WI: Henry VIII married his daughter Mary off young

[Velasco]

In OTL, the same anxiety which spurred Henry VII on to six different marriages seems to have restrained him from marrying his children off in any great haste. While there were several betrothals at different intervals, including famously that between the then-Princess Mary and Charles V which was broken off by Charles, Henry seems to have shied away from the very real possibility of marrying off his eldest daughter in her early teens and procurring a male heir through her (all Julio-Claudian-like, by annexing a potential son-in-law as a stand-in adoptive son and presumptive crown prince, and, in the long run, through him and her, female-line grandsons).

The possibility of uniting Mary (born 1516) with cousins such as James V of Scots (born 1512), Henry Courtenay, 1st Marques of Exeter (born c.1498) or else his son Edward Courtenay (b.1527), Henry Stafford (b.1501), son and heir of the last, overmighty Duke of Buckingham, or Henry Pole (c.1492), Lord Montague, son of the Countess of Salisbury, or even Thomas Manners, later 1st Earl of Rutland, all of whom were rich in Plantagenet blood and would offer Henry a sound presumptive heir and line of succession. Henry would, quite naturally, have almost absolute control over such a match and its offspring, to raise and promote as he saw fit.

Scottish noblemen and heirs presumptives such as John Stewart, 2nd Duke of Albany, James Hamilton, 2nd Earl of Arran and Matthew Stewart, 4th Earl of Lennox also have their merits.

 

[ordinarylittleme]

Why exactly are you not looking at foreign candidates?

 

[Elfwine]

I suppose if you're looking at an in-law as a stand-in son, you presumably want a subject - but at that point I'm not sure a Plantagenet-blooded candidate is ideal. Someone who is dependent on Henry's generosity seems more suitable for annexing than someone whose claim to the throne doesn't depend at all on being Mary's husband.

 

[ordinarylittleme]

I suppose if you're looking at an in-law as a stand-in son, you presumably want a subject - but at that point I'm not sure a Plantagenet-blooded candidate is ideal. Someone who is dependent on Henry's generosity seems more suitable for annexing than someone whose claim to the throne doesn't depend at all on being Mary's husband.

And if that's the case, he can literally pick ANY Englishman around...

 

[isabella]

In OTL, the same anxiety which spurred Henry VII on to six different marriages seems to have restrained him from marrying his children off in any great haste. While there were several betrothals at different intervals, including famously that between the then-Princess Mary and Charles V which was broken off by Charles, Henry seems to have shied away from the very real possibility of marrying off his eldest daughter in her early teens and procurring a male heir through her (all Julio-Claudian-like, by annexing a potential son-in-law as a stand-in adoptive son and presumptive crown prince, and, in the long run, through him and her, female-line grandsons).

The possibility of uniting Mary (born 1516) with cousins such as James V of Scots (born 1512), Henry Courtenay, 1st Marques of Exeter (born c.1498) or else his son Edward Courtenay (b.1527), Henry Stafford (b.1501), son and heir of the last, overmighty Duke of Buckingham, or Henry Pole (c.1492), Lord Montague, son of the Countess of Salisbury, or even Thomas Manners, later 1st Earl of Rutland, all of whom were rich in Plantagenet blood and would offer Henry a sound presumptive heir and line of succession. Henry would, quite naturally, have almost absolute control over such a match and its offspring, to raise and promote as he saw fit.

Scottish noblemen and heirs presumptives such as John Stewart, 2nd Duke of Albany, James Hamilton, 2nd Earl of Arran and Matthew Stewart, 4th Earl of Lennox also have their merits.

Mary will NEVER EVER marry James V while her father lived as james inheriting England was Henry VIII’s greatest nightmare… and any other Scottish match is absolutely out of question, same for the Poles.
If Catherine had eiother died or had not fought against the annulment or the Pope had ruled in favour of Henry, then Mary would remain a Royal Princess and would be married early, but to some foreign ruler and likely renouncing to her rights to the English crown.
Remember who Henry was only the second Tudor ruler of England and he wanted a son of his own as heir (or at least a Tudor boy). If Jasper Tudor had a legitimate son by Katherine Woodville, I could see a son of this second Duke of Bedford as the natural domestic candidate for Mary’s hand as her children would still have the Tudor surname.
In Henry’s mind having a legitimate son was the only way for leaving behind a stable succession and looking at the English precedents he was NOT wrong

 

[FalconHonour]

A surviving Henry Brandon, Earl of Lincoln would also do nicely. Yes, he and Mary are first cousins, but it weaves Henry's line with that of his nearest male relative, in lieu of a legitimate son. Or as Isabella said, a grandson of Jasper Tudor, Duke of Bedford.

 

[Ivan Lupo]

I think either Henry or Catherine will have to die at some point in order for Mary to get married young. Let's say that by some coincidence, one of them dies in 1525.

If it's Henry, then Mary is under a regency council that likely includes her mother, Wolsey, and other important nobles. I don't know what direction they would go, but I think this would be the scenario where a domestic marriage would be seriously considered, especially if they are all eager to avoid seeing James V try and press his own claim as the eldest male descendant of Henry VII. But if they're amenable to that, I could see Catherine arguing that it would be a British version of the landmark marriage of her own parents to combine both crowns, providing that they each remain separate from one another and with the assurance that England, despite having being ruled by a woman, would still end up becoming the senior partner in this union by weight of population, money, and military strength, as well as the attractive proposition of securing permanent peace with the Scots. But if they decline to do this, they may just go with a domestic marriage. Beyond James V, there would be the sons of Mary Tudor and Charles Brandon. After these sons though, who the hell knows.

The reason I chose 1525 is if Catherine dies that year, leaving Henry to remarry himself. One candidate out there would be Margaret of Angouleme, very recently widowed following the death of her first marriage, but has not yet married the much younger Henry of Navarre. Suppose that Henry decides to realign himself with Francis, marrying the similarly aged Margaret (which admittedly, I find unlikely), while Mary is given to Henry of Navarre. In OTL, Margaret gave birth to her first child in 1528 at about the age of 36, and would be remarrying at about 33 or so. This is a massive risk on Henry's part and I think he would definitely prefer a younger bride this time around. He could even just turn around and marry Anne Boleyn too, there wouldn't be much stopping him at this point. If he does this, then I think Anne's French leanings would possibly revive the previous betrothal to the current Dauphin, Francis. And if he really wanted to hedge his bets in case he doesn't have a son with Anne, then perhaps he opts for Francis' younger brother Henry to prevent a possible personal union of France and England (of course, at this point, they would have no idea that Francis would die in 1536 and that Henry would eventually become King of France).

And it both of them die that same year for some reason....well, this probably just leads to a combination of war with Scotland, a civil war, and a French attempt to retake Calais, very likely all at once.

 

[isabella]

I think either Henry or Catherine will have to die at some point in order for Mary to get married young. Let's say that by some coincidence, one of them dies in 1525.

If it's Henry, then Mary is under a regency council that likely includes her mother, Wolsey, and other important nobles. I don't know what direction they would go, but I think this would be the scenario where a domestic marriage would be seriously considered, especially if they are all eager to avoid seeing James V try and press his own claim as the eldest male descendant of Henry VII. But if they're amenable to that, I could see Catherine arguing that it would be a British version of the landmark marriage of her own parents to combine both crowns, providing that they each remain separate from one another and with the assurance that England, despite having being ruled by a woman, would still end up becoming the senior partner in this union by weight of population, money, and military strength, as well as the attractive proposition of securing permanent peace with the Scots. But if they decline to do this, they may just go with a domestic marriage. Beyond James V, there would be the sons of Mary Tudor and Charles Brandon. After these sons though, who the hell knows.

At this point, James would be the obvious candidate for everyone involved, as I doubt who Mary's changed status would keep her betrothal to Charles V's intact or resumed as the Emperor wanted kids soon at this point...

The reason I chose 1525 is if Catherine dies that year, leaving Henry to remarry himself. One candidate out there would be Margaret of Angouleme, very recently widowed following the death of her first marriage, but has not yet married the much younger Henry of Navarre. Suppose that Henry decides to realign himself with Francis, marrying the similarly aged Margaret (which admittedly, I find unlikely), while Mary is given to Henry of Navarre. In OTL, Margaret gave birth to her first child in 1528 at about the age of 36, and would be remarrying at about 33 or so. This is a massive risk on Henry's part and I think he would definitely prefer a younger bride this time around. He could even just turn around and marry Anne Boleyn too, there wouldn't be much stopping him at this point. If he does this, then I think Anne's French leanings would possibly revive the previous betrothal to the current Dauphin, Francis. And if he really wanted to hedge his bets in case he doesn't have a son with Anne, then perhaps he opts for Francis' younger brother Henry to prevent a possible personal union of France and England (of course, at this point, they would have no idea that Francis would die in 1536 and that Henry would eventually become King of France).

Margaret of Angouleme is way too old for being taken in consideration by Henry VIII at this point. He will remarry to a younger bride, possibly Anne Boleyn as OTL. Mary will marry the Dauphin as the eldest daughter of the King of England will NOT marry as second son, but the engagement will be reinstated only once Mary had a half-brother

And it both of them die that same year for some reason....well, this probably just leads to a combination of war with Scotland, a civil war, and a French attempt to retake Calais, very likely all at once.

Most likely outcome of this scenario is, again, James V proposing marriage and Mary's regents accepting the offer in her name

 

[rgroberts]

I love the premise of Henry VIII marrying Mary off young without him dying. I agree that a close relative is likely - probably a Brandon boy, because Charles Brandon is his best friend and is also excellent at doing what he's told, so he's not likely to get too big for his britches. And Mary Tudor the Elder is Henry's favorite sister, so that would probably play a part, too.

But what would press Henry into marrying Mary off? Would a near-death experience be enough? What if the Pope granted him his annulment but left Mary legitimate?

 

[isabella]

I love the premise of Henry VIII marrying Mary off young without him dying. I agree that a close relative is likely - probably a Brandon boy, because Charles Brandon is his best friend and is also excellent at doing what he's told, so he's not likely to get too big for his britches. And Mary Tudor the Elder is Henry's favorite sister, so that would probably play a part, too.

But what would press Henry into marrying Mary off? Would a near-death experience be enough? What if the Pope granted him his annulment but left Mary legitimate?

If the Pope granted the annulment to Henry, Mary would remain without doubt legitimate, and would likely marry the French Dauphin

 

[ofyork]

mary was quite small as a child, and there weren't many hopes of her producing a son that her father could name as heir.

 

[Ivan Lupo]

I love the premise of Henry VIII marrying Mary off young without him dying. I agree that a close relative is likely - probably a Brandon boy, because Charles Brandon is his best friend and is also excellent at doing what he's told, so he's not likely to get too big for his britches. And Mary Tudor the Elder is Henry's favorite sister, so that would probably play a part, too.

So good at doing what he's told that he married Henry's sister without his consent so that they could immediately and conveniently knock boots.

I kid though, I know what you mean. It's possible that Henry would have consented to this marriage had they come to him in the first place.

 

[Velasco]

Why exactly are you not looking at foreign candidates?

Foreign princes were largely unpopular with the English and would remove the valuable heiress and her eventual children from native soil - most likely weakening Mary's chances of actually succeeding (some native candidate would seize the throne instead, Aegon II-like).

Long before the Virgin Queen, Henry himself seems to have been cautious about allowing a foreigner to annex his daughter-bloodline-claim to the throne.

I suppose if you're looking at an in-law as a stand-in son, you presumably want a subject - but at that point I'm not sure a Plantagenet-blooded candidate is ideal. Someone who is dependent on Henry's generosity seems more suitable for annexing than someone whose claim to the throne doesn't depend at all on being Mary's husband.

Plantagenet blood made sense to me as a means of
1) bolstering Mary's chances of actually succeeding,
2) Henry seeing a would-be candidate as eligible or worthy,
3) neutralizing a potentially rival claim to the throne.

I don't see Henry marrying his daughter off to a commoner at all. What remained of the white rose nobility makes the most sense to me - either a Pole, a Courtenay or a Stafford in all honesty.

 

[isabella]

Foreign princes were largely unpopular with the English and would remove the valuable heiress and her eventual children from native soil - most likely weakening Mary's chances of actually succeeding (some native candidate would seize the throne instead, Aegon II-like).

Long before the Virgin Queen, Henry himself seems to have been cautious about allowing a foreigner to annex his daughter-bloodline-claim to the throne.



Plantagenet blood made sense to me as a means of
1) bolstering Mary's chances of actually succeeding,
2) Henry seeing a would-be candidate as eligible or worthy,
3) neutralizing a potentially rival claim to the throne.

I don't see Henry marrying his daughter off to a commoner at all. What remained of the white rose nobility makes the most sense to me - either a Pole, a Courtenay or a Stafford in all honesty.

Pretty unlikely at all. Specially NOT a Stafford or a Pole… Henry Brandon is the likeliest candidate as Exeter had no son of a good age for Mary…

 

[Elfwine]

Plantagenet blood made sense to me as a means of
1) bolstering Mary's chances of actually succeeding,
2) Henry seeing a would-be candidate as eligible or worthy,
3) neutralizing a potentially rival claim to the throne.

I don't see Henry marrying his daughter off to a commoner at all. What remained of the white rose nobility makes the most sense to me - either a Pole, a Courtenay or a Stafford in all honesty.

I'm not sure how much it really neutralizes a rival claim here, is the main thing. I'd have to check some family trees as far as non-Plantagenet blooded options, but off the top of my head as far as "not a guy who has a claim in his own right" - a Percy nephew may be preferable in terms of "wholly dependent on his father-in-law's favor", but I don't think there's any of even close to the right age for marrying Mary in her early teens.

But "dependent on his father in law's favor" - in the sense Henry can just assume control here - and "worthy" do seem like they're going to produce "not sure who is both".

 

[ordinarylittleme]

If Katherine died in 1525, Henry would remarry to Anne Boleyn who he was courting already, she would willingly marry him as he was a widower without need for messy divorce, with much less stress then she could carry to full term her sons.
-
Plantagenet blood does not make sense to me. This blood would mean the man can claim the throne on his own WITHOUT need of Mary. That's not what Henry wants.
-
Mary would not renounce her rights to the English crown the same way Matilda didn't when she married a Holy Roman Emperor.

 

[Velasco]

Pretty unlikely at all. Specially NOT a Stafford or a Pole… Henry Brandon is the likeliest candidate as Exeter had no son of a good age for Mary…

The Staffords were England's premier noble dynasty (with a decent smattering of royal blood) up until Buckingham's downfall.
His son would be among the best-bred and most well-endowed native candidates for Mary's hand.

I'm not sure how much it really neutralizes a rival claim here, is the main thing. I'd have to check some family trees as far as non-Plantagenet blooded options, but off the top of my head as far as "not a guy who has a claim in his own right" - a Percy nephew may be preferable in terms of "wholly dependent on his father-in-law's favor", but I don't think there's any of even close to the right age for marrying Mary in her early teens.

But "dependent on his father in law's favor" - in the sense Henry can just assume control here - and "worthy" do seem like they're going to produce "not sure who is both".

I'm not sure "wholly dependent on his father-in-law's" favour is a good thing, here. Henry was controlling, but he was also proud. So a candidate for Mary's hand would have to be well-bred enough. And that would mean royal blood. English royal blood, if we're talking about a native candidate.

If Katherine died in 1525, Henry would remarry to Anne Boleyn who he was courting already, she would willingly marry him as he was a widower without need for messy divorce, with much less stress then she could carry to full term her sons.
-
Plantagenet blood does not make sense to me. This blood would mean the man can claim the throne on his own WITHOUT need of Mary. That's not what Henry wants.
-
Mary would not renounce her rights to the English crown the same way Matilda didn't when she married a Holy Roman Emperor.

A son-in-law would have no reason to try and usurp a throne he and his wife were already on the way to inheriting.

I don't think Mary renouncing her rights was ever on the cards.

 

[Elfwine]

I'm not sure "wholly dependent on his father-in-law's" favour is a good thing, here. Henry was controlling, but he was also proud. So a candidate for Mary's hand would have to be well-bred enough. And that would mean royal blood. English royal blood, if we're talking about a native candidate.

Well, you posted "annexing a potential son-in-law as a stand-in adoptive son and presumptive crown prince" (my emphasis).

Someone like Montague is more likely to present themselves as a Plantagenet than a Tudor, even assuming (I'm not trying to debate this, I mean) he doesn't attempt to take the throne before his father in law croaks. He doesn't need to (and has less reason than other candidates might to want to) lean on Henry's status as king or prestige or anything the way someone less royal blooded would be as far as what being "annexed" sounded like to me.

 

[Avrorrange]

Foreign princes were largely unpopular with the English and would remove the valuable heiress and her eventual children from native soil - most likely weakening Mary's chances of actually succeeding (some native candidate would seize the throne instead, Aegon II-like).

Long before the Virgin Queen, Henry himself seems to have been cautious about allowing a foreigner to annex his daughter-bloodline-claim to the throne.



Plantagenet blood made sense to me as a means of
1) bolstering Mary's chances of actually succeeding,
2) Henry seeing a would-be candidate as eligible or worthy,
3) neutralizing a potentially rival claim to the throne.

I don't see Henry marrying his daughter off to a commoner at all. What remained of the white rose nobility makes the most sense to me - either a Pole, a Courtenay or a Stafford in all honesty.

You don’t need a fictional example when you have a real one.His name was Stephen.

 

[ordinarylittleme]

Y'all realize foreign husbands don't necessarily mean Mary has to leave England, right? Just marry her off to a younger son and he will stay in England with her.