WI Charles IV of France has a son.

[CaptainShadow]

As it says on the tin, the PoD is that Charles le Bel has a son. In particular, let's say Blanche is born male.

Who serves as regent? How would European landscape be changed with (presumably) no HYW? Would Gascony still be confiscated?

P.S. For the sake of discussion let's assume Charles jr is competent.

 

[isabella]

As it says on the tin, the PoD is that Charles le Bel has a son. In particular, let's say Blanche is born male.

Who serves as regent? How would European landscape be changed with (presumably) no HYW? Would Gascony still be confiscated?

P.S. For the sake of discussion let's assume Charles jr is competent.

Then Jeanne d’Evreux will become regent as soon she is churched. Edward III of England has no leverage for trying to claim the French crown.

 

[phil03]

Then Jeanne d’Evreux will become regent as soon she is churched. Edward III of England has no leverage for trying to claim the French crown.

Why Jeanne and not OTL Philippe VU tough? Seem to me he would be the most logical candidate in many ways as both the heir presumptive and the largest landowner in France...

Beyond that, I'd say that some kind of large scale war between France and England is gonna happen in any case. Edward III's claim was utter tosh in OTL as it was and I'd argue he probably knew it...

Philip V and Charles IV had both been aknowledged as monarchs by England, which IMO is tantamount to implicit recognition of the Salic War. Even if someone would argue that it doesn't a non-salic succession would still designate Jeanne herself and not Edward. Even if someone would want to really stretch things and argue that Jeanne was a bastard because of the Tour de Nesle mess then it would be Philip V's daughters and their own descendants (including men already born in 1328 so arguing that women could not inherit the french crown but could transmit their rights wouldn't have helped Edward either) who would get the crown.

The true causes of the conflict where the Franco-Scottish alliance, tensions around Gascony and tensions around Flanders. Those aren't going away and, in many ways, the claim to the French crown was just a handy bargaining chip and legal excuse for the Flemish to back England as well as for Edward to act as if Gascony was his without overlord.

 

[CaptainShadow]

Then Jeanne d’Evreux will become regent as soon she is churched. Edward III of England has no leverage for trying to claim the French crown.

Would she? I mean, the Valois faction is still dominant at court. At best she'd be formally regent with Phil holds the reins imo.

Edward III's claim was utter tosh in OTL as it was and I'd argue he probably knew it...

💯

Those aren't going away and, in many ways, the claim to the French crown was just a handy bargaining chip and legal excuse for the Flemish to back England as well as for Edward to act as if Gascony was his without overlord.

So, in ATL, Edward would just outright rebel against his rightful overlord? Or would he go the normal way and take up arms to "remove the evil advisors". Especially given he holds claims to a not insignificant part of Philip's demense.

 

[isabella]

Why Jeanne and not OTL Philippe VU tough? Seem to me he would be the most logical candidate in many ways as both the heir presumptive and the largest landowner in France...

Because in France the regent is ALWAYS the mother of the underage King if she is still alive

Beyond that, I'd say that some kind of large scale war between France and England is gonna happen in any case. Edward III's claim was utter tosh in OTL as it was and I'd argue he probably knew it...


Philip V and Charles IV had both been aknowledged as monarchs by England, which IMO is tantamount to implicit recognition of the Salic War. Even if someone would argue that it doesn't a non-salic succession would still designate Jeanne herself and not Edward. Even if someone would want to really stretch things and argue that Jeanne was a bastard because of the Tour de Nesle mess then it would be Philip V's daughters and their own descendants (including men already born in 1328 so arguing that women could not inherit the french crown but could transmit their rights wouldn't have helped Edward either) who would get the crown.

Wrong, the only boy already born from a female (aka Philip V’s eldest daughter) had in no way a better claim than that of Jeanne or Edward as the latter was a closer descendant/relative to both Philip IV or Charles IV (male preference primogeniture would give the Crown to Jeanne but allowing female to transmit rights, the son of Jeanne of Burgundy is behind Edward III in the line of succession (blood proximity would need to be taken in consideration if females are allowed to pass a claim who they do not have to their heirs)

Would she? I mean, the Valois faction is still dominant at court. At best she'd be formally regent with Phil holds the reins imo.

Maybe Philip would hold the reins but only if Jeanne let him do that.

 

[phil03]

Because in France the regent is ALWAYS the mother of the underage King if she is still alive

Wrong, the only boy already born from a female (aka Philip V’s eldest daughter) had in no way a better claim than that of Jeanne or Edward as the latter was a closer descendant/relative to both Philip IV or Charles IV (male preference primogeniture would give the Crown to Jeanne but allowing female to transmit rights, the son of Jeanne of Burgundy is behind Edward III in the line of succession (blood proximity would need to be taken in consideration if females are allowed to pass a claim who they do not have to their heirs)


Maybe Philip would hold the reins but only if Jeanne let him do that.

No, she isn't... the future Philip V was regent despite Jean I's mother being around mere years before that.

As for blood proximity, it had never been used to determine succession in France before that so I frankly don't see it holding much sway. At the end it would be an excuse to claim the crown with no base to it, which would fit the lack of value of Edward's claim in OTL now that I think of it...

 

[isabella]

No, she isn't... the future Philip V was regent despite Jean I's mother being around mere years before that.

She was pregnant first and not yet churched at the death of her son. John I was posthumous and lived only few days but if he had lived Philip (V) would need to leave the regency to Clementia as soon she was able to take it

As for blood proximity, it had never been used to determine succession in France before that so I frankly don't see it holding much sway. At the end it would be an excuse to claim the crown with no base to it, which would fit the lack of value of Edward's claim in OTL now that I think of it...

Was used a lot in France in that same period (see the case with Artois were the male line
grandson of the precedent holder was passed in favor of his father’s sister)

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

She was pregnant first and not yet churched at the death of her son. John I was posthumous and lived only few days but if he had lived Philip (V) would need to leave the regency to Clementia as soon she was able to take it

Was used a lot in France in that same period (see the case with Artois were the male line
grandson of the precedent holder was passed in favor of his father’s sister)

I was under the impression that the Artois case was the exception, rather than the rule. Or have I been paying too much attention to Le Rois Maudits?

 

[isabella]

I was under the impression that the Artois case was the exception, rather than the rule. Or have I been paying too much attention to Le Rois Maudits?

Was a rather unusual thing, but the fact who the inheritance passed that way and was recognized as valid support the fact who blood proximity was used. Also we have other cases (between Outremer and Scottish Semi-Salic law) who point highly in favor of an use of blood proximity over primogeniture for establishing Charles IV‘s successor, specially as primogeniture in the contest made ZERO sense [as is already established who females have no right of their own is quite logical who the Crown would pass either to the closest male relative of the last King OR the nearest male heir of the last holder (in direct line, and at this point both Louis X and Philip V are collateral lines) to have male descendants and in both cases Edward III is closer than Joanna of Burgundy’s son].
Switch Philip (V) and Charles (IV)‘s death dates and you will see Joanna of Burgundy‘s son named as next King of France over Philip (VI).

 

[material_boy]

John I was posthumous and lived only few days but if he had lived Philip (V) would need to leave the regency to Clementia as soon she was able to take it

I can't recall ever having read this in any of the accounts of the regency dispute. Indeed, it seems very hard to believe that Philip of Poitiers and Odo of Burgundy spent so much time trying to build support for the regency if they were only going to be in the position for a month. What is your source on this?

 

[isabella]

I can't recall ever having read this in any of the accounts of the regency dispute. Indeed, it seems very hard to believe that Philip of Poitiers and Odo of Burgundy spent so much time trying to build support for the regency if they were only going to be in the position for a month. What is your source on this?

Either of them would be most likely regent for Jeanne (who was NOT daughter of Clementia), if she inherited the Crown. Odo had no relation to the young King. French tradition always gave (formal) power to the mother of the underage King, but that do not mean who she would be effectively the one in charge

 

[Jonathan1997]

The 100 years war are you still going to happen it's unavoidable war may be shorter or start watch later. A big consequence of this is Edward III successfully conquer Scotland and his son Edward the Black Prince has a son in his late teens like his father. So big consequence of this will be that the next three kings of England and will be competent due to being trained for rulership.

 

[VVD0D95]

The 100 years war are you still going to happen it's unavoidable war may be shorter or start watch later. A big consequence of this is Edward III successfully conquer Scotland and his son Edward the Black Prince has a son in his late teens like his father. So big consequence of this will be that the next three kings of England and will be competent due to being trained for rulership.

Successfully conquer Scotland? I doubt it

 

[CaptainShadow]

The 100 years war are you still going to happen it's unavoidable war may be shorter or start watch later. A big consequence of this is Edward III successfully conquer Scotland and his son Edward the Black Prince has a son in his late teens like his father. So big consequence of this will be that the next three kings of England and will be competent due to being trained for rulership.

Scotland? Nah. Lothian and or Ireland would be more doable.

I mean, Joan of Kent is still around.....

 

[Jonathan1997]

Successfully conquer Scotland? I doubt it

I do not way people think Scotland cannot be conquer Oliver Cromwell did it Edward the first of England got close to but have problems with France and Wale's.

 

[Jonathan1997]

Scotland? Nah. Lothian and or Ireland would be more doable.

I mean, Joan of Kent is still around.....

The kings of England and of Europe see island as savage and there is not much prestige to be won there. As for Scotland way why can't it be conquered.

 

[CaptainShadow]

The kings of England and of Europe see island as savage and there is not much prestige to be won there. As for Scotland way why can't it be conquered.

Yet Edward was making plans for invading it no?

Because there's this whole treaty for peace and the English are to my understanding utterly lacking in supporters there.

 

[Jonathan1997]

Yet Edward was making plans for invading it no?

Because there's this whole treaty for peace and the English are to my understanding utterly lacking in supporters there.

That is wrong there is supposed that was one reason way king David the second of Scotland has to flee to France. As for supporting remove the nobility and do not persecute the peasants. That will provide a successful Conquest because there is no nationalism and the King of England is a Frenchman in culture and politics so the Scottish people will not care.

 

[VVD0D95]

I do not way people think Scotland cannot be conquer Oliver Cromwell did it Edward the first of England got close to but have problems with France and Wale's.

Both had help from locals. Who is going to help Edward IiI?

 

[Jonathan1997]

Both had help from locals. Who is going to help Edward IiI?

Edward III has a lot more resources than the Scots as long as he is not fight the kings of France he should have know proplem. Unless he handles the situation like Louis XII of France with northern Italy. Machiavelli stated in Prince in order to conquer a territory the Old elites must be removed or turn into allies, and a conquering king stay in the conquered lands to ensure good governance and just rule. In many ways France is to England what England is to Scotland which I think is incredibly ironic as a side note. Also as another side not does any I wonder what would have happened if Alexander III wife inherited the crown of England.