View Message

This is a reply within a larger thread: view the whole thread

Re: Another additional note...
in reply to a message by Julia
"Fitz" names were traditonally given to the illegitemate sons of royalty.According to a few websites I found looking up Fitz- names, this is actually untrue, though I'd like to ask CKE or someone else with proper authority (heh) to set the record straight.Array


...a girl who's in love with the world...A revolution without dancing is a revolution not worth having.

This message was edited 6/28/2007, 6:29 PM

vote up1vote down

Replies

As some others have pointed out, there are some cases where illegitimate children of royal men in England have received surnames that start with Fitz- such as Fitzroy or Fitzclarence.However, there have been a lot of commentators who have therefore jumped to the conclusion that ALL families with surnames starting with Fitz- are descended from royal bastards, and that is definitely NOT the case. The huge majority of persons with Fitz- surnames have no royal connection.
vote up1vote down
Thanks for the explanation, CKE. :DAll this information (from everyone who replied, heh) is fascinating. :)Array
vote up1vote down
Hmm, really?I've read that in several places...but it could definitely be wrong. Next time I see a post by CKE I'll ask him.
vote up1vote down
Must be true, at least in some cases. Henry VIII had one acknowledged illegitimate son named Henry Fitzroy (= "son of the king").
vote up1vote down
AndFitzroy was also used by the children of Charles II, Henry I and JohnThe Fitzcharles who were also the children of Charles II and the Fitzclarences who were the children of William IV (from when he was the Duke of Clarence.(And to the OP: FitzWilliam is the name of an earldom (real life, not just in P&P) according to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_FitzWilliam, though being Wikipedia any information has to be taken with some caution).
vote up1vote down