WI Henry FitzRoy lives and becomes King of Ireland?

Thande

Donor
Henry FitzRoy was the illegitimate son of Henry VIII by his mistress Elizabeth Blount. In OTL, when Henry VIII planned to upgrade Ireland to a Kingdom and bring it under closer control, there was a plan to put Henry FitzRoy in place as King Eanrig I. However, he died in 1536 of tuberculosis before this could happen, and so Ireland instead went into personal union with England, with Henry VIII king of both kingdoms.

So what if he had lived and Ireland had stayed entirely separate from England, though still under a Tudor monarch?

Would Eanrig have claimed the throne of England on the death of his father?
 
Wow, didn't know that atall - this could be really interesting.

Any chance of you turning this into a TL Thande?
 
Henry FitzRoy was the illegitimate son of Henry VIII by his mistress Elizabeth Blount. In OTL, when Henry VIII planned to upgrade Ireland to a Kingdom and bring it under closer control, there was a plan to put Henry FitzRoy in place as King Eanrig I. However, he died in 1536 of tuberculosis before this could happen, and so Ireland instead went into personal union with England, with Henry VIII king of both kingdoms.

So what if he had lived and Ireland had stayed entirely separate from England, though still under a Tudor monarch?

Would Eanrig have claimed the throne of England on the death of his father?

No, Edward has the strongest and legitimate claim.
Now... When Edward dies, sure.
 

Thande

Donor
Wow, didn't know that atall - this could be really interesting.

Any chance of you turning this into a TL Thande?

I was wondering if Nek might be interested in incorporating it into his.

I think I would like to do an Ireland-focused TL at some point in the future, with a POD sometime in either the 16th or 17th century.
 
I haven't read the Ireland thing. I have read that Henry VIII was seeking a Papal dispensation to allow Henry FitzRoy and his legit daughter Mary to get married. I don't think that this is true, since their brother and sister.

If Henry has a relatively long life (say dies at 45) then he will throw all kinds of monkey wrenches into Tudor succession. If he marries and has children (and by children I mean sons) then he may be able to get either himself, or, more likely his son, into the line of succession. Henry VIII was obsessed with continuing his dynasty, and if Henry FitzRoy's line was the best way to do that, then he would get him legitamized by Parliament.

On the other hand, Henry VIII knows that his own dynasty is descended from a bastard with a rather tenuos claim on the throne of England. Bastard lines like his and another one (Beuforts?) that were legitimized vastly complicated the War of the Roses. If you look at when Henry FitzRoy died, shortly after the birth of Edward, and add in very recent English royal history, you get the feeling that Henry FitzRoy was the victim of his father's desire to make sure that his legitmite line ruled unopposed by legimitized bastards with good claims.

So I think that the best way for Henry FitzRoy to make Tudor succession even more interesting than OTL is to push back Edward's birth. Let Henry F get a little older, get married, and have a son, all before H VIII can father his own legitimite son.

With Henry FitzRoy as the father of Henry VIII's only grandson, things get dicey. Does Henry VIII include a bastard or a bastard's son in the line succession? Does he have a choice?
 
I was wondering if Nek might be interested in incorporating it into his.

I think I would like to do an Ireland-focused TL at some point in the future, with a POD sometime in either the 16th or 17th century.

It's certainly an interesting idea. Obviously, the Consequential Avalanche has demolished the affair as it was IOTL, but getting Henry to cheat on his wife is like encouraging a libidinous dog to hump something, with similar results.

Of course, *FitzRoy wouldn't be the King of all the Tudor domains in TFC, since Prince Edward of Wales and Asturias is there to throw a spanner in the works, but I imagine it could still work.
 
Henry FitzRoy was the illegitimate son of Henry VIII by his mistress Elizabeth Blount. In OTL, when Henry VIII planned to upgrade Ireland to a Kingdom and bring it under closer control, there was a plan to put Henry FitzRoy in place as King Eanrig I. However, he died in 1536 of tuberculosis before this could happen, and so Ireland instead went into personal union with England, with Henry VIII king of both kingdoms.

So what if he had lived and Ireland had stayed entirely separate from England, though still under a Tudor monarch?

I don't understand; how does creating the Kingdom of Ireland under a seperate person bring Ireland and England closer together?
 
I don't understand; how does creating the Kingdom of Ireland under a seperate person bring Ireland and England closer together?

It means that the Irish get further from England, and therefore are less angry with England in general, so they might be more happy to remain under Tudor rule.
 

Thande

Donor
It means that the Irish get further from England, and therefore are less angry with England in general, so they might be more happy to remain under Tudor rule.

Also because personal rule is usually better than rule by an absentee king (cf. America, Hanover), and by keeping it in the family, but to someone whose wider claims would be unrecognised because of his bastard status, Henry could ensure this Ireland would still be a dependency. Whereas putting it under a random duke could lead to Yorkists (or later Catholic nobles) breaking away and opening it up to the Spanish or something.
 
Another example we could look at is Canada becoming a Kingdom in DoD to strengthen their position against America.
 
He did marry, a Howard IIRC, and tho they had to have separate households its was a full marriage and Henry VIII even conceded this to his widow, just tried to stop her getting any of the inheritance (of course)

So, if Eanrig (is this Irish for Henry ?) goes to Ireland, he'd go with a wife from a pretty fruitful family and the likelihood of kids

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 

Thande

Donor
Another example we could look at is Canada becoming a Kingdom in DoD to strengthen their position against America.
Just so.
So, if Eanrig (is this Irish for Henry ?)
Yep - I looked up all the Irish equivalent names for English monarchs while researching LTTW.

Grey Wolf said:
goes to Ireland, he'd go with a wife from a pretty fruitful family and the likelihood of kids

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Sounds promising.
 
Good day, all

I usually lurk around here but this one caught my attention, largely because I was looking at a Tudor based timeline earlier this year and did a lot of work on Irish history a few years back.

A resident king in Ireland wouldn't be as easy as just putting him there and declaring him King.There's no real animosity towards the English at this point. everybody, anglo-Irish and Gaelic alike were happy to swear fealty to the crown as long as the king stayed in England or at most came to Ireland for a short period.

1) There's virtually no royal demesne left in Ireland to support a resident royal. The post of Lieutenant of Ireland was a revolving door for anybody from England from about 1400 on because few if any Lieutenants had the personal resources to make a go of it and the crown was always hugely in arrears in sending the promised salaries to support the troops. It only really worked when a local (read Kildare or maybe Ormond) was in the office because they could draw on their own connections to back the office.

No demesene, no troops, no authority, especially in the hinterlands, which would be anything beyond 30 miles from Dublin. Having said that...you could give him all the land from the dissolution of the monastaries and that might do the trick, if he can actually make good on the grant. Which leads to...

2) The theoretically united Lordship of Ireland had fragmented into a patchwork of lordships, none of which really wanted a strong leader in Dublin. To make his kingship work, young king Eanrig would be on campaign for the next 20 years or so. The only thing he has going for him is that the Kildare earldom is in abeyance due to an attainder and that the Ormond lordship is basically quite supportive of the crown. But even there, they wouldn't welcome a more active overlord.

That's enough for now but hopefully I've given some food for thought.
 
Also because personal rule is usually better than rule by an absentee king (cf. America, Hanover), and by keeping it in the family, but to someone whose wider claims would be unrecognised because of his bastard status, Henry could ensure this Ireland would still be a dependency. Whereas putting it under a random duke could lead to Yorkists (or later Catholic nobles) breaking away and opening it up to the Spanish or something.

I think you just reasoned out why Henry VIII would never create a separate kingdom in Ireland and hand it to his bastard son.

The Yorks and Lancasters weren't rival families, they were family rivals. They came from the same family and started fighting over whose claim to the throne was better. I don't think that Henry is going to give his bastard son his own personal power base right next to England. Fitzroy as an English noble is fine, he is in the court, under supervision, he can do various tasks, have various positions, but he will always be under control. Also, in England he will always be a bastard. The King's Bastard certainly, but a bastard nonetheless, unable to inherit, and unable to put forward a claim. Put him in his own Kingdom, and you've given him his own territory for him to fill with people who are loyal to him.

If Edward turns out to be unpopular, or Henry VIII were to become unpopular, where would people opposed to them go? Why to Ireland of course, where another Tudor rules anyway. A Tudor who may see reason and decide that if he is good enough to rule Ireland, he is good enough to rule England. And by putting him in Ireland, Henry would've given him the resources to launch such a campaign.

Henry VIII was a very political shrewd, intelligent man, he was not a trusting man. He would not trust that his son's fraternal loyalty would last minute longer than it was compelled. That is why Henry FitzRoy died in the first place.
 
Henry VIII was a very political shrewd, intelligent man, he was not a trusting man. He would not trust that his son's fraternal loyalty would last minute longer than it was compelled.

However this does lead us back to the point of what if Henry had a son etc family before Edward is born. . .
 
Top