The Gold Rose: An Edward of Angoulême timeline

Provençal Civil War: King Carlo III of Naples isn't content with southern Italy.
Voted for this one, although I have noticed the terrible news from the latest update.

But of course even given that Charles III is dead, Ladislaus ITTL seems to have a much, much stronger start:
1. The fact that his father was able to get to Provence almost certainly means that Ladislaus is either king or co-king of Hungary.
2. Three years between Charles death IOTL and ITTL provides Ladislaus with a much more secure power base in Naples
3. Ladislaus posioning is probably butterflied away (this one seems not certain, but given that perpetrator IOTL was the bishop of Arles seems extremely vulnerable to butterflies not to mention that Ladislaus could spend large portion of his time in Buda, making him unreachable to culprit)
4. Louis of Anjou invasion to Naples seems a lot less likely. Not only he has to first clear Charles and Ladislaus supporters from Provence (the task difficult in itself and I am not quite sure that even accomplishable with the forces Louis can count on in early 1390s), he cannot really get meaningful support from his royal cousin since the war with England is ongoing ITTL.

So at best Louis can hope to reach Naples in mid to late 1390s when Ladislaus would unlike ITTL be adult and would have at least some Hungarian support. Given that Ladislaus was able to beat Louis IOTL and basically conquer all Cenral Italy by the early 1410s, I am a little bit of terrified of what can he accomplish ITTL. Of course Ladislaus ITTL would have to spend a lot of time and effort on Hungarian affairs, but he also tried to claim Hungary IOTL, so this is not a massive change unlike much better Ladislaus starting position.
 
Last edited:
Voted.

Bearing in mind the lack of Scottish luck in battles, wouldn't it better for them to met the English, give them some gold each 50 years and spare thus some hundreds of soldiers and a bit of the pride?
 
Damn, now I want to see how the Scots solve this mess of a situation. I vote Stewart Civil War! Let the thistles prick themselves bloody
 
Last edited:
1. The fact that his father was able to get to Provence almost certainly means that Ladislaus is either king or co-king of Hungary.
I try not to comment too much on things that aren't yet published in the timeline, in part to avoid spoiling things and also in part to give myself room to change direction before publication, but since this is on the periphery of the core conflict, I'll say:

I'm no expert on the Capetian Angevins, but Welbore St. Clair Baddeley's book on Charles III and Urban VI -- admittedly an older work, but one of the few on the pair in English and also, due to its age, available online for free -- said that Charles was not initially inclined to pursue Hungary, and only decided to do so after a cardinal convinced him that there was a loophole in the oath he swore to Louis the Great to support Mary. (It sounded similar to the role the church played in breaking Joan I of Naples away from Urban.) Maybe Baddeley was putting too much emphasis on Charles's religious conviction, but I've been leaning on this history to think that he does not pursue Hungary in ATL, hence an invasion of Provence ...

Voted for the Stewart Civil War
Damn, now I want to see how the Scots solve this mess of a situation. I vote Stewart Civil War! Let the thistles prick themselves bloody
Even if we don't get to Scotland this time, we will absolutely be getting back there at SOME point 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

edit: Holy cow, I made a lot of typos
 
Last edited:
I try not to comment too much on things that aren't yet published in the timeline, in part to avoid spoiling things and also in part to give myself room to change direction before publication, but since this is on the periphery of the core conflict, I'll say:

I'm no expert on the Capetian Angevins, but Welbore St. Clair Baddeley's book on Charles III and Urban VI -- admittedly an older work, but one of the few on the pair in English and also, due to its age, available online for free -- said that Charles was not initially inclined to pursue Hungary, and only decided to do so after a cardinal convinced him that there was a loophole in the oath he swore to Louis the Great to support Mary. (It sounded similar to the role the church played in breaking Joan I of Naples away from Urban.) Maybe Baddeley was putting too much emphasis on Charles's religious conviction, but I've been leaning on this history to think that he does not pursue Hungary in ATL, hence an invasion of Provence ...
Please stop me if I am offtopic in this thread, but I would argue that this interpretation does not seem plausible:
Given what Charles did IOTL later in life I seriously doubt that his oath renouncing his claim to Hungary was of much substance for him. Not only did he break it IOTL, he arguably did break a much more important oath to Pope Urban himself (in which he promised to give Urban’s nephew massive land grants in the kingdom of Naples). Now Urban was frankly a moron who constantly bickered with everyone, but he was a Pope and also the main driving force for the Charles’ acquisition of Naples.
Given this it seems extremely unlikely that an oath renouncing his rightful claim to Hungary (where Charles grew up and had massive support) would be impossible for him to break, considering the fact that he did break the oath to Pope which IOTL led to his excommunication by Urban (putting king of Naples in a unique spot of being excommunicated by both Urban and Clement).

Based on Nancy Goldstone’s The Lady Queen and Pal Engel’s The Realm of St. Stephen I do have a spin on what could have happened if Catherine survived (and I do believe that Charles reaching Provence by late 1380s is extremely plausible).
If it is not offtopic here I could provide a possible scenario here or in PMs. Or I can spot bothering you on the topic of Hungary and the fate of Capetian House of Anjou)
 
Top