C.P. Correction: Scrope-Chaworth-Braybrook
Douglas Richardson
Complete Peerage, 11 (1949): 566-568 (sub Scrope) includes a good
history of John le Scrope, Knt. (died 1455), 4th Lord Scrope of
Masham. The author states that Sir John le Scrope "m[arried] before
24 August 1418, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Thomas Chaworth, of
Wiverton, Notts, by his 1st wife, of whom she was the only child and
h., Nichole, da. and h. of Sir Gerard Braybroke (Sheriff of Essex and
Herts, 5 Nov. 1406)."
In my forthcoming book, Plantagenet Ancestry, I have identified
Elizabeth Chaworth's mother, Nichole Braybrook, as the daughter of Sir
Gerard Braybrook (died 1403), by his 2nd wife, Isabel, daughter of Sir
Hugh de Meynell. This identification would make Nichole the sister,
not daughter, of the Gerard Braybrook who was Sheriff of Essex and
Herts in 1406, and thus would be a new correction for Complete
Peerage.
The evidence for this affiliation has been somewhat weak, as I've
never located a direct record associating Thomas Chaworth and his
wife, Nichole, with the Braybrook family. Moreover, the 1569
Visitation of Nottinghamshire identifies Nichole as the daughter of
the Sir Reginald Braybrook who occurs in the next generation:
"Sir Thomas Chaworth Knt. ob. 10 Feb. 37 H. 6, [1] = Nichola d. &
heire of Sir Reignald Braybrook Knt., [2] = Issabell d. of Sr Thomas
Aylesbury Kt Lord of Wiverton in Com. Nott. Aunt & coheire of Hugh
Aylesbury her nephew" [Reference: R. Mundy et al. Vis. of Nottingham
1569 & 1614 (H.S.P. 4) (1871): 123–128 (Chaworth pedigree)].
The parentage of Nichole assigned by the visitation is virtually
impossible given the known history of Sir Reginald's family and
descendants. Surviving records make it clear that Sir Reginald
Braybrook was survived by only one daughter and heiress, Joan.
Furthermore, Nichole Braybrook can not possibly be Sir Reginald's
daughter and heiress, as a surviving shield of arms at a font at South
Kilvington, Yorkshire shows the Chaworth arms impaling Braybrooke [see
Yorkshire Arch. Jour. 22 (1913): 226-230]. Had Nichole Braybrooke
been an heiress, her arms would have been quartered, not impaled with
the Chaworth arms. Likewise, Nichole can not have been the daughter
of the Gerard Braybrook who was Sheriff in 1406, as his issue is known
to have later died out.
The following item from the A2A catalogue settles the issue once and
for all. This item is the abstract of a title deed dated 1394
involving Thomas Chaworth and his wife, Nichole, who is specifically
called "the daughter of Gerard de Braybrok, Knight." Presumably this
deed is dated about the time of Thomas and Nichole's marriage. Given
the chronology of the Chaworth and Braybrook families, it is clear
that Nichole's correct placement in the Braybrook family would be as
stated in my book as daughter of Sir Gerard Braybrook (died 1403) and
his 2nd wife, Isabel de Meynell. Sir Gerard Braybrook (died 1403) and
Isabel de Meynell were married in 1369.
For interest sake, I've listed below the names of the colonial
immigrants who descend from Sir Thomas Chaworth and his 1st wife,
Nichole Braybrooke.
l. Richard & William Bernard.
2. Mary (Launce) Sherman.
3. Anne (Mauleverer) Abbott.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
* * * * * * * * *
ITEM FROM A2A CATALOGUE:
Leicestershire, Leicester and Rutland Record Office: Peake (Nevill of
Holt) MSS
PEAKE (MEVILLE OF HOLT) MSS
Catalogue Ref. DE221
Creator(s):
Nevill family of Holt, Leicestershire
Peake family of Burrough-on-the-Hill, Leicestershire
Title Deeds
FILE [no title] - ref. DE221/2/1/3/1 - date: Monday after Feast
of Exaltation of Holy Cross [21st Sept.] 18 Richard II [1394]
[from Scope and Content] (b) Thomas, son of William de Chaworth,
Knight, and Nichola, his wife the daughter of Gerard de Braybrok,
Knight.
Rosie Bevan
While it is good to see that, like the rest of us, you have discovered the
delights of A2A, I am wondering why you don't give the full record for each
item, as the context of the genealogical details given is not only
interesting but important.
For example the full record for the abstract you have given below shows that
it is a grant by Thomas Chaworth's feofees, settling the manor of Medbourne
on Thomas and Nichola and their heirs.
"Reference: DE221/2/1/3/1
Creation dates: Monday after Feast of Exaltation of Holy Cross [21st Sept.]
18 Richard II [1394]
Physical characteristics: SEALS (i) (red wax) armorial, shield charged with
cross indented surmounted by knight's helmet and all within legend "JONIS DE
LEKE": (ii) (red wax) armorial, shield, paly, a bend, all within ornate
border and legend "S. HUGONIS --- ANASLE ---"; (iii) (red wax) armorial,
shield, crusilly a chevron, and all within ornate border and legend
"SIGILLUM JOHAN -- DE OUGH; (iv) (red wax) a leaf and a Capital H.
Scope and Content
Medbourne
GRANT (Indented).
(a) (i) John de Lek, Knight;
(ii) Hugh de Annesly;
(iii) Thomas, son of John de Haugh;
(iv) Henry Ogaston.
(b) Thomas, son of William de Chaworth, Knight, and Nichola, his wife the
daughter of Gerard de Braybrok, Knight.
John, Hugh, Thomas and Henry lease to Thomas and Nichola the manor of
Medbourne with all the lands and tenements they hold in the town of
Medbourne except all the lands which formerly belonged to William
Wakebridgge, and now called Dame Margaretisthyng.
To hold to Thomas and Nichola and the heirs of their body of the chief lord
of the fee forever for the servies owed and accustomed (And failing such
heirs to Thomas and Nichola the Manor is to revert to the said William
Chaworth, Knight and his heirs and assigns to hold as above).
DATED at Medbourne."
Thomas Chaworth settled 40 marks p.a. from the manor of Medbourne on his
daughter Elizabeth and John Scrope after their marriage. See below
"Reference: DE221/2/1/11
Creation dates: 3rd Dec. 3 Henry VI [1424]
Physical characteristics: SEAL (red-brown wax, broken).
Scope and Content
Medbourne
GRANT (Indented).
(a) Thomas Chaworth, Knight;
(b) John, Lord Lescrop & Elizabeth his wife.
Thomas grants to John and Elizabeth a certain annual rent of 40 marks
issucing from his manor of Meddeburn in county of Leicestre with the
exception of the lands and tenements in Medburne which lately belonged to
William Wakebrigge called Dame Margarete Thyng, paid at the high altar in
the Cathedral Church of the Blessed Mary of Lincoln at the Feasts of Easter
and St. Michael by equal portions.
To hold to John and Elizabeth for the term of their term of their lives or
whichever shall live longer. And if the said rent should fall into arrears
in part or whole during 40 days then Thomas binds himself by these presents
to John and Elizabeth in 5 marks in the name of a penalty as often as the
said rents shall be in arrears. (And if it is in arrears by more than 40
days then they may distrain upon the manor.
ENDORSEMENT :- Medburne."
For anyone interested in the Braybrook family, I'd recommend a browse
through the Centre for Buckinghamshire Studies: Grubb Estate where more
information can be found.
Cheers
Rosie
> 1569 & 1614 (H.S.P. 4) (1871): 123-128 (Chaworth pedigree)].
Sutliff
evidence. Nichola's parentage and correct placement are discussed in a book
by a medieval authority in a recent publication [1991], who agrees with CP's
placement. It was disingenuous of Richardson to only identify Isabel de
Meynell's fourth (or sixth) and final marriage to Braybrooke and not
identify that she was born between 1335 [possible date of parents' marriage]
and 1337 [minimum age of 15 to have produced her oldest son Thomas de
Bradestone of Breadstone, Glos.born in 1351-1352]. To suggest that Nichola
was Isabel's daughter and married in 1394 defies chronology and credibility.
Thomas Chaworth was born after 1374 and presumably Nichola would have been
younger than her husband so Isabel would have had to have been well past 40
at Nichola's birth for Nichola to have been her daughter. Richardson is
apparently unaware that Nichola died in 1411 or that Dr. David Faris as well
as most authorities give the surname as Braybrooke. In order to correct CP
it would seem something more is needed.
CP specifically identifies Nichola as daughter of the Sir Gerard Braybrooke
d. bef 1429 (and because of chronology, his first wife Eleanor de St. Amand
d. 1389). CP's placement of Nichola (who Richardson says was married circa
1394) as sister of Gerard Braybrooke b. 1382 is much sounder placement than
what Richardson is seeking to overturn. No onomastic inferences can be made
as the surname of Eleanor's mother Ida and paternal grandmother Eleanor are
from families whose surnames are unknown and there is no other Nichola in
the immediate ancestry of the Meynell or Audley families to suggest their
placement. The only Nichola in the pedigree would be Nichola de Grenville,
wife of John de Hampden and grandmother of Gerard d. 1403 and thus existing
in the Braybrooke family and not evidence as coming through Meynell or any
other ancestry. HOP II [1386]: 346 states that Gerard Braybrooke d. 1429 was
born before October 1354 when his grandfather named him as heir after his
father. HOP II [1386]: 345-6 does not identify any daughters from
Braybrooke's marriage to Isabel de Meynell and also provides two additional
marriages to John Peverell d. 1349 and Robert Rigge. I have doubts about
these additional spouses (although Isabel held dower interest in Castle
Ashby and Chadstone in Northamptonshire and Chesterton in Huntingdonshire
[Peverell properties] later settled on Reynold Braybrooke, the second son,
at his marriage to Joan, granddaughter of John Peverell's sister Margaret
who held the remaining parts of these properties). If valid these additional
marriages would be an even greater complication to support Richardson's new
claim. It should also be noted that HOP II [1386]: 533-4 does not identify
any parents for Nichola. Richardson's abstract would seem to confirm a
Braybrooke ancestry for Nichola, but his placement is unsupported by the
evidence he has provided. This suggested change does not meet even the most
elementary requirements for scholarship.
Henry Sutliff
"Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5cf47a19.04050...@posting.google.com...
> Dear Newsgroup ~
<snip>>
> The following item from the A2A catalogue settles the issue once and
> for all. This item is the abstract of a title deed dated 1394
> involving Thomas Chaworth and his wife, Nichole, who is specifically
> called "the daughter of Gerard de Braybrok, Knight." Presumably this
> deed is dated about the time of Thomas and Nichole's marriage. Given
> the chronology of the Chaworth and Braybrook families, it is clear
> that Nichole's correct placement in the Braybrook family would be as
> stated in my book as daughter of Sir Gerard Braybrook (died 1403) and
> his 2nd wife, Isabel de Meynell. Sir Gerard Braybrook (died 1403) and
> Isabel de Meynell were married in 1369.
>
<snip>
Sutliff
before mid-1375 at the earliest, rather than 1374 as I posted. His mother
Alice Caltoft's first husband Sir Thomas Hethe of Tottenham, Middlesex died
in October 1374, so even a quick remarriage to William Chaworth (b. 1352)
could not have produced Thomas any earlier than mid-1375 or later. I would
add that Nichola de Braybrooke could not have been daughter of
Reynold/Reginald de Braybrooke as her daughter Elizabeth would eventually
have been one of the coheirs to the barony of Cobham which she was not.
HS
"Sutliff" <sut...@redshift.com> wrote in message
news:109ua2k...@corp.supernews.com...
Kevan Barton
Granted, I may be mistaken, but I believe you put too much weight on the
impalement vs. quartering in your msg of the above topic. You state,
"The parentage of Nichole assigned by the visitation is virtually
impossible given the known history of Sir Reginald's family and
descendants. Surviving records make it clear that Sir Reginald
Braybrook was survived by only one daughter and heiress, Joan.
Furthermore, Nichole Braybrook can not possibly be Sir Reginald's
daughter and heiress, as a surviving shield of arms at a font at South
Kilvington, Yorkshire shows the Chaworth arms impaling Braybrooke [see
Yorkshire Arch. Jour. 22 (1913): 226-230]. Had Nichole Braybrooke
been an heiress, her arms would have been quartered, not impaled with
the Chaworth arms. Likewise, Nichole can not have been the daughter
of the Gerard Braybrook who was Sheriff in 1406, as his issue is known
to have later died out."
An armigerous woman becomes her father's heraldic heiress upon the death of
her father if she has no living brothers and no nephews or nieces from the
deceased brothers. While her father is living, her arms are impaled with
her husband's, but when the father dies they are displayed on an escutcheon
of pretence. After her death, her husband ceases to bear the escutcheon of
pretence, and her children may quarter their arms, incorporating both those
of the father and mother. Therefore, the presence of the impaled shield
could lead one to think that
an heiress of Braybrooke married a Chaworth. You are probably correct if you
are saying Nichole was not an heiress of a Chaworth/Braybrooke marriage, but
you can't use the impalement vs. quartering to say she was not a Braybrooke
heiress in her own right. The use of arms in an impalment infers appropriate
use at a certain point in time. Now, if you knew when the font was
constructed and time lined that with the Chaworth/Braybrooke family, you'd
have better grounds to say what you did.
If I am misreading your para, please let me know. I'm up too, too early on
this Maryland morning.
Cheers,
Kevan
Douglas Richardson
There are several problems with your post. The most serious one is
your erroneous statement that Nichole Braybrook's mother, Isabel de
Meynell, was married six times. This error has been printed in
several sources, the most recent being J.S. Roskell, House of Commons
1386–1421, 1 (1992): 343–344.
My research indicates that Nichole Braybrook's mother, Isabel de
Meynell, married (1st) Thomas de Shirley, Knt. (died 1362); (2nd) John
de Wodhull, Knt. (died 1367); and (3rd) in 1369 Gerard Braybrook, Knt.
(died 1403). Isabel died in 1393, as the wife of Gerard Braybrook,
Knt. Isabel had issue by all three of these marriages.
Although they are often confused in print, Isabel de Meynell is a
separate and distinct person from the Isabel who married John Peverel,
Robert de Bradeston, and Robert de Rigge. This is proven by suits
dated 1375 and 1376, involving Robert de Rigge and Isabel, his wife,
"formerly wife of John Peverel," which suits date from the period when
Isabel de Meynell is known to have then been the wife of Sir Gerard
Braybrook [Reference: G. Wrottesley, Staffordshire Suits: Plea Rolls
(Colls. Hist. Staffs. 13) (1892): 92, 126, 134].
The "medieval authority in a recent publication [1991]" which you have
cited appears to have their facts wrong. The elementals of
scholarship require you to name this source and cite their evidence.
You have failed to do this. Likewise, CP's placement of Nichole as
"sister of Gerard Braybrook b. 1382" is absolutely impossible. A
little knowledge of the Braybrook family tree would have spared you
this error.
Your post demonstrates what happens when you place too much reliance
on secondary sources. I trust in the future you will correct this
deficit in your research.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
"Sutliff" <sut...@redshift.com> wrote in message news:<109ua2k...@corp.supernews.com>...
Douglas Richardson
If you go to Leo van de Pas' great website, you'll find Isabel de
Meynell's three marriages correctly stated there. Also, Leo shows
Isabel's correct parentage as well. If you haven't been to Leo's
website, I recommend you do so. He has a veritable wealth of
information available online in his database.
The address of Leo's website is:
For interest sake, I've posted below a slightly revised copy of an
earlier post of mine dated 2001 in which I discuss the evidence for
Isabel de Meynell's parentage, along with Leo van de Pas' interesting
reply. In Leo's post, he discusses the prominent and notable
descendants of Isabel de Meynell's son, Sir Hugh Shirley. This is
great stuff!
Hopefully, Leo can now share with us the prominent descendants of
Isabel de Meynell's newly identified daughter, Nichole (Braybrook)
Chaworth.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
COPY OF DOUGLAS RICHARDSON'S EARLIER POST
From: royala...@msn.com (Douglas Richardson)
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: The six husbands of Isabel Meynell
Date: 4 Jul 2001 13:19:17 -0700
Dear John ~
Thank you for your good post.
The Isabel you asked about who married successively Shirley, Wodhull,
and Braybrook is usually identified in print as a sister of Ralph
Basset, last Lord Basset of Drayton Basset, co. Stafford. This
identification is made on the basis that Ralph Basset referred to
Isabel's son, Hugh Shirley, as his "nephew" in his will.
Ralph Basset was clearly related to Hugh Shirley through Hugh's
mother, Isabel, as in a settlement of property made some years prior
to his death, Ralph named Isabel's sons by different marriages, namely
Hugh Shirley and Ralph Braybrook, as successive remainders to his
lands. Including Isabel's children by different marriages in the
settlement indicates that her son's Hugh Shirley's kinship to Ralph
Basset was through Isabel, rather than her husband, Sir Thomas de
Shirley.
As for possible kinships, it is a certain fact that Ralph Basset had
no near legitimate Basset kinfolk who survived him. At the time of
Ralph's parents' marriage, there was a manor settled on them and their
issue by his mother's family. Following the marriage, the manor was
held successively by Ralph's parents, then Ralph's mother and
step-father, Sir Hugh de Meynell, and then by Ralph himself. At
Ralph's death, the property reverted to his mother's relations,
proving Ralph had no legitimate surviving siblings or issue.
As for Ralph's mother, Alice de Audley, she is known to have married
(2nd) Sir Hugh de Meynell, by whom she had several sons named in a
Warwickshire fine. Alice was not, however, the mother of Sir Hugh's
eldest son and heir, Richard Meynell, as Richard was born when Alice
de Audley was still married to her Basset husband.
That Isabel de Shirley was Alice de Audley's daughter by her Meynell
marriage is proven by a later dispensation for marriage between one of
Isabel's Shirley descendants and one of her half-brother, Richard
Meynell's descendants. If you work out the relationship stated in
the dispensation, it agrees with Isabel having been a sister or
half-sister of Richard Meynell. In fact, this is no other apparent
relationship between the ancestry of the two parties, except through
the Meynell family. Furthermore, it may be noted that Isabel named a
son, Hugh, doubtless in honor of her father, Sir Hugh de Meynell.
Given the various facts stated above, it is evident that Isabel, wife
successively of Shirley, Wodhull, and Braybrook, was the daughter of
Sir Hugh de Meynell, by Alice de Audley, and thus was a legitimate
half-sister of Ralph Basset, last Lord Basset of Drayton Basset.
For further particulars on this matter, please see the forthcoming
book, Plantagenet Ancestry, where Isabel's identity and parentage will
be discussed at length and all documentation provided.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
* * * * * * * * * * * *
COPY OF LEO VAN DE PAS' EARLIER POST
From: leov...@iinet.net.au (Leo van de Pas)
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: The six husbands of Isabel Meynell
Date: 4 Jul 2001 18:27:23 -0600
Dear Douglas,
This Isabel de Meynell and her parents are a cornerstone in many
people's
ancestry. For instance, they are ancestors of
H.M. the Queen Mother, Lady Diana Spencer, Sarah Ferguson, the Aga
Khan,
Lord Bertrand Russell, Lady Antonia Fraser as well as today's Dukes of
Abercorn, Beaufort, Bedford, Buccleuch, Devonshire, Gloucester,
Grafton,
Hamilton, Leinster, Marlborough, Norfolk, Northumberland, Richmond,
and
Westminster; and, of course, many other interesting personages..
Many thanks for your message. It made me look a bit further around and
what
I found fascinating was that the Complete Peerage Volume II pages 3
and 4
there is a huge footnote.
This does go into the heirs of Ralph Basset and offers the several
solutions
to his link with Isabel (de Meynell), from her being his legitimate
full
sister, his father's illegitimate daughter as well as his legitimate
uterine
half-sister and even a sister of Ralph's father. Especially as Ralph
Basset
calls Isabel's son his "neveu/nephew' I think you have establised the
correct link.
However, I think it is a pity you did not mention just the sources
where you
found the appropriate details. I am sure no-one on his list would
expect you
to go through great lengths to discuss your find but just what source
you
used.
Again many thanks for your message.
Best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Claud...@aol.com
I have some information and a few questions on the correction you posted.
This has to do with the early Chaworth family and there is a connection to the
Braybrooke line but not a direct one to Gerard Braybrooke.
In A2A the following:
FILE [no title] - ref. DE221/2/1/7/1 - date: 8th May 14 Edward III [1340]
[from Scope and Content] (b) Lord Thomas de Chaworth, Knight, son of
Lord Thomas de Chaworth and Lady Joan his wife.
[from Scope and Content] (ii) Pro Chaworth in Medburne.
The son was called Thomas Chaworth, Junior:
FILE [no title] - ref. DE221/2/1/15/1 - date: 25th March 20 Edward III
[1346]
[from Scope and Content] (b) Lord Thomas de Chaworth, junior, Knight.
The connection is through Joan his mother as follows:
FILE [no title] - ref. F(M) Charter/1381 - date: 13 Feb 31 Edw III [1357]
[from Scope and Content] COVENANT between William de Thorp, Knt.,
and William de la Pole, Knt., son of Richard de la Pole, that as the latter
has sold his reversion of the manor of Milton to the former, which manor Dame
Joan de Chaworth, mother of the said William de la Pole holds for term of his
life, with reversion to the said William, he has "fulfilled his faith" in
presence of the King's Justices and granted as a loyal knight that William de Thorp
may have a fine levied of the said manor by the said William de la Pole.
FILE [no title] - ref. F(M) Charter/1383 - date: 15 Feb 31 Edw
III [1357]
[from Scope and Content] GRANT by William de la Pole, Knt., to
William de Thorp, Knt., of the reversion of the manor of Milton which Dom.Thomas
de Chaworth and Joan his wife hold from him for their lives.
FILE [no title] - ref. F(M) Charter/1387 - date: Th aft Ascension
Day [25 May] 31 Edw III [1357]
[from Scope and Content] COVENANT between William de la Pole and
Margaret his wife, and William de Thorp, Knt. that the latter be held free of
any charge brought against the latter on the part of Thomas de Chaworth and
Joan his wife, in respect of the fine levied whereby the said William de la Pole
conveyed to the said William de Thorp, the manor of Milton.
Joan was married first to Richard de la Pole who died ca. 1337 and secondly
to Thomas Chaworth. By her first marriage she was the mother of William de la
Pole, Knt. of Ashby David, Norchants and Kingston upon Hull, Yorks. who married
Margaret Peverell. Their son John de la Pole married Joan Cobham, and their
granddaughter Joan de la Pole married Reginald Braybrooke.
Thomas Chaworth, son of Thomas and Joan, married Margaret NN.:
FILE [no title] - ref. DE221/2/2/23 - date: Sunday before Feast of St.
Mathew Apostle [10th Sept] 37 Edward iii [1363]
[from Scope and Content] (a) Lady Margaret de Chaworth, wife of late
lord Thomas de Chaworth son of lord Thomas de Chaworth, Kt
FILE [no title] - ref. DE221/2/2/92/1 - date: Sunday before Feast of St.
Michael Archangel [24th Sept.] 37 Edward III [1363]
[from Scope and Content] (a) Lady Margaret wife of lord Thomas de
Chaworth
[from Scope and Content] Witnesses that lady Margaret has leased to
William, Agnes and [?] one messuage called Bernardisplace, 7 acres of land and 2
acres of meadow in Medburn, of which ½ acre of land lies in Blakmilde next to
the land of Walter son of Avicia Herberd, 1½ roods on Bestonysacre next to the
land of Richard son of Robert, 1½ rood in the same furlong next to the land
of Richard Walden, 1½ roods in the same furlong 'in the Mersdale' next to the
land of lord Thomas de Chaworth, 1½ roods in the same furlong next to the land
of Matilda o ye Medow [Meadow] ½ rood abuts 'into Mersdale' next to the land
of Richard son of Robert, ½ rood abuts on Mersdalewell, next to the land of
John de Manton, 1½ roods abutting 'into Mersdale' next to the land lately
belonging to Robert de Preston, 1½ roods in the same Furlong which belonged lately to
Elena Gerard, ½ rood on Flaxland next to the land of Walter Herberd, ½ rood
at Mersdaleknol next to the land of William Neal, 1½ roods on Pletton next to
the land lately of Robert Ade, 1 rood upon Aschgate next to the land of Richard
Walden, 1½ roods 'into Calverbreche' next to the land of Richard son of
Robert, one rood under Gildmorysyerd next to land of the said Richard, 1½ roods
abutting 'in to Mare' next to the land of Matilda o ye Medou, one rood in 'ye
Brokfurlong' next to the land of Richard son of Robert, ½ rood abutting 'into
Draytongate' next to the land of the said Richard, one rood 'into Draytongate'
and abutting on to the land of the said Richard, 1½ roods 'into Hayterissike'
next to the land of Richard Walden, 1½ roods abutting on Barers next to the land
of lord Thomas de Chaworth, 1½ roods 'in to Teperwellsik' next to the land of
John de Manton, one rood in the same furlong next to the land of Hugh de
Hemyngton, one acre of meadow lies in 'le Southlangedale' abutting on to the
meadow of Richard son of Robert one rood 'in to Wandoles' next to Waldenys acre, ½
acre 'into Mareleyes' next to the meadow of Richard son of Robert, ½ of half
an acre divided with Richard o ye Medou in the same furlong, one third part of
half an acre in Southlangedole divided with the said Richard, a third part of
2 half roods in Littilmedou Hok and divided with the said Richard, a third
part of one Rood in the same furlong divided with the said Richard.
FILE [no title] - ref. DE221/2/2/68 - date: Sunday 'in Ramis Palmorum'
[17th March] 38 Edward III [1364]
[from Scope and Content] a) Lady Margaret, late wife of Lord Thomas de
Chaworth;
[from Scope and Content] ENDORSEMENT :- Medborne 'A'o 38.E.3. Margareta
Chaworth dimisit ad termin vite Rob'to Whyrler messuagium cum gardino vocat
Daundelynysplace.
Their son William Chaworth married Alice de Caltoft and they were the parents
of Thomas Chaworth that married Nicola Braybrooke and Isabella Aylesbury.
Do either of you have any information on the identity of Joan wife of Richard
de la Pole and Thomas Chaworth?
Thanks.
MichaelAnne
Claud...@aol.com
Alice Caltoft wife of William Chaworth is one of the heirs of Ralph Bassett
of Drayton. She is descended through her mother Katherine Brette who is
descended from Joanna de Heriz that married Jordan de la Brette. Joanna Heriz is the
daughter of Matilda Bassett and William Heriz. Matilda's sister Margaret
Bassett married Edmund Stafford.
Here is the documentation on the heirs:
George F. Farnham, Leicestershire Medieval Village Notes, Vol. IV, W.
Thornley & Son, 1930, Leicester, sub Long Whatton, pages 290-291:
Inquistion p.m. Ralph Basset of Drayton. File 62-9. Taken at Loughborough on
Tuesday beforw St. Gregory, 14 Richard II, 1391. The jury say that Ralph
Basset held no lands in co. Leicester of the king or of others on the day he died,
because they say that on Sunday after St. Hilary, 13 Richard II, Ralph Basset
emfeoffed Walter Skirlowe, bishop of Durham, and others (named) in all his
lands and tenements in co. Leicester, as trustees to hold them for him, his heirs
and assigns, by virtue of which enfeoffment they hold the same. They say 24
virgates of land in Whatton are worth £10 a year and are held of John de
Beaumont, knight, by knight service, etc.
Ralph Basset of Drayton, kt. died on 11 May last. Thomas, earl of Stafford,
and Alice the wife of William Chaworthe, kt., are kinsmen and heirs of the said
Ralph basset. Thomas is the son of Hugh, son of Ralph, son of Margaret, one
of the sisters of Ralph Basset, father of Ralph, the father of Ralph Basset,
just deceased. Alice is the daughter of Katherine, daughter of John, son of
Roger, son of John [Johanna], son [daughter] of Matilda, the other sister of Ralph
Basset, father of Ralph, father of Ralph Basset, just deceased.
I hope this helps.
MichaelAnne
Rosie Bevan
You are absolutely right in your thinking. Moreover even when an heiress had
come into her own, heraldry displaying impalement rather than quartering can
still be found according to its context. For example a celebration of the
houses a family had married into would only include impalement of that
primary family. To base a genealogical reasoning on impalement as Douglas
has done is a very unsound practice and not to be recommended. In genealogy
context is vital, and that is an area where Mr Richardson's work often lets
him down.
Cheers
Rosie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevan Barton" <kevan...@adelphia.net>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Leo van de Pas
of interesting descendants. However, not many went to the USA, I have for
the USA
Mary Launce,
Thomas and Philip Nelson
Sir Robert Eden, Bt, Governor of Maryland
As at present (but that will be reduced) I have 1076 descendants marked off
as interesting, I should give at least a few.
Ian Fettes
Queen Elizabeth II
Lady Diana Spencer
Sarah Ferguson
Sophie Rhys-Jones
Rachel Ward
the Aga Khan
Lady Antonia Fraser
Bertrand Russell
Sir Alec Douglas-Home
Lord Lucan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sutliff
intend to reply. However, I am in the middle of composing a tribute (for
publication) for an Academy Award winning friend who died in February. That
takes precedence over this so genealogy will have to wait a bit.
HS
"Sutliff" <sut...@redshift.com> wrote in message
news:109ucbj...@corp.supernews.com...
Kevan Barton
Thanks for the note. A question was asked of me directly about whether the
practices of heraldry had even developed to the point by the 13th and 14th
centuries to ascribe the hard and fast rules followed now. I'd have to say
no, and you brought to the discussion an excellent word: context.
Impalement could simply celebrate the marital connections between two
families and not at all infer a bride was an heiress or not. I've seen
stained glass windows, escutcheons decorating monuments, fonts, paintings,
etc., with impaled arms, but the context is only to infer a marital
connection exists. I'd have to see how the descendents of a couple handle
their arms by quartering the impaled arms of their parents to feel
comfortable enough to assume the bride, the mother, was an heiress in her
own right.
There's lots to be gained from a study of arms, but it pays to remember all
the contexts in which they could be used, and familial celebration is just
one of them!
Cheers,
Kevan
Douglas Richardson
> Douglas,
>
> Granted, I may be mistaken, but I believe you put too much weight on the
> impalement vs. quartering in your msg of the above topic.
>
of a >Chaworth/Braybrooke marriage, but you can't use the impalement
vs. quartering >to say she was not a Braybrooke heiress in her own
right. The use of arms in >an impalment infers appropriate use at a
certain point in time. Now, if you >knew when the font was
constructed and time lined that with the Chaworth/Braybrooke family,
you'd have better grounds to say what you did.
>
> If I am misreading your para, please let me know. I'm up too, too early on
> this Maryland morning.
>
> Cheers,
> Kevan
Dear Kevan ~
Thank you for your good post.
When I have time, I'll contact Cecil Humphery-Smith at the Institute
of Heraldic and Genealogical Studies and ask him for his opinion on
this matter. I'll let you know what he says.
Douglas Richardson
Thank you for sharing this information with all of us. It's very much
appreciated.
If it is easy for you to do, can you tell us the specific descent from
Nichole (Braybrook) Chaworth down to Queen Elizabeth II?
Again, thanks!
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
leov...@netspeed.com.au ("Leo van de Pas") wrote in message news:<005b01c436db$55245a40$c3b4fea9@email>...
John Higgins
well documented in Paget - start with Q115012.
[You ARE familiar with Paget, I assume....}
John Higgins
"Who begot whom is a most amusing kind of hunting" - Horace Walpole
Douglas Richardson
As a followup to my original post this past week regarding Nichole
(Braybrooke) Chaworth, I thought I would post Nichole's two descents
from King Henry II of England. Further particulars on these descents
can be found in my book, Plantagenet Ancestry.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
* * * * * * * * * *
Line Number One:
1. HENRY II, King of England, by a mistress, IDA _____.
2. WILLIAM LONGESPÉE, Knt., Earl of Salisbury, married ELA OF
SALISBURY.
3. IDA LONGESPÉE, married WILLIAM DE BEAUCHAMP, Knt., of Bedford,
Bedfordshire.
4. ELA DE BEAUCHAMP, married BALDWIN WAKE, Knt., Baron of Bourne,
Lincolnshire.
5. JOAN WAKE, married MICHAEL PICOT, of Doddington, Lincolnshire.
6. LORA PICOT, married GERARD DE BRAYBROOKE, Knt., of Horsenden,
Buckinghamshire.
7. GERARD DE BRAYBROOKE, Knt., of Clifton, Bedfordshire, married
ISABEL DAKENEY.
8. GERARD BRAYBROOKE, Knt., of Clifton, Bedfordshire, married ISABEL
DE MEYNELL (desc. King Henry II -see below).
9. NICHOLE BRAYBROOKE, married THOMAS CHAWORTH, Knt., of Wiverton,
Nottinghamshire [see BRAYBROOKE 10].
- - - - - - - -
Line Number Two:
1. HENRY II, King of England, by a mistress, IDA _____.
2. WILLIAM LONGESPÉE, Knt., Earl of Salisbury, married ELA OF
SALISBURY.
3. WILLIAM LONGESPÉE, Knt., of Amesbury, Wiltshire, married IDOINE DE
CAMVILLE.
4. ELA LONGESPÉE, married JAMES DE AUDLEY, Knt., of Heleigh (in
Audley), Staffordshire.
5. NICHOLAS DE AUDLEY, Knt., of Heleigh (in Audley), Staffordshire,
married KATHERINE GIFFARD.
6. NICHOLAS DE AUDLEY, Knt., 1st Lord Audley, married JOAN MARTIN.
7. ALICE DE AUDLEY, married HUGH DE MEYNELL, Knt., of Langley Meynell
(in Kirk Langley), Derbyshire.
8. ISABEL DE MEYNELL, married (1st) THOMAS DE SHIRLEY, Knt., of Lower
Ettington, Warwickshire;(3rd) GERARD DE BRAYBROOKE, Knt. (see above).
9. NICHOLE BRAYBROOKE, married THOMAS CHAWORTH, Knt., of Wiverton,
Nottinghamshire.
royala...@msn.com (Douglas Richardson) wrote in message news:<5cf47a19.04050...@posting.google.com>...
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Complete Peerage, 11 (1949): 566-568 (sub Scrope) includes a good
> history of John le Scrope, Knt. (died 1455), 4th Lord Scrope of
> Masham. The author states that Sir John le Scrope "m[arried] before
> 24 August 1418, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Thomas Chaworth, of
> Wiverton, Notts, by his 1st wife, of whom she was the only child and
> h., Nichole, da. and h. of Sir Gerard Braybroke (Sheriff of Essex and
> Herts, 5 Nov. 1406)."
>
> In my forthcoming book, Plantagenet Ancestry, I have identified
> Elizabeth Chaworth's mother, Nichole Braybrook, as the daughter of Sir
> Gerard Braybrook (died 1403), by his 2nd wife, Isabel, daughter of Sir
> Hugh de Meynell. This identification would make Nichole the sister,
> not daughter, of the Gerard Braybrook who was Sheriff of Essex and
> Herts in 1406, and thus would be a new correction for Complete
> Peerage.
>
> The evidence for this affiliation has been somewhat weak, as I've
> never located a direct record associating Thomas Chaworth and his
> wife, Nichole, with the Braybrook family. Moreover, the 1569
> Visitation of Nottinghamshire identifies Nichole as the daughter of
> the Sir Reginald Braybrook who occurs in the next generation:
>
> "Sir Thomas Chaworth Knt. ob. 10 Feb. 37 H. 6, [1] = Nichola d. &
> heire of Sir Reignald Braybrook Knt., [2] = Issabell d. of Sr Thomas
> Aylesbury Kt Lord of Wiverton in Com. Nott. Aunt & coheire of Hugh
> Aylesbury her nephew" [Reference: R. Mundy et al. Vis. of Nottingham
> 1569 & 1614 (H.S.P. 4) (1871): 123?128 (Chaworth pedigree)].
Douglas Richardson
Thank you for your good post. You've stated correctly that Alice
Caltofte, wife of Sir William Chaworth, was identified as co-heiress
of Ralph Basset (died 1390), 3rd Lord Basset of Drayton, in an
inquisition taken following Ralph's death in 1391. The inquisition
indicated that Alice Caltofte was a descendant of one of his
great-aunts. Complete Peerage 2 (1912): 3, footnote 3 (sub Basset)
provides the same information. It accepts the inquisition's statement
that Alice Caltofte was a descendant of Lord Basset's great-aunt, Maud
Basset, wife of William de Heriz. While Alice Caltofte certainly was
a descendant of the Basset family, her connection was actually two
generations back in the Basset than stated by Complete Peerage.
Trevor Foulds' book, Thurgaton Cartulary, pg. clv contains some
helpful information regarding Alice Caltofte's ancestor, William de
Heriz. Foulds states that William was a juror in 1230 and a justice
itinerant for Nottinghamshire in 1236. He was evidently still living
in 1251, when his lands were mentioned in a record. Sometime prior
to 1261, he and Roger IV Deyncourt witnessed a grant by Robert de
Gretwik.
Regarding the matter of the identity of William de Heriz' wife, Maud
Basset, Foulds has the following to say:
"Thoroton cited a grant to William de Heyrez by Ralph Basset
(1211-1265) whereby Ralph granted to William, in free marriage with
his sister Matilda, 6 marks of land in Wyndesclive (unidentified)
which Ralph father of Ralph Basset had granted to Matilda. Thoroton
further stated that this marriage produced Joan de Heriz but his
account of her marriage and descent is confused. Joan de Heriz
certainly existed. Her land in Wiverton is mentioned in the
[Thurgarton] cartulary (248-49, 276). She was still alive in 1277,
for Thomas of Mells, son of Alina sister and co-heiress of Richard III
of Wiverton, at his death in that year, held two and a third bovates
of her in Wiverton which were worth 37s. 4d. per annum. Joan married,
again according to Thoroton, Jordan le Bret and they had at least one
son Roger le Bret ...."
Given the above chronology of the Heriz family, Foulds is quite
correct to assign Maud Basset, wife of William de Heriz, as daughter
of Ralph Basset (died 1254/61). In any event, she could not possibly
be this Ralph's great-granddaughter as stated in the 1391 inquisition
and by Complete Peerage.
Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention, MichaelAnne. Much
appreciated.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
P.S. For those following the Chaworth-Braybrooke thread elsewhere, I
should mention that Alice Caltofte, wife of Sir William Chaworth, was
mother-in-law of Nichole (Braybrooke) Chaworth. Alice Caltofte can be
found on Leo van de Pas' great website at www.genealogics.org.
Claud...@aol.com wrote in message news:<b6.2bce5cf...@aol.com>...
John Higgins
here. CP 2-3-4, footnote f (not 3), sub Basset, refers to Alice, wife of
William Chaworth, DESCENDED FROM Maud...who m. Sir William Herriz. The only
reference to "great-granddaughter" in the footnote is to Alice's
graet-granddaughter who d. in 1507, not to Alice herself as a
great-graddaughter of anyone. CP does not state the specific number of
generations connecting Alice to the Basset family, but simply references a
pedigree in Collectanea Topographica et Genealogica 7:257 which lays it out
clearly. The CTG pedigree corresponds to the 1391 IPM (with the corrections
indicated by MichaelAnne), which also does not specify Alice as Ralph
Basset's great-graddaughter. Count the generations again....
John Higgins
"Who begot whom is a most amusing kind of hunting" - Horace Walpole
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Douglas Richardson [mailto:royala...@msn.com]
Kevan Barton
Folks,
How far off then are the 1569/1640 Nottingham visitations that make Alice
the great-great-grand-daughter of Maud Bassett?
1. Alice Caltofte + Sir William Chaworth
2. Sir John Caltofte + Catherine le Brett
3. Roger le Brett + Bamburga Deincourt
4. (Jordan) le Brett + Joan Heriz
5. William Heriz + Maud Basset
George William Marshall, [ITAL:]The Visitations of the County of Nottingham
In the Years 1569 and 1614[:ITAL], Vol. IV (London: The Harleian Society,
1871)<, [CD]>.
Cheers,
Kevan
Claud...@aol.com
1.Matilda Basset married William de Heriz of Wiverton, Nottinghamshire
2. Joanna de Heriz married Jordan le Brette
3. Sir Roger le Brette married Roberta D'Eincourt [William Flower
Somerset Herald
notes 1581 "Rogerus le Brette miles et uxor Robertam filiam
Johannis Deyncourt de Thurgarton.]
4. Sir John le Brette married Alice, widow of John de Loudham
[ibid "Johannes le Brette miles duxit Aliciam relictam Johis
de Loudham militis." " Cartae Antiquae:
Paleat universis ....sentes me Aliciam de Loudham quonda
Uxorem Johis Brette militis de Wyverton relaxase et omnimo pro me
et heredis meus quietium
.Lamasse dmo. Johi Brette Mil. filio meo et Johannae uxor
ejus ...........
The property conveyed to John le Brette and his wife Joanna
was the manor of Prensthorp. The deed was dated at Wyverton
"die Dominica proxima pot Purification beatae
Mariae Virginis" 18 Edw. III. {Aft. Feb. 2, 1345}
5. Catherine le Brette married Sir John Caltoft of East
Bridgeford, Northamptonshire. [ibid
"Escaetria anno Domini 27 Edward III. #35.
Johannes de Caltoft obiit on transmarinis partilires
die Mercury proxima port festum St. Johannes
Baptiste anno dominu 25 Edward III. Et Alicia filia et
haeres ejus est aetalis 8 annoris." He died on the Wednesday before
June 24, 1352. His daughter and heir Alice was aged eight years.
6. Alice Caltoft married (1) Sir Thomas Hethe (2)
Sir William Chaworth
Thorton's Antiquities of Nottingham, Vol. I,
sub east Bridgeford, page 294:
It appears that John Caltoft (son of Philip)
in 25 Edward III [1352] enfeoffed Sir
John de Loudham, knight, Richard Penfax, and others in
a moiety of this manor, which descended to Alice his daughter and
heir, who, it seems, was first married to Sir
Thomas Hethe, and after to Sir William
Chaworth.
Basset:
1. Ralph Basset of Drayton (1242-Dec. 31, 1299) married Hawise NN.
2. Margaret Basset ( -bef. March 17, 1335/6) married Edmund Stafford
(July 17, 1273-bef. Aug. 12, 1308)
2. Ralph Basset of Drayton ( - Feb. 25, 1342/3) married Joan de Grey,
daughter of John de Grey of Wilton by Anne de Ferrers
2. Matilda Basset married William de Heriz [see above]
Ralph Basset (1242-Dec. 31, 1299) was the son of Ralph Basset of Drayton
(1215- August 4, 1265) by his wife Margaret de Somery (- aft. June 18, 1293),
daughter of Roger de Somery by Nicola d'Albini.
Rosie Bevan
There may be a generation missing as indicated by the inquisition below.
Bamburga Deincourt, or alternatively Roberta, was daughter of John Deyncourt
(d.1257) and Agnes de Neville (d. bef 20 July 1293), widow of Richard de
Percy of Topcliffe, Yorks. Agnes was a Neville of Raby according to CP IV
118 (d), "Lady Agnes gave the manor of Steeping, Lincs to her son Edmund
D'Eyncourt and his heirs by deed 20 Edw I. The effigy on her seal wears a
dress charged with billets and a fess dancett (Deincourt) and holds up two
shields, the dexter charges with two fusils conjoined in fesse (Percy), the
sinister with a saltirs (Neville of Raby)."
During an inquisition post mortem for Joan (Chaworth) Ormond held in 1508
[CIPM Henry VII v. 3 no.370], jurors must have presented charter evidence
for her right in the manors of Toynton and Timberland, Lincs, which had
descended via the Caltofts
"John Ormond, esq, and the said Joan, his wife, long before their death were
seised in fee tail, in right of the said Joan, of the under-mentioned manor
of Toynton, by gift of Thomas Onyebey, parson of the church of Estbrugeford,
to John Caltofte and the heirs of his body. the said manor after the death
of the said John Caltofte, Alice his daughter and heir, Thomas Chaworth, son
and heir of the said Alice, William son of the said Thomas, and Thomas son
of the said William, descended to Joan Ormond aforesaid, as sister and heir
of the last-named Thomas.
Also the said John and Joan were seised in fee tail, in right of the said
Joan, of the undermentioned manor of Tymberland, by gift of Agnes de Percy
relict of John Dayncourt, to Roger Lebrette and Roberta his wife, daughter
of the said Agnes, and the heirs of their bodies. The said manor after the
death of the said Roger and Roberta, John their son, John son the said John,
Katharine sister of the said John Brett son of John, Alice daughter of the
said Katharine, Thomas son of the said Alice, William son of the said
Thomas, and Thomas son of the said William, descended to Joan Ormond
aforesaid as sister and heir of the last-named Thomas."
If you compare the above with the Visitation, the generation of John Le
Brett, father of Katherine is missing.
Cheers
Rosie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevan Barton" <kevan...@adelphia.net>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Rosie Bevan
Our posts crossed - interesting to see you have John le Bret married to
Alice relict of John Loudham. I suspect she was a Kirketon, as the following
PRO records would suggest.
"C 143/260/4
John de Kirketon to settle the castle of Tattershall and the manors of
Tattershall and Tumby, with the knights' fees and advowsons thereto
pertaining, on himself and Isabel his wife and the heirs of his body, with
remainder to Robert de Litlebury and Florence his wife and the heirs male of
the body of the said Robert, remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male
of his body, remainder to John son of John le Bret and the heirs male of his
body, remainder to John son of Nicholas le Grey and the heirs male of his
body, remainder to the grantor's right heirs.
16 EDWARD III. "
C 143/307/2
John de Kyrketon to settle the castle and manor of Tattershall, with the
advowsons of Kirkstead abbey, Markby priory, Tattershall church, and the
chapel of the said castle, on himself and the heirs of his body, with
remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body, remainder to
Alice daughter of John de Loudham and the heirs male of her body, remainder
to Isabel her sister and the heirs male of her body, remainder to the right
heir of John de Loudham and the heirs of his body, remainder to the right
heir of John de Loudham the father and Alice his wife, and the heirs of his
body, remainder to the right heirs of the grantor, who retains the manors of
Tumby and Kirton in Holland.
26 EDWARD III. "
Cheers again
Rosie
----- Original Message -----
From: <Claud...@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Claud...@aol.com
Wonderful information as always! Thanks for the citations on John de
Kirketon. This will add
another link in the Brette family.
MichaelAnne
Douglas Richardson
> Unless I'm missing something, I don't think there's a "correction" to CP
> here. CP 2-3-4, footnote f (not 3), sub Basset, refers to Alice, wife of
> William Chaworth, DESCENDED FROM Maud...who m. Sir William Herriz. The only
> reference to "great-granddaughter" in the footnote is to Alice's
> graet-granddaughter who d. in 1507, not to Alice herself as a
> great-graddaughter of anyone. CP does not state the specific number of
> generations connecting Alice to the Basset family, but simply references a
> pedigree in Collectanea Topographica et Genealogica 7:257 which lays it out
> clearly. The CTG pedigree corresponds to the 1391 IPM (with the corrections
> indicated by MichaelAnne), which also does not specify Alice as Ralph
> Basset's great-graddaughter. Count the generations again....
>
> John Higgins
Dear John ~
Yes, you're missing something. Read the Basset section of Complete
Peerage again. In Volume 2, page 3, the author states:
"[Ralph Basset, 3rd Lord Basset]" was bur[ied] under a 'goodly
monument in Lichfield Cathedral,' when the Barony became dormant, or,
possibly, fell into abeyance between the heirs of his two great
aunts."
The only way for Maud (Basset) de Heriz to be Lord Basset's great aunt
would be for her to be great-granddaughter of his ancestor, Ralph
Basset, who died 1154/61. As I indicated in my post, Maud was the
daughter, not great-granddaughter, of Ralph Basset (died 1154/61). As
such, her descendant, Alice (Caltofte) Chaworth, was incorrectly
identified as heir to Lord Basset in the 1391 inquisition.
Furthermore, Complete Peerage in footnote f on the same page (carried
over to page 4) states that if the illegitimacy of Isabel [de
Meynell], wife of Sir Thomas Shirley and Sir Gerard Braybrooke, could
be established (Note: I have since proved that Isabel was Lord
Basset's uterine half-sister), that then "this dignity [the Barony of
Basset] would be, in abeyance between the representatives of Thomas,
Earl of Stafford ... and those of the said Dame Alice Chaworth." The
only way for this to be true would be if Alice Chaworth's ancestress,
Maud (Basset) de Heriz was great aunt of Lord Ralph Basset, died 1390.
This is chronologically impossible.
I suggest you count the generations again, John. Maud (Basset) de
Heriz was placed two generations off in the Basset family tree. This
was a very bad mistake in Complete Peerage. It can still be found
circulating today in the royalty databases. But no more.
Kevan Barton
What wonderful information so quickly provided. Thank you very much.
Cheers,
Kevan
Douglas Richardson
> here. CP 2-3-4, footnote f (not 3), sub Basset, refers to Alice, wife of
> William Chaworth, DESCENDED FROM Maud...who m. Sir William Herriz. The only
> reference to "great-granddaughter" in the footnote is to Alice's
> graet-granddaughter who d. in 1507, not to Alice herself as a
> great-graddaughter of anyone. CP does not state the specific number of
> generations connecting Alice to the Basset family, but simply references a
> pedigree in Collectanea Topographica et Genealogica 7:257 which lays it out
> clearly. The CTG pedigree corresponds to the 1391 IPM (with the corrections
> indicated by MichaelAnne), which also does not specify Alice as Ralph
> Basset's great-graddaughter. Count the generations again....
>
> John Higgins
Dear John ~
Yes, you're missing something. Read the Basset section of Complete
Peerage again. In Volume 2, page 3, the author states:
"[Ralph Basset, 3rd Lord Basset]" was bur[ied] under a 'goodly
monument in Lichfield Cathedral,' when the Barony became dormant, or,
possibly, fell into abeyance between the heirs of his two great
aunts." Please read it again: two great aunts.
The only way for Maud (Basset) de Heriz to be Lord Basset's great aunt
would be for her to be the great-granddaughter of his remote ancestor,
Ralph Basset, who died 1154/61. As I indicated in my post, Maud was
the daughter, not great-granddaughter, of Ralph Basset (died 1154/61).
As such, her descendant, Alice (Caltofte) Chaworth, was incorrectly
identified as heir to Lord Basset in the 1391 inquisition.
Furthermore, Complete Peerage in footnote f on the same page (carried
over to page 4) states that if the illegitimacy of Isabel, wife of Sir
Thomas Shirley and Sir Gerard Braybrooke, could be established (Note:
I have since proved that Isabel was Lord Basset's uterine
half-sister), that then "this dignity [the Barony of Basset] would be,
in abeyance between the representatives of Thomas, Earl of Stafford
... and those of the said Dame Alice Chaworth." The only way for this
to be true would be if Alice Chaworth's ancestress, Maud (Basset) de
Heriz was great aunt of Lord Ralph Basset, died 1390. This is
chronologically impossible.
I suggest you count the generations again. Maud (Basset) de Heriz was
placed two generations off in the Basset family tree. This was a very
bad mistake in Complete Peerage.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
R. Battle
<snip>
> The only way for Maud (Basset) de Heriz to be Lord Basset's great aunt
> would be for her to be the great-granddaughter of his remote ancestor,
> Ralph Basset, who died 1154/61.
Wouldn't that make her his second cousin (an indeterminate number of times
removed--depends on how "remote" Ralph Basset was)? At least as I employ
the term, a great-aunt is a sister of any of your ancestors except your
parents; I suppose the precise meaning would be the sister of either your
grandparent or great-grandparent (depending on whether or not you
distinguish between great-aunts and grand-aunts).
> As I indicated in my post, Maud was
> the daughter, not great-granddaughter, of Ralph Basset (died 1154/61).
<snip>
That would seem to be a great-aunt of sorts.
-Robert Battle
Chris Phillips
> The only way for Maud (Basset) de Heriz to be Lord Basset's great aunt
> Basset, who died 1154/61. As I indicated in my post, Maud was the
> daughter, not great-granddaughter, of Ralph Basset (died 1154/61). As
> such, her descendant, Alice (Caltofte) Chaworth, was incorrectly
> identified as heir to Lord Basset in the 1391 inquisition.
CP notes that one inquisition found Thomas, Earl of Stafford, to be the sole
heir, but that two more found Alice and Thomas to be coheirs. It sounds as
though someone hoodwinked the jurors into thinking that Maud was the
daughter of a Ralph Basset two generations later than her real father. It's
surprising that no eyebrows were raised when it was claimed that Alice (a
married woman) was three generations younger than the man who had just died
aged about 45!
In case anyone else is confused by the statements of CP about Margaret, the
real great aunt - the account under Stafford [vol. 12, part 1, page 173],
which implies she was Ralph's aunt, is corrected in volume 14 to place her
as his great aunt, in agreement with the inquisitions.
Chris Phillips
Patricia Junkin
Is this the same John de Kirketon to whom you refer below?
1362 Nicholas de V. died. Held manor of Johnby by cornage. 淤ohn de
Kirketon's manor of Joneby, Cumberland, and seemingly the one quarter
share of the manor of Clifford which he received as Gregory de Burdon's
heir, were feoffed to Nicholas de Veteri Ponti and his wife Ellen or Elena
(nee Daubeny) (died 1363) by Sir John de Lancastre for a fee or fine of
cornage. [References: Calendars of Inquisition Post Mortem, Vol.XI 23-24
Edward III [1350]. The Musgraves of Johnby Hall obtained the manor through
the heiress of Stapelton of Edenhall. William Musgrave died at Johnby in
1609.{Vipont descendants]
The Viponts and Kirketons must also have remained somehow connected into the
20th C. since Vipond Kirketon is listed among the dead of World War I on the
memorial at Garrigill near Alston Moor.
Thanks.
Pat
----------
>From: Rosie Bevan <rbe...@paradise.net.nz>
>To: GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
>Subject: Re: Another CP Correction: Chaworth-Basset Connection
>Date: Wed, May 12, 2004, 10:06 PM
John Higgins
The sequence of the Bassets of Drayton was apparently as follows (based on
CP):
1. Richard, Justiciar (d. 1144)
2. Ralph (d. 1160)
3. Ralph (d. 1211)
4. Ralph (d. 1254-61) [not 1154/61 as in your post below]
5. Ralph (d. 1265)
6. Ralph, 1st L. Basset (d. 1299)
7. Ralph, 2nd L. Basset (d. 1342/3)
8. Ralph (d. [vp] ca. 1335)
9. Ralph, 3rd L. Basset (d. 1390)
As for Maud Basset, who m. William Heriz, CP (following the pedigree in CTG)
makes her a daughter of #6 Ralph, 1st L. Basset, which does in fact make her
a great-aunt of the 3rd L. Basset. But your citation of Foulds citing
Thoroton indicates that Maud/Matilda was sister of #5 Ralph (d. 1265) and
thus dau. of #4 Ralph (d. 1254/61, not 1154/61). I agree that the
chronology makes more sense this way, and CP thus appears to be wrong.
If it's established that Maud/Matilda was not a daughter of the 1st L.
Basset, I wonder if there's any question about the parentage of her supposed
sister Margaret who m. Edmund, 1st Lord Stafford. I suspect not, since the
chronology works better in that case. If Margaret's parentage is correct,
them presumably the Stafford family are the sole heirs of the barony of
Basset of Drayton, since the Chaworth heirs have now been ruled out.
You say that you've proved that Isabel Basset who m. Thomas Shirley was
uterine sister of Ralph, 3rd L. Basset and thus dau. of Alice Audley. Have
you established who her father was? What are your sources for this proof?
John Higgins
"Who begot whom is a most amusing kind of hunting" - Horace Walpole
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Douglas Richardson [mailto:royala...@msn.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 8:13 PM
> To: GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
> Subject: Re: Another CP Correction: Chaworth-Basset Connection
>
>
Douglas Richardson
Thank you for all of your great posts. Finally, we're back to
discussing medieval genealogy! Yeah!
Please find below a chart showing the specific relationship between
Ralph Basset, 3rd Lord Basset (died 1390) and his kinswoman, Alice
(Caltofte) Chaworth. I show these two parties were fourth cousins
once removed. This is a much different relationship than Complete
Peerage asserted in the Basset account.
Ralph Basset, of Drayton, Staffordshire
(died 1254/61)
______________/___________
/ /
Ralph Basset Maud Basset
(died 1265) =William de Heriz (occurs 1230-1251)
=Margaret de Somery /
/ /
Ralph Basset Joan de Heriz (living 1277)
(died 1299) =Jordan le Bret
=Hawise /
/ /
Ralph Basset Roger le Bret (b. say 1260, liv. 1319)
(died 1343) =Roberta Deincourt
=Joan de Grey /
/ /
Ralph Basset John le Bret (d. bef. 1345)
(died c.1335) = Alice
=Alice de Audley /
/ /
Ralph Basset, Katherine le Bret
3rd Lord Basset =Sir John Caltofte (died 1352)
d. 1390 /
/
Alice Caltofte (b. ca. 1344)
1=Thomas Hethe
2=Sir William Chaworth
Elsewhere, I find that Trevor Foulds in his book, Thurgaton Cartulary,
pg. clvi, states that Roger le Bret above married Sarah of Coston
(Leics.), granddaughter of Alice, sister of Richard III of Wiverton.
I suspect, however, there were two separate and distinct Roger le
Bret's, one who married Roberta Deincourt and one who married Sarah of
Coston. I believe Roger le Bret (husband of Roberta Deincourt) had
his chief seat at Wiverton, Nottinghamshire and Williamsthorpe,
Derbyshire. He was presumably living in 1319, as indicated by a
record provided below from the A2A Catalogue. His son and heir was
named John le Bret. The other Roger le Bret resided at Coston,
Leicestershire. He was living in 1302/3, and died before 1313/4,
being survived by his wife, Sarah. His son and heir was named Roger
le Bret. This information is provided below by three items from the
PROCAT Catalogue.
From PROCAT Catalogue:
C 143/44/7:
Roger le Bret the elder to grant a messuage and land in Coston to
Roger his son and heir, retaining a messuage and land in Coston. Leic.
31 Edward I [1302-3].
C 143/95/11:
Roger son of Roger le Bret and Thomas his brother to retain land in
Wiverton and Tithby acquired to them and the heirs of Roger from John
son of John de Mendham. Notts.
Date: 7 Edward II [1313-4].
C 143/98/2:
Sarah, late the wife of Roger le Bret of Coston, and John de Mendham
to grant messuages, land, and rent in Wiverton and Barnston to Hugh le
Vaus of Garthorpe, Maud his wife, and his heirs. Notts.
Date: 7 Edward II [1313-4].
- - - - - - - - - - -
From A2A Catalogue:
Nottinghamshire Archives: Foljambe of Osberton: Deeds and Estate
Papers [DD/FJ/2 - DD/FJ/10]
Foljambe of Osberton: Deeds and Estate Papers
Catalogue Ref. 157 DD/FJ
Creator(s):
Foljambe family of Osberton, Nottinghamshire
LEGAL PAPERS. - ref. DD/FJ/5
DERBYSHIRE.
Reference: DD/FJ/5/5/1
Creation dates: 13 June 1319
Language: Latin
Scope and Content
Acquittance
1) Hen. de Faucomberge, sheriff of Derbs.
2) Roger son of Rob. Bretoun of Waleton.
(1) to (2) for 8 marks in part of £22 which (2) adjudged, in assize of
novel disseisin, to pay to Roger le Bret, of Williamesthorp.
Given at Nottingham, Wed. after St. Barnabas, 12 Edw. II. END OF
CATALOGUE ITEMS.
Best always, Douglas Richardson,Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
"R. Battle" <bat...@u.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<Pine.A41.4.58.04...@dante24.u.washington.edu>...
Chris Phillips
> If it's established that Maud/Matilda was not a daughter of the 1st L.
> Basset, I wonder if there's any question about the parentage of her
supposed
> sister Margaret who m. Edmund, 1st Lord Stafford. I suspect not, since
the
> chronology works better in that case. If Margaret's parentage is correct,
> them presumably the Stafford family are the sole heirs of the barony of
> Basset of Drayton, since the Chaworth heirs have now been ruled out.
I agree that the chronology does work if this Margaret was the great aunt of
the deceased Ralph Basset. The CP article on Stafford [vol. 12, part 1, page
173] originally placed her a generation later (which was clearly
chronologically impossible), but this was corrected in volume 14.
Chris Phillips
Douglas Richardson
Below please find a record regarding Roger le Bret [ancestor of Alice
(Caltofte) Chaworth] which indicates he was sued in 9 Edward I
(1280-1) for common pasture in Williamsthorpe, Derbyshire. Roger's
grandfather, William de Heriz, is also mentioned in the record. This
helps give a better fix chronologically to Roger le Bret. The le Bret
family were seated at Williamsthorpe, Derbyshire and Wiverton,
Nottinghamshire.
In the item below, Roger le Bret is incorrectly in the first instance
called "Robert Bret," but this mistake (that is, Robert for Roger) is
corrected later in the same sentence.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Source: http://www.usigs.org/library/books/uk/dby/DbyYeatman5/dbyy5ch10Cust.htm
352 THE STEYNESBYS OF HARDWICK.
Hansedly conveyed their rights in a bovate in Ulecotes to jocelyne de
Haramere, this is the earliest dated record of his acts. In 54 H. I I
I. Sir William de Steynesby obtained a charter of freewaren in
Hardwick, Steynesby and Threebirches, a clear test of ownership. It
would not however appear that jocelyne de Steynesby was always so good
a son of the church, for there is a suit in the Cur. Reg. of 9 E. 1.
by the Abbot of Croxden against William " de Hardwick " for common of
pasture in Ulecotes and Steynesby, which belonged to his free tenement
in land, " of which Gocelyn de Steynesby had desseized his Abbe.%,"
and at the same time Robert Bret was sued for common of pasture in
Williamsthorpe, of which William de Heriz (grandfather of the said
Roger) had desseized them. This William de Heriz is no doubt the
witness to the two charters above recited. Joan, his daughter, married
Sir Jordan de Bret, probably Uncle of Ralf del Hardwick.
Douglas Richardson
> Let me see if I've got this straight...
>
> The sequence of the Bassets of Drayton was apparently as follows (based on
> CP):
>
> 1. Richard, Justiciar (d. 1144)
> 2. Ralph (d. 1160)
> 3. Ralph (d. 1211)
> 4. Ralph (d. 1254-61) [not 1154/61 as in your post below]
> 5. Ralph (d. 1265)
> 6. Ralph, 1st L. Basset (d. 1299)
> 7. Ralph, 2nd L. Basset (d. 1342/3)
> 8. Ralph (d. [vp] ca. 1335)
> 9. Ralph, 3rd L. Basset (d. 1390)
>
> As for Maud Basset, who m. William Heriz, CP (following the pedigree in CTG)
> makes her a daughter of #6 Ralph, 1st L. Basset, which does in fact make her
> a great-aunt of the 3rd L. Basset. But your citation of Foulds citing
> Thoroton indicates that Maud/Matilda was sister of #5 Ralph (d. 1265) and
> thus dau. of #4 Ralph (d. 1254/61, not 1154/61). I agree that the
> chronology makes more sense this way, and CP thus appears to be wrong.
>
> If it's established that Maud/Matilda was not a daughter of the 1st L.
> Basset, I wonder if there's any question about the parentage of her supposed
> sister Margaret who m. Edmund, 1st Lord Stafford. I suspect not, since the
> chronology works better in that case. If Margaret's parentage is correct,
> them presumably the Stafford family are the sole heirs of the barony of
> Basset of Drayton, since the Chaworth heirs have now been ruled out.
>
Dear John ~
My apologies for misstating the death date of Ralph Basset (your #4
above). I showed the correct death date in my post today in which I
set forth the relationship between Ralph Basset, 3rd Lord Basset, and
his kinswoman, Alice (Caltofte) Chaworth.
As for Margaret Basset, wife of Edmund de Stafford, 1st Lord Stafford,
she was definitely the great-aunt of Ralph Basset, 3rd Lord Basset
(died 1390), as stated by Complete Peerage in the Basset account.
Yes, you are correct: her issue are the sole heirs to the barony of
Basset.
Elsewhere, as Chris Phillips has kindly noted, Complete Peerage sub
Stafford identifies Margaret as Lord Basset's aunt, which statement is
incorrect. Margaret was Lord Basset's great-aunt. This appears to be
another case of "right here, wrong there" which occasionally afflicts
Complete Peerage. This kind of problem is very hard to avoid.
Rosie Bevan
To add a bit further, in 1320 John le Brett purchased the marriage of Alice,
widow of John de Loudham, and evidently had a son, John, by her as shown in
the Kirketon settlement I posted yesterday. Alice would also appear to have
been the mother of Katherine as her eldest son, John de Loudham, was feoffee
of Sir John Caltoft as shown in his IPM [CIPM X 71]. Sir John Caltoft died
overseas in 1351 leaving Alice his eight year old daughter.
Cheers
Rosie
----- Original Message -----
From: <Claud...@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: Another CP Correction: Chaworth-Basset Connection
Janet Ariciu
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/colonialhouse/history/
When will the series be broadcast on PBS?
The series premieres May 17, 18, 24, 25, 2004 from 8-10 pm each night on
PBS. (Check local listings.) Rebroadcast schedules will vary from station to
station.
Janet
Claud...@aol.com
Rosie Bevan has uncovered the answer to this line as to the identity of
Alice, wife of John le Brette and mother of Catherine le Brette.
The line appears to be:
1. Sir Simon de Driby (- aft. 1286) married Alice Fitzhugh, daughter of Hugh
FitzRalph by Agnes de Greasley.
2. Robert de Driby married Joan de Tatteshall (-Oct. 8, 1329)
3. Simon de Driby married Margery NN (died bef. Aug. 8, 1322 sp)
3. Robert de Driby, aged 40 in 1332 died bef. 1334, heir to his
brother Simon.
3. John de Driby, aged 40 in 1329 heir to his mother, married
Huegilina and died sp leaving as his heir his sister Alice, wife of
William Bernake aged 50 or more in 1334.
3. Alice de Driby (-April 12, 1341) married (1)William Bernake
(1284-March 20, 1344/5)
married (2) Sir John Folville (-1363).
4. John Bernake (1309-1349) married Joan Mamion(1313-1362)
5. Maud Bernake (1327-April 10, 1419) married Ralph de
Cromwell (1346-Aug. 27, 1398)
5. William Bernake (1321-1360)
5. John Bernake
4. Hugh Bernake, Parson of Hethersett
4. Elizabeth Bernake married Sir James Byron
2. Beatrix de Driby married Robert de Kyrketon
3. Florence de Kyrketon married Robert de Littlebury
3. Isabel de Kyrketon married Nicholas de Grey
3. John de Kyrketon (CIPM #150, 41 Edward III) married Isabel, widow
of George Meriot. He was Lord Kirketon and involved in
numerous lawsuits with Alice and William Bernake. He died sp.
3. Alice de Kyrketon married (1) Sir John de Loudham (2) John le
Brette
4. Catherine le Brette married Sir John Caltoft (- ca. June 24,
1353)
5. Alice Caltoft married William Chaworth (1352-December 1398)
The IPM of John de Kyrketon states he died Feb. 20, 41 Edward III [1367] and
his heirs were John de Ludeham, knight, John de Lyttelbyrs, John de Tylnaye
and William de Sutton, parson of the church of Whitewell.
Fine, Trinity, 8 Edward III, 1334. Between John de Driby of Tatershale, parson
of a mediety of the church of Hedersete, plaintiff, and Roger de
Estbriggeforde, chaplain, and John Cleymond, of Kirketon, defendants, of the
manors of Breedon and Holewell and 14 marks, 12 1/4 d of rent, the rents of 3
lbs. of pepper, 1/2 lb. of cummin, and amoiety of 4 capons and 2 hens, two
parts of a messuage and one virgate of land in Ketilby and Holewell, also a
third part of the manor of Somerdeby and the advowson of the priory of
Langleye
by Diseworth. The above manors and lands are declared to be the right of
Roger, which Roger granted them to John de Dryby [for life], the reversion of
them to John son of Thomas de Dryby, and Amie the daughter of Piers de
Gaveston, and theor issue, and in default to John de Kirketon, chivaler, and
his issue, in default to Robert de Ltlebury, chivaler, and his issue, in
default to the right heirs of John de Driby forever."
There is also a long discussion of Tatteshall that was posted by Paul Reed in
2001. The thread is:
From: Reedpcgen (reed...@aol.com)
Subject: Re: Amy de Gaveston - the 1334 fine
View: Complete Thread (39 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Date: 2001-02-28 16:42:42 PST
Snipet as Follows:
On 20 March 1431, Ralph, 3rd Lord Cromwell, brought into Chancery record of
several suits between Maud de Bernake and her husband, Sir Ralph de
Cromwell, and Sir John de Kirketon [CPR 1429-36, 147-52].
Sir Ralph de Cromwell and Maud [de Bernake] his wife, brought suit against
Sir John de Kirketon concerning the castle of Tateshale and manor of
Scremeby-halle as her inheritance. The pleas were presented at Westminster
before the
justices of the Bench Trinity Term 33 Edward III [10 June-1 July 1360].
They claimed that Maud de Bernake's "ancestor," John de Driby, was seised of
the holdings during Edward III's reign, that he died without issue, and that
the plaintiff Maud is the next heir of John de Driby's sister Alice [m. Sir
William de Bernake]. In John de Kirketon's reply, it states "that the
plaintiffs [Maud and Ralph Cromwell] recovered it [Tateshale Castle] that
very day from him, the present defendant, as being her right by a writ _de
consanguinitate_." So they got possession. Kirketon "craves leave to
imparl"but defaulted later, though the plaintiffs showed up, so judgment was
granted Maud and Ralph.
Ralph and Maud (de Bernake) de Cromwell brought another suit forward to
recover the manor of Kirkeby upon Bayne [and other lands] from Sir John de
Kirketon.
The result was the same. Kirketon craved leave to imparl, but defaulted,
and judgment was again granted Maud and Ralph.
THEN, in Michaelmas Term of that same year [9 Oct.-28 Nov. 1360], Sir John
de Kyrketon brought suit against Ralph de Cromwell, knight, and Maud his wife,
concerning the castle of Tateshale and manor of Kirkeby upon Bayne.
Sir John de Kyrketon claimed that he had been seised of the castle and manor
during his own lifetime during the reign of the present king. Kyrketon
acknowledged that John de Driby had seisin during his lifetime,
BUT he produced a deed in court [!], dated at Tateshale Tuesday after St.
Barnabas, 8 Edward III [14 June 1334 (which would indicate that even if the
deed was false, the parson might have then been alive, according to personal
knowledge of Kirketon)], by which, by the name of John de Driby, lord of
Tateshale, granted it with warranty to Kyrketon. [This wording would seem
odd, as by that time John styled himself parson of Hetherset.]
THEN Sir John de Kyrketon claims he appeared before the king's justices at
Westminster the quinzaine of Michaelmas 26 Edward III [about 23 Oct. 1353]
and levied a fine to three men. They, in return, granted the castle and lands
back to the said John de Kirketon and the heirs of his body, WITH REMAINDER TO
John de Loudham, then to Alice his daughter, then to Isabel her sister [and
the
heirs of their bodies], with remainder to John de Loudham the father and
Alice his wife and the heirs of their bodies, with ultimate remainder to the
right
heirs of the said John de Kirketon.
John pleaded that BY VIRTUE OF THIS FINE he held the castle, and he put
himself on the grand assize.
Curiously, they had difficulty finding enough knights to make up the jury,
all the knights in the county being associated or related to one or other of
the
parties. BUT eventually a grand assize was made, and THE JURORS SWORE upon
their oath that regarding the castle of Tateshale "Ralph and Maud have the
better right, as in her descent, than the said John de Kirketon...by reason
of the deed and fine as he seeks.... So as regards the castle, it is adjudged
that Ralph and Maud are to hold it as in her right ... quit of the said John
de Kirketon and his heirs for ever." John de Kirketon was to be in mercy for
his false claim. And note that if there had ever been a fine, it was not
upheld,as the Loudham family did not receive the reversion of lands after Sir
John's death.
Notes for Alice Fitzhugh, wife of Simon de Driby:
Alice is the daughter of Hugh FitzRalph (apparently by Agnes de Greasley).
She married Sir Simon de Driby. She is specifically called his daughter in an
assize record abstracted in _Linconshire Notes & Queries_ 3:239-40. Alice's
brother, Ralph FitzHugh, son and heir apparent of Hugh FitzRalph by Agnes,
daughter and heir of Ralph de Greasley (of Greasley, Nottinghamshire), left one
daughter and heir Eustache, her grandfather's heir, who married (1) Sir Nicholas de
Cauntelo and (2) Sir William de Ros, of Ingmanthorpe (CP 11: 117-118). This
William de Ros also had interests in the manor of Lavynton, which was held of
him by Simon de Driby in 1286.
Notes for Joan Tatteshall:
George F. Farnham, Leicestershire Medieval Village Notes, Vol. V, W. Thornley
& Son, 1931, Leicester, sub Breedon, Tonge and Wilson, pages 70-73:
Cal. Inq. p.m. Joan de Driby, 16-22, vol. vii, p. 172. Taken on Tuesday
before St. Martin, 3 Edward III. 1329. The jury say that Joan held no lands or
tenements on the day she died in co. Leicester, for, eleven days before her death,
she granted her manors of Bredon and Somerby, which are held of Henry, earl
of Lancaster, by knight service, and her manors of Holewell and Ketelby, which
are held of Ralph Basset of Weldon by knight service, to John de Drybi, her
son, and his heirs for ever. She died on 8 October 1329. John de Drybi, her son,
aged 40 years and more, is her next heir. In the Lincoln inquisition he is
called John, son of Robert de Dryby.
De Banco roll 207. Michaelmas, 8 Edward II, 1314, membrane 403, Leycester.
Joan de Dryby, lady of Tateshale, acknowledges that she owes Ralph Basset of
Drayton 1600 marks, to be repaid at certain dates; Simon de Driby acknowledges
that he owes Ralph Basset 600 marks; Thomas de Cayly acknowledges that he owes
Ralph Basset 600 marks.
Cal. Inq. p.m. John de Dryby. File 38-28. Vol. iii, p. 404. There is no
extant inquisition for the county of Leicester. In co. Lincoln the jury say that
John de Dryby held in Baston two parts of a messuage, lands and rents, which
were sometime of Simon de Driby, and which Margery, late the wife of the said
Simon, holds as dower.
Alice, the daughter of Robert de Dryby, whom William de Bernak, knight,
married, aged 50 years and more, is the next heir of John.
This with Rosie's original post:
"C 143/260/4
John de Kirketon to settle the castle of Tattershall and the manors of
Tattershall and Tumby, with the knights' fees and advowsons thereto
pertaining, on himself and Isabel his wife and the heirs of his body, with
remainder to Robert de Litlebury and Florence his wife and the heirs male of
the body of the said Robert, remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male
of his body, remainder to John son of John le Bret and the heirs male of his
body, remainder to John son of Nicholas le Grey and the heirs male of his
body, remainder to the grantor's right heirs.
16 EDWARD III. "
C 143/307/2
John de Kyrketon to settle the castle and manor of Tattershall, with the
advowsons of Kirkstead abbey, Markby priory, Tattershall church, and the
chapel of the said castle, on himself and the heirs of his body, with
remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body, remainder to
Alice daughter of John de Loudham and the heirs male of her body, remainder
to Isabel her sister and the heirs male of her body, remainder to the right
heir of John de Loudham and the heirs of his body, remainder to the right
heir of John de Loudham the father and Alice his wife, and the heirs of his
body, remainder to the right heirs of the grantor, who retains the manors of
Tumby and Kirton in Holland.
26 EDWARD III. "
MichaelAnne
Mardi Carter
provided some time ago to me by Robert Battle:
CCR Edward Ii (1318-1323):25-6Oct 1318, "order to deliver to John
Breton and Alice his wife, late the wife of John de Loudham, a third
of a moiety of Blunteshale, co. Essex, which the king has assigned her
in dower…To the aforesaid John and Alice. Order to keep safely John
son and heir of the aforesaid John de Loudham, tenant in chief.
"CFR 2:377 – 6 Nov 1318, "Pardon, for a fine of 20 marks made by John
Bret, to him and Alice, late the wife of John de Loudham, tenant in
chief, of their trespass in intermarrying without licence."
There is another Breton/Bret connection in the Loudham family and I
wonder if anyone can connect them with documentary evidence. Alice de
Kirketon m. (1) John de Loudham and (2) John le Bret. . Alice and
John Loudham's son John m. Isabel, dau. of Sir Robert Bret/Breton.
CIPM 9:392-3 – IPM of Robert Bretoun or le Breton – writ 14 May 24
Edward III (1350); lands in Derby (Walton, Calal, Brymington, and
Wyttyton Roudiches); d. Saturday after ‘St. John before the Latin
Gate,' 24 Edward III; heir daughter Isabel (age 26), wife of Sir John
de Loudham, knight."
CFR 6:250 – 25 June 1350, order to escheator of Nottingham and Derby
"to deliver to John de Loudham and Isabel, daughter and heir of Robert
Bretoun, tenant in chief, whom he has taken to wife," lands of Robert.
I don't know where this one fits:
CIPM 6:357 – wardship of John, son of John de Polre (of Kent), had
been granted to John Breton, husband of Alice (sister of Bartholomew
de Badlesmere); John of full age 3 May 17 Edward II (1324).
Mardi
Chris Phillips
been posted in this thread, but if John de Kirketon was the son of Robert de
Kirketon by Beatrice Driby (as posted by MichaelAnne), that's another
correction for CP [vol. 7, p. 338], which says that John was the son of
Robert by Cecily his wife. A footnote says that "Cecily, as widow,
petitioned Parl. about her dower in Kirton in 1304", but there's nothing to
suggest any direct evidence that she was John's mother. Perhaps CP has
jumped to a conclusion.
CP vol. 7, p. 340, note h, says that John de Kirketon's heirs in 41 Edward
III were John de Ludeham, chr., John de Lytleburs, John de Tylnaye, and
William de Sutton, parson of Whitewell (kinship not stated). The first two
would fit in with John's sisters married to Loudham and Littlebury in
MichaelAnne's post, but I don't know about the other two.
Mardi Carter wrote:
> I don't know where this one fits:
>
> CIPM 6:357 - wardship of John, son of John de Polre (of Kent), had
> been granted to John Breton, husband of Alice (sister of Bartholomew
> de Badlesmere); John of full age 3 May 17 Edward II (1324).
If Alice was a daughter of Robert de Kirketon by Beatrice Driby, and if she
was also the "sister" of Bartholomew de Badlesmere, doesn't that imply that
Beatrice was Bartholomew's mother?
The mother of Bartholomew de Badlesmere (c.1275-1322) is unknown (having
traditionally been believed to be Joan, daughter of Ralph Fitz Bernard [CP
vol. 5, p. 403, note b]), but chronologically it seems impossible to
identify her with the Beatrice of MichaelAnne's post, particularly if Robert
de Kirketon left a widow named Cecily. Am I missing something?
Chris Phillips
Claud...@aol.com
Rosie Bevan found the IPM for John de Kirketon and to start we should look at
it in its entirety:
CIPM #150 41 Edward III [1367]
150. John de Kirketon, knight
Writ 27 February , 41 Edward III
Lincoln. Inq. (indented) taken at Horncastle, Thursday in the first week of
Lent , 41 Edward III.
Tateshale. The castle and manor with the appurtenances in Tateshale, Thorp
by Tateshale, Parva Stretton, Marton by Thornton ad Boston, held for life by
demise of Thomas de Wyke, clerk, Thomas de Kirkeby, parson of the church of
Tateshale, Henry Asty, John de Wyke and William Stel, to whom Ralph de Cromwell
and Maud his wife had demised them with the king's licence for the term of John
de Kirketon's life, with reversion to Ralph and Maud and Maud's heirs. The
premises are held of the king in chief by service of three parts of a knight's
fee and by service of 40s. yearly to be paid at the Exchequer by the hands of
the sheriff of Lincoln as the settled fine from Tateshale.
Tumby. The manor, with the appurtenances in Tumby and Marum, held for life by
the demise of Ralph de Cromwell, knight, and Maud his wife, with reversion as
above. The manor is held of the king in chief by service of half a knight's
fee. The demise was made with the king's licence.
Kirkeby upon Bayne. The manor, with the appurtenances in Kirkeby, Tateshale
and Thorp by Tateshale, held in all respects as the castle and manor of
Tateshale above. It is held of John de Wylughby, as of the manor of Eresby, by
service of one knight's fee and £20 13s. 1d. yearly.
Roughton, Two ruinous messuages, a carucate of barren and sandy land, 5 acres
meadow inundated most years by the River Bayne, and 19s. rent, held of John
Dynmok, Knight, as the manor of Scryvelby, by service of 30s. 10d. yearly.
Wodehall and Langton by Thornton. @ bovates of stony land, held of the heirs
of John de Wodehall by knight's service.
Trusthorp. Three messuages and half a bovate of land.
Sutton by Markeby. Three messuages and 2 bovates of land.
Malteby by Strubby. One and one half bovates of land. Held of lady Maud de
Welle by service of half a knight's fee.
Wynthorp. £10 rent, held of Gilbert de Umfravill, earl of Angus, as of the
manor of Kyme, by service of a fifth part of a knight's fee. The Premises in
Roughton, Wodehale, Langton by Thornton, Trusthorp, Sutton by Markeby, Malteby by
Strubby and Wynthorp he held for life by demise of the aforesaid Ralph de
Cromwell and Maud, with reversion to Ralph and Maud and the heirs of Maud.
Sixhill. The manor, held jointly with Ralph Daubenaye, clerk, and Thomas,
parson of the church of Tateshale, for their lives, by demise of Roger la Warre,
knight, with reversion to Roger and his heirs. It is held of Henry de Percy,
knight, by service of a fifth part of a knight's fee.
Castelcarleton. A third part of the manor, held jointly with Isabel his wife,
as the dower which fell to her after the death of George de Meryet, knight,
her former husband. The manor is held of the king in chief by service of a
fifth part of a knight's fee.
Kirketon in Holand. The manor, held jointly with Isabel his wife, for their
lives, by demise of Ralph Daubenaye, parson of the church of Broughton, and
Thomas, parson of the church of Tateshale, with reversion to John de Littelbyrs
and his heirs, to whom the said John and Isabel attorned. The manor is held of
Sir William de Huntynfeld, knight, by service of a third part of a knight's
fee.
He died on 20 February, 41 Edward III [1367]. John de Ludeham, knight, John
de Lyttelbyrs, John de Tylnaye and William de Sutton, parson of the church of
Whitewell, all of full age, are his heirs.
C. Edw. III. File 194. (8.)
There is no question that John de Kirketon was related to John de Driby as he
left him Tateshall and other lands in 1334 which was bitterly contested by
William and Alice Bernake and then decided in favor of Maud Bernake and her
husband Ralph de Cromwell.
John de Kirketon as Beatrix de Driby's son would have been a first cousin to
John de Driby.
We know from the PRO post that Rosie made:
"C 143/260/4
John de Kirketon to settle the castle of Tattershall and the manors of
Tattershall and Tumby, with the knights' fees and advowsons thereto
pertaining, on himself and Isabel his wife and the heirs of his body, with
remainder to Robert de Litlebury and Florence his wife and the heirs male of
the body of the said Robert, remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male
of his body, remainder to John son of John le Bret and the heirs male of his
body, remainder to John son of Nicholas le Grey and the heirs male of his
body, remainder to the grantor's right heirs.
16 EDWARD III. "
C 143/307/2
John de Kyrketon to settle the castle and manor of Tattershall, with the
advowsons of Kirkstead abbey, Markby priory, Tattershall church, and the
chapel of the said castle, on himself and the heirs of his body, with
remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body, remainder to
Alice daughter of John de Loudham and the heirs male of her body, remainder
to Isabel her sister and the heirs male of her body, remainder to the right
heir of John de Loudham and the heirs of his body, remainder to the right
heir of John de Loudham the father and Alice his wife, and the heirs of his
body, remainder to the right heirs of the grantor, who retains the manors of
Tumby and Kirton in Holland.
26 EDWARD III. "
That the heirs mentioned in these posts are the sisters of John de Kirketon
and his nephews. Alice de Kyrketon had a son by John de Loudham named John de
Loudham who is cited above along with his sisters Alice de Loudham and Isabel
de Loudham. John le Bret is the son of Alice de Kyrketon by her second
husband John le Bret [and she also had a daughter named Catherine Brette]. John de
Grey is the son of Nicholas de Grey and Isabel de Kyrketon, another nephew. It
appears from the documentation above that Robert Littlebury [husband of
Florence de Kyrketon] was the father of John de Littlebury, making him another
nephew of John de Kyrketon.
I do not believe that John de Kirketon and Isabel, widow of George Meryot,
had any issue of their own as the title of Lord Kirketon fell into Abeyance in
1367 at John de Kirketon's death.
As far as the Tilney connection goes I am unaware as of yet as to how this
fits in with the Driby/Kirketon line.
Cecily mentioned in CP may well have been a second wife of Robert de Kyrketon
and I need to find an IPM for him. He witnessed several deeds between
1270-1300 in Nottinghamshire and I have him in my files as the son of William de
Kyrketon but no sources listed which usually means it may be Thoroton which I
have to check on this line.
I hope this helps and will post more later on this line.
MichaelAnne
Patricia Junkin
John connected to the family of Nicholas de Veteriponte, however, Nicholas
de Veteriponte in 1362 held Kirketon's manor of Johnby by cornage.
Nicholas had married Elena/Elen Daubeney. When Elena died the year later,
she was seized of the Manor of Johnby. In 1371 when Robert de Veteripont,
son of Nicholas died the manor held of John de Kirketon, heir of Gregory
Burdon by homage and fealty rendering 5 s 3 d for cornage. He was seised
thereof by a feoffment made by John de Lancastre, knight, to Nicholas his
father and Ellen his mother and the heirs of their bodies. Ivo, the
progenitor of this line, married Isabel, probably the daughter of William
de Lancaster and Gundred de Warrene and was perhaps the sister of Avice who
married Richard de Morville, brother to the Maud de Morville who married
William de Veteriponte.
1367 From the posted IPM--"Kirketon in Holand. The manor, held jointly with
Isabel his wife, for their lives, by demise of Ralph Daubenaye, parson of
the church of Broughton, and Thomas, parson of the church of Tateshale,
with reversion to John de Littelbyrs and his heirs, to whom the said John
and Isabel attorned. The manor is held of Sir William de Huntynfeld,
knight, by service of a third part of a knight's
fee."
Broughton, and John de Hagh to grant a messuage and land in Kirton in
Holland to a chaplain at the altar of St. John the Baptist and St. Thomas
the Martyr in the church there, Roger de Kirketon retaining a messuage and
land in Kirton, and John de Hagh retaining a messuage and land in Pinchbeck.
Linc
1392 After the death of Roger Clifford, Richard de Restwold and William de
Querton held divers lands in Tibay and by rent of 5s. for all services
In 1444, Johnby is still in the possession of the Vipont heirs.
John (or Gilbert) de Kirketon, 1241,was Sheriff of Westmoreland. As I
understand it, the right of the appoinment of undersheriff was held by the
Veteripontes, since Isabel and Idonea got into a bit of a tiff over this
right, John/Gilbert was probably appointed by either Robert de Veteriponte
or his father John.
My research tends to indicate that the family of Linc. and Notts. was the
probably the same as Westm. and I very much would like to establish the
parentage of Elena Daubeney.
Thank you for your thoughts.
Pat
----------
>From: "Chris Phillips" <c...@medievalgenealogy.org.uk>
>To: GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
>Subject: Re: Another CP Correction: Chaworth-Basset Connection
>Date: Fri, May 14, 2004, 1:40 PM
Rosie Bevan
The Robert le Breton holding "Walton, Calal, Brymington, and Wyttyton
Roudiches" Derbyshire at his inquisition, (the reference should be CIPM
9:567), was son and heir of Roger Breton of the same whose inquisition [CIPM
6, no. 408] says that his son and heir was Robert aged 32 and more.
Looking at the last record (the reference is incorrect it should be CIPM
6:541), it seems that the John le Bret, having a holding in Kent and married
to a sister of Bartholomew de Badlesmere of this record is unrelated to the
Derbyshire/Notts family. Unfortunately le Bret, le Brut, Breton, Bretoun is
a very common toponym given to descendants of the Bretons associated with
the Earls of Brittany, and a common name does not necessarily imply a family
relationship.
It's interesting to see Alice (Kirketon) Loudman having Bluntshalle, Essex
as dower. This was previously a Tregoz manor in the hands of Nicholas de
Tregoz, son of Geoffrey de Tregoz who died in 1279. His widow Eve remarried
Robert de Valoines and when she died in 1292 her inquisition [CIPM III no.
150] states that Nicholas' heirs were his nephews John de Boys aged 24,
James de Bornham aged 26, and John de Ludham aged 23. Evidently the Loudhams
had Tregoz ancestry and obtained full possession of the manor as a result.
Probably an obvious point to be made regarding the two Kirketon settlements
is that the Black Death had intervened and the family structure severely
affected by it, making another settlement of the property necessary.
Cheers
Rosie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mardi Carter" <mard...@yahoo.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 4:08 AM
Subject: Re: Another CP Correction: Chaworth-Basset Connection
> Some additional items of interest to this discussion were kindly
> provided some time ago to me by Robert Battle:
>
> CCR Edward Ii (1318-1323):25-6Oct 1318, "order to deliver to John
> Breton and Alice his wife, late the wife of John de Loudham, a third
> of a moiety of Blunteshale, co. Essex, which the king has assigned her
> in dower.To the aforesaid John and Alice. Order to keep safely John
> son and heir of the aforesaid John de Loudham, tenant in chief.
>
> "CFR 2:377 - 6 Nov 1318, "Pardon, for a fine of 20 marks made by John
> Bret, to him and Alice, late the wife of John de Loudham, tenant in
> chief, of their trespass in intermarrying without licence."
>
> There is another Breton/Bret connection in the Loudham family and I
> wonder if anyone can connect them with documentary evidence. Alice de
> Kirketon m. (1) John de Loudham and (2) John le Bret. . Alice and
> John Loudham's son John m. Isabel, dau. of Sir Robert Bret/Breton.
>
> CIPM 9:392-3 - IPM of Robert Bretoun or le Breton - writ 14 May 24
> Edward III (1350); lands in Derby (Walton, Calal, Brymington, and
> Wyttyton Roudiches); d. Saturday after 'St. John before the Latin
> Gate,' 24 Edward III; heir daughter Isabel (age 26), wife of Sir John
> de Loudham, knight."
>
> CFR 6:250 - 25 June 1350, order to escheator of Nottingham and Derby
> "to deliver to John de Loudham and Isabel, daughter and heir of Robert
> Bretoun, tenant in chief, whom he has taken to wife," lands of Robert.
>
> I don't know where this one fits:
>
> CIPM 6:357 - wardship of John, son of John de Polre (of Kent), had
Tim Powys-Lybbe
<snip>
> Source:
> http://www.usigs.org/library/books/uk/dby/DbyYeatman5/dbyy5ch10Cust.ht
> m
I tried to find who the author was of this account and found this
hilarious version of a public quarrel between John Pym Yeatman, the
apparent author, and Horace Round at:
http://www.usigs.org/library/books/uk/dby/DbyYeatman5/dbyy5a.htm
Have we anything to learn from them?
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe t...@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
Chris Phillips
Arms on British Brasses at the Society of Antiquaries" (1994) for Chaworth
heraldry, I came across this note, relating to the descent that's been
discussed:
LONDON, SAVOY CHAPEL Now lost 1582
Quarterly of twelve.
1. Chaworthe: Barry of ten arg and gu an orle of martlets sa;
2. Alfreton: Az two chevrons or;
3. Caltofte: Arg an escutcheon within an orle of ten cinquefoils sa;
4. Brett: Gu a fess dancetty between ten billets or;
5. Herriz: Az a hedgehog or;
6. Bassett: Or three piles conjoined in base gu a canton erm;
7. Aylesbury: Az a cross arg;
8. Keynes: Vert three bars gu;
9. Bassett: Arge three palets gu, a bordure az bezanty;
10. Pabenham: Barry of six arg and az on a bend gu three mullets or;
11. Engaine: Gu a fess dancetty between six crosses crosslet or;
12. Annesley: Paly of six arg and az a bend gu.
The source given is "Monumental Brass Society Transactions I-XIII".
From William Lack's handy online index to the MBS transactions, this brass
is discussed and illustrated in vol 7, pp. 281-3.
http://home.clara.net/williamlack/mbsindex/
Chris Phillips
Kevan Barton
Do you know if the brass survived, albeit the Chapel didn't? You mentioned
"1582". Is the date when chapel was lost, or is it the date of the brass?
This isn't important, but was wondering.
Cheers,
Kevan
Chris Phillips
As I read it, 1582 is the date of the brass. According to Weinreb and
Hibbert, "The London Encyclopaedia", the Savoy Chapel is still in existence,
although it has been damaged by fire and rebuilt several times (nothing
noted for 1582, though).
Chris Phillips
Rosie Bevan
This same armorial arrangement is found in a manuscript College of Arms
pedigree of the Chaworth family in the Chaworth/ Musters papers held by
Manchester University. The arms relate to the younger branch of the family
descending from George Chaworth and Alice Annesley. This detailed pedigree
consisting of 30 folio pages was commissioned in 1581 by George Chaworth,
Viscount Armagh and the work completed by William Flower and Robert Glover.
Considering the era, it is a magnificent effort to document the pedigree of
the Chaworth family, as well as the families whose arms are quartered.
If anyone is interested in knowing what the arms look like uncoloured, I'm
happy to send a digital photo.
Cheers
Rosie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Phillips" <c...@medievalgenealogy.org.uk>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 3:35 AM
Subject: Re: Another CP Correction: Chaworth-Basset Connection