The thread about Mary Stuart managing to escape to France was interesting to read, and sveral other Wis about her have been too. I have another major WI about the ill fated Queen which would have some pretty overarching effects.
Firstly, WI Mary Stuart in 1566 gave birth not to a boy who would become James VI, but instead a girl, also named Mary in honor of her grandmother and also her mother. Assuming history runs it's same course (the sex of the child is NOT enough to keep Mary from making major mistakes), Mary still ends up deposed.
Is the little Princess proclaimed Queen Mary II, or is the possible the nobility, relunctant to see another woman as Queen, even if a child and properly brought up Protestant that the Scottish rebel Lords elect Moray as their king> Or is a second Queen really not that big a of deal? Especially one who will be reared and raised in Scotland, and not end up a virtual foreigner like Mary, Queen Scots seemed to them.
If the little girl is kept made Queen, what happens when she comes of age? Is she allowed to begin her personal rule as James I? Or are there more restrictions in place because she is a woman, with fears of yet another dysfunctional petticoat government? Or is she properly raised and educated, perhaps even as a boy would be, so she can properly rule and reign, sort of Scotland's own Elizabeth?
There's also Elizabeth. She's probably still as unwilling as OTL to ever name an heir. Does she view this younger queen as a threat, or perhaps see herself as a surrogate mother in place of her real mother, imprisoned in England, offering her advice on how to deal with difficult decisions, ect. When Elizabeth dies, does the council act much as it did IOTL, and send forth for Mary II, or would there be more division within the council of who should succeed Elizabeth?
Next, marriage. Who would Mary II marry? Unlike her mother, I don't see her having free reign over this, and her Uncle Moray (or any other Regent) as well as the council having a large say. They would avoid any Scotsman IMO, as to avoid raising one of their own above the rest, or any foreign prince connected to a powerful state. A minor German Prince seems likely, or a Prince of Sweden or Denmark, or perhaps even a son of the Prince of Orange. Any marriage is probably subject to Elizabeth's approval too, with the council seeking a match that won't upset her. This child's only cousin would be Arabella Stuart, the child of Darnley's brother and Elizabeth Cavendish. Charles Stuart was also in disfavor with the Queen over his marriage, so even if Arabella is born a boy, Elizabeth would not be supportive of such a marriage as once again it'd be reaffirming the English blood in Mary, Queen of Scots blooodline and her position as a potential successor. Unlike OTL, the marriage contract probably has numerous stipulations to keep her husband from playing any major role in government, especially if she is raised to be able to govern herself. Definitely no joint reign, and I don't see this Prince crowned as King of Scots, at least not right off the bat. If he proves himself competent in matters of government and is an asset to the Queen? Then certainly.
Another possibility is no birth at all. The ordeal of David Rizzio's murder was quite traumatic, and the instigators held Mary prisoner within her own palace for a short time, and there are accounts of either Darnley or one of the men who carried out the assassination putting a gun on the Queen, pointing it at her stomach. What if all of this stress causes the Queen an even greater amount of stress? Bleeding is observed and essentially she goes into labor early, delivering a stillborn child, as at six months the pregnancy is not viable. This leaves Mary childless, and sours her relationship with Darnley further. Again, I doubt this butterflies her actions, and in this situation may make her even more determined to end the marriage. Either way, Darnley is still murdered, Mary marries Bothwell, and is deposed.
The issue here is Mary's successor, I'm not clear on who would succeed her. The Darnley line still exists in the form of Matthew Stuart and his son Charles, but there is also Esmé Stewart, son of John, the Lord of Aubigny. Neither seem good choices; Aubigny was Catholic, too, while the Darnleys seemed to do whatever suited them and saved their heads. There is also another, older, Stuart of the Darnley branch, that of Robert, who was form time a Scottish Churchman, although he was married IOTL in 1579, although they divorced in 1581 and seem to have had no issue. Would Moray's party even follow the succession in 1566 if the Queen makes rash decisions? They might delay deposing her, instead having her imprisoned much as IOTL, but Moray effectively reigning in her name, but there is still the issue of her possibly escaping, and the sticky issue there is no direct heir of her body readily available to be proclaimed in her place.
Firstly, WI Mary Stuart in 1566 gave birth not to a boy who would become James VI, but instead a girl, also named Mary in honor of her grandmother and also her mother. Assuming history runs it's same course (the sex of the child is NOT enough to keep Mary from making major mistakes), Mary still ends up deposed.
Is the little Princess proclaimed Queen Mary II, or is the possible the nobility, relunctant to see another woman as Queen, even if a child and properly brought up Protestant that the Scottish rebel Lords elect Moray as their king> Or is a second Queen really not that big a of deal? Especially one who will be reared and raised in Scotland, and not end up a virtual foreigner like Mary, Queen Scots seemed to them.
If the little girl is kept made Queen, what happens when she comes of age? Is she allowed to begin her personal rule as James I? Or are there more restrictions in place because she is a woman, with fears of yet another dysfunctional petticoat government? Or is she properly raised and educated, perhaps even as a boy would be, so she can properly rule and reign, sort of Scotland's own Elizabeth?
There's also Elizabeth. She's probably still as unwilling as OTL to ever name an heir. Does she view this younger queen as a threat, or perhaps see herself as a surrogate mother in place of her real mother, imprisoned in England, offering her advice on how to deal with difficult decisions, ect. When Elizabeth dies, does the council act much as it did IOTL, and send forth for Mary II, or would there be more division within the council of who should succeed Elizabeth?
Next, marriage. Who would Mary II marry? Unlike her mother, I don't see her having free reign over this, and her Uncle Moray (or any other Regent) as well as the council having a large say. They would avoid any Scotsman IMO, as to avoid raising one of their own above the rest, or any foreign prince connected to a powerful state. A minor German Prince seems likely, or a Prince of Sweden or Denmark, or perhaps even a son of the Prince of Orange. Any marriage is probably subject to Elizabeth's approval too, with the council seeking a match that won't upset her. This child's only cousin would be Arabella Stuart, the child of Darnley's brother and Elizabeth Cavendish. Charles Stuart was also in disfavor with the Queen over his marriage, so even if Arabella is born a boy, Elizabeth would not be supportive of such a marriage as once again it'd be reaffirming the English blood in Mary, Queen of Scots blooodline and her position as a potential successor. Unlike OTL, the marriage contract probably has numerous stipulations to keep her husband from playing any major role in government, especially if she is raised to be able to govern herself. Definitely no joint reign, and I don't see this Prince crowned as King of Scots, at least not right off the bat. If he proves himself competent in matters of government and is an asset to the Queen? Then certainly.
Another possibility is no birth at all. The ordeal of David Rizzio's murder was quite traumatic, and the instigators held Mary prisoner within her own palace for a short time, and there are accounts of either Darnley or one of the men who carried out the assassination putting a gun on the Queen, pointing it at her stomach. What if all of this stress causes the Queen an even greater amount of stress? Bleeding is observed and essentially she goes into labor early, delivering a stillborn child, as at six months the pregnancy is not viable. This leaves Mary childless, and sours her relationship with Darnley further. Again, I doubt this butterflies her actions, and in this situation may make her even more determined to end the marriage. Either way, Darnley is still murdered, Mary marries Bothwell, and is deposed.
The issue here is Mary's successor, I'm not clear on who would succeed her. The Darnley line still exists in the form of Matthew Stuart and his son Charles, but there is also Esmé Stewart, son of John, the Lord of Aubigny. Neither seem good choices; Aubigny was Catholic, too, while the Darnleys seemed to do whatever suited them and saved their heads. There is also another, older, Stuart of the Darnley branch, that of Robert, who was form time a Scottish Churchman, although he was married IOTL in 1579, although they divorced in 1581 and seem to have had no issue. Would Moray's party even follow the succession in 1566 if the Queen makes rash decisions? They might delay deposing her, instead having her imprisoned much as IOTL, but Moray effectively reigning in her name, but there is still the issue of her possibly escaping, and the sticky issue there is no direct heir of her body readily available to be proclaimed in her place.
