DBWI: Henry IX born a female

Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: Before 1900' started by Timeline Junkie, Apr 27, 2019.

  1. Timeline Junkie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2018
    Location:
    The Citadel, Oldtown
    As we know Henry IX of England and Ireland son Henry VIII Tudor and Katherine of Aragon was one of England's greatest and learned kings. Being forced on to the throne at 17 after the untimely death of his father, he remained a defender of Catholicism while also allowing Protestants who swore personal loyalty to the Crown to be free to pursue their faith in private. His marriage to Margaret Stewart cemented the later of unification of Britain under one crown 87 years later.

    Imagine if he was born a female. His father Henry VIII was obsessed with having sons I could imagine Europe being irrevocably changed. England might even go Protestant! However, Henry IX had brothers like Alexander, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Charles, Duke of Calais.


    Let me know what could happen



    OOC: I'm planning on writing a Tudor timeline and I am using this as a semi-brainstorming thread
     
  2. DanMcCollum P-WI

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Location:
    Wauwatosa, WI
    I really doubt that Henry VIII would have gone Protestant - the man had been named Defender of the Faith in OTL and was a passionate Catholic. Although Protestantism was present among the urban merchant class, Protestants were still the minority in England and it wouldn't have offered Henry a good base of support for his own rule in any case, leaving aside his personal feelings and devotions. And, as to your claim that his desire for a son would bush him in that direction, I'm really not sure of that - most kings of that era were obsessed with having sons and I can't think of a single one of them who went Protestant because they couldn't get one.

    Assuming England DID embrace Protestantism though, I suppose it would have had a lot less difficulties with Ireland - the breaking away of the Bishop of Armagh and the Irish Church into a semi-Lutheran came as a direct result of Henry IX's policies which were much less liberal in Ireland than in England, true, but due to its cultural and economic connections with Scotland, Ireland was probably always going to move in the way of Protestantism no matter who the monarch was. A Protestant England probably doesn't lose Ireland during the less than spectacular rule of Henry IX's second son Edward.
     
    SavoyTruffle and AusmanOut like this.
  3. BlueFlowwer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2017
    If Henry had been born female would he have taken his sister Elizabeth's place as Holy Roman Empress?
     
    AusmanOut and Cate13 like this.
  4. WillVictoria Hasn't happened yet though

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2014
    The most ASBs timeline I've ever seen was one where Henry IX was an only child a born a girl, called Mary (odd, given his OTL sisters were Elizabeth, Margaret, and Katherine). In it, Henry VIII divorced Catherine and married Ann Bolwyn(?!) (OTL Countess of Northumberland and sister of his mistress Mary) with whom he had a daughter called Elizabeth (who was clearly a 16th-century copy of the 18th century Katherine I) and then he executed her and got married 4 more times. His other wives were Jane Seymour (Catherine's favorite lady in waiting and OTL's Countess of Essex, Anne of Cleves (OTL's Duchess of Lorraine), Kathryn Howard (a cousin of Bolwyn who died at age 4 IOTL and also got executed here), and Catherine Parr (who was governess to Henry IX and Isabel of Spain's children)
     
  5. Rheinbund Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2017
    It's difficult to say, I don't think that Henry VIII will go protestant but if he does, England would surely suffer a sort of religious strife as France, it would have a negative impact in short term, but in long term?

    We could all agree that the United Kingdom is a strong regional power, and was a powerful force in the XVIII-XIXth century, but I think that they could have done better if they managed to become a protestant nation, Historic studies show that during the reformation a country that becomes protestant undergoes many upheavals that could have benefited a nation like the UK, by example they could have sold a lot of Catholic lands to gain money, financial income, etc. A new religion would be in his birth more dynamic and indulge a new mindset, the Protestant and Scandinavians country was a pioneer in term of innovations in this period, the UK under a Protestant mindset could have done wonder, they had a lot of potentials instead they choose under Henry VIII a sort of counter-revolutionary mindset, they still tolerated protestant and innovation but they stay conservative.

    But hey some argue that the United Kingdom could have also be destroyed by the conflict of succession, religious war so it's really difficult to say, for me, Henry iX represents a kind of middle way.


    But I think that it could be really interesting in term of the regional bloc, let's say that Henry VIII get a daughter, and not a kid would they have continued the alliance with the Habsburgs? if no, the relation between the Protestants, France, and the Ottoman Empire would have been altered, it was this bloc that leads to in large part to these good relationships, it leads to an informal network of exchange that is really interesting to study.

    Same with the relation between France and their religious minorities, a protestant UK could had lead to a more catholic France in the purpose to improve relationships with the Pope and Habsburg so in this case the Huguenot would not be treated as sympathetically (in this period the relation between Huguenot and Catholic was really cold (religious wars) but it improved after many war fight in the same side against Habsburg, English, and thanks to the alliances with the Protestants.
     
  6. Timeline Junkie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2018
    Location:
    The Citadel, Oldtown

    Irish would probably be more widely spoken with Henry IX being born a female. Henry IX's grandson Edward VII was nothing like his grandfather. There's a reason he's called the Scourge of the Irish. The Reconquest of Ireland was followed by the mass execution of Irish Protestants and other traitors to the Crown and English Catholic settlement. Edward VII, on the other hand, is beloved by the Scottish Highlanders for promoting Catholicism in Scotland and Ireland. Without this patronage, there are no Highlander settlements in Northern Ireland. More people spoke the Scottish Gaelic and Scots in Ireland than even Irish 50 years after Edward VII's initial incursion into Ireland. His determination to unite the Three Kingdoms under one King forged the beginnings of Britain's role as the hegemon in European politics for the next 150 years. The Danish Prince propped up as King of Ireland was horse, drawn, and quartered so I imagine no North Sea War without the birth of England's cruelest King, Edward VII Tudor
     
  7. Aqua817 Eternally Exhausted

    Joined:
    May 11, 2014
    Location:
    Space
    IMO, if Henry IX had gone Protestant, the Jacobites would have definitely invaded and tried to meddle around. They were still a force to be reckoned with and could have tried to arrange something with Spain or another powerful Catholic power to try to launch an invasion. But among other things, with no North Sea War, maybe the Irish would be doing far better? Today, the Irish language is essentially extinct, though there are a few groups that are trying to bring it back (though the language they're teaching is basically Gaelic with a few extra twinges, notwithstanding every Joe Blow who says "my great grandmother was an Irish princess and spoke more Irish than the Irish themselves!").

    Also, maybe England would have been able to focus more on things like colonies and etc under Protestantism? OTL, England was way too busy with Edward VII that when the Netherlands finally tried to settle some people on the Eastern Seaboard, the Tsenacommacah [OOC: Powhatan] Empire basically wiped the floor with any European incursions, and by the time folks were trying to settle up towards Pautuxet [OOC: Rhode Island] the European diseases had already run their course in the Native American nations and Askuwheteau's advocation of the introduction of European and African farming styles and the resulting population boom had occured, leading to the Tsenacommacah, Haudenosaunee, Muscogee, Nakota, etc just wiping the floor with anyone who tried to settle in their respective lands, thus leading to the emergence of the vaguely Europeanized Native American nations that dominate the East Coast of the continent to this day. Perhaps a unified and determined Britain could have ended up crushing the nacent Tsenacommacah Empire before it became too powerful? Though I don't know what was there that would be worth the intercontinental war required. There were some experiments in growing something I think folks call "Tobacco," though once the Pope and the Universal Primate of the Unitarians condemned it the trade in it went away. Maybe your protestant england could butterfly that away?
     
  8. Rheinbund Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2017
    I don't think that the Irish would have existed as an independent nation if the United Kingdom became protestant, I mean both nations had a lot of bad blood between them but I don't think that they would have a sort of ALT Edward VII, it's him that pushed the Irish in mass rebellion and its alliance with the Habsburg advanced an alliance between the Dutch and French that permitted them to support Irish separatists the next centuries.

    Yeah their alliance with the Habsburg to claim back French land and French crown (they still crown themselves as king of France) was really a bad move in long term, they should have focused on the colonial game they had all the resource to become a powerful colonies nation instead they never managed to implement themselves in the North American continent. A protestant England would surely have allied with the Dutch so no war against them and instead they could have allied to crush the French colonies (so no New France and no Tsenacommacah Empire, this empire was backed and supported by the French to fight against the English and the Habsburgs).
     
  9. Tamara Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2019
    Why the heck would not having a son make Henry decide to go Protestant? “God must not be happy with me, so I guess I’m worshipping wrong” is the only rationale I can think of.
    Although, if England did go Protestant, it would be pretty hilarious if Ireland stayed Catholic just to spite them.
     
    kasumigenx likes this.
  10. Landmass Wave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2017
    Location:
    Landmass between New Orleans and Mobile
    I can't imagine the Diocese of Biloxi without the English priests.
     
  11. KingOnTheEdge Vive La Revolucion

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2019
    Well otl Protestant countries went on to become the world powers, generally due to easier tax leading to funding of colonies and industrialisation, and Protestant Sweden used the opportunity presented by a lacklustre British colonial claim Ny Vinland, Baltisk, and the Finnish settlements of kuuma suo just in America. Of course they also conquered Guinea and Sydafrika in Africa. But the biggest prize I think Sweden would lose to a stronger Britain? The Korean Peninsula and Japan, or what they called Norra Kina. Even otl Britain was able to hold several Chinese ports, and the only reason they didn’t take more is that Sweden, the Confederation of Germany, France, and the other established great powers were getting uppity about an upstart island taking their stuff.

    (OOC: new world colonies of Canada, the norther Gulf of Mexico and southern Mississippi basin, and Panama and northern colombia. And in this world the prussians created something of a united Germany sooner without Napoleon