Battle of Bosworth: King Richard III and Henry Tudor die. Would Lincoln declare for Warwick?

I feel Warwick's mental state would be pretty important here. If Warwick truly is mentally handicapped, and Lincoln is right there to see it for himself, it seems he would be less likely to declare for him.

Warwick was absolutely not 'mentally handicapped'. His mental age was pretty much stunted by being imprisoned in the Tower by Tudor. He was kept in almost complete solitary confinement with rare visits from loved ones/his sister, he had no education after this. There is zero evidence that Warwick was anything but a bright young boy before that, educated alongside his cousins at court.

Does he even have possession in this scenario? De la Pole should be at Bosworth and is currently scattered to the winds.

I am sure that his uncle, Edward IV granted him some lands when he made him Earl of Lincoln (not a subsidiary title) and he also benefited from the fall of Buckingham etc during the reign of Richard. De la Pole should not have been at Bosworth, he and his cousins were all sent to Sherrif Hutton for their protection in the 'unlikely' case of Tudor winning the battle.
 
Warwick was absolutely not 'mentally handicapped'. His mental age was pretty much stunted by being imprisoned in the Tower by Tudor. He was kept in almost complete solitary confinement with rare visits from loved ones/his sister, he had no education after this. There is zero evidence that Warwick was anything but a bright young boy before that, educated alongside his cousins at court.



I am sure that his uncle, Edward IV granted him some lands when he made him Earl of Lincoln (not a subsidiary title) and he also benefited from the fall of Buckingham etc during the reign of Richard. De la Pole should not have been at Bosworth, he and his cousins were all sent to Sherrif Hutton for their protection in the 'unlikely' case of Tudor winning the battle.
So
It then becomes the case of who gets to sheriff Hutton first
 

Derek Pullem

Kicked
Donor
Warwick was not in the Tower, he was with John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, at Sheriff Hutton in Yorkshire with the York Princesses and Richard III's bastard son, John of Gloucester. So the Stanley's do not have custody of him..
I am sure that his uncle, Edward IV granted him some lands when he made him Earl of Lincoln (not a subsidiary title) and he also benefited from the fall of Buckingham etc during the reign of Richard. De la Pole should not have been at Bosworth, he and his cousins were all sent to Sherrif Hutton for their protection in the 'unlikely' case of Tudor winning the battle.

So is De la Pole actually a player in this game of thrones or merely someone else's pawn? He's hardly likely to be able to withstand several thousand troops in an under garrisoned castle.

As VVD0D95 says whoever gets to Sheriff Hutton first and takes control of the potential heirs to the throne holds all the cards
 
I feel Warwick's mental state would be pretty important here. If Warwick truly is mentally handicapped, and Lincoln is right there to see it for himself, it seems he would be less likely to declare for him.

Lincoln fought and died for Warwick, so that should be a good indicator of Edward of Warwick's mental state. So is the fact that Henry VII eventually decided Warwick was enough of a threat that he needed to be executed.

The idea that Warwick was mentally handcapped comes from a figure of speech used by chronicler Edward Hall, who was 2 years old when Warwick was executed.

Hall said "The XV Yere of Kyng Henry the VII Edward Plantagenet erle of Waricke, of whome ye haue heard before, beyng kept in the Towre almost fro his tender age, that is to saye, fro his first yere of the kyng to thys xv yere, out of al copany of me & sight of beastes, i so much that he coulde not descerne a Goose from a Capon." Or in modern English - Edward Plantagenet, Earl of Warwick, of whom ye have heard before, being kept in the Tower almost from his tender age, that is to say, from the first year of the king [Henry VII] to this 15th year, out of all company of men and sight of beasts, in so much that he could not discern a goose from a capon." In context it seems to me that the figure of speech has nothing to do with Edward of Warwick's natural intellectual ability and instead is referring to the effects of 15 years of imprisonment, denied education or companionship. Another, though less likely interpretation would be that Edward of Warwick was scared witless at his imminent execution.
 
Warwick was absolutely not 'mentally handicapped'. His mental age was pretty much stunted by being imprisoned in the Tower by Tudor. He was kept in almost complete solitary confinement with rare visits from loved ones/his sister, he had no education after this. There is zero evidence that Warwick was anything but a bright young boy before that, educated alongside his cousins at court.



I am sure that his uncle, Edward IV granted him some lands when he made him Earl of Lincoln (not a subsidiary title) and he also benefited from the fall of Buckingham etc during the reign of Richard. De la Pole should not have been at Bosworth, he and his cousins were all sent to Sherrif Hutton for their protection in the 'unlikely' case of Tudor winning the battle.

Lincoln fought and died for Warwick, so that should be a good indicator of Edward of Warwick's mental state. So is the fact that Henry VII eventually decided Warwick was enough of a threat that he needed to be executed.

The idea that Warwick was mentally handcapped comes from a figure of speech used by chronicler Edward Hall, who was 2 years old when Warwick was executed.

Hall said "The XV Yere of Kyng Henry the VII Edward Plantagenet erle of Waricke, of whome ye haue heard before, beyng kept in the Towre almost fro his tender age, that is to saye, fro his first yere of the kyng to thys xv yere, out of al copany of me & sight of beastes, i so much that he coulde not descerne a Goose from a Capon." Or in modern English - Edward Plantagenet, Earl of Warwick, of whom ye have heard before, being kept in the Tower almost from his tender age, that is to say, from the first year of the king [Henry VII] to this 15th year, out of all company of men and sight of beasts, in so much that he could not discern a goose from a capon." In context it seems to me that the figure of speech has nothing to do with Edward of Warwick's natural intellectual ability and instead is referring to the effects of 15 years of imprisonment, denied education or companionship. Another, though less likely interpretation would be that Edward of Warwick was scared witless at his imminent execution.
Thank you guys for clarifying that for me! I meant no disrepect to Warwick, I wasn't sure.
 
Thank you guys for clarifying that for me! I meant no disrepect to Warwick, I wasn't sure.

No need to apologize. None of us knows everything and history is subject to interpretation. I have seen published historians quote just the "could not discern a goose from a capon" and interpret it as showing that Warwick was mentally handicapped. I think the fuller context shows that is not what the original author, Hall, intended, but for anyone who just saw the "goose from a capon" phrase or even just interpretations of it, coming to the conclusion that Warrick was mentally handicapped is a reasonable conclusion.
 
Top