Italian Centered Holy Roman Empire

Faeelin

Abdul Hadi Pasha said:
In Frederick's time? No, there was no Kingdom of Germany - at least as any sort of unitary state. Perhaps the confusion is that you were only emperor after the Pope crowned you, otherwise upon election you were just king.

And I know where Burgundy was. Don't make me slap you.
Click to expand...

Staufen Germany, prior to the Interregnum following the death of Henry VI, was every bit as centralized as the Capetian domains in France.

The King of Germany was elected, and he became the Emperor after the Pope crowned you.
 

Faeelin

Abdul Hadi Pasha said:
Meh (to coin a phrase), Frederick wouldn't have had any more luck running a Kingdom of Jerusalem than anyone else. This was a diplomatic triumph, but a fairly insubstantial one. It lasted something like three years. Ask the residents of Cyprus and Crete how much they appreciated Italian rule, BTW.
Click to expand...

Sure, it lasted three years, when he had to deal with the Pope, the Lombards, aa rebellious son, being excommunicated, etc. If he'd had more time, who knows?
 

Abdul Hadi Pasha

Banned
Faeelin said:
Staufen Germany, prior to the Interregnum following the death of Henry VI, was every bit as centralized as the Capetian domains in France.

The King of Germany was elected, and he became the Emperor after the Pope crowned you.
Click to expand...

Gulp. While Henry was certainly a powerful emperor, to characterize the empire as "centralized" is a big stretch. If in your comparison you meant "every bit as centralized as Capetian France" then I agree with you. If you meant "every bit as centralized as the Capetian DOMAINS in France", then you may very well be high.

Henry's empire included half of France as vassal, not to mention England.
 

LordKalvan

Abdul Hadi Pasha said:
Meh (to coin a phrase), Frederick wouldn't have had any more luck running a Kingdom of Jerusalem than anyone else. This was a diplomatic triumph, but a fairly insubstantial one. It lasted something like three years. Ask the residents of Cyprus and Crete how much they appreciated Italian rule, BTW.
Click to expand...
The Normans (and then the Houenstaufen) had quite a good record in handling subjects with a different religion in Sicily and Southern Italy: effectively, the Southern kingdom was organised on a very sound and centralised basis, both from the taxation point of view and the recourse to law. The real troubles there started later, after the death of Frederik II (and a good portion of them stemmed out from the fact that the kingdom was a feudal subject to the Pope).
Strnge to say, also the other Norman fiefdom in Outremer (Antioch, under the Altavillas) was generally governed in a reasonable way.
The problems you mention (Crete and Cyprus) were mostly arising out of the Orthodox populace resenting their Catholic overlords. OTOH, Venerian domination in Crete lasted four and half centuries; Cyprus was for 3 centuries under Frankish and later Venetian overlords. The Ionian Islands were Venetian from the 15th century up to the French Revolution. In all cases, it took a foreign conqueror to change the status quo.
A true Imperial Domination (like it might have stemmed out of the Houenstaufen House in another TL) would certainly improve the conditions of the local populace: empires are not much interested in changing the beliefs of subjects: they want peaceful domains and taxes flowing. The idea of an empire spanning Egypt, Cyprus, Crete, maybe Tunis would not be so unlikely.
 

Faeelin

Abdul Hadi Pasha said:
Gulp. While Henry was certainly a powerful emperor, to characterize the empire as "centralized" is a big stretch. If in your comparison you meant "every bit as centralized as Capetian France" then I agree with you. If you meant "every bit as centralized as the Capetian DOMAINS in France", then you may very well be high.

Henry's empire included half of France as vassal, not to mention England.
Click to expand...

I said Capetian domains because half of France was ruled by the Plantagenets, who were the archenemies of the Capetians.

To rephrase: "Henry's rule over Italy, Germany, and Sicily was as centralized as the Capetian rule over areas of France not loyal to a dynasty dedicated to their destruction as a monarchy."
 

Midgard

Hermanubis said:
Nasty cough there. :rolleyes:
I actually almost made a double of this thread, but decided to do a search first. Knew it seemed familiar… :p

Anyway, thought of a new POD- What if Otto III (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_III,_Holy_Roman_Emperor) wasn’t forced out of Rome, and his successors continued to concentrate on Italy as a center of Imperial Power?
Click to expand...


Give him more time, and let him live until 60. There you go... the Saxon dynasty will become Roman Emperors in fact as well as in name.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top