Louis (VIII) of France maring Eleanor of Brittany in 1195

France and England both follow primogeniture.It is highly doubtful that Louis will split England and France unless the personal union proves unfeasible and ungovernable.Giving excess lands in the massive domain to form appanages might be a more realistic choice.The same with Brittany.Seeing how Brittany is legally independent of France and England,I think a personal union will be maintained.So realistically,you might see Louis granting duchies created from the royal domain in England and southern France.
 
Last edited:
France and England both follow primogeniture.It is highly doubtful that Louis will split England and France unless the personal union proves unfeasible and ungovernable.Giving excess lands in the massive domain to form appanages might be a more realistic choice.The same with Brittany.Seeing how Brittany is legally independent of France and England,I think a personal union will be maintained.So realistically,you might see Louis granting duchies created from the royal domain in England and southern France.

However the primogeniture was not quite as clear cut with the Royal Domain in the early days as it was held separate from the French Duchies.
Whether England and France are split depends on the nobles within each and the Privy Council.
If we assume Louis remains steadfast in control of both then he will try to pass them on together.
We can assume however that:
the Lordship of Ireland will be appanaged out, perhaps with a crown from the Pope.
Northern England will no doubt get its own council and the first duchies may start from here
Aquitaine will be appanaged
Normandy will be added to the French Royal Domain
 
However the primogeniture was not quite as clear cut with the Royal Domain in the early days as it was held separate from the French Duchies.
Whether England and France are split depends on the nobles within each and the Privy Council.
If we assume Louis remains steadfast in control of both then he will try to pass them on together.
We can assume however that:
the Lordship of Ireland will be appanaged out, perhaps with a crown from the Pope.
Northern England will no doubt get its own council and the first duchies may start from here
Aquitaine will be appanaged
Normandy will be added to the French Royal Domain
If Aquitaine gets appanaged,I don't see the whole domain of Eleanor of Aquitaine being given to one son.The 'Duchy of Aquitaine' under Eleanor was actually a conglomerate of feudal titles like the Duchy of Gascony,Duchy of Aquitaine and the County of Poitou.

And yes,if England proved to be ungovernable from a distance then there's no doubt Louis and his eldest son will consent to it being given to a younger brother.
 
If Aquitaine gets appanaged,I don't see the whole domain of Eleanor of Aquitaine being given to one son.The 'Duchy of Aquitaine' under Eleanor was actually a conglomerate of feudal titles like the Duchy of Gascony,Duchy of Aquitaine and the County of Poitou.

And yes,if England proved to be ungovernable from a distance then there's no doubt Louis and his eldest son will consent to it being given to a younger brother.

Yep, and the suzerainty over Auvergne and other.

So, can I consider as plausible the following deal :

- Normandy attached to Royal Demesne during the life of Philippe Auguste
- Artois attached to RD during the life of Louis VIII

Now, the succession:
- Kingdom of France, Duchy of Brittany, Counties of Poitiou, Anjou, Maine and Touraine to Philippe III of France
- Kingdom of England to Louis II of England
- Duchy of Aquitaine and Gascony to prince Charles of France who will get a good match (something like the heiress of Toulouse or Provence)

Is this fair/plausible enough? Charles will receive a huge piece of land, very rich (to not be frustrated with the share of his older brothers) but also quite rebellious and divided.

Now, other possibility is that Charles will receive the Counties of Anjou, Maine and Touraine .The Aquitaine and Gascony goes to Philippe... Is this a better deal for France? but for Charles?
Will Louis want lands over the channel - something like Duchy of Aquitaine ?

Thanks
 
Yep, and the suzerainty over Auvergne and other.

So, can I consider as plausible the following deal :

- Normandy attached to Royal Demesne during the life of Philippe Auguste
- Artois attached to RD during the life of Louis VIII

Now, the succession:
- Kingdom of France, Duchy of Brittany, Counties of Poitiou, Anjou, Maine and Touraine to Philippe III of France
- Kingdom of England to Louis II of England
- Duchy of Aquitaine and Gascony to prince Charles of France who will get a good match (something like the heiress of Toulouse or Provence)

Is this fair/plausible enough? Charles will receive a huge piece of land, very rich (to not be frustrated with the share of his older brothers) but also quite rebellious and divided.

Now, other possibility is that Charles will receive the Counties of Anjou, Maine and Touraine .The Aquitaine and Gascony goes to Philippe... Is this a better deal for France? but for Charles?
Will Louis want lands over the channel - something like Duchy of Aquitaine ?

Thanks
That's assuming England isn't ungovernable,which is hardly the case really.England is probably much more governable than France itself considering it's much more centralized.It's not like Aquitaine where the duke needs a really hands a approach to govern,which is why Richard I can safely spend his days in France subjugating Aquitainian nobles whereas England can be left in the hands of regents.
 
Last edited:
That's assuming England isn't ungovernable,which is hardly the case really.England is probably much more governable than France itself considering it's much more centralized.It's not like Aquitaine where the duke needs a really hands a approach to govern,which is why Richard I can safely spend his days in France subjugating Aquitainian nobles whereas England can be left in the hands of regents.

But keeping the two crowns together will not be too much? I suppose that the English nobility will be very hostile about it and will prefers to have it split.
 
But keeping the two crowns together will not be too much? I suppose that the English nobility will be very hostile about it and will prefers to have it split.
A lot of them still has lands in France at this point in time.Few of them objected when their king was de facto King over half of France.
 
I honestly think the French could get away with giving Brittany to any royal son. In the OTL during her captivity Eleanor was unable to press her claims to England AND Brittany. In her stead her younger half sister Alix was recognized as Duchess of Brittany.
 
A lot of them still has lands in France at this point in time.Few of them objected when their king was de facto King over half of France.

But he wasn't King and that makes the difference - remember that a lot of the nobles were often calling upon their liegelord's liegelord ie the French King. In this situation this can't happen and there'll be a lot of tension now directed at the throne.


Brittany I suspect may become a realm held by who OTL became the Dauphin (which will probably not happen here, expect the Delphinate to go to Savoy) ie the heir to France. So legally still separate but under the Kingdom of France.
Anjou or Maine may occassionally be added but I suspect overtime will partition to various other vassals until centralisation of titles begins to kick in again.
Alternativeely it may be Guyenne [1]-Gascony that fills this role.
Perhaps Brittany can be held by the King of England?

With division of the crowns will France be considered the overlord? ie OTL the King of Scotland, Prince (Major) of Wales, Lord of Ireland [2] were all vassals of the King of England (note that the King was his own vassal in being Lord of Ireland!)
If so expect serious problems with the HRE who will view France as trying to usurp the Western Roman Imperial title


[1] As distinguished from Aquitaine which we can call the past conglomeration of Guyenne, Gascony, Poitou, etc
[2] Don't forget this important inheritance!
 
But he wasn't King and that makes the difference - remember that a lot of the nobles were often calling upon their liegelord's liegelord ie the French King. In this situation this can't happen and there'll be a lot of tension now directed at the throne.
Hardly means anything.All the English kings prior to John got away with defying the king of France and smashed any attempt by the king of France to assert control.Furthermore,the nobles know that serving two lieges would one day mean having to choose between them,which is what happened when Philippe Augustus took control. They must relinquish the territories in France or in England depending on who they choose to serve.
Brittany I suspect may become a realm held by who OTL became the Dauphin (which will probably not happen here, expect the Delphinate to go to Savoy) ie the heir to France. So legally still separate but under the Kingdom of France.
Anjou or Maine may occassionally be added but I suspect overtime will partition to various other vassals until centralisation of titles begins to kick in again.
Alternativeely it may be Guyenne [1]-Gascony that fills this role.
Perhaps Brittany can be held by the King of England?
Of all the territories,I least expect it not to remain with the crown of France,seeing how it is essentially surrounded in the continent by France.Since Brittany is legally independent of any kingdom,giving the duchy to anyone other than the King of France would signal returning it's independence.
With division of the crowns will France be considered the overlord? ie OTL the King of Scotland, Prince (Major) of Wales, Lord of Ireland [2] were all vassals of the King of England (note that the King was his own vassal in being Lord of Ireland!)
If so expect serious problems with the HRE who will view France as trying to usurp the Western Roman Imperial title
The opinion of the HRE is irrelevant.I know this isn't the HRE post interregnum,but the emperors were still too busy either fighting in Italy or against usurpers in Germany.They were so busy that they were okay with handing the entirety of Pomerania and other territories in northern Getmany to the king of Denmark.
 
Last edited:
Hardly means anything.All the English kings prior to John got away with defying the king of France and smashed any attempt by the king of France to assert control.Furthermore,the nobles know that serving two lieges would one day mean having to choose between them,which is what happened when Philippe Augustus took control. They must relinquish the territories in France or in England depending on who they choose to serve.
So all those rebellions By Henry II's sons supported by Phillipe mean nothing?
Of all the territories,I least expect it not to remain with the crown of France,seeing how it is essentially surrounded in the continent by France.Since Brittany is legally independent of any kingdom,giving the duchy to anyone other than the King of France would signal returning it's independence.
I'm not sure if you're trying to argue Brittany will or won't be joined to France.
Brittany was not strong enough to stand up to French Royal encroachment - hence it's consistent alliances with the English Royals. Especially with the limbo regarding the Duchy's status within or without the Kingdom of France - the Duke was certainly a vassal of the King.
My example parallels what happened with Wales vis-a-vis England in the time of Edward I. And Wales was more obviously independent of England.
The opinion of the HRE is irrelevant.I know this isn't the HRE post interregnum,but the emperors were still too busy either fighting in Italy or against usurpers in Germany.They were so busy that they were okay with handing the entirety of Pomerania and other territories in northern Getmany to the king of Denmark.
The preeminent ruler of Christendom irrelevant?
Yes they were busy. Not so busy that OTL they formed a military alliance with King John that resulted in the debacle at Bouvines.
 
So all those rebellions By Henry II's sons supported by Phillipe mean nothing?
They mean nothing.Not relevant at all.Those rebellions were only massive because they were led by Henry's heirs.In normal circumstances,attempts by the King of France to interfere in the English King's French lands were usually smashed hard.Henry's one of the exceptions because he is infamous for being in sh$t terms with nearly everyone of his sons except for John Lackland.Besides that,even if King of France doesn't have any suzerainty over Henry's lands,they are bound to be involved anyway.It makes sense politically to weaken a strong neighbor by any means.
I'm not sure if you're trying to argue Brittany will or won't be joined to France.
Brittany was not strong enough to stand up to French Royal encroachment - hence it's consistent alliances with the English Royals. Especially with the limbo regarding the Duchy's status within or without the Kingdom of France - the Duke was certainly a vassal of the King.
My example parallels what happened with Wales vis-a-vis England in the time of Edward I. And Wales was more obviously independent of England.
I am saying the King of France will permanently become the Duke of Brittany.Brittany was by all means independent of France,legally and practically for much of it's existence.To grant someone else than the King of France the duchy would create illusions that the duchy is given it's independence again.
The preeminent ruler of Christendom irrelevant?
Yes they were busy. Not so busy that OTL they formed a military alliance with King John that resulted in the debacle at Bouvines.
The HRE is irrelevant.The HRE at the time was actually busier than he thought,which was why he was immediately deposed after Bouvines.The HRE joined Bouvines in a desperate attempt to salvage his rule.Philippe Augustus was basically supporting Frederick Hohenstaufen at the time,the HRE decided to end his support by joining the coalition.The HRE following the Investiture Controversy was a shadow of it's former self,with it's unity being completely obliterated after Frederick II died.
 
Last edited:
Thanks a lot for the feedback.

My last queries is if Louis VIII of France succeed to conquer England (in this scenario) will pass both crowns to his first son or will split the crowns, giving France to the first and England to the second....

For both variants there are pro and contra arguments, some of them very solid... I'm just trying to deduce how were the customs and mentalities back-then and what version is more plausible to happens in this scenario.
 
Thanks a lot for the feedback.

My last queries is if Louis VIII of France succeed to conquer England (in this scenario) will pass both crowns to his first son or will split the crowns, giving France to the first and England to the second....

For both variants there are pro and contra arguments, some of them very solid... I'm just trying to deduce how were the customs and mentalities back-then and what version is more plausible to happens in this scenario.

I think you're going to have to assume that Louis will intend to pass both to his first son but it will be the interplay of the nobles of each realm, including those with estates in both, the relative power of the King in each realm (greater in England than France), and the personalities of the sons that will decide.
LSCatilina would probably be the best person to ask on the finetuning.
 
I think you're going to have to assume that Louis will intend to pass both to his first son but it will be the interplay of the nobles of each realm, including those with estates in both, the relative power of the King in each realm (greater in England than France), and the personalities of the sons that will decide.
LSCatilina would probably be the best person to ask on the finetuning.
This is correct.Another problem is what happened to John and Henry?Did they get imprisoned,executed,forced to abdicate but retain some land or in exile?That would be important.If it's the latter two,they will constantly try to raise and army and reclaim their lands,essentially becoming a thorn at the side of the French crown.
 
I think you're going to have to assume that Louis will intend to pass both to his first son but it will be the interplay of the nobles of each realm, including those with estates in both, the relative power of the King in each realm (greater in England than France), and the personalities of the sons that will decide.
LSCatilina would probably be the best person to ask on the finetuning.

Yep... I would like the imput of LSCatilina...if is interested about it :confused:
 
Top