Rethinking the Hussite Sequence

[Don_Quigleone]

I agree, though, that the alternative reformation sequence ought to be affected by the outcome of Lollardy in Wessex and Hussitism in Bohemia. I personally believe that if either survives, then the alternative reformation is LESS likely to happen.

You're right about that, what I was more thinking is that if jan hus is protected by the church, and negotiated with, then the alternate reformation should be more likely as this is internal reform, whereas if the church reacts harshly to them then it should lead to the traditional reformation, as this promotes narrowminded leading to others breaking off. How the church reacts should determine the probability of alternate vs. traditional reformation. However whether the hussites actually survive or not will have comparitevely little to do with whether the church is more supportive of internal reform, but it should effect how the reformation works within the local areas, if the hussites fair well then ai bohemia should go protestant on the reformation (in the traditional case)

When it comes to putting this in game terms, I think the best idea is that at the start of every game the papal states ai gets a random choice between alternate reform and traditional, if it chooses alternate then the papal states should usually (i.e first choice) react to protect jan hus, and listen to him on internal reform (or whatever, I'm sorry to say that my knowledge on hus's views are limited), and similiarly for other heresies like the lollards, if on the other hand the ai chooses the traditional path it should take the path of burning jan hus and reacting harshly to heresy, this way the catholic church should take a fairly consistent position. If a player takes rome this can be all be overidden of course, if an ai takes rome this process should not be affected, except if a country like bohemia or swabia takes it.

I think this would be a fairly manageable way of managing the reformation and
it's relationships to the events leading up to it

 

[MattyG]

More likely. Surely with agitating, anti-papal pamphlets appearing all over northen and eastern Europe, the seeds of doubt in papal authority begin to be planted.

I'd go as far (go go go) to say that if Hus is executed, we should sleep event some of the Papal States events concerning Indulgences.

But, if Bohemia remains protestant, this undermines the Reformist movement. It illicits the "See, look at the thin edge of the wedge there!!!!!!!" response. Under threat, the Catholic Church is less likely to reform, not more likely, just as happened with the actual reformation. Instead of joining them they spent 100 years trying to crush them, only to accept defeat and trying and live with them.

 

[MattyG]

Neat, sweet and tight. I object only to action_c under Item 3. I can't see a power vacuum being filled with a council, in 1419. Why is Sigismund not the likely heir here?

And I love the Polish version, supported by Bavaria. Bohemia continue with Sigismund, as vassals of Poland, then an event at (childless) Sigismunds death annexing the country if Poland is bigger than - say - 4 provinces.

Well, Sigismund is not Vaclav's heir. His claim to the throne comes from being the son of Emperor Charles IV, but Charles is not our Empeor, the Wittelsbachs are, ergo, although Sigismund may still exists, he is not the son of the Emperor and has no claims to anything.

Even if Charles IV was still our Emperor at that time (till 1378) the House of Luxemburg has fallen and the ittelsbach have replaced them as the premier family and current empeors.

 

[unmerged(16159)]

But, if Bohemia remains protestant, this undermines the Reformist movement. It illicits the "See, look at the thin edge of the wedge there!!!!!!!" response. Under threat, the Catholic Church is less likely to reform, not more likely, just as happened with the actual reformation. Instead of joining them they spent 100 years trying to crush them, only to accept defeat and trying and live with them.

Didn't say Bohemia remaining protestant, I wrote Hus remaining alive. I agree the Hussite uprising should be as short-lived as it currently is.

 

[unmerged(16159)]

Well, Sigismund is not Vaclav's heir. His claim to the throne comes from being the son of Emperor Charles IV, but Charles is not our Empeor, the Wittelsbachs are, ergo, although Sigismund may still exists, he is not the son of the Emperor and has no claims to anything.

Even if Charles IV was still our Emperor at that time (till 1378) the House of Luxemburg has fallen and the ittelsbach have replaced them as the premier family and current empeors.

If not Sigismund, then another royal upstart with wonky sperm. This is too early for a council. As I said, I like the Bavaria supported Polish vassalage idea.

 

[MattyG]

If not Sigismund, then another royal upstart with wonky sperm. This is too early for a council. As I said, I like the Bavaria supported Polish vassalage idea.

But IRL there WAS a council, which vanilla called the Hussite Regency.

 

[unmerged(16159)]

But IRL there WAS a council, which vanilla called the Hussite Regency.

Ah.

Ok.

Was this an arrangement by the Hussites? Or the HRE? I doubt the HRE would countenance anything other than rule by Monarchy.

 

[MattyG]

Ah.

Ok.

Was this an arrangement by the Hussites? Or the HRE? I doubt the HRE would countenance anything other than rule by Monarchy.

In the period from 1421 to 1437 when the Hussite Wars were ongoing, the different Hussite factions each had their own leadership. The Taborites, for example, had a democratically elected council. And, no, I don't think, the Emperor approed - they were at war with him.

 

[unmerged(36449)]

Very nice.

Your knowledge of the period certainly exceeds mine. And I am very happy that your suggested outcome be one of those we present.

However, let me challenge you on two points.

1. If this is an alternate history, with the Wittelsbachs as the imperial family, would they still be in contention with the Pope? This is a new Pope, freshly minted at the (delayed) Council of Constance. Are the Wittelsbachs going to be in contention with this Pope, or desperately supporting him and the stability he represents?

2. Even if the Wittelsbachs do support Hus, at least initially, there is still the matter of heresy to be dealt with. How could the Emperor be both the protector of the Pope and the Church and a champion of one of the major heretics of the period?

Sorry for the delay in answering.

Well they may, or may not be in contention with the new Pope, but they sure as shooting had been butting heads with the Papacy in general for a good 100 years off and on (assumes family policy of the previous Wittelsbach Emperor' is maintained to a degree by others of the family). The problem was not so much religious but temporal.

The Pope kept trying to exert papal authority over the Emperor and kept trying to take control of the Kingdom of Italy for themselves.

During the IRL reign of Louis/Ludwig the Bavarian he went OFF on the Pope! To the point that the Pope excommunicated him (he yawned at that), declared him to be no longer emperor (got a bit ticked off on that), and claimed the empire was under direct papal rule and authority...he invaded Italy on that one.

Upon the conquest of Italy and being crowned King of the Lombards he continued his march until he took Rome, was crowned Emperor by the representatives of the Roman people (some "senator" I can't recall the name of), deposed the sitting Pope and put a pet one on the throne.

Now the Emperor that Hus was generally in support OF was Ruprecht of the Palatine branch of the family (or in Abe THE family), who had just about the same kind of grief with the Pope as Louis did a generation or two back.

Now if we take the personalities of the Wittelsbach' of real history and use them as the templates for their aberrated versions...and frankly it is just easier to do that or we are up the creek sans canoe in trying to figure out the probable outcomes...

They supported substantial church reforms, and would not have considered Hus a "heretic" per se since the kind of reforms he was talking about were not that far off from the kind they favored.

Now if this new Pope comes out of the Council of Constance with a reform agenda in the same vein as the kind of reforms that the house of Bavaria is in favor of it is not going to be far enough away from the teachings of Hus to really warrant the Pope making a big old fuss about in the form of a war.

Better to talk it out over tea and chocolates...if they had either during the time.

If he comes out of it with a more orthodox agenda and views on Papal authority which would eventually impinge upon imperial power?

They support Hus to the tits and invade Italy! They are the protectors of Christianity and all that, but if it means bowing to Rome in regards to their authority? They will side with the empire every time. Only in later generations of the family do we see a more conciliatory tone towards Rome.

 

[unmerged(36449)]

1. But in our history, there is a growing conflict between Wittelsbach and Pope. It's a central platform of the Crusade events and reaction to the reformation.

2. I don't think Bavaria would support Hus, unless it was to 'protect' them byb making them a Vassal. They didn't want instability in their region, nor do they want anyone challenging the monarchy rule. Vaclav and Sigismund would stay, even if Hus was supported, surely.

On point 2?

The reason to protect Hus is simple: He remained loyal to the emperor over the Pope, and he has quite a following back home. A following that can be used to further erode Papal authority in the empire, and to wrest Bohemia away from the Luxembourgs. IRL Ernst did support Sigi but that was more a political game then anything to ensure no loss of position for the family as a whole. You see the family divided on which faction they supported in that imperial election IRL as a hedge bet.

Given that they are a much stronger force in imperial politics due to Louis' possessions not being split up by his daft sons...Sigi would never have stood a chance in being elected emperor, and since the Bohemians made no great secret that they wanted the Luxembourg' GONE to the point that they offered the throne to Ernst' brother Ludwig....