Charles II: legitimate children & ******* offspring

[jamesreid]

Charles II had about dozen children through his many mistresses, yet he had no legitimate heirs by his wife Catherine of Braganza. Obviously his fecundity was not in quesiton, but hers may have been.

Surely the monarchy would have had in place a mechanism to resolve such an issue. What would have been the constitutionally correct thing for Charles to do? Divorce on grounds of barrenness?

[Drusilla1S]

Catherine of Braganza was a Catholic, as was Charles' own mother and he respected the 'no divorce' ruling of the Catholic Church. He had strong Catholic sympathies himself, even converting to the faith on his death bed, apparently.

Although Catherine and Charles were not well suited at the beginning of their marriage, he grew to respect and admire her. He was also very aware that his younger brother, James, would carry on the Stuart line should he die without a legitimate heir. As a result of this, he was was not prepared to become embroiled in the type of constitutional crisis a divorce might have pre-empted.