No James VI

In 1567 Mary, Queen of Scots was forced to give up the throne to her infant son, James VI.
Suppose Queen Mary had no children.
Who shall be the sovereign of Scotland in 1567?
 
Mary's problems started AFTER the birth of her son, i.e. once there was an heir.

If she didn't have a child in 1566 then Darnley would not have been killed and everything would have continued until she DID have a child.

If she died childless then the crown would probably have passed a Darnley, either Mathew, Henry (assuming he was still alive) or Charles.
 
Mary was around six months pregnant with James when Darnley attacked Rizzio in her chambers - assuming an early labour brought upon by the stress is not unlikely that solves that problem.

You then have increasingly difficult situation - Mary estranged from her husband and childless - her deposition though becomes very difficult without an obvious heir.

Mary had consistantly refused Darnley the Crown Matrimonial (making him her heir if she died without issue - it was a principal cause of their estrangement).

The legal heir (though his rights were challenged by Darnley's father Lord Lennox) was James Hamilton Earl of Arran - however he left Scotland after Mary married Darnley and is living in France at this point and his eldest son who was probably insane was imprisoned.

Hamilton's advantage was that he was (at least nominally) Protestant and had a large family which was well connected.

Darnley's unpredicatability and dubious religion (nominally Catholic but like his father willing to shift for advantage) make him a difficult candidate.
 
Top