 |
Reply
| | From:  terrilee62 (Original Message) | Sent: 5/4/2003 11:17 PM |
No real question here - just a comment on the ironies of history. Today in history was the battle of Tewksbury, where Edouard of Lancaster, Prince of Wales, son of the hapless Henry VI, died, either by the hand of George of Clarence's men, or Dickon of Gloucester's own hand. (Depending on who you believe) It could be argued thad Edouard had to die, for the safety of the realm and to guarantee the succession of Edward IV's son. Some 12 years later, to the day, Edward's son entered London as the uncrowned king, along with his uncle of Gloucester...... later to dissapear in the Tower. So I guess I will pose a question - if Tewksbury had turned the other way, would Edouard have been a good king? I'm of the opinion that his mother would have tried to take control, and exercised her kind of revenge on all those who followed York. The war would have continued on, bloodier that ever. What do you think? |
|
 First
Previous
2-4 of 4
Next
Last
|
Reply
| |
If he GOT to be king.....Henry VI was still alive at Tewkesbury & disgustingly healthy ROFL.....if he had been allowed to live out his natural lifespan, who knows how long it would have taken him to kick the bucket? I think we prolly would have seen a regency situation not unlike when George III degenerated into madness, & Margaret of Anjou would definitely have continued to have been the power behind the throne. Another irony.....Richard III's wife, Anne Neville, was first wed to Edward of Lancaster when her father, The Kingmaker, changed sides & threw his support to the Lancastrian party. So Tewkesbury made Princess Anne a widow free to marry again. Had Edward lived, Anne did not seem like she would have posed much of a challenge to Margaret's supremacy, & she died young of consumption anyway. |
|
Reply
| |
If Margaret of Anjou had felt secure on the throne, do you think she would have allowed the marriage of Edouard & Anne to continue? Forgive my "indelicacy" but was it a marriage in truth, or just in name only. It runs in my mind that Margaret wouldn't allow consummation until Warwick had placed her son on England's throne. Maybe that came from a novel and not a history book, but it makes sense to me. Besides, didn't Warwick die before the battle of Tewksbury? In that case, Anne would have been even more useless to Margaret - I'll bet there would have been some reason to stuff Anne in a nunnery and find a new bride for Prince Eddie. I can't imagine what kind on person he would have been, all the contrary traits of his mother & father combined! (Assuming, of course, that poor pathetic Henry was his father!) terrilee (gotta make me a fancy doodad for my name!!) |
|
Reply
| |
terrilee, You bring up some good points, but think about this...Margaret may have left the marriage alone because Anne was fairly meek and biddable. If Eddy had become enthrawled with her...what better way for Margaret to have all the power she could want! |
|
|
First
Previous
2-4 of 4
Next
Last
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Return to The Plantagenets