I once asked that, but someone replied that in this case the pope would move north, maybe to Köln and make a new papal state there with the backing of the holy roman empire, Spain, Portugal and France
Spain didn't exist at this point. They're too busy fighting off the Muslims as various petty kingdoms.
But yes, I see the problem. Maybe have HRE and France both balkanise in the coming centuries? Catholicism could slowly become discredited, with true Christianity being funded by the revived Roman Empire.
Expand further into eastern Europe, maybe?
Perhaps Hungary (already Catholic, but a king converting to Orthodoxy may be possible, for better relations with the Byzantines?) and Lithuania become Orthodox, along with eastern Poles/Mazovians?
Perhaps Hungary (already Catholic, but a king converting to Orthodoxy may be possible, for better relations with the Byzantines?) and Lithuania become Orthodox, along with eastern Poles/Mazovians?
I think a strict geopolitism would be a superficial way to see the relationship between papacy and Latin churches.
Assuming a Byzantine takeover of Rome, which is clearly not that easy, at the very best you'd have a reverse Greek-Catholic church, a Latin-Orthodox church if you will. Probably more autonomous religiously as a mega-patriarchate.
I think that people greatly exagerate the opposition between Rome and Constantinople, as if both were somehow limited enough to act as Crusader Kings AI : in the case of a Byzantine reconquest of Rome, it's likely that the emperors would put someone there as a religious head for the West, being far less concerned to curb down Latin church, than making it "compatible" with their own cesaropapism (and would certainly not try to abide to radical eastern clergy demands, as Rome would be probably needed to balance their influence as it happened historically).
Roughly speaking, a return to pre-VIIth situation, except with a much more defined Latin church, with a Byzzie-friendly pope.
The real, and growing, difference between Latin and Greek churches never really went to the point they weren't porous enough to reach agreement on the institutional level (popularily, it's another story, but it was much more obvious in Byzantine population than for Latins).
As for reaction from western kingdoms : pontifical legitimacy was far too tied with its relation with Rome to really survive a permanent exile so far from it. Avignon Papacy was essentially a thing because Avignon was as much a pontifical territory than the Italian cities (as Perugia) popes often resided semi-permanently.
Either Papacy-in-Exile vanishes after a while, with whoever is set in Rome becomes the religious head in the west; either this papacy in exile becomes a peripherical schismatic movement without much relevance.
Assuming a Byzantine takeover of Rome, which is clearly not that easy, at the very best you'd have a reverse Greek-Catholic church, a Latin-Orthodox church if you will. Probably more autonomous religiously as a mega-patriarchate.
I think that people greatly exagerate the opposition between Rome and Constantinople, as if both were somehow limited enough to act as Crusader Kings AI : in the case of a Byzantine reconquest of Rome, it's likely that the emperors would put someone there as a religious head for the West, being far less concerned to curb down Latin church, than making it "compatible" with their own cesaropapism (and would certainly not try to abide to radical eastern clergy demands, as Rome would be probably needed to balance their influence as it happened historically).
Roughly speaking, a return to pre-VIIth situation, except with a much more defined Latin church, with a Byzzie-friendly pope.
The real, and growing, difference between Latin and Greek churches never really went to the point they weren't porous enough to reach agreement on the institutional level (popularily, it's another story, but it was much more obvious in Byzantine population than for Latins).
As for reaction from western kingdoms : pontifical legitimacy was far too tied with its relation with Rome to really survive a permanent exile so far from it. Avignon Papacy was essentially a thing because Avignon was as much a pontifical territory than the Italian cities (as Perugia) popes often resided semi-permanently.
Either Papacy-in-Exile vanishes after a while, with whoever is set in Rome becomes the religious head in the west; either this papacy in exile becomes a peripherical schismatic movement without much relevance.
Butterfly away the Mongol conquest, that's the POD:
1) Rus is not steamrolled, a few million of Orthodox lives saved. Rus is not occupied by the Catholic PLC and by the Golden Horde.
2) The Mongols don't push the numerous Turkic tribes to the west; in our case to Anatolia. So we don't have reinvigorated Turkic conquest of Anatolia by the refugee Turks, who escaped the Mongols. So without that push the Byzantines might hold parts of Anatolia longer; anyway the Balkans has a good chance not to be conquered by the Ottomans and staying Orthodox.
So...
In this ATL with the Mongols butterflied away there are a lot of strong, rich and prosperous Orthodox countries in Rus and the Balkans.
The Cuman steppes between Rus and the Balkans might get baptized to Orthodoxy, they were somehow close to it in OTL before the Mongols.
So that might be a rather big 'Orthodox world'; I am not sure that it will be like 'Catholic world', but some similarity, resemblance is definitely there with Constantinople patriarch instead of Pope of Rome, etc.
The 'Catholic World' of OTL had an advantage of escaping the Mongol and Ottoman invasions; well these invasions impacted the West only after losing its' momentum.
Here the 'Orthodox world' is not at disadvantage and it's full of potential and here it's holding trading routes between the West and the East.
In OTL out of Orthodox countries only 'Russia' had a chance for greatness; in this ATL some other Orthodox entities might form their Empires and expand East, West, South... anywhere.
Zagan
Donor
Oh, please!
Those "Cuman Steppes" were actually inhabited by a Romanian majority, a significant Slavic minority and a very small number of Cuman overlords!
And of course, both the Romanians and the Slavs there had already been Orthodox for centuries!
That's true for the tribes in the west. The ones in the east were mostly pagan or muslim. "Cumania" was something like a huge confederation of tribes reigning over many other tribes and populations from Urals down to Danube. However, they were far from united nor from uniformed.
I think I'm going to speak out against the notion that Western European powers would really be that upset with the Byzantines controlling Rome. The Papacy staying in East Roman hands means the Eastern ecclesiastical model is the one which will become dominant throughout Christianity, and as long as no one in Constantinople is dumb enough to try to conquer the entirety of Gaul the Emperor can offer church autocephaly as a reward to whatever Germanic states manage to get themselves together, meaning they can still get Roman-style religion/legitimacy without having to answer to some guy in Rome.
Having control over their "national churches" would be in the best interests of a great many Germanic rulers.
That said, depending on your POD the filioque controversy is looming, and even if Rome doesn't endorse the doctrine it still may find enough of a footing in Western theology to make some sort of schism unavoidable.
Alternatively better Russian evangelization in Alaska is always an option.
And are we strictly talking Eastern Orthodoxy? Because a stronger Ethiopia could also satisfy the requirement if it can evangelize throughout East Africa.
Having control over their "national churches" would be in the best interests of a great many Germanic rulers.
That said, depending on your POD the filioque controversy is looming, and even if Rome doesn't endorse the doctrine it still may find enough of a footing in Western theology to make some sort of schism unavoidable.
Alternatively better Russian evangelization in Alaska is always an option.
And are we strictly talking Eastern Orthodoxy? Because a stronger Ethiopia could also satisfy the requirement if it can evangelize throughout East Africa.
Last edited:
My best guess is to maintain the Kyivan Rus', this gives you a potential Orthodox Balkans and possibly even Finland. You could have Hungary convert to Orthodoxy as well though I don't know how you'd go about doing that. Obviously getting rid of the Arab conquests is an amazing way to make most of the Middle East Christian.