Alternate Hundred Years War with England-Scotland Personal Union

[Publio]

How would the war play out if the Plantagenets had control of Scotland?

The POD would be Edward II marrying a surviving Margaret maid of Norway and become king consort. now, they have been betrothed since childhood and i assume there would be some urgency from Ed I to produce an heir to inherit both thrones, if they do produce an heir early on then Alternate Edward III is of appropiate age to marry Isabella (no more than 6 year apart if Margaret ha a son really early) and get a child on her before the Capet die out.
Assuming that the male Capets die out and the Valois take power like OTL and TTL Edward III decides to press Isabella’s son, the prince of Wales claim as closest relative.

I have no idea how Ed II’s would play out and i doubt that Margaret being his wife instead of Isabella would change him that much (I remember Ed I was planning on them growing together in England so there’s that) he would still be an incompetent king but maybe Margarett manages to cull the devotion Ed shows his favorites. The Scottish-English union would be really weak at the beginning with the kingdoms only sharing monarchs but overtime integrating on another, the nobility would mix and today Scots and English would not dislike each other as much.

the big if is Edward III, he is not the same Edward of OTL having different mothers so he may no be as brilliant (which i think is a trait that he inherited from Isabella) but at the same time with the resources of scotland in his hands and without having to worry about his northern borders will give him a good advantage that OTL Edward III didn’t have.
How would the war be concluded? A treaty similar to OTL with the english regaining Aquitaine, a more complete victory with the old Angevin enpire restablished in Normandy and Anjou or even Edward III conquers the entirety of France and rules it in his son’s name until he comes of age (Maybe Isabella would be a more appropiate regent for the French? She did good in England OTL)

 

[CaptainShadow]

Why not just have alt E3 marry Joan II of Navarre?

 

[Publio1]

Why not just have alt E3 marry Joan II of Navarre?

Because the french nobility would never have agreed to it, especially not the Valois, Isabella is safer since no one at the time of her marriage had any expectation a child of hers could sit on the throne.

 

[CaptainShadow]

Because the french nobility would never have agreed to it, especially not the Valois, Isabella is safer since no one at the time of her marriage had any expectation a child of hers could sit on the throne.

Logically no child of her could sit on the throne, the Plantagenet claim otl was wonky af. If E3's married to Joan then atleast he's got a feasibly higher claim, and why would the French "never agree" to their king's daughter marrying the English king, especially given that the English king is technically a French vassal?

@material_boy

 

[Publio1]

Logically no child of her could sit on the throne, the Plantagenet claim otl was wonky af. If E3's married to Joan then atleast he's got a feasibly higher claim, and why would the French "never agree" to their king's daughter marrying the English king, especially given that the English king is technically an English vassal?

@material_boy

Wonky? France succession law was wonky, and that is why Ed was able to claim the throne, French law never said stated that a woman can’t inherit, it was some archaic obscure Frankish law book that said salic law was absolute, the succession was not as clear cut as the Valois would have you believe.
I mean, i don’t see how him being a vassal would matter that much given he is still a foreign king, im sure the french know that if you let Joan marry Edward you get a Angevin empire 1.5 (with Joan’s possessions in northern france) and i don’t see the french allowing the English to get more territory in France given all the trouble Phillippe August had to go trough to strip the Plantagenets of most of their continental possessions.

While Joan has the higher claim Isabella has more legitimacy, a lot of the french nobles think of Joan as a bastard.

 

[Jonathan1997]

Scotland and england a really poor countries when it comes in contrast to France the French could gather an army on 50000 and the English could gather about 30,000 when the Scottish invaded England in 1346 the army of 19000 strong. Also during the hundreds years war England never dispatched an army that could meet the French in equal size. The man who created the army that could defeat the French was Edward the First of England who modernised the English military in order to defeat the French (Longbowmen are cheaper than kights). As for the new Edward iii the Plantagenets like Henry Ii was a very clever man the proplem with the Plantagenet they rarely left capable hairs to succeed. I can only think of Edward I, Edward III, Edward the black Prince and Henry V and Henry VIII who were good successor's. If this new Edward pushes his father from the throne my be even having a battle like Bannockburn the war with France my start early. Edward II of England was also fight Charles IV of France over Aquitaine/Gascony I do not believe a warrior King trying to be more like his grandfather than father will let this stand. As for when Charles dies Edward would naturally push his son or wife for the crown of France but nobility of France will not want a strong overlord like Edward ruling a large kingdoms back stretches from Scotland to the Pyrenees. There could even be a possibility off when Philip IV tries to take Gascony from Edward I of England that old king Bed will devoted his energies in taking land in Aquitaine. As I stated above he created the Army which gave England victory in 100 years war so it's possible he can defeat the French in a large land Battle. So the question would you want the wars to start during Edward I and ii rule over Gascony then expanding to Aquitaine and finally French crown itself. There is even a possibility Edward I my live longer due to not dying of dysentery and he my Also be less stressed out with no Scotland to fight as the same time as fighting Wales and France. What are your thoughts.

 

[material_boy]

This is a really hard question to answer without fleshing out ATL Edward II's reign more fully. Maybe Edward would be in a stronger position against rebels like Lancaster and Mortimer if he had the support of the Scottish -- or maybe the Scottish would join Lancaster and bring Edward II down much earlier in this timeline. If Edward survives all the way to an ATL Despenser-Mortimer war and was forced to abdicate, then why would Mortimer not just take the throne for himself? It seems unlikely Margaret would be as open to an affair as Isabella, and thus there'd be no queen protecting the heir to the throne from assassination or exile.

Because the french nobility would never have agreed to it, especially not the Valois, Isabella is safer since no one at the time of her marriage had any expectation a child of hers could sit on the throne.

Why would the French not allow it? They've already declared Joan ineligible for the throne and, after buying off her ducal uncle with a massive bribe, confiscated her lands in the north of France and sent her packing off to Navarre. Philip V had major problems with rebellion early in his reign, and so wedding off the possibly-bastard daughter of older brother to secure the support of the duke of Gascony seems like an easy transaction to make.

 

[Publio1]

This is a really hard question to answer without fleshing out ATL Edward II's reign more fully. Maybe Edward would be in a stronger position against rebels like Lancaster and Mortimer if he had the support of the Scottish -- or maybe the Scottish would join Lancaster and bring Edward II down much earlier in this timeline. If Edward survives all the way to an ATL Despenser-Mortimer war and was forced to abdicate, then why would Mortimer not just take the throne for himself? It seems unlikely Margaret would be as open to an affair as Isabella, and thus there'd be no queen protecting the heir to the throne from assassination or exile.



Why would the French not allow it? They've already declared Joan ineligible for the throne and, after buying off her ducal uncle with a massive bribe, confiscated her lands in the north of France and sent her packing off to Navarre. Philip V had major problems with rebellion early in his reign, and so wedding off the possibly-bastard daughter of older brother to secure the support of the duke of Gascony seems like an easy transaction to make.

Well, if Margaret manages to gather the support of the scots (she would be queen since she was a child so plenty of time) and actually form a friendship with her husband (since love is not possible) then she would certainly help her husband to protect her heir.
Would Margaret have a good grip on the scottish lords by adulthood? I feel like with Edward I alive to safeguard her birthright i don’t see Bruce or Comyn causing much trouble and if they rebel they will be two sides divided against a unified English/Scottish/Norwegian?? force so Margaret throne would be pretty secure at the beginning and hopefully would be able to assist Edward II in any baron revolt.

Marrying Joan to Ed III would in the eyes of the french give more cannonballs to Englnd to throw at France. She may be declared unqualified for the throne but that did not stop Charles the bad from claiming it,a claim is a claim however finicky and you shouldn’t give one of your biggest rivals one willy-nilly. i feel like a weak england with no continental possessions is in the French’s best interests.

 

[material_boy]

Margaret could be reasonably popular with the Scottish, but it's just as likely that they'd come to resent her for spending her life in the south of England with her husband and their country becoming little more than an appendage of England -- a problem that the Stuarts faced in OTL after the union of the crowns -- and thus join Lancaster's rebellion. The POD here is necessarily so early in her life that this could go anyway you want, tbh. You could have her spend her early life in Scotland before moving south or have her spend her whole life in England. You could have been an astute political player who moderates her husband's erratic reign or she could be a more traditional female figure who sits quietly in the background. It's a choose your own adventure thing.

Norwegian??

I doubt the Norwegians would have any interest in Margaret's affairs and would be too far away to help in most instances anyway.

Marrying Joan to Ed III would in the eyes of the french give more cannonballs to Englnd to throw at France. She may be declared unqualified for the throne but that did not stop Charles the bad from claiming it,a claim is a claim however finicky and you shouldn’t give one of your biggest rivals one willy-nilly. i feel like a weak england with no continental possessions is in the French’s best interests.

Marrying Joan to literally anyone gave that person a claim to the throne and yet Joan was still allowed to marry in OTL, and to marry one of the great lords of France at that.

The English were not rivals for the throne of France during Philip V's lifetime, so I don't see how this is a consideration for him anymore than it was allowing Joan to marry Charles d'Evreux. As you point out, Charles II of Navarre made his own bid for the throne.

Suggesting that England would have no continental possessions is something that's only clear to us with the benefit of hindsight. In Philip V's day, this would have been practically inconceivable. The kings of England -- in the capacity as dukes of Gascony -- were very popular with their Gascon subjects and vassals precisely because they were so far away. The Capetians had been slowly consolidating power in the French crown for generations, but the absentee ducal overlordship of the English king allowed Gascon lords to live their lives largely undisturbed and, in OTL, they would fight for their ducal overlords against the French crown fiercely and in large numbers to preserve this quasi-independence.

All of this is not to say that I think this exact marriage is a guarantee in ATL, just that I don't think the original suggestion of it is out of the question.

 

[Jonathan1997]

Edward III my also be fight over the crown of Norway being the only male relative of Eric II of Norway and I do not believe Edward I of England would miss the chance of his daughter-in-law and grandson inheriting three Kingdoms.

 

[CaptainShadow]

Edward III my also be fight over the crown of Norway being the only male relative of Eric II of Norway and I do not believe Edward I of England would miss the chance of his daughter-in-law and grandson inheriting three Kingdoms.

I think Edward's more "likely" to focus on Ireland ttl if he wants his grandchild to have three thrones. If he's not antagonized into it I can't really see him declaring war there. Could see alt E3 wage war there tho to capture Orkney, Shetlands etc and to prove himself (after E2, he's probably got a lot of proving to do.).

 

[Jonathan1997]

I think Edward's more "likely" to focus on Ireland ttl if he wants his grandchild to have three thrones. If he's not antagonized into it I can't really see him declaring war there. Could see alt E3 wage war there tho to capture Orkney, Shetlands etc and to prove himself (after E2, he's probably got a lot of proving to do.).

I understand where you are coming from but from the French normal perspective Ireland is a backwater. If Edward I of England was going to sort out Ireland he would done it before involving himself in Scotland. As for the new Edward iii he does have a legitimate claim to the throne because Eric and his brother Magnus left no heirs male.

 

[CaptainShadow]

I understand where you are coming from but from the French normal perspective Ireland is a backwater. If Edward I of England was going to sort out Ireland he would done it before involving himself in Scotland. As for the new Edward iii he does have a legitimate claim to the throne because Eric and his brother Magnus left no heirs male.

Otl E3 was gonna move to Ireland before Philip confiscated Gascony iirc, but true.

I'm not saying he doesn't have a claim, just that I'm doubtful he'd be interested much in Norway. He'd like the islands around Scotland, maybe go overboard and capture Iceland but anymore......well as above doubtful.

 

[Publio1]

Otl E3 was gonna move to Ireland before Philip confiscated Gascony iirc, but true.

I'm not saying he doesn't have a claim, just that I'm doubtful he'd be interested much in Norway. He'd like the islands around Scotland, maybe go overboard and capture Iceland but anymore......well as above doubtful.

So is alt Ed III more likely to pursue his own claim on Norway or pursue Isabella/Joan’s son claim on France? assuming the french start getting antagonistic in Gascony.

 

[CaptainShadow]

So is alt Ed III more likely to pursue his own claim on Norway or pursue Isabella/Joan’s son claim on France? assuming the french start getting antagonistic in Gascone.

France.

 

[Publio1]

France.

And how more succesful wpuld he be than OTL? considering he has scottish soldiers and money on his side, no need to worry about his northern borders or that the scots may give troops to France

 

[CaptainShadow]

And how more succesful wpuld he be than OTL? considering he has scottish soldiers and money on his side, no need to worry about his northern borders or that the scots may give troops to France

Well otl he had the Scots rekt anyway so probably not necessarily better. I suppose he might be able to enforce the treaty of London if you butterfly black monday?

 

[Publio1]

Well otl he had the Scots rekt anyway so probably not necessarily better. I suppose he might be able to enforce the treaty of London if you butterfly black monday?

So this alt treaty of Bretigny would make Edward lord of all Aquitaine, Normandy, Anjou and sovereign of Brittany? Would the english manage to keep it once Ed drops the bucket? If TTL Ed manages to have a adult competent heir survive (and not die leaving a child on the throne like the black prince) Britain would be able to retain its continental possessions at least until France manages to centralize its monarchy and keep their big estate holders in line.

 

[Jonathan1997]

I would more like bet Edward iii would go for Norway he has a very strong claim due to Eric ii and magnus leaving no heirs that are male. Edward my not even after fight and a war With France over Gascony my be able to bring the kingdoms together in a deeper Union. There is also a possibility that the war my have deepened if Edward I of England decided to reclaim the dukedom of Aquitaine. Due to Philip IV France taking his continental lands.

So is alt Ed III more likely to pursue his own claim on Norway or pursue Isabella/Joan’s son claim on France? assuming the french start getting antagonistic in Gascony.

 

[isabella]

For me with an Edward II/Margaret of Norway’s wedding is pretty unlikely who either Isabella or Joan would end in England.