AH Challenge: German Unification by the 1600's

I've got an idea for a TL kicking around in my head, but I haven't the basis in German history really required for it. What I want is a really early German unification, whether that's into a country actually called "Deutschland" or a more-unified version of the HRE.

This might require a pretty early POD because of all the religious wars, I'm not really sure. Honestly, the renaissance/early modern eras are probably what I know the least about out of any era of history, so I'll be needing some help...

So, I don't care how ASB it is, just throw it out there. Your challenge is to have a significant amount of what's now Germany under a single government by 1650. I don't care where the capital is, it doesn't have to be Berlin.
 
The easiest way would be that Otto the great died earlier. At first this might look strange since Otto was a very competent ruler and managed to centralize Germany and also to defeat the Hungarians. He also diminished the power of the nobles by giving more land to the church. However in 961 he invaded Italy - a local King was getting to powerful so various refugees and the pope asked Otto for help. In short term this was a very profitable decision: Not only became Otto emperor which further elevated him over the nobles but he also gained control of the richest and most developed lands in Europe.
In the long term however it turned out to be disastrous: The Holy roman emperor would from now on be forced to hold down both the Italian Cities and the German nobles, which proofed to be behind their capabilities. So Otto inadvertently set for the decay of the Empire he created.

So just let him die in the spring of 961. This isn't to improbable since he was already 49 years old and just had recovered form an illness. Thus the German kings will be free to concentrate on Germany and will be able to follow a similar path like the Kings of France and England.
 

Susano

Banned
Thats way too early. Without the Ottons, who knows if a German identity would develop at all?

One possibility is that the Erbreichsplans (Hereditary Empire Plan) of Henry VI suceeds in 1196. It was a close affair, and throw in some clerical confusions to avoid the Papacy meddling in the HRE... Germany/ The HRE becomes a hereditary monarchy and can gradualyl centralise, just as France did IOTL.

Or Henrys son Frederick II is avoided somehow. He mainly concentrated on his Sicilian Kingdom, and gave the princes great orivileges, which they were able to fortify in the Interregnum following Fredericks death.

Or have the attenpted Impeiral Reform aroudn 1500 suceeding. Thats considerably more difficult and less plausible, though. But who knows, witha differentR eformation (say, an Imperial Church), it might work...
 
I agree, hereditary succession to the throne is one of the key ingredients that would be necessary for Germany or the HRE to form a true nation-state (though the latter would be more a nation in the American sense than the European). Even that though wouldn't make it a sure thing. At some point Germany would have needed a monarch clever enough to undermine the rest of the power the nobility retained.

--
Bill
 

Susano

Banned
Id see it the oither way round: I dont think hereditary sucession was necessary per se. But it wouldve helped greatly, and with the strong positiosn of the Staufen in the 12th century, if they had suceeded in making the throne herditary, centralisation would have been nearly sure to follow (eventually, over generations, and barring disasters, of course).
 
Thats way too early. Without the Ottons, who knows if a German identity would develop at all?
One possibility is that the Erbreichsplans (Hereditary Empire Plan) of Henry VI suceeds in 1196. It was a close affair, and throw in some clerical confusions to avoid the Papacy meddling in the HRE... Germany/ The HRE becomes a hereditary monarchy and can gradualyl centralise, just as France did IOTL.
Or Henry's son Frederick II is avoided somehow. He mainly concentrated on his Sicilian Kingdom, and gave the princes great orivileges, which they were able to fortify in the Interregnum following Fredericks death.
Or have the attenpted Impeiral Reform aroudn 1500 suceeding. Thats considerably more difficult and less plausible, though. But who knows, witha differentR eformation (say, an Imperial Church), it might work...

How about a Black Death that causes a bit death, taking out a few more nobles. Then some surviving noble (let's say from Baveria, 'cause that's where my ancestors came from :D) starts to stage a land-grab of the newly-vacated property?
 
Id see it the oither way round: I dont think hereditary sucession was necessary per se. But it wouldve helped greatly, and with the strong positiosn of the Staufen in the 12th century, if they had suceeded in making the throne herditary, centralisation would have been nearly sure to follow (eventually, over generations, and barring disasters, of course).

The biggest problem with the hereditary monarchy was that if the reigning emperor could not secure the succession for his son while he was on the throne, the Nobility was likely to choose a candidate who was likely to be a weak emperor; thus allowing the nobles to retain or even expand their power.

I don't think it is coincidence that every state that emerged from the middle ages as a strong centralized state had an hereditary monarch.

--
Bill
 
Top