Change is simple-Dauphin has a son with his Burgundian wife, born just few weeks before his death. That infant, grandson of both Charles VI and John the Fearless, is now heir of the French throne according to Salic Law. So are Burgundians going to dominate the scene, marginalizing Armagnacs? Such change certainly should butterfly away Anglo-Burgundian alliance.
Louis of Guyenne has a son with Margaret of Burgundy. How is HYW impacted?
- Thread starter Jan Olbracht
- Start date
krieger
Banned
We should notice that Louis, duc of Guyenne (at least according to @Kellan Sullivan and @jeandebueil) was genuinely loved by his mother, and this in combination with Burgundians siding with infant John (I think this name is probable), would butterfly treaty of Troyes. Henry V would need to settle for much more moderate gains in France, but not claiming (or not pressing his claim) to France, he can live longer.
I will admit, this does throw a spanner in the works of Henry V. But the question is "by how much". Obviously he can't claim the crown of France - Guienne was never rumoured to be illegitimate like OTL Charles VII - but Agincourt happened and apparently surprised even the English. The English just sorta kept rolling from that momentum. So, IMO, it could lead to an interesting momentum. Especially since OTL Troyes was (IIRC) a case of Henry V holding a sword over Isabeau's head "sign this or I go out and keep breaking things until you do". With an infant dauphin (how would that title work, anyway, since Charles VI's sons were the first holders, and AIUI it was never specified if the title was reserved for the eldest son of the king (à la Prince of Wales) or not), things would change. Henry V can't demand the crown, but he can demand territorial concessions from Paris (Aquitaine, ICR offhand where else England was claiming).
The duke of Burgundy might exploit the situation as well. Henry keeping France on the backfoot is good for Burgundy, Jean sans Peur might not want to dismember his grandson's kingdom (least, not entirely), but he will want to achieve a sort of "independence" for Burgundy I'd imagine.
@Zulfurium
It is certainly an interesting scenario.
I think in regards to Henry V, he would have to content himself with robbing the French blind and resecuring Aquitaine and possibly Normandy - the latter of which would honestly be a disaster for the English given how fervently pro-French the region had become by this point in time. As for the Armagnacs and their partisans, I think we might end up seeing somewhat of a reversal from OTL, with the Burgundians strengthening their grip on the French Crown and opposing the English while the Armagnacs look to the English to weaken their rivals. I doubt we would see a similar alliance to the Anglo-Burgundian one, but a more tacit agreement to focus attentions against the Burgundians would make a good deal of sense. On the whole, I think the most interesting part of this scenario is that it gets Henry out of France relatively quickly - he would probably assign a brother or subordinate to deal with pacifying Normandy. This then leaves us with the question of what the hell Henry V does if he isn't fighting in France.
While Jean sans Peur would probably continue strengthening Burgundian power, I actually think this scenario would see JSP try to recreate his father's grip on French power. My understanding of the Burgundian Valois' is that Phillip II was focused on power in France, as was JSP - with Phillip III (le Bon) being the one who wanted an independent Burgundy. JSP still thought he and his descendants could secure control over the French kingdom - which is a far more appetising prospect than the ramshackle construction emerging in the Low Countries (For god's sake, they don't even speak French!). Therefore, since JSP is the figure in power in Burgundy I could well see him filling in the role of the Armagnacs from OTL with young Jean. The shift in supporting faction from Armagnac to Burgundian has a ton of interesting consequences which could be fun to explore.
I think in regards to Henry V, he would have to content himself with robbing the French blind and resecuring Aquitaine and possibly Normandy - the latter of which would honestly be a disaster for the English given how fervently pro-French the region had become by this point in time. As for the Armagnacs and their partisans, I think we might end up seeing somewhat of a reversal from OTL, with the Burgundians strengthening their grip on the French Crown and opposing the English while the Armagnacs look to the English to weaken their rivals. I doubt we would see a similar alliance to the Anglo-Burgundian one, but a more tacit agreement to focus attentions against the Burgundians would make a good deal of sense. On the whole, I think the most interesting part of this scenario is that it gets Henry out of France relatively quickly - he would probably assign a brother or subordinate to deal with pacifying Normandy. This then leaves us with the question of what the hell Henry V does if he isn't fighting in France.
While Jean sans Peur would probably continue strengthening Burgundian power, I actually think this scenario would see JSP try to recreate his father's grip on French power. My understanding of the Burgundian Valois' is that Phillip II was focused on power in France, as was JSP - with Phillip III (le Bon) being the one who wanted an independent Burgundy. JSP still thought he and his descendants could secure control over the French kingdom - which is a far more appetising prospect than the ramshackle construction emerging in the Low Countries (For god's sake, they don't even speak French!). Therefore, since JSP is the figure in power in Burgundy I could well see him filling in the role of the Armagnacs from OTL with young Jean. The shift in supporting faction from Armagnac to Burgundian has a ton of interesting consequences which could be fun to explore.
krieger
Banned
I didn't say that Henry V would be defeated entirely, this would require much better king than Charles VI (maybe if Louis, duke of Orleans ascended after Charles the Wise it'd be possible, but this is not the point of the tread). Isabella would never agree to weaken Guyenne's sons position because she liked Guyenne, but she didn't like Charles. I thought that Henry V would settle for returning to conditions of treaty of Bretigny (so "Great Aquitaine" being English and free from French overlordship), but on the other side he might live longer ITTL than IOTL, because he'd not lay a siege to Meaux where he got an abcess because of which he died. And regarding Henry V living longer there is important question - would Catherine of Valois still meet Owen Tudor? Because if yes, it could lead to the situation when she cuckolds her husband with Owen. If not, Henry might leave a couple of another legitimate sons - which means that even if Henry VI happens to be still mad, the Wars of the Roses are avoided. Maybe longer-living Henry V would send his eldest son (if he saw younger as more fit to kingship) to monastery?
Surely still being Queen would have an effect on her household and residences and what not, potentially precluding her from having anything to do with Tudor. In any case, is there any reason to think Catherine would be so catastrophically reckless? I know she had her dalliance with Beaufort IOTL, but that's less high stakes than cuckolding the king.
VVD0D95
Banned
This and the fact that Owen Tudor no
Matter what history might think, isn’t Henry V. If what I’ve read of him is any indication Henry V was the ultimate Chad
The question of course, would arise as to whether Henry and Catherine even get married here.
It's ONE thing for the king to marry Catherine when her all except one of her brothers has died without children. Here, she's removed further, since I can imagine that not becoming dauphin saves Jean, duc de Touraine (first husband of Jacqueline, Countess of Hainaut) from being poisoned (unless he's stupid enough to challenge Jean sans Peur for the regency of his nephew). No reason to imagine that THEY won't have kids. Which FURTHER decreases Catherine's importance to Henry.
Hell...I could see Henry marrying differently here (Anne of Burgundy, OTL Duchess of Bedford; Isabel of Portugal, OTL Duchess of Burgundy; Blanca II of Navarre; Elisabeth of Görlitz, duchess of Luxemburg are all possibilities, although Burgundy/Portugal seems more likely to me)
It's ONE thing for the king to marry Catherine when her all except one of her brothers has died without children. Here, she's removed further, since I can imagine that not becoming dauphin saves Jean, duc de Touraine (first husband of Jacqueline, Countess of Hainaut) from being poisoned (unless he's stupid enough to challenge Jean sans Peur for the regency of his nephew). No reason to imagine that THEY won't have kids. Which FURTHER decreases Catherine's importance to Henry.
Hell...I could see Henry marrying differently here (Anne of Burgundy, OTL Duchess of Bedford; Isabel of Portugal, OTL Duchess of Burgundy; Blanca II of Navarre; Elisabeth of Görlitz, duchess of Luxemburg are all possibilities, although Burgundy/Portugal seems more likely to me)
VVD0D95
Banned
Anne of Burgundy would be an interesting marriage I think. I've never been able to figure out why Henry waited so long to get married.
Would we draw any negative inferences from her lack of reproductive success IOTL, or can that be put down to Bedford/bad luck?
I'd go with poor luck. According to some sources she died in childbirth, others say she died of the plague
Well true who Bedford was rather old and was married to her only for short times, but considering Jacquetta’s reproductive story I would think pretty likely who troubles were on his side...
krieger
Banned
Well, I think that Henry would still marry Catherine to secure peace with young king. Under the Salic Law, Catherine had no claim nonetheless, if Henry wanted to get the crown he'd need to fight for it.
And Henry himself stated that his own rights to the throne of France are better than these of Catherine.
krieger
Banned
Because it is...true, if we don't allow female-line inheritance, Catherine has no rights, and if we do, Henry has better claim as a descendant of Philip IV not his younger brother, Charles of Valois.