On Jun 30, 9:15 pm, m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Mark Brader) wrote:
> James Allen writes:
> > But yes, the genealogies associated
> > with the War of the Roses are fascinating.
>
> No, they aren't.
Well, shame on some posters for continuing to discuss
these genealogies!
The genealogies are surely *interesting*
even if *fascinating* was an exaggeration.
(Certainly more interesting than a geography
word problem to be "solved without computer
assistance" based on a mountain range that
very few of us would have even *heard* of
*without computer assistance*!)
On Jul 6, 6:39=A0pm, Nick Wedd <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In message
> <8fdd2aa4-e149-4f9c-aac4-d38c5c949...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> Mensanator <mensana...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
> >All this talk of removable cousins made me think of
> >The War of the Roses for some reason.
> Edward III's grandson Richard of Conisburgh married his first cousin
> twice removed, Anne Mortimer, Edward III's great great granddaughter.
It *is* interesting that the 3rd Duke of York,
Richard Plantagenet (1411-1460), was *both*
the cognatic heir of King Edward III (through
Richard's mother Anne) *and* his Salic (agnatic)
heir (through Richard's father Richard).
Richard was *not* Edward's heir using the
rule of absolute primogeniture: that would be
Jeanne de Bar (1415-1462) whose father was
killed at Agincourt fighting *against* England.
Nor, after his death, could Richard's heirs
claim the throne as "closest kin" to Edward III,
since Edward had several great grandchildren who
survived the War of the Roses, including Isabella,
daughter of King Joao I of ****tugal and mother
of Charles the Bold, Grand Duke of the West.
(One might argue that England had but a single
inheritance rule, so inheritance via alternate
rules is irrelevant, but this ignores political
reality. The Lancaster Kings claimed the throne
via agnatic primogeniture, kin****p of blood,
election *and* conquest -- in other words, almost
every inheritance rule *except* the cognatic
primogeniture England actually used and uses.
More recently, George King of the Willing took
his throne, in defiance of America's selection
rules, with the political aid of Rupert Duke of Fox
and Sir Antonin `the Black' of Scalia.)
The marriage in 1406 between Richard Plantagenet's
parents was the key marriage that unified the
cognatic and eventual Salic heir****ps of Edward III,
but the bride and groom didn't know this at the time
and presumably married out of love!
(In 1406 the bride, Anne Mortimer, had two brothers
who would have been expected to inherit the Earldom
of March (and Kingdom of England) rather than her,
but both were to die early and childless. And the
groom, Richard of Cambridge, had a married older brother,
Edward Duke of York, who later died at Agincourt,
childless.)
The usurpations of Kings Henry IV and VII eventually
"healed themselves" in the sense that Henry VIII Tudor
was, under England's rule of cognatic primogeniture,
the legitimate heir of King Edward III (and therefore
of King William I the Bastard himself). The same can
*not* be said of the Protestant usurpation of 1689.
If Parliament's 1701 Act disinheriting papists and their
heirs were rescinded, England's Heir Presumptive
would be 13-year old Joseph of Liechtenstein who would
then, upon the deaths of his parents, unite the thrones
of Britain and Liechtenstein!
James Hussein Allen
|
