The Sons of John of Gaunt

Another thing I've been pondering as of late is this:

By his first wife Blanche of Lancaster, John of Gaunt had seven children:

Philipa (b. 1360) she married John I of Portugal

John (b. 1362: d. 1365)

Elizabeth (b. 1364) married three men, Hastings, Holland and other

Edward (b. 1365: d. 1365)

John (b. 1366: d. 1367)

Henry of Bolingbroke, later Henry IV (b. 1367)

Isabel (b. 1368: d. 1368)

My query is this, what consequences could there be if John of Gaunt's sons Edward (b. 1365) and John (b.1366) had survived, would this have removed Henry's conception and birth, or would he have still been born. Secondly, with two sons, possibly three, what titles and marriages could they make, and how would this influence the political scene within England? Especially in a scenario where Richard II potentially doesn't survive into adulthood? With two maybe three sons, does John of Gaunt still marry Constance of Castile?
 
I suppose another query is, in this scenario where John of Gaunt's children are:

Philippa (b. 1360)

Elizabeth (b. 1364)

Edward (b. 1365)

John (b. 1366)

Henry (b. 1367)

And say Richard II dies in the late 1370s, what does this influence, who succeeds? John or Mortimer?
 
And say Richard II dies in the late 1370s, what does this influence, who succeeds? John or Mortimer?

The Mortimer heir at that stage would be Roger, yeah? Because people might be unenthusiastic at the prospect of a 4-5 year old king and another regency. Even if he did get the throne, there might be struggles over the regency (or influence more generally) between Gaunt and Mortimer's father Edmund.

And if Richard is still underage at his death, then he probably won't have made any pronouncements on who his heir is (this seems to have come in the 1380s), so it's not at all clear that the Mortimers would be acknowledged as the 'proper' heir.

Were the Mortimers at all stained in the popular imagination by the actions of 1327-30? Because that might make things harder for them.
 
Ooh as far as I know regarding the Mortimer during Richards regency they were regarded okay, nothong special, nothing bad.

But wasn't there also something stating they'd be overlooked for the succession should something like this happen?
 
But wasn't there also something stating they'd be overlooked for the succession should something like this happen?

It appears that in 1376/7 (i.e. After the Black Prince died) Edward III set up an entail by which the crown would pass to his heirs male (Richard>John of Gaunt>Henry of Bolingbroke>York and sons>Gloucester and son; in your scenario this entail would obviously include Gaunt's other surviving sons).

Between this, and the fact that Richard hasn't reached his majority and therefor probably hasn't asserted an alternate line of succession, and the fact that the Mortimer claimant is either a woman (if Philippa of Clarence is still alive) or a kid (Roger, b. 1474), then Gaunt seems exceedingly likely to get the throne (though a Mortimer claimant could easily cause trouble at some point in the future).

He was personally unpopular to some extent though (didn't the Peasant Revolters have it out for him?), so his reign might not be overly stable. There might also be some accusations of him poisoning his nephew, as often happens.

What was his relationship with his surviving brothers like? Because that'll obviously have a big effect on his regime.
 
From what I recall he got on with Edmund duke of York but didn't get on with Thomas duke of Gloucester.

And I can see that, the peasant revolt might become worse if he's king
 
Thomas was apparently campaigning in Brittany in 1379-80, so he won't be able to cause immediate trouble for his brother. Though of course a healthy adult King John II will himself probably have to get involved in France sooner or later.

I'd expect that ruling England and wrangling in France will utterly distract John from pursuing anything in Spain (if he still marries Constance of Castile), though he'd probably maintain his claim (just like how every English monarch claimed to be King of France until the Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars). I suppose if he was feeling generous he could let Edmund (married to Constance's sister Isabella) to pursue things there.

As to whether he still marries Constance- I think he probably does, Constance gives him a crown (or at least the opportunity to pursue one) and at the time he married her (1371) his prospects of inheriting England were limited (both the Black Prince and his eldest son Edward of Angouleme are still alive, in addition to Richard).

It's also worth noting that by the late 1370s the sons of John of Gaunt you outlined above will be on the verge of adulthood and possibly capable of doing things to shore up their father's regime (even if its just purely ceremonial stuff), and of course all of John's kids can be bartered around marriage-wise to garner support.

It's likely one of John of Gaunt's sons is already set up with Mary de Bohun by the time he ascends the throne (she married Henry IV in 1380 IOTL). If she has initially been set up with the eldest son (Edward), she might get shunted down to the second one (John) so that Edward can go for a more prestigious foreign match.

There'll likely be tensions between King John and his sons on the one hand and Thomas of Woodstock on the other over the Bohun inheritance (Thomas was married to Mary's sister Eleanor), which were probably already present IOTL.
 
I agree, he'd still marry Constance of castile and likely try and Push her claim as a temporary thing to distract France from what's happening in Britany and elsewhere.

I agree with Edward initially being betrothed to Mary de bohun before being given a more prestigious foreign marriage the question is who?

And I agree. Could Edward and John diffuse the tension in the peasants revolt and if so could this bring tension between them and their father?
 
Top