WI: King Edward III of England dies in 1363?

I've just finished reading Ian Mortimer book on King Edward III of Englan, "The Perfect King". Near the end, he mentions that if Edward had died in 1363 at the height of his success and power, he might be known today as Edward the Great. Instead, IOTL, he lingered on until 1377, suffering through the rise of Charles V of France, the loss of his wife, two eldest sons, eldest grandson and almost all his contiental gains, and the rise of Alice Perrers and others at court.

What do people here think? Does anyone think there's truth to Mortimer's words? And besides that, what else might have happened? Edward the Black Prince would become King Edward IV, perhaps he might avoid the Battle of Najera and/or the disease which killed him. Although I must admit, my opinion of the Black Prince has gone down since reading Mortimer's book. He describes him as having the military prowess of Edward I and III but the diplomatic tact of Edward II.

Any thoughts?
 
Then Edward of Woodstock does not get ill? Good. I mean, he might not have been a good diplomat, but Richard might take the throne when he's older.
 
Then Edward of Woodstock does not get ill? Good. I mean, he might not have been a good diplomat, but Richard might take the throne when he's older.

I think seeing Edward's oldest son ascend the throne after his father would be more interesting than just assuming Richard ascends as expected
 
I've just finished reading Ian Mortimer book on King Edward III of Englan, "The Perfect King". Near the end, he mentions that if Edward had died in 1363 at the height of his success and power, he might be known today as Edward the Great. Instead, IOTL, he lingered on until 1377, suffering through the rise of Charles V of France, the loss of his wife, two eldest sons, eldest grandson and almost all his contiental gains, and the rise of Alice Perrers and others at court.
It's a view that I've heard before, including from a Medieval Historian that I greatly respect.

He may have first seen the argument advanced by Mortimer, but that doesn't make it less sound.

If he dies with a secure succession, a very good treaty with the French (we'll ignore the fact that Bretigny will never stick, and blame its collapse on his son), and no senility and mistresses, he may well be up there with Alfred. Certainly above Henry V. Whether he gets a "Great" is hard to tell, but there'll certainly be those saying he deserves it.
 
That ludicrously high number is disgustingly French.

Let's say despite the butterfly, France still gets the Bonaparte dynasty.. and they survive till today...

Welcome to the alternate universe of Edward XXI & Napoleon VIII! where the most 2 visible monarchies have their monarch taken the same regnal name without fail for centuries!
 
Top