Germany's Size

[gavmeister13]

When in it's history [excluding wartime] was Germany at it's biggest and smallest size?

[Gwynn Compton]

Germany, in the form of the Holy Roman Empire would have been its biggest continental European expansion. The Holy Roman Empire dominated most of central Europe, and at times expanded both southwards into northern Italy and eastwards into modern Poland. The Holy Roman Empire was never a stable political unit, and was generally a very loose confereration of principalities. Frederick Barbarossa is one notable Holy Roman Emperor who managed to unite most of it.

The Holy Roman Empire in 1180


Website Caption: On this map, areas outlined in yellow are part of the Holy Roman Empire. Dark purple areas are controlled by France, brown areas are controlled by the House of Anjou, and green areas are controled by the House of Austria. The red segment is Brandenberg, and the blue is Aragon, Spain

From http://historymedren.about.com/library/ ... ce1180.htm

Though one could argue that German conquests in WW1 and WW2 were bigger, but in a historical sense, the Holy Roman Empire was more lasting than the World War conquests.

The next biggest German incarnation was the Second Reich (the Holy Roman Empire being post-humourously referred to as the First Reich)


From http://www.atsnotes.com/other/germany-1870.JPG

Hope that helps

Gwynn

[cybercat]

Well you know what they say: Size isn't everything

[lukeo]

Wasn't the Princedom of Hohenzoler an already part of Prussia by 1871?

[Gwynn Compton]

I suspect you may be right...

http://www.pantel-web.de/bw_mirror/history/bw318_e.htm

1806 The price for Napoleon's gift - together with other German states -- was the accession into the Rhine Confederation, an alliance against Prussia and Russia.
1815 Napoleon was finally ruined. In that, through a change of sides, troops of Baden and Württemberg also made a timely contribution. In the place of the German empire which had fallen in 1806, there arose the Germanic Confederation under the leadership of the Austrian emperor. Baden, Württemberg and Hohenzollern were independent members of this confederation. In Baden and in Württemberg there was already in the legislatures an assured right of participation by the citizens.
1848 - 1849 The revolution in France and in Germany also shook the southern German states, mostly the Hohenzollern principalities. In 1850, their princes turned their states over to the Prussian ruling family of the same origin, from which the counts of Zollern also descended. The new governmental district of Sigmaringen up to 1945 belonged to the Prussian Rhine Province with the capital of Coblenz.

1866 The southern German states fell into great distress. In the war between Prussia and Austria, the Germanic Confederation broke apart. The unsuccessful struggle by troops from Baden and Württemberg did not stand in the way of annexation to the North Germanic Confederation. For all of southern Germany it was a decision between the North German-Prussian and the Austrian influence.
1871 After the war with France, the German states, without Austria, entered into the new German Empire. The confederation princes held onto their titles, but the King of Prussia as German emperor and commander-in-chief of the armed forces had a definite pre-eminence. From 1871 to 1918 France was no longer a neighboring country. Alsace-Lorraine was, as an imperial state, part of the German Empire.

I wonder if any special autonomy was in place.

Gwynn

[PAK]

I think the Frankenreich, the forunner of the holy roman empire, was bigger and in diffrence to 1180 it wasn't devided and it was the real first reich.

[Germania]

The smallest size is now, I think!

[lukeo]

The smallest size is now, I think!

No, smallest size was after the Fraknish kingdom was divided. The newly founded eastern kingdom was almost the same in shape, as Western Germany after the ww2. The eastern parts were Slavic princedoms at that time.

[Windward]

Hey lukeo I guess someone will come here to smell out "Polish chauvinist" for your words "eastern parts were Slavic princedoms" soon.

Here you can find exact area of the Second Reich gavmeister13:

http://www.dhm.de/lemo/objekte/statisti ... index.html

and for Weimar Republic's:

http://www.dhm.de/lemo/objekte/statisti ... index.html

regards

[lukeo]

I have the consciousness, that this someone is lurking aside:)
But he cannot doubt that fact. The lausitsian Sorbs are the modern remnants of Slavic population of modern Eastern Germany.
Berlin itself is a Slavic name. It is derived, depending on theory, from word "berlo" - "sceptre", or "barlog" - "ber's den". The suffixe "-lin" is very common in Slavic city names.

[PAK]

Waht's the fuss about? It's also a fact that from 3000 b.c. to 375 a.c. the territory from the Rhein to the Weichsel (Vistula/Wisla) had been under german rule.
It's strange that you start arguing without anyone said anything.
btw. the map of Gwynn shows very nice how Berlin was polish, so no doubt here.

[Attila the Hunking]

I have the consciousness, that this someone is lurking aside:)
But he cannot doubt that fact.

Allright, here we go! Btw, I'm not among those who doubt.
But nevertheless, check THIS out:

http://www.rollintl.com/roll/germaniamap.gif

Don't know the exact time this map refers to, but in any way it should be prior to the great migration of peoples in early 5th century AD - hundreds of years before the first slavic people ever arrived in eastern and central europe. 8) During the great migration of peoples, the greatest parts of the germanic population living in the areas mentioned above left for the west. However not all of them did and were later absorbed (or perhaps expelled?) when the slavs came.

Another map of ancient europe:

http://historymedren.about.com/library/ ... manicb.gif

Look were the slavs are to be found!
I suppose one can't doubt these facts either.

[Windward]

It's strange that you start arguing without anyone said anything.

We meant an old guy, who lukeo and other Pole members know him before. So it's not "arguing without anyone", but just awating him. ONLY waiting for him. PS, he's not a German. Gesundheit! Gott segnen Sie!

[Karl da Kraut]

This question is hard to answer as it's difficult to define since which date (or decade, better century or even millenium) you can speak of Germany. Moreover, you'd need to define "Germany", for example as a German state (which criterias should a German state fulfill) or simply as a territory inhabited by people with a German identitiy (which criterias should a German identity) fulfill?

lukeo wrote:

No, smallest size was after the Fraknish kingdom was divided.

I guess you mean the second partition of the Frankish empire in 887 (Charles III. had reunited the Frankish empire a few years before). However, it's still problematic to equate the East-Frankish empire to Germany. It was not until 920 that the term Regnum teutonicumappeared for the first time. Modern scholars agree that a somewhat explicit "German identity" developed not before the 11th century.

PAK wrote:

I think the Frankenreich, the forunner of the holy roman empire, was bigger and in diffrence to 1180 it wasn't devided and it was the real first reich.

The (united) Frankish empire is surely not to be equated with Germany; it was neither German nor French, it was simply Frankish.

Gwynn Compton wrote:

Germany, in the form of the Holy Roman Empire would have been its biggest continental European expansion. The Holy Roman Empire dominated most of central Europe, and at times expanded both southwards into northern Italy and eastwards into modern Poland. The Holy Roman Empire was never a stable political unit, and was generally a very loose confereration of principalities. Frederick Barbarossa is one notable Holy Roman Emperor who managed to unite most of it.

Again, it's hard to equate the HRE with Germany.

The Empire was called
since 1034 Romanum Imperium
since 1254 Sacrum Romanum Imperium
since Charles IV.: Heiliges Römisches Reich (in documents in German)
the term "of German nation" was not added until the late 15th century.

Also, the elected German king was not automatically named Emperor; the title of the German king merely justified to lay claim to the title of the Emperor. This shows that "Germany" and the universal Empire weren't considerd the same.

I'd suggest another period of time for the "smallest" German state ever: 1806-1815. In 1806 (after defeating Prussia) Napoleon I. forced the last Emperor of the HRE, Franz II., to lay down this title (Franz II. accepted the title of the Emperor of Austria instead). The HRE seized to exist. For the next nine years there were German states, but no German state which was reinstituted with the foundation of the German League (Deutscher Bund) in 1815.

[lukeo]

Waht's the fuss about? It's also a fact that from 3000 b.c. to 375 a.c. the territory from the Rhein to the Weichsel (Vistula/Wisla) had been under german rule.

Not under GERMAN rule! Only inhabited by the Germanic tribes, and even that is not so sure. Archeological proovs show Slavic presence on Odra (Oder) river in 2nd century AD (the Lusitian Culture). The lands beetween river Laba (Elbe) and Wisla (Vistula) were possibly ethnical mixed. The lands east to Wisla were Slavic.
Slavs (under the name od Vendens) were mentioned by Roman writers. The identification of Slavs as Vendens is almost sure. Pre0christian Norse sagas call Poland "Vendland".

It's strange that you start arguing without anyone said anything.
btw. the map of Gwynn shows very nice how Berlin was polish, so no doubt here.

Not Polish, but SLAVIC. Poles are Slavs, but not all Slavs are Poles .