info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Roos family of Laxton
627 views
Skip to first unread message
Mark Jennings
Feb 27, 2021, 5:56:52 AM2/27/21
to
Has anyone looked into the Roos family of Laxton, Nottinghamshire and their antecedents in any detail?
I've been helping a contact scan the literature, starting with the Visitation record and Thoroton's notes, but parts of these seem unreliable or slightly muddled.
I've been helping a contact scan the literature, starting with the Visitation record and Thoroton's notes, but parts of these seem unreliable or slightly muddled.
Mark Jennings
Feb 27, 2021, 8:36:38 AM2/27/21
to
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 10:56:52 AM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
> Has anyone looked into the Roos family of Laxton, Nottinghamshire and their antecedents in any detail?
>
> I've been helping a contact scan the literature, starting with the Visitation record and Thoroton's notes, but parts of these seem unreliable or slightly muddled.
So, starting with the Visitation of Nottinghamshire, 1614 (Harl Soc Pub IV, London 1871, pp 111-112), it seems we only reach firm ground with John Roos who married [Isabel] Etton, thereby acquiring Laxton since she was an heiress. The pedigree is muddled at this juncture, since it reverses the generations, ie it makes John Roos the son of Robert Roos who married Elizabeth Midleton, whereas he seems actually to have been Robert's father. The line is correctly presented thereafter, with the third generation being William Roos who married Eleanor Wandesford. Thus:
> Has anyone looked into the Roos family of Laxton, Nottinghamshire and their antecedents in any detail?
>
> I've been helping a contact scan the literature, starting with the Visitation record and Thoroton's notes, but parts of these seem unreliable or slightly muddled.
1. John Roos, married by June 1433 Isabel, eldest daughter and coheir of Miles Etton, and grand-daughter of Sir John Etton of Laxton, born about 1408
Per the Visitation: "John Roos of Laxton" married "eldest daughter and coheir of Sir Myles Etton of Gilling, knight"
Sir John Etton of Laxton (who has a detailed biography in HoP) survived his eldest son, Miles, and left a will dated 1 October 1431 and proved 30 March 1433, and for whom IPMs were held at York, Ancaster and Newark during June 1433 (Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, XIX, 1907, 179-181). The IPMs name Isabella, aged 25, now the wife of John Roos, one of the four daughters and heirs of Miles de Etton, his late son and heir, and specifies that Laxton in particular was her inheritance.
C & C Orwin's "History of Laxton", 1935, OUP, 1935, states that John Roos died in 1458. Isabel remarried, to Roland Sutton: she and her second husband, together with her eldest son, Robert Roos, made a settlement of the manor of Laxton with Archbishop Rotherham of York on 8 July 1484 (CP 25/1/186/41, number 3).
2. Robert Roos, married Elizabeth, probably daughter of William Middleton and grand-daughter of Sir John Middleton
Per the Visitation: "Robert Roos was Lord of Steeton in Com. York" married "Elizabeth daughter of Sir John Midleton of Stokeld, knight"
Robert Roos, of Laxton, esquire, and his wife Elizabeth made a settlement of the manor of Steeton "of her inheritance" on 12 November 1476 (CP 25/1/281/164, number 31). He was named in the 1484 settlement of Laxton. Chronologically, his wife can hardly be the daughter of Sir John Middleton, but she may well have been his sister (which is Thoroton's take on things) and thus a daughter of William Middleton and his wife Margaret Hamerton; in 1484 Robert Roos was acting as a feofee for Sir John's brothers Nicholas, Richard and Thomas.
3. William Roos, married Eleanor, daughter of Christopher Wandesford
Per the Visitation: "William Roos of Laxton" married "Ellinor daughter of Christopher Wandisford of Kirklington"
paulorica...@gmail.com
Feb 27, 2021, 12:43:55 PM2/27/21
to
Mark Jennings
Feb 27, 2021, 2:10:24 PM2/27/21
to
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 1:36:38 PM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
>
> 2. Robert Roos, married Elizabeth, probably daughter of William Middleton and grand-daughter of Sir John Middleton
Proof of this can be found in the following deed, dated 14 February 1443, and possibly a marriage settlement:
>
> 2. Robert Roos, married Elizabeth, probably daughter of William Middleton and grand-daughter of Sir John Middleton
From John Roos of Laxton esq., to Robert Roos his son and heir and Elizabeth his wife, daughter of William Medilton of Stockeld Esq., of a toft and croft and 22 acres now in the tenure of John Wright, a toft and 4 acres now in the tenure of Richard Dighton, a toft and croft and 4 acres now in the tenure of John Malynson, a cottage now in the tenure of Thomas Cawse, 6 acres now in the tenure of Robert Milner, a croft and 3 acres now in the tenure of Margaret Haward, a croft and 36 acres now in the tenure of John Barnbow, a tenement now in the tenure of John Hwton(?), 31 acres now in the tenure of William Wike, a tenement with 40 acres now in the tenure of Robert Genekyr all in North Deighton.
(TNA, WYL230/117)
Mark Jennings
Feb 27, 2021, 2:18:04 PM2/27/21
to
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 7:10:24 PM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
> On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 1:36:38 PM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
> >
> > 2. Robert Roos, married Elizabeth, probably daughter of William Middleton and grand-daughter of Sir John Middleton
>
> Proof of this can be found in the following deed, dated 14 February 1443, and possibly a marriage settlement:
>
>
> (TNA, WYL230/117)
> On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 1:36:38 PM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
> >
> > 2. Robert Roos, married Elizabeth, probably daughter of William Middleton and grand-daughter of Sir John Middleton
>
> Proof of this can be found in the following deed, dated 14 February 1443, and possibly a marriage settlement:
>
>
Recte: West Yorkshire Archives (not TNA)
Mark Jennings
Feb 27, 2021, 6:09:43 PM2/27/21
to
WYL230/114
Title: Settlement made before marriage
Description:
Of Robert, son and heir of John Roos of Laxton Esq, and Elizabeth, daughter of William Midilton of Stockeld, Esq, by which it is agreed that William will pay John 145 marks, and that John will enfeoff Robert and Elizabeth with lands to the yearly value of 10 marks in North Deighton, and after the death of Dame Elizabeth Etton lands to the value of 5 marks, and that he will leave lands of the value of 100 marks to the use of Robert after the deaths of life tenants. John will repay the 145 marks if Robert divorces Elizabeth, or £46. 8s. 4d. if there are no children living when Elizabeth is 42, and will provide for the marriage of daughters if Robert dies leaving no sons. William is to have governance of Robert and Elizabeth until Robert is 14, and both are to be bound by statute merchant in 200 marks.
Written at York 14 Apr. 18 Henry VI [ie 1440]
Seal: red, square, IR.
This likely also gives a name for the wife and widow of Sir Miles Etton (Elizabeth, living in 1440) as well as indicating that John Roos's son Robert was aged under 14 in April 1440, ie born after 1425
Mark Jennings
Feb 28, 2021, 4:53:38 AM2/28/21
to
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 1:36:38 PM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
> On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 10:56:52 AM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
> > Has anyone looked into the Roos family of Laxton, Nottinghamshire and their antecedents in any detail?
> >
> > I've been helping a contact scan the literature, starting with the Visitation record and Thoroton's notes, but parts of these seem unreliable or slightly muddled.
> So, starting with the Visitation of Nottinghamshire, 1614 (Harl Soc Pub IV, London 1871, pp 111-112), it seems we only reach firm ground with John Roos who married [Isabel] Etton, thereby acquiring Laxton since she was an heiress. The pedigree is muddled at this juncture, since it reverses the generations, ie it makes John Roos the son of Robert Roos who married Elizabeth Midleton, whereas he seems actually to have been Robert's father. The line is correctly presented thereafter, with the third generation being William Roos who married Eleanor Wandesford. Thus:
>
> 1. John Roos, married by June 1433 Isabel, eldest daughter and coheir of Miles Etton, and grand-daughter of Sir John Etton of Laxton, born about 1408
>
> Per the Visitation: "John Roos of Laxton" married "eldest daughter and coheir of Sir Myles Etton of Gilling, knight"
>
> Sir John Etton of Laxton (who has a detailed biography in HoP) survived his eldest son, Miles, and left a will dated 1 October 1431 and proved 30 March 1433, and for whom IPMs were held at York, Ancaster and Newark during June 1433 (Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, XIX, 1907, 179-181). The IPMs name Isabella, aged 25, now the wife of John Roos, one of the four daughters and heirs of Miles de Etton, his late son and heir, and specifies that Laxton in particular was her inheritance.
>
> C & C Orwin's "History of Laxton", 1935, OUP, 1935, states that John Roos died in 1458. Isabel remarried, to Roland Sutton: she and her second husband, together with her eldest son, Robert Roos, made a settlement of the manor of Laxton with Archbishop Rotherham of York on 8 July 1484 (CP 25/1/186/41, number 3).
>
John Roos was certainly living as late as April 1458, when he and his son Robert received a quitclaim in respect of certain property at North Deighton, Yorkshire (West Yorkshire Archives, WYL230/13). I haven't been able to confirm a 1458 death date, cited in the Orwins' monograph, but perhaps it came from the court rolls which seem to have survived from the period and which I haven't yet had the opportunity to review.
> > Has anyone looked into the Roos family of Laxton, Nottinghamshire and their antecedents in any detail?
> >
> > I've been helping a contact scan the literature, starting with the Visitation record and Thoroton's notes, but parts of these seem unreliable or slightly muddled.
> So, starting with the Visitation of Nottinghamshire, 1614 (Harl Soc Pub IV, London 1871, pp 111-112), it seems we only reach firm ground with John Roos who married [Isabel] Etton, thereby acquiring Laxton since she was an heiress. The pedigree is muddled at this juncture, since it reverses the generations, ie it makes John Roos the son of Robert Roos who married Elizabeth Midleton, whereas he seems actually to have been Robert's father. The line is correctly presented thereafter, with the third generation being William Roos who married Eleanor Wandesford. Thus:
>
> 1. John Roos, married by June 1433 Isabel, eldest daughter and coheir of Miles Etton, and grand-daughter of Sir John Etton of Laxton, born about 1408
>
> Per the Visitation: "John Roos of Laxton" married "eldest daughter and coheir of Sir Myles Etton of Gilling, knight"
>
> Sir John Etton of Laxton (who has a detailed biography in HoP) survived his eldest son, Miles, and left a will dated 1 October 1431 and proved 30 March 1433, and for whom IPMs were held at York, Ancaster and Newark during June 1433 (Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, XIX, 1907, 179-181). The IPMs name Isabella, aged 25, now the wife of John Roos, one of the four daughters and heirs of Miles de Etton, his late son and heir, and specifies that Laxton in particular was her inheritance.
>
> C & C Orwin's "History of Laxton", 1935, OUP, 1935, states that John Roos died in 1458. Isabel remarried, to Roland Sutton: she and her second husband, together with her eldest son, Robert Roos, made a settlement of the manor of Laxton with Archbishop Rotherham of York on 8 July 1484 (CP 25/1/186/41, number 3).
>
John has a short biography in HoP 1439-1509 (1725-6), which shows that he was MP for Nottinghamshire in 1449. This attributes him with a birthdate of 1405 and a marriage date of circa 1425, but these are probably both broad estimates (no specific primary reference is given for the dates). No parentage is given or guessed at, but it seems clear that he belonged to the branch of the Roos family based at Ingmanthorpe within the parish of Kirk Deighton, West Yorkshire, as alleged in the Vis. Notts entry; he appears frequently in West Yorkshire deeds, mostly relating to property at North Deighton, in the period from 1439 to 1458.
In particular, he seems to have been in dispute with the head of the Ingmanthorpe family, Sir Robert Roos (d 1451) , since in 1447 he submitted to arbitration over claims to the manors of Kirk Deighton, Ingmanthorpe, North Deighton and Steeton (inter alia; West Yorkshire Archives, WYL230/121). In Trinity term 11 Henry VI [1433] Sir Robert and one "John Roos knight" were at loggerheads over the advowson of Kirk Deighton (Pedigrees from the Plea Rolls, 348) - certainly John of Laxton was only an esquire, so that case might not relate to him.
Vis. Notts is so muddled at this point that it is almost worthless. If we accept that the generations of John and his son Robert have simply been transposed, that pedigree would seek to make him the son of Sir Robert Roos of Ingmanthorpe, and the brother of "William Roos, Lord of Ingmanthorpe". I'm not sure there was a William holding Ingmanthorpe at this time period, while there were two Sir Roberts, grandfather and grandson, the first of whom died at a fairly advanced age in 1393, and the second of whom was living in 1393 and died about 1451 (Admon at York). The latter certainly had a younger brother John Roos [and a William, FWIW], named in the 1399 will of their father Thomas, but it isn't clear that he was the man who married Isabel Etton. The younger Sir Robert's aunt, Eleanor Roos, also left a will (York, 1438, printed in Testamenta Eboracensia, ii, 65) in which she names "John Roos, esquire" without expressing the nature of their relationship - possibly this is the Laxton man.
In the absence of clearer evidence, the relationship between the Ingmanthorpe and Laxton families remains unknown, although it seems highly likely that the latter was a cadet branch of the former.
John Roos of Laxton and his wife Isabel Etton had a younger son, William Roos, a priest, named together with his elder brother Robert Roos in connection with property at North Deighton in 1479 (West Yorkshire Archives, WYL230/140)
Michael Rochester
Mar 1, 2021, 9:51:53 PM3/1/21
to
I have been piecing together the ancestry of Humphrey Roos/le Ros of Laxton. Peidgrees in Nottingham histories give me this descent....from William de Ros m. Eustachia FitzRalphThe line is not well documented:
Sir William and Isabel Steetson
Robert de Ros and ----
Robert de Ros and Elizabeth Middleton
John de Ros and Isabel de Etton
William Ros and Ellen Wandesford
Humphrey Ros and Anne Restwold
Francis Ros and Elizabeth Skrimshire
Alice Ros and Jane Stapleton
Jane Stapleton 1535-
(Sir) Thomas Fairfax Sheriff of Yorkshire 1574-1636
Mary Fairfax 1600-1636
Catherine Layton 1618-1686
Layton (Laton) Eden Vicar of Hartburn 1645-1735
Jane Eden 1710-1798
Margaret Harle 1734-1818
George Eden Meggison 1756-1815
Sir William and Isabel Steetson
Robert de Ros and ----
Robert de Ros and Elizabeth Middleton
John de Ros and Isabel de Etton
William Ros and Ellen Wandesford
Humphrey Ros and Anne Restwold
Francis Ros and Elizabeth Skrimshire
Alice Ros and Jane Stapleton
Jane Stapleton 1535-
(Sir) Thomas Fairfax Sheriff of Yorkshire 1574-1636
Mary Fairfax 1600-1636
Catherine Layton 1618-1686
Layton (Laton) Eden Vicar of Hartburn 1645-1735
Jane Eden 1710-1798
Margaret Harle 1734-1818
George Eden Meggison 1756-1815
Mark Jennings
Mar 2, 2021, 6:10:05 AM3/2/21
to
Comments interspersed. You say you are keen to learn - please take these constructively.
On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 2:51:53 AM UTC, kingofr...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have been piecing together the ancestry of Humphrey Roos/le Ros of Laxton. Peidgrees in Nottingham histories
As has been mentioned previously, it would be helpful if you spelled out what these "Nottinghamshire histories" are - without references, it isn't possible to comment on them or engage with them, and you will not be able to learn whether they are reliable or whether this is the best research methodology for you.
>give me this descent....from William de Ros m. Eustachia FitzRalphThe line is not well documented:
> Sir William and Isabel Steetson
I don't know of any evidence that such a person existed - can you cite your specific reference for this? if you don't have one, to be afraid to ditch her completely; for medieval lines, sources such as other people's Ancestry Trees are worse than worthless, unless they are clearly references, preferably to primary sources, or you have learned that the tree owner is an authority on the topic (that is a hard-won accolade, not to be assumed lightly).
> Robert de Ros and ----
> Robert de Ros and Elizabeth Middleton
> John de Ros and Isabel de Etton
Here I have to observe that one of the best ways of learning is to read and absorb material provided. In a series of posts above-thread, I have laid out in detail the primary evidence that proves these two generations are in the wrong order: John Roos [never styled de Ros so far as I know] and Isabel de Etton were the parents of Robert Roos [sic] who married Elizabeth Middleton. It's vital to make corrections when they are offered, or you risk wasting your own time following up lines or facts that are wrong (a good example is the Fitton thread, where the issue is not just whether Isabel Gascoigne has the right parents: the other two descents also fail, since (a) Alice Fitton was not the mother of John Howard and (b) Sir Edward Fitton was not the father of Alice Fitton; these facts got lost in the squabbling). Additionally, there is no good evidence of who John Roo's father is.
> William Ros and Ellen Wandesford
> Humphrey Ros and Anne Restwold
> Francis Ros and Elizabeth Skrimshire
> Alice Ros and Jane Stapleton
This should read "Brian Stapleton" rather than "Jane" of course - I mention this because it appears that Alice Roos married three times, and two of her husbands had the surname Stapleton (History of Parliament, entry for Anthony Stapleton d 1574)
> Jane Stapleton 1535-
> (Sir) Thomas Fairfax Sheriff of Yorkshire 1574-1636
> Mary Fairfax 1600-1636
> Catherine Layton 1618-1686
> Layton (Laton) Eden Vicar of Hartburn 1645-1735
This is another instance of not making corrections when they are given. Layton Eden was almost certainly not born in 1645, despite the later reference to him being "90" when he died (age inflation in the elderly is not something unique to earlier centuries, so it is doubtless a phenomenon you are aware of from your own genealogical studies); a sensible rule of them is that early life ages are normally to be preferred to late life ages, where there is conflict. In this case, we have the 1666 Visitation of Durham, which states that Layton was the 3rd son, and the eldest son was then aged 21 - unless he was a triplet, he must have been younger than his eldest brother to whom we can assign a birthdate of circa 1645. We also have the evidence of his matriculation at Cambridge in 1670 (see Alumni Cantabrigiensis) when he is said to be aged 16. This gives an approximate birth year of 1654 rather than 1645. Getting these facts as correct as possible is an important methodology, since it can allow testing of other events - eg whether a marriage year is likely or not, whether a female is of child-bearing age etc. In genealogy, as you know, small things matter, and in medieval genealogy they matter even more, since it it is not unusual for us to have relatively few fixed facts at our disposal.
> Jane Eden 1710-1798
> Margaret Harle 1734-1818
> George Eden Meggison 1756-1815
This tree outline is much easier to follow - although it takes more work for you to pull together (because it isn't a simply "copy and paste" from the Ancestry facility that shows outline pedigree relationships), it will allow others to engage better and thus to assist you.
On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 2:51:53 AM UTC, kingofr...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have been piecing together the ancestry of Humphrey Roos/le Ros of Laxton. Peidgrees in Nottingham histories
>give me this descent....from William de Ros m. Eustachia FitzRalphThe line is not well documented:
> Sir William and Isabel Steetson
> Robert de Ros and ----
> Robert de Ros and Elizabeth Middleton
> John de Ros and Isabel de Etton
> William Ros and Ellen Wandesford
> Humphrey Ros and Anne Restwold
> Francis Ros and Elizabeth Skrimshire
> Alice Ros and Jane Stapleton
> Jane Stapleton 1535-
> (Sir) Thomas Fairfax Sheriff of Yorkshire 1574-1636
> Mary Fairfax 1600-1636
> Catherine Layton 1618-1686
> Layton (Laton) Eden Vicar of Hartburn 1645-1735
> Jane Eden 1710-1798
> Margaret Harle 1734-1818
> George Eden Meggison 1756-1815
Michael Rochester
Mar 2, 2021, 11:01:37 AM3/2/21
to
To answer:
https://www.stirnet.com/genie/data/british/zwrk/ros2.php for Ros - Steetson (stirnet is based on previous pedigrees, and tries to pull them all together)
http://www.nottshistory.org.uk/monographs/laxton1935/laxton2.htm
(1870) The Visitation of the County of Rutland in the Year 1618-19, Taken by William Camden, Clarenceux King of Arms. London: Harleian Society.
https://www.british-history.ac.uk/thoroton-notts/vol3/pp205-212
https://archive.org/details/whitmoretractsa00whitgoog/page/n42/mode/2up?q=roos
Is that enough? I spelt it all from these sources. As for primary sources, I am not acclimated to Latin, terminology of the time period, and archaic language.
Is this enough?
https://www.stirnet.com/genie/data/british/zwrk/ros2.php for Ros - Steetson (stirnet is based on previous pedigrees, and tries to pull them all together)
http://www.nottshistory.org.uk/monographs/laxton1935/laxton2.htm
(1870) The Visitation of the County of Rutland in the Year 1618-19, Taken by William Camden, Clarenceux King of Arms. London: Harleian Society.
https://www.british-history.ac.uk/thoroton-notts/vol3/pp205-212
https://archive.org/details/whitmoretractsa00whitgoog/page/n42/mode/2up?q=roos
Is that enough? I spelt it all from these sources. As for primary sources, I am not acclimated to Latin, terminology of the time period, and archaic language.
Is this enough?
Michael Rochester
Mar 2, 2021, 11:11:59 AM3/2/21
to
From
"William [Roos] Lord of Ingmanthorpe is said to be father of Sir Robert Roos Lord of Ingmanthorpe, Steeton, and many other lands in Yorkshire, who had two sons — Steeton is indeed one of the lands owned, so in my impure genealogical mind it was attainded by a marriage by a Steeton.
Likely by this marriage:
Sir William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe (d before 12.11.1334)
m. (1310) Isabel de Steeton (a 1347, dau/heir of Richard de Steeton (son of Richard), niece/heir of Sir Thomas de Steeton, widow of Robert de Ughtred)
https://www.stirnet.com/genie/data/british/zwrk/ros2.php
The only will I could find was Humphrey Roos myself, and that is only due to the fact it was all over the interent.
More references to Humphrey: https://books.google.ca/books?id=IGREAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA349
His IPM: https://www.google.com/books/edition/Abstracts_of_the_Inquisitiones_Post_Mort/vGA1AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Humphrey+roos%22&pg=PA121&printsec=frontcover
By the way I am the first one on ancestry to even enter Humphrey Roos as a person, so nearly everything I am doing is due to my own research.
"William [Roos] Lord of Ingmanthorpe is said to be father of Sir Robert Roos Lord of Ingmanthorpe, Steeton, and many other lands in Yorkshire, who had two sons — Steeton is indeed one of the lands owned, so in my impure genealogical mind it was attainded by a marriage by a Steeton.
Likely by this marriage:
Sir William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe (d before 12.11.1334)
m. (1310) Isabel de Steeton (a 1347, dau/heir of Richard de Steeton (son of Richard), niece/heir of Sir Thomas de Steeton, widow of Robert de Ughtred)
https://www.stirnet.com/genie/data/british/zwrk/ros2.php
The only will I could find was Humphrey Roos myself, and that is only due to the fact it was all over the interent.
More references to Humphrey: https://books.google.ca/books?id=IGREAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA349
His IPM: https://www.google.com/books/edition/Abstracts_of_the_Inquisitiones_Post_Mort/vGA1AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Humphrey+roos%22&pg=PA121&printsec=frontcover
By the way I am the first one on ancestry to even enter Humphrey Roos as a person, so nearly everything I am doing is due to my own research.
Michael Rochester
Mar 2, 2021, 11:22:51 AM3/2/21
to
I am pretty confident of this lineage because after Francis Roos, it goes into very well documented families (Stapleton, Fairfax, Eden). Unfortunately, in the intervening generations from the Inglemathorpe Roos/De Ros families, only Wandesford, Etton (leading to Everingham family) and Middleston seem well documented. The rest like Restwold.
As for Rev Layton Eden, I located his will (as well as his father), found several pedigrees (and a book on the family), and mined new information on him via the parish registers; thus anything new is welcome. I do have his college information; I am unsure of ages of matriculation (people did things at much younger ages so I would need a history lesson as well as medieval genealogy lessons (although technically this is Elizabethian age genealogy), and I know he was not an eldest son since his brother Robert, ancestor of the Virginian Edens, received the title. Usually younger sons of nobility go into clerical duties, I have learned. And he married three times (to a Johnson, an Aynselry and Margaret Dove), and his daughter Jane who married Margaret Harle. Since he was vicard for 50 years in the parish of Hartburn he was entering the information on his own marriage and children so in this case, I trust the information.
As for Rev Layton Eden, I located his will (as well as his father), found several pedigrees (and a book on the family), and mined new information on him via the parish registers; thus anything new is welcome. I do have his college information; I am unsure of ages of matriculation (people did things at much younger ages so I would need a history lesson as well as medieval genealogy lessons (although technically this is Elizabethian age genealogy), and I know he was not an eldest son since his brother Robert, ancestor of the Virginian Edens, received the title. Usually younger sons of nobility go into clerical duties, I have learned. And he married three times (to a Johnson, an Aynselry and Margaret Dove), and his daughter Jane who married Margaret Harle. Since he was vicard for 50 years in the parish of Hartburn he was entering the information on his own marriage and children so in this case, I trust the information.
Michael Rochester
Mar 2, 2021, 11:23:53 AM3/2/21
to
By the way I meant I IPM of Humphrey not will; I cannot edit posts.
wjhonson
Mar 2, 2021, 11:24:26 AM3/2/21
to
But I can also add that Jane Stapleton was not born in 1535
wjhonson
Mar 2, 2021, 11:39:03 AM3/2/21
to
On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 8:24:26 AM UTC-8, wjhonson wrote:
> You are hilarious.
>
> But I can also add that Jane Stapleton was not born in 1535
You can *prove* this by yourself
> You are hilarious.
>
> But I can also add that Jane Stapleton was not born in 1535
Francis /Roos/ of Laxton, co Nott
"aet 15" 13H8 (1521-2)
He could *not* have a granddaughter born 25 years after his own birth
Michael Rochester
Mar 2, 2021, 12:27:24 PM3/2/21
to
YOU are not hilarious. Insufferable, perhaps; not hilarious. I have done stand up comedy and do a humorous blog. This is not your forte. Stick to substantive statements and not delusions of your grandeur.
http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/fairfax-sir-william-1531-97
Burke's Commoners, Vol. II, p., 115
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Yorkshire_Archaeological_Journal/q09NAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22william+fairfax%22+%22jane+stapleton%22&pg=PA133&printsec=frontcover
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Publications_of_the_Thoresby_Society/MR4tAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22william+fairfax%22+%22jane+stapleton%22&pg=PA129&printsec=frontcover
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Miscellanea/eNhAAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22william+fairfax%22+%22jane+stapleton%22&pg=PA129&printsec=frontcover
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Whitmore_tracts_a_collection_of_essays_o/nysBAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=%22william%20fairfax%22
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Miscellanea/eNhAAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=roos+%22jane+stapleton%22&pg=PA129&printsec=frontcover
The relationship is SPELLED OUT. I may have the dates off, but the relationship is solid,
My suggestion: if you have a retort, do it within the confines of assisting me; if you are insulting, I will be insulting back. Choose your words wisely.
Thanks
http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/fairfax-sir-william-1531-97
Burke's Commoners, Vol. II, p., 115
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Yorkshire_Archaeological_Journal/q09NAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22william+fairfax%22+%22jane+stapleton%22&pg=PA133&printsec=frontcover
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Publications_of_the_Thoresby_Society/MR4tAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22william+fairfax%22+%22jane+stapleton%22&pg=PA129&printsec=frontcover
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Miscellanea/eNhAAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22william+fairfax%22+%22jane+stapleton%22&pg=PA129&printsec=frontcover
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Whitmore_tracts_a_collection_of_essays_o/nysBAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=%22william%20fairfax%22
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Miscellanea/eNhAAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=roos+%22jane+stapleton%22&pg=PA129&printsec=frontcover
The relationship is SPELLED OUT. I may have the dates off, but the relationship is solid,
My suggestion: if you have a retort, do it within the confines of assisting me; if you are insulting, I will be insulting back. Choose your words wisely.
Thanks
Michael Rochester
Mar 2, 2021, 12:35:56 PM3/2/21
to
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Whitmore_tracts_a_collection_of_essays_o/nysBAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=francis+roos+stapleton&pg=RA3-PA37&printsec=frontcover
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_House_of_Commons_1509_1558/u_eIrJpc_T0C?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=roos
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Publications_of_the_Thoresby_Society/MR4tAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=francis+roos+stapleton&pg=PA129&printsec=frontcover
Well, it seems all these sources agree with the lineage, Mr "Jhonson". I may be hilarious, but I do have evidence. If you don't LIKE the evidence, I would be curious as to why (sans ANY of your asides). Give me substantive reasoning, or get off this thread.
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_House_of_Commons_1509_1558/u_eIrJpc_T0C?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=roos
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Publications_of_the_Thoresby_Society/MR4tAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=francis+roos+stapleton&pg=PA129&printsec=frontcover
Well, it seems all these sources agree with the lineage, Mr "Jhonson". I may be hilarious, but I do have evidence. If you don't LIKE the evidence, I would be curious as to why (sans ANY of your asides). Give me substantive reasoning, or get off this thread.
wjhonson
Mar 2, 2021, 3:34:32 PM3/2/21
to
I said that she was not born in 1535
Wake up
John Higgins
Mar 2, 2021, 5:18:34 PM3/2/21
to
On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 8:11:59 AM UTC-8, kingofr...@gmail.com wrote:
> From
> "William [Roos] Lord of Ingmanthorpe is said to be father of Sir Robert Roos Lord of Ingmanthorpe, Steeton, and many other lands in Yorkshire, who had two sons — Steeton is indeed one of the lands owned, so in my impure genealogical mind it was attainded by a marriage by a Steeton.
>
> Likely by this marriage:
> Sir William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe (d before 12.11.1334)
> m. (1310) Isabel de Steeton (a 1347, dau/heir of Richard de Steeton (son of Richard), niece/heir of Sir Thomas de Steeton, widow of Robert de Ughtred)
> https://www.stirnet.com/genie/data/british/zwrk/ros2.php
>
FWIW, Stirnet's source for the Steeton marriage is the article on "Ros of Ingmanthorpe" in CP vol. 11 pp. 117-119, which provides sources for this particular issue.
> "William [Roos] Lord of Ingmanthorpe is said to be father of Sir Robert Roos Lord of Ingmanthorpe, Steeton, and many other lands in Yorkshire, who had two sons — Steeton is indeed one of the lands owned, so in my impure genealogical mind it was attainded by a marriage by a Steeton.
>
> Likely by this marriage:
> Sir William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe (d before 12.11.1334)
> m. (1310) Isabel de Steeton (a 1347, dau/heir of Richard de Steeton (son of Richard), niece/heir of Sir Thomas de Steeton, widow of Robert de Ughtred)
> https://www.stirnet.com/genie/data/british/zwrk/ros2.php
>
A point to consider: This particular Stirnet page is clearly labeled "FRAFT" and includes this statement:
"This family is still being researched. It has NOT yet been launched formally into the Database but is shown here as DRAFT in the hope that one or more visitors to the site will contribute information that will enable us to develop this page to an acceptable standard."
That should be a warning to be cautious in citing it without further checking - and certainly not as a sole source for anything.
Michael Rochester
Mar 2, 2021, 5:44:12 PM3/2/21
to
Oh geeze, I did find that reference to Joan Stapleton's age:
Here is your reference: https://www.jing.fm/iclip/imiowx_pog-mo-thoin-t-shirt-kiss-my-ass/
Here is your reference: https://www.jing.fm/iclip/imiowx_pog-mo-thoin-t-shirt-kiss-my-ass/
Michael Rochester
Mar 2, 2021, 5:46:58 PM3/2/21
to
I use (?) as unsure for cases like this; wikitree has options to make pedigree connections "certain" and "uncertain;" ancestry does not so...I have to put the uncertainties in the notes. It is nothing exciting to pursue anyway, as only the father is known. If there are some breakthroughs in the lineage of Roos/Steeton I will be happy to look at them.
wjhonson
Mar 2, 2021, 7:19:39 PM3/2/21
to
On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 2:44:12 PM UTC-8, kingofr...@gmail.com wrote:
> Oh geeze, I did find that reference to Joan Stapleton's age:
> Here is your reference: https://www.jing.fm/iclip/imiowx_pog-mo-thoin-t-shirt-kiss-my-ass/
You are so blinded you cannot even see that one of your own sources *states* her age.
> Oh geeze, I did find that reference to Joan Stapleton's age:
> Here is your reference: https://www.jing.fm/iclip/imiowx_pog-mo-thoin-t-shirt-kiss-my-ass/
Perhaps English is your third language
Mark Jennings
Mar 3, 2021, 3:39:51 AM3/3/21
to
On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 10:18:34 PM UTC, jhigg...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 8:11:59 AM UTC-8, kingofr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > From
> > "William [Roos] Lord of Ingmanthorpe is said to be father of Sir Robert Roos Lord of Ingmanthorpe, Steeton, and many other lands in Yorkshire, who had two sons — Steeton is indeed one of the lands owned, so in my impure genealogical mind it was attainded by a marriage by a Steeton.
> >
> > Likely by this marriage:
> > Sir William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe (d before 12.11.1334)
> > m. (1310) Isabel de Steeton (a 1347, dau/heir of Richard de Steeton (son of Richard), niece/heir of Sir Thomas de Steeton, widow of Robert de Ughtred)
> > https://www.stirnet.com/genie/data/british/zwrk/ros2.php
> >
> FWIW, Stirnet's source for the Steeton marriage is the article on "Ros of Ingmanthorpe" in CP vol. 11 pp. 117-119, which provides sources for this particular issue.
>
John -- many thanks for posting this reference to the article in CP - I didn't know it existed (since the Ro(o)s of Ingmanthorpe line was never accounted as holding a peerage).
> On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 8:11:59 AM UTC-8, kingofr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > From
> > "William [Roos] Lord of Ingmanthorpe is said to be father of Sir Robert Roos Lord of Ingmanthorpe, Steeton, and many other lands in Yorkshire, who had two sons — Steeton is indeed one of the lands owned, so in my impure genealogical mind it was attainded by a marriage by a Steeton.
> >
> > Likely by this marriage:
> > Sir William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe (d before 12.11.1334)
> > m. (1310) Isabel de Steeton (a 1347, dau/heir of Richard de Steeton (son of Richard), niece/heir of Sir Thomas de Steeton, widow of Robert de Ughtred)
> > https://www.stirnet.com/genie/data/british/zwrk/ros2.php
> >
> FWIW, Stirnet's source for the Steeton marriage is the article on "Ros of Ingmanthorpe" in CP vol. 11 pp. 117-119, which provides sources for this particular issue.
>
Mark
Mark Jennings
Mar 3, 2021, 12:08:34 PM3/3/21
to
On Sunday, February 28, 2021 at 9:53:38 AM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
>
> John has a short biography in HoP 1439-1509 (1725-6), which shows that he was MP for Nottinghamshire in 1449. This attributes him with a birthdate of 1405 and a marriage date of circa 1425, but these are probably both broad estimates (no specific primary reference is given for the dates). No parentage is given or guessed at, but it seems clear that he belonged to the branch of the Roos family based at Ingmanthorpe within the parish of Kirk Deighton, West Yorkshire, as alleged in the Vis. Notts entry; he appears frequently in West Yorkshire deeds, mostly relating to property at North Deighton, in the period from 1439 to 1458.
>
> In particular, he seems to have been in dispute with the head of the Ingmanthorpe family, Sir Robert Roos (d 1451) , since in 1447 he submitted to arbitration over claims to the manors of Kirk Deighton, Ingmanthorpe, North Deighton and Steeton (inter alia; West Yorkshire Archives, WYL230/121). In Trinity term 11 Henry VI [1433] Sir Robert and one "John Roos knight" were at loggerheads over the advowson of Kirk Deighton (Pedigrees from the Plea Rolls, 348) - certainly John of Laxton was only an esquire, so that case might not relate to him.
>
> Vis. Notts is so muddled at this point that it is almost worthless. If we accept that the generations of John and his son Robert have simply been transposed, that pedigree would seek to make him the son of Sir Robert Roos of Ingmanthorpe, and the brother of "William Roos, Lord of Ingmanthorpe". I'm not sure there was a William holding Ingmanthorpe at this time period, while there were two Sir Roberts, grandfather and grandson, the first of whom died at a fairly advanced age in 1393, and the second of whom was living in 1393 and died about 1451 (Admon at York). The latter certainly had a younger brother John Roos [and a William, FWIW], named in the 1399 will of their father Thomas, but it isn't clear that he was the man who married Isabel Etton. The younger Sir Robert's aunt, Eleanor Roos, also left a will (York, 1438, printed in Testamenta Eboracensia, ii, 65) in which she names "John Roos, esquire" without expressing the nature of their relationship - possibly this is the Laxton man.
>
> In the absence of clearer evidence, the relationship between the Ingmanthorpe and Laxton families remains unknown, although it seems highly likely that the latter was a cadet branch of the former.
Thanks to CP as kindly pointed out by John Higgins, we can likely place John Roos, the founder of the Laxton branch, within the Ingmanthorpe line; rather then being a cadet branch, it appears that the Laxton family was the senior line, largely disinherited in the late 1300s.
>
> John has a short biography in HoP 1439-1509 (1725-6), which shows that he was MP for Nottinghamshire in 1449. This attributes him with a birthdate of 1405 and a marriage date of circa 1425, but these are probably both broad estimates (no specific primary reference is given for the dates). No parentage is given or guessed at, but it seems clear that he belonged to the branch of the Roos family based at Ingmanthorpe within the parish of Kirk Deighton, West Yorkshire, as alleged in the Vis. Notts entry; he appears frequently in West Yorkshire deeds, mostly relating to property at North Deighton, in the period from 1439 to 1458.
>
> In particular, he seems to have been in dispute with the head of the Ingmanthorpe family, Sir Robert Roos (d 1451) , since in 1447 he submitted to arbitration over claims to the manors of Kirk Deighton, Ingmanthorpe, North Deighton and Steeton (inter alia; West Yorkshire Archives, WYL230/121). In Trinity term 11 Henry VI [1433] Sir Robert and one "John Roos knight" were at loggerheads over the advowson of Kirk Deighton (Pedigrees from the Plea Rolls, 348) - certainly John of Laxton was only an esquire, so that case might not relate to him.
>
> Vis. Notts is so muddled at this point that it is almost worthless. If we accept that the generations of John and his son Robert have simply been transposed, that pedigree would seek to make him the son of Sir Robert Roos of Ingmanthorpe, and the brother of "William Roos, Lord of Ingmanthorpe". I'm not sure there was a William holding Ingmanthorpe at this time period, while there were two Sir Roberts, grandfather and grandson, the first of whom died at a fairly advanced age in 1393, and the second of whom was living in 1393 and died about 1451 (Admon at York). The latter certainly had a younger brother John Roos [and a William, FWIW], named in the 1399 will of their father Thomas, but it isn't clear that he was the man who married Isabel Etton. The younger Sir Robert's aunt, Eleanor Roos, also left a will (York, 1438, printed in Testamenta Eboracensia, ii, 65) in which she names "John Roos, esquire" without expressing the nature of their relationship - possibly this is the Laxton man.
>
> In the absence of clearer evidence, the relationship between the Ingmanthorpe and Laxton families remains unknown, although it seems highly likely that the latter was a cadet branch of the former.
The key to this identification lies in the court cases between John Roos of Laxton and Sir Robert Roos of Ingmanthorpe, disputing various family manors and rights (1433-1447). We have a brief pedigree for Sir Robert, abstracted from the 1433 case:
1. Robert Roos, Lord of Ingmanthorpe
2. Thomas Roos, married Joan
3. Sir Robert Roos, plaintiff in 1433
1. is Sir Robert Roos was one of the witnesses in the famous heraldic case of Scrope v Grosvenor (1389), when he is said to be aged 76 (so born circa 1313). His will from 1393 survives at York, and is reproduced in Testamenta Eboracensia. The only son he named in it is 2. Thomas, who also left a will (1399) at York, in which he names his son 3. Robert - the plaintiff of 1433. This second Sir Robert succeeded his father Thomas in the Ingmanthorpe estates.
However, as CP makes clear, the older Sir Robert had an elder son, also named Robert, whom he appears to have disinherited. CP states that this Robert recovered the manors of North Deighton and Steeton in 1396. As "Robert Roos, elder son and heir of Robert Roos, knight, of Ingmanthorpe", he was dealing with property at North Deighton in 1398/9 (22 Richard II) [West Yorkshire Archives, WYL230/84, 86). He held the manor of North Deighton between 1397 and 1408 (West Yorkshire Archives, Court Rolls of Robert Roos for North Deighton, WYL230/1580). As we have seen, John Roos of Laxton afterwards held the manor of North Deighton. The 1433 and 1447 cases likely represent John's attempt to revisit the exclusion of Robert Roos from his wider inheritance, and therefore it seems reasonable to conclude that John was the son (or perhaps grandson) of Robert Roos, elder son of Sir Robert. Adding the further details from CP, we can propose the following descent:
A. Sir William de Ros of Helmsley, died circa 1264 (son of Robert de Ros and Isabel of Scotland)
B. Sir William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe (younger son), dead by 1310; married circa 1268 Eustache, daughter and heir of Ralph Fitz Hugh
C. Sir William de Ros of Ingmanthorpe, dead by 1334; married 1310 Isabel, daughter and coheir of Richard de Stetton
D. Sir Robert Roos of Ingmanthorpe, born circa 1313; died 1393
E. Robert Roos of North Deighton, ff 1407 - disinherited by his father
F. John Roos of North Deighton, married Isabel de Etton, heiress of Laxton
Michael Rochester
Mar 3, 2021, 5:10:41 PM3/3/21
to
THANK YOU!
That leads to my Humphrey Roos. I am grateful for your assistance.
Mike
That leads to my Humphrey Roos. I am grateful for your assistance.
Mike
lancast...@gmail.com
Mar 5, 2021, 11:04:22 AM3/5/21
to
In the hopes of ending the loop: What wjhonson sort-of explained was that Francis Roos of Laxton, was apparently 15 in 1521/2 ("aet 15" 13H8). I don't know from which document, but this is typical visitation shorthand, so this is clearly from a visitation made 1521/2. I am presuming one of the sources linked to in the discussion above either is, or cites, such a visitation?
Apparently this Francis is grandfather to Jane Stapleton who therefore can not have been born in 1535. Make sense?
Andrew
Mark Jennings
Mar 5, 2021, 1:56:35 PM3/5/21
to
On Friday, March 5, 2021 at 4:04:22 PM UTC, lancast...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 1:19:39 AM UTC+1, wjhonson wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 2:44:12 PM UTC-8, kingofr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Oh geeze, I did find that reference to Joan Stapleton's age:
> > > Here is your reference: https://www.jing.fm/iclip/imiowx_pog-mo-thoin-t-shirt-kiss-my-ass/
> > You are so blinded you cannot even see that one of your own sources *states* her age.
> > Perhaps English is your third language
> To be fair, "aet" is not English, so to me it makes no sense to write a long series of mails to a person who has already said they don't read Latin, when you have not yet simply spelled out what this Latin says.
>
> In the hopes of ending the loop: What wjhonson sort-of explained was that Francis Roos of Laxton, was apparently 15 in 1521/2 ("aet 15" 13H8). I don't know from which document, but this is typical visitation shorthand, so this is clearly from a visitation made 1521/2. I am presuming one of the sources linked to in the discussion above either is, or cites, such a visitation?
The age comes from his father's IPM of July 1521, in which Francis is said to be aged 15, thus indicating a birthdate of circa 1506.
> On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 1:19:39 AM UTC+1, wjhonson wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 2:44:12 PM UTC-8, kingofr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Oh geeze, I did find that reference to Joan Stapleton's age:
> > > Here is your reference: https://www.jing.fm/iclip/imiowx_pog-mo-thoin-t-shirt-kiss-my-ass/
> > You are so blinded you cannot even see that one of your own sources *states* her age.
> > Perhaps English is your third language
> To be fair, "aet" is not English, so to me it makes no sense to write a long series of mails to a person who has already said they don't read Latin, when you have not yet simply spelled out what this Latin says.
>
> In the hopes of ending the loop: What wjhonson sort-of explained was that Francis Roos of Laxton, was apparently 15 in 1521/2 ("aet 15" 13H8). I don't know from which document, but this is typical visitation shorthand, so this is clearly from a visitation made 1521/2. I am presuming one of the sources linked to in the discussion above either is, or cites, such a visitation?
Mark Jennings
Mar 5, 2021, 2:34:46 PM3/5/21
to
On Friday, March 5, 2021 at 4:04:22 PM UTC, lancast...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 1:19:39 AM UTC+1, wjhonson wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 2:44:12 PM UTC-8, kingofr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Oh geeze, I did find that reference to Joan Stapleton's age:
> > > Here is your reference: https://www.jing.fm/iclip/imiowx_pog-mo-thoin-t-shirt-kiss-my-ass/
> > You are so blinded you cannot even see that one of your own sources *states* her age.
> > Perhaps English is your third language
> To be fair, "aet" is not English, so to me it makes no sense to write a long series of mails to a person who has already said they don't read Latin, when you have not yet simply spelled out what this Latin says.
Presumably the source referred to is History of Parliament online. The entry for Sir William Fairfax states that he married Jane Stapleton "circa 1572" [it was actually 27 April 1571, at Burton Joyce, Nottinghamshire, per the parish registers], and that she was then aged 16. However, it isn't clear which of the cited sources provides/asserts such a birthdate. Her only surviving child, Thomas Fairfax, was born about 1575 (there is a detailed discussion about his birthdate in the notes for his own biography in HoP). In any case, a 1535 birthdate does seem too early for Jane Stapleton.
> > On Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 2:44:12 PM UTC-8, kingofr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Oh geeze, I did find that reference to Joan Stapleton's age:
> > > Here is your reference: https://www.jing.fm/iclip/imiowx_pog-mo-thoin-t-shirt-kiss-my-ass/
> > You are so blinded you cannot even see that one of your own sources *states* her age.
> > Perhaps English is your third language
> To be fair, "aet" is not English, so to me it makes no sense to write a long series of mails to a person who has already said they don't read Latin, when you have not yet simply spelled out what this Latin says.
Thoroton notes that a monument to Alice Roos stood in the church at Burton Joyce, and he records the since-effaced inscription as follows (it gives no clues as to ages):
Here lyeth the body of Alis Rous, doughtere of Francis Roos of Laxston in the county of Nottingham, esquier, first wiffe to Brian Stapiltun, esq; younger sonn of sir Brian Stapiltun, knyght after wiffe to Anthony Stapilton of Remson, esq; last wiffe to Thomas Leeke of Hasland in the county of Darby, esq. The said Alis was buryed the 3d. day of January in the yeare of our Lord MVC.D.AVE
(Thoroton suggested that the year of death was intended for 1595)
Mark Jennings
Mar 6, 2021, 12:37:00 PM3/6/21
to
Incidentally, it appears that the Orwins may have been incorrect in putting forward a 1458 death date for John Roos: administration of his estate was granted at York on 20 October 1461 (Reg 20 (W. Booth), fo: 282r) and a writ of diem clausit extremum was issued on 13 February 1461/2 (CFR, 20, 6), although it seems no Inquisition is recorded in the NA series (perhaps there was no holding in chief). A death date of 1461 accordingly seems more likely.
wjhonson
Mar 6, 2021, 3:24:12 PM3/6/21
to
On Friday, March 5, 2021 at 11:34:46 AM UTC-8, mark66j...@gmail.com wrote:
> Presumably the source referred to is History of Parliament online. The entry for Sir William Fairfax states that he married Jane Stapleton "circa 1572" [it was actually 27 April 1571, at Burton Joyce, Nottinghamshire, per the parish registers], and that she was then aged 16. However, it isn't clear which of the cited sources provides/asserts such a birthdate. Her only surviving child, Thomas Fairfax, was born about 1575 (there is a detailed discussion about his birthdate in the notes for his own biography in HoP). In any case, a 1535 birthdate does seem too early for Jane Stapleton.
>
The sources cited for this section are
> Presumably the source referred to is History of Parliament online. The entry for Sir William Fairfax states that he married Jane Stapleton "circa 1572" [it was actually 27 April 1571, at Burton Joyce, Nottinghamshire, per the parish registers], and that she was then aged 16. However, it isn't clear which of the cited sources provides/asserts such a birthdate. Her only surviving child, Thomas Fairfax, was born about 1575 (there is a detailed discussion about his birthdate in the notes for his own biography in HoP). In any case, a 1535 birthdate does seem too early for Jane Stapleton.
>
*Foster, Yorks. Peds. i; Gooder, Parl. Rep. Yorks. ii. 37-8; Yorks. Arch. Jnl. xix. 133-4.
I can't find these details in Foster's Visitation of York
What is the second source exactly?
Mark Jennings
Mar 6, 2021, 3:31:42 PM3/6/21
to
Mark Jennings
Mar 6, 2021, 3:34:56 PM3/6/21
to
wjhonson
Mar 6, 2021, 3:42:19 PM3/6/21
to
On Saturday, March 6, 2021 at 12:34:56 PM UTC-8, mark66j...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, March 6, 2021 at 8:31:42 PM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
> > On Saturday, March 6, 2021 at 8:24:12 PM UTC, wjhonson wrote:
> > >
I have found the information in the Yorkshire Archaeology Journal Volume 19 page 133-4
> On Saturday, March 6, 2021 at 8:31:42 PM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
> > On Saturday, March 6, 2021 at 8:24:12 PM UTC, wjhonson wrote:
> > >
which states
"Brian [Stapleton] died on the 27th Aug 1567 and when his IPM was taken on the 4 Dec following his daughter and heiress Jane was eleven years and five months old"
They cite Inq p m 10 Eliz no 69 at Nottingham
wjhonson
Mar 6, 2021, 3:43:57 PM3/6/21
to
Mark Jennings
Mar 6, 2021, 4:42:38 PM3/6/21
to
Mark Jennings
Mar 7, 2021, 12:36:56 PM3/7/21
to
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 1:36:38 PM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
> On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 10:56:52 AM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
> > Has anyone looked into the Roos family of Laxton, Nottinghamshire and their antecedents in any detail?
>
> 1. John Roos, married by June 1433 Isabel, eldest daughter and coheir of Miles Etton, and grand-daughter of Sir John Etton of Laxton, born about 1408
>
> Per the Visitation: "William Roos of Laxton" married "Ellinor daughter of Christopher Wandisford of Kirklington"
Apart from the Visitation of Nottinghamshire, there is very little historical reference to William Roos, the third generation of that family at Laxton. This possibly because his father Robert had in 1484 given effective possession of the manor to the Archbishop of York; Robert was still living in 1496 when he and his wife were dealing with the manor of North Deighton (West Yorkshire Archives, WYL230/163). Although a son Thomas Roos is named in 1482 (WYL230/152) - he was likely the one of that name admitted as rector of Laxton in 1499 - none of the family papers appears to mention William. The only other reference I have seen is in Dugdale's 1665 Visitation of Yorkshire, sub Wandesford, where "Elizabeth" the daughter of Christopher Wandesford is said to have married "William Roos of Nottinghamshire".
There is a "William Roos of Laxton, gentleman", who was living in the early 1500s - he was a juror in an IPM in 1508 (Thoroton Society Record Series, III, p 49) and is named as a feoffee of Humphrey Roos of Laxton in 1513 (ibid, p 121) - but he cannot be the father of Humphrey Roos, since that individual would have been of the rank of esquire (heir of the eldest son of a knight) and would not have appeared last in a list of feoffees appointed by his son. He also seems too early to have been Humphrey's nephew, son of his brother Richard (per Vis. Notts), so perhaps he is an otherwise unattested further brother.
> On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 10:56:52 AM UTC, Mark Jennings wrote:
> > Has anyone looked into the Roos family of Laxton, Nottinghamshire and their antecedents in any detail?
>
> 1. John Roos, married by June 1433 Isabel, eldest daughter and coheir of Miles Etton, and grand-daughter of Sir John Etton of Laxton, born about 1408
>
> 2. Robert Roos, married Elizabeth, probably daughter of William Middleton and grand-daughter of Sir John Middleton
>
> 3. William Roos, married Eleanor, daughter of Christopher Wandesford
> 2. Robert Roos, married Elizabeth, probably daughter of William Middleton and grand-daughter of Sir John Middleton
>
>
> Per the Visitation: "William Roos of Laxton" married "Ellinor daughter of Christopher Wandisford of Kirklington"
Apart from the Visitation of Nottinghamshire, there is very little historical reference to William Roos, the third generation of that family at Laxton. This possibly because his father Robert had in 1484 given effective possession of the manor to the Archbishop of York; Robert was still living in 1496 when he and his wife were dealing with the manor of North Deighton (West Yorkshire Archives, WYL230/163). Although a son Thomas Roos is named in 1482 (WYL230/152) - he was likely the one of that name admitted as rector of Laxton in 1499 - none of the family papers appears to mention William. The only other reference I have seen is in Dugdale's 1665 Visitation of Yorkshire, sub Wandesford, where "Elizabeth" the daughter of Christopher Wandesford is said to have married "William Roos of Nottinghamshire".
There is a "William Roos of Laxton, gentleman", who was living in the early 1500s - he was a juror in an IPM in 1508 (Thoroton Society Record Series, III, p 49) and is named as a feoffee of Humphrey Roos of Laxton in 1513 (ibid, p 121) - but he cannot be the father of Humphrey Roos, since that individual would have been of the rank of esquire (heir of the eldest son of a knight) and would not have appeared last in a list of feoffees appointed by his son. He also seems too early to have been Humphrey's nephew, son of his brother Richard (per Vis. Notts), so perhaps he is an otherwise unattested further brother.
0 new messages