Thursday, March 22, 2012

The "other" Katherine Swynford & the Importance of Remembering our Roots

Though Katherine Roet Swynford didn't live long enough to see her namesake granddaughter, her son Thomas Swynford and first wife Joan Crophill did indeed produce a daughter whom they named Katherine, after his famous mother.

In 1404, Thomas Swynford, Hugh and Katherine's son, became Captain of Calais under the authority of his half-brother, John Beaufort. This was apparently an appointment of trust for Beaufort; the previous year had witnessed the treachery which has arisen between the lieutenant and the soldiers there….

He would stay overseas for the next couple of years as one of two negotiators appointed by step-brother Henry IV seeking a treaty with Flanders. By 1406, son Thomas would be born with daughter Katherine following in 1410. Katherine's birth seems to have come at a difficult time for her father, who by 1409 had been relieved as Sheriff of Lincoln and been declared an outlaw due to indebtedness to a London draper. By 1411, he seems to be desperate to claim an inheritance in his mother's father's lands in Hainault; the occasion was accompanied by letters patent issued by Henry IV in which he declares his step-brother's legitimate birth.

It's an odd document. Thomas' legitimacy was not questioned at his birth, nor in his father Hugh's inquisition post mortem, nor was it questioned when he took possession of his patrimony of Kettlethorpe and assumed his father's arms. Even if Lindsay Brook of the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy is correct in his proposition that Paon Roet was identical with the known Giles du Roeulx of the same era, there simply would not have been any Hainault lands to inherit as the last Lord of Roeulx -- Eustace -- and surviving brother, Fastré, were forced to sell back their patrimony to their Count due to economic circumstances. Regrettably, many secondary genealogy sources state that the House of Roeulx died out for lack of heirs; however, this is clearly not the case as the last generation of Roeulx and certainly the two preceding it had no lack of heirs or heiresses.

But such is the stuff of family remembrance and legend, and what had occurred 3 or 4 generations previously is likely to have escaped Thomas' notice, and thus memories of a long-disposessed patrimony were forgotten in favor of remembering the family's possible glory days. Such is the power of ancestral memories, the key to a person's identity. For the family of Swynford, these were enshrined in heraldic remembrances, several of which no longer exist but were once established with pride and taken note of by passers-by.

By 1421, Thomas' wife Joan Crophill had passed away and he remarried a widow, Margaret Gray, first the wife of John Lord Darcy. His son was 15 and his daughter 11, and added to his financial responsibilities were the many minor children of his new wife, later joined by the addition of Thomas and Margaret's own son, William Swynford, last Swynford owner of Kettlethorpe. Thomas himself evidently alienated Kettlethorpe before his death as his IPM does not show him owning any lands in Lincolnshire.

His daughter Katherine, however, was to be married into the ancient (as in, living in England as of the Conquest) Drury family of Rougham, Suffolk. She married William Drury, knight, son and heir of Sir Roger Drury and Margaret Naunton. The marriage would have had to have taken place at some point prior to 1429 when their eldest surviving son, Thomas, perhaps named for his ailing grandfather, was born; Thomas, son of Hugh and Katherine Swynford, died in 1432. Other children followed: Roger (who appears to have survived until at least 1475), George (Parson of Wolpitte; also alive as late as 1475), and at least three daughters, one of whom was also named Catherine. Daughters Ann and Catherine Drury took the veil, but third daughter, Mary, married into the Grimston family.

Living to the ripe old age of ~67 years, Katherine Swynford Drury died in 1478. Many internet sources place her internment at Lincoln Cathedral but this seems unlikely. Her husband William, who predeceased her in 1450, requested to be buried in the Church of the Friars Minor of Babewell in his will. This building is no longer extant. Other Drury relatives were buried in the Rougham Church in Suffolk, and her daughter Mary's monument was once to be seen in a Thorndon, Suffolk church:

in the chancel of a stone is the portraiture of a woman above whose head are these arms per pale france and Ingland qtrly a label of 3 points and azure a chevron charged with 3 boars heads coupd, about the arms these words, these be the arms of dame Katherine Swinford.

Mary Drury took the memory of her famous heritage to her death. As the great-granddaughter of Katherine Roet Swynford, the memory of her grandfather's arms were still fresh in her mind (the the label of three points has been noted elsewhere as being the arms of Thomas, son of Hugh and Katherine), and she knew that her family was closely related to the royal family itself, as indicated by the inclusion of the royal arms, just as happened in her grandfather's time at the church of Ss. Peter and Paul at Kettlethorpe. Sadly, the Thorndon monument seems to have disappeared in the remodeling efforts that destroyed many medieval relics, including most of Kettlethorpe's.

Mary likely had another sister who tends not to be found in Drury genealogical accounts but whose existence seems confirmed by the 1471 Bylaugh, Norfolk, brass to her and her husband, Sir John Curson/Curzon. Her name was Joan and she outlived her husband, and though many accounts give her family name as Bacon, the heraldry on her husband's brass clearly allude to her Drury-Swynford heritage:







Finally, the family Swynford and Roet were remembered in the mid-15th century tomb of Lewis Robessart in Westminster Cathedral. Swinford, Thomas Swynford, and Katherine Roet were remembered on Robessart's tomb emblazonings. What we don't know is why. Robessart was a Hainaulter, like Katherine Roet Swynford's father. He may have served abroad with Thomas Swynford. In any case, the relationship was clearly worth remembering for one reason or another that may well be lost to us now.

We only know about some of these otherwise obscure relationships because tombs were the vehicle for immortality. There was a time when it was important to know from whence we came and our relationships with our relatives and close friends.

Further Reading:

THE ROBESSART TOMB IN WESTMINSTER ABBEY. Cecil Humphery-Smith, Foundations (2004) 1 (3): 178-192.

Humphery-Smith, C R (1957). The Blount Quarters. The Coat of Arms. 4: 224-227

Humphery-Smith, C R (1964). The Robessart Tomb in Westminster Abbey. Family History. 2 (11): 142-149.

Engravings of Sepulchral Brasses i N orfolk and Suffolk..., John S. Cotman, Vol. 1 (London: 1839).

http://www.genealogysource.com/drury.htm

KATHERINE ROET'S SWYNFORDS: A RE-EXAMINATION OF INTERFAMILY RELATIONSHIPS AND DESCENT. Judy Perry, July 2003, Foundations 1 (2): 122-131.]; Foundations (2004) 1 (3): 164-174.

Monday, November 22, 2010

Observations on Dugdale's Drawing of Katherine & Joan's Tombs


Icy gist Dame Katerine Duchesse de Lancastre, jadys feme de la tres noble et tres gracious Prince John, Duke de Lancastre, fitz a tres noble Roy Edward le tierce, La quelle Katerine morust le x jour de May l'an du grace M. cccc. tierz, de quelle alme Dieu yet merci et pité.  Amen.


I only recently looked closely enough at the Dugdale drawings to notice what seem to be a few errors. You can find Dugdale's drawing of Joan Beaufort's and Katherine Swynford's Lincoln Cathedral tombs above.  You can view a larger version of this drawing at my Katherine Swynford Facebook group page. Katherine's tomb is at the top and Joan's at the bottom, reflecting the fact that the two tombs were originally side-by-side rather than end-to-end as they are now (seemingly chopping of a portion of the head of Joan's tomb).

The tombs were constructed of Purbeck marble (although photos make it look as if only the top of Joan's tomb was made of the same marble as her mother's) and both originally sported memorial brass effigies, despoiled during by Cromwell's men during the English Civil War in 1644.  Joan was instrumental in finally establishing the chantry altar chapel envisioned by her father before his own 1399 death for that of his third wife, who died in 1403 but whose tomb and architectural surroundings date its construction to a good 20  years later if my memory serves me (q.v. the Harvey pamphlet, referenced below, which I've seen available online for about £14 -- I'll warn you:  it's a pamphlet, not a book, but I'm glad I bought it at the cathedral when it could still be had cheaply!).

What's interesting about the Dugdale drawing is that it purports to show Joan's tomb as being the one with the circular enameled insets along the side.  However, an 1809 drawing by John Buckler, below, and reproduced in the Lincoln Cathedral publication "Catherine Swynford's Chantry" by John Hooper Harvey, shows that it was the larger of the two tombs, that of Katherine, whose tomb had such side circular enameled insets:


The above drawing does not seem to show The Irons which can be clearly seen in the photo below, taken by Christy Robinson and which can be seen in a larger size here at The Beauforts Facebook group page:


Christy Robinson's image seems to show shield-shaped insets, perhaps originally painted (as on the arms of the weepers on the tomb of Alice Chaucer, Duchess of Suffolk, at Ewelme) on the smaller of the two tombs.  Also, the Dugdale drawing shows four circular insets, while the Buckler drawing and modern photographs correctly indicate that there were five:

Photo (c) Alistair Ross and found here.

Photo (c) "Palimzest" and found here

So, too, does this shot, taken from a family history website:



As does this top-shot of Katherine's tomb and part of Joan's taken by Roger Joy and (c) him, found at the website of The Katherine Swynford Society:


Dr. Joy has proposed a lovely recreation of Katherine's brass top, taking perhaps some liberties not supported by either the Dugdale drawing or the remains of the tomb itself, but liberties which are certainly to be artistically appreciated:

(see larger version at link above)

Joan's tomb seems to have heraldic shields marching at the bottom of her feet, but not Katherine's.  This recreation, however, shows the arms of Swynford, St. Edward the Confessor and those of Roet.  The arms of Roet show a somewhat controversial pierced mullet, described in only two places:  a purported forgery of a grant of arms by Katherine's father to the Brothers Andrewe, and in a physical examination of her seal when it was still extant in the 19th century.  Dr. Joy has also included a small pet dog at Katherine's feet -- a charming and historically authentic touch.

Not to feel too sorry for poor Joan, however, inasmuch as while Katherine's tomb inscription was the conventional request for a passers-by's prayer and basic information on Katherine's identity (see quotation at the top of this post, below Dugdale's image), Joan's originally recorded something to the effect that the entire nation mourned her passing (Below is Joan and some of her daughters).



All of this makes me wonder, however, what exactly happened with the Dugdale drawing?  It would seem that a very hurried sketch was made with notes that were perhaps later misinterpreted.

I wonder what the five insets originally were.  My guess would include an emblem of the Order of the Garter, a Lancastrian collar of SS's, her own arms encircled by either, her arms impaled by those of John of Gaunt (and encircled)... and just maybe her encircled arms impaled by those of Swynford?  And the photos above, taken from both sides of the tomb, show that those circular insets were on both sides of Katherine's tomb.

Any alternative ideas?

Friday, September 24, 2010

$50 for a compilation of Wikipedia articles? I think not!

Well... I'm certainly not paying that much for a compilation of wikipedia entries. Thanks to Susan Higgenbotham for this heads-up!

New Book on Katherine Swynford?

There's apparently another new book out on our Katherine:

Katherine Swynford by by Frederic P Miller, Agnes F Vandome, John McBrewster, SBN: 6130655827 / ISBN-13: 9786130655822, Alphascript Publishing, 2010, 94 pages.

$US50 for a 94-page paperback?

Hmmmmm...

Saturday, July 10, 2010

Looking for information on the Beauforts?

Historical fiction author Susan Higginbotham has created a new resource for fans of Katherine Swynford and her family. If you are on Facebook, go here to visit her Facebook group dedicated to the Beauforts.

Of course, you can also read the brief bio's I've got posted at http://katherineswynford.tk.

Enjoy!

Friday, July 09, 2010

New Hollar Portrayal of Old St. Paul's Discovered


One of only a few known preparatory drawings made by the Bohemian artist Wencelslaus Hollar for his spectacular series of 14 engravings of Old St. Paul's Cathedral for Dugdale's monumental history of the structure was recently discovered and is expected to fetch between £60,000 and £80,000 on auction at Sotheby's.

It is only the second known Hollar preparatory drawing of Old St. Paul's in existence.

I have compiled a PDF of all the Old St. Paul's images I could find online that you can find here.

Friday, June 18, 2010

Roet Pendant Give-Away

Wonderful news from Michelle Moore! She produces a line of unique jewelry related to her favorite fiction and historical fiction authors, including Anya Seton, and she has provided a copy of her Roet arms pendants to the folks over at the Historical Tapestry blog.

Michelle also offers several beautiful other items with the same design, so be certain to go enter yourself into the give-away contest!