Anglo-England

what if the Norman invasion never happened, how would England be different? Would it make a stronger England or a weaker England? And what about France without a 100 Years' War how would it change?
 
Admitting Norwegians or Danes don't conquer England.

The first change would be a more importantly germanized England : most of purely feudal features were due to Normans. Even the Common Law was a solution in order to merge Anglo-Saxon and Norman customs and uses.

While feudal influence from continent is likely to have some consequences in England, it would be far less than OTL : maybe at the same extent than it was in Spain or (more close to *English exemple) Danmark.

Expect a more important presence of "free peasantry", clientelism and "magnates"

France without a Norman invasion of England could turn itself to other objectives, but would have first to deal with Normandy : the duchy (like Brittany and Flanders) managed to keep an important unity and being the most powerful neighbor of Capetians and able to threaten their positions.
I think royal victory would be pretty unavoidable, but if Angevins manage to gain as OTL Normandy and part of Brittany, they could be great opponents.

Finally, I think french king focus would be on Flanders rather than the south of their kingdom but they would be kind of forced to be interested on. See, the Plantagenet presence in Aquitaine was a great factor on the perpetuated link between Capetians and House of Toulouse by exemple : Raymond V allied himself with Philipp to counter Henri II campaign in his estates.
Furthermore, the permanence of a important duchy of Aquitaine (that represented more or less 1/5 of the kingdom, 1/4 if you count temporary conquests) could really be a challenge for Capetians, even if the extreme feudal fragmantation of the southern part of their kingdom would be a favorable point for them.

Back to England : royal power would be still dependent on great houses, and you could see maintained the struggle for power : England is still a young kingdom and traces of earlier disunity and localism are still really present. I would tend to be dubious about a quick expansion in Wales or Scotland, and in the best scenario for the english king, it would take them some time to impose their power.
Economically, I could see England being far more likely turned to North Sea rather than Channel for obvious reasons.
 
In fact, before the conquest of 1066, the duke of Normandy and the king of France had most of the time been allied against other powerful vassals threatening either the duke of Normandy or Capetian king.
 
In fact, before the conquest of 1066, the duke of Normandy and the king of France had most of the time been allied against other powerful vassals threatening either the duke of Normandy or Capetian king.

Don't forget that the County of Rouen and the Marche of Normandy were more or less limited to the eastern part of OTL Normandy, and that the acquisition of Norman Maine seriously cooled the relation between them as it was the key to the access of Crown Estates.
As much the alliance made sense when Bretons had a quite aggressive policy or that such behavior was to be expected, and while it was used against Flanders at some point (the county being another threatening neighbor), such alliances at the time of William I were reversed.

Actually rebels during William I's father, Robert the Magnificent, already searched help and recruitment in France. The help he gave to Henri I was less the fact of an alliance than a regular help from a vassal to a liege (for example, some lords that were hostile or even in open war with Philipp II Augustus still were part of his army at Bouvines)
 
Not likely, and in a very "clumsy" way for the PoD

Capetians managed to do so OTL for many reasons :
- Two of the Robertians (old name for Capetians) already were kings
- They benefited from the prestige of their family that already have the title of "Duke of Franks", the suzerainity over the core of Western Francia including Tours and St Martin relic (the famous "cape" that owed Hugues and dynasty its name), the historical prestige due by exemple, to how they reacted during Vikings attacks.
- Carolingians weren't supported anymore by a good bunch of powerful nobility (except the one too far from WF core to really count)
- Feudal system was at the end of its formation, and it was somewhat more easy to overthrow dynasties.

And in the middle of XI century...
I don't see how it would be possible for the Dukes of Normandy, except by inheritance if we assume the "Capetian Miracle" is butterflied and if not other house inherit and if powerful nobles don't oppose it.
Many IFs and a bit random. Admittedly, you won't have many obvious candidates in case of vacancy of the throne, but it could be Normandy as well than, say, Anjou or Barcelona.
 
Top