Alternate History Thread IV: The Sequel
- Thread starter Dachs
- Start date
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
The Return of Rome. Oh the glory that would be. Well really continuation.
The Strategos
Thanatos
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2002
- Messages
- 1,175
Which is why conciliarism has its logical benefits. The ecumenical council meets once every ten years, with local synods meeting more often, say, once every year. Muscovy gets its own little synod, which, considering its on the fringes of the Church, doesn't really get noticed all that much, so a strong Muscovite leader can manipulate it as he wished.
As to the Greeks defending conciliarism; somehow I doubt they could really do much if it comes to actual fighting.
That's okay, if it came to actual fighting, the Pope couldn't really do much offensively.
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.
Well, someone has to rule the Papal States once the Pope is shorn of his temporal power. Now that I think about it, it would make sense in some strange kind of way. You don't want to give the Papal States to one of the Italian states or any major power, because everyone else will be jealous, so give it to a "weak" outsider who everyone can think they can manipulate. Quick, bombard me with the downsides to this, because the idea is starting to grow on me!
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
Yea and then unify the German states, Austria and Rome. Only saying it because it would look cool.
das
Regeneration In Process
The main problem would be getting the Basileus to go there in the first place. Also, ofcourse, the angry Roman mobs would be problematic. I mean, those were some of the angirest mobs in medieval Europe at some of their angriest; they chased the Italian Pope out of the city in a boat during this period, and I don't think a Greek Emperor would be much more popular.
Also, ofcourse, the angry Roman mobs would be problematic. I mean, those were some of the angirest mobs in medieval Europe at some of their angriest; they chased the Italian Pope out of the city in a boat during this period, and I don't think a Greek Emperor would be much more popular.And the Greek Emperor might also have less military support than the Pope would have.The main problem would be getting the Basileus to go there in the first place.
The Strategos
Thanatos
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2002
- Messages
- 1,175
The main problem would be getting the Basileus to go there in the first place.
Kidnap! That would be something so outrageous that it is almost certain something like that would happen in real life.
That would be our good friend Eugene IV, though in his defense, it was caused by the conquering of the city by Fortebraccio and Piccinino which led to the establishment of an insurrectionary republic. And as we all know, republics, especially the insurrectionary kind, are cesspools of all sorts of mob mentalities and vicious acts.
But he's not a "Greek Emperor" quite clearly his title says "Roman Emperor." How could the people of Rome not like a Roman Emperor?
But on a more serious note, when has the opinions of a local populace ever been considered when swapping territories in global politics?
Edit:
You realize the whole point I was (half) considering it was percisely because of the supposed weakness of the Emperor, so that would probably be a point in his favor
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
After Constantine XI was there any true heir to the Roman throne?
The Strategos
Thanatos
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2002
- Messages
- 1,175
I don't think he had any sons, but he did have some brothers left alive, Thomas and Demetrios at least I know were still kicking.
Demetrius Palaeologus is a good choice. Actually there were loads of Palaeologus relatives around; I believe that the Habsburgs were the most directly related.
Actually, that would make an interesting twist to the Alsatian TL outline: have the Habsburgs reestablish the Empire instead of the Russians.
das
Regeneration In Process
Okay, but what about his troops? Or maybe the council will hire Genoese mercenaries to kidnap the Emperor and then conquer Rome, dragging him kicking and screaming into the Lateran (or whatever the Popes used at this point)?
"I don't want to rule Italians!"
What I mean is that the angry Roman mobs did this sort of thing all the time, or at least tried to do it as often as possible. So would they pass up this opportunity? I think not.
Does he speak the Roman dialect properly? No? Then he isn't a proper Roman Emperor, now, is he.
What I mean is that they might place him there, but keeping him in power might be another matter entirely. Then again, I suppose they'll pretty much have to; a succesful Roman Republic is too scary to comprehend, good thing it's pretty much impossible.
I'm pretty sure there are some heirs even today; lots of dynastic lines in that empire. The commonly-recognised post-Constantine XI heir was Demetrios; after he defected, Thomas.
EDIT: Was that an Orthodox cross post?
Actually, that would make an interesting twist to the Alsatian TL outline: have the Habsburgs reestablish the Empire instead of the Russians.
As part of the Universal Empire?
The Strategos
Thanatos
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2002
- Messages
- 1,175
Alright, here's my thinking as it stand right now, tell me what you think.
The Papal States are not going to be conquered by the Romans (or Greeks if you must). That was never my intention. What I think likely will happen, however, is that the Pope will be stripped by the council of his temperal power. After all, the council is 1) anti-pope power, and so would welcome an opportunity to limit the pope's power and 2) pro-reform, and one of the major topics of reform is limit the wealth/power of prelates so that they could more conform to the monastic ideal.
Now that we've established that the Papal States will no longer be the Pope's (and if he fights the council's wishes, the use of mercenaries is not out of the question, its been done, against this very pope, a few short years before), whose will it become? As das pointed out, no one wants a Roman Republic, so that's out of the question. It can't be one of the major powers, because that would probably spark a war. So it has to be some minor branch of some minor noble family somewhere.
Enter the Palaiologos. They would most likely be at their height of popularity in the West right now, after all, they almost single handedly delivered the church union. However, they are militarily weak, needing the West to come save them, so obviously they are no threat to the territories surrounding the Papal States to embark on wars of conquest. Yes, they might be too militarily weak, unable to hold on to the Papal States, but that would play into the councils hands. After all, they may need to appeal to the council for help, which would put them even further in the councils debt. All in all, setting them up perfectly for the role of weak puppets.
So who would be most likely to ascend the Roman throne? Depends on the timing. If the council moves immediately in its steps towards reform/neutering the pope, they would do it immediately, so around 1439. That may make Constantine the most likely candidate. After all, he was just regent of Constantinople, and so needs a nice province to run as a reward. The other option is taking these actions in the next council, in other words 1450. In this case, I am thinking Thomas, or else some really minor relative, (Graitzas Palaiologos would make an interesting choice here). Now Emperor Constantine wants to ship off Demetrios as far as possible, true, but Demetrios also humiliated everyone by throwing a fit over the unification and leaving Italy before the council was over, so he is unacceptable to the council. Thus, Thomas, or an even more interesting choice, Graitzas.
The Papal States are not going to be conquered by the Romans (or Greeks if you must). That was never my intention. What I think likely will happen, however, is that the Pope will be stripped by the council of his temperal power. After all, the council is 1) anti-pope power, and so would welcome an opportunity to limit the pope's power and 2) pro-reform, and one of the major topics of reform is limit the wealth/power of prelates so that they could more conform to the monastic ideal.
Now that we've established that the Papal States will no longer be the Pope's (and if he fights the council's wishes, the use of mercenaries is not out of the question, its been done, against this very pope, a few short years before), whose will it become? As das pointed out, no one wants a Roman Republic, so that's out of the question. It can't be one of the major powers, because that would probably spark a war. So it has to be some minor branch of some minor noble family somewhere.
Enter the Palaiologos. They would most likely be at their height of popularity in the West right now, after all, they almost single handedly delivered the church union. However, they are militarily weak, needing the West to come save them, so obviously they are no threat to the territories surrounding the Papal States to embark on wars of conquest. Yes, they might be too militarily weak, unable to hold on to the Papal States, but that would play into the councils hands. After all, they may need to appeal to the council for help, which would put them even further in the councils debt. All in all, setting them up perfectly for the role of weak puppets.
So who would be most likely to ascend the Roman throne? Depends on the timing. If the council moves immediately in its steps towards reform/neutering the pope, they would do it immediately, so around 1439. That may make Constantine the most likely candidate. After all, he was just regent of Constantinople, and so needs a nice province to run as a reward. The other option is taking these actions in the next council, in other words 1450. In this case, I am thinking Thomas, or else some really minor relative, (Graitzas Palaiologos would make an interesting choice here). Now Emperor Constantine wants to ship off Demetrios as far as possible, true, but Demetrios also humiliated everyone by throwing a fit over the unification and leaving Italy before the council was over, so he is unacceptable to the council. Thus, Thomas, or an even more interesting choice, Graitzas.
das
Regeneration In Process
Actually, removing the Pope's temporal power might allow future Popes to focus on reclaiming the spiritual power; that's a bigger threat to the counciliary movement in the long-term. Then again, they might not realise it.
Btw, if it's Graitzas (Thomas already having a secure position and all), then would he be a Despot of Rome? Or just a prince or something? And if it's Constantine, then I see the Roman Empire clash with the Habsburgs if/when the latter turn to Italy. That, in turn, suggests an alliance with France.
Btw, if it's Graitzas (Thomas already having a secure position and all), then would he be a Despot of Rome? Or just a prince or something? And if it's Constantine, then I see the Roman Empire clash with the Habsburgs if/when the latter turn to Italy. That, in turn, suggests an alliance with France.
I favor the title Despot of Rome because it sounds cool.
Also, how would Constantinopolis hold out during all of this? It's a great way to interdict the Turks and keep apart the two halves of their empire if it is maintained; combined with vigorous Hungarian action from Hunyadi and later Matthias Corvinus, we could actually have a good chance of significantly reducing Ottoman holdings in Europe. Then again, the Palaeologus family might want to concentrate on Rome as opposed to the Second Rome, seeing as it's got better prospects for expansion.
das
Regeneration In Process
Not really; there are all kinds of territorial Italian powers that won't allow that. I think there might be more of a chance in the late 15th century, if/when France initiates the Italian Wars; as said, the Romans would be France's natural allies, and would probably be able to get something out of it as well. Until then, the Balkans have far better opportunitise, especially if the Hungarians defeat the Ottomans badly enough (doable, if they get extra help that the Byzantine Emperor might just be able to arrange; the crusading spirit is not dead, after all).
By the way, how about a later coalition war with Rome, France and Hungary fighting the Habsburgs and whatever allies they could procur (England seems likely, but maybe also an unholy alliance with the Ottomans)?
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
Austrian Roman Empire would be quite awesome. Go write it. The Austrians never get good things.
das
Regeneration In Process
On the contrary, they keep uniting Germany in my althists, or at least conquering the entire Danube Basin. They should be knocked down a peg.
