Question: WI Elizabeth I was executed?

Having seen the film "Elizabeth", which suggests Mary Scots threatened it, but didn't do it (OK, Hollywood's only slightly above ASB:p), I wondered what the effect might be if Liz had been executed for treason?
 
Elizabeth I

Do you mean that Mary of Scotalnd has Elizabeth executed? Or is she executed by her half sister Mary? Elizabeth was under virtual house arrest during Mary's reign.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
He means Queen Mary of England, not Mary Queen of Scots. And in addition to being under house arrest for much of the time, she was also thrown into the Tower at one point, as the film depicts.

If Elizabeth was executed, then I suppose the successor would be Mary Queen of Scots, and the restoration of Catholicism begun by Queen Mary I would continue. England could have been wracked by the sort of religious infighting that took place in France and Germany.
 
Having seen the film "Elizabeth", which suggests Mary Scots threatened it, but didn't do it (OK, Hollywood's only slightly above ASB:p), I wondered what the effect might be if Liz had been executed for treason?

Elizabeth didn't commit treason against the Kingdom of Scotland. ;)
 
[FONT=&quot]Had Mary I of [/FONT][FONT=&quot]England[/FONT][FONT=&quot] executed Elizabeth then Mary Queen of Scots, while the next closest heir, would not certainly have succeeded to the throne.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1. Henry VIII had excluded the Scottish line from succession (though Mary I could certainly have changed this in order to safeguard Catholicism and the legitimate Catholic succession) and, more significantly[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2. English people (or those that mattered) would have been very reluctant to support the accession to the throne of the Queen of Scotland as she was married to Dauphin Francis (later Francis II) heir to the throne of [/FONT][FONT=&quot]France[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. Could [/FONT][FONT=&quot]England[/FONT][FONT=&quot] have agreed to a succession that would in due course, subsume [/FONT][FONT=&quot]England[/FONT][FONT=&quot] in a great French led empire including [/FONT][FONT=&quot]France[/FONT][FONT=&quot], [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Scotland[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and [/FONT][FONT=&quot]England[/FONT][FONT=&quot]? (This would have been the empire of the son of Mary and Francis.) Surely NO.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Additionally, could [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Spain[/FONT][FONT=&quot] have accepted this? Methinks no – and the best evidence is that they were not prepared to support Mary Queen of Scot’s claim (even surreptitiously) until the late 1560s (even though Francis’ death in 1560 broke her direct link to the French Royal family) and, indeed repeatedly persuaded the various Popes between 1558 and 1570 not to excommunicate the Protestant Elizabeth because of their fears of French advantage from Mary’s accession.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So what might have happened in 1558:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Option 1. English accept Mary, Queen of Scots as their monarch. French, elated, would probably not have accepted the compromise peace terms of Cateau Cambrésis, April 1559. With [/FONT][FONT=&quot]England[/FONT][FONT=&quot] swapping onto the French side they would probably have held out for better terms. As an aside Henry II was killed at a tournament celebrating the peace (and an associated marriage). [With France stronger and Henry II still alive – France continues to fight for Italian advantages; Henry’s superior political skills reduce French religious / political divisions and civil wars may be avoided or have a less serious impact.] But … Francis, Mary’s husband, dies anyway in 1560. Mary (now Queen of France and [/FONT][FONT=&quot]England[/FONT][FONT=&quot]) is no longer connected to [/FONT][FONT=&quot]France[/FONT][FONT=&quot] – very eligible. IOTL she was sent packing to [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Scotland[/FONT][FONT=&quot]; ITTL the French would make sure she married a satisfactory French / pro-French husband. Who? Another member of the French Royal Family? Quite possibly – but that would make conflict with [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Spain[/FONT][FONT=&quot] inevitable – let alone English reaction. A French noble? Quite possibly. Another candidate? How about the son of her cousin Margaret, Countess of Lennox – Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley. This is what she does. Eventually we have James VI and I (maybe under another name). OTL James was brought up by Protestant Scottish nobles; ITTL he would be brought up by pro-French Catholics – wouldn’t marry a Danish princess …[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Option 2. English don’t accept Mary, Queen of Scots on nationalistic grounds. Who would they go for instead? The choice is between the lines of Henry VIII’s two sisters, Margaret and Mary. Margaret’s line leads to Mary Queen of Scots, etc. Mary’s line leads in less familiar directions:[/FONT]

  1. [FONT=&quot]The line of Frances, Duchess of Suffolk (1517-1559). But this was the Protestant family of Lady Jane Grey against whom Mary I had struggled for the throne in 1553. I cannot see that Mary or her Catholic parliament would have found any of [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Frances[/FONT][FONT=&quot] family acceptable. This would exclude Lady Catherine Grey (1540-1568) and Lady Mary Grey (1545-1578).[/FONT]
  2. [FONT=&quot]The line of Eleanor Clifford, Countess of Cumberland (1519-1547). Her surviving daughter, Lady Margaret Clifford (1540-1596) married in 1554 (i.e. before the POD) Henry Stanley, Earl of Derby. Their surviving male children were Ferdinando (1559-94) and William (1561-1642). Ferdinando had a daughter, Lady Anne Stanley …[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Henry Stanley (4th Earl of Derby) was a conventional Protestant during the OTL reign of [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Elizabeth[/FONT][FONT=&quot] but his father, Edward Stanley, was a close confidant of Mary I. What possibility Catholic conversion of Henry Stanley and Eleanor to secure the succession?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]What about Margaret’s line? The principal line brings one to Mary Queen of Scots. But Margaret re-married Archibald Douglas, Earl of Angus. Their daughter was Margaret, Countess of Lennox (1515-1578). She was brought up at the English court, and was a close friend of Mary I of [/FONT][FONT=&quot]England[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. She was a Roman Catholic who married, in 1544, Matthew Stewart, Earl of Lennox. They had two sons, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley (1545-67) who in OTL married Mary Queen of Scots and Charles Stuart, who married Elizabeth Cavendish who gave birth to their only daughter, Arbella Stuart (1575-1615).[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]England[/FONT][FONT=&quot] could, therefore have been divided into a number of camps:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Margaret Lennox camp – almost legitimist, English nationalist, Roman Catholic, pro [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Spain[/FONT][FONT=&quot].[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Lady Margaret Stanley – follows Henry VIII’s will exclusion of Margaret Tudor line. Religiously could be Catholic or Protestant, methinks, depending on circumstances.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Frances Suffolk line (plus her daughters Lady Catherine and Lady Mary Grey). Protestant.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Mary Queen of Scots. Legitimist, Roman Catholic but likely to destroy [/FONT][FONT=&quot]England[/FONT][FONT=&quot]’s independence.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I suspect that Mary I, as an English monarch as well as a Catholic, have been minded to exclude Mary, Queen of Scots, from the succession – partly following the will of Henry VIII – and to have allowed the succession of her friend, Margaret Lennox (as above). This would doubtless have been supported by her husband, Phillip II of [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Spain[/FONT][FONT=&quot].[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Consequences …[/FONT]

  1. [FONT=&quot]Religion. Catholic – does this lead to religious civil war?[/FONT]
  2. [FONT=&quot]Foreign relations. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Spain[/FONT][FONT=&quot] pleased and supportive. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]France[/FONT][FONT=&quot] furious.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Would it be interesting to consider a timeline on the above lines?[/FONT]
 
[FONT=&quot]Had Mary I of [/FONT][FONT=&quot]England[/FONT][FONT=&quot] executed Elizabeth then Mary Queen of Scots, while the next closest heir, would not certainly have succeeded to the throne.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1. Henry VIII had excluded the Scottish line from succession (though Mary I could certainly have changed this in order to safeguard Catholicism and the legitimate Catholic succession) and, more significantly[/FONT]

it's unlikely that Mary I would of gotten the power to change order of succession, Edward VI couldn't, and in OTL Mary didn't try to cut Elizabeth (who she hated) out of the succession. it told 46 years of Elizabeth working to superce the Will to get James on the Throne, any way i doubt highly that Mary Queen of Scots would be given the Throne the Country was very anti-Catholic after Mary I's rule, and the parliament wasn't Catholic, there were Catholics in it but mostly Closet Protestants, so were this leaves us...

the mother of Jane Gray, Frances Grey, Duchess of Suffolk, was Mary Tudor's daughter was alive in 1558 she could make a move, though she didn't try in 1554 and dies 1559 so unlikely that leaves 18 year old Lady Catherine Grey, and her sister, 13 year old, Lady Mary Grey, two underaged unmarried girls with a history of treason, mmmm

so to the Line of Frances little sister, Eleanor Clifford, Countess of Cumberland, her only child was Margaret Stanley, Countess of Derby, married Henry Stanley, 4th Earl of Derby and pregnant with a child that would in OTL be Ferdinando Stanley, 5th Earl of Derby,

if we wish to brake the Will and go to Margaret Tudor's line, we have a a few choices the line of her Son James V goes to Mary Queen of Scots, how ever his Step-Sister Margaret Douglas is alive and in England and married and she has issue, boys too, she's 43 at the time and in good health, but she's Catholic

my bet is Margaret Stanley
 
You only really have three obvious points to remove Elizabeth Tudor as an active player
1) during Edward VI's reign -
He lives long enough to get Parliament to pass a new Act of Succession removing both his sisters (as per his handwritten device for the succession) - with a packed Parliament Northumberland might have been able to get a change through which would have over ridden Henry VIII's last Act of the Succession.
However whilst a Protestant Parliament might have been willing to remove Mary - it might have proved more difficult to remove Elizabeth. During her brother's reign Elizabeth lived relatively modestly was sober in her dress and style (in other words far closer to the more protestant tone of Edward's court) and was seens as an example of protestant demure modest womanhood (hard to believe but true) although some scandal over Thomas Seymour still clung to her.
It's also worth bearing in mind that Edward VI's reign saw a move towards the protestantism of Northern Europe that was a lot further down the road of reform than Henry VIII's Anglo Catholicism it wasn't particularly popular and there was still a groundswell of support for the Catholic Lady Mary. In OTL Elizabeth absolutely supported Mary in 1553 against Northumberland's attempts to put Jane Grey on the Throne - with the two of them united it would be hard for Northumberland to defeat them given how narrow his support was.
b) During Mary I's reign.
Mary's relationship with her was complex and by nature Mary wasn't a bloodthirsty or particularly vindictive woman - she delayed sending Jane Grey to her death until absolutely forced to it. So it would take a lot to get her to the point of actually executing Elizabeth. The nearest point you can get to it is in 1554 when Sir Thomas Wyatt lead a number of rebellions designed to bring on end to the Spanish marriage and the return to the Catholic fold. Elizabeth still had friends in Mary's council who worked to protect her, whilst some of Mary's loyalist arch Catholic supporters urged that she be tried and executed. There was no hard evidence she'd had knowledge of the revolt - although some historians have argued that she might have been more involved than has hithertoe been suggested. Her life was in OTL spared and she was placed under house arrest for a year and as Mary's reign deteriorated Elizabeth's popularity continued to grow. After 1554 King Philip was keen to protect Elizabeth because at this point his relgion played second fiddle to his dislike of Valois France and he was keen to prevent Mary of Scots (then Dauphine of France) accession.
c) During her own reign - when she developed smallpox and in OTL nearly died in 1563 - this is the most likely point at which you can remove her and cause a real succession crisis with the maximum problems for all the major players.
So Elizabeth I after only 5 years died in 1563 of the smallpox - in her last moments she names Robert Dudley Lord Protector but to the last refuses to name an heir. Her council faces a major crisis.
Under the Act of Succession 1543 (or 4) - the King had the right to pass the throne to persons named in his will
By his Will in default of his own issue the throne passed to the heirs of his sister the Queen Dowager of France, Duchess of Suffolk.
Frances, Dowager Duchess of Suffolk (died 1559) - Mary I kept her at court along with her surviving daughters despite her scandalous remarriage within weeks of her first husbands execution.
LADY CATHERINE GREY - (born -1540) had married secretly in 1560 Edward Seymour Earl of Hertford - causing a huge scandal two sons Edward (b1561) and Thomas (b1563) - imprisoned in the tower and then under house arrest.
LADY MARY GREY (born 1545) - born with some form of deformity.
LADY MARGARET CLIFFORD Countess of Derby (b1540) - only child of Lady Eleanor Brandon and had married in 1554 Henry 4th Earl of Derby
FERDINDANDO STANLEY Lord Strange (bc 1559)
WILLIAM STANLEY (bc1561)
Claimants according to strict Primogeniture:
MARY QUEEN OF SCOTS, Queen Dowager of France (born 1542) - although a Roman Catholic on her return to Scotland in 1561 she had disappointed the Catholic nobles by tolerating the protestants. As of 1563 the Queen of Scots is unmarried and is still relatively popular in Scotland despite her religion.
LADY MARGARET DOUGLAS Countess of Lennox (born 1515) - nominally Roman Catholic at this period and had been popular and high in favour with her cousin Mary I (tudor). She had the advantage over her late half brother James V and his daughter having been born in England she is also in England living in Yorkshire with her husband and is the mother of two sons
HENRY STUART Lord Darnley (born 1545)
CHARLES STUART (born 1555)
Rank Outsiders:
CATHERINE POLE Countess of Huntingdon - born circa 1511 - daughter of Henry Pole, 1st Baron Montagu (d1539) and great grand daughter of George Duke of Clarence (brother of Edward IV) - married to Francis Hastings 2nd Earl of Huntingdon (died c 1560)
The couple had 11 children. Initially a supporter of Jane Grey, Huntingdon, was also nephew by marriage to Mary I's favourite - Cardinal Reginald Pole however the Hastings were nominally loyal to Mary they were also Protestant.
Her eldest son was
HENRY HASTINGS 3rd EARL OF HUNTINGDON (born 1536) - educated with Edward VI - was Protestant despite being in the household of his great uncle Cardinal Pole. Was married to Robert Dudley's sister Catherine Dudley but had no children his brother George (born 1540) was his heir.
HENRY STAFFORD - born (Died 1563) father of nine children by his wife Ursula Pole (daughter of Margaret Countess of Salisbury and aunt to Catherine Pole) - dual claims (his wife's through her grandfather George Duke of Clarence and his own as the eldest son of the Duke of Buckingham descended from youngest son of Edward III)
THOMAS HOWARD 4th DUKE OF NORFOLK (Born 1536) - descended from Edward II in the Howard/Mowbray and from Edward III through his grandmother Elizabeth Stafford daughter of the last Duke of Buckingham. Devout Roman Catholic - and England's only Duke.
 
Top