Czechoslovakia in 1938, and they were expelled after World War II (something that has come back to haunt the Czech Republic as it seeks to join the European Union, since the Union would not recognize the legality of such expulsions).
| 2. Bans & Kings of Bosnia | |
|---|---|
| Boric | Ban (viceroy), 1154-1163 |
| to Romania, 1163-1180 | |
| Kulin | 1172-1204 |
| Stephen | 1204-1232 |
| Matthew Ninoslav | 1232-c.1253 |
| Prijezda I Kotromanic | 1254-1287 |
| Prijezda II | 1287-1290 |
| Stephen I | 1267-1302, d. 1313 |
| Mladen I Subic | 1302-1304 |
| Mladen II | 1304-1322 |
| Stephen II Kotromanic | 1322-1353 |
| Tvrtko I | 1353-1376 |
| King, 1376-1391 | |
| Stephen III Dabisa | 1391-1395 |
| Helena the Crude | 1395-1398 |
| Stephen IV Ostoja | 1398-1404, 1409-1418 |
| Tvrtko II | 1404-1409, 1421-1443 |
| Stephen V Ostojic | 1418-1421 |
| Stephen VI Thomas | 1443-1461 |
| Stephen VII Tomasevic | 1461-1463 |
| Ottoman conquest, 1463 | |
intermediate and ambiguous position between Francia, Romania, and Islâm. The worst strife in the breakup of Yugoslavia, with the Serbs against Catholics (Croats) and Moslems (Bosniacs), and then Serbs and Catholics both against Moslems, resulted from these divisions. Only UN Peacekeeping forces restrain the communities now. Herzegovina ("free duchy") began as a dependency, sometimes less than dependent, of Bosnia. The two have generally been treated as one territory since the Turkish conquest.
A genealogy of some of the Kotromanic Bosnian Bans, with marriages to Serbian and German royalty and nobility is given at right. By way of Cilly, this even leads to Elizabeth of Hungary, who marries into the Hapsburgs. Further marriage connections extend to Poland, Serbia, the Palaeologi, and even the Ottomans. The connections and doings of the Austrian House of Cilly in the region are of great interest. These end up with Ulrich II, who for a while is appointed by the Emperor Albert II to be Regent of Bohemia, and then in 1456 forces himself, against 
János Hunyadi (Iancu of Hunedoara in Romanian), Prince of Transylvania, as Regent of Hungary for Albert's son, Ladislas Postumus. This doesn't last long, since he is soon killed by Matthias Corvinus, Hunyadi's son and King of Hungary after 1458. These connections thus involve a great deal of the history of the region in the era.
| Dukes or Princes of Transylvania, Hungarian Suzerainty | |
|---|---|
| Lorand Lepes | 1415-1438 |
| János Hunyadi (Iancu of Hunedoara) | 1441-1456 |
| Regent of Hungary, 1446-1456 | |
| Prince of Wallachia, 1447 | |
| to Ottoman Empire, 1526-1699 | |
| John Zapolya | 1526-1540 |
| King of Hungary, 1526-1540 | |
| John Sigismund | 1540-1571 |
| Gasnar Bekesy | 1571-1572 |
| Polish Occupation, 1572-1576 | |
| Christopher Bathory | 1576-1581 |
| Sigismund | 1581-1598 |
| Andrew | 1599-1600 |
| Michael the Brave | 1600-1600, d.1601 |
| Moldavia, 1600 | |
| Wallachia, 1593-1600 | |
| Moyses Szekely | 1602-1603 |
| Austrian Occupation, 1602-1605 | |
| Stephen Bocskai | 1605-1606 |
| Sigismund Rakoczi | 1607-1608 |
| Gabriel Bathory | 1608-1613 |
| Wallachia, 1610-1611 | |
| Gabriel Bethlen | 1613-1629 |
| Stephen Bethlen | 1630 |
| George Rakoczy I | 1630-1648 |
| George Rakoczy II | 1648-1660 |
| Achatius Bocskai | 1658-1660 |
| Johann Kemeny | 1661-1662 |
| Michael Apafi I | 1661-1690 |
| Emerich Tokoli | 1682-1699 |
| Michael Apafi II | 1690-1699 |
| to Austria-Hungary, 1699-1919 | |
| Francis Rakoczy | 1704-1711 |
| to România, 1919 | |
Transylvania ("beyond the forest"), although largely Romance speaking, was historically part of Hungary. The history of the ethnic composition of the region is still hotly disputed by Hungarian and Romanian historians. Largely surrounded by mountains, the plateau of Transylvania, Dacia to the Romans, was relatively isolated and protected from the grassy lowlands around it, which were the avenues of incursion from the Steppe. Although certainly the name most commonly associated with Transylvania, one will search the list of Princes in vain for (Count) Dracula, who was actually the much earlier Prince Vlad III of Wallachia. The Ottoman conquest of Hungary in 1526 brought the area under Turkish control, although it was then largely ruled through appointed Princes, as were Wallachia and Moldavia. When the Turks were expelled in 1699 by the Hapsburgs, Transylvania was then ruled again from Hungary, without the device of local Princes. It passed to România after World War I and, except for a part returned to Hungary by Hitler, has remained there ever since.
The small map of Eastern Europe above also shows the "Catholic Russias," meaning parts of Belorussia and the Ukraine. They acquired that religious character through long possession by Lithuania and union with Poland and were recovered for Russia first by the Tsars and then again, after another period of rule by Poland (1920-1939), by the Soviet Union (in the coordinated invasion and partition of Poland by Hitler and Stalin). Those who have held to their Catholicism have been troubled both under the Tsars and under the Communists.
| Grand Dukes of Lithuania | |
|---|---|
| Mindaugas | 1236-1263 |
| Treniota | 1263-1264 |
| Vaisvilkas | 1264-1267 |
| Svarnas | 1267-1270 |
| Traidenis | 1270-1281/2 |
| Pukuveras | c.1283-1294 |
| Viten / Vytenis | 1295-1316 |
| Gediminas | 1316-1331 |
| Ivan I of Moscow | 1331-1341 |
| Jaunutis | 1341/2-1345 |
| Olgierd / Algirdas | 1345-1377 |
| Jogaila / Jagiello | 1377-1434 |
| converts to Christianty; marries Jadwiga; becomes Wladyslaw V of Poland | |
| Vytautas / Witold the Great | regent, 1392 Grand Duke 1401-1430 |
| Swidrygiello | 1430-1432 |
| Zygmunt | 1432-1440 |
| Duchy passes to Casimir IV | |
At right are the Grand Dukes of Lithuania. Mindaugas converted to Christianity and received a crown from the Pope, but he reverted to paganism in 1259, in support of a pagan revolt against the Teutonic Knights. Lithuania then continued to resist conversion for over a century, in part because of the sort of religious no-man's-land that it represented between the Catholic West and the Russian Orthodox East. We unfortunately know little about what its religion was like, though sacred woods, as among the Celts, seem prominent. As the power of the Golden Horde declined, Lithuania was the power to take the most advantage of it, expanding vigorously into the Ukraine. Jagiello converted to Christianity with his marriage to the Anjevian heiress of Poland, Jadwiga. He ended up ceding Lithuania proper to his cousin Vytautas. But both of them were present at the catastrophic defeat of the Teutonic Knights at Tannenberg in 1410. This represented a major change in the balance of power and held the promise of a dominant position in Eastern Europe. When Vytautas's brother Zygmunt (Sigismund) was murdered in 1440, uniting Poland and Lithuania, this produced a large powerful country, but over time the promise slipped away in the chaotic "Republican" institutions of Poland. The final conversion of Lithanuania rounds off the Christianization of Europe.
With each of the domains in Eastern Europe, the word for "duke" would have ambiguities similar to what we find with the Russian word knyaz. This is certainly the case with Lithuanian, where kunigaikshtis can be translated either "prince" or "duke." In Transylvania the prince/duke was called voivode. This is no longer used in either Hungarian (where the familiar Germanic herceg now does for both) or Romanian (Latinate print, and duce respectively). It was Slavic, and it turns up, in whole or part, in surrounding Slavic languages. Thus, in Croatian vojvoda is "duke" and voða "leader"; in Slovak, vodca is "leader," vojna "war," and vojak "soldier"; in Polish, przy-wódca is "leader." Voivode thus scans as "war" (voi) "leader" (vode) -- very much like the structure of German herzog, discussed elsewhere. This would translate Latin dux in both primary ("leader"), secondary ("frontier military commander"), and tertiary ("ethnic/tribal chieftain") senses. There is also a quaternary sense, were voivode declines to merely meaning "governor." This seems to have happened in Polish, which still contains the term województwo, translated as "voivodeship," i.e. "province." Most interesting, however, is the entry in the Concise Oxford Russian Dictionary (Paul Falla, Oxford University Press, 1984, 1998, p.41) for voyevoda, "(hist.) voivode (commander of an army in medieval Russia; also, in Muscovite period, governor of a town or province)." Thus, while voivode begins as an equivalent to dux and takes on the sovereign associations that go with the ambiguity of knyaz words in Eastern Europe, the decline of Principalities like Transylvania, Wallachia, and Moldavia to the status of provinces, brings down the word with them.
In Poland and Hungary, conversion to Christianity brought with it a royal crown from the Pope. Bohemia, as it became part of the East Frankish Kingdom, qualified less obviously for its own status as a Kingdom, which came later. In Poland, the royal title came and went for a while, with concessions to German sovereignty. With each of these, however, the word for "king" is noteworthy. In Czech it is král, in Polish król, and in Hungarian király. For comparison, the same word in Croatian is kralj, in Slovakian král', in Russian koról, and in Lithuanian karalius. Just as the Latin name Caesar gives us the word for "emperor" in many of these languages (and in German), here it looks like Carolus Magnus, Charlemagne, has given us the word for "king." Since the Slavic languages had not diverged very much in the 9th century, the title could have been borrowed into all of them virtually simultaneously, and then into Hungarian (which isn't Slavic, or even Indo-European) when the Magyars arrived.
The background colors in the table below (not above, except for Lithuania) are coded for dynasties rather than countries, since the overlapping of rulers is one of the conspicuous features of the histories of Bohemia, Hungary, and Poland. In the genealogical charts, however, red is used for Poland, green for Hungary, and blue for Bohemia. Note that "Wenceslas" and "Ladislas" are the Latin versions of, respectively, Václav in Czech and László in Hungarian (or Wladyslaw in Polish).
| Duke & Kings of Bohemia & Moravia | Dukes & Kings of Hungary | Dukes & Kings of Poland | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Przemysls | |||||
| Borzivoi I Przemysl | Duke, c.850-894 | Arpads | |||
| Spytihniev I | 895-c.905/15 | Árpád | Duke, Prince, or Voivode, c.896-907 | ||
| Vratislav I | 905/15-921 | Zoltan | 907-946 | ||
| St. Václav, Wenceslas, Wenzel (I) | 921-929/35 | Fausz/Val | 946-952 | ||
| Boleslav I the Gruesome | 929/35-967/72 | Tacsony | 952-972 | Piasts | |
| Boleslav II the Pious | 967/73-999 | Geza | 972-997 | Mieszko I Piast | Duke, 960-992 |
| Boleslav III the Red | 999-1002, 1003, d.1037 | St. Stephen I | 997-1001 | Boleslaw I the Brave | 992-1025; King, 1025 |
| Valdivoi | 1002-1003 | ||||
| Jaromir | 1003, 1004-1012, 1033-1034, d.1038 | King, 1001-1038 | |||
| Boleslav the Brave of Poland | 1003-1004, d.1025 | Duke of Bohemia, 1003-1004 | |||
| Udalrich | 1012-1033, 1034 | Mieszko II | 1025-1031, 1032-1034 | ||
| Brzetislav I | 1034-1055 | Peter Urseolo | 1038-1041, 1044-1046 | Bezprym | 1031-1032 |
| Samuel Aba | 1041-1044, d.1046 | Kazimierz I / Casimir I the Restorer | Duke, 1034, 1038/40/43- 1058 | ||
| Spytihnev II | 1055-1061 | Andrew I | 1047-1061 | ||
| Bela I | 1061-1063 | Rebellion, anti-German & Pagan, 1034; suppressed, 1038-1043 | |||
| Vratislav II | 1061-1085; King, 1085-1092 | Solomon | 1063-1074 | Boleslaw II the Bold | 1058-1076, King, 1076-1079 |
| Geza I | 1074-1077 | ||||
| St. Ladislas I | 1077-1095 | Wladyslaw I Herman | Duke, 1079-1102 | ||
| Conrad I Otto | Duke, 1092 | Coloman (Kalman) | 1095-1114 | Boleslaw III Wrywouth | 1102-1138 |
| Brzetislav II | 1092-1100 | ||||
| Borzivoi II | 1100-1107, 1117-1121, d.1124 | Stephen II | 1114-1131 | ||
| Svatopluk | 1107-1109 | Pomerania vassal of Poland, 1121 | |||
| Vladislav I | 1109-1117, 1121-1125 | Bela II | 1131-1141 | Wladyslaw II the Exile | 1138-1146 |
| Sobieslav I Udalrich | 1125-1140 | Geza II | 1141-1162 | Boleslaw IV the Curly | 1146-1173 |
| Vladislav II | 1140-1158; King, 1158-1172, d.1175 | Ladislas II | 1162-1163 | ||
| Stephen III | 1162-1172 | ||||
| Stephen IV | 1163-1165 | ||||
| Frederick | Duke, 1172-1173, 1178-1189 | Bela III | 1172-1196 | ||
| Sobieslav II | 1173-1178, d.1180 | Mieszko III the Old | 1173-1177 1194-1202 | ||
| Conrad II Otto | 1189-1191 | ||||
| Wenceslas (II) | 1191-1192 | ||||
| Ottokar, Otakar I | 1192-1193, 1197-1189, King, 1198-1230 | Emeric | 1196-1204 | Kazimierz II the Just | 1177-1194 |
| Henry Brzetislav | Bishop of Prague, 1182-1197; Duke, 1193-1197 | Ladislas III | 1204-1205 | Leszek I the White | 1202-1227 |
| Vladislav III Henry | 1197 | Andrew II | 1205-1235 | Wladyslaw III Spindleskanks | 1228-1231 |
| Václav, Wenzel, Wenceslas I (II) | King, 1230-1253 | Bela IV | 1235-1270 | Henryk I the Bearded of Silesia | 1231-1238 |
| Henryk II the Pious | 1238-1241 | ||||
| Mongols defeat Poles & Teutonic Knights at Liegnitz, April 1241 | |||||
| Konrad I Mazowiecki | 1241-1243 | ||||
| Ottokar, Otakar II the Great | 1253-1278 | Mongols crush Hungarians at the River Sajó, April 1241; occupy Hungary, 1241-1242 | Boleslaw V the Chaste | 1243-1279 | |
| Stephen V | 1270-1272 | Leszek II the Black | 1279-1288 | ||
| Henryk IV Probus | 1288-1290 | ||||
| Ladislas IV | 1272-1290 | Przemyslaw | 1290-1295, King, 1295-1296 | ||
| Václav, Wenceslas II (III) | 1278-1305 | Andrew III last Arpad | 1290-1301 | Wenceslas II of Bohemia | 1300-1305 |
| Wenceslas III (IV) | 1305-1306, last Przemysl | 1301-1305 | Waclaw, Wenceslas III of Bohemia | 1305-1306 | |
| Rudolf of Hapsburg | 1306-1307 | Otto (III) of Bavaria | 1305-1307 | ||
| Henry of Carinthia | 1307-1310 | Charles I of Anjou | 1308-1342 | Wladyslaw IV the Short | Duke, 1306-1320, King, 1320-1333 |
| John of Luxemburg | 1310-1346 | Kasimierz III / Casimir III the Great -- last Piast | 1333-1370 | ||
| Charles I Emperor Charles IV | 1347-1378 | 1342-1382 | Louis I the Great Ludwik | 1370-1382 | |
| Wenceslas IV Emperor Wenzel | 1378-1419 | Mary of Anjou; marries Emperor Sigismund | 1382-1385 1386-1395 | [interregnum] | 1382-1383 |
| Charles II of Naples | 1385-1386 | Jadwiga of Anjou marries Jagiello | 1383-1399 | ||
| 1419-1437 | Emperor Sigismund | 1387-1437 | Wladyslaw V Jagiello Grand Duke of Lithuania | 1386-1434 | |
| 1437-1439 | Albert of Austria | 1437-1439 | Teutonic Knights defeated at Tannenberg, 1410 | ||
| 1439-1457 | Ladislas I Posthumus, Ladislas V of Hungary | 1440-1444 | Vladislav Jagiello/Wladyslav VI | 1434-1444 | |
| 1444-1457 | [interregnum] | 1444-1447 | |||
| Jirzí Podebrady, George Podiebrad | 1459-1471 | Matthias Corvinus, Mátyás Korvin | 1458-1490 | Kazimierz, Casimir IV | Grand Duke of Lithuania, 1440 |
| 1469-1490 | 1446-1492 | ||||
| 1471-1516 | Ladislas II/ Vladimir Jagiello Ladislas VI of Hungary | 1490-1516 | John I Albert | 1492-1501 | |
| 1516-1526 | Louis/ Louis II of Hungary-- killed by the Süleymân I at the Battle of Mohács | 1516-1526 | Alexander | 1501-1506 | |
| 1526-1564 | Ferdinand of Austria | John Zapolya, Duke of Transylvania | 1526-1540 | Sigismund I | 1506-1548 |
| 1527-1564 | Sigismund II Augustus | 1548-1572 | |||
| Bohemia, Moravia, & Hungary continue with the Hapsburgs, 1564-1918 | Union of Poland & Lithuania, 1569 | ||||
Hungary is named after the Huns, who camped on the Hungarian plain in the 5th century. But the modern Hungarians are not Huns, they are Magyars, another steppe people speaking a Uralic language ultimately related to Finnish, Estonian, and other languages in Siberia. The Magyars arrived after being defeated by the Patzinaks in 892. They were encouraged by the Emperor Arnulf to attack Great Moravia, which they succeeded in overthrowing by 906. Unfortunately for the Franks, the Magyars then extended their attacks into Western Europe, adding to the misery of the "Second Dark Age" of that era, while the Vikings and Arabs raided from north and south. "Prince" is probably not the right title for the earliest leaders (I don't know if they used the Turko-Bulgarian khan), like the eponymous Árpád, but it became more appropriate after the Magyars were tamed by defeats at the hands of King Henry I at Riade in 933 and then especially by Otto I at Lechfield in 955. Soon Christianity and a royal crown from the Pope were brought to Hungary by St. Stephen, producing one of the great constituent Kingdoms of Francia. St. Stephen's sister even married a Doge of Venice, whose son then briefly succeeded Stephen. Some of the dates in the diagram are different from those in the table above. This reflects conflicts in the sources. The diagram also gives more of the Hungarian renderings of the names than in the table. The origin of the Bavarian, Bohemian, and Anjevian claims to the Hungarian throne are evident in the marriages shown.
My sources for some of the early material, especially Poland, show some conflicting information. Sorting out the Polish Kings has been a bit of a compromise, starting with Gene Gurney's Kingdoms of Europe [Crown Publishers, New York, 1982, pp. 521-522], and then expanding and correcting this list using Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski's Poland, A Historical Atlas [Dorset Press, New York, 1988, pp. 56-57], the Regentenlisten und Stammtafeln zur Geschischte Europas by Michael F. Feldkamp [Philpp Reclam, Stuttgart, 2002], and the Erzählende genealogische Stammtafeln zur europäischen Geschichte, Volume I, Part 1, Deutsche Kaiser-, Königs-, Herzogs- und Grafenhäuser I [Andreas Thiele, Third Edition, R. G. Fischer Verlag, 1997, for Bohemia], and Volume II, Part 2, Europäiche Kaiser-, Königs- und Fürstenhäuser II Nord-, Ost- und Südeuropa [Andreas Thiele, R. G. Fischer Verlag, Second Edition, 1997, for Poland and Hungary]. I was able to fill some gaps in the line of the Dukes of Lithuania from Bruce R. Gordon's Regnal Chronologies. The Kings of Croatia come from The Cambridge Medieval History, Volume II, c.700-c.900 [Rosmond McKitterick, editor, Cambridge, 1995, p.862] and from Gordon, as do the Kings of Bosnia. The German sources frequently only give German or Germanized versions of the Slavic names, but the lack of diactrics in HTML often makes it impossible to accurately render the Slavic, especially Polish, names anyway. Appropriate diacritics can be shown in the genealogical diagrams.
The genealogical diagram above for Poland ends neatly where the diagram below begins, with Boleslaw III. For Bohemia there is more overlap -- some relatives who ruled briefly in the days of Frederick and Ottokar I are shown in table above but not below. After Boleslaw III, the succession of the Piasts is bewildering, as the Throne jumps from brother to brother and then cousin to cousin. This happens because the family actually divided up the country. The senior living dynast, ordinarily, is the one credited as being "Duke of Poland," but it did not affect the parts of the country directly ruled. For instance, all the Henryks were rulers of Silesia, regardless of where they figure in the succession. After this, the Premsyls get involved in Poland, and then the houses of Luxemburg and Anjou. Later, as the Premysl and Piast male lines end, we get the entry of the Hapsburgs and Jagiellans (from Lithuania). The Hapsburgs come and go and then come back, by the end to permanently acquire Bohemia and Hungary. Poland, with a sprinkling of in-laws or unrelated Kings, passes to the Vasa dynasty of Sweden. With the end of the Vasa Kings, the elective principle reigns supreme in Poland. The Hapsburgs get their big break when the Jagiellan Louis II of Hungry is killed by the Turks in the Battle of Mohács in 1526 and his brother-in-law, Ferdinand of Austria, future Emperor and brother of the Emperor Charles V, pressed his claims to the kingdoms.
| Kings of Poland | |
|---|---|
| Henry of Valois | 1573-1574 |
| King of France 1574-1589 | |
| Stephen Bathory | 1575-1586 |
| Sigismund III Vasa | 1587-1632 |
| Wladyslaw VII | 1632-1648 |
| Tsar of Russia, 1610-1612 | |
| John II Casimir | 1648-1668 |
| Michael Wisniowiecki | 1669-1673 |
| John III Sobieski | 1674-1696 |
| Augustus II the Strong (I of Saxony) | 1697-1706 1709-1733 |
| Saxony, 1694-1733 | |
| Stanislas Lesczynski | 1704-1709 1733 |
| Lorraine, 1737-1766 | |
| War of the Polish Succession, 1733-1735 | |
| Augustus III (II of Saxony) | 1733-1763 |
| Saxony 1733-1763 | |
| Stanislas Poniastowski | 1764-1795 |
| Poland partitioned between Prussia, Austria, & Russia: 1772, 1793, & 1795 | |
| Frederick Augustus (III/I of Saxony) | Grand Duke of Warsaw, 1807-1815 |
| Saxony 1763-1827 | |
At left are the stages in the partition of Poland, by which Prussia, Russian, and Austria erased Poland and Lithuania from the map of Europe. The last two stages seem to have been in part defensive measures against the French Revolution, to whose enthusiasms Poland, with a weak monarchy, was seen as susceptible. Napoleon's later revival of a Polish state confirmed the role of Poland as a subversive force. At the Congress of Vienna in 1815, Poland was erased again. Russia ended up with most of the Prussian and Austrian shares of 1795, and some of Prussia's 1793 slice. Poland and Lithuania were not independent again until after World War I, only to have Poland partitioned again between Germany and the Soviet Union in 1939, with Lithuania absorbed by the latter in 1940. Stalin kept his part of Poland after World War II, compensating a communist Poland with large pieces of Germany. Lithuania only regained its independence with the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.
While the election of the Polish Kings is sometimes celebrated as creating a Republic, this was not only merely a government of self-interested nobility, the only electors, but it gives us the most sobering paradigm in all of history for the disaster that is invited in by a divided and hopelessly impotent government. Poland became a plaything, a joke, and then, after the German occupation in World War II, a place of incomprehensible crime and horror. The Jews of Poland, some 10% of the population of Poland in 1939, brought in by the Mediaeval Kings to create a commercial class, and then resented by Polish peasants for their consequent wealth and status, were all but exterminated by the Germans. Forty years of Soviet rule then served to suppress such commercial instincts as existed elsewhere. Now, post-communist Poles, while hating Communism (not to mention the Russians), still know little better than to elect ex-Communists to the government. After World War I, Bohemia (and Moravia) became part of Czechoslovakia with the hitherto Slovak part of Hungary.
| Czechoslovakia | Hungary | Poland | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thomas Garrigue Masaryk | 1918-1935 | Miháaly Count Károlyi | 1919 | Jozef Pilsudski | 1918- 1922 | ||
| Sándor Garbai | 1919 | Gabriel Narutowicz | 1922 | ||||
| Eduard Benésh | 1935-1938 | Miklos Horthy | 1920- 1944 | Stanislaw Wojchiechowski | 1922- 1926 | ||
| Ignacy Moscicki | 1926- 1939 | ||||||
| German Occupation, 1938-1945 | German Occupation, 1939-1945 | ||||||
| Emil Hácha | Bohemia- Moravia, 1938- 1945 | Jozef Tiso | Slovakia 1939- 1945 | Ferenc Szálasi | 1944- 1945 | ||
| Eduard Benésh | 1945-1948 |  Soviet Occupation,1945-1991 | |||||
| Zoltán Tildy | 1946- 1948 | Boleslaw Bierut | 1947- 1952 | ||||
| Klement Gottwald | 1948-1953 | Árpád Szakasits | 1948- 1950 | ||||
| Sándor Ronai | 1950- 1952 | ||||||
| Antonin Zápotocký | 1953-1957 | István Dobi | 1952- 1967 | Aleksander Zawadzki | 1952- 1964 | ||
| Antonin Nóvotný | 1957-1968 | Edward Ochab | 1964- 1968 | ||||
| Ludvig Svoboda | 1968-1975 | Pál Kosonczi | 1967- 1987 | Marian Spychalski | 1968- 1970 | ||
| Soviet Occupation, 1968-1991 | Jozef Cyrankiewicz | 1970- 1972 | |||||
| Gustav Husák | 1975-1989 | Karoly Nemeth | 1987- 1988 | Henrik Jablonski | 1972- 1985 | ||
| Bruno Straub | 1988- 1990 | Wojciech Jaruzelski | 1985- 1990 | ||||
| Václav Havel | Czech Republic, 1989- 2003 | Michael Kovác | Slovakia 1993- 1998 | Árpád Goncz | 1990- 2000 | Lech Walesa | 1990- 1995 |
| Rudolf Schuster | 1999- 2004 | Ferenc Mádl | 2000- 2005 | Aleksander Kwasniewski | 1995- 2005 | ||
| Václav Klaus | 2003- Present | Ivan Gasparovic | 2004- Present | László Sólyom | 2005- Present | Lech Kaczynski | 2005- Present |
The most prosperous country in Eastern Europe, Czechoslovakia was first dismembered and terrorized by Nazi Germany and then fell to Communism through an internal coup (with the probable murder, but official suicide, of Jan Masaryk, son of the first President of the Republic -- Eduard Benésh, the pre-War President, soon resigned and died himself), the only country in Eastern Europe not to become Communist merely through Soviet occupation. 
Occupation it became after the "Prague Spring" of 1968, when Alexander Dubcek tried to reform the regime and create "Communism with a human face."
| Lithuania | |
|---|---|
| Antanas Smetona | 1919-1922, 1926-1940 |
| Alexandras Stulginskis | 1922-1926 |
| Kazys Grinius | 1926 |
| Soviet Occupation, 1940-1941, 1944-1991 | |
| German Occupation, 1941-1944 | |
| Vytautas Landsbergis | 1991-1992 |
| Algirdas Brzauskas | 1992-1998 |
| Valdas Adamkus | 1998-2003 |
| Rolandas Paksas | 2003-2004 |
| Arturas Paulauskas | 2004 |
| Valdas Adamkus | 2004-present |
| Croatia | |
|---|---|
| Yugoslavia, 1918-1941, 1945-1991 | |
| German Occupation, 1941-1945 | |
| Tomislav (II, Aimone of Spoleto) | King, 1941-1943, d.1948 |
| Ante Pavelic | 1943-1945 |
| Franjo Tudman | 1991-1999 |
| Vlatko Pavletic | acting, 1999-2000 |
| Zlatko Tomcic | acting, 2000 |
| Stjepan Mesic | 2000-present |
| Bosnia Herzegovina | |
|---|---|
| Yugoslavia, 1918-1941, 1945-1992 | |
| German Occupation, 1941-1945 | |
| Alija Izetbegovic | Bosniak, 1990-2002 |
| Živko Radišic | Serbian, 1998-2002 |
| Ante Jelavic | Croatian, 1998-2002 |
| Sulejman Tihic | Bosniak, 2002-2006 |
| Mirko Šarovic | Serbian, 2002-2003 |
| Borislav Paravac | Serbian, 2003-2006 |
| Dragan Covic | Croatian, 2002-2005 |
| Ivo Miro Jovic | Croatian, 2005-2006 |
| Haris Silajdžic | Bosniak, 2006-present |
| Nebojša Radmanovic | Serbian, 2006-present |
| Željko Komšic | Croatian, 2006-present |
The whole country, indeed, is now formally partitioned between the "Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, for Croats and Bosniaks, and the "Republika Srpska," which is Serbian. Bosnia's position on the border between Francia and Romania, Francia and Islâm (i.e. Ottoman Turkey), is no more painfully evident than in this ethnic strife, atrocities, and partition.
Heads of State for the post-World War I nations are originally taken from the Regentenlisten und Stammtafeln zur Geschischte Europas by Michael F. Feldkamp [Philpp Reclam, Stuttgart, 2002]. They have been updated as needed from print and on-line news sources.
Denmark, 
Norway, and 
Sweden, 588 AD-Present
Scandinavia forms a natural unit in the Periphery of Francia, not the least because Denmark, Norway, & Sweden, whose early history is scrambled together, were also eventually united, by the Union of Kalmar, in 1397. Otherwise, converting to Christianity at about the same time as the Eastern European peoples, the Scandinavian kingdoms had relatively little influence on European history in general after the great period of pre-Christian Norse and Varangian raiding and conquest in West and East. This influence was considerable enough, even just noting the permanent foundations of Normandy, Norman Sicily and Naples, Norman England, and Varangian Russia. Gustavus Adolphus entering the Thirty Years War was then probably the last decisive Scandinavian intervention in European history.
The Flags of the Scandinavian countries, as well as those of some dependencies, are based on the venerable, 
distinctively asymmetrical white cross on red of the Dannebrog, which is supposed to have been adopted by King Valdemar II, the Victorious, on 15 June 1219, establishing the earliest national flag in continuous use since. 
However, there is no real certainty that the flag was used before the reign of Valdemar III (1340-1375).
Here the background colors represent countries and combinations of countries. Denmark and Norway together appear as yellow; Norway and Sweden as blue; and all three together as white. These kingdoms pose a particular problem in listing the kings and giving the genealogy, since the historical rulers shade over gradually into the legendary, and then into the mythic, and it is very difficult to tell what kind of ground one is on. The table here begins with legendary rulers who are more or less historical, which means that they probably existed, 
even while dating them and identifying genuine events of their reigns involves considerable guesswork and uncertainty. Genealogy for the kings in the first table below, and for earlier legendary and mythic kings, is given separately at Legendary and Early Kings of Scandinavia. When that link is used, a new browser window will open for the page. If the window is reduced in size and positioned conveniently, the diagrams can be compared with the table in this window.
The picture here is a compromise between several sources. The best discussion of the difficulties and uncertainties is in the Royal Families of Medieval Scandinavia, Flanders, and Kiev by Rupert Alen and Anna Marie Dahlquist [Kings River Publications, Kingsburg, California, 1997]. While the title of this book mentions Flanders and Kiev, it deals with them from the perspective of intermarriages with Norwegan, Swedish, and Danish houses. Additonal information, especially on Denmark, Norway, and the early legendary and mythic material, is from The Mammoth Book of British Kings and Queens by Mike Ashley [Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc., New York, 1998, 1999]. These two books have been compared with the large genealogical chart, Kings & Queens of Europe, compiled by Anne Tauté [University of North Carolina Press, 1989], and with Kingdoms of Europe, by Gene Gurney [Crown Publishers, New York, 1982]. There is considerable disagreement between the sources, even for historical kings, not just on dates (which can be infuriatingly different) but even on the succession and the occurrence of various rulers. Priority is given to the sources as listed, but even Alen and Dahlquist are not always consistent in their own presentation -- e.g. they have one chart showing the Sweden King Inge II living and reigning until 1130, while otherwise placing Magnus Nielsson from Inge's death in 1125 to 1130. On the other hand, Tauté also has Inge ruling until 1130 and doesn't show Magnus at all. And this is a confusion about rulers well within the historical period. Early in the chart it will be noted that Ragnar Lodbrok is listed both for Denmark and for Sweden, but at somewhat different periods -- and neither set of dates works if Ragnar is the Viking chief who sacked Paris in 845 and treated with Charles the Bald. This is a good indication of the uncertainties and mismatches that can occur in the early chronology. That Erik I of Sweden occurs after Erik II is also a good clue. All the Swedish Eriks are, nevertheless, accounted for (with Erik the Victorious as Erik VI, not always the number he is given). What is not accounted for are Swedish Kings Charles (Karl) I-VI, who all appear to be mythic. The numbers really should be redone, but it is too late for that -- the present King of Sweden is Charles XVI. Sometimes earlier Swedish Knuts are numbered, but not here -- Knut I (1167-1196) is the first.
| Kings of Denmark | Kings of Norway | Kings of Sweden | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ivar Vidfamne | 588-647 | 565-623 | |||
| Harald I Hildetand | 647-735, or d.c.750 | Olaf the Tree-hewer | 680-710 | Harald Hildetand | 647-735, or d.c.750 |
| Sigurd Ring | 735-750, or c.770-812 | ||||
| Randver | c.750 | Halfdan I | 710-750 | Ragnar Lodbrok | 860-865, or 750-794 |
| Eystein I | 750-780 | Eystein Beli | 750 or 860-? | ||
| Sigurd I Ring | 735-750, or c.770-812 | Björn Järnsida | 794-804, or c.856 | ||
| Horik I | 850-854 | Halfdan II Whitelegs | 780-800 | Erik II | 804-808, or d.c.870 |
| Horik II | 854-? | Gudrod the Magnificent | 800-810 | Erik III | 808-820 |
| Ragnar Lobrok | c.860-865 | Olaf Geirstade | 810-840 | Edmund I | 820-859 |
| Sigurd II Snogoje | 865-873 | Halfdan III the Black | 840-863 | Erik I | d.c.870 |
| Hardeknut Canute I | 873-884 | Civil War, 863-885 | Björn | 870-920 | |
| Frodo | 884-885 | Harald I Fairhair | 885-933 | Olaf I Ring | 920-930 |
| Harald II Parcus | 885-899 | Eric I Bloodaxe | 933-934 | Eric IV Väderhatt | ? |
| Gorm the Old | c.900-950 | Haakon I the Good | 934-963 | Erik V | 930-950 |
| Harald III Bluetooth | c.950-986 | First Christian King | Edmund II | 950-965 | |
| First Christian King | Harald II Graypelt | 963-977 | Olaf II | 965-970 | |
| Sweyn I Forkbeard | 986-1014 | Haakon | Jarl of Lade, 977-995 | Eric VI the Victorious | 970-995 |
| Olaf I Tryggvason | 995-1000 | ||||
| Eric | Jarl of Lade, 1000-1015 | Olaf III Skötkonung | 995-1022 | ||
| Harald IV | 1014-1018 | St. Olaf II Haraldson | 1015-1028, d.1030 | ||
| 1018-1035 | Canute II the Great | King of England 1016-1035 | |||
| 1028-1035 | First Christian King | ||||
| Hardecanute, Canute III | 1035-1042 | Magnus I the Good | 1035-1047 | Anund Jakob Kolbrenner | 1022-1050 |
| King of England, 1040-1042 | Edmund III Slemme | 1050-1060 | |||
| 1042-1047 | Stenkil | 1060-1066 | |||
| Sweyn II | 1047-1074 | Harald III Hårdråde | 1047-1066 | Erik VII & Erik VIII | 1066-1067 |
| Serves in Varangian Guard, 1034-1044; defeated & killed invading England, Stamford Bridge, 1066 | |||||
| Magnus II | 1066-1069 | ||||
| Harold V Hen | 1074-1080 | Olaf III the Peaceful | 1066-1093 | Inge I the Elder | 1066-1080, 1083-1110 |
| Halsten | 1066-1070 | ||||
| Canute IV the Holy | 1080-1086 | Magnus III the Barefoot | 1093-1103 | Blot-Sven | 1180-1183 |
| Olaf IV Magnusson | 1103-1115 | Filip Halstensson | 1110-1118 | ||
| Olaf IV the Hungry | 1085-1095 | Eystein II | 1103-1122 | ||
| Eric I the Evergood | 1095-1103 | Sigurd (Sigurðr) I the Crusader | 1103-1130 | Inge II the Younger | 1118-1125 |
| Earl of Orkney, 1099-1105 | |||||
| goes on Crusade, entertained by Alexius I Comnenus, addresses Danish Varangians, dies in Cyprus, 1103 | King of the Isles, 1099-1103 | ||||
| Niels the Elder | 1103-1134 | King of Man, 1099-1103 | |||
| Magnus IV the Blinded | 1130-1135, d.1139 | Magnus Nielsson | 1125-1130 | ||
| Eric II | 1134-1137 | Harald IV Gillechrist | 1130-1136 | Sverker I the Elder | 1130-1156 |
| Eric III | 1137-1146 | Inge I | 1136-1161 | St. Eric IX | 1156-1160 |
| Sweyn III | 1146-1157 | Sigurd II | 1136-1155 | ||
| Canute V Magnussen | 1147-1157 | Eystein III | 1142-1157 | Charles VII | 1161-1167 |
| Valdemar I the Great | 1157-1182 | Haakon II | 1161-1162 | Knut I | 1167-1196 |
| Canute VI the Pious | 1182-1202 | Magnus V | 1163-1184 | Sverker II the Younger | 1196-1208, d.1210 |
| Valdemar II the Victorious | 1202-1241 | Sverre | 1184-1202 | Eric X | 1208-1216 |
| Eric IV | 1241-1250 | Haakon III | 1202-1204 | John I | 1216-1222 |
| Abel | 1250-1252 | Inge II Baardson | 1204-1217 | Eric XI | 1222-1229 1234-1250 |
| Christopher I | 1252-1259 | Haakon IV the Old | 1217-1263 | Knut II the Long | 1229-1234 |
It has been noted that genealogical diagrams for the table above are given elsewhere. Genealogies for the following kings are given after their respective tables below. 
At right is a diagram for descent and marriages of some of the kings above that involve Emperors of Romania (Byzantium) and Grand Dukes or Princes of Kiev. This avenue of Romanian descent into subsequent European royalty and nobility is the best authenticated, despite the remaining uncertainty about the parentage of Irene. Otherwise, much less certain is the Romanian descent of the Counts of Savoy.
Noteworthy is also the connection to King Harold II of England, the Saxon King who was killed at the battle of Hastings in 1066, as William the Conqueror invaded England. While Harold did not have descendants in Britain directly, his descendants through Kiev and Denmark ultimately lead to the marriage of Margaret of Oldenburg to King James III of Scotland, from whom all subsequent Scottish and then British monarchs are descended.
| Kings of Denmark | Kings of Norway | Kings of Sweden | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eric V | 1259-1286 | Magnus VI | 1263-1281 | Valdemar | 1250-1275 |
| Eric VI | 1286-1319 | Eric II | 1281-1299 | Magnus I | 1275-1290 |
| Haakon V | 1299-1320 | Berger | 1290-1320 | ||
| Christopher II | 1320-1332 | Magnus (VII of Norway, II of Sweden) | 1320-1365 | ||
| Haakon VI | 1343-1380 | Eric XII | 1356-1359 | ||
| Valdemar III | 1340-1375 | Albert | 1365-1388 | ||
| the Black Death arrives in Norway, 1349, Denmark & Sweden, 1350 | Duke of Mecklenburg, 1379-1412 | ||||
| Olaf V (IV of Norway) | 1376-1387 | ||||
| Union of Denmark & Norway, 1380 | |||||
| 1387-1412 | |||||
| Union of Kalmar -- Denmark, Norway, & Sweden, 1397 | |||||
| 1412-1439 | |||||
| 1439-1448 | |||||
| Charles VIII | 1448-1457 1464-1465 1467-1470 | ||||
| 1448-1481 | |||||
| 1481-1513 | |||||
After the Viking era, Scandinavia rarely intrudes into the large events of European history. A spectacular exception was 
when Gustavus II Adolphus Vasa (Gustav Adolf) landed in Germany in 1630 determined to salvage the Protestant cause in the Thirty Years War. This won a subsidy from France, and Gustavus soon destroyed the Imperial army at Breitenfeld (1631), liberating northern Germany and the Palatinate. Another victory was won at Lützen (1632), but Gustavus himself fell in the battle. Although the Swedish army was then defeated at Nördlingen (1634), a
compromise peace was reached in 1635 (the Peace of Prague). This would have ended the war if France had not then intervened directly to keep things going and reduce Imperial power further.
Gustavus' daughter Christina (Kristina), the last of the House of Vasa, is best known for her learning, inviting people like René Descartes to her court. Unfortunately, the climate and Christina's early morning habits, distruptive to Descartes, resulted in his death from pneumonia (d.1650). Whether or not she felt guilty over this, she wearied of ruling and soon abdicated the throne (1654), joining the select company of rulers over the centuries to retire from their jobs. The throne passed to her cousin, Charles X of the Palatinate. His grandson, Charles XII, the "Madman of the North," revived Swedish military fortunes and then saw them catastrophically collapse when he was defeated far inside Russia by Peter the Great at Poltava (1709). Charles' army disintegrated, and he was so far from any base that he had to escape as a refugee south to Turkey, making his way home by sea. After this extraordinary odyssey, he ended up killed in battle. This was the end of Sweden's imperial adventures.
| Denmark | Norway | Sweden | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1513-1523 | |||||
| Frederick I | 1523-1533 | Gustavus I Vasa | 1523-1560 | ||
| Christian III | 1534-1558 | Eric XIV | 1560-1568 | ||
| Frederick II | 1558-1588 | John III | 1568-1592 | ||
| Christian IV | 1588-1648 | Sigismund | 1592-1604 | ||
| Charles IX | 1604-1611 | ||||
| Gustavus II Adolphus | 1611-1632 | ||||
| Christina | 1632-1654 d.1689 | ||||
| Frederick III | 1648-1670 | Charles X | 1654-1660 | ||
| Christian V | 1670-1699 | Charles XI | 1660-1697 | ||
| Frederick IV | 1699-1730 | Charles XII "Madman of the North" | 1697-1718 | ||
| Queen Ulrika | 1718-1720 | ||||
| Christian VI | 1730-1746 | Frederick | 1720-1751 | ||
| Landgrave of Hesse, 1730-1751 | |||||
| Frederick V | 1746-1766 | Adolphus Frederick | 1751-1771 | ||
| Christian VII | 1766-1808 | Gustavus III | 1771-1792 | ||
| Gustavus IV Adolphus | 1792-1809 | ||||
| Frederick VI | 1808-1839 | Charles XIII | 1809-1818 | ||
| Christian VIII | 1839-1848 | Norway & Sweden, 1814 | |||
| Charles XIV Bernadotte | 1818-1844 | ||||
| Oscar I | 1844-1859 | ||||
| Frederick VII | 1848-1863 | Charles XV | 1859-1872 | ||
| Christian IX | 1863-1906 | Oscar II | 1872-1907 | ||
| Frederick VIII | 1906-1912 | Haakon VII | 1905-1957 | Gustavus V | 1907-1950 |
| Christian X | 1912-1947 | ||||
| Frederick IX | 1947-1972 | Olaf V | 1957-1991 | Gustav VI Adolph | 1950-1973 |
| Queen Margaret II | 1972-present | Harald V | 1991-present | Karl / Charles XVI Gustaf | 1973-present |
In the following chart, we do not see any connection between the House of Vasa and the earlier Kings of Sweden (except the rebellious Charles VIII Bonde). My thanks to Leon Pereira, O.P., for exploring the connections of Bonde and Vasa to earlier Kings and supplying the information to me, much of it from Swedish websites like this. These connections can be examined on a separate popup. I have only been able to confirm part of this using Andreas Thiele, and, indeed, there seem to be many uncertainties in the early period.
While the recent Kings of Sweden have all been of the House of Bernadotte, with no connection shown to earlier Swedish Kings, they nevertheless descend, like the previous Swedish dynasty, from the Margrave Frederick VI of Baden-Durlach -- actually by two different routes -- and so from the previous Palatine and Vasa dynasties. This can be examined on a separate popup. Eugene de Beauharnais was the son of Josefine de la Tascher de la Pagerie, the wife of Napoleon Bonaparte, by her first marriage, to Alexander Francis, Viscount de Beauharnais (d.1794). He was adopted by Napoleon and well married, to a daughter of Maximilian I of Bavaria. My thanks to Leon Pereira, O.P., for drawing these connections to my attention and supplying the information, which has been confirmed and expanded using Andreas Thiele.
| Iceland | |
|---|---|
| Sveinn Björnsson | 1944-1952 |
| Asgeir Asgeirsson | 1952-1968 |
| Kristjan Eldjarn | 1968-1980 |
| Vigdis Finnbogadottir | 1980-1996 |
| Olafur Ragnar Grimsson | 1996-present |
associated with Norway in 1262 and then with Denmark in 1380, became independent, with the King of Denmark still as the King of Iceland, in 1918, and then a republic, as Denmark was still occupied by Germany, in 1944. Iceland was occupied as an important Allied base in World War II. It was also important for observation and logistics in the Cold War. Surnames preserve active patronymic suffixes, "-son" and "-dottir," as can be seen in the names of the Presidents.
Heads of State for the post-World War I nations are taken from the Regentenlisten und Stammtafeln zur Geschischte Europas by Michael F. Feldkamp [Philpp Reclam, Stuttgart, 2002].
| Finland | |
|---|---|
| Per Evind of Svinhufvud | 1917-1918 |
| Carl Gustav Emil von Mannerheim | 1918-1919 |
| Carl J. Stahlberg | President, 1919-1925 |
| Lauri Relander | 1925-1931 |
| Per Evind of Svinhufvud | 1931-1937 |
| Kyösti Kallio | 1937-1940 |
| Risto Ryti | 1940-1944 |
| Carl Gustav Emil von Mannerheim | 1944-1946 |
| Juho Kusti Paasikivi | 1946-1956 |
| Urho Kekkonen | 1956-1981 |
| Mauno Koivisto | 1982-1994 |
| Martti Ahtisaari | 1994-2000 |
| 2008 Nobel Peace Prize | |
| Tarja Halonen | 2000-present |
Finland and Estonia (speaking closely related Uralic languages) enter history as dependencies of Sweden, then of Russia. Only in the 20th Century do they emerge as independent countries -- Estonia briefly in the 1920's and 30's and then only after fifty years of terror (1940-1991) under the Soviet Union.| Estonia | |
|---|---|
| Konstantion Päts | President, 1938-1940 |
| Soviet Occupation, 1940-1941, 1944-1991 | |
| German Occupation, 1941-1944 | |
| Arnold Rüütel | 1991-1992, 2001-2006 |
| Lennart Georg Meri | 1992-2001 |
| Toomas Hendrik Ilves | 2006-present |
Finland managed to preserve its independence continuously since breaking away from Tsarist Russia in 1917. This was no small achievement when the Soviet Union was right next door, with aggressive designs, and the worst consequences might have been expected from Finland being an open ally of German in World War II. Oddly enough, Stalin settled for Finnish neutrality. This despite the outright humiliation inflicted on the Russians when they attacked the Finns in 1939 -- the "Winter War," 1939-1940. The Nazi-Soviet Pact had divided up Eastern Europe between Hitler and Stalin. Hitler was not happy when Stalin began making territorial demands on Finland, but he wasn't ready to do anything about it. When the Finns resisted, Stalin attacked. This all made it obvious, at the time, that Stalin was as great an enemy of peace and freedom as Hitler (a matter confused in the minds of many when Stalin later joined the Allies thanks to Hitler's invasion of Russia). But Stalin was in for a surprise. The Finns, led by Carl von Mannerheim, well prepared for fighting in the snows of the north (and with the Soviet Army weaked by Stalin's purges), inflicted sharp defeats on the Russians -- leaving 68,000 Russian dead. The British began thinking of ways to get aid to the Finns across neutral Norway and Sweden.
| Martti Ahtisaari's Nobel Peace Prize [2008]...won't get European elites buzzing as in past years... In his diplomatic and political career, the former Finnish President brokered peace on various continents -- yet also recognized clear limits to good intentions...
In the early 1990s, he ran the U.N. mission to Iraq after the first Gulf War, watching Saddam Hussein's repression up close. Twelve years of frustrated diplomacy later, and against the grain of conventional European opinion, Mr. Ahtisaari found himself defending the U.S. invasion, the absence of nuclear or biological weapons program notwithstanding. "Since I know that about a million people have been killed by the government of Iraq, I do not need much those weapons of mass destruction," he said. [Wall Street Journal, 11 October 2008] |
The Scandinavian countries are not well known for having colonial possessions. At the height of its power, Sweden was preoccupied with acquisitions in the Baltic area, like Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Pomerania. There was one distant colony of Sweden, however, in the future American State of Delaware, called "New Sweden." The first Swedish settlers were actually brought by the Dutch West India Company in 1638. The Swedish government then appointed a governor in 1640. But this was all on territory that was claimed by the New Netherlands, and the famous Dutch governor, Peter Stuyvesant, captured the Swedish colony in 1655. Danish possessions began rather earlier and were more distant and durable. Greenland, discovered by Eric the Red in 982, became a possesson of Norway, but the Union of Kalmar brought all Scandinavian possessions into the hands of Denmark. The settlement in Greenland actually died out, but colonization began again in 1721. Greenland remains Danish today. The story is similar for Iceland, discovered in 874. 
In 1262, the local Icelandic assembly, the Althing, voted for union with Norway. The Union of Kalmar then brought them together with Denmark. Denmark gave Iceland autonomy in 1874, and virtual independence in 1918, except that the King of Denmark was still the King of Iceland. This continued until Denmark was occupied by Germany in World War II. Iceland voted in 1944 to become a republic (which it had been from 930-1262). The stories of Greenland and Iceland, of course, are part of the earliest explorations of the Vikings. A Christianization of Scandinavia seems to have stilled the spirit of adventure and exploration. It was remembered that Lief Ericson had discovered lands beyond Greenland in about 1003, which he had named Vinland, and some efforts had been made at settlement there, but then the project lapsed, permanently. In the later Age of Discovery, the Danes ventured further. There were a couple of Danish footholds in India, Tranquebar and Serampore. A Danish fleet arrived at Tranquebar in 1616 and a colony was founded in 1620. It remained Danish and was sold to Britain in 1845. Serampore was established in 1658. The Nawabs of Bengal didn't like the presence of the colony and expelled the settlers. With the help of the French, the Nawabs allowed a colony back in 1755. Like Tranquebar, Serampore was sold to Britain in 1845.
Danish Guinea, in West Africa, at first consisted of coastal forts, Christiansborg (Osu, in Accra today), Augustaborg (Teshie), Fredensborg (Ningo), Kongensteen (Ada), and Prindsensteen (Keta). But then Denmark banned the slave trade, the first country to do so, in 1792 (effective 1803). This rendered the forts uneconomical, but inland concessions were obtained to establish some plantations. These did not do well, and so the colony was sold to Britain in 1850 for £10,000 and became part of the Gold Coast. Today, Christiansborg Castle is actually the official residence of the President of Ghana.
Several attempts were made by Denmark to colonize the Nicobar Islands. The first occured in 1723. The colony was then officially annexed by Tranquebar in 1756 and named "Frederiksøerne" (Frederik's Islands). But hundreds died of malaria and the colony was abandoned the following year. In 1768 Moravian missionaries reestablished the colony. This was more successful, but the missionaries left in 1787. The Danish Crown, which asserted sovereignty over the islands in 1777, nevertheless maintained a small garrison. The British occupied Tranquebar in 1801 and the Nicobars in 1809. In 1831 Denmark returned to the Nicobars, but the colony was abandoned in 1837. The British asked the Danes to suppress local piracy, and they returned in 1845, but then left again in 1848. Denmark tried to sell the islands, but even the British were unwilling to pay. The Danish claim was renounced in 1868, and Britain occupied the islands the next year.
The most durable Danish colony was in the Virgin Islands. Danish forces landed in 1666 on St. Thomas. The settlement failed, but the Danes were back in 1671 and expanded to St. John in 1717. St. Croix was purchased from France in 1733. British occupation of the islands in the Napoleonic period (1807-1815) introduced an English speaking population. Eventually, Denmark simply sold the islands to the United States in 1917. Thus ended the modern phase of the Scandinavian colonial experience.
Information about Danish colonies, and some of the wording above, has been provided, with thanks, by Kristian Jensen of Denmark.
Legendary and Early Kings of Scandinavia
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}