Alternate History Thread IV: The Sequel

So, Dachs, this is a re-do? Interesting nonetheless. Speaking of neglected time periods, I may or may not be planning to do something in an even more neglected one, though not quite yet.

India was relatively uninterested in the Muslims until the "oh crap" factor of Prithviraj's death and the establishment of the Delhi Sultanate, and by then it was too late.

That's ignoring the fact of previous Rajput wars with the Ghaznavids.

Btw, check out the Prithviraj article in Wikipedia. I particularily advise silver2039 to look up some of the previous versions. They are simply awesome. :lol:
 
I liked the ideas about Mexico das. Thanks. I will look them over more carefully and consider writing it. I am not skilled in such things and thus would probably ruin it. But trying is worth it.
 
So, Dachs, this is a re-do? Interesting nonetheless. Speaking of neglected time periods, I may or may not be planning to do something in an even more neglected one, though not quite yet.

Hopefully that means something in BCE. Regardless, it better not be in the early-mid 1400s, for as a break from my usual Greco-Roman alt-hists, I am laying claim to that time period. Actually, 1435-1437 for the PoD to be exact. The PoD can first be clearly seen in 1437, but one needs some minor behind the scenes changes before that.
 
The 15th century is by no means neglected (though far from exhausted as well), so don't worry. ;)
 
The 15th century is by no means neglected (though far from exhausted as well), so don't worry. ;)

Were any from the time period done on this forum? Not that I'm worried that someone here has already done my idea (though I would be very impressed if someone did) but it might give me some ideas.
 
Before he killed DisNES III Disenfrancised also killed DisNES II (I got over it, but that's no reason to stop bringing it up :p ), which was based on an althist of mine that started in the 15th century. Also, NK wrote an althist about the Council of Constance way back. I suspect there were also some others, but those two were the biggest.
 
Before he killed DisNES III Disenfrancised also killed DisNES II (I got over it, but that's no reason to stop bringing it up :p ), which was based on an althist of mine that started in the 15th century.
Both of those were so awesome. I only wish I could have played in DisNES II...:(...then again, Panda took the HRE, revolting against your Ottomans wouldn't have worked, and Kalmar was united. Meh.
das said:
So, Dachs, this is a re-do? Interesting nonetheless. Speaking of neglected time periods, I may or may not be planning to do something in an even more neglected one, though not quite yet.
Not a redo; a retcon and resumption at my previous start point. I should probably also qualify "resumption", too, but then again that's an entirely different project that may have to wait for awhile. :crazyeye:
alex994 said:
Once more, I would like to state my dislike of dach's alt-history. I dislike the death of William the Conqueror and his Duchy as well as the fact it's so military orientated
I am sick of the god****ed "military oriented" crap. Okay, so I don't include literature and art; neither does anyone else. I put in religious stuff, political, and while I really don't go over social history that much (with the exception of my Gettysburg project's brief Marxist overview), you can't honestly make a charge of all of my althists being completely military oriented. And besides, if so, what about das' stuff? alex, do you have some kind of problem with me?
Thlayli said:
India was relatively uninterested in the Muslims until the "oh crap" factor of Prithviraj's death and the establishment of the Delhi Sultanate, and by then it was too late.
The presence of Seljuk Turkic Persians in the Deccan provided an inducement for the Cholas to act. ;) They really didn't do much; in the original version that I wrote up, the war was a lot more like the Greco-Persian Wars of 492-48 BC but that seemed somewhat unbelievable, so I scaled it down a good deal to mostly just Chalukya aggrandizement.
 
revolting against your Ottomans wouldn't have worked

It might've worked had the NES continued; I was working on an all-or-nothing offensive, and had I gotten "nothing", well, you would've stood a chance.

Not a redo; a retcon and resumption at my previous start point.

I seem to recall it being somewhat different in the first incarnation, though. Mostly, didn't you place Vikings in the north originally? And didn't Poland do better, though as a German vassal?

alex, do you have some kind of problem with me?

Knowing alex, he was just pretending that he had a problem with you. He does that all the time; one'd think you would've noticed by now. ;)

The presence of Seljuk Turkic Persians in the Deccan

Wait, they broke all the way into the Deccan? Chilling.
 
Wait, they broke all the way into the Deccan? Chilling.

How exactly is that possible anyway? Maybe I'm in the wrong time period but the Seljuiks are what 1200's right? By that point the Chola Empire was already severely reduced and wasn't really much of an empire anymore. Their height was in 1050. At this point the Hoysala Empire was on the rise.

Edit: Oh wait I am in the wrong period. Never mind, yeah the Chola Empire were still strong at that point, as were the Pala Empire, the Katikya Empire and such. But how exactly did the Seljiks get into the Deccan anyway?
 
I seem to recall it being somewhat different in the first incarnation, though. Mostly, didn't you place Vikings in the north originally? And didn't Poland do better, though as a German vassal?
Poland did better as a German vassal indeed; Kievan Rus disintegrated more, the Almoravids took southern Spain and the Normans took the north, the Romans did a lot better, and Khwarezm had Persia and the Seljuks had central Asia, not vice versa. I suppose that isn't a retcon in the strictest sense, but I don't really care. :p
das said:
Wait, they broke all the way into the Deccan? Chilling.
And were promptly smashed and driven northwestwards beyond the Hindu Kush. This is slightly analogous to the invasion of Anatolia except less successful for our Turkic friends due to being further away and the relatively higher power of Chalukya + Chola as opposed to the post-Romanus Diogenes Roman Empire.
 
Both of those were so awesome. I only wish I could have played in DisNES II...:(...then again, Panda took the HRE, revolting against your Ottomans wouldn't have worked, and Kalmar was united. Meh.
We're sorry, Symphony D. is screaming bloody murder at this time. Please try again later.
 
I am sick of the god****ed "military oriented" crap. Okay, so I don't include literature and art; neither does anyone else. I put in religious stuff, political, and while I really don't go over social history that much (with the exception of my Gettysburg project's brief Marxist overview), you can't honestly make a charge of all of my althists being completely military oriented. And besides, if so, what about das' stuff? alex, do you have some kind of problem with me?

I do apologize if I had touched a nerve, but I was under the assumption you understood I was making fun of you in nothing but good jest :( Das has it quite right, despite what it seems I have quite a positive outlook towards you :cry:

Knowing alex, he was just pretending that he had a problem with you. He does that all the time; one'd think you would've noticed by now. ;)

Am I so transparent? :mischief:
 
The Sacred Bonds:
Chapter 1

The holy synod of Basel, representing the universal church, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit under the presidency of the most reverend father in Christ lord Julian, cardinal deacon of St Angelo of the holy Roman church, legate of the apostolic see, for the glory of almighty God, the exaltation of the catholic faith and the progress of the Christian religion, laying its foundation on the cornerstone Christ Jesus, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord, calls to mind that the holy general synod of Constance, celebrated in the holy Spirit, esteeming it salutary and beneficial that general councils should be frequent in the holy church of God, established this by its decree as follows: The frequent holding of general councils . . . 2 Hence for the execution of that decree, the city of Pavia in Italy was chosen for the general council to be held at the end of the five years immediately following. At the decreed time that council was indeed inaugurated in the said city of Pavia and thence it was translated for certain reasons to the city of Siena. In that general council which was begun in Pavia and was held in the city of Siena, this city of Basel was chosen and duly assigned for the next future general council to be held after the seven-year period from the end of the council of Siena, as is stated in the public instrument then composed about this succession.

The most reverend lord legate in his desire to fulfill the apostolic commission since at the time when the beginning of the council was imminent he was immersed in the expedition against the pestilential heresy of the Hussites for the sake of the faith, had his vicegerents dispatched to this city and thereafter with all possible speed came himself to this city, in order that, with the help of God's grace, he might fulfill in this general council the office of legate laid upon him, as our most holy lord Eugenius IV, pope by divine providence, had by a series of letters of his holiness enjoined on him. In this city, during more than three months, he held several congregations with prelates and others who had arrived in the city for the said general council, and he had discussions about the establishment and holding of the council. Finally it was decreed that the present solemn session should be held, in which, firstly, since from the above it is manifest that this city is the place deputed for the general council and the date for it to be held is already past, and the authority of the most holy apostolic see is not lacking, it decrees, defines and declares that in this city and place the general council is canonically fixed and founded, and that all, both prelates and others who by right or custom are obliged to attend general councils, are bound to come to its celebration.

Seeing that all things direct their actions more immediately and intensely the more knowledge they have of their destined purpose, so this holy synod, after intense meditation and thought on the needs of the Christian religion and after mature and ordered deliberation, decrees that, with the help of God from whom all good things comet, it will pursue with all its zeal and attention these three ends. First that, with the banishment of the darkness of all heresies from the bounds of the Christian people, the light of catholic truth, by the generosity of Christ the true light, may be resplendent. Secondly that, after due thought and with the help of the author of peace, the Christian people, freed from the madness of wars by which -- with the sower of weeds doing his work -- it is affected and divided in various parts of the world, may be brought back to a peaceful and tranquil state. Thirdly, as the vine of Christ has already almost run wild on account of the multitude of thistles and thorns of vices crowding in upon it, to cut them back through the endeavor of necessary cultivation, with the work from on high of the evangelical husbandman, so that it may flourish again and produce with happy abundance the fruits of virtue and esteem. Since such great benefits as these cannot be hoped for without a generous flow of heavenly grace, it earnestly exhorts in the Lord all Christ's faithful that for the happy achievement of the aforesaid they should urge the divine majesty with devout prayers, fasts and almsgiving that the good and merciful God, placated by such humble submission, may deign with his accustomed goodness to grant to this sacred council the desired completion of all these things, imposing this on them unto the remission of their sins.


-The Conciliar Decree for the First Session of the Council of Basel Given on the 14th of December in the Year of Our Lord 1431.


In the days of Constantine, when the Church became threatened with schism over the Arian controversy, Constantine had called a council. Throughout the time of the Roman Empire, Emperors had followed his lead. Later, when the Pope in Rome gained increasing influence in the West, the church councils became instruments for their policies and programs.

However, the power and prestige of the papacy was severely weakened during the so-called “Babylonian Captivity of the Papacy” from 1309-1377 as well as the Great Schism which immediately followed. In the Great Schism, the same group of cardinals elected two different men pope, at two different times. One, who took on the name Clement VII, established his papal court at Avignon, the site of the infamous “Babylonian Captivity.” The second, Urban VI, who was actually the first pope elected, established his papal court at Rome.

Naturally, each pope declared the other an anti-pope, and a pretender, causing Christendom to divide itself in their loyalties along national and factional lines. Because of this, when both initial claimants died, the schism continued, represented by Boniface IX, and later Innocent VII at Rome and Benedict XIII at Avignon. Since the Church had become split due to papal rivalries, a growing movement saw the only way to overcome this was to have a universal council of the Church, which would solve the dispute. This sentiment led to the Council of Pisa in 1408. However, this only added to the confusion, since instead of ruling in favor of one pope or the other, it simply elected a new pope, Alexander V, who after his death in 1410, was replaced by John XXIII.

Now the situation was worse, as neither of the two previous popes renounced their claims, creating, in effect, three popes. This situation continued until yet another council which gathered at Constance in 1414. Here, the council not only deposed the Avignon Pope Benedict XIII, but also Pope John XXIII, who the previous council had elected. At this, Pope Gregory XII voluntarily agreed to resign. The council then elected Pope Martin V, ending the Great Schism.

However, having exercised its power in ending the schism, the council felt itself above the pope. Because of politics, the council was able to force Martin to agree to periodically reconvene the council. The first council called under this agreement in 1423 did not accomplish much as attendance was low and difficulties arose due to a break out of plague. Because of this, Martin thought that he might be able to get away with not calling another council in 1430, the date set for the next council to meet.

However, despite the minor setback of 1423, counciliarism was still strong, so in order to prevent a crisis, Martin called one to meet at Basel, though he died shortly after it gathered. However, the progress of the Hussites, the lately begun war between Burgandy and Austria, and the low attendance to the council damaged the reputation of the council, causing Martin’s successor, Eugene IV, to believe that the counciliarism movement had died. Because of this, Eugene declared the council to be disbanded. Eugene’s plan, however, backfired dramatically. Led by the vigorous cardinal Julian Cesarini, the council refused the orders to disband. Believing that disbanding the council would amount to a surrender to the Hussites as well as give up all hope for reform in the Church, Cesarini devoted his considerable energies to the council, swaying the council to refuse the pope’s command to disband. As a result of his efforts, attendance rose and concrete measures were taken, showing that the council was not dead.

Soon, it appeared the council would win over the pope, as the pope became increasingly isolated. Seeing the council make headway on a variety of issues, many cardinals abandoned the pope, throwing their lot in with the council. In addition, because of home politics or merely wanting to see the power of the pope reduced, the various temporal powers all refused to support the pope. Finally, adding injury to insult, the pope was deprived of his traditional estates through a series of short wars fought by condottieri, who invoked the authority of the council to justify their wars.

Because of this, on 15th of December 1433, the pope issued a papal bull declaring that his previous bull of dissolution was null and void, and recognizing that the council had never ceased to be legitimately assembled. After this, the council worked to curb the Hussites, negotiate peace between France and England, investigate private cases involving clergy, and pass decrees limiting the power of the pope.

The pope, however, did not take all this lightly, and had, in fact, one last gamble, the Roman Emperor John Palaeologus.[1] In the east, the Romans had found themselves suffering defeat after defeat against the Turks, which had cumulated in the Siege of Constantinople in 1422. Though successful in beating back the Turks from the walls of Constantinople, John wished to secure as many allies as possible in what he felt would be a fight to the death with the Turks. Because of this, John approached the Western Church, offering to reconcile the Eastern Church with them in exchange for assistance against the Turk.

In this opportunity, the pope saw a way to curb the power of the Council of Basel. Because of difficulties of travel, the Greeks would only consent to meeting the western church in a southern city of Italy. If the Council of Basel agreed to the move, they would be moving into the pope’s own turf, where he could personally oversee the council and work towards dominating it. If the council refused to move, he could start a rival council and use the prospect of rapprochement with the East to slowly siphon members away from the Council of Basel towards his own council, using the drain of members to doom the Council of Basel to obscurity.

What the pope did not count on, however, was the fact that the Greek church had also been in discussions with the Council of Basel. Though originally unwilling to move from Basel, the council finally agreed to move to Florence. The agreement that finally made the council willing was a promise of alliance with the Greeks to curb any potential meddling by the pope. After all, the Greeks, in seeking reunification with the West preferred a council, which was similar to their own synod system, rather than recognizing papal supremacy.

Thus, in 1437 when the council reconvened at Florence, the pope, who thought he was now at an advantage over the council, found himself again at a disadvantage. Brief hope appeared in the form of a threatened end to the council following the great debates of the filioque clause which threatened to end the talks of unification. This papal hope proved fleeting, however, as the tireless work of Cardinal Cesarini, along with others on the side of the Latins, and the Emperor and Isidore of Kieve on the Greek side produced an agreement. In this agreement, the Greeks agreed to recognize the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son as from one principium (arche) and from one cause (aitia). As importantly to the counciliarism party, they and the Greeks agreed that the council had authority over the pope. In return, the Greeks received promises of aid from the west in their war against the Turks.

The success of the Council of Florence, combined with the previous successes of the Council of Basel, seemed to ensure the power of the counciliarism party. The pope, who already had the prestige of his office diminished through the previous troubles of the “Babylonian Captivity” and “Great Schism” had it even further diminished. Now, he was back to being the “first among equals” and even that had proved to mean little before the power of the councils. As the Greeks left the Italian shores bound for their own lands, only one thing seemed certain, the Church would never be the same again.


[1]By Roman, I of course mean what is commonly referred to as the Byzantine Empire.
 
I do apologize if I had touched a nerve, but I was under the assumption you understood I was making fun of you in nothing but good jest Das has it quite right, despite what it seems I have quite a positive outlook towards you
It's all good - you're a Star Wars fan too. :p I'm just very irritable today is all.
Symphony D. said:
We're sorry, Symphony D. is screaming bloody murder at this time. Please try again later.
That was pretty funny. Maybe I should have tested the waters with you first. :lol: Still, if I had tried to help break up Kalmar as a Swedish rebellion, I'd have wanted to go after Finland anyway. As Greeks...well, those first-turn moves das made preempting religious-initiated strife, plus the relative inability of the Phanariotes to assist would have made such a thing difficult at best.

Strategos, if the Council of Florence's success actually matters and the union of the churches actually holds, I will marry you. ;) Seriously, if we have even a rump Roman Empire, it will make me cry with joy. Retarding the Ottomans' growth would be nice too.

Then again...I remember the last time the Council of Florence succeeded, we got a nine-year reprieve with the same basic result. :(
 
Strategos, if the Council of Florence's success actually matters and the union of the churches actually holds, I will marry you. ;) Seriously, if we have even a rump Roman Empire, it will make me cry with joy. Retarding the Ottomans' growth would be nice too.


Then I am glad that state laws are protecting my chastity.
 
As Greeks...well, those first-turn moves das made preempting religious-initiated strife, plus the relative inability of the Phanariotes to assist would have made such a thing difficult at best.
You seem to be ignoring that das was, in the Balkans, getting the crap beat out of him, was failing to make much headway at all against vastly inferior Orthodox forces who were calling for Crusades and holy wars against him, and that my spies were everywhere, fermenting revolt, and openly killing all the clergy that he paid off to keep the Greeks in line.

Short answer: yes, you should have, because the Greeks were fraking pansy-ass wusses in that game, and I would use vastly harsher language were it not censored by this forum. :p I truly, genuinely, hated that entire geographic region as an NPC (and if you go read my orders from that game it shines through very strongly) for its continuous refusal to act even when the Ottomans were failing catastrophically (which, given they couldn't even kill me despite my horribly flawed strategy [:p] they were).
 
was failing to make much headway at all against vastly inferior Orthodox forces who were calling for Crusades and holy wars against him

By this point I was fully focused on fighting off the Catholics; and your forces hadn't made all that much progress neither. ;)

But I agree that by the NES' end the situation was ripe. Prior to that my hold on the area was strong enough (through a combination of an extensive network of collaborationists, a secret police and garrison troops), but if the Imperials were to make any more breakthroughs that would've been it.

The Strategos - bah, conciliarism. ;)

I must agree with Dachspmg's fears that this might not work out after all. Isidore of Kiev in particular faced quite a backlash back in Moscow, from what I recall...
 
The Strategos - bah, conciliarism. ;)

Don't worry, as the conciliarist movement becomes more and more radical (as it is almost certainly to do considering it is made up mostly of lower clergy), I am sure there will be a nice monarchist backlash led, of course, by the pope. Or perhaps not, I haven't fully decided yet.

I must agree with Dachspmg's fears that this might not work out after all. Isidore of Kiev in particular faced quite a backlash back in Moscow, from what I recall...

The Muscovite backlash, and indeed for the most part the entire eastern backlash, was not so much against the religious union, as it was against the religious union under the pope. The Muscovites in particular didn't want to lose their religious independence and have to follow the pope. With the pope's power neutered, much more power (as will be seen) goes to local synods, which is basically how the east is now. In other words, except for a few minor theological points, which most priests will either not notice at all, or give only token assent towards, everything will stay the same in the east.

Then of course, if/when the monarchist backlash rears its head, the Greeks will be in the forefront of the conciliarist defense. In fact, the eastern bloc, combined with those members of the western bloc who will be jealous of their local power, might be strong enough to defeat the pope's counter-revolution.
 
I get the impression Muscovy really didn't want anything to do with either the Latins or the Greeks at this moment; lots of nationalism in its contemporary religious revival.

As to the Greeks defending conciliarism; somehow I doubt they could really do much if it comes to actual fighting. ;) Or will you have the Byzantines conquer Rome and evacuate the imperial court there to get away from the Turks? That would be an original solution. :p
 
Back
Top Bottom