Henry VIII dies in a jousting accident

[Elfwine]

I don't agree with you so I'm trolling? cool off will you, I'm not getting up and digging out my books because you got a bee in your hair about this, but really, why would they agree to her in 1513 and not 1524? we have shown its not her gender, woman could be regents, clearly, her being Spanish? and the people loved the "Good Queen Catherine" she was wildly popular till she died, something some one as politically smart as her could play on

I did not say anything like that. I said that you're citing nothing and giving no foundation for your statements.

That you disagree isn't the problem, that your statements are without any visible foundation is the problem.

And if you're going to assert something and then refuse to get out your books to actually back it up, why should I believe what you're saying?

 

[black angel]

I did not say anything like that. I said that you're citing nothing and giving no foundation for your statements.

That you disagree isn't the problem, that your statements are without any visible foundation is the problem.

And if you're going to assert something and then refuse to get out your books to actually back it up, why should I believe what you're saying?

...... we have agreed on the main points, England has had female regents by this time, history of countries around England show that female regency is normal, since the Dark ages (and before) the role of a Queen mother of a minor king was regent, some times they lost it, any ways you haven't given me a reason, why would it be ok in 1513 and not 1524?

 

[Elfwine]

...... we have agreed on the main points, England has had female regents by this time, history of countries around England show that female regency is normal, since the Dark ages (and before) the role of a Queen mother of a minor king was regent, some times they lost it, any ways you haven't given me a reason, why would it be ok in 1513 and not 1524?

Still waiting for your sources, because we have most certainly not agreed on the main points unless you're talking to the Elfwine who plays cricket on Thursday and not this one.

1513 is not the same situation as 1524.

 

[mcdnab]

Female regency was actually pretty rare in England and not normal. Largely because minor's succeeding to the English throne were rare.

Henry III - regency was assumed by William Marshall not his mother Isabella of Anjouleme.
Roger Mortimer ruled for Edward III briefly who had been crowned at 15 following his father's deposition although his mother had enormous power briefly but it was exercised by her lover Mortimer.
Henry VI - at his accession the English nobles actively prevented his mother Katherine of Valois from playing a large role in his upbringing or the government. The realm was governed by John Duke of Bedford as principal regent alongside a regency council.
Edward V - much debate over this one as any codicil leaving the regency to Richard III does not survive - the Edward IV's council seemed initially intent to follow the pattern of Henry VI's minority by ruling themselves.
Henry VIII - his grandmother was declared regent for a short period ahead of her death and his 18th birthday - this was in part because of the great respect and love between the woman and her son Henry VII - and because she was exceptionally well-regarded for her piety and intelligence etc. By the way she signed herself Margaret R (for Richmond) though it is often pointed out the R was easily mistaken for Regina (latin for Queen of course).
On occassion King's did name their wives regents whilst out of the country enabling them with the support of the King's council to act in his name during the absence of the monarch.
Incidentally the plan by Henry VIII for Edward VI's minority is worth examining - his will left the realm to be governed by a regency council to rule collectively it was that council that then invested power in Seymour as Protector.

Up to this point in history it is also worth pointing out that France had only had two formal female regents - Blanche of Castile ruled as regent for her son Louis IX and Charles VIII's regent was his older sister Anne.

Assuming Catherine of Aragon will become Regent is debatable.

 

[Incognitia]

Assuming Catherine of Aragon will become Regent is debatable.

Agreed. I'd be entirely unsurprised if she popped up as a regent. Maybe even one of the most influential figures on a regency council. But as sole regent? Never going to happen. That's not a level of power that the great men of the kingdom are going to permit a foreign woman to wield, no matter how popular she is.

And I don't know where this idea of civil war is coming from - the alternatives are not "Give Catherine what she wants or fight a civil war." The most likely choice is between "Give Catherine what she wants or intrigue against her at Court", and that is for much lower stakes.

 

[Grimm Reaper]

Where is the evidence of Katherine being even slightly politically astute?

If she were then she would have stepped aside and England remained Catholic when Henry decided he wanted to marry Anne Boleyn.

 

[Incognitia]

Where is the evidence of Katherine being even slightly politically astute?

If she were then she would have stepped aside and England remained Catholic when Henry decided he wanted to marry Anne Boleyn.

That assumes that she would place religious consequences above her own personal interests; alternatively she might not have believed that Henry would be batshit insane enough to change the religious doctrine for an entire country for the benefit of his own marriage.

 

[Elfwine]

That assumes that she would place religious consequences above her own personal interests; alternatively she might not have believed that Henry would be batshit insane enough to change the religious doctrine for an entire country for the benefit of his own marriage.

Interests and beliefs.

 

[lambert]

What about Richard de la Pole: he seems like an interesting candidate.

Perhaps the French would invade to put this guy on the throne.

As the eldest surviving son of Richard III's nominated heir, Richard de la Pole is considered the rightful heir of York. It seems that the view in France was that fifty thousand Northerners would flock to his banners if he had led an army across the Scottish border.

France can't afford to have England allied to Spain while fighting the Spanish in Italy. Francis will definitely want to put Richard on the English throne, the only question is does he get distracted by the Italian front. In OTL the French suffer a major defeat at the end of April and Provence is invaded in July.

 

[mcdnab]

Richard de la Pole was rather like Henry VII had been in exile a useful stick to beat the English with but not regarded as having a strong chance of any kind of victory.

His claim was exceptionally weak whatever Francis I might have felt about it.
There is no evidence Richard III named any heir - in fact John de la Pole, whose large pension under RIchard III and position rested as much with the fact that he was Richard's only close adult male relative, made his peace with Henry VII initially before rebelling at Stoke.
It is extremely doubtful that he would have found much English support in 1524 amongst the English.

Francis has other options depending on whether Katherine of Aragon becomes regent or not.

If control rests with the great men of the kingdom then a switch of alliance might have easily happened - Mary had been betrothed to the Dauphin until 1522 when Henry as he often did switched and betrothed her to Charles V.
Wolsey and Suffolk were far more pro-french in inclination.