Is this too radical a ripple effect?

[rcduggan]

I would like some feedback on this progression on effects from the initial POD. Is it too much happening too soon? Thoughts? Flaming tires?

Initial POD and effects (scroll passed the dashed line if you have ADHD or just don't feel like reading it all):

860: Methodius decides to accompany his brother Constantine (later named Cyril) on his mission to the Khazars. (POD)

861: Cyril is captured by the Magyars AIOTL. But this time he has Methodius with him. While imprisoned, a disgreement with the Magyar prince leads to the execution of both Cyril and Methodiu.

862: King Rostislav of Great Moravia requests for the Byzantines to send him missionaries to counteract Frankish influence in his kingdom. However, as Photius and Michael are still investigating and negotiating with the Khazars the death of the two missionaries, they ignore Rostislav's request.

863: Without the introduction of the Old Slavonic alphabet to Great Moravia, Khan Boris I of Bulgaria is not as interested in Byzantine-rite Christianity. So the main two choices for religion are Christianity (the Frankish variety) and Judaism (led by an envoy of Khagan Zachariah I).

864: Khan Boris comes to a decision. Due to Khazar influence, he converts to Judaism. He knows that this will be incredibly unpopular with the Byzantines, but chooses to rely on Khazar aid to survive.

------------------------------------------------------------

It goes on, but that is the gist of the main effects. Then there is some other effects that happen at a similar time, but are all interconnected. I would like input on this part especially.



866: Between 863 and 866, Frankish influence had been steadily increasing in Great Moravia. Since the request to the Byzantines was ignored, the Moravians have no alternative. At this point, the ruler and nobility still are pagan, as is a large part of their population (not OTL).
In retaliation against the Franks, the Moravians launch a huge raid against East Francia (held along with the rest by Charles the Fat). One army attacks Swabia and kills Charles's wife Richardis (great name, I know ). This leads Charles to focus on legitimizing his only son Bernard.


Another more radical (IMO) effect of the death of C&M:


864: After refusing the initial request for missionaries, the Byzantines eventually decide to send missionaries to Great Moravia. The men who are chosen to go are the ones who IOTL went to Russia to attempt to Christianize the Rus' Khaganate.

These missionaries are killed by hostile Jewish Bulgars en route to Great Moravia. The Rus' Khaganate thus stays pagan, and is not destroyed by the Finns and Slavs rebelling in reaction to the Christianization.


865: Rorik of Dorestad (OTL Rurik, founder of the Rurikids) attempts to capture Ladoga, in OTL Russia. The stronger Rus' Khaganate defeats Rorik and forces him to leave Russia.

868: Without his success in Russia, Rorik and his men join the Great Heathen Army. With his considerable skill, Rorik manages to come into a position of power, leading a great number of Vikings against the Anglo-Saxons.

871: At the Battle of Ashdown, Rorik helps the Danes crush the Anglosaxons. Alfred and Ethelred are killed, leading to Danish nomination of the *British Isles



Keep in mind this is just a very basic sketch, something I just threw together out of some brainstorming. Feedback would be great.

 

[Broz]

yes that is too much of a ripple effect

the ideas are interesting but Bizant is still too strong and eager to extend its influence
and it literarly had priests to throw avay

if Chiril and Method get killed somwhere, and bizant does not send more missionaries, most of the balkans become chatholic

those are the olnly two ways it could of gone

olnly real alternative is a strong Kiev that helps out fellow non-christians, for politicall purposes, but then its not judaism they convert too but a restructured form of slavic religion, or there is a revival of the local faith

still the idea that a number of fairly strong east european/central asian states might not convert to christianity and so naturally form a sistem of aliances against the christian states that would directly opose them, is wery interesting

 

[Empror Mike]

yes that is too much of a ripple effect

the ideas are interesting but Bizant is still too strong and eager to extend its influence
and it literarly had priests to throw avay

if Chiril and Method get killed somwhere, and bizant does not send more missionaries, most of the balkans become chatholic

those are the olnly two ways it could of gone

olnly real alternative is a strong Kiev that helps out fellow non-christians, for politicall purposes, but then its not judaism they convert too but a restructured form of slavic religion, or there is a revival of the local faith

still the idea that a number of fairly strong east european/central asian states might not convert to christianity and so naturally form a sistem of aliances against the christian states that would directly opose them, is wery interesting

I rather think the ideas proposed by Broz are not altogether unreasonable. rcduggan, the nomadic conversions were not all about politics, you know. These conversions were spiritually neccesary. Once the nomad horde settled down somewhere, their lifestyle changed (for the better, I'd say) dramatically. Monotheism or greater spiritual influence was a need OF THE PEOPLE. The general population, and especially the nobility did look for something more than magical snakes and sacred fire.Therefor, should politics prevent said peoples from converting to the Byzantine and Frankish faith, the conversion to another monotheistic religion is alltogether plausible and could be decided by the rulers, just like that.Now to this specific case:The situation Broz proposes seems radical, and that, in-fact, was true. He examines a TL where Byzantine influence over Bulgaria in the mid 9th century is greatly reduced, leaving two big boys: the Khazars, and the Franks. Now, seemingly, one would say the Franks are much bigger a threat and should be pleased by conversion - but I say the opposite. Appeasing the Franks would be a death-sentence to Boris' rule. He may be forced to surrender territory, and he would certainly be forced to oblige to the whims of their Pope and his goddamn priests. The Khazars, however, want nothing but influence. Their empire is further away geographically (i think?) and closer culturally. In the given situation they seem to replace Byzantium's place in east-European politics. Additionally, having Judaism as the state religion pleases the spiritual need of the people but surrenders spiritual authority to NO ONE.So, given Boris' situation if Cyril and Methodiu are executed, I'd say the first third of the ripple is not completely unplausible, but very possible indeed.The later parts, no one can truly disprove, since such a dramatic change may lead to ANY consequences.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

This is one of the most breathtakingly condescending and culturocentric posts I have ever read, and that is saying something around here.

How on Earth do you think you know what the spiritual necessities of 9th c Bulgars were? And how did "primitive" cultures like the Roman Empire manage without Monotheism?

And in what ways did the lifestyles of nomads increase dramatically for the better? If that's the case, why did populations so often re-nomadize? The boundaries between the two, BTW, are not so clear; people drifted back and forth depending on what made the most economic sense.

Decisions to convert a people were always nearly entirely political. What about the Khazars' "spiritual void" do you think was screaminig out for circumcision and inconvenient dietary restrictions?

And I would hope you realize that non-Monotheistic faiths are not all about magic snakes and sacred fire, as you so contemptuously put it. They are real spiritual systems that have supported very advanced and sophisticated cultures, and still do.

There is no reason why the Bulgars could not choose to convert to Judaism, especially given their long history as vassals of the Khazars. In fact in a situation where they are pressed between Catholic and Orthodox powers, it's a real option, much like the Khazars between Byzantium and the Caliphate. Opting for either Catholicism or Orthodoxy threatens to subordinate you to the dominant power of either; Judaism does not.

I think the Bulgars have much less incentive to do this than did the Khazars, but I can assure you the spiritual requirements of THE PEOPLE will have no bearing on the decision.

The Khazars are not really a viable long-term power that is going to replace the Byzantines in the region - and the execution of two priests is not going to cause the canny Byzantines to torpedo their entire diplomatic posture on a permanent basis.

I rather think the ideas proposed by Broz are not altogether unreasonable. rcduggan, the nomadic conversions were not all about politics, you know. These conversions were spiritually neccesary. Once the nomad horde settled down somewhere, their lifestyle changed (for the better, I'd say) dramatically. Monotheism or greater spiritual influence was a need OF THE PEOPLE. The general population, and especially the nobility did look for something more than magical snakes and sacred fire.Therefor, should politics prevent said peoples from converting to the Byzantine and Frankish faith, the conversion to another monotheistic religion is alltogether plausible and could be decided by the rulers, just like that.Now to this specific case:The situation Broz proposes seems radical, and that, in-fact, was true. He examines a TL where Byzantine influence over Bulgaria in the mid 9th century is greatly reduced, leaving two big boys: the Khazars, and the Franks. Now, seemingly, one would say the Franks are much bigger a threat and should be pleased by conversion - but I say the opposite. Appeasing the Franks would be a death-sentence to Boris' rule. He may be forced to surrender territory, and he would certainly be forced to oblige to the whims of their Pope and his goddamn priests. The Khazars, however, want nothing but influence. Their empire is further away geographically (i think?) and closer culturally. In the given situation they seem to replace Byzantium's place in east-European politics. Additionally, having Judaism as the state religion pleases the spiritual need of the people but surrenders spiritual authority to NO ONE.So, given Boris' situation if Cyril and Methodiu are executed, I'd say the first third of the ripple is not completely unplausible, but very possible indeed.The later parts, no one can truly disprove, since such a dramatic change may lead to ANY consequences.

 

[Broz]

thousands of people had to be killed and hundreds of temples burned before the population would convert

conversion was alvais, but alvais a political thing, and in any place where there was no political suport of conversion the misionaries were brutally murdered or politely ignored

and the christian misionaries were usually the ones armed with superstition and "sacred fires"

the people definitley didnt need anyone to save them from any kind of spiritual crisis, it was just that christian culture was agresive and armed with latin and greek, all sumarised in one book, standardised for export, and backed by politicall powers that were willing to use misionaries as cannon fooder if necesary, let alone send another couple of priests on a mision if some are killed or captured, or another, or another, constantinopol was full of eager young christians ready to go and play martir

 

[rcduggan]

yes that is too much of a ripple effect

the ideas are interesting but Bizant is still too strong and eager to extend its influence
and it literarly had priests to throw avay

if Chiril and Method get killed somwhere, and bizant does not send more missionaries, most of the balkans become chatholic

those are the olnly two ways it could of gone

olnly real alternative is a strong Kiev that helps out fellow non-christians, for politicall purposes, but then its not judaism they convert too but a restructured form of slavic religion, or there is a revival of the local faith

still the idea that a number of fairly strong east european/central asian states might not convert to christianity and so naturally form a sistem of aliances against the christian states that would directly opose them, is wery interesting

For the moment disregarding the counterarguments others have presented, there is another part of the TL involving the Byzantines which will result in reduced influence: the commander who in OTL led the Byzantines to victory at the Battle of Poson in 863 instead is fighting in Bulgaria in a vain attempt to stop Boris from converting. So the Greeks lose at Poson, and much of eastern Anatolia falls to the Arabs.

IMO the rest of your post does not make much sense, but that might be just me.

Also, if it changes anything, I am thinking of moving the Moravian raid that kills Richardis to the 870s.

I rather think the ideas proposed by Broz are not altogether unreasonable. rcduggan, the nomadic conversions were not all about politics, you know. These conversions were spiritually neccesary. Once the nomad horde settled down somewhere, their lifestyle changed (for the better, I'd say) dramatically. Monotheism or greater spiritual influence was a need OF THE PEOPLE. The general population, and especially the nobility did look for something more than magical snakes and sacred fire.Therefor, should politics prevent said peoples from converting to the Byzantine and Frankish faith, the conversion to another monotheistic religion is alltogether plausible and could be decided by the rulers, just like that.Now to this specific case:The situation Broz proposes seems radical, and that, in-fact, was true. He examines a TL where Byzantine influence over Bulgaria in the mid 9th century is greatly reduced, leaving two big boys: the Khazars, and the Franks. Now, seemingly, one would say the Franks are much bigger a threat and should be pleased by conversion - but I say the opposite. Appeasing the Franks would be a death-sentence to Boris' rule. He may be forced to surrender territory, and he would certainly be forced to oblige to the whims of their Pope and his goddamn priests. The Khazars, however, want nothing but influence. Their empire is further away geographically (i think?) and closer culturally. In the given situation they seem to replace Byzantium's place in east-European politics. Additionally, having Judaism as the state religion pleases the spiritual need of the people but surrenders spiritual authority to NO ONE.So, given Boris' situation if Cyril and Methodiu are executed, I'd say the first third of the ripple is not completely unplausible, but very possible indeed.The later parts, no one can truly disprove, since such a dramatic change may lead to ANY consequences.

The attempts to convert the Bulgars to Judaism was an OTL event that happened during Boris's reign... obviously there was no success. I just figured that without the conversion of the Moravians, Boris might feel less in a "Christian vice," so to speak, caught between two powers.

The Khazars actually shared a border (before 865) with Bulgaria, along the Dnieper River. However, after the Magyars seceded from Khazaria in the mid 860s, that area was separated and they no longer shared the border. But you are close with cultural proximity. The Volga Bulgarians (also pagan at this point) were tributaries of the Khazars. The Batbayan Bulgars (who lived east of Crimea) were also Jews.

And in what ways did the lifestyles of nomads increase dramatically for the better? If that's the case, why did populations so often re-nomadize? The boundaries between the two, BTW, are not so clear; people drifted back and forth depending on what made the most economic sense.

That is what the Khazars did. In the summer they tended massive farms around the major cities, and in the off-season some resumed nomadic activities. But the shift to sedentary society was beginning at least among the nobility (Ak-Khazars), and IIRC it was the Pecheneg invasion that destroyed that.

The Khazars are not really a viable long-term power that is going to replace the Byzantines in the region - and the execution of two priests is not going to cause the canny Byzantines to torpedo their entire diplomatic posture on a permanent basis.

I agree with this point, which is why I had the Abbasids win at Poson. According to some, it was the battle which finally turned the tables in favor of the Byzantines (I had a link on GoogleBooks, but it is on another computer). So with resurgent Abbasids on their doorstep, it may distract the Phrygians and Macedonians somewhat.

 

[Empror Mike]

This is one of the most breathtakingly condescending and culturocentric posts I have ever read, and that is saying something around here.

And that's truly a non-egocentric non-condescending non-personal way of starting a reply post.

How on Earth do you think you know what the spiritual necessities of 9th c Bulgars were?

I do not, as not much is known about that time at all, especially not for the Bulgars. However, history teaches us a lesson or two about similar situations (nomadic hordes settling in a given territory); such as the Khazars, who did, apparently, have certain spiritual needs.

And how did "primitive" cultures like the Roman Empire manage without Monotheism?

Fact is, that as the lifestyle and life quality improved in the Roman empire, the people did turn to monotheism (by the people I mean those who lived well, not the poor masses of course). The empire was swarming with Jews (some estimates put them on 20% of total pop) and these waren't exiles from palestine. Afterwards, Christianity came and - being less bearing on the "circumsitions and inconvinient dietary ristrictions" - took off real well. The rulers, being politicians, truly chose to convert only when it was politically neccesary but the people converted at need.

Decisions to convert a people were always nearly entirely political. What about the Khazars' "spiritual void" do you think was screaminig out for circumcision and inconvenient dietary restrictions?

Yes, because these restrictions will keep people away from turning to a certain faith... not. At least part of the Khazars, having taken over a large territory and stabilized their reign (and economy, to a limited extant) fealt a spiritual need for - shall we say - a more "fantastic" and omnimystical religion.
Natually, people who convert to certain faiths are often converted, or at least influenced to convert by a certain factor or part of the population. Such as the steppe's mass of Jewish merchants at the time. This, coupled with the political factors, helped ease-up the way for Khazarian conversion.

And I would hope you realize that non-Monotheistic faiths are not all about magic snakes and sacred fire, as you so contemptuously put it. They are real spiritual systems that have supported very advanced and sophisticated cultures, and still do.

I admit that the term monotheism was not the right one to choose. I generally meant religions that are "better" designed as genuine systems of faith rather than a webb of explanatory or political superstitiuns (no offense or hint intended here, too).

There is no reason why the Bulgars could not choose to convert to Judaism, especially given their long history as vassals of the Khazars. In fact in a situation where they are pressed between Catholic and Orthodox powers, it's a real option, much like the Khazars between Byzantium and the Caliphate. Opting for either Catholicism or Orthodoxy threatens to subordinate you to the dominant power of either; Judaism does not.

I think the Bulgars have much less incentive to do this than did the Khazars, but I can assure you the spiritual requirements of THE PEOPLE will have no bearing on the decision.

The spiritual requirements of "THE PEOPLE" will certainly have a bearing on the decision, since "THE PEOPLE" (as I stated in the Roman example, the people who lived well) are a political factor themselves. And if there was a portion of the Bulgar population, who were converted or leaning to conversion by Khazar influence - whether we know of this now or not - this would have certainly had an impact on dear Boris' decision.

The Khazars are not really a viable long-term power that is going to replace the Byzantines in the region - and the execution of two priests is not going to cause the canny Byzantines to torpedo their entire diplomatic posture on a permanent basis.

Boris doesn't study the dark ages in retrospective. If he sees the Byzantines going down, who knows if its temporary or permanent.