WI: Henry II of England killed at Battle of Ewloe

At the disastrous battle of Ewloe, during the Norman invasion of Wales, Henry's army was routed and he was very nearly killed, being saved by the Earl of Hertford.
What happens if Henry isn't saved and has his reign end 32 years early?
 
At the disastrous battle of Ewloe, during the Norman invasion of Wales, Henry's army was routed and he was very nearly killed, being saved by the Earl of Hertford.
What happens if Henry isn't saved and has his reign end 32 years early?

Excellent question. If Henry dies in the rout in the woods then Richard I should become king the moment that he's born in September of that year. The problem is that would be two months after the death of his father. Which is where things get... interesting. The nobility would know that Eleanor of Aquitaine was pregnant, but would have no idea on if the baby would be a girl or a boy. Would they wait or would they want a king? Henry's next brother was Geoffrey, Count of Nantes. Who died of something (I'm not sure what) the very next year. Oh, imagine the butterflies!
 
Excellent question. If Henry dies in the rout in the woods then Richard I should become king the moment that he's born in September of that year. The problem is that would be two months after the death of his father. Which is where things get... interesting. The nobility would know that Eleanor of Aquitaine was pregnant, but would have no idea on if the baby would be a girl or a boy. Would they wait or would they want a king? Henry's next brother was Geoffrey, Count of Nantes. Who died of something (I'm not sure what) the very next year. Oh, imagine the butterflies!

Actually, if Henry II died in 1157, then technically, Henry the Young King, having been born in 1155, would be next in line for the throne, by virtue of being the late king's eldest surviving son. However, succession rights were hardly set in stone and it is quite possible that the nobles might not want a child for a king and would pass him over for Henry II's younger brother, as you pointed out. Definitely some serious butterflies there.

I suppose it would depend on a number of factors. Would Eleanor of Aquitaine and even the Empress Matilda be able to drum up enough support for the boy? Possible, but not likely, I would think. The Empress was not well-liked in England, given her haughty behavior which had cost her the one chance she'd had to claim the throne in her own right years before. As for Eleanor, she was a foreigner and as tenacious as she was, most of the support that she might be able to count on was in Aquitaine, her own domains.
 
Actually, if Henry II died in 1157, then technically, Henry the Young King, having been born in 1155, would be next in line for the throne, by virtue of being the late king's eldest surviving son. However, succession rights were hardly set in stone and it is quite possible that the nobles might not want a child for a king and would pass him over for Henry II's younger brother, as you pointed out. Definitely some serious butterflies there.

I suppose it would depend on a number of factors. Would Eleanor of Aquitaine and even the Empress Matilda be able to drum up enough support for the boy? Possible, but not likely, I would think. The Empress was not well-liked in England, given her haughty behavior which had cost her the one chance she'd had to claim the throne in her own right years before. As for Eleanor, she was a foreigner and as tenacious as she was, most of the support that she might be able to count on was in Aquitaine, her own domains.

Curses, I'd forgotten about Henry the Young king. You're quite right, he would have been Henry III at the ripe old age of two. This also has an impact in Wales. Owain Gwynedd has just effectively won his war and retakes Eastern Gwynedd and Rhuddlan Castle. How far South does he then go?
 
Actually, if Henry II died in 1157, then technically, Henry the Young King, having been born in 1155, would be next in line for the throne, by virtue of being the late king's eldest surviving son. However, succession rights were hardly set in stone and it is quite possible that the nobles might not want a child for a king and would pass him over for Henry II's younger brother, as you pointed out. Definitely some serious butterflies there.

King Stephen's younger son, William of Boulogne, was alive in 1157 and being aged 20 certainly not too young. Yes, he had been passed over in favour of Henry II but that does not mean he wouldn't be preferred to a two-year old toddler.
 
King Stephen's younger son, William of Boulogne, was alive in 1157 and being aged 20 certainly not too young. Yes, he had been passed over in favour of Henry II but that does not mean he wouldn't be preferred to a two-year old toddler.

True, that. I'd forgotten about Stephen's son. So that's another claimant that might be seen as a better alternative to a toddler King, along with Geoffrey of Anjou.
 
It's likely that Eleanor would marry again. Who is available to become stepfather to the King of England and sort-of Duke of Aquitaine?

There would also be problems with Scotland with disputed claims to Cumbria and Northumbria.
 
It's likely that Eleanor would marry again. Who is available to become stepfather to the King of England and sort-of Duke of Aquitaine?

There would also be problems with Scotland with disputed claims to Cumbria and Northumbria.

Perhaps she could marry Raymond of Toulouse.
 
King Stephen's younger son, William of Boulogne, was alive in 1157 and being aged 20 certainly not too young. Yes, he had been passed over in favour of Henry II but that does not mean he wouldn't be preferred to a two-year old toddler.

True, that. I'd forgotten about Stephen's son. So that's another claimant that might be seen as a better alternative to a toddler King, along with Geoffrey of Anjou.

With everyone anxious to avoid Anarchy II between Geoffrey and William, could we see them form an official Regency Council?
Making the civil war more civil so to speak, since the scheming won't stop.
 
Top