Bastard Children of King Henry II of England
Douglas Richardson
Below is a list of the illegitimate children of King Henry II of
England taken from variety of sources. The list below includes one
new bastard daughter not seen on previous lists, namely, Maud Fitz
Roy, Abbess of Barking. Maud is a separate and distinct person from
her niece, Maud, illegitimate daughter of King John, who also served
as Abbess of Barking.
If anyone has any corrections or additions to the list below, I'd
appreciate it if they would post them here on the newsgroup.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
- - - - - - - - - -
LIST OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN OF KING HENRY II OF ENGLAND
Illegitimate child of Henry II, by a mistress, Ykenai or Hikenai _____
(she was living 1180/1) [Reference: Great Roll of the Pipe A.D.
1180-1181 (Pipe Roll Soc., vol. 30) ((1909): xxiv,64 ("mater G.
cancellarii"):
i. GEOFFREY FITZ ROY, born about 1153. As a child, he was put into
deacon's orders and made Archdeacon of Lincoln. In 1173 he was
elected Bishop of Lincoln at his father's request, which election was
confirmed in 1175. In 1182 he resigned his bishopric and was
appointed by his father Chancellor of England, which post he held
until his father's death in 1189. In 1189 he was nominated Archbishop
of York by his brother, King Richard I, was formally ordained a
priest, but was not consecrated in his office until 1191. Geoffrey
was zealous in raising money for his brother, Richard's ransom in
1193, which later led to a charge of spoilation and extortion by the
canons of York. In 1195 he was suspended for contumacy, but the
following year was restored to his office. In 1207 he disputed with
his brother, King John, about taxing church revenues for the royal
treasury. After issuing an anathema against the collectors and payers
of the tax, he fled overseas in despair. GEOFFREY FITZ ROY,
Archbishop of York, died at Notre-Dame-du-Parc (commonly called
Grandmount) near Rouen, France on or about 18 Dec. 1212. D.N.B. 7
(1908): 1018-1024 (biog. of Geoffrey, archbishop of York) ("...
"secular office in his father's service ... as Geoffrey's true
vocation ... [he possessed] an impracticable self-will and an
ungovernable temper"). D.M. Stenton, Great Roll of the Pipe
Michaelmas 1194 (Pipe Roll Soc., n.s., vol. 5) (1928), pp. xxviij,165
(his unnamed "sister" (sorori archiepiscopi) mentioned in 1194). D.
L. Douie Archbishop Geoffrey Plantagenet and the Chapter of York
(Borthwick Papers, no. 18) (1960) (Archbishop Geoffrey had a brother,
Peter, Archdeacon of Lincoln, who occurs c. 1191-1217). J.C. Davies,
Cartae Antiquae (Pipe Roll Soc., n.s., vol. 33) (1960), pg. 131
(Geoffrey styled "my son" (filio meo) by King Henry II). NEHGR 119
(1965): 94-102. C. Given-Wilson & A. Curteis, Royal Bastards of
Medieval England (1984), pp. 103-125,179. J.C. Holt, Acta of Henry II
and Richard I (List & Index Soc., special series, v. 21) (1986), pg.
39.
Illegitimate child of Henry II, by unknown mistress, _____:
i. MAUD FITZ ROY, nun, appointed Abbess of Barking by her father, King
Henry II, about 1175, occurs 1198. Sir William Dugdale, Monasticon
Anglicanum 1 (1817): 437,441. VCH Essex 2 (1907): 120.
Illegitimate child of Henry II, by a mistress, Ida _____, presumably
daughter of Ralph V de Tony (died 1162), Baron of Flamstead, co.
Hertford, by Margaret, daughter of Robert, 2nd Earl of Leicester. Ida
later became the wife of Roger Bigod, Earl of Norfolk, Magna Carta
baron (died 1221) [see note under LONGESPEE 3]:
i. WILLIAM LONGESPÉE, Knt., Earl of Salisbury, married ELA OF
SALISBURY [see LONGESPEE 3].
Illegitimate child of Henry II, by a mistress, Alice of France,
daughter of Louis VII, King of France, by his 3rd wife, Alice,
daughter of Thibaut IV, Count of Blois and Champagne. She was born
about 1160. Alice was longtime fiancée of King Henry II's son,
Richard (afterwards King of England), who voided his marriage contract
with her at Messina in Mar. 1190/1. She was restored to her brother,
King Philip of France, in 1195. She married at Meudon 20 Aug. 1195
Guillaume III, Count of Ponthieu. She was living 18 July 1218. W.
Stubbs, Chronica Magistri Rogeri de Houedene 3: 302-303.
i. unnamed daughter, presumably born in or after 1177, died in
infancy. L. Landon, Itinerary of King Richard I (Pipe Roll Soc.,
n.s., vol. 13) (1935), pp. 224-232 (citing W. Stubbs, Gesta Regis
Henrici Secundi Benedicti Abbatis 2 (1867): 160; W. Stubbs, Chronica
Magistri Rogeri de Houedene 3: 99; Cambrensis 8:232; E. A. Bond,
Chronica Monasterii de Melsa 1 (1866): 255-256). NEHGR 119 (1965):
94-102.
Illegitimate child of Henry II, by a mistress, Nest, daughter of
Iowerth ap Owain, lord of Caerleon, by Angharad, daughter of Uchdrud,
Bishop of Llandaff: Nest later married Ralph Bluet, Knt. (died c.
1199), of Silchester, Hampshire and Lacock, Wiltshire.
i. MORGAN FITZ ROY, clerk. He was appointed Provost of Beverley in
1201. He was nominated as Bishop of Durham in 1213. He travelled to
Rome, but his election was quashed by the Pope. He died at Fountains
Abbey about 1217. Dict. Welsh Biog. (1959), pg. 638 (biog. of Morgan
ap Hywel). NEHGR 119 (1965): 94-102. P.C. Bartrum, Welsh
Genealogies, A.D. 300-1400 (1980) [Rhydderch ap Iestyn 1]. C.
Given-Wilson & A. Curteis, Royal Bastards of Medieval England (1984),
pp. 9-10,99,130,179. D. Crouch, William Marshal: Court, Career and
Chivalry in the Angevin Empire, 1147-1219 (1990), pp. 139-140,198-199.
N. Vincent, Letters & Charters of Cardinal Guala Bicchiere Papal
Legate in England 1216-1218 (Canterbury & York Soc., vol. 83) (1996),
pg. 55.
History Writer
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Below is a list of the illegitimate children of King Henry II of
> England taken from variety of sources. The list below includes one
> new bastard daughter not seen on previous lists, namely, Maud Fitz
> Roy, Abbess of Barking. Maud is a separate and distinct person from
> her niece, Maud, illegitimate daughter of King John, who also served
> as Abbess of Barking.
>
> If anyone has any corrections or additions to the list below, I'd
> appreciate it if they would post them here on the newsgroup.
>
> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
>
> E-mail: royala...@msn.com
>
If you have not done so, I recommend reading Walter Lee Sheppard's
article "The Bastards of Henry II" in the September 1964 issue of "The
Genealogists' Magazine", published by the Society of Genealogists.
Sheppard suggests that Alix de Porhoet, who is believed to have had a
child by Henry II in 1168, might be the mother of Williams Longespee.
Sheppard also found a reference to a "Richard the King's son" in the
Pipe Rolls for Suffolk during the reign of Richard I (vol 14, page
16), and believes this likely refers to a son of Henry II.
As for Alice of France, Alison Weir states in "Britain's Royal
Families" that she had four children by Henry II, all of whom died
young. Most histories seem to refer to just one, which was enough for
Richard I to convince Alice's brother to take her back. Weir states
that Matilda (i.e. Maud), Abbess of Barking, Essex, died by 1202.
Weir includes a few more apparently unsubstantiated children of Henry
II, including, with a question mark, Hugh of Wells, Bishop of Lincoln
(died 1235), as well as a Richard (also with a question mark - so
presumably the same one that Sheppard referred to).
Douglas Richardson
Thank you for mentioning the article by Mr. Sheppard. Yes, I've seen
this article. I've looked for the reference he mentioned for "Richard
the king's son" in the Pipe Rolls volumes but could not find it. It
is possible I overlooked it, however. The Pipe Rolls indexes are
extremely hard to use. The editors sometimes put the king's sons
under the king's name in the names index, sometimes under the child's
name in the names index, sometimes under the heading "filius Rex" in
the name's index, and sometimes they are put in the subject index
under the king! Or the entry may simply have been indexed as Richard
with no reference to him being the "king's son." Needless to say, it
is quite frustrating to use such indexes. All the same, I'll be sure
to check again for this citation when I go to the library again. In
this case, Mr. Sheppard's reference doesn't give the year of
publication, nor the year of the item. It would help to have that
information.
As for Alice of France, Lionel Landon's book, Itinerary of Richard I,
includes an excellent account of Alice's life in England which source
I have cited. According to contemporary sources, King Richard
believed that his father, King Henry, had seduced Alice. That much is
very clear. Alice is stated in a couple of sources cited by Landon to
have had an illegitimate daughter by the king who died young. If Mr.
Landon has his sources correctly stated (and I believe he does), then
Ms. Weir is incorrect to allege that Alice had four illegitimate
children by King Henry II. There was only one daughter who died
young.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
hbv...@aol.com (History Writer) wrote in message news:<3943286.03011...@posting.google.com>...
History Writer
>
> Thank you for mentioning the article by Mr. Sheppard. Yes, I've seen
> this article. I've looked for the reference he mentioned for "Richard
> the king's son" in the Pipe Rolls volumes but could not find it. It
> is possible I overlooked it, however. The Pipe Rolls indexes are
> extremely hard to use. The editors sometimes put the king's sons
> under the king's name in the names index, sometimes under the child's
> name in the names index, sometimes under the heading "filius Rex" in
> the name's index, and sometimes they are put in the subject index
> under the king! Or the entry may simply have been indexed as Richard
> with no reference to him being the "king's son." Needless to say, it
> is quite frustrating to use such indexes. All the same, I'll be sure
> to check again for this citation when I go to the library again. In
> this case, Mr. Sheppard's reference doesn't give the year of
> publication, nor the year of the item. It would help to have that
> information.
>
and dismissed as well as the Hugh of Wells story. This is from a 1998
posting by D. Sharp:
"For Hugh of Wells, Bishop of Lincoln (d 1235), DNB and the sources
quoted there show that he was the eldest son of Edward of Wells.
The only mention of Richard is in Rotulus Curiae Regis Ric I no 1
(Pipe
Roll Soc 14 p 16) where Ric' fil Reg' appears in a plea of land in
Trinity
1194. Since king Richard was not then old enough to have an adult son
the
entry has been explained by making him a son of Henry II. It would be
surprising if the king's own court called him a son when he was a
brother
and surely there is another answer. The same person does occur earlier
in
this plea where the name is written as Ric' fil' Rog'. The conclusion
must be
that his father was Roger and they were not related to the king."
.:Nichol:.
> (Pipe
> Roll Soc 14 p 16) where Ric' fil Reg' appears in a plea of land in
> Trinity
> 1194. Since king Richard was not then old enough to have an adult son
> the
> entry has been explained by making him a son of Henry II. It would be
> surprising if the king's own court called him a son when he was a
> brother
> and surely there is another answer. The same person does occur earlier
> in
> this plea where the name is written as Ric' fil' Rog'. The conclusion
> must be
> that his father was Roger and they were not related to the king."
Hypothetically, if Richard fil. Reg/Rog were son of King Henry II, it
seems odd to me that he would be called "son of the king" (Henry II,
who was deceased in 1189) rather than "brother of the king" (Richard
II). I agree that this Richard fil. Reg/Rog was probably the son of a
man named Reginald or Roger, and not the bastard son of any king at
all.
.:Nichol:.
Douglas Richardson
Thank you for re-posting D. Sharp's comments about this reference to
"Ric. fil. Reg." in the court records of King Richard I. He is
correct that there is a reference in the same suit to a "Ric. fil.
Rog." I noticed that as well. Given the fragmentary nature of the
notes of this case, though, I don't think we can necessarily assume
that "Ric. fil. Reg." is the same person as "Ric. fil. Rog." I
suspect Mr. Sharp is right, however. The original copy of this suit
was obviously not in good condition when it was abstracted for
publication. If so, it is certainly possible to read faded entries of
the same name two different ways in the same record.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
hbv...@aol.com (History Writer) wrote in message news:<3943286.03011...@posting.google.com>...
Richard Smith
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 8:32 AM
Subject: Bastard Children of King Henry II of England
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Below is a list of the illegitimate children of King Henry II of
> England taken from variety of sources. The list below includes one
> new bastard daughter not seen on previous lists, namely, Maud Fitz
> Roy, Abbess of Barking. Maud is a separate and distinct person from
> her niece, Maud, illegitimate daughter of King John, who also served
> as Abbess of Barking.
>
> If anyone has any corrections or additions to the list below, I'd
> appreciate it if they would post them here on the newsgroup.
>
> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
>
> E-mail: royala...@msn.com
>
> - - - - - - - - - -
>
> LIST OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN OF KING HENRY II OF ENGLAND
>
> *****
> Illegitimate child of Henry II, by unknown mistress, _____:
>
> i. MAUD FITZ ROY, nun, appointed Abbess of Barking by her father, King
> Henry II, about 1175, occurs 1198. Sir William Dugdale, Monasticon
> Anglicanum 1 (1817): 437,441. VCH Essex 2 (1907): 120.
> *****
At a time when surnames were unknown, how was it that an abbess was called
"Maud, son of the king?"
How will Richardson index his book? "Fitz Roy, Maud"
What about the archbishop? "Fitz Roy, Geoffroy"
If the number of female sons of kings grows as it will by Richardson, we
shall have great fun reading and laughing about Richardson's fascination
with "sons of fitz's" and other oddities squeezed in, after otherwise
unknown surnames.
Much more fun to be had when reading further comments on Richarsons lists of
bastards.
Suggestion: examine the parentage of the Alix of France who was the intended
of Richard I. More to come.
RSmith
Douglas Richardson
It was common for the bastard son of the king to be styled "filius
Regis" even after his father the king died. The modern equivalent of
"filius Regis" is Fitz Roy. A similar counterpart may be seen in the
Latin style "filius Comitis" which is uniformly translated by editors
and historians as "Fitz Count." Actually "Fitz Earl" would be a
better designation I think. Occasionally I find "filius Regis"
translated as "the king's son" instead of "Fitz Roy." Either is
correct in my opinion.
A good example of the practice of referring back to one's deceased
"progenitor" is "Thomas nepos Comitis," who was styled as such in the
lifetime of his uncle, Robert, Earl of Gloucester, as well as during
the lifetime of Robert's son and successor, William, Earl of
Gloucester. One might argue that Thomas was grandson (nepos) to Earl
Robert and nephew (nepos) to Earl William, as the word "nepos" can be
translated as either grandson or nephew. However, in this case, I
suspect the term was used exclusively to mean "nephew of Earl William"
and that this was fully understood by Thomas' contemporaries. Other
men appear in records of this period styled "nepos Episcopi" (clearly
Bishop's nephew).
Curiously, I have found references in the Surrey or Sussex fines to a
family actually surnamed "le Fitz Rey." I assume this family descends
from a bastard son of one of the early English kings. So far, I
haven't been able to determine which king is the ancestor of this
family. However, given the number of bastards procreated by Kings
Henry I and King John, a fair guess would be that one of these kings
is the ancestor implied in the term "Rey." In this one instance, "le
Fitz Rey" became a fixed surname passing from generation to
generation. This is the exception to the rule, however.
This is as complex or simple as it gets (depending on your point of
view).
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
Nichol...@yahoo.com (.:Nichol:.) wrote in message news:<f7dc395a.03011...@posting.google.com>...
Reedpcgen
during Richard's reign, never fil. Reg. during RIchard's rule (that I am aware
of).
Is he not a better comparison?
I'd feel more comfortable with the Latin term which appears in record, or
Anglo-Norman, for that matter, set off in quotes, rather than imposing the
"surname" Fitz Roy in this period AS a SURNAME. They may have sometimes been
styled in records as son or brother of the King, but that was not a surname.
Paul
D. Spencer Hines
Just stick with the Latin or Anglo-Norman ---- whatever is actually in the
record. Set off in half-quotes is fine.
Don't try to tart it up for the 21st Century reader....
That's where Richardson is making his blunder....
Richard Smith's instincts are correct. Or is it _Smyth[e]_?
In other words:
Don't muck about with it.
Of course, if Richardson hasn't actually LOOKED at the record...only the
secondary source....
Ay, there's the rub....
Deus Vult.
"For by diligent perusing the actes of great men, by considering all the
circumstances of them, by composing Counseiles and Meanes with events, a man
may seem to have lived in all ages, to have been present at all enterprises,
to be more strongly confirmed in Judgement, to have attained a greater
experience than the longest life can possibly afford."
John Hayward, __The Lives of the III Norman Kings of England, William the
First, William the Second and Henry I__, London, 1612, Preface
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly. All original material
contained herein is copyright and property of the author. It may be quoted
only in discussions on this forum and with an attribution to the author,
unless permission is otherwise expressly given, in writing.
------------
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor.
"Reedpcgen" <reed...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030116164529...@mb-dh.aol.com...
Douglas Richardson
The style "Fitz Roy" is a modern convention designed to convey an
approximation of the original Latin text. That is all.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
ptr...@cox.net ("Richard Smith") wrote in message news:<001801c2bd8f$ba48c760$d829...@ks.ok.cox.net>...
> Richardson wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com>
> To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 8:32 AM
> Subject: Bastard Children of King Henry II of England
>
>
D. Spencer Hines
Christian name, in quotes or half-quotes, in the notes ---- if he has actually
read the primary source.
As Paul Reed, among others, has already stated ---- and calling him Philip of
Cognac.
Eschew "Modern Conventions" For Mediaeval Names ---- And Avoid Egregious
Pratfall.
Further, _Fitz Roy_ is ANOTHER amusing blunder....
It's _FitzRoy_.
Vide, CP VI, Appendix F.
Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum.
Deus Vult.
"For by diligent perusing the actes of great men, by considering all the
circumstances of them, by composing Counseiles and Meanes with events, a man
may seem to have lived in all ages, to have been present at all enterprises,
to be more strongly confirmed in Judgement, to have attained a greater
experience than the longest life can possibly afford."
John Hayward, __The Lives of the III Norman Kings of England, William the
First, William the Second and Henry I__, London, 1612, Preface
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly. All original material
contained herein is copyright and property of the author. It may be quoted
only in discussions on this forum and with an attribution to the author,
unless permission is otherwise expressly given, in writing.
------------
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor.
"Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5cf47a19.03011...@posting.google.com...