If Edward died, then his brother Richard would have inherited his claims to be the “legitimate” Yorkist King.
I think the history is very clear that RIII’s main problem was his own supporters deserting him or switching sides, some of them on the field of battle itself. And a prime reason for that was the rumors that he had killed the Princes.
On a practical note, none of these kings of the period had any greater or lesser “right” to the throne than any of the others. It was a clearcut power struggle, that was all.
Of course, a king who came to power by these means soon found that his throne was insecure and that he could be overthrown by exactly the same methods. A good example of poetic justice.
Henry VII was actually a reasonably good king, as compared with other kings, admittedly not a particularly high standard to beat. He mostly kept England out of foreign wars. He was “oppressive” to the high nobility that threatened his throne, though to be fair the high nobility needed to be taken down several pegs. They had, after all, put England through several decades of horrible civil war pursuing their own interests.
I don’t believe for one second the nobles who turned against Richard the Third did it because he “killed” his nephews. After all, when Richard took Lord Stanley’s son hostage during Bosworth, sending Stanley a message that he would kill his son if he didn’t throw in with him, Stanley replied: “I have other sons.” Those nobles were cold! (Richard did not kill the kid, by the way.)
The nobles, especially the Stanleys, changed sides constantly. They were never satisfied with what they had and so always threw in with the “usurper.” Richard apparently did not do enough for some of these guys; that’s why they turned against him.
Richard, of course, in his short tenure, was an excellent king as he had been a duke. He legislated that all laws were to be written in English rather than Latin, set up courts of justice for poor people and established the Royal College of Arms.
Henry VII, was a miserly, reclusive monarch who gave the world the horrible Henry the VIII.
I don’t believe for one second the nobles who turned against Richard the Third did it because he “killed” his nephews. After all, when Richard took Lord Stanley’s son hostage during Bosworth, sending Stanley a message that he would kill his son if he didn’t throw in with him, Stanley replied: “I have other sons.” Those nobles were cold! (Richard did not kill the kid, by the way.)
The nobles, especially the Stanleys, changed sides constantly. They were never satisfied with what they had and so always threw in with the “usurper.” Richard apparently did not do enough for some of these guys; that’s why they turned against him.
Richard, of course, in his short tenure, was an excellent king as he had been a duke. He legislated that all laws were to be written in English rather than Latin, set up courts of justice for poor people and established the Royal College of Arms.
Henry VII, was a miserly, reclusive monarch who gave the world the horrible Henry the VIII.