Complete Peerage Addition: Parentage of Elizabeth Holand, wife of Sir Roger Fiennes
Douglas Richardson
Regarding your earlier question regarding the identity of Elizabeth,
wife of Sir Robert de Holand, 2nd Lord Holand, since I published my
book, Plantagenet Ancestry (PA), I've secured evidence through the
kindness of a correspondant which proves Elizabeth, wife of Robert de
Holand, is not the same person as Elizabeth de Holand, bastard sister
of Queen Philippe of Hainault (wife of King Edward III of England).
The correspondant and I plan to co-author an article for future
publication regarding Queen Philippe's bastard sister.
This new development still leaves unexplained how Ralph Lovel,
great-grandson of Sir Robert and Elizabeth de Holand, was of near
kinship to King Henry IV of England. All things considered, it is
still possible that Elizabeth, wife of Sir Robert de Holand, is a
member of noble English family closely related to King Henry IV of
England.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: douglasr...@royalancesty.net
Website: www.royalancestry.net
From: jthi...@yahoo.com (John Higgins)
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: Complete Peerage Addition: Parentage of Elizabeth Holand,
wife of Sir Roger Fiennes
Date: 30 Apr 2004 09:46:43 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 143
Message-ID: <54fb60f6.04043...@posting.google.com>
References: <5cf47a19.0404...@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.247.216.230
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1083343604 31455 127.0.0.1 (30 Apr 2004
16:46:44 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 16:46:44 +0000 (UTC)
[reply originally posted to Gen-Med - never made it to SGM - apologies
for any doubleposting]
This is interesting new information on these elusive Holands of Thorp
Waterville, which the archives show you've been pursuing since at
least 1999. The connection to the Lords Holand is useful. In a 2002
post, Leo van de Pas cited a (secondary) source from 1908 whcih made
the same connection, but presumably with less detail than you've
located.
In a related matter, your previous posts have raised the possibility
that Elizabeth (Holand) Fiennes' grandmother, also named Elizabeth,
the wife of Robert, 2nd Lord Holand, was the bastard sister of
Philippa, the queen of Edward III. The hypothesis was based on three
apparently unrelated pieces of information:
1) The surname of Robert's wife was not indicated in CP - surprising
for someone of her (or his) rank.
2) A reference to Philippa's sister gave her the surname Holand -
which was more likely based on marriage than on place of origin.
3) Per CP, Queen Philippa had shown an interest in the affairs of
Robert and his mother after his father died - possibly indicating a
relationship between Philippa and Robert.
Have you reached any further conclusion on this possibility, or does
the identification of Elizabeth, wife of Robert 2nd Lord Holand, as a
bastard sister of Philippa still remain simply a conjecture?
Peter Stewart
> Dear John ~
>
> Regarding your earlier question regarding the identity of Elizabeth,
> wife of Sir Robert de Holand, 2nd Lord Holand, since I published my
> book, Plantagenet Ancestry (PA), I've secured evidence through the
> kindness of a correspondant which proves Elizabeth, wife of Robert de
> Holand, is not the same person as Elizabeth de Holand, bastard sister
> of Queen Philippe of Hainault (wife of King Edward III of England).
> The correspondant and I plan to co-author an article for future
> publication regarding Queen Philippe's bastard sister.
>
> This new development still leaves unexplained how Ralph Lovel,
> great-grandson of Sir Robert and Elizabeth de Holand, was of near
> kinship to King Henry IV of England. All things considered, it is
> still possible that Elizabeth, wife of Sir Robert de Holand, is a
> member of noble English family closely related to King Henry IV of
> England.
Do you think you're kidding someone here?
The only "new development" in this mattter was your error in supposing
you had identified Robert de Holand's wife - that she wasn't Queen
Philippa's sister isn't remotely "new" in any other context.
You published this error with insufficient thought ("all things
considered", indeed...) & from incompetent research, and now you won't
simply admit it. That's NOT new, under any meaning of the word.
Peter Stewart
Pierre Aronax
"Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:5cf47a19.04071...@posting.google.com...
> Dear John ~
>
> Regarding your earlier question regarding the identity of Elizabeth,
> wife of Sir Robert de Holand, 2nd Lord Holand, since I published my
> book, Plantagenet Ancestry (PA), I've secured evidence through the
> kindness of a correspondant which proves Elizabeth, wife of Robert de
> Holand, is not the same person as Elizabeth de Holand, bastard sister
> of Queen Philippe of Hainault (wife of King Edward III of England).
> The correspondant and I plan to co-author an article for future
> publication regarding Queen Philippe's bastard sister.
It's not called an article: it's called an erratum.
Pierre
Douglas Richardson
I published no error, Peter. In my book, I said that Elizabeth, wife
of Robert de Holand, may possibly be the sister of Queen Philippe. At
the time, the statement was true. Due to the kindness of a
correspondent, it has now been proven otherwise. This is very much a
new development. When I have the time, I'll post the change up on my
website.
I believe that collegiality is the key to solving many of these
longstanding genealogical puzzles. Your post displayed not a trace of
collegiality. This is to your utter shame, Peter. You can and should
do better.
As I've indicated in earlier posts, Ralph Lovel, clerk, was styled "of
the stock" of King Henry IV of England [see Papal Registers: Letters 6
(1904): 248]. There are two holes in Ralph Lovel's immediate ancestry
which are still unknown or unproven. One is the identity of his
great-grandmother, Elizabeth, wife of Robert de Holand, 2nd Lord
Holand. Given the rapacity of Robert de Holand's mother, Maud la
Zouche, I can't imagine Maud not having her son marry well. As such,
it is highly likely that Robert de Holand's wife, Elizabeth, came from
the orbit of one of the families in the near ancestry of King Henry
IV. In other words, I believe Elizabeth de Holand's identity can be
solved. If you or anyone have any suggestions for her identity, I'd
be glad to hear from them.
For starters, the ancestry of King Henry IV of England can be
displayed for up to 8 generations on Leo van de Pas' great website at
www.genealogics.org. This provides anyone interested with the list of
potential families from which Elizabeth de Holand might be descended.
In general, when someone is stated to be a kinsman of the king, the
person is related to the king in the 5th degree on at least one side.
If Ralph Lovel's link to King Henry IV comes through Elizabeth de
Holand, Elizabeth would presumably descend from a brother or sister of
at least one of King Henry IV's great-great-grandparents. It
shouldn't be too difficult to determine whether or not a stray
Elizabeth is lurking among one of these families.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: douglasr...@royalancestry.net
Website: www.royalancestry.net
Peter Stewart <p_m_s...@msn.com> wrote in message news:<Wa4Ic.88673$sj4....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...
>
> Do you think you're kidding someone here?
>
> The only "new development" in this mattter was your error in supposing
> you had identified Robert de Holand's wife - that she wasn't Queen
> Philippa's sister isn't remotely "new" in any other context.
>
> You published this error with insufficient thought ("all things
> considered", indeed...) & from incompetent research, and now you won't
> simply admit it. That's NOT new, under any meaning of the word.
>
> Peter Stewart
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: douglasr...@royalancestry.net
Pierre Aronax
"Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:5cf47a19.04071...@posting.google.com...
>
> I published no error, Peter. In my book, I said that Elizabeth, wife
> of Robert de Holand, may possibly be the sister of Queen Philippe. At
> the time, the statement was true. Due to the kindness of a
> correspondent, it has now been proven otherwise.
Why do you phrase things in a so tortuous way? the statement was always
wrong, but you discovered it was only recently, "due to the kindness of a
correspondent".
> This is very much a
> new development.
Well, if it is an information coming from an unpublished or previously
unnoticed document (that is: unnoticed not only by you), that would be
indeed something new. Otherwise not.
Pierre