Luckymoose
The World is Mine
You know the drill.
Alternate History Thread III
- Thread starter Luckymoose
- Start date
Oruc
Reactionary
I dont think they will post in this thread, your too new
Thlayli
Le Pétit Prince
Alternative? ALTERNATIVE?
:suicide:
:suicide:
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
emu said:
And its not the point. The point is to keep the other one from going over 2000 posts.How bouty thaty.
Edit: Yes Alternative.Spice things up right?
Insane_Panda
Deity
No, you are wrong.
Thlayli
Le Pétit Prince
Luckymoose said:
Unfortunately the creation of this thread is therefore null and void, since there was no Alternative History Thread I or II.
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
I spiced up the name a bit. BAM!
Swissempire
Poet Jester
yeah, i would get that changed, PM a mod.....
and BTW, Symph, why the Iggy Punch?
and BTW, Symph, why the Iggy Punch?
Oruc
Reactionary
Thlayli said:
SEE! what did I tell you
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
I PM'd a mod about it.Hopefully it gets done.
North King
blech
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
- Messages
- 18,165
Stop spamming, and post some alt-hists.
Insane_Panda
Deity
You can rename your own threads by clicking the thread name twice (in the forum page). It will give you a box allowing you to rename your own thread.
EDIT: or something like that.
EDIT: or something like that.
Swissempire
Poet Jester
I was thinking of an Alt-hist where Boniface doesn't die from his wounds. This would result, IMHO in:
1: Stronger Papal Authority if he kept on the roll he was going. He would not have lived much longer, but with the ALbert I dead and Phillip under Inderdict, he had a pretty free reign
2: No Babylonian Captivity to weaken the church. Proceeding Popes would not have to deal with the image they were in captivity, and they wouldn't have to sell indulgences and Simony's to make Avignon Grand.
3: Greater Weakening of France. Phillip the Fair would have been greatly weakened by the inderdict, and France without Avignon would have lost many revenues. This also may have sparked and earlier 100 years war....
4: Maybe no Habsburgs, because powerful popes don't want a powerful dynasty like that sucking their power. Plus, they could easily be stopped.
5: Easier to deal with the reformation, maybe even no reformation
1: Stronger Papal Authority if he kept on the roll he was going. He would not have lived much longer, but with the ALbert I dead and Phillip under Inderdict, he had a pretty free reign
2: No Babylonian Captivity to weaken the church. Proceeding Popes would not have to deal with the image they were in captivity, and they wouldn't have to sell indulgences and Simony's to make Avignon Grand.
3: Greater Weakening of France. Phillip the Fair would have been greatly weakened by the inderdict, and France without Avignon would have lost many revenues. This also may have sparked and earlier 100 years war....
4: Maybe no Habsburgs, because powerful popes don't want a powerful dynasty like that sucking their power. Plus, they could easily be stopped.
5: Easier to deal with the reformation, maybe even no reformation
Finmaster
The White Ghost
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2003
- Messages
- 2,716
@Swiss: while your idea is interresting, I don't think that it's very realistic. Weak popes and "Babylonian Captivity" had their parts in decreasing the pope's power, but mainly they were the results, and not the cause of the decrease.
True reasons lie in changes of the social and economic structure of that time's society: one of the biggest reasons were developing monetary systems in late middle ages. It was the direct reason for the collapse of the Feudalistic society; money became equally (or more) important than land, and as kings got richer, they could simply pay for their knights.
Feudalistic system collapsed quickly in the late middle ages because of this, and with it, collapsed the pope's power. Kings suddenly had control of their entire country, they were less dependant on the nobility. Nationalism started to increase in France especially (slowly, though) along with the power of the king.
The kings became so powerful in this changing society that they simply didn't need the pope's support anymore. And when he wasn't needed, he had no control over the kings anymore.
True reasons lie in changes of the social and economic structure of that time's society: one of the biggest reasons were developing monetary systems in late middle ages. It was the direct reason for the collapse of the Feudalistic society; money became equally (or more) important than land, and as kings got richer, they could simply pay for their knights.
Feudalistic system collapsed quickly in the late middle ages because of this, and with it, collapsed the pope's power. Kings suddenly had control of their entire country, they were less dependant on the nobility. Nationalism started to increase in France especially (slowly, though) along with the power of the king.
The kings became so powerful in this changing society that they simply didn't need the pope's support anymore. And when he wasn't needed, he had no control over the kings anymore.
silver 2039
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Messages
- 16,208
Furthermore the Pope was only listened to when it was fashinable to do so. Kings acted for the Pope out of their own intreast rather than any type of deep spirtuality.
Finmaster
The White Ghost
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2003
- Messages
- 2,716
@silver: I tend to think that most kings back in middle ages were more or less spiritual, actually (or at least tried to be), as God's existance was then as certain as Earth being round is now.
Altough that's a bit beyond the point. It's somewhat irrelevant wether pope's political power existed because of the spirituality of the kings or because it was suitable for the kings. Either way, pope's power started decreasing because the power of the kings began rising and a strong political force such as the pope was no longer required.
@Swiss: if you want to make an alt hist with pope in power, u need to think of a way to keep Europe feudalized - or some other way to ensure that kings and nations (first signs of nationalistic thinking followed soon after pope began losing his power) are kept small and without much power and dependant on nobility. Then it might be possible that pope would've never lost his power.
Altough that's a bit beyond the point. It's somewhat irrelevant wether pope's political power existed because of the spirituality of the kings or because it was suitable for the kings. Either way, pope's power started decreasing because the power of the kings began rising and a strong political force such as the pope was no longer required.
@Swiss: if you want to make an alt hist with pope in power, u need to think of a way to keep Europe feudalized - or some other way to ensure that kings and nations (first signs of nationalistic thinking followed soon after pope began losing his power) are kept small and without much power and dependant on nobility. Then it might be possible that pope would've never lost his power.
Disenfrancised
Beep Beep
Finmaster said:
Easiest way is preventing the invention of gunpowder - without that the kings vassels can hide in their castles and the kings power is severly limited.
das
Regeneration In Process
Before commenting on the interesting discussion that followed, the PoD itself:
You mean Boniface VIII ofcourse, right? I put it to you that the exact day and age of his death would be scarcely significant; the Pope was VERY old for that time - not a competitor to Dachspmg's least favourite Venetian, but still. In any case, he was quite broken by then; his plans were crushed and so, they say, was his spirit after all that torture he had undergone. If anything, had he reigned for any longer, the Papacy would have only lost in power and influence, and would have become a French puppet; the effects would have been exactly the opposite of what you imply, as France would have been considerably strenghthened; it could have intervenned in the HRE and nipped the Habsburg threat in the bud, and I am not sure if the English would have dared move against it then.
They were, with several well-known exceptions. But above all, most of them tended to be quite pragmatical when dealing with the Pope.
Nonetheless, I do remind you that even at his strongest the Pope wasn't all that strong as people make him out to be. A notable example would be the Canossa incident; yes, many enough know of it and cite it as an example of Papal power and influence. Rather less popularily known is the fact that Gregory VII subsequently only barely saved his life with Norman help and even then de facto lost power while Rome burned; the Normans didn't care for him more than the Emperors did.
Nevertheless, I do not think that the Papacy was doomed to lose what power and influence it did have; at least, it could retain all that for longer without its internal crises. If, instead of kings and emperors manipulating the cardinals, Vatican was to play the kings and emperors off against each other - as it had tried, and with some success - it could have fared quite well. Heh, now that would have been a fun timeline, with Papacy as a Britain-like power, fighting to preserve the balance of power with the help of a mercenary army (perhaps had the Pope struck an earlier agreement with the Swiss... I really think that supporting the Habsburgs was a disastrous decision for them). If we ever have a medieval NES, someone just HAS to do that.
You mean Boniface VIII ofcourse, right? I put it to you that the exact day and age of his death would be scarcely significant; the Pope was VERY old for that time - not a competitor to Dachspmg's least favourite Venetian, but still. In any case, he was quite broken by then; his plans were crushed and so, they say, was his spirit after all that torture he had undergone. If anything, had he reigned for any longer, the Papacy would have only lost in power and influence, and would have become a French puppet; the effects would have been exactly the opposite of what you imply, as France would have been considerably strenghthened; it could have intervenned in the HRE and nipped the Habsburg threat in the bud, and I am not sure if the English would have dared move against it then.
They were, with several well-known exceptions. But above all, most of them tended to be quite pragmatical when dealing with the Pope.
Nonetheless, I do remind you that even at his strongest the Pope wasn't all that strong as people make him out to be. A notable example would be the Canossa incident; yes, many enough know of it and cite it as an example of Papal power and influence. Rather less popularily known is the fact that Gregory VII subsequently only barely saved his life with Norman help and even then de facto lost power while Rome burned; the Normans didn't care for him more than the Emperors did.
Nevertheless, I do not think that the Papacy was doomed to lose what power and influence it did have; at least, it could retain all that for longer without its internal crises. If, instead of kings and emperors manipulating the cardinals, Vatican was to play the kings and emperors off against each other - as it had tried, and with some success - it could have fared quite well. Heh, now that would have been a fun timeline, with Papacy as a Britain-like power, fighting to preserve the balance of power with the help of a mercenary army (perhaps had the Pope struck an earlier agreement with the Swiss... I really think that supporting the Habsburgs was a disastrous decision for them). If we ever have a medieval NES, someone just HAS to do that.
das
Regeneration In Process
Btw, Moose, please add a link to the two previous threads in the first post, it may be useful...
Reno
The Studio Ghibli Fanatic
das said:
That isn't really necessary, you can find the links in the Notice Board.
If this thread catches wind (People start posting AHTLs), then I'll ask for this to be added to the Notice Board.
