WI: Charles "V" die at Poitiers and Charles II of Navarre take the French throne.

[SunZi]

Hello,

The idea of this alternate history is as follows: Charles II, King of Navarre seizes the throne of France during the late 1350s - early 1360s.

Charles of Navarre as the only grandson of Louis X, by his mother Jeanne II of Navarre was a serious candidate for the French crown held by the Capetian house of Valois since 1328. Charles had to wait for his mother's death, in 1349 , to form a solid party to his claims, especially since he was, through his father Philip of Evreux, a powerful French lord. In open competition with John II, successor to Philip VI of Valois, in the early 1350s, Charles II also led a movement to reform the French monarchy which increased his support and befriended his heir, the Dauphin Charles. Nevertheless, Navarre was imprisoned in 1354 after the assassination of Charles de la Cerda, constable and favorite of John, by his men. The conflict then seemed to be over, but it was then that the English, an ally of Navarre, ravaged France and captured John at the Battle of Poitiers in 1356.

This second humiliating defeat of the Valois in the Hundred Years' War seriously threatens their legitimacy on the throne; the king was captive, the regency ensured by a young man of eighteen, the states general revengeful and the English everywhere in the country. 1357 and 1358 then seemed to be the twilight of the Valois era. The bourgeois of Paris led by Etienne Marcel imposed a constitution, John II had concluded a peace which deprived France of half of its lands, Charles of Navarre was liberated and the peasantry revolted.

Yet the Valois have maintained themselves? Thanks to the genius of Dauphin Charles, future Charles V. Gaining experience as the crisis progressed, he managed to neutralize his Navarrese cousin and turn the situation around. It was he who was the main obstacle to the seizure of power by Charles of Navarre. Managing to gather his support and maneuvering each faction against each other. However, Charles could have known a much worse fate than that experienced by his father in Poitiers. The heir assisted by his young brothers Louis d'Anjou, Jean de Berry and the constable Walter of Brienne was at the head of a knightly "battle" which charged the entrenched English and was cut to pieces. The constable was himself killed, and the Dauphin was lucky to lose only his standard bearer.

So let's imagine that the Dauphin Charles, Duke of Normandy is killed during the battle of Poitiers. Imagine that in the absence of such an antagonist, Charles II of Navarre could overthrow the Valois and ascend the throne of France?

----------------------------

After this presentation, I ask your opinion on this idea. I have already thought about how Charles will reach the throne, and the probable civil war it will trigger in the decade of 1360. But I have vaguely thought about the consequences in the medium term, especially abroad with a France almost absent from the European game.

Of course the England of Edward III would be the big winner, but without leaving on the survival of such princes or others (I am thinking in particular of Edward of Angoulême), that it would be the consequences of a winning Brétigny. Would Peter the Cruel in Castile retain his throne? Will there be a Western schism?

Express yourself, to know if our ideas converge and thus help me to refine my project on this uchronia.

 

[Anarch King of Dipsodes]

Yabbut what about Edward III's claim to the French crown? That was nominally what the battle of Poitiers was about. If the Dauphin is killed, doesn't that clear the way for Edward to enforce his claim? Charles of Navarre would have to challenge his erstwhile ally.

 

[SunZi]

Yabbut what about Edward III's claim to the French crown? That was nominally what the battle of Poitiers was about. If the Dauphin is killed, doesn't that clear the way for Edward to enforce his claim? Charles of Navarre would have to challenge his erstwhile ally.

It vill not deviate from OTL. John II has four sons; Charles, Louis, John and Philip. So his succession is not threatened and Edward III will content himself with concluding the Treaty of Brétigny as OTL, after having vehemently sought to impose the Treaties of London. The "Great Aquitaine" against the renunciation of the French crown, but you are sufficiently far-sighted to think of the inevitable clash between Charles of Navarre (and of France) and Edward of England.

I would like to emphasize that this confrontation is already in the seeds of Poitiers and even before. The alliance between Navarre and England is very circumstantial, and each seeks to fool the other.

 

[material_boy]

I have to agree with @Anarch King of Dipsodes. The early death of Charles the Wise only elevates the then-count of Anjou and Anjou was a remarkable figure in his own right. His only real shortcoming was his overwhelming ambition, which is less of an issue here -- he will not be distracted from affairs of state in pursuit of a crown when he is already the heir to one.

The best POD for Charles the Bad's ascension to the French throne is December 1357, in the brief window of time that separates his triumphant return to Paris and the signing of the First Treaty of London. Charles very likely had the support to take the crown at this time, but waited just a little too long. The news of the treaty's signing kicks off the chain of events that leads to the anarchy of the Jacquerie, the breakdown of the coalition supporting Charles of Navarre, and ultimately to the dauphin's return to Paris.