Duchess Dudley/Royal family connection?

[bx...@yahoo.com]

I have tried,  but have been unable to find a blood connection between  Duchess Dudley and the  Royal Family.  I'm hoping someone else might have better luck.

Born Alice Leigh to  Katherine (d. 1639,  nee Spencer) and Sir Thomas Leigh, 1st Bt. (d. 1625), she married Sir Robert Dudley  (illegitimate son of Robert Dudley, 1st Earl of Leicester).  They had 7 daughters.

Her maternal grandfather was Sir John Spencer, of Wormleighton.   In the years and centuries to come, the Spencer family   would claim many descendants as  peerage holders.    However, I couldn't find a single member of the peerage, much less nobility, that Alice  could claim as a direct ancestor.  

Alice was created Duchess Dudley for life in 1644.  She died in 1669, when the life peerage became extinct.

As always, any help would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Brooke

[dpth...@gmail.com]

This doesn't give a royal connection but gives more ancestry which might help.

Her paternal grandparents were:

Sir Thomas Leigh (ca 1504-17 Nov 1571); m.before 13 Mar 1536 Alice Barker [alias Coverall or Coverdale] (d.1603).


From Burke's Commoners, Volume I, pp 654ff:

Alice Barker was daughter of John Barker, of Haughmond, and his wife Elizabeth Hill (sister of Sir Rowland Hill, Lord Mayor of London).

Elizabeth Hill was daughter of Thomas Hill and of his wife, Margaret Wilbraham (daughter of Thomas Wilbraham of Woodhey).

Thomas Hill was son of Humphrey Hill, of Buntingdale, and of his wife Agnes Bird daughter of John Bird "and cousin and heiress of David de Malpas".

Humphrey Hill was son of Griffith Hull (note spelling change) and of his wife Margaret Warren, dau of Griffith Warren (said to be collateral branch of the Warrens, Earls of Surrey.)

[bx...@yahoo.com]

Paul, thanks for the additional information. I think if there had been a royal connection, you probably would have found it.  

To date, of the two dukes/duchesses where I have been unable to find a royal blood tie, both have been women.  

The other woman, the Duchess of Munster and Kendal was "at least"  the mistress of a King.  Here, there is no apparent connection (if you will ) to the Royal Family at all.

Brooke

[S. S.]

There is something interesting about the Dukedom of Dudley, both in terms of its creation, precedence and validity as a peerage. The Complete Peerage (2nd Edition) has the following entry:

"Alice Leigh, 2nd da. of Sir Thomas Leigh, 1st Bart., of Stoneleigh, by Katherine... m., about 1596 (before 25 Sep. 1597) as his 2nd wife, at Plymouth, the versatile Sir Robert dudley, the "so-called son" of Robert, Earl of Leicester... About this time Sir Robert tried to establish his legitimacy and his right to his ancestral titles, but in May 1605 the Star Chamber pronounced against him. He left England for Florence... and contracted a (so-called) marriage abroad with Elizabeth Southwell... By diploma of the Emperor of Germrany, 9 Mr. 1620, he was cr. Duke of Northumberland... His wife Alice [aforementioned], by a patent, dat. at Oxford, 23 May (1644) 20 Car. I, in which (inter alia) the creation as a Duke of the Holy Roman Empire by the Emperor Ferdinand II is recited, was cr. "DUCHESS OF DUDLEY" for her life, in England and other of our realms and dominions with such precedences as she might have had, if she had lived in the dominions of the sacred empire as a mark of our favour unto her and out of Our Prerogative Royal"...

Now what is really interesting is that V.G. notes in a footnote that the patent for this creation is given in extenso (i.e. in full) in Dugdale's Baronage, vol. ii, p. 225. What is rather important to note is that I could not find reference for a patent of creation being enrolled anywhere else. It is not noted in the venerable Sir John Christopher Sainty's Peerage Creations (2008) as that work only counts English peerages from 1649 to 1800. It is not either present in the Appendix to the 47th Report of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records (which is an invaluable and authoritative chronological list of peerage and baronetcy creations), a definitive work for peerage creations between 1483 and 1646.

V.G. goes on to note the following: "J. H. Round [the famous and authoritative scholar and historian], however does not accept this creation of an English dignity (though it has been so supposed), and deems it merely the concession of such precedence in England". 

It also further notes that this is the last time that a peerage was given a higher precedence by warrant of precedency. You can find further details for warrants of precedence higher than the creation of a peerage in Appendix C of volume I of the Complete Peerage (2nd Edition) btw. 

In short, I think the patent awarded to Alice Leigh was simply one granting her the status and precedence of a Duchess and assigning the same style and precedence to her children. Therefore, she was not in fact created a true Duchess as a peeress by letters patent and it would be (I think) incorrect to assume her as a peeress. She merely had the precedence and style of a peeress, not being beholden to the dignity of one.

Could someone more experienced shed some light on this situation?

Funnily enough, the patent in full can be found in Burke's Extinct Peerage 1883, pp. 181-182. Here it is in full (apologies for the formatting since I had to copy it from the PDF copy I had):—

Whereas, in the reign of King JAMES, a suit was commenced

in the Star Chamber Court against Sir Robert Dudley, for pre

tending himself lawful heir to the honours and lands of the

earldoms of Warwick and Leicester, as son and heir of Robert,

Earl of Leicester, by Douglas, wife to the said earl, and all

proceedings stayed in the ecclesiastical courts, in which the

said suit depended for proof of his legitimation ; yet, never

theless, did the said court vouchsafe liberty to the said Sir

Robert to examine witnesses in the Star Chamber Court, to

make good his legitimacy. Whereupon, by full testimony of

the Lady Douglas herself, and other witnesses it was made

appear. But a special order being made, that the depositions

should be sealed up, and no copies taken, did cause the said Sir

Robert, to leave the kingdom; whereof his adversaries taking

advantage, occasioned his lands to be seized on, to the king,

our father's use. And not long after, Prince Henry made

overture to the said Sir Robert, to obtain his title by purchase

of Kenilworth Castle, &c., valued at £50,000, but bought by the

prince in consideration of £14,500, and promise of his princely

favour to restore Sir Robert in honours and fortunes; but

before payment thereof was made (if any at all), to the said

Sir Robert's hands, the prince was dead. And it appearing

that Alice, Lady Dudley, wife of Sir Robert had an estate of

inheritance in the same, descendible unto her posterity, in the

19th of JAMES I, an act was passed to enable her to alien her

estate from her children as a feme sole; which she accordingly

did, in consideration of £4,000, and further payments yearly to

be made out of the exchequer, &c.; which having not been

accordingly paid for many years, are to the damage of the said

Lady Alice and her children, to a very great value. And the

said Sir Robert settling himself in Tuscany, within the terri

tories of the great duke, (from whom he had extraordinary

esteem,) had from the emperor, FERDINAND II., the title of a

duke given him, to be used by himself and his heirs through

out the sacred empire.

“And whereas, our father not knowing the truth of the

lawful birth of the said Sir Robert, (as we piously believe),

granted away the titles of the said earldom to others,

which we now hold not fit to call in question. And yet

‘having a very deep sense of the injuries done to Sir Robert

Dudley, and the Lady Alice, and their children, &c., and

holding ourselves in honour and conscience obliged to make

reparation; and also taking into consideration the said great

estate which the Lady Alice had in Kenilworth, and sold at our

desire to us at a very great undervalue, and yet not performed

or Satisfied to many thousand pounds damage. And we also,

casting our princely eye upon the faithful services done by Sir

Richard I.eveson, who married the Lady Catherine, one of the

daughters of the said duke, and also the great services which

Robert Holbourne, Esq., hath done us by his learned pen, and

otherwise, who married Anne, another of the daughters; we

have conceived Ourselves bound in honour and conscience to

give the said Lady Alice and her children such honours and

precedencies as is, or are due to them in marriage or blood.

And therefore we do not only give and grant unto the said

Lady Alice Dudley the title of Duchess of Dudley for

life, in England, and other our realms, &c., with such pre

cedencies as she might have had, if she had lived in the

dominions of the sacred empire, &c.; but we do also further

grant unto the said Lady Catherine and Lady Anne, her

daughters, the places, titles, and precedencies of the said duke's

daughters, as from the time of their father's creation during

their respective lives, &c. Conceiving ourselves obliged to do

much more for them, if it were in our power, in these unhappy

times of distraction, &c., witness ourself, at Oxford, 23rd May, in the 20th Year of our reign.

P.S. Brooke, here is a link to the Complete Peerage (2nd Edition). The 1st Edition is terribly out of date and leaves much to be desired. The 2nd edition is far superior. Unfortunately, since it is apparently still under copyright, the work has not been published in full on Google Books, only till about vol 4 out of a total of 14. You can access and download all the volumes of the 2nd edition after making a simple free account on familysearch.org.

Here is the link: https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/271412?availability=Family%20History%20Library

S.S.

[Paul Theroff]

I was writing a response at the same time as S.S., so have some of the same information:

This seems to have been a very unusual case with unusual circumstances. According to The Complete Peerage, the patent creating her Duchess specifically cited the fact that her husband had been created a Duke of the Holy Roman Empire, and so this creation might be considered as nothing more than assigning her a rank in England which she might have had in the Empire.

This was notwithstanding the fact that the title was different (her husband was created Duke of Northumberland by the Emperor), and her husband was actually parading a different woman around the continent as his wife.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Peerage News" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/peerage-news/zADaC_mMIuQ/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to peerage-news...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/peerage-news/f1726e83-bef9-48d8-ac3b-5867b4a7ec49n%40googlegroups.com.

--

D. P. Theroff

[bx...@yahoo.com]

S.S. and Paul, thank you both for your replies.

I had read what was written in The Complete Peerage before posting.  It wasn't like any other ducal creation I had ever seen, and I thought the whole story, especially Sir Robert (the "Duke of Northumberland")'s involvement with another woman was bizarre.  

I do believe your evaluations of the situation-- i.e., that it was more about creating an "equal" rank for her-- is spot on, and that she should not be considered a peeress in the true sense.  I therefore will not be including her in my research.

Ironically, today, I had been researching the Duke of Northumberland (1551 creation).  As it turns out, John Dudley, the first and last Duke of that creation, was the grandfather of Sir Robert.  I'm guessing that is why he chose to be called "the Duke of Northumberland", even though Sir Robert's was not a "true" peerage.

Also, S.S., thank you so much for sharing the link on familysearch.org regarding the Complete Peerage.  I already have a free account, so this is perfect.

Brooke

[malcolm davies]

The words of creation for Dudley (if that is what they are) may be contrasted with the letters patent for the Duke of Wellington(which can be found at p286 of Palmer.

The Duke’s letters patent include the following words “And moreover it being our will and pleasure to dignify the said Arthur,Marquis of Wellington,with the title of Duke,and to admit him amongst the Dukes of our United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland….And him the said Arthur,Marquis of Wellington,Duke of Wellington in our county of Somerset,Do by these presents advance,prefer,dignify and create …….the said Arthur….the name,state,degreestyle ,dignity,title and honour of Duke of Wellington aforesaid.

[S. S.]

Ah I finally found out Dugdale's Baronage of England has been digitized (the scanned copies are rather bad quality on the internet). Here is the excerpt from p 225 over the Duchess Dudley Case: 

Upon the departure of Sir Robert Dudley out of England, he took with him (as is credibly reported) ... the Daughter of Sir Robert Southwell, of Wood-•isting, in Com. Norff. Kt. (a very beautiful Lady) in the habit of a Page: whom, it is said, that he Married in Italy. And, seating himself within the Territories of the great Duke of Tuscany, had, by reason of his singular Endowments, no little esteem in all those parts. For, by his means it was, that Liburne, a small and obscure Village; not only grew to be a fa∣mous Port, but adorn'd with excellent Buildings; and to be as eminent a Mart, as Scala-Franca (in Italy) is; whereunto the English-Merchants do usually repair for Commerce. As also, that the Fenns and Marshes, in those parts, have by his contrivance been happily drained. His Fame therefore, deservedly, spreading into Germany; he had, by Letters-Patents from his Imperial Majestly, Ferdinand the second (bearing date at Uienna, 9 Martii Anno MDCxx.) the Title of Duke conferred upon him, to be used by himself and his Heirs, throughout all the Domini∣ons of the sacred Empire. Whereupon he was generally called Duke of Northumberland. which Title, as Iohn, his Grandfather bore, though for∣feited by At•ainder in the first year of Queen Mary: So did he, whilst he lived; and so doth Charles his eldest Son, by the Daughter of Sir Ro∣bert Southwell. That he was a person, of statu•e tall, and come∣ly: also strong, valiant, famous at the excercise of Tilting; singularly skill'd in all Mathematick Learning, but chiefly in Navigation, and Archi∣tecture; a rare Chymist, and of great knowledge in Physick, his learned Works do sufficiently ma∣nifest; Especially that, de Arcanis Maris, Printed at Florence in an. 1646. and since at Uenice, in folio, adorn'd with Sculpture. Also, that of Physick, call'd Catholicon, of no small esteem with the most skillfull in that profession. Nor is his memory a little famous, for his In∣vention of that Powder, called Cornachine-Pow∣der; touching the virtue whereof, the Learned Marcus Cornachinus of Pise, hath written; and endeavoured to shew, that all Corporeal Disea∣ses, may be safely, and suddenly cured thereby. Nor is it less remarkable, that his merits were so highly esteem'd of, by the great Duke of Tuscany, as that he allow'd him an yearly Stipend, of little less than a thousand pounds sterling. Also, that he erected a noble Palace in the City of Flo∣rence: and, that his Daughters by the Wife he took thither, a•e all of them Married to several Princes of the Empire. Moreover, that he died, at a Palace of the Dukes of Florence (two or three Italian-Miles distant from that City) in or about the year 1650. And, that his Body resteth in the Monastery of Nuns at Boldrone, except it be removed to the Church of St. Pancrace in Florence, where he rais'd a noble Monument for that Wife, with purpose to be there interred himself. Likewise, that he left to his Sons divers curious Mathematical Instruments, chiefly of his own In∣vention: of which, they, making little use, have disposed to the great Duke of Tuscany.

 

To countenance which Marriage with Mrs Southwell; it is said, that he did alledge his Mar∣riage with the Lady Alice Leigh, to be by the Ca∣non-Law, Illegal; by reason that he had Carnal knowledge of her, during the Life of his first Wife ... Sister to Mr Thomas Cavendish, the famous Navigator. But I return to the Lady Alice, his second Wife. Leaving her thus in England, with the five Daughters he had by her; viz. Aliza, and Dou∣glas, who both died unmarried; Katherine, after∣wards Wedded to Sir Richard Leveson Knight of the Bath, Frances to Sir Gilbert K•iveton Knight, and Anne to Robert Holborne Esq (afterwards Knight and Sollicitor General to King Charles the First:) she received the said sum of four thousand pounds, payable from the Exchequer: but of her Annuity (in like sort granted) there was a great Arrear, at the beginning of the late unhappy Troubles. For the receipt whereof discerning little hopes; and considering, that her Husband (then alive) had the Title of a Duke in those Fo∣reign parts, where he did reside; representing the same, to his late Majesty King Charles the First (of blessed memory) she obtain'd a grant under the Great Seal of England, bearing date at Ox∣ford, 23 Maii, in the twentieth year of his Reign, of the Title of a Dutchess, during her natural life: and likewise, that her Daughters should have place and precedence, as Children to a person of that Degree; a Copy of which Patent, I have thought fit here to exhibite* 1.4

 

 

CHarles, by the grace of God, King of Eng∣land, Scotland, France, and Ireland, De∣fender of the Faith, &c. To all Archbishops, Dukes, Marquesses, Earls, Viscounts, Bishops, Barons, Knights; and all other our loving subjects, to whom these our Letters shall come, greeting. Whereas, in or about the beginning of the Reign of our dear Fa∣ther King James, of famous memory; there was a Sute commenced, in our High-Court of Star-Cham∣ber, against Sir Robert Dudley Knight and others, for pretending himself to be lawful Heir to the Ho∣nours and Lands, of the Earldoms of Warwick and Leicester; as Son and Heir of the Body of Robert late Earl of Leicester; lawfully begotten upon the Lady Douglass his Mother, Wife to the said late Earl of Leicester; and all Proceedings stayed in the Ecclesiastical Courts, in which the said Sute de∣pended, for proof of his Legitimation. Yet, never∣theless, did the said Court vouchsafe liberty to the said Sir Robert, to examine Witnesses in the said Court of Star-Chamber, in order to the making good of his Legitimacy; and divers Witnesses were exa∣mined there accordingly. Whereupon, by full testi∣mony upon Oath; partly made by the said Lady Douglasse her self, and partly by divers other per∣sons of quality, and credit, who were present at the Marriage, with the said Late Earl of Leicester, by a lawful Minister, according to the form of Matrimony, then by Law established in the Church of England: and the said Sir Robert and his Mother, owned by the said late Earl of Leicester, as his lawful Wife and Son, as by many of the said Depositions remain∣ing upon Record, in our said Court, still appear (which we have caused to be perused, for our better satisfaction herein.) But a special Order being made, that the said Depositions should be sealed up, and no Copies thereof taken, without leave, did cause him the said Sir Robert to leave this our King∣dom. description PAGE 226 Whereof his Adversaries taking advantage, procured a special Privy-Seal, to be sent unto him, commanding his return into England. Which he not obeying (because his Honour and Lands were denied unto him) all his Lands were therefore sei∣zed on, to the King our Father's use. And, not long afterwards, Prince Henry (our Dear Brother deceased) made overture to the said Sir Robert, by special Instruments, to obtain his Title by purchase, of and in Kenilworth-Castle, in our County of Warwick, and his Mannors, Parks, and Chases belonging to the same: which, upon a great under-value, amounted (as we are credibly in∣formed) to about fifty thousand pounds; but were bought by the said Prince our Brother, in considera∣tion of fourteen thousand, five hundred pounds, and upon his faithful Engagement, and promise of his Princely favour unto the said Sir Robert in the said Cause, to restore him, both in Honours and Fortunes. And thereupon certain Deeds were sealed, in the ninth year of the Reign of our said Father; and Fines also then were levyed, setling the Inheritance thereof in the said Prince, our Brother, and his Heirs. But, the said Prince our Brother, departing this life, there was not above three thousand pounds of the said sum of fourteen thousand five hundred pounds, ever paid (if any at all) to the said Sir Robert's hands; and we our selves, as Heir to the said Prince our Brother, came to the possession thereof. And, it appearing to our Council, that the said Alice Lady Dudley, Wife of the said Sir Robert, had an Estate of Inheritance of and in the same, descendable unto her Posterity; in the nineteenth year of our said dear Father's Reign, an Act of Parliament was passed, to enable the said Lady Alice, Wife to the said Sir Robert, to alien her Estate, which she had by the said Sir Robert therein, from her children by the said Sir Robert, as if she had been a feme sole, which accordingly she did in the nineteeth year of our said Father's Reign, in consideration of four thousand pounds; and further payments yearly to be made by us to her, out of our Exchequer; and out of the said Castles and Lands, which have not been accordingly paid unto her by us, for many years; to the damage of the said Lady Alice, and her Chil∣dren, to a very great value. Which Sir Robert, setling himself in Italy, within the Territories of the great Duke of Tus∣cany (from whom he had extraordinary esteem;) he was so much favoured by the Emperour Ferdinand the Second; as that being a person, not only eminent for his great Learning and Blood, but for sundry rare endowments (as was well known) he had, by Letters Patents from his Imperial Majesty, the Title of a Duke given unto him; to be used by himself and his Heirs for ever, throughout all the Dominions of the sacred Empire. Which Letters Patents have been perused by our late Earl-Marshall and Heralds. And, Whereas our Dear Father, not knowing the truth of the lawful Birth of the said Sir Robert (as we piously believe) granted away the Titles of the said Earldoms to others, which we now hold not fit to call in question, nor ravel into our deceased Fa∣ther's actions; especially they having been so long enjoyed by these Families, to whom the said Honours were granted (which we do not intend to alter:) And yet, we having a very deep sense, of the great injuries done to the said Sir Robert Dudley, and the Lady Alice Dudley, and their Children: and, that we are of opinion, that in Iustice and Equity, the possessions so taken from them, do rightly belong unto them, or full satisfaction for the same. And holding our selves in honour and conscience obliged, to make them reparation now, as far as our present ability will enable us. And also, taking into our consideration the said great estate, which she the said Lady Alice Dudley, had in Kenilworth; and sold, at our desire to us, at a very great under-value; and yet not perform'd or satisfied, to many thousand pounds damage. And, we also casting our Princely Eye, upon the faithful services done unto us, by Sir Richard Le∣veson Knight of the Bath, who hath Married the Lady Catherine, one of the Daughters of the said Duke, by his said Wife, the said Lady Alice Dud∣ley: and also the great services, which Robert Holburne Esq hath done to us, by his learned Pen, and otherwise (which said Robert Holburne hath Married the Lady Anne one other of the Daughters of the said Duke, by his said Wife, the Lady Alice Dudley:) we have conceived our selves bound in ho∣nour, and conscience, to give the said Lady Alice and her Children, such Honour and Precedencies, as is, or are due to them in Marriage or blood. And therefore we do not only give and grant, unto the said Lady Alice Dudley, the Title of Dutchess Dudley, for her life, in England, and other our Realms, and Dominions, with such Precedencies, as she might have had, if she had lived in the Domini∣ons of the sacred Empire (as a mark of our favour unto her; and out of our Prerogative Royal, which we will not have drawn into dispute:) But we do also farther grant unto the said Lady Katherine, and Lady Anne, her Daughters, the Places, Titles, and Precedencies of the said Dukes Daughters, as from the time of their said Father's Creation, during their respective lives; not only in England, but in all other our Kingdoms and Dominions, as a testimony of our Princely favour, and grace unto them: con∣ceiving our selves obliged to do much more for them, if it were in our power, in these unhappy times of distraction. And we require all persons of Honour, and other our loving Subjects, especially our Earl Marshall, Heralds, and Officers at Arms, to take notice of this our Princely pleasure, and to govern themselves ac∣cordingly: and to cause the said places and prece∣dencies to be quietly enjoyed, according to this our gratious intention, as they do tender our displeasure, and will answer the contempt thereof at their Pe∣rils. And we further command and require, that our said Heralds do make entry of this our pleasure and Grant in their Offices accordingly. In Witness whereof we have caused these our Letters to be made Patent. Witness our self at Oxford, the three and twentieth day of May, in the twentienth year of our Reign.

 

S.S.