Longer reign for Henry IV of England

King Henry IV of England died in 1413 aged 46, after several years of bad health.

What if he didn't have the health issues he had in OTL, and instead of dying aged 46 he lived for another 25 years, dying aged about 71 or 72 in 1438.

Consequences?
 
Living up to the 70s was really uncommon for people during the Middle Ages, even for Kings... However, it's still a possibility.

So, Henry IV dies in 1438... If things go OTL, Henry V may never rule (OTL he died in 1422) and Henry IV will be succeeded upon his death by his grandson, OTL Henry VI, who will be 17. As he will be a major, there will be no regency.

However, I think having Henry IV living longer could butterfly away what Henry V did OTL...
 
Yeah that sounds about right, (Though really in the late middle ages 46 was roughly the same as present day 60 not super old but not exactly young and even without plague there were alot more nasty ways to buy it back then).

Even if he doesn't become King, Henry V was a soldier first and foremost and if henry IV presses the claim to the French throne then probably Prince Henry goes to France however if he still dies young then England will still face henry VI (or V) who aside from not being up to the job was nuts on more than one occasion so the War of the Roses probably still happens.

Speaking of that, Henry IV was deeply unpopular with many during his reign, he was after all a usurper who almost certainly murdered Richard II. While the old King wasn't loved Henry spent the first ten years of his reign dealing with rebellions both of the Welsh and people who had supported Richard and rebellion erupted again in the last year of his reign. In fact this is where Prince Henry got much of his early battle experience.

Now OTL these rebellions were stepped on by Prince Henry and when he came to power he tried to make peace with his fathers enemies and with one exception managed to avoid rebellions in his reign, now if Henry IV lives longer then this does not happen and domestic strife will remain a problem for a while longer.

Assuming a rebellion doesn't suceed, his Grandson (or son) will come to power after twenty more years of trouble, now Henry V (if he lives) can put this down and if he stays smart in trying to avoid the personal hatred of his fathers enemies then we could see peace, but if OTL Henry VI inherits then we now have a weak king inheriting not from a beloved father but a despised grandfather (hated by the nobility that is, the lower classes don't have much of a say at this point; peasents revolt not withstanding).

In OTL the Yorkist threat didn't fully flower until the defeat in France during the 1450's but in this timeline Henry VI is going to be facing rebellion by people who not only hated Granddad, but known Henry is personally weak.

Add in the fact that if Henry V dies on schedule and Joan of Arc still happens then by Henry IV's new death date, the War in France is going very badly, and the blame is gonna stick to the ruler, in OTL Henry VI got the crown as England was winning, here he'll get the job as things go badly wrong and his enemies may take the chance to move.

Still if Henry V does live in this timeline, we might get him Vs Joan of Arc which would be a very interesting battle...

(Sorry for going on but I've been reading Agincourt by Juliet Barker, so I've got half the hundred years war running through my head, (gotta get her new book)).
 
Living up to the 70s was really uncommon for people during the Middle Ages, even for Kings... However, it's still a possibility.

So, Henry IV dies in 1438... If things go OTL, Henry V may never rule (OTL he died in 1422) and Henry IV will be succeeded upon his death by his grandson, OTL Henry VI, who will be 17. As he will be a major, there will be no regency.

However, I think having Henry IV living longer could butterfly away what Henry V did OTL...

Well first we have to consider Henry's life. He was faced with constant coup attempts which probably made him paranoid and stressed; indeed, the disease that killed him could have been cardivascular and he may have did of a heart attack or something like it (either caused by aforementioned stress or by a Medieval diet). Therefore, I'd say it's unlikely he'd live 25 years olonger; the best we can hope for really is five or ten, and even then as a shell of a man.

His later death probably wouldn't affect Henry Vs death date, as he did of typhoid or something like that in France, which was really rather 'accidental' so to say-if he hadn't caught that he could well have lived many more years. That would of course affect Henry VI and the Wars of the Roses.

In Henry IV Part I (the play) Henry makes it clear that once England is stable he intends to go on crusade. This is referred to in history, and so may have been on the cards had he lived longer. It probably wouldn't be a very grand affair; few others would join in probably and the restless barons would probably rebel as soon as he got on the boat. Now, Henry V on crusade-that would be awesome.
 
Actually it was Henry V who planned to crusade after he finished taking France (but we all know how that ended) his father seems to have been a bit less militaristic so he might have called for Crusade (even two centuries after the great age of the Crusade it was still a popular battle cry) but I'm not sure he would want to actually under take one (please remember Shakespere was writing plays about Queen Elizbeth I's ancesters which is why the useless Henry VI gets a good write up and Richard III (who Liz's grandfather killed) is made totally rotten; Princes in the tower excepted he was actually a reasonable ruler it's now thought).


Also a crusade at this point? Despite the way we talk up the period this is when Europe was at it's weakest, the Age of Exploration is decades away and except in Spain the Islamic states are on the rise and close to finally smashing the Byzantines, a badly equiped assault by a nation exhursted by decades of war (all be it not the way France was) is going to end badly for those involved.

Also back to my last post, there is some suggestion that Henry (or at least his advisors) was bent while his son was extremely honest, I doubt twenty years more of corruption would go down well.
 
Last edited:
Let's get this straight re: Henry V's death date. Henry died in 1422 after contracting dysentery IIRC from the squalor of the camps during the Siege of Meaux, a city in Ile de France. Henry V supported the Armagnacs as I recall, in agreement for full sovereignty of the English crown over Gascony, and totally against his father's will, since Henry IV was at the same time supporting the Burgundians. Indeed I'm pretty sure that at one point there were two English armies in France, both fighting for opposite sides. Henry V recanted his stance and rushed to his father's side to repent shortly before Henry IV's death but if his father doesn't look like dying then more such actions are likely to continue, with Henry pursuing his own policies against his father's will. I honestly don't believe that Henry V was a truly rebellious man who hated his father, rather a hot-headed man who seized opportunities and was too brash to back down at the first calling - so I doubt Henry V will spend all his father's life fighting for the Armagnacs but it changes the complexion of the war entirely. For a start, the claim to the French throne is likely to be butterflied entirely as it was entirely to do with how over-the-barrel Henry had the two French factions in 1414 and the Armagnacs had most to lose. In this scenario, we likely have the Armagnacs in a slightly stronger position thanks to Henry V's support for them on-off for a much longer position, and circumstances and the passage of time mean that the Armagnac-Burgundian dispute will likely peter out before Henry V ascends.

At any rate, the entire conflict has changed far too much for Henry V to be likely to catch dysentery again.

As per comments about rebellion brewing against Henry VI as a lame duck king...possibly, but bear in mind that in this TL, it's far more likely that Henry V has several sons, each of which will become a major supporter to Henry VI in the same way that the Dukes of Bedford, Gloucester and Clarence were Henry V's most trusted allies. Henry VI is not going to be an isolated figure dominated by his wife - in fact far more plausibly here his wife will be a supplicant woman from somewhere other than Provence - because his brothers will be the major part of his government and will be seen as a major column of support and a legitimising influence over Henry VI to any who thought of trying to have Henry VI deposed. Yes, it's possible that some of them will be...slow...like Henry VI himself, but genetics, history and chance suggests that Henry VI would have a couple of sound-of-mind brothers behind him.
 
Very good points.

Maybe Henry IV living into his 70s is pushing it then, but how about his early 60s with him dying in 1428, giving him about 15 more years to rule than he had in OTL?

With regards to Henry V and Henry VI, wouldn't Henry IV living longer mean Henry V might not end up marrying Catherine of Valois? Henry VI inherited his mental health issues from his maternal grandfather Charles VI of France, if Henry V married someone else his son would be a very different person.

I agree that Henry IV living longer also affects Henry V's death date. The crusade idea is interesting. I believe both Henry IV and Henry V intended to go on crusade. Perhaps one of them would in this scenario.
 
the riddle said:
With regards to Henry V and Henry VI, wouldn't Henry IV living longer mean Henry V might not end up marrying Catherine of Valois? Henry VI inherited his mental health issues from his maternal grandfather Charles VI of France, if Henry V married someone else his son would be a very different person.

That's one of the things I was wondering... Will OTL Henry VI exists or will we have a different one?
Besides, wasn't Henry V and Catherine de Valois' marriage arranged so that Henry VI (when he was born) could claim both the French and English crowns?
 
Unless Prince Henry becomes King, I don't see him being able to press his claim to the throne of France, unless his father assents. War with France is a prohibitively expensive matter. Even if Henry IV wants to go for it, I don't know if he would have committed to such an expensive matter since his realm was not a model of stability. Even with his tremendous personality and advantage in not being a usurper, Henry V always had to fight to get funds to pay for the War with France. Even if his father committed, I don't think the English would have fared so well against the French.

Unless Agincourt happens I don't see Prince Henry marrying Catherine of Valois. Remember in RL, the matter dragged on for years (IMO partly due to English demands and I suggest concerns about the Princess marrying below her). The house of Lancaster being a cadet branch of Plantagenets was relatively new, lacked prestige, probably not a good bet long term (similar to how the Trastamara probably viewed the Tudors). Perhaps Henry V's son avoids mental illness in exchange for not having dual rights to the thrones of England and France.
 
For me, Blanche I of Navarre is the Ideal bride for Henry V if he is looking to improve the English claims to the French throne it merges Joan II of Navarre and Isabella of France's claims.
 
For me, Blanche I of Navarre is the Ideal bride for Henry V if he is looking to improve the English claims to the French throne it merges Joan II of Navarre and Isabella of France's claims.
She can be a good choice and her kingdom can become a valuable power base for the wars with France
 
Top