WI: The House of Lancaster Wins

I recently started reading War of the Roses by Alison Weir, and that combined with Avitus' Palaiologos timeline got me thinking. What if the Lancastrians won when they invaded during Warwick's Rebellion. I don't know how, maybe Warwick wins in the battle of Barnet or something like that. Who would run the English government: Warwick or Queen Margaret of Anjou? I assume Edward himself would either flee into exile or be executed so what would happen to Edward IV's family( wife, children,mother, brother)? What kind of ruler would Edward of Westminster be?
 
I recently started reading War of the Roses by Alison Weir, and that combined with Avitus' Palaiologos timeline got me thinking. What if the Lancastrians won when they invaded during Warwick's Rebellion. I don't know how, maybe Warwick wins in the battle of Barnet or something like that. Who would run the English government: Warwick or Queen Margaret of Anjou? I assume Edward himself would either flee into exile or be executed so what would happen to Edward IV's family( wife, children,mother, brother)? What kind of ruler would Edward of Westminster be?


At some point Margaret and Warwick will fall out - if ever an alliance was born only to die, it was that one. My guess is Margaret wins, esp if Edward IV and his brothers are dead and Warwick no longer has a credible candidate for the throne.

As for Edward of Westminster, there's no way to tell. We know so little about him, and that from his childhood, But there's no reason for him to be any worse than the general run of medieval kings.
 
As Mikestone8 says, that alliance is doomed to fracture, there is just too much personal hatred between Warwick and Margaret. However I wouldnt be so quick to discount Warwick in the ensuing power struggle as both himself and his brother Montagu are both considerable battle commanders and married into alot of noble families. True the Lancastrians may hold the advantage to start with but if the Neville's manage to rally their retainers and engage the Lancastrians in battle I think they have a chance. As for candidates to the throne, I dont really think they need one..... after all Edward of Lancaster is married to Warwick's daughter so presuming they have an heir Warwick is grandfather to the future King/Queen. And excluding that (say if Anne is discarded) they could always make a play for Elizabeth of York who was betrothed to George Neville Duke of Bedford, Warwicks nephew gaining potential Yorkist supporters.
 
Well even if they win Barnet their alliance is doomed to failure - I can't see Margaret being as conciliatory to Yorkist peers nor as generous to Warwick (as Edward IV was).
Warwick still has an ace in the hole given that Clarence is still onside and married to Warwick's eldest daughter - Anne's marriage to the Prince of Wales is going to be problematic - Clarence and Wales now fight over the warwick inheritance (just as in OTL Gloucester and Clarence argued) and Margaret is probably going to want to dispose of the marriage for a better match if she can.
The dispossed Duchess of York (formerly Queen Elizabeth Woodville has an infant son Edward V to Yorkists assuming Edward IV dies and her daughters) is going to offer some form of symbolic resistance.
 
Warwick still has an ace in the hole given that Clarence is still onside

Clarence returned to the Yorkist fold shortly before Barnet so if Warwick wins I cant see him forgiving his son in laws betrayal. Infact of all the Yorkist brothers Gloucester probably has the best chance of leniency, he is close to Warwick whose household he grew up in and his youth and inexperience would probably work in his favour. Obviously once Margaret arrives everything changes as she wont want any remaining Yorkists.
 
Would Elizabeth Woodville be allowed to call herself the Duchess of York? After winning, the Lancastrians would no doubt attain all members of the house of York, including Clarence. So the warwick inheiritance would go to the Prince of Wales. However I had red something interesting about Anne Neville in a previous thread about Edward of Westminster surviving.
"Anne got remarried to Richard of Gloucester ca. 1472 and gave him his only legitimate son, Edward of Middleham, ca. 1473. That makes her a mother at 17 and she died at 29. We don't know the details on the birth of Richard III's son, so maybe it was difficult and made Anne infertile afterwards, but if not that's not much." So would Edward remain married to Anne if she was infertile?
 
House of Lancaster

I agree with everything here. Warwick and Margaret of Anjou will rapidly fall out. They only came together because Warwick detested the Woodvilles so much..From what I remember of Warwick's 2 daughters, they were never particularly healthy and both died relatively young. I also read somewhere that Edward Prince of Wales was very violent and not very mentally stable.
 
I agree with everything here. Warwick and Margaret of Anjou will rapidly fall out. They only came together because Warwick detested the Woodvilles so much..From what I remember of Warwick's 2 daughters, they were never particularly healthy and both died relatively young. I also read somewhere that Edward Prince of Wales was very violent and not very mentally stable.


As far as I can make out this picture of him only stems from two episodes, neither of them proving very much.

The first was at age seven (!!) when he condemned two Yorkist knights to be beheaded. But if his age alone weren't sufficient proof, even the sketchy account which has come down to us makes it perfectly clear that he was only a mouthpiece for the Queen.

The other is six years later, when someone who has met the Prince in exile remarks that "This boy, though but thirteen year of age, talks of nothing but cutting off heads and making war, as if he had everything in his hands or was the God of Battle". But such bloodthirsty tastes were and are quite common in young boys, and this boy was, after all, in training to become a Medieval king, for whom cutting off heads and making war would be normal parts of the job description. Even if the observer was right, it wouldn't seem to make Edward any worse than the other kings of the period, Lancastrian, Yorkist or Tudor, save of course for the ineffectual Henry VI.
 
Last edited:
As far as I can make out this picture of him only stems from two episodes, neither of them proving very much.

The first was at age seven (!!) when he condemned two Yorkist knights to be beheaded. But if his age alone weren't sufficient proof, even the sketchy account which has come down to us makes it perfectly clear that he was only a mouthpiece for the Queen.

The other is six years later, when someone who has met the Prince in exile remarks that "This boy, though but thirteen year of age, talks of nothing but cutting off heads and making war, as if he had everything in his hands or was the God of Battle". But such bloodthirsty tastes were and are quite common in young boys, and this boy was, after all, in training to become a Medieval king, for whom cutting off heads and making war would be normal parts of the job description. Even if the observer was right, it wouldn't seem to make Edward any worse than the other kings of the period, Lncastrian, Yorkist or Tudor, save of course for the ineffectual Henry VI.


I agree. The quote about cutting of heads is repeated so much, but I don't think its a good source to say he would be a bad king. Now if Anne Neville dies on schedule and leaves either no children or, going by OTL, one child, who would Edward marry? Someone had suggested Elizabeth of York in a previous thread but is that possible or just wishful thinking?
 
I agree. The quote about cutting of heads is repeated so much, but I don't think its a good source to say he would be a bad king. Now if Anne Neville dies on schedule and leaves either no children or, going by OTL, one child, who would Edward marry? Someone had suggested Elizabeth of York in a previous thread but is that possible or just wishful thinking?


Iirc, when Warwick was making his peace with Margaret of Anjou in 1470, the Queen remarked at one point that "she had the offer of the Princesse for her sonne" so why should she marry him to Warwick's daughter?

She may have been lying, of course, but Edward IV's son had not yet been born, so such a deal would have made sense. Later, much depends on what happens to young Edward, but given the high infant mortality of those days, his existence mightn't be an insuperable obstacle, and even if he lived he might be made a Bishop or something, which would ensure that he never had legitimate heirs.
 
I think Margarets hatred for the Lancastrians excludes Elizabeth of York from becoming Queen. I mean with the Yorkist princes dead and the princesses presumably in the Lancastrians custody I just dont think Anjou would see the upside of the marriage as we nowadays might
 
Women were not attainted even at the height of the civil war when Cecily Neville Duchess of York was taken she was treated with all the due civility as the wife of a peer and her "imprisonment" was actually.
The widows of men killed in those circumstances were usually permitted to retain their dower rights etc
Although the battle might have been brutal rules of chivalry and honour were still regarded quite highly and to attack a wife for standing by her husband was on the whole considered beyond the pale.
In 1470 Elizabeth Woodville and her daughters had taken themselves to
the Tower of London where her son Edward Prince of Wales was born.

I think the question should be whether she continues to insist on being regarded as Queen Consort (she had been crowned after all) lol.


Would Elizabeth Woodville be allowed to call herself the Duchess of York? After winning, the Lancastrians would no doubt attain all members of the house of York, including Clarence. So the warwick inheiritance would go to the Prince of Wales. However I had red something interesting about Anne Neville in a previous thread about Edward of Westminster surviving.
"Anne got remarried to Richard of Gloucester ca. 1472 and gave him his only legitimate son, Edward of Middleham, ca. 1473. That makes her a mother at 17 and she died at 29. We don't know the details on the birth of Richard III's son, so maybe it was difficult and made Anne infertile afterwards, but if not that's not much." So would Edward remain married to Anne if she was infertile?
 
Top