Looking for assistance

[genyodectes]

So I'm planning on making a long TL starting with Otto III living longer and marrying Zoe of Constantinople in 1002 before having children with her. However, I'll need help with the planning for the Dynasties and then the TL itself since it wasn't until the 19th century where Royal Politics became far less important, at least in OTL.

If you're interested in giving aid, just post her or send me a message. Would love for the help of anyone.

[lordroel]

Dec 28, 2021 14:40:34 GMT genyodectes said:

So I'm planning on making a long TL starting with Otto III living longer and marrying Zoe of Constantinople in 1002 before having children with her. However, I'll need help with the planning for the Dynasties and then the TL itself since it wasn't until the 19th century where Royal Politics became far less important, at least in OTL.

If you're interested in giving aid, just post her or send me a message. Would love for the help of anyone.

Well if he lives longer and has a son we might get Otto IV.

[genyodectes]

Dec 28, 2021 16:28:57 GMT lordroel said:

Dec 28, 2021 14:40:34 GMT genyodectes said:

So I'm planning on making a long TL starting with Otto III living longer and marrying Zoe of Constantinople in 1002 before having children with her. However, I'll need help with the planning for the Dynasties and then the TL itself since it wasn't until the 19th century where Royal Politics became far less important, at least in OTL.

If you're interested in giving aid, just post her or send me a message. Would love for the help of anyone.

Well if he lives longer and has a son we might get Otto IV.

That much is certain and it's likely another of his sons would become Emperor of Byzantium once Constantine VIII dies in 1028. However, I was also planning for a third son, Heinrich, who is given the County of Flanders as a landed title and marries an Alternate Daughter of Edmund II of England when he flees because of Cnut the Great (Her brothers Edward the Exile and Edmund Ætheling die in exile). Heinrich's son Andreas, named after St. Andrew the Apostle moves to become King of England in the 1070sas Cnut lived to his 70s, but his grandson Harold and Great-Grandson Edmund prove ineffective rulers, leading to a three way war between the Danes, the Anglo-Saxons, and Andreas for control of England, ending in an Andrewian victory with the Ottonians taking over England and Andreas becoming King Andrew I.

[stevep]

Dec 28, 2021 16:40:35 GMT genyodectes said:

Dec 28, 2021 16:28:57 GMT lordroel said:

Well if he lives longer and has a son we might get Otto IV.

That much is certain and it's likely another of his sons would become Emperor of Byzantium once Constantine VIII dies in 1028. However, I was also planning for a third son, Heinrich, who is given the County of Flanders as a landed title and marries an Alternate Daughter of Edmund II of England when he flees because of Cnut the Great (Her brothers Edward the Exile and Edmund Ætheling die in exile). Heinrich's son Andreas, named after St. Andrew the Apostle moves to become King of England in the 1070sas Cnut lived to his 70s, but his grandson Harold and Great-Grandson Edmund prove ineffective rulers, leading to a three way war between the Danes, the Anglo-Saxons, and Andreas for control of England, ending in an Andrewian victory with the Ottonians taking over England and Andreas becoming King Andrew I.

  Well if you can get a reliable and strong emperor in Byzantium at that date and he successfully overcomes the inevitable revolts then you might avoid the OTL 11thC collapse.  That would make a hell of a difference to both regional and world history if they repel the Turks.  That could mean a resurgent empire not only holding its own lands but quite possibly later gaining control of southern Syria and Palestine - albeit that they might have to face the Mongols later on which could be very nasty for them. 

  In terms of England that sounds bad.  Edmund flees rather that fighting - albeit unsuccessfully - and Cnut the bloody living much longer.  That won't be good for England.  Although it does sound like we avoid William this time around.  Difficult for Andreas to be as vile as him.

[genyodectes]

Dec 29, 2021 14:07:08 GMT stevep said:

Dec 28, 2021 16:40:35 GMT genyodectes said:

That much is certain and it's likely another of his sons would become Emperor of Byzantium once Constantine VIII dies in 1028. However, I was also planning for a third son, Heinrich, who is given the County of Flanders as a landed title and marries an Alternate Daughter of Edmund II of England when he flees because of Cnut the Great (Her brothers Edward the Exile and Edmund Ætheling die in exile). Heinrich's son Andreas, named after St. Andrew the Apostle moves to become King of England in the 1070sas Cnut lived to his 70s, but his grandson Harold and Great-Grandson Edmund prove ineffective rulers, leading to a three way war between the Danes, the Anglo-Saxons, and Andreas for control of England, ending in an Andrewian victory with the Ottonians taking over England and Andreas becoming King Andrew I.

  Well if you can get a reliable and strong emperor in Byzantium at that date and he successfully overcomes the inevitable revolts then you might avoid the OTL 11thC collapse.  That would make a hell of a difference to both regional and world history if they repel the Turks.  That could mean a resurgent empire not only holding its own lands but quite possibly later gaining control of southern Syria and Palestine - albeit that they might have to face the Mongols later on which could be very nasty for them. 

  In terms of England that sounds bad.  Edmund flees rather that fighting - albeit unsuccessfully - and Cnut the bloody living much longer.  That won't be good for England.  Although it does sound like we avoid William this time around.  Difficult for Andreas to be as vile as him.

Well, Andreas puts every single Danish and Anglo-Saxon Noble and their families to the sword and replaces them with Norman/German/Flemish knights who served him or with his children. His power further increases after he crushes a rebellion from his second son (he has 9) Otto I of Cornwall, leading to him consolidating the power around the Monarchy even more, ensuring England will forever go to his eldest's line (Andrew II) with all other lines giving up their claims to the throne. Andrew I dies in 1112 at 72 and after ruling England with an Iron, Absolutist Fist for 34 years.

[stevep]

Dec 29, 2021 14:15:50 GMT genyodectes said:

Dec 29, 2021 14:07:08 GMT stevep said:

  Well if you can get a reliable and strong emperor in Byzantium at that date and he successfully overcomes the inevitable revolts then you might avoid the OTL 11thC collapse.  That would make a hell of a difference to both regional and world history if they repel the Turks.  That could mean a resurgent empire not only holding its own lands but quite possibly later gaining control of southern Syria and Palestine - albeit that they might have to face the Mongols later on which could be very nasty for them. 

  In terms of England that sounds bad.  Edmund flees rather that fighting - albeit unsuccessfully - and Cnut the bloody living much longer.  That won't be good for England.  Although it does sound like we avoid William this time around.  Difficult for Andreas to be as vile as him.

Well, Andreas puts every single Danish and Anglo-Saxon Noble and their families to the sword and replaces them with Norman/German/Flemish knights who served him or with his children. His power further increases after he crushes a rebellion from his second son (he has 9) Otto I of Cornwall, leading to him consolidating the power around the Monarchy even more, ensuring England will forever go to his eldest's line (Andrew II) with all other lines giving up their claims to the throne. Andrew I dies in 1112 at 72 and after ruling England with an Iron, Absolutist Fist for 34 years.

  That's even worse.   William stripped all Anglo-Saxon nobles of their lands but didn't slaughter them and their families outright.  Plus the turd lives a lot longer than William did.  This is very bad for England.

[genyodectes]

Dec 30, 2021 12:32:27 GMT stevep said:

Dec 29, 2021 14:15:50 GMT genyodectes said:

Well, Andreas puts every single Danish and Anglo-Saxon Noble and their families to the sword and replaces them with Norman/German/Flemish knights who served him or with his children. His power further increases after he crushes a rebellion from his second son (he has 9) Otto I of Cornwall, leading to him consolidating the power around the Monarchy even more, ensuring England will forever go to his eldest's line (Andrew II) with all other lines giving up their claims to the throne. Andrew I dies in 1112 at 72 and after ruling England with an Iron, Absolutist Fist for 34 years.

  That's even worse.   William stripped all Anglo-Saxon nobles of their lands but didn't slaughter them and their families outright.  Plus the turd lives a lot longer than William did.  This is very bad for England.

Yeah. Andrew I is a cruel. ambitious, and power-hungry man who wants to make sure everyone lives in fear of him and his dynasty, as these morals are drilled into his sons and their sons. This ensures no rebellions and allowing for the Ottonians of England to consolidate England without much opposition.

(If you're curious, the Jellings rule England until 1078 thanks to, as previously mentioned, Cnut living a lot longer before his grandson and great-grandson screw everything up. Andrew I rules 1078-1112, his son Andrew II rules 1112-1127, and his grandson Andrew III, who also becomes Duke Andre I of Aquitaine, rules 1127-1159. Andrew I is so cruel because of his son's rebellion from 1102-1110 and his son (the rebel) Otto I of Cornwall conveniently dies while in jail)