Todayinah Ed. says, the Tudor Dynasty survives the English Succession Crisis because the Earls move against the Cecil Family. If you're interested in viewing samples of my other work why not visit Todayinah site.
| February 8 |  |
Editor says, what if Queen Elizabeth had died at the outset of the Essex Rebellion? Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the author(s). This story was published in the February 2011 edition of Changing the Times Magazine.
| Share this Article on: |  Facebook |  Twitter |
In 1601, on this morning Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex led a party of nobles and gentlemen into the city of London in an attempt to force an audience at Court only to discover that the Queen had expired during the night and the Government was in the hands of his chief adversary Robert Cecil, 1st Earl of Salisbury.
Essex RebellionHis status of court favourite destroyed by the Cecil Family, he had attempted to restore his support amongst the aristocracy by talking himself into the leadership of the military expedition to Ireland. By the end of his time as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, more than half the knights in England owed their rank to Essex. The rebels were said to have joked that "he never drew sword but to make knights".
Relying on his general warrant given under the great seal, Essex sailed from Ireland even though the Queen had expressly forbidden his return and was surprised when he presented himself in her bedchamber one morning at Nonsuch Palace, before she was properly wigged or gowned. On that day, the Privy Council met three times, and it seemed his disobedience might go unpunished, although the Queen did confine him to his rooms with the comment that "an unruly beast must be stopped of his provender".
Brought before the Privy Council and cross-examined by Robert Cecil, he was stripped of public office and confined to York House. In August his freedom was granted, but the source of his basic income, the sweet wines monopoly was not renewed. His situation had become desperate, and he shifted "from sorrow and repentance to rage and rebellion". In early 1601, he began to fortify Essex House, his town mansion on the Strand, and gathered his followers. And persuaded the Sheriff of London call out the Trayned Bands on his behalf.
As the Essex Rebellion reached a bloody climax, King James VI of Scotland struck across the border.
This post is a reversal of Robbie Taylor's King Robert article and continues the Tudor B*stards thread.
Entry posted by Todayinah Editor
© Alternate Historian, 2004-.Story Tags
Permalinks: Post, Day. Browse Thread: Tudor Bstards Source: Wikipedia Labels: Robert Devereux, Queen Elizabeth, Earl of Essex, Essex Rebellion, Tudor. Editor says, in this post we explore an idea from the Alternate History discussion group and repurpose content from Wikipedia. In our timeline, the Sherriff backed out at the last moment, the rebellion was crushed and the Queen was still alive.
~ A bulletproof vest salesman could make himself a nice profit under these circumstances. :)
~ It would end with James VI and I coming to the English throne a bit earlier, and with more bloodshed. I wonder if James would bring the Border Reivers along? Turning them loose on London would seem like a very Heaven to them.
~ Ho boy, plenty of bloodshed. The invitation to Catholic James was one thing, but if he had been seen as an invader... all the more fodder for Civil War earlier.
comments powered by Disqus
February 10
Editor says, what if Queen Elizabeth had died at the outset of the Essex Rebellion? Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the author(s). This story was published in the February 2011 edition of Changing the Times Magazine.
| Share this Article on: | Facebook | Twitter |
In 1639, on this day King Robert II lost the Tudor's greatest living servant when the iconic Monarchist General Oliver Cromwell (pictured) was killed defending Newcastle from the latest Scottish attack.
Essex Rebellion #2At the climax of the English Succession Crisis, the Earl's Counter-plot had prevented the Cecils from passing the throne to King James IV of Scotland, the son of Elizabeth's first cousin once removed, Mary Stuart. Instead they had placed a Tudor B*stard on the throne, Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex.
The enraged Scottish monarch responded by invading England. And instead of the two crowns being united, both monarchs became locked in a bitter dynastic struggle that was continued by their children well into the third decade of the seventeenth century. In Cromwell, the Tudors believed that they had found the military commander that could finally end the Jacobite menace, but with his tragic death the conflict seemed destined to stretch into the 1640s.
This post is a reversal of Robbie Taylor's King Robert article and continues the Tudor B*stards thread.
Entry posted by Todayinah Editor
© Alternate Historian, 2004-.Story Tags
Permalinks: Post, Day. Browse Thread: Tudor Bstards Source: Wikipedia Labels: Robert Devereux, Queen Elizabeth, Earl of Essex, Essex Rebellion, Tudor. Editor says, in this post we imagine that the Essex Rebellion succeeded and the out of wedlock children of Elizabeth I continued the Tudor Dynasty.
~ Of course, one might say that all the Tudors were b*stards...
~ How would a b*stard be Earl of Essex? According to the movie "Anonymous" (the inspiration for this thread) through substitution into the nobility's households as secretly adopted children who become the heirs of the Earldom. e.g the Queen was in a remote location during "progress" and before returning to Court, the baby was taken to that household.
Please click hyperlink for Google Groups Discussion comments.
~ This is some sick shiznit.
~
I can only say b*stards were excluded from the succession.
of course Henry VII and the Tudors were descended from Henry IV, who was fathered by an archer in Calais, but it was covered up.
The major problem is the conversion of Oliver Cromwell to Calvinism and the Independents , which iswhy he stopped being a country squire to take upo arms agianst the religious establishment and was going to emigrate to New England at one stage.
Unless the Cecils decide to embrace calvinism, O C is going to be fighting on behalf of the invading Scots, theirinvasion being for James Vi and I and the Reformed faith.
Of course, Oliver Cromwell might receive one of his messages from God and change sideds with his army just before the battle starts.
~ We do have the problem of religion with the Catholic Stuarts... In fact, many Calvinist Scots hurried him to London to be rid of him. We could very well see him being overthrown in a Scottish civil war if he went too far.
comments powered by Disqus
February 21
Editor says, what if Queen Elizabeth had died at the outset of the Essex Rebellion? Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the author(s). This story was published in the February 2011 edition of Changing the Times Magazine.
| Share this Article on: | Facebook | Twitter |
In 1639, on this day the decades-long "War of the Crosses" took the oddest of turns with the bizarre nature of the fall of the great Tudor city of Newcastle.
Essex Rebellion #2, Reboot co-written with Richard RoperAfter the Scots crossed the border, King Robert II had appointed his first choice military commander Oliver Cromwell. Astonishingly, the iconic Monarchist General had opened the city gates to the pretender to the English throne King Charles of Scotland. And then ordered his men to sign the Covenant put forward by the Scottish Presbyterian Church.
In the following months, Cromwell would force the Stuart accession and then the abolition of the English bishopric. A glittering military career would follow in which he would aid the King's nephew, Prince Rupert of the Rhine in defending the Calvinistic Palatinate and intervening in the Thirty Years War. This post is a reversal of Robbie Taylor's King Robert article and continues the Tudor B*stards thread.
Entry posted by Todayinah Editor
© Alternate Historian, 2004-.Story Tags
Permalinks: Post, Day. Browse Thread: Tudor Bstards Source: Wikipedia Labels: Robert Devereux, Queen Elizabeth, Earl of Essex, Essex Rebellion, Tudor. Editor says, in this post we explore an idea from guest historian Richard Roper who explains ~ this point of divergence would turn history on its head, with Oliver Cromwell putting Charles in power; there would be no Laudian High Churchism which started the English Civil War and Charles coming from Scotland is a Presbyterian even if for political reasons and abolishes the English bishops once in power. The Church of England becomes Presbertyrian (without bishops) and identical to the Church of Scotland. Someone living in this Time Line would find ours incredible.
~ In this TL, Cromwell might be remembered as the monarchy's savior. I don't know if there was enough anti-episcopal feeling in England itself to make the abolition of the office of bishop stand, though.
~ It's "Calvinistic." Fixed - thanks. Ed
Apart from that, I share Eric Oppen's skepticism about the outright abolition of the bishopric. More likely, I think, would be an edict forcing the bishops to swear allegiance first and foremost to the Crown, making the Anglican Church firmly subservient to the secular government while appearing, at least at first, to preserve its privileges.
~ James must've been quite Protestant in this TL. Seems Cromwell was all right with his Divine Rule arguments that way.
comments powered by Disqus
February 13
Editor says, what if Queen Elizabeth had died at the outset of the Essex Rebellion? Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the author(s). This story was published in the February 2011 edition of Changing the Times Magazine.
| Share this Article on: | Facebook | Twitter |
In 1639, on this day King Robert II's second-choice military commander John Lilburne took charge of the Tudor Army defending Newcastle from the latest Scottish attack in the decades-long "War of the Crosses".
Essex Rebellion #3
co-written with Richard RoperUpon arrival he was shocked to discover that contrary to first reports his first choice predecessor Oliver Cromwell was very much alive. Astonishingly, the iconic Monarchist General had turned his coat and joined the Jacobite forces of the pretender to the English throne Charles Stuart, King of Scotland.
Fundamentally, this personal decision was driven by considerations of faith rather than politics. A devoutly religious man who answered first and foremost to God, Cromwell had formed an unshakeable reformist mentality as he matured in years. And during his prayers before the Battle of Newcastle, he had mistakenly determined that the Stuarts rather than the Tudors were better placed to uphold true religion and virtue.
It was quite true that the Stuarts had repeatedly played the Calvanist Card throughout the seventeenth century. But before too long, he would discover a shattering deeper truth. That just about the only thing the Stuarts wanted in life was the throne of England. It was a bitter revelation that would force Cromwell to depart for the Virginian Colonies and open up a brand new chapter in the "Essex Rebellion".
This post is a reversal of Robbie Taylor's King Robert article and continues the Tudor B*stards thread.
Entry posted by Todayinah Editor
© Alternate Historian, 2004-.Story Tags
Permalinks: Post, Day. Browse Thread: Tudor Bstards Source: Wikipedia Labels: John Lilburne, Queen Elizabeth, Earl of Essex, Essex Rebellion, Tudor. Editor says, in this post we imagine that the Essex Rebellion succeeded and the out of wedlock children of Elizabeth I continued the Tudor Dynasty.
~ Cromwell in the colonies would have been very interesting indeed...and I wonder if Britain could ever recover from this series of civil wars?
~ Cromwell Rex, King of the Americas...
~ @Eric Oppen: I doubt it.
~ Wonder if Cromwell would go on a conquering circuit of locals in America as he did in Ireland.
comments powered by Disqus
February 8
Editor says, what if the Earls had moved against the Cecil Family? Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the author(s). This story was published in the February 2011 edition of Changing the Times Magazine.
| Share this Article on: | Facebook | Twitter |
By 1601, Tudor England stood on the cusp of dissolution, but the insidious forces of commercialism that had been nurtured by unscrupulous politicians such as the Cecil Family were suppressed at the last by those noblemen of ancient lineage that Queen Elizabeth had unwisely chosen to ignore throughout her long reign.
Tudor B*stards end the English Succession CrisisWith Protestantism restricted to the north-west of Europe the monarch had been advised to remain unmarried thus giving the Catholic Powers false hope of a union with England. Secretary of State William Cecil (pictured) and son Robert orchestrated a sinister plot to yield the throne to James VI of Scotland, the son of Elizabeth's first cousin once removed, Mary Stuart. But a union of the English and Scottish crowns could only occur if Elizabeth's out of wedlock offspring were denied their inheritance.
For fifteen years, the two factions had fought a cat and mouse game to gain ascendancy. But with the Queen in terminal decline, the Earls were compelled into action. They executed a counter-plot that forced the country to decide whether a Tudor B*stard was preferable to a Scottish overlord. It was a decision that had been postponed for too long because of the catastrophic damage it would cause to the reputation of "Good Queen Bess".
This post is a reversal of Robbie Taylor's King Robert article and continues the Tudor B*stards thread.
Entry posted by Todayinah Editor
© Alternate Historian, 2004-.Story Tags
Permalinks: Post, Day. Browse Thread: Tudor Bstards Source: Wikipedia Labels: Robert Devereux, Queen Elizabeth, Earl of Essex, Essex Rebellion, Tudor. Editor says, the succession crisis is considered to have accelerated the forces of modernity including the power of the Cecils whose heirs ultimately became Britain's Prime Ministers. This article explores counterhistorical ideas in the 2011 movie Anonymous and the Guardian Review.
~ Out-of-wedlock offspring? That would have destroyed Elizabeth's position in one red-hot second! Mary Stuart (Mary Queen of Scots) lost her throne for a lot less! Obvious but valuable insight, adjustment made - thanks. Ed
~ There were several possibles. One, I didn't know about was Arbella, I forget which family she was descended from, and Haddon Hall in Derbyshire was built as a grand mansion to establish her claim. She died in the Tower, where James had sent her.
~ If Scotland and England don't unify, we'd see troubles along the borders for centuries to come. Scotland might see a golden age in the 1800s with the Industrial Revolution (most of which was taken up as part of Victorian British glory in the day).
comments powered by Disqus
Older Posts
Related posts from the same era that you may also like
 President "Medal of Freedom" receives |  Pope Innocent VIII sends his son Cristoforo Colombo to discover "The New Jerusalem" in the Americas. |  New Model Fleet wins the "Battle of Jutland" |
 Mayor Lindsay's "Time for Choosing" speech |  Mycenaeans repulse the "Dorian Invasion" |  March 24, 1603 - "Anne Stanley" Succeeds Elizabeth I |
 March 23, 1801 - Conspiracy to "Murder the Tsar" Stopped |  Mothballing of "Avro Arrow" Project | ![In 1565 on this day a huge Turkish Fleet
quietly disembarked the forces of Vizier Lala Mustafa Pasha at a remote section of Malta [1]; the army then moved inland and seized the unprotected old capital Mdina.](http://www.todayinah.co.uk/support_images/300px-Siege_of_malta_1.jpg) Knights Hospitaller vanquished at the "Great Siege of Malta" |
 Kriegsmarine: "Where is TIRPITZ?" |  Jefferson killed in the "Tragedy at Charlottesville" |  In "Victims of Hitler's Madness" George Marshall loses a potential new ally. |
© Today in Alternate History, 2013-. All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
