James (Crofts) Scott
Privacy Level: Open (White)

James (Crofts) Scott (1649 - 1685)

James "Duke of Monmouth, Duke of Buccleuch" Scott formerly Crofts
Born in Rotterdam, Holland, Republiek der Zeven Verenigde Nederlandenmap
Ancestors ancestors
Husband of — married 20 Apr 1663 [location unknown]
Descendants descendants
Died in Tower Hill, London, Englandmap
Profile last modified | Created 23 Nov 2008
This page has been accessed 6,088 times.


European Aristocracy
James Crofts was a member of the aristocracy in England.

James Scott, 1st Duke of Monmouth

Married in "the Earl of Wemyss House London"[1]

20 June 1685: James (Crofts) Scott, the illegitimate first-born son of King Charles II, declares himself "King of England".[2]

15 July 1685: He was beheaded for treason by Jack Ketch at Tower Hill[3]


  1. Record in "The Peerage" http://thepeerage.com/p10837.htm#i108367
  2. Wikipedia: June 20
  3. Wikipedia: Jack Ketch

See Also:

More Genealogy Tools

Sponsored Search

Is James your ancestor? Please don't go away!
 star icon Login to collaborate or comment, or
 star icon contact private message the profile manager, or
 star icon ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com

DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with James by comparing test results with other carriers of his Y-chromosome or his mother's mitochondrial DNA. Y-chromosome DNA test-takers in his direct paternal line on WikiTree:

Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.

Sponsored by Ancestry ®

Family History Search.


Enter a grandparent's name. Just one grandparent can lead you to many discoveries.

Comments: 4

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
reputed father of Jennings-9102, see profile

can we add him as an uncertain son?

posted by Monica Edmunds
I'd like to see something more reliable than Burke's Commoners statement "that he was reputed to be" to confirm the relationship and there is the issue that Monmouth would have only been 13 or so at the time of Jennings birth. I'd prefer not to have Jennings added, even as an uncertain son, until better evidence is found.
posted by John Atkinson
Crofts-1 and Scott-35740 appear to represent the same person because: clearly the same man - Crofts-1 is the older profile and any merge should be into Crofts-1 as "Scott" was his married name, not at birth. I have added a PPP to Crofts-1 in advance of the merge. Please merge them now.
posted on Scott-35740 (merged) by Chet Snow
Scott-3715 and Crofts-1 appear to represent the same person because: After creating 3715 I found that his birth name was Crofts. My mistake.
posted by Charlie Varnell Jr

C  >  Crofts  |  S  >  Scott  >  James (Crofts) Scott

Categories: Monmouth Rebellion | Battle of Sedgemoor | Prisoners of the Tower of London | Rye House Plotters