Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
C.P. Addition: Children of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219)
156 views
Skip to first unread message
celticp...@gmail.com
Sep 7, 2018, 4:56:31 PM9/7/18
to
Dear Newsgroup ~
Complete Peerage 6 (1926): 647, footnote l (sub Huntingdon) discusses the children of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219). It states Earl David had three sons and three daughters: Robert, Henry, and John, and three daughters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada. A seventh child David is suggested by the editor.
Recently I came across a Common Pleas lawsuit dated Easter term 1303 which deals with the heirs of Alexander III, King of Scots (died 1286). The lawsuit may be viewed at the following weblink:
Court of Common Pleas, CP40/147, image 50 (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT6/E1/CP40no147/IMG_0050.htm).
The lawsuit names the three main competitors to the Scottish crown then living, namely John de Hastings (plaintiff in the lawsuit), John de Balliol, and Robert de Brus. The lawsuit states how each of the competitors were descended from King Alexander III's great uncle, David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219). Since these lines of descent are covered by many other published sources, they will not be repeated here.
Something which is new in the lawsuit is a list of the children of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon. The lawsuit alleges that Earl David was successively succeeded by three sons in turn, namely Thomas, David, and John, and that following John's death, he was succeeded by his four sisters, Alice (who died without issue), Margaret, Isabel, and Ada.
Contemporary records, however, show that Earl David was succeeded on his death by his son, Earl John (died 1237). When John died without issue, his properties were divided by his surviving sisters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada, or their representatives. There appears to have been a fourth sister, Maud, wife of John de Monmouth, who predeceased her brother John and she died without issue.
The 1303 lawsuit confirms that Earl David had a son, David, who is known to have died young. The existence of the younger David is known from two charters of his father, Earl David, to Lindores Abbey. See Dowden, Chartulary of the Abbey of Lindores (Scottish Hist. Soc. 42) (1903): 2–9, which may be viewed at the following weblink:
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=bc.ark:/13960/t52g0bz47;view=1up;seq=104
But the 1303 lawsuit is the first record which alleges that Earl David had a son, Thomas, or a daughter, Alice.
In this case, I'm fairly certain that Alice is a mistake for the known daughter, Maud, who died before 1237 many years before this lawsuit. Earl David's daughter, Maud, is allegedly mentioned by name in the following contemporary document which I have not consulted:
PRO DL 42/2, fos. 196v.–7r.
Maud, daughter of Earl David, is also mentioned in the following two sources, both of whom place her as the third of four daughters of Earl David:
1. Buchanan, Tracts illus. of the Traditionary & Historical Antiqs. of Scotland (1836): 87 (Petition of John de Balliol: “Johannes obiit sine haerede de corpore suo. Unde de eodem Johanne descendit jus, et debuit descendere, Margaretae, Isabellae, Mathildae et Adae, ut sororibus et uni haeredi, si Regum esset partible ...”).
2. Burton, Chronica Monasterii de Melsa 1 (Rolls Ser.) (1866): 436 (“Iste nempe Johannes Scoticus 4 habuit sorores; scilicet .... 3a soror Matildis obiit sine liberis”).
In summary, the 1303 Common Pleas lawsuit alleges that David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon, had a total of seven children, two of which are not known in other sources, namely a son, Thomas, and a daughter, Alice. One known daughter, Maud, is not mentioned in the lawsuit.
For a more detailed account of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219), and his descendants, please see my book, Royal Ancestry (5 volume set), published in 2013.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Complete Peerage 6 (1926): 647, footnote l (sub Huntingdon) discusses the children of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219). It states Earl David had three sons and three daughters: Robert, Henry, and John, and three daughters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada. A seventh child David is suggested by the editor.
Recently I came across a Common Pleas lawsuit dated Easter term 1303 which deals with the heirs of Alexander III, King of Scots (died 1286). The lawsuit may be viewed at the following weblink:
Court of Common Pleas, CP40/147, image 50 (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT6/E1/CP40no147/IMG_0050.htm).
The lawsuit names the three main competitors to the Scottish crown then living, namely John de Hastings (plaintiff in the lawsuit), John de Balliol, and Robert de Brus. The lawsuit states how each of the competitors were descended from King Alexander III's great uncle, David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219). Since these lines of descent are covered by many other published sources, they will not be repeated here.
Something which is new in the lawsuit is a list of the children of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon. The lawsuit alleges that Earl David was successively succeeded by three sons in turn, namely Thomas, David, and John, and that following John's death, he was succeeded by his four sisters, Alice (who died without issue), Margaret, Isabel, and Ada.
Contemporary records, however, show that Earl David was succeeded on his death by his son, Earl John (died 1237). When John died without issue, his properties were divided by his surviving sisters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada, or their representatives. There appears to have been a fourth sister, Maud, wife of John de Monmouth, who predeceased her brother John and she died without issue.
The 1303 lawsuit confirms that Earl David had a son, David, who is known to have died young. The existence of the younger David is known from two charters of his father, Earl David, to Lindores Abbey. See Dowden, Chartulary of the Abbey of Lindores (Scottish Hist. Soc. 42) (1903): 2–9, which may be viewed at the following weblink:
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=bc.ark:/13960/t52g0bz47;view=1up;seq=104
But the 1303 lawsuit is the first record which alleges that Earl David had a son, Thomas, or a daughter, Alice.
In this case, I'm fairly certain that Alice is a mistake for the known daughter, Maud, who died before 1237 many years before this lawsuit. Earl David's daughter, Maud, is allegedly mentioned by name in the following contemporary document which I have not consulted:
PRO DL 42/2, fos. 196v.–7r.
Maud, daughter of Earl David, is also mentioned in the following two sources, both of whom place her as the third of four daughters of Earl David:
1. Buchanan, Tracts illus. of the Traditionary & Historical Antiqs. of Scotland (1836): 87 (Petition of John de Balliol: “Johannes obiit sine haerede de corpore suo. Unde de eodem Johanne descendit jus, et debuit descendere, Margaretae, Isabellae, Mathildae et Adae, ut sororibus et uni haeredi, si Regum esset partible ...”).
2. Burton, Chronica Monasterii de Melsa 1 (Rolls Ser.) (1866): 436 (“Iste nempe Johannes Scoticus 4 habuit sorores; scilicet .... 3a soror Matildis obiit sine liberis”).
In summary, the 1303 Common Pleas lawsuit alleges that David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon, had a total of seven children, two of which are not known in other sources, namely a son, Thomas, and a daughter, Alice. One known daughter, Maud, is not mentioned in the lawsuit.
For a more detailed account of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219), and his descendants, please see my book, Royal Ancestry (5 volume set), published in 2013.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
celticp...@gmail.com
Sep 7, 2018, 6:08:03 PM9/7/18
to
Dear Newsgroup ~
The correct weblink for the 1303 Common Pleas lawsuit is:
Court of Common Pleas, CP40/147, image 89 (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT6/E1/CP40no147/IMG_0089.htm).
Below is another reference to Earl David's known daughter, Maud.
Polychronicon Ranulphi Higden maonachi Cestrensis; together with the English translations of John Trevisa and of an unknown writer of the 15th Cent. (“Iohn Scot, erle of Chestre [and of Hontyngdon, deide wiþ oute children*. [chyldern, γ.] at Derenhale þe sevenþe day of Iune, and was y-buryed at Chestre];*. [From α., β., γ., and Cx.] but for his londes hadde prerogatyf of realte, his erldom fil to þe kyng his hond, and his sustres þat were his heyres*. [eyres, β.] hadde oþer londes þerfore in compensacioun, for so faire lordschip schulde not be deled bytwene distaves of*. [and, α.] wommen. Þis Iohn hadde foure sustres;*. [voure sosters, γ.] oon of hem heet*. [heet] om. β.] Mergrete,*. [Margarete, α.; Margaret, γ. and Cx.] and*. [and] om. α. and β.] was i-wedded [to Aleyn*. [Alayn, γ.] of]*. [From α. β., and Cx.; into, MS.] Galewey,*. [Galwey, γ.] and baar þe maide Devergoile; þis maide was i-wedded to Iohn Baillol, and baar Iohn Baillol kyng of Scotlond; þe oþer suster Isabel was i-maried to Robert de Brus;*. [Bruys, α., β., and Cx.; Bruiȝ, γ.] þe þridde suster Mold deide wiþ oute children; þe fourþe suster Alda was maried to Henry de Hastynges.”).
The above is available at the following weblink:
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cme/AHB1341.0001.001/1:9.36?rgn=div2;sort=occur;subview=detail;type=simple;view=fulltext;q1=Mold).
The correct weblink for the 1303 Common Pleas lawsuit is:
Court of Common Pleas, CP40/147, image 89 (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT6/E1/CP40no147/IMG_0089.htm).
Below is another reference to Earl David's known daughter, Maud.
Polychronicon Ranulphi Higden maonachi Cestrensis; together with the English translations of John Trevisa and of an unknown writer of the 15th Cent. (“Iohn Scot, erle of Chestre [and of Hontyngdon, deide wiþ oute children*. [chyldern, γ.] at Derenhale þe sevenþe day of Iune, and was y-buryed at Chestre];*. [From α., β., γ., and Cx.] but for his londes hadde prerogatyf of realte, his erldom fil to þe kyng his hond, and his sustres þat were his heyres*. [eyres, β.] hadde oþer londes þerfore in compensacioun, for so faire lordschip schulde not be deled bytwene distaves of*. [and, α.] wommen. Þis Iohn hadde foure sustres;*. [voure sosters, γ.] oon of hem heet*. [heet] om. β.] Mergrete,*. [Margarete, α.; Margaret, γ. and Cx.] and*. [and] om. α. and β.] was i-wedded [to Aleyn*. [Alayn, γ.] of]*. [From α. β., and Cx.; into, MS.] Galewey,*. [Galwey, γ.] and baar þe maide Devergoile; þis maide was i-wedded to Iohn Baillol, and baar Iohn Baillol kyng of Scotlond; þe oþer suster Isabel was i-maried to Robert de Brus;*. [Bruys, α., β., and Cx.; Bruiȝ, γ.] þe þridde suster Mold deide wiþ oute children; þe fourþe suster Alda was maried to Henry de Hastynges.”).
The above is available at the following weblink:
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cme/AHB1341.0001.001/1:9.36?rgn=div2;sort=occur;subview=detail;type=simple;view=fulltext;q1=Mold).
Peter Stewart
Sep 7, 2018, 6:44:28 PM9/7/18
to
On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 6:56:31 AM UTC+10, celticp...@gmail.com wrote:
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Complete Peerage 6 (1926): 647, footnote l (sub Huntingdon) discusses the children of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219). It states Earl David had three sons and three daughters: Robert, Henry, and John, and three daughters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada. A seventh child David is suggested by the editor.
>
> Recently I came across a Common Pleas lawsuit dated Easter term 1303 which deals with the heirs of Alexander III, King of Scots (died 1286). The lawsuit may be viewed at the following weblink:
>
> Court of Common Pleas, CP40/147, image 50 (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT6/E1/CP40no147/IMG_0050.htm).
>
> The lawsuit names the three main competitors to the Scottish crown then living, namely John de Hastings (plaintiff in the lawsuit), John de Balliol, and Robert de Brus. The lawsuit states how each of the competitors were descended from King Alexander III's great uncle, David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219). Since these lines of descent are covered by many other published sources, they will not be repeated here.
>
> Something which is new in the lawsuit is a list of the children of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon. The lawsuit alleges that Earl David was successively succeeded by three sons in turn, namely Thomas, David, and John, and that following John's death, he was succeeded by his four sisters, Alice (who died without issue), Margaret, Isabel, and Ada.
>
> Contemporary records, however, show that Earl David was succeeded on his death by his son, Earl John (died 1237). When John died without issue, his properties were divided by his surviving sisters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada, or their representatives. There appears to have been a fourth sister, Maud, wife of John de Monmouth, who predeceased her brother John and she died without issue.
The four sisters were named correctly in the claim of John de Balliol ("Johannes obiit sine herede de corpore suo, unde de eodem Johanne descendit jus, et debuit descendere, Margarete, Ysabelle, Matildi, et Ade, ut sororibus et uni heredi, si regnum esset partibile"). You can find this in Edward Stones & Grant Simpson (editors), *Edward I and the Throne of Scotland, 1290–1296: An Edition of the Record Sources for the Great Cause*, 2 vols (1978), vol ii p 140, and in Foedera vol i/part II p 776.
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Complete Peerage 6 (1926): 647, footnote l (sub Huntingdon) discusses the children of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219). It states Earl David had three sons and three daughters: Robert, Henry, and John, and three daughters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada. A seventh child David is suggested by the editor.
>
> Recently I came across a Common Pleas lawsuit dated Easter term 1303 which deals with the heirs of Alexander III, King of Scots (died 1286). The lawsuit may be viewed at the following weblink:
>
> Court of Common Pleas, CP40/147, image 50 (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT6/E1/CP40no147/IMG_0050.htm).
>
> The lawsuit names the three main competitors to the Scottish crown then living, namely John de Hastings (plaintiff in the lawsuit), John de Balliol, and Robert de Brus. The lawsuit states how each of the competitors were descended from King Alexander III's great uncle, David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219). Since these lines of descent are covered by many other published sources, they will not be repeated here.
>
> Something which is new in the lawsuit is a list of the children of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon. The lawsuit alleges that Earl David was successively succeeded by three sons in turn, namely Thomas, David, and John, and that following John's death, he was succeeded by his four sisters, Alice (who died without issue), Margaret, Isabel, and Ada.
>
> Contemporary records, however, show that Earl David was succeeded on his death by his son, Earl John (died 1237). When John died without issue, his properties were divided by his surviving sisters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada, or their representatives. There appears to have been a fourth sister, Maud, wife of John de Monmouth, who predeceased her brother John and she died without issue.
Peter Stewart
Peter Stewart
Sep 7, 2018, 6:48:34 PM9/7/18
to
Peter Stewart
0 new messages