|
|
Post by Otto Kretschmer on Sept 18, 2023 15:45:44 GMT
AHC: wank France.
|
|
|
|
Post by halferking on Sept 18, 2023 17:57:47 GMT
I must make a slight correction – I think Charles may have been in London rather than Scotland, which makes things slightly more dramatic – the plotters were keen to take him and ride north to the Midlands with Charles to 'kidnap' Elizabeth – so there would be a race on to secure the now infant King.
The plotters were a small group and therefore the number of people who knew of the plot, other than the cabal, were just as small. Many Catholics were be outraged at the attempted attack which was to be carried out in their name. Life for Catholics was ‘uncomfortable’ however unlike his successors who had ruled over a land torn apart by religious conflict James believed them to be loyal to the Crown, but he did make them swear an oath of allegiance to him rather than the Pope. The more radical Protestant MPs, following the failed attack, called for tougher response against the Catholic population.
If the attack had happened, then Catholics would have a choice – either swear allegiance to the ‘new regime’ or declare for Charles. I suspect that they would be appalled and angry that a few men could endanger the entire Catholic community for what was a selfish power grab. There would probably be retaliatory attacks against the Catholics, but I would think that the large percentage, if not all, English Catholics would declare for Charles and the ‘Carolean Regency Council’ and make a very public statement about doing so in the hopes of dissuading Protestant vigilantism.
With regards to Ireland, I’m not sure the Carolean Regency Council would want to upset the apple cart. James’ policy toward the Irish Catholics had many of them leave for Europe, which created an atmosphere of peace. I can imagine that the CRC would want to maintain some sort of truce. Either that or martial law would be declared. The harsh treatment of Irish Catholics would anger the Catholic Monarchs of Europe and that would be a problem at such a vulnerable time.
Which candidate did the plotters want to install as a Catholic ruler of England?
James I & VI and Anne of Denmark had seven children:
Henry Frederick, b. 1549 d. 1612 The Prince of Wales
Elizabeth Stuart, b. 1595 d. 1662 Queen of Bohemia, “The Winter Queen”
Margaret, b. 1598 d. 1600
Charles I, b. 1600 d. 1649 King of England, Scotland & Ireland
Robert, b. 1602 d. 1602
Mary, b. 1605 d.1607
Sophia, b. 1606 d. 1606
The Stuarts were not blessed with good health and Charles, Duke of Albany, 2nd son of James, was no exception. He was a weak sickly infant so although he was the natural successor to his Father the plotters considered him to be too fragile and decided to install his elder sister, the Princess Elizabeth. She was 9 years-old, a girl, a queen, a suitable matriominal prospect and more importantly pliable to be controlled by Men...
|
|
|
|
Post by halferking on Sept 18, 2023 18:23:38 GMT
WI: Henry VIII born a girl.
Ferdinand II of Aragon & Isabella I of Castile considered marrying their son John, Prince of Asturias to Catherine of York, da. of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville. Henry VII had marred her sister Elizabeth of York, which made Catherine an asset.
Henry VII viewed an alliance with Spain to be beneficial against his hereditary enemy – France. He married Arthur off to Catherine of Aragon and when Arthur died, he married Catherine to Henry VIII to keep the alliance alive.
If Henry VIII was a girl, then perhaps, she could be married to a Catholic power perhaps even France...
|
|
|
|
Post by Otto Kretschmer on Sept 19, 2023 16:51:34 GMT
AHC: best case scenario for Napoleon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Sept 20, 2023 21:07:40 GMT
AHC: best case scenario for Napoleon. This gives us several potential PoDs:
- Victory at Akko - Lasting agreement with Tippu Sahib against the Brits - Lasting agreement with tsar Alexander against... you know - Victory against Russia
|
|
|
|
Post by Otto Kretschmer on Sept 22, 2023 6:09:32 GMT
WI: Rome without slavery.
Let's say Rome develops a strong aversion to slavery early in it's history. How is it's economic and political history affected?
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Sept 23, 2023 21:00:57 GMT
WI: Rome without slavery. Let's say Rome develops a strong aversion to slavery early in it's history. How is it's economic and political history affected? ... - How early?
- Too many changes to mention, I'd say.
|
|
|
|
Post by diamondstorm on Sept 24, 2023 3:07:47 GMT
In a scenario where ratification of the Constitution fails and eventually leads to the United States collapsing, is it possible for the Southern States to go to war against each other in the 1780s or 1790s, as well as between said states and their western territories?
|
|
|
|
Post by Otto Kretschmer on Sept 24, 2023 3:35:57 GMT
WI: Rome without slavery. Let's say Rome develops a strong aversion to slavery early in it's history. How is it's economic and political history affected? ... - How early?
- Too many changes to mention, I'd say.
How early? Already during the kingdom or early republic. |
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Sept 26, 2023 0:46:23 GMT
PC: Richard, Duke of Gloucester (OTL Richard III) dies during the 1482 English Invasion of Scotland
Would the early death of Richard in this case have a positive or negative effect on the House of York overall? Keep in mind that the two boys that would later be labelled as the Princes in the Tower will be alive in this scenario. Would a possible reign of Edward V be beneficial or a liability? Moreover, this could also result in Henry Tudor remaining a nobody.
|
|
|
|
Post by Otto Kretschmer on Sept 26, 2023 11:44:28 GMT
AHC: maximally successful crusades
Just how successful could they reasonably be?
|
|
|
|
Post by Otto Kretschmer on Sept 29, 2023 15:10:56 GMT
WI: Charles Martel dies in the battle of Tours, the battle being won by the Muslims obviously.
|
|
|
|
Post by halferking on Sept 30, 2023 10:10:05 GMT
PC: Richard, Duke of Gloucester (OTL Richard III) dies during the 1482 English Invasion of Scotland Would the early death of Richard in this case have a positive or negative effect on the House of York overall? Keep in mind that the two boys that would later be labelled as the Princes in the Tower will be alive in this scenario. Would a possible reign of Edward V be beneficial or a liability? Moreover, this could also result in Henry Tudor remaining a nobody.
The Woodvilles were a low born family with no wealth to speak of. They rose to prominence through Richard’s marriage to Jacquetta of Luxembourg, the widower of Hery V of England’s brother, John of Lancaster, Duke of Bedford. This was a scandal as Jacquetta was nobility descended from the House of Plantagenet and thus her status was of an order of magnitude higher than that of her new husband.
Richard and Jacquetta had 14 children including Elizabeth, their first child. The Woodvilles were Lancastrian, and indeed Jacquetta was related through marriage to both Henry VI (married his uncle) and Queen Margaret of Anjou (her sister married Margaret’s uncle), but this was not enough for Jacquetta. She knew the secret to her success was her children in particular Elizabeth.
Elizabeth had been married before meeting Edward to a man named Sir John Grey of Groby, who was killed fighting for the House of Lancaster. Elizabeth had two sons to Sir John – Thomas* and Richard.
Jaquetta saw an opportunity to effectively switch sides by encouraging a relationship between Elizabeth and Edward IV. The House of York were non-too-plussed by this arrangement – a Lancastrian daughter of no note and the King from the House of York.
Elizabeth nonetheless married Edward IV and set about securing high office and noble titles for her family. It didn’t take long for rumour mill to start turning - an ambitious Commoner who used sex, witchcraft and yes even murder to get her own way. Even Edward IV own brother George, Duke of Clarence was against the union – he even formed an alliance with Richard ‘The King Maker’ Neville, the Earl of Warwick to take Edward IV captive and indeed that worked for a time, but Edward was eventually restored to power. George had married Richard’s daughter; Isabel Neville, to cement the alliance and they had children*. Only two survive Margaret and Edward. Isabel died shortly after giving birth to a son named Richard, who also dies. George accuses Elizabeth of poisoning Isabel and being a witch – so not a great start. George tries again to overthrow his brother, but is executed by being drowned in a barrel of Malmsey Wine (rumour has it he requested this method and Malmsey Wine was a tad expensive)
The main thing to remember is that the Woodville’s power and survival depended totally on Edward IV (a) being alive and (b) being King. So, without Edward the Woodvilles are in a precarious situation. Yes, Elizabeth has sole custody of the boy, Edward V, but he is young, and Elizabeth would need to form a regency council or effectively rule as Queen of England – neither are optimal options and, will piss off a lot of people. Remember her reputation at Court is in the gutter...
In OTL Margaret Beaufort, mother of Harri Tudur (Henry Tudor), works with Elizabeth Woodville to oust Richard III to place her son Henry VII, who is then married off to Elizabeth’s daughter, Elizabeth of York. What if in the ATL Margaret starts to scheme to replace Edward V with her son. She has not gone away and Richard, alive or dead, had no impact on her plans – she wanted power, and she was going to use her son to enforce her claim to the Throne of England... The situation could be easier for Margaret – she could find many allies who oppose Elizabeth and may see her weakness (young King) as a means to overthrow the Yorks and replace them with the Tudors. The outcome of that would be – would the House of York stand to defend Edward V claim or not...
As for Edward V we will never know what type of King he was.
*Side note: Thomas Grey, 1st Marquess of Dorset was Lady Jane Grey’s great-grand father.
*Side note: George and Isabel’s daughter Margaret goes on to marry Richard Pole (Henry VIII)
|
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Sept 30, 2023 23:46:46 GMT
Geez, it is like Margaret Beaufort was also a power hungry schemer in her own right. What's worse is that one of her uncles was the same Lord Somerset that emerged as the 3rd Duke of York's enemies.
I did start an ambitious TL with a Wars of the Roses PoD, but I got no responses so far. I had this discussion with another poster in the PM about a different marriage prospect for Edward (who became Edward IV IOTL). It involves the 3rd Duke of York marrying his eldest son to an Elizabeth of Nevers, who's related to Charles the Bold.
|
|
|
|
Post by Otto Kretschmer on Oct 1, 2023 12:56:10 GMT
WI: no HRE
What if the Hooy Roman Empire was never established? How would it impact German history?
|
|
