Help support TMP


"You are Plantagenet!" Topic


10 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

In order to respect possible copyright issues, when quoting from a book or article, please quote no more than three paragraphs.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the War of the Roses Message Board


Areas of Interest

Medieval
Renaissance

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Profile Article

Herod's Gate

Part II of the Gates of Old Jerusalem.


1,296 hits since 19 Jan 2022
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian19 Jan 2022 6:26 a.m. PST

You were asked – TMP link

In your opinion, which dynasty should have legitimately reigned over England from 1455? That of Plantagenet, that of Lancaster or that of Tudors?

37% said "Plantagenet"
22% said "Lancaster"
5% said "Tudors"

olicana19 Jan 2022 6:45 a.m. PST

Funny question.

York and Lancaster were both branches of the same Plantagenet heritage. Henry VI was a Plantagenet, so were Edward IV and Richard III. All were descended through the male line from Edward III (a Plantagenet).

The Tudor claim only succeeded by right of arms. Being the grandson of Catherine of Valois (widow of Henry V) and Owen Tudor (Henry V's steward) wouldn't, I suspect, hold much water in a court of law unless all Plantagenets were dead.

The dubious nature of the 'inheritance' of the Tudors is what lead to such a vicious propaganda campaign, by the Tudors, to besmirch the good name of Richard III, the rightful and just Plantagenet King of England.

GildasFacit Sponsoring Member of TMP19 Jan 2022 7:19 a.m. PST

After the incessant squabbling of the last dregs of the Plantagenet dynasty and their inability to actually rule the country, I think having their 'rights' taken away by the same means they had used to usurp each other was quite appropriate.

olicana19 Jan 2022 8:24 a.m. PST

and their inability to actually rule the country,

Edward IV and Richard III both provided good and stable rule (by the standard of other contemporary monarchies). A fairly decent peace had existed for the best part of fourteen years and the economy was on an upward trend (since Tewkesbury 1471).

Misrule by Richard III is mostly regarded as myth by modern historians because there is little to no evidence to back up Tudor claims that Richard III was a bad administrator, despot and tyrant.

Edward IV gets good press from almost everybody, including the Tudors, because his rule was remembered fondly by most – the Tudors simply wouldn't have gotten away with the same lies.

Eumelus Supporting Member of TMP19 Jan 2022 8:27 a.m. PST

It's a misleading poll. All three "dynasties" were of the same family. Henry Tudor claimed legitimacy through his mother Margaret Beaufort, not through his father or paternal grandmother. As for York versus Lancaster, that depends on whether you prioritize strict primogeniture (York) or the established right of Parliament to depose and appoint sovereigns (as for Edward II and Richard II). Had Henry VI been a capable monarch the entire issue would never have arisen.

42flanker20 Jan 2022 1:01 p.m. PST

A small point, perhaps, but it seems that 'Plantagenet' as a royal surname was in fact only associated with the House of York

Although the father of Henry II of England, Geoffrey le Bel, Count of Anjou, also bore as a personal sobriquet 'Plantagenest' there is no evidence of it being used as a dynastic surname thereafter. Kings generally had personal cognomens or sobriquets, often deriving from their birth place- Edward of Caernarvon, John of Gaunt, Richard of Bordeaux, etc, etc.

It was not until 1460 that the name 'Plantagenet' appears as a royal surname, or at least that of a royal pretender, with the claim presented to Parliament by "Richard Plantaginet, Duc of York". the surname at that time being associated specifically with the Duke of York himself.

Subsequently, the name was given to Edward IV's illegitimate son Arthur Plantagenet, born a few years later, and in reference to Richard of Gloucester's son, "our dear nephew Edward Plantagenet" when created Earl of Salisbury in 1478, and also to Gloucester's illegitimate daughter, Katherine Plantagenet.

Dagwood20 Jan 2022 2:56 p.m. PST

If a surname is used by both their ancestors and descendants, it must be associated with both Edward IV and Richard of Gloucester as well …

hi EEE ya Supporting Member of TMP21 Jan 2022 11:22 a.m. PST
42flanker21 Jan 2022 11:55 a.m. PST

@Dagwood

Apparently not.

Regicide164903 Feb 2022 2:30 p.m. PST

Plantaganet was a cadet branch of the House of Anjou. If any of the despicable Henrys claimed to be kings of France – which they all did in this era (VI, VII and VIII)- they were claiming to be Plantaganets.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.