Euphemia de Brus - Uncertain children

Since the nonMedlands children have to do with a different connection, I would say unknown partner. Unless this is Euphemia Stewart.

Are we disconnecting Euphemia Stewart from Patrick? So far I think we should?

N.N. created.

Profile currently reads:

[Euphemia Stewart Euphemia Stewart] was previously thought in peerages to have been the wife of [Patrick ll de Dunbar, 5th/6th Earl of Dunbar Patrick, Earl of Dunbar]. She is now thought to be [Euphemia de Brus, countess of Dunbar Eupheme de Brus].

This is a placeholder profile for children seen of his with an unconfirmed mother. If she can be shown to be the same as Euphemia, we will merge. If the children are disproved, they should be detached.

*Robert Dunbar
*Thomas Dunbar
* Isabel de Dunbar m 1) Roger FitzJohn, of Warkworth 2) ) Sir Simon Baard (Bayard)
* Ada de Dunbar
* Agnes Dunbar m Christell de Seton

Current research on the Dunbars

*MacEwen, Andrew. A Clarification of the Dunbar Pedigree. The Genealogist, 9(2) 1988: [http://marshall.3utilities.com:8000/DISK%201/genealogy/refs/books/M... PDF]

This is an interesting thread and the whole Walter story is for that matter or story of the Walters.

In a related thread, James Bland . I realized that I was descended through a likely spurious situation and am in the process of remedying the 1st Unknown wife of William Bland Sr. and his second wife Catherine Kay. Going to check out the Margaret Harrison suggestion @Erica Howton posed. However, I am more deeply entrenched amongst the Brus lines on a different branch just not direct to Euphemia. She is like a 1st cousin 22 times removed now through those that hail from Annandale. Again, very interesting. Thanks for trying to get it right.

I think this proves Eufemia de Brus as mother of Isabel and vice versa.

https://www.geni.com/documents/view?doc_id=6000000172816247147

If you have the chance to read the entire article (its a bad xerox), please do. From what I’m picking out so far, it’s logical and evidence supported.

http://marshall.3utilities.com:8000/DISK%201/genealogy/refs/books/M...

In which case, this: *** (A) Patrick, 7th Earl of Dunbar (b c1213, d 24.08.1289) m. (1242) Cecilia (dau of John (Fraser ?))

becomes a more plausible scenario than "Cecelia daughter of John FitzRobert de Stokes". (Especially since there is no evidence for a Cecelia among his children.)

On the other hand Patrick II de Dunbar and Eufeme de Brus would probably have needed a Papal dispensation, but since they weren't related by blood there was no reason not to grant one. (It's that Canon law thing again - the daughter of your stepmother "is" your sister. That one didn't go away until the Reformation and subsequent loosening of Canon restrictions.)

In reading it, I feel I need a graphic organizer to sort it out, but it seems to be a good critique of sources and why some things work and make sense and some do not.

The tree worked for me. :)

I made a Placeholder Dunbar for the miscellaneous Dunbars.

The evidence for Thomas Dunbar is just Stirnet so far, we would need more.

Ada & Robert are probably time traveling.

Same source cited to prove Eufeme de Brus married secondly Patrick (6) de Dunbar, also "proves" Cecelia daughter of John to be the daughter of John FitzRobert de Stokes with a bit of specious reasoning about the family not using settled surnames yet (but surnames *weren't* entirely stable yet, just look at the Fitzalans/Stewarts).

A supposed "Cecelia FitzJohn" would have been related to Patrick (7) de Dunbar by the marriage of her brother Roger to Patrick's sister Isabel - and this was Just Not Done. (This is one of the stickier points of Canon law, and was completely dispensed with after the Reformation, so it's not surprising that most people don't realize it *is* a problem.)

It *might* have been gotten around by arranging both marriages at the same time, but the point is still highly arguable, and if any of the parties involved ever wanted out of their marriage, it would be "consanguinity open and shut, annulment granted".

Private User, how did all these ancestors of mine think it was cool to marry 1st or 2nd cousins ? Just makes me shudder and wonder how we have a brain at all. I thank heavens every day that my father found a bride from Finland. :-)

I can’t get the inquest to load on the iPad, maybe someone else will have better luck.

* People of Medieval Scotland, 1093–1314 - William Comyn of Kilbride https://www.poms.ac.uk/record/person/9742/ “ Inquest concerning plea between Simon Baard and Isabel his wife, and William Comyn and Euphemia, his wife” [https://www.poms.ac.uk/record/factoid/47513/ factoid]

Also not sure on proper naming for “before surname” Euphemia de Clavering

The wording of the inquest is here as well as these comments.

http://powys.org/pl_tree/ps16/ps16_014.html

In spite of MichaelAnne's firm statement that Euphemia was not the dau. of Roger and Isabella, John Ravilous is saying that she was (s.g.m. 4 Nov 2004, "Magna Carta line of Euphemia wife of William Comyn..."):

"Two items that support the present placement of the latter Euphemia (__) (Comyn) Murray as daughter of Isabel de Dunbar and Roger fitz John:

" 1. Isabel's brother Earl Patrick was alive at the time of the dispute between Euphemia and William Comyn on one part, and Isabel de Dunbar and her 2nd husband Simon Baard of the 2nd part. It seems illogical for Isabel to have been placed as guardian for the minor Euphemia as to the castle given her by the elder [Euphemia de Brus, countess of Dunbar Euphemia de Brus, Countess of Dunbar], UNLESS Isabel was in fact Euphemia's mother, and not her aunt.

" 2. In discussing these finds with Andrew MacEwen last week, he stated that Euphemia was the daughter of Isabel de Dunbar and Roger fitz John."

Here the entire discussion at soc,gen.med

*[https://soc.genealogy.medieval.narkive.com/I3eoYHeH/magna-carta-lin... Magna Carta line of Eufemia (was Eufemia wife of William Comyn of Kilbride)] (2004)

Wikitree https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Clavering-112

Cecilia, wife of Patrick lll Dunbar. Details supporting her as daughter pod John "of Warkworth" FitzRobert de Clavering.

I’m convinced Fraser is spurious - just a ruled out guess.

“ It appears that this parentage we known at least as early as 2004 from this post in the Newsgroup soc.genealogy.medieval by John Ravilious, and later confirmed by Douglas Richardson. It appears that it was first discovered by the late Andrew B. W. MacEwen.”

Susanne, the Church didn't approve of such closely related marriages either (the ban used to run out to third cousins at least, and *always* included relatives-by-marriage), but they found there was a profitable sideline in dispensations allowing them.

By the 15th or 16th century royalty and high nobility could have dispensations almost for the asking (Richard then Duke of Gloucester got one to marry his first cousin once removed - but even he didn't dare ask to marry his sister-in-law, which Anne Neville also was).

As for the Spanish. once they got the Papacy in their pocket, it was deuces wild - the end result being Carlos II, the product of so many first-cousin and uncle-niece marriages that he was more inbred than if his parents had been opposite-sex clones. (The Spanish having the Papacy in their pocket was also why Henry VIII couldn't get an annulment from Catherine of Aragon and had to go through the whole megillah of breaking with the Church of Rome so he could marry Anne Boleyn.)

Yep, Private User. I really enjoy the history we get on this site. I think in the southern colonies, marriages between kin were as much about keeping property and wealth in the family in many cases. Then there was the availability of potential mates. It was a matter of survival, I guess. My father used to say that members of such and such a family would marry someone if they had to marry their cousin.

https://www.geni.com/path/Cheley-Hokanson+is+related+to+Euphemia-de...

This is really quite fascinating thank you for making this discussion!

It’s like a history lesson in a bottle.
And what makes it even MORE interesting is that ..... it’s your direct ancestors!
Fascinating!
Thank you!!!

Private User, they are our ancestors, too.

Mmmmmmyeahhh!!!!

At least until they’re not Ha Ha Ha Ha LOL

Just get your screenshots while you can get them I guess smiles...

At least the DNA doesn’t change

Smiles at you cousin!....from a Red white and blue blooded Lady of American decent..

Did you ever see that movie with Mickey Rourke in it called angel heart and the scene where he’s crying I know who I am I know who I am I hope this isn’t like that but sometimes climbing around in the branches of these family trees of mine there are some really terrifying stories of my direct ancestors and all of their lives in Times and how it affected world history it’s just I don’t know can’t even explain it sometimes how weird it is weird and cool and scary all at the same timeSometimes

Like here’s one that’s really wild on my mother side I am directly descended from King Harold fair hair and on my father side I am directly descended from King Harold fair hairs right hand Man Rognvald!!!

I can see several places in the family tree where my parents bloodlines have collided and those collisions have resulted in world history events... And it’s not just in one or two places throughout time....

But I’m late I have figured out that this has happened many times throughout history in my family tree...Sometimes I think I need a therapist just to get my head to wrap all around it LOL big smiles

Another one is that I am related to Robert the Bruce and to William Wallace on one side of my family and on the other I am related to Comryn!

I am also On another branch directly descended from the evil king who ordered William Wallace executed!!!

I am also related to ann askew!

And Catherine par and anne Boylen and Henry the eighth...

And Catherine of Aragon and Margaret Plantagenet De pole countess of Salisbury who was put to death by Henry the eighth....