Elizabeth Beauchamp and her "uncle" Ralph Boteler, Lord Sudeley
Chris Phillips
The Complete Peerage account of Sudeley (vol. 12, part 1, p. 418, note k)
notes that Thomas Boteler (d. 1398) was said to have married a daughter of
Sir John Beauchamp of Powick, but points out that in 1440 Thomas's son and
eventual successor Ralph is described as the uncle of Elizabeth Beauchamp,
daughter of Sir William Beauchamp, Sir John's son and heir. (The description
is actually quoted from the will of Henry V, in 1421.)
It seems impossible for Ralph Boteler to have been Elizabeth Beauchamp's
uncle by blood:
(1) On Elizabeth's father's side, William Beauchamp's father John died
between 1378 and 1401 left a widow Elizabeth, who died 1411 [CP ii 46 note
f]. Ralph Boteler's father Thomas (d. 1398) left a widow Alice, who died
1442/3 [CP xii/1 418. 419]. So Ralph could not have been a half-brother
(sharing a common mother) of Elizabeth's father.
(2) Elizabeth's mother was Catherine, daughter of Sir Gerard Usflete [CP ii
47] (Catherine is named as the wife of William Beauchamp in 1492 [History of
Parliament] and survived her husband; Elizabeth was unmarried when Henry V
made his will in 1421). Catherine was the full sister (obviously born in the
mid-1380s or earlier) of Gerard Usflete (d. 1420), son of Gerard Usflete (d.
1405) [she was stated to be one of the younger Gerard's coheirs in 1423;
Douglas Richardson, 7 August 2002; dates of death from HOP]. So the
chronology makes it impossible for Ralph (who was born by 1396) to have been
a half-brother (sharing a common mother) of Elizabeth's mother.
Perhaps, instead, Ralph could have been Elizabeth's "uncle by marriage"?
In 1421, Ralph was married to Elizabeth, widow of John Hende [CP xii/1 421].
The new DNB, in its article on Hende, says that his wife was "perhaps
daughter of Sir John Norbury". No evidence is presented for this, but if so,
Ralph would have been marrying his sister's step daughter, as (apparently)
his sister Elizabeth had married John Norbury as his second wife [thus HOP
and DNB, though CP calls her husband Henry].
If Ralph's wife was really a daughter of Sir John Beauchamp (or even if he
had had a previous wife, either a daughter of Sir John, or a daughter of the
elder Gerard Usflete), the puzzle could be solved. Can anyone shed any light
on this question?
Chris Phillips
Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com
You've asked an excellent question.
My research indicates that Sir Ralph Boteler, Lord Sudeley (died 1473),
and Elizabeth Beauchamp (wife successively of Thomas Swynford, Esq.,
and Thomas Rothwell) were first cousins to one another. They were not
uncle and niece.
Ralph le Boteler's mother was Alice Beauchamp, aunt of Elizabeth
Beauchamp. Alice's identity and parentage is indicated by several
visitations:
1. Hawley et al., Vis. of Essex 1552, 1558, 1570, 1612 & 1634 2
(H.S.P. 14) (1879): 563-565 (Misc. Peds.) (Cooke pedigree: "Sr
Thomas Butler. = Alice d. of John Beauchamp of Powick.").
2. Harvey et al., Vis. of Bedfordshire 1566, 1582, 1634 & 1669 (H.S.P.
19) (1884): 162-163 (Bray pedigree: "Thomas Butler Baron of Sudley
= Allice d. and heire of John Beauchampe of Powick.").
3. Benolte et al., Vis. of Surrey 1530, 1572 & 1613 (H.S.P. 43) (1899):
219-221 (Vincent pedigree: "Sir Thom. Botteler Knt. = Allice d. of
Sir John Beauchamp of Powick Knt.").
Besides the above cited visitations, you might wish to consult Roskell,
House of Commons 1386-1421, vol. 2 (1992): 458-459 (biog. of Sir
Thomas Butler, 1st husband of Alice Beauchamp), 742-744 (biog. of Sir
John Dallingridge, 2nd husband of Alice Beauchamp).
You can also find additional information on both the Beauchamp and
Boteler families in my own two books, Plantagenet Ancestry (2004) and
Magna Carta Ancestry (2005). My material is fully documented and
includes numerous corrections and additions to the information found on
these families in Complete Peerage.
For interest's sake, I've listed below the names of various 17th
Century New World immigrants who descend from Sir Ralph Boteler's
mother, Alice (Beauchamp) (Boteler) Dallingridge:
1. Robert Abell.
2. Elizabeth Bosvile.
3. Charles Calvert.
4. Matthew Kempe.
5. Thomas Owlsey.
6. Mary Johanna Somerset.
7. Hawte Wyatt.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www.royalancestry.net
Chris Phillips
> Ralph le Boteler's mother was Alice Beauchamp, aunt of Elizabeth
> Beauchamp. Alice's identity and parentage is indicated by several
> visitations:
>
> 1. Hawley et al., Vis. of Essex 1552, 1558, 1570, 1612 & 1634 2
> (H.S.P. 14) (1879): 563-565 (Misc. Peds.) (Cooke pedigree: "Sr
> Thomas Butler. = Alice d. of John Beauchamp of Powick.").
>
> 2. Harvey et al., Vis. of Bedfordshire 1566, 1582, 1634 & 1669 (H.S.P.
> 19) (1884): 162-163 (Bray pedigree: "Thomas Butler Baron of Sudley
> = Allice d. and heire of John Beauchampe of Powick.").
>
> 3. Benolte et al., Vis. of Surrey 1530, 1572 & 1613 (H.S.P. 43) (1899):
> 219-221 (Vincent pedigree: "Sir Thom. Botteler Knt. = Allice d. of
> Sir John Beauchamp of Powick Knt.").
Thank you for providing details from these visitation pedigrees. No doubt
this is what the author of the CP account was referring to in vol. 12/1, p.
418, note k ("It has been stated that she was da. of Sir John Beauchamp of
Powick"), and presumably this is the basis for the unqualified (and
unsourced) identification of Alice in the History of Parliament articles.
To add to the mix, Bevan Shortridge has kindly sent me details from a
pedigree in Dugdale's History of Warwickshire (p. 1073). This gives Thomas
Boteler two wives - firstly "Johanna filia Joh. Beauchamp de Powyk mil."
(citing "Ex autog. penes Rob. D. Digby") and secondly "Alicia ux. secunda,
postea nupta Joh. Dalingrugge mil." (citing "Claus. 8 H 4 in d. m. 36"). The
first wife is made the mother of Thomas's children.
I do think it would be nice to have some contemporary evidence of the
marriage rather than having to rely on the much later visitation pedigrees.
And it would certainly be nice to have an explanation for the reference in
Henry V's will to Ralph Boteler as the uncle (not cousin) of Elizabeth
Beauchamp. I'm copying below a transcript of the entry in the patent rolls
where this is quoted.
Chris Phillips
_______________________________________________________
[p. 364]
Membranes 3 (cont.) and 2.
1440 [1439/40] Jan 8. Windsor Castle
Ratification of the estate of Elizabeth, daughter of Sir William
Beauchamp of Powik and sister of Sir Walter Beauchamp, his son and
heir, and of that of Thomas Rothewell, her husband, in the manors of
Stratton [Sutton] with the hamlets of Potton, Stratton and Holm,
co. Bedford, and the manor of Asperton with the hamlet of Stratton,
co. Hereford, as held to her and the heirs of her body by Thomas
Swynford, her previous husband, lawfully begotten and of her life
estate in the manor and soke of Snayth, co. York, and the manor of
Briddesgreve, co. Surrey; such ratification being made in consideration
of the following:- The king's father, in his will, written with his own
hand, desired that the said Elizabeth should have, of the gift of his
feoffees, 300 marks' worth of land for life on condition that she would
marry by advice of her mother, of the king's uncle, of Exeter, of Sir Walter
Beauchamp, then treasurer of the Household, and of her uncle, Sir Ralph
[p. 365]
Butiller, and take a husband within a year of the said king's decease by
their assent or that of the survivors of them, and with reasonable pleasure
of heart (complacentia cordis sui); but if she married contrary to the
intention of the said king, the letters of the estate which the said
feoffees
would make to her should be of such effect that they might lawfully
enter and she should not benefit under the will; and if she married by
the advice aforesaid and have issue by her husband, so taken, such heirs
should inherit in fee tail 100£. worth of the land given her for life; and
if she predeceased her husband, he should have the said 100£. worth for
life whether there were issue between him and her or not, the remaining
100£. to revert to the feoffe for the purpose of fulfilling a further will.
If, however, she would not marry, but desired to live chaste to the praise
of God, she was to have from the said feoffees lands worth 200 marks yearly
for life with reversion to the feoffees to the intents of the other will.
Touching the land worth 100£. a year the will was to be carried out without
delay after testator's decease, unless expressly revoked, so soon as its
contents became known to the feoffees as might best avail the said Elizabeth
on her fulfilling her part, notwithstanding any defect of legal form in the
will, as more plainly appears in an autograph paper codicil to the will
annexed. Now it appears from the petition of the said Thomas and
Elizabeth that, on 1 July, 1 Henry VI, Thomas, late bishop of Durham,
Thomas, late duke of Exeter, Ralph, late earl of Westmorland, henry,
late Lord Filzhugh, John Wodehous and John Loventhorp (sic), all since
deceased, and Henry archbishop of Canterbury, Henry, bishop of
Winchester, and Walter Hungreford, who survive, by deed, reciting their
enfeoffment of divers possessions of the duchy of Lancaster, and, amongst
others, of the said manor of Sutton with the hamlets of Potton, Stratton
and Holm, and of the said manor of Asperton with its hamlet of Stratton,
and their having been required by letter by the said king to fulfil his
will as regards the premises whereby the said Elizabeth, remaining chaste,
was to have lands out of them worth 100£. a year for life, demised to her
for
such term the said manor of Sutton with its hamlets as of the yearly value
of 51£. 18s. 5 3/4d, and the said manor of Asperton with its hamlet, as
worth
59£. 9s. 8d. a year, knights' fees and advowsons excepted, at the yearly
rent of 11£. 8s. 1 3/4d. payable to the said demisors with the rights of
distraint
and of felling and disposing of large timber. then on 23 November,
4 Henry VI, the said bishop of Winchester and the said late duke, by
another deed, reciting how, by virtue of the said demise, the said Elizabeth
and the said Thomas Swynford, who had married her by the advice and
arrangement of the said late duke, Walter Beauchamp and Ralph Botiller,
were seised of the said manors and hamlets, confirmed their estate in the
same, to be held in fee tail as a moiety of the lands worth 200£. a year to
be given to her under the said will, rent free, as not exceeding the yearly
value of 100£., with remainder to her in fee tail, should he predecease her
without heir of her body lawfully begotten, with remainder over to the
said bishop and late duke. Afterwards, on 22 July in the same year, the
said archbishop, bishop of Winchester, late bishop, late duke, late earl of
Westmorland, Walter Hungreford, John and John, by deed, reciting their
enfeoffment of divers lands of the said duchy of Lancaster, to the intent
to fulfil thereof the said will, and particularly of the said manor and soke
of Snayth and manor of Briddesgreve, and the provision of the said will
relating to the marriage of the said Elizabeth [as above] demised to the
said Thomas Swynford and her for life, the said manor and soke of
Snayth as of the value of 91£. a year, and the said manor of Briddesgreve
as of the value of 6£. a year, except knights' fees and advowsons, as in
full satisfaction, with the other manors and hamlets aforesaid of the said
[p. 366:]
300 marks worth of land. Now the said last mentioned demisors only once
looked at the said will, and superficially when four or five of them at most
were present, and did not notice the provision that the said Elizabeth
was to decide whether she would marry or live chaste within one year of
the testator's decease, and consequently they did not inform her of the
contents of the will within the said period, during which according to
their belief she lived unmarried and then was wedded with the consent of
her mother (sic) the said late duke, Walter Beauchamp and Ralph, to the
said Thomas Swynford. By K.
[Calendar of Patent Rolls 1436-41, pp. 364-366]