Dear Lee, Douglas, et al.,
As to the question of Richard de Burgh (d. 1326) and his wife
Margaret, her identity does not appear to have any bearing on the
relationship between Richard and Edward I (and II), King(s) of
England. Robert II, King of Scots and great-nephew of Earl
Richard, was called "Illustris Principis, Roberti Consanguinei
nostri de Scotia" (' [the] illustrious prince, Robert our kinsman
of Scotland') in 1373 by King Edward III of England [Reference:
Thomas Rymer, Foedera 7 (1728): 2–3, 9–10, courtesy Douglas
Richardson]. If the relationship between Robert II and Edward
III of England was through the unidentified wife of Fergus, Lord
of Galloway (alleged illeg. daughter of Henry I of England), they
would have been 6th cousins 2x removed (with Robert II being the
one who was two generations removed). It appears more likely
that a closer relationship was being acknowledged, and most
likely the same relationship as that noted by Edward I in his
addressing Richard de Burgh as 'consanguineus'.
An interesting identification has been noted on this subject,
in "A New General Biographical Dictionary" by the Rev. Hugh
James Rose (1857). In an article concerning the de Burgh family,
fraught with a combination of things factual and not, is the
following statement concerning William de Burgh (called in error
'Fitz-Adelm', which error has been repeated to our day):
" His son, Richard de Burgo, by Isabel, natural daughter
of Richard I., was lord of Connaught and Trim, and was
appointed lord-lieutenant of Ireland in 1227, where he
died in 1242, after having built the castles of Galway
and Loughrea." [1]
Lacking source citations in this particular article, it is
difficult to evaluate; as I mentioned, there are a number of
errors in this article, but there are statements drawn from known
facts (re: William de Burgh, Rev. Rose also wrote that King
Richard "in 1198 gave him leave to return to Ireland, and to take
possession, in his own right, of all the territory in the western
part of the island that he could obtain by conquest", which is I
believe drawn from a royal grant to William mentioned by Adrian,
or another of the list, recently). The source for this statement
may or may not be reliable, but sounds too detailed to have been
fabricated (at least, by Rev. Rose himself).
If the stated descent was through this 'Isabel, natural
daughter of Richard I', the relationships between the English
Kings and the de Burgh descendants would have been as follows:
Richard de Burgh (d. 1326) and
Edward I : 2nd cousins 2x removed
Robert II (of Scots) and
Edward III of England : 4th cousins 2x removed
This would also work with the Irish text from the Annals of
the Four Masters, cited by Douglas, late though the current
version may be, which states of Richard de Burgh, ' Richard 'the
old' (whose mother was daughter of the Saxon king) ' ["Riocaird
mhoir (ingen righ Saxan a mathair)"]. I should note, despite
the late date of the MSS. as kindly shown by P. J. Evans, that
the Annals of the Four Masters is considered a major source for
reliable medieval Irish history, and genealogy.
Rev. Rose's source for his statement would be a major find.
With further study and some luck, this may yet be resolved.
Cheers,
John
NOTES
[1] Rev. Hugh James Rose, B.D., A New General Biographical
Dictionary (London: T. Fellowes, Ludgate Street, et al.,
1857), V:274-5.
The subject text can be viewed at
http://books.google.com/books?ie=ISO-88 ... =PA275&lpg
=PA275&dq=burgo+connaught&prev=http://books.google.com/books%3Fq%3Dburgo%2Bcon
naught%26lr%3D%26start%3D20&sig=1K3HCD1VBIlGMO5nQUzwhyf9NIA
C.P. Addition: Parentage of Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: C.P. Addition: Parentage of Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Ken
Dear John,
With apologies, I have not followed this line as I should have.
However, Richard de Burgh who died in 1326 I have as 2nd Earl of Ulster and
in my system is a 6th cousin once removed of King Edward I.
I have the wife of this Richard de Burgh as a fourth cousin of Edward I.
My counting is the modern counting not the evil medieval way
Leo
----- Original Message -----
From: <Therav3@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 1:32 PM
Subject: C.P. Addition: Parentage of Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent
With apologies, I have not followed this line as I should have.
However, Richard de Burgh who died in 1326 I have as 2nd Earl of Ulster and
in my system is a 6th cousin once removed of King Edward I.
I have the wife of this Richard de Burgh as a fourth cousin of Edward I.
My counting is the modern counting not the evil medieval way
Leo
----- Original Message -----
From: <Therav3@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 1:32 PM
Subject: C.P. Addition: Parentage of Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent
Dear Lee, Douglas, et al.,
As to the question of Richard de Burgh (d. 1326) and his wife
Margaret, her identity does not appear to have any bearing on the
relationship between Richard and Edward I (and II), King(s) of
England. Robert II, King of Scots and great-nephew of Earl
Richard, was called "Illustris Principis, Roberti Consanguinei
nostri de Scotia" (' [the] illustrious prince, Robert our kinsman
of Scotland') in 1373 by King Edward III of England [Reference:
Thomas Rymer, Foedera 7 (1728): 2–3, 9–10, courtesy Douglas
Richardson]. If the relationship between Robert II and Edward
III of England was through the unidentified wife of Fergus, Lord
of Galloway (alleged illeg. daughter of Henry I of England), they
would have been 6th cousins 2x removed (with Robert II being the
one who was two generations removed). It appears more likely
that a closer relationship was being acknowledged, and most
likely the same relationship as that noted by Edward I in his
addressing Richard de Burgh as 'consanguineus'.
An interesting identification has been noted on this subject,
in "A New General Biographical Dictionary" by the Rev. Hugh
James Rose (1857). In an article concerning the de Burgh family,
fraught with a combination of things factual and not, is the
following statement concerning William de Burgh (called in error
'Fitz-Adelm', which error has been repeated to our day):
" His son, Richard de Burgo, by Isabel, natural daughter
of Richard I., was lord of Connaught and Trim, and was
appointed lord-lieutenant of Ireland in 1227, where he
died in 1242, after having built the castles of Galway
and Loughrea." [1]
Lacking source citations in this particular article, it is
difficult to evaluate; as I mentioned, there are a number of
errors in this article, but there are statements drawn from known
facts (re: William de Burgh, Rev. Rose also wrote that King
Richard "in 1198 gave him leave to return to Ireland, and to take
possession, in his own right, of all the territory in the western
part of the island that he could obtain by conquest", which is I
believe drawn from a royal grant to William mentioned by Adrian,
or another of the list, recently). The source for this statement
may or may not be reliable, but sounds too detailed to have been
fabricated (at least, by Rev. Rose himself).
If the stated descent was through this 'Isabel, natural
daughter of Richard I', the relationships between the English
Kings and the de Burgh descendants would have been as follows:
Richard de Burgh (d. 1326) and
Edward I : 2nd cousins 2x removed
Robert II (of Scots) and
Edward III of England : 4th cousins 2x removed
This would also work with the Irish text from the Annals of
the Four Masters, cited by Douglas, late though the current
version may be, which states of Richard de Burgh, ' Richard 'the
old' (whose mother was daughter of the Saxon king) ' ["Riocaird
mhoir (ingen righ Saxan a mathair)"]. I should note, despite
the late date of the MSS. as kindly shown by P. J. Evans, that
the Annals of the Four Masters is considered a major source for
reliable medieval Irish history, and genealogy.
Rev. Rose's source for his statement would be a major find.
With further study and some luck, this may yet be resolved.
Cheers,
John
NOTES
[1] Rev. Hugh James Rose, B.D., A New General Biographical
Dictionary (London: T. Fellowes, Ludgate Street, et al.,
1857), V:274-5.
The subject text can be viewed at
http://books.google.com/books?ie=ISO-88 ... =PA275&lpg
=PA275&dq=burgo+connaught&prev=http://books.google.com/books%3Fq%3Dburgo%2Bcon
naught%26lr%3D%26start%3D20&sig=1K3HCD1VBIlGMO5nQUzwhyf9NIA