The Sport of Kings

[Grey Wolf]

Shadow Knight, thank you for the encouragement

The thing about Humphrey is that he seems to have been badly served by 'History'. When you look closely into things he doesn't seem to have been scheming or venal, but also doesn't seem to have been viewed by contemporaries as being particuarly competent either.

Henry V 's will established John as Regent in France and Humphrey as Regent in England, but parliament forced on Humphrey a council of advisors of whom he was simply the head with the title of Protector not Regent

I get very confused about the political interplay, especially since leading magnates either were great military leaders as well, or wanted to pretend to be - I'm not sure which category Suffolk comes under, tho' I would say that by 1444 Somerset was simply trying to prove himself to be one, and failed

Humphrey's fall from grace came in the wake of the collapse of the English position in France, a decade after John's death, when Henry VI's personal rule had established Suffolk as one of his favourites. Humphrey and Richard of York were constantly trying to gain their 'expected' place in governance of the realm, and Suffolk IIRC led a sort of coup against Humphrey's interests - it all gets very complicated involving his second wife, allegations of witchcraft, public penance and later imprisonment where Humphrey conveniently died.

In this alternate timeline, with no Henry VI to have personal rule for, and with John II making the decisions, would Humphrey be Regent in England, appointed by and supported by his brother ?

If John dies without an heir in 1435, then one assumes we get King Humphrey... I had initially assumed that he would be done away with for factional strife, but it was based on 'History' and not analysis.

But I can't for the life of me work out the succession from Humphrey if his daughter has married a Grey - was there a child ? If not, what do we do with Antigone ? Its in Humphrey's own power to determined her legitimacy and he is not going to cast any aspersions over his own second marriage...

Humphrey's death before John would benefit the timeline, I thought, until I ran up against the question of what did Somerset think of the matter ! It seems to have been assumed at this time that the succession was from Humphrey to Richard of York, and that Henry IV's disbarring of the Beauforts from the line of succession still held. But when matters came down to it, would Somerset simply have accepted that ?

Questions ! But who can answer them...

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Grey Wolf]

Easy or not - if we didn't know that Joan existed, and someone wrote a TL with a person much like her - would you believe it or qualify as ASB?

Some things are hard or impossible to butterfly away - frex the fact that France with its good soil has a higher population than England in medieval times. Others are quite easy to butterfly away - like extraordinary persons.

Joan might have arrived at one of those conjunctions of event and circumstance that were simply ideal for her. Maybe in this timeline she would not - especially if John gets his way and goes after Anjou first instead of Orleans. In those circumstances, what is Joan going to be able to offer Charles VII ? And is she even going to be spurred to go to Chinon and make the offer ?

Perhaps we hear of her, and maybe she leads a minor expedition or something, and fades away ?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Grey Wolf]

I think so, though in some terms Bedford could have claimed to be Henry VI's heir male, even if the actualities of the French succession do not recognise his claim.

After a bit more research this is DEFINITELY Henry V's view of things - he claimed the throne for himself, not for his putative son, and the marriage to Katherine was to seal the agreement of the French not to legitimate the deal in the form of a son.

Thus, John as Henry V's heir simply inherits all of his brother's claims and justifications, and would present himself as rightful King of France from the off. After all, the Treaty of Troyes made Henry V heir to Charles VI, and after Henry come HIS heirs male, of whom John is the foremost at that time (Henry VI came later)

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Shadow Knight]

Shadow Knight, thank you for the encouragement

Glad to help.

The thing about Humphrey is that he seems to have been badly served by 'History'. When you look closely into things he doesn't seem to have been scheming or venal, but also doesn't seem to have been viewed by contemporaries as being particuarly competent either.

So an average Joe kind of guy then.

Henry V 's will established John as Regent in France and Humphrey as Regent in England, but parliament forced on Humphrey a council of advisors of whom he was simply the head with the title of Protector not Regent.

I get very confused about the political interplay, especially since leading magnates either were great military leaders as well, or wanted to pretend to be - I'm not sure which category Suffolk comes under, tho' I would say that by 1444 Somerset was simply trying to prove himself to be one, and failed

Well it is possible that with John as king that Humphrey may not even be regent in England. He may very well be fighting alongside John in France or some such thing. A good place to be injured or die too.

Humphrey's fall from grace came in the wake of the collapse of the English position in France, a decade after John's death, when Henry VI's personal rule had established Suffolk as one of his favourites. Humphrey and Richard of York were constantly trying to gain their 'expected' place in governance of the realm, and Suffolk IIRC led a sort of coup against Humphrey's interests - it all gets very complicated involving his second wife, allegations of witchcraft, public penance and later imprisonment where Humphrey conveniently died.

Could be problem, but as Henry VI doesn't even exist in TTL Suffolk might actually be courting Humphrey for support or just end up a nobody.

In this alternate timeline, with no Henry VI to have personal rule for, and with John II making the decisions, would Humphrey be Regent in England, appointed by and supported by his brother ?

Maybe or he could very well be taking part of the fighting in France (John II might see it as a need to keep an eye on his brother in case rebellious nobles in England get any ideas about a 'King Humphrey').

If John dies without an heir in 1435, then one assumes we get King Humphrey... I had initially assumed that he would be done away with for factional strife, but it was based on 'History' and not analysis.

Unless he is already dead.

But I can't for the life of me work out the succession from Humphrey if his daughter has married a Grey - was there a child ? If not, what do we do with Antigone ? Its in Humphrey's own power to determined her legitimacy and he is not going to cast any aspersions over his own second marriage...

When was this child born? Perhaps he might have died before she was born.

Humphrey's death before John would benefit the timeline, I thought, until I ran up against the question of what did Somerset think of the matter ! It seems to have been assumed at this time that the succession was from Humphrey to Richard of York, and that Henry IV's disbarring of the Beauforts from the line of succession still held. But when matters came down to it, would Somerset simply have accepted that ?

If John II was strong enough and had declared Richard of York his heir (presumably because Humphrey died along the way) wouldn't Somerset of had to accept it?

Questions ! But who can answer them...

I might not be the best one to answer them but I tried.

 

[Grey Wolf]

Glad to help.

So an average Joe kind of guy then.

Well it is possible that with John as king that Humphrey may not even be regent in England. He may very well be fighting alongside John in France or some such thing. A good place to be injured or die too.

Its a good point - did Henry V appoint anyone Regent in England in his absence ? Hmmm, maybe I should look into that ! I don't know much about Humphrey's martial might, but as Heir Presumptive it would not be unnatural to decide to try and show he actually has some...even if he hasn't ! The third brother, Clarence, got himself uselessly killed in 1421 after all...

Could be problem, but as Henry VI doesn't even exist in TTL Suffolk might actually be courting Humphrey for support or just end up a nobody.

True, without Henry VI's support Suffolk might well not rise above the likes of other nobles, especially if Salisbury remains alive longer - which, if there is no siege of Orleans, he has a chance of doing...

If John II was strong enough and had declared Richard of York his heir (presumably because Humphrey died along the way) wouldn't Somerset of had to accept it?

Yes, I think so. I guess as the foremost prince of undoubted blood royal, and not really touched by his father's treason (because he had been an infant at the time) Richard would be the 'natural' Heir Presumptive.

Maybe Somerset rebels anyway and gets crushed ? It would be a good start to Richard's reign in many ways, especially if he is conciliatory towards the other Beauforts

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Grey Wolf]

John Beaufort, 1st Duke of Somerset

Amazing what a little research can do !

Apparently this chap was taken prisoner by the French at the Battle of Bauge in 1421 (where Henry V''s brother Thomas, Duke of Clarence was killed) and was only released in 1438 !

Thus, if John II dies in 1435 then Somerset isn't even around to muddy the waters. OTL he only had one child, born in 1443 after his release, so in captivity he has no direct heir

His heir would have been Edmund Beaufort, his brother, who succeeded him as Earl and later Duke of Somerset, and HE was the main rival to Richard of York in Henry VI's later reign in OTL

Here, as a younger Beaufort scion in the absence of his elder brother, head of the family, he would have little chance to do anything to deny the crown to Richard of York as John II's appointed heir, if Humphrey was already dead

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Shadow Knight]

Its a good point - did Henry V appoint anyone Regent in England in his absence ? Hmmm, maybe I should look into that ! I don't know much about Humphrey's martial might, but as Heir Presumptive it would not be unnatural to decide to try and show he actually has some...even if he hasn't ! The third brother, Clarence, got himself uselessly killed in 1421 after all...

See plenty of opportunities for him to die gloriously for England.

True, without Henry VI's support Suffolk might well not rise above the likes of other nobles, especially if Salisbury remains alive longer - which, if there is no siege of Orleans, he has a chance of doing...

Another obstacle sidelined.

Yes, I think so. I guess as the foremost prince of undoubted blood royal, and not really touched by his father's treason (because he had been an infant at the time) Richard would be the 'natural' Heir Presumptive.

Or at least one John feels is 'worthy' of it.

Maybe Somerset rebels anyway and gets crushed ? It would be a good start to Richard's reign in many ways, especially if he is conciliatory towards the other Beauforts

Well there you go. If it is a short rebellion and does not do to much damage (such as a single battle where Somerset is killed) then sure why not.

 

[Shadow Knight]

Amazing what a little research can do !

Apparently this chap was taken prisoner by the French at the Battle of Bauge in 1421 (where Henry V''s brother Thomas, Duke of Clarence was killed) and was only released in 1438 !

Thus, if John II dies in 1435 then Somerset isn't even around to muddy the waters. OTL he only had one child, born in 1443 after his release, so in captivity he has no direct heir

His heir would have been Edmund Beaufort, his brother, who succeeded him as Earl and later Duke of Somerset, and HE was the main rival to Richard of York in Henry VI's later reign in OTL

Here, as a younger Beaufort scion in the absence of his elder brother, head of the family, he would have little chance to do anything to deny the crown to Richard of York as John II's appointed heir, if Humphrey was already dead

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

Huzzah!

 

[Grey Wolf]

1st Attempt in Full

1425 Henry VI dies an infant
His uncle John, Duke of Bedford becomes King John II

The French campaign goes as per OTL until 1428 (that is, it goes well)

1428 King John II gets his way for a campaign to consolidate Anjou rather than turn against the Loire cities (Orleans etc)

Joan of Arc makes a minimal impact - she is received by Charles VII at Chinon, and leads or accompanies an army into Anjou, but it achieves little and she disappears from history, her fate being indeterminate (a bit like Owen Glendower)

Salisbury thus survives after 1428

Anjou is subdued and the siege of Orleans occurs in 1430

1431 Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester is killed in action at Tours, leaving no heir
John II names Richard, Duke of Gloucester as Heir Presumptive

1435 John II dies at Rouen
Richard accedes unopposed as King Richard III

1438 sees Richard bring Charles VII to battle and defeat and kill him
The young Louis XI is now head of the Valois claim to France, and the Duke of Anjou is Regent until Louis declares himself of age the following year

- - - - - - -

I am rather confused about Richard's children. If he married Cicely Neville in 1429, how come he didn't have any children for a decade ?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Shadow Knight]

I am rather confused about Richard's children. If he married Cicely Neville in 1429, how come he didn't have any children for a decade ?

Well there are obvious biological problems that might arise. Some couples just have a hard time having kids. Or he had another lady to spend the nights with and at some point was like "damn, I need to spawn some heirs with that harridan I married before it is too late". Or he was busy doing something else...?

Good start btw GW.

 

[Grey Wolf]

Well there are obvious biological problems that might arise. Some couples just have a hard time having kids. Or he had another lady to spend the nights with and at some point was like "damn, I need to spawn some heirs with that harridan I married before it is too late". Or he was busy doing something else...?

Good start btw GW.

I've looked into the marriage in some detail (as far as I can find details). When they were betrothed they were aged 13 and 9, but when the marriage took place 4 years later they were 17 and 14. The age at which sexual relations was allowed in a noble marriage was 12, so its not that which is the bar here - note that Edmund Tudor got Margaret Beaufort pregnant when she was 12, tho' there is a hint that people thought it was a mite in poor taste, the haste at least if not the fact.

One possibility I cannot find data on is that as Richard did not come into inheritance (as an orphan) until he was 21 they might not have been able to set up house together until then - 4 years after the marriage. Even so, it wouldn't explain why it was another 4 years before they had any children.

Whilst it might be possible to postulate absences on campaign, that kind of thing, it doesn't seem a likely explanation when you consider that after 1438 they had 13 children together, and he was most certainly away on campaign at least as much as before that date.

It could therefore just be a 'biological thing', and thus without any information to the contrary I won't change it for this timeline. I will however, have to play with the names of his children, and their titles, for reasons I will outline in the following post

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Grey Wolf]

Whilst I dno't want to belittle Richard's daughters in any way, the thrust of this post concentrates on his sons.

OTL they were as follows :-

Henry
born 1441, died young
presumably named for the king

Edward
born 1442
probably named for Richard's uncle of whom he inherited his dukedom

Edmund
born 1443
probably named for Edmund Mortimer, from whom he inherited many lands

William
born 1447, died young
Don't know whom he was named after, but possibly a kingly name for by this time Richard had his ambitions

John
born 1448, died young
Probably named for John, Duke of Bedford, Regent to Henry VI

George
born 1449
Haven't a clue where he got this name from, its not exactly common at this time

Thomas
born 1451, died young
Possibly named for a Holland ancestor, or for Henry V's late brother, the Duke of Clarence

Richard
born 1452
Presumably named for himself, or his father, though why it was the 8th son and not an earlier one that got this name I don't know


OTL, the surviving sons had the following titles

pre-1460

Edward as eldest surviving son as Earl of March
Edmund as second surviving son as Earl of Rutland

This does not exactly have a precedent, though the logic is clearly there
- the title of March came from his Mortimer (maternal) ancestors and is hereby made the title of the heir to the Duchy of Yotk
- the title of Rutland was historically linked to the Duchy of Cambridge, of which Richard's father had been the last (attainted) holder; Richard inherited the title of York from his uncle.

It is possible that with these titles, Richard was aiming to have Edward succeed him as Duke of York and Edmund later become Duke of Cambridge (presuming that Richard never became king)

After 1461, titles were awarded by Edward to his two surviving brothers, and its worth making a note of this OTL event here

George was created Duke of Clarence
Richard was created Duke of Gloucester

Clarence was a title 'historically' borne by the next eldest brother of the king at this point, though historically means it had happened twice before, once with Lionel, second son of Edward III and next eldest brother to the Black Prince (who would have been king had he lived), and with Thomas, next eldest brother to Henry V, killed in battle in 1421

Gloucester's prominence probably relates to the example of Henry IV's sons again. After Henry V and Clarence had come Bedford, then Gloucester, but during Henry VI's reign the title of Bedford had been granted to Jasper Tudor, and in the 1460s to a Neville, and thus was seen as debased and no longer royal. Gloucester would be the next royal dukedom to retain its lustre

Its an interesting question of why the dukedom of Cambridge was not regranted, and presumably the answer to that is to be found in Edward IV's attempts to ape his Lancastrian predecessors by regranting titles associated with Henry V's reign.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Grey Wolf]

For the purposes of the ATL, we might as well keep the order and dates of birth as per OTL, and the children who died young or lived to adulthood the same as well. It could be argued that its not very likely, but at the same time any playing with these details is complete speculation and isn't anywhere near more likely.

1st son
born 1441
ATL name Richard (named after the king)
created Prince of Wales
dies young

2nd son
born 1442
ATL name Edward (named for his paternal uncle)
created Duke of York
created Prince of Wales after the death of his brother

3rd son
born 1443
ATL name Edmund (named for his maternal uncle, also his paternal grandfather)
created Duke of Cambridge

4th son
born 1447
ATL name John (named for the previous king)
dies young

5th son
born 1448
ATL name Humphrey (named for the late Duke of Gloucester)
dies young

6th son
born 1449
ATL name Thomas (named for the late Duke of Clarence)
created Duke of Clarence

7th son
born 1451
ATL name Lionel (after Lionel of Antwerp)
dies young

8th son
born 1452
ATL name Richard (following the practice of re-using a favoured name if the original holder dies young)
created Duke of Bedford

Thus, of the 4 surviving sons of Richard whom we know from history, we have a similar but slightly different reckoning here :-

Edward, Prince of Wales
born 1442

Edmund, Duke of Cambridge
born 1443

Thomas, Duke of Clarence
born 1449
(OTL's George)

Richard, Duke of Bedford
born 1452
(OTL's Duke of Gloucester)


Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Grey Wolf]

Any comments ?

The timeline next calls for some marriages, of course ! Its going to be complicated, but there needs to be a mix of foreign royalty (I assume Edward IV brought up as Prince of Wales is going to make a dynastic match here, probably as some sort of an Anglo-French armistice down the line), and English heiresses. I'm considering marrying Clarence to Mary of Burgundy, whilst at the same time his sister marries her father...

Then there are Navarre and Brittany to factor in . . .

As well as the rest of the decidedly complex French !

I'm in two minds what to do about Orleans and Angouleme on the one hand, and Somerset on the other. OTL the Anglo-French peace of the 1440s saw them restored to their homelands, where they all proceeded to marry and produce progeny to muddy the waters. Here, I don't see the peace coming until maybe 10 years later, and by then the family of Anjou will have emerged as heirs to whatever realm Louis XI has left to rule. I can't see the Duke of Anjou looking very happily on the return of the Orleans brothers who have a place dynastically ahead of him, or if he agrees to it, I'm thinking maybe he will simply arrange to have them killed - this could in turn spur another French civil war, which would be very nice for the timeline

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Shadow Knight]

Looking good GW. Any English marriages into the Scottish Royal houses?

 

[Grey Wolf]

Looking good GW. Any English marriages into the Scottish Royal houses?

That is a very good question (which is why you asked it !). I did toy with the idea of Richard marrying a Scottiish princess, but that was before I understood the circumstances of his marriage to Cicely Neville (as an orphan he was her father's ward and he made the match for him).

Edward IV will no doubt sire a goodly amount of progeny, as per OTL in that respect. I have a short-lived in OTL, longer-lived in ATL, Angevin princess in mind for him... Of their children, some might well have a pointer at the Scottish royalty

There's also more confusion in my mind about Franco-Scottish relations. They became quite important at this time, and Louis XI marries a Scottish princess, Scottish troops serve in France etc. But with England on the rise, the distance physically between Scotland and France is going to increase, and with England and Burgundy remaining allies, the physical logistics of any help, as well perhaps as to how desirable it is seen in Edinburgh, might well preclude it from happening.

Its a bit like trying to hold half a dozen balls in the air at one time, this !

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Douglas]

I once asked the question if Henry VI had died, and no one was really there to discuss it, but I came to the conclusion that Richard would gain the throne...in the same way!

Anyway, the English must be careful about Louis XI...the man had a way of getting things to either go his way, or knowing exactly what to do to get out of trouble.

 

[Jammy]

Looks good GW

 

[Grey Wolf]

Thank you for the comments

Yes, Louis XVI is going to be a problem. I considered killing him off as an infant too, in the mad rush to evacuate Charles' headquarters or something, but decided it was too pat and history would have to deal with his existence.

Richard won't let up, though, and as long as he can achieve three very difficult things he should be OK !

-1- Keep the English nobility together, which in a large part would come through continued warfare and victories on the battlefield, allowing awards of French titles as per the policy of Henry V

-2- Keep the Scots from sticking him in the arse, which could be a convenient way to keep the stay-at-home nobility, whoever is governing for him from London, from conspiring against him

-3- Keep revenues flowing in enough to sustain the war - IIRC this gets EASIER the more French lands he has as he can raise revenue directly off them in his position as de facto King of France in those territories

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Grey Wolf]

One thing about Louis XI is that he had no offspring from his first marriage to Margaret of Scotland, and that could be very useful to this scenario, placing the Duke of Anjou closer to the throne.

Louis OTL remarries in the late 1450s and has a child in 1461. Whether this happens or not is a question to be answered

A note is that Louis will at least be free from the intrigues of his brother, Charles of Berry as he doesn't exist in this timeline as his father dies before siring him

Best Regards
Grey Wolf