If King Stephen of England adopted Henry count of Anjou in 1153, then why didn’t Henry drop the inheritance that his natural father, count Geoffrey of Anjou, had bequeathed to him on his death in September 1151? By placing himself as heir to the throne of England, Henry ought to have ceased to be count of Anjou. Or am I missing something? I’m sure an Anglo-Angevin lawyer could easily answer this fanciful question, if only someone had addressed it.
handwritten, printed, digital – a blog about ancient, medieval & late-modern book cultures. New posts every Monday, Wednesday & Friday. Don't forget to subscribe
biblonia 
If he inherited Anjou (or any property) from Geoffrey in 1151, and was not adopted by Stephen until 1153, I see no reason why he should forfeit Anjou, because it was already his. The fact that he had it by inheritence need not be relevant.
Just my tuppence. đŸ™‚
LikeLike
Thank you, “Jonny” for that. I agree with you but imagine this. What if Henry’s brother Geoffrey, later count of Nantes, had disputed the comital inheritance in 1153? He is known to have been a thorn in Henry’s side until 1158. Curtmantle would then have had to establish kinship before claiming his parental inheritance. This raises another question, namely, that of the origin of the assize of mort d’ancestor and I have no idea to what extent, if any, this legal innovation was germinating on the continent at that time. Cognitive reverie, I guess.
LikeLike