Henry the Young King Survives

tuareg109

Banned
Just that, what if the first of Henry II's legitimate sons to survive to adulthood does not predecease him?

Henry the Young King was tall, fair, handsome, charming, generous, kind, brave, and merciful, as well as being something of a tournament hero and celebrity among the middle class and maybe even the commoners.

He was originally slated to inherit England, Normandy, and Maine; Richard would get Aquitaine and Guyenne, Geoffrey (surviving easily due to butterflies) would get Brittany, and John some small county in France. Given the turbulent relationships in this family, it seems as though Richard and Geoffrey will plot with King Philip Augustus of France to take Normandy and Maine off of Henry III's hands.

What else can happen in the short term? Could the brothers work together, each being rather popular in his own domain, to completely dismember France?
 
Last edited:
I don't see how Arthur would be a problem for a while - he's a baby when Henry II dies. But Richard and John are certainly not going to be very friendly and will be plotting like crazy. Big question is who goes on crusade.
 

tuareg109

Banned
I don't see how Arthur would be a problem for a while - he's a baby when Henry II dies. But Richard and John are certainly not going to be very friendly and will be plotting like crazy. Big question is who goes on crusade.

Dammit, I meant Geoffrey! Let's say that Geoffrey survives too; not ASB whatsoever.

If anybody goes Crusading, I guess. With so much trouble in France for Henry III--and thus trouble for King Philip--we could see a much smaller and even less successful Third Crusade, or no Third Crusade at all.
 
Henry the Young King was tall, fair, handsome, charming, generous, kind, brave, and merciful, as well as being something of a tournament hero and celebrity among the middle class and maybe even the commoners.
?

Was he? I don't know many accounts of him but some portray him as uncouth dumber version of his father.
 
Was he? I don't know many accounts of him but some portray him as uncouth dumber version of his father.

It depends on who you believe. The most negative contemporary opinions came from his father's chroniclers, who saw him as a monstrous Absalom for having turned against his father and who denounced him as a worthless, stupid traitor. The opinions of those not in Henry II's hire are generally more complex. Most mention his incredible charm, good looks, knightly abilities, and liberality, while at the same time criticizing him for his disloyalty, immaturity, and poor judgement. He was said to be an especially poor judge of character, befriending and protecting the wicked and the good indiscriminately as if he was unable to differentiate between them.

To me he seems deeply insecure; his father was very good at making sure young Henry never knew exactly what to expect from him. Promise, forget, give, take away, offer power, snatch away at last minute: that's crazy-making behaviour.
 
It depends on who you believe. The most negative contemporary opinions came from his father's chroniclers, who saw him as a monstrous Absalom for having turned against his father and who denounced him as a worthless, stupid traitor. The opinions of those not in Henry II's hire are generally more complex. Most mention his incredible charm, good looks, knightly abilities, and liberality, while at the same time criticizing him for his disloyalty, immaturity, and poor judgement. He was said to be an especially poor judge of character, befriending and protecting the wicked and the good indiscriminately as if he was unable to differentiate between them.

To me he seems deeply insecure; his father was very good at making sure young Henry never knew exactly what to expect from him. Promise, forget, give, take away, offer power, snatch away at last minute: that's crazy-making behaviour.

Ah the goodlooking nutjob, got it ;)
 
If Henry the Young King survives and inherits the throne, Richard still likely goes on the Third Crusade. As long as he gets the Crusader tax Henry II built up, he's unlikely to challenge his brother. IOTL, he ransacked the kingdom to get as much money for the Crusade as possible. ITTL, he only has the Aquitaine.

Knowing that he is unlikely to inherit the throne, will Richard still seek to rule the Aquitaine after he gets back from the Crusade, or might he be tempted to sell it to his brother for more funds in the hope he'll be made King of Jerusalem? He'll likely want to keep the title, but he may make Henry his heir and use other means to raise the funds.

With Henry the Young King in power, King Philip II of France is unlikely to go on Crusade. He needs to stay in Paris to keep an eye on Henry. That means the French Crusaders are likely lead by Hugh III, Duke of Burgundy. The combined Anglo-French force will be smaller than the one sent IOTL, but it won't experience the defections it did as well.

Richard is likely to become the leader of the crusade just as IOTL since Barbarossa still dies, and there is no obvious senior commander. However, he'll be only one Duke among many, so he is likely to not offend Leopold of Austria. Without the need to turn back to France to counteract King Philip's intrigues, the Third Crusade might stay in the Holy Land longer than it did IOTL. Since Saladin will die soon, and the Franks are staying, this might even lead to Richard taking Jerusalem back.

If so, what happens? Richard has little reason to go back to Aquitane to play second fiddle to his brother. Might he try to become King? Or perhaps enter the Templars and become Grandmaster? I think this remains a possibility. Richard liked fighting more than anything else, and being responsible for the defense of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, or perhaps even expanding it, would be very attractive to him.
 
If Richard still takes Cyprus, maybe he'll stay there as its king instead of selling it to the Templars. Doesn't prevent any of his other crusading activities.
 
Top