What if a queen has a paramour?

Question

is this possible? what if her paramour is just a commoner and bears a child from him? will her child be recognized or not? please help. thanks.

Answer 1

Many have had. But they knew better than bear illegitimate children.

Answer 2

Have you seen the Queen lately? Slim chance.

Answer 3

Illegitimate children are not eligible to inherit the throne. However, there is nothing to stop royalty from marrying commoners. Technically both Prince Philip and Princess Diana were commoners (Prince Philip was born Royalty but when he became a naturalised British Citizen he gave up his titles). Princess Diana only had a courtesy title and was technically a commoner. There is nothing to stop Prince William marrying Kate Middelton and she is most definitely a commoner.

Answer 4

She'd have to keep it quiet! Any child would be recognized as the offspring of the queen and her husband.If the child is recognized as ofspring of an affair,that child is illegitimate and can make no claims to the succession.If the queen in question is a queen consort and she has a child out of wedlock,she might end up getting a divorce and losing her status!

Answer 5

Illigetimate or suspect children of any union that does not involve the bloodline of the royal would not be recognized.

As for some of the others, someone such as Princess Diana not being of royal blood {she was; actually related to the royal family from not too afar} the main issue was the the 'issue' {children} were born of her and the royal {Charles}.

Answer 6

Horrible things tended to happen to both her and the paramour.

The 3 musketeers (well, the part everybody knows about) revolves about the musketeers trying to get the diamond thingies before the Cardinal's men can, precipitating the queen's disgrace... (and probably murdering the duke of Buckingham in the process)

more case in point, if you like French history, there as the case of the king's daughters in law in 1314. It was found out that two of the king's sons had adulterous wives.

The men guilty of diddling with the princesses were executed with seldom seen refinements of barbary/cruelty.

The adulterous wives were cast into a fairly hard prison, while the wife to the third son, who had been an accessory but not guilty of the crime was sent for about a year in a less harsh prison.

The wife to the elder son was secretly assassinated after her husband became king so as to allow him to procreate an heir untainted by doubt of parentage.

The other adulterous wife spent about 10 years in a fortress, and was transferred to a nunnery after her husband became king and had the marriage annulled.

The basic idea is that kings need heirs, and so doubts about a child's parentage can't bee brooked, it does not matter whether the other man is noble or a commoner. kingly wives are OFF limits. Even in the modern world, if the wife of a title bearing royal had children with another man, that would lead to a messy divorce and that lady's kids being struck off the succession list.