Blount-Ayala

[John Brandon]

Toblerone Bars aren't toffee. They are delicious Swiss chocolate with
little pieces of honey and almond nougat. My personal favourite is the
white chocolate one but they are all scrumptious.

Sue

My recollection of Toblerone is that it's rather nasty ... way too
rich. Of course, having just eaten an ungodly amount of cheap
chocolate over the holidays, perhaps my recollections aren't
accurate ...

[Cory Bhreckan]

Jellore wrote:

On Jan 16, 1:26 am, Cory Bhreckan <coryvreckan@NO_SPAM.verizon.net
wrote:
Jellore wrote:
On Jan 15, 6:07 pm, "Ray O'Hara" <[email protected]> wrote:
"Young John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
any reasonbly fit person who can afford the fees can summit mt everest.
K2,goodwin-austen, is the real challenge for climbers.
Everything's easier when someone has led the way, but there are plenty
of dead bodies on Everest to attest to the fact that it isn't as easy as
you suggest. Before modern weather forecasts, it was an extremely
hazardous thing to do, and before Hunt's expedition, no-one had done it.
but you missed the point.
Doctors told them that there wasn't enough oxygen to survive at that
altitude, which is why they used it.
its still not a technical climb.
that's why tourists make the trip up everest.
Don't be so stupid.
You must be new around here.

--
"For the stronger we our houses do build,
The less chance we have of being killed." - William Topaz McGonagall

What does that have to do with replying to someone who states that
climbing Everest is only for tourists ?

Nothing, it was *who* you were replying to that marked you as new to
these parts. Welcome

--
"For the stronger we our houses do build,
The less chance we have of being killed." - William Topaz McGonagall

[Gjest]

On Jan 17, 1:42 am, Nathaniel Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:

In article
2a4a4fd0-d296-489d-85bd-811e86b17...@s1 ... groups.com>,

 [email protected] wrote:
On Jan 16, 7:05 am, Nathaniel Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:

While we're on the subject of odd rituals to claim a throne, I recently
read Philip Pullman's book,  The Tin Princess , in which a woman (a
foreigner save by marriage) establishes her throne-right in a tiny
German principality by carrying a flag up a hill.  I thought it a silly
premise, though I rather admired the three other books in his 'Sally
Lockhart' series set in Victorian London.  Is there any even remote
parallel in real life to this, in any period or culture?  

What about the story related of the Persian conspirators lining up at
dawn to see whose horse would neigh first at the rising sun, and
Darius bribing his groom in order to win the throne that was the
contest's prize?

Great one; is this in Herodotus?

Yep - Book III, #84 et seq

MA-R

[Stewart Baldwin]

Peter Stewart <[email protected]> wrote:

Lot does not go into this, but I suppose you are thinking of Szabolcs de
Vajay's miguided attempt to reinterpret that passage, in 'À propos de la
"Guerre de Bourgogne": note sur les successions de Bourgogne et de Mâcon
aux Xe et XIe siècles', _Annales de Bourgogne_ 24 (1962).

That was the main work I was thinking about when I made my comment that some
authors have tended to gloss over the marriages of Eudes-Henri of Burgundy,
but I was also thinking, to a lesser extent, of the work on the same subject
by Constance Bouchard ["Sword, Miter, and Cloister - Nobility and the church
in Burgundy", 980-1198 (1987)] and Christian Settipani ["Les origines
maternelles du comte de Bourgogne Otte-Guillaume", Annales de Bourgogne 66
(1994), 5-63]. Bouchard denies the existence of Gersende as a separate
individual, claiming that most likely the name was a "variant spelling" of
Gerberge, and she argues that Gerberge survived her second husband (p. 268).
Settipani stated that he preferred to set aside Bouchard's supposition (p.
13, n. 4), but he didn't discuss the origin of Gersende, which seems to me
to be a necessary prerequisite to ruling out the possibility that she was
the sister of count-bishop Hugues whom Eudes-Henri married.

Looking at Lot's discussion (for which I thank you, by the way), the case
for identifying Eudes-Henri's second wife Gersende with the woman of that
name who was a daughter of the duke of Gascony is plausible enough, but I
don't find it very compelling. The Gersende of "Historia abbatiae
Condomensis" is stated to have married in Burgundy, but that is pretty
vague. Lot's interpretation of the "Rythmus satiricus" of bishop Adalbero
would fill things in by having the wife of [Eudes-]Henri take refuge in
Gascony after their marriage ended, but others have interpreted the poem
differently. Bouchard states that "the wording of the poem seems to suggest
that it was Landric's wife, not Henry's, who was so distressed that she fled
south, though Henry does appear in that part of the poem." (p. 268) My own
lack of skill at Latin poetry effectively prevents me from having an
informed opinion on the exact interpretation of the poem's statements.

Given that the standard interpretation of various pieces of evidence, when
added together, seems to lead inevitably to the conclusion that Adélaïde,
wife of count Lambert of Chalon, had a child at an advanced age (which
Settipani succeeds in reducing to an estimate of 47 only by making the most
favorable chronological assumptions at every turn [p. 14]), it seems more
likely to me that something has to give. I am inclined to think that this
chronological problem is best solved by making Gerberge a daughter of
Lambert by an unknown earlier marriage, despite the use of the word
"germana" to describe her relationship to count-bishop Hugues. However,
given that Eudes-Henri is known to have had a second wife whose own origin
is somewhat doubtful, it seems unwise to me that authors have brushed aside
discussions of her origin.

Stewart Baldwin

[Peter Stewart]

"Stewart Baldwin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Peter Stewart <[email protected]> wrote:

Lot does not go into this, but I suppose you are thinking of Szabolcs de
Vajay's miguided attempt to reinterpret that passage, in 'À propos de la
"Guerre de Bourgogne": note sur les successions de Bourgogne et de Mâcon
aux Xe et XIe siècles', _Annales de Bourgogne_ 24 (1962).

That was the main work I was thinking about when I made my comment that
some authors have tended to gloss over the marriages of Eudes-Henri of
Burgundy, but I was also thinking, to a lesser extent, of the work on the
same subject by Constance Bouchard ["Sword, Miter, and Cloister - Nobility
and the church in Burgundy", 980-1198 (1987)] and Christian Settipani
["Les origines maternelles du comte de Bourgogne Otte-Guillaume", Annales
de Bourgogne 66 (1994), 5-63]. Bouchard denies the existence of Gersende
as a separate individual, claiming that most likely the name was a
"variant spelling" of Gerberge, and she argues that Gerberge survived her
second husband (p. 268).

I find it hard to take Constance Bouchard's musings on genealogy or
onomastics very seriously at the best of times, and she was not at her best
on this subject.

Apart from any other evidence, the contemporary notice for Gerberge in the
obituary of Auxerre cathedral makes it clear enough that she died as wife of
the reigning duke, not as his widow. The entry says "Ob. Girberga cometissa
[sic] uxor Henrici ducis". This clearly suggests that she was in fact "uxor"
and not "vidua" when she died, and that Eudes-Henri was living at the time.
The idea that "Gerberga" should inexplicably - and uniquely - switch to
"Garsenda" in several independent records, with each name consistent within
a different timeframe, and then switch back to "Gerberga" in a local record
of her death is absurd - and that, frankly, is not unique in this instance
of Bouchard's thinking on such matters.

Settipani stated that he preferred to set aside Bouchard's supposition (p.
13, n. 4), but he didn't discuss the origin of Gersende, which seems to me
to be a necessary prerequisite to ruling out the possibility that she was
the sister of count-bishop Hugues whom Eudes-Henri married.

The name Garsenda would be very hard to place in Chalon in her time. It
would also be extremely difficult to account for the chronicler of
Saint-Pierre de Condom in the 14th century hitting on the bizarre
coincidence of stating that a Garsenda from the Gascon ruling family at this
time married in Burgundy, just when we find a Garsenda married to
Eudes-Henri, duke of Burgundy, after the disappearance of his wife Gerberge
from the record.

The chronological problem with Gerberge of Chalon is that she was mother of
Otto-Guillaume who was born ca 960 while her putative mother Adelais - that
is, the only known wife of Lambert of Chalon - had a son born no earlier
than late in 979 from her subsequent marriage to Geoffroy Grisegonelle of
Anjou. A range of 34+ years for the childbearing of Adelais is too much of a
stretch to credit in my view, and the obvious alternative is as you suggest,
that if Gerberge was daughter of Lambert, sister of the count-bishop Hugo as
we are implicitly told without full details, then she must have been born to
an unknown first wife. This does not run into a particular difficulty from
her being called "germana" to Hugo, as paternal half-siblings were sometimes
described in this way. (I think it is inescapable that Maurice was a uterine
half-brother of Hugo, son of Adelais by the count of Anjou, despite forced
efforts by some genealogists to make him into a son of Lambert.)

Looking at Lot's discussion (for which I thank you, by the way), the case
for identifying Eudes-Henri's second wife Gersende with the woman of that
name who was a daughter of the duke of Gascony is plausible enough, but I
don't find it very compelling. The Gersende of "Historia abbatiae
Condomensis" is stated to have married in Burgundy, but that is pretty
vague.

It becomes somewhat less vague since we have charters subscribed by a
contemporary Garsenda as wife of the duke of Burgundy.

Lot's interpretation of the "Rythmus satiricus" of bishop Adalbero would
fill things in by having the wife of [Eudes-]Henri take refuge in Gascony
after their marriage ended, but others have interpreted the poem
differently. Bouchard states that "the wording of the poem seems to
suggest that it was Landric's wife, not Henry's, who was so distressed
that she fled south, though Henry does appear in that part of the poem."
(p. 268) My own lack of skill at Latin poetry effectively prevents me from
having an informed opinion on the exact interpretation of the poem's
statements.

I don't have time to go into this at present, but will post again later.

Given that the standard interpretation of various pieces of evidence, when
added together, seems to lead inevitably to the conclusion that Adélaïde,
wife of count Lambert of Chalon, had a child at an advanced age (which
Settipani succeeds in reducing to an estimate of 47 only by making the
most favorable chronological assumptions at every turn [p. 14]), it seems
more likely to me that something has to give. I am inclined to think that
this chronological problem is best solved by making Gerberge a daughter of
Lambert by an unknown earlier marriage, despite the use of the word
"germana" to describe her relationship to count-bishop Hugues. However,
given that Eudes-Henri is known to have had a second wife whose own origin
is somewhat doubtful, it seems unwise to me that authors have brushed
aside discussions of her origin.

Well, unless Garsenda was the same as Gerberga as Bouchard postulated on her
flim-flam reasoning - not quite as incredible as Vajay's speculations about
Mathilde but not far from it - or unless the exotic name Garsenda can be
otherwise placed in the family of either Lambert or Adelais, the parents of
Hugo of Chalon, there is no clear alternative to your proposal above. This
may seem untidy, necessitating an unrecorded prior wife of Lambert, but that
kind of half-light resolution is scarcely unsual for the time and place.

Peter Stewart

[John P. Ravilious]

Dear Todd,

Actually, the marital connections which brought the adoption of
the chevron(s) gules into successive families does not actually
include St. Liz. As indicated below, the descent and adoption of the
chevron gules appears to go de Clare -> FitzWalter -> d'Aubigny ->
Strathearn:



CLARE
Or, three Robert fitz Richard = Maud de
chevrons of Dunmow, Essex I St.
gules (yr brother of Gilbert I Liz
de Clare, d.ca. 1117) I
I
________________________I___
I I
Walter fitz Maud 'de St. Liz'
Robert = William
= 1) Maud de Lucy d'Aubigny
I I
I __________I_____
FITZWALTER Sir Robert fitz I I
Or, a fess Walter I I
between two (MC Surety) I I
chevrons gules I I
I I
William d'Aubigny Maud
of Belvoir = Gilbert
D'AUBIGNY d. 1236 E of
Or, within a Strathearn
bordure gules d. 1223
two chevrons of I
the last I
I
STRATHEARN Robert
Or, two E of
chevronels gules Strathearn


A generous correspondent has provided evidence that there were
known links carrying these arms (e.g. FitzWalter to Pecche), but the
d'Aubigny and Strathearn 'descent' was apparently not previously
noticed.

Cheers,

John



On Jan 7, 7:30 pm, [email protected] wrote:

On Jan 7, 1:00 pm, "John P. Ravilious" <[email protected]> wrote:



' He was probably William the Breton (Brito) II,
ancestor of the Lords of Belvoir, whose wife was
Maud de St Liz, da. of Robert FitzRichard de Clare. '[2]

I can add to the foregoing what the heraldic evidence
indicates. The account in Scots Peerage of the Earls of
Strathearnnotes that Earl Gilbert had a seal with nine billets
(or similar), but that "The later Celtic Earls all bore or, two
chevronels gules" [3]. The arms ofd'Aubignyof Belvoir were,
"Or, within a bordure gules two chevrons of the last"
(alternately described as "Or, two chevrons within a bordure
gules"). These are reflected in many printed sources, and are
also the arms found in the windows at Belvoir castle. The arms
ofd'Aubignyof Arundel were 'Gules, a lion rampant or', which
were modified by their Mowbray kinsman [4]. These arms were
clearly unrelated to the arms of the lords of Belvoir, or to
those of the Earls ofStrathearn.

This is a clear indication of the adoption of the arms of
Gilbert's wife in place of his own, with a difference in that
the bordure was eliminated. This provides sufficient evidence
that Maudd'Aubignywas of the family ofd'Aubignyof Belvoir,
and clearly not that of thed'AubignyEarls of Arundel. While
it does not in itself assist in placing her in the correct
generation, I believe all the evidence points to Maud being
the daughter of Williamd'Aubignyand Maud de St. Liz, as
previously discussed.

It is perhaps noteworthy that the Clare family and their kin represent
one of the well-studied clusters of related arms in Anglo-Norman
England (along with the Vere-Mandevilles quarterly cluster and the
Warenne-Beaumont chequey cluster), sharing chevrons. It would seem
that the chevron arms of Aubigny of Belvoir come from Clare via St.
Liz.

taf

[John P. Ravilious]

Dear 'M',

There were three known daughters of Gilbert, Earl of Strathearn
and Maud/Matilda d'Aubigny:

1. Matilda, m. Malcolm, Earl of Fife
(his 1st wife; she d. sine prole)
2. Cecilia, m. Walter fitz Alan of Ruthven
There were sons of this marriage (extant descents
via Ruthven, Earl of Gowrie); one daughter I note,
m. Sir Patrick Edgar [see SP IV:255]. There may
be a female descent here, which I have not traced.
3. Ethna, m. David de Hay of Erroll
Again, male issue, from whom the Hays, Earls
of Erroll [see SP III:556 et seq.].
I am not aware of any female line of descent from
this couple.

Hope this is of interest, and possible use.

Cheers,

John



On Jan 7, 5:28 pm, "M.Sjostrom" <[email protected]> wrote:

Interestingly enough, the matriline to which William
the Conqueror belonged, continues straight through
this family:http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00002954&tree=LEO&displa...

It would be a service to this matriline (passing the
mitochondrial DNA of the exalted fisher's wife from
Normandy), if daughters of thisStrathearncouple were
to have children, also daughters to continue it.

____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch ... y=shopping

[Gjest]

On Jan 17, 5:32 am, "John P. Ravilious" <[email protected]> wrote:

Actually, the marital connections which brought the adoption of
the chevron(s) gules into successive families does not actually
include St. Liz. As indicated below, the descent and adoption of the
chevron gules appears to go de Clare -> FitzWalter -> d'Aubigny -
Strathearn:

CLARE
Or, three Robert fitz Richard = Maud de
chevrons of Dunmow, Essex I St.
gules (yr brother of Gilbert I Liz
de Clare, d.ca. 1117) I
I
________________________I___
I I
Walter fitz Maud 'de St. Liz'
Robert = William
= 1) Maud de Lucy d'Aubigny
I I
I __________I_____
FITZWALTER Sir Robert fitz I I
Or, a fess Walter I I
between two (MC Surety) I I
chevrons gules I I
I I
William d'Aubigny Maud
of Belvoir = Gilbert
D'AUBIGNY d. 1236 E of
Or, within a Strathearn
bordure gules d. 1223
two chevrons of I
the last I

Well, the line does include one St. Liz generation, Maud, and didn't
William d'Aubigny's sister Maud also appear with her mother's St. Liz
surname? I vaguely remember this as an odd case of maternal surname
inheritance commented upon by Round in one of the Hist Manu Comm
volumes.

taf

[D. Spencer Hines]

Hilarious!

We must have a large number of pogues reading these newsgroups who are
bastards.

Hence the extreme hypersensitivity to the State of Bastardy.

I'm NOT speaking figuratively but LITERALLY.

Stockdill is clearly a bastard.

He HIMSELF tells us so.

Ergo:

I'm not surprised in the LEAST that OTHER little bastards now take this
opportunity to ATTACK me with IRRELEVANCIES.

Par For The Course.

'Nuff Said.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum

"Geoff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

"D. Spencer Hines" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Hmmmmmmmm...

Pogue Stockdill HIMSELF Tells Us He Is A Bastard -- Literally...

One cannot help being born outside wedlock ergo a bastard - literally:
but figuratively speaking, being a bastard like you is avoidable.

[Jeff]

D. Spencer Hines wrote:

now take this

opportunity to ATTACK me with IRRELEVANCIES.

The fact that you are a complete failure in life and a disgrace to your
family is relevant and deserves being oft-repeated.

[Gjest]

In a message dated 1/17/2008 3:50:17 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

(B) The date may be wrong. If '2 Ed. I' was
actually '2 Ed. II', the date would have
been 27 Nov 1308. Robert was still alive
then, and John aged 27 or more (born before
the 1282 - 2nd - marriage of his father).>>


------------------------
That was my initial suspicion. Later today I'll have a look. It seems like
I discovered at some point a way to find a URL directly to a specific do
cument at A2A but I may just be getting old and imaging things.

Will



**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[John Brandon]

Mathew Bridges must have had two sons, John and Elisha, alive in
1660 ...

--from A2A ("Greville of Warwick Castle")

Market Place and by Church

FILE [no title] - ref. CR1886/Box417/48/1-2 - date:
1633;1660
item: [no title] - ref. CR1886/Box417/48/2 - date:
18 April 1660
hit[from Scope and Content] Lease for lives of John,
Elisha and Elizabeth, children of Matthew Bridges, by Robert Lord
Brooke to Matthew Bridges of Alcester, gent, of above. Consideration
£75. Rent £3.10. Od per annum.

[John Brandon]

http://books.google.com/books?id=jTwLAA ... lr=&pgis=1

[D. Spencer Hines]

Cardinal Beaufort was, of course, his Granduncle.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:796c7325-8f6b-495a-a660-4bcfde0461d5@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

According to the Dictionary of National Biography (the old version) he
was crowned at Notre Dame in Paris on 16 December 1430 by Cardinal
Beaufort. This was in opposition to the crowning of Charles VII at
Rheims on 17 July 1429.

[Gjest]

On Jan 17, 6:48 pm, "Leo van de Pas" <[email protected]> wrote:

David Williamson gives in Kings and Queens of Britain, page 91, 16 December 1431 Notre Dame, Paris

Elizabeth Hallam in Plantagenet Encyclopedia says only 1432

The Oxford illustrated History of the British Monarchy,
1......page 310 Henry VI was crowned in 1431 in Notre Dame
but
2.....page 239 maintains he was crowned in Saint Denis _near Paris_ in 1431

And so we for date 16 December 1431----and just 1431------ and just 1432
As place Notre Dame, Paris and Saint Denis near Paris

Does anyone know when and where did it happen?
Leo van de Pas,
Canberra, Australia

According to the Dictionary of National Biography (the old version) he
was crowned at Notre Dame in Paris on 16 December 1430 by Cardinal
Beaufort. This was in opposition to the crowning of Charles VII at
Rheims on 17 July 1429.

[Ford Mommaerts-Browne]

The link is not found

----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 6:41 PM
Subject: Guethenoc (Queznoc) de Rieux line

From: The Journal of the Polymatic Society of Morbihan (1879) and the
article by Monsieur le Mene:

http://books.google.com/books?id=mpBLAA ... #PPA345.MI

The ascent is listed through Josselin de Rieux.

Jim Malone

________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! -
http://webmail.aol.com

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

[TJ Booth]

Google books must have different index codes on different servers or
something. Below link works for me - note only the ID code is different
http://books.google.com/books?id=mpBLAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA345

Otherwise do a google books search using Guethenoc+de+Rieux - only 4 or 5
books qualify. Given a clue, genealogists are expected to be resourceful
enough to follow it.

TJBooth
Chicago IL

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ford Mommaerts-Browne" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: Guethenoc (Queznoc) de Rieux line

The link is not found

----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]
To: <[email protected]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 6:41 PM
Subject: Guethenoc (Queznoc) de Rieux line



From: The Journal of the Polymatic Society of Morbihan (1879) and the
article by Monsieur le Mene:

http://books.google.com/books?id=mpBLAA ... #PPA345.MI

The ascent is listed through Josselin de Rieux.

Jim Malone

________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! -
http://webmail.aol.com

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message




-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

[Ford Mommaerts-Browne]

This one works!

----- Original Message -----
From: "TJ Booth" <[email protected]>
To: "GenMedieval" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: Guethenoc (Queznoc) de Rieux line

Google books must have different index codes on different servers or
something. Below link works for me - note only the ID code is different
http://books.google.com/books?id=mpBLAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA345

Otherwise do a google books search using Guethenoc+de+Rieux - only 4 or 5
books qualify. Given a clue, genealogists are expected to be resourceful
enough to follow it.

TJBooth
Chicago IL

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ford Mommaerts-Browne" <[email protected]
To: <[email protected]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: Guethenoc (Queznoc) de Rieux line


The link is not found

----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]
To: <[email protected]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 6:41 PM
Subject: Guethenoc (Queznoc) de Rieux line



From: The Journal of the Polymatic Society of Morbihan (1879) and the
article by Monsieur le Mene:

http://books.google.com/books?id=mpBLAA ... #PPA345.MI

The ascent is listed through Josselin de Rieux.

Jim Malone

________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! -
http://webmail.aol.com

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without
the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message




-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

[David Rorer]

For those who are fans - Fraser's last book "The Revers" is available for
pre order at Amazon

There is no description, but extrapolating from the title and the cover art
displayed it is a novel set at the time of the Anglo-Scotish border wars -
subject of his first book "The Steel Bonnets"

In the official Flashman history it is noted that his great-something
grandfather ran screaming from the field at Bannockburn - perhaps one of
Flashy's ancestors will make an appearance.

[Leo van de Pas]

Dear James, what you describe is a move _from_ the English royal family _to_
Brittany. I have the feeling Fox-Davies means the reverse as apparetnly he
claims that people allowed using the English coat-of-arms are _also_ allowed
to use those of Brittany, you describe the reverse.
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas,
Canberra, Australia

----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Breton descent of the English royal family?

In a message dated 1/19/2008 5:23:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

My understanding of heraldry is very limited, but I feel the question was
for present day people having the right to use the coat of arms of
Brittany.

This implies descendants.

Constance, Duchess of Brittany by Geoffrey had three children
1.Eleanor born in 1184 died in 1241, locked up for most of her life by
King
John to prevent her from marrying and passing on her line senior to his
in
regards of the English crown. She died unmarried and childless

2.Mathilde born about 1185 died in infancy

3.Arthur Duke of Brittany, born 1187, murdered in 1203, unmarried and no
children.

If Fox-Davies is correct there has to be another link. Constance married
three times in all and by her third husband had two daughters
4. Alix de Thouars, Duchess of Brittanny married Pierre I, in his wife's
righ Duke of Brittany, and their line continued the Dukes of Brittany

5. Catherine de Thouars, who married Andre de Vitre, and had descendants.

Of Constance's five children, no doubt, Alix was the most important, but
Catherine, genealogically, should not be overlooked.

Catherine is an ancestor of Canadian Gateway Anne Angelique de Falaise de
Gannes
of Jean Baptist Donatien de Vimeur, Comte de Rochambeau
Pedro IV-I Emperor and Gateway to Brazil

Crown Princess Mathilde of Belgium
10th Duke of Roxburghe
6th Duke of Westminster
Jean Luc Godard
Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark
Hugh Grant
Giovanni Agnelli
Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden
Prince William of Wales
Princess Beatrice of York

and many more.

With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Watson" <[email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <[email protected]
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 8:35 AM
Subject: Re: Breton descent of the English royal family?


On Jan 19, 3:37 pm, [email protected] wrote:
Various British families with female-line descents from cadets of the
Royal Family quarter the Royal Arms.

For instance, the Howards quarter the arms of the Plantagenets
courtesy of their descent from Margaret Mowbray, the great-great
granddaughter of Thomas of Brotherton (son of Edward I).

Fox-Davies (Complete Guide to Heraldry) states that English families
with the right to quarter the royal arms may also displaying a quarter
for Brittany.

I can't think off the top of my head how the English royal family
could be considered the heirs of the Dukes of Brittany, or any branch
thereof.

Any ideas?

MA-R

Possibly this is it. Geoffrey of England, 4th son of Geoffrey
Plantagenet and brother of Henry II, born 23 Sept. 1158, in right of
his wife, Duke of Brittany and Earl of Richmond. He married Constance
of Brittany, daughter and heiress of Conan IV le Petit, Duke of
Brittany, Earl of Richmond, by Margaret, daughter of Henry of
Scotland, Earl of Northumberland.

Regards,

John

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without
the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.7/1233 - Release Date:
1/19/2008
6:37 PM




-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject
and the body of the message
Dear Leo and others,
While in no sense an heiress ,
Beatrice of England, daughter of King Henry III of England by Eleanor of
Provence married John II, Duke of Brittany and Earl of Richmond and was
the mother
of all his children.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA






**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.7/1233 - Release Date: 1/19/2008
6:37 PM

[Gjest]

In a message dated 1/19/2008 5:23:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

My understanding of heraldry is very limited, but I feel the question was
for present day people having the right to use the coat of arms of Brittany.

This implies descendants.

Constance, Duchess of Brittany by Geoffrey had three children
1.Eleanor born in 1184 died in 1241, locked up for most of her life by King
John to prevent her from marrying and passing on her line senior to his in
regards of the English crown. She died unmarried and childless

2.Mathilde born about 1185 died in infancy

3.Arthur Duke of Brittany, born 1187, murdered in 1203, unmarried and no
children.

If Fox-Davies is correct there has to be another link. Constance married
three times in all and by her third husband had two daughters
4. Alix de Thouars, Duchess of Brittanny married Pierre I, in his wife's
righ Duke of Brittany, and their line continued the Dukes of Brittany

5. Catherine de Thouars, who married Andre de Vitre, and had descendants.

Of Constance's five children, no doubt, Alix was the most important, but
Catherine, genealogically, should not be overlooked.

Catherine is an ancestor of Canadian Gateway Anne Angelique de Falaise de
Gannes
of Jean Baptist Donatien de Vimeur, Comte de Rochambeau
Pedro IV-I Emperor and Gateway to Brazil

Crown Princess Mathilde of Belgium
10th Duke of Roxburghe
6th Duke of Westminster
Jean Luc Godard
Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark
Hugh Grant
Giovanni Agnelli
Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden
Prince William of Wales
Princess Beatrice of York

and many more.

With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Watson" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 8:35 AM
Subject: Re: Breton descent of the English royal family?

On Jan 19, 3:37 pm, [email protected] wrote:
Various British families with female-line descents from cadets of the
Royal Family quarter the Royal Arms.

For instance, the Howards quarter the arms of the Plantagenets
courtesy of their descent from Margaret Mowbray, the great-great
granddaughter of Thomas of Brotherton (son of Edward I).

Fox-Davies (Complete Guide to Heraldry) states that English families
with the right to quarter the royal arms may also displaying a quarter
for Brittany.

I can't think off the top of my head how the English royal family
could be considered the heirs of the Dukes of Brittany, or any branch
thereof.

Any ideas?

MA-R

Possibly this is it. Geoffrey of England, 4th son of Geoffrey
Plantagenet and brother of Henry II, born 23 Sept. 1158, in right of
his wife, Duke of Brittany and Earl of Richmond. He married Constance
of Brittany, daughter and heiress of Conan IV le Petit, Duke of
Brittany, Earl of Richmond, by Margaret, daughter of Henry of
Scotland, Earl of Northumberland.

Regards,

John

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.7/1233 - Release Date: 1/19/2008
6:37 PM

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject
and the body of the message
Dear Leo and others,
While in no sense an heiress ,
Beatrice of England, daughter of King Henry III of England by Eleanor of
Provence married John II, Duke of Brittany and Earl of Richmond and was the mother
of all his children.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA






**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[Peter Stewart]

My apologies for taking so long to get back to this - I was preoccupied by a
Test match in Perth, one of a series of annual cricket events in Australia
that take precedence over medieval genealogy. Apologies also for a long
post:



"Stewart Baldwin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Peter Stewart <[email protected]> wrote:

Lot does not go into this, but I suppose you are thinking of Szabolcs de
Vajay's miguided attempt to reinterpret that passage, in 'À propos de la
"Guerre de Bourgogne": note sur les successions de Bourgogne et de Mâcon
aux Xe et XIe siècles', _Annales de Bourgogne_ 24 (1962).

That was the main work I was thinking about when I made my comment that
some authors have tended to gloss over the marriages of Eudes-Henri of
Burgundy, but I was also thinking, to a lesser extent, of the work on the
same subject by Constance Bouchard ["Sword, Miter, and Cloister - Nobility
and the church in Burgundy", 980-1198 (1987)] and Christian Settipani
["Les origines maternelles du comte de Bourgogne Otte-Guillaume", Annales
de Bourgogne 66 (1994), 5-63]. Bouchard denies the existence of Gersende
as a separate individual, claiming that most likely the name was a
"variant spelling" of Gerberge, and she argues that Gerberge survived her
second husband (p. 268). Settipani stated that he preferred to set aside
Bouchard's supposition (p. 13, n. 4), but he didn't discuss the origin of
Gersende, which seems to me to be a necessary prerequisite to ruling out
the possibility that she was the sister of count-bishop Hugues whom
Eudes-Henri married.

Looking at Lot's discussion (for which I thank you, by the way), the case
for identifying Eudes-Henri's second wife Gersende with the woman of that
name who was a daughter of the duke of Gascony is plausible enough, but I
don't find it very compelling. The Gersende of "Historia abbatiae
Condomensis" is stated to have married in Burgundy, but that is pretty
vague. Lot's interpretation of the "Rythmus satiricus" of bishop Adalbero
would fill things in by having the wife of [Eudes-]Henri take refuge in
Gascony after their marriage ended, but others have interpreted the poem
differently. Bouchard states that "the wording of the poem seems to
suggest that it was Landric's wife, not Henry's, who was so distressed
that she fled south, though Henry does appear in that part of the poem."
(p. 268) My own lack of skill at Latin poetry effectively prevents me from
having an informed opinion on the exact interpretation of the poem's
statements.

I'm afraid that Constance Bouchard has once again hit on a reading that the
text does not support, although in this case it must be said that 'Rythmus
satiricus' is extremely difficult to interpret. The verses were clearly
written for people with inside knowledge of court gossip at the time: its
style is cryptic, with some twisted expressions and figurative use of words,
rendering a literal translation barely comprehensible.



Consequently, I will give the passage with my own translation as directly as
seems useful into English (PS) followed by Claude Hohl's translation into
French (CH), and then mine of this into English with some added comments. NB
The edition is from the appendix to Hohl's Le comte Landi de Nevers dans
l'histoire et dans la geste de 'Girart de Roussillon', in _La chanson de
geste et le mythe carolingien: Mélanges René Louis_
(Saint-Pierre-sous-Vézelay, 1982). This differs in one important point as
noted below from the text given by Ferdinand Lot.



Adalbero is the author, bishop of Laon; Achitophel is Landri of Nevers:




13. Non percipit Adalbero

Achitophel cur rideat:

Vulpes portat in pectore

Qui suis nescit parcere.



PS: Adalbero does not quite understand

What makes Achitophel laugh:

At heart he has fox instincts

Mindless of sparing his own friends.



CH: Adalbéron ne comprend pas pourquoi Achitophel éclate ainsi de rire: il
porte des renards dans son sein, celui qui ne sait pas épargner ses amis.
(Adalbéron does not understand why Achitophel bursts so into laughter: he
carries foxes in the core of his heart, that does not know how to spare
friends.)



14. Dolis armatus furcifer

Heinrico tollit feminam,

Prius Widoni gratiam,

Timens sponsae prudentiam.



PS: Armed with tricks, the rascal

Parts the woman from Henri,

Initially as a service to Wido,

Dreading the bride's safeguard.



CH: L'animal au pied fourchu, bardé de ruses, enlève à Henri sa femme, et d'abord
ses bonnes graces à Gui, craignant la perspicacité de son épouse. (The
animal with cloven hoof, armed all over with trickery, takes from Henri his
wife, and at first her kind thanks to Gui, fearing the perspicacity of his
wife.)



At the end of the first line Lot gave 'justifer' (justiciar), following the
only known manuscript - now lost - instead of 'furcifer' (a yoked beast or
rogue), that was an emendation proposed by Mabillon in the 17th century,
when this poem was discovered and first published.



I don't think Hohl got an intelligible meaning out of the third and fourth
lines of this strophe. He supposed that Gui (Wido) was an associate or
relative of Henri and that the bride in question was Gui's - if so, the
point is lost to me. I think that Wido was Landri's young brother-in-law, by
this time (996) the co-count of Mâcon recently elevated to comital rank in
association with his father Otto-Guillaume who was Duke Eudes-Henri's
step-son and adopted heir. The favour or service to Gui by Landri was in
splitting husband (Eudes-Henri) from his new second wife (Garsende of
Gascony) before she could exercise the prudence of a bride, i.e. safeguard
her marriage by getting pregnant. Such a turn of events threatened to
produce a son who would cut Otte-Guillaume, and consequently the latter's
son Gui, out of the promised inheritance of Burgundy. Such a context then
makes far better sense of what follows, in Landi's imprecations against
Henri and his brother and nephew that they should all become celibate.



15. Uxor petit Vasconiam,

Achitophel malitiam,

Dum, per iurandi sarcinam,

Totam conturbat patriam.



PS: The wife goes off to Gascony,

Achitophel resorts to spite,

While, by the onus of swearing oaths

He disturbs the entire land.



CH: La femme s'installe en Gascogne; Achitophel s'installe dans l'iniquité
et se fait fort de se justifier par serment, mettant ainsi le trouble dans
tout le pays. (The woman settles in Gascony; Achitophel settles in iniquity
and undertakes to justify himself by oath, thus stirring disorder in all the
land.)



16. Honoris fundit terminum,

Intrans regis palatium:

- Henricus sit aedituus,

Dicit Bodonis filius,



PS: He stretches the limit of his status,

Intruding on the royal preserve:

- Let Henri become a sacristan,

Says Bodo's son,



CH: Il renverse les bornes de l'honneur quand il entre dans le palais du
roi. - Qu'Henri devienne sacristain! déclare le fils de Bodon, (He turns
honour upside down when he enters the palace of the king. - Let Henri become
a sacristan! declares the son of Bodo, [Landri was the son of Bodo, a petty
seigneur].



I don't think the second line should be taken literally - there is no reason
to believe that Landri would actually go to the royal court in order to
insult the two kings and their brother/uncle Henri in public. I think the
reference is just to political overreaching by Landri, son of a local noble
of no great importance, by meddling somehow in the personal affairs of the
ruler of Burgundy (perhaps by adultery with the duke's wife, or more likely
by creating mischief and implicating her, that drove Garsende to flee back
to Gascony in disgrace, or in high dudgeon, with her husband).



17. Fiat Rex Hugo monachus,

Rex Robertus episcopus,

Habens hic vitam simplicem,

Alter vocis dulcedinem!



PS: Make King Hugo a monk,

King Robert a bishop,

The one enjoying a simple life,

The other sweetness of voice!



CH: - Que le roi Hugues devienne moine et le roi Robert évêque, car le
premier aime la vie simple et l'autre a une voix mélodieuse. (May King
Hugues become monk and King Robert a bishop, because the first likes the
simple life and other has a melodious voice.)



Please let me know if you would like a copy of Hohl's article with the
edited text, his translation and further comments.



Peter Stewart

[Gjest]

Surely, all Breton descent would come from the Stuarts, originally from
Brittany, or am i missing the point?

Pg

[Leo van de Pas]

I suppose _descending from_ is one thing, the right to quarter arms is
another. The Stewarts/Stuarts did come from Brittany but they did not use
the coat-of-arms of the rulers of Brittany which is what this is about.
Leo

----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 5:27 AM
Subject: Re: Breton descent of the English royal family?

Surely, all Breton descent would come from the Stuarts, originally from
Brittany, or am i missing the point?

Pg





-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.7/1233 - Release Date: 1/19/2008
6:37 PM

[Gjest]

Dear Leo et al,

Yes but did not the ruleers of Brittany stop being its rulers before the
rules of heraldry became tabulated - i.e before Heraldry was accepted as a
tribal/familial/regional emblem?

Pg

[Hovite]

On Jan 20, 6:27 pm, [email protected] wrote:

Surely, all Breton descent would come from the Stuarts, originally from
Brittany, or am i missing the point?

The Stuarts were more Scottish than English, and did not descend from
the Breton ducal family.

The original Stewart arms were Or a fess chequy Azure and Argent.

http://www.baronage.co.uk/bphtm-03/stewart1.html

[Gjest]

In a message dated 1/20/2008 4:10:17 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

Make that 1236, of course. The child died in the same year.


---------------------------
Someone on Wikipedia has stated that this child was Stillborn.
I'm going to change that now.
Thanks
Will



**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[Douglas Richardson]

On Jan 20, 7:23 pm, [email protected] wrote:
< ---------------------------
< Someone on Wikipedia has stated that this child was Stillborn.
< I'm going to change that now.
< Thanks
< Will

Good genealogy, indeed good history, is based on reliance on original
primary sources, not on internet friends who may be well meaning but
misinformed.

As I indicated in my last post, the German historian, Heinisch, refers
to this Jordan in his index to his full length biography of Emperor
Frederick II as the "angebl. Sohn" of Emperor Frederick II. The term
"angebl. Sohn" means Jordan was the "supposed" son of Emperor
Frederick II. Supposed means unproven.

Here is the weblink to the reference to Jordan as "angebl. Sohn":

http://books.google.com/books?id=eEYbAA ... s=1#search

Before Will rushes to "fix" Wikipedia, I suggest that he do a little
more homework.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[D. Spencer Hines]

Good Reasoning...

DSH

"Douglas Richardson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:35bd6501-2a3c-4677-b67a-7b9c2735371d@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

On Jan 20, 7:23 pm, [email protected] wrote:
---------------------------
Someone on Wikipedia has stated that this child was Stillborn.
I'm going to change that now.
Thanks
Will

Good genealogy, indeed good history, is based on reliance on original
primary sources, not on internet friends who may be well meaning but
misinformed.

As I indicated in my last post, the German historian, Heinisch, refers
to this Jordan in his index to his full length biography of Emperor
Frederick II as the "angebl. Sohn" of Emperor Frederick II. The term
"angebl. Sohn" means Jordan was the "supposed" son of Emperor
Frederick II. Supposed means unproven.

Here is the weblink to the reference to Jordan as "angebl. Sohn":

http://books.google.com/books?id=eEYbAA ... s=1#search

Before Will rushes to "fix" Wikipedia, I suggest that he do a little
more homework.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[Peter Stewart]

Inane crossposting removed, again.

"Douglas Richardson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:35bd6501-2a3c-4677-b67a-7b9c2735371d@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

On Jan 20, 7:23 pm, [email protected] wrote:
---------------------------
Someone on Wikipedia has stated that this child was Stillborn.
I'm going to change that now.
Thanks
Will

Good genealogy, indeed good history, is based on reliance on original
primary sources, not on internet friends who may be well meaning but
misinformed.

So why are you always asking for weblinks?

And why do you spend so much time wallowing helpessly through medieval
sources you can't evaluate and/or relying on early modern references found
in 19th-century works?

Does it never occur to you that obsolete published writers may have been
well-meaning but misinformed? That is why scholarship is ongoing, and most
of it goes on in print that you can't find in "snippet view" on Google
Books.

Peter Stewart

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

I just checked one online genealogical database which concerns the
genealogy of the medieval rulers of Italy/Sicily. This website is
located at the following weblink:

http://www.jmarcussen.dk/historie/reference/naples.html

The following mishmash was listed for the children of Emperor
Friedrich (or Frederick) II and his wife, Isabel of England:

1. Henry Charles; * 1235; † Dec. 1253;
2. Margaret = Margareta; * 1237; † 8/8 1270 in Frankfurt am Main;
m 1254 Albrecht der Entartete, † 20/11 1315, Markgraf von Meißen,
Landgraf von Thüringen; they got:
a) Margrave Frederick, claimant to Sicily;
3. Carlotus, from 1242 called Heinrich; * 18/2 1238, † dec. 1253 or
jan. 1254;
4? Frederick of Sicily - existence not controled;
5? Carl Otto - existence not controled;
6? Agnes of Sicily - existence not controled;

No mention is made of the supposed son, Jordan. Also, no primary
sources whatsoever are given for the six children listed above. This
could be why this list of children is such a mess.

Likewise, I note that no mention is made of Emperor Friedrich II's
unnamed daughter who was betrothed in 1238 to Hermann II, Landgrave of
Thüringia. However, because Hermann II is known to have come of age
in 1237, I find it rather doubtful that he was contracted to marry the
infant daughter of Emperor Friedrich that had just been born in
February 1237. Rather, it seems likely to me that Hermann II's
contracted wife was Emperor Friedrich II's illegitimate daughter,
Constance (or Anna), who was married (allegedly in 1244) to Johannes
III Dukas Vatatzes, Emperor of Nicaea. Constance would certainly have
been much closer in age to Hermann. In fact her illegitimacy may well
have been a factor in Hermann II's repudiation of this wife which took
place c.1239.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[Bob Turcott]

Denis,

I thought the similarities between Turquault & Turquet here are funny!!!

Turquault D'argent, au chevron de gueules, acc. de trois têtes de More, tortillées d'or.
Turquet de Beauregard D'or, à deux coeurs de gueules appointés, celui en pointe renversée, acc. de trois molettes du même, 2 et 1.

however I suspect prior to Turqualt the name might have been Turcus.


question regarding the crusader that is most definitely true. The crest I described in the previous email is that of a Poor knights member. The Poor Knights are better known to day as Templars. What is interesting is that there is a good possiblity that our crest predates the official formation of of the Templars and may Have given rise to the Sigil afixed to may Templar sites and monument as far away as England and Scotland. The crest originated most likely in the Burgundy Kingdom that is now part modern day france. We faught the Moslem invaders when the serisans invaded burgundy in about the 900's. Lots of people seem to forget that Europe almost fell to the Sarisan in that time period. The earliest root of the name I have tracked down is Turcus judging from the root and suffix used it appears to be of Roman or Ancient Greek origin. I am still doing research on this. I know that the family is ancient and has given rise to family and tribal sir names in many countries.
Once and for shure I can state that that Our family was seated in Provance France Since at least the times of the kingdom of Burgundy and that means they owned land and where titled there at least as lords since at minimum the tehth century. The family where crusaders and did fight the invaders prior to the crusades we know this by the registered heraldry of our family(the earliest family crest on record from the tenth century).

Of course this is an ongoing project and I state that Gallica is an excellent source
for research, I will duly keep those informed of my research as this is getting very interesting!!!

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:48:52 +0000 (UTC), [email protected] ("Ford
Mommaerts-Browne") wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:

Dear Bob,
Re. Ricardus filius Torke: Torke looks, to me, to be an Anglish [sic], (or,
possibly, Danish), name, derived from Tor (Thor), which at such a time and
place, (i.e. eleventh-to-thirteenth-century Yorkshire) was not uncommon.
Re. William le Turk: With the introduction of Norman-type surnames, which
you mentioned, the insertion of a 'de', or, less frequently, a 'le', became
common practice, in an effort to climb into the dominant paradigm socially;
much the same as American immigrants of a later period would (ironically)
shorten their names. However, the forenames William and Robert, (which you
cite), being French, would seem to indicate that such was not the case for
these more Southern 'forebarers' of your surname.

Non sense.

Old records shown the name to be TURCAULT or TURQUAULT. Example:


TURCOT name found at Mouilleron-en-Pareds (Vendée) in 1610 and 1617,
but records are missing 1618 to 1700.

There is an Abel TURCAULT in the parish of St-Maurice-le-Girard, same
town.

In French, -OT or -AULT or -AUT or -EAUX etc. are common meaningless
terminations. Root is definitely TURC or TURQUE. Since family names
appeared in the 1300s, you have to think about what it could mean
at that time. It was after the crusades, so it could mean someone
with dark skin or dark hair or very strong (an expression in French
means strong as a Turk), but also many other local words.

See http://notrefamille.com/v2/services-nom ... le/nom.asp
for distribution of the names. Try with TURCOT (half are in Vendée),
as other variations are less common.


Denis

--
0 Denis Beauregard -
/\/ Les Français d'Amérique - http://www.francogene.com/genealogie-quebec/
|\ French in North America before 1716 - http://www.francogene.com/quebec-genealogy/
/ | Mes associations de généalogie: http://www.SGCF.com/ (soc. gén. can.-fr.)
oo oo http://www.genealogie.org/club/sglj/index2.html (soc. de gén. de La Jemmerais)

_________________________________________________________________
Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?o ... ife_012008

[Stewart Baldwin]

"Peter Stewart" <[email protected]> wrote:

"Stewart Baldwin" <[email protected]> wrote:
... Lot's interpretation of the "Rythmus satiricus" of bishop Adalbero
would fill things in by having the wife of [Eudes-]Henri take refuge in
Gascony after their marriage ended, but others have interpreted the poem
differently. Bouchard states that "the wording of the poem seems to
suggest that it was Landric's wife, not Henry's, who was so distressed
that she fled south, though Henry does appear in that part of the poem."
(p. 268) My own lack of skill at Latin poetry effectively prevents me
from having an informed opinion on the exact interpretation of the poem's
statements.

I'm afraid that Constance Bouchard has once again hit on a reading that
the text does not support, although in this case it must be said that
'Rythmus satiricus' is extremely difficult to interpret. The verses were
clearly written for people with inside knowledge of court gossip at the
time: its style is cryptic, with some twisted expressions and figurative
use of words, rendering a literal translation barely comprehensible.

Thanks for your comments on this. If Bouchard wanted to interpret this in a
completely different way, it seems that she should have at least offered the
details of how she was interpreting the text of the poem.

14. Dolis armatus furcifer

Heinrico tollit feminam,

Prius Widoni gratiam,

Timens sponsae prudentiam.



PS: Armed with tricks, the rascal

Parts the woman from Henri,

Initially as a service to Wido,

Dreading the bride's safeguard.



CH: L'animal au pied fourchu, bardé de ruses, enlève à Henri sa femme, et
d'abord ses bonnes graces à Gui, craignant la perspicacité de son épouse.
(The animal with cloven hoof, armed all over with trickery, takes from
Henri his wife, and at first her kind thanks to Gui, fearing the
perspicacity of his wife.)



At the end of the first line Lot gave 'justifer' (justiciar), following
the only known manuscript - now lost - instead of 'furcifer' (a yoked
beast or rogue), that was an emendation proposed by Mabillon in the 17th
century, when this poem was discovered and first published.



I don't think Hohl got an intelligible meaning out of the third and fourth
lines of this strophe. He supposed that Gui (Wido) was an associate or
relative of Henri and that the bride in question was Gui's - if so, the
point is lost to me. I think that Wido was Landri's young brother-in-law,
by this time (996) the co-count of Mâcon recently elevated to comital rank
in association with his father Otto-Guillaume who was Duke Eudes-Henri's
step-son and adopted heir. The favour or service to Gui by Landri was in
splitting husband (Eudes-Henri) from his new second wife (Garsende of
Gascony) before she could exercise the prudence of a bride, i.e. safeguard
her marriage by getting pregnant. Such a turn of events threatened to
produce a son who would cut Otte-Guillaume, and consequently the latter's
son Gui, out of the promised inheritance of Burgundy. Such a context then
makes far better sense of what follows, in Landi's imprecations against
Henri and his brother and nephew that they should all become celibate.



15. Uxor petit Vasconiam,

Achitophel malitiam,

Dum, per iurandi sarcinam,

Totam conturbat patriam.



PS: The wife goes off to Gascony,

Achitophel resorts to spite,

While, by the onus of swearing oaths

He disturbs the entire land.



CH: La femme s'installe en Gascogne; Achitophel s'installe dans l'iniquité
et se fait fort de se justifier par serment, mettant ainsi le trouble dans
tout le pays. (The woman settles in Gascony; Achitophel settles in
iniquity and undertakes to justify himself by oath, thus stirring disorder
in all the land.)

The main point of interest for my purposes is that if the wife who went to
Gascony was Henri's wife (as seems to be the case), then the identity of
Henri's second wife Gersende with Gersende of Gascony is strengthened. That
in turn would shut the door on any attempt to identify Gersende with the
wife of Henri who was a sister of count-bishop Hugues. I wasn't really
anticipating that this would be a problem, but I felt that thoroughness
demanded that this point at least be addressed in any discussion of
Gerberge's parentage. Without knowledge of Gersende's family, it would be
difficult to show that she was not a daughter of Lambert and Adélaïde (whose
parentage is unproven). Although they were not ancestors of Henry II of
England, I am in the process of writing pages for Otte-Guillaume (a
step-ancestor of Henry II), Gerberge, Lambert, and Adélaïde (also a
step-ancestor) for the Henry Project, along with pages for the various
Burgundians who were ancestors of Henry. It is interesting how the subject
of Gerberge's parentage is interrelated not only with the present thread,
but also with a number of other issues which have been bones of contention
in the literature (e.g., the identification of Otte-Guillaume's wife
Ermentrude with the widow of Aubry II of Mâcon, conjectures about the
marriage of Otte-Guillaume's son Guy, the identification of Adélaïde's
second husband Geoffroy with Geoffroy of Anjou).

Stewart Baldwin

[Denis Beauregard]

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 03:31:58 +0000, Bob Turcott <[email protected]>
wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:

Denis,

I thought the similarities between Turquault & Turquet here are funny!!!

Turquault D'argent, au chevron de gueules, acc. de trois têtes de More, tortillées d'or.
Turquet de Beauregard D'or, à deux coeurs de gueules appointés, celui en pointe renversée, acc. de trois molettes du même, 2 et 1.

The only common parts are that one feature is red (gueule) and
another has 3 components.

however I suspect prior to Turqualt the name might have been Turcus.

Both names have probably a similar origin, i.e. turc meaning
either of the color of Turks (dark skin, like Morin for Maurs)
or related to the Turkish people. But it can be turquoise, which
is a shade of blue or green, or so many more words of that time.
Nothing to make them cousins.


Denis

--
0 Denis Beauregard -
/\/ Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/
|\ French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/
/ | Maintenant sur cédérom, début à 1770 (Version 2008)
oo oo Now on CD-ROM, beginnings to 1770 (2008 Release)

[Tim]

On Jan 21, 2:41 pm, [email protected] wrote:

On Jan 21, 7:27 am, [email protected] wrote:

In a message dated 1/21/2008 6:30:25 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  

[email protected] writes:

Am I the  only one who sees a problem with this?
Tom

-------------------
Can you be more clear?

**************Start the year off right.  Easy ways to stay in shape.    http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489

Is there an historical basis for Crusaders being called collectively
"Franks" & certain Persians "Mongols"? That stopped me right there,
but maybe this is something I just didn't know...?

At the beginning of the 13th century Persia was part of the Empire of
Khwarezm. In the early 1200's the Mongols, under Genghis Khan,
attacked Khwarezm and eventually destroyed it. Hulagu Khan (grandson
of Genghis) invaded and conquered Persia. He set up an empire in
Persia, known as the Il-Khanate, which was a subdivision of the
greater Mongol Empire. This is what is meant by referring to the
Persians as Mongols. As time went on the Mongol rulers of the Il-
Khanate, descended from Hulagu Khan, gradually adopted Persian
culture. In 1295 the ruler converted to Islam and declared his realm
an independent empire. In 1335 the Il-Khanate began to disintegrate
due to internal rivalries. Around 1370 it was conquered by Tamerlane's
forces and became part of his new empire which was based in what had
been old Khwarezm (now modern Uzbekistan).

[wjhonson]

On Jan 21, 3:12 pm, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

     Sir Duncan Campbell, 1st Lord Campbell was born before 1390.2 He
was the son of Sir Colin Campbell of Lochow and Mariot Campbell.2 He
married, firstly, Lady Marjorie Stewart, daughter of Robert Stewart,
1st Duke of Albany and Margaret Graham, Countess of Menteith.2 He
married, secondly, Margaret Stewart, daughter of Sir John Stewart,
before 12 March 1439/40.

I should say. The record of their dispensation to marry was posted
here back on 24 May 2006 by John Ravilous "...dated St. Peter's Rome,
16 Kal. Feb. [17 Jan] 1422/3]..."

See full post following

Will Johnson



Subj: Campbell of Lochawe and Stewart of Ardgowan: a conjecture
Date: 5/24/06 7:10:27 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: Therav3
To: [email protected]

An entry in Notes and Queries concerning King Robert III
(1390-1406) states, "unlike his father and his successors in the
dynasty, had a very limited number of natural sons. By a lady whom
tradition connects with the house of Campbell of Lochawe he had two
sons, John and James. " While this statement cannot as yet be proved
or disproved, there is evidence that indicates this may be correct,
and to which generation in the Campbell family this relationship can
be traced.

The record of dispensation for Sir Duncan Campbell and his 2nd
wife Margaret Stewart [dated St. Peter's Rome, 16 Kal. Feb. [17 Jan]
1422/3]

[wjhonson]

On Jan 21, 3:12 pm, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

F, #108015, b. before 1426

Last Edited=9 Sep 2003
     Elizabeth Somerville was born before 1426. She was the daughter
of John Somerville, 2nd Lord Somerville and Helen Hepburn.1,2 She
married Archibald Campbell, Master of Campbell, son of Sir Duncan
Campbell, 1st Lord Campbell and Lady Marjorie Stewart.1

This line breaks here, John 2nd Lord Somerville was a much younger
man, either contemporary or even a generation nearer than Elizabeth


Will Johnson

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

As I continue to survey the existing historical and genealogical
literature regarding the children of Isabel of England, I find ever
more disparity between published sources, even among works published
in recent time. The weblink below is for the book, Schrift-- macht--
Heiligkeit in den Literaturen des jüdisch-christlich-muslimischen
Mittelalters, published in 2005 by Karl Bertau.

http://books.google.com/books?id=f8nTCI ... v30dLSis6Y

Here we find only two children listed for Isabel of England, namely

1. Margaretha, born 1237, died 1270.
2. Carl-Otto, died 1253/4.

The child Carl-Otto appears to be the child elsewhere called Heinrich
in other sources. The daughter Margaretha is here identified as the
female child born in 1237, yet we are not told on what basis this
identification is made. No mention whatsoever is made of the child
born in 1241.

I note there is no mention of the alleged child Jordan that one
enthusiastic poster was certain belonged as a child of Isabel of
England.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[[email protected]]

On Jan 21, 11:28 pm, wjhonson <[email protected]> wrote:

On Jan 21, 3:12 pm, "[email protected]"

[email protected]> wrote:
     Sir Duncan Campbell, 1st Lord Campbell was born before 1390.2 He
was the son of Sir Colin Campbell of Lochow and Mariot Campbell.2 He
married, firstly, Lady Marjorie Stewart, daughter of Robert Stewart,
1st Duke of Albany and Margaret Graham, Countess of Menteith.2 He
married, secondly, Margaret Stewart, daughter of Sir John Stewart,
before 12 March 1439/40.

I should say.  The record of their dispensation to marry was posted
here back on 24 May 2006 by John Ravilous "...dated St. Peter's Rome,
16 Kal. Feb. [17 Jan] 1422/3]..."

See full post following

Will Johnson

Subj:   Campbell of Lochawe and Stewart of Ardgowan: a conjecture
Date:   5/24/06 7:10:27 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From:   Therav3
To:     [email protected]

     An entry in Notes and Queries concerning King Robert III
(1390-1406) states, "unlike his father and his successors in the
dynasty, had a very limited number of natural sons.  By a lady whom
tradition connects with the house of Campbell of Lochawe he had two
sons, John and James. "  While this  statement cannot as yet be proved
or disproved, there is evidence that indicates this may be correct,
and to which generation in the Campbell family this relationship can
be traced.

     The record of dispensation for Sir Duncan Campbell and his 2nd
wife Margaret Stewart [dated St. Peter's Rome, 16 Kal. Feb. [17 Jan]
1422/3]

John Ravilious records the integrity of the following:

Robert Stewart, 1st Duke of Albany-Margaret Graham, Countess of
Menteith
Duncan Campbell, 1st Lord of Lochow=Majorie Stewart, dau. of RS, 1st
Duke
Archibald CampbellI, Master of Campbell=Elizabeth Somerville

Of this, Leo van de Pas needs to correct the first generation wife,
Margaret Graham, Countess of Menteith,
married 9 Sep 1361, by Papal dispensation

Aaron

[Alex Maxwell Findlater]

In supplying the additional or variant surname of Comerford for the bride,
the entry cites the surname of one of the 9 other civic families of
Kilkenny. This raises the question of why Comerford was borne as an
alternate name for Archdeacon (Archdekin).

In this context it would indicate that she was the widow of one
Comerford. But why go to Portpatrick? Perhaps no-one approved. Was
it a catholic marrying a protestant? It was a protestant marriage.

[D. Spencer Hines]

Yes, that overenthusiastic poster, fascinated by the clatter of his own
keyboard gropings, often gets carried away by his soaring solipsistic
rhetoric and blinkered parochialism to the greater detriment of genealogical
accuracy and probity.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

"Douglas Richardson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:ca92f78a-1170-4b1d-a8a8-f395d17361f4@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Dear Newsgroup ~

As I continue to survey the existing historical and genealogical
literature regarding the children of Isabel of England, I find ever
more disparity between published sources, even among works published
in recent time. The weblink below is for the book, Schrift-- macht--
Heiligkeit in den Literaturen des jüdisch-christlich-muslimischen
Mittelalters, published in 2005 by Karl Bertau.

http://books.google.com/books?id=f8nTCI ... v30dLSis6Y

Here we find only two children listed for Isabel of England, namely

1. Margaretha, born 1237, died 1270.
2. Carl-Otto, died 1253/4.

The child Carl-Otto appears to be the child elsewhere called Heinrich
in other sources. The daughter Margaretha is here identified as the
female child born in 1237, yet we are not told on what basis this
identification is made. No mention whatsoever is made of the child
born in 1241.

I note there is no mention of the alleged child Jordan that one
enthusiastic poster was certain belonged as a child of Isabel of
England.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[AdrianBnjmBurke]

On Jan 21, 5:28 pm, Marc Nuber <[email protected]> wrote:

I am looking for information on "ADEMARIUS NUBERIUS" , from the

Necrologio del Liber confratrum di S. Matteo di Salerno
from Salerno (Italy). San Matteo (Cathedral), Carlo Alberto Garufi -
Salerno (Italy) - 1922

Is there anyone that has this book or would be able to access it?

If someone could translate my question into Italian it would
be a kindness.

Thank you for your help."

[Apparently it's a late medieval manuscript found in the cathedral
church of Salerno, the "Liber Confratrum" of San Matteo, containing
death notices of various people dating back to the Lombard and Norman
period - an edition of the manuscript can be found in C. A. Garufi,
"Necrologio del Liber confratrum di S. Matteo di Salerno", vol.56 of
"Fonti per la storia d'Italia" (Rome, Istituto Storico Italiano per il
Medio Evo, 1922.  This information was found in  Valerie Ramseyer "The
Transformation of a Religious Landscape: Medieval Southern Italy,
850-1150", Cornell University Press, 2006, p.78, displayed by
Googlebooks]

I can help you with your question:

<I am looking for information on "ADEMARIUS NUBERIUS" , from
thevNecrologio del Liber confratrum di S. Matteo di Salerno from
Salerno (Italy). San Matteo (Cathedral), Carlo Alberto Garufi -
Salerno (Italy) - 1922>

<Sto cercando informazione oppure una copia di qualche pagine dal'
libro chiamato "ADEMARIUS NUBERIUS", dall' Necrologio del Liber
confratrum di S. Matteo di Salerno from Salerno (Italia). San Matteo
(Catedrale), Carlo Alberto Garufi - Salerno (Italia) - 1922.

[Tony Hoskins]

I've worked rather extensively in NW Devon-NE Cornwall parishes where in
the 19th century it was the exception not to find a "native" married
couple that wasn't related in some fashion, often no farther removed
than 4th cousins. Extrapolating, I suspect this is a genealogical
commonplace rendered difficult of proof due to documentary lacunae.

Anthony Hoskins
History, Genealogy and Archives Librarian
Sonoma County Archivist
Sonoma County History and Genealogy Library
3rd and E Streets
Santa Rosa, California 95404

707/545-0831, ext. 562

[Leo van de Pas]

Chapter and verse had been quoted, but some enthusiastic amateur, or is it
trained historian and genealogist, must have overlooked it and thought he
found reasons to gloat.
It is such a wonderful way to make friends.
I can only think his Charlemagne venture is growing and, as usual, he is
using Gen-Med by stealth.
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas

----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 5:55 AM
Subject: Re: Children of Isabel of England (Died 1241),Wife of Emperor
Frederick II

In a message dated 1/22/2008 12:20:12 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

I note there is no mention of the alleged child Jordan that one
enthusiastic poster was certain belonged as a child of Isabel of
England.


------------------
Or it's possible that the child was not created by any enthusiastic poster
here, but rather a citation and quote was provided that showed that
previous
historians have indicated there was such a child.

Will Johnson



**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.8/1235 - Release Date: 1/21/2008
9:39 AM

[Gjest]

In a message dated 1/22/2008 12:20:12 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

I note there is no mention of the alleged child Jordan that one
enthusiastic poster was certain belonged as a child of Isabel of
England.>>


------------------
Or it's possible that the child was not created by any enthusiastic poster
here, but rather a citation and quote was provided that showed that previous
historians have indicated there was such a child.

Will Johnson



**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

Another issue related to Emperor Frederick II is whether or not he had
three or four wives.

Two poorly documented online sources (Wikipedia and Medieval Lands)
get confused about this, saying that Emperor Frederick II had a
mistress named "Bianca Lancia," who was "the daughter of Manfred II
Lancia, Marquess of Busca and Bianca 'Maletta', daughter of one
Guglielmo, whose family surname is unknown." Regarding the issue of
whether or not Frederick actually married Bianca, Wikipedia waffles on
this issue, saying she was his "mistress and (according to some
historians) wife of emperor Frederick II of Hohenstaufen." Emperor
Frederick II had at least two children by Bianca (otherwise called
Blanche), namely Manfred, King of Sicily, and Anna, wife of Johannes,
Doukas Batatzes, Emperor of Nikaia.

In 2003 the historian, Paul Crawford, published a text which states
that Emperor Frederick II in fact married the said Blanche, and that
their son, Manfred, though conceived in adultery, was thereby
legitimized. In a footnote on page 18, Mr. Crawford has the following
to say about Emperor Frederick II's wife, Blanche, who he identifies
as the daughter of Boniface, Count of Angliano:

"The mother of Manfred, King of Sicily, was a noblewoman named
Blanche, of the family of the Marquis of Lancia and Loreto, in
southern Lombardy. She was the daughter of Boniface, Count of Agliano
(near Asti), one of the principal fiefs of Lancia. Even
contemporaries were unsure of the exact degree of her relationship
with the Marquis of Lancia, who had accompanied Emperor Frederick II
to the East. They could not tell if she were his niece or his
granddaughter." [Reference: Source: Paul Crawford, The 'Templar of
Tyre': Part III of the 'Deeds of the Cypriots' (Crusade Texts in
Translation 6) (2003), pg. 18, footnote 4].

The two Marquis'es of Lancia here mentioned by Mr.Crawford are Manfred
I and his son, Manfred II, both of whom held the title of Marquis.
They were eventually succeeded in the next generation by Manfred III,
also a Marquis..

Elsewhere the story of Emperor Frederick's marriage to King Manfred's
mother, Blanche, and their son, Manfred's subsequent legitimacy is
discussed in another contemporary source, Chronica Majora, by Matthew
Paris, which may be viewed at the following weblinks:

http://books.google.com/books?id=ufYKAA ... #PPA571,M1
http://books.google.com/books?id=ufYKAA ... #PPA572,M1

That Emperor Frederick II actually married Blanche, a kinswoman of the
Marquis of Lancia, and that Mr. Crawford is correct that Blanche was
not the daughter of the Marquis of Lancia is supported by evidence
found in a charter issued by Emperor Frederick II dated 1248, which
charter was witnessed by Manfred [III], Marquis of Lancia, "our
beloved kinsman" [dilectus affinis noster]. The word here used for
kinsman is "affinis," that is kinsman by marriage, not blood. A
transcript of this charter is published in Huillard-Bréholles,
Historia diplomatica Friderica Secundi, 6(2) (1861): 670-672. It may
be viewed at the following weblink:

http://books.google.com/books?id=C1cBAA ... #PPA672,M1

Clearly Emperor Frederick II considered his marriage to Blanche valid,
otherwise he would never have addressed Manfred [III], Marquis of
Lancia, as his "affinis." Also, if this Manfred [III] was the
Emperor's brother-in-law, as claimed by Medieval Lands, he would
likely would have been addressed as "frater" [i.e., brother-in-law]
not "affinis." As for Blanche's daughter, Anna, I believe she is the
Emperor's daughter that was contracted to marry to Hermann, Landgrave
of Thüringia, in 1238, and subsequently repudiated by him c.1239. In
any case, it is highly unlikely that Hermann, who was an adult in
1237, was contracted to marry the Emperor's infant daughter by Isabel
of England born in February 1237 as claimed by Medieval Lands. It
would be highly unusual for a grown man to be contracted to marry an
infant, even the Emperor's daughter.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[Leticia Cluff]

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:13:03 -0800 (PST), Douglas Richardson
<[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Newsgroup ~

As I continue to survey the existing historical and genealogical
literature regarding the children of Isabel of England, I find ever
more disparity between published sources, even among works published
in recent time. The weblink below is for the book, Schrift-- macht--
Heiligkeit in den Literaturen des jüdisch-christlich-muslimischen
Mittelalters, published in 2005 by Karl Bertau.

http://books.google.com/books?id=f8nTCI ... v30dLSis6Y

Here we find only two children listed for Isabel of England, namely

1. Margaretha, born 1237, died 1270.
2. Carl-Otto, died 1253/4.

The child Carl-Otto appears to be the child elsewhere called Heinrich
in other sources. The daughter Margaretha is here identified as the
female child born in 1237, yet we are not told on what basis this
identification is made. No mention whatsoever is made of the child
born in 1241.

I note there is no mention of the alleged child Jordan that one
enthusiastic poster was certain belonged as a child of Isabel of
England.

Douglas,

I notice that you yourself started this thread with a moderately
enthusiastic reference to the historian Mary Anne Everett Green. The
enthusiasm was evident in the amount of time and space you devoted to
her "interesting and well researched biography of King John's
daughter, Isabel of England."

You rightly observed that Green, like many other writers
(authoritative or otherwise), says that Isabel had four children, and
you quoted in full the sources in Green's footnotes, without any hint
that you disputed them.

You then correctly pointed out that many other writers mention only
the two children that survived. To your list of argumenta ex silentio
I could add one writer who was closer to the events than anyone else
cited hitherto, namely the father himself. In a letter to Henry III of
England, reporting the news of the empress's death in childbirth,
Frederick II is consoled by the fact that God "provided that she
should live to us and to you in the memory of her TWO children." ...
"Although, therefore, the loss of our august spouse, your sister,
cannot be mentioned by me or heard of by you, without great sorrow of
heart, and affliction at her death cannot be separated from our inmost
heart, yet the memory of the beloved parent flourishes in the DOUBLE
offspring, and our connection is indissolubly confirmed by those same
nephews whom your august sister bore to me as children." (Matthew
Paris, vol 1, page 393 of the English translation by J. A. Giles,
capitals mine)

I just have one question. I trust that you (unlike me) have
scrutinized the sources cited by Green in support of the birth to
Isabel of a son named Jordan, so I was wondering, where exactly
do you find them wanting?

Tish

[John P. Ravilious]

Dear Michael,

I think there's a missing link of sorts here. See below.



On Jan 22, 5:07 pm, [email protected] wrote:

Got it - I think!

Apologies to Fox-Davies for having doubted him, and many thanks to Leo
for his assistance - this descent is based on Genealogics.

1. Conan III, Duke of Brittany 1112-1148
2. Bertha, daughter and heir, married Odo II of Porhoet

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Bertha m. 1stly, Alan 'the Black', lord of the honour of Richmond
(d. 15 Sept 1146). They had two sons I note in my records: Conan IV,
Duke of Brittany 1156-1166 and Earl of Richmond (England), and a
younger son Brian, ancestor of Brian fitz Alan of Bedale. Given that
the eldest son of this marriage would have carried the undifferenced
arms, I'm not sure of any right to same of the part of Eudo of
Porhoet.

This is assuming of course that Eudo (or Odo below) was actually
the son of Bertha of Brittany - if there is supporting evidence that
this is the case, I'd be most interested in hearing of it.

3. Odo III, Vicomte de Porhoet
4. Matilda, daughter and heir
5. Ralph III de Fougeres
6. Joan, daughter and heir, married Hugh XII of Lusignan
7. Joan, daughter and coheir, married Peter de Geneville
8. Joan, daughter and heir, married Roger Mortimer
9. Sir Edmund Mortimer
10. Roger, 2nd Earl of March
11. Edmund, 3rd Earl of March
12. Roger, 4th Earl of March
13. Anne, daughter and heir, married Richard, Earl of Cambridge
14. Richard, 3rd Duke of York
15. King Edward IV

Thus, the English families descended from Edward IV *are* entitled to
a quartering for Brittany, it would seem - e.g. the Child-Villiers,
Earls of Jersey as the senior heirs of Mary Tudor and Charles Brandon.

(The descendants of George, Duke of Cambridge, are not so entitled,
due to the attainder of his daughter, the Countess of Salisbury, their
gateway ancestress.)

MA-R

Cheers,

John

[Leticia Cluff]

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 14:15:42 -0800 (PST), "M.Sjostrom"
<[email protected]> wrote:

Unlikely that the royal Sicilian court meant, were
anywhere near Sicily.
Marie would in all likelihood have been with her
brother, somewhere in their more or less French
holdings, or with her mother, the famed Queen Yolande,
whose chief residence could have been Angers.

You see, those kings of Sicily had several kingdoms
which for them, had sadly mostly been drowned under
sundry political tides.
Queen Yolande was titularly queen of four kingdoms.
They just did not actually rule any of them.

IIRC the closest dominion to Sicily which they
actually held at that time, was Provence.

So in actual terms, the royal family of Sicily was
just a nicely fancy and high appellation for a French
potentate family.

Yes, I was tempted to add Provence? after Naples? Calabria?
I've no idea where Louis III had his court in July 1429. I just know
that he was in Cosenza (Calabria) when he died in 1434.

Tish

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Tish ~

Thank you for your good post. Much appreciated. I'm glad to see that
a fellow newsgroup poster is actually capable of citing a contemporary
source.

I hadn't yet encountered the letter of Emperor Frederick II in which
he stated that his wife, Isabel of England, was survived at her death
by two children. Nice work.

By any chance, do you happen to have the weblink reference for the
Giles citation for Matthew Paris?

As for the historian, Green, she seems to have taken great pains to
get her information as accurate as possible. Her work is easy to
read, and she includes interesting anecdotes of each royal princess
she treats. Her sources for the children of Isabel of England,
however, appear to have been drawn from primarily from secondary
works, not primary sources. She does refer to the published letter of
Emperor Frederick II dated February 1237, in which he mentioned the
birth of a daughter. She assigns the name of Agnes to this child, but
I don't know on what authority.

Matthew Paris refers to the births of two sons, one in 1237 named
Heinrich, and one in 1238 whose name he does not state. So far I have
found only contemporary or near contemporary references to a son
Heinrich born in February 1236 and a daughter born in February 1237.
There was also evidently a child born in Dec. 1241, at the time Isabel
of England died in childbirth. This information obviously does not
match Paris's account. This also does not match the information
provided by the enthusiastic and misinformed poster who has claimed
that a son, Jordan, was born in 1236. As you are aware, at least one
historian has expressed serious doubts about the existence of Jordan
as the Emperor's child. Likewise, I still haven't verified the
birthdate of the daughter, Margaretha, which child survived to
adulthood, unless she is the female child born in 1237 or the child
born in 1241 ar the time of Isabel of England's death. Most modern
sources refer to the birth of a son, Heinrich, in 1238. I suspect
this is the correct date for Heinrich's birth, rather than the 1236
date. But this still needs confirmation.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah





On Jan 22, 2:31 pm, Leticia Cluff <[email protected]>
wrote:

Douglas,

I notice that you yourself started this thread with a moderately
enthusiastic reference to the historian Mary Anne Everett Green. The
enthusiasm was evident in the amount of time and space you devoted to
her "interesting and well researched biography of King John's
daughter, Isabel of England."

You rightly observed that Green, like many other writers
(authoritative or otherwise), says that Isabel had four children, and
you quoted in full the sources in Green's footnotes, without any hint
that you disputed them.

You then correctly pointed out that many other writers mention only
the two children that survived. To your list of argumenta ex silentio
I could add one writer who was closer to the events than anyone else
cited hitherto, namely the father himself. In a letter to Henry III of
England, reporting the news of the empress's death in childbirth,
Frederick II is consoled by the fact that God "provided that she
should live to us and to you in the memory of her TWO children." ...
"Although, therefore, the loss of our august spouse, your sister,
cannot be mentioned by me or heard of by you, without great sorrow of
heart, and affliction at her death cannot be separated from our inmost
heart, yet the memory of the beloved parent flourishes in the DOUBLE
offspring, and our connection is indissolubly confirmed by those same
nephews whom your august sister bore to me as children." (Matthew
Paris, vol 1, page 393 of the English translation by J. A. Giles,
capitals mine)

Tish

[D. Spencer Hines]

Indeed...

DSH

"Douglas Richardson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:fa517bad-c7f0-4685-aef5-2b34b432a2ec@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com...

Matthew Paris refers to the births of two sons, one in 1237 named
Heinrich, and one in 1238 whose name he does not state. So far I have
found only contemporary or near contemporary references to a son
Heinrich born in February 1236 and a daughter born in February 1237.

There was also evidently a child born in Dec. 1241, at the time Isabel
of England died in childbirth. This information obviously does not
match Paris's account.

This also does not match the information provided by the
enthusiastic and misinformed poster who has claimed that a son, Jordan,
was born in 1236. As you are aware, at least one historian has expressed
serious doubts about the existence of Jordan as the Emperor's child.

[Leticia Cluff]

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 14:33:36 -0800 (PST), Douglas Richardson
<[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Tish ~

Thank you for your good post. Much appreciated. I'm glad to see that
a fellow newsgroup poster is actually capable of citing a contemporary
source.

I hadn't yet encountered the letter of Emperor Frederick II in which
he stated that his wife, Isabel of England, was survived at her death
by two children. Nice work.

By any chance, do you happen to have the weblink reference for the
Giles citation for Matthew Paris?

You will find the three volumes here in VERY LARGE pdf files:
http://standish.stanford.edu/bin/search ... s&offset=0

You can have a nice long walk or write a short novel while you are
downloading volume 1.

Tish

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

Here are the weblinks to Emperor Frederick II's letter to King Henry
III of England dated 30 January 1242, in which he announces the death
of his wife, Empress Isabel, the king's sister, and states she was
survived by two children:

http://books.google.com/books?id=WWENAA ... #PPA392,M1

http://books.google.com/books?id=WWENAA ... #PPA393,M1

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[John H]

Wow!! is this the longest header ever?

"Re: Who was the 13th Lord Dunsany's wife Margaret Archdekin, daughter of
Edward Archdekin, Esq., of Co. Kilkenny, Ireland, and widow of Edward
Mandeville, of Ballydean, Co. Tipperary"

John H

"Alex Maxwell Findlater" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

In supplying the additional or variant surname of Comerford for the
bride,
the entry cites the surname of one of the 9 other civic families of
Kilkenny. This raises the question of why Comerford was borne as an
alternate name for Archdeacon (Archdekin).



In this context it would indicate that she was the widow of one
Comerford. But why go to Portpatrick? Perhaps no-one approved. Was
it a catholic marrying a protestant? It was a protestant marriage.

[Gjest]

On Jan 23, 9:35 am, "John P. Ravilious" <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Michael,

     I think there's a missing link of sorts here.  See below.

On Jan 22, 5:07 pm, [email protected] wrote:

Got it - I think!

Apologies to Fox-Davies for having doubted him, and many thanks to Leo
for his assistance - this descent is based on Genealogics.

1. Conan III, Duke of Brittany 1112-1148
2. Bertha, daughter and heir, married Odo II of Porhoet



     Bertha m. 1stly, Alan 'the Black', lord of the honour of Richmond
(d. 15 Sept 1146).  They had two sons I note in my records: Conan IV,
Duke of Brittany 1156-1166 and Earl of Richmond (England), and a
younger son Brian, ancestor of Brian fitz Alan of Bedale.  Given that
the eldest son of this marriage would have carried the undifferenced
arms, I'm not sure of any right to same of the part of Eudo of
Porhoet.

Arms, when quartered, do not need to show any differencing or marks of
cadency [actually, the English cadency system is entirely voluntary];
the quartering is usually considered sufficient distinction.

This is assuming of course that Eudo (or Odo below) was actually
the son of Bertha of Brittany - if there is supporting evidence that
this is the case, I'd be most interested in hearing of it.

Sorry - can't say.

MA-R

[John Briggs]

Douglas Richardson wrote:

In 2003 the historian, Paul Crawford, published a text which states
that Emperor Frederick II in fact married the said Blanche, and that
their son, Manfred, though conceived in adultery, was thereby
legitimized.

By a quickie divorce as well?
--
John Briggs

[Peter Stewart]

[Crosspostings removed]

On Jan 23, 9:33 am, Douglas Richardson <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Tish ~

Thank you for your good post.  Much appreciated.  I'm glad to see
that a fellow newsgroup poster is actually capable of citing a
contemporary source.

Meaning that Richardson is glad to obtain some free research
assistance....He doesn't even know in this case what is or is not a
"contemporary" source, because he can't read the MGH editorial
prefaces in Latin that discuss the texts from which he
indiscriminately quoted.

I hadn't yet encountered the letter of Emperor Frederick II in which
he stated that his wife, Isabel of England, was survived at her death
by two children.  Nice work.

Considering that you started this thread stating "The only thing on
which modern sources seem to agree is that only two children that
survived Isabel" it's amazing that you admit to such incompetence at
fulfilling your own aim of backing up this consensus you already knew
about from Googling with evidence you had to make some further effort
to find.

By any chance, do you happen to have the weblink reference for the
Giles citation for Matthew Paris?

As for the historian, Green, she seems to have taken great pains to
get her information as accurate as possible.

Yet now you are writing (below) about "the enthusiastic and
misinformed poster" who agreed with her about Jordan...

 Her work is easy to read, and she includes interesting anecdotes
of each royal princess she treats.  Her sources for the children of
Isabel of England, however, appear to have been drawn from primarily
from secondary works, not primary sources.

You have been told that no contemporary source is known for the birth
& death of Jordan in 1236. There is indirect evidence for a
confinement probably too soon after the marriage for a baby to live at
that time (around seven to eight months, from 20 July 1235 when
Frederick and Isabel were married to the early spring of 1236). You
have been told that this baby was baptised in water brought from the
Jordan - Frederick was king of Jerusalem by right of his second wife,
and not even he would have allowed Jordan water that came with her to
be used for the baptism of an illegitimate child. The perfectly
plausible account was stated, for the first time known to us, by a
later historian who may well have had access to contemporary source/s
now lost. You have been given a quotation from Van Cleve mentioning
this evidence as less firm than that for Henry, confirming the opinion
of Klaus Heinisch that the "alleged" son Jordan is less well-
documented. This does not give you warrant to talk about
"misinformation". If you wish to make a case that the Italian
historians whose work you have not even bothered to check were somehow
mistaken in giving specific information about a child whose brief
existence could make not a jot of difference to them one way or the
other, then by all means do so. But you can't do this by insinuation
and wishful thinking.

 She does refer to the published letter of Emperor Frederick II dated > February 1237, in which he mentioned the birth of a daughter.  She
assigns the name of Agnes to this child, but I don't know on what
authority.

She was wrong on this - the daughter was Margaret, and the letter
announcing her birth was read in February 1237 but may have been
written in January for all you know.

Matthew Paris refers to the births of two sons, one in 1237 named
Heinrich, and one in 1238 whose name he does not state.  So far I
have found only contemporary or near contemporary references to a
son Heinrich born in February 1236

Um, you have found an entry in Annales Siculi to this effect, that is
clearly enough wrong for Henrich who survived infancy, since Isabel
had married Frederick only seven months before that time, but you have
not established whether this source was even contemporary, much less
assessed its accuracy more generally.

and a daughter born in February 1237.

_By_ February 1237...

There was also evidently a child born in Dec. 1241, at the time Isabel
of England died in childbirth.  This information obviously does not
match Paris's account.  This also does not match the information
provided by the enthusiastic and misinformed poster who has claimed
that a son, Jordan, was born in 1236.

Eh? A non sequitur - ask Hines what that means. How does a fatal
childbirth in 1241 prove that someone is misinformed about another
baby born & dead five years earlier?

 As you are aware, at least one historian has expressed serious
doubts about the existence of Jordan as the Emperor's
child.

Who? Van Cleve and Heinisch note the comparative inadequacy of the
evidence, but this is not the same as expressing "serious doubts"
about its veracity. Until you know what this evidence amounts to, you
had better refrain from characterising it.

 Likewise, I still haven't verified the birthdate of the daughter,
Margaretha, which child survived to adulthood, unless she is the
female child born in 1237 or the child born in 1241 ar the time of
Isabel of England's death.

Considering that the 1241 baby died and Margaret lived to adulthood,
this is another potential waste of your time.

Most modern sources refer to the birth of a son, Heinrich,
in 1238.  I suspect this  is the correct date for Heinrich's birth,
rather than the 1236 date.  But this still needs confirmation.

No it doesn't, as far as the record goes - you mean you still need to
confirm this for yourself, but what you do or do not know is far from
being the standard point of reference for medieval historians or
genalogists.

Peter Stewart

[Douglas Richardson]

On Jan 22, 5:11 pm, "John Briggs" <[email protected]> wrote:
< Douglas Richardson wrote:
<
< > In 2003 the historian, Paul Crawford, published a text which
states
< > that Emperor Frederick II in fact married the said Blanche, and
that
< > their son, Manfred, though conceived in adultery, was thereby
< > legitimized.
<
< By a quickie divorce as well?
< --
< John Briggs

The matter of the marriage of Emperor Frederick and his mistress,
Blanche, has Wikipedia and Medieval Lands tied up in knots.

Perhaps you have a pair of scissors to hand them?

DR

[John Briggs]

Douglas Richardson wrote:

On Jan 22, 5:11 pm, "John Briggs" <[email protected]> wrote:
Douglas Richardson wrote:

In 2003 the historian, Paul Crawford, published a text which
states
that Emperor Frederick II in fact married the said Blanche, and
that
their son, Manfred, though conceived in adultery, was thereby
legitimized.

By a quickie divorce as well?

The matter of the marriage of Emperor Frederick and his mistress,
Blanche, has Wikipedia and Medieval Lands tied up in knots.

Perhaps you have a pair of scissors to hand them?

No, but how was Manfred "conceived in adultery"? Who was married to whom
[or possibly vice versa - vide supra...]?
--
John Briggs

[Gjest]

In a message dated 1/22/2008 5:40:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

Dear Michael,

I think there's a missing link of sorts here. See below.



On Jan 22, 5:07 pm, [email protected] wrote:

Got it - I think!

Apologies to Fox-Davies for having doubted him, and many thanks to Leo
for his assistance - this descent is based on Genealogics.

1. Conan III, Duke of Brittany 1112-1148
2. Bertha, daughter and heir, married Odo II of Porhoet

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Bertha m. 1stly, Alan 'the Black', lord of the honour of Richmond
(d. 15 Sept 1146). They had two sons I note in my records: Conan IV,
Duke of Brittany 1156-1166 and Earl of Richmond (England), and a
younger son Brian, ancestor of Brian fitz Alan of Bedale. Given that
the eldest son of this marriage would have carried the undifferenced
arms, I'm not sure of any right to same of the part of Eudo of
Porhoet.

This is assuming of course that Eudo (or Odo below) was actually
the son of Bertha of Brittany - if there is supporting evidence that
this is the case, I'd be most interested in hearing of it.

3. Odo III, Vicomte de Porhoet
4. Matilda, daughter and heir
5. Ralph III de Fougeres
6. Joan, daughter and heir, married Hugh XII of Lusignan
7. Joan, daughter and coheir, married Peter de Geneville
8. Joan, daughter and heir, married Roger Mortimer
9. Sir Edmund Mortimer
10. Roger, 2nd Earl of March
11. Edmund, 3rd Earl of March
12. Roger, 4th Earl of March
13. Anne, daughter and heir, married Richard, Earl of Cambridge
14. Richard, 3rd Duke of York
15. King Edward IV

Thus, the English families descended from Edward IV *are* entitled to
a quartering for Brittany, it would seem - e.g. the Child-Villiers,
Earls of Jersey as the senior heirs of Mary Tudor and Charles Brandon.

(The descendants of George, Duke of Cambridge, are not so entitled,
due to the attainder of his daughter, the Countess of Salisbury, their
gateway ancestress.)

MA-R

Cheers,

John



-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
the body of the message
Dear John Ravilious, I would think that the heraldic
arms would follow the decent of succession
1 Conan III, Duke of Brittany married Maud fitz
Henry of England
2 Bertha of Brittany married Alan, Earl of
Richmond
3 Conan IV, Duke of Brittany married Margaret of
Huntingdon
4 Constance, Duchess of Brittany married 2nd Guy
de Thouars
5 Alice de Thouars, Duchess of Brittany married
Peter I de Dreux jure uxoris Duke of Brittany
6 John I, Duke of Brittany married Blanche of
Navarre
7 John II, Duke of Brittany married Beatrice of
England
8 Arthur II, Duke of Brittany married 1st Marie de
Limoges, 2nd Yolande de Dreux, Countess de Montfort
9 Guy of Brittany, Count of Penthievre married Joan
of Goello
10 Joan of Brittany , Duchess of Brittany married
Charles de Blois, Duke of Brittany j. u.
11 Marie de Blois married Lous I d` Anjou, King of
Naples
12 Louis II, King of Naples married Yolande of
Aragon
13 Rene, King of Naples, Duke of Lorraine and Bar
married Isabel of Lorraine
14 Yolande d`Anjou married Frederick, Count of
Vaudemont
15 Rene II, Duke of Lorraine married Philippa of
Guelders
16 Anthony, Duke of Lorraine married Renee of
Bourbon- Montpensier
(many generations down to Francis Joseph I,
Emperor of Austria)







**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[Gjest]

Perhaps you have a pair of scissors to hand them?

No, but how was Manfred "conceived in adultery"? Who was married to whom
[or possibly vice versa - vide supra...]?
--
John Briggs

Manfred was conceived and, indeed, born to Bianca Lancia when she was
mistress of the Emperor while his third Empress, Isabel of England,
was still alive. He married her -- if he married her -- and he may
have regarded the marriage as legitimate without the Church, his
bitter enemy, doing so as well -- after Isabel's death, and then
legitimized their children. Nonetheless, Manfred was not regarded as
legitimate enough to become a reigning sovereign on his father's
death, as both Frederick's other legitimate sons did. He eventually
usurped the throne of Sicily after their deaths.

It was quite normal for grown men to marry infant heiresses in this
period, as for instance in the case of Frederick's father-in-law, Jean
de Brienne, who married the child Queen of Jerusalem, Maria of
Montferrat (their daughter was Frederick II's second wife), and in the
case of Petronilla Queen of Aragon, who was married at the age of one
week to the 31-year-old Count Raymond Berengar of Barcelona. (The
marriage proved a happy one and produced five children; a
granddaughter was the first wife of Emperor Frederick II.)

Henry Raspe is unlikely to have been unaware of Constance's dubious
legitimacy; he had plenty of reasons for quarreling with Frederick,
however.

Jean Coeur de Lapin

[John Briggs]

[email protected] wrote:

Perhaps you have a pair of scissors to hand them?

No, but how was Manfred "conceived in adultery"? Who was married to
whom [or possibly vice versa - vide supra...]?

Manfred was conceived and, indeed, born to Bianca Lancia when she was
mistress of the Emperor while his third Empress, Isabel of England,
was still alive. He married her -- if he married her -- and he may
have regarded the marriage as legitimate without the Church, his
bitter enemy, doing so as well -- after Isabel's death, and then
legitimized their children. Nonetheless, Manfred was not regarded as
legitimate enough to become a reigning sovereign on his father's
death, as both Frederick's other legitimate sons did. He eventually
usurped the throne of Sicily after their deaths.

The Wikipedia - which Douglas says is confused - gives dates of birth, and
dates of death of mothers in childbirth, which don't tie up with your
account - i.e. that Bianca died before Frederick married Isabella (who was
considerably younger).
--
John Briggs

[Peter Stewart]

Crosspostings removed.

"John Briggs" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:wNClj.17131$g%[email protected]...

[email protected] wrote:
Perhaps you have a pair of scissors to hand them?

No, but how was Manfred "conceived in adultery"? Who was married to
whom [or possibly vice versa - vide supra...]?

Manfred was conceived and, indeed, born to Bianca Lancia when she was
mistress of the Emperor while his third Empress, Isabel of England,
was still alive. He married her -- if he married her -- and he may
have regarded the marriage as legitimate without the Church, his
bitter enemy, doing so as well -- after Isabel's death, and then
legitimized their children. Nonetheless, Manfred was not regarded as
legitimate enough to become a reigning sovereign on his father's
death, as both Frederick's other legitimate sons did. He eventually
usurped the throne of Sicily after their deaths.

The Wikipedia - which Douglas says is confused - gives dates of birth, and
dates of death of mothers in childbirth, which don't tie up with your
account - i.e. that Bianca died before Frederick married Isabella (who was
considerably younger).

We don't know when Bianca died, there are several conflicting reports and
indications. The most plausible timing is before the wedding of her daughter
to Ioannes Batatzes in 1244, but maybe only a short while before this as it
is said she died 20 years after the start of her liaison with Frederick,
that evidently happened in the late 1220s - although the same source
unhelpfully also implied that she died 20 years before events taking place
in 1256.

Historians often opted for 1233/34 as the time of her death (i.e. a year or
so before the marriage of Isabel to Frederick rather than a few years after
the English empreess died), mainly due to the above, and this lingers in
reference works but is not considered reliable by most specialists nowadays.

Peter Stewart

[Peter Stewart]

"Leo van de Pas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Briggs" <[email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval, soc.history.medieval,
alt.history.british,alt.talk.royalty
To: <[email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: Children of Isabel of England (Died 1241),Wife of Emperor
Frederick II


[email protected] wrote:
Perhaps you have a pair of scissors to hand them?

No, but how was Manfred "conceived in adultery"? Who was married to
whom [or possibly vice versa - vide supra...]?

Manfred was conceived and, indeed, born to Bianca Lancia when she was
mistress of the Emperor while his third Empress, Isabel of England,
was still alive. He married her -- if he married her -- and he may
have regarded the marriage as legitimate without the Church, his
bitter enemy, doing so as well -- after Isabel's death, and then
legitimized their children. Nonetheless, Manfred was not regarded as
legitimate enough to become a reigning sovereign on his father's
death, as both Frederick's other legitimate sons did. He eventually
usurped the throne of Sicily after their deaths.

The Wikipedia - which Douglas says is confused - gives dates of birth,
and dates of death of mothers in childbirth, which don't tie up with your
account - i.e. that Bianca died before Frederick married Isabella (who
was considerably younger).
--
John Briggs

In this instance Wikpedia must be dreadful if you conclude that:

If Emperor Friedrich on _his_ deathbed married Bianca, was that before he
married Isabella?

Yolande de Brienne married Friedrich 9 November 1225 and died 8 May 1228
Isabella of England married Friedrich 20 July 1235 and died 1 December
1241

Manfred was born in 1232, in between the two marriages

Friedrich II died 13 December 1250

Bianca Lancia, what I found about her was "It is not known when she died
other than that she survived the Emperor.

This is possibly a mistake, it perhaps was meant to state "other than that
she did not survive the emperor".

There is almost complete agreement amongst the sources that Frederick
married Bianca on _her_ deathbed, although there is one account that she
recovered from the illness as soon as she thought her son was made
legitimate. However, there is no evidence to back this up against the
usually accepted story that she died. Furthermore, it would be highly
unlikely that the emperor in Nicaea would have accepted an illegitimate
daughter of his western counterpart in 1244.

Peter Stewart

[Renia]

Peter Stewart wrote:

Crosspostings removed.

Shame because I don't think John Briggs reads shm.

"John Briggs" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:wNClj.17131$g%[email protected]...

[email protected] wrote:

Perhaps you have a pair of scissors to hand them?

No, but how was Manfred "conceived in adultery"? Who was married to
whom [or possibly vice versa - vide supra...]?

Manfred was conceived and, indeed, born to Bianca Lancia when she was
mistress of the Emperor while his third Empress, Isabel of England,
was still alive. He married her -- if he married her -- and he may
have regarded the marriage as legitimate without the Church, his
bitter enemy, doing so as well -- after Isabel's death, and then
legitimized their children. Nonetheless, Manfred was not regarded as
legitimate enough to become a reigning sovereign on his father's
death, as both Frederick's other legitimate sons did. He eventually
usurped the throne of Sicily after their deaths.

The Wikipedia - which Douglas says is confused - gives dates of birth, and
dates of death of mothers in childbirth, which don't tie up with your
account - i.e. that Bianca died before Frederick married Isabella (who was
considerably younger).


We don't know when Bianca died, there are several conflicting reports and
indications. The most plausible timing is before the wedding of her daughter
to Ioannes Batatzes in 1244, but maybe only a short while before this as it
is said she died 20 years after the start of her liaison with Frederick,
that evidently happened in the late 1220s - although the same source
unhelpfully also implied that she died 20 years before events taking place
in 1256.

Historians often opted for 1233/34 as the time of her death (i.e. a year or
so before the marriage of Isabel to Frederick rather than a few years after
the English empreess died), mainly due to the above, and this lingers in
reference works but is not considered reliable by most specialists nowadays.

Peter Stewart

[Douglas Richardson]

On Jan 23, 1:20 am, "John Briggs" <[email protected]> wrote:

< The Wikipedia - which Douglas says is confused - gives dates of
birth, and
< dates of death of mothers in childbirth, which don't tie up with
your
< account - i.e. that Bianca died before Frederick married Isabella
(who was
< considerably younger).
< --
< John Briggs

The two sources which I cited gave no date whatsoever for the marriage
of Emperor Frederick to Blanche, so I'm not sure how either they or I
could disagree with the dates cited in Wikipedia.

All I said is that the Emperor evidently considered his marriage to
Blanche to be a valid marriage, as he referred to her first cousin,
Manfred, Marquis of Lancia, as his "affinis," that is, kinsman by
marriage. I cited a contemporary record to back up this statement,
not a modern genealogical database as you have done.

Perhaps it would be good, John, if you went on the record. What date
do you give to this marriage? And what is your primary source? Do
you agree or disagree with Wikipedia that Blanche was only the
Emperor's mistress? If you disagree, why so? On what records are you
basing your analysis?

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[Francisco Tavares de Alme]

On 21 Jan, 23:12, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

...

As a result of his marriage, Robert Stewart, 1st Duke of Albany
was styled as Earl of Menteith on 28 February 1361.3,2 He was created
1st Earl of Fife [Scotland] on 30 March 1371.

...

Could you please confirm:
a) Styled earl of Menteith on 28 February 1361
The papal dispensation of 9 September 1361 was granted after the
marriage?

b) Created 1st Earl of Fife
Didn't Isabel, countess of Fife resigned the earldom to him?

Regards
Francisco

[Ernst Hoffmann]

Bianca Lancia the younger was undoubtedly married "in articulo mortis
<her>" <i.e. her death bed> which was a legal "form of marriage under
condition" and which made her children from the relation "legitime"
children. She died either 1233 or 1234 which thus is the date the
marriage became "effective".

Ernst

It helps considerably if you KNOW the legal regulations of the time
instead of mumbling around. <sm>


Am 23.01.2008 um 17:53 schrieb Douglas Richardson:

On Jan 23, 1:20 am, "John Briggs" <[email protected]> wrote:

The Wikipedia - which Douglas says is confused - gives dates of
birth, and
dates of death of mothers in childbirth, which don't tie up with
your
account - i.e. that Bianca died before Frederick married Isabella
(who was
considerably younger).
--
John Briggs

The two sources which I cited gave no date whatsoever for the marriage
of Emperor Frederick to Blanche, so I'm not sure how either they or I
could disagree with the dates cited in Wikipedia.

All I said is that the Emperor evidently considered his marriage to
Blanche to be a valid marriage, as he referred to her first cousin,
Manfred, Marquis of Lancia, as his "affinis," that is, kinsman by
marriage. I cited a contemporary record to back up this statement,
not a modern genealogical database as you have done.

Perhaps it would be good, John, if you went on the record. What date
do you give to this marriage? And what is your primary source? Do
you agree or disagree with Wikipedia that Blanche was only the
Emperor's mistress? If you disagree, why so? On what records are you
basing your analysis?

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected]
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
the body of the message

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

For those who can read Italian, there is a detailed discussion of
Emperor Frederick II's mistress/wife, Blanche (or Bianca), in the
following Italian source:

Carlo Troya, vita pubblica e privata, studi opere (Naples, 1899), pp.
lxv-lxxii.

This material can be found at the following weblink on the internet:

http://books.google.com/books?id=S0MFAA ... A1-PR65,M1

The author discusses the claim that Blanche was the uterine sister
["sorella uterina"] of Gualvano Lancia. Reference is also made to
Count Jordan d'Anglano (or d'Anglone) kinsman of Blanche's son, King
Manfred ["consanguineus Manfredi regis"].

If someone is fluent in Italian, perhaps they would be so kind as to
provide a synopsis of the author's findings here on the newsgroup.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[John Briggs]

Douglas Richardson wrote:

On Jan 23, 1:20 am, "John Briggs" <[email protected]> wrote:

The Wikipedia - which Douglas says is confused - gives dates of
birth, and
dates of death of mothers in childbirth, which don't tie up with
your
account - i.e. that Bianca died before Frederick married Isabella
(who was
considerably younger).

The two sources which I cited gave no date whatsoever for the marriage
of Emperor Frederick to Blanche, so I'm not sure how either they or I
could disagree with the dates cited in Wikipedia.

All I said is that the Emperor evidently considered his marriage to
Blanche to be a valid marriage, as he referred to her first cousin,
Manfred, Marquis of Lancia, as his "affinis," that is, kinsman by
marriage. I cited a contemporary record to back up this statement,
not a modern genealogical database as you have done.

Perhaps it would be good, John, if you went on the record. What date
do you give to this marriage? And what is your primary source? Do
you agree or disagree with Wikipedia that Blanche was only the
Emperor's mistress? If you disagree, why so? On what records are you
basing your analysis?

Well, according to the Wikipedia, Bianca died in 1233. Do you see the cause
of my perplexity?
--
John Briggs

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

There is additional discussion regarding Emperor Frederick II and his
mistress/wife, "la bella Bianca di Agliano," in the following Italian
source:

Archivio storico italiano, n.s. 13(1) (1861): 78-83.

This can be found at the following weblink:

http://books.google.com/books?id=4lkRAA ... o#PPA78,M1

This author dates the affair of Frederick and "la bella Bianca" as
starting in 1226:

"Federico II visito per la prima volta l'Italia subalpina nel 1226; e
dovette allora aver conoscuito la Bianca in uno de'castelli del padre
di lei."

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[Douglas Richardson]

On Jan 23, 10:59 am, "John Briggs" <[email protected]> wrote:

< Well, according to the Wikipedia, Bianca died in 1233. Do you see
the cause
< of my perplexity?
<
< John Briggs

I asked you for your analysis and your sources, not a statement of
your perplexity.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[Gjest]

*That* Wikipedia says she was only his mistress, is now corrected by a
statement that although they married, it was considered non-canonical.



**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[Gjest]

In a message dated 1/23/2008 9:34:41 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

Bianca Lancia the younger was undoubtedly married "in articulo mortis
<her>" <i.e. her death bed> which was a legal "form of marriage under
condition" and which made her children from the relation "legitime"
children. She died either 1233 or 1234 which thus is the date the
marriage became "effective".


--------------------------------------
What evidence is there as to what year she died?
I would note the Chronicle of Saliimbene di Adam would be a logical place to
look since the word Chronicle *might* imply it's by year of event.

Thanks
Will Johnson



**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[John Briggs]

Douglas Richardson wrote:

On Jan 23, 10:59 am, "John Briggs" <[email protected]> wrote:

Well, according to the Wikipedia, Bianca died in 1233. Do you see
the cause
of my perplexity?

I asked you for your analysis and your sources, not a statement of
your perplexity.

And I was asking you how Manfred was "conceived in adultery".
--
John Briggs

[Gjest]

In a message dated 1/23/2008 12:25:23 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

The Wikipedia - which Douglas says is confused - gives dates of birth, and
dates of death of mothers in childbirth, which don't tie up with your
account - i.e. that Bianca died before Frederick married Isabella (who was
considerably younger).>>>>


-------------------------
I'm modifying the *W* articles as the conversation goes along. And noting
where we have and don't have a reliable source. Medlands states 1233/4
WITHOUT SOURCE and so must be thrown out as we all know.

Will Johnson



**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[Gjest]

To answer that we'd need a clear source stating when Manfred was born, or
how old he old at some particular time. Peter stated that Manfred was 12 when
his parents were married. Depending on when the marriage occurred you could
see when he was born and where Fred was married at that time.



**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[Gjest]

We must remember at all times, that the VAST majority of *W* articles are
writen by anybody.

By experts in their field, and by complete novices simply believing that
something from e-familytree, Stirnet, Medlands, or "the Ancestors of George
Bush" by Mrs Grimsby Superlative

is a reliable source.

IF a cited statement has no source, and you suspect it, I would strongly
encourage you to Edit the page, and add {{fact}} immediately after the suspect
phrase.

Anyone can do it, and everyone should do it.

Will Johnson



**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[Gjest]

It seems many of us, including some genealogists and historians, even those
with published works and enormous databases are *perplexed* at the antics of
these two.

It would be quite helpful if we could stick to the primary sources *first*
and then perhaps we can all clearly see WHY, since they themselves cannot agree
with themselves.



**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[Ernst Hoffmann]

Will!

It is very simple to answer your question, once you can assure me
<with authority> on which date the New Year 's day was celebrated in
Apulia in the year 1234.....

Since she died in the "first half of the year" nobody will ever be
able to come up with any better year , than 1233/34. It's simply a
general deficiency in medieval chronology or calendars
The place of her death <Gioa de Colle> is based on a 17th century
"tradition" and far from certain.
The name of her mother is however very certain: Bianca Lancia the
Elder who was married first to a count Lancia whose Christian Name is
not given <and open to a wide range of speculations> and secondly to a
Count
Bonifatius de Anglano.

<sm>

Ernst

Am 23.01.2008 um 19:18 schrieb [email protected]:

In a message dated 1/23/2008 9:34:41 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]
writes:
Bianca Lancia the younger was undoubtedly married "in articulo mortis
her>" <i.e. her death bed> which was a legal "form of marriage under
condition" and which made her children from the relation "legitime"
children. She died either 1233 or 1234 which thus is the date the
marriage became "effective".
--------------------------------------
What evidence is there as to what year she died?
I would note the Chronicle of Saliimbene di Adam would be a logical
place to look since the word Chronicle *might* imply it's by year of
event.

Thanks
Will Johnson



Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape in the new year.

[wjhonson]

In a message dated 1/23/2008 11:20:10 AM Pacific Standard Time, Ernst-
[email protected] writes:

<< It is very simple to answer your question, once you can assure me
<with authority> on which date the New Year 's day was celebrated
in
Apulia in the year 1234..... >>
----------------------
This is assuming that Peter Stewart is suggesting a date ten years
later based on no authority. I find that suggestion a bit more
untenable that the possibility that whatever source you are quoting
may be misunderstood.

Can you clarify what your source is and exactly what it states?

Thanks
Will Johnson

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

There is an interesting discussion of the children of Isabel of
England by Emperor Frederick II, as well as a discussion of the
question of the marriage of Emperor Frederick II and his mistress/
wife, Blanche/Bianca, in the following French source. Grande chronique
de Matthieu Paris by A. Huillard-Bréholles, 8 (1840): 491-499. This
material can be found at the following weblink:

http://books.google.com/books?id=ncYsAA ... 5-PA491,M1

The author includes a transcript of the letter of Emperor Frederick
II's son, Conrad, written in Feb. 1254 to King Henry III of England
following the death in Dec. 1253 of Conrad's half-brother, Heinrich
[notre très-chere frère], son of Isabel of England, and nephew to King
Henry III of England [votre neveu]. In the letter, Conrad
specifically states that Heinrich will live with us [... puisqu'il
vivra avec nous] in the person of our very dear sister [notre très-
chère soeur], Margaretha, who has survived Heinrich [qui lui survit],
and who is married to the Margrave of Meissen. Conrad adds that "nous
les trouvons resserrés, grâce á son heureuse fécondité, par les
héritiers venus d'elle."

In a footnote on page 494, the author assigns four children to Isabel
of England, namely Jordan, born at Ravenna in 1236, who died young;
Agnes, died in 1237, Margaretha, and Heinrich. No sources are given
to substantiate this list of children, although it agrees favorably
with the list published by Green. The author comments in the same
footnote that Margaretha can hardly have been more than 15 years old
at the time Conrad's letter was written, as Conrad speaks of her
fecundity (i.e., fruitfulness), implying that Margaretha was already a
mother. If Margaretha was 15, it would place her birth at about
1239. Whatever the case, Margaretha would surely not be the child of
Isabel of England born at Isabel's death in childbirth in Dec. 1241.
A birth in Dec. 1241 would make Marguerite at best 12 years old in
Feb. 1254, which would not be old enough to allow her to be a mother.

Matthew Parris says that Emperor Frederick II and his wife, Isabel of
England, had two sons, Heinrich and another son who he did not name.
Added to this, we know that Emperor Frederick II had a female daughter
born about Feb. 1237. Lastly, there was a child born in Dec. 1241, at
the time Isabel of England died in childbirth. This list doesn't
match Green or Huillard-Bréholles. If we accept Matthew Paris'
testimony of the births of two sons, this would appear to suggest that
Margaretha was the female child born in Feb. 1237. Other than that,
we know for certain that only two children, Heinrich and Margaretha,
survived Isabel of England.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[Peter Stewart]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

In a message dated 1/23/2008 12:25:23 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

The Wikipedia - which Douglas says is confused - gives dates of birth,
and
dates of death of mothers in childbirth, which don't tie up with your
account - i.e. that Bianca died before Frederick married Isabella (who was
considerably younger).


-------------------------
I'm modifying the *W* articles as the conversation goes along. And
noting
where we have and don't have a reliable source. Medlands states 1233/4
WITHOUT SOURCE and so must be thrown out as we all know.

I thought I had already explained that a source implies Bianca died 20 years
before 1256 - since Frederick married her on her death bed, and he was
married to someone else in July 1235, this loose statement was taken to mean
that Bianca must have died in 1233/34.

However, the same source can be understood as saying that she died 20 years
after her liaison with Frederick began, that is usually dated to 1226/27.

The strongest likelihood from other vague indications - apart from this
source - is that she died before, perhapos shortly before, her daughter's
marriage in 1244. Manfred was born in 1232, so was around 12 at the time his
mother most probably died. But these are not certain facts.

Peter Stewart

[Peter Stewart]

[Crosspostings removed]

"Douglas Richardson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1e6b81ad-8506-4629-bea3-bc9da2bf66ba@d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

<snip>

Matthew Parris says that Emperor Frederick II and his wife, Isabel of
England, had two sons, Heinrich and another son who he did not name.
Added to this, we know that Emperor Frederick II had a female daughter
born about Feb. 1237. Lastly, there was a child born in Dec. 1241, at
the time Isabel of England died in childbirth. This list doesn't
match Green or Huillard-Bréholles. If we accept Matthew Paris'
testimony of the births of two sons, this would appear to suggest that
Margaretha was the female child born in Feb. 1237. Other than that,
we know for certain that only two children, Heinrich and Margaretha,
survived Isabel of England.

You may care to reflect that nothing in the above contradicts anything I
have said from the start, despite your calling me "misinformed" for what is
now evidently shaping as your own new opinion.

Peter Stewart

[Peter Stewart]

"Ernst Hoffmann" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Will!

It is very simple to answer your question, once you can assure me <with
authority> on which date the New Year 's day was celebrated in Apulia in
the year 1234.....

Since she died in the "first half of the year" nobody will ever be able
to come up with any better year , than 1233/34. It's simply a general
deficiency in medieval chronology or calendars
The place of her death <Gioa de Colle> is based on a 17th century
"tradition" and far from certain.
The name of her mother is however very certain: Bianca Lancia the Elder
who was married first to a count Lancia whose Christian Name is not given
and open to a wide range of speculations> and secondly to a Count
Bonifatius de Anglano.

Actually it's not "very certain" - this version of Bianca's parentage is
from the hypotheseis of G.B. Moriondo in 'Monumenta Aquensia', in turn based
on the not altogether reliable acocunt in 'Annali Genovesi'. I outlined this
from Natale Ferro's article of 1992 (from the Bianca Lancia symposium of
1991) in an earlier post, as well as an alternative hypothesis that comes
from F. Lancia's 'Dei Lancia di Brolo: albero genealogico e biografie'
(Palermo, 1879) and was repeated by G. Lanza del Vasto in 'Enciclopedia
Italiana' (1949).

Peter Stewart

[wjhonson]

The information from Matthew of Paris is now copied out in full

http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... ly#Sources

[Peter Stewart]

On Jan 24, 9:00 am, wjhonson <[email protected]> wrote:

The information from Matthew of Paris is now copied out in full

http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... King_of_...

In case anyone wants to copy-paste this extract, you might want to
substitute the version below, with a few corrections:

Memfredus triumphat de hostibus suis et prosperatur in guerra, sua. --
Temporibus quoque sub eisdem, Memfredus, qui filius tantum naturalis
Fretherici diu credebatur, jam inquisita et scita rei veritate, non
jam tantum naturalis, id est, illegitimus, immo pro legitimo
habebatur. Unde ab omnibus Siculis et Apulis et finitimarum illarum
regionum incolis, qui eidem cOEperunt adhaerere, amabatur et
honorabatur. Contigit enim, quod jam circiter viginti annis elapsis
[fn 1] mater [fn 2] ipsius Memfredi graviter infirmata [fn 3] vocavit
ipsum F[rethericum] imperatorem, ut misertus illius pro Deo ipsam
visitare non dedignaretur ; credebatur namque in proximo moritura. Et
cum venisset imperator, ait ei mulier junctis palmis, et abortis
lacrimis cum singultibus, "Domine, miserere mihi, miserere mihi in
proximo moriturae, et succurre periturae ; de periculo corporis mihi
formidandum est, sed multo magis solliciter de periculo animae
imminenti. Habes namque filium quendam naturalem Memfredum, quem tibi
genui. Placeat igitur [tibi] [fn 4] me desponsare, ut et ille
M[emfredus] legitimetur, et anima mea a periculo liberetur."
Inclinatus est igitur precibus supplicantis, et ipsum sibi matrimonio
copulavit. Haec autem multis annis multos latuerunt. Sed hoc anno,
omnibus Siculis et Apulis manifeste patuerunt, unde hactenus
immobiliter steterunt cum eodem contra Papam et omnes qui illi
adversabantur ; et cOEpit Memfredus prosperari in via sua, et in
guerra, quam contra Papam moverat, super omnes fere inimicos suos
exaltari, et ad votum dominari, unde Papa cOEpit rogare ea [quae] pacis
sunt. Ceperat namque dictus M[emfredus] jam Neapolim, Barletum,[fn 5]
et civitates maritimas, Capuam et alias multas civitates et oppida. Et
quod pluris est, corda magnatum et populorum ad se conciliata pronius
inclinavit. [Nec erat aliquis de praelatis ecclesise qui domino Papae,
heu heu, condoleret ; quod profecto non valeo sine lacrimarum
profluvio scribere vel pronuntiare. Taliter se habet versus fideles
Christi dominus Papa, quos teneretur in sinu caritatis affectu ...]

However, there is no value in including the text in square brackets
(ending mid-sentence anyway), that is not about Manfred but a lament
on the predicament of the pope.

Peter Stewart

[Gjest]

In a message dated 1/22/2008 11:07:27 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

Nope, the heraldic succession most probably would not
follow the line to emperor Francis Joseph of Austria.

firstly, a digression.

1 Conan III, Duke of
Brittany - predecessor of duke Piers, thus not
ascertained whether even held ermine Arms

2 Bertha of Brittany
married Alan, Earl of
Richmond- predecessor of duke Piers, thus not
ascertained whether even held ermine Arms

3 Conan IV, Duke of Brittany
- predecessor of duke Piers, thus not ascertained
whether even held ermine Arms

4 Constance, Duchess of
Brittany married 2nd Guy
de Thouars- predecessor of duke Piers, thus not
ascertained whether even held ermine Arms

5 Alice de Thouars, Duchess
of Brittany married
Peter I de Dreux jure uxoris Duke of Brittany -
AFAIK, it was this duke Piers who actually took the
ermine pattern into use.



--

Then, succession from them:

6 John I, Duke of Brittany
married Blanche of
Navarre
7 John II, Duke of Brittany
married Beatrice of
England
8 Arthur II, Duke of
Brittany married 1st Marie de
Limoges, 2nd Yolande de Dreux, Countess de Montfort
9 Guy of Brittany, Count of
Penthievre - had elder brother, thus was not the heir
in his generation; however, his daughter (next entry,
see below) then succeeded in rights of her said uncle

10 Joan of Brittany ,
Duchess of Brittany married
Charles de Blois, Duke of Brittany j. u.
11 Marie de Blois married
Lous I d` Anjou, King of
Naples - Marie de Blois had brothers. This is the
mistaken point in the whole venture as proposed.

---


the following were not heirs of Brittany rights, sorry
to say.

12 Louis II, King of Naples
married Yolande of
Aragon
13 Rene, King of Naples,
Duke of Lorraine and Bar
married Isabel of Lorraine
14 Yolande d`Anjou married
Frederick, Count of
Vaudemont
15 Rene II, Duke of Lorraine
married Philippa of
Guelders
16 Anthony, Duke of Lorraine
married Renee of
Bourbon- Montpensier
(many generations down to
Francis Joseph I,
Emperor of Austria)

---

Instead, the succession passed in the line of brother
of Marie de Blois.
In that line, there were counts of Penthievre, first
in Blois family, then in Bresse family, then in some
branch of Lorraine; then bastard-line Bourbon-Vendome,
then Savoy-Nemours. Then a senior line of kings of
Sardinia. That branch was inherited by duchess of
Modena. And even otherwise it starts to follow the
so-called Jacobite succession.
Current heir is Francis, duke of Bavaria. Who combines
in his person rights to Brittany Arms and Jacobite
throne of England etc.

-----

And all that does not say a word why some current
English families could possibly have Arms of duke
Piers of Brittany




______________________________________________________________________________
______
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62s ... o8Wcj9tAcJ


-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
the body of the message
Dear qsj5,
Quite right.
11 John III de Blois-Chatillion, Count
of Penthievre married Marguerite de Clisson
12 Charles de Blois-Chattillion, Baron
d` Avaugor married Isabeau de Vivonne
13 Nicole de Blois- Chatillion,
Countess of Penthievre married Jean II de Brosse, Seigneur de Broussac
14 Jean III de Brosse, Count of
Penthievre married Louise de Laval
15 Rene de Brosse, Count of Penthievre
married Jeanne de la Clite de Commines
16 Charlotte de Brosse married
Francois de Luxembourg, Viscount of Martigues
17Sebastien de Luxembourg, Duke of
Penthievre married Marie de Beaucaire
18 Marie de Luxembourg, Countess of
Penthievre married Philippe Emmaunel de Lorraine, Duke of Mercouer
19 Francoise de Lorraine, Duchess of
Penthievre married Caesar de Bourbon, Duke of Vendome
20 Elisabeth de Bourbon married
Charles Amadeus of Savoy, Duke of Nemours
21 Maria- Giovanna de Savoy-Nemours
married Charles Emmauel II, Duke of Savoy
Source: Genealogics.org
Sincerely,

James W Cummings

Dixmont, Maine USA



**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exer ... 0000002489

[Peter Stewart]

On Jan 24, 9:52 am, Peter Stewart <[email protected]> wrote:

On Jan 24, 9:00 am, wjhonson <[email protected]> wrote:

The information from Matthew of Paris is now copied out in full

http://www.countyhistorian.com/cecilweb ... King_of_...

In case anyone wants to copy-paste this extract, you might want to
substitute the version below, with a few corrections:

Memfredus triumphat de hostibus suis et prosperatur in guerra, sua. --
Temporibus quoque sub eisdem, Memfredus, qui filius tantum naturalis
Fretherici diu credebatur, jam inquisita et scita rei veritate, non
jam tantum naturalis, id est, illegitimus, immo pro legitimo
habebatur. Unde ab omnibus Siculis et Apulis et finitimarum illarum
regionum incolis, qui eidem cOEperunt adhaerere, amabatur et
honorabatur. Contigit enim, quod jam circiter viginti annis elapsis
[fn 1] mater [fn 2] ipsius Memfredi graviter infirmata [fn 3] vocavit
ipsum F[rethericum] imperatorem, ut misertus illius pro Deo ipsam
visitare non dedignaretur ; credebatur namque in proximo moritura. Et
cum venisset imperator, ait ei mulier junctis palmis, et abortis
lacrimis cum singultibus, "Domine, miserere mihi, miserere mihi in
proximo moriturae, et succurre periturae ; de periculo corporis mihi
formidandum est, sed multo magis solliciter de periculo animae
imminenti. Habes namque filium quendam naturalem Memfredum, quem tibi
genui. Placeat igitur [tibi] [fn 4] me desponsare, ut et ille
M[emfredus] legitimetur, et anima mea a periculo liberetur."
Inclinatus est igitur precibus supplicantis, et ipsum sibi matrimonio
copulavit. Haec autem multis annis multos latuerunt. Sed hoc anno,
omnibus Siculis et Apulis manifeste patuerunt, unde hactenus
immobiliter steterunt cum eodem contra Papam et omnes qui illi
adversabantur ; et cOEpit Memfredus prosperari in via sua, et in
guerra, quam contra Papam moverat, super omnes fere inimicos suos
exaltari, et ad votum dominari, unde Papa cOEpit rogare ea [quae] pacis
sunt. Ceperat namque dictus M[emfredus] jam Neapolim, Barletum,[fn 5]
et civitates maritimas, Capuam et alias multas civitates et oppida. Et
quod pluris est, corda magnatum et populorum ad se conciliata pronius
inclinavit. [Nec erat aliquis de praelatis ecclesise qui domino Papae,
heu heu, condoleret ; quod profecto non valeo sine lacrimarum
profluvio scribere vel pronuntiare. Taliter se habet versus fideles
Christi dominus Papa, quos teneretur in sinu caritatis affectu ...]

However, there is no value in including the text in square brackets
(ending mid-sentence anyway), that is not about Manfred but a lament
on the predicament of the pope.

Peter Stewart

Apologies, that didn't come out right when I copy-pasted your version
- the amended version below has the unwanted capitalisations fixed.

Peter Stewart


Memfredus triumphat de hostibus suis et prosperatur in guerra, sua. --
Temporibus quoque sub eisdem, Memfredus, qui filius tantum naturalis
Fretherici diu credebatur, jam inquisita et scita rei veritate, non
jam tantum naturalis, id est, illegitimus, immo pro legitimo
habebatur. Unde ab omnibus Siculis et Apulis et finitimarum illarum
regionum incolis, qui eidem cOEperunt adhærere, amabatur et
honorabatur. Contigit enim, quod jam circiter viginti annis elapsis
[fn 1] mater [fn 2] ipsius Memfredi graviter infirmata [fn 3] vocavit
ipsum F[rethericum] imperatorem, ut misertus illius pro Deo ipsam
visitare non dedignaretur ; credebatur namque in proximo moritura. Et
cum venisset imperator, ait ei mulier junctis palmis, et abortis
lacrimis cum singultibus, "Domine, miserere mihi, miserere mihi in
proximo morituræ, et succurre perituræ ; de periculo corporis mihi
formidandum est, sed multo magis solliciter de periculo animæ
imminenti. Habes namque filium quendam naturalem Memfredum, quem tibi
genui. Placeat igitur [tibi] [fn 4] me desponsare, ut et ille
M[emfredus] legitimetur, et anima mea a periculo liberetur."
Inclinatus est igitur precibus supplicantis, et ipsum sibi matrimonio
copulavit. Hæc autem multis annis multos latuerunt. Sed hoc anno,
omnibus Siculis et Apulis manifeste patuerunt, unde hactenus
immobiliter steterunt cum eodem contra Papam et omnes qui illi
adversabantur ; et cOEpit Memfredus prosperari in via sua, et in
guerra, quam contra Papam moverat, super omnes fere inimicos suos
exaltari, et ad votum dominari, unde Papa cOEpit rogare ea [quæ] pacis
sunt. Ceperat namque dictus M[emfredus] jam Neapolim, Barletum,[fn 5]
et civitates maritimas, Capuam et alias multas civitates et oppida. Et
quod pluris est, corda magnatum et populorum ad se conciliata pronius
inclinavit. [Nec erat aliquis de prælatis ecclesiæ qui domino Papæ,
heu heu, condoleret ; quod profecto non valeo sine lacrimarum
profluvio scribere vel pronuntiare. Taliter se habet versus fideles
Christi dominus Papa, quos teneretur in sinu caritatis affectu ...]

[wjhonson]

On Jan 23, 2:52 pm, Peter Stewart <[email protected]> wrote:

However, there is no value in including the text in square brackets
(ending mid-sentence anyway), that is not about Manfred but a lament
on the predicament of the pope.

Peter Stewart

Thanks Peter. The text just sorts of runs right through and since I
only comprehend every third word of Latin anyway, on a good day, I
couldn't tell where exactly to stop.

Will

[Peter Stewart]

My proofreading skills and are fading fast from a base that was never good -
I see that I missed at least one "OE" in the second version.

I don't know why there can't be a single internet protocol for treating all
alphabetical characters, but no doubt there's a perfect explanation that I
couldn't understand to save myself...

Peter Stewart


"wjhonson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Jan 23, 2:52 pm, Peter Stewart <[email protected]> wrote:

However, there is no value in including the text in square brackets
(ending mid-sentence anyway), that is not about Manfred but a lament
on the predicament of the pope.

Peter Stewart

Thanks Peter. The text just sorts of runs right through and since I
only comprehend every third word of Latin anyway, on a good day, I
couldn't tell where exactly to stop.

Will

[wjhonson]

On Jan 22, 12:55 pm, Douglas Richardson <[email protected]> wrote:

 As for Blanche's daughter, Anna, I believe she is the
Emperor's daughter that was contracted to marry to Hermann, Landgrave
of Thüringia, in 1238, and subsequently repudiated by him c.1239.  In
any case, it is highly unlikely that Hermann, who was an adult in
1237, was contracted to marry the Emperor's infant daughter by Isabel
of England born in February 1237 as claimed by Medieval Lands.  It
would be highly unusual for a grown man to be contracted to marry an
infant, even the Emperor's daughter.

I'm slowly working my way through this thread, and perhaps this has
been mentioned already forward, but Hermann was the *titular*
Landgrave of Thuringia in 1238. He never reigned. He was *not* an
adult at this time. His father Louis (Ludwig) had died in 1227 and
Hermann's mother Elizabeth died in 1231.

Hermann's uncle Henry "Raspe" was Regent for his nephew. Nephew
Hermann *never* achieved majority dying in 1241 some say poisoned by
his uncle Henry.

Will Johnson

[Tim]

On Jan 23, 9:54 pm, wjhonson <[email protected]> wrote:

On Jan 22, 12:55 pm, Douglas Richardson <[email protected]> wrote:

 As for Blanche's daughter, Anna, I believe she is the
Emperor's daughter that was contracted to marry to Hermann, Landgrave
of Thüringia, in 1238, and subsequently repudiated by him c.1239.  In
any case, it is highly unlikely that Hermann, who was an adult in
1237, was contracted to marry the Emperor's infant daughter by Isabel
of England born in February 1237 as claimed by Medieval Lands.  It
would be highly unusual for a grown man to be contracted to marry an
infant, even the Emperor's daughter.

I'm slowly working my way through this thread, and perhaps this has
been mentioned already forward, but Hermann was the *titular*
Landgrave of Thuringia in 1238.  He never reigned.  He was *not* an
adult at this time.  His father Louis (Ludwig) had died in 1227 and
Hermann's mother Elizabeth died in 1231.

Hermann's uncle Henry "Raspe" was Regent for his nephew.  Nephew
Hermann *never* achieved majority dying in 1241 some say poisoned by
his uncle Henry.

Will Johnson

Emperor Frederick II had several natural children through a union with
an unnamed paramour. One of these daughters, Caterina da Marano, was
the grandmother of Rainero Grimaldi, an ancestor of the Monegasque
royal family. 'Genealogics' website traces this lineage.

[Gjest]

On Jan 23, 2:35 pm, "John Briggs" <[email protected]> wrote:

Kong occupies so
important a position, had at the time 25 per cent. more _secondary

.. . . Here we go again.


As happened toward the end of last year, someone has decided to
protest the unnecessary crossposting of this thread by posting
nonsense under the forged addresses of thread participants, while
adding an additional irrelevant group.

1. Do not respond to these forged posts.

2. If your address has been one of those selected to make this point,
you need not compound the problem by making a post declaring that you
didn't make the original - it's obvious, and it just adds to the
chaos.

3. If someone hadn't been egotistically crossposting this thread to
begin with, this would not be happening again. Do us all a favor and
just stop.

taf

[Peter Stewart]

[Crosspostings removed]

"wjhonson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:97112c6a-d2a7-469d-98d9-959acc8f77f2@l32g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

On Jan 22, 12:55 pm, Douglas Richardson <[email protected]> wrote:
As for Blanche's daughter, Anna, I believe she is the
Emperor's daughter that was contracted to marry to Hermann, Landgrave
of Thüringia, in 1238, and subsequently repudiated by him c.1239. In
any case, it is highly unlikely that Hermann, who was an adult in
1237, was contracted to marry the Emperor's infant daughter by Isabel
of England born in February 1237 as claimed by Medieval Lands. It
would be highly unusual for a grown man to be contracted to marry an
infant, even the Emperor's daughter.

I'm slowly working my way through this thread, and perhaps this has
been mentioned already forward, but Hermann was the *titular*
Landgrave of Thuringia in 1238. He never reigned. He was *not* an
adult at this time. His father Louis (Ludwig) had died in 1227 and
Hermann's mother Elizabeth died in 1231.

Hermann's uncle Henry "Raspe" was Regent for his nephew. Nephew
Hermann *never* achieved majority dying in 1241 some say poisoned by
his uncle Henry.

According to an old note that I can't recall making (or where from, but
probably ES) Hermann's parents were married in 1221 and he was born in 1223.

I can't vouch for this, but no doubt Douglas Richardson can tell us - with
source citations and weblinks, of course - exactly where he found that
Hermann "was an adult in 1237".

Peter Stewart

[wjhonson]

Thanks for that Peter.

My dates on Louis, Langrave of Thuringia and his wife Elizabeth "The
Saint" of Hungary come from

Heraldry of the Royal Families of Europe, Table 89
Jiri Louda and Michael Maclagan. Clarkson N Potter, New York 1981

Where they say Elizabeth was b 1207 and d 1231, while Louis was b 1200
and d 1227

If true, Lizzie was only 20 when Louie died so it gives a fairly
narrow range into which they can have Herman and Sophia, to wit 1221
to 1228 (allowing the possiblity of a posthumous child)

Herman must have made an impression on somebody as he has his own
article here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_II ... _Thuringia
where they repeat 1221 but without inline source

Sophia went on to marry
Henry II, Duke of /Brabant/ (Lower Lorraine) reigned 1235-48

and they had a son
Henry I, Landgrave of /Hesse/

who either d.s.p. or I just didn't trace any line from him forward
yet.

Will Johnson

[Gjest]

'Quite' condemns it out of hand -

P~g

[Peter Stewart]

"wjhonson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Thanks for that Peter.

My dates on Louis, Langrave of Thuringia and his wife Elizabeth "The
Saint" of Hungary come from

Heraldry of the Royal Families of Europe, Table 89
Jiri Louda and Michael Maclagan. Clarkson N Potter, New York 1981

Where they say Elizabeth was b 1207 and d 1231, while Louis was b 1200
and d 1227

My dates must have come from Isenburg's ES or maybe from Schwennicke's first
go at the family - in his latest revision, ES neue Folge Band I.1 (1998),
Tafel 145, the following information is given:

Ludwig IV was born on 28 October 1200 and died at Otranto on 11 September
1227. In 1221 he married Elisabeth of Hungary who was born in 1207 and died
at Marburg 16/17 November 1231. Their son Hermann was born at Kreuzburg on
28 March 1222 and died there on 3 January 1241 - i.e. nearly three months
before his 19th birthday.

It's beginning to look as if Richardson might have been "enthusiastic and
misinformed" about his age in 1237. But of course we wait on him to provide
the full details, sources and weblinks he asks of everyone responding to his
own questions.

Peter Stewart

[Gjest]

On Jan 24, 3:10 pm, [email protected] wrote:

On Jan 23, 2:35 pm, "John Briggs" <[email protected]> wrote:

Kong occupies so
    important a position, had at the time 25 per cent. more _secondary

. . . Here we go again.

As happened toward the end of last year, someone has decided to
protest the unnecessary crossposting of this thread by posting
nonsense under the forged addresses of thread participants, while
adding an additional irrelevant group.

1. Do not respond to these forged posts.

2. If your address has been one of those selected to make this point,
you need not compound the problem by making a post declaring that you
didn't make the original - it's obvious, and it just adds to the
chaos.

3. If someone hadn't been egotistically crossposting this thread to
begin with, this would not be happening again.  Do us all a favor and
just stop.

taf

I'd just like to congratulate Douglas Richardson on this one.

Alt.talk.royalty has been rendered virtually useless as a discussion
group for the past several months due to this sporging attack.

And Douglas was warned time and time and time again not to cross-post
for fear that the sporging would infect this group - and he ignored
every request.

Now here we are. Good one, Douglas - if this group becomes full of
rubbish, we'll know which selfish idiot to blame.

Then again, Douglas has always worked hard to fill SGM with rubbish
anyway, so perhaps it's just a matter of degree.

MA-R

[Gjest]

Michael,

I was going to reply to your first two messages, but you have now covered
much of what I was going to write (except I had not seen the possible marriage
of Katherine to Peter Sainthill, so I had no problem with her). Instead I
give my transcription of Sir Humphrey's Will:

Summary of Will
Humfrey Browne (-Will 12 Nov 1562 pr 14 Jan 1562/3 request to be bur St
Martin’s the Orgar, Candlewick Str., London) Justice of Common Pleas,
Westminster; My wife Agnes; Sons: George Browne (s&h) Daughters: Mary Browne; Christain
Browne (to have pastures in Epping); Katherine Browne; probably all unmarried
as not to marry without permission; Brother-in-law: Sir Robert Throckmorton
knt; Nephew: Anthony Browne, Justice of Common Pleas, Westminster. Others:
Richard Townshen and wife Katherine [Humphry Browne’ daughter m a Richard
Townshend, but he had died 1544?] Property: Cow Lane, St Sepulchre, London; Manor
of Cryfield, Gloucs; rectory of Manden or Manndon als Battellshall, Essex;
Manor of Perryball [ac: ?= Perivale below] als Little Grindford, Middlesex

In the name of god amen I S^r^ Humfrey / Browne knighte one of the Queens
majestes Justies of her common pleas at Westm’ being of / whole mynde and
perfect memory praise be to god maketh thys my testament and laste will /
concerning my gooddes and landes hereafter declared the xij th daye of November in
the fourth / yere of the Raigne of o^r^ sorevaigne Ladie Elizabeth by the grace
of god of England ffrance and / Irelande Quene deffender of the faith etc,
in maner and forme followinge fforst I bequeath / my soule to almightie god my
boddie to be buried within the parish church of S^t^ Martins the / Orgars in
the cittie of London if I departe this presant life within tenne miles of the
same / cittie and that in noe sumptuns mannor but after a charitable fasshon
and the greatest case / therin to be donne for me to be bestowed and given
to the poore and nedie people also I will that / my debts be paid which I owe
and restitu’con be made to all men to whome I have donne wronge / in tymes
past yf it be well proved and I will that my plate and and other my movable
goods / content’aton therof ffurther I give to the saide Agnes my wief all my
household stuf and hangings / in my little chamber within my mannor house
adjoying to cowlane in the parish of Saint / Sepulkers in London in the Which
chamber my brother in lawe S^r^ Robert Throckmorton / knight is accustomed to lye
in and called by the name of his chamber with all manner thanplemete /
therein also I give to my saide wief my scarlet bed commonly called my feelde bedd
wholy withall / the bedde bedsteed couletts curtens and all other things to
the same belonging or any partetherof / Also I give to my said Wief all suche
goods and cattells that she had before the tyme I married / her that wise be
unsoulde and ungiven alvine and also all the proffetts and encreace of the
said // goods and cattalles ever sithens the tyme of the saide mariage Also I
will and give to my saide / wief all the rings chaynes of golde, villements
of golde Juells stones and golde pinyhes woorkes / etc whatsoever whiche she
now hath and had before the tyme I married her ffurther I give to my / my
daughter xp’ian my lease of cowleer being certayne pastures within the parrish of
Eppinge / in the countie of essex whereof Thomas Lycynes of Epping ys now
temiante ymmediatly after / my decease And from that tyme she shall have and
take the proffitts of the same Also I will / and give to every of my housholde
sr’nnts whiche take wage one quarter of a yeres wages next / after my decease
and meate and drinke for half a yere next following my decease yf they will
/ take yt and to every of the same my ser’nnts then in wage xx^s^ in money.
Now concerning / my will of my landes herafter following ffirst I will that
if George Browne my sonne and heire / apparante dye withoute issue of his
boddie laufully begotten that then immiadiatly after his / decease my Manor of
Cryfeld with thappt’enncs in the countie of Gloucter and my rectorie / of
Manden with thapp^r^te’nich in this countie of essex shall wholy remayne to Mary
Browne / xp’ian Browne, and kathren Browne my daughter and to theire heires
for ever Also where I / did entayle the mannor of Mannden otherwise called
Battellshalle in the saide countie of / essex and the mannor of perryball
othewise called littell Grindford in the countie of / Midd’ unto Richarde Towneshend
and to Kathyeren his wief and to theires of the boddie of the / same
kathcren lawfully begotten I will that yf thissue of the same Katheren of her boddie
lawfully / begotten dye withoute issue of their boddies lawfully begotten,
that then the same Manners / with theire appetenncs shall then ymmediatly
remayne to the said Mary xp’ian and katheryn / Browne my daughters and to theire
heirs for ev’ ffurthermore I ^will and^ give to the p’son and church
wardens / of the parish of St Martins the Orgars abovesaide and to theire
successors all those mysay) / messuage or tennements situate and being in Cowlane in
the parish of St Sepulkers about / standing and being on thest syde of my
greate gate of my saide man’con house to thintent that / they and every of them
and their successors shall give and dispose the Rents and proffitts of / the
same tennements in manner and forme following that is to saye that they and
every of / them shall yearley give and dispose every frydaye weekely from the
first daye of December / till the last daye of March then next following ij
horselods of charcoles amongst the / poore and nedest persons of the same
theire parrish another overplus of the said Rente and oth^r^ / proffitts to be
given amongst the poore people of theire saide parrish yearly from tyme to tyme
/ Provided alwayes that yf my said daughters or any of them doe marry
withoute the assente / and consente of Thomas Husse and Gilbert Husse gentlemen my
bretheren in Law Robert / Husse and John Husse of Greys Inne in the suburbs of
London or of the moste parte of / them that then yf the same my daughters or
any of them shall otherwise doe withoute theire / assents shall inherret noe
parcell of my saide lands, But that the same shall then remayne to / thother
of my saide daughters that shall marry by thassents aforsaide And of this my
present / testamente and laste will I ordayne and make Agnus my said wief my
sole exectrix to whome / I bequeathe and give the residue of my goods my
debts funeralls legacy and childrens por’cons / dyscharged And further doe
hartely desire and praye my nephew Anthony Browne one of ye / Queens majestes
inlawe of her common pleas at Westm’ that yt will please hym to be my / Overseer
of this my last will and testamente and also to ayde and helpe my saide wif
and my / younge children that they have noe wrongs And for his paynes that he
shall take therein I give / to hym all my bookes of the lawe In witnes whereof
to this my present testamente and last will / I have putto my hande and
seale in the presence of these persons following whose names be / hereunder
subscribed the daye and yere ^first^ above written Thomas Tressham John Raly
clarke Will’ / Elliot Robert Throckmorton Humfrey Browne Thomas Baggen Kay Bales
Roger Fairson /
Probatum ... Agnes Browne relicte et executrix... /

Indexed as Humphrey Browne, (Sir) one of the Queen's Majesty's Justice of
Her Common Pleas at Westminster; 14 January 1563; PROB 11/46

Regards,
Adrian