Giles de Erdington descent from Baldwin de Boulers

[Jim Weber]

This may have been discussed before, but I could find no record of
it: I have seen no relationship between Giles de Erdington and
Baldwin de Boulers/Bollers, as indicated below.

Jim Weber

british-history.ac.uk, has the following:

Roll No. 19.

Headed, "Placita apud Westm: in Octabis Sancti Michaelis, anno R. R.
Henrici, filii Regis J., IX.o." [6th October, 1225.]

Salop. Vitalis Engaing puts in his claim to the Honor of Mungumery,and
derives his right in this way. King Henry the elder (Henry I.) gave
the land in marriage to Baldwin de Bollers with Sibilla de Faleise his
niece.Sibilla had issue a daughter Matilda, whom the King gave to
Richard fitzUrse, who had by her a son and two daughters, viz.,
Reginald fitz Urse, and Margery and Mabilla. Reginald had a daughter
Matilda, the wife of Robertde Curtenay, and mother of William de
Curtenay, who died without issue; so that the land ought to revert to
the (issue of) the said Margery and Mabilla. Margery had a son Richard
Engaing, and Richard had a son Vitalis,who now pleads.

Mabilla was mother of Roger Gernet, and the inheritance of the said
William de Curtenay should revert to them (viz., Vitalis and Roger).

Giles de Erdington also claimed the honor, because the said Baldwin,
after the death of Sibilla, married again, and he held the lands and
honor during his life, because he had issue from Sibilla, and he had
by his second wife a son and daughters, through whom Giles derived his
claim. m. 3, dorso.

From 'Plea Rolls for Staffordshire: 1225-6', Staffordshire Historical
Collections, vol. 4 (1883), pp. 32-40.

[Doug]

According to below his father acquired the honor from the Stantons:

Giles de Erdington was the son and heir of Thomas de Erdington, of Erdington, to whom King John gave the manors of Wellington and Shawbury, Salop. on 3 Nov 1212, and confimed the honor of Montgomery, with the manor Badmondisfield, Suffolk, &c., which he acquired from Stephen de Stanton and Robert his son, 18 Jan 1214/5 [Charter Rolls, 14 John, m.3; 16 John, m.5; Close Roll, 16 John, p.2, m.11]. Thomas de Erdintone sapientissimus et fascundissimus obiit Wigornie xiij kal Aprilis (20 Mar 1217/8) cucullatus" [Annales de Wigornia, p.410], leaving a widow, Rohese de Cocfeld [Close Roll, 2 Hen. III, m.8; Patent Roll, m.6: Ch. Inq. p.m, Hen. III, file 42, no.20]

~ Cokayne's Complete Peerage, 2nd Edition, Vol. V, (Erdington), p. 85, footnote (d)

Doug Smith

[David Topping]

This was a grant rather than a family relationship. See here:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=52388
for an account with pedigrees.
Good to see you active on here again, Jim!
David

[Jim Weber]

Thank you both for the info. I will be looking up those grants,
properties, etc.

It sounded to me as if Giles were claiming some sort of descent from
Baldwin Boulers and his 2nd wife, Margery de Limesi's unnamed son or
daughter (perhaps from both?!). So the claim was not necessary as the
property was granted; but was he fibbing, or just mistaken? Or is it
my misinterpretation?

I did find that Thomas de Erdington' father was William (VCH Warks,
v7, p. 58-72. His father's name was mentioned when Thomas was
enfeoffed of the Manor of Aston by Ralph de Somery in 1200. I have
not been able to take the line any further back yet.

BTW Copinger, "The Manors of Suffolk", p. 83, states that Rohais, the
wife of Thomas de Erdington, would have been known as Cockfield/
Cokefield because her 1st husband was Adam de Cokefield who Copinger
states d. c1209, but Douglas Richardson in a 16 Jan 2006 post stated
d. <1201.

Jim Weber

[Wjhonson]

I have a Giles, but he is a century (or somewhat) too late to be this one.
Can someone give me the connectors between this Giles (adult in 1225) and his same-named kin who was evidently living about a century later

roperties, etc.
It sounded to me as if Giles were claiming some sort of descent from

aldwin Boulers and his 2nd wife, Margery de Limesi's unnamed son or

aughter (perhaps from both?!). So the claim was not necessary as the

roperty was granted; but was he fibbing, or just mistaken? Or is it

y misinterpretation?
I did find that Thomas de Erdington' father was William (VCH Warks,

7, p. 58-72. His father's name was mentioned when Thomas was

nfeoffed of the Manor of Aston by Ralph de Somery in 1200. I have

ot been able to take the line any further back yet.
BTW Copinger, "The Manors of Suffolk", p. 83, states that Rohais, the

ife of Thomas de Erdington, would have been known as Cockfield/

okefield because her 1st husband was Adam de Cokefield who Copinger

tates d. c1209, but Douglas Richardson in a 16 Jan 2006 post stated

. <1201.
Jim Weber

------------------------------
o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com
ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
he message

[Jim Weber]

Sorry, I forgot one more important point: VCH Warks, in mentioning
Thomas' father, also states that Thomas' son Giles was succeeded by
his nephew Henry. I would assume therefore that the famous Giles de
Erdington, Judge and Dean of the College of St. Peter of
Wolverhampton, Staffs for 44 years, died without issue c1268. However
VCH Shrops, v11, p. 215-21 (Wellington Manor of Telford), states that
Henry was a son of Giles. VCH Warks was written in 1964 (fairly
late), but the VCH Shrops treatise was written in 1985; so is Henry
now considered to be a son, not a nephew, of Giles?

Jim Weber

[John Watson]

Hi Jim,

I don't have the whole descent to Giles de Erdington, but Baldwin de
Bollers and Margaret [or Margery] de Limesi had three children:
Stephen de Bollers,
Margaret - died s.p.
Sybil - married Stephen de Stanton

See another case from the Staffordshire plea rolls, where Major
Wrottesley has kindly drawn up the pedigrees:

'Plea Rolls for Staffordshire: 1239-43', Staffordshire Historical
Collections, vol. 4 (1883), pp. 90-102
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=52388

Regards,

John

[Wjhonson]

I had this "Vitalis" in my database already as "Viel"
Is that a proper alternate first name? Or some kind of mistake?

-----Original Message-----
From: John Watson <watso...@gmail.com>
To: gen-medieval <gen-me...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thu, May 3, 2012 1:00 pm
Subject: Re: Giles de Erdington descent from Baldwin de Boulers

ollers and Margaret [or Margery] de Limesi had three children:

tephen de Bollers,
argaret - died s.p.

ybil - married Stephen de Stanton
See another case from the Staffordshire plea rolls, where Major

rottesley has kindly drawn up the pedigrees:
'Plea Rolls for Staffordshire: 1239-43', Staffordshire Historical

ollections, vol. 4 (1883), pp. 90-102

ttp://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=52388
Regards,
John

[John Watson]

Hi again,

That should be Major-General and not Major - also read footnote 3 on
that page:
"When Mr. Eyton wrote his "Antiquities of Shropshire." he had not
apparently seen this suit of 25 H. III., which would have cleared up
all his doubts respecting the nature of the claim of Giles de
Erdington and the Cantilupes to the Honor of Montgomery. It will be
seen that neither the Erdingtons nor the Cantilupes claimed by
hereditary descent, their claims resting only on grants made by the
Stantons and Gernets respectively of their shares of the patrimony."

Regards,

John

[Jim Weber]

Thank you for the information, which indicates that there was no blood
relationship. That answers all of my questions about his possible
connection with Baldwin de Bollers.

There is still the question of Giles having Henry as a son or a
nephew, and whether the generations-later Giles is son of Henry (minor
in 1282), son of Henry, son (or nephew) of Giles de Erdington. The
descent of Thomas is given below, and Michael Guido posted, 8 Jan
2002, that a Giles de Erdington, d. 1359, was a son of a Henry.

WELLINGTON Manor in TELFORD,

...1210 when the manor was granted in fee farm to Thomas of Erdington,
the sheriff. From 1211 Thomas held by serjeanty and from 1212 by the
service of one knight. He died in 1218 and in 1221 his son Giles (d.
c. 1268) was lord. Giles was succeeded by his son Sir Henry (d. c.
1282). Sir Henry's son, also Henry, was a minor, and by 1283 Hugh
Burnell (d. 1286) was lord. His widow Sibyl (d. by 1306) held
Wellington in dower and was succeeded by their grandson Edward Burnell
(d. 1315).
From: 'Wellington: Manors and other estates', A History of the County
of Shropshire: Volume 11: Telford (1985), pp. 215-221. URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk

On a differnt topic, I found some information on your Warin son of
Hugh, who m. Alice de Beaumont:

THEMILTHORPE,

Warine Fitz-Hugh had an interest here in the 17th of Edward I. by
Alice his wife, relict of John de St. Clare; he had 2 daughters and
coheirs; Mabil married to Robert de St. Lys, and Alice to Walter de
Clopton, who contended for the lands of Warine, in Cowling, Suffolk,
this town, Kerdeston, Repham, and East Barsham, Norfolk; and on a
division of the estate, Mabil had Cowling, and Alice the other towns
and lands.

William de Clopton held here and in Kerdeston, in the 20th of Edward
III. the 3d part of a fee, and Hugh de Burgolion, in the said towns, a
3d part of the Earl Warren's fee; William de Kerdeston, also two parts
of a third part of a fee, of William de Clopton.

From: 'Eynford Hundred: Themilthorpe', An Essay towards a
Topographical History of the County of Norfolk: volume 8, pp. 277-279.
URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk

From the above date of 17 Edw I (1288/9) and having 2 coheirs (not
mentioning Lucy who m. John Picot), I believe that the Warin FitzHugh
of Themilthorpe is a grandson of the Warin FitzHugh who m. Alice de
Beaumont. Anyway, with the exception of Cowling, all of the above
lands seem to be the inheritance of Alice de Beaumont, and they all
entered into the Clopton family.

Jim Weber

[CE Wood]

So, has John P. Ravilious' proposed pedigree from his post of 13 May
2002 (see below) been discarded? It is quite different!

CE Wood

"Without putting too fine a point on it, I would suggest a pedigree
showing the following relationships. The de Limesi connection, as
conjectured, may also serve to explain how the other lands held by
descendants of Baldwin de Boulers came to be claimed (successfully,
justifiably, or not) by William de Cantelou.

[conjectured connections shown with dots ... as opposed to 'Lines',
'I' ]

Ralph de Limesi = Hawise
tenant in Domesday Book, I
Luccombe, Somerset & c. I
_____________________________I_________________________
I .
I .
Alan de Limesi (1) Sibyl = Baldwin de = (2) Margery de
. 'nepta I Boulers I Limesi
. Regis' I I
. ________I__ ________I_____________
. I I I I
Geoffrey de Richard = Maud Hilaire Stephen _____ = Sibyl
Limesi FitzUrse I fitz de Stanton I
I I Baldwin I
_I_________ I k. 1152 I
I I I _________I_____ I
I I I I I I
Matillis Beatrice = Reginald Robert = Hilaire Baldwin Stephen
= ___de I "I" dsp 1203 - dower dsp 1207 de
I Beauchamp I in Stanton
I I______ UPMINSTER [1]
_I_______________ ___I____________________
. I I I I
______ Elias Reginald Margaret Mabel
de de "II" = Richard = Benet
Beauchamp Beauchamp FitzUrse I Engaine I Gernet
. I I I________ I_______________
. I I I I
V V V V I
from whom, from whom, from whom, from whom, Roger GERNET
William Elias William Viel ('Vitalis')
DE DE DE ENGAINE
CANTELOU BEAUCHAMP CURTENAI

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Wjhonson]

Rohese was *living* in 1209 and her first husband was then dead.
Silly geese claim he died "about 1209" which is a outrageous simplification of the fact that his wife was claiming in 1209 to be his widow. He could have died 60 years before....

(Well maybe not 60 but you get my point)

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Weber <jim....@nwintl.com>

To: gen-medieval <gen-me...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thu, May 3, 2012 10:40 am
Subject: Re: Giles de Erdington descent from Baldwin de Boulers

-------------------------------
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

[Wjhonson]

Recte: His widow was not claiming to *be* his widow in 1209, rather that he was her prior husband at some point before then

-----Original Message-----
From: Wjhonson <wjho...@aol.com>
To: jim.weber <jim....@nwintl.com>; gen-medieval <gen-me...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thu, May 3, 2012 7:01 pm
Subject: Re: Giles de Erdington descent from Baldwin de Boulers


Rohese was *living* in 1209 and her first husband was then dead.
Silly geese claim he died "about 1209" which is a outrageous simplification of
the fact that his wife was claiming in 1209 to be his widow. He could have died
60 years before....

(Well maybe not 60 but you get my point)







-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Weber <jim....@nwintl.com>
To: gen-medieval <gen-me...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thu, May 3, 2012 10:40 am
Subject: Re: Giles de Erdington descent from Baldwin de Boulers

[Cherryexile]

All,

Just for clarity I thought I would point out that Telford did not
exist as a place until the late 1960's. It was a New Town created to
deal with population overspill from Birmingham and was named after
Thomas Telford the 18th Century Archtitect and Canal builder (amongst
other things). So in this context it is only a geographical reference
point for where Wellington can currently be found on a map and will
not appear in any medieval records. Wellington was one of a number of
small towns that were put together to form Telford.

Neil

> > Jim Weber
>
> Sorry, I forgot one more important point: VCH Warks, in mentioning
> Thomas' father, also states that Thomas' son Giles was succeeded by
> his nephew Henry.  I would assume therefore that the famous Giles de
> Erdington, Judge and Dean of the College of St. Peter of
> Wolverhampton, Staffs for 44 years, died without issue c1268.  However
> VCH Shrops, v11, p. 215-21 (Wellington Manor of Telford), states that
> Henry was a son of Giles.  VCH Warks was written in 1964 (fairly
> late), but the VCH Shrops treatise was written in 1985; so is Henry
> now considered to be a son, not a nephew, of Giles?
>

> Jim Weber- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[John Watson]

Jim,

Although I posted here some time ago that I thought Lucy was the
daughter of Warin son of Hugh and Alice de Beaumont I now see that
this is an error and I had jumped to a conclusion without any real
evidence. I was going to post a correction, but I still have not
figured out exactly who she was.
I have two possibilities in mind at the moment for who Lucy was:
1. She was an illegitimate daughter of Magister Michael Belet
2. She was the widow of a brother (dvp) of Ela, Alice, and Joan de
Beaumont - this seems to fit most of the facts of the various fines.

Regards,
John

[Jim Weber]

Will Johnson,

After searching through hundreds of british-history items for more
information on the Erdington family, I happened to be looking for
something else in CP, and there on the same pages was the Erdington
line which I had posted about a few days ago. Of the line which I had
found in british-history (ERDINGTON descent: Thomas, Giles, Henry (son
or newphew of Giles), Henry, and then possibly Giles), it turns out
that the younger Henry became Henry 1st Lord de Erdington, and that
his son Giles was the 2nd Lord. So there is now a lot of information
on the family, which I will share below starting with Thomas, the
eldest in the CP line, V:85-90:

1. Thomas de Erdington, given manors of Wellington & Shawbury, Salop
by King John 3 Nov 1212, and confirmed the honour of Montgomery, with
Badmondisfield, Suffolk which Thomas had acquired from Stephen de
Stanton.

2. Giles de Erdington, d. shortly before 10 Jan 1268/9. I found a lot
of entries in british-history on Giles. He was a judge and dean of
the College of St Peter in Wolverhampton. With the help of a royal
decree (Hen III) and a papal bull, Giles was instrumental in
establishing the independance of royal chapels from the control of the
local bishop.

3. Henry de Erdington, of age but not yet knighted, 20 Jun 1272, d.
shortly bef. 26 Mar 1282, m. Maud, 4th dau. of Sir Roger de Somery of
Dudley, Worcs.

4a. Giles de Erdington, a minor at his father's death, d. s.p. while a
king's ward.
4b. Henry, 1st Lord de Erdington, b. c1274, living 1341/2, m. bef. Jun
1315 Joan, dau & coheir of Sir Thomas de Wolvey by Alice (who Michael
Guido, SGM 6 Jan 2002, stated was dau. of James de Clinton, of
Badlesley Clinton, Warks).

5. Giles, 2nd Lord de Erdington, of age 20 Jun 1343 when he was
pardoned for acquiring his father's manor of Shawbury without a
license, living 10 Jun 1359, m. Elizabeth dau. & coheir of William de
Tolthorpe, of Tolethorpe, Rutland, by Alice, dau. of Sir Ralph de
Normanville, of Empingham. Alice d. 26 May, 1375.

The line continues on: the 3rd, 4th, & 5th Lords were all named
Thomas, with the last d. s.p.

John Watson,

So no Lucy, dau. of Warin & Alice de Beaumont? I still think, but
with less conviction, that the Warin FitzHugh, husband of Alice, and
father of Alice (wife of Walter de Clopton), was a grandson of Warin &
Alice de Beaumont.

Jim Weber

[John Watson]

Jim,
I can add a few more snippets of information about your 1. Thomas
Erdington.

Thomas married Roese, widow of Adam de Cockfield who died about 1197.
They appear to have had four children:

Mary de Erdington, (d. aft. Jun 1235) married firstly about 1214 to
William FitzAlan and secondly before 1222 to William de Duston.II (d.
1231).
Giles de Erdington -, your No. 2
Thomas de Erdington - living in 1251
Henry de Erdington - a priest

Roese, wife of Thomas de Erdington, by her first husband was the
mother of Nesta de Cockfield who had at least three husbands: Thomas
de Burgh, John de Beauchamp and Matthew de Leyham. In 1248, it was
stated that Nesta's heirs were Bartholomew de Crek, Ralph de Berners
and William de Beaumont, but I haven't had the time to research how
they were Nesta's heirs - probably someone here knows :-)

Mary de Erdington and William de Duston had three daughters, Isabel,
married to Walter de Grey of Rotherfield, Roese, married to John de
Oyly and Joan who married Mauger le Vavasour of Denton.

Regards,

John