My brain, it hurts
Jan. 5th, 2009 12:25 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Off work today - was up coughing half the night. Why haven't they cured disease yet?
Anyway - following
lizbee's post comparing the looks of Henry VIII and Prince William Julie asked me which of his children survived, so I went digging into Henry VIII - and was amused to discover that three of his four children became rulers of the country. Is this a record? Does it take a uniquely English fucked-up-ness to achieve this kind of thing?
Anyway - following
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 12:51 pm (UTC)But it's not peculiarly English. Three sons of Louis II of France (Louis III, Carloman II and Charles III) ended up ruling, as did three sons of Henry II (Francois II, Charles IX and Henry III).
Looking north, no fewer than five of the sons of Malcolm III (Malcolm Canmore) ruled Scotland: Duncan II, Edmund, Edgar, Alexander I and David I.
William the Silent was succeeded as Prince of Orange by three of his sons in turn (Philip William, Maurice and Frederick Henry).
Henry VIII's children are not unusual in that so many of them became monarchs. What is more unusual is that two of them became reigning queens rather than kings, and that one of the three was of a different religion to the other two.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 12:52 pm (UTC)I do love my friends list :->
no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 03:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 04:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 05:45 pm (UTC)I have to say I find Henry VIII a completely unappealing character.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 05:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 12:51 pm (UTC)What this would have done to the succession is unclear. He had only one child, who became Queen Victoria. Had he lived another 17 years, Victoria (or rather Princess Alexandrina Victoria) would have been his eldest child, but it's entirely possible if not likely that he would have produced a son by then who would have succeeded him and kept the House of Hanover on the throne through what we call the Victorian era.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 01:00 pm (UTC)how well did queen vic's kids do??
no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 01:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 01:15 pm (UTC)There were some threes before the conquest (according to wikipedia), but no others afterwards. Henry still feels like the winner, though, for having such a quick succession of children (including, in some sense, Jane), followed by Elizabeth.
Pre-conquest:
* Ethelbald, Ethelbert, Ethelred, Alfred the Great
* Elfward, Athelstan the Glorious, Edmund the Magnificent, Eadred
* Saint Edward the Martyr, Ethelred the Unready
* Harold Harefoot, Harthacanute
* Edmund Ironside, Saint Edward the Confessor (Half brothers, Edmund was deposed by the Danish, and Edmund apparently from his half-brother through his mother). Hence:
* Harthacanute, Saint Edward the Confessor
Post-conquest, things settle a little:
* William II & Henry I
* Henry the Young King, Richard I, John Softsword[1]
* Henry VI, Henry VI (if you count single children who obtain the throne twice)
* Edward IV, Edward IV, Richard III (ditto)
* Edward VI, Mary, Elizabeth
* Charles II, James II
* Mary II, Anne
* George IV, William IV
* Edward VIII, George VI
[1] I mean, seriously, did this guy have the worst PR or what? "Bad", "Lackland", and now "Softsword"! :)
no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 01:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 02:00 pm (UTC)He may have had a son and a daughter with Mary Boleyn, making 6.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 03:25 pm (UTC)The wikipedia entry about Fujiwara Michinaga (never an emperor since he wasn't of the royal family, but always there in the background), it says "he was father to four (non-reigning) empresses, uncle to two emperors and grandfather to another three."
It's not quite the same as having three of your children rule outright, but as the head of the Fujiwaras he was pretty well the most influential man around..
no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 05:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-07 02:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 07:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-05 07:32 pm (UTC)