Elizabeth I lives another 25 years

[TheNordicBrit]

Hey Guys,

Let's say that Elizabeth I of England, who IOTL died in 1603 and succeeded by James VI of Scotland, lives on another 25 years. I know that this is highly implausible, she was 69 when she died and so ITTL she would be 94 years old when death finally takes her. Obviously this doesn't mean she'll be healthy the whole time, and I assume for much of the end of her reign she'd be bed-ridden.

Whilst highly unlikely, IOTL Christian Augustus, Count Palatine of Sulzbach lived to the old age of 85 in the 17th century, so this kind of age isn't totally unseen around this era.

So, what would happen? Obviously James VI would be annoyed as he'd be waiting for the death of Elizabeth, and if she might even live longer than him. How would it affect foreign affairs, especially with Spain?

Would we see the 'Republican' government grow even larger? IOTL the later reign saw her council and Parliament take on more responsibilities, but with an old and slowly deteriorating Elizabeth could we see Parliament and her Council grow in size and power?

Who would succeed her? If James' first son, Henry, survives due to butterflies I assume it'd be him, and he'd probably be a more effective ruler than IOTL's Charles I.

 

[Tripwire]

Who would succeed her? If James' first son, Henry, survives due to butterflies I assume it'd be him, and he'd probably be a more effective ruler than IOTL's Charles I.

So then, no English Civil War. Could republicanism paradoxically become more popular later on without a previous bad example?

 

[Lindseyman]

Quite possible. I read somewhere that Britain didn't go down the revolution road in the late 1700s/early 1800s and (less plausibly) in 1848 because we had had the trauma already of killing our monarch in 1649. This probably butterflies away the Hanovers as possible heirs to UK as Elizabeth as Princess of Scotland is not as good a catch as she was as Princess of England and Scotland. James VI of Scotland dies a frustrated man just before Elizabeth and then it depends on who survives out of Henry and Charles. If Charles, the civil war is delayed but not gone because of his character. If Henry???

 

[Escape Zeppelin]

And what happens to Ireland? The Plantation of Ulster and the anti-Catholic laws were James' project. With an declining and infirm Elizabeth will Parliament have the same drive to pacify the Irish that the Crown did or will they view it as a waste of the power and wealth that they increasingly control?

 

[jlk7e]

Does Elizabeth make peace with Spain in 1604? Unlikely, but the war can't go on forever - perhaps the two powers remain at war until the 12 year Truce in 1609. With James still in Scotland, there's probably no Palatine marriage for his daughter Elizabeth, which is going to have significant effects on the early part of the Thirty Years War.

I'd add that I don't think Charles I's character is inherent. If he spends his whole life in Scotland until inheriting the English throne, he's going to be very different from the king who spent most of his life in England. I'd think he'd have to be considerably more cautious about his steps in England, and more reliant on his advisors, who will be different people from OTL - certainly Buckingham is butterflied into obscurity.

 

[Just a Rube]

I'd add that I don't think Charles I's character is inherent. If he spends his whole life in Scotland until inheriting the English throne, he's going to be very different from the king who spent most of his life in England. I'd think he'd have to be considerably more cautious about his steps in England, and more reliant on his advisors, who will be different people from OTL - certainly Buckingham is butterflied into obscurity.

He certainly would be less likely to try to forcibly impose the Book of Common Prayer on his fellow Scots!

 

[Simreeve]

Do we even have a Scottish succession to the English throne, or does Elizabeth settle on one of the alternative candidates instead as her heir?

 

[jlk7e]

Do we even have a Scottish succession to the English throne, or does Elizabeth settle on one of the alternative candidates instead as her heir?

Possibly - William Seymour is 40 in 1628, and presumably the quesiton of his father's legitimacy would have been settled in 1621 at the time of his grandfather's death (to see whether he could succeed as Earl of Hertford).

The other candidate descended from Mary Tudor is Anne Stanley, who would probably be ignored.

This TL might also see Arabella Stewart having a child, who would also be a possible candidate.