On a Lilac Rose Valois England

On a Lilac Rose:A Valois England TL
Valois-Lancaster.png
Intro
The count of Anjou, Louis II of Naples, King of Anjou, count of Provence, count of Piedmont and pretender king of Naples marries the Yolande of Aragon who bears two children named Rene and John but Yolande dies on the birth of a daughter named Marie he married Blanche of England and has two sons with her named Richard and John named after the sons of Eleanor of Aquitaine, King Louis groomed Richard to be the King of England and the Duke of Aquitaine, Richard marries the Maid of Orleans Jeanne of Arc and was victorious against his cousin Henry V , thus Richard of Valois-Lancaster becomes the King of England and Duke of Guyenne with Queen Jeanne who gave him two children named Henry and William.

Valois-Lancaster.png
 
1430s-1440s when Richard takes England by the looks of it.

Unfortunately there's quite a lot wrong with this idea anyway, the first bit being "marrying into a family doesn't give you an automatic claim to the throne".
 
1430s-1440s when Richard takes England by the looks of it.

Unfortunately there's quite a lot wrong with this idea anyway, the first bit being "marrying into a family doesn't give you an automatic claim to the throne".

He becomes king on the right of conquest and is also supported by the marriage of his parents.
 
He becomes king on the right of conquest and is also supported by the marriage of his parents.

But under what pretext does he have a right to conquer England? And what right did Louis have to groom a French noble from birth to be King of England?
 
But under what pretext does he have a right to conquer England? And what right did Louis have to groom a French noble from birth to be King of England?
He grooms him to be a king to create a rival to the throne of england and to make him subservient to the king of france once he becomes king. Richard uses the defeat and death of henry v and the right of conquest like a reward after he defeated the enemy.
 
He grooms him to be a king to create a rival to the throne of england and to make him subservient to the king of france once he becomes king. Richard uses the defeat and death of henry v and the right of conquest like a reward after he defeated the enemy.

Thing is, medieval politics didn't work like that. You couldn't just declare that you had a rival claimant. They had to have an actual legal claim - the kind of case where, in modern society, they could take the case to court and stand at least a fair chance of producing a legally accurate proposition and convincing the judge and jury. If any old person was able to claim any throne by virtue of being slightly related to the King, there would have been anarchy - every war would have been about deposing kings and installing puppets rather than just taking bits of land and winning monetary reparations. Generally the only times that thrones were won by conquest was: A - when the King in place was do unpopular and despotic that the claimant said they had voided their right to the throne (note - VERY rarely did this happen, there had to be abuses worse than even genocide for this, really) or B - in the case of religious conflict, where one state or King attempted to conquer a country to institute their own religion. Neither of these were massively common, and they were very circumstantial.
 
Thing is, medieval politics didn't work like that. You couldn't just declare that you had a rival claimant. They had to have an actual legal claim - the kind of case where, in modern society, they could take the case to court and stand at least a fair chance of producing a legally accurate proposition and convincing the judge and jury. If any old person was able to claim any throne by virtue of being slightly related to the King, there would have been anarchy - every war would have been about deposing kings and installing puppets rather than just taking bits of land and winning monetary reparations. Generally the only times that thrones were won by conquest was: A - when the King in place was do unpopular and despotic that the claimant said they had voided their right to the throne (note - VERY rarely did this happen, there had to be abuses worse than even genocide for this, really) or B - in the case of religious conflict, where one state or King attempted to conquer a country to institute their own religion. Neither of these were massively common, and they were very circumstantial.
Richard becomes a king because he kills Henry VI.

I'll create another tl like this..
 
Last edited:
Richard becomes a king because he kills Henry VI.

I'll create another tl like this..

And what about OTL Edward IV, the rest of the House of York, the remaining members of the House of Lancaster, the Beaforts, the Tudors and the entire nobility of England? They'd all prefer an English king to a French one, making the country effectively ungovernable.
 
Top