WI: No Edward VI

There is one other available match for Elizabeth--if Henry is serious about England remaining Protestant. Prince Eric Vasa of Sweden. Eric courted Elizabeth and might have married her except that they both inherited thrones before they could.

Henry wasn't serious, he was Catholic in all but name!:eek: Anyway, Erik Vasa is far less powerful, not a good catch.
 
Completely agree with you about Mary. Personally I think it has something to do with her siding with her mother during their divorce. The only people who really considered Mary was her own father and the Boleyns.

I've always wanted to write a TL with an Empress Mary but do you think its possible? I mean in 1541 he was 41 and was always on the move. I know he could produce a child with Mary (his illegitimate son was born in 1547) but how would that work. Would Mary live in Spain or stay closer to England? Would this lead to closer relations with Spain and the Empire at the expense of France? With the English Heiress married to the Emperor I would guess that England would return to the Catholic sphere, either then or after Mary I ascended. The idea of an autonomous Anglican Church has merit and has been brought up before but I doubt that Henry VII would return to the church since it would mean admitting that he was wrong. Maybe the Pope could invite Henry to return?

Both Parliament and the Privy council was much weaker at the point in time. Henry VIII was the closest thing to a successful absolute monarch that England had. But yes offering the Low countries would be possible. After all England and the Netherlands would have been inherited by the Son of Mary and Philip II if they had produced one son obviously Charles wasn't opposed to the Netherlands parting with Spain.

I think it is, with the right POD to get Henry and European politics to align appropriately. As Empress Mary wouldn't live in England - I imagine she'd join Charles in the Low Countries, perhaps accompanying him here and there, but always fairly nearby to rush back to England once her father passed. Throughout the Middle Ages Kings broke with Rome and then reconciled, perhaps with the Pope throwing in some goodies by ways of Cardinal's hats for Henry's favourites, dispensations and so on. But maybe something akin to the rights of the Kings of Sicily - paying some sort of lip service to Rome but enjoying autonomy and complete authority over the national church.
 
I think it is, with the right POD to get Henry and European politics to align appropriately. As Empress Mary wouldn't live in England - I imagine she'd join Charles in the Low Countries, perhaps accompanying him here and there, but always fairly nearby to rush back to England once her father passed. Throughout the Middle Ages Kings broke with Rome and then reconciled, perhaps with the Pope throwing in some goodies by ways of Cardinal's hats for Henry's favourites, dispensations and so on. But maybe something akin to the rights of the Kings of Sicily - paying some sort of lip service to Rome but enjoying autonomy and complete authority over the national church.

That would be the most likely compromise. Plus having the Emperor on your side couldn't hurt with negotiations.
 
Henry wasn't serious, he was Catholic in all but name!:eek: Anyway, Erik Vasa is far less powerful, not a good catch.


True, but it wouldn't be the first time an illegitimate daughter of an English king was used to solidify an alliance with a minor prince or king. Think of Henry I's daughter Sybilla's marriage to Alexander I of Scotland. And John's daughter, Joan, was married to Llywelyn the Great. Come to think of it, Henry II's sister, Emma, was also married to a Welsh prince.

Plus this alliance would just be fun. If Elizabeth was in Sweden when Erik lost his marbles, then she'd have given the would be John III and the Swedish nobility a run for their money.

But, more seriously, there was a lot of talk during Henry's reign of Elizabeth marrying the Earl of Arran. Even without Edward and the "Rough Wooing", this match would still have advantages.
 
True, but it wouldn't be the first time an illegitimate daughter of an English king was used to solidify an alliance with a minor prince or king. Think of Henry I's daughter Sybilla's marriage to Alexander I of Scotland. And John's daughter, Joan, was married to Llywelyn the Great. Come to think of it, Henry II's sister, Emma, was also married to a Welsh prince.

Plus this alliance would just be fun. If Elizabeth was in Sweden when Erik lost his marbles, then she'd have given the would be John III and the Swedish nobility a run for their money.

But, more seriously, there was a lot of talk during Henry's reign of Elizabeth marrying the Earl of Arran. Even without Edward and the "Rough Wooing", this match would still have advantages.

Elizabeth's case (of questionable legitimacy) is similar to a more contemporary example. Constance and Isabella of Castille were the daughters of Peter the Cruel and Maria de Padilla (who Peter married in secret and then was forced to repudiate but kept her as a mistress). Bother girls were considered claimants to the throne of Castille. The sisters married John of Gaunt and Edmund Duke of York. Constance and John's daughter Catherine of Lancaster eventually became Queen consort of Castille. Isabella of Castille's son with Edmund Duke of York became Richard of Conisburgh, the father Richard Duke of York.
 
What mattered most in Elizabeth's case was her title to the throne, which her father preserved. That is, even with Mary married off to the Emperor, Elizabeth would still have great worth in the marriage market at home and abroad.
 
What mattered most in Elizabeth's case was her title to the throne, which her father preserved. That is, even with Mary married off to the Emperor, Elizabeth would still have great worth in the marriage market at home and abroad.

True. Bastard or not she was still second in line. Personally I think if Henry married her off, it would be to a foreign prince. Too many problems came from domestic marriages. Just look at the War of the Roses. Plus there are still several families that have a claim to the English throne and I doubt Henry would want to risk them being strengthened.
 
In 1541 the Second Henrician Succession Act (1536) applied - which excluded Mary and Elizabeth from the succession but in the event of Henry dying without legitimate issue gave him the power to name an heir of his choosing via letters patent or in his final will.
The question is whether Henry will opt for his eldest daughter or not following the death of his only son.
Mary had been restored to his favour but was hardly at the centre of power and Henry in 1541 was still devoted to his pretty but feckless wife Catherine Howard.
Her downfall begins with her arrest and imprisonment in November 1541 (so depends when Edward pegs it) but a devastated Henry may cleave even harder to his young wife who may give him the heir he now desperately needs.
If she falls as in otl - then Henry is more likeley to chose a woman of more obvious fertility than Catherine Parr as wife number 6.
While Henry certainly remained a traditional Catholic he was adamant in his supremacy (it was treason to even question it) over the English Church - something which put him in conflict with his eldest daughter.
Henry's main concern was the survival of his dynasty and English independence.
It is noticeable in both his third succession act and his will he did not legitimise either Mary or Elizabeth.
Whatever marriage is proposed for Mary after her brother's death it is unlikely that any foreign suitor will not expect her to be named Henry's heir (in default of male issue) - equally Henry is going to insist on his own conditions whether he names her his heir at all - such as the consort living in England for a time, that any issue be brought up in England and so on - there is enough room for negotiations that will drag on long after Henry's death.
The same applies for Elizabeth - the proposal she marry Arran's heir was in part a way of getting Arran to support a match between Mary of Scots and Edward VI - it dropped after Arran switched sides (as he frequently did). There is little political advantage to the marriage in the changed circumstances.
Edward VI dying in 1541 - probably diminishes the chance of Henry marrying Catherine Parr and increases the chances of single Mary ascending the throne six years earlier in 1547 - her main advantage in that is her brother's more reformist tendencies are going to not have happened (no enforced book of common prayer etc).
The real issue will be what methods she takes to turn back time in terms of the breach with Rome.
Elizabeth will escape the Seymour scandal and may be closer to Mary now given that she is much younger when her sister becomes Queen - it is likely that Mary will replace her tutor's who were of a reformist nature with more catholic ones but much will depend on how Elizabeth reacts to those changes.
 
Top