The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > British Royal History

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1  
Old 07-02-2010, 03:14 AM
lady of hay's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: around the uk, United Kingdom
Posts: 214
Richard III and the Battle of Bosworth: a "what if?"

Does anyone have any thoughts on what would have happened had Richard, not Henry Tudor , won the battle of Bosworth in 1485 ?

Tony Robinson did an interesting programme called "Englands real royal family", about who they think should be ruling the country.

However this programme was based on the assumption that Edward IV was illigitimate and the fact that Richard had lost at Bosworth.
I would be interested to know what other members opinions are
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-02-2010, 04:12 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,090
We shouldn't look at the past and go What if?
What happened, happened.
We can't imagine what will have happened if Richard had won the battle.
__________________

__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-02-2010, 05:25 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by lumutqueen
We shouldn't look at the past and go What if?
Why not? Richard III's defeat by Henry Tudor was a major turning point in English history and therefore the "what if?" question is perfectly legitimate.
It may encourage those members with a knowledge of the period to offer their views and create an interesting discussion. This is what we are - a discussion forum.
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-02-2010, 05:26 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,090
I just don't think we should look at the past and go what if?
I don't see the point, what happened happened, we can't change it so why talk about it?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-02-2010, 05:31 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,299
If you don't wish to participate in the discussion in a constructive manner then please stand aside and allow other members to do so.
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-02-2010, 12:00 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 237
Hi,

Well, Richard would have had to kill or have killed Henry Tudor and his relatives.
He would have had to marry again and have children.
And then, govern wisely & well or there would have been others barking at his door!

Larry
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-02-2010, 01:14 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,175
Well I am not sure about the governing wisely but I definitely believe that of Richard had defeated Henry at the Battle of Bosworth, the possiblity exists of another English Civil War. Henry wouldn't have gone away quitely.

But it does make you think...if Henry hadn't become King, you wouldn't have Henry VIII, not all of those wives, certainly not the English Reformation, or the Glorious reign of Elizabeth I. And poor Margaret Pole most likely would have died from old age.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-02-2010, 01:53 PM
lady of hay's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: around the uk, United Kingdom
Posts: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren View Post
If you don't wish to participate in the discussion in a constructive manner then please stand aside and allow other members to do so.
Warren , I am really greatful for this comment.
It was my intention to provoke some kind of debate on this matter other than the usual who is wearing what. I had hoped that this forum might have been the place for it.
I am not as they say "throwing my teddy out of the pram", as someone who has done high level academic work ,I am used to criticism, but I feel that these forums may not be the place for someone like myself who is interested in the more academic aspect of royal history.
If what is past is past , then why so many posts about Diana, the late Princess of Wales?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-02-2010, 02:51 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by lady of hay View Post
It was my intention to provoke some kind of debate on this matter other than the usual who is wearing what. I had hoped that this forum might have been the place for it.
As much as all of the forums on the British Royal Family are very interesting for me to read, I do have to admit the British Royal History fascinates me. I may not know enough to post and debate on the topics but I sure do love reading them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-02-2010, 06:04 PM
Vasillisos Markos's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Crete, United States
Posts: 1,158
Wouldn't Richard III have to answer about the royal princes in the tower? I mean, with his death on the field and Henry VII marrying the sister of the imprisoned princes, the matter sort of went away but I think if Richard had been victorious, there might have been a demand for explanation once peace ruled throughout the land.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-02-2010, 06:15 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,175
But didn't Henry marry Elizabeth after the battle? Or am I thinking Elizabeth and Edward IV?
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-02-2010, 06:59 PM
Vasillisos Markos's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Crete, United States
Posts: 1,158
Yes, Henry married Elizabeth after he became King but he pledged to marry her before becoming King.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-02-2010, 07:20 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,368
Richard wasn't being asked about the princes at the tmie so why would that have changed. and by the law of the land they had been declared illegitimate so he really had no question to answer on that score.

Most people in the north say he ruled wisely there and even in his short reign did so so saying that he would rule wisely and well based on the available evidence is something I believe he would have done. He certainly would have had to remarry but I am not totally sure he would have married Elizabeth (although she was a good choice but officially illegitimate and there would still be Lancastrians seeking the throne.) He would have needed to find a suitable Lancastrian heiress to make his queen I think. He would certainly have had to kill Henry Tudor and the leading supporters of that usurper.

As for the Reformation we don't know but I suspect it would still have happened - just with a different trigger as it was about power in England as much as a divorced. We wouldn't have had the Stuarts though and that could easily see Scotland and England developing as two separate nations to this day and no British Empire (maybe a small English one and even a small Scottish one but not the Great British one that developed.) Australia would probably be French speaking not English (for those who don't know how close that was to happening the French had an explorer here to claim this land only a week or so after Philip arrived with the First Fleet to invade the country).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-04-2010, 06:33 AM
lady of hay's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: around the uk, United Kingdom
Posts: 214
Richard indeed was never asked about the fate of the two princes . Elizabeth Woodville, the boys mother , would not, I believe have let things lie if she had suspected that they were dead. Richard was not,I believe ever accused of this crime during his lifetime ,only later by so called Tudor propogandists.

Richard not marring Elizabeth of York because of her illigitimacy provokes another interesting question. Why did Henry Tudor marry her, or wasn't he so picky ? If in order to marry Elizabeth , Henry had to legitimise her he would have automaticaly made the elder of the two boys Edward V . A possible motive for murder surely ?

It is interesting to note that following the death of Lady Eleanor Butler, with whom Edward IV was said to be pre contracted, he and Elizabeth Woodville could have married again . This would have made their children ligitimate. Did Edward think that the matter would just "go away " Elizabeth Woodville certainly did not know about the pre contract as she was as suprised as anyone on hearing the news.

Henry Tudor married Elizabeth of York, but she was not crowned queen untill 1487, after the birth of their first child, Henry presumably wanting to make sure she could fulfil the Woodville side of the bargain.
Elizabeth Woodville did not even attend her own daughters coronation, and spent the last five years of her life in a convent, having been part of a plot to overthrow her son-in-law Henry Tudor (VII).

Anyone reading this who wishes to know more about this period in history may find the following books usefull

The Daughter of Time by Josphine Tay, a work of fiction but it brought about my interest in the period ,and although published in the 1950's it is still available
Good King Richard ? by Jeremy Potter, this may now be out of print but is worth tracking down at your local library.

and finally Elizabeth Woodville by David Baldwin a good well balanced portrait.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-04-2010, 01:57 PM
Vasillisos Markos's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Crete, United States
Posts: 1,158
Henry VII married Elizabeth in order to strengthen his claim to the throne because now his children were descended from her father who had been rightful and acknowledged as a King of England.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-08-2010, 10:27 AM
EleanorOfAquitaine's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Trier, Germany
Posts: 37
What a pitty, that Richard III falls...otherwise there maybe were no Henry VIII, who was a really worst King.
but what happend to the son of Richard III after the battle?
I read, that he had in his marriage one son.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-08-2010, 11:35 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,090

Edward of Middleham, Prince Of Wales was Richard's only legitamate child.
He died in 1484.
Edward of Middleham, Prince of Wales - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Battle of Bosworth happened in 1485.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-09-2010, 12:43 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Egham, United Kingdom
Posts: 17
Edward IV was legitimate - there is no evidence otherwise. He was almost certainly premature and his baptism was rushed. His brother Richard III remained entirely loyal to him while he was alive.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-09-2010, 08:08 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,368
The question with regard to Edward IV being legitimate has never really been the question. A child is legitimate is born to a married couple and the father accepts the child as his but....there is a question about his paternity. However, if a father accepts the child I don't see why anyone should be questioning that this many years later (it is the same with people questioning Harry's paternity - legally Charles is his father and personally I believe that he is biologically as well but there are many that don't but ...)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-11-2010, 10:30 AM
lady of hay's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: around the uk, United Kingdom
Posts: 214
Many years ago, almost 30 , a friend of mine , a medievalist who had studied the "war of the roses" and who sadly is no longer with us, told me that we should not seek to judge the actions of the men of that time by the standards of our own. He said that as we do not live in their times we should not seek to judge at all.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king albert ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince joachim prince laurent prince pieter-christiaan princess princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit sweden wedding william


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:00 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]