The key problem for the two rival claims from Margaret Tudor was over the 1351 Act that required an English titleholder to be born in England. Whether the monarchy itself was affected is unclear,
Is the Act online anywhere?
The key problem for the two rival claims from Margaret Tudor was over the 1351 Act that required an English titleholder to be born in England. Whether the monarchy itself was affected is unclear,
The law says that the children of an English monarch born outside England could succeed the throne, and foreign-born children born of two English subjects are able to inherit their parents' properties. While Margaret Douglas and Lord Darnley were both natural-born English subjects and thus exempt from the law, none of Mary Queen of Scots' parents were English or born in England(they were both Edward III's descendants, though, as James V was a descendant of both John Beaufort, first Earl of Somerset and Edward IV of England, while one of Marie de Guise's ancestors was a French lord who married the eldest daughter of Edward III). Thus during 1560s, many pamphlets written by lawyers and jurists emerged about the application of this law to the English throne.Is the Act online anywhere?
Didn't Max II refuse permission for that match OTL? Not to mention that given how poorly-received Felipe II was a few years earlier, would a Habsburg match be accepted by the English?
A mix of things. Mary wanted to choose by herself, Charles' territory(Styria, Littoral, Carinthia and Carniola) lacked direct access to Scotland, and Mary at the time wanted to use marriage as a weapon for diplomatic means.I had always read that Mary blocked the Charles of Austria match because it was negotiated behind her back by her uncle? Idk it was probably a mix of things
Pretty unlikely to happen (and with open conflict between France and Spain over English succession, princess Elisabeth would NOT be married to Philip II (and likely neither to don Carlos).As I saw the ideas above, I have a mini-TL(I wonder whether it's plausible)
In 1558, Elizabeth and Frances Brandon, the Protestant candidates for the throne, died mysteriously amidst the Anglo-French negotiations over Calais, with people suspecting the French, Mary I or Margaret Douglas as being involved. Margaret Douglas died shortly after. On the negotiation table, France required England to stop quartering French arms and recognize Francis and Mary, King-Dauphin and Queen-Dauphine, as heirs to the throne. Amidst the chaos, Mary died as OTL, without specifying who was the heir.
As Mary I died, Marie de Guise, queen-regent of Scotland, declared Mary Queen of Scots and her husband, Francois the Dauphin, Queen and King of England and Ireland. Home Counties Protestants and returnees from Geneva declared support for Lady Katherine Grey, sister of Jane Grey, whom they considered a religious martyr. Philip II of Spain, Emperor Ferdinand I, Catholics and moderate Protestants declared support for Henry Stewart, Lord Darnley. Margaret Clifford was proclaimed Queen by her father-in-law, the Earl of Derby and Lord of Mann.
As a civil war was imminent, Mary offered a proposal in which the Lennoxes' Scottish holdings would be restored in exchange for recognizing her claim, Katherine Grey would be made Duchess of Suffolk, and Protestants would be tolerated. But the Habsburgs would not allow a Franco-British Monarchy, and Geneva returnees would not allow a Catholic woman to be their ruler. The war continued as Mary tried to get Welsh and Irish support, Katherine Grey made a deal with Geneva returnees to make England a Protestant state, and Habsburgs and Guises fought on the English soil.
As the French became weary of war, Constable Anne de Montgomecy convinced the King to recall the army from England and started negotiating with Habsburgs. Francois and Mary refused to cede her claim to Lord Darnley because unlike in OTL, this time Mary was really the heir general. The two sides agreed, though, to marry off Elisabeth de Valois to Philip II. Meanwhile, a match between Lady Katherine Grey and Lord Darnley was made as an attempt to end the war, to the dismay of the Protestant faction. Seeing Elisabeth de Valois, her best friend forever gone, and Mary's English and Irish birthright beyond her hands, Mary fainted.
Amidst the situation, Marie de Guise had the moderate Protestants successfully co-opted while the radical Protestants continued to try to overthrow the regency, but without English money unlike in OTL.
I have read somewhere that Constable Anne de Montmorency wanted the king to disengage from England, and a peace deal would be likely be brokered.Pretty unlikely to happen (and with open conflict between France and Spain over English succession, princess Elisabeth would NOT be married to Philip II (and likely neither to don Carlos).
Henry II would NOT let go England so easily and Philip was much sceptical about Margaret Douglas‘ claim on the English crownI have read somewhere that Constable Anne de Montgomecy wanted the king to disengage from England, and a peace deal would be likely be brokered.
As I saw the ideas above, I have a mini-TL(I wonder whether it's plausible)
In 1558, Elizabeth and Frances Brandon, the Protestant candidates for the throne, died mysteriously amidst the Anglo-French negotiations over Calais, with people suspecting the French, Mary I or Margaret Douglas as being involved. Margaret Douglas died shortly after. On the negotiation table, France required England to stop quartering French arms and recognize Francis and Mary, King-Dauphin and Queen-Dauphine, as heirs to the throne. Amidst the chaos, Mary died as OTL, without specifying who was the heir.
As Mary I died, Marie de Guise, queen-regent of Scotland, declared Mary Queen of Scots and her husband, Francois the Dauphin, Queen and King of England and Ireland. Home Counties Protestants and returnees from Geneva declared support for Lady Katherine Grey, sister of Jane Grey, whom they considered a religious martyr. Philip II of Spain, Emperor Ferdinand I, Catholics and moderate Protestants declared support for Henry Stewart, Lord Darnley. Margaret Clifford was proclaimed Queen by her father-in-law, the Earl of Derby and Lord of Mann.
As a civil war was imminent, Mary offered a proposal in which the Lennoxes' Scottish holdings would be restored in exchange for recognizing her claim, Katherine Grey would be made Duchess of Suffolk, and Protestants would be tolerated. But the Habsburgs would not allow a Franco-British Monarchy, and Geneva returnees would not allow a Catholic woman to be their ruler. The war continued as Mary tried to get Welsh and Irish support, Katherine Grey made a deal with Geneva returnees to make England a Protestant state, and Habsburgs and Guises fought on the English soil.
And what do you think would be the outcome of such a war of the English succession? @isabellaHenry II would NOT let go England so easily and Philip was much sceptical about Margaret Douglas‘ claim on the English crown
Why would Francis agree to this? It makes more sense that their second son get Scotland and their eldest gets France.Scotland go to their offspring and France to Charles, brother of Francois
Why would Francis agree to this? It makes more sense that their second son get Scotland and their eldest gets France.
It might, but idk the ins and outs of that one so I can't say.The legality also seems iffy.
It is several centuries down the line from this point, but IIRC IOTL there was a whole debate over whether the Spanish Bourbon's renunciation of their claim to the French throne was a legitimate action. Francois effectively renouncing the throne on behalf of his unborn future children might raise the same issue?
Because Francis has a clear heir of his own (plus a daughter would be unable to inherit France)? Charles inheriting France is not a given if Francis and. Mary had at least two surviving children and one of them is a boy. Also if they can not keep all the crowns made more sense renouncing to France (who can go to Francis’ next brother) instead of England and Scotland (who would go to the Lennnox)It might, but idk the ins and outs of that one so I can't say.
What I really don't see happening is Francis effectively disinheriting his children in favor of his brother or anyone so much as suggesting so. Why would anyone give up France to have England and Scotland?
It might, but idk the ins and outs of that one so I can't say.
What I really don't see happening is Francis effectively disinheriting his children in favor of his brother or anyone so much as suggesting so. Why would anyone give up France to have England and Scotland?
Because Francis has a clear heir of his own (plus a daughter would be unable to inherit France)? Charles inheriting France is not a given if Francis and. Mary had at least two children (one of them a boy)
Idk if I misread "Scotland go to their offspring and France to Charles, brother of Francois" but it sounds like Francis' offspring won't be allowed to get France, whether or not they have a son(s).Because Francis has a clear heir of his own (plus a daughter would be unable to inherit France)? Charles inheriting France is not a given if Francis and. Mary had at least two children (one of them a boy)
Idk if I misread "Scotland go to their offspring and France to Charles, brother of Francois" but it sounds like Francis' offspring won't be allowed to get France, whether or not they have a son(s).
Idk if I misread "Scotland go to their offspring and France to Charles, brother of Francois" but it sounds like Francis' offspring won't be allowed to get France, whether or not they have a son(s).
AFAIK "offspring" does not have a grammatically correct plural and thus is referring to all the children that Francis and Mary have.The treaty is worded badly but in that point is clearly talking about offspring aka only one child not more so is giving the split in the case in which Mary and Francis had only one surviving child as the crowns MUST be separated, if you see the treaty do say nothing about England (who must be named together with Scotland)
True. I haven't clarified about this. The part has been revised.The treaty is worded badly but in that point is clearly talking about offspring aka only one child not more so is giving the split in the case in which Mary and Francis had only one surviving child as the crowns MUST be separated, if you see the treaty do say nothing about England (who must be named together with Scotland). That is Henry II’s work to guarantee who his line will rule on both England/Scotland and France
In this TL Francois and Mary had a daughter, so the second situation applied. Guises hated Earl of Arran, so bastardizing Earl of Arran would be a must if Guises had to approve this treaty.The final Franco-Spanish treaty was a compromise on both sides: Mary would succeed the English throne, but the throne would be separated after Mary and Francois’ death:
If there were two male offspring issued from Francois and Mary, then the eldest one would succeed the British domains;
If there was a single offspring, then the offspring would succeed the British domains, while Charles, Francois' brother, would succeed France;
Lord Darnley would be heir to all British domains if Mary died without heirs.
Elisabeth de Valois would be married to Don Carlos, Prince of Asturias and Prince of Girona. France would renounce its claims over all Italian territories and recognize Spanish rule in Upper Navarre, while Spain would recognize Antoine de Bourbon and Jeanne d'Albret as King and Queen of Lower Navarre. Calais would be transferred to England in exchange for a promise that the future monarchs of England, after the re-separation of crowns, would not quarter French arms. Mary felt saddened by her best friend, Elisabeth de Valois, being married abroad, but she felt glad that her birthright was now enshrined by the international treaty. The Treaty was soon passed by the Estates-General, thus formally ending the War of the English Succession.