• Do you love Genealogy? Why not write for us? we're looking for volunteers to write articles for Family history. Please contact us for further information.

is this true???

Posts
16
Likes
0
Location
leicestershire
#1
:confused: My mum phoned me last night to give me a history lesson I think!!!
she was obviously watching some programme and informed that I think it was King Charles II and many other Kings of England had rather a lot of illegitamate (sorry know that is spellt wrongly) children, therefore they were (the children that is) granted membership to the house of Lords????
Therefore it is now banned ,I am not sure which way round this is for either any mamber of the house of Lords to do there family history or is it any historian to do a family history search on a member of the house odf Lords????
can anyone elaborate on this or has mum lost the plot????
Looking forward to a reply
Kim
 

Guy

Valued Member
Posts
401
Likes
1
Location
Wakefield, West Yorkshire
Website
freespace.virgin.net
#5
:confused: My mum phoned me last night to give me a history lesson I think!!!
she was obviously watching some programme and informed that I think it was King Charles II and many other Kings of England had rather a lot of illegitamate (sorry know that is spellt wrongly) children, therefore they were (the children that is) granted membership to the house of Lords????
This is certainly correct, it was commonplace for gentlemen of all ranks to have illegitimate children. In the past there was no shame attached to illegitimacy. There was shame and punishment if one could not support ones illegitimate children and they became a charge on the parish.

Returning to the point yes many kings had illegitimate children, yes some of those children became Peers of the Realm

Therefore it is now banned ,I am not sure which way round this is for either any mamber of the house of Lords to do there family history or is it any historian to do a family history search on a member of the house odf Lords????
can anyone elaborate on this or has mum lost the plot????
Looking forward to a reply
Kim
If such family history had been banned that would have meant the end of Heraldry as heraldry depends on family history.

Between 1767 and 1802 every member of the House of Lords had to supply an 8 generation family tree when they first took their seat.

I am afraid your mum must have misheard.
Cheers
Guy
 

Minden

Active member
Posts
86
Likes
0
Location
Cambridgeshire
#6
The story is probably related to this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_****er,_1st_Duchess_of_Cleveland

She had lots of children by various fathers, some of them later called FitzRoy (as in Fitz = son of, Roy as in roi/king), which were elevated to the peerage by a grateful Charles II.

Further back in history royal bastards would have had arms which included the royal arms to a greater or lesser degree, as they were proud of their father's blood. You can still see that in the arms of the Duke of Grafton (one of Charles and Barbara's offspring) here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_of_Grafton
 

Similar threads

Top