LADY PERCY, WIFE OF HOTSPUR (DAUGHTER OF EDMUND MORTIMER, EARL OF MARCH), AND JANE SEYMOUR'S ROYAL DESCENT.
(Vol. vii., p. 42. Vol. viii., pp. 104. 184)
The mischief that arises from apparently the most trifling inaccuracy in a statement of fact is scarcely to be estimated. A mistake is repeated, multiplied, and perpetuated often to an extent that no after rectification can thoroughly efface. Blunders even become sacred by antiquity; and the attempt to correct any misstatement, if it does not entirely fail through the subsequent destruction of evidence that would have contained the refutation, is frequently received with a coldness and suspicion, and can seldom, with every aid from undoubted sources, be brought to prevail against the more familiar and preconceived impression. An illustration of this may be seen in the reference made by your correspondent C. V. to the authority of Dugdale, as overriding the result of later investigations relative to the issue respectively of the fifth and seventh Lords Clifford of Westmoreland. The loose and ill-advised assertion of Miss Strickland, intended as it clearly was to insinuate a mean origin in Jane Seymour, and to lessen her pretension to an exalted birth, has fortunately received a most complete and signal disproof; but a question is now raised, which, if it can be supported, will suit Miss Strickland's view quite as well as her own inconclusive statement. I cannot but think that what she wished to say is, as hinted in the suggestion of C. V., that the claim contended for cannot be supported through the alleged marriage of a Wentworth with the descendant of Elizabeth Percy, because Elizabeth, Lady Percy's only daughter, Lady Elizabeth de Percy, who married John, Lord Clifford, is by some ancient heralds stated to have left no daughter. This would have been an intelligible assertion, and not entirely inconsistent with what may be gathered from peerages, and other works compiled solely upon the authority of Dugdale; and it is indeed the very point of difficulty contemplated by your learned correspondent C.V., who if I do not mistake the signature, is himself an authority entitled to much respect.
Dugdale, Collins, and Nicolas make the intermarriage of Wentworth to have taken place with a daughter of Roger, fifth Lord Clifford; and Dugdale and Collins are silent as to any female issue of John, the seventh Lord. Edmondson (Baronagium Genealogicum, vol. iv. p. 364.) adopts the same conclusion; but no higher authority is cited by any one of the above writers, upon which to found this statement. On the other hand, both Collins and Edmondson, in the Wentworth pedigree, show the marriage of Sir Philip Wentworth, of Nettlested, to have taken place with a daughter of John, seventh Lord Clifford. Edmondson describes the daughter as Elizabeth; but Collins more accurately calls her Mary. Banks (Baronage, vol. ii. p. 90.) gives both statements with an asterisk, implying a doubt as to which of the two is to be accepted.
The Pembroke MS. contains a summary of the lives of the Veteriponts, Cliffords, and the Earls of Cumberland, compiled from original documents and family records for the celebrated Lady Anne Countess Dowager of Pembroke, daughter and sole heir of George Clifford, Earl of Cumberland, who died in 1605. This valuable collection gives the most minute particulars and anecdotes connected with the ancient family of the Lords Clifford and their descendants, and being a few years anterior in date to the publication of Dugdale's Baronage, the information contained there is entitled to the greatest possible weight as an original and independent authority.
In this MS. (a copy of which is in the British Museum, Harl. 6177.) the descendants of Roger, fifth Lord Clifford, are named, but there is no mention of any daughter who formed an alliance with a Wentworth. Afterwards come the issue of the marriage of John, seventh Lord Clifford, with Elizabeth Percy, the only daughter of Henry Lord Percy, surnamed Hotspur, son to Henry Earl of Northumberland.
"This Elizabeth Percy was one of the greatest women of her time, both for her birth and her marriages, &c. Their eldest son, Thomas de Clifford, succeeded his father both in his lands and honours, &c. Henry, their second son, died without issue, but is mentioned in the articles of his brother's marriage. Mary Clifford, married to Sir Philip Wentworth, Kt., of whom descended the Lords Wentworth that are now living, and the Earl of Straffod, and the Earl of Cleveland."
To which of the above statements must we give credit? If Dugdale be right, there will appear a startling discrepance in the ages of the two persons who are presumed to have formed the alliance in question; whereas if the filiation given in the Pembroke MS. is relied upon, their ages will be quite consistent, and all the other circumstances perfectly in accordance.
Roger, fifth Lord Clifford, was born and baptized at Brougham on the 20th of July, 7 Edw. III., 1333; his eldest son Thomas, sixth lord, was born circa 1363, being twenty-six years old at his father's death, which happened on 13th July, 1389, in the fifty-sixth year of his age. Thomas Lord Clifford died on 4th of October, 1392, leaving his son and heir John (seventh Lord Clifford) an infant of about three years old. This lord married the Lady Elizabeth de Percy circa 1413, and his eldest son was born on 20th of August, 1414: he died on 13th March, 1422.
The wife of Sir Philip Wentworth, were she a daughter of Roger, fifth Lord Clifford, must have been born between 1363 and 1389; if a daughter of John, seventh Lord Clifford, she must have been born between 1414 and 1422.