Was this man the son of the 1st Duke of Berwick?

Question

Recently, John William Stewart was added as one of the children of the 1st Duke of Berwick.  I don't see any support for this relationship, apart from a meandering discussion on Rootsweb linked on the profile.  The birth details on the profile are particularly problematic, as a) it would make him the eldest son, not the youngest and b) it would place the family in Scotland when it was already in exile in France.

Answer 1

I'm going to be blunt, and say it is basically total nonsense. and gets the chronology of the royal Stuart family completely wrong.

The 1st Duke of Berwick, was an illegitimate son of James II King of England and Scotland (James VII of Scotland) and Arabella Churchill.  James II was one of the great grandsons of Henry Stuart, Earl of Darnley and Mary Queen of Scots, so there is no way this fraudulent younger son of the Duke of Berwick, can be a cousin of Henry Stewart Earl of Lennox (the father of the Earl of Darnley).

According to The Complete Peerage, 2nd edn, vol. 2, p. 164, (usually a very reliable source) James Francis Stuart-FitzJames, the son of the 1st Duke of Berwick, and his first wife, Honora de Burgh, was their only child, and born 21 Oct 1696.

I would definitely disconnect the profile of John William Stewart from the current parents.

Answer 2

Scots Peerage, Vol. 1:34 says that James, by his first wife, Honora Bourke, "He had with other issue, a son, ancestor of the present Dukes of Berwick and Alba in Spain." He does not mention any children's names. By his second wife, Anne Bulkely "he had issue two sons, one of whom was ancestor of the Duc de Fitz-James in France." Again, frustratingly, he does not supply names. He cites ''Tableaux Généalogiques et Historiques de l'Empire Britannique,'' F. Baron de Beder, Hanover, 1830. I don't find that available online easily, but perhaps a French researcher could help if you add the tag "France" to your query.

Sorry, not much help.  

Answer 3

I don't see supporting evidence. To the contrary, the sources presented either aren't really sourced or go into sufficient discussion to state that there is considerable doubt on which of two possibles that John William is.  Read the first note in the rootsweb source citation.  The book referenced (by Bowman) has no source citations for the information other than family tradition.

The second citation has problematic information as well. Berwickshire Castle doesn't/didn't exist. Berwick Castle is in England, not Berwickshire, Scotland. Anyway, completely unsourced.

James Balfour Paul in the Scots Peerage (considered relatively reliable for Scotland while the Peerage and Burke's have a lot of problems), doesn't give much in the way of info on the father and doesn't mention John William by name. See https://archive.org/details/scotspeeragefoun01paul/page/34/mode/2up

Comments

Also note that the Dukedom of Berwick-on-Tweed appears to be an English title and seems to confuse the family tradtion as well.

Answer 4

Since nobody has actually been brave enough to disconnect them, I have marked the parents of Stewart-11355 as uncertain.

He came up on the path linking me to one of this week's featured profiles.

Answer 5

Below is the timeline for the Duke of Berwick during this period:

"In 1689, the Duke of Berwick served under James II in the campaign in Ireland, and, on 12 July 1690, was present at the Battle of the Boyne during which he led a charge, was unhorsed and almost killed in the melee. When his father departed for France after the Boyne, Berwick remained with the Jacobite Irish Army as commander-in-chief during the retreat to Limerick. On 22 June 1691, Berwick was present at the Battle of Aughrim. He then took part in the unsuccessful defence of Limerick.

The Duke of Berwick then took service in the French army, fought under Maréchal Luxembourg in Flanders. In 1692, it took part in the Battle of Steenkerque; and in 1693, in the Battle of Landen, where he was taken prisoner. He was, however, immediately exchanged for the Duke of Ormond, and afterwards he served under Villeroy."

"During the Nine Years' War (1688-1697), on 27 March 1693, Villeroy was promoted to maréchal de France, without having assumed any major command. In 1695, he commanded the French army who uselessly bombarded Bruxelles and lost the city of Namur."

Answer 6

There is evidence that the Duke of Berwick was in England in 1696 based on his memoirs.  In it, the Duke explains that he went to England in secret to meet with several nobles and drum up support for an invasion which never happened.  However, it appears that he went to London by way of the straight of Dover from Calais, so this still does not place him in Berwick-Upon-Tweed.  I suppose it is possible that he had an affair during this excursion, perhaps with a noble woman visiting London from Berwick-Upon-Tweed, and that the woman later returned to Berwick-Upon-Tweed to have the child... but this is a stretch.

https://books.google.com/books?id=EZZCAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false