How would one go about getting a centralised Holy Roman Empire, with a POD after the death of Otto III? When is the best time to do it, and how would it be done? What does a centralised Reich look like?
If Henry VI lives another twenty or thirty years, he can keep up the progress he's already made - with the resources of Sicily at his disposal, he's less dependent on the good will of the German princes or the Italian cities.
If Henry VI lives another twenty or thirty years, he can keep up the progress he's already made - with the resources of Sicily at his disposal, he's less dependent on the good will of the German princes or the Italian cities.
And when Frederick II succeeds him (ideally by Henry VI having succeeded at removing the Electoral aspect of things), he would be in a much better place than OTL.
I'm perhaps going to surprise Elfwine () and state that I do not (necessarily) expect a successful centralized HRE to become the European hegemon, at least not in the sense of enforcing pan-European political unification in pre-modern times. It would not be big and strong enough for that (a successful centralized Carolingian Empire might be a different issue).
Exactly how are the medieval kings going to "contain the power of the Church"? I'm not saying Church power can't be eroded, but its not something you can form a military coalition to stop.Most likely, and especially if the HRE and the other Western European states band together at some point to contain the power of the Church (quite possible), the Church ends up much more decentralized than OTL, with the Pope and Curia seriously dewanked, and most of the power in the hands of the national episcopates, under the watchful eye and supervision of the various monarchs (something rather akin to the Anglican and Orthodox churches), with the ecumenical council as the one true universal authority for the occasional settlement of issues.
Quite easily, this might lead to an healing of the Greek-Latin schism (if at some point the Byzantines, the HRE, and the other Western states experience a spell of good relations) and/or butterfly away the Reformation (or it happens as a wave of social unrest taking a religious mask, rather like the Hussites and Anabaptists, and suffering a similar fate).
Several factors that would be immensely difficult to align correctly, unless this involves the ERE - you know, the only Christian state with armies that can reasonably expected to beat Muslim ones over the long haul, and near enough to the area to viably threaten things.If several factors align correctly, we might even see the borders of the Muslim world seriously pushed back by European colonial expansion in the Late Middle Ages, esp. if the Renaissance happens earlier (quite possible) and/or the discovery of the Americas is slightly delayed (less likely).
The HRE is in an awkward position to engage in colonial expansion - same as the Dutch, though with Baltic ports.Like France, Sweden is in all likelihood going to find the path of expansion to its south forever barred, and if ever manages to rise as a regional power (possible, but seriously liable to butterflies; a lasting Kalmar Union might have better chances) would be driven to seek its fortunes in Russia (with varying degrees of success) or with colonial expansion (unlikely to get much success with the addition of the HRE to the OTL big players).
And more likely than a neo-Angevine Empire. France being blocked in the east? Definitely true. The west? Since when did this become an Englishwank?Yet another possibility is that France ends up largely partitioned between England (which gets something akin to a neo-Angevine Empire), the HRE (which gets chunks of eastern France), and Aragon/Spain (which gets most of Occitania), with the Capetian state a tiny buffer polity in Central France, if it endures at all. A possbility more favorable to France is that it manages to follow a path much akin to OTL, and then it may seek expansion in the Iberian peninsula, by a varying mix of military conquest of and dynastic marriages with the Iberian states. This might lead to the rise of a Franco-Aragonian, Franco-Castillian, or even Franco-Spanish union, which again would be a valid match and competitor to the HRE.
This does run into the problems of all the things historically dividing them, however. Not sure a HRE hegemon is going to inspire more love of Swedes for Danish kings and their demands.The lasting unifications of the Iberian and Nordic states might also happen as the result of the shadow the HRE would cast. This is far from mandatory but it is a reasonable outcome of geopolitical competition with a powerful state in central Europe.
Faeelin said:It occurs to me that Henry VI, if he stuck around, may have pursued Mediterranean ambitions instead of focusing on the German princes. He was already making noises about taking Byzantium, after all...
Eurofed said:By the end of the 13th century and early 14th century, the HRE might easily be at a similar degree of unity as contemporary OTL France and England. Assuming the Mongol threat gets defused much like OTL, and no uncanny dynastic disaster happens in the 13th century, nothing really troublesome is scheduled to happen until the Black Death. But if the HRE has been a success story up to then, in all likelihood its centralization is as irreversible as the ones of the other Western European states.
Exactly how are the medieval kings going to "contain the power of the Church"? I'm not saying Church power can't be eroded, but its not something you can form a military coalition to stop.
Several factors that would be immensely difficult to align correctly, unless this involves the ERE - you know, the only Christian state with armies that can reasonably expected to beat Muslim ones over the long haul, and near enough to the area to viably threaten things.
Defining "the area" as Egypt and the Levant - Africa is more manageable, but if you want to dewank Islam beyond that, the Western states are ill-equipped (by their nature and location) to deal with it.
The HRE is in an awkward position to engage in colonial expansion - same as the Dutch, though with Baltic ports.
This isn't to say it can't, but its more likely to look like France than England or Iberia here.
And more likely than a neo-Angevine Empire. France being blocked in the east? Definitely true. The west? Since when did this become an Englishwank?
This does run into the problems of all the things historically dividing them, however. Not sure a HRE hegemon is going to inspire more love of Swedes for Danish kings and their demands.
While I agree with this, I would emphasize the "by the end of the 13th century" part. The HRE needs a long period of successful emperors just to establish both the position of the emperor and the centralization of the state to the level necessary to go in this direction.
While nothing specifically troublesome is scheduled until the Black Death, papal issues will be a problem for a good while - and as stated above, you can't solve this with an army. Not while still wrestling with the fact that even if the princes are brought down to size there are still forces and individuals who would enjoy smashing the Hohenstaufens.
It would be tragically easy for a successful Henry and Frederick to happen and for Conrad* to still see things fall down again.
Its far from inevitable, but the task of Henry and Frederick has to be meaning that even if Conrad* (OTL his oldest surviving son but his second son by birth, so * ) does die young or some other crap that things have acquired deep enough roots to continue.
I misexplained myself; I meant (and since edited my wording) to "contain the power of the Popes", which wasn't all that difficult to accomplish, IF the rulers of the HRE, England, and France (which all had their grief with the Papacy) actually recognize their common interest at curbing the power of the Pope and band together at some point, using their combined influence on their respective bishops to impose a decentralization reform of the Church through an ecumenic council.
The Maghreb, yeah. Egypt and the Levant would be a challenge even with a vigorous ERE as an ally (which is not likely to happen - the ERE has no reason to want to see the HRE any more in its turf than is avoidable, or any other Franks for that matter. Realpoltik>religion.)I actually meant North Africa, Egypt, the Levant, and quite possibly Mesopotamia, nothing more than that, and I meant that it would necessarily involve the ERE, with the obvious exception of North Africa,. As it concerns the latter, it would not be too difficult for a more successful HRE, France, or Spain to kick Islam out of the Maghreb. Strategically, it is just an extension of the Reconquista.
Probably. The problem with the ports is the issue of location - the HRE is awkwardly positioned to reach the Atlantic and beyond just as the Dutch were. This is far from an impossibility, but it probably means a role similar to the Dutch with more to back it up when people threaten the colonies rather than painting the map with Imperial...gray?And Italian ports. The Dutch, limited as their power base at home was, managed to grab and hold Indonesia. They could have easily done much better if they could have tapped the pooled resources of Germany and Italy.
Agreed. All things being even, at least.Yeah, but it is not that difficult to imagine the HRE reversing the OTL outcome of the *French and Indian Wars.![]()
The problem is that whether they're "happy being eternal second fiddle" or not, actually forming those nations is going to be difficult. Aragon isn't going to eagerly embrace union with Castile-Leon just because the HRE is the biggest state in Western-Central Europe.*Shrug* I do expect that ITTL some serious degree of political consolidation in Western Europe has to take place one way or another, with national identities still being relatively fluid and not so important in the Middle Ages, unless the rulers of England, France, and Spain are happy being eternal second fiddle to the HRE. At least one and half, if not better a couple of those nations have to get merged somehow for a decent competitor to emerge.
A successful Kalmar Union does require the Danish kings (or Norweigan kings or whoever) to be able to successfully get everyone on board though, and for that not to be undone by either the HRE or dissent from within as in OTL.True, but Denmark is going to be in a rather different position with a united HRE. It is actually not that likely that an independent Denmark survives ITTL, be it by a successful Kalmar Union or because the Emperors would love to control the Danish Straits trade.
Okay, let's take the lifespans of OTL's Hohenstaufens up to Conrad IV.True, but it is far from difficult, with a successful Henry and Frederick, to have butterflies make *Conrad, too, have a sufficiently long and productive reign. Barring uncanny disasters, the dynasty seemed to produce reasonably competent and longeve scions, and a string of four fairly successful and longeve rulers (Frederick I, Henry VI, Frederick II, and *Conrad) spanning close to a century and half of reign, is not that outlandish a divergence. If we can have this long a "grace period" (which is wholly akin to what OTL France got), centralization and imperial power in the HRE would get in all likelihood irreversible.
And if the Bulgarslayer had a son, we'd discussing how awful a world without the Roman Empire would be.As it concerns the Popes, as I said, their supremacy was not inevitable nor unassailable. The history of Great Schism suggests that with the right butterflies, their power could be substantially dewanked IF a sufficient amount of secular rulers and bishops loyal to them acted together.