Grafton, Voynich and other oddities
Roundtable
he couldn't afford such luxurious clothing at such a young age.
(I've got pix of me in front of Buckingham Palace - doesn't mean
I actually own the place, does it now.)
http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/articles/2005/10/28/gallery_says_portrait_is_not_shakespeare/
I also stumbled onto an amusing link called "the museum of hoaxes",
with pages about Pope Joan, the medieval female pope, etc. and an
article about the "Voynich" book, a medieval manuscript book with
drawings of plants, flowers and naked women and page after page of
scribblings, written in an alphabet that has not been decoded to date.
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/voynich.html
Roundtable
lariadna
I like the story about the couple who gave their child 'Google'
as a middle name. (They said that one was true.)
I have heard the story about the Grafton portrait before
because some Marlowe folks think that the sitter might be
Marlowe, while others say that he might be Shakespeare
or a nobleman.
So, I wonder how many noblemen of that age were living in
England at that time. You'd think they could trace that.
C.
>
> http://villakreuzbuch.4t.com
> http://roundtable.iwarp.com
Al
society" types, through the wardrobe holdings of their companies?
Such clothing was sometimes purchases by the players, and
sometimes given to them by theater-friendly gentry. A concrete
example of this is provided in the 1581 will of Alexander Hoghton of
Lancashire. In his will, Hoghton leaves some of his clothing amd
musical instruments to his players, including an intriguing
fellow he refers to as William Shakeshafte...
lyra
Roundtable wrote:
> "Grafton portrait not Shakespeare!" - mainly because apparently
> he couldn't afford such luxurious clothing at such a young age.
> (I've got pix of me in front of Buckingham Palace - doesn't mean
> I actually own the place, does it now.)
>
> http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/articles/2005/10/28/gallery_says_portrait_is_not_shakespeare/
It looked better BEFORE restoring!
This is especially annoying to me,
as it's almost certainly Marlowe.
Why couldn't they leave it alone!
lyra, fed up with life going wrong...
................................................
John W. Kennedy
> "Grafton portrait not Shakespeare!" - mainly because apparently
> he couldn't afford such luxurious clothing at such a young age.
> (I've got pix of me in front of Buckingham Palace - doesn't mean
> I actually own the place, does it now.)
>
> http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/articles/2005/10/28/gallery_says_portrait_is_not_shakespeare/
Apart from the fact that /actors/ had access to luxurious clothing, why
should we suppose that a painting, like a photograph, actually shows the
clothing the subject wore? I know that in early American painting, it is
a safe assumption that the clothing is /not/ the subject's.
--
John W. Kennedy
"Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne
of the kingdom of idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts"
-- J. Michael Straczynski. "Babylon 5", "Ceremonies of Light and Dark"
Art Neuendorffer
>
> > "Grafton portrait not Shakespeare!" - mainly because apparently
> > he couldn't afford such luxurious clothing at such a young age.
> > (I've got pix of me in front of Buckingham Palace - doesn't mean
> > I actually own the place, does it now.)
> >
> > http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/articles/2005/10/28/gallery_says_portrait_is_not_shakespeare/
lyra wrote:
> It looked better BEFORE restoring!
>
> This is especially annoying to me,
> as it's almost certainly Marlowe.
Maybe it's a young Henry Neville:
http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/1405824379.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
Art Neuendorffer
Mark Steese
news:1130734415.6...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
[snip]
> I have heard the story about the Grafton portrait before
> because some Marlowe folks think that the sitter might be
> Marlowe, while others say that he might be Shakespeare
> or a nobleman.
>
> So, I wonder how many noblemen of that age were living in
> England at that time. You'd think they could trace that.
It could be a nobleman, but it could just be someone wealthy -- the John
Rylands University Library, which owns the piece, refers to it as
"Portrait of an Unknown Gentleman." I'd infer that the sitter was well-
to-do not from his dress but from the fact that he commissioned someone
to paint his portrait. It's highly unlikely that Shakespeare had
sufficient wealth and social standing in 1588 to justify such an
extravagance.
The National Portrait Gallery's press release confirms that the
'24' in the inscription 'AE SVAE 24' was originally '23,' but the change
was "contemporary with the rest of the picture" (IIRC, there was some
speculation that it was changed later to match Shakespeare's known age
at the time). Why the change? The press release says it "indicates that
the young man had probably passed his 24th birthday by the time the
painting was complete and requested his age be altered." If so, that
raises some difficulties concerning the possibility that the sitter was
Marlowe. At the time the portrait was painted, the English calendar year
began on March 25; by our calendar, Marlowe was born in February 1564,
but to his contemporaries he was born in February 1563, and would have
turned 24 in February 1587. The year painted on the portrait, 1588,
shows no signs of alteration, so it seems reasonable to suppose that the
painter painted it at the same time he painted the original age, 23 --
but Marlowe was 24 before 1588 began.
(See http://www.npg.org.uk/live/prelgrafton.asp for the full text of the
press release.)
IMO the portrait is most likely that of some young Elizabethan gentleman
whose name would provoke no hint of recognition nowadays. That so many
people would like to believe that it is a portrait of Shakespeare or
Marlowe is symptomatic of the frustration felt over the lack of a decent
portrait of either man; the two authentic likenesses of Shakespeare are
mediocre at best, but at least they have a reasonably good provenance,
unlike the putative likenesses of Marlowe. There is interesting
circumstantial evidence regarding the Corpus Christi portrait, but there
is no such evidence regarding the Grafton.
--
Mark Steese
===========
The first signs of the death of the boom came in the summer,
early, and everything went like snow in the sun.
Out of their office windows. There was miasma,
a weight beyond enduring, the city reeked of failure.
lariadna
It sounds like you could be right, but I'm reading an excerpt
from Schoenbaum, and just to clarify, the clothing and musical
instruments were not left by Hoghton to Shakeshafte, but first
to his half-brother Thomas, and secondly to Sir Thomas Hesketh,
and Hoghton mentioned in the will that Sir Thomas Hesketh should be
friendly to Fulk Gillom and Shakeshafte, who were dwelling with him
and 'either to take them unto his service or else to help them to
some good master.' It does sound like these clothes were intended
for players first.
Whether someone would wish to paint an actor, I do not know.
There are some portraits of actors at that time, but I don't
think they are in fancy outfits. Someone would have had to
pay for the cost of the portrait as well, I believe.
C.
Robert Stonehouse
Not 'ready access'. The costumes were the main fixed assets
of the company. They cosr more than was ever paid for
plays. You might as well say the a vice-president of Exxon
had 'ready access' to use a refinery as he pleased.
--
Robert Stonehouse
To mail me, replace invalid with uk. Inconvenience regretted
Peter Farey
Mark Steese wrote:
>
> "lariadna" wrote:
>
> [snip]
> > I have heard the story about the Grafton portrait before
> > because some Marlowe folks think that the sitter might be
> > Marlowe, while others say that he might be Shakespeare
> > or a nobleman.
> >
> > So, I wonder how many noblemen of that age were living in
> > England at that time. You'd think they could trace that.
>
> It could be a nobleman, but it could just be someone wealthy
> -- the John Rylands University Library, which owns the piece,
> refers to it as "Portrait of an Unknown Gentleman." I'd infer
> the fact that he commissioned someone to paint his portrait.
> It's highly unlikely that Shakespeare had sufficient wealth
> and social standing in 1588 to justify such an extravagance.
>
> The National Portrait Gallery's press release confirms that
> the '24' in the inscription 'AE SVAE 24' was originally
> '23,' but the change was "contemporary with the rest of the
> picture" (IIRC, there was some speculation that it was
> changed later to match Shakespeare's known age at the time).
> Why the change? The press release says it "indicates that
> the young man had probably passed his 24th birthday by the
> time the painting was complete and requested his age be
> altered." If so, that raises some difficulties concerning
> the possibility that the sitter was Marlowe. At the time
> the portrait was painted, the English calendar year began
> on March 25; by our calendar, Marlowe was born in February
> 1564, but to his contemporaries he was born in February 1563,
> and would have turned 24 in February 1587. The year painted
> on the portrait, 1588, shows no signs of alteration, so it
> seems reasonable to suppose that the painter painted it at
> the same time he painted the original age, 23 -- but Marlowe
> was 24 before 1588 began.
According to Roy Strong, Tudor portraits often took quite a
long time to complete, and much of the work was therefore
done away from the sitter. It would therefore have been quite
easy for them to have asked his age when they started, but
not painted that bit until it was finished. It was only when
he was shown the finished article that the mistake would have
been noticed?
What matters, of course, is that the date is correct as shown,
and matches the 21/1585 age/date of the Corpus Christi portrait.
Also very similar are the styles of the doublet and collar, but
they do differ of course in the slightly more gaunt face of the
Grafton - which could be explained - and the different colour
of its eyes (grey rather than brown) which is less easy.
It is interesting to note, however, that the Grafton turned up
only about 17 miles (not three, as Wraight said!) from where
the Lamport Hall collection of unique editions of Shakespeare
and Marlowe were discovered.
> (See http://www.npg.org.uk/live/prelgrafton.asp for the full
> text of the press release.)
>
> IMO the portrait is most likely that of some young Elizabethan
> gentleman whose name would provoke no hint of recognition
> nowadays. That so many people would like to believe that it
> is a portrait of Shakespeare or Marlowe is symptomatic of the
> frustration felt over the lack of a decent portrait of either
> man; the two authentic likenesses of Shakespeare are mediocre
> at best, but at least they have a reasonably good provenance,
> unlike the putative likenesses of Marlowe. There is interest-
> ing circumstantial evidence regarding the Corpus Christi
> portrait, but there is no such evidence regarding the Grafton.
As we were discussing earlier, Park Honan has come up with
more evidence supporting the Marlowe identification. The portrait
was apparently found neither in the old or new Master's Lodge,
nor in Marlowe's original room in the north-west corner of the
Old Court. Where it turned up was in a room at the southern end
of the east wing, the wing where the Parker scholars (as he was)
were usually housed.
The wood had been used as a support for a gas-fire which was
installed in an old fireplace, but nail holes in it suggested that even
before that it had been used for some other unportrait-like use!
Peter F.
pet...@rey.prestel.co.uk
http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rey/index.htm
lyra
Peter Farey wrote:
> Mark Steese wrote:
> >
> > "lariadna" wrote:
> It is interesting to note, however, that the Grafton turned up
> only about 17 miles (not three, as Wraight said!) from where
> the Lamport Hall collection of unique editions of Shakespeare
> and Marlowe were discovered.
>
> > (See http://www.npg.org.uk/live/prelgrafton.asp for the full
> > text of the press release.)
>
> As we were discussing earlier, Park Honan has come up with
> more evidence supporting the Marlowe identification. The portrait
> was apparently found neither in the old or new Master's Lodge,
> nor in Marlowe's original room in the north-west corner of the
> Old Court. Where it turned up was in a room at the southern end
> of the east wing, the wing where the Parker scholars (as he was)
> were usually housed.
Thanks for the extra information, Lamport Hall and Old Court.
Old Court panorama picture...
(quote)
Panoramics
Corpus is one of
the older and
more central Colleges
in Cambridge.
You can also view our 360-degree panoramic pictures if you have the
QuickTime plug-in installed. (Many new browsers already have QuickTime
installed - if not it is free and takes only a few minutes to download
and install).
New Court
Old Court
Bursar's Garden
If you don't know whether you have the QuickTime plug-in one way to
check is to try loading any of the 360° images above.
If you see what looks like a regular picture then you have the plug-in.
If you get a simple graphic image symbolizing a "broken image," a
message saying "plug-in not available," or a side-ways image then you
do not have QuickTime installed and will need to do so before you can
view the images.
The worst thing that can happen by trying is that you find out that you
do not have the plug-in, in which case you can then follow the links
above for retrieving it.
http://www.corpus.cam.ac.uk/about/360.htm
lyra
I HATE it!
It's like the masks seen at Halloween...
where has the REAL EXPRESSION gone?
lyra
lyra wrote:
...........................................
...
a very interesting look at the Grafton,
from the
National Portrait Gallery, London...
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
(quote)
NEWLY CONSERVED GRAFTON PORTRAIT FUELS FRESH DEBATE ON SHAKESPEARE
National Portrait Gallery restores iconic portrait used as covers to
many editions of complete works - but shows no evidence it is of
Shakespeare
New research has taken place on a portrait of a young man which
throughout the twentieth century has had numerous champions expressing
the hope it is of William Shakespeare. The original inscription painted
above the man's head records the sitter's age as 24 in 1588 making him
an exact contemporary of Shakespeare.
In preparation for its Searching for Shakespeare exhibition next year,
the National Portrait Gallery has painstakingly restored the portrait
to enable exhibition visitors to see it as it would have appeared in
the late sixteenth century.
The painting had suffered some damage and a number of losses, including
significant woodworm damage to the left side of the picture. Viewers of
BBC TWO's The Culture Show tonight (Thursday) will be able to compare
the portrait before and after restoration.
On loan to the exhibition from the John Rylands University Library, The
University of Manchester, The Grafton Portrait shows a rather beautiful
youth with curly brown hair and grey eyes, wearing a sumptuous slashed
scarlet doublet, painted in such a way as to depict silk or satin.
As a portrait of an angelic faced young man, this picture has fuelled
interest in romantic notions of Shakespeare's youth prior to his life
as an established playwright. Today there are those who support this
view including Peter Ackroyd, the writer of the new book Shakespeare:
The Biography. However, the John Rylands University Library which now
owns the portrait does not uphold the identification of this painting
as of Shakespeare.
Technical analysis undertaken at the National Portrait Gallery has
confirmed a late-sixteenth-century date, as well as an English origin
for this picture.
The technical examination focused upon confirming the date of the
panel, and exploring an obvious adjustment applied to the last digit of
the inscription from 23 to 24. The change in the lettering from 23 to
24 was confirmed through the use of paint sampling as contemporary with
the rest of the picture, which indicates that the young man had
probably passed his 24th birthday by the time the painting was complete
and requested his age be altered.
It has not been possible to identify a specific artist, but the
handling of the painting is in line with a controlled linear technique
of English artists of the late sixteenth century. The Grafton Portrait
acquired its name in the early 20th century, when the owners recalled
an old family tradition that the portrait had been bequeathed by one of
the Dukes of Grafton to their ancestor, a yeoman farmer in the village
of Grafton, Northamptonshire five or six generations previously.
The technical analysis and conservation work is part of a research
programme being undertaken by the National Portrait Gallery on three of
six portraits which have at some time been associated with
Shakespeare's identity and will be displayed together in the Searching
for Shakespeare exhibition for the first time.
In a three-part series of films BBC TWO's The Culture Show has already
revealed details of the research on the Flower Portrait belonging to
the Royal Shakespeare Company and the final programme to be shown
shortly before the opening of the exhibition will focus on the National
Portrait Gallery's own Chandos Portrait.
Searching for Shakespeare (2 March - 29 May 2006) will bring together
original documents artefacts and costumes relating to Shakespeare's
life together with portraits of his contemporaries including actors,
patrons and other dramatists, in order to place the poet not in our
historical imagination, but within his own time.
The exhibition will be one of two celebrating the National Portrait
Gallery's 150th Anniversary. The Chandos Portrait was the first
portrait acquired by the Gallery in 1856. The exhibition will tour to
the Yale Center for British Art, New Haven from 24 June-17 September
2006.
Notes to Editors
Portrait of an Unknown Gentleman (known as the Grafton Portrait), 1588
Unknown, British School
Oil on a single member of English oak panel
445 x 385 mm (17 1/4 x 15 1/2")
Inscribed top left: 'AE SVAE 24'; top right: '1.5.8.8'; on verso: 'W+S'
(applied in the 19th century)
John Rylands University Library, The University of Manchester
Provenance: The Misses Ludgate, The Bridgewater Inn, Winston-on-Tees,
Co. Durham, c.1907; Bequeathed to the John Rylands Library, Manchester,
1914 by Thomas Kay
Literature: M. H. Spielmann,'The Grafton and 'Sanders' Portraits of
Shakespeare', The Connoisseur, XXIII, 1909, Thomas Kay, The Story of
the Grafton Portrait of William Shakespeare, Fitzroy and Harris,
Grafton Regis, 1914; Ernest Jarratt, 'The Grafton Portrait', John
Rylands Library Bulletin, date, pp.225-229; S. Schoenbaum, William
Shakespeare Records and Images, Scholar Press, London, 1981, p. 191-194
The portrait has appeared as the frontispiece to numerous books of
Shakespeare's collected works, see for example; John Semple Smart,
Shakespeare: Truth and Tradition, 1928 and Richard Wilson, Secret
Shakespeare, 2004.
The John Rylands University Library, The University of Manchester does
not uphold the identification of this painting as William Shakespeare.
The picture was supposed to have been in a manor house at Grafton
Regis, Northamptonshire and removed after a siege in 1643. The 1st Duke
of Grafton was Henry Fitzroy, formerly Palmer, (1663-1690). Philip
Riden, (assisted by Charles Insley), A History of the County of
Northampton, Vol. Victoria County History, Boydell Press, 2002 p.145.
Searching for Shakespeare opens at the National Portrait Gallery on 2
March 2006 and runs until 29 May 2006. Admission £8 /£5.25
concessions. Booking opens 7 November 2005. Book by telephone on 0870
013 0703 (transaction fee applies)
The Culture Show is transmitted on BBC TWO, Thursday 27 October at 7pm
(8pm in Scotland) and repeated at 11.15pm Saturday 29 October 2005.
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS ON THE GRAFTON PORTRAIT
The date of 1588 had rarely been doubted and technical analysis and a
dendro-chronological examination (tree ring analysis) undertaken at the
National Portrait Gallery in 2005 has confirmed a
late-sixteenth-century date, as well as an English origin for this
picture.
The technical examination focused upon confirming the date of the
panel, and exploring an obvious adjustment applied to the last digit of
the inscription from 23 to 24 which can be clearly seen in the x-ray.
An examination using dendro-chronology established an earliest felling
date of the tree that was used for the panel of around 1573.
By matching chronologies and growing patterns of other examples of wood
from this date, the panel has been determined as deriving from a tree
grown in southern England, in particular the area around Surrey and
London.
As most wood used by professional painters for panel painting in
Britain has been found to derive from the Baltic region, this example
is unusual.
The change in the lettering from 23 to 24 was confirmed through the use
of paint sampling as contemporary with the rest of the picture, which
indicates that the young man had probably passed his 24th birthday by
the time the painting was complete and requested his age be altered.
It has not been possible to identify a specific artist, but the
handling of the painting is in line with a controlled linear technique
of English artists of the late sixteenth century.
PUBLICATIONS
A fully illustrated book accompanies this exhibition by curator Tarnya
Cooper with essays by Stanley Wells, James Shapiro and Marcia Pointon
(price £30 hardback). A complementary book on Shakespeare and His
Contemporaries by Charles Nicholl is available from October (price
£9.99).
For further press information please contact Neil Evans, Acting Press
Officer, National Portrait Gallery Tel 020 7312 2452 Mobile 07790
428638 Email nev...@npg.org.uk
www.npg.org.uk
lyra
lyra wrote:
............................................
"a rather beautiful youth"
"an angelic faced young man"
!!!!!! ONCE, maybe! pre restoration !!!!!!
.............................................
lyra
............................................
.....................................................
to see the older version,
and to me the nicer and more real,
try
http://shakespearepictures/blogspot.com
sometimes the picture doesn't seem to appear,
I don't know why.
lariadna
> Roundtable wrote:
>
> > "Grafton portrait not Shakespeare!" - mainly because apparently
> > he couldn't afford such luxurious clothing at such a young age.
> > (I've got pix of me in front of Buckingham Palace - doesn't mean
> > I actually own the place, does it now.)
> >
> > http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/articles/2005/10/28/gallery_says_portrait_is_not_shakespeare/
>
>
> It looked better BEFORE restoring!
>
> This is especially annoying to me,
> as it's almost certainly Marlowe.
>
> Why couldn't they leave it alone!
>
> lyra, fed up with life going wrong...
>
They did make him less pale, and maybe thickened his
hair a bit. He seems to frown slightly more now, but it's
hard to really tell from just a small picture.
(Just C's impressions, nothing to take seriously.)
But I had heard that some of the paint had been washed
off previously.
BTW, you are right that the Harry Potter books are a
good pickme-up, though I'm not quite caught up with
them. I think children's lit is often like that, and I am
looking for some more myself.
And then adult's lit is often just the opposite, for some
reason. Neither one seems completely realistic to me.
C.
Roundtable
Bernhard, had to supply their own costumes and their own jewels. This
meant that they had to have money from some sugar-daddy or mommy. Or be
a whizz at sewing - but then you had to buy the cloth somehow.
John W. Kennedy
Yes, but Paris in the 1860's is not London in the 1580's, where, as far
as I know, costumes were generally the property of the company.
--
John W. Kennedy
"Sweet, was Christ crucified to create this chat?"
-- Charles Williams. "Judgement at Chelmsford"
lyra
to Cambridge University,
in fact a very good link,
here it is...
(he could have borrowed the painting,
if it was in the University
when he was there...
if for instance
it was of their celebrated graduate
Christopher Marlowe...)
(quote)
[Ode] ODE performed in the Senate-House at Cambridge, July 1, 1769,
at the Installation of his Grace Augustus-Henry Fitzroy, Duke of
Grafton,
Chancellor of the University.
Set to music by Dr. Randal, Professor of Music.
Author: [Gray, Thomas, 1716-1771]
Print Source: Cambridge: printed by J. Archdeacon Printer to the
University, M.DCC.LXIX.
Medium: 8p.; 4°. Half-title: Ode for Music.
http://www.thomasgray.org/cgi-bin/view.cgi?collection=primary&edition=1769
lyra
Art Neuendorffer wrote:
> Maybe it's a young Henry Neville:
>
> http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/1405824379.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
more on the subject of John Neville...
(quote)
John NEVILLE
(3rd B. Latimer)
The details in this biography come from the History of Parliament
<http://www.history.ac.uk/hop>, a biographical dictionary of Members of
the House of Commons.
Born 17 Nov 1493, first son of Richard Neville, 2nd Lord Latimer, by
Anne, dau. and heiress of Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcsester
and Blatherwyk, Northants.
Married first, by 1520, Dorothy (d. 7 Feb 1527), dau. of Sir George
Vere, sister of John, 14th Earl of Oxford, by whom he had at least one
son and one dau.;
second, lic. 20 Jun 1528, Elizabeth, dau. of Sir Edward Musgrave of
Hartley, Westmoreland and Edenhall, Cumb.;
(3) 1533, Catherine <../aboutCatherineParr.htm>, dau. of Sir Thomas
Parr of Kendal, Westmoreland, widow of Sir Edward Borough.
Kntd. 14 Oct 1513; succeeded family title as 3rd Lord Latimer Dec 1530.
J.p. Yorks. (N. Riding) 1528-39, (liberty of Ripon) 1538, (W. Riding)
1538-41, (E. Riding) 1538-41; commr. to inquire into all misdeeds,
Yorks. 1536, musters 1539; steward, Ripon in 1536, Galtres forest May
1542; member, council in the north Jun 1530.
John Neville was a descendant of Ralph, 1st Earl of Westmorland, by his
second wife Joan Beaufort, the daughter of John of Gaunt: thus he was
not only a distant kinsman of Henry VIII <../aboutHenryVIII.htm> but he
was also connected by blood and marriage with many noble families. His
immediate forbears had been protagonists in the feuding which preceded
the Wars of the Roses and in 1469 his grandfather had fallen in the
cause of Henry VI at Edgecote. The fortunes of this branch of the
Nevilles were rescued after that disaster by a sympathetic relative,
Cardinal Bourchier, who procured the wardship of the 2nd Lord Latimer
and preserved his inheritance. Latimer grew up to become a figure of
importance in the north.
The first glimpse of his son John Neville is of a 20 year-old warrior
accompanying Henry VIII <../aboutHenryVIII.htm> to northern France in
1513 and being knighted after the taking of Tournai. By 1522 he was
recognized as a spokesman for his father by the northern magnates and
the heads of monastic houses, but it was not until six years later that
he was first named to the Yorkshire bench for his native Riding. His
return to the Parliament of 1529 as one of the knights for Yorkshire
was a further step in his progress, even if he owed it to his father:
the representation of the county was something of a family affair,
Neville's fellow-knight being his cousin Sir Marmaduke Constable
<MarmadukeConstableofEveringham.htm>, over whom he took precedence
probably by reason of his noble lineage. He was not to be a Member of
the Commons for long: his father died either a few days before the
close of the first session or immediately after it and thenceforth he
was to sit in the Lords. The resulting vacancy was not filled until
three years later, when his kinsman and namesake of Chevet was chosen
in his place.
In 1530 the new Lord Latimer was appointed to the council in the north
and signed the letter sent to Clement VII in favour of the King
<../aboutHenryVIII.htm>'s divorce. The opening of the second session of
the Parliament saw him take his place in the Lords: the loss of the
Journal of that House for all but one of the sessions obscures his
attendance save at the sixth, when he was regularly present, but his
two letters of 1534 and 1536 to Cromwell <ThomasCromwell(1EEssex).htm>
asking for leave of absence show that he journeyed to Westminster for
the prorogations and in 1532 he used his attendance in Parliament to
sue out livery of his inheritance.
Lord Latimer, had a daughter named Margaret, betrothed in Oct of 1534
to Ralph, son of Sir Francis Bigod. The contract provided that 'Ralf or
other son of Sir Francis should marry Margaret or other daughter of
Lord Latimer'.
Business in Worcestershire kept Latimer from the opening of the
Parliament of 1536; he reappeared there soon afterwards but although
this was a brief Parliament he evidently quitted it early as for the
last week his name lacks the "p" which would have signified his
presence. He may have returned to Worcestershire to complete his
business there, but by the time the Pilgrimage of Grace
<../Documents/PilgrimageofGrace.htm> began in the autumn he was back in
Yorkshire.
As the leading figure in Mashamshire, one of the centres of the revolt,
he was urged to spare no effort to prevent it from spreading, but his
house at Snape was not strong enough to be held and he could not rely
on the support of his neighbours. By 16 Oct he was reported with his
brother-in-law Sir Christopher Danby to have been taken captive, and
his behaviour at the conference at York and later at Doncaster, where
he put the Pilgrims' case to Thomas Howard, 3rd Duke of Norfolk
<ThomasHoward(3DNorfolk).htm>, prompted the suspicion that he secretly
sympathized with his ostensible captors. Norfolk
<ThomasHoward(3DNorfolk).htm> did not share this view and recommended
Latimer's retention on the council in the north, but others were not so
sure and Latimer was to spend the following year enlisting the aid of
friends to clear his name. Cromwell <ThomasCromwell(1EEssex).htm> still
harboured doubts even after Sir Francis Bigod's insurrection of Jan
1537 in Yorkshire had given Latimer the chance to prove his loyalty by
decisive action, and he cultivated the minister with an annuity of 20
nobles and perhaps by surrendering to him the Latimer house in London:
he followed this up in 1538 by selling one Buckinghamshire manor to
Cromwell <ThomasCromwell(1EEssex).htm>'s friend John Gostwick and
another to Cromwell <ThomasCromwell(1EEssex).htm> himself, although
these sales were also designed to pay for lands at Nun Monkton and
elsewhere in Yorkshire which he bought about the same time.
Latimer attended the Parliament of 1539 nearly every day, but he did
absent himself on 19 May 1539, when the attainder of Thomas, Lord Darcy
<ThomasDarcy(1BTemplehurst).htm>, for complicity in the Pilgrimage
<../Documents/PilgrimageofGrace.htm> was made final, and during the
final session a year later he missed the last week of May. The
deterioration of relations with Scotland and the troubled state of the
borders soon demanded his presence in the north, but he was able to
attend the first session of the Parliament of 1542. By the summer he
was back in the north fighting the Scots and advising the Earl of
Rutland <ThomasManners(1ERutland).htm> on the conduct of the campaign.
He prepared for the hazards of war by making a will on 12 Sep 1542 in
which he provided for his wife, family and servants, but he was not to
die in the field. When the second session of the Parliament opened in
the following Jan he did not make an appearance in the Lords, but he
must have journeyed to London to attend the session for it was there
that he died on 2 Mar 1543 and in St. Paul's that he was buried. He was
succeeded in the barony by his son John, then aged 23 years.
His widow, Catherine Parr <../aboutCatherineParr.htm>, was sought in
marriage by Sir Thomas Seymour <ThomasSeymour(1BSudeley).htm> but in
the following Jul she became the sixth wife of the King
<../aboutHenryVIII.htm> and only after his death did she marry Seymour
<ThomasSeymour(1BSudeley).htm>.
http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/Bios/JohnNeville(3BLatimer).htm
lyra
Art Neuendorffer wrote:
>
> Maybe it's a young Henry Neville:
>
> http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/1405824379.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
Thanks for the link.
I think he is a close kin to
John Neville,
I shall try to find this.
John Neville is interesting for his marriages to
the Musgrave, de Vere and Parr families.
This could link Henry Neville to the families.
.............................................................................................................
(quote)
John NEVILLE
(3rd B. Latimer)
Born: 17 Nov 1493, Snape Hall, Snape, Yorkshire, England
Died: 2 Mar 1543, London, Middlesex, England
Buried: St. Paul's Cathedral, London
Father: Richard NEVILLE (2° B. Latimer) <../NEVILLE3.htm>
Mother: Anne STAFFORD (B. Latimer) <../STAFFORD1.htm>
Married 1: Dorothy De VERE (B. Latimer) <../VERE.htm>
ABT 1518, Oxford, Oxfordshire, England
Children:
1. John NEVILLE (4° B. Latimer) <../NEVILLE3.htm>
2. Margaret NEVILLE
Married 2: Elizabeth MUSGRAVE (B. Latimer) (b. 1504)
20 Jul 1528, Snape, Yorkshire, England
Married 3: Catherine PARR (Queen of England) <../PARR1.htm>
1533, London, Middlesex, England
http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/Bios/JohnNeville(3BLatimer).htm
Bellatrix Lestrange
(3rd B. Latimer)
Born: 17 Nov 1493, Snape Hall, Snape, Yorkshire, England
...........................................................................................
I notice the name of Snape...
I say no more...
_______________________
Bellatrix Lestrange
_______________________
..........................................................................................
lyra wrote:
> Art Neuendorffer wrote:
>
> > Maybe it's a young Henry Neville:
>
lyra
lyra wrote:
> Art Neuendorffer wrote:
>
>
> > Maybe it's a young Henry Neville:
> >
> > http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/1405824379.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
>
>
> more on the subject of John Neville...
>
> (quote)
>
> John NEVILLE
> (3rd B. Latimer)
>
>
> The details in this biography come from the History of Parliament
> <http://www.history.ac.uk/hop>, a biographical dictionary of Members of
> the House of Commons.
>
>
> Born 17 Nov 1493, first son of Richard Neville, 2nd Lord Latimer, by
> Anne, dau. and heiress of Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton,
................................................................................................................
GRAFTON
.................................................................................................................
so there is Grafton AGAIN !
.................................................................................................................
>Worcsester
> and Blatherwyk, Northants.
>
> http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/Bios/JohnNeville(3BLatimer).htm
lyra
John NEVILLE
(3rd B. Latimer)
Born 17 Nov 1493,
he was the first son of Richard Neville, 2nd Lord Latimer, by
his wife
Anne, dau. and heiress of Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton,
................................................................................................................
GRAFTON
.................................................................................................................
so there is Grafton AGAIN !
.................................................................................................................
> > http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/Bios/JohnNeville(3BLatimer).htm
lyra
It occurs to me,
that if Anne Neville is the heiress
of a lord in Grafton,
(Sir Humphrey Stafford,)
she may have inherited a house, manor house
or farm in the Grafton area,
and this may have descended to her grandchildren,
the Musgrave/Nevilles,
whose stepmother is Katherine Parr.
(and, for a little while, a de Vere stepmother too.)
I wonder if the
GRAFTON portrait of a young man,
could have spent time
at such a Grafton house or farm,
which would link it
to the
Nevilles, de Veres, Parrs, etc.
(and Musgraves and Staffords...)
............................................................................................................
(I shall investigate the Stafford link to Grafton...)
............................................................................................................
John NEVILLE
(3rd Baron Latimer)
Born 17 Nov 1493,
he was the first son of Richard Neville, 2nd Lord Latimer, by
his wife
Anne, daughter (and HEIRESS) of Sir Humphrey Stafford of GRAFTON,
lyra
...............................................................................
1. The first paragraph I have quoted following this,
would fit the idea that
Henry Fitzroy, Duke of Grafton in the 1700's,
borrowed the picture during his reign
as Chancellor of Cambridge University,
having perhaps found a picture in the University
of the "under a cloud" Christopher Marlowe.
It may have spent time in "disgrace",
neglected in an empty room or cupbpoard etc.
.............................................................................
2. The second paragraph, however, is much more
in line with the idea I wrote elsewhere,
of Sir Humphrey Stafford having a manor house
at Grafton,
and his daughter as heiress bringing it into
the Neville family.
(John Neville, Lord Latimer,
with links to the
de Vere, Musgrave,
and Parr families.)
.....................................................................
a very interesting look at the Grafton,
from the
National Portrait Gallery, London...
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
(quote, excerpts)
NEWLY CONSERVED GRAFTON PORTRAIT FUELS FRESH DEBATE ON SHAKESPEARE
The Grafton Portrait
acquired its name in the early 20th century, when the owners recalled
an old family tradition that the portrait had been bequeathed by one of
the Dukes of Grafton to their ancestor, a yeoman farmer in the village
of Grafton, Northamptonshire five or six generations previously.
...............................................................................................................
The picture was supposed to have been in a manor house at Grafton
Regis, Northamptonshire and removed after a siege in 1643.
...........................................
lyra
the grandchildren of Anne Neville,
nee Stafford,
are in fact
de Vere/Nevilles.
.........................................................
lyra wrote:
> It occurs to me,
> that if Anne Neville is the heiress
> of a lord in Grafton,
>
> (Sir Humphrey Stafford,)
>
> she may have inherited a house, manor house
> or farm in the Grafton area,
>
> and this may have descended to her grandchildren,
> the Musgrave/Nevilles,
>
> whose stepmother is Katherine Parr.
..............................................................................
I regret an error...
the grandchildren of Anne Neville,
nee Stafford,
are in fact
de Vere/Nevilles.
> (and, for a little while, a de Vere stepmother too.)
..............................................................................
(a Musgrave stepmother.)
...................................................................................
lyra
in case I lose them!
1.
Grafton
The home of Sir Humphrey Stafford
and his brother Thomas who also fought for Richard III at the battle of
Bosworth
and survived to cause further trouble for Henry VII later on.
http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/places/worcestershire.html
.......................................................................................................................
2.
3. Beatrice Stafford,
who was married three times.
One of her marriages was to Thomas de Roos, who died in 1384.
He was the 2nd son of William de Roos and his wife, Margery Badlesmere.
He was the grandson of William de Roos, who married Maud (Matilda)
Vaux, daughter of John de Vaux.
He was great grandson of Robert de Roos, who married Isabel Albini,
granddaughter of the Surety William de Albini.
Thomas de Roos and his wife Beatrice Stafford had the following
children:
1. William de Roos, the eldest son, 7th Baron Roos, Knight of the
Garter under King Henry IV, and Lord Treasurer of England, died at
Belvoir September 1, 1414. He married Margaret Fitz Alan, daughter of
John Fitz Alan (and his wife Elizabeth Despencer), a descendant of the
Surety Robert de Vere.
2. John de Roos
3. Thomas de Roos
4. Robert de Roos
5. Margaret Roos, married Reynold de Grey.
6. Elizabeth Roos, married Thomas Clifford.
http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~pmcbride/james/f041.htm
lyra
in case I lose them!
1.
Grafton
The home of Sir Humphrey Stafford and his brother Thomas
who also fought for Richard III at the battle of Bosworth
and survived to cause further trouble for Henry VII later on.
http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/places/worcestershire.html
.................................................................................................
2.
Art Neuendorffer
> >
> > > Maybe it's a young Henry Neville:
> > >
> > > http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/1405824379.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
> lyra wrote:
>
> > John NEVILLE
> > (3rd B. Latimer)
> >
> > The details in this biography come from the History of Parliament
> > <http://www.history.ac.uk/hop>, a biographical dictionary of Members of
> > the House of Commons.
> >
> > Born 17 Nov 1493, first son of Richard Neville, 2nd Lord Latimer, by
> > Anne, dau. and heiress of Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton,
> > http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/Bios/JohnNeville(3BLatimer).
lyra wrote:
> so there is Grafton AGAIN !
-------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.stratford-upon-avon.co.uk/blueboar.htm
<<The Parish of Temple Grafton is mentioned in the Doomsday
Book of 1086 as being owned by a man named Gilbert .
The longest ownership of the manor was by
the Sheldon family who held it from 1548 to 1675.
The oldest part of The Blue Boar dates from the early 1600's
and records show that it has been an ale house since that time,>>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
November 27, 1095 Tues. Pope Urban launches 1st Crusade [Templars]
November 27, 1582 Tues. Wm Shaxpere & Anna Whateley of Temple Grafton
1582. On 27th November a licence was issued in the Registry of the
Bishop of Worcester authorising the marriage of William Shaxpere
to Anna Whateley of Temple Grafton.
1582. On 28th November the Bishop of Worcester insisted upon a
marriage bond exempting him from all liability should
there be any irregularity in the speedy marriage of
"William Shagspere and Anne Hathwey of Stratford
in the Diocese of Worcester. maiden..."
November 28, 1582 William Shagspere & Anne Hathwey of Stratford
November 28, 1660 founding FELLOW of the Royal Society
------------------------------------------------------
[N]over(int) universi
[N]vero(tin) ni.verius
----------------------------------------------------------
SHAKESPEARE'S MARRIAGE AND CHILDREN
http://www.shakespeare-online.com/biography/
<<Recordings in the Episcopal register at Worcester on the dates of
November 27 & 28, 1582, reveal that Shakespeare desired to marry a
young girl named Anne. There are two different documents regarding this
matter, and their contents have raised a debate over just whom
Shakespeare first intended to wed. Were there two Annes? Was
Shakespeare in love with one but in lust with the other? Was
Shakespeare ready to join in matrimony with the Anne of his dreams only
to have an attack of conscience and marry the Anne with whom he had
carnal relations? To discuss the controversy properly we should look at
the documents in question. The first entry in the register is the
following record of the issue of a marriage license to one Wm
Shakespeare:
Anno Domini 1582...Novembris...27 die eiusdem mensis.
Item eodem die supradicto emanavit Licentia inter
Wm Shaxpere et Annam Whateley de Temple Grafton.
The next entry in the episcopal register records
the marriage bond granted to one Wm Shakespeare:
*Noverint universi* per praesentes nos Fulconem Sandells de Stratford
in comitatu Warwici agricolam et Johannem Rychardson ibidem agricolam,
teneri et firmiter obligari Ricardo Cosin generoso et Roberto Warmstry
notario publico in quadraginta libris bonae et legalis monetae Angliae
solvend. eisdem Ricardoet Roberto haered. execut. et assignat. suis ad
quam quidem solucionem bene et fideliter faciend. obligamus nos et
utrumque nostrum per se pro toto et in solid. haered. executor. et
administrator. nostros firmiter per praesentes sigillis nostris
sigillat. Dat. 28 die Novem. Anno regni dominae nostrae Eliz. Dei
gratia Angliae Franc. et Hiberniae Reginae fidei defensor &c.25.2 The
condition of this obligation is such that if hereafter there shall not
appear any lawful let or impediment by reason of any precontract,
consanguinity, affinity or by any other lawful means whatsoever, but
that William Shagspere on the one party and Anne Hathwey of Stratford
in the diocese of Worcester, maiden, may lawfully solemnize matrimony
together, and in the same afterwards remain and continue like man and
wife according unto the laws in that behalf provided... >>
-------------------------------------------------------
<<There is an old English word WHATE,
meaning fortune, fate, or destiny,
I think that in a desperate moment of inspiration,
confused before the clerk, Shakespeare reached
into his heart and came out with the name of that Anne
who would have been his choice, his fate, his destiny.>>
- _The Late Mr. Shakespeare_ by Robert Nye
--------------------------------------------------------
h_ o n orific
a_ b_ i litudi
n i_ t atibus
------------------------------------------------------
[N]vero(tin) ni.verius
[N]over(int) universi
-------------------------------------------------------
The Latin word for OVER : SUPER
--------------------------------------------------------------
He has hidden his own name, a fair name, William, in the plays,
a SUPER here, a clown there, as a painter of old Italy set his face
in a DARK CORNER of his canvas. He has REVEalED it in the sonnets
where there is Will in O-VER(pl)US. Like John o'Gaunt his name is dear
to him, as dear as the coat and crest he toadied for, on a bend
sable a spear or steeled argent, honorificabilitudinitatibus,
dearer than his glory of greatest shakescene in the country.
What's in a name? That is what we ask ourselves in childhood
when we write the name that we are told is ours.
--------------------------------------------------------
<<Noverint derives form the Third Person Plural of the
perfect subjunctive tense of the verb NESCERE, 'to know'.
In English it occurs as the opening phrase of writs.
Thus Noverint universi, 'let all men know'.
Now then, by extension this English word Noverint
has come to be applied not just to a writ but to the man
who writes it- in short , to any member of the tribe of legal
scriveners.>> - _The Late Mr. Shakespeare_ by Robert Nye
---------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sourcetext.com/lawlibrary/campbell/03.htm
In Act I, Sc. 2, [As You Like It] Shakespeare makes the lively
Rosalind, who, although well versed in poesy and books of chivalry, had
probably never seen a bond or a law-paper of any sort in her life,
quite familiar with the commencement of all deeds poll, which in Latin
was,
Noverint universi per presentes,
in English, "Be it known to all men by these presents:"
............................................................................
Le Beau.: There comes an old man and his three sons?
Cel.: I could match this beginning with an old tale.
Le Beau.: Three proper young men, of excellent growth and presence;?
Ros.: With bills on their necks?
"Be it known to all men by these presents,"?
............................................................................
This is the technical phraseology referred to by Thomas NASH in
his _Epistle to the Gentlemen Students of the two Universities_
in the year 1589, when he is supposed to have denounced
the author of Hamlet as one of those who had
"left the trade of Noverint, whereto they were born,
for handfuls of tragical speeches"
that is, an attorney's clerk become a poet,
and penning a stanza when he should engross.
As You Like It was not brought out until shortly before the year 1600,
so that NASH's Noverint could not have been suggested by it.
Possibly Shakespeare now introduced the "Be it known to all men,"
&c., in order to show his contempt for NASH's sarcasm.
In Act. II. Sc. 1, there are illustrations which would present
themselves rather to the mind of one initiated in legal proceedings,
than of one who had been brought up as an apprentice to a "lover, or an
assistant to a butcher or a woolstapler: for instance, when
it is said of the poor wounded deer, weeping in the stream:
"thou makest a testament
As worldlings do, giving thy sum of more
To that which hath too much
And again where the careless herd, jumping by him without greeting him,
are compared to "fat and greasy citizens," who look
Upon that poor and broken bankrupt there, without pitying his
sufferings or attempting to relieve his necessities.
It may perhaps be said that such language might be used by any man
of observation. But in Act III, Sc. 1, a deep technical knowledge
of law is displayed, howsoever it may have been acquired.
The usurping Duke, Frederick, wishing all the real property of Oliver
to be seized, awards a writ of extent against him, in the language
which would be used by the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer:
Duke Fred. Make an extent upon his house and lands an extendi facias
applying to house and lands, as a fieri facias would apply to goods and
chattels, or a capias ad satisfaciendum to the person.
---------------------------------------------------------
"through EVERy art and thrive by none,
to leave the trade of Noverint" -- Thomas NASH
The Hebrew word for SERPENT: "NA(ha)SH" (a.k.a.: BRASS)
Anglo-Saxon word for SERPENT: "(wi)VERE"
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sourcetext.com/lawlibrary/greenwood/isasp/08.htm
<<"Kyd was born to the trade of 'Noverint,' & perhaps
spent a few years in the office of his father who
was a scrivener; in A Warning, IV, 4, the indictments
of Browne, Anne Sanders, and Drury, with their legal jargon,
point to the probability of their having been drawn up by one
accustomed to copying legal documents. All Kyd's plays,
with the exception of his translation of Garnier's Cornelia,
were issued anonymously, so was A Warning.">>
----------------------------------------------------
HOW SHAKESPEARE HAS BEEN MADE A LAWYER.
http://www.sourcetext.com/lawlibrary/devecmon/02.htm
The reasons given by Lord Campbell for the faith that was in him,
besides the legalisms in the plays, are as follows:
"Envy does merit as its shade pursue; and rivals whom he surpassed,
not only envied Shakespeare, but grossly libeled him. Of this we have
an example in 'An Epistle to the Gentlemen Students of the Two
Universities, by Thomas Nash,' prefixed to the first edition of
Robert Greene's Menaphon (which was subsequently called
Greene's Arcadia), according to the title page, published in 1589.
The alleged libel on Shakespeare is in the words following, viz.:
"'I will turn back to my first studies of delight, and talk a little in
friendship with a few of our trivial translators. It is a common
practice nowadays, amongst a sort of shifting companions that run
through EVERy art and thrive by none, to leave the trade of Noverint
whereto they were born, land busy themselves with the endeavors of art,
that could scarce Latinize their neck-verse if they should have need;
yet English Seneca, read by candle light, yields many good sentences,
as blood is a beggar, and so forth; and if you entreat him fair
in a frosty morning, he will afford you whole Hamlets;
I should say whole handfuls of tragical speeches.
But, O grief! Tempus edax rerum-what is it that will last always?
The sea exhaled by drops will in continuance be dry;
and Seneca, let blood, line by line and page by page,
at length must needs die to our stage.'"
------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Innes:
Here is an excerpt from Aubrey in his Nat. Hist. Wilts, Royal Soc.
MS p. 259, an anecdote which cites a story of Sir Thomas More:
"... they had on their left arm an armilla of tinn printed in some
workes, about four inches long; they could not gett it off. They wore
about their necks a great horn of an oxe in a string of bawdrie, which
when they came to an house for almes, they did wind; and they put the
drink given them into this horn, whereto they did putt a stopple. Since
the warres I doe not remember to have seen any one of them." In a later
hand is added,
"I have seen them in Worcestershire within these thirty years, 1756."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
tinn = sick (Scottish, Irish)
------------------------------------------------------
VERO NI. VERIUS: tinn
nOVERint UNIVERSI
-----------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
lyra
is the name of his second wife,
Elizabeth Wrottesley,
who I take to be
descended from the Earl of Southampton,
Henry Wriothesley,
and his wife Elizabeth Vernon.
................................................................................
lyra wrote:
I have discovered a link from the later Dukes of Grafton,
to Cambridge University,
in fact a very good link,
which follows...
(he could have borrowed the painting,
if it was in the University
at the time he was there...
if, for instance,
lyra
which follows further on...
.....................................................................
lyra wrote:
Another interesting link here,
is the name of his second wife,
which is
Elizabeth WROTTESLEY,
who I take to be
descended from the Earl of Southampton,
Henry Wriothesley,
and his wife Elizabeth Vernon.
................................................................................
(The wife of Henry, Duke of Grafton,
in case that isn't clear.)
more about his interesting life...
(and note, he was a student at Cambridge,
so his links with the University go back a long way)
(and is the wife Anne Liddell
the same family as Alice
(Through the Looking Glass) Liddell,
I wonder.)
............................................................
(quote, excerpts)
Augustus Henry Fitzroy, third Duke of Grafton (1735 -- 1811)
Prime Minister: 14 October 1768 -- 28 January 1770
Marjie Bloy Ph.D., Senior Research Fellow, National University of
Singapore
Augustus Henry Fitzroy was the second of three sons born to Lord
Augustus Fitzroy and Elizabeth Cosby. Their eldest son died at the age
of two, so Grafton became the heir.
The family was descended from one of the illegitimate sons of Charles
II and Barbara Villiers; Grafton inherited the dark complexion of the
Stuarts as well as their love of horse racing.
Grafton was a founder member of the Jockey Club, along with the second
Marquis of Rockingham <rocky.html>. Other interests included hunting to
hounds, breeding racehorses, farming and collecting books. His horses
were Derby winners three times and Oaks winners twice.
Grafton was educated initially at a private school in Hackney, London.
Later he went to Westminster School and in 1751 entered Peterhouse,
Cambridge. After being awarded an MA in 1753 he undertook his Grand
Tour, visiting France, Switzerland, Italy, Germany and Holland.
In January 1756 Grafton married Anne Liddell, the daughter of Baron
Ravensworth. During their stormy marriage, they had three children.
One of the problems for the couple was that Grafton was remarkably
unfaithful to his wife, keeping a series of mistresses openly. In 1764
he left his wife to live with Anne Parsons, alias Mrs. Houghton and
then outraged his contemporaries by taking her openly into high
society.
Horace Walpole's comment on Mrs. Houghton was that she was "the Duke of
Grafton's Mrs. Houghton, the Duke of Dorset's Mrs. Houghton,
everybody's Mrs. Houghton".
Meanwhile, Lady Grafton had embarked on an affair with the Duke of
Portland <portland.html>. In January 1765 Grafton and his wife
separated: Lady Grafton began an affair with the Earl of Upper Ossory
to whom she had a son in 1768. The couple then eloped, to the
embarrassment of Grafton.
He divorced his wife in March 1769; she married Lord Upper Ossory and
Grafton abandoned Mrs. Houghton in order to marry Elizabeth Wrottesley
in June 1769. Grafton and his second wife had thirteen children. Mrs
Houghton went on to marry the Duke of Cumberland and therefore partly
was responsible for the Royal Marriages Act <../marriage.html> of
1772..
http://www.victorianweb.org/history/pms/grafton.html
................................................................................................................................
lyra
lyra wrote:
> Notes...
>
> ...............................................................................
>
> 1. The first paragraph I have quoted following this,
>
> would fit the idea that
> Henry Fitzroy, Duke of Grafton in the 1700's,
>
> borrowed the picture during his reign
> as Chancellor of Cambridge University,
>
> having perhaps found a picture in the University
> of the "under a cloud" Christopher Marlowe.
>
> It may have spent time in "disgrace",
> neglected in an empty room or cupbpoard etc.
>
> .............................................................................
>
> 2. The second paragraph, however, is much more
> in line with the idea I wrote elsewhere,
> of Sir Humphrey Stafford having a manor house
> at Grafton,
> and his daughter as heiress bringing it into
> the Neville family.
>
> (John Neville, Lord Latimer,
> with links to the
> de Vere, Musgrave,
> and Parr families.)
>
> .....................................................................
I find that the manor house at Grafton,
Grafton Manor,
in fact was confiscated from one of the Staffords,
and owned by the Talbot family.
This is very interesting to me,
as if Christopher Marlowe was really a Parr,
the Talbot family are his very close kin.
I will add some of the marriages of the two families.
...................................................................................
lyra
lyra wrote:
I've found some of the marriages of the Talbots
into the Parr family tree...
note, that all the marriages here are to the very family
which is in the First Folio,
the Earl of Pembroke, etc.,
and the household which Baker (and Wraight?)
think Marlowe to be found living in,
as a page,
and/or the 3rd Earl of Pembroke his son,
therefore not legitimate.
................................................................................
does this make any sense? it's an odd day today...
I don't know if I'm making my postings clear to read...
................................................................................
(quote)
_________First Parr/Pembroke/Talbot marriage...____________
_____________________________________________________
William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke, K.G.,
Welsh, born 1506 [Wilton House guide book],
killed a man in a brawl in Bristol, escaped to France, returned to
England 1534
and mar soon after [according to Wilton House video, but their guide
book says 2nd Earl born 1534],
mar 1stly to Anne PARR
[born 1514, descendant of Edward III, sister of Catherine Parr] and
had issue:
1. Henry Herbert, 2nd Earl of Pembroke.
2. Sir Edward Herbert, of Powis Castle, Welshpool, Powys, Wales,
ancestor of Herbert, Baron Powis and Marquess of Powis [which family
stayed Catholic during Penal Times, involved in Jacobite resistance],
and female-line ancestor of Herbert, Earl of Powis, of the second
creation.
......................................................................................
mar 2ndly to Anne TALBOT [born est c.1520],
died at Hampton Court, 17th Mar 1570, age 64 yrs, bur St.Paul's
Cathedral.
Anne Talbot bur 8th Aug 1588, age est c.68 yrs.
http://humphrysfamilytree.com/Herbert/1st.earl.html
......................................................................................
_________Second Parr/Pembroke/Talbot marriage___________
_____________________________________________________
Henry Herbert, 2nd Earl of Pembroke, K.G.,
born 1534 [Wilton House guide book],
mar 1stly, 21st May 1553 [him age 19, her age 12] to Lady Catherine
Grey [sister of Lady Jane],
after the fall of Lady Jane Grey in July 1553, the 1st Earl banished
Lady Catherine from Wilton, marriage dissolved or declared null 1554 by
influence of 1st Earl, unsurprisingly it had not been consummated,
though she was saddened by losing him [Complete Peerage],
mar 2ndly, 17th Feb 1563 [him age 29, her age est c.15] to Catherine
TALBOT est c.1548],
succ 1570, entertained Elizabeth I at Wilton 1574,
Catherine bur 15th May 1576, age est c.28 yrs,
mar 3rdly, 21st Apr 1577 [him age 43, her age 15, but marriage seems to
have been happy]
to Lady Mary Sidney [born 27th Oct 1561, descendant of Edward I] and
had issue:
http://humphrysfamilytree.com/Herbert/2nd.earl.html
............................................................................................
_________Third Parr/Pembroke/Talbot marriage...____________
_____________________________________________________
William Herbert, 3rd Earl of Pembroke, K.G.,
poet, gave his name to Pembroke College, Oxford,
born 8th Apr 1580, succ 1601,
mar 4th Nov 1604 to Mary TALBOT,
was an investor in the Bermuda Company to colonize the Bermuda islands
from 1612 onwards, Pembroke Parish, Bermuda is named after him,
notorious womaniser, had affair post-1614 with his 1st cousin Lady Mary
Wroth and had issue:
William ----, illegitimate,
settled in Ireland by 1640,
captain under Sir Henry Herbert
and colonel under Prince Maurice in English Civil War (1642-51).
Catherine ----, illegitimate,
mar Mr. Lovel, living near Oxford.
Chancellor of Oxford University 1617-30,
Edward Herbert, 1st Baron Herbert of Chirbury sent a congratulatory
poem to Mary Wroth, "A Merry Rime Sent to Lady Mary Wroth upon the
birth of my Lord Pembroke's Child. Born in the spring", seems to be
spring 1620,
when Pembroke College founded 1624 it was named after him (see also
here),
died 10th Apr 1630, age 50 yrs.
............................................................................................................................................
Mary Talbot died Mar 1649.
...........................................................................................................................................
See Connections to Shakespeare.
...........................................................................................................................................
http://humphrysfamilytree.com/Herbert/3rd.earl.html
...........................................................................................................................................
............................................................................
( I find that the manor house at Grafton,
Grafton Manor,
in fact was confiscated from one of the Staffords,
and owned by the Talbot family.
This is very interesting to me,
as if Christopher Marlowe was really a Parr,
the Talbot family are his very close kin.
I will add some of the marriages of the two families.)
lyra
...........................................................................................................................................
http://humphrysfamilytree.com/Herbert/3rd.earl.html
................................................................................................................
here is the page about Shakespeare...
(quote)
Connections with Shakespeare
The Herbert family had numerous connections with Shakespeare,
and also, interestingly, with Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford,
who some claim is the real Shakespeare:
de Vere's unhappy wife Anne Cecil had once been intended
for Lady Pembroke's brother Sir Philip Sidney.
Anne married de Vere in 1571, and he treated her badly.
Sidney (still then unmarried) and de Vere had a famous quarrel in 1579.
[Sidney died in 1586, and Anne died in 1588. de Vere remarried in
1591.]
It is reputed that Shakespeare and his players first performed As You
Like It (1600)
and perhaps Twelfth Night (prob. 1601) at Wilton
(although note that nearby Salisbury town, Wiltshire,
also claims a particular spot as the place where As You Like It was
first performed).
[de Vere died June 1604.]
The 3rd Earl of Pembroke was apparently engaged to de Vere's daughter
(must be Bridget)
at some time, before marrying another in Nov 1604.
The 4th Earl married de Vere's daughter Susan in Dec 1604.
Shakespeare's sonnets were dedicated to "Mr. W. H." in 1609.
This has been identified with William Herbert, the 3rd Earl.
See the short story The Portrait of Mr. W. H. by Oscar Wilde.
[William Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon died 1616.]
The first folio edition of Shakespeare's plays (pub posthumously 1623)
is dedicated to the 3rd and 4th Earls of Pembroke.
http://humphrysfamilytree.com/Herbert/4th.earl.html#shakespeare
..................................................................................................................................................
lyra wrote:
I've found some of the marriages of the Talbots
(the family in Grafton Manor, where the
Grafton portrait may have come from)
into the Pembroke family tree...
note, that the marriages here are to the very family
which is in the First Folio,
the Earl of Pembroke, and his brother,
and the house which Baker (and Wraight?)
think Marlowe to be found in,
maybe as a page,
and/or the 3rd Earl of Pembroke to be his son,
(therefore not legitimate).