WI:Henry VIII's sister, Mary Tudor marries a Bourbon or Valois
- Thread starter kasumigenx
- Start date
Bourbon is unlikely; a royal princess was used a chess piece of diplomacy. The Tudors were also on precarious footing regarding their legitimacy and thus their marriages into the European royal houses solidified their legitimacy versus being usurpers. The Bourbons at this time are merely premier French nobility. Yes, they have Capetian blood, but Henry VII isn't going to waste his daughter on such a match. He's going to want to marry her to a king, or the son of one.
Now asking about a Valois is a little redundant... she did marry a member of the House of Valois, King Louis XII, actually. He died shortly after their marriage however. You could have him hang on a little longer though, maybe long enough to knock Mary up, and if she has a son, that would produce some changes. Even a daughter would produce some changes, assuming she lives.
You just have to be a little more specific. Which Bourbon? Which Valois? What sort of differences are you seeking out? Another scenario might be Mary marrying François Ier after the death of Louis XII; his wife Claude was always sickly, so two well timed deaths could see Mary Tudor twice crowned Queen of France.
Now asking about a Valois is a little redundant... she did marry a member of the House of Valois, King Louis XII, actually. He died shortly after their marriage however. You could have him hang on a little longer though, maybe long enough to knock Mary up, and if she has a son, that would produce some changes. Even a daughter would produce some changes, assuming she lives.
You just have to be a little more specific. Which Bourbon? Which Valois? What sort of differences are you seeking out? Another scenario might be Mary marrying François Ier after the death of Louis XII; his wife Claude was always sickly, so two well timed deaths could see Mary Tudor twice crowned Queen of France.
Yes, but he's interested in the implications of a French match. Not with Charles V.
The marriage was negotiated as part of a peace treaty. Not sure Charles V would be too interested in her, anyways--someone with a larger dowry is of much more use to him. Quite awkward for all concerned if she married Charles III, Duke of Bourbon, if his history panned out the way it did in real life. He had huge estates and Francis I of France was suspicious of him, unfairly at first. Eventually, perception became reality: Francis confiscated the Bourbon estates, and Charles became a general of Francis's enemy, the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. If Mary had been Charles III's wife, it's hard to see how Henry VIII couldn't have been dragged heavily into the ensuing wars on the Bourbon side to restore his sister's (and her hypothetical children's) marital estates.
[There's an unstated butterfly in this -- Charles III was married to someone else, also a Bourbon, through whom he'd obtained most of his lands. She has to die early].
Charles V defeated Francis I without English help; the only difference would have been the added dynastic incentive for restoring the Bourbon estates (which didn't happen in OTL). There's a decent chance that it would have happened in the revised timeline.
The long-term consequence, assuming Mary had children, is that when the Bourbons inherited the throne, it would have been one of her descendants (rather than the younger Bourbon line represented by Henry IV) who became king of France when the last Valois king died.
[There's an unstated butterfly in this -- Charles III was married to someone else, also a Bourbon, through whom he'd obtained most of his lands. She has to die early].
Charles V defeated Francis I without English help; the only difference would have been the added dynastic incentive for restoring the Bourbon estates (which didn't happen in OTL). There's a decent chance that it would have happened in the revised timeline.
The long-term consequence, assuming Mary had children, is that when the Bourbons inherited the throne, it would have been one of her descendants (rather than the younger Bourbon line represented by Henry IV) who became king of France when the last Valois king died.
There is also a chance of them inheriting the throne of England after Elizabeth dies, so they get both thrones of England and France but they will have problems with the protestants.
archaeogeek
Banned
Only if it's a boy. Also, the problems happened in reverse with catholics IOTL anyway.
I'm not sure, however, that the English would take turning into a province (actually 4-8, see below) of France without a fight, but this situation would lead to a few options
- France becomes even more of a hegemon, with England and Ireland grafted to it
- France eventually loses the islands to rebellions
- Something in between
- France retains the islands but doesn't follow the same centralizing impulse as OTL, thus avoiding "proto-nationalist" rebellions, but becoming a bit of a mess - we'll call it Francia-Englary
(this is not quite accurate, of course, but you see what I mean). Admittedly pre-revolutionary France was already a mess.This also somewhat lessens the impulse for colonization; that said, it's possible that this leads to a french eastern seaboard anyway, just "french" instead of french in my third option, as the provinces most likely to colonize are, well, only two speak french.
If England-Ireland ends up integrated to the french legal system (and trust me, if it doesn't revolt away, it will), I could see a minimum of four provinces - Ireland, England, Wales & Marches and "Northumbria" based on the chanceries. Given how some provinces formed, I could actually see the following added to that list: Lancaster (Lancashire + duchy lands), Cornwall (Cornwall + duchy lands; IIRC this represents enough of Devon that most of the county would be in it) and Chester. A situation somewhere between Guyenne and the Loire (one was a mashup of multiple royal and feudal estates, the other was split into multiple provinces)
I still don't think it holding together is very likely. If it does, though, you end up with a much weaker social position of english, especially when considering the state of english finances at the time and that it's going to lose direct control of its dependent countries.
Last edited:
Their chance depends on the descedents of Margareth Tudor being extinct, and if they are French I guess their chances become even smaller than the OTL descendants of Mary Tudor.
Why would they care? Scotland was not exactly a wealth of riches. Besides, no-one would have predicted England being united with Scotland at this point in time. Even in 1603, it was a total shock to many people.
Plus, Mary Tudor's heirs could easily be side stepped. She still had descendents in 1603 and the English council still chose James VI. Even if Mary had heirs with her French husband, Margaret's heirs are still the senior most claimants of the Tudors if Henry's line fails.