Anne Boleyn has Multiple Daughters

Ok, here is the idea. So, we know Anne Boleyn did not have any children survive after Elizabeth the First. But what if she did? And what if they were female children. :eek: Where does that leave Henry VIII? He suddenly has many children but still no male heir. I'll say she has about 3/4 surviving daughters. Would Henry still execute her? If not, what happens with the English Succession? What happens about Mary Tudor? How does this affect the children? Names?

Anne_Boleyn.png
 
Anne had only a short time to produce her children and we know that after Elizabeth there may have been a miscarriage at some point in late 1534/early 1535 (the fetus is thought to have been male) and a stillborn son in early 1536.
At most you would get one other live child (given the time after the birth of a child a couple were supposed to refrain from sex) possibly two.

Given Anne's temperament and Henry's desperation for a male heir in the short term a surviving daughter after Elizabeth is not going to change much.

In name terms lets say Anne's conceives in 1534 and gives birth to a second daughter - probably named Anne for her mother. (Margaret would be a possible but given Henry's poor relationship with his eldest sister I doubt it - again if the baby is born on a specific female saints day then that would be a likely name for the infant)

In early 1536 Henry is still going to be despairing of a male heir after Anne has given him two daughters - Catherine's death in early 1536 means he is now free to marry whomever without the taint of bigamy that dogs his marriage to Anne.
 
one-a daughter, two-a daughter, three-a daughter, all-a same-a. From Henry's POV he already had a surplus of daughters. What he needed was a son.

No change at the time. But if Elizabeth has a sister , and that sister has lawful issue ( entirely possible) then we have a honking big change when Elizabeth dies. No James VI & I. No union of crowns.
 
Anne had only a short time to produce her children and we know that after Elizabeth there may have been a miscarriage at some point in late 1534/early 1535 (the fetus is thought to have been male) and a stillborn son in early 1536.

At most you would get one other live child (given the time after the birth of a child a couple were supposed to refrain from sex) possibly two.

Yes, I know about the miscarriages and stillborn babies through her marriage. My idea is that Henery continues to try for a male heir from her as it is obvious she is fertile. What would happen after?
 
Wot it said below. Nothing. Makes no difference until Elizabeth dies. Unless you mean that Henry sticks with Anne B and never marries Jane Seymour. In that case no Edward VI, an earlier and longer reign for Mary, maybe England remains Papist.
 
Ok, so if there is no Edward and Mary is on the throne sooner, what happens next? What happens with the 3/4 daughters during her reign? Are they married off? If so, who to?
 
Catherine of Aragon had 6 pregnancies total, over 9 years of marriage:
A miscarriage or premature stillbirth, daughter, January 1510;
A son Henry, 1st of January 1511 - died before age 2 months;
A son, October 1513 - either stillborn or died in a few hours, not named;
A son, December 1514 - named Henry but died an unknown short time later (few hours to month)
Bloody Mary, February 1516
A daughter, October 1518, unnamed, lived from few hours to 6 days.
She was 33 by then, and no more pregnancies for the rest of the marriage.

12 months spacing from stillbirth to live son was acceptable.

If Anne, instead of miscarrying a boy in January 1536 (4 months), had stayed pregnant to term (June-July 1536) then Henry would certainly not have invented a plot in April-May 1536. After the disappointment of another girl - inventing the plot took 3 months OTL after the January 1536 miscarriage, so it would take time as well.

And the miscarried, malformed boy was used OTL as bad PR to denounce Anne Boleyn as witch. A healthy daughter would be disappointment but would not be such useful bad PR.

Anne Boleyn OTL also had a miscarriage sometime in 1534 - sources vary whether it was summer or winter. This did cause Henry to consider Jane Seymour, but he went on to reconcile with Anne in 1535.

So, consider OTL where Anne has 3 living and healthy daughters by July 1536 (Elizabeth, another born late 1534, and the third born July 1536). Catherine is dead as per OTL, and Jane Seymour on the horizon again as per OTL.

Would Henry try for fourth time?

With less dirt available against Anne than in OTL, what would he try to do?
 
Catherine of Aragon had 6 pregnancies total, over 9 years of marriage:
A miscarriage or premature stillbirth, daughter, January 1510;
A son Henry, 1st of January 1511 - died before age 2 months;
A son, October 1513 - either stillborn or died in a few hours, not named;
A son, December 1514 - named Henry but died an unknown short time later (few hours to month)
Bloody Mary, February 1516
A daughter, October 1518, unnamed, lived from few hours to 6 days.
She was 33 by then, and no more pregnancies for the rest of the marriage.

12 months spacing from stillbirth to live son was acceptable.

If Anne, instead of miscarrying a boy in January 1536 (4 months), had stayed pregnant to term (June-July 1536) then Henry would certainly not have invented a plot in April-May 1536. After the disappointment of another girl - inventing the plot took 3 months OTL after the January 1536 miscarriage, so it would take time as well.

And the miscarried, malformed boy was used OTL as bad PR to denounce Anne Boleyn as witch. A healthy daughter would be disappointment but would not be such useful bad PR.

Anne Boleyn OTL also had a miscarriage sometime in 1534 - sources vary whether it was summer or winter. This did cause Henry to consider Jane Seymour, but he went on to reconcile with Anne in 1535.

So, consider OTL where Anne has 3 living and healthy daughters by July 1536 (Elizabeth, another born late 1534, and the third born July 1536). Catherine is dead as per OTL, and Jane Seymour on the horizon again as per OTL.

Would Henry try for fourth time?

With less dirt available against Anne than in OTL, what would he try to do?

This is what I was looking for! :D And, in my opinion, he would probably keep trying for a son with Anne. With all these successful pregnancies and his pride on the line, he had no other choice. If he wanted to get rid of Anne, he really had two options:

1- Go back to the Cathlic Church aand renounce all of his daughters. This would be unacceptable. He would be admitting he was at fault, and our Henry couldn't do that! Also, this would bastardise all of his children by Anne, which would leave him with one heir. Even though they were female, mulitple heirs were better than one.

2- Create a plot to get rid of Anne. Most likely a poisoning or the like. This would be the more likely option, as it left him with his heirs and he was free to remarry.

Any thoughts? :)
 

Flubber

Banned
Would Henry try for fourth time?


I'd say no. Birth-wise if not survival-wise, he had batted .500 with Catherine producing three girls and three boys. With Anne, he's batting zero, nothing but girls, and Jane Seymour is on deck.

Anne is going to be benched one way or another.

With less dirt available against Anne than in OTL, what would he try to do?
He didn't need much dirt on Catherine to kick her to the curb. Anne might not be killed, but she's going to be put aside.

After all, he founded the CoE in order to get divorced. Why not get divorced again?

As for Elizabeth's younger sisters, Mary didn't push to arrange a dynastic marriage for Elizabeth because she was Mary's heir. (If Mary had managed to have a child, Liz would have been on the marriage market pronto.) The heir angle wouldn't apply to Lizzie's younger sisters so they'd be shopped off to gain various foreign and/or domestic political advantages. I think at least one would be flogged to Spain to strengthen links there, perhaps to the Duke of Savoy Elizabeth was supposed to wed during Mary's reign.
 
This is what I was looking for! :D And, in my opinion, he would probably keep trying for a son with Anne. With all these successful pregnancies and his pride on the line, he had no other choice. If he wanted to get rid of Anne, he really had two options:

1- Go back to the Cathlic Church aand renounce all of his daughters. This would be unacceptable. He would be admitting he was at fault, and our Henry couldn't do that! Also, this would bastardise all of his children by Anne, which would leave him with one heir. Even though they were female, mulitple heirs were better than one.

2- Create a plot to get rid of Anne. Most likely a poisoning or the like. This would be the more likely option, as it left him with his heirs and he was free to remarry.

Any thoughts? :)

Uh, whats wrong with (3) same as OTL, high treason.
 
Uh, whats wrong with (3) same as OTL, high treason.
Wouldn't that illegitemise all of his children, therefore leaving him with efectively no heir? :confused: I guess he could just create a new Act of Succession like OTL, but that might be difficult. Then again, he is Henry.
 

Flubber

Banned
If he wanted to get rid of Anne, he really had two options: 1- Go back to the Cathlic Church aand renounce all of his daughters.


Whatever for? He split with Rome in order to get a divorce. Why wouldn't he be able to get a second one from church he controls?

2- Create a plot to get rid of Anne.

Again why if she's been giving him live children who just happen to be of the wrong sex? While Henry was a titanic asshole, he wasn't Bluebeard either. Three of his 6 wives survived their marriages to him.

Neither Catherine of Aragon or Anne of Cleves were executed, both were set aside with getting the headsman involved. Seymour died of complications from giving birth. Anne Boleyn's death was more due to the political ambitions of her idiot family than anything else. Catherine Howard were executed because she had been committing adultery.

Why couldn't Henry set aside a fertile, but girl producing, Anne without either killing her or rejoining the Catholic church?
 
Wouldn't that illegitemise all of his children, therefore leaving him with efectively no heir? :confused: I guess he could just create a new Act of Succession like OTL, but that might be difficult. Then again, he is Henry.


Uh, how ? Why ? Treason attaints the blood but it certainly doesn't illegitimise. Not under the Statute of Treasons, nor any of Henry's add-on treasons, nor under the common law. And the corruption of blood wouldn't matter, because the girls are Henry's heirs, not Anne's. They cant inherit from her, but they can from him.

Just because your head is cut off doesn't mean your marriage is invalid
 
Whatever for? He split with Rome in order to get a divorce. Why wouldn't he be able to get a second one from church he controls?



Again why if she's been giving him live children who just happen to be of the wrong sex? While Henry was a titanic asshole, he wasn't Bluebeard either. Three of his 6 wives survived their marriages to him.

Neither Catherine of Aragon or Anne of Cleves were executed, both were set aside with getting the headsman involved. Seymour died of complications from giving birth. Anne Boleyn's death was more due to the political ambitions of her idiot family than anything else. Catherine Howard were executed because she had been committing adultery.

Why couldn't Henry set aside a fertile, but girl producing, Anne without either killing her or rejoining the Catholic church?

How ? Catherine of A, the marriage was annulled (not divorced). That's certainly possible with Anne, but then , as the OP notes, the legitimacy of the children is problematic. Anne of Kleves, never consummated, obviously not an option here. And Katherine Parr simply outlived him.

I agree that Henry was no Bluebeard, but "setting aside" a wife in those days wasn't a simple matter.
 
Uh, how ? Why ? Treason attaints the blood but it certainly doesn't illegitimise. Not under the Statute of Treasons, nor any of Henry's add-on treasons, nor under the common law. And the corruption of blood wouldn't matter, because the girls are Henry's heirs, not Anne's. They cant inherit from her, but they can from him.

Just because your head is cut off doesn't mean your marriage is invalid

Oh, ok. I never really understood the laws on treason, especially when they pertain to Henry. I was really just going off OTL but the treason was about her faithfulness, and the marriage was annuled, so I understand why Elizabeth was illegitamised. Sorry for the stupid comment. :eek:
 
He was a king so of course it wasn't a simple matter.

There were, however, other options than becoming Catholic again or chopping off heads.

I know, but those were the two that jumped out at me first up. :) What would your suggestion be?
 

Flubber

Banned
I know, but those were the two that jumped out at me first up. :) What would your suggestion be?


Throw out Option #1. Henry will not return to Rome.

Add Option #3. The marriage to Anne is annulled for fill-in-the-blank. As with Anne's execution, an annulment doesn't automatically effect the status of Anne's daughters. Their status in the succession and otherwise is going to be what Henry wants it to be and that is going to change year to year if not day to day.

Remember, Henry's marriage to Catherine was annulled yet her daughter, Mary, remained Henry's primary heir until Edward was born and was always part of the various succession legislation he drew up up during his lifetime. Anne got the cold chip yet her daughter, Elizabeth, succeeded her half-sister, Mary, in accordance to a document Henry had again promulgated.

Elizabeth's younger sisters are going to be used as political marriage pawns first by Henry and then by whoever succeeds Henry. (Jane Seymour's Edward is not a given.)
 
Top