Thread replies: 7
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4
File: 369px-David_Rizzio.png (315KB, 369x480px) Image search:
[Google]
315KB, 369x480px
David Rizzio, sometimes written as David Riccio or David Rizzo (c. 1533 – 9 March 1566), was an Italian courtier, born close to Turin, a descendant of an ancient and noble family still living in Piedmont, the Riccio Counts di San Paolo e Solbrito, who rose to become the private secretary of Mary, Queen of Scots. Mary's husband, Lord Darnley, is said to have been jealous of their friendship, because of rumours that he had impregnated Mary, and joined in a conspiracy of Protestant nobles, led by Patrick Ruthven, 3rd Lord Ruthven, to murder him. The murder was the catalyst for the downfall of Darnley, and it had serious consequences for Mary's subsequent career. Mary was having dinner with Riccio and a few ladies-in-waiting when Darnley joined them, accused his wife of adultery and then had someone murder Riccio, who was hiding behind Mary. Mary was held at gunpoint and Riccio was stabbed numerous times. His body had over 50 wounds.
>>
File: 311px-François_Clouet_-_Mary,_Queen_of_Scots_(1542-87)_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg (68KB, 311x480px) Image search:
[Google]
68KB, 311x480px
my question for /his/ is has anyone been educated enough to know how likely this story (from Wikipedia) is? if this is true that means that james VI and I was illegitimate.
>>
File: MurderOfRizzio.jpg (47KB, 580x480px) Image search:
[Google]
47KB, 580x480px
David Rizzio was stabbed 56 times on 9 March 1566 by Lord Darnley and his friends. He was accused of leaving the Queen pregnant.
>>
>>3258947
only a DNA test would prove it. We know Richard III's dad, for example, wasn't his dad. He was born of cuckholding according to the DNA. So is Napoleon III.
>>
File: 352px-Scotland-2016-Aerial-Stirling-Stirling_Castle.jpg (67KB, 352x480px) Image search:
[Google]
67KB, 352x480px
>>3258966
medical reports suggest lord Darnley had syphilis before he married Mary and the fact that he didn't pass the disease to his wife is cited as another indication that James VI was not his son.
>>
>>3258966
>We know Richard III's dad, for example, wasn't his dad.
We also know that Richard's descendants aren't his descendants. So either he was both a bastard and cucked, or the doubtful remains recently discovered aren't actually his.
What seems more likely to you?
>>
>>3261113
not sure desu. but i thought they compared his DNA with his parents or something. as it is anyway none of his descendants took the throne as he was the last plantagenet
Thread posts: 7
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4