Dear Newsgroup ~
This post is a reply to Brad Verity's post earlier today. Since Brad quotes freely from my previous posts, to avoid confusion, I've labelled my earlier statements as "DR" and Brad's responses as "BV." Where I have replied to Brad's post, it has no label.
On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 11:43:51 AM UTC-6, Brad Verity wrote:
> > DR: The marriage of John Wogan and Anne Butler has been accepted by several historians,
> BV: Which historians, specifically?
The marriage of John Wogan and Anne Butler was first published in Peerage of Ireland 7 (1789): 95-100 (sub Philips, Lord Milford) which reads as follows:
"Sir John Wogan ... was father of the said Catharine, by Anne his wife, daughter of James Butler, Earl of Ormond, by Eleanor, daughter of Humphrey, Earl of Hereford, by Elizabeth, daughter of K. Edward I.").
As with the Lewis Dwnn pedigrees, the source for the marriage of John Wogan and Anne Butler is likely to have been the Phillips family, who were the senior co-heirs of the Wogan family. The author accepted the marriage, but placed Anne Butler in the wrong generation of her family. It's an easy enough mistake to make.
Notes & Queries 2nd Ser. 5 (1858): 329-330 includes the marriage without qualification.
Morris, County Seats of the Noblemen & Gentlemen of Great Britain & Ireland 1 (1866): 21-22 includes the marriage.
Allen, Notes on the Sheriffs of Pembrokeshire, 1541-1899 (1900): 3-4 does not mention the marriage, but he cites Lewis Dwnn as a reliable source for the Wogan family.
Bartrum, Welsh Genealogies 300-1400 3 (1980): 164 [Bleddyn ap Maenyrch 2: "John [Wogan] d. before 1420 = Ann d. James Butler Earl of Ormond"].
There are probably other historians who support the marriage, but this should suffice for now.
< < DR: Since my original post on the Wogan family, I've had the opportunity to check an Irish source, Rotulorum Patentium et Clausorum Cancellariae Hiberniae Calendarium, Volume 1, Part I, published in 1828. This book contains a variety of documents pertaining to Irish families in the period from King Henry II to King Henry VII.
< < DR: On page 219, the following document is found which pertains to the administration of the estate of John Wogan, son and heir of David Wogan, knight, dated 1421.
< < DR: Date: 17 April 1421.
> > DR: "R. p. eo qd. oia. man'ia. tre. &c. qua fuer' Johis f' & her' David Wogan militis in co. Kild', que in man' Rs, rone min' etat' Eliz'e, Kat'ine, Johe & Agnetis filiar' & hedu' dci Johis, exist', in frontura marchiar' Hibnicor'inim' sita & p ip'os pene destructa sunt, de assensu &c. p m'capco'em Johis f. Rob'ti Burnell de Dub' & Pat' Penkeston de co' Kild', comis' Johi Bellewe mil' jun' custod' oi'm dcor' man'ior' &c., hend' dur' bpito, (dotib' Anastacie nup ux dci Dav', & Marga'te nup ux' dci Johis f' Dav', exceptis,) reddend' extent'. Dub', 17 Ap."
< < DR: The above record indicates that the manors, lands, etc. in county Kildare which formerly belonged to John son and heir of David Wogan knight were granted to John Bellewe, knight, the younger, during the minority of Elizabeth, Katherine, Joan, and Agnes, daughters and heirs of the said John. The dowers of Anastasie late wife of the said David Wogan and Margaret late the wife of John son of David Wogan were excepted.
> > DR: The above record proves that John Wogan survived his father, Sir David Wogan, who died in 1417.
< BV: I'm not sure about this. It proves he was dead by April 1421. But I'm not familiar enough with abbreviated Latin legalese to determine if this April 1421 grant was done very soon after John Wogan's death, or changing custody of his lands some years after it.
Inasmuch as John Wogan is called "son and heir" of Sir David Wogan, it is virtually certain that he survived his father who died c.1417. Exactly when John Wogan died, we are not told. An exact answer would be to say that John Wogan died sometime between c.1417 and 1421.
> >DR: This record also tells us that John Wogan was survived by a widow, Margaret, and four daughters, Elizabeth, Katherine, Joan, and Agnes.
> BV: Yes, and the four daughters were minors, so all under the age of sixteen in April 1421.
You seem to be following S.S. Walker, 'Proof of Age of Feudal Heirs in Medieval England,' Medieval Studies, 35 (1973), p. 307 which states that male wards came of age at twenty-one, female at fourteen if married and sixteen if single.
On the surface, this blanket statement is correct. However, in a recent thread, I cited a record in which Walter de Bermingham the younger [died 1361] was styled a minor by the king in a certain record, whereas we know from a later proof of age that he had already turned 21.
Because majority was dependant not on age (as stated by Walker), but on proof of age, all you can reliably say is that the Wogan daughters were unmarried and "presumably" under aged 16 in 1421. That is certainly close to the truth but should not be taken as an exact statement. Medieval records can be fuzzy at times, certainly with respect to ages of wards.
For evidence that Elizabeth Wogan, the eldest daughter of John Wogan, was already 16 as of 18 October 1421, see a grant made by her on that date published in Rotulorum Patentium et Clausorum Cancellariae Hiberniae Calendarium 1(1) (1828): 219. She was dispensed to marry the following year. I have estimated her birth as being c.1407, but the Calendarium record would suggest she was probably born closer to c.1406.
< < DR: As Mr. Higgins has kindly pointed out, Complete Peerage 12(1) (1953): 6, note g (sub Slane) indicates that John Wogan's eldest daughter and heiress, Elizabeth Wogan, was married by papal dispensation dated 11 May 1422 to Christopher Fleming, Lord Slane, son and heir of Thomas Fleming, Lord Slane, by Elizabeth, daughter of Robert Preston, Knt., by his 1st wife, Margaret, daughter of Walter de Bermingham, Knt., of Castle Carbury, co. Kildare, Chief Governor of Ireland. The dispensation for this marriage is found in Cal. of Entries in the Papal Registers: Papal Letters, 1417-1431, pg. 221, which indicates that Elizabeth Wogan and Christopher Fleming were related in the 3rd and 4th degrees of affinity.
> BV: Here is the exact papal register entry:
> BV: "1422...5 Id. May. St. Peter's, Rome. To the archbishop of Armagh. Mandate to dispense Christopher Flemyng, donsel, and Elizabeth Wogan, damsel, of the diocese of Meath (Minden.), to marry notwithstanding that they are related in the third and fourth degrees of affinity. Edward, bishop of Meath, who ought to have been written to. is at present absent (in remotis agat). Oblate nobis. (f.92)"
There is a second record of the dispensation for this marriage which you missed. Where is it?
> > DR: Assuming that Elizabeth Wogan was approximately aged 15 at the time of he marriage, this would place her birth as about 1407.
> BV: We know she was still a minor (under 16) the year previous, in April 1421.
"We know" (who is we?). Once again you have made a blanket statement about the age of a minor female which is not necessarily true.
> > DR: Complete Peerage 12(1) (1953): 6, note g (sub Slane) notes that a John Wogan (doubtless Elizabeth's father) is recorded by Hollinshed as having married in 1411 to the eldest daughter of Christopher Preston. The record in Hollinshed is attributed by Complete Peerage as being in Hollinshed, Chronicle of Ireland, p. 75. However, I found the marriage recorded in Hollished's Chronicles of England, Scotland & Ireland 6 (1808): 263. It reads as follows:
> > DR: "In the year 1411, marriages were celebrated among the nobilitie in Ireland .... John Wogan matched with the eldest daughter of Christopher Preston." END OF QUOTE.
> BV: Great. Nice work going to the original chronicle source.
The record of this marriage was actually first published in Spencer, Ancient Irish Histories: A View of the State of Ireland (1809): 23-24, and reads as follows:
Henry Marleburrough's Chronicle sub A.D. 1411: "And on Saint Valentines Even and Day, Mariages were Celebrated between John Wogan, and the Daughter of Christopher Preston and Walter de la Hide, and the second daughter of the same Christopher, with a great deale of charges." END OF QUOTE.
This same record was again published in Ware, Antiquities and History of Ireland (1705): 71, and again at a later date slightly altered by Hollinshed.
> BV: Ummm, why is there no corresponding mention of John Wogan's marriage to a daughter (or sister, if the marriage took place after the earl's 1405 death) of the earl of Ormonde, in an Irish chronicle? That would have been an even more prestigious match...
Henry Marleburrough's Chronicle overlooks many major events. What appears to have caught his interest is that the two marriages incurred "a great deale of charges." Must have been a great double wedding!
> > DR: If correct, then Elizabeth Wogan's step-mother, Margaret Preston, would have been the first cousin of her husband, Christopher Fleming, Lord Slane. Since the papal dispensation makes no mention of Elizabeth Wogan and Christopher Fleming themselves being related in the 2nd degree, it seems clear that Margaret Preston was not the mother of Elizabeth Wogan.
> BV: Agreed. Nice deductive work.
> > DR: We can be certain of this for another reason as Elizabeth Wogan was born c.1407, whereas John Wogan did not marry Margaret Preston until 1411.
> BV: You are on shakier ground here. We only know that Elizabeth was under age 16 in April 1421, you are only guessing that she was about age 15 when the papal dispensation was granted the next year. Marriage dispensations could be granted for children of any age, even infants. She is described as "damsel" in the dispensation. I don't know if an age can be determined from that descriptor.
The grant by Elizabeth Wogan recorded in Rotulorum Patentium et Clausorum Cancellariae Hiberniae Calendarium 1(1) (1828): 219 suggests she was already 16 in October 1421, or born c.1405. So, no, I'm not on shakier ground.
> > DR: This means, of course, that John Wogan [died 1421] must have had two wives, and that his surviving wife, Margaret Preston, was a later wife.
> BV: It would appear to be the case that Elizabeth Wogan and her husband Christopher Fleming were not related by blood. *IF* all of the parentage CP assumed for Christopher Fleming, and for Margaret Preston Wogan, is accurate, then yes, Margaret Preston could not have been the mother of Elizabeth Wogan.
> BV: This is as far as you have gone, Douglas. You have shown using a contemporary 15th-century record (the 1422 marriage dispensation) that the eldest (and only the eldest) daughter of John Wogan, namely Elizabeth, can not have been descended from the daughter of Christopher Preston whom the chronicle reports was married to John Wogan in 1411.
> BV: Because of this, you have opened the possibility that John Wogan had a previous wife to Margaret Preston. You are now making a tremendous leap that the previous wife was a daughter of the 3rd earl of Ormonde, with only a pedigree from about 1600 to back you up.
The marriage of John Wogan and Anne Butler was almost certainly drawn from the muniments of the Phillips family, of Picton Castle, Pembrokshire. Picton Castle was an ancient Wogan family property and had descended by inheritance to the Phillips family.
> DR: You have not found a single piece of corroborating evidence, that pre-dates 1600, that James, the third earl of Ormonde, had any daughter at all, let alone one named Anne married to John Wogan.
> BV: Of the 24 separate sources you cite as support for your account, *not a single one of them* states that he had a daughter Anne, wife of John Wogan. Wow, not a single one. Not CP, not Collins's Peerage, not Lodge's Peerage of Ireland, not a single one of those 24 sources makes mention of a daughter married to John Wogan. What? Did the Butlers of Ormonde forget all about it?
As far as I know, there is no reliable pedigree of the Butler family either in print or in private hands. Over the years I've had to assemble the various children of the Earls of Ormond from a variety of sources.
In dismissing my list of sources, you overlooked several which support the marriage of John Wogan and Anne Butler. Did you overlook mention of their marriage in your haste to trash this line, or did you patiently go through available sources as I have done? I think you already had your mind made up.
> BV: By the way, the daughter "Joan (wife of Teige O'Carroll)" you also give to the 3rd Earl of Ormonde and Anne Welles above, is an error. Teige O'Carroll married Joan Butler, daughter of the 2nd (not the 3rd) Earl of Ormonde:
> BV: http://books.google.ca/books?ei=XGw1VMTVMoHloATixIK4BA&id=tQGFAAAAIAAJ&dq=Teige+O%27Carroll+married+Joan+Butler&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=Joan+Butler
> BV: Joan, no doubt named for her maternal grandmother Joan de Burgh, Lady Darcy, apparently died of the plague in 1383, so it is chronologically impossible for her to have been the daughter of the 3rd Earl of Ormonde and Anne Welles:
> BV: http://books.google.ca/books?ei=d201VMWgCtbkoATF14KABw&id=mlgyAQAAMAAJ&dq=Joan+Butler+O%27Carroll+1383&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=Joan+Butler+1383
I've seen Joan Butler assigned as daughter of both the 2nd and 3rd Earl of Ormond. I'm sure you're correct, however. I'll remove her as the daughter of the 3rd Earl. Thank you for this correction.
> > DR: While it is possible that Anne, wife of John Wogan, might be an illegitimate daughter of James le Boteler, 3rd Earl of Ormond, I believe the fact that John Wogan's father, Sir David Wogan, was styled a nobleman and that he held extensive estates, including two castles, negates against that idea. Sir David Wogan would have been in a position socially to have married his son and heir, John Wogan, to a legitimate daughter of James, 3rd Earl of Ormond.
> BV: This argument of yours then begs the question - If the Wogans were an important enough family to be given a legitimate daughter of the earl of Ormonde in marriage, why is there complete silence on this in Butler of Ormonde pedigrees?
That's a silly statement. You seem to be implying that the Butlers of Ormond preserved a reliable pedigree of their family. Really? Where?
Sir David Wogan, styled a nobleman in his lifetime, was clearly an important enough man for his son and heir, John Wogan, to have married a daughter of the Earl of Ormond. I might note that Sir David Wogan, for example, appears in numerous contemporary records in Rotulorum Patentium et Clausorum Cancellariae Hiberniae Calendarium. He was an important figure in his day.
> > DR: Also the given name of John Wogan's wife, Anne, fits nicely with her being the daughter of Earl James' lawful wife, Anne Welles.
> BV: It's only Welsh Wogan pedigrees from about 1600 that give John Wogan's wife the first name of 'Anne'. A contemporary document from 1421 states that his wife's name was 'Margaret'.
I've presented sufficient evidence which shows that Margaret was John Wogan's surviving second wife.
> > DR: I believe the reason for the accuracy of this particular set of pedigrees is that the senior line of the Wogan family, namely the Phillips family, were still in possession of Picton Castle, Pembrokeshire (an ancient Wogan family holding), at the time Lewis Dwnn was doing his work. It is likely that the Phillips family provided Lewis Dwnn access to their family muniments and, based on those original documents, he was able to construct a reliable pedigree from Sir David Wogan (died 1417), grandson of Sir John Wogan, Justiciar of Ireland [died 1321], down to the various Welsh co-heirs of the Wogan family.
> BV: Rather than speculating/fantasizing about the state of the muniments in Picton Castle, Pembrokeshire in about 1600 (and thanks for the laugh which that colourful account provided me), you'd be better off speculating and researching about life for the Butlers of Ormonde and the Wogans in county Kilkenny in about 1400.
Lewis Dwnn recorded accurate pedigrees of the Wogan family starting with Sir David Wogan [died c.1417] and going down for the next four generations. I presented the proofs documenting the pedigrees from contemporary records.
The only error that I know Dwnn made is that he referred to John Wogan's daughter, Anne, in two places as Anne and once as Joan. Her correct name was Anne. It's a minor error but still an error.
BV: Other than them living in the same county, is there any evidence that indicates a connection, let alone a blood tie, existed between the two families?
I read a statement in print this last week that Sir John Wogan [died 1321], the famous Justiciar of Ireland, was the chief tenant of the Earl of Ormond. Sir John Wogan's extensive Irish land holdings descended to his grandson, Sir David Wogan. As such, I assume this made Sir David Wogan the chief tenant of the Earl of Ormond in his generation.
> > DR: Next the pedigrees inform us that John Wogan was married to Anne, daughter of the Earl of Ormond, and that they had two daughters, Katherine and Anne. We know from the record of the administration of the estates of John Wogan dated 1421, that he was survived by a wife, Margaret (who was evidently a second wife), and four daughters, Elizabeth, Katherine, Joan, and Agnes. The daughters Katherine and Agnes would would be the daughters Katherine and Anne named in the Welsh pedigree. The name Agnes was interchangeable with Anne in this time period.
> BV: Can you provide a concrete example where the names 'Anne' and 'Agnes' are interchangeable in the early 15th-century?
Yes, I can. Ellis, Original letters, illustrative of English history, 2nd Ser. 1 (1827), pages 117-124 presents a contemporary letter dated 1454 in which Anne Wogan, widow of Oliver Eustace, is called both Anne and Anneis. Anne, Agnes, Anneis, Annis are all interchangeable name forms.
BV: Francis Green in 1919 thought that it was Joan Wogan, not her sister Agnes, who was married to Oliver Eustace. I can see 'Jo-Ann' and 'Ann' being interchangeable a lot easier than 'Agnes' and 'Ann'.
Jo-Ann indeed. You have a lot of learn.
> > DR: Elsewhere I find that Joseph Hunter, Rotuli selecti ad res anglicas et hibernicas spectantes (1834): 86 includes a contemporary record dated 24 October 1426, which specifically names Anne and Katherine, minor daughters of John Wogan son and heir of David Wogan knight. This record reads as follows:
> > Idemq' dns Rex xxiiij. die Octob'r anno quinto  p'dco de assensu d'ci justic' & consilii Regis &c. p xx marc' dno Regi p Ric'm fitz Eustace milit solvend' ad recept' sca'cii Hibn' concessit & vendidit eid'm Ric'o custodiam oim t'ras & ten que fuerunt David Wogan militis vel Joh'is Wogan fil & hered' p'dci David & que p morte p'dci David vel Joh'is & rone minoris etatis Anne Wogan & Kat'ine Wogan filia's & hered' p'dci Joh'is ac consanguineas p'fati David in manib's Regis &c. hend' usq. ad plenum etatem her' p'dict &c. et sic de hered' in hered' &c. que val' p a[nnu]m xl. marc'.
> DR: Great find, Douglas. Of course since Anne and Katherine were minors in October 1426, they were under age 16, so born after 1410.
Once again you have fallen into the trap of assuming a "minor" unmarried female had not yet achieved aged 16 when a guardian was appointed for her by the king. That may or may not be true. The exact thing to say is that the Wogan girls hadn't yet proven their age. And that is a different matter.
> > DR: With these new pieces of evidence, additional proof has been adduced to further verify the accuracy of the Wogan pedigrees published by Meyrick. I conclude therefore that the Wogan pedigrees are reliable and can be trusted in their statements that John Wogan [died 1421] married Anne daughter of the Earl of Ormond.
As stated above, I'm satisfied that this line is sound.