WI: Francis II of France lives longer, has issue with Mary, Queen of Scots.

IOTL, he was the first husband of Mary Queen of Scots, who was a year older than him. He was crowned king at a young age after the death of his father, Henry II. His mother, Caterina de Medici was an influential regent. Through his wife he was also jure uxoris king consort of Scotland. Unfortunately he died at sixteen due to an ear condition. What if he had instead lived decades longer, outliving his mother and having issue with his wife, Mary?

ITTL's issue of Francis and Mary:
Francis III of France (b. 1562)
Mary (b. 1563)
Caterina (b. 1565)
James VI of Scotland (b. 1566)
 
IOTL, he was the first husband of Mary Queen of Scots, who was a year older than him. He was crowned king at a young age after the death of his father, Henry II. His mother, Caterina de Medici was an influential regent. Through his wife he was also jure uxoris king consort of Scotland. Unfortunately he died at sixteen due to an ear condition. What if he had instead lived decades longer, outliving his mother and having issue with his wife, Mary?

ITTL's issue of Francis and Mary:
Francis III of France (b. 1562)
Mary (b. 1563)
Caterina (b. 1565)
James VI of Scotland (b. 1566)
Their firstborn son would end up ruling both France and Scotland, I’m pretty sure. AFAIK, the way that the Habsburg monarchs tended to split up their territories between their sons and daughters was pretty unique to them. I don’t think that the House of Valois would split their territories like that when it’s two kingdoms like France and Scotland, and especially because Francis and Mary’s firstborn son would also have a claim to the throne of England. If Elizabeth is still unmarried with no children here (which is unlikely if MQOS stays married to Francis and they have children; more on this later) then Mary and Francis’s firstborn son could, theoretically, unite the thrones of England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and France after Mary, Francis, and Elizabeth’s deaths. If Elizabeth acknowledged the Stuart claim to England as she did IOTL.

So, on that subject, I think that if MQOS and Francis have children, I believe that Elizabeth will actually probably marry and have children here. Mary is recognized by Catholics as the rightful Queen of England, and she has the backing of Scotland and France’s continued support here. It would be super risky for her not to marry and have children, because a joint invasion by France and Scotland (and potentially Spain depending on the political situation) sponsored by a Pope might have a better chance at succeeding than any of the other attempts at dethroning Elizabeth IOTL.
 
Have there been historical monarchs who ruled both Scotland and France, or Scotland and any other kingdom outside of the British isles or Scandinavia? I wonder how it would work.
 
Their firstborn son would end up ruling both France and Scotland, I’m pretty sure. AFAIK, the way that the Habsburg monarchs tended to split up their territories between their sons and daughters was pretty unique to them. I don’t think that the House of Valois would split their territories like that when it’s two kingdoms like France and Scotland, and especially because Francis and Mary’s firstborn son would also have a claim to the throne of England. If Elizabeth is still unmarried with no children here (which is unlikely if MQOS stays married to Francis and they have children; more on this later) then Mary and Francis’s firstborn son could, theoretically, unite the thrones of England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and France after Mary, Francis, and Elizabeth’s deaths. If Elizabeth acknowledged the Stuart claim to England as she did IOTL.

So, on that subject, I think that if MQOS and Francis have children, I believe that Elizabeth will actually probably marry and have children here. Mary is recognized by Catholics as the rightful Queen of England, and she has the backing of Scotland and France’s continued support here. It would be super risky for her not to marry and have children, because a joint invasion by France and Scotland (and potentially Spain depending on the political situation) sponsored by a Pope might have a better chance at succeeding than any of the other attempts at dethroning Elizabeth IOTL.
Why would it be? Mary wasn't Elizabeth's only heir even IOTL. She could just bypass Mary's claim in favor of her children like she did IOTL. Though I suppose that's near ASB. Anyway, who could Elizabeth marry in the 1560s? She'd be seen as pretty "up there" and her earlier suitors are mostly all taken
 
Why would it be? Mary wasn't Elizabeth's only heir even IOTL. She could just bypass Mary's claim in favor of her children like she did IOTL. Though I suppose that's near ASB. Anyway, who could Elizabeth marry in the 1560s? She'd be seen as pretty "up there" and her earlier suitors are mostly all taken
I know she wasn’t Elizabeth’s only heir IOTL, but she was the person with the best claim to the throne. If Elizabeth died, it would be an incredibly simple matter for the Stuarts to depose anyone else that she names as her successor, considering that none of them would have the backing of another country like France. So, it’s urgent for Elizabeth to marry ITTL, and quick.

Since the POD is 1560, when Francis died, a few possible suitors for Elizabeth would still be alive and single by the time Francis III is born in 1562:
  • Eric XIV of Sweden (married in 1568 IOTL, was an actual suitor for Elizabeth; would be a good Protestant match for her and would bring military aid from that could help England fend off the Scots if need be)
  • John III of Sweden (married in late 1562 IOTL, but this can be butterflied away; since he doesn’t become King of Sweden until 1568 he could relocate to England full-time; another good Protestant match, but a more moderate one because he tried to find a balance between Catholicism and Protestantism)
  • Archduke Charles of Austria (married in 1571 IOTL, another actual suitor of Elizabeth; even though there is a religious difference, I believe that the need to marry and have an heir to combat Mary&Francis could make Elizabeth feel the need to compromise and marry a Catholic; political backing from the Empire is also a big plus here)
  • Frederick II of Denmark and Norway (married 1572 IOTL; another actual suitor of Elizabeth; yet another good Protestant match, with the added bonus of more military aid from Scandinavia that could combat the Scots if need be)
  • I’m sure there are a few English matches she could make too, with some of the older noble families, but I’m not sure what they could be.
 
Well… I guess you already know what is my first thought about this : the Polish election. 😁
Charles is likely to be elected instead of Henry as he is older and is not king of France in this timeline. Does he still die as in OTL ? If so, Henry may be elected after him. With Charles or Henry as king of Poland, Stephen Báthory stays prince of Transylvania and Sigismund Vasa stays king of Sweden.

That being said, let’s talk about Francis and Mary.

Francis’ survival changes the French Religious Wars. For the short time he reigned, Francis gave some concessions to non-rebellious Protestants (the Edict of Amboise and the Edict of Romorantin) but he did not hesitate to violently repress rebels.
After his death, Catherine de Medici became « gouvernante » of the kingdom (not formally regent) and awkwardly tried to use Protestants to counterbalance the influence of the Guises. She just managed to totally lose control of the situation.
With Francis alive, the situation is less ambiguous. The duke of Guise is de facto price minister. He and Francis are likely to severely punish any attempt of rebellion. The prince of Condé was already condemned to death. Likely, he is executed. Other troublemakers like the admiral of Coligny may end up like him.
Is it enough to prevent the disaster that occured in OTL ? Maybe. Or maybe not. It may also have the opposite effect and lead to a massive rebellion.

Scotland was virtually lost. Marie de Guise was dead and the Lords of the Congregation had taken power. Mary was still queen of Scotland but it was essentially symbolic : she had no power over Scotland.
Of course, Francis and Mary are unlikely to renounce to Scotland that easily. They would send French troops to Scotland as soon as they can and would search support from some loyalist clans still favorable to Mary. That means civil war in Scotland. If rebels win, I guess Lord Hamilton would usurp the throne and his eldest son would marry Elizabeth. If loyalists win, one of Mary’s uncles may become regent of Scotland.

Francis and Mary may find substantial support in Ireland. Irish Catholics would likely be unpleased to fall under French domination but, obviously, they would prefer that to English domination. An attempt of Francis and Mary to kick out the English from Ireland would probably receive massive approval from the locals.
However, I am unaware of the strength of English forces in Ireland and I don’t know how realistic it is to imagine Francis and Mary managing to take Ireland. If they do it, another one of Mary’s uncles may be regent of Ireland. (Yeah, she had many uncles.)

England is an entirely different matter. There is no way for English Protestants to accept the idea of a union with France and even English Catholics would dislike the idea.
As a result, if Elizabeth dies childless, I am pretty sure English Protestants would simply apply Henry VIII’s Third Succession Act and give the throne of England to some descendant of Mary Tudor the Elder. English Catholics may want to have Lord Darnley as a successor but I think he would have only very little chances.
Elizabeth having a child or not, Francis and Mary would still claim the throne of England but the only way for them to actually take power in England would be an invasion. And such a thing is always difficult. Maybe possible but difficult. Moreover, Philip II of Spain would do whatever he can to prevent such a union of crowns, even if it means England has to stay Protestant.
 
Last edited:
All of this is really interesting! You considered some factors I didn't, like the Polish elections, Lol.
However, I am unaware of the strength of English forces in Ireland and I don’t know how realistic it is to imagine Francis and Mary managing to take Ireland. If they do it, another one of Mary’s uncles may be regent of Ireland. (Yeah, she had many uncles.)
They could try and take Ireland, but I don't know if they would be successful. IIRC, the English really started cracking down on Ireland even more under the Tudors.
 
Why do you say that?
It did happen in OTL and I don't see why Francis' survival would prevent this election.
But his situation in this TL is quite different. He is not a heir to the throne because Charles is alive and there are royal children as well. So there is no reason for the King of France to look for the way of getting rid of him and Catherine, who wanted a crown for her favorite son, is not in power and can’t give the promises she gave in OTL to secure his election: Jean de Monluc was sent to Poland to negotiate a deal in exchange for military support against Russia, diplomatic assistance in dealing with the Ottoman Empire, and financial help. In this TL Henry is simply not important enough personally and in the terms of a political backing.

Of course, the schema could not be completely excluded but Charles seems to be a more likely candidate due to his seniority (and because he allegedly had a lousy temper so sending him far away from the court would be to everybody’s satisfaction 😜).
 
Have there been historical monarchs who ruled both Scotland and France, or Scotland and any other kingdom outside of the British isles or Scandinavia? I wonder how it would work.
Not that I think so, it would be logistically horrendous, imagine all that constant traveling?
There is probably no travel - a viceroy rules Scotland in their place.
The precedent would be Navarre under Louis X of France, which was effectively ruled by its Cortes.
So, probably not a viceroy, more likely a local noble assembly is allowed to let Scotland govern itself with limited input from the Louvre.
 
But his situation in this TL is quite different. He is not a heir to the throne because Charles is alive and there are royal children as well. So there is no reason for the King of France to look for the way of getting rid of him and Catherine, who wanted a crown for her favorite son, is not in power and can’t give the promises she gave in OTL to secure his election: Jean de Monluc was sent to Poland to negotiate a deal in exchange for military support against Russia, diplomatic assistance in dealing with the Ottoman Empire, and financial help. In this TL Henry is simply not important enough personally and in the terms of a political backing.

Of course, the schema could not be completely excluded but Charles seems to be a more likely candidate due to his seniority (and because he allegedly had a lousy temper so sending him far away from the court would be to everybody’s satisfaction 😜).
That would still NOT secure the Crown of Poland to a French prince.
 
That would still NOT secure the Crown of Poland to a French prince.
“Secure” as a 100% guarantee? Of course, not. But in OTL mission of Monluc (with the promises I listed) was successful in Poland (Lithuania was seemingly less happy but followed the suit) so it is realistic to assume that it would be successful with Francis on the throne.

However, if is an open question if in this TL anybody would care enough to give the OTL promises on behalf of Charles or Henry.
 
But his situation in this TL is quite different. He is not a heir to the throne because Charles is alive and there are royal children as well. So there is no reason for the King of France to look for the way of getting rid of him and Catherine, who wanted a crown for her favorite son, is not in power and can’t give the promises she gave in OTL to secure his election: Jean de Monluc was sent to Poland to negotiate a deal in exchange for military support against Russia, diplomatic assistance in dealing with the Ottoman Empire, and financial help. In this TL Henry is simply not important enough personally and in the terms of a political backing.

Of course, the schema could not be completely excluded but Charles seems to be a more likely candidate due to his seniority (and because he allegedly had a lousy temper so sending him far away from the court would be to everybody’s satisfaction 😜).
I definitely agree that Charles is likely to be preferred over Henry. This is precisely what I said there:
Charles is likely to be elected instead of Henry as he is older and is not king of France in this timeline. Does he still die as in OTL ? If so, Henry may be elected after him.
It is only if Charles still dies of tuberculosis as in OTL that Henry may be elected after him.

In OTL, the idea to make Henry king of Poland came from Sokollu Mehmed Pasha, the Ottoman Grand Vizier. In 1569, when Sigismund II was still alive but expected to die childless, Sokollu Mehmed Pasha received the French ambassador, asked him some questions about Henry and suggested to make him Sigismund's successor.
The purpose was to have an alliance with Poland against the Habsburgs and the Russians. Catherine liked the idea and Charles agreed. Then, they sent Jean de Monluc to Poland.
This is the main reason Henry was elected. Charles wanted so much to get rid of him that he cried when they separated.
As for Catherine, she was not in power in OTL either. Charles was. Of course she had influence over Charles but she had influence over Francis too. And, though it is true that Henry was her favorite, she actually wanted a crown (either as regnant either as consort) for all of her children.

“Secure” as a 100% guarantee? Of course, not. But in OTL mission of Monluc (with the promises I listed) was successful in Poland (Lithuania was seemingly less happy but followed the suit) so it is realistic to assume that it would be successful with Francis on the throne.
We agree.
However, if is an open question if in this TL anybody would care enough to give the OTL promises on behalf of Charles or Henry.
Catherine would, obviously.
I guess we can't know what Francis would think about it but Catherine is likely to convince him if he is reluctant.

There is probably no travel - a viceroy rules Scotland in their place.
The precedent would be Navarre under Louis X of France, which was effectively ruled by its Cortes.
So, probably not a viceroy, more likely a local noble assembly is allowed to let Scotland govern itself with limited input from the Louvre.
In OTL, Marie de Guise ruled Scotland as regent. If Francis and Mary manage to reconquer Scotland, my guess is that one of Mary's uncles would become the new regent (or viceroy if you prefer).
Considering all the trouble with the Lords of the Congregation, there is zero chance that Francis and Mary may let some "local noble assembly" govern without someone trustworthy above them.
 
Top