DD Correction: the Bardolfs of Ilketshall, Suffolk, Waddington, Lincs. & c.
The...@aol.com
Hello All,
In Domesday Descendants, K. S. B. Keats-Rohan provides two accounts of
individuals surnamed ‘Bardulf’ whom she reflects as being related: Hamelin,
and his (alleged) son Hugh [‘Hugo’]. Specifically, she states regarding
these
individuals:
1. Re: Hamelin,
‘ Tenant of Hugh Bigod at Bungay, Suffolk...... Succeeded by his
son Hugh (Farrer, HKF ii, 234). ‘ [1]
2. Re: Hugh,
‘ Son of Hamelin Bardulf (Farrer, HKF ii, 234). Between 1142 and
1146 he was given land in the demesne of Ranulf II of Chester...
His heir was Robert Bardulf....’ [2]
These accounts appear to both (A) conflate Hugh Bardolf, ‘senior’ (d.
1176)
and Hugh Bardolf, ‘junior’, his son (d. aft 1 July 1197), and also to (B)
erroneously assign Hugh ‘senior’ as son of Hamelin.
A. Hugh Bardolf ‘senior’ was the beneficiary of a charter from Ranulf
Earl of Chester, dated by G. Barraclough ca. 1142-46, giving him
for his services the manor of Waddington, Lincs. (excluding certain
lands in the hands of the Knights Templars and others) [3]. Hugh
witnessed further charters of Earl Ranulf, including one at least as
late as 1153 [4]. Based at least on the first charter cited, Hugh
‘senior’ was clearly older than 18, and most likely older than 21,
to have both rendered service significant enough to receive this
grant, and to further be held responsible for holding the manor
of Waddington by the service of 3 knights’ fees:
‘...predictam tenuram teneat per fra[nc]um servicium trium
militum benef et hon[orifice in vil]la et extra, in foro et
mercato,....’ [5]
We can then say with some confidence that Hugh Bardolf was born say
1125 at the latest, and most likely before, based on Barraclough’s
dating of charter #66.
Hugh ‘senior’ is shown in AR 7 and elsewhere as having married
Isabel de Condet or de Cundy, daughter of Robert de Condet of
Wickhambreux and his wife Adeliza of Chester, widow of Richard de
Clare (d. 1136) and sister of Earl Ranulf of Chester (d. 1153) [6].
Isabel de Condet was most likely born in 1137 or soon thereafter -
it may well be say 1152/3, when Hugh Bardolf was still in service
to Earl Ranulf (including as witness to his charters, see above),
that they were married. Hugh ‘senior’ is shown as having died ca.
1176 [7].
B. Hugh Bardolf ‘junior’ was active quite some time later (‘He died
c. 1200’ according to Keats-Rohan; Barraclough states that Hugh
was succeeded by ‘his heir, Robert’ ca. 1200 [8]). The relationship
of Hugh ‘junior’ to Hamelin Bardolf is given in a grant by Hugh
Bardolf of land in Ilketshall, Suffolk and elsewhere, dated 1 July
1197:
' Grant by Hugh Bardolf to William son of Bartholomew de Hakford of 10
marcatas of land in grantor's manor of Ilketshall and its
appurtenances,
viz. half the mill of Ellingham worth 50s. and 97a. in his demesne of
Puneshage with rustici living there, i.e. Reginald son of Roger and
Roger son of Gar', and in 24a. of his other demesne in Thwaite and in
Levingeshage and Osbernes acre with 6 oxen, 2 horses, 80 sheep and 5
cows, and in five other rustici, i.e. Robert Hed, William Scot, Simon
de Poraj, Roger son of Ralph and Peter son of Langlif with their
tenements, chattels and their sequel living in said land when this
charter was made, for service of half a knight. For which gift grantee
quitclaimed in the king's court at Westminster on the 1st of July 1197
to grantor right in grantor's land of Bungay, Ilketshall, Wint'nton
and Danbi of which grantor's uncle Hamel' Bardolf was seised before
him. ' [9]
The basis on which Farrer claimed Hugh to be son of Hamelin (on which the
statements in Barraclough and Keats-Rohan are based) I do not have to hand.
However, as the above charter was written at the direction of Hugh Bardolf
and
in which, as a principal, he would have sought reasonable accuracy
(especially
given the land rights involved), it is not reasonable to assume he would have
had his father identified as his uncle, or that he would have permitted an
error of this nature to go uncorrected.
Should anyone have access to Honors and Knights’ Fees, I would certainly
appreciate a lookup to determine what is stated there, and on what evidence.
Assuming that there is no substantial difference to be found in Farrer or
elsewhere, the following appears to be an accurate rendering of the Bardolf
family of Ilketshall and Bungay, Suffolk & c. and their immediate
descendants.
Comment, criticism and related documentation are welcome.
John *
NOTES
[1] Domesday Descendants, p. 162
[2] Ibid., pp. 162-3
[3] G. Barraclough, The Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, c.
1071-1237 (1988: The Record Society of Lancashire and Cheshire), pp. 78-79,
charter #66. Barraclough states in his note, ‘Hugh Bardulf was the son of
Hamelin Bardulf (H.K.F. p. 234).’ This evidently was the basis that
Keats-Rohan used in assigning Hugh as son of Hamelin.
[4] Ibid., pp. 106-107, charter #93
[5] Ibid., p. 107, text of charter #66.
[6] Ancestral Roots, 7th ed.; also Complete Peerage, Vol III (Clare,
lords of), p. 243.
[7] Ancestral Roots, 7th ed. I have not yet seen or verified the evidence
for this dating.
[8] Domesday Descendants, p. 162; Barraclough, p. 79, charter #66 (notes).
[9] Public Record Office, Norfolk Record Office: Gillingham Estate, DEEDS,
SUFFOLK: Bungay, Mettingham, Ilketshall and elsewhere [ GIL/1/264, 717 x 4 ]
_____________________________
BARDOLF OF ILKETSHALL, SUFFOLK; WADDINGTON, CO. LINCS., & C.
1 NN Bardolf
----------------------------------------
Children: Hugh (-ca1176)
Hamelin (-<1197)
1.1 Hugh Bardolf
----------------------------------------
Death: ca 1176[1]
of Waddington and Great Carlton, co. Lincs. and Hoo, Kent[2]
had a gift of the manor of Waddington, co. Lincs. ca. 1142-46 from Earl
Ranulf of Chester
(with certain exceptions) for his service to the Earl, to be held by the
service of 3
knights' fees [Barraclough, charter #66, pp. 78-79][3]
'Hugone Bardo[lf],..' witness to Earl Ranulf of Chester's gift of certain
lands,
1153 [Barraclough, charter #93, pp. 106-7][3]
evidently predeceased his brother Hamelin (the manors of Ilkesthall and
Bungay, Suffolk
& c. of Hamelin's tenure evidently passed directly to Hugh's son Hugh: cf.
grant and
quitclaim for Ilketshall & c., ' ... of which grantor's uncle Hamel'
Bardolf was seised
before him. '- PRO, Norfolk Record Office: Gillingham Estate, DEEDS,
SUFFOLK: Bungay,
Mettingham, Ilketshall and elsewhere [ GIL/1/264, 717 x 4 ][4]
Spouse: Isabel de Condet[2]
Birth: aft 1136
Death: aft 1165[1]
Father: Robert de Condet (-ca1141)
Mother: Adeliza of Chester
Children: Beatrice
Juliana (-<1218)
Iseude (-<1246)
Hugh (->1197)
Robert (-<1225)
1.1.1 Beatrice Bardolf
----------------------------------------
one of five sisters and coheiresses of Robert Bardolf[2]
[her inheritance including Grimston, co. Notts, and one-fifth of a knight's
fee in Hoo, Kent]
identified as Beatrice in 'Ancestral Roots', per Todd Farmerie (Jan 25
1997)[1]
Spouse: Richard Foliot
Children: Jordan (-<1235)
1.1.1.1 Jordan Foliot
----------------------------------------
Death: bef 5 Mar 1235[2]
of Grimston, co. Notts & c.
performed homage and had livery of his purparty of the lands of uncle Robert
Bardolf,
1 Jul 1225[2]
this included Grimston, co. Notts [as indicated by holdings of Isabel de
Condet][1]
Children: Sir Richard (>1214-1299)
Beatrice
1.1.2 Juliana Bardolf
----------------------------------------
Death: bef 20 Jan 1218[2]
coheiress (in her issue) of brother Robert de Bardolf (d. 1225) [2]
lst wife of Nicholas de Poyntz[2]
Spouse: Nicholas de Poyntz
Death: bef 2 Nov 1223[2]
Children: Hugh (-<1220)
1.1.2.1 Hugh de Poyntz
----------------------------------------
Death: bef 4 Apr 1220[2]
Occ: heir apparent (d.v.p.)[2]
of Curry Malet, co. Somerset
followed father against King John; captured at Worcester 17 July 1216;
pledged to serve
Henry III and restored to his lands, 1216/1217
first husband of Hawise [2]
Spouse: Hawise Malet
Death: aft 4 May 1287[5]
Father: William Malet (-ca1216)
Mother: NN
Marr: bef 23 Mar 1217[2]
Children: Sir Nicholas (~1220-<1273)
1.1.3 Iseude Bardolf[2]
----------------------------------------
Death: bef 18 Jun 1246[2]
identified as daughter of Hugh Bardolf in CP (Grey)[2]
her maritagium included the manor of Codnor
re: her husband, Sir Henry de Grey:
purchased manor of Thurrock, 1199; acquired Codnor, 1201
'In 1212 he held in co. Derby the following fees: 1 each in Heanor,
Normanton,
Shirland, Codnor and Toton, and Berley; and in Nott l in
Radcliffe-on-Trent.'
[CP Vol VI- Grey, p. 133n][2]
Spouse: Sir Henry de Grey, of Thurrock
Death: 1219[2]
Father: John de Grai
Mother:
Children: Sir Richard (-<1271)
Sir John (-<1265)
1.1.3.1 Sir Richard de Grey
----------------------------------------
Death: bef 8 Sep 1271[2]
of Codnor and Grays Thurrock, co. Derby
of the King's council, 1255
joined the baronial opposition
captured by the royal forces after the Battle of Lewes, 1264 and forfeited -
restored
to his lands afterward[2]
Spouse: Lucy de Humez
Father: John de Humez
Children: Sir John (-<1271)
1.1.3.2a Sir John de Grey*
----------------------------------------
Death: bef 18 Mar 1265[2]
of Shirland, co. Derby[5]
younger son[2]
had grant of a fair at Fenny Stratford, co. Bucks by charter from King Henry
III dated
16 Dec 1252 -'to be held at the manor'[6]
one of four councillors appointed for Prince Edward, 1258 (supporter of de
Montfort
and baronial party acc. to Prestwich)
identified as a royalist supporter, July 1263 (his house in London sacked by
pro-Montfort mob)[7]
Spouse: Emma de Glanville
Father: Geoffrey de Glanville
Children: Emma
Other Spouses Emma de Cauz, Joan
1.1.3.2b Sir John de Grey* (See above)
----------------------------------------
Spouse: Emma de Cauz[2]
Father: Roger de Cauz
Mother: Nichole de Leigh
Children: Sir Reynold (-1308)
Iseude (->1265)
Other Spouses Emma de Glanville, Joan
1.1.3.2c Sir John de Grey* (See above)
----------------------------------------
Spouse: Joan[2]
Death: 1256, Leyham[2]
Marr: 17 Oct 1251[2]
Other Spouses Emma de Glanville, Emma de Cauz
1.1.4 Hugh Bardolf
----------------------------------------
Death: aft 1 Jul 1197, d.s.p.[2],[4]
of Bungay and Ilketshall, Suffolk & c.
heir to uncle Hamelin Bardolf, as noted in grant of 1 July 1197 :
' Grant by Hugh Bardolf to William son of Bartholomew de Hakford of 10
marcatas of
land in grantor's manor of Ilketshall and its appurtenances, viz. half the
mill
of Ellingham worth 50s. and 97a. in his demesne of Puneshage with rustici
living
there, i.e. Reginald son of Roger and Roger son of Gar', and in 24a. of
his other
demesne in Thwaite and in Levingeshage and Osbernes acre with 6 oxen, 2
horses,
80 sheep and 5 cows, and in five other rustici, i.e. Robert Hed, William
Scot,
Simon de Poraj, Roger son of Ralph and Peter son of Langlif with their
tenements,
chattels and their sequel living in said land when this charter was made,
for
service of half a knight. For which gift grantee quitclaimed in the king's
court
at Westminster on the 1st of July 1197 to grantor right in grantor's land
of
Bungay, Ilketshall, Wint'nton and Danbi of which grantor's uncle Hamel'
Bardolf
was seised before him. '- PRO, Norfolk Record Office: Gillingham Estate,
DEEDS,
SUFFOLK: Bungay, Mettingham, Ilketshall and elsewhere [ GIL/1/264, 717 x 4
][4]
1.1.5 Robert Bardolf
----------------------------------------
Death: bef 1 Jul 1225, d.s.p.[2]
of Great Carlton, co. Lincoln and Hoo, Kent[2]
gave to Reading abbey lands in the manor of Hoo from which 40m. were due,
1205[6]
inherited manor of Waddington, co. Lincs. He arraigned an assize of novel
disseisin against Earl Ranulf III of Chester, which was settled ca. 1200
by
surrender of original charter and acceptance of new tenure of 1/2 the
manor for
the service of 1 1/2 knights' fees. [Barraclough, p. 79, charter 66
notes][3]
1.2 Hamelin Bardolf
----------------------------------------
Death: bef 1 Jul 1197, d.s.p.[4]
of Bungay and Ilketshall, Suffolk, Wintonton and Danby, Norfolk
identified as (previous) holder of the above in grant and quitclaim of 1 July
1197
by nephew Hugh Bardolf[4]
'Hame[lino] Bardulfo...', witness to charter of Ranulf, Earl of Chester ca.
1142-46, giving his brother Hugh Bardolf the manor of Waddington, Lincs.
(saving lands already held by the Knights Templars and others) [Barraclough,
pp. 78-79, charter #66[3] ]
1. "Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists," Frederick L. Weis
(additions and
corrections, Walter L Sheppard Jr.), Genealogical Pub. Co., Baltimore,
MD,
connection of Isabel de Condet and Hugh Bardolf, as cited by E. Mann, Line
132D-27,-28 in AR7.
2. "The Complete Peerage," G. E. Cokayne, 1910 -
The Complete Peerage of England Scotland Ireland Great Britain and the
United
Kingdom.
3. "The Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, c. 1071-1237," Geoffrey
Barraclough, The Record Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, 1988, cites
charters in the Public Record Office, the Bodleian Library and elsewhere.
4. "Public Record Office Archives," http://www.a2a.pro.gov.uk/
5. "The Magna Carta Sureties, 1215," Frederick L. Weis, Th. D., Gen Pub Co.,
Baltimore, MD, 5th ed., 1997 (W. L. Sheppard Jr & David Faris).
6. "Gazetteer of Markets and Fairs to 1516," www.histparl.ac.uk/cmh/gaz/
7. "Edward I," Michael Prestwich, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997
[in England, originally 1988 -Methuen], Yale English Monarchs series.
_______________________
* John P. Ravilious
Cristopher Nash
>1.1.3 Iseude Bardolf[2]
[SNIP]
>Spouse: Sir Henry de Grey, of Thurrock
>Death: 1219[2]
>Father: John de Grai
I know you're calling on CP, but however many times I've grubbed
through this (CP VI, 171 & chart betw 129 & 130, & note p. 133) and
other texts for one I've never managed to find a 'satisfactory' fa.
for Henry. Have you maybe another source?
Cheers!
Cris
--
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> 2. Re: Hugh,
>
> ‘ Son of Hamelin Bardulf (Farrer, HKF ii, 234). Between 1142 and
> 1146 he was given land in the demesne of Ranulf II of Chester...
> His heir was Robert Bardulf....’ [2]
[snip]
> B. Hugh Bardolf ‘junior’ was active quite some time later (‘He died
> c. 1200’ according to Keats-Rohan; Barraclough states that Hugh
> was succeeded by ‘his heir, Robert’ ca. 1200 [8]). The relationship
> of Hugh ‘junior’ to Hamelin Bardolf is given in a grant by Hugh
> Bardolf of land in Ilketshall, Suffolk and elsewhere, dated 1 July
> 1197:
[snip]
> 1.1 Hugh Bardolf
> ----------------------------------------
> Death: ca 1176[1]
> Spouse: Isabel de Condet[2]
> Birth: aft 1136
> Death: aft 1165[1]
> Father: Robert de Condet (-ca1141)
> Mother: Adeliza of Chester
>
> Children: Beatrice
> Juliana (-<1218)
> Iseude (-<1246)
> Hugh (->1197)
> Robert (-<1225)
I do not have access to Farrer now, but back in the Stone Age,
when I was in high school, I typed up some quick notes. These
show that in two places, the coheiresses of Robert Bardolf
(specifically, Isolda m. Henry de Grey i:149-59, and Philippa m.
Thomas Basset ii:17) are said to be his nieces, not his sisters.
Considering my relative development (or lack thereof) as a
scholar at the time, I can't promise this is accurate, but it
certainly merits a closer look before accepting a reconstruction
making them his sisters.
taf
Cristopher Nash
>I do not have access to Farrer now, but back in the Stone Age, when
>I was in high school, I typed up some quick notes. These show that
>in two places, the coheiresses of Robert Bardolf (specifically,
>Isolda m. Henry de Grey i:149-59, and Philippa m. Thomas Basset
>ii:17) are said to be his nieces, not his sisters. Considering my
>relative development (or lack thereof) as a scholar at the time, I
>can't promise this is accurate, but it certainly merits a closer
>look before accepting a reconstruction making them his sisters.
It's got to be! But/And Todd --
>Philippa m. Thomas Basset ii:17
I'm not too good at interpreting this. Would it be Thomas Basset of
Headington (d. 1219/1220) you meant in those halcyon years? If so,
have we a theory rivaling the proposition that he m. Philippa da. of
William Fitz Hugh Malbank?
Best,
Cris
--
Roz Griston
in you find in page feature to jump to the paragraphs where it sources
iseulde is the neice of robert.
http://www.usigs.org/library/books/uk/dby/DbyOldHallsTilly1892/dbyh4
ReptonEtc/dbyh4097.htm
On Saturday, January 18, 2003 11:29 AM, Cristopher Nash
Todd A. Farmerie
> It's got to be! But/And Todd --
>
>> Philippa m. Thomas Basset ii:17
>
> I'm not too good at interpreting this. Would it be Thomas Basset of
> Headington (d. 1219/1220) you meant in those halcyon years? If so, have
> we a theory rivaling the proposition that he m. Philippa da. of William
> Fitz Hugh Malbank?
All I can do retype the pedigree as it appears in my notes:
v.11
17
+----------------+
Robert ?
Bardolf |
Philippa=Thomas Basset
|
+--------+----------+ 2
Philippa Alice=John Basset
dsp
That's it. The identifications must be left to those familiar
with these relationships. Certainly this can all be resolved by
a quick look at Farrer.
(FWIW, not knowing the wife of William Fitz Hugh off the top of
my head, there two solutions need not be mutually exclusive.)
Reedpcgen
suggests that Framlingham transferred to the fee of Bigod after the break up of
the honor of Chester in 1232 and 1242.
Framlingham became the caput of the Bigod fee in Suffolk. "Henry II confirmed
to the canons of Barlings the church of the Holy Trinity of Bungay of the gift
of Hameline Bardulf and of the confirmation of Hugh Bardulf, Hamelin's heir
[Cal. Chart. R. 2:390].
Page 199, Earl Ranulf have the whole demesne of Waddington to Hugh Bardolf,
excepting lands already held by the Knights of the Temple, to hold by Hugh and
his heirs by service of 3 marks. Hamelin Bardulf was among the witnesses
[Duchy of Lancaster Cart. Misc. 2:61].
Robert Bardolf married Annora Malbanc. He obtained letters of protection for
his men and property of Waddington in 1205 touching which he had arraigned an
assize of novel disseisin against the earl of Chester, under judgment of which
the earl was amerced 100 pounds.
Page 17: "As Bardolf had no issue by Annora, Brickhill was vested during his
withdrawal from the kingdom in the other heirs of William Malbanc...."
Paul
The...@aol.com
Dear Todd, Cris, Paul, Rosie, and Roz,
Many thanks for your responses and lookups in your assorted notes
and databases, and particularly Paul, for providing the information
from Honors and Knights’ Fees.
Todd, your notes from a bygone era were of interest, and (as we
will see below) were evidently spot on concerning Iseude (Bardolf ?)
de Grey. Interestingly, as Cris pointed out, the Philippa - Basset
connection did not ring true with other known information, e.g. the
Philippa Malbank who m. Thomas Basset of Headington (d. 1220): the
information that Paul has now provided gives us both the source of
the confusion, and the answer to that particular problem.
A. As to Iseude and her relationship to Hugh and Robert Bardolf:
Todd, your notes indicated that Iseude was a niece, not a sister
to Robert Bardolf. According to my notes, this conflicts with
what little is given in CP Vol VI (Grey of Codnor), pp. 122-123
from which I took some time ago the relationship as I had posted.
Mirabile dictu, the following fine is to be found in the Excerpta
e Rotulis Finium:
D’ homag capto. } Dns Rex cep homag JORD’ FOLIOT ISOLD’ DE
} GRAY ’t RAD’ PAYNEL de portoibs suis q eos
coting de tris q fuut ROB’TI BARDULF’ avuncli sui q’s de dno R.
tenuit i cap ’t mand est Vic Kanc qd accepta ab eis sec’itate de
relevio suo dno R. reddendo q’tu p jud curie dni R. inde redde
debuint: plena eis saisina hre fac de portoibs suis ipos heditar
ctingetibs de tris pdcis i balla sua, accepta & ead sec’itate a
ROB’TO LUPO loco MATILD’ BARDULF’ mris sue q est una hedu
pdci Robti de relevio suo dno R. reddendo q’tu ad ipam ptin t
p pte sua silr eid Rob pl saisina hre fac loco mat’s sue de portoe
ipam heditar cting de tris pdcis. Portoem vo ctingente fil ’t hede
HUG’ POINZ qui similr e unus hedu ipius Robti ’t inf’ etate est
’t i custodia dni R. salvo custodiat don dns R. aliud inde pcepit.
T. R. ap Westm j. die Jul. [1]
From the foregoing, we can I think safely state at least the
following:
1. The first three named heirs of Robert Bardolf are nephews/
nieces of Robert (his being clearly identified as their
‘avunculus’). More specifically, it is clearly indicated by use
of this term that to his heirs, Robert Bardolf was ‘mother’s
brother’ to each. This agrees with my prior portrayal of Jordan
Foliot, but Iseude wife of Henry de Grey is clearly indicated as
a niece.
2. Given the inheritance as shown, Jordan Foliot, Iseude ( ), and
Ralph/Radulf Paynel were not the issue of less than three sisters
of Robert Bardulf, else (given that Jordan and Ralph/Radulf were
males) the inheritance would not have been represented thus.
3. There was no brother of Robert Bardolf who left surviving issue,
which issue would have claimed inheritance in preference to the
issue of Robert Bardolf’s sisters. Therefore, Matilda Bardolf,
named as mother of Robert ‘Lupo’ (who was acting ‘in loco matris
sue’) can be identified as a sister of Robert Bardolf, and not
the daughter of a brother (Hugh Bardolf or otherwise).
4. It appears that Nicholas Poyntz (identified in the text only as
‘fil ’t hede HUG’ POINZ’, that is,‘son and heir of Hugh Poyntz)
was differentiated in the text as he was an heir, ‘ ’t inf’
etate est ’t i custodia dni R.’, that is, who was under age and
in the King’s custody.
Based on the foregoing, I would show the relationships thus as
opposed to those shown in the first post of this thread:
__________________________________________
I I
Hugh Bardolf = Isabel de Hamelin Bardolf
d.ca. 1176 I Condet d. bef 1 Jul
I 1197
_______________________I___________________________________
I I I I I I I
Hugh Robert Beatrice NN NN Juliana Matilda
Bardolf Bardolf = I I Bardolf Bardolf
d. aft d. bef Richard I I d. bef 20 living on 1
1 Jul 1 Jul Foliot I I Jan 1218 July 1225
1197 1225 I I I = Nicholas = NN 'Lupo'
______________I I I Poyntz I
I ______I I I____ I
I I I I I
Jordan Foliot Iseude Ralph Hugh Robert
of Grimston, co. m. Henry (Radulf) Poyntz 'Lupo'
Notts. d. bef de Grey Paynel dvp bef
5 Mar 1235/6 of Thurrock 4 Apr 1220
= Hawise Malet
I
I
Nicholas Poyntz
b. ca. 1220
(later) knt., of Curry Malet,
Somerset
B. As to Philippa and her relationship to Hugh and Robert Bardolf:
Todd, you had indicated that your notes from HKF ii:17 showed
Philippa, wife of Thomas Basset as niece of Robert Bardolf.
Given the issue you reflected (Alice, wife of John - Bisset, not
Basset; and Philippa, dsp) it is clear you meant Thomas Basset
of Headington, Oxon., who was married to Philippa, eldest dau.
and coheiress [from CP Vol X (Poyntz), p. 672n] of William
Malbank of Wich Malbank, co. Chester, baron of Nantwich. From
your notes it appeared possible that Philippa’s mother might
have been a sister of Robert Bardolf.
However, we find this is not correct given the following:
1. There is no inclusion of Philippa or any descendant in the
fine cited above.
2. The information provided by Paul from Farrer states clearly:
“ Robert Bardolf married Annora Malbanc,” and further, that the
confusion concerning the relationship arose from the inheritance
of Brickhill by “ the other heirs of William Malbanc.”
We now have Robert Bardolf, dsp by 1 July 1225, having
held Brickhill by his marriage to Annora Malbank; following his
death, Brickhill was evidently recovered by Alice Basset (and
possibly in part by her sisters, Joan wife of Reginald de Vautort
and Philippe Countess of Warwick, wife of Earl Henry, both of
whom were then still alive), relict of William Malet (d. 1216)
and wife of John Bisset of Combe Biset, co. Wilts.
Comment, criticism and additional documentation welcome as always.
Best regards,
John *
NOTES
[1] Excerpta e Rotulis Finium, in Turri Londinensi asservatis Henrico
Tertio Rege, A.D. 1216-1272, ed. C. Roberts [The Commissioners of
the Public Records of the Kingdom, Vol I (1216-1246), 1835],
p. 129
* John P. Ravilious
Apsg...@aol.com
The...@aol.com writes:
> HKF ii:17
Todd was accurate in putting a speculative question mark in his chart as to
how exactly how Philippa was related to Robert Bardolf. Farrer H&KF 2:17
After stating that Robert Bardolf had no issue by Annora, in discussing
Brickhill, he then states that Thomas Basset presented to the church there in
1218-19. A claim to a third part of the patronage of the church was
withdrawn by Warin de Verdun and his wife Ada [Reg. Hen. de Welles 1:101].
Eleanor Malbanc "appears" to have released her share to Basset prior to the
voidance of the church.
"From Thomas Basset and Philippa the manor of Great Brickhill passed to their
daughter and coheir, Philippa, second wife of Henry de Newburgh, 5th Earl of
Warwick." Philippa died (after a colorful life) without issue about 1246,
leaving as heirs the heirs of her sister Alice by her second husband John
Basset, the heirs appearing to have enfeoffed John de Grey, as he was in
possession in 1265 [Abbrev. Placit. 158].
Paul
Chris Phillips
> A. As to Iseude and her relationship to Hugh and Robert Bardolf:
>
> Todd, your notes indicated that Iseude was a niece, not a sister
> to Robert Bardolf. According to my notes, this conflicts with
> what little is given in CP Vol VI (Grey of Codnor), pp. 122-123
> from which I took some time ago the relationship as I had posted.
Your revised reconstruction, with Iseude as the daughter of Robert's sister,
is in agreement not only with the Poyntz article in Complete Peerage which
you cite (vol. 10, pp. 671-673), but also the Foliot article (vol. 5, p.
538, note f - continued on p. 539; which does not name the wife of Richard
Foliot, but describes her only as "one of the five sisters and coheirs of
the said Robert Bardolf ... br. and h. of Hugh Bardolf, and 2nd s. and
eventually h. of Hugh Bardolf, by Isabel his wife", citing the Cartulary of
Barlings).
The statement in the Grey of Codnor article (which is in a note on p. 133 of
vol. 6) is:
"He [Henry de Grey] m. Iseude, da. of Hugh Bardolf (by his wife Isabel), and
one of the 5 sisters and coheirs of Robert Bardolf, of Great Carlton, co.
Lincoln, and Hoo, Kent, which Robert Bardolf (parson of 30 churches)
succeeded his brother the said Hugh Bardolf" (and "the said" before Hugh
must be an error, as it makes the sentence nonsensical).
A similar statement is made under Grey of Sandiacre (vol. 6, p. 165).
The same Cartulary of Barlings is quoted as saying, "Dominus Robertus
Bardolfus qui dedit nobis ... habuit quinque sorores quae successerunt ei in
hereditate .. De secunda Dominus Ricardus de Grey, de quo Johannes, de quo
Henricus ...". It adds that on 3 July 1225 the King took the homage of
Jordan Foliot, Iseude de Grey and Ralph Paynell for their portions of the
lands of Robert Bardolf (citing Close Roll, 9 Hen. III, m.10).
If your extract from the fine roll is accurate, as you say CP must be wrong
in making Iseude a sister of Robert, and she should be a niece. Having said
that, the chronology is a little strange, as the grandsons of the sisters
who married Foliot and Poyntz would be born around 1220. In contrast,
Iseude's husband was active by 1195, and his eldest son Richard, with his
younger brother John, was "employed in Guernsey and Jersey in 1226 ... and
they were wardens thereof". Maybe the chronology is worth a closer look.
Chris Phillips
The...@aol.com
Dear Chris,
Many thanks for the lookups in CP, which confirm (A) the
relationships as posted originally, and in the reconstructed
chart, between the Bardolf family and those of Foliot and
Poyntz; and (B) that there was a basis (if erroneous) for my
earlier casting of Iseude, wife of Henry de Grey, as Iseude
Bardolf, sister of Robert [since corrected].
The chronology re: the sons of Henry de Grey and his wife
Iseude does sound strange; I do not believe the answer lies
in Iseude not being the mother of Henry de Grey's son(s),
given the inheritance of Codnor (originally her maritagium).
The fact that Henry de Grey may have been noticeably older
than Iseude would not be that unusual. It is also not
inconceivable that, given (A) the descent to the Grey sons
through two female generations (instead of one, to Foliot
and Poyntz), and (B) theoretically the Grey descent being
from the 2nd daughter of Hugh Bardolf and Isabel de Condet
[based on the order in the fine of 1225], the Grey sons
could have been something of a 'step ahead' of the other
collateral lines.
A. Isabel Condet was probably born between say 1137 and
1140;
B. Richard de Grey, later of Codnor, was more probably
say 1200-1205 based on the information you supplied;
C. The 3 generation span indicated (estimated) is
between 60 and 68 years; or about 20 to 23 years
per generation.
Not that problematic, per se, I think; the example of
Richard II and his first cousin Philippa's daughter,
Elizabeth Mortimer, comes to mind. Richard II was about 4
years of age when Elizabeth was born...
My rendering of the text of the fine was as accurate as
possible, the main problem that various markings (a tilde
here, other more unusual markings there) could not be
replicated on my keyboard. For example, where I showed
" 't " in the transcribed text, it was an unusual " t " that
[in the text] clearly was an abbreviated " et ". I would
attempt an expanded transcription (incl. interpreting the
abbreviations) but I fear that would add another level of
interpretation to the mix. Scanning the page is the next
best alternative, when I have one installed - but again, the
scanned attachment would not make it's way to the
newsgroup....
Hope the foregoing is helpful. Thanks again, Chris, for
your care and critical eye.
Cheers,
John *
* John P. Ravilious
Chris Phillips
> Many thanks for the lookups in CP, which confirm (A) the
> relationships as posted originally, and in the reconstructed
> chart, between the Bardolf family and those of Foliot and
> Poyntz; and (B) that there was a basis (if erroneous) for my
> earlier casting of Iseude, wife of Henry de Grey, as Iseude
> Bardolf, sister of Robert [since corrected].
I suppose one has to assume the fine roll was correct in referring to Robert
Bardolf as the "avunculus" of all three of the coheirs, but maybe some more
digging is warranted. If Iseude is a niece of Robert, it would be nice to
have some indication of who her father was, for example.
> My rendering of the text of the fine was as accurate as
> possible, the main problem that various markings (a tilde
> here, other more unusual markings there) could not be
> replicated on my keyboard.
Sorry - I expressed myself very clumsily, and noticed after the message was
posted that it looked more as if I was questioning the accuracy of your
transcript than that of the record itself.
I'm sure your transcript was accurate - of course, it's an insoluble problem
rendering one of those documents printed in "record type" into plain text
(without developing a set of codes for the special marks).
What I wondered was whether in the fine roll Iseude could have been wrongly
bracketed with the other two as a niece. Not very strong reasons for
suspecting that, though it may be worth more investigation.
Chris Phillips