WI: Henry VIII dead in 1521?

abc123

Banned
I'm sure that this was allready done to death, but what would happen if somehow Henry VIII let's say broke his neck when he fall off the horse in 1521?
Who would suceed him? He had an illegitimate son Henry Fitzroy, aged 2 at the time, but I doubt that he could suceed him...

Is there a possibility of another civil war?

Obviously, no six marriages and Act of Supremacy....
 

Bee

Mary was born in 1516, so she would have been the obvious successor in 1519, with Catherine of Aragon as regent. If Henry died before Mary was born, Henry's sister Mary is the likeliest successor.
 

von hitchofen

Banned
Last edited:

abc123

Banned
And if Duke of Buckingham is still alive, you would have him trying to get the throne for himself.
So, this way or another, a civil war between Queen Mary/regent Catherine of Aragon and some of Plantagenets is in the cards...

OTOH, Margaret, Queen of Scots could also claim the throne ( her right is not significantly weaker than Mary's ), so if they win, we could have England and Scotland under same monarch much before OTL.
 

von hitchofen

Banned
abc123 said:
And if Duke of Buckingham is still alive, you would have him trying to get the throne for himself.
Click to expand...

He would have to get out of captivity alive first - which is no small matter when you are suspected of treason

also he was charged with prophesying the King's death - and the King's just died

its not looking good
 

abc123

Banned
von hitchofen said:
He would have to get out of captivity alive first - which is no small matter when you are suspected of treason

also he was charged with prophesying the King's death - and the King's just died

its not looking good
Click to expand...

No, I wanted to say if Henry VIII died before 1521, before his captivity/execution...
 

Shogun

And of course it has to be asked whenever we talk about King Henry VIII -what of the future of Catholicism in England?
 

mcdnab

Undoubtedly the five-year-old Mary is proclaimed Queen
There is no obvious alternative and the battle will be for control of the infant Queen and the government
Key figures in that will be the Queen Dowager Katherine of Aragon, Cardinal Wolsey and the Duke of Suffolk.
One issue is the role of Wolsey he was largely unpopular with many courtiers (and that was one reason for the fall of the Duke of Buckingham and whilst Buckingham was very aware of his royal descent it is debateable whether he had the political power of backing for any rebellion even after Henry's death)
The remaining agnatic descendants of the Plantagenets were disparate and had no real legal claim (Mary herself is the great granddaughter of Edward IV when all is said and done)
In fact the strongest claims rest with Elizabeth of York's surviving sister whose husband had been favoured by Henry VIII.
Katherine of York and her children - Henry Courtenay and Margaret Courtenay
and then Margaret Countess of Salisbury (daughter of George Duke of Clarence) who had been restored to the earldom by Henry VIII and was Governess to the Princess Mary (she had been close to Katherine of Aragon since she arrived in England to marry Arthur Tudor)
Katherine of Aragon is likely to favour a pro-imperial policy whereas Wolsey tended to favour a French approach - Mary's first betrothal to the French dauphin is still in place in 1521.
Legally as this predates the change in succession rules granted to Henry by Parliament - the Tudor succession would, by the standards of the day, be Mary Tudor, Margaret Queen Dowager of Scotland, James V of Scotland, Lady Margaret Douglas, Mary Queen Dowager of France Duchess of Suffolk, Henry Brandon (d1522), Frances Brandon, Eleanor Brandon.
 

abc123

Banned
mcdnab said:
Undoubtedly the five-year-old Mary is proclaimed Queen
There is no obvious alternative and the battle will be for control of the infant Queen and the government
Key figures in that will be the Queen Dowager Katherine of Aragon, Cardinal Wolsey and the Duke of Suffolk.
One issue is the role of Wolsey he was largely unpopular with many courtiers (and that was one reason for the fall of the Duke of Buckingham and whilst Buckingham was very aware of his royal descent it is debateable whether he had the political power of backing for any rebellion even after Henry's death)
The remaining agnatic descendants of the Plantagenets were disparate and had no real legal claim (Mary herself is the great granddaughter of Edward IV when all is said and done)
In fact the strongest claims rest with Elizabeth of York's surviving sister whose husband had been favoured by Henry VIII.
Katherine of York and her children - Henry Courtenay and Margaret Courtenay
and then Margaret Countess of Salisbury (daughter of George Duke of Clarence) who had been restored to the earldom by Henry VIII and was Governess to the Princess Mary (she had been close to Katherine of Aragon since she arrived in England to marry Arthur Tudor)
Katherine of Aragon is likely to favour a pro-imperial policy whereas Wolsey tended to favour a French approach - Mary's first betrothal to the French dauphin is still in place in 1521.
Legally as this predates the change in succession rules granted to Henry by Parliament - the Tudor succession would, by the standards of the day, be Mary Tudor, Margaret Queen Dowager of Scotland, James V of Scotland, Lady Margaret Douglas, Mary Queen Dowager of France Duchess of Suffolk, Henry Brandon (d1522), Frances Brandon, Eleanor Brandon.
Click to expand...

OK, so do you think that Margaret of Scotland would try to take the throne?
Or, Mary Queen Dowager of France ( and her husband Charles Brandon )?
 

Falastur

von hitchofen said:
Mary I becomes Queen aged 5, quick find a regent and raise and army before those Plantagenet nutters come back...
Click to expand...

Which Plantagenets? Pretty much the sole reason the House of Tudor had come to the throne was because the entire Plantagenet House had been killed off one by one during the Wars of the Roses.
 

Velasco

The Princess Mary is declared Queen immediately, with her mother as Regent. Katherine and Henry were both popular and popular opinion would be on the side of the young princess, the Spanish alliance and the experienced, pious, exalted Queen Katherine.

Mary was at this time betrothed to the Dauphin François and cousin of the newly elected Emperor Charles V. Neither Spanish nor French help would be forthcoming for any would-be usurpers. Queen Katherine was particularly close to the Countess of Salisbury, so I don't think her children or in-laws (the Buckingham Staffords) would rebel. Actually, as Katherine enjoyed close ties with most of the high nobility and prized their ancient Plantagenet lineages over the Tudor "new men" favoured by her husband, Mary could well sail through without any meaningful attempts at usurpation whatsoever.

The Regent Dowager Katherine's first move would probably be to cancel her daughter's betrothal to the Dauphin and pledge her instead to her nephew the Emperor. Charles V would probably swing by the Isles sooner rather than later to take hold of the throne and whisk Mary away to the continent, leaving Katherine behind as the typical Habsburg widow-regent.

Falastur said:
Which Plantagenets? Pretty much the sole reason the House of Tudor had come to the throne was because the entire Plantagenet House had been killed off one by one during the Wars of the Roses.
Click to expand...

You have the Courtenays, Nevilles, de la Poles, the Poles, the Manners, the Staffords, the Bourchiers and a half dozen other families with just as much Plantagenet blood - if not more - than the Tudors.
 

von hitchofen

Banned
Falastur said:
Which Plantagenets? Pretty much the sole reason the House of Tudor had come to the throne was because the entire Plantagenet House had been killed off one by one during the Wars of the Roses.
Click to expand...

read post #5 :rolleyes:

if you didn't understand it, read it until you do
 

Velasco

von hitchofen said:
if a civil war kicks off, the children of this women are the strongest claimants to the throne

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Pole,_8th_Countess_of_Salisbury

Plantagenets are extinct in the male line, except for the Royal Bastards, Tudors, Somersets et al

if the Duke of Buckingham, Edward Stafford has been executed for treason [May 1521]

this guy will want revenge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Stafford,_1st_Baron_Stafford

he also has a claim to the throne
Click to expand...

Margaret Pole was a close personal friend of Queen Katherine and governess of Princess Mary. Her children's studies were financed by King Henry. I do not see them rising up against the Tudors in rebellion.

Furthermore, the Tudors themselves, the Courtenays and the children of Princess Cecily are all more senior heirs than the Poles.

Lastly, OTL Henry Stafford never sought revenge. There's no reason he'd do so ITTL. His claim to the throne was also ridiculously distant and meaningless (unless backed up by a fortune like his father's).
 

Velasco

abc123 said:
OK, so do you think that Margaret of Scotland would try to take the throne?
Or, Mary Queen Dowager of France ( and her husband Charles Brandon )?
Click to expand...

Margaret Tudor was unpopular both in England and in Scotland, she would not have the backing necessary to usurp the throne from her niece - especially not with her own troublesome marital career.

Charles Brandon was likewise unpopular with the English élite and would not have the wherewithal necessary to take the throne from the legitimate heiress backed by France, Spain, the Empire and above all the Pope.
 

Alpha Trion

If Henry VIII had died in 1521, Queen Catherine of Aragon would have most likely been made regent and guardian of Mary. There would have probably been a regency council made up of the dukes of Suffolk and Norfolk and Cardinal Wolsey. The regency council could act as a brake on the regent’s power with some acts of the royal prerogative requiring a majority vote of the council. In OTL, Henry Fitzroy was not made duke of Richmond until 1525, so in TTL, he may just be a bastard son of a dead king with no powerbase to challenge Mary.

Margaret, Queen of Scots would probably not contest her niece Mary’s right to the throne. Margaret couldn’t have challenged Mary’s right to the throne without using arguments that could threaten her own claim to the throne. In 1521, Margaret was having a difficult time maintaining her position in Scotland, so she lacked a powerbase to challenge Mary. Margaret would probably focus on the possibility of her son, James V of Scotland, marrying Mary. In OTL, Mary, Duchess of Suffolk, had a good relationship with Catherine of Aragon. She even opposed her brother’s attempt to obtain an annulment of his marriage to Catherine. Henry VIII named Queen Mary I after his sister. So I suspect that in TTL, Mary would be loyal to her niece and namesake. Mary would be content with her husband sitting on the regency council and focus on forming a powerbase in the event of Queen Mary’s death. If Queen Mary were to die without issue, it would be fascinating to see if Mary would recognize her older sister Margaret’s claim to the throne.

The question of whom Queen Mary would marry in TTL looms large. She was betrothed to the Dauphin in OTL but I doubt she would marry him in TTL. The regency council would not support the personal union of France and England. Another possible husband would be James V of Scotland. Margaret would love the idea James marrying Mary but the regent of Scotland, the duke of Albany, would want a French match for James. The French court would do everything in its power to maintain its alliance with Scotland and prevent the marriage of James to Mary. Catherine of Aragon would want her daughter to marry Emperor Charles V. In TTL, I could easily see Charles ending his marriage negotiations with Portugal in order obtain the throne of England. A dowry of England would be too tempting to ignore. Wolsey would campaign for the Dauphin, but I suspect that Charles would use plenty of bribes to convince Norfolk and Suffolk to betroth Mary to Charles. Charles could sign a marriage treaty to Mary limiting his powers as king of England with terms similar to what his son Philip II signed in OTL. Charles could agree to leave the Netherlands to a second son of the couple with that son also inheriting England upon Mary’s death.

The future of Catholicism in England would be brighter in TTL. Mary and Catherine of Aragon were both devout Catholics and they would have done everything in their power to preserve the religion in England. Queen Mary, in TTL, would have been raised in a happier environment than in OTL, and would have had a more peaceful reign than she did in OTL.
 

Alpha Trion

In TTL, the schism with Rome wouldn’t happen, and if anything Mary would have asked the pope for the right to institute the Inquisition in England. Even if Henry VIII had died in 1521, there would have been a Protestant movement in England. In TTL, Catherine of Aragon, Mary, and their Hapsburg heirs would have crushed any attempts by Protestants to convert England. An English Inquisition could have been used to increase royal power in a similar way to what happened in OTL to Mary’s grandparents, Isabella and Ferdinand of Spain. However despite the potential for religious conflict, I believe that (in the short tem) England would have been ruled better in TTL by Catherine and Mary than it was by Henry in OTL. Catherine was an intelligent woman who was liked and respected by the majority of the nobles and commoners. Under her mother’s tutelage, Mary would have been taught how to rule England. However, upon Mary’s death, her Hapsburg heirs would eventually hurt England with their constant conflicts with France and their devotion to the Catholic Church. I’ve always believed that England not being Catholic gave them an advantage in scientific advancement over both France and Spain after 1600.
 

Dathi THorfinnsson

Alpha Trion said:
In TTL, the schism with Rome wouldn’t happen, and if anything Mary would have asked the pope for the right to institute the Inquisition in England. Even if Henry VIII had died in 1521, there would have been a Protestant movement in England. In TTL, Catherine of Aragon, Mary, and their Hapsburg heirs would have crushed any attempts by Protestants to convert England. An English Inquisition could have been used to increase royal power in a similar way to what happened in OTL to Mary’s grandparents, Isabella and Ferdinand of Spain. However despite the potential for religious conflict, I believe that (in the short tem) England would have been ruled better in TTL by Catherine and Mary than it was by Henry in OTL. Catherine was an intelligent woman who was liked and respected by the majority of the nobles and commoners. Under her mother’s tutelage, Mary would have been taught how to rule England. However, upon Mary’s death, her Hapsburg heirs would eventually hurt England with their constant conflicts with France and their devotion to the Catholic Church. I’ve always believed that England not being Catholic gave them an advantage in scientific advancement over both France and Spain after 1600.
Click to expand...
Hoo boy. Inquisition in England. Let's guarantee a Calvinist State, possibly a republic in 50 years time after the Catholic Tudors are kicked out.

Could Mary have kept England Catholic? Certainly for some time. But the moment she starts doing a foreign inquisition, and I guarantee it will be perceived as that even if many of the Inquisitors are English by birth, there will be civil war, and it will may Catholicism 'unEnglish'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top