Eleanor de Bohun's Plantagenet Ancestry?
Shawn Potter
Eleanor de Bohun, wife of John de Verdun and daughter of Humphrey de
Bohun, 1st Earl of Hereford, and Maud de Avenbury. I infer from the
following (perhaps incorrectly) that Eleanor de Bohun has Plantagenet
ancestry.
Douglas Richardson wrote in message news:<5cf47a19.02020...@posting.google.com>...
> ... Needless to say, the publication date has been delayed a bit to the
> multiple new discoveries which have occured in recent time, such Ela
> de Herdeburgh, Margaret Mowbray, Gladys Dhu, Eleanor de Bohun, and
> Margery de Bohun...
Can someone post Eleanor de Bohun's Plantagenet ancestry? I searched
the archives for an explanation of the connection without success.
Thanks,
Shawn Potter
Arthur Murata
Bohuns or perhaps you have your Earls of Hereford mixed up
in terms of the numbering sequence. What I have is that the
1st Earl of Hereford whose name was de Bohun was one Henry,
also Sheriff of Kent and Constable of England, b. c. 1176
and d. while on pilgrimage in 1220, married c. 1199 to Maud
FitzGeffrey de Mandeville, Countess of Essex, c. 1178-Aug.
27, 1236. They, however, would obviously be much too early
to have a child who could bear the name "Plantagenet" (and
yes, of course, it was not actually a 'surname'....).
On the other hand, if you want a Humphrey de Bohun who had
a daughter, Eleanor, with "Plantagenet" heritage, try the
8th Earl of Hereford, also 10th Earl of Essex and Lord High
Constable of England, born February 1277, d. March 16, 1322
in Yorkshire, who, on November 14, 1302, at Westminster
Abbey, married Elizabeth, daughter of King Edward I. They
had a daughter, Eleanor, born in 1310-d. Ocober 7, 1363. I
don't have the complete in front of me right now to look
for other marriages, but she certainly married James Butler
who, upon that marriage, became 1st Earl of Ormond. Eleanor
de Bohun and James Butler are my 21st g-grandparents. By
the way, you wouldn't be a Shawn Potter from central
California, would you? Best, Bronwen Edwards
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
Douglas Richardson
Thank you for your good post.
In answer to your question, the maternity of Eleanor de Bohun, wife of
Sir John de Verdun, is still uncertain. If Eleanor was the daughter
of Humphrey de Bohun's lst wife, Maud of Eu, she would possess
Plantagenet ancestry. If she is the daughter of Humphrey's 2nd wife,
Maud of Avenbury, she would not.
After giving the matter some thought, I've decided to include Eleanor
de Bohun's descendants in the forthcoming Plantagenet Ancestry book.
I plan to make it clear that Eleanor's maternity is not certain.
While the evidence is not clear about Eleanor's maternity, Mr. Hagger
(the Verdun family historian) claims that Eleanor de Bohun married
John de Verdun by the year 1258. If so, it seems to me that the odds
are good that Eleanor was the daughter of Maud of Eu, who died in
1241. As a general rule, women of this station were around 12-14
when they were married, sometimes younger. If we used this rule of
thumb, and knowing that Eleanor was married by 1258, it would suggest
that Eleanor was born by 1244/6 at the latest.
Second, as I noted in an earlier post, we have another reason to
suppose that Eleanor was born before 1245. Eleanor's husband, John de
Verdun, married (lst) in 1244 to Margaret de Lacy, by whom he had
several children. Historically, as a rule, second wives are at least
as old as their oldest step-child. If so, this would suggest that
Eleanor was born before 1245, the year her oldest step-child was
presumably born. In fact, 1245 would represent the latest limit of
her birth. If we made Eleanor just five years older than her oldest
step-child (certainly well within the evidence), it would make Eleanor
the daughter of Maud of Eu.
Finally, a third way to extrapolate Eleanor de Bohun's birthdate would
be to examine the size of family John de Verdun had by his first wife,
Margaret de Lacy, then try to estimate the likely date of his 2nd
marriage to Eleanor. My notes show John had three sons by Margaret,
the youngest, Theobald, being born about 1248. If Theobald was the
youngest child by Margaret, then John de Verdun's marriage to Eleanor
could have taken place as early as say 1250. If so, and if Eleanor
was aged 12 to 14 at marriage, then Eleanor would have been born about
1236/8. A birth date of 1236/8 would make Eleanor the daughter of
Maud of Eu.
However, I need to reexamine Cris Nash's post of Mr. Hagger's material
to see if John de Verdun may had more than the three sons I show for
his first marriage. If there were more children, it would obviously
push Eleanor de Bohun's birthdate later into the period. Right now,
however, based on the analysis above, we have a birth range for
Eleanor of 1236/8 to 1245. This looks good for Eleanor de Bohun to
be the child of Earl Humphry de Bohun's lst wife, Maud of Eu (died
1241), as any child by Earl Humphrey's 2nd wife, Maud of Avenbury, was
presumably born no earlier than 1243. I'll post again after I've
restudied the Hagger material.
If anyone else has some thoughts on this matter, I would appreciate
hearing them.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
shp...@home.com (Shawn Potter) wrote in message news:<1bb11216.02020...@posting.google.com>...
Douglas Richardson
I checked the newsgroup archives and couldn't find anything posted by
Cris Nash regarding Mark Hagger's material on the children of John de
Verdun's first marriage to Margaret de Lacy. Hopefully if Cris sees
this post, he can tell us what Mr. Hagger has to say about John de
Verdun's children.
Checking my files, I see they state that John de Verdun's first wife,
Margaret de Lacy, died in 1256. If so, then a marriage of 1257/8 for
his 2nd marriage to Eleanor de Bohun would reasonable. However, I
don't know the source for the 1256 deathdate for Margaret de Lacy.
Incidentally, in my previous post, I forgot to mention that another
method I use to help extrapolate dates is 85 years for three
generations, which breaks down to roughly 28 years per each
generation. It's unwise to use the average for any one generation.
However, with that warning, we know that Eleanor de Bohun's son,
Humphrey de Verdun, was born in 1267. If we subtract 28 years from
that, we get 1239 for Eleanor's birthdate. Or we can take Eleanor's
great-grandchildren and subtract 85 years. I show one
great-grandson, Reynold de Grey of Wilton, was born in 1311.
Subtracting 85 years suggests a birthdate for Eleanor of 1226.
Another great-grandson was Reynold de Grey of Ruthin, who was born
about 1319. Subtracting 85 years from that date suggests a birthdate
of 1234 for Eleanor.
Reviewing these findings, we see the one generation extrapolation
suggests that Eleanor was born about 1239, and that the three
generation extrapolation suggests that Eleanor was born in the period,
1226-1234. By either method, it suggests Eleanor was the daughter of
Maud of Eu. However, averages are just that - averages. You can
only use them as a rule of thumb. In any one given situation, they
may or may not apply.
Regardless, as best I can tell, it is more likely that Eleanor de
Bohun was the daughter of Maud of Eu, and barely possible for her to
be the daughter of Maud of Avenbury. Hopefully, a little proding in
the records may yield more answers to the question of Eleanor de
Bohun's maternity.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
royala...@msn.com (Douglas Richardson) wrote in message news:<5cf47a19.0202...@posting.google.com>...
Shawn Potter
Douglas,
Thank you for taking the time to provide such an excellent answer to my question.
Best wishes,
Shawn
Douglas Richardson
Thank you for your good post.
The Eleanor de Bohun that Shawn and I are discussing is Eleanor de
Bohun, 2nd wife of Sir John de Verdun (died 1274), of Alton, co.
Stafford, who I have identified as a daughter of Humphrey de Bohun
(died 1275), Earl of Hereford. Eleanor is mentioned in CP under
Verdun. Unfortunately, her parentage is not identified there, nor are
any living descendants traced. That may be why you haven't heard of
Eleanor before now.
As it turns out, Eleanor (de Bohun) de Verdun was mother of at least
one surviving child, Maud de Verdun, wife of John de Grey, 2nd Lord
Grey of Wilton, co. Hereford. Eleanor's daughter, Maud, has many
descendants, among them at least one third to one half of the people
who post here on the newsgroup. If you search the archives, you will
find several posts on Eleanor de Bohun and her daughter, Maud de
Verdun.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
lostc...@yahoo.com (Arthur Murata) wrote in message news:<2002021000081...@web13302.mail.yahoo.com>...
Douglas Richardson
Since posting earlier today, I've came across yet another
great-grandchild of Eleanor (de Bohun) de Verdun. The new
great-grandchild is Roger de Moels, who I show was born about 1295
(age 21 in 1316). Roger de Moels was presumably Eleanor's eldest
great-grandchild, he being senior to the other two great-grandchildren
both named Reynold de Grey who I mentioned in my earlier post. Using
the 85 year rule of thumb for three geneations once again, this time
it suggests that Eleanor de Bohun was born about 1210. This is
clearly much earlier than Eleanor's actual birth.
Using the 85 year rule of thumb, I find that all three of Eleanor de
Bohun's great-grandchildren from different wings of her family support
a birthdate for her prior to 1241. As such, it seems highly likely to
me that she was a child of Earl Humphrey de Bohun's first wife, Maud
of Eu (died 1241).
Just for fun tonight, I randomly selected several other sets of three
generations from other families in this same time period. All the
families I examined ran 85 years for three generations right on the
money. So the 85 year rule of thumb is a pretty good indicator of
dates for families in this period. All the same, I must again stress
that this rule of thumb is based on averages, not individual
situations. Individual situations can and do vary from the average
norms.
In a related vein, I also pulled up three great-grandchildren of
Eleanor de Bohun's daughter, Maud de Verdun. Again, I used the 85
year rule of thumb. The three great-grandchildren for Maud de Verdun
I examined were Muriel de Moels, born about 1322, Henry de Grey of
Wilton, born 1338 or 1340, and Reynold Grey of Ruthin, born about
1362. Subtracting 85 years from each of these dates gives an
indicated birth date for Maud de Verdun of 1237, 1253-1255, and 1277.
The middle date seems to be the more likely estimate of Maud's birth
as Hagger states Maud's parents were married by 1258 and we know Maud
was married in or before 1276. If we accept that Maud de Verdun was
born about 1255, it again tells us that her mother Eleanor de Bohun
was almost certainly the child of Maud of Eu (died 1241).
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
shp...@home.com (Shawn Potter) wrote in message news:<1bb11216.02021...@posting.google.com>...
Cristopher Nash
I'm v. sorry to be so late in spotting these comments!
Mark Hagger believes John de Verdun had only four known children -
Nicholas, eldest, killed in Ireland 1271; John, about whom nothing is
known beyond the fact of his death at the same time; and Theobald,
who suc. his fa. in 1274. Hagger sees these three as "apparently by
John's first marriage to Margaret de Lacy"; the 4th ch. is Humphrey,
by Alianor de Bohun (p. 251).
Hagger, with whom I'm now in contact, in a preliminary guess thinks
it likely that Alianor/Eleanor is indeed the daughter of Humphrey de
Bohun (died 1275), E. of Hereford and Essex. If so, he
adds, >it might also provide some additional illumination on John de
Verdun's support of the baronial party during the early stages of
the Barons' War<.
>I checked the newsgroup archives and couldn't find anything posted by
>Cris Nash regarding Mark Hagger's material on the children of John de
>Verdun's first marriage to Margaret de Lacy. Hopefully if Cris sees
>this post, he can tell us what Mr. Hagger has to say about John de
>Verdun's children.
>
>Checking my files, I see they state that John de Verdun's first wife,
>Margaret de Lacy, died in 1256. If so, then a marriage of 1257/8 for
>his 2nd marriage to Eleanor de Bohun would reasonable. However, I
>don't know the source for the 1256 deathdate for Margaret de Lacy.
Hagger says the marriage is "by 1258" (p. 219) but without clear sign
of his reasoning (though this may be related to dates associated with
information he believes he gleans from the famous seal - carrying
Verdun and Bohun bearings - printed in William Salt, since it's to
this that he refers in his nearest footnote affecting Eleanor).
(Hagger repeats frequently that John de Verdun m. Margaret de Lacy by
1242.)
I'll pass on more details in response to the numerous questions I've
asked Hagger when/as they arrive. (I've invited him to join us
directly but suspect he may hold back at present; he's currently in
the throes of domestic developments and I want to give him plenty of
room.)
Cheers,
Cris
--
canberra
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cristopher Nash" <c...@windsong.u-net.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: Eleanor de Bohun's Plantagenet Ancestry?
> royala...@msn.com (Douglas Richardson) wrote on 10 Feb --
>
> I'm v. sorry to be so late in spotting these comments!
>
> Mark Hagger believes John de Verdun had only four known children -
> Nicholas, eldest, killed in Ireland 1271; John, about whom nothing is
> known beyond the fact of his death at the same time; and Theobald,
> who suc. his fa. in 1274. Hagger sees these three as "apparently by
> John's first marriage to Margaret de Lacy"; the 4th ch. is Humphrey,
> by Alianor de Bohun (p. 251).
====Where does that leave Maud who married John de Grey, 2nd Lord Grey of
Wilton?
Best wishes
Leo van de Pas
U...@aol.com
royala...@msn.com writes:
> Dear Shawn ~
>
> Since posting earlier today, I've came across yet another
> great-grandchild of Eleanor (de Bohun) de Verdun. The new
> great-grandchild is Roger de Moels, who I show was born about 1295
What I have:
Descendants of Eleanor de Bohun
1 Eleanor de Bohun
.. +John de Verdon b: Abt. 1226 m: Aft. 1256 d: 1274
2 Humphrey de Verdun b: 1267
2 Maud de Verdun
.. +John de Grey b: Abt. 1258 in Of Ruthin, Wilton-on-the-Wye, &c
d: 28 October 1323 Burial: Abt. 18 November 1323
3 Roger de Grey b: Abt. 1279 d: 06 March 1352/53
.. +Elizabeth de Hastings b: Abt. 1295
4 John de Grey b: Bef. 1319 d: Bet. 25 October 1348 - 04 May
1350
.. +Anneys de Montagu m: Abt. 12 June 1335
4 Reynold de Grey b: Abt. 1319 d: 04 August 1388
.. +Alianore Lestraunge d: 20 April 1396
4 Maud de Grey
.. +William de la Roche d: Abt. 1377
4 Juliane de Grey d: Abt. 01 December 1361
.. +John Talbot, Sir b: Abt. 29 September 1318 d: 20 September
1355
3 Henry de Grey b: Abt. 28 October 1281 d: Abt. 16 December 1342
.. +Anne de Rockley
4 Reynold de Grey b: 01 November 1311 d: Abt. 28 May 1370 in
Shirland
.. +Maud de la Vache m: Bef. 10 January 1327/28 d: 14 September
1391 in Shirland
3 Maud de Grey
.. +John de Moels m: Abt. 1302 d: 20 May 1310
4 Nicholas de Moels b: 10 August 1289 d: Bef. 29 January
1315/16
.. +Margaret de Courtenay d: 1349
4 Roger de Moels b: 11 June 1295 d: Bef. 13 July 1316
4 John de Moels b: in Of Maperton d: Bef. 21 August 1337
.. +Joan Lovel
3 Iseult de Grey
.. +Unknown St. Pierre
3 Joan de Grey d: Bef. 05 April 1353
.. +Ralph Basset d: 25 February 1342/43
4 John Basset d: Bef. 1342
4 Ralph Basset d: Abt. 1335
.. +Alice Audley m: Bef. 1335
Always optimistic--Dave
John Ravilious
Hello Dave,
Thanks for your post of the descendants (3 generations) of John de
Verdun and Eleanor de Bohun.
One note if I might. From the fine of 1311/2 by which John de
Grey directed the inheritance of (many of) his holdings, it is certain
that Roger de Moels (b. ca. June 1295), later 3rd Lord Moels, was the
son of Maud de Grey as you show him. Given that his elder brother
Nicholas - presumed to have been alive at the time, and having
succeeded his father (John de Moels, d. 1310) as 2nd Lord Moels - is
not named in the fine, we can be certain he was not the son of Maud de
Grey [cf. the earlier thread <Identification of Maud, wife of John de
Moels...> in Jan 2002; also CP Vol. VI-Grey, p. 153n], but rather the
elder son of John de Moels by a former wife yet unidentified.
I believe also that CP states John de Moels married Maud [now
identified as Maud de Grey] _before 1302_ . The marriage date was now
be best stated as _before 1295_ [birth date of Roger de Moels].
Good luck, and good hunting.
John
U...@aol.com wrote in message news:<c5.1deb465...@aol.com>...
Bryant Smith
> Tuesday, 12 February, 2002
>
> Given that his elder brother Nicholas - presumed to have been alive at the
> time, and having
> succeeded his father (John de Moels, d. 1310) as 2nd Lord Moels - is
> not named in the fine, we can be certain he was not the son of Maud de
I do not follow the logic which I assume is implicit here. Why does it
necessarily follow that because he was not named in the fine Nicholas
could not have been a full brother of Roger?
Saludos
Bryant Smith
Playa Palo Seco
Costa Rica