The Plantagenets (1154-1399)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
An interesting article on Mary of Woodstock, Royal Nun

Mary was the daughter of Edward I and Eleanor of Castile and was born in 1279 she became a nun at Amesbury Priory on the Feast of the Assumption in 1291.
Mary died sometime after July 1332 and was buried at Amesbury Priory,sadly the priory was dissolved in 1539 and destroyed, her burial was not preserved.

https://historytheinterestingbits.com/2020/11/28/mary-of-woodstock-royal-nun/
 
Philippa of Clarence (1355-1382) was the daughter of Lionel, Duke of Clarence and Elizabeth de Burgh.
She married Edmund Mortimer, 3rd Earl of March in the Queen's Chapel at Reading Abbey in Reading, Berkshire, England in 1368.
 
Philippa of Clarence (1355-1382) was the daughter of Lionel, Duke of Clarence and Elizabeth de Burgh.
She married Edmund Mortimer, 3rd Earl of March in the Queen's Chapel at Reading Abbey in Reading, Berkshire, England in 1368.
And it was through Philippa that the House of York claimed the throne.


Philippa of Clarence > Roger Mortimer > Anne Mortimer > Richard 3rd Duke of York > Edward IV and Richard III
 
Last edited:
Although Henry II was the son of Geoffrey Plantagenet, Kings Henry II, Richard I and John are called "Angevins" (from the House of Anjou) rather than Plantagenets. Why?
 
This may be off topic.
I'm trying to trace the ancestry of Philip DeSpencer (through his daughter, Margery - from Nettlestead, Suffolk - who died in 1478) to the Plantagenet king, Edward I (through Edward's daughter, Joan of Acre).
Margery married Sir Roger Wentworth, and they had a daughter, Agnes Wentworth.

I'm descended from Joan of Acre through her marriage to Gilbert de Clare.

What is the entire line?
 
Although Henry II was the son of Geoffrey Plantagenet, Kings Henry II, Richard I and John are called "Angevins" (from the House of Anjou) rather than Plantagenets. Why?

Plantagenet is the umbrella term and IIRC can be used somewhat interchangeably with Angevin depending on the source.

The reason some historians call Henry II, Richard I and John "Angevins" and the others Plantagenets is because John (of Magna Carta infamy) lost Anjou and therefore technically ceased to be "Angevin" Dukes of Anjou and the Kings that came after him are referred to as "Plantagenet" for that reason.
 
This may be off topic.
I'm trying to trace the ancestry of Philip DeSpencer (through his daughter, Margery - from Nettlestead, Suffolk - who died in 1478) to the Plantagenet king, Edward I (through Edward's daughter, Joan of Acre).
Margery married Sir Roger Wentworth, and they had a daughter, Agnes Wentworth.

I'm descended from Joan of Acre through her marriage to Gilbert de Clare.

What is the entire line?


Joan of Acre's daughter Eleanor de Clare married Hugh Despenser. Margery Despenser's father Philip was the grandson of Hugh's younger brother, another Philip.

Unfortunately, this means Margery was not a descendant of Joan of Acre or Edward I.

But Margery was a descendant of King Henry I of England and King William the Lion of Scotland.

You can view an 8-generation list of her ancestors here:
https://genealogics.org/ahnentafel.php?personID=I00076299&tree=LEO&parentset=0&generations=8

Click on a name to learn more about that person and trace their ancestors further back.
 
In 1428 why did Parliament pass an act to forbid Catherine of Valois to marry without the consent of the king and his council?
 
In 1428 why did Parliament pass an act to forbid Catherine of Valois to marry without the consent of the king and his council?
It was feared that Edmund Beaufort, the grandson of John of Gaunt, would become to powerful and even try to seize the crown himself if he married the Queen Dowager.
 
It was feared that Edmund Beaufort, the grandson of John of Gaunt, would become to powerful and even try to seize the crown himself if he married the Queen Dowager.

Wasn't there rumours of an affair between the queen and duke?
 
Yes. But anyone who married Catherine de Valois would, as the stepfather of the child king, then have been in a very powerful position. I think they were hoping she'd quietly disappear into a convent!
 
Yes. But anyone who married Catherine de Valois would, as the stepfather of the child king, then have been in a very powerful position. I think they were hoping she'd quietly disappear into a convent!

Sadly the dowager queen dis enter Bermondsey Abbey but was ill and died 3 days after entering it the abbey in 1437.

In the 1490's Elizabeth Woodville would also enter the abbey.
 
Yes. But anyone who married Catherine de Valois would, as the stepfather of the child king, then have been in a very powerful position. I think they were hoping she'd quietly disappear into a convent!
I never heard of rumours of an affair....
 
I never heard of rumours of an affair....

There were certainly rumours of an affair, which is one alleged reason why parliament decided the Queen needed permission to remarry, which would only be granted by her son after his majority IIRC, which would be a decade in the future (and she in the end would be dead anyway).

There are even some rumours that Edmund Tudor was actually the son of Edmund Beaufort, although that seems to have been promulgated by a few modern anti Tudor revisionists.
 
There were also rumours that Catherine's grandson Edward, son of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou, was the son of the second Edmund Beaufort, the nephew of the Edmund Beaufort who was supposed to have had an affair with Catherine ... if anyone's managed to follow that rather convoluted sentence! Some people have very over-active imaginations. Either that or everyone called Edmund Beaufort has a very busy love life!
 
There were also rumours that Catherine's grandson Edward, son of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou, was the son of the second Edmund Beaufort, the nephew of the Edmund Beaufort who was supposed to have had an affair with Catherine ... if anyone's managed to follow that rather convoluted sentence! Some people have very over-active imaginations. Either that or everyone called Edmund Beaufort has a very busy love life!

Edmund married Lady Eleanor Beauchamp in the early 1430's secretly and it wasn't pardoned until March 1438.
They had 10 children!!!
 
There were also rumours that Catherine's grandson Edward, son of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou, was the son of the second Edmund Beaufort, the nephew of the Edmund Beaufort who was supposed to have had an affair with Catherine ... if anyone's managed to follow that rather convoluted sentence! Some people have very over-active imaginations. Either that or everyone called Edmund Beaufort has a very busy love life!

Both?

Royal sex scandals: entertaining gossips for 600 (and more) years.

And there's the fact that before DNA testing alleging bastardy was the quickest way of attempting to invalidate someone's claim to the throne.
 
Both?

Royal sex scandals: entertaining gossips for 600 (and more) years.

And there's the fact that before DNA testing alleging bastardy was the quickest way of attempting to invalidate someone's claim to the throne.

I've never heard of rumours of an affair between Catherine De Valois and anyone but the man she secretly married, Owain Tudor... but yes accusations of affairs and children being illegitimate were often thrown up.
 
Both?

Royal sex scandals: entertaining gossips for 600 (and more) years.

And there's the fact that before DNA testing alleging bastardy was the quickest way of attempting to invalidate someone's claim to the throne.
When they were doing DNA analysis on Richard III they compared his Y-Chromosome to that of two current members of the Beaufort family (distant cousins of each other from 19th century brothers.) Theoretically they should all have matched as male-line descendants of Edward III.

However, they found THREE different Y-Chromosomes. Just which one, if any, was Edward III's is unknown at this time. (There were allegations that RIII's paternal grandfather may not have been the son of his legal father. This would not have negated the Yorks' claim to the throne, as that came via a female line: Edward III >Lionel D. of Clarence > Philippa>Roger Moritmer> Anne>Richard D. of York >RIII & Edward IV))



Just because the claim of bastardy was "quickest" doesn't necessarily mean it was wrong!
 
Last edited:
In 1547 Margaret of Anjou, Queen of England, spouse of King Henry VI of England, "introduced conscription, a measure hitherto employed only by the kings of France".
The War of the Roses by Alison Weir​

How could Margaret as a Queen introduce conscription? She was not a Queen Regnant.
 
In 1547 Margaret of Anjou, Queen of England, spouse of King Henry VI of England, "introduced conscription, a measure hitherto employed only by the kings of France".
The War of the Roses by Alison Weir​

How could Margaret as a Queen introduce conscription? She was not a Queen Regnant.

Helps to explain just what a "conscription" is to us that are not informed of the term. Basically it's like executing a draft to serve in the military here in the US. It hasn't been done here since the Viet Nam war.

I don't see it happening in the UK here or the US even by *anybody* .;)
 
In 1547 Margaret of Anjou, Queen of England, spouse of King Henry VI of England, "introduced conscription, a measure hitherto employed only by the kings of France".
The War of the Roses by Alison Weir​

How could Margaret as a Queen introduce conscription? She was not a Queen Regnant.

Margaret of Anjou was long dead by 1547 I assume you meant 1447?
 
The Daily Telegraph, The Times and The Daily Mail are all publishing articles about the Missing Princes Project which is headed by Phillipa Langley of the Richard III Society. The Missing Princes Project is viewing their disappearance using police methodology employed for missing persons.


The MPP is suggesting that Edward V was permitted to live out his life in secrecy on an estate in Devon after his mother and uncle Richard came to an agreement. The estate was at that time owned by Edward's older half-brother, Thomas Grey. In one of the local churches, St Matthews there are artifacts suggesting a connection to the Plantagenet/Yorks and Edward V. Click on the link to view the photographs.



https://sparkypus.com/2020/12/26/a-...a-resting-place-st-matthews-church-coldridge/
 
Last edited:
Hum... why if that were the case, didn't Richard produce Edward when accusaitions of his having killed the children came out? And this is from the Richard III society
 
The Daily Telegraph, The Times and The Daily Mail are all publishing articles about the Missing Princes Project which is headed by Phillipa Langley of the Richard III Society. The Missing Princes Project is viewing their disappearance using police methodology employed for missing persons.


The MPP is suggesting that Edward V was permitted to live out his life in secrecy on an estate in Devon after his mother and uncle Richard came to an agreement. The estate was at that time owned by Edward's older half-brother, Thomas Grey. In one of the local churches, St Matthews there are artifacts suggesting a connection to the Plantagenet/Yorks and Edward V. Click on the link to view the photographs.



https://sparkypus.com/2020/12/26/a-...a-resting-place-st-matthews-church-coldridge/

I was reading those articles the other day ,what they did say became of Prince Richard?
 
Helps to explain just what a "conscription" is to us that are not informed of the term. Basically it's like executing a draft to serve in the military here in the US. It hasn't been done here since the Viet Nam war.

I don't see it happening in the UK here or the US even by *anybody* .;)

there has been conscription in most European countries, in fact the UK was one of the few coutnries that did not maintain a large standing army.. and have a draft for its young men. However, it happened in england during the 2 World wars because they needed the men to serve in the army.
 
Last edited:
I was reading those articles the other day ,what they did say became of Prince Richard?




An Ard Ri-I could not find any theories as to what happened to the young Duke of York.
 
One of Philippa Gregory's books involves Richard being smuggled to the Netherlands. I assume she was going to say that Perkin Warbeck really was Richard, but she seems to have thought better of writing anything so bonkers, and switched to writing about the Civil War instead!

I just can't believe that Richard III would have let either or both of their princes live quietly in the countryside somewhere. It would have been way too much of a risk. It wouldn't have taken very much for someone to find out where they were and start a rebellion on their behalf. Even if they didn't, surely the prince/princes would have rebelled themselves as soon as they were in their late teens.
 
Back
Top Bottom