Marriage of John of Gaunt to Katherine Swynford
The marriage of John of Gaunt, son of King Edward III to Katherine Swynford on 13th January 1396 was unannounced and rather controversial.
John of Gaunt’s role within government
John was a son of King Edward III, he had acted as regent in England during his father’s absences in France and also for his eldest brother, The Black Prince, in Gascony. At the succession of his nephew, Richard II, he was excluded from holding an official role but remained highly significant and was known as a senior advisor to the young King.
John of Gaunt meets Katherine Swynford
Gaunt’s first wife was Blanche of Lancaster. Blanche was his third cousin, daughter of Henry of Grosmont, the first Duke of Lancaster. One of Blanche’s Ladies in Waiting was Katherine, daughter of Sir Payn Roelt, who at the time was married to Sir Hugh Swynford. When Blanche died in 1368, Katherine Swynford was appointed as Governess to the children of John and Blanche: the future King Henry IV among them.
Katherine Swynford as mistress to John of Gaunt
John then made a diplomatic marriage, in 1369, to Constance of Castile. Through this he would press a claim for the Castilian throne. Katherine’s husband died in 1371. The widow continued to work for John of Gaunt and soon she became his mistress. Between 1373 and 1379 Katherine bore four children who were acknowledged as being John of Gaunt’s children.
The relationship between John and Katherine posed problems at court. She was being shown favour, the Duke’s wife was not being treated properly. Following the death of both his father and the Black Prince, pressure grew on Gaunt to end his relationship with Katherine Swynford. In 1381 he did so, renouncing her and resuming a more appropriate relationship with his wife.
Marriage of John of Gaunt to Katherine Swynford
John, however, maintained discreet contact with Katherine. Following the death of Constance in 1394, the Duke once again turned to his mistress and mother of his illegitimate children. This time, he married her. Due to his rank John of Gaunt should have asked for the Kings permission to do so. He did not, which led to legal issues. A Papal Bull was sought to give retrospective permission for the marriage, granted in September of 1396. In February 1397, a full 13 months after the marriage had happened, King Richard II issued a Royal Patent. This patent acknowledged the marriage, recognised the children that the couple had prior to the marriage and legitimised them as sons of the Duke and bestowed upon children of the pair the family name, Beaufort.
The relationship between John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford did, however, include royal succession. It is through this line that the house of Tudor lay claim to the throne.
Recommended Link
I thought the Richard II patent did not include the barring from the Royal succession and that this was scrawled in later by Henry IV. This meant that as it was not ratified by Parliament it was not legally recognised. I may be wrong but I do seem to recall this from elsewhere.
Is it accurate that the patent issued by Richard III at the time of Gaunt’s marriage to Swynford excluded their children and their children’s descendants from the Royal succession? I don’t think so
I have read that Richard II’s patent mentioned no such condition. Later, after Gaunt and Swynford had both died, and Gaunt’s son by his first marriage had usurped the throne and become Henry IV, John Beaufort, Earl of Somerset, son of Gaunt and Swynford, asked his half brother Henry IV for a copy of the patent which had legitimized him and his Beaufort siblings.
Henry IV did so, but before providing the patent, he added a codicil barring the Beaufort and their descendants from inheriting the throne. This was his act and his alone, and it occurred some years after the original patent.
It’s easy to see why he would do this. Other than his Beaufort half brothers, his living siblings and half siblings were all female and thus less of a threat to his line than were the three male Beauforts, so he took advantage of what he saw as a loophole. However, it’s very questionable that a King had the right, by himself, to amend an Act of Parliament that way.
It’s significant because Henry VII’s sole line of descent from Edward III and John of Gaunt was through John Beaufort Earl of Somerset, and to this day some people still say he had no right to the throne because they erroneously believe that the Beauforts were legitimized “on the condition” that they and their descendants were barred from the throne. If Henry IV’s codicil was illegal, as many believe it to have been, Henry VIi had every right.
It isn’t accurate that the Beauforts were excluded by the Royal Patent or by Parliament at the time of its issue, they could inherit all titles and lands as if legitimate and they were not barred by Parliament from the royal dignity. This has been disproved by Nathen Amin who wrote the first full length biography of them. What he discovered was that sometime later, during the reign of Henry iv the rolls were amended and the words “excepting the royal dignity” added, without the Act being read and legally amended. They were not there at the time of Richard ii and they were not originally excluded.