Plausible: French Succession Crisis in 1390s-1400s

Shackel

Banned
If Charles VI were to die the 1390s or 1400s, is there a chance that France could collapse in a large succession crisis? Without a male heir(Pre 1404) and notably known for the power struggle going on during and after his reign, France seemed somewhat unstable at that point.
 
Perhaps I'm missing something here, but...the throne just descends to his brother, Louis Duke of Orleans, n'est-ce pas?
 

Shackel

Banned
Perhaps I'm missing something here, but...the throne just descends to his brother, Louis Duke of Orleans, n'est-ce pas?

The Duke of Burgundy and the Duke of Berry were after the throne.

If Charles VI died earlier, Louis could be killed earlier as well.
 
Shackel said:
The Duke of Burgundy and the Duke of Berry were after the throne.

If Charles VI died earlier, Louis could be killed earlier as well.

They weren't after the throne. They were after power and wealth. The Duke of Berry and the Duke of Burgundy were both declared regents for Charles VI when he ascended the throne (he was a minor) and they reclaimed the regency later, when Charles VI descended into madness. They had plenty of occasions of killing Charles VI during his reign but they didn't.

If Charles VI were to die bewteen 1390 and 1410, Salic Law would be applied by the French nobles. The order of succession if the following one, providing the different cases :

1. Charles - Second son of Charles VI. Born in 1392, died in 1401 OTL.
2. Louis - Third son of Charles VI. Born in 1397, died in 1415 OTL.
3.John - Fourth son of Charles VI. Born in 1398, died in 1417 OTL.
4.OTL Charles VII - Fifth and last son of Charles VI. Born in 1403, died in 1461 OTL.

Then comes the Orléans line.

5.Louis, Duke of Orléans - Charles VI's brother. Born in 1372, murdered in 1407 OTL.
6.Charles, Duke of Orléans - Eldest son of Louis of Orélans. Born in 1391, died in 1465 OTL.
7.Philippe, count of Vertus - Fourth but second surviving son of Louis of Orléans. Born in 1396, died in 1420 OTL.
8.John, count of Angoulême - Fifth but third surviving son of Louis of Orléans. Born in 1400, died in 1467 OTL.

Then comes the line of Louis of Anjou (Louis I of Naples), Charles VI's eldest Uncle.

9.Louis II of Sicily - Son of Louis I of Naples. Born in 1377, died in 1417 OTL.
10.Louis III of Sicily - Son of the former. Born in 1403, died in 1434 OTL.
11.René of Anjou - Second son of Louis II of Sicily. Born in 1409, died in 1480 OTL.
12.Charles, prince of Tarente - Brother of Louis II of Sicily. Born in 1380, died without children in 1404 OTL.

Then comes the line of the Duke of Berry.

13.John, Duke of Berry - Uncle of Charles VI. Born in 1340, died in 1416 OTL.
14.John, count of Montpensier - Second son of John of Berry. Born in 1363, died in 1402 OTL.

And then comes the line of the Duke of Burgundy.

14.Philip II the Bold, Duke of Burgundy - Youngest Uncle of Charles VI. Born in 1342, died in 1404 OTL.
15.John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy - Son of the former. Born in 1371, murdered in 1419 OTL.
16.Philip III the Good, Duke of Burgundy - Son of the former. Born in 1396, died in 1467 OTL.

And I'll stop there because I think we have all what we need.
We also have to take the English into account : remember that the Hundred Years' War is not officially over although there has been no fighting since some time. But both Henry IV, Henry V and the Yorkists could have claims for the French crown.
 
Not much to add to Yorel's exhaustive post. The French capetian dynasty was never in any danger of extinction (and it's still flourishing nowadays). They were some issues regarding succession to the throne in 1316 (first succession from nephew to uncle - Jean I to Philippe V) and 1328 (first succession between cousins - Charles IV to Philippe VI - and final exclusion of the women from the succession line - the famous, and apocryphal, Salic Law).

The only time were there could have been a change of dynasty was 1589, not because of a lack of successors, but because of the religious issue and the ambitions of the Guise family.
 
johnjcakos said:
The only time were there could have been a change of dynasty was 1589, not because of a lack of successors, but because of the religious issue and the ambitions of the Guise family.

Actually, there was also the fact that Henri IV was a very distant cousin of Henri III : the only common ancestor they had was Louis IX and it was a little hard to swallow that the next king was the ninth cousin (or something like that) of the former.

The Guise were very ambitious, but their first try was to have Henri IV's Uncle, Cardinal Charles of Bourbon, to become King. They even hailed him as King after Henri III's death, but it was never recognized officially and Charles of Bourbon himself said Henri IV was the legitimate King. Plus, the Cardinal died in 1593, leaving the Guise and their Catholic supporter without a legitimate heir.

It is then that the Guise used law to remember everyone that Kingship in its early years was elective and that the Estates General should choose the new king, as Henri IV was too far related to the last King to be worthy of the throne.
Charles of Guise thought he had the chances of being elected King because he could claim being a descendant of Charlemagne as he was Duke of Lorraine, and the Dukes of Lorraine were descendants of Charles of Lower Lorraine, the Uncle of the last Carolingian King of France and the one who lost the French throne to Hugues Capet (the first Capetian).
Everything collapsed because he failed to acquire support from the Estates General, because Philip II of Spain intervened and tried to have a Hapsburg on the French throne and because Henri IV converted to Catholicism, suppressing what most people considered to be the problem.
 
Actually, there was also the fact that Henri IV was a very distant cousin of Henri III : the only common ancestor they had was Louis IX and it was a little hard to swallow that the next king was the ninth cousin (or something like that) of the former.

The Guise were very ambitious, but their first try was to have Henri IV's Uncle, Cardinal Charles of Bourbon, to become King. They even hailed him as King after Henri III's death, but it was never recognized officially and Charles of Bourbon himself said Henri IV was the legitimate King. Plus, the Cardinal died in 1593, leaving the Guise and their Catholic supporter without a legitimate heir.

It is then that the Guise used law to remember everyone that Kingship in its early years was elective and that the Estates General should choose the new king, as Henri IV was too far related to the last King to be worthy of the throne.
Charles of Guise thought he had the chances of being elected King because he could claim being a descendant of Charlemagne as he was Duke of Lorraine, and the Dukes of Lorraine were descendants of Charles of Lower Lorraine, the Uncle of the last Carolingian King of France and the one who lost the French throne to Hugues Capet (the first Capetian).
Everything collapsed because he failed to acquire support from the Estates General, because Philip II of Spain intervened and tried to have a Hapsburg on the French throne and because Henri IV converted to Catholicism, suppressing what most people considered to be the problem.

Exactly. The Bourbons were still Capetians. There's a reason why Louis XVI was referred to Louis Capet by the Revolutionaries with such derision.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
Exactly. The Bourbons were still Capetians. There's a reason why Louis XVI was referred to Louis Capet by the Revolutionaries with such derision.

I know that patrilineally the Bourbons were Capetians but there were other branches that were not considered official because they were too distantly related. This may not be applicable to the OP but does anyone know to what 'degree' one still counts as a Capetian for dynastic and inheritance purposes? Was it actually written in law or merely by custom or royal decree? The House of Courtenay, for example, could claim patrilineal descent from Louis VI but they were never considered to be part of the Royal Family and the Bourbon monarchs consistently refused to give them status as Princes du Sang. Thus if the Bourbons, Condes and Contis all died out the Courtenay would not be considered legitimate to succeed. Perhaps this was mainly because they were so impoverished they were not accorded Royal status.
 
I know that patrilineally the Bourbons were Capetians but there were other branches that were not considered official because they were too distantly related. This may not be applicable to the OP but does anyone know to what 'degree' one still counts as a Capetian for dynastic and inheritance purposes? Was it actually written in law or merely by custom or royal decree? The House of Courtenay, for example, could claim patrilineal descent from Louis VI but they were never considered to be part of the Royal Family and the Bourbon monarchs consistently refused to give them status as Princes du Sang. Thus if the Bourbons, Condes and Contis all died out the Courtenay would not be considered legitimate to succeed. Perhaps this was mainly because they were so impoverished they were not accorded Royal status.

They have to count male line, legitimate descent from Hugh Capet. The Bourbons were rather distantly related to the late Valois, but they had a common ancestor in Louis IX. The branch would theoretically be next in line if the Bourbons died out, but I believe Louis XIV signed a secret treaty with the Duke of Lorraine in 1682 which promised the succession to the House of Lorraine should the dynasty die out. I don't think the Parlement of Paris accepted the treaty. If doesn't matter if they were impoverished or not, they were still legitimate Capetians.
 
The House of Courtenay, for example, could claim patrilineal descent from Louis VI but they were never considered to be part of the Royal Family and the Bourbon monarchs consistently refused to give them status as Princes du Sang. Thus if the Bourbons, Condes and Contis all died out the Courtenay would not be considered legitimate to succeed. Perhaps this was mainly because they were so impoverished they were not accorded Royal status.

True, the house of Courtenay (extinct in male line in 1733) was a minor branch of the Capetian family, and in theory would have been next in line had all the Bourbons disappeared - this, however, was never even a probability.
 
johnjcakos said:
True, the house of Courtenay (extinct in male line in 1733) was a minor branch of the Capetian family, and in theory would have been next in line had all the Bourbons disappeared - this, however, was never even a probability.

The Capetians have plenty of Branches that could have inherited the French throne at one point. However, the only ones that are still alive today are the Bourbons and the Braganzas, the latter being an illegitimate branch.

Here is a little diagram :

CAPETIANS
Direct Capetians :
Main line. Died out in 1328.
House of Valois : Issued from Charles of Valois, second son of Philip III of France. Died out in 1589, had three illegitimates branches : the Valois-Saint-Rémy issued from Henri II who got extinct in 1785, the Longueville issued from Jean de Dunois (son of Louis of Orléans, brother of Charles VI of France) who got extinct in 1764 and the Burgundy, issued from a bastard son of John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy, who got extinct in 1886.
House of Evreux-Navarra : Issued from Louis of Evreux, third son of Philip III of France. Died out in 1425, had an illegitimate branch that survived up to the 1650s.
House of Bourbon : Issued from Robert of Clermont, youngest son of Louis IX.Still alive. The main branch did die out with Henri, count of Chambord in 1883 but cadet branches such as the Spanish Bourbons (Eldest of the Capetians : Luis Alphonso de Borbon, pretender to the French throne as Louis XX; main representant : Juan Carlos I of Spain), or the House of Orléans (Issued from Philip of Orléans, brother of Louis XIV; current head of house : Henri, count of Paris and pretender to the French throne as Henri VII).
House of Artois : Issued from Robert of Artois, a brother of Louis IX and a son of Louis VIII. Died out in 1472.
Houe of Anjou-Sicile : Issued from Charles I of Anjou, brother of Louis IX and a son of Louis VIII. Died out in 1435. Composed of the following branches : Hungary (branch died out in 1399), Naples (branch died out in 1382), Tarente (branch died out in 1374), Durazzo (branch died out in 1435, bringing an end to the Anjou-Sicile line).
House of Dreux : Issued from Robert I of Dreux, younger son of Louis VI of France. Died out in 1590, even if an illegitimate branch survived up to 1746.
House of Courtenay : Issued from Peter I of Courtenay, youngest son of Louis VI of France. Died out in 1768.
House of Vermandois : Issued from Hugh of Vermandois, son of Henri I of France. Died out in 1266.
First House of Burgundy : Issued from Robert the Old, younger son of Robert II of France. The main line died out in 1361.
A cadet branch is the royal house of Portugal, who died out in 1383 but had two illegitimate branches : the House of Aviz, extinct in 1580, and the House of Braganza, still alive.
 
I did some quick research on how the Bourbons could have become extinct.

You would need John II, Earl of Vendôme (d. 1477 in OTL) to die childless (or to have only daughters). Then when the elder branch of the Bourbons ends with the death of Charles III of Bourbon-Montpensier (Charles the Constable) in 1527, there is no remaining male heir (the junior branch of Carency becomes extinct in 1515).

At this point, if I am not mistaken, the next in line after the Valois will be the descendants of Pierre de Courtenay (unless the Bourbons-Busset are finally declared legitimate, since there is a controversy on this subject).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourbon-Busset
 
Top