Introduction: 1316
"On the 5th of June, in 1316, Louis X of France (also Louis I of Navarre), commonly called 'the Hutin', departed from life, most likely as the result of drinking an excessive quantity of chilled wine after a vigorous game of tennis. It was the end of a brief and unhappy reign that had begun with scandal, misery and embarrassment. Louis X had attempted many things during his reign, and succeeded at exactly one, something that, in typical fashion, only became clear some months after his death.

That one thing was, in theory, a simple matter, and yet Louis had either failed at or made a rather dismal attempt of it for the last decade, depending on who one asked. However, on the 15th of November, his success became definite. That one thing, of course, was securing the line of succession, a feat Louis and his second wife Clementia of Hungary had performed by bringing forth a male child that was indubitably his, feats his alleged daughter by his first wife Margaret of Burgundy, Joan, could obviously not boast of.

As the young boy born a king was baptised and christened 'John', as his mother had wished, his uncle Phillip 'the Tall', Count of Poitiers must have looked on with a mix of resentment and satisfaction. Resentment because had John been a stillborn or a girl, he would have had an excellent chance at taking the throne himself. Satisfaction, because as Regent he was the most powerful man in the kingdom, having successfully elbowed his ambitious uncle Charles of Valois out of the way.

How was Phillip to know that in a handful of years he would be dead, and his uncle would once again have clambered into power? And the boy he cast those perhaps envious glances at? John the Posthumous would live. Indeed there were many long hard years ahead for this man who would live and die a king for all the days of his life."

--John I of France, Vol. 1; A King in His Cradle, Antony Oates (1978)

---
Just a little something I've started up to keep myself busy. Enjoy.
 
Always glad to see new stuff from you -- and to see your wit applied to the disasters of the 14th century...
 
Yep. This will change the conflict of England and France during this time, of course, but the fact remains, those two were on a collision course.
 
Keep it up Space! Any help required in the time period? (I would personally recommend A Distant Mirror by Barbara Tuchman for 14th century France/England/Europe)
 
And now, a few important characters who will play a part in the next installment of our tale.

Estampes_par_Nicolas_de_Larmessin.f056.Philippe_V%2C_roi_de_France.jpg

Philip the Tall, Count of Poitiers, and Regent of France

240px-Robert3.jpg

Robert of Flanders


225px-Flandry1.jpg

Louis of Nevers

EdwardII-Cassell.jpg

Edward II of England

490px-Karel_Valois.jpg

Charles, Count of Valois, and TITULAR LATIN EMPEROR OF CONSTANTINOPLE

John_I_of_France.jpg

And little baby King John the Posthumous, of France.
 
1317-20: France
1317-1320: DIVERS SQUABBLES

"The Count of Poitiers began his regency under numerous shadows. Perhaps the most severe was a rather patchy war, his brother's lackluster effort to bring Robert of Flanders to heel. The Hutin had waged a monumentally ineffectual campaign again Count Robert, one which had succeeded in nothing but wasting funds and turning the region near Flanders into an increasingly lawless no-man's land. Bringing this situation to some sort of a conclusion would dominate the early portion of Philip's regency.

"But there were other problems to occupy his times--King Edward II of England continued to refuse to pay homage for his Gascon lands, maintaining the intransigent stance he had throughout Louis X's reign. Charles of Valois and Eudes of Burgundy both considered themselves robbed of their rightful position in the government, and deluged the Regent with countless complaints, debates on matters of precedence, and vague accusations of wrong-doing. While Eudes' complaints lessened with his marriage to Philip's eldest daughter[1], the Regent's uncle proved harder to satisfy.

"Ironically, it was the first problem that proved the easiest to solve--despite their relative success, Flemish support for the war was waning, both from below and, to a more immediate effect, at the top. While Robert had spent his life in measured defiance of the French crown, his son and grandson, Louis the Elder and Younger of Nevers and Revel, were different men--French nobles with heavy (and growing) ties to Paris. And Robert himself was an old man, increasingly aware of his mortality. As the calls came to reach a peaceable arrangement with France, he listened to them, though his grandson's marriage to the Regent's second daughter, Margaret in 1320 doubtless played a role as well.[2]

"Edward of England would prove more intractable, despite his arguably weaker hand. Even facing an ongoing war with Scotland that was going poorly, a situation in England itself that bordered on an undeclared civil war, and a constant sequence of embarassments that would include a one-eared man in Oxford claiming to be the true king of England[3], Edward refused to pay homage. His offered reasons for this would change constantly, ranging from claims of instability to matters of precedence--on several occasions, he would even suggest the homage be put off until John I reached his majority. Despite the risks of this approach, with its accompanying dangers of a confrontation with France, Edward kept it, possibly because it represented the only thing close to a success in his foreign policy. For now, he was able to escape any retribution simply because Philip was distracted by other business--poor harvests, regency disputes, the matter in Flanders, and in late 1320, something more severe...

--John I of France, Vol. 1; A King in His Cradle, Antony Oates (1978)

---------------------
[1] They were likewise married IOTL. While her status would be a little lower ITTL, the fact remains that young Joan happens to be a very tempting potential heiress even if she isn't a royal princess.

[2] See above.

[3] John Deydras, also known as John of Powderham was a clerk who claimed to have been the REAL Edward II, with the man who was going around being king being in reality some carter's child who had been swapped with him. In 1318, he started going around and challenging the King to single combat. This ended with his arrest, and execution, along with his cat, which he stated had given him the whole idea.

Not making any of that up.
 
Well, a Space Oddity TL was the thing that got me to make my first post on the previous forum, so it's only proper that another Space Oddity TL is the thing that gets me to make my first post on this new forum ;)

If King John lives as long as his cousin Edward (and I'm sure they'll get along just famously), he'll reign until 1381, and a lot of very eventful happenings took place between now and then. Obviously the big questions of what changes with his survival pertain to the Hundred Years' War, but what about the Black Death? One imagines that such a significant event wouldn't be butterflied... would it?
 
If King John lives as long as his cousin Edward (and I'm sure they'll get along just famously), he'll reign until 1381,

That would be one long reign, wouldn't it? :cool:

Obviously the big questions of what changes with his survival pertain to the Hundred Years' War, but what about the Black Death? One imagines that such a significant event wouldn't be butterflied... would it?

Well, obviously, Edward couldn't pull the "I'm the real King of France" card, but then, that's unlikely to stop him from causing trouble, isn't it?

As for the Black Death--given that the demographics for it had been in place for decades now, yeah, that big ol' bullet ain't getting dodged.
 
Hm. What's happening to Charles, Count of La Marche (OTL Charles IV)? Would he still die without any sons? Hopefully, he does, so his appanage like that given to the regent Philip, would revert to the crown.
 
Hm. What's happening to Charles, Count of La Marche (OTL Charles IV)? Would he still die without any sons? Hopefully, he does, so his appanage like that given to the regent Philip, would revert to the crown.

Charles is puttering about being Count of La Marche. He's really not a terribly assertive fellow, despite being the Regent's brother.
 
Well it's pretty hard for this PoD to not make the world a much better place. It could hardly make it worse considering what a clusterfuck this bit of history was. Right?
 
Well it's pretty hard for this PoD to not make the world a much better place. It could hardly make it worse considering what a clusterfuck this bit of history was. Right?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! x'D

Sorry, just had to get that out of my system.

Simply put, many of the problems that lead to said clusterfuck are already there. Some elements may be lessened--and Edward probably won't try to claim to be King of France--but the fact is, this was never gonna be an easy century.
 
1320-1: France
1320-1: THE SHEPHERDS' CRUSADE, THE COWHERDS' CRUSADE, AND THE LEPERS' PLOT

"...It was in the early spring, by most accounts, when a teenaged shepherd, one Stephen of Rouen, by most accounts[1], claimed to have been visited by the Virgin Mary who told him that God had called upon men to take up the cross and drive the Moors from Iberia. (Though some say Stephen was a defrocked priest, and some say he called upon men to deliver Jerusalem.) The message spread amongst the lower orders and the meanest of men, who gathered together and, spreading havoc wherever they did go, marched upon Paris, where they called upon the Count of Poitiers to meet with them. When he did not, they did rampage throughout the city, setting lose prisoners held the Grand Chatelet, killing Jews and Italians, and in all ways acting without restraint or law. Marching to the south, they made their way to Languedoc, persecuting Jews and any other who met with their ire along the way, and earning the ire and approbation of the Pope, who denounced them, and said they were no true crusaders. While much of the movement simply degenerated into bandits, waylaying travelers and performing other acts of violence, a small portion arrived in Aragon, where in the guise of offering their services to its king[2] they continued to pass their time with assaults upon the Jews, until the king was forced to attack them, forcing them to disperse. So ended the Shepherds' Crusade.

"And yet the folly was not finished, for the Count of Poitiers declared that restitution was to be offered to the Jews for their suffering. In response to this, a cowherd, William the Lame, did proclaim that the Regent was an impious lord, a veritable Herod, in the service of the Devil. Once again the mean and vulgar gathered together and called their riots a crusade, stating they would free France from the wicked man who had made himself master, against all right and law, and then march to save the Holy City. They spent their time attacking the Jews, bishops, and agents of royal authority, so that the Count was forced to march to restore order throughout the kingdom. Falling upon the main body of them in Cahors, he crushed them utterly, and captured William the Lame, who was tried as a traitor and hanged...[3]

"But the madness had not yet passed, for during this time, a great pestilence of flux came to pass where the Shepherds and Cowherds were practicing their folly, likely from the gathering of so many together and the wreckage they had left in their wake. But rather then recognize this, the people sought a sacrificial lamb, and lighted upon the lowest and meanest, the lepers, who they said were poisoning wells to spread the contagion. Capturing them, many of these poor people were tortured and made to confess to these imaginary crimes, which some did, stating they did them at the instigation of the Jews. Yet another wave of persecution swept through the south of France, and when the Count of Poitiers went to restore order, he himself became ill from the contagion, expiring near the end of the year...[4]"

--From The Passions of Mobs, by John Roy (1845)

--------------------------------------------------------------
[1] This name is more then we know IOTL, though as the later sections of this should make clear, this author isn't necessarily the most accurate of sources.

[2] James II of Aragon, who responded in this fashion IOTL as well.

[3] The above paragraph is a combination of later fantasies and accretions to the events of the year--while there were riots and further Jewish persecutions, ITTL as IOTL, there really was no "Cowherds' Crusade" movement to accompany them.

[4] Philip died early in 1322 IOTL.
 
Last edited:
Top