Carlos II's wife cheats on him and has a kid

zhropkick

Banned
Studies have shown that it is reasonably common for a woman to have a kid with somebody other than the supposed father and have nobody notice. Millions of people who are walking around, sleeping or at work as you are reading this don't even suspect the real nature of their paternity, and it's been that way for all of human history. Genetic tests on the British royal family have shown that cheating and passing off the child as the husband's isn't absent from royal families either: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science...s-british-royal-family-may-not-have-royal-bl/

Could this have saved the Spanish Hapsburgs though? It seems very possible to have one of Charles II's wives (maybe an alternate one, maybe a real one as well) bang another guy CK2 style and fall pregnant to him. How likely would it be for the bastard to be mistaken for a legitimate child? Wouldn't a lot of people in the Spanish court, who basically act as babysitters for a disabled Hapsburg, have a vested interest in keeping the Spanish Empire intact by going along with the charade even though the baby might look nothing like a real Hapsburg (no Hapsburg jaw, et cetera). The kid would not be a Hapsburg by blood and wouldn't be affected by generations of inbreeding, so you'd basically be giving the family a fresh start if he could be passed off as legitimate. How likely is this to have been able to happen?
 
Could this have saved the Spanish Hapsburgs though? It seems very possible to have one of Charles II's wives (maybe an alternate one, maybe a real one as well) bang another guy CK2 style and fall pregnant to him. How likely would it be for the bastard to be mistaken for a legitimate child? Wouldn't a lot of people in the Spanish court, who basically act as babysitters for a disabled Hapsburg, have a vested interest in keeping the Spanish Empire intact by going along with the charade even though the baby might look nothing like a real Hapsburg (no Hapsburg jaw, et cetera). The kid would not be a Hapsburg by blood and wouldn't be affected by generations of inbreeding, so you'd basically be giving the family a fresh start if he could be passed off as legitimate. How likely is this to have been able to happen?

@Valena did this in her TL - the Life and Times of the First Duchess of Cumberland - where the baby daddy of Carlos II's kid is his bastard half-brother, D. Juan José. That said, it'd be extraordinarily unlikely - even if these people had vested interests in maintaining the ruse. Why? Spain had had the succession "possibly" tainted once before - and fought a whole war over who the king's legitimate successor was (his daughter (rumoured to be illegitimate) or his half-sister (Queen Isabel la Catolica). Protocol/etiquette at the Spanish court was so strict that no courtier was even allowed to touch the queen, still less get on the "touching" needed to make babies.

The first person who's going to have something to say about Carlos II's *kid* being a bastard is going to be his brother-in-law in France, Louis XIV. The French ambassadors had sent letters home (even before Marie Louise d'Orléans went to Spain) about it being unlikely/impossible that Carlos could father a child. Equally interested in Carlos II not having an heir was Emperor Leopold I, since it meant his daughter would be queen of Spain (or at least mother to the future king). So, Carlos' queen can get it on with someone who's not her husband, and all of Europe will denounce her as a whore if she produces a child (whether it's legitimate or not), starting with her mother-in-law, Queen Mariana.

The only way that it would work is if Carlos marries either of his nieces, Louis XIV's daughter (Madame Royale, who died in childhood) or Maria Antonia of Austria. The wife herself would have a claim to the Spanish throne, so whether or not Carlos II is the father is neither fish nor fowl.

Studies have shown that it is reasonably common for a woman to have a kid with somebody other than the supposed father and have nobody notice. Millions of people who are walking around, sleeping or at work as you are reading this don't even suspect the real nature of their paternity, and it's been that way for all of human history. Genetic tests on the British royal family have shown that cheating and passing off the child as the husband's isn't absent from royal families either: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science...s-british-royal-family-may-not-have-royal-bl/

The article doesn't prove anything, since unless the journalist is confused between Henry Beaufort, 3e duke of Somerset (Henry VII's uncle) and Henry Somerset, 5e duke of Beaufort (who lived in the 18th century), the argument is hollow. It means that there's a broken link in the chain between the 3e duke of Somerset and his great-grandson, the duke of Beaufort, which considering that the dukes of Beaufort are an acknowledged bastard line of the Plantagenet-Beauforts is hardly news. It doesn't make Elizabeth II illegitimate since she doesn't descend from either Henry (nor does her claim to the throne come from either). The claim that Edward IV was a bastard was well known in his own day (first time I hear speculation that his daughter may have been a bastard, though (at least outside the whole pre-contract story Stillington cooked up)), but most chalked it up to cheap sensation/court gossip AFAIK
 
Top