Tudors vs Plantagenets in 1514

Who ends up on the throne?

  • Margaret Tudor, Queen of Scotland

    Votes: 10 28.6%
  • Princess Mary Tudor

    Votes: 4 11.4%
  • Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury

    Votes: 1 2.9%
  • Edward Stafford, Duke of Buckingham

    Votes: 11 31.4%
  • Richard de la Pole, the White Rose

    Votes: 8 22.9%
  • None of the above

    Votes: 1 2.9%

  • Total voters
    35
Hi all, after seeing VulcanTreekkie45's thread on Henry VIII dying in 1528, I got to thinking about a POD where Henry's death could cause real confusion and even conflict. WI Henry VIII dies in the Spring/Summer of 1514?


Possible contenders for the throne
  • Margaret Tudor, Queen of Scots - rightful heir, currently regent of Scotland which is still reeling after the loss at Flodden and the death of James IV. Margaret is regent for her infant son James V, but lacks support from her nobility and declaring her Queen would give the King of Scotland the English throne upon her death
  • Princess Mary Tudor - Younger sister of Henry, present at court. The only living Tudor excepting her sister Margaret
  • Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury - The last living Plantagenet and has friends at court
  • Edward Stafford, Duke of Buckingham - Wealthiest man in the Kingdom and is descended from Edward III. The Norfolk, Northumberland and Hasting's families are all married into Buckingham's
  • Richard de la Pole, the White Rose - In French exile, but has support of the French King. A proven soldier who had 12000 troops in Brittany for an invasion before Henry's death
So who will gain the crown? Will there be open conflict or a smooth succession? What are the ramifications of Henry's untimely death?
 
Simply by the times I think its going to be a man - women succeed to the throne through peaceful succession, men by civil war. Stafford would be in the strongest position, able to get to London and rally an army - IIRC a Howard is c-in-c effective at this point. There would not be much desire amongst the English nobility to have a pretender foisted on them by France, tho if Stafford screws up then they will likely turn in that direction, since backing by the King of France could make them rich if Stafford and his supporters are attainted.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
i like the idea of magaret, quen of the scots, succedding though..more for the sake of it wouldve brought the union up nearly 200 years...and even though her son was scottish and catholic, they, like james I, probaly wouldve spent their reigns in england and made it their capital rather than scotland...in all...a much stronger and more easily (and peacefully) brought about great britain (ireland however would still be in the air for a while as to who got it)
 
i like the idea of magaret, quen of the scots, succedding though..more for the sake of it wouldve brought the union up nearly 200 years...and even though her son was scottish and catholic, they, like james I, probaly wouldve spent their reigns in england and made it their capital rather than scotland...in all...a much stronger and more easily (and peacefully) brought about great britain (ireland however would still be in the air for a while as to who got it)

I think you comparisons to james I are accurate, the problem with Margaret is that she has a shaky hold on the Scottish regency and Scotland was totally defeated a few months previous by Norfolk. How likely is it that he would be willing to support Margaret and her son having just killed their husband/father and would the English accept this at this point?
 
If Margaret Tudor inherits, the legal and political situation for the succession after her is complicated. If she remarries and has more children, that sets up a dynastic struggle upon her eventual death, between James V of Scotland and her heir by her second marriage.

There's also not much precedent for female inheritance in England at this point, only Empress Matilda who had been overthrown by her cousin Steven, and the memory of the War of the Roses is still fairly fresh. Female claimants will likely have trouble attracting support, due to the self-fulfilling prophecy of the belief that they'll be unable to hold the throne. OTL, Bloody Mary was only able to inherit because she had a very well-established legal position as heir, and the only other actual and plausible rival claimants were also women.

My vote was for Buckingham, who seems to have a much stronger political and military position than the other male claimant. In some ways, his legal claim to the throne is stronger than the Tudor claim, as the Tudor line runs through a legitimized bastard while the Buckingham line is unquestionably legitimate all the way back to Edward III. I'd expect Buckingham to try to shore up his claim by marrying his son to Mary Tudor (Henry Stafford was 13 at the time, Mary Tudor 17, and both were unmarried).
 
If Margaret Tudor inherits, the legal and political situation for the succession after her is complicated. If she remarries and has more children, that sets up a dynastic struggle upon her eventual death, between James V of Scotland and her heir by her second marriage.

it wouldnt be that hard to stop her furture kids from succedding to the throne once james reached majority, or it could be a condition of her (in her sons name, people seem to be ignoring she was a regent for her son, rather than a ruling monarch herself) acceptence of a union between scotland and england
 
I see Richard de la Pole ascended the throne of England, although it would be a good contrast from the House of York. After all, it was his nephew by Elisabeth and her heir at the time of the Battle of Bosworth. But propaganda Tudors recent twenty-nine years had tarnished his reputation and his exile in France does not help his right to the throne. However, the scenario of Bosworth in August 1485, can be repeated thirty years later and allow restoration of Yorks by the de la Pole.

Edward of Buckingham had the military resources, the necessary support from the nobility and ancestry with Edward III by Thomas of Woodstock.
 
de la Pole has the most military resources, he can call on both his supporters in England, his mother who is a very wealthy peeress in her own right and in 1514 he has 12000 troops in Brittany waiting to invade. In OTL England made peace with France and his troops dispersed but depending on what time in 1514 that won't happen.
 
I think you are confusing Richard de La Pole's mother Elizabeth of York Duchess of Suffolk who died in 1503 with his cousin Margaret Pole Countess of Salisbury.



I see Richard de la Pole ascended the throne of England, although it would be a good contrast from the House of York. After all, it was his nephew by Elisabeth and her heir at the time of the Battle of Bosworth. But propaganda Tudors recent twenty-nine years had tarnished his reputation and his exile in France does not help his right to the throne. However, the scenario of Bosworth in August 1485, can be repeated thirty years later and allow restoration of Yorks by the de la Pole.

Edward of Buckingham had the military resources, the necessary support from the nobility and ancestry with Edward III by Thomas of Woodstock.
 
I would stick another candidate on the list - Henry VIII's first cousin - Henry Courtenay b 1496 son of Catherine of York - around 18 and in favour with his cousin at the time.

Much depends on whether Henry dies before the October marriage between Mary Tudor and Louis XII.

If it is before that date - then Buckingham's son is still unmarried and the obvious deal would be to marry Henry Stafford to Mary Tudor (who could repudiate her betrothal to Louis) with Buckingham as the power behind the throne - he has the wealth and strength to do it.

Much will depend on how willing Mary is to revoke her French betrothal, marry Stafford and assume her sister's place on the English throne.

De La Pole is a bit of an also ran and if Stafford can keep the French on side then he will neutralise him (there is also no real domestic support for him and his claim is extremely weak)

Margaret Tudor may be having significant problems but much depends on whether Henry dies before her August marriage to Douglas which cost her the Scots regency and the custody of her two surviving sons by James IV. If Henry dies after that August marriage then she will find enforcing her rights much harder if he dies before then it is likely she will make a formal move to claim the throne.

In Margaret's defence she was shrewd (apart from in her private life), she has just negotiated peace treaties with Scotland's enemies successfully and was holding things together - it was her infatuation or passion for Douglas that destroyed her and gave the pro-french party the opportunity to remove her.
 
Top