stuff to make it easier to read). Butterflies, and more or less short-term ones, being huge, it's more about possible tendencies than really safe bets.
It was discussed a bit
there (allow me to copy some of the post there) : wiking proposed something interesting, having Liudolf's mother surviving and Otto dying before intervening in Italy; making Liutdolf focused on solidifying his control of Germany rather than going South.
Italy
Hugues d'Arles managed IOTL to fought off the worst of the italian feudal anarchy that plagued the peninsula, but it took his power himself from an invasion not too dissimilar to Otto's.
Admittedly, if Lothar of Arles survives and that Ottonians support Bosonids, you may end with a Bosonid Italy which may be slightly stabler but Ottonians would have few reasons to support Bosonids all the time from this point.
In fact, Ottonids could see fit to favour one or the other pretender or regional powers (Bosonids, Old Welfs, Ivreans), in order to prevent a relativly powerful rival on their southern borders to appear (admittedly, we could see a stronger Carolingian or Robertian Francia meddling itself in Provence as they tried to do IOTL): don't forget that Italian kingship is particularly tied to the imperial title. A strong Italian king would certainly be declared such and that would be a threat for Germany, not even considering most of important roads passed trough northern Italy.
While Ottonians could be spared to intervene as deeply they did IOTL (by lack of clear claims) they would still be likely to undergo campaigns more or less regularly. They would indeed be the main dynasty of the Xth and maybe XIth centuries, and would have to intervene there would it be only for their own sake.
This unstability may even be an Ottonian objective : giving that main trade and strategic roads were passing trough Italy, they won't let them to someone else. Having at least North-East Italian nobility under their lead seems likely.
On the other than, Carolingians in Western Francia may have interest to keep links with Burgundy, would it be only to prevent a too great Ottonian influence on France (even if it wouldn't likely counter-balance the PoD's effects).
An Ottonian focus on Italy and Carolingian focus on Burgundy may sounds interesting, but I'm afraid it'd would be too simplistic. Mostly because they are going to deal with more close issues : Carolingians/Robertians with their immediate neighbours; Ottonians with their nobles and clergy.
Eventually, depending on the strength of Carolingian/Robertian France, I could indeed see Ottonians putting a relative or a client in charge of Burgundy or Italy, at least temporarily.
We could see some nobles switching alliegance, and in Burgundy's case being more close to France or Germany depending on the situation. Eventually it's going to be clarified, but I can't really say how in the forseeable future (again, it depends a lot of what happen in France and Italy).
his assumption of the protection of the papacy and subsequent Papal coronation as Emperor of the Romans.
I'm not sure it was as clear as it became in the later Ottonian reigns : IIRC, they took the same titles than Carolingian Emperors "August Emperor", but it should be checked out.
Germany
Italy was really important for several German matters : not only it was where most of roads and trade ways passed trough before entering Germany, but it represented a huge legitimacy necessity for Ottonians :
- Pontifical support, that helped undergo ecclesiastical reforms to have a German church directly tied to Ottonians, rather than great nobles.
(Without this, I don't think nominating Bruno as Duke of Lotharingia would have been entierly possible for instance, or rather be really safe, and more generally Otto's policy to use ecclesiastical power to bound secular principalities as in Franconia and Lotharingia)
- Imperial kingship that would reinforce the sacrality of Ottonians more than any "simple" feudal kingship could have done.
It would have some consequences for what matter Germany, eventually, critically when it comes to how Ottonian strengthened their domination over Germany IOTL.
There's no doubt, however, that Ottonians would still be the leading dynasty of western Europe in the Xth/XIth century.
I could see Liutdolf still having to deal with important principalities (being the main German prince, not the only one), and eventually playing one against the other, rather than a chimerical attempt at centralisation (see above). Without a complete support, it means less ecclesiastical lands, more regionally-issued court of fidei, but as well a greater capacity of reaction.
I do agree that we'd end with a de facto hereditary Ottonian succession, much like Robertian IOTL : meaning formal elections with a growingly reduced number of nobles, and coronation of the heir during his father's reign being a great legitimazing tool.
There would be different situation, though : Ottonians were certainly much more powerful in Germany than Capetians were in France.
Meaning a probable more important opposition, as it existed IOTL (and one of the reasons why Ottonians went after imperial legitimacy) and that would be a factor of instability, contrary to France where feudal principalities were generally particularly divided themselves (save Normandy or Flanders, that didn't avoid themselves disunity, but where it was more limited) and where Capetians managed to first unify their demenesne and then to play on their neighbours divisions.
On the long term, the absence of the Rex Romanorum/King of Germany mix, means probably no or little pontifical intervention in the succession, which would make it stabler, IMO.
Culturally, however, no Ottonian hegemony in Europe could mean a longer Post-Carolingian world, or an even more blurry feudal structures.
You may end with smaller "renaissances", and more "national", altough I've trouble to discern on what would make them distinct from each other (maybe a plolycentric "Renaissance"?), instead of an "Ottonian Renaissance".
France/England/Danemark/Slaves/Southern Italy
Not reviving the imperial crown would make Ottonians less influents. Their political meddling in Francia, for exemple, wouldn't benefit from the huge clerical support they recieved IOTL.
Lesser pontifical authority means likely nobiliar (royal and feudal at the same time) takeover of the clergy. Maybe no Peace of God movement as we know it. Medieval society of the XIth century may looks more what it looked like in the Xth : more violent, less culturally-driven, etc.
It may butterfly Crusades, at least in their historical definition, without a strong pontifical/clerical restructuration. Without pontifical hegemony, and ecclesiastical "independence", I don't think you'd end with the mix of milites/clergy features.
French Carolingians may have a better time holding their dynastical claims without Ottonian meddling comparable to IOTL.
It could means, eventually, that Liutdolf and his successors would have to focus a bit more on Rhineland and compromise with houses as Ardennais in order to stabilize a bit the border territories.
In fact, I could see Ottonians not objectively supporting as much they did Robertians, either by active support or absence of intervention on behalf of one or the other side.
Links with Anglo-Saxon England are going to be even stronger than IOTL, between Ottonians and Wessex. Maybe it could evolve up to intervening in Danemark against Sven I? A bit far fetched, I concede.
But main focus is indeed going to be against Western Slavs, not only Bohemia but Poland and Wendes (which could incidentally increase tensions with Danes). I could see Ottonians playing eastern principalities against each other in order to weary them (not unlike Capetians did with Angevins and Normans before 1066) : an absence of Polish presence in Pomerania, for exemple?
As for Southern Italy...To be honest, I'm not seeing why Normans wouldn't go for south Italy as IOTL, as the region would be basically unchanged. That said, with a clearly more unstable Italy, I could see them advancing further in the central part of the peninsula, acting as pontifical protectors (maybe somethin akin to the short lived Principality of Rome?)