GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2002-10 > 1035388256


From: (Douglas Richardson)
Subject: Re: John de Lancaster
Date: 23 Oct 2002 08:50:56 -0700
References: <025601c27a6f$918890c0$de00a8c0@mshome.net>


Dear Rosie ~

In answer to your question, Sir Thomas of Lancaster, Earl of
Lancaster, died 1322, actually had two illegitimate sons, not one, as
follows:

1. Thomas of Lancaster, Knt., king's chamberlain, was engaged in the
attack on Sens. In 1354 he requested permission to become a Friar
Minor.

References: Cal. of Entries in the Papal Registers: Petitions 1
(1896): 262. Cal. Patent Rolls, 1346-1349 (1905), pg. 545.

2. John of Lancaster, king's clerk, warden of the hospital of St.
Julian without St. Albans, predendary of St. Chad's, Shrewsbury,
living 1369.

References: Cal. of Entries in the Papal Registers: Letters 4 (1902):
346 (styled "kinsman" of King Edward III), 357 (being the son of a
married man and a spinster related in the 3rd degree of kindred),
543,545. Cal. Patent Rolls, 1348-1350 (1905), pp. 302,330. Cal.
Close Rolls, 1360-1364 (1909), pp. 301,431. Cal. Close Rolls,
1364-1368 (1910), pp. 60,68-69. Cal. Close Rolls, 1369-1374 (1911),
pg. 97. Cal. Patent Rolls, 1358-1361 (1911), pg. 190. Cal. Patent
Rolls, 1361-1364 (1912), pp. 132,475. Cal. Patent Rolls, 1367-1370
(1913), pg. 224.

Yes, I agree that the mother of John of Lancaster above would
definitely have been a high born woman, if she was related to John's
father in the 3rd degree of kindred as stated in the record. The
illegitimate children above will be included in the forthcoming book,
Plantagenet Ancestry.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

E-mail:

("Rosie Bevan") wrote in message news:<025601c27a6f$918890c0$>...
> Browsing through the Papal Letters recently, I came across mention of an
> illegitimate son of Thomas, earl of Lancaster, called John de Lancaster.
> Thomas, the eldest son of Edmund Crouchback and the mortal enemy of Piers de
> Gavaston, was born about 1278, and beheaded in 1322 by Edward II. Married to
> Alice de Lacy in 1294, he died without issue. CP does not mention the
> existence of John, but the intriguing thing about his birth is that his
> mother was quite closely related to Earl Thomas, and given his illustrious
> ancestry, must have been of high rank.
>
> "4 Non February 1349
> To John de Lancastria son of the late Thomas, earl of Lancaster, scholar of
> theology, extension of dispensation at the request of king Edward, whose
> kinsman he is, on account of illegitimacy, he being the son of a married man
> and a spinster related in the third degree of kindred, so as to enable him
> to resign the church of Uxtoxather and accept any other benefice in its
> place, and hold the same together with other benefices."
> [Papal Letters, v.3.p.357]
>
> There is no mention of a John de Lancaster in the Fasti Ecclesiae
> Anglicanae, so no hint of a career in the church. To hold a benefice, one
> did not necessarily have to be ordained a priest, though it was expected
> that it would happen at some stage.
>
> Uttoxeter, Staffordshire is probably the name of the place meant in the
> dispensation.
>
> Can anyone can add anything further about the maternity of John de
> Lancaster?
>
> Thanks
>
> Rosie

This thread: