James II/VII born a girl: consequences

So, OTL James Duke of York is born female.
What are the consequences for the succession assuming a similar Restoration and death of Henry of Gloucester?
 
James II was Charles I's 3rd child, assuming that everything is OTL up to his birth and more or less so afterward, then his/her older sister, Mary's son William (OTL's William III) becomes king on his uncle's death (Mary having died in 1660) bring the Britain into Personal union with The Netherlands.
 
James II was Charles I's 3rd child, assuming that everything is OTL up to his birth and more or less so afterward, then his/her older sister, Mary's son William (OTL's William III) becomes king on his uncle's death (Mary having died in 1660) bring the Britain into Personal union with The Netherlands.

The interesting thing here is that there is no bill of rights now establishing James daughter as heir (no need).

William as King in his own right means the "usual" succession laws apply. William's agnatic heir was John William Friso when considering the Prince of Orange title but i'm not sure how it would be applied in the case of the English Crown. I guess the claim by the Electress Sophie could still be pursued but I would hazard it is likely that the personal union of the Netherlands and England would be maintained.
 
well there is of course an issue of whom a female James might marry

The succession by traditional methods would on Charles II's death in 1685

1) William of Orange (nephew to Charles II)
2) A female James if living and her issue
3) Marie Louise of Orléans Queen of Spain (niece of Charles II)
4) Anne Marie d'Orléans Duchess of Savoy

after them comes the numerous descendants of Elizabeth Stuart Electress Palatine.

Given the above there might not be an exclusion crisis especially given with a different wife William of Orange might have children before his uncle's death.
But if he is childless by Charles II's death then unless a female James was married to a Protestant with issue there might well be a problem given the lack of a near Protestant heir.
 
The interesting thing here is that there is no bill of rights now establishing James daughter as heir (no need).

William as King in his own right means the "usual" succession laws apply. William's agnatic heir was John William Friso when considering the Prince of Orange title but i'm not sure how it would be applied in the case of the English Crown. I guess the claim by the Electress Sophie could still be pursued but I would hazard it is likely that the personal union of the Netherlands and England would be maintained.

well William can't/wouldn't marry James' daughter, because no James, assuming that Charles I's 3rd child lives to be an adult in this case, she would be married off to some foreign court like Mary and Henrietta, if its a Catholic court (like Henrietta) her children would be totally unsuitable for a bride to the Prince of Orange, and if not, well there just wouldn't be the dynastic advantages that marrying William to Mary had, any ways, different wife means different luck in the children department the problem William and Mary had seems to have been on Mary's end

any ways, failing William having heirs, it'd pass to whatever heirs Charles I's 3rd child/2nd daughter had, who might well be Catholic, to failing that, Henrietta's children, who were Catholic
 
well William can't/wouldn't marry James' daughter, because no James, assuming that Charles I's 3rd child lives to be an adult in this case, she would be married off to some foreign court like Mary and Henrietta, if its a Catholic court (like Henrietta) her children would be totally unsuitable for a bride to the Prince of Orange, and if not, well there just wouldn't be the dynastic advantages that marrying William to Mary had, any ways, different wife means different luck in the children department the problem William and Mary had seems to have been on Mary's end

any ways, failing William having heirs, it'd pass to whatever heirs Charles I's 3rd child/2nd daughter had, who might well be Catholic, to failing that, Henrietta's children, who were Catholic

But in the case of a Catholic Queen / King then we get back to the Glorious Revolution all over again but with George not William? Or is Hanover too distant a relation to sustain public support.
 
There'd certainly be a lot more pressure for William to marry and father protestants the older Charles II gets without children.
Would William now marry Mary (or would he marry "Jamesina"?) for dynastic reasons?

What protestant marriages would be suitable for Jamesina?
 
But in the case of a Catholic Queen / King then we get back to the Glorious Revolution all over again but with George not William? Or is Hanover too distant a relation to sustain public support.

maybe maybe not James II was monumentally tactless about is his religion and its role in society, a Catholic with better sense and more political skill might be able to thread the needle, if not George Louis isn't William, William was a man of action and a general, George Louis..... wasn't and Hanover isn't the kind of country you can use as a base for an invasion of England, I guess it depends on the will of the ruling class of England

any ways

James II was born in 1633, Charles I's daughters in OTL married big players, so maybe we can rule out minor Princes, Christian V of Denmark is too young, Charles X Gustav of Sweden is about 10 years older and he married a woman 3 years younger than James when he was 21, however that was 1654, when Charles II was in exile and England was a Republic so not a great catch for any Protestant Prince, there's Ernest Augustus of Hanover, who married Sophia in OTL who was an exiled Princess with little to bring to the table, and they married in 1658 when Britain was a Republic so she couldn't even claim a link to that royal family, a lady James II would be a bit of a better catch for him, maybe to one of the sons of Elizabeth Stuart, in OTL Charles II tried to net Sophia in hopes of getting funds from the Winter Queen's supporter Lord William Craven, so maybe Charles would try to use his sister to get that support by marrying her off to Philip Frederick, though he died in 1650 in OTL, Charles also wanted/needed support from France and having no reason to assume he'd be childless and wouldn't think his little brother Henry would die before him and childless so might try to marry her off to some branch of the French royal family, Louis XIV is nearly the right age, but I doubt he'd put out for such a bad catch
 
Would Henry Stuart, Duke of Gloucester live longer as heir to Charles II with this pod or would charles I aim for another son.
 
there's Ernest Augustus of Hanover, who married Sophia in OTL who was an exiled Princess with little to bring to the table, and they married in 1658 when Britain was a Republic so she couldn't even claim a link to that royal family, a lady James II would be a bit of a better catch for him

When he married her her brother had already received the Palatinate back, and Ernst August was only a fourth son, with no expectations to be the heir.

Maybe this female James (Elizabeth, perhaps?) could be married to a relative of William II, Prince of Orange (as he is married to her eldest sister)?

Or, if she stays single during the whole time of the Stuart exile, after Restoration they could make a double marriage with the Portuguese royal family: Charles II/Catherine and Alfonso VI/*Elizabeth. Yes, she would be 10 years older than the Portuguese king, and 28 at the time of her marriage, but it's the Braganzas we are talking about here. IOTL the best they could find for him was the daughter of the Duke of Nemours (a lesser branch of Savoy) with a descendent of a bastard of Henry IV of France. Marrying an older woman, but clearly of royal blood, would be nice match for them.
 
When he married her her brother had already received the Palatinate back, and Ernst August was only a fourth son, with no expectations to be the heir.

Maybe this female James (Elizabeth, perhaps?) could be married to a relative of William II, Prince of Orange (as he is married to her eldest sister)?

Or, if she stays single during the whole time of the Stuart exile, after Restoration they could make a double marriage with the Portuguese royal family: Charles II/Catherine and Alfonso VI/*Elizabeth. Yes, she would be 10 years older than the Portuguese king, and 28 at the time of her marriage, but it's the Braganzas we are talking about here. IOTL the best they could find for him was the daughter of the Duke of Nemours (a lesser branch of Savoy) with a descendent of a bastard of Henry IV of France. Marrying an older woman, but clearly of royal blood, would be nice match for them.

Hmm interesting.

Any more ideas?
 
I am intrigued by the Portuguese match. How would that affect Alfonso's removal from power?

I think it all depends on the character of his Stuart wife. Given the king's disabilities, I doubt they would have been able to have a child and the marriage would probably be unconsummated). And his brother Pedro would probably still have the same reasons to remove Alfonso as IOTL. So, it depends on how is her relationship with the king and if she (as Marie Françoise IOTL) thinks that it would be an advantage to replace her husband by his brother. The problem is that if the marriage happens in 1661 (in a double union with Charles/Catherine) then Pedro would be too young to even be considered as a replacement. So, perhaps if the queen plays her cards right she could become the dominant figure in the court (being an older and experienced woman married to a teenage and disabled king) and only dispose of him later.
 
I think it all depends on the character of his Stuart wife. Given the king's disabilities, I doubt they would have been able to have a child and the marriage would probably be unconsummated). And his brother Pedro would probably still have the same reasons to remove Alfonso as IOTL. So, it depends on how is her relationship with the king and if she (as Marie Françoise IOTL) thinks that it would be an advantage to replace her husband by his brother. The problem is that if the marriage happens in 1661 (in a double union with Charles/Catherine) then Pedro would be too young to even be considered as a replacement. So, perhaps if the queen plays her cards right she could become the dominant figure in the court (being an older and experienced woman married to a teenage and disabled king) and only dispose of him later.

Interesting. I guess she could be considered a tragic figure in "modern" times with AH scenarios abounding.
Could she remarry and perhaps cause some consternation on the succession from her line?
 
Top