Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Inheritance questions

>
> I've overlooked the end of the original FitAlan line in 3 heiresses
> in the 14th century. The castle of Arundel, together with the
> Earldom, was devised on a cousin who I had assumed had inherited
the
> entire estate.
> So who inherited the other principles estates, and who held them in
> 1453?
> These would be:
> Oswestry
> Sharwarden
> Clun
> Brimsfield
> Holt (Bromfield and Yale)
> Reigate
> Lewes
> Acre
>

I can't vouch for all these estates, but Holt Castle was certainly owned by the Mowbray Duke of Norfolk in the early 1460s and a check might reveal he had some of the rest of them.

As I understand it, after the last direct line Arundel died - 1415 or thereabouts IIRC - his cousin only got the title and the male-heir properties, the remainder passing to the heirs of the previous earl's sisters.

Of these, one married Lord Charlton of Powys and had no children - he was heired by his brother. Another married Lord William Beauchamp of Abergavenny, and was parent of that confusing fellow Richard Beauchamp, earl of Worcester, the first of Isabelle Despenser's Richard Beauchamps. The third (and eldest) married (among others) that Thomas Mowbray Duke of Norfolk who was banished in 1397.

I suspect therefore the lands were partitioned between the Mowbray and Beauchamp of Abergavenny families, but I have a feeling the first Duchess of Norfolk may have had a child or two by her last hubby, a chap whose name escapes me, but who came to a bad end at Shrewsbury, 1403.

Regards
Brian Wainwright











SPONSORED LINKS
United kingdom calling card United kingdom flower delivery Call united kingdom
United kingdom florist United kingdom phone card United kingdom hotel




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


a.. Visit your group "" on the web.

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

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


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mmmm, the only reference I can find to Holt is it turning up in the
possession of Lord Stanley. I've seen some Stanley arms which bear a
Warenne quarter, so perhaps this was derived through the Goushill
line? Don't know where the Mowbrays fit into it however!
You mention the Male heir properties - would this include Arundel
which was aquired through an Albini heiress, or just Oswestry?
The post 1415 FitzAlans must have been exceptionally poor for Earls,
although they did obtain the Maltravers barony by marriage.

--- In , "Brian Wainwright"
<Brian@g...> wrote:
>
> >
> > I've overlooked the end of the original FitAlan line in 3
heiresses
> > in the 14th century. The castle of Arundel, together with the
> > Earldom, was devised on a cousin who I had assumed had inherited
> the
> > entire estate.
> > So who inherited the other principles estates, and who held them
in
> > 1453?
> > These would be:
> > Oswestry
> > Sharwarden
> > Clun
> > Brimsfield
> > Holt (Bromfield and Yale)
> > Reigate
> > Lewes
> > Acre
> >
>
> I can't vouch for all these estates, but Holt Castle was certainly
owned by the Mowbray Duke of Norfolk in the early 1460s and a check
might reveal he had some of the rest of them.
>
> As I understand it, after the last direct line Arundel died - 1415
or thereabouts IIRC - his cousin only got the title and the male-heir
properties, the remainder passing to the heirs of the previous earl's
sisters.
>
> Of these, one married Lord Charlton of Powys and had no children -
he was heired by his brother. Another married Lord William Beauchamp
of Abergavenny, and was parent of that confusing fellow Richard
Beauchamp, earl of Worcester, the first of Isabelle Despenser's
Richard Beauchamps. The third (and eldest) married (among others)
that Thomas Mowbray Duke of Norfolk who was banished in 1397.
>
> I suspect therefore the lands were partitioned between the Mowbray
and Beauchamp of Abergavenny families, but I have a feeling the first
Duchess of Norfolk may have had a child or two by her last hubby, a
chap whose name escapes me, but who came to a bad end at Shrewsbury,
1403.
>
> Regards
> Brian Wainwright
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> United kingdom calling card United kingdom flower delivery
Call united kingdom
> United kingdom florist United kingdom phone card United
kingdom hotel
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> a.. Visit your group "" on the web.
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service.
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
>
>
>
>
>

Re Sir William Stanley

I've found the source I was looking for. _Sir William Stanley of Holt_ by Jean Gidman states (p21) "On 10 December 1484 the grant of lands to Sir William Stanley was confirmed. These included 'the castle town and lordship of Denasbrayn*,the castle, town and lordship of Holt, the lordships manors and lands called Hewlyngton, Bromfeld*, Yale, Wrexham...Ridley...' as well as various 'offices , reversions, services and hereditaments late of John, late Duke of Norfolk and George Neville' "

(* This will be Dinas Bran near Llangollen)
(*Bromfeld will be Bromfield)

My other source is thus confirmed and it appears WS did rather well than is generally appreciated under Richard III. It also looks as if the Mowbray inheritance was not simply divided between Jocky Howard and Lord Berkeley, as is generally assumed, but had other bits filched from it and passed around as royal patronage.

Brian

Mmmm, the only reference I can find to Holt is it turning up in the
possession of Lord Stanley. I've seen some Stanley arms which bear a
Warenne quarter, so perhaps this was derived through the Goushill
line? Don't know where the Mowbrays fit into it however!
You mention the Male heir properties - would this include Arundel
which was aquired through an Albini heiress, or just Oswestry?
The post 1415 FitzAlans must have been exceptionally poor for Earls,
although they did obtain the Maltravers barony by marriage.

Holt, and a great deal more in that area, was part of the original Fitzalan estates, and passed to the Mowbray dukes of Norfolk, whose line ended, of course, in 1477. After that the Mowbray estates were effectively in the hands of the crown. According to a note in my possession, for which unfortunately I do not have a source as it was given me by a third party, Holt, together with various associated lands in the area, was given to Sir William Stanley by Richard III on 10 December 1484. I would guess this will show up in the Patent Rolls, if you have access to them. While I have no reason to think that the original author of the note was not working in good faith, it would bear checking.

I had forgotten (if I ever knew) that William Stanley was son of Joan Goushill, and thus grandson of Elizabeth Fitzalan, Duchess of Norfolk, and thus he certainly had a reasonable claim to a partition of the Fitzalan estates. I think the outstanding question is when he actually got them in his hands.

I have another source that may help, I shall try to dig it out.

Brian