Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
After the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born after 1472.
The identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born in 1472.
Is anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much else.
Katherine Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child (Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one of his illegitimate children.
Katherine and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent. Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence, which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine. Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway. According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with, whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
On Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:44, "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <> wrote:
After the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born after 1472.
The identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born in 1472.
Is anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much else.
Katherine Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child (Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one of his illegitimate children.
Katherine and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent. Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence, which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine. Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway. According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with, whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:46
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Sorry I corrected this and sent this twice.
On Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:44, "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <> wrote:
After the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born after 1472.
The identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born in 1472.
Is anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much else.
Katherine Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child (Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one of his illegitimate children.
Katherine and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent. Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence, which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine. Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway. According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with, whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
FWIW, I had a look at measuringworth.com. This site gives various conversions, but if you measure both payments in terms of wages the time, £5 would be £28,080 in today's terms where as £20 would be £124,900.
Since servants would have earned about £3 a year (£18,740), I think Alice was more than a servant or lady in waiting to Anne, but the payment does suggest that he gave her up when he married and gave her a generous settlement.
Nico
On Saturday, 25 March 2017, 10:12, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
Nico I have so far managed to find one Alice Burgh in Yorkshire who could have fit the bill. I reckon Isabel is a Weirism. For one thing, she has them both with the surname Burgh, but one is married.The Alice Burgh I found was born in about 1444 and is the daughter of William Burgh of Catterick (sometimes spelled Borough). They originated from Richmond and moved in the same circles as Richard - the Conyers, the Fulthorpes, theTempests, the Metcalfes.We know she became Prioress of Ellerton, which is by Selby but that could have been later. Interestingly, her brother was a Hospitaller.There are lots of Burghs around at that time, but no other Alices have come to light so far.As for Katherine Haute, I agree that the amount is much smaller and, despite the husband that has always puzzled me. I personally would have thought it more likely that both children belonged to the same mother. But that's just me. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:46
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Sorry I corrected this and sent this twice.
On Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:44, "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <> wrote:
After the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born after 1472.
The identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born in 1472.
Is anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much else.
Katherine Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child (Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one of his illegitimate children.
Katherine and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent. Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence, which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine. Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway. According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with, whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Nicholas Brown nico11238@... [] <> wrote:
Thanks Hilary for looking that up. I also suspect Alice may have been the mother of both John and Katherine. If they were in Yorkshire, they would have probably had some contact with Richard growing up. Also, if Alice wasn't married, the children could have remained in her care and she would have more need of the money to bring them up in keeping with their status. Katherine could have been born to Katherine Haute, but since the Hautes had links to Kent and the Moyles, I wonder if there is a degree of truth in Richard of Eastwell's story, which was probably embellished over the years. £5 would cover boarding him with a schoolmaster, whereas £20 would have given Alice and her children a very comfortable life.
FWIW, I had a look at measuringworth.com. This site gives various conversions, but if you measure both payments in terms of wages the time, £5 would be £28,080 in today's terms where as £20 would be £124,900.
Since servants would have earned about £3 a year (£18,740), I think Alice was more than a servant or lady in waiting to Anne, but the payment does suggest that he gave her up when he married and gave her a generous settlement.
Nico
On Saturday, 25 March 2017, 10:12, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Nico I have so far managed to find one Alice Burgh in Yorkshire who could have fit the bill. I reckon Isabel is a Weirism. For one thing, she has them both with the surname Burgh, but one is married.The Alice Burgh I found was born in about 1444 and is the daughter of William Burgh of Catterick (sometimes spelled Borough). They originated from Richmond and moved in the same circles as Richard - the Conyers, the Fulthorpes, theTempests, the Metcalfes.We know she became Prioress of Ellerton, which is by Selby but that could have been later. Interestingly, her brother was a Hospitaller.There are lots of Burghs around at that time, but no other Alices have come to light so far.As for Katherine Haute, I agree that the amount is much smaller and, despite the husband that has always puzzled me. I personally would have thought it more likely that both children belonged to the same mother. But that's just me. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:46
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Sorry I corrected this and sent this twice.
On Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:44, "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
After
the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look
for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her
mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born
after 1472.
The
identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine
isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh
and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity
for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John
of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least
John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from
Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says
that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born
in 1472.
Is
anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been
suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much
else.
Katherine
Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which
made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child
(Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term
mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity
to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to
him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one
of his illegitimate children.
Katherine
and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons
Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son
Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry
was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so
Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If
she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time
before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The
Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as
being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent.
Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence,
which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear
who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to
that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in
Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine.
Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard
have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and
Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with
William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The
assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's
mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired
St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway.
According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some
interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps
Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a
child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with,
whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress
who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since
James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have
been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her
attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Love the word Weirism. I have just read someone called the Ginger Historian who claimed, in an article about Clarence's son Edward Earl of Warwick, that Richard was trying to marry Edward's widow Elizabeth or Joanna of Portugal. I suppose we could call that a Gingerism! Obviously had not done any proper research.
.Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Envoyé de mon iPad
Le 25 mars 2017 à 18:34, maryfriend@... [] <> a écrit :
Love the word Weirism. I have just read someone called the Ginger Historian who claimed, in an article about Clarence's son Edward Earl of Warwick, that Richard was trying to marry Edward's widow Elizabeth or Joanna of Portugal. I suppose we could call that a Gingerism! Obviously had not done any proper research.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Love it…….
From:
[mailto: ]
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2017 12:47 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Mary, yesterday I read a comment that referred to HT as a “usurping grub”. Might we say therefore that anything HT uttered was a Grubism? =^..^=
From: mailto:
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2017 5:34 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Love the word Weirism. I have just read someone called the Ginger Historian who claimed, in an article about Clarence's son Edward Earl of Warwick , that Richard was trying to marry Edward's widow Elizabeth or Joanna of Portugal. I suppose we could call that a Gingerism! Obviously had not done any proper research.
.
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Saturday, 25 March 2017, 13:32
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Thanks Hilary for looking that up. I also suspect Alice may have been the mother of both John and Katherine. If they were in Yorkshire, they would have probably had some contact with Richard growing up. Also, if Alice wasn't married, the children could have remained in her care and she would have more need of the money to bring them up in keeping with their status. Katherine could have been born to Katherine Haute, but since the Hautes had links to Kent and the Moyles, I wonder if there is a degree of truth in Richard of Eastwell's story, which was probably embellished over the years. £5 would cover boarding him with a schoolmaster, whereas £20 would have given Alice and her children a very comfortable life.
FWIW, I had a look at measuringworth.com. This site gives various conversions, but if you measure both payments in terms of wages the time, £5 would be £28,080 in today's terms where as £20 would be £124,900.
Since servants would have earned about £3 a year (£18,740), I think Alice was more than a servant or lady in waiting to Anne, but the payment does suggest that he gave her up when he married and gave her a generous settlement.
Nico
On Saturday, 25 March 2017, 10:12, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
Nico I have so far managed to find one Alice Burgh in Yorkshire who could have fit the bill. I reckon Isabel is a Weirism. For one thing, she has them both with the surname Burgh, but one is married.The Alice Burgh I found was born in about 1444 and is the daughter of William Burgh of Catterick (sometimes spelled Borough). They originated from Richmond and moved in the same circles as Richard - the Conyers, the Fulthorpes, theTempests, the Metcalfes.We know she became Prioress of Ellerton, which is by Selby but that could have been later. Interestingly, her brother was a Hospitaller.There are lots of Burghs around at that time, but no other Alices have come to light so far.As for Katherine Haute, I agree that the amount is much smaller and, despite the husband that has always puzzled me. I personally would have thought it more likely that both children belonged to the same mother. But that's just me. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:46
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Sorry I corrected this and sent this twice.
On Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:44, "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <> wrote:
After the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born after 1472.
The identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born in 1472.
Is anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much else.
Katherine Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child (Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one of his illegitimate children.
Katherine and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent. Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence, which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine. Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway. According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with, whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
According to what I read she went to Clarence s house after that. His leger reads 'For certain special causes and considerations"
On Mar 26, 2017 4:45 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
With his 'gift' Richard describes her as his 'beloved gentlewoman' which says to me she must have been close to him and she should be on the radar somewhere. I even looked for older Alices in case she was one of his nurses but there is no-one who fits the bill. Neither is there any amongst the Burghs of Gainsborough. Alice is not a particularly Burgh name. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, 25 March 2017, 13:32
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Thanks Hilary for looking that up. I also suspect Alice may have been the mother of both John and Katherine. If they were in Yorkshire, they would have probably had some contact with Richard growing up. Also, if Alice wasn't married, the children could have remained in her care and she would have more need of the money to bring them up in keeping with their status. Katherine could have been born to Katherine Haute, but since the Hautes had links to Kent and the Moyles, I wonder if there is a degree of truth in Richard of Eastwell's story, which was probably embellished over the years. £5 would cover boarding him with a schoolmaster, whereas £20 would have given Alice and her children a very comfortable life.
FWIW, I had a look at measuringworth.com. This site gives various conversions, but if you measure both payments in terms of wages the time, £5 would be £28,080 in today's terms where as £20 would be £124,900.
Since servants would have earned about £3 a year (£18,740), I think Alice was more than a servant or lady in waiting to Anne, but the payment does suggest that he gave her up when he married and gave her a generous settlement.
Nico
On Saturday, 25 March 2017, 10:12, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Nico I have so far managed to find one Alice Burgh in Yorkshire who could have fit the bill. I reckon Isabel is a Weirism. For one thing, she has them both with the surname Burgh, but one is married.The Alice Burgh I found was born in about 1444 and is the daughter of William Burgh of Catterick (sometimes spelled Borough). They originated from Richmond and moved in the same circles as Richard - the Conyers, the Fulthorpes, theTempests, the Metcalfes.We know she became Prioress of Ellerton, which is by Selby but that could have been later. Interestingly, her brother was a Hospitaller.There are lots of Burghs around at that time, but no other Alices have come to light so far.As for Katherine Haute, I agree that the amount is much smaller and, despite the husband that has always puzzled me. I personally would have thought it more likely that both children belonged to the same mother. But that's just me. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:46
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Sorry I corrected this and sent this twice.
On Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:44, "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
After
the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look
for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her
mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born
after 1472.
The
identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine
isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh
and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity
for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John
of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least
John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from
Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says
that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born
in 1472.
Is
anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been
suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much
else.
Katherine
Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which
made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child
(Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term
mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity
to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to
him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one
of his illegitimate children.
Katherine
and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons
Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son
Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry
was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so
Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If
she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time
before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The
Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as
being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent.
Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence,
which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear
who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to
that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in
Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine.
Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard
have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and
Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with
William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The
assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's
mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired
St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway.
According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some
interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps
Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a
child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with,
whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress
who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since
James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have
been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her
attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 26 March 2017, 13:21
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
According to what I read she went to Clarence s house after that. His leger reads 'For certain special causes and considerations"
On Mar 26, 2017 4:45 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
With his 'gift' Richard describes her as his 'beloved gentlewoman' which says to me she must have been close to him and she should be on the radar somewhere. I even looked for older Alices in case she was one of his nurses but there is no-one who fits the bill. Neither is there any amongst the Burghs of Gainsborough. Alice is not a particularly Burgh name. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, 25 March 2017, 13:32
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Thanks Hilary for looking that up. I also suspect Alice may have been the mother of both John and Katherine. If they were in Yorkshire, they would have probably had some contact with Richard growing up. Also, if Alice wasn't married, the children could have remained in her care and she would have more need of the money to bring them up in keeping with their status. Katherine could have been born to Katherine Haute, but since the Hautes had links to Kent and the Moyles, I wonder if there is a degree of truth in Richard of Eastwell's story, which was probably embellished over the years. £5 would cover boarding him with a schoolmaster, whereas £20 would have given Alice and her children a very comfortable life.
FWIW, I had a look at measuringworth.com. This site gives various conversions, but if you measure both payments in terms of wages the time, £5 would be £28,080 in today's terms where as £20 would be £124,900.
Since servants would have earned about £3 a year (£18,740), I think Alice was more than a servant or lady in waiting to Anne, but the payment does suggest that he gave her up when he married and gave her a generous settlement.
Nico
On Saturday, 25 March 2017, 10:12, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Nico I have so far managed to find one Alice Burgh in Yorkshire who could have fit the bill. I reckon Isabel is a Weirism. For one thing, she has them both with the surname Burgh, but one is married.The Alice Burgh I found was born in about 1444 and is the daughter of William Burgh of Catterick (sometimes spelled Borough). They originated from Richmond and moved in the same circles as Richard - the Conyers, the Fulthorpes, theTempests, the Metcalfes.We know she became Prioress of Ellerton, which is by Selby but that could have been later. Interestingly, her brother was a Hospitaller.There are lots of Burghs around at that time, but no other Alices have come to light so far.As for Katherine Haute, I agree that the amount is much smaller and, despite the husband that has always puzzled me. I personally would have thought it more likely that both children belonged to the same mother. But that's just me. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:46
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Sorry I corrected this and sent this twice.
On Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:44, "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
After the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born after 1472.
The identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born in 1472.
Is anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much else.
Katherine Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child (Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one of his illegitimate children.
Katherine and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent. Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence, which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine. Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway. According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with, whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Well, her existence probably erases the idea that Richard married Anne because he was so in love with her. Honestly I remember being a nine year old girl and how annoying boys were
. Comparing Richard's "Mrs. Robinson" with a fifteen year old could not have been very conducive to happiness either. May have been a rocky start. Hope they did better over time.
Richard refers to Anne and his cousin Norfolk as 'most beloved'.
On Mar 26, 2017 10:27 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
That I believe is Weir again. H
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: @ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, 26 March 2017, 13:21
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
According to what I read she went to Clarence s house after that. His leger reads 'For certain special causes and considerations"
On Mar 26, 2017 4:45 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
With his 'gift' Richard describes her as his 'beloved gentlewoman' which says to me she must have been close to him and she should be on the radar somewhere. I even looked for older Alices in case she was one of his nurses but there is no-one who fits the bill. Neither is there any amongst the Burghs of Gainsborough. Alice is not a particularly Burgh name. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, 25 March 2017, 13:32
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Thanks Hilary for looking that up. I also suspect Alice may have been the mother of both John and Katherine. If they were in Yorkshire, they would have probably had some contact with Richard growing up. Also, if Alice wasn't married, the children could have remained in her care and she would have more need of the money to bring them up in keeping with their status. Katherine could have been born to Katherine Haute, but since the Hautes had links to Kent and the Moyles, I wonder if there is a degree of truth in Richard of Eastwell's story, which was probably embellished over the years. £5 would cover boarding him with a schoolmaster, whereas £20 would have given Alice and her children a very comfortable life.
FWIW, I had a look at measuringworth.com. This site gives various conversions, but if you measure both payments in terms of wages the time, £5 would be £28,080 in today's terms where as £20 would be £124,900.
Since servants would have earned about £3 a year (£18,740), I think Alice was more than a servant or lady in waiting to Anne, but the payment does suggest that he gave her up when he married and gave her a generous settlement.
Nico
On Saturday, 25 March 2017, 10:12, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Nico I have so far managed to find one Alice Burgh in Yorkshire who could have fit the bill. I reckon Isabel is a Weirism. For one thing, she has them both with the surname Burgh, but one is married.The Alice Burgh I found was born in about 1444 and is the daughter of William Burgh of Catterick (sometimes spelled Borough). They originated from Richmond and moved in the same circles as Richard - the Conyers, the Fulthorpes, theTempests, the Metcalfes.We know she became Prioress of Ellerton, which is by Selby but that could have been later. Interestingly, her brother was a Hospitaller.There are lots of Burghs around at that time, but no other Alices have come to light so far.As for Katherine Haute, I agree that the amount is much smaller and, despite the husband that has always puzzled me. I personally would have thought it more likely that both children belonged to the same mother. But that's just me. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:46
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Sorry I corrected this and sent this twice.
On Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:44, "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
After
the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look
for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her
mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born
after 1472.
The
identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine
isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh
and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity
for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John
of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least
John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from
Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says
that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born
in 1472.
Is
anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been
suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much
else.
Katherine
Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which
made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child
(Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term
mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity
to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to
him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one
of his illegitimate children.
Katherine
and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons
Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son
Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry
was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so
Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If
she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time
before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The
Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as
being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent.
Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence,
which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear
who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to
that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in
Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine.
Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard
have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and
Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with
William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The
assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's
mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired
St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway.
According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some
interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps
Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a
child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with,
whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress
who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since
James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have
been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her
attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 26 March 2017, 19:07
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Well, her existence probably erases the idea that Richard married Anne because he was so in love with her. Honestly I remember being a nine year old girl and how annoying boys were
. Comparing Richard's "Mrs. Robinson" with a fifteen year old could not have been very conducive to happiness either. May have been a rocky start. Hope they did better over time.
Richard refers to Anne and his cousin Norfolk as 'most beloved'.
On Mar 26, 2017 10:27 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
That I believe is Weir again. H
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: @ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, 26 March 2017, 13:21
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
According to what I read she went to Clarence s house after that. His leger reads 'For certain special causes and considerations"
On Mar 26, 2017 4:45 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
With his 'gift' Richard describes her as his 'beloved gentlewoman' which says to me she must have been close to him and she should be on the radar somewhere. I even looked for older Alices in case she was one of his nurses but there is no-one who fits the bill. Neither is there any amongst the Burghs of Gainsborough. Alice is not a particularly Burgh name. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, 25 March 2017, 13:32
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Thanks Hilary for looking that up. I also suspect Alice may have been the mother of both John and Katherine. If they were in Yorkshire, they would have probably had some contact with Richard growing up. Also, if Alice wasn't married, the children could have remained in her care and she would have more need of the money to bring them up in keeping with their status. Katherine could have been born to Katherine Haute, but since the Hautes had links to Kent and the Moyles, I wonder if there is a degree of truth in Richard of Eastwell's story, which was probably embellished over the years. £5 would cover boarding him with a schoolmaster, whereas £20 would have given Alice and her children a very comfortable life.
FWIW, I had a look at measuringworth.com. This site gives various conversions, but if you measure both payments in terms of wages the time, £5 would be £28,080 in today's terms where as £20 would be £124,900.
Since servants would have earned about £3 a year (£18,740), I think Alice was more than a servant or lady in waiting to Anne, but the payment does suggest that he gave her up when he married and gave her a generous settlement.
Nico
On Saturday, 25 March 2017, 10:12, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Nico I have so far managed to find one Alice Burgh in Yorkshire who could have fit the bill. I reckon Isabel is a Weirism. For one thing, she has them both with the surname Burgh, but one is married.The Alice Burgh I found was born in about 1444 and is the daughter of William Burgh of Catterick (sometimes spelled Borough). They originated from Richmond and moved in the same circles as Richard - the Conyers, the Fulthorpes, theTempests, the Metcalfes.We know she became Prioress of Ellerton, which is by Selby but that could have been later. Interestingly, her brother was a Hospitaller.There are lots of Burghs around at that time, but no other Alices have come to light so far.As for Katherine Haute, I agree that the amount is much smaller and, despite the husband that has always puzzled me. I personally would have thought it more likely that both children belonged to the same mother. But that's just me. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:46
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Sorry I corrected this and sent this twice.
On Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:44, "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
After the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born after 1472.
The identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born in 1472.
Is anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much else.
Katherine Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child (Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one of his illegitimate children.
Katherine and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent. Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence, which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine. Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway. According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with, whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Which website did you use to find the Broughs of Catterick? I found one, but it might be a different one. It shows a visitation listing Alice (Ales) and a sister Katherine (Kateren) who married someone called Allen Fulthorpe, but no Isabel.
Also what would have happened to the lands from which they payments to Alice Brugh and Katherine Haute were made? Would they they have gone to Henry as crown lands? I wonder if these annuities were kept up after Bosworth - probably not though.
Nico
On Monday, 27 March 2017, 11:03, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
Of course it could have been a gift to Prioress Alice Burgh, who happened to be related to Richard's friends. We shall never know unless something else comes to light. H
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 26 March 2017, 19:07
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Well, her existence probably erases the idea that Richard married Anne because he was so in love with her. Honestly I remember being a nine year old girl and how annoying boys were
. Comparing Richard's "Mrs. Robinson" with a fifteen year old could not have been very conducive to happiness either. May have been a rocky start. Hope they did better over time.
Richard refers to Anne and his cousin Norfolk as 'most beloved'.
On Mar 26, 2017 10:27 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
That I believe is Weir again. H
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: @ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, 26 March 2017, 13:21
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
According to what I read she went to Clarence s house after that. His leger reads 'For certain special causes and considerations"
On Mar 26, 2017 4:45 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
With his 'gift' Richard describes her as his 'beloved gentlewoman' which says to me she must have been close to him and she should be on the radar somewhere. I even looked for older Alices in case she was one of his nurses but there is no-one who fits the bill. Neither is there any amongst the Burghs of Gainsborough. Alice is not a particularly Burgh name. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, 25 March 2017, 13:32
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Thanks Hilary for looking that up. I also suspect Alice may have been the mother of both John and Katherine. If they were in Yorkshire, they would have probably had some contact with Richard growing up. Also, if Alice wasn't married, the children could have remained in her care and she would have more need of the money to bring them up in keeping with their status. Katherine could have been born to Katherine Haute, but since the Hautes had links to Kent and the Moyles, I wonder if there is a degree of truth in Richard of Eastwell's story, which was probably embellished over the years. £5 would cover boarding him with a schoolmaster, whereas £20 would have given Alice and her children a very comfortable life.
FWIW, I had a look at measuringworth.com. This site gives various conversions, but if you measure both payments in terms of wages the time, £5 would be £28,080 in today's terms where as £20 would be £124,900.
Since servants would have earned about £3 a year (£18,740), I think Alice was more than a servant or lady in waiting to Anne, but the payment does suggest that he gave her up when he married and gave her a generous settlement.
Nico
On Saturday, 25 March 2017, 10:12, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Nico I have so far managed to find one Alice Burgh in Yorkshire who could have fit the bill. I reckon Isabel is a Weirism. For one thing, she has them both with the surname Burgh, but one is married.The Alice Burgh I found was born in about 1444 and is the daughter of William Burgh of Catterick (sometimes spelled Borough). They originated from Richmond and moved in the same circles as Richard - the Conyers, the Fulthorpes, theTempests, the Metcalfes.We know she became Prioress of Ellerton, which is by Selby but that could have been later. Interestingly, her brother was a Hospitaller.There are lots of Burghs around at that time, but no other Alices have come to light so far.As for Katherine Haute, I agree that the amount is much smaller and, despite the husband that has always puzzled me. I personally would have thought it more likely that both children belonged to the same mother. But that's just me. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:46
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Sorry I corrected this and sent this twice.
On Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:44, "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
After the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born after 1472.
The identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born in 1472.
Is anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much else.
Katherine Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child (Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one of his illegitimate children.
Katherine and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent. Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence, which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine. Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway. According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with, whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Monday, 27 March 2017, 20:49
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hilary, is there any record of when she became the prioress? However, if it was a gift to the prioress, wouldn't the payment have been recorded as a gift to the priory? Also, it was a yearly payment. My feeling is still that Alice was Richard's Mrs. Robinson.
Which website did you use to find the Broughs of Catterick? I found one, but it might be a different one. It shows a visitation listing Alice (Ales) and a sister Katherine (Kateren) who married someone called Allen Fulthorpe, but no Isabel.
Also what would have happened to the lands from which they payments to Alice Brugh and Katherine Haute were made? Would they they have gone to Henry as crown lands? I wonder if these annuities were kept up after Bosworth - probably not though.
Nico
On Monday, 27 March 2017, 11:03, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
Of course it could have been a gift to Prioress Alice Burgh, who happened to be related to Richard's friends. We shall never know unless something else comes to light. H
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 26 March 2017, 19:07
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Well, her existence probably erases the idea that Richard married Anne because he was so in love with her. Honestly I remember being a nine year old girl and how annoying boys were
. Comparing Richard's "Mrs. Robinson" with a fifteen year old could not have been very conducive to happiness either. May have been a rocky start. Hope they did better over time.
Richard refers to Anne and his cousin Norfolk as 'most beloved'.
On Mar 26, 2017 10:27 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
That I believe is Weir again. H
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: @ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, 26 March 2017, 13:21
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
According to what I read she went to Clarence s house after that. His leger reads 'For certain special causes and considerations"
On Mar 26, 2017 4:45 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
With his 'gift' Richard describes her as his 'beloved gentlewoman' which says to me she must have been close to him and she should be on the radar somewhere. I even looked for older Alices in case she was one of his nurses but there is no-one who fits the bill. Neither is there any amongst the Burghs of Gainsborough. Alice is not a particularly Burgh name. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, 25 March 2017, 13:32
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Thanks Hilary for looking that up. I also suspect Alice may have been the mother of both John and Katherine. If they were in Yorkshire, they would have probably had some contact with Richard growing up. Also, if Alice wasn't married, the children could have remained in her care and she would have more need of the money to bring them up in keeping with their status. Katherine could have been born to Katherine Haute, but since the Hautes had links to Kent and the Moyles, I wonder if there is a degree of truth in Richard of Eastwell's story, which was probably embellished over the years. £5 would cover boarding him with a schoolmaster, whereas £20 would have given Alice and her children a very comfortable life.
FWIW, I had a look at measuringworth.com. This site gives various conversions, but if you measure both payments in terms of wages the time, £5 would be £28,080 in today's terms where as £20 would be £124,900.
Since servants would have earned about £3 a year (£18,740), I think Alice was more than a servant or lady in waiting to Anne, but the payment does suggest that he gave her up when he married and gave her a generous settlement.
Nico
On Saturday, 25 March 2017, 10:12, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Nico I have so far managed to find one Alice Burgh in Yorkshire who could have fit the bill. I reckon Isabel is a Weirism. For one thing, she has them both with the surname Burgh, but one is married.The Alice Burgh I found was born in about 1444 and is the daughter of William Burgh of Catterick (sometimes spelled Borough). They originated from Richmond and moved in the same circles as Richard - the Conyers, the Fulthorpes, theTempests, the Metcalfes.We know she became Prioress of Ellerton, which is by Selby but that could have been later. Interestingly, her brother was a Hospitaller.There are lots of Burghs around at that time, but no other Alices have come to light so far.As for Katherine Haute, I agree that the amount is much smaller and, despite the husband that has always puzzled me. I personally would have thought it more likely that both children belonged to the same mother. But that's just me. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: "@ yahoogroups.com" <@ yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:46
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Sorry I corrected this and sent this twice.
On Friday, 24 March 2017, 12:44, "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
After the discussion about Katherine's age on the Lovell thread, I had a look for Alice Burgh and Katherine Haute, either of whom may have been her mother. Whoever it was, I think it was unlikely that Katherine was born after 1472.
The identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born in 1472.
Is anything known about Alice and her sister Isabel? It has been suggested that they were from Knaresborough, but I can't find much else.
Katherine Haute received a £5 annuity in 1477, much less than Alice Burgh, which made me think that Alice may have been the mother of more than 1 child (Katherine or maybe Richard of Eastwell?) or had been a long term mistress of Richard. However, it is difficult to explain the annuity to Katherine Haute who was married and appears to have no connection to him, so I can't think of any other reason than she was the mother of one of his illegitimate children.
Katherine and James Haute were married by the early 1470s. They had two sons Alan (d1529) and Henry (1474-1508). Some sources say there was a son Edward, but according to ODNB, he was a cousin. Of the two sons, Henry was likely to have been the younger since he became a priest, so Katherine and James would have been married at the latest by 1472. If she was Katherine's mother, Katherine would have been born some time before that, probably around 1470 or maybe even before.
The Hautes are usually associated with Kent, but James was described as being of London, Kinsbourne Hall, Hertfordshire and Bishopsbourne Kent. Kinsbourne Hall in Harpenden seems to have been his main residence, which he is first recorded as occupying in 1473 (although it is unclear who lived there from 1467 until then.) Since he had no connections to that area, he may have acquired it as well the land he held in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire through his marriage to Katherine. Previously the house had belonged to the Annable family. Did Richard have any connections to them? FWIW, unlike his brothers, William and Richard, James did not join Buckingham's rebellion and was rewarded with William's confiscated estates. (HVII later returned them.)
The assumption is that Katherine Haute would be Katherine Plantagenet's mother because of the name. However, Richard is known to have admired St. Katherine of Siena, so he may have chosen the name anyway. According to the Inquisitions, the Haute and Moyle families had some interests in common, so Richard of Eastwell comes to mind. Perhaps Katherine Haute was his mother and the £5 annuity was for the upkeep of a child from a brief relationship that he had little or no contact with, whereas both Katherine and JofG were the child of a much loved mistress who he provided for more generously and saw regularly.
Since James Haute and Elizabeth Woodville were cousins, the marriage may have been arranged through her. Is there any way of checking who her attendants were in the late 1460 and early 1470s?
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "maryfriend@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 28 March 2017, 17:53
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hilary, I have found a book on archive.org called The Story of Wandesforde of Kirklington and Castle Comer by Hardy Bertram McCall. On page 151 there is a bit about the Fulthorpes of Hipswell. There is a family tree and on it " Alan Fulthorpe 1476 and 1484 Constable of Middleham Castle held 8 messuages and 3 ploughlands in Hipswell, temp Richard 111 " Said Alan is married to Katherine Burgh daughter of William. Not sure how accurate it is. Possibly the source for your genealogical site.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
As for Isabel, she probably is a Martha Woodville or perhaps someone unrelated. Also, I don't think someone of Alice Burgh's social class would be a wet nurse, although she could have been a governess.
Nico
On Wednesday, 29 March 2017, 9:29, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
Thanks very much Mary. I'll have a look but I bet it is as the Constable bit is not included in the Visitation. From what I've read Constables of castles looked after them during the lord's absence, which implies, I would have thought, that Fulthorpe and the Burghs knew Richard well. Their connection with the Conyers and Metcalfes also suggests this. Weir has her Alice as nursemaid to Edward of Middleham but doesn't say where she comes from the never substantiates this by giving a reference. H
From: "maryfriend@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 28 March 2017, 17:53
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hilary, I have found a book on archive.org called The Story of Wandesforde of Kirklington and Castle Comer by Hardy Bertram McCall. On page 151 there is a bit about the Fulthorpes of Hipswell. There is a family tree and on it " Alan Fulthorpe 1476 and 1484 Constable of Middleham Castle held 8 messuages and 3 ploughlands in Hipswell, temp Richard 111 " Said Alan is married to Katherine Burgh daughter of William. Not sure how accurate it is. Possibly the source for your genealogical site.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Chris Skidmore in Bosworth: The Birth of the Tudors, says that he was Constable of Middleham Castle and that he died the day after Bosworth according to his IPM. There are also a few references to it on family geneaology sites.
On Wednesday, 29 March 2017, 11:39, Nicholas Brown <nico11238@...> wrote:
Hilary and Mary, that is really interesting about Alan Fulthorpe and Middleham Castle. I will have a a look to see if I can find anything more on it. I also noticed (if the birth order on the visitation is correct) that Katherine and John were the siblings closest to Alice in age. So it does look like Alice was in a long term relationship with Richard, (perhaps about 1468-1472). and was the mother of John and Katherine. Katherine Haute was probably a shorter fling resulting in another child, probably Richard of Eastwell. As for Stephen Hawes and Anne Hopper, I'm not so convinced. Overall, while Richard's illegitimate children may seem a trivial topic, the fact that he was willing to provide for them so generously shows him in a very positive light, better than a lot of noblemen of his time. Edward didn't formally recognize any illegitimate children.
As for Isabel, she probably is a Martha Woodville or perhaps someone unrelated. Also, I don't think someone of Alice Burgh's social class would be a wet nurse, although she could have been a governess.
Nico
On Wednesday, 29 March 2017, 9:29, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
Thanks very much Mary. I'll have a look but I bet it is as the Constable bit is not included in the Visitation. From what I've read Constables of castles looked after them during the lord's absence, which implies, I would have thought, that Fulthorpe and the Burghs knew Richard well. Their connection with the Conyers and Metcalfes also suggests this. Weir has her Alice as nursemaid to Edward of Middleham but doesn't say where she comes from the never substantiates this by giving a reference. H
From: "maryfriend@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 28 March 2017, 17:53
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hilary, I have found a book on archive.org called The Story of Wandesforde of Kirklington and Castle Comer by Hardy Bertram McCall. On page 151 there is a bit about the Fulthorpes of Hipswell. There is a family tree and on it " Alan Fulthorpe 1476 and 1484 Constable of Middleham Castle held 8 messuages and 3 ploughlands in Hipswell, temp Richard 111 " Said Alan is married to Katherine Burgh daughter of William. Not sure how accurate it is. Possibly the source for your genealogical site.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
But Fulthorpe doesn't appear in HT's attainders after the battle and although I've scoured the web I can find nothing to actually pin him to Middleham, so Skidmore could have taken it from that same genealogy as us. One red herring is that the Fulthorpes were associated with a village called Bishops Middleham which is in Durham. There's lots about them on the web, but precious little about Alan.However, on the positive side, I do think it's probably the closest we've got to finding an Alice Burgh who through geography and affinity is close to Richard. I just wish I could get something that clinches it.The other thing I need to look at of course is the age of her mother, because as a younger child this will give us a better idea of her real date of birth. It has to be before 1444 because Elena Pickering Burgh died on 20 Jun 1446 and on the Visitations Alice has a younger brother and sister. But Visitations can be spectacularly wrong!I'm less worried about Katherine Haute, it could be her name which has made her another red herring.Keep digging though, and I will too. H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Wednesday, 29 March 2017, 12:01
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Alan Fulthorpe:
Chris Skidmore in Bosworth: The Birth of the Tudors, says that he was Constable of Middleham Castle and that he died the day after Bosworth according to his IPM. There are also a few references to it on family geneaology sites.
On Wednesday, 29 March 2017, 11:39, Nicholas Brown <nico11238@...> wrote:
Hilary and Mary, that is really interesting about Alan Fulthorpe and Middleham Castle. I will have a a look to see if I can find anything more on it. I also noticed (if the birth order on the visitation is correct) that Katherine and John were the siblings closest to Alice in age. So it does look like Alice was in a long term relationship with Richard, (perhaps about 1468-1472). and was the mother of John and Katherine. Katherine Haute was probably a shorter fling resulting in another child, probably Richard of Eastwell. As for Stephen Hawes and Anne Hopper, I'm not so convinced. Overall, while Richard's illegitimate children may seem a trivial topic, the fact that he was willing to provide for them so generously shows him in a very positive light, better than a lot of noblemen of his time. Edward didn't formally recognize any illegitimate children.
As for Isabel, she probably is a Martha Woodville or perhaps someone unrelated. Also, I don't think someone of Alice Burgh's social class would be a wet nurse, although she could have been a governess.
Nico
On Wednesday, 29 March 2017, 9:29, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
Thanks very much Mary. I'll have a look but I bet it is as the Constable bit is not included in the Visitation. From what I've read Constables of castles looked after them during the lord's absence, which implies, I would have thought, that Fulthorpe and the Burghs knew Richard well. Their connection with the Conyers and Metcalfes also suggests this. Weir has her Alice as nursemaid to Edward of Middleham but doesn't say where she comes from the never substantiates this by giving a reference. H
From: "maryfriend@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 28 March 2017, 17:53
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hilary, I have found a book on archive.org called The Story of Wandesforde of Kirklington and Castle Comer by Hardy Bertram McCall. On page 151 there is a bit about the Fulthorpes of Hipswell. There is a family tree and on it " Alan Fulthorpe 1476 and 1484 Constable of Middleham Castle held 8 messuages and 3 ploughlands in Hipswell, temp Richard 111 " Said Alan is married to Katherine Burgh daughter of William. Not sure how accurate it is. Possibly the source for your genealogical site.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
This is probably all wrong but genealogy.com lists a Steven Hawkes as one of Richard's children. Never heard that name.
On Mar 29, 2017 4:29 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
Thanks very much Mary. I'll have a look but I bet it is as the Constable bit is not included in the Visitation. From what I've read Constables of castles looked after them during the lord's absence, which implies, I would have thought, that Fulthorpe and the Burghs knew Richard well. Their connection with the Conyers and Metcalfes also suggests this. Weir has her Alice as nursemaid to Edward of Middleham but doesn't say where she comes from the never substantiates this by giving a reference. H
From: "maryfriend@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: @ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 28 March 2017, 17:53
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hilary, I have found a book on archive.org called The Story of Wandesforde of Kirklington and Castle Comer by Hardy Bertram McCall. On page 151 there is a bit about the Fulthorpes of Hipswell. There is a family tree and on it " Alan Fulthorpe 1476 and 1484 Constable of Middleham Castle held 8 messuages and 3 ploughlands in Hipswell, temp Richard 111 " Said Alan is married to Katherine Burgh daughter of William. Not sure how accurate it is. Possibly the source for your genealogical site.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 29 March 2017, 14:02
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
This is probably all wrong but genealogy.com lists a Steven Hawkes as one of Richard's children. Never heard that name.
On Mar 29, 2017 4:29 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
Thanks very much Mary. I'll have a look but I bet it is as the Constable bit is not included in the Visitation. From what I've read Constables of castles looked after them during the lord's absence, which implies, I would have thought, that Fulthorpe and the Burghs knew Richard well. Their connection with the Conyers and Metcalfes also suggests this. Weir has her Alice as nursemaid to Edward of Middleham but doesn't say where she comes from the never substantiates this by giving a reference. H
From: "maryfriend@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: @ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 28 March 2017, 17:53
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hilary, I have found a book on archive.org called The Story of Wandesforde of Kirklington and Castle Comer by Hardy Bertram McCall. On page 151 there is a bit about the Fulthorpes of Hipswell. There is a family tree and on it " Alan Fulthorpe 1476 and 1484 Constable of Middleham Castle held 8 messuages and 3 ploughlands in Hipswell, temp Richard 111 " Said Alan is married to Katherine Burgh daughter of William. Not sure how accurate it is. Possibly the source for your genealogical site.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
http://flyhigh-by-learnonline.blogspot.com/2013/07/richard-iii-and-other-anne-author-guest.html?m=1
Anne Harrington as mother 2 or 3?
On Mar 29, 2017 9:43 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
Nor have I until Nico mentioned it earlier. H
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: @ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, 29 March 2017, 14:02
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
This is probably all wrong but genealogy.com lists a Steven Hawkes as one of Richard's children. Never heard that name.
On Mar 29, 2017 4:29 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Thanks very much Mary. I'll have a look but I bet it is as the Constable bit is not included in the Visitation. From what I've read Constables of castles looked after them during the lord's absence, which implies, I would have thought, that Fulthorpe and the Burghs knew Richard well. Their connection with the Conyers and Metcalfes also suggests this. Weir has her Alice as nursemaid to Edward of Middleham but doesn't say where she comes from the never substantiates this by giving a reference. H
From: "maryfriend@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: @ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 28 March 2017, 17:53
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hilary, I have found a book on archive.org called The Story of Wandesforde of Kirklington and Castle Comer by Hardy Bertram McCall. On page 151 there is a bit about the Fulthorpes of Hipswell. There is a family tree and on it " Alan Fulthorpe 1476 and 1484 Constable of Middleham Castle held 8 messuages and 3 ploughlands in Hipswell, temp Richard 111 " Said Alan is married to Katherine Burgh daughter of William. Not sure how accurate it is. Possibly the source for your genealogical site.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 29 March 2017, 23:49
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
http://flyhigh-by-learnonline.blogspot.com/2013/07/richard-iii-and-other-anne-author-guest.html?m=1
Anne Harrington as mother 2 or 3?
On Mar 29, 2017 9:43 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
Nor have I until Nico mentioned it earlier. H
From: "Karen O karenoder4@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: @ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, 29 March 2017, 14:02
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
This is probably all wrong but genealogy.com lists a Steven Hawkes as one of Richard's children. Never heard that name.
On Mar 29, 2017 4:29 AM, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Thanks very much Mary. I'll have a look but I bet it is as the Constable bit is not included in the Visitation. From what I've read Constables of castles looked after them during the lord's absence, which implies, I would have thought, that Fulthorpe and the Burghs knew Richard well. Their connection with the Conyers and Metcalfes also suggests this. Weir has her Alice as nursemaid to Edward of Middleham but doesn't say where she comes from the never substantiates this by giving a reference. H
From: "maryfriend@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com>
To: @ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 28 March 2017, 17:53
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hilary, I have found a book on archive.org called The Story of Wandesforde of Kirklington and Castle Comer by Hardy Bertram McCall. On page 151 there is a bit about the Fulthorpes of Hipswell. There is a family tree and on it " Alan Fulthorpe 1476 and 1484 Constable of Middleham Castle held 8 messuages and 3 ploughlands in Hipswell, temp Richard 111 " Said Alan is married to Katherine Burgh daughter of William. Not sure how accurate it is. Possibly the source for your genealogical site.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
I had a look for Alan Fulthorpe's IPM and couldn't find it. It probably is from an unpublished set, like the one Hicks is working on. As for Stephen Hawes, he was a poet who was a chamber groom for Henry VII and VIII. Alison Weir list him as a possible illegitimate son of Richard III, but no one seems to where and when the rumour started. Here is some more info on him.
Stephen Hawes
Stephen Hawes Someone asked today if Stephen Hawes was one of Richard III"s illegitimate children, as he is listed as a b...
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
A thought on Stephen Hawes, if Katherine was Katherine Haute's child, she would presumably have had half brothers and/or sisters. If Katherine and James Haute had children were any of them named Stephen? Could the name Hawes have been mistaken for Haute? Just a thought.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
I saw Alison Weir claims 8 illegitimate children for him in her book.
On Mar 30, 2017 1:56 PM, "maryfriend@... []" <> wrote:
Just checked it was an Ancestry site that reported he died in 1487, so possibly it could be a mistake.Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
That is because Weir is a total joke.
From:
[mailto:]
Sent: 31 March 2017 02:34
To:
Subject: Re: [Richard III Society
Forum] Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
I saw Alison Weir claims 8 illegitimate children for him in her book.
On Mar 30, 2017 1:56 PM, "maryfriend@... []" <> wrote:
Just checked it was an Ancestry site that reported he died in 1487, so possibly it could be a mistake.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "maryfriend@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 30 March 2017, 18:17
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
When I was Googling Alan Fulford I came across a site which reported that he had died in 1487. Another site mentioned Skidmore's book and the IPM but it only gave the date of August 23rd and no year.
A thought on Stephen Hawes, if Katherine was Katherine Haute's child, she would presumably have had half brothers and/or sisters. If Katherine and James Haute had children were any of them named Stephen? Could the name Hawes have been mistaken for Haute? Just a thought.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "maryfriend@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 30 March 2017, 18:56
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Just checked it was an Ancestry site that reported he died in 1487, so possibly it could be a mistake.Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
As for Stephen Hawes and the Hautes, as far as I know, the Katherine and James Haute had two or possibly three sons - definitely Alan and Henry, but also possibly an Edward. ODNB lists Edward as a cousin, but other websites list him as the eldest brother. It is possible there were two Edwards, but no Stephen. Also, Stephen Hawes came from Aldeburgh in Suffolk, not an area connected to the Hautes.
Also, can anyone help. When my messages on this thread go through, they are followed by a string of old messages. Is there any way of getting rid of them. Also, my messages seem to go through twice.
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 31 March 2017, 9:39
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Mary, thanks for posting archive.org. It looks like it could be quite helpful.
As for Stephen Hawes and the Hautes, as far as I know, the Katherine and James Haute had two or possibly three sons - definitely Alan and Henry, but also possibly an Edward. ODNB lists Edward as a cousin, but other websites list him as the eldest brother. It is possible there were two Edwards, but no Stephen. Also, Stephen Hawes came from Aldeburgh in Suffolk, not an area connected to the Hautes.
Also, can anyone help. When my messages on this thread go through, they are followed by a string of old messages. Is there any way of getting rid of them. Also, my messages seem to go through twice.
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Would Alan Fulthorpe have made a will? Also there seem to be lots of other people named Alan in his family tree too.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: "maryfriend@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Friday, 31 March 2017, 9:55
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
I have researched some of my family tree and I have come across mistakes that other people make. My great great grandfather is called Robert but so was his grandfather, an uncle and a cousin and quite often he is down as an ancestor when from the dates they are researching he can't possibly be. He has quite a distinctive middle name that they have quoted.
Would Alan Fulthorpe have made a will? Also there seem to be lots of other people named Alan in his family tree too.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Envoyé de mon iPad
Le 31 mars 2017 à 03:33, Karen O karenoder4@... [] <> a écrit :
I saw Alison Weir claims 8 illegitimate children for him in her book.
On Mar 30, 2017 1:56 PM, "maryfriend@... []" <> wrote:
Just checked it was an Ancestry site that reported he died in 1487, so possibly it could be a mistake.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Agreed.
On Mar 31, 2017 3:10 AM, "'Stephen' stephenmlark@... []" <> wrote:
That is because Weir is a total joke.
From:
@ yahoogroups.com
[mailto: @yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 31 March 2017 02:34
To:
@ yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Richard III Society
Forum] Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
I saw Alison Weir claims 8 illegitimate children for him in her book.
On Mar 30, 2017 1:56 PM, "maryfriend@... []" <@ yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Just checked it was an Ancestry site that reported he died in 1487, so possibly it could be a mistake.
Mary
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Walsham le Willows (Suffolk, UK) | History Group Quarterly Review 30 - July 2004
Walsham le Willows (Suffolk, UK) | History Group Quarterly Review 30 - July 2004
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Going back to Weir's Isabel Burgh, there could be the possibility that she was our Alice's sister-in-law, we have two 'Unknowns' - the wife of George, who is said to be the daughter of Sir William Dutton (but I think it could be a typo and is more likely to be Hutton or Hilton) and 'Unknown Proctor', the wife of Richard. According to Weir Isabel was nurse to Edward Warwick.. The Burghs came from Richmond as well as Catterick. Clarence owned Richmond. I hate to back up Weir who gives no reference but perhaps we ought to look? H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Sunday, 2 April 2017, 3:14
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From what I can see Hawes and Hawker are separate families in Suffolk. I am not sure that the story of Stephen Hawes goes back any further than a 1958 novel called The Willing Heart. The author, Hilda Lamb claims that it was a family legend. Here is some information on her family, but it doesn't say how Stephen Hawes fits in. Besides, he said he was from Aldeburgh in his will, not the area around Thetford where her family originated. Nico
Walsham le Willows (Suffolk, UK) | History Group Quarterly Review 30 - July 2004
Walsham le Willows (Suffolk, UK) | History Group Quarterly Review 30 - July 2004
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
On Sunday, 2 April 2017, 8:49, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
There are a number of Hawes in Solihull who married into the Greswold family who were part of the Stanley/Stafford affinity. One married William Fitzwilliam, Chamberlain to Wolsey so one can see how they got into the Court. They also seem to be associated with the wool trade so your Suffolk connection would be very feasible. I haven't looked at them there. Yes the Hawkers are different.
Going back to Weir's Isabel Burgh, there could be the possibility that she was our Alice's sister-in-law, we have two 'Unknowns' - the wife of George, who is said to be the daughter of Sir William Dutton (but I think it could be a typo and is more likely to be Hutton or Hilton) and 'Unknown Proctor', the wife of Richard. According to Weir Isabel was nurse to Edward Warwick.. The Burghs came from Richmond as well as Catterick. Clarence owned Richmond. I hate to back up Weir who gives no reference but perhaps we ought to look? H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Sunday, 2 April 2017, 3:14
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From what I can see Hawes and Hawker are separate families in Suffolk. I am not sure that the story of Stephen Hawes goes back any further than a 1958 novel called The Willing Heart. The author, Hilda Lamb claims that it was a family legend. Here is some information on her family, but it doesn't say how Stephen Hawes fits in. Besides, he said he was from Aldeburgh in his will, not the area around Thetford where her family originated. Nico
Walsham le Willows (Suffolk, UK) | History Group Quarterly Review 30 - July 2004
Walsham le Willows (Suffolk, UK) | History Group Quarterly Review 30 - July 2004
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
BTW Unknown Proctor is the wife of Sir James Burgh, not Richard. Sorry! H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Monday, 3 April 2017, 12:01
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
I'll keep a look out for Isabel. She could be Alice's sister in law. I'm not sure what Alison Weir's source is. It could be Richard's accounts, maybe privy purse or wardrobe, which are not available online. I don't like Alison Weir's conclusions about Richard, but she is quite good at pinning down dates and small details, so I don't write her off as she is good for some things - same for Michael Hicks.
On Sunday, 2 April 2017, 8:49, "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <> wrote:
There are a number of Hawes in Solihull who married into the Greswold family who were part of the Stanley/Stafford affinity. One married William Fitzwilliam, Chamberlain to Wolsey so one can see how they got into the Court. They also seem to be associated with the wool trade so your Suffolk connection would be very feasible. I haven't looked at them there. Yes the Hawkers are different.
Going back to Weir's Isabel Burgh, there could be the possibility that she was our Alice's sister-in-law, we have two 'Unknowns' - the wife of George, who is said to be the daughter of Sir William Dutton (but I think it could be a typo and is more likely to be Hutton or Hilton) and 'Unknown Proctor', the wife of Richard. According to Weir Isabel was nurse to Edward Warwick.. The Burghs came from Richmond as well as Catterick. Clarence owned Richmond. I hate to back up Weir who gives no reference but perhaps we ought to look? H
From: "Nicholas Brown nico11238@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Sunday, 2 April 2017, 3:14
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From what I can see Hawes and Hawker are separate families in Suffolk. I am not sure that the story of Stephen Hawes goes back any further than a 1958 novel called The Willing Heart. The author, Hilda Lamb claims that it was a family legend. Here is some information on her family, but it doesn't say how Stephen Hawes fits in. Besides, he said he was from Aldeburgh in his will, not the area around Thetford where her family originated. Nico
Walsham le Willows (Suffolk, UK) | History Group Quarterly Review 30 - July 2004
Walsham le Willows (Suffolk, UK) | History Group Quarterly Review 30 - July 2004
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
"Also, can anyone help. When my messages on this thread go through, they are followed by a string of old messages. Is there any way of getting rid of them. Also, my messages seem to go through twice."
Carol responds:
I don't know about posting from your e-mail, but if you post from the site, you can click "show message history" after you hit "Reply." That way you can quote what you want and delete the rest.
Carol
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Happy Easter, Nico
Posting problems
Nico wrote:
"Thanks Carol. It could be my email. I will try posting from the site and see if it helps.
"Happy Easter, Nico"
Carol responds:
You're welcome. Happy Easter to you and everyone. Easter is also my birthday this year so I am going out of town to be with family. Will try to get caught up as soon as I return and not fall behind on posting again.
Hope Phil Stone has popped by to see how lively this forum is at the moment!
Carol
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Re: Posting problems
On Saturday, 15 April 2017, 17:53, "justcarol67@... []" <> wrote:
Nico wrote:
"Thanks Carol. It could be my email. I will try posting from the site and see if it helps.
"Happy Easter, Nico"
Carol responds:
You're welcome. Happy Easter to you and everyone. Easter is also my birthday this year so I am going out of town to be with family. Will try to get caught up as soon as I return and not fall behind on posting again.
Hope Phil Stone has popped by to see how lively this forum is at the moment!
Carol
Re: Posting problems
Thanks
Paul
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Sorry late catching up - been away.
That's interesting about Alan Fulthorpe's death. His name is on the list of people who were granted pardons after the Fitzhugh rebellion, most of whom seem to have been Warwick's servants, but according to my information Sir John Conyers was the constable of Middleham - he certainly was in 1473-4 (for which we have surviving accounts for the lordship of Middleham), and he was reappointed to the position by Henry VII shortly before his death in 1486. Frustrating that Skidmore doesn't give a source for his claim that Fulthorpe was the constable of Middleham.
Marie
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hi again,
All I really want to say on this subject is simply that (Weir notwithstanding):-
1) there is no reliable evidence that Richard had any illegitimate children other than John and Katherine; and
2) the names put forward for their mothers (Alice burgh and Katherine Haute) are just wild speculation. Basically, from all Richard's vast scattered estates we have just two surviving sets of accounts:
a) for the lordship of Middleham for the accounting year Michaelmas 1473 to Michaelmas 1474; and
b) for the East Anglian lands that the old Countess of Oxford had made over to Richard, for 1476.
Each of these fragments yields one payment to a female - the Middleham accounts to Alice Burgh gentlewoman, and the East Anglian ones to Katherine Haute.
To take Alice Haute first. Since the money was to be paid from the revenues of the lordship of Middleham, she probably lived in that area, not in Pontefract where Richard was when he issued the annuity. There are a lot of minor Burgh families so I don't think it is possible to identify Alice with any degree of confidence. Perhaps she belonged to the Burghs of Hackforth? As for the reason for the grant, I find it unlikely that it had anything to do with Richard's offspring. The accounts are useful in that they give a date for the original grant of most of the annuities and retainers being paid out of the revenues of the lordship at that time. The greater proportion were granted by Richard in the autumn of 1471 when he first took over. Since his children appear to have been born before his marriage you would expect that any annuity to their mother would also have been set up before Richard married Anne. But no. Alice Burgh's annuity was granted in February 1474, well after the marriage, and after the Countess of Warwick's return to Middleham (in fact, during the period of arbitration with Clarence prior to the final parliamentary settlement). 20 marks is a high figure, but there is another annuity in the accounts of that same amount (to Robert Wycliff esq). Is it perhaps more likely that Alice was an older woman who had served Anne and her mother in some important capacity?
As for Katherine Haute, I'm not sure she was that young, and given her surname, I wonder if we should perhaps consider that hers may have been an annuity originally been granted by the old countess of Oxford, and which Richard had promised to honour.
Just imagine how many female annuitants of Richard's we would find if we had all the accounts for all his estates. Historians like to speculate, particularly about Richard's love life (because it sells), but maybe Identifying Alice & Katherine as the mothers of John and Katherine is perhaps a bit like concluding that the Titanic must have been hit by the tip of the iceberg?
Marie
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 20 April 2017, 10:44
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hi again,
All I really want to say on this subject is simply that (Weir notwithstanding):-
1) there is no reliable evidence that Richard had any illegitimate children other than John and Katherine; and
2) the names put forward for their mothers (Alice burgh and Katherine Haute) are just wild speculation. Basically, from all Richard's vast scattered estates we have just two surviving sets of accounts:a) for the lordship of Middleham for the accounting year Michaelmas 1473 to Michaelmas 1474; andb) for the East Anglian lands that the old Countess of Oxford had made over to Richard, for 1476.Each of these fragments yields one payment to a female - the Middleham accounts to Alice Burgh gentlewoman, and the East Anglian ones to Katherine Haute. To take Alice Haute first. Since the money was to be paid from the revenues of the lordship of Middleham, she probably lived in that area, not in Pontefract where Richard was when he issued the annuity. There are a lot of minor Burgh families so I don't think it is possible to identify Alice with any degree of confidence. Perhaps she belonged to the Burghs of Hackforth? As for the reason for the grant, I find it unlikely that it had anything to do with Richard's offspring. The accounts are useful in that they give a date for the original grant of most of the annuities and retainers being paid out of the revenues of the lordship at that time. The greater proportion were granted by Richard in the autumn of 1471 when he first took over. Since his children appear to have been born before his marriage you would expect that any annuity to their mother would also have been set up before Richard married Anne. But no. Alice Burgh's annuity was granted in February 1474, well after the marriage, and after the Countess of Warwick's return to Middleham (in fact, during the period of arbitration with Clarence prior to the final parliamentary settlement). 20 marks is a high figure, but there is another annuity in the accounts of that same amount (to Robert Wycliff esq). Is it perhaps more likely that Alice was an older woman who had served Anne and her mother in some important capacity?As for Katherine Haute, I'm not sure she was that young, and given her surname, I wonder if we should perhaps consider that hers may have been an annuity originally been granted by the old countess of Oxford, and which Richard had promised to honour.
Just imagine how many female annuitants of Richard's we would find if we had all the accounts for all his estates. Historians like to speculate, particularly about Richard's love life (because it sells), but maybe Identifying Alice & Katherine as the mothers of John and Katherine is perhaps a bit like concluding that the Titanic must have been hit by the tip of the iceberg?
Marie
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Mary
Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richard's Illegitmate
Hi again,
All I really want to say on this subject is simply that (Weir notwithstanding):-
1) there is no reliable evidence that Richard had any illegitimate children other than John and Katherine; and
2) the names put forward for their mothers (Alice burgh and Katherine Haute) are just wild speculation. Basically, from all Richard's vast scattered estates we have just two surviving sets of accounts:
a) for the lordship of Middleham for the accounting year Michaelmas 1473 to Michaelmas 1474; and
b) for the East Anglian lands that the old Countess of Oxford had made over to Richard, for 1476.
Each of these fragments yields one payment to a female - the Middleham accounts to Alice Burgh gentlewoman, and the East Anglian ones to Katherine Haute.
To take Alice Haute first. Since the money was to be paid from the revenues of the lordship of Middleham, she probably lived in that area, not in Pontefract where Richard was when he issued the annuity. There are a lot of minor Burgh families so I don't think it is possible to identify Alice with any degree of confidence. Perhaps she belonged to the Burghs of Hackforth? As for the reason for the grant, I find it unlikely that it had anything to do with Richard's offspring. The accounts are useful in that they give a date for the original grant of most of the annuities and retainers being paid out of the revenues of the lordship at that time. The greater proportion were granted by Richard in the autumn of 1471 when he first took over. Since his children appear to have been born before his marriage you would expect that any annuity to their mother would also have been set up before Richard married Anne. But no. Alice Burgh's annuity was granted in February 1474, well after the marriage, and after the Countess of Warwick's return to Middleham (in fact, during the period of arbitration with Clarence prior to the f inal parliamentary settlement). 20 marks is a high fi gure, but there is another annuity in the accounts of that same amount (to Robert Wycliff esq). Is it perhaps more likely that Alice was an older woman who had served Anne and her mother in some important capacity?
As for Katherine Haute, I'm not sure she was that young, and given her surname, I wonder if we should perhaps consider that hers may have been an annuity originally been granted by the old countess of Oxford, and which Richard had promised to honour.
Just imagine how many female annuitants of Richard's we would find if we had all the accounts for all his estates. Historians like to speculate, particularly about Richard's love life (because it sells), but maybe Identifying Alice & Katherine as the mothers of John and Katherine is perhaps a bit like concluding that the Titanic must have been hit by the tip of the iceberg?
Marie
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richard's Illegitmate
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hi,
Thanks to everyone for the good wishes. It's nice to be back.
Hilary, I'm afraid I'm still a bit brain fogged after travel, so I'm afraid you will need to remind me of your Alice Burgh's family connections and the sources - I'd be really interested to hear as it does indeed sound like the right area.
The annuity of 20 marks (£13 6s 8d) isn't far off the £10 annuity granted to the nurse Clarence appointed to look after Edward Earl of Warwick.
Marie
Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richard's Illegitmate
Yes, Doug, the only other set of accounts of Richard's that I'm aware of from his time as Duke of Gloucester is a single page of the Middleham household expenses (as opposed to estate accounts) from the summer of 1483 which appear in Harley 433.
As you suggest, there are other documents that contain information about him - he makes a lot of appearances in the York House Books, and the odd appearance in the accounts of other towns and cities, and of course he features in a lot of government documents. I think people often don't appreciate the really patchy nature of the records from this period or the creative exploits required to piece together what even very prominent individuals were doing.
Marie
Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richard's Illegitmate
Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richard's Illegitmate
I'm also very pleased to you are back. Your input has been much missed.
It is such a shame that there are so few surviving accounts for Richard. If there were more we might have a completely different picture of so many things. I wonder how they got lost; whether they were mislaid over time or they were deliberately destroyed by the Tudors. The annuity to Katherine Haute may well have something to do with the Countess of Oxford or some other reason. The date - 1477 - seems very late to be Katherine's mother, and Rosemary Horrox made the connection on the basis of the fact that Richard made a significant payment to a woman called Katherine. Since Katherine has always one of one the most common names for medieval noblewomen, it isn't much to go on.
However, I still think Alice Burgh could be a good candidate to be the mother of both the children. I'm no expert on the Burghs and there were a lot of them, but Hilary does point out that Alice is an unusual name in that family. Also, I was struck by the fact that John and Katherine were the names of the siblings closest to her in age. Again though, common names and circumstantial evidence. She would have been quite a bit older than Richard too (Hilary estimates she was born c.1444), which would make sense, because if he had a relationship with a girl his own age, he would have damaged her marriage prospects. Even so, her age still seems too young to justify such a high payment for service to any of the women in his family.
The thread about the illegitimate children started with speculation about the ages of children especially Katherine, who a Welsh genealogy site said that she died very young, suggesting that she was a child rather than a teenager. However, that is seems to be just vague language. According to the dreaded Michael Hicks, Richard granted land to Katherine prior to her marriage with Earl of Huntingdon in April 1484. He says that while her age was unknown, this would indicate that she was at least 14, the minimum age for women to hold land in their own right. Therefore, since Katherine can't have been that old given Richard's own age, he speculates that she was most likely born around 1469. That would make sense, but if these children did have the same mother, I suspect John was born maybe a year or so later, before his marriage to Anne rather than after is as Hick's seems to believe. (Source: his book on Anne Neville)
I don't know if you have caught up with the Edward of Middleham discussion, but I was wondering if you had any information about this.
Nico
On Thursday, 20 April 2017, 16:54, "cherryripe.eileenb@... []" <> wrote:
I think that Marie has made a very good point that as the children, as far as we know, were born before Richard's marriage, the annuities would have been made prior to that. I'm afraid we are no nearer to finding out the identities of the mother/s of John and Katherine frustratingly. I use that word a lot on here...frustratingly...>
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Firstly I think your last point is from where Weir got her Alice and Isabel nursemaid theory. I've never found Isabel.
This Alice Burgh is the daughter of William Burgh (Borough/Brough) of Catterick and Richmond, and Elena Pickering whose mother was a Harington. She can have been born no later than 1446 because her mother died then. Her brother married a daughter of Sir Christopher Conyers and one of her sisters the Alan Fulthorpe, supposed Constable of Middleham Castle. I actually think that may be a confusion with Bishop Middleham near Durham with which the Fulthorpes were associated. She is listed in the Visitation but for once this seems to stand up to scrutiny because the people it lists are pretty well known. She's listed as Prioress of Ellerton in Swaledale but we don't know when she took the veil. I've searched for Priory Records but they are very sparse and don't list every prioress. She's also the aunt by marriage of Thomas Metcalfe's daughter, and further family associations are with the Saltmarshes, Gowers, those who generally formed the Warwick/Richard 'set' and who also have connections with the town of York. So although she may not have been the mother of Richard's children, she could indeed be somebody whom he would have known and she is a 'gentlewoman'. The only other Alice Burgh I've yet turned up was in 1292 - it really doesn't seem to have been a family name. She has another married brother called Sir James Burgh, but I've yet to turn up his children.
One tiny other point, until his fall George did 'own' the honour of Richmond (which was part of the ancient Breton inheritance of the Dukes of Richmond), so he does have a connection with the place. Hope this helps...H
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Friday, 21 April 2017, 10:26
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hi,
Thanks to everyone for the good wishes. It's nice to be back.
Hilary, I'm afraid I'm still a bit brain fogged after travel, so I'm afraid you will need to remind me of your Alice Burgh's family connections and the sources - I'd be really interested to hear as it does indeed sound like the right area.
The annuity of 20 marks (£13 6s 8d) isn't far off the £10 annuity granted to the nurse Clarence appointed to look after Edward Earl of Warwick.
Marie
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Nico wrote:
The identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born in 1472.
Marie responds:
The source (Middleham accounts) doesn't actually describe Alice Burgh as beloved, nor does it say she was from Pontefract - Richard was at Pontefract (travelling) when he made the grant on 1 March 1474 (Weir has evidently failed to take account of the calendar starting on 25 March), but since the annuity was paid from the revenues of the lordship of Middleham and Richard didn't feel it necessary to explain more precisely who Alice Burgh gentlewoman was, my conclusion is that she belonged to that area and not to Pontefract.
I agree that John may have been born at Pontefract as per his moniker, and so we need to identify the occasions when Richard was there - basically any time he was travelling between the south and the North East.
The East Anglian account doesn't show Katherine being granted an annuity in 1477 (actually the account runs from 1475-7), only receiving her annual payment. In other words, the annuity would seem to have been granted earlier than that. Bearing in mind that these lands belonged to the Countess of Oxford until 1473, and that when she gave them up to Richard he promised to honour certain of her obligations, the annuity may well not have been granted by Richard at all.
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Friday, 21 April 2017, 16:05
Subject: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Nico wrote:The identity of the mother/s of Richard's children, John and Katherine isn't known, but Rosemary Horrox does make a good case for Alice Burgh and/or Katherine Haute. Alice, the 'beloved gentlewoman' got an annuity for £20, an extremely generous sum for a servant and the same as John of Gloucester got from Henry. This does sound like she was at least John of Gloucester's mother, especially since it says she was from Pontefract. The annuity was for 1st March 1473, and Alison Weir says that Richard spent time in Pontefract in 1471, so perhaps JofG was born in 1472.
Marie responds:The source (Middleham accounts) doesn't actually describe Alice Burgh as beloved, nor does it say she was from Pontefract - Richard was at Pontefract (travelling) when he made the grant on 1 March 1474 (Weir has evidently failed to take account of the calendar starting on 25 March), but since the annuity was paid from the revenues of the lordship of Middleham and Richard didn't feel it necessary to explain more precisely who Alice Burgh gentlewoman was, my conclusion is that she belonged to that area and not to Pontefract. I agree that John may have been born at Pontefract as per his moniker, and so we need to identify the occasions when Richard was there - basically any time he was travelling between the south and the North East.The East Anglian account doesn't show Katherine being granted an annuity in 1477 (actually the account runs from 1475-7), only receiving her annual payment. In other words, the annuity would seem to have been granted earlier than that. Bearing in mind that these lands belonged to the Countess of Oxford until 1473, and that when she gave them up to Richard he promised to honour certain of her obligations, the annuity may well not have been granted by Richard at all.
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hi Hilary,
Do you have the details of your Alice Burgh to hand?
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
https://archive.org/stream/visitationofyork00flow#page/26/mode/2up
Alice's parents have tombs at Catterick so we know their dates are right. I've obviously done some more work on it to flesh it out but again I wasn't looking for it at the time, though I had looked at the more obvious Thomas Burgh of Gainsborough. In the late 1460s if Alice had not taken the veil she would probably have been living with her much older brother and his wife, or indeed she could have been living with her nephew and his wife Cecily Metcalf. That could well have brought her into contact with Richard. H
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Friday, 21 April 2017, 19:46
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hi Hilary,
Do you have the details of your Alice Burgh to hand?
Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richard's Illegitmate
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Friday, 21 April 2017, 10:34
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Yes, Doug, the only other set of accounts of Richard's that I'm aware of from his time as Duke of Gloucester is a single page of the Middleham household expenses (as opposed to estate accounts) from the summer of 1483 which appear in Harley 433.
As you suggest, there are other documents that contain information about him - he makes a lot of appearances in the York House Books, and the odd appearance in the accounts of other towns and cities, and of course he features in a lot of government documents. I think people often don't appreciate the really patchy nature of the records from this period or the creative exploits required to piece together what even very prominent individuals were doing.
Marie
Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richard's Illegitmate
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Yes, okay, I had found her. Perhaps she could be the Alice Burgh of the grant, but I have real doubts that she would have been Richard's mistress.
1) Her age. Her mother died in 1442, and so even as the youngest of the three daughters she could have been born no later than that, and (particularly given that there were also six boys) possibly some years earlier. I take your point about Richard taking an older woman in order not to damage her marriage prospects, but the way to do that would be to choose a widow. A married woman's child would anyway be classed as her husband's. That brings us to point 2.
2) She is described as Prioress of Ellerton (in Swaledale). The prioresses of Ellerton at this period are not otherwise recorded, but she appears to have become prioress by the end of 1485 as there is an earlier visitation of the North, taken some time between 1485 and 1500, which also describes her as Prioress of Ellerton. I'd previously used this visitation for the FitzHughs, and come to the conclusion, from those alive and dead on it, that it the information was collected quite soon after Bosworth.
If the Alice Burgh in the grant is the same person, she clearly hadn't become prioress by March 1474 as she is simply described as "generose" (gentlewoman). I imagine that could have been an kay way to describe a nun - I'm not sure.
But anyway, we have the issue that the only Alice Burgh in the records was a nun who was round about a dozen years older than Richard. I'm afraid that doesn't look too good to me. Maybe she became a nun after having his child, but then why so long unmarried?
So, maybe this annuitant was Alice the nun, maybe not (I doubt these Visitations are absolutely complete for earlier generations). But if she was Alice the nun then I don't think she was also Richard's mistress.
I'd personally want to concentrate on Richard's visits to Pontefract (for John - although he may simply have been raised at Pontefract), and his general itinerary during the months after he left Warwick's household (for Katherine). Unfortunately, I don't think either of these routes would take us to Catterick. I'm also not sure whether past mistresses would have been paid official annuities in this way. Regarding Edward IV, for instance, the official sources of annuities and payments have yielded nothing and Hicks says the Privy Purse expenses would have been the way it was done (which we don't have for either Edward or Richard's reigns). Nor do we have the equivalent of that for Richard as Duke.
Just a wildcard, but there is of course an outside chance that John and Katherine were twins.
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Nico wrote:
"Wishing you also a very Happy Birthday!"
Carol responds:
Thank you. The weather was lovely in Prescott (Arizona). Anyone from the UK who wants a warm springtime should go there. Back to deserty Tucson now. It may reach 100 degrees Fahrenheit soon.
Carol
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Envoyé de mon iPad
Le 22 avr. 2017 à 19:16, justcarol67@... [] <> a écrit :
"Wishing you also a very Happy Birthday!"
Carol responds:
Thank you. The weather was lovely in Prescott (Arizona). Anyone from the UK who wants a warm springtime should go there. Back to deserty Tucson now. It may reach 100 degrees Fahrenheit soon.
Carol
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
The case for:
Elena Pickering/Burgh died on 20 June 1446, so Alice as the nearly youngest child could have been born about 1444 or later, so she was only eight years' older than Richard. That follows the pattern of Edward who liked older women. No influential father would allow his daughters to enter into any sort of liaison, they were worth (literally) too much, so Richard's mistress/lover was almost certainly a wife/ widow or a spinster whose father was dead and who was one of the younger of several children (i.e. not an heiress). And if in the late 1460s he wanted a role model it was Warwick who had his own mistress and child.
If she was Prioress by 1485 that would be entirely consistent. A king who had declared that his brother had 'loose morals' ( sorry sounds harsh but I couldn't think of anything better) wouldn't want the mother of his illegitimate children in the public domain for all sorts of reasons when he was under attack by rumour. And how could an unmarried/woman widow explain two children?
The Burghs were based at Catterick and Richmond but they were also close to the city of York via the Metcalfes et al, as were many including Stillington, the Constables, the Holmes who held land in East Yorkshire but were still within commuting distance of the city and had held office there. Furthermore Richmond is pretty close to Middleham.
The case against:
There is a pretty good case for saying this Alice Burgh knew Richard. She could after all be a retired gentlewoman (bit young) who entered the priory and Richard used his influence to help her gain a top position. One of the previous Prioresses was a Conyers, I recall. However, it is interesting that Richard declared he wanted to fight the infidel when we now know her brother John was a Hospitaller. There's also intriguingly a link with Stillington, the Bretons and the Hospitallers, which I've been following today.
Have to keep digging. H
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 22 April 2017, 14:53
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Yes, okay, I had found her. Perhaps she could be the Alice Burgh of the grant, but I have real doubts that she would have been Richard's mistress.
1) Her age. Her mother died in 1442, and so even as the youngest of the three daughters she could have been born no later than that, and (particularly given that there were also six boys) possibly some years earlier. I take your point about Richard taking an older woman in order not to damage her marriage prospects, but the way to do that would be to choose a widow. A married woman's child would anyway be classed as her husband's. That brings us to point 2.
2) She is described as Prioress of Ellerton (in Swaledale). The prioresses of Ellerton at this period are not otherwise recorded, but she appears to have become prioress by the end of 1485 as there is an earlier visitation of the North, taken some time between 1485 and 1500, which also describes her as Prioress of Ellerton. I'd previously used this visitation for the FitzHughs, and come to the conclusion, from those alive and dead on it, that it the information was collected quite soon after Bosworth. If the Alice Burgh in the grant is the same person, she clearly hadn't become prioress by March 1474 as she is simply described as "generose" (gentlewoman). I imagine that could have been an kay way to describe a nun - I'm not sure.
But anyway, we have the issue that the only Alice Burgh in the records was a nun who was round about a dozen years older than Richard. I'm afraid that doesn't look too good to me. Maybe she became a nun after having his child, but then why so long unmarried?
So, maybe this annuitant was Alice the nun, maybe not (I doubt these Visitations are absolutely complete for earlier generations). But if she was Alice the nun then I don't think she was also Richard's mistress.
I'd personally want to concentrate on Richard's visits to Pontefract (for John - although he may simply have been raised at Pontefract), and his general itinerary during the months after he left Warwick's household (for Katherine). Unfortunately, I don't think either of these routes would take us to Catterick. I'm also not sure whether past mistresses would have been paid official annuities in this way. Regarding Edward IV, for instance, the official sources of annuities and payments have yielded nothing and Hicks says the Privy Purse expenses would have been the way it was done (which we don't have for either Edward or Richard's reigns). Nor do we have the equivalent of that for Richard as Duke.
Just a wildcard, but there is of course an outside chance that John and Katherine were twins.
Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richard's Illegitmate
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 22 April 2017, 14:28
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Yes, it includes everything from the actual House Books that survives. There is a lot lost.
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hi Hilary.
I've checked the date of Elen's death because it seems to be given differently in every website I look at: viz 1442, 1442 or 1443, 1446, 1462 . . .. The reason for this seems to be that the date has been variously read from the inscription on the tomb. This is a drawing of it:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8hQtAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=william+brough+died+1462&source=bl&ots=xuCQw5N4xH&sig=5OK_QMlIok85tLWxBa6E6luHDeI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjtsILJqLnTAhUGYlAKHfNSDWgQ6AEILzAD#v=onepage&q=william%20brough%20died%201462&f=false
The inscription isn't easy to follow but I've no doubt that what it says is here is 1443. You can see how the iij might have been read as vj.
So Alice would have been at the very, very least 10 years older than Richard, and given that William and Ellen had twice as many boys as girls, the likelihood is that she was not the youngest child.
For me, there are just too many problems with identifying the prioress as Richard's mistress:-
1) Age gap is not just about preference. Any girl that much older than Richard would probably have been already married or in a nunnery by the time he reached puberty.
2) Is it likely that a woman who had entered the convent after bearing a bastard child would have been chosen as prioress?
3) Obviously Richard could have known her (although the Metcalfe marital link came later so could not have played a part), as he could have known any member of any gentry family in that area, but that doesn't take us very far.
4) There is the question of when this liaison could have occurred. Whilst in Warwick's household Richard would have been carefully supervised, and so far as his hosts were concerned he was set aside for their younger daughter. Unmarried young ladies would also have been carefully supervised, which would have made a liaison doubly difficult. John's moniker suggests his mother may have belonged to Pontefract, and Katherine's marriage date suggests she may have been conceived during the year after Richard was given livery of his estates and left Warwick's household as an independent young man - which is a far more plausible scenario in itself.
4) Even the ?1485 Visitation sets down only the two sons who inherited for the generation above Alice's, and similarly only the heir in each of the generations prior to that, so it is not a complete family tree for those generations. Ergo there were very likely Alices in previous generations, or sons married to ladies named Alice who are not recorded in the visitations (after all, names didn't usually appear in families out of nowhere) - i.e. perhaps this was Prioress Alice's Auntie Alice?? Because, although the identification of Alice the nun as the gentlewoman who received the annuity is slightly less unlikely of itself than her having been Richard's mistress, it still strikes me as unlikely. Could a nun receive a private income like that? I know they often received bequests of prayer books, etc, in wills, but they were supposed to give up worldly goods so I wonder about a private income. Does anyone know of other examples? I still feel our Alice Burgh is more likely to have been a particularly valued old retainer and that the generosity of the annuity may reflect her importance to the family coupled with her lack of other income.
There is also an extant set of annual accounts for Middleham from the mid 1490s. I haven't seen it, but it would tell us whether this annuity was still being paid.
Marie
Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richar
Marie wrote:
Yes, Doug, the only other set of accounts of Richard's that I'm aware of from his time as Duke of Gloucester is a single page of the Middleham household expenses (as opposed to estate accounts) from the summer of 1483 which appear in Harley 433.
As you suggest, there are other documents that contain information about him - he makes a lot of appearances in the York House Books, and the odd appearance in the accounts of other towns and cities, and of course he features in a lot of government documents. I think people often don't appreciate the really patchy nature of the records from this period or the creative exploits required to piece together what even very prominent individuals were doing.
Doug here:
Good grief! I knew there wasn't a lot of direct source material about Richard the person, but I never realized just how little it amounted to! My appreciation for those who dig through those documents to piece together itineraries, bequests and then putting that information into something intelligible for the rest of us has gone up even higher!
Doug
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Richard's Illegit
Marie wrote:
Yes, okay, I had found her. Perhaps she could be the Alice Burgh of the grant, but I have real doubts that she would have been Richard's mistress.
1) Her age. Her mother died in 1442, and so even as the youngest of the three daughters she could have been born no later than that, and (particularly given that there were also six boys) possibly some years earlier. I take your point about Richard taking an older woman in order not to damage her marriage prospects, but the way to do that would be to choose a widow. A married woman's child would anyway be classed as her husband's. That brings us to point 2).
2) She is described as Prioress of Ellerton (in Swaledale). The prioresses of Ellerton at this period are not otherwise recorded, but she appears to have become prioress by the end of 1485 as there is an earlier visitation of the North, taken some time between 1485 and 1500, which also describes her as Prioress of Ellerton. I'd previo usly used this visitation for the FitzHughs, and come to the conclusion, from those alive and dead on it, that it the information was collected quite soon after Bosworth.
If the Alice Burgh in the grant is the same person, she clearly hadn't become prioress by March 1474 as she is simply described as "generose" (gentlewoman). I imagine that could have been an kay way to describe a nun - I'm not sure.
But anyway, we have the issue that the only Alice Burgh in the records was a nun who was round about a dozen years older than Richard. I'm afraid that doesn't look too good to me. Maybe she became a nun after having his child, but then why so long unmarried?
So, maybe this annuitant was Alice the nun, maybe not (I doubt these Visitations are absolutely complete for earlier generations). But if she was Alice the nun then I don't think she was also Richard's mistress.
I'd personally want to concentrate on Richa rd's visits to Pontefract (for John - although he may simply have been raised at Pontefract), and his general itinerary during the months after he left Warwick's household (for Katherine). Unfortunately, I don't think either of these routes would take us to Catterick. I'm also not sure whether past mistresses would have been paid official annuities in this way. Regarding Edward IV, for instance, the official sources of annuities and payments have yielded nothing and Hicks says the Privy Purse expenses would have been the way it was done (which we don't have for either Edward or Richard's reigns). Nor do we have the equivalent of that for Richard as Duke.
Just a wildcard, but there is of course an outside chance that John and Katherine were twins.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richar
Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richar
A J
On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 2:19 PM, mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]> wrote:
Should have added that we do have quite a number of deeds concerning Richard, charters and stuff, in fact a whole stash of them, in BL MS Cotton Julius BXII, but most don't tell us where he was at any given time.
Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Richar
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
As for opportunity, another of us mentioned the time Richard spent with the Harringtons. Now those girls were heiresses and almost certainly too young but Alice's grandmother was a Harrington. She would almost certainly not be alive by the late 1460s but I suppose there is a possibility that Alice could have been there or as you say there could be an Alice who was a daughter of Richard or James Burgh who are proving elusive at the moment. I did find a mention of a John Burgh Hospitaller in the 1460s. He was one of about half a dozen at Royston who were excommunicated by the Prior and appealed to the Pope. I'll send you the link.
Those Middleham accounts sound useful. BTW it would seem that as most now agree that EOM was born circa 1476 she could not have been his nurse in 1474 so I don't know where Weir gets that from.H
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 23 April 2017, 2:12
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hi Hilary.
I've checked the date of Elen's death because it seems to be given differently in every website I look at: viz 1442, 1442 or 1443, 1446, 1462 . . .. The reason for this seems to be that the date has been variously read from the inscription on the tomb. This is a drawing of it:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8hQtAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=william+brough+died+1462&source=bl&ots=xuCQw5N4xH&sig=5OK_QMlIok85tLWxBa6E6luHDeI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjtsILJqLnTAhUGYlAKHfNSDWgQ6AEILzAD#v=onepage&q=william%20brough%20died%201462&f=false
The inscription isn't easy to follow but I've no doubt that what it says is here is 1443. You can see how the iij might have been read as vj.
So Alice would have been at the very, very least 10 years older than Richard, and given that William and Ellen had twice as many boys as girls, the likelihood is that she was not the youngest child.For me, there are just too many problems with identifying the prioress as Richard's mistress:- 1) Age gap is not just about preference. Any girl that much older than Richard would probably have been already married or in a nunnery by the time he reached puberty.2) Is it likely that a woman who had entered the convent after bearing a bastard child would have been chosen as prioress?3) Obviously Richard could have known her (although the Metcalfe marital link came later so could not have played a part), as he could have known any member of any gentry family in that area, but that doesn't take us very far. 4) There is the question of when this liaison could have occurred. Whilst in Warwick's household Richard would have been carefully supervised, and so far as his hosts were concerned he was set aside for their younger daughter. Unmarried young ladies would also have been carefully supervised, which would have made a liaison doubly difficult. John's moniker suggests his mother may have belonged to Pontefract, and Katherine's marriage date suggests she may have been conceived during the year after Richard was given livery of his estates and left Warwick's household as an independent young man - which is a far more plausible scenario in itself.4) Even the ?1485 Visitation sets down only the two sons who inherited for the generation above Alice's, and similarly only the heir in each of the generations prior to that, so it is not a complete family tree for those generations. Ergo there were very likely Alices in previous generations, or sons married to ladies named Alice who are not recorded in the visitations (after all, names didn't usually appear in families out of nowhere) - i.e. perhaps this was Prioress Alice's Auntie Alice?? Because, although the identification of Alice the nun as the gentlewoman who received the annuity is slightly less unlikely of itself than her having been Richard's mistress, it still strikes me as unlikely. Could a nun receive a private income like that? I know they often received bequests of prayer books, etc, in wills, but they were supposed to give up worldly goods so I wonder about a private income. Does anyone know of other examples? I still feel our Alice Burgh is more likely to have been a particularly valued old retainer and that the generosity of the annuity may reflect her importance to the family coupled with her lack of other income.There is also an extant set of annual accounts for Middleham from the mid 1490s. I haven't seen it, but it would tell us whether this annuity was still being paid.
Marie
Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Richard's Illegit
From: "'Doug Stamate' destama@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 23 April 2017, 16:25
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Marie, I've left your post below whole, but I do have a thought about your sentence: But anyway, we have the issue that the only Alice Burgh in the records was a nun who was round about a dozen years older than Richard. I'm afraid that doesn't look too good to me. Maybe she became a nun after having his child, but then why so long unmarried? Could Alice Burgh have retired to the convent, first as a lay member and then later taken orders (if that's the correct term for a nun?)? Would that help explain things? Also, am I correct in presuming that the Alice Burgh we know of was married and Burgh was her husband's surname? But did widows ever use their maiden names? For example, what would the status of a woman be who'd had her marriage annulled? She'd certainly no longer be considered a maiden, would she? Would a woman in such circumstances retain her maiden name, but be generally considered, and treated as, a widow ? Or am I just being ridiculous? Doug Marie wrote: Yes, okay, I had found her. Perhaps she could be the Alice Burgh of the grant, but I have real doubts that she would have been Richard's mistress. 1) Her age. Her mother died in 1442, and so even as the youngest of the three daughters she could have been born no later than that, and (particularly given that there were also six boys) possibly some years earlier. I take your point about Richard taking an older woman in order not to damage her marriage prospects, but the way to do that would be to choose a widow. A married woman's child would anyway be classed as her husband's. That brings us to point 2). 2) She is described as Prioress of Ellerton (in Swaledale). The prioresses of Ellerton at this period are not otherwise recorded, but she appears to have become prioress by the end of 1485 as there is an earlier visitation of the North, taken some time between 1485 and 1500, which also describes her as Prioress of Ellerton. I'd previo usly used this visitation for the FitzHughs, and come to the conclusion, from those alive and dead on it, that it the information was collected quite soon after Bosworth. If the Alice Burgh in the grant is the same person, she clearly hadn't become prioress by March 1474 as she is simply described as "generose" (gentlewoman). I imagine that could have been an kay way to describe a nun - I'm not sure. But anyway, we have the issue that the only Alice Burgh in the records was a nun who was round about a dozen years older than Richard. I'm afraid that doesn't look too good to me. Maybe she became a nun after having his child, but then why so long unmarried? So, maybe this annuitant was Alice the nun, maybe not (I doubt these Visitations are absolutely complete for earlier generations). But if she was Alice the nun then I don't think she was also Richard's mistress. I'd personally want to concentrate on Richa rd's visits to Pontefract (for John - although he may simply have been raised at Pontefract), and his general itinerary during the months after he left Warwick's household (for Katherine). Unfortunately, I don't think either of these routes would take us to Catterick. I'm also not sure whether past mistresses would have been paid official annuities in this way. Regarding Edward IV, for instance, the official sources of annuities and payments have yielded nothing and Hicks says the Privy Purse expenses would have been the way it was done (which we don't have for either Edward or Richard's reigns). Nor do we have the equivalent of that for Richard as Duke. Just a wildcard, but there is of course an outside chance that John and Katherine were twins.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Ri
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Ri
Wouldn't that be lovely??????
From: [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 10:35 AM
To:
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hilary wrote:
You have raised another point Doug which is we don't know the first names of the wives of Richard and James Burgh - still digging. So one of them could be Alice (or Isabel) Burgh.
Doug here:
Now see, if this were an Agatha Christie mystery, Poirot would simply have Miss Lemon toddle off to Somerset House...
Doug
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hi Hilary,
I've tried the link and it came up one page before the image. It is plate 32 you're looking for, and there's no confusion over identities.
As you say, the Harrington girls were too young - also long gone from Hornby when Richard visited in March 1470. March 1470 also too late for Katherine's conception unless Richard allowed her to consummate rather young. Anyway, didn't Alice Burgh's maternal grandmother belong to a different Harrington branch?
Yeah, I know about Edward of Middleham's birth year - and the mistress of his nursery was Anne Idley. Who knows where Alison Weir's "facts" come from? Tea leaves, maybe.
Marie
Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Ri
From: "'Doug Stamate' destama@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Monday, 24 April 2017, 16:35
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hilary wrote: You have raised another point Doug which is we don't know the first names of the wives of Richard and James Burgh - still digging. So one of them could be Alice (or Isabel) Burgh. Doug here: Now see, if this were an Agatha Christie mystery, Poirot would simply have Miss Lemon toddle off to Somerset House... Doug
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Monday, 24 April 2017, 19:39
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Hi Hilary,
I've tried the link and it came up one page before the image. It is plate 32 you're looking for, and there's no confusion over identities.
As you say, the Harrington girls were too young - also long gone from Hornby when Richard visited in March 1470. March 1470 also too late for Katherine's conception unless Richard allowed her to consummate rather young. Anyway, didn't Alice Burgh's maternal grandmother belong to a different Harrington branch?Yeah, I know about Edward of Middleham's birth year - and the mistress of his nursery was Anne Idley. Who knows where Alison Weir's "facts" come from? Tea leaves, maybe.
Marie
Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Richard III Societ
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
I'd somehow got it into my head that she was in the wardship of the Herberts at Ludlow, with a view to her eventual marriage into that family. But of course I can't find anything to justify this (quite likely totally imaginary) belief, other than that would have been the standard practice for someone of her station.
Tamara (who keep swatting at the tiny green dragons that only she can see flitting about the hob)
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
Nothing is known about the early life of Katherine or John of Gloucester. We only know of their existence from references to them in the records from 1483-1486. The first mention of Katherine concerns arrangements for her marriage to Herbert in 1484, then land grants connected with it, the last in the Spring of 1485. It is unlikely that she grew up in the care of the Herberts, as the idea of the marriage seems to have been put together quickly after Buckingham's rebellion to secure the loyalty of William Herbert (who may have had a natural leaning towards HT from their childhood together). If it hadn't been for that we may never have heard of her at all. It seems that she must have died at Herbert's house in London as she is buried in same parish (St. James' Garlickhythe), but the date isn't known, just some time before EofY's coronation in 1487, because Herbert was described as a widower on the guest list. He isn't buried at St. James, but at Tintern Abbey with his first wife Mary Woodville. Nor does it seem that he could have been bothered to arrange a permanent memorial for Katherine even though he had several years to do so, which raises the question that he may never have taken the marriage seriously at all and distanced himself from Katherine as soon as HT took over. Not very nice of him and somehow this just makes her short life seem even more tragic.
Nico
Re: Richard's Illegitmate Children - And their Mothers
