A Different Investiture Controversy?

The ending to the investiture controversy seems to have really weakened medieval european monarchs. How could it have gone differently, not happened at all or in some way lead to european monarchs not losing their power to the church? What would the short and long-term effects of this be? I feel like this is a great POD to lead to more centralized medieval states, something I have always been in favor of.
On another note, does can anyone recommend some good timelines (or books) for a more successful France (starting in any time period). I am a huge francophile and am always looking for good France-tls, but have trouble finding them.
Thanks,
Scipio
 
Yes, a different investiture controversy would certainly be better for the (H)RE since the Emperor ceded so much comital power to prince-bishoprics instead of counts like in France. Germany is my other favorite European states, the Germany-France dynamic, especially, is very interesting to me.
Scipio
 
Pope Leo IX decisively wins the Battle of Civitate in June 1053. He and his Byzantine allies proceed to root the Normans completely out of southern Italy. Later, when the Investiture Controversy gets going under Leo's successors, there are no Normans in southern Italy to prop up and fight for the Papacy when the Holy Roman Emperor comes south to deal with the Pope. The Emperor wins and successfully installs a Pope to his liking, and the power of the Papacy is permanently and severely curtailed.
 
So no one has any ideas on the long term effects of this? I would be nice if more people responded to my posts. I know I haven't been here that long, but I still have a decent knowledge of history by the standards of this site, and an incredible one by the standards of most people.
Scipio
 
It's not at all my period, but does this mean a more centralised HRE as under the Ottonian Emperors? You have a strong Byzantium to the South, which will certainly continue to influence Italian politics, including the Reich. Perhaps the Papacy will start to fulfil a role more like the Patriarch of Constantinople, and the Western Emperor will become much stronger than IOTL.

Other butterflies from the POD proposed by Robert could be no Normans in England either, due to the lack of Papal support. No Crusades as we know them either, which will impact upon the rise of the merchant republics. More national churches?
 
It's not at all my period, but does this mean a more centralised HRE as under the Ottonian Emperors? You have a strong Byzantium to the South, which will certainly continue to influence Italian politics, including the Reich. Perhaps the Papacy will start to fulfil a role more like the Patriarch of Constantinople, and the Western Emperor will become much stronger than IOTL.

Other butterflies from the POD proposed by Robert could be no Normans in England either, due to the lack of Papal support. No Crusades as we know them either, which will impact upon the rise of the merchant republics. More national churches?

The West-East dualism of the Roman Empire could be revived.
 
Very interesting, that sounds like it would work! Its ironic that an earlier papal victory leads to a later papal defeat.
Scipio

Yes, I thought so too. So much so that I used a somewhat slightly altered version of this POD in my BRITONS TRIUMPHANT timeline.

So no one has any ideas on the long term effects of this? I would be nice if more people responded to my posts. I know I haven't been here that long, but I still have a decent knowledge of history by the standards of this site, and an incredible one by the standards of most people.
Scipio

Well, in the timeline I mentioned above, it leads, in the short term, to a strengthening of royal and imperial authority in Germany and Italy (the Holy Roman Emperor renounces his claim to Italy in the timeline, and a separate Kingdom of Italy, ruled by a junior branch of the Imperial ruling family, is created). It also leads to a major schism within the Church, with rival Popes enthroned...the Gregorian Pope at Rome and the Anti-Gregorian Pope at Sens, in France ("Gregorian," or course, referring to whether or not the Pope supports the Gregorian Reform). The various kingdoms of Europe aligned themselves behind one or the other. The Kings of Italy (in collusion with his relative, the German Emperor) and the Kings of France keep the rival Popes pretty much under their thumbs while using them to promote their own agendas. In the longer term, growing dissatisfaction with the church as a result of its dominance by the kings and emperors allows various anti-clerical heresies to gain traction, leading to what is, essentially, an earlier Reformation in the 1200s. By the end of the 1200s, Europe is being torn apart by the Fifty Years' War.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I have always thought europe, and the world, would be better off with much weaker temporal power of religions, like the "The Raptor of Spain"
(my favorite medieval tl). Sure, there is more political conflict, but at least people aren't dying because some old man say "god" wants it to be so. I think what makes TRoS (is that acronym ever used?) so interesting is that the POD happens at a very formative time in europe, but late enough that instead of otl countries never existing, they exist as reflections of each other. SO you have have a more Germanic Francia instead of France, a more secular and much earlier united Spana instead of spain, etc. Sorry for the tangent, I've been thinking about that for a while.
Scipio
 
Top