Scottish Gascony

As a political move, more to embarass England rather than make territorial concessions, a king of France confers the title of Prince of Gascony to the king of Scotland. I'm thinking that perhaps Charles V could try this. Political results?
 
gascons rebel, because they would rather be independent than ruled by scots.

that or the british invade.

either way, it becomes english-dominated when scotland and england unite
 

archaeogeek

Banned
gascons rebel, because they would rather be independent than ruled by scots.

that or the british invade.

either way, it becomes english-dominated when scotland and england unite

English.

Also I could see a scene of enormous drama in one of Shakespeare's plays about this horrendous slight :p
 
As a political move, more to embarass England rather than make territorial concessions, a king of France confers the title of Prince of Gascony to the king of Scotland. I'm thinking that perhaps Charles V could try this. Political results?

The Gascons take over Scotland since they had greater wealth and population at that time. I think Scottish Kings would prefer South West France to Perth or Edinburgh.
 

archaeogeek

Banned
The Gascons take over Scotland since they had greater wealth and population at that time. I think Scottish Kings would prefer South West France to Perth or Edinburgh.

Let's see; palace in the sun at Bayonne or Bordeaux or palace in a peat bog :p
 
Let's see; palace in the sun at Bayonne or Bordeaux or palace in a peat bog :p

Bah, cliches, cliches! Who builds a palace in a peat-bog? It would sink. ;)

But Scottish monarchs at that time did not live mainly in Edinburgh but travelled the country, staying often at Dunfermline - so since the choices were Bayonne or Fife, your point stands. :p
 
Last edited:
Scotland couldn't hold Gascony and, to be honest, I don't really see why it would want to. The Scots king's response to such an offer would probably be a hearty "Eh?"
 
Scotland couldn't hold Gascony and, to be honest, I don't really see why it would want to. The Scots king's response to such an offer would probably be a hearty "Eh?"

Don't forget that the wine of Gascony have a really good market in the XIV's Scotland. In fact, it appears it was more drank than local liquors.

So, yeah, Scotland COULD have the utility of having some harbours. Not the whole region of course. After all, wine was one of the major medieval trades.

EDIT : Oops...Didn't see it was an old thread. Don't hurt me.
 
Maybe James II is a bit more unlucky with sons; they all end up dying young and he has only one heir, or rather heiress -- Margaret Stewart who is also conveniently married to the Dauphin. She was heiress from 1437 until 1445... it's not unlikely to see her brother's die young and we get the union of François II and Mary with the Guises and Huguenots.

Either way, France still manages to turn the tide in France, and reconquers Gascony. The Dauphin plays a huge role, and let's say Margaret has reconciled with him. The King grants the Duchy of Aquitaine/Gascony as an additional appanage to his son.

I know it's not quite what you were asking, but a Scottish Princess and future Queen would be the Duchess of Gascony.
 
Either way, France still manages to turn the tide in France, and reconquers Gascony. The Dauphin plays a huge role, and let's say Margaret has reconciled with him. The King grants the Duchy of Aquitaine/Gascony as an additional appanage to his son.
.

The problem is that Gascony didn't have good ties with royal France. During the 100 years wars you have even the creation of urban militias that chase royal forces to open their cities to the English king.

Don't underestimate the strength of the feudal contract into the loyalty of local populations : for them, the anglo-aquitan rule was familiar and they benefited from liberties that a french conquest could revert.

In fact, more you wait for a reconquest of Gascony by the French, the more you have a Brittany-like situation where the king have to grant more freedoms that make the conquest less benefitial except in a geo-strategic point of view.
 
The problem is that Gascony didn't have good ties with royal France. During the 100 years wars you have even the creation of urban militias that chase royal forces to open their cities to the English king.

Don't underestimate the strength of the feudal contract into the loyalty of local populations : for them, the anglo-aquitan rule was familiar and they benefited from liberties that a french conquest could revert.

In fact, more you wait for a reconquest of Gascony by the French, the more you have a Brittany-like situation where the king have to grant more freedoms that make the conquest less benefitial except in a geo-strategic point of view.

Well I know after the reconquest the Gascons actually invited the English back in as competition from northern wines in Champagne and ect. were ruining them. Still, it didn't keep Charles VII from naming his second son as the Duke of Aquitaine. It was more a nominal title than an actual appanage. I'm sure the French King could use the carrot and the stick to appease the Gascons. Talbot was welcomed by the Gascons in an attempt to retake Gascony in 1453, but it was all over by then. There's a reason Gascony was conquered last. Once it's done, the English have exhausted all their efforts and the Gascons don't have anyone else to call upon.

I'm not aware there too many troubles after the French had taken back the region, except economic ones due to wine competition. Was Gascony really resentful when French rule was imposed?
 
I'm not aware there too many troubles after the French had taken back the region, except economic ones due to wine competition. Was Gascony really resentful when French rule was imposed?

Resentful? Not really. At least, not enough to go in a war against the king only for this.
Still having an independent feeling? Yes.

In fact, Gascony (or Gasconies, as the region was divided) relied mainly on the local dynasties and rules. You can see by exemple that before the coronation of Henri III of Navarre as king of France, even the technically his not-navarrese possessions claimed to be distinct from France (especially Bearn). In fact, even after the official edicts that made the reunion happened, it wasn't clear for all (and by all, i mean the locals inhabitants).

Before him, and before the reunion of Abret and Foix possessions, you have many region where the king don't have a great hold. But it's mainly highland Gascony here.

The coastal Gascony until the Discoveries was declining because of the absence of trade with England, because of the loss of liberties (the french kings made the city of Bordeaux a "ville royale" and surrounded it with fortified places.

In fact, only the return of liberties and the creation of a Parliment of Gascony really helped the french kings to hold the region. Well, that and the lack of serious alternative.
But have an even short period were a official autonomous Gascony reappers and all is to be made again from the start.

Again, the gascon identity is really strong. Even today, it's the most distinct region of Occitania and during the modern times (until the end of XVIII/beggining of XIX) Gascony could means all of oc language-speaking aeras.
 
Last edited:
Top