WI: Edward of Lancastar born female

What would be the consequences of Edward of Lancaster, only son of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou, being born as a girl (likely named Margaret)? How does that affect the Roses' War?
 
Probably not very much, other than making once the war breaks out Henry's safety and freedom that much more important (without a male heir).

Henry isn't so old that not having a male heir yet will be overly worrisome otherwise - though it won't exactly be comforting, and of course York and his fellows will dislike the situation of (if memory serves) Suffolk remaining heir presumptive.

Could have more consequences, but I'm not sure anything significant would be altered.
 
Last edited:
Assuming that Edward IV still becomes king then probably the greatest divergence is that "Margaret" and his possible husband would become the main opponent of Yorkist rule. So most of the changes would depend on who she marries. Maybe there would be other person then Henry Tudor to claim Richard's throne (assuming things go more or less like IOTL).
 
Margaret would have been still a (young) child when Henry was deposed.

Even allowing for early marriages in those days, she would have been eight as of Towton, which pretty much crushed the Lancasterians as having a real chance. And as the daughter of a deposed king, she's not exactly ideal marriage material for those who would want to marry her for their own purposes.
 
Was not the birth of a male heir a reason for the increased hostility of the York and Lancaster camps before 1860? A female heir may well have not roused the same passions, and maybe a marriage to Edward would have been suggested?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Was not the birth of a male heir a reason for the increased hostility of the York and Lancaster camps before 1860? A female heir may well have not roused the same passions, and maybe a marriage to Edward would have been suggested?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

1860?

By 1460 the hostility has already started armed conflict.
 
1860?

By 1460 the hostility has already started armed conflict.

OJ, I'm too used to typing 1800s dates

Yeah, but Edward of Lancaster was born in 1453 so what I was asking was whether his birth as a MALE heir, and thus in being so borjn kocking Richard of York backwards, was one of the causes of the escalation of the conflict, and thus by not hap[pening... and so on

Beset rearguards
Grey Wolf
 
OJ, I'm too used to typing 1800s dates

Yeah, but Edward of Lancaster was born in 1453 so what I was asking was whether his birth as a MALE heir, and thus in being so borjn kocking Richard of York backwards, was one of the causes of the escalation of the conflict, and thus by not hap[pening... and so on

Beset rearguards
Grey Wolf

I don't think so, personally. It certainly didn't inspire any great good will, but the pre-birth situation seems to have angered/upset York more.

Keeping in mind that the original cause for dispute was not York wanting the throne but the utter fiasco that was Henry VI's reign.
 
I don't think so, personally. It certainly didn't inspire any great good will, but the pre-birth situation seems to have angered/upset York more.

Keeping in mind that the original cause for dispute was not York wanting the throne but the utter fiasco that was Henry VI's reign.

Yeah but he was heir apparent was he not, until suddenly he wasn't.

Oh heck, I'm tired
 
Yeah but he was heir apparent was he not, until suddenly he wasn't.

Oh heck, I'm tired

He thought he should have been, Henry appointed (I believe) Sommerset - or is it Suffolk? One of the two, I can't remember who came first.

Edward being born dashed any chance of that for either equally.
 
How about Margaret d'Anjou arranges a marriage of her infant daughter with some other powerful nation's prince (France? Castille? HRE?) in order to have their back up in case Yorkists overthrow Henry VI? Was there any prince eligible then?
 
How about Margaret d'Anjou arranges a marriage of her infant daughter with some other powerful nation's prince (France? Castille? HRE?) in order to have their back up in case Yorkists overthrow Henry VI? Was there any prince eligible then?

There's probably an eligible prince somewhere, but it sounds more like a potential source of trouble than security. The English don't like Margaret (the queen) as is. A queen "not worth ten marks" who has lead to the loss of England's possessions in France.

Not sure it really would be dangerous to England - the prince only has a claim in right of his wife if Henry has no male heir, but it'll come off that way.
 
Couldn't the Yorkists try to secure the throne by having Henry VI's daughter marry OTL Edward IV? They are eleven years apart from one another but it could be a way of satisfying everyone: the Duke of York would be Regent for Henry VI and have his son inherit the throne while Margaret of Anjou would be sure her daughter is the next queen of England.

Not sure how likely this is, but it could be interesting. The age gap is an issue, but not a big one since it wasn't uncommon to arrange or celebrate a royal marriage before one or both the spouses reached the age of 16.
 
Couldn't the Yorkists try to secure the throne by having Henry VI's daughter marry OTL Edward IV? They are eleven years apart from one another but it could be a way of satisfying everyone: the Duke of York would be Regent for Henry VI and have his son inherit the throne while Margaret of Anjou would be sure her daughter is the next queen of England.

Not sure how likely this is, but it could be interesting. The age gap is an issue, but not a big one since it wasn't uncommon to arrange or celebrate a royal marriage before one or both the spouses reached the age of 16.

Margaret would sooner take poison than marry her daughter to the spawn of York.

The two parties have too many quarrels between them for this to be acceptable.

Also, I'm not sure if they're close enough to need a dispensation. The two houses are cousins, but I'm not sure how close (and how close is too close).
 
Elfwine said:
Margaret would sooner take poison than marry her daughter to the spawn of York.

The two parties have too many quarrels between them for this to be acceptable.

Well, that was only a supposition. I was actually more looking for a scenario where York would force Margaret of Anjou's hand. However, given how Henry VI's queen acted during the Roses' War, she will probably do anything to escape York's hands and thus such a situation.

Elfwine said:
Also, I'm not sure if they're close enough to need a dispensation. The two houses are cousins, but I'm not sure how close (and how close is too close).

The Lancaster and York are both descendants of Edward III: the Lancaster are scions of John of Gaunt, Edward III's third son, while the York have blood from both Edward III's second and fourth son, Lionel of Clarence and Edmund of York.
Technically, the Catholic Church forbade marriage within the fourth degree of consanguinity: the two spouses thus mustn't have at least one great great great grandfather in common. I'm pretty sure there was no intermarriage between the Yorks and Lancaster between Edward III and the situation we're discussing. Thus, Edward III is the closest common ancestor of the two houses.

To Henry VI, Edward III is great great grandfather. Thus, he is a great great great grandfather of his daughter in the scenario we're discussing.
To Edward IV, Edward III is a great great grandfather via Edmund of York and a great great great great grandfather via Lionel of Clarence.
Thus Edward IV would be a 4th cousin 1ce Removed of Henry VI's daughter via his descent from Edmund of York while he would be a 5th cousin 1ce Removed via his descent from Lionel of Clarence. In other words, they are not too closely related and wouldn't require a dispence from the Pope.

But even if they had been in forbidden degree of consanguinity, papal dispency wasn't a problem: the Popes were generally concilient in regards to dynastic marriages.
For example, Edward I's second wife was Margaret of France, half sister of Philip IV. They were related because Edward I's father, Henry III, had married the sister of Margaret of Provence, queen of Louis IX of France. Thus, to Edward I, his second wife was a 1st cousin 1ce Removed. The Pope gave his consent without thinking twice despite consanguinity. He also didn't give any objection to Edward II and Isabelle of France who were 2nd cousins 1ce Removed.
 
Political marriage ends Lancaster/York conflict? Of course this would butterfly away the Tudors, so the long term reprecussions would be huge.
 
Well, that was only a supposition. I was actually more looking for a scenario where York would force Margaret of Anjou's hand. However, given how Henry VI's queen acted during the Roses' War, she will probably do anything to escape York's hands and thus such a situation.

You need an earlier POD in this. It would not be impossible to put Margaret and Richard (of York) in a situation where they're drawn to cooperate against those who are trying to abuse the good will of their sovereign.

Would be hard, but not impossible.

Not even entirely impossible within the idea of the conflicts brewing - York-and-Lancaster as houses bent on the other's doom is a relatively late development compared to York's frustrations with Sommerset.

The Lancaster and York are both descendants of Edward III: the Lancaster are scions of John of Gaunt, Edward III's third son, while the York have blood from both Edward III's second and fourth son, Lionel of Clarence and Edmund of York.
Technically, the Catholic Church forbade marriage within the fourth degree of consanguinity: the two spouses thus mustn't have at least one great great great grandfather in common. I'm pretty sure there was no intermarriage between the Yorks and Lancaster between Edward III and the situation we're discussing. Thus, Edward III is the closest common ancestor of the two houses.

To Henry VI, Edward III is great great grandfather. Thus, he is a great great great grandfather of his daughter in the scenario we're discussing.
To Edward IV, Edward III is a great great grandfather via Edmund of York and a great great great great grandfather via Lionel of Clarence.
Thus Edward IV would be a 4th cousin 1ce Removed of Henry VI's daughter via his descent from Edmund of York while he would be a 5th cousin 1ce Removed via his descent from Lionel of Clarence. In other words, they are not too closely related and wouldn't require a dispence from the Pope.

But even if they had been in forbidden degree of consanguinity, papal dispency wasn't a problem: the Popes were generally concilient in regards to dynastic marriages.
For example, Edward I's second wife was Margaret of France, half sister of Philip IV. They were related because Edward I's father, Henry III, had married the sister of Margaret of Provence, queen of Louis IX of France. Thus, to Edward I, his second wife was a 1st cousin 1ce Removed. The Pope gave his consent without thinking twice despite consanguinity. He also didn't give any objection to Edward II and Isabelle of France who were 2nd cousins 1ce Removed.
Interesting. Still, something that would come up and take time to get resolved - and if something happens in the meanwhile, ugh.
 
Top