If there was blood ancestor of the Ruthvens who were Murdered by King James, alive today, could he claim his lands and £85,000 that was stolen from them by the King, from the present Queen ?
2007-07-12 03:57:43 · 7 answers · asked by Mainline 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
Sorry I don't know but it's a good sensible question and I've given you a star for that. Hope you get a sensible answer - I'd quite like to know myself. :-)
2007-07-12 04:02:51 · answer #1 · answered by chameleon 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For one thing, a blood ANCESTOR of the Ruthvens would be at least 400 years old, so if he is in need of a few quid, he should start by selling his story to the papers.
Secondly, the king said they were traitors. The Scottish Parliament agreed. A just punishment was therefore ordered. Nothing was stolen, it was a perfectly legal and just punishment under the law. Since the king and the parliament between them made all the laws, the king didn't need to fool around with anything inconvenient like proof. Back in those days, it was good to be the king.
Finally, the current head of the Ruthven family is the Earl of Gowrie. He was a member of the British Cabinet in the 1970s, so I would suggest that he is pretty comfortably ensconced within the aristocracy, and unlikely to stir up trouble by reminding everyone that his claim to fame is to be descend from dubious characters.
2007-07-13 03:55:07 · answer #2 · answered by Tim N 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Whether the Ruthvens were murdered by James VI or killed while attempting to kill the king depends entirely on whose point of view you accept. You can read an account of the events leading up to the deaths here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ruthven,_3rd_Earl_of_Gowrie
Once a person is declared a traitor, all their lands and property are forfeit to the crown. This had happened to the Ruthvens earlier but the lands and titles were restored two years after the execution of the 1st earl. They continued to plot against the king and ended up dead as traitors usually did in those days.
You could ask the Queen to restore the lands but she has no obligation to do so and I doubt she would. Traitors don't deserve it.
2007-07-12 21:42:31 · answer #3 · answered by tentofield 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm sorry but there is no linage between king James and queen Elizabeth ll. He was a Stuart. She is a Windsor. There have been 2 revolutions Between there rule. The governments are not the same so are not responsible.
2007-07-13 02:55:54 · answer #4 · answered by old-bald-one 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. The government and its rulers and treaties have changed many times over the years. To start making reparations would open a floodgate for even perceived old wrongs.
2007-07-13 01:33:49 · answer #5 · answered by AdamKadmon 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are plenty of people with the surname Ruthven - if they are not bothered, why are you?
2007-07-12 14:04:22 · answer #6 · answered by derfini 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, I doubt it. LOL! It's very doubtful the Queen would hand over anything like that!
2007-07-12 11:06:43 · answer #7 · answered by arrianna_vt 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋