What if Mary Queen of Scots had never given birth to James VI?

What if Mary Queen of Scots had died childless, either by dying a lot earlier or by proving to be barren? For example, if she'd died on her voyage back to Scotland in 1561 - let's say a summer storm blows up and sinks her ship a la the White Ship Disaster - what would have happened to Scotland? And further down the line, what would that have meant for who succeeded Elizabeth I of England?
 
Iirc the Hamiltons were next in the Scottish succession, and Arbella Stewart next in the English.
I do feel some sort of union is coming though in the next century or so, it's too useful both sides of the border.
 
Maybe(if say Mary ITTL too is chased over the border into England & winds up in Eliz-
abeth’s clutches)she does not die on the block @ Fotheringhay. Instead, Elizabeth & her manage to come to an agreement. Elizabeth agrees to not only back Mary’s efforts to regain her throne- Elizabeth names her as her heir(for with James butterflied away there is nobody else high-born in Scotland with any relation to the Tudors- & Elizabeth would have turned to Scotland here for the same reasons she did IOTL). In return, Mary would agree to break the old alliance with France, ally now with England, & promise NOT to reintroduce Catholicism into Scotland.
 
Last edited:
Iirc the Hamiltons were next in the Scottish succession, and Arbella Stewart next in the English.
I do feel some sort of union is coming though in the next century or so, it's too useful both sides of the border.

This is true, I just wonder how you would go about it.

Surely Elizabeth's reign would be more stable, though, without Mary alive to act as a not always fully complicit flashpoint for Catholic plots??
 
In 1561, Mary's heir presumptive in Scotland was James Hamilton, Earl of Arran, followed by his son. Next was Matthew Stuart, Earl of Lennox, who was living in England and was married to Margaret Douglas, the daughter of Margaret Tudor from her second marriage.
The death of Mary puts Margaret first in line for the English throne. After her comes her son Henry, Lord Darnley. (He was, of course, IOTL, the second husband of Mary, Queen of Scots, and thus the father of James VI and I.)
It is quite conceivable that Henry or his heir ends up uniting the two kingdoms under a single monarch.
 
Iirc the Hamiltons were next in the Scottish succession, and Arbella Stewart next in the English.
I do feel some sort of union is coming though in the next century or so, it's too useful both sides of the border.

Re: Arbella Stewart- with a POD in the early 1560s there's no guarantee she'd exist (her parents only married in the 1570s). With no marriage to Mary her uncle Darnley won't get himself killed in the same circumstances, and could produce children from a difference marriage.

The Lennox Stewarts also disputed the Hamilton's status as next-in-line to the Scottish throne (there was something iffy about the 1st Earl of Arran's marriage), so they could get drawn into disputing the throne in Scotland, and that would presumably affect their prospects in England.

Things in Scotland could also get complicated if the Hamilton heir goes crazy, as he did IOTL.

Re: the succession in England. With Mary off the table you're down to, what?

  • The Greys. Catherine has already disgraced herself with her secret marriage at this point (I think). Though she is the most respectably Protestant of the claimants. Mary is deformed.
  • Margaret Douglas and her kids. Though Darnley is a pretty loathsome character who might do something stupid. Charles may have had delicate health. They may also be suspect religiously.
  • Margaret Clifford (daughter of Eleanor Brandon), and her Stanley kids. They had their own brushes with disgrace and Catholic plots IOTL.
Another question- without Mary's imprisonment, do we still get something akin to the Northern Rising, and does Norfolk still get himself executed?

In 1561, Mary's heir presumptive in Scotland was James Hamilton, Earl of Arran, followed by his son. Next was Matthew Stuart, Earl of Lennox, who was living in England and was married to Margaret Douglas, the daughter of Margaret Tudor from her second marriage.
The death of Mary puts Margaret first in line for the English throne. After her comes her son Henry, Lord Darnley. (He was, of course, IOTL, the second husband of Mary, Queen of Scots, and thus the father of James VI and I.)
It is quite conceivable that Henry or his heir ends up uniting the two kingdoms under a single monarch.

Aren't there potentially hurdles to them succeeding based around Henry VIII's will and Darnley's difficult character?
 
Re: Arbella Stewart- with a POD in the early 1560s there's no guarantee she'd exist (her parents only married in the 1570s). With no marriage to Mary her uncle Darnley won't get himself killed in the same circumstances, and could produce children from a difference marriage.

The Lennox Stewarts also disputed the Hamilton's status as next-in-line to the Scottish throne (there was something iffy about the 1st Earl of Arran's marriage), so they could get drawn into disputing the throne in Scotland, and that would presumably affect their prospects in England.

Things in Scotland could also get complicated if the Hamilton heir goes crazy, as he did IOTL.

Re: the succession in England. With Mary off the table you're down to, what?

  • The Greys. Catherine has already disgraced herself with her secret marriage at this point (I think). Though she is the most respectably Protestant of the claimants. Mary is deformed.
  • Margaret Douglas and her kids. Though Darnley is a pretty loathsome character who might do something stupid. Charles may have had delicate health. They may also be suspect religiously.
  • Margaret Clifford (daughter of Eleanor Brandon), and her Stanley kids. They had their own brushes with disgrace and Catholic plots IOTL.
Another question- without Mary's imprisonment, do we still get something akin to the Northern Rising, and does Norfolk still get himself executed?



Aren't there potentially hurdles to them succeeding based around Henry VIII's will and Darnley's difficult character?

Darnley and one of the Grey girls can marry.
 
Re: Arbella Stewart- with a POD in the early 1560s there's no guarantee she'd exist (her parents only married in the 1570s). With no marriage to Mary her uncle Darnley won't get himself killed in the same circumstances, and could produce children from a difference marriage.

The Lennox Stewarts also disputed the Hamilton's status as next-in-line to the Scottish throne (there was something iffy about the 1st Earl of Arran's marriage), so they could get drawn into disputing the throne in Scotland, and that would presumably affect their prospects in England.

Things in Scotland could also get complicated if the Hamilton heir goes crazy, as he did IOTL.

Re: the succession in England. With Mary off the table you're down to, what?

  • The Greys. Catherine has already disgraced herself with her secret marriage at this point (I think). Though she is the most respectably Protestant of the claimants. Mary is deformed.
  • Margaret Douglas and her kids. Though Darnley is a pretty loathsome character who might do something stupid. Charles may have had delicate health. They may also be suspect religiously.
  • Margaret Clifford (daughter of Eleanor Brandon), and her Stanley kids. They had their own brushes with disgrace and Catholic plots IOTL.
Another question- without Mary's imprisonment, do we still get something akin to the Northern Rising, and does Norfolk still get himself executed?



Aren't there potentially hurdles to them succeeding based around Henry VIII's will and Darnley's difficult character?

The 1st Earl of Arran's first marriage was dissolved due to the fact that it emerged his wife's first husband had still been alive at the time of their marriage. If that wasn't the case then his second marriage would have been regarded as invalid and his issue illegitimate.
In that case the claim passed to Mary Stewart's (dau of James II) younger children's descendants including her great grandson Matthew 4th Earl of Lennox.

With Mary out of the way - Arran would in my view have been King - he was widely considered the strongest claimant and Lennox was a rebel living in England. Arran was probably a good choice for the Scots - he himself wavered between Protestant and Catholic (but at this period was firmly allied with the Lords of the Congregation) and his daughters were married to some of the most prominent Catholic families including the Huntley's.
His heir was also at this point on the reform side - he would however be declared insane within a short period and was largely held under close watch for the rest of his very long life - he was eventually succeeded by his brother John's son.
There was a strong streak of mental illness in the family Arran's wife and her sister were considered to have "issues" as was Arran's younger son and one of his daughter's.

So assuming Arran becomes James VI in 1561 ish and is on his death succeeded by mad King James VII it is likely the country faces a long long regency under Prince John Duke of Albany one assumes.
Interestingly at this point all of Arran's sons are unmarried.

As to England:

By statute at this point the succession:

1) Lady Katherine Grey - her illicit marriage is suggested to have taken place in December 1560 - by her husband she bore two son's but the second might be butterflied by Mary's death changing circumstances
2) Lady Mary Grey - her own low marriage didn't take place till 1565.
3) Lady Margaret Clifford Countess of Derby (daughter of Eleanor Brandon)
4) Ferdinando Stanley Lord Strange b1559
5) William Stanley b 1561

Notes: Katherine's illicit marriage was declared invalid however her claim to the throne was widely recognised at court at this point and indeed at the point her marriage was discovered and her obvious pregnancy a pamphlet suggesting she had the strongest claim after the Queen was published.

By Primogeniture:

1) Margaret Douglas Countess of Lennox
2) Henry Stewart Lord Darnley
3) Charles Stewart b1555

Then the Grey, Clifford and Stanley claimants above.

The problem for Elizabeth is that she personally disliked all of them - she had little time for the Grey girls and had a difficult relationship with Margaret Douglas. I suspect her councillors will favour the Greys in the short term and if they behave as in OTL then opt for Margaret Clifford - unless Darnley disgraces himself and the Queen can effectively adopt the young Charles and have him raised in effect as her adopted son and as an Anglican. Then assuming he lives longer than in otl its Charles I in 1603
 
Top