Did Matilda/Maude de Pecche have two husbands?
mrdgen
Suffolk, I found many citations that John de Burgh married Hawise de
Lanvaley. Hawise in turn in most of these sources was said to be
daughter of Matilda/Maude de Pecche and William de Lanvaley of
Walkern, Hertfordshire.
However, a Google search came up with the following:
***
Text: Feudal Cambridgeshire, p. 214
1230-40:
Matilda le Lanvalei gives to the monks of Colecestre land in
Herlestone; Hamon Peche, a witness. Source: Cartulary of Colchester,
203.
Hamon Pecche, son Gilbert Pecche, confirms the above gift which
Matilda de Lanvalei, his sister, made to the monks of Colchester.
Source: Cartulary of Colchester, 204.
John de Burgh confirms the above gift which Matilda de Lanvaley,
mother of Hawise his wife (WHO WAS DAUGHTER OF HUGH DE BOCLANDE),
made. Source: Cartulary of Colchester, 205.
***
I would welcome any comments as to which man, William de Lanvaley or
Hugh de Bocland, is the correct father of Hawise, wife of John de
Burgh.
Michael Darnel
royala...@msn.com
I believe you've confused two separate generations of William de
Lanvallays, who were father and son.
The elder William de Lanvallay (died c.1204), of Walkern and
Datchworth, Hertfordshire, Blagrave (in Lambourn), Berkshire, Great
Hallingbury, Essex, Wakerley, Northamptonshire, etc., married Hawise,
daughter of Hugh de Buckland, of Buckland, Berkshire. Hawise de
Buckland was the younger half-sister of Geoffrey Fitz Peter, Knt.,
Earl of Essex. Hawise and Earl Geoffrey had the same mother.
The junior William de Lanvallay (minor in 1204, died 1217), of Walkern
and Datchworth, Hertfordshire, Blagrave (in Lambourn), Berkshire,
Great Bromley, Great Hallingbury, Lexden, and Stanway, etc., Essex,
etc., married Maud Pecche, daughter of Gilbert Pecche (died 1212), of
Great Bealings, Suffolk, by Alice, daughter of Walter Fitz Robert, of
Little Dunmow, Essex. This William de Lanvallay was the Magna Carta
baron. William and his wife, Maud, were in turn the parents of Hawise
de Lanvallay, who married John de Burgh, Knt. (died 1275).
The correct title of the book, Cartulary of Colchester, by the way, is
Cartularium Monasterii Sancti Johannis Baptiste de Colecestria
(1897). For other helpful sources for the Lanvallay family, please
see my book, Magna Carta Ancestry (2005).
Lastly, I might suggest that you avoid the Latin form, Matilda, and
instead use the vernacular form, Maud.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
CE Wood
de Lanavallay, mother of Hawise, wife of John de Burgh.
Sureties state that she was a daughter of Alan Basset. You, Paget,
and Sanders' Baronies state that she was Matilda Pecche. Which is
correct, and when/where confirmed?
CE Wood
royala...@msn.com
The correct Lanvallay pedigree is set forth in charters published in
Cartularium Monasterii Sancti Johannis Baptiste de Colecestria
(1897). I recommend you view these charters.
You might also wish to view related material on the Lanvallay family
in VCH Cambridge, 8 (1982): 178–194, which may be viewed at the
following weblink:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=66754&strquery=Harston
This information shows that Maud Pecche, wife of William de Lanvallay
the younger, had the manor of Harston, Cambridgeshire as her
maritagium, which property subsequently passed to her daughter and
heiress, Hawise de Lanvallay, wife of Sir John de Burgh, Knt.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
mrdgen
Farrer’s Feudal Cambridgeshire, which was published in 1920. This
text can be found at
(or, as I did, using a Google search for “Peche” and “Lanvaley”).
My highlighted statement “(WHO WAS DAUGHTER OF HUGH DE BOCLANDE)” was
taken directly from p. 214 of Farrer’s text.
At this time, it is unclear to me if the above parenthetical statement
is indeed part of item #205 of the cartulary, or was due to Farrer
himself. For this reason, it would be very helpful if someone could
supply exactly what the Colchester cartulary (or, more appropriately,
Cartularium Monasterii Sancti Johannis Baptiste de Colecestria) has to
say.
Michael Darnel
royala...@msn.com
Even though you quoted him correctly, the error is Mr. Farrer's. All
I can say is to err is human.
The Lanvallay charters published in Cartularium Monasterii Sancti
Johannis Baptiste de Colecestria set forth the correct line, just as I
have given it.
Once again, I recommend you follow VCH Cambridge, 8 (1982): 178–194,
which can be viewed at the following weblink:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=66754&strquery=Harston
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
On Mar 26, 8:40 am, mrdgen <mrdar...@gmail.com> wrote:
< In my earlier posting, I quoted (nearly verbatim) from William
< Farrer’s Feudal Cambridgeshire, which was published in 1920. This
< text can be found at
<
< http://books.google.com/books?id=xdY8AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA214&lpg=PA214&dq=%...
CE Wood
own or can view on the internet. Not all of us have mobility.
How DID the daughter of Alan Basset get into the mix? Weis must have
had some justification/proof/whatever.
CE Wood
On Mar 25, 10:12 pm, royalances...@msn.com wrote:
> Dear Carolyn ~
>
> The correct Lanvallay pedigree is set forth in charters published in
> Cartularium Monasterii Sancti Johannis Baptiste de Colecestria
> (1897). I recommend you view these charters.
>
> You might also wish to view related material on the Lanvallay family
> in VCH Cambridge, 8 (1982): 178–194, which may be viewed at the
> following weblink:
>
> http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=66754&strquery=Ha...