Edward II dies in 1307, what next?

Forgive me for not knowing, but what does that have to do with it? Unless you're saying Philip's nephew wants to marry Isabella to himself
I think she meant to say the King of England is Philip's nephew.

Thomas of Brotherton would be the king here, his uncle Thomas of Lancaster and his mother Margaret of France would be the two leading figures in the young king's regency.
 
Thomas I of England (b.1300) m Eleanor of Castile (b.1307)

A) Margaret of England (b.1324) m. David II of Scotland (b. 1324)

B) Eleanor of England (b.1329) m. Arnaud Amanieu d'Albret (b. 1328)

C) Thomas II of England (b.1331) m. Blanche of Navarre (b. 1330)

Joan of England (b.1333) m. John IV of Brittany (b. 1335)*

Edmund, Duke of Lancaster (b.1336) m. Maud, Countess of Lancaster (b. 1340)

*Penthièvre dude.
 
Last edited:
Forgive me for not knowing, but what does that have to do with it? Unless you're saying Philip's nephew wants to marry Isabella to himself
I wrote France instead of England...

England*

And Thomas is half-french is there really a pressing need for a french match at this point of time? Phil's busy with the Templars, so war over Gascony etc may not be feared for the time being.

Also, Eleanor of Castile was Countess of Ponthieu suo jure, after E2 dies her heir is Edward I of Bar, so that might be a problem.
Exactly, I can not believe who a French match here is needed or truly useful for either side

I think she meant to say the King of England is Philip's nephew.

Thomas of Brotherton would be the king here, his uncle Thomas of Lancaster and his mother Margaret of France would be the two leading figures in the young king's regency.
Yes and unless Lancaster is strongly against France I can not see either side interested in starting a war here. Also that kinship mean who if Thomas married in France is likely who he will not marry to Philip’s only daughter but another girl like Catherine of Artois, Blanche of Burgundy or Mary of Burgundy
 
Last edited:
I wrote France instead of England...


Exactly, I can not believe who a French match here is needed or truly useful for either side


Yes and unless Lancaster is strongly against France I can not see either side interested in starting a war here. Also that kinship mean who if Thomas married in France is likely who he will not marry to Philip’s only daughter but another girl like Catherine of Artois, Blanche of Burgundy or Mary of Burgundy
So would Eleanor of Castile be likelt then?
 
@material_boy @RedKing remember also who the new King of France is Philip’s own nephew.
And Thomas is half-french is there really a pressing need for a french match at this point of time?
But the match between Edward I and Margaret occurred in OTL -- in the middle of negotiations for the Treaty of Paris, no less -- and was not considered an important enough match to end the war. Why would Philip feel differently about it or its offspring now? At POD, Thomas is nearing an age where he, by English custom, he would be removed from his mother's household and begin his political and military education under a man, so her influence over the boy would be minimal from this point forward.
 
But the match between Edward I and Margaret occurred in OTL -- in the middle of negotiations for the Treaty of Paris, no less -- and was not considered an important enough match to end the war. Why would Philip feel differently about it or its offspring now? At POD, Thomas is nearing an age where he, by English custom, he would be removed from his mother's household and begin his political and military education under a man, so her influence over the boy would be minimal from this point forward.
So you think Isabella is a go then?
 
I lean toward yes. There may be a compelling argument against it or for someone else that could change my mind, but I don't think "Thomas is Philip's nephew" is particularly persuasive.
Even with the papacy and their whole thing against it at this point? Tho I suppose the Iberian monarchs are arguments against that
 
Question- What would happen to the children of Joan of Acre? Eleanor was married to Hugh Despenser in 1306 and lurking at the edges, so he's still there, but that's the only marriage that was completed by POD. Would the double Ulster match in 1308 go through for Gilbert and Elizabeth? (And in turn, would still Gilbert die young and childless, causing Despenser to claim the lordship of Glamorgan?) If Despenser never gets the Glamorgan title, would he have the resources to do... *waves hands in the direction of all his other crimes*
 
But the match between Edward I and Margaret occurred in OTL -- in the middle of negotiations for the Treaty of Paris, no less -- and was not considered an important enough match to end the war. Why would Philip feel differently about it or its offspring now? At POD, Thomas is nearing an age where he, by English custom, he would be removed from his mother's household and begin his political and military education under a man, so her influence over the boy would be minimal from this point forward.
Because things changed. Margaret was destined to be the second wife of a much older King who had already heirs so a match of low to moderate value. Now Margaret’s still very young son isTHE KING of England, something on which nobody in Paris was counting on when Margaret married.
 
Last edited:
Question- What would happen to the children of Joan of Acre? Eleanor was married to Hugh Despenser in 1306 and lurking at the edges, so he's still there, but that's the only marriage that was completed by POD. Would the double Ulster match in 1308 go through for Gilbert and Elizabeth? (And in turn, would still Gilbert die young and childless, causing Despenser to claim the lordship of Glamorgan?) If Despenser never gets the Glamorgan title, would he have the resources to do... *waves hands in the direction of all his other crimes*
I think Gilbert’s death is most assuredly butterflied, the double Ulster March may go ahead, due to the de burghs beinf close to the crown and all
 
I agree with the general consensus that Thomas wedding Isabella is less likely as Phillip can get away with cancelling it. However I'm not ruling it out in a few years depending how the Regency and France goes.
 
I agree with the general consensus that Thomas wedding Isabella is less likely as Phillip can get away with cancelling it. However I'm not ruling it out in a few years depending how the Regency and France goes.

This is true, hmm, given his young age as well, one imagines there will be a fair few possible brides being discussed. Same for his brother Edmund as well. I also imagine that without Piers Gaveston around, Edmund will get the Earldom of Cornwall
 
Because things changed. Margaret was destined to be the second wife of a much older King who had already heirs so a match of low to moderate value. Now Margaret’s still very young son isTHE KING of England, something on which nobody in Paris was counting on when Margaret married.
You're choosing to ignore the fact that Margaret's influence over her son is about to end, as boys were removed from their mother's households in late childhood. The marriage of Edward and Isabella in OTL was meant to give the French crown influence at the English court for an entire reign. They simply won't have that without having a French woman as queen of England.

There is a real world parallel to this in the reign of Henry VI. That Henry was Charles VII's nephew is never at any point considered a diplomatic advantage for either side. When the English wanted peace and the French wanted influence at the English court, both sides sought a marriage. The English wanted one of Charles's daughters -- AKA one of Henry's own first cousins. Charles's objection to this was not the closeness of their relation, but that such a union would strengthen the English claim to the French crown. There is no English claim to the French throne in ATL, so that is not a concern here.

We know with the benefit of hindsight that neither England nor France were in a position for war. It's doubtful either of them understood how weak the other was at this particular moment, as there is a great deal of historical analysis that shows English and French diplomats were often ignorant of the political complexities of each others' kingdoms.

As I said earlier, I don't think a Thomas-Isabella match is a lock, and I could be convinced that another marriage makes more sense in ATL, but this particular line of argument is not very persuasive.
 
You're choosing to ignore the fact that Margaret's influence over her son is about to end, as boys were removed from their mother's households in late childhood. The marriage of Edward and Isabella in OTL was meant to give the French crown influence at the English court for an entire reign. They simply won't have that without having a French woman as queen of England.

There is a real world parallel to this in the reign of Henry VI. That Henry was Charles VII's nephew is never at any point considered a diplomatic advantage for either side. When the English wanted peace and the French wanted influence at the English court, both sides sought a marriage. The English wanted one of Charles's daughters -- AKA one of Henry's own first cousins. Charles's objection to this was not the closeness of their relation, but that such a union would strengthen the English claim to the French crown. There is no English claim to the French throne in ATL, so that is not a concern here.

We know with the benefit of hindsight that neither England nor France were in a position for war. It's doubtful either of them understood how weak the other was at this particular moment, as there is a great deal of historical analysis that shows English and French diplomats were often ignorant of the political complexities of each others' kingdoms.

As I said earlier, I don't think a Thomas-Isabella match is a lock, and I could be convinced that another marriage makes more sense in ATL, but this particular line of argument is not very persuasive.

Could the French consider using a minor Princess from a cadet line do you think, or would they just prefer to use Isabella?
 
You're choosing to ignore the fact that Margaret's influence over her son is about to end, as boys were removed from their mother's households in late childhood. The marriage of Edward and Isabella in OTL was meant to give the French crown influence at the English court for an entire reign. They simply won't have that without having a French woman as queen of England.

There is a real world parallel to this in the reign of Henry VI. That Henry was Charles VII's nephew is never at any point considered a diplomatic advantage for either side. When the English wanted peace and the French wanted influence at the English court, both sides sought a marriage. The English wanted one of Charles's daughters -- AKA one of Henry's own first cousins. Charles's objection to this was not the closeness of their relation, but that such a union would strengthen the English claim to the French crown. There is no English claim to the French throne in ATL, so that is not a concern here.

We know with the benefit of hindsight that neither England nor France were in a position for war. It's doubtful either of them understood how weak the other was at this particular moment, as there is a great deal of historical analysis that shows English and French diplomats were often ignorant of the political complexities of each others' kingdoms.

As I said earlier, I don't think a Thomas-Isabella match is a lock, and I could be convinced that another marriage makes more sense in ATL, but this particular line of argument is not very persuasive.
Charles VII and Henry VI is not a good parallel as the two men were enemies and rivals who had both been Kings of the same kingdom (taking it from the other). You are sure about the motivation of Charles’ refusal? Considering the conditions for the wedding with Marguerite I believe who he wanted only umiliate the English and had no intention to sign a durature peace. If he had wanted something different he would have sent one of his daughters with a decent dowry in England
 
Top