Henry II of France Lives.

Henry II of France was famously killed in a freak jousting accident. I want to ask those one the board more familiar with French History than I, what would have been the implications of a longer reign for King Henri II? How much longer could he have lived and reigned had his accident never occurred? What impact would his survival have had on the religious tension France experienced during the period during which his sons reigned? What international implications would his survival have had, specifically regarding Scotland and England? How might France and the rest of Europe have developed in the absence of that accident?
 
He was 40 at death, so let's give him 20 more years, but assume his sons are still sickly. Broadly, he's more competent than his wife and sons but far more intolerant and aggressive.

There's no chance in hell of him giving his daughter Margaret in marriage to a Navarrese Protestant; I'd pick Henri of Guise for her husband. So no Bourbon claim on the French throne when the Valois peter out (unless Charles IX's daughter is born a boy this time around). He may have Louis, Prince of Conde murdered simply for being a prince of the blood and Protestant.

Henri believes his son is legitimately King of Scotland; he doesn't care about the Scottish legalities. So he'll be trying to invade in 1560. Betcha Elizabeth chooses to support her northern neighbor against French aggression and it goes poorly for France.

That's off the cuff, I may think more later.
 
He was 40 at death, so let's give him 20 more years, but assume his sons are still sickly. Broadly, he's more competent than his wife and sons but far more intolerant and aggressive.

There's no chance in hell of him giving his daughter Margaret in marriage to a Navarrese Protestant; I'd pick Henri of Guise for her husband. So no Bourbon claim on the French throne when the Valois peter out (unless Charles IX's daughter is born a boy this time around). He may have Louis, Prince of Conde murdered simply for being a prince of the blood and Protestant.

Henri believes his son is legitimately King of Scotland; he doesn't care about the Scottish legalities. So he'll be trying to invade in 1560. Betcha Elizabeth chooses to support her northern neighbor against French aggression and it goes poorly for France.

That's off the cuff, I may think more later.


I'll agree with most if this but the Bourbon claim did NOT come from Margot. Under Salic law females could neither ascend the throne nor pass any claim on to their children. No under Salic law Henri IV was the eventual heir, as the senior descendent of King Louis IX.
 
He was 40 at death, so let's give him 20 more years, but assume his sons are still sickly. Broadly, he's more competent than his wife and sons but far more intolerant and aggressive.

There's no chance in hell of him giving his daughter Margaret in marriage to a Navarrese Protestant; I'd pick Henri of Guise for her husband. So no Bourbon claim on the French throne when the Valois peter out (unless Charles IX's daughter is born a boy this time around). He may have Louis, Prince of Conde murdered simply for being a prince of the blood and Protestant.

Henri believes his son is legitimately King of Scotland; he doesn't care about the Scottish legalities. So he'll be trying to invade in 1560. Betcha Elizabeth chooses to support her northern neighbor against French aggression and it goes poorly for France.

That's off the cuff, I may think more later.

Since Francis, from what I know, suffered from poor health for the majority of his life, is there a possibility that the Dauphin will die more or less on schedule? If so, how will his death impact the relationship between Queen Mary of Scots and France?
 
Since Francis, from what I know, suffered from poor health for the majority of his life, is there a possibility that the Dauphin will die more or less on schedule? If so, how will his death impact the relationship between Queen Mary of Scots and France?

I'm counting on it (Charles also had poor health throughout his short life). At which point the relationship goes very far south; Henri believes that at that point, his 10-year-old son Charles is the legitimate King of Scotland, and he is Regent of Scotland until his son's majority (and on his death, France and Scotland will be in personal union). The Scots have...very different ideas on the matter. Mary and Henri will each regard the other as usurpers, Henri will send an army to enforce his son's claim, and that army will not actually accomplish much (except perhaps to make Mary and Elizabeth more interested in cooperation).

Between annihilating French Protestants, invading Scotland, and occasionally fighting Spain, Henri will be keeping his realm on something like a permanent war footing, with probably quite negative economic impact. On the other hand, he'll solve the Huguenot problem in a manner that makes his wife's massacres seem like small potatoes...
 
I'm counting on it (Charles also had poor health throughout his short life). At which point the relationship goes very far south; Henri believes that at that point, his 10-year-old son Charles is the legitimate King of Scotland, and he is Regent of Scotland until his son's majority (and on his death, France and Scotland will be in personal union). The Scots have...very different ideas on the matter. Mary and Henri will each regard the other as usurpers, Henri will send an army to enforce his son's claim, and that army will not actually accomplish much (except perhaps to make Mary and Elizabeth more interested in cooperation).

Why would Charles have any claim to Scotland? His brother Francis was married to the Queen, but Charles wouldn't have any right to the throne.
 
Why would Charles have any claim to Scotland? His brother Francis was married to the Queen, but Charles wouldn't have any right to the throne.

I suppose he could arrange that Mary marry Charles when the Dauphin dies. I think she could consider it, as it was certainly suggested before she decided to return home. Catherine de Medici was also somewhat "rivals" with Mary Stuart and vetoed the idea.

He could also be bargaining on the fact that that Mary Stuart was forced to sign several dubious documents upon her marriage. One gave Francis the crown matrimonial (ie he would remain king if she died before him, he could also pass on the crown to issue by someone else should he have no issue with Mary). She also pledged the Scottish inheritence to the French crown should her line go extinct and also agreed to heavy financial demands to make up for the French paying her education as well as garrisoning Scotland. Of course she was sixteen and essentially signed these under duress, but we'd have to assume Mary is dead for any of these articles to take effect. And she'd still be very much alive in 1560.

Now, marrying Charles to Mary and bolstering French troops to support their claim? That makes more sense. Elizabeth I is certainly going to be more pro-Spanish in this scenario, especially if Henry is more aggressive in supporting Catholic rule in Scotland and perhaps the eventual enthronement as his son and daughter-in-law as King and Queen of England, too.

Henri already had great debts from the Italian Wars (some 29-30 million Livres) and I believe he was forced to declare bankruptcy sometime in 1559. Henri may have all these awesome ideas to smash the Protestants at home, protect his son's inheritance in Scotland, but he doesn't have the finances to pull it off. He's going to have to make strategic choices or else make some early financial reforms to bolster his income (which seems unlikely -- even Henri IV, as a reformist, changed the taxation system little aside from creating new ways to tax people, such as the Paulette). He's also going to have to deal with the rising power of the Guises -- he's not going to marry Margot to the upstart Duke of Guise. Sebastian of Portugal seems like a better idea. If a Guise gets a royal bride, it's giving them too much legitimacy IMO and will make them believe their station higher than it is. Henri needs to smack them down, not rise them up. His ideal situation is stabilizing the Protestant heresies, but letting the Bourbons and Guise factions bleed each other dry. But chaos in the provinces is not good for taxation purposes, especially for the Taille in particular.
 
His ideal situation is stabilizing the Protestant heresies, but letting the Bourbons and Guise factions bleed each other dry. But chaos in the provinces is not good for taxation purposes, especially for the Taille in particular.

Thing is the Guises are Politiques at this point--they DON'T want to smash the Protestants right now. (Also, their rivalry with their cousins the Bourbons isn't so bad right--the real people they have a hate-on for is the Montmorencys.) This is a BIG problem for Henri's little anti-Huguenot crusade--there's not a lot of enthusiasm at the top for it at this time. The three big families of his reign--the Montmorencys, the Bourbons, AND the Guises--all aren't very keen on it. The courts and jurists aren't very keen on it either. It's basically Henri, and a few very old courtiers he leans on, one of whom is his mistress. (Not that there isn't anti-Huguenot sentiment, but it's a bit lower down.)
 
Thing is the Guises are Politiques at this point--they DON'T want to smash the Protestants right now. (Also, their rivalry with their cousins the Bourbons isn't so bad right--the real people they have a hate-on for is the Montmorencys.) This is a BIG problem for Henri's little anti-Huguenot crusade--there's not a lot of enthusiasm at the top for it at this time. The three big families of his reign--the Montmorencys, the Bourbons, AND the Guises--all aren't very keen on it. The courts and jurists aren't very keen on it either. It's basically Henri, and a few very old courtiers he leans on, one of whom is his mistress. (Not that there isn't anti-Huguenot sentiment, but it's a bit lower down.)

Were the Guises really Politiques, though? The term it's self didn't even gain currency until the Catholic League was founded. Which yes, it was founded by Henry, Duke of Guise, but he was the son of Francis (1519 - 1563) which is the Duke of Guise we're speaking about and who was paramount during Henri II's reign.

He was universally popular, affable, and France's premier military figure. Yes, there was a lot of dislike of the Montmorency's too, just as the Bourbons, but I think it's a little wrong to paint him in the shade that he has a politique. He seemed to have no issue of Henri II's use of the Burning Chamber. The Bourbons were, and you're right, a practical nonentity at this point, although it was Henri II who rose them up a bit more by arranging that Jeanne d'Albret, his relation, marry the Duke of Bourbon. In fact, the big issue Montmorency had with the Guises were that they had supplanted him as the keys key advisors. Considering he readily allied with them against the Bourbons (perhaps more "the enemy of my enemy is my friend). The family feud definitely continued under his sons, though.

In the scenario of Henri II living, Montmorency still has his honors, but is still supplanted by the Guises. There will definitely be issues with that. I'm still not buying the Guises as politiques though -- not that I don't believe you, but most literature points to Ultra-Catholic affiliation. Although Henri II's death only cemented the Duke and Cardinal de Guise's supremacy on the council, they were a strong influence even before that, as Henri II was pretty weakwilled and greatly relied upon others.

The Cardinal of Guise is a true enigma and could have been a politique, but I hardly see it: approving of the Augsburg confession is one thing, but then wanting to establish the inquisition in France? He was definitely a torn man, but the Guises were oppurtunists above all. The Catholic Party didn't exist yet, but I would hardly say they were too upset of Henri II's intense bigotry. They probably thought it a waste of time and better to quash or appease the movement in Scotland and secure their niece's inheritance for both her and her husband the Dauphin before settling things in France.

Less politiques, and more opportunists, and great masters of the policy of the carrot and stick. Without Henri's death and the tumult of Amboise, their views won't radicalize. In such a case then, I do agree that they would urge Henry against being so ruthless in this case. Quash the smaller bug in Scotland, then crush the bug in France.
 
Top