Elizabeth I dies in 1563. All Hail... who?

I always love a good succession crisis, and when you put an heiress (that is, Elizabeth I of England), not to mention one who distinctly refuses to name an heir, well then, things just go really crazy. Bess was known for her longevity, but it wasn't long after her ascension in 1563 that Elizabeth became ill with smallpox. While she was on her death bed, the council debated.

Her wishes had nothing to do with the succession, as, drifting in and out of consciousness the Queen merely demanded her favorite, Dudley, be made Lord Protector and be given an income of £50,000. Not really important when she was about to die and was more worried about her favorite.

So, Elizabeth dies. Who is her successor in this case?

Mary Stuart is still upon her throne, and is the most genelogical senior year, Catholic though relations with Darnley are strained. Darnley, the hopeful boy of the Catholics has all but discredited himself in both England and Scotland, and some years before his marriage was considered a viable successor by the Catholic party not so here. Mary may be able to muster an army with the help of Moray, but I doubt she could take England by force, and that is never what she was wanted until she was locked up and began scheming.

England has several better, more Protestant candidates. The offspring of Mary Tudor and Brandon, including the Grey sisters, the Ladies Catherine and Mary Grey. Catherine was the eldest and was hunched back, but was a popular by Spanish influences in court, but was somewhat of a blacksheep. Her first marriage had led to her husband abandoning her due to the political claimant following Edward VI's death. Elizabeth was quite friendly with her, but by 1563 she has married Seymour, been locked up, and her children declared illegitimate. Even on her death bed, I find Catherine to be the least likely to possibly succeed.

Mary is in a bit better position, as in 1563 she's not yet tarnished her reputation. But as far as I can tell, there were really no movements that supported her ascension, She was just a 'spare' Grey and nothing more.

Another option was a dark horse, Henry Hastings. The Earl of Huntington was a Calvinist, and held a few minor posts, as Elizabeth feared his influence. He had some Plantagenet blood through his veins, as well. He's also a man, which gives him a boost over the Grey sistsers, as neither of them was considered very brilliant. Catherine was mooted before her marriage, and Spain especially favored it, but here you'd have an actual viable, Protestant successor. Maybe a Puritan, but still a man. There be some after Mary and now Elizabeth's short reigns who do not want to risk a third.

1563 may be the best time since Scotland has her own political issues; Mary was too busy with her own problems to raise a host to take her to London (although honestly, it's more likely to get her to Berwick and start complaining then go any further). Spain is busy in the Netherlands with it's own troubles and the latest flames have broken out. Elizabeth's succession may be able to succeed with minimal foreign trouble, although domestic troubles are very possible.

What would happen under Queen Catherine, or hell, Henry? Domestic policies, foreign? I don't know know enough to make a broad answer, but may the Calvinist Henry seek to bring England's religious makeup closer to Calvinism? Does England give involved with the Dutch? In France? How does Europe begin to look at the close of the 17th century?

One interesting modern side effect is there will be little interest in the Tudors. Henry VIII might have some popularity, but probably only for his string of marriages and lack of issue in them. No surviving Elizabethan cult and probably no interest to little interest in Edward, Mary or Elizabeth except probably in he most hardcore historian.

How does it go from there? Maybe if Mary Grey is chosen given the fact she's unwed. will she take a husband like Elizabeth refused to do? Who?
 
Last edited:
OK, when was Thomas Seymour born to Catherine Grey? I think this could be key, because if Elizabeth is dead before this, then Catherine is still in the Tower and clearly her "husband" has access. If Elizabeth dies after the birth, when she has ordered Catherine parted from her husband, and into some one's care then I think that weakens Catherine.

Interesting that it was Dudley who Catherine went to to pleas her case with Elizabeth but that Dudley didn't do much pleading, just ratted on her. Things may then depend on whether the council accepts Elizabeth's dyiing wish for Dudley to be made Lord Protector

If not, then surely it would be Cecil, who would probably seek to be rid of Dudley as soon as possible, and would strengthen Catherine's bid

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
OK, when was Thomas Seymour born to Catherine Grey? I think this could be key, because if Elizabeth is dead before this, then Catherine is still in the Tower and clearly her "husband" has access. If Elizabeth dies after the birth, when she has ordered Catherine parted from her husband, and into some one's care then I think that weakens Catherine.

Interesting that it was Dudley who Catherine went to to pleas her case with Elizabeth but that Dudley didn't do much pleading, just ratted on her. Things may then depend on whether the council accepts Elizabeth's dyiing wish for Dudley to be made Lord Protector

If not, then surely it would be Cecil, who would probably seek to be rid of Dudley as soon as possible, and would strengthen Catherine's bid

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

Thomas Seymour was born c. 1563, the same year the Queen was ill. But I think for her the damage may already be done, as she had married without the Queen's assent and her surviving son was declared illegitimate and the marriage barred.

As for Dudley, that was her wish and I doubt they'd stick to it, especially in returns to income. She was wanting to give him the same income she'd try to give Alençon during their wedding negotiations and the council rejected. He was disliked in a lot of social climbers so I don't think Dudley was get the protectorship. Not get me wrong, I like the man, but he was looking after his first interests first. He'd back whoever benefited him the most, as he benefited very greatly from Elizabeth.
 
Thanks Gonzaga. I wasn't sure on the date completely so it's a very similar scenario, could be interesting for a mini TL.

Anyway, just to keep the discussion here, I agree with what mcdnab said in the other thread. The council would probably still declare Catherine as the new queen, and very quickly they would find all the legal documents and witnesses they need to declare that her marriage was valid.
 
The issue of Lady Catherine marrying without the Queen's consent becomes a non-issue once she herself is Queen. In those days medieval customs, such as betrothal etc, were still in vogue - basically, once you promised to marry someone, all you needed to do was have sex for it to become a proper marriage. Obviously this is right in the period where things become more secular, witnesses are required, etc, but children from two betrothed parties would generally be considered legitimate I believe.

A young Queen with a native husband and a ready-made Prince of Wales would certainly be preferable to an ugly dwarf (her sister, Lady Mary) or superstitious would-be occultist (Lady Margaret Clifford) or a Papist, Francophile Queen of Scots or the Lennoxes.

That said, maybe one of James V's bastards would be of interest, maybe as a consort for Catherine?
 
The issue of Lady Catherine marrying without the Queen's consent becomes a non-issue once she herself is Queen. In those days medieval customs, such as betrothal etc, were still in vogue - basically, once you promised to marry someone, all you needed to do was have sex for it to become a proper marriage. Obviously this is right in the period where things become more secular, witnesses are required, etc, but children from two betrothed parties would generally be considered legitimate I believe.

A young Queen with a native husband and a ready-made Prince of Wales would certainly be preferable to an ugly dwarf (her sister, Lady Mary) or superstitious would-be occultist (Lady Margaret Clifford) or a Papist, Francophile Queen of Scots or the Lennoxes.

That said, maybe one of James V's bastards would be of interest, maybe as a consort for Catherine?

True, but the marriage was scandalous at the time and the fact it was dubious (they couldn't find the priest who officiated the match) caused some issues. Customs may of dictated sex after a betrothal, but this was a possible heir to the throne and such a custom couldn't legitimately be held up. Of course if she does legitimize her match and son, it'd be a help, but I wonder if her supporters might merely suggest an annulment and remarriage, perhaps to the Archduke Charles. Of course, Catherine was attached to Seymour...
 
Of course if she does legitimize her match and son, it'd be a help, but I wonder if her supporters might merely suggest an annulment and remarriage, perhaps to the Archduke Charles. Of course, Catherine was attached to Seymour...

If think it would only mean more trouble. A man having a illegitimate son would be ok, but a female monach? Also, surely her first order would be to release Edward Seymour from the Tower and they would start to live as a couple. The more likely is that if she becomes the queen then the council would make her marriage be declared valid and her child legitimate.
 
If think it would only mean more trouble. A man having a illegitimate son would be ok, but a female monach? Also, surely her first order would be to release Edward Seymour from the Tower and they would start to live as a couple. The more likely is that if she becomes the queen then the council would make her marriage be declared valid and her child legitimate.

I agree that this is the more likely of options. Do we know much abou Seymour? I get the feeling he'd be the power behind the throne.
 
Does the revolt of the Northern Earls come sooner in this TL, and in any event how are its chances of success affected?
 
Does the revolt of the Northern Earls come sooner in this TL, and in any event how are its chances of success affected?

I'm not sure. Depends who succeeds. Remember that early in her reign Elizabeth was pretty lenient with the rescusants and even instructed her officials to leave them be and not make them take the oath if they refuse. If Elizabeth's successor is heavily Protestant, it may speed up the process, and they might seek help from the Queen of Scots. They didn't have their house in order IOTL though, so I doubt they will here either.
 
Catherine's marriage was declared invalid in 1562 by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
However as i have said before the council really only had two choices on Elizabeth's untimely death -
Mary of Scotland or Lady Catherine Grey.
Any other choice would have been frought with difficulties and risk civil war.
Crowning Catherine risks war with Scotland but it isn't likely (France is in no position to aid Scotland given it it in the midst of the first war of religion) - Catherine is the main choice to retain Elizabeth's religious settlement. The council will also like the fact that she is married with an heir - parliament and the council had been able to create the legal fiction to legitimize and bastardise Henry VIII's children at will so i have no doubt they would have managed to do the same for Catherine I.

Mary Stuart is still hunting for a new husband and I would think Catherine's accession reduces the likelihood of Darnley and increases the likelihood of a foreign match for Mary who in the eyes of some (including herself) will be legally regarded as Queen of England. A Hapsburg match (either Spanish or Austrian) will push France to side with England I would have thought.
 
Catherine's marriage was declared invalid in 1562 by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
However as i have said before the council really only had two choices on Elizabeth's untimely death -
Mary of Scotland or Lady Catherine Grey.
Any other choice would have been frought with difficulties and risk civil war.
Crowning Catherine risks war with Scotland but it isn't likely (France is in no position to aid Scotland given it it in the midst of the first war of religion) - Catherine is the main choice to retain Elizabeth's religious settlement. The council will also like the fact that she is married with an heir - parliament and the council had been able to create the legal fiction to legitimize and bastardise Henry VIII's children at will so i have no doubt they would have managed to do the same for Catherine I.

Mary Stuart is still hunting for a new husband and I would think Catherine's accession reduces the likelihood of Darnley and increases the likelihood of a foreign match for Mary who in the eyes of some (including herself) will be legally regarded as Queen of England. A Hapsburg match (either Spanish or Austrian) will push France to side with England I would have thought.

There's also the issue of the Stuarts regularly dying early and leaving child monarchs who require a Regency. This may well be viewed as an issue when it comes to a Stuart succession. However it should be noted that it wasn't until 1688 that there was any mechanism within England for the crown to be passed on to anyone other than the closest blood kin (in this case Mary of Scotland)

Mary may be a Catholic but remember that not long prior to 1563 Lady Jane Grey had attempted to succeed Edward VI at Edward VI's explict instruction and this failed when the people rose in favour of Edward's closest blood kin - Mary I. This fact would weigh heavily on the minds of both the Council of State and the Grey sisters.

In 1563 the success of the reformation in England was a long way from certain. My bet is on there being as many people supporting Mary of Scotland because she's Catholic as opposing her for that very reason.

My money is on Mary succeeding and the outbreak of a War of the English Succession pitting Mary and her partisans alongside France and Scotland against the Hapsburgs, their candidate and ironically enough the Protestants of England who would not accept a Catholic monarch
 
I'm not so sure Catherine was anywhere near as Protestant as Elizabeth. In the State Papers the Spanish ambassador describes her as the Queen's heir and says they met often and were on good terms, that she was well-disposed to Philip, etc.

I don't see her divorcing Seymour, all she'd need is an Act of Parliament establishing her son as her successor. Main issue might be her previous "marriage"/betrothal, so she'd either need a Papal bull clarifying the issue or some sort of ruling from the Archbishop of Canterbury (obviously favourable if she's Queen).

Mary would be unpopular as she was a French puppet whilst Catherine could be expected to maintain the traditional alliance with Spain-Burgundy, which is what the Kingdom's whole economy depended on.
 
Under English Law in 1563 Catherine Grey was heiress presumptive.
The Third Act of Succession passed during 1543 allowed Henry VIII to name his heir in his will in default of his legitimate issue - in his will he bequethed the throne to Edward, Mary and Elizabeth and then to the issue of his nieces Lady Frances and Lady Eleanor.

Until her marriage and disgrace Catherine was widely regarded at the English Court as the nearest likely heir much to Elizabeth's distaste (she disliked the Grey family personally)

In 1563 Mary's position to make good her claim (which under primogeniture was the strongest) was even weaker than it was in 1558 when her father in law had her use the undifferenced English arms on Mary Tudor's death.

Elizabeth had succeeded despite her illegitimacy under the terms of her father's will largely because she was a protestant and Henry VIII's daughter.

The English Reformation may well have been in the balance but by the 1560s there was no real Catholic majority and power was in the hands of Protestants - It is likely that some Catholic Peers with an unmarried Catholic Queen north of the border would look on it as an opportunity and i wouldn't rule out a rising in favour of Mary but I don't think it would necessarily happen immediately or would be successful.

Catherine Grey's advantages were pretty strong - she was probably more malleable (in the council's view) than Elizabeth had been, she was nominally of the right religion, she was English born, and she had an heir whose legitimacy could easily be solved.

Mary Stuart was a Roman Catholic, a foreigner (more French than Scottish), unmarried and childless and very much an unknown quantity.

Mary Stuart couldn't necessarily rely on French support in her claim she is merely a french Queen Dowager, England and France are at peace with each other, her relations with the French Queen Mother were not good and the Guise faction was no longer in the ascendancy.

She is more likely to get Spanish support (given that at this point she is still trying to get herself married to Don Carlos) - given the unpopularity of Mary Tudor's marriage and the fact that it and Philip in particular was unfairly blamed for the harsh terms imposed on English protestants during the 1550's that will not go down well with anyone but the most recalcitrant English Catholics.


There's also the issue of the Stuarts regularly dying early and leaving child monarchs who require a Regency. This may well be viewed as an issue when it comes to a Stuart succession. However it should be noted that it wasn't until 1688 that there was any mechanism within England for the crown to be passed on to anyone other than the closest blood kin (in this case Mary of Scotland)

Mary may be a Catholic but remember that not long prior to 1563 Lady Jane Grey had attempted to succeed Edward VI at Edward VI's explict instruction and this failed when the people rose in favour of Edward's closest blood kin - Mary I. This fact would weigh heavily on the minds of both the Council of State and the Grey sisters.

In 1563 the success of the reformation in England was a long way from certain. My bet is on there being as many people supporting Mary of Scotland because she's Catholic as opposing her for that very reason.

My money is on Mary succeeding and the outbreak of a War of the English Succession pitting Mary and her partisans alongside France and Scotland against the Hapsburgs, their candidate and ironically enough the Protestants of England who would not accept a Catholic monarch
 
Top