Who is Elizabeth Audley's mother?
Leo van de Pas
The Complete Peerage gives Elizabeth as daughter of James, Lord Audley, and Eleonore Holand, his second wife; but a genealogy of 1563 gives her born from Marguerite Roos, the first wife.
Sadly it does not say what this 1563 genealogy is. The plot thickens, it would be great to hear from Douglas Richardson,
he may well have the last word.
Best wishes
Leo van de Pas
RBodine996
through my files the date of 1563 turns up the pedigree of Awdeley from the
Visitation of Norfolk (Harleian Society, vol. 32, p. 10) wherein the children
of James Toochett, Lord Audeley by his 1st wife, Margaret Roos were-
1. John Tochet, Lord Audeley.
2. Margaret, m. Sir Thomas Dutton.
3. Ann, m. Edward, Lord Cobham. **
By his 2nd wife, Eleanor, dau. of Edmund, Earl of Kent, he had-
4. Margaret, Lady Powes.
5. Ann, m. Richard Delabere.
6. Sir Humphrey Audeley.
7. Edmond, Bishop of Salisbury.
8. Thomas.
** The Complete Peerage does name the wife of Edward Brooke, 6th Lord Cobham,
as being Elizabeth, dau. of James Tuchet by his 2nd wife, Eleanor Holland.
Sir Richard Hoare in his The History of Modern Wiltshire, vol. 1, part 2, p.
227, also includes Elizabeth, wife of Edward Brooke, as a daughter of the 2nd
wife.
Ronny Bodine
Douglas Richardson
My source for the parentage of Edward Brooke's wife, Elizabeth
Tuchet otherwise Audley, is their marriage settlement agreement
filed in Calendar of Close Rolls, 1435-1441, pg. 101 (published
1937) which stipulates that the couple was to marry on or before
2 Feb. 1436/7. Elizabeth's father, Sir James Tuchet otherwise
Audley, is specifically named in the document.
Inasmuch as Edward Brooke was himself born about 1412 and since
Elizabeth Audley appears to have immediately had children
following the marriage, I have to assume that Elizabeth was the
child of her father's first marriage to Margaret Roos, which
took place in 1415, as opposed to her father's second marriage
to Eleanor Holand, which took place in 1430. If Elizabeth was
the child of Eleanor Holand, as claimed by Complete Peerage, she
would have been five years old or less at her marriage, making
her considerably younger than her husband, and incapable of
bearing children for many years.
The 1563 Visitation of Norfolk cited by Ronny Bodine below
correctly places Elizabeth as a child of Sir James Tuchet
(otherwise Audley)'s first wife, Margaret Roos.
The following four immigrants descend from Elizabeth (Tuchet)
Brooke:
Henry & William Randolph, of Va.
Capt. Henry Fleete, of Va.
Rev. Hawte Wyatt, of Va.
Robert O'Connor of New Zealand also informs me he descends from
this woman through his English Tanfield ancestry.
Best always, Douglas Richardson
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
In article <20000418083930...@ng-bh1.aol.com>,
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Leo van de Pas
Especially as there are other sources quoted that she was from the first
marriage, and your pointer in regards to her childbearing immediately after
the marriage, I think I have to agree with Margaret Ro(o)s being the mother.
Many thanks
Leo van de Pas
Leo van de Pas
Reading quickly through your message makes me accept your statement, reading
it slowly still makes me accept but I have a question which, I think, others
also will have.
The couple Edward Brooke and Elizabeth Audley were to marry "on or before 2
February 1436/7".
You say "and since Elizabeth Audley APPEARS to have immediately had
children" my question is, do you have dates (and names) for her children? I
have a John and an Elizabeth but I have no dates of birth for either. For
John's children I have no dates of birth but for Elizabeth I have a son born
circa 1461. Sadly it is circa because we have to keep on presuming.
This would (guessing) make Elizabeth being born circa 1440/1445. And this
would be another pointer that Elizabeth Audley's mother 'must' be Margaret
Ro(o)s.
I think you have chosen your words very carefully, with which I agree, as
you can only assume. Especially as there seem to be two 16th century
references to Elizabeth's mother being Margaret Ro(o)s and, I hope, you can
supply years of birth for her children, I think we can quite safely assume
the same.
Look forward to hearing from you .
Best wishes
Janet Denham
I have a notation showing an approximate birth year of 1444 for John Brooke,
son of
Elizabeth Tuchet/Audley and Edward Brooke. Will try to find where I got
this. Could be speculation on someone's part. Then I show Thomas, the son
of John born in 1467.
This would have made his father, John, about 23 at the time of his birth.
Certainly plausible but I will also need to check that date as well. If
1444 is reasonable/accurate for John, then Elizabeth was probably born not
later than 1427 and possibly earlier. I
agree that Margaret de Roos, chronologically, seems to be the better
candidate for
Elizabeth's mother. Sadly, neither of the possible candidates show with the
names Elizabeth or Ann as parents or grandparents so no clues from those
quarters. The late date of 1430 for James Tuchet's marriage to Eleanor
Holand leaves very little room for Elizabeth to be the first child of that
marriage. Unless other information can be found to fill in some of the
blanks more thoroughly, I am inclined to agree that Eleanor is probably out
of the running in this race. Please post anything else that might provide
clues and thanks again for the interest and responses.
Lee Denham
DadG...@aol.com
In a message dated 4/18/00 1:33:33 PM, royalances...@msn.com.invalid
writes:
<< Dear Leo, et al.:
[snip]
Inasmuch as Edward Brooke was himself born about 1412 and since
Elizabeth Audley appears to have immediately had children
following the marriage, I have to assume that Elizabeth was the
child of her father's first marriage to Margaret Roos, which
took place in 1415, as opposed to her father's second marriage
to Eleanor Holand, which took place in 1430. If Elizabeth was
the child of Eleanor Holand, as claimed by Complete Peerage, she
would have been five years old or less at her marriage, making
her considerably younger than her husband, and incapable of
bearing children for many years. >>
[snip]
Douglas, Leo, Lee et al
The interesting exchange regarding Elizabeth Tuchet (Audley) seems to have
elicited consensus that the chronology is too tight for her to have been the
daughter of Elizabeth Holand. However, the response from Douglas Richardson
above raises a different chronological question with respect to Elizabeth's
husband, Edward Brooke, 6th Lord Cobham.
Faris, 2nd Edition, shows Joan Braybrooke, the mother of Edward Brooke, to
have been born about 1404. That date would not work with a birthdate for
Edward Brooke of about 1412 as cited above. While a later birthdate for
Edward would not invalidate the conclusions regarding his wife Elizabeth,
does anyone know if there is original source material which could clarify
this inconsistency? Or is this just one of those instances in which the two
birthdates for mother (1404) and son (1412) have been chronologically
estimated from different starting points, and the inconsistency has not yet
been recognized or reconciled?
Even though this inconsistency does not appear to bear on the placement
matter under immediate discussion, is there enough known to resolve it now so
that it doesn't rear its head in some future inquiry?
Thanks,
John Stuart
Leo van de Pas
the first two husbands are of interest.
Her first husband died in 1391, then circa 1392 she marries Reginald
Braybrooke who died 20 September 1405.
Circa 20 February 1410 the marriage settlement is made for Joan Braybrooke,
Baroness Cobham. There are no dates but Joan was born between 1392 and 1406,
that is a long period.
If she was born 1392-1395 then she was 15-18 when she married which, to me
seems a reasonable age and allows her son, Edward, to be born in 1412.
Sources
Complete Peerage Volume III 346; Burke's Peerage 1938 page 611; Gerald Paget
P59429, and Cahiers de St.Louis.
Best wishes
Leo van de Pas .
----- Original Message -----
From: <DadG...@aol.com>
To: <royala...@msn.com>; <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>;
<leov...@iinet.net.au>; <den...@henderson.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: Who is Elizabeth Audley's mother?
>
Douglas Richardson
Tuchet otherwise Audley, I have the following comments to make:
1. The approximate birth date of 1412 which I used for Edward
Brooke comes from Wedgwood's book of biographies of members of
Parliament. Wedgwood states that Edward was so many years old
at his father's death, indicating as I recall that Edward was
born about 1412. I am citing the year 1412 from memory, as I
don't have a copy of Wedgwood in front of me. Dr. Faris
evidently left the date of Edward Brooke's birth out of the
Plantagenet book.
2. It was common for women of this rank to marry at or around
their 14th birthday. Since we know that Edward Brooke and
Elizabeth Tuchet were married in 1437, it seems highly likely
that Elizabeth was born about 1423. This fits well
chronologically with Elizabeth being the daughter of James
Tuchet's lst wife, Margaret Roos, who is known to be living in
1423.
3. As for Edward Brooke's mother, Joan Braybrooke, being born
about 1404, I don't know where Dr. Faris got that date. But
the date would evidently have to be in error if her son, Edward,
was truly born about 1412. My guess is that Joan's birthdate
comes from her mother's IPM probably taken in 1444, which
probably says Joan was aged forty and more in that year. Such a
statement simply means that Joan was above forty and less than
fifty in 1444. If we took forty years off 1444, it would
derive a birthdate of 1404 for Joan. Estimates of ages given in
IPM's are usually fairly accurate except when the age is given
in rounded years such as twenty, thirty, forty, etc. Then the
age can be off a little.
As others have noted, Joan Braybrooke could have been born
anytime in the period of her parents' marriage, 1392-1405.
Since her own marriage settlement is dated 1410, I imagine that
Joan was actually born closer to 1396, which would make her 14
at the time of her marriage. Joan's husband, Thomas Brooke, was
himself born about 1392. That date harmonizes well with Joan
being born about 1396. A birthdate of 1396 would make her above
forty but less than fifty at her mother's death in 1444.
4. Leo asked what evidence there was that Elizabeth Tuchet
immediately started having children after her marriage to Edward
Brooke. Dr. Faris shows that Elizabeth (Tuchet) Brooke had a
grandson, Robert Tanfield, born about 1461 (see Faris,
Plantagenet Ancestry, 2nd ed., pg. 352). For Elizabeth Tuchet
to marry in 1437, and have a grandson in 1461, this means she
had to have her own daughter, Elizabeth, fairly soon after her
marriage.
All for now. Best always, Douglas Richardson
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
In article <001101bfaa23$eaf58740$53433bcb@leo>,
Douglas Richardson
beginning of Edward Brooke's biography (pg. 115) that he was
born in 1412. But, in a footnote below, it says Edward Brooke
was aged 24 at his father's death in 1439. If correct, that
would mean Edward Brooke was born about 1415, not 1412 as stated
above.
I believe Roskell is Faris' source for the approximate birth
date of circa 1404 for Edward Brooke's mother, Joan Braybrooke.
I found that birth date listed for her in Roskell's biography of
her husband, Thomas Brooke. As I said in an earlier post, I
assume the birth date of circa 1404 comes from her mother's IPM
in 1444. But, if her son, Edward Brooke, was born about 1415,
Joan must clearly have been born earlier than 1404.
Best always, Douglas Richardson
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
In article <0e866f13...@usw-ex0106-047.remarq.com>,