VVD0D95
Banned
Hmm this is true, and I suppose the servants who would've tended to Edward and Richard would've reporetd directly to Richard III himself. Hmm, getting a damned Yorkist restoration seems bloody hard aha.
richard Duke of York stakes a claim
- Thread starter VVD0D95
- Start date
Hmm this is true, and I suppose the servants who would've tended to Edward and Richard would've reporetd directly to Richard III himself. Hmm, getting a damned Yorkist restoration seems bloody hard aha.
It's not impossible though, the trick is minimalising butterflies so events go like OTL until the battles result in restoration.
What you need:
- A noble who can gain access to the boys and be convinced using them is worth his betrayal against Gloucester being discovered
- Said noble losing control of Richard in a way that doesn't drastically alter events leading up to Bosworth
- Shrewsbury ending up where he can't affect Bosworth but can gain support to fight back against Tudor
- Tudor losing in such a way that gains Shrewsbury the crown
VVD0D95
Banned
Hmm this is true, and it does have to be a noble correct? Perhaps old William Stanely could be convinced to do the deed?
You need someone whose status and support network will protect them if discovered. A peasant is unlikely since the risk is too high for possible rewards, a cleric might work if there's an available bishop who won't defrock him and hand him over.
VVD0D95
Banned
This is true. And someone who was in London during the period. Perhaps William herbert himself could domit? Or anwoodville relation?
Would a Woodville be trusted with access?
A neutral or prominent Yorkist hedging their bets post death of Middleham?
VVD0D95
Banned
Oh that's true. Definitely someobe whose not considered a threat to richard post middlehams death
So who fits that bill and supported, or a least was neutral to, Warbeck?
VVD0D95
Banned
ord Fitzwater, Sir Simon Montfort, Sir Thomas Thwaites (ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer), Sir William Stanley (the Lord Chamberlain) and Sir Robert Clifford.
VVD0D95
Banned
Hmm it appears Lovell was lord chamberlain throughout Richards reign, but that Stanley was important in North Wales. Given his opportunistic nature, I reckon he could be the one to do it as you say. Could he then lose Richard if sshrewsbury through some miscalculation?
Absolutely. You can even make out that his support of Tudor at Bosworth is fear or realisation that Gloucester will soon find out his involvement. Then make out to Shrewsbury that he didn't side with Tudor but against his usurper uncle!
VVD0D95
Banned
Oh I like that, a bluff out of sheer fear then? Very interesting. As regards him losing Shrewsbury though, would that be perhaps from his gambit or merely having to move the kid around a lot?
Whatever fits the narrative but sheer practicality would limit how often he'd be moved.
VVD0D95
Banned
This is very true, I imagine that when it becomes likely that Tudor won’t tolerate any threat to his reign whatsoever, Shrewsbury is moved to burgundy. Or rather when Stanley goes oh fuck
I was thinking Shrewsbury goes missing shortly before Bosworth. That gives Stanley the choice of back Richard and get screwed if he knows, or back Tudor and get rewarded but hope he doesn't find out.
So he hedges and thus enters Bosworth in a way that he can explain as backing Richard if Henry drops dead or v.v.
Then later he finds out Shrewsbury is in Burgundy and now has to back him or Henry screws him!
VVD0D95
Banned
Ah this makes sense. And I like it. Would someone else sneak Shrewsbury to burgundy then?