Edward V of England

Edward IV lives longer. Edward V is nearly 18 or 19 when Edward IV dies, making it much more difficult for Richard to seize the throne. How does Edward V reign? Can he control the Woodvilles? Possible marriage prospects and relations with France and Scotland?
 
I imagine Edward V would be influenced by his Woodville relations. I wonder what his relationship with his uncle Gloucester would be like.

This would mean Edward's younger brother Richard, Duke of York is alive too. Would he be loyal to the King, or cause trouble for his brother (much like the Duke of Clarence did with Edward IV)?

Presumably this means no Tudor dynasty. I can't see Henry Tudor having much support if Edward IV's sons reach adulthood.
 
I did suggest a timeline on this a while back here it is I'd appreciate your thoughts at the time it didn't spark much interest perhaps it's been done to death before.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=121033

To answer a few points - Gloucester's relationship with the Queen Consort and her family was cordial up to the point of Edward IV's death there is therefore no reason to assume they'd fall out with the succession of an adult Edward V.
The Queen's family are largely victimised due to Ricardian and Lancastrian propoganda dating from 1470/1 and 1483/4. Her eldest brother Anthony 2nd Earl Rivers was highly regarded and a talented man. Her family may have gained greatly from her marriage but certainly not as much as say the Nevilles did during Edward IV's first reign.
Henry Tudor's mother Margaret was highly regarded by Edward IV and was its thought on the point of persuading him to allow Henry to return to England. By the 1480s the Yorkist dynasty was in firm control - there were no obvious and legitimate Lancastrian claimants (Henry's claim only became relevant after Richard III's usurpation) - Margaret was a rich woman and Henry was her only heir.
 
Edward IV lives longer. Edward V is nearly 18 or 19 when Edward IV dies, making it much more difficult for Richard to seize the throne.

Whatever you think of Richard, he was not a fool. By that point, Edward V is an adult and Ralph Shaa, the source for the claim that Edward V is illegitmate, is dead. And barring enough butterflies, Richard's only legitmate son is dead.

I do think Richard would remarry, though not with the speed that OTL's planned marriage to Joanna of Portugal was considered. Unless the court turns against him or Edward V proves himself an inpet king in TTL, I don't see Richard going into revolt.

OTOH, if Edward V's brother Richard of Shrewsbury or his cousins John de la Pole or Edward of Warwick prove as ambitious as Warwick's father did in OTL, there may still be attempted revolts. (Many dismiss Warwick as lacking the mental capacity for that, but Henry VII thought he was dangerous enough to lock away at age 10 and execute at age 24.)

How does Edward V reign? Can he control the Woodvilles?

We don't know enough to answer that, he could be good, mediocre or spectacularly bad as king.

Possible marriage prospects and relations with France and Scotland?

He was engaged to Anne of Brittany. If that doesn't change in TTL, France and England may already be at war over Brittany before Edward V becomes king.

There's also the problem of an heir. In OTL, Anne produced a lot of children by two different husbands. Most were stillborn or died within a month of their birth.
 
OTOH, if Edward V's brother Richard of Shrewsbury or his cousins John de la Pole or Edward of Warwick prove as ambitious as Warwick's father did in OTL, there may still be attempted revolts. (Many dismiss Warwick as lacking the mental capacity for that, but Henry VII thought he was dangerous enough to lock away at age 10 and execute at age 24.)

Couldn't someone "liberate" him to rule him as puppet ruler so to speak, like he's on the thrown but someone else is making the decisions?

I though Henry locked him up cos he didn't want someone leading a rebellion in his name?
 
Anne of Brittany's fertility is an interesting question - she was remarkably unlucky - however her eldest son by Charles VIII was healthy and lived until struck by measles when he was three - her other pregnanices by Charles VIII did end in miscarriages or stillbirth and two further sons who died within days of their birth and a daughter who also died on the day of her birth. By Louis XII she bore two healthy daughters and a number of stillborn sons.

I think its worth bearing in mind that the mortality of children wasn't uncommon and it's worth also remembering that the French court was constantly on the move and that her first stillbirth was brought on whilst accompanying Charles, her second was brought on by attending court events heralding Charles' departure for Italy.

One point is that Anne of Brittany was almost permanently pregnant from a very young age (she was just 15 when she bore her first child) and it would be interesting to suspect what damage that might have done to her by that and if you add that to the pressure on her to produce on heir. Poor woman!

Medical care being what it was its a miracle that any Queen delivered a healthy child!!!

Whatever you think of Richard, he was not a fool. By that point, Edward V is an adult and Ralph Shaa, the source for the claim that Edward V is illegitmate, is dead. And barring enough butterflies, Richard's only legitmate son is dead.

I do think Richard would remarry, though not with the speed that OTL's planned marriage to Joanna of Portugal was considered. Unless the court turns against him or Edward V proves himself an inpet king in TTL, I don't see Richard going into revolt.

OTOH, if Edward V's brother Richard of Shrewsbury or his cousins John de la Pole or Edward of Warwick prove as ambitious as Warwick's father did in OTL, there may still be attempted revolts. (Many dismiss Warwick as lacking the mental capacity for that, but Henry VII thought he was dangerous enough to lock away at age 10 and execute at age 24.)



We don't know enough to answer that, he could be good, mediocre or spectacularly bad as king.



He was engaged to Anne of Brittany. If that doesn't change in TTL, France and England may already be at war over Brittany before Edward V becomes king.

There's also the problem of an heir. In OTL, Anne produced a lot of children by two different husbands. Most were stillborn or died within a month of their birth.
 
Couldn't someone "liberate" him to rule him as puppet ruler so to speak, like he's on the thrown but someone else is making the decisions?

I though Henry locked him up cos he didn't want someone leading a rebellion in his name?

Yeah, but who is capable of this, and would be willing to do this, but doesn't have at least a tenuous relation to the crown himself? there may be somebody who fits the bill, but I can't imagine who.

And, assuming that warwick is locked up by Edward, liberating him without inflicting some sort of defeat on the king might be a bit difficult.
 
Firstly
Warwick was a threat to Henry VII because he was the last male line Plantagenet.
Secondly
Warwick was never formally named Richard III's heir (to do so would have seriously undermined his own claim to the throne which was based 1) the alleged but unproven allegation that Edward IV had never been legally married to Elizabeth Wydeville and 2) that the children of George Duke of Clarence were excluded from the throne under the act of attainder (whcih they weren't)
During Edward IV's reign both children were treated well and cared for.
Thirdly
Assuming Edward V succeeds as an adult then it is highly likely that Warwick and his sister would be at liberty and treated as members of the family in the same way the RIchard of Gloucester would have been. All their fates were dictated by the fact of Edward IV leaving a power vacuum by dying young and leaving a teenager as his heir.
Fourthly
Any threat to Edward V''s reign would almost certainly be the usual rebellious peer - as has always been the case. The Lancastrian v Yorkist arguement was dead and buried by 1483. Bosworth was far more about the collapse of the house of york than a traditional dynastic battle of the wars of the roses. Its actually hard to think of any Lancastrian peer who hadn't been reconciled to Edward IV at that period.
 
Couldn't someone "liberate" him to rule him as puppet ruler so to speak, like he's on the thrown but someone else is making the decisions?

If Edward of Warwick proves as ambitious and easy to manipulate as his father was in OTL, then someone will probably try to step into the Kingmaker role. OTOH, if Edward V proves easy to manipulate, most would be Kingmakers will focus on him first.

No one will have to liberate Edward of Warwick unless Edward V imprisons him. Considering Warwick's father was attainted for treason in 1478, Edward V probably won't imprison his cousin unless he tries something.
 
Top