What If: Eleanor of Aquitaine and Louis VII have a on?

What would have happened if Eleanor of Aquitaine had given Louis VII a son before their annulment, or they had not gotten their marriage annulled and she had had a son later on (which she was obviously capable of doing). How would France have evolved compared to England? I'm guessing more centralized and powerful early on.
Scipio
 
What would have happened if Eleanor of Aquitaine had given Louis VII a son before their annulment, or they had not gotten their marriage annulled and she had had a son later on (which she was obviously capable of doing). How would France have evolved compared to England? I'm guessing more centralized and powerful early on.
Scipio
If they had had a son, they wouldn't have been able to have an annulment in the first place.

Centralization would have been difficult even with Aquitane firmly clasped to the busom of the French crown. The English still control many lands in northwestern France, and their is still the Duke of Burgundy, the Flemish city states, and the various counts of the Languedoc and Provence to consider.

Also, Eleanor d'Aquitane and Louis VII hated each other, so if they have a son, that is the only child they are likely to have together.
 
What I am saying is, what if they had had a son before the annulment, or not gotten an annulment and then had a son. It certainly would have helped in the drive towards centralization.
Scipio
 
I agree that with a male heir Louis VII wouldn't risk an annulment that could have any bad consequence regarding his son's legitimity. So, despite all the problems they had, they would still keep their marriage.

However, how that Eleanor stays queen of France, what would happen to Henry II? Would he have the resources to challenge Stephen?
 
Eleanor had two daughters by Louis VII; all it would have taken is for a particular spermatozoon to zig instead of zag and they could have had a son. Their daughters' legitimacy was not affected by the annulment, which was on grounds of consanguinity (the spurious nature of which is shown by the fact that they both promptly married new spouses that were more closely related than they had been to each other). The children of a marriage made in good faith but later shown invalid and so annulled remained legitimate. However, in practical terms there would have been no annulment; Eleanor would have desired it just as much, but Louis never desired it at all, being forced to it by their entire estrangement and his need for a son and heir. If already provided with one he would never have permitted either her or her great inheritances to go.

Without those inheritances Henry would doubtless have still acceded in England; his own French inheritance made him very powerful already without Eleanor's lands, his claim was strong and Stephen near a broken man. The Treaty of Wallingford which secured the succession for Henry was made after his marriage, but not long after, and before he had had time to really marshal the resources of Aquitaine (which would take some marshalling, Aquitaine despite its wealth was not an unmixed blessing, being near-ungovernable). English involvement in Continental affairs would thus have continued, although the French kings would have been in a relatively stronger position vis-a-vis England. Henry of course would have married someone, and whoever it was might have brought their own advantages. If it were someone of less strength of will than Eleanor the marriage might perhaps have been less stormy, though like Louis but for the opposite reasons Henry was never going to make great husband material. Then with different children for Henry and no Philip Augustus for France the changes would more or less spiral out of control. All from neither one of two children being a boy.
 
Domenic seems to have sumed up everything.

Basically, Louis VII having a son with Eleanor means that son (probably called Louis or Philip) will be the next King of France but also the next Duke of Aquitaine, provided Louis and Eleanor do not have a second son (a splitting of the inheritance would still be possible in that case). This wouldn't forcibly cancel the annulation of Louis VII and Eleanor, but would mean Aquitaine will have a stronger link with France.

Henry II is gonna be a bit weaker ITTL. I'm not sure he would marry Eleanor after her divorce from Louis VII : the fact she left Louis a son would probably reduced her attractiveness as a possible bride since her Duchy wouldn't stay with her second husband's children after her death.
As Domenic pointed out, Henry II not having Aquitaine won't probably change things much regarding his coronation as King of England. He will still be Count of Anjou, Maine and Tourraine as well as Duke of Normandy furthemore, and will probably make it so Britanny falls under his wing like OTL (when he married his son Geoffrey to Duchess Constance).

I'm wondering if that wouldn't butterfly Capetian-Plantagenêt rivalry... Probably not as their will still be the issue of Anjou and Normandy being vassals of the French King. But it wouldn't reach the scale it had OTL though.

Jackson said:
Also, Eleanor d'Aquitane and Louis VII hated each other, so if they have a son, that is the only child they are likely to have together.

They didn't hated each other : they just had non-matching personnalities.

Eleanor was a Southern Woman while Louis VII was a Northern man. In the Middle Age, Southern France was culturally richer than the North, who was military stronger on the other hand. Northern and Southern Feudal Lords never really got along in France, and that hartred can be clearly shown during the Cathar Crusade which happened several years later, as it was seen by the Languedocian as a Northern Invasion.

Plus Eleanor was rather cultivated woman, was rather strong-willed and had a love of arts. She also liked to have an oppulent life, having been born in one of the richest families of France.
Louis VII, on the other hand, had first started a career in the Church as he wasn't supposed to be king : the accidental death of his elder brother Philip made him heir then King to the French throne. However, his religious teachings marked his personnalities. Eleanor even said she had been married not a man but a monk.

Lastly, Eleanor had troubles adapting life at the French court. She was from the South in a court where they were plenty of Northen Nobles, and as I pointed out, the two sides of the Loire didn't get along well. Not to mention a meridional women already had left a dark mark in French history : Constance of Arles, third wife of Robert II of France and one nasty bitch. Thus, there probably was some sort of defiance against her at the court.

The marriage of Louis and Eleanor only started to fail during the Second Crusade, when Eleanor showed she was very close to her uncle Raymond of Poitiers, prince of Antioch. So close that rumors said Eleanor had shared her uncle's bed. And even after that events, you still had to wait 1154 before Louis VII and Eleanor had their marriage annulled, after several tries of recounciliation.

One correction also : that son wouldn't be the only child of Louis and Eleanor. Eleanor had two daughters by Louis VII : Marie (1145-1198), who married Henri I of Champagne, and Alix (1150-1195), who married Theobald V of Blois.
Plus, Eleanor later had eight children with Henry II of England and they weren't exactly love-birds...
 
Domenic seems to have sumed up everything.

Basically, Louis VII having a son with Eleanor means that son (probably called Louis or Philip) will be the next King of France but also the next Duke of Aquitaine, provided Louis and Eleanor do not have a second son (a splitting of the inheritance would still be possible in that case). This wouldn't forcibly cancel the annulation of Louis VII and Eleanor, but would mean Aquitaine will have a stronger link with France.

Henry II is gonna be a bit weaker ITTL. I'm not sure he would marry Eleanor after her divorce from Louis VII : the fact she left Louis a son would probably reduced her attractiveness as a possible bride since her Duchy wouldn't stay with her second husband's children after her death.
As Domenic pointed out, Henry II not having Aquitaine won't probably change things much regarding his coronation as King of England. He will still be Count of Anjou, Maine and Tourraine as well as Duke of Normandy furthemore, and will probably make it so Britanny falls under his wing like OTL (when he married his son Geoffrey to Duchess Constance).

I'm wondering if that wouldn't butterfly Capetian-Plantagenêt rivalry... Probably not as their will still be the issue of Anjou and Normandy being vassals of the French King. But it wouldn't reach the scale it had OTL though.



They didn't hated each other : they just had non-matching personnalities.

Eleanor was a Southern Woman while Louis VII was a Northern man. In the Middle Age, Southern France was culturally richer than the North, who was military stronger on the other hand. Northern and Southern Feudal Lords never really got along in France, and that hartred can be clearly shown during the Cathar Crusade which happened several years later, as it was seen by the Languedocian as a Northern Invasion.

Plus Eleanor was rather cultivated woman, was rather strong-willed and had a love of arts. She also liked to have an oppulent life, having been born in one of the richest families of France.
Louis VII, on the other hand, had first started a career in the Church as he wasn't supposed to be king : the accidental death of his elder brother Philip made him heir then King to the French throne. However, his religious teachings marked his personnalities. Eleanor even said she had been married not a man but a monk.

Lastly, Eleanor had troubles adapting life at the French court. She was from the South in a court where they were plenty of Northen Nobles, and as I pointed out, the two sides of the Loire didn't get along well. Not to mention a meridional women already had left a dark mark in French history : Constance of Arles, third wife of Robert II of France and one nasty bitch. Thus, there probably was some sort of defiance against her at the court.

The marriage of Louis and Eleanor only started to fail during the Second Crusade, when Eleanor showed she was very close to her uncle Raymond of Poitiers, prince of Antioch. So close that rumors said Eleanor had shared her uncle's bed. And even after that events, you still had to wait 1154 before Louis VII and Eleanor had their marriage annulled, after several tries of recounciliation.

One correction also : that son wouldn't be the only child of Louis and Eleanor. Eleanor had two daughters by Louis VII : Marie (1145-1198), who married Henri I of Champagne, and Alix (1150-1195), who married Theobald V of Blois.
Plus, Eleanor later had eight children with Henry II of England and they weren't exactly love-birds...
Louis' love for Eleanor was one sided.

Some spanish see Southern France as Northern Spain occupied by France but had Occitania or a large part of it has been part of spain Occitan would had been the Spanish language.
 
Thinking about whom Henry might have married instead of Eleanor, one name leaps to mind: Stephen's daughter, Marie of Blois. As Henry was already married the question didn't arise in the negotiations for the Treaty of Wallingford, but had he not been it seems reasonable that Stephen might have asked for this, by way of ensuring the future and safety of his surviving son, William. Marie was at the time in a convent, from which she was removed and married off upon William's (natural) death making her Countess of Boulogne, and it doesn't seem too much of a stretch that she would have been for purposes of sealing the treaty. She and Henry were second cousins but no matter, a dispensation would readily have been obtained, and her eventual inheritance of Boulogne would have fitted nicely enough I would think with Henry's own French dominions. Incidentally all English, later British monarchs from Richard II on have in fact been descended from Marie and therefore Stephen, as she was an ancestress of Edward III's wife Philippa of Hainault.
 
Top