Where WAS the Earl of Lincoln when Bosworth was fought ?
Who is in command of the Tower of London and the gates of the city ?
By this time, the country was very tired of the war. Perhaps compromise candidates for the throne would have been chosen by both sides. On the Yorkist side, the earl of Warwick and his sister are still alive, as well as the daughters of Edward IV. I'm not sure who the Lancastrian claimants were at that point. I can't see a queen Margaret of Beaufort, because she is too old and no longer able to have children.
Now the lack of leadership isn't going to be an issue, since Henry Tudor has also died. But the question is whether John de la Pole is going to be able to raise enough troops to counter the Lancaster and their victorious army.
The country may have been tired of war, but the Lancasters had the edge with their victory, and if they can quickly move on London, then they can probably consolidate their win at Bosworth. So what does King Thomas I Grey's new regime look like?
Not so fast! Thomas Gray became the Lancastrian claimant so fast upthread that I blinked and missed it. What was the Lancastrian 'command structure' at Bosworth immediately after the battle? Who has what personal following and what authority? What is the Stanleys' play, when they find out they doublecrossed one dead guy to make another dead guy king?
This is not a challenge to your TL - I just don't know what the situation was, or what combination of 'rightful claim' and force on hand he has to quick nail down effective control of the Lancastrian army and hold it together. Once he does it, I agree that he can probably grab London and the crown at least in the short term.
While I believe that the Lancastrians would remain unified and "quickly" (within a week after the battle) select a new leader of the faction (I'll go along with Corvinus and put my support behind Thomas Grey) while sending some troops to London to secure it. I can't help but think of mass chaos coming about.
The Stanleys seeing their opportunity demand the crown for switching sides against Lancastrian supporters who had gone into exile and pressed their claims. The Lancastrians split in Stanley supporters and another candidate's (doesn't have to be Grey necessarily) supporters. A Lancastrian civil war erupts with Yorkist supports badly beaten on the sidelines with John de la Pole thinking its best to wait it out and slowly build up his forces then which ever side loses get those supporters on his side to get revenge.
However, while the Yorkists wait and the Lancastrians fight amongst themselves some others look to get a piece of the English pie. Maybe James III of Scotland with his Beaufort ancestory claims the throne and invades causing the Lancastrian factions and Yorkists to consider either uniting to expel the Scots or continuing fighting amongst themselves regardless. Then perhaps King John II of Portugal or his cousin Manuel (future King Manuel I) of Portugal invades looking for the throne. In all 3 to 5 factions, including perhaps two invading forces from European kingdoms, are all battling it out for the throne of England. Yet this is probably far-far-fetched.
In the end, I think the Portuguese are definitely out of it (one can dream of a personal/dynastic union) all together. James III might have schemed to claim the English throne (no doubt if his son, James IV, had been old enough and king he wouldn't have hesitated), but whether it might have worked depends on his tactics & strategy and the what the support of the Scottish nobles (though one can't discount the desire of revenge against England for the Wars of Independence). And for the Yorkists, for them to recover they need to Lancastrians to split into factions and fight.
But what if if there were two (or more) Lancastrian factions, the Yorkists, the Scots, and the Portuguese battling it out on the fields of England and Wales for the English throne? A relatively, low in succession Englishman of either Lancastrian or Yorkist pedigree unites the English to expel the invaders and gets compared to Alfred the Great in later history? An earlier Stewart/Stuart rule of England under James III or his son James IV and the creation of Great Britain with the capital at York or closer to the border between the two countries? A personal/dynastic union of England & Portugal? All possible if total chaos erupts after Richard III and Henry Tudor die.
What I basically figured is that the leaders at Bosworth have a stake in a new, Lancaster regime in London.
Yes, they do. My queasy niggle is that some of them also have a personal stake in being king. All of their claims are presumably weaker than Henry Tudor's was, and his was awfully weak. The biggest factor IMHO would be Grey's force of personality, or someone's. You're trying to convince a bunch of fractious would be kings to make you king, on the premise that they are better off as your subject than trying for the gold hat themselves. The Lancastrian cause could easily fracture.
How far does this go before the English crown becomes 'occupatory,' like a Basileus, and having a drop more Plantagenet blood than the next 500 claimants doesn't count for anything any more?
I just don't see many foreigners getting deeply mixed up in it, because what makes anyone think England is a very governable country? How do you control it without a big standing garrison to keep the lords in line? England would look like a snake pit to stay out of.
The English crown had been in this 'occupartory' role for some time. But I feel that there is enough difference in social systems that this parallel doesn't really work.
Exactly but that if anything will encourage foreigners to financially back their favored candidate. After all, anything could happen, and who wouldn't want a King in their debt?
But I think Thomas Grey through his wife's claim and with two sons, will become the Lancastrians candidate because they can't waste this opportunity.
Actually, the Earl of Kent was Yorkist, as was his son. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_of_Kent#Earls_of_Kent.2C_eighth_Creation_.281465.29
Edmund participated in Richard III's coronation, and is listed among Richard's supporters in The Battle of Bosworth Field. http://www.chronique.com/Library/Knights/bosworth.htm
While I appreciate meries’ tracking down the precedence of potential heirs, I think this mess would be decided on the battlefield. Also, while the Lancastrians would likely want to skip over foreign claimants, the foreign claimants might use their claim to seek all or part of England, especially since they come before all the English candidates on the list. Nor can they ignore the Yorkist claimants; Henry Tudor had to deal with attempted uprising through 1499, and whoever the Lancastrians back won’t be in as firm of a position.
So lets looks at possible Lancastrian claimants at the battle:
Thomas Grey, Marquess of Dorset – 4th on meries’ list, he’d also probably be favored by the Woodvilles. He’s also a Johnny-come-lately to the Lancastrian side.
George Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury – 5th on the list.
Thomas Stanley, Earl of Derby – 7th on the list. Probably not popular with Yorkists or Lancastrians. After all, whoever he was trying to aid died.
John de Vere, 13th Earl of Oxford – 8th on the list and commander at Bosworth. Also single, which may be of interest to the Woodvilles.
Jasper Tudor, Henry’s uncle. Also a commander and also single, which may be of interest to the Woodvilles.
I can easily see this bunch falling into internal dissention over which of them should be king.
Then there’s the foreign claimants:
King James III of Scotland has the best claim. He had both allied with and fought the English and he did want to expand his kingdom. In OTL he supported Yorkist claimants. If things are chaotic enough in England, he might try to invade, if nothing else then to distract internal discontent.
John II of Portugal had arranged for his sister Joanna to marry Richard III, though obviously Richard’s death prevented that. http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A396029 So in addition to possibly claiming the throne in his own, he might gain some sympathy from remaining Yorkists. Even if he doesn’t get directly involved, he might at least support the Yorkists.
Emperor Maximilian I of Austria might get involved as well. He’s also a recent widower, which may attract the Woodvilles.
For a longshot, while Richard III was king, Elizabeth of York had been engaged to the Duke of Beja. http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A396029 If things are chaotic enough in England, the Duke might seek to claim ‘his’ bride and ‘his’ kingdom.
And the Yorkists:
In OTL, the Yorkists had three major claimants. Edward, Earl of Warwick was Richard III’s heir until his wife’s death and is generally thought to have been simple-minded. Still, Henry VIII thought him enough of a threat that he eventually had him executed. His claim is better than all but 2 of the men on meries’ list and since we’re dealing with alternate history, perhaps he was (like Roman Emperor Claudius) playing dumb in order to survive. Also, he may not be captured by the Lancastrians in TTL. People claiming to be Edward of Warwick were supported in 1487 (Lambert Simnel) and 1499 (Thomas Wilford).
Richard of Shrewsbury was the younger of the Princes in the Tower is generally believed to have been killed during Richard III’s reign, but his name could draw support. In 1487, Lambert Simnel made a bid for the throne, at various times claiming to be Edward of Warwick and Richard of Shrewsbury. It seems Richard’s own mother believed the claim, she was deprived of much of her properties and packed off to a nunnery for supporting Simnel against her own daughter and son-in-law. Another person claiming to be Richard of Shrewsbury attempted to gain the English throne in 1491, 1495, 1496, and 1497. This time Sir William Stanley, the man who had betrayed Richard III at Bosworth was executed by Henry VII for refusing to fight a man the thought might be Richard of Shrewsbury.
John de la Pole was Richard’s final heir, and certainly had skill as a military commander. However, in OTL he never made a personal attempt for the throne and he died fighting for Lambert Simnel. His younger brothers inherited the claim and continued to seek support aboard until the last one died in battle in 1523.
And for a longshot, Richard III’s illegitimate son John, Captain of Calais in 1485 and executed in 1499.
Of the Yorkists on meries’ list, Ralph Neville, 3rd Earl of Westmoreland (1st on the list) and Henry Percy, 3rd Earl of Northumberland (6th on the list) were captured at Bosworth, as was Thomas Howard, the 2nd Duke of Norfolk. Percy is most likely to be blamed for Richard III’s death and was widely unpopular (he was murdered by his own tenants in OTL.) Neville’s a wild card, considering his relatively strong claim (first on meries’ list), the Lancastrians need to either dispose of him or make friends quickly.
Edmund Grey, Earl of Kent and William FitzAlan, Earl of Arundel are other possible Yorkists claimants. And the Earl of Kent is married to a Woodville.
Lastly, there’s the Woodvilles. Technically Yorkist, they certainly married well in OTL – Elizabeth of York to Henry Tudor, her aunt Catherine Neville to Jasper Tudor, and her sister Cecily married Henry’s half-uncle John de Welles. For a wild card, Catherine Neville was mother to Edward Stafford, 3rd Duke of Buckingham.
Didnt John de la Pole had a weak claim? Despite being from a senior blood line his ancestor George Duke of Clarence was attainted (sic) and that weakened his claim?