Lady Anne Arundell [née Herbert] was a daughter of Sir William Herbert, 2nd Marquess of Powis and his wife, Mary Preston.
By her father, Anne was a descendant of the Herbert branch of Powis Castle that began with the second son of Sir William, 1st Earl of Pembroke and his first wife, Lady Anne [née Parr]–Sir Edward Herbert (June 1544-1595). Lady Anne was known for being the sister of Queen Katherine Parr, the 6th and surviving wife of King Henry VIII. Edward was father to the 1st Baron Powis. Lady Anne’s Mother, Mary, was the eldest daughter and co-heiress of Sir Thomas, 3rd and last Baronet of Furness, and his wife, Mary Molyneux. The Baronet Furness had been a priest, but upon the death of his elder brother, he left the priesthood behind and inherited the Preston estates. He married the daughter of Caryll, Viscount Molyneux and the couple had three children. His heir, Francis, died young and with him the title went extinct. Mary, at that time, became a co-heiress with her sister Anne who married Hugh, 2nd Lord Clifford of Chudleigh. Mary would marry, the then titled, Viscount Montgomery, William Herbert, around 1695. The title of Marquess of Powis would be granted to her husband later on.
A contract for the marriage of Lady Anne Herbert and Henry Arundell, 6th Baron Arundell of Wardour was signed on 18 January 1728/29. The 6th Baron was the son of Henry, 5th Baron Arundell of Wardour and his wife, Elizabeth Panton (d.1700).
Elizabeth Panton was the eldest daughter of Colonel Thomas Panton, a member of Charles II’s life-guards and foot-guards. Panton’s success at gambling enabled him to buy property in Herefordshire and London’s west end, where he built what is now Panton Street. In July 1681 Elizabeth, with her mother and brother, left England, claiming health reasons but in actuality to escape the persecution they faced as Roman Catholics. The exiled Catholic court of James II at Saint-Germain-en-Laye in France became a natural focal point for English papists abroad. Gennari followed the Stuart court into exile in 1689, and his notebook records that this was the first work he produced from there.Anne was the second wife of Lord Arundell. (Tate)
Henry, the 6th Baron, had previously been married to Elizabeth Everard by whom he had issue. His heir was his son, also named Henry.
After her marriage, Lady Anne Herbert was styled as Lady Arundell of Wardour on 18 January 1728/29. From 18 January 1728/29, her married name became Arundell.
Lady Arundell died on 2 October 1757 at Salisbury, Wiltshire, England, without issue. She was buried on 5 October 1757 at Tisbury, Wiltshire, England. Her last will was dated from 17 May 1757 to 27 August 1757. Her will was proven (by probate) on 2 November 1757.
G.E. Cokayne; with Vicary Gibbs, H.A. Doubleday, Geoffrey H. White, Duncan Warrand and Lord Howard de Walden, editors, The Complete Peerage of England, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain and the United Kingdom, Extant, Extinct or Dormant, new ed., 13 volumes in 14 (1910-1959; reprint in 6 volumes, Gloucester, U.K.: Alan Sutton Publishing, 2000), volume I, page 266. [The Peerage]
The never ending problem of amateur genealogists trying to link their kin back to a royal…this story has been debunked several times. As I have Anne ______ Dorsey as an ancestress who married the immigrant Edward Dorsey of Hockley, I have been studying the lines and claims to Anne’s supposed descent from Lady Margaret Douglas, the daughter of a Queen of Scotland, and niece to King Henry VIII of England. As my site deals with Queen Katherine Parr–sixth and last wife of Henry, Lady Margaret features largely in Parr’s life as Queen. Katherine’s own father, Lord Thomas, was part of her escorts early on. Katherine and Margaret would have known each other from early on, in the 1520s. And when Katherine married King Henry in 1543, Margaret was present. Afterward, Margaret became a chief lady-in-waiting to the Queen.
Lady Margaret was born to the elder sister of Henry, Princess Margaret. Margaret became the Queen of Scots, but would remarry after the death of King James. That’s where Margaret comes from; Archibald Douglas, 6th Earl of Angus. However, through her mother, Queen Margaret, she had a claim to the throne–Henry refused to acknowledge the Scottish line in favor of his younger sister, Princess Mary’s lineage. Even so, Margaret would have been kept under constant scrutiny as a possible heiress one day to the throne. Those who are close to the throne–their recorded history tends to be thorough, especially when it comes to children.
A child with Thomas Howard would have been illegitimate and may have caused Lady Margaret her life for committing treason against the King. Like I said, possible heiresses were closely watched. In fact, due to this secret “engagement” to an uncle of the disgraced Queen Anne (Boleyn) in 1536, a new rule was established–no Royal family member could marry without the permission of the sovereign. This rule would be broken several times after the death of King Henry, especially with Queen Elizabeth’s ladies.
Thomas and Margaret were thrown in the Tower. Henry eventually relented with his niece, but Thomas never saw Margaret again. There is no mention of a pregnancy or a possible child from this match–and seeing how brutal Tudor life was–if there had been a child, it either would have been given away or aborted (after birth). So, even the pregnancy of Margaret could be debated. There are no written statements in the historical account of Margaret which state, perhaps she moved away from court to have the child, and there are no statements from courtiers and the Queens she served that talk of a pregnancy (which was extremely hard to hide). So, the argument for a Robert Howard is BOGUS when you review the historic record of Margaret’s life.
As for the lineage of Mrs. Anne Dorsey, we have yet to learn where she came from and who her parents were. However, we DO have documentation that her daughter by Edward, Sarah, married a Matthew Howard. On FindAGrave, however, we see that this Matthew Howard is linked to the parents Matthew and Anne Hall; the same parents linked to Sarah’s mother, Anne. With this connection, Sarah would be marrying her own uncle! And that consanguinity was not common among courtiers–maybe with the Habsburg dynasty–but not with these immigrants.
Sarah Dorsey and Matthew Howard (Jr) were not related that we know of. In fact, it may well be, as stated in some books, that Matthew’s surname was not Howard, but Hayward. In “The Founders of Anne Arundel and Howard Counties, Maryland” by Joshua Dorsey Warfield, the chapter on the Howard family states:
“An early certificate in the Land Office at Annapolis reads, “Laid out July 3rd 1650 for Matthew Howard on the Severn southside near a creek called Marsh’s beginning at a hollow called Howard’s Hollow and binding on said creek a tract containing 350 acres also another tract running with Howard’s swamp containing 350 acres more.” These surveys of Lloyd were not patented. This record indicates clearly that Matthew Howard came up with Edward Lloyd in 1650. In support of this, the records of Lower Norfolk County Virginia give us the following history of the Howards of Virginia.
There were three Howards or Haywards among the English members of the Virginia Companies, records Alexander Brown in his First Republic. They were Master John, Rev John, and Sir John Howard, Knight. They contributed in all 112 and 12s. Master John, the historian, was born in Suffolk in 1560, was DCL of Cambridge pleader in ecclesiastical courts was knighted 1619, and an MP in 1621, married Jane Pascal, died in London 1627. His “Life of Edward VI” was published after his death. Rev John Howard was reported in Stiths “History of Virginia” as John Howard, Clerk. He subscribed 37. He was the author of “Strong Helper” in 1614. Sir John Howard subscribed 75. He was the second son of Sir Rowland by his second wife Catherine Smythe. He was knighted at Windsor July 23rd, 1609, was High Sheriff of Kent in 1642. In 1622, a John Howard who had come with Edward Bennett’s first company in 1621 was killed by the Indian massacre of 1622. His plantation formed the border line of the Isle of Wight, Virginia. From some of these Howards members of the Virginia Company descended Matthew Howard a close friend, relative, and neighbor of Edward and Cornelius Lloyd in Virginia; and with the former came to Maryland. Matthew Howard was in Virginia in 1635, as shown by a court record in which he had a suit with Mr Evans. In 1645, he was the executor of the will of Richard Hall, a merchant of Virginia, who in 1610 was one of the Grocers Court of England which contributed 100 toward the plantation in Virginia. Colonel Cornelius Lloyd was a witness to Richard Hall’s will in 1645. The testator’s property was left to Ann, Elizabeth, John, Samuel, Matthew, and Cornelius Howard; children of Matthew and Ann Howard. Philip Howard, the youngest son of Matthew and Ann was evidently not born in 1645 for his name was not included in the list of legatees. But, in 1659, Commander Edward Lloyd surveyed for him after the death of Matthew, the Severn tract of Howard stone, for Philip Howard, Orphan. In 1662, the sons of Matthew Howard came up to the Severn and seated themselves near their father’s surveys. John Samuel and Cornelius Howard all transported a number of settlers and received grants for the same, upon the Severn. They located, adjoining each other, near Round Bay. In 1661, Henry Catlin, one of Edward Lloyd’s commissioners, also of the Nansemond Church, assigned his survey to Matthew Howard Jr., who resurveyed the same with Hopkins Plantation, added into Howard’s Inheritance. In 1662, the five brothers, John, Samuel, Matthew, Cornelius, and Philip had nine hundred acres granted them as brothers.”
With that, we have a considerable amount of possible fathers to Matthew Howard. Do we know which one was his? Still working on it…
Whilst researching a branch of my family I came across an interesting connection relating to my 11x great grandparents Thomas Burlingham (1563 – 1650) and Elizabeth Howard (1579 – 1620) both of Norfolk, England. Many researchers have incorrect dates for this couple which would make them about aged four when they started a family lol. (putting those silly mistakes to the side) the biggest issue with this couple is research that was made in the 1700’s, of which a line of descent made Elizabeth Howard the granddaughter of a Robert Howard of Syon House, London (1537 – 1598). It is claimed that this Robert Howard who married a Phillipa Buxton was the illegitimate son of Lord Thomas Howard (1511 – 1537) and Lady Margaret Douglas, Princess and Countess Lennox, who married in secret in 1536 against the wishes of King Henry VIII. This part of the story is correct, the…
ARCHBISHOP THOMAS CRANMER’S LICENSE FOR THE MARRIAGE OF KING HENRY VIII AND KATHERINE PARR LATIMER, INCLUDING DISPENSATION OF THE REQUIRED PROCLAMATION OF BANNS, JULY, 10, 1543
To the most excellent and most invincible prince on a throne, and our supreme lord Henry VIII, by the Grace of God King of England, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, and on earth Supreme Head, under Christ, of the Churches of England and Ireland: Thomas, by divine compassion Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of all England, and Metropolitan, dully and lawfully invested therein by the subscribed authority of the Parliament of England:
Health and perpetual happiness, with honor.
Since by your most excellent royal majesty it has been considered worthy to lead into matrimony the noble and distinguished woman Lady Katherine Latimer, lately the wife of the distinguished and powerful man, Lord Latimer, during his natural life, now deceased, she being favored by the most good and most great God and by your initiatives:
Therefore, that marriage between your most excellent kingly majesty and the said noblewoman, Lady Katherine, in whatever Church, chapel, or oratory or wherever else your kingly majesty may wish to choose, without any proclamation of banns, may be solemnized by any bishop or priest whatsoever; and that you may exempt from actual constraints,
We and our soul, moved in this regard duly and legitimately by the honor of your estate and concerned for the benefit of the whole realm of England, with the authority established by these presents, do dispense with constitutions and ordinances propounded to the contrary, nothing whatsoever standing in the way.
Given at our manor of Lambeth, under our seal for enactments, the tenth day of the month of July, the year of our Lord one thousand five hundred forty-three; and of your majesty’s most happy and most illustrious reign, the thirty-fifth; and of our consecration, the eleventh year.
Nicholas Wotton, Comissioner
Richard Lyell, Clerk for enactments by the said very Reverend [Lord Archbishop]
Source: Kew, Surrey: The National Archives, E 30/1472(6). A formulaic Latin writ in the engrossing hand of Richard Lyell, Cranmer’s clerk for enactments, sealed with the archbishop’s outsized seal.
From Katherine Parr: Complete Works & Correspondences, edited by Janel Mueller.
On 20 June 1543: John Dudley, Lord Lisle writes to Lord William Parr from Greenwich Palace.
“Thanks for his letter of the 11th and for taking Lisle’s servants during the time of his abode there. In reply to his desire for news; the King is well, and is newly come from Harwiche, where he perused and saw two notable havens but liked Coulme Water best. Wrote that it was like to grow to war with France; and this is now intimated, and the King sends Mr Treasurer to Guisnes with 4,000 footmen and 500 horsemen; and Sir Rice Mansfeld is gone to the seas with 10 ships. This for a beginning. When the Emperor comes into Flanders, who is already past Italy and arrived in Almayne, you shall hear of greater going both by land and sea. Other news “is none but that my lady Latymer, your sister, and Mrs Herbert be both here in the Court with my lady Mary’s grace and my lady Elizabethe.” Will write again when he has news. Made his commendations as directed, and also to other friends, of whom there be numbers that desire his “short return.”
Greenwich 20 June Signed P 1 Flyleaf with address lost
The day I found out that a link had been added to a Guardian Book Review was last year on this day. The highlighted “Lamentations of a Sinner“, went directly to my web site, TUDORQUEEN6. I was astonished and flattered. So, lets look back on this review…
A series of novels have been written about Queen Catherine Parr. Recently, Catherine was a hot topic for historical fiction authors like Philippa Gregory and Elizabeth Freemantle. This book, “Lamentations”, is an older novel that deals with a reoccuring narrator named Matthew Shardlake.
In this novel, Shardlake and the queen go back a long way, to a time when she was merely the widowed Lady Latimer and Shardlake entertained vain hopes that she might overlook his hump if he offered his hand (in the manner of all great detectives, Shardlake’s vast intellect and emotional insecurity mean he doesn’t have much luck with women). But though Shardlake has repeatedly vowed to cease putting himself in danger, he can’t resist the commission to trace the whereabouts of a secret, potentially heretical manuscript that has been stolen from the queen’s bedchamber.
Catherine did write a book and published it during the King’s reign. The book, Prayers and Meditations, was a huge success and the Queen was encouraged to write more. A mere encounter with almost being arrested quieted the Queen, just enough to make her the only surviving wife of King Henry. After Henry’s death in January of 1547, the Dowager Queen was once again encouraged to put forth her writings by her brother, William, now Marquess of Northampton and the Dowager Duchess of Suffolk, Katherine Willoughby. Lamentations of a Sinner was published. The book was more “heretical” than her earlier publication. If Catherine had tried to publish the book under Henry’s reign, she most definitely would have been arrested and tried for “heresy” by the Catholics at court. Whether or not she would have been put to death, we will never know, because Catherine was smart enough to plead her case to the King before the Catholic faction could even arrest her. Way to go Catherine!
Lady Anne Clifford, Countess Dowager of Dorset, Pembroke and Montgomery, suo jure 14th Baroness de Clifford (30 January 1590 – 22 March 1676) was an English peeress in her own right. She descended from Princess Mary, Duchess of Suffolk, the daughter of King Henry VII and Elizabeth of York by Mary’s daughter, Lady Eleanor Brandon (aunt of Lady Jane Grey). She married into the Herbert family; Sir Philip, 4th Earl of Pembroke. Pembroke was the grandson of Lady Anne Herbert; the Queen’s sister.
Lady Anne become an important woman in her time. She was an important patron of literature and due to her own writings in the form of letters and the diary she kept from 1603 to 1616, was a literary figure in her own right. John Donne said of her that she could “discourse of all things from Predestination to Slea-silk”.
Lady Anne Clifford was also a patron of art. She commissioned a large scale portrait that includes three separate panels detailing her life. The Great Picture, a huge triptych measuring 8ft 5″ high and 16ft 2″ wide, commissioned in 1646 by Anne Clifford. The artwork is attributed to Jan van Belcamp (1610-1653). It formerly hung in Appleby Castle, but is now displayed in the Abbot Hall Art Gallery, Kendal, Cumbria. The portrait depicts Anne as a girl at left and as a mature woman at right. The central panel shows her parents and young brothers. The painting is replete with significant elements referring to her life and to her succession to her paternal inheritance, gained after a lengthy legal dispute.
Abbott Hall Art Gallery had Lady Anne featured in an exhibition, Anne Clifford: A Life of Portrait and Print. Abbott Hall is in the Lake District where the Parr family originated. The Huddersfield University in Kendal, UK, wrote a feature PDF on two pieces presented in the exhibition.
“Great Books of Record” which preserves Anne’s ancestral records and her own children and grandchildren. Three volumes were made specifically to highlight the inheritance the women of the Clifford family brought to their marriages. A nod to what would become “feminism” I suppose.
“The Great Picture” which is previously discussed and a portrait is provided in this post.
There is a yet another discrepancy as to who the sitter is in another Hans Eworth portrait from the Tudor era. This time around, the actual sitter is, in fact, unknown. The proposed sitter of the painting was (and still is often) Lady Eleanor Clifford. Wikipedia has the portrait as Lady Eleanor’s main portrait. However, there has been a nod to perhaps the sitter being Eleanor’s daughter, Lady Margaret Clifford. As to who is really is–we’re not sure, so let’s study the background of each woman.
Lady Clifford was born Lady Eleanor Brandon in 1519 – 27 September 1547) She was the second daughter of Sir Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk and his wife the former Princess Mary, Queen of France. Her mother was the younger sister of King Henry VIII; making Eleanor a grandchild of King Henry VII and Elizabeth of York. In March 1533, a marriage contract was written up for Lady Eleanor and Lord Henry Clifford, the eldest son and heir of Henry Clifford, 1st Earl of Cumberland by Lady Margaret Percy. However, since her mother died nine months later, she waited to go and live with her young husband and in-laws. Eleanor officially married Lord Clifford at Brandon house, Bridewell, in 1537; her uncle King Henry VIII was present.
Lady Clifford served several of her uncle’s queens. In 1536, she was Chief Mourner to Queen Katherine of Aragon; the deposed wife Henry put aside for his second, Anne Boleyn.
Lady Eleanor and her husband had one surviving child, Lady Margaret, who was born in 1540. Eleanor died on 27 September 1547, nine months after her uncle Henry VIII. At the time of her death, her cousin Edward VI was King.
Lady Margaret Clifford would have been born in the process of King Henry VIII’s wife swaps. In 1540, Katherine Howard was consort. A short lived marriage that put Katherine on the chopping block dissolved and Henry was single again. In 1543, the King would marry for the 6th and final time to the widowed Lady Latimer (born Katherine Parr). Queen Katherine had a sturdy circle of religious women around her at all times. In her list of ladies-in-waiting, we see that both Lady Cumberland (mother to Margaret) and the Duchess of Suffolk (Lady Frances Brandon; aunt to Margaret) are listed. Margaret would have only been three when her granduncle married Katherine Parr.
The scandal of Lady Jane Grey hit Lady Margaret’s immediate family hard. Her cousin, Jane was in line to the throne after King Edward VI and his two sisters; Ladies Mary and Elizabeth. King Edward saw fit to bypass his sisters in his will and give his cousin Lady Jane the crown. Jane was the daughter of Lady Frances Brandon, Duchess of Suffolk. As such, Jane was the niece of Lady Eleanor Clifford; mother of Lady Margaret. The scandal was quickly suppressed and the will of Henry VIII (Edward’s father) was upheld. Lady Mary Tudor came to court to denounce her cousin Jane. The will of Henry VIII held more sway over Edward’s. Also, the blood descendants of King Henry VIII were preferred over the descendants of his father, Henry VII. There were two still living. Mary claimed her right to the throne and Jane was disposed. Jane, her father, her husband, and a few others were implicated and eventually executed under the new queen. As for Lady Margaret? She joined the court of Queen Mary. Queen Mary consented to the marriage of Lady Margaret to the heir of the Earldom of Derby and the two were married at Westminster Palace on February 12, 1555.
In 1557, Lady Margaret started to cause somewhat of a ruckus by claiming a superior succession to the crown than her cousins, Lady Catherine Grey and Lady Mary Grey. Margaret stated that because her cousin Jane had been tainted, tried, and executed, the whole line of the Grey family should be barred from the succession.
The death of Queen Mary set Lady Margaret in the attendance of the new Queen, Elizabeth. She held the rank of two of the highest noblewomen in the country along with her cousin, Lady Margaret Douglas (daughter of the eldest sibling of Henry VIII; Queen Margaret of Scots). Lady Margaret Clifford’s status may have been enough for a portrait. Her cousin, Margaret Douglas, certainly got a few.
What We Know About the Portrait
The coat of arms in the top left corner, which may have been added later, are the impaled arms (those of a husband and wife) of Henry Clifford, 2nd Earl of Cumberland, and his wife Lady Eleanor, daughter of Charles Brandon, 1st Duke of Suffolk and Mary Tudor, Dowager Queen of France. As a result the painting has been frequently exhibited in the past as a portrait of Lady Eleanor, regardless of the fact that she died in 1547, well before the date of this portrait [the roman numerals MDLX at the top right = 1560]. It is, however, a rule of heraldry that impaled arms are not used by the children of a marriage, as they would have their own. Hence the later addition and erroneous use of the arms here suggests that the identity of the portrait was already unclear only two or three generations after it was painted, a situation by no means unusual amid the frequent early deaths, multiple marriages, and shifting alliances and fortunes of the most powerful families of the Tudor era. Later the portrait was thought to represent the only child of Eleanor and Henry to survive infancy, Margaret. Unfortunately the inscription on the right which might have provided a check (Margaret would have been aged 25-28 at the time of this portrait) has been truncated; although the Roman numerals of the year can apply only to 1565-8, the age of the sitter cannot be ascertained with any useful accuracy. The National Portrait Gallery has an online sketch of this portrait identified as Lady Eleanor, but the portrait remains in dispute.
Another unfortunate aspect of the portrait is the clothing; the clothing does not match the time period of Lady Eleanor Brandon. The dress is third quarter of the 16th century and is of Spanish influence. According to Richard Davey. The sisters of Lady Jane Grey and their wicked grandfather, E.P. Dutton and co., 1912:
The Lady Eleanor Brandon was a better looking woman than her sister Frances. When her tomb in Skipton Church was disturbed in the seventeenth century her skeleton which was in perfect condition proved her to have been very tall and large boned whereas the Lady Frances was of medium stature. Lady Eleanor, if we may judge by her portrait, which hangs at Skipton Castle, was pretty rather than beautiful. The writer confesses that the portrait at Skipton did not impress him as that of one who could have put forward the slightest pretensions to good looks; the cheeks are high, the forehead abnormally broad, the eyes however are fine, and the hair fair but the complexion according to this venerable picture must have been quite ghastly. The portrait is very badly painted; a poor thing worth little as a work of art but none the less interesting.
The site for the Tate Gallery concludes that the painting is still unidentified, yet there is an identical sketch on the site for the National Portrait Gallery identified as Lady Eleanor. Who’s who?
Another proposal for the sitter is given as Hon. Margaret Wentworth, daughter of Thomas Wentworth, 1st Baron and his wife Margaret Fortescue. Sir Thomas was a nephew of Queen Jane Seymour’s mother, Margaret Wentworth. Thomas’s daughter, Margaret, married three times; Sir John, Baron Williams of Thame; Sir William Drury; and Sir James Croft. The new identification is given by Dr. Roy Strong based on the comparison to her sister, Jane Wentworth, Lady Cheney [below].
Problems with Identifying Tudor Portraits
For years Queen Katherine Parr’s many portraits were thought to be Lady Jane Grey; it is just recently that the portrait in the NPG in London (first portrait) was finally changed permanently to Queen Katherine Parr based on the research of the Queen’s inventory of jewels which was recorded in the documents of King Henry VIII. They are also recorded in the back of the recently published book, “Katherine Parr: Works and Correspondences.” Those very same jewels that belonged to the Queens of England were last worn by Queen Katherine Parr. After the death of King Henry, and after Edward Seymour proclaimed himself Lord Protector, the jewels, along with her personal jewels, were put into the Tower for safekeeping. Since Edward VI had no queen the jewels would not have been in use unless Edward’s wife Anne Stanhope got a hold of them; which she was not entitled to. Lady Jane Grey was in the household of Queen Dowager Katherine Parr until her death in 1548, but as stated the queen’s jewels were not accessible to Lady Jane and the portrait which is dated in the early 1540s also proves that the person painted had to have possession of those jewels; and who had possession during that time — only Queen Katherine Parr.
Let’s Talk to an Expert
The portrait at the Tate is certainly not of Eleanor Brandon. The artist of that painting is identified as Hans Eworth, an artist who did not become active in England until after Brandon’s death. Too, the style of the sitter’s costume also quite firmly dates the painting to at least a decade after Brandon’s death.
It seems quite logical that a portrait of Eleanor would have hung at Skipton, since that castle belonged to the family of Eleanor’s husband Henry Clifford, Earl of Cumberland. I do see that Richard Davey claims to have viewed the portrait in situ just prior to World War I. Whether or not his claim is factual is an open question, however. Davey too often simply invented the “facts” presented in his books. His list in Nine Days Queen of portraits of Jane Grey is packed with errors and deliberate falsehoods.
I understand that Skipton is now partially derelict, though it may still have some limited habitable spaces. Have you contacted Skipton Castle directly through their website to ask for any information they may have? That is certainly where I would start. I did check the Getty Research Institute’s Provenance Research Database, but that did not turn up any portraits of Eleanor Brandon Clifford appearing at public auction between 1700 and 1900. But the portrait may have been sold privately. –Dr. Stephan Edwards (Author of A Queen of a New Invention and The Lady Jane Grey Prayer Book)
I have contacted Skipton Castle looking for information. I have yet to receive and email. So for now, as of the end of 2016, the portrait remains unknown.
Lawrence Manley, “From Strange’s Men to Pembroke’s Men: 2 “Henry VI” and “The First Part of the Contention”.”, Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 54, No. 3 (Autumn, 2003), pp. 253-287.
Sir Sidney Lee. Dictionary of national biography, Volume 54, Smith, Elder, & co., 1898. pg 70.Google eBook
Eleanor Clifford (née Brandon), Countess of Cumberland, probably by Alfred Thomas Derby, after Unknown artist, Purchased, 1893, Reference Collection NPG D23066. National Portrait Gallery
The Tate Gallery 1984-86: Illustrated Catalogue of Acquisitions Including Supplement to Catalogue of Acquisitions 1982-84, Tate Gallery, London 1988, pp.66-8. Tate Collections
Katherine Parr, attributed to Master John, circa 1545. Purchased with help from the Gulbenkian Foundation, 1965 Primary Collection. Reference Collection NPG 4451
Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox (1515-78), c.1572, British School, 16th Century, Royal Collection Trust. RCIN 401183