Q: Could a surviving Frankish Empire become a sort of 'European China'?

Given the following premises:

- The post-Charlemagne Frankish Empire does not disintegrate and finds the way to become a relatively united entity, skipping the Frankish laws about partitions among the heirs.

- This entity becomes involved in the Reconquista and the invasions of England, so both Spain (including Portugal) and England become, if not directly integrated, vassal or peripheral entities.

In this scenario, there is not much room for the trigger of the Age of Exploration, as there are no clear motivations for that, and no competition between nations like Portugal, Spain, France and England, as all of them remain under the same sphere.

So question is: could this lead to an alternate scenario where Europeans are not interested in trans-oceanic explorations, thus prioritizing their own domestic affaires in a similar way that China did in Asia? Maybe the alternate Exploration would be mostly carried by 'private' companies of merchants without support of their rulers?
 
I'm not sure the Franks have the manpower or military capabilities to subdue ALL of Europe the way the Chin Empire did, and we also have to remember that both the Qin and Han embarked on generations long campaigns to wipe out the individual identities of the peoples that would become Han Chinese. Could the Franks do the same? There are rival powers near as great if not greater in the Byzantines and Ummayads. Final opinion; No, not without somehow taking over all of Espana and installing Agnostic Primogeniture somehow.
 
- The post-Charlemagne Frankish Empire does not disintegrate and finds the way to become a relatively united entity, skipping the Frankish laws about partitions among the heirs.
It will goes trough a long enough period of crisis, even with an early PoD.
For all the imperial pretentions, Carolingia was more of a weak state than Merovingian Gaul was in several respect. The rise of a landed aristocracy that gathered both landowning and nobiliar benefices was the result of Carolingian take-over of Francia, which passed trough the fidelisation of Frankish nobility trough an early stage of what we call feudality.

Thing is, between climatic changes, the economic and monetary crisis of both Abbasids and Umayyads and the subsequent Scandinavian and Arabo-Berber piracy, and general weariness of a Frankish aristocracy not willing to suicide for the good of Charlemagne's grand-sons' claims; Carolingia won't be able to extend itself much longer. Carolingian expansionism was already a violent way to reestablish Frankish proeminence under its old sphere of influence, and it wasn't that stable (autonomisation of peripheral regions happened really quickly).

It's not to mean that you couldn't keep more of Carolingia than IOTL : I think the best system would be to go toward a more or less supple dynastic system that could include not only direct Carolingians under the dominance (real, limited or technical) of one Frankish king, but also semi-Carolingians tied up by matrimonial links like Bosonids or the house of Wessex, whom realms would form a broad ensemble maybe up to form something short of a confederation.
The best chance for this would probably be in late 800's and to keep the original split of Charlemagne's demesne between Aquitaine, Italy and Francia alive.

Note that these splits didn't obeyed laws, but were more customs from Late Antiquity : that said, at the difference of Merovingian split of kingship (which didn't separated fiscus and was akin to Late Roman practices with the imperium), Carolingian splits tended to form rather separated bodies.


- This entity becomes involved in the Reconquista and the invasions of England, so both Spain (including Portugal) and England become, if not directly integrated, vassal or peripheral entities.
The Carolingian dynastic ensemble described above might be a good path, then. I doubt it would lead to a Reconquista comparable to IOTL, and probably something more slow and incomplete compared to it.

and no competition between nations like Portugal, Spain, France and England, as all of them remain under the same sphere.
I highly doubt it would be maintainable : Francia was rather weak structurally at this point, not in small part due to strong regional and regionalist aristocracies that backed up for their realm autonomy and own kingship. You'd need some luck maintaining an united Francia as a fiction already.
 
I'm not sure the Franks have the manpower or military capabilities to subdue ALL of Europe
Probably not : at this point Carolingian army, even as one body, already had trouble managing two campaigns in the borders of the empire due to the management of the army (which heavily relied on mobile forces led by the emperor or trusted man).

There are rival powers near as great if not greater in the Byzantines and Ummayads.
Neither were in good shape in the late IXth and Xth, that said, especially al-Andalusian Umayyads. The problem is that Carolingians weren't either for the same reasons.

Final opinion; No, not without somehow taking over all of Espana and installing Agnostic Primogeniture somehow.
It's not like successions laws à la CKII were actually a thing : they're useful as historiographical models, but weren't historical concepts. Split of kingship in Early Medieval Europe answered to various needs and influence (from Late Roman practices to the need of ensuring defenses to other fronts, with the pressing claims of possible successors), and without a strong structuration of these states (which implies if ot bureaucracy, at least strong hegemony) it would be let to situational outcomes IMO.
 
I'm not sure the Franks have the manpower or military capabilities to subdue ALL of Europe the way the Chin Empire did, and we also have to remember that both the Qin and Han embarked on generations long campaigns to wipe out the individual identities of the peoples that would become Han Chinese. Could the Franks do the same? There are rival powers near as great if not greater in the Byzantines and Ummayads. Final opinion; No, not without somehow taking over all of Espana and installing Agnostic Primogeniture somehow.

This has not to be made in the same way of the Chinese. I am not talking about Charlemagne's heirs campaigning in Spain against the Saracens: just support the local entities (first Kings of Asturias declared themselves vassals of Charlemagne, even if only in name) to do a quicker Reconquista and keep these resulting Hispanic entities under your umbrella, like IOTL Bohemia or Croatia at early 800s.

I think it is more to keep a somehow united core (France/Germany/Alps/North Italy) with lot of peripherals, rather than a huge and bureaucratically unified Empire, not realistic for the Europe of that time.
 
This has not to be made in the same way of the Chinese. I am not talking about Charlemagne's heirs campaigning in Spain against the Saracens: just support the local entities (first Kings of Asturias declared themselves vassals of Charlemagne, even if only in name) to do a quicker Reconquista and keep these resulting Hispanic entities under your umbrella, like IOTL Bohemia or Croatia at early 800s.

I think it is more to keep a somehow united core (France/Germany/Alps/North Italy) with lot of peripherals, rather than a huge and bureaucratically unified Empire, not realistic for the Europe of that time.
Certainly if they had kept all of France and Germany as a united core they would have become the cultural hegemon of Europe much as Tang China was to its neighbors, and eventually yes, I think it could have gained nominal vassalage of kings such as the petty anglo-saxons kingdoms.
 
The best way to get around the problem of division without turning it into an eternal problem of civil war is to be continually expansionist and have the younger sons given the new lands to rule. If their line fails, you can either incorporate that realm into the main empire, or farm it out to a next-generation lesser heir.
 
This has not to be made in the same way of the Chinese. I am not talking about Charlemagne's heirs campaigning in Spain against the Saracens: just support the local entities (first Kings of Asturias declared themselves vassals of Charlemagne, even if only in name) to do a quicker Reconquista and keep these resulting Hispanic entities under your umbrella, like IOTL Bohemia or Croatia at early 800s.
Then, we might need to have a PoD in the first campaign in Spain. Nothing that would remotely look like a reconquista I agree, but I could still see, a partial conquest of vassalisation of Ebre's basin by Carolingians.
We know that, in 765 and 768, Franks and Abassids exchanged ambassies at the initiative of Peppin III. Would he have lived a bit more, you could have seen earlier Carolingian expeditions in Pyrenean Iberian peninsula, comparable to what Charlemagne and his son eventually pulled out : it would be as much territories being possibly used as a stepstone for later campaigns.

A future equivalent to Paderborn's embassy could as well ensure more Abassid's support (remember that Abbassids were able to pull two, while unsuccessful, expeditions and revolts in al-Andalus including Abd al-Rahman ibn Habid al-Siqlabi's revolt that was likely made in cunjunction with Paderborn's embassy) or at least a more efficient one with the support of part of Ebre's Arab nobles.
It could then lead to a support and possible clientelisation of north-western andalusian polities with the conquest of key positions north of Ebre, at least until the revolt was crushed.

The main problem is that these same Arabo-Andalusian lords weren't exactly thrilled at the prospect being clientelised and possibly threatened by closer Franks, especially when they suffered recent and regular defeats against them.
Basically, you'd need a more successful pro-Abbasid revolt in al-Andalus, to make these nobles more solid when it come to the Abbasid-Carolingian alliance in Spain.
If it fails, or if Arab nobles eventually refuse Frankish presence as IOTL, you'd have at best a superficial conquest of transpyrenean highlands as IOTL, bonus or minus some places.

I couldn't say exactly which places would be taken by Franks in this expeditions, but I think it could give something like this as a maximal range (on left, with IOTL situation for early 814 on right). Not immediately, but over different expeditions, swalloing up of submitted Islamic principalities, etc. in 810's/820's.

ZPFalMd.png


Basically, an extension over most of Pyrenean highlands, with

- Gasconia ulterior (south of Pyrenees) being more importantly developed (which may make the big Basque revolt less successful IOTL)
- Marca Hispanica/Tolosana being slightly reduced, but expanding up to Ebre
- Asturias acknowledging a relatively formal Frankish overlordship, while expanding more quickly in the same direction than IOTL (roughly the situation in late IXth)
- al-Andalus, either pro-Abbasid or not being more likely fragmented outside core areas into principalties (keeping in mind that whoever is in charge would have a relatively easy time not only ensuring overlordship but increasing his power over time) possibly with earlier concession to muladi (or Christian princes as in Murcia)

Over time it could mean a lasting Kingdom of Aquitaine, would it be as a sub-kingdom, giving a more important hold in Spain of his nobility (especially Gascon and Tolosan);

I think it is more to keep a somehow united core (France/Germany/Alps/North Italy) with lot of peripherals,.
It's unlikely to keep most of southern European regions as a core : think along the lines of the planned split of 806

Certainly if they had kept all of France and Germany as a united core.
With the rise of landed aristocracy, this is going to be hard to achieve. An unified Carolingian ensemble would be ambitious already, let alone united.

The best way to get around the problem of division without turning it into an eternal problem of civil war is to be continually expansionist
Thing is, outer territories are either too poor to be really attracting, or too powerful (Spain or Byzantium). Not mentioning that inner strifes aren't only caused by redistribution issues (but as well, maybe more, by growing independence of nobility). In several regards, Caronlingians mostly managed to secure the old Frankish sphere of influence, and control it more tightly than during most of Merovingian era : but it was fairly unstable and based on immediate and strong conquest, which couldn't be enforced eternally.

Giving the pressure from Scandinavians, Arabo-Berbers and Maygars at its fringes, the Carolingian ensemble would be lucky enough to keep its marges especially in Eastern and Southern Europe.
 
Given the following premises:

- The post-Charlemagne Frankish Empire does not disintegrate and finds the way to become a relatively united entity, skipping the Frankish laws about partitions among the heirs.

- This entity becomes involved in the Reconquista and the invasions of England, so both Spain (including Portugal) and England become, if not directly integrated, vassal or peripheral entities.

In this scenario, there is not much room for the trigger of the Age of Exploration, as there are no clear motivations for that, and no competition between nations like Portugal, Spain, France and England, as all of them remain under the same sphere.

So question is: could this lead to an alternate scenario where Europeans are not interested in trans-oceanic explorations, thus prioritizing their own domestic affaires in a similar way that China did in Asia? Maybe the alternate Exploration would be mostly carried by 'private' companies of merchants without support of their rulers?
A highly developed core which periodically massively expands prior to retracting back to said core for some reason or another and only coming to rule most of its present land in the 1700s? China was far from being an eternal state, rather it's more like an excellent geographic core region that repeatedly produced states capable of stomping al the surrounding states.

Should Francia survive long enough to develop a definitive core including northern France and western Germany (preferably including some sort of completed Fossa Carolina to facilitate trade and expansion) then it could be kinda like China. The trouble is figuring out the how.

As to how colonization would work, I think it would be dominated by the Church, the existence of a unified Europe won't remove its mission to save souls, so missionaries, monasteries, and abbeys would probably represent the early stage of European exploration and overseas expansion.
 
Top