Marriages of Richard's nieces

Hi,

I was also wondering if anyone knows why Richard was negotiating an
alliance between Anne de la Pole and James Duke of Rothersay in 1484?
(James IV) Was Anne the elderst daughter of John De La Pole? (I'm
guessing at the time Elizabeth of York was nsuitable because she was
in Sanctuary and declared illegitimate).
Does anyone know the ages of the other De la Pole girls? presumably
Elizabeth was close in age to Lord Morley who she married but I'm not
sure when? There is a gap between John's birth in 1462 and Edward in
1469. Were the other four De la Pole girls born in between?

Mim

--- In , mrm_bell
<no_reply@y...> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was also wondering if anyone knows why Richard was negotiating an
> alliance between Anne de la Pole and James Duke of Rothersay in
1484?
> (James IV) Was Anne the elderst daughter of John De La Pole? (I'm
> guessing at the time Elizabeth of York was nsuitable because she
was
> in Sanctuary and declared illegitimate).
> Does anyone know the ages of the other De la Pole girls? presumably
> Elizabeth was close in age to Lord Morley who she married but I'm
not
> sure when? There is a gap between John's birth in 1462 and Edward
in
> 1469. Were the other four De la Pole girls born in between?
>
> Mim

All I know is that Anne de la Pole later became a nun, and was
Prioress of Sion by the time Cecily Neville wrote her will in April
1495. She's the only one of the de la Pole girls mentioned in the
will (three of her brothers are remembered). My guess is that she may
have been the eldest but I too would be very glad of data on the
marriage dates of the others (I doubt we have any real record of
births - for the brothers who inherited there would be evidence from
inquisitions post mortem, I guess).
Elizabeth of York was evidently okay for a Portuguese nobleman, when
Richard was marrying a Portuguese princess, but I don't think in her
illegitimate state she would have done for the future king of
Scotland. Nor would it have been a very wise move as it might have
led to James IV claiming the throne of England!

Marie

--- In , "mariewalsh2003"
<marie@r...> wrote:
> --- In , mrm_bell
> <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was also wondering if anyone knows why Richard was negotiating
an
> > alliance between Anne de la Pole and James Duke of Rothersay in
> 1484?
> > (James IV) Was Anne the elderst daughter of John De La Pole? (I'm
> > guessing at the time Elizabeth of York was nsuitable because she
> was
> > in Sanctuary and declared illegitimate).
> > Does anyone know the ages of the other De la Pole girls?
presumably
> > Elizabeth was close in age to Lord Morley who she married but I'm
> not
> > sure when? There is a gap between John's birth in 1462 and Edward
> in
> > 1469. Were the other four De la Pole girls born in between?
> >
> > Mim
>
> All I know is that Anne de la Pole later became a nun, and was
> Prioress of Sion by the time Cecily Neville wrote her will in April
> 1495. She's the only one of the de la Pole girls mentioned in the
> will (three of her brothers are remembered). My guess is that she
may
> have been the eldest but I too would be very glad of data on the
> marriage dates of the others (I doubt we have any real record of
> births - for the brothers who inherited there would be evidence
from
> inquisitions post mortem, I guess).
> Elizabeth of York was evidently okay for a Portuguese nobleman,
when
> Richard was marrying a Portuguese princess, but I don't think in
her
> illegitimate state she would have done for the future king of
> Scotland. Nor would it have been a very wise move as it might have
> led to James IV claiming the throne of England!
>
> Marie


Hi again
I came across a website last njight with more approximate dates of
birth for the De La Pole children. It seems that Anne was the second
daughter and would have been just 5 when Richard negotiated a
marriage for her with the heir to the Scottish throne. The duke of
Rothesay would have been around 9 at that time so it makes sense!
Mim
:

1.John De La Pole
Born: Abt 1462, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
Married: Abt 1482 Margaret Fitzalan
Died: 16 Jun 1487, Battle Of, Stoke, , England

2.Edward De La Pole
Born: Abt 1465, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
Died: Bef 8 Oct 1485

3.Edmund De La Pole
Born: 1471-1472, Of, Suffolk, England
Married: Bef 10 Oct 1496, Margaret Scrope, in Bentley, Yorkshire,
England
Died: 4 May 1513, Tower Hill, London, Middlesex, England

4.Elizabeth De La Pole
Born: Abt 1473, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
Elizabeth married Henry Lovell
Died: After 24 Dec 1489

5.Humphrey De La Pole
Born: 1 Aug 1474, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
Died: Bef 15 Feb 1512-1513

6.William De La Pole
Born: Abt 1476, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
Married: Bef 8 Jun 1501, Katherine Stourton of Stourton, Wiltshire,
England
Died: Bef 20 Nov 1539, Tower Of, London, Middlesex, England

7.Geoffrey De La Pole
Born: Abt 1478, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
Died: After 1499

8.Anne De La Pole
Born: Abt 1479, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England

9.Richard De La Pole
Born: Abt 1480, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
Died: 24 Feb 1524-1525, Pavia, , Italy

10. Katherine De La Pole
Born: Abt 1486, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
Katherine married William Stourton

11.Dorothy De La Pole
Born: Abt 1488, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England

--- In , mrm_bell
<no_reply@y...> wrote:
> --- In , "mariewalsh2003"
> <marie@r...> wrote:
> > --- In , mrm_bell
> > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was also wondering if anyone knows why Richard was
negotiating
> an
> > > alliance between Anne de la Pole and James Duke of Rothersay in
> > 1484?
> > > (James IV) Was Anne the elderst daughter of John De La Pole?
(I'm
> > > guessing at the time Elizabeth of York was nsuitable because
she
> > was
> > > in Sanctuary and declared illegitimate).
> > > Does anyone know the ages of the other De la Pole girls?
> presumably
> > > Elizabeth was close in age to Lord Morley who she married but
I'm
> > not
> > > sure when? There is a gap between John's birth in 1462 and
Edward
> > in
> > > 1469. Were the other four De la Pole girls born in between?
> > >
> > > Mim
> >
> > All I know is that Anne de la Pole later became a nun, and was
> > Prioress of Sion by the time Cecily Neville wrote her will in
April
> > 1495. She's the only one of the de la Pole girls mentioned in the
> > will (three of her brothers are remembered). My guess is that she
> may
> > have been the eldest but I too would be very glad of data on the
> > marriage dates of the others (I doubt we have any real record of
> > births - for the brothers who inherited there would be evidence
> from
> > inquisitions post mortem, I guess).
> > Elizabeth of York was evidently okay for a Portuguese nobleman,
> when
> > Richard was marrying a Portuguese princess, but I don't think in
> her
> > illegitimate state she would have done for the future king of
> > Scotland. Nor would it have been a very wise move as it might
have
> > led to James IV claiming the throne of England!
> >
> > Marie
>
>
> Hi again
> I came across a website last njight with more approximate dates of
> birth for the De La Pole children. It seems that Anne was the
second
> daughter and would have been just 5 when Richard negotiated a
> marriage for her with the heir to the Scottish throne. The duke of
> Rothesay would have been around 9 at that time so it makes sense!
> Mim
> :
>
> 1.John De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1462, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Married: Abt 1482 Margaret Fitzalan
> Died: 16 Jun 1487, Battle Of, Stoke, , England
>
> 2.Edward De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1465, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Died: Bef 8 Oct 1485
>
> 3.Edmund De La Pole
> Born: 1471-1472, Of, Suffolk, England
> Married: Bef 10 Oct 1496, Margaret Scrope, in Bentley, Yorkshire,
> England
> Died: 4 May 1513, Tower Hill, London, Middlesex, England
>
> 4.Elizabeth De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1473, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Elizabeth married Henry Lovell
> Died: After 24 Dec 1489
>
> 5.Humphrey De La Pole
> Born: 1 Aug 1474, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Died: Bef 15 Feb 1512-1513
>
> 6.William De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1476, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Married: Bef 8 Jun 1501, Katherine Stourton of Stourton, Wiltshire,
> England
> Died: Bef 20 Nov 1539, Tower Of, London, Middlesex, England
>
> 7.Geoffrey De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1478, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Died: After 1499
>
> 8.Anne De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1479, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
>
> 9.Richard De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1480, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Died: 24 Feb 1524-1525, Pavia, , Italy
>
> 10. Katherine De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1486, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Katherine married William Stourton
>
> 11.Dorothy De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1488, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England

Another website? Please tell me which so I can look up the next
generation!

Stephen

>
> Hi again
> I came across a website last njight with more approximate dates of
> birth for the De La Pole children. It seems that Anne was the
second
> daughter and would have been just 5 when Richard negotiated a
> marriage for her with the heir to the Scottish throne. The duke of
> Rothesay would have been around 9 at that time so it makes sense!
> Mim
> :

Hmm... that would have made her only 15 or 16 when Cecily wrote her
will - by which time she was already Prioress of Syon - a very top
religious house. My gut feeling is that she must have been older than
that - she could even have been older than James. It was by no means
unheard of for the bride to be 2 to 4 years older than the groom.
Richard would have had to balance the suitability in age with the
desire of the Scots to have as senior a member of the House of York
as possible. There had, after all been a earlier arrangement for
James to marry Cecily of York, and she was born in 1469 so was 4
years older than James. My guess is that Anne would have been the
oldest de la Pole daughter still unmarried. Given the birth dates you
have from the website, I shouldn't have thought any of them would
have been married by 1484. I'll try to do some more looking up on
this when I next get to a 'proper' library.
By the way, Elizabeth of York and Suffolk were married in 1458, so I
also wonder if there might not have been a child or two born before
John. Perhaps he/she/they did not survive, but perhaps one of these
daughters was a LOT older than is often supposed.

However.....
I do have some family trees which I compiled in the past mainly using
the Complete Peerage. My Lovell one tells me that Henry Lovell Lord
Morley (husband of Elizabeth de la Pole) died after 1489, aged 51.
Now, I don't know how long after 1489 that would have been, but he
was eldest son and his parents were married in 1445, and his sister
Alice was married firstly to Sir William Parker (Richard's Standard
Bearer at Bosworth, their son & heir born 1476), and secondly to
Thomas Howard, 2nd Duke of Norfolk (1443-1524). This suggests to me
that Elizabeth would have been a lot older than suggested by this
website, quite probably, in fact, born before John. So I'm still
inclined to suspect that Anne de la Pole was also a lot older than
this website suggests. If the dates for the boys are right, then
there is a gap for a child around 1469 - if Anne fitted in there,
then it would make her the same age as James' previous prospective
bride, Princess Cecily, and 24/25 when Cecily Neville wrote her will.

As Stephen knows, I'm a terrible damp squib when it comes to some of
these internet genealogies, though I must confess to using them
myself when I can't get to a library.

Marie

>
> 1.John De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1462, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Married: Abt 1482 Margaret Fitzalan
> Died: 16 Jun 1487, Battle Of, Stoke, , England
>
> 2.Edward De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1465, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Died: Bef 8 Oct 1485
>
> 3.Edmund De La Pole
> Born: 1471-1472, Of, Suffolk, England
> Married: Bef 10 Oct 1496, Margaret Scrope, in Bentley, Yorkshire,
> England
> Died: 4 May 1513, Tower Hill, London, Middlesex, England
>
> 4.Elizabeth De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1473, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Elizabeth married Henry Lovell
> Died: After 24 Dec 1489
>
> 5.Humphrey De La Pole
> Born: 1 Aug 1474, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Died: Bef 15 Feb 1512-1513
>
> 6.William De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1476, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Married: Bef 8 Jun 1501, Katherine Stourton of Stourton, Wiltshire,
> England
> Died: Bef 20 Nov 1539, Tower Of, London, Middlesex, England
>
> 7.Geoffrey De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1478, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Died: After 1499
>
> 8.Anne De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1479, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
>
> 9.Richard De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1480, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Died: 24 Feb 1524-1525, Pavia, , Italy
>
> 10. Katherine De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1486, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England
> Katherine married William Stourton
>
> 11.Dorothy De La Pole
> Born: Abt 1488, Of, Wingfield, Suffolk, England

--- In , "mariewalsh2003"
<marie@r...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi again
> > I came across a website last njight with more approximate dates
of
> > birth for the De La Pole children. It seems that Anne was the
> second
> > daughter and would have been just 5 when Richard negotiated a
> > marriage for her with the heir to the Scottish throne. The duke
of
> > Rothesay would have been around 9 at that time so it makes sense!
> > Mim
> > :
>
> Hmm... that would have made her only 15 or 16 when Cecily wrote her
> will - by which time she was already Prioress of Syon - a very top
> religious house. My gut feeling is that she must have been older
than
> that - she could even have been older than James. It was by no
means
> unheard of for the bride to be 2 to 4 years older than the groom.
> Richard would have had to balance the suitability in age with the
> desire of the Scots to have as senior a member of the House of York
> as possible. There had, after all been a earlier arrangement for
> James to marry Cecily of York, and she was born in 1469 so was 4
> years older than James. My guess is that Anne would have been the
> oldest de la Pole daughter still unmarried. Given the birth dates
you
> have from the website, I shouldn't have thought any of them would
> have been married by 1484. I'll try to do some more looking up on
> this when I next get to a 'proper' library.
> By the way, Elizabeth of York and Suffolk were married in 1458, so
I
> also wonder if there might not have been a child or two born before
> John. Perhaps he/she/they did not survive, but perhaps one of these
> daughters was a LOT older than is often supposed.
>
> However.....
> I do have some family trees which I compiled in the past mainly
using
> the Complete Peerage. My Lovell one tells me that Henry Lovell Lord
> Morley (husband of Elizabeth de la Pole) died after 1489, aged 51.
> Now, I don't know how long after 1489 that would have been, but he
> was eldest son and his parents were married in 1445, and his sister
> Alice was married firstly to Sir William Parker (Richard's Standard
> Bearer at Bosworth, their son & heir born 1476), and secondly to
> Thomas Howard, 2nd Duke of Norfolk (1443-1524).

Sorry, can I correct myself. Alice Lovell's second husband was Duke
Thomas' son Sir Edward Howard, 1477-1513. This would make him a year
younger than Alice's own son by William Parker, assuming that 1476 is
correct for him - it seems to be one of those guesswork jobs again.
The other Lovell dates I have are as follows:
William 7th Lord Lovell : 1397 - 1455. Married 1422.
His sons:
John, 8th Lord Lovell (father of Francis), born in or before
June 1433. Father of Francis, born 1454.
William Lovell, married Eleanor, Lady Morley.