Eustace IV Count of Boulogne

Son and heir of King Stephen of Blois, who claimed the throne of England during the anarchy, he died in August, 1153, mere months before the agreement was reached between Stephen and Matilda, whereby Henry II Matildas son was recognised as heir.

What if Eustace had not died in August, and had lived on through the war? What would have happened?
 
It depends how helpful Eustace's death was.
If he lives and England still goes to Henry then Eustace or any male heirs could at some stage try to claim England.
Expect him to get lots of covert support from Philippe.
 
His brother could marry Eleanor instead.:)

William was already married to Isabel de Warenne at this point, which was a much better alliance anyway: it kept East Anglia quiet during the whole Anarchy shebang, while Eleanor would only bring an unprofitable and fractious domain and various hereditary feuds with the Kings of France and the Counts of Toulouse. Far better to support the Count of Champagne's abduction attempt and carve out a network of Blois lands in the process.
 
William was already married to Isabel de Warenne at this point, which was a much better alliance anyway: it kept East Anglia quiet during the whole Anarchy shebang, while Eleanor would only bring an unprofitable and fractious domain and various hereditary feuds with the Kings of France and the Counts of Toulouse. Far better to support the Count of Champagne's abduction attempt and carve out a network of Blois lands in the process.

Interesting, so should Eustace survive, would there be attempts later on following his father's death for Henry and the Anjous to take the throne?
 
Interesting, so should Eustace survive, would there be attempts later on following his father's death for Henry and the Anjous to take the throne?

Undoubtedly. I'm of the opinion that it was already a foregone conclusion that Stephen would be removed as early as the arrest of Nigel of Ely, but I'm prepared to believe that his rule was tenable for the purposes of this WI.

The point is that the Angevins already controlled Normandy and half of England, and Eustace seems to have been a bit of a dick, surrounded by violent sycophants. But then, half the Kings of England can be described in those terms, and they still managed to cling on.
 
Undoubtedly. I'm of the opinion that it was already a foregone conclusion that Stephen would be removed as early as the arrest of Nigel of Ely, but I'm prepared to believe that his rule was tenable for the purposes of this WI.

The point is that the Angevins already controlled Normandy and half of England, and Eustace seems to have been a bit of a dick, surrounded by violent sycophants. But then, half the Kings of England can be described in those terms, and they still managed to cling on.

Indeed they did, until people camee to their sense.
 
Top