Dear Mr Everingham,

Worry not about your concerns over scepticism - it is always healthy to be circumspect about information that lacks a thoroughly robust pedigree (if you will excuse the pun!). As far as proving a descent from the Barons Everingham, I have no difficulty whatsoever. However, proving that one is entitled to claim an ancient Barony is another matter and somewhat more difficult.

Who am I, you ask? My full name is 'David Alexander Richard Waterton-Anderson' and my descent from the Everinghams comes through my mother's family - the Watertons. Until recently, publications concerning themseves with the abeyancy of the Barony of Everingham (Burkes 'Extinct & Dormant Peerages' - Banks 'Baronatum Anglicana' - Cockaynes 'The Complete Peerage' - etc., etc.,) give little information about the part that the Watertons played in this mediaeval scenario.

It is without question that the Barony of Everingham fell into 'abeyance' (not extinction as you put it) between the two daughters of Sir William de Everingham of Skinningrove who was the only son of the 2nd & last Baron (Adam). This is where my claim begins, as the last Baron had two (some say three) daughters (Joan & Margaret) both from whom I also descend. Sir William had his first daughter Joan in 1363; his second Katherine in 1366, and his only son in 1368. On the 16th August 1369, Sir William died in the lifetime of his father Adam. Sadly, his infant son of two years of age, died in 1370, again in the lifetime of Adam his grandfather. On the 8th February 1370/71 Adam died leaving Joan and Katherine his heirs, between whom the barony of Everingham fell into abeyance. Having been created by writ of summons to Parliament on 4th March 1309, the title did not have any limitations and was known as 'a barony in fie' which can descend through the female line. In this period, all legal precedence was in favour of sons according to their chronological dates of birth, but females did not have the same legal status as men and did not enjoy any precedence as far as age was concerned. This meant that a legal hiatus was created in which it was not possible to say (legally) which heiress might be able to claim the barony and a sort of 'stalemate' ensued. This is not an unusual situation in the history of the Peerage and there are countless examples of such a situation.

Forgive me if I don't qualify all my statements but it might be easier to just state the facts as I know them to be and we might be able to address the issue of proofs at a later date.

Katherine, the younger daughter, married John, son of Thomas de Etton of Gilling Castle in Yorkshire. They had a son Miles (who died in his father's lifetime) who produced only four daughters, with no son. Thus, John de Etton became the last of his line and his properties and estates went eventually to his collateral heirs, the Fairfaxes of Gilling, from whom I also descend. Miles' daughter Anne, married Robert Rowcliffe and they too are my ancestors.

Joan de Everingham the elder daughter of Sir William, married firstly, Sir William Ellis (or Ellys) of Kiddal in Yorkshire and had a son Robert and a daughter Agnes. this Agnes married Sir John Poucher; whose heiress married John sothill of Sothill; whose heiress married Sir Marmaduke Constable; who was the progenitor of the Constable-Maxwells of Everingham Park. There is no solid evidence that the son Robert Ellis ever married and certainly he was living at Methley with his mother and her 2nd husband in the middle of the 15th century. One notice of him has him notated as "an idiot." In contemporary situations, this usually meant that he was "Downes Syndrome, or that he was not altogether fully fit with some incapacity or other. Notwithstanding this, in such circumstances (given there were no other claimants) he was undoubtedly the heir male of Adam de Everingham the last Baron.

However, Joan remarried after the death of her first husband in October 1391, to Sir Robert, son & heir of Robert Waterton of Waterton & Methley. There was quite a difference in their ages, but Joan was a great prize and marriage in those days was more about political alliances than anything else. This union produced another son, another Sir Robert Waterton who became, at the death of his half-brother Robert Ellis on 17th March 1463/4, the 'de facto' heir male of the last Baron Everingham. From this Robert, the descent to my mother and Uncle is quite straightforward.

Why none of the Watertons claimed the Barony is wrapped up in the political machinations of the time. The Wars of the Roses were in full swing and there were also attempts by the husband (Lionel Lord Welles) of Jane, the daughter of Joan and Robert, to seize the properties and estates. Plus, it is not until later times when it becomes clear that the current generations enjoy descent from the 2nd Baron through several different lines (which all add the the strength of the claim), has it been possible to mount a credible claim to have the Barony brought back out of abeyance.

So, in a nutshell as they say, you have the story as it has panned out over the centuries. If you would let me have your regular address, I shall dispatch some further reading for you to consider. I hope this diatribe has been of interest to you.

Yours ever, ........... Lord Everingham.

Back to Family Title Page