The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > Royal Genealogy

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #281  
Old 08-20-2013, 09:04 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by crymson77 View Post
...So what im really saying here is what right did both the yorks and the lancasters really have...
I'm not sure what's confusing you here.

Richard II was the king. He was king because his father, Edward the Black Prince, was the eldest son of the previous king, Edward III. Richard didn't have any children, so his heir presumptive was the next male in the line of succession - the grandson of his father's eldest brother, Roger Mortimer, then later Roger's son, Edmund. The eldest son of his father's second brother, Henry of Bolingbroke, conflicted with Richard lead a rising and seized the throne, putting himself on it as Henry IV.

Go forward in time a bit and Roger's grandson, Richard, Duke of York, conflicted with Henry VI and pointed out that hey, his bloodline was of a senior line to the king's, so really he should be king. He lead a rising and when he was killed his sons continued that rising until eventually winning (twice) and establishing the eldest, Edward IV, on the throne.

People usurping the throne happened before, and happened again, but the case of the Lancasters/Yorks is one of the few ones where a house with a better claim was able to restore itself. Other usurpations/conquests happened under:
  1. William the Conqueror, who conquered England from Harald Godwinson
  2. Henry I, who seized the throne on the death of his elder brother, William II, over his elder brother Robert Curthose
  3. Stephen, who seized the throne over his female cousin, Matilda. Matilda's father, Henry I, had no male heirs so made the nobles swear to support his daughter as the heir, however when he died his nephew (the eldest son of his sister, and closest male relation) put himself on the throne, leading to a period of time known as the Anarchy as the two cousins fought for control. In the end, Stephen agreed to name Matilda's son as his heir, resulting in Henry II becoming king
  4. Edward III's supporters, lead by his mother, overthrew his father, Edward II
  5. Richard II's cousin, Henry IV, overthrew him. Later, Henry's grandson, Henry VI, would be overthrown by the great-grandson of Richard's heir presumptive, Edward IV
  6. Richard III usurped the throne of his nephew, Edward V
  7. Henry VII conquered the throne from Richard III. Both he and his son, Henry VIII, would put down Yorkist risings throughout their reigns
  8. Jane Grey attempted to usurp her cousin, Mary I, on the death of Mary's half-brother, Edward VI, but would be overthrown very quickly and eventually executed
  9. Similarly, during the reign of Mary's sister, Elizabeth II, their other cousin, Mary of Scots, was the subject of an attempt to usurp the throne, leading to Mary's execution
  10. Charles I was overthrown by Parliament and Oliver Cromwell. After Cromwell's death his son, Richard, became Lord Protector briefly before resigning in favour of the restoration of the monarchy under Charles' elder son, Charles II
  11. James II was also overthrown by Parliament in favour of his daughter, Mary II, and her husband, William III. On William's death, Mary's sister, Anne, became monarch, and on her death George I, was asked to be monarch, over the 50+ people that came before him in the line of succession but were deemed undesirable
  12. Edward VIII was pushed off the throne by Parliament and the Church because the woman he wanted to marry was deemed undesirable. His eldest brother, George VI, became monarch
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 08-20-2013, 09:06 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by crymson77 View Post
Thanks for all ut awesome help by the way but I thought I understood everything untill I just read this. If this is true about henry VII and john of portugal then wouldnt Guants male children be higher in succession than philippa or her children.
Yes. And that's why Henry VII got the support of the Lancasters while John of Portugal remained in Portugal.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 08-20-2013, 10:58 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: west palm beach, United States
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
Yes. And that's why Henry VII got the support of the Lancasters while John of Portugal remained in Portugal.
But I thought u had said the yorks had a superior claim through maternal decent. It really sounds to me based on what you just said about henry vii being from a son and jon of portugal being from a daughter that the lancasters did have the better claim because philppa was a duaghter too. And that relationship seems very parallel to me. I dont see why that would apply to john of portugal but not to phillippas children. Unless u were just saying that they "felt" they had a better claim.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 08-20-2013, 11:40 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,125
The line of succession at the time goes like this:
  1. The first son and his male descendants
  2. The second son and his male descendants
  3. The third son and his male descendants
  4. And so on through all the sons
  5. The male descendants of the first daughter
  6. The male descendants of the second daughter
  7. The male descendants of the third daughter
The descendants of the Black Prince came before the descendants of Lionel of Antwerp, who came before the descendants of John of Gaunt. The Yorks were descended from Lionel of Antwerp through his only child, Philippa of Clarence, therefore they came before the Lancasters, who were descended from John of Gaunt.

Within the children of John of Gaunt, his sons and their descendants come first, then his daughters. John's eldest surviving son was Henry IV, the first Lancaster monarch. His second eldest surviving son was John Beaufort, through whom Henry VII descended. His eldest surviving daughter was Philippa of Lancaster, through whom John of Portugal descended. Henry IV and his descendants are first because he's the eldest male, John Beaufort and his descendants are second because he's the second male, while John of Portugal comes after because he's descended through the eldest female.
.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 08-21-2013, 06:22 AM
SLV's Avatar
SLV SLV is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 647
Why did non of the other children of Henry IV do anything? Were they all dead?

- - - - -
I extended the British-English line all the way to Alfred the Great.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...vN2wzNWc#gid=0

It was fun to figure out the kings in the Anglo-Saxon&Danish period.
And to find several double-connections.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 08-21-2013, 06:41 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: west palm beach, United States
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
his only child, Phillippa
Got it. I think I was getting the differeny phillipas confused.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 08-21-2013, 12:43 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLV View Post
Why did non of the other children of Henry IV do anything? Were they all dead?
In short, yes. There were no living descendants of Henry IV, so the Lancaster line went to the next (mostly) male-line descendant of John of Gaunt, Henry VII.

Henry VII began being promoted as the Lancaster king in 1483. Going through the line we can see the various deaths that had to occur first:
  1. Henry IV, died in 1413
    1. Henry V, died in 1422
      1. Henry VI, died in 1471
        1. Edward of Westminster, Prince of Wales, died in 1471
    2. Thomas of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Clarence, died in 1421, no issue
    3. John of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Bedford, died in 1435, no issue
    4. Humphrey of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Gloucester, died in 1447, no legitimate issue
    5. Blanche of England, died in 1409
      1. Rupert, Hereditary Prince of the Palatinate, died in 1426
    6. Philippa of England, died in 1430, no issue
  2. John Beaufort, 1st Earl of Somerset died in 1410
    1. Henry Beaufort, 2nd Earl of Somerset, died in 1418, no issue
    2. John Beaufort, 1st Duke of Somerset, died in 1444
      1. Margaret Beaufort, died in 1509
        1. Henry VII
So, basically the entire line of Henry IV was dead by 1471, when Henry VI and the Prince of Wales died. The most senior person in the line of John Beaufort was Margaret Beaufort, who couldn't inherit due to her gender, leaving her son, Henry, to inherit. There were The 1st Earl of Somerset had other children, who had descendants as well, but none who would have been as senior as Henry VII.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 08-21-2013, 12:59 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by crymson77 View Post
Got it. I think I was getting the differeny phillipas confused.
There are a lot of Philippa's involved here. There are a lot of name duplications in general.

The thing to remember is that the children of Lionel and their descendants all come before the children of John and his descendants, and within John his sons and their descendants all come before his daughters and their descendants. This distinction isn't neccessary in Lionel's line because he only had a daughter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SLV View Post
I extended the British-English line all the way to Alfred the Great.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...vN2wzNWc#gid=0

It was fun to figure out the kings in the Anglo-Saxon&Danish period.
And to find several double-connections.
My computer's being lame and not letting me open the doc, but I was able to look at it on my phone and as usual I'm loving it. I'll do a closer look at it later!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old 08-21-2013, 01:43 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NN, Lithuania
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
The line of succession at the time goes like this:...
t's only your suggestion.
They didn't have written law. King's nephews was grey zone.
Usually kings named smb. as their heir.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old 08-21-2013, 01:49 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spheno View Post
It's only your suggestion.

They didn't have written law. King's nephews was grey zone.
How is this my suggestion? It's based on what happened.

When Richard II was on the throne his cousin's child was his heir presumptive. That follows the succession that I described.

When Henry VI and the Prince of Wales died the person put forth as the heir was Henry VII because he was the senior male descendant.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #291  
Old 08-21-2013, 02:14 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NN, Lithuania
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
How is this my suggestion? It's based on what happened.
Quote:
Henry quickly gained enough power and support to have himself declared King Henry IV, imprison King Richard (who died in prison under mysterious circumstances) and bypass Richard's seven-year-old heir-presumptive, Edmund de Mortimer.
I can't describe it as " the throne passed smoothly to the first person in line".
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #292  
Old 08-21-2013, 02:16 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,125
And I didn't describe it as that. The throne didn't pas smoothly at all because people usurped it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #293  
Old 08-21-2013, 02:41 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Freehold, New Jersey,, United States
Posts: 59
Another set of questions...

1) Queen Mary's brother married the 1st Duke of Grosvenor's daughter... Since the daughter is Elizabeth's great-aunt by marriage, what is the 1st Duke? Her great-grandfather?

2) I know Edward VII is her great-grandfather. I also know that Marie of Edinburgh/Romania is his niece... However Alexander II of Russia is her maternal grandfather.
Is Marie Elizabeth's ___th cousin, and is Alexander an nth g-grandfather of Elizabeth?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #294  
Old 08-21-2013, 03:07 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,125
Neither the 1st Duke of Grosvenor not Alexander II of Russia are direct ancestors of HM.

The 1st Duke of Grosvenor is HM's great-uncle's father-in-law. There is no relation between him and HM.

Marie of Edinburgh's father was Prince Alfred, Duke of Edinburgh, who was the brother of Edward VII. Her mother was Maria Alexadrovna of Russia, daughter of Alexander II of Russia. So Alexander II was Prince Alfred's father-in-law, and Prince Alfred was HM's great-great uncle. No relation between HM and Alexander.

Marie would have been George V's first cousin. That would make her HM's first cousin twice removed.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #295  
Old 08-21-2013, 08:18 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: west palm beach, United States
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
It's based on what happened.
I think you are exactly right. Its all based on what happened. And it seems to me if what I read is correct that after Henry IV took over, parliament and the nobility accepted the Lancaster line. In my opinion giving them and any future descendants the legitimate claim to the throne.

Likewise I read that in 1460 it was agreed that after Henry VI's death the succession of the throne would transfer to Richard Duke of York and his sons. This effectively disinherited Henry's young son Edward. Seemingly giving them and any future descendants the legitimate claim to the throne.

I just know if I was a Lancaster or a York I would feel my claim was superior And again in my opinion now after reading here and many other pages is that who ever the parliment and nobles wanted to have the throne is who was suposed to and their claim was valid to them anyway and any of there children would feel it belonged to them. Whoever had any relation to any former king that could gain the political support and the bigger army was basically who should be the legitimate ruler.

One could argue that once the lancasters took over that they were the only claim to the throne and any who came before or after were null and void excluding there own descendants obviously. I know thats what I would proclaim if I took over.

This could probably be said for any new family taking the throne. I mean what gave any king a claim to the "throne?" Even those early early Kings you mentioned. I guess I just mean what gives any of them the right over any other human being on the planet. Again other than the support from the people. Once the people or the nobles I gather or parliament decides someone else should be king or the new line they pass a rule and it is so.
All that being said I know understand the line of succession but I'm just saying I know if I was scar in any situation I would always feel my claim was just as good as any grand kid of any of my siblings. And I guess my claim wouldn't mean much unless everyone else agreed with me or wanted it to be so for some reason that it would benefit them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #296  
Old 10-05-2013, 01:40 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: johnstown, United States
Posts: 1
Spencer - Compton Genealogy

My 12th great grandfather is Sir John Spencer Lord Mayor of London (1538-1610) through his daughter Elizabeth Spencer who married Sir William Compton. I feel fairly confident that I am a distant relative of Princess Diana but I am having one heck of a time sorting through all the Spencers to link us..... does anyone have any suggestions?

Thank you
A Queen in my own mind,
Nancy Compton
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #297  
Old 10-05-2013, 03:25 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,125
I can't find a connection between Sir John Spencer and the Spencers of Althorp, largely because the Spencer trail that I can follow on the Peerage and wikipedia ends very close to Sir John.

His peerage page is here: - Person Page 2829, but looking at the various Spencers in Diana's direct line at the time I can't make the connection between her ancestors and either your Sir John or his father.

There is a connection, however, from William Compton to both the Queen and Diana if you're interested. William Compton's mother was Frances Hastings, whose parents were Francis Hastings, 2nd Earl of Huntingdon and Catherine Pole.

They were also parents to George Hastings, 4th Earl of Huntingdon, who fathered the following line:
  • Francis Hastings, Lord Hastings
  • Catherine Hastings
  • Sir Henry Stanhope, Lord Stanhop
  • Philip Stanhope, 2nd Earl of Chesterfield
  • Elizabeth Stanhope
  • Thomas Lyon, 8th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne
  • John Bowes, 9th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne
  • Thomas Lyon-Bowes, 11th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne
  • Thomas George Lyon-Bowes, Lord Glamis
  • Claude Bowes-Lyon, 13th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne
  • Claude Bowes-Lyon, 14th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne
  • Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon
  • Elizabeth II
Francis and Catherine were also parents to Elizabeth Hastings, from whom Diane descends in this line:
  • Henry Somerset, 1st Marquess of Worcester
  • Edward Somerset, 2nd Marquess of Worcester
  • Henry Somerset, 1st Duke of Beaufort
  • Charles Somerset, Marquess of Worcester
  • Henrietta Somerset
  • Isabella FitzRoy
  • Vice Admiral Hugh Seymour
  • Colonel Sir Horace Beauchamp Seymour
  • Adelaide Seymour
  • Charles Spencer, 6th Earl Spencer
  • Albert Spencer, 7th Earl Spencer
  • John Spencer, 8th Earl Spencer
  • Diana Spencer
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #298  
Old 10-07-2013, 02:44 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Freehold, New Jersey,, United States
Posts: 59
Are these royals related to HM Elizabeth II (of the UK of course)

1) Louis Philippe, Duke of Anjou
2) Infanta Alicia, Duchess of Calabria
3) Maria Theresa, Queen of Hungary & Bohemia
4) Duchess Marie Therese of Wurttemberg
5) Louise Marie Therese (she's a French royal)
*Louise Marie Therese d'Artois
6) Archduke Charles, Duke of Teschen
7) Prince Leka II of Albania
8) George Mikhailovich of Russia

They may be indirectly related, but that's fine.

I also know (according to a new biography of Prince Philip) that said the Duke of Edinburgh's aunt Marie Bonaparte was a direct descendant of Napoleon's younger brother Louis. Would this make Philip a grandnephew of Napoleon?

Another one I forgot to add is if HM is related to Princess Caroline of Hanover, Grace Kelly's daughter.
.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #299  
Old 10-07-2013, 02:55 PM
Andolini's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Seattle, United States
Posts: 749
Do you mean George, son of Maria of Russia? The woman with the interesting personality and dress style? If so, he is related.
His mother is the child of Vladimir Cyrillovich, whose mother was Victoria Melita (Ducky).
Ducky is the child of Alfred, Queen Victoria's second son, and her mother was Grand Duchess Maria Alexandrova, daughter of Alexander II of Russia.
But I am no expert at all, so please correct me - anyone - if I am wrong. Thank you.
.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #300  
Old 10-07-2013, 03:14 PM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 842
COUSINS
__________________

__________________
The only word I hate in the Royal Dictionary - ABDICATION
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
ancestry, british royal family, china, countess of errol, crusades, descent, duke of edinburgh, edward iii, elizabeth ii, genealogy, marie bonaparte, napoleon, prince philip, prince william, queen elizabeth (the queen mother), queen elizabeth the queen mother, royal monarch line of succession heirs, tang dynasty


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





Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games ottoman poland pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:25 AM.

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]