1669 Stuart luck

Two pods here: henrietta daughter of James duke of York and his wife Anne Hyde survives, and Charles II and his wife Catherine welcome a son named Charles on the 2nd June, 1669.

Charles, prince of Wales, spends the first fourteen years of his life in England learning how to rule and forming a friendship with his half brother George fitZroy, who is created earl and later duke of Northumberland. At the age of fourteen, Charles is sent to Scotland to remind the land of his ancestors of who rules them, and whilst there he develops a friendship with the duke of Hamilton and Brandon and his heir. He also keeps in correspondence with his father and cousin henrietta with whom he had developed a lot it affection for. In 1685, his father dies, and Charles is crowned king of Scotland after learning of his half brothers Monmouth and Southampton revelling with aid from leading Whigs under false pretences. Charles matches south and quickly deals with the rebellion, executing his brothers and thei allies and seizing their lands and titles for himself. An act later confirmed by parliament.

Thoughts so far? Suggestions?
 
If there's a legitimate PROTESTANT son for Charles II, Monmouth rebelling becomes unlikely. And it's unlikely that they're gonna let the future king of England marry his domestic cousin. She brings nothing to the table - no alliances, no money, zilch. If she were still doing one of those things, then perhaps, otherwise, look for another bride.
 
If there's a legitimate PROTESTANT son for Charles II, Monmouth rebelling becomes unlikely. And it's unlikely that they're gonna let the future king of England marry his domestic cousin. She brings nothing to the table - no alliances, no money, zilch. If she were still doing one of those things, then perhaps, otherwise, look for another bride.
Alright, even if Charles iii is more high church than his father? Would Monmouth remain loyal then?

And intrtesting and if the boy married his cousin on a whim?
 
Alright, even if Charles iii is more high church than his father? Would Monmouth remain loyal then?

And intresting and if the boy married his cousin on a whim?

As long as there is a protestant heir (high church or not) Monmouth's support will be nil (except among perhaps extreme Whig). If Charles has a legit son with Catherine of Braganza, I'm not even sure Monmouth tries anything.

My questions would be - who would "Charles III" marry (it would have to be a princess who give them something, no way an English-born cousin)...and how does history change with James II not as heir (he still becomes Catholic, in fact Anne Hyde died as a Catholic). Do we still get the anti-catholic hysteria that led to the odious Titus Oates and the death of several good men like Viscount Stafford on perjured testimony in the Popish plot or the Test Acts against James? And with a protestant heir for Charles what does William of Orange (and his allies in OTL) do? There is no Glorious Revolution. No Penal Laws in Ireland. And a son of Charles II, who owed so much to his cousin Louis of France, will (Protestant or not) probably not be interested in the continental wars. Does this mean Churchill never becomes Marlborough (even though he was a favorite of the Duke of York)? A lot of butterflies here. A lot of noble titled families who supported William and Mary and were prominent in the Georgian period never come to the forefront now (and the Dukes of Devonshire just remain Earls).
 
As long as there is a protestant heir (high church or not) Monmouth's support will be nil (except among perhaps extreme Whig). If Charles has a legit son with Catherine of Braganza, I'm not even sure Monmouth tries anything.

My questions would be - who would "Charles III" marry (it would have to be a princess who give them something, no way an English-born cousin)...and how does history change with James II not as heir (he still becomes Catholic, in fact Anne Hyde died as a Catholic). Do we still get the anti-catholic hysteria that led to the odious Titus Oates and the death of several good men like Viscount Stafford on perjured testimony in the Popish plot or the Test Acts against James? And with a protestant heir for Charles what does William of Orange (and his allies in OTL) do? There is no Glorious Revolution. No Penal Laws in Ireland. And a son of Charles II, who owed so much to his cousin Louis of France, will (Protestant or not) probably not be interested in the continental wars. Does this mean Churchill never becomes Marlborough (even though he was a favorite of the Duke of York)? A lot of butterflies here. A lot of noble titled families who supported William and Mary and were prominent in the Georgian period never come to the forefront now (and the Dukes of Devonshire just remain Earls).

Hmm very true, well I guess that means I'll need to change up a few things. Regarding who he marries I presume a Protestant princess, perhaps his cousin Sophie Charlotte of Hannover? I suppose the hysteria of the popish plot and the tests acts might well be butterflies due to there being someone between Charles and James. Also could we not see Charles get involved in the wars in France's side?
 
If Monmouth and Charles iii didn't get along would Monmouth remain in britain or flee into exile?
 
If there is a stable English-French alliance up to the Spanish Succession War, it will be unstoppable. Marlborough being awarded a french duchy for having conquered the Spanish Netherlands for the Sun King ! Maybe also a more polished policy of religious immigration : british Catholics are welcomed in France, french Protestants in England, as a way to quietly resolve the religious "issues" of the two countries. Nonetheless, this alliance will surely dissolve itself in the 18th c., when the competition between the two main powers rise.
 
Interesting, had Britain changed its stance toward franxe due to or because of the Franco-Dutch wars?
 
Also would having Joseph Ferdinand survive prevent the soanish war of succession or merely worsen it?
 
It would change it. The compromise candidate would still mean the dispute about Italian holdings of Spain and Spanish Netherlands.
 
It would change it. The compromise candidate would still mean the dispute about Italian holdings of Spain and Spanish Netherlands.
Alright interesting. So candidates for Charles iii: Sophie Charlotte of hannover, perhaps Anne Marie of oroeans?
 
I'm partial to Fiquelotte of Hannover, though with Anglo-French Alliance Charles II would look at Anne Marie d'Orleans.
 
I'm partial to Fiquelotte of Hannover, though with Anglo-French Alliance Charles II would look at Anne Marie d'Orleans.
Alright would he have had time to arrange a marriage before his death? When did the Anglo French alliance come back into play? The 1680s?
 
The bride for Charles III would heavily depend on religious climate in the country in 1670ies-1680ies. If it's like OTL, then a Protestant Queen is needed to pacify folks and the Hannover Princess is just the right thing. If it's more favorable for Catholic match for the King, then a French Princess is the way to go.
 
The bride for Charles III would heavily depend on religious climate in the country in 1670ies-1680ies. If it's like OTL, then a Protestant Queen is needed to pacify folks and the Hannover Princess is just the right thing. If it's more favorable for Catholic match for the King, then a French Princess is the way to go.
Alright makes sense. Would it make sense for there to be less anti catholic sentiment with Charles II having a son, regardless of the health of that son as an infant?
 
The anti-Catholic settlement is lessened if there is no risk of Duke of York becoming a heir.

In A&D we still had Scottish war in late 1670ies despite healthy male heir and spare brought up Anglican (OK, Duke of Kendal is converting but as of 1680 he is still Anglican), some underlying conflicts just won't go.
 
The anti-Catholic settlement is lessened if there is no risk of Duke of York becoming a heir.

In A&D we still had Scottish war in late 1670ies despite healthy male heir and spare brought up Anglican (OK, Duke of Kendal is converting but as of 1680 he is still Anglican), some underlying conflicts just won't go.
Alright that does make sense. I was thinking of having there be a rebellion when Charles iii ascends the throne in 1685, who could likely candidates be for such a thing?
 
Top