info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Wives & Daughters of Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox - Part 1
378 views
Skip to first unread message
Brad Verity
May 5, 2014, 2:42:06 AM5/5/14
to
In 'Scots Peerage' Volume 5 (19), Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox is said to have "married first, after 1471, and before 13 June 1480, Margaret, daughter of John, Lord Lyle". It cites 'The Lennox' by Fraser, vol. i. p. 330, as it's source for the statement:
https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun05pauluoft#page/350/mode/2up
I do not know what 'The Lennox' by Fraser is. If anyone does, please let me know.
Scots Peerage doesn't say anything further about Lennox's first wife Margaret Lyle in the Lennox article linked to above, but in the Lyle article, it states of Margaret, daughter of Robert, 2nd Lord Lyle, that "She had a charter 15 April 1494 from Matthew Stewart, son and heir of John Stewart, Earl of Lennox, of the lands of Inchavan and others. She was married to James Stewart of Blackhall":
https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun05pauluoft#page/554/mode/2up
Why the Lyle article doesn't mention Margaret's marriage to Matthew Stewart, I don't know.
I also do not have the Lennox article from Complete Peerage [CP] to see what it has to say about Lennox's first wife Margaret Lyle.
Burke's Peerage (2003) merely states that Lennox "m 1st Margaret, day of Robert, Lord Lyle".
The ODNB bio of the 2nd Earl of Lennox by Roland J. Tanner states: "He may have contracted, by 13 June 1480, to marry Margaret, daughter of Robert, second Lord Lyle. That marriage, however, either did not take place or was annulled; a grant of lands to Margaret on 15 April 1494, just six days after Lennox contracted to marry Elizabeth (d. after 1530), daughter of James Hamilton, first Lord Hamilton (d. 1479), suggests that she was bought off."
Of Lennox's second marriage, we would appear to have a firm date - the spring of 1494. Scots Peerage states of it "contract, dated at the College of Bothwell, 9 April 1494" and "this marriage was ratified by papal dispensation dated at Rome 15 April and 31 August 1495".
His second wife was Elizabeth Hamilton, first cousin of King James IV, and in the spring of 1494, an orphaned young lady no older than age nineteen (her parents were married in March 1474). Lennox was at least age 31, as per his bio "He was of age by 1484, when he first attended parliament."
So Lennox would have been at least age 17 in June 1480, by which date he is said to have been contracted to marry Margaret Lyle. He and his father were certainly closely allied to Robert Lord Lyle during the 1480s, "Stewart, his father, and Robert, Lord Lyle, raised a rebellion in the Lennox in April 1489 against their allies of the previous year...His father resigned the formal ownership of the Lennox and Darnley estates (though not the titles and tenancy) to him on 1 June 1490" [ODNB].
So, it was at some point in the next four years, between 1490 and the spring of 1494, that Lennox, now in his late 20s, administering the family's castles and estates, and effectively the public head of the family, perhaps rebelled against his arranged marriage to Margaret Lyle. Certainly a teenaged first cousin of the young Scottish king (who himself turned 21 in the spring of 1494) was a better connected wife for Lennox than Margaret Lyle.
The marriage of Lennox to Elizabeth Hamilton would certainly have had the king's blessing after the fact, if not his full knowledge and complicity beforehand, for one month after the contract of Lennox's marriage to Elizabeth Hamilton was formalized at Bothwell, the king confirmed Lennox's charter of land settlement on Margaret Lyle.
The charter, in Latin is transcribed in The Register of The Great Seal of Scotland:
"6 JAC. IV. 2212. Apud civitatem Glasguen., 16 Maii. REX confirmavit cartam Mathei Stewart, filii et apparentis heredis Johannis Stewart comitis de Levenax et dom. Dernley,--[qua--pro ejus benemeritis--concessit Domicelle MARGARETE LILE, filie Roberti dom. L.,--[snip of lands]--TENEND. dicte Marg., et assignatis ejus, viz., dicto Rob. dom. L. et heredibus ejusdem quibuscunque, de rege tanquam senescallo Scotie:--[snip of witnesses to the April charter]--Apud Glasgw, 15 Apr. 1494]:--[snip of witnesses to the king's confirmation of the charter]":
https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi02scot#page/466/mode/2up
If anyone has the time to translate the above into English, I'd very much appreciate. I've become familiar with enough Latin to recognize some phrases, but I'd really like to know what it says in full.
Now for the 2nd Earl of Lennox's daughters. Scots Peerage [SP] gives him three - Margaret, Elizabeth, Agnes. It doesn't specify which wife was the mother.
1) Margaret Stewart of Lennox "contracted to William Cunningham, Master of Glencairn, son of Cuthbert, Earl of Glencairn, and a dispensation obtained for their marriage 15 December 1507" [SP]. A dispensation was probably needed because Margaret Stewart and William Cunningham were third cousins (related in the 4th degree):
Sir Adam Hepburn of Hailes had two daus A1 & B1
A1) Elizabeth Hepburn, who had
A2) Margaret Montgomerie, who had
A3) Matthew Stewart, 11th Earl of Lennox, who had
A4) Margaret Stewart
B1) Margaret Hepburn, who had
B2) Robert Cunningham, 2nd Earl of Glencairn, who had
B3) Cuthbert Cunningham, 3rd Earl of Glencairn, who had
B4) William Cunningham
CP states (vol. 5 p. 531) that Margaret was the "1st da. of Matthew (Stewart), 2nd Earl of Lennox [S.], by Elizabeth, da. of James (Hamilton), Lord Hamilton [S.]". The earliest a child could have been born to Lennox and his second wife Elizabeth Hamilton is 1495, so Margaret was no older than age 12 in December 1507 when a dispensation was granted for her marriage, possibly a couple months short of age 13 if she was conceived immediately following the April 1494 marriage contract of her parents. It would not be unusual for noble parents to arrange a marriage for their eldest daughter at that age, even though by 1507 Lennox had two sons, so it was clear that Margaret was not an heiress.
But what occurred next is unusual, especially because she was not an heiress. SP: "This marriage [to William Cunningham] did not take place, and she was married, but apparently without the sanction of the Church, before 12 March 1508-9 to John, Lord Fleming, which marriage was dissolved before 26 October 1515, at which date she is styled in a charter 'olim reputata sponsa' of John, Lord Fleming.
The 1509 charter is also transcribed in Latin in The Register of the Great Seal of Scotland:
"21 JAC. IV. 3325. Apud Edinburgh, 12 Mar. REX concessit MARGARETE STEWART filie Mathei com. de Levenax, &c.,--terras et baronias de Bigar et Thankertoun, cum tenentibus, &c., patronatuum juribus, advocationibus ac donationibus ecclesiarum et capellaniarum earundem, vic. Lanark;--quas Joh. dom. Flemyng resignavit:--TENEND. dicte M. et heredibus masc. inter ipsam et dictum Joh. procreatis, quibus deficientibus, iterum reversuras dicto Joh. et heredibus ejus masc.:--insuper, si contingent filios inter eos procreari antequam dispensatio matrimonii a curia Romana deveniret et ante complementum contractus matrimonii in facie ecclesie, rex pro grata speciali concessit dict. filio aut filiis facultatem libere disponendi in toto tempore vite sive in tempore mortis de omnibus terris, &c., ac de bonis mobilibus et immobilibus cuicunque persone, non obstante eorum bastardia; ac etiam eosdem legitimavit":
https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi02scot#page/710/mode/2up
Again, if anyone has the time to translate the above into English, I'd greatly appreciate it. The same for the 1515 charter:
"3 JAC. V. 50. Apud Edinburgh, 26 Oct. REX &c., concessit JOHANNI DOMINO FLEMYNG, et ejus heredibus,--terras et baronias de Bigar et Thankertoun, cum tenentibus &c., advocationibus ecclesiarum et capellaniarum earundem, vic. Lanark;--quas Margareta Stewart domina Flemyng, olim reputata sponsa dicti Joh., personaliter resignavit"
https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi03scot#page/10/mode/2up
So, by March 1509, John Fleming, who was at least age 30 (his father was dead by 1480), and probably closer to age 40 ("He was one of the nobles who opposed James III, and, seizing his son, proclaimed him King in 1488" [CP]), had clandestinely married Margaret Stewart, who if daughter of Lennox's second marriage was no older than age 14, and received the blessing of King James IV, who approved the marriage settlement of the couple, after doing so. Then by October 1515, when Margaret Stewart was no older than age 20, the lovebirds had proved incompatible, and officially ended their marriage.
The chronology just doesn't compute here. And it gets even more irreconcilable with further details. Per CP, Margaret "was divorced twice, firstly in or about 1509...The ground for her first divorce was that she had been raped by John Fleming, son of Fleming of Boghall, and for her second that her husband's cousin german, James Lindsay, had had connexion with her before marriage."
'Royal Descent of Archibald Dunlop', a 1998 article by John L. Scherer in NEHGR vol. 152 (many thanks to John Higgins for providing me the article), has some further details "In 1508/9, shortly after their marriage, John, Lord Fleming, and Margaret Stewart were divorced on the grounds that Margaret had been abducted by John Fleming, son of Fleming of Boghall. Lord and Lady Fleming were remarried after 17 December 1509, when a papal dispensation was granted, the couple being related in the fourth degree of consanguinity and of affinity. They were again divorced before 25 October 1515, on the grounds that James Lindsay, cousin german to Lord Fleming, had known Lady Fleming before her marriage."
I admit confusion here. Certainly the papal dispensation granted in December 1509 was to validate the clandestine marriage that had occurred by March that year? Margaret's two divorces were not both from the same husband? The first divorce, the grounds for which she had been raped, would have been her divorce from William Cunningham, and the 'John Fleming, son of Boghall' was actually her next husband John, Lord Fleming?
So Margaret was arranged in marriage to William Cunningham, then at some point the following year, suffered John Fleming, son of Fleming of Boghall (if a different man than her husband John, Lord Fleming) forcing himself on her, had an (apparently consensual) sexual/romantic liaison with James Lindsay, then clandestinely married the much older John, Lord Fleming - all before the age of 15!!
It seems that chronology does not favour Margaret Stewart having been the daughter of Lennox by Elizabeth Hamilton. Her overwrought love life 1507-09 is indicative of an adult lady aged 20 at least, not of a girl aged 14 not yet through puberty, and still under the protection of parents and other guardians. As there is no reason to think that Lennox's first marriage to Margaret Lyle was unconsummated or childless, it's more logical to make Margaret Stewart his daughter from that marriage.
That is given further weight when it becomes apparent that Lennox probably had another daughter named Margaret, who chronologically would have to have been from his second marriage to Elizabeth Hamilton, but the details on that will have to wait for Part II.
Cheers, ----Brad
https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun05pauluoft#page/350/mode/2up
I do not know what 'The Lennox' by Fraser is. If anyone does, please let me know.
Scots Peerage doesn't say anything further about Lennox's first wife Margaret Lyle in the Lennox article linked to above, but in the Lyle article, it states of Margaret, daughter of Robert, 2nd Lord Lyle, that "She had a charter 15 April 1494 from Matthew Stewart, son and heir of John Stewart, Earl of Lennox, of the lands of Inchavan and others. She was married to James Stewart of Blackhall":
https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun05pauluoft#page/554/mode/2up
Why the Lyle article doesn't mention Margaret's marriage to Matthew Stewart, I don't know.
I also do not have the Lennox article from Complete Peerage [CP] to see what it has to say about Lennox's first wife Margaret Lyle.
Burke's Peerage (2003) merely states that Lennox "m 1st Margaret, day of Robert, Lord Lyle".
The ODNB bio of the 2nd Earl of Lennox by Roland J. Tanner states: "He may have contracted, by 13 June 1480, to marry Margaret, daughter of Robert, second Lord Lyle. That marriage, however, either did not take place or was annulled; a grant of lands to Margaret on 15 April 1494, just six days after Lennox contracted to marry Elizabeth (d. after 1530), daughter of James Hamilton, first Lord Hamilton (d. 1479), suggests that she was bought off."
Of Lennox's second marriage, we would appear to have a firm date - the spring of 1494. Scots Peerage states of it "contract, dated at the College of Bothwell, 9 April 1494" and "this marriage was ratified by papal dispensation dated at Rome 15 April and 31 August 1495".
His second wife was Elizabeth Hamilton, first cousin of King James IV, and in the spring of 1494, an orphaned young lady no older than age nineteen (her parents were married in March 1474). Lennox was at least age 31, as per his bio "He was of age by 1484, when he first attended parliament."
So Lennox would have been at least age 17 in June 1480, by which date he is said to have been contracted to marry Margaret Lyle. He and his father were certainly closely allied to Robert Lord Lyle during the 1480s, "Stewart, his father, and Robert, Lord Lyle, raised a rebellion in the Lennox in April 1489 against their allies of the previous year...His father resigned the formal ownership of the Lennox and Darnley estates (though not the titles and tenancy) to him on 1 June 1490" [ODNB].
So, it was at some point in the next four years, between 1490 and the spring of 1494, that Lennox, now in his late 20s, administering the family's castles and estates, and effectively the public head of the family, perhaps rebelled against his arranged marriage to Margaret Lyle. Certainly a teenaged first cousin of the young Scottish king (who himself turned 21 in the spring of 1494) was a better connected wife for Lennox than Margaret Lyle.
The marriage of Lennox to Elizabeth Hamilton would certainly have had the king's blessing after the fact, if not his full knowledge and complicity beforehand, for one month after the contract of Lennox's marriage to Elizabeth Hamilton was formalized at Bothwell, the king confirmed Lennox's charter of land settlement on Margaret Lyle.
The charter, in Latin is transcribed in The Register of The Great Seal of Scotland:
"6 JAC. IV. 2212. Apud civitatem Glasguen., 16 Maii. REX confirmavit cartam Mathei Stewart, filii et apparentis heredis Johannis Stewart comitis de Levenax et dom. Dernley,--[qua--pro ejus benemeritis--concessit Domicelle MARGARETE LILE, filie Roberti dom. L.,--[snip of lands]--TENEND. dicte Marg., et assignatis ejus, viz., dicto Rob. dom. L. et heredibus ejusdem quibuscunque, de rege tanquam senescallo Scotie:--[snip of witnesses to the April charter]--Apud Glasgw, 15 Apr. 1494]:--[snip of witnesses to the king's confirmation of the charter]":
https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi02scot#page/466/mode/2up
If anyone has the time to translate the above into English, I'd very much appreciate. I've become familiar with enough Latin to recognize some phrases, but I'd really like to know what it says in full.
Now for the 2nd Earl of Lennox's daughters. Scots Peerage [SP] gives him three - Margaret, Elizabeth, Agnes. It doesn't specify which wife was the mother.
1) Margaret Stewart of Lennox "contracted to William Cunningham, Master of Glencairn, son of Cuthbert, Earl of Glencairn, and a dispensation obtained for their marriage 15 December 1507" [SP]. A dispensation was probably needed because Margaret Stewart and William Cunningham were third cousins (related in the 4th degree):
Sir Adam Hepburn of Hailes had two daus A1 & B1
A1) Elizabeth Hepburn, who had
A2) Margaret Montgomerie, who had
A3) Matthew Stewart, 11th Earl of Lennox, who had
A4) Margaret Stewart
B1) Margaret Hepburn, who had
B2) Robert Cunningham, 2nd Earl of Glencairn, who had
B3) Cuthbert Cunningham, 3rd Earl of Glencairn, who had
B4) William Cunningham
CP states (vol. 5 p. 531) that Margaret was the "1st da. of Matthew (Stewart), 2nd Earl of Lennox [S.], by Elizabeth, da. of James (Hamilton), Lord Hamilton [S.]". The earliest a child could have been born to Lennox and his second wife Elizabeth Hamilton is 1495, so Margaret was no older than age 12 in December 1507 when a dispensation was granted for her marriage, possibly a couple months short of age 13 if she was conceived immediately following the April 1494 marriage contract of her parents. It would not be unusual for noble parents to arrange a marriage for their eldest daughter at that age, even though by 1507 Lennox had two sons, so it was clear that Margaret was not an heiress.
But what occurred next is unusual, especially because she was not an heiress. SP: "This marriage [to William Cunningham] did not take place, and she was married, but apparently without the sanction of the Church, before 12 March 1508-9 to John, Lord Fleming, which marriage was dissolved before 26 October 1515, at which date she is styled in a charter 'olim reputata sponsa' of John, Lord Fleming.
The 1509 charter is also transcribed in Latin in The Register of the Great Seal of Scotland:
"21 JAC. IV. 3325. Apud Edinburgh, 12 Mar. REX concessit MARGARETE STEWART filie Mathei com. de Levenax, &c.,--terras et baronias de Bigar et Thankertoun, cum tenentibus, &c., patronatuum juribus, advocationibus ac donationibus ecclesiarum et capellaniarum earundem, vic. Lanark;--quas Joh. dom. Flemyng resignavit:--TENEND. dicte M. et heredibus masc. inter ipsam et dictum Joh. procreatis, quibus deficientibus, iterum reversuras dicto Joh. et heredibus ejus masc.:--insuper, si contingent filios inter eos procreari antequam dispensatio matrimonii a curia Romana deveniret et ante complementum contractus matrimonii in facie ecclesie, rex pro grata speciali concessit dict. filio aut filiis facultatem libere disponendi in toto tempore vite sive in tempore mortis de omnibus terris, &c., ac de bonis mobilibus et immobilibus cuicunque persone, non obstante eorum bastardia; ac etiam eosdem legitimavit":
https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi02scot#page/710/mode/2up
Again, if anyone has the time to translate the above into English, I'd greatly appreciate it. The same for the 1515 charter:
"3 JAC. V. 50. Apud Edinburgh, 26 Oct. REX &c., concessit JOHANNI DOMINO FLEMYNG, et ejus heredibus,--terras et baronias de Bigar et Thankertoun, cum tenentibus &c., advocationibus ecclesiarum et capellaniarum earundem, vic. Lanark;--quas Margareta Stewart domina Flemyng, olim reputata sponsa dicti Joh., personaliter resignavit"
https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi03scot#page/10/mode/2up
So, by March 1509, John Fleming, who was at least age 30 (his father was dead by 1480), and probably closer to age 40 ("He was one of the nobles who opposed James III, and, seizing his son, proclaimed him King in 1488" [CP]), had clandestinely married Margaret Stewart, who if daughter of Lennox's second marriage was no older than age 14, and received the blessing of King James IV, who approved the marriage settlement of the couple, after doing so. Then by October 1515, when Margaret Stewart was no older than age 20, the lovebirds had proved incompatible, and officially ended their marriage.
The chronology just doesn't compute here. And it gets even more irreconcilable with further details. Per CP, Margaret "was divorced twice, firstly in or about 1509...The ground for her first divorce was that she had been raped by John Fleming, son of Fleming of Boghall, and for her second that her husband's cousin german, James Lindsay, had had connexion with her before marriage."
'Royal Descent of Archibald Dunlop', a 1998 article by John L. Scherer in NEHGR vol. 152 (many thanks to John Higgins for providing me the article), has some further details "In 1508/9, shortly after their marriage, John, Lord Fleming, and Margaret Stewart were divorced on the grounds that Margaret had been abducted by John Fleming, son of Fleming of Boghall. Lord and Lady Fleming were remarried after 17 December 1509, when a papal dispensation was granted, the couple being related in the fourth degree of consanguinity and of affinity. They were again divorced before 25 October 1515, on the grounds that James Lindsay, cousin german to Lord Fleming, had known Lady Fleming before her marriage."
I admit confusion here. Certainly the papal dispensation granted in December 1509 was to validate the clandestine marriage that had occurred by March that year? Margaret's two divorces were not both from the same husband? The first divorce, the grounds for which she had been raped, would have been her divorce from William Cunningham, and the 'John Fleming, son of Boghall' was actually her next husband John, Lord Fleming?
So Margaret was arranged in marriage to William Cunningham, then at some point the following year, suffered John Fleming, son of Fleming of Boghall (if a different man than her husband John, Lord Fleming) forcing himself on her, had an (apparently consensual) sexual/romantic liaison with James Lindsay, then clandestinely married the much older John, Lord Fleming - all before the age of 15!!
It seems that chronology does not favour Margaret Stewart having been the daughter of Lennox by Elizabeth Hamilton. Her overwrought love life 1507-09 is indicative of an adult lady aged 20 at least, not of a girl aged 14 not yet through puberty, and still under the protection of parents and other guardians. As there is no reason to think that Lennox's first marriage to Margaret Lyle was unconsummated or childless, it's more logical to make Margaret Stewart his daughter from that marriage.
That is given further weight when it becomes apparent that Lennox probably had another daughter named Margaret, who chronologically would have to have been from his second marriage to Elizabeth Hamilton, but the details on that will have to wait for Part II.
Cheers, ----Brad
Matt Tompkins
May 5, 2014, 8:49:59 AM5/5/14
to
On Monday, 5 May 2014 07:42:06 UTC+1, Brad Verity wrote:
> The marriage of Lennox to Elizabeth Hamilton would certainly have had the king's blessing after the fact, if not his full knowledge and complicity beforehand, for one month after the contract of Lennox's marriage to Elizabeth Hamilton was formalized at Bothwell, the king confirmed Lennox's charter of land settlement on Margaret Lyle.
>
> The charter, in Latin is transcribed in The Register of The Great Seal of Scotland:
>
> "6 JAC. IV. 2212. Apud civitatem Glasguen., 16 Maii. REX confirmavit cartam Mathei Stewart, filii et apparentis heredis Johannis Stewart comitis de Levenax et dom. Dernley,--[qua--pro ejus benemeritis--concessit Domicelle MARGARETE LILE, filie Roberti dom. L.,--[snip of lands]--TENEND. dicte Marg., et assignatis ejus, viz., dicto Rob. dom. L. et heredibus ejusdem quibuscunque, de rege tanquam senescallo Scotie:--[snip of witnesses to the April charter]--Apud Glasgw, 15 Apr. 1494]:--[snip of witnesses to the king's confirmation of the charter]":
>
> https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi02scot#page/466/mode/2up
>
> If anyone has the time to translate the above into English, I'd very much appreciate. I've become familiar with enough Latin to recognize some phrases, but I'd really like to know what it says in full.
>
I'm not familiar with the standard formulas used in Scottish grants, either in Latin or English, except that I am aware that they varied in some respects from their English equivalents (calling an advowson an advocation, for example, or disponing rather than disposing), but here is my best shot - someone with more knowledge of Scottish records can no doubt improve on it.
> The marriage of Lennox to Elizabeth Hamilton would certainly have had the king's blessing after the fact, if not his full knowledge and complicity beforehand, for one month after the contract of Lennox's marriage to Elizabeth Hamilton was formalized at Bothwell, the king confirmed Lennox's charter of land settlement on Margaret Lyle.
>
> The charter, in Latin is transcribed in The Register of The Great Seal of Scotland:
>
> "6 JAC. IV. 2212. Apud civitatem Glasguen., 16 Maii. REX confirmavit cartam Mathei Stewart, filii et apparentis heredis Johannis Stewart comitis de Levenax et dom. Dernley,--[qua--pro ejus benemeritis--concessit Domicelle MARGARETE LILE, filie Roberti dom. L.,--[snip of lands]--TENEND. dicte Marg., et assignatis ejus, viz., dicto Rob. dom. L. et heredibus ejusdem quibuscunque, de rege tanquam senescallo Scotie:--[snip of witnesses to the April charter]--Apud Glasgw, 15 Apr. 1494]:--[snip of witnesses to the king's confirmation of the charter]":
>
> https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi02scot#page/466/mode/2up
>
> If anyone has the time to translate the above into English, I'd very much appreciate. I've become familiar with enough Latin to recognize some phrases, but I'd really like to know what it says in full.
>
City of Glasgow, 16 May. The king confirmed the charter of Matthew Stewart, son and heir apparent of John Stewart, earl of Lennox and lord Darnley, -- [which -- for her merits -- he granted to the damsel Margaret Lyle, daughter of Robert lord Lyle, -- [snip of lands], -- to hold to the said Margaret and her assigns, namely to Robert lord Lennox and his heirs whosoever, of the king as steward of Scotland
>
<snip>
>
> But what occurred next is unusual, especially because she was not an heiress. SP: "This marriage [to William Cunningham] did not take place, and she was married, but apparently without the sanction of the Church, before 12 March 1508-9 to John, Lord Fleming, which marriage was dissolved before 26 October 1515, at which date she is styled in a charter 'olim reputata sponsa' of John, Lord Fleming.
>
> The 1509 charter is also transcribed in Latin in The Register of the Great Seal of Scotland:
>
> "21 JAC. IV. 3325. Apud Edinburgh, 12 Mar. REX concessit MARGARETE STEWART filie Mathei com. de Levenax, &c.,--terras et baronias de Bigar et Thankertoun, cum tenentibus, &c., patronatuum juribus, advocationibus ac donationibus ecclesiarum et capellaniarum earundem, vic. Lanark;--quas Joh. dom. Flemyng resignavit:--TENEND. dicte M. et heredibus masc. inter ipsam et dictum Joh. procreatis, quibus deficientibus, iterum reversuras dicto Joh. et heredibus ejus masc.:--insuper, si contingent filios inter eos procreari antequam dispensatio matrimonii a curia Romana deveniret et ante complementum contractus matrimonii in facie ecclesie, rex pro grata speciali concessit dict. filio aut filiis facultatem libere disponendi in toto tempore vite sive in tempore mortis de omnibus terris, &c., ac de bonis mobilibus et immobilibus cuicunque persone, non obstante eorum bastardia; ac etiam eosdem legitimavit":
>
> https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi02scot#page/710/mode/2up
>
> Again, if anyone has the time to translate the above into English, I'd greatly appreciate it. The same for the 1515 charter:
>
Edinburgh, 12 March. The king granted to Margaret Stewart daughter of Matthew earl of Lennox etc, -- the lands and baronies of Bigar and Thankertoun, with the tenants etc, rights of patronage, advocations and donations of their kirks and chapels, [within?] the sheriffdom of Lanark; -- which John lord Flemyng has resigned: -- to hold to the said M and her heirs male lawfully begotten between her and the said John, remainder to the said John and his heirs male.:--further, if it should happen that sons be begotten between them before a dispensation shall be obtained from the court of Rome and before a full marriage in church, the king by his special grace granted to the said son or sons faculty freely to dispone in full, in life or death, of all lands etc. and of all goods, moveable and immoveable, to any person, notwithstanding their bastardy, and he also legitimised them.
> But what occurred next is unusual, especially because she was not an heiress. SP: "This marriage [to William Cunningham] did not take place, and she was married, but apparently without the sanction of the Church, before 12 March 1508-9 to John, Lord Fleming, which marriage was dissolved before 26 October 1515, at which date she is styled in a charter 'olim reputata sponsa' of John, Lord Fleming.
>
> The 1509 charter is also transcribed in Latin in The Register of the Great Seal of Scotland:
>
> "21 JAC. IV. 3325. Apud Edinburgh, 12 Mar. REX concessit MARGARETE STEWART filie Mathei com. de Levenax, &c.,--terras et baronias de Bigar et Thankertoun, cum tenentibus, &c., patronatuum juribus, advocationibus ac donationibus ecclesiarum et capellaniarum earundem, vic. Lanark;--quas Joh. dom. Flemyng resignavit:--TENEND. dicte M. et heredibus masc. inter ipsam et dictum Joh. procreatis, quibus deficientibus, iterum reversuras dicto Joh. et heredibus ejus masc.:--insuper, si contingent filios inter eos procreari antequam dispensatio matrimonii a curia Romana deveniret et ante complementum contractus matrimonii in facie ecclesie, rex pro grata speciali concessit dict. filio aut filiis facultatem libere disponendi in toto tempore vite sive in tempore mortis de omnibus terris, &c., ac de bonis mobilibus et immobilibus cuicunque persone, non obstante eorum bastardia; ac etiam eosdem legitimavit":
>
> https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi02scot#page/710/mode/2up
>
> Again, if anyone has the time to translate the above into English, I'd greatly appreciate it. The same for the 1515 charter:
>
> "3 JAC. V. 50. Apud Edinburgh, 26 Oct. REX &c., concessit JOHANNI DOMINO FLEMYNG, et ejus heredibus,--terras et baronias de Bigar et Thankertoun, cum tenentibus &c., advocationibus ecclesiarum et capellaniarum earundem, vic. Lanark;--quas Margareta Stewart domina Flemyng, olim reputata sponsa dicti Joh., personaliter resignavit"
>
> https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi03scot#page/10/mode/2up
>
Matt Tompkins
Steve Wilson
May 5, 2014, 10:41:00 AM5/5/14
to
> So Margaret was arranged in marriage to William Cunningham, then at some point the following year, suffered John Fleming, son of Fleming of Boghall (if a different man than her husband John, Lord Fleming) forcing himself on her, had an (apparently consensual) sexual/romantic liaison with James Lindsay, then clandestinely married the much older John, Lord Fleming - all before the age of 15!!
The traditional seat of the Lords Fleming was Boghall Castle, near Biggar, Lanarkshire, so I suspect "John Fleming, son of Fleming of Boghall" would have to be the same person as Margaret's eventual husband. The only other alternative would be making him an otherwise unattested son of her eventual husband by one of his previous marriages.
jhigg...@yahoo.com
May 5, 2014, 12:40:00 PM5/5/14
to
On Sunday, May 4, 2014 11:42:06 PM UTC-7, Brad Verity wrote:
> In 'Scots Peerage' Volume 5 (19), Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox is said to have "married first, after 1471, and before 13 June 1480, Margaret, daughter of John, Lord Lyle". It cites 'The Lennox' by Fraser, vol. i. p. 330, as it's source for the statement:
>
> https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun05pauluoft#page/350/mode/2up
>
>
>
> I do not know what 'The Lennox' by Fraser is. If anyone does, please let me know.
>
> Cheers, ----Brad
> In 'Scots Peerage' Volume 5 (19), Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox is said to have "married first, after 1471, and before 13 June 1480, Margaret, daughter of John, Lord Lyle". It cites 'The Lennox' by Fraser, vol. i. p. 330, as it's source for the statement:
>
> https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun05pauluoft#page/350/mode/2up
>
>
>
> I do not know what 'The Lennox' by Fraser is. If anyone does, please let me know.
>
"The Lennox", by Sir William Fraser (2 volumes):
vol. 1: https://archive.org/details/lennoxvol1memov100fras
vol. 2: https://archive.org/details/lennoxvol1memov200fras
(Ignore the inaccurate headings on the Internet Archive pages, which misidentify the volume numbers - check the title pages themselves)
Brad Verity
May 5, 2014, 12:46:42 PM5/5/14
to
On Monday, May 5, 2014 5:49:59 AM UTC-7, Matt Tompkins wrote:
> I'm not familiar with the standard formulas used in Scottish grants, either in Latin or English, except that I am aware that they varied in some respects from their English equivalents (calling an advowson an advocation, for example, or disponing rather than disposing), but here is my best shot - someone with more knowledge of Scottish records can no doubt improve on it.
> City of Glasgow, 16 May. The king confirmed the charter of Matthew Stewart, son and heir apparent of John Stewart, earl of Lennox and lord Darnley, -- [which -- for her merits -- he granted to the damsel Margaret Lyle, daughter of Robert lord Lyle, -- [snip of lands], -- to hold to the said Margaret and her assigns, namely to Robert lord Lennox and his heirs whosoever, of the king as steward of Scotland
Thank you very much, Matt. "Which--for her merits--he granted to the damsel Margaret Lyle" was the phrase I was unable to understand in Latin. Margaret's assign "Rob. dom. L." wasn't Robert lord Lennox, but rather her father Robert Lord Lyle.
> I'm not familiar with the standard formulas used in Scottish grants, either in Latin or English, except that I am aware that they varied in some respects from their English equivalents (calling an advowson an advocation, for example, or disponing rather than disposing), but here is my best shot - someone with more knowledge of Scottish records can no doubt improve on it.
> City of Glasgow, 16 May. The king confirmed the charter of Matthew Stewart, son and heir apparent of John Stewart, earl of Lennox and lord Darnley, -- [which -- for her merits -- he granted to the damsel Margaret Lyle, daughter of Robert lord Lyle, -- [snip of lands], -- to hold to the said Margaret and her assigns, namely to Robert lord Lennox and his heirs whosoever, of the king as steward of Scotland
Peter Stewart was very kind to provide me links to the 1874 two-volume 'The Lennox' by William Fraser, which was the main source for the Lennox article in Scots Peerage. Fraser says this about Lennox's first marriage, "A bond was made by Robert Lord Lyle to John Lord Darnley, dated 14th December 1471, to the effect that he should not sell the lands of Linbank, Hewkheid, Rayelands, and Fulhope, until the completion of the marriage betwixt Matthew Stewart, eldest son of John Lord Darnley, and Margaret, daughter of Lord Lyle. Infeftment was given by John Earl of Lennox with his own hands, 13th June 1480, to Matthew his son and heir, and Margaret Lyle his spouse, and the longest liver of them, and their heirs-male, in the Mains of Darnley, with the mill, multures, etc., thereof, till they should be infected in the lands of Meikle Crossie, according to the contract, when the said Matthew and Margaret were to resign the lands of the Mains of Darnley to the said Earl". Fraser's source for the two documents was "Old Inventory of the Duke of Lennox's Writs at Buchanan. Written on parchment, without seal or subscription":
https://archive.org/stream/lennoxvol1memov100fras#page/330/mode/2up
Fraser was apparently unaware of Lennox's grant of the lands of Inchavan made on 15 April 1494 to Margaret Lyle, for he later states, "Margaret Lyle, the first wife of Matthew Master of Lennox, having died, he married, secondly, Elizabeth Hamilton":
https://archive.org/stream/lennoxvol1memov100fras#page/332/mode/2up
However, Fraser may not have been far off the mark by having Margaret Lyle die, for he does include a document, dated at Lyle 30 January 1496/7 ("at Lyle, the penult daye of the moneth of Januar, the zer of God a thousand four hwndreth nynte and sex zeris"), in which Robert Lord Lyle "nochtwithstanding the said Mathow erle of the Leuenax has infect and charterit me and myn assignais heretably into the landis of the towne of Inchenan..." agrees to sell back the same lands to Lennox, for various sums of marks of gold, on various days:
https://archive.org/stream/lennoxvol1memov200fras#page/158/mode/2up
No mention at all is made of Margaret Lyle. So either she died in the ensuing two-and-a-half years since her April 1494 grant of Inchavan, or she turned the rights over to her father. Scots Peerage states she re-married one James Stewart of Blackhall. I don't know what it's source was for this statement, except that it obviously wasn't William Fraser's 'The Lennox'. "Allan Stewart", "Johne Stewart" and "William Stewart" are among the nine named witnesses to her father's January 1497 charter, but no James Stewart.
Fraser also unknowingly provides the answer as to why Lennox cast aside Margaret Lyle to marry Elizabeth Hamilton. It was to heal a feud between him and the Hamiltons for his role in the murder of George Hamilton. "Matthew, it would appear, had been implicated in the slaughter of George Hamilton, which had been a cause of feud between the houses of Hamilton and Lennox. With the view of terminating the feud, it was provided in the contract that Lord Hamilton and Matthew Stewart should meet at Bothwell on Sunday the 13th of April. The precise date of the marriage is uncertain. An instrument requiring the proclamation of the bans of marriage between Matthew, son of John Earl of Lennox and Lady Elizabeth Hamilton, in the church of Hamilton, is dated 30 March 1494-5". Fraser's source for that last date is once again "Old Inventory of the Duke of Lennox's Writs at Buchanan", but, if accurate, it means that their first child could not have been born before December 1495. If their firstborn was Margaret Stewart, she was age 11 turning 12 when the dispensation for her marriage to William Cunningham was granted in December 1507, and only age 13 when King James IV approved her marriage settlement to Lord Fleming in March 1509.
> Edinburgh, 12 March. The king granted to Margaret Stewart daughter of Matthew earl of Lennox etc, -- the lands and baronies of Bigar and Thankertoun, with the tenants etc, rights of patronage, advocations and donations of their kirks and chapels, [within?] the sheriffdom of Lanark; -- which John lord Flemyng has resigned: -- to hold to the said M and her heirs male lawfully begotten between her and the said John, remainder to the said John and his heirs male.:--further, if it should happen that sons be begotten between them before a dispensation shall be obtained from the court of Rome and before a full marriage in church, the king by his special grace granted to the said son or sons faculty freely to dispone in full, in life or death, of all lands etc. and of all goods, moveable and immoveable, to any person, notwithstanding their bastardy, and he also legitimised them.
So again the question arises - would the king have approved such a marriage if Margaret was only a girl of 12 or 13?
> Edinburgh, 26 Oct. The king etc., granted to John lord Flemyng and his heirs, --- the lands and baronies of Bigar and Thankertoun with the tenants etc the advocations of their kirks and chapels [within?] the sheriffdom of Lanark;-- which Margaret Stewart lady Flemyng, formerly the reputed spouse of the said John, personally resigned.
On Monday, May 5, 2014 7:41:00 AM UTC-7, Steve Wilson wrote:
> The traditional seat of the Lords Fleming was Boghall Castle, near Biggar, Lanarkshire, so I suspect "John Fleming, son of Fleming of Boghall" would have to be the same person as Margaret's eventual husband. The only other alternative would be making him an otherwise unattested son of her eventual husband by one of his previous marriages.
Fraser transcribes the papal dispensation for the William Cunningham/Margaret Stewart marriage in full (in Latin), here:
https://archive.org/stream/lennoxvol1memov200fras#page/182/mode/2up
Thanks & Cheers, -----Brad
Brad Verity
May 5, 2014, 4:18:17 PM5/5/14
to
On Sunday, May 4, 2014 11:42:06 PM UTC-7, Brad Verity wrote:
> Now for the 2nd Earl of Lennox's daughters. Scots Peerage [SP] gives him three - Margaret, Elizabeth, Agnes. It doesn't specify which wife was the mother.
2) Elizabeth Stewart of Lennox "married to Sir Hugh Campbell of Loudoun" [SP]:
https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun05pauluoft#page/350/mode/2up
Scots Peerage's sole source for this daughter was Fraser's 'The Lennox'. He states, "Elizabeth, the second daughter, married Sir Hugh Campbell of Loudoun, sheriff of Ayr. The grandson of that marriage was created Lord Campbell of Loudoun in 1601":
https://archive.org/stream/lennoxvol1memov100fras#page/338/mode/2up
Fraser cites neither source nor supporting documentation for this daughter. Turns out he was incorrect as to both her first name and her placement as second daughter of the 2nd Earl of Lennox.
The marriage settlement of Hugh Campbell of Loudoun and Margaret [not 'Elizabeth'] Stewart, approved by the king on 14 October 1533, is transcribed in the Register of the Great Seal of Scotland.
"21 JAC. V. 1312. Apud Glasgw, 14 Oct. REX confirmavit HUGONI CAMPBELL de Lowdoun, et MARGARETE STEWART ejus sponse,--8 marcatas terrarum antiqui extentus de Newmylnis, cum molendino granorum, in baronia de Lowdoun, balliatu de Cunynghame, vic. Are;--quas idem Hugo resignavit:--TENEND. dictis Hug. et Marg. et ipsorum alteri diutius viventi in conjuncta infeodatione, et heredibus inter ipsos legit. procreatis, quibus deficientibus, legitimis et propinquioribus heredibus dicti Hug. quibuscumque, de rege tanquam principe Scotie":
https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi03scot#page/287/mode/2up
A marriage in 1533 makes it chronologically possible for Margaret Stewart Campbell of Loudoun to be the daughter of either the 2nd Earl of Lennox or of his son the 3rd Earl. The 3rd Earl was married in January 1512, when he was age 16/15, if the firstborn child of his parents, and his son and heir the 4th Earl of Lennox was born 21 September 1516. If Margaret was the 3rd Earl's firstborn child, she would be between the ages of 18 and 20 in 1533.
But there is no compelling reason for the 3rd Earl to have married her off as a teenager. He had three healthy sons in 1533, so Margaret was not the heiress to his estates. His daughter Helen Stewart was married to the underage Earl of Erroll in about 1539. This was a more prestigious match than Sir Hugh Campbell, possibly indicating that Helen did not have an elder sister.
Elizabeth Hamilton was no older than age 20 when she married the 2nd Earl of Lennox, so was able to bear him children at any point up until his 1513 death at Flodden. If Margaret Stewart Campbell of Loudoun was the daughter of the 2nd Earl of Lennox, she was at least age 20 in 1533, and likely even older. Chronologically she would necessarily be the youngest daughter, not the second, as the other daughters were married in 1507, 1515 and 1518 (see previous post and below). But being the youngest daughter also makes it more natural for her not to have been married until she was in her twenties.
I lean toward Margaret Stewart Campbell of Loudoun being the daughter of the 2nd Earl of Lennox, rather than the 3rd Earl, but I'm curious what others think. At any rate, if daughter of the 2nd Earl, that leaves him with two daughters named 'Margaret'. In addition to all the chronological reasons, this is also a good reason to make Margaret Stewart Fleming the daughter of the 2nd Earl's first marriage. He is far likelier to have bestowed the same first name on two daughters if they had different mothers, rather than the same.
3) Agnes Stewart of Lennox "married to William Edmonstone of Duntreath" [SP, which again cites Fraser as its sole source]. Fraser does provide supporting evidence for this daughter "Agnes, the third daughter, married William Edmonstone of Duntreath, who granted to her as his spouse a charter, under his own hand and seal, dated 11th March 1518, of his twenty jerk lands of Duntreath, in liferent", and gain cites "Old Inventory of the Duke of Lennox's Writs at Buchanan" as his source.
I didn't have this daughter Agnes in my database, but I see Leo does in his:
http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00311039&tree=LEO
I've added her into mine. A marriage date of 1518 works well chronologically for Agnes to have been the daughter of the 2nd Earl of Lennox and his second wife Elizabeth Hamilton.
The three daughters Margaret, Elizabeth [sic], and Agnes are all that both Fraser and Scots Peerage give to the 2nd Earl of Lennox. But I see that Leo has given him another daughter
4) Janet Stewart of Lennox, wife of Ninian, 3rd Lord Ross:
http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00046370&tree=LEO
Both Fraser and Scots Peerage make this Janet a daughter of the 1st Earl of Lennox, but I think they are incorrect here. The king's approval on 15 November 1515 of the marriage settlement of Ninian Ross and Janet Stewart is also transcribed in the Register of the Privy Seal of Scotland.
"3 JAC. V. 2661. Apud Edinburgh, 15 Nov. Preceptum carte facte cum avisamento, consensu et assensu dicti tutoris et gubernatoris NINIANO DOMINO ROS DE HALKHEDE et JONETE STEWART ejus sponse, et ipsorum alteri diutius viventi in conjuncta infeodatione, et heredibus suis subscriptis,--de totis et integris terris de Tarbart, cum molendino earundem et suis pertinentiis, jacen. in ballia de Cunynghame infra vic. nostrum de Are: Que fuerunt dicti Niniani domini Ros hereditarie et quas idem in manibus dicti tutoris nomine regis apud Edinburgh personaliter resignavit: TENENDIS, etc., dicto Niniano et Jonete, etc., et heredibus masculis inter ipsos legitime procreatis seu procreandis, quibus deficientibus legitimis et propinquioribus dicti Niniani quibuscunque, etc., cum clausulis carte: FACIENDO, etc., jura et servitia de dictis terris cum molendino earundem et suis pertinentiis ante prefatam resignationem regi debita et consueta, etc.":
https://archive.org/stream/registrumsecret00scotgoog#page/n430/mode/2up
Per Scots Peerage, two of the other daughters of the 1st Earl of Lennox were married in 1472 and about 1480, so for him to have had a daughter who wasn't married until 1515 doesn't work chronologically. It does work for her to have been a daughter of the 2nd Earl of Lennox, the eldest daughter of his second marriage. Ninian's father had been one of the closest allies of the Stewarts of Lennox throughout the 1480s and ensuing decades. With both John, Lord Ross and the 2nd Earl of Lennox, having fallen at Flodden, it's natural that the two families would wish to strengthen their long association through a marriage of their houses. The young new Lord Ross with Lennox's eldest unmarried daughter.
And so it goes. Given the chronology, the likeliest conclusion is that the 2nd Earl of Lennox had four daughters: one, Margaret, by his first wife Margaret Lyle, and three, Janet, Agnes, and another Margaret, by his second wife Elizabeth Hamilton. As the 2nd Earl of Lennox is ancestral to practically every crowned head of Europe, it's worthwhile, both genealogically and historically, to get his family sorted properly.
Cheers, -----Brad
al...@mindspring.com
May 5, 2014, 6:42:16 PM5/5/14
to
Great posts as always Brad
Some sources give another daughter Catherine:
http://books.google.com/books?id=xOY_AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA260&lpg=PA260&dq=John+colquhoun+Glens+catherine+stewart&source=bl&ots=NizsQPAiAc&sig=JTg7zypPf9togGvh6lml4KB9sxM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8BJoU-nFJsaisASw7YHgCQ&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=John%20colquhoun%20Glens%20catherine%20stewart&f=false
Doug Smith
Some sources give another daughter Catherine:
http://books.google.com/books?id=xOY_AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA260&lpg=PA260&dq=John+colquhoun+Glens+catherine+stewart&source=bl&ots=NizsQPAiAc&sig=JTg7zypPf9togGvh6lml4KB9sxM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8BJoU-nFJsaisASw7YHgCQ&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=John%20colquhoun%20Glens%20catherine%20stewart&f=false
Doug Smith
Douglas Richardson
May 6, 2014, 1:46:31 AM5/6/14
to
Brad ~
In your post on the daughters of Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox [died 1513], you address the issue of the placement and marriages of his daughter, Margaret Stewart.
As far as I know, Margaret Stewart was merely contracted in 1507 to marry William Cunnningham, so no divorce would be necessary for this paring. Being dispensed at aged 12 for an earl's eldest daughter to marry would be normal procedure in this time period.
As per Scots Peerage, Margaret Stewart subsequently married (1st) before 12 March 1508/9 (date of grant) (by dispensation dated Dec. 1509) (as his 2nd wife) John Fleming, 2nd Lord Fleming. They had one daughter, Margaret. As you have noted, this couple were divorced in 1515.
Regarding the identity of Margaret Stewart's rapist, Pitcairn, Criminal Trials in Scotland 1(1) (1833): 60-61, indicates that on 13 Feb. 1508/9, John, Lord Fleming, was fined 500 marks for not "compearing," he having acted as surety or bail for trial to "enter" John Fleming, son of the Laird of Baghall, to "underly the law for art and part" of the rape of Margaret Stewart, daughter of Matthew, Earl of Lennox.
This record makes it clear that John, Lord Fleming (husband of the said Margaret Stewart) and John Fleming, son of the Laird of Baghall, were two different individuals. See the following weblink for this item:
http://books.google.com/books?id=1GwNAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA60
However, given that this record dated Feb. 1508/9 states that John Fleming of Baghall merely took "part" in the rape of Margaret Stewart, it seems likely to me that it was Lord Fleming who abducted, raped, and married Margaret Stewart and that his kinsman, John Fleming, of Baghall merely assisted in the abduction. This seems to be the likely train of events, given that the king acknowledged that Lord Fleming and Margaret Stewart were married the very next month, March 1508/9.
Following the divorce of Margaret Stewart and John, Lord Fleming in 1515, she married (2nd) before 1 May 1528 Alexander Douglas, of Mains. They had one son, Matthew. This marriage is mentioned is several sources, including Scots Peerage 5 (1908): 351 (sub Stewart, Duke of Lennox) and Crawfurd, General Description of the Shire of Renfrew (1818): 222. Burke states this marriage took place in 1518 [which may be true], but he gives no source. See Burke, Gen. & Heraldic History of the Landed Gentry of Great Britain & Ireland 1 (8th ed., 1894): 529-530 (sub Douglas of Mains), available at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=93M-AQAAIAAJ&pg=PA529
Alexander Douglas' death date seems to be unknown. However, I presume he is the Alexander Douglas of Mains who is found acting as factor for the Lennox earldom in 1542 [see Cameron and Macdougall, James V: The Personal Rule, 1548-1542 (1998): 137, 329].
Andrew MacEwen, the resident expert in all things Scottish, is of the firm opinion that Margaret Stewart, wife of John Fleming and Alexander Douglas, was the eldest daughter of Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, by his 2nd wife, Elizabeth Hamilton. He does not believe that Matthew Stewart had any children by his 1st marriage to Margaret Lyle.
As for myself, I believe you need additional evidence before you conclude that Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, had a second daughter named Margaret, who married Hugh Campbell. Mr. MacEwen indicates you might find helpful information on Hugh Campbell in the book, Clan Campbell, an 8 volume set published in 1914. If Hugh Campbell's wife was called Margaret in one record and Elizabeth elsewhere, it would not be the first time a contemporary record made an error regarding a wife's given name.
Good luck in your sleuthing.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
In your post on the daughters of Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox [died 1513], you address the issue of the placement and marriages of his daughter, Margaret Stewart.
As far as I know, Margaret Stewart was merely contracted in 1507 to marry William Cunnningham, so no divorce would be necessary for this paring. Being dispensed at aged 12 for an earl's eldest daughter to marry would be normal procedure in this time period.
As per Scots Peerage, Margaret Stewart subsequently married (1st) before 12 March 1508/9 (date of grant) (by dispensation dated Dec. 1509) (as his 2nd wife) John Fleming, 2nd Lord Fleming. They had one daughter, Margaret. As you have noted, this couple were divorced in 1515.
Regarding the identity of Margaret Stewart's rapist, Pitcairn, Criminal Trials in Scotland 1(1) (1833): 60-61, indicates that on 13 Feb. 1508/9, John, Lord Fleming, was fined 500 marks for not "compearing," he having acted as surety or bail for trial to "enter" John Fleming, son of the Laird of Baghall, to "underly the law for art and part" of the rape of Margaret Stewart, daughter of Matthew, Earl of Lennox.
This record makes it clear that John, Lord Fleming (husband of the said Margaret Stewart) and John Fleming, son of the Laird of Baghall, were two different individuals. See the following weblink for this item:
http://books.google.com/books?id=1GwNAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA60
However, given that this record dated Feb. 1508/9 states that John Fleming of Baghall merely took "part" in the rape of Margaret Stewart, it seems likely to me that it was Lord Fleming who abducted, raped, and married Margaret Stewart and that his kinsman, John Fleming, of Baghall merely assisted in the abduction. This seems to be the likely train of events, given that the king acknowledged that Lord Fleming and Margaret Stewart were married the very next month, March 1508/9.
Following the divorce of Margaret Stewart and John, Lord Fleming in 1515, she married (2nd) before 1 May 1528 Alexander Douglas, of Mains. They had one son, Matthew. This marriage is mentioned is several sources, including Scots Peerage 5 (1908): 351 (sub Stewart, Duke of Lennox) and Crawfurd, General Description of the Shire of Renfrew (1818): 222. Burke states this marriage took place in 1518 [which may be true], but he gives no source. See Burke, Gen. & Heraldic History of the Landed Gentry of Great Britain & Ireland 1 (8th ed., 1894): 529-530 (sub Douglas of Mains), available at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=93M-AQAAIAAJ&pg=PA529
Alexander Douglas' death date seems to be unknown. However, I presume he is the Alexander Douglas of Mains who is found acting as factor for the Lennox earldom in 1542 [see Cameron and Macdougall, James V: The Personal Rule, 1548-1542 (1998): 137, 329].
Andrew MacEwen, the resident expert in all things Scottish, is of the firm opinion that Margaret Stewart, wife of John Fleming and Alexander Douglas, was the eldest daughter of Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, by his 2nd wife, Elizabeth Hamilton. He does not believe that Matthew Stewart had any children by his 1st marriage to Margaret Lyle.
As for myself, I believe you need additional evidence before you conclude that Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, had a second daughter named Margaret, who married Hugh Campbell. Mr. MacEwen indicates you might find helpful information on Hugh Campbell in the book, Clan Campbell, an 8 volume set published in 1914. If Hugh Campbell's wife was called Margaret in one record and Elizabeth elsewhere, it would not be the first time a contemporary record made an error regarding a wife's given name.
Good luck in your sleuthing.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Brad Verity
May 6, 2014, 2:41:58 PM5/6/14
to
On Monday, May 5, 2014 3:42:16 PM UTC-7, al...@mindspring.com wrote:
> Some sources give another daughter Catherine:
> http://books.google.com/books?id=xOY_AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA260&lpg=PA260&dq=John+colquhoun+Glens+catherine+stewart&source=bl&ots=NizsQPAiAc&sig=JTg7zypPf9togGvh6lml4KB9sxM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8BJoU-nFJsaisASw7YHgCQ&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=John%20colquhoun%20Glens%20catherine%20stewart&f=false
Dear Doug,
> Some sources give another daughter Catherine:
> http://books.google.com/books?id=xOY_AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA260&lpg=PA260&dq=John+colquhoun+Glens+catherine+stewart&source=bl&ots=NizsQPAiAc&sig=JTg7zypPf9togGvh6lml4KB9sxM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8BJoU-nFJsaisASw7YHgCQ&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=John%20colquhoun%20Glens%20catherine%20stewart&f=false
Scots Peerage has the wife of Sir John Colquhoun of Luss as Elizabeth Stewart, daughter of the 1st Earl of Lennox, married about 1480:
https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun05pauluoft#page/350/mode/2up
The marriage and her first name Elizabeth are verified in a settlement made on 6 April 1498, transcribed in the Register of the Great Seal of Scotland
"10 JAC. IV. Apud Dunbertane, 6 Apr. REX confirmavit JOHANNI COLQUHOUN de Luss, et ELIZABETH STEWART ejus sponse,--10 lib. terrarum de Garthsquyb et molendina earundem, in comitatu de Levenax, vic. Dunbertane;--quas idem Joh. personaliter resignavit:--TENEND. dictis Joh. et Eliz. et eorum alteri diutius viventi in conjuncta infeodatione et heredibus masculis inter ipsos legitime procreatis, quibus deficientibus, legitimis et propinquioribus heredibus dicti Joh. quibuscunque":
https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi02scot#page/510/mode/2up
If this was a marriage settlement - and it certainly looks like one - it was 18 years after the estimated date SP gave for the marriage, and this Elizabeth could certainly, chronologically, have been the daughter of the 2nd Earl of Lennox and his first wife Margaret Lyle.
On Monday, May 5, 2014 10:46:31 PM UTC-7, Douglas Richardson wrote:
> As far as I know, Margaret Stewart was merely contracted in 1507 to marry William Cunnningham, so no divorce would be necessary for this paring. Being dispensed at aged 12 for an earl's eldest daughter to marry would be normal procedure in this time period.
>
>
> As per Scots Peerage, Margaret Stewart subsequently married (1st) before 12 March 1508/9 (date of grant) (by dispensation dated Dec. 1509) (as his 2nd wife) John Fleming, 2nd Lord Fleming. They had one daughter, Margaret. As you have noted, this couple were divorced in 1515.
> Regarding the identity of Margaret Stewart's rapist, Pitcairn, Criminal Trials in Scotland 1(1) (1833): 60-61, indicates that on 13 Feb. 1508/9, John, Lord Fleming, was fined 500 marks for not "compearing," he having acted as surety or bail for trial to "enter" John Fleming, son of the Laird of Baghall, to "underly the law for art and part" of the rape of Margaret Stewart, daughter of Matthew, Earl of Lennox.
> This record makes it clear that John, Lord Fleming (husband of the said Margaret Stewart) and John Fleming, son of the Laird of Baghall, were two different individuals. See the following weblink for this item:
> http://books.google.com/books?id=1GwNAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA60
"Rape of the Earl of Levinax's Daughter. [22 Jac. IV, 1508-9] Feb. 13--JOHN FLEMYN, son to the Laird of Boghall.--John Lord Flemyng, often called (as surety) to enter the said John to underly the law for art and part of the Rape or Ravishment of Margaret Stewart, daughter of Mathew Earl of Levenax; and for all action which could be imputed to him by reason of the said Ravishment, and intromission with her at the time thereof: and not compearing, the said Lord was fined in the penalty of 500 merks.--John Flemyn was denounced Rebel at the King's horn, &c."
> However, given that this record dated Feb. 1508/9 states that John Fleming of Baghall merely took "part" in the rape of Margaret Stewart, it seems likely to me that it was Lord Fleming who abducted, raped, and married Margaret Stewart and that his kinsman, John Fleming, of Baghall merely assisted in the abduction. This seems to be the likely train of events, given that the king acknowledged that Lord Fleming and Margaret Stewart were married the very next month, March 1508/9.
John Fleming is described as son to the Laird of Boghall in the document. Either his father was still alive, or John was a younger son, as he was not himself the Laird of Boghall. In either case, the impression is that John was a young man, not one of middle age, like Lord Fleming, who was around age 40 at this date. The Flemings of Boghall must have been a cadet branch of the Lords Fleming, and John a member of his kinsman Lord Fleming's household, as king and court were holding Lord Fleming, not the Laird of Boghall, responsible for bringing this young man in to answer for his ravishment of Margaret Stewart.
What happens next is interesting. Instead of bringing John Fleming of Boghall into court, Lord Fleming comes to court a month later, married to Margaret Stewart, and with a marriage settlement that guaranteed the lady a good portion of his lands, as well as legitimizing any issue she had, even if born before a proper papal dispensation could be obtained.
What seems to me the scenario behind all of this: Margaret Stewart, for whatever reason, was not too keen on William Cunningham, the kinsman chosen by her father to be her husband. She caught the eye of John Stewart of Boghall, a young man in the household of his kinsman Lord Fleming. Hopefully for Margaret's sake, the attraction was mutual and the "ravishment" of the young lady was not the violent act we associate today with the term 'rape'. Whatever the case, Margaret's relationship with John Fleming of Boghall was illicit and sinful - she was betrothed to William Cunningham in the eyes of God and society. Nor was John Fleming of Boghall at all suitable as a husband for an earl's daughter. Once the 'ravishment' was discovered, all hell undoubtably broke loose.
Margaret's father the Earl of Lennox and Cunningham's father the Earl of Glencairn must've been furious. Lord Fleming was clearly being held responsible for his young kinsman's actions. This would be enough to cause a blood feud for the Flemings with the Stewarts of Lennox and Cunninghams of Glencairn. Perhaps the only way forward to placate the injured parties was for Lord Fleming to marry Margaret himself. And so, James IV granted his approval. Lord Fleming shared a bond of mutual tragedy with the King - his first wife Euphemia Drummond and her sister Margaret, mistress of James IV, had been murdered together through poisoning seven years previous in 1502.
This would help explain why the Lord Fleming/Margaret Stewart marriage didn't last. This much older husband was never a man Margaret loved. Perhaps the plan from the beginning had been that the marriage would not be of a long duration, but two years after her father the 2nd Earl of Lennox fell at Flodden, Margaret officially divorced Lord Fleming and renounced her rights to the lands he had granted her in the marriage settlement of March 1509.
> Andrew MacEwen, the resident expert in all things Scottish, is of the firm opinion that Margaret Stewart, wife of John Fleming and Alexander Douglas, was the eldest daughter of Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, by his 2nd wife, Elizabeth Hamilton. He does not believe that Matthew Stewart had any children by his 1st marriage to Margaret Lyle.
Elizabeth Hamilton and the 2nd Earl of Lennox were married in the spring of 1495, presumably immediately after the banns for their marriage were posted on 30 March. IF they were blessed with immediate conception, the resulting child was born December 1495/January 1496. IF that resulting child was the 2nd Earl's eldest daughter Margaret (as MacEwen firmly believes), not his elder son John, the 3rd Earl of Lennox, then Margaret had just turned 13 when Lord Fleming showed up at court in March 1509 claiming her as his bride. Otherwise, she was even younger than that, if Elizabeth Hamilton was her mother.
There's also an implication within the court document of 13 Feb. 1508/9 regarding the timing of her ravishment. It states that Lord Fleming was "often called" to bring John Fleming of Boghall in to answer for his action. The ravishment had not just happened that February, but had occurred earlier. So Margaret was not even 13 when ravished (presumably at some point in 1508), but no more than 12.
MacEwen needs to provide some reasoning to reconcile the chronological difficulties here in order for me to share his "firm belief".
> As for myself, I believe you need additional evidence before you conclude that Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, had a second daughter named Margaret, who married Hugh Campbell. Mr. MacEwen indicates you might find helpful information on Hugh Campbell in the book, Clan Campbell, an 8 volume set published in 1914.
> If Hugh Campbell's wife was called Margaret in one record and Elizabeth elsewhere, it would not be the first time a contemporary record made an error regarding a wife's given name.
I would now need to see a contemporary record that refers instead to his wife as 'Elizabeth', in order for me to believe that could ever have been the first name of Sir Hugh's Stewart of Lennox wife.
> Good luck in your sleuthing.
pj.evans
May 6, 2014, 3:50:34 PM5/6/14
to
On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 11:41:58 AM UTC-7, Brad Verity wrote:
> On Monday, May 5, 2014 3:42:16 PM UTC-7, al...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
{snipped]
> On Monday, May 5, 2014 3:42:16 PM UTC-7, al...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>
> > As for myself, I believe you need additional evidence before you conclude that Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, had a second daughter named Margaret, who married Hugh Campbell. Mr. MacEwen indicates you might find helpful information on Hugh Campbell in the book, Clan Campbell, an 8 volume set published in 1914.
>
>
>
> I appreciate you and Mr. MacEwen pointing me to this reference. I can already guarantee that no library here in Vancouver is likely to carry this 8-volume series. And, if published in 1914, I'm assuming it's not available online? Do you or Mr. MacEewn know which particular volume Sir Hugh Campbell of Loudoun is covered in? I will be at the Library of Congress in July and will try to track this work down then.
>
It's apparently available as a PDF on CD:
> > As for myself, I believe you need additional evidence before you conclude that Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, had a second daughter named Margaret, who married Hugh Campbell. Mr. MacEwen indicates you might find helpful information on Hugh Campbell in the book, Clan Campbell, an 8 volume set published in 1914.
>
>
>
> I appreciate you and Mr. MacEwen pointing me to this reference. I can already guarantee that no library here in Vancouver is likely to carry this 8-volume series. And, if published in 1914, I'm assuming it's not available online? Do you or Mr. MacEewn know which particular volume Sir Hugh Campbell of Loudoun is covered in? I will be at the Library of Congress in July and will try to track this work down then.
>
http://www.amazon.com/The-Clan-Campbell-8-Volumes/dp/B009NADIFC
jhigg...@yahoo.com
May 6, 2014, 4:22:04 PM5/6/14
to
https://familysearch.org/eng/library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=titledetails&titleno=129769
Good luck in searching through all 8 volumes for the relevant information. :-)
jhigg...@yahoo.com
May 6, 2014, 5:03:29 PM5/6/14
to
On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 11:41:58 AM UTC-7, Brad Verity wrote:
> On Monday, May 5, 2014 3:42:16 PM UTC-7, al...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> > Some sources give another daughter Catherine:
>
> > http://books.google.com/books?id=xOY_AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA260&lpg=PA260&dq=John+colquhoun+Glens+catherine+stewart&source=bl&ots=NizsQPAiAc&sig=JTg7zypPf9togGvh6lml4KB9sxM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8BJoU-nFJsaisASw7YHgCQ&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=John%20colquhoun%20Glens%20catherine%20stewart&f=false
>
>
>
> Dear Doug,
>
>
>
> Scots Peerage has the wife of Sir John Colquhoun of Luss as Elizabeth Stewart, daughter of the 1st Earl of Lennox, married about 1480:
>
> https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun05pauluoft#page/350/mode/2up
>
>
>
> The marriage and her first name Elizabeth are verified in a settlement made on 6 April 1498, transcribed in the Register of the Great Seal of Scotland
>
> "10 JAC. IV. Apud Dunbertane, 6 Apr. REX confirmavit JOHANNI COLQUHOUN de Luss, et ELIZABETH STEWART ejus sponse,--10 lib. terrarum de Garthsquyb et molendina earundem, in comitatu de Levenax, vic. Dunbertane;--quas idem Joh. personaliter resignavit:--TENEND. dictis Joh. et Eliz. et eorum alteri diutius viventi in conjuncta infeodatione et heredibus masculis inter ipsos legitime procreatis, quibus deficientibus, legitimis et propinquioribus heredibus dicti Joh. quibuscunque":
>
> https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi02scot#page/510/mode/2up
>
>
>
> If this was a marriage settlement - and it certainly looks like one - it was 18 years after the estimated date SP gave for the marriage, and this Elizabeth could certainly, chronologically, have been the daughter of the 2nd Earl of Lennox and his first wife Margaret Lyle.
>
> Thanks & Cheers, ----Brad
>
> > Some sources give another daughter Catherine:
>
> > http://books.google.com/books?id=xOY_AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA260&lpg=PA260&dq=John+colquhoun+Glens+catherine+stewart&source=bl&ots=NizsQPAiAc&sig=JTg7zypPf9togGvh6lml4KB9sxM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8BJoU-nFJsaisASw7YHgCQ&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=John%20colquhoun%20Glens%20catherine%20stewart&f=false
>
>
>
> Dear Doug,
>
>
>
> Scots Peerage has the wife of Sir John Colquhoun of Luss as Elizabeth Stewart, daughter of the 1st Earl of Lennox, married about 1480:
>
> https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun05pauluoft#page/350/mode/2up
>
>
>
> The marriage and her first name Elizabeth are verified in a settlement made on 6 April 1498, transcribed in the Register of the Great Seal of Scotland
>
> "10 JAC. IV. Apud Dunbertane, 6 Apr. REX confirmavit JOHANNI COLQUHOUN de Luss, et ELIZABETH STEWART ejus sponse,--10 lib. terrarum de Garthsquyb et molendina earundem, in comitatu de Levenax, vic. Dunbertane;--quas idem Joh. personaliter resignavit:--TENEND. dictis Joh. et Eliz. et eorum alteri diutius viventi in conjuncta infeodatione et heredibus masculis inter ipsos legitime procreatis, quibus deficientibus, legitimis et propinquioribus heredibus dicti Joh. quibuscunque":
>
> https://archive.org/stream/registrummagnisi02scot#page/510/mode/2up
>
>
>
> If this was a marriage settlement - and it certainly looks like one - it was 18 years after the estimated date SP gave for the marriage, and this Elizabeth could certainly, chronologically, have been the daughter of the 2nd Earl of Lennox and his first wife Margaret Lyle.
>
The link provided by Doug Smith above is to vol. 2 of Sir William Fraser's two volume work "The Chiefs of Colquhoun". According to this work, there were two John Colquhouns who married daughters of a Stewart Earl of Lennox. Volume 1 of the work is available here:
https://archive.org/details/chiefsofcolquhv100fras
Sir John Colquhoun of Luss [not Glens] is covered in vol. 1 pp. 71ff, where he is said to have married Elizabeth, daughter of John Stewart, 1st Earl of Lennox - as reported in SP and noted by Brad above. Fraser makes several references to this Sir John's brother-in-law Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox. So this parentage for Elizabeth seems be accurate.
The reference in vol. 2 (p. 260) that Doug provided is to Sir John's distant cousin John Colquhoun of Glens, who is said to have married "Lady Katherine Stewart, daughter of Mathew, Earl of Lennox". Fraser provides no sources for this (or anything else in this particular pedigree), but that's what he says - take it for what it's worth.
The latter couple, John Colquhoun of Glens and Katherine Stewart are identified as ancestors of Prince Charles in Paget's work on that subject, but there appears to be some question about that particular descent. I'm trying to put the pieces together on that matter and will hopefully address it in a separate post.
al...@mindspring.com
May 6, 2014, 6:10:22 PM5/6/14
to
Doug Smith
jhigg...@yahoo.com
May 6, 2014, 6:48:47 PM5/6/14
to
Douglas' Baronage has now been scanned by the FHL and can be read online or downloaded here:
https://familysearch.org/eng/library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=titledetails&titleno=2126679
Douglas Richardson
May 7, 2014, 2:13:19 AM5/7/14
to
My comments are interspersed below. My earlier comments are marked DR. Brad's reply to me are marked BV.
On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 12:41:58 PM UTC-6, Brad Verity wrote:
> On Monday, May 5, 2014 10:46:31 PM UTC-7, Douglas Richardson wrote:
DR: > > As far as I know, Margaret Stewart was merely contracted in 1507 to <marry William Cunnningham, so no divorce would be necessary for this paring. <Being dispensed at aged 12 for an earl's eldest daughter to marry would be <normal procedure in this time period.
<BV: It wasn't unusual, agreed. But it also wasn't unusual for a marriage <dispensation to be granted when the eldest daughter was older - 18, 19, age 20 <even - if the daughter was not the heiress of her parents, and Margaret <Stewart was not the heiress of her father the 2nd Earl of Lennox - she had two <brothers in 1507.
Being an heiress had nothing to do when parents contracted their daughters in marriage. Children could be contracted as early as age 7 (I've actually seen earlier but it is very rare). 12-14 years of age for actual marriage was common.
DR: > As per Scots Peerage, Margaret Stewart subsequently married (1st) <before <12 March 1508/9 (date of grant) (by dispensation dated Dec. 1509) (as <his 2nd <wife) John Fleming, 2nd Lord Fleming. They had one daughter, <Margaret. As <you have noted, this couple were divorced in 1515.
BV: > SP provides the 12 March 1508/9 date for Margaret Stewart and 2nd Lord <Fleming, but it definitely does not provide the Dec 1509 date of the <dispensation, nor mention this dispensation at all. I wish it did - I'd love <to know what source to find it in!
I believe I got the date of the 1509 dispensation from John Scherer's NEHGR article. I have his e-mail address if you'd like it. He should be able to supply you the citation for the dispensation.
DR: > > Regarding the identity of Margaret Stewart's rapist, Pitcairn, Criminal <Trials in Scotland 1(1) (1833): 60-61, indicates that on 13 Feb. 1508/9, John, <Lord Fleming, was fined 500 marks for not "compearing," he having acted as <surety or bail for trial to "enter" John Fleming, son of the Laird of Baghall, <to "underly the law for art and part" of the rape of Margaret Stewart, <daughter of Matthew, Earl of Lennox.
DR: < > This record makes it clear that John, Lord Fleming (husband of the said <Margaret Stewart) and John Fleming, son of the Laird of Baghall, were two <different individuals. See the following weblink for this item:
<
< > http://books.google.com/books?id=1GwNAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA60
BV: > Thank you very much, Douglas - this is a very useful piece of <information!
DR: > However, given that this record dated Feb. 1508/9 states that John <Fleming of Baghall merely took "part" in the rape of Margaret Stewart, it <seems likely to me that it was Lord Fleming who abducted, raped, and married <Margaret Stewart and that his kinsman, John Fleming, of Baghall merely <assisted in the abduction. This seems to be the likely train of events, given <that the king acknowledged that Lord Fleming and Margaret Stewart were married <the very next month, March 1508/9.
BV: < I'm not having the same reading of the document, Douglas. It seems to me <that John Fleming of Boghall was the one who was responsible for the <ravishment of Margaret Stewart. Lord Fleming was often called upon by the <court to bring in this John Fleming of Boghall to answer for this. Fleming of <Boghall didn't appear to answer for his crime, so Lord Fleming was fined 500 <marks for not bringing him in, and John Fleming of Boghall was officially <pronounced a Rebel by king and court.
The term used in the above mentioned legal proceeding is rape. I spoke with Andrew MacEwen again today. He pointed out to me that the archaic meaning of rape was to "seize and take away by force."
As such, if I read the above mentioned criminal proceeding correctly, it does not mean that Margaret Stewart was raped by John Fleming, of Baghall. Rather it apparently means that John Fleming of Baghall took "part" [the exact words] in the abduction of Margaret Stewart.
I asked Andrew MacEwen if he had any understanding as to why Margaret Stewart would have been abducted and married by John, Lord Fleming. He said as in so many cases, we simply don't know what the motivations were for the actions that were taken. He simply said: "It was a turbulent time."
BV: What happens next is interesting. Instead of bringing John Fleming of <Boghall into court, Lord Fleming comes to court a month later, married to <Margaret Stewart, and with a marriage settlement that guaranteed the lady a <good portion of his lands, as well as legitimizing any issue she had, even if <born before a proper papal dispensation could be obtained.
This can only be understood if John Fleming, of Boghall, had abducted (not raped - modern meaning) Margaret Stewart, so that his kinsman, Lord Fleming, could marry her. Carrying off women to marry them happened on occasion in medieval times. Men were usually accompanied by their friends and kinsfolk in abducting the woman in question.
BV: < What seems to me the scenario behind all of this: Margaret Stewart, for <whatever reason, was not too keen on William Cunningham, the kinsman chosen by <her father to be her husband. She caught the eye of John Stewart of Boghall, a <young man in the household of his kinsman Lord Fleming. Hopefully for <Margaret's sake, the attraction was mutual and the "ravishment" of the young <lady was not the violent act we associate today with the term 'rape'. Whatever <the case, Margaret's relationship with John Fleming of Boghall was illicit and <sinful - she was betrothed to William Cunningham in the eyes of God and <society. Nor was John Fleming of Boghall at all suitable as a husband for an <earl's daughter. Once the 'ravishment' was discovered, all hell undoubtably <broke loose.
This doesn't make any sense at all. In this case, I believe Andrew MacEwen is correct to interpret the word "rape" as meaning abduction. Then it makes perfect sense.
BV: > Margaret's father the Earl of Lennox and Cunningham's father the Earl of >Glencairn must've been furious.
You don't know this. Possibly Margaret Stewart was carried off by Lord Fleming with the approval of her father, in order to void the marriage contract she had with William Cunningham. But even that is idle speculation. Andrew MacEwen refused to speculate as to the motives of the parties involved. He is wise.
BV: < This would help explain why the Lord Fleming/Margaret Stewart marriage <didn't last. This much older husband was never a man Margaret loved.
This sounds like the stuff in romance novels, not sound medieval history. I recommend you stick to the facts and you'll be on surer ground.
DR: > > Andrew MacEwen, the resident expert in all things Scottish, is of the <firm opinion that Margaret Stewart, wife of John Fleming and Alexander <Douglas, was the eldest daughter of Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, by <his 2nd wife, Elizabeth Hamilton. He does not believe that Matthew Stewart <had any children by his 1st marriage to Margaret Lyle.
>
BV: > What are his reasons for this "firm belief"?
As you have already noted, on their divorce in or about 1494, Matthew Stewart released property to Margaret Lyle "and her assigns." No mention is made in that record of any children. There were subsequent dealings between Matthew Stewart and Margaret Lyle's father regarding the same property, and again no mention is made of any children. Matthew Stewart eventually got the property back from Margaret Lyle's father.
That is why Andrew MacEwen rejects your theory that Margaret Lyle was the mother of Matthew Stewart's eldest daughter, Margaret. He doesn't believe Margaret Lyle had any issue by her marriage to Matthew Stewart.
BV:> Elizabeth Hamilton and the 2nd Earl of Lennox were married in the spring <of 1495, presumably immediately after the banns for their marriage were posted <on 30 March. IF they were blessed with immediate conception, the resulting <child was born December 1495/January 1496. IF that resulting child was the 2nd <Earl's eldest daughter Margaret (as MacEwen firmly believes), not his elder <son John, the 3rd Earl of Lennox, then Margaret had just turned 13 when Lord <Fleming showed up at court in March 1509 claiming her as his bride. Otherwise, <she was even younger than that, if Elizabeth Hamilton was her mother.
You really have a problem with a 13 year old bride? Seriously?
BV: > There's also an implication within the court document of 13 Feb. 1508/9 <regarding the timing of her ravishment. It states that Lord Fleming was "often <called" to bring John Fleming of Boghall in to answer for his action. The <ravishment had not just happened that February, but had occurred earlier. So <Margaret was not even 13 when ravished (presumably at some point in 1508), but <no more than 12.
Again Andrew MacEwen's interpretation prevails that Margaret Stewart was abducted (not raped) by John Fleming, of Baghall.
> MacEwen needs to provide some reasoning to reconcile the chronological difficulties here in order for me to share his "firm belief".
There are no chronological difficulties. For what it is worth, I concur with Mr. MacEwen's conclusions. I've never met anyone more knowledgeable than him about medieval matters, especially Scottish medieval matters. He is a veritable fountain of knowledge.
DR: > > As for myself, I believe you need additional evidence before you <conclude that Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, had a second daughter named <Margaret, who married Hugh Campbell.
Andrew MacEwen believes that Margaret Stewart, wife of John, Lord Fleming, and Alexander Douglas, might possibly be the Margaret Stewart who married Hugh Campbell, of Loudon. However, if Alexander Douglas was living in 1542, this would necessarily mean that Margaret would have to have divorced Alexander Douglas in order to marry Hugh Campbell by 1533. As Andrew MacEwen has pointed out to me previously, most of the divorce records for the medieval period of Scotland have not survived.
He suggested that the Alexander Douglas, of Mains, who acted as factor for the Lennox earldom in 1542 was her son, not her husband. But this seems to be pushing the chronology to me. My guess is that the man in 1542 was Margaret Stewart's 2nd husband as I suggested yesterday. Whether or not they were still married in 1542, I have no idea.
DR: Mr. MacEwen indicates you might find helpful information on Hugh Campbell <in the book, Clan Campbell, an 8 volume set published in 1914.
Mr. MacEwen says the first Campbell volume was published in 1914. The 8 volume series was actually published over several years. He says the volumes are quite helpful.
One last note: I consulted several early Scottish secondary sources today and they all state that Hugh Campbell married Elizabeth Stewart, daughter of Matthew Stewart, Earl of Lennox. If so, I suppose it is possible that Hugh Campbell married both an Elizabeth Stewart and a Margaret Stewart. This is another option which should be considered.
Mr. MacEwen pointed out that errors as to given names often start in one early source, and then are copied over and over again. It makes finding the truth that much more difficult. He is aware that if an early source called Hugh Campbell's wife Elizabeth Stewart in error, such a mistake might be continued by many later writers. We saw this problem with the Lumley-Plantagenet matter earlier this year.
On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 12:41:58 PM UTC-6, Brad Verity wrote:
> On Monday, May 5, 2014 10:46:31 PM UTC-7, Douglas Richardson wrote:
<BV: It wasn't unusual, agreed. But it also wasn't unusual for a marriage <dispensation to be granted when the eldest daughter was older - 18, 19, age 20 <even - if the daughter was not the heiress of her parents, and Margaret <Stewart was not the heiress of her father the 2nd Earl of Lennox - she had two <brothers in 1507.
Being an heiress had nothing to do when parents contracted their daughters in marriage. Children could be contracted as early as age 7 (I've actually seen earlier but it is very rare). 12-14 years of age for actual marriage was common.
DR: > As per Scots Peerage, Margaret Stewart subsequently married (1st) <before <12 March 1508/9 (date of grant) (by dispensation dated Dec. 1509) (as <his 2nd <wife) John Fleming, 2nd Lord Fleming. They had one daughter, <Margaret. As <you have noted, this couple were divorced in 1515.
BV: > SP provides the 12 March 1508/9 date for Margaret Stewart and 2nd Lord <Fleming, but it definitely does not provide the Dec 1509 date of the <dispensation, nor mention this dispensation at all. I wish it did - I'd love <to know what source to find it in!
I believe I got the date of the 1509 dispensation from John Scherer's NEHGR article. I have his e-mail address if you'd like it. He should be able to supply you the citation for the dispensation.
DR: > > Regarding the identity of Margaret Stewart's rapist, Pitcairn, Criminal <Trials in Scotland 1(1) (1833): 60-61, indicates that on 13 Feb. 1508/9, John, <Lord Fleming, was fined 500 marks for not "compearing," he having acted as <surety or bail for trial to "enter" John Fleming, son of the Laird of Baghall, <to "underly the law for art and part" of the rape of Margaret Stewart, <daughter of Matthew, Earl of Lennox.
DR: < > This record makes it clear that John, Lord Fleming (husband of the said <Margaret Stewart) and John Fleming, son of the Laird of Baghall, were two <different individuals. See the following weblink for this item:
<
< > http://books.google.com/books?id=1GwNAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA60
BV: > Thank you very much, Douglas - this is a very useful piece of <information!
DR: > However, given that this record dated Feb. 1508/9 states that John <Fleming of Baghall merely took "part" in the rape of Margaret Stewart, it <seems likely to me that it was Lord Fleming who abducted, raped, and married <Margaret Stewart and that his kinsman, John Fleming, of Baghall merely <assisted in the abduction. This seems to be the likely train of events, given <that the king acknowledged that Lord Fleming and Margaret Stewart were married <the very next month, March 1508/9.
BV: < I'm not having the same reading of the document, Douglas. It seems to me <that John Fleming of Boghall was the one who was responsible for the <ravishment of Margaret Stewart. Lord Fleming was often called upon by the <court to bring in this John Fleming of Boghall to answer for this. Fleming of <Boghall didn't appear to answer for his crime, so Lord Fleming was fined 500 <marks for not bringing him in, and John Fleming of Boghall was officially <pronounced a Rebel by king and court.
The term used in the above mentioned legal proceeding is rape. I spoke with Andrew MacEwen again today. He pointed out to me that the archaic meaning of rape was to "seize and take away by force."
As such, if I read the above mentioned criminal proceeding correctly, it does not mean that Margaret Stewart was raped by John Fleming, of Baghall. Rather it apparently means that John Fleming of Baghall took "part" [the exact words] in the abduction of Margaret Stewart.
I asked Andrew MacEwen if he had any understanding as to why Margaret Stewart would have been abducted and married by John, Lord Fleming. He said as in so many cases, we simply don't know what the motivations were for the actions that were taken. He simply said: "It was a turbulent time."
BV: What happens next is interesting. Instead of bringing John Fleming of <Boghall into court, Lord Fleming comes to court a month later, married to <Margaret Stewart, and with a marriage settlement that guaranteed the lady a <good portion of his lands, as well as legitimizing any issue she had, even if <born before a proper papal dispensation could be obtained.
This can only be understood if John Fleming, of Boghall, had abducted (not raped - modern meaning) Margaret Stewart, so that his kinsman, Lord Fleming, could marry her. Carrying off women to marry them happened on occasion in medieval times. Men were usually accompanied by their friends and kinsfolk in abducting the woman in question.
BV: < What seems to me the scenario behind all of this: Margaret Stewart, for <whatever reason, was not too keen on William Cunningham, the kinsman chosen by <her father to be her husband. She caught the eye of John Stewart of Boghall, a <young man in the household of his kinsman Lord Fleming. Hopefully for <Margaret's sake, the attraction was mutual and the "ravishment" of the young <lady was not the violent act we associate today with the term 'rape'. Whatever <the case, Margaret's relationship with John Fleming of Boghall was illicit and <sinful - she was betrothed to William Cunningham in the eyes of God and <society. Nor was John Fleming of Boghall at all suitable as a husband for an <earl's daughter. Once the 'ravishment' was discovered, all hell undoubtably <broke loose.
This doesn't make any sense at all. In this case, I believe Andrew MacEwen is correct to interpret the word "rape" as meaning abduction. Then it makes perfect sense.
BV: > Margaret's father the Earl of Lennox and Cunningham's father the Earl of >Glencairn must've been furious.
You don't know this. Possibly Margaret Stewart was carried off by Lord Fleming with the approval of her father, in order to void the marriage contract she had with William Cunningham. But even that is idle speculation. Andrew MacEwen refused to speculate as to the motives of the parties involved. He is wise.
BV: < This would help explain why the Lord Fleming/Margaret Stewart marriage <didn't last. This much older husband was never a man Margaret loved.
This sounds like the stuff in romance novels, not sound medieval history. I recommend you stick to the facts and you'll be on surer ground.
DR: > > Andrew MacEwen, the resident expert in all things Scottish, is of the <firm opinion that Margaret Stewart, wife of John Fleming and Alexander <Douglas, was the eldest daughter of Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, by <his 2nd wife, Elizabeth Hamilton. He does not believe that Matthew Stewart <had any children by his 1st marriage to Margaret Lyle.
>
BV: > What are his reasons for this "firm belief"?
As you have already noted, on their divorce in or about 1494, Matthew Stewart released property to Margaret Lyle "and her assigns." No mention is made in that record of any children. There were subsequent dealings between Matthew Stewart and Margaret Lyle's father regarding the same property, and again no mention is made of any children. Matthew Stewart eventually got the property back from Margaret Lyle's father.
That is why Andrew MacEwen rejects your theory that Margaret Lyle was the mother of Matthew Stewart's eldest daughter, Margaret. He doesn't believe Margaret Lyle had any issue by her marriage to Matthew Stewart.
BV:> Elizabeth Hamilton and the 2nd Earl of Lennox were married in the spring <of 1495, presumably immediately after the banns for their marriage were posted <on 30 March. IF they were blessed with immediate conception, the resulting <child was born December 1495/January 1496. IF that resulting child was the 2nd <Earl's eldest daughter Margaret (as MacEwen firmly believes), not his elder <son John, the 3rd Earl of Lennox, then Margaret had just turned 13 when Lord <Fleming showed up at court in March 1509 claiming her as his bride. Otherwise, <she was even younger than that, if Elizabeth Hamilton was her mother.
You really have a problem with a 13 year old bride? Seriously?
BV: > There's also an implication within the court document of 13 Feb. 1508/9 <regarding the timing of her ravishment. It states that Lord Fleming was "often <called" to bring John Fleming of Boghall in to answer for his action. The <ravishment had not just happened that February, but had occurred earlier. So <Margaret was not even 13 when ravished (presumably at some point in 1508), but <no more than 12.
Again Andrew MacEwen's interpretation prevails that Margaret Stewart was abducted (not raped) by John Fleming, of Baghall.
> MacEwen needs to provide some reasoning to reconcile the chronological difficulties here in order for me to share his "firm belief".
DR: > > As for myself, I believe you need additional evidence before you <conclude that Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, had a second daughter named <Margaret, who married Hugh Campbell.
Andrew MacEwen believes that Margaret Stewart, wife of John, Lord Fleming, and Alexander Douglas, might possibly be the Margaret Stewart who married Hugh Campbell, of Loudon. However, if Alexander Douglas was living in 1542, this would necessarily mean that Margaret would have to have divorced Alexander Douglas in order to marry Hugh Campbell by 1533. As Andrew MacEwen has pointed out to me previously, most of the divorce records for the medieval period of Scotland have not survived.
He suggested that the Alexander Douglas, of Mains, who acted as factor for the Lennox earldom in 1542 was her son, not her husband. But this seems to be pushing the chronology to me. My guess is that the man in 1542 was Margaret Stewart's 2nd husband as I suggested yesterday. Whether or not they were still married in 1542, I have no idea.
DR: Mr. MacEwen indicates you might find helpful information on Hugh Campbell <in the book, Clan Campbell, an 8 volume set published in 1914.
Mr. MacEwen says the first Campbell volume was published in 1914. The 8 volume series was actually published over several years. He says the volumes are quite helpful.
One last note: I consulted several early Scottish secondary sources today and they all state that Hugh Campbell married Elizabeth Stewart, daughter of Matthew Stewart, Earl of Lennox. If so, I suppose it is possible that Hugh Campbell married both an Elizabeth Stewart and a Margaret Stewart. This is another option which should be considered.
Mr. MacEwen pointed out that errors as to given names often start in one early source, and then are copied over and over again. It makes finding the truth that much more difficult. He is aware that if an early source called Hugh Campbell's wife Elizabeth Stewart in error, such a mistake might be continued by many later writers. We saw this problem with the Lumley-Plantagenet matter earlier this year.
Brad Verity
May 7, 2014, 11:35:53 AM5/7/14
to
On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 11:13:19 PM UTC-7, Douglas Richardson wrote:
> I believe I got the date of the 1509 dispensation from John Scherer's NEHGR article. I have his e-mail address if you'd like it. He should be able to supply you the citation for the dispensation.
Thanks Douglas, but I'm going to pass on the offer. I imagine the dispensation will be similar to the one for Margaret and Cunningham that William Fraser transcribed - four pages of Latin. I won't be able to understand it, and it's too long to ask someone to translate.
> I believe I got the date of the 1509 dispensation from John Scherer's NEHGR article. I have his e-mail address if you'd like it. He should be able to supply you the citation for the dispensation.
> I asked Andrew MacEwen if he had any understanding as to why Margaret Stewart would have been abducted and married by John, Lord Fleming. He said as in so many cases, we simply don't know what the motivations were for the actions that were taken. He simply said: "It was a turbulent time."
> As you have already noted, on their divorce in or about 1494, Matthew Stewart released property to Margaret Lyle "and her assigns." No mention is made in that record of any children. There were subsequent dealings between Matthew Stewart and Margaret Lyle's father regarding the same property, and again no mention is made of any children. Matthew Stewart eventually got the property back from Margaret Lyle's father.
Specific children aren't mentioned, but Lyle does follow every mention he makes (save for that first line above) of Matthew Earl of Lennox with the phrase "his ayeris or assignais", throughout the document.
> You really have a problem with a 13 year old bride? Seriously?
> Andrew MacEwen believes that Margaret Stewart, wife of John, Lord Fleming, and Alexander Douglas, might possibly be the Margaret Stewart who married Hugh Campbell, of Loudon. However, if Alexander Douglas was living in 1542, this would necessarily mean that Margaret would have to have divorced Alexander Douglas in order to marry Hugh Campbell by 1533. As Andrew MacEwen has pointed out to me previously, most of the divorce records for the medieval period of Scotland have not survived.
> Mr. MacEwen says the first Campbell volume was published in 1914. The 8 volume series was actually published over several years. He says the volumes are quite helpful.
> One last note: I consulted several early Scottish secondary sources today and they all state that Hugh Campbell married Elizabeth Stewart, daughter of Matthew Stewart, Earl of Lennox. If so, I suppose it is possible that Hugh Campbell married both an Elizabeth Stewart and a Margaret Stewart. This is another option which should be considered.
Thanks & Cheers, -----Brad
Brad Verity
May 11, 2014, 1:59:43 PM5/11/14
to
On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 11:13:19 PM UTC-7, Douglas Richardson wrote:
> I recommend you stick to the facts and you'll be on surer ground.
This is good advice and I will try and follow it.
> I recommend you stick to the facts and you'll be on surer ground.
> As you have already noted, on their divorce in or about 1494, Matthew Stewart released property to Margaret Lyle "and her assigns." No mention is made in that record of any children. There were subsequent dealings between Matthew Stewart and Margaret Lyle's father regarding the same property, and again no mention is made of any children. Matthew Stewart eventually got the property back from Margaret Lyle's father.
http://rlhf.info/a-weird-history-the-lost-palace-of-inchinnan/
Here's the charter again, in Latin:
"6 JAC. IV. Apud civitatem Glasguen., 16 Maii. REX confirmavit cartam Mathei Stewart, filii et apparentis heredis Johannis Stewart comitis de Levenax et dom. Dernley,--[qua--pro ejus benemeritis--concessit Domicelle MARGARETE LILE, filie Roberti dom. L.,--[snip of lands]--TENEND. dicte Marg., et assignatis ejus, viz., dicto Rob. dom. L. et heredibus ejusdem quibuscunque, de rege tanquam senescallo Scotie:--[snip of witnesses to the April charter]--Apud Glasgw, 15 Apr. 1494]:--[snip of witnesses to the king's confirmation of the charter]"
Here's Matthew Tompkins's translation of it in English:
"City of Glasgow, 16 May. The king confirmed the charter of Matthew Stewart, son and heir apparent of John Stewart, earl of Lennox and lord Darnley, -- [which -- for her merits -- he granted to the damsel Margaret Lyle, daughter of Robert lord Lyle, -- [snip of lands], -- to hold to the said Margaret and her assigns, namely to Robert lord L[yle] and his heirs whosoever, of the king as steward of Scotland".
The facts are: Lennox granted Inchinnan to Margaret Lyle and her "assigns". 'Assign' is what today is called 'assignee' (law: 1. a person to whom a right or liability is legally transferred; 2. a person appointed to act for another). Margaret's assignee was her father Robert Lord Lyle, and his heirs whatsoever.
We know from a different document of January 1497 that Lord Lyle then, three years later, agreed to sell Inchinnan back to Lennox and his heirs.
I have consulted off list an individual who has far more expertise in medieval legal documents than I do. He confirmed my suspicion that there is nothing in the above sequence of events regarding Inchinnan which prevents Lennox and Margaret Lyle from having had a daughter together.
He did point out that the usual phrase in such transactions was his/her "heirs and assigns". The specific designation of Margaret's assign (her father Lord Lyle and his heirs whatsoever) within the April 1494 is atypical.
As we know that Lord Lyle agreed, in January 1497, to sell back Inchinnan to Lennox and his heirs, perhaps the specific designation of Lord Lyle as assign to it in the April 1494 grant helped to guarantee the smooth re-sale of it?
Lennox didn't receive papal dispensation for his marriage to Elizabeth Hamilton until September 1495, a year and a half after the April 1494 grant of Inchinnan to Margaret Lyle and her father. By January 1497, a son and heir (John, the future 3rd Earl of Lennox) may well have been born. Perhaps it was agreed at the time of the original grant of Inchinnan that Lennox would be allowed to buy it back if he were to be blessed with a legal son and heir?
But that is speculation, and I will try and stick to just the facts.
> That is why Andrew MacEwen rejects your theory that Margaret Lyle was the mother of Matthew Stewart's eldest daughter, Margaret. He doesn't believe Margaret Lyle had any issue by her marriage to Matthew Stewart.
So the argument boils down to this.
Mr. MacEwen/Douglas: Margaret Stewart was not mentioned in the April 1494 grant of Inchinnan to Margaret Lyle and her father Lord Lyle, because Margaret Stewart was not yet born.
Me: Margaret Stewart was born. She simply was not mentioned in the grant of Inchinnan.
So, if the sole reason for making Margaret Stewart the daughter of Lennox and his second wife Elizabeth Hamilton, was her lack of mention in Lennox's grant of Inchinnan to his first wife Margaret Lyle, that roadblock is now removed.
Margaret Stewart - dispensed to marry William Cunningham of Glencairn in December 1507, abducted and married by John, 2nd Lord Fleming, before February 1509, and apparently having had a consenting liaison with Lord Fleming's kinsman James Lindsay at some point beforehand - does not now have to have been born after Lennox's marriage to Elizabeth Hamilton in April 1495. She now no longer has to have been age 12 or younger when all of this occurred. She could have been born at any point after 1480, when Lennox and his wife Margaret Lyle were granted lands by his father, and so could have been as old as age 28 when abducted.
Since the circumstances surrounding Margaret Stewart's marriage to Lord Fleming do point to her having been a lady who was at least of some sexual maturity, chronology favours her having been the daughter of Lennox by Margaret Lyle.
It's good to remember that both William Fraser in his 1874 'Lennox Book', and Scots Peerage in 1908, do not say that Margaret Stewart was the daughter of Elizabeth Hamilton - neither work specifies which of Lennox's two wives was her mother. It is not until Complete Peerage in 1926 that Elizabeth Hamilton was specifically called Margaret's mother. No source is cited for that parentage, and as Douglas can readily agree, CP is not without error.
I'm going to side with chronology and make Margaret Stewart, wife of Lord Fleming, the daughter of Matthew, 2nd Earl of Lennox and his first wife Margaret Lyle, in my database. Hopefully someday evidence will surface that conclusively indicates which of Lennox's two wives was Margaret's mother.
Cheers, -----Brad
jhigg...@yahoo.com
May 11, 2014, 6:21:03 PM5/11/14
to
On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 11:13:19 PM UTC-7, Douglas Richardson wrote:
> My comments are interspersed below. My earlier comments are marked DR. Brad's reply to me are marked BV.
>
>
> My comments are interspersed below. My earlier comments are marked DR. Brad's reply to me are marked BV.
>
>
> DR: > > As for myself, I believe you need additional evidence before you <conclude that Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox, had a second daughter named <Margaret, who married Hugh Campbell.
>
>
>
> Andrew MacEwen believes that Margaret Stewart, wife of John, Lord Fleming, and Alexander Douglas, might possibly be the Margaret Stewart who married Hugh Campbell, of Loudon. However, if Alexander Douglas was living in 1542, this would necessarily mean that Margaret would have to have divorced Alexander Douglas in order to marry Hugh Campbell by 1533. As Andrew MacEwen has pointed out to me previously, most of the divorce records for the medieval period of Scotland have not survived.
>
>
>
> He suggested that the Alexander Douglas, of Mains, who acted as factor for the Lennox earldom in 1542 was her son, not her husband. But this seems to be pushing the chronology to me. My guess is that the man in 1542 was Margaret Stewart's 2nd husband as I suggested yesterday. Whether or not they were still married in 1542, I have no idea.
>
>
>
> DR: Mr. MacEwen indicates you might find helpful information on Hugh Campbell <in the book, Clan Campbell, an 8 volume set published in 1914.
>
>
>
> Mr. MacEwen says the first Campbell volume was published in 1914. The 8 volume series was actually published over several years. He says the volumes are quite helpful.
>
>
>
> One last note: I consulted several early Scottish secondary sources today and they all state that Hugh Campbell married Elizabeth Stewart, daughter of Matthew Stewart, Earl of Lennox. If so, I suppose it is possible that Hugh Campbell married both an Elizabeth Stewart and a Margaret Stewart. This is another option which should be considered.
>
>
>
> Mr. MacEwen pointed out that errors as to given names often start in one early source, and then are copied over and over again. It makes finding the truth that much more difficult. He is aware that if an early source called Hugh Campbell's wife Elizabeth Stewart in error, such a mistake might be continued by many later writers. We saw this problem with the Lumley-Plantagenet matter earlier this year.
>
>
>
> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
The 8-volume "Clan Campbell" series does have quite a number of references to Sir Hugh Campbell of Loudoun (distinguishing him carefully from his his father and his grandson, who were also Sir Hugh). Although it does not confirm or deny whether Sir Hugh had a wife who was a Stewart of Lennox, it does make it clear that Sir Hugh Campbell did have at least two wives, and thus it agrees with the pedigrees of the Campbell family - insofar as it goes.
>
>
>
> Andrew MacEwen believes that Margaret Stewart, wife of John, Lord Fleming, and Alexander Douglas, might possibly be the Margaret Stewart who married Hugh Campbell, of Loudon. However, if Alexander Douglas was living in 1542, this would necessarily mean that Margaret would have to have divorced Alexander Douglas in order to marry Hugh Campbell by 1533. As Andrew MacEwen has pointed out to me previously, most of the divorce records for the medieval period of Scotland have not survived.
>
>
>
> He suggested that the Alexander Douglas, of Mains, who acted as factor for the Lennox earldom in 1542 was her son, not her husband. But this seems to be pushing the chronology to me. My guess is that the man in 1542 was Margaret Stewart's 2nd husband as I suggested yesterday. Whether or not they were still married in 1542, I have no idea.
>
>
>
> DR: Mr. MacEwen indicates you might find helpful information on Hugh Campbell <in the book, Clan Campbell, an 8 volume set published in 1914.
>
>
>
> Mr. MacEwen says the first Campbell volume was published in 1914. The 8 volume series was actually published over several years. He says the volumes are quite helpful.
>
>
>
> One last note: I consulted several early Scottish secondary sources today and they all state that Hugh Campbell married Elizabeth Stewart, daughter of Matthew Stewart, Earl of Lennox. If so, I suppose it is possible that Hugh Campbell married both an Elizabeth Stewart and a Margaret Stewart. This is another option which should be considered.
>
>
>
> Mr. MacEwen pointed out that errors as to given names often start in one early source, and then are copied over and over again. It makes finding the truth that much more difficult. He is aware that if an early source called Hugh Campbell's wife Elizabeth Stewart in error, such a mistake might be continued by many later writers. We saw this problem with the Lumley-Plantagenet matter earlier this year.
>
>
>
> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Volumes 6 and 8 of the series contain quite a number of references to Sir Hugh Campbell of Loudoun, with the most pertinent ones being in vol. 6. There are a handful of references to his widow Agnes Drummond (later the wife of Hugh Montgomery, 3rd Earl of Eglinton) - but only as his widow. All the references to Sir Hugh while he was living make no reference to any wife - Stewart or Drummond. Thus, although there is no reference to a Stewart wife in this compilation, it is not possible to conclude that he did not have a Stewart wife.
One item in volume 6 (p. 14, dated 17 Feb. 1562/3) confirms information from pedigrees of the Drummond and Campbell families that makes it clear that Sir Hugh Campbell of Loudoun had at least one marriage prior to Agnes Drummond. The item references the 3 Drummond sisters Agnes, Margaret, and Isobel and their then current husbands Hugh Montgomery, Earl of Eglinton, Robert, Lord Elphinstone, and Sir Matthew Campbell of Loudoun - the last being the eldest son of Sir Hugh Campbell of Loudoun. Clearly Agnes Drummond must have been the stepmother of Sir Matthew Campbell, as Sir Matthew obviously would not have married his aunt. So Sir Matthew must have been the son of an earlier marriage - and the only earlier marriage that we know of is to the Stewart daughter of Lennox.
Brad has noted that the SP article on Lennox says the first wife was Elizabeth Stewart - citing Sir William Fraser's "The Lennox". OTOH the Loudoun article in the same volume of SP calls her Margaret, without citing any source. We also have the 1533 item in Registrum Magni Sigilli cited by Brad, which calls Sir Hugh's wife Margaret. But, as DR noted earlier, "it would not be the first time a contemporary record made an error regarding a wife's given name". FWIW my guess is that she was Elizabeth Stewart.
Per DR, Andrew MacEwan has suggested that the Stewart wife of Sir Hugh Campbell of Loudoun was possibly the Margaret Stewart who married (1) John Fleming, 2nd Lord Fleming and (2) Alexander Douglas of Mains. But Alexander Douglas of Mains was living as late as 1547, when he was a witness in a transaction recorded in Registrum Magni Sigilli (see item 96 in vol. 4 of that series). But, as DR has indicated earlier, this requires a divorce between Alexander Douglas and Margaret Stewart by 1533 (the date of the Campbell/Stewart marriage settlement), and we have no record of such a divorce. In addition, the assignment of yet another divorce and marriage to this Margaret Stewart begins to approach "the stuff in romance novels, not sound medieval history". :-) We'll be on "surer ground" if we simply "stick to the facts" and not introduce speculation about an unsupported divorce.
If the 1st wife of Sir Hugh Campbell of Loudon, was Elizabeth [not Margaret] Stewart, this removes one of Brad's objections to Margaret Stewart Fleming Douglas being a daughter of Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox by his 2nd wife. In addition the fact that Sir Hugh Campbell named his son Matthew certainly fits well with his 1st wife being a daughter of Matthew Stewart.
0 new messages