Why must France alway die in Rhoman Survival TLs?

Philip Augustus dies in The Eagle of the Bosphorus, but so does King John, which butterflies away the Magna Carta and Parliamentarism as we know it.

@Shevek23 Quite frankly, calling someone a reactionary is like calling someone a racist, particularly as many OTL reactionaries were racists.
 
Philip Augustus dies in The Eagle of the Bosphorus, but so does King John, which butterflies away the Magna Carta and Parliamentarism as we know it.

@Shevek23 Quite frankly, calling someone a reactionary is like calling someone a racist, particularly as many OTL reactionaries were racists.

Yay, someone mentioned my timeline in a discussion! :D

Some thoughts:
France dies in my timeline because as best as I can tell, Philip is why France as the secure state the people defending it are pointing to. (This is drawn from the translation of a French author's work on the Capet dynasty).

Certainly the Capets before that were nothing to take lightly, but they weren't exactly masters of France.

Yet.

The Eagle of the Bosporus is exploring how the world would look if some states that failed OTL (Byzantium primarily, but also the HRE, Poland - yes, I did just say both Poland and Das Deutchblobben*...) did well, and other areas...not so much.

France OTL was one of the winners. There's not a whole lot to explore about "So what if things went differently?" in regards to things making it or not on the success end.

But there is a lot to explore about how a France that never forms like OTL's France would look.

This being said, I'd personally rather read a story of France successful than France being absorbed by Germany or England and forgotten.

At worst, France will be like Poland, in the sense of breaking apart, being under the thumb of a stronger power, but returning.

Oops, was that a spoiler? :(

Barring a POD too early to have "France" as we know it at all.

And...that's all I can think to say at the moment. Except this:

The world would be a poorer place without France.

* Pardon my crummy German.
 
Yeah, Philip Augustus deserves that name more than his Roman counterpart, IMO.

I don't know if he deserves it more, but I've become convinced he was the kind of Great Man you need when we look at "Well, with exceptional leadership, such and such a place MIGHT be able to deal with its problems."

The HRE didn't get such a figure, for instance. England managed to avoid ever being that divided (by the point there was only one kingdom of England, those issues had been beaten down in the process of uniting the petty kingdoms).

And quite frankly, the more I learn about the Angevins, the more I root for the Capets. Philip and his heirs deserved to succeed as well as they did.

But I digress.
 
I don't know if he deserves it more, but I've become convinced he was the kind of Great Man you need when we look at "Well, with exceptional leadership, such and such a place MIGHT be able to deal with its problems."

The HRE didn't get such a figure, for instance. England managed to avoid ever being that divided (by the point there was only one kingdom of England, those issues had been beaten down in the process of uniting the petty kingdoms).

And quite frankly, the more I learn about the Angevins, the more I root for the Capets. Philip and his heirs deserved to succeed as well as they did.

But I digress.

I've always thought of making a TL where the Rhomanians and the French are the dominant powers of Europe - not that wasn't improbable, what with Charlemagne and all.
 
I've always thought of making a TL where the Rhomanians and the French are the dominant powers of Europe - not that wasn't improbable, what with Charlemagne and all.

Wonder how that would look. Presumably a lot different than the OTL Franco-Ottoman alliance, and yet some things would probably remain the same.

If you ever write that, I'll probably read it. Unless I decide to take an unannounced absence again. :D

Do you think they'd quarrel over Italy? Byzantium does have a half dozen fronts, picking that one seems unnecessary.
 
Wonder how that would look. Presumably a lot different than the OTL Franco-Ottoman alliance, and yet some things would probably remain the same.

If you ever write that, I'll probably read it. Unless I decide to take an unannounced absence again. :D

Do you think they'd quarrel over Italy? Byzantium does have a half dozen fronts, picking that one seems unnecessary.

Well, as long as the French gently remind the Rhomans that the Pope is their domain...
 
kasumigenx said:
I would actually wanted to see the Byzantines and France as allies..
That could be possible at one point... One of Philip Augustus' sisters, Agnès (also known as Anna after her marriage), was married to two Byzantine Emperors: Alexius II in 1180 and Andronicus I in 1183 when the latter overthrew the former and had him strangled. Her second marriage was also a short one as Andronicus I was killed by a mob two years later...

Maybe if Alexius II isn't overthrown or Andronicus I isn't killed, you could have a Franco-Byzantine alliance. Don't know if that would work well, but that's a possibility.
 
Err...It basically what happened during the reign of Philip the Fair : after Agniani coup, the papacy was a toy in his hands.

So have something like that in in For France AND Byzantium (or whatever SavoyTruffle comes up with). :D

What I meant was, havea this without the Pope being moved. Having West Francia include "the Kingdom of Italy" to start, perhaps.
 
Top