Britain’s Royal Families

People often seem to overemphasise the differences between the various royal families that have reigned in Britain. Saying that Elizabeth I was the last Tudor monarch and James I/VI was the first of the Stuarts can make people believe that they were completely unrelated, when, actually, James was only Elizabeth’s first cousin twice removed. This is even more obvious when we say that Victoria was the last of the Hanoverians and Edward VII was the first of the Saxe-Coburgs. Edward was Victoria’s son and the name of the royal house only changed because Edward used his father’s name.

There is only one British royal family. The current queen can trace her ancestors back well over a thousand years. With this in mind, in this article we’ll trace the history of the royal family back to the Norman Conquest and explain how each monarch is related to their successor.

We’ll start with William I. As his epithet implies, he conquered Britain in 1066. He wasn’t related to the previous Anglo-Saxon royal family. But I should mention that his son, Henry married a descendant of Alfred the Great, so the family does link to the previous rulers of the island.

House of Normandy

So we start the House of Normandy with William I. He was succeeded by his son, William II who was, in turn, succeeded by his brother Henry I. Henry was briefly succeeded by his daughter Matilda (and that’s a fascinating story that we should probably cover in more detail in the future). When Matilda was unable to hold on to power, she was succeeded by her cousin, Stephen. But when Stephen died, the throne went to Matilda’s son, Henry II, bringing in the House of Plantagenet.

House of Plantagenet

The succession was very smooth for most the long period of Plantagenet rule. Henry II was followed by his son, Richard I, who was then followed by his brother, John. John was succeeded by his son, Henry III, and then Henry’s son Edward I. Edwards I, II and III all followed and all were the son of the previous king. Then there’s a minor blip when Edward III was succeeded by his grandson, Richard II. Richard’s father was Edward, the Black Prince who died before his father, Edward III.

Richard II was followed by his cousin, Henry IV who was succeeded by his son, Henry V, and his grandson Henry VI. And then things are a little confused for a while as we get to the Wars of the Roses. This diagram might help.

Some descendants of John of Gaunt
The most important descendants of John of Gaunt

John of Gaunt was  a son of Edward III. Following the death of Richard II, in 1399, John’s son Henry was next in line and the succession followed that (obvious) route for three generations until Henry VI was on the throne. But in 1455 a civil war broke out and Henry’s second cousin, Edward IV seized the throne in 1461. Henry seized it back in 1470, but this reign was short-lived and Edward regained the throne the following year. When Edward IV died in 1483, he was succeeded briefly by his son, Edward V and then by his brother, Richard III. Richard’s reign was short and he was defeated in battle by another second cousin who installed himself as Henry VII – the first of the Tudor monarchs.

House of Tudor

Henry VII was the first monarch of the house of Tudor and was succeeded by his son, Henry VIII. Henry VIII was followed by his son, Edward VI, but from then on, the Tudor succession gets a little more complicated. Edward VI wrote a will naming Jane Grey, his first cousin once removed, as his successor but on Edward’s death Jane found it impossible to hold on to the throne and she reigned for only nine days. She was succeeded by Edward’s half-sister, Mary I, who was, in turn, succeeded by another half-sister, Elizabeth I. At that point, the Tudor succession dries up and we need to look elsewhere in the family tree.

House of Stuart

When a monarch dies without children, we look to their siblings for the next monarch. And once there are no more siblings, we need to search back through previous generations to find the nearest relative. When Elizabeth I died, she was the last legitimate descendant of Henry VIII. We therefore need to look at descendants of Henry VIII’s father, Henry VII. Henry VII had a daughter, Margaret, who had married the Scottish king, James IV. They had a son, James V, who had a daughter, Mary, Queen of Scots, who had a son who was on the Scottish throne as James VI. After Elizabeth’s death, James was her nearest living relative (her cousin twice removed) and became the English king as James I.

The succession was easy for the Stuarts for a while. James I/VI was followed by his son, Charles I, who was followed by his son Charles II (I’m omitting, of course, the small matter of the Civil War and the temporary removal of the monarchy). Charles II was followed by his brother, James II/VII.

Then things get a bit strange again. James II/VII was deposed in the Glorious Revolution and was replaced by his daughter, Mary II, and her husband, William III. On Mary’s death, William reigned alone until he died and was succeeded by Mary’s sister Anne.

But none of Anne’s children lived very long and it became clear that this branch of the Stuart succession had dried up. Once again the search had to go back a couple of generations. This time, the search was complicated by the fact the Catholics had been banned from the British throne and most of the descendants of James I/VI were Catholics. The first protestant on the list was Electress Sophia of Hanover and (as she died a few weeks before Anne) her son became George I. He was Anne’s second cousin.

House of Hanover

We’re past all the complexities now. It’s plain sailing from here. George I was followed by his son, George II. George II was succeeded by his grandson, George III (as George III’s father, Prince Frederick had died). George III was followed by his son, George IV and George IV was succeeded by his brother, William IV. William IV was followed by his niece, Victoria

House of Saxe-Coburg / House of Windsor

And we’re into the twentieth century. You can probably all fill in the details from here.

Victoria was followed by her son, Edward VII. He was followed by his son, George V. He was followed by his son, Edward VIII, who was then followed by his brother, George VI. And he was followed by his daughter, Elizabeth II.

And as I write this, it seems likely that Elizabeth II will be succeeded by her son, Prince Charles, her grandson, Prince William, and her great-grandson, Prince George.


So there you have it. Almost a thousand years of British royal history. And they are all related to each other. Our current queen can trace a direct ancestry back to William the Conqueror.

Britain doesn’t have a number of different royal families. It has one royal family – which just goes by different names.

0 thoughts on “Britain’s Royal Families

  • Whilst i like and support the royal family i honestly hope for all our sakes that Charles does NOT become the next ruling monarch i can think of very few people less suited for the job , And i still believe the death of Princess was pre meditated MURDER ..

    • Rachel Oxley says:

      Charles will, in due course, be a wonderful King. He is eminently suitable, a caring, intelligent and forward thinking man who puts his money where his mouth is and helps thousands of young people through the Prince’s Trust.
      A drunk driver and high speed chase were the cause of Diana’s tragic death.

    • Unless he is removed from the succession before Her Majesty passes away then he automatically be King the moment she has gone, as it is (I believe) specified in the Act Of Succession that the succession is automatic and immediate and follows the rules laid down in that Act. In other words a law would have to be passed, or the existing law changed, to remove Charles from being next in line, and such a law, or change, would require Her Majesty’s signature to enact (or her regent’s if she becomes declared incapable due to infirmity, but then her regent would be the man himself). I can’t imagine for one minute that Her Majesty would ever agree to do that.

      There are only three other ways he might not become the next monarch, and the last of those is far fetched. One is if he converts to Catholicism, which seems more than a little bit unlikely. The second is if her were to pass away before Her Majesty, which would of course make William the heir. And the third way is if a more senior legitimate line was somehow discovered and proven beyond doubt, meaning that Her Majesty, or one of the King’s in her direct male-line somehow had an older son (or even older daughter in George VI’s case) that was on the one hand somehow kept secret from the public so far, but on the other hand is provably a legitimate child who is undeniably the rightful heir (or the deceased ancestor of the current rightful heir). Obviously that last possibility is deeply unlikely to occur.

  • Edward Warden says:

    Sheesh the artical ignores the fact that all of the aristrioricy in Europe came from the same bloodline. Those Vikings left a bloody trail behind them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.