WI: Henry VIII dies in March 1536

In mid to late January 1536 Henry VIII was unhorsed in a tournament and was badly injured, never recovered after months of bed rest he dies on March 18 1536.

Succession to the Crown Act 1533 names 3 year old Princess Elizabeth of England heir.

Lady Mary Tudor aged 20 is the newly barred from the throne ex-princess, who considers herself the only Legitimate child and true heir to the throne.

Henry Pole, 1st Baron Montagu aged 44 son of the last living member of the Plantagenet dynasty, with a 15 or 16 year old male heir.

Any more likely candidates to throne?

Who is most likely to inherit?

jefferypendragon said:

In mid to late January 1536 Henry VIII was unhorsed in a tournament and was badly injured, never recovered after months of bed rest he dies on March 18 1536.

Succession to the Crown Act 1533 names 3 year old Princess Elizabeth of England heir.

Lady Mary Tudor aged 20 is the newly barred from the throne ex-princess, who considers herself the only Legitimate child and true heir to the throne.

Henry Pole, 1st Baron Montagu aged 44 son of the last living member of the Plantagenet dynasty, with a 15 or 16 year old male heir.

Any more likely candidates to throne?

Who is most likely to inherit?

Click to expand...

Well unless Mary is very quickly secured, chances are there's gonna be a civil war in England. Remember most of the population saw Elizabeth as a bastard, not Mary. This was shortly after good Queen Catherine's death, so assuming that Anne also miscarries at the same time, it'll be seen as divine retribution on the King and the Boleyns. I think Henry de la Pole is probably a non-entity but he could be an ally of Mary, considering his mother was one of the Princess's closest supporters.

Emperor Constantine said:

Well unless Mary is very quickly secured, chances are there's gonna be a civil war in England. Remember most of the population saw Elizabeth as a bastard, not Mary. This was shortly after good Queen Catherine's death, so assuming that Anne also miscarries at the same time, it'll be seen as divine retribution on the King and the Boleyns. I think Henry de la Pole is probably a non-entity but he could be an ally of Mary, considering his mother was one of the Princess's closest supporters.

Click to expand...

At this point Mary wasn't a princess but your point is well taken.

The reason I mention Henry de la Pole is he was a Male Noble of royal blood who has an heir, which might look pretty attractive for the purposes of stability especially since at this time there still hadn't been a reigning queen.

If they would of ignored the law at this point, like they most likely would of. Then Montagu claim is as good as Mary's, maybe even better since traditional conventions on succession only established that females could transfer their royal claim to their progeny not make a claim in their own right.

Mary would probably be queen after a civil war though you are right.

jefferypendragon said:

At this point Mary wasn't a princess but your point is well taken.

The reason I mention Henry de la Pole is he was a Male Noble of royal blood who has an heir, which might look pretty attractive for the purposes of stability especially since at this time there still hadn't been a reigning queen.

If they would of ignored the law at this point, like they most likely would of. Then Montagu claim is as good as Mary's, maybe even better since traditional conventions on succession only established that females could transfer their royal claim to their progeny not make a claim in their own right.

Mary would probably be queen after a civil war though you are right.

Click to expand...

Yeah remember that only Henry and his most devoted supporters ever really considered Mary a bastard. Everyone else knew it was political BS. The best bet would be to marry Mary to Baron Montagu's son, strengthening the anti-Boleyn faction and creating a joint opposition to Elizabeth's rule.

Emperor Constantine said:

Yeah remember that only Henry and his most devoted supporters ever really considered Mary a bastard. Everyone else knew it was political BS. The best bet would be to marry Mary to Baron Montagu's son, strengthening the anti-Boleyn faction and creating a joint opposition to Elizabeth's rule.

Click to expand...

Yeah that would strengthen the Mary's claim. the Treason Act 1534 made it treason not to swear to uphold the First Succession Act 1533. So I assume most nobles swore to it. But I am sure most saw that as a necessity that was against morality.

Elizabeth in this atl would probably immediately accede to the throne. But even if her faction lost, she most likely be safe, and would be raised catholic and married off to a foreign noble or prince when she came to age.

If Mary lost, she would loose her head.

A lot depends on exactly where Mary is at the time. If she is in Anne Boleyn's hands, expect another unfortunate accident

There are, incidentally, two other possibles - James V of Scotland and Margaret Douglas, later Countess of Lennox. I know Henry later barred the Stuarts from the succession, but I'm not sure if he'd done so as of 1536.

Mikestone8 said:

A lot depends on exactly where Mary is at the time. If she is in Anne Boleyn's hands, expect another unfortunate accident

There are, incidentally, two other possibles - James V of Scotland and Margaret Douglas, later Countess of Lennox. I know Henry later barred the Stuarts from the succession, but I'm not sure if he'd done so as of 1536.

Click to expand...

I find it doubtful that James V and Margaret Douglas would make any claim to throne while Mary was alive. They were Catholic and didn't recognize Henry VIII divorce and Mary's bastardization, therefore in their minds their blood claim was secondary to Mary's.
Unless James tried to claim women couldn't sit on the throne, which was valid traditional non legalistic view, then his claim is strongest and he might make a claim. But at this point I believe that the English would of prefered a native queen to a foreign king, so I don't like his chances.

jefferypendragon said:

I find it doubtful that James V and Margaret Douglas would make any claim to throne while Mary was alive. They were Catholic and didn't recognize Henry VIII divorce and Mary's bastardization, therefore in their minds their blood claim was secondary to Mary's.
Unless James tried to claim women couldn't sit on the throne, which was valid traditional non legalistic view, then his claim is strongest and he might make a claim. But at this point I believe that the English would of prefered a native queen to a foreign king, so I don't like his chances.

Click to expand...

I was thinking of a scenario in which Anne Bolyn has arranged a fatal accident for Mary, so her enemies had to find another candidate.

James V would have the better hereditary right, but Margaret had been born in England, so might have been considered to have a better title.

Mikestone8 said:

I was thinking of a scenartio in which Anne Bolyn has arranged a fatal accident for Mary, so her enemies had to find another candidate.

James V would have the better hereditary right, but Margaret had been born in England, so might have been considered to have a better title.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but I find it doubtful that Pembroke would arrange the death of Mary, that would be asking for rebellion if she had Mary in her custody then keeping her well guarded and her an eternal prisoner is a much smarter move.

If Margaret made a play, I find it likely James would too, why should he let a women with a lesser blood right claim usurp a throne god meant for him?

Even with a full out civil war with multiple claimants I do not see elizabeth staying on the throne.

Mary is placed on the throne with greater speed than historical. Her bastardy is overturned and England remains as Catholic as ever. Anne Boleyn is divested of all her rights as Queen or Queen consort but is probably offered a merciful settlement as Marchioness of Pembroke if she acknowledge Mary as Queen, embrace Catholicism and accept her lot as a former royal mistress. Alternatively Mary prosecutes her for the poisoning of Catherine of Aragon and destroys her completely. Henry FitzRoy dies as expected. Elizabeth is declared illegitimate and raised fervently Catholic under Mary's supervision. Mary is probably pressured by her Council to wed Montagu's son or James V, but she turns to Charles V, who might do anything from supporting James V (as a means of detaching him from France), to supporting his own son (the Prince of Asturias Philip, then a mere child) or Montagu's son (whose uncle Reginald Pole Chapuys suggested be married - far better Montagu's son, a non-clerical youth of a staunchly Catholic pro-Hapsburg family).

What about
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_FitzRoy,_1st_Duke_of_Richmond_and_Somerset
IOTL he dies by July but he could survive if he is moved etc

He was sick already IIRC.

Few thoughts:
Assuming the majority of the King's council in London and the Queen's supporters can move speedily to proclaim Elizabeth Queen then they will control London in the short-term.
The infant Queen's supporters will almost certainly include - the Boleyn family and their connections (that would include Norfolk in the short-term), Cromwell almost certainly (though a fall-out with Norfolk remain on the cards at some point) and in church terms key figures such as Crammer, Archbishop of Canterbury, Latimer Bishop of Worcester etc.
Mary's support will certainly be strongest in the North and the Archbishop of York Edward Lee (whilst on good terms with Cromwell had been out of favour with the King and was regarded as Anti reformation) along with people like Bishop Gardiner.
To the council and in particular Cromwell a child of Elizabeth's age on the throne gives them enormous political prestige and power for some time.
Anne's role will be difficult to determine, despite her intelligence, no Queen Dowager had ever occupied a strong political role in widowhood and there was no English tradition of them being proclaimed regent on behalf of their child. If she attempts to take too much control then she will find herself at significant odds with most of her supporters.
Not sure where Mary was in March 36 but after her mother's death she was pretty much in seclusion at the King's estate at Hunsdon in Hertfordshire. Anne/Elizabeth's supporters should be able to get her in custody quickly if she is based at any of her or the King's residences in or around London.
Either way I would put money on a much earlier Pilgrimage of Grace type rebellion from the North with it most likely being in Mary's name.
Mary's support is hard to gauge at this point - but she will certainly attract support in great numbers from those at odds with the regime.
If Mary escapes capture then an obvious solution which will probably be favoured by her cousin Charles V would be to marry James V and use Scots supports to take England.
He is contracted to a French alliance which the Hapsburgs would be delighted to see annulled - but as of March 1536 his betrothal is still up in the air as in OTL he didn't travel to France until September. The match will be pushed by his mother Margaret Tudor who is still living. In that case a Scots invasion on Mary's behalf is likely and will probably be supported in the traditional north of England - however the south is far more likely to rally to Elizabeth - the question will be if the invasion looks like been successful then how many of Elizabeth's supporters will switch sides to save their own skin.
If Mary wins and takes control then Anne and her daughter would possibly flee abroad and the obvious destination for them is France - where Francis will be delighted to support Anne's daughter as an alternative to the now Pro-Hapsburg Queen Mary.

If Elizabeth's supporters can capture or defeat Mary then keeping her in close but stately imprisonment is the ideal solution to protect Elizabeth from foreign claims (particularly that of Margaret Tudor and her children James V and Margaret Douglas). I would rule out any "accident" or "trial and execution" - an earlier Mary Queen of Scots situation.
Either way the situation creates a very different Elizabeth Tudor and - she has a surviving intelligent mother for a start - if she survives as Queen then her education and upbringing will be closer to that of OTL but will be much more under scrutiny - she will also be far more likely to not have the marital reservations of otl. If she flees abroad then a possible French betrothal might be made (Charles duke of Orleans younger son of Francis I is ten years older than Elizabeth and in otl died in 1545) then her education is likely to be significantly different depending on what influence her mother has on it and who her tutors are.

mcdnab nice and well thought out reply

I just had another thought, If Elizabeth or in reality her regents held London and weren't immediately deposed, Support for her would increase for simple point of stability of the realm. The civil wars of the roses wasn't to long ago at this point, and a lot of people might not care to much who sat on the throne as long as it didn't cause chaos.

Realistically, I find it likely that Elizabeth would be forced in to marriage before she was twenty, when she was still under a regency or soon after.

In this atl if Elizabeth keeps the throne Queen Anne Bolyne Marchioness of Pembroke, The Queen mother, would make an a very attractive marriage match. Would she be aloud to remarry? Would she want to remarry? If she did who would be the candidates for husband?