Make Italy considered a part of Eastren/Central Europe

This is pretty hard when countries well to the east of Italy insist they are in central Europe:
GUEST_df3dacb5-d92d-4205-a0ec-cda5c4067f6b
Italy could also be put in Central Europe like I said, just not with Westren Europe.
 
Yeah, since it’s orthodox.

You did not get it: it would be Catholic, Orthodox, Muslim, Catholic depending upon time. This approach would also provide interesting time with Lithuania and Poland because each of them would be in both East and West, and the border would be moving with a passage of time and sometimes not clear at all.
 
You did not get it: it would be Catholic, Orthodox, Muslim, Catholic depending upon time. This approach would also provide interesting time with Lithuania and Poland because each of them would be in both East and West, and the border would be moving with a passage of time and sometimes not clear at all.
So, to make sure we are on the same page here, it would change between East and West? Correct me if I am wrong please. If it is, then I would want some of the Italian peninsula to be eastren european to the present day.
 
Last edited:

Vuu

Banned
Difficult, the current central Europe is a little bit more actually west geographically speaking - the midline basically goes very close to the Russian border
 
Actually, there was one more meaning: part of Europe that was under strong Byzantine, Orthodox, Ottoman cultural influence. Which is, again, rather vague and imprecise. For example, the PLC would end partially as Western and partially as Eastern Europe.

Anyway, the term (short of the Soviet time meaning) is pretty much meaningless: so Italy is designated (by whom?) as Eastern Europe and so what? The rivers will start flowing in an opposite direction?

To show how the "Soviet time meaning" differed from the "cultural" one: During the Cold War, if you were to ask people in the US (and I suspect in western Europe as well) to name an eastern European country, Poland would probably be the first one they would name--even though its post-1945 borders are to the west of the Orthodox vs. Catholic line. Indeed, when Gerald Ford famously said that "There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe and there never will be under a Ford administration" he specifically mentioned Poland...
 
To show how the "Soviet time meaning" differed from the "cultural" one: During the Cold War, if you were to ask people in the US (and I suspect in western Europe as well) to name an eastern European country, Poland would probably be the first one they would name--even though its post-1945 borders are to the west of the Orthodox vs. Catholic line. Indeed, when Gerald Ford famously said that "There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe and there never will be under a Ford administration" he specifically mentioned Poland...

Of course, the Soviet meaning was convenient from a purely pragmatic point of view but even then Yuogoslavia was a somewhat special case. OTOH, from the cultural perspective, neither Poland nor Hungary were quite “Soviet” and I suspect that the same would go at least for Czechoslovakia as well.

But the Soviets has a little bit more complicated system which also included the Central and Northern Europe (to minimize Western).

Back to the initial time frame, there could be some division of Europe by Catholic/Protestant, Orthodox, Muslim and even pagan but these borders would be quite dynamic and, personally, I don’t see any valid reason for bundling the Orthodox and Muslims into the same group (especially if somehow Andalusia ends up as Western Europe; wouldn’t it be Eastern Europe before Reconquista was over and what sense does this make?).

IMO, OP makes sense if it is formulated as “Orthodox Italy”. This can produce quite interesting scenarios but they would be too different from OTL to say something with a reasonable degree of a certainty. To start with, there must be a plausible alternative to the OTL Bishop of Rome as a supreme religious leader of the Alt-Catholic world and that alternative should provide at least formal territorial independence of the “papal state” (Avignon being too French-dependent for a permanent solution).
 
So, to make sure we are on the same page here, it would change between East and West? Correct me if I am wrong please. If it is, then I would want some of the Italian peninsula to be eastren european to the present day.

Well, if the main criteria is religion, then west/east is dynamic and in some cases almost impossible to define because various regions of the same state may have different religious balances and these balances could change reasonably fast.
 
Is almost ASB as Rome and Italy were the center of the Roman Empire.
You can not have the Catholic Church taking seat in another place because if they are not based in Rome we will not have any reason for a split between the Orthodox and the Catholic Church.
Take Rome and Italy out of the Western Europe and it will never exist
It's not ASB in the slightest. Is Greece a Western European country or an Eastern European country? The answer is not straight-forward, yet Greece has had an incalculable effect on Western Europe.
 
It's not ASB in the slightest. Is Greece a Western European country or an Eastern European country? The answer is not straight-forward, yet Greece has had an incalculable effect on Western Europe.

The split between Western Europe and Eastern Europe is more about wealth differentials and capitalist vs communist society in the second half of the 20th Century. If you had an alternative history where the UK, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, France, Benelux, are in the Western bloc, and there's a separate Russian-dominated Eastern bloc of Poland, Romania, Bulgaria etc, and then you have Germany, Italy, Yugoslavia as non-aligned buffer states, Italy will be considered central Europe.
 
As others have alluded to a Byzantine-wank is probably the easiest. If they get wanked enough to take over and keep the entire peninsula (I guess everything south of the Po?) is that enough to have Italy be considered "eastern?"
 
As others have alluded to a Byzantine-wank is probably the easiest. If they get wanked enough to take over and keep the entire peninsula (I guess everything south of the Po?) is that enough to have Italy be considered "eastern?"
No, as neither the Western Roman Empire or the Western Europe will exist...
Maybe a north-south division but not an east-west
 
So a Catholic north and an Orthodox south?
Maybe Frederick II von Hohenstaufen is successful and lays the groundwork for the HRE to centralize and thus the HRE keeps the Italy and since its the main hegemonic power in Central Europe, Italy is seen as a de jure part of it.

Or in a Ottoman Italy scenario Mehmet II somehow manages to conquer Souther Italy or a revived Tunisian sultanate conquer Sicily and makes inroads into Southern Italy like the old Caliphate did. The pope is forced to flee and the Ottomans have to battle a set of invasions by the French, Spanish, and the Germans. This continued warfare leaves Italy devastated and prevents it from developing since its considered more of a frontier. This might even butterfly the Renaissance because Italy wouldn’t be able to develop with the constanr fighting between Ottoman and Holy League Forces.

Or the Byzantines or a Bulgarian-Byzantine or Serbian-Byzantine Empire emerges and pulls Ottomans style expansion and manages to conquer Southen Italy. This would be after they conquer Constantinople, Anatolia (or its coasts), and the other Byzantine successor/splinter states. They style themselves as the continued Basilea ton Rhomaoin and their prestige is expanded with a reconquest that saw the empire retake Sicily and Souther Italy.
 
Napoleon's Kingdom of Italy absorbs the Illyrian provinces, Lazio, Tuscany, Ostia, and the Ionian Islands. The Kingdom expands eastward, absorbing Bosnia, Monenegro, and Sandzak. It later nabs Crete and Rhodes from the Ottomans.

The Adriatic/Balkan/Eastern orientation of the Kingdom leads to its being seen as a Central and Eastern Euro
 
Last edited:
Napoleon's Kingdom of Italy absorbs the Illyrian provinces, Lazio, Tuscany, Ostia, and the Ionian Islands. The Kingdom expands eastward, absorbing Bosnia, Monenegro, and Sandzak. It later nabs Crete and Rhodes from the Ottomans.

The Adriatic/Balkan/Eastern orientation of the Kingdom leads to its being seen as a Central and Eastern Euro
And a good pod for this is Napoleon II survives tuberculosis and flees to Italy during the Italian nationalism craze. He manages to secure an army and takes over Italy mirroring his father and reclaims the title King of Rome that his father bestowed upon him as a small child. Austria is unable to do anything as their empire collapses because of revolutionaries and Hungary breaks away thanks to the loss of Lombardy Venetia and the government being unable to maintain order. In Itlay Napoleon strikes a deal with the pope like his father has and the Bourbons fearing Napoleon try to declare war on him. This causes the French to mutiny and then Napoleon swoops in and restores the French Empire and is seen as a man restoring order to the chaotic world. He makes Napoleon III his new viceroy in Italy, and Napoleon II rules and consolidates control over France. Once his rule is secure, he goes on a conquering spree like his father, but his conquests last because his geopolitical opponents are too disorganized to resist. Britain is meanwhile recoiling in horror but has no real continental allies in Europe and is forced to recongnize Napoleon II especially with their economy taking a hit thanks to Europe collapsing in 1848.
 
Top