What if the Hungarians adopted Orthodox Christianity instead of Catholic Christianity (technically, they'd be adopting Greek Rite Chalcedonianism as this is presumably pre-1054, but still)? What would a Hungary which adopted Orthodox instead of Catholic Christianity look like? How would an Orthodox Hungary affect its neighbors?
WI: Orthodox Hungary
- Thread starter Whiteshore
- Start date
Koprulu Mustafa Pasha
Gone Fishin'
Pfff... I guess like the Bulgar State. Or just like now but without the Catholics I guess.
Maybe without Croatia.
Koprulu Mustafa Pasha
Gone Fishin'
Possibly as a Friend. It is by no means a threat to Constantinople like it was with the Bulgarians. You might even see a triangle of marriage alliances: Kievan Rus, Hungary, East Roman Empire.
Ofcourse there would be marriage ties with the Catholics as well.
I think the Kingdom of Hungary adopting Orthodoxy wholesale is a bit too late. You need to make a change rather early, due to the fact that the early Hungarian state built on the existing church infrastructure that was already in place when they arrived. Church infrastructure that was inherited from the recent two, two and half centuries before the founding of the kingdom.
As already noted, the schism in the church happens in 1054, and the kingdom is established for half a century by that point (from 1000 AD onwards). Those developments sort of pass each other by, further complicating matters. I think you need to go before the existence of the kingdom, back to the OTL roots of church infrastructure and adoption of Christianity in central Europe as a whole, to really get a good idea on how to build a predominantly-Orthodox ATL outcome.
The Kingdom of Hungary inherited a substantial part of its future churchly infrastructure from the days of Great Moravia. Though there is a century between the small empire (a principality) and the kingdom, the various churches, clerical staff and monks survived the disintegration of the old empire. Previously, when the empire adopted Christianity officially in the early 9th century (830s), there was a bit of a tug-of-war between missionaries and church officials of the Latin tradition and those of the future Orthodox tradition.
There were handfuls of Frankish missionaries in GM before, representing the Latin tradition, while Cyril and Methodius were Byzantine missionaries who represented the eastern tradition, the future Orthodox. There was still cooperation between them and Rome, with the pope no less, but it is hard to deny the ongoing tension in GM between the two traditions. The empire was sort of pivoting both ways, but when Christianity was adopted, it was leaning more pro-Byzantine at that time (while still wanting good relations with the Franks). The prince that followed the one who invited Byzantine missionaries, brought somewhat of an end to that tension. He reoriented the country in a more pro-Latin, and consequently more pro-Rome and pro-Frankish direction, while still doing independent politics and some territorial expansion of the realm.
GM bit the dust by the end of the 9th century, but local warlords and noblemen preserved the church infrastructure within the scope of their fiefdoms and kept it going. These successor noblemen (e.g. Hunt and Poznan) later merged with the beginnings of the Hungarian state, as vassals of its princely and later royal family. The Hungarian state inherited the church infrastructure via these guys. Churches and even a few monasteries didn't vanish with the empire, they kept chugging on. No doubt the officials in Rome or those in the bishoprics of neighbouring early German states had an interest for Christianity to continue in the whole area, business as usual.
Finally, in today's western Hungary, there was substantial Slavic settlement in the early medieval period, even though the people there never formed a bigger polity of their own. They later became allies of the east Franks and some were a bit closer to them, as they didn't have the same degree of political and military independence as the Slavs in the Great Moravian monarchy to the north. These areas in western Hungary had adopted Christianity too, but they and their church infrastructure always seemed to be pro-Latin (and pro-Frankish) in orientation. One of the more powerful local noblemen was prince Pribina, exiled from GM during the formation of that state. (His original principality was annexed and his line was overthrown.) He was already a Christian at the time of the move to his southward exile, and while still on the throne, he promoted a pro-Latin course for the beginnings of the church in what would become GM. While in exile in the western Hungarian areas, him and his heirs (Koceľ, etc.) built a fair amount of new secular and church infrastructure in the region, during the course of the 9th and 10th centuries. Eventually, said region was incorporated into the fledgling kingdom of Hungary.
As you can see, there is a definite orientation towards the Latin tradition of the Church (what would eventually become Roman Catholicism by the later Middle Ages) in the early history of Hungary. This is mainly because most local supporters of the church and the creation of church infrastructure leaned towards Rome in their religious and political orientation, even early on in the history of the adoption of Christianity in central Europe. This was a trend throughout the whole 9th and 10th century. The pro-"Orthodox" leaning in central Europe by a West Slavic ruler was a rather short-lived experiment. It only lasted during his reign, for a few years, with a pair of renowned missionaries. However, even that wasn't done out of some fondness for the Byzantine way of doing things. It was done out of political expediency. That particular prince, while getting on with the Franks, wanted to build stronger ties with the Byzantine emperor. So, as a gesture of diplomatic good will, he asked him to send him some missionaries from the Byzantine Empire. The emperor accordingly sent his two men from Thessaloniki (Salonica), who also started developing a writing script (an ancestor of later Cyrillic), on order to ensure the Byzantine Empire would have a cultural influence on the would-be West Slavic ally neighbouring the Franks. Ultimately, neither the Byzantine church influence, or the script influence provided by the missionary duo, would last. The very next GM prince alone would ensure a more pro-Latin/pro-Frankish direction.
And this brings me to Hungary. The best way to ensure a predominantly Orthodox or all-Orthodox Hungary, is to have all of the adoption of Christianity and church infrastructure in early medieval central Europe take place under the aegis of a pro-Byzantine direction. Easier said than done, given the proximity of the East Franks, and their political and economic influence. Franks and Byzantines were the two European "superpowers" of the time, as the main heirs of Roman antiquity, and their influence on smaller polities developed accordingly. The Franks are next door to the West Slavs and their early states and the territory of future Hungary. The Byzantines are, comparatively, quite far away. Even with central European rulers adopting the Byzantine flavour of Christianity and completely excising the Latin rite and tradition (somehow), the fact of the matter is that buddying up with the Byzantines is prohibitive in terms of logistics.
Ironically, in OTL, Hungary under the Árpád dynasty still sought good relations with the Byzantines (even some royal marriages), but that was for different reasons. Orthodox-esque cultural elements of Christianity didn't vanish in the early centuries of the Hungarian state. But they were always a minor thing and partly a result of some past heritage, or appeared because of the influence of eastern neighbours who had adopted Orthodoxy. Turning towards the Byzantines for more than political/diplomatic reasons, turning towards them for reasons of religious reorientation of the state, would be difficult in later centuries. And I do mean difficult. If you have, say, two centuries of building the domestic church on the basis of a Latin orientation and an orientation towards Rome, it isn't plausible to just throw all of that out and make Hungary Orthodox, just because some ruler of the Árpád dynasty decides so. A later Orthodox reorientation gets even more difficult in later centuries, and especially after the extinction of the Árpád dynasty. 14th and 15th century Hungarian dynasties didn't really care that much for political ties with Rhomaion anymore, especially in light of its gradual diminishment at the hands of the crusaders in the Fourth Crusade and then the Ottoman Turks.
Also, have a look at this older thread, it discussed the same topic.
Last edited:
The problem with your assesment is that you place entirely too much weight on pre existing structures. The Carpathian basin was pretty scarcly populated and that the majority became ater hungarian/magyar. And in regards of existing chruch infrastructure: after a pagan revolt - in 1056 I think - we have written source that states that there was but 3 bishops left in the whole country. If a pagan revolt nearly destroyed a chruch infrastructure that was activly supported by the state for 60 years indicates that there wasnt much of an infrastructure to begin with, certainly not in a manner that it couldnt be displaced if the political will existed.
My point is that instead of focusing on the population in place who had no political weight whatsoever we should concentrate on the people who basically decided this question: the tribal leaders of pagan Hungary.
Its important to understand that we have very scarce information. However according to Gyula Kristó, the hungarian nomad state actually fell apart to tribal states after the settlement of the carpathian basin. More than one of the tribal leaders is known to have been christened by the orthodox church. Gyula from Transylvania for sure, most likely Ajtony and Bulcsú as well. The state was later unified by Stephen I of the Árpád dynasty who went on to become the first christian king of Hungary. However during the unification of the country several of his enemies were at least in name orthodox christians.
Best POD would be IMO Bulcsú, who was the strongest tribal leader in the mid X century and was christened in 948 in Constatinople. If it was him instead of the Árpáds who unified Hungary it would be most likely an Orthodox Hungary.
What would be major differences between Orthodox Hungary and Catholic Hungary, anyways?
Hello.
Sorry if I came across as banging the "pre-existing church infrastructure and developments will determine the faith of medieval Hungary" drum a bit too loudly.
I was just pointing out that it had plenty of influence in OTL, though the influence wasn't entirely absolute, of course.I concede that, at the latest, things could have been changed substantially during Stephen I's rule. That's, IMHO, the last period that offers favourable enough conditions to a large-scale paradigm shift in what specific church/branch of Christianity Hungary will adhere to. But go beyond Stephen's time, 50 or 100 years later, and it becomes increasingly difficult to switch to a pro-Orthodox path from a more pro-Latin path.
How would the self identifying Magyar nation identify later on ? How would they think of pan-slavism and neighboring slavic nations ? Would there be some kind of romantic-patriotic brotherhood feeling in 19th Century nationalistic era ? What would they Hungarian nationalist think about South Slav statehood for example or Russia ? Not sure their relationship regarding Romania.
Given that Serbia became a majority-Orthodox nation, a majority-Orthodox Hungary (and the nations that later separate from it, if they ever separate in some equivalent of post-19th century nationalisms) could have interesting implications for relations with Serbia. Or with the Romania lands, given that Orthodoxy is also very traditional there. Maybe there'd be some loose kinship between the various countries, based on their affiliation to Orthodox Christianity.