Complete Peerage Addition: Parentage of Maud Botetourt, wife of Sir Reynold de Grey. 4th Lord Grey of Wilton
Douglas Richardson
Complete Peerage, 6 (1926): 176-177 (sub Grey of Wilton) includes an
account of Sir Reynold de Grey, Knt., 4th Lord Grey of Wilton, who
died in 1370. Regarding his only marriage, the following brief
information is supplied:
"He married before 10 Jan. 1327/8 Maud, said to have been a daughter
of Sir John de Botetourt, of Weoley, co. Worcester." END OF QUOTE.
Curiously, when one checks for the documentation of Maud's parentage
in Complete Peerage's footnotes, no references whatsoever are
provided. Once again, Complete Peerage appears to have copied from
another secondary source, yet it doesn't tell us what that source is.
As best I know, the ORIGINAL source for this information is the 1619
Visitation of Leicestershire, which reads as follows:
"Reginaldus Dn's Gray de Wilton = Matilda fil. et hær. Joh'is Boutort
Lo. of Weley" [Reference: Lennard & Vincent, Vis. of Leicester 1619
(H.S.P. 2) (1870): 74-75 (Grey pedigree)].
As we can see Maud is here styled the daughter AND heiress of John
Botetourt, lord of Weoley. Please note that there is no "de" in
Botetourt, nor should there be.
The only John Botetourt who fits this description is Maud de Grey's
contemporary, Sir John Botetourt, 2nd Lord Botetourt, who died in
1386, which individual was lord of Weoley (in Northfield),
Worcestershire for all of his adult life. Sir John Botetourt was born
about 1317/18, being aged 4 in 1322, aged 7 in 1324. We know that
Maud's husband, Sir Reynold de Grey, was born in 1311, and was married
to Maud in or before 1328. Thus, it doesn't appear possible
chronologically for Sir John Botetourt and Maud de Grey to have been
father and daughter. Rather, the two were clearly of the same
generation.
It should be mentioned at this point that Sir John Botetourt did
indeed have a daughter named Maud Botetourt, which person was a nun at
Polesworth Abbey. She was elected Abbess of Polesworth 8 March 1362,
but had to obtain an episcopal dispensation to hold office, she being
under 20 years of age. In 1399 the pope granted her exemption from
the jurisdiction of the archbishop, or the bishop of Lichfield. She
resigned her office as Abbess in 1400. She was co-heiress in in 1407
to her niece, Joyce Botetourt, wife of Hugh Burnell, K.G., 2nd Lord
Burnell [References: VCH Warwick 2 (1908): 62-65. C.P.R. 1361-1364
(1912): 157, 171. VCH Worcester 3 (1913): 194-201. VCH Buckingham 4
(1927): 409-422.]. Thus, the records show that Maud Botetourt,
daughter of Sir John, had a separate and distinct history from that of
Maud, wife of Sir Reynold de Grey, 4th Lord Grey of Wilton.
Regardless, evidence of a Botetourt match can be adduced from two
pieces of evidence, neither of which were discussed by Complete
Peerage. My research indicates that there was formerly an ancient
monument in the church of Shirland, Derbyshire, which monument is
believed to have been that of Sir Henry de Grey, Knt., 5th Lord Grey
of Wilton, who died 22 April 1396. This Sir Henry de Grey was the son
and heir of Sir Reynold de Grey, 4th Lord Grey of Wilton named above,
by his wife, Maud. For a description of this tomb, see J. Charles
Cox, Notes on the Churches of Derbyshire, 1 (1875): 333-336, which
material can be viewed at the following weblink:
http://books.google.com/books?id=QPIDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA335&dq=Poynings+barry+ten#PPA333,M1
Found at this tomb were some twenty-two escutcheons which appear to
have memorialized the marriages of the various Lords Grey of Wilton.
Presumably the person who prepared the escutcheons was fully advised
of Sir Henry de Grey's immediate ancestry. Included among the shields
is one for Talbot, which would be for Henry de Grey's wife,
Elizabeth's family. There was also a shield placed there for
Botetourt (a saltire engrailed), which shield was located immediately
next to the one for Talbot.
That the arms of Botetourt would be found at Sir Henry de Grey's tomb
is good evidence that there was a match between the Grey and Botetourt
families. But where might it have been? If we follow the 1619
Leicestershire visitation, then it seems likely that Sir Henry de
Grey's mother, Maud, was a Botetourt, even though it is not possible
chronologically for her to be the daughter of Sir John Botetourt, 2nd
Lord Botetourt, as stated in the visitation.
Be that as it may, further investigation has turned up a direct
connection between Sir Reynold and Maud de Grey and Sir John
Botetourt, 2nd Lord Botetourt. In a surprise discovery, a fine has
been located between these parties dated 1340, whereby Sir Reynold de
Grey and Maud his wife conveyed the manor of Bobbington, Staffordshire
to Sir John Botetourt for 100 marks.
For an abstract of this fine, see the following weblink:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=52493&strquery=Reginald%20Grey%20100%20marks
It is not known what was the occasion of this fine, or the reason
behind it. Reynold de Grey and his wife, Maud, may have simply be
serving as feoffees for John Botetourt in the settlement of this
property. The chief point is that the parties were well acquainted
with each other early in their adult lives.
Given the evidence of the visitation, the Grey monument, and the fine,
it seems obvious that Maud de Grey was closely related to Sir John
Botetourt. I presume therefore that she was his sister, not his
daughter. This arrangement would make Maud de Grey the daughter of
Thomas Botetourt, Knt. (died 1322), of Essex, Upton, Norfolk and Great
Bradley, Suffolk, by his wife, Joan, younger daughter of Roger de
Somery, of Dudley (in Sedgley), Staffordshire, Castle Bromwich,
Warwickshire, etc. Joan de Somery, wife of Sir Thomas Botetourt, was
was born about 1292, she being aged 30 and more in 1322. The
chronology would permit Joan de Somery to be the mother of Maud de
Grey.
For interest's sake, below is a list of the 17th Century New World
immigrants that descend from Sir Reynold de Grey and his wife, Maud
Botetourt:
William Asfordby, George & Nehemiah Blakiston, Edward Digges, Mary
Launce, Anne Mauleverer, Philip & Thomas Nelson, Richard Saltonstall,
Diana & Grey Skipwith, Samuel and William Torrey.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
P.S. I'm refraining from making further analysis of the other arms
placed at the tomb of Sir Henry de Grey, 5th Lord Grey of Wilton,
until I can study them furtther. However, I will add the following
comments. The first set of arms (a bend cotised between six lions
rampant) is not identified by Mr. Cox. However, I have no doubt but
they are the arms of the Bohun family, which family is in Sir Henry de
Grey's ancestry. The fifth set of arms are likewise not identified by
Mr. Cox. I believe they are for Despenser. The third arms which are
identified by Mr. Cox are for Courtenay. This suggests to me the
possibility that Henry de Grey, 3rd Lord Grey of Wilton, whose wife is
not known, may have married a daughter of Sir Hugh de Courtenay (died
1292), by his wife, Eleanor le Despenser. Sir Hugh and Eleanor de
Courtenay reputedly had a daughter, Eleanor, married to Henry de Grey
(died 1308), 1st Lord Grey of Codnor, but the chronology does not
permit such a marriage. If the Courtenay daughter was actually
married to Henry de Grey, 3rd Lord Grey of Wilton, it would readily
explain the Courtenay and Despenser arms found at the Grey tomb in
Shirland, Derbyshire. This matter deserves further study.
John Briggs
>
> Complete Peerage, 6 (1926): 176-177 (sub Grey of Wilton) includes an
> account of Sir Reynold de Grey, Knt., 4th Lord Grey of Wilton, who
> died in 1370. Regarding his only marriage, the following brief
> information is supplied:
>
> "He married before 10 Jan. 1327/8 Maud, said to have been a daughter
> of Sir John de Botetourt, of Weoley, co. Worcester." END OF QUOTE.
That is absolutely correct - she is "said to have been" : there is no actual
evidence.
> Given the evidence of the visitation, the Grey monument, and the fine,
> it seems obvious that Maud de Grey was closely related to Sir John
> Botetourt. I presume therefore that she was his sister, not his
> daughter.
That is perfectly possible - there just happens to be no actual evidence to
that effect.
Are you proposing the following correction?
"He married before 10 Jan. 1327/8 Maud, said to have been a sister of Sir
John Botetourt, of Weoley, co. Worcester."
--
John Briggs
Douglas Richardson
On Oct 8, 9:17 am, "John Briggs" <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Douglas Richardson wrote:
>
> > Complete Peerage, 6 (1926): 176-177 (sub Grey of Wilton) includes an
> > account of Sir Reynold de Grey, Knt., 4th Lord Grey of Wilton, who
> > died in 1370. Regarding his only marriage, the following brief
> > information is supplied:
>
> > "He married before 10 Jan. 1327/8 Maud, said to have been a daughter
> > of Sir John de Botetourt, of Weoley, co. Worcester." END OF QUOTE.
>
> That is absolutely correct - she is "said to have been" : there is no actual
> evidence.
>
> > Given the evidence of the visitation, the Grey monument, and the fine,
> > it seems obvious that Maud de Grey was closely related to Sir John
> > Botetourt. I presume therefore that she was his sister, not his
> > daughter.
>
> That is perfectly possible - there just happens to be no actual evidence to
> that effect.
The 1619 visitatation is evidence. The Botetourt coat of arms at the
Grey tomb is evidence. The fine I cited is evidence. As far as I
can tell, Complete Peerage was not aware of any of this material. The
author of the Grey article in Complete Peerage appears to have found
reference to the Grey-Botetourt marriage only in a secondary work such
as Burke or Banks. That is why they used the phrase "it is said."
Incidentally, it is thought that there was a second tomb at Shirland,
Derbyshire which Cox says Dr. Pegge thought commemorated a Reynold de
Grey, who died 1 Edward II, his wife, Maud, and their two children,
John and Joan. Either Cox or Pegge has the date wrong, as there was
only one Reynold de Grey in this family with a wife, Maud, which
individual was Reynold de Grey, 4th Lord Grey of Wilton, who died in
1370. Assuming the man intended is Reynold de Grey who died in 1370,
the name of Reynold and Maud's son, John, would come from Maud's
brother, Sir John Botetourt. And, the name Joan would come from
Maud's mother, Joan de Somery. Also, as I pointed out already, Sir
John Botetourt had a daughter named Maud Botetourt, who was Abbess of
Polesworth. So the onomastics are fine, even though the given names
are terrribly common, even for these families. I have other evidence
which I will discuss shortly which suggests that Sir Reynold de Grey
(died 1370) and his wife, Maud, had a son named John.
> Are you proposing the following correction?
>
> "He married before 10 Jan. 1327/8 Maud, said to have been a sister of Sir
> John Botetourt, of Weoley, co. Worcester."
I'm saying that Maud, wife of Sir Reynold de Grey, was evidently the
daughter of Sir Thomas Botetourt, of Essex, and his wife, Joan de
Somery, and the sister of Sir John Botetourt, 2nd Lord Botetourt, of
Weoley (in Northfield), Worcestershire. If you look around, I believe
you will find more evidence to support the Grey-Botetourt marriage..
> John Briggs
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salr Lake City, Utah
Douglas Richardson
Go the Google Book Search and type in the words: Cox Churches
Derbyshire Grey Botetourt
The material in Notes on Derbyshire Churches should come right up.
DR
On Oct 8, 9:17 am, Jwc1...@aol.com wrote:
< Dear Douglas,
< I was not able to view the tomb of Henry
Grey of
< Wilton and am curious to know if the Botetourt or Talbot arms there
given were in
< any way differenced, For instance, does Butler impale Talbot ?
< Sincerely,
< James W Cummings
< Dixmont, Maine USA
<
John Briggs
"Evidently"? It's a guess! A good one, I grant you, but still a guess.
--
John Briggs
al...@mindspring.com
She might also have been a much younger sister of Sir Thomas, born say
20 years after him. All in all it would appear that being his
daughter is more likely but not proven.
Doug Smith
John Watson
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> My research indicates that there was formerly an ancient
> monument in the church of Shirland, Derbyshire, which monument is
> believed to have been that of Sir Henry de Grey, Knt., 5th Lord Grey
> of Wilton, who died 22 April 1396. This Sir Henry de Grey was the son
> and heir of Sir Reynold de Grey, 4th Lord Grey of Wilton named above,
> by his wife, Maud. For a description of this tomb, see J. Charles
> Cox, Notes on the Churches of Derbyshire, 1 (1875): 333-336, which
> material can be viewed at the following weblink:
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=QPIDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA335&dq=Poynings+ba...
>
Douglas,
Much easier to see here, rather than Google Books;
Notes on the churches of Derbyshire (Volume 1) - Cox, J. Charles (John
Charles), 1843-1919
http://www.archive.org/details/notesonchurcheso01coxjiala
Notes on the churches of Derbyshire (Volume 2) - Cox, J. Charles (John
Charles), 1843-1919
http://www.archive.org/details/notesonchurcheso02coxjiala
Notes on the churches of Derbyshire (Volume 3) - Cox, J. Charles (John
Charles), 1843-1919
http://www.archive.org/details/notesonchurcheso03coxjiala
Notes on the churches of Derbyshire (Volume 4) - Cox, J. Charles (John
Charles), 1843-1919
http://www.archive.org/details/notesonchurcheso04coxjiala
Regards,
John
WJhonson
Incidentally, it is thought that there was a second tomb at Shirland,
Derbyshire which Cox says Dr. Pegge thought commemorated a Reynold de
Grey, who died 1 Edward II, his wife, Maud, and their two children,
John and Joan. Either Cox or Pegge has the date wrong, as there was
only one Reynold de Grey in this family with a wife, Maud, which
individual was Reynold de Grey, 4th Lord Grey of Wilton, who died in
1370. >>
That is provided we ignore Reginald (Reynold), 1st Lord Grey of Wilton who d 5 Apr 1308 and his wife Maud (Matilda) de Longchamp who d bef 21 Nov 1302
Will Johnson