So anyone who's read Thespitron's A more Personal Union knows who Francois II is, but to those who don't, he was Mary Queen of Scots' first husband. The marriage between the two was designed to create an Franco-Scottish Union, with the future King getting a claim to England as well. Obviously that fell threw. So what if Francois II was more healthy and didn't die of an ear infection (BTW I'm also covering the whole undescended testicles thing in the more healthy department)? What changes would we see? And as I stated earlier I am well aware of the obvious TL example. Personally I love that TL but I do question whether or not France would really abandon the Catholic Church. So any other opinions? Would this force Elizabeth I to marry? Would we see a better or worse religious Situation in France? Would France and Scotland be able to form a workable union? Would the French send troops back to Scotland at a later date? Would the Guise family be more or less influential? What about Mary herself? Would she usurp Catherine de Medici's position as ruler behind the curtain?
WI: A healthier Francois II?
- Thread starter Emperor Constantine
- Start date
It would be interesting to see who she would pick. I wonder if a Franco-Scottish union would push her into the Habsburg camp. But the best choice would be either an English noble with Royal blood (It think there was a few around that survived Henry's purges) or a second son from Sweden or Denmark.
As for recognizing an heir, Elizabeth new how much of a joke Darney was so perhaps Catherine Grey? Or even more unlikely, could we see a compromise with the French Court, with a second son of Francois and Mary becoming heir-presumptive to England? Or would this be unlikely/ cause a rift wit Spain?
Any thoughts about France and how Francois would affect it?
Well, Margaret Douglas (Mary's aunt, Elizabeth's cousin) was still alive at the time as well. Darnley was only born in 1545: he was in his mid-teens when Elizabeth came to power and excelled in languages and music (like Elizabeth 
). He would make for a nice match if it wasn't for his proximity to the throne - Elizabeth might fear him making a grab for sole power or relegating her to consort status. On the other hand the prospect of placing him on the Scottish throne, thus making him her equal but also an inferior (in a way), and displacing Mary that way, would also be interesting.
OTL Elizabeth apparently snubbed Erik of Sweden for being a "mere" elected King, while her sister had married a higher-ranking, hereditary one. I don't see Elizabeth swallowing her pride and making a marriage less prestitigious than her sisters - when you factor in the religious issue it's not hard to see why she ended up single.
Right when Elizabeth ascended the throne the French proposed a double marriage: her eldest son to Mary's eldest daughter, and her eldest daughter to the future dauphin. Respective claims to England and France, possession of Calais and France's debts to the English crown would all be resolved by these marriages in the French proposal. The English correspondence back to the Queen dismissed the proposal entirely, I recall a one liner along the lines of "The French make some talk of marriages" and that was basically it
A lasting Valois France means a lasting Bourbon, and Protestant, Navarre. Marie de Médicis is never married, perhaps resulting in Navarre being inherited through a female line. As for François, it's hard to predict since he died so young and his frail health probably affected a lot of his OTL personality.
). He would make for a nice match if it wasn't for his proximity to the throne - Elizabeth might fear him making a grab for sole power or relegating her to consort status. On the other hand the prospect of placing him on the Scottish throne, thus making him her equal but also an inferior (in a way), and displacing Mary that way, would also be interesting.OTL Elizabeth apparently snubbed Erik of Sweden for being a "mere" elected King, while her sister had married a higher-ranking, hereditary one. I don't see Elizabeth swallowing her pride and making a marriage less prestitigious than her sisters - when you factor in the religious issue it's not hard to see why she ended up single.
Right when Elizabeth ascended the throne the French proposed a double marriage: her eldest son to Mary's eldest daughter, and her eldest daughter to the future dauphin. Respective claims to England and France, possession of Calais and France's debts to the English crown would all be resolved by these marriages in the French proposal. The English correspondence back to the Queen dismissed the proposal entirely, I recall a one liner along the lines of "The French make some talk of marriages" and that was basically it
A lasting Valois France means a lasting Bourbon, and Protestant, Navarre. Marie de Médicis is never married, perhaps resulting in Navarre being inherited through a female line. As for François, it's hard to predict since he died so young and his frail health probably affected a lot of his OTL personality.
It's kinda a Catholic screw in general. I liked the writing and the time period, but I eventually couldn't handle the level of screwed Catholicism was, with France, England, Scotland and more going Protestant, Spain in a state of seemingly perpetual civil war, Austria and Venice being conquered by the Ottomans, and a new weak Catholic Bavarian dynasty in the Holy Roman Empire. I think things were going badly for Catholicism in the Americas too, but by that point my reading the TL had become sporadic so I probably didn't get the whole picture.
I definitely don't think that Francis II's survival=Protestant France (though I won't say it is impossible, I don't see why his survival lends itself to such a thing any more than any other random French Renaissance PoD, especially given that Mary of Scotland was a staunch Catholic and Catherine d'Medici wasn't pro-Protestant IOTL). What it does likely mean, is that the English don't get control of Scotland. With a foothold in Britan and a strong claim on the English throne, I can see the heir of this union as having a very real chance of taking England as well, either by pressuring the now surrounded and outnumbered Elizabeth I, or by direct military action against her heir upon her death. Holding such a union together would be difficult in the extreme, especially given the religious divide between France and the others, but without an English monarch to fund the French Protestants the Wars of Religion might fizzle without as much action, leaving the Valois with the time and resources to focus on holding their union together.
Of course, then there are the Habsburgs, who won't be happy with this turn of events, and will almost certainly try to break thefragile union, but the Spanish ones had trouble enough facing England in OTL, while the Austrians are contending with the worst of the Ottomans at this point, so it all depends on whether the Spanish can do anything about it. Then there is the question of whether the union is split between multiple Valois lines or not. I would guess it would be divided up again only as a last resort, but if it is a choice between losing control entirely or placing it in the hands of multiple persons, then I can't imagine that they would choose the former option, especially given the example of the Habsburgs.
You know Thespitron6000, why did you pull off such a massive screw of the Hapsburgs? Also why did you make the Spanish branch into a bunch of card carrying villains?I would contribute to this thread, but, well, you know...
Anyone have any thoughts about the religious wars in France and to a lesser extent in Scotland? During Francois II's reign the Treaty of Edinburgh was signed, which called for French withdrawl from Scotland. Now as far as I know both Francois II and Mary were against the treaty and refused to give ascent. Now would a longer lived Francois II re-send troops into Scotland at a later date or would we see something like with thespitron, with Mary sending her uncle guise to act as Regent? Also, how much do we know about Francois' personality? I mean much of his reign was dominated by the Guise family so would this continue or would we get to a point with Francois assuming power personally, or at least dismissing the Guise family?
Apart from a Danish prince/king, I don't see who Elizabeth could marry in these conditions. But even then, Denmark isn't a kingdom as prestigious as Spain.Velasco said:
One question comes to my mind though: if she saw her marriage as being essential for the good of the realm, would Elizabeth have consented to having a less prestigious marriage than her sister Mary?
The way I see it, it looks more like North & Western Europe (Britain, France, Scandinavia, Northern Germany) have turned Protestant while Southern and Central Europe (Spain, Portugal, Italy, Switzerland, Southern Germany, Hungary, Poland) have remained Catholic despite a few issues here and there. Still a bit of a Catholic Screw but not so much.Avitus said:
As for Catholicism in the Americas, the main problem is Ferdinand: I think he has a few screw looses since he lost the war against his nemesis and has been forced into exile from Spain.
Lastly, Austria hasn't been conquered by the Ottomans: it is still in the hands of the Hapsburgs, who have managed to reconquer most of Hungary as well. In fact, since they lost the HRE, Hungary has become the main title of the Hapsburgs.
To be fair, France became Protestant in its timeline for various plausible reasons (at least in my opinion).Pericles said:
Regarding the Topic: an healthier François II would mean he would live and reign longer than he did OTL. Considering that most Valois Kings tended to live past the age of 50, sometimes even up to 60, and that François II was 15 when he came on the throne, he could be ruling France for 40-50 years. In other words, his reign will be the one to have to deal with the Religious Wars and affect France's policies in that matter. The Guise will probably have an important role in the King's court: they Mary Stuart's uncles, so they will most likely have an influence over her and the King. That said, I am not sure Catherine de Medici would loose her influence in court that easily: François is still her son, and she has pretty good political skills.
If François is healthier, this also means he will likely consumate his marriage and have children with Mary Stuart. This of course brings the question of the succession: in theory, the eldest son of François II and Mary Stuart would be the heir to both France and Scotland, as well as England. That being said, would such a union really happen? Unless special conditions allow for it, I don't think so. There are many problems against it and furthermore, we have to account for the possibility of François and Mary not wanting to unite their crowns: if they have two sons, they could choose to have the elder become King of France and the second King of Scotland.
Why not? OTL was an Hapsburgs wank. And sorry but Philip II of Spain was monster and he raised his son with hate so it's no surprise that Ferdinand is a little insane well the Spanish branch was a bunch of degenerate anyway. I don't get the love for them they were as bad as the Bourbons. If anything the Hapsburgs might recover and take advantage of the curent weak HRE emperor. If anything the Hapsburgs have proven themselve to be really resilient and ressourfull.
Last edited:
I hadn't realized that about Austria (I don't know where I got that wrong), but the fact remains that not only did France leave the church, but Spain is royally screwed, and southern Germany is politically weak as well.
I'm not sure that I agree about the plausibility of Francois making France convert. Unless I've forgotten, he did it in the TL because he was impressed by the Protestant speakers at one of the councils to reunite the church in France, and because of war with Spain and the Pope being decidedly Habsburg biased. The problem is, even then most of France wont just go along with Protestantism, and you don't have enough Protestants to force the Catholics to go along with it. Francois making his dramatic speech about converting seems unlikely, given that Paris was willing to kill royals who supported Protestantism. In all likeliness, I think that the threat to become protestant might be used in a Spanish invade France scenario, but I can't see it being followed through on. Aside from that, Philip invading France was pretty implausible. Given how willing he was to let Elizabeth be when it suited him I can't see him going for the throat in France without the monarch even converting, nor can I see him wanting to gamble it all without having some level of certainty that it will be worth his while.
Don't forget the Pope acting like a Habsburg puppet in a decade where, historically, relations between Spain and the Papacy were close to a nadir. (But not an actual nadir, as Philip wasn't excommunicated this time.) Also Cardinal de Lorraine boycotting the Colloquy of Poissy, which IOTL he organized, thinking he could get everyone on board with his big compromise.
Understand, I like the writing, but yeah, I do have issues with the TL.
Wow, I'm wondering why Thespitron6000 did all the things that were the exact opposite in OTL.
I already explained in an other thread why imagining France becoming protestant is les alternate history than fantasy.
France was latin and so remained catholic. Look at the religious frontier in Europe. And you will notice that the frontier between dominating catholicism and dominating protestantism is more or less the frontier of the roman empire.
Though he had an army, Henry IV of France was forced to convert.
The french king did not need becoming protestant to settle his conflict the Pope since he had won this conflict by force 2 centuries earlier (with king Philip IV) while remaining catholic. The estates belonging to the church were in the jands of french bishops and abbots, not of italian ones. So there was no need to take back the land from "Rome".
In the 1570's, it remains much more probable to have England finally not becoming protestant than to have France becoming protestant.
And I think England had much more opportunity to obtain religious tolerance from a french Valois king than from a spanish Habsburg king or ally. At that time, England was a rather second-rank player.
France was latin and so remained catholic. Look at the religious frontier in Europe. And you will notice that the frontier between dominating catholicism and dominating protestantism is more or less the frontier of the roman empire.
Though he had an army, Henry IV of France was forced to convert.
The french king did not need becoming protestant to settle his conflict the Pope since he had won this conflict by force 2 centuries earlier (with king Philip IV) while remaining catholic. The estates belonging to the church were in the jands of french bishops and abbots, not of italian ones. So there was no need to take back the land from "Rome".
In the 1570's, it remains much more probable to have England finally not becoming protestant than to have France becoming protestant.
And I think England had much more opportunity to obtain religious tolerance from a french Valois king than from a spanish Habsburg king or ally. At that time, England was a rather second-rank player.
And yet, Matteo, France had a major Protestant movement, as well as a significant Evangelical Catholic movement, and was the starting point of one of the major proto-Protestant groups. Further the most significant Protestant leader after Luther--was a Frenchman. One might almost get the impression that matters are bit more complicated than you appear to think...
I'd question that complication. I learned in School that the Protestants/Huguenots were only 10-15% of the population of France, but they were mainly nobles so that's why they were considered powerful.
10-15% is hardly a negligible amount, especially, as you note, if many of its members are nobility. Smaller groups have controlled nations.
Now, I would hardly deny that a Protestant France would be difficult, and quite unlikely to come about. But Matteo's relegation of it to fantasy, based on the nation's "Latin" heritage is a bit much.