r/UKmonarchs • u/t0mless Henry II / David I / Hywel Dda • Jul 24 '25

On this day On this day in 1567, Mary, Queen of Scots, was forced to abdicate in favor of her infant son, James VI, after the suspicious murder of her husband, Henry Stuart, and her sudden, controversial marriage to the Earl of Bothwell, which provoked the growing outrage among the Scottish nobility

Post image
107 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

10 comments sorted by

23

u/sophieyi Jul 24 '25

I wonder what Scottish nobles would have done if baby James VI had died. Good thing he grew up healthy and had heirs. But I think it must have been quite a gamble for them to invest all for an infant who could die any day at that era.

16

u/bassman314 Sweyn Forkbeard Jul 24 '25

I am saying this as someone with Scottish Ancestry...

Scottish nobles weren't always the smartest group of folks. They rarely agreed, even when the course of action was patently obvious. Some just have to be contrarian to be contrarian.

The clans were easily subverted and manipulated by the English.

7

u/t0mless Henry II / David I / Hywel Dda Jul 24 '25 edited Jul 24 '25

I was looking into this and it’s a mess.

There would definitely be a push for Mary’s restoration. Undoubtedly crowning her would be controversial, but she’d have a strong legal claim as James’s mother and former monarch. Perhaps some arguments that her (forced) abdication was now void. Mary would definitely demand to be reinstated, and foreign allies (especially France) would back her. But the Protestant regency (figures like Moray, Morton, and Mar) had no interest in giving up power or returning Scotland to Catholic rule, and I would assume argue Mary forfeited her right by her disastrous marriage to Bothwell, her suspected role in Darnley’s murder, and her loss of public support. It might lead to civil war but I really don’t see Mary regaining the throne. If she does, it would be short term.

Alternatively, the only other option would be the Hamiltons, descended from Mary Stewart, daughter of James II. Namely, James Hamilton, Earl of Arran (1519-1575), had a claim and had been heir presumptive earlier in Mary’s reign. Scottish nobles knew and distrusted them, but the Hamiltons were Protestant-leaning (ish) and better positioned in Scottish politics.

However, James Hamilton had converted to Catholicism in the mid 1560s. So the stronger claim (or at least one Parliament was done with) would be his son, also James Hamilton, who was Protestant, but he was exhibiting symptoms of mental illness by the early 1560s (literally described as “insane”) so I’m not quite sure he’d be popular. Palatable perhaps and could be installed with a regency. Otherwise the options are the younger brothers John 1st Marquess of Hamilton, and Claude 1st Lord Paisley.

John never had the political support as some of his family did, so his eligibility may be a bit murky, Claude was Catholic and apparently also suffered from “insanity” later in life. There was a daughter named Anne who was a lady-in-waiting of Mary of Guise and technically eligible if her brothers were passed over! But she was married into the Gordons, who were Catholic even if Anne herself didn’t seem to be.

Completely alternatively, it goes to the line of James Hamilton 2nd Earl of Arran’s elder sister Elizabeth. Elizabeth married (second marriage) Matthew Stewart 2nd Earl of Lennox, who was a descendant of a common Stewart ancestor and great-grandfather of Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley. Henry had a younger brother named Charles 5th Earl of Lennox, so he could maybe claim the throne on basis of primogeniture. But because of his ties to Darnley, I’m not sure if he would be successful. Would the Scottish magnates really want the brother of Mary’s husband, whom they despised?

This is a tangled mess, but imo it would end up being James Hamilton, 3rd Earl of Arran with a regency. If he’s deemed unfit, it passes to his brother John (if John’s not already the heir presumptive) who was Protestant and in history had a close relationship with James VI. The line continues through him. John is probably the safest, most stable option at that point.

13

u/volitaiee1233 George III (mod) Jul 24 '25

Man imagine if all this happened like 50 years earlier. Shakespeare so could have made an awesome play about it. Mary’s life was as Shakespearean as it gets.

3

u/RoosterGloomy3427 Jul 24 '25

Just started Jane Dunn's 'Elizabeth and Mary' Can't wait to get to that part.

4

u/GoldfishFromTatooine Charles II Jul 24 '25

So began the long and glorious reign of James VI.

6

u/Glennplays_2305 Henry VII Jul 24 '25

I forgot if the Scottish hated him or not

17

u/t0mless Henry II / David I / Hywel Dda Jul 24 '25

If you mean Bothwell? Definitely. His marriage to Mary after Darnley’s murder was seen as scandalous and likely coercive. The Scottish nobles rose up and forced Mary to abdicate largely because of him. The Scottish lords claimed they were acting to “free her from Bothwell,” (probably out of concern on how much influence he would have in addition to the suspicious circumstances) but Mary initially refused to denounce him, even as their military support crumbled.

4

u/Bugsy_Neighbor Jul 24 '25

James Hepburn, 4th Earl of Bothwell was a nasty piece of work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hepburn,_4th_Earl_of_Bothwell

Mary, Queen of Scots was among a list of women badly used by the Earl.

Being Jack the Lad too often finally caught up with Bothwell, and his end was gruesome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUDML08E5VQ

2

u/BodyAny3964 Jul 25 '25

"But marrying her dead husband's murderer does not go down well with the Scottish people, who force Mary to hand her crown to her baby son, James VI, and run away to England." - Bob Hale, 2013