The Anti-Habsburg TL

[Justin Pickard]

- At the bequest of Louis IV, Pope *Adrian VI passes a Papal Bull in 1326, which enshrines a fixed college of three ecclesiastical, one metroplitan, and five hereditary lay electors. From this point, a majority vote by the electors automatically confers the kingship of Germany. The territories of the hereditary electors are indivisible, while the elections themselves are changed to proceed more like the conclaves of the Church.

The nine electors are, for the time being:

- King of Bohemia (and Poland)
- Count Palatine of the Rhine (held by the Duke of Bavaria from 1340)
- Count of Burgundy (King of France, 1332-1364)
- Duke of Saxe-Lauenburg (as legitimate Saxon sucessor-state)
- Margrave of Brandenburg

- Burghermaster of Lübeck (de facto representative of the Hanseatic League)

- Archbishop of Köln
- Archbishop of Mainz
- Archbishop of Trier

Whoops. No Hanseatic League yet. This should read:

- At the bequest of Louis IV, Pope *Adrian VI passes a Papal Bull in 1326, which enshrines a fixed college of three ecclesiastical and four hereditary lay electors. From this point, a majority vote by the electors automatically confers the kingship of Germany. The territories of the hereditary electors are indivisible, while the elections themselves are changed to proceed more like the conclaves of the Church.

The seven electors are, for the time being:

- King of Bohemia (and Poland)
- Count Palatine of the Rhine (held by the Duke of Bavaria from 1340)
- Duke of Saxe-Lauenburg (as legitimate Saxon sucessor-state)
- Margrave of Brandenburg

- Archbishop of Köln
- Archbishop of Mainz
- Archbishop of Trier

I'm intending that the Grand Burghermaster of Lübeck should eventually become an elector, as the de facto representative of the Hanseatic League, from the late 1350s. At the moment, however, not so much.

- Following its official formation in 1357-1358, the Hanseatic League concludes a series of treaties (1359, 1362,1363) with the HRE, in which the Empire imposes a flat tax of Hanseatic trade. In exchange for these taxation rights, the HRE affords the Hansa both an insurance of their independence by Imperial forces and their own elector-prince in the shape of the life-elect Grand Burghermaster of Lübeck. This is by way of being an attempt on the HRE's part to seek an integratation of the Hanseatic League into the Empire; whilst the financial costs would ultimately prove somewhat destabilizing for the League, this strategy did give the Hansa a stake in the Empire and a say in its governance.

Iin TTL, the various Holy Roman Emperors never fully oppose the city leagues (Städtebünde), instead they come to rely on revenues from their levies and taxes to fill the Empire's coffers. As such, the cities will become increasingly influential as they are granted greater autonomy. The cost of this will be a financial one.

 

[SteveW]

When you integrate parts of Holland into the HRE, will the lower bits (i.e. Limburg) come under the sway of the Prince-Bishops of Liege, as some did in OTL? If that happened, and Liege became an expanded principality,
a) Walloon might survive as a dominant language -the Prince Bishops of Liege were oddly quite keen on more liberal ideas and (obviously far later) the Enlightenment.

b) maybe the Prince-Bishops would be elevated to Elector status?

 

[Justin Pickard]

When you integrate parts of Holland into the HRE, will the lower bits (i.e. Limburg) come under the sway of the Prince-Bishops of Liege, as some did in OTL? If that happened, and Liege became an expanded principality,
a) Walloon might survive as a dominant language -the Prince Bishops of Liege were oddly quite keen on more liberal ideas and (obviously far later) the Enlightenment.

b) maybe the Prince-Bishops would be elevated to Elector status?

Flanders is going to be an angry French province. Zeeland is going to be something along the line of Flanders-in-exile. Some of Holland is going to become direct Imperial territories, some of it will undoubtedly become part of the Hanseatic League, and - yes - I would imagine that some of it will fall to the Prince-Bishops of Liege.

In Liege, divergences will probably be evident fairly early on. With Flanders falling to the French, Liege will be far more willing to co-operate with the HRE, perhaps getting Limburg and associated territories in exchange for loyalty to the Emperor (UnEmperor?).

What effects would the survival of the Walloon language have? Could it have been spread by the Hansa as part of a series of trading dialects?

 

[benedict XVII]

Flanders is going to be an angry French province. Zeeland is going to be something along the line of Flanders-in-exile. Some of Holland is going to become direct Imperial territories, some of it will undoubtedly become part of the Hanseatic League, and - yes - I would imagine that some of it will fall to the Prince-Bishops of Liege.

In Liege, divergences will probably be evident fairly early on. With Flanders falling to the French, Liege will be far more willing to co-operate with the HRE, perhaps getting Limburg and associated territories in exchange for loyalty to the Emperor (UnEmperor?).

What effects would the survival of the Walloon language have? Could it have been spread by the Hansa as part of a series of trading dialects?

Flemish (or rather Diets) was already the language of a third of the Principality of Liège OTL, all the main acts were translated into Diets, and the Prince-Bishop swore his oath in French, Walloon and Diets.

The real prize for the Prince-Bishops would have been to seize Brabant, then you really have a super-power, controlling even Antwerp. That would of course definitely tilt the language balance towards Diets.

Walloon survived well into the 19th century OTL. Only compulsory education did away with it. I can see Walloon play a role in Mosan-Rhinish trade, but not much beyond. It's not like you have many Walloon sailors...

 

[SteveW]

. It's not like you have many Walloon sailors...

That might well be the funniest thing I've heard all day.

Walloon, according to what I've read, survived into the 20th Century- I know the odd person here who can speak it. A surviving, strong Walloon language (not one described as a dialect under the Ordinance of Villiers-Coterets) would form another language block which might act as a cultural buffer between France and Dutch/ Flemish.

 

[SteveW]

@ Justin: to boot, Liege was becoming slightly democratic (amazing at that period in time). If Burgundy keeps out of the way in your TL (maybe if Liege does keep some ties to the HRE), then that's an interesting social development in the region.

A medieval, Walloon-speaking democracy!

 

[Justin Pickard]

The real prize for the Prince-Bishops would have been to seize Brabant, then you really have a super-power, controlling even Antwerp. That would of course definitely tilt the language balance towards Diets.

The best way I can imagine for this to happen is with no Blijde Inkomst, so that - upon the death of John III, Duke of Brabant with no male heirs - the Duchy of Brabant decends into anarchy, with several factions vying for control. The French threaten an invasion in an attempt to encircle Flemish Zeeland. Then we could have a Liege-Brabant mutual defense union thingummy, which eventually becomes political and permanent...? Anyone got any better ideas

@ Justin: to boot, Liege was becoming slightly democratic (amazing at that period in time). If Burgundy keeps out of the way in your TL (maybe if Liege does keep some ties to the HRE), then that's an interesting social development in the region.

I can definitely see Liege as having strong ties to the HRE, perhaps even as a member state. Having siezed the French throne in 1332, the Dukes of Burgundy will be driven back by Charles II of Navarre in the early 1360s of TTL. Charles will probably annex a fair chunk of Burgundy to the French nation following his sucesses in 1362. So, yes - some form of limited oligarchic democracy does look quite likely...interesting...

 

[Gladi]

Bright day
So how is the east shaping up? Only thing we lately heard so far was Przemyslid polish conquest(adventure?).

 

[Justin Pickard]

Bright day
So how is the east shaping up? Only thing we lately heard so far was Przemyslid polish conquest(adventure?).

I haven't really worked out all that much about the East so far. My plan is to have a Kingdom of Bohemia-Poland under the Premyslids in an arrangement where the Bohemian half is still part of the HRE. Poland's going to keep hold of a Baltic coast.

With no Poland-Lithuania in TTL, I think that Lithuania will probably go Orthodox, and might become one of several "European" kingdoms/principalities in Rus', with Muscovy remaining relatively small, and Novgorod given a boost by Hanseatic ascendency...

Hungary is still in union with Provence and Naples, for some bizarre reason.

 

[Justin Pickard]

The Last Pope:

- The death of Pope Constantine II from the Black Death in 1348 leads to far more optimism and sympathy for a church, which endures without a figurehead. ‘The Great Interregum’ (1348-1373) allows a concilliar faction gain increasing influence. Without an incumbant pope, no new cardinals are appointed and, as the concilliarists come to dominate the ever-shrinking college of cardinals, the prospect of church reform begins to recieve much in the way of popular support. In 1373, with no replacement of older cardinals, these concilliarists finally form a majority. They call an unexpected papal election, where one of their own [who is he?] is elected to the papacy with the explicit goal of initiating church restructuring and reform “from within”. This is the last Pope who, following the necessary reforms in 1373-1375, willingly abdicates the position.

Could a concilliar church really work without a pope? Is this too soon? What do you guys think?

 

[SteveW]

It could, I think. BUT if you add it to your TL, there might well also be several people declaring themselves anti-Popes, in the strangest places.

 

[Justin Pickard]

It could, I think. BUT if you add it to your TL, there might well also be several people declaring themselves anti-Popes, in the strangest places.

Yes. I suppose that, for the moment, my main concern is how the Orthodox Church would respond. Could prove...uh...interesting to say the least.

Perhaps I should have the last pope happen later though. What would it be like if there is no incumbant to crown the Emperor, create cardinals, saints etc. etc. What do you guys reckon would happen? I haven't really thought through *all* of the ramifications of a truly 'Great Interregnum' yet.

Any suggestions as to likely places for anti-Popes to emerge? I think there'll probably be one in Castile/Aragon/Majorca, perhaps one in England/Scotland/Gwynedd, one from the grass roots in Bohemia/Poland, and another somewhere in Scandinavia. The princes of the Holy Roman Empire itself will probably be happy to remain loyal to the Synod of Rome (concilliar body suceeding the papacy). Possibly something else involving the Guelphs and Ghiblines. Is that a Holy War I see on the horizon?

In TTL, it would seem that the reformation is likely to be a hell of a lot weirder.

 

[SteveW]

Not sure about England, but you could maybe have a King or Prince somewhere declare his local Archbishop to be the true Pope! Now that would be fun!

 

[Justin Pickard]

What might be interesting would be to have conciliarism gradually permeate through the church during the 'Grand Interregnum', as the older (and presumably more conservative) cardinals perish through old age. Ultimately, there would only be a few of the younger cardinals left, in which the conciliarists form a majority and would be able - essentially - to elect whoever they want to the papacy. Including, for example, a moderniser, who is able to initiate reforms from within. This pope (*John XXII) circulates a major Papal Bull which makes it very difficult for a successor to be elected (say, by making it so that any potential papal candidate would need to fulfil several specific requirements), and that a council, the 'Synod of Rome', should govern the church in an interregnum.

This move will appease the reformists without totally alientating the traditionalists. As far as the peasants are concerned, an (initially) more egalitarian and conciliar church is not much different to a church headed by the pope. It makes it seem slightly more remote, yes, but is that such a bad thing? And, unlike the old church, it's not going around killing people for heresy (yet).

-----

Problem #1: Without the Pope, there is no way to legitimate the rule of the Holy Roman Emperor. Unless something changes, all subsequent Emperors won't actually be Emperors, just Kings of Germany/the Romans.

Solution: At some point in the early 15thC, a reactionary King of Germany calls an ecumenical council in which he decries the activities of the 'Synod of Rome' and - with the aid of several dissenting conservative archbishops - holds a papal (or patriarchal?) election in Germany, fixing it so that one of the archbishop-electors is...uh...elected. He refuses to aknowledge the papacy of *John XXII, and this, as far as he is concerned, will be the only legitimate successor to Constantine II. The HRE is now lumbered with its own pope, which no subsequent Emperor can undo. Also, slightly strangely, the pope is an elector of the HRE. I might have the papal role become tied to one of the German archbishoprics as an additional responsibility. But which one?

- Archbishop of Köln
- Archbishop of Mainz
- Archbishop of Trier

And who would appoint the archbishops? My head is starting to hurt a bit...

EDIT: C/O Catholic Encyclopedia, I have an answer...

The vacancy of an archiepiscopal see is filled in the same manner as that of an ordinary bishopric, whether it be by an election properly so called, or by a presentation or nomination, or by direct papal appointment. If the new archbishop be a priest, he will receive episcopal consecration; if already a bishop, he will be solemnly installed in the new office. But it is neither the consecration nor the installation which makes the archbishop. It is his appointment to an archdiocese.

Hmmm...

-----

Problem #2: In TTL, the political territory of the Papal States + Sicily + Some Other Italian Territory were transformed, by Papal Bull in 1339, into the Holy Republic of Rome, under the nominal leadership of a Grand Council, but the de facto temporal leadership of the Pope.

Solution: Without the Pope, the 'Synod of Rome' undermines the temporal authority structure, gradually coming to fill the role of both the de facto and the de jure authority in the Holy Republic. Behold: A European Theocratic Republic!

 

[SteveW]

But which one?

- Archbishop of Köln
- Archbishop of Mainz
- Archbishop of Trier

Hmmm...I would go for Cologne. Though of course you could go one further and give it to Liege

Great TL and ideas btw, really enjoying it.

 

[Justin Pickard]

Hmmm...I would go for Cologne. Though of course you could go one further and give it to Liege

I think I might keep it non-official, and just have it as a convention that it is held by one of the eclesiastical electors. Which means that we might have an arrangement whereby the Pope could refuse to legitimate an Emperor who he himself voted against, whilst an Emperor could attempt to swing or otherwise influence the papal election through his own non-official channels. A kind of bizarre cycle of power and legitimation seems to be emerging.

I think that the conciliar Roman Church might implode at some point in the fifteenth century (or at the very least, be marginalised by the Germanic pope). Perhaps the Empire might try to absorb some of the Italian city states in a more pro-active and comprehensive way.

I think that the Archbishop of Liege will probably be made an elector at roughly the same time as the Grand Burghermaster of Lubeck, in order to keep the number of electors odd and ensure a majority can always be reached.

Great TL and ideas btw, really enjoying it.

Thank you very much. Your input is proving very useful.

 

[Justin Pickard]

Right, currently working on a map of Europe in 1400 in the hope that it will allow me to work backwards and flesh out the 14th Century a bit more effectively. In the meantime, here are some ideas for the late 14th and 15th centuries for your consideration:

- In ‘the Grand Interregnum’, the conflict between Guelphs and Ghibellines is exacerbated by religious uncertainty. Far more successful *Revolt of the Ciompi in Florence? Pseudo-egalitarian Florentine peasant republic?
- Spread of Peasant Revolts (a la OTL 1848?)
- ‘Time of Troubles’ in England
- Gwynedd's declaration of independence
- Survival of the Teutonic Knights in the Baltic
- Survival of Friesland as a Frisian-speaking state within the HRE
- Emergence of a Spanish Anti-Pope
- Emergence of a Scandinavian Anti-Pope [perhaps they go Orthodox?]
- Effects/butterflies stemming from the absense of a 100 Years War?
- Growth of grass-roots Communalism within the HRE
- Consolidation of the Hanseatic League
- Growth of ‘City Leagues’ within the HRE
- Consolidation of Bohemia-Poland
- The Ottomans vs. ‘Fortress Europe’
- The [Russian] Orthodox Reformation
- The Rise of Novgorod [Novgorod-Lithuania vs. Muscovy?]
- Italian banking dynasties slowly become Proto-Corporations?
- ‘Light Towers’ (optical telegraphy meets lighthouses) and primititve [Ramon Lull-esque] Mechanical Computing
- The Printing Press, similar to OTL but occurs at a different place/date - perhaps initially used for a different purpose?
- Several gunpowder accidents?
- *Wars of the Roses analogue – Stafford and Plantagenet dynasties battling for control of the English throne.
- Bavarian, Bohemian and Luxembourg dynasties battling it out for control of the German throne.
- No Spanish Unification = prolonged Reconquista? Granada survives as Ottoman Ally?
- *Columbus?
- *Leonardo Da Vinci?

 

[Diamond]

Finally got a chance to read this. Very well thought-out TL and clear writing (which is even more important!).

I look forward to seeing more.

 

[Max Sinister]

- In ‘the Grand Interregnum’, the conflict between Guelphs and Ghibellines is exacerbated by religious uncertainty. Far more successful *Revolt of the Ciompi in Florence? Pseudo-egalitarian Florentine peasant republic?
- Spread of Peasant Revolts (a la OTL 1848?)

1. The Ciompi were wool weavers (the source of Northern Italy's wealth!), so it'd be more artisans or workers.
2. Peasant Revolts would be more like the Jaquerie in France or the Peasant Wars in Germany (at Luther's time).

 

[benedict XVII]

Hmmm...I would go for Cologne. Though of course you could go one further and give it to Liege

Great TL and ideas btw, really enjoying it.

Trier has precedence, being the oldest bishopric in Germany.