Discussion:
Discussion of Arundel family in old Notes and Queries journal
(too old to reply)
c***@gmail.com
2019-06-11 21:07:42 UTC
Permalink
Dear Newsgroup ~

This past week I came across a series of interesting posts regarding the Arundel family in back issues of the Notes and Queries journal. I thought it would be informative to see how earlier genealogists grappled with the various complex issues involving this important family. Simply put, we owe a huge debt to those who have gone before.

Of the genealogists, Hermentrude was aware of the given name Aleise was distinct from Alice. Good work Hermentrude. However, it appears that none of the genealogists were aware that this family dropped the surname Fitz Alan c.1313 and changed it to Arundel. To be fair, some current genealogists still haven't figured out that one, although contemporary records make it clear this is what happened.

Among the various issues discussed in this series of posts is the maternity of Joan Stradling, bastard daughter of Henry Beaufort, Cardinal Beaufort. The genealogists appear to have thought that her mother was likely Alice/Aleise Arundel, wife of John Cherleton, 4th Lord Cherleton. I note that Hermentrude states that Alice/Aleise Arundel was earlier affianced to Roger de Mortimer, Earl of March, which claim I have not encountered previously. Regardless, as I have conclusively proven this past week, Alice/Aleise Arundel and John Cherleton were definitely married as children sometime before Easter term 1376 (date of lawsuit). As such, it is virtually impossible that Alice/Aleise had a bastard daughter by Cardinal Henry Beaufort before he was ordained as a priest.

Question remains: Who is the mother of Joan Stradling?

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

+ + + + + +

Notes and Queries 8th Ser. 2 (1892): 248: "Alice Fitz Alan. - In Burke's 'Dormant and Extinct Peerages' (ed. 1883), on p. 200, it is stated that Richard Fitz Alan, ninth Earl of Arundel (born 1306, died 1376), married first Isabel, daughter of Hugh le Despenser, and had issue by her a daughter named Philippa, who married Sir Richard Sergeaux, Knt., of Cornwall. In 1345 the earl was divorced from this lady and married to Lady Eleanor Plantagenet, daughter of Henry, Earl of Lancaster, and widow of John Baron Beaumont, by whom he had issue, inter alia, Alice Fitz Alan, married to Thomas Holland, Earl of Kent. From the above it appears that Richard, the ninth Earl of Arundel, had but two wives, and that Alice was the daughter of the second, viz., Eleanor Plantagenet; but on p. 384 it seems he had another wife (making three in all), viz., Philippa, daughter of Edmund Mortimer, third Earl of March; and this statement seems confirmed by the Clarence and Mortimer pedigrees given on pp. 3 and 5 in Logan's lately published 'Genealogical Chart of the Royal Family.' Now, under these circumstances, what proof is there against Alice being the child of Philippa Mortimer, instead of that of Eleanor Plantagenet? X." END OF QUOTE.

Notes and Queries 8th Ser. 2 (1892): 314: "Alice Fitz Alan (8th S. ii. 248). - Your queriest has confused the father with the son. Richard, eleventh (not ninth) Earl of Arundel, married, (1) about February, 1321, Isabel, daughter of Hugh Le Despenser the younger, by whom he probably had no issue; he divorced her in 1345, and within a few weeks married (2) Alianora, daughter of Henry, Earl of Lancaster, who was the mother of all his children, including Alice (or more correctly Ales), Countess of Kent, her fourth child, born about 1350. Philippa Sergeaux was not the daughter, but the niece of the earl, herself being witness, for in a charter of hers on the Close Roll for 20 Rich. II. she describes herself as 'file and vne des heires Monsieur Esmond Darundell, Chivaler,' and widow of Sir Richard Sergeaux; and there is strong reason to believe that Mary l'Estrange, by some writers called the earl's daughter, was also a daughter of his brother. The chronological evidence as to both Mary and Philippa Sergeaux will not at all admit of either being Earl Richard's daughter. The twelfth earl, named Richard like his father, was also twice married: first to Elizabeth Bohun (marriage contract dated Sept. 28, 1359), and secondly to Philippa Mortimer, without royal license, for which he received pardon on Nov. 10, 1391, for a fine of 500 marks (Patent Roll, 15 Rich. II., part 1). It is very evidence that the Countess of Kent could not be born of a marriage that did not take place till she was about forty years of age. The date of her birth likewise disproves a columnious tale preserved by Sir Harris Nicolas ('Testamenta Vetusta,' p. 251), which brackets her name with that of Cardinal Beaufort. She must have been twenty-six years older than the cardinal, if not more; and her eldest son was her senior. Hermentrude." END OF QUOTE.

Notes and Queries 8th Ser. 2 (1892): 457: "Alice Fitz Alan (8th S. ii. 248, 314). - Hermentrude, kindly answering my query, says that Richard Fitz Alan, who married first Isabel Le Despenser, and secondly Alianore Plantagenet, was the eleventh Earl of Arundel. Burke, in his 'Dormant Peerage' (p. 200, ed. 1883), makes him out the ninth; I followed Burke. The whole thing is rather confusedf. Hermentrude is certainly right in saying that it was the son of this earl, and not he himself, that married Philippa Mortimer; this is evident from Beltz's 'Garter,' p. 305. X." END OF QUOTE.

Notes and Queries 8th Ser. 2 (1892): 496: "Alice Fitz Alan (8th S. ii. 248, 314, 457). - Whoever was the mother, Cardinal Beaufort undoubtedly had a daughter Jane, married in 1411 to Sir Edw. Stradling of St. Donat's. All the pedigrees are agreed, and for once are supported by evidence, cogent if not conclusive: one (Harl. 1434, fo. 58) is careful to add 'begotten before he was priest.' By his will the cardinal leaves her a considerable legacy in valuables, and one hundred pounds in gold, besides a legacy in the codicil to Sir Edward. In 1429 her husband granted the manor of Lanfey to Cardinal Beaufort and other trustees, and in 1441 suffer a recovery, when his wife Jane and the cardinal are again mentioned. Her marriage portion was the manor of Halsway, which seems to have belonged to her father the cardinal. As to her mother, all the pedigrees call her Alice Fitz-Alan, some adding 'daughter of Richard, Earl of Arundel,' and another 'widow of the Earl of Kent.' May she not have been a daughter of the twelvth Earl of Arundel, and not of the eleventh? This would remove the difficulty raised by Hermentrude in regard to the dates; but I have always regarded it a strange social incident that no marriage should have taken place between persons of such high birth and position. If the elder Alice be the mother in question, the great disparity of age might perhaps be a sufficient reason, and so the first difficulty explain the second. D.H.Parry." END OF QUOTE.

Notes and Queries 8th Ser. 3 (1893): 74-75: "Alice FitzAlan (8th S. ii. 248, 314, 457, 496). - This seems perfectly clear; see Burke. Richard, tenth Earl of Arundel, died 1397/8, had a daughter Alice, born circa 1370, who married John Cherlton, Lord Powis. Thomas Holland, Earl of Kent, died 1397, married Alice FitzAlan, as above, and had issue. Cardinal Beaufort, born about 1372, may have contracted to this lady early in life, but when he took orders this contract would be annulled. I say nought of the morality of the proceeding, nor do I dispute the alleged paternity of Sir John de Stradling. A. Hall. END OF QUOTE.

Notes and Queries 8th Ser. 3 (1893): 316: "Alice Fitz Alan (8th S. ii. 248, 314, 457, 496; iii. 74). - Mr. A. Hall evidently thinks that there was but one Alice Fitz Alan (nat. circ. 1370), the daughter of Richard, the tenth Earl of Arundel, and that she was first contracted to Cardinal Beaufort (before his ordination, of course), taken from him and married to John Cherleton, Lord Powis, and after the latter's death married to Thomas Holland, Earl of Kent, who died in 1397. For all of this he quotes Burke, but neither book nor page. I find, according to Burke ('Extinct and Dormant Peerages,' ed. 1883, p. 201), that there were two Alice FitzAlans. The first, daughter to Richard, ninth Earl of Arundel, married Thomas Holland, Earl of Kent; the second, daughter of Richard, tenth Earl of Arundel, married John Cherleton (ob. s.p.), Lord Powis. From this is seems most likely that it was the second Alice who was probably affianced to Beaufort, and not Last Kent, the pedigree asserting the contrary being at fault by confounding the two Alices. C." END OF QUOTE.

Notes and Queries 8th Ser. 3 (1893): 378: "Alice Fitz Alan (8th S. ii. 248, 314, 457, 496; iii. 74, 316). - That there were two Alice FitzAlans there cannot be the least doubt, except that the real name of the elder was not Alice (Latin Alicia), but Ales or Aleyse (Latin, Alesia). If the younger Alice were ever contracted to Cardinal Beaufort, it must have been almost in infancy. The earliest name for his birth in 1376, and 1378 and 1380 is more probable. Alice may have been a little older, but the probability is that she was born after 1372. But from 1385 (if not earlier) to 1388 (when the marriage was broken off) she was affianced to Roger, Earl of March, and in 1392 she was the wife of Lord Charleton, while Cardinal Beaufort was a prebendary in 1390. Hermentrude." END OF QUOTE.
Peter Stewart
2019-06-12 00:49:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
Dear Newsgroup ~
This past week I came across a series of interesting posts regarding the Arundel family in back issues of the Notes and Queries journal. I thought it would be informative to see how earlier genealogists grappled with the various complex issues involving this important family. Simply put, we owe a huge debt to those who have gone before.
Of the genealogists, Hermentrude was aware of the given name Aleise was distinct from Alice. Good work Hermentrude.
Hermentrude was used as a pseudonym by Emily Sarah Holt, most of whose
published works were novels written for children - if you want to see
how good were her sustained efforts at work in medieval history, try this:

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=J2ABAAAAQAAJ

Peter Stewart
Lee Bertie
2019-12-27 01:15:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
Notes and Queries 8th Ser. 2 (1892): 496: "Alice Fitz Alan (8th S. ii. 248, 314, 457). - Whoever was the mother, Cardinal Beaufort undoubtedly had a daughter Jane, married in 1411 to Sir Edw. Stradling of St. Donat's. All the pedigrees are agreed, and for once are supported by evidence, cogent if not conclusive: one (Harl. 1434, fo. 58) is careful to add 'begotten before he was priest.' By his will the cardinal leaves her a considerable legacy in valuables, and one hundred pounds in gold, besides a legacy in the codicil to Sir Edward. In 1429 her husband granted the manor of Lanfey to Cardinal Beaufort and other trustees, and in 1441 suffer a recovery, when his wife Jane and the cardinal are again mentioned. Her marriage portion was the manor of Halsway, which seems to have belonged to her father the cardinal. As to her mother, all the pedigrees call her Alice Fitz-Alan, some adding 'daughter of Richard, Earl of Arundel,' and another 'widow of the Earl of Kent.' May she not have been a daughter of the twelvth Earl of Arundel, and not of the eleventh? This would remove the difficulty raised by Hermentrude in regard to the dates; but I have always regarded it a strange social incident that no marriage should have taken place between persons of such high birth and position. If the elder Alice be the mother in question, the great disparity of age might perhaps be a sufficient reason, and so the first difficulty explain the second. D.H.Parry." END OF QUOTE.
Thanks for the info.
Regards,
Lee
wjhonson
2019-12-27 22:14:57 UTC
Permalink
I don't put any stock in the idea that they were married *in* 1411.
But it is possible there is a contract with that date, written while she was a child.

There are many cases where girl children were "betrothed" by contract, as children.

They would then go live in the household of their parents-in-law until they were of age to consent to the marriage.
Lee Bertie
2019-12-29 19:50:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by wjhonson
I don't put any stock in the idea that they were married *in* 1411.
But it is possible there is a contract with that date, written while she was a child.
There are many cases where girl children were "betrothed" by contract, as children.
They would then go live in the household of their parents-in-law until they were of age to consent to the marriage.
Sorry to go off topic earlier, but...

Yes, Mr. Johnson, it's possible, but why did the author of the note write that they married in 1411 instead of the actual later date? Marriage to Jane had its benefits, but what benefits came from an "anonymous" esquire, who would be waiting about 10 years to get married, when he was in his early 30's, "begetting" illegitimate kids in the interim, who could have been slain in war? I guess Beaufort trusted Sir Gilbert Denys' opinion of the Stradlings, and he liked Edward.

How old was Jane? We don't know who her mother was, as Mr. Richardson points out above. I think Jane was born in the early 1390s, which Mr. Richardson has sources for- yes, not rock-solid, but still sources. Yes, people did live into their 80s, even back then, like John Sutton, 1st Baron Dudley(1400-1487)and probably his great-grandmother, Isabella. I recently read that Lettice Knollys, the 2nd wife of Robert Dudley, died in 1634 at age 91. It's harder for me to imagine Beaufort, who was given the Bishopric of Lincoln in 1398 by the Pope a year after legitimation by the king, "biting the hands that fed him". It's easier to imagine a 16 or 17 year old enjoying sexual freedom while away at college. No, I'm not Catholic.

Edward got the Steward and Receiver of South Wales job, JP, and other benefits, from 1423 on, but I think in the context of Henry becoming part of a royal council basically governing England, and thus more able to make such appointments for people, after Henry V died in 1422. Beaufort was chancellor before that a couple of times, but under the thumb of Henry V, who ordered him not to accept the Pope's offer of a cardinalship in 1417, which he obeyed. Also, I'd like to think that Edward got later appointments as sheriff, etc. from his own reputation, talent, and hard work.

Finally, I don't understand why Edward didn't marry Joan, formerly Dauntsey, Russell, the 22 year old widow who became available in 1416, but was married rather quickly by his uncle John Stradling. It could be that Edward was betrothed or he could have been married, and I think he was already married.

Yes, I'm descended from Katherine Deighton, but also from another "gateway"-William Skepper, like a million others. I like trying to figure out mysteries. I finally got the guts to post...this is not my specialty. I'm in the hard, not necessarily harder, sciences.
Loading...