The Marriage of the Century - A Burgundian Timeline

The aftermath of these deaths will be made clear in the next chapter, but the house of York is not in a good place right now.
 
Chapter 12. Spring 1483 London.
Chapter 12. Okay, that is enough Blue. Now chill.


The death of his only remaining son would be the final blow to Edward IV. The king’s condition, already grave enough, broke completely. He spent the short remainder of his life bedridden at Westminster palace. It would be the Duke of Gloucester who took over the reigns, meeting with parliament and overseeing the kings’s final testament.
At 14th April the king of England confirmed his sole living brother as his heir. The princesses right to the throne were overlooked, England needed a adult man to function properly at this point. The rumours of bastardy hung over the royal family; Elizabeth of York being the first queen regnant would invite disaster. In his will Edward requested that his three surviving daughters Elizabeth, Anne and Catherine would be taken care of and “make good matches with Christian princes.”
Richard was encouraged by his dying brother to continue the negotiations for the hand of Princess Joanna of Portugal, knowing that he needed a queen himself.


In 17th April the King of England died. The great sun of York had set. What the future held, no one knew.


upload_2019-2-20_12-54-52.png


Edward IV of England who saw the destruction of almost his entire house.
 
Last edited:
Edward's made the right choice. At least that's what my head says. My heart, on the other hand, is less happy.

At least this means no 1483 rebellion, I suppose. That's something.
 
Yes he did. Richard is the better option for the throne. Elizabeth would just invite potential disasters, something the next chapter will show.
 
George's act of attainder specifically didn't mention the children's right to inherit the crown it merely barred his heir the title of duke
You are sure who the attainder deprived them only from inhereiting the Ducal title? I think more likely who the attainder deprived them of all their paternal inheritance so Ducal title, place in line of succession and little else as almost all the lands came from their mother’s side
 
You are sure who the attainder deprived them only from inhereiting the Ducal title? I think more likely who the attainder deprived them of all their paternal inheritance so Ducal title, place in line of succession and little else as almost all the lands came from their mother’s side
From memory and sadly it's not yet been digitised by national records it mentions the kids in passing as barred the ducal title I suspect because when the act passed Edward IV had heirs and the throne wasnt an issue Edward Simply wanted the land etc he'd endowed George with back. At the end of the day Edward was attainted himself as was Henry VI etc nominally it wad a bar in practise it meant nothing if you had managed to take control.
 
In that case i'm attaining them again just to be safe
Your parliament won't stand that sadly .
There was a general reluctance to pass acts of attainder at this period and you had to prove wrongdoing so you simply can't attaint children.
Add to the problem that Edward's initial claim was as heir general of Edward III and now he's turning round and saying he was leaving the throne to his brother because girls can't inherit well hello to civil war. Some will support Warwick he is the senior heir male some will support Elizabeth as senior heir general some will opt for Gloucester as the only adult male. Edward can dictate what he likes but there is no legal obligation on a dead kings will being followed at this period it is without precedent.
 
Top