And Brandenburg and Bavaria were part of the HRE.
Are you mocking me?
This is what I said: "If Poland and Hungary become local powers within a decentralized HRE as Brandenburg and Bavaria did in OTL it would suit me just fine."
Just what the hell are you trying to pull here?
And I know you're not asking for one, I'm saying one is necessary for this to happen.
And you're saying this based on...?
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/71528/Bohemia
"A kingdom within the Holy Roman Empire".
And throughout its history as kingdom not in personal union with the imperial house, we see the dukes and kings accepting that - yes, including Ottokar II, who was not rebelling against Imperial authority in the sense of the Emperor being his sovereign but just being a pretender to the throne, at most.
Please tell me this whole weirdness is not all about you wildly misinterpreting a line from Britannica. Bohemia was not "legally incorporated within the Empire," it was made a component of it just like all the others. Bohemia had
the same relation to the HRE as did the other estates under immediate imperial authority (which is to say, vassals of the Emperor and not vassals of his vassals), minus the fact that some were electorates and others weren't. When Bohemia did finally lose independence, over 5 centuries after being vassalized, it had nothing to do with the Empire becoming more centralized - it obviously hadn't - and it did not lose its independence to the Empire to begin with, it lost it to the Habsburgs, who unlike the also foreign Luxembourgs were already so strong that they made Bohemia a province of their domain rather than its center (Rudolf II excepted).
I'm hesitating to criticize the error you appear to be making because it's inconsistent with the other error you're making.
No, I'm pointing out that the only way they become part of the HRE is either a) voluntary on their part (and why would they want to be part of the empire?)
No, the question is why they would accept becoming vassals of the Holy Roman Emperor. And the obvious answers are, because the Emperor is a threat (it would be centuries before decentralization had advanced past that point, just think Frederick Barbarossa), or because the Emperor offers defense against another threat.
or b) the Empire being able to control the area, and when the Emperor can only barely influence things within its OTL borders, Poland and Hungary are too much.
Obvious you'd be circling back to that again. No point in me even repeating that direct authority is not what I have in mind, who gives a shit what the person who started the thread thinks it's about?
You seem to be more intent on being rude than anything else here, which is not surprising, but which really isn't helping produce anything.
There once was a person on this forum, now banned, who I had a pretty good opinion of in spite of some deep disagreements between us and with whom I got along quite well. One day, this person thought it would be a splendid idea to use me as a punching bag in the sort of debate he'd had a million times before but which I was not interested in. And while he was at it, he figured he'd also lie to my face about what I was saying and insult me for not showing interest in his preferred topics. This person then instantly joined my ignore list.
That was someone I liked. You're someone I had a bad impression of even before this thread. Forget your crimes against intellectual rigor in our Cold War "debate," you all but called me a Confederate apologists because you didn't agree with me in an ACW thread.
You've no idea what it would be like if I intended to be rude.
Yes, it is certainly possible given a few PODs, but Hungary and Poland were strong states very much free from HRE influence. It would take some doing.
As I said in the OP, do it early on, before Hungary has expanded to the south and Poland to the north and east.
