List of Children for Sir Edmund de Arundel & Sibyl de Montagu
Douglas Richardson
Sir Edmund de Arundel (born ca. 1329) was the only child of Richard de
Arundel (died 1376), 10th Earl of Arundel, 9th Earl of Surrey, by his
first wife, Isabel le Despenser. He married before July 1349 to Sibyl
de Montagu, daughter of William de Montagu, lst Earl of Salisbury.
Sir Edmund and Sibyl left issue, among whom are many American
descendants.
Sir Edmund de Arundel's history is a bit tangled, in that as a young
adult, he was bastardized by his parents' divorce. This in turn
deprived him of his father's lands and earldoms. Sir Edmund's
bastardization was surely awkward for all parties, especially since he
was near related to King Edward III through his mother, Isabel le
Despenser. That Sir Edmund was his parents' only child is indicated
by no less than three papal petitions involving his parents' divorce.
Yet Complete Peerage sub Arundel gives his parents no less than three
children, one of whom was Sir Edmund's own daughter and one who was
the widow of his first cousin, John le Strange.
Needless to say, I've had a difficult time finding primary sources
which indicate the names of Sir Edmund de Arundel's children or heirs,
or exactly when he died. Sir Edmund was living as late as 1377, when
he was freed from the Tower of London by the mainprise of his
brothers-in-law, Guy de Bryan, Lord Bryan, and John de Montagu, Lord
Montagu, and Robert Rous. The same year his half-brother, Richard de
Arundel, then Earl of Arundel and Surrey, complained that he and
others fished at his free fishery at High Rothing, Essex and "carried
away fish and other goods and £100 of money by tale there." Sir
Edmund's imprisonment and his theft at his brother's fishery in Essex
were evidently events triggered by a fight which ensued in 1376, on
the death of Edmund's father, Richard de Arundel, Sr., regarding
Edmund's inheritance.
Recently while combing through obscure law suits, I unexpectedly came
across a suit dated 1382 which names Sir Edmund de Arundel's heirs,
they being his daughters, Elizabeth (then wife of John de Meriett,
Knt.) and Philippe (then wife of Richard Sergeaux, Knt.), and a
grandson, Robert Deincourt (son of Edmund's deceased daughter,
Katherine). The suit states that Sir Edmund's heirs were dispossessed
by his half-brother, Richard, Earl of Arundel and Surrey, of tenements
in Singleton, Sussex. Presumably Sir Edmund died just previous to the
start of this lawsuit which appears to be dated 12 February 1382.
The suit states that Sir Edmund's grandson, Robert Deincourt, did not
join the lawsuit, but the reason for this was not given. The suit
was therefore continued by his aunts, Elizabeth and Philippe, who
appear to have lost the case, when it was judged that their father,
Edmund, was a bastard [Reference: Samuel E. Thorne, ed., Year Books of
Richard II, 1382-1383 (Ames Foundation, vol. 2) (1996): 66-69].
Interestingly, this suit reveals the name of a new grandson for Sir
Edmund de Arundel, namely Robert Deincourt, which individual I haven't
encountered previously. I'm uncertain as to the identity of Sir
Edmund de Arundel's grandson, Robert Deincourt. I presume he is the
Robert son of Robert Deincourt, Knt., who obtained seisin of his
father's inheritance in 1391, which consisted of the manor of Little
Walleye, co. Derby and a rent of 10 marks from the manor of Tuxford,
co. Nottingham. Robert's father, Robert, Sr., appears to have been a
younger son of William Deincourt, Lord Deincourt [Reference: Cal.
Close Rolls, 1389-1392, published 1922, pg. 457].
For interest sake, I have posted a list of colonial immigrants who
descend from Sir Edmund de Arundel. The specific descents down to the
American colonists will be found in the forthcoming book, Plantagenet
Ancestry, 3rd edition.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah, Home of Winter
2002 Olympics
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
- - - - - - -
List of Colonial immigrants who descend from Edmund de Arundel, Knt.
(died c. 1382) and his wife, Sibyl de Montagu:
l. William Bladen.
2. St.Leger Codd (two descents).
3. Francis Dade.
4. Edward Digges.
5. Henry Fleete.
6. Warham Horsmanden (two descents).
7. Edmund Jennings.
8. Mary Launce.
9. Anne Lovelace.
10. Katherine Saint Leger (two descents).
11. Diana & Grey Skipwith.
12. John Throckmorton.
Brad Verity
> Recently while combing through obscure law suits, I unexpectedly came
> across a suit dated 1382 which names Sir Edmund de Arundel's heirs,
> they being his daughters, Elizabeth (then wife of John de Meriett,
> Knt.) and Philippe (then wife of Richard Sergeaux, Knt.), and a
> grandson, Robert Deincourt (son of Edmund's deceased daughter,
> Katherine).
So, this will change a lot of people's databases, as it appears that
Sir Edmund did NOT have a daughter named Alice who married Sir Leonard
Carew (d. 1369), of Mohun's Ottery in Devonshire.
If Alice Carew had been his daughter, but died before him, then
certainly her son Sir Thomas Carew (born about 1368) would have been
one of Sir Edmund's heirs and named in the 1382 suit.
>The suit states that Sir Edmund's heirs were dispossessed
> by his half-brother, Richard, Earl of Arundel and Surrey, of tenements
> in Singleton, Sussex. Presumably Sir Edmund died just previous to the
> start of this lawsuit which appears to be dated 12 February 1382.
> The suit states that Sir Edmund's grandson, Robert Deincourt, did not
> join the lawsuit, but the reason for this was not given.
Maybe he was a minor in 1382?
> The suit
> was therefore continued by his aunts, Elizabeth and Philippe, who
> appear to have lost the case, when it was judged that their father,
> Edmund, was a bastard [Reference: Samuel E. Thorne, ed., Year Books of
> Richard II, 1382-1383 (Ames Foundation, vol. 2) (1996): 66-69].
Very sad. Philippe seems to have done well in her marriage to Sir
Richard Sergeaux, one of the biggest landowners in Cornwall. But
Elizabeth might have needed her share in the Sussex manor, as I've
never heard of her husband Sir John de Meriett. Does anyone know who
he might have been?
That marriage of Isabel le Despenser and Richard, future Earl of
Arundel, back in the 1320s, started off auspiciously (King Edward II
attended), but had unfortunate consequences for the next 60 years and
several generations.
> For interest sake, I have posted a list of colonial immigrants who
> descend from Sir Edmund de Arundel. The specific descents down to the
> American colonists will be found in the forthcoming book, Plantagenet
> Ancestry, 3rd edition.
I wonder how many colonial imigrants have lost a royal descent now
that Alice, wife of Sir Leonard Carew, proves not to have been a
daughter of Sir Edmund de Arundel.
Great find, Douglas.
Best regards, -------Brad Verity
Douglas Richardson
I believe that Elizabeth Arundel married (lst) Sir Leonard Carew and
(2nd) Sir John Meriet. At least I think this is correct. So,
American descendants of the Carew family would still retain the line
from Sir Leonard's son, Thomas Carew. They'll just have to change
Leonard's wife's name from Alice to Elizabeth on their charts.
There is a long Meriet article in print which probably indicates
whether or not Sir John Meriet's wife Elizabeth was the widow of Sir
Leonard Carew. The reference I have for the Meriet article is:
Proc. Somerset Arch. Soc. xxviii, pedigree chart facing pg. 101.
The library here doesn't seem to have a copy of this particular
volume. Perhaps someone can look it up and post the information for
the newsgroup. I'd very much like to confirm that Sir John Meriet's
wife was the widow of Sir Leonard Carew. To help identity the correct
party, I should mention that Sir John Meriet (husband of Elizabeth
Arundel) died in 1391, as per VCH Somerset, 4 (1978):90.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
bat...@hotmail.com (Brad Verity) wrote in message news:<8ed1b63.02013...@posting.google.com>...
John Ravilious
Hello Douglas,
Your discovery obviously puts a hole (temporarily) in the ancestry
of Edmund de Arundel's alleged sister Mary/Isabel, wife of John le
Strange.
1. How do you show John le Strange's relationship to Edmund de
Arundel
(you indicated they were cousins) ?
2. Do you have a 'new identity' for the wife of John le Strange ?
Interesting to note, in PA 2nd ed. that she is called Mary in one
place (p. 74), Isabel in another (p. 349).
Thanks, good luck, and good hunting.
John
royala...@msn.com (Douglas Richardson) wrote in message news:<5cf47a19.02013...@posting.google.com>...
Chris Phillips
> Your discovery obviously puts a hole (temporarily) in the ancestry
> of Edmund de Arundel's alleged sister Mary/Isabel, wife of John le
> Strange.
>
> 1. How do you show John le Strange's relationship to Edmund de
> Arundel
> (you indicated they were cousins) ?
>
> 2. Do you have a 'new identity' for the wife of John le Strange ?
>
> Interesting to note, in PA 2nd ed. that she is called Mary in one
> place (p. 74), Isabel in another (p. 349).
As Douglas Richardson pointed out previously, there's good evidence that
Mary was an aunt, not a sister, of Edmund.
I've tried to summarise the evidence at:
http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cp/vol1.shtml#arundel
Chris Phillips
ADRIANC...@cs.com
Chris Phillips wrote,
>
> As Douglas Richardson pointed out previously, there's good evidence that
> Mary was an aunt, not a sister, of Edmund.
>
> I've tried to summarise the evidence at:
> http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cp/vol1.shtml#arundel
>
The Will of Richard (c1313-1376) 10th Lord Arundal is in Testamenta Vetusta,
the editor thereof sates that the only issue he had by Isabel le Despencer
was a da. Philippa who m Sir Richard Serjeaux of Cornwall, knight.
The 10th earl's Will gives his issue as Richard; Thomas [Ed. Bishop of Ely];
John [Ed. Maltravers]; Joane [Ed. wife of Humphrey Bohun, KG, earl of
Hereford] and Alice [Ed. m Thomas Holland earl of Kent]
His will also makes bequests to Henry and Edward, younger sons of my son John
[Ld Maltravers] and also William another of his sons.
This last was William Arundal KB of Rochester whose Will is also in
Testamenta Vetusta. His will (1 Aug 1400 pr 5 Aug 1400) and his wife's Agnes
de Aroundell (Will 6 Sept 1401 proved 14 Oct 1401) are both mentioned in
"Lamberth Wills - Book 3" (see
http://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/Research/Libr/Wills/Lbth/LbthIntro.htm> )
William's will includes the clause "to my carnal brother Sir Richard Arundel"
I have this Richard as brother to Sir William (he m Alice and left Joan who
m Thomas Willoughby), but I suppose the above implies Richard was
illegitimate?
Adrian
Chris Phillips
> The Will of Richard (c1313-1376) 10th Lord Arundal is in Testamenta
Vetusta,
> the editor thereof sates that the only issue he had by Isabel le Despencer
> was a da. Philippa who m Sir Richard Serjeaux of Cornwall, knight.
I think it's now clear that Philippa - still thought to be a daughter of
Richard and Isabel when the original Arundel article in the Complete Peerage
was written - was a daughter of Richard's son Edmund. That's stated, for
example, in the Calendar of Close Rolls, 1396-99, pp.72, 84.
> The 10th earl's Will gives his issue as Richard; Thomas [Ed. Bishop of
Ely];
> John [Ed. Maltravers]; Joane [Ed. wife of Humphrey Bohun, KG, earl of
> Hereford] and Alice [Ed. m Thomas Holland earl of Kent]
>
> His will also makes bequests to Henry and Edward, younger sons of my son
John
> [Ld Maltravers] and also William another of his sons.
>
> This last was William Arundal KB of Rochester whose Will is also in
> Testamenta Vetusta. His will (1 Aug 1400 pr 5 Aug 1400) and his wife's
Agnes
> de Aroundell (Will 6 Sept 1401 proved 14 Oct 1401) are both mentioned in
> "Lamberth Wills - Book 3" (see
>
http://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/Research/Libr/Wills/Lbth/LbthIntro.htm> )
>
> William's will includes the clause "to my carnal brother Sir Richard
Arundel"
> I have this Richard as brother to Sir William (he m Alice and left Joan
who
> m Thomas Willoughby), but I suppose the above implies Richard was
> illegitimate?
I'll have to plead ignorance concerning most of those people (except that
the daughters appear - as children of Richard's second wife - in the
Complete Peerage, as does Richard's successor, also Richard. And John, Lord
Mautravers appears as the husband of Eleanor, b.c.1345, granddaughter and
eventual heir of John, Lord Mautravers, d.1364).
From what you say, the abstract of Richard's will in Testamenta Vetusta
doesn't include the reference to Mary as his sister, which is slightly odd.
That reference I got from mentions Margaret Aston, "Thomas Arundel", chart
following p.436 (1967), citing Reg. Sudbury, Lambeth, f.95v.
Chris Phillips
Vickie Elam White
>Sir Edmund de Arundel's history is a bit tangled, in that
>as a young adult, he was bastardized by his parents' divorce.
Wasn't it an annullment rather than a divorce? A small point,
perhaps, but I want my database to be correct.
Vickie Elam White
ADRIANC...@cs.com
> From what you say, the abstract of Richard's will in Testamenta Vetusta
> doesn't include the reference to Mary as his sister, which is slightly odd.
> That reference I got from mentions Margaret Aston, "Thomas Arundel", chart
> following p.436 (1967), citing Reg. Sudbury, Lambeth, f.95v.
>
>
>
Thanks for your message.
The Will includs "To my nephews and nieces, sons and daughters of Sir Roger
le Strange, and to my sister, Dame Alaine [sic not Mary nor Isabel?] le
Strange, wife to the said Roger"
Adrian
ADRIANC...@cs.com
"Margaret Ashton, _Thomas Arundel,_ 1967, FitzAlan Family Tree, p. 436,
argues that Mary FitzAlan (Presumably the Isabel in Vol I page 244) was da.
of Edmund, 9th Earl of Arundel, not Richard, 10th Earl. If this was so, Mary
would have been about forty years of age when her son John was born."
Adrian
ADRIANC...@cs.com
CP Vol XII/i p 354 (Strange of Knokyn)
"5. Roger (LESTRANGE), Lord STRANGE ....... He m., in or before 1338, {fn...}
Aline or Alaine, da. of Edmund (FitzAlan), EARL OF ARUNDEL....."
It looks to me as though Margaret Aston has muffed it?
regards
Adrian
CE Wood
at the time of John's birth, as Chris Phillips pointed out: "As to the
chronology, Mary's son John Lestrange was born in the early 1350s
[Complete Peerage volume 12, part 1, p. 344], while Edmund, the 9th
earl of Arundel, married while a minor in 1305 and was executed in
1326. From this it appears that Mary could have been under 30 when
John was born."
CE Wood
ADRIANC...@cs.com wrote in message news:<16c.82ab86...@cs.com>...
Chris Phillips
> > From what you say, the abstract of Richard's will in Testamenta Vetusta
> > doesn't include the reference to Mary as his sister, which is slightly
odd.
> > That reference I got from mentions Margaret Aston, "Thomas Arundel",
chart
> > following p.436 (1967), citing Reg. Sudbury, Lambeth, f.95v.
Adrian Channing replied:
> The Will includs "To my nephews and nieces, sons and daughters of Sir
Roger
> le Strange, and to my sister, Dame Alaine [sic not Mary nor Isabel?] le
> Strange, wife to the said Roger"
[later]
> Has the addition in CP Vol XIV to Strange of Blackmere been discussed.
>
> "Margaret Ashton, _Thomas Arundel,_ 1967, FitzAlan Family Tree, p. 436,
> argues that Mary FitzAlan (Presumably the Isabel in Vol I page 244) was
da.
> of Edmund, 9th Earl of Arundel, not Richard, 10th Earl. If this was so,
Mary
> would have been about forty years of age when her son John was born."
[later still]
It looks as though she may have, unless a reference to Mary has been omitted
from the abstract in Testamenta Vetusta.
However, there are two other pieces of evidence that identify Mary as a
daughter of Edmund, 9th earl, not Richard, 10th earl:
(1) in a petition to the Pope in 1364, she calls herself "Mary la Straunge,
lady of Corfham, widow, and sister of the Earl of Arundell" [Cal. Papal
Petitions, 1342-1419, p.484];
(2) an agreement between the attorneys of Richard, earl of Arundel and
Surrey, and the attorneys of Isabel, late the wife of John Lestrange of
Blakemere, concerning Isabel's dower, refers to this John [Mary's son] as
the earl's nephew [Cat. Ancient Deeds vol. 3, C3059: English abstract of a
French original]. A little interpretation is needed to work out which earl
is referred to here, as the 10th earl died soon after John Lestrange, but it
seems clear that it was the 10th earl, not the 11th.
I'll see if it's feasible to look at Richard's will, or get a copy, to
clarify whether Mary is mentioned there.
Chris Phillips
Chris Phillips
John seems to have been born in the early 1350s. A daughter of the 9th earl could apparently have been born at any time up to his execution in late 1326.
Chris Phillips
John Ravilious
Good afternoon Adrian,
Actually, this is just another Strange marriage.
1. Mary = John le Strange, of Blackmere
2. Aline/Alaine = Roger le Strange, of Knokyn
Both Strange men, descended from John le Strange, of Knokyn, co.
Salop (d. bef 26 Mar 1269) and his wife Lucy de Tregoz.
Hope this helps.
John
ADRIANC...@cs.com wrote in message news:<93.1774a07...@cs.com>...