Question on succeeding Charles II if James Stuart dies in 1660?

[DTF955Baseballfan]

let's say that James dies childless and Henry Stuart survives the run of smallpox in 1660. then, henry dies later, before Charles II, with issue.

Would it automatically be Henry's descendants who take the throne since he's a male? Or does it go to mary's son, William of Orange (Mary is also dead)) since he is the firstborn?

Or, does Parliament just decide based on whom they think will runt he place best? Does William being a 35YO male play into it if Henry Stuart's progeny is still a child? Or if Henry insists on moving his child to be brought up in England would they say, "Okay, we've got a king/queen here, so we'll use them." (Probably likely, by the late 1670s he'd know Charles was going to die childless.)

[Velasco]

Henry's issue succeeds.

[Emperor Constantine]

Originally Posted by DTF955Baseballfan

let's say that James dies childless and Henry Stuart survives the run of smallpox in 1660. then, henry dies later, before Charles II, with issue.

Would it automatically be Henry's descendants who take the throne since he's a male? Or does it go to mary's son, William of Orange (Mary is also dead)) since he is the firstborn?

Or, does Parliament just decide based on whom they think will runt he place best? Does William being a 35YO male play into it if Henry Stuart's progeny is still a child? Or if Henry insists on moving his child to be brought up in England would they say, "Okay, we've got a king/queen here, so we'll use them." (Probably likely, by the late 1670s he'd know Charles was going to die childless.)

Henry's decendents would go first because he was before Mary in the succession. Next would be William of Orange. William would play little to no role if Henry's child or children are children. Their mother would be Regent first and if she's dead then Charles II would have named a regent before his death. William might be a member of the English Royal family by his mother but he's still a foreign ruler and i doubt the English would name him regent.

[DTF955Baseballfan]

Okay, thanks.

[Makemakean]

Originally Posted by Emperor Constantine

Henry's decendents would go first because he was before Mary in the succession. Next would be William of Orange. William would play little to no role if Henry's child or children are children. Their mother would be Regent first and if she's dead then Charles II would have named a regent before his death. William might be a member of the English Royal family by his mother but he's still a foreign ruler and i doubt the English would name him regent.

Are you sure of that? Now, I concede that English succession is tricky business. I am still unsure of whether or not in the end the Unwritten Constitution actually says that it's whoever the Parliament wants it to be. After all, they could bar Catholics from the throne, declare that James II had vacated the throne when he most adamantly insisted he hadn't, and they could outright both abolish and restore the monarchy. However, unless I'm mistaken, it works in such a way that in a family all the boys get a turn after age, then all the girls. Like how it was first Edward VI (eldest (legitimate) son of Henry VIII), then Mary I (eldest daughter), then Elizabeth II (next eldest daughter).

Now just like how Victoria inherited the throne as a woman, despite her father's younger brother, the Duke of Cumberland, still being alive, I think that Mary would still inherit the throne, despite her father's younger brother Henry, Duke of Gloucester, still being alive.

[V-J]

Originally Posted by Makemakean

Are you sure of that?

Yes. The issue of Charles' brothers would come before his sisters. Male primogeniture, yo.

Inheritance at this time follows the eldest male lines. It only devolves on the female lines when the male lines are extinct. Victoria became Queen precisely because she was the issue of the eldest male line of succession. In this case, that's Henry's children.

(I think people are getting confused here; I believe the OP is talking about a scenario where OTL's James II dies young and has no issue. 'Mary' refers to Charles and James' sister, the Princess of Orange, not OTL's Mary II, who is a different person)

[Emperor Constantine]

Originally Posted by Makemakean

Are you sure of that? Now, I concede that English succession is tricky business. I am still unsure of whether or not in the end the Unwritten Constitution actually says that it's whoever the Parliament wants it to be. After all, they could bar Catholics from the throne, declare that James II had vacated the throne when he most adamantly insisted he hadn't, and they could outright both abolish and restore the monarchy. However, unless I'm mistaken, it works in such a way that in a family all the boys get a turn after age, then all the girls. Like how it was first Edward VI (eldest (legitimate) son of Henry VIII), then Mary I (eldest daughter), then Elizabeth II (next eldest daughter).

Now just like how Victoria inherited the throne as a woman, despite her father's younger brother, the Duke of Cumberland, still being alive, I think that Mary would still inherit the throne, despite her father's younger brother Henry, Duke of Gloucester, still being alive.

I this TL James would have died in 1660, 2 years before Mary was born. Now if James' first son Charles, Duke of Cambridge survived the situation would be different. Parliament only gained these powers after the Glorious revolution, and only declared James II to have abdicated when William was already on hand and Mary was ready to head to England. The British Line of Succession was pretty clear. Males are preferred but a daughter can succeed if she has no brothers. Parliament didn't control the line of succession at the time.

[Makemakean]

Ah, missed the childless-part. Sorry, my bad.

[Emperor Constantine]

Originally Posted by Makemakean

Ah, missed the childless-part. Sorry, my bad.

Its ok. General Question: Who would Henry marry? It would effect whether or not the mother would be Regent after all. In OTL Henry was close to the Grand Prince de Conde so maybe a Conde Princess? Other option would be a danish Princess, Anne Sophie.

[Velasco]

Maybe a home-grown girl? Re-affirm ties with the English nobility and all that.

[Emperor Constantine]

Originally Posted by Velasco

Maybe a home-grown girl? Re-affirm ties with the English nobility and all that.

That could work, a born and raised English girl would be more popular in England and, if necessary, would be accepted as Regent fairly easily. The only reason I'd be skeptical would be because there would be no advantage. No alliance. If she was ah heiress on the other hand... well that's different.

[Asharella]

Originally Posted by Emperor Constantine

That could work, a born and raised English girl would be more popular in England and, if necessary, would be accepted as Regent fairly easily. The only reason I'd be skeptical would be because there would be no advantage. No alliance. If she was ah heiress on the other hand... well that's different.

I think it is much more likely Henry would have married one of Conde's nieces, which was the plan in OTL just before he died.

[Gonzaga]

Originally Posted by Asharella

I think it is much more likely Henry would have married one of Conde's nieces, which was the plan in OTL just before he died.

Which Conde niece? He didn't have any niece by 1660.

[mcdnab]

In the period 1660 the succession to the English Throne and to the Scots Throne would be as follows
1) Henry Duke of Gloucester
2) Mary Princess of Orange (d 1660)
3) William III Prince of Orange
4) Henrietta Anne m 1661 Phillip Duke of Orleans.
5) Elizabeth Stuart Electress Palatine (d1662)
6) Charles I Louis, Elector Palatine
7)Charles of the Palatine (b1651)
8) Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate (b1652)
9) Prince Rupert Duke of Cumberland
10) Edward Count Palatine of Simmern
11) Louise Maria of the Palatinate (b1647)
12) Anne Henriette Julie of the Palatinate (b1648)
13) Benedicta Henrietta (b1652)
14) Elisabeth of the Palatinate (b1618) unmarried
15) Louise Hollandine of the Palatinate (b1622) became a nun in 1659
16) Sophia of the Palatinate (b 1630)
17) George of Hannover (b1660) (Sophia had 6 further children that lived)

That exhausts the descendants of James VI and I -
Scotland would be likely claimed by descendants of Mary daughter of James II
England would be disputed but the strongest claim would be the descendants of Mary Tudor daughter of Henry VII.

If you accept the issue of Charles Louis Elector Palatine's second marriage - only two were born by 1660 (there was no such thing as a morganatic marriage in England)
Karl Ludwig von der Pfalz (b1658) and would come ahead of his half sister Elizabeth Charlotte
Karoline von der Pfalz (b1659)

After the Glorious Revolution the British succession is governed by statute and the heir is always the senior protestant heir general of Sophia of Hannover - using male preference primogeniture.
The Monarch must be in communion with the Church of England, may not be a Roman Catholic and may not be married to a Roman Catholic.

Originally Posted by Makemakean

Are you sure of that? Now, I concede that English succession is tricky business. I am still unsure of whether or not in the end the Unwritten Constitution actually says that it's whoever the Parliament wants it to be. After all, they could bar Catholics from the throne, declare that James II had vacated the throne when he most adamantly insisted he hadn't, and they could outright both abolish and restore the monarchy. However, unless I'm mistaken, it works in such a way that in a family all the boys get a turn after age, then all the girls. Like how it was first Edward VI (eldest (legitimate) son of Henry VIII), then Mary I (eldest daughter), then Elizabeth II (next eldest daughter).

Now just like how Victoria inherited the throne as a woman, despite her father's younger brother, the Duke of Cumberland, still being alive, I think that Mary would still inherit the throne, despite her father's younger brother Henry, Duke of Gloucester, still being alive.

[DTF955Baseballfan]

Originally Posted by mcdnab

In the period 1660 the succession to the English Throne and to the Scots Throne would be as follows
1) Henry Duke of Gloucester
2) Mary Princess of Orange (d 1660)
3) William III Prince of Orange
4) Henrietta Anne m 1661 Phillip Duke of Orleans.
5) Elizabeth Stuart Electress Palatine (d1662)
6) Charles I Louis, Elector Palatine
7)Charles of the Palatine (b1651)
8) Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate (b1652)
9) Prince Rupert Duke of Cumberland
10) Edward Count Palatine of Simmern
11) Louise Maria of the Palatinate (b1647)
12) Anne Henriette Julie of the Palatinate (b1648)
13) Benedicta Henrietta (b1652)
14) Elisabeth of the Palatinate (b1618) unmarried
15) Louise Hollandine of the Palatinate (b1622) became a nun in 1659
16) Sophia of the Palatinate (b 1630)
17) George of Hannover (b1660) (Sophia had 6 further children that lived)

That exhausts the descendants of James VI and I -
Scotland would be likely claimed by descendants of Mary daughter of James II
England would be disputed but the strongest claim would be the descendants of Mary Tudor daughter of Henry VII.

If you accept the issue of Charles Louis Elector Palatine's second marriage - only two were born by 1660 (there was no such thing as a morganatic marriage in England)
Karl Ludwig von der Pfalz (b1658) and would come ahead of his half sister Elizabeth Charlotte
Karoline von der Pfalz (b1659)

Wow, thanks for the list. What website is that from, and can you get it for any country? I figure it has to be somewhere.

[mcdnab]

Sorry there is not any list or site I have seen but it is usually fairly simple to work out as long as you know at least one monarch you can usually work backwards geneologically speaking (it helps if the family isn't a large one lol)

[DTF955Baseballfan]

Okay, thanks, that's what I try to do with Wikipedia but sometimes it cvan be tricky. And witht he Hapsburgs, it's convoluted to sayt he least.

[The Professor]

Originally Posted by DTF955Baseballfan

Wow, thanks for the list. What website is that from, and can you get it for any country? I figure it has to be somewhere.

Originally Posted by DTF955Baseballfan

Okay, thanks, that's what I try to do with Wikipedia but sometimes it cvan be tricky. And witht he Hapsburgs, it's convoluted to sayt he least.

Remind me to dig out that Czech (but in English or French) genealogic site for you - it shows most of the major houses marriages and offspring.

[DTF955Baseballfan]

thanks, that would help. I'll save it in my archives at least, though things are getting busy enough I wont' be starting my timeline right away (I don't like starting and then leaving it after 8-10 parts)

[The Professor]

Originally Posted by DTF955Baseballfan

thanks, that would help. I'll save it in my archives at least, though things are getting busy enough I wont' be starting my timeline right away (I don't like starting and then leaving it after 8-10 parts)

Here's the link though now seems be purely in English
http://genealogy.euweb.cz/