For Douglas Richardson

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Leo van de Pas

For Douglas Richardson

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 04 okt 2007 21:16:15

Douglas Richardson enjoys grandstanding for "his public" simultaneously on
the several newsgroups, but he forgets unfinished business.
He makes observations and even statements, but when confronted by simple
questions he runs away.

As a trained genealogist and historian he has placed himself on a pedestal
and his standards should be better than those of others.
He expects others "to learn from him", in which case he should be an example
of how things should be done----not behaving like a sulking petulant child.

We are still waiting for his sample of "Countess" being an acceptable first
name in medieval Britain. And that child of Edward III by Alice Perrers
still needs to be established.

An what was it about Ida de Tosny? This below message has also been waiting
for a comment from the "trained historian and genealogist".
Look forward to see Richardson finalising business instead of "entertaining
his public"
Leo van de Pas


Will Johnson has not been able to find the reference in Froissart that
Douglas Richardson referred to at second hand from Given-Wilson.

This is misleading anyway, selecting only a part of the account. Froissart
referred to the person eight times, twice calling him a bastard brother of
the king (in the summer of 1382, i.e. Richard II - "messires Jehans Soudrée,
frère dou roy d'Engletière, bastart" and "un chevalier bastart, frère au roy
d'Engletière, qui s'appelloit messires Jehans Soustrée"), once describing
him as a bastard brother of Richard II's maternal half-brother John Holand
(later duke of Exeter - "messire Jehan Soustrée, frère bastart à messire
Jehan de Hollandes") and once in a reported speech of John Holand (calling
him "Beau-frère Soustrée", that might mean brother-in-law or, as evidently
here, a polite way to address a bastard half-brother).

Plainly Froissart thought that John de Sotheray was either a son of Richard
II's and John Holand's mother Joan, countess of Kent, the only way he could
be called bastard brother to both men, or else possibly that he was a son of
the Black Prince and had married a sister of John Holand. The latter seems
impossible, as although John de Sotheray's wife was named Matilda and John
Holand had a sister of this name, by 1382 Matilda Holand was no longer the
widow of Hugh de Courtenay and had been remarried to Valeran of Luxemburg,
count of Saint-Pol.

Either way there is no sustainable argument that Froissart merely called
John "frère au roy d'Engletière" in a passing slip when he correctly meant
"oncle au roy d'Engletière".

There is no definite evidence that John de Sotheray was a son of Edward III,
or indeed no direct statement that he was a son of Alice Perrers, who was
merely called his "friend" when she could just as well have been called his
mother, if so, with no disrespect to anyone.

Froissart's apparent idea that he was the son of Joan "the fair maid" of
Kent is implausible, as no such allegation was made in the process of
deposing her son Richard II when her infidelity was vaguely alleged (she was
supposed to have had a son by a cleric, but this was probably just slander
and no details were ever put forward as far as I know, certainly none
involving a known individual).

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»