WI: Attila kills Pope Leo I and attacked Rome?

Not necessarily. Attila was already in no good state when he encountered the pope (Italy isn't good country for cavalry armies at the best of times and he had caught a bad time). The stories about persuasive powers or heavenly apparitions are nice, but hardly convincing. That would mean he'd only do that if the pope manages to insult him badly enough. from what I 've read, Attila took a lot of provocation. That means he's irrational and will attrite his suffering army in Italy (attacking Rome, a purely symbolic target untenable if taken). A decisive Roman victory becomes likely at this point. The City will elect another bishop and Leo likely be canonised as a martyr, and all is well with the world.
 
There are many reason why Atilla didn't sack Rome.
  • Winter was coming so there wasn't much grass for horses and it would be difficult to forage for already dwindling supplies.
  • There was a malaria epidemic going through the Hun camp so they were nowhere near fighting capacity.
  • There wasn't really anything to take in Rome, in Italy, or anywhere else in the Western Roman Empire and Atilla had his sights set on the wealthier Eastern half.
  • Pope Leo, besides being a persuasive speaker (saying that there were several legions waiting in Rome), also brought several coffers of gold along with him.
The Church's story of the Pope and the Saints makes a good story, but the reality is much more practical.
 
Top