Nationalism in Ottonia

Ottonia is and has been home to a number of nationalist movements that have significantly shaped the region from the 17th century CE through the present day. Due to the number of ethno-linguistic and religious groups, as well as historical entities that have occupied the area, many of these movements and intellectual lines are at odds with one another, often with mutually-incompatible goals. For the most part, these movements can be divided between one of two throughlines: the Unificationist movements that broadly seek the region being combined into a single political entity, and Separatist or Regionalist movements that seek either independence or autonomy for groups or regions within Ottonia on ethnic, linguistic, or historical grounds.

Unificationist Movements

Pan-Ottonianism

Pan-Ottonianism in its modern, identifiable form, dates back to the late 17th century. First articulated in the 1687 treatise The Case for an Ottonian People by the Onnerian antiquarian Harald Aldon, Aldon postulated that the shared contact and the imperial history of the region had made the various peoples of the Ottonian states alike in contrast to their southern Audonian and eastern Hval and Kupalnitsan neighbors. This novel was also the first to refer to the area as a whole as "Ottonia"; prior to 1687, the various kingdoms and petty states that had risen in the aftermath of the Empire's collapse had sometimes been called "the Ottonian states" or "the Ottonian kingdoms", but the area had never been referred to as "Ottonia" other than as a descriptor. It is difficult to overstate the consequences of this work; for the first time, thinkers and policy-makers in the various Ottonian states were faced with the idea of a single, distinct region, one that perhaps ought to be unified.

The movement only accelerated with the publication of the book The Ways of Our Ancestors, a book which piggybacked off of Case, by the Tyrrslynder historian Graegur Hollenswyrth, in 1709. In the book, Hollenswyrth attempted to reconstruct the pre-Fabrian religious practices of the "Ottonian peoples." In spite of being based off of what turned out to be somewhat dubious scholarship, the vision of the ancient "right way to live" sparked a religious revival, especially strong in northern and eastern Ottonia, presenting a real, serious challenge to the authority of the Honorian Church in the region, and inspiring in many young thinkers and radicals a vision of a united Ottonia, freed from the shackles of the Honorian Church and, usually implicitly, the stagnancy of inherited privilege.

The iconoclastic and implicitly republican overtones of Pan-Ottonianism meant that the movement, despite picking up steam in all of the Ottonian kingdoms, was officially suppressed by their respective governments. The fears of the movement would prove justified, as the Tyrrslynd monarchy would find itself deposed and forced to flee to a holdout in Draakurr during the Jormundean Revolution. The Ostmarker monarchy would find itself likewise deposed, and the Innian Archduchy would be brought in line by Innian Pan-Ottonians, resulting in much of Northern Ottonia joining the Pan-Ottonian Alliance. Fears of the growing movement would trigger the Siege of Ottonia (1854) and the Wars of Ottonian Unification that would, in 1872, end in the unification of the entire region under the Ottonia#Ottonian Federation. During the post-unification period, the movement split into two competing schools: the Futurists, and the Traditionalists.

Futurist

The school of Pan-Ottonianism which was primarily aligned with the Federation, the Futurists sought an Ottonia which was largely converted to Reytled and thus under that single primary religious system, as well as desiring the defeat of monarchism and inherited privilege. The Futurists would gradually dissolve into a number of other schools, based on other dominant proclivities; some would find themselves affiliated with Allamunnic nationalist movements, socialist movements, radical republicanism, and still others would abandon Pan-Ottonianism entirely. During the Federation's half-century, "Futurist Pan-Ottonianism" largely came to be synonymous with the middle-class-led, republican Federal government.

Traditionalist

Somewhat confusingly, the Traditionalists actually sought a radical change in Ottonian society. Largely Reytled adherants and frequently utopian socialists, the Traditionalists sought to slow the tide of industrialization and create an agrarian, pagan paradise within Ottonia. The Traditionalists were also more culturally pluralist, being the primary school that emphasized autonomy for ethnolinguistic minorities within the country.

Neo-Imperialist

Following the unification of Ottonia in 1872, many former royalists and partisans of the pre-unification states found themselves entranced by the possibilities of the newly-unified state. The Neo-Imperialists sought the "restoration" of the House of Otto in the form of a new dynasty to rule the unified country, to lead Ottonia into a new era as a superpower as well as turning back the tide of apostasy. Despite occasional tensions, this group largely found themselves allied with the last group. Although not explicit, many Neo-Imperialists held the belief that Allamunnae were the dominant group within Ottonia and their culture should be favored accordingly.

Invictists

The Invictist school of Pan-Ottonianism began to coalesce in the early 1900's, unified by the idea that Ottonia could and should become a Belisarian superpower, that the Empire should be reformed, and society radically transformed into a martial one ruled by a warrior elite; monarchy was negotiable. The Invictists, even more than the Neo-Imperialists, conflated the Ottonian state with the Honorian Church, and sought a future in which the Honorian Church would serve as an organ of the unified Ottonian state. The Invictists, even more so than the Neo-Imperialists, largely conflated Pan-Ottonianism with Allamunnic nationalism.

Separatist or regionalist movements

Allamunnic nationalism

Due to the Allamunnae's historical political dominance over the other ethnolinguistic groups of Ottonia, Allamunnic nationalism has been the most prone to conflation with Pan-Ottonianism, and often manifests less as a separatist ideology and more as the idea that Allamunnic culture and language should be favored in the context of the Ottonian state. In North Ottonia this ideology is largely defunct due to efforts to maximize regional autonomy and the fact that ethnic Allamunnae only make up a small plurality of the population, but in South Ottonia this is largely the de facto position of the state due to a much more homogenous ethnic makeup.

Eonese nationalism

The Eonese people speak a language that, unlike Allamunnic and its sister languages, is a descendent of Latin. Living primarily in northwest Ottonia, the Eonese people have had a history of living alongside and sometimes fighting their Allamunnic and Corvaik neighbors, and then of being ruled by Allamunnae in the Archduchy of Innia. Eonese nationalism initially started as a pushback against Pan-Ottonianism in an era where the latter was largely conflated with Allamunnic nationalism, with Eonese identity gradually forming alongside a call for the end of Allamunnic rule over the Eonese, the preservation of their own language, and in some cases, for independence. Eonese nationalism has historically had a strongly-republican character, with the left-right divide among Eonese nationalists usually coming more along religious lines. In modern times, the movement has become more muted, as most Eonese people live within North Ottonia, where an autonomous Eonese republic is largely allowed to self-govern its internal affairs.