Effects of Elizabeth of York As Dauphine/Queen of France?

As it says, what if the eldest daughter is married before her father's death, to the dauphin of France. Does Richard of Gloucester still attempt to take power? Can he, or will he fear the fact that France will support Elizabeth/her children's claim over his? What does this imply for her surviving siblings at this point?
Please discuss
 
Given Charles was only ~13 at the time of Edward IV's death it might be hard to squeeze in a marriage in time.

France will likely protest strongly at its Queen being labelled a bastard and her brothers being (apparently) murdered. Though given that they're in their own turbulent regency (assuming Louis XI dies on schedule) I'm not sure they can do much.

I think Richard still takes the throne, nothing major has changed- he'd still feel under threat from the hostile Woodville party and be compelled to act, or, if you're one of those people, he's still an evil, murderous, tyrannical psychopath hellbent on carving his way to the throne. I suppose it might be possible that, faced with French diplomatic pressure (and with an eye towards Henry Tudor potentially seeking sanctuary/support there), he keeps the princes around (though they'd still be the focus of plots, liberation/kidnapping attempts and the like, so...)

Should Richard still take the throne we likely get a bunch of Woodville exiles hanging around the French court, and it'd be interesting how the French react to Henry Tudor (should he still flee Brittany). Elizabeth might take umbrage at supporting Tudor over her possibly-still-surviving brothers (she could hope, at least), herself and her sisters.

IIRC she tended to stay out of politics IOTL, but that might be more to avoid undermining her husband's precarious claim to the throne rather than inclination. Whether she has any effect on French policy depends on how she gets along with her husband and sister-in-law/regent.

Do we know how Elizabeth felt about Richard vis-a-vis the princes in the tower and his alleged usurpation? Obviously when she came out of sanctuary she took part in court revelry and seemed to get along with Richard well enough (to the extent that there were probably outlandish marriage rumours). This could be read as anything between her not begrudging Richard's occupation of the throne, a ruthless ambition to be Queen (even if that means not giving a shit about her brothers' fate) through to a teen girl putting on a brave face to make the best of a bad situation. How she feels towards Richard over the whole ordeal likely effects how she acts and what she does as a Queen of France.
 
Given Charles was only ~13 at the time of Edward IV's death it might be hard to squeeze in a marriage in time.

France will likely protest strongly at its Queen being labelled a bastard and her brothers being (apparently) murdered. Though given that they're in their own turbulent regency (assuming Louis XI dies on schedule) I'm not sure they can do much.

I think Richard still takes the throne, nothing major has changed- he'd still feel under threat from the hostile Woodville party and be compelled to act, or, if you're one of those people, he's still an evil, murderous, tyrannical psychopath hellbent on carving his way to the throne. I suppose it might be possible that, faced with French diplomatic pressure (and with an eye towards Henry Tudor potentially seeking sanctuary/support there), he keeps the princes around (though they'd still be the focus of plots, liberation/kidnapping attempts and the like, so...)

Should Richard still take the throne we likely get a bunch of Woodville exiles hanging around the French court, and it'd be interesting how the French react to Henry Tudor (should he still flee Brittany). Elizabeth might take umbrage at supporting Tudor over her possibly-still-surviving brothers (she could hope, at least), herself and her sisters.

IIRC she tended to stay out of politics IOTL, but that might be more to avoid undermining her husband's precarious claim to the throne rather than inclination. Whether she has any effect on French policy depends on how she gets along with her husband and sister-in-law/regent.

Do we know how Elizabeth felt about Richard vis-a-vis the princes in the tower and his alleged usurpation? Obviously when she came out of sanctuary she took part in court revelry and seemed to get along with Richard well enough (to the extent that there were probably outlandish marriage rumours). This could be read as anything between her not begrudging Richard's occupation of the throne, a ruthless ambition to be Queen (even if that means not giving a shit about her brothers' fate) through to a teen girl putting on a brave face to make the best of a bad situation. How she feels towards Richard over the whole ordeal likely effects how she acts and what she does as a Queen of France.

The french might conquer england..
 
The french might conquer england..

If they were inclined that way (which would be wildly over-ambitious) they'd likely wait for Elizabeth and Charles to have a kid with a legit claim to both thrones- and a healthy kid is by no means a certainty, given Charles' ill-health and lack of reproductive success IOTL.
 
I think the french might make war, not just to press Elizabeth's claim, but in response to the Insult. It is a huge insult to say that the Queen of France is a bastard, it is something that would be appealed to the pope, which probably would of succeeded.

Now if this time line went like ours except after the princes are dead, the pope declares the marriage of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville valid and always had been, Richard will be an open usurper sitting on the throne. The next heir in law would of been John de la Pole, he might get French support especially if he married Cecily of York, he would very definitely receive a lot of Yorkish support. Henry Tudor wouldn't get as much support unless he was the only option besides Richard, and probably not enough support without Elizabeth of York. But with Richard III an open usurper every thing is thrown into the air, and I see John de la Pole, Henry Tudor or Edward Plantagenet (17th Earl of Warwick) claiming the throne. John de la Pole as adult male with the clearest claim is the best bet, I do not believe very many would support the future, yet to be born French Dauphin as King. Warwick's claim was clouded by his father's attainder and being a child.

My biggest question is would John de la Pole move against his uncle after the pope ruled that Edward V was the legitimate King when Richard deposed him? He seemed to of been adamant supporter of Richards, but with the possibility of becoming king and knowing you have a traitor on throne, would he of acted? If not there is a distinct possibility he would of died when Richard eventually went down.
 
If they were inclined that way (which would be wildly over-ambitious) they'd likely wait for Elizabeth and Charles to have a kid with a legit claim to both thrones- and a healthy kid is by no means a certainty, given Charles' ill-health and lack of reproductive success IOTL.

Actually, Charles had a healthy son named Charles Orlando, which was a first son, Anne of Brittany also had a problem in giving birth with her other husband.
 
The thing is we know Charles VIII of France was definitely fertile, 4 children by Anne of Brittany over 7 years, with 3 over a period of around 3 years shows he could definitely father many children. And something else to consider about his fertility, Anne of Brittany only had 3 out of around 15 children survived past birth, so I am going to guess that there was something wrong on her end.

And so, with Elizabeth, even if Charles still dies in 1498, he most likely has at least 4/5 children, most likely 6/7. Of these, there is probably more than half are that are male, so let's day 4 boys and 2 girls. The names would be pretty clear, Charles and Francis for the eldest boys (2 out his 3 sons were named Francis OTL), Louis, John and Robert would be good options for the other 2. For the girls: Anne, Margaret, Joan, Louise and Charlotte are all good options.

So, by this logic, the family would look a little something like this:

Charles VIII of France (b.1470: d.1498) m. Elizabeth of York (b.1466: c.1515/1530) (a)

1a) Charles IX of France (b.1486)

2a) Francis, Duke of Anjou (b.1488)

3a) Robert, Duke of Berry (b.1489: d.1490)

4a) Anne of France (b.1491)

5a) John, Duke of Berry (b.1493)

6a) Margaret of France (b.1496)​

As for the issue of England, Charles most likely does not support Henry Tudor and thus he ends up dying in obscurity, secure in the knowledge he was never going to be king. However, another option for him would be to support the accession of Elizabeth, who would be the one that was meant to be in line to the English Throne. In her stead, Cecily of York is most likely created Queen of England with Edward, Earl of Warwick as her co-monarch. If Henry Tudor proves himself, he may become the Earl of Richmond and might even be rewarded with the hand of Anne of York.
 
The thing is we know Charles VIII of France was definitely fertile, 4 children by Anne of Brittany over 7 years, with 3 over a period of around 3 years shows he could definitely father many children. And something else to consider about his fertility, Anne of Brittany only had 3 out of around 15 children survived past birth, so I am going to guess that there was something wrong on her end.

And so, with Elizabeth, even if Charles still dies in 1498, he most likely has at least 4/5 children, most likely 6/7. Of these, there is probably more than half are that are male, so let's day 4 boys and 2 girls. The names would be pretty clear, Charles and Francis for the eldest boys (2 out his 3 sons were named Francis OTL), Louis, John and Robert would be good options for the other 2. For the girls: Anne, Margaret, Joan, Louise and Charlotte are all good options.

So, by this logic, the family would look a little something like this:

Charles VIII of France (b.1470: d.1498) m. Elizabeth of York (b.1466: c.1515/1530) (a)

1a) Charles IX of France (b.1486)

2a) Francis, Duke of Anjou (b.1488)

3a) Robert, Duke of Berry (b.1489: d.1490)

4a) Anne of France (b.1491)

5a) John, Duke of Berry (b.1493)

6a) Margaret of France (b.1496)​

As for the issue of England, Charles most likely does not support Henry Tudor and thus he ends up dying in obscurity, secure in the knowledge he was never going to be king. However, another option for him would be to support the accession of Elizabeth, who would be the one that was meant to be in line to the English Throne. In her stead, Cecily of York is most likely created Queen of England with Edward, Earl of Warwick as her co-monarch. If Henry Tudor proves himself, he may become the Earl of Richmond and might even be rewarded with the hand of Anne of York.

Four things:

1) At this point in time all law in England debarred women from ascending to the throne. An in a time of turmoil that is unlikely to change.

2) The Earl of Warwick was a child, and debarred by corruption of blood. This does not make it impossible but does make it hard.

3) Elizabeth was never considered to be in line for the throne. Women did not have dynastic rights they just passed them on to their children, which their sons could assert.

4) If Warwick was successful in pressing his blood claim, which was strong, he would be sole monarch. Yes a marriage to Cecily would increase his claim, but there is no way at this time she would be co-monarch.


If Edward IV would not of had any sons, no one would of contested Richard's ascent to the throne, let alone his nieces. He would of been the true heir to the throne, just like when he died in otl he was the true king, even though he likely got there by foul murder.
 
Last edited:
Actually, Charles had a healthy son named Charles Orlando, which was a first son, Anne of Brittany also had a problem in giving birth with her other husband.

Fair enough, I took Charles Orlando dying in infancy as a sign of poor health, but apparently it was measles which is just dumb luck.

That said, the point still stands that Charles and Elizabeth definitely won't have a son by the time of Richard's usurpation, and it seems foolish for the French to claim the English throne in Elizabeth's name without the security of an heir or two- they wouldn't want to invade and then watch the whole thing collapse like a house of cards should Charles or Elizabeth die.

I think the french might make war, not just to press Elizabeth's claim, but in response to the Insult. It is a huge insult to say that the Queen of France is a bastard, it is something that would be appealed to the pope, which probably would of succeeded.

But there are wildly different scales of "war", from all-out assault on England to desultory attacks on Calais, and the former isn't too feasible. Would such an enterprise against England and a perceived insult against have any effect on uniting the domestic Orleanist opposition with Anne's Beaujeau regime?

Side note: what would happen to Brittany ITTL- it can't be subsumed into France, so is there a chance the Habsburg match is successful?
 
Last edited:
But there are wildly different scales of "war", from all-out assault on England to desultory attacks on Calais, and the former isn't too feasible. Would such an enterprise against England and a perceived insult against have any effect on uniting the domestic Orleanist opposition with Anne's Beaujeau regime?

Side note: what would happen to Brittany ITTL- it can't be subsumed into France, so is there a chance the Habsburg match is successful?

FYI it wouldn't be a perceived insult, it would be a grave insult, but you are right at most a single campaign into mainland england for forms sake is possible, more likely attacks on Calais and strongly supporting Richard's rivals.
 
Side note: what would happen to Brittany ITTL- it can't be subsumed into France, so is there a chance the Habsburg match is successful?

Might be, but Brittany still won't unite with the Habsburg domains unless Philip kicks the bucket without issue. Then again, wasn't there a provision in the Treaty of Sablé that says Anne can't marry without the French King's consent?

Anyway, what about Richmond marrying Cecily ITTL?
 
Might be, but Brittany still won't unite with the Habsburg domains unless Philip kicks the bucket without issue. Then again, wasn't there a provision in the Treaty of Sablé that says Anne can't marry without the French King's consent?

Anyway, what about Richmond marrying Cecily ITTL?

Henry Tudor marrying Cecily? It depends, does the Pope on appeal declare Edward IV marriage Invalid, then yes, if not Henry has little chance. Even if John de la Pole does not press his claim, the next Yorkish heir would of been Henry Bourchier, 2nd Earl of Essex, who still has a way better claim then Henry Tudor. Henry succeeded because: Richard III was only under suspicion, not generally known as a murderer and Usurper; he had a slight Lancastrian claim, which was possibly superior domestic one; the possible heirs with superior claim were not willing to challenge a true king on suspicion, when their claim came from the same source, and Henry was because his doubtful claim came from a different source. But if Richard was an acknowledged usurper, then other Yorkish claimants would challenge him, and Henry Tudor becomes a distant weak claimant to the throne, and no way a contender for a royal daughter's hand. Henry only became King through a miraculous set of circumstances, if anything else happened his accession very very very unlikely, but not quite impossible.
 
Henry Tudor marrying Cecily? It depends, does the Pope on appeal declare Edward IV marriage Invalid, then yes, if not Henry has little chance. Even if John de la Pole does not press his claim, the next Yorkish heir would of been Henry Bourchier, 2nd Earl of Essex, who still has a way better claim then Henry Tudor. Henry succeeded because: Richard III was only under suspicion, not generally known as a murderer and Usurper; he had a slight Lancastrian claim, which was possibly superior domestic one; the possible heirs with superior claim were not willing to challenge a true king on suspicion, when their claim came from the same source, and Henry was because his doubtful claim came from a different source. But if Richard was an acknowledged usurper, then other Yorkish claimants would challenge him, and Henry Tudor becomes a distant weak claimant to the throne, and no way a contender for a royal daughter's hand. Henry only became King through a miraculous set of circumstances, if anything else happened his accession very very very unlikely, but not quite impossible.
Henry Tudor wouldn't be king at all.His invasion in 1483 depended quite heavily on French support.In this scenario,France won't lift a hand to help him if not have him killed.
Given Charles was only ~13 at the time of Edward IV's death it might be hard to squeeze in a marriage in time.

France will likely protest strongly at its Queen being labelled a bastard and her brothers being (apparently) murdered. Though given that they're in their own turbulent regency (assuming Louis XI dies on schedule) I'm not sure they can do much.

I think Richard still takes the throne, nothing major has changed- he'd still feel under threat from the hostile Woodville party and be compelled to act, or, if you're one of those people, he's still an evil, murderous, tyrannical psychopath hellbent on carving his way to the throne. I suppose it might be possible that, faced with French diplomatic pressure (and with an eye towards Henry Tudor potentially seeking sanctuary/support there), he keeps the princes around (though they'd still be the focus of plots, liberation/kidnapping attempts and the like, so...)

Should Richard still take the throne we likely get a bunch of Woodville exiles hanging around the French court, and it'd be interesting how the French react to Henry Tudor (should he still flee Brittany). Elizabeth might take umbrage at supporting Tudor over her possibly-still-surviving brothers (she could hope, at least), herself and her sisters.

IIRC she tended to stay out of politics IOTL, but that might be more to avoid undermining her husband's precarious claim to the throne rather than inclination. Whether she has any effect on French policy depends on how she gets along with her husband and sister-in-law/regent.

Do we know how Elizabeth felt about Richard vis-a-vis the princes in the tower and his alleged usurpation? Obviously when she came out of sanctuary she took part in court revelry and seemed to get along with Richard well enough (to the extent that there were probably outlandish marriage rumours). This could be read as anything between her not begrudging Richard's occupation of the throne, a ruthless ambition to be Queen (even if that means not giving a shit about her brothers' fate) through to a teen girl putting on a brave face to make the best of a bad situation. How she feels towards Richard over the whole ordeal likely effects how she acts and what she does as a Queen of France.

Elizabeth might be send over to France to be educated there.In that case,would the marriage still go on?
 
One thing I've seen pointed out is that a son being born to Charles the Rash of Burgundy MIGHT be enough to save the princes in the tower because, with Marie the Rich not being heiress to her father when he dies, it becomes unlikely that Louis will dump an English bride in exchange for an Austrian one as OTL, thus with Elizabeth being married to the dauphin, most likely Cecily ends up being married shortly thereafter to the Scots king. Thus, when Edward kicks in '83, whether he has grandsons or no, Gloucester might have to think twice about usurping due to the fact that England CAN be caught like a nut in a vise between France and Scotland. Bonus points if Mary survives to marry the Kalmar king as was proposed. With three kings as brothers-in-law (albeit one not very powerful), Edward V can be sure that while THEY won't necessarily come to his rescue, Richard can't declare Edward IV's marriage illegitimate without creating an uproar.
 
It's possible that Richard would be reluctant to brand the Queen of France a bastard and instead pursue separate means of legitimizing his rule - for one, reinforcing the notion that the royal dignity could only descend along the male line, and secondly keeping Edward V around in some capacity until his hold on power was strong enough.
 
One thing I've seen pointed out is that a son being born to Charles the Rash of Burgundy MIGHT be enough to save the princes in the tower because, with Marie the Rich not being heiress to her father when he dies, it becomes unlikely that Louis will dump an English bride in exchange for an Austrian one as OTL, thus with Elizabeth being married to the dauphin, most likely Cecily ends up being married shortly thereafter to the Scots king. Thus, when Edward kicks in '83, whether he has grandsons or no, Gloucester might have to think twice about usurping due to the fact that England CAN be caught like a nut in a vise between France and Scotland. Bonus points if Mary survives to marry the Kalmar king as was proposed. With three kings as brothers-in-law (albeit one not very powerful), Edward V can be sure that while THEY won't necessarily come to his rescue, Richard can't declare Edward IV's marriage illegitimate without creating an uproar.

If Mary of Burgundy had a brother, that brother will be likely an half-brother with Margaret of York as mother... so Elizabeth will be also a first cousin of the Duke of Burgundy (something who will make her French marriage still more likely to happen).
 
Top