Which country was closest to become the hegemon in europe?

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Rome. Next?
 
Putin announced that from now on he will sell gas to Europe only for the Russian ruble. Putin became the master of all of Europe, he was greatly loved for gas.
What failed Attila, Genghis Khan, Stalin, succeeded Putin.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
e4e.png
Oh what????:rolleyes:
 
Not really, no. There's really no comparison with the hegemony the Franks enjoyed under Charlie. Byzantium was very rich, but it was very much contained and besieged half the time. They could occasionally play spoilers, but they were in a long process of contraction. Franks had alliances with Bulgars and Abbasids, while Byzantines had no allies to throw against the Franks, except for an exiled Lombard prince or two and briefly the Avars (thoroughly destroyed by the Franks anyway).

Post-Franks, they had some success among the Slavs (albeit cultural, not political).

Charlemagne's Franks defined Europe, then and forever after.
Totally agree. The Franks of from Clodowech* (Clovis), Karel* de Grote (Charlemagne) etc. defined the standard of West. With France, Germany, the Low Countries, northern Italy, Switzerland and Austria as its' core. These Western cultural standard were exported to the British Isles, Scandinavia, the Iberian Peninsula, Southern Italy and Catholic Slavic Europe.

(*= I'm Dutch hence I prefer the more native Frankish variants)
 
In general you make a good case but this is overstating it. The Netherlands and Austria have their own interests and they've pushed for it at times against Germany's wishes, e.g. dismissing German concessions to France. (I'm not saying that's a good thing, the most fruitful EU policies came out of Franco-German negotiations.) The Netherlands used to hide behind the UK when it wanted something different; after Brexit it's increasingly common for them to seek common ground with Baltic and Scandinavian countries to make a bloc that can't simply be overruled.
Yes, but the Netherlands and Austria pushing against concessions Germany made does sound like something Berlin wasn't unhappy about provided it could move Paris for a bit. Otherwise it was again Berlin selling out to Paris. Yes, in the Eurozone it really is a clash of two economic schools. The Netherlands too, was only aboard if the Euro was an European DM (the Dutch Guilder had been tied to the DM since the 1970's), an concession to this more towards the French view was politically inpalatable, hence Zalm's brave last stand (defending Dutch & German even after Germany abandoned him politically). And in hindsight Zalm was right.

However the whole political inception might be flawed, it almost like wanting to combine the benefits of the French and German system, while lacking the most important part a decent political union. This is what hinders the Eurozone most, monetary-wise it needs a stronger union to solve certain issues.
 
Totally agree. The Franks of from Clodowech* (Clovis), Karel* de Grote (Charlemagne) etc. defined the standard of West. With France, Germany, the Low Countries, northern Italy, Switzerland and Austria as its' core. These Western cultural standard were exported to the British Isles, Scandinavia, the Iberian Peninsula, Southern Italy and Catholic Slavic Europe.

(*= I'm Dutch hence I prefer the more native Frankish variants)
And the standardized Latin alphabet and notation was exported from monasteries in England (in fact, exported from one supremely hardworking monk who advised Charlemagne). The Church was very well-connected even in the 6th century, let alone the 8th.

In fact, can we not put forward the Latin Church, which at the height of all the chaos in Europe, maintained a vast information network, defined all European languages, methods of writing, faith, politics and policy, and were in general the richest and most powerful people for a good 500 years or so?
 
They weren't from Europe, but my vote would be on the Mongols. At the height of their invasions of Europe they had all of Eastern Europe under their control and had invasions into Germany/HRE, the Balkans, and tributary states throughout central Europe.
 
Last edited:
They weren't from Europe, but my vote would be on the Mongols. At the height of their invasions of Europe they had all of Eastern Europe under their control and had invasions into Germany/HRE, the Balkans, and tributary states throughout Europe.
What? They only got Ruthenian lands (bar the North) with few raids on Poland and Hungary. Never reached Germany actually.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
They raided inside Germany itself.

"The Mongol light reconnaissance units, led by Orda Khan, pillaged through Meissen and burned most of the city of Meissen to the ground.[34] "
OK, I didn't know that raid, but it was nothing significant anyway.
They also won the Battle of Legnica in Silesia against a combined Polish-Teutonic Order force.

Polish-Teutonic? Must be some German propaganda. Maybe there were some Teutons in the foreign contingent, among Templars and Hospitallers, but the main ally of Polish duchies were actually the Moravians.
 
Last edited:
Let's say it again, it was Sweden;) (replying to the thread)