The New Murrey and Blue blog

Some notes on the Vaughans of Tretower

,
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

If you fully understand the genealogy of the Vaughan family of Wales you are a better person than I. There were at least three branches, and probably more. I have come across the Vaughans of Hergest, a very interesting bunch; the Vaughans of Monmouth (see Sir Thomas Vaughan, executed 1483); and by no means least the Vaughans of Tretower who seem to have been fanatical Ricardian Yorkists who enjoyed themselves looting Brecon Castle at the time of the Buckingham rebellion.

Sir Roger Vaughan of Tretower (1410-1471) had a very large family of children. Some of these were born to Eva Coch, his mistress, the rest to his first wife, Denise (or Denys) Thomas. At some point after 17 December 1466 Roger married Margaret Audley as his second wife. Margaret was the widow of Richard Grey, Lord of Powys, and the daughter of James, Lord Audley by Alianore Holland, the daughter of Constance of York and Edmund Earl of Kent.

In 1471 Roger was captured by Jasper Tudor and executed (without any legal justification) at Chepstow. It becomes clear why the Vaughans were not among the Welsh families who worshipped the Tudors.

Roger’s second son, Sir Roger ‘of Porthaml‘ (1436-1514) married (in 1469) Joan Whitney, who was his stepmother’s niece, being the daughter of Constance Audley by Sir Robert Whitney. He had at least two children with her, who were, of course, descendants of Edmund of Langley. He and two of his brothers received pardon in 1486 for their part in resisting Henry VII. 

Subscribe to my newsletter

  1. mry4441 Avatar
    mry4441

    I believe the Vaughan family were descended from Ednyfed Fychan, Llewellyn ap Iorwerth’s Steward. I think the name Vaughan is an anglicisation of Fychan. If Owain Tudor was Edmund Tudor’s father then Henry VII is also descended from Ednyfed Fychan.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply
    1. amma19542019 Avatar
      amma19542019

      I appreciate that “if Owain Tudor was Edmund Tudor’s father” … I agree with G L Harriss on this one, there is ample room to surmise that dear Owain was not. Then again I would also like to think the Welsh deserve better than be saddled with that heinous wreck of a ‘family’ using the name Tewdwr!

      Recently I read that Sir Thomas Vaughan (exec. July 1483) may not have been quite the fine upstanding chivalrous knight I foolishly assumed he was – when Sir Thomas Browne was executed for his part in the seriously defense at the demented Siege of the Tower in 1460, (July at Tyburn) mostly the work of Lord Scales btw, his widow, Lady Eleanor Fitzalan, was promptly married to Vaughan a couple months later. He also was given the role as ‘protector’ of the widow and her (7) children by Browne, offering some 1000 pounds for the goods and chattels and was granted Sir Thomas’ lands for another 1000 with the intention that the lands would be divided between his sons. George, the heir, as with the other sons, found themselves excluded from their father’s inheritance (Vaughan would have had access to Eleanor’s own inheritance by courtesy of England – they had a daughter in 1462) but after her death in 1469 Vaughan was allowed to retain her lands, and those of the heirs. George did petition Parliament for his inheritance in 1472, but that was after the relationship was already in tatters with Vaughan and he threw his lot in with Warwick and Clarence 1468-71 hoping he’d see restitution from that side. As he was already part of Clarence’s affinity the younger Browne made the slick move back over to Edward when Clarence did, and was probably knighted by Clarence on the eve of Tewkesbury. He never did get restitution from Vaughan, who was tight with Edward, being the young Prince of Wales’ guardian, but he was placed in Edward’s own chamber, and favored in that way by 1479, and by 1480 achieved his father’s office of Sheriff of Kent.

      Typical of the bad blood that Richard would have to pay the price for, which he did not cause, the younger Browne, soon as he could in the October Rebellion of 1483, was easily led into that insurrection by the rebels of the southeast (John and Richard Guildford). I have wondered if the execution of Vaughan in July led George Browne to expect immediate restitution of his inheritance from Richard that summer and when it was not forthcoming foolishly allowed himself to join the Guildfords and Poynings? (John Guildford was caught and jailed for his part in the October rebellion and Richard was allegedly aconfidant of Reginald Bray, who had alerted him to the date and plans for the overthrow of King Richard but he escaped as too many of them managed to do) Richard Guildford’s daughter would later marry George Browne’s son Matthew; more should be done in researching the Guildfords’ and their roles in instigating the revolt in Kent and the southeast in 1483.

      A good if basic article on the Guildfords’s earlier anti-Yorkist revolt is found in Malcolm Mercer, “A Forgotten Kentish Rebellion, Sept-Oct 1470” Archaeologia Cantiana 122, p.143-52. When Richard found d himself in the middle of a dozen plots that summer in London 1483 I honestly do not think he had any idea how many of them had roots in unsettled bad blood from his brother’s reign!

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
      1. sighthound6 Avatar
        sighthound6

        Thank you. Another excellent example of Edward IV fiddling with inheritances, that historians generally think is a big ‘no no’ for medieval kings.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. amma19542019 Avatar
    amma19542019

    exactly! Somewhere someone should catalog a list of all of Edward’s peculiar issues with property and inheritance! The ghastly mess he saddled Richard with known as the Hungerford grant is so mind numbing obvious that his little brother was never going to get anything out of that cursed grant (Anne Sutton does a great job trying to untangle what was encumbered, what was in the hands of feoffees, what was already a piecemeal grant, oh it was a mess! Richard ended up negotiating with Lady Hungerford for Farleigh, honoring all her various charitable bequests, and escaping while he could! In the end Farleigh went to George, by 1473 or earlier, but I have no idea why). Edward’s worst habit was granting you something, then 6 months later taking it back, or swapping it for something else, or leaving Richard to hold properties, like the de Vere estates like a bag man for Edward, until Edward decided when he wanted them, I don’t think Richard ever actually lived in any of the de Vere properties, and one was used (Fowlmere) to finance a chantry for the fallen squires around him in 1471 – properties like that de Vere would not be able to get back later either.

    BTW, Vaughan did not need the Browne inheritance, he was wealthy enough to build a palace for the young Edward in Westminster for them to reside WITH his royal parents should they visit the boy so he was not lacking hefty financial rewards! I do wonder what else Richard knew about this Vaughan from the incident at Northampton – Stony Stratford that he did not hesitate in the least when he had Vaughan, Rivers and Grey arrested and then moved north – not that he had them executed on the spot, just out of further plots in and around London (yes yes, I am one of those people who is convinced that there were multiple plots on Richard’s life even before he managed to get to Northampton)!

    Like

    Reply
  3. More historic walks on Channel Five – murreyandblue

    […] in case of an invasion. Williams, who comes from Worcestershire and has the intriguing middle name Vaughan, has a natural feel for his […]

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to More historic walks on Channel Five – murreyandblue Cancel reply