Printer-friendly version
Author:
Taxonomy upgrade extras:
I am aware there are parentage questions of at least two kings:
Edward III: was his father Edward II or William Wallace? (source: movie Braveheart)
James I: did the real James I die as an infant? (source: biography of Mary, Queen of Scotts)
Are there any other similar questionable parantage situations with the king or queen?
Please note I am not talking about events like the War of the Roses where two or more branches of the family claimed the throne.
shalimar
Comments
All of them?
I'll bet someone somewhere has questioned the parentage of every one of the monarchs (save the recent Windsors); it was sort of the only way to attack them. Another (and more likely) putative father for Edward 3 is Edward I, purposed because Ed 2 supposedly couldn't or wouldn't do the job and because they were similar in temperament and abilities. Of course Ed 2 couldn't have really been Ed 1's child now, could he?
Henry the sixth was called a bastard for all sorts of reasons. The Beauforts (ancestors of the Tutors) were legitimized children of John of Gaunt and his long time mistress whom he married late in life, so that taints them all. (That mistress, Katherine Swynford, was probably Chaucer's sister-in-law btw; proving that great art has always need connections with the great)
Elizabeth I's parentage almost led to a civil war in spite of the fact that she had all of the Tutor features and strongly resembled H 8. (E I is another good one to use for the replaced prince story too, because she did have a near fatal bout of scarlet fever as a child.)
Victoria's lineage is questioned because with her hemophilia was introduced into the line for the first time. It was understood to be inherited from the mother by then. But that would mean either her father was a hemophiliac or call into question her mother's parents more than her own. Sudden appearances aren't unheard of though, but that is the most famous and clear case of it happening.
But if you want to libel any of these monarchs go ahead, you won't be the first and it's a tort that doesn't survive death.
Mercedes Lackey has...
a series of books around Elizabeth I... And there ARE changelings involved., but she's not one of them.
"Another (and more likely)
"Another (and more likely) putative father for Edward 3 is Edward I, purposed because Ed 2 supposedly couldn't or wouldn't do the job and because they were similar in temperament and abilities."
Edward I died on 7 July 1307. Edward III was born on 13 November 1312. :-)
There's no reason to assume that Edward II was not the father of Edward III; he and Queen Isabella were certainly together at York nine months before Edward III's birth (they were also together nine months prior to the births of their three younger children). Nobody in the 14th century doubted that Edward II was Edward III's father - there's not the slightest hint in any source that it ever occurred to anyone that he might not be - and the first suggestion that someone else fathered Edward III that I've found dates from a 1982 novel.
Edward II fathered an illegitimate son called Adam in his early to mid twenties, so apparently wasn't repulsed by sexual relations with women!
Not much question in the first.
Eduard III was born five years after William Wallace died. That would have been one long gestation.
Movies are not reliable sources of historical information.
LoriAnn
history and movies
<snicker />
My father was an historian. He knew all the best books to give to a bright, somewhat isolated child, so I was voraciously devouring specialist histories by the time I hit Junior High. Even better, though, was watching movies with him ... oh, nearly unbearable joy. For me. My brother and sister and my mother hated it, because we'd sit there and make fun of anachronisms and outright historical falsehoods, and laugh ourselves sick while they were "caught up in the story." Very bad of us, I suppose.
However, one exception must be made. Princess Bride contains nothing but the barest, unvarnished truth, utterly without polish or spin.
:-)
Amy!
Royal Might-have-beens.
Shalimar,
A potted history, based on schoolday memories. Concerning a nearly king. :) Or the true king depending on where your loyalties lie. In some British regiments there was no water allowed on the table when the royal toast was drunk. This was to stop the officers passing their wineglass over their glass of water and thus drinking to the health of the "King over the Water"'
It was rumoured that James II's son was not his, or his Queen's come to that, but was smuggled into the Royal bedchamber in a warming pan when his own baby died in childbirth. No foundation just politics really as James had been foolish enough to openly practice Roman Catholicism and the last thing that was wanted was a catholic succession. The subsequent 'Glorious Revolution' called the stoutly protestant William and Mary to the throne.
The son, James Francis Edward Stuart was of course the Old Pretender who was behind the 1715 Jacobite rising. He was recognised as James III by catholic Europe, i.e. France, Spain, etc. His son was the Bonnie Prince Charlie or Charles Edward Stuart, The Young Chevalier, of the '45 Rising. Which of course nearly succeeded.
Hugs.
Prince Harry -
RAMI
There are still rumors that Prince Harry, Princess Di's second son is not legitimate of Prince Charles.
RAMI
RAMI