GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

From:
Subject: Amy de Gaveston 's Mother
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 15:56:00 EST

Of course, it is impossible to "prove" anything about Amy's possible mother
at this point. That does not mean that sorting out these possibilities are a
waste of time. In fact, it could be quite productive. In order for Amy to be
in Isabella's court, she must have been born to someone with high
connections. Piers rutting with a milk maid can be ruled out, as the daughter
would not be in the court, privy to a good education and the social graces of
life in this court. The candidate is likely well bred and with a history and
genealogy that is now unknown to us. I think we can narrow down the
possibilities of who this person could be. Some of these women may well have
known ancestries. Other records then might be found simply because we are now
looking for them. No one has really tried to get a handle on this before. It
is well worthy an ongoing examination.

Cecily de la Legrave is a possibility. What is known of her ancestry and what
records exist about her tenure in Isabella's court? Mary de Sancto Martino,
Margaret de Villers and Juliana/Joan de Nauntel are not excluded. What
records are there for these women? Where does one look? These are questions
we should be asking. Within these searches, there may actually exist an
answer. It is never as easy to find something as it is to disprove
something. That is why I say the job is just beginning.
The answer may indeed hinge on something seemingly unimportant, such as new
clothes or a robe bought for one of these women, as commented upon by Robert
Battle. Where did the information about a new robe come from, Robert? These
are the kinds of clues that might be needed.

In a message dated 3/2/01 8:09:21 AM, writes:

<< "At this point we are near finding possibilities for Amy's mother. The

likelihood that she was born of some woman in Isabella's court is highly

probable."


"Highly probable?" Isn't "not impossible" a better description of where we

are here? To get to highly improbable, I think we'd need to have evidence

that the primary, no the overwhelming source of damsels for the Queen was

illegitimate daughters of other damsels. Without that, all we've got is an

artificial limitation of the pool of possible mothers. But even if one

wanted to start with the idea (assuming some justification) that Amie's

mother was professionally related to the Queen at the time of Amie's

conception, shouldn't we be looking at sisters, first cousins, second

cousins, and well-born next-door neighbors of the known damsels? Seems to

me that any such are equally likely to be the source of a future damsel, and

maybe more likely to "hook up," as the kids say, with Piers.


Opinions? >>

This thread:

• Amy de Gaveston 's Mother by

  • Re: Amy de Gaveston 's Mother by John Carmi Parsons <>