N.France Unites with Britain and Occitania unites with Aragon

Gascony is not part of Occitania. Occitania refers to the lands surrounding Toulouse and Narbonne and Marseille. The Gasons do have linguistic and cultural similarities to the Occitanians, but they are not the same.
:confused:Since "Occitan" = "Langue d'Oc" and Gascons are definitely in that linguistic group, how can you claim that?

True, Gascon is a distinct dialect of Occitan, but so e.g. is Provençal, and no one claims it isn't part of Occitan.
 
:confused:Since "Occitan" = "Langue d'Oc" and Gascons are definitely in that linguistic group, how can you claim that?

True, Gascon is a distinct dialect of Occitan, but so e.g. is Provençal, and no one claims it isn't part of Occitan.

The issue is political control. At the time of the probably POD (early 1200s), Gascony was Angevin territory and would be under England's control, at least initially, under this scenario. (http://www.euratlas.com/travel_time/europe_south_west_1200.html) So instead of Occitania, "County of Toulouse" is probably better, since that's what Aragon was trying to conquer before being defeated at Muret in OTL.

Now Gascony would be a likely battleground between the Angevin and Aragonese kingdoms later on, especially if Aragon decides it wants an Atlantic coastline. And it may be that the political border ultimately stabilizes vaguely close to the linguistic one, as indeed several borders did in OTL.
 
This gets very interesting.

We'll have the political capital in Paris. The King will have to be crowned in Paris, London, Rouen (for Normandy) Nantes? (for Brittany), Anjou and such, so expect several grand cathedrals. London is the economic centre of the Kingdom, but the treasury is at Wincester (probably will remain so). The Kingdom has 6 Archbishops (Canterbury, York, Paris, Rouen, Rennes, Reims, Tours, Dijon), and possibly a further one in Wales.

It is interesting, isn't it? However, it's not necessarily that complicated. There are going to be more important areas than others. England and France will take priority. The others are going to be second class to various degrees. The Kings may choose to be crowned by proxy in some territories, such as Anjou and Maine, or crowned several years later in places like Gascony. This wasn't unknown - it was in fact fairly common for powerful Kings marrying foreign royals to be married by proxy, for instance, so the marriage could be already established when the couple first met. Both parties would take part in a marriage ceremony in their native capitals, marrying a noble of the same nationality standing in for the other party, usually a chaperone or escort who would then take them to meet the other member of the new married couple. And remember that having grand churches was common for this era anyway, and a city was largely defined as being a town with a cathedral, so there would be little need to expand the local religious facilities, though over time stuff would happen - for instance, a university to match the University of Paris would likely gradually arise in Rouen etc. The Archbishops comment is true, though since the territories would all nominally be equal I don't think you should expect to see any sort of version of a "Primate of All England (Angevin Empire)" analogue. Also, since Wales is largely regarded as an extension of England, and indeed was officially annexed in 1542 with the Wales Acts, I'm unsure about it getting its own Archbishop but yes, the basic point stands.

Just as a comment by-the-by, I wouldn't fall for the trap of believing that the smaller territories will chafe at being "ignored". While a country like England might well chafe under a unified France where it is eclipsed, this is largely because of the prestige and the failure to meet potential that England would suffer. In situations such as this, places like Maine and Anjou and even Normandy would likely enjoy receiving less attention. In this formative period, merchants were becoming a more important body and nobles were starting to understand the threat of centralisation to their power. Such territories would likely enjoy being out of the limelight as it gives the influential figures the room to grow in power and to exert themselves without the King constantly placing a glass ceiling above them. This goes doubly so for Gascony, where the Duke had virtually no territory of his own and the nobles believed, due to history and precedent, that they had a God-given right to do what they like and to veto royal/ducal decrees concerning them, and so they absolutely loved the Duke being absent and exerting no control. Obviously there's a threat that the territories become too "flamboyant" and outspoken in their exertions and risking royal wrath, but historically in this era the lesser territories did very much enjoy being the lesser partners in such unions. Indeed, my book commented on how the Angevins (specifically of Anjou I mean) took advantage of the Empire by frequently requesting Englishmen take the reins of government in the King's absence, as the Angevin Empire gave them access to a pool of courtiers from England who were neutral in French affairs and thus prevented factions from taking over. In the 12th century Englishmen were frequently hired as magistrates and regents in France...

Of course, I don't want to misrepresent the issue. It wouldn't be all happiness and flowers, but in this era before the proper formation of nationalism and centralisation, this is the equivalent of children being left in the house alone for a whole month with no parents to stop them having houseparties.

:confused:Since "Occitan" = "Langue d'Oc" and Gascons are definitely in that linguistic group, how can you claim that?

True, Gascon is a distinct dialect of Occitan, but so e.g. is Provençal, and no one claims it isn't part of Occitan.

Ahh yes, but Germany does not equal all German speaking territories. As others have pointed out, political boundaries can affect such definitions over time, even when the root word for the region comes from the same word as the language spoken.
 
:confused:Since "Occitan" = "Langue d'Oc" and Gascons are definitely in that linguistic group, how can you claim that?

True, Gascon is a distinct dialect of Occitan, but so e.g. is Provençal, and no one claims it isn't part of Occitan.

Sorry, I should have clarified - when I say Occitania, I'm referring to the lands ruled over by the Counts of Toulouse, which is what the Aragonese were trying to conquer. As Falastur points out, they have little to do with linguistics and more to do with politics.
 
Top