George Holland (Holand)

37 views
Skip to first unread message

Rod Dav4is

unread,
Oct 30, 2003, 7:44:05 AM10/30/03
to
Hi,
George Holland, whose daughter, Mary [1581-1615], m.
Rev. John Pell, is said to be descended from Sir Thomas
de Holand who m. Joan Plantagenet, the Fair Maid of Kent.
I've been unable to work out the details of that
descent. Is it true? Would some kind soul post it here?

TIA,
-R.

--
Regards, Rod Dav4is / P.O. Box 118 / Hyde Park, NY
12538 / USA
Genealogy, et Cetera:
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~dav4is/ 356 ancestral &
collateral families, mostly 17th - 19th century New
England & European roots, total population: 80,300+
Annex: http://www.gencircles.com/users/dav4is/

Reedpcgen

unread,
Oct 30, 2003, 3:07:35 PM10/30/03
to
> George Holland, whose daughter, Mary [1581-1615], m.
>Rev. John Pell, is said to be descended from Sir Thomas
>de Holand who m. Joan Plantagenet, the Fair Maid of Kent.

Might one ask how you trace back to this George Holland?

Paul

Brad Verity

unread,
Oct 30, 2003, 3:54:20 PM10/30/03
to
Rod Dav4is <dav...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:

> George Holland, whose daughter, Mary [1581-1615], m.
> Rev. John Pell, is said to be descended from Sir Thomas
> de Holand who m. Joan Plantagenet, the Fair Maid of Kent.
> I've been unable to work out the details of that
> descent. Is it true? Would some kind soul post it here?

Rod,

The descent would not be through a legitmate male line. The last
legitimate direct-male descendant of Joan the Fair Maid of Kent and
Sir Thomas Holland was Henry Holland, Duke of Exeter, who drowned in
1473. In 1486, his only sister Anne, Lady Douglas, died - the last of
the legitmate Holland descendants of Joan, Countess of Kent.

However both Henry Holland, Duke of Exeter (d. 1473) and his father
John Holland, Duke of Exeter (d. 1447), left illegitimate sons, so it
may be through one of those sons that your George Holland descends.

I don't know whether or not the lines of descent from the illegitimate
Exeter Holland sons have been worked out.

Of course there's always the possibility - which would be very
coincidental - that George Holland descends from Thomas Holland and
Joan the Fair Maid through one of their many female descendants that
left issue. But a female descent from them would have no bearing on
his Holland surname.

Hope this helps.

Cheers, ----Brad

Todd A. Farmerie

unread,
Oct 30, 2003, 10:16:45 PM10/30/03
to
Brad Verity wrote:
>
> However both Henry Holland, Duke of Exeter (d. 1473) and his father
> John Holland, Duke of Exeter (d. 1447), left illegitimate sons, so it
> may be through one of those sons that your George Holland descends.

I am curious what evidence there is for Henry having illegitimates.

I only know of three sources, each of which I would question -
Stow's Chronicle, which simply says that two bastard sons of the
Duke of Exeter were killed at Towton, but he also says that
Edward Duke of Exeter was killed there, so he is clearly
confused. (I suspect that this refers to Thomas, Bastard of
Exeter, actually executed days earlier, and William, Bastard of
Exeter, whose properties were forfeit after the battle. These
were both sons of John, apparently named in his will, which I
have not seen.) The other two sources, apparently linked, are
Vivian's Visitations of Devon, which erroneously calls Robert,
Bastard of Exeter the son of Henry, citing 'Col. of Arms'; and
Stanford's history, which cites Stow for two dying at Towton, and
explicitly states that one of these was Robert, citing 'Visit.
Devon & Corn.' Robert was certainly not son of Henry, as they
were, more or less, contemporaries. I have found one history of
the War of the Roses that explicitly calls Robert brother of
Henry, citing a document at the PRO, but I have yet to follow up
on that, so I don't know if the original calls him brother, of if
this is a supposition of the author.

> I don't know whether or not the lines of descent from the illegitimate
> Exeter Holland sons have been worked out.

Robert is said to have left two daughters and coheiresses, one of
whom died without issue, the other is said to have married John
Kendall. I have found no contemporary evidence of this marriage.
However, supporting it, an agreement whereby Robert Holland,
Bastard of Exeter, on being given two Pembrokeshire manors by
Henry Holland, Duke of Exeter, confirmed the rights which Henry
had previously granted his tennants, is now held by the Cornwall
Association among the muniments that came to them from the
Kendall family.

I am not aware of any claimed, let alone documented children of
Thomas or William, Bastards of Exeter.

taf

brad verity

unread,
Oct 31, 2003, 4:08:10 AM10/31/03
to
>From: "Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com>

>I am curious what evidence there is for Henry having illegitimates.

I used Leo's great database, which indicates Henry Holland, Duke of Exeter,
had a bastard son, Sir Robert de Holand, and cites "Cahiers de Saint Louis
Magazine., Jacques Dupont, Jacques Saillot, Reference: 1016", as the source
for this.

>I only know of three sources, each of which I would question - Stow's
>Chronicle, which simply says that two bastard sons of the Duke of Exeter
>were killed at Towton, but he also says that Edward Duke of Exeter was
>killed there, so he is clearly confused. (I suspect that this refers to
>Thomas, Bastard of Exeter, actually executed days earlier, and William,
>Bastard of Exeter, whose properties were forfeit after the battle. These
>were both sons of John, apparently named in his will, which I have not
>seen.)

From "Testamenta Vetusta":

"John Holland, Duke of Exeter, July 16th, 25 Henry VI. 1447. ... I will
that my feoffees of my manors of Stevynton, Barford, St. Martin, and
Hamerviez, after my testament be performed, make an estate to my said son
Sir Henry, of those manors: provided always, that an annuity of XLl. be
reserved for my two bastard sons, William and Thomas. [footnote: From
Dugdale's Abstract, vol. ii., p. 81.]"

>The other two sources, apparently linked, are Vivian's Visitations of
>Devon, which erroneously calls Robert, Bastard of Exeter the son of Henry,
>citing 'Col. of Arms'; and Stanford's history, which cites Stow for two
>dying at Towton, and explicitly states that one of these was Robert, citing
>'Visit. Devon & Corn.' Robert was certainly not son of Henry, as they
>were, more or less, contemporaries. I have found one history of the War of
>the Roses that explicitly calls Robert brother of Henry, citing a document
>at the PRO, but I have yet to follow up on that, so I don't know if the
>original calls him brother, of if this is a supposition of the author.

You've done much research on this, Todd. More so, it appears, than 'Cahiers
de Saint Louis", which probably simply took the Visitation of Devon at its
word, regarding Sir Robert de Holand as bastard son of Henry, Duke of
Exeter.

>Robert is said to have left two daughters and coheiresses, one of whom died
>without issue, the other is said to have married John Kendall. I have
>found no contemporary evidence of this marriage. However, supporting it,
>an agreement whereby Robert Holland, Bastard of Exeter, on being given two
>Pembrokeshire manors by Henry Holland, Duke of Exeter, confirmed the rights
>which Henry had previously granted his tennants, is now held by the
>Cornwall Association among the muniments that came to them from the Kendall
>family.
>
>I am not aware of any claimed, let alone documented children of
>Thomas or William, Bastards of Exeter.

So it seems this 16th-century George Holland could not have been descended
illegitimately from either of the 15th-century Dukes of Exeter. That leaves
only a possible illegitimate descent from either the first Holland Duke of
Exeter (d. 1400), or any of the three Holland Earls of Kent - Thomas, 2nd
Earl (d. 1398), Thomas 3rd Earl (d. 1400), or Edmund, 4th and final Earl
(d.1407).

As none of those individuals have recorded bastard sons, it appears George
is not a male-line descendant of Thomas Holland and Joan the Fair Maid of
Kent.

Cheers, -----Brad

_________________________________________________________________
Never get a busy signal because you are always connected with high-speed
Internet access. Click here to comparison-shop providers.
https://broadband.msn.com

Todd A. Farmerie

unread,
Oct 31, 2003, 1:00:10 PM10/31/03
to
brad verity wrote:
>> I am curious what evidence there is for Henry having illegitimates.
>
> I used Leo's great database, which indicates Henry Holland, Duke of
> Exeter, had a bastard son, Sir Robert de Holand, and cites "Cahiers de
> Saint Louis Magazine., Jacques Dupont, Jacques Saillot, Reference:
> 1016", as the source for this.
>
>> I only know of three sources, each of which I would question - Stow's
>> Chronicle, which simply says that two bastard sons of the Duke of
>> Exeter were killed at Towton, but he also says that Edward Duke of
>> Exeter was killed there, so he is clearly confused. (I suspect that
>> this refers to Thomas, Bastard of Exeter, actually executed days
>> earlier, and William, Bastard of Exeter, whose properties were forfeit
>> after the battle. These were both sons of John, apparently named in
>> his will, which I have not seen.)
>
> From "Testamenta Vetusta":
>
> "John Holland, Duke of Exeter, July 16th, 25 Henry VI. 1447. ... I will
> that my feoffees of my manors of Stevynton, Barford, St. Martin, and
> Hamerviez, after my testament be performed, make an estate to my said
> son Sir Henry, of those manors: provided always, that an annuity of XLl.
> be reserved for my two bastard sons, William and Thomas. [footnote: From
> Dugdale's Abstract, vol. ii., p. 81.]"

Thanks. (I was hoping he might have refered to Robert too.)

>> The other two sources, apparently linked, are Vivian's Visitations of
>> Devon, which erroneously calls Robert, Bastard of Exeter the son of
>> Henry, citing 'Col. of Arms'; and Stanford's history, which cites Stow

Oops - that should be Sandford.

> You've done much research on this, Todd. More so, it appears, than
> 'Cahiers de Saint Louis", which probably simply took the Visitation of
> Devon at its word, regarding Sir Robert de Holand as bastard son of
> Henry, Duke of Exeter.

Or Sandford, who was also followed by Sheppard's Royal Bye Blows to make
Robert son of Henry.

>> Robert is said to have left two daughters and coheiresses, one of whom
>> died without issue, the other is said to have married John Kendall. I
>> have found no contemporary evidence of this marriage. However,
>> supporting it, an agreement whereby Robert Holland, Bastard of Exeter,
>> on being given two Pembrokeshire manors by Henry Holland, Duke of
>> Exeter, confirmed the rights which Henry had previously granted his
>> tennants, is now held by the Cornwall Association among the muniments
>> that came to them from the Kendall family.

I should have added, this took place when Henry was 29, and thus Robert,
acting as an adult, could not be son of Henry. The genealogical
relevance of this is that colonist Oliver Mainwaring appears to descend
from this Kendall marriage. (I say appears, because it has not been
fully vetted. The descent is found by combining a series of published
visitations, each being used for nothing more distant than the
informer's sister's marriage, or father's, sibling's or maternal
grandfather's identity, as well as the ipm of Walter Kendall and a
Kendall muniment, but the visitations have not yet been checked with the
originals at the College of Arms).

>> I am not aware of any claimed, let alone documented children of
>> Thomas or William, Bastards of Exeter.
>
> So it seems this 16th-century George Holland could not have been
> descended illegitimately from either of the 15th-century Dukes of
> Exeter.

This is (perhaps) too strong to say they could not have been. I just am
not aware of any indication that Thomas or William had families, but
this may be a function of my own lack of awareness. It is clear that
following their deaths at the close of the War, and their brother the
Duke's 'accidental' drowning, their whole faction passed into obscurity,
their land confiscated (as appears to have been the case with Robert as
well, his Pembroke manors apparently confiscated, as they were granted
by the new King to Duke Henry's widow, the King's sister). I have seen
just a single reference to Robert afterward, reporting him as prior
owner, and a handful for William, again all in reference to him having
been attainted/his land now in other hands.

> That leaves only a possible illegitimate descent from either
> the first Holland Duke of Exeter (d. 1400), or any of the three Holland
> Earls of Kent - Thomas, 2nd Earl (d. 1398), Thomas 3rd Earl (d. 1400),
> or Edmund, 4th and final Earl (d.1407).

Again, with no indication that anything of the sort did happen, it is
theoretically possible that Richard, eldest son of the first John, had
an illegitimate son before his death.

> As none of those individuals have recorded bastard sons, it appears
> George is not a male-line descendant of Thomas Holland and Joan the Fair
> Maid of Kent.

It certainly appears that such a descent is unsupportable.

taf

Reedpcgen

unread,
Oct 31, 2003, 5:03:46 PM10/31/03
to
Just to put the initial query in perspective,

my memory is not what it used to be, but I seem to remember that the initial
genealogical problem is on the Virginia side of things. "Gabriell Holland"
came to Virginia with his wife in the _John & Francis_; they were listed in the
muster at James Island, with no children. If they had arrived by 1620, but had
no children by the January-February 1624/5 muster of surviving inhabitants,
....

WHAT EVIDENCE is there that the children attributed to this Gabriel by a second
wife were his children? Is there a probate record, or can it be shown they
held the same land? People have even made this Gabriel equivalent with a
Francis Holand of Maryland!

And to push things further, the strongest advocates of a connection are
apparently descendants of a John Holland of Nansemond County.

Given that the surname Holland is not rare, one would FIRST like to have some
good - even probable - indication that the children attributed to this Gabriel
were his.

On the English side of things, there was a Gabriel Hollande baptized 15 Feb.
1596 at Saint Martin In The Fields, Westminster, but no parents' names are
given. There are baptisms of other Holland children there, also without names:
Michael, Hester, Leonard, Robert, Peter, Constance, Frances, Philemon, and even
a Richard (Gabriel appears with a Richard in Virginia records), but those are
not names that occur in the Virnia family, are they? Is there a probate record
for the John Holland who is given as their father wjocj names all these
children?

I theorize that the occurence of the name Constance Holland among these
baptisms at Westminster would have immediately led descendants to claim a
connection to the daughter (and thus family) of the Duke of Exeter.

Paul

Sutliff

unread,
Nov 2, 2003, 8:53:20 PM11/2/03
to
To further confuse things, there are also internet sites which have made
John Holland of Dorchester, Suffolk, Massachusetts, an immediate member of
the family of Gabriel and tied them all back into the Holands of Upholland.
John Holland of Dorchester was baptized in Plymouth, but that hasn't stopped
some to create fabulous ancestries for persons of the same or similar names.

HS

"Reedpcgen" <reed...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031031170346...@mb-m26.aol.com...

Todd A. Farmerie

unread,
Nov 4, 2003, 12:17:09 AM11/4/03
to
Sutliff wrote:

> John Holland of Dorchester was baptized in Plymouth, but that hasn't stopped
> some to create fabulous ancestries for persons of the same or similar names.

How solid is this? Is it based on more than just a marriage
there of a John Holland to a Judith, the name of the immigrant's
wife? (I have a descent from them that is best characterized as
flaky, and if this is true, becomes officially bogus.)

taf

Sutliff

unread,
Nov 4, 2003, 1:13:14 AM11/4/03
to
Todd,

This info comes from:

"The English Origin of John1 Holland of Dorchester, Massachusetts" by John
Plummer (TAG: July 1993). My possible descent is via daughter Obedience,
wife of Philip Curtis.

HS

"Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:3FA73655...@interfold.com...

Rod Dav4is

unread,
Nov 10, 2003, 9:48:29 PM11/10/03
to

I'd like to thank all who contributed here. It looks
like that this "said to be" is a figment -- like so
many others!
To put this in perspective, Thomas [bp.1613,
dsp.1669], 2nd son of Rev. John Pell and Mary Holland,
bought a large tract of land in Westchester Co., NY
and, obtaining s patent from the Duke of York, was
"erected the Lordship and Manor of Pelham, 1666". This
passed to his nephew, Lt.-Col. Sir John Pell, and
remains as the present day town of Pelham Manor on Long
Island Sound, memorable as the place where Anne
(Marbury) Hutchinson and so many of her children had
earlier (1643) met their gruesome end.
I am investigating the possible connections of these
Pells with a large country estate near Hopewell
Junction in Dutchess Co. that I remember from my youth
as "the Pell Estate".

-R.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages