Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2006-05 > 1147486381

Subject: Re: SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de Caldcotis (and Livingston of Kilsyth)
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 22:13:01 EDT

Friday, 12 May, 2006

Dear Doug (et al.),

On 7 May 2006, you wrote (in part), citing your conversation with
Andrew B. W. MacEwen:

' Second, Andrew confirmed that dispensations for 2nd & 3rd degree
kinships in Scotland were exceedingly rare. He said he only knew
of two Scottish women in the medieval period who received such
dispensations, both of whom were major heiresses. The first
was Eupheme Sterwart, Countess of Strathearn, who obtained
successive dispensations to marry Albany half-brothers to whom
she was related by kindred in the 2nd and 3rd degrees and by
affinity in the 3rd and 4th degrees. Neither marriage took
place. The 2nd woman was Margaret Douglas (living 1473),
"the Fair Maid of Galloway," who was wife successively of
William Douglas, 8th Earl of Douglas (died 1451), James
Douglas, 9th Earl of Douglas, and John Stewart, 1st Earl
of Atholl. " [1]

Based on the foregoing, we therefore (at this moment) know of at
least 4 dispensations for individuals, one of whom (but evidently
only one) related to the other in the 2nd degree. If you recall, I
cited two other examples the other day:

' A. 'Egidie de Duglas quondam Henrici Soeuclar Militis relicte
vidue Glasguen.' , postnuptial dispensation for her marriage
to Alexander Stewart (related in the 3rd and 2nd degrees),
mandate issued at Rome, 29 Apr 1418 [Stuart, p 449 citing
'Martinus V. anno primo. 3 kal. Maii. 1418' ]

Elizabeth Mure = Robert II = 2) Euphemia of Ross
__________________I I__________
Robert, Duke of Albany Sir William Douglas = Egidia
d. 1420 d. 1391 I Stewart
Murdoch, Duke of Albany ____________I
I_________________ I
2) Alexander Stewart = Egidia = 1) Sir Henry
Douglas Sinclair

B. Record of the supplication and dispensation for marriage of
Elizabeth Douglas to William Sinclair, dated at Rome, 12 Aug
' Dispensatio matrimonialis Cor.
Since William de Sancto Claro [Sinclair] and Elizabeth de
Douglas, damsel, Orkney diocese, not ignorant that they were
related on divers sides in second and third also in third
degrees of consanguinity...' [CSSR 1428-1432]

Joanna = Archibald Douglas = NN
_______I I_ _ _ _
Archibald = Margaret Sir William Douglas = Egidia
Douglas I Stewart of Nithsdale I Stewart
I Sir Henry Sinclair = Egidia Douglas
I___________ I
Elizabeth Douglas = William Sinclair ' [2]

Add to the foregoing a fifth example, pointed out to me some time
ago by Andrew himself. Regarding the first wife (evidently named
Beatrix or Beatrice), of George Dunbar, Earl of March (d. ca. 1455),
she d. before 9 Aug 1421, when Alicia de Hay and George Dunbar had a
postnuptial dispensation, due to consanguinity (4th and 4th degree)
and affinity (she and Beatrix, former wife of George Dunbar were
related in the 4th and 2nd degrees) [3].

You might think the 1421 dispensation for William Livingston and
Elizabeth Caldecote (de Caldcotis) was involving two relative
'nobodies', but note: William was half-brother of Sir Alexander
Livingston of Callendar, the nephew (in 1421) of Sir James Douglas
of Dalkeith [then son-in-law of King Robert III] and 1st cousin
1x removed of George Dunbar, Earl of March (d. 1455, mentioned
above). By my reconstruction, his wife Elizabeth Caldecote was
great-niece of the same Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith.

Now, as to the evidence of dispensations themselves. As has been
discussed on occasion, dispensations can be valuable or nearly
useless, depending on the individuals and other available
documentation. I can cite many cases where a dispensation of '4th
degree' [or even '4th and 4th' as stated] is later corrected, the
parties being actually related in the 3rd and 4th degree. There are
cases where no such correction is documented, but the relationship is
known to be 3rd and 4th degree.

I think there are other dispensations worded for individuals
allegedly related 'in the 3rd degree of kinship', where the
relationship (if detailed) was actually 2nd and 3rd (or 3rd and 2nd).
Unfortunately, this opinion can I think neither be confirmed or
disproved; however, based on the foregoing, I see no problem with
the Douglas-Tweedie-Caldecote-Livingston descent as I proposed, and
will write further on same in the very near term.


John *


[1] Douglas Richardson, <SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de
Caldcotis (and Livingston of Kilsyth)>, SGM, 7 May 2006.

[2] John P. Ravilious, <SP Addition: ancestry of Elizabeth de
Caldcotis (and Livingston of Kilsyth)>, SGM, 5 May 2006,
cites Andrew Stuart, Genealogical History of the Stuart,
p. 449, and Dunlop and Cowan, Calendar of Scottish
Supplications, 1428-1432.

[3] Stuart, p. 452.

* John P. Ravilious

This thread: