GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2002-07 > 1027198077


From: "Rick Eaton" <>
Subject: Re: The Kindred of Hugh le Despenser (revisited)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 17:02:44 -0400


John:

In addition to being very much interested in your theory, I
would like to thank you very much for the thoroughness of
it; that is including the full names (where available), the
titles and dates of all involved.

For those of us who are not professionals, fully and
continuously immersed in genealogy, but attempting to learn
and become more useful, having the detail of the sort you
provided is as thoughtful and instructive as it is useful.

Thank you very much.

I am saving your posting in my study file as it includes
connections to the Eyton/Eaton families of Shropshire,
Cheshire, Wales, Kent and elsewhere which I am so poorly if
doggedly pursuing.

Rick Eaton

Voice: 203.453.6261 Fax:203.453.0076






----------
>From:
>To:
>Subject: The Kindred of Hugh le Despenser (revisited)
>Date: Sat, Jul 20, 2002, 1:15 PM
>

> Saturday, 20 July, 2002
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> Over the last few years several posts to SGM (primarily by
> Douglas
> Richardson) have touched on the relationships between Hugh le
> Despenser 'the
> younger' (husband of Eleanor de Clare; exe. 24 Nov 1326) and
> numerous other
> members of the English nobility. Primary references were provided
> by
> Douglas, extracted from Pierre Chaplais' book, War of
Saint-Sardos,
> 1323-1325
> - see his post of 14 March 2002, <Hugh Despenser's kinsfolk:
> Basset, Grey,
> Haudlo, Keynes, Lacy, Segrave, Warenne> .
>
> Prior posts have shown a few of these relationships, including
> that with
> John de Segrave [1] and Richard de Grey of Codnor [2]. However,
> many
> relationships have yet to be resolved, both from this source and
> others -
> Douglas noted an evident relationship between Edmund de Lacy, earl
> of
> Lincoln, and Hugh le Despenser (k. at Evesham, 4 Aug 1265),
> grandfather of
> Hugh 'the younger', which had yet to be explained.
>
> One explanation seems most probable, although supporting
> evidence is
> wanting at this point. As the ancestry of Hugh 'the younger' is
> well
> established in other lines, the connection is most certainly with
> the mother
> of Hugh his grandfather [for simplicity's sake, I will refer to
him
> hereafter
> as Hugh II]. With Hugh II's birthdate of say 1223, his mother
most
> likely
> would have been born in an outward range of say 1180 to 1210.
>
> A strong possibility, given the relationships claimed in
> Chaplais' book
> and elsewhere, would be:
>
> 1. That Hugh II's mother was an otherwise unidentified
> daughter of Saier IV de Quincy (d. 1219), Earl of
> Winchester and MC Surety, presumably by his wife
> Margaret de Beaumont.
>
> 2. That Hawise, mother of Ralph Basset, 2nd Lord Basset
> of Drayton (d. 1342/3) who is also identified as
> 'trescher cousin' by Hugh le Despenser, was Hawise
> de Vere, a daughter of Robert de Vere, Earl of
> Oxford (d. 1296) by Alice de Sanford [3].
>
> These two identifications, if solid, would provide the
> following chart
> and support the relationships given in Chaplais and elsewhere.
<L>
> indicates
> individuals identified as kinsman by Edmund de Lacy, Earl of
> Lincoln; <D>
> indicates individuals identified as kinsmen by Hugh le Despenser
> 'the
> younger' [shown below as Hugh IV].
>
> _________________
> I I
> Saier de = Margaret de Amice de = Simon de
> Quincy I Beaumont Beaumont I Montfort
> d. 1219 I I d. 1188
> ___________I_____________ _ _ _ _ _ I__________
> I I I I
> Hawise = Hugh de Robert de ___ de Quincy Simon de
> I Vere Quincy = Hugh I le Montfort
> I Earl of dvp 1217 Despenser Earl of
> I Oxford = Hawise of I Leicester
> I d. 1263 Chester I d. 1218
> I I_______ I____ I
> I I I I
> I I I I
> Robert de Vere Margaret Hugh II Simon de
> Earl of Oxford = John k. 1265 Montfort
> d. bef 7 Sep 1296 de Lacy <L> Earl of
> = Alice de Sanford Earl of I Leicester
> I Lincoln I k. 1265
> I d. 1240 I <L>
> ____I______ _ _ _ _ I_____ I________
> I I I I I
> Joan = Alfonso Hawise Edmund de Hugh III
> William de Vere = Ralph Lacy, Earl le Despenser
> de Warenne Basset of Lincoln Earl of
> dvp 1286 d. 1299 d. 1258 Winchester
> I I <L> exe. 1326
> I I I
> I I I
> John de Warenne Ralph Basset Hugh IV le
> Earl of Surrey Lord Basset of Despenser
> <D> Drayton, d. 1342/3 exe. 1326
> <D> <D>
>
> The above reconstruction would make John de Warenne a third
> cousin of
> Hugh IV - in addition to their relationship through descent from
> Maud le
> Marshal [wife of Hugh le Bigod, 2ndly of William de Warenne]. It
> would place
> Ralph Basset (d. 1342/3) as a third cousin as well. The de Lacy
> connection
> would also be explained, as this would place Hugh II as first
> cousin once
> removed of his 'kinsman' Edmund de Lacy, earl of Lincoln. An
> explanation as
> to the Keynes and Haudlo relationships is still wanting.
>
> In addition to explaining these relationships, this theory
> would also
> provide a close connection to the family of the Earls of
Winchester
> (although
> not a requisite one) that Edward II may have relied on in his
grant
> in 1322
> of that earldom to Hugh le Despenser 'the elder' [shown above as
> Hugh III].
>
> This theoretical de Quincy link for the Despenser family may
> have support
> in the histories of the Leicestershire holdings of the two
> families. Should
> anyone have any 'related' theories, suggestions, or evidence in
> support (or
> disproof) of the foregoing, that would be most welcome.
>
> Good luck, and good hunting.
>
> John *
>
>
>
> NOTES
>
> [1] Given in Douglas' original post.
>
> [2] J. Ravilious, 15 March 2002: <Re: Hugh le
> Despenser's Kinsfolk>
>
> [3] This theoretical identification is currently being
> pursued by myself and others; certainly any feedback
> or suggestions (nay even evidence) is welcome from
> others of the list.
>
>
>
> * John P. Ravilious
>
>
>
>
>
>


This thread: