Alice de Driby : Birth: ABT 1340. Death: 12 OCT 1412
Title: Ancestral Roots, Frederick Lewis Weis
Title: Plantagenet Ancestry, Second Edition, David Faris, 1999
Note: I don't know who this Amy Gaveston is, but neither *Complete Peerage* nor either of the current monographs on Piers Gaveston assign him a daughter of this name--at least not a legitimate daughter by Margaret de Clare. There is a short family tree of Piers' immediate relatives in one of the monographs and it may be verifiable from that that Piers had a sister or niece named Amy, but not until these postings have I ever seen him credited with a daughter of that name.
Piers' daughter Joan was b. in Feb. 1312 and d. at Amesbury 14 Jan. 1325 (N.S.)
according to *CP*.
Dear Brad and Ron:
Thank you for your good posts. Last year, after studying the available evidence, I proposed that Amy de Gaveston was an illegitimate daughter of Margaret de Clare. I presumed Amy was born in the five years that Margaret was a widow after Peter de Gaveston's death. I published my somewhat radical theory in Plantagenet Ancestry, 2nd edition, by David Faris.
In the new issue of Ken Finton's periodical, Plantagenet Connection, there is an interesting new article on Amy de Gaveston by Robert Todd. Mr. Todd agrees that Amy was an illegitimate child of Margaret de Clare, but he advances the theory that Amy was the product of an adulterous relationship which Margaret de Clare had during, not after, her marriage to Peter de Gaveston. Todd shows rather conclusively that Peter de Gaveston was out of the country in Scotland when Margaret de Clare conceived a female child born to her about 12 January 1312.
Having read the Todd article, I think it is a plausible explanation of the mysteries surrounding Amy de Gaveston. I also found the article interesting to read, as Todd shares details of Peter de Gaveston's life and relationship to King Edward II not commonly found in your average history books.
As for the 1334 fine which Brad mentioned, I don't believe that it proves that Amy de Gaveston was Peter de Gaveston's daughter. I know of a case in which a woman was born during the period of her mother's widowhood as a bastard, yet years later a deed was recorded in which she is identified as the daughter of mother's prior husband. If the same thing happened to Amy, it would explain why she might have been called Peter de Gaveston's daughter without actually having been his lawful issue. As the French say, "Plus ca change, plus ca meme!"
As for Amy's marriage date, the 1334 fine has all the earmarks of a marriage settlement which was common in that time period. I have seen many of these kinds of fines over the years. The 1334 fine was almost certainly recorded just previous to the marriage of Amy de Graveston to John de Driby.
I haven't seen the Underhill book which Brad mentions. However, I'm interested to read it, as the subject of the book, Elizabeth de Burgh, Lady of Clare, is a distant ancestress of mine. Elizabeth is one of the more interesting women of the English medieval period.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
RootsWeb.com is NOT responsible for the content of the GEDCOMs uploaded through the WorldConnect Program. The creator of each GEDCOM is solely responsible for its content.