Henry VII dies shortly after taking the English throne

On the Lancastrian side, you have three possible heirs to Henry VII, none of whom has an excellent claim:
  • Jasper Tudor, his closest male relative, an adult general and half-brother of the late Henry VI, but entirely lacking in Plantagenet blood: he'd have to marry Elizabeth, claim succession to Henry VII by right of conquest and election by Parliament. Constitutionally, it'd be real messy.
  • Charles Beaufort, later known as Charles Somerset, bastard son of the late Duke of Somerset, a male-line Plantagenet. Some vague argument for a secret marriage between his parents could be made, I suppose.
  • Edward Plantagenet, Earl of Warwick, on account of his father's Lancastrian dealings, and being a male-line Plantagenet.
And on the Yorkist, obviously Elizabeth, who would need to be matched to one of these and would most likely not be allowed/able to rule on her own.
You forgot the most obvious Lancastrian claimant, Edward Stafford, Duke of Buckingham.
What about Margaret as a temporary measure? A Queen regnant unlikely to produce heirs, but able to stabilize the country and nominate an heir (someone like Lincoln).
I doubt it. Her father and uncle were two of the most hated Englishmen at the time. Plus, there is still the legitimacy of the Beauforts and if they are allowed to inherit the throne. Combine that with other claimants running around and I can’t see Margaret getting the throne.

Depending on where they are at the time of Henry’s death, I could see Jasper and Oxford playing Kingmaker, installing Edward of Warwick on the throne in hopes he will be a puppet. They might even try to marry him to Elizabeth to beef up his claim. Meanwhile, John de la Pole, if he was made privy to Richard’s plans to name him heir, would likely organise a revolt against the new regime. Lovell and other surviving Ricardians are likely to support him to. So if John, goes for the crown we could see another civil war break out. If not, then the plan to put Warwick on the throne could succeed, though there would obviously be some revolts along the way. Alternatively, Oxford and Jasper could support John and beg for mercy. Personally, I see a civil war happening no matter what happens.
 
You forgot the most obvious Lancastrian claimant, Edward Stafford, Duke of Buckingham.

I doubt it. Her father and uncle were two of the most hated Englishmen at the time. Plus, there is still the legitimacy of the Beauforts and if they are allowed to inherit the throne. Combine that with other claimants running around and I can’t see Margaret getting the throne.
Buckingham was a child then, and his mother a sister to Elizabeth Woodville.
 
Buckingham was a child then, and his mother a sister to Elizabeth Woodville.
Not so much a guarantee that he'll be loyal. Think it comes back to Warwick as the premier York candidate v Buckingham as premier Lancastrian. Marry Warwick to EoY and you'd have most of the Yorkist supporters backing him. Buckingham - as a kid - wouldn't be a viable candidate until the 1490s except for ones who'd want a regency to exploit the chaos. As to Warwick being an idiot, its worth noting that (AFAIK) until 1483, he was still ward of Dorset, so he hasn't had more than a decade in the Tower to rob him of his wits (if he ever lost them to begin with, and it wasn't just him deliberately playing dumb to avoid Henry VII's scrutiny). I'd be interested in a TL where they go for King Warwick marrying Elizabeth of York, and he plays the smiling idiot until he's eighteen, when he shows that he's the Kingmaker's heir (with York temper/martial prowess thrown in to boot)
 

VVD0D95

Banned
Not so much a guarantee that he'll be loyal. Think it comes back to Warwick as the premier York candidate v Buckingham as premier Lancastrian. Marry Warwick to EoY and you'd have most of the Yorkist supporters backing him. Buckingham - as a kid - wouldn't be a viable candidate until the 1490s except for ones who'd want a regency to exploit the chaos. As to Warwick being an idiot, its worth noting that (AFAIK) until 1483, he was still ward of Dorset, so he hasn't had more than a decade in the Tower to rob him of his wits (if he ever lost them to begin with, and it wasn't just him deliberately playing dumb to avoid Henry VII's scrutiny). I'd be interested in a TL where they go for King Warwick marrying Elizabeth of York, and he plays the smiling idiot until he's eighteen, when he shows that he's the Kingmaker's heir (with York temper/martial prowess thrown in to boot)
You’ve given me an idea. Curse you
 
Not so much a guarantee that he'll be loyal. Think it comes back to Warwick as the premier York candidate v Buckingham as premier Lancastrian. Marry Warwick to EoY and you'd have most of the Yorkist supporters backing him. Buckingham - as a kid - wouldn't be a viable candidate until the 1490s except for ones who'd want a regency to exploit the chaos. As to Warwick being an idiot, its worth noting that (AFAIK) until 1483, he was still ward of Dorset, so he hasn't had more than a decade in the Tower to rob him of his wits (if he ever lost them to begin with, and it wasn't just him deliberately playing dumb to avoid Henry VII's scrutiny). I'd be interested in a TL where they go for King Warwick marrying Elizabeth of York, and he plays the smiling idiot until he's eighteen, when he shows that he's the Kingmaker's heir (with York temper/martial prowess thrown in to boot)
A Warwick-EoY marriage wouldn't do much to satisfy Margaret Beaufort or the other Lancastrians -- i.e., the faction that is currently on top after winning a major battle -- or the Ricardians who divided the traditional Yorkist party against itself.
 
Buckingham was a child then, and his mother a sister to Elizabeth Woodville.
The other claimants aren’t exactly seasoned themselves though. Elizabeth of York is 19, Edward of Warwick is 10 and John de la Pole is 27. Also, Buckingham’s father was allied with Richard III, but still betrayed him, so I don’t think buckingham’s mum being a Woodville will affect much.
Not so much a guarantee that he'll be loyal. Think it comes back to Warwick as the premier York candidate v Buckingham as premier Lancastrian. Marry Warwick to EoY and you'd have most of the Yorkist supporters backing him. Buckingham - as a kid - wouldn't be a viable candidate until the 1490s except for ones who'd want a regency to exploit the chaos. As to Warwick being an idiot, its worth noting that (AFAIK) until 1483, he was still ward of Dorset, so he hasn't had more than a decade in the Tower to rob him of his wits (if he ever lost them to begin with, and it wasn't just him deliberately playing dumb to avoid Henry VII's scrutiny). I'd be interested in a TL where they go for King Warwick marrying Elizabeth of York, and he plays the smiling idiot until he's eighteen, when he shows that he's the Kingmaker's heir (with York temper/martial prowess thrown in to boot)
That would be really interesting. Especially if Edward wastes no time in emancipating himself from his Regents.
A Warwick-EoY marriage wouldn't do much to satisfy Margaret Beaufort or the other Lancastrians -- i.e., the faction that is currently on top after winning a major battle -- or the Ricardians who divided the traditional Yorkist party against itself.
A decent portion of Henry VII’s supporters were Yorkist though, so the Lancastrian base at the time may not be large enough to keep the show going. Plus the Lancastrians don’t have the best claimants at the moment. The best possible claimant Edward Stafford is 7 and considering how the last three regencies for child longs went, some may not be too keen on having him as King. If the Lancastrians really want a Lancastrian King, their best move would be to play nice with whoever gets the crown and wait for Edward Stafford to reach adulthood before making a play for the crown.

As for the Ricardians, they are going to be a headache, especially if John de la Pole (their best claimant) makes a go for the crown. It’s part of the reason why I see this ending in another civil war.
 
A Warwick-EoY marriage wouldn't do much to satisfy Margaret Beaufort or the other Lancastrians -- i.e., the faction that is currently on top after winning a major battle -- or the Ricardians who divided the traditional Yorkist party against itself.
Nothing would satisfy Margaret Beaufort; she'd be completely heartbroken. It's hard to imagine her being a leading figure in politics when she has absolutely no motivation to keep going. She openly wept when her son became king. In the event of his death she should be inconsolable. It's not as if he's been murdered or anything, either. It was a freak accident. She doesn't even have revenge to keep her going.

Margaret's main allies, the Stanleys, aren't exactly diehard Lancastrians either. They've been switching sides since the whole conflict began. The Stanleys are plain opportunists. They'd have no problem with a York as long as they had something left to gain.

Besides, it was the Wydeville-Lancastrian faction that overthrew Richard. It wasn't strictly Lancastrians. And Elizabeth Wydeville should still have plenty of steam left in her.
 
Ccould she manage to get her daughter as suo-jure queen?
She certainly wants her daughter to be queen, though I don't think she's particularly fussy about the details.

Her first course of action was to marry Elizabeth of York off to a male with some plausible claim to the throne, so there's a decent chance she tries that again. Another alternative (less likely in xenophobic England) is marry Elizabeth of York to a foreign royal who can then become King of England jure uxoris. There's a chance she tries to make Elizabeth of York queen in her own right, but I think that's less likely than the other two options.
 
Nothing would satisfy Margaret Beaufort; she'd be completely heartbroken. It's hard to imagine her being a leading figure in politics when she has absolutely no motivation to keep going. She openly wept when her son became king. In the event of his death she should be inconsolable. It's not as if he's been murdered or anything, either. It was a freak accident. She doesn't even have revenge to keep her going.

Margaret's main allies, the Stanleys, aren't exactly diehard Lancastrians either. They've been switching sides since the whole conflict began. The Stanleys are plain opportunists. They'd have no problem with a York as long as they had something left to gain.

Besides, it was the Wydeville-Lancastrian faction that overthrew Richard. It wasn't strictly Lancastrians. And Elizabeth Wydeville should still have plenty of steam left in her.
Henry VII's support came from Lancastrians and Edwardians, sure, but his death doesn't change the fact that both sides still need one another. Richard III's usurpation was driven by intense anti-Woodville sentiment, and now the Ricardians have the chance to put one of their own (Lincoln) on the throne -- they're not going to simply accept the boy Warwick or whoever else Elizabeth of York may wed (their master had pushed the lie that she was a bastard, after all). I don't think any of the three sides factions is strong enough to defeat the other two on its own, and the Lancastrian-Edwardian alliance was recently victorious. It seems to me that these are the two factions that would be most likely to work together to maintain power -- and neither side gets anything from bringing Warwick to the fore.
 
Henry VII's support came from Lancastrians and Edwardians, sure, but his death doesn't change the fact that both sides still need one another. Richard III's usurpation was driven by intense anti-Woodville sentiment, and now the Ricardians have the chance to put one of their own (Lincoln) on the throne -- they're not going to simply accept the boy Warwick or whoever else Elizabeth of York may wed (their master had pushed the lie that she was a bastard, after all). I don't think any of the three sides factions is strong enough to defeat the other two on its own, and the Lancastrian-Edwardian alliance was recently victorious. It seems to me that these are the two factions that would be most likely to work together to maintain power -- and neither side gets anything from bringing Warwick to the fore.
I think Jasper would want someone he could control, and maybe Dorset would be further strengthened by Henry’s sudden death.
 
I don't think any of the three sides factions is strong enough to defeat the other two on its own, and the Lancastrian-Edwardian alliance was recently victorious. It seems to me that these are the two factions that would be most likely to work together to maintain power -- and neither side gets anything from bringing Warwick to the fore.
Assuming they continue to work with a (successful) Wydeville faction, the Lancastrians get to rejoin political life in England. That's all most of them wanted anyway. The Earl of Oxford was an attained prisoner before he helped beat Richard at Bosworth. So long as he gets restored to his lands and titles and a few prominent court positions, I don't think he particularly cares very much who the king is. He was still instrumental in defeating Richard III, so he can still reasonably expect those rewards from Elizabeth Wydeville. I also doubt the Ricardians would treat him kindly if he changed sides, so his loyalties might as well be locked in anyway.

The only Lancaster man I can't place is Jasper himself. No doubt the death of the nephew he raised as his own would shake him, but I don't know if he'd be as inconsolable as Margaret Beaufort. He still has the chance at a good marriage, lands, and a life that isn't one of exile. And I don't think he'd get that by switching over to the Ricardian faction.

Maybe the Wydeville-Lancaster alliance could be maintained by a marriage between Jasper and Elizabeth Wydeville? Jasper married Elizabeth's sister OTL, but it seems like they could really use each other at the moment in a way that an in-law relationship just wouldn't solidify.

I'm also just not as sold on Lincoln's abilities as you are, I think. What I see from his activities OTL is a man who's lacking a bit of a backbone despite all his ambitions. Which I anticipate to be especially true with so many of the leading Ricardian figures having died at Bosworth.
 
Assuming they continue to work with a (successful) Wydeville faction, the Lancastrians get to rejoin political life in England. That's all most of them wanted anyway. The Earl of Oxford was an attained prisoner before he helped beat Richard at Bosworth. So long as he gets restored to his lands and titles and a few prominent court positions, I don't think he particularly cares very much who the king is. He was still instrumental in defeating Richard III, so he can still reasonably expect those rewards from Elizabeth Wydeville. I also doubt the Ricardians would treat him kindly if he changed sides, so his loyalties might as well be locked in anyway.

The only Lancaster man I can't place is Jasper himself. No doubt the death of the nephew he raised as his own would shake him, but I don't know if he'd be as inconsolable as Margaret Beaufort. He still has the chance at a good marriage, lands, and a life that isn't one of exile. And I don't think he'd get that by switching over to the Ricardian faction.

Maybe the Wydeville-Lancaster alliance could be maintained by a marriage between Jasper and Elizabeth Wydeville? Jasper married Elizabeth's sister OTL, but it seems like they could really use each other at the moment in a way that an in-law relationship just wouldn't solidify.

I'm also just not as sold on Lincoln's abilities as you are, I think. What I see from his activities OTL is a man who's lacking a bit of a backbone despite all his ambitions. Which I anticipate to be especially true with so many of the leading Ricardian figures having died at Bosworth.
The Lancastrians in exile may have been willing to settle for rejoining political life before Bosworth, but at this point they are victorious. Henry's army at Bosworth was drawn almost entirely from the Lancastrian cause, mainly Jasper's Welsh allies and the Talbots' English retainers. They now have the Stanleys in the camp. All of these men, as well as their lieutenants, are going to understand the power they wield relative to the divided Yorkist cause, they're going to want to something for their efforts at bringing down Richard, and none of them are going to be able to count on a Yorkist boy king to get it. They're going to want a Lancastrian to wed Elizabeth, as was originally planned.

I don't really see Lincoln as lacking backbone. IIRC, he was the primary figure conspiring with his aunt in Burgundy, which doesn't suggest that he's reluctant to strike. I always saw his support for the Lambert Simnel farce as hedging his bets -- something that could allow him to try and reconcile with Henry if he had survived Stoke. "Oh, I'm sorry, I was taken in by his lies, I thought he was Edward's true born son -- now that I know he's not, of course I support you and your wife."
 
They're going to want a Lancastrian to wed Elizabeth, as was originally planned.
They have nobody lined up. Henry of Richmond was their last credible claimant. I can't see them being so dense as to risk their lives in England twiddling their thumbs over finding somebody they already know doesn't exist. They need to attach themselves to somebody already running around, and it sure as heck isn't the Ricardians.
Henry's army at Bosworth was drawn almost entirely from the Lancastrian cause, mainly Jasper's Welsh allies and the Talbots' English retainers. They now have the Stanleys in the camp.
I've already explained that the Stanleys will switch sides to anyone who benefits them; they aren't Lancastrian loyalists. And the Lancastrian army at Bosworth was also inflated with French mercenaries whose interests aren't going to be aligned with the Lancastrian cause very strongly either.

I think you're vastly overestimating the capability of the Lancastrian holdouts here. There weren't that many of them in exile to begin with, they have no claimant (even Henry of Richmond was the bottom of the barrel), and many of them have already got what they've asked for. Whether they go with Warwick or the Elizabeth of York/Elizabeth Wydeville circle, I'm not sure, but I can't see them going with Lincoln given they've pretty much alienated themselves from the Ricardian cause by helping take down Richard.

And there just isn't anyone else for them to rally behind. Buckingham? He's too young to marry Elizabeth and his claim makes Henry of Richmond's look positively sterling by comparison.
 
They're going to want a Lancastrian to wed Elizabeth, as was originally planned.
And there just isn't anyone else for them to rally behind. Buckingham? He's too young to marry Elizabeth and his claim makes Henry of Richmond's look positively sterling by comparison.
If we trust Alison Weir (that’s iffy) then there is Thomas Beaufort (b. 1442), but even if he existed I doubt Edward IV would’ve let him live past the 1470s. Honestly, Jasper and Oxford playing Kingmaker and installing a Yorkist King of their choice (Warwick) is the most logical decision they could make imo.
 
They have nobody lined up. Henry of Richmond was their last credible claimant. I can't see them being so dense as to risk their lives in England twiddling their thumbs over finding somebody they already know doesn't exist. They need to attach themselves to somebody already running around, and it sure as heck isn't the Ricardians.
I agree there's no obvious contender -- I said just that in my first post in this thread 🙃 That doesn't change the fact that both the Lancastrians and the Edwardians need each other, though, and that a marriage between a Lancastrian (probably Jasper) and Elizabeth of York is the cleanest way to unite the two factions.


I've already explained that the Stanleys will switch sides to anyone who benefits them; they aren't Lancastrian loyalists. And the Lancastrian army at Bosworth was also inflated with French mercenaries whose interests aren't going to be aligned with the Lancastrian cause very strongly either.
Except the Stanleys have no place to go now. Their intervention at Bosworth changes their position in the kingdom rather dramatically -- they simply cannot reconcile themselves with the Ricardians after the being the deciding factor in the battle that killed Richard himself.


I think you're vastly overestimating the capability of the Lancastrian holdouts here. There weren't that many of them in exile to begin with, they have no claimant (even Henry of Richmond was the bottom of the barrel), and many of them have already got what they've asked for. Whether they go with Warwick or the Elizabeth of York/Elizabeth Wydeville circle, I'm not sure, but I can't see them going with Lincoln given they've pretty much alienated themselves from the Ricardian cause by helping take down Richard.

And there just isn't anyone else for them to rally behind. Buckingham? He's too young to marry Elizabeth and his claim makes Henry of Richmond's look positively sterling by comparison.
And I think you're overestimating the capability of the Edwardians 🤷‍♂️

There were reportedly 400 exiles in Brittany, which is a small enough number on its own but would be entirely drawn from the nobility. That is a pretty sizable number of lords, knights and squires. There were 6500ish Lancastrians at Boworth, of which 2000 were Frenchmen. That's 4500 men drawn primary from Jasper's Welsh allies and the Talbot men. I doubt the Edwardians could raise much more than this. Yet, if we look at Stoke just a couple of years later, we see that Lincoln is able to raise about 8,000 men. The Edwardians and Lancastrians need one another to survive.


Honestly, Jasper and Oxford playing Kingmaker and installing a Yorkist King of their choice (Warwick) is the most logical decision they could make imo.
How on earth is choosing a child with no support whatsoever the most logical decision? The figure in question is such a political nonentity that 1) Richard III just ignored him entirely during the usurpation of 1483 and there is no record of anyone objecting to this, 2) Richard murdered the princes in the Tower and there is no record of anyone floating Warwick as a possible contender to the throne, 3) the Ricardians would promote the imposter Lambert Simnel before rather than take up Warwick's cause, and 4) Edwardians alienated by Henry VII's reign would promote the imposter Perkin Warbeck rather than take up Warwick's cause.

The only people who ever seem to have been interested in Warwick are history nerds like us who think "Well, there was a male line Plantagenet running around" -- but there's genuinely no evidence that anyone at the time cared.
 
I agree there's no obvious contender -- I said just that in my first post in this thread 🙃 That doesn't change the fact that both the Lancastrians and the Edwardians need each other, though, and that a marriage between a Lancastrian (probably Jasper) and Elizabeth of York is the cleanest way to unite the two factions.



Except the Stanleys have no place to go now. Their intervention at Bosworth changes their position in the kingdom rather dramatically -- they simply cannot reconcile themselves with the Ricardians after the being the deciding factor in the battle that killed Richard himself.



And I think you're overestimating the capability of the Edwardians 🤷‍♂️

There were reportedly 400 exiles in Brittany, which is a small enough number on its own but would be entirely drawn from the nobility. That is a pretty sizable number of lords, knights and squires. There were 6500ish Lancastrians at Boworth, of which 2000 were Frenchmen. That's 4500 men drawn primary from Jasper's Welsh allies and the Talbot men. I doubt the Edwardians could raise much more than this. Yet, if we look at Stoke just a couple of years later, we see that Lincoln is able to raise about 8,000 men. The Edwardians and Lancastrians need one another to survive.



How on earth is choosing a child with no support whatsoever the most logical decision? The figure in question is such a political nonentity that 1) Richard III just ignored him entirely during the usurpation of 1483 and there is no record of anyone objecting to this, 2) Richard murdered the princes in the Tower and there is no record of anyone floating Warwick as a possible contender to the throne, 3) the Ricardians would promote the imposter Lambert Simnel before rather than take up Warwick's cause, and 4) Edwardians alienated by Henry VII's reign would promote the imposter Perkin Warbeck rather than take up Warwick's cause.

The only people who ever seem to have been interested in Warwick are history nerds like us who think "Well, there was a male line Plantagenet running around" -- but there's genuinely no evidence that anyone at the time cared.
Henry VII cared. Why do you think Warwick went in the tower as soon as practically possible? He knew the dangers of a male York boy…
 
Top