The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #161  
Old 08-10-2013, 02:02 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 57
Mary was sent to France partly because of the French monarchy being more prestigious but also because of concerns that if an English army invaded Scotland it could capture Mary, and Henry VIII would then have made her marry his son, the future Edward VI, his idea being that England would then take over Scotland.

I always think that one of Mary's main problems was that she had such terrible taste in men!! Even if you believe that she was forced to marry Bothwell, she certainly wasn't forced to marry Darnley.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 08-10-2013, 02:41 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,369
I'm sure most in here know the history behind Mary and why she was sent to France.
It could be said that Mary's problems stem from being a French girl ruling Scotland but how to figure in her mother who did it well?
__________________

__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 09-02-2013, 06:31 AM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Posts: 9,765
Mary Queen of Scots exhibition

Mary Queen of Scots shown in right royal colours - Visual Arts - The Scotsman
__________________
December 5th,2014 -Death of H.M.Queen Fabiola of Belgium
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 09-02-2013, 10:01 PM
Vasillisos Markos's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Crete, United States
Posts: 1,159
It seems the Scots are determined to resurrect their national pride and identity by reclaiming their history independent of the English.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 09-02-2013, 10:05 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,324
Well, it seems appropriate for the Scots to be as determined to have an identity as England has been over the centuries.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 09-02-2013, 10:30 PM
Vasillisos Markos's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Crete, United States
Posts: 1,159
Please don't misunderstand my comment -- My post was not meant as criticism of the Scots -- I admire them greatly and find nothing wrong in their nationalistic pride. It is a reflection of their thirst for independence from the English and while I admire the English (as well as the Scots), there is nothing wrong in being independent.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 09-02-2013, 11:08 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
By the time Marie Stuart was born (Mary Stewart to the English) there had been an continuance over centuries of brutal combat between the English and the Scots. Constant killing. A terrible picture. Marie Stuart was only one of many such victims.
Princess Kaimi asked a long time ago how the "Stuarts" became kings of Scotland. The first High Steward of Scotland was Walter Fitzallen in the 12th century. He came to Scotland at the invitation of King David I, to continue the feudalization and Normanization of Scotland (see "Normans in Scotland" by Graeme Ritchie). He brought with him from Shropshire a group of knights whom he settled on lands in Renfrewshire, two of whom were my ancestors Robert Croc and Robert de Pollock. This band of knights had lost the "Battle of the Standard", the final battle over whether Queen Matilda or King Stephen should rule England. Walter Fitzallen and some of these knights had lived in the Shropshire area of England for one or two generations, along with other relatives. Walter's ancestors had come originally from Brittany. They had served William the Conqueror of Normandy, who took over Britain in 1066. Their ancestors in Brittany had been "Stewards" to the kings of Dol, in Brittany, so being "stewards" was nothing new to them.

Walter Fitzallen, thus at least partly of Breton ancestry, nevertheless had a Norman outlook and spoke French. He married Eschyna de Molle, an heiress from Roxburghshire in Scotland, who used her mother's name because she was her mother's heiress of vast lands, but her father's name, for the record, was de Londonis. Eschyna married at least two times, perhaps three: first to my ancestor Robert Croc, and then, after his death, she married Walter Fitzallen, and began the dynasty of men who served the king as High Steward. The name Steward was at first a title, then became a surname. After six generation of High Stewards, one of them was elected king, not without controversy, and thus began the Royal Stewarts. The spelling Stuart was used by those who associated themselves with their French background, and the spelling Stewart became more common in Scotland.
At the beginning of the Stewart royal dynasty, the kings were still elected, although usually chosen from those descended from various earlier kings of various ethnic backgrounds--Gaels, Normans, Bretons, Flemish, even Saxon. Heavy politics was played in the selection of some of these kings, politics which depended on English influence as well as the influence of the old Gaelic (and Celtic and Breton and Flemish and Saxon) families. Violence was frequent, and it continued into the days of Mary Queen of Scots. A bloody history.
The Scots should not ask for Mary's body back, as they were not helpful to her. They should send her body to where she wanted it buried, to France. Why not honor HER wishes? But taking it out of its tomb would be somewhat shocking and difficult, so why not leave it where it is, for her soul is not there; it is with God.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 09-02-2013, 11:24 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,324
Thank you so much, Mariel. I now get the connection between Steward and Stuart (duh!) I have some Scots ancestry too (and lots of Norman-French/British as well, but it is from earlier days than poor Marie). I remember the "Battle of the Standard" from recent reading (I'm catching up on my history of the British Isles).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 09-02-2013, 11:29 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
Princess Kaimi, an excellent book you can have your library send for is "Normans in Scotland" by Graeme Ritchie.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 09-03-2013, 12:08 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,377
Mariel, your history is pretty right except for one thing. The Stuarts were not elected to the throne, they came to it via primogeniture.

By the reign of Kenneth MacAlpin I it was established that the Scottish monarch would come from the line of Alpin, although primogeniture wasn't always followed. By the reign of David I primogeniture was established, although it wasn't necessarily followed in the immediate period following the death of Margaret of Norway owing to the fact that it wasn't clear just who the heir should be. Primogeniture was re-established once Robert I conquered the throne.

The Stuarts came to the throne through primogeniture. Robert I was succeeded by his son, David II, who died without legitimate children. At the time there were no other living legitimate sons of Robert I, so the throne passed to the son of Robert's eldest legitimate daughter, Marjorie. Marjorie Bruce had married Walter Stuart, 6th High Steward of Scotland, and their son became Robert II, the first Stuart monarch.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 09-06-2013, 01:38 AM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,369
Was it possible for Mary to have remained un-married after she was raped by Bothwell and became pregnant? I do think that was the stupidest thing she ever did in her life and it caused the Scots to officially kick her out; but was the alternative possible? To remain unmarried but pregnant; what would have happened to the twins, Lets say they lived. She was called a whore for marrying him but would they have called her worse if she didn't?
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old 09-06-2013, 03:03 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,377
She very likely could have hidden the pregnancy and given away the children. While it would have been difficult, she wouldn't have been the only woman of her position (or close enough) to do so.

I believe I've read allegations that Elizabeth I had an illegitimate child at some point that was sprinted away, but I never placed much faith in them. We do know that other women at different periods did do so though - i.e. the Duchess of Devonshire.

She also could have married another, more acceptable man, and foisted the children on him. Or foisted the pregnancy on him, did away with the children later, and claimed miscarriage. There have also been means to undertake abortions for a long time, although obviously any such means that existed at the time would have been extremely dangerous (although, so was child birth).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old 09-06-2013, 07:32 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 868
I don't believe that Mary was raped by Bothwell. I suppose it is possible he actually abducted and raped her because she broke it off--either because she had nothing to do with Darnley's death or she was involved but felt they needed to cool it for a while. But her actions at Carberry Hill are more consistent with the theory that she was Bothwell's willing partner.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old 09-07-2013, 03:21 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,369
I don't know enough about Mary to definitely come down on a side of was she or wasn't she raped.
But as for her pregnancy no matter what happened the children would have had to be kept a secret had they lived?
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old 09-07-2013, 03:39 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
I don't know enough about Mary to definitely come down on a side of was she or wasn't she raped.
But as for her pregnancy no matter what happened the children would have had to be kept a secret had they lived?
Yes and no.

There are instances where a noble woman simply gave up the child to someone else. These children are kept a secret in the sense that the birth parents hide that they are in fact the parents, but the child isn't hidden away in a cupboard or anything.

Consider Eliza Courtney. She was the daughter of Georgiana Cavendish and Charles Grey, but raised by her paternal grandparents with no knowledge of her parentage. She wasn't told of her parentage until after Georgiana's death.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #176  
Old 09-07-2013, 03:52 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
Thanks, Ish, for that primogeniture information on the first Stuart king. It is SO complex to see what happened at a distance. But I did know that the descent of Margery, Robert I's wife, was the primary reason why he could be accepted as king. For anyone who does not know, Margery died in childbirth, following a riding accident, in Paisley Abbey, but was successfully delivered of the baby who became the next king, Robert II. Or so I heard it. It's one reason why I thought Robert would be a good name for a British heir, since the thrones are united now, and rancor should heal.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old 09-07-2013, 04:11 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,377
Um... I'm not entirely following here.

Robert I was descended from David I through both his parents. The paternal line is:
1. David I of Scotland and Maud of Northumberland
2. Henry of Scotland, 3rd Earl of Huntingdon and Ada de Warenne
3. David of Scotland, 9th Earl of Huntingdon and Matilda of Chester
4. Robert de Brus, 4th Lord of Annandale and Isobel of Huntingdon
5. Robert de Brus, 5th Lord of Annandale and Isabel de Clare
6. Robert de Brus, 6th Lord of Annandale and Marjorie, Countess of Carrick
7. Robert I of Scotland

Marjorie of Carrick is also descended from the 3rd Earl of Huntingdon, through a female line. Robert I married twice, first Isabella of Mar and secondly Elizabeth de Burgh. Isabella of Mar, who gave birth to Robert's only legitimate daughter, Marjorie (who in turn gave birth to Robert II), was also descended from the 3rd Earl, but Robert II's claim came through his descent from Robert I.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Old 09-07-2013, 05:54 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
Yes, I'm all mixed up too. I have read over and over that the 6th Steward became king through election, but the election was based on inherited prominence among the contenders. Princess Marjorie was considered more "royal" in descent than her husband. So I don't see the direct Stewart line here in your list. I have been reading primarily about the emergence of the High Stewards, and not about the royal line which followed. I wanted to know more about the life of those who came to Scotland with Walter Fitzallen, the First High Steward.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Old 09-07-2013, 07:06 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariel View Post
Yes, I'm all mixed up too. I have read over and over that the 6th Steward became king through election, but the election was based on inherited prominence among the contenders. Princess Marjorie was considered more "royal" in descent than her husband. So I don't see the direct Stewart line here in your list. I have been reading primarily about the emergence of the High Stewards, and not about the royal line which followed. I wanted to know more about the life of those who came to Scotland with Walter Fitzallen, the First High Steward.
The thing with the Stewarts is that prior to Robert II, they themselves were not royal. Noble, yes, but not actually royal.

The first High Stewart to marry someone of royal descent was Walter Stewart, 3rd High Stewart, who married Béthoc Mac Gille Crěst. Béthoc was the daughter of Marjorie of Huntingdon, who was the daughter of Henry of Scotland, 3rd Earl of Huntingdon, the son of David I of Scotland. This Marjorie's brother was William I of Scotland.

The second High Stewart to marry someone of royal descent was Walter Stewart, 6th High Stewart, who married Marjorie Bruce. Her father was Robert I of Scotland, and her brother was David II. Marjorie and Walter had one son who became Robert II on the death of his maternal uncle. He became the first Stewart King of Scotland.

I've never read anything that said that Walter Stewart was ever king of Scotland. Walter died in 1327, while his father-in-law was still king. At that point, his son became the 7th High Stewart, an office which he held until he ascended to the throne on the death of his maternal uncle, in 1371.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #180  
Old 09-08-2013, 01:13 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
Thanks, Ish. Clearer.
The only thing I might add is what I read in "Normans in Scotland" that there was competition from the old "Gaelic" or "Pictish" or even Flemish families in Scotland with the Normans who came in during the 11th century and afterwards, as to who was the rightful monarch. Perhaps this is like the present claimants to the the throne descended from the monarchs prior to the Act of Settlement. All are inter-related but some prefer certain lines of descent.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mary I (1516-1558) Kotroman British Royal History 48 11-01-2014 07:43 PM
Queen Mary, consort of George V (1867-1953) gaoshan1021 British Royal History 278 10-15-2014 01:09 AM




Popular Tags
belgium brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven poland president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:30 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]