If James IV and V had not died young, could they have kept Scotland Catholic?

Just as is says:

If James IV and V had not died young, would the reliable Catholics been able to stymy the Protestant Reformation in Scotland?

Or was that inevitable?

I'm considering a TL where James IV was captured and not killed at Flodden. If he was released to go home, could he have nipped the Protestant Reformation in the bud?
 
I tend to think so. Replacing an underage monarch being raised in France to be a French queen (and replaced by Protestant Reformers in the Regency and ruling Scotland in her stead) with a middle-aged male long-reigning resident Catholic King would make quite a bit of difference (and there were clearly pockets of Catholics in the Highlands that still remained even post-Reformation that served as the backbones for the Old and Young Pretender). If Knox tried some altered version of his "The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstruous Regiment of Women" against James V then he would have lost his head very quickly or spent the rest of his life in the foreign court of another "Monstrous Woman" - Elizabeth Tudor.
 
Last edited:
So you think that James IV and V would have cracked down hard enough that that Presbyterians would have been stillborn?

I've had this TL in mind regarding Scotland remaining Catholic when James IV was captured instead of killed. Meanwhile, Henry VIII gets captured at the battle of the Spurs by France and a deal is worked out that he only is freed if James is.

This solidifies the Auld Alliance and, as Henry goes forward with his reformation, then Scotland and France combine to seize Ireland from him.
 
I would think so.

The structures of the Presbyterian kirk arose because of a relatively decentralized government due to the untimely deaths of monarchs and the respective regencies that succeeded them.

That said, James IV and V would need to have a centralizing tendency, though given that James IV was Scotland's first Renaissance monarch, this is likely.
 
Top