Ancestors of Queen Katherine: Joan of Kent, Princess of Wales

Medieval depiction of Princess Joan of Kent.

Circa 1380, Joan of Kent, Princess of Wales (1328 – 1385), wife of Edward, the Black Prince, mother of Richard II. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

Princess Joan of Kent, suo jure 4th Countess of Kent and 5th Baroness Wake of Liddell, later the first Princess of Wales, as wife to Edward, the Black Prince, son and heir of King Edward III. Joan was the daughter of Prince Edmund of Woodstock, 1st Earl of Kent (5 August 1301-19 March 1330) and his wife Hon. Margaret, suo jure 3rd Baroness of Wake of Liddell (c.1297-29 September 1349). Princess Joan had three other siblings; Edmund, 2nd Earl of Kent (1326 – before 5 October 1331); John, 3rd Earl of Kent and 4th Baron Wake of Liddell (7 April 1330 – 26 December 1352); and Margaret, Viscountess of Tartas. Upon the death of her brother, the 3rd Earl of Kent and 4th Baron Wake, Joan assumed the titles as the 4th Countess and 5th Baroness. Joan is one of the few women in Medieval history to hold/inherit a title in her own right. Joan’s great-granddaughter, Lady Alice Montacute, would be another women to hold that honor as the suo jure 5th Countess of Salisbury. Jean Froissart called her “the most beautiful woman in all the realm of England, and the most loving.”

By her maternal grandfather, Sir John Wake, 1st Baron Wake of Liddell, Joan was descended from Llywelyn the Great, Prince of Gwynedd and Joan, Lady of Wales, the illegitimate daughter of John I of England. Her maternal grandmother, Joan de Fiennes, was a sister of Margaret de Fiennes, making her a cousin of Roger Mortimer, 1st Earl of March. Joan’s great-grandfather, William Fiennes, was killed at the battle of Courtrai in 1302; her great-great-great-grandfather Jean de Brienne was Emperor of Constantinople and King of Jerusalem; and her great-great-great-great-grandmother Berenguela of Castile was the sister of Edward II’s grandfather Fernando III of Castile, both being children of Eleanor of England, Queen of Castile, daughter of Henry II of England and Eleanor of Aquitaine.

The Earl and Countess of Kent, Prince Edmund of Woodstock and Margaret, suo jure Baroness Wake of Liddell.

The Earl and Countess of Kent, Prince Edmund of Woodstock and Margaret, suo jure Baroness Wake of Liddell.

Joan’s father, Edmund of Woodstock, was executed after the deposition of her uncle, Edward II. At the time of her father’s death, her mother was pregnant with John who would become the 3rd Earl at age one after the death of his elder brother in 1331. Joan and her sister Margaret were brought to court after Edward III learned of the injustice done to his uncle by the hand of his mother, Queen Isabella (the French queen consort of Edward II) and her love Roger Mortimer, Earl of March (cousin of Joan’s mother). Joan and her siblings were raised in the royal nursery; therefore she was brought up along side her cousin and future husband, Edward, Prince of Wales. After the death of her mother on 29 September 1349, Joan was made a ward of Edward III and his queen Philippa of Hainault. This connection perhaps led to the marriage of her brother, the 3rd Earl of Kent, to Isabella of Jülich (died 6 June 1411), the daughter of William V, Duke of Jülich and Joanna of Hainaut, a younger sister of Queen consort Philippa of Hainault on 3 April 1348. They couple had no children, but Isabella’s brother, Gerhard VI of Jülich, Count of Berg and Ravensberg, was grandfather to Adolf I, Duke of Cleves and thus was an ancestor to Anne of Cleves, 4th wife of King Henry VIII.

Left, Thomas Holland, Earl of Kent and right William, Earl of Salisbury; from the Bruges Garter Book, 1430/1440, BL Stowe 594

Left, Thomas Holland, Earl of Kent and right William, Earl of Salisbury; from the Bruges Garter Book, 1430/1440, BL Stowe 594

Joan was eventually assigned a govern and governess; William and Catherine Montacute, the 1st Earl and Countess of Salisbury. The couple was determined to have Joan married to their son and heir William. Instead of following their plans, Joan followed her own path and fell in love with Sir Thomas Holland, Baron Holland. She married her first husband, Sir Thomas Holland, around the age of twelve. Thomas was about fourteen years older, which was not considered an issue at the time. Sir Thomas Holland was an English nobleman and would become a military commander during the Hundred Years’ War. He was from a gentry family in Holland, Lancashire. He was a son of Sir Robert Holland, 1st Baron and Maud la Zouche, daughter of Sir Alan le Zouche, 1st Baron and Eleanor de Segrave. Alan Zouche’s mother, Ela Longespee was the granddaughter of the 1st Earl of Salisbury, the illegitimate son of King Henry II of England. His other ancestors included Henry I of England (twice), David I of Scotland (twice), Raoul Count of Marche Lusignan, and Duncan II of Scots. Holland would be granted the honour of being chosen as one of the founders of the Most Noble Order of the Garter. He secretly married Joan of Kent in a clandestine marriage without first gaining the royal consent necessary for couples of their rank. Since the couple did not get consent of the crown and the marriage was simply one of sworn love for each other, Joan was forced by the Salisbury’s to marry their son Sir William Montague, 2nd Earl of Salisbury while her husband was overseas.

Joan of Kent, Princess of Wales

Joan of Kent, Countess of Kent, Baroness Wake of Liddell, and Princess of Wales. The Montacute arms (bottom left) represent her forced marriage to the 2nd Earl of Salisbury; above Montacute is that of the Prince of Wales; and above both is that of the Holland family. In the top right corner — is her mother’s family crest, Wake of Liddell and below that of her father Prince Edmund of Woodstock.

In 1341 when Holland returned from the Crusades, Salisbury refused to believe the validity of the marriage between Lady Joan and Holland. In 1342, Holland accompanied Robert of Artois to Brittany in support of the Countess of Montfort. In 1346, Holland captured Raoul, Count of Eu, and Jean Tancerville at Caen, France. The same year he fought in the Battle of Crecy as Edward, the Black, Prince of Wales’s chief officers. In 1347, he was awarded 80, 000 florins by the King for the exchange of the Count of Eu. Soon after, Holland appealed to the Pope in Avignon for the return of his wife and confessed to the King. Salisbury decided to keep Joan captive in his home rather than let her return to Holland. In 1349, Pope Clement VI annulled Joan’s marriage to Salisbury and had her sent back to Holland. In 1352, Joan assumed the title of 4th Countess of Kent and 5th Baroness Wake of Liddell after the death of her brother, John, 3rd Earl of Kent. Joan inherited her brother’s title as 4th Countess of Kent and 5th Baroness Wake of Liddell (the barony and title of her mother which passed to her children along with the title of Earl of Kent). These titles were suo jure, meaning “in her own right” as her mother and siblings predeceased her leaving no issue. With the title also came a substantial amount of property and money. The happy couple had three sons and two daughters:

  1. Thomas Holland (later 2nd Earl of Kent), married Lady Alice FitzAlan, daughter of Sir Richard FitzAlan, 10th Earl of Arundel and Lady Eleanor of Lancaster. Katherine Parr and King Henry VIII descended from them.
  2. Edmund who died young, and
  3. John Holland, the youngest son and child — later became 1st Duke of Exeter and married Lady Elizabeth of Lancaster, daughter of his cousin Prince John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster by his first wife, also a cousin, Blanche of Lancaster.
  4. Lady Maud Holland, Countess of Ligny (d.1407) as wife to Waleran III of Luxembourg, Count of Ligny; they had one daughter, Jeanne of Luxembourg who married Antoine, Duke of Brabant. The Count and Countess of Ligny’s lineage died out after the death of their two grandsons, John IV, Duke of Brabant (1403–1427) and Philip of St. Pol (1404–1430), Duke of Brabant.
  5. Lady Joan Holland, Duchess of Brittany (1350–1384) who married John V, Duke of Brittany in London, May 1366. They had no issue. The Duke had previously been married to the Duchess’s cousin, Princess Mary of Waltham, daughter of Edward III. John V was knighted by Edward III in 1375-1376 as a member of the Order of the Garter. It is believed he is the only Duke of Brittany to have attained this English honor. The Duke would marry thirdly to Joanna of Navarre (mother to his children), the future queen consort to King Henry IV of England.

Her two surviving sons were the godsons of Lady Kent’s cousin and future husband, Edward, Prince of Wales. Thomas Holland, 1st Earl of Kent died in 1360.

Although marriages within the Royal Family and between Royal Families are the most desirable, it is interesting to note the marital ties of the Holland children also to the English royal family.

The 1st Duke of Exeter married John of Gaunt’s daughter, Lady Elizabeth of Lancaster; their children married nobility. The 3rd Duke would marry into the royal family — as husband to Anne of York, sister of Edward IV and Richard III. Their daughter, also named Anne, would marry the 1st Marquess of Dorset; son of Queen Elizabeth, wife of Edward IV, by her first husband.

The children of the 2nd Earl of Kent: Lady Joan Holland married Edmund of Langley, 1st Duke of York (son of Edward III); no issue. Lady Joan was the sister of Lady Margaret Holland who married firstly to Gaunt’s son John Beaufort, 1st Earl of Somerset (ancestors of Lady Margaret Beaufort) and secondly to the Duke of Clarence (Thomas of Lancaster), grandson of John of Gaunt by his son King Henry IV; she would be known as the Duchess of Clarence for the rest of her life. Another sister, Lady Eleanor Holland was mother-in-law to Richard Neville, 5th Earl of Salisbury, grandson of John of Gaunt by his daughter Lady Joan Beaufort, Countess of Westmorland. Yet another sister, Lady Alianore Holland was mother to Anne de Mortimer, wife to York’s (Langley) son, Richard of Conisburgh, Earl of Cambridge. Another sibling of Lady Joan, Edmund Holland, 4th Earl of Kent would father a child by York’s daughter Constance of York; it has been claimed there was a marriage betrothal between the two, but no evidence that they were officially married.(Richardson)

Princess of Wales

By Sophie Carter.

By Sophie Carter.

Now a rich widow, Joan was sought after by just about every eligible bachelor in the country. The Countess’s royal birth, her extraordinary beauty and grace, and the circumstances of her life had caused this cynosure of every man; that she was the universal subject of men. Joan declined all that approached her. In one instance her cousin, the Prince of Wales, had been approached by a soldier in his entourage to intercede upon his behalf; now identified as a Sir Denis Brocas. According to the story (for the full account see Burrows),

“an English noble, whose name history does not mention, having fallen in love with the widowed Countess of Kent, and found his suit tardy, entreated the Prince’s good word; but that after certain denials, she told him plainly, ‘that when she was under ward, she had been disposed of by others; but now, being mistress of her own actions, she would not cast herself beneath her rank, but remember that she was of the blood-royal of England, and therefore resolved never to marry again but a Prince of quality and virtue like herself;’ and that the hero, while pleading the cause of his friend, felt the old flame rekindled.” (Finch)

A valuable anonymous MS reposited in the National Library at Paris has been edited by the well known antiquary M. Simeon de Luce, called the “Chronique des quatre premiers Valois” of which this one copy alone exists. According to the chronicler:

 “The Prince did speak many times for the knight to the said Lady of Holland; for he went with great good will for his own pleasure to see the said lady, who was his cousin, and he oftentimes observed with admiration her brilliant beauty and most gracious presence, which marvellously delighted him. And when one day the Prince was speaking to the said Countess for the said knight, she gave him her answer. She never would have any husband. And often said she this to the Prince, for she was very subtle and clever. ‘Ha!’ said the Prince fair, ‘cousin if you decline to marry my friends your wonderful beauty will be all the worse for you. If you and I were not so near of kin there is no lady under heaven whom I should love so dearly as I should you.’ Then was the Prince much overcome with love of the Countess; and so the Countess fell a weeping just like the subtle woman that she was and full of wiles. And now the Prince began to console her and tenderly affected by her tears took to kissing her very often and said; ‘Fair cousin, I am come to speak to you for one of the most perfect knights in England, and moreover of high lineage.’ Bathed in tears, Madame the Countess thus addressed him: ‘Ah sire! for God’s sake I beseech you say no more on that point, for I am resolved never to marry. I have already given myself away to the most perfect knight in all the world and for the love of him never do I mean to have so long as I shall live, any spouse but God. It is quite impossible. For his love I forswear the society of men, not one of whom do I intend to marry.’ The Prince was tormented with a vehement desire to know who this most perfect knight in the world might be and repeatedly pressed the Countess to tell him his name. But the said Countess, the more eager she saw him become, the more she besought him that he would ask no further question. Falling on her knees, she cried: ‘For the love of God and of His most sweet Lady Mother, will you not submit to this restraint?’ To bring the story to an end, the Prince told her that if she would not inform him who was the most perfect knight in the world he would be her mortal enemy. Then said the Countess: ‘Most dear and honoured lord, it is you. It is for the love of you that I declare that knight shall never marry me.’ The Prince who was by this time well nigh beside himself with love, then said: ‘Lady, and I also on my part vow to God that as long as you shall be alive, never will I take any other woman to my wife.’ And there and then he plighted her his troth, shortly enough after which the marriage took place. . .Edward, the king of England, was marvellously vexed and annoyed at this affair and was even desirous of putting her to death, for this Prince might have made a very much more lofty match. There was neither emperor, king, nor prince under the sky who would not have been rejoiced to have the Prince enrolled among his lineage.”(Burrows)

The tales and accounts may have been exaggerated as most records were back then. This seems to be a tad too romantic for the time and I doubt anyone would remember such detail as stated in the Burrow’s account. Looking at the dates of the publications — it is no doubt the Victorian romanticized version of the tale.

Princess Joan of Kent and her son, King Richard II

Circa 1377, Joan of Kent (1328 – 1385) Princess of Wales, wife of Edward the Black Prince and mother of King Richard II of England (1367 – 1399) (second and only surviving son). (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

The Prince of Wales became affectionate towards the Countess of Kent. It is said that even the Prince had fallen for her charm earlier in his lifetime, but that his parents did not approve. Nevertheless, it seems that their marriage was one of love. Although his parents did not approve of the match (they most likely wanted him to marry a foreign Princess to forge some sort of alliance between England and another European country). Although Joan had been a favored ward of the King and queen, the Countess’s living ex-husband was an issue when it came to inheritance. The secret marriage the Prince of Wales and Countess of Kent are said to have contracted in 1360 would have been invalid anyway because of the consanguinity prohibition (they were first cousins, once removed). At the King’s request, the Pope granted a dispensation allowing the two to be legally married. The official ceremony occurred on 10 October 1361, at Windsor Castle with the King and Queen in attendance. The Archbishop of Canterbury presided.

The couple had two children, Edward of Angoulême and Richard of Bordeaux (later King Richard II). The eldest died around age 6 while the couple was ruling in Bordeaux as Prince and Princess of Aquitaine. The couple returned to England in 1371 where the plague had become an issue. Edward was a Prince who enjoyed fighting and was usually pre-occupied with some campaign. In 1371, he attempted one final campaign to regain his father’s French possessions. On 7 June 1376, he died at Westminster, a week before his forty-six birthday. Joan’s son by the Prince, young Richard, became heir to his grandfather Edward III. Edward died circa a year after his son and Richard was crowned King at the age of ten.

Portrait of Joan of Kent (1328-1385) with her son Richard II, 1377. (Photo by Photo12/UIG/Getty Images)

Portrait of Joan of Kent (1328-1385) with her son Richard II, 1377. (Photo by Photo12/UIG/Getty Images)

As a power behind the throne, she was well loved for her influence over the young king – for example, on her return to London (via her Wickhambreaux estate) from a pilgrimage to Becket’s shrine at Canterbury Cathedral in 1381, she found her way barred by Wat Tyler and his mob of rebels on Blackheath but was not only let through unharmed, but saluted with kisses and provided with an escort for the rest of her journey. She was well loved by the people.

By Sophie Carter Designs.

By Sophie Carter Designs.

In 1385, Sir John Holland (1st Duke of Exeter), son of the Princess of Wales’s first marriage, was campaigning with the King in the Kingdom of Scotland, when a quarrel broke out between him and Ralph Stafford, son of the 2nd Earl of Stafford, a favorite of the new Queen Anne of Bohemia. Stafford was killed, and John Holland sought sanctuary at the shrine of St John of Beverley. The Princess of Wales herself did not take to foreign queens for some reason so one wonders if she got along with Queen Anne of Bohemia. On the King’s return, Holland was condemned to death. Joan pleaded with her son for four days to spare his half-brother. On the fifth day (the exact date in August is not known), she died, at Wallingford Castle. Richard relented, and pardoned Holland (though he was then sent on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land).

This head, believed to represent Joan Plantaganet, wears her hair in a netted fret, a fashion popular in the late 14th century. The actual boss in Canterbury Cathedral is not terribly prominent and takes a few minutes to locate - like most cathedrals it is possible to discover something new on each visit.

This head, believed to represent Joan Plantaganet, wears her hair in a netted fret, a fashion popular in the late 14th century. The actual boss in Canterbury Cathedral is not terribly prominent and takes a few minutes to locate – like most cathedrals it is possible to discover something new on each visit.

Joan was buried, as requested in her will, at the Greyfriars, the site of the present hospital, in Stamford in Lincolnshire, beside her first husband, the Earl of Kent. In her will she stipulated:

‘My body is to be buried in my chapel at Stanford, near the monument of our late lord and husband, the Earl of Kent.’

Her third husband, the Black Prince, had built a chantry for her in the crypt of Canterbury Cathedral where he was buried with ceiling bosses of her face (seen above). She however chose to be buried with the Earl of Kent, as stated above.

The Prince and Princess of Wales portrayed by James Purefoy and an unknown actress in "A Knight's Tale" (2001)

The Prince and Princess of Wales portrayed by James Purefoy and an unknown actress in “A Knight’s Tale” (2001)

Lady Joan was featured without credit in “A Knight’s Tale” (2001) as the woman sitting next to the Black Prince [alias Coleville in the film] at the final tournament. As the Prince of Wales had no other wife, we can assume that this is the Princess of Wales, Joan.

So just how is Queen Katherine Parr descended from Princess Joan?

Joan_of_Kent_KP

Sources

  • Wentersdorf, Karl P (1979). “The Clandestine marriages of the Fair Maid of Kent,Journal of Medieval History 5 (3): 203–231.
  • Douglas Richardson. “Magna Carta Ancestry: A Study in Colonial and Medieval Families,” 2nd Edition, 2011.
  • Anne Crawford. “Yorkists: The History of a Dynasty,” Continuum International Publishing Group, Apr 15, 2007.
  • Montagu Burrows. “The family of Brocas of Beaurepaire and Roche court: hereditary masters of the royal buckhounds, with some account of the English rule in Aquitaine,” Longmans, Green, 1886. Google eBook (available for download)
  • Barbara Clay Finch. “Lives of the princesses of Wales,” Volume 1, Remington and co., 1883. Google eBook
  • Getty Images — Search: Joan of Kent, Princess of Wales

© Meg McGath
27 March 2013

“The Queen’s Gambit” by Elizabeth Fremantle

Queen's Gambit Free, released 14 Mar 2013 in the UK. See Amazon.co.uk

Queen’s Gambit, released 14 Mar 2013 in the UK. See Amazon.co.uk

Queen's Gambit: A Novel [Hardcover] by Elizabeth Fremantle. Due 11 June 2013 in the US. See Amazon.com

Queen’s Gambit: A Novel [Hardcover] by Elizabeth Fremantle. Due 11 June 2013 in the US. See Amazon.com

New historical fiction book on Queen Katherine Parr by Elizabeth Fremantle.
“In Queen’s Gambit, Elizabeth Fremantle has taken on this extraordinary figure who lived more fully in her fewer than forty years than most women of her age and I think she has done Katherine Parr proud.”

Kate (For Winter Nights)'s avatarFor winter nights - A bookish blog

Publisher: Michael Joseph
Pages: 480
Year: 2013, Pb 2014
Buy: Hardback, Kindle, Paperback
Source: Review copy

Queen's Gambit by Elizabeth FremantleReview
Katherine Parr had the distinction of outliving her husband Henry VIII. This remarkable – and most definitely not guaranteed at the time – fact means that she is among historical fiction’s more neglected Tudor wives. Anne Boleyn, Catherine Howard and even Katherine of Aragon are difficult to compete with. This is a pity for at least two reasons: firstly, I was named after Katherine (or Katharine) Parr so I’m unashamedly biased and, secondly, she was a remarkable woman in her own right. Not only did she manage to outfox and outlive a man who almost certainly wanted to cut her head off at least once, Katherine also had an intellectual and religious curiosity that made her stand out in those days, among women and among reformers…

View original post 670 more words

Family of Queen Katherine: Sir Edward Herbert of Powis

Pembroke family of Wilton. Wilton Church.

Pembroke family of Wilton. Wilton Church. Left panel shows the 1st Earl of Pembroke with his two sons, Henry (future 2nd Earl of Pembroke) and Sir Edward of Powis.

Sir Edward Herbert of Powis Castle (Jun 1544-23 March 1595) was the second child and son of Sir William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke (10th creation) and his first wife, Lady Anne (Parr). His siblings were Lord Henry Herbert (later 2nd Earl of Pembroke) and Lady Anne Talbot, wife of Lord Francis Talbot. Through his mother, Herbert was a nephew to Queen Katherine Parr and the 1st Marquess of Northampton, William Parr. Upon the death of his aunt, Queen Katherine, his mother became the sole heiress to her brother the Marquess of Northampton.

Arms of Sir William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke (10th creation)

Arms of Sir William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke (10th creation) [2]

Herbert was a member of the Herbert family, a Welsh noble family who descended from Sir William ap Thomas of Raglan Castle. His father, Sir William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke of the second creation (within the Herbert family) was the grandson of the first creation also named William (1423-1469). From birth, Edward Herbert had the backing of his family’s powerful clan. It also didn’t hurt that his father, the Earl of Pembroke, would become a large influence at court. Due to his mother’s affiliation to Henry VIII’s last queen, Katherine Parr, Herbert’s father owed some of his advancement to Edward’s mother — Anne. Lady Pembroke (at the time Lady Anne Herbert) was sister to Queen Katherine, the last queen consort to King Henry VIII. In the reign of Henry VIII’s children, especially Edward VI, Pembroke became a guardian to the young king and was part of the court circle of men around the boy. Pembroke tried to advance his standing by marrying his son to a granddaughter of Princess Mary Tudor (Henry VIII’s younger sister and designated heirs to the throne after his immediate children), Lady Katherine Grey. The marriage was to bring the family close to the crown upon the attempt to put Grey’s sister, Lady Jane, on the throne as Queen. When Lady Jane was “deposed,” Pembroke tried to distant himself from the “traitors” which included his brother-in-law, Northampton. Pembroke had the marriage between his son and Lady Katherine annulled and tried to gain favour with the Catholic queen Mary Tudor. The plan worked and his family was spared. Pembroke would also contribute heavily to the reign of Elizabeth I.

Lord Pembroke’s marriage to the queen’s sister advanced the family and Anne gave legitimacy to the Herbert family. Lady Pembroke’s descendants also had the luxury of becoming the heirs of the Parr inheritance once Lady Pembroke’s brother, William, 1st Marquess of Northampton died in 1571 without issue. Although the title of Marquess of Northampton and Earl of Essex were forfeit, the children inherited other “titles”, manors, lands, etc.

HANWORTH, a village and a parish in Staines district, Middlesex. Ordnance Survey First Series, Sheet 8.

HANWORTH, a village and a parish in Staines district, Middlesex. Ordnance Survey First Series, Sheet 8.

In June 1544, the Queen lent her sister Lady Herbert her manor, Hanworth for the lying-in for her second child. It was there that Anne Herbert gave birth to her second son, Edward (his elder brother was named Henry, was this a coincidence?). The Queen sent regular messengers to Hanworth to inquire on the health of her sister. For the christening, the queen provided a large delegation (five yeo-men, two grooms, and Henry Webbe) from her household to attend. Letters continued well into July between the two sisters while Lady Herbert remained at Hanworth. After the birth, Lady Herbert visited Lady Hertford (Anne Stanhope), who had also just given birth, at Syon House near Richmond.[1]

In August 1544, the queen paid for a barge to bring her sister Lady Herbert by river from Syon House (home to the Hertford’s) to Westminster. The queen’s involvement in the birth and christening of her nephew would eventually lead her to take him in as part of her household after the death of King Henry.[1]

After King Henry VIII’s death in January 1547, when the queen dowager’s household was at Chelsea, both Lady Herbert and her son Edward were part of the household there. The Dowager queen, as always, was keen to have her family close to her. After having no children of her own by her previous three husbands and no role in the new government, the queen probably didn’t mind having her toddler nephew around. While Lady Herbert attended her sister, her husband Lord Herbert was appointed as one of the guardians to the new king, Edward VI. Lord Herbert became part of the circle around the new king which included his brother-in-law, the Marquess of Northampton.[1]

Hendon Church, Middlesex. London, England; June 1, 1815 (published). John Preston Neale, born 1766 - died 1847 (artist); Bonner, Thomas, born 1735 - died 1816 (engraver) Engraving. Given by Dr. G. B. Gardner. V&A Online Collections.

Hendon Church, Middlesex. London, England; June 1, 1815 (published). John Preston Neale, born 1766 – died 1847 (artist); Bonner, Thomas, born 1735 – died 1816 (engraver) Engraving. Given by Dr. G. B. Gardner. V&A Online Collections.

At the age of his majority, Herbert returned for the family borough and never sat for Parliament again. On the death of his father in 1569, Herbert inherited the manor of Hendon, Middlesex. He also inherited his mother’s lands in Northampton and Westmorland (the Parr inheritance).

Powis_Castle

Probably the most important event in his life was the purchase of Powis Castle in Wales (at the time it was called “Poole Castell”).[2] Sir Edward Herbert bought the lordship and castle in 1587 from Edward Grey, a feudal Lord of Powis.[3] Edward Grey was the illegitimate child of the last Lord Powis and Jane Orwell; therefore his father’s estates, which he inherited, came with limitations within Lord Powis’s will.[4] One of those limitations was the obvious title, Baron Powis, which would be bestowed on Herbert’s son, William Herbert, in the reign of James I. The castle Sir Edward took over was probably in serious need of repair and modernisation, and he undertook extensive work between 1587 and 1595, of which only the long gallery survives (completed in 1593).[5]

Herbert’s interests were mostly in Montgomeryshire and he had little to do with public life (most likely by choice). He was knighted in 1574. In 1590, his brother the 2nd Earl of Pembroke put him forward for a membership in the council of the marches. Herbert appears to have been of the Catholic faith and that may also explain his non-involvement in Parliament and at the court of Elizabeth I. Herbert’s wife however was Catholic and it was most likely to her influence that he converted. Lord and Lady Herbert’s names appeared on a list of Catholics drawn up between 1574 and 1577; his wife’s name would appear again in 1582. In 1580, Henry Sydney (brother to his sister-in-law Lady Pembroke), was to arrest recusants and did institute proceedings against them in Montgomeryshire. The Herbert’s were left to be until June 1594 when Lady Herbert and her five children, all under age, were presented for recusancy, not having attended Church services (Protestant) at the parish church in Welshpool for twelve months.

Women were very important to the recusant cause in Wales, as in England. Often a wife stayed at home while her husband kept up appearances by attending Anglican services. Some people outwardly conformed to avoid stiff fines, but secretly remained Catholics.

In 1581, it was made treason to convert to Catholicism, or try to convert someone else to it; further measures followed, and the penalty for being caught was often death. But some Catholics risked their lives all the same. The Jesuit order provided many missionary priests, some raised in Wales but trained on the continent. It was a perilous life, and some Welsh homes still have priest holes, where these men hid from the authorities. A number of Welsh Catholics (mostly priests) were executed in the 16th and 17th centuries.[6]

In 1570, Herbert married Mary Stanley, daughter and heir of Sir Thomas Stanley of Standon, Herts. and London. They had four sons and eight daughters.[7] Their children included the eldest son and heir Sir William Herbert, 1st Baron Powis; George, who died unmarried; Sir John Herbert, Knt, who died without issue; Edward, who died a bachelor; Elizabeth died young; Joyce; Frances; Jane; Mary; Winifred; and two more daughters named Anne and Katherine (most likely named after Herbert’s mother and aunt, the queen).[8][9]

Herbert died on 23 March 1595 and was buried in Welshpool Church, Montgomeryshire, where a monument is erected in his memory on the North side of the Chancel. The Herbert memorial consists of two figures in black marble kneeling. In the middle is an inscription in letters of gold, in roman capitols.[9]

Here lyeth the Bodyes of the Right Worshipful Sir Edward Herbert, Knight, second Son to the Right Honourable Sir William Herbert, Knt. Earl of Pembroke, Lord Cardiffe and Knight of the most Noble Order of the Garter, and of Anne his Wife, Sister and sole Heire to Sir William Parr, Kt. Lord Parr of Kirbeby, Kendall, Marmion, FitzHugh, St. Quintin, Earl of Essex, Marquis of Northampton, and Knt. of the most Noble Order of the Garter. Which Sir Edward Herbert married Mary Daughter and sole Heire to Thomas Stanley of Standen, in the County of Hertford, Esq; Master of the Mint, A.D. 1570, youngest Son of Thomas Stanley of Dalgarthe, in the County of Cumberland, Esq. Which Sir Edward Herbert and Dame Mary his Wife had Issue iv Sonnes and viii Daughters, viz.

William Herbert, Esq; his eldest Sonne and Heire, who married Lady Eleanor, second Daughter to Henry late Earl of Northumberland, George Herbert, 2d Son, John Herbert, 3d Son, and Edward Herbert, 4th Son : Elizabeth, first Daughter died young, Anne 2d Daughter, Joyce 3d Daughter, Frances 4th Daughter, Katharine 5th Daughter, Jane 6, Mary 7, and Winifred 8th Daughter. Which Sir Edward died 23 Day of March DMDLXXXXIV and this Monument was made at the Charge of the sayd Lady Herbert 23 October 1595.[9]

Letters of administration were issued to his widow in April 1595.[7]

Books of Hours belonging to Lady Eleanor Powis, wife to Sir William, 1st Baron Powis.  Lady Eleanor used her Book of Hours to remind her of important anniversaries writing these dates against the Feast Days of the Catholic Calendar at the front of her book. She includes the birthdays of herself, her husband William, and her children. © National Trust Collections

Books of Hours belonging to Lady Eleanor Powis, wife to Sir William, 1st Baron Powis. Lady Eleanor used her Book of Hours to remind her of important anniversaries writing these dates against the Feast Days of the Catholic Calendar at the front of her book. She includes the birthdays of herself, her husband William, and her children. © National Trust Collections

Sources

  1. Susan James. “Catherine Parr: Henry VIII’s Last Love,” The History Press, US Edition: 2009. pg 275-76.
  2. European Heraldry. “House of Herbert
  3. George Edward Cokayne. Complete Peerage of England, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain and the United Kingdom, Extant, Extinct, Or Dormant , Volume 6. G. Bell & sons, 1895. pg 295.
  4. A letter dated 8 October 1590 from Sir Edward Herbert at “The Poole Castell.” Kynaston Peerage Papers No 148.
  5. Hugh Montgomery-Mass, Christopher Simon Sykes. “Great Houses of England & Wales,” Laurence King Publishing, 1994. pg 44-45. Google eBook.
  6. Katharine Olson. “A New History of Wales: Katharine Olson debates Reformation in Wales – a hidden history?,” Wales Online, 24 September 2010. URL: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/welsh-history/articles/2010/09/24/a-new-history-of-wales-katherine-olsen-debates-reformation-in-wales-a-hidden-history-91466-27334897/2/#ixzz2OKGjwyCM
  7. “The History of Parliament: the House of Commons” 1558-1603, ed. P.W. Hasler, 1981. HERBERT, Edward II (c.1542-95), of Wilton, Wilts.; later of Powis Castle, Mont.
  8. Edward Thornton Evans. “The History and Topography of the Parish of Hendon, Middlesex,” Simpkin, 1890 – Hendon (London, England). pg 37.
  9. Arthur Collins. “The Peerage of England,” Volume 1, 1735. pg 506. Google eBook.

Holbein Pendant of Helena, Marchioness of Northampton

Drawn by Hans Holbein the Younger, c.1532-1543

Drawn by Hans Holbein the Younger, c.1532-1543

Description
Pendant, with a lady holding a stone, and three hanging pearls, one of three designs for jewellery with inscriptions, from the ‘Jewellery Book’; half-length figure of a lady facing front, her head turned slightly to right and wearing a head-dress, holding an inscribed rectangular tablet in front
Pen and black ink, with grey wash.

The drawing was acquired in 1753, bequeathed by Sir Hans Sloane. Transferred from the Dept. of Manuscripts to Prints + Drawings on 20 July 1860. For a history of the contents of Sloane 5308, see SL,5308.1.

Inscriptions
Inscription Content: Rowlands 1993
Inscribed by an early hand, in brown ink on the stone, “WELL / LAYDI / WELL”

'The Master of the Countess of Warwick', ‘Portrait of a lady, aged 21, possibly Helena Snakenborg’, dated 1569.

‘The Master of the Countess of Warwick’, ‘Portrait of a lady, aged 21, possibly Helena Snakenborg’, dated 1569. The brooch can be seen around her neck hanging from a gold chain.

‘Although there appears to be no surviving example of this type, as Sjögren has noted, the sitter in the painting, according to Strong, by ‘The Master of the Countess of Warwick’, ‘Portrait of a lady, aged 21, possibly Helena Snakenborg’, dated 1569 (R. Strong, ‘The English Icon’, London and New York, 1969, p. 113, no. 61, repr.) in the Tate Gallery (T400) is wearing a very similar pendant jewel, in which the half-length figure of a lady is depicted holding a large stone. This suggests that the inscription was a later, although probably still sixteenth-century, addition. Sjögren makes the tempting, not impossible, proposal that they are one and the same jewel and further conjectures that it was given to the sitter by William Parr (1513-71), the Marquess of Northampton, brother of Queen Katherine Parr, prior to her becoming his third wife in 1565. It is conceivable, if so, that the jewel had originally been ordered in the 1540s for Parr’s first wife, Anne Bourchier.’

By 1540, Parr’s marriage was already in trouble. It is doubtful Parr ordered this for his adulteress wife who ran away in 1541 with her lover. Helena also did not become Parr’s wife until the death of Anne Bourchier on 28 January 1571. Perhaps it was ordered for Elisabeth Brooke, Parr’s common wife by law.

Sources

20 MARCH 1549: THE EXECUTION of Lord Seymour of Sudeley

Seymour_Thomas1

Portrait of Thomas Seymour (1508-49) 1st Baron of Sudeley from ‘Memoirs of the court of Queen Elizabeth’ — Sarah of Essex, out of copyright

Following the death of Queen Katherine Parr in September 1548, Lord Seymour didn’t even wait for his wife’s funeral before he returned to London. As he was free to marry Lady Elizabeth Tudor again, Seymour went straight to her for the second time. Seymour bombarded Elizabeth with letters, lent her his house in London, and coerced her governess Kat Ashley into pleading his case on any and every occasion possible. Of course, Elizabeth refused to comply, a move that probably kept her from being beheaded herself.

Stewart Granger and Jean Simmons as Lord Seymour and Lady Elizabeth in "Young Bess" (1953)

Stewart Granger and Jean Simmons as Lord Seymour and Lady Elizabeth in “Young Bess” (1953)

In his head, Seymour had a grand plan for himself and had acquired ten thousand men and was preparing for a military coup. As things started to go awry, Seymour refused to wait. He took a gun and broke into the private quarters of the King. On his way to the King, the boy King’s spaniel awoke and started to bark. Seymour shot the dog and the whole household was awoken. Seymour was arrested, thrown in the Tower, and accused of 33 charges of High Treason and misdemeanor.

Death scene of Queen Katherine played by Deborah Kerr and Stewart Granger as Thomas Seymour in "Young Bess." Kerr had a strong resemblance to the real Queen Katherine.

Death scene of Queen Katherine played by Deborah Kerr and Stewart Granger as Thomas Seymour in “Young Bess” (1953). Kerr had a strong resemblance to the real Queen Katherine.

The authorities had thrown everything they could at Seymour. They even accused him in a possible connection to the death of his wife, the Dowager Queen. That ‘he helped to her end to hasten forth his other purposes.’ Seymour was never given a trial before his peers. Instead, an Act of Attainder (the same legal process that had be used to rid Henry VIII of Katherine Howard) was introduced to Parliament. It passed unopposed in the House of Lords on 25 February, and in the House of Commons on March 5, where it was only opposed by a handful of members.

The Act lists thirty-three charges trumped up against Seymour. In “The Annals of Winchcombe and Sudeley” by Emma Dent, she summarizes the charges:

“Articles of High Treason and other Misdemeanors against the King’s Majesty and his Crown objected to Sir Thomas Seymour Kt Lord Seymour of Sudeley and High Admiral of England Article

  1. He was charged with endeavouring to get into his own hands the government of the king

  2. With bribing certain members of the Privy Chamber

  3. With dictating a letter for the king to send to Parliament tending to the disturbance of the government

  4. For endeavouring to gain several of the nobility to join him in making changes in the affairs of state

  5. For threatening to make the Blackest Parliament ever known in England

  6. For refusing to answer a summons to explain certain things laid to his charge

  7. For prejudicing the king against the protector

  8. For suggesting to the king to take upon himself the affairs of government

  9. For plotting to take the king into his custody

  10. For plotting that the king should apply to him alone for all he needed

  11. For intending to control the king’s marriage

  12. For confederating with discontented noblemen to make a strong party abroad ready to serve them when occasion required

  13. 13 For planning that certain noble partisans should counteract those who opposed him

  14. For winning over the yeomanry to be ready to serve in case of need

  15. For strengthening his party by giving away various stewardships

  16. For retaining in his service too great a number of gentlemen and yeomen ready to strengthen his cause if needed

  17. For having 10,000 available men

  18. And having in readiness sufficient money to support the 10,000 for a month

  19. For endeavouring to bring about a clandestine marriage with the Princess Elizabeth second heir to the throne

  20. For having married the queen scandalously soon after the death of the king

  21. For deceiving the king and others in persuading them to plead with the queen they being already married

  22. For refusing to promote every way tl at was to the king’s advantage and of so strengthening his own party by sea and land as to bring within his reach the power of aspiring to the throne

  23. For endeavouring to obtain the public authority for his having the Mint of Bristol and which by fraud he had already got into his hands

  24. For having aided and abetted Sir Wm Sherrington who was known to be a traitor to the king

  25. For defrauding the king of 2,800 having conspired for this object with Sir Wm Sherrington

  26. For extorting large sums of money from ships

  27. For having taken possession of goods seized by pirates

  28. For wrongfully imprisoning those who had captured pirates

  29. For letting go free head pirates thus captured and brought before him

  30. For openly disobeying the Protector’s orders for the restitution of goods taken from pirates

  31. For robbing foreign ships wrecked on the English coast

  32. For betraying the king’s secret counsel

  33. For laying in provisions and money for a great number of men for his servants spreading the report the king was dead of a riot in consequence being expected had it not been stopped by his apprehension and committal to prison”(Dent)

Edward and Anne from "The Tudors"

Edward and Anne Seymour from “The Tudors”

He was sentenced to death; his own brother signed his death warrant. Later it was said that his fate was sealed by the Duchess of Somerset, Anne, who had threatened to leave her husband if he did not act against his own brother. Whether or not that is true we do not know. It may simply be speculation.

The Act of Attainder concluded:

‘considering that he is a member so unnatural, unkind and corrupt and such a heinous offender of your majesty and your laws as he cannot be suffered to remain in body of your grace’s commonwealth but to the extreme danger of your highness and it is too dangerous an example that such a person, so much bound and so forgetful of it … should remain among us.’ He was to be ‘adjudged and attained of high treason and … shall suffer such pains of death as in cases of high treason have been accustomed.’

Stewart Granger and Jean Simmons and Lord Seymour and Lady Elizabeth "Young Bess" (1953)

Stewart Granger and Jean Simmons and Lord Seymour and Lady Elizabeth “Young Bess” (1953)

Seymour remained optimistic to the end and in his last moments tried to send Lady Elizabeth a message sewn into his servants velvet shoes. However, he retreated into silence as far as those who condemned him were concerned. While in the Tower, Seymour made his peace with the God others accused him of rejecting, writing the following lines:

‘Forgetting God
to love a king
Hath been my rod
Or else nothing:
In this frail life
being a blast
of care and strife
till in be past.
Yet God did call
me in my pride
lest I should fall
and from him slide
for whom loves he
and not correct
that they may be
of his elect
The death haste thee
thou shalt me gain
Immortally
with him to reign
Who send the king
Like years as noye
In governing
His realm in joy
And after this
frail life such grace
As in his bliss
he may have place.’ (Harington)

On the even of his death, Seymour requested his daughter should be given into the care of the Dowager Duchess of Suffolk, Katherine Willoughby. A few days later, Lady Mary Seymour, who was now about seven months old, was taken from Syon House (home to the Lord Protector and his wife, Anne) to the Duchess’s home — Grimsthorpe Castle in Lincolnshire. Upon the death of Mary’s mother, Queen Katherine, she had left all her wealth and possessions to her husband. Therefore upon his execution, Seymour’s wealth and possessions (which included that which he inherited by the Dowager Queen) reverted to the Crown and there was no money for his daughter.

Seymour was executed early in the morning of 20 March 1549. It took two blows of the axe to sever his head. He was buried in St. Peter’s Chapel in the Tower of London where other royals like Anne Boleyn, Lady Salisbury (the last Plantagenet “Princess”, daughter of the Duke and Duchess of Clarence), and Katherine Howard had been buried. Seymour’s own brother, Somerset (Edward), would join him in January of 1552 after his own execution under Edward VI; two uncles in one reign.

Elizabeth said, upon hearing of his death: “There died this day a man of much whit and very little judgement.”

References

  • Linda Porter. “Katherine, the queen,” St. Martin’s Press, 2010.
  • John Harington, “Nugae Antiquae,” (London, 1769), vol. 3, pg 259. (Linda Porter)
  • Susan James. “Catherine Parr: Henry VIII’s Last Love,” The History Press, 2009.
  • Young Bess” (1953)

Family of Queen Katherine: DEATH of William, 1st Earl of Pembroke

Pembroke family of Wilton. Wilton Church. Pembroke family of Wilton. Wilton Church.

Yesterday was the anniversary of the death of Sir William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke, husband of Anne Parr, and thus sister-in-law to Queen Katherine. Lord Pembroke died on 17 March 1570 at Hampton Court Palace. William was eldest son of Sir Richard Herbert of Ewyas, Herefordshire, by his wife Margaret, daughter of Sir Matthew Cradock of Swansea. Pembroke’s father, Sir Richard, was an illegitimate son of the original William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke of the first creation (d. 1469), by a mistress, Maud, daughter of Adam ap Howell Graunt. He married firstly to Anne Parr in 1538 and after her death, Lady Anne Talbot, daughter of the Earl of Shrewsbury. Parr gave Pembroke an heir (the 2nd Earl), an heir to spare (ancestor to the Earls of Powis), and a daughter (no issue). Talbot had no issue by Pembroke.

Hampton Court Palace, London, England. Hampton Court Palace, London, England.

On the eve of 17 March 1570, Pembroke took to his bed in his quarters at Hampton Court Palace. He was joined by his younger son, Sir Edward Herbert and the Earl of Leicester, Robert Dudley.

Pembroke had written his will back on 28 December 1569. Pembroke’s executors/witnesses of his will were his heir Henry Herbert (later 2nd Earl of Pembroke was the sole executor), the Earl of Leicester (Robert Dudley); Sir Walter Milday; Sir Nicholas Throckmorton (cousin to his first wife); Gilbert Gerrard. To those men he bequethed £50 to be delivered either in money, plate of jewels, within one month. And by codicil it is mentioned that Pembroke declared to Leicester and his son, Sir Edward Herbert, that on the night before his death, the Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, Sir James Crofts, and Mr. Secretary Cecil be joined in the oversee and receive the same gifts. To his wife, (Anne Talbot) he left her, her own clothes and jewels, which would otherwise go to his son Henry, Lord Herbert and his wife. Lady Pembroke was to be looked after and to be allowed to stay at Baynard’s Castle where Pembroke’s previous wife had died in 1552. Pembroke’s second son, Edward, was given a plate with the value of 500 marks. Pembroke’s daughter, Anne, Lady Talbot, was to receive £500. To his brother-in-law, the Marquess of Northampton (William Parr), he left his second-best gold sword. Leicester received Pembroke’s best gold sword. Pembroke also wanted £200 bestowed upon the poor near Baynard castleward in London, Salisbury in Wiltshire, and Hendon. To the Queen (Elizabeth), he left his “newest fairest and richest bed” and his greatest jewel called the “Great Ballace.” Most importantly, the ordinary men (his servants, etc) were to be looked after by his heir, Henry.

That my lorde Herbert do consider Thomas Gregorie and Tidie with money for their travaile and paines beside that he hath bequethed to them in annuity that he speciallie do appointe to Francis Zouche and Charles Arundell fit and good annuities for them. That he have special care of Henrie Morgan, George Morgan, Phillip Williams, Robert Vaughan, and Thomas Scudamore and either entertaigne them into his service payinge them their wages beforehand or else appoint them sufficient annuities. That he do entertaigne his household and keep them together

Philip Williams had been Pembroke’s secretary; Robert Vaughan, his treasurer; Thomas Scudamore was one of the men who carried his coffin.

Leicester then left Pembroke’s bedside, leaving Pembroke with his son and physicians. Pembroke died the next morning, 17 March 1570 at the age of sixty-three.

In his will, Pembroke listed two possible burial places; Old Saint Paul’s or Canterbury Cathedral. If he died near London, his wishes were to be buried in St. Paul’s Cathedral next to his first wife, Anne Parr. Pembroke obviously loved his wife for when he wrote his will, despite being married again, he wanted nothing more than to be buried “near the place where Anne my late wife doth lie buried” in St. Paul’s. He was buried in April.

Shortly after his death, the Dowager Lady Pembroke received a letter from the Queen in the hand of Cecil, but heavily corrected (most likely by Elizabeth). The Queen expressed her condolences of the loss of “our late cousin.”

See also: “Funeral of William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke

References

  • Adam Nicolson. “Quarrel with the King: The story of an English family on the high road to Civil War,” HarperCollins, Oct 6, 2009.
  • Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, Devizes : Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, 1879. pg 126-28.

Queen Katherine Parr: The Coronet Brooch

Katherine Parr attributed to Master John c. 1544

Katherine Parr attributed to Master John c. 1544

In 1965, the National Portrait Gallery bought a portrait which was labeled “Katherine Parr.” In the late 60s however, one man came to the conclusion that it was not Parr, but “Lady Jane Grey,” the nine day queen who followed King Henry VIII’s only legitimate son, King Edward VI. Most people don’t even realize that the painting came in as “Katherine Parr.” In fact, unless you do thorough research you won’t even know that the portrait was originally at Glendon Hall, the seat of the Lane family. Glendon Hall once belonged to Sir Ralph Lane who married Hon. Maud Parr, a cousin and lady-in-waiting to Queen Katherine Parr. The portrait came to be generally accepted as Lady Jane for decades. The re-naming to “Lady Jane” was based on what you ask?

Seventy-two years after Kateryn Parr’s death
in September 1548, the bookseller Henry Holland published a
volume of plates purporting to be portraits of famous people, entitled
Henwologia Anglica. Holland asserts in the preface that he had
taken great pains to establish the identities of those in the portraits.
One of the plates shows a woman called ‘Iana Graya’ (Fig.28),
wearing the same crown-headed brooch as the sitter in our portrait;
a note on the plate indicates that the engraving was copied
‘from Mr James Harrison’s Holbein’. It was on the basis of the similarity
of the two brooches that Strong re-identified the panel portrait
as Jane Grey. However, Holland’s information in 1620 may
well have been incorrect, and nothing is known of Mr Harrison or
his ‘Holbein’ (which, on the evidence of the engraving would
appear to have been a variant of NPG 4451, quite close to the one
at Seaton Delaval). And the evidence of the jewellery indicates that
the crown-headed brooch did belong to Kateryn Parr and is most
unlikely to have passed through the hands of Jane Grey. (James)

Jane_Grey_KParr

Following research published in 1996 the identity of the sitter has been reassessed and the traditional identification of the sitter as “Katherine Parr” has been re-confirmed (James, 1996). Several of the jewels worn in the portrait can be traced to certain lists. James used several different inventories of jewels belonging to queens Katherine Howard (inventory as of 1542), ‘The Quene’s Jewells’ (inventory as of 1550), and a third undated list entitled “Inventory of jewels — parcel of the Queen’s Jewels and other stuff which came from the late Admiral’s [Thomas Seymour] house of Sudeley.” The 1542 list is of particular interest due to the fact that after Howard was arrested, her jewels were handed over to her lady-in-waiting, Lady Anne Herbert (sister of the future queen Katherine Parr). The list of 1550 was ordered by the Lord Protector as part of a comprehensive inventory of the ‘goods of Henry VIII.’ This list was entitled “The Quene’s Jewells.” Each list was looked at by James. The coronet shaped brooch was not found in the list for 1542. However, a similar one was described in the 1550 list and that of Parr’s possessions. The brooch may be identified with one described in the 1550 jewel list as,

Detail of the Coronet Brooch of Katherine Parr, NPG; © Susan James (black&white detail) © National Portrait Gallery (color detail)

Detail of the Coronet Brooch of Katherine Parr, NPG; © Susan James (black&white detail) © National Portrait Gallery (color detail)

‘one ouche or flower
with a crown containing two diamonds, one ruby, one emerald; the
crown being garnished with diamonds, [andl three pearls pendant’
(an ‘ouche’ or ‘flower’ was a brooch worn pinned to the bodice).

The inheritors of the Coronet Brooch, Elizabeth I and Anne of Denmark.

The inheritors of the Coronet Brooch, Elizabeth I and Anne of Denmark.

As for the brooch and what happened to it — it is believed the brooch was uniquely made for Katherine by her favorite goldsmith, Peter Richardson. The brooch, with the rest of the royal jewelery, was passed to Elizabeth I. The brooch appears in her list of 1587 listed as

‘a flower with a crown, garnished with xv small diamonds and in the midst of the flower is a ruby with two diamonds and one emerald, and the three pearls pendant.’

At Elizabeth’s death (1603), the brooch passed to James I’s queen, Anne of Denmark and is also described in her inventory of 1606 as

‘a jewell being a crownet of gold garnished with small diamonds upon a circle, having had one emerald, one rock ruby and two other triangle stones nowe wanting in collets, with three pearles pendant, of ancient making, in weight 2 oz 1dwt 6grs.’

A working copy of of the documentation kept in the jewel house describes the fate of the brooch. By 1606, the the brooch was missing two triangular cut diamonds. It was ordered to be

‘delivered to Mr. Nicasius Russell, Jeweler, the 8th September 1609 by her Majesties’ direction, for the making of Gold plate; the stones by number, the Gold by weight.’

The sixty-six year history of the brooch can be traced through the jewel inventories of three queens, Katherine Parr, Elizabeth I, and Anne of Denmark. Now, if only we could find a portrait of Elizabeth actually wearing the brooch!

Sources

  • Susan E. James. “Lady Jane Grey or Queen Kateryn Parr?” The Burlington Magazine, Vol. 138, No. 1114 (Jan., 1996), pp. 20-24.

Family of Queen Katherine: Margaret Fiennes, 11th Baroness Dacre

Margaret Fiennes, 11th Lady Dacre with her husband Sampson Lennard.

Margaret Fiennes, 11th Lady Dacre with her husband Sampson Lennard from Hon. Thomas Barrett-Lennard’s “An Account of the Families of Lennard and Barrett,” 1908.

Margaret Fiennes (or Fynes), 11th Baroness Dacre of the South (1541 – 16 March 1612) was a suo jure peeress having been created Baroness Dacre by King James I of England in 1604. She was the daughter of Thomas Fiennes, 9th Baron Dacre who was executed for murder in the year of her birth. His title and lands, upon his death, were forfeited to the crown. The title would not return to the family until her brother was restored in 1558 by Elizabeth I.

Thomas Fiennes, Baron Dacre, father to Lady Dacre.

Thomas Fiennes, 9th Baron Dacre, father to Lady Dacre.

Family

Mary Neville and her son Gregory Fiennes, 10th Baron Dacre by Hans Eworth c. 1559

Mary Neville and her son Gregory Fiennes, 10th Baron Dacre by Hans Eworth c. 1559

Lady Dacre was born in 1541, the youngest child and only daughter of Thomas Fiennes, 9th Baron Dacre and Mary Nevill, daughter of the 5th Baron Bergavenny. In the year of her birth, her father was hanged for the murder of a gamekeeper by the order of King Henry VIII, and his lands and title were forfeited to the crown. Lady Dacre’s brother, Gregory Fiennes, would become the 10th Baron Dacre upon the ascension of Elizabeth I in 1558. The 10th Baron married to Anne Sackville, cousin to Queen Anne Boleyn; they had one daughter who died young. Upon his death, the barony went into abeyance until it was revived for Margaret under James I of England.

Coat of arms of the 9th Baron Dacre of the South from his tomb in Chelsea Church, London.

Coat of arms of Gregory Fiennes, 10th Baron Dacre of the South from his tomb in Chelsea Church, London.

Lady Dacre was related to three of Henry VIII’s six queens. Her paternal great-grandparents were Thomas Fiennes, 8th Baron Dacre and Anne Bourchier. Anne Bourchier was the uterine half-sister of Lady Elizabeth Howard (mother of Queen Anne Boleyn) and Lord Edmund Howard (father of Queen Katherine Howard). Lady Dacre’s father, the cousin of Queen Katherine Howard, was executed in 1541 despite her position as queen.

The Parr’s shared several connections. Firstly, Fiennes’s great-grandfather, Thomas, 8th Baron Dacre was the first cousin of Sir Thomas Parr of Kendal, father of Queen Katherine Parr. Their mothers, Alice Fiennes (FitzHugh) and Elizabeth Parr/Vaux (FitzHugh) were sisters; both daughters of Sir Henry FitzHugh, 5th Baron FitzHugh and Lady Alice Neville (sister of Warwick, the Kingmaker). The Parr’s also shared the Woodville connection of Mary Neville, Lady Dacre’s great-grandmother, Katherine Woodville, Duchess of Buckingham.

Anne Boleyn (wife no. 2), Katherine Howard (wife no. 5), and Katherine Parr (wife no. 6) were all cousins to Lady Dacre.

Anne Boleyn (wife no. 2), Katherine Howard (wife no. 5), and Katherine Parr (wife no. 6) were all cousins to Lady Dacre.

Marriage and issue

On 10 November 1564 at the age of 23, Margaret married Sampson Lennard (died 1615), who came from a family of landed gentry. They resided at Chevening, Kent. He was a Member of Parliament for various constituencies, and from 1590 to 1591, he held the post of High Sheriff of Kent. Lady Dacre and her husband had four sons and six daughters:[1]

  • John Lennard, born 1567; buried 10 Oct 1575.
  • Sir Henry Lennard, 12th Baron Dacre (25 March 1570 – 8 August 1616); Born in Chevening, Kent, England; married Chrysogona Baker, by whom he had issue.[1]
CHRYSOGNA BAKER, Lady Dacre, aged six (d.1616) who  married the 12th Lord Dacre (1589); a portrait (English 1579) by an unknown artist at The Vyne.

CHRYSOGNA BAKER, Lady Dacre, aged six (d.1616) who married the 12th Lord Dacre (1589); a portrait (English 1579) by an unknown artist at The Vyne. ©National Trust Images/Derrick E. Witty

  • Anne Lennard, born 1 Aug 1572 Chevening, Kent; married Herbert Morley.
  • Elizabeth Lennard, born 5 Jun 1580; buried 20 Oct 1581.
  • Elizabeth Lennard, born 26 Nov 1581; married Sir Francis Barnham, by whom she had issue.
  • Gregory “George” Lennard, born 25 Oct 1573Chevening, Kent; married in 1614 to Maud Llewellyn. Died 1620, without issue.[1]
  • Mary Lennard, born 22 Oct 1574 Chevening, Kent; married Sir Ralph Bosville.
  • Thomas Lennard, died 1638 without issue (d.s.p).[1] He is NOT the ancestor to the “Leonards” of Taunton and Bridgewater in America.[1][2]
  • Margaret Lennard, born 28 Sep 1578; married Sir Thomas Waller, by whom she had issue, including Parliamentarian soldier Sir William Waller.
  • Frances Lennard, born 28 Jul 1583; married Sir Robert More
  • John Lennard,[1] born 11 Oct 1584; died bef. 1615.

Baroness Dacre

The title of Baron Dacre had been restored to Margaret’s brother Gregory by Queen Elizabeth I shortly after her ascension to the throne; however upon his death in 1594, it had once again lapsed in abeyance. On 8 December 1604,[2] King James I created her suo jure Baroness Dacre, and she held this title until her death on 16 March 1612. She was succeeded by her eldest son, Henry.

References

  1. Thomas Barrett-Lennard. “An account of the families of Lennard and Barrett compiled largely from original documents by Thomas Barrett-Lennard,” Spottiswoode and Co. Ltd, 1908. pg 214, 240. Open Library
  2. Wm. R. Deane. “A genealogical memoir of the Leonard family containing a full account of the first three generations of the family of James Leonard, who was an early settler of Taunton, Ms., with incidental notices of later descendants,” Boston: Office of the New England historic-genealogical register, 1851. Open Library

16 MARCH 1485: THE DEATH of Queen Anne

Anne Neville from Cardiff Castle. Anne Neville from Cardiff Castle.

Today, 16 March, in 1485, the death of Queen Anne at Westminster Palace at the age of 28. Anne was Queen consort to Richard III from 26 June 1483 until her death.

She was born, Lady Anne Neville. She was a younger daughter of Sir Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick and 6th Earl of Salisbury, known in history as ”the Kingmaker”, and Lady Anne Beauchamp, suo jure 16th Countess of Warwick.

Anne was betrothed to the son of King Henry VI and Queen Margaret of Anjou, Prince Edward, the Prince of Wales, as a truce between the Lancastrians and the Warwick/Clarence faction while they were exiled in Brittany.

Shortly after Warwick’s defeat at Barnet on Easterday 1471, Queen Margaret and Prince Edward returned from France and were decisively defeated. Prince Edward was killed in the battle of Tewkesbury, and King Henry VI was killed soon after, making Anne, the Princess of Wales a widow at the age of just 15.

St Katherine by the Tower, Middlesex, England – Queen Anne (Neville) consort of King Richard III from 1483 France modern quartering England; impaling: Quarterly of eight, 1: Checky or and azure a chevron ermine (Newburgh); 2: Gules a fess between six crosscrosslets or (Beuachamp); 3: Argent three fusils conjoined in fess gules (Montague); 4: Or an eagle displayed vert (Monthermer); 5: Gules a saltire argent and a label of five points or (Neville) [label should be compony argent and azure]; 7: Or three chevronels gules (Clare); r three chevronels gules (Clare); 8: Quarterly argent and gules a fret or a bendlet sable (Despenser).

 
Luckily, Anne’s sister Isabel, Duchess of Clarence and her husband George, the Duke of Clarence agreed to take in the Dowager Princess of Wales and by 1474, Anne was married to George’s brother, Richard, Duke of Gloucester.

After the death of his brother, King Edward IV, Richard became Lord Protector of the Realm for the young King Edward V. Edward V and his brother, Richard, the Duke of York, were taken to the Tower as was custom before a Kings coronation. Things unfortunately did not go as planned. The two boys were declared illegitimate under an Act of Parliament by the Lord Protector in 1483. With the Act now in place, the Lord Protector took the throne and crowned himself King Richard III of England.

Lady Anne was elevated from Duchess of Gloucester and was crowned Queen of England with Richard in Westminster Abbey on 6 July in a joint coronation.

Richard and Anne had one son; Edward, Prince of Wales. The young prince died on 9 April 1484.

The Eclipse as portrayed in the the BBC TV Series 'The White Queen' The Eclipse as portrayed in the the BBC TV Series, ‘The White Queen’.

By early 1485, Anne was spending less time at court functions. These absences lead to speculation that the queen was already dead. After the death of her son, Anne’s mental health, no doubt, suffered which could have contributed to the slow decline in health. There were also rumors that Richard was going to kill Anne with poison so that he could marry his niece, Elizabeth of York. This of course, has only been speculation and there are no contemporary sources to prove this. However, the symptoms of Tuberculosis were present in Anne’s last few months; fever, breathlessness, night sweats, coughing up blood, weakness, weight loss and anorexia. Another possibility was cancer. Physicians during this time did not understand illness. There was always some remedy invented that in some cases made patients worse. The doctors, perhaps, may have tried to prescribe garlic and the poisons Mercury and arsenic. To any modern reader, we know today that Mercury and arsenic are toxic and can kill you. Never the less, Anne died on 16 March 1485. Some sources record that she passed away during an eclipse of the sun. The York dynasty used the brilliant sun as one of their motifs — in all its splendor. The eclipse was seen as prophecy for the future of Richard’s reign.

'The White Queen' [BBC] ‘The White Queen’ [BBC]

Few tributes to Queen Anne remain. Her reign was one of the shortest in English history, lasting only twenty-two months. According to Fabyan, she was a woman of ‘gracious fame, upon whose soul … Jesus have mercy’. Agostino Barbarigo, future Doge of Venice, wrote to Richard III, regretting the loss of his ‘beloved’ consort and exhorting him, ‘endowed with consummate equanimity and marvellous virtues, of your wisdom and grandeur of mind to bear the disaster calmly and resign yourself to the divine will’. According to the Italian, who had never met Anne, she lived a ‘religious and catholic life, and was so adorned with goodness, prudence, and excellent morality, as to leave a name immortal’. In the intervening centuries, though, it was Anne’s mortal name that was often overlooked. Her life has been overshadowed by the controversies of Richard’s reign and his death in battle. (Amy Licence p 203)

Queen Anne lying in state as portrayed by the TV series, 'The White Queen'. Queen Anne lying in state as portrayed by the TV series, ‘The White Queen’.

Anne had a magnificent funeral and was buried on the southern side of the Abbey near the altar. No stone or monument marked her grave, possibly because Richard was killed that year at Bosworth.

Detail of an illuminated initial 'H'(ere) with the arms of Anne Neville, wife of Richard III, at the beginning of book 3. Detail of an illuminated initial ‘H'(ere) with the arms of Anne Neville, wife of Richard III, at the beginning of book 3. The British Library, all rights reserved [Royal 18 A XII]

A brass plate and coat of arms, designed by J.S.Comper, was erected in 1960 on the wall of the south ambulatory with the inscription:
ANNE NEVILL 1456-1485 QUEEN OF ENGLAND YOUNGER DAUGHTER OF RICHARD EARL OF WARWICK CALLED THE KINGMAKER WIFE TO THE LAST PLANTAGENET KING RICHARD III. In person she was seemly, amiable and beauteous … And according to the interpretation of her name Anne full gracious. Requiescat in pace.

 

Plaque of Queen Anne [Neville], consort to the last York King, Richard III

 

Sources

  • Vegetius, translation attributed to John Walton. De re militari (the Book of Vegecye of Dedes of Knyghthode), England, 1483/85. The British Library [Online]
  • Amy Licence. Anne Neville: Richard III’s Tragic Queen, Amberley Publishing, United Kingdom, 2013. pg 200-05.

See also — The Coronation of King Richard III and Queen Anne

Alison Weir: “New” Portrait of Katherine Parr

20130315-162933.jpg

Catherine the Chameleon: some of the wildly different faces of Catherine Parr.
Perhaps she was just hard to capture in paint.
The image on the bottom right, previously thought to be Elizabeth I, has now been identified by Alison Weir as another portrait of Catherine. (Alex David)

I would love to know on what basis Weir has identified the “new” portrait of Katherine Parr. No other actual historian or biographer of Parr has agreed with her findings and the portrait is not officially recognized.

First off–the one on the bottom right is reported to be done by Holbein, the younger c.1542 (before the marriage of Queen Katherine in 1543). The one of the top right was done posthumously and has been officially identified by Katherine’s biographer Susan James. That portrait was done after her death (d.1548). The two on the left were done during Parr’s time as Queen. Although the two on the left look at tad different as the blogger states (David) — during studies done on the full length portrait done c.1545 show that the face, among other parts of the portrait, were altered. An x-ray study shows this below.

X-ray comparison of NPG portrait of Queen Katherine Parr by Master John compared to the queen's portrait attributed to Scrots (right).

X-ray comparison of NPG portrait of Queen Katherine Parr by Master John compared to the queen’s portrait attributed to Scrots (right). The two without altering do look very similar.

According to Art History Today’s blog (7 October 2011), “Rediscoveries & Revelations. Book Review: The Secrets of Leonardo da Vinci,” the portrait is actually that of the future Queen Elizabeth Tudor. The portrait is labeled ‘Hans Hoblein the Younger, Portrait of Elizabeth Tudor, the future Elizabeth I, Private Collection, tempera and oil on oak panel, 52 x 42 cm.’

Graeme Cameron’s last major revelation is the publication of a Holbein’s Portrait of Elizabeth the First a beguiling image of the beautiful, young English princess dating from about 1542. Despite its strong provenance, and its approval by a leading Holbein scholar, Paul Ganz in The Conoisseur in 1952, the painting has never been accepted into the artist’s oeuvre. Cameron supplies strong evidence and arguments for overturning the dis-attribution. Apart from the web of historical evidence and fact tying the work to the young Elizabeth, there is the iconography of the Judgement of Paris, reappearing again, this time on the brooch around the woman’s neck, which must relate to her virtue and beauty. (Art History Today)

Weir, who is no expert on Parr, has more than a few errors in Parr’s section of her book, “The Six Wives.” While I applaud her efforts at writing, I do not use her for a reference and neither do most scholarly authors/historians.

Weir states that the portrait is identified by the necklace the sitter is wearing; which is present in the newly identified portrait of Katherine Parr by Susan James (2009). As stated before, James’s find is posthumous. Christie’s describes it as:

“It has been suggested that the present portrait dates to circa 1590-1620, and may be a rare record of the lost depiction of the Queen by Hans Eworth, showing the Queen in costume typical of 1545-1550.”

Weir states: “actually it’s a carcanet, or choker, and it’s very distinctive, and in fact unique in Tudor portraits of this period – is identical to the one in the portrait said to be Elizabeth (above, right). It’s almost certainly the same one, and fits a description of a carcanet listed in the Queen’s inventory.” To which I ask… which inventory of Queen Katherine? The inventory listed in Janel Mueller’s compilation of Katherine Parr’s works and correspondences has no mention of the carcanet.

"A Lady called Anne Boleyn," Henry Bone Pierce, Royal Collection.

“A Lady called Anne Boleyn,” Henry Bone Pierce, Royal Collection.

The above portrait, the traditional identification of the sitter as Anne Boleyn has now been discredited and the image no longer forms part of the accepted limited iconography of Anne Boleyn. (Royal Collection Trust)

Weir goes on to compare the portrait to a newer version recorded in the Royal Collection as “Anne Boleyn.” The woman in the miniature wears the same necklace — Weir believes it to be a copy of the larger portrait. She then states:

For 300 years, it  was owned by her cousin, Sir Lionel Duckett, and his family. In 1832, it was put on sale in London with the rest of Sir George Duckett’s collection, and sold to Sir Joseph Neeld of Grittleton House near Chippenham Wiltshire. In 1851, it was described in the Grittleton catalogue as ‘the portrait of Queen Anne Boleyn’. It follows that Katherine Parr’s cousin would own a portrait of her. No doubt he was proud to display one of his kinswoman as queen.

"Lady called Anne Boleyn," Christie's Auction.

“Lady called Anne Boleyn,” Christie’s Auction.

Lot Notes for the Christie’s Auction state:

“the traditional identification of the sitter as Anne Boleyn has been questioned, first raised by Lionel Cust in 1880. It has been suggested that the identity of the sitter is possibly that of Katherine Parr (1512-1548), daughter of Sir Thomas Parr (1478-1517) and his wife Jane Fogge. She was the sixth wife of King Henry VIII and Queen of England from 1543 until her death in 1548.”

However, anyone who knows anything about Queen Katherine knows that her mother and the wife of Sir Thomas Parr was Maud Green, daughter of Joan Fogge.

Looking back into the genealogy of Queen Katherine, modern genealogy amateurs state there is apparently a connection to Lionel Duckett. It is not clear, though. I looked into it and found a RootsWeb tree that connects an Eleanor Harrington to a daughter of Sir Thomas Parr of Kendal and Alice Tunstall who apparently married a William Harrington. Looking into the sources, The Duckett line from ‘Pedigrees Recorded at the Heralds’ visitations of the counties of Cumberland and Westmorland’, does not spell out who Eleanor’s mother is. It simply says “daug. of Wm. Harrington, of Wresham, in co. Lane”. The lineage also names only two sons of Eleanor–Richard and Robert. No William Duckett is listed; father of Lionel. In the lineage listed for Harrington in the same book, the pedigree lists that William Harrington of Wreysham married to “…dau. and co-heir of … Parr”. This again, leaves us with no solid evidence. Looking into Burke’s ‘A Genealogical and Heraldic Dictionary of the Peerage and Baronetage of the United Kingdom’, the Duckett line quotes an Eleanor Harrington, ‘dau of William Harrington, who had considerable possessions both in Lancashire and the barony of Kendal’. No mother listed. As I look through Douglas Richardson’s ‘Plantagenet Ancestry’, 2nd edition, there is indeed a daughter named Eleanor as the child of Thomas and Alice. Eleanor is listed as marrying Sir Henry Agard. Another daughter, Anne, is listed as the wife of William Harrington. However, it ends there with no documentation to further the connection between Duckett and Harrington. It seems to be a big mess that has yet to be figured out.

Lionel married a Mary Leighton — if I’m not mistaken, the Leighton family was connected directly and indirectly to the Boleyn’s via Mary Boleyn’s descendants. Yes, Mary Leighton’s uncle Sir Thomas Leighton married Elizabeth Knollys (granddaughter of Mary Boleyn, sister of Queen Anne). So Weir’s whole thing about them claiming it is Anne Boleyn..[which she doesn’t agree with] would make MORE sense!

Alison Weir's website with the two portraits "she found" of Katherine Parr (2012).

Alison Weir’s website with the two portraits “she found” of Katherine Parr (2012).

Before she put this portrait out as Parr, she had another which was thought to be Lady Jane which has already been thoroughly studied and found not to be her (see “The Norris Portrait”). Weir then tried to pass it off as Parr. It’s odd how the specialist’s findings from “The Norris Portrait” were then found on her site, same portraits and all, only the info was changed around slightly to fit “her” findings (something all too familiar to Weir’s writing). The writing was all very eerily familiar to the website that had already done research on the portrait only her conclusion was that it was “indeed” Parr. As soon as she was confronted by the researcher and page owner, she took it all down and kept this “new” portrait of “Katherine Parr.”

So nice try, but until her biographers and other art specialists agree–the portrait, bottom right, is NOT a portrait of Katherine. Weir should really stick to writing and leave portraiture to the experts!

Reference:

Links