Anne Norreys, 2nd wife of Edward Sulyard, daughter of Isabell/Elizabeth Wyfold, granddaughter of Margaret Chedworth sometime Duchess of Norfolk

[karen sims]

The will of Jane Redmyld, daughter of Margaret (nee: Chedworth) Wyfold
Norreys Howard, suggested to me that Anne Norreys Sulyard, 2nd wife of
Edward Sulyard was the daughter of Isabell Wyfold. However, i could not
find this in any family trees.

Leo's database here:
http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00500054&tree=LEO
has this Anne Norreys as the daughter of John Norreys and Millicent
Ravenscroft which is the wrong generation, since this John Norreys of Bray
died in 1361.

Douglas Richardson showed that Isabell Wyfold had a daughter Amy/Anne here:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/gen-medieval/2010-04/1270792335

The first document Douglas listed C 1/151/124 is here:

http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT7/ChP/C1no151/IMG_0220.htm

It was the last document in the bundle and the right side is faded and
ripped.
I can read just enough of it to be sure that it is the right document and
her name is Anne not Amy
Maybe someone else can get more out of it.
(Query: C4's - not on AALT?)

Searching further I discovered this identification had been made in 1987 by
Keene, D.J.; Harding, Vanessa. in the Historical gazetteer of London before
the Great Fire - Cheapside; parishes of All Hallows Honey Lane, St Martin
Pomary, St Mary le Bow, St Mary Colechurch and St Pancras Soper Lane
which can be viewed at:

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=1835&strquery=wyfold

It says:

Nicholas Wyfold died in 1456, and his widow married John Howard, duke of
Norfolk (k. 1485); they apparently held the property for a time.
Wyfold's heir was his daughter Isabel, who married John Nores and
afterwards Sir Henry Marny, kt. (cr. Lord Marny 1523).
The London properties appear to have been settled, by agreement, on
Isabel's children by Sir Henry Marny. In 1503 John Marny, esquire,
probably the elder son of Sir Henry by a previous marriage, and Robert
Sympson, clerk, recovered certain properties in London, including 4
messuages in All Hallows Honey Lane, against Edmund Nores, son of John
Nores and Isabel. The recovery was to the use of Thomas Marny,
son of Sir Henry and Isabel, and his heirs, with remainders successively to
Grace Marny, daughter of Sir Henry and Isabel, Edmund Nores,
and Anne, wife of Edmund Suliard and daughter of John Nores and Isabel.
John Marny and Robert Sympson granted the properties to
Sir Henry Marny and Robert Badby, clerk, to hold for the former's life with
remainders as above. In 1505 Edmund Nores quitclaimed
in the property for Sir Henry Marny's life and to Thomas Marny and Grace
Marny and their heirs. (fn 14)
(fn 14 Beaven; PRO, SC6/Hen 8/2116; HR 231(20, 29). Cf. *Complete Peerage*,
viii, p. 523, ix, p. 612; *Burke's Extinct Peerages* (s.n. Marney).)

Anne Norreys was the mother of Edward Sulayrd's children Mary Sulyard who
married Sir Thomas Cornwallis, and of Eustace Sulyard.

Nina Green discusses the "erroneous" 1634 visitation of Essex pedigree here:

http://www.oxford-shakespeare.com/Probate/PROB_11-31_ff_271-4.pdf

-----

The will of Jane Redmyld: (my transcription and mistakes)

Note: Grace (nee: Bayard) Langley Danyell was the wife of Edmund Danyell,
son of Margaret Howard (Duke John Howard's sister) and Thomas Danyell.
Edmund Danyell was raised in the Howard household. While Grace was
related to the Knyvetts, I have not found anything that would make her a
blood cousin of Jane Redmyld, but I presume cousin covers step-cousin in
law, especially when you have spent time in the same household together.

In the name of god amen, the 18th day of June in the year of our lord 1500,
I Jane Redmyld being
of whole mind and good remembrance, make my will and testment in this wise:
first I bequeath my soul to almighty god,
our blessed lady and to all seynts. My body to be buried in Stoke Neyland
church within the guier(?) at the end of the
end of the (sic) tomb of my lady, my mother, sometime DUCHESS OF NORFOLK,
And I give vj li in money to have an
honest preist to sing for my soul by the space of x years after my
decease. And moreover, I will that myne executors or the executors
of them dispose yearly xiij s. ii d. in keeping yearly my year day or obite
as long as the sum of x l. shall endure, And
the form and manner following: I will have a durge by note....

(there follows direction for specific payments and specific dirges, masses,
and conditions)...

And all the remainder of the said xiij s. ii d. yearly de devided among
poor people.
Also I give to the Proffyte of Seynt Johns gilde xx s. Item: to the Grey
Friars of Colchester x s. Item: To the Crouche
Friars of the same town x s. Item: I give to the church of Leyr Marney a
t__ vestment ast_ my priest serson_ And
I will that myne executors provide for an honest stone of marble to lay of
my grave. Moreover I give to MARY SOLYARD
a flower with a ruby and a diamond, and a great pearl, the which is in her
possession. Item: a pair of beeds of gold, a basin
and the ewer of pewter, and a pair of sheets. Item: to my niece ANN
SOLYARD a night gown of black worsted trimmed
with white. And to my neice GRACE MARNEY a black gown furred with gray.
Item: I give to JANE BADBY a gown of black
furred with black. Item: to my niece KATE KNYVETT a black gown furred
with white and a Kertell of black satin. Item: I will
that JANE AUSTY have a black gowne purseled with velvet, a kyrtell of
worsted and the pair corse sheets, a __
of black cloth __ __ and a noble more. Also I give to ROBT my servant a
gelding saddle and bridle, a __
for a palette, a pair corse sheets, his wages and a noble more. Item: I
give to my cousin GRACE DANYELL a pair of beads of
white amber with a crucifix thereon, a demysent of blakc woolwett. Item:
to JOHN DANYELL her son xx s. Item to JANE
DANYELL her daughter a featherbed with the bolster and a count~poynt. Item
I bequeath to JOHN JOYE xj s. viij d.. The
residue of my goods not bequeathed nor given I commit them to the
disposition of Sar THOMAS SWAYN(e) vicar of Stoke
Neylond and Sar ROBT SYMSON parson of Leyr Marney, whom I make my
executors. And I give to Sar Thomas Swanye
xxvy s. viij d. And to the __ Sar ROBT GRYMSON xx s.

[Brad Verity]

On Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:54:59 AM UTC-7, karen sims wrote:
> The will of Jane Redmyld, daughter of Margaret (nee: Chedworth) Wyfold
> Norreys Howard, suggested to me that Anne Norreys Sulyard, 2nd wife of
> Edward Sulyard was the daughter of Isabell Wyfold. However, i could not
> find this in any family trees.

[snip]

> Nicholas Wyfold died in 1456, and his widow married John Howard, duke of
> Norfolk (k. 1485); they apparently held the property for a time.
> Wyfold's heir was his daughter Isabel, who married John Nores and
> afterwards Sir Henry Marny, kt. (cr. Lord Marny 1523).
> The London properties appear to have been settled, by agreement, on
> Isabel's children by Sir Henry Marny. In 1503 John Marny, esquire,
> probably the elder son of Sir Henry by a previous marriage, and Robert
> Sympson, clerk, recovered certain properties in London, including 4
> messuages in All Hallows Honey Lane, against Edmund Nores, son of John
> Nores and Isabel. The recovery was to the use of Thomas Marny,
> son of Sir Henry and Isabel, and his heirs, with remainders successively to
> Grace Marny, daughter of Sir Henry and Isabel, Edmund Nores,
> and Anne, wife of Edmund Suliard and daughter of John Nores and Isabel.
> John Marny and Robert Sympson granted the properties to
> Sir Henry Marny and Robert Badby, clerk, to hold for the former's life with
> remainders as above. In 1505 Edmund Nores quitclaimed
> in the property for Sir Henry Marny's life and to Thomas Marny and Grace
> Marny and their heirs. (fn 14)
> (fn 14 Beaven; PRO, SC6/Hen 8/2116; HR 231(20, 29). Cf. *Complete Peerage*,
> viii, p. 523, ix, p. 612; *Burke's Extinct Peerages* (s.n. Marney).)

Dear Karen,

Great research - many thanks for sharing. Thomas Marney, the son of Henry, Lord Marney & Isabel Wyfold, is new to my database. He must've died before 1525, when his elder half-brother the 2nd Lord Marney, died, or he would've inherited the title?

So many individuals descend from Anne Norreys & Edward Sulyard - it's great to have her parentage established.

Thanks again & Cheers, ----Brad

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Karen ~

You've presented good evidence that Anne Norreys, 2nd wife of Edward Sulyard (or Sulliard), of London and Otes (in High Laver), Essex, is the daughter of John Norreys (or Norreis), Esq., of Goldston (in Ash) and Poulders (in Woodnesborough), Kent, by Elizabeth (or Isabel) Wyfold, daughter and heiress of Nicholas Wyfold (died 1456), Alderman, Citizen, and grocer of London, Mayor of London (1450–1).

I can further identify Anne Norreys' father, John Norreys, Esq., as a younger son of John Norreys, Esq., of Ockwells (in Bray) and Yattendon, Berkshire, Codbarrow (in Tanworth), Warwickshire, etc., Usher of the Chamber, 1429–49, Forester of Purbeck, 1436, Sheriff of Oxfordshire and Berkshire, 1437–8, 1442–3, 1457–8, Escheator of Anglesey, 1437–9, King’s sergeant, 1438, Knight of the Shire for Berkshire, 1439–40, 1445–7, 1449–51, 1453–4, ?1455–6, Sheriff of Wiltshire, 1440–43, Esquire of the Body, 1441–60, Knight of the Shire for Oxfordshire, 1442, Keeper of the Great Wardrobe, 1444–6, and Treasurer of the Queen’s Chamber, by his 2nd wife, Eleanor, daughter and co-heiress of Roger Clitherow, of Goldston (in Ash), Little Betshanger (in Northborne), and Poulders (in Woodnesborough), Kent, by his wife, Maud.

You can find helpful material on the Clitherow family in Hasted, History & Top. Survey of Kent 4 (1799): 148 (Clitherow arms: Three cups covered, within a bordure ingrailed or), 234; 9 (1800): 222, 591–592; and Planché, Corner of Kent (1864): 207–211.

The last named source, Planché, indicates that John Norreys, Esq. [husband of Elizabeth/Isabel Wyfold] was a legatee in the 1457 will of his maternal grandmother, Maud Clitherow, widow.

Roger Clitherow's parents in turn are Richard Clitherow, Esq., of Goldston (in Ash), Kent, Sheriff of Kent, Admiral of the seas west of Thames, and his wife, [?Katherine], daughter of John Oldcastle.

John Oldcastle named here is Sir John Oldcastle, Knt., Lord Cobham, of Almeley near Kington, Herefordshire, Captain of Builth and Hay, Sheriff of Herefordshire, 1406–7, Knight of the Shire for Herefordshire, and, in right of his 2nd wife, of Cooling, Kent. He was summoned to Parliament from 26 October 1409 to 22 March 1413/4, by writs directed Johanni Oldcastell Chlr. He led the first Lollard revolt in 1414. His last years were spent in hiding in the West Midlands in 1415 and in 1417 near Welshpool, where he was captured and taken to London for execution. He was hanged and burnt hanging as a Lollard heretic and traitor at St. Giles’s Fields 25 Dec. 1417.

His wife, Joan Pole, Lady Cobham, survived him and married (5th) before June 1428 (as his 2nd wife) John Harpeden (or Harpenden), Knt., of Harpsden, Oxfordshire. Sir John Harpeden has been the subject of several newsgroup posts in recent time.

Nathan, Annals of West Coker (2011): 150–151 indicates that Sir John Oldcastle was declared an outlaw in June 1414 and his lands and tenements were placed in the hands of his son-in-law, Richard Clitherow, of Kent, and Thomas Brook, of Somerset.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

[Jan]

Hussey's abstracts of the wills of Roger Clitherow and his wife Matilda are available on line, as is Weever's transcription of their tomb inscription in Ash Church and that of their daughter Joan. I think it was not Roger's mother but his wife Matilda who was the daughter of John Oldcastle, by John's first wife Katherine ferch Richard ab Ieuan.

"Roger Clyderow,† esquire. 7 March 1454-5. Buried in the choir of the Church of St. Nicholas of Esshe, near Joan my daughter. To the high attar for tithes 20s, also to the same altar one missal for ever, and for one chalice or other necessaries to be bought for the altar 10 marcs (£6 13s. 4d.). To the fabric (fabrice) of the same church 10 mares. That John Noryes, Thomas Haryes, Thomas Berwin, Richard Well and Baldewin Eulysoolye, each have 40s. Residue of goods to wife Matilda, who with Thomas Hardes and John Oxinden, my ex’ors. Feoffees : Henry Oldcastell, Thomas Hardes and John Oxinden. That a chaplain receive all the profits coming from my Manor of Nelmys, also a certain yearly rent of 15s. from one tenement in the parish of St. Peter, next the Cornmarket in the town of Sandwich, to celebrate in the choir, or chapel of St. Mary in the church of Ash, for my soul, wife Matilda, and our parents, etc., during twenty years, and after the twenty years the Manor of Nelmys and rent of 15s. to my daughter Elianore and her heirs. That my tenement in Sandwich called the Houe, formerly the Swan, after the death of John Kyryell, remain to Elianore my daughter and her heirs for ever, but if she interfere in this my Will, then my Manor of Nelmys and tenement in Sandwich be sold, and the money in works of charity by my Ex’ors. That John Noryes have two messuages in the parish of St. Mary, Sandwich, and to his issue for ever, but if he die without issue, then to my right heirs. All debts, etc., to be paid with the money in the hands of John Noryes my son [in law], to be received by my Ex’ors. [No probate.] (Con. Vol. I., fol. 71.) † See Corner of Kent, pp. 71, 207."

Arthur Hussey, "Ash next Sandwich Wills, Part 1," Archaeologia Cantiana 34 (1920), 58-59.
http://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/Research/Pub/ArchCant/Vol.034%20-%201920/02/47-62.htm.

"Matilda, relict of Roger Clyderow. 8 Oct. 1457. Buried in the choir of the church, near the body of the said Roger. To the use of ornaments specially necessary at the high altar 5 marcs. To the fabric of the nave (corpus) of the same church 5 marcs. That John, the son of John Norys and Alianore his wife, have one cloak of crimson furred with martens, a dagger, sword, pair of brigandines, and all armour for the body of Roger my husband. To Katherine Brome 40s,; and the Nuns of Sheppey to pray for my soul and parents 40s.; to Dom. William Wynchepe, monk of Christ Church, Canterbury, 20s.; Benedict Pawcherst 20s. and a kirtle of murrey, pair of blankets and sheets, and a coverlet; Alice Septvans have all the fine linen (flammeole) called paris kerchieffs. Thomas Symson my godson have 20s. yearly for seven years. To the White Friars at Sandwich 20s. To Ash church a chalice, and a cloak of red damask for a vestment to be made for the high altar. Thomas Derwent and his wife Margerie have a pair of blankets and sheets, a coverlet, and 20s. Ex’ors : John Norreyes of Ash and John Westcliff* of Sandwich have residue of goods after paying debts, etc., to dispose in works of charity. Probate 4 November 1457. (Con. Vol II, fol.103.) * Mayor of Sandwich, 1464-5.

Arthur Hussey, "Ash next Sandwich Wills, Part 1," Archaeologia Cantiana 34 (1920), 59-60. Same link as above.

Weever transcribed the monumental brass in Ash to [Roger] Clitherow and his wife [Matilda] who was the daughter of John Oldcastle as, "Hic iacet . . . . Clitherow, Ar. & . . . . . uxor eius filia Iohannis Oldcastell qui obijt . . . . ."

Following the transcription of the tomb for Clitherow and his Oldcastle wife is Weever's transcription of the tomb of Joan Keriell, daughter of Roger Clitherow:

Pray for the sowle of Ioane Keriell,
Ye frends all that forth ypasse;
In endlesse lyff perpetuall;
That God it grant mercy and grase,
Roger Clitherow her fader was,
Tho erth to erth of kynd returne,
Pray that her sowle to lyff may come.

John Weever, Ancient Funerall Monuments (London: Thomas Harper, 1631), 265. http://books.google.com/books?id=sDxQAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA265

For a reprint (which is easier to search) of Weever's book, see
John Weever, Ancient Funerall Monuments (London: W. Tooke, 1767), 63.
http://books.google.com/books?id=Um0DAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA63

[Matt Tompkins]

On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 10:54:59 UTC+1, karen sims wrote:
> (Query: C4's - not on AALT?)

No, they're not on AALT. Suzanne Jenks tells me C4 is not included in the licence under which the AALT project photographs documents, so they are not likely to be in the near future, either.

Matt Tompkins

[karen sims]

I am still looking for the father of Jane Redmyld. It has been proposed
that she is the daughter of another, unknown, husband of Margaret
Chedworth. One possibility I am looking at is that the last name is Wales
or Waleis. Jene, Alison and John Wales appear in the will of John
Norreys, with legacies in marcs, (so not servants) and Jenet, Alsone and
John Waleis appear as members of the Howard household, but not as "Mastres"
etc. So it appears that they are somehow dependents, but not children, of
Margaret Chedworth.

I can not locate the will of Nicholas Wyfold to see if these names also
appear in it - can someone point me to it?

Norreys will:
http://archive.org/stream/historyandantiq00kerrgoog#page/n134/mode/1up<http://archive.org/stream/historyandantiq00kerrgoog#page/n131/mode/1up>

Houshold books:
http://archive.org/stream/cu31924027939820#page/n695/mode/2up

Does anyone recognize any of these Waleis children? "Wales" is one of
those names that is particularly difficult to search for. A few hours of
searching did not yeild anything except the number of different spellings
possible for this name, including Wallace, Walshe, atte Walle, and Vales.

There is, perhaps, just enough time for a another marriage between the
death of Nicholas Wyfold (1466) and Margaret's marriage to John Norreys
(abt 1459 - see next)

This document from from: A Descriptive Catalogue of Ancient Deeds: Volume
2 would appear to be part of the marriage settlement between John Norreys
and Isabell Chedworth Wyfold. It would place the marriage probably in
early 1459. I found it in British History Online here:

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=64285&strquery=norreys+Chaddeworth

B. 2722. Letter of attorney by Edmund Hungerford, knight, John Norreys,
esquire, Roger Norreys and William Norreys,
authorising William Cheueler, parson of the parish church of Inglefeld co.
Berks, and William Engleys of Newenham co. Oxford,
gentleman, to deliver to John Chaddeworth, bishop of Lincoln, and others,
seisin of the manor of Newenham with its
appurtenances in Warfeld, Benfeld, Bray, Brakenhale and Wynkefeld co.
Berks, and in all the towns and parishes aforesaid.
4 February, 37 Henry IV. Three seals and a fragment. (Must mean Henry VI)

It has been pointed out before that the Victoria County History of
Berkshire vol 3. gives a date around 1451, which can not be settlement with
Margaret Chedworth: the 1451 appears to have come from the IPM of John
Norreys.
"Before 1451 John Norreys of Yattendon held the manor of Newenham, which
he settled in that year on himself, his wife Margaret and his heirs male. (fn.
39<http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=43202&strquery=norreys#n39>)
(fn 39 Chan. Inq. p.m. 6 Edw. IV, no. 45; Feet of F. Div. Co. Trin. 2 Edw.
IV.)"

Karen



On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Douglas Richardson
<royala...@msn.com>wrote:

> -------------------------------
> 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
>

[jhigg...@yahoo.com]

On Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:54:59 AM UTC-7, karen sims wrote:

> The will of Jane Redmyld, daughter of Margaret (nee: Chedworth) Wyfold
>
> Norreys Howard, suggested to me that Anne Norreys Sulyard, 2nd wife of
>
> Edward Sulyard was the daughter of Isabell Wyfold. However, i could not
>
> find this in any family trees.
>
>
>
> Leo's database here:
>
> http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00500054&tree=LEO
>
> has this Anne Norreys as the daughter of John Norreys and Millicent
>
> Ravenscroft which is the wrong generation, since this John Norreys of Bray
>
> died in 1361.
>

The identification of Anne Norreys, wife of Edward Sulyard, as daughter of John Norreys and Millicent Ravenscroft is probably based on a Sulyard pedigree in vol. 4 of "The Genealogist" (old series). This pedigree says that John Norreys is of Bray in Lancashire, not Berkshire. Aside from the geographical error, the chronology doesn't support this parentage, as noted above. Both Richardson editions of "Plantagenet Ancestry" cite the pedigree from "The Genealogist" and repeat the erroneous assignment of Bray to Lancashire, but don't specify the wife of John Norreys.

The family of Norreys of Bray and Yattendon, Berkshire, is said in at least two visitation pedigrees (Lancashire and Berkshire) and in pedigrees in various editions of the peerages to be descended from a younger son of the family of Norreys of Speke in Lancashire. But George Ormerod, in a study of the family of Norreys of Speke in his 1851 "Miscellanea Palatina", pointed out that the traditional connection of Norreys of Bray to Norreys of Speke is chronologically impossible. The narrative of Bray in vol. 4 of VCH Berks supports this conclusion. What evidence (aside from the visitation pedigrees) supports the earlier generations of the family of Norreys of Bray and Yattendon (e.g., before the John Norreys (the father of Anne who married Edward Sulyard), who is not himself mentioned in the visitation pedigrees)?

[Jan]

The following fine shows that John Norris married Margaret Chedworth before 1 July 1462 and already had a son William by her on that date:
http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/fines/abstracts/CP_25_1_294_74.shtml#8

The fine identifies the mother of each of the four sons of John Norris: John and William by Alice, John by Eleanor, and William by Margaret. It also states that the father of John Norris was William Norris. The elder son William was already a knight in 1462 as he is so designated in the fine. (Douglas Richardson, quoting from a secondary source, referred to this fine in a post in 2010.)

The will of Roger Clitherow indicates that John Norris' second wife Eleanor (Clitherow) was living on 7 March 1454/5 and married to John by that date. I can’t tell from the abstract of the will of Matilda Clitherow, written 8 October 1457, whether or not Eleanor was still living on that date. Since she is mentioned only as the wife of John Norris in the bequest to their son John and not as a legatee herself, she may well have been dead by October 1457. Matilda’s will does establish that Eleanor’s son John Norris was born before 8 October 1457.

The entry at the bottom of the following page in the Patent Rolls indicates John Norris' first Alice was living on 4 May 1439. Two earlier grants concerning the same property (pages 92 and 116 of the same volume, September and November 1437) do not mention John's wife Alice, possibly suggesting that their marriage occurred after November 1437. Since William, the second son by Alice, was already a knight by July 1462, it seems plausible that he was born before the mid 1440s. Perhaps someone can find the date he was knighted.
http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/patentrolls/h6v3/body/Henry6vol3page0309.pdf

[karen sims]

John
I actually had never looked at the visitations before, and can not find the
one you cite for Berkshire linking Norreys of Berkshire to Norreys of
Lancashire. I have been using the research of Stephen D. Norreys as a
guide: both of the addresses below have to be pasted in the Internet
Archives WAYBACK MACHINE to view them

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Meadows/3026/norreys1.html
http://www.geocities.com/heartland/meadows/3026/norreys2.html

This research makes Richard of Bray the same person as Richard of
Burtonhead. I can't say whether it is right or wrong. Since Stephen D Bray
does not give his sources on these pages, it is only a guide. This
research doesn't give all the younger children, and does not follow all
the daughters. It does not always help me. I started with the five
Chedworth women, added some Marrows, Riches, Essexs, Fennes and Arundels
and have crossed the Norreys line at least 3 more times now. I have not
found anything in this research that I can prove wrong, but I can't always
prove it right. It is certainly better than some other work but more could
be done.

Remember that with all the various efforts to return people to serfdom,
people had to lie about their ancestry. The Pastons are a well documented
example, with Edward IV validating their fake pedigree, when claims were
made that the Paston's were not even entitled to hold property. Thomas
Danyell, husband of Margaret Howard seems to be another one who lied,
claiming descent from the same family in Daresbury. Graham Pratten has
been working on the Danyell problem for years.

Queen Elizabeth had "farmers" looking for such people. She extracted 10%
of their net worth in return for granting them manumissions. Some of these
people had not been serfs/villeins for 3-4 generations.

VCH Berks Vol 4 seems to have gotten lost in the occurrence of three John
Norreys in only two generations.

for evidences from the court records of Bray since at least 1334 see the
History and Antiquities of the Hundred of Bray, in the County of Berks,
which I already cited for the will of John Norreys. Starts at:

http://archive.org/stream/historyandantiq00kerrgoog#page/n128/mode/1up


Karen

[Hal Bradley]

Jan, Karen,

Wedgwood's HOP, p. 639 states, John Norreys died "1 Sept. 1466, and William,
aged 33, is his s. and h." placing William's birth c. 1433. This appears to
be referencing an i.p.m., but the note at the bottom of the page only gives
an abstract of John Norrey's will. The abstract:

"Will, dat. 4 Apr. 1466, pr. 4 July 1467. To be bur. in St. Michael's, Bray;
five thousand masses "with as many placebos, diriges and other observances
used in mortuaries be done and sung for my soul in as hasty time as it may
goodly be done" - also for the souls of Alice, Alinore and Margaret,
sometime my wives. To have a marble tomb erected. Bequest for buying a great
bell for the steeple at Bray, and for repairing Maidenhead Bridge. All
household stuff to his s. William at Yattenden. Bequests to sons John the
elder, John the younger, and William the youngest, and to Anne his eldest,
and Lettice his youngest da. To Margaret his w., the residue, if she remain
unmarried. Exors.: - his w. Margaret, his bro. William Norris, Richard
Bulstrode, Thomas Babham (P.C.C. 19 Godyn)."

Richard Bulstrode would be John Norrey's nephew. Richard Bulstrode's brother
William is ancestral to the brothers Gabriel and Roger Ludlow.

Hal Bradley

>
> The entry at the bottom of the following page in the Patent Rolls
> indicates John Norris' first Alice was living on 4 May 1439. Two
> earlier grants concerning the same property (pages 92 and 116 of the
> same volume, September and November 1437) do not mention John's wife
> Alice, possibly suggesting that their marriage occurred after November
> 1437. Since William, the second son by Alice, was already a knight by
> July 1462, it seems plausible that he was born before the mid 1440s.
> Perhaps someone can find the date he was knighted.
> http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/patentrolls/h6v3/body/Henry6vol3page0309.pdf
>

> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-
> req...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in

> the subject and the body of the message
>
>

> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.3408 / Virus Database: 3222/6680 - Release Date:
> 09/19/13

[jhigg...@yahoo.com]

On Thursday, September 19, 2013 9:26:37 AM UTC-7, karen sims wrote:
> John
>
> I actually had never looked at the visitations before, and can not find the
>
> one you cite for Berkshire linking Norreys of Berkshire to Norreys of
>
> Lancashire. I have been using the research of Stephen D. Norreys as a
>
> guide: both of the addresses below have to be pasted in the Internet
>
> Archives WAYBACK MACHINE to view them
>
>
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Meadows/3026/norreys1.html
>
> http://www.geocities.com/heartland/meadows/3026/norreys2.html
>
>
>
> This research makes Richard of Bray the same person as Richard of
>
> Burtonhead. I can't say whether it is right or wrong. Since Stephen D Bray
>
> does not give his sources on these pages, it is only a guide. This
>
> research doesn't give all the younger children, and does not follow all
>
> the daughters. It does not always help me. I started with the five
>
> Chedworth women, added some Marrows, Riches, Essexs, Fennes and Arundels
>
> and have crossed the Norreys line at least 3 more times now. I have not
>
> found anything in this research that I can prove wrong, but I can't always
>
> prove it right. It is certainly better than some other work but more could
>
> be done.
>

>

> VCH Berks Vol 4 seems to have gotten lost in the occurrence of three John
>
> Norreys in only two generations.
>
>
>
> for evidences from the court records of Bray since at least 1334 see the
>
> History and Antiquities of the Hundred of Bray, in the County of Berks,
>
> which I already cited for the will of John Norreys. Starts at:
>
>
>
> http://archive.org/stream/historyandantiq00kerrgoog#page/n128/mode/1up
>
>
>
>
>
> Karen
>

Thanks, Karen, for these references. The websites of Stephen D. Norreys (now only available through the Wayback Machine) are definitely quite extensive, although (as you say) they are only a guide since no sources are provided. At a quick glance, I see that the part relating to Norreys of Speke appears to agree with Ormerod's work on that family which I mentioned previously - that's a good sign.

The visitation pedigrees covering Norreys of Bray and Yattendon are in the Harleian Society edition of the visitations of Berkshire (vol. 57, starting at p. 184) and the Chetham Society edition of the 1567 visitation of Lancashire (vol. 81, starting at p. 83). Links to both of these can be found at Joe Cochoit's excellent list of visitations online here:
https://sites.google.com/site/cochoit/home/visitations

The visitation pedigrees are not at all accurate or complete for Norreys of Bray and Yattendon, especially when compared with the Norreys websites you mentioned above. I cited them primarily to point out the supposed link between the Berkshire Norreys families and the Norreys of Speke family, which is chronologically impossible - although it has been perpetuated in the peerages up through the last edition of BP. Interestingly, Ormerod briefly mentions that Lysons in his "Magna Britannia" proposes a much earlier link between the Berkshire and Lancashire Norreys families. I haven't yet checked this out, but it may be the same descent shown in the Norreys websites.

Thanks also for the reference to Charles Berry's "History and Antiquities of the Hundred of Bray". The Google Books copy (which is the one also available through the Internet Archive and HathiTrust) appears to have pedigrees of the Norreys family (among other families) at the end of the volume. But the scanning process has (as usual) mangled the folded pedigrees, and they are unreadable. With luck, I should be able to get a copy of the book itself via ILL and see if the pedigrees are useful.

[Jan]

On Thursday, September 19, 2013 4:41:53 PM UTC-4, Hal Bradley wrote:
> Jan, Karen,
>
> Wedgwood's HOP, p. 639 states, John Norreys died "1 Sept. 1466, and William,
> aged 33, is his s. and h." placing William's birth c. 1433. This appears to
> be referencing an i.p.m., but the note at the bottom of the page only gives
> an abstract of John Norrey's will. The abstract:
>
> "Will, dat. 4 Apr. 1466, pr. 4 July 1467. To be bur. in St. Michael's, Bray;
> five thousand masses "with as many placebos, diriges and other observances
> used in mortuaries be done and sung for my soul in as hasty time as it may
> goodly be done" - also for the souls of Alice, Alinore and Margaret,
> sometime my wives. To have a marble tomb erected. Bequest for buying a great
> bell for the steeple at Bray, and for repairing Maidenhead Bridge. All
> household stuff to his s. William at Yattenden. Bequests to sons John the
> elder, John the younger, and William the youngest, and to Anne his eldest,
> and Lettice his youngest da. To Margaret his w., the residue, if she remain
> unmarried. Exors.: - his w. Margaret, his bro. William Norris, Richard
> Bulstrode, Thomas Babham (P.C.C. 19 Godyn)."
>
> Richard Bulstrode would be John Norrey's nephew. Richard Bulstrode's brother
> William is ancestral to the brothers Gabriel and Roger Ludlow.
>
> Hal Bradley

Thanks, Hal, I see that the same HOP article states that William Norris was knighted just before the battle of Northampton, 10 June 1460.

There is an IPM for John Norrys (no. 44 in 6 Edward IV) listed in Caley and Bayley's index:
http://books.google.com/books?id=E9NL-QkROVsC&pg=PA337
I do not think that this IPM has been published. Perhaps it will become available via the Mapping the Medieval Countryside Project.

It is interesting that among John Norris' sons by Alice Meerbroke, William was older than John but John preceded William in the list of heirs in the 1462 fine.

The same volume of HOP states that John Norris (1405-1466) was the son and heir of Roger Norris of Bray, but the 1462 fine names John's father as William Norris.

There seems to be some confusion in the HOP entry for John Norris (1440-1506/7). Perhaps the author has conflated John the son by Alice and John the son by Eleanor.

[Matt Tompkins]

On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 10:54:59 UTC+1, karen sims wrote:

> The will of Jane Redmyld, daughter of Margaret (nee: Chedworth) Wyfold Norreys Howard, suggested to me that Anne Norreys Sulyard, 2nd wife of Edward Sulyard was the daughter of Isabell Wyfold. However, i could not find this in any family trees.

> Leo's database here:
http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00500054&tree=LEO
has this Anne Norreys as the daughter of John Norreys and Millicent Ravenscroft which is the wrong generation, since this John Norreys of Bray died in 1361.

> Douglas Richardson showed that Isabell Wyfold had a daughter Amy/Anne here:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/gen-medieval/2010-04/1270792335

> The first document Douglas listed C 1/151/124 is here:

http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT7/ChP/C1no151/IMG_0220.htm

> It was the last document in the bundle and the right side is faded and ripped. I can read just enough of it to be sure that it is the right document and her name is Anne not Amy
> Maybe someone else can get more out of it.

<snip>

That image of C 1/151/124 is indeed rather difficult, especially close to the right margin (it would probably not be too bad under ultra violet light), but it is possible to make out the gist of the plaint.

Anne Norreys is complaining that her father John Norreys, esquire, granted his manors of Goldston, Nelmes and Poulders in Kent, and lands and rents, formerly Henry Oldcastle's, in Bledlow, Princes Risborough and Monks Risborough in Bucks, to Sir William Norreys and other feoffees to the use of his will. His will provided that after payment of certain debts and the provision of sung masses, the issues and profits of the properties should be employed for Anne's marriage, once she has reached the age of 16 and if she marries by the advice of John Noreys' wife Isabel. It is now 5 years since John's death, Isabel has received her dower, the debts have been paid, masses have been sung, and Anne is 16 years of age and wishes to marry with the advice of Isabel, but Sir William Norreys refuses to release any of the issues and profits despite repeated requests.

I can't see any reference to the name Suliard. There is a reference to 'the son and heir of the sayd John' (start of line 14), but the preceding words are illegible.

Matt Tompkins

[Matt Tompkins]

On Friday, 20 September 2013 02:26:06 UTC+1, Jan wrote:
> Thanks, Hal, I see that the same HOP article states that William Norris was knighted just before the battle of Northampton, 10 June 1460.

> There is an IPM for John Norrys (no. 44 in 6 Edward IV) listed in Caley and Bayley's index:
http://books.google.com/books?id=E9NL-QkROVsC&pg=PA337
I do not think that this IPM has been published. Perhaps it will become available via the Mapping the Medieval Countryside Project.

<snip>

I'm afraid there are no present plans to calendar the IPMs from 1447 to 1485. The present project is only for enhancement of the existing published calendars. When it ends, in December 2014, we would very much like to start calendaring the 1447-1485 gap, but unfortunately there is presently no money for it. We intend to apply to the various grant bodies here in the UK for funding for a further IPM project, but a project which consisted merely of further calendaring would not be likely to be approved.

If anyone knows of a wealthy institution or philanthropist outside the UK which might be interested in funding more calendars, please let us know!

Matt Tompkins

[Douglas Richardson]

On Thursday, September 19, 2013 9:26:47 AM UTC-6, Jan wrote:

< The entry at the bottom of the following page in the Patent Rolls indicates <John Norris' first Alice [Merbrook] was living on 4 May 1439.

Dear Jan ~

Alice Merbrook, 1st wife of John Norreys, Esq., was actually living as late as 1448, when she was made a Lady of the Order of the Garter.

See Beltz, Memorials of the Order of the Garter (1841): ccxxiv, which source is available at the following weblink:

http://books.google.com/books?id=4xwNAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR224

Alice (Merbrook) Norreys was favored with this honour, as her husband, John Norreys, was then Keeper of the Queen’s Wardrobe, 1446–58, and Treasurer of the Queen’s Chamber, ?-1452 [see Hicks, Richard III & His Rivals (1991): 424, footnote 13].

There is an interesting article entitled "The Household of Queen Margaret of Anjou, 1452–1453," which was published in the Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 40 (1957–8), 79–113, 391-431.

This article might well have additional information on Alice (Merbrook) Norreys. If someone has access to this journal, perhaps they can check it for mention of the Norreys family.

Elsewhere I note that Alice "Meerbrook", wife of John Norreys, is mentioned on page 123 in the book, Crown, Government and People in the Fifteenth Century, by Rowena Archer, published in 1995.

The snippet view of this book available on Google Books doesn't tell if Alice was living past 1448:

books.google.com/books?ei=koM8Uu-OAuTAyAG47oDYCA&id=MOwLAQAAMAAJ&dq=Queen+Margaret+Rylands+Alice+wife+John&q=both+Alice+and+John#search_anchor

But the following statement is evidently made on the same page:

"Both Alice and John were regular recipients of gifts from the queen: Alice, described as 'capital damisell Regine', ..."

I assume that Archer gives her sources for this statement. If someone has ready access to this book, perhaps they can check it for Archer's sources.

Given that Alice (Merbrook) Norreys was living as late as 1448, I believe it is entirely possible that she is the mother of John Norreys' elder daughter, Anne Norreys, wife successively of John Harcourt, Esq. (born c. 1450, died 1485), of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire, and John Grey, Esq. (living 1495), of Bosworth, Leicestershire.

If it can be proven that Alice (Merbrook) Norreys was living in 1450 or later, then I think a good case can be made that she was the mother of Anne (Norreys) (Harcourt) Grey.

[karen sims]

Thank you Matt, and thanks to everyone else. I am now rather overwhelmed
with new data.

I did receive a reply from Graham Pratten, off-list, concerning the
Wales/Waleis and their occurence in the Howard household books

"I*n the Anne Crawford edition there are 10 references to Alison, 1 to
Jenet, 6 to John, and 33 to Richard as well as 9 to Waleys with no first
name. *
* *
* *
*Jenet and John are in a list of gentlemen and women in the household of
Margaret Wyfold three days before her marriage to John Howard. Jenet had
2.5 yerdes , John had 2 yerdes, while some others had 3 yerdes. It looks
as if the yerdes was related to the size of the person, as John Noryse the
younger had 1.5 yerdes. There were only three women with the others being
mastres Anne Ramsey and mastres Elizabeth Noryce. William Radmyld was in
the list with 2 yerdes.*
* *
* *
* *
*In a list in 1465 of the Margaret Howard’s household Jenet Waleis and
Alison Waleis come immediately after the Margaret’s daughters Jane,
Isabelle and Letuse and son William. John Waleis is immediately after
William Norys in her list of gentlemen. Richard Walys is in John Howard’s
list of gentlemen (in top third but well below the family).*
* *
* *
* *
*Jenet and Richard only appear in the first book. John and Alison are in
both.*
* *
* *
* *
*in 1482 material is bought for Margaret Howard, Lady Berners, and Aliuson
Waleys. *
* *
*another entry for Alison immediately after one for Lady Berners. The same
again a bit later. She seems linked to Lady Berners in some way. *
* *
*master Danyell (possibly Edmund Danyell) took John Wales his wages.*
* *
*still in 1482 money paid to maistres [Agnes] for various including clothes
for Alison*
* *
*money to John Waleis*
* *
*Margaret Howard took money for Alison Waley’s wages*
* *
*lining a gown for Alison Waleys*
* *
*wages for John Wales 6s 8d*
* *
*shoes for Alison*
* *
*money to Alison Wales*
* *
*wages for John Wales 6s 8d*
* *
*shoes for Lady Berners and Alison Waleys*
* *
*master Danyell give wages for John Wales and others*
* *
* *
* *
*so no great clues for the Wales family*"

Karen

> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to

> GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the

[Douglas Richardson]

Jan ~

I did some more googling of the Archer book and came up with some additional details regarding John Norreys and his 1st wife, Alice Merbrook.

Source: Rowena Archer, Crown, Government & People in the 15th Century (1995).

Page 123 (“Alice Meerbrook married John Noreys, a king’s serjeant and usher of the chamber, who rose to become keeper of the king's great wardrobe ... Both Alice and John were regular recipients of gifts from the queen: Alice, described as ‘capital damisell Regine’, received a gold belt and a yard of blood-red fabric in 1445–6, a gold chain in 1446–7, a silver parcel-gilt cup in 1448–9”).

Pages 135–136 (“One of the most outstanding of Suffolk’s associates to rise to high office and grow rich in the service of the queen was John Noreys, master of her jewels. During the 1440s he was showered with royal favours and gifts from the queen ... Noreys has been described by R.A. Griffiths as ‘a prototype among Suffolk’s household associates’ and he was identified as such by contemporary critics of the government in 1450, attracting popular odium and denunciation from Cade’s followers. He survived the political crisis of 1449-50 which destroyed Suffolk ...”).

It would appears that Alice (Merbrook) Norreys was living in 1448–9.

[janetrobertw...@gmail.com]

Thanks, Douglas,

The journal article, in two parts, is available via the following website:
http://www.johncassidy.org.uk/bulletin/index.html
The specific links to the pdfs are
https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=uk-ac-man-scw:1m1951&datastreamId=POST-PEER-REVIEW-PUBLISHERS.PDF
and
https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=uk-ac-man-scw:1m1938&datastreamId=POST-PEER-REVIEW-PUBLISHERS.PDF

John Norris is mentioned several times, but I did not find a mention of his wife Alice. Perhaps Alice had died by 1452-1453, and either John had not yet married Eleanor Clitherow or Eleanor was not yet favored by the queen.

[jhigg...@yahoo.com]

On Friday, September 20, 2013 10:33:28 AM UTC-7, Douglas Richardson wrote:

>
> Given that Alice (Merbrook) Norreys was living as late as 1448, I believe it is entirely possible that she is the mother of John Norreys' elder daughter, Anne Norreys, wife successively of John Harcourt, Esq. (born c. 1450, died 1485), of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire, and John Grey, Esq. (living 1495), of Bosworth, Leicestershire.
>
>
>
> If it can be proven that Alice (Merbrook) Norreys was living in 1450 or later, then I think a good case can be made that she was the mother of Anne (Norreys) (Harcourt) Grey.
>
>
>
> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

This is a departure from the statement in both Richardson editions of RPA and and both editions of MCA that Anne Norreys Harcourt Grey was the daughter of her father's 2nd marriage to Eleanor Clitherow. What was the specific basis for that conclusion in those books? How can we reconcile these obviously conflicting positions?

[David Topping]

John, I think this is an assumption based on chronology. Whether Alice Norreys was actually admitted to the Order of the Garter or not, she was certainly alive in 1448. No reference to her has been found after that date (AFAIK). Anne Norreys' husband was born c 1450 (20 in 1470) so it is reasonable to assume she was a tad younger, say born around 1452. Eleanor must have died by 1459, but it is not clear exactly how many children need to be squeezed in. She does appear to be the logical choice based on what is presently known.
However, as to her parentage.....The HOP biography of Richard Clitheroe/Clitherow makes it clear that his 1420 will made specific arrangements for his burial in the priory church of London Charterhouse next to that of his wife, Alice, who had predeceased him in 1417 and was already buried there:
http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/clitheroe-richard-i-1420
The memorial at Ash has often been identified as his, but is far more likely to be that of Roger, his son, and his wife Maud.
http://archive.org/stream/cornerofkentorso00plan#page/n251/mode/2up/search/clitherow
http://archive.org/stream/antientfuneralm00weevgoog#page/n257/mode/2up/search/clitherow
It is Roger who was married to a daughter of Sir John Oldcastle and who wished to be buried by his daughter Jane/Joan/Johanna Keriel.
The HOP warns about the confusions possible due to there being three(?) Richard Clitheroes during this period. I am not sure whether they themselves have not fallen foul of this by identifying Richard’s wife Alice as widow of a Mountford of Hackforth. There are posts in the archives of this group which suggest that this widow was called Elizabeth and married the Newcastle Richard.
Cheers
David

[jhigg...@yahoo.com]

Thanks, David for these comments - very useful. I agree with your judgment that, based on chronology, Eleanor Clitheroe is likely to be the mother of Anne Norreys - although DR does make a reasonable case now that Alice Merbrooke MIGHT also be a plausible candidate based on chronology. My query was to ascertain if there were non-chronological reasons why Eleanor was designated as the mother in RPA and MCA. It's not at all clear from the sources given in those books.

Thanks also for pointing out the HOP biography of Richard Clitheroe. The narrative there, and particularly the specification of his burial place, seems to make clear that the memorial in Ash church, Kent, must be that of his son Roger and that Roger (not Richard) was the son-in-law of Sir John Oldcastle - despite what Planché says. I had wondered about this, as the chronology seemed also to favor Roger as the son-in-law. I guess the other reference provided by DR earlier in this thread (Nathan, Annals of West Coker (2011): 150–151) must also be wrong indicating that Richard was the son-in-law of Sir John Oldcastle. Perhaps it too relied on Planché.

[Douglas Richardson]

On Friday, September 20, 2013 5:41:18 PM UTC-6, David Topping wrote:

< John, I think this is an assumption based on chronology. Whether Alice <Norreys was actually admitted to the Order of the Garter or not, she was <certainly alive in 1448. No reference to her has been found after that date <(AFAIK). Anne Norreys' husband was born c 1450 (20 in 1470) so it is <reasonable to assume she was a tad younger, say born around 1452.

Contemporary records indicate that John Harcourt, the husband of Anne Norreys, was born about 1450, he being aged 20 in 1470. It appears that John Harcourt and Anne Norreys were married before 1468, as their only son and heir, Robert Harcourt, Knt., was born about 1469.

In the medieval period, women were usually aged 12-16 at the date of their first marriage. Brides were often 2-3 years within the age of the groom on their first marriage, and the bride could be the older of the two. The bride was not always younger than the groom as David supposes. The goal of parents who arranged such marriages was to connect potential brides and grooms who were of similar age and similar rank in social status.

Taking John Harcourt's birth date of c.1450, we can extrapolate an estimated birth date for his wife, Anne Norreys, as sometime in the period 1447 to 1453.

Contemporary records show that Alice Merbrook, 1st wife of John Norreys, Esq., was living as late as 1448–9, when she received a silver parcel-gilt cup from the queen. This date is in the time range of Anne Norreys' likely birth.

Furthermore, we know that Alice (Merbrook) Norreys' elder son, William Norreys, Knt., was born about 1441, he being aged 25 in 1446. Alice Merbrook had only one other known child, a son, John. Given that Alice (Merbrook) Norreys was living from 1441 until at least 1448-9, that is sufficient time for her to have had several children.

Hence my suggestion that Alice (Merbrook) Norreys was possibly the mother of Anne (Norreys) Harcourt.

[Matt Tompkins]

> On Friday, September 20, 2013 5:41:18 PM UTC-6, David Topping wrote:
> < John, I think this is an assumption based on chronology. Whether Alice <Norreys was actually admitted to the Order of the Garter or not, she was <certainly alive in 1448. No reference to her has been found after that date <(AFAIK). Anne Norreys' husband was born c 1450 (20 in 1470) so it is <reasonable to assume she was a tad younger, say born around 1452.
>
>

> On Monday, 23 September 2013 22:04:27 UTC+1, Douglas Richardson wrote:
> <snip>

> In the medieval period, women were usually aged 12-16 at the date of their first marriage. Brides were often 2-3 years within the age of the groom on their first marriage, and the bride could be the older of the two. The bride was not always younger than the groom as David supposes. The goal of parents who arranged such marriages was to connect potential brides and grooms who were of similar age and similar rank in social status.

> <snip>
>

I'm sure you're right about medieval wives often being older than their husbands, Douglas, but I'm not so sure about your first two statements. Where do your statistics come from (and does the first perhaps derive from data relating solely to the higher aristocracy)?

Matt Tompkins

[David Topping]

On Monday, 23 September 2013 22:04:27 UTC+1, Douglas Richardson wrote:

Actually, Douglas, what I was doing was trying to show why I thought that your previously published position made sense. I think we all know only too well that no assumption can be other than just that. This discussion has not, so far, added to the knowledge which we already had. Until that happens my own database will continue to record the two possibilities.

[jhigg...@yahoo.com]

This adds some interesting information on this matter. But it is still a chronological cased based largely on assumptions - notably the two statements that Matt Tompkins questioned in a separate post here just a while ago. But it doesn't really address the point that I made in my earlier post.

I agree (as I said earlier) that a (perhaps) reasonable case can be made that Alice Merbrooke MIGHT be the mother of Anne Norreys. But this must be judged in parallel with DR's conclusions in both editions of Plantagenet Ancestry and Magna Carta Ancestry that Eleanor Clitheroe was the mother of Anne Norreys. That's why I asked whether the argument for Eleanor Clitheroe was also just chronological, or whether there was other evidence in favor of Eleanor as the mother.

Since DR has now expressed his judgment regarding Alice Merbrooke as the possible mother of Anne Norreys, in light of his previous conclusion it seems quite reasonable for him to tell us (and his readers) if he is retreating from his previous conclusion - and specifically why or why not. Or is he perhaps saying now that the maternity of Anne Norreys cannot be determined?

[MILLARD A.R.]

> From: Matt Tompkins [mailto:ml...@le.ac.uk]
> Sent: 23 September 2013 22:42

>
> I'm sure you're right about medieval wives often being older than their
> husbands, Douglas, but I'm not so sure about your first two statements.
> Where do your statistics come from (and does the first perhaps derive
> from data relating solely to the higher aristocracy)?

There's probably something for the early modern period in Hollingsworth's Demography of the Peerage, but I don't have that to hand.

Older, but probably as reliable, is J C Russell's British Medieval Population pp.156-158. He used IPMs where daughters' are stated to be single, married or with a different surname from their father, or have no stated marital status, to look at age of marriage in the reigns of Edwards I, II and III and Henry VII. He calculates the age at which at least 50% are indicated to be married as 24, 22, 20 and 15 respectively in the four reigns, so these are minimum values for the median age at marriage. Lack of indication of marital status more often meant unmarried than not, and declines with age, so he argues these are close to the actual median ages. He also considers the evidence for the proportion of people married in the 1377 poll tax, which varied between 55-70%. Using life-tables he shows that the median age of marriage was reached by the 25-29 age group. He concludes "the general thesis [is] that marriage was not very early", but the "marriage age amongst heiresses seems somewhat lower than for medieval marriage on the average".

Best wishes

Andrew
--
Andrew Millard - A.R.M...@durham.ac.uk
President, Architectural & Archaeological Society of Durham &
Northumberland: www.aasdn.org.uk
Chair, Trustees of Genuki: www.genuki.org.uk
Maintainer, Genuki Middx + London: homepages.gold.ac.uk/genuki/MDX/ + ../LND/
Academic Co-ordinator, Guild of One-Name Studies: www.one-name.org
Bodimeade one-name study: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/Bodimeade/
My genealogy: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/

[Matt Tompkins]

On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 09:55:06 UTC+1, MILLARD A.R. wrote:
> There's probably something for the early modern period in Hollingsworth's Demography of the Peerage, but I don't have that to hand.
>
> Older, but probably as reliable, is J C Russell's British Medieval Population pp.156-158. He used IPMs where daughters' are stated to be single, married or with a different surname from their father, or have no stated marital status, to look at age of marriage in the reigns of Edwards I, II and III and Henry VII. He calculates the age at which at least 50% are indicated to be married as 24, 22, 20 and 15 respectively in the four reigns, so these are minimum values for the median age at marriage. Lack of indication of marital status more often meant unmarried than not, and declines with age, so he argues these are close to the actual median ages. He also considers the evidence for the proportion of people married in the 1377 poll tax, which varied between 55-70%. Using life-tables he shows that the median age of marriage was reached by the 25-29 age group. He concludes "the general thesis [is] that marriage was not very early", but the "marriage age amongst heiresses seems somewhat lower than for medieval marriage on the average".
>
> Best wishes
>
> Andrew

Thank you, Andrew. That reflects what I understood to be the case for late medieval society generally - that first marriage of women was typically at a greater age than 12-16. Barbara Hanawalt's Ties that Bound (pp 95-100) surveyed the existing state of research in the mid-1980s and concluded that although late medieval marriage was probably at a younger age than in the early modern period, 'it was never common to marry in the early or mid teens'. I don't think more research has changed that.

Though I am sure I have also read that the daughters of the higher aristocracy, whose parents married their children for their own political advantage rather than the child's future economic security, typically married at a much younger age than the daughters of the gentry or the population generally. I suspect Douglas' data came from such a study.

Matt

[Matt Tompkins]

On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 11:18:40 UTC+1, Matt Tompkins wrote:
Should have been: "I don't think more *recent* research has changed that."

Matt

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

A fellow poster wished to know why I changed my position on the possible maternity of Anne Norreys, wife of John Harcourt, Esq. The simple answer is new evidence. Until this last week, I was not aware that Alice Merbrook, 1st wife of John Norreys, Esq., was living as late as 1448-9. The new evidence opens the door to the possibility that Alice Merbrook was the mother of Anne (Norreys) Harcourt.

With regard to ages of women at marriage, I can offer an example in Anne (Norreys) Harcourt's immediate family. We know from the surviving records that Anne Norreys and her 1st husband, John Harcourt, Esq. (died 1485), of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire, had five surviving children, a son, Robert, and four daughters, Lettice (wife of Humphrey Peshale, Esq., and Thomas Neville, Esq.), Elizabeth (wife of George Gaynesford), Katherine (wife of Thomas Stonor, Esq.), and Ellen (wife of Thomas Beckingham).

We know that the only son Robert Harcourt was born about 1469, he being aged 19 in 1488. Assuming he was the eldest child, the births of the four daughters should have ensued at regular intervals from 1471 through 1485.

The following Chancery Proceeding lists the four daughters. Their names are presumably given in order of birth.

Discovery Catalogue
Chancery Proceerding, C 1/341/36

Date: 1504-1515

Description:

Plaintiffs: Thomas Nevill, esquire, and Lettice, his wife, George Gaynsford and Elizabeth, his wife, Thomas Stoner, esquire, and Katherine, his wife, and Thomas Bekyngham and Elyn, his wife.

Defendants: William Grevile, serjeant-at-law, William Harcourt, of Bosworth, Nicholas Sutton, Robert Secole, Rauf Bawdon, and John Tomys, feoffees to uses, and Dame Agnes Harcourt.

Subject: The manors of Stanton Harcourt, Ellenhall, Sharesdoun, Shareshill, Brimsford, Coven, and Bosworth, and lands in Sutton, South Leigh, and elsewhere, late of Robert Harcourt, knight, who died without issue, brother of the said Lettice, Elizabeth, Katherine, and Elyn, and husband of the said Agnes. Oxfordshire, Staffordshire, Leicestershire. END OF QUOTE.

+ + + + + + + + +

We see above that the last Harcourt daughter listed is Ellen (or Elyn), wife of Thomas Bekyngham. This seems rather ironclad evidence that Ellen Harcourt's husband was named Thomas Bekyngham (or Beckingham).

Recently, however, I located a lawsuit in the Court of Common Pleas which suggests that Ellen Harcourt's husband was actually named Richard Beckingham and that their marriage probably took place in 1495.

The lawsuit reveals that in 1495 Humphrey Conyngesby sued John Grey, Esq., of Bosworth, Leicestershire, and his wife, Anne, regarding the ravishment of his minor ward, Richard son and heir of Edward Beckingham [Reference: Court of Common Pleas, CP40/931, rot. 820d]. This lawsuit may be viewed at the following weblink:

http:// aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/H7/CP40no931/aCP40no931fronts/IMG_0333.htm

John Grey, Esq., was the second husband of Anne Norreys, widow of John Harcourt, Esq.

But you say: This is Richard Beckingham, not Thomas Beckingham.

I checked further and discovered that the Beckingham family pedigree in the published visitations of Oxfordshire indicates that it was Richard Beckingham, son of Edmund Beckingham, who married Ellen Harcourt. The visitation record reads:

"Richard Beckingham, of Pudlecote = Ellen, dau'r to John Harecourt, first wyfe of Stanton; maryed [2nd] Jane, da. of ... Pye, widow of Richarde Newporte" [Reference: Harvey et al., Visitations of Oxford 1566, 1574, 1634 & 1574 (H.S.P. 5) (1871): 156 (Beckingham ped.)].

The above visitation may be viewed at the following weblink:

http://books.google.com/books?id=t_sUAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA156

Given the obvious disparity in records, I decided to contact Dr. James Ross who is a member of the Medieval and Early Modern Team at the National Archives. I asked Dr. Ross to check the original Chancery Proceeding given above to see if the original Chancery record states that Ellen Harcourt's husband was actually named Thomas Beckingham in that record.

Here is his response:

"I have checked the C1 and the catalogue description is correct – ‘Thomas Bekyngham and Elyn his wife’. However, the following document (no. 37) which is the answer to the initial bill has Richard Bekingham (the Richard being over an erasure), so the error is contemporary. I will ask for this to be amended on the catalogue." END OF QUOTE.

So Ellen Harcourt's husband was Richard Beckingham as I suspected.

As to Ellen's age at marriage, assuming she was born late in her parents' marriage, say 1479-1485, she can't have been more than 10-16 when her husband, Richard Beckingham, was reported to have been ravished in the lawsuit dated 1495.

I might make one further comment. We see above that Richard Beckingham's father is called Edward in the 1495 lawsuit, whereas his name is given as Edmund in Beckingham pedigree in the visitations of Oxford. In an earlier thread, I noted that the given names Robert and Roger were interchangeable in this time period. So with Edmund and Edward.

[MILLARD A.R.]

> From: MILLARD A.R. [mailto:a.r.m...@durham.ac.uk]
> Sent: 24 September 2013 09:55

>
> Older, but probably as reliable, is J C Russell's British Medieval
> Population pp.156-158

...

> in the reigns of Edwards I, II and III and Henry VII. He calculates the
> age at which at least 50% are indicated to be married as 24, 22, 20 and
> 15 respectively in the four reigns, so these are minimum values for the
> median age at marriage.

Sorry that should have been *maximum* values for the median age at marriage.

Andrew

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

In my post earlier today, I gave a slightly incorrect weblink for the 1495 Common Pleas lawsuit involving Humphrey Conyngesby and John Grey, Esq., of Bosworth, Leicestershire, and his wife, Anne.

The correct weblink is:

http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/H7/CP40no931/aCP40no931fronts/IMG_0333.htm

[Matt Tompkins]

On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 17:10:01 UTC+1, Douglas Richardson wrote:
> Recently, however, I located a lawsuit in the Court of Common Pleas which suggests that Ellen Harcourt's husband was actually named Richard Beckingham and that their marriage probably took place in 1495.
>
> The lawsuit reveals that in 1495 Humphrey Conyngesby sued John Grey, Esq., of Bosworth, Leicestershire, and his wife, Anne, regarding the ravishment of his minor ward, Richard son and heir of Edward Beckingham [Reference: Court of Common Pleas, CP40/931, rot. 820d]. This lawsuit may be viewed at the following weblink:
>
> http:// aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/H7/CP40no931/aCP40no931fronts/IMG_0333.htm
>
> John Grey, Esq., was the second husband of Anne Norreys, widow of John Harcourt, Esq.
>

<snip>

>
> As to Ellen's age at marriage, assuming she was born late in her parents' marriage, say 1479-1485, she can't have been more than 10-16 when her husband, Richard Beckingham, was reported to have been ravished in the lawsuit dated 1495.
>

<snip>

>
> I might make one further comment. We see above that Richard Beckingham's father is called Edward in the 1495 lawsuit, whereas his name is given as Edmund in Beckingham pedigree in the visitations of Oxford. In an earlier thread, I noted that the given names Robert and Roger were interchangeable in this time period. So with Edmund and Edward.
>

That really isn't right, Douglas - both pairs of names were quite distinct from each other and not interchangeable in the way that, say, Elizabeth and Isabel were. The most one can say is that they could easily be confused when appearing in an indistinct text in their abbreviated forms, Robert and Roger being commonly abbreviated to Rob't' and Rog', and Edmund often being abbreviated to Ed'.

It might be useful for some readers of this list to explain two aspects of that 1495 Common Pleas lawsuit which are not clearly brought out above; that Humphrey Coningsby was suing as a king's attorney, and that his complaint that John and Ann Grey had ravished the king's ward Richard Beckingham didn't mean he had been physically raped, only that they had married him to Ann's daughter Ellen without royal permission. The entry actually alleges that they had 'rapuerunt et abduxerunt' Richard - ever since the Statute of Westminster 1285 sexual ravishment had described in legal records by 'rapuit' alone, with 'rapuit et abduxit' being used to describe abduction (often with the willing participation of the abductee). This is why it seems likely that Richard Beckingham and Ellen Harcourt were married in or before 1495.

Matt Tompkins

[Douglas Richardson]

My comments are interspersed below. DR

On Tuesday, September 24, 2013 11:58:29 AM UTC-6, Matt Tompkins wrote:

< That really isn't right, Douglas - both pairs of names were quite distinct <from each other and not interchangeable in the way that, say, Elizabeth and <Isabel were. The most one can say is that they could easily be confused when <appearing in an indistinct text in their abbreviated forms, Robert and Roger <being commonly abbreviated to Rob't' and Rog', and Edmund often being <abbreviated to Ed'.

Actually Matt I can provide examples of the given names, Edward and Edmund, being interchangeable. Years ago in rapid succession I found two separate men who were styled "Edmund alias Edward" in contemporary records. So I've known for a long time that Edmund and Edward were interchangeable. I didn't learn about Robert and Roger being interchangeable until about four years ago. Most people think Margaret and Margery were not especially interchangeable, but I have found instances of all the high born women we know as Margaret being called Margery in contemporary medieval records. I now consider the two names entirely interchangeable, at least until 1350.

< It might be useful for some readers of this list to explain two aspects of <that 1495 Common Pleas lawsuit which are not clearly brought out above; that <Humphrey Coningsby was suing as a king's attorney, and that his complaint that <John and Ann Grey had ravished the king's ward Richard Beckingham didn't mean <he had been physically raped, only that they had married him to Ann's daughter <Ellen without royal permission. The entry actually alleges that they had <'rapuerunt et abduxerunt' Richard - ever since the Statute of Westminster 1285 <sexual ravishment had described in legal records by 'rapuit' alone, with <'rapuit et abduxit' being used to describe abduction (often with the willing <participation of the abductee). This is why it seems likely that Richard <Beckingham and Ellen Harcourt were married in or before 1495.

Thank you for the important clarification of the word "ravish/ravishment" Much appreciated. Yes, I was aware that Humphrey Coningsby was the king's attorney.

If Richard Beckingham was the king's ward, there should be an inquisition post mortem for his father. Before you posted today, I was actually looking for such an inquisition but didn't located it immediately. It should be in the Henry VII series of inquisitions which are in print.

I checked just now and yes, there is an inquisition post mortem for Edward (not Edmund) Bekyngham listed in the Discovery Catalogue:

Reference:
C 142/7/30
Description: Edward Bekyngham: Oxfordshire

Date: 6 Hen VII
Held by: The National Archives, Kew

I located the published abstract of this inquisition in Calendar of IPM Henry VII 1 (1898): 298. It can be viewed at the following weblink:

http://books.google.com/books?id=xPMLAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA298

According to the inquisition, Richard Bekyngham was aged 10 as of the date of the inquisition which is 24 October 1491.

This means that Richard Bekyngham was born about 1481, and was aged about 14 when he was abducted and married to Ellen Harcourt. Richard was born in the same time frame I estimated for Ellen Harcourt's birth, i.e., 1479-1485. If we use the 2-3 year difference in age as a measure, it would mean that Ellen was born c.1481, plus or minus three years, or 1478-1484.

Thanks again, Matt, for your help.

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

This thread started out with a discussion of Nicholas Wyfold (died 1456), Alderman, Citizen, and grocer of London, Mayor of London (1450–1). His surviving widow, Margaret Chedworth, married (2nd) John Norreys, Esq. (died 1466), and (3rd) John Howard, Duke of Norfolk (died 1485). To date no one has commented on the earlier marriages of Nicholas Wyfold.

Chris Given-Wilson, Parliament Rolls of Medieval England, 1275-1504 (2005): 4 indicates that Nicholas Wyfold (died 1456), previously married Katherine, widow of John Brockley, Alderman of London:

"This concerned the execution of the will of John Brockley, alderman of London, of which Tresham was an executor. Brockley's widow, Katherine, who had since married Nicholas Wyfold, had in her hands money which was supposed to be deployed for the benefit of her dead husband's soul. As she had done 'little or nothing' for his soul, the executors .." END OF QUOTE.

Elsewhere a snippet view of Albert Hugh Lloyd, The Early History of Christ's College, Cambridge (1934): 72, 383-385 indicates that Nicholas Wyfold had three marriages, the second being Katherine Brockley, who died about 1453, and the third wife being Margaret, a widow, and daughter of Thomas Catteworth [sic]. I'm unable to tell the name of the first wife of Nicholas Wyfold but I assume she is the Alice Wyfold who is mentioned in the index of this book.

pg. 385:

"They say that after the payment of all bequests and debts and all alms done for the testator's soul before Katherine's marriage to Nicholas Wyfold, there remains due to the executors the sum of seven or eight thousand marks (£4666 to £5333) in money received by her, which should be disposed for ..."

pg. 385:

"... story ends and all efforts to trace the outcome of the proceedings before the Chancellor have failed. Tresham died in 1450, Katherine about 1453, and Nicholas Wyfold in 1456; Thomas Burgoyne lived until 1470 and was a feoffee in relation to the Herrys portion of the Godshouse site. Wyfold was clearly the villain of the piece; he married after Katherine's death a third wife, also a widow, Margaret, daughter of Thomas Catteworth, another prominent citizen, sometime mayor, and, like Wyfold, ..." END OF QUOTE.

The following record in the Discovery Catalogue confirms the marriage of Nicholas Wyfold and Katherine, widow and executrix of John Brockley, Alderman of London:

Reference: C 1/19/109
Description:

Date: 1452-1454

Plaintiffs: Nicholas Wyfold, of London.

Defendants: Thomas Burgoyn, feoffee of John Brokley, alderman of London.

Subject: Messuage, etc in Chelmsford, sold by Katherine formerly the wife and executrix of the said John, and late the wife of petitioner, to John Roper and others. END OF QUOTE.

Clive Burgess & Martin Heale, The Late Medieval English College and Its Context (2008): 224, footnote 125 adds the following information:

"Brockley left £3,000 to his widow and an estimated 7,000 marks to charity; his widow and her new husband, Nicholas Wyfold, refused to part with money: see The House of Commons 1386–1421, ed. Roskell, Clark and Rawcliffe: Brockley." END OF QUOTE.

Roskell's well written biography of John Brockley (died 1444/5), draper, Alderman and Mayor of London, is found at the following weblink:

http://www.histparl.ac.uk/volume/1386-1421/member/brockley-john-14445

The above mentioned biography indicates that John Brockley's widow, Katherine, married (2nd) before February 1445 Nicholas Wyfold.

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

Strachey, Rotuli Parliamentorum 5 (1777): 129-130 includes the transcript of the Parliamentary petition dated 1447 regarding the delayed settlement of the estate of John Brockley, Citizen and Alderman of London, whose widow, Katherine, married (2nd) Nicholas Wyfold.

The petition may be viewed at the following weblink:

books.google.com/books?id=UzFDAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA129

[jhigg...@yahoo.com]

On Tuesday, September 24, 2013 9:10:01 AM UTC-7, Douglas Richardson wrote:
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
>
>
> A fellow poster wished to know why I changed my position on the possible maternity of Anne Norreys, wife of John Harcourt, Esq. The simple answer is new evidence. Until this last week, I was not aware that Alice Merbrook, 1st wife of John Norreys, Esq., was living as late as 1448-9. The new evidence opens the door to the possibility that Alice Merbrook was the mother of Anne (Norreys) Harcourt.
>
>
>
> With regard to ages of women at marriage, I can offer an example in Anne (Norreys) Harcourt's immediate family. We know from the surviving records that Anne Norreys and her 1st husband, John Harcourt, Esq. (died 1485), of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire, had five surviving children, a son, Robert, and four daughters, Lettice (wife of Humphrey Peshale, Esq., and Thomas Neville, Esq.), Elizabeth (wife of George Gaynesford), Katherine (wife of Thomas Stonor, Esq.), and Ellen (wife of Thomas Beckingham).
>

> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

This new information from "a fellow poster" is perhaps interesting, but it misses the point of my query on this matter.

I wasn't asking WHY the "fellow poster" (OK, we all know it's DR!) had changed his position on the maternity of Anne Norreys Harcourt, because it wasn't at all clear that he HAD changed his position - and, if so, what exactly his new position was. Is his position now that Anne's maternity is presently uncertain - and that either Alice Merbrook or Eleanor Clitheroe are possible candidates? Or is he now saying that Alice Merbrook is more likely the mother of Anne - a status which may easily morph into certainty by the time his next multi-volume work is published? After all, uncertainty (particularly with respect to parentage) is rarely acknowledged or allowed in DR's works. :-)

We can only judge this matter by comparing the evidence in favor of each of the candidates: Alice Merbrook and Eleanor Clitheroe. In this thread, we've seen a certain amount of evidence regarding Alice as the POSSIBLE mother of Anne - together with quite a number of assumptions, a number of which have been questioned by other "fellow posters". But we've seen no discussion at all of WHY Eleanor Clitheroe was assigned as the mother (not just the POSSIBLE mother) of Anne Norreys Harcourt in DR's previously published works. What now is Eleanor's status with regard to the maternity of Anne? The world wonders....

[Jan]

The following summary of a CP case suggests that Katherine (widow of John Brockley) married Nicholas Wyfold after 7 June 1445:

"Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/752, rot. 336. Term: Hilary 1449. County: London. Writ type: Debt (bond). Damages claimed: 20m. Case type: Bond. Pleading: Nicholas and Katherine Wyfold state that on 7 June 1445 Godard Pulham made bond with KW, when she was a single woman, in £42. GP satisfied KW of £20 of this debt, but has not paid the remaining £22, to their damage of 20m. They show the bond in court. Pleading: GP granted licence to imparl to quindene of Easter, with assent of plaintiffs."
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=118119
Jonathan Mackman and Matthew Stevens, Court of common pleas: The National Archives, CP40: 1399-1500 (2010).

Alfred P. Beaven, Aldermen of the City of London: Temp. Henry III - 1912 (1908), 1-20, notes that Nicholas Wyfold was "Auditor 1442-4: Master Grocers 1443-4, 1451-2. Died 1456; Will [P.C.C. 8 Stokton] dated June 22, 1456."
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=67239

I do not see this will in the online TNA catalog.

The entry in Beaven about Nicholas Wyfold says that Wyfold succeeded John Welles, Grocer, as an Alderman in London on 20 July 1442, and was Alderman, Castle Baynard, 1442-51, Tower, 1451, and Cornhill, 1451-6. He was succeeded by Ralph Josselyn on 29 November 1456. The same list indicates that John Brokle [Brockley] was succeeded as Alderman, Walbrook, on 19 October 1444.

In 1430 a Nicholas Wyfold, citizen of London, and Alice his wife, 5 Kal. April (f. 313.), received an indult to have a portable altar (dated at SS. Apostoli, Rome).
J. A. Twemlow, Calendar of Papal Registers Relating to Great Britain and Ireland, Volume 8: 1427-1447 (1909), 179-191.
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=104424

There are many entries concerning Nicholas Wyfold on the British History Online website and in the online TNA catalog.

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Jan ~

Thank you for posting these important details regarding Nicholas Wyfold, grocer, of London, died 1456. Much appreciated.

Sylvia Thrupp, The Merchant Class of Medieval London: (1300-1500) (1948) also includes information on Nicholas Wyfold.

On page 327, she has a biography of John Brokle, whose widow, Katherine, married Nicholas Wyfold. On page 376, she has a biography of Nicholas Wyfold, but I can only see a partial view of it.

pg. 327: "Brokle, John, draper, ald[erman] 1426-44. Beaven, II, 7. Son of William Brokle of Neuport Pagnell, Bucks. Stowe MSS 860, fol. 50. Claimed property in Suffolk by right of inheritance. E.C.P., 12/165. His widow Katherine in 1445 m. Nicholas Wyfold. Rot. parl., V, 129-30." END OF QUOTE.

pg. 376: "Wyfold, Nicholas, grocer, ald[erman] 1443-56. Beaven, II, 9. Son of Thomas Wyfold, of Hertley, Berks. Stowe MSS 860, fol. 53. Married (1) after 1445, Katherine, widow of John Brokle, (2) Margaret, who survived him and m. John Noreys, esquire. Rot. parl., V, 129-130; E.C.P. 15/248; Cal. P.R., 1461-67, p. 316. Died 1456, desiring that thirty priests of Reading and neighborhood sing an obit for him in the parish church of Shinfield and that refreshments be offered on this occasion at his place at Hertley. Will mentions two sisters, a nephew, ....." END OF QUOTE.

Thrupp apparently missed Nicholas Wyfold's first marriage to Alice.

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Newsgroup ~

Kingsford, Stonor Letters and Papers 1290–1483 1 (Camden Soc. 3rd Ser. 29) (1919): 174 includes a reference to the following grant:

"1433, Dec. 4. Demise by Thomas Chaucer and others to Nicholas Wyfold of 'Botolphus Puddellez' in Shenyngfeld, Berks. C.1482." END OF QUOTE.

The modern spelling of "Shenyngfeld," Berkshire is Shinfield, Berkshire, which parish is mentioned in the 1456 will of Nicholas Wyfold.

Elsewhere I find that in 1430 Nicholas Wyfold, Citizen and Grocer of London, sued John Saltmerssh, of Barton on Humber, Lincolnshire, chaplain and several others in the Court of Common Pleas regarding various debts. [Reference: Court of Common Pleas, CP40/677, rot. 896d].

This lawsuit may be viewed at the following weblink:

http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/H6/CP40no677/bCP40no677dorses/IMG_0896.htm

[Jan]

Here is the rest of Thrupp's biography of Nicholas Wyfold (p. 376):

Will mentions two sisters, a nephew, and one dau., Isabel, under age. P.C.C., Stokton, 8. Seal, 1453, a flower growing out of a heart, inscription: "a Luy Dere Herte." Anc. Deeds, C1482.

In "Appendix B, London Landowners in 1436. Information as to London Owners of Lands and Rents Assessed in 1436 at the Annual Value of £5 and over (from Lay Subsidy Roll, E, 179/238/90" the listing for "Wifold, Nicholas" gives the location of his property as "London, Berks." and his assessment as 20. (p. 385). John Brokle's property in the same list is in "Suff., Bedf., Bucks., N'hants." and his assessment is 40. (p. 379).

[Douglas Richardson]

Dear Jan ~

Thanks for posting the additional information regarding the biography of Nicholas Wyfold, Citizen and Alderman of London, found in Sylvia Thrupp, The Merchant Class of Medieval London: (1300-1500) (1948): 376.

Below is a Common Pleas lawsuit dated 1465, which involves the estate of Nicholas Wyfold. The lawsuit names his widow and co-executrix, Margaret, and her 2nd husband, John Norreys, Esquire:

In 1465 William Chedworth & John Maplethorp clerk executors of the testament of Nicholas Wyfold late Citizen and Alderman of London alias Nicholas Wyfold late Alderman and Citizen and Grocer of London & John Noreys esquire and Margaret his wife who was the wife of the said Nicholas co-executrix [with] the forsaid William and John of the said testament sued John Pudde of Wolaston in county Northampton junior carter regarding a debt. Reference: Court of Common Pleas, CP40/814, rot. 1897d.

The above lawsuit is available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT2/E4/CP40no814/bCP40no814dorses/IMG_1897.htm

William Chedworth named in the above lawsuit was the uncle of Margaret Chedworth, wife successively of Nicholas Wyfold, John Noreys, and John Howard, Duke of Norfolk. William Chedworth was a Citizen of London and formerly served as Clerk of the Chamber of London [see Douglas-Smith, City of London School (1965): 514; Barron, London in the Later Middle Agnes (2005): 184].

[Jan]

On Friday, September 20, 2013 1:33:28 PM UTC-4, Douglas Richardson wrote:
>
<snip>

> Elsewhere I note that Alice "Meerbrook", wife of John Norreys, is mentioned on page 123 in the book, Crown, Government and People in the Fifteenth Century, by Rowena Archer, published in 1995.
>
> The snippet view of this book available on Google Books doesn't tell if Alice was living past 1448:
>
> books.google.com/books?ei=koM8Uu-OAuTAyAG47oDYCA&id=MOwLAQAAMAAJ&dq=Queen+Margaret+Rylands+Alice+wife+John&q=both+Alice+and+John#search_anchor
>
> But the following statement is evidently made on the same page:
>
> "Both Alice and John were regular recipients of gifts from the queen: Alice, described as 'capital damisell Regine', ..."
>
> I assume that Archer gives her sources for this statement. If someone has ready access to this book, perhaps they can check it for Archer's sources.
>

> Given that Alice (Merbrook) Norreys was living as late as 1448, I believe it is entirely possible that she is the mother of John Norreys' elder daughter, Anne Norreys, wife successively of John Harcourt, Esq. (born c. 1450, died 1485), of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire, and John Grey, Esq. (living 1495), of Bosworth, Leicestershire.
>

> If it can be proven that Alice (Merbrook) Norreys was living in 1450 or later, then I think a good case can be made that she was the mother of Anne (Norreys) (Harcourt) Grey.

>
> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Rowena Archer is actually the editor of the above book which includes ten articles. The article cited is "Margaret of Anjou, Queen Consort of Henry VI: a Reassessment of her Role, 1445-53" by Diana Dunn, Senior Lecturer in History, Chester College at the time of publication of the book (1995).

Page 123 of the above cited book says,
"Alice Meerbrook married John Noreys, a king's serjeant and usher of the chamber, who rose to become keeper of the king's great wardrobe from October 1444 to October 1446 and treasurer of the queen's chamber and master of her jewels from April 1447 until Michaelmas 1452." Footnote 56: "See below, pp. 135-6. Both Alice and John were regular recipients of gifts from the queen: Alice, described as 'capital damisell Regine', received a gold belt and a yard of blood-red fabric in 1445-6, a gold chain in 1446-7, a silver parcel-gilt cup in 1448-9; apart from his annual fee of £20 as treasurer of the chamber and keeper of the queen's jewels, John received a gift of £10 and a silver cup in 1445-6, £10 and a part-gilt cup in 1446-7, £20 in 1451-2 and in 1452-3 when he no longer held the offices mentioned above."

Although the author, Diana Dunn, doesn't cite the source for these gifts in the quoted footnote, it is clear from the citations for gifts to others and in the general explanations in this article that the source of the lists of gifts is Exchequer Accounts E101/409/14, 409/17, 410/2, 410/8, and 410/11. In another footnote, Dunn mentions that "The five surviving accounts of the master of the jewels of Queen Margaret appear to be a unique record for any medieval queen." Other surviving accounts "contain a record of general expenditure on the queen's wardrobe and household and do not list all of the jewels purchased each year with the names of the recipients of each jewel."

Unfortunately for determining when Alice Noreys died, Dunn's description of the dates of the accounts suggests that the accounts for 1449-50 and 1450-51 did not survive. It appears that Alice was not mentioned in the accounts of 1451-2 and 1452-3, suggesting she had died by that time.

TNA's description of the accounts are provided at the following urls:
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C4518117
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C4518120
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C4518125
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C4518131
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C4518134

TNA's date range for the third account (E 101/410/2) is 01 September 1448 - 31 August 1450. The fourth account is dated 01 September 1451 - 31 August 1453, and the fifth is dated 01 September 1452 - 31 August 1454. So, perhaps it is just 1 September 1450 - 31 August 1451 that is missing.

Perhaps actually looking at E 101/410/2 (Account of John Norys, treasurer of the chamber and keeper of the jewels of queen Margaret. 3 ms. 27 & 28 Henry VI.) would enable one to date the last mention of a gift to John's wife Alice.

[Les A Cox]

http://www.oxford-shakespeare.com/Probate/PROB_11-31_ff_271-4.pdf

Executors Thomas Cornwallis and William (M)orrice??

I can find no Morrice link only (N}orreys.

Kind regards

[Les A Cox]

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/hants/vol4/pp208-210
Richard Andrews married Katherine Welsh.

https://archive.org/stream/historyandantiq00kerrgoog#page/n55/mode/2up
Ursula Andrews (their daughter) married Henry Norris of Bray

Could this be your Welsh family.
Kind regards