Challenge: Virgin King of England

Firstly, if Elizabeth was born male then he would have succeeded Henry VIII directly, and quite probably would have been married off before Henry dies. The only reason Elizabeth wasn't was that she was considered a bastard at the time

If hypothetical 'male Elizabeth' (lets call him Henry) was married and yet wasn't sexually active with his wife it would be considered very suspicious, possibly pointing at him being gay. That wouldn't be seen in a positive light

Also, applying the word virgin to men at this time is anachronistic. Until the 20th century it only applied to women and girls who'd never had sex. There was no real comparable word for men. The word itself derives from the Latin for sexually inexperienced girl

Calling a man a virgin would be quite an insult. It would be viewed as if you were saying he was nothing more than a young girl, inexperienced and unworthy of having his opinions listend to. Indeed even today calling a man a virgin is often considered insulting
 

Grey Wolf

Donor
You'd be looking for a scholar king, or a cleric type for a man. I suppose Henry VI would have fulfilled this role well enough, but for obvious dynastic reasons he was married off.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
If the child of Anne Boleyn (wife #2) had been male he could well have been called Edward, as was Henry VIII's male child by Jane Seymour (wife #3). To avoid confusion, I'll refer to the 'male Elizabeth' as Fred.

In OTL, as has been mentioned, Elizabeth had been declared illegitimate. Would that have happened to Fred? If Anne B had been executed, it's quite possible he would have been. Assuming the reign of Edward VI is as it was in OTL, would Fred then have been declare legitimate and succeeded him? Given that the alternative was a staunchly Catholic Mary, I think that's quite plausible.

Of course, there is the distinct possibility that Edward and/or his advisers would have sought to 'remove' Fred completely from the scene, viewing a male more dangerous than a female (huh!).

If Henry had been content with a male heir via Anne B, he might not have sought further marriages, particularly if there were other children by Anne B. So Fred would have ascended to the throne in 1547 (assuming Henry's death was as in OTL), maybe as Edward VI of his TL, at the age of 13 years and 4 months. As with 'our' Edward VI, I'd assume that there would have been a period of Regency.

If Fred were to prove as canny and ruthless as 'our' Elizabeth, the events of the 2 TLs during his reign might be very similar. But it's inconceivable (IMHO) that he would not have married to secure the Tudor succession, which could have resulted in alternate continental alliances etc. So that would indicate a longer rule by the House of Tudor and leave the Stuarts in Scotland ...... possibly!

So, a 'virgin' King? Unlikely in the extreme. A celibate 'spiritual' King - not in the pervading climate of 'give us an heir'.
 
If the child of Anne Boleyn (wife #2) had been male he could well have been called Edward, as was Henry VIII's male child by Jane Seymour (wife #3). To avoid confusion, I'll refer to the 'male Elizabeth' as Fred.

If Fred were to prove as canny and ruthless as 'our' Elizabeth, the events of the 2 TLs during his reign might be very similar. But it's inconceivable (IMHO) that he would not have married to secure the Tudor succession, which could have resulted in alternate continental alliances etc. So that would indicate a longer rule by the House of Tudor and leave the Stuarts in Scotland ...... possibly!

So, a 'virgin' King? Unlikely in the extreme. A celibate 'spiritual' King - not in the pervading climate of 'give us an heir'.

One possibility would be for 'Fred' to suffer some injury or illness at an early age and be diagnosticated as either sterile or impotent.
 
But presumably, if Anne had produced a healthy male child, Henry would not wanted to get rid of her, so 'Fred' would have gone to the throne in '47, Mary would have been a princess always, and Anne Boleyn might have still been alive, to be the Tudor version of the Queen Mother. [in this case, the 'King' Mother] I always understood that Henry only got tired of Anne because she didn't give him a son, not that he really believed that crap about her being a witch. He would still have been banging Jane Seymour, et al, but there would be no more need for wives.
Completely unrelated, was Edward the Confessor possibly a virgin? I don't know much about him, except that he was married, had no issue, and was very religious. Perhaps, priestlike, he thought celibacy was a virtue? Possibly he was secretly gay?
 
Also, applying the word virgin to men at this time is anachronistic. Until the 20th century it only applied to women and girls who'd never had sex. There was no real comparable word for men. The word itself derives from the Latin for sexually inexperienced girl

Calling a man a virgin would be quite an insult. It would be viewed as if you were saying he was nothing more than a young girl, inexperienced and unworthy of having his opinions listend to. Indeed even today calling a man a virgin is often considered insulting


Malcolm IV of Scotland (reigned 1153-1165) was called "the Maiden" but died age 24 and might well have married if he had lived longer.
 
ASB from the POD given in the OP, but I'll give it my closest shot.

To really pull this off without serious opprobrium directed against the "Virgin King" (which, as others have mentioned, is a nonsense title in this era), you need a situation to occur where there are three brothers (A, B, and C). A is raised to be the heir, B is given a clerical education, and C is just another younger son. A and C get married, but only C has children. A dies young, so B can have a long reign, without need for a male heir, as everyone knows that C and his children will be able to continue the line.

Interestingly, this situation fits nearly perfectly for the Tudors if Arthur survives a little longer, but has no children, and Edmund Tudor survives past his first birthday and into adulthood, having children of his own; Henry VIII becomes your "Virgin King", ironically.
 
A king who was celibate or unmarried by choice would be under all sorts of pressure to father an heir, especially if there's not one immediately available.

(In Douglas's situation, there is one available, so that might not be such a big deal.)
 
But surely this is only a pressing problem for 'Fred' because he's ascending to the throne at age 13, and thus his mother and councillors will marry him off as quickly as possible? Let Henry VIII live a few more years because the presence of a healthy (if a bit odd) heir lessens his stress, and then who can make Fred marry if he refuses to? People will be plotting for his throne and planning his murder regardless, so it's not as if marrying and fathering legitimate children would really make him safer. Still assuming no younger siblings ever enter the picture, of course, and that Mary goes to Spain and still dies childless there.

Even if it's a lie, SOMEONE is going to claim to be Fred's bastard in 1603 to oppose the accession of the Stuarts.
 

Blair152

Banned
WI the Confederates won the Battle of Glorietta Pass?

This is another Civil War related thread. It deals with the only battle fought
in the New Mexico Territory. A little background: Both the Union and the Confederacy claimed New Mexico. The Confederates created the Confederate
Territory of Arizona, and sent troops from Texas, into the New Mexico Territory, the Union sent the 5th Colorado Militia, into Mexico to find the
Confederates, and stop them. They met at a mountain pass. What if the Confederates won the battle of Glorietta Pass?
 
The nearest thing to a Virgin King...

... Was that prat Edward the Confessor, who let England be abused by William the Norman Bastard.

He refused to consummate his marriage as he thought this would ruin his plans for sainthood.

Useless!:mad:
 
Firstly, if Elizabeth was born male then he would have succeeded Henry VIII directly, and quite probably would have been married off before Henry dies. The only reason Elizabeth wasn't was that she was considered a bastard at the time

Henry would face same problems. Liz's bastardom was result of Henry VIII divorcing his first wife and marrying Anne under circumstances catholics didn't find legitimate. Gender had nothing to do with it.

If hypothetical 'male Elizabeth' (lets call him Henry) was married and yet wasn't sexually active with his wife it would be considered very suspicious, possibly pointing at him being gay. That wouldn't be seen in a positive light

Of course this would have to come out and not be confined to their bedroom. As for being gay, one of Liz's suitors was notorious transvestite so that was (somewhat) tolerated.

Also, applying the word virgin to men at this time is anachronistic. Until the 20th century it only applied to women and girls who'd never had sex. There was no real comparable word for men. The word itself derives from the Latin for sexually inexperienced girl

Calling a man a virgin would be quite an insult. It would be viewed as if you were saying he was nothing more than a young girl, inexperienced and unworthy of having his opinions listend to. Indeed even today calling a man a virgin is often considered insulting

Indeed. he would likely be called "celibate", "chaste" or something similar.

However if "Henry" is married (to whom? were there any promising ladies in marriage market where Liz browsed?) that means that England is tied to that country and can't avoid such connections as single Liz could. If it's France england is more likely to get sucked into their religious wars. If it's Spain than religion would be a big problem (one can assume he would be raised protestant, same as Liz).
 
Elizabeth would have been Edward had she been a boy (the announcement for the birth of the prince was already drafted when Anne took to her lying in bed).
A healthy male heir born in 1533 - saves Anne's life - she might have been temperamental but her position would have been unasailable whilst the boy lived - given that she conceived at least three times during her short marriage - I would suspect more children - her stress could have played a significant role in her miscarriage and stillbirth after Elizabeth was born.
Catholic Europe would regard the future Edward VI as a bastard - but as a male he wouldn't attract quite as much dislike as Elizabeth did.
Mary remains an outsider under pressure over religion until her death - with little chance of a marriage - as to Catholic Europe she is still going to be Henry's only legitimate child.
I also think you'll see a slightly stronger English reformation - not as strong as Scotland's in the 1550's but Anne and Crammer were close - so think the Henrician church will owe a bit more the Luther - and that will mean her son will probably not be that disimilar in religion to otl Edward VI. That in turn make
Anne if she outlives Henry is simply Queen Anne - English Queen Dowager's had no official title, style or constitutional or legal position. The style Queen Mother was used informally for Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary but their official styles remained simply Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary - whilst their husbands were reigning they were simply the Queen. Queen Elizabeth used a more formal style partially to differentiate herself from the Queen her daughter given they shared a christian name in Royal circles she remained simply Queen Elizabeth.
 
Top