ANGUS. 93 Agnes, or Elizabeth/ 4 ) 3rd da. of Alexander (Cojiyn), TCart, of BrcHAN* [S.] by Elizabeth, <la. of Roger (tie Qui.nty), Karl of Winchester. He d. the same year (1307) in which he had been sum. as an Karl, being seized of the Valley of Rede, the Castles of Hurbotel, Prndhoe, Alnwick. Sc., co. Northumberland, post mortem in which lie is styled Gilbcrtus de Umjmmvilt, alias Ditmfranvill, Comes tic Antgos, alias Dancyus, 1 Ed. II, in. 14, No. IS. His widow is said to have </. (1320), 3 Ed. Ill, at [Gilbert de Umfravill, who, as a and h. ap. of an Earl, was pro- bably in England stykd LORD UMFRAVILL, was, in 1290, questioned in Pari for striking an officer of the Crown. He m. Margaret, da. of Thomas de Clare. He d. v.])., s.p. (1303), 31 Ed. I.] under Qanyn Earl of Buchan [8.], was sum. to Pari, from 1331 till his decease, 1340, as ' Henrico de Bello Monte, Comiti de Boghan,' hut that his s. and h., John Beaumont, having lost the Buchan property in Scotland, was no longer sum. by the title of Buchan, but by that of Beaumont only." See " Courthope," p. 24. The remarks of Mr. Towusend "will be found in "Coll". Top. and Gen.," vii, 3S3, who adds (alluding to the manner in winch this peerage seems to have altogether ceased afterthe death of Earl Gilbert in 1381), that this case seems to countenance the idea " that the descent of ancient dignities in general depended chiefly upon the will of the Crown." The following remarks (made by Mr. J. Horace Hound on the above note) are subjoined — " Courtbope's view is evidently based on the ' Lords' Reports on the dignity of ;i Peer,' from which Ids argument is practically derived, and which were issued (1820-22) subsequent to Townsend's day. (See 1st Report, p. 432 ; 3rd Report, p. 116, 117.) The reports incline rightly to the view 'that those Earls, though summoned by the names of Earls, were really summoned as Barons of the Realm.' It may be added that the summonses were not addressed to them, as stated by Courthope, as ' Umfrevill* (sic), Comiti de Anggos,' but as ' l T mfnimvill, Comiti de Anegos ; ' and a more serious error is committed by Courthope [as also by 'Nicolas,' both of them following Dngdide's ' Summons '] in the dates of the writs ; Gilbert, the father, not having been sum. after the 20 Aug. 1307 [1 Ed. ], while Robert, his son, was first sum. on 19 Jan. 1307-S [1 Ed. II]. The father and son are also confused by a most careless error in the Lords' Report (iii. 171), where the writ of 2f> Ed. I is twice said to have been addressed to Robert (sic) de Umframville." With respect to this Earldom, and the summons, in 25 Ed. I, to Gilbert Umfravill as an Earl, there is in " Dugdale " (reference being made to Camden's Scotland) , the following statement ; " at which time, it is said, our Lawyers of England were somewhat startled, and refused in their breves and instruments to acknowledge him Earl, by reason that Angus was not within the Kingdom of England, until he had openly produced the King's Writ and warrant in the face of the Court, whereby he was summoned by that title." {') Her Christian name is somewhat uncertain, but of the marriage itself there is no doubt. Wyntoun, who is exceptionally accurate in genealogy, in his account of the Earls of Buchan, states (his spelling has been somewhat modernised in the quotation) that of the husbands whom the " sisters five " of Earl John " had " — " The third [had] Sir Gilbert Umfrayvyle Earl of Angus in that while : (Of Angus and of Ryddysdale Earl he was, and Lord all hale.) On that Lady (afterward) Of Umfraywylle he gat Robert ; On that Lady he gat alswa Other brethyr to Robert ma."
- Courthope alters, for some unexplained reason, the spelling of the name (rightly
given m " Nicolas," " Dugdale," &c.) to Umfrevill, and Umfreville, and backs up the teration by misquoting the writs as being so directed.
