Elizabeth: Lancastrian Princess, Yorkist Queen - and her world

[isabella]

Only thing mentioning Cis that I could find, tense relationships with Neville mother in law =/= hating the Nevilles.
Literally nothing on Gloucester and Clarence is given.

Why does Jacquetta randomly hate Cecily ITTL? Even if I took your word for saying that Cecily hated Jacquetta (IOTL), why would Jacquetta hate Cecily? She literally gave her daughter to Cecily's husband ITTL, her hating any of the Yorks is implausible.

Well I will say who bad blood between the women existed (but mostly Cecily against Jacquetta and between Elizabeth and Cecily). Jacquetta accepted and supported the Elizabeth/Edward match as she knew who that was the best match possible for her daughter. In the timeframe between the two story’s post Warwick has done everything possible mistake for setting Elizabeth‘s firmly against him (most of that mirroring OTL)....

Lancastrian? She barely knew her father. She'd remember his smile at most for story purposes.
You can't abandon your roots if you never knew em.

It was a man's world back then, any influence she would've had would be over her husband, and through him, his supporters. Maybe she can bring some of the more moderate Lancastrians over to the Yorkists, but that's about it.

Why would she not care? Everyone would give a **** if their spouse was cheating on them, and AIUI, she NOT caring would be OOC.

You're already making Edward OOC for the (long term) worse, why not make him loyal?

Elizabeth lived her first 13 years in Lancastrian households (her cousin’s court and the house of her mother and stepfather) and the war/tension between Richard of York and Henry VI was still far away then
Noblewomen were used to look on the other side about their husband‘s mistresses in both Middle and Modern age... and Edward is neither OOC (the biggest change is ATL Elizabeth’s influencing him more than Warwick) and for what reason that would be for worse?
Elizabeth initially will be able to reconcile the more moderate Lancastrian with Edward and prevent the harshest punishment against some of the biggest ones but after Edward IV had recovered his crown (with Henry VI and Edward of Westminster already dead) she will be able to reconcile all the Lancastrians (including Oxford and the Tudors) with the crown

 

[CaptainShadow]

Well I will say who bad blood between the women existed (but mostly Cecily against Jacquetta and between Elizabeth and Cecily). Jacquetta accepted and supported the Elizabeth/Edward match as she knew who that was the best match possible for her daughter. In the timeframe between the two story’s post Warwick has done everything possible mistake for setting Elizabeth‘s firmly against him (most of that mirroring OTL)....

Elizabeth lived her first 13 years in Lancastrian households (her cousin’s court and the house of her mother and stepfather) and the war/tension between Richard of York and Henry VI was still far away then
Noblewomen were used to look on the other side about their husband‘s mistresses in both Middle and Modern age... and Edward is neither OOC (the biggest change is ATL Elizabeth’s influencing him more than Warwick) and for what reason that would be for worse?
Elizabeth initially will be able to reconcile the more moderate Lancastrian with Edward and prevent the harshest punishment against some of the biggest ones but after Edward IV had recovered his crown (with Henry VI and Edward of Westminster already dead) she will be able to reconcile all the Lancastrians with the crown

There was no 'Lancastrian' side at this time, she lived with her mother IIRC, who has little reason to sing tge praises of her father, seeing as she remarried after......what? A month?
Since Jacquetta doesn't hate Cecily, why would Elizabeth?

Why would Warwick try to alienate a 13 year old? How could he even alienate a 13 year old? Or a 16 year old?

Reasons Eddie boy being influenced by Elizabeth would be worse;
A) It's a man's world, if she has as much influence on Edward as Warwick did, Edward's rep is phukd.
B) You say she has reason (why tho?) And influence over Edward to alienate Gloucester, making his rep even more phukd.
C) Alienating Gloucester, natch.
D) Alienating Warwick, natch.

"Women looking the other side"? Considering what you're making Elizabeth's personality, I have a freaking bridge to sell you.

"Uniting the Lancastrians"? Just by virtue of blood? Preventing Hardest punishments? Cuz Edward would care more about hurting his wife's feelings more than taking revenge for his father, huh?

 

[BlueFlowwer]

I can see Elizabeth as a Matilda of Boulogne, fighting for her husband and her own right as a anointed queen, using diplomacy and sneakiness and being generally awesome, while operating within the rules of queenship.

 

[isabella]

I can see Elizabeth as a Matilda of Boulogne, fighting for her husband and her own right as a anointed queen, using diplomacy and sneakiness and being generally awesome, while operating within the rules of queenship.

Exactly, that is the kind. She was a very popular and much beloved Queen.

There was no 'Lancastrian' side at this time, she lived with her mother IIRC, who has little reason to sing tge praises of her father, seeing as she remarried after......what? A month?
Since Jacquetta doesn't hate Cecily, why would Elizabeth?

Why would Warwick try to alienate a 13 year old? How could he even alienate a 13 year old? Or a 16 year old?

Reasons Eddie boy being influenced by Elizabeth would be worse;
A) It's a man's world, if she has as much influence on Edward as Warwick did, Edward's rep is phukd.
B) You say she has reason (why tho?) And influence over Edward to alienate Gloucester, making his rep even more phukd.
C) Alienating Gloucester, natch.
D) Alienating Warwick, natch.

"Women looking the other side"? Considering what you're making Elizabeth's personality, I have a freaking bridge to sell you.

"Uniting the Lancastrians"? Just by virtue of blood? Preventing Hardest punishments? Cuz Edward would care more about hurting his wife's feelings more than taking revenge for his father, huh?

You are trying to distorce every my word? Jacquetta will remarry at least a year after Bedford’s death, having fallen for Woodville during that year (her eldest son by Richard is two years younger than Elizabeth, born mere days before her father’s death). Elizabeth’s parents were married just for short time, but that do not mean who her mother had no respect for her father, plus Elizabeth (for many heiress presumptive of England until the birth of Edward of Westminster, who happened when she was already married) spent a lot of time at court (who was the place were she heard most praises of her late father, but she heard
Warwick will alienate Elizabeth and Edward in the timeframe between 1461 (the first post ended before Edward’s victory) and 1471 (when Edward had retaken his crown, timeframe in which Elizabeth was talking with Jasper) when Elizabeth was neither 13 or 16 (she was between 24 and 35 years old in that timeframe).
Elizabeth’s influence was well know but accepted as natural (and that do not mean she forced Edward to doing things against his will, plus they were often NOT of the same opinion about things and that also was well know). She was royal and English as him and some years older, and knew perfectky the limits of her power.
Elizabeth NEVER influenced her husband AGAINST Richard, who has NO REASON for feeling resentment against his brother and sister-in-law: sure he would have wanted to marry Anne Neville, but was perfectly able to understand why their wedding was impossible and the political reasons behind the Scottish match. Warwick alienated both Edward and Elizabeth with his own actions as he and his brother (like Clarence) were power hungry as OTL (and Edward IV had NOT liked it at all and also Clarence’s actions also in OTL).

 

[ranichi17]

Maybe my eyes just missed it because I just woke up, but why is *Elizabeth allowed to keep her father's title of Duke of Bedford? Maggie B's father was Duke of Somerset, and she never held the title of Duchess. She did, however, IIRC get to keep the estates, just without the title that comes with it.

 

[isabella]

Maybe my eyes just missed it because I just woke up, but why is *Elizabeth allowed to keep her father's title of Duke of Bedford? Maggie B's father was Duke of Somerset, and she never held the title of Duchess. She did, however, IIRC get to keep the estates, just without the title that comes with it.

Elizabeth will keep the titles of Countess of Kendal and receive that of Countess of Bedford. Edward, who is already Earl of March (as heir of his father’s Dukedom of York) will be made Duke of Bedford when they married. Richmond (title and estates) will be the only thing not inherited by Elizabeth (and as OTL will go to Edmund and then Henry Tudor).
Elizabeth was married Edward when she was 13 (and he 7) and she was Duchess of Bedford for the next 11 years...
More like her OTL (and AT) daughter-in-law Anne Mowbray as title goes. The Dukedom of Somerset had gone to Maggie B‘s uncle (or was recreated for him?) after her father’s death together with the Earldom of Somerset

 

[CaptainShadow]

You are trying to distorce every my word?

Best way to argue, or make a point.

Jacquetta will remarry at least a year after Bedford’s death, having fallen for Woodville during that year (her eldest son by Richard is two years younger than Elizabeth, born mere days before her father’s death).

OK, IOTL Jacquetta fell in love with Woodville ~1435, and remarried ~ 1437, let's say that she marries even later, in 1439, by then, Elizabeth would be about 3, her first father figure is likely to have been Richard (Woodville).

Elizabeth’s parents were married just for short time, but that do not mean who her mother had no respect for her father

I'd say falling in love with another man after your husband has recently died means little to moderate respect, not enough to randomly sing praises, but whatever.

spent a lot of time at court (who was the place were she heard most praises of her late father,

OK, this I agree with, but I don't see why the court would still be singing Bedford's praises 4-13 (when she could understand who exactly they were talking about) years after his death. He was popular tho, so not fully implausible, but where Elizabeth becoming a 'Lancastrian' figures into this, idk, she spent a lot of her formative years in the Yorkist household, who have no reason to make her a 'Lancastrian' nor a 'Yorkist' (in the die hard sense of the word), more likely a 'Daughter of the Good Bedford, and the wife of the Great York'

but she heard
Warwick will alienate Elizabeth and Edward in the timeframe between 1461 (the first post ended before Edward’s victory) and 1471

'She heard' that Warwick will alienate her and her husband at court? Through what? A prophecy?

when Elizabeth was neither 13 or 16 (she was between 24 and 35 years old in that timeframe).

OK, I might've gotten the timeframes mixed up, but
A) No ******* butterflies?!
B) She would have viewed Warwick as a semi father figure, like he was to the rest of the Yorks, including Edward, even if she didn't, she wouldn't hate him, as you said before, and even after his rebellion, she oughta be like: "Let us remember him for the man he was, not the man he became".

Elizabeth’s influence was well know but accepted as natural

Depending on a wife as much as you depend on a father will NOT be accepted as natural, and you earlier stated that she holds OTL Warwick levels of influence, it was a man's world back then.

and that do not mean she forced Edward to doing things against his will, plus they were often NOT of the same opinion about things and that also was well know)

You're turning Edward's personality 180 degrees, wht tf would she not force him? She's forcing him (and it would be forcing post 1471) to forgive the Lancastrians.

She was royal and English as him and some years older, and knew perfectky the limits of her power.

Did I ever say that she didn't? I'm sorry if you understood one of my statements like that, but I don't think that I ever said that she didn't know her parameters as Queen.

Elizabeth NEVER influenced her husband AGAINST Richard, who has NO REASON for feeling resentment against his brother and sister-in-law: sure he would have wanted to marry Anne Neville, but was perfectly able to understand why their wedding was impossible and the political reasons behind the Scottish match.

and NEVER trusted her mother-in-law or brothers-in-law


This above is your post, notice how you said brotherS in law? Gloucester is in that.


Gloucester would have been unoficially betrothed to Anne since he was.....idk. (10?)

You're drastically alienating the at-this-time-more-or-less-content-Gloucester by forcing him to throw away his entire love life. He wouldn't like his scottish match, and would hold his brother and sister in law responsible for forcing him into a loveless marriage.

Warwick alienated both Edward and Elizabeth with his own actions as he and his brother (like Clarence) were power hungry as OTL (and Edward IV had NOT liked it at all and also Clarence’s actions also in OTL)

Warwick wasn't power hungry (ok, he was, but not as much as people make him out to be) the main reason for his rebellion was
A) Woodville marriage.
B) Woodvilles social climbing.

You've removed that, removing 80% of his reasons for rebelling, and even then he rebels? Lol, I don't think so, you need to give more factors for rebellion other than "I want to"

 

[isabella]

@CaptainShadow: the Woodville marriage and the Woodville’s social ascent were only excuses and the Woodvilles were in no way so greedy as they were depicted by the Nevilles.
Cecily pretty much hated Jacquetta because she was forced to give precedence to her also after Jacquetta’s remarriage to a lower ranking man (and that hurt a lot her pride (and do not worry who she was pretty good in making her daughter-in-law uncomfortable quite often).
90% of the reasons of Warwick’s rebellion are tied to Warwick, Montagu and George‘s greed and to Warwick tentative to influence Edward’s foreign and matrimonial politics and ATL this will NOT CHANGE. OTL Edward already do not liked that so much (and was AGAINST the weddings of his brothers and Warwick’s daughters of his own). ATL Elizabeth‘s influence (and support) will simply prompt him to be more against a serie of things who he already do not liked of his own in OTL and to listen less to Warwick’s suggestions. I NEVER said she would have Warwick’s level but who she will PREVENT Warwick from having OTL levels (and who Elizabeth would be also more influential than ATL Warwick, not the OTL one).
Plus the Woodvilles, being Elizabeth‘s family, will have the same kind of benefits (who Warwick’s propaganda vastly exaggerate) they had OTL.
Plus while Elizabeth do not fully trust Richard (and neither Margaret for saying the whole truth) she will not doing anything against him, if he prove to be loyal and EDWARD, who is the one who mattered most, has full trust in Richard so Gloucester will marry the Scottish princess and receive the rule ship of the North plus Middleham and the former northern estates of the Nevilles...
And about Richard and Anne you have forgotten who Anne’s father had given her to another man (who was sworn enemy of Richard’s family, by the way)? Sure, Anne is widowed now, but she is practically prisoner of her own sister and brother-in-law who had taken control also of her share of inheritance...
Plus Richard know very well his duty and is not like his siblings (excluding maybe George) had made any love match: Edward, Anne and Elizabeth were all married for political reasons and when they were very young, and his and Margaret’s political matches were needed for sealing important alliances for England (specially Richard’s match AND his placement in the North were destined to keep secure the border with Scotland during the wars between England and France)

 

[CaptainShadow]

the Woodville marriage and the Woodville’s social ascent were only excuses and the Woodvilles were in no way so greedy as they were depicted by the Nevilles.

When did I ever say they were greedy? I said they were social climbers.

Cecily pretty much hated Jacquetta because she was forced to give precedence to her also after Jacquetta’s remarriage to a lower ranking man (and that hurt a lot her pride (and do not worry who she was pretty good in making her daughter-in-law uncomfortable quite often).

which I have already addressed.

90% of the reasons of Warwick’s rebellion are tied to Warwick, Montagu and George‘s greed and to Warwick tentative to influence Edward’s foreign and matrimonial politics and ATL this will NOT CHANGE.

Lol yeah sure.
No ******* butterflies?

OTL Edward already do not liked that so much (and was AGAINST the weddings of his brothers and Warwick’s daughters of his own).

Both his brothers. He allowed Gloucester to marry Anne IOTL because of the reason I have given.

ATL Elizabeth‘s influence (and support) will simply prompt him to be more against a serie of things who he already do not liked of his own in OTL and to listen less to Warwick’s suggestions

He wasn't against Gloucester marrying Anne IOTL, why would he be ITTL?

I NEVER said she would have Warwick’s level but who she will PREVENT Warwick from having OTL levels (and who Elizabeth would be also more influential than ATL Warwick, not the OTL one).

And where does the lost influence go? Methinks Elizabeth.
Might have misread that, but since his own brother(s) don't have enough influence to prevent a loveless marriage, and you're replacing a father figure with a wife, which means that influence makes Ed4's rep phukd.

Plus the Woodvilles, being Elizabeth‘s family, will have the same kind of benefits (who Warwick’s propaganda vastly exaggerate) they had OTL.

Vastly exaggerate? Lol, a baron's daughter marrying the ******* duke of Buckingham isn't beneficial? Or social climbing?

Plus while Elizabeth do not fully trust Richard (and neither Margaret for saying the whole truth) she will not doing anything against him, if he prove to be loyal and EDWARD, who is the one who mattered most, has full trust in Richard so Gloucester will marry the Scottish princess and receive the rule ship of the North plus Middleham and the former northern estates of the Nevilles...

Why doesn't she trust Gloucester or Clarence is my biggest question, they'll be like younger brothers to her.
Northern Neville estates are male line, as you essentially yelled at me in the other thread.

You're still phuking Gloucester's whole (salvageable) love life up. He wouldn't like it.







Tldr: In your quest to make Elizabeth badass, you're alienating half of England and turning the personalities of everyone upside down.

 

[isabella]

When did I ever say they were greedy? I said they were social climbers.

which I have already addressed.

Lol yeah sure.
No ******* butterflies?

Both his brothers. He allowed Gloucester to marry Anne IOTL because of the reason I have given.

He wasn't against Gloucester marrying Anne IOTL, why would he be ITTL?

And where does the lost influence go? Methinks Elizabeth.
Might have misread that, but since his own brother(s) don't have enough influence to prevent a loveless marriage, and you're replacing a father figure with a wife, which means that influence makes Ed4's rep phukd.

Vastly exaggerate? Lol, a baron's daughter marrying the ******* duke of Buckingham isn't beneficial? Or social climbing?


Why doesn't she trust Gloucester or Clarence is my biggest question, they'll be like younger brothers to her.
Northern Neville estates are male line, as you essentially yelled at me in the other thread.

You're still phuking Gloucester's whole (salvageable) love life up. He wouldn't like it.


Tldr: In your quest to make Elizabeth badass, you're alienating half of England and turning the personalities of everyone upside down.

George and Richard will not be like younger brothers to Elizabeth because she will NEVER felt Edward’s parents or siblings as HER family, with the exclusion of Anne and Elizabeth (but their affinity is born from both companionship and specially from the fact who they were all three in the same situation).
Gloucester’s love life do not mattered to anyone (and making two counts is pretty likely who he was more interested in Anne’s rich inheritance, who ATL will vanish in nothing than in her).
I said also who both Warwick and Montagu here will be ATTAINTED and that mean who they will LOSE ALL THEIR LANDS. Then Edward will be free to do whatever he want with said lands...
The matches of Elizabeth‘s sisters were arranged either by Edward for tying some nobles to his family or by the family of the husbands who wanted marry close to the royal family. Buckingham’s match was arranged by Edward for political reasons and because he had no other suitable relative for Buckingham (as lady Anne Holland was not suited to that use because she was herself daughter of a Lancastrian and a big heiress).
ATL Edward will be simply harder to influence than the OTL one (most of Elizabeth‘s interventions AGAINST Warwick and Clarence would be like asking her husband ”Who is the King?” or “we are talking about the weddings of OUR SONS? Who is Warwick for arranging them at his will?”).
OTL Edward accepted the match between Richard and Anne because that would take away part of the Warwick inheritance from George’s hands and accepted every request of his brothers about that (as both Richard and George wanted the lands jure-uxoris instead of from a royal grant). ATL he will take proper measures against the Nevilles so George will NOT have the OTL position. In any case OTL and ATL George wa the biggest obstacle for a wedding between Anne and Richard

 

[CaptainShadow]

George and Richard will not be like younger brothers to Elizabeth because she will NEVER felt Edward’s parents or siblings as HER family,

Gee, you'd think that, as Clarence and Gloucester have known Elizabeth since their very early childhood (Clarence would be 3, Gloucester would be 1), they'd form a bond,like that between Anne and Elizabeth.

(but their affinity is born from both companionship and specially from the fact who they were all three in the same situation).

see above.

Gloucester’s love life do not mattered to anyone (and making two counts is pretty likely who he was more interested in Anne’s rich inheritance, who ATL will vanish in nothing than in her).

Except Gloucester, who's pretty damn powerful.

Gloucester is likely to have viewed Anne in 2 ways:
A) A younger sister
B) A love interest.
Considering he married her, I think option A is outta the window.

The matches of Elizabeth‘s sisters were arranged either by Edward for tying some nobles to his family or by the family of the husbands who wanted marry close to the royal family. Buckingham’s match was arranged by Edward for political reasons and because he had no other suitable relative for Buckingham (as lady Anne Holland was not suited to that use because she was herself daughter of a Lancastrian and a big heiress).

Considering Edward marries earlier, he probably has progeny earlier, butterflying away the need for a Buckingham Woodville match.

Woodvilles are still social climbers.

ATL Edward will be simply harder to influence than the OTL one (most of Elizabeth‘s interventions AGAINST Warwick and Clarence would be like asking her husband ”Who is the King?” or “we are talking about the weddings of OUR SONS? Who is Warwick for arranging them at his will?”).

Where tf did I say that Warwick won't try and influence the Prince of Wales' marriage? I said that Gloucester marrying according to Edward’s will is unlikely.

OTL Edward accepted the match between Richard and Anne because that would take away part of the Warwick inheritance from George’s hands and accepted every request of his brothers about that (as both Richard and George wanted the lands jure-uxoris instead of from a royal grant).

And why is he being stupid ITTL?

ATL he will take proper measures against the Nevilles so George will NOT have the OTL position. In any case OTL and ATL George wa the biggest obstacle for a wedding between Anne and Richard

Ooh boy, saying that the Nevilles (and through them,George) have their influence checked AND is able to argue against his brother's match is contradictory.




Operate in your own parameters plz

 

[BlueFlowwer]

Would this Elizabeth be a more Eleanor of Provence type of queen?

 

[isabella]

Would this Elizabeth be a more Eleanor of Provence type of queen?

Not really. Maybe an Eleanor of Aquitaine with a decent husband as she has her own political agenda...
or like Philippa of Hainault...

 

[isabella]

Gee, you'd think that, as Clarence and Gloucester have known Elizabeth since their very early childhood (Clarence would be 3, Gloucester would be 1), they'd form a bond,like that between Anne and Elizabeth.

see above.

Except Gloucester, who's pretty damn powerful.

Gloucester is likely to have viewed Anne in 2 ways:
A) A younger sister
B) A love interest.
Considering he married her, I think option A is outta the window.

Considering Edward marries earlier, he probably has progeny earlier, butterflying away the need for a Buckingham Woodville match.

Woodvilles are still social climbers.

Where tf did I say that Warwick won't try and influence the Prince of Wales' marriage? I said that Gloucester marrying according to Edward’s will is unlikely.

And why is he being stupid ITTL?

Ooh boy, saying that the Nevilles (and through them,George) have their influence checked AND is able to argue against his brother's match is contradictory.




Operate in your own parameters plz

Not really. Conflict between Edward and Elizabeth on one side and Warwick and George on the other ended with the latter two rebelling first and then supporting a Lancastrian rebellion. Once Edward recovered his crown Warwick and Montagu were attained, while George was reconciled with Edward through the intervention of their relatives before the final battle. Part of the deal (for changing side again, as Edward was not really willing to declare his brother as enemy once for all) was the full control over the Earldom of Warwick and its lands (as that, belonging to Warwick’s wife, was not subjected to the attainder) and so over his mother-in-law and sister-in-law.
Plus the Yorks will NOT live all together in the same household (quite often that do not happen)...
Do you believe a case who Margaret was a lot closer to George (and Richard) than to Edward?

 

[CaptainShadow]

Not really. Conflict between Edward and Elizabeth on one side and Warwick and George on the other ended with the latter two rebelling first and then supporting a Lancastrian rebellion. Once Edward recovered his crown Warwick and Montagu were attained, while George was reconciled with Edward through the intervention of their relatives before the final battle. Part of the deal (for changing side again, as Edward was not really willing to declare his brother as enemy once for all) was the full control over the Earldom of Warwick and its lands (as that, belonging to Warwick’s wife, was not subjected to the attainder) and so over his mother-in-law and sister-in-law.
Plus the Yorks will NOT live all together in the same household (quite often that do not happen)...
Do you believe a case who Margaret was a lot closer to George (and Richard) than to Edward?

I'm pretty sure the first para is fully OTL, or were you trying to make a point? Cuz I completely missed it.


All of the Yorks were hanging around at Fotheringray, even if the eldest son (Edward) was shipped of to a castle somewhere in his earldom, it'd have been when he was ~15, putting Elizabeth at 21, giving her plenty of time to strike up a friendship/siblinghood with the 10 y/o Clarence and 8 y/o Gloucester. And saying that she d
she her stepsiblings as her only siblings is, frankly, BS.

Margaret? Margaret of York? Wife of Charles the Bold?
She was closest to Clarence IOTL, and probably Gloucester as well in their youth, her love for Clarence carried onto adulthood, idk about Gloucester, but it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to say she was close to him as well. She later became politically ambivalent to her eldest brother because her favourite (Clarence) brother was executed.

Or did you mean some other Margaret?

 

[isabella]

I'm pretty sure the first para is fully OTL, or were you trying to make a point? Cuz I completely missed it.

All of the Yorks were hanging around at Fotheringray, even if the eldest son (Edward) was shipped of to a castle somewhere in his earldom, it'd have been when he was ~15, putting Elizabeth at 21, giving her plenty of time to strike up a friendship/siblinghood with the 10 y/o Clarence and 8 y/o Gloucester. And saying that she d
she her stepsiblings as her only siblings is, frankly, BS.

Margaret? Margaret of York? Wife of Charles the Bold?
She was closest to Clarence IOTL, and probably Gloucester as well in their youth, her love for Clarence carried onto adulthood, idk about Gloucester, but it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to say she was close to him as well. She later became politically ambivalent to her eldest brother because her favourite (Clarence) brother was executed.

Or did you mean some other Margaret?

Talking about that Margaret. And searching again a little Edward and Edmund lived in Wales since before Richard’s birth and also neither Anne or Elizabeth lived in their parents household (as I more or less remembered) so the little Margaret, George and Richard lived pretty much alone). Elizabeth once married to Edward, surely will not live with the younger York children who were already simple acquaintances of their elder siblings

 

[CaptainShadow]

Talking about that Margaret. And searching again a little Edward and Edmund lived in Wales since before Richard’s birth and also neither Anne or Elizabeth lived in their parents household (as I more or less remembered) so the little Margaret, George and Richard lived pretty much alone). Elizabeth once married to Edward, surely will not live with the younger York children who were already simple acquaintances of their elder siblings

Ok....this clears up her not supporting Gloucester.

None of my other points have been addressed tho.




(Bravo! I liked your answer.)

 

[isabella]

Ok....this clears up her not supporting Gloucester.

None of my other points have been addressed tho.




(Bravo! I liked your answer.)

What others points I MUST ANSWER TO YOU BEFORE YOU STOPPED TO ORDER ME HOW I MUST DEVELOP MY STORY AS YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH MY TAKE ABOUT SOMETHING I AM WORKING ON SINCE SOME YEARS AGO BECAUSE YOU HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS ABOUT IT?
I am starting to lose any will and inspiration to work again over it as I need to over explaining any my choice as I am not free anymore to developing it

 

[CaptainShadow]

What others points I MUST ANSWER TO YOU BEFORE YOU STOPPED TO ORDER ME HOW I MUST DEVELOP MY STORY AS YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH MY TAKE ABOUT SOMETHING I AM WORKING ON SINCE SOME YEARS AGO BECAUSE YOU HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS ABOUT IT?
I am starting to lose any will and inspiration to work again over it as I need to over explaining any my choice as I am not free anymore to developing it

I suggest you re read the entire thread. I never ordered you to develop you TL in any way, I asked for an explanation on how shit developed in such a way that a conclusion was reached that would be far cry from OTL, with the same goddamn people involved.
" I AM WORKING ON SINCE SOME YEARS AGO BECAUSE YOU HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS ABOUT IT?" Guess what? Everyone has been working on something or the other, maybe not for years, maybe for decades. If this was book or something, fictional, then you could've done everything your way. But do you know what? It isn't.
"Starting to lose my will and inspiration"? You aren't the first person this has happened to, and you won't be the last. This has happened to everyone at some point of time. If you can't handle criticism, what's the bloody point of writing....anything?
"Not free any more to developing it"? You never were, this....project of yours is inspired by historical events and characters, with one non historical person thrown in, you can't just flip shit over on people's character just because that one other person has influence on the person who's personality you're flipping around.

 

[BlueFlowwer]

I think both of you need to take a breather from this tread.