Better Luck for the Lancastrian (Heirs)

[FONT=&quot]So Henry VI, King of England, was the only grandchild of King Henry IV who was possessed of the twin qualifications of being male and being English. The rest of Henry IV's sons had trouble siring living children by their wives.

Henry IV, King of England[/FONT]
· [FONT=&quot]Henry V, King of England [1314-1422] (1387-1422) m. 1420 Catherine de Valois (1401-1437)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]o [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Henry VI, King of England [1422-1461; 1470-1471] (1421-1471) m. 1445 Marguerite d’Anjou (1429-1482)[/FONT]
§ [FONT=&quot]Edward, Prince of Wales (1453-1471)[/FONT]
· [FONT=&quot]Thomas, duke of Clarence (1388-1421) m. 1412 Margaret Holland[/FONT]
· [FONT=&quot]John, duke of Bedford (1389-1435) 1m. 1423 Anne of Burgundy (1404-1432); 2m. 1433 Jacquetta of Luxembourg (1416-1472)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]o [/FONT][FONT=&quot]A stillborn child (September 1432)[/FONT]
· [FONT=&quot]Humphrey, duke of Gloucester (1390-1447) 1m. 1422 (annulled 1428) Jacqueline of Bavaria, Countess of Holland, Hainaut & Zeeland [1417-1433] (1401-1436); 2m. 1428/1431 (annulled 1441) Eleanor Cobham (1400-1452)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]o [/FONT][FONT=&quot]A stillborn child (1424)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

Now, what would've happened if Bedford and Gloucester's child had survived, or perhaps that they had more children? Would the War of the Roses still occur on schedule? And would the duke of York still be as ambitious if he were further removed from the throne?
 
Given that York's grievances were as a senior peer of the realm and only very late as someone with a claim to the throne, assuming no butterflies on him, I doubt it would mean much - one less thing to be him vs. the court party over, but that's really not going to change that he felt they didn't give him his due and that they weren't exactly enthusiastic about what he considered his due.
 
I expect Margaret of Anjou at least would have felt less threatened if York didn't try to disinherit her son. If she's willing to go along with a different regency, then Henry won't cause problems. But if York hadn't spent the better part of a decade as heir presumptive (excluding the Beauforts), he'd likely be less ambitious to start with.

On the other hand, if Henry's uncles survived longer, then we'd have a different issue, especially if any of them wanted to play York's OTL role.
 
AFAIK Bedford served as Regent in France during Henry VI's minority, surely with surviving children he might be more ambitious. Also, Humphrey's kids by Jacqueline would be the heirs to Holland, Zeeland and Hainaut and considering how long England fought for their rights to the French throne, the idea of the Plantagenets having a foothold in the Low Countries might be interesting.
 
While the idea of an English Holland , Hainaut and Zeeland sounds cool, I get the feeling that much like Bedford's marriage to Jacquetta, it might also be denounced as the marriage most detrimental to England - Jacquetta's was denounced as such due to the fact that it caused the loss of Burgundy as an ally (since the duke of Burgundy was opposed to the remarriage of his one-time brother in law).

Also, I don't gather that Humphrey was too concerned with his wife's claims or inheritance enough to push for English backing (although surviving children might change this). I wonder if England would be willing to go to war in the Low Countries at the same time that it is fighting France for it's equally (in French eyes) questionable claim to the throne in Paris.

Humphrey and Jacqueline's marriage (if it produces children) might pass the claim to a cadet line of the English royal family, and the claim might be trotted out whenever convenient, or might simply be kept as part of the titulary much like the title 'king of France' was until the Peace of Amiens.
 
Top