Was: Is this why the anti-Richard bias persists? Better claims to t
Was: Is this why the anti-Richard bias persists? Better claims to t
2012-12-02 02:52:56
Hi Stephen,
Could you explain the descent as to how Philip II and "her Cardinal" had
better claims to the throne? I know better claims certainly abounded than
Henrry VII, but I'm interested in their line of descent. I assume thru the
Portugese line from John of Gaunt?
Terry
Terence Buckaloo
Sterling-Rock Falls Hist. Soc.
Director and Curator
815-622-6215
Could you explain the descent as to how Philip II and "her Cardinal" had
better claims to the throne? I know better claims certainly abounded than
Henrry VII, but I'm interested in their line of descent. I assume thru the
Portugese line from John of Gaunt?
Terry
Terence Buckaloo
Sterling-Rock Falls Hist. Soc.
Director and Curator
815-622-6215
Re: Was: Is this why the anti-Richard bias persists? Better claims
2012-12-02 10:53:00
Mary I had no claim other than through her grandfather's conquest - a pseudo-Lancastrian further weakened by the Beaufort exclusion.
Phillip II of Spain was probably descended through Henry IV's sister marrying into the Portugese royal family - a real Lancastrian through Blanche. I can check this.
Reginald, Cardinal Pole, was Clarence's grandson - a Yorkist encumbered by the Clarence attainder.
----- Original Message -----
From: Terry Buckaloo
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2012 2:52 AM
Subject: Was: Is this why the anti-Richard bias persists? Better claims to the throne than illegitimate Tudors
Hi Stephen,
Could you explain the descent as to how Philip II and "her Cardinal" had
better claims to the throne? I know better claims certainly abounded than
Henrry VII, but I'm interested in their line of descent. I assume thru the
Portugese line from John of Gaunt?
Terry
Terence Buckaloo
Sterling-Rock Falls Hist. Soc.
Director and Curator
815-622-6215
Phillip II of Spain was probably descended through Henry IV's sister marrying into the Portugese royal family - a real Lancastrian through Blanche. I can check this.
Reginald, Cardinal Pole, was Clarence's grandson - a Yorkist encumbered by the Clarence attainder.
----- Original Message -----
From: Terry Buckaloo
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2012 2:52 AM
Subject: Was: Is this why the anti-Richard bias persists? Better claims to the throne than illegitimate Tudors
Hi Stephen,
Could you explain the descent as to how Philip II and "her Cardinal" had
better claims to the throne? I know better claims certainly abounded than
Henrry VII, but I'm interested in their line of descent. I assume thru the
Portugese line from John of Gaunt?
Terry
Terence Buckaloo
Sterling-Rock Falls Hist. Soc.
Director and Curator
815-622-6215
Re: Was: Is this why the anti-Richard bias persists? Better claims
2012-12-02 16:42:02
--- In , "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...> wrote:
>
> Mary I had no claim other than through her grandfather's conquest - a pseudo-Lancastrian further weakened by the Beaufort exclusion.
> Phillip II of Spain was probably descended through Henry IV's sister marrying into the Portugese royal family - a real Lancastrian through Blanche. I can check this.
> Reginald, Cardinal Pole, was Clarence's grandson - a Yorkist encumbered by the Clarence attainder.
Carol responds:
It wasn't Mary I, Philip's wife, whom he attempted to attack with the Spanish Armada; it was her half-sister, Elizabeth I. Philip II seems to have known that their grandmother, Elizabeth of York, had been declared illegitimate but set aside his objections in Mary's case because she was Catholic. Her Protestant half-sister was another matter. In any case, Philip II was, as you say, descended from John of Gaunt through Henry IV's sister, Philippa, who married John of Portugal. (Isabella of Castille was their granddaughter and Philip II's grandmother.)
Ironically, perhaps, he was descended from both mad Joanna (Juana) of Castille (Ferdinand and Isabella's daughter and Catherine of Aragon's sister, whom Henry VII had considered marrying after Elizabeth of York's death) and Manuel of Portugal, the man that Elizabeth of York would have married had Richard III lived. (I wonder if the connection to Catherine of Aragon was the reason that Philip was willing to set aside any objections to Mary's ancestry. Maybe he thought that marriage to him helped to legitimate her claim?)
Sources which say that any claim he had to the English throne died with Mary I have clearly not examined his Lancastrian ancestry, with claims through both the Spanish and Portuguese royal families.
But, all that said, Reginald, Cardinal Pole had a stronger claim still if we disregard his grandfather George of Clarence's attainder, but it was, of course, a Yorkist claim, not a Lancastrian one. Does anyone know whether Henry VII made sure that Reginald went into the church? Or maybe his mother did it trying to keep him safe from the Tudors. Ironically, he lived and she was executed.
Carol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_II_of_Spain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabella_I_of_Castile
>
> Mary I had no claim other than through her grandfather's conquest - a pseudo-Lancastrian further weakened by the Beaufort exclusion.
> Phillip II of Spain was probably descended through Henry IV's sister marrying into the Portugese royal family - a real Lancastrian through Blanche. I can check this.
> Reginald, Cardinal Pole, was Clarence's grandson - a Yorkist encumbered by the Clarence attainder.
Carol responds:
It wasn't Mary I, Philip's wife, whom he attempted to attack with the Spanish Armada; it was her half-sister, Elizabeth I. Philip II seems to have known that their grandmother, Elizabeth of York, had been declared illegitimate but set aside his objections in Mary's case because she was Catholic. Her Protestant half-sister was another matter. In any case, Philip II was, as you say, descended from John of Gaunt through Henry IV's sister, Philippa, who married John of Portugal. (Isabella of Castille was their granddaughter and Philip II's grandmother.)
Ironically, perhaps, he was descended from both mad Joanna (Juana) of Castille (Ferdinand and Isabella's daughter and Catherine of Aragon's sister, whom Henry VII had considered marrying after Elizabeth of York's death) and Manuel of Portugal, the man that Elizabeth of York would have married had Richard III lived. (I wonder if the connection to Catherine of Aragon was the reason that Philip was willing to set aside any objections to Mary's ancestry. Maybe he thought that marriage to him helped to legitimate her claim?)
Sources which say that any claim he had to the English throne died with Mary I have clearly not examined his Lancastrian ancestry, with claims through both the Spanish and Portuguese royal families.
But, all that said, Reginald, Cardinal Pole had a stronger claim still if we disregard his grandfather George of Clarence's attainder, but it was, of course, a Yorkist claim, not a Lancastrian one. Does anyone know whether Henry VII made sure that Reginald went into the church? Or maybe his mother did it trying to keep him safe from the Tudors. Ironically, he lived and she was executed.
Carol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_II_of_Spain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabella_I_of_Castile
Re: Was: Is this why the anti-Richard bias persists? Better claims
2012-12-02 17:30:50
Oh yes, I was just commenting on the situation in England from 1553-8.
Reginald Pole died of natural causes at about 58, on the same day as Mary.
His siblings: Henry, Lord Montagu was beheaded in 1538/9 at 46, Sir Geoffrey died in late 1558 at a similar age to Reginald whilst Sir Arthur had died much earlier at about 30 and Ursula (Stafford) lived long enough to have a large family.
Montagu was unfortunately in England when the exiled Reginald published a tract against the Boleyn marriage. Sir Geoffrey was forced to testify and was "broken" by the ordeal.
----- Original Message -----
From: justcarol67
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2012 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: Was: Is this why the anti-Richard bias persists? Better claims to the throne than illegitimate Tudors
--- In , "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...> wrote:
>
> Mary I had no claim other than through her grandfather's conquest - a pseudo-Lancastrian further weakened by the Beaufort exclusion.
> Phillip II of Spain was probably descended through Henry IV's sister marrying into the Portugese royal family - a real Lancastrian through Blanche. I can check this.
> Reginald, Cardinal Pole, was Clarence's grandson - a Yorkist encumbered by the Clarence attainder.
Carol responds:
It wasn't Mary I, Philip's wife, whom he attempted to attack with the Spanish Armada; it was her half-sister, Elizabeth I. Philip II seems to have known that their grandmother, Elizabeth of York, had been declared illegitimate but set aside his objections in Mary's case because she was Catholic. Her Protestant half-sister was another matter. In any case, Philip II was, as you say, descended from John of Gaunt through Henry IV's sister, Philippa, who married John of Portugal. (Isabella of Castille was their granddaughter and Philip II's grandmother.)
Ironically, perhaps, he was descended from both mad Joanna (Juana) of Castille (Ferdinand and Isabella's daughter and Catherine of Aragon's sister, whom Henry VII had considered marrying after Elizabeth of York's death) and Manuel of Portugal, the man that Elizabeth of York would have married had Richard III lived. (I wonder if the connection to Catherine of Aragon was the reason that Philip was willing to set aside any objections to Mary's ancestry. Maybe he thought that marriage to him helped to legitimate her claim?)
Sources which say that any claim he had to the English throne died with Mary I have clearly not examined his Lancastrian ancestry, with claims through both the Spanish and Portuguese royal families.
But, all that said, Reginald, Cardinal Pole had a stronger claim still if we disregard his grandfather George of Clarence's attainder, but it was, of course, a Yorkist claim, not a Lancastrian one. Does anyone know whether Henry VII made sure that Reginald went into the church? Or maybe his mother did it trying to keep him safe from the Tudors. Ironically, he lived and she was executed.
Carol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_II_of_Spain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabella_I_of_Castile
Reginald Pole died of natural causes at about 58, on the same day as Mary.
His siblings: Henry, Lord Montagu was beheaded in 1538/9 at 46, Sir Geoffrey died in late 1558 at a similar age to Reginald whilst Sir Arthur had died much earlier at about 30 and Ursula (Stafford) lived long enough to have a large family.
Montagu was unfortunately in England when the exiled Reginald published a tract against the Boleyn marriage. Sir Geoffrey was forced to testify and was "broken" by the ordeal.
----- Original Message -----
From: justcarol67
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2012 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: Was: Is this why the anti-Richard bias persists? Better claims to the throne than illegitimate Tudors
--- In , "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...> wrote:
>
> Mary I had no claim other than through her grandfather's conquest - a pseudo-Lancastrian further weakened by the Beaufort exclusion.
> Phillip II of Spain was probably descended through Henry IV's sister marrying into the Portugese royal family - a real Lancastrian through Blanche. I can check this.
> Reginald, Cardinal Pole, was Clarence's grandson - a Yorkist encumbered by the Clarence attainder.
Carol responds:
It wasn't Mary I, Philip's wife, whom he attempted to attack with the Spanish Armada; it was her half-sister, Elizabeth I. Philip II seems to have known that their grandmother, Elizabeth of York, had been declared illegitimate but set aside his objections in Mary's case because she was Catholic. Her Protestant half-sister was another matter. In any case, Philip II was, as you say, descended from John of Gaunt through Henry IV's sister, Philippa, who married John of Portugal. (Isabella of Castille was their granddaughter and Philip II's grandmother.)
Ironically, perhaps, he was descended from both mad Joanna (Juana) of Castille (Ferdinand and Isabella's daughter and Catherine of Aragon's sister, whom Henry VII had considered marrying after Elizabeth of York's death) and Manuel of Portugal, the man that Elizabeth of York would have married had Richard III lived. (I wonder if the connection to Catherine of Aragon was the reason that Philip was willing to set aside any objections to Mary's ancestry. Maybe he thought that marriage to him helped to legitimate her claim?)
Sources which say that any claim he had to the English throne died with Mary I have clearly not examined his Lancastrian ancestry, with claims through both the Spanish and Portuguese royal families.
But, all that said, Reginald, Cardinal Pole had a stronger claim still if we disregard his grandfather George of Clarence's attainder, but it was, of course, a Yorkist claim, not a Lancastrian one. Does anyone know whether Henry VII made sure that Reginald went into the church? Or maybe his mother did it trying to keep him safe from the Tudors. Ironically, he lived and she was executed.
Carol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_II_of_Spain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabella_I_of_Castile
Richard III on Amazon
As an Amazon Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.