Basically, the time line was to do with King Louis I the Great of Hungary of the House of Angevine attaining the throne of Naples as opposed to his younger brother Andrew. This PoD (Period of Difference, meaning an Alternate History) is being developed in the Alternate History thread of the NES forum. I am posting the basic PoD and some of the discussion up to this point here for reference. Hopefully, you all will be intrigued and will lend your voice to the discussion in the thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=183372&page=70). I know it looks like a lot to read, but it really isn't very much and it shouldn't take too long. if you have any interest in the period, the region, or really history at all it should also be quite interesting.

I was re-reading through Pál Engel’s paper "The Age of the Angevines, 1301-1382" (Chapter 5 [pg. 34-53] of Peter F. Sugar's, Péter Hanák's, and Tibor Frank's [editors] A History of Hungary) and I got an idea for a PoD:

In 1343 King Robert of Naples and of Anjou of the House of Angevine, great-great-uncle to King Louis I the Great of Hungary of the House of Angevine. At the time, Louis' younger brother Andrew was the Duke of Calabria, the husband of Joan I of Naples, grand-daughter by his first son to King Robert. This made Andrew the natural heir to Robert. However, Queen Mother Elisabeth of Poland of Hungary, the mother of both Andrew and Louis, was just as power-thirsty as her first son and so wished to see Hungary and Naples united under one king, Louis I. Upon Robert's death she embarked with the blessing of Buda's court to Italy, where she invested five tons of gold florins and more of silver in an attempt to purchase the Neaopolitan throne for Louis. She did, in fact, manage to win the favor of the pope, Naple's overlord, but it was too late. Her second son Andrew ascended to the throne (he was quickly murdered, however, leading to two Hungarian campaigns to conquer the region in revenge, both of which failed as no southern Italian wished to see a king not bearing the Neapolitan crown on the throne).

Here is the PoD, Robert remains on the death bead for some time longer drawing out the whole process; this gives Elisabeth the necessary time to purchase the crown for her elder son. Upon Richard's death, Louis comes across the Adriatic and is crowned the legitamate King of Naples.

Having a firm grip over Naples, Louis then proceeds to use the resources he spends in his two Neapolitan campaigns in OTL plus added resources from Italy to campaign against his southern neighbours in Račka (Bosnia), Serbia, Bulgaria, and Cumania (Walachia and Moldavia). While in OTL these campaigns were unseccessful, the added resources and focus would likely make the campaigns much more successful, effectively extending Hungary deep into the southern Balkans as far as the Byzantines.

This strengthens Hungary, affirming its place. It also strengthens the Angevine line, allowing Hungary to continue its Golden Age past where in OTL the Angevine line died out and unattentive Jagellion rulership, distracted from a slowly weakening Hungary sapped of strength after the fall of its Byzantine ally, allowed Hungary to fall to pieces and be overrun by the Ottomans and Austrians. However, a strengthened Hungary would also naturally run into conflict with its long-time Byzantine ally. The Byzantine fall would thus be quickened, as a Byzantium engaged in conflict with both Hungary and the Ottomans could not last long.

Additionally, the Ottomans being forced from easy conquest of the weak Christian kingdoms as they pursied in OTL by Hungary having conquered them would turn the Ottomans away from Europe. This would turn them even more towards Africa and towards conflict with Persia. This conflict with Persia would likely trickle down to India and East Asia in some way, though I don't know quite how. Additionally, without domination of most of the Balkans, the Ottomans would lose nearly all of their Janissary forces that proved so precious in OTL, weakening them militarily.

As for Western Europe, the strengthening of Hungary would mean that the Queen Mother Elisabeth of Bosnia would have been able to prevent the marriage of her daughter Mary to Sigismund, who was destested by both, in favor of a marriage with a member of either the related Bosnian royal family or the Croatian noble family, the Frangipanis who were close friends with Elisabeth as well as part of the larger Gorjanskih clan which were the major allies of the Bosnian royal family to which Elisabeth belonged or, just as likely or perhaps more likely, carrying out of her reign indepedently. In the former case a Hungarian heir would have been produced and in the later case Tvrtko, Ban (a Hungarian noble title) of Bosnia and King of the Serbs would have succeeded to the Hungarian throne. In any case this would have fit in to Hungary's growing dominance of the Balkans, while more importantly to the west would have turned Sigismund's attention towards Germany.

Deprived of power in Hungary, he most likely would have embarked on a series of the sort of sinister political moves for which he is remembered as he reached for power in Germany. On the other hand, without the accumen and power gained while king of Hungary he may not have been in the necessary position to secure the Holy Roman Emperorship upon the death of King Rupert. How either of these scenarios would have fanned out I am not sure, but I am sure it would have been significant.

IMHO the resistance was too strong. Serbia for one thing was at its strongest. A Hungarian hegemony is not impossible but complete conquest all the way towards the Byzantine border sounds farfetched.



Doubtable, Africa didn't interest the Ottomans much before the defeat of the Mamlukes.

Apart from that, quite nice.

Perhaps you are right about Africa, I won't argue that as the Ottomans are really an area of expertise. As for the Balkans, Serbia may have been strong, but if you pay close attention to the titles heald by the key players, the problem of them is eliminated. Ban Istvan Tvrkto of Bosnia, the most likely successor to the Hungarian throne following Mary (in OTL Mary appointed him as her successor but he was "mysteriously murdered" (i.e. Sigismund had him knocked off) too early), was not only Ban of Bosnia by the grace of Hungary, but he also managed to secure for himself the kingship of Serbia (he would later also sever Bosnia from Hungary and become king of Bosnia, but TTL eliminates that). Should Tvrtko ascend to the throne of Hungary already possessing the banship of Bosnia and the kingship of Serbia, Hungary would have total authority of the west Balkans and be simply too powerful for Bulgaria or the Byzantium to contend. It should also be noted that the rise of Serbia in OTL was, in fact, in large part due to its union with Bosnia under Tvrtko. Make Tvrtko the king, and all the power that Serbia would gain is placed under Hungary. Furthermore, it must also be noted that up until Sigismund and the fall of the Angevine, Serbia had always been a semi-dependency on Hungary. Belgrade and all the Serb territory north of it was, in fact, originally ruled by the Magyars and inhabited by a mix of Magyars and Bosniaks before it was gifted by Ladislaus IV of Hungary to Stefan Urlos II Milutin.

Only presuming it works out well. There might be problems of a religious nature (like the ones that upset the various OTL plans for a Russo-Polish union in the 16th century).

Religious qualms could be a possibility, but there are two key differences between the attempted Russo-Polish union and the Hungarian-Bosno-Serbian union. First, Poland at the time had never been concidered either part of or subject to Russia. Serbia, on the other hand, had always been at least somwhat dependent on Hungary while Bosnia had for centuries been in fact a part of Hungary, with Trvtko being the one to seperate Bosnia after the fall of the Angevines. Second, where as the religious differences were of great importance for the Polish and Russians, they are not nearly as important for the Hungarians and Serbs. While it is true that Hungary has always been a devoutly Catholic country, there has also always been a significant Hungarian Orthodox minority that lived in complete peace with the Catholics. Additionally, after the Protestant reformation, Hungary is notable in that there was no real significant infighting between the Catholics and Protestants, not counting Austrian intervention (I should no, half of my father's family is Hungarian with half Catholics and half Protestants). Basically, wheras in Poland and Russia religion was a significant concern, in Hungary and Serbia power politics and family relations were more important. (You know, its kind of funny that you are arguing for greater importance of religion and I am arguing for lesser importance, don't you think?)

On a different note, I was doing some research on Sigismund and something struck me. Namely, Sigismund was vastly important in the condemnation of the Hussites and the following Hussite wars. He was the one that convinced his brother, Wenceslaus IV of Bohemia, to persecute the Hussites. He was also the main man responsible for the Council of Constance condemning the Hussites. He was also the man responsible for securing the Papal Bull calling for crusade against the Hussites. If Sigismund is eliminated as a power due to his failure to attain a base in Hungary and indeed to gain an "in" of any sort into the complex familial power politics of Europe, then perhaps the Hussites would have been able to live in peace under the rulership of the frankly un-caring Wenceslaus in Bohemia. For how long they would have survived and spread and how much of an effect they would have had, I don't know. But it seems like an important line of events to follow. Any thoughts?

That's entirely beside the point (the Protestants are even more so). I just doubt that the Hungarian nobility would accept an Orthodox Southern Slav on the throne. I do not recall any precedents, at least in religiously-stable countries. There are too many complications involved.

Religion as such is still quite unimportant, don't worry. ;)



I doubt that Sigismund would be "eliminated"; he still remains a Luxembourg, and so will still inherit Bohemia, though not Hungary. Ofcourse, if he fails to take over the Holy Roman Empire then the Hussites will overthrow him easily; after that I'd imagine that they will invite a Jagiellon to take the throne, as they had been planning to do in OTL. In that case the Hussite faith has fair chances of spreading into Poland (where it was quite popular even in OTL) and Lithuania (which was still quite malleable in many regards). Then we eitehr get a religious "cold war" or an "ultimate" clash between the Germans and the West Slavs that the Polish nobility had so feared. Basically, the Pope would attempt to prop up the Teutonic Order again, and organise crusades into Bohemia, Silesia and western Poland. Hussite Wars writ large.

Actually, after doing some more research, I stumbled upon a nice little tidbit: Tvrtko was Catholic. Most Bosniaks, at the time, still adhered to teachings of the Church of Bosnia (a now defunct church that was neither Orthodox or Catholic and lay outside of the jurisdiction of either) but were nominal Roman Catholics. In fact, Tvrtko's uncle and the previous holder of the Bosnian crown, Stjepan II, had allied himself with the pope and fought a vicious campaign against the power of the Bosnian Church in support of the Hungarian bishopric. Tvrtko was a Catholic in line with the Hungarian court but still accepted, more than readily, by the Orthodox Serbs and the Kristjani (Bosnian Church) Bosniaks. So, obviously, Tvrtko would not have been a problem for the Hungarians and is, in fact, the missing precedent you speak of for a Catholic ruling over Orthodox/Kristjani people. (Also, do note that Tvrtko was only half a Slav and was indeed a member, matrilineally, of the native Magyar Arpad dynasty and thus had strong claims as a Magyar and as a rightful holder of the Hungarian throne.)


Perhaps "eliminated" is too strong a turn of phrase. He was a Luxembourg, which put him in a place of prominence, but he most likely would never have achieved de facto rulership of Bohemia, only titular. The Czechs generally despised him and did not recognise him for almost two decades after he inherited the throne. You are probably right in that a Jagiellon would have been invited to ascend to the Bohemian throne, although Wenceslaus IV did have relations to the Angevine thrown in Hungary and with a powerful, religiously tolerant Hungarian monarchy it might be possible that Bohemia could fall to Hungarian rule.

As for a face off between the Hussites and the Catholics, I would think a "cold war" more likely, as very few other than Sigismund actually wanted eradication of the Hussites, most just wanted to ignore the whole affair. By the time the Holy See and the rest of the Catholic monarchs caught up to whole affair, it would most likely be too late for any serious Hussite Wars. More likely, the whole affair would follw a trend similar to that of the OTL post-Protestant Reformation with a gradual spread of Hussite religion and some more localized face offs between Catholic and Hussite similar to the OTL face offs between Catholic and Protestant, such as the
OTL Anglo-Spanish contentions.

@Dachspmg- Any thoughts on all of this? You seem to have a pretty good knowledge of the region IIRC and any input at all would be valued.