Let's say Henry V managed to dodge the bout of dysentery that killed him like an Oregon Trail player in 1422, and so he outlived his father-in-law Charles VI. How would that have changed history?
100 Years War could turn into a stalemate with Charles controlling the south and Henry the north.
 
Well depending on when Henry V kicks the bucket, Henry VI might not be so weak-willed?
Or Henry V might have been able to produce more kids with Catherine of Valois (very reasonable given she had 5/6 kids with Owen Tudor) and an ATL little brother of Henry VI (probably made Duke of Clarence after his late uncle Thomas) who is much savvier will certainly help. Particularly if Henry's brother, who we'll call John for argument's sake, is uber loyal to his brother he can be a great advisor/spare/lord protector for his brother.

Plus, if Henry ends up having a sister, she might marry a Louis XI as his second wife instead of Henry marrying Margaret of Anjou, removing a key piece of the War of the Roses from the board.
 
Henry V could very well have produced more sons too who also could have been more effective than older brother Henry was. However, the Dauphin Charles wouldn't have just passively allowed Henry V to reign uncontested, he would have tried to curry support for himself, the rightly born heir.

The most likely thing that happens is that Henry is able to raise his son partly into young adulthood, but a distant relationship, as Hal will be spending nearly the rest of his life in France fighting to keep his conquest, while Henry remains in England, surrounded only by his books, bibles, and prayers. However, Henry is able to be groomed correctly into a future king, a king who is more interested in peace and piety than war and chivalry. Whether he could still be a good king depends on who he surrounds himself with, starting with his marriage. More on that in a bit.

How does Hal do as a king with no war to fight? Even his early reign during a short peace was geared for war. Now he is a usurper, as far as most of his subjects are concerned. Now he has to consolidate his power and authority. It will be extremely difficult. We have no way to predict how good at this Hal can be. He will put down a ton of uprisings and revolts in a best case scenario. He would widely work to make alliances and play upon ever present French divisions. Can he reconcile two completely different nations together in a time when national identity was still taking it's first steps? I kind of have my doubts.

Charles VII needs allies fast, and if Hal is able to maintain his grip and see his heir grow safely into adulthood, how long are the other kings and princes of Europe going to stand by and let England, in effect, become OP? Let's see how good a diplomat and politician Charles can become in what is a much worse situation than OTL. He could see a fire sale on French land erupt before him.

What does Burgundy want to do here? They could perhaps finally see Burgundy break free of French vassalage and gain full independence. Or a more ambitious duke could decide to seize the French throne for himself somehow. They couldn't do either alone, however.

What kind of marriage options are there now for Henry? Depending on the advisors he ends up acquiring, or how close to his father's great project is his own goals are, Henry and his connections could strengthen alliances with Burgundy via marriage, could perhaps hope that a rich, landed heiress of somewhere like Brittany, Navarre, or further afield comes on the market, or they want to make a grand foreign alliance with the Habsburg-led Holy Roman Empire or with Castile or Aragon. Doesn't have to be Marguerite d'Anjou here, she might not even be in the running what with Henry's father likely negotiating the marriage instead.
 
Who is "Hal?" A lot of posters who talk about dynasties are always using nicknames and for someone who's not familiar with those it can be incredibly confusing.
 
Who is "Hal?" A lot of posters who talk about dynasties are always using nicknames and for someone who's not familiar with those it can be incredibly confusing.

Going by Shakespeare, Hal is Henry V. As for the nickname thing, don't blame us, blame medieval parents for never having an original thought in their heads when it comes to names... :openedeyewink:
 
Who is "Hal?" A lot of posters who talk about dynasties are always using nicknames and for someone who's not familiar with those it can be incredibly confusing.
Hal is Henry V. It derives from Shakespeare's use of Prince Hal in his 2 Henry IV plays.
Hal is a shortening of Harry the common Anglo-French pronunciation of Henry.
 
Who is "Hal?" A lot of posters who talk about dynasties are always using nicknames and for someone who's not familiar with those it can be incredibly confusing.
I figured Hal would be a good way to differentiate Henry V from Henry VI without constantly having to put the numerals in.
 
Let's say, baseline, Henry V lives to 1435 (picked by averaging the ages of Henry, his brothers, father, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers) and has the following children

Henry V (1386 - 1435) m. Catherine of Valois (1401 - 1437)
  1. Henry VI (1421 - 1477)
  2. John, Duke of Clarence (1423 - 1445)
  3. Mary (1425 - 1483)
  4. Catherine (1425 - 1465)
  5. Edward, Duke of Bedford (1429 - 1465)
  6. Isabelle (1431)
  7. Eleanor (1434 - 1449)
 
This certainly butterflies away the entire Tudor family as we know them if Catherine doesn't shack up with Owen Tudor when she did in OTL. For all we know, she might not even have the chance to even meet and interact with Owen given that she would most likely be in France with Hal for most of the rest of his life.

The scenario @WillVictoria poses above still sees Henry VI come to throne at about 14, so he would still be a minority king in need of a regency, but I don't think anyone would have had any idea of the mental problems that would manifest later on. 1435 incidentally sees the OTL death of John of Bedford, Henry's uncle, so for a few years, the regency itself would be contested if John dies on schedule. It would be a hammer blow to Lancastrian hopes of maintaining both crowns.
 

VVD0D95

Banned
This certainly butterflies away the entire Tudor family as we know them if Catherine doesn't shack up with Owen Tudor when she did in OTL. For all we know, she might not even have the chance to even meet and interact with Owen given that she would most likely be in France with Hal for most of the rest of his life.

The scenario @WillVictoria poses above still sees Henry VI come to throne at about 14, so he would still be a minority king in need of a regency, but I don't think anyone would have had any idea of the mental problems that would manifest later on. 1435 incidentally sees the OTL death of John of Bedford, Henry's uncle, so for a few years, the regency itself would be contested if John dies on schedule. It would be a hammer blow to Lancastrian hopes of maintaining both crowns.

Would Henry's mental problems still be there if he's had time to grow up under his father's tutelage?
 
Would Henry's mental problems still be there if he's had time to grow up under his father's tutelage?
I can't imagine they would go away if he is otherwise born the same person, just with different circumstances. The difference is that where in OTL, all he knew about his life is that he had been a king and treated as such for literally every moment of his life, whereas here, he would be Prince of Wales in his formative years. That means that he gets to have a different perspective of what it means to be king and can be groomed for his responsibilities. I wonder if Henry would be allowed to renounce his throne if he had younger brothers who could step in, because Henry just wasn't cut out to be king, though I highly doubt it would even be a possibility.
 
This certainly butterflies away the entire Tudor family as we know them if Catherine doesn't shack up with Owen Tudor when she did in OTL. For all we know, she might not even have the chance to even meet and interact with Owen given that she would most likely be in France with Hal for most of the rest of his life.

The scenario @WillVictoria poses above still sees Henry VI come to throne at about 14, so he would still be a minority king in need of a regency, but I don't think anyone would have had any idea of the mental problems that would manifest later on. 1435 incidentally sees the OTL death of John of Bedford, Henry's uncle, so for a few years, the regency itself would be contested if John dies on schedule. It would be a hammer blow to Lancastrian hopes of maintaining both crowns.

IOTL Henry was able to assume the reins of government in 1437, so I assume Gloucester can suffice for 2 years. Maybe have Henry die a few months after John (December vs. John's death in September) so he can name Gloucester as regent.
 

VVD0D95

Banned
I can't imagine they would go away if he is otherwise born the same person, just with different circumstances. The difference is that where in OTL, all he knew about his life is that he had been a king and treated as such for literally every moment of his life, whereas here, he would be Prince of Wales in his formative years. That means that he gets to have a different perspective of what it means to be king and can be groomed for his responsibilities. I wonder if Henry would be allowed to renounce his throne if he had younger brothers who could step in, because Henry just wasn't cut out to be king, though I highly doubt it would even be a possibility.

Ahh that's interesting and I think if he's raised as POW and has seen his father in action, surely he'd know who to trust and who not to in terms of advisors etc
 
Ahh that's interesting and I think if he's raised as POW and has seen his father in action, surely he'd know who to trust and who not to in terms of advisors etc
You would hope so, or he could he be a Henry III type of king who is surrounded by his wife's family and extended kin....which he kind of already was in OTL.

Hopefully, if his old man notices his son swearing devotion to Edward the Confessor, that's an instant red flag just based on family history. Henry III, Edward II, Richard II, and finally Henry VI were all kings who somehow looked to Edward the Confessor as their model for kingship and all 4 of them were at best weak and ineffectual, and at worst, complete disasters. That should be Hal's cue to try and pump out more sons and allow Henry to enter a monastery.
 

VVD0D95

Banned
You would hope so, or he could he be a Henry III type of king who is surrounded by his wife's family and extended kin....which he kind of already was in OTL.

Hopefully, if his old man notices his son swearing devotion to Edward the Confessor, that's an instant red flag just based on family history. Henry III, Edward II, Richard II, and finally Henry VI were all kings who somehow looked to Edward the Confessor as their model for kingship and all 4 of them were at best weak and ineffectual, and at worst, complete disasters. That should be Hal's cue to try and pump out more sons and allow Henry to enter a monastery.

Definitely agreed with you there
 
Top