The two histories are entangled in the text but easily disentangled.
In both the Danellian and the beta timelines, Fredrerick disappointed successive Popes by postponing crusades in order to secure his own power but did eventually embark and regain Jerusalem although by bargaining, not by fighting.
In the Danellian timeline, the strong Pope Gregory excommunicated Frederick who crowned himself king of Jerusalem whereas, in the beta timeline, the weak Celestine did not excommunicate him but instead the Church anointed him king which strengthened him, e.g., to supplant John Ibelin of Cyprus and to make agreements with Muslim Egypt, Damascus and Iconium. Consequently, Byzantium had to accept the supremacy of the Holy Roman Empire.
In both timelines, Frederick defeated a German revolt led by his son and Queen Iolande died young. In the Danellian timeline, Pope Gregory arranged Fredrick's marriage to Isabella of England whereas, in the beta timeline, Frederick married an Aragonese princess, conquered Lombardy and Sardinia, married his son to the Sardinian queen and, ignoring excommunication by Celestine, overran central Italy.
In 1241beta, he resoundingly defeated the invading Mongols, who had succeeded in the alpha timeline, and made Lucius IV Pope after the death of Celestine. He annexed Polish territory where he had defeated the Mongols and his tools, the Teutonic Knights, began conquering Lithuania. His centralized state did not disintegrate after his death. Instead, it embraced all of Europe, reached the Americas late, subordinated the Church, lacked a Renaissance, Reformation or scientific revolution and eventually decayed.
5 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Anderson seems to have believed that, absent a fruitful tension where neither Church or state dominated the other, that was why we did get a Renaissance and scientific revolution. And we see him making related, but somewhat different suggestions in "Delenda Est" and IS THERE LIFE ON OTHER WORLDS? I dismiss the "Reformation" as a bad thing and disaster.
I looked up the long article about Gregory IX from the old CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA at the New Advent website, and no mention was made of him disliking cats!
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Might that be something that the CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA would not draw attention to?
A woman who showed Sheila and me around a Catholic Cathedral knew nothing of Thomas More approving the burning of Protestants.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
That was because, during his years as Lord Chancellor, More was also a JUDGE, and in those days heresy was considered by the state as the crime of treason, punishable by death for the obstinate. I don't agree treating with heresy like that, but people of past times had different ideas from ours. But that was the case--among PROTESTANTS as well, btw.
MY view is that judges are supposed to interpret and enforce the laws as the plain meaning of the texts of a constitution or statutes passed by a congress or parliament can be plainly and strictly understood. Judges should NOT make laws, because that is not their job. To do so is to usurp a function belonging properly to the executive and legislative branches of a gov't, any gov't.
Ad astra! Sean
Kaor, Paul!
I will check other sources online re Gregory IX and cats. But, another possibility that was just another urban legend, a false story which became attached to this or that historical person or event.
Ad astra! Sean
Incidentally, SHIELD brings out how the history that produced us was the result of a series of low-probability accidents. The industrial and scientific revolutions didn’t have to happen; if you rewound history to 0 or even 1000 CE, 99.99% of the time they wouldn’t.
Post a Comment