Henry Bolingbroke (the future OTL Henry IV of England) supports Edmund Mortimer for the English throne after overthrowing and killing Richard II?

[WolfBear]

What if Henry Bolingbroke (the future OTL Henry IV of England) supports Edmund Mortimer for the English throne after overthrowing and killing Richard II instead of personally acquiring the English throne for himself? The logic behind this, of course, would be that Mortimer was the legitimate heir to the English throne if one follows male-preference cognatic primogeniture rather than agnatic primogeniture:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Mortimer,_5th_Earl_of_March

Anyway, what do you think, @stevep @Circle of Willis? Henry Bolingbroke could justify what he did to Richard II in this TL by arguing that he overthrew a brutal tyrant.

 

[Circle of Willis]

Not good news for England, which I imagine was why Bolingbroke just seized the throne for himself IOTL (that, and obviously it was a nice fat opportunity to elevate his Plantagenet cadet branch to kingship). Mortimer was 8 when Bolingbroke took Richard II down - and England hasn't exactly had great luck with child-kings, Richard II himself being just the most recent example.

I'd expect tensions between the Plantagenet cadets and the Mortimers + their allies (March's uncle Edmund didn't get along with Henry IV and the king eventually accused him of treason & seized his properties after he was beaten by Owain Glendower in battle on suspicion of treason, ironically driving him to rebel for real alongside his Percy relatives) to dominate the reign of *Edmund I. I further expect the new king to side with his kinsman, which puts Bolingbroke and the Duke of York in a role similar to that which Thomas, Duke of Gloucester had played against Richard II. If matters escalate into a civil war (as opposed to 'just' a quick Lancastrian/Yorkist coup against the Mortimers or a Mortimer purge of the Plantagenets) then England won't be in any shape to restart the HYW in the early 15th century, much less almost win as they had under Henry V's leadership.

 

[WolfBear]

Not good news for England, which I imagine was why Bolingbroke just seized the throne for himself IOTL (that, and obviously it was a nice fat opportunity to elevate his Plantagenet cadet branch to kingship). Mortimer was 8 when Bolingbroke took Richard II down - and England hasn't exactly had great luck with child-kings, Richard II himself being just the most recent example.

I'd expect tensions between the Plantagenet cadets and the Mortimers + their allies (March's uncle Edmund didn't get along with Henry IV and the king eventually accused him of treason & seized his properties after he was beaten by Owain Glendower in battle on suspicion of treason, ironically driving him to rebel for real alongside his Percy relatives) to dominate the reign of *Edmund I. I further expect the new king to side with his kinsman, which puts Bolingbroke and the Duke of York in a role similar to that which Thomas, Duke of Gloucester had played against Richard II. If matters escalate into a civil war (as opposed to 'just' a quick Lancastrian/Yorkist coup against the Mortimers or a Mortimer purge of the Plantagenets) then England won't be in any shape to restart the HYW in the early 15th century, much less almost win as they had under Henry V's leadership.

Excellent analysis! Also, how would things have differed had Edmund's father lived longer? He died in 1398.

 

[Circle of Willis]

Richard II wouldn't have had to go to Ireland to restore order in his stead, giving Bolingbroke no opening to launch his coup (at least not in 1399).

 

[WolfBear]

Richard II wouldn't have had to go to Ireland to restore order in his stead, giving Bolingbroke no opening to launch his coup (at least not in 1399).

You're saying that, had he lived, Edmund's father would have been sent by Richard II to crush the Irish rebellion in Richard II's place? Interesting and sounds very plausible, frankly. Why have a King directly do something when he can send one of his minions to do this in his place, after all?

 

[Circle of Willis]

Yes - Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March was also Earl of Ulster (having inherited the title from his mother Philippa, daughter of Lionel of Clarence, from whom the Mortimers and Yorks got their female-line claim to the English throne) and Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland. Suppressing Irish uprisings was literally his job and it's what he died doing in 1398, Richard only stepped in (and accidentally exposed himself to Bolingbroke's landing) after Mortimer had failed and perished.

 

[WolfBear]

Yes - Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March was also Earl of Ulster (having inherited the title from his mother Philippa, daughter of Lionel of Clarence, from whom the Mortimers and Yorks got their female-line claim to the English throne) and Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland. Suppressing Irish uprisings was literally his job and it's what he died doing in 1398, Richard only stepped in (and accidentally exposed himself to Bolingbroke's landing) after Mortimer had failed and perished.

Makes sense; thank you.