Re: Need Help with Plantagenet line
-
In reply to:
Need Help with Plantagenet line
Stanley Gould 7/17/11
I assume you already know how the various lines of monarchs of England are related so I am guessing this is about trying to fit various royal families into a single family with one surname.
If so, there are a few problems with the idea. ‘King of England’ is a title held by a variety of individuals over a period of nearly 800 years (after which England became Great Britain and the titles of the kings and queens changed). This would be similar to trying to list all the presidents of the United States into one family based on their holding the title of president. While many of the Kings of England were related, some closely some distantly, they are not in the same male line, which is what a surname implies.
The first Tudor king, Henry VII could be called a claimant to the thrown by royal descent, but it was not at all a strong claim. He was a 3rd great grandson of Edward III, his mother being a Beaufort, and although his great grandfather, Sir John Beaufort was born illegitimate, he and his siblings were later legitimized. But the war of the Roses had thinned out the claimants increasing Henry’s chances. Henry VII, however, won his thrown by conquest—by defeating King Richard III at Bosworth and seizing the throne. To solidify his claim he married Elizabeth of York, daughter of Edward IV of York, King of England essentially uniting the two warring houses of York and Lancaster into the new house of Tudor.
Your next problem is that Kings of England (927 to 1707) did not use or even have hereditary surnames. They had dynastic or family names, most often applied by later historians, but not hereditary surnames. According to the Official website of the British Family, “Before 1917, members of the British Royal Family had no surname, but only the name of the house or dynasty to which they belonged” ( http://www.royal.gov.uk/ThecurrentRoyalFamily/TheRoyalFamilyname/Overview.aspxhttp://www.royal.gov.uk/ThecurrentRoyalFamily/TheRoyalFamilyname/Overview.aspx ). Occasionally a future king was given a surname at his baptism, as in the example of Henry Fitzroy (later Henry VIII). But they rarely if ever used such a surname once they became a king. Even the name Plantagenet is a dynasty name and was not actually a surname—as it applies to kings of England. The first known use of Plantagenet as a surname by any member of this family was by Richard Plantagenet, Duke of York (and father of Edward IV), who assumed that name circa 1448 [The Complete Peerage, Vol I, 1910, p. 183, note c].
What it seems most family historians and genealogists do is to list them normally as they occur in their own family groups, but leaving the surname field blank in the case of most kings of England. Then use your program’s features to create groups which you can list separately. Or, use your search function to create lists of everyone with the title “king of England.” That will work up to 1707 when the kingdom of England became part of the British Empire, i.e. Great Britain. There may be other ways in which FTM can make a connection between kings of various dynasties in England that I’m not aware of since I haven’t used FTM for several years. If someone here doesn’t come up with features you can use in FTM to connect your kings, perhaps you could try the question at the Using Family Tree Maker Forum: http://genforum.genealogy.com/using/http://genforum.genealogy.com/using/Perhaps someone there may have an additional idea or two. Hope this helps.
Jim
More Replies:
-
Re: Need Help with Plantagenet line
Stanley Gould 7/20/11
-
Re: Need Help with Plantagenet line
Jim Fina 7/20/11
-
Re: Need Help with Plantagenet line
Stanley Gould 7/22/11
-
Re: Need Help with Plantagenet line
Tom Burnett 9/10/11
-
Re: Need Help with Plantagenet line
-
Re: Need Help with Plantagenet line