Grrr. Arrgh. Oh, yeah, and the first book printed in England

As I've mentioned before. I often check into the tree in preparation for writing one of these posts and find that the details have changed. In the previous post, I looked briefly at Elizabeth Woodville, the White Queen, who at one time appeared in the genealogy for my side of the tree. 

She had disappeared from my tree some weeks before, but I discussed her because while I was tracing one of the families in the history of my great x4 grandmother, I ran across a listing for the queen's brother, Sir Anthony Woodville, 2nd Earl of Rivers, leading me to believe I still had some relationship to Elizabeth, though removed from my direct line.

I announced that I would look at his life for this post. Before logging off last week, I did a run through the tree again, only to discover that he had disappeared from the family lineage, this coming just a week after having found him in the first place. Instead I found Lady Margaret Woodville, who I thought might still have some connection to the famous queen.

I searched Family Search for Sir Anthony separately from my tree and found his tree, which ended with him. Attached to his listing is a timeline, which details the dates and places of his life and includes information on the dates when the timeline was edited, along with the name of the editor. I don't know how to track other changes that may be made to a tree, and the time line has no changes dates close to when I had found the information of a possible relationship. 

I looked this week to see if Lady Margaret still has a place in my tree, and she's there. How long that will last, I have no idea. But you can find entries for Margaret Woodville, the daughter of Sir Anthony. But note that I did not call her Lady Margaret in that last sentence. 

This is because she does not appear to have been married to a member of the peerage or a knight, and because though she is Sir Anthony's daughter, she was born out of wedlock and would not be entitled to call herself "Lady."

Is she the Margaret Woodville listed in my family tree? I'm guessing not. The dates for the women do not match. The Family Tree listing for "Lady Margaret" contains no information about her parents and gives her birth as 1473, but the biographical information I can find on Sir Anthony's daughter indicates her birth was 1455, and has her marrying a Robert Poyntz in 1479. I doubt he married a six year old. 

Now, Robert and Margaret had a passel of children, including four daughters. Could Lady Margaret be one of them, someone might wonder? Not with the dates we've just looked at. So who is she? Not a clue. 

Of Sir Anthony, because this blog is intended to include some history, we know several things.

-- He was the oldest of the siblings that include the White Queen.

-- The family was Lancastrian, but Sir Anthony gave his allegiance to Edward IV, Elizabeth's husband, who came from the House of York. 

-- He was a noted fighter, participating in a number of battles to support Edward and once participated in a two-day contest in a tournament. 

-- Edward conferred on him the rank of Knight of the Garter, a rank created by Edward III, now considered the oldest and most senior of the Order of Chivalry. Like keeping up with peerage ranks isn't enough. The order used to be limited to the aristocracy. Members of the Garter are chosen personally by the sovereign.

-- Sir Anthony had been given charge over Edward VI and Elizabeth's son, Edward, as Anthony was a scholar and would see that the young Edward was properly educated. When Edward IV died, Elizabeth sent for her son, asking Anthony, among others, to accompany him. Edward IV had appointed his brother, Richard, to be his heir's protector, but Richard had other ideas. On the journey to London, Richard had the men accompanying the young king-to-be arrested. Anthony was subsequently executed on what was probably a trumped up charge of treason. Edward V never served as king. Richard went on to become the new regent.

-- Anthony translated a French work, titled Dictes and Sayings of the Philosophers, which was published in 1477. Some consider it to be the first dated book published in England, while others refer to the work as "one of the, if not the first, books published in England. 

Next time I'll be back on the trail of ancestors who I hope will remain attached to the tree after being discussed. 

Picture: Sir Anthony Woodville, Lord Rivers, from the British Museum website. I assume it's copyrighted to the museum.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Road not Taken

Image
I mentioned last week that I would check to see if I was related to Robert Frost or Robert Burns. I meant it as a joke, but as the week progressed, I decided I would follow up on the idea, including another couple of famous poets, W.B. Yeats and John Keats while I was at it.  As I've said before, if you broaden your search beyond direct ancestors -- your great and great-to-the-X grandparents, the chances you are related to someone famous multiply greatly, and some of the genealogy sites make the search pretty easy. Give them enough information to pinpoint the person you're looking for, click an icon, and voila, the information pops up.  The program I use won't identify relations beyond 15 generations, but you can still go back pretty far. I ran the four men I cited above and found that our family is related to two of them -- Yeats, who married a 10th cousin, three times removed, and Frost, a 6th cousin, three times removed. I'll skip which side of the family is related ...
Read more

TJ and the Liberties: That infamous letter

Image
A letter such as the one sent by the Danbury Baptist Association to a sitting president needed to be answered. When I first read it, I was a little confused because the letter doesn't seem to indicate that the writers knew anything about the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment, which were ratified a decade before they contacted President Jefferson.  Now I wonder if they were testing the President. How committed was he to religious freedom? After all, his politics trended to a "states' rights" perspective. Now that he held the president, would he commit to defending religious rights for everyone as part of the duties of his office, or might he side with states that had enacted establishment legislation and defer to them in the hopes that they, like his home state, might see the light and disestablish their Christian denominations? I've not read widely enough to settle these questions. But keep them in mind when you consider the contents of the letter. Take a min...
Read more

TJ and the Liberties: Who were those pesky Baptists

Image
I neglected to mention last time the outcome of the "Bill Establishing a Provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion" -- it failed. Perhaps you already guessed that.  I should also point out Patrick Henry's reasoning on the bill. Simply put people who follow religion -- and yes, I know that whole argument about how "Christianity's not a religion, etc." -- and who regularly attend churches for religious instruction tend to be the kind of citizens we want to foster: prone to follow rules (laws), not given as much to being quarrelsome, more generous than the average unchurced person, regular nice people. And government should want to prop up an institution that creates these law-abiding, somewhat passive citizens. I see this reasoning quoted in an annual ad by a commercial business that used to appear in the papers I read. Ben Franklin -- hardly a Christian icon -- and George Washington -- pretty much your standard Anglican churchgoer -- believed the same ...
Read more