WI/AHC: Orthodox England after 1066

There's that whole thing about England being somewhat Orthodox/schismatic prior to William of Normandy's usurpation of the throne in 1066, whereupon he agreed to hold the crown as a fief of the Papacy. This tentatively remained unchanged until Henry VIII broke with Rome and asserted England was an "empire", though it seems to me England was universally seen as heretic/Protestant after that, as opposed to schismatic - even when Elizabeth assured King Philip she differed from him on only a handful of theological questions.

What would be the most plausible POD for an Orthodox England post-1066? What if Richard Lionheart married the Byzantine princess (the damsel of Cyprus, daughter of Isaac Dukas Comnenus) and she came to rule the Angevin empire as regent for their children? Or something like that. Or would it be necessary to wait until the Reformation and the Tudors?

That is kinda difficult to establish, but I'll try my best in giving out an answer. Having most of Scandinavia going Orthodox may do the trick, although this in itself is hard to do. With half or most of Scandinavia Orthodox, the Orthodox Nordics could easily reach the British Isles.

What if the Gregorian Reforms don't get off the ground during the 11th century? Or there's no conclusive victor for either the church or the secular authorities, which results in a secondary schism within the Latin Christian Church? Perhaps in this situation, missionaries efforts directed by the church of the Byzantine Empire could gain some influence in Scandinavia over that of the western church, and could extend this influence to England, should it be occupied by the Dane's as per OTL in 1013.

What is the Gregorian reforms and how does that help the Byzantine missionaries with their work on converting the Scandinavians to Orthodoxy?

MarshalBraginsky said:

What is the Gregorian reforms and how does that help the Byzantine missionaries with their work on converting the Scandinavians to Orthodoxy?

Click to expand...

The Gregorian Reforms were chiefly to remove the Holy Roman Emperor's initiative from appointing bishops, and to keep the western (Roman Catholic) Church firmly under the control of the Papacy in Rome. If the dispute over church authority between the popes and the Holy Roman emperors were to be inconclusive during the 11th century, then maybe missionary efforts by the western church might suffer a lack of focus to a degree where missionaries from the Greek Orthodox Church spread their influence through the recently-Christianized kingdoms of northern Europe.

And if the Norman invasion were to be butterflied or prevented, maybe the church in England, which was pretty ambivalent towards the the church reforms on the continent, could be enticed with links to the Greek Orthodox Church.

I don't think, though, that an Eastern Orthodox England would be possible if the Norman Invasion of 1066 were to happen as it did. The Normans came to spread the Gregorian Reforms to the English Church, which was why the Papal Banner was given to Duke William of Normandy as he was readying the invasion. Events of the Investiture Controversy, and maybe the succession of the English throne around 1050, would have to be considerably altered for there to be a chance for the Byzantine Church to assert its supremacy in parts of western Europe.

The Byzantine priests would have to go through Kievan Rus' before proceeding towards Scandinavia if they are to be successful. I'm also looking at this possible same scenar plus the Baltics)

I think your best bet is an early squabble with the pope. Someone like John, who had major issues with the papacy, pulls a ,,henry viii,, and sets up a national church, nominally under constantinople. Which, since the orthodox have established the idea of independent national churches already, should be possible.

Of course, it couldnt be OTLs John, who wasnt popular...

Have Edgar the Aethling regain the English throne, he was the legitimate King not William the Conqueror.

Technically William was legitimate as he was chosen by the Witangemot after they had earlier chosen EdgarII; possibly 20,000 Norman soldiers outside the door might have had something to do with it?.............

The idea of Eastern Orthodox missionaries coming through Kiev Rus gives a route whereby they convert the Rus, thence Scandinavia so the Danes bring Eastern Orthodoxy to England seems the strongest possibility. The alternative of a link between the Celtic Church and the Eastern Orthodox is a less likely scenario and needs an earlier change.

kasumigenx said:

Have Edgar the Aethling regain the English throne, he was the legitimate King not William the Conqueror.

Click to expand...

Technically neither was, the legitimate king was Harold Godwinson as he was the man chosen by the Witan and they where the people who determine succession, Edgar is only the legitimate king in a Jacobite kind of way.

This is impossible. Britain was never under the cultural influence of Byzantium which is the only way a nation would become Orthodox.

Blackfox5 said:

This is impossible. Britain was never under the cultural influence of Byzantium which is the only way a nation would become Orthodox.

Click to expand...

Replace "Orthodox" with "schismatic" then.

Blackfox5 said:

This is impossible. Britain was never under the cultural influence of Byzantium which is the only way a nation would become Orthodox.

Click to expand...

why do you say that?

If the English got annoyed enough at the Pope, why wouldnt they split off? Sure it would be a very different 'orthodox' church to the others, but all they would probably have to do is renounce the pope, which in this scenario they want to do already, and drop the filioque clause. Whoopee dingee. 'Sarum rite' probably becomes the basis for this 'western rite orthodoxy', equivalent to otls 'eastern rite catholics'(uniates).

Sarum rite? Wouldn't the term Celtic rite be more plausible since there is a Celtic Orthodox Christianity existing in the British isles?

MarshalBraginsky said:

Sarum rite? Wouldn't the term Celtic rite be more plausible since there is a Celtic Orthodox Christianity existing in the British isles?

Click to expand...

Only if the Celtic Church can see off the more aggressive and politically astute Roman Catholic Church. Even so if the latter lose the Synod of Whitby, they are going to keep coming back until they get Catholic kings. From there they will start cleaning out the Celtics as heretics.

Dathi THorfinnsson said:

why do you say that?

If the English got annoyed enough at the Pope, why wouldnt they split off? Sure it would be a very different 'orthodox' church to the others, but all they would probably have to do is renounce the pope, which in this scenario they want to do already, and drop the filioque clause. Whoopee dingee. 'Sarum rite' probably becomes the basis for this 'western rite orthodoxy', equivalent to otls 'eastern rite catholics'(uniates).

Click to expand...

When you break with Rome, you don't just jump ship to the biggest "alternative" - that would be the perfect way to prove that your belief is insincere, since you have suddenly switched to a religion which bears few similarities to your culture or understanding of Christianity - if you're willing to compromise on your doctrinal beliefs just to break with Rome then you're clearly not a very good Christian. Perhaps if your state bordered an Orthodox country then you could as the cultures would be much closer and so points of doctrine would be closer to Orthodox (as some doctrinal beliefs tend to slowly change across geographical regions in the same way language changes as you travel further and further) but for England, there's no shared system of belief beyond the basic aspects of Christianity. It wouldn't be that far flung from England changing to Islam just to spite the Pope - and I know that supposedly Richard II did consider this, but seriously, does anyone actually believe that the rest of England wouldn't have instantly overthrown him and then horribly lynched and butchered him as a heretic for doing this?

No, if England were to break from Rome it would form its own Church based around English cultural mores and various church practises which existed in England and not in Rome.

Harald Hardrada had been commander of the Byzantine Varangian Guard. If he had won the English crown in 1066, there would at least have been a high connection with Constantinople.

Another point: It is sometimes claimed that Scandinavians were Greek Christians before the British and German missionaries became dominant, but this is a poorly documented period in Scandinavia, so it is based more on some findings of very old ornamental stone carvings at the churches, and similar things.

Falastur said:

No, if England were to break from Rome it would form its own Church based around English cultural mores and various church practises which existed in England and not in Rome.

Click to expand...

She eventually did under Henry VIII. However, that was at a time when the Roman Catholic Church did not have enough power to tryand bring her back into the fold.

yulzari said:

The idea of Eastern Orthodox missionaries coming through Kiev Rus gives a route whereby they convert the Rus, thence Scandinavia so the Danes bring Eastern Orthodoxy to England seems the strongest possibility. The alternative of a link between the Celtic Church and the Eastern Orthodox is a less likely scenario and needs an earlier change.

Click to expand...

And it should be noted right about now that the Kievan Rus were converted, a century (ish) earlier. Didn't lead to significant going to Scandinavia.


And (@ Jurgen): "I was a member of the Varangian Guard" is a really, really tenuous connection.

Elfwine said:

And it should be noted right about now that the Kievan Rus were converted, a century (ish) earlier. Didn't lead to significant going to Scandinavia.


And (@ Jurgen): "I was a member of the Varangian Guard" is a really, really tenuous connection.

Click to expand...

Actually being captain of the Varangian Guard would be a big deal if the same emperor he was a captain under was still in power (which given the status of the empire at the time is unlikely), the Captain of the Guard and the emperor in the very least interact a lot and know each other fairly well given how his job was to act as a protector for the Emperor and his family (and occassionaly act as riot police of Constantinople and fight against invaders with the emperor). Of course as I said, the dude he worked for or anyone in his family being in power is unlikely.