Alternate History: What If Mary I Had a Child?

One thing for certain is that if Mary I had a child, he or she would become king or queen. It would have been a more stable ruling if the child was a boy, but Mary had proven that females could rule. I want to point out right now that the term Bloody Mary was coined long after Mary and Elizabeth’s reigns. Many of the English people supported her as queen. Yes, there was a small group of Protestants against her, but then there were Catholics plotting against Edward VI and even Henry VIII!

A child between Mary and Phillip would have been viewed as the rightful heir to the English throne. Not only that, but it would have been viewed as the rightful heir to Phillip’s throne, too. That would have come later, but it would have still eventually happened.

With a child between Mary and Philip, there would have been no reason for the crown to pass onto Elizabeth. The only need would have been if the child died without an heir.

There are very high chances that Mary and Philip would have only had one child together. That would have meant no siblings for the crown to pass onto after the child’s death. Therefore, it would have gone to the next person in line. Mary never officially removed her half-sister from the line of succession, and even with a child I don’t think she would have. She would have put all hope in that child going on to live and have children of his or her own.

However, had the child died without an heir, it is possible that Elizabeth would have become queen. It’s now a big “if.” You see, the child would have been raised as a Catholic and would have wanted to avoid the country moving back into a Protestant country. Elizabeth would have threatened that, so the child may have changed the line of succession—or the regent for the child (likely Philip II of Spain).

There are a few options for a predecessor if Elizabeth was out of the running. Mary, Queen of Scots, remained a Catholic despite her country turning Protestant. While she abdicated from her Scottish throne, there is a chance she would have found safety with Mary’s child as a ruling monarch and that may have led to her becoming next in line for the English throne. Other options would have come from Spain.

There is no doubt that a child between Mary and Philip would have been raised as a Catholic. Mary was devout in her faith, and Philip was a strict Catholic ruling over a Catholic country. It would make sense for them to hire Catholic teachers, the way that Katherine Parr hired Protestant teachers for both Elizabeth and Edward while married to Henry VIII.

Would the country have continued with the burning of the Protestants? It would depend on the position of the council and just how devout the child was raised. There may have been uprisings as the reformed faith pushed through, so the executions may have been necessary for the child to try and keep order.

Would the country have eventually reformed? It’s not something I’m really that sure about. The Stuart period was full of religious issues throughout England, and that could have taken place with Mary’s child. The difference is that the monarch would be Catholic, meaning there would be more pressure to keep the country a Catholic one unless enough people rose up against the idea.

What do you think would have happened with this alternate history? It is fun to guess the what ifs, judging by things that have been confirmed to have happened through various literature. If Mary had a child, history could have dramatically changed, especially if that child lived long enough to have at least one heir.