Europa Universalis: Our World (Alternate Earth: OOC/Open)

[Bordurian]

I'm fine with the Orthodox. Just not Protestants.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

I'm fine with the Orthodox. Just not Protestants.

"You see those people over there with almost the exact same beliefs as mine? I wanna kill em."

[Ceannairceach]

Heretics will be killed, certainly; That does not mean that every person who doesn't follow the Pope, twelve percent of my nation I might add, will be killed. But a show of loyalty is certainly not not following them.

So you will not be following the churches orders because you disagree with it. Hence, you are not listening and in fact ignoring the church, at least to some extent. I'm not saying you can't, though I find it very odd that in a time when the church was supremely important you wouldn't, I'm just pointing out it will most likely contribute to the Catholic churches complete collapse.

The church, it seems, is collapsing already at this point; Ireland wouldn't support it entirely if it didn't hold the sway it did in our timeline. A show of faith is all that is rational and reasonable at this time.

[New Sapienta]

I'm fine with the Orthodox. Just not Protestants.

"You see those people over there with almost the exact same beliefs as mine? I wanna kill em."

His doing it to not piss off his predominantly Orthodox neighbors.

[Mondrova]

I'm fine with the Orthodox. Just not Protestants.

I imagine you wouldn't be fine with them, since there aren't any.

[Parhe]

I'm fine with the Orthodox. Just not Protestants.

I don't think they exist yet

[Bordurian]

I'm fine with the Orthodox. Just not Protestants.

I don't think they exist yet

Not yet but when they do *clenches fist* I will hunt and kill.

[Mondrova]

I don't think they exist yet

Not yet but when they do *clenches fist* I will hunt and kill.

I doubt they ever will exist.

[Mishmahig]

So hey, guys, I was reading over the current IC thread, and, uhm, I have a few key issues I'd like to point out, if you don't mind...

Maidstone
Duchy of Kent
Duke Cledwyn, serving prime minister of the Empire was sitting comfortably in his grand mansion. It would be hard to believe that just sixteen years ago, this very man was just a peasant roaming in streets of Wales, doing whatever job came his way and living on the edge. Who says there is lack of social mobility in the Empire? They need look no further than Cledwyn to see how utterly wrong they were. Anyone could climb social ladder if they had sufficient courage, will and most importantly didn't shy away from hard work. Nothing to do with luck at all.

Hi, so uhm, first of all, excellent post, very well written and well done.

However, if I understand this correctly, a Welsh peasant went from a homeless jack-of-all trades to one of the most powerful men in the Empire, with one of the highest titles in medieval Europe, in addition to a massive estate, all in the span of sixteen years? May I ask how this is possible, given that social mobility in the medieval ages was either limited to the Church or marrying above your class. There are examples of commoners and peasants being elevated to higher social classes, but that usually occurred by marrying a wealthy and high-class widow (unlikely and, as far as I can tell, has only happened a few times in the medieval era), or by entering the Church (which, since he's a Duke, is obviously not the case).

Now, kings and queens did sometimes grant titles and knight commoners, but this was an uncommon case, and the titles were usually low-level, with no large estates and/or prestige attached. To grant a commoner such a high title of Duke would cause severe unrest among the other nobility, who would likely see it as eroding the prestige and honor of their class, or as an insult to themselves.

Plymouth, Cornwall
The Walls of Plymouth
Feburary 28th, 1402
Mid-day

A Young Person, Wore wore prominent clothes, slowly walked with his horse closely follows towards the gate. The Guards noticed him and bowed with their spears still standing in their clutches.

"Open the gate!" The Person shouted, his voice a little annoyed.

The Guards immediately went to work and the wooden gate slowly slid outwards with a creak. Suddenly, a gaurd stopped the Person,

"Sire" Stammered the Guard, "a-are you sure you want to go out there all by yourself?"

"Thou should not be worried about me" Replied the Monarch while getting onto his pet, "but thou does have a point, I will be able to support up to 5 or 15 strong men".

Not as serious, but why is your king walking out of his city in plainsclothes, escorted by only a few people? Since he's young, it's likely he doesn't have an heir (or if he does, the heir is very young), which means that if he were waylaid by bandits, the kingdom would be thrown into turmoil.

Not really a problem, but something to keep in mind.

The numerous arguments stemmed from the recent message received from the Papacy, who had the gall to request that Rome, home to equality for all, exterminate all so-called "heretics".

We don't have equality for all in a good portion of the globe today, let alone in the 1400s, which was a period of time known for bat-shit insane religious purges and whatnot. I mean, the Crusades are just beginning to finish IRL...

Marcus, who was a self-described "religious abstainer" found the idea barbaric and quite simply, crazy.

What.

"In it, they demanded that we, a haven of equality and fair treatment n the known world, begin the systematic destruction of so-called 'heretics' within our fair nation."

1400s, no one is a haven of equality and fair treatment. Actually, at this point, the Arabs/Islamics would most likely be the greatest haven of tolerance, since they only taxed unbelievers. Europe was most certainly not a bastion of equality, and was downright barbaric.

However I for one cannot imagine a Republic where only one religion is tolerated, where freedom is stifled and rights are not given

1208, Albigensian Crusade. The entire Cathar sect, which was a non-violent and pacifistic sect of Catholicism, which was not all that popular and didn't challenge the Catholic Church, was wiped out. Islam, countless Crusades all throughout this time period. Orthodox Church, massive schism, and the sack of one of their most powerful cities, Constantinople. The English Civil War, in the 1650s, was motivated largely because of divides between Catholicism and Protestantism.

Freedom of religion was totally incompatible with the time period, and wouldn't exist for centuries to come.

And thus I call, for a vote to refuse these outright idiotic orders from the Pope! We are, and will always remain faithful Christians, however we must not let ourselves be corrupted by these ancient and intolerant views.

Calling the Pope idiotic is likely to get oneself lynched by those who, y'know, believe him to be the mouthpiece of God, like, y'know, the vast majority of Europeans in this time period. Given that your nation is around the heart of Christendom on Earth, it's unlikely that your leader can stand up and call the Pope a moron in a public forum without some sort of massive backlash.

Marcus grinned, and the Speaker announced that through democratic vote, the Republic would not follow the orders of the Papacy.

So, the nation that contains the heart of Christendom on Earth, with the best relation with the Catholic Church (in your words), in one of the most Catholic areas on the planet, in a time where the Inquisition was in full force, decides to disobey the Catholic Church. Not only that, but insult the Pope, mock his call for cleansing of Europe (after the Crusades are just finishing up, mind you), and there's no backlash whatsoever? How does that work?

Guys. 1600s, the Thirty Years' war, was a massive conflict between the Catholics and the Protestants that devastated a huge portion of Europe for decades, and led to entire towns and countries being wiped out. Religion played a HUGE role (although there were other things too) in this war. 1640s, English Civil War, another massive war where the English Parliamentarians feared the King would force the rule and authority of the Catholic Church on them again. These wars are two hundred and change years from now, after immense social, political, economic, and (above all), mental changes in the world. 1400s? None of it happened yet.

While this is an AWRP, and we are allowed quite a bit of freedom, it doesn't mean we can toss out everything that happened IRL.

But the Dominion was under Laninga's control, and he would not allow them to be an omnipresent and corrupt force that would influence his decisions. Even as a Catholic, he would not have his religion corrupted by the might of the Pope.

Actually, most governments would see this as a good thing, since it would allow them to seize the property of the heretics, and redistribute any wealth/estates/titles the heretics owned to their own supporters. It's why Crusades and "kill the heretic!" were so popular for so long.

Pushing his hands back on his graying hair, he messaged the heretic communities to alarm them of the Pope's threat. It also advised to practice discreetly, as he did not want to make his opposition public. He wrote documents to give the Papacy a fake reassurance that the law was in effect.

...........why would he care? They're heretics. They're condemned to burn in hell in the eyes of any Catholic, and it is his duty, as a self-professed Catholic, to obey the word of the Pope and convert the heretic, or kill them if they refuse. And it's not like it doesn't help his own government..

[New Sapienta]

Not yet but when they do *clenches fist* I will hunt and kill.

I doubt they ever will exist.

A schism of some sort will happen though.

We are supposed to be at least marginally historical.

[Bordurian]

Not yet but when they do *clenches fist* I will hunt and kill.

I doubt they ever will exist.

Damnit.

[Mondrova]

I doubt they ever will exist.

A schism of some sort will happen though.

We are supposed to be at least marginally historical.

No, there most likely wont, there is no reason for one, especially when the church collapses, at least as I think it will.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

It's interesting when you realise it's likely the Jews are going to probably end up more influential than the Catholics.

[Bordurian]

It's interesting when you realise it's likely the Jews are going to probably end up more influential than the Catholics.

Says who?

[Mondrova]

So hey, guys, I was reading over the current IC thread, and, uhm, I have a few key issues I'd like to point out, if you don't mind...

Maidstone
Duchy of Kent
Duke Cledwyn, serving prime minister of the Empire was sitting comfortably in his grand mansion. It would be hard to believe that just sixteen years ago, this very man was just a peasant roaming in streets of Wales, doing whatever job came his way and living on the edge. Who says there is lack of social mobility in the Empire? They need look no further than Cledwyn to see how utterly wrong they were. Anyone could climb social ladder if they had sufficient courage, will and most importantly didn't shy away from hard work. Nothing to do with luck at all.

Hi, so uhm, first of all, excellent post, very well written and well done.

However, if I understand this correctly, a Welsh peasant went from a homeless jack-of-all trades to one of the most powerful men in the Empire, with one of the highest titles in medieval Europe, in addition to a massive estate, all in the span of sixteen years? May I ask how this is possible, given that social mobility in the medieval ages was either limited to the Church or marrying above your class. There are examples of commoners and peasants being elevated to higher social classes, but that usually occurred by marrying a wealthy and high-class widow (unlikely and, as far as I can tell, has only happened a few times in the medieval era), or by entering the Church (which, since he's a Duke, is obviously not the case).

Now, kings and queens did sometimes grant titles and knight commoners, but this was an uncommon case, and the titles were usually low-level, with no large estates and/or prestige attached. To grant a commoner such a high title of Duke would cause severe unrest among the other nobility, who would likely see it as eroding the prestige and honor of their class, or as an insult to themselves.

Plymouth, Cornwall
The Walls of Plymouth
Feburary 28th, 1402
Mid-day

A Young Person, Wore wore prominent clothes, slowly walked with his horse closely follows towards the gate. The Guards noticed him and bowed with their spears still standing in their clutches.

"Open the gate!" The Person shouted, his voice a little annoyed.

The Guards immediately went to work and the wooden gate slowly slid outwards with a creak. Suddenly, a gaurd stopped the Person,

"Sire" Stammered the Guard, "a-are you sure you want to go out there all by yourself?"

"Thou should not be worried about me" Replied the Monarch while getting onto his pet, "but thou does have a point, I will be able to support up to 5 or 15 strong men".

Not as serious, but why is your king walking out of his city in plainsclothes, escorted by only a few people? Since he's young, it's likely he doesn't have an heir (or if he does, the heir is very young), which means that if he were waylaid by bandits, the kingdom would be thrown into turmoil.

Not really a problem, but something to keep in mind.

The numerous arguments stemmed from the recent message received from the Papacy, who had the gall to request that Rome, home to equality for all, exterminate all so-called "heretics".

We don't have equality for all in a good portion of the globe today, let alone in the 1400s, which was a period of time known for bat-shit insane religious purges and whatnot. I mean, the Crusades are just beginning to finish IRL...

Marcus, who was a self-described "religious abstainer" found the idea barbaric and quite simply, crazy.

What.

"In it, they demanded that we, a haven of equality and fair treatment n the known world, begin the systematic destruction of so-called 'heretics' within our fair nation."

1400s, no one is a haven of equality and fair treatment. Actually, at this point, the Arabs/Islamics would most likely be the greatest haven of tolerance, since they only taxed unbelievers. Europe was most certainly not a bastion of equality, and was downright barbaric.

However I for one cannot imagine a Republic where only one religion is tolerated, where freedom is stifled and rights are not given

1208, Albigensian Crusade. The entire Cathar sect, which was a non-violent and pacifistic sect of Catholicism, which was not all that popular and didn't challenge the Catholic Church, was wiped out. Islam, countless Crusades all throughout this time period. Orthodox Church, massive schism, and the sack of one of their most powerful cities, Constantinople. The English Civil War, in the 1650s, was motivated largely because of divides between Catholicism and Protestantism.

Freedom of religion was totally incompatible with the time period, and wouldn't exist for centuries to come.

And thus I call, for a vote to refuse these outright idiotic orders from the Pope! We are, and will always remain faithful Christians, however we must not let ourselves be corrupted by these ancient and intolerant views.

Calling the Pope idiotic is likely to get oneself lynched by those who, y'know, believe him to be the mouthpiece of God, like, y'know, the vast majority of Europeans in this time period. Given that your nation is around the heart of Christendom on Earth, it's unlikely that your leader can stand up and call the Pope a moron in a public forum without some sort of massive backlash.

Marcus grinned, and the Speaker announced that through democratic vote, the Republic would not follow the orders of the Papacy.

So, the nation that contains the heart of Christendom on Earth, with the best relation with the Catholic Church (in your words), in one of the most Catholic areas on the planet, in a time where the Inquisition was in full force, decides to disobey the Catholic Church. Not only that, but insult the Pope, mock his call for cleansing of Europe (after the Crusades are just finishing up, mind you), and there's no backlash whatsoever? How does that work?

Guys. 1600s, the Thirty Years' war, was a massive conflict between the Catholics and the Protestants that devastated a huge portion of Europe for decades, and led to entire towns and countries being wiped out. Religion played a HUGE role (although there were other things too) in this war. 1640s, English Civil War, another massive war where the English Parliamentarians feared the King would force the rule and authority of the Catholic Church on them again. These wars are two hundred and change years from now, after immense social, political, economic, and (above all), mental changes in the world. 1400s? None of it happened yet.

While this is an AWRP, and we are allowed quite a bit of freedom, it doesn't mean we can toss out everything that happened IRL.

But the Dominion was under Laninga's control, and he would not allow them to be an omnipresent and corrupt force that would influence his decisions. Even as a Catholic, he would not have his religion corrupted by the might of the Pope.

Actually, most governments would see this as a good thing, since it would allow them to seize the property of the heretics, and redistribute any wealth/estates/titles the heretics owned to their own supporters. It's why Crusades and "kill the heretic!" were so popular for so long.

Pushing his hands back on his graying hair, he messaged the heretic communities to alarm them of the Pope's threat. It also advised to practice discreetly, as he did not want to make his opposition public. He wrote documents to give the Papacy a fake reassurance that the law was in effect.

...........why would he care? They're heretics. They're condemned to burn in hell in the eyes of any Catholic, and it is his duty, as a self-professed Catholic, to obey the word of the Pope and convert the heretic, or kill them if they refuse. And it's not like it doesn't help his own government..

Yeah, guys, seriously, AWRP's are still meant to be based in reality, a lot of what has been described here is simply not possible.

[Aeken]

Hey, I could edit. Most of the good stuff was eaten when I wrote it. It was very sad. And besides, who were the people who made Protestantism? Catholics.

[New Sapienta]

A schism of some sort will happen though.

We are supposed to be at least marginally historical.

No, there most likely wont, there is no reason for one, especially when the church collapses, at least as I think it will.

That would only cause more reason, as people will think the Church collapsed for a reason.

[Mondrova]

Hey, I could edit. Most of the good stuff was eaten when I wrote it. It was very sad. And besides, who were the people who made Protestantism? Catholics.

Okay?

[Ceannairceach]

Minor change to application; Changed Catharism to Lollardy and threw it some more percentage points to make it a more present threat.

[Aeken]

Hey, I could edit. Most of the good stuff was eaten when I wrote it. It was very sad. And besides, who were the people who made Protestantism? Catholics.

Okay?

Okay to what?

[Mondrova]

No, there most likely wont, there is no reason for one, especially when the church collapses, at least as I think it will.

That would only cause more reason, as people will think the Church collapsed for a reason.

If you have no church, you cannot have a schism, because Catholicism would not exist.

EDIT: It could move to another city and try and start up there, but it would be so weak that were it moved would probably want to have it, and so it is doubtful there would be a divide.

[Mondrova]

Okay?

Okay to what?

And besides, who were the people who made Protestantism? Catholics. Since I have no idea what you were talking about before that.

[Ceannairceach]

That would only cause more reason, as people will think the Church collapsed for a reason.

If you have no church, you cannot have a schism, because Catholicism would not exist.

Indeed. Rather, you would have breakaway sects that take up the lands of the church after its fall.

[Aeken]

Okay to what?

And besides, who were the people who made Protestantism? Catholics. Since I have no idea what you were talking about before that.

I was talking about when I made a previous post that was more realistic was nonexistent after I submitted it.

[Mondrova]

If you have no church, you cannot have a schism, because Catholicism would not exist.

Indeed. Rather, you would have breakaway sects that take up the lands of the church after its fall.

There would be the Kristians, the Christains, the Christions, and the Caffolics. *nods