History Unplugged Podcast

Late at night in his palace at Aachen, Charlemagne had a dream. A mysterious figure approached him carrying a sword engraved with four Germanic words: raht, radoleiba, nasg, and enti. The meaning seemed immediately clear to the emperor, who fancied himself a philosopher as well as a conqueror. There would be four ages of his dynasty: one of abundance, one of sudden failure, one of great disorder, and then the end. The dream is almost certainly a fiction, composed as a warning to a later generation of kings. But it turned out to be perfectly accurate. Within a century of Charlemagne's death, every word on that sword had come true.
Today's guest is James Palmer, author of Charlemagne's Dream: The Rise and Fall of the Carolingian Empire. We discuss how the dynasty's founder, Charles Martel, was an unloved son from a failed relationship whose tomb was later found scorched as if a dragon had been inside, why the Battle of Tours may not have been the civilizational turning point that Gibbon and centuries of historians have claimed, and how Pippin III pulled off the most audacious political revolution of the early Middle Ages by deposing the last Merovingian king and making himself the first Carolingian with papal blessing. We look at how Louis the Pious triggered the empire's collapse by publicly confessing his father's sins, why a twelve-year royal divorce scandal involving ordeal by boiling water and papal excommunication became the greatest crisis of the ninth century, and how Charles the Fat reunited the entire empire for the first time since Charlemagne only to be deposed within three years. Palmer argues that the Carolingians were destroyed not by Vikings, Arabs, or Slavs but by their own impossibly high standards: they built a system that demanded moral perfection from its rulers and then punished every ruler who fell short.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On December 7, 43 BCE, a sixty-three-year-old man was carried in a litter down a woodland path near the Italian coast, fleeing soldiers who had been sent to kill him. When they caught up, he ordered his attendants to set down the litter, put his head out, and offered them his neck. They cut it off, along with the hand that had written the fourteen speeches attacking Mark Antony. The head and hand were nailed to the rostra in the Roman Forum, the speaker's platform from which that same voice had held Rome in thrall for nearly four decades. Antony's wife Fulvia took the severed head in her lap, forced open the mouth, and pierced the tongue with her hairpins. The tongue was the weapon that had wounded her husband most.
Today's guest is Catharine Edwards, author of Cicero's Tongue: The Life of Rome's Greatest Orator and the End of the Republic. We discuss how a small-town outsider from Arpinum conquered Roman politics with nothing but his voice and was mocked as an upstart for the rest of his life, why the bloodbath of the Marius-Sulla civil wars traumatized a teenage Cicero so deeply that he spent the next forty years trying to prevent it from happening again, and how the trial of the corrupt governor Verres made Cicero the most famous advocate in Rome while revealing the scale of imperial plunder he never fundamentally challenged. We look at why the Catiline conspiracy made him "father of the fatherland" but also planted the seed of his exile, how his fourteen Philippics against Antony were delivered by a man whose lung capacity was failing and who knew the speeches would probably get him killed, and why his fatal miscalculation was betting everything on a nineteen-year-old named Octavian he thought he could control. Edwards argues that Cicero's tragedy is inseparable from the Republic's: a man who believed passionately that persuasion could solve any crisis, confronted by opponents who had discovered that violence was faster.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On March 13, 1930, Adolf Hitler was sitting in the passenger seat of his chauffeur-driven car when a trailer truck sped through an intersection and struck the vehicle, pushing it across the road and stopping just short of crushing it. Everyone survived. Three years later, Hitler became chancellor of Germany. Would tens of millions of people still have died if the truck had killed him? To many people, the answer is obviously yes, because Hitler was uniquely evil. To many others, the answer is obviously no, because the Treaty of Versailles and hyperinflation had already created the conditions for catastrophe. Jared Diamond spent decades trying to figure out who is right, and his answer is: it depends on the circumstances, and we can actually test it.
Today's guest is Jared Diamond, author of Guns, Germs, and Steel and now Profits, Prophets, Coaches, and Kings: (When) Do Leaders Matter? We discuss how the inbreeding of European royal families created a natural experiment proving that monarchs' intelligence directly affected national outcomes, why Botswana's founding president is the clearest modern example of an irreplaceable leader because only he could have given away his own tribe's diamond rights without starting a civil war, and why Genghis Khan's conquests depended on rainfall patterns revealed by tree rings. We also see that Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, and Steve Jobs all made a difference but none of them passes what he calls the Hamlet test. Diamond's framework applies across politics, business, sports, and religion, and his conclusion is that leaders matter most when three conditions align: high discretion, genuine choices between balanced alternatives, and no one else who could have made the same decisions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Washington’s most extraordinary achievement was not winning the Revolutionary War or helping found a new nation. It was something far rarer: He gave up power, twice. First, when he resigned his command after victory. Then again, when he stepped down as president, establishing a precedent no law required and no force could compel. In an age dominated by kings and emperors, Washington chose restraint, and in doing so, he helped define the American experiment.
There’s really no comparison to what Washington did, except for Byzantine General Belisarius and Roman general Cincinnatus. After being granted absolute dictatorial authority to rescue an encircled Roman army, Cincinnatus held it for only 15 days, and immediately resigned his office to return to his small farm across the Tiber. Belisarius was offered the Western Roman imperial crown by the Ostrogoths in 540 but claimed the city for Emperor Justinian, and surrendered command to return home. Washington’s renunciation was harder because, unlike Cincinnatus and Belisarius, he had no emperor above him or proven institutional framework to enforce his departure, instead walking away twice when his own unpaid, loyal army actively urged him to seize supreme power over a fragile, untested nation.
Today’s guest is Richard Lim, author of “Refusing a Crown: How George Washington Changed the World.” We place Washington’s decisions within the sweeping Western shift from monarchy to republic, showing why that transition was anything but inevitable. After all, From Napoleon to Simón Bolívar, revolutionary leaders across the world found themselves compared unfavorably to the American who walked away from power. We see why Washington walking away from power was the most important moment in early American History.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

At 1:15 p.m. on April 12, 1945, Franklin Roosevelt was sitting for a portrait at his cottage in Warm Springs, Georgia, when his face suddenly fell forward. He raised his left hand to his temple and whispered to his cousin Daisy: "I have a terrific pain in the back of my head." He was dead by 3:35. That evening, Harry Truman, a former farmer and failed haberdasher who had been vice president for eighty-two days and had met with Roosevelt only twice, placed his hand on a Bible and became the thirty-third president of the United States. He had never been briefed on the atomic bomb. Thirteen days later, War Secretary Henry Stimson handed him a three-page memo that began: "Within four months we shall in all probability have completed the most terrible weapon ever known in human history, one bomb of which could destroy a whole city."
Today's guest is James M. Scott, author of Empire of Ashes: Truman, Hirohito, and the Descent into Total War. We discuss how a Hungarian physicist who did his thinking in the bathtub tracked down Einstein by asking a boy on a Long Island street corner to launch the Manhattan Project, why Oak Ridge, Tennessee, became a secret city of 75,000 people who had no idea what they were building, and how the firebombing of Tokyo killed 105,000 people in a single night months before the atomic bombs fell. We look at why Groves wanted to destroy Kyoto for its two thousand temples and Stimson stopped him because he had honeymooned there, how Japan's military leaders refused to surrender even after two atomic bombs and forced an unprecedented intervention by an emperor who had spent the war collecting marine specimens in a palace while his cities burned, and why a group of young officers assassinated the commander of the Imperial Guards and seized the palace on the eve of surrender in a coup that came within hours of succeeding. Scott argues that the historical record supports Truman's decision but lets the last word belong to the survivors, and to a war minister who committed seppuku wearing the white shirt the emperor had personally given him, with a photograph of his dead son folded on top of his dress uniform.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.