AHC keep the Frankish empire united

As we know the Frankish Empire was effectively divided after the treaty of Verdun in 843, and it only didn't splitted before because all Karolus Magnus except Louis the pious died. After Louis died his sons divided the realm

The challenge is to keep the Frankish empire (of Roman empire if you prefer) united as much time possible without turning ASB

begin

Carolus_Magnus_c1557.jpg
 
Going back into the Merovingian period, the divisions were basically a tradition set in stone by Clovis in the 400s or 500s.

So, two ways I can forsee:

  1. Clovis decides that only one of his sons would inherit, but would inherit everything.
  2. A big civil war in Francia at some point scares all of the heirs into wanting to ensure more stable successions. The most likely candidate for this would be a war in 772 between Karl and Karloman, but there are other possibilities. Of course, the war has to be extremely devastating for this to occur.
There is another way - if the situation around Louis the Pious' succession is repeated every generation after 480, or at least long enough for it to become expected. I think that is headed into ASB territory though.

- BNC
 
The Capetiens had used a legal fiction in France by naming their elder sons kings of their entire kingdom. It wouldn't be hard for Charlemagne to do the same, should he think of it. This would lead to primogeniture being achieved earlier should the Karlings replicate this.
 
The Capetiens had used a legal fiction in France by naming their elder sons kings of their entire kingdom. It wouldn't be hard for Charlemagne to do the same, should he think of it. This would lead to primogeniture being achieved earlier should the Karlings replicate this.

Not quite that simple. Charlemagne wasn't the first of his dynasty on the throne (Clovis for the Merovings, Pippin III or even Martel for the Karlings, Hugh for the Capetians). After all, he did nearly have to fight his brother for the throne. If he decides to do something like that, there will certainly be resistance as he is going against both a long-standing tradition and his own father's actions.

Plus, that would result in Pippin the Hunchback, a bastard, as having a claim to the throne. Hunchback was pretty much disinherited, especially after 792, and either Karl's sons are going to get extremely angry at this bastard son getting a claim. OR Karl labels Karl the Younger (lived to 811 or something, no?) as heir and then Hunchback gets mad and probably starts a 2nd rebellion.

Hugh Capet's ability to do this was mostly because the throne of 'West Francia' (or whatever they called it in 980) had never been divided, at least not in any history the common lord could remember. It had remained whole as a West Francia, ever since about the 600s.
On the other hand, the whole Frankish realm in the 770s-810s was more than one kingdom - at the time Neustria, Austrasia, Thuringia, Aquitaine and Bavaria were all pretty much their own thing, just ruled by the same person. In the 980s, Lotharingia (or whatever it had become), East Francia and Italy were all ruled by different people, so there was only one throne to pass down.

- BNC
 
Not quite that simple. Charlemagne wasn't the first of his dynasty on the throne (Clovis for the Merovings, Pippin III or even Martel for the Karlings, Hugh for the Capetians). After all, he did nearly have to fight his brother for the throne. If he decides to do something like that, there will certainly be resistance as he is going against both a long-standing tradition and his own father's actions.

Plus, that would result in Pippin the Hunchback, a bastard, as having a claim to the throne. Hunchback was pretty much disinherited, especially after 792, and either Karl's sons are going to get extremely angry at this bastard son getting a claim. OR Karl labels Karl the Younger (lived to 811 or something, no?) as heir and then Hunchback gets mad and probably starts a 2nd rebellion.

Hugh Capet's ability to do this was mostly because the throne of 'West Francia' (or whatever they called it in 980) had never been divided, at least not in any history the common lord could remember. It had remained whole as a West Francia, ever since about the 600s.
On the other hand, the whole Frankish realm in the 770s-810s was more than one kingdom - at the time Neustria, Austrasia, Thuringia, Aquitaine and Bavaria were all pretty much their own thing, just ruled by the same person. In the 980s, Lotharingia (or whatever it had become), East Francia and Italy were all ruled by different people, so there was only one throne to pass down.

- BNC
These are very good points. So if Pépin le Bref had used this, would it have had a greater chance of success ?
 
These are very good points. So if Pépin le Bref had used this, would it have had a greater chance of success ?

Certainly a greater chance. He would be best avoiding having his son Karloman anointed as co-king by the pope in 754, and would have to wait until his brother (also called Karloman) to die as well.

If he announced primogeniture in 755 or later, it would probably be accepted. Karloman would grumble a little about it as an adult, but he was 4 at the time so could easily be brought up differently, accepting primogeniture. The nobles at this point won't care much - the Karlings had uprooted everything that came before them, near enough. None of them could form any effective alliances against it - Pippin was personal boss over Austrasia, Neustria and Burgundy (about 75% of the kingdom), and Aquitaine didn't do very well when it resisted in OTL.

- BNC
 
Charlemagne COULD claim that the Empire was a different thing from a Kingdom, and not divisible. This might mean that you still get splitting into France/Germany/Lotharingia, but as subsidiary Kingdoms subject to a senior line as Emperor. Whether it would be more politically feasible to have the Emperor hold one of the kingdoms or none would be a good question.

While Charlemagne wasn't the first of his LINE, he WAS the first EMPEROR.
 
Charlemagne COULD claim that the Empire was a different thing from a Kingdom, and not divisible. This might mean that you still get splitting into France/Germany/Lotharingia, but as subsidiary Kingdoms subject to a senior line as Emperor. Whether it would be more politically feasible to have the Emperor hold one of the kingdoms or none would be a good question.

While Charlemagne wasn't the first of his LINE, he WAS the first EMPEROR.

The Imperial title was passed down as part of the divisions. After Karl and Louis, four more Karlings held the title (Lothar, Louis of Italy, Charles the Bald and Charles the Fat), and then a couple of relatives from offshoot branches of the dynasty. Nominally, Lothar especially was supposed to have authority over his brothers and nephews, but no-one really cared about this.

The problem is that no-one saw the realm post-800 as anything different than pre-800, only that the Pope had granted Karl a title that happened to call him Emperor. It was still refered to as the 'Frankish Kingdom', or later the Kingdom of Aquitaine/W. Francia/Lotharingia/Italy/E. Francia/Burgundy/whatever.

The 'Roman Empire' at the time was what we now call the Byzantine Empire. Charlemagne, at best, could call himself co-emperor of this. But even that was divisible (events in 395 prove this).

- BNC
 
Certainly a greater chance. He would be best avoiding having his son Karloman anointed as co-king by the pope in 754, and would have to wait until his brother (also called Karloman) to die as well.

If he announced primogeniture in 755 or later, it would probably be accepted. Karloman would grumble a little about it as an adult, but he was 4 at the time so could easily be brought up differently, accepting primogeniture. The nobles at this point won't care much - the Karlings had uprooted everything that came before them, near enough. None of them could form any effective alliances against it - Pippin was personal boss over Austrasia, Neustria and Burgundy (about 75% of the kingdom), and Aquitaine didn't do very well when it resisted in OTL.

- BNC

So let's say that Karolus decides to adopt a primogeniture law for the empire and all it's kingdoms/members, and this results in many vassals and Pepin the Hunchback revolting against him

If he crushes their revolt would it be possible to keep the empire united with it's 804 borders intact?
 
So let's say that Karolus decides to adopt a primogeniture law for the empire and all it's kingdoms/members, and this results in many vassals and Pepin the Hunchback revolting against him

If he crushes their revolt would it be possible to keep the empire united with it's 804 borders intact?

That would depend on if Karl the Younger survives his father (OTL he died 811). Without him, Karl (Sr.)'s whole base for primogeniture probably gets thrown out the window as Louis is something like his 3rd or 4th son.

As for the borders, definitely everything the Franks held in 772 could be kept. Lombardy/Italy (conquered 774) was still technically a separate realm that was headed by the same ruler, so it may split off. Bavaria (nominally a vassal since the early 8th century, conquered outright 788) was in a similar state. Cannot be sure about them, as in OTL they basically represented more than half of their respective rulers' (Lothar and Louis the German) realms post-843, rather than 1/6 each.

Somehow Karl would have to proclaim that Italy and Bavaria were part of the Frankish crown, which he didn't do in OTL. I think if he tried he would face a lot of opposition.

- BNC
 
Louis the Pious never remarries, hence no Charles the Bald. Of his three remaining sons, Lothair only has surviving daughters (lets say Lothair's son Louis II dies of disease around the time of his father's death) and dies of unrelated causes before his father. Pepin gets executed as part of one of his rebellions, and his minor sons Charles and Pepin are pushed into an ecclesiastic career, and die childless as OTL.

This leaves just Louis the German (probably "Louis II" ITTL) as Louis the Pious' sole heir. *Louis II lives a long, healthy life as IOTL, dying aged 74 in 876. OTL he had 3 boys and 4 girls. ITTL, he has 2 boys and 5 girls, and splits his lands equally between them.

The two however engage in a civil war shortly after their father's death, which results in one of them dying of disease whilst on campaign, making the other one, let's call him Charles, winner by default.

Charles, like Charles the Fat from OTL, fails to have any kids with his wife (lets go with infertility), and attempts to have his sole illegitimate child (who isn't even his in the first place, but resembles his father just enough to pass off as such) legitimized by the Pope and bishops. Unlike OTL, he succeeds in this endeavor. Lets call this bastard Bernard, just to keep things simple. *Charles dies aged 68, in 908 AD.

Bernard, unlike his father, has lots of kids, including 4 adult and 2 underage boys, 3 daughters and lots more illegitimate ones. Bernard dies aged 52, in 930 A.D, and his realm devolves into a ten-year civil war among his sons. Out of the ashes, the youngest of his 4 adult sons emerges victorious. Let's call him Charles, after his "grandfather".

Charles has been thoroughly traumatized by he war he just fought, with his wife dying in childbirth not helping matters either. Distraught, he vows never to remarry again, and divides the realm between his two younger brothers (let's call them Karl and Carloman), for which he was a sort of father figure. Charles dies after a mere 9 years at the helm of the united Empire, in 949 AD

Karl however has no intention of re-living the civil war that nearly killed off most of his family, and has his brother murdered shortly after the death of their father. Karl proceeds to have numerous kids, and lives to the ripe old age of 76, dying in 1005 A.D. Throughout his life, Karl makes sure that all his sons are raised with the understanding that only the eldest should become ruler of the realm, and in this he succeeds.

His son and co-emperor Lothair succeeds him, and keeps all of his brothers (at least those who hadn't been given to the Church) at court on a short leash. He also easily crushes a rebellion by one of his more ambitious brothers and has him tortured to death, just to make a point.

Lothair dies shortly afterward in 1016 A.D., but not before siring a child, his only surviving boy, named Pepin the Posthumous. Pepin the Posthumous lives in the shadow of a regency council ran by his uncles, who fight and win a civil war on his behalf when the eldest of them tried to grab absolute power. Pepin's uncles will go on to provide ample cadet branches without any real claim to the throne (Louis the Traitor's rebellion in 1039 A.D. notwithstanding). As for himself, Pepin the Posthumous only has single male child (odd considering his relatives' 'achievements' in that area), whom he names co-emperor and passes the throne to, aged 48, in 1072 A.D.

After ~200 of a united Carolingian Empire, unity of the realm should be ingrained enough in the culture of the nobility that the centrifugal forces inherent in any large state shouldn't be able to tear it apart.

upload_2016-9-5_14-12-44.png
 
Karl and Charles are the same name, at least in this point in time. Charles was conceived as a gradual Latinised corruption of the German name. In my posts, anyone up to and including Charlemagne is 'Karl', anyone after his death is 'Charles'. A person in 900 or so would not intentionally name their son as a corruption, it would be that they are giving their name to their son and modern people stuffed this up.

Very long story
This seems oddly similar to my original post. Only drawn out and requiring quite a lot of luck (as any drawn out Karling unity would).

One problem: How would Louis the German handle the Vikings? I understand he was decently competent in handling the modest East Francia, but his 839 and 859 campaigns were both complete disasters (one against his father, the other against Charles the Bald). East Francia didn't have nearly the same amount of trouble from the Norse as the West did. Any major Viking operation could wreck Louis' control of at least the west.

Does the 10-year civil war need to be in the 10th century? Karl and Karloman (771) hated each other enough and war was only prevented from a (suspiciously) timely death. Considering the size of those two realms, that war would be devastating enough for the other to recognise the need for stable succession, hence why I brought it up in my first post.

divides the realm between his two younger brothers (let's call them Karl and Carloman),

You chose those names on purpose. Too much of a coincidence to call it otherwise. Plus, the name Carloman was out of fashion by 900, let alone 940. The last ruler with the name died in 880-something, and before him the only significant ones lived in the 740s and 770s. Most people with the name belonged to the 6th and 7th centuries (including Charlemagne's lots-of-greats-grandfather, the father of Pippin I).

... not before siring a child, his only surviving boy, named Pepin the Posthumous.

I always wondered what a future Pippin would be called. I've always assumed Pippin IV or V (depends on if hunchback is counted) would be 'Pippin the Final', because, like Carloman, the name belonged to older centuries. The two names were mostly replaced by Charles (obviously), Louis, Lothar, Arnulf and a bunch of other silly sounding stuff.

After ~200 of a united Carolingian Empire, unity of the realm should be ingrained enough in the culture of the nobility that the centrifugal forces inherent in any large state shouldn't be able to tear it apart.

Feudalism isn't that simple, unfortunately. Especially in the 9th and 10th centuries, a 'realm' consisted only of a bunch of nobles that were vassals to a king. If his successor was a drooling fool, the nobles would just pack up and leave the realm.

(I'm not trying to pick apart everything you say, your timeline is plausible enough. Just had a few thoughts that you might want to consider :))

- BNC
 
Louis the Pious never remarries, hence no Charles the Bald. Of his three remaining sons, Lothair only has surviving daughters (lets say Lothair's son Louis II dies of disease around the time of his father's death) and dies of unrelated causes before his father. Pepin gets executed as part of one of his rebellions, and his minor sons Charles and Pepin are pushed into an ecclesiastic career, and die childless as OTL.

This leaves just Louis the German (probably "Louis II" ITTL) as Louis the Pious' sole heir. *Louis II lives a long, healthy life as IOTL, dying aged 74 in 876. OTL he had 3 boys and 4 girls. ITTL, he has 2 boys and 5 girls, and splits his lands equally between them.

The two however engage in a civil war shortly after their father's death, which results in one of them dying of disease whilst on campaign, making the other one, let's call him Charles, winner by default.

Charles, like Charles the Fat from OTL, fails to have any kids with his wife (lets go with infertility), and attempts to have his sole illegitimate child (who isn't even his in the first place, but resembles his father just enough to pass off as such) legitimized by the Pope and bishops. Unlike OTL, he succeeds in this endeavor. Lets call this bastard Bernard, just to keep things simple. *Charles dies aged 68, in 908 AD.

Bernard, unlike his father, has lots of kids, including 4 adult and 2 underage boys, 3 daughters and lots more illegitimate ones. Bernard dies aged 52, in 930 A.D, and his realm devolves into a ten-year civil war among his sons. Out of the ashes, the youngest of his 4 adult sons emerges victorious. Let's call him Charles, after his "grandfather".

Charles has been thoroughly traumatized by he war he just fought, with his wife dying in childbirth not helping matters either. Distraught, he vows never to remarry again, and divides the realm between his two younger brothers (let's call them Karl and Carloman), for which he was a sort of father figure. Charles dies after a mere 9 years at the helm of the united Empire, in 949 AD

Karl however has no intention of re-living the civil war that nearly killed off most of his family, and has his brother murdered shortly after the death of their father. Karl proceeds to have numerous kids, and lives to the ripe old age of 76, dying in 1005 A.D. Throughout his life, Karl makes sure that all his sons are raised with the understanding that only the eldest should become ruler of the realm, and in this he succeeds.

His son and co-emperor Lothair succeeds him, and keeps all of his brothers (at least those who hadn't been given to the Church) at court on a short leash. He also easily crushes a rebellion by one of his more ambitious brothers and has him tortured to death, just to make a point.

Lothair dies shortly afterward in 1016 A.D., but not before siring a child, his only surviving boy, named Pepin the Posthumous. Pepin the Posthumous lives in the shadow of a regency council ran by his uncles, who fight and win a civil war on his behalf when the eldest of them tried to grab absolute power. Pepin's uncles will go on to provide ample cadet branches without any real claim to the throne (Louis the Traitor's rebellion in 1039 A.D. notwithstanding). As for himself, Pepin the Posthumous only has single male child (odd considering his relatives' 'achievements' in that area), whom he names co-emperor and passes the throne to, aged 48, in 1072 A.D.

After ~200 of a united Carolingian Empire, unity of the realm should be ingrained enough in the culture of the nobility that the centrifugal forces inherent in any large state shouldn't be able to tear it apart.

View attachment 286198


I just loved this scenario, apart from the names as it have been said above, they are too... unnatural for the circunstance
 
Top