WI: Henri II doesn't have a Jousting accident

I've never heard of Lorraine being sympathetic of them; if he was, they certainly didn't think so as he was pretty universally hated by them.

He was also hated by the conservative Catholics. Cardinal de Lorraine just had a knack for making enemies. Part of it is, he wanted the Huguenots to stay in the Catholic Church and the Catholic Church to broaden its rites to be amenable to Huguenots.

In other words, a compromise that managed to offend everybody equally.

Attempting to introduce an Inquisition would probably do that though, as well as running the Chambre Ardente.

But again, lots of Cardinals got sidelined into that, including Cardinal de Chatillon and Cardinal de Bourbon. None of them actually seemed to have been particularly sympathetic to it, not even the fairly-conservative Cardinal de Bourbon. (Probably because he didn't want bring charges against his brothers.) It was just... the King says do it, and you do it. Not very enthusiastically, but you still do it.

I know he did support reforms further than Trent went in alliance with the Germans, so he may of been somewhat sympathetic to them. The big thing is that the Cardinal could be quite delicious; lots of memoirs of the era attack him for his under the table tactics.

Again, the guy just seems to have been tailor-made to make enemies.

His advisors will also be a big issue. The Cardinal of Lorraine was quite long lived...

Not so much, actually. He had rather questionable health, and died at fifty. Of course, if Henri doesn't make him carry around a giant cross in the rain, then he might live a bit longer. (Funny story about that one, which I'll go into at some later time.)


So who would replace Henri's confidants as they age and die off?

Likely--the Montmorency boys, and the Duke of Guise. Which as they have a little feud going on, is going to be very interesting.

Antoine de Bourbon is possible, but speaking frankly, he was an imbecile and it was Jeanne who wore the pants.

You know, I've had to reevaluate Antoine. True, he was arrogant, rather opportunistic and something of weak reed--but he seems to have had a genuine open-mindedness and willingness to deal with reality that he passed on to his son. A lot of the criticism he faced from his fellow Huguenots was based on his tendency to reach out to the moderate Catholics--I've found in my researches that we really rose-tint away the Huguenots' less appealing traits, especially their fanaticism.

Henri IV's lucky to have gotten his father's mind and his mother's spine. Too many of his descendants got it reversed.


Condé also seems a good choice, much smarter than his brother, and Coligny too.

Ehh, I'm less fond of the pair, I'm afraid. If Guises have been dyed a blacker black than they deserve by historiography, Condé and Coligny have been bleached far whiter than they deserve. They were both pretty devious bastards when you get down to it. Especially Condé.

Still, is Henri likely to listen to them? My suspicion is he'll listen to anyone who will tell him that war with Spain is a good idea, so, yeah. I think it's going to be an ever juggling group of favorites, each telling Henri a combination of what he wants to hear, and what they want him to hear, moving out of power when it goes bad, only to come back into power after some later favorite fouls up...


There were also many good moderate Catholics that could help fill the void. A biconfessional government would be go a long way, but in Renaissance Europe in the era of Each Prince, His Religion, it makes it difficult.

I'm afraid it would be destined to fail much as it did IOTL. The problem is, there's too much fanaticism on both sides to make a working compromise...
 
Likely--the Montmorency boys, and the Duke of Guise. Which as they have a little feud going on, is going to be very interesting.

Who wasn't fighting at court, though, really? It wouldn't be much different than the Bourbons and the Guises, really, so I can't imagine it being so bad.


You know, I've had to reevaluate Antoine. True, he was arrogant, rather opportunistic and something of weak reed--but he seems to have had a genuine open-mindedness and willingness to deal with reality that he passed on to his son. A lot of the criticism he faced from his fellow Huguenots was based on his tendency to reach out to the moderate Catholics--I've found in my researches that we really rose-tint away the Huguenots' less appealing traits, especially their fanaticism.

Henri IV's lucky to have gotten his father's mind and his mother's spine. Too many of his descendants got it reversed.

I've personally never found him too appealing, mostly because, as you mention, his lack of a spine. His lack of any sort of real convictions in an era when people were willing to die for them seems to rub me the wrong way. Not to mention his constant switching of religion and general rough treatment of Jeanne, although not she would have any of it.

Henri IV also seemed to have inherited his father's womanizing. :p


Ehh, I'm less fond of the pair, I'm afraid. If Guises have been dyed a blacker black than they deserve by historiography, Condé and Coligny have been bleached far whiter than they deserve. They were both pretty devious bastards when you get down to it. Especially Condé.

Still, is Henri likely to listen to them? My suspicion is he'll listen to anyone who will tell him that war with Spain is a good idea, so, yeah. I think it's going to be an ever juggling group of favorites, each telling Henri a combination of what he wants to hear, and what they want him to hear, moving out of power when it goes bad, only to come back into power after some later favorite fouls up...

No one is perfect, especially in this conflict. I like to think everyone was wrong and everyone had their faults. History is often written by the victors, though, so when the League was crushed, people such as Guise got bad raps while Condé and Coligny were heros. Coligny also gets the complex in that he was assassinated so everyone forgets all the bad things he did and he is suddenly a Saint.

But would Henri II listen? I'm honestly not sure. Coligny was very rapidly anti-Spanish, so perhaps him, but I'm not sure about Condé...I lean more towards no, he would not. And I agree, it'll be pretty ever shifting once the older ones such as Diane are gone.
 
Henri II de Valois was strongly against Protestants within his own borders. Chances are his intolerant policies would probably not prevent a Hugenot uprising, though with his experience, I doubt the conflict would last as long as it did. I don't know however, if he would support protestants abroad to use against his opponents, the Hapsburgs though.

But what would he do though? The Protestant population boomed during his reign and became increasingly assertive. By 1559, it was too late for him to just crush them through persecution. He might be able to defeat them on the battlefield but that won't stop the movement. (In OTL, several of the individual Wars of Religion did end in Catholic victory.) Any French king was going to have to grant them some toleration. I don't know if he had it in him to do so, though.
 
Last edited:
Top