So I've noticed a trend that in TL's revolving around the survival of the Rhomanian Empire, no mater the PoD, France tends to get split between Germany and England. Why is this?
Why must France alway die in Rhoman Survival TLs?
- Thread starter GeneralInTheShell
- Start date
Honest to god I've never read a Byzantine survives TL, mostly because Im a Latin Empire Fan boy. But If I had to guess, definitely the option that People hate France.
I kinda agree, albeit I wonder if a Kingdom could survive at least stronger than the sore state of medieval royal domains...
Because dem Franks be... CRAZY!
Honestly, idk. Authors in favor of Byzantium hate the French? As a trend, I think more British althistorians write Byzantine survival Tls, so that may have something to do with it.
Honestly, idk. Authors in favor of Byzantium hate the French? As a trend, I think more British althistorians write Byzantine survival Tls, so that may have something to do with it.
It's just American writers getting even with all those rude French waiters. When they stop trying to convince us that snails are really food and that people really eat them, we'll stop trying to erase them from history. 
I've always thought of it simply being a matter of making the geopolitical situation of the TL dynamic and therefore more interesting. Of course rather than a TL where there are only slight variations from OTL and therefore to the eyes of the author boring when compared to the ability to cut it up into multiple chunks. Then again, French unity behind a single centralized government based in Paris without dire circumstances like the 100 Years War to unite everyone is a very recent development in terms of modern history. Hell, it took several civil wars and centuries for the Bourbons to be able to legitimately say France was ruled under an absolute monarchy.
Though to be honest, there is a certain bias those who write predominantly in the English language have against the French ingrained in a very long history of bad blood between England and France. That's recently changed of course in the 20th century, but it is hard to let go of one of the biggest rivalries in history.
Though to be honest, there is a certain bias those who write predominantly in the English language have against the French ingrained in a very long history of bad blood between England and France. That's recently changed of course in the 20th century, but it is hard to let go of one of the biggest rivalries in history.
It's just American writers getting even with all those rude French waiters. When they stop trying to convince us that snails are really food and that people really eat them, we'll stop trying to erase them from history.
You do realise snails, who are actually nice food, are not a common food item, but a delicacy? and such..
That's it : because many peoples, including history teachers are conviced this passage is 100% true, Timelines writers try to make something accurate and respect this.
Of course, this kinf of vision doesn't explain at all why the royal desmene eventually became the major power in the kingdom or why France was united.
In fact, the feudal desunion is less "black&white" than Germany or Italy before XIX :
-the king have an arbitrage authority in all his kingdom (and could such place his allies in good places, as managing to make an army to defend him from his vassals even if their interests were not to do such)
- his desmene was among the richer of the north (the picture of a little land, enough to allow the king to not starve is capetian medieval propaganda : "do not fear me, i'm a tiny noble")
-and of course he had the possibility to use at maximum the feudal rules. As the supreme liege, he could change it at the right times (inheritence of women is a good exemple) and to gain to them great feudal lands because of family policy. Burgundy was TWICE gained such and given to brothers of the king.
So, yes, if we believe the common cliché, France have better odds to be divided entierly or between England and Germany.
Now, if we see what feudal contract and "politics" were, we have more odds to see it "desunited" as HRE, or at least partially united in TLs
You do realise snails, who are actually nice food, are not a common food item, but a delicacy? and such..
THAT'S IT!!! No more history for you! (erases from Ubbergeek from next Byzantium TL)
Never read it. Tried to, but Im not a big enough fan of the Byzantines to really be drawn into it.
I've always thought of it simply being a matter of making the geopolitical situation of the TL dynamic and therefore more interesting. Of course rather than a TL where there are only slight variations from OTL and therefore to the eyes of the author boring when compared to the ability to cut it up into multiple chunks. Then again, French unity behind a single centralized government based in Paris without dire circumstances like the 100 Years War to unite everyone is a very recent development in terms of modern history. Hell, it took several civil wars and centuries for the Bourbons to be able to legitimately say France was ruled under an absolute monarchy.
Though to be honest, there is a certain bias those who write predominantly in the English language have against the French ingrained in a very long history of bad blood between England and France. That's recently changed of course in the 20th century, but it is hard to let go of one of the biggest rivalries in history.
Heres an even bigger rivalry Muslims vs Byzantines
that shit lasted from the 600s-1452
I'd say the Franco-British rivalry (with some initial French superiority
) has lasted since about 1066. And the Byzanto-Muslim rivalry lasted from 632-1258, with the fall of the Abbasids. I wouldn't say that was the end of it, but after that not only was Byzantium not really a viable opponent, but the Abbasids, the last contiguous dynasty from Muhammed, IMO, had fallen. Arguably that date could even be 1204.
Well the French monarchy falls in IE, but I wasn't aware it does so in any other Byzantine TLs. Where else does it happen? Have I created some sort of AH.com meme?
Who do y'all want to blame it on: historical assumptions and cultural rivalry, or BG?