All of Henry VII's sons live

Alright.

Also how likely would Henry be to try for the throne should Arthur die early leaving a young child behibd
 
Alright.

Also how likely would Henry be to try for the throne should Arthur die early leaving a young child behibd

Not likely. Tudor propoganda - named Sir Thomas More, among others - was already lambasting Richard III for murdering his nephews to usurp the throne, so I would say Henry won't dare, besides, he might have been more like his Plantagenet grandfather than what Arthur was (based on the limited info I have on Arthur, he seems more like Harry Tudor than Edward IV), but I don't think he'd relish the thought of ending up like Richard III or his father (the duke of York) did.
 
Hmm okay. Would Arthur be more like Henry VII do you think? Or somewhere in between?

By looking at his portraits and what I've read of his personality, he seems more introverted and awkward than his younger brother - of course, that could just be because he's a teenager (many are awkward and introverted at that age) - while his younger brother seems to have been more boisterous, outgoing and all of that, but at the same time, neurotic and insecure (which Arthur and Edmund could share). Just BTW, you left out Henry VII's son Edward

most likely that he was born towards the beginning of the marriage (1487 or 1488) or towards the end of it (1498–1501)

who would just make things altogether more fun if he pushes Henry further down in the succession, or is the dog nipping at Hal's heels, especially if Arthur has to constantly play referee between his brothers.
 
Alright that seems fair

And ah definitely.

You know that's giving me some extra thoughts. What's more interesting to people a Tudor family including s surviving Arthur, Edward and Edmund or a Tudor family which is Henry, Edward and Edmund?
 
Alright that seems fair

And ah definitely.

You know that's giving me some extra thoughts. What's more interesting to people a Tudor family including s surviving Arthur, Edward and Edmund or a Tudor family which is Henry, Edward and Edmund?
I'd go for the latter.
Could Edmund be pushed for the Church since 2 elder surviving brothers?
 
Alright interesting why Henry and Edward?
Well because you can still have the break from the Church but you've got an alternate succession with the son of Prince Ed who could be used to marry Queen Mary of Scots and then succeed Elizabeth/Edward VI.
It might even allow for Anglicanism to proceed as Anglo-Catholicism rather than a form of Protestantism
 
Well because you can still have the break from the Church but you've got an alternate succession with the son of Prince Ed who could be used to marry Queen Mary of Scots and then succeed Elizabeth/Edward VI.
It might even allow for Anglicanism to proceed as Anglo-Catholicism rather than a form of Protestantism
Interesting and you don't think a break could
Come under Arthur?
 
Arthur running things? Henry not getting to choose his bride or even his path in life? (He'll get the day-to-day, but not the objective set by himself.) That's more innovative than Henry having two younger brothers to boss around.....
 
Interesting and you don't think a break could
Come under Arthur?
Very unlikely, the whole break was to allow Henry divorces of his own choosing.
While I could see cooler relations with the Pope I can't see a complete break to Protestantism coming from Arthur himself (a later successor could try though).
Perhaps if Arthur's relations parallel that of France you could see a Conciliarism 2.0
 
Arthur running things? Henry not getting to choose his bride or even his path in life? (He'll get the day-to-day, but not the objective set by himself.) That's more innovative than Henry having two younger brothers to boss around.....

Very true

Very unlikely, the whole break was to allow Henry divorces of his own choosing.
While I could see cooler relations with the Pope I can't see a complete break to Protestantism coming from Arthur himself (a later successor could try though).
Perhaps if Arthur's relations parallel that of France you could see a Conciliarism 2.0
Also true.

Hmm I think a coin toss is in order
 
So how does this sound re a family tree:

Henry VII (b.1457: d. 1507) m Elizabeth of York (b. 1466: d. 1509)

Children:

Arthur I of England (b. 1486)

Margaret Tudor, Queen of Scotland (b. 1489)

Henry, Duke of York (b. 1491)

Mary Tudor, Queen of France/ Duchess of Suffolk (b. 1496)

Edmund, Duke of Somerset (b. 1499)

There was a Princess born in 1492, named Elizabeth, who died in 1495.
 
Just BTW, you left out Henry VII's son Edward
I've seen this Edward mentioned on Wikipedia, and am a bit confused. Is there more evidence that he actually existed than the single reference they include? Is it possible that he was just Edmund (someone hearing "the king's son named for his grandfather" and guessing the wrong grandfather)?
 
I've seen this Edward mentioned on Wikipedia, and am a bit confused. Is there more evidence that he actually existed than the single reference they include? Is it possible that he was just Edmund (someone hearing "the king's son named for his grandfather" and guessing the wrong grandfather)?

In the case of the mysterious Edward Tudor, many have suggested he was a mysterious other son, born between Arthur Tudor and Margaret Tudor, or Elizabeth Tudor and Mary Tudor. This is due to a single piece of writing referring to the king's children as 8, 4 boys and 4 girls. However, due to the fact that in every other document and piece of art that refer's to Henry VII's children they are 7 in number, 3 boys and 4 girls, it is generally assumed that this mysterious Edward Tudor was not in fact a child. I have seen it suggested that "Edward Tudor" might have been a short-lived son of Jaspar Tudor, Duke of Bedford but I doubt it. So most likely there was no other son, and it was just someone's mistake.
 
If Henry as Duke of York were given Middleham, Sandal Castle, Sherriff hutton etc, would that make sense?
 
Top