Parentage of Matilda de Braose (St Valery)
Robert New
how is Joane, d. of Sir Thomas Walerie, wife of William de Beauchamp
related?
Help would be appreciated, Bob New
Chris Phillips
Robert New wrote:
> Whilst on the topic of the "Parentage of Matilda de Braose (St Valery)":
> how is Joane, d. of Sir Thomas Walerie, wife of William de Beauchamp
> related?
I believe this Joan is shown by some secondary sources as the wife of the
William de Beauchamp who died in 1197. Other evidence shows that his wife,
and the mother of his sons, was Bertha, daughter of William de Braose by his
wife Maud de St Valery. William de Braose gave to the couple land in
Tetbury, which had come originally from the St Valerys. It seems possible
that "Joan" represents a confused memory of this St Valery descent.
Chris Phillips
Chris Phillips
Robert New wrote:
> Whilst on the topic of the "Parentage of Matilda de Braose (St Valery)":
> how is Joane, d. of Sir Thomas Walerie, wife of William de Beauchamp
> related?
Peter Stewart
Perhaps you have different William de Beauchamps in mind - I think
Bertha de Braose was the wife of William I, lord of Elmley, who was
sheriff of Worcester from 1155, sheriff of Gloucester in 1156-7,
sheriff of Hereford 1160-67, sheriff of Warwick 1158-9, and reportedly
died in 1170.
His heir, Bertha's son William II (died in Normandy 1197), married
first a sister (name unknown) of Odo, the tenant of Salwarpe, and
secondly a lady named Amicia, the mother of his sons. The elder of
these was William III, known as 'Wilekin' (died 1211/12) who married
Joan (daughter of Thomas, seigneur of Saint-Valery & Adela of
Ponthieu) and was succeeded in Emley by his brother Walter.
But please note, this information is not from a close study of the
family, just from old notes citing, amongst other secondary works,
Emma Mason's 'Legends of the Beauchamps' Ancestors: The Use of
Baronial Propaganda in Medieval England', _Journal of Medieval
History_ 10 (1984), and her edition of _The Beauchamp Cartulary
Charters 1100-1268_ (London, 1980). I am not able to check either of
these at present.
Peter Stewart
Doug Thompson
p_m_s...@msn.com wrote on 19/10/03 11:29 pm:
> Perhaps you have different William de Beauchamps in mind - I think
> Bertha de Braose was the wife of William I, lord of Elmley, who was
> sheriff of Worcester from 1155, sheriff of Gloucester in 1156-7,
> sheriff of Hereford 1160-67, sheriff of Warwick 1158-9, and reportedly
> died in 1170.
>
> His heir, Bertha's son William II (died in Normandy 1197), married
> first a sister (name unknown) of Odo, the tenant of Salwarpe, and
> secondly a lady named Amicia, the mother of his sons. The elder of
> these was William III, known as 'Wilekin' (died 1211/12) who married
> Joan (daughter of Thomas, seigneur of Saint-Valery & Adela of
> Ponthieu) and was succeeded in Emley by his brother Walter.
>
> But please note, this information is not from a close study of the
> family, just from old notes citing, amongst other secondary works,
> Emma Mason's 'Legends of the Beauchamps' Ancestors: The Use of
> Baronial Propaganda in Medieval England', _Journal of Medieval
> History_ 10 (1984), and her edition of _The Beauchamp Cartulary
> Charters 1100-1268_ (London, 1980). I am not able to check either of
> these at present.
>
> Peter Stewart
Peter
It appears that you are not up to date on current views on this topic.
The question has been discussed in Sep 2002 on soc.genealogy.medieval. The
archives give a good review of the evidence. Chris Phillips was a
significant contributor to the sorting out of the evidence.
Regards
Doug Thompson
--------------
History and Genealogy of the Braose Family
http://freespace.virgin.net/doug.thompson/BraoseWeb/index1.htm (Genealogy)
http://freespace.virgin.net/doug.thompson/BraoseWeb/stage.htm (History)
Peter Stewart
Thanks Doug - I hadn't read the discussion of this & certainly should
have checked the archive.
Peter Stewart
Chris Phillips
Peter Stewart wrote:
> Perhaps you have different William de Beauchamps in mind - I think
> Bertha de Braose was the wife of William I, lord of Elmley, who was
> sheriff of Worcester from 1155, sheriff of Gloucester in 1156-7,
> sheriff of Hereford 1160-67, sheriff of Warwick 1158-9, and reportedly
> died in 1170.
>
> His heir, Bertha's son William II (died in Normandy 1197), married
> first a sister (name unknown) of Odo, the tenant of Salwarpe, and
> secondly a lady named Amicia, the mother of his sons. The elder of
> these was William III, known as 'Wilekin' (died 1211/12) who married
> Joan (daughter of Thomas, seigneur of Saint-Valery & Adela of
> Ponthieu) and was succeeded in Emley by his brother Walter.
>
> But please note, this information is not from a close study of the
> family, just from old notes citing, amongst other secondary works,
> Emma Mason's 'Legends of the Beauchamps' Ancestors: The Use of
> Baronial Propaganda in Medieval England', _Journal of Medieval
> History_ 10 (1984), and her edition of _The Beauchamp Cartulary
> Charters 1100-1268_ (London, 1980). I am not able to check either of
> these at present.
Yes - Mason does give this identification (I had seen only the Beauchamp
Cartulary, and will make a note to look at the other reference you mention
too). She has been followed in this by Keats-Rohan, in Domesday Descendants.
Essentially, the document identifying Bertha - an early 14th-century
inquisition - does place her as the wife of the William who died in 1197,
but dates the marriage to the mid 12th century. This is one of the reasons
for which Mason moves it back a generation. But it seems clear that the land
involved would not have come to the Braoses before the 1190s, so that the
inquisition has overestimated the lapse of time.
The other reason for moving Bertha a generation earlier was an undated
charter for Westwood Priory, given by an Anicia, lady of Salwarp, who is the
widow of one William de Beauchamp and the mother of another. Elsewhere she
is called Amice de Mumby. Mason identified her as the widow of William de
Beauchamp who d. 1197, presumably in the absence of another candidate.
It appears she could perhaps be the same as Amice, the wife of Eudo de Mumby
(d. c. 1197). The only suggestion I can make is that the Amice/Anice of the
charter was the widow of a different William de Beauchamp, perhaps before
marrying Eudo (whose son and heir was a minor in 1197).
There's more discussion of this in a thread entitled "Early Beauchamps (was:
Second update to DP and DD amendments)" in July this year.
Chris Phillips
Peter Stewart
> Peter Stewart wrote:
<snip>
> > But please note, this information is not from a close study of the
> > family, just from old notes citing, amongst other secondary works,
> > Emma Mason's 'Legends of the Beauchamps' Ancestors: The Use of
> > Baronial Propaganda in Medieval England', _Journal of Medieval
> > History_ 10 (1984), and her edition of _The Beauchamp Cartulary
> > Charters 1100-1268_ (London, 1980). I am not able to check either of
> > these at present.
>
>
> Yes - Mason does give this identification (I had seen only the Beauchamp
> Cartulary, and will make a note to look at the other reference you mention
> too).
I'm not sure that this will repay any effort, from memory the article
deals mainly with the Beauchamps' antecessors in the earldom of
Warwick, with the legendary figure of Guy of Warwick, and to a lesser
extent with the Tosny family.
I only metioned it along with the cartulary, where there is some
genealogical research into the Beauchamp family of Elmley, because I
can't tell from my notes which of Mason's works the (apparently wrong)
details came from.
Is it definite that the same Amice was actually the widow successively
- in either order - of both Eudo de Mumby and of an undetermined
William de Beauchamp, or just that she had been married to these two
men and that both were probably dead in 1197? Apologies if this goes
over old ground, my search retrieved quite a lot of posts but I'm
simply not up to reading them all today. Please don't trouble to
answer if this point has been discussed before.
Peter Stewart
Chris Phillips
> Is it definite that the same Amice was actually the widow successively
> - in either order - of both Eudo de Mumby and of an undetermined
> William de Beauchamp, or just that she had been married to these two
> men and that both were probably dead in 1197?
No, this is speculation on my part. Amice the widow of William de Beauchamp
is called Amice de Mumby in some documents. In one, she is represented by a
Ralph de Mumby, and Eudo did have a brother of that name, but beyond the
name that's the only clue to link the wives of William and Eudo.
According to Keats-Rohan, Eudo de Mumby's issue became extinct, so one
possible alternative - that the wife of William de Beauchamp was a Mumby by
birth, a daughter of Eudo and Amice - is ruled out (at least, if she left
Beauchamp descendants, as Mason's reconstruction has it).
The William de Beauchamp stated to have married Bertha died about 1197, as
did Eudo de Mumby (I think both these come from pipe roll evidence).
My suspicion is that there may be a generation missing in the accepted
Beauchamp pedigree, and that Amice could have been the mother of the William
de Beauchamp who died in 1197 (in this scenario she would have been widowed
by William Beauchamp before her marriage to Eudo de Mumby, say around 1180).
Chronologically there is ample room for an extra generation, but obviously
some proper evidence is required before such a radical revision can be
accepted.
Chris Phillips
Cristopher Nash
Chris, as you can see I'm still catching up (or trying to) and come
late to issues about which I doubtless 'ought to know better'. But -
again, just by way of clarification and to get me on the right road -
I'm just wondering whether it's your feeling that Amice/Anice (de
Mumby? or wife of a Mumby?), lady of Salwarpe, might be the wife of
William de Beauchamp of Elmley, Sheriff of Worcester 1139/41-ca.
1154, etc. (sometimes called 'William I') who d. 1170 and mo. of
William (sometimes called 'II') who d. 1197 -- which I think you've
not actually said -- or do you gauge her to be the wife of another as
yet unidentified William?
Cheers!
Cris
--
The...@aol.com
Dear Cris, Chris, et al.,
Looking back at both prior posts and my database as last
modified:
I show Walter de Beauchamp of Elmley and Salwarpe (d. 1236)
as son of William de Beauchamp by Bertha de Braose, based upon
his having received a grant of a moiety of Tetbury, co. Glocs.
from his uncle Reginald de Braose in 1221:
'... Reynold, a son of William [de Braose], had secured his
title by 1221 when he granted part of the manor to Walter
Beauchamp; p. 265 describes this as a confirmation to Walter
of a large estate described as a moiety of Tetbury manor
[citing CP25(1)/73/4, no 20]. ' [1]
Needless to say, earlier generations & filiations are still
proving problematic, but the marriage and passage of Tetbury
at least appear to give us some solid ground here, no?
Cheers,
John
NOTES
[1] Chris Phillips, Cristopher Nash, John P. Ravilious & c.,
<Re: Maud de Beauchamp, wife of Robert Marmion>, SGM,
September 2002. Incl. citation by Chris Phillips of Cal.
Inq. Misc., vol. 1, p. 534 (C. Inq. Misc. File 64. (29.) ),
identifying relationship of William de Beauchamp,
Earl of Warwick (d. 1298) to Bertha de Braose/Breuse;
also, VCH Gloucestershire 11:264, as to relationship of
William de Braose (d. 1211) to the family of Maud de St.
Valery and the tenure of Tetbury, co. Gloucs.
Cristopher Nash
DNB - sub Walter & Reginald (under William de Braose) - confirmed for
once.)
Cris
--
Chris Phillips
> Chris, as you can see I'm still catching up (or trying to) and come
> late to issues about which I doubtless 'ought to know better'. But -
> again, just by way of clarification and to get me on the right road -
> I'm just wondering whether it's your feeling that Amice/Anice (de
> Mumby? or wife of a Mumby?), lady of Salwarpe, might be the wife of
> William de Beauchamp of Elmley, Sheriff of Worcester 1139/41-ca.
> 1154, etc. (sometimes called 'William I') who d. 1170 and mo. of
> William (sometimes called 'II') who d. 1197 -- which I think you've
> not actually said -- or do you gauge her to be the wife of another as
> yet unidentified William?
I had been thinking in terms of an unidentified William, who could
conceivably come between the Williams who died (old) in 1170 and (young) in
1197. But perhaps it would be viable for Amice to be the widow of the
William who died in 1170, and the mother of the one who died in 1197.
If Amice is identical with the Amice the wife of Eudo de Mumby (which is a
tempting identification), then she is also the mother of Eudo's son and heir
Alan, who seems to have been born around 1178. If she was also the widow of
William de Beauchamp who d. 1170, and if he really is the same who was
active by the 1130s, then she would have to be a very much younger wife of
his old age - perhaps as much as 30 years younger.
Chris Phillips