Edward IV of England

WI: He never marries Elizabeth Woodville. Her first husband survives. Would he end up marrying the French princess that the Earl of Warwick had selected for him? Does this prevent their falling out?
 
WI: He never marries Elizabeth Woodville. Her first husband survives. Would he end up marrying the French princess that the Earl of Warwick had selected for him? Does this prevent their falling out?

Probably, yes

Probably not

Warwick wants to be the power behind the throne, and whilst this is relatively easy and OK when Edward is younger, once he has children of his own, and begins to feel dynastically secure, then he is able to branch out more, make his own decisions, appoint officers off his own back etc, and Warwick will begin to feel side-lined, just because that is the type of person that he is

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Probably, yes

Probably not

Warwick wants to be the power behind the throne, and whilst this is relatively easy and OK when Edward is younger, once he has children of his own, and begins to feel dynastically secure, then he is able to branch out more, make his own decisions, appoint officers off his own back etc, and Warwick will begin to feel side-lined, just because that is the type of person that he is

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

And if Warwick feels sidelined, he'll try to find someone else to control, and thus foment disorder in England.
 
The importance of Edward not marrying Elizabeth is not just Warwick, but a large number of the nobility - including Edwards family - were upset and annoyed by the move. Any disorder that the Kingmaker can forment is likely less than IOTL, and potentially so little that he does not bother trying.

That may mean that Richard of Gloucester is not exposed to the brutality of the battle of Teweksbury, or the killing of Henry VI. I've heard it argued that these formative events, along with the execution of his brother Clarence gave him a ruthless streak which came out in his siezure of power with the death of the princes in the tower - if Edward marries as required, Richard may be an honest Regent for his nephew, and no Tudors on the English throne.
 
The importance of Edward not marrying Elizabeth is not just Warwick, but a large number of the nobility - including Edwards family - were upset and annoyed by the move. Any disorder that the Kingmaker can forment is likely less than IOTL, and potentially so little that he does not bother trying.

So does this mean that Edward IV goes looking for a foreign bride, or does he remain domestic? A domestic match is probably going to piss off a large number of people, where a foreign match could bring future support if he or his children were ever to be knocked off the throne . . .

That may mean that Richard of Gloucester is not exposed to the brutality of the battle of Teweksbury, or the killing of Henry VI. I've heard it argued that these formative events, along with the execution of his brother Clarence gave him a ruthless streak which came out in his siezure of power with the death of the princes in the tower - if Edward marries as required, Richard may be an honest Regent for his nephew, and no Tudors on the English throne.

Although I won't dispute that some of the reasons Richard III took the throne probably came from blood-soaked formative years, I think that the much more important reason was the larger history of the War of the Roses. Richard knew the most dangerous moments in the War came when a minor sat on the throne. He therefore took steps to make sure that an adult (himself) sat on that throne. It was not nice and a real bit of realpolitik, but I don't think Richard saw much choice. It was basically get rid of his nephews, or face the end of Yorkist rule. Now his rule ended anyway, but I think that if you'd seen Henry Tudor on the field against Regent Richard it would have been worse for him, as in Henry's father-in-law's family (Henry and William Stanley) would be in the field with Tudor, rather than waiting on the sidelines.
 
Top