[Richard III Society Forum] Tudor and Stafford descent

What I am trying to say is that Buckingham was descended maternally from John of Gaunt and paternally from Thomas of Woodstock, who was younger. The Beauforts do seem to have been barred in principle but Edward IV and Henry VII were both under attainder. Henry VII's Beaufort grandfather was older than Buckingham's. In other words, Henry VII was descended once from Edward III to Buckingham's twice but it was arguably stronger. Edmund Tudor and Buckingham's father are almost as irrelevant as sperm donors.

As for the "Stafford Line", which starts with Edward III and goes down to the present day, it can be obtained by sending fifty pence and an A5 SAE to my Group Chairman, John Ashdown-Hill, 8 Thurlston Close, Colchester, Essex CO4 3HF. It should be ready at the Society AGM. One page features the Beauforts (including Richard's grandmother), another the Woodstock descent, another the line to Mary Stafford, another shows William Howard's descent from Edward of Buckingham (3rd Duke) and, finally, the descent from the Stafford-Howard marriage. There are illustrations and notes, all of the genealogy being in PowerPoint.
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Trevor Bale
To:
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: RE: Plots


How can you say this when Henry's father was not of the old nobility,
while Buckingham was descended directly from Edward III, and his family
had never been barred from the throne.
Please explain how you make Tudor's claim out to be better than
Buckingham.
Thanks
Paul
On 24 Sep 2004, at 19:25, PamelaJButler@... wrote:

> In a message dated 9/23/2004 3:28:48 PM Mountain Standard Time,
> smlark@... writes:
>
> Your ideas have plenty of merit, Pamela, but Henry of Richmond's
> claim was
> superior to Henry of Buckingham's. Their mothers were Beaufort
> cousins, both
> named Margaret and both Henries were born in the same year. However,
> Margaret
> Tudor's father was older than Margaret Stafford's. See my "Stafford
> Line"
> booklet.
> PS I don't trust Henry of B any more than you do, at least his
> descendants
> were nice people!
>
> Stephen
>
>
>
> Stephen,
> I'd like to see your "Stafford Line" booklet; in your previous mentions
> about the Stafford line, I believe you mentioned how to obtain it, but
> I didn't
> do so then, so would you share the information again? (Please?)
>
> I'm not one who should be arguing the relative merits of claims to the
> throne, as my knowledge is rather hit-and miss, but I've always read
> that the Duke
> of Buckingham's claim was far superior and that Henry Tudor's claim
> was weak
> to non-existent. Putting aside the Beaufort issues for a second, the
> mere
> fact that Henry Tudor's father Edmund was the son of Welshman Owen
> (and of
> what pedigree?) and Princess Catherine of Valois of France wouldn't
> have
> entitled him to the English throne.
>
> I think we could have a real meaty debate if Tudor had instead been
> the son
> of Margaret Beaufort, Countess of Richmond and Derby and her second
> husband,
> Henry Stafford. I'll call her Countess Margaret to avoid confusion.
> Countess Margaret's father John (b. 1404--d. 1444, alleged suicide)
> was indeed older
> than her cousin Margaret Beaufort's father, Edmund (b. 1406 / 1407,
> d. 1455
> St. Albans), but it seems that you're considering the legitimised
> Beauforts
> only in this scheme.
>
> The Duke of Buckingham had the added heritage of not only being
> descended
> from John Beaufort, but of his sister Joan as well, via her daughter
> Anne
> Neville (1411-1480), who was married to Humphrey Stafford (~1402-1460,
> d. Battle
> of Northampton), grandson of Prince Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of
> Gloucester.
> FWIW, he was also descended from Richard Beauchamp and Elizabeth de
> Berkeley.
> A great pedigree, but still inferior to the Yorks' descent from
> Lionel of
> Antwerp (and JOG and Edmund of Langley.)
>
> Sorry that I don't have much time to go into this, but I'm under an
> insane
> amount of pressure and have little time to research details or
> articulate
> coherently. I hope you'll mention some of the Buckingham descendants
> that you've
> referred to! I can't get over Buckingham and Hastings having mutual
> descendants, or that, say, the "notorious" Penelope Devereux and her
> brother, the
> Earl of Essex, were descended from Hastings, Buckingham, and Elizabeth
> Woodville!
>
> LML,
> Pam
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
you're never too old to launch your dreams





Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.