The English Charlemagne: A Plantagenet-Capet TL
- Thread starter Liminia1
- Start date
considering that in any case in Otl, even after Philip kindly convinced Clement to accuse of heresy and subsequently decree the dissolution of the Templars, investigations were carried out in the rest of Europe which demonstrated the total innocence of the order, clearly making it clear that the trial in France was a complete farce, even if it should be remembered that the intervention of King Edward II saved numerous knights from certain death, allowing a pass for his French possessions and then for England, perhaps here the situation is enough similar, to be premised on a good part of the French members of the Order to save themselves by finding refuge under the Plantagenet monarch, perhaps on the condition that they undertake a campaign in the Holy Land ( so if they fail they all die, otherwise Philip once again makes a terrible impression on the international ) although technically to be precise, Philip never had Bonifacio VIII killed, he died of natural causes due to the humiliation suffered and subsequent imprisonment, which worsened his health conditions
Creative interpretation/legends believe that Philip had Boniface killed lol, dying in mysterious circumstances in prison has u do that, the entire thing is very OTL though.
Well it just confusing as hell to me, especially when you cannot tell who is talking to who
Last edited:
I don't understand. If the Plantagenets take over, how will this in any way bring renown to the English? They will just be culturally erased under the weight of France. A Plantagenet Charlemagne is just another French Charlemagne.
Also the Plantagenets were not English kings, they were actually kings of England.
Like Victoria was not an Indian Empress...
Also the Plantagenets were not English kings, they were actually kings of England.
Like Victoria was not an Indian Empress...
actually the assimilation of the English identity into the French one is a quite probable risk ( given the disparity in numbers, around 13 million versus around 1.5 million ), but considering that such a sovereign will be the undisputed aspiring continental hegemon, it is easier to see the creation of a different cultural identity which rather Capetian France takes inspiration from Franks / Normans or even Romans is that it unites the various nuances present in the kingdom ( including the English one ) after all, this renewed Carolingian kingdom in the making will have great expansionist aspirations in Iberia and HRE ( Italy first and foremost ) so future sovereigns will probably try to promote a new, more inclusive culture, perhaps along the lines of the label that the Arabs and Byzantium gave to the crusaders ( Latins/Ifranji )
Last edited:
Charlemagne was a German speaking barbarian, didn’t stop him from getting appropriated by both the Germans and the French.
not German speaking but Germanic speaking, specifically Frankish, which Germans never spoke and it was phased out for French. The only modern people who speak a language related to Frankish are the Netherlanders, as far as I am aware.
And political identity has more to do with the state succession of France being the direct continuation of the Frankish realm, rather than any specific court language which evolved over time.
And due to the split succession shenanegans of the Franks, both Germany and France have a clear line of descent from the common ancestor that was the state of Francia. So it's a bit unfair to say Germans and French "appropriated" Charlemagne
Last edited:
I would also add Italy as an indirect daughter of the Carolingian empire, even if I prefer the version that my teacher used at school, that is to think of Charlemagne as the father of Europe, furthermore I hate the term Barbarian in reference to it ( since by doing so, we ignore the fact that for the Romans of the Urbe, who acclaimed him as Caesar ( and over the previous decades awarded him the title of senator and patrician, furthermore, already after the conquest of Pavia in 774, many people saw in Charles a revived Constantine, even people who were not part of his court ), he was not a " simple barbarian ", but rather a individual worthy of the purple and therefore willingly recognized his imperial coronation by their most important political exponent ( the pontiff ) as legitimate, it must be remembered that the Romanitas had many nuances, and was not limited only to the Constantinopolitan vision of it, so why not let's recognize that there were two ( equally correct ) ideas of what it was to be a Roman instead of limiting ourselves to the perennial problem of who was more "true" Roman than the other ( which however is a reductive and slightly idiotic argument ) let's say that I am more in tune with the opinion of Louis II in his Kaiserbreif sent to the court of Basil I, where he rightly stated that the Roman emperors came from various regions and peoples, so why couldn't there have been an Augustus of Frankish origin ?
Last edited:
It’s a joke in reference to the idea that Edward III would not be seen as English.