Tudor 'Might-have-been' thread

mary was the heiress to burgundy! the heir to the empire was her husband maximilian

I know, I didn't say otherwise, did I?

That's true, but remember that Marie of Burgundy married a very powerful man, the heir to the Empire - any suggestions for whom little Katherine (for I have no doubt that such would be her name) would be married off to?

She'd be just the right age for Catherine de' Medici's favourite son Henri duc D'Anjou (b. 1552)!

I know, I didn't say otherwise, did I?

my eyesight is bad, sorry... for some reason i saw what you said as like she was the heiress... the thing is, her example shows that the people from the low countries didn't think it was that bad to be ruled by women. the regency of the low countries belonged first to charles 1st's aunt, then to his sister and no-one said a thing about it...

mary was the heiress to burgundy! the heir to the empire was her husband maximilian

At the time of their marriage Maximilian wasn't elected Roman king, that means legally (though it was quite probable that he would be elected) he wasn't heir to the Empire, but later after Mary's death, in 1486. And he wasn't emperor until 1508, when he was not crowned by the pope, but proclaimed emperor. The Habsburg emperors weren't very powerful until they made wise matches under Frederick III (1440-1493) and Maximilian I (1493-1519).
Bella gerant alii!
Tu, felix Austria, nube!
Nam quae Mars aliis, dat tibi regna Venus.
Austria est imperio optime unita
Austria erit in orbe ultima
Austria est imperare orbi universo

Hi guys! I'm reviving this (wonderful) thread to ask your advice!

I'm in the middle of writing (just for the fun of it) a sort of non-fictional style account of what might have happened if Katherine of Aragon had given birth to a daughter after Prince Arthur's death. I've called the girl Elizabeth, and since Elizabeth of York would have been able to take consolation in this after Arthur's death, I've had both her and her daughter Catherine (born 1503) survive. Let's say little Elizabeth and her aunty Catherine are brought up together, and Henry VII dies as normal in 1509. Henry VIII (who is merely still Duke of York) is made Lord Protector, and affiances his niece to Henry Pole, Lord Montagu. Meanwhile Henry himself is engaged to Eleanor of Austria. Later on, Catherine (Henry's sister) is enaged to Archduke Ferdinand (also born 1503), Eleanor's brother.

Does all of these seem plausible?

i have just one comment to make: most historians believe and i agree with them, that catherine was a last attempt by elizabeth and henry to conceive an heir, since the succession was quite fragile if based on one son only... so if arthur had a child, and henry was heir to that child... maybe it wouldn't have been a reason to conceive another heir...

Do you mean Arthur's child wouldn't have married?

no, i mean, had arthur left an heir/heiress, there wouldn't have been such necessity to conceive a new one, therefor no aunty catherine

Oh! Now I understand, thanks for the feedback!   However, Arthur died in April. Catherine was born in February. Therefore she must have been conceived very soon after Arthur's death. Let's say Katherine of Aragon became pregnant just before Arthur died - in those days, didn't they wait till she was a few months gone before making the announcement, to be sure she was actually pregnant?

maybe they knew she wasn't? i don't know... interesting...

maybe they knew she wasn't? i don't know... interesting...

And if they new she wasn't then they must have known she and Arthur didn't have sex . . . or dear this is familiar territory.  

does anyone know how long it took them to ask for a papal dispensation for her to marry henry? because if they did it straight away, that should tell you something... also, the fact that isabella wrote henry after arthur died something of the sort 'we're glad to know our daughter is just the way she was before' (i don't remember exactly how she put it) meaning, a virgin... so maybe, yeah, they did know something...  :-/

does anyone know how long it took them to ask for a papal dispensation for her to marry henry? because if they did it straight away, that should tell you something... also, the fact that isabella wrote henry after arthur died something of the sort 'we're glad to know our daughter is just the way she was before' (i don't remember exactly how she put it) meaning, a virgin... so maybe, yeah, they did know something...  :-/

The dispensation was applied for by both parties immediately following the betrothal which took place on 25 June 1503. It was for a dispensation which (wisely!)included the possibility that the marriage had been consummated.

Hi guys! I'm reviving this (wonderful) thread to ask your advice!

I'm in the middle of writing (just for the fun of it) a sort of non-fictional style account of what might have happened if Katherine of Aragon had given birth to a daughter after Prince Arthur's death. I've called the girl Elizabeth, and since Elizabeth of York would have been able to take consolation in this after Arthur's death, I've had both her and her daughter Catherine (born 1503) survive. Let's say little Elizabeth and her aunty Catherine are brought up together, and Henry VII dies as normal in 1509. Henry VIII (who is merely still Duke of York) is made Lord Protector, and affiances his niece to Henry Pole, Lord Montagu. Meanwhile Henry himself is engaged to Eleanor of Austria. Later on, Catherine (Henry's sister) is enaged to Archduke Ferdinand (also born 1503), Eleanor's brother.

Does all of these seem plausible?

Yessish. I don't think Henry Pole would have been grand enough for the princess though - or are you implying that Henry was making sure she had a rubbish match while he married the Emperor's sister?