Edward V reply

Maria wrote:

"...To champion the young Edward V might seem to him an intelligent move to encourage the gratitude of the young king. So, from this perspective, there was never a fully-formed Edward V faction, though there may or may not have been one in formation. ..."

theblackprussian wrote:
"...I'm not convinced it's possible to separate Edward V and his brother
from the "Woodville Faction". ..."


I shouldn't have used the word 'faction' the way I did.
What I was trying to get out was that, on the death of Edward IV, ALL of the Yorkists were supporting Edward V as king. I should have reservd the word faction for those groups who differed on who would run the government; but they still considered themselves loyal supporters of Edward V (or so I believe). And even when Richard, Hastings, and Buckingham moved against the Woodvilles, they were doing so as loyal subjects of Edward V (His Majesty's Loyal Opposition?). They may have been concerned about the composition of the government, but it was still Edward V's government.
The reason I was wondering about how to look at the support for Edward V is because Hastings' actions in June of 1483 (whatever his real motives) then could be looked at as an attempt to maintain the rightful king (in his view). And from THAT could follow that any "Tudor" link (the Stanleys, Morton, etc.), AT THAT TIME, which can be so confusing, was not to put HT on the throne but to maintain Edward V. Whether that clarifies anything is still up in the air, but I thought it would be an interesting way to look at it.

Hope the above is clearer than my previous post and thanks for the feedback,

Doug

The reason I was wondering about how to look at the support for Edward V
is because Hastings' actions in June of 1483 (whatever his real motives)
then could be looked at as an attempt to maintain the rightful king (in
his view). And from THAT could follow that any "Tudor" link (the
Stanleys, Morton, etc.), AT THAT TIME, which can be so confusing, was
not to put HT on the throne but to maintain Edward V. Whether that
clarifies anything is still up in the air, but I thought it would be an
interesting way to look at it.

Hope the above is clearer than my previous post and thanks for the
feedback,

Doug
=====================================

Feels clear to me! But I do wonder if Morton, for one, was ever all
that interested in maintaining Edward V once Edward IV was gone, and, I
feel, his obligation/allegiance/expedient bond to York. I don't know
that he would ever have felt any obligation to invest loyalty to the boy
he would consider the son of a usurper. Similarly, Tommy Stanley had
his hands figuratively tied by his marriage to Margaret Beaufort:
regardless of where he would have liked to have focused - and a Stanley
was almost always unabashedly for Stanley as opposed to any current
power - in the end, it was possible that the Beaufort bond forced things
in the Tudor direction whether he liked it or not. If there's any
validity to the story that Hastings was anticipating Edward IV's death
months before it occurred, then it may be possible that a tiny pro-Tudor
movement could have been starting. Edward IV was trying to get his
hands on Tudor off and on, so Hank was never really fully out of the
picture anyway.

Speculating,

Maria
elena@...