Robert Carr does not fall from favour

Robert Carr was a favourite of James VI and I, he was created Earl of Somerset by the King and was lavished with a great many gifts and favours, however, he soon fell from favour and was replaced by George Villiers, who became Duke of Buckingham and a crucial advisor to both James and his son Charles. Robert Carr later sealed his complete doom with his involvement in the Overbury murder plot.

My query is this, what happens if Carr is not involved in Overbury's murder and therefore, is not imprisoned etc. He'd still have some small influence over James, but not a lot. Would he be able to compete with Buckingham for James's affections, or would he move onto the heir apparent, and try and ingratiate himself in with Charles? If he does so, how does this change Charles's early reign?
 
He's defiantly going to focus on James I if I read about him correctly, but I think it might be smarter to focus on the heir. Well, by the time Charles starts, he would have lost much influence. By then he'd be some Earl who dad hung around a lot, which I don't think gives you much more than someone like Robert of Glouster was to Henry I.
 
He's defiantly going to focus on James I if I read about him correctly, but I think it might be smarter to focus on the heir. Well, by the time Charles starts, he would have lost much influence. By then he'd be some Earl who dad hung around a lot, which I don't think gives you much more than someone like Robert of Glouster was to Henry I.

Alright this is true, who is more likely to drift to a more charismatic Charles I?
 
Charles will probably attract whoever he did in real life, unless Carr brushes up on his butt kissing power and administrative efficiency when James dies, and we know James will die.
 
Charles will probably attract whoever he did in real life, unless Carr brushes up on his butt kissing power and administrative efficiency when James dies, and we know James will die.

Alright this is true. WOuld be interesting to see Carr v Buckingham
 
I expect that the English Kingdom might end up more centralized. Perhaps the Scots might have some resentment. But Carr's influence will only be temporary.
 
Carr had hoped to build a kind of "rainy day fund" in contrast to monarchs who tend to treat their treasuries as bladders (the more inside, the greater the pressure to let it all out...). While not always, this usually means centralization (an easier way to save funds is just cut some expense). But there is a Morton's fork here. Including Scotland in the hypothetical administrative reforms will make them feel that James VI is trampling on their autonomy. So they probably won't which means the lesser evil of making them feel neglected as the King spends more time in London (it's easier to give approval this way than a chain of letters going back and fourth, so for the convenience of the king, he's staying where most of the decisions need to be made)
 
Hmm true and under Charles even could always have his brother represent him in Scotland to ensure the noble aren't shafting the crow
 
Top