|
|
 |
|
Reply
| |
In the last battle fought on English soil (no, the Battle of Britain does NOT count; it was in the SKIES), the troops of Catholic king James II defeated those of his nephew & namesake, James, Duke of Monmouth. Jemmy was the firstborn of many children of Charles II; his mother, Lucy Walter, was Charles' first mistress. It was even rumored that Charles would have married Lucy had he not had to flee for his life, which makes Jemmy about as close to legitmate as one can get & still be a bastard. Contemporary accounts depict him as an impulsive young man, but a Protestant nonetheless in a Protestant country ruled by a Catholic king who had just remarried to a Catholic princess (Mary of Modena) & would presumably soon be breeding up male Catholic heirs to displace his grown, also Protestant, daughters, Mary & Anne, in the succession to the throne. The aftermath of Monmouth's Rebellion was so brutal it was refered to as the Bloody Assizes & its presiding judge, Judge Jeffreys, became infamous for his cruelty. But I digress, as I am wont to do lol.  My point (& I do have one) is regards bastards inheriting the throne. Jemmy was of the blood royal & would have been king but for the teeny matter of the not-said I dos. Henry VIII was looking into legitimizing his son Henry, Duke of Richmond in the absence of a male heir. And then there were those damn Beauforts! Considering the monarchial caliber of some of these inbred rocket scientists, & the chaos left in their wakes.....why not? Has there ever BEEN a bastard to successfully snatch a throne, ANYWHERE? And why would having one as king be such a bad thing? |
|
 First
Previous
2-9 of 9
Next
Last
|
Reply
| |
The Battle of Britian DOES count...the bombs and aircraft from the air have a tendency to fall. But in answer to your question about bastardy... the monarchy from 1066 onward was founded upon it. It's the politics and power plays that stopped many "bastards" from attaining the throne... A well-placed bastard can and has made his/her way to ruling. (Might be a good post sometime?) -Milesgreen |
|
Reply
| |
For shame Forever Amber...."has there ever been a bastard to snatch the thrown???" WILLIAM I (also known as the BASTARD King!) (DUH) (I am really surpised at you!) |
|
Reply
| |
::flounces huffily::  That wasn't the same thing.....he was pretty much promised the throne & then swooped in to collect it. I was talking by popular rebellion such as Jemmy's or after-the-fact legitimization like Henry VIII wanted to do with Richmond before the kid hacked up a lung. |
|
Reply
| |
EXCUSE ME??...... There was a VAGUE promise by Edward the Confessor to William. Upon Edward's death the Anglo-Saxon Earls proclaimed HAROLD II King and opposed the claim of William!!!!!!! Hense, the battle of Hastings. And that was after a lot of toing and froing. William hardly "swooped" in and just collected the crown without opposition. |
|
Reply
| |
Er...and others getting in through marriage...etc. -Methinks |
|
Reply
|  0 recommendations | Message 7 of 9 in Discussion |
|
| This message has been deleted by the manager or assistant manager. |
|
Reply
| |
Ok ladies! Here's another bastard who gained a throne - it was the bastard Henry who usurped Costanza of Castile by murdering her father, King Pedro. John of Gaunt (my hero!) subsequently married her and fought her battles (what a guy!) - thus neatly bringing us back to our people. Lady Grace |
|
Reply
| |
Well! I stand corrected on the cleverness of bastards as a whole, then! Wasn't this the guy who was termed "Pedro the Cruel"? Sounds like he required usurping! Just to further illustrate the forked twisting of the family tree Plantagenet.....from this Castilian expedition of John of Gaunt's is how Catherine of Aragon & Henry VIII were related! |
|
|
First
Previous
2-9 of 9
Next
Last
|
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Return to The Stuarts