If we put together what has been published about the mistresses of Edward
IV, we may get an interesting picture.
Cahiers de Saint Louis, page 880, gives Edward IV
by Elisabeth/Elizabeth Waite
3.Elisabeth/Elizabeth, she married her cousin Thomas, 4th Lord Lumley
(he wasn't a Lord Lumley!!!)
The Plantagenet Encyclopedia, General Editor Elizabeth Hallam, page 160.
Arthur Plantagenet, died 1542. Illegitimate son of Edward IV of England and
Elizabeth Lucy, daughter of Thomas Wayte, a minor Hampshire gentleman. Their
affaire lasted from around Edward IV's accession in 1461 to his marriage to
Elizabeth Woodville in 1464.
The Complete Peerage Volume VIII page 63.
Elizabeth suo jure Baroness Lisle, married (2) 12 November 1511
Arthur Plantagenet, illegitimate son of Edward IV. His mother's name is
unknown; by some said to be the "Lady Elizabeth Lucy" by others the
notorious Jane Shore, and by others one Elizabeth Waite, he himself being at
first known as Arthur Waite.
Blood Royal, by Charles Mosley, pages65 and 166
He gives Edward IV nine legitimate children whereas Cahiers de Saint Louis
gives as a tenth legitimate child Brigitte 1480-1517.
One less legitimate child but one more illegitimate one. However,
uncertainty is certainly indicated.
Edward IV is said to have had (a) a bastard son (Edward, of Wigmore, died
young 1468) by Eleanor, daughter of the 4th Earl of Ormonde.
====somehow I doubt this one, as wasn't Eleanor Butler supposedly engaged to
Edward IV? An engagement (if there was one) which should render the children
by Elizabeth Woodville illegitimate?
(b) a bastard daughter (Elizabeth married Thomas Lumley and had issue) by a
woman referred to as "Lady Elizabeth Lucy" presumably wife of Sir William
Lucy who died in 1492 and (c) illegitimately either by Elizabeth (not
Jane) Shore (wife of William Shore, a London merchant) on whom he fathered a
bastard daughter Grace (living 1492, Or Elizabeth Waite;
===the link between Elizabeth Waite and what follows is, to me, not very
4e.Arthur, surname originally Waite or Wayte, subsequently Plantagenet, born circa 1470.
What have we got from this? That Arthur was known as Arthur Waite, may give
an indication that his mother was Elizabeth Waite/Wayte. Elizabeth Hallam's
book makes this Elizabeth Waite a Mrs. Elizabeth Lucy. The Complete Peerage
makes this Mrs. Elizabeth a Lady Elizabeth Lucy. "Blood Royal" makes Lady
Elizabeth Lucy also mother of Elizabeth (Lumley).
Elizabeth Hallam indicates as years of possible birth of the child(ren) of
Edward IV by Elizabeth Waite as about 1461 till 1464/5. "Blood Royal"
guesses that Arthur was born about 1470 and Richardson guesses "say 1475".
Richardson wants him to be as young as possible, because Arthur didn't marry
If Arthur was born in 1463 he would have been about 48 when marrying,
if he was born in 1470 he would have been 41, if born in 1475 he would have
been about 36.
However, we most not forget that he was in 1511 "only" the bastard brother
of the Queen, and also he married the widow of a disgraced man, disgraced
enough to be decapitated. And this, in my opinion, makes the age of Arthur,
when marrying, irrelevant, he could well have been 48 as easy as only 36.
For the children of Thomas Lumley and Elizabeth "Plantagenet", Richardson
seems to follow Burke's Extinct Peerage,
one son, Richard (Lord Lumley)
and three daughters
Anne (wife of Robert Ogle)
Sibyl (wife of William Hilton
Elizabeth (wife of Robert Cresswell)
Then follows a weird observation "Descendants (not traced)". Whose
descendants? Or, not traced by whom? Especially as earlier in his message he
notes that Gary Boyd Roberts indicated that there are American descendants
of Elizabeth Lumley.
Cahiers de Saint Louis, which Richardson has learned to appreciate, gives
the same three daughters but instead of one son, gives four sons. The last
son, Roger, is important as he is an ancestor of Prince Charles (See Paget
That Richardson's remark "Descendants (not traced)" is ludicrous can also be
shown by the known acestry of just three of the children of Thomas and
Elizabeth Lumley (let's skip Roger, he has been shown to have descendants
till the present):
he is an ancestor of the later Earls of Scarborough, HRH Richard, Duke of
Gloucester, Dukes of Buccleuch, Dukes of Northumberland, Marquess of
Exeter, Marquess of Linlithgow, Marquess of Zetland
she is ancestor of HM the Queen, Lady Diana Spencer, Sarah Ferguson, Dukes
of Atholl, Bedford, Northumberland, Richmond, Earls of Harewood and Warwick
she is ancestor of HM the Queen, Lady Diana Spencer, Dukes of Abercorn,
Buccleuch, Devonshire, Marlborough, Westminster, Northumberland and the last
Duke of Leeds.
Hope this is of some interest and helps.
As always, best wishes
Leo van de Pas