WI: Edward VI dies earlier

[Elfwine]

As we saw OTL, Mary was willing to go to any lengths to bring about things she considered important - her succession, the return of England to the Catholic fold, the Spanish marriage. In a timeline where she inherits considerably earlier she is younger, presumed (by her contemporaries) far more nubile and fertile, and the memory of both her parents very fresh in all minds. As with both Mary and Elizabeth, the opinions on the Council are divided enough to allow Mary to force through her chosen consort against any other candidates. No English nobleman (or at least, no amount significant enough to amount to an insurmountable faction) would want one of his peers suddenly elevated to the Kingship. The English people and council don't have to fall in line, because Mary could care less when it comes to such matters.

Which (underlined bit) is a recipe for trouble. Rulers unconcerned with what their subjects think are rulers destined for trouble with their subjects. Not necessarily said subjects overthrowing them, but still.

When I say Mary "loved" Charles, I don't mean in a romantic, Taylor Swift way. Throughout the whole of her adult life she and her mother looked to him, and him alone, for emotional and political support. His exertions on their behalf and the mere threat of his towering figure was enough to make even Henry Tudor think twice before making a move. Catherine met Charles once, maybe twice, but was completely devoted to him and his cause. Mary likewise. She immediately and completely looked to him for paternal counsel, support and - upon her succession - a husband. With the next legitimate heiress about to marry the Dauphin, you can bet your bottom dollar bringing England into the Habsburg orbit decisively is of the utmost importance.

For the Habsburgs. For England, being in neither orbit is preferable by most of the people whose opinions matter

 

[DrakeRlugia]

Why would Mary not care about what the council thinks? You seems to forget that Parliament does control the purse strings to an extent; Tudor monarchs were more powerful than their Stuart counterparts, but they were still reliant upon Parliament for extraordinary taxation. Mary isn't going to alienate possible bases of support simply because of what her mother wanted. She was no great states woman, but she wasn't stupid.

The point of the Emperor is moot anyways, as already described, the Emperor isn't going to propose himself. He'll offer his son in this case. He's getting older and sicker, there's no way he's going to go into a second marriage.

 

[Velasco]

Why would Mary not care about what the council thinks? You seems to forget that Parliament does control the purse strings to an extent; Tudor monarchs were more powerful than their Stuart counterparts, but they were still reliant upon Parliament for extraordinary taxation. Mary isn't going to alienate possible bases of support simply because of what her mother wanted. She was no great states woman, but she wasn't stupid.

The point of the Emperor is moot anyways, as already described, the Emperor isn't going to propose himself. He'll offer his son in this case. He's getting older and sicker, there's no way he's going to go into a second marriage.

The Emperor's just had a son, so he's still capable of cohabiting with a woman. He's not retired and still involved in the affairs of the world. Mary was able to push through a Habsburg marriage OTL, far older and against greater (Protestant) odds. Here, she inherits a more Catholic England and a throne without potent rivals.

Again, I don't think Mary is going to care about Parliament, the Council, her nobles, her bishops. A Habsburg marriage and return to the Roman fold will happen, at any cost. If she was able to force the nobility to part with monastic land, I doubt she'll let go of her divine unction to marry and keep England Catholic just because some of her councillors don't want a Spaniard for King.

I'd agree Philip is a more 'likely' husband, but I think you're all ruling the Emperor out prematurely and without good reason.

 

[DrakeRlugia]

The Emperor's just had a son, so he's still capable of cohabiting with a woman. He's not retired and still involved in the affairs of the world. Mary was able to push through a Habsburg marriage OTL, far older and against greater (Protestant) odds. Here, she inherits a more Catholic England and a throne without potent rivals.

Again, I don't think Mary is going to care about Parliament, the Council, her nobles, her bishops. A Habsburg marriage and return to the Roman fold will happen, at any cost. If she was able to force the nobility to part with monastic land, I doubt she'll let go of her divine unction to marry and keep England Catholic just because some of her Councillors don't want a Spaniard for King.

I'd agree Philip is a more 'likely' husband, but I think you're all ruling the Emperor out prematurely and without good reason.

I don't think I am. The Emperor is already suffering from gout, and has already began to tire of ruling his globe spanning empire. He lost his first wife very young, with only a sole son to show for it. If the Emperor was going to remarry, he certainly would have done it before Mary Tudor certainly came on the scene as a reigning Queen. He's old beyond his years and really wants to retire. His catastrophic defeat at Metz in merely a few years show this. He was most certainly suffering from gout by 1549 and in no fit state to consider a second marriage. Mary certainly isn't going to live in Spain, which is where the Emperor intended to retire. Why marry Mary when he can offer his much younger and much more vibant son to carry out his goals for him?

This fixation with the Emperor makes sense on paper, but in reality, he is an awful match in this time period. I don't know what other reasons you would need besides his suffering health and the fact he was pretty much tired with the worldly pleasures earth had to offer. Fertile or not, Charles just isn't a good choice of a husband for Mary. This isn't Crusaders Kings; just because he is capable of fathering a son means he's the perfect match.

I also never said that he had retired, merely than he was already beginning to think about it and it weighed heavily on his mind. It's evident in the later campaigns of the Italian Wars he fought, most especially the Siege of Metz, where the Imperial Forces were forced to retreat because Charles suffered an attack of gout. His years of rule and lifestyle are, by 1549, beginning to weight on him heavily.

Yes, Mary was able to marry Philip. But not without controversy, given Wyatt's Revolt broke out over that very same marriage. Even some of her most staunchest supporters were against her. Not to mention even the Spanish played a role in delaying it continuously, hoping Mary would make a ruling on Elizabeth, such as having her executed for treason. She doesn't inherit a more Catholic England, but merely one with much less religious divisions. Without Edward's religious reforms, you merely have a divide between the Catholics and Henry's Anglicans. Not that the radicals that dominated Edward's reign have ceased to exist. They exist, just without the years of Edward's reign behind them.

Mary will be popular at first and have a base of support (As IOTL) that will allow her to reign. She'll marry, of course, because that was something that was important to her. It just remains to see what effects that will have, because any Spanish match is still going to be popular. She needs no parliamentary permission and can do as she wishes, but as Elfwine stated, a ruler who completely ignores public opinion is putting themselves in a dangerous position. An earlier reign gives Mary a chance to actually leave a (positive) imprint, which is far more interesting than some hypothetical marriage to Charles V.

Also, it's news to me that Mary made anyone part with monastatic land, considering that was one thing she ultimately had to recognize. The Queen herself returned some properties, but there was no monastic restoration on any large scale while she was Queen. She can not care all she likes, but it doesn't seem a safe idea in early modern England, considering Parliament is control of extraordinary taxation which she may be needing if she views French occupation of Scotland serious, or ignore her council even though they are meant to give her advice, or even the nobles, even though pissing off the ruling classes is the sure fireway to quickly lose any flush of support she'll gain upon ascending the throne.

So you can see why I (and others) have written off the Emperor. His advantages are easily transferred to his son, while he has a series of negatives that only he possesses. It's a pretty simple choice, IMO. Sure, the marriage would be "neat" in the Chinese sense and make the map pretty, but Charles is never going to propose. He'll simply offer Philip instead.