What if King richard III had defeated Henry VII
- Thread starter DBZfan
- Start date
Vroqrak
Kage in the Making 👑
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2011
- Messages
- 14,081
- Reaction score
- 357
He would have had a long reign, probably fairly peaceful on the domestic side (what other Lancastrians were there?). Hard to say on the foreign end--wasn't he the one who was upset that Edward IV took the French King's bribe and thus there was no war?
He would have married again, although I'm not sure who was available. (what does anyone think of the rumor that he was to marry his niece Elizabeth? It was done--see some of the later Hapsburgs) Hopefully had children, etc.
Margaret Beaufort would have been executed. Something more severe than house arrest under her husband, 'tany rate.
Edward's daughters--their fate probably wouldn't have changed, except for the names. Married well and to the benefit of the family within England.
Elizabeth Woodville--gracious and FUNDED retirement. More Court appearances than under Henry VII, especially if Richard did indeed marry his niece.
On the other hand--no Henry VIII, no Elizabeth I (not as we know them). Would there have been anything resembling the Elizabehan era, the birth of drama? What about the Reformation? Colonization of the Americas? The mind boggles...
He would have married again, although I'm not sure who was available. (what does anyone think of the rumor that he was to marry his niece Elizabeth? It was done--see some of the later Hapsburgs) Hopefully had children, etc.
Margaret Beaufort would have been executed. Something more severe than house arrest under her husband, 'tany rate.
Edward's daughters--their fate probably wouldn't have changed, except for the names. Married well and to the benefit of the family within England.
Elizabeth Woodville--gracious and FUNDED retirement. More Court appearances than under Henry VII, especially if Richard did indeed marry his niece.
On the other hand--no Henry VIII, no Elizabeth I (not as we know them). Would there have been anything resembling the Elizabehan era, the birth of drama? What about the Reformation? Colonization of the Americas? The mind boggles...
BlacLord™
Kage in the Making 👑
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2012
- Messages
- 16,201
- Reaction score
- 1,503
Impossible to say.
Though if Richard had seized control of the wave, it would not have ended. He was the last in the line of York, but Henry wasn't the last of the Lancaster. The former making a win at Bosworth would only see him turn the tides temporarily; it would've been a close call that wouldn't instil confidence in the public, and Richard wasn't strong enough to sway them into belief, nor was he enough to make the Lancastrian contenders believe he wasn't to be messed with.
He was always the only thing standing between them and power; he was outnumbered and in way over his head. Fighting them off and desperately attempting to bring the political situation into stability at the same time? No way. So then you have to ask how long could Richard have curbed his inevitable defeat? Henry V fought and won against much more than such a hypothetical scenario. If he had won there, then he wouldn't have spent most of his reign dealing with France because he would be too busy taking up the task of re-stabilizing England. Though really, he could've have done what he did and seen Troyes through since he wouldn't be in the position that caused his premature death, or even the disaster that Thomas caused wouldn't have happened.
In which case, England would have truly conquered France. Anyway, I digress. What I'm really trying to say is that Henry V is a template for a fair king; there were others as, and even more capable; of which Richard would not be able to handle, considering other pressures.
Though if Richard had seized control of the wave, it would not have ended. He was the last in the line of York, but Henry wasn't the last of the Lancaster. The former making a win at Bosworth would only see him turn the tides temporarily; it would've been a close call that wouldn't instil confidence in the public, and Richard wasn't strong enough to sway them into belief, nor was he enough to make the Lancastrian contenders believe he wasn't to be messed with.
He was always the only thing standing between them and power; he was outnumbered and in way over his head. Fighting them off and desperately attempting to bring the political situation into stability at the same time? No way. So then you have to ask how long could Richard have curbed his inevitable defeat? Henry V fought and won against much more than such a hypothetical scenario. If he had won there, then he wouldn't have spent most of his reign dealing with France because he would be too busy taking up the task of re-stabilizing England. Though really, he could've have done what he did and seen Troyes through since he wouldn't be in the position that caused his premature death, or even the disaster that Thomas caused wouldn't have happened.
In which case, England would have truly conquered France. Anyway, I digress. What I'm really trying to say is that Henry V is a template for a fair king; there were others as, and even more capable; of which Richard would not be able to handle, considering other pressures.
Last edited:
The Great Second Hokage
Jōnin Strategist 🧠
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2013
- Messages
- 1,652
- Reaction score
- 109
Your thought provoking question is very appreciated.....clearly is reign would have been longer and he using his charisma would have stabilized England as a whole again.