Direct Capetians last longer

Supposing that instead of having no surviving paternal grandsons, one of Philip IV's sons has one who doesn't die in infancy. What are the ramifications for French history?
 
That will depend on several factors I say. The most obvious result in the absence of the Valois on the throne and of the Hundred Years War.

Salic Law can be butterflied away or at least moderated depending on a which of Philip IV's sons leaves an heir behind. The first possibility is that Louis X's son, John I the Posthumous, survives infancy: if so, there is no need to proclaim Salic Law as he is the first in line and thus the Eldest of the Capetians. Thus, it's quite possible France never applies Salic Law in the first place or applies it later than OTL.
If it is a son of Philip V or Charles IV that succeed the throne, then Salic Law would be applied to avoid the rise of a woman on the throne (Louis X had a daughter and Philip V three). However, as the rule did not said anything about male descendants of French princess (the basis of the claim of Edward III OTL), then it might possible that to have male descendants of women line inherit the throne: the only condition will probably be to have said candidate be French and not foreigner. However, proclaiming Salic Law could lead to possible counter-claimants to Philip V and Charles IV's heirs later on. That's more or less what happened with Charles II the Bad, King of Navarra and son of Joan of Navarra (the daughter of Louis X), who tried to claim the throne in the middle of the Hundread Years War: he isn't well remembered because he was less important than Edward III of Philip VI at the time. If he is still born OTL, Charles the Bad could still try to claim the throne if he has enough ambition: the role could also be filled up by an ATL equivalent.

There is also the question of the Personnal Union between France and Navarra... If John I the Posthumous survives, the question will not arise as he is heir to both crowns. If it is Philip V or Charles IV that leaves heirs behind, then there could be a quarrel of rights with OTL Joan II of Navarra. Navarra never applied Salic Law, but both Philip V and Charles IV assumed Kingship of Navarra while Joan II, as daughter of Louis X, should have become Queen of Navarra the moment her father died. Of course, there is an easy way to settle the question: Joan was 4 by the time of her father's death in 1316; depending on the date of birth of the heir of either Philip V or Charles IV, she could marry him. The scenario has chances to happen if it is Philip V's son as one of his sons who died in infancy was born around 1316. It is harder with Charles IV as he remained married to an imprisonned woman until he rose on the French throne OTL (in 1322, when Joan was 10) I believe...

In the case Philip V's son is the one to inherit the French throne, then it is likely that Artois and Franche-Comté, which where the inheritance of Philip V's wife, will end up as part of the Royal Domaine. Artois could cause a problem though as the succession was contested between Mahaut d'Artois, stepmother of Philip V, and her nephew Robert III, who thought himself as the legitimate heir (and he had arguments). Robert of Artois is no easy political foe from what I understood, although his skills might have been enhanced by the book The Accursed Kings of Maurice Druon.

Conflict with England might not be avoided: even without the Hundred Years War, Guyenne is still in English hands. The French and English often fought because of it before Edward I and Philip IV signed a treaty (which also resulted in the marriage of Edward II and Isabella the She-Wolf). However, the fact the English King is a vassal of the French King will probably not please the former.

If you keep the OTL deaths of Louis X, Philip V and Charles IV, the new King will end up under Regency until he is 14. The likely regents are Philip V and Charles IV if they do not become Kings and the Valois as they are the nearest French male relatives as well as powerful French Barons.
 
That will depend on several factors I say. The most obvious result in the absence of the Valois on the throne and of the Hundred Years War.

Salic Law can be butterflied away or at least moderated depending on a which of Philip IV's sons leaves an heir behind. The first possibility is that Louis X's son, John I the Posthumous, survives infancy: if so, there is no need to proclaim Salic Law as he is the first in line and thus the Eldest of the Capetians. Thus, it's quite possible France never applies Salic Law in the first place or applies it later than OTL.
If it is a son of Philip V or Charles IV that succeed the throne, then Salic Law would be applied to avoid the rise of a woman on the throne (Louis X had a daughter and Philip V three). However, as the rule did not said anything about male descendants of French princess (the basis of the claim of Edward III OTL), then it might possible that to have male descendants of women line inherit the throne: the only condition will probably be to have said candidate be French and not foreigner. However, proclaiming Salic Law could lead to possible counter-claimants to Philip V and Charles IV's heirs later on. That's more or less what happened with Charles II the Bad, King of Navarra and son of Joan of Navarra (the daughter of Louis X), who tried to claim the throne in the middle of the Hundread Years War: he isn't well remembered because he was less important than Edward III of Philip VI at the time. If he is still born OTL, Charles the Bad could still try to claim the throne if he has enough ambition: the role could also be filled up by an ATL equivalent.

There is also the question of the Personnal Union between France and Navarra... If John I the Posthumous survives, the question will not arise as he is heir to both crowns. If it is Philip V or Charles IV that leaves heirs behind, then there could be a quarrel of rights with OTL Joan II of Navarra. Navarra never applied Salic Law, but both Philip V and Charles IV assumed Kingship of Navarra while Joan II, as daughter of Louis X, should have become Queen of Navarra the moment her father died. Of course, there is an easy way to settle the question: Joan was 4 by the time of her father's death in 1316; depending on the date of birth of the heir of either Philip V or Charles IV, she could marry him. The scenario has chances to happen if it is Philip V's son as one of his sons who died in infancy was born around 1316. It is harder with Charles IV as he remained married to an imprisonned woman until he rose on the French throne OTL (in 1322, when Joan was 10) I believe...

In the case Philip V's son is the one to inherit the French throne, then it is likely that Artois and Franche-Comté, which where the inheritance of Philip V's wife, will end up as part of the Royal Domaine. Artois could cause a problem though as the succession was contested between Mahaut d'Artois, stepmother of Philip V, and her nephew Robert III, who thought himself as the legitimate heir (and he had arguments). Robert of Artois is no easy political foe from what I understood, although his skills might have been enhanced by the book The Accursed Kings of Maurice Druon.

Conflict with England might not be avoided: even without the Hundred Years War, Guyenne is still in English hands. The French and English often fought because of it before Edward I and Philip IV signed a treaty (which also resulted in the marriage of Edward II and Isabella the She-Wolf). However, the fact the English King is a vassal of the French King will probably not please the former.

If you keep the OTL deaths of Louis X, Philip V and Charles IV, the new King will end up under Regency until he is 14. The likely regents are Philip V and Charles IV if they do not become Kings and the Valois as they are the nearest French male relatives as well as powerful French Barons.

Interesting ideas. John the Posthumous surviving infancy seems to be the most interesting scenario.
 
Interesting ideas. John the Posthumous surviving infancy seems to be the most interesting scenario.

Or you could have Louis X not dying during that strange incident at the tennis court. He was only 27, could have lived maybe 3 decades more or longer, and would have all conditions to father other son.
 
Or you could have Louis X not dying during that strange incident at the tennis court. He was only 27, could have lived maybe 3 decades more or longer, and would have all conditions to father other son.

Even better. From what I see, Louis X readmitted the Jews and began to emancipate the serfs, in order to strengthen the royal treasury.
 
Top