WI:Guy the Conqueror not William the conqueror

There is a legitimate alternative to William the Conqueror, his name is Gui de brionne, actually OTL the Dukes of Anjou and Burgundy had legitimate rights to Normandy but did not forward their claims, what if Gui de Brionne married Matilda of Flanders and got support from the Duke of Flanders and got Normandy or alternatively William the Conqueror died, would Gui de Brionne try to invade England like William did or just ignore England completely?
 
Why would Count Baldwin V of Flanders marry his daughter to a displaced baron who failed to displace a bastard duke from the throne of Normandy? That seems a bit of a poor catch from a diplomatic standpoint. Also, if William dies, Normandy does not go to Gui de Brionne unless by force, which Gui cannot provide.

William the Bastard was only able to invade England due to a shaky claim that, when Harold Godwinson was shipwrecked in Normandy in 1064, he gave his claim to the throne upon Edward the Confessor's death to William. This was impossible in English law, by which the next king would be elected by the Witengamot - Harold didn't inherit the throne in the Norman sense. Moreover, Harold denied this promise ever happened and there was no physical proof. What I'm saying is William's claim was very weak, probably fabricated, and not something any Norman duke would have or act on.

I suppose that any duke of Normandy in 1066 could invade England, but it's not particularly likely. And if Gui has somehow become duke, I suspect he'd have enough on his plate on his side of the channel.
 
Why would Count Baldwin V of Flanders marry his daughter to a displaced baron who failed to displace a bastard duke from the throne of Normandy? That seems a bit of a poor catch from a diplomatic standpoint. Also, if William dies, Normandy does not go to Gui de Brionne unless by force, which Gui cannot provide.

William the Bastard was only able to invade England due to a shaky claim that, when Harold Godwinson was shipwrecked in Normandy in 1064, he gave his claim to the throne upon Edward the Confessor's death to William. This was impossible in English law, by which the next king would be elected by the Witengamot - Harold didn't inherit the throne in the Norman sense. Moreover, Harold denied this promise ever happened and there was no physical proof. What I'm saying is William's claim was very weak, probably fabricated, and not something any Norman duke would have or act on.

I suppose that any duke of Normandy in 1066 could invade England, but it's not particularly likely. And if Gui has somehow become duke, I suspect he'd have enough on his plate on his side of the channel.

Gui de Brionne is the brother of William of Burgundy, who is the ancestor of the Trastamaras, actually if William of Burgundy ruled Normandy both Franche Comte and Normandy would be under Personal Union, , I think if William the Bastard dies young it is either the Duke of Anjou or Gui that gets Normandy because the two have legitimate claims to Normandy - if the Anjous get Normandy it is possible that we might have an earlier Angevin England.

Gui de Brionne has a claim via proximity of Blood via Emma of Normandy to the throne of England but it is more legitimate than that of William the Bastard.
 
Gui de Brionne is the brother of William of Burgundy, who is the ancestor of the Trastamaras, actually if William of Burgundy ruled Normandy both Franche Comte and Normandy would be under Personal Union, , I think if William the Bastard dies young it is either the Duke of Anjou or Gui that gets Normandy because the two have legitimate claims to Normandy - if the Anjous get Normandy it is possible that we might have an earlier Angevin England.

Gui de Brionne has a claim via proximity of Blood via Emma of Normandy to the throne of England but it is more legitimate than that of William the Bastard.

Gui is gonna be no more legitimate the William because both where basing their claim on complete fiction. The king is not a familial position, It's elected by the witengamot. If anything this claim would be even more fictional than Williams claim because in the very least the supposed incident where Harold promised him the throne could plausibly happen where Harold stupid enough when shipwrecked. That and the conflict that would result in an Angevin Normandy in my opinion only makes things harder for the invasion because now it is depleted due to recent military conflict.
 
Gui is gonna be no more legitimate the William because both where basing their claim on complete fiction. The king is not a familial position, It's elected by the witengamot. If anything this claim would be even more fictional than Williams claim because in the very least the supposed incident where Harold promised him the throne could plausibly happen where Harold stupid enough when shipwrecked. That and the conflict that would result in an Angevin Normandy in my opinion only makes things harder for the invasion because now it is depleted due to recent military conflict.
Would this Angevins try to Antagonize the Capets ITTL?
 
There's also another legitimate alternative. His name is Harold Godwinson.

Arguably the claim of Edgar (II) the Aetheling might be considered even more legitimate. Though the Witengamot does have the final say, unless there's an invasion. And no duke William of Normandy, doesn't mean Harald Hardrada wouldn't invade. IIRC king Sweyn II Estridson of Denmark also had a claim.
 
If we want a French claimant, we can have either Drogo of Mantes (d. 1035) and sons, or Eustace of Boulogne, seeing as both married Edward the Confessor's sister.

The only problem with these claims is that:
1) Goda died in 1047
2) her children by Drogo, Ralph the Timid (d.1057) and Walter III (d. 1063) were both dead by 1066
3) Goda had no children with Eustace.

If we change some of these points, principally the last one, then we can have a French claimant who isn't William the Bastard.
 
yeah ... best claims would probably (in order) be:

Edgar Ætheling (son of Edmund Ironside, Edward the confessors half-borther, and the probable intended heir if he was older; bypassed by Witengamot due to concerns about a unproven king in times of danger against invasions)
Sweyn Estridson (Daughterson of Sweyn Forkbeard, and nephew of Cnut the Great)
Harald Hardrada (Claim by an argeement between Magnus I (of Norway) and Harthacnut that if one died childless the other was to inherit, and Harald's claim to be Magnus I's Heir, by being his co-king)

...

William Bastard (Likely false claim from being promised it by Edward the Confessor), and a protentially just as false claim of being asked to do so by the pope)



Actually an interesting PoD to consider would be either Edmund Ironside outliving Edward the Confessor ... or Edward the Confessor living another ~5 years so Edgar Æltheling was an adult and the acknowledged heir
 
Don't forget Earl Gospatric: his maternal grandmother was another of Ethelred the Unready's daughters, his maternal grandfather (Uhtred?) was a Northumbrian earl, and his father Maldred was a Scottish prince (younger brother to King Duncan) which meant that he was a first cousin to King Malcolm Canmore of Scotland as well.
 
Don't forget Earl Gospatric: his maternal grandmother was another of Ethelred the Unready's daughters, his maternal grandfather (Uhtred?) was a Northumbrian earl, and his father Maldred was a Scottish prince (younger brother to King Duncan) which meant that he was a first cousin to King Malcolm Canmore of Scotland as well.

His grandmother was a daughter of Ethelred II, not Ethelred the Unready. It's a distinctly tenuous claim, but since his maternal grandfather was Uhtred and as such can be levered into the Earldom of Northumbria he has a chance.

Incidentally, no-one's quite sure who his father was.
 
There's another alternative claimant, Nicholas, son of Duke Richard III the elder brother of William's father. Nicholas was very young when his father died and was shunted aside. In later life he became a bishop. I can't tell you whether he was legitimate or not (modern sources are inconsistent and I haven't seen the originals) but even if he was illegitimate, William wasn't in much of a position to make this an issue.
 
This is my idea.



The marriage of Bertha of Burgundy and Robert II of France went ahead on 996, although the wedding was in prohibited degrees of Consanguity and Gregory V declared the pair excommunicate, on 999, a daughter was born named Emma, this proved that the pair could have children and it was not cursed, Sylvester II gave his own blessing for the wedding of Bertha and Robert.

Another child named Henry was born on 1001, he was strong and very pious as a child.

Otto III marries Zoe Porphygeneta on 1002.

Bertha’s son was given the inheritance of the Kingdom of Burgundy and for this reason, Queen Bertha was known as the great queen for expanding the realm.

Theophanu of Lotharingia marries Bezprym I of Bohemia and later of Poland on 1015 who had just won against Oldrich of Bohemia after his expedition from Hungary supported by his Hungarian relatives, Mieszko Lambert married Richeza and Bezprym of Bohemia defeated Mieszko Lambert after the death of his father and was crowned as King of Poland as Bezprym I of Poland and Bohemia.

Alice of Normandy married Henry of France on 1015 and Edward the Confessor married Princess Emma of France on 1020 in order to support an alliance between the two countries of France and England.
 
Top