History questions not worth their own thread III

[LightSpectra]

While Charles V of Spain is wrong, it is commonly used in English.

Only by people who don't know what they're talking about. That's a pretty serious error. It'd be like mistaking the United Nations with the European Union.

I remember reading a while ago that Malta was ceded to the Hospitallers by the King of Spain (or, well, Aragon, technically) in return for a nominal tribute of a falcon every year. Of course the Hospitallers as an order were subject only to the Pope, but I think they held Malta as a theoretical Aragonese fief. Therefore I am inclined to say that this story about a golden falcon is probably an embellishment of the actual fact that a yearly tribute of a falcon was actually paid.

Citation please?

 

[aronnax]

What does the Siege of Malta have to do anything? The Ottomans took Cyprus from the Knights in 1522 and there continual fighting between the Knights and Barbary Pirates and Ottomans.

Knit-picking. Because... well, knit-picking.

You mean Rhodes right? Not Cyprus.

 

[say1988]

That's not nit-picking it is correcting a really stupid mistake. Of course Cyprus was where they resided before they took Rhodes.

 

[spryllino]

Citation please?

The Shield and the Sword: The Knights of Malta by Ernle Bradford, I think. It isn't a tremendously academic or critical book, and it's quite a populistic and trivial piece of historical writing, so if you have a contrary source that discusses the matter I expect you're right.

@say1988: It's Rhodes that the Turks took from the Hospitallers in 1522, not Cyprus or Malta.

 

[Prospo]

Could the ottoman empire become a respectable power and reverse its long decline, starting in 1860 or so? Or was that already past the point of no return?

 

[Dachs]

t-t-t-t-tanzimat!!!

 

[Prospo]

So if the Crimean War hadn't happened and tanzimat had continued as planned, the empire could have realistically become a major power?

 

[Louis XXIV]

Charles is a legitimate anglicization of "Karl" and "Carlos", except he wasn't Charles V of Spain, he was the fifth Kaiser named Charles. He was Charles I of Spain (though if you want to get super technical, Spain didn't exist yet; he was the king of Castile-León and Aragon).

As for the tribute part: the Ottomans didn't attack Malta until 1565, which was when Carlos' son Felipe II was king of Castile-León & Aragon.

In English, I'd argue Emperor Charles V is appropriate. That's simply anglicizing his German name and title. Charles V of Spain would be incorrect, however.

 

[Tee Kay]

t-t-t-t-tanzimat!!!

Isn't it more likely that it would lead to the dissolution of the Ottoman state rather than prolong it?

 

[ParkCungHee]

In English, I'd argue Emperor Charles V is appropriate. That's simply anglicizing his German name and title. Charles V of Spain would be incorrect, however.

Wouldn't Charles the First of Spain be correct?

 

[Traitorfish]

He was also Charles II of Burgundy. Solution? Average it out, and call him Charles the 2.7th.

 

[ParkCungHee]

He was also Charles the fifth of Italy, so he's Charles the 3.25.

 

[Virote_Considon]

Was he Emperor of Italy or King of Italy? If the latter, then the discussion has been subverted, since you would be able to call him King Charles V...

 

[Arakhor]

I just call him Charles V & I and expect people to know whom I'm talking about.

 

[Virote_Considon]

Ah, you mean Charles the Sixth?

 

[Tee Kay]

Don't forget Charles IV of Naples, Charles III of Guelders and Charles I of Austria.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Wouldn't Charles the First of Spain be correct?

Yeah, sure that works. I just think of him as Holy Roman Emperor first and foremost.

 

[Dachs]

Isn't it more likely that it would lead to the dissolution of the Ottoman state rather than prolong it?

You say that as though there was a single coherent Tanzimat program.

 

[Tee Kay]

You say that as though there was a single coherent Tanzimat program.

Oops.

Nothing to see here folks. Move along.

 

[W|M]

Kaiser Karl V was technically:

Charles II of Burgundy
Charles II of Brabant
Charles II of Limburg
Charles II of Lothier
Charles III of Luxembourg
Charles II of Namur
Charles II of Burgundy (Franche-Comté)
Charles II of Artois
Charles II of Charolais
Charles III of Flanders
Charles II of Hainault
Charles II of Holland
Charles II of Zeeland
Charles III of Guelders
Charles II of Zutphen
Charles I of Castille-León
Charles I of Aragón and Sicily
Charles IV of Naples
Charles V of Holy Rome
Charles I of Austria

So he was actually Charles 2.4th.