The earl of Warwick and George duke of Clarence are anchored outside Calais harbour after fleeing England with the countess of Warwick, duchess of Clarence and Anne Nevill. John Wenlock sends word that they should not try to land in Calais. Isobel duchess of Clarence gives birth to her first child, a boy, who is either stillborn or dies within hours. He is buried at sea. Her father sends to Calais for wine for her, as it was believed to have strengthening qualities.

  1. Ruth Crumpton says:

    Can I ask where did you find evidence that this child was a boy? I’m rather new at this – all I can find on-line are statements that the child was a girl named Anne. Some give thepeerage.com as their source and that site gives Alison Weir’s Britain’s Royal Families as it’s source. I have no idea what her source is (or even if she gives one) so if you have a different primary source I’d be very grateful to be pointed at it.

    Thank you.

    • anevillfeast says:

      The misconception the child was a girl seems to come from reference in one of the chronicles to ‘a child, Anne’ being aboard that ship. Which there was, of course – Anne Nevill. There’s mention of a burial at sea but not a christening, so it’s doubtful Isobel’s baby lived long enough to be given a name. I shall have to dig for the source that identifies the child as male.

      • Ruth Crumpton says:

        Interesting. I did find this http://www.ancestors-genealogy.com/webb/GEORGE%20PLANTAGENET.htm today – it gives George’s children as including a “son” born at sea in 1470 but I have heard that ancestors.genealogy is not always to be believed and there’s no source listed on-site that I can see.

        This was of course almost exactly 9 months after the marriage so unless she became pregnant VERY quickly, the baby was premature. If there was no baptism at all then that would imply a stillbirth as if the child showed any sign of life at all then someone would have performed a baptism. No baptism is quite tragic as it would leave Isabel and George believing their child would not enter Heaven.

      • anevillfeast says:

        Ruth, I never rely on online genealogies.

  2. anevillfeast says:

    Ruth, my information comes via a reliable secondary source. When I come across the information again I will let you know. It most decidedly did *not* come from an online genealogy!
    I have no doubt the infant was baptised. What he didn’t have was a christening (which I imagine would have been as lavish as the family could manage, in the circumstances) with its multiple opportunities for someone to record things, such as the baby’s name.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s