WI: No King John of England?

I remember reading that in their early years, OTL's King John of England and his sister Joan were brought up at Fontevraud Abbey, possibly with the hope that John would take an interest in the Church, given his dismal prospects for an inheritance. In OTL, this obviously did not seem to have much effect on the prince and we next hear of him at his father's court.

My question is, what if John did enter the Church? Say he either took a liking to the ecclesiastical life early on, or Henry II or Eleanor decides it's the best route for him given his prospects?

A few things I was considering: John's future will probably be linked to wherever he holds the majority of his benefices, the Continent or England. If it's the latter, he could still manage to hold a great deal of influence as regent, given the frequent absences of the Angevin kings.

Also, would this butterfly (or at least delay) the events of the Great Revolt? Without John later receiving some of the Angevin patrimony earmarked for his brothers, would Henry the Young King and Henry II enjoy at least less tense relations?

How do things turn out in England, Ireland and the Continent without a King John Lackland on the throne—and not necessarily Arthur of Brittany, I would point out, given the date of the POD may or may not have significant butterflies for the fates of Henry's sons?

As I have said, I know that the butterflies will be massive, but I'm curious as to the (at least semi-)predictable effects...
 
You still have Henry Fitzempress (to avoid saying "Henry" confusingly) irritating his sons with his desire to keep them from sharing his power.

Richard marrying quickly is probably more of a big deal without John as a safety net (while HF and Eleanor had many kids, three sons died before Henry II - William, Henry the Young King, and Geoffrey) - although this is something I'm vaguely surprised wasn't more thoroughly addressed OTL.

As for how things turn out in England - who is Richard's successor? John's decisions and reputation did a lot to influence what happened in that period.
 
Richard marrying quickly is probably more of a big deal without John as a safety net (while HF and Eleanor had many kids, three sons died before Henry II - William, Henry the Young King, and Geoffrey) - although this is something I'm vaguely surprised wasn't more thoroughly addressed OTL.

Well, Richard was supposed to marry Louis VII's daughter, Alys, and she was even sent to Henry II's court as a child in preparation for the match. After she came of age, Henry II delayed, supposedly because she had become his mistress, which pissed off both the Pope and Louis VII, but for some reason, neither pushed the issue any further. Richard doesn't seem to have wanted to marry her either, but I'm not sure how much of that was Eleanor's influence, considering after Richard's marriage in OTL, she sabotaged Philippe II's attempts to pawn Alys off on John...which leads me to believe that there might have been some truth to the rumours (it would have put them within a forbidden degree of canonical affinity).

I think the reason there wasn't such a push to get Richard married was because there really wasn't any great opportunity. Henry the Younger was wed to one of Louis VII's daughters as part of a settlement which brought the disputed Vexin territories (which would serve him in the future, since he was going to receive Normandy); Geoffrey was betrothed to Constance of Brittany early on, since it neutralised the Bretons and easily supplied Geoffrey with an inheritance of his own; and John was betrothed to Isabella of Gloucester since she was a very significant heiress that would give him a land base of his own. Aquitaine was already earmarked for Richard from the beginning and there really weren't any great marriage opportunities of strategic value in relation to his future role.

As for how things turn out in England - who is Richard's successor? John's decisions and reputation did a lot to influence what happened in that period.

Well, it is always possible that the butterflies in this scenario prevent the deaths of Henry the Young King (in which case Richard might not even succeed to the English Crown at all) and/or Geoffrey, as they were entirely avoidable. Otherwise, either the pressure on Richard to sire a son is increased or he names Arthur as his heir. It would be interesting to see how Philippe II uses this to his advantage ITTL.

As an aside, who is going to get Ireland? In OTL, Henry II gave the rights to the lordship to John around the time he came of age, since it was a convenient way to cobble together something of an apanage.
 
You know, in the absence of heirs to the throne, it was not unknown for clergymen to be given dispensation by the Pope to forsake their vows and take the crown. Sometimes they were even given permission to marry.
 
I think the reason there wasn't such a push to get Richard married was because there really wasn't any great opportunity. Henry the Younger was wed to one of Louis VII's daughters as part of a settlement which brought the disputed Vexin territories (which would serve him in the future, since he was going to receive Normandy); Geoffrey was betrothed to Constance of Brittany early on, since it neutralised the Bretons and easily supplied Geoffrey with an inheritance of his own; and John was betrothed to Isabella of Gloucester since she was a very significant heiress that would give him a land base of his own. Aquitaine was already earmarked for Richard from the beginning and there really weren't any great marriage opportunities of strategic value in relation to his future role.
That leaves the unpleasant prospect - brought on by being second in line to the throne after Henry the Young King died - of having the fact "King of England" merits such attention.

OTL by that point it seems Richard and Henry Fitzempress were not on good terms, but if Richard is still uncomfortably close to being his brother's heir TTL, it might be worth pushing harder.

Well, it is always possible that the butterflies in this scenario prevent the deaths of Henry the Young King (in which case Richard might not even succeed to the English Crown at all) and/or Geoffrey, as they were entirely avoidable. Otherwise, either the pressure on Richard to sire a son is increased or he names Arthur as his heir. It would be interesting to see how Philippe II uses this to his advantage ITTL.

Yeah. Quite a bit in the way of options - and from our perspective, if the Angevins die out the next in line are Henry the Lion's sons.

As an aside, who is going to get Ireland? In OTL, Henry II gave the rights to the lordship to John around the time he came of age, since it was a convenient way to cobble together something of an apanage.

It might stay with the crown - not bothering to make a distinct lordship of Ireland. Or given to the heir as part of preparing him to rule (and from Henry II's perspective, giving someone something that doesn't disrupt his desire to keep power in his hands).
 
Yeah. Quite a bit in the way of options - and from our perspective, if the Angevins die out the next in line are Henry the Lion's sons.
Or any sons of Alfonso of Castile or Raymond of Toulouse who married Henry's other daughters given that primogeniture - especially for female lines - is not set in stone yet.

It might stay with the crown - not bothering to make a distinct lordship of Ireland. Or given to the heir as part of preparing him to rule (and from Henry II's perspective, giving someone something that doesn't disrupt his desire to keep power in his hands).

That seems more likely from my view. Though we can't rule out a later King from separating it out into a Kingdom or various grandprincipalities or duchies
 
Or any sons of Alfonso of Castile or Raymond of Toulouse who married Henry's other daughters given that primogeniture - especially for female lines - is not set in stone yet.
Not in stone, but they do have a better claim - and are nearby (thanks to Henry the Lion's exile from 1180 on).

That seems more likely from my view. Though we can't rule out a later King from separating it out into a Kingdom or various grandprincipalities or duchies

Oh naturally. But in the short run, it seems unlikely to develop there without a son needing it.
 
Not in stone, but they do have a better claim - and are nearby (thanks to Henry the Lion's exile from 1180 on).
Better claim in the sense that they are older and nearer and liable to have more local backing.
Not better by blood claim though since the daughters would be considered equal rather than ranked by age as sons would be.
A successful Welfing however would probably settle that though ;)

Oh naturally. But in the short run, it seems unlikely to develop there without a son needing it.

Oh indeed. And without the Lordship being firmly established do think it would come to be a royal title? A Kingdom of England and Ireland if you will rather than a Kingdom of England and Kingdom of Ireland held by the same ruler
 
Better claim in the sense that they are older and nearer and liable to have more local backing.
Not better by blood claim though since the daughters would be considered equal rather than ranked by age as sons would be.
A successful Welfing however would probably settle that though ;)
Not sure about the blood claim part. I think that all things being even, oldest daughters might come first - although its hard to tell at this point in English history.

Oh indeed. And without the Lordship being firmly established do think it would come to be a royal title? A Kingdom of England and Ireland if you will rather than a Kingdom of England and Kingdom of Ireland held by the same ruler

Not entirely sure I get the difference.
 
Wouldn't any children of Geoffrey's come before any of the children of the daughters? Especially if John was never born, I'd think Arthur would be made King if Richard had no children.
 
Wouldn't any children of Geoffrey's come before any of the children of the daughters? Especially if John was never born, I'd think Arthur would be made King if Richard had no children.

Oh aye. I was looking at the daughters as "If the male line is extinct, who comes next".

Richard seems to have liked his Welf nephews OTL.
 
I think that it's also important to remember that Eleanor has two surviving daughters with Louis VII at this time, which means if the Plantagenets do die out in the male line (and there's no guarantee that they will), her eldest daughter Marie, wife of the Count of Champagne, has a decent claim to Aquitaine, Gascony and Poitou—and there is at least an established precedent in those lands of the eldest daughter succeeding in the absence of sons. Then again, Eleanor of Castile is right across the border to the south and also powerful enough to launch an invasion. I suppose it all depends on the provisions Eleanor of Aquitaine herself makes and whether or not Philippe II is willing to back his sister, since it would result in another nightmarish situation of an over mighty vassal (in this case, the Count of Champagne).

As for England, well, primogeniture wasn't really established by this point and even in Common Law, daughters had equal claims as co-heirs since the time of Henry I. It really depends on the provisions Richard I makes for the inheritance of his lands.

On another note, if Arthur succeeds to the Angevin domains, what is the likelihood of Brittany remaining in personal union with England, even if Philippe II manages to confiscate Normandy and Anjou as in OTL?
 
As for England, well, primogeniture wasn't really established by this point and even in Common Law, daughters had equal claims as co-heirs since the time of Henry I. It really depends on the provisions Richard I makes for the inheritance of his lands.

England since the Conquest:

The appointed heir by royal fiat (William II)
A usurper (Henry I)
Another usurper (Stephen)
The king before last's grandson (Henry II) via adoption by the previous
?

Arguably there isn't anything established, but the situation as of William II's death implies that the oldest son (oldest surviving brother in this case) had a claim.

On another note, if Arthur succeeds to the Angevin domains, what is the likelihood of Brittany remaining in personal union with England, even if Philippe II manages to confiscate Normandy and Anjou as in OTL?

Depends on what Arthur gives his sons.

OTL, incidentally, Philip's agreement seems to have left Arthur Anjou - Normandy was specifically mentioned as "if Philip can take its his.".
 
Top