So the Avignon Papacy lasts until modern times?
It would make Orthodoxy popular in Italy if the Pope still hasn't left France.
Yes
It sounds like Manuel (now the future Manuel II) is around 19-20, roughly the same age as his OTL counterpart? He certainly has a stronger position than his counterpart, both with a stronger empire and with a niece instead of a nephew.

It's a shame to have lost that double alliance with the Plantagenets, but Manuel is still uncle to the future John II and could in theory betroth his son to Sophia to avoid her husband challenging him. It would be interesting to see his trip to England under these changed circumstances, but we'll have to see if ever becomes possible.

The new Prince of Hellas is betrothed to Anna of Bulgaria, the only living child of Tsar Konstantin II. That's the most important development here - more than just a Palaiologos Tsar, we're looking at a personal union, which some in Bulgaria will have objections to. They should be of an age to be married or marry soon?
Betrothing his son to his niece would more than likely be too incesty for the liking of most in Constantinople. Not to mention, the empire has reached the point of marrying princesses from other kingdoms. Wasting an alliance possibility just to keep a niece in line wouldn't be all that smart...
It would be a waste, it's just a shame. Best to probably marry her off somewhere far enough that the claim won't matter.
Yeah, let's go for an alliance
But who? That's the question
ik she would be 7 years older but how about:

Maybe Sophia is married to future John II?
I feel like giving an Angevin any kind of claim to the empire would give the Palaiologoi indigestion.

Sigismund of Luxembourg would be around that age, but it's hard to see the angle to break relations with the Angevin mega-state to their east. Rudolf IV could have a son that age, but it's also hard to see the route in or how to best utilize the alliance as things stand now. Seeing as a Aragon is no friend of the empire, thanks to Sicily, there's maybe a pick in one of the other Iberian kingdoms? That could be a way for the English to gain some ground. Did the Castilian Civil War still happen? Could be Pedro had a son here.
If pedro had a son then sounds good.
We know there's the treaty already in place from page 21, but I guess the country is currently a bit of a mystery box. It could be Joan of England lived to marry him, in which case he could have had an heir as early as when he and his wife were 18 in 1352, closer in age to Manuel than Sophia. That avoids plenty of scandal and misfortune, and his Alfonso could have a son of his own of an age with Sophia (though I can't guess at who he himself might be married to). Or, you know, none of that!
Cousin marriage isn't off the table, and is--to be honest, what I intended. It requires a dispensation from the Patriarch, but that is easily achieved.

It's a fresh note in John V's mind that families can and will devolve into civil war if things aren't kept close; in his mind marrying his grandchildren through Andronikos and Manuel would both salvage the 'dual marriage alliance' to a degree, and firmly tie into place the planned 'Bulgarian Inheritance'--which will be fought over when the time comes.

To spoil, the Inheritance occurs in around 40 years time, that's all I'll say.
I'm also waiting to see what will become of castile, love the habsburgs but i want spain to be ruled by a native dynasty and the hasburgs to stay in the HRE
As for Castile? I'm unsure about how that'd go, I'll probably further branch out into things to do with that part of the Old World sooner rather than later.
 
As for Castile? I'm unsure about how that'd go, I'll probably further branch out into things to do with that part of the Old World sooner rather than later.
I would have no objections if you follow OTL with the trastamaras, if that's the case just want Juan to live.
It's a fresh note in John V's mind that families can and will devolve into civil war if things aren't kept close; in his mind marrying his grandchildren through Andronikos and Manuel would both salvage the 'dual marriage alliance' to a degree, and firmly tie into place the planned 'Bulgarian Inheritance'--which will be fought over when the time comes.

To spoil, the Inheritance occurs in around 40 years time, that's all I'll say.
Interesting hope the empire gets bulgaria
 
It would make Orthodoxy popular in Italy if the Pope still hasn't left France.


quite unlikely, it would have only consolidated the western schism, with Rome simply creating its own native Pope, in contrast to the French one, convincing the rest of Europe to support the conciliar movement to a much greater extent than Otl, honestly, Orthodoxy as a religion deemed suitable for Italians definitively died as a idea, with the Crusades, where the interaction with Byzantium convinced the Latins of their superiority in the ecclesiastical and theological sphere, I don't see how a schism could convince the majority of Italians to embrace a ritual that has been totally foreign to them for centuries now, especially when in Rome there are still noble families who can easily, with the right support, challenge Avignon and choose a pontiff from among themselves, they did it in Otl without fear, why wouldn't they do it in TL ?
 
Last edited:
A match between Sophia and Manuel's son (could be a Ioannes VI or Constantine XI after either of his grandfathers) would leave the empire allied with Trebizond, Montferrat, Serbia, Wallachia, Bulgaria (until any succession crisis), England, and Castile. That's not a bad network of alliances, even if it risks pulling them into conflict in western Europe, and Manuel could secure other allies with any other children.

The lack of Castilian aid for England could suggest they're either pinned down by Aragon or have shifted camps due to a Trastamara takeover, but it might also be fun to give Peter I a son with Joan of England (continuing the house of Ivrea) or dig up someone new who could marry one of his daughters and set up a new dynasty. Peter was a pretty tall guy, so if you had a daughter of his marry Lionel of Antwerp, you could create a bloodline of giants in the House of Clarence. Would be a bit funny to have the name León (or Leonel) associated with the family running Castile and León.
 
quite unlikely, it would have only consolidated the western schism, with Rome simply creating its own native Pope, in contrast to the French one, convincing the rest of Europe to support the conciliar movement to a much greater extent than Otl, honestly, Orthodoxy as a religion deemed suitable for Italians died as a legitimate idea with the Crusades, where the interaction with Byzantium convinced the Latins of their superiority in the ecclesiastical and theological sphere, I don't see how a schism could convince the majority of Italians to embrace a ritual that has been totally foreign to them for centuries now, especially when in Rome there are still noble families who can easily, with the right support, challenge Avignon and choose a pontiff from among themselves, they did it in Otl without fear, why wouldn't they do it in TL ?
It's not so much a matter of Rome as it is a matter of ambitious nobles and akin outside of Rome.

As for adopting Orthodoxy over Catholicism? You could say that the embracing of Protestantism OTL was just as big a leap as it would be to embrace Orthodoxy. The primary drivers for both would be power over one's own church; Orthodoxy has Autocephaly, Protestantism has Denominational Autonomy--which can effectively be wielded the exact same way given the correct circumstances.
The trastamaras were great rulers for the most part (except for henry iv obviously)
Interesting, I'll give it a look
A match between Sophia and Manuel's son (could be a Ioannes VI or Constantine XI after either of his grandfathers) would leave the empire allied with Trebizond, Montferrat, Serbia, Wallachia, Bulgaria (until any succession crisis), England, and Castile. That's not a bad network of alliances, even if it risks pulling them into conflict in western Europe, and Manuel could secure other allies with any other children.

The lack of Castilian aid for England could suggest they're either pinned down by Aragon or have shifted camps due to a Trastamara takeover, but it might also be fun to give Peter I a son with Joan of England (continuing the house of Ivrea) or dig up someone new who could marry one of his daughters and set up a new dynasty. Peter was a pretty tall guy, so if you had a daughter of his marry Lionel of Antwerp, you could create a bloodline of giants in the House of Clarence. Would be a bit funny to have the name León (or Leonel) associated with the family running Castile and León.
Well, Castile tangentially through England, but yes.

Could do, my current fixation is figuring out a way to put a less divisive figure than Lionel in the radius of Ireland--because I'd rather Ireland not develop an utter hatred of the English that ruins any chance of a unified Isles 🤣
 
Could do, my current fixation is figuring out a way to put a less divisive figure than Lionel in the radius of Ireland--because I'd rather Ireland not develop an utter hatred of the English that ruins any chance of a unified Isles 🤣
Could always have Elizabeth de Burgh born male (maybe a Henry, after Maud of Lancaster's father) or not be born at all - in which case William's uncle Edmond would have had a brief stint as third earl and then been succeeded by his son Richard as fourth. Or William Donn survives and crushes his opposition, which keeps things simple. There's less of an opening to prop up his second boy in Ireland in either case, so Edward might have looked elsewhere for Lionel's match and future.

In such a case, not unreasonable to have Lionel wed Blanche of Lancaster and become Lionel, Duke of Lancaster (though that leaves some reshuffling for the other brothers). Lionel would be the great northern magnate and occupied holding the north against Scotland. I'm not sure where that would leave John.
 
Last edited:
Book 2; A Short & Rough Treatise on the House of Wittelsbach c. 1370
In Treue fest - Motto of the House of Wittelsbach; "steadfast in loyalty; firm in fidelity"


Having achieved the highest heights of its power yet with the election of Louis IV of Bavaria as Holy Roman Emperor in 1328, the Wittelsbachs during his long life, wherein he was King of the Romans as early as 1314, would gradually expand into holding various territories across the Empire; namely a unified Duchy of Bavaria, the Electorate of the Palatine, the Margravate of Brandenburg, the Counties of Holland, Hainaut, Zeeland, and Tyrol.

Much of this, in fact nearly all of it, had been achieved at the expense of various German Princes, and nobles--especially those of the House of Luxembourg, who would even elect an Anti-King in the form of the future Emperor Charles V in the last years of Louis IV's life.

What had turned out to be an unexpected boon to the Emperor however, as sad and painful as it seemed at the time, would be the death of much of his family during the Black Death, thereafter only having as heirs his eldest, Louis of Brandenburg, and youngest Otto; this state of affairs allowing, following Louis IV's death in 1347, the avoidance of a ruinous division of the Wittlesbach lands.

Louis of Brandenburg would inherit Bavaria, Brandenburg and Tyrol, while Otto would inherit the Low Country lands of Holland, Hainaut, and Zeeland; effectively splitting the Wittelsbachs into a total of three branches; an elder Bavarian branch, the Palatinate branch held by the nephews of Louis IV and their descendants, and the Low-Countries branch.

The dynasty though, due to excommunications, and other issues of that kind, would be robbed of having the Imperial Crown a second time; with it passing to their long-time rival Charles V of Luxembourg, who would shortly thereafter begin a long feud that dragged on; attempting to wrestle Brandenburg directly from Louis of Brandenburg.

Charles would have early successes, but by 1350 he was forced to accept the investment of the Wittelsbachs as Margraves of Brandenburg. This had been achieved through a combination of Danish assistance, and the aid of the Habsburgs, who were by now loyal friends of the Wittelsbachs, under Rudolf the Founder. In order to gain the support of Rudolf, Louis had given up Tyrol to them, and thus from there Charles V would find himself pressured on two fronts.

Come the Golden Bull of 1356 the Wittelsbachs were able to force through the evolution of Bavaria, considered an ancient 'Stem Duchy' of Germany, to the rank of Electorate; at the cost of Brandenburg losing this status. To punish this, Charles V would ensure their Habsburg allies themselves would not get an Electorate, resulting in the forging of the Privilegium Maius by Rudolf, as well as the cooling of relations between the two former allies.

The rise of Bavaria to Electorate, and the privileges of Primogeniture that it gave, would firmly tie the possessions of the Bavarian branch together within Bavaria itself; giving them a strong power base.

By 1370 the Bavarian branch, ruled by Meinhard III Wittelsbach, is one of the key realms within the Empire; rivalled only by the growing power of the Habsburgs, and their rivals the Luxembourgers.
 
Last edited:
So will John name Sophia as Princess of Hellas, to show her as next in line (though can she be as shes not born in the purple) or promote one of his other sons to the position, damaging his ties with England.
 
So will John name Sophia as Princess of Hellas, to show her as next in line (though can she be as shes not born in the purple) or promote one of his other sons to the position, damaging his ties with England.
Why wouldn’t she be born-in-the-purple? She was born in Constantinople, in the Boukoleon.

Also, why would John break his own Golden Bull, which dictates Agnatic-Cognatic (ala women only after all viable male claimants are dead)? It wouldn’t damage ties with England to not create her as Princess of Hellas, because the English wouldn’t be expecting it.
 
With how the Romans are going as far east as Indonesia, what could be interesting to see in the distant future of this TL would be the possibility of any conflict akin to the Ottoman-Portuguese Wars ITTL?
 
Last edited:
Though the question is who they'd be fighting against ITTL, then, for dominance over the Indian Ocean. Also, a modest proposal to punish Venice for what happened in 1204:

https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...d-as-punishment-by-a-conquering-state.514118/


Good question… I’m open to suggestions

Let’s see here…

In this case something if like this happens ( Rhomanois-Portuguese wars in the Indian Ocean ( because given that we let Constantinople win, unlike Portugal they know how to fight on the open sea right ? ) or Venice which is destroyed and literally submerged by the land ( so It's worth reconquering the whole of Italy and Hellenizing it, after all it's easily possible, right ? ), unfortunately it pains me to say it, but I'll stop reading this story, because I would consider it a simple Byzaboo wank ( like all the others present in large quantities on the site ) which I have definitively lost that touch of realism that had fascinated me at the beginning, I'm sorry to be so polemical, but I am deeply sad to see this little masterpiece take the usual path of " Rhomania rising again to govern the world, because they are the state elected by the creator " instead of talking about a state that must rebuild, definitively adapt to the fact that the world around them is no longer stuck in the 4th century and that the "barbarians" are now extremely advanced civilizations on a par with Constantinople, is therefore that the policies that could have gone well with Justinian are now no longer effective and that therefore diplomacy must be used to win their respect and one's place in the world ( basically putting one's heart at peace with the fact that one can no longer be the hegemon of this part of the world but an important political actor among many others ) I don't want to offend anyone but I could be very disappointed by a similar development, however this outburst does not mean that the story so far is a little gem, very nice to read
 
Last edited:
In this case something if like this happens ( Rhomanois-Portuguese wars in the Indian Ocean ( because given that we let Constantinople win, unlike Portugal they know how to fight on the open sea right ? ) or Venice which is destroyed and literally submerged by the land ( so It's worth reconquering the whole of Italy and Hellenizing it, after all it's easily possible, right ? ), unfortunately it pains me to say it, but I'll stop reading this story, because I would consider it a simple Byzaboo wank ( like all the others present in large quantities on the site ) which I have definitively lost that touch of realism that had fascinated me at the beginning, I'm sorry to be so polemical, but I am deeply sad to see this little masterpiece take the usual path of " Rhomania rising again to govern the world, because they are the state elected by the creator " instead of talking about a state that must rebuild, definitively adapt to the fact that the world around them is no longer stuck in the 4th century and that the "barbarians" are now extremely advanced civilizations on a par with Constantinople, is therefore that the policies that could have gone well with Justinian are now no longer effective and that therefore diplomacy must be used to win their respect and one's place in the world ( basically putting one's heart at peace with the fact that one can no longer be the hegemon of this part of the world but an important political actor among many others ) I don't want to offend anyone but I could be very disappointed by a similar development, however this outburst does not mean that the story so far is a little gem, very nice to read
This isn’t in any way intended to be a wank—I’ve been against the notion of that from when this TL was made several years ago.

Rather my efforts are directed towards striking a balance between ‘wank’ and the by-now stereotypical ‘anti-wank’ wherein the Empire basically just arbitrarily gets impeded due to some meta need to ‘balance’ things.

If someone told you that England, as it was in the time of Henry VIII, would go on to rule the largest empire the world had ever seen, without the hindsight of it actually happening you’d probably have scoffed at it.

I want to treat the world of this TL, and that includes the Empire, as a living breathing thing that would make logical and illogical choices; I don’t want to approach it from the meta mindset of ‘balancing’ everything out to avoid it being called a ‘wank’.

I want realism—and all the stuff said beforehand that has yet to happen is in reality a loose ‘we’ll get there, maybe’—it’s a rough idea of where things will go, but that isn’t set in stone. I’ve had to go back several times since resuming this TL, and even since then, to edit chapters to reflect changes I had decided on later.
 
This isn’t in any way intended to be a wank—I’ve been against the notion of that from when this TL was made several years ago.

Rather my efforts are directed towards striking a balance between ‘wank’ and the by-now stereotypical ‘anti-wank’ wherein the Empire basically just arbitrarily gets impeded due to some meta need to ‘balance’ things.

If someone told you that England, as it was in the time of Henry VIII, would go on to rule the largest empire the world had ever seen, without the hindsight of it actually happening you’d probably have scoffed at it.
Agreed here, especially with how, in addition to the British Empire reference you mentioned, the rise of Genghis Khan was arguably even more impressive, with how an illiterate nomad in the steppes of Mongolia was able to forge one of the largest empires in history.
 
Top