From: celticprince51@gmail.com

Dear Newsgroup ~

Complete Peerage 6 (1926): 647, footnote l (sub Huntingdon) discusses the c= hildren of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219). It states = Earl David had three sons and three daughters: Robert, Henry, and John, and=
three daughters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada. A seventh child David is sugg= ested by the editor.

Recently I came across a Common Pleas lawsuit dated Easter term 1303 which = deals with the heirs of Alexander III, King of Scots (died 1286). The laws= uit may be viewed at the following weblink:

Court of Common Pleas, CP40/147, image 50 (available at http://aalt.law.uh.= edu/AALT6/E1/CP40no147/IMG_0050.htm).

The lawsuit names the three main competitors to the Scottish crown then liv= ing, namely John de Hastings (plaintiff in the lawsuit), John de Balliol, a=
nd Robert de Brus. The lawsuit states how each of the competitors were des= cended from King Alexander III's great uncle, David of Scotland, Earl of Hu= ntingdon (died 1219). Since these lines of descent are covered by many oth=
er published sources, they will not be repeated here.

Something which is new in the lawsuit is a list of the children of David of=
Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon. The lawsuit alleges that Earl David was suc= cessively succeeded by three sons in turn, namely Thomas, David, and John, = and that following John's death, he was succeeded by his four sisters, Alic=
e (who died without issue), Margaret, Isabel, and Ada.

Contemporary records, however, show that Earl David was succeeded on his de= ath by his son, Earl John (died 1237). When John died without issue, his p= roperties were divided by his surviving sisters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada,=
or their representatives. There appears to have been a fourth sister, Mau=
d, wife of John de Monmouth, who predeceased her brother John and she died = without issue.

The 1303 lawsuit confirms that Earl David had a son, David, who is known to=
have died young. The existence of the younger David is known from two cha= rters of his father, Earl David, to Lindores Abbey. See Dowden, Chartulary=
of the Abbey of Lindores (Scottish Hist. Soc. 42) (1903): 2=E2=80=939, whi=
ch may be viewed at the following weblink:

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id
bc.ark:/13960/t52g0bz47;view
1up=
;seq
104

But the 1303 lawsuit is the first record which alleges that Earl David had =
a son, Thomas, or a daughter, Alice.

In this case, I'm fairly certain that Alice is a mistake for the known daug= hter, Maud, who died before 1237 many years before this lawsuit. Earl Davi= d's daughter, Maud, is allegedly mentioned by name in the following contemp= orary document which I have not consulted:

PRO DL 42/2, fos. 196v.=E2=80=937r.

Maud, daughter of Earl David, is also mentioned in the following two source=
s, both of whom place her as the third of four daughters of Earl David:

1. Buchanan, Tracts illus. of the Traditionary & Historical Antiqs. of Scot= land (1836): 87 (Petition of John de Balliol: =E2=80=9CJohannes obiit sine = haerede de corpore suo. Unde de eodem Johanne descendit jus, et debuit des= cendere, Margaretae, Isabellae, Mathildae et Adae, ut sororibus et uni haer= edi, si Regum esset partible ...=E2=80=9D).

2. Burton, Chronica Monasterii de Melsa 1 (Rolls Ser.) (1866): 436 (=E2=80= =9CIste nempe Johannes Scoticus 4 habuit sorores; scilicet .... 3a soror Ma= tildis obiit sine liberis=E2=80=9D).

In summary, the 1303 Common Pleas lawsuit alleges that David of Scotland, E= arl of Huntingdon, had a total of seven children, two of which are not know=
n in other sources, namely a son, Thomas, and a daughter, Alice. One known=
daughter, Maud, is not mentioned in the lawsuit.

For a more detailed account of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died = 1219), and his descendants, please see my book, Royal Ancestry (5 volume se= t), published in 2013.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
* Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)

From: celticprince51@gmail.com

Dear Newsgroup ~

The correct weblink for the 1303 Common Pleas lawsuit is:

Court of Common Pleas, CP40/147, image 89 (available at http://aalt.law.uh.= edu/AALT6/E1/CP40no147/IMG_0089.htm).

Below is another reference to Earl David's known daughter, Maud.

Polychronicon Ranulphi Higden maonachi Cestrensis; together with the Englis=
h translations of John Trevisa and of an unknown writer of the 15th Cent. (= =E2=80=9CIohn Scot, erle of Chestre [and of Hontyngdon, deide wi=C3=BE oute=
children*. [chyldern, =CE=B3.] at Derenhale =C3=BEe seven=C3=BEe day of Iu= ne, and was y-buryed at Chestre];*. [From =CE=B1., =CE=B2., =CE=B3., and Cx= ..] but for his londes hadde prerogatyf of realte, his erldom fil to =C3=BEe=
kyng his hond, and his sustres =C3=BEat were his heyres*. [eyres, =CE=B2.]=
hadde o=C3=BEer londes =C3=BEerfore in compensacioun, for so faire lordsch=
ip schulde not be deled bytwene distaves of*. [and, =CE=B1.] wommen. =C3=9E=
is Iohn hadde foure sustres;*. [voure sosters, =CE=B3.] oon of hem heet*. [= heet] om. =CE=B2.] Mergrete,*. [Margarete, =CE=B1.; Margaret, =CE=B3. and C= x.] and*. [and] om. =CE=B1. and =CE=B2.] was i-wedded [to Aleyn*. [Alayn, = =CE=B3.] of]*. [From =CE=B1. =CE=B2., and Cx.; into, MS.] Galewey,*. [Galwe=
y, =CE=B3.] and baar =C3=BEe maide Devergoile; =C3=BEis maide was i-wedded =
to Iohn Baillol, and baar Iohn Baillol kyng of Scotlond; =C3=BEe o=C3=BEer = suster Isabel was i-maried to Robert de Brus;*. [Bruys, =CE=B1., =CE=B2., a=
nd Cx.; Brui=C8=9D, =CE=B3.] =C3=BEe =C3=BEridde suster Mold deide wi=C3=BE=
oute children; =C3=BEe four=C3=BEe suster Alda was maried to Henry de Hast= ynges.=E2=80=9D).

The above is available at the following weblink:

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cme/AHB1341.0001.001/1:9.36?rgn
div2;sort
o=
ccur;subview
detail;type
simple;view
fulltext;q1
Mold).

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
* Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)

From: Peter Stewart <psssst@optusnet.com.au>

On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 6:56:31 AM UTC+10, celticp...@gmail.com w= rote:

Dear Newsgroup ~

Complete Peerage 6 (1926): 647, footnote l (sub Huntingdon) discusses the=

children of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219). It state=
s Earl David had three sons and three daughters: Robert, Henry, and John, a=
nd three daughters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada. A seventh child David is su= ggested by the editor.

Recently I came across a Common Pleas lawsuit dated Easter term 1303 whic=

h deals with the heirs of Alexander III, King of Scots (died 1286). The la= wsuit may be viewed at the following weblink:

Court of Common Pleas, CP40/147, image 50 (available at http://aalt.law.u=

h.edu/AALT6/E1/CP40no147/IMG_0050.htm).

The lawsuit names the three main competitors to the Scottish crown then l=

iving, namely John de Hastings (plaintiff in the lawsuit), John de Balliol,=
and Robert de Brus. The lawsuit states how each of the competitors were d= escended from King Alexander III's great uncle, David of Scotland, Earl of = Huntingdon (died 1219). Since these lines of descent are covered by many o= ther published sources, they will not be repeated here.

Something which is new in the lawsuit is a list of the children of David =

of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon. The lawsuit alleges that Earl David was s= uccessively succeeded by three sons in turn, namely Thomas, David, and John=
, and that following John's death, he was succeeded by his four sisters, Al= ice (who died without issue), Margaret, Isabel, and Ada.

Contemporary records, however, show that Earl David was succeeded on his =

death by his son, Earl John (died 1237). When John died without issue, his=
properties were divided by his surviving sisters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ad=
a, or their representatives. There appears to have been a fourth sister, M= aud, wife of John de Monmouth, who predeceased her brother John and she die=
d without issue.

The four sisters were named correctly in the claim of John de Balliol ("Joh= annes obiit sine herede de corpore suo, unde de eodem Johanne descendit jus=
, et debuit descendere, Margarete, Ysabelle, Matildi, et Ade, ut sororibus =
et uni heredi, si regnum esset partibile"). You can find this in Edward Sto= nes & Grant Simpson (editors), *Edward I and the Throne of Scotland, 1290= =E2=80=931296: An Edition of the Record Sources for the Great Cause*, 2 vol=
s (1978), vol ii p 140, and in Foedera vol i/part II p 776.

Peter Stewart
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
* Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)

From: Peter Stewart <psssst@optusnet.com.au>

On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 8:44:28 AM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:

On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 6:56:31 AM UTC+10, celticp...@gmail.com=

wrote:

Dear Newsgroup ~

Complete Peerage 6 (1926): 647, footnote l (sub Huntingdon) discusses t=

he children of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon (died 1219). It sta= tes Earl David had three sons and three daughters: Robert, Henry, and John,=
and three daughters, Margaret, Isabel, and Ada. A seventh child David is = suggested by the editor.

Recently I came across a Common Pleas lawsuit dated Easter term 1303 wh=

ich deals with the heirs of Alexander III, King of Scots (died 1286). The = lawsuit may be viewed at the following weblink:

Court of Common Pleas, CP40/147, image 50 (available at http://aalt.law=

..uh.edu/AALT6/E1/CP40no147/IMG_0050.htm).

The lawsuit names the three main competitors to the Scottish crown then=

living, namely John de Hastings (plaintiff in the lawsuit), John de Ballio=
l, and Robert de Brus. The lawsuit states how each of the competitors were=
descended from King Alexander III's great uncle, David of Scotland, Earl o=
f Huntingdon (died 1219). Since these lines of descent are covered by many=
other published sources, they will not be repeated here.

Something which is new in the lawsuit is a list of the children of Davi=

d of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon. The lawsuit alleges that Earl David was=
successively succeeded by three sons in turn, namely Thomas, David, and Jo= hn, and that following John's death, he was succeeded by his four sisters, = Alice (who died without issue), Margaret, Isabel, and Ada.

Contemporary records, however, show that Earl David was succeeded on hi=

s death by his son, Earl John (died 1237). When John died without issue, h=
is properties were divided by his surviving sisters, Margaret, Isabel, and = Ada, or their representatives. There appears to have been a fourth sister,=
Maud, wife of John de Monmouth, who predeceased her brother John and she d= ied without issue.

The four sisters were named correctly in the claim of John de Balliol ("J=

ohannes obiit sine herede de corpore suo, unde de eodem Johanne descendit j= us, et debuit descendere, Margarete, Ysabelle, Matildi, et Ade, ut sororibu=
s et uni heredi, si regnum esset partibile"). You can find this in Edward S= tones & Grant Simpson (editors), *Edward I and the Throne of Scotland, 1290= =E2=80=931296: An Edition of the Record Sources for the Great Cause*, 2 vol=
s (1978), vol ii p 140, and in Foedera vol i/part II p 776.

And also in the same order (but with Ada as Alda) in 'Annales Londonienses'=
, see *Chronicles of the Reigns of Edward I and Edward II*, edited by Willi=
am Stubbs, 2 vols (1882=E2=80=931883), vol i p 126 ("Ranulphus comes Cestri= =C3=A6 habuit quatuor sorores: primogenita nomine Matillda [sic] fuit despo= nsata comiti David ... Matillda primogenita habuit filium quemdam nomine Jo= hannem qui [habuit] comitatum Cestri=C3=A6, et quatuor filias, Margaretam, = Isabellam, Matilldam et Aldam.")

Peter Stewart

--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
* Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)