WI: Anne de Mowbray, Countess of Norfolk Lives

Happy New Year to all.

Anne de Mowbray died young and she married Richard of Shrewsbury, duke of York, at a still younger age. What if Anne were to survive? If everything goes as OTL will she go into sanctuary alongside her in-laws? Or will she be spared by Richard III? How will she fare under a Tudor regime (widow to a murdered prince - much like Anne Neville was in 1471 - under a regime whose legitimacy depends on her husband being dead)? And what of when Perkin Warbeck shows up? I suspect, that much like with Louis XVII, they won't get someone who knew him (Madame Royal for Louis; Elizabeth of York or Anne de Mowbray for Perkin) to identify him and say he is/isn't. And even if they do, it's not like anyone who has a beef with Henry is going to believe the "discrediting".
 
Well she poses a problem for Richard III in the short term - Richard Duke of York vanishing into the tower leaves Anne in no mans land - legally she is married for Richard to offer her hand to a supporter along with her inheritance would acknowledge her husband's death which is unlikely.
All he can do is get her to renounce the marriage as she wasn't of age to consent and presumably get papal approval for a fresh marriage - in which case the obvious is Thomas Howard grandson of Richard's loyal supporter John Howard - the match would tie up the Norfolk inheritance.
However we don't know whether Richard in these circumstances would gain the Howard's support as arguably their favour might have been based on the fact that after Anne's death they lost out on their rightful inheritance as her widower the Duke of York continued to hold her estates.
Assuming that then it might well be that Henry VII cancels the match on his accession (in otl Thomas Earl of Surrey spent the first three years of Henry's reign in the Tower but was eventually restored).
Legally Thomas won't turn 14 until 1487 and Anne will be 16.
 
Well she poses a problem for Richard III in the short term - Richard Duke of York vanishing into the tower leaves Anne in no mans land - legally she is married for Richard to offer her hand to a supporter along with her inheritance would acknowledge her husband's death which is unlikely.
All he can do is get her to renounce the marriage as she wasn't of age to consent and presumably get papal approval for a fresh marriage - in which case the obvious is Thomas Howard grandson of Richard's loyal supporter John Howard - the match would tie up the Norfolk inheritance.
However we don't know whether Richard in these circumstances would gain the Howard's support as arguably their favour might have been based on the fact that after Anne's death they lost out on their rightful inheritance as her widower the Duke of York continued to hold her estates.
Assuming that then it might well be that Henry VII cancels the match on his accession (in otl Thomas Earl of Surrey spent the first three years of Henry's reign in the Tower but was eventually restored).
Legally Thomas won't turn 14 until 1487 and Anne will be 16.

Hence why I asked if she wouldn't accompany her husband and in-laws to sanctuary? Elizabeth Wydeville would realize that Anne is almost as dangerous a piece in Dickon's hand as his niece, Anne St. Leger. Two rich heiresses (he can always play the marriage was illegal (spouses underage)/under false pretences (RoS being legitimate) card for Mowbray; he dismissed St. Leger's Grey betrothal so it's not impossible) with which to reward his supporters could strengthen his hand. Also, I wonder if Anne DOES go to sanctuary if Dickon doesn't insist on her accompanying her husband to the Tower
 
I assume if she is still in the Queen's household, ie being raised with her sisters in law, then yes she will accompany the Queen and her children to sanctuary. If assuming the tl follows ours she will leave sanctuary either when the Queen dowager did or when the queen surrendered the duke of York and Richard will assign her custody to whoever he wants to reward perhaps Sir John Howard or perhaps her mother the Dowager Duchess Elizabeth. He begins the process to rescind her marriage (which wouldn't be too hard given she and the groom were both under age). If she was with her mother which is also probable then the new King might leave custody with the dowager duchess in the short term.
 
I assume if she is still in the Queen's household, ie being raised with her sisters in law, then yes she will accompany the Queen and her children to sanctuary. If assuming the tl follows ours she will leave sanctuary either when the Queen dowager did or when the queen surrendered the duke of York and Richard will assign her custody to whoever he wants to reward perhaps Sir John Howard or perhaps her mother the Dowager Duchess Elizabeth. He begins the process to rescind her marriage (which wouldn't be too hard given she and the groom were both under age). If she was with her mother which is also probable then the new King might leave custody with the dowager duchess in the short term.

Fair enough. I wonder if Dickon will maybe look at her and try to wed her to Edward of Middleham. It's a waste of an heiress that could be otherwise used to reward a loyal aupporter, plus a waste of a foreign marriage opportunity with the heir to the throne. But it's a thought
 
Does anyone know how the creation of RoS as "duke of Norfolk" worked? If he had two sons would the first have been duke of York and the second duke of Norfolk? Or would the two dukedoms be held by one son? And if he only had daughters, York would obviously revert to the crown, but what of Norfolk?
 
Does anyone know how the creation of RoS as "duke of Norfolk" worked? If he had two sons would the first have been duke of York and the second duke of Norfolk? Or would the two dukedoms be held by one son? And if he only had daughters, York would obviously revert to the crown, but what of Norfolk?

Not off the top of my head, but given ROS was to be Duke of Norfolk even if Anne died, I'd guess they'd both revert to the Crown if Richard only had daughters,though the Howards would probably try and claim Norfolk. And this is in the days of male-preference primogeniture. The eldest son would get both, most likely...
 
Richard's Dukedom of York and Earldom of Nottingham would have passed by male pref primogeniture as per usual. His other titles - Duke of Norfolk and Earl Warenne were created in 1477 and also would pass to his eldest son, he was also Anne's titles - the Earldom of Norfolk, Baron Mowbray and Baron Seagrave would pass to their eldest son also - if they had no eldest son then her titles would fall into abeyance until extinguished in favour of one of her heirs unless say she had just one daughter who would succeed her mother in those titles.
One Anne's death without issue the Earldom probably goes extinct and the barony's remain in abeyance until extinguished in favour of one of the co heirs of the Mowbray family.
Richard's Norfolk titles would be male preference to would along with York go extinct if he died without male issue.
Her estates would remain with Richard Duke of York and Duke of Norfolk and then pass to his heirs.
 
Not off the top of my head, but given ROS was to be Duke of Norfolk even if Anne died, I'd guess they'd both revert to the Crown if Richard only had daughters,though the Howards would probably try and claim Norfolk. And this is in the days of male-preference primogeniture. The eldest son would get both, most likely...
Richard's Dukedom of York and Earldom of Nottingham would have passed by male pref primogeniture as per usual. His other titles - Duke of Norfolk and Earl Warenne were created in 1477 and also would pass to his eldest son, he was also Anne's titles - the Earldom of Norfolk, Baron Mowbray and Baron Seagrave would pass to their eldest son also - if they had no eldest son then her titles would fall into abeyance until extinguished in favour of one of her heirs unless say she had just one daughter who would succeed her mother in those titles.
One Anne's death without issue the Earldom probably goes extinct and the barony's remain in abeyance until extinguished in favour of one of the co heirs of the Mowbray family.
Richard's Norfolk titles would be male preference to would along with York go extinct if he died without male issue.
Her estates would remain with Richard Duke of York and Duke of Norfolk and then pass to his heirs.

So his eldest son would be HRH the duke of York and Norfolk, and a second son would simply be "Prince/Lord X of York and Norfolk"?
 
HH, most likely. I don't think the Royal Highness style came into fashion until later.

My bad.

Would it be completely ASB to have the titles split? York goes to the elder son and Norfolk to the second son? Or have a scenario where RoS' eldest son is entitled "duke of Norfolk" and the York dukedom returns to the crown?
 
My bad.

Would it be completely ASB to have the titles split? York goes to the elder son and Norfolk to the second son? Or have a scenario where RoS' eldest son is entitled "duke of Norfolk" and the York dukedom returns to the crown?
The Dukedom of York will stay with RoS’ heirs at least until the extinction of the male line and the same for that of Norfolk (that unless some attainteder) ... While splitting titles is absolutely possible
 
How does this scenario sound. Richard has two sons, Edward and John. Edward marries some lord (probably Buckingham or Suffolk)'s daughter, and succeeds as duke of York and Norfolk. John marries an heiress (maybe OTL's Baroness Lisle since he's not expected to become a duke after all) and becomes Baron Lisle jure uxoris. However, Edward dies with only female heirs. John succeeds as duke of York, but the title of duke of Norfolk is extincted and the earldom is in abeyance.

Or would John become 3e duke of Norfolk as well?
 
How does this scenario sound. Richard has two sons, Edward and John. Edward marries some lord (probably Buckingham or Suffolk)'s daughter, and succeeds as duke of York and Norfolk. John marries an heiress (maybe OTL's Baroness Lisle since he's not expected to become a duke after all) and becomes Baron Lisle jure uxoris. However, Edward dies with only female heirs. John succeeds as duke of York, but the title of duke of Norfolk is extincted and the earldom is in abeyance.

Or would John become 3e duke of Norfolk as well?
Good question... but maybe Richard will split the titles so we will have Edward, Duke of York and John, Duke of Norfolk and then inhereiting also York
 
Would be completely ASB to split the titles - they were created by patent one assumes with a male heir remainder attached - so one assumes it would pass like this.
Richard Duke of York etc m Anne De Mowbray Countess of Norfolk etc
issue:
Lord Edward - later 2nd Duke of York, Duke of Norfolk, Earl Warenne, Earl of Nottingham, 9th Earl of Norfolk, Baron Mowbray and Baron Seagrave.

Lord Richard - succeeds his brother as 3rd Duke etc

Edward dies leaving only heirs female - his mother's baronies fall into abeyance (as they would legally pass to his daughter's) - there is some debate over the Earldom of Norfolk - Anne was styled 8th Countess of Norfolk - so its possible that Earldom would continue to her son but would then fall into abeyance to her daughter's - however Richard was styled Earl of Norfolk and it isn't clear if he was merely Earl by right of his wife or whether a new Earldom of Norfolk was created for him along with the rest of the titles in which case there are two Earldom's of Norfolk one passes to Richard's male heirs only the other passes from his wife to their eldest son and then into abeyance to his daughter's.

His brother succeeds him as 3rd Duke of York, 3rd Duke of Norfolk, Earl Warenne and Earl of Nottingham.

It is likely that a future King Edward V would ennoble his nephew on his majority in order that he could be summonsed to Parliament as a peer unless he already held his mother's Baronies in which case it would be unnecessary - so the elder might be granted an Earldom as he aged ahead of inheriting (that title might be limited to his male line descendants so wouldn't necessarily pass to his brother)

At this period the children and grandchildren of monarchs had no particular style - 'Prince' would have been used for the children - the Most Noble, the Most High Prince, Richard Duke of York and of Norfolk etc etc. In much the way most Duke's were addressed

The King's daughter's were most likely styled The Lady Elizabeth daughter to the King etc - Princess wasn't used much at this period either but might have been a bit - by the Tudor period it was in more common useage etc.
 
Last edited:
Would be completely ASB to split the titles - they were created by patent one assumes with a male heir remainder attached - so one assumes it would pass like this.
Richard Duke of York etc m Anne De Mowbray Countess of Norfolk etc
issue:
Lord Edward - later 2nd Duke of York, Duke of Norfolk, Earl Warenne, Earl of Nottingham, 9th Earl of Norfolk, Baron Mowbray and Baron Seagrave.

Lord Richard - succeeds his brother as 3rd Duke etc

Edward dies leaving only heirs female - his mother's baronies fall into abeyance (as they would legally pass to his daughter's) - there is some debate over the Earldom of Norfolk - Anne was styled 8th Countess of Norfolk - so its possible that Earldom would continue to her son but would then fall into abeyance to her daughter's - however Richard was styled Earl of Norfolk and it isn't clear if he was merely Earl by right of his wife or whether a new Earldom of Norfolk was created for him along with the rest of the titles in which case there are two Earldom's of Norfolk one passes to Richard's male heirs only the other passes from his wife to their eldest son and then into abeyance to his daughter's.

His brother succeeds him as 3rd Duke of York, 3rd Duke of Norfolk, Earl Warenne and Earl of Nottingham.

It is likely that a future King Edward V would ennoble his nephew on his majority in order that he could be summonsed to Parliament as a peer unless he already held his mother's Baronies in which case it would be unnecessary - so the elder might be granted an Earldom as he aged ahead of inheriting (that title might be limited to his male line descendants so wouldn't necessarily pass to his brother)

At this period the children and grandchildren of monarchs had no particular style - 'Prince' would have been used for the children - the Most Noble, the Most High Prince, Richard Duke of York and of Norfolk etc etc. In much the way most Duke's were addressed

The King's daughter's were most likely styled The Lady Elizabeth daughter to the King etc - Princess wasn't used much at this period either but might have been a bit - by the Tudor period it was in more common useage etc.
Well we do not know how the titles were created in this specific case and often wedding contracts in which both bride and groom were titled had provisions for splitting tiles and inheritances between sons (see the Nevilles)
 
Top