Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Richard & his 'bastard'nephews

No they weren't as you well know Paul - John De La Pole Earl of Lincoln
(nephew of course to the late King's Edward and Richard and nephew through
his wife to the Queen Dowager Elizabeth) and the Duke of Buckingham's
surname if you check was Stafford.

Stafford's dual descent was from Thomas of Woodstock's daughter and through
the Beaufort line of John of Gaunt - both of them matrilineal.

John de la Pole's only royal lineage came through his mother the Duchess of
Suffolk.

If you believe that those two were true Plantagenets Paul then I am afraid
you will have to include Henry VII (Beaufort Plantagenet blood through his
mother) and his son Henry VIII - taking his father's Beaufort descent from
John of Gaunt, his mother's descent from Lionel of Antwerp, John of Gaunt,
and Edmund Duke of York, his grandmother Elizabeth Wydeville's three lineal
descents from the House of Plantagenent - in other words he more than any
other member of the English Nobility had the strongest Plantagenet lineal
descent of any of them.

But none of them were Plantagenets - though Henry VIII became the chief heir
general of Edward III on his mother's death.



----- Original Message -----
From: "P.T.Bale" <paultrevor@...>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 10:33 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Richard & his 'bastard'nephews


> tim <tmc_dale@...>12/01/2003 14:00tmc_dale@...
>
> > There was
> > only one male Plantagenet alive after Bosworth - Edward Earl of
> > Warwick
> what about Lincoln, and Buckingham, they were Plantagenets too.
> Paul
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>

At 04:07 AM 1/13/03 -0000, you wrote:
>
>No they weren't as you well know Paul - John De La Pole Earl of Lincoln

etc. You're right, of course, but I think that what folks were trying to
get at was less a matter of who was around with the Plantagenet surname and
more who was around who could be mooted as a potential claimant of the
throne.

--
Laura Blanchard
lblancha@... (Philadelphia Area Consortium of Special
Collections Libraries
lblanchard@... (all other mail)
Home office: 215-985-1445 voice, -1446 fax
http://pobox.upenn.edu/~lblancha

Speaking of Plantagenet heirs, I came across the name Arthur Plantagenet in a
book I'm reading about Thomas Cromwell. The author said he was an
illegitimate son of Edward IV. I wonder what happened to him...

-Victoria
"Crying is the refuge of plain women, but the ruin of pretty ones."-Oscar
Wilde

--- In , hockeygirl1016@a...
wrote:
> Speaking of Plantagenet heirs, I came across the name Arthur
Plantagenet in a > book I'm reading about Thomas Cromwell. The author
said he was an> illegitimate son of Edward IV. I wonder what happened
to him...
>
> -Victoria

I found out that Arthur Plantagenet (1464-1542) was the Illegitimate
son of King Edward IV. Most authorities suggest by the Lady Elizabeth
Liny: writer of the "l'isle Letters." He died in the Tower, which
suggests that he was in trouble. Of course, if he was illegitimate he
shouldn't have taken his Father's surname.

I wonder if Edward III was legitimate? If Edward II was as gay as
recorded, Isabella of France may've been Edward III's Mother, but was
Edward II the Father? This would mean that none of the Lancastrian or
Yorkist Kings were legally Plantagenet.

Just because Edward II was gay doesn't necessarily mean he had children.
James I was gay and him and his wife had many children. Unless Edward II was
homosexual and James I was bisexual, but I don't really think that would be a
factor, would it? The job of the king and queen was always to produce heirs

-Victoria
"Crying is the refuge of plain women, but the ruin of pretty ones."-Oscar
Wilde

At 08:38 PM 1/13/03 -0000, you wrote:

>
>I found out that Arthur Plantagenet (1464-1542) was the Illegitimate
>son of King Edward IV. Most authorities suggest by the Lady Elizabeth
>Liny: writer of the "l'isle Letters." He died in the Tower, which
>suggests that he was in trouble. Of course, if he was illegitimate he
>shouldn't have taken his Father's surname.
>

I think that's a typo for Elizabeth Lucy. The Lisle letters are available
in an agreeably abridged volume, I think. As I recall, Arthur Plantagenet
tried hard to keep a very low profile to avoid any Tudor attention, but was
snagged on suspicion of being involved in a conspiracy and died "of pure
joy" on receiving the news that he was to be released from the Tower. I
suppose they didn't want to say that he died of pure displeasure and
melancholy before receiving the news...

--
Laura Blanchard
lblancha@... (Philadelphia Area Consortium of Special
Collections Libraries
lblanchard@... (all other mail)
Home office: 215-985-1445 voice, -1446 fax
http://pobox.upenn.edu/~lblancha

--- In , hockeygirl1016@a...
wrote:
> Just because Edward II was gay doesn't necessarily mean he had
children.> James I was gay and him and his wife had many children.
Unless Edward II was> homosexual and James I was bisexual, but I don't
really think that would be a > factor, would it? The job of the king
and queen was always to produce heirs
>

I think you meant Edward II didn't have children above.

James I was bisexual, but Edward II has come down to us as out & out
homosexual & these find women repulsive and we know that his wife had
a paramour (Roger Mortimer I think) and had Edward II murdered with
the red hot poker (this hardly suggests they were a love match!)

Isabella could've passed off Roger's child as that of Edward II. A
man recently on the news had 5 children, DNA tests proved that only
one was his! Be interesting to compare the DNA of Edward 2 & Edward
3. Both remains still exist.

Laura Blanchard13/01/2003 5:28lblanchard@...

>> No they weren't as you well know Paul - John De La Pole Earl of Lincoln
>
> etc. You're right, of course, but I think that what folks were trying to
> get at was less a matter of who was around with the Plantagenet surname and
> more who was around who could be mooted as a potential claimant of the
> throne.
yes, thanks Laura for that. Tim you are being a bit anal here, if I may say
so. I'm sure you realised that everyone in direct descent from Edward III
was a Plantagenet, no matter what their surname, and threfore was in the
race. Henry VII would always be out of it because of the bastardy issue back
with the John of Gaunt marriage and the bar which only by becoming king
would he be able to remove totally.
Paul