Henry VI of England.

WI: He had been a strong and capable ruler, instead of the idiot that he turned out to be. What does this mean for the future development of the houses of York and Lancaster, since the civil wars are not likely to occur. Could England have held onto more of it's French possessions?
 
WI: He had been a strong and capable ruler, instead of the idiot that he turned out to be. What does this mean for the future development of the houses of York and Lancaster, since the civil wars are not likely to occur. Could England have held onto more of it's French possessions?

The butterflies here, had Henry VI been capable of initiating, inspiring and uniting others, are of course many. I'm not certain that a Yorkist challenge wouldn't have occured with a strong & capable H-6 on the throne, though it's likely that it would have been put down rather quickly (maybe). One other note, perhaps who should have said "WI he had been a strong and capable ruler, and had not suffered through bouts of insanity as an adult" or something like that. Henry had many qwirks and was mentally ill, but that doean't make him an idiot.
 
The butterflies here, had Henry VI been capable of initiating, inspiring and uniting others, are of course many. I'm not certain that a Yorkist challenge wouldn't have occured with a strong & capable H-6 on the throne, though it's likely that it would have been put down rather quickly (maybe). One other note, perhaps who should have said "WI he had been a strong and capable ruler, and had not suffered through bouts of insanity as an adult" or something like that. Henry had many qwirks and was mentally ill, but that doean't make him an idiot.


And for all his faults he commanded quite a bit of loyalty. It took years of fighting to dislodge him, despite the crippling handicap of a French wife. Take Margaret away, and I suspect he dies of old age despite all his personal shortcomings - as Henry III did.
 
Last edited:
And for all his faults he commanded quite a bit of loyalty. It trook years of fighting to dislodge him, despite the crippling handicap of a French wife. Take Margaret away, and I suspect he dies of old age despite all his personal shortcomings - as Henry III did.

Yes, but as per French territories the answer has to be no. By the time he is old enough for his intelligence (or genetic lack of) to come into play England has lost virtually everything. The only thing that remains is the 1450 Gascon insurrection where the English were invited back, and Calais. Calais however is a hard sell for an English reconquest because the French are now ready for the English and the Gascon insurrection was outnumbered from the start. Basically England has no chance.

Now what really screwed England over was Henry V dying early. If Henry VI was born more..."capable"...and inherited the throne at a much more mature age, chances are Henry V would have left him a French birthright he was more than capable of defending, rather than being entirely pushed out of France while he was still in his pre-teens.
 
Top