The Perfect King_ The Life of Edward III Part 12

Finally, Edward had three illegitimate children by Alice Perrers - Sir John Southeray, and two daughters, Joan and Jane. It is impossible that the abbot of Westminster, Nicholas Lytlington, was Edward's b.a.s.t.a.r.d offspring. John Southeray appears regularly in the records, and there is no doubt that he was an illegitimate son of the king's. In January 1377 1377 he was knighted and married to Maud, a sister of Lord Percy, the future earl of Northumberland. In the arrangements for this wedding a payment is made for his 'sisters'. Much less is known of them. They were still young at the time of Edward's death. Jane married Richard Northland, about whom almost nothing is known. Joan married a lawyer called Robert Skerne from Kingston-upon-Thames. He died in he was knighted and married to Maud, a sister of Lord Percy, the future earl of Northumberland. In the arrangements for this wedding a payment is made for his 'sisters'. Much less is known of them. They were still young at the time of Edward's death. Jane married Richard Northland, about whom almost nothing is known. Joan married a lawyer called Robert Skerne from Kingston-upon-Thames. He died in 1437, 1437, and the fine bra.s.s memorial he ordered to be made, which shows himself and Joan, is still extant. and the fine bra.s.s memorial he ordered to be made, which shows himself and Joan, is still extant.

By 1500 1500 many English earls and barons were descendants of Edward III, and so were many Iberian n.o.ble families. By many English earls and barons were descendants of Edward III, and so were many Iberian n.o.ble families. By 1600 1600 almost the entire English gentry were his descendants. By almost the entire English gentry were his descendants. By 1900 1900 hundreds of thousands of people could demonstrate their descent from him. Therefore it is a fair question whether Edward is the last king to be a common ancestor of the English people. hundreds of thousands of people could demonstrate their descent from him. Therefore it is a fair question whether Edward is the last king to be a common ancestor of the English people.

It is of course, impossible to answer this through tracing every single family offshoot. Records do not exist for the vast majority of people born before the mid-sixteenth century, and even some very high-born individuals' families are shrouded in medieval mist. However, it is possible to estimate reasonably accurately whether this statement might be true. By tracing his descendants to a point in time where they const.i.tute a group, with a distinguishable range of social and geographical features as well as predictable nuptial and paternal behaviour, we may then start to make observations about the descendants of Edward III as a subset of the English people as a whole.

Of Edward's twelve legitimate children, only six themselves had children. Together they had at least twenty-four legitimate (or legitimised) children: Prince Edward had two, Isabella two, Lionel one, John eleven, Edmund three, and Thomas five. Prince Edward's legitimate line died out with this generation, but the others carried on. Lionel had four legitimate grandchildren, Isabella one, John at least forty-four, Edmund eight, and Thomas eight. Not all of these survived, of course, and some were born abroad, especially in Portugal (following the marriage of John's daughter Philippa to King John I of Portugal). But twenty-one of them ensured that the bloodlines of four of Edward Ill's sons continued in England in perpetuity.

If we trace the descendants of these twenty-one great-grandchildren we may establish that Edward III had at least 436 436 descendants alive in England in the year descendants alive in England in the year 1500. 1500. This is a minimum, excluding all three of Edward's illegitimate children (whose lines are difficult to trace) and all but four lines of descent from an illegitimate descendant (only including those cases where an illegitimate descendant was recognised and enn.o.bled), and excluding all lines descended from those who married overseas or married into Scottish and Welsh families. It also excludes a number of very young children who might have been born by This is a minimum, excluding all three of Edward's illegitimate children (whose lines are difficult to trace) and all but four lines of descent from an illegitimate descendant (only including those cases where an illegitimate descendant was recognised and enn.o.bled), and excluding all lines descended from those who married overseas or married into Scottish and Welsh families. It also excludes a number of very young children who might have been born by 1500 1500 but probably were not (dates of birth being difficult to determine in several cases). Many more descendants were alive in Portugal, France, Spain and Scotland and a handful in Ireland and Wales, but these have been excluded in the following calculations. It is important at every step to underestimate the number of descendants flouris.h.i.+ng in England to reduce the risk of error or exaggeration, so although the actual number of descendants was certainly much greater than but probably were not (dates of birth being difficult to determine in several cases). Many more descendants were alive in Portugal, France, Spain and Scotland and a handful in Ireland and Wales, but these have been excluded in the following calculations. It is important at every step to underestimate the number of descendants flouris.h.i.+ng in England to reduce the risk of error or exaggeration, so although the actual number of descendants was certainly much greater than 436, 436, possibly in excess of a thousand, the minimum number has been used. possibly in excess of a thousand, the minimum number has been used.

The population of England in 1500 1500 was about was about 2.75 2.75 million. Therefore, as a proportion of the English population, Edward's descendants amounted to at least this fraction: million. Therefore, as a proportion of the English population, Edward's descendants amounted to at least this fraction: 436/2,750,000. 436/2,750,000. This does not sound very impressive, but over time the proportion increased steadily. Moreover, we must consider the social privilege and geographical circ.u.mstances of the This does not sound very impressive, but over time the proportion increased steadily. Moreover, we must consider the social privilege and geographical circ.u.mstances of the 436. 436. Whereas the descendants of a fourteenth-century Cornish tin miner would be unlikely to have spread very far from Cornwall by Whereas the descendants of a fourteenth-century Cornish tin miner would be unlikely to have spread very far from Cornwall by 1500, 1500, let alone to have reached into the upper cla.s.ses in other counties, Edward Ill's descendants were settled in almost every county in England and in all the higher ranks of society. The propensity of the gentry to intermarry their heirs among other gentry families in neighbouring counties meant that the heads of most gentry families would have been descended from Edward by let alone to have reached into the upper cla.s.ses in other counties, Edward Ill's descendants were settled in almost every county in England and in all the higher ranks of society. The propensity of the gentry to intermarry their heirs among other gentry families in neighbouring counties meant that the heads of most gentry families would have been descended from Edward by 1600. 1600.

If all things were equal - if every woman in England was as likely to marry any man as any other, and vice versa - one could say that the maximum proportion of the English who were not not descended from Edward one generation after 1500 (roughly 1530) would be descended from Edward one generation after 1500 (roughly 1530) would be [1-(436 / 2.75 million)]2 = 99.9683% and one generation after that, approximately 1560, 1560, the proportion would be the proportion would be (99.9683% (99.9683% x x 99.9683%) = 99.9366%. 99.9683%) = 99.9366%. On this basis way we might say that at least On this basis way we might say that at least 1,879 1,879 of the English population in of the English population in 1560 1560 (estimated at (estimated at 2,963,505) 2,963,505) were descended from Edward were descended from Edward III. III. However, there is a problem in that there were considerable social obstacles which prevented any man from marrying any woman. Although Edward's genes had seeped into the gentry of most counties by However, there is a problem in that there were considerable social obstacles which prevented any man from marrying any woman. Although Edward's genes had seeped into the gentry of most counties by 1500 1500 - from Devon to Norfolk and Northumberland - there were significant social barriers which prevented the children of rich fathers from marrying members of the working cla.s.ses and vice versa. This issue affects the rate of increase of Edward's legitimate descendants in the following way. If the daughter of an earl or a duke was restricted to marrying someone of similar status, then her husband, of course, would have been more likely than not also to be descended from Edward III. Where this happened, two of Edward's decendants would have given rise to one family, not two. - from Devon to Norfolk and Northumberland - there were significant social barriers which prevented the children of rich fathers from marrying members of the working cla.s.ses and vice versa. This issue affects the rate of increase of Edward's legitimate descendants in the following way. If the daughter of an earl or a duke was restricted to marrying someone of similar status, then her husband, of course, would have been more likely than not also to be descended from Edward III. Where this happened, two of Edward's decendants would have given rise to one family, not two.

The intermarriage of Edward's descendants as a result of social expectation was at its height in the fifteenth century. As noted above, of the twenty-one great-grandchildren whose descendants perpetuated Edward's lineage, ten (48%) (48%) married another descendant, implying five of the sixteen marriages in this generation married another descendant, implying five of the sixteen marriages in this generation (31%) (31%) were intermarriages. But this proportion seems to decline over the centuries. Of all the marriages noted as taking place in the generation alive in and shortly after were intermarriages. But this proportion seems to decline over the centuries. Of all the marriages noted as taking place in the generation alive in and shortly after 1500, 1500, less than less than 13% 13% were to other descendants of Edward III, so far as can be determined. This is surprising at first, until we reflect that it was only a few great families whose children were all expected to marry peers of the realm. The younger sons and daughters of younger sons and daughters of the gentry increasingly married merchants and local yeomen. Even by were to other descendants of Edward III, so far as can be determined. This is surprising at first, until we reflect that it was only a few great families whose children were all expected to marry peers of the realm. The younger sons and daughters of younger sons and daughters of the gentry increasingly married merchants and local yeomen. Even by 1500 1500 merchants and minor gentry were marrying descendants of Edward III. Thus the proportion of intermarriage which took place as a result of social obligation or bias (as opposed to pure chance) decreased, and this decrease was probably continual. Nevertheless, if the merchants and minor gentry were marrying descendants of Edward III. Thus the proportion of intermarriage which took place as a result of social obligation or bias (as opposed to pure chance) decreased, and this decrease was probably continual. Nevertheless, if the 13% 13% of intermarriage around of intermarriage around 1500 1500 is taken as a guide, this would have reduced the number of descendants in the generation centred on is taken as a guide, this would have reduced the number of descendants in the generation centred on 1530 1530 by a factor of 1oo by a factor of 1oo/113. Rather than doubling to roughly Rather than doubling to roughly 872 872 descendants as implied in the previous calculation, the total would have been around descendants as implied in the previous calculation, the total would have been around 771. 771. Applying the same corrective factor would have led to a further decline in the increment of the next generation, so that the figure for the generation centred on Applying the same corrective factor would have led to a further decline in the increment of the next generation, so that the figure for the generation centred on 1560 1560 would be would be 1,472 1,472 of the population of of the population of 2,963,505. 2,963,505. If we then apply this corrective factor once more to the increment, we arrive at about If we then apply this corrective factor once more to the increment, we arrive at about 3,424 3,424 of the population in of the population in 1590 1590 (estimated at (estimated at 3,895,749) 3,895,749) and and 7,208 7,208 of the population in of the population in 1620 1620 (estimated at (estimated at 4,634,570) 4,634,570) as being descended from Edward III. A rough check on the acceptability of these figures is possible. If the twenty-two descendants of Edward's alive on as being descended from Edward III. A rough check on the acceptability of these figures is possible. If the twenty-two descendants of Edward's alive on 1 1 January January 1380 1380 had increased to at least had increased to at least 436 436 in in 1500 1500 (an increase of (an increase of 20x 20x over over 120 years of slowly increasing population levels), a 16 120 years of slowly increasing population levels), a 16.5X increase over the 120 years from 1500 (a period of rapidly increasing population levels) is reasonable, and almost certainly an underestimate, as intended. increase over the 120 years from 1500 (a period of rapidly increasing population levels) is reasonable, and almost certainly an underestimate, as intended.

This implies that maybe up to 99.84% of the population of England was the population of England was not not descended from Edward in descended from Edward in 1620. 1620. Nevertheless, continuing to use the correction factor of Nevertheless, continuing to use the correction factor of 13% 13% of all marriages between Edward's descendants being non-accidental status-related intermarriages, we may estimate that the maximum proportions of the population who were of all marriages between Edward's descendants being non-accidental status-related intermarriages, we may estimate that the maximum proportions of the population who were not not descended from Edward were as follows: descended from Edward were as follows: 1620: 99.84447% 99.84447% 1710: 1710: 99.1416% 99.1416% 1800: 1800: 95.3596% 95.3596% 1650: 1650: 99.7249% 99.7249% 1740: 1740: 98.4873% 98.4873% 1830: 1830: 91.9774% 91.9774% 1680: 1680: 99.5138% 99.5138% 1770: 1770: 97.3428% 97.3428% 1860: 1860: 86.3703% 86.3703%.

Up to this point we have been adjusting for non-accidental intermarriages in every generation at a level of 13%. 13%. However, by However, by 1860 1860 the real level was much less than this. Therefore the percentages in the above table are very considerable overestimates of the population the real level was much less than this. Therefore the percentages in the above table are very considerable overestimates of the population not not descended from Edward. Also, from this point onwards, the emerging capitalist society and the railway network mean that, with the exception of remote areas of the country, the corrective factor applies less and less. If we dispense with this factor from now on, the remaining generations work out as follows: descended from Edward. Also, from this point onwards, the emerging capitalist society and the railway network mean that, with the exception of remote areas of the country, the corrective factor applies less and less. If we dispense with this factor from now on, the remaining generations work out as follows: 1890: 74.60% 1950: 30.97% 1920: 55.65% 1980: 9.59%.

And, following this pattern, we should expect less than 1% 1% of English children born to English-descended parents after of English children born to English-descended parents after 1995 1995 not not to be descended from Edward III. to be descended from Edward III.

The above working has been exceedingly cautious on several levels. The social bias affecting whom one married did not extend to 13% 13% of all marriages of Edward's descendants in of all marriages of Edward's descendants in 1860. 1860. The population in that year was about The population in that year was about 18,682,352, 18,682,352, and the above deliberate underestimate suggests that at least and the above deliberate underestimate suggests that at least 2,546,348 2,546,348 of these were legitimately descended from Edward. Social considerations of ancestry were of importance to the minority: probably fewer than of these were legitimately descended from Edward. Social considerations of ancestry were of importance to the minority: probably fewer than 100,000 100,000 members of the aristocracy, gentry and upper-middle cla.s.ses (less than members of the aristocracy, gentry and upper-middle cla.s.ses (less than 4% 4% of Edward's descendants). In addition, the model above allows for a far higher level of intermarriage due to social bias in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries than was probably the case. The reality is that the upper tiers of society would have become relatively quickly saturated with Edward Ill's genes, and thus almost every marriage out of cla.s.s would have resulted in a dispersal of genes down the social hierarchy. Although the contrast in about of Edward's descendants). In addition, the model above allows for a far higher level of intermarriage due to social bias in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries than was probably the case. The reality is that the upper tiers of society would have become relatively quickly saturated with Edward Ill's genes, and thus almost every marriage out of cla.s.s would have resulted in a dispersal of genes down the social hierarchy. Although the contrast in about 1600 1600 is great - most of the n.o.bility and gentry is great - most of the n.o.bility and gentry were were descended and yet descended and yet 99% 99% of all English people were not - the likelihood of anyone alive today having absolutely no gentry or n.o.bility among his or her eleven, twelve or thirteen great-grandparents (eight thousand or so antecedents) is small. Furthermore, we have been working on minima throughout, and totally ignoring illegitimate conception as a factor to be taken into account. Historians tend to put the proportion of illegitimacy in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries at around of all English people were not - the likelihood of anyone alive today having absolutely no gentry or n.o.bility among his or her eleven, twelve or thirteen great-grandparents (eight thousand or so antecedents) is small. Furthermore, we have been working on minima throughout, and totally ignoring illegitimate conception as a factor to be taken into account. Historians tend to put the proportion of illegitimacy in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries at around 5% 5% of all births, so the result of neglecting this of all births, so the result of neglecting this 5% 5% increase in the number of Edward's descendants in each generation, as we have done above, amounts to an underestimate over a two-hundred-year period of roughly a quarter. To correct this we should increase the numbers of descendants at the end of the sixteenth century by increase in the number of Edward's descendants in each generation, as we have done above, amounts to an underestimate over a two-hundred-year period of roughly a quarter. To correct this we should increase the numbers of descendants at the end of the sixteenth century by 33%. 33%. Obviously if by Obviously if by 1600 1600 there were there were 33% 33% more descendants than estimated in the above model (including many more among the lower cla.s.ses, reducing the need for a status-connected corrective factor), the proportion of people of English descent alive today who are not descended from Edward would be negligible. more descendants than estimated in the above model (including many more among the lower cla.s.ses, reducing the need for a status-connected corrective factor), the proportion of people of English descent alive today who are not descended from Edward would be negligible.

As a result of this we may regard Edward III as being a common ancestor of well over 80% 80% - probably over - probably over 95% 95% - of the living English-descended population of England. It is conceivable that there are exceptional areas in some comparatively geographically isolated corners of the country which welcomed few newcomers before recent times and which have remained largely independent of the mobile middle cla.s.ses, and have had few or no resident landowners, and never served as a port of any sort, and are isolated from the major highways, but there cannot be many of these. Rural and isolated poor farming communities which themselves practised inbreeding on a regular basis would be the most likely instances, and even then they must be considered exceptional if they have entirely avoided the steady march of Edward III's genes. - of the living English-descended population of England. It is conceivable that there are exceptional areas in some comparatively geographically isolated corners of the country which welcomed few newcomers before recent times and which have remained largely independent of the mobile middle cla.s.ses, and have had few or no resident landowners, and never served as a port of any sort, and are isolated from the major highways, but there cannot be many of these. Rural and isolated poor farming communities which themselves practised inbreeding on a regular basis would be the most likely instances, and even then they must be considered exceptional if they have entirely avoided the steady march of Edward III's genes.

Finally, it is worth noting that the above conclusion implies that all the post-Conquest kings of England prior to Edward are also common ancestors of the vast majority of the English, with the exceptions of William II, Stephen and Richard I.24 It also implies that among the common ancestors of the English people are the kings of France before 1314, 1314, the kings of Castile before the kings of Castile before 1252, 1252, the counts of Hainault before the counts of Hainault before 1337, 1337, the counts of Provence before the counts of Provence before 1245, 1245, the counts of Savoy before the counts of Savoy before 1233, 1233, and the dukes of Aquitaine before and the dukes of Aquitaine before 1204, 1204, not to mention a mult.i.tude of earlier French, Italian, Spanish and German n.o.ble familes. The same thing may also be said for some of the English magnates who appear in this book. Probably the most notable example is Roger Mortimer, the first earl of March, Edward's erstwhile enemy, whose twelve children yielded more than thirty-five grandchildren, twenty-two of whom had had progeny by not to mention a mult.i.tude of earlier French, Italian, Spanish and German n.o.ble familes. The same thing may also be said for some of the English magnates who appear in this book. Probably the most notable example is Roger Mortimer, the first earl of March, Edward's erstwhile enemy, whose twelve children yielded more than thirty-five grandchildren, twenty-two of whom had had progeny by 1380. 1380. Time has not permitted an accurate estimate of how many descendants of Roger Mortimer were alive in Time has not permitted an accurate estimate of how many descendants of Roger Mortimer were alive in 1500 1500 but it is very likely to have been many more than the total for Edward III, and they would certainly have been equally widely dispersed across all the English counties. The story told at the beginning of this book - of how Edward III survived and surmounted the terror of the first earl of March - is thus a story in which probably everyone of English descent has a stake. The political history of England up to and including the reign of Edward III is the collective family history of the English people. but it is very likely to have been many more than the total for Edward III, and they would certainly have been equally widely dispersed across all the English counties. The story told at the beginning of this book - of how Edward III survived and surmounted the terror of the first earl of March - is thus a story in which probably everyone of English descent has a stake. The political history of England up to and including the reign of Edward III is the collective family history of the English people.