WI:Mary Stuart Flees To France

On a later date perhaps, the thrones of Britain and France could unite if the Stuart's or Valois die out, though it could cause a lot of trouble.

Thesprion, who posted in this topic has a timeline that concerns such a union, of which Mary Stuart plays a vital role: that is, she has a son with her first husband, François II. It's definitely worth reading.

In the scenario I've described, the thrones of Britain and France would likely not unite; certainly they may be on better terms in the end, but the only possible union would mean the extinction of the Stuart line. Even so, there would be claimants through female lines that would have a better claim.

Mary's children by Charles IX have no claim to the English throne; I suppose technically they do, but at least de facto, Mary would be ceding her claim to England to James and his heirs. If the Valois die out, they would be succeeded by the Bourbons, as France follows Salic Law and female cannot inherit.
 
Thesprion, who posted in this topic has a timeline that concerns such a union, of which Mary Stuart plays a vital role: that is, she has a son with her first husband, François II. It's definitely worth reading.

In the scenario I've described, the thrones of Britain and France would likely not unite; certainly they may be on better terms in the end, but the only possible union would mean the extinction of the Stuart line. Even so, there would be claimants through female lines that would have a better claim.

Mary's children by Charles IX have no claim to the English throne; I suppose technically they do, but at least de facto, Mary would be ceding her claim to England to James and his heirs. If the Valois die out, they would be succeeded by the Bourbons, as France follows Salic Law and female cannot inherit.


Thanks. With a PoD like this, the Stuarts might be suceeded by different people.
 
How would Mary's marriage to Charles IX effect the French Wars of Religion? Would there still be the St Bartholomew's Massacre? I think Mary might be a moderating influence.
 
Mary's relationship with James was non-existant in our timeline and I doubt either would be willing to compromise their beliefs to satisfy the other one.

Even if she flees to France his education is likely to remain the same and it was drummed into him by his main tutor Buchanan that his mother was little better than a whore, a murdress etc.
Even from exile gifts and communications from her to him were ignored or returned.
It certainly fed into his own relationships and views of women. He certainly did nothing to save her life in OTL in fact he was far more pleased with his English pension and a pretty good relationship with Elizabeth.
He may have had mixed feelings that led to him reinterring her but not until he'd sat on the English throne for nearly a decade.
At no time did James ever conceed that his mother had any rights in Scotland and despite at one time Elizabeth trying to pack Mary back to Scotland as some kind of co-ruler James firmly rejected the idea.
Mary herself made it absolutely clear that she remained Queen of Scots and that James at best in her view was regent for her and had no intention of returning home to be treated as a widowed Queen Dowager which was the most James was willing to conceed.

In fact her will leaving her claim to England to Philip of Spain was probably her final rather pointless slap in the face to James


As Queen Consort of France she might have been more willing to make concessions but she was extremely aware of her station as a Queen Regnant and would not give it up willingly.


Mary's religious toleration in her early reign in Scotland was fact - but she had little choice having neither the power or will to suppress the reformation despite her wildly extravagant claims she frequently made to her relatives in France, the Pope and Philip II.

I don't necessarily believe that once under the influence of her French relatives with significant axes to grind against Coligny she is going to continue to be the paragon of tolerance some people seem to credit her with.

And I doubt there are any circumstances that Coligny is going to support the match.

If she does reach France and does marry Charles - she is now in her early thirties - and even after delays in extracting her from her third husband (although the marriage and his previous divorce were not recognised by most Catholics) and the necessary papal dispensation to marry her 1st husbands' brother - she may well bear more children.

Though she had miscarried twins during her problems in Scotland after marrying Bothwell so we'll hope there weren't complications preventing further issue.

The French are going to have to consider a few things by the marriage - Mary is effectively dowerless beyond her relatively small estates in France, her crown rather hollow and one that would take expensive military action to recover and would mean war with England, marriage to Mary is going to largely restore the Guise ascendancy and their harsh anti-hugeonot views, that is going to cause instability in France, in return it is likely to strongly tempt Elizabeth's council to offer more support to French Hugeonots than in our time.

I can't see what the French gain by the marriage - a childless Mary with her claim to the English throne (in effect to many Catholics she is already the rightful Queen rather than the bastard heretic Elizabeth) was one thing. Mary, a three times wed and deposed mother of one, is hardly a great match.
 
Top