CP Correction: The Earls of Warwick and the Bohun family
Chris Phillips
for me at least):
> Another piece of evidence (or allusion to same) has been found which
> should lead towards a more correct reconstruction of these families.
>
> Pat Patterson provides the following text (transcription ?) from
Worthy's
> Devonshire Parishes:
>
> " This marriage is proved by the "Hundred Roll" = "Milo de Bohun
holds
> the manor of Gussich Dynaunt, which was at some time forfeited to the
> lord, the King, through a certain Roland Dynaunt, a Norman; and the
king
> gave the said manor to Matilda D'Oyly, but they know not why, which
> Matilda was afterwards the wife of William de Cantilupe, and which
manor
> after Matilda's death came to the hands of Humphrey de Bohun, the son
of
> the sister of the said Matilda." Gussich Dynaunt was situated in the
> county of Dorset." [1]
>
> The foregoing is difficult to relate to the known facts of these
> families,
> unless
>
> 1. 'Matilda D'Oyly' was actually a wife of Walter de Cantilupe,
father
> of William (d. 1239), and
>
> 2. Humphrey de Bohun was the son of the brother (not sister) of
Matilda.
Thanks for that, but I have to say it left me a bit confused - I think
because I don't know these families well enough to know what was down to
previous authors and what was your new suggestion.
Just a couple of questions:
(1) Is the marriage of Maud de Bohun, wife of Henry d'Oilly (d. 1163)
certain? Keats-Rohan (DD p. 332) has her married first to Henry d'Oilly and
then to Walter fitz Robert.
You show her marrying first Walter de Cantilupe (before Henry d'Oilly who d.
1163). The only Walter de Cantilupe given by KKR who could have died pre
1163 is on p. 384, and is married to Emmecina, widow of Geoffrey _d'Oyry_
(scope for confusion?).
But maybe I've misunderstood your chart and she is only meant to be Walter's
first wife, in which case he could be the son of Walter and Emmecina, whon
was living 1166. Unfortunately KKR gives no spouse for him.
(2) Again, is the parentage of Maud the wife of Henry d'Oilly (d. 1196)
known definitely? Keats-Rohan marries this Henry to an unidentified Sibyl
and to a Matilda de Canteloup (DD p. 621), but doesn't commit herself as to
which wife is the mother of his children.
Chris Phillips
John Ravilious
Subj: Re: CP Correction: The Earls of Warwick and the Bohun family
Date: 5/25/2003 12:42:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: Therav3
To: GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
CC: c...@medievalgenealogy.org.uk
CC: rbe...@paradise.net.nz, all...@pacbell.net
CC: c...@windsong.u-net.com, royala...@msn.com
Saturday, 24 May, 2003
Dear Chris, Rosie, Cris, Douglas, Kay, et al.,
Another piece of evidence (or allusion to same) has been found which
should lead towards a more correct reconstruction of these families.
Pat Patterson provides the following text (transcription ?) from Worthy's
Devonshire Parishes:
" This marriage is proved by the "Hundred Roll" = "Milo de Bohun holds
the manor of Gussich Dynaunt, which was at some time forfeited to the
lord, the King, through a certain Roland Dynaunt, a Norman; and the king
gave the said manor to Matilda D'Oyly, but they know not why, which
Matilda was afterwards the wife of William de Cantilupe, and which manor
after Matilda's death came to the hands of Humphrey de Bohun, the son of
the sister of the said Matilda." Gussich Dynaunt was situated in the
county of Dorset." [1]
The foregoing is difficult to relate to the known facts of these families,
unless
1. 'Matilda D'Oyly' was actually a wife of Walter de Cantilupe, father
of William (d. 1239), and
2. Humphrey de Bohun was the son of the brother (not sister) of Matilda.
The following chart is my rendering of the relationships between the de
Bohun, d'Oilly and de Cantilupe (de Cantelou) families based on this
understanding. The names of those individuals referred to above as holding
'Gussich Dynaunt' in 1166 or before are capitalized.
Humphrey de Bohun = Maud of Salisbury
d. before 1130 I
___________I_________________________
I I
I <1> <2> I
1) NN = Henry = 2) MAUD DE = Walter de = NN Humphrey = Margaret of
I d'Oilly BOHUN Cantilupe I d bef 1166 I Gloucester
I d.1163 'D'OYLY' I I d. 1187
I d.bef 1166 I I
I _________________________I_ _________I_______
I I I I I
1)Henry = Maud de = 2) Henry de William de HUMPHREY MILO DE
d'Oilly I Cantilupe I Longchamp Cantilupe DE BOHUN BOHUN
d. 1196 I I d.1212 d.1239 d.ca.1187 ( cf DD
I I I I 332 )
I V V I
I 2) Margery de = Waleran de
I___________ Bohun I Newburgh
I I E of Warwick
______________I______________ I d. bef
I I ____________I Oct 1204
I I I
Henry d'Oilly Margery d'Oilly = Henry de Newburgh
dsp 1232 I E of Warwick
V d bef 17 Oct 1229
This reconstruction does include one tight chronological sequence, the
descent from Humphrey de Bohun (d. ca. 1187) and Margaret of Huntingdon to
Henry de Newburgh, Earl of Warwick (born say 1190) as noted by Chris Phillips
earlier in this thread. This would, however, explain the inheritance of
'Gussich Dynaunt' by Humphrey de Bohun (from whom his brother Milo de Bohun
evidently held same in 1166, according to Worthy), as Maud (de Bohun) d'Oilly
evidently dsp in 1166 or before. It also identifies Maud de Cantelou (wife of
Henry II d'Oilly according to Keats-Rohan, DD) as being first wife of Henry
d'Oilly, secondly wife of Henry de Longchamps, by whom she was the ancestress
of the subsequent holders of Wilton (Longchamps and de Grey).
~ This further removes the problematic Bohun descent for Margery d'Oilly,
wife of Henry de Newburgh (d. 1229), as the return of 'Gussich Dynaunt'
to the Bohun family indicates that Maud de Bohun had no surviving issue
(d'Oilly or de Cantelou).
Should anyone have access to Worthy, or any other relevant documentation,
any and all contributions will be greatly appreciated. Comments and criticism
are welcome as always.
Cheers,
John *
NOTES
[1] Ahnentafel for Pat Patterson, located at:
http://www.patpnyc.com/ahn-27.shtml
Text evidently derived from
Devonshire Parishes, or the Antiquities, Heraldry and Family History of
Twenty-Eight Parishes in the Archdeaconry of Totnes by Charles WORTHY, Esq.,
Late H.M. 82nd Regiment (Exeter: William Pollard & Co, Printers North Street
London: George Redway, York Street, Covent Garden, 1889), II:31-34
' Gussich Dynaunt ' may be an earlier name for either Gussage All
Saints or Gussage St. Michael (or another manor/parish subsequently
renamed).
* John P. Ravilious
"Chris Phillips" <c...@medievalgenealogy.org.uk> wrote in message news:<baq13d$l3k$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>...
John Ravilious
Dear Chris,
Thanks for your response - I have posted the original message
(currently MIA) to the newsgroup just prior to this.
Observations/replies to your response are interspersed below.
"Chris Phillips" <c...@medievalgenealogy.org.uk> wrote in message news:<baq13d$l3k$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>...
<<<<<<< insert >>>>>>>>
Certainty is a bit of a problem here, hence my raising the
question re: this Worthy publication.
As to Walter de Cantilupe, I insert him in lieu of William (as
per Worthy) because of the chronological problem - William son of
Walter was probably born say 1155-1160, and would make a poor husband
for a widow in 1163.
~ The inclusion of the Cantilupe/Cantelou family was important
here
only in re: the Bohun connection, and so (other than showing
William
as the son of a spouse other than Maud (de Bohun) d'Oilly) I
was not
getting into added detail there....
>
> But maybe I've misunderstood your chart and she is only meant to be Walter's
> first wife, in which case he could be the son of Walter and Emmecina, whon
> was living 1166. Unfortunately KKR gives no spouse for him.
>
> (2) Again, is the parentage of Maud the wife of Henry d'Oilly (d. 1196)
> known definitely? Keats-Rohan marries this Henry to an unidentified Sibyl
> and to a Matilda de Canteloup (DD p. 621), but doesn't commit herself as to
> which wife is the mother of his children.
>
> Chris Phillips
<<<<<< insert >>>>>>>
The parentage of Maud de Cantilupe/Cantelou as shown is
theoretical,
again a presumption from the chronology as per my reconstruction.
In all reality, this Maud could have been a daughter of Walter
de Cantelou and Maud de Bohun (as per my reconstruction) but this
would be hard to explain given the statement by Worthy that the manor
held by Maud (de Bohun) d'Oilly passed back to her nephew.
Cheers,
John
Chris Phillips
John Ravilious wrote:
> Observations/replies to your response are interspersed below.
Thank you for the explanatory comments. I understand a bit better now, I
think.
One other point - I think the Hundred Rolls were all produced in the late
13th century, so if this does come from Hundred Roll and is correctly
reported, I think it's likely to be referring to a different Miles de Bohun
(a younger son?). If so, it's also likely to be more than a century after
the events described, so perhaps some confusion is understandable...
Chris Phillips
Chris Phillips
John Ravilious wrote:
> Pat Patterson provides the following text (transcription ?) from
Worthy's
> Devonshire Parishes:
Incidentally, I see that Pat Patterson's site is now displaying a notice
saying that it's been suspended. It would certainly be a shame if it were to
disappear, as it includes a lot of useful material. I tried to email Pat at
a patpnyc.com address, but it bounced back.
Does anyone know more, or can anyone suggest an alternative contact address?
Chris Phillips
William Addams Reitwiesner
The contact address for that domain (use WHOIS) gives a RoadRunner address.
William Addams Reitwiesner
wr...@erols.com
Chris Phillips
William Addams Reitwiesner wrote:
> The contact address for that domain (use WHOIS) gives a RoadRunner
address.
Thanks for that suggestion, and for others given to me off-list.
Unfortunately all the email addresses I've tried so far have bounced, but
John tells me he visited the site very recently, so it may turn out to be a
temporary problem.
Chris Phillips
Anne Gilbert
It may be a temporary "finance" problem, too. In which case we might see
the site again. It's full of interesting and valuable stuff.
Anne G
">
>