British freewomen : $b Their historical privilege — John Shaqi
British freewomen : $b Their historical privilegeStopes, C. C. (Charlotte Carmichael)
History
British freewomen : $b Their historical privilege
Stopes, C. C. (Charlotte Carmichael)
Women -- Great Britain; Women -- History
IN Selden’s “Titles of Honour,” iii., 890, he says, “Of feminine titles
some are immediately created in women, some are communicated by their
husbands, others are transmitted to them from their ancestors, and some
also are given them as consequents only of the dignity of their husbands
and parents.” Of “immediate creation” he gives the example of Margaret,
Countess of Norfolk, created by Richard II. Duchess of Norfolk, wherein
the investiture is mentioned by the patent to be by putting on her the
cap of honour “recompensatio meritorum.” Henry VIII. created Anne Boleyn
Marchioness of Pembroke. James I. created Lady Mary Compton the Countess
of Buckingham in her husband’s lifetime, without permitting him to share
the honour. He also created Lady Finch, first Viscountess of Maidstone,
and afterwards Countess of Winchilsea, limiting inheritance to heirs of
her body.
Anne Bayning, wife of James Murray, was created Viscountess Bayning of
Foxley in 1674. Several titles have been granted for discreditable
causes, too few for “recompensatio meritorum.” Men that were merely rich
have been made peers. Women that have been truly noble have not been
made Noble by Letters Patent. The Baroness Burdett Coutts is the only
modern example I can recal.
The titles that women received from their husbands were doubtless
intended more as an honour to their husbands than to themselves, though
they carried, at times, considerable privileges along with them. They
bore them as widows until their death, sometimes with the full honours
and powers their husbands had borne.
There are some curious cases of titles being _assigned_. Randol, Earl of
Chester and Lincoln, granted the Earldom of Lincoln to his sister, the
Lady Hawise de Quency. She afterwards granted the title to John de Lacy,
who had married her daughter Margaret, a grant confirmed by the King in
a charter, limiting the inheritance to the heirs of Margaret.
I have already noted the two limitations of a daughter’s inheritance of
property. The same affected titles. But having inherited, she became
endowed with every privilege to the full; and every duty was exacted of
her to the utmost.
=Women paid Homage.=—In spite of many careless remarks to the contrary,
women paid homage. “John, heir of the Devereux, died under age; his
sister Joane, making proof of her age, and doing her homage, had Livery
of the Lands of her Inheritance” (2 Ric. II., Dugdale, 117).
The summons to Ladies as well as to Lords for aids to the King was “de
fide et homagio.”
It is true that at some periods widows did not pay Homage for the lands
of their deceased husbands; but neither then did men pay Homage for the
lands of their deceased wives, holding only by “the Courtesy of
England.” “Because if Homage be given, it might never return to the
lawful heir” (“Statutes of the Realm, Lands held by Courtesy,” vol. i.,
p. 220).
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account