DBWI - What if Edward VI Dies Before His Majority?

Here's a thought?* What if King Edward VI had died before he was able to marry his cousin Jane and before he was able father an heir?

In such a timeline, we would have no Henry IX and his indelible stamp on militant protestantism, and certainly we would never see the Seymour Family reach the power and influence they did before they lost it all.

Indeed, if Edward and Jane never have an opportunity to marry, English history would be that much less interesting with the bloody mess that ensued a generation later when their daughters Margaret and Elizabeth and their sons brought the nation to civil war, broken down largely over sectarian lines. Can you even imagine no War of the Sisters? What would Allison Wyles and Samantha Gregory have to wrote about? We certainly would be bereft without the stories of poor, misused Princess Katherine and her ill-fated betrothals (just think of how many actresses won awards for portraying her).

Would the English even have such a robust presence in the New World if there is no colony at Henricia?** Where would all of the Tolerists end up after Edward starts his purges?

* Hey guys - this is my first attempt at a DBWI post; please advise if I am doing it wrong ;)
** what would a colony named after a Latinized 'Henry' be called?
 

Spengler

Banned
I fear england could have up back in papal control remember that Henry VIII before he died left his throne to in he will to Mary who was married to the arch catholic Phillip II. Just imagine if England had been dominated by the Spanish. England would probably have probably been put back a hundred years trying to get a foot in the America. Plus it probably would have turned into a civil war like happened in the Netherlands.
 
I fear england could have up back in papal control remember that Henry VIII before he died left his throne to in he will to Mary who was married to the arch catholic Phillip II. Just imagine if England had been dominated by the Spanish. England would probably have probably been put back a hundred years trying to get a foot in the America. Plus it probably would have turned into a civil war like happened in the Netherlands.


But would the English have tolerated the very Catholic Mary when she was married to Phillip of Spain and living abroad when Princess Elizabeth was alive and well and present in England?

I know, I know, that Henry VIII specifically set down the line of succession in his will, but surely the inclusion of Mary and Elizabeth was a formality as everyone expected the long awaited Edward to ascend and rule a long time. I mean, sure Mary was the lawful heiress, but was there political and military support for her return to England?

I wonder what sort of reign Mary would have had if she had to ascend to the throne of her father? In OTL she was a pious and charitable woman, founded many hospitals and such, and was a rigorous religious scholar. Her support of the Convent of the Immaculate Virgin* sowed the seeds for it to become the celebrated women's college and theological center that it is today. Would she even attempt to try to restore England to Catholicism? It's not like she could turn back the Protestant movement with a wave of her scepter - what was she going to do? Start executing all the Protestants? That would be unbelievably cruel and short-sighted. Which is not even to say it would be grossly out of character for her anyway.

Here's a question: if Mary becomes Queen of England, how do they handle the succession both in Spain and England? Does her son Charles (Carlos) stand to inherit both thrones?

*Better known as Marian University today, obviously :)
 
Last edited:
Here's a question: if Mary becomes Queen of England, how do they handle the succession both in Spain and England? Does her son Charles (Carlos) stand to inherit both thrones?

You seem to be confusing her stepson, Don Carlos, with her son, Don Ferdinand. Easy to do, of course, as Carlos was the one at the forefront of pressing his half-brother's claims over the years, and the 'wittiest man in Spain' (which as he used to note, was no great boast) was a far more overwhelming personality then the 'Great Lump'.
 
You seem to be confusing her stepson, Don Carlos, with her son, Don Ferdinand. Easy to do, of course, as Carlos was the one at the forefront of pressing his half-brother's claims over the years, and the 'wittiest man in Spain' (which as he used to note, was no great boast) was a far more overwhelming personality then the 'Great Lump'.


Are you sure? I know that in OTL Charles did ascend in Spain as King Charles VI, but I can never remember how the rest of the Hapsburg possessions came to be broken off. I know that for a while Don Ferdinand was Prince of Asturias but I can never make sense of the way Ferdinand came to be Holy Roman Emperor (but not King of Spain) after Charles VI ended up dead. Charles VI's surprisingly unexceptional daughter Joan (Joanna la Grisa) was briefly queen before the Cortes had her safely put away in a convent, but from there I always got lost when dealing the Hapsburgs.

In any event, I suppose for our idyll that if Mary came to ascend to the English throne her son Ferdinand would claim England and her stepson Charles, being the child of Phillip and his first wife (Bianca of Aragon?) would end up with Spain.

Hmmm.

I still am unconvinced that the English would accept Mary and all of her Spanish and Catholic leanings, however, unless she was imposed upon them with Spanish guns. If Edward VI dies early, I still say that Elizabeth would be the preferred candidate, especially if she marries Frederick of Denmark when the marital suit was first presented. Which is more likely to occur without Edward VI's persistent refusal to let her marry at all (don't want too many suitably protestant Tudor descendants flitting about Europe, especially when you are trying to hold down an increasingly unpopular reign and you haven't managed to produce a male heir*). Of course, I don't know if the famously headstrong and hotblooded (and if we are to believe the vicious political gossip, promiscuous) Elizabeth was as indiscreet in her young womanhood as she came to be in her brother's later reign. I guess, if you let her keep a lively court away from the stern and dour atmosphere at Whitehall... well all that energy would have to go somewhere :) It's not for nothing that Queen Jane kept her girls well away from 'Ready Elly.' But that all came later, I think. From what I recall, she tried to be a proper Tudor lady but I guess all those years of waiting for permission to marry led her towards poor decision-making. If Edward dies young, say when he was fifteen, all of Elizabeth's scandals are still well in the future. Elizabeth, in a way, was fortunate that Frederick was still willing to take her off Edward's hands after she'd been through the machinery of Seymour propaganda. I suppose it was love after all :p.

* It is highly ironic that Edward VI would mirror his father and up siring only daughters until Jane finally produced a boy, late enough in his reign to make the succession precarious.
 
Last edited:
Are you sure? I know that in OTL Charles did ascend in Spain as King Charles VI, but I can never remember how the rest of the Hapsburg possessions came to be broken off. I know that for a while Don Ferdinand was Prince of Asturias but I can never make sense of the way Ferdinand came to be Holy Roman Emperor (but not King of Spain) after Charles VI ended up dead. Charles VI's equally unexceptional daughter Joan (Joanna la Grisa) was briefly queen before the Cortes had her safely put away in a convent, but from there I always got lost when dealing the Hapsburgs.

They're a confusing family. For example--it was Carlos II of Spain--he was only Charles VI on those coins he had printed up to convince his German cousins that he was thinking of throwing his hat in for the Holy Roman Emperor--which is how Ferdinand wound up getting the titles instead of his nephew Rudolph.

As for why Ferdinand didn't wind up King of Spain, aside from the fact that no one wanted that, not even him--then again, the Great Lump didn't want much of anything--Carlos wanted the throne to go to Henri of Armagnac, his grandson by his daughter Maria (by his first wife, Elizabeth of Valois). Seeing as Carlos' speciality was finding a way to make a legal claim for some kingdom or property, and then start hounding the present owner until they gave him some form of settlement--well, let's just say he could make a pretty airtight will, and leave it that.
 
They're a confusing family. For example--it was Carlos II of Spain--he was only Charles VI on those coins he had printed up to convince his German cousins that he was thinking of throwing his hat in for the Holy Roman Emperor--which is how Ferdinand wound up getting the titles instead of his nephew Rudolph.

As for why Ferdinand didn't wind up King of Spain, aside from the fact that no one wanted that, not even him--then again, the Great Lump didn't want much of anything--Carlos wanted the throne to go to Henri of Armagnac, his grandson by his daughter Maria (by his first wife, Elizabeth of Valois). Seeing as Carlos' speciality was finding a way to make a legal claim for some kingdom or property, and then start hounding the present owner until they gave him some form of settlement--well, let's just say he could make a pretty airtight will, and leave it that.

That makes sense, then, I think. That does explain why the ruling house of Spain shifted to the Valois-Hapsburg (or am I confusing nomenclature again?). After Carlos II came Joanna (albeit briefly), then Henri (Enrique), right? But why didn't Maria rule directly - I know that the Spanish had fewer qualms about a regnant woman that others did elsewhere, so why did she feel she had to step back and rule from behind the throne and pull strings (she's one of my favorite historical heroines, Maria la Arana [hmm, is 'heroine' the right term? Some of her acts were pretty despicable]). I mean she was all but the sovereign during most of Enrique's reign. In fact, when Joanna was deposed (must be the name ;)) and ...uh, forcibly cloistered Henri wasn't even old enough to ascend yet, so Maria should have been coronated in her own right - but he was crowned anyway, and she wasn't ever regent. That was one of his great-uncles, right? The youngest son of Phillip II and Mary? Arturo, Duke of Manila or something, right?


Back to Maria la Arana, I suppose that her sister's rule was such a disaster that they Spanish didn't have the stomach for another woman on the throne. Perhaps her interests were more prospective and she thought mainly in dynastic terms, rather than day to day governance. She certainly did her darndest to bring in all of her French relations and intermarry them across the breadth of the Hapsburg Empire. The marriage she made for her son just barely skirted the line of consanguinity! As it was, they needed papal dispensation anyway.

The Mariana Islands near Florida are named after her, unless my geography is off (it usually is)? The best rum comes from there :) ..., yum, mixed with blood orange juice and a stiv of raw sugar cane... I could use a Maria Sucre right now.

Anyway, we have ventured far afield from my initial question - in this timeline, does the union of Scotland and England ever occur if James IV of Scotland never gets to marry Margaret Tudor*?

* Margaret Tudor, the Princess of Wales, the eldest of Edward VI's daughters, not his aunt, silly (that Margaret Tudor is actually James VI's grandmother anyway...)
 
Last edited:
Top