Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: Before 1900' started by RMcD94, Mar 5, 2019.
I don't see the connection between the survival of Claudius Drusus on the life of Drusus Caesar. It's not even certain that Sejanus was responsible for his death; it may have been retroactively blamed on him after his fall. Furthermore, Tiberius' move to Capri was not singularly predicated on the death of his son (the primary source we have for this period is Tacitus, and his account is fragmentary and he consistently blamed early deaths on the machinations of ambitious underlings). He displayed a great unwillingness to hold the singular mantle of princeps from the very start of his reign, and while the death of his son may have exacerbated that, there's nothing to say he wouldn't have stepped down similarly even if his son was alive. If anything, he probably would have retired to Capri earlier than IOTL if he had a well-groomed successor to stay and manage things in Rome. Furthermore, if Sejanus did actually assassinate Drusus Caesar IOTL, then his daughter's marriage to Claudius Drusus would have only strengthened his position in the events leading up to this and likely make him bolder in having Drusus Caesar killed.
Also, Sejanus didn't singularly target members of Germanicus' family. His daughter was originally supposed to marry Claudius Drusus before his untimely death, and there's a chance Sejanus might even groom him as his heir, or make efforts to politically marginalize him if he had other plans. Part of the uncertainty comes from the fact that we don't actually know what Sejanus' endgame was, so it's difficult to assign motives to any of his actions. He certainly feared that if Tiberius died, he would be left without a tenable political position, which is probably why he arranged for himself to be appointed to the senate and made consul in 31 CE. The survival of Claudius Drusus would likely play directly into Sejanus' designs, and with another male heir possibly on the table, Caligula may not have even been spared by Tiberius. Basically, what I'm saying is, the survival of Claudius Drusus would probably lead to a stronger Sejanus, and one of the two of them (or Claudius) would likely make a play at becoming emperor after Tiberius.
Thank you for the feedback.
The Six Sons of Henry VIII
1 - Henry IX
2 - Thomas, Duke of York
3 - Edward, Duke of Somerset
4 - John, Duke of Ulster
5 - Edward, Bishop of Durham
6 - George Tudor
So - six sons, six wives. England may never break from the church if Catherine of Aragon manages to produce male issue, but perhaps she dies giving birth to the future Henry IX. Or perhaps Henry, Duke of Cornwall survives, and Catherine leaves the picture for other reasons - the birth of the spare?
Mary ergo isn't excommunicated, neither are Elizabeth or Thomas, Duke of York, because Henry is a widower not a divorcee unless Henry tries to claim the marriage o Anne Boleyn wasn't valid for other reasons.
Jane Seymour is pretty much the same, gives birth to Edward but dies giving birth so even if Lizzie and Tommy are deligitimised you've still got an heir in Henry IX and Prince Edward, Duke of Somerset.
Anne of Cleves having a son would take a bit of manipulation of history with Henry not being attracted to her and never consumating their marriage. If they do, and she gets pregnant then she lasts longer as Queen Consort and may even get crowned.
She outlives him IOTL, so would Catherine Howard be a mistress who gives a fifth son, whom Henry at the very least recognises in the same way he does IOTL with Henry Fitzroy, but Henry (both VIII and IX) pushes this son/brother into the church.
Finally we've got Catherine Parr for whom a son is unlikely. But let's say it's a miracle baby but that Henry is still technically married to Anne of Cleves. What happens to little George Tudor - a good thirty years younger than his eldest sibling.
Could we shuffle the issue so that Catherine of Aragon gives birth to two male issue, so there's an heir and spare, but she dies giving birth to the latter. This allows us to escape the Parr Miracle Baby and to avoid repeat of the illegitimate son being ushered into the church?!
Better two sons for Katherine (aka Henry and Arthur/Ferdinand/Charles) then a Anne having a George/William/Thomas, Edward by Jane, John by Anna of Cleves (but he will marry her here? He is still Catholic and a king who has lost three wives in childbirth so Kristine of Denmark as fourth wife would be more likely than Anna of Cleves)... Katherine Howard can be a mistress and mother of the sixth son (or the sixth can be the second son of Kristine)
As I understand it Anne of Cleves was born Roman Catholic and converted to Lutheranism, even c. 1535, her mother was a devout Catholic whilst her brother was a practising Lutheran and Anne only formally converted to Anglicanism upon her arrival in England.
Catherine of Aragon dies (2), Anne Boleyn betrays (1), Jane Seymour dies in childbirth (1), Anne of Cleves survives (1), Catherine Howard is his mistress, and Catherine Parr never arrives on the scene, so perhaps ...
Catherine of Aragon:
1 - Henry IX, prev Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall
2 - Ferdinand, Duke of York
X - Mary Tudor, Princess Royal
3 - Thomas, Duke of Richmond & Somerset
X - Elizabeth Tudor
4 - Edward, Bishop of Durham
Anne of Cleves:
5 - John, Duke of Ulster
6 - Edmund Fitzroy, Constable of Beaumaris
I can't imagine a son of Anne of Cleves being sent to join the Church. Perhaps Anne Boleyn if she still does something that seriously upsets Henry VIII could cause the deligotimisation of Thomas, after all we've got Henry IX and Duke Ferdinand as Heir and Spare.
Would a 'bastard' such as Edmund Fitzroy or delegitimised issue such as Thomas be recognised with a title, or even able to rise up to the rank of Archbishop?
So let's say Thomas is made Duke of Richmond and gets stripped of his title whilst the unwed Elizabeth similarly finds herself unwed and unlikely to and forced to wait as a Lady in Waiting on Jane Seymour, Edmund is set up in a convenient out of the way position where he won't be the focus of much attention - Constable of Beaumaris, perhaps, like Henry VII rumoured illegitimate son, Roland De Velville, but he would be given this post by his half-brother Henry IX and therefore anything goes.
Edward therefore is our likely Bishop in the family. Perhaps my original idea of Bishop of Durham might be a better guess.
The point is who from a political point of view a wedding to Anna of Cleves make no sense without the need of a Protestant alliance because He day would most likely try to remarry to some relative of either the King of France or the Emperor. Plus I think pretty unlikely both the name Thomas for the son of Anne (as William after her grandfather and the conqueror or George for her brother and the saint are more likely choice for honoring her family than the name of her father and uncle) and seeing her (or any woman who had given a son to Henry) killed with her children stripped of their titles...
OTL the only reason for which the accuses against Anne destroyed her was the fact who Henry needed to be freed for her for marrying Jane Seymour and try to get a legitimate son from her
Plus for the Henry VIII’s six sons we would not need to include also the OTL Duke of Richmond and Somerset?
I'm guessing with the future Henry IX born c. 1510, Henry may not stray whilst married to Catherine and therefore Henry Fitzroy is never born and the Dukedoms of Richmond and Somerset are both free to recreate here for Thomas/George before their delegitimisation.
I agree on the front that the accusations on Anne would need to be significantly stronger here as he has two heirs by Cata and an heir by Anne, as well as a daughter by each. But perhaps Anne gets caught involved in trying to arrange an "accident" for both Henry and Ferdinand so that her own son, Thomas/George jumps to the front of the line with regards to succession.
What would be greater - that she had given him a son (And he already had two, one of whom would likely be married himself by the time Anne arrives on scene) or that she had sought to remove heirs? Is Regicide Futurus even a thing?
For what reason Anne Boleyn would be so stupid to try to do something like that? She would never do something like that
Okay. So - What could Anne do that would cause her to be killed and her children deligitimised? Given it's been suggested that reasonable belief of adultery wouldn't be sufficient to have this happen in a world where Anne had provided a male heir.
I can only imagine that the remaining avaliable option is that Anne attempts to convert Henry to Protestantism as IOTL which backfires, but would that be enough to have her beheaded? Unless that is then coupled with the accusation of adultery with George/Thomas and Elizabeth being suggested as the other persons children.
Who at court might have the desire to make a move? Could this be where the fictional future Henry IX comes into his own and frames his stepmother?
You have simply no way to get that result with Anne and likely no reason. The worst you can have is get her in (small) trouble for her ideas (and considering who she had not tried to talked to Henry about reform until that would be a viable option for him and never interfered about Mary is pretty unlikely) the worst who can happen to her is having her wedding annulled with the kids staying as legitimate prince and princess. Maybe Jane Seymour can end in bigger troubles as she was less careful than Anne in dealing with Henry (and less smarter than her predecessor) but I will kill Anne in childbirth...
Is this more realistic?
In addition to Lincoln, William H. Seward and Andrew Johnson are assassinated. The North's crackdown on the South is even harder. Eventually, Socialism starts to become popular in the South since the Southerners see themselves as being oppressed by Northern capitalists.
Okay - so different possibility: Anne and Henry never marry so whilst he isn't having an affair (a la Henry and Catherine), the children (make them twins) are born out of wedlock and thus not in line of succession. He may acknowledge them as his children, but when Jane Seymour arrives on the scene, Anne is packed off to Kimbolton Castle with the twins and thus lives much longer than IOTL - when Henry VIII dies, Anne tries to assert some sense of their legitimacy but has both Henry IX and the Dowager Queen, Anne of Cleves, against her (Anne of Cleves won't want her son, John, Duke of Ulster, pushed out of his place in the line of succession) which results the twins being stripped of their courtesy titles and then packed off to the continent, Elizabeth to the French Court (let's say Mary is married to Henri, Duke of Orleans) whilst George is conscripted and stationed in Calais.
Anne herself is sent to Bermondsey Abbey and basically placed under house arrest, much like Elizabeth Woodville decades earlier.
Pretty unlikely as Anne Boleyn was not the kind of woman to accept to be a mistress. If you do not wish her as Queen and her children as possible heirs then take her completely off from the list...
Who could Henry VII appoint as Duke of Gloucester around the year 1500? It's for an upcoming timeline, and Tudor history isn't really my forte.
The Curse of George III
George III had many children but by 1800, only a handful are married and he has only one legitimate grandchild - over the years more will follow. But then Charlotte dies in childbirth, Elizabeth of Clarence suffers from an intro-susception of the bowels, Alexandrine of York dies of a severe fever in Ramsgate, George of Cumberland first goes blind and then dies in a riding accident, the Duke of Cambridges children live longer - but George of Cambridge dies whilst on duty in the army, with Augusta and Mary Adelaide both dying in childbirth like their cousin Charlotte.
The crown cycles through the children of George III ...
1820 - 1830 : George IV
1830 - 1837 : William IV
1837 - 1851 : Ernest
1851 - 1857 : Mary III
At which point, the crown passes down to the issue of George III's eldest sister, Princess Augusta ...
The House of Brunswick-Bevern
1857 - 1873 : Charles III
1873 - 1884 : William V
The House of Wurttemburg
1884 - 1891 : Charles IV
1891 - 1898 : Catherine
1898 - 1921 : William VI
1921 - 1965 : Pauline
1965 - 2000 : William VII
2000 - 2015 : Frederick
2015 - Present : Frederick II
Has anyone ever made a timeline splitting from ours at end of the Jewish Revolt in 70 AD, the PoD being the Second Temple still getting sacked, but being left structurally intact?
Is this realistic?
Plausibility check on the western Roman Empire devolving into something resembling an HRE style confederation of legally settled tribes ala the Goths?
Separate names with a comma.