Karl der große or Charlemagne?

[soopaman2]

I think it should be more widely known in the German name, since the Franks were a Germanic tribe.


His empire eventually split up and made both countries, but why did the French name for him take hold throughout the centuries?

I feel like the Germans got a raw deal here, as when I was in school it was taught to me he was French, here I am 20 something years later, and found I was betrayed by the school system again.

#standwithGermany

Just my history nerd rambling. Don't mind me.:O:

[Raptor1]

Surely it should be Carolus Magnus...? :hmmm:

[Archibald]

Hmm.....I say,amazing.:D

[Dowly]

He himself preferred to use Karolus serenissimus Augustus a Deo coronatus magnus pacificus imperator Romanum gubernans imperium.

I say we should honor his wish. :yep:

[Oberon]

Well, no-one knows for certain where he was born. :hmmm:

I think though that considering that the Frankish Empire lends more of its name and history towards the creation of modern France than it does to modern Germany, despite the Franks having originated in Germany, then it makes some sense to associate Charlemagne with France.

While we're here, have a picture of a descendent of Charlemagne dressed as Charlemagne:

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02154/Christopher-Lee_2154270i.jpg

[soopaman2]

He himself preferred to use Karolus serenissimus Augustus a Deo coronatus magnus pacificus imperator Romanum gubernans imperium.

I say we should honor his wish. :yep:

That is not easy to teach to grade schoolers.:o

No matter what he calls himself he was a great man, bringing literacy to Europe, and one of the many cogs to making the modern world.

That coronation thing did not go well in 800, Napoleon himself remembered this and was sure to crown himself, rather than let the Pope do it.

His whole story is interesting, he pretty much invented crusades, because he loved smiting heretics and pagans.

[soopaman2]

Well, no-one knows for certain where he was born. :hmmm:

I think though that considering that the Frankish Empire lends more of its name and history towards the creation of modern France than it does to modern Germany, despite the Franks having originated in Germany, then it makes some sense to associate Charlemagne with France.

While we're here, have a picture of a descendent of Charlemagne dressed as Charlemagne:

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02154/Christopher-Lee_2154270i.jpg


Franks are Germanic. (edit: they are mentioned in the Stategikon [a military manual] written by Emperor Maurice (of the ERE/ Byzantines), in the same classification as other Germanic peoples, "light haired peoples) Clovis was the man who set it up, then when the Merovingian dynasty fell due to weird traditions. They had a puppet king, and the "mayor of the Palace" who really ruled. Pepin went to the Pope and got holy agreement, that the man who truly rules deserves to be king (divine right).

He (legally under divine right from the Catholic Church) overthrew the "fake" and established the Carolingian Dynasty, which is famous today. It also propelled Catholicism to being a huge force in early feudal politics.

I think if you are from Europe, or New Worlders from Europe (like me), then you got a lot of German in you, they overran the continent when the Western Roman empire fell.

[Oberon]

Franks are Germanic. Clovis was the man who set it up, then when the Merovingian dynasty fell due to weird traditions. They had a puppet king, and the "mayor of the Palace" who really ruled. Pepin went to the Pope and got holy agreement, that the man who truly rules deserves to be king (divine right).

He (legally under divine right from the Catholic Church) overthrew the "fake" and established the Carolingian Dynasty, which is famous today. It also propelled Catholicism to being a huge force in early feudal politics.

I think if you are from Europe, or New Worlders from Europe (like me), then you got a lot of German in you, they overran the continent when the Western Roman empire fell.

Franks are indeed Germanic, most of modern Europe is, but the name itself Frank and Francia was what became the modern name of France. Even Germany calls France 'Frankreich' IIRC.
I'm from England, so there's definitely Germanic lineage here, as well as...well, just about every other race from Europe. :haha:

[Archibald]

I bet that he comes from the north.:hmmm:

[soopaman2]

Franks are indeed Germanic, most of modern Europe is, but the name itself Frank and Francia was what became the modern name of France. Even Germany calls France 'Frankreich' IIRC.
I'm from England, so there's definitely Germanic lineage here, as well as...well, just about every other race from Europe. :haha:


Angles lent thier name to your fine island, and our language. Also your famous King Arthur came about in this time period this thread discusses.

No I do not believe that he was real, but with what was going on there, with all the invasions going on, I can see a medieval urban legend popping up to give people hope. :)

[Jimbuna]

Franks are indeed Germanic, most of modern Europe is, but the name itself Frank and Francia was what became the modern name of France. Even Germany calls France 'Frankreich' IIRC.
I'm from England, so there's definitely Germanic lineage here, as well as...well, just about every other race from Europe. :haha:

You can chuck in a few other continents as well while you're at it :03:

[Oberon]

Angles lent thier name to your fine island, and our language. Also your famous King Arthur came about in this time period this thread discusses.

No I do not believe that he was real, but with what was going on there, with all the invasions going on, I can see a medieval urban legend popping up to give people hope. :)

I'd say that there probably was an 'Arthur' (although I doubt he was actually called that), but things like Merlin, Camelot and the Knights of the Round table are stretching it a little. :haha:
More likely Arthur was a figurehead in sub-Roman Britain, but certainly never rose to Bretwalda or the like. Still, makes for good reading, and L'Morte d'Arthur is good reading. :yep:

I must admit I've had a growing interest over the past couple of years in regards to sub-Roman Britain, and the era of 'Bretwalda', but it's not the easiest era to get firm information on, thanks to Norsemen burning our records. :/\\!! But it's definitely a very interesting time, and the likes of 'Brytenwalda' (http://mountandblade.wikia.com/wiki/Brytenwalda) for Mount and Blade: Warband, and 'The Rood and the Dragon' (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=105759) for Civilization III awakened my interest in the era.

[Raptor1]

Angles lent thier name to your fine island, and our language. Also your famous King Arthur came about in this time period this thread discusses.

No I do not believe that he was real, but with what was going on there, with all the invasions going on, I can see a medieval urban legend popping up to give people hope. :)

Arthur almost certainly existed in some form. The modern character of King Arthur is surely the creation of people like Geoffrey of Monmouth, but earlier references to him in Welsh and Breton poetry as well as other early Medieval literature were quite likely based on a historical person (or maybe several).

Charlemagne was the subject of much of the same fiction as King Arthur (he's supposedly 200 years old in The Song of Roland, for example), it just happens that we have much more surviving evidence of his reign than we do anything that happened in Britain in the early Dark Ages (thanks in no small part to Charlemagne himself).

[soopaman2]

I'd say that there probably was an 'Arthur' (although I doubt he was actually called that), but things like Merlin, Camelot and the Knights of the Round table are stretching it a little. :haha:
More likely Arthur was a figurehead in sub-Roman Britain, but certainly never rose to Bretwalda or the like. Still, makes for good reading, and L'Morte d'Arthur is good reading. :yep:

I must admit I've had a growing interest over the past couple of years in regards to sub-Roman Britain, and the era of 'Bretwalda', but it's not the easiest era to get firm information on, thanks to Norsemen burning our records. :/\\!! But it's definitely a very interesting time, and the likes of 'Brytenwalda' (http://mountandblade.wikia.com/wiki/Brytenwalda) for Mount and Blade: Warband, and 'The Rood and the Dragon' (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=105759) for Civilization III awakened my interest in the era.

Post Romano British history is so elusive due to massive raids from Proto vikings and angles and saxons, like you said, due to destruction of records.

I am not saying a man who rallied the populace, and gave hope in a time of pillage and rape, never existed.

I just don't think he pulled a sword out of a rock.

I am more in opposition to the supernatural crap attributed to this person. I understand how legends can pop up, considering the supernatural/religious state peoples of that era held dear.

Arthur was certainly based on someone, no idea is original, I just think he was given more gravitas than he deserves.

[soopaman2]

Franks are indeed Germanic, most of modern Europe is, but the name itself Frank and Francia was what became the modern name of France. Even Germany calls France 'Frankreich' IIRC.
I'm from England, so there's definitely Germanic lineage here, as well as...well, just about every other race from Europe. :haha:


I am horrid in French, but don't they call the Germans, Allemand?

There was a German tribe called the Allemani.

Euro history, and history in general, has always fascinated me, because it is my history, all the way over here in America, things that happened back then influence my life today.

We still live with remnants of Roman traditions today, Look at Washington D.C's architecture, look at alot of republics constitutional systems. Look at the catholic church., they filled a void after the fall of Rome.

I am always amazed at how little we change, despite how much we have changed.

[Aktungbby]

thanks to Norsemen burning our records.
You're welcome :D As with Charlemagne's birthplace and legitimacy (he was born out of wedlock?) so with the true dynastic master of it all...it's where you end up that counts..Rollo the Ganger "Ganger-Hrolf"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/Rollo_statue_in_falaise.JPG/220px-Rollo_statue_in_falaise.JPG (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rollo_statue_in_falaise.JPG)Made Duke of Normandy by hard pressed Carolingian, Charles the Simple, his descendant, that other famous Bastard, William I, 'put paid' to it all Vikingwise in 1066 and replaced those burned records with the DOMESDAY BOOK! "Witenie: King's land; Harold from St. Guthlac's Church." https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e8/Domesday_plaque.JPG/800px-Domesday_plaque.JPGI want it ALL back!:O: :wah:http://opendomesday.org/media/images/cropped/7006-1.png

[Eichhörnchen]

I read a weighty novel years ago by Rosemary Sutcliffe, called "Sword At Sunset". She was heavily into researching how things really were in the Dark Ages, and she was probably one of the first to postulate that Arthur was a heavy cavalryman of some social rank, levied by the Romans from the native population (as was their practice).

He would have retained his high status after the occupation and, as in her novel, maybe have come to chieftainship or kingship; there seem to have been 'kings' all over the place back then, one highly tangible example being King Raedwald of Sutton Hoo fame.

I'm fortunate enough to live in East Anglia.

[Oberon]

The land of the Eastern Angles, thank you, although technically I believe in that era your neck of the woods was primarily swamp land. :hmmm:

[soopaman2]

The land of the Eastern Angles, thank you, although technically I believe in that era your neck of the woods was primarily swamp land. :hmmm:

You guys got some scandinavian in ya, you are not pure Germanic like the continentals.

A guy named Harald almost made Angles and Saxons a moot point.:O:

But he was an idiot militarily, he had the chance.

[Aktungbby]

You guys got some scandinavian in ya, you are not pure Germanic like the continentals.

AHEM! TIME TO LEAVE THE THREAD KAMERAD:D
From Scandinavia. German ancestry begins with the original European people of Scandinavia, mostly clustered in southern Norway and Sweden.
Mainland Europe. Original Scandinavians begin migrating to continental mainland in 850 BC (modern Denmark, Northern Germany, spreading West, East, South). Those on mainland soon develop a separate “identity”. Those on mainland are later referred to by Romans as Germanus (Latin), cementing a distinction between the Scandinavians that remained in Scandinavia, and the Scandinavians that now inhabited the mainland. The Germanic term would later be ascribed to those that remained in Scandinavia (forefathers to Norse and Swedes), since they were of the same origin as the Germanic peoples. The Mainland Germanics, as understood to be those in Central/Northern Europe would be the forefathers to the people we now consider to be “German”. They would primarily dominate the lands from the Rhine to the West, and the Danube to the south and east, stretching into Ukraine, residing along the northern border of the Roman Empire.
http://www.worldology.com/Europe/images/ancient_europe_germanic.jpghttp://www.worldology.com/Europe/images/classical_europe_germanic.jpg:rock:http://www.worldology.com/Europe/Europe_Nations/Germany/ (http://www.worldology.com/Europe/Europe_Nations/Germany/) predates your limited-scope Völkerwanderung which wiped out the Roman empire. :up: Origins of Germanic tribes:

Germanic peoples (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_peoples) moved out of southern Scandinavia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia) and Germany (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany) to the adjacent lands between the Elbe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbe) and Oder (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oder) after 1000 BC. The first wave moved westward and southward (pushing the resident Celts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celts) west to the Rhine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhine) by about 200 BC) and moving into southern Germany (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Germany) up to the Roman province of Gaul (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaul) by 100 BC, where they were stopped by Gaius Marius (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaius_Marius) and Julius Caesar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar). It is this western group which was described by the Roman historian Tacitus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus) (56–117 AD) and Julius Caesar (100–44 BC) A later wave of Germanic tribes migrated eastward and southward from Scandinavia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia) between 600 and 300 BC to the opposite coast of the Baltic Sea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_Sea), moving up the Vistula (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vistula) near the Carpathians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpathian_Mountains). During Tacitus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus)' era they included lesser known tribes such as the Tencteri (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tencteri_and_Usipetes), Cherusci (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherusci), Hermunduri (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermunduri) and Chatti (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatti); however, a period of federation and intermarriage resulted in the familiar groups known as the Alemanni (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alemanni), Franks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks), Saxons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxons), Frisians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisians) and Thuringians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thuringii). [wiki]
IMHO Tacitus seldom got it wrong: required reading!:up: "Regarding the question of ethnic origins, evidence developed by archaeologists and linguists suggests that a people or group of peoples sharing a common material culture dwelt in a region defined by the Nordic Bronze Age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Bronze_Age) culture between 1700 BCE and 600 BCE. The Germanic tribes then inhabited southern Scandinavia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia), Schleswig-Holstein (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schleswig-Holstein) and Hamburg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburg), but subsequent Iron Age cultures of the same region, like Wessenstedt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wessenstedt) (800 to 600 BCE) and Jastorf (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jastorf_culture), are also in consideration. The change of Proto-Indo-European (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PIE) to Proto-Germanic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic) has been defined by the first sound shift (or Grimm's law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimm%27s_law)) and must have occurred when mutually intelligible dialects or languages in a Sprachbund (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprachbund) were still able to convey such a change to the whole region. So far it has been impossible to date this event conclusively.
The precise interaction between these peoples is not known; however, they are tied together and influenced by regional features and migration patterns linked to prehistoric cultures like Hügelgräber, Urnfield (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urnfield), and La Tene (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Tene). A deteriorating climate in Scandinavia around 850 BCE to 760 BCE and a later and more rapid one around 650 BCE might have triggered migrations to the coast of Eastern Germany and further toward the Vistula." [wiki] The term Germanic was a lagely Roman invention for anything 'barbarian' that afflicted them...especially after 9AD when 3 legions were wiped out after in "Germania" by those so-called 'barbarians' !:sunny: Your 'pure Germanic' is in fact, impure Scandinavian; but we're being 'Minnesotahttp://smileys.emoticonsonly.com/emoticons/n/norway-1635.gif (http://www.emoticonsonly.com/flags/1635/norway.html) Nice' today!:rotfl2:

[soopaman2]

AHEM! TIME TO LEAVE THE THREAD KAMERAD:D http://www.worldology.com/Europe/images/ancient_europe_germanic.jpghttp://www.worldology.com/Europe/images/classical_europe_germanic.jpg:rock:http://www.worldology.com/Europe/Europe_Nations/Germany/ (http://www.worldology.com/Europe/Europe_Nations/Germany/) predates your limited-scope Völkerwanderung which wiped out the Roman empire. :up: Origins of Germanic tribes:

Germanic peoples (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_peoples) moved out of southern Scandinavia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia) and Germany (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany) to the adjacent lands between the Elbe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbe) and Oder (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oder) after 1000 BC. The first wave moved westward and southward (pushing the resident Celts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celts) west to the Rhine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhine) by about 200 BC) and moving into southern Germany (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Germany) up to the Roman province of Gaul (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaul) by 100 BC, where they were stopped by Gaius Marius (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaius_Marius) and Julius Caesar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar). It is this western group which was described by the Roman historian Tacitus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus) (56–117 AD) and Julius Caesar (100–44 BC) A later wave of Germanic tribes migrated eastward and southward from Scandinavia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia) between 600 and 300 BC to the opposite coast of the Baltic Sea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_Sea), moving up the Vistula (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vistula) near the Carpathians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpathian_Mountains). During Tacitus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus)' era they included lesser known tribes such as the Tencteri (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tencteri_and_Usipetes), Cherusci (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherusci), Hermunduri (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermunduri) and Chatti (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatti); however, a period of federation and intermarriage resulted in the familiar groups known as the Alemanni (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alemanni), Franks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks), Saxons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxons), Frisians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisians) and Thuringians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thuringii). [wiki]
IMHO Tacitus seldom got it wrong: required reading!:up: "Regarding the question of ethnic origins, evidence developed by archaeologists and linguists suggests that a people or group of peoples sharing a common material culture dwelt in a region defined by the Nordic Bronze Age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Bronze_Age) culture between 1700 BCE and 600 BCE. The Germanic tribes then inhabited southern Scandinavia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia), Schleswig-Holstein (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schleswig-Holstein) and Hamburg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburg), but subsequent Iron Age cultures of the same region, like Wessenstedt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wessenstedt) (800 to 600 BCE) and Jastorf (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jastorf_culture), are also in consideration. The change of Proto-Indo-European (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PIE) to Proto-Germanic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic) has been defined by the first sound shift (or Grimm's law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimm%27s_law)) and must have occurred when mutually intelligible dialects or languages in a Sprachbund (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprachbund) were still able to convey such a change to the whole region. So far it has been impossible to date this event conclusively.
The precise interaction between these peoples is not known; however, they are tied together and influenced by regional features and migration patterns linked to prehistoric cultures like Hügelgräber, Urnfield (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urnfield), and La Tene (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Tene). A deteriorating climate in Scandinavia around 850 BCE to 760 BCE and a later and more rapid one around 650 BCE might have triggered migrations to the coast of Eastern Germany and further toward the Vistula." [wiki] The term Germanic was a lagely Roman invention for anything 'barbarian' that afflicted them...especially after 9AD when 3 legions were wiped out after in "Germania" by those so-called 'barbarians' !:sunny: Your 'pure Germanic' is in fact, impure Scandinavian; but we're being 'Minnesotahttp://smileys.emoticonsonly.com/emoticons/n/norway-1635.gif (http://www.emoticonsonly.com/flags/1635/norway.html) Nice' today!:rotfl2:



You threw a complication in my uncomplicated racial thoeries.:D

My opinion remains rock solid, Charlamagne should not be what he is remembered as.



He is a great man who shaped the modern world, who brought literacy to so called "dark age" Europe, which later sparked the renaissance era.

He is not only a French hero. My beef is with the French "owning" him. which is why I brought up Germanic heritage.

I ask this though sir..

If Germanic was a Roman invention that does not exist, why is there a modern country named Germany, and people proud to be Germans, is thier nationalism false, based on a fallacy?

My point stands, Germany gets the short end of the stick in European history.
Now back to why the French took ownership of a German hero?

[Raptor1]

You threw a complication in my uncomplicated racial thoeries.:D

My opinion remains rock solid, Charlamagne should not be what he is remembered as.



He is a great man who shaped the modern world, who brought literacy to so called "dark age" Europe, which later sparked the renaissance era.

He is not only a French hero. My beef is with the French "owning" him. which is why I brought up Germanic heritage.

I ask this though sir..

If Germanic was a Roman invention that does not exist, why is there a modern country named Germany, and people proud to be Germans, is thier nationalism false, based on a fallacy?

My point stands, Germany gets the short end of the stick in European history.
Now back to why the French took ownership of a German hero?

You'll find that things like nationalism and national heritage are a fairly recent invention. The concept of an independent state didn't even really exist until the end of the Thirty Years' War, and actual nationalism didn't really become widespread until the French Revolution. When it did, the modern nations based on geographical regions, history and culture generally followed historically-established lines, hence the creation of modern Germany on the area of the Holy Roman Empire that used to be East Francia.

'Germania' was the Roman name for the region that modern Germany exists in; they didn't invent the Germanic tribes that lived there nor the concept of a German state, but they certainly did coin the name for the nation that would eventually exist on the same area later. Oh, and if you want irony, a certain French Emperor is probably the single most responsible person for the emergence of German nationalism in the first place.

[Aktungbby]

^Thanks for that Raptor! You get lefse with your lutefisk! http://smileys.emoticonsonly.com/emoticons/l/lefse-4216.gif (http://www.emoticonsonly.com/world/4216/lefse.html):D:D @ Soopaman2: My beef is with the French "owning" him. In which case you should spell it "beof" also a Norman-French adaptation from the Conquest:O: :|\\ Bon appetit mon amie!

[soopaman2]

You'll find that things like nationalism and national heritage are a fairly recent invention. The concept of an independent state didn't even really exist until the end of the Thirty Years' War, and actual nationalism didn't really become widespread until the French Revolution. When it did, the modern nations based on geographical regions, history and culture generally followed historically-established lines, hence the creation of modern Germany on the area of the Holy Roman Empire that used to be East Francia.

'Germania' was the Roman name for the region that modern Germany exists in; they didn't invent the Germanic tribes that lived there nor the concept of a German state, but they certainly did coin the name for the nation that would eventually exist on the same area later. Oh, and if you want irony, a certain French Emperor is probably the single most responsible person for the emergence of German nationalism in the first place.

That short little French guy certainly shook things up. He modeled himself as the second coming of Charles the Awesome (title not approved by historians), he even tried to fix the mistake of the coronation of 1300.

I suppose you are right, I look at the peace of Westphalia, which pretty much invents the modern nation state, that happened in like the mid 1600's or so.

(Late edit: I love this board, it is the only place I can geek out with history and have good discussion with other history nuts)