A place for images, links, and discussion relevant to the Tudor period. The Tudor period is defined as from the beginning of Henry VII's reign in 1485 to the end of Elizabeth I's reign in 1603. All history (economic, social, religious etc) and discussion of all types of people (monarchs, nobles, commoners) welcome. Submissions pertaining to the Wars of the Roses may be accepted or removed at the discretion of the mods.
After all his obsession with having a male heir because of the contemporary view women could not rule, why were they added back into the succession? Were women rulers becoming more common at the time or was it simply lack of choice?
Sort by:
Best
Open comment sort options
Best
Top
New
Controversial
Old
Q&A
Lack of choice
Seriously, the Tudors and Plantagenets had killed off most of their own relatives by then. Who else was there.
Yeah if you don't have Henry's children (no matter how bastard they are this week), then you back to those of his sisters.
Which means:
Mary Queen of Scots - who is Scottish and a child. She isn't yet engaged to the Dauphin and spirited out of Scotland to France, but there is no way she is an improvement on anybody else
If for some reason James V is still alive, or MQS is a boy and Anglo-Scots relations are better then maybe Henry would make them heir in preference to Mary or Elizabeth
Or you have Mary's daughters by Charles Brandon, who are also all girls, maybe had either of their Henrys had survived they'd be preferred. They are male, English and born in 1516 and 1523 so they'd be capable adults at the time of Henry's passing.
But it's just girls all the way down, so Henry sticks to his own
I've always thought it was deeply ironic that England and Scotland finally united and ended* centuries of warfare... because the English royals had killed all of their own relatives that they could reach.
*Mostly ended...
The Tudors are just one irony after another. Henry having his two daughters end up as the first two Queen Regnants of England, one after the other, is so delightful it's hard to believe it isn't fiction.
Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley (who married Mary Queen of Scots) was a potential claimant. He and Mary were cousins, both grandchildren of Margaret, Henry VIII's older sister.
But VIII would prefer his own child, even a woman, over his nephew.
Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley was also hated so much that he was literally assassinated. Some even suspected Mary, Queen of Scots of killing her own husband due to abuse.
He was blown up then strangled and she had no explosives experience and had freshly given birth. I don’t believe the stories of her involvement and think Elizabeth just wanted her dead
this! literally the Tudor & Elizabethan propaganda still runs strong hundreds of years later…. bc Elizabeth is more popular than Mary she gets all the praise and Mary all the negative speculation
He was only a month old when Henry died, so that's not really relevant to the succession question.
He's born 1546, a minor and a Scot
In my opinion, it was just a cover all of his bases. The hope was that Edward would rule, marry and have an heir. Mary and Elizabeth were a safety net so if that Edward died without his own kids, then hopefully by then, Mary and Elizabeth would have heirs that could rule but it would have been an impossibility if they were both bastardized and removed from the line of succession, they had to be added back in. Also, because they were only about 50 years removed from the cousins war, I’m sure they wanted a clean line of succession.
I don't think it crossed Henry's mind that all three of his children would die childless.
Also, Henry was sincerely religious (most of the time). I'm sure he believed God gave him Edward as proof that his marriage to Jane was holy, and that God created Edward to be the next king.
I've always thought disinheriting the girls was, no matter how much Henry wanted a boy, a very stupid thing to do for that reason. Yeah, well done, now you have no heir, what a good idea, no way that could lead to problems.
England came very close to having another succession crisis due to King Henry VIII's pride and ego. It was very fortunate that Mary, Queen of Scots married Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, another claimant to the throne, and gave birth to Prince James, Duke of Rothesay (later King James VI of Scotland), who also managed to survive long enough to be selected as Queen Elizabeth I's heir, and inherit the crown of England. If James had died without producing any heirs of his own, there would be no clear successor to Elizabeth I.
Possible heirs in the event of King James VI's death:
Lady Arbella Stuart, who had been disowned by Queen Elizabeth I for marrying William Seymour, 2nd Duke of Somerset without royal assent;
Edward Seymour, Lord Beauchamp, whose legitimacy was questioned;
Anne Stanley, Countess of Castlehaven, who was mired in public scandal; her second husband - Mervyn Tuchet, the 2nd Earl of Castlehaven - was arrested and charged with being an accomplice to her rape by a servant. He was also accused of sodomy, found guilty, and was executed on 14 May 1631.
If we remove the line of Mary Tudor from the succession entirely, on account to all of the potential claimants, many of which were dubious, the succession would then fall back on the earlier Lancastrian and Yorkist lines. Assuming that Parliament would exclude all potential Yorkist claimants, the closest royal relatives and potential heirs to the throne with Lancastrian blood would be through the earlier Beaufort line.
John Beaufort, 1st Earl of Somerset and his descendants would be examined with the greatest scrutiny; specifically, those of his eldest daughter, Joan Beaufort, Queen of Scots, the spouse of King James I of Scotland. While King James VI was also the strongest claimant to both the thrones of England and Scotland through his descent from Joan Beaufort, as well as Margaret Tudor, in the event of his death, this complicates things greatly; for one, Joan Beaufort and King James I had only one son - King James II of Scotland - but a bevy of royal daughters; whereas Joan Beaufort had three sons with her second husband, James Stewart, the "Black Knight of Lorne".
Complicating matters further were that several of Joan's daughters were married into the royal lines of foreign countries, meaning that none of their blood remained in Scotland or England. The most likely successor by James VI's time would be George Gordon, 1st Marquess of Huntly, who was also an ally, supporter, and favorite of King James VI. Huntly was not only one of the few senior remaining descendants of Joan Beaufort in Scotland, but he was also the grandson of James Hamilton, 2nd Earl of Arran and Duke of Châtellerault, another claimant to the Scottish and English thrones.
However, here, another issue arises: Huntly was an ardent Roman Catholic, which also disqualified him from inheriting the throne of England. In addition to this, his ancestor, Annabella of Scotland, also had her marriages annulled, making Huntly "illegitimate".
If we go through the line of King James II of Scotland, his only other surviving child, besides King James III, was Mary Stewart, Countess of Arran, who married and had issue with James Hamilton, 1st Lord Hamilton. From this line came James Hamilton, 1st Duke of Châtellerault, 2nd Earl of Arran, who was 2nd in line to the Scottish throne behind King James VI. His son and heir, James Hamilton, 3rd Earl of Arran, had been unsuccessfully proposed as a potential husband to a few potential Tudor brides, but each candidate refused to marry him on a account of his mental illness. He thusly died childless.
The claim then passed to John Hamilton, 1st Marquess of Hamilton, who was married to Lady Margaret Lyon, a staunch Protestant. The only issue with John Hamilton is that he was an unknown Scottish noble. John Hamilton also died in 1604, making his son, James Hamilton ("Lord Aven"), the 2nd Marquess of Hamilton and 4th Earl of Arran.
Per Wikipedia, James Hamilton ("Lord Aven") was also a favorite of King James VI:
This comment has been edited for clarity.
Thank you! This is fascinating.
You're welcome!
Wow, this was super interesting! Thank you! I can't believe they were all so closely related!
You're welcome! It appears King James VI kept James Hamilton ("Lord Aven") as part of his court to use as a "backup heir" in the case he or his heir(s) died prematurely.
This is so interesting, thanks for all this work!
You're welcome, and thank you for your reply!
Henry VIII wanted a more permanent reconciliation between him and his daughters when he knew he was dying.
He also wanted to make sure that he had spare heirs in case Edward VI died without issue. So in a way it was lack of choice.
Henry VIII also wanted the Crown to remain in Tudor hands and keep their dynasty strong. He had named how the line of succession should go.
In monarchies, the throne typically goes to the firstborn male. The British crown allowed both males and females to inherit the throne. But males were to inherit first and if they died without issue, the females would inherit.
Little did he know 😂
He wanted that boy so bad but his youngest daughter was one of the most famous monarchs in history. Really if anyone had changed naming conventions, Tudors could have just been on the throne forever, as long as they had that last name.
If Elizabeth had a girl, she could have just given her the Tudor name (instead of her husband's) and the throne.
The issue with the latter sentence is that any female offspring of Queen Elizabeth I would've still been seen as the house of Elizabeth's husband, not the House of Tudor. It's why King James VI/I was designated as part of the House of Stuart, despite being a descendant of Margaret Tudor. Every time a new paternal line comes in, the children are usually designated as members of the father's house. The House of Windsor, and keeping the mother's house, is only a relatively recent change in royal history.
That's what I mean- if naming conventions were different, her children could just be named as the House of Tudor, rather than getting credit,so to speak, for the father's house.
Lack of choice. He hoped for Edward's line continuing but was worried about it happening. And his other options, aside from his own daughters, were also women.
His sister Margaret had one son, James V, but Henry outlived him and James had one legitimate child, Mary, Queen of Scots, live until adulthood. His sister Mary has one son, Henry Brandon, and he died before Henry VIII, too. She had two daughters live until adulthood and Frances Brandon had Jane Grey along with 2 other daughters.
All he had was women to chose from.
And they say God/the universe has no sense of humour...
The only other distant options were the Poles and one became a priest and he killed off all the other claimants...
He had SO MANY women around him- 6 wives, 2 daughters, 2 sisters, all those nieces, it's remarkable
Neat how that worked out.
Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley (who married Mary Queen of Scots) was also a potential claimant. He was another grandchild of Margaret, Henry VIII's older sister.
Yes, he was, through Margaret's second marriage. He's still behind Henry's daughters and even his wife. The Catholic factor was another knock against him. Mary I was very much the exception because she was Henry's own daughter. Of course, why give the Scottish family a chance when there's relatives in England.
Edward was an obviously sickly kid, and the next in line to the throne was Mary Queen of Scots, who was in the hands of the French, or as an alternative Frances Brandon, mother of Lady Jane Grey. There were no male heirs left after Edward, and he wanted to make sure that his line at least continued to rule. Besides, there were plenty of Catholics who would have supported Mary regardless of whether he restored her to the line of succession, he likely believed that this was ensuring a peaceful transition of power if Edward did die without an heir. Obviously he didn’t foresee Edward making up a whole new succession plan though.
I don't think he didn't think women could rule. Certainly there were successful women rulers in other European countries that he would have been aware of, such as Isabela of Spain. However, he was also aware that his father had won the crown on the battlefield and that there would be more threats to it, and he just thought men were more likely to command the respect of the aristocracy and therefore keep the throne.
So he wanted a male heir because he thought that was more secure. But he knew it was possible that Edward would die childless and covered his bases.
That’s a good point - Catherine of Aragon’s mother was indeed a remarkably successful ruler.
It’s also worth remembering that both Mary and Elizabeth came to the throne with popular support. He’d given them that in part by naming them in his succession.
I think he wanted them to be considered good marriage prospects so that Edward could use them diplomatically. Mary was old by this point but Elizabeth was highly desirable as a marriage prospect and it’s well documented that lots of marriages were considered for them - which could have helped Edward longer term as king.
No one really thought women couldn’t rule. Henry had his first and last wife act as regents with major authority- and they both did well. Even France, where women couldn’t inherit the throne, they acted as regents.
If Edward didn’t produce a male hier the direct Tudor named dynasty would end. But he’d rather his daughters than a more distant relative.
But a woman ruling was complicated. Queen Anne was the first female monarch to be married to a man who didn’t become co-king with her. But at the same time, steps could be taken to ensure the succession - Phillip lost the throne when Mary I died, William didn’t when Mary II died but after he did it went to her closest hier.
And Mary I was the first Queen to successfully take the throne.
Henry wanted his blood on the throne, as close as possible. And he was right in the end, replacing them in the succession kept the Tudor line for one of the most remarkable eras of English history. It maintained it enough to keep the throne in his father’s genealogical line through his sister’s descendants.
Did he believe that Mary and Elizabeth would protect his son’s rule if they were listed as heirs. I know people will leave someone a small amount of money so they can’t challenge a will. Was his goal similar? Did he also wish to protect his daughters or finally acknowledge them so they could marry? They also would be more likely to accept their brother as the natural successor. If he wrote Mary out of the line of succession that could have caused a war. Instead his daughters are given legitimacy the potential to marry well have kids be the mother of kings. I feel like he didn’t necessarily see them as both becoming queens in their own right.
There may have been more political reasons , but I personally have always seen it as an aging man wanting a harmonious life .
Henry had always loved his daughters , even though he had a funny way of showing it .
During his later life he seems to have wanted to capture the more tranquil and stable moments from his earliest relationships with Catherine of Aragon , where he was seen as the golden prince and his wife was dutiful and tender towards him .
Catherine parr seemed to offer him this , she seems to have been calm and compassionate, had already had two older husbands she had cared for until Their death as well as being very intelligent . She reminded him of his first love Catherine A and reminded him of a time when he was the most promising prince in the world .
This , in my opinion based on what I have read , was why he felt so comfortable with going back to France and why he felt so comfortable leaving Catherine in charge of England in his absence, just like he had done with his first wife .
After all the drama surrounding Catherine Howard Henry just wanted a simple live with a loving dutiful wife and children.
Catherine p was older than Catherine h had been and already had two previous husbands so there was no chance of her lying and pretending to be a virgin, Henry wanted assurance from his final wife and this allowed him to be more trusting towards her .
As she reminded him of his youth and calmed his temper he began to concede to her wishes to allow Mary and Elizabeth back in the succession. After all Edward was older and Henry had well established Edward as heir , neither daughter posed much of a threat anymore to Henry’s rule or Edwards succession.
Henry was old and tired and most likely was influenced by Catherine p whom he trusted and with no obvious risk to Edward he just wanted to live the remainder of his days being doted on by his obedient ( and probably terrified) family .
Because he had no other choice. I think he knew despite his efforts, Edward wouldn’t survive them. He just had a bad track record with his children surviving. Particularly the boys.
If memory serves, I don’t think Henry Fitzroy lived to be 20?
Edit: typo.
I think Henry Fitzroy was 19
I think you’re right
Henry Fitzroy died in 1536, after Henry VIII married Jane Seymour. Fitzroy was 17 and married to Mary Howard but had no issue.
Right. But he died tragically young. I don’t think he saw his 20th birthday. I think Henry VIII feared the same for Edward.
Yes — none of Henry VIII’s sons (Henry, Duke of Cornwall, Henry Fitzroy and Edward VI) lived to adulthood. It would be interesting to see how each son would have acted as a adult!
I’d hope they’d do a better job than Edward. I think it’s good he died young cause he was a tiny tyrant in the making. He’d have been far worse than Henry imo.
I keep thinking about that poor Falcon he tore to pieces.
Legacy. He was only the 2nd Tudor to rule and despite his insanity, he was not a fool. He had far more children in the grave than living. Without the death of his brother, he would have never came to the throne. He wanted a Tudor. No more, no less.
He knew first hand one heir is not enough. He himself was a second son who only by the death of his elder brother succeeded to the throne. If his son did die without an heir, he wanted to make sure that his line and the Tudor family would stay on throne. He had no way of knowing that all three of his children would die childless. Looks like his plan didn’t work to well. lol 😂
It was likely less about the girls themselves and more about putting their future hypothetical sons in line.