WI: John Lackland Dies 1199-1203, All Hail King Arthur!?

The Professor

The Professor

ByzantineLover said:
The issue isn't going to be availability but consanguinity. All the current Angevins/Plantagenets are descended from Eleanor of Aquitaine, and all the mainline Blesevins are descended from Theobald V of Blois and Henry I of Champagne, whose wives were Eleanor's daughters with Louis VII. And this is also the age of Pope Innocent III.
Click to expand...
Damn Innocent!
 

ByzantineLover

The Professor said:
Damn Innocent!
Click to expand...

Er, sorry, did you mean that as in "That damn Innocent, always messing things up!" or as in "Screw Innocent! Who cares what he thinks"?

Another idea I've had is for Arthur to marry Isabella of Angouleme after John's death (or would that be forbidden under Leviticus?) and giving his sister, Eleanor, as a bride to Hugh IX of Lusignan's son (who IOTL married Isabella after John's death) as compensation.

As for Arthur's relationship with Philip II and Louis VIII, he's about the same age as the latter, and he had spent a few years growing up in Philip's court. Apparently, Constance of Brittany did that as part of continuing his father's pro-French policies. The way I see it, Arthur having spent time in Philip's court from a young age could mean that Philip could find Arthur a bit more pliable than his uncles, but it could also mean that Arthur may be a bit more knowledgable and/or savvy than John in terms of negotiating with his feudal lord. I.E. if Philip, as he did with John, summons Arthur as Count of Poitou, not Duke of Normandy or King of England, Arthur would probably do so.
 
Last edited:
kasumigenx

kasumigenx

What about John marrying Louis VIII to Alix of Blois who is an abbess of Fontravraud, a marriage with Alix would mean a continued interdict of France.
 

Kellan Sullivan

ByzantineLover said:
Er, sorry, did you mean that as in "That damn Innocent, always messing things up!" or as in "Screw Innocent! Who cares what he thinks"?

Another idea I've had is for Arthur to marry Isabella of Angouleme after John's death (or would that be forbidden under Leviticus?) and giving his sister, Eleanor, as a bride to Hugh IX of Lusignan's son (who IOTL married Isabella after John's death) as compensation.

As for Arthur's relationship with Philip II and Louis VIII, he's about the same age as the latter, and he had spent a few years growing up in Philip's court. Apparently, Constance of Brittany did that as part of continuing his father's pro-French policies. The way I see it, Arthur having spent time in Philip's court from a young age could mean that Philip could find Arthur a bit more pliable than his uncles, but it could also mean that Arthur may be a bit more knowledgable and/or savvy than John in terms of negotiating with his feudal lord. I.E. if Philip, as he did with John, summons Arthur as Count of Poitou, not Duke of Normandy or King of England, Arthur would probably do so.
Click to expand...

So what differences do you think Arthur could get from his relationship with Philippe that John couldn't OTL? He IS king of England, so just as much of a threat to Phil as John was in that regard. He just perhaps has a better relationship with Philippe than John did
 

ByzantineLover

Kellan Sullivan said:
So what differences do you think Arthur could get from his relationship with Philippe that John couldn't OTL? He IS king of England, so just as much of a threat to Phil as John was in that regard. He just perhaps has a better relationship with Philippe than John did
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I meant.
 

aegis03florin

The Professor said:
Let me rephrase, what exactly would Arthur be able to to achieve?
Click to expand...
Best case scenario: keeping all the Angevin lands for one more generation (including Britany)
A more plausible scenario: giving pieces of lands to Philip (ex. Norman Vexin) and share with John some stuff (Ireland + other French lands, maybe Aquitaine)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top