WI:Henry VIII Dies Jousting In 1510
- Thread starter Pericles
- Start date
1603 comes early!
Senior living descendant of Henry VII is Margaret Tudor. Lack of English queens regnant since Maud means she would more than likely rely on James IV of Scotland to secure her rule. He would actually probably make a fairly good de facto English monarch, truth be told. And he would live much longer due to the fact that he would no longer likely die in the Battle of Flodden Field. Lord knows Margaret Tudor would have a happier life. James V of Scotland then becomes the first Stuart English king.
The alternative senior Yorkist claim would be Henry Courtenay, Marquess of Exeter, the son of Catherine of York and William Courtenay.
If we are paying attention to all those nasty things Richard III said about his mother and that archer then the senior Yorkist claimant is, through poor Margaret Pole, her son Henry Pole, first baron Montagu. And I don't think at this point Margaret Pole even as her lands or title in her own right.
Henry VII was quite strategic when it came to marrying off his wife's female relatives, as you can see. None of these alternate claimants have the wealth, the retainers or the strength of claim to fend off the king's elder sister, her husband, and the Scottish army.
Senior living descendant of Henry VII is Margaret Tudor. Lack of English queens regnant since Maud means she would more than likely rely on James IV of Scotland to secure her rule. He would actually probably make a fairly good de facto English monarch, truth be told. And he would live much longer due to the fact that he would no longer likely die in the Battle of Flodden Field. Lord knows Margaret Tudor would have a happier life. James V of Scotland then becomes the first Stuart English king.
The alternative senior Yorkist claim would be Henry Courtenay, Marquess of Exeter, the son of Catherine of York and William Courtenay.
If we are paying attention to all those nasty things Richard III said about his mother and that archer then the senior Yorkist claimant is, through poor Margaret Pole, her son Henry Pole, first baron Montagu. And I don't think at this point Margaret Pole even as her lands or title in her own right.
Henry VII was quite strategic when it came to marrying off his wife's female relatives, as you can see. None of these alternate claimants have the wealth, the retainers or the strength of claim to fend off the king's elder sister, her husband, and the Scottish army.
The most interesting thing is that this changes the balance of power in western Europe at a key moment. The new Anglo-Scottish union would most likely ally itself to Louis XII and later Francis I against Maximilian and later Charles V. Perhaps the French retain Milan. Perhaps James does some empire-building in the Netherlands using Calais as a base. While it's not clear how much effect it has, this does seem to augur against the Habsburg domination of sixteenth century Europe.
If this is the joust in January, the Stuart male heir is Arthur (only a few months old, died in July of 1510 OTL) - James isn't even born yet.
Now, one might say Arthur's death isn't butterflied away, but let's at least acknowledge he exists.
And why would the Anglo-Scottish union ally itself with Louis?
Now, one might say Arthur's death isn't butterflied away, but let's at least acknowledge he exists.
And why would the Anglo-Scottish union ally itself with Louis?
I don't think it would be automatic that Margaret's claim would pass to a living son. Henry VII claimed the crown in 1485 by right of battle, so that he avoided the messy matter of the legal justification of his claim against his own living mother, who was of course just fine with how matters ended up anyway. Moreover, for practicality's sake there is a strong disfavoring of crowned infants, not just because one might die on them just as Arthur likely would, but because of the experience with Henry VI.
Also, Auld Alliance aside, the two kings were very close, and were in fact allies in the War of the League of Cambrai. In fact Queen Anne of Brittany declared James IV her knight.
Oh aye. I'm saying Arthur as opposed to his not-yet-born brother, not his mother. My bad for not being clearer.
Though I don't know why its especially likely he'd die TTL.
But James - who is only king of Scotland, not England (and I suspect Parliament is going to make a big deal of this if he tries to be "de facto king", whatever the view of a female ruler is) may or may not be able to use that to get England to side with France.
And siding with France as King of Scotland while being the husband of the Queen of England is going to be exceedingly awkward. Possible, but less than ideal politically.
Well look, if someone wanted to make a timeline along these lines, it could be a whole thing. James IV is using his money and men to prop up Margaret against a potential revolt by Buckingham. Margaret in turn feels she has to oblige him in matters of foreign policy. If England loses as a result, we're on a quick route to War of the Roses territory. But if England wins and has some nice Belgian real estate as a result, likely all is well. However this pliancy still makes her look more like a puppet to the Parliament and the nobility. Buckingham himself is handicapped by the small matter of not being at all close in the line of succession, with assorted Howards, Poles and Courtenays lurking behind him without enough strength among themselves to land a killing blow.
In the end, my money would be on Margaret. She was a force in Scottish politics on her own for thirty years or so after James's death, and during that period was strong-willed, resourceful, and pragmatic, although not always lucky in love.
In fact, if someone were to write a timeline of this, and really really really wanted to screw with people's heads, we would have some version of Margaret's OTL complicated romantic life play out in front of both kingdoms in such a way that Henry VIII's goings-on would seem positively tasteful by comparison.
"But I love him not!"
Extra credit: Her paramour could be George Boleyn!
In the end, my money would be on Margaret. She was a force in Scottish politics on her own for thirty years or so after James's death, and during that period was strong-willed, resourceful, and pragmatic, although not always lucky in love.
In fact, if someone were to write a timeline of this, and really really really wanted to screw with people's heads, we would have some version of Margaret's OTL complicated romantic life play out in front of both kingdoms in such a way that Henry VIII's goings-on would seem positively tasteful by comparison.
"But I love him not!"
Extra credit: Her paramour could be George Boleyn!
Sounds a bit like her granddaughter, Mary Queen of Scots, but in a stronger position politically.
He would be crowned King Consort to Queen Margret 1 of England. He would not take the throne himself (unlike William III iotl who was actually crown king along side Anne).
If the marriage only produced one son then there MAY be a personal union of the thrones, but if more than one son then likely eldest gets English throne and second son gets Scot's throne.
But King Consort - if he's given that title - is vastly different than King of England in his own name, like that timeline would have.
If his wife become Queen of England, he would have to become King Consort (as he was already a King).
IF Margaret chose (or was allowed) to make him King (as Mary did with William) then they would hold the throne jointly, but Margaret is the Queen no matter what.
I suspect "would be allowed" is an issue here.
Velasco: What heritage is that again?
James II married Mary of Guelders, daughter of Duke Arnold and Catherine of Cleves (great-aunt of Anne of Cleves). Her father and brother fought over the Duchy, her father eventually sold it to Burgundy. Her nephew Charles was the last duke: a prisoner for some years, he escaped and took Guelders back. When he died without issue, he was suceeded by his cousin Duke William of Cleves (Queen Anne's brother) but the Habsburgs disputed and eventually took it back.
Here James IV might make a more sensible heir than William.
Its pretty inconceivable to think that there wouldn't be at least one noble in the whole of England who wouldn't marry Princess Mary, Henry's younger sister and claim the English throne as an alternative to England being swallowed by Scotland.
The logical option would be Henry Courtenay, Mary and Henry's 1st cousin and the son of their mother Elizabeth of York's younger sister Catherine.
The logical option would be Henry Courtenay, Mary and Henry's 1st cousin and the son of their mother Elizabeth of York's younger sister Catherine.