WI:Edward of Westminster has a younger twin

Would depend. Edward IV dying with an underage heir and an ambitious brother was a perfect storm. Even if Edward had lived only until the end of 1483 - long enough to see Elizabeth of York married to Emperor Maximilian or that Marie of Burgundy's death was avoided and so Liz was due to marry Charles VIII - things would be different. Deposing a king who has zero allies abroad is a VERY different matter to deposing an underage king who is brother-in-law to the future emperor or even an adult king (had Edward IV lasted until 1486/87)
Empire would not matter much as it was unable to project it's power to England, but I agree that Liz being married to Charles VIII would change everythings.
 
I think Edmund's fate in life is in three diverged paths.
Either
A) He get's killed in a futile battle for his pretty-much already lost throne by the Yorks or
B) He dies a failure with a string of attempted risings with little continental support due to his failings or
C) He invades England Tudor-style and kills Richard (if the scenario plays out the same with the princes in the tower) and marries either Elizabeth of York or some other daughter of Edward IV to shore up his english support. I can see Tudor being a important player in his attempts or reign.
 
Or he might wait and strike after Edward IV died, after all Henry Tudor was close in age to him.
IIRC, Tudor had a very specific set of circumstances which helped him become king:
A) His enemies were in disunity(Without that useless marriage, Richard of Gloucester can't claim that EdV and RoY were illegitimate, so nada)
B) There was an alt-claimant lying around that he could easily marry(EoY would be married by the time he shows up, and he himself would probably be married by then, so again, nada)
C)He had a man on the inside, and an important one at that.(This might be doable, but idt it's likely)
D) Mercs,money and the usual stuff(This is the most he can hope for, they'd probably be given by Louis XI)


Seriously, if you want the Lancastrians to win, you wanna use butterflies earlier than Tewkesbury, and Emperor Maximilian would be able to project power into England. What's stopping him?
 
Matyas Corvinus? The Burgundian Estates? France? Just three off the top of my head
Isn't Burgundy allied with the Yorkists? Why would they stop him?
And possible aggression against France would be included in any alliance between em.
And idk who Matyas Corvinus is, google tells me he was king of Hungary, why would he interfere in english matters? Unless he and the emperor were at war.......I'll look into him.
 
Isn't Burgundy allied with the Yorkists? Why would they stop him?
Max only married Marie after Tewkesbury. So before then, he wouldn't be interested in England. Charles the Bold was someone who only helped the Yorkists if it was useful to him - why the Readeption of Henry VI lasted as long as it did - but then Charles went and curbstomped the English alliance during the very next war with France by refusing to let England use his territories to land troops for war with France.
Things between Edward IV and Margaret of York were iffy in general. Started with him marrying Elizabeth Wydeville (who Marge never really warmed to). Then a dowry that had late payments or missed payments, which made her life very uncomfortable. Then he "murdered" her favourite brother (George of Clarence) - something which she apparently never forgave him for (she wasn't the only one in the family with a strong-reaction - their mother likewise didn't approve of it. The differecne was that the Dowager Duchess was her son's subject, so she couldn't say too much too loudly). Add Edward's lack of willingness to help Charles (due both to the pension that Louis XI was paying him and Charles' behaviour) in his wars with France, and Marge was politically ambivalent to her eldest brother.
 
Max only married Marie after Tewkesbury. So before then, he wouldn't be interested in England. Charles the Bold was someone who only helped the Yorkists if it was useful to him - why the Readeption of Henry VI lasted as long as it did - but then Charles went and curbstomped the English alliance during the very next war with France by refusing to let England use his territories to land troops for war with France.
Things between Edward IV and Margaret of York were iffy in general. Started with him marrying Elizabeth Wydeville (who Marge never really warmed to). Then a dowry that had late payments or missed payments, which made her life very uncomfortable. Then he "murdered" her favourite brother (George of Clarence) - something which she apparently never forgave him for (she wasn't the only one in the family with a strong-reaction - their mother likewise didn't approve of it. The differecne was that the Dowager Duchess was her son's subject, so she couldn't say too much too loudly). Add Edward's lack of willingness to help Charles (due both to the pension that Louis XI was paying him and Charles' behaviour) in his wars with France, and Marge was politically ambivalent to her eldest brother.
Who's Marie? If you mean Margaret, then the family drama can be butterflied away. the POD is set in 1453 and the butterflies start taking place exactly after Tewkesbury and the Burgundian match happened~1468 so Burgundy and England are technically allied, even if Charles doesn't offer support, he'd have to let the emperor do his intriguing, right?
 
What if apart from Edward of Westmister, Margaret d'Anjou gave also birth to another baby boy in 1453, likely christened Edmund after Edmund Beaufort? Assuming that Edward and his fate are more-less OTL, how would existence of Edmund alter the reality? Who would he marry (or be set to marry)? Louis XI likely won't waste his daughter on a son of deposed king, but some French noblewomen is likely, isn't she? I imagine that with claimant with a lot stronger rights that Henry Tudor, Edward IV's rule after Tewkesbury would be a lot less secure. @isabella @VVD0D95 @Kellan Sullivan
I have read the thread but I think the best thing is answering directly to the first post:
a boy (Henry or John more likely than Edmund) would be the ATL husband of Anne Neville (whose wedding in OTL was most likely consummated, judging from Anne’s travels and treatment after the wedding)
a daughter (Margaret more than Isabella or Catherine) would be without doubt destined to marry the Earl of March (as his father would provide to arrange and celebrate the match).
 
Who's Marie of Burgundy? If you mean Margaret, then the family drama can be butterflied away. the POD is set in 1453 and the butterflies start taking place exactly after Tewkesbury and the Burgundian match happened~1468 so Burgundy and England are technically allied, even if Charles doesn't offer support, he'd have to let the emperor do his intriguing, right?
Charles doesn't have to let the emperor do jack. IIRC, Charles actually was both more powerful and richer than Emperor Friedrich III. What Charles wanted from the emperor was a royal crown (there was also talk that Charles intended to stand for election as king of the Romans apparently). It was in the emperor's interest to keep him friendly, or at least, not unfriendly towards the empire.
 
Charles doesn't have to let the emperor do jack. IIRC, Charles actually was both more powerful and richer than Emperor Friedrich III. What Charles wanted from the emperor was a royal crown (there was also talk that Charles intended to stand for election as king of the Romans apparently). It was in the emperor's interest to keep him friendly, or at least, not unfriendly towards the empire.
Where does not supporting the Yorkists come into this?
 
I have read the thread but I think the best thing is answering directly to the first post:
a boy (Henry or John more likely than Edmund) would be the ATL husband of Anne Neville (whose wedding in OTL was most likely consummated, judging from Anne’s travels and treatment after the wedding)
According to you would Henry of Lancaster stay in France with his wife or he'd go with his brother to England?
 
Both things are possible, but likely Henry (and Anne) will sail for England with the rest of his family once England is retaken
Wouldn't Louis XI want to keep them as essentially hostages to ensure loyalty of Edward of Westminster once he gains English throne?
 
Wouldn't Louis XI want to keep them as essentially hostages to ensure loyalty of Edward of Westminster once he gains English throne?
Maybe he would like that but unless he is able to get Marguerite’s agreement he will not be able to do that (and I do not think likely who Marguerite will leave behind one of her sons)

IMHO Margaret and Henry VI would probably stay with Louis XI while the brothers go to Tewkesbury.
No way, specially because Henry VI is NOT in France (he was imprisoned in the Tower of London) and will NEVER be in France.
Reuniting her sons will their father is a good excuse for Marguerite for NOT leaving her second son on France by the way
 
Last edited:
Maybe he would like that but unless he is able to get Marguerite’s agreement he will not be able to do that (and I do not think likely who Marguerite will leave behind one of her sons)
But that way, it is certain that one of her sons won't die, so I think she might agree to that, thinking that if Edward wins, he'll get his brother out of France, if he loses, Henry will be safe and could mount next invasion. And what if Henry goes to England with Edward, dies, but Anne Neville gives birth to Henry's baby named Edward in honor of his royal uncle?
 
But that way, it is certain that one of her sons won't die, so I think she might agree to that, thinking that if Edward wins, he'll get his brother out of France, if he loses, Henry will be safe and could mount next invasion. And what if Henry goes to England with Edward, dies, but Anne Neville gives birth to Henry's baby named Edward in honor of his royal uncle?
How is it certain? Why do you think that Louis XI would support the Lancastrians post- Tewkesbury?

And for your second question, wouldn't it be easier for literally everyone if said child was a girl? IIRC, Edward of Westminster never consummated his marriage, why do you think Henry/Edmund would?

A male child of Henry might be able to mount an invasion, but it would be ~20 years till it's possible, by then the Yorkists would pretty much have established themselves and would have allies all over Europe, and a ridiculous amount of children by that time as well( they were absurdly fertile OTL)

Also, a question, the OP said that Westminster's life stays the same till Tewkesbury, does this mean that there are no butterflies between 1453-1471?
 
How is it certain? Why do you think that Louis XI would support the Lancastrians post- Tewkesbury?

And for your second question, wouldn't it be easier for literally everyone if said child was a girl? IIRC, Edward of Westminster never consummated his marriage, why do you think Henry/Edmund would?

A male child of Henry might be able to mount an invasion, but it would be ~20 years till it's possible, by then the Yorkists would pretty much have established themselves and would have allies all over Europe, and a ridiculous amount of children by that time as well( they were absurdly fertile OTL)

Also, a question, the OP said that Westminster's life stays the same till Tewkesbury, does this mean that there are no butterflies between 1453-1471?

It is not certain, but Margaret could think that possibility of blackmailing Yorkists by supporting Henry's/Edmund's claim would be enough to keep him alive. Yorkists were absurdly fertile or Elizabeth Woodville was? It is not the same thing.
 
It is not certain, but Margaret could think that possibility of blackmailing Yorkists by supporting Henry's/Edmund's claim would be enough to keep him alive. Yorkists were absurdly fertile or Elizabeth Woodville was? It is not the same thing.
Yorkists were.
Edward IV had 10 legitimate children, his father had 12, his paternal grandfather had 3 kids in 3 years, his maternal grandfather had ~22 (with 2 different wives), so there.

Also, Edmund of Rutland probably survives in this scenario, if he was as frrtile as his brother and ancestors, there's a sh*t-ton of legit Yorkist claimants lying around, as apposed to 1 Lancastrian.


A legit Lancastrian win isn't impossible, but you need Tewkesbury not to happen for that.


BTW you didn't answer my last question.
 
does this mean that there are no butterflies between 1453-1471
Yes, there are no butterflies in this time period, so Rutland stays as dead as he was IOTL.

Edward IV had 10 legitimate children, his father had 12, his paternal grandfather had 3 kids in 3 years, his maternal grandfather had ~22 (with 2 different wives), so there.
But his Edward IV's brothers weren't so lucky with progeny -George of Clarence had only two children, and Richard of Gloucester had one sickly boy.
 
Top