Joanna Arman's Blog, page 4

‘The Only True Lancastrians’: or a Tale of Two Ladies named Blanche

There is a claim that is frequently put forward on social media, and even now on Television with the renewed interest in all thing relating to the Wars of the Roses. This is that Henry Tudor was not a ‘true Lancastrian’ or indeed a ‘true Plantagenet’. Some even take it as far as to suggest he was the illegitimate descendant of a servant with no claim the throne. Many who make such claims are – partisan to say the least. When one examines the historical and genealogical evidence on its own terms an interesting and rather different picture emerges. 

The term ‘Lancastrian’ applies not only to a political faction in the Wars of the Roses, but also the members of a particular royal bloodline descendants of one particular individual. Not John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, but his wife, Blanche.  Apparently, the only ‘true Lancastrians’ are  those descended in this approved bloodline. What qualifies some people  to determine the ancestral ‘right’ of distant Plantagenets is left unsaid.

Why the emphasis on the Great Lady? Allegedly because  after 1471 there was only one specific line of ‘true Lancastrians’ left, which was conveniently represented in Juana, a Portuguese Princess distantly descended from Blanche who was ‘going to marry’ Richard III.  Even though they weren’t formally betrothed, and the plans for marriage don’t seem to have got beyond the negotiation stage, some speak about Juana as if she and Richard were already husband and wife.

This selective cherry-picking of ancestry is problematic for two reasons. The first being that it is just plain wrong. Juana was not the last descendant of Duchess Blanche  left alive after 1471. The sons of King Henry IV,  and his grandson Henry VI were all gone, but Blanche had two daughters, and descendants of her youngest,  Elizabeth,  were very much alive after that date. The most prominent of them were the Holland Dukes of Exeter, of which the male line died out with Henry Holland the 2nd Duke in 1475. However, the descendants of Elizabeth’s daughter and grand-daughter lived well into the sixteenth century and beyond. They included  the Grey Earls of Kent, and a junior branch of the famous Neville family who sprang from her daughter’s marriage to John, 1st Lord Neville. So there were actually a lot of Lancastrian descendants around in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth century.

More troublesome, however, is the insistence that only descendants of Duchess Blanche ‘count’. Why? The estates and title of the Dukes of Lancaster did not originate with her. They actually came from her great-grandfather  Edmund ‘Crouchback’ first Earl of Lancaster, younger brother of Edward I. Earl Edmund was married to another Blanche, Blanche of Artois, the first Blanche of Lancaster. Their descendants were many and, as we shall see, attained high rank and prominence.

[image error]

Their grandson, Henry de Grosmont, was raised to the title of 1st Duke of Lancaster. When he died,  because he had only daughters who could not become Duchesses in their own right unless they married, the title was then settled on his son in law, John of Gaunt. The descendants of this union are well-known, but Henry himself came from a large family with six sisters. One was Eleanor, born in 1318, and married to Richard (III) Fitzalan, Earl of Arundel. She had seven children with him, including two daughters called Joan and Alice. Joan, the elder, married Humphrey de Bohun 7th Earl of Hereford, and their daughter was none other than Mary be Bohun, the mother of King Henry V and his brothers. The redoubtable Lady Joan outlived her daughter by many years surviving until 1419, the sixth year of the reign of her grandson.

Joan’s younger sister Alice FitzAlan also made a good marriage, to Thomas Holland the half-brother of King Richard II. One of her daughters, Margaret Holland married John Beaufort. Yes Beaufort, as in the son of John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford. John and Margaret’s grand-daughter was one other than Margaret Beaufort the mother of Henry Tudor. So Henry Tudor was in fact a descendant of the original Earls of Lancaster (the title they hed before Henry de Grosmont was promoted to Duke) , just not in senior male line. Yet this ancestry still made him a descendant of Henry III. His aforementioned great-grandmother Margaret Holland was also a descendant of Joan of Kent, the daughter of Edward I’s younger son, Thomas of Woodstock. So it turns out that Tudor was so much more than ‘just a Beaufort’ or ‘the son of a servant’. He was actually descended from no fewer then three Plantagenet Kings, and was the Second Cousin, twice removed of Henry V.

Is a pity this branch of his family line is not well-known or publicized. Some of course will still assert that it ‘does not count’. Yet it does reveal how a little digging can sink the assumptions of popular wisdom favoured by certain interest groups.

All genealogical information from http://www.thepeerage.com which uses various respected and recognized genealogical sources, including Burke’s Peerage and the Royal Genealogies Website.

The Southampton Plot: Revelations, DNA and Implications

[image error]A plot to overthrow Henry V was betrayed on July 31st, 1415, just as the invasion of France was about to begin

The leader of the plot, Richard, Earl of Cambridge, and his co-conspirators, were tried condemned and beheaded before Southampton’s Bargate on August 2nd and August 5th. Richard’s head and body were buried in the Chapel of St Julien on Winkle Street (Southampton) and were last seen in 1861.

Henry V was able to set sail for France on August 11th and the expedition culminated in the glorious victory at Agincourt on October 25th. Through odd twists of fortune two of Richard’s grandchildren became kings of England, as Edward IV and Richard III. In this book Bryan Dunleavy describes the background to the plot, the assorted plotters and the convergence of people and events on Southampton in July and August 1415.

And there is a twist to the tale. Recent DNA evidence, coupled with historical information, suggests that Richard, Earl of Cambridge may not have been a Plantagenet after all!

A few months ago I read the the book with the cover shown here. , an independently published study of The Southampton Plot of 1415 by local author Bryan Dunleavy. Entitled as it really only could be 1415:The Plot, The Events in Southampton on the Eve of Agincourt Mr Dunleavy’s book is a comprehensive new study on the figures, events, issues and historical context that bought three noblemen together in the region around Southampton in a plot against the King.

The nature of the evidence being as it is, there is not a lot that is new. Most of the material can also be found in what is still the seminal academic study Henry V and the Southampton Plot of 1415 by T.B.Pugh. Sadly, that book is now out of print, and copies are few and far between. The author does have one she procured several years ago, and she’s keeping it.

Published, of course, for the Agincourt commemorations last year The Plot does cut through some of the silliness that has been bandied about by dramatists, playwrights, and even some historians. No, Richard of Conisbrough, Earl of Cambridge the ringleader of the plot  was not homosexual as a recent play dedicated to the plot strongly implied. In fact, he had a son, and was the grandfather of Richard III.

That said, I did not agree with everything the author stated, but one does not have to in every book one reads. In one passage, surprise was expressed that Henry Tudor did not go after the heirs of John Holland Duke of Exeter- well the reasons for that are pretty simple. Holland was eventually married to Henry IV’s sister, Elizabeth, and so his heirs were scions of the House of Lancaster. Contrary to popular opinion, the wicked Tudors did not have it in for anyone with a drop of Plantagenet blood (as my previous post shows, they had a fair amount of it themselves). 

Nor was the charge that the plotters were trying to kill King Henry V ‘trumped up’. I do wish writers would stop quoting the historian who first made that charge verbatim. It makes logical sense to assume that to put Edmund Mortimer on the throne, and secure his position, Henry and his brothers would have had to die. The plotters probably knew this, Henry certainly realized it, and like is not, this part of the plan simply was not confessed because the plotters wanted to get away with a lesser punishment. Aside from a few other problems with typos and repetition of certain content, the book is useful and helpful, with chapters on the buildings relevant to the narrative, family trees, and ancestry as well as the social and economic connections between Medieval noble families. It is a useful guide-book for anyone interested in the subject, and early 15th century English history in general.

[image error]Richard of Conisburgh 3rd Earl of Cambridge: Son of York or Son of Holland?

The most interesting aspect, however, was to be found in the conclusion and appendix regarding the so-called Richard III DNA gap. It has been suggested by historians in the last century that Richard Earl of Cambridge, the paternal grandfather of Edward IV and Richard III was not the biological son of Edmund of Langley, 1st Duke of York the fourth and longest surviving son of Edward III (d.1402 ). This is based on a rumour, and various pieces of circumstantial evidence from the late 14th century which suggest his mother had a number of affairs, the most prominent with John Holland, Duke of Exeter and Earl of Huntingdon (d. January 1400) the son of King Richard II’s mother by her first marriage. If true, Holland remains the most likely candidate for Richard of Conisbrough’s biological father.

Hitherto, this intriguing theory had to remain in the realm of speculation (no matter how likely). Until the discovery of the remains of Richard III, when the DNA was tested to identify them, and a scientific publication mentioned a “false paternity break” had been discovered “between Richard III and Edward III. In other words, Richard III did not share the Y chromosome of his supposed ancestor Edward III”. Ricardians and others have asserted that the gap was probably in the male line of the Beauforts, because the DNA was identified was taken from distant relatives of Richard in the Beaufort line. Yet others have remembered the rumours about the paternity of Richard of Conisbrough, and have rightly asserted that this could account for the gap.

The latter theory is not well-known, and the fact that it has not been mentioned, let alone considered, in certain circles and in the media is somewhat revealing. Why ignore a proposal, known for decades and supported by some contemporary evidence, and look for some illegitimate offspring in tangled lines of the Beaufort family? Besides of which, we already know that Charles Somerset (b.c1460) the last direct male descendant of Edmund Beaufort Duke of Somerset (d.1455) was born to his son Henry by a mistress, Joan Hill. He was acknowledged as illegitimate anyway, and he never claimed the throne. I believe that the reluctance to consider theory about Richard of Conisbrough might be because of the implications. If his dubious paternity did account for the gap, it could potentially overturn much of what we know about the ancestry of the Yorkist Kings and their claims to royal pedigree. 

1: It would mean they were not descended from Edward III in the male line at all. Only in the female line, through their mother Cecily Neville, and two Grandmothers, Joan Beaufort and Anne Mortimer. Considering the parentage of the former two, it would also mean that the Yorkist Kings were more closely related to John of Gaunt than any of the other sons of Edward III. That they were, in essence, more Lancastrians than anything else, and had no blood link to Edward’s fourth son, Edmund of Langley 1st Duke, through whom they derived their ancestral title to the Dukedom.

2: Considering how the Tudor claim to the throne is so often discounted for being the female line, and marred by the illegitimate birth of his distant ancestor, John Beaufort, (and the possible birth of Edmund Tudor before his parents’ marriage), it would mean the Yorkist Kings also had illegitimate ancestors on both sides. Of course, the supposed illegitimacy of Tudor’s Beaufort ancestors is something of a misnomer, considering that they were in fact declared legitimate after the marriage of John of Gaunt and his long-term mistress Katherine Swynford.

Yet if the above were true, it would mean that the only legitimately born royal ancestor of the Yorkists would have been Anne Mortimer, the great-great-grandaughter of Edward III. Of course, it was through her that they claimed the throne, but a claim through two female ancestors (Anne and her grandmother, Philippa the daughter King Edward’s second son) does not seem so strong when the claims of others are discounted on the same basis.

3: As is mentioned by the author, it would mean that the last King descended from Edward III and his illustrious male forbears in direct and legitimate male line was in fact Henry VI- not Richard III. Richard’s grandfather, if the rumours are true, would have been little more than an illegitimate descendant of Joan of Kent, the daughter of Edward I’s younger son, Thomas of Woodstock- and as stated, above, not a descendant of the first man in England to carry the title of the Duke of York.

Considering the potentially radical implications, that could shake up everything we know about the ancestry of the Plantagenet Kings after 1461, it’s not surprising that some would wish to ignore it. Some today like to level accusations of illegitimacy at various members of the Lancastrian royal family and their relatives in the hope of discrediting the Tudors, but these can just as easily apply to the other side. They should not be ignored. 

Of course, the only way to be certain would be to test the remains of Richard of Conisbrough, which as far as we know, are still interred beneath St Julien’s Chapel in Southampton, where he was originally buried shortly  after his execution in 1415. Somehow, I doubt Philippa Langley and Co. will be adding that to their project list anytime soon.

Further Reading and References

Bryan Dunleavy, 1415: The Plot: The Events in Southampton on the Eve of Agincourt, Magic Flute Publications (Southampton), 2015.  This book is available on Amazon, but can also be purchased directly from the author via the form available on the publisher’s website.

T.B.Pugh, Henry V and the Southampton Plot of 1415, Southampton Records Office (Southampton), 1988. This is by far the most comprehensive study, and contains transcripts of the plotters’ original confessions. Available on Amazon, used book retailers, and some good libraries.

L. Harriss, ‘Richard , earl of Cambridge (1385–1415)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004; online edn, May 2012 [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article...] Website requires Login.

See also:

Juliet Barker, Agincourt: The King, The Campaign, The Battle, Abacus (London), 2006. Chapter Five ‘Scots and Plots’ contains an account of the Plot.

Anne Curry, Agincourt: A New History, The History Press (Stroud), 2006. Chapters 2 and 3 are the most relevant.

Ian Mortimer, 1415: Henry V’s Year of Glory, Vintage (London), 2009. Mortimer’s book contains a detailed account of the plot, although it is highly speculative and questionable, reporting the intimate thoughts and feelings of the plotters, which cannot be known today. It is also rather biased, so should be treated with caution.

Brain Wainwright, Frustrated Falcons: The Three Children of Edmund of Langley, First Duke of York, 2013. A useful little Kindle book with a short chapter devoted to the Earl of Cambridge, discussing, among other things, his first marriage to Anne Mortimer.

So Great A Prince- Lauren Johnson

The King is dead: long live the King. In 1509, Henry VII was succeeded by his son Henry VIII, second monarch of the house of Tudor. But this is not the familiar Tudor world of Protestantism and playwrights. Decades before the Reformation, ancient traditions persist: boy bishops, pilgrimage, Corpus Christi pageants, the jewel-decked shrine at Canterbury.

So Great a Prince offers a fascinating glimpse of a country and people that at first appear alien – in calendar and clothing, in counting the hours by bell toll – but which on closer examination are recognisably and understandably human. Lauren Johnson tells the story of 1509 not just from the perspective of king and court, but of merchant and ploughman; apprentice and laundress; husbandman and foreign worker.

She looks at these early Tudor lives through the rhythms of the ritual year, juxtaposing political events in Westminster and the palaces of southeast England with the liturgical and agricultural events that punctuated the year for the ordinary people of England.

Hardback, Paperback and Ebook Available, Published 2016, Head of Zeus

[image error]Henry VIII didn’t start out as a vindictive and capricious tyrant. For the first decade and a half of his reign, he was in fact a fairly decent chap, at least by the standards of 16th Century Monarchs. Lauren Johnson, a fellow women’s historian recreates England in 1509, the year that the second Tudor King succeeded to the throne.

The new King and his Spanish bride were greeted with hope and optimism by their subjects. Henry was young and handsome, bringing every hope of a fresh start and setting political prisoners free. Katherine of Aragon, the former bride of his brother, was more than just a scion of the useful alliance with Spain. She was the beloved bride of the new King. Even though we know how it ended, So Great a Prince is one of those books which freezes time: requiring the audience to leave aside our historical hindsight to appreciate the world from the perspective of those who lived then.

England in the early sixteenth century was an old country on the cusp of great change. In the days before the Reformation, the church Calendar with its Saints days and religious feasts was still the main way of measuring time. Cleverly, the book is divided into chronological chapters arranged according to the dates that marked the year. Michaelmas, Ascension, All Hallows. It covers not only political events, lives and preoccupations of ordinary people and how they interacted with the world around them.

We may not believe that agricultural labourers or cloth merchants could relate to the movers and shakers in the Tudor court, and they didn’t always directly do so. Yet the author reveals how the people of 16th century England were connected to each other, and their environment not just by bonds of marriage or affinity, but the cycles of the year, as well as common bonds of morality, culture and religion. Sometimes, these bought them into conflict, when overmighty and overbearing nobles like the Duke of Buckingham tried to maintain that tenants who insisted they were free were still villains, and the families in question had to fight their case in court.

Merchants made the goods that the nobles wore, and increasingly often in the early modern period, common born men could rise through the ranks to become courtiers and royal advisors. The King and the lowly alike bought contested marriages to church courts, and the same institution sought to regulate everything from dietary requirements to licensed brothels.

For those like me, who have a longstanding fascination with socio- economic history, and likes to get inside the minds of the men and women of the past, this book is a real gem. I shall certainly be purchasing the paperback.

I requested a copy of this book from Head of Zeus via Netgalley. I was not required to write a positive review and all opinions expressed are my own.

Some Great Resources

Whilst editing process is underway for Warrior Queen, I though I ought to get back to the day job alongside reading and blogging.

For a Lady who has been called the Greatest Englishwoman who ever lived, there are remarkably few books on Ethelfleda of Mercia. I’ve probably come close to using pretty much every one of them written in Modern English in my meagre contribution.

For the interested reader, I’m listing some of the better known and accessible titles here. For those who can’t wait until the release of my little booky in May, I hope these might be of some use if you can get hold of them.

Aethelflaed: Royal Lady, War Lady by Jane Wolfe

A short little booklet which explores the life and campaigns of the Great Lady, and contains chapters on her husband, the too often misrepresented Ethelred, Lord of the Mercians. 

[image error]

The Lady Who Fought the Vikings by Don Stansbury

A full length biography, and one of my major sources. Stansbury’s book spans Ethelflead’s entire life, and includes useful maps and diagrams illustrating where some of her fortifications may have been. Some of the author’s conclusions are speculative, albeit educated speculation.

Nevertheless, it brings her reign to life, and sheds on what some of her motivations and attitudes may have been. 

Like Wolfe, this is a rare book, now out of print which is really only available in certain public libraries and online secondhand book retailers.

[image error]

King Alfred’s Daughter: The Lady of the Mercians by Marjory A. Grieser

This book is a rare thing: a novel which reads like a biography. With a sound basis in the sources it’s probably one of the most accurate novels about Ethelfleda ever written. A word of warning, however is necessary. It’s no Game of Thrones: don’t expect any exhilarating battle scenes, romance or non stop actions it’s not that kind of novel, but give the reader and appreciation of the remarkable intelligence and achievements of the Lady of the Mercians.

The family free and map of tenth century England are also helpful, of course  Unlike the other two, Grieser’s book can be purchased from Amazon as a Kindle Edition. Don’t get me wrong, I love ‘real’ books, but ebooks are great as well. Of course, there is always the advantage of not having to wait for books to arrive through the post.

[image error]

Further Reading and Sources

Although the below are about other figures and subjects, the passages which are related to the Lady of the Mercians have proved invaluable.

Athelstan by Tom Holland

Athelstan by Sarah Foot

Available from all good bookstores

King Alfred and the Anglo-Saxons: BBC Documentary by Michael Wood, Episode 2, The Lady of the Mercians.

Available from Prime Instant Video on Amazon UK, and from the BBC Store.