Effects of Bolingbroke born female

With all the threads about RII&III and HVIII's heirs what could have happened if Henry Bolingbroke son of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster and Steward of England, was born female?

Would the Beauforts have been legitimised? Would they be preferable over other candidates to be Richard II's heirs?
 
The only question really revolves around what John of Gaunt would have done to try to have his inheritance in the male line, rather than going to a female heir and thus to whomever she married. If he CAN get the Beaufort line legitimised, then yes he is going to do this, to make a male heir to whatever is entailed. But he no doubt will face opposition from his brothers who are going to be trying to write him out of the equation.

Richard II may oddly have favoured not only legitimising the Beauforts but placing them in the line of succession in this scenario, as doing one but not the other would be illogical if they inherit the duchy. At the time, Richard has no real fear that he will be childless and the question of succession be one to bug him

Actually, without Bolingbroke, it is not unlikely that Richard II's second wife would have borne him children (she would be of age, 12, in 1401)

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Interestingly it makes significant financial differences for Gaunt during his lifetime.
A significant proportion of his property and estates and indeed many of his titles were held in right of his wife Blanche of Lancaster.
If we assume Bolingbroke (like several of his brothers) dies at birth or is born as a third surviving daughter then those daughter's are going to be great co-heiresses of their mother's wealth
Philippa Queen of Portugal, Elizabeth Duchess of Exeter and our female Bolingbroke and whoever she marries.
Gaunt might be tempted to attempt a more advantageous match on the death of his second wife in order to produce a legitimate male heir rather than marry his long-term mistress and the mother of his illegitimate children - if that is the case then it becomes more difficult to legitimate them later.
It also means a difference in the longer term to the de Bohun inheritance - in otl Bolingbroke married the co-heiress Mary de Bohun whilst her sister was married to his uncle Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Gloucester. Gloucester tried to prevent Mary from marrying in order to ensure his wife got all the inheritance in otl Gaunt managed to get hold of her and marry her to his son - in this tl no Bolingbroke means it is likely Gloucester gets the entire inheritance making him and his heirs much richer and slightly more powerful (one of the mooted reasons for Buckingham's initial support of Richard III was the hope he would finally receive the Lancastrian half of the de Bohun inheritance)
And as was pointed out no Bolingbroke means no usurpation and a surviving Richard II is far more likelier to produce heirs by his second wife.
 
All interesting.

So we have:

i) John of Gaunt trying to secure legitimisation of his bastards earlier to secure them the Duchy of Lancaster (which includes the Earldom of Leicester and attached title of Steward of England) or securing a new marriage to gain a legitmate son.

ii) Stronger Gloucester

What would happen if Richard II still does not produce a male heir? How would he devise the succession the longer he lives?
 
Top