Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox

[Prince_Lieven]

Yep, Arran's mother was Janet Beaton, daughter of David Beaton of Creich, just a knight, I think. Lennox's mother, on the other hand, was Elizabeth Stuart, daughter of the Earl of Atholl.

[bell_the_cat]

This Earl of Atholl being the son of (Queen) Joan Beaufort and her second husband, the Black Knight of Lorne!

[ilyala]

As far as I know, he is the only English king to have been allowed to choose his own successor.

not really. from the moment people started realizing that elizabeth was not going to have children they asked her to name a successor. she only did that on her deathbed. isn't that one of the two things she said she'd never do? 1. marry 2. name a successor... both in a way inspired by her sister mary's unfortunate life?

the truth is, though, that henry's will was not irrevocable, since james did come to the throne. neither was elizabeth's wish. they didn't choose their successors, they just suggested... or at least that's how all the other people saw it (see northumberland)... i'm sure henry had other ideas

[Prince_Lieven]

I said English king, so I was right.  

[ilyala]

henry 1st also named his daughter matilda as his successor in lack of a male heir. that some didn't listen was a different matter, but most of them pledged to recognize her as a successor wihle henry was alive

[bell_the_cat]

henry 1st also named his daughter matilda as his successor in lack of a male heir. that some didn't listen was a different matter, but most of them pledged to recognize her as a successor wihle henry was alive

In fact all kings before the end of the twelfth century were well advised to name their successors. I can't think of many primogeniture successions before John - Henry III. Henry II - Richard I was one.

Henry II had his eldest son Henry crowned while he was still alive to ensure his succession (though he fought against his father and died first).

In Scotland the tradition before Malcolm Canmore (known as Tanism) was for the succession to go to different branches of the royal family alternately.

[Prince_Lieven]

Yes, primogeniture only really set in after King John's reign.

It was perhaps fortunate for both Lady Lennox and the Duke of Northumberland that she was in Scotland in 1553. For Northumberland, it meant he didn't have to worry about another potential Catholic heiress running about the country - for Margaret, it may well have saved her life. Northumberland's first priority was to capture Mary and Elizabeth, but afterwards, could he have ignored Margaret's closeness to the throne?

Another question is why didn't Mary I, that most Catholic of queens, make her Catholic cousin Margaret - or indeed the latter's son Henry - her successor? Possibly because to do so, she would have had to overturn Henry VIII's 1544 Act of Parliament, on which her own right of succession hinged.

[bell_the_cat]

Noone would have accepted Margaret Douglas as heir- as Mary knew from the Jane Grey fiasco.

For the first part of the reign Mary was hoping to produce an heir herself.  During the second half ofthe reign an attempt to make Margaret Douglas heir would have produced the very legitimate objection that the Queen of Scots had a better claim (which was being trumpeted at the French court).

In order to avoid the crown going to Mary and Francis, Mary had no choice but to let the throne go to the logical heir (by the laws of primogeniture) - Elizabeth.

[Prince_Lieven]

Yes, yes, I certainly agree - Margaret would have shared Jane's fate. The only thing is, Mary was living in such a fantasy world by the time she died, I'm surprised she considered this.

Mary Stuart's claim was in the senior line, but since Margaret Tudor had renounced the dynastic rights of the descendants of her marriage to James IV, Lady Lennox had the better legal claim - but of course such hair splitting would have cut no ice with the King of France.

[umigon]

Yes, yes, I certainly agree - Margaret would have shared Jane's fate. The only thing is, Mary was living in such a fantasy world by the time she died, I'm surprised she considered this.

Mary Stuart's claim was in the senior line, but since Margaret Tudor had renounced the dynastic rights of the descendants of her marriage to James IV, Lady Lennox had the better legal claim - but of course such hair splitting would have cut no ice with the King of France.

I really think Mary Tudor was much more intelligent and knew much more of politics that we tend to believe. She knew the only possible heir was Elizabeth and she respected that, even if she did it reluctantly.

[Prince_Lieven]

Yes . . . but she had written in her will that the crown was to go to the fruit of her body . . .  

In any case, I think by that time, Lady Lennox hadn't ambitions to become a queen herself - she was more interested in the prospects of her sons . . .

[bell_the_cat]

I really think Mary Tudor was much more intelligent and knew much more of politics that we tend to believe. She knew the only possible heir was Elizabeth and she respected that, even if she did it reluctantly.

I agree with Umigon here! I also think that Mary perhaps subconsciously wanted Elizabeth to be her heir, as she was Henry VIII's daughter. I've no evidence for this though!

[umigon]

Yes, that is exactly what I mean. No matter that Mary and Elizabeth's relationship had become worse and worse year after year (not Mary's fault, in my humble opinion), Mary always thought that Elizabeth was her heir. And, really, she was the best option she could chose!

[Prince_Lieven]

Yes, that is exactly what I mean. No matter that Mary and Elizabeth's relationship had become worse and worse year after year (not Mary's fault, in my humble opinion), Mary always thought that Elizabeth was her heir. And, really, she was the best option she could chose!

Agreed. I lose this time.  

[bell_the_cat]

Back to Mags.

Did she ever express the wish to be queen? She was obviously ambitious for her boys, but as they grew up she probably noticed they were not "king material".