With Richard's return not delayed, and with his ransom not having to be raised, he is in a much stronger position militarily and diplomatically. The laymen, nobles, and clergy have a better opinion of him (IOTL they were taxed for 25% of their wealth to pay his ransom), and John and Philip don't get a chance to invade the French possessions. Butterflies mean that he definitely doesn't die when and where he did IOTL, and probably doesn't die for a long time afterwards; he might have a son, or he might ensure the inheritance of his nephew Arthur of Brittany (which would enlarge England's continental possessions and piss off/render impotent incapable John).
I like the idea, and makes me wonder what kind of a powerhouse England could become economically if it didn't have to throw away what amounts to a quarter or so of its wealth just to get the King back. That said, and call me superstitious here, but I'm not sure I like the idea of grooming Arthur of Brittany to be King. It just sounds like it means a bad and early end for Arthur, if the others are any measure to go by.
Henry VI also isn't excommunicated, and also doesn't get any ransom money. I'm not sure how this effects events in Germany; he may find it easier to make the imperial crown hereditary because he isn't excommunicated (though of course money might've had something to do with that), and getting a solid grip on Italy and Sicily might be harder.
This is quite probable, and if you ask me probably the largest butterfly of them all. Not sure just yet what to make of it, but it is definitely is. What does a Hohenstaufen Holy Roman Empire look like..and perhaps more interestingly, how long does it last? I don't mean in saying this to suggest that the Holy Roman Empire was not, de facto, a hereditary body, but I think that, as proved at the Erfurt Diet, the princes and dukes and kings in their respective lands are all too relcutant to be meaningfully superceded in perpetuity by Henry's successors. Part of what kept the Empire together , in my opinion, was the notion that, however much the truth may prove otherwise, at least in theory any ruler could raise himself to the rank of Emperor. This hope, this lust for power amongst the Electors kept the empire together as I see it...and by making the empire hereditary, like so many other titles, it undermines the Holy Roman Empire and while it may survive and even thrive for a time afterwards, it'll collapse far sooner than Napoleon if this continues. Well, either that or it coaleses into Greater Germany, for lack of a better term, as people get used to the situation.
With a weaker France with no resurgence under Philip II Augustus, and thus changes in all those little fiefs in that neighborhood, the Fourth Crusade is totally butterflied. I think this means that the Byzantines will survive longer and better; it looks as though Turkish rise is much less likely.
Probably true...and any Fourth Crusade that does occur is probably direct not at Jerusalem but against the Turks.
The English might not lose their continental possessions, so their kings will stay more French than English.
True, at least for a short while. I don't imagine Frankish (for lack of a better word) Kings on the English throne lasting for terribly much longer, loss of French holdings or not. As I understand it, there's just too much cultural pressure to become increasingly English. It may take longer, but the end result is much the same.
=
As for another change...the town of Dürnstein would never grow toprominence, nor would it have any reason besides its apricots for anyone to visit in the modern age.
Having been there recently, that's all the town seems to care about... Apricots and Richard being kept in teh dungeon in the castle that overlooks the town on the bank of the Danube.