WI Henry VIII died in October, 1513

[LacheyS]

This is after the defeat and death of King James IV of Scotland and the capture of Tournai. Henry VIII has either returned to England for the winter or could be in northern France.

Does his sister, Margaret, the Queen Widow of Scotland, become Queen of England? Or would the death of all males Tudors only 30 years after Bosworth weigh against her? And if not her, who?

What would become of Katherine of Aragon? Wolsey? Will England still be involved in the War of the League of Cambrai?

And how would Margaret manage being Regent of Scotland, Queen of England and keeping some type of control over her son?

Thoughts?

 

[Derek Pullem]

This is after the defeat and death of King James IV of Scotland and the capture of Tournai. Henry VIII has either returned to England for the winter or could be in northern France.

Does his sister, Margaret, the Queen Widow of Scotland, become Queen of England? Or would the death of all males Tudors only 30 years after Bosworth weigh against her? And if not her, who?

What would become of Katherine of Aragon? Wolsey? Will England still be involved in the War of the League of Cambrai?

And how would Margaret manage being Regent of Scotland, Queen of England and keeping some type of control over her son?

Thoughts?

James IV was excommunicated for attacking England, it is hard to imagine that the death of Henry VIII would lead to James' son becoming King of England and Scotland. In theory Margaret is the senior heir but her marriage to the Scots King makes her an unlikely successor.

I suspect Mary Tudor now becomes the most elligible bride in Christendom

 

[lambert]

Two potential monarchs from outside the house of Tudor are Edward Bohun the Duke of Buckingham and Richard de la Pole.

The Duke of Buckingham was the richest noble in England and descended from Edward III's 5th son. In 1504 the several of the 'great personages' of Calais had expected him to become king if Henry VII died before Prince Henry was an adult, and in 1513 his position was none the weaker.

Richard de la Pole was the eldest surviving son of Edward IV's eldest sister. So for those that accepted the Ricardian claim that Edward IV and Clarence's children are excluded from the succession, he is the rightful heir. He was an experienced landsknecht commander in service to the French crown. In OTL's 1514 the French king gave him an army of 12000 landsknechts, but made peace with Henry before the invasion was launched.

 

[mcdnab]

In terms of succession - Henry VII was King by Conquest not by inheritance so arguably the only legitimate succession is from him - Margaret and Mary Tudor.

Think you mean Edward Stafford 3rd Duke of Buckingham and yes he is a powerful and wealthy figure. His principal claim is through his Beaufort lineage but he is also the senior descendant of Edward III's youngest son.

In terms of Richard de la Pole - he is pretty impoverished which reduces his ability to garner support in England for any claim and his claim is very weak - though in the short term he might get French backing.


In House of York (or Plantagenet terms in 1513)

Descendants of Edward IV

Margaret Tudor Queen of Scotland and issue
Mary Tudor
Catherine of York, Countess of Devon and issue (her son Henry is 17 in 1513)
Bridget of York a nun

Descendants of George Duke of Clarence
Lady Margaret Pole Countess of Salisbury (her eldest son Henry is 21)

Descendants of Anne of York eldest sister of Edward IV
Anne St Leger Lady Roos (her eldest son Thomas Manners is around 21 as well)

Descendants of Elizabeth of York Duchess of Suffolk
Sir William De La Pole (a prisoner in the tower for more than a decade)
Richard de La Pole (abroad in service with the French)

After them the Plantagenet line passes first to the descendants of Richard Duke of York's daughter Isabel Countess of Essex.

 

[lambert]

Yes, Edward Stafford. The article I grabbed to namecheck appears to have obsessed over him using the name Bohun himself.

 

[Velasco]

Margaret inherits with relative ease, becomes most eligible bachelorette in Christendom and most likely marries an Englishman who will take over and dominate things until her son inherits.

 

[Teejay]

In terms of succession - Henry VII was King by Conquest not by inheritance so arguably the only legitimate succession is from him - Margaret and Mary Tudor.

Yep

Elizabeth of York being the oldest daughter of Edward IV I would argue, was the rightful heir to her father's Edward IV's throne. Under English common law I meant, because under Common Law there are no sons, then the oldest daughter gets to inherit instead.

That was the legal basis of the Yorkist claim to the throne. They argued they were descended from Lionel of Antwerp who was an older brother to John of Gaunt. Not to mention the argument Edward III used to justify his claim on the French throne. Since he was the son of Isabella, who was the daughter of King Philip the Fair.

Although if Henry VIII had died in October 1513, it would have been probable that either Edward Stafford 3rd Duke of Buckingham (Edward VI) or Richard De La Pole (Richard IV) would have succeeded to the throne.

 

[Rich Rostrom]

James IV was excommunicated for attacking England, it is hard to imagine that the death of Henry VIII would lead to James' son becoming King of England and Scotland. In theory Margaret is the senior heir but her marriage to the Scots King makes her an unlikely successor.

She's also pregnant with James' second son, Alexander (1514-1515).

I suspect Mary Tudor now becomes the most elligible bride in Christendom

If she succeeds as Queen Regnant, she's not going to marry the King of France.

The English have two choices.

Queen Margaret, who is also Regent of Scotland for her infant son, James V of Scotland, and will be succeeded by him as King of England. She's 24, and a fairly good political operator, when she isn't thinking with her ovaries. (She made two foolish marriages.) She's likely to remarry, but her husband won't be fathering the next dynasty, unless both of her sons die.

Princess Mary, who is 17. She's highly eligible, but there will be a huge dispute over who gets to marry her and beget the next King. At least with Margaret the succession is already settled.

If they are passed over, TSMHTF. There's no one else left on the Lancastrian side.

On the York side, the next heir is Edward IV's sixth daughter Catherine, widow of William Courtenay, Earl of Devon. She's taken a public vow of chastity, which might make her a safer choice. She has two living children, Henry (age 17) and Margaret (14).

After her comes Edward's youngest daughter Bridget, a nun.

Then Clarence's surviving daughter, Margaret, Countess of Salisbury, who was favored by Henry at this time. She's a widow with four healthy sons, the eldest (Henry) being 21. He's already married.

 

[Tudorfan]

It would be Margaret, I'm afraid. The Stuarts were only barred in 1543 by Henry VIII.

If Henry VIII died in 1513, the succession would be
1) Margaret
2) James V of Scotland
3) Alexander, Duke of Ross
4) Mary Tudor
5) Catherine Plantagenet of York, Countess of Devon
6) Henry Courtenay, Marquess of Exeter
7) Margaret Courtenay
8) Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury (Yes, it would be her; she's closer to the throne than Buckingham as a cousin of Henry VIII's mother).
Then, it would be Margaret Pole's eldest son and so on.

This is, of course, assuming that Catherine's infant son -- born October, 1513 -- does not survive. If he does, then he would be King.

 

[Teejay]

It would be Margaret, I'm afraid. The Stuarts were only barred in 1543 by Henry VIII.

If Henry VIII died in 1513, the succession would be
1) Margaret
2) James V of Scotland
3) Alexander, Duke of Ross
4) Mary Tudor
5) Catherine Plantagenet of York, Countess of Devon
6) Henry Courtenay, Marquess of Exeter
7) Margaret Courtenay
8) Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury (Yes, it would be her; she's closer to the throne than Buckingham as a cousin of Henry VIII's mother).
Then, it would be Margaret Pole's eldest son and so on.

This is, of course, assuming that Catherine's infant son -- born October, 1513 -- does not survive. If he does, then he would be King.

Royal succession especially in the Tudor period was not a thing set in stone. If Henry VIII had died in 1513, then I believe the person with the strongest support among the "commonwealth of the realm" would get the throne.

For example: Edward VI stated in his will, that the Lady Jane Grey would be his successor. However Mary I became queen, because she had much more support among the "commonwealth of the realm".

Also it really took the experience of having both Mary I and Elizabeth I on the thrones to get the English comfortable with the idea of a Queen ruling as if she was a King. Hence why I believe in this TL either Richard (Richard IV) De La Pole or Edward Stafford (Edward VI), 3rd Duke of Buckingham or even Henry (Henry IX) Pole, 1st Baron Montagu would become king.

 

[Derek Pullem]

It would be Margaret, I'm afraid. The Stuarts were only barred in 1543 by Henry VIII.

If Henry VIII died in 1513, the succession would be
1) Margaret
2) James V of Scotland
3) Alexander, Duke of Ross
4) Mary Tudor
5) Catherine Plantagenet of York, Countess of Devon
6) Henry Courtenay, Marquess of Exeter
7) Margaret Courtenay
8) Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury (Yes, it would be her; she's closer to the throne than Buckingham as a cousin of Henry VIII's mother).
Then, it would be Margaret Pole's eldest son and so on.

This is, of course, assuming that Catherine's infant son -- born October, 1513 -- does not survive. If he does, then he would be King.

Discounting a butterfly allowing the son to survive, the powers that be have a choice between requesting the powers who hold Margaret in Scotland, who they have recently destroyed at Flodden when Margaret's husband broke a treaty, was excommunicated and was killed in battle to allow "their" queen and her son to rule England.........or choosing someone else.

The Scots nobility would not just hand over Margaret and her son so I would strongly suspect that an alternative solution would be found

Mary Tudor marrying Henry Courtenay would be neat but there are many other permutations

 

[Velasco]

The Scots nobility would most likely appreciate the opportunity to be rid of the Queen Dowager, though they may desire to hold onto her son the King and his unborn sibling, delaying her departure somewhat.

Given the recent defeat at Flodden and the psychological aftermath of that, I don't see the Scots rallying sufficiently to hold the English Queen prisoner. English pride or proto-nationalism would probably coalesce around freeing their beloved new Queen and bringing her home, no doubt pushed forward by the more grasping of the nobility eager to annex the new Queen for wife.

Catherine of Aragon most likely remains on as a nominal Regent during this initial period. I can see her staying on in England a while longer to guarantee her dower settlement and to serve as Ferdinand's ambassador securing the transfer of Charles' betrothal to Mary over to Queen Margaret herself. Mary marrying Louis of France remains a distinct possibility, as peace with France and a re-negotiation of the French subsidies would be crucial to any new regime, unless Margaret is very quickly sucked into the Hapsburg-Trastamara orbit and is pressured by them into continuing the French war. The Emperor Maximilian was considered by Henry VIII as a candidate for Margaret's hand during this period, so he might well attempt to stick his oar in as a potential husband for either sister, if only to secure access to what's left of Henry VII's coffers.

The succession was a murky business so I'd wager the Courtenays, de la Poles, Poles and Staffords have a fairly equal chance. Stafford's vast fortune, numerous connections and personal retainers gave him a competitive edge despite the relatively junior nature of his claim: movers and shakers at court might even seek to place figures such as Arthur Plantagenet (natural son of Edward IV) and Charles Somerset (who actually used the surname Beaufort until Henry VII told him not to, and who could easily claim his parents were secretly betrothed) upon the throne.

 

[Teejay]

The succession was a murky business so I'd wager the Courtenays, de la Poles, Poles and Staffords have a fairly equal chance. Stafford's vast fortune, numerous connections and personal retainers gave him a competitive edge despite the relatively junior nature of his claim: movers and shakers at court might even seek to place figures such as Arthur Plantagenet (natural son of Edward IV) and Charles Somerset (who actually used the surname Beaufort until Henry VII told him not to, and who could easily claim his parents were secretly betrothed) upon the throne.

I say that is a recipe for a civil war.

 

[Velasco]

I say that is a recipe for a civil war.

Only if Margaret, James, Alexander and Mary all die without issue. While Margaret's reign would be necessarily messy - especially in the early years, if she remained unmarried and left herself prey to all sorts of "let's rebel and force her to marry [candidate]" - I don't see her being deposed so that Margaret Plantagenet or Edward Stafford can take the crown.

 

[Velasco]

I wonder whether Katherine of Aragon would return to the continent - maybe as Ferdinand's candidate for Louis' new bedmate? or even for Maximilian?- or stay in England, marry some English nobleman, or enter religion.

 

[Tudorfan]

Margaret would, 100%, become the next Queen. After an absence of males -- and as Henry VIII has not cut them out in 1513 -- she is next in line; it would lead to a union of the crowns in 1542 under James V.

 

[Rich Rostrom]

Only if Margaret, James, Alexander and Mary all die without issue. While Margaret's reign would be necessarily messy - especially in the early years, if she remained unmarried and left herself prey to all sorts of "let's rebel and force her to marry [candidate]"...

What seems more likely is that Margaret falls in love and makes a politically imprudent marriage. She did that twice OTL - both times to seriously inconvenient husbands who were also unfaithful.

This is in contrast to her relatively competent politicking otherwise.

 

[Teejay]

What seems more likely is that Margaret falls in love and makes a politically imprudent marriage. She did that twice OTL - both times to seriously inconvenient husbands who were also unfaithful.

This is in contrast to her relatively competent politicking otherwise.

Alison Weir believes if Margaret Tudor had been queen of England, her reign would have been a disaster.

 

[Velasco]

What seems more likely is that Margaret falls in love and makes a politically imprudent marriage. She did that twice OTL - both times to seriously inconvenient husbands who were also unfaithful.

This is in contrast to her relatively competent politicking otherwise.

True, but being Queen of England puts her in a far better (emotionally, financially etc) position than as a Dowager of Scotland, stuck in an impoverished foreign land surrounded by enemies and desperate for some solid ground to stand on.

 

[Teejay]

I honestly don't buy into the idea of Margaret Tudor becoming Queen of England, if Henry VIII died in 1513. Because the Tudors were still a new dynasty and not a terribly secure one at that.

Henry VIII in his latter years, managed to increase support for the Tudor dynasty among those who mattered. This was achieved through executing people with credible claim to the throne and not to mention giving lands to the nobility and gentry from the dissolution of the monasteries.