Anglo-French union, 1500

Two years ago, I played in a LARP called Temptemus Papam, simulating a fictional 1500 papal election. I was Henry VII. In the game, alliances went differently from in OTL: the most important two changes are that I negotiated a marriage alliance with France, which with legal changes would allow Henry VIII to inherit both realms, and that the player of Louis XII made a compromise with the player of Ascanio Sforza, allowing the Sforza to rule Milan in the name of France.

Here is a narrative version of the scenario I drew as a result of this. It goes as far as 2013, and is about 55,000 words.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ewlh3jE8iE3vgnzdTvh6VaHJoaijU2MPpvXbtwjya3I/edit

A few notes:

1. Strictly speaking, there are multiple PODs all in rapid succession. If you want to retcon it as a single POD, then imagine that, shortly after the birth of Charles V, Louis XII got into an accident that prevented him from having future children. This would get him worried about succession early, and might get him to actually make that agreement with England, to balance against the upcoming Austro-Spanish union.

2. This TL is fairly parallel in the sense that the industrial centers and such are the same as in OTL, and major conflicts happened around the same time as in OTL. I have a somewhat deterministic view of history, one in which Europe's industrialization was triggered by the maturation of its North American colonies, the world wars were triggered by conflict over colonies between the established major power and an upstart, communism as a serious force is an inevitable consequence of early industrialization, and so on. Even locations of new industrial centers like Birmingham and Manchester were for the most part already ordained by geographic factors by 1500, even if those specific cities were still tiny. A few decisions could have gone the other way, and I mentally coin-flipped: the biggest is that Japan did not have to industrialize early and Turkey could have (China was pretty much hopeless by the POD).

3. There's a lot of genocide and ethnic cleansing, some of which is flipped from OTL. Often the genocidaires get away with it. I hope I don't get accused of promoting either; I did try to be very clear about consequences like "the black slaves who were returned to Africa died of tropical diseases" or "Germany and Russia killed millions of Poles."

4. Later in the TL, I talk more about economic history. 2013 francs ~ OTL's 2013 dollars. It's actually not because I wanted to match modern currency value, but because I wanted to match that of OTL's mid-19th century Britain for a story I started writing about Anna Natri, and it was just easier to assume a factor-of-100 inflation rate since then, as in OTL's Britain, and not a factor-of-20 rate as in OTL's America.

5. I don't really have good maps. I asked a while back how to make maps and never got a fully satisfactory answer. I have a few Google Earth maps for borders, but in a lot of cases, especially colonial African and Southeast Asian borders, you'll have to infer things from the text.

6. For the North American cities, I definitely took shortcuts, like calling *New York New Amsterdam where it would probably fit better to call it New Antwerp (instead, New Antwerp = *Albany), and keeping a lot of geographic or Native American names. The TL has 1 or 2 cities with the same name as a different OTL city (Narragansett = *Providence, if it counts, and 1 city that's too small to be discussed). So in general, if you see a recognizable name, it's the same city, maybe with a slightly different CBD location. For the other cities: Monvert = *Richmond, VA; New Suffolk = *Norfolk, VA; New Bristol = *Boston; Alba = *Vancouver; Henriville = *Georgetown/Washington; Ohio City = *Cincinnati; Hodgeton = *Columbus, OH; Point Junction = *Atlanta; New Liege = *Birmingham, AL. North American provinces are a lot like US states, at least in the East; the big differences are that NC/SC/GA are divided into 2 (Thomasina and Carolina) and not 3, AL/MS/eastern LA are one province, New Netherlands = NY+NJ+western VT, New Scotland = PA+DE, and New Devon = NH+southern ME (most of ME is in Acadia).
 

Saphroneth

Banned
One problem with Henry VII making a marriage alliance is that he kind of already was in one - with the House of York.
 
Henry VII married into the House of York, but Arthur (and later Henry VIII) did not. Henry VII could easily perceive the emerging Habsburg union as a greater threat than France and married Arthur/Henry VIII to Claude of France and not to Catherine of Aragon.
 
Two years ago, I played in a LARP called Temptemus Papam, simulating a fictional 1500 papal election. I was Henry VII. In the game, alliances went differently from in OTL: the most important two changes are that I negotiated a marriage alliance with France, which with legal changes would allow Henry VIII to inherit both realms, and that the player of Louis XII made a compromise with the player of Ascanio Sforza, allowing the Sforza to rule Milan in the name of France.

Here is a narrative version of the scenario I drew as a result of this. It goes as far as 2013, and is about 55,000 words.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ewlh3jE8iE3vgnzdTvh6VaHJoaijU2MPpvXbtwjya3I/edit

A few notes:

1. Strictly speaking, there are multiple PODs all in rapid succession. If you want to retcon it as a single POD, then imagine that, shortly after the birth of Charles V, Louis XII got into an accident that prevented him from having future children. This would get him worried about succession early, and might get him to actually make that agreement with England, to balance against the upcoming Austro-Spanish union.

2. This TL is fairly parallel in the sense that the industrial centers and such are the same as in OTL, and major conflicts happened around the same time as in OTL. I have a somewhat deterministic view of history, one in which Europe's industrialization was triggered by the maturation of its North American colonies, the world wars were triggered by conflict over colonies between the established major power and an upstart, communism as a serious force is an inevitable consequence of early industrialization, and so on. Even locations of new industrial centers like Birmingham and Manchester were for the most part already ordained by geographic factors by 1500, even if those specific cities were still tiny. A few decisions could have gone the other way, and I mentally coin-flipped: the biggest is that Japan did not have to industrialize early and Turkey could have (China was pretty much hopeless by the POD).

3. There's a lot of genocide and ethnic cleansing, some of which is flipped from OTL. Often the genocidaires get away with it. I hope I don't get accused of promoting either; I did try to be very clear about consequences like "the black slaves who were returned to Africa died of tropical diseases" or "Germany and Russia killed millions of Poles."

4. Later in the TL, I talk more about economic history. 2013 francs ~ OTL's 2013 dollars. It's actually not because I wanted to match modern currency value, but because I wanted to match that of OTL's mid-19th century Britain for a story I started writing about Anna Natri, and it was just easier to assume a factor-of-100 inflation rate since then, as in OTL's Britain, and not a factor-of-20 rate as in OTL's America.

5. I don't really have good maps. I asked a while back how to make maps and never got a fully satisfactory answer. I have a few Google Earth maps for borders, but in a lot of cases, especially colonial African and Southeast Asian borders, you'll have to infer things from the text.

6. For the North American cities, I definitely took shortcuts, like calling *New York New Amsterdam where it would probably fit better to call it New Antwerp (instead, New Antwerp = *Albany), and keeping a lot of geographic or Native American names. The TL has 1 or 2 cities with the same name as a different OTL city (Narragansett = *Providence, if it counts, and 1 city that's too small to be discussed). So in general, if you see a recognizable name, it's the same city, maybe with a slightly different CBD location. For the other cities: Monvert = *Richmond, VA; New Suffolk = *Norfolk, VA; New Bristol = *Boston; Alba = *Vancouver; Henriville = *Georgetown/Washington; Ohio City = *Cincinnati; Hodgeton = *Columbus, OH; Point Junction = *Atlanta; New Liege = *Birmingham, AL. North American provinces are a lot like US states, at least in the East; the big differences are that NC/SC/GA are divided into 2 (Thomasina and Carolina) and not 3, AL/MS/eastern LA are one province, New Netherlands = NY+NJ+western VT, New Scotland = PA+DE, and New Devon = NH+southern ME (most of ME is in Acadia).

Sorry but this is too unrealistic.

Louis XII, less than the previous kings, could not violate the laws of succession of the kingdom because ... He precisely benefited from it !

If he had tried so, he would have jeopardized his own legitimacy since he was only a distant cousin of Charles VIII.

If girls could transmit the crowd to their husbands, then Anne of Beaujeu, daughter of Louis XI, who was a very clever stateswoman, would have and Louis XI would have arranged It for his daughter or Charles VIII for his elder sister (who had been regent during his minority).

Besides, I can't figure out why Louis XII would have wanted to do so. He wanted to have sons. And he knew and accepted that, if he did not have a son, he had a cousin from the branch of Orleans, who was his legal heir : the one who became Francis I.

And, last but not least : nobody was un aware of what had been the relations between the kingdoms of France and England for the last 150 years.

It was too late to have any Union between the 2 kingdoms work. The last possible moment was the middle of the 14th century.
 
Sorry but this is too unrealistic.

Louis XII, less than the previous kings, could not violate the laws of succession of the kingdom because ... He precisely benefited from it !

If he had tried so, he would have jeopardized his own legitimacy since he was only a distant cousin of Charles VIII.

If girls could transmit the crowd to their husbands, then Anne of Beaujeu, daughter of Louis XI, who was a very clever stateswoman, would have and Louis XI would have arranged It for his daughter or Charles VIII for his elder sister (who had been regent during his minority).

Besides, I can't figure out why Louis XII would have wanted to do so. He wanted to have sons. And he knew and accepted that, if he did not have a son, he had a cousin from the branch of Orleans, who was his legal heir : the one who became Francis I.

And, last but not least : nobody was un aware of what had been the relations between the kingdoms of France and England for the last 150 years.

It was too late to have any Union between the 2 kingdoms work. The last possible moment was the middle of the 14th century.

The bit about Louis XII being unable to have more children was part of the game canon, to put a lot of issues that happened from 1492 to the 1510s in just one decision point. (The game also fidgeted people's ages a bit and removes extraneous children - Claude was already 11 in the game and Arthur Tudor did not exist, but in the TL I restored the historical ages and, although he's not mentioned, Arthur Tudor's existence and death.) Hence the retcon that in 1500 Louis XII got into the accident, which provides an impetus for everything.

The Valois-Sforza alliance also requires a big break, and in-game came from the fact that the person who played Louis XII had read The Prince and knew what mistakes not to make. The Spanish occupation of Naples was already written into the game, but at least France could hold onto Milan.

England and France were enemies... but England was a small, relatively unimportant country, whereas the Spanish and Austrian crowns were unifying, threatening to create a power stronger than France (which indeed happened in both OTL and the ATL). In-game, I got the marriage alliance because there was a constant threat that I'd ally with Spain and the HRE and conquer chunks of France if I didn't get it. In OTL England indeed allied itself with Spain, but Louis would've known of the threat and considered ways to avoid it.

If you went into previous generations' succession based on male-preference primogeniture, then the English monarchs already had a claim to the French throne.

At any rate, it's a WI and not an AHC, so I wouldn't even try to figure a different POD to get the same result. The only point in this TL that I tried to get a preordained result is when I had to retcon something, after talking to other players in the game after having already begun writing.

My initial plan was to have Alexander VI succeed in making the papacy hereditary, with Alexander VII (i.e. Cesare Borgia) unifying Italy south of Milan, only for the dynasty to go extinct in the early 17c and have Italy disintegrate again. However, the person who played Alexander VI explained to me that in the game's TL he'd be even more hated than he was in OTL; he used the word "nazgul" to describe what Cesare would be doing in Italy, in the aftermath of my and Giambattista Orsini's having assassinated Lucrezia. The game writer said that a Colonna dynasty was unlikely in the early 16c and instead Giovanni de' Medici was best-placed to become pope, followed by Alessandro Farnese after him, taking both game elements and OTL elements that didn't make it into the game for balance reasons. (The real-life de' Medici hated the Colonna, but the game significantly powered up the Colonna cardinal to provide the HRE with a papabile ally). Hence the awkward unification-loss-unification-disintegration situation of 16c Italy.

I wanted to have that unification-disintegration cycle simply because a lot hangs on what 17-18c Rome would end up like, and by the time I realized a Borgia dynasty wouldn't have happened, I was well into the Early Modern Era and didn't want to rewrite too much.
 
Sorry if I may seem always to object to your ideas. But if you want a serious alternate History, you need solid foundations. You need plausibility. And you need no wrong assertions.

Legally speaking, It is wrong that Edouard III and his descendants ever had a rightful claim on the french throne : Neither by male primogeniture, not in the female line.

On the male side, No need for any list : It is History as we know It.

If female could have in hérités the crowd, then neither Isabelle (wife of Edward II) nor Catherine (wife of Henry V) have claimed It.

Louis X had a daughter that married to the Evreux.

Philip V and Charles IV had daughters of their own who then could have inherited.

Catherine was not the elder daughter.

You would have to kill or have die many many many people to erase all the potentiel heir that had priority over the Plantagenet or Lancasters in the line of succession.
 

Delvestius

Banned
You would have to kill or have die many many many people to erase all the potentiel heir that had priority over the Plantagenet or Lancasters in the line of succession.

High Middle Ages/Early Renaissance politics of western Europe isn't my strongest area. I know very little about all this court intrigue because it tends to bore the piss out of me. I do know however that legitimate claim is important but oftentimes secondary when the claimant has armed support.

Now how that may fit in to make this situation plausible, I'm not sure but something is probably plausible.
 
Have Philip IV live 15 or 20 more years.

All his 3 sons are dead before him. None of his 3 sons left him a living grandson. His only living grandson in 1328 is Edward, the son of his beloved daughter Isabelle.

Better, add that Isabelle had her son Edward raised in France during several years and Edward becomes the favour its grandson of Philip IV. Then Philip decides to make his grandson Edward his heir as king of France and has him married to a daughter of the House of Valois or of the house of Evreux.

This works. But Edward will be remembered ad a king of France much more than ad the king of the satellite kingdom of England.
 
Well, re England being a satellite kingdom, there's a very good reason why I use only French numerals for monarchs (Henry II, not Henry II and VIII), and why I refer to the Episcopal Church as the Church of France and not the more accurate Church of England and France. (Orsini fled to England, not France, and this is game-canon, even if it's based on a game balance decision made by the writer to make Orsini my ally.)

Edward III argued a combination of male-preference primogeniture and proximity of blood in his claim, yes... but the French adoption of strict Salic law was still specifically about excluding him.

I really don't want to move the POD any farther into the past, because anything that butterflies Charles V changes far too much. If the major Catholic-Protestant war in Germany is in the mid-16c and not in the early 17c, it does not make France the major European power; instead, most likely the Habsburgs win, extinguish German Protestantism, and destroy the Low Countries, dispersing their merchants to kingdoms that are only going to be interested in them for the tax revenues, probably butterflying away European industrialization. (Probably, because England would stand to gain heavily from such dispersal, and might end up as a maritime merchant republic as a result, but it would have to build up an economy from scratch, whereas in OTL it could leech off of Dutch industry.)
 
The argument of the Salic law was found and used in 1358, that is thirty years after the Valois branch inherited the crown.

In 1328 ad in 1316, the real point was "we don't want to be ruled by a woman, nor by a girl of questionable blood legitimacy, nor by a foreign prince, and especially not an english king with whom out kingdom had been at war for a Parce part of the last 170 years."
 
Top