Earl of Warwick

George, Duke of Clarence, brother of King Edward IV, had a son who was executed by Henry VII. What if he had been born a girl?
 
"She" could had ended up as "her" sister, Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury, or like "her" cousins, Catherine, Countess of Devon, Anne, Lady Howard, and Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk, you choose... ;)
 
Catherine, Countess of Devon


She wasn't executed but her son, Henry Courtenay, 1st Marquess of Exeter, executed, while her grandson, Edward Courtenay, 1st Earl of Devon, exiled.

Anne, Lady Howard
Her marriage was to her husband, Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk's politically advantageous.
She died aged 36, with no issues.

Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk.
Sons
- John de la Pole, 1st Earl of Lincoln (c. 1462-16 June 1487). He was designated heir to his maternal uncle Richard III. Rebelled against Henry VII and was killed at the Battle of Stoke Field.
Edmund de la Pole, 3rd Duke of Suffolk (1471-30 April 1513). Yorkist pretender in succession to his brother John. Beheaded by order of Henry VIII.
Humphrey de la Pole (1474–1513). In Holy Orders.
Sir William de la Pole, Knight, of Wingfield Castle (1478–1539). William was kept in the Tower of London, his date of death is generally regarded as being during late 1539, either October or November. Married Katherine Stourton, no issue.
Richard de la Pole (1480-24 February 1525). Yorkist pretender in succession to Edmund. Killed at the Battle of Pavia.

Elizabeth de la Pole (c. 1468-1489). Married to Henry Lovel, 8th Baron Morley (1466–1489), without issue.
Anne de la Pole (1476–1495). Nun. Catherine de la Pole (c. 1477-1513). Married to William Stourton, 5th Baron Stourton, without issue.
 
The problem was not on being a female Yorkist, but a man, as you have proved. Unless they were not a threat for Henry VII (or to his son, he wasn't shy of beheading any possible claimant to the throne, as poor old bugger Buckingham discovered), their chances of survivial were quite slim.

There were some few exceptions, luckily.

Let's look at Thomas Manners, 1st Earl of Rutland, grandson of Anne of York (1439-1476), a daughter of Richard Plantagenet, Duke of York, sister of Kings Edward IV and Richard III . Made earl by Henry VII himself and the beginning of a long line.

Having York blood on the veins and being a male was certainly quite an unhealthy feature in those days, I agree, but there were some exceptions.

Also, she could have been married with a foreigner, like Margaret, Duchess of Burgundy, and be "safe" there.
 
Also, she could have been married with a foreigner, like Margaret, Duchess of Burgundy, and be "safe" there.

So Elizabeth, countess of Warwick could marry:
- Charles VIII of France
- Future King James IV of Scotland, whom had wanted to marry Cecily of England, however the plan never work, but he was still interest in an English marriage remained. IOTL he married Margaret Tudor, but what if Elizabeth, beat her to him.
- Maximilian I, Holy Roman Emperor as his third wife.
- George, Duke of Saxony
- Frederick I of Denmark
 
Perhaps marrying her to James would give him too many ideas about claiming the crown based on the rights of his wife...

I would forget about Charles of France. His marriage was part of the 1482 Peace of Arras.

Saxony and Denmark are good distant places to pack her off and forget her:D
 
Perhaps marrying her to James would give him too many ideas about claiming the crown based on the rights of his wife.
Or even better, when they have a son, James could claim the crown based on the rights of his son, who would be King of Scotland and England :D

Saxony and Denmark are good distant places to pack her off and forget her:D

In Denmark, she could keep Catholism burning strong in the hearts of the Danes, or burn the Danes that want to follow Lutherism :cool:
 
Or even better, when they have a son, James could claim the crown based on the rights of his son, who would be King of Scotland and England :D

The sole idea of that may preclude any kind of engagement and may cause some troubles to sleep to Henry VII. Or if not to him, to his heir :D

In Denmark, she could keep Catholism burning strong in the hearts of the Danes, or burn the Danes that want to follow Lutherism :cool:

Or turn a Lutheran herself:D
 
If Warwick had been a girl, she would not have been an asset in the marriage market - just look at Margaret. Clarence was attainted, so money and land will not follow. As a note Warwick was YOUNGER than Margaret, so our putative Elizabeth (I'll go with that) would be even less of a match than Margaret was. She'll probably marry ambitious gentry, if she's lucky.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
If Warwick had been a girl, she would not have been an asset in the marriage market - just look at Margaret. Clarence was attainted, so money and land will not follow. As a note Warwick was YOUNGER than Margaret, so our putative Elizabeth (I'll go with that) would be even less of a match than Margaret was. She'll probably marry ambitious gentry, if she's lucky.

So that leaves Elizabeth to become Queen Elizabeth of Scotland, consort of King James IV, when she married him in a ceremony at the altar of Glasgow Cathedral on 15 March 1483, when James was 10 and Elizabeth was 8, arranged by, Archibald Douglas, 5th Earl of Angus, who had joined Alexander Stewart, Duke of Albany, in league with Richard III of England, who wanted a relative on the throne of Scotland, but had no legitimate daughter.
 
So that leaves Elizabeth to become Queen Elizabeth of Scotland, consort of King James IV, when she married him in a ceremony at the altar of Glasgow Cathedral on 15 March 1483, when James was 10 and Elizabeth was 8, arranged by, Archibald Douglas, 5th Earl of Angus, who had joined Alexander Stewart, Duke of Albany, in league with Richard III of England, who wanted a relative on the throne of Scotland, but had no legitimate daughter.

I like this, but why did he not marry Margaret who would have been 10 also?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Top