Two Deaths at Bosworth

Who becomes King?


  • Total voters
    52
  • Poll closed .
Presumably he’d “inherit” his cousin’s proposed marriage to Elizabeth of York to bolster his credibility? Still be a tough sell, I’d imagine.
If he was a hard sell before Henry he'd still be a hard sell after. Recall Henry got support because there wasn't a legitimate Beaufort left for the Lancastrians.
 
If h e was a hard sell before Henry he'd still be a hard sell after. Recall Henry got support because there wasn't a legitimate Beaufort left for the Lancastrians.
OTOH he's on the spot, unmarried and about the right age (abt (abt 25 to Henry's 28) so unless Stanley wants to claim the throne himself (which would also be a big gamble, and he wasn't a gambling man) he might have to do.

The Lancastrians don't have a lot of options, and if the Yorkists can accept Henry Tudor they can probably accept Beaufort. After all, to them *no* Lancastrian has a legitimate claim, so it's of little moment exactly *who* keeps the seat warm for Edward IV's grandson.
 
OTOH he's on the spot, unmarried and about the right age (abt (abt 25 to Henry's 28) so unless Stanley wants to claim the throne himself (which would also be a big gamble, and he wasn't a gambling man) he might have to do.

The Lancastrians don't have a lot of options, and if the Yorkists can accept Henry Tudor they can probably accept Beaufort. After all, to them *no* Lancastrian has a legitimate claim, so it's of little moment exactly *who* keeps the seat warm for Edward IV's grandson.
True though does anyone know where he was? Because I don’t think he was at bosworh
 
OTOH he's on the spot, unmarried and about the right age (abt (abt 25 to Henry's 28) so unless Stanley wants to claim the throne himself (which would also be a big gamble, and he wasn't a gambling man) he might have to do.

The Lancastrians don't have a lot of options, and if the Yorkists can accept Henry Tudor they can probably accept Beaufort. After all, to them *no* Lancastrian has a legitimate claim, so it's of little moment exactly *who* keeps the seat warm for Edward IV's grandson.
Is he on the spot? His bio on the Wikipedia claims he was knighted only in the reign of Henry VII and later gained an Earldom. Would a bastard commoner be more acceptable than Jasper's noble stepson?
 
Is he on the spot? His bio on the Wikipedia claims he was knighted only in the reign of Henry VII and later gained an Earldom
Which bio is that? Most of the online ones that I've come across say that either he was knighted in Flanders by Archduke Philip "before Bosworth" or else by Henry Tudor at Milford Haven. And his entry in my Concise Dictionary of National Biography states that he "fought at Bosworth".
 
Which bio is that? Most of the online ones that I've come across say that either he was knighted in Flanders by Archduke Philip "before Bosworth" or else by Henry Tudor at Milford Haven. And his entry in my Concise Dictionary of National Biography states that he "fought at Bosworth".
This one.
Sources are primarily Burke.
Do anyone of them categorically state he was seriously considered as heir to the Lancastrian cause?
 
This one.
Sources are primarily Burke.
Do anyone of them categorically state he was seriously considered as heir to the Lancastrian cause?
Pretty unlikely for me... At that point James III of Scotland, the Yorks, Stanley’s sons and young Stafford are all more attractive candidates with Beaufort blood...
If Jasper, half-brother of Henry IV, is still alive the Lancastrian would likely support him as consort for Elizabeth of York
 
Pretty unlikely for me... At that point James III of Scotland, the Yorks,
James III was already married. If you mean his son, the future James IV, the latter was only twelve, and with 1483 such a recent memory, no one will really want a child king, and those willing to accept one will surely prefer Warwick

And I'm not sure which "Yorks" you mean. The only adult one I can think of is Lincoln, who is both already married and seen as Richard III's heir, which makes him a no-no for those who have just overthrown Richard.
 
That link only mentions when he received the Order of the Garter. It says nothing about when he was knighted
Which an interesting omission don't you think?
Why would there be as long as Henry Tudor was available?
When the last of the legitimate Beauforts died there should have been some discussion as to who takes up the mantle. If only Henry was considered and an adult male son of a Beaufort Duke ignored it says something about his status. Even if the status was brought up as to why he wasn't top of the running he would have gained some position in the hierarchy of their forces if he was considered in the line of succession.
After Henry dies Edward Stafford's father would have been in the same position as Henry being the legitimate male son of a female Beaufort. With Buckingham's death that claim falls to Edward who also happens to be Jasper Tudor's stepson. So why would even Sir Charles Somerset be considered this time if there's another Henry equivalent? One who has legitimacy, a title (in Lancastrian eyes at least), and connections?
 
Which an interesting omission don't you think?
How so? Presumably the authors of the DNB couldn't establish for certain whether he was knighted in Flanders or at Milford haven, so didn't enter it. However, in either case it would be prior to Bosworth.

After Henry dies Edward Stafford's father would have been in the same position as Henry being the legitimate male son of a female Beaufort. With Buckingham's death that claim falls to Edward who also happens to be Jasper Tudor's stepson
No he doesn't. That marriage didn't take place util three months after Bosworth. And even had he been, that would have disqualified Jasper from consideration, since it would have prevented him from marrying EoY - even had his total lack of even illegitimate English royal blood not been disqualification enough.
-
And given that Edward Stafford was only seven years old at that time - even younger than Warwick - it's a trifle hard to imagine him marrying EoY.
 
Going through the thread again, here are what I think are the most likely scenarios, in order of most likely to least.

1. The Yorkists manage to agree quickly to crown Edward, Earl of Warwick and bid him to marry Elizabeth of York. John de la Pole is compensated with a higher ranked title. Optional in the first scenario is Jasper Tudor keeping enough troops together to force the Yorkists to agree to return his personal lands to him, the other option is that the threat of Jasper Tudor is enough to give the Yorkists an enemy to oppose and hold together.

2. The Yorkists decide that John de la Pole should be crowned King due to his royal blood, his status as an adult, and unlike Edward, Earl of Warwick not under an attainer. He also would be required to marry Elizabeth of York.

3. The Yorkists quickly splinter into in-fighting between those who want to crown Edward, Earl of Warwick, those who would rather crown John de la Pole, and those who want to use Elizabeth of York as a means to taking the throne themselves.

4. Variant on the third scenario; however the infighting allows Jasper Tudor a chance to sell the remaining forces with him on the idea of capturing Elizabeth of York and marrying the girl himself, making himself King Jasper I, and able to make good on all the promises Henry Tudor made them.

5. Second variant on the third scenario; however the infighting causes Elizabeth of York to flee for the safety of her aunt Margaret of York, Dowager Duchess of Burgundy, who in turn arranges for her niece to marry Emperor Maximillian I of the Holy Roman Empire to champion her family's claim to the English throne, creating an English branch of the House of Habsburg.

6. James III of Scotland feels bold enough to not just try and retake Berwick but also to make a play for the English throne, via his Lancastrian blood through the Beaufords.

7. Edward V and/or Prince Richard, Duke of York (or a really good fake) is found to be alive in the Tower of London and is presented as the 'rightful' heir of Edward IV and Richard III's 'reign' is fully repudiated.

8. The Yorkists find both Edward, Earl of Warwick and John de la Pole unacceptable/dead/other and decide that Elizabeth of York should be crowned Queen Regnant in her own right, any future husband(s) would be mere King-Consorts.

Anything I missed or got wrong?
 
No he doesn't. That marriage didn't take place util three months after Bosworth.
So it was. My mistake. I had it down as earlier than Bosworth.
And even had he been, that would have disqualified Jasper from consideration, since it would have prevented him from marrying EoY - even had his total lack of even illegitimate English royal blood not been disqualification enough.
I've not even raised Jasper as a possible candidate precisely because he lacks the legitimate bloodline so I don't know why you are saying I am.
Jasper was 2nd in command due to being Henry's paternal uncle and experience. He wasn't there because of being in the Lancastrian succession.
You'll notice I never mentioned everyone in command had to be in the succession also.
And given that Edward Stafford was only seven years old at that time - even younger than Warwick - it's a trifle hard to imagine him marrying EoY
Warwick is 10 and he was still considered. Underage betrothals and marriages happened all the time. Especially among noble heirs and heiresses.
Difficult but possible and easier than an unaccomplished bastard without connections.
 
So at the polls close, Edward earl of Warwick and Elizabeth of York had the most votes coming first and second respectively. I have my answer. A betrothal between the two seems to be the easiest solution. Thank you all, expect a timeline on this soon.
 
So it was. My mistake. I had it down as earlier than Bosworth.

I've not even raised Jasper as a possible candidate precisely because he lacks the legitimate bloodline so I don't know why you are saying I am.
Jasper was 2nd in command due to being Henry's paternal uncle and experience. He wasn't there because of being in the Lancastrian succession.
You'll notice I never mentioned everyone in command had to be in the succession also.

Warwick is 10 and he was still considered. Underage betrothals and marriages happened all the time. Especially among noble heirs and heiresses.
Difficult but possible and easier than an unaccomplished bastard without connections.
Jasper, while without royal bloodline from any branch of the Plantagenet, is still Henry IV’s half-brother so would be acceptable for Lancastrians and Yorkists if married to Edward IV’s heiress... Sure, unlike his nephew, he would be more or less forced to rule jure-uxoris as consort of Elizabeth of York instead of doing that in his own right but that is just a small price to pay and would likely made his rule more secure than the OTL one of his nephew...
Marrying EoY to Warwick is already at the limits of age difference but Stafford will likely marry Anne or Catherine of York here (with the other married to Norfolk)


@Shiva: your scenario number 2 can not be valid as John de la Pole is already married to one of the cousins of Elizabeth of York
 
Jasper, while without royal bloodline from any branch of the Plantagenet, is still Henry IV’s half-brother so would be acceptable for Lancastrians and Yorkists if married to Edward IV’s heiress... Sure, unlike his nephew, he would be more or less forced to rule jure-uxoris as consort of Elizabeth of York instead of doing that in his own right but that is just a small price to pay and would likely made his rule more secure than the OTL one of his nephew...
Marrying EoY to Warwick is already at the limits of age difference but Stafford will likely marry Anne or Catherine of York here (with the other married to Norfolk)


@Shiva: your scenario number 2 can not be valid as John de la Pole is already married to one of the cousins of Elizabeth of York
In terms of Warwick and eliAbeth how long would they wait before pushing Warwick to consummate the marriage
 
Top