Descendants of Royals of the British Isles

[Baroness of Books]

Somewhat OT, I know, but wasn't there a claim established that Edward IV wasn't legally married to Elizabeth Woodville because of a prior betrothal, thus making their children illegitimate? George and his descendants would then have been next in line, in theory.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

Then, if Parliament made the law (about Electress Sophie), they could obviously change it!

Yes, I live in a world where occasional tumult has its place.

 

[Iluvbertie]

But would a descendent of Sophie sign it???

 

[Domhangairt]

Somewhat OT, I know, but wasn't there a claim established that Edward IV wasn't legally married to Elizabeth Woodville because of a prior betrothal, thus making their children illegitimate? George and his descendants would then have been next in line, in theory.

England's King Edward IV (VII) secretly married Lady Elizabeth Butler while his Chancellor, Lord Neville, was negotiating Edward;'s marriage to a daughter of the Duke of Burgundy. Edward's marriage to Elizabeth Wydville was thus bigamous- and this was the legal argument used by Edward's brother, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, to claim the English Crown. Edward's sons, Edward (V) and Richard, Duke of York, were thus disqualified by the English Council of State, and the Duke of Gloucester was crowned King Richard III. It is possible that Richard may have known of his brother's illegitimacy, and used the bigamous marriage story to mask the fact that King Edward and his children had no right to the English Throne by virtue of his own illegitimate birth. He looked very different from his brothers and was much taller.

 

[Mariel]

The Stuart claim to the throne seems to go to the present Duke in Bavaria, HRH Franz. Franz has no children, so his heir is Max, his brother. Max had only daughters, and the eldest is Princess Sophie of Leichtenstein, who is a Serene Highness of Leichtenstein, but also a HRH of Bavaria. Her heir is her eldest son Jospeh Wenzel. These people, however, make no claim to the throne of England. It is the "Jacobites" who make the claim for them.

Prince Joseph Wenzel of Leichtenstein was the first Jacobite heir to be born in England since the last ruler of the House of Stuart there since the Hanovers took over.

Of course, Electress Sophie of Hanover also had Stuart lineage, but these Jacobites have it all figured out that the correct descent is to the present "King of England," Duke Franz in Bavaria.

I became interested in these wandering genes through my own genetic history, which I didn't find out about until about 16 years ago, when I was diagnosed with Porphyria, a disease quite a few royal people have had or even have today. I knew nothing at all about my Scots antecedents, since my parents thought discussion of such things was vulgar. But I became aware that my Scots grandma came from Dundee (she was my porphyria link) and I could not trace her back more than four generations, none of them royal or noble or even rich.
But then I traced back the family roots to the era in the 12th century when my ancestor Robert Pollock lived next door to Walter Fitzallen, and apparently was FitzAllen's aide in Shropshire and then in Renfrewshire. Fitzallen's descenants become the Royal Stewarts. The Stuarts are well known in later centuries for having the Porphyria gene, which is very rare (at least in so far as those officially diagnosed). I probably got the gene from a Stuart or more directly from one of the lowland Scots families who married Stuarts over the years, including Leslies, Hamiltons, Pollocks, Maxwells, and so forth.

So I have no direct descent of royalty, but boy do I have a bloodline descent of Porphyria, not something one would choose. The mystery to me is how the gene got down those years to me. I now know my dad had it, and his mother and sisters and probably a couple of cousins, but I can't look back through the years to see how it got to me.
Do people other than royals have it? Of course, most do not even try to trace royal lineage, but it seems to be a disease which sprang up through inbreeding, and I know some of my Scots ancestors were champs at that, such as the Maxwells, who married cousins every time one was available (and sometimes abandoned the female spouse after an heir was produced, very bad people to be related to). Maybe this bad behavior produced a curse? I hope not. I have prayed for the curse to leave in any case.

 

[Stormshadow]

Yes the Stuart line is currently in Habsburg hands, but a direct descendant of the throne is able to appeal to the British Monarchy to allow them to have their titles back. Fitz is not a Scottish name, it Irish from Fitzgerald. There are two Stuart clans in Scotland. The first are the commoners, spelt S-t-e-w-a--r-t, or Stewart were a lower class clan and commonly mistaken for Royal Stuarts. ( Still are today. ) Lower class clan also used for butlers, servicemen, guilds men, and guards. Royals Stuarts , the second clan were unmistakable. Often had brilliantly red hair, long noses complimented by soft featured faces with cats eyes ( almond shaped eyes from earlier marriage with Fraser Clan). Men were usually around 6'0, women around 5'6-5'11 in height. In reality the only way you can tell is if you have had a DNA test. I have have had a DNA test for my maternal side , as well as created a family tree. ( found out I am a Royal O'conner/O'connor descendant from the County of Kerry, descended from Fraser Clan , Macdonald of Macdonld of the Isles and and Unnamed Royal Stuart in the 13-16 century). Now I am going to do my fathers side and see what comes up.

 

[Warren]

Yes the Stuart line is currently in Habsburg hands...

It was in Habsburg hands until 1919 and the death of Queen Maria Theresia of Bavaria, daughter of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria-Este. She had succeeded her paternal uncle, Duke Francesco V of Modena as "representative and heir of King Charles I of England" in 1875.

The Jacobite claim passed to her son Crown Prince Rupprecht, then to his son, the late Duke Albrecht and is now with Albrecht's son Franz, Duke of Bavaria.
Thus it currently rests with the House of Wittelsbach.

 

[Moritzburg]

I am a direct descendent of King Edward III through his son John of Gaunt. However, genealogists claim that all Americans with English ancestry can claim descent from King Edward I so I suppose that negates any bragging rights. As others have mentioned, there is also that little law, the Act of Settlement to interfere with any royal aspirations I might entertain.

 

[crump]

Just found out that King Egbert of Wessex was my 37th Great Grandfather. I know little about Royalty, probably a different house huh?

 

[Artemisia]

Welcome to the Forum, crump!

King Egbert of Wessex belonged to the Anglo-Saxon House of Wessex. He was a great King, so you can be proud of your ancestor.
However, you are not in the Line of Succession since only legitimate and non-Catholic descendants of Sophia, Electress of Hanover are.

Incidentally, King Egbert of Wessex is also one of the direct descendants of Queen Elizabeth, making you distant cousins:
Egbert I -> Aethelwulf of Wessex -> Alfred the Great -> Edward the Elder -> Edmund I -> Edgar -> Ethelred II -> Edmund II -> Edward the Exile -> Margaret of Scotland -> Edith of Scotland -> Empress Matilda -> Henry II -> King John -> Henry III -> Edward I -> Edward II -> Edward III -> Lionel, 1st Duke of Clarence -> Philippa, 5th Countess of Ulster -> Roger, 4th Earl of March -> Lady Anne Mortimer -> Richard, 3rd Duke of York -> Edward IV -> Elizabeth of York -> Margaret Tudor -> James V of Scotland -> Mary, Queen of Scots -> James I and VI of Scotland and England -> Elizabeth of Bohemia -> Sophia, Electress of Hanover -> George I of Great Britain -> George II -> Frederick, Prince of Wales -> George III -> Edward, Duke of Kent and Strathearn -> Queen Victoria -> Edward VII -> George V -> George VI -> Queen Elizabeth II

 

[LisaEGarrett]

Well sure somewhere along the line I would have a claim. I can trace my family tree from my dad, through his mother (Lorna) and then through plenty of princes, princesses, lords etc, until we get to William De Meschines, Richard I of Normandy, and then Charlamagne (Charles the Great) Holy Roman Emperor. So im a direct descendant of Charlamagne and also the First King of England. My tree is pretty interesting to read and "freaked" my dad out when i finalised it after 2 years research. The only reason why we have no entitlement now is due to "law or Peerage". But if they were desperate, guess that would be the case. A direct relative descendant was also on the first Order of the Garter aswell as signing of the Magna carter.

I think we are related! Somewhere down the line. My husband was a little jealous to see my line!

 

[MarkUK]

In my experience internet genealogies showing that you are descended from Royalty centuries ago are highly suspect. I found one which showed one of my Victorian ancestors, and therefore myself, was descended from Charlemagne. When I looked into it there was a huge margin for doubt when descent was claimed from a supposed illegitimate son of an English Prince, the best authorities on the subject say no more than he was a possible son and it could not be proven. That for me is not enough to claim Royal descent.

 

[Astartiel]

I created an account here just so I could reply to this post.

While doing my own genealogy work, I discovered there was an ancestor who was supposedly descended, twice out of wedlock, to King Charles II Stuart. Now, since he didn't have any legitimate heirs, even if this claim turns out to be true, I wouldn't be in line for the throne. But it is a fun bit of family trivia. If it is true, it would make him my 11th Great-Grandfather.

I also discovered a Bodwell in my ancestry that claims to be from a line of ancient Celtic Kings. Again, this can not be proven either, as we are talking 100-500AD times, but it is interesting to speculate on having "Royal Blood" running through my veins.

Of course, since I'm from America, I couldn't claim any European crown anyway! But maybe I should make my own Kingdom instead! But no, I'm not in line for the British Throne.

 

[cepe]

In reply to the original question " Are you in line for the British Throne?"

No thank goodness! I couldn't bear either the intrusion or the scrutiny.

 

[Astartiel]

... Royals Stuarts , the second clan were unmistakable. Often had brilliantly red hair, long noses complimented by soft featured faces with cats eyes ( almond shaped eyes from earlier marriage with Fraser Clan). Men were usually around 6'0, women around 5'6-5'11 in height...

Looks in mirror. Reads again. Looks in mirror again. Damn freaky...

 

[Artemisia]

If you were, say, 3,459th in the Line of Succession, there wouldn't be any intrusion but definitely something to boast about.

 

[cepe]

3,460th and you might b right

 

[Astartiel]

Obviously there would not be a claim to Succession from me since my family's claim is of being descendant from King Charles II Stuart, Electress Sophia of Hanover's first cousin. That + his children all being out of wedlock + another out-of-wedlock claim that can not be verified + being from America makes me pretty much not eligible at all. But even possibly being a little related is fun bragging rights. lol

 

[Roy D Pope Jr]

Lineal Descendant of Edward III

Well, this ought to count for something...

My 19th great grandfather was Edward III. That means that nearly every king of England prior to 21 Jun 1377 was my grandfather.

So, where do I go to sign up for the job?

- Roy

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Doesn't a person have to be descended from the Electress Sophia of Hanover, to be in line for the British throne? If that's the case, then its a big fat NO for me!

 

[Lumutqueen]

Doesn't a person have to be descended from the Electress Sophia of Hanover, to be in line for the British throne?

Indeed you do. I've always found the title Electress so much more interesting than Queen.

I'm in line for the british throne, in my head. Does that count?

 

[Catherine J]

On the paternal side, my family is one that came with William the Conqueror from Normandy and is subsequently listed in the Domesday book. It is an anglicized French/Norman name and the original ancestor was given land and title in Ireland. In the early 1600s, by this time impoverished and titleless, the last male ancestor from that side of the family came here and settled in Nova Scotia on the very first boat that left England for the New World. Several locations, including a well known body of water, bear the family name.

On my mother's distaff, we wear the Stuart tartans and can trace ancestors back to the Scottish Stuarts, Mary and James (this is no great claim, at this late date, many, many people are related to nobility). That part of the family came here in the late 1700s and has been here since, marrying willy nilly with, apparently, any Irishman that came along

So, yeah, sort of.

My daughter has the interesting fate of having two family crests, coats of arms and mottos, one of which is roughly "war" and one of which is "peace" (I am being deliberately ambiguous in the translation but this is correct in spirit).

 

[Artemisia]

Well, this ought to count for something...
My 19th great grandfather was Edward III. That means that nearly every king of England prior to 21 Jun 1377 was my grandfather.

So, where do I go to sign up for the job?
- Roy

I believe over 30% of British people of English descent can claim descent from Edward III, so you'll have quite a competition.

Obviously there would not be a claim to Succession from me since my family's claim is of being descendant from King Charles II Stuart, Electress Sophia of Hanover's first cousin. That + his children all being out of wedlock + another out-of-wedlock claim that can not be verified + being from America makes me pretty much not eligible at all. But even possibly being a little related is fun bragging rights. lol

The out of wedlock aspect notwithstanding, being American wouldn't have harmed your succession rights in any way. As long as you are not a Catholic, not married to one and can claim ancestry from the Electress through a legitimate (and non-Catholic) line, you'd be eligible.

Doesn't a person have to be descended from the Electress Sophia of Hanover, to be in line for the British throne? If that's the case, then its a big fat NO for me!

That's indeed the case. In order to be in the (very, very long) Line of Succession to the British Throne, you have to be a legitimate descendant of Sophia, Electress of Hanover through a Protestant line. And of course, you can't be a Catholic or married to a Catholic yourself.

Indeed you do. I've always found the title Electress so much more interesting than Queen.

I'm in line for the British throne, in my head. Does that count?

The only place and way it counts, Lumutqueen.

 

[Roy D Pope Jr]

Oh well... it was worth a try. Maybe I'll just start my own kingdom. Now all I need is a vast tract of land, peers, subjects, a chest of gold and jewels, a... uh, forget the vast tract of land, peers and subjects. I'd be happy just getting my hands on a chest of gold and jewels.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

Just having Edward III as an ancestor does not at all make one a lineal descendant of every other King. There was the whole Tudor thing, for example.

And Edward III had several children who were not Kings. That's why there was, later, the War of the Roses. Are you also a descendant of Richard II? I would warrant not.

Like others, you are probably a descendant of a non-reigning line. I am a descendant of John of Gaunt (whose son, Henry IV, IIRC, eventually was crowned). Both men (John of Gaunt and Henry IV) had non-reigning descendants.

Just because you have an ancestor who reigned doesn't mean the entire line since then was reigning. That's the whole problem (sigh). Otherwise, yes, indeed, I'd be Queen.

Oh, and someone should make an edict that this whole Sophie thing is just a ruse. Restore the Plantagenets!

 

[Marc23]

I have one question about this line:

What if a person who is in line is an atheist and is not baptized in any faith?

Will that kind of person be excluded?Also,when a child to a line parents is born,is that child included in line from his birth automatically under the premise that his parents are of for example,protestant faith,or it is waited until the child id legally baptized...

 

[NGalitzine]

The only exclusion is for Roman Catholics or those who marry a Roman Catholic. You are automatically in the line of succession until you either become Roman Catholic or marry one.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

I think the Sovereign must be in communion with the Church of England. Does this mean a public belief and confession?

 

[NGalitzine]

I think the Sovereign must be in communion with the Church of England. Does this mean a public belief and confession?

Guess that depends on what you mean by public belief and confession. The Coronation is a Christian ceremony conducted by Anglican clergy and organized by a Roman Catholic peer. Also the monarch will over the course of their reign attend numerous Anglican church services.
I suppose if one were an athiest it would depend on how much of a compromise in your beliefs you are willing to take in order to assume the throne. Henry IV felt "Paris is worth a mass" so might St Edwards Crown not also be worth a few church services, even if you were not a true believer?

 

[Catherine J]

Henry IV felt "Paris is worth a mass" so might St Edwards Crown not also be worth a few church services, even if you were not a true believer?

Excellent!

You're very good at getting to the point of the matter.

In the context of the original question regarding atheism, this is as succinct and perfect a summary as is possible.

So, yeah, what she said