All of Henry VII's sons live

So I've been doing a bit of thinking, and I've begun wondering, regarding the House of Tudor, say all three sons of Henry VII and Elizabeth of York live, these three sons being Arthur (b. 1486), Henry (b.1491) and Edmund (b.1499) what consequences could this have in terms of England, Europe, religion and the security of the Tudor dynasty?

Arthur would naturally succeed his father as King in 1507, but would he experience the same fertility issues as his brother did, or could he have better luck?

What of Henry, now that his brother is alive, he's Duke of York, what role could he play at court?
 
I don't think Henry VIII had any particular fertility issues - he produced two daughters and a son in wedlock and at least one son out of wedlock who survived past infancy after all, and I'm fairly sure there were a least a couple of other pregnancies his wives had. A similar record on Arthur's part would see the Tudor dynasty set up secure for the next couple of generations at least.

As for the differences, without HVIII needing a divorce there will almost certainly be no break with Rome. That alone is a huge change - and as for HVIII, I'm sure I've seen it said that he was being groomed for a career in the church while Arthur was alive, that in itself is something with considerable protection for wackiness.

But the greatest change of an enduring House of Tudor is surely going to be that the Red Dragon does not get dropped as a supporter of the Royal Arms, thereby forestalling decades of argument of there being nothing representing Wales in official UK symbology.

p071_1_03.jpg
 
Alright fascinating, so we could see a fair few branches of the family running around. Also, the reformation might well become underground then?

As for Arthur, would he be more authoritative like his father and brother, or more relaxed? Could the nobles power slowly continue its erosion?
 
Henry VIII being groomed for the church is one of those things that floats around without much evidence. If nothing else, Henry VII would be acutely aware of the danger to the succession (and it's not like second sons becoming bishops was ever really a thing in the English royal family). So most likely, he marries and likely has kids as another cadet branch.

Assuming no successful Rough Wooing, this delays the union of Scotland and England (as it provides additional lines of descent that don't run through Margaret Tudor), but you knew that.

It's hard to predict how Arthur would turn out; he died fairly young, and of course Edmund is a complete enigma. With Arthur and Catherine marrying when they did, you probably do see kids out of that union, but that doesn't necessarily prevent a break with Rome, only makes it less likely. Things will depend on how the Reformation plays out; there were significant numbers of Protestants in England even before Henry VIII decided on the Act of Supremacy.
 
Very true, Henry, Duke of York marrying someone from Spain/ Austria, or from Portugal? Where might he based as Duke of York?

Hmm indeed, I do think certain things might be avoided, such as the Battle of FLodden Field, perhaps the invasion of France as seen under Henry VIII.

Hmm could we see a religious war in England?
 
I don't think Henry VIII had any particular fertility issues - he produced two daughters and a son in wedlock and at least one son out of wedlock who survived past infancy after all, and I'm fairly sure there were a least a couple of other pregnancies his wives had. A similar record on Arthur's part would see the Tudor dynasty set up secure for the next couple of generations at least.

As for the differences, without HVIII needing a divorce there will almost certainly be no break with Rome. That alone is a huge change - and as for HVIII, I'm sure I've seen it said that he was being groomed for a career in the church while Arthur was alive, that in itself is something with considerable protection for wackiness.

But the greatest change of an enduring House of Tudor is surely going to be that the Red Dragon does not get dropped as a supporter of the Royal Arms, thereby forestalling decades of argument of there being nothing representing Wales in official UK symbology.

p071_1_03.jpg

There's a theory that Henry VIII had an autoimmune syndrome, kell antibody. He was kell + (kind of rare) and his wives likely were kell -. After their first kids, their immune systems become sensitised to the kell + foetuses of Henry VIII and recognised them as foreign bodies leading to miscarriages (oversimplifying here). This similar to Rh- mum's with Rh+ babies, only we have Rhogam these days so we can help with that (OBGyns always test for this). This would explain why most of his wives had a series of miscarriages and stillbirths after their first child.
 
There's a theory that Henry VIII had an autoimmune syndrome, kell antibody. He was kell + (kind of rare) and his wives likely were kell -. After their first kids, their immune systems become sensitised to the kell + foetuses of Henry VIII and recognised them as foreign bodies leading to miscarriages (oversimplifying here). This similar to Rh- mum's with Rh+ babies, only we have Rhogam these days so we can help with that (OBGyns always test for this). This would explain why most of his wives had a series of miscarriages and stillbirths after their first child.

Apart from the latter three.
 
Very true, Henry, Duke of York marrying someone from Spain/ Austria, or from Portugal? Where might he based as Duke of York?

Hmm indeed, I do think certain things might be avoided, such as the Battle of FLodden Field, perhaps the invasion of France as seen under Henry VIII.

Hmm could we see a religious war in England?
James was already married to a Tudor princess OTL and it didn't stop him from prioritizing his alliance with France; the only way to avoid Flodden is to make England side with France against the Habsburgs instead of vice-versa.

As for a religious war in England? It depends on how many powerful individuals go Protestant and how the monarchy reacts; both France and Scotland underwent fairly significant religious conflict between Protestants and Catholics during the 1500s OTL. It's more difficult in England (which was a much more centralized state), but not impossible. For extra fun, give Edmund Protestant leanings and see what happens.

Henry might marry a foreign princess, or he could be given a rich heiress to save Henry VII from having to provide for him (it's what Edward III did OTL for his sons, and how the House of Lancaster got its start, after all); I suspect Edmund will end up with an heiress, just because there are only so many princesses to go around.
 
True on all accounts there.

I was thinking what if Edmund marry Anne Boleyn?

Then there's a good chance of scandal, especially if he turns up married to her while big brother Arthur is still seeking marriage options for him (or if he is meant for the church but elopes before getting Holy Orders!). There's no way it's not an Edward IV/Elizabeth Woodville style elopement, because half-Howard or not Anne's not high enough to be a bride chosen even for a younger prince.

Obviously as the third son Edmund's prospects aren't ideal, but Arthur could still use him in an alliance, and regardless Edmund deciding things on his own is the kind of thing kings don't appreciate. You might see a Mary Tudor/Charles Brandon thing, with the new couple accepted but fined for the presumption.
 
Then there's a good chance of scandal, especially if he turns up married to her while big brother Arthur is still seeking marriage options for him (or if he is meant for the church but elopes before getting Holy Orders!). There's no way it's not an Edward IV/Elizabeth Woodville style elopement, because half-Howard or not Anne's not high enough to be a bride chosen even for a younger prince.

Obviously as the third son Edmund's prospects aren't ideal, but Arthur could still use him in an alliance, and regardless Edmund deciding things on his own is the kind of thing kings don't appreciate. You might see a Mary Tudor/Charles Brandon thing, with the new couple accepted but fined for the presumption.
And that could make things very interesting if Anne really had reformist leanings
 
And that could make things very interesting if Anne really had reformist leanings

As the wife of the third Tudor son her influence depends on his, but her religious tendencies aren't likely to affect the initial scandal because I doubt she openly shares them. If, later, she and her husband become known for it (she convinced Henry even if most of it didn't stick, I imagine she can persuade Edmund)...

That depends on Arthur's view of religion, really.
 
Arthur would naturally succeed his father as King in 1507, but would he experience the same fertility issues as his brother did, or could he have better luck?

In the beginning, H8 didn't have fertility problems, what he had was a wife who had been treated with callous indifference by his father (in whose custody she was) and her father (who failed ensure she was treated as the princess she was, despite the non-consummation of the marriage with Arthur). From 1503-1509, Katherine probably suffered nutritionally, emotionally, and mentally at the hands of these two power-hungry men as they played the royal version of king of mountain. This resulted in her probably needed more bedrest to bring child to term and less time attending to court duties (and to get rid of those damn stomachers!) as well as a diet adjusted for pregnancy rather than the Church dictations (eat this, don't eat that except when.....etc). I believe, given her family history, had H7 wed her to the Duke of York upon Henry's 14th birthday, instead of dicking around with everybody and dithering like an old woman over Katherine, Henry, and himself and matrimony. Katherine's many pregnancies resulted in miscarriages, possibly a SIDS infant, a child or two stillborn or dying soon after birth, and Mary.

Anne's history mirrors the experiences of friends of mine (without the medical expertise to help): A successful first pregnancy and none other getting past the second trimester. She was pregnant at least two more times, possibly three in the period (January 1533-May 1536). Anne's could have been Rh negative, while Henry was Rh positive; if Elizabeth were Rh positive, she would have sensitized her mother to another Rh positive child - only an Rh negative would survive at that time.

Jane was in her late 30s when she wed Henry, was more than 15 years older; now this wife might run into the 'fertility issues' that you reference. Henry was experimenting the pain with ulcerating leg, trying to run a kingdom increasing fraught with religious disputers; while he had declared the daughter born in 1536, he knew what choice would be make if he died in his sleep .
 
All very true, hmm I wonder would Arthur be as staunchly cstholic as his brother claimed to be early on or perhaps more relaxed about the whole thing.

As for Edmund, I imagine the old Beaufort patrimony in the south would now be his
 
There's a theory that Henry VIII had an autoimmune syndrome, kell antibody. He was kell + (kind of rare) and his wives likely were kell -. After their first kids, their immune systems become sensitised to the kell + foetuses of Henry VIII and recognised them as foreign bodies leading to miscarriages (oversimplifying here). This similar to Rh- mum's with Rh+ babies, only we have Rhogam these days so we can help with that (OBGyns always test for this). This would explain why most of his wives had a series of miscarriages and stillbirths after their first child.

That theory actually doesn't work - Mary was nowhere near the first child for Henry and Katherine. There was also a non-first son who probably died of SIDS. It also falls apart if you research the kell/ macleod syndrome medically. It was an interesting theory until I researched it apart from what was posited in the book (only the bits that fit the theory). That's why Katherine's deprivations and Anne being Rh negative is a better fit. Henry was just a narcissistic, paranoid bastard who thought what he wanted, GOD wanted, and acted accordingly. And it got worse as he got older. (The paranoia came from his dad, the narcissism from being spoiled and adored.)
 
Last edited:
That theory actually doesn't work - Mary was nowhere near the first child for Henry and Katherine. There was also a non-first son who probably died of SIDS. It also falls apart if you research the kell/ macleod syndrome medically. It was an interesting theory until I researched it apart from what was posited in the book (only the bits that fit the theory). That's why Katherine's deprivations and Anne being Rh negative is a better fit. Henry was just a narcissistic, paranoid bastard who thought what he wanted, GOD wanted, and acted accordingly. And it got worse as he got older. (The paranoia came from his dad, the narcissism from being spoiled and adored.)

Interesting, would Arthur suffer from something similar re the fertility issues?
 
So how does this sound re a family tree:

Henry VII (b.1457: d. 1507) m Elizabeth of York (b. 1466: d. 1509)

Children:

Arthur I of England (b. 1486)

Margaret Tudor, Queen of Scotland (b. 1489)

Henry, Duke of York (b. 1491)

Mary Tudor, Queen of France/ Duchess of Suffolk (b. 1496)

Edmund, Duke of Somerset (b. 1499)
 
Alternatively, a German/Scandinavian match could be a thing if Arthur ends up sticking with t
he would have a healthy Katherine, if I'm correct (and occasionally I am), she won't have all the issues she had OTL.
Not to mention an extra 8 years to try (and at a time when she is in her late teens and early 20s), even if she does end up with similar issues.
 
Top