Alternate Succession For The British Crown

[Ish]

At least three of Anne's early pregnancies seems to have been carried to term, her two daughters died very young of smallpox and her son died at the age of 11. Most of her miscarriages or premature births happened after the birth of her son, perhaps something had happened during that delivery that made it difficult for her to carry later child to term. I would say that her body never had the time to recuperate between pregnancies, as there were times when she had two miscarriages the same year. Perhaps if she had rested a year or two between each pregnancy/miscarriage she might have been able to carry a child to term.

Most of her miscarriages/stillbirths were after the birth of William, but of her first 6 pregnancies (William being the 6th), half of them ended in a stillbirth or miscarriage. William himself was a very sick child too. This kind of makes me think that Anne herself wasn't necessarily the healthiest of women, and there is speculation that her miscarriages were owing to an unregulated illness.

 

[Ish]

In 1505, negotiations began for the marriage of 11-year-old Princess Mary, the daughter of King Henry VIII, to Charles, the grandson of King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain.
As the victory of Thérouanne was celebrated, it was agreed that Charles and Mary should be married by May of 1514.
Charles and Mary did not marry.
Suppose in May of 1514, Charles of Spain marries Princess Mary.
What happens then?
​

Then instead of marrying Philip II, Mary would have married his father.

This would have made things more difficult for Henry VIII when he went about trying to divorce Catherine, but Mary's marriage wouldn't have removed Henry's desire for a divorce - it might have even made said desire worse, as if he had died with no male heir then he would have guaranteed that England would have been essentially taken over by the Spanish (provided the English didn't revolt against their Queen).

Mary, however, might have been happier. She would have gotten out of England before her parents' marital problems became really bad and would have been able to avoid the worst of her father's abuse as Henry didn't become a truly bad father (by the standards of the 16th century) until he was pushing for his divorce. Getting married younger might have also enabled Mary to have children, particularly if she married a man who she actually lived with (Philip didn't spend a lot of time in England during his marriage).

 

[Ish]

King Edward IV of England reigned 1461 to 1470 and 1471 to 1483.
Suppose Edward and his wife, Queen Elizabeth Woodville have no children.
Edward dies in 1483. Suppose his brother George, Duke of Clarence, does not die in 1478.
George lives numerous years past 1478.
Thus in 1483 the Duke of Clarence becomes King George I. What happens then?
​

Assuming that Edward IV had no children and the Duke of Clarence didn't die in 1478 then when Edward died George would have become king. George as King wouldn't have provided the same opportunity for usurption that Edward V provided, so Richard III likely wouldn't have been able to push his brother off the throne.

George as king likely would have still had to face the threat of Henry Tudor and the Lancasters, but Henry likely wouldn't have gained the same support that he did under Richard's rule owing to the lack of usurption - Richard lost a lot of the York support through his actions, George might have kept it. George had a son, Edward, who only died when he did because Henry VII executed him.

It's hard to say what would have happened within George's reign, whether or not he would have been able to stabilize England, or prevent the Tudors from gaining power. It's also not really easy to say what would have happened in the face of the Protestant Reformation under a Clarence reign either.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

King James I had no son

What if King James I of England and his wife, Queen Anne had no sons? There is no Henry Frederick. There is no Charles I. Upon James I's demise in 1625, his daughter, Elizabeth Stuart (1596-1662), the wife of Frederick V Elector Palatine, succeeds as Queen Elizabeth II.

 

[Denville]

Hi,


Anne Boleyn was not a Queen who went out and distributed alms to the poor and in fact was even booed in public. She was perceived as haughty. And, she was only Queen for about 3 years.
When Anne died, the people turned up just to see her get her 'comeuppence' as it were. Although she died quite dignified and the people begrudgingly admired that 'she died well'....

Catherine of Aragon was one of the finest examples of a Queen England ever had....
Anne Boleyn was not...

Larry

that's not the case, I know this is a late reply but I'm a new member.. Anne was not popular because she had replaced a very loved queen in controversial circumstances. however, she DID give alms to the poor, she worked hard at royal charity. And she did achieve some sympathy and popularity in her death because it was obvious that the case agianst her was very weak and that she was not guilty.

 

[Countessmeout]

What if King James I of England and his wife, Queen Anne had no sons? There is no Henry Frederick. There is no Charles I. Upon James I's demise in 1625, his daughter, Elizabeth Stuart (1596-1662), the wife of Frederick V Elector Palatine, succeeds as Queen Elizabeth II.

Her son Charles would have been Charles I following her death in 1662.Charles II, his son with Charlotte of Hesse-Kassel died 5 years after his dad in 1685. He had no kids. If catholics were not barred his sister Elizabeth, Duchess of Orleans would be Elizabeth III. The French line would follow the current claim until Philippe who died in 1926. The French claim passed to his BIL and cousin, the grandpa of the current Count of Paris. But the British would have passed to his eldest sister Amelia. Her sons died first so in 1951 her sister would rule Queen Louise for 7 years. Juan Carlos' Aunt Maria would be queen and we would have King Adam I, if marriages continued the same. Heir would be Princess Tamara (38). She is unmarried only child, dad only child. But Maria and others would likely wed different if heirs.

If Catholics were a no, Charles II would look back to his dad's siblings. And George I would be king anyways. Though after his mother ruled 29 years. Siblings between Charles I and Sophie died 1st and kids were catholic.