WI Duke of Exeter claims the English Throne in 1471?

In 1471 King Henry VI died either from melancholy following the disastrous battle of Teweksbury or he was murdered by Edward IV who then ascended the throne... Henry Holland 3rd Duke of Exeter had a plausible claim to the throne by being John Gaunt's great-grandson (if i am not mistaken this makes him having a higher claim than Edward IV who was a great-grandson of Edmund Langley)
WI THe Duke of Exeter took the crown and proclaimed himself King Heny VII against the "usurper" Edward IV in 1471 thus continuing the Wars of the Roses?
 
Henry Holland was descended from John of Gaunt through one of Gaunt's daughters with Blanche of Lancaster. However the problem with Henry using this argument is that he basically undermines his own position. While Edward IV is the direct male descendant of Gaunt's younger brother Edmund of Langley, he is also descended from Gaunt's older brother Lionel of Antwerp through Lionel's daughter which was basically the House of York's claim to the throne as Richard II's true heirs not the House of Lancaster.

However in this time period, might makes right and while Henry Holland could set himself up as the legitimate successor to the Lancasterian's right to the throne, what forces could he amass to support this position?

Edward IV had just stunned the country by invading against the advice of his ally the Duke of Burgundy and then won, not one, but two crushing victories that obliterated nearly all Lancastrian supporters. Edward IV had no domestic opposition that Henry Holland could call upon to help him challenge for the throne.

Also Henry Holland was still technically married to Edward IV's older sister, Anne, who had always supported her family while Henry supported the Lancastrians...to say that the marriage was difficult would be an understatement. In 1475, Henry "volunteered" to joined Edward IV's campaign in France but on the way "accidently" drowned in the Channel...but let's be honest Edward IV probably offed his ex-brother-in-law on request from his sister.

And Henry Holland wasn't very liked by other Lancastrians to boot, so while he might have been the best possible option in 1471 had he kept himself alive through 1483-85, Holland might have been suppassed by Henry Tudor just because Tudor was younger, likeable, and someone people would gravitate too.

Finally to answer your question if Henry Holland had rallied any of the Lancastrian forces after Tewkesbury and challenged Edward IV...he would lose and if he didn't die during the battle, he would be dead shortly thereafter.
 
How about the Duke of Exeter lays low in 1471 and tries to keep himself alive during Edward's IV reign and when Richard III arises and usurps the crown he rises in rebellion against him? He had a better claim than Henry's Tudor vague claim...
 
If Exeter lays low/escapes to France in 1471 and joins with other exile Lancastrians then he could be a possible person to rally around. While he doesn't have a son, he had a daughter with Anne of York...Anne Holland who married Thomas Grey, Marquess of Dorset, the son of Elizabeth Woodville and thus stepson of Edward IV. But Anne Holland died in 1474/5 and thus Exeter had no surviving children.

To be a contender by the time of Richard III, Exeter needed to have the potential to continue the line. By 1483, Exeter would be 53 and it's not out of the question he could produce an heir, he's not getting any younger. Exeter needs to produce an heir or the Lancastrians would start to surrounding Henry Tudor because he would have better odds of producing an heir and thus a dynasty.

Get Exeter a son or two and he boosts his claim. Then it comes down to playing politics within the Lancastrian party in France if it's Richard III vs. Henry Holland or Henry Tudor.
 
Or we could butterfly away Anne's death in 1474 and if she has issue by her marriage with Marquis of Dorset then the Duke of Exeter has a heir in the person of his grandchildren... (Or his daughter if he can persuade the nobles to support a Queen Regnant in 15th century...)
 
That is a possibility, having Anne bear a few sons with Thomas Grey soon after 1471 and still be alive when Grey joins Buckingham's rebellion against Richard III. After Buckingham's defeat Grey escapes to France same as OTL but knowing his wife's Lancastrian connections make sure they escape with him.

Then its all about politics within the Lancastrian exiles as Exeter parades around with his 10 to 12-year old grandsons establishing a line of succession that considering Exeter could live long enough that his oldest grandson could succeed him bypassing Anne with her "consent."

Of course this all depends on Exeter getting the Lancastrian factions to side with his claim over Henry Tudor, which is going to be a problem since even Lancastrian had a bad view of him.
 
If Henry Tudor doesnt marry Elizabeth of York he stucks with a really vague claim while Exeter's claim would be really higher...
 
Of course Henry could always go with marrying Anne following the "fatal accidents" Henry Holland and Thomas Grey suffer.

This would solidify his Lancastrian claim but does mean he has nothing to offer York if he still wins against them.
Of course this does give the dilemma of what to do with the Holland-Grey offspring if Henry wants his own dynasty. An odd parallel of the Richard III's nephews could occur.
 
Henry Holland was divorced from Anne of York in 1472... If he manages to stay alive during Edward's IV and Richard's III reign (flee to France maybe?) He could remarry and have an offspring of his own instead of depending to his daughter... He was in his 40s then and (assuming) still capable of having children... So if he has a son by 1483-1485 he could claim the throne instead of Henry Tudor (who had a really vague claim through the Beauforts... an illegitimate line of John Gaunt).
I guess that Henry would be supported by the French King and several Lancastrian nobles if he had a son by 1483-85 during the reign of his unpopular kinsman Richard III...
 
Ok we have Henry Holland with a infant son gain the Lancastrian and French support. What does he offer Henry Tudor? the Duchy of York and Elizabeth's hand?
Anyways, assuming there's an invasion roughly similar to OTL and Richard III is defeated. There is always the possibility that Henry Holland dies too!
Would Henry Tudor then get the Regency?
Could he angle for the throne himself as before or just arrange marriages between his heirs and Henry Holland's?
 
Ok we have Henry Holland with a infant son gain the Lancastrian and French support. What does he offer Henry Tudor? the Duchy of York and Elizabeth's hand?
Anyways, assuming there's an invasion roughly similar to OTL and Richard III is defeated. There is always the possibility that Henry Holland dies too!
Would Henry Tudor then get the Regency?
Could he angle for the throne himself as before or just arrange marriages between his heirs and Henry Holland's?

If Henry Holland invades and overthrows Richard III he wont marry Tudor to Elizabeth because this act would have legitimised Tudor's claim and made Holland look like an usurper... Maybe he would set him off to some distant place (Ireland perhaps?) and makes sure he wont cause any troubles... However if Henry Holland dies in battle too and he has an underage son (or grandson if he is unlucky enough to have sons of his own and his daughter manages to live and bear a grandson to him) i guess that James Douglas 9th Earl Douglas husband of his sister Anne Holland would be his chosen Regent... Though i could see Tudor scheming against the infant King and his Regent after Holland's early demise...
 
Well if Exeter was to parlay the fact that he had a son or grandson (via Anne) and he had the most senior claim to the throne to become leader of the Lancastrian exiles over the younger Henry Tudor, the next important thing to getting enough men to challenge Richard III.

What helped Tudor at Bosworth was that Richard III's supporters were abandoning him, most famously Tudor's step-father Lord Stanley, or decided to see how the tide of battle was going before joining. Also Tudor while nominally in command of his army, it was actually Tudor's uncle Jasper and the Earl of Oxford as the field commanders. While Exeter would have the services of Oxford, but would those supporting the Tudor/Beaufort Lancastrian claim join Exeter?

Also how would Exeter's grandson, who's paternal grandmother was Elizabeth Woodville, as the heir-apparent play in England since some nobles didn't like the Woodville faction?

As for Yorkist princesses, my two cents would be this. Depending on the age of Exeter's eldest grandson (and thus heir-apparent), if Exeter were to win "Bosworth" and become Henry VII. He would look secure the future of his dynasty and would marry Elizabeth to his grandson the future king to ultimately unite the two claims to the throne.

As for Henry Tudor's future in a Exeter-as-King TL, if he supported Exeter in battle he would probably be given his father's earldom and be given the task of insuring Wales came into line with the new regime. If Tudor hung back while Exeter won the crown, he would eventually be given his inheritance after his mother pleaded on his behalf but because he didn't help the Lancastrian cause he would be persona non grata. In either case, Exeter would ensure Tudor doesn't get any closer to the throne than he already is most likely having Tudor marry a daughter of the Nevilles of Westmoreland or a Percy.

Finally, what if Exeter were to die while defeating Richard III? Well, Exeter's son-in-law Thomas Grey would most likely become King via his wife, Anne Holland. Thomas' son (Exeter's grandson and heir-apparent) would be a minor and while some would not want to put Grey on the throne, it was either Thomas or a minor with Thomas as regent and after Henry VI and what happened to Edward V it would be seen as preferable to let Grey be crowned.
 
Finally, what if Exeter were to die while defeating Richard III? Well, Exeter's son-in-law Thomas Grey would most likely become King via his wife, Anne Holland. Thomas' son (Exeter's grandson and heir-apparent) would be a minor and while some would not want to put Grey on the throne, it was either Thomas or a minor with Thomas as regent and after Henry VI and what happened to Edward V it would be seen as preferable to let Grey be crowned.

I dont see Thomas becoming King if Exeter dies in battle... Most propably Exeter's grandson becomes King with Grey as a regent... Maybe if he is old enough (lets say 13-14) Parliament could be persuaded to declare him an adult so there wouldnt be any need for a regent...
 
I dont see Thomas becoming King if Exeter dies in battle... Most propably Exeter's grandson becomes King with Grey as a regent... Maybe if he is old enough (lets say 13-14) Parliament could be persuaded to declare him an adult so there wouldnt be any need for a regent...

It would depend on the grandson's age yes, but also the most senior heir is technically Anne Holland. While Exeter would have promoted his bid for the crown through his grandson(s), legally his heir (at least to the Duchy of Exeter) is his daughter and Thomas Grey could claim the crown through her as nobles claimed titles via there wives previously...the chances are slim to none but there is that possibility.
 
It would depend on the grandson's age yes, but also the most senior heir is technically Anne Holland. While Exeter would have promoted his bid for the crown through his grandson(s), legally his heir (at least to the Duchy of Exeter) is his daughter and Thomas Grey could claim the crown through her as nobles claimed titles via there wives previously...the chances are slim to none but there is that possibility.

Well Grey could become Duke of Exeter "jure uxoris" in that case and as a "Royal Duke" could be appointed as Regent if Parliament doesnt decide to declare Holland's grandson an adult... (assuming that the grandson is about 13-15 yo at the time...)
 
Top