Walter de Cornwall, son of Richard Plantagenet, Earl of Cornwall
Douglas Richardson
for Walter de Cornwall, the illegitimate son of Richard
Plantagenet, Earl of Cornwall. My research that Walter received
land in Brannel, Cornwall in 1300 by gift of his half brother,
Edmund, Earl of Cornwall, and that Walter died in 1313, leaving
as his heir, a son William, aged 26.
Does anyone know if Walter de Cornwall's son, William, left
descendants or if Walter had any other children? I say that
because I show that sometime prior to 1314, Walter enfeoffed
James Peverel and his wife, Margaret, with lands in Nansbighen,
Cornwall. Is it possible that Margaret was Walter's daughter?
James Peverel and Margaret, his wife, mentioned here appear to
have been the great-grandparents of Katherine Peverel (born say
1380), wife of Walter Hungerford (died 1449), lst Lord
Hungerford, Lord High Treasurer of England. Among the manors
of Katherine's Peverel inheritance appears to have been the
manor of Nansyrgh, Cornwall [Reference: Calendar of Close Rolls,
1435-1441 (published 1937), pp. 217-9, 227-8]. One source
identifies Nansyrgh as Nanjeth in the parish of St. Stephen in
Brannel. By any chance, is Nansyrgh/Nanjeth identical with the
lands in Brannel conveyed to Walter de Cornwall in 1295, by
Edmund, Earl of Cornwall? If so, then I presume that Katherine
Peveral might be a descendant and perhaps lineal heir of Walter
de Cornwall. If so, then Katherine (Peverel) Hungerford might
possibly have a valid descent from King John of England, via his
son, Richard, Earl of Cornwall.
For interest's sake, the following eleven immigrants descend
from Katherine (Peverel) Hungerford:
1. Humphrey Davie of Mass.
2. Mary (Launce) Sherman of Mass.
3. John Nelson
4. Thomas Owsley
5. Elizabeth Pelham, wife of Col. John Humphrey, of Mass. (she
died in England).
6. Herbert Pelham of Mass.
7. Edward Raynsford of Mass.
8. Maria Johanna Somerset of Md.
9. John Stockman
10. John West of Va.
11. George Yate of Md.
Please contact me if anyone has any helpful particulars. Best
always, Douglas Richardson
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
R. Battle
consensus (if there is one) on the validity of the Howard descent from
the same Richard, Earl of Cornwall? The purported line is as follows
(from RD500 p. 317):
1. Richard, Earl of Cornwall (son of John, k. of England)
2. Richard de Cornwall (illeg. by Joan de Valletort), m. Joan ___
3. Joan de Cornwall, m. Sir John Howard
4. Sir John Howard, m. Alice de Boys
etc.
Thanks,
Robert Battle
Kay Allen AG
There is some discussion in the archives, probably 1999, which gives a
slightly different descent.
Kay Allen AG
Kay Allen AG
>
> I'm interested in knowing if any descendants have been traced
> for Walter de Cornwall, the illegitimate son of Richard
> Plantagenet, Earl of Cornwall. My research that Walter received
> land in Brannel, Cornwall in 1300 by gift of his half brother,
> Edmund, Earl of Cornwall, and that Walter died in 1313, leaving
> as his heir, a son William, aged 26.
>
> Does anyone know if Walter de Cornwall's son, William, left
> descendants or if Walter had any other children?
Yes. See House of Cornewall.
He is also ancestral to Ann Lloyd, wife of Eaton and Yale.
Kay Allen AG
Kevan L. Barton
I've taken a look at the archives and noted that Markenfield came up in
association with other postings, i.e. Gascoigne, Calverley, but it was
never the main topic.
I have an Elizabeth Markenfield (b. abt 1406) as the spouse of Walter
Calverley. Elizabeth's parents are Sir Thomas Markenfield and Beatrice
Sothill. Does anybody have any ancestors of these people? I'd appreciate
any help you may be able to give.
Cheers,
Kevan
R. Battle
<snip>
> He is also ancestral to Ann Lloyd, wife of Eaton and Yale.
What's the line?
-Robert Battle
D. Spencer Hines
was Grandmother of Elihu Yale?
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Black care rarely sits behind a rider whose pace is fast enough." --
Theodore Roosevelt (1888)
D._Spencer_Hines_TD [at] aya.ballast.yale.edu
Jettison ballast before testing rig in light airs.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of
the author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and
with an attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise
expressly given, in writing.
"Kay Allen AG" <all...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:262671...@pacbell.net...
| He is also ancestral to Ann Lloyd, wife of Eaton and Yale.
|
| Kay Allen AG
Kay Allen AG
>
> Are you speaking of Anne Lloyd, who was married to Thomas Yale and who
> was Grandmother of Elihu Yale?
Yes.
Douglas Richardson
A friend of mine already checked the House of Cornewall by
Liverpool. He says it has precious little in it on Walter de
Cornwall and that it says nothing about any connection to the
Peverel family.
However, I find that Walter de Cornwall (died 1313) is shown as
the father of Margaret, wife of James Peverel, in both the LDS
Ancestral File and in the database for www.ancestry.com. So,
clearly someone somewhere someplace has said something in print
about this matter.
Best always, Douglas Richardson
In article <262671...@pacbell.net>, all...@pacbell.net (Kay
ED MANN
I have:
Descendants of John Conyers
1 John Conyers aka: Knt. / K.G. ref #: see F190:6
2 Alianor Conyers
+Thomas Markenfield ref #: (Ä156-35)
3 [1] Ninian Markenfield d: 25 Mar 1528
+Dorothy Gascoigne d: 4 Mar 1485/86 ref #: F190:6
*2nd Wife of [1] Ninian Markenfield:
+Eleanor Clifford
3 Elizabeth Markenfield ref #: (Ä156-35)
+Walter Calverly aka: Walter Scot d: 1466 ref #: W87-12
--
FWIW; AFAIK; IMHO; YMMV; yadda, yadda, yadda.
Regards, Ed Mann mailto:edl...@mail2.lcia.com
References:
Ä = Weis, _Ancestral_Roots_, 7th ed.
AACPW = Roberts & Reitwiesner, _American Ancestors and Cousins of
the Princess of Wales_, [page].
AAP = Roberts, _Ancestors_of_American_Presidents_, [page] or
[Pres. # : page].
BP1 = _Burke's_Presidential_Families_, 1st ed. [page].
BPci = _Burke's_Peerage_, 101st ed., [page].
BRF = Weir, _Britain's_Royal_Families_, [page].
BxP = _Burke's_Dormant_&_Extinct_Peerages_, [page].
EC1 = Redlich, _Emperor_Charlemagne's_Descendants_, Vol I, [page].
EC2 = Langston & Buck, _Emperor_Charlemagne's_Descendants_, Vol II,
[page].
EC3 = Buck & Beard, _Emperor_Charlemagne's_Descendants_, Vol II,
[page].
F = Faris, _Plantagenet_Ancestry_, [page:para].
NK1 = Roberts, _Notable_Kin_Volume_One_, [page].
NK2 = Roberts, _Notable_Kin_Volume_Two_, [page].
Π= Hardy, Colonial_Families_of_the_Southern_States_of_America, [pg].
PA = Faris, _Plantagenet_Ancestry_, 2d ed. [page:para].
S = Stuart, _Royalty_for_Commoners_, 2d ed. Caveat lector.
W = Weis, _Magna_Charta_Sureties,_1215_, 4th ed.
WFT = Broderbund's World Family Tree CD, [vol]:[num] Caveat lector.
WMC = Wurt's Magna Charta, [vol]:[page] Caveat lector.
GLAUC...@aol.com
EDL...@MAIL2.LCIA.COM writes:
> 3 [1] Ninian Markenfield d: 25 Mar 1528
> +Dorothy Gascoigne d: 4 Mar 1485/86 ref #: F190:6
> *2nd Wife of [1] Ninian Markenfield:
> +Eleanor Clifford
> 3 Elizabeth Markenfield ref #: (Ä156-35)
> +Walter Calverly aka: Walter Scot d: 1466 ref #: W87-12
There seems to be a date problem here. Walter Calverly seems to die before
his mother-in-law. Is this right or is there further clarification?
Regards,
Lloyd King
Dallas, Texas, USA
ED MANN
You've misread my post. Ninian and Elizabeth are siblings. The 3
indicates the same generation.
Descendants of John Conyers
1 John Conyers aka: Knt. / K.G. ref #: see F190:6
2 Alianor Conyers
+Thomas Markenfield ref #: (Ä156-35)
3 [1] Ninian Markenfield d: 25 Mar 1528
+Dorothy Gascoigne d: 4 Mar 1485/86 ref #: F190:6
*2nd Wife of [1] Ninian Markenfield:
+Eleanor Clifford
3 Elizabeth Markenfield ref #: (Ä156-35)
+Walter Calverly aka: Walter Scot d: 1466 ref #: W87-12
--
D. Spencer Hines
I've also wondered about Ursula Knight, the mother of Elihu Yale
[1649-1721] ---- as to whether we can trace her ancestry.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Black care rarely sits behind a rider whose pace is fast enough." --
Theodore Roosevelt (1888)
D._Spencer_Hines_TD [at] aya.ballast.yale.edu
Jettison ballast before testing rig in light airs.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of
the author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and
with an attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise
expressly given, in writing.
"R. Battle" <bat...@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.A41.4.21.000412...@dante11.u.washington.edu
...
| On 12 Apr 2000, Kay Allen AG wrote:
|
| <snip>
| > He is also ancestral to Ann Lloyd, wife of Eaton and Yale.
|
GLAUC...@aol.com
J.C.B.Sharp
MANN) wrote:
> "Kevan L. Barton" wrote:
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > I've taken a look at the archives and noted that Markenfield came up
> > in
> > association with other postings, i.e. Gascoigne, Calverley, but it was
> > never the main topic.
> >
> > I have an Elizabeth Markenfield (b. abt 1406) as the spouse of Walter
> > Calverley. Elizabeth's parents are Sir Thomas Markenfield and
> > Beatrice
> > Sothill. Does anybody have any ancestors of these people? I'd
> > appreciate
> > any help you may be able to give.
>
> I have:
>
> Descendants of John Conyers
>
> 1 John Conyers aka: Knt. / K.G.
ref #: see F190:6
> 2 Alianor Conyers
> +Thomas Markenfield ref #:
(Ä156-35)
> 3 [1] Ninian Markenfield d: 25 Mar 1528
> +Dorothy Gascoigne d: 4 Mar 1485/86
ref #: F190:6
> *2nd Wife of [1] Ninian Markenfield:
> +Eleanor Clifford
> 3 Elizabeth Markenfield ref #:
(Ä156-35)
> +Walter Calverly aka: Walter Scot d:
1466 ref #: W87-12
Walter and Elizabeth were married in 1415 (Calverley Charters nos 320-1),
so it seems unlikely that she and Ninian had the same mother.
J.C.B.Sharp
London
jc...@obtfc.win-uk.net
Ivor West
Lysons' Cornwall shows that the manor of Brannel was granted to Richard,
Earl of Cornwall who gave it to Richard, his natural son by Joan de
Valletort [Oxton]. CFF244 of 1270 also carries a note that Earl Richard was
the father of Richard and Joan by Joan de Oxtone. The Lysons also say that
Geoffrey de Cornwall, a Carmelite friar and writer who flourished about
1300, was born at Court, the manor house of Brannel. Richard and Walter
were probaly born c.1250 so Geoffrey could have been either's son. Vivian
also has a Geoffrey de Cornwall of the same period as the father of
Elizabeth who married William de Champernon (1314 - 1353). (Perhaps
Geoffrey had opted for the mendicant austerities of the White Friars after
having first tasted the joys of married life.)
CFF567 of 1343 has John, son of William de Cornwall, and Margery his wife
giving the manor of Brannel and the advowson of the church (St. Stephen's)
to Ralph de Treiagu and, after his death, to David Hendour and Isabella [de
Cornwall?]. The Lysons also say that the elder de Cornwall branch died out
in the 14th century, the heiress marrying into Hendower (see also CFF 566)
and their heiress into Tanner. The younger branches of de Cornwall became
Cornwall of Burford, Shropshire, Hereford and Kings Nymet in Devon. If the
elder branch is thought to be Walter - William - John - Isabella, it seems a
bit tight with William born 1287 and Isabella married in 1343. Of course,
Ralph de Treiagu could have been a brother of John, Isabel being Ralph's
daughter. Margaret could still have been enfeoffed by Walter with
Nansbighen as a marriage portion but it doesn't sound like Brannel (unless
only a small piece of it) if Treiagu and Hendower were given it by CFF567.
Court is about a mile outside the village of St. Stephen-in-Brannel. The
farmhouse called Brannel is a further half mile south. Nanjeth,or Lanjeth
as it is known today, (the Cornish place-name elements Nan- and Lan- are
sometimes interchangeable, Nan- > Lan-, which is confusing, as one means
valley and the other means enclosure), lies further out to the east of St.
Stephen. As Court is an English word, it is possible that it might have
carried an earlier Cornish name, like Nansyrgh or Nansbighen, which has
since been lost. Nan- ( Nans-) means valley, -sergh > -serth means steep,
and -byghan means small. So, on the face of it, even if they are the same
place, a small steep valley doesn't seem to take us much further, although
Court does lie at the top of the valley of St. Stephen's Coombe, now
shortened to Coombe, and the farmhouse Brannel is on the edge of Coombe.
However coincidental that may be, Court seems a little more likely than
Lanjeth as the traditional capital farm of the manor but these places are so
close together they could be all one and the same. The EPNS for Cornish
Place-name Elements suggests that Nan > Lan + byghan = Lanvean or Laddenvean
(byghan > bean > pean > vean). There is a village of Nanpean a couple of
miles north of St. Stephen but there could be quite a few permutations of
the elements.
No mention of the Peverels though.
Ivor West
Douglas Richardson <royalances...@msn.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:2af090cc...@usw-ex0102-013.remarq.com...
> I'm interested in knowing if any descendants have been traced
> for Walter de Cornwall, the illegitimate son of Richard
> Plantagenet, Earl of Cornwall. My research that Walter received
> land in Brannel, Cornwall in 1300 by gift of his half brother,
> Edmund, Earl of Cornwall, and that Walter died in 1313, leaving
> as his heir, a son William, aged 26.
>
> Does anyone know if Walter de Cornwall's son, William, left
> descendants or if Walter had any other children? I say that
Nathaniel Taylor
<i...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>Lysons' Cornwall shows that the manor of Brannel was granted to Richard,
>Earl of Cornwall who gave it to Richard, his natural son by Joan de
>Valletort [Oxton]. CFF244 of 1270 also carries a note that Earl Richard was
>the father of Richard and Joan by Joan de Oxtone. The Lysons also say that
>Geoffrey de Cornwall, a Carmelite friar and writer who flourished about
>1300, was born at Court, the manor house of Brannel. Richard and Walter
>were probaly born c.1250 so Geoffrey could have been either's son. Vivian
>also has a Geoffrey de Cornwall of the same period as the father of
>Elizabeth who married William de Champernon (1314 - 1353). (Perhaps
>Geoffrey had opted for the mendicant austerities of the White Friars after
>having first tasted the joys of married life.)
This is useful; thank you. I am not familiar with "Lysons' Cornwall" and
don't see a title that could be referred to as this in the Harvard
University Library on-line catalogue (telnet://hollis.harvard.edu). Can
you forward a fuller citation? Or did I miss this cited more fully in one
of the recent postings?
Further, is there an explicit instrument referred to for the grant which
names Richard as the Earl's son by Joan de Valletort (other than the 1270
fine)? If the maternity of Richard is so clear, is there some reason that
Joan de Valletort [or de Oxton] seems not to have been named by Foljambe
and Reade in their 1908 genealogy of the Cornwalls (at least to go by the
postings based on Reade to s.g.m. last year?
Nat Taylor
Todd A. Farmerie
> Further, is there an explicit instrument referred to for the grant which
> names Richard as the Earl's son by Joan de Valletort (other than the 1270
> fine)?
Well, Pole mentioned a charter in which Richard of Cornwall
called Joan (de Oxton) wife of Richard Champernoun his
"sister". This is best (basically only) explained by
Richard and Joan both being children of Joan de Valletort,
mistress of Earl Richard of Cornwall and wife of Alexander
de Oxton. Unfortunately, as far as I know, the original
document to which Pole refered is since lost.
taf
Douglas Richardson
I believe it was Edmund, Earl of Cornwall, who referred to Joan
Champernoun as his sister, not Richard of Cornwall.
Edmund was also brother to Walter de Cornwall, the reputed
ancestor of Katherine Peverel, wife of Walter Hungerford.
Edmund gave lands in Brannel, Cornwall to Walter in 1295.
Does anyone know what became of Walter de Cornwall's property in
Brannel? As I pointed out earlier, the Hungerford family
subsequently held a manor in Brannel. I suspect the two
properties are the same. Can anyone verify that for me?
Best always, Douglas Richardson
In article <38F79AAB...@po.cwru.edu>, ta...@po.cwru.edu
mikay...@gmail.com
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
taf via
> nta...@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
>
> > Further, is there an explicit instrument referred to for the grant which
> > names Richard as the Earl's son by Joan de Valletort (other than the 1270
> > fine)?
>
> Well, Pole mentioned a charter in which Richard of Cornwall
> called Joan (de Oxton) wife of Richard Champernoun his
> "sister". This is best (basically only) explained by
> Richard and Joan both being children of Joan de Valletort,
> mistress of Earl Richard of Cornwall and wife of Alexander
> de Oxton. Unfortunately, as far as I know, the original
> document to which Pole refered is since lost.
mind must have been completely elsewhere when I wrote this (else I
couldn't read my own notes). Well, better (very) late than never when
it comes to corrections in the archive.
Pole, in his Collections Towards a Description of the County of Devon,
p. 309, wrote in his summary of Modbury:
"Roger de Valletort conveyed it, amongst other lands, unto Sr
Alexander de Okeston, wch had married Jone, the widowe of Raph de
Valletort, wch woman (as it is probable) was the concubine of Richard
Erle of Cornwall, & Kinge of Almayne, or of ye Romans ; they had issue
Sr James de Okeston, wch died wthout issue ; wth commandment of Kinge
Edw. 2 [hee] conveyed Modbiry, & all other lands, formerly granted
unto his father by Roger de Valletort unto Sr Richard Chambernon, wch
was sonne of Richard Champernon, & Jone, daughter of Jone before
mentioned, whom Edmond Erle of Cornwall calleth by the name of his
sister, in a grant made by hym unto the said Richard and Jone, of
thassise of breade & ae, dated anno 12 of Kinge Edw. 1."
Now a couple of notes. First, Pole's language can be a little
misleading due to its more archaic form (he wrote in the early 17th
century). As was pointed out by the scholars of the early 20th
century studying this, in Pole's time the word 'probable' he used was
closer to its root, 'provable', than its modern usage of 'likely,
having a greater chance of being true than false'. Second, the claims
here constitute two types of information. The majority of the text is
simple assertion, without accompanying source. However, one specific
part is explicitly cited, if not in a form up to modern standards, as
coming from a grant made 12 Edw. 1 that Pole actually had seen. To
dismiss the majority of the paragraph, one need only claim that Pole
was mistaken. However, to dismiss the relationship between Earl
Edmund and Joan Champernoun, one must conclude that Pole was
incompetent, guilty of fraud, or in the possession of a document
transcribed or created erroneously or fraudulently. In a perfect
world, we would have this grant to look at, but unless we know him to
have been unworthy of trust, we must provisionally accept Pole's
representation of the contents of the document at face value.
So, what are the consequences? The only way that Earl Edmund, son of
Earl/King Richard by his wife, Sancha of Provence, could be brother of
Joan, wife of Richard Champernoun, would be for Joan to be daughter of
at least one of Edmund's parents, Richard and Sancha. We know enough
about the legitimate family of the Earl/King to exclude Joan being his
legitimate daughter, but he is known to have had a mistress Joan de
Valletort, by whom he is said to have had children. That leaves one
possibility (it is not reasonable to suppose that she was illegitimate
daughter of Sancha - queens did not have secret illegitimate children
at this time - the child would either have been passed off as the
king's, no matter how much they looked like the court jester, or it
precipitated a scandal that would not have escaped notice, as happened
with the queen of Garcia Ramirez of Navarre). Joan was daughter of
Richard, Earl of Cornwall and King of Germany, by a mistress. If we
then return to the other part of Pole's account, we are told that
Richard de Champernoun, Joan's son, was nephew of James de Oxton,
meaning that either Richard de Champernoun or else Joan shared at
least one parent with James. We know both parents of Richard, and we
know Joan's father was not also James' father, so it must have been a
link through a common mother, and we are told that James' mother was
the same Joan de Valletort who was mistress of Joan's father.
Thus one half of Pole's account 'proves' that Joan was daughter of
Richard. The other part, if correct, would indicate that she must
have been daughter of Joan de Valletort, but unlike the first part
this is not proven by a direct documentary citation.
taf
Bronwen Edwards
queens did not have secret illegitimate children
at this time
taf via
referring to queens consort, not queens regnant.
Just think what Henry VIII did to a wife because a rumor surfaced that
she had sex long before she ever met the king. To impregnate the
queen consort (unless you were the king) was high treason against the
monarch, for the queen to allow herself to become pregnant by anyone
else was high treason, to cover up the fact that the queen was
pregnant was high treason. In an environment as political as a court,
it is hard to conceive of a scenario in which a queen would have had
the opportunity to become pregnant, bring the child to term and
deliver the child without someone (lady in waiting, guard, midwife,
maid, milk-nurse, confessor) with less loyalty to the queen than to
their personal ambition or greed telling the king, or telling someone
who would tell the king. I am not saying that there were no queens
who were impregnated by men other than the king, only that it was in
everyone's interest to pass that child off as the king's rather than
to try to keep the existence of the pregnancy secret.
A queen regnant, on the other hand, was in the driver's seat, and it
was not treason against the monarch to impregnate the queen regnant.
There is actually one medieval queen regnant (Urraca) with two
fully-recognized illegitimate children (although they were not
secret). That being said, all claims of Queen Elizabeth I having a
child, whether by Ormond or Essex or whoever, take as their starting
point the complete absence of evidence, and pretty much amount to
conspiracy theories.
taf
taf via
> The Monk pedigree, p. 179 of the 1634 Buckinghamshire Visitation (late, I know!), gives a garbled version of this line:
>
> http://www.mocavo.com/The-Visitation-of-the-County-of-Buckingham-Made-in-1634-by-John-Philipot-Esq-58-59/501601/175#201
Very garbled - in addition to its confusion with the
Champernoun/Cornwall connection, it drops Richard Champernoun, son of
Joan and father of Thomas, and then it adds a misplaced Henry
(actually Joan's father-in-law) between Thomas and his son Richard,
and from there the line should be Richard - John - Richard, rather
than Richard - John - Richard - John - Richard. Add to that two
additional generations in the Cornwall connection (it shows Earl
Richard's mistress instead as his granddaughter) and we have a a total
of 5 extra and 1 short, for a net of 11 generations where there should
be just 7 from Earl Richard to the last Richard Champernoun.
Part of the confusion would seen to come from the fact that the
Champernouns did quarter Valletort, not due to a descent from the
illegitimate daughter of the widow of a Valletort, but because a
different Champernoun married the coheiress to a different Valletort
branch. They may also have wished to 'upgrade' their royal descent
from an illegitimate one.
taf
