|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Apr 14, 2021 20:43:57 GMT
Castile or Aragon would have been a good place for an ATL bride of Henry VI, since I recall reading about some distant Lancastrian who married into the Portuguese ruling dynasty. A Portuguese princess would have also been a good candidate for Henry VI. Richard, 3rd Duke of York would still be stuck with Cecily Neville, unless she ends up giving birth to a daughter who IOTL would have been born a boy (Edward IV). In fact, a good PoD for all of this would have been for a daughter to be born instead of OTL Edward IV (possibly basing this scenario on the documentary ‘Britain’s Real Monarch’.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856 
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Apr 15, 2021 12:53:18 GMT
Castile or Aragon would have been a good place for an ATL bride of Henry VI, since I recall reading about some distant Lancastrian who married into the Portuguese ruling dynasty. A Portuguese princess would have also been a good candidate for Henry VI. Richard, 3rd Duke of York would still be stuck with Cecily Neville, unless she ends up giving birth to a daughter who IOTL would have been born a boy (Edward IV). In fact, a good PoD for all of this would have been for a daughter to be born instead of OTL Edward IV (possibly basing this scenario on the documentary ‘Britain’s Real Monarch’.
Was that John_of_Gaunt? He wasn't exactly a distant Lancasterian as he was the founder of that line and a younger son of Edward III. His son Henry IV was the man who took over England after a revolution against Richard II, the son of the Black Prince. He had a claim to the throne of Castile via his marriage to Constance of Castile and one their children Phillippa was married to John I of Portugal who assisted in his failed attempt to gain the throne of Castile. |
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Apr 15, 2021 13:56:23 GMT
I think it was Philippa of Lancaster who married John I of Portugal.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Apr 15, 2021 19:08:06 GMT
I think it was Philippa of Lancaster who married John I of Portugal.
Yes that was John of Gaunt's daughter. Sorry didn't reply very clearly.
|
|
|
|
Post by halferking on Apr 15, 2021 23:23:08 GMT
Would anyone want to marry Henry VI? I get the impression that Margaret, if she had a choice, would not have married him - it's seems to me that although she belongs to a poor noble family, distant blood relation and niece through marriage to Charles VII Henry was a consolation prize. I mean she couldn't be married off to an influential family, but Charles had to do something with her so why not...
I would think that word would have got round the European Courts that Henry's grasp on reality, let alone power, was unstable at the best of times and with a powerful and equal competing claim to the Throne of England a marriage could be a step too far for most.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Apr 16, 2021 1:11:24 GMT
Would anyone want to marry Henry VI? I get the impression that Margaret, if she had a choice, would not have married him - it's seems to me that although she belongs to a poor noble family, distant blood relation and niece through marriage to Charles VII Henry was a consolation prize. I mean she couldn't be married off to an influential family, but Charles had to do something with her so why not... I would think that word would have got round the European Courts that Henry's grasp on reality, let alone power, was unstable at the best of times and with a powerful and equal competing claim to the Throne of England a marriage could be a step too far for most. Would insanity even be a good justification for the possible dethroning of Henry VI and bringing in the Yorkists as the next dynasty? Given that if Henry VI remained unmarried and no offspring would come from his loins, so to speak, the Lancastrians would pretty much be extinct, and I don't even know if at this point, butterflies would kill off the existence of Henry Tudor as we know him. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Apr 16, 2021 8:41:47 GMT
Would anyone want to marry Henry VI? I get the impression that Margaret, if she had a choice, would not have married him - it's seems to me that although she belongs to a poor noble family, distant blood relation and niece through marriage to Charles VII Henry was a consolation prize. I mean she couldn't be married off to an influential family, but Charles had to do something with her so why not... I would think that word would have got round the European Courts that Henry's grasp on reality, let alone power, was unstable at the best of times and with a powerful and equal competing claim to the Throne of England a marriage could be a step too far for most.
Well England is still a powerful and wealthy nation so a marriage to its king would be attractive to some. Possibly especially if its thought the king is weak and easily lead by his wife and possibly some of her aides. The other issue is when did it become clear that he has bouts of insanity - assuming that was actually the case rather than some propaganda by either opponents or successors seeking to explain his actions?
By the last bit do you mean something like a marriage to say a member of the Burgundian dynasty might mean that nation could have a claim on the throne of England which is likely to be unpopular with nobles/people in England? Not sure I'm following you here?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Apr 16, 2021 8:47:53 GMT
Would anyone want to marry Henry VI? I get the impression that Margaret, if she had a choice, would not have married him - it's seems to me that although she belongs to a poor noble family, distant blood relation and niece through marriage to Charles VII Henry was a consolation prize. I mean she couldn't be married off to an influential family, but Charles had to do something with her so why not... I would think that word would have got round the European Courts that Henry's grasp on reality, let alone power, was unstable at the best of times and with a powerful and equal competing claim to the Throne of England a marriage could be a step too far for most. Would insanity even be a good justification for the possible dethroning of Henry VI and bringing in the Yorkists as the next dynasty? Given that if Henry VI remained unmarried and no offspring would come from his loins, so to speak, the Lancastrians would pretty much be extinct, and I don't even know if at this point, butterflies would kill off the existence of Henry Tudor as we know him.
I think being married would occur at some stage simply because being queen of England would be too attractive a prize, or at least having one of your daughters/sisters in such a role for their male family members. However if he didn't he has no legal offspring so what became the House of York would inherit anyway, albeit that since he became king as a child that could be a long time. If their to wait and - without the strong wife and son for Henry of OTL - can gain effective effective control of the king while he's alive then that could avoid both a highly destructive civil war and the questions that a violent usurping of an ordained monarch would bring to their own position.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Apr 17, 2021 0:44:01 GMT
Well England is still a powerful and wealthy nation so a marriage to its king would be attractive to some. Possibly especially if its thought the king is weak and easily lead by his wife and possibly some of her aides. The other issue is when did it become clear that he has bouts of insanity - assuming that was actually the case rather than some propaganda by either opponents or successors seeking to explain his actions?
By the last bit do you mean something like a marriage to say a member of the Burgundian dynasty might mean that nation could have a claim on the throne of England which is likely to be unpopular with nobles/people in England? Not sure I'm following you here? Plus England being entangled in alliances that may get involved in conflicts is a huge fear among the English during the late medieval period to early modern period. That was why OTL Elizabeth I did not get married, because she feared being used by foreign noble families. I don't know if that fear might be applied to a weak king, with a powerful foreign-born queen becoming the real power. I think being married would occur at some stage simply because being queen of England would be too attractive a prize, or at least having one of your daughters/sisters in such a role for their male family members. However if he didn't he has no legal offspring so what became the House of York would inherit anyway, albeit that since he became king as a child that could be a long time. If their to wait and - without the strong wife and son for Henry of OTL - can gain effective effective control of the king while he's alive then that could avoid both a highly destructive civil war and the questions that a violent usurping of an ordained monarch would bring to their own position.
How would a lack of Wars of Roses affect England in the long run? |
|
|
|
Post by halferking on Apr 17, 2021 5:40:22 GMT
Would anyone want to marry Henry VI? I get the impression that Margaret, if she had a choice, would not have married him - it's seems to me that although she belongs to a poor noble family, distant blood relation and niece through marriage to Charles VII Henry was a consolation prize. I mean she couldn't be married off to an influential family, but Charles had to do something with her so why not... I would think that word would have got round the European Courts that Henry's grasp on reality, let alone power, was unstable at the best of times and with a powerful and equal competing claim to the Throne of England a marriage could be a step too far for most. Would insanity even be a good justification for the possible dethroning of Henry VI and bringing in the Yorkists as the next dynasty? Given that if Henry VI remained unmarried and no offspring would come from his loins, so to speak, the Lancastrians would pretty much be extinct, and I don't even know if at this point, butterflies would kill off the existence of Henry Tudor as we know him. Marriage between Royals was one of convenience rather than love. Children would be betrothed at a young age as part of treaties to bring about peace and power. If the Courts of Europe are aware that Henry VI has nothing to offer them they're not going to be handing over their best assets. |
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Apr 17, 2021 6:09:05 GMT
At worst, Henry VI would settle for either some random duchess from Ireland, or he wouldn't marry at all. Moreover, if Richard, 3rd Duke of York is already taken, then there is the option of Richard's older sister Isabel of York and her offspring, who could be wedded to the minor noble families within Continental Europe.
|
|
|
|
Post by halferking on Apr 17, 2021 6:48:34 GMT
Would insanity even be a good justification for the possible dethroning of Henry VI and bringing in the Yorkists as the next dynasty? Given that if Henry VI remained unmarried and no offspring would come from his loins, so to speak, the Lancastrians would pretty much be extinct, and I don't even know if at this point, butterflies would kill off the existence of Henry Tudor as we know him.
I think being married would occur at some stage simply because being queen of England would be too attractive a prize, or at least having one of your daughters/sisters in such a role for their male family members. However if he didn't he has no legal offspring so what became the House of York would inherit anyway, albeit that since he became king as a child that could be a long time. If their to wait and - without the strong wife and son for Henry of OTL - can gain effective effective control of the king while he's alive then that could avoid both a highly destructive civil war and the questions that a violent usurping of an ordained monarch would bring to their own position.
The England of Henry VI was a lawless corrupt country. His marriage to Margaret was a disaster as far as the English Nobility was concerned - no dowry, the King's redistribution of land to his favourites and England had to give up territory in France - was the last straw. Would you give up your daughter or sister to a less than stable King who could be about to lose everything? |
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Apr 17, 2021 7:36:52 GMT
I’m surprised that the Wars of Roses from OTL didn’t degenerate into a European Sengoku Jidai, with multiple Lords claiming lands and forming their own semi independent domains where they can rule. Imagine the Percys, Boleyns, de la Poles, Tudors, and every other English noble family carving out their own slice of England.
Which could make things a lot easier for James II Stuart.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,856
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Apr 17, 2021 9:51:58 GMT
I’m surprised that the Wars of Roses from OTL didn’t degenerate into a European Sengoku Jidai, with multiple Lords claiming lands and forming their own semi independent domains where they can rule. Imagine the Percys, Boleyns, de la Poles, Tudors, and every other English noble family carving out their own slice of England. Which could make things a lot easier for James II Stuart.
I think especially from Edward III a strong English identity had emerged from the shadow of the Norman conquest so I suspect that would be unlikely. Plus with both France and Scotland as external threats - although the latter more a regional one threatening devastating of the north - there is strong motivation to avoid this. Plus after the Percy's revolt under Henry_Percy_(Hotspur) I think their power had been sharply reduced. Also the advantage of being in a position of power in a unified kingdom was probably greater than having a relatively small state continually having to struggle against both other break-away lords and foreign powers. |
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Apr 17, 2021 15:18:02 GMT
Would Margaret of Anjou exercise more influence if she was the wife of an energetic king like James II? I can't imagine her having the same kind of mindset as her OTL counterpart who is married to Henry VI, though I think Margaret might have a happier marriage to James II.
|
|
