Is there a possibility that the Young Pretender was a bigamist?

I know. The obvious answer is no. Further, I know this post will sound like something from an 18th Century Jeremy Kyle, but hear me out.

However I do have a few questions surrounding Charles Edward Stuart, namely in relation to his relationship with Clementina Walkinshaw and his marriage to to Louise of Stolberg-Gedern.

After arriving on the Continent after Culloden, Charles took up with Clementina Walkinshaw, who was acknowledged as his mistress. Gradually as the years went on, he took to drink and eventually became violent towards her. This got so bad that, with the apparent blessing of the Old Pretender James Edward Stuart, she left Charles with their daughter Charlotte. I say with the blessing as James arranged for a pension of 10,000 livres per year. This was not a small amount. Charles, furious at her leaving him and taking his child never forgave her.

After the passing of James, her situation became more troublesome and this is where my questions begin.

Aware of the dangers of falling into poverty, Clementina went to Charles brother Henry, who agreed to continue her pension on one condition. That she sign a document stating she never married Charles. If she was just his mistress, why should this condition exist? Further, she later tried to rescind this statement. Why should she try to do so if she was just his mistress?

On the back of this, why didn't Charles marry until he was 52 years old, on the assumption that he never married Clementina? Surely keeping the line would be the priority for him after all, and I have no doubt after the '45 he would have had ladies from aristocratic families flocking to him.

None of it makes any sense to me. Any answers as to why the clause was added?
 
Last edited:

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Maybe, maybe not. It was all politics. The main thing was probably that there might have been rumors, and perhaps they were married perhaps not. But unless Clementina assured they weren't married there was always a cloud of uncertainty. Which is why Charles' family needed it.

Another thing is that Charles was somewhat obsessed with the idea that his daughter was taken from him. Maybe Charles wanted her to be heiress to the cause. You can see why Charles' family would want her to be a bastard.
 
I initially posted this on Chat, but just had it moved here. Being on the second page, I thought I'd give it a bump.

Any thoughts?
 
As for why there wasn't a large parade of noblewomen looking to be matched with him, I think it was because the Hanoverian victory was pretty decisive and it seemed unlikely that he would ever be able to get a real foothold in Britain again without a massive French invasion force. The Highland Clearances largely sapped him of the one bit of manpower possible to find in Britain (keep in mind that the substantially more Catholic Northeast of England did NOT rise for him in 1745), and with Britain's wealth and power stacking up as it was after the war of Austrian Succession, nobody really thought he had much of a chance. Even the French thought he was a poor bet after meeting with him before an attempted invasion in 1759.
 
As for why there wasn't a large parade of noblewomen looking to be matched with him, I think it was because the Hanoverian victory was pretty decisive and it seemed unlikely that he would ever be able to get a real foothold in Britain again without a massive French invasion force. The Highland Clearances largely sapped him of the one bit of manpower possible to find in Britain (keep in mind that the substantially more Catholic Northeast of England did NOT rise for him in 1745), and with Britain's wealth and power stacking up as it was after the war of Austrian Succession, nobody really thought he had much of a chance. Even the French thought he was a poor bet after meeting with him before an attempted invasion in 1759.
By 1759 he was a fully fledged alcoholic who was bitter about his failure. IIRC, he turned up for the meeting drunk.

In the late 1740s, he was the star of the Paris set, known widely as an adventurer who nearly reclaimed his throne. He would be a match at that point for any number of the French nobility. The Highland Clearances took place over a far longer period. There were a series of laws made in a bid to destroy Highland culture after the 45.

In terms of the 1745 rising, neither did Lowland Scotland, which was one of the reasons he headed south as chronicled in the book by his Adjutant, titled Arcanius. The lack of people joining the rising is definitely not the same as support however, and places like Manchester were much more sympathetic than Glasgow.

Besides, I am not asking over the success or failure of the rising. The question in the OP piqued my interest.
 
Well, if you believe whats-his-face (Prince Michael of Albany)'s genealogy, then Charles was a bigamist, since he has Charlie marrying a woman - Marguerite O'something-or-other and begetting his ancestor - during the time that he was legally married to Luise of Stolberg (yes, he and Luise were separated, but the Papal States didn't allow divorce (nor was any annulment issued AFAIK)). So then, technically, Charles is a bigamist.

Whether he married Clementina - it's iffy at best. I remember reading of something involving a church at Ghent (but that could've simply been Charlotte's baptism), and Clementina's main reason for attempting to claim in later life that they had been married was financial. She had to support herself and Charlotte's three illegitimate kids (which no one at the Stuart court was allowed to know about). As to the Cardinal-King's pressuring her to sign an affidavit swearing up and down, it was more, as stated, to ensure that no one contested his rights. And James' support I'd guess was probably more in the line of sympathy for the woman ruined by his son, or perhaps it was a way of sticking it to Charlie (since they weren't on speaking terms before Charlie and Clementina parted ways to start with). I'd imagine if there was any real marriage between them, he'd have sent for Clementina and Charlotte to come to Rome (in lieu of Charles), or he'd have been absolutely scandalised by his son's behaviour and tried to downplay the rumours as best he could.

Regarding Charlie at the end of the 1740s, his mistress (Princess Jablanowska?) reported in a letter from Avignon that there was talk of a princess of Hesse-Rheinfels (who likewise descended from James I via the Winter Queen, and was related to the duchess of Savoy, the princess de Condé and the Rohans, and a few others) being betrothed to Charles, but nothing ever came of it. (No doubt Charles considered a match to a 'mere' princess of a cadet line of Hesse beneath his 'kingly' dignity.
 
An interesting thing is the difference of law systems n England/Ireland and Scotland. If Charles married Walkinshaw after the birth of Charlotte, she would be legitimate in Scotland, but not in England or Ireland. An unexpected way to have "national" pretenders for Scotland. Of course, Charles had no reason to do so ; either they married before the birth or not at all.
 
An interesting thing is the difference of law systems n England/Ireland and Scotland. If Charles married Walkinshaw after the birth of Charlotte, she would be legitimate in Scotland, but not in England or Ireland. An unexpected way to have "national" pretenders for Scotland. Of course, Charles had no reason to do so ; either they married before the birth or not at all.

I'd love to see a TL where Charlotte is born male. Or she's got a less nebulous position than OTL. I feel she sort of got the short end of the stick. How would her being male change things? Would Charles marry Clementina after the child's birth? Or just leave Charles Jnr a bastard?
 
Top