Henry VIII dies in 1529

Just having watched THE MADNESS OF HENRY VIII on the National Geographic Channel last night, a POD occurred to me.

Henry VIII, during his frustrated attempts to divorce his wife, Catherine of Aragon, often flew into great rages. One especially notable one took place after the failure of the trial at the Black Friars Convent in June 1529, where Catherine ably defended herself from Henry's attacks on her and Henry was defied by John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, when Henry attempted to introduce a petition bearing Fisher's forged signature in support of his case against Catherine. Let's suppose that, during this particular rant, Henry suffers a stroke as a blood vessel in his brain bursts. He collapses to the floor, is carried away to his palace, and is pronounced dead the next morning.

Catherine of Aragon is now Regent of England, on behalf of her young daughter, Mary. Catherine had ruled ably as regent once before, when the King went to war against France in 1513, including repelling an invasion by the Scots. She was immensely popular with the people, and would probably be a good ruler. Several obvious consequences come immediately to mind.

--The marriage of Henry to Anne Boleyn has never happened, so no Elizabeth Tudor to later become Good Queen Bess.
--No break with the Catholic Church.
--Mary doesn't suffer years of abuse by Henry, and so has a much less vindictive and suspicious personality. She does not go down in history as a bloody tyrant, and may even be a much beloved ruler.

Some interesting questions...

--Who does Mary marry? My own thought is that it will not be Phillip of Spain. Who would be the other logical candidates?
--Will there be a legitmate heir? She had no children in OTL, but in OTL she didn't marry until she was 38 years old, and then died 4 years later...she didn't have much of a window of opportunity.

Thoughts?
 
I certainly agree with your main points. I'm not sure why Mary probably won't marry Philip of Spain, and she sure wouldn't marry Francis of France.
On another note, will we see an update on the Tawantinsuya TL. I'm asking since you used to upate it every three weeks or so, and I figure either this week or the next.
 
Wendell said:
Maybe Mary could marry into the Scottish lines?

I thought of that too, as long there's less ill will towards the Scots at this time, if the memory of the invasion has faded away. Not France though. Never France:mad:
 
Since you have stipulated Catherine of Aragon as Regent, Mary will probably end up marrying Charles V. This had been a dream of Catherine's in OTL, and Henry VIII dying in 1529 would virtually guarantee a Charles V/Mary marriage.

On the other hand, if Wolsey were the Regent, things might be different...
 
vandevere said:
Since you have stipulated Catherine of Aragon as Regent, Mary will probably end up marrying Charles V. This had been a dream of Catherine's in OTL, and Henry VIII dying in 1529 would virtually guarantee a Charles V/Mary marriage.

So England ends up as another province in the Habsburg empire? That might be interesting. France and Holland are really screwed, then. However, one possible problem...Charles V married the Infanta Isabella of Portugal in 1526. At that time, Mary was only 10 years old, so he would not likely have foregone the match with Isabella to marry Mary at that time. Isabella died in 1539, so I suppose Charles could have married Mary then (she would have been 23 and he 39, which would not have been unheard of). But Mary may well have already been married by that time, and not been available (23 was sort of a late age for a girl to marry in those days).

vandevere said:
On the other hand, if Wolsey were the Regent, things might be different...

Since Wolsey was actively helping Henry in his effort to divorce Catherine, I think in this scenario his name is pretty much mud. Not much chance he'd end up as Regent in this case...
 
Last edited:
johnp said:
I certainly agree with your main points. I'm not sure why Mary probably won't marry Philip of Spain, and she sure wouldn't marry Francis of France.

The marriage to Phillip was brought on, in OTL, in part because Mary felt she needed a strong Catholic mate to help her bring the country back to the Catholic fold. There will be less of that kind of pressure here, and she might be more willing to listen to those who argued against the marriage in OTL because it meant England becoming a mere dependency of Spain. Besides, he was 11 years her junior...in this scenario Mary probably marries much younger.


johnp said:
On another note, will we see an update on the Tawantinsuya TL. I'm asking since you used to upate it every three weeks or so, and I figure either this week or the next.

Probably next weekend.
 
vandevere said:
Possibly King James V...

That's a possibility. He was the right age, and unmarried up until 1537 (when in OTL he married Madeleine de Valois). One issue...his mother was Margaret Tudor, sister of Henry VIII. So he and Mary would have been first cousins. Would this have proved a barrier to their marriage, I wonder? How did the church look at marriage between such close relatives? Also, his marriage to Madeleine de Valois was part of his effort to renew the Auld Alliance with France. Would he have considered Mary a more attractive partner?
 
Superdude said:
It was very common, actually.

I don't think the Church would raise much of a fuss, if at all.

Okay...so it's James V of Scotland and Mary of England, marrying about 1535. James is 23 and Mary is 19. Mary is probably fertile (it is thought that she developed an ovarian cyst which later became cancerous later in life, but that wouldn't have happened yet). James never marries Madeleine of Valois and so there won't be a Mary, Queen of Scots in this timeline...or at least not the same one as OTL. And the historical Stuart line of James VI/I, Charles I, Charles II, and James VII/II doesn't happen. The butterflies are just taking off here, aren't they! LOL

If Mary conceives a male heir, the House of Stuart takes over rule in England about 70 years earlier than OTL.

If on the other hand, Mary was physically unable to have children even at a young age, who would have inherited the throne on her death?
 
robertp6165 said:
Okay...so it's James V of Scotland and Mary of England, marrying about 1535. James is 23 and Mary is 19. Mary is probably fertile (it is thought that she developed an ovarian cyst which later became cancerous later in life, but that wouldn't have happened yet). James never marries Madeleine of Valois and so there won't be a Mary, Queen of Scots in this timeline...or at least not the same one as OTL. And the historical Stuart line of James VI/I, Charles I, Charles II, and James VII/II doesn't happen. The butterflies are just taking off here, aren't they! LOL

If Mary conceives a male heir, the House of Stuart takes over rule in England about 70 years earlier than OTL.

If on the other hand, Mary was physically unable to have children even at a young age, who would have inherited the throne on her death?

There's still the Princess Mary who married Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk in OTL. Come to think of it, i think she married him Before 1529. :eek:
 
vandevere said:
There's still the Princess Mary who married Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk in OTL. Come to think of it, i think she married him Before 1529. :eek:

Yes, she married him in 1515.

But Princess Mary was still junior to her sister Margaret, and upon further research I find that Margaret did have another child by her second marriage to the Earl of Angus. This was Margaret Douglas, b. 1515, d. 1578, married Matthew Stewart, Earl of Lennox, in 1544. Her son, Henry Stewart, Lord Darnley (b. 1545). So when Mary of England dies in 1558 of cancer, the next legitimate heir would be Margaret Douglas or possibly her son, Lord Darnley. If we assume the latter (with the throne going to the next legitimate male heir), then Darnley becomes King Henry IX of England in 1558! :eek:
 
Yeah, I kind of doubt that there'll be that big of deal over an incestous relationship, though it does seem kind of close. But does Mary have a male child? Your last post is supposing that she doesn't, and I'm wondering the options for this possibility. Maybe have an Edward VI or Henry IX ascend to the throne when she dies. Possible personality is a discussion for another time. Maybe tomorrow.
 
.

It's not an incestuous relationship in Europe. In fact cousins marrying, especially in royal families, is quite common.
 
JP_Morgan said:
Yeah, I kind of doubt that there'll be that big of deal over an incestous relationship, though it does seem kind of close. But does Mary have a male child? Your last post is supposing that she doesn't, and I'm wondering the options for this possibility. Maybe have an Edward VI or Henry IX ascend to the throne when she dies.

Well, that is another possibility, if it does turn out she is fertile. Or it may be a James II (if her husband is James V of Scotland (who would be James I of England in that scenario).

I did discuss this a bit in a previous post...

Okay...so it's James V of Scotland and Mary of England, marrying about 1535. James is 23 and Mary is 19. Mary is probably fertile (it is thought that she developed an ovarian cyst which later became cancerous later in life, but that wouldn't have happened yet). James never marries Madeleine of Valois and so there won't be a Mary, Queen of Scots in this timeline...or at least not the same one as OTL. And the historical Stuart line of James VI/I, Charles I, Charles II, and James VII/II doesn't happen. The butterflies are just taking off here, aren't they! LOL

If Mary conceives a male heir, the House of Stuart takes over rule in England about 70 years earlier than OTL.
 
Peter Cowan said:
.

It's not an incestuous relationship in Europe. In fact cousins marrying, especially in royal families, is quite common.

I know that cousins marrying is quite common in royal families. What I was questioning was whether FIRST cousins marrying would have been considered acceptable. Based on what yourself and others have posted, I accept that it would have been, and have posited as the most likely candidate for Mary's mate James V of Scotland.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Peter Cowan said:
.

It's not an incestuous relationship in Europe. In fact cousins marrying, especially in royal families, is quite common.

True enough.

Just take a look at Prince Charles.:D
 
Top