Plausibilty Check: King of both France and England?

An idea that I have involves Louis VIII replacing John as king of England. The feudal barons pissed off at John used him as an alternative (they didn't have a proposed successor IOTL, which makes it very unusual) in exchange for him signing the Magna Carta. He was literally the only person with legitimacy. He would later also become the king of France, thus starting a union between the two.

As long as the barons' rights were respected in the Magna Carta, they were content and wouldn't threaten rebellion. Since the king would be forced to move to Paris to properly rule both kingdoms, he wouldn't have to be involved in English affairs much anyway.

A major problem, I experience is trying to make the barons receptive to the idea of a man native to France, whom they had been warring with for thirty years. Butterflying the wars would end up butterflying the reasons the barons rebelled in the first place. Could their rebellion end up losing legitimacy since they don't have a potential successor? Or perhaps some actions of John would force them to choose an alternative?

And what would this theoretical country be called?

I appreciate any input.
 
Sadly, probably just "France", the French population was so much higher than England's that England could easily be subservient to the French, whihc does make me sad.

Saying that, you could (with a smart, pragmatic King) get an Anglo-French Union ala Austria-Hungary or Denmark-Norway, with it basicaly starting as a loose personal union and slowly centralising until some form of the "Act of Union" is passed a couple hundred years down the line.

If you wanted to be poetic, something Latinised? Greater Britannia, if it was English dominated? Perhaps something Dynastic, a formalised Angevin (or Capet in this case) Empire?
 
Sadly, probably just "France", the French population was so much higher than England's that England could easily be subservient to the French, whihc does make me sad.

Saying that, you could (with a smart, pragmatic King) get an Anglo-French Union ala Austria-Hungary or Denmark-Norway, with it basicaly starting as a loose personal union and slowly centralising until some form of the "Act of Union" is passed a couple hundred years down the line.

If you wanted to be poetic, something Latinised? Greater Britannia, if it was English dominated? Perhaps something Dynastic, a formalised Angevin (or Capet in this case) Empire?
Ya.

Besides which. What makes you think that a) Louis would be able to deal better with the barons than John did? (in the long run. He could hardly do worse.) b) that Louis would allow the Magna Carta to stand? (remember John signed it and then repudiated it), c) that the union would last for more than a generation or so?

While I could see Capetians being on the throne of England for some time, it's likely to be a different branch than who rules Paris. Possibly the Burgundians take Paris, say.

OT3H, 'nation states' weren't a thing yet, so I suppose it could last for some time.

With a major English component, "Langue d'Oïl" isn't going to be as ascendant, which might mean "Langue d'Oc" (possibly in multiple variants) survives longer.
 
Besides which. What makes you think that a) Louis would be able to deal better with the barons than John did? (in the long run. He could hardly do worse.)

Part of the problem John faced was that the Barons had rather gotten used to having Kings who didn't get too involved with their affairs. Both Henry II and Richard spent a lot of their time outside England and the Barons enjoyed a certain amount of independence from them. When the French lands were lost, they had to deal with a King who was constantly around them. Granted, John really damaged himself by provoking the Barons by being... Well, John. But an absent King Louis who spends a lot more time in France could have an effect on them not rebelling.
 
Part of the problem John faced was that the Barons had rather gotten used to having Kings who didn't get too involved with their affairs. Both Henry II and Richard spent a lot of their time outside England and the Barons enjoyed a certain amount of independence from them. When the French lands were lost, they had to deal with a King who was constantly around them. Granted, John really damaged himself by provoking the Barons by being... Well, John. But an absent King Louis who spends a lot more time in France could have an effect on them not rebelling.

Actually... that's not exactly true. Henry was quite the busybody, which is why, like his youngest son, he died facing a major rebellion. Richard... well, Richard also could be a busybody, but he tended to do it by remote control, as he really, really didn't like England all that much. He was mostly in his French lands.

Which is why he died during a bit of a minor rebellion there.

The Angevin monarchy. A haphazard, centralizing process dominated by what I like to call "rule by assholes".
 
Actually... that's not exactly true. Henry was quite the busybody, which is why, like his youngest son, he died facing a major rebellion. Richard... well, Richard also could be a busybody, but he tended to do it by remote control, as he really, really didn't like England all that much. He was mostly in his French lands.

Which is why he died during a bit of a minor rebellion there.

The Angevin monarchy. A haphazard, centralizing process dominated by what I like to call "rule by assholes".

Wasn't Richard's rebellions in France mostly born out of the King of France stirring it about? England was, by and large, peaceful under his reign. And the remote control thing was generally what I meant, they didn't have to put up with Richard personally and the blame could be more on his Ministers and similar excuses.
 
Wasn't Richard's rebellions in France mostly born out of the King of France stirring it about?

Well, that was frequently the case with John as well. Richard gave them plenty of things to be stirred up about. Like, when he was a lad, running Aquitaine, he used to carry off women.


England was, by and large, peaceful under his reign. And the remote control thing was generally what I meant, they didn't have to put up with Richard personally and the blame could be more on his Ministers and similar excuses.

Peaceful, aside from the rebellion John lead. And a few other incidents.
 
Top