Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
8:40 am
October 31, 2010
Offline
For those of you who are extremely visual (like myself) and tend to get a little lost when people start discussing exactly how people are related to each other and how the royal lines of descent have worked themselves out, this is a very handy website:
http://www.britroyals.com/index.htm
If you click the links at the top of the page, there is a link for family trees and it breaks down the British monarchy into the various houses. There are pictures so you can put faces with names, too included in the trees. I JUST NOW figured out that The Princes in the Tower–yeah, apparently those were the brothers of Henry VIII's mother, Elizabeth of York. Yeah…completely never put two and two together on that one until I saw it laid out in a family tree.
The only downside is that they don't indicate directly on the tree who is legitimate and who isn't, although I'm sure if you click for more information it's in there somewhere. Wasn't John of Gaunt illegitimate?
"We mustn't let our passions destroy our dreams…"
10:20 am
November 18, 2010
Offline
No, since his parents were married when he was born. Though like a lot of royal children, Edward IV for example, there were rumours that he was the son of another man.
It's always bunnies.
10:24 am
December 5, 2010
Offline
That does look very handy indeed! Thank you for that! And no, John of Gaunt wasn't illegitimate. It's his children by Katherine Swynford that are generally disputed. I need to figure out the John and Katherine thing, it always confuses me..!
I wish to confess to you and tell you my secret, which is that I am no angel. -Queen Elizabeth I
11:07 am
February 24, 2010
Offline
That puts in perspective.
John of Gaunt had four children by Katherine Swynford. The name given to these children was Beaufort. Margaret Beaufort, Henry VI's Mother, was Gaunt's great granddaughter, if I have it right. The Beaufort children were legitimized in 1397, but it was stipulated that they could not succeed to the throne.
John and Katherine were lovers for years before they married. A great book (fiction) about them is Katherine by Anya Seton. It is one of my favorites.
1:45 pm
June 7, 2010
Offline
There were rumors that John of Gaunt was a changeling, but they are unfounded. It was a case of attempting to discredit his position and power within his father, Edward III's court, and subsequenlty, his nephew, Richard II's court (who was a minor when he ascended to the throne). John of Gaunt was one of the most powerful men in the last half of the 1300's, and so he earned many enemies. Many of England's social and economic problems were blamed on him (and Katherine Swyford). The Peasants's Revolt of 1381 is a perfect example of the people's hatred of him.
I agree with Sharon, Seyton's Katherine does an excellent job of portraying John in a favorable light.
"By daily proof you shall find me to be to you both loving and kind" Anne Boleyn
2:26 pm
October 31, 2010
Offline
Ok, I knew there was some kind of legitimacy question surrounding John of Gaunt–either his or his children. See? If they had just indicated that on the tree then I would have known!!
Wasn't the Peasants Revolt the only time that the Tower of London has ever been taken? And that was because the guards were sympathetic to the peasants and just let them walk right in? Or was that another Revolt? Sorry! So much history!!
"We mustn't let our passions destroy our dreams…"
3:35 pm
February 24, 2010
Offline
Oh I forgot about the changeling thing. Yeah, they should put the Beaufort's on that tree. They contributed to a great deal of the history during their lifetime.
During the Peasant's Revolt the Tower was taken by the people. They wanted Simon Sudbury, the Archbishop of Canterbury released to them. There was not a lot of love going on for the Archbishop. The guards let them in and allowed them to drag Sudbury to Tower Hill where he was beheaded. Wat Tyler was one the revolt's leaders.
I don't know if this counts but in 1643 the Parliamentarians seized the Tower from Charles I. It remained in their hands throughout the Civil War. During that time, a permanent garrison was installed at the Tower.
3:59 pm
April 11, 2011
Offline
The Tower was also surrendered to Yorkist forces in 1460 during the wars of the roses.
5:08 pm
June 7, 2010
Offline
Sharon said:
Oh I forgot about the changeling thing. Yeah, they should put the Beaufort's on that tree. They contributed to a great deal of the history during their lifetime.
I think for simplicity sake the Beauforts are not included on some royal genealogical trees. I believe they should be, but some people may find it confusing.
However, Katherine Swynford and John of Gaunt are the common ancestor for every (I could be wrong— it's late here) British monarch since Henry VII. The Beauforts contributed a lot of the English monarchy (good or bad: it's a matter of opinion).
John of Gaunt is an interesting figure, which I wish I knew more about. He is not only Henry VIII's ancestor; he's also Katherine of Aragon's too through his child Catherine (who married Henry III of Castile) by his second wife, Constance of Castile.
Frankly, most of his children went on to great marriages and played roles in history. Wikipedia (okay, I know it can be unreliable) has a great links to information on John's children, wives, and other kinship. I find it a great source.
"By daily proof you shall find me to be to you both loving and kind" Anne Boleyn
10:04 am
February 24, 2010
Offline
Katherine of Aragon was related to John of Gaunt through two of his daughters. Phillipa, daughter of John and Blanche of Lancaster, (first wife) was KOA's great, great grandmother. While Catherine, daughter of John and Constance of Castile, (2nd wife) was her great grandmother. Phillipa and Catherine were Edward III's grandaughters.
11:39 am
June 7, 2010
Offline
Sharon said:
Katherine of Aragon was related to John of Gaunt through two of his daughters. Phillipa, daughter of John and Blanche of Lancaster, (first wife) was KOA's great, great grandmother. While Catherine, daughter of John and Constance of Castile, (2nd wife) was her great grandmother. Phillipa and Catherine were Edward III's grandaughters.
Shoot, I forgot about Philippa's realtionship to KOA. I always do. Thanks for the correction.
Have you re-read Katherine lately? I feel that I might have to now after all this John of Gaunt talk!
"By daily proof you shall find me to be to you both loving and kind" Anne Boleyn
1:23 am
April 9, 2011
Offline
Firstly, that's a brilliant site, thanks for sharing the link. I love looking at family trees. I always use the British Royal Family tree to show how Queen Victoria is the cause of the Russian Revolution. My students though always end up shocked to find out that Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Phillip are closely related. LOL. Will be definitely be using that site to answer my question of how QEII is related to Henry VIII – just out of curiousity.
Just a couple of quick question about John Of Gaunt – if a law was passed that none of his illegitamte children that came legitimate upon marriage (and their descendents) were allowed to ascend to the throne, how come Henry VII got the throne? Because if it was Elizabrth Of York that got that couple onto the throne (legally) then she should have been the monarch not Henry.
Is it solely based upon the fact that Henry VII defeated Richard III in battle, which overrides the law? If that is the case, does that mean if one of QEII's relatives fights her in a battle and wins they get the throne over Charles? Or does the current Royal Family ascend to the throne through different channels now?
3:10 am
April 11, 2011
Offline
Bill, as I understand it, Elizabeth Woodville (mother of Elizabeth of York) supported Henry's claim to the throne on the promise that he married her daughter. When Henry defeated Richard at Bosworth he insisted on claiming the throne by right of conquest, to this end he made sure he was crowned before marrying Elizabeth of York in order to avoid sharing power. That is my simple summing up as an answer to your question, but to be honest the ins and outs of all the family connections involved here can be a bit of a minefield and as my brain is starting to hurt and it's Sunday morning here, I'm taking the dog for a walk! Cheers.
P.S. This would not apply now as Right of Conquest ceased to be recognised in any form of International law by degrees throughout the 20th century, until becoming completely obsolete.
