Page:Notes and Queries - Series 11 - Volume 2.djvu/380

374 Bertram de Verdon †1192.

c. 1140 Rose, 2nd wife. †1215.

Thomas de Verdon, 1st husband. †1197.

1194 Eustachia, d. of Gilbert Basset, who †1205.

Richard de Camvill, liv. time Henry III., 2nd husband.

Nicholas de Verdon †1230.

Josceline alias Lesceline de Verdon, b. c. 1195. † c. 1212-1216. 1st wife.

Hugh de Laci Earl of Ulster, b. c. 1167. †1242-3.

c. 1212-16 Emeline d. of Walter de Riddlesford, b. c. 1198, liv. 1276. 2nd wife of Hugh.

c. 1243 Stephen de Longespee. Slain 1260. (Brother to William, 2nd Earl of Salisbury.) 2nd husband.

Idonea de Camvill.

c. 1225 William de Longespee, 2nd Earl of Salisbury, b. c. 1212. Slain 1250.

Rose de Verdon. †1247.

Theobald le Butiller. †1230.

Maud de Laci, married twice. b. c. 1210-12. †1303.

Emelina de Longespee, liv. 1306.

Maurice FitzGerald, 3rd Baron of Offaly. †1286.

Ela de Longespee.

Roger la Zouche. †1285.

Ela de Longespee.

Sir James, Lord Audley, b. c. 1220. †1271.

John, who assumed his mother's surname of De Verdon. †1308.

Margaret, d. of Gilbert de Laci, nephew of Hugh, Earl of Ulster.

We now come to the question of the issue of Hugh de Laci, Earl of Ulster. By Lesceline de Verdon, according to Lord Walter, he had a daughter Maud or Matilda (to whose second marriage I will refer presently), of whom, however, your correspondent makes no mention. As regards issue by his second wife, Lord Walter writes that "it is not known if Emeline de Riddlesford, his [Hugh's] second wife, had any issue," yet we find assuming her, in his table, to have been the mother of Hugh's other children on the ground that they bore distinctive De Laci Christian names, and must therefore have been legitimate. I admit that the children mentioned bore, as stated, De Laci family Christian names; but, with all due deference to your correspondent, I can hardly agree that that fact alone is sufficient proof of their legitimacy, for Hugh could, had he so pleased, have given these particular names equally well to his natural children. Though Sweetman (i. 1372) states that Walter and Roger were alive in 1226, their ages are not given, and Hugh had, in 1225, already deserted his wife for a mistress. I echo your correspondent's remark that "the dates of the births of Hugh's children are much needed," although I cannot but think that, had they been Emeline's issue, the fact would have been known to Lord Walter FitzGerald.

It is only since the receipt of Lord Walter's pedigree of De Riddlesford that I have become aware of the fact that Emeline had, by her second husband, Stephen de Longespee, two daughters, instead of one as stated by me.

I have stated above that I would refer presently to Maud de Laci's second marriage.

With reference to this, Lord Walter writes that he does "not know upon what authority the Peerages state that Maud, or Matilda, de Laci married, as second husband, Walter de Burgh." To my mind the added statement in the pedigree that Walter's widow was Evelina—according to Banks's 'Baronies in Fee,' ii. 78, she was granddaughter, not daughter, of John FitzGeoffrey, Justiciar of Ireland in 1245—would seem—as Maud did not die until 1303, whilst Walter de Burgh died in 1271—to imply one of two things: either that Walter de Burgh never married Maud, or Matilda, de Laci (though, if he did not, how came he to be styled Earl of Ulster in 1264?), or that the marriage was dissolved, and Walter married Evelina, or Aveline, third daughter of John FitzJohn FitzGeoffrey, who died in 42 Henry III. (1257).