Interesting indeed, where was sir Charles when Bosworth was going down?
I thought he was at Bosworth. Was I mistaken?
Interesting indeed, where was sir Charles when Bosworth was going down?
His wiki doesn’t say anything so he could well have been. Though he is actually illegitimate so that’s going to be an interesting sellI thought he was at Bosworth. Was I mistaken?
Interesting indeed, where was sir Charles when Bosworth was going down?
Though he is actually illegitimate so that’s going to be an interesting sell
If he was a hard sell before Henry he'd still be a hard sell after. Recall Henry got support because there wasn't a legitimate Beaufort left for the Lancastrians.Presumably he’d “inherit” his cousin’s proposed marriage to Elizabeth of York to bolster his credibility? Still be a tough sell, I’d imagine.
If h e was a hard sell before Henry he'd still be a hard sell after. Recall Henry got support because there wasn't a legitimate Beaufort left for the Lancastrians.
True though does anyone know where he was? Because I don’t think he was at bosworhOTOH he's on the spot, unmarried and about the right age (abt (abt 25 to Henry's 28) so unless Stanley wants to claim the throne himself (which would also be a big gamble, and he wasn't a gambling man) he might have to do.
The Lancastrians don't have a lot of options, and if the Yorkists can accept Henry Tudor they can probably accept Beaufort. After all, to them *no* Lancastrian has a legitimate claim, so it's of little moment exactly *who* keeps the seat warm for Edward IV's grandson.
Is he on the spot? His bio on the Wikipedia claims he was knighted only in the reign of Henry VII and later gained an Earldom. Would a bastard commoner be more acceptable than Jasper's noble stepson?OTOH he's on the spot, unmarried and about the right age (abt (abt 25 to Henry's 28) so unless Stanley wants to claim the throne himself (which would also be a big gamble, and he wasn't a gambling man) he might have to do.
The Lancastrians don't have a lot of options, and if the Yorkists can accept Henry Tudor they can probably accept Beaufort. After all, to them *no* Lancastrian has a legitimate claim, so it's of little moment exactly *who* keeps the seat warm for Edward IV's grandson.
Is he on the spot? His bio on the Wikipedia claims he was knighted only in the reign of Henry VII and later gained an Earldom
This one.Which bio is that? Most of the online ones that I've come across say that either he was knighted in Flanders by Archduke Philip "before Bosworth" or else by Henry Tudor at Milford Haven. And his entry in my Concise Dictionary of National Biography states that he "fought at Bosworth".
Pretty unlikely for me... At that point James III of Scotland, the Yorks, Stanley’s sons and young Stafford are all more attractive candidates with Beaufort blood...This one.
Sources are primarily Burke.
Do anyone of them categorically state he was seriously considered as heir to the Lancastrian cause?
This one.
Sources are primarily Burke.
Do anyone of them categorically state he was seriously considered as heir to the Lancastrian cause?
Pretty unlikely for me... At that point James III of Scotland, the Yorks,
Which an interesting omission don't you think?That link only mentions when he received the Order of the Garter. It says nothing about when he was knighted
When the last of the legitimate Beauforts died there should have been some discussion as to who takes up the mantle. If only Henry was considered and an adult male son of a Beaufort Duke ignored it says something about his status. Even if the status was brought up as to why he wasn't top of the running he would have gained some position in the hierarchy of their forces if he was considered in the line of succession.Why would there be as long as Henry Tudor was available?
Which an interesting omission don't you think?
After Henry dies Edward Stafford's father would have been in the same position as Henry being the legitimate male son of a female Beaufort. With Buckingham's death that claim falls to Edward who also happens to be Jasper Tudor's stepson
So it was. My mistake. I had it down as earlier than Bosworth.No he doesn't. That marriage didn't take place util three months after Bosworth.
I've not even raised Jasper as a possible candidate precisely because he lacks the legitimate bloodline so I don't know why you are saying I am.And even had he been, that would have disqualified Jasper from consideration, since it would have prevented him from marrying EoY - even had his total lack of even illegitimate English royal blood not been disqualification enough.
Warwick is 10 and he was still considered. Underage betrothals and marriages happened all the time. Especially among noble heirs and heiresses.And given that Edward Stafford was only seven years old at that time - even younger than Warwick - it's a trifle hard to imagine him marrying EoY
Jasper, while without royal bloodline from any branch of the Plantagenet, is still Henry IV’s half-brother so would be acceptable for Lancastrians and Yorkists if married to Edward IV’s heiress... Sure, unlike his nephew, he would be more or less forced to rule jure-uxoris as consort of Elizabeth of York instead of doing that in his own right but that is just a small price to pay and would likely made his rule more secure than the OTL one of his nephew...So it was. My mistake. I had it down as earlier than Bosworth.
I've not even raised Jasper as a possible candidate precisely because he lacks the legitimate bloodline so I don't know why you are saying I am.
Jasper was 2nd in command due to being Henry's paternal uncle and experience. He wasn't there because of being in the Lancastrian succession.
You'll notice I never mentioned everyone in command had to be in the succession also.
Warwick is 10 and he was still considered. Underage betrothals and marriages happened all the time. Especially among noble heirs and heiresses.
Difficult but possible and easier than an unaccomplished bastard without connections.
In terms of Warwick and eliAbeth how long would they wait before pushing Warwick to consummate the marriageJasper, while without royal bloodline from any branch of the Plantagenet, is still Henry IV’s half-brother so would be acceptable for Lancastrians and Yorkists if married to Edward IV’s heiress... Sure, unlike his nephew, he would be more or less forced to rule jure-uxoris as consort of Elizabeth of York instead of doing that in his own right but that is just a small price to pay and would likely made his rule more secure than the OTL one of his nephew...
Marrying EoY to Warwick is already at the limits of age difference but Stafford will likely marry Anne or Catherine of York here (with the other married to Norfolk)
@Shiva: your scenario number 2 can not be valid as John de la Pole is already married to one of the cousins of Elizabeth of York