WI The Empress Irene accepts Charlemagne's marriage proposal?

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Didn't Charlemagne already have a couple of wives. Would it be suitable for an empress to marry such a foreign king, and not even become his only wife?
 
More seriously i think you have a scenario for a Frankish-East Empire war, how about it

or

What if we butterfly Irene into being a real catch and she calls on her husband to assist the Empire against the Arabs, as leader of HRE
can he pressurise the pope to call a crusade -
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
More seriously i think you have a scenario for a Frankish-East Empire war, how about it

or

What if we butterfly Irene into being a real catch and she calls on her husband to assist the Empire against the Arabs, as leader of HRE
can he pressurise the pope to call a crusade -
The concept of crusades didn't exist yet. The Pope wasn't yet that powerful.
 
True, but Charlemagne recently crowned HRE might suggest a war with church backing. The pope might think, hey know heres a chance to increase my authority. It needn't be called a crusade, im talking about the content not the labelling.
 
True, but Charlemagne recently crowned HRE might suggest a war with church backing. The pope might think, hey know heres a chance to increase my authority. It needn't be called a crusade, im talking about the content not the labelling.

The Pope was close to to Constantinople even by 800s... If Leo III had a choice he wouldnt have called for Frankish help... And certainly Charlemagne wouldnt have been crowned...

About the whole marriage thing as it was mentioned above Irene had to persuade the nobles that marrying Charlemagne would be a good thing and that he is not a barbarian... Absolutely 0 chances that the nobles would be convinced...
And as ive said above in OTL Irene was handling the whole thing in secresy because she was afraid the nobles's reactions... However if she managed to get it through and announced her marriage in public it is more than certain that a coup would erupt on the very next moment...
 
I think Charlemagne was not the most ignorant of people.
He was interested in many subjects, incl astronomy, he could read and speak several languages, incl latin, he instituted important economic and monetary reforms, educational reforms, i think maybe some snobbery and chauvinism is going on here.

 
I think Charlemagne was not the most ignorant of people.
He was interested in many subjects, incl astronomy, he could read and speak several languages, incl latin, he instituted important economic and monetary reforms, educational reforms, i think maybe some snobbery and chauvinism is going on here.


Ι wont disagree... But in the eyes of Roman nobles he was a mere barbarian totally unworthy of the Imperial office... And any attempt to bring him on ERE's throne or even recognise his title as a Roman Emperor was equal to high treason... Plus even Charlemagne himself knew that his title was a big nothing if recognition wasnt granted by Eastern Roman Empire which still possessed the Western Roman Regalia in its treasury since 476 AD... In OTL Charlemagne practically begged Emperor Nicephorus I for recognition and Nicephorus kept refusing... Finally he was recognised as Emperor in the "Pax Nicephori" but not as Western Roman Emperor only as Emperor of the Franks/Germans...
 
Last edited:
What's the probability of Charlemagne abandoning Aachen and becoming the Emperor of Constantinople? He could appoint Charles the Younger as his regent in the West.

Let's say the Constantinoplitan aristocracy accepts him as Emperor after a series of bribes and blackmails. How would his reign be? And there is still the problem that he hasn't a qualified heir. Could he marry someone of the Roman elite if Irene dies 'mysteriously' and produce a legitimate prince?

Also, what's the Greek name of Charles?
 
What's the probability of Charlemagne abandoning Aachen and becoming the Emperor of Constantinople? He could appoint Charles the Younger as his regent in the West.

Let's say the Constantinoplitan aristocracy accepts him as Emperor after a series of bribes and blackmails. How would his reign be? And there is still the problem that he hasn't a qualified heir. Could he marry someone of the Roman elite if Irene dies 'mysteriously' and produce a legitimate prince?

Also, what's the Greek name of Charles?

He cant bribe and blackmail every noble... Even if he could at least half of them would refuse to accept him as their sovereign... He is simply too "barbarian" to be accepted...
Remember the hard time Zeno had... Even he who was completely romanised was hated by everyone because of his Isaurian ancestry...
I dont think Charlemagne would abandon Aachen for Constantinople... Too dangerous for him... Being Emperor in a foreign city with everyone hating your guts? He ll get a knife in the back for sure...

The Greek name for Charles is Karolos...
 
I think Charlemagne was not the most ignorant of people.
He was interested in many subjects, incl astronomy, he could read and speak several languages, incl latin, he instituted important economic and monetary reforms, educational reforms, i think maybe some snobbery and chauvinism is going on here.


Again, as barbarian kings go, he's impressive. The problem is that speaking from the perspective of "civilization", aka something like the Byzantines (which I will proudly and shamelessly side with), none of those compare to what the Byzantines have already.

Its a great step for the West back towards that level, but no more.

And yes, the Byzantines were snobs, but not without reason.
 
Again, as barbarian kings go, he's impressive. The problem is that speaking from the perspective of "civilization", aka something like the Byzantines (which I will proudly and shamelessly side with), none of those compare to what the Byzantines have already.

Its a great step for the West back towards that level, but no more.

And yes, the Byzantines were snobs, but not without reason.

Until the common Ottomans over ran them, hooray for the Ottomans. ;)
 
Until the common Ottomans over ran them, hooray for the Ottomans. ;)

The Ottomans borrowed much from the Byzantines. They were far from barbarians by the 15th century, assuming the Turks of the eleventh century as Western Europe in the 9th century for discussion's sake.

And why are you hooraying for one autocratic set of emperors over another?
 
Top