York/Lancaster

Grey Wolf said:
Just think, if Edward of Angoulême (27 January 1365 - January 1372) eldest son of the Black Prince had lived, we wouldn't be having this discussion!

Maybe. Maybe not. No one knows how Edward of Angoulême would have ruled : he may have turned out better than Richard II but he could also have been worse. And no one guarantees us that TTL Edward IV would be overthrown by his younger brother!

Beside, you would still have the trouble of Edward III being succeeded by a minor (Edward of Angoulême would have been 12 in 1377) which could lead to a succession crisis later.

Grey Wolf said:
btw how do you pronounce Eu??? Yoo? Oo? Er? Yer?

Eu is a French city. So you would have to pronounce it the French way which is like how the french say the letter "e".
Sadly, I'm no expert in English phonetic writing so I can't write it phonetically...
 
Eu is a French city. So you would have to pronounce it the French way which is like how the french say the letter "e".
Sadly, I'm no expert in English phonetic writing so I can't write it phonetically...

I believe it's said like a cross between "Er" and "Uh". That's with my southern English accent, anyway. Think "Er" only not too much emphasis on the 'r' bit. A bit like the sound people make when they eat food and don't like it's taste.

Yeah...I genuinely can't find a better way of describing it than that.
 

Thande

Donor
I would say Eu is pronounced something like English "Eurgh!" but with less of a distasteful-recoiling feel to it, and a shorter sound.
 
The One True King

The first medieval group I belonged to was Lancastrian (20+ years ago). However, the House of York made England stronger and Richard III may have been an excellent King so on balance I'd have to go with Edward IV being the best choice at that time
 
York/Lancaster.

The first medieval group I belonged to was Lancastrian (20+ years ago). However, the House of York made England stronger and Richard III may have been an excellent King so on balance I'd have to go with Edward IV being the best choice at that time
I agree. Had economic times been better, Henry VI may have been able to last. And the complete loss of Lancastrian France certainly did'nt help his reputation.
 
Hi I am a yorkist

I have just joined today and I hope I can bring plenty of debate about Richard III and the people of his day without having any PHD I was quite thick at school. So that just shows you what rubbish is being taught at school because Shakesphere Richard III is not the real one. What do you think?
 

The Vulture

Banned
I have just joined today and I hope I can bring plenty of debate about Richard III and the people of his day without having any PHD I was quite thick at school. So that just shows you what rubbish is being taught at school because Shakesphere Richard III is not the real one. What do you think?

Are you even trying to make sense?
 
I support the hypothetical House of Buckingham created when the son of that branch did not die and also when people got sick of the Yorkists and Lancastrians constantly fighting and messing up the country.

I don't know anything about English history of that era.
 
Kinda sucks that the House of Buckingham was a supporter of the House of Lancaster then, doesnt it????

To begin with anyway....
 
Nope, you're thinking of the wrong ones.

That was the Staffords. They were heirs of Thomas of Woodstock and, more to the point, his wife Eleanor de Bohun through Humphrey's sister Anne, who married the Earl of Stafford (actually she married two of them, one after the other). Her son by the second of her Stafford husbands was the 1st Duke of Buckingham. Both he and his own eldest son were killed fighting for Lancaster, the latter first. The second duke, the first duke's grandson, succeeded when only four years old and grew up under Yorkist rule. He was a main supporter of Richard III, but turned against him and to the cause of Henry Tudor. Unfortunately for Buckingham this was the first revolt against Richard, which failed and he was subsequently executed. Anyway, with three successive generations dying one way or another in the Lancastrian cause, the allegiance of the line is fairly clear.
 
I agree. Had economic times been better, Henry VI may have been able to last. And the complete loss of Lancastrian France certainly did'nt help his reputation.


Big trouble being that Edward IV (like Charles II in the Stuart family) was virtually the only bright member of his house, so that with his death the Yorkists quickly collapsed and all had to be done again.

Interesting question is whether, had EIV lived a few years longer, an adult Edward V could have held things together, or whether he would have been swept away as his uncle Richard was.
 
Top