Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old July 11th, 2018, 11:25 AM   #1

Visigoth Panzer's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Apr 2017
From: U.S.A.
Posts: 444
Was England more developed than Bohemia in the 1300's?


Was England more developed/wealthy than Bohemia/Moravia during the 1300's? Generally meaning if you could rule either Bohemia/Moravia or England, which would be better? (not taking into account enemies/war commitments).
Visigoth Panzer is offline  
Remove Ads
Old July 11th, 2018, 11:35 AM   #2
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,928

I would say yes, England was more developed than Bohemia, but I do not know much on 1300 Bohemia.

London was a larger city than any Bohemia, and England had a strong central government, with a well developed national court system. England at this time was one of the more prosperous regios of Europe, along with the Low countries (Belgium, Netherlands) and the northern Italian cities.
Bart Dale is offline  
Old July 11th, 2018, 12:12 PM   #3

Linschoten's Avatar
nonpareil
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Wessex
Posts: 13,929
Blog Entries: 11

I'd always thought that everything was fine in Bohemia when Good King Wenceslaus was on the throne!
Linschoten is offline  
Old July 11th, 2018, 07:09 PM   #4
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Chalfont, Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,154

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linschoten View Post
I'd always thought that everything was fine in Bohemia when Good King Wenceslaus was on the throne!
Well, the song Good King Wenceslaus was actually about "Good Duke Wencelsaus", Wencelsaus I who ruled from 921 to 935.

In 1085 Duke Vratislaus I (ruled 1062-1092) was promoted to King for Life by Emperor Henry IV.

In 1158 Duke Vladislaus II (ruled 1140-1172) was promoted to King by Emperor Frederick I. Online sources differ whether this was supposed to be a life kingship or a hereditary kingship, but when Vladislaus II abdicated his successors used the title of Duke.

Ottokar I was Duke of Bohemia from 1192-1193 and from 1197. He was recognized as hereditary King of Bohemia by Emperors Philip in 1198, Otto IV, and Frederick II in 1212.

And some later sources may have anachronistically imagined that Duke Wenceslaus was a king of Bohemia.

The song "Good King Wenceslaus" was written in 1853 by Englishmen John Mason Neale and Thomas Helmore who may have have used anachronistic sources.

Duke Wenceslaus was murdered in 935. The next year Otto the Great became King of Germany and overlord of Bohemia. Otto became Holy Roman Emperor in 962 and died in 973.

According to the online Catholic Encyclopedia:

Quote:
The Emperor Otto I conferred on him the regal dignity and title.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. Wenceslaus

Since Otto didn't become King until the year after Wenceslaus was killed, and didn't become Emperor with the power to make kings until 27 years after Wenceslaus was killed, if that is true it would have had to have been a posthumous promotion.

In fact, Wikipedia claims that Otto promoted Wenceslaus posthumerously:

Quote:
Although Wenceslas was, during his lifetime, only a duke, Holy Roman Emperor Otto I posthumously "conferred on [Wenceslas] the regal dignity and title" and that is why, in the legend and song, he is referred to as a "king".[11]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_King_Wenceslas

I believe that I once asked a question somewhere asking if Wenceslaus was really made a king posthumously.

Good "King" Wenceslaus?

Anyway, I think that Bohemia was probably much more developed in the 14th century (1301-1400) than in the reign of Duke Wenceslaus (921-935), even though King Wenceslaus IV who ruled from 1378 to 1419 was sort of like "Bad King Wencesalus".

Last edited by MAGolding; July 11th, 2018 at 07:16 PM.
MAGolding is offline  
Old July 11th, 2018, 07:39 PM   #5
Archivist
 
Joined: May 2018
From: Ramgarh
Posts: 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart Dale View Post
I would say yes, England was more developed than Bohemia, but I do not know much on 1300 Bohemia.

London was a larger city than any Bohemia, and England had a strong central government, with a well developed national court system. England at this time was one of the more prosperous regios of Europe, along with the Low countries (Belgium, Netherlands) and the northern Italian cities.
England suffered from Black Death in 1348. In 1362 the plague killed 20 percent of the population. So probably caused massive economic destruction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death_in_England
Gabbar Singh is offline  
Old July 11th, 2018, 08:04 PM   #6
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 5,165

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabbar Singh View Post
England suffered from Black Death in 1348. In 1362 the plague killed 20 percent of the population. So probably caused massive economic destruction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death_in_England
Not really economic destruction. It caused higher wages and lower rents.
betgo is online now  
Old July 11th, 2018, 08:20 PM   #7
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: Bulgaria
Posts: 3,200

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabbar Singh View Post
England suffered from Black Death in 1348. In 1362 the plague killed 20 percent of the population. So probably caused massive economic destruction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death_in_England
Indeed the plague didnt hit all of the continent equally. There were places which were less affected than the rest of Europe, like Basque Country, parts of Belgium and the Netherlands, Kingdom of Poland and Bohemia to a certain extent. Read the last post of The Rat in this thread.

black death vs Golden age of Bohemia

The point is these lands were affected Kingdom of Poland for example lost a quarter of its population to the plague. This pandemic infection that swept over the continent and its impact upon economy of medieval european states was a global event.
At Each Kilometer is offline  
Old July 11th, 2018, 10:44 PM   #8
Archivist
 
Joined: May 2018
From: Ramgarh
Posts: 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by betgo View Post
Not really economic destruction. It caused higher wages and lower rents.
The higher wages didn't compensate for lower populations. The total GDP went down.
Gabbar Singh is offline  
Old July 12th, 2018, 10:08 AM   #9
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2017
From: Connecticut
Posts: 2,008

I'm surprised how lopsided this is. I'd vote Bohemia in this era. Also the Bohemian throne also comes with being Holy Roman Emperor around this time!
Emperor of Wurttemburg 43 is online now  
Old July 12th, 2018, 10:27 AM   #10

Linschoten's Avatar
nonpareil
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Wessex
Posts: 13,929
Blog Entries: 11

I'm inclined to suspect that you don't have sufficient knowledge of 14th Century Bohemia (let alone 14th Century England) to be able to express an opinion that is worth a moment's consideration; and in point of fact, only one contributor to this thread has expressed any opinion at all on the main question. To have a one-sided debate, you have to have a debate in the first place. Any Bohemians out there?
Linschoten is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
1300, bohemia, developed, england, war



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looking for informations: Dagmar of Bohemia KirstenK European History 8 October 27th, 2016 12:40 PM
the ones at power in Bohemia in the past younghistorian European History 0 October 21st, 2014 05:38 AM
Help regarding my ancestors from Bohemia prussianwolf European History 5 November 24th, 2012 08:52 AM
Hus and Bohemia wer Medieval and Byzantine History 32 August 24th, 2010 05:58 PM
Bohemia - can someone point me in the right direction please? pj812 European History 3 July 20th, 2010 11:09 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.