Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
C.P. Addition: Roger de Mortimer, K.G., 2nd Earl of March, Marshal of England (died 1360)
25 views
Skip to first unread message
Douglas Richardson
Feb 2, 2012, 1:37:29 PM2/2/12
to
Dear Newsgroup ~
Recently I was going through the volume, Suppliques d’Innocent VI
(1352–1362) (1911), by Berlière. On page 577, there is the record of
a Papal indult for a portable altar granted on 10 March 1360 to Roger
de Mortimer, Earl of March, Marshal of England. This record may be
viewed at the following weblink:
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?u=1&num=577&seq=13&view=image&size=100&id=njp.32101014965964
Earl Roger de Mortimer died suddenly at Rouvray (near Avalon), France
26 Feb. 1359/60, As such, he appears to have died just before the
above mentioned papal indult was granted to him.
Since I didn't recall that Earl Roger de Mortimer was ever Marshal of
England, I checked both Complete Peerage, 8 (1932): 442–445 (sub
March) and Doyle, Official Baronage of England 2 (1886): 467–468 (sub
March) to see if either source mentions that Earl Roger was Marshal of
England. Surprisingly neither source mentions anything about him
being Marshal of England. As for Wikipedia, it alleges that Thomas de
Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick (died 1369) was Marshal of England from
1343/4 until 1369. No mention is made of Roger de Mortimer.
So was Earl Roger de Mortimer ever Marshal of England? Checking
various sources, I finally found a helpful account of the Marshals of
England in the book, William Berry, Encyclopaedia Heraldica, or
Complete Dictionary of Heraldry 1 (1828), unpaginated. The Marshal
account in this book may be viewed at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=w_5BAAAAcAAJ&pg=PR401
In the Marshal account, Mr. Berry states that Thomas Beauchamp, Earl
of Warwick, was constituted Marshal of England in 1344. So far, so
good. Then the following information is given:
"In 1350, but on what account is not mentioned by historians, he
resigned the office of Marshal of England in favour of Roger Mortimer,
Earl of March, who was appointed Marshal by patent durante bene
placito, and dying in the same year, the before-mentioned Thomas
Beauchamp, was again constituted Marshal of England during pleasure,
in the 40th year of Edward III [i.e., 1366-1367] and dying three years
afterwards, Edmund Mortimer, Earl of Marsh and ulster, was constituted
Marshal of England." END OF QUOTE.
While Mr. Berry is wrong that Earl Roger de Mortimer died in 1350, he
seems to have seen some contemporary record which granted the office
of Marshal of England to him in 1350. Does anyone have a better
reference for the 1350 record or of the later regranting of the office
of Marshal to Thomas de Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
P.S. For interest's sake, the following is a list of the 17th Century
New World immigrants that descend from Earl Roger de Mortimer (died
1360):
William Bladen, George & Nehemiah Blakiston, St. Leger Codd, Humphrey
Davie, Edward Digges, William Farrer, Elizabeth & John Harleston,
Warham Horsmanden, Hannah, Samuel & Sarah Levis, Agnes Mackworth, Anne
Mauleverer, Richard More, Joseph & Mary Need, John and Margaret
Nelson, Philip & Thomas Nelson, Robert Peyton, George Reade, William
Rodney, Katherine Saint Leger, Richard Saltonstall, William Skepper,
Mary Johanna Somerset, Samuel & William Torrey.
Recently I was going through the volume, Suppliques d’Innocent VI
(1352–1362) (1911), by Berlière. On page 577, there is the record of
a Papal indult for a portable altar granted on 10 March 1360 to Roger
de Mortimer, Earl of March, Marshal of England. This record may be
viewed at the following weblink:
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?u=1&num=577&seq=13&view=image&size=100&id=njp.32101014965964
Earl Roger de Mortimer died suddenly at Rouvray (near Avalon), France
26 Feb. 1359/60, As such, he appears to have died just before the
above mentioned papal indult was granted to him.
Since I didn't recall that Earl Roger de Mortimer was ever Marshal of
England, I checked both Complete Peerage, 8 (1932): 442–445 (sub
March) and Doyle, Official Baronage of England 2 (1886): 467–468 (sub
March) to see if either source mentions that Earl Roger was Marshal of
England. Surprisingly neither source mentions anything about him
being Marshal of England. As for Wikipedia, it alleges that Thomas de
Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick (died 1369) was Marshal of England from
1343/4 until 1369. No mention is made of Roger de Mortimer.
So was Earl Roger de Mortimer ever Marshal of England? Checking
various sources, I finally found a helpful account of the Marshals of
England in the book, William Berry, Encyclopaedia Heraldica, or
Complete Dictionary of Heraldry 1 (1828), unpaginated. The Marshal
account in this book may be viewed at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=w_5BAAAAcAAJ&pg=PR401
In the Marshal account, Mr. Berry states that Thomas Beauchamp, Earl
of Warwick, was constituted Marshal of England in 1344. So far, so
good. Then the following information is given:
"In 1350, but on what account is not mentioned by historians, he
resigned the office of Marshal of England in favour of Roger Mortimer,
Earl of March, who was appointed Marshal by patent durante bene
placito, and dying in the same year, the before-mentioned Thomas
Beauchamp, was again constituted Marshal of England during pleasure,
in the 40th year of Edward III [i.e., 1366-1367] and dying three years
afterwards, Edmund Mortimer, Earl of Marsh and ulster, was constituted
Marshal of England." END OF QUOTE.
While Mr. Berry is wrong that Earl Roger de Mortimer died in 1350, he
seems to have seen some contemporary record which granted the office
of Marshal of England to him in 1350. Does anyone have a better
reference for the 1350 record or of the later regranting of the office
of Marshal to Thomas de Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
P.S. For interest's sake, the following is a list of the 17th Century
New World immigrants that descend from Earl Roger de Mortimer (died
1360):
William Bladen, George & Nehemiah Blakiston, St. Leger Codd, Humphrey
Davie, Edward Digges, William Farrer, Elizabeth & John Harleston,
Warham Horsmanden, Hannah, Samuel & Sarah Levis, Agnes Mackworth, Anne
Mauleverer, Richard More, Joseph & Mary Need, John and Margaret
Nelson, Philip & Thomas Nelson, Robert Peyton, George Reade, William
Rodney, Katherine Saint Leger, Richard Saltonstall, William Skepper,
Mary Johanna Somerset, Samuel & William Torrey.
Jan
Feb 2, 2012, 7:39:03 PM2/2/12
to
Here is an entry in CPR v. 11, Edward III that supports Douglas'
discovery that Roger de Mortimer was the marshal of England (last item
on the page):
http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/patentrolls/e3v11/body/Edward3vol11page0349.pdf
Curiously, when I searched for "Roger de Mortuo" in this volume, this
item did not appear in the search results. I found it by searching for
"marshal" in the same and other volumes. The item is clearly listed in
the index of the volume. Combining this item with Douglas' quotation
from Berry suggests to me that Roger may have been marshal in 1359/60,
just before he died, rather than in 1350 as stated in Berry. There are
many references to Thomas, earl of Warwick, as marshal of England in
the CPR volumes surrounding 1350.
On Feb 2, 1:37 pm, Douglas Richardson <royalances...@msn.com> wrote:
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Recently I was going through the volume, Suppliques d’Innocent VI
> (1352–1362) (1911), by Berlière. On page 577, there is the record of
> a Papal indult for a portable altar granted on 10 March 1360 to Roger
> de Mortimer, Earl of March, Marshal of England. This record may be
> viewed at the following weblink:
>
> http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?u=1&num=577&seq=13&view=image&size...
discovery that Roger de Mortimer was the marshal of England (last item
on the page):
http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/patentrolls/e3v11/body/Edward3vol11page0349.pdf
Curiously, when I searched for "Roger de Mortuo" in this volume, this
item did not appear in the search results. I found it by searching for
"marshal" in the same and other volumes. The item is clearly listed in
the index of the volume. Combining this item with Douglas' quotation
from Berry suggests to me that Roger may have been marshal in 1359/60,
just before he died, rather than in 1350 as stated in Berry. There are
many references to Thomas, earl of Warwick, as marshal of England in
the CPR volumes surrounding 1350.
On Feb 2, 1:37 pm, Douglas Richardson <royalances...@msn.com> wrote:
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Recently I was going through the volume, Suppliques d’Innocent VI
> (1352–1362) (1911), by Berlière. On page 577, there is the record of
> a Papal indult for a portable altar granted on 10 March 1360 to Roger
> de Mortimer, Earl of March, Marshal of England. This record may be
> viewed at the following weblink:
>
Douglas Richardson
Feb 2, 2012, 10:16:50 PM2/2/12
to
Dear Jan ~
Thanks for the Patent Rolls item you posted. Much appreciated. The
Patent Rolls item definitely confirms that Roger de Mortimer was
Marshal of England at the time of his death in 1360.
The record I found in Suppliques d’Innocent VI (1352–1362) (1911) is
also published in Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers:
Petitions 1 (1896): 351. This item may be viewed at the following
weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=lmNnAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA351
Thanks for the Patent Rolls item you posted. Much appreciated. The
Patent Rolls item definitely confirms that Roger de Mortimer was
Marshal of England at the time of his death in 1360.
The record I found in Suppliques d’Innocent VI (1352–1362) (1911) is
also published in Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers:
Petitions 1 (1896): 351. This item may be viewed at the following
weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=lmNnAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA351
Derek Howard
Feb 3, 2012, 5:33:32 AM2/3/12
to
On Feb 2, 7:37 pm, Douglas Richardson <royalances...@msn.com> wrote:
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Recently I was going through the volume, Suppliques d’Innocent VI
> (1352–1362) (1911), by Berlière. On page 577, there is the record of
> a Papal indult for a portable altar granted on 10 March 1360 to Roger
> de Mortimer, Earl of March, Marshal of England. This record may be
> viewed at the following weblink:
>
> http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?u=1&num=577&seq=13&view=image&size...
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Recently I was going through the volume, Suppliques d’Innocent VI
> (1352–1362) (1911), by Berlière. On page 577, there is the record of
> a Papal indult for a portable altar granted on 10 March 1360 to Roger
> de Mortimer, Earl of March, Marshal of England. This record may be
> viewed at the following weblink:
>
pleasure 10 Feb 1343/4 (CPR 1343-5, p 243). He had a fresh commission
16 Oct 1366 (CPR 1364-7 p 332) and died 13 Nov 1369. See: Edmund
Mortimer G D Squibb, “The High Court of Chivalry”, 1959, 230. Squibb
does not list Roger Mortimer but does note that appointments made for
the purposes of coronations or other special occasions have not been
included.
Meanwhile, Mortimer was knighted Jul 1346 (Ormrod, "Edward III", 2011,
271). He was restored to the Earldom of March in 1354, (Ormrod, 363)
so it is unlikely he was named marshal before 1354. Roger, the earl of
March, is mentioned as marshal of the army (not of England per se)
when he died during the descent into Burgundy on the Reims campaign of
1359-60 (Ormrod, 403, citing for his paragraph including this - Gray:
“Scalacronica”, ed King, 2005, 174-5; “Knighton’s Chronicle 1337-1396”
ed Martin, 1995, 178-9; “Chronicon Anonymi Cantuariensis”, ed Scott
Stokes & Given-Wilson 2008, 56-7). Not sure which one(s) give(s) the
precise info.
Derek Howard
Douglas Richardson
Feb 3, 2012, 12:40:37 PM2/3/12
to
Thanks, Derek, for posting this information. Much appreciated.
The desired passage in the 'Scalacronica' of Sir Thomas Gray is
available in Scottish Historical Review 4 (1907): 427. It reads as
follows:
"The said king remained at Golion near Montreal in Burgundy, to
negociate a treaty with the duchy of Burgundy; and here Roger de
Mortimer, Earl of March and marshal of the army and most in the
confidence of the king, died on the 24th day of February." END OF
QUOTE.
The above may be viewed at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=T1cJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA427
The editor adds a note that the death of Roger de Mortimer took place
in A.D. 1360.
As I understand it, the position Marshal of the Army is different from
Marshal of England.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + +
The desired passage in the 'Scalacronica' of Sir Thomas Gray is
available in Scottish Historical Review 4 (1907): 427. It reads as
follows:
"The said king remained at Golion near Montreal in Burgundy, to
negociate a treaty with the duchy of Burgundy; and here Roger de
Mortimer, Earl of March and marshal of the army and most in the
confidence of the king, died on the 24th day of February." END OF
QUOTE.
The above may be viewed at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=T1cJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA427
The editor adds a note that the death of Roger de Mortimer took place
in A.D. 1360.
As I understand it, the position Marshal of the Army is different from
Marshal of England.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Wjhonson
Feb 5, 2012, 11:44:41 AM2/5/12
to royala...@msn.com, gen-me...@rootsweb.com
The place he died suddenly was not in France, but in the independent state of Burgundy. Not a subject to France or any other kingdom.
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
the message
John P. Ravilious
Feb 5, 2012, 10:22:41 PM2/5/12
to
On Feb 5, 11:44 am, Wjhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
> The place he died suddenly was not in France, but in the independent state of Burgundy. Not a subject to France or any other kingdom.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Douglas Richardson <royalances...@msn.com>
> To: gen-medieval <gen-medie...@rootsweb.com>
> Sent: Thu, Feb 2, 2012 10:47 am
> Subject: C.P. Addition: Roger de Mortimer, K.G., 2nd Earl of March, Marshal of England (died 1360)
>
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Recently I was going through the volume, Suppliques d’Innocent VI
> (1352–1362) (1911), by Berlière. On page 577, there is the record of
> a Papal indult for a portable altar granted on 10 March 1360 to Roger
> de Mortimer, Earl of March, Marshal of England. This record may be
> viewed at the following weblink:
>
> http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?u=1&num=577&seq=13&view=image&size...
> The place he died suddenly was not in France, but in the independent state of Burgundy. Not a subject to France or any other kingdom.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Douglas Richardson <royalances...@msn.com>
> To: gen-medieval <gen-medie...@rootsweb.com>
> Sent: Thu, Feb 2, 2012 10:47 am
> Subject: C.P. Addition: Roger de Mortimer, K.G., 2nd Earl of March, Marshal of England (died 1360)
>
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Recently I was going through the volume, Suppliques d’Innocent VI
> (1352–1362) (1911), by Berlière. On page 577, there is the record of
> a Papal indult for a portable altar granted on 10 March 1360 to Roger
> de Mortimer, Earl of March, Marshal of England. This record may be
> viewed at the following weblink:
>
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
> the message- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
===================
Dear Will,
If you are referring to Burgundy as it existed in the 14th
century, there was no independent state by that name. The Duchy of
Burgundy was an appanage held of the King of France; the lands called
Burgundy or the 'Free County' (Franche-comte) on the eastern side of
the imperial border were held of the German (or Holy Roman) Emperor.
If you are referring to a period prior to the death of Rudolf
III, King of Burgundy (d. 1032) and lands subject to his rule, or that
of his predecessors, the answer would be different.
Cheers,
John
Douglas Richardson
Feb 6, 2012, 10:50:26 AM2/6/12
to
On Feb 5, 8:22 pm, "John P. Ravilious" <ther...@aol.com> wrote:
< If you are referring to Burgundy as it existed in the 14th
< century, there was no independent state by that name. The Duchy of
< Burgundy was an appanage held of the King of France; the lands
called
< Burgundy or the 'Free County' (Franche-comte) on the eastern side of
< the imperial border were held of the German (or Holy Roman) Emperor.
Thanks for sharing this information, John. Much appreciated.
< If you are referring to Burgundy as it existed in the 14th
< century, there was no independent state by that name. The Duchy of
< Burgundy was an appanage held of the King of France; the lands
called
< Burgundy or the 'Free County' (Franche-comte) on the eastern side of
< the imperial border were held of the German (or Holy Roman) Emperor.
There are several maps of France on the internet which show its
borders in 1360 following the Treaty of Bretigny. One shows France
including Burgundy. One shows France excluding Burgundy. But the map
in the following weblink shows Burgundy as a "vassa holdingl" of
France in 1360, much like Blois or Dreux.
http://www.emersonkent.com/map_archive/france_1360_usma.htm
0 new messages