Talk:Earl of Devon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The numbering is probably like his:

First Creation:

1. Balwin de Reviers, created about 1141, died 1155, succeeded by his son:

2. Richard de Reviers, died 1162, succeeded by his son:

3. Baldwin de Reviers, died 1188, succeeded by his brother:

4. Richard de Reviers, died in or before 1193, succeeded by his uncle:

5. William de Reviers, died 1217, succeeded by his grandson:

6. Baldwin de Reviers, died 1245, succeeded by his son:

7. Baldwin de Redviers, died 1262, succeeded by his sister:

8. Isabella de Redviers, died 1293, succeeded by her cousin:

9. Hugh de Courtenay, great-great-grandson of the 5th Earl, declared Earl in 1335 (this is sometimes reckoned as a new creation in tail male), died 1340, succeeded by his son:

10. Hugh de Courtenay, died 1377, succeeded by his grandson:

11. Edward de Courtenay, died 1419, succeeded by his son:

12. Hugh de Courtenay, died 1422, succeeded by his son:

13. Thomas de Courtenay, died 1458, succeeded by his son:

14. Thomas Courtenay, beheaded & attainted 1461.

15. John Courtenay, brother of 14th Earl, restored 1470, forfeited & killed 1471.

Second Creation:

1. Humphrey Stafford, created May 1469, beheaded & forfeited August 1469.

Third Creation:

1. Edward Courtenay, great-great-grandson of the 10th (or 2nd) Earl, attainted in 1484, created Earl of Devonshire in 1485, with remainder to the heirs male of his body, and later the same year the attainder was reversed and his honours restored (possibly including an earldom supposedly created in 1335), died 1509, and his titles forfeited by his son’s attainder.

Fourth Creation:

1. William Courtenay, son of the previous Earl, attainted 1504, attainder reversed & created Earl of Devon in May 1511, but died in June 1511 before he had been invested, succeeded in 1512 by his son:

2. Henry Courtenay, obtained a reversal of his father’s attainder and succeeded as Earl of Devon in 1512, attainted 1538, beheaded 1539.

Fifth Creation:

1. Edward Courtenay, son of the previous Earl, created 1553 with remainder to his heirs male whatsoever (so determined in 1831), died 1556, theoretically succeeded by his sixth cousin once removed:

2. William Courtenay, great-great-great-great-great-great-grandson of the 10th (or 2nd) Earl, killed 1557, his son:

3. William Courtenay, died 1630, his son:

4. Francis Courtenay, died 1638, his son:

5. William Courtenay, created Baronet 1644, died 1702, his grandson:

6. William Courtenay, 2nd Baronet, his son:

7. William Courtenay, 3rd Baronet, created Viscount Courtenay on 6 May 1762, and died on 16 May 1762, his son:

8. William Courtenay, 2nd Viscount, died 1788, his son:

9. William Courtenay, 3rd Viscount, declared 9th Earl of Devon in 1831 (Sharpe’s Genealogical Peerage, dated 1830, explained: “William, Eleventh Earl of Devon, descended from Hugh, second Earl, succeeded to the Earldom on the judgment of the House of Lords that he had made out his claim, 15 March 1831, as William, Eleventh and Present Earl. The Earl, although only the eleventh of his family who has borne the title, is the eighteenth in hereditary descent; or the twentieth, taking in the reversals of attainder in the short lived restoration of King Henry VI, 1470. He is the ninth under the patent, so long dormant, of 1553, under which he has established his claim”), died 1835, succeeded by his cousin:

10. William Courtenay, died 1859, succeeded by his son:

11. William Reginald Courtenay, died 1888, succeeded by his son:

12. Edward Baldwin Courtenay, died 1891, succeeded by his uncle:

13. Henry Hugh Courtenay, died 1904, succeeded by his grandson:

14. Charles Pepys Courtenay, died 1927, succeeded by his brother:

15. Henry Hugh Courtenay, died February 1935, succeeded by his brother:

16. Frederick Leslie Courtenay, died June 1935, succeeded by his son:

17. Charles Christopher Courtenay Courtenay, died 1998, succeeded by his son:

18. Hugh Rupert Courtenay, born 1942.

Sixth Creation:

1. Charles Blount, created “Comes Devon” in 1603, died 1606, title extinct.

Seventh Creation:

1. William Cavendish, created “Comes Devon” in 1618, died 1626, succeeded by his son:

2. William Cavendish, died 1628, succeeded by his son:

3. William Cavendish, died 1689, succeeded by his son:

4. William Cavendish, created “Dux Devon” in 1694, died 1707, succeeded by his son:

5. William Cavendish, 2nd Duke & 5th Earl, died 1729, succeeded by his son:

6. William Cavendish, 3rd Duke & 6th Earl, died 1755, succeeded by his son:

7. William Cavendish, 4th Duke & 7th Earl, died 1764, succeeded by his son:

8. William Cavendish, 5th Duke & 8th Earl, died 1811, succeeded by his son:

9. William George Spencer Cavendish, 6th Duke & 9th Earl, died 1858, succeeded by his cousin:

10. William Cavendish, 7th Duke & 10th Earl, died 1891, succeeded by his son:

11. Spencer Compton Cavendish, 8th Duke & 11th Earl, died 1908, succeeded by his nephew:

12. Victor Christian William Cavendish, 9th Duke & 12th Earl, died 1938, succeeded by his son:

13. Edward William Spencer Cavendish, 10th Duke & 13th Earl, died 1950, succeeded by his son:

14. Andrew Robert Buxton Cavendish, 11th Duke & 14th Earl, died 2004, succeeded by his son:

15. Peregrine Andrew Morny Cavendish, 12th Duke & 15th Earl, born 1944.

Hovite 09:04, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Hmm.

Surely the creation of the Dukedom of Devonshire shouldn't be listed here?

So, the article text should be:

... or, if taking the 1335 transfer as the second creation:

Is this right, or am I making a complete mess of it?

James F. (talk) 13:24, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

You look to be right - this makes sense out of the 9th Earl thing... john k 15:54, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The following additional comments may be of interest:

The sources for the notes that commenced this discussion were:

Sharpe, John (incorrectly dated 1830) Sharpe’s Genealogical Peerage of the British Empire. London.

Gibbs, Vicary & others (1910-98) The Complete Peerage, 2nd edition. London.

Fryde, E. B & others (1986) Handbook of British Chronology, 3rd edition. London.

Samuels, William S. (1980) Burke’s Peerage and Baronetage, 105th edition, 4th impression. London.

Supposed creation in 1335: It seems likely that Hugh de Courtenay simply inherited the earldom from his third cousin.

Burke’s Peerage says: “HUGH, EARL OF DEVON, who succeeded also to the great Honour of Plympton in Devon, 1293, as heir of the family of Reviers, Earls of Devon 1141-1293; was summoned to Parliament as Lord Courtenay 1299-1334; and on claiming the third penny of the county of Devon, was declared Earl of Devon by letters patent, 22 Febuary 1335, following upon due investigation”.

The Handbook of British Chronology lists this Hugh de Courtenay as “9. Hugh de Courtenay, cousin & heir; born 1275-76, styled from 22 February 1335; died 23 December 1240”.

The Complete Peerage says: “He succeeded his father 28 February 1292 in the Okehampton estate, being then 16 years old, and succeeded his abovenamed cousin Isabel 10 November 1293, in such of the Reviers estates as had not been alienated, and (possibly) as de jure EARL OF DEVON, though not so recognised till more than 40 years later”.

On the other hand, Sharpe’s Genealogical Peerage said “representing to King Edward III that the claim which he had inherited to the ‘tertium denarium’ was refused to be paid, because he was ‘no Earl’ was created (the line of Redvers having failed) EARL OF DEVON, 1335, and took his place on the bench as youngest Earl, but the following year was restored to the precendence of his maternal ancestors”.

A similar story is told by

Burke, Sir Bernard (1883) A Genealogical History of the Dormant, Abeyant, Forfeited, and Extinct Peerages of the British Empire.

which concludes: “The king immediately instituted an inquiry into the affair, and finding it as stated removed the difficulty by creating his lordship an earl”.

Numbering: The usual practice is that the numbering starts afresh with each new creation, but the various reference books do not always follow this simple rule.

Sharpe’s Genealogical Peerage called the first Courtenay earl “HUGH, FIRST EARL OF DEVON”, but seemed somewhat confused by the supposed dormancy, referring to the revived Earl thusly: “The Earl, although only the eleventh of his family who has borne the title, is the eighteenth in hereditary descent; or the twentieth, taking in the reversals of attainder in the short lived restoration of King Henry VI, 1470. He is the ninth under the patent, so long dormant, of 1553, under which he has established his claim”.

Burke’s Peerage ignored all the earls before 1553, and then numbered them from that creation onwards, referring to each of the imaginary earls during the supposed dormancy as “de jure nth Earl of Devon”.

The Complete Peerage used two different systems simultaneously: Roman numerals for each successive earl and Arabic numerals for the members of the same family, without regard to attainders and new creations. The Blount and Cavendish creations had a separate numbering with this justification:

“The Earldom of this County as enjoyed since 1603 (at which period, and for more than two centuries afterwards, the Earldom thereof enjoyed by the Courtenay family was considered extinct) is treated as ‘Devonshire’ (to distinguish it from the Courtenay Earldom) and is numbered (for the sake of clearness) as if the title were distinct. Two Earldoms of the same county (Devon) having (according to the decision in 1831) existed since the 17th century concurrently, this appears to be the best, though perhaps not the most logical, way of treating the junior one”.

The Handbook of British Chronology used a similar system, but this is only to be expected, because “The chief sources from which this compilation is taken are The Complete Peerage (1st and 2nd editions)”, except that they used Arabic numerals consecutively, using bold numbers to identify each new creation. Inevitably, they listed the Blount and Cavendish creations under “Devonshire”.

Supposed distinction between Devon and Devonshire:

Devon and Devonshire are alternative names for the same place. In reality, the Blount and Cavendish creations were new grants of an old title, then believed extinct, and in both cases (according to The Complete Peerage) the words used were “Comes Devon”. The Courtenay earl created in 1485 is referred to the Parliament Roll as “Devonshire” (again according to The Complete Peerage). It is a fact of history that duplicated titles occur. Other examples are the Barons Strange and the Earls of Mar. The original Baron Strange was created in 1299, but the title is now Baron Strange of Knokin, in order to distinguish it from Baron Strange, accidentally created in 1628, when the wrong man was summoned to Parliament. The Mar case is very confused, involving a confiscation and regrant, but the result is that there are now two Earldoms of Mar, one of which happens to be merged with the Earldom of Kellie.

The correct treatment of the Blount and Cavendish creations is to say something along the lines of “Although these were new grants of the old title, which was then believed extinct, and although the words used were ‘Comes Devon’, these later creations are usually referred to as ‘of Devonshire’ in order to avoid confusion with the subsequently revived Courtenay creation of 1553”.

---

But why is the creation of 1603 still the Seventh Creation? - --VM 16:49, 19 October 2005 (UTC)