Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

Durant, Plessis and Wrotham families of Somerset and Middlesex

1,266 views

Skip to first unread message

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Dec 25, 2012, 3:24:44 AM12/25/12

Greetings,

Firstly, a very Merry Christmas to all!

Secondly, I am curious if anyone has identified (or assembled) an update-to-date and historically and evidentiary established pedigree of the Durant family of Newton Plecy, Somerset and Enfield, Middlesex and, in particular, its descent from the Wrotham and Plessis families. I would be most appreciative for any assistance as I am presently endeavouring to: (1) establish an accurate genealogical pedigree; and (2) identify the corroborating documentary evidence to substantiate same. I have started working from the pedigree set forth on this site and as set forth below (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/soc.genealogy.medieval/nXDveuBZqX0/sNqQOTOHBS4J). If there are any corrections, additions or deletions they would be most appreciated. Many thanks!

Cheers,

Pete

“1 Geoffrey de WROTHAM
---------------------------------------------
Birth: Of Radenville, near Wrotham, co Kent, England,

Of Radenville, near Wrotham, co Kent
Domestic servant of several Archbishops of Canterbury

Sources1,2,3

Spouse: Muriel de LYD

Sources2,4

Children: William de (-1213)

1.1 William de WROTHAM
---------------------------------------------
Birth: Of Newton, North Petherton, co Somerset, England
Death: 1213

Lord of Newton, North Petherton, co Somerset
Warden of the Stannaries cos. Devon and Cornwall 1197-8
Granted him the manor of Cathanger in Fivehead, and the bailiwick of
North Petherton, co. Somerset
Granted Newton, co. Somerset, 1198
Sheriff co. Devon 1199
Forester of Dorset and Somerset 1199
Lieutenant of Dover Castle, and ultimately Constable of the Castle and
Lord Warden
Served Archbishop Hubert Walter

Other children:
William, Archbishop of Taunton; d. 1218

Sources1,5,6,7,8

Discrepancies:
6The author of the article in Arch. Cant. gives the accomplishments
listed as those of the
father of William, Archdeacon of Taunton.
1Foss notes that father and son held similar offices and it is
difficult to separate them.
7I think this William is confused with his son William

Spouse: Maud de CORNHILL

Sources1,5,9,7,8

Children: Richard (-1219)

1.1.1 Richard WROTHAM
---------------------------------------------
Birth: Of Newton, co Somerset, England
Death: 1219/1224

Lord of Newton, co Somerset

Other children:
Richard m. Margaret de Shopland &/or Cecilia
Constance m. John le Blund; oc 1264
Christina m. Thomas Picot
Emma m. Geoffrey Scoland; d. bef 1250

Sources5,6,7,8,10

Discrepancies:
5Wrothe line descends from son Richard
6son Richard d. 1250 s.p.
7called nephew of William, but the offices held are attributed to
William, the Archdeacon,
brother of this Richard. The nephew of William, the Archdeacon
is Richard who d. 1250 s.p.

Children: Muriel de (-<1250)

1.1.1.1 Muriel de WROTHAM
---------------------------------------------
Death: bef 1250

Sources5,9,8,10,11

Spouse: Hugh PLESSIS

A Poitevin

Other children:
William b. 1220; d. 1276

Sources5,3,8,10,11

Discrepancies:
5bastard of John, Earl of Warwick
3nephew of John, Earl of Warwick
11brother of John Earl of Warwick - citing Kimber's Baronetage I:523

Children: Richard de”

Wjhonson

unread,

Dec 25, 2012, 4:29:45 PM12/25/12

to pd...@peterdale.com, gen-me...@rootsweb.com

Did you mean that the WROTHs descend from the Wrotham and Plessis families?
That is what this chart is showing
Not the durants.

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
the message

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Dec 26, 2012, 3:13:32 AM12/26/12

to pd...@peterdale.com, gen-me...@rootsweb.com

Hi Will,

Merry Christmas and thanks for your post. I am referring to the descent of the Wroth/Durant family from the Plessis and Wrotham families. I have set forth below a few notes I have started to aggregate with respect to my own ancestry starting with my 14th G-Grandmother Elizabeth Wroth (wife of John Jermy, Esq. of Metfield, Suffolk, d. 1487). What I am really struggling with is trying to correctly identify, establish and properly corroborate via evidence the Plessis and Wrotham families post the pedigree set forth below. I very much welcome any assistance and hope that this information may be of some use to anyone who may peruse same.

Cheers,

Pete

14-G - Elizabeth Wroth – Elizabeth was the daughter of William Wroth of Enfield, Middlesex.

b. approx. 1415 – Enfield, Middlesex, England. Elizabeth has at least 1 sibling: (1) John of Enfield ((ob. 2 or 20 E. IV.) and m. to Elizabeth Lewknor/Lewkenor daughter of Sir Roger. They had a son John or Thomas of Enfield (ob. 6 or 9 H. VIII.) m. to Margaret or Johanna Newdigate daughter of Richard. (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees below)
d. approx. 1465 – Metfield (?), Suffolk, England

The book, ‘Middlesex pedigrees, as collected by Richard Mundy in Harleian ms. no. 1551’, (1914), edited by Sir George John Armytage, published by Mitchell, Hughes and Clarke in London, provides a pedigree of the Wroth family from Enfield, Middlesex:

(source: http://www.archive.org/stream/middlesexpedigre65mund#page/16/mode/2up)

The book, ‘The visitations of the county of Somerset, in the years 1531 and 1573, together with additional pedigrees, chiefly from the visitation of 1591’, (1885), by Thomas Benolt, Robert Cooke, England. College of Arms, British Museum, edited by Frederic William Weaver, published by W. Pollard, provides a pedigree of the Wroth family from Enfield, Middlesex:

(source: http://books.google.ca/books?id=sf4GAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92&dq=%22wm.+de+wrotham,+lord+of+newton%22&source=bl&ots=H39b6BH9ea&sig=0wwOk4j1mS6tSrvefVmwp1pia-4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=rUpdT6GuMoPW0QHvxuieAw&sqi=2&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22wm.%20de%20wrotham%2C%20lord%20of%20newton%22&f=false)

An article, ‘William de Wrotham, Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports’, in the book, ‘Archaeologia Cantiana being Transactions of the Kent Archaeology Society’, (1878), volume XII, by Canon Scott Robertson, printed for the Society by Mitchell & Hughes, London, provides a history and pedigree of the of the Wrotham/Wroth family:

(source: http://www.archive.org/stream/archaeologiacant12kent/archaeologiacant12kent_djvu.txt)

The book, ‘The visitations of Essex by Hawley, 1552; Hervey, 1558; Cooke, 1570; Raven, 1612; and Owen and Lilly, 1634. To which are added Miscellaneous Essex pedigrees from various Harleian manuscripts: and an appendix containing Berry's Essex pedigrees (1878)’, published by Mitchell and Hughes, London, provides a pedigree of the Wroth family:

(source: http://www23.us.archive.org/stream/visitationsofess13byumetc/visitationsofess13byumetc_djvu.txt)

15-G - William Wroth, Esquire, M.P. – William was from Durants, Middlesex and Newton, Somerset. (ob. 28 H. VI). Ob. 28 May temp. H. 6, 22 years old at the death of his father. (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above).

b. approx. 1386 or 1389 – London, England and baptized in October 1389 in the church of All Hallows, Honey Lane, London. (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=7942)
m.
d. approx. May 8, 1450 – Somersetshire, England. He is buried on the north side of the chancel of the parish church of Bridgwater, Somersetshire. (source: http://www.archive.org/stream/historyantiqutit03colluoft/historyantiqutit03colluoft_djvu.txt; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=7942)

The book, ‘Calendar of the Fine Rolls – Vol. XVIII, Henry VI, A.D. 1445-1452’, (1939), published for the Public Record Office by His Majesty’s Stationery Office, states the following with respect to William Wroth:

p. 133, 28 Henry VI. Membrane 31.

Writs of diem clausit extremum, after the death of the following persons, directed to the escheators in the counties named: - ...

May 8, 1450. Leicester. William Wrothe, esquire; Somerset; Essex and Hertford; Middlesex; London (Thomas Chalton, mayor and escheator).

p. 201, January 12, 1451. Membrane 18. Order to the escheator in the county of Somerset to take the fealty of John Wroth esquire, son and heir of William Wroth esquire, and cause him to have full seisin of all the lands which the said William held of the king in chief or was seised of in his demesne as of fee on the day of his death, as the king for ½ mark paid in the hanaper has respited his homage until Michaelmas next.

p. 177, 29 Henry VI. Membrane 34. Writs of diem clausit extremum, after the death of the following persons, directed to the escheators in the counties named: - ...

January 28, 1451. Almerica late the wife of William Wrothe; Middlesex.” (source: http://archive.org/stream/calendaroffinero18greauoft#page/176/mode/2up)

16-G - William Wroth, King’s Esquire, M.P. – William was from Enfield, Middlesex. (ob. 8 Sept. 9 H. 4). (ob. 10 H. IV.). (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above). He is described as being of Enfield, Middlesex and Newton Plecy, Somerset. (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408). Apparently, William inherited only his mother’s property. (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-john-1396)

b. – William has at least 2 half-siblings: (1) Sir John (M.P. for Middlesex, ob. 8 H. IV. He married Margaret Willington/Willinton or Buckland and had the following children: John and Elizabeth [and another 2 sons and 2 daughters (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-john-1396)]; and (2) Agnes (she married Sir Pagan Tibbetofte/Pain Tibetot). (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above)
m.
d. September 9, 1408 (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=7942) or September 17, 1408 (source: ‘Calendar of the Inquisitions Post Mortem, and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, Vol. 19, 7-14 Henry IV (1405-1413), p. 109)

The book, ‘Calendar of the Inquisitions Post Mortem, and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, Vol. 19, 7-14 Henry IV (1405-1413), edited by J. L. Kirby, HMSO, London, p. 189, states the following with respect to William Wrothe, Esquire:

“William Wrothe, Esquire
517. Writ 17 Nov. 1408.
Somerset. Inquisition. Bridgewater. 1 April 1409.
He held in his demesne as a fee of the king in chief by knight service a third part of the manor of North Newton with the advowson of the chapel at the third presentation, annual value 16 marks; and two tenements in Exton and Hawkridge with the advowsons of those places at the third presentations, annually value 2 marks.

He died on 17 Sept. 1408. William his son and next heir is aged 18 years and more.

C 137/71, no. 18
E 149/94, no. 7
E 152/427, no. 5”

17-G - John Wroth, ‘the younger’, J.P., M.P. – John was of Epping, Essex and Enfield, Middlesex (source: e-mail from Michael Andrews-Reading dated May 8, 2012). John was married twice. His first wife was N.N. John’s son from his first marriage was John. His second wife was Matilda (or Maud) Durant who married a second time in approx. 1376 to Baldwin de Radington, M.P. (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above, http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-john-1396; Michael Andrews-Reading blog post dated December 3, 2005 - http://groups.google.com/group/soc.genealogy.medieval/browse_thread/thread/9d70ef7ae059a97d/2e0587333990dab0)

b.
m. by 1353 (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=26951; Visitation of the county of Rutland pedigree below)
d. 1375 - (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-john-1396; e-mail from Michael Andrews-Reading dated March 24, 2012); by 1376 (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=26951)

17-G - Matilda Durant – Matilda (or Maud) was the daughter and heir of Thomas Durant of Enfield, Middlesex and Newton Plecy, Somerset. (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above; http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; Michael Andrews-Reading blog post dated December 3, 2005 - http://groups.google.com/group/soc.genealogy.medieval/browse_thread/thread/9d70ef7ae059a97d/2e0587333990dab0)

b. approx. 1338 – Enfield, Middlesex, England. (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; e-mail from Michael Andrews-Reading dated May 8, 2012)
d.

18-G - Thomas Durant – Thomas was of Enfield, Middlesex and Newton Plecy, Somerset. (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408)

b. approx. 1310 (source: ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1909), Vol. VII, Edward III, printed for His Majesty’s Stationery Office by Mackie and Co. Ld., London, pp. 359-60)
m. 1333-34 (source: Visitation of Hampshire pedigree below)
d. Enfield, Middlesex, England - 1349 (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; Visitation of the county of Rutland pedigree below)

The book, ‘Pedigrees from the visitation of Hampshire made by Thomas Benolt, Clarenceulx a 1530, enlarged with the visitation of the same county made by Robert Cooke, Clarenceulx anno 1575 both which are continued with the visitation made by John Phillipott, Somersett (for William Camden) in a 1634’, (1913), by Thomas Benolt, Robert Cooke, John Philipot and Richard Mundy, edited by William Harry Rylands, published by the Harleian Society, Volume 64 of Publications of the Harleian Society, pp. 123-26, provides a pedigree of the Durant family:

See link - http://archive.org/stream/pedigreesfromvis64beno#page/122/mode/2up

The book, ‘The Visitation of the county of Rutland in the year 1618-19: Taken by William Camden, Clarenceaux king of arms Volume 3 of Publications of the Harleian Society’, (1870), by William Camden, College of Arms (Great Britain), published by the Harleian Society, pp. 40-44, provides a pedigree of the Durant family:

(source: http://books.google.ca/books?id=SBys70CiCosC&pg=PA40&dq=%22walter+durant%22+%22sussex%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nNBnT7qRBafI0AGH1NXtCA&ved=0CEEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22walter%20durant%22%20%22sussex%22&f=false)

The book, ‘The history and antiquities of the County of Rutland’, (1684), by James Wright, printed for Bennet Griffin, London, p. 40, provides a pedigree of the Durant family:

(source: http://books.google.ca/books?id=V0EjAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=%22sir+walter+durant%22&source=bl&ots=GNhpABNxEP&sig=-cIJJfXV2NmsdDGqk3tDrzBuXJg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Xc9nT7HFC4H50gHezPW2CQ&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=%22sir%20walter%20durant%22&f=false)

19-G - Richard Durant – Richard was from Enfield, Middlesex and Lord of the 3rd part of Newton, Plecy, Somerset.

b. – approx. 1285-1293 (source: see ‘Knights of Edward I’, vol. I below). Richard is the eldest son and has at least 3 siblings: (1) John (second son and m. to the daughter of Sir Charles Lupus as his second wife); (2) Simon (third son); and (3) Michael (fourth son and m. Ellenor, daughter and co-heir of Walter Alett).
m. 1311-12 (source: Visitation of Hampshire pedigree above)
d. Enfield, Middlesex, England – on or before October 7, 1333 (source: ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1909), Vol. VII, Edward III, printed for His Majesty’s Stationery Office by Mackie and Co. Ld., London, pp. 359-60)

The book, ‘The Battle Abbey roll: with some account of the Norman lineages, Volume 1’, (1889), edited by Catherine Lucy Wilhelmina Powlett Cleveland (Duchess of), published by J. Murray, p. 345, states the following with respect to a Richard Durant of Somerset:

“Durant. ... Richard Durant, a land-owner in Somerset, was knight of the shire for Middlesex in 1316...” (source: http://books.google.ca/books?id=yV8JAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA345&dq=%22sir+walter+durant%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=L3acT_zGFObD6AGlgcmTDw&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22sir%20walter%20durant%22&f=false)

The book, ‘Knights of Edward I’, vol. I [A to E.], published by The Harleian Society, est. 1869, vol. LXXX for the year 1929, notices collected by Rev. C. Moor, p. 294, states the following with respect to the Duraunt family:

“Duraunt, Richard. Of Burton, Bucks. Sealed 1325: Three boars’ heads (Birch). Perhaps aged 32-40, s. h. of Jn. and Avelina Duraunt, who were dead 23 Aug. 1293 and 21 May 1312, respectively, leaving s. h. Richard. Avelina was sis. coh. of Ric. de Plessetis, dec., who held lands in Som. and at Enfield, Midx., 4 May 1289 (Inq. and F.R.).”

(other source information for Richard: Wrothe of Petherton Park, Archaeologia Cantiana, Visitation of the county of Rutland and The History and Antiquities of the County of Rutland pedigrees above; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=26951)

The book, ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1909), Vol. VII, Edward III, printed for His Majesty’s Stationery Office by Mackie and Co. Ld., London, pp. 359-60, states the following with respect to ‘Richard Durant of Enefeld’.

20-G - John Durant

b.
m. 1288-89 (source: Visitation of Hampshire pedigree above)
d. August 23, 1293 (source: see ‘Knights of Edward I’, vol. I above)

(source information for John: Archaeologia Cantiana, Visitation of the county of Rutland and The History and Antiquities of the County of Rutland pedigrees above; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=26951)

20-G - Avelina/Evelina de Placetis/Plessetis – Avelina was the daughter and co-heiress of William de Placetis.

b. in or before 1268 (source: see ‘Knights of Edward I’, vol. IV below). Avelina is the second eldest daughter of William. She has at least 3 siblings: (1) Richard (he held a 1/5 knight's fee of the manor of Enfield, Middlesex in 1235, he was called Barbafleta, [b. approx. 1246 (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108079&strquery=Plessetis)] d. on or before March 28, 1289; seized of the manors of Newton Forester and Exton in Somerset (1285-86). His wife was Margery – source: 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Edward I, File 54', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2: Edward I (1906), pp. 441-449)); (2) Sabina (eldest daughter and m. to Nicholas Pech/Peche/Peach and had sons Nicholas and Richard); and (3) Emme (third daughter and m. to John Heryon/Heron/Hearne who died 1326-27).
d. May 21, 1312 (source: see ‘Knights of Edward I’, vol. I above)

The book, ‘Knights of Edward I’, vol. IV [P to S.], published by The Harleian Society, est. 1869, vol. LXXXIII for the year 1931, notices collected by Rev. C. Moor, p. 80, states the following with respect to the Plescy family:

“Plescy, Sr Richard de, Kt. Keeper of K’s park of Perton (N. Petherton), Som., 22 May 1276, of Mendip Forest, Som., 1 Aug. 1279 (C.R.), of Selewode Forest 11 Dec. 1283, of Recchichen (Neroche) Forest and Petherton 28 Dec. 1284 (P.R.). Writ for his Inq. 28 Mar. 1289. He held mess. at Enfield, Midx., as ½ Kt. Fee, Neuton Forester Manor and Exton, Som., ¼ Fee, and bailiwick of Exmoor and other forests in Som., and left 3 sis. coh., viz., Sabina, w. of Nicholas Peche, Avelina, w. of Jn. Durant, and Emma, w. of Jn. Heyron, all of age (Inq.). Livery to these 20 June 1289 (F.R.), and dower to his wid. Margery, viz., 1/3 of the chief mess. of Newton Forester Manor, with 10 l. 9 s. 11 ¼ d. lands and rents there, and 1/3 of the chief mess. at Enfield, with 10 l. 13 s. 4 d. lands and rents there, 25 June 1289 (C.R.). She was dead 1 Jy. 1293 (F.R.).”

The book, 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Edward I, File 54', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2: Edward I (1906), pp. 441-449, states the following with respect to ‘Richard de Plessetis alias de Plescetis, de Pleysetis’:

“719. Richard de Plessetis alias de Plescetis, de Pleysetis. Writ, 28 March, 17 Edw. I. Middlesex. Inq. 4 May, 17 Edw. I. [1289]

Enefeld. A messuage, 106s. 4½d. rent, 86 customs of freemen in August, a corn mill and fulling mill, 294a. land, 27a. meadow, 27a. pasture &c. held of the earl of Hereford by service of 1/5 knight's fee, two suits at the court of knights, viz.—one at Blanchesapeltone and another at Hertford, suit every three weeks at the earl's court in Enefeud, 7s. yearly, and 35 quarters wheat for the said two mills; a messuage, 15a. land, 1½a. pasture, whereof Hugh de Castello and Elicia his wife hold the messuage, pasture and 8a. land for life, rendering 29s. yearly, a fulling mill, which Matthew le Folour holds in fee, rendering 14s. 4d. yearly to the said Richard and his heirs, and to Alice late the wife of Richard the chamberlain for life as dower 16s., and a corn mill, all held of the abbot &c. of Waleden for 30s. yearly, and 10s. for tithes of the said mills; and 8a. land held of John Baldewyne, rendering 4s. 2d. yearly. All those lands pay 5d. to St. Peter's pence yearly. His sisters, Sabina the wife of Nicholas Peche, Avelina the wife of John Durant, and Emma the wife of John Heyron, are his next heirs and of full age.

Somerset.

Inq. Saturday after St. Mark, 17 Edward I.

Neuton Forester alias Nyweton, and Exton. The manor (full extent given) held of the king in chief for ¼ knight's fee; 44a. arable, and 40a. meadow [in Nyweton] held of the heir of Henry de Erlegh, now in the king's wardship, by service of 2s. 4d. yearly; and 5s. rent held of the fee of the prior of Montacute, quit of all service.
Heirs as above.
Writ to the escheator to extend without delay the bailiwick of forestry which the said Richard held in the king's forest in Somerset, 8 May, 17 Edw. I.

Somerset.

Inq. Monday the morrow of Holy Trinity, 17 Edw. I. (defective.)

Exemore. The bailiwick of the forest (extent given) rendering 12s. 6d. yearly at the king's exchequer for 14 heifers and a bull which he receives from the commoners (communicantibus) in the forest.
Recchich. The bailiwick of the forest (extent given).
Northperton alias [Nortpedertone]. The bailiwick of the king's park (extent given) including a meadow called Wudemede, containing 35a.
Menedep. The bailiwick of the forest (extent given).
Selewude. The bailiwick of the forest (extent given) and he receives thence of ancient custom for boughs falling under the foot of the wolf, from the township of Kelmeton [alias Culmetone] 6s., and from that of Brywham [alias Bruham] 4s. yearly rent.
Somerton. The bailiwick of the warren (extent given).
The steward, clerks, and foresters keeping the said forests [have been accustomed to] be sustained from the issues of the said bailiwick.
Writ to Roger L'Estrange (Extraneo), justice of the forest, to take into the king's hand and extend the abovesaid bailiwick, 8 May, 17 Edw. I.

[Somerset.]

Inq. Monday the morrow of Holy Trinity, 17 Edw. I.

The same as the above, save that 'and 14 heifers and a bull' is given instead of 'for 14 heifers and a bull.'
Extent or summary of the lands &c. in the forestry of Menedep, which ought to be parted between the three sisters partners of the inheritance, whereof each portion is 21l. 11s. 7¼d.; and Avelina one of the sisters holds 8l. of land in Neuton Forester, Exton, and Enefeld, formerly assigned to her, and now seeks a moiety of the dower of Margery late the wife of the said Richard, according to a composition made between the partners (undated).
Extent or summary of lands &c. as above, and assignment of dower made thereout to Margery late the wife of the said Richard (undated).

C. Edw. I. File 54. (3.)” (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108126)

The book, ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and Other Analogous Documents Preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1912), Edward I., Vol. III, printed by The Hereford Times Limited, Hereford, p. 58, provides an IPM for ‘Margery, late the wife of Richard de Plessetis alias de Plesettis’ in 1293.
(source: http://archive.org/stream/cu31924011387812#page/n103/mode/2up)

(other source information for Avelina: Visitation of Hampshire, Wrothe of Petherton Park, Archaeologia Cantiana, Visitation of the county of Rutland and The History and Antiquities of the County of Rutland pedigrees above; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=26951)

21-G - William de Placetis/Plessitis/Plessetis

b. – approx. 1220 (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108079&strquery=Plessetis). William has at least 1 sibling: (1) John (who is the ancestor of the Placeys of Wimborne, Dorset [Hutchins, III. 166, 579]).
m.
d. on or before October 6, 1274 (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108079&strquery=Plessetis)

The article, 'Enfield: Manors', A History of the County of Middlesex: Volume 5: Hendon, Kingsbury, Great Stanmore, Little Stanmore, Edmonton Enfield, Monken Hadley, South Mimms, Tottenham (1976), pp. 224-229, states the following with respect to the Plessis family of Enfield, Middlesex:

“Property in Enfield held by William de Plessis at the end of the 12th century (fn. 33) was probably that conveyed in 1232 by Roger of Dauntsey to his son Richard. (fn. 34) Richard de Plessis held 1/5 knight's fee of the manor of Enfield in 1235 (fn. 35) and died in 1289, (fn. 36) whereupon his estate was divided between his sisters Aveline, wife of John Durant, and Emme, wife of John Heron. (fn. 37) After Aveline's death in 1312 (fn. 38) her property passed in turn to her son Richard (d. 1333), (fn. 39) Richard's son Thomas (d. 1349), (fn. 40) and Thomas's daughter Maud, who had married John Wroth by 1353. (fn. 41 )” (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=26951)

The book, ‘The Battle Abbey roll: with some account of the Norman lineages, Volume 3’, (1889), edited by Catherine Lucy Wilhelmina Powlett Cleveland (Duchess of), published by J. Murray, p. 26, states the following with respect to the Placy family:

“Placy. For Placetis, a baronial family that became widely spread. But their name has no title to be here, for they descended from John de Placetis or de Plessetis, a Norman by birth, who, from being a domestic servant at the court of Henry III., rose high in his master's favour, was rapidly promoted to wealth and power, and at length became Earl of Warwick through his marriage with Margery de Newburgh. She was, as we have seen, a most unwilling bride; for though, after the death of her first husband, John Mareschal, the King issued his mandate that she should be "earnestly persuaded—not to say, commanded—to marry this low-born adventurer, he seems himself to have doubted her obedience;" and on Christmas day following promised to his favourite, in case she could not be induced to comply, the fine she would have to pay for marrying without the Royal consent.” (source: http://books.google.ca/books?id=FF8JAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=%22the+King+issued+his+mandate+that+she+should+be+%22earnestly+persuaded%22&source=bl&ots=5IE3fKeUGR&sig=_oUrXXKZ5NEcTcwakpEs0ky0id8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vH6cT77qKejC6AGRjOHeDg&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22the%20King%20issued%20his%20mandate%20that%20she%20should%20be%20%22earnestly%20persuaded%22&f=false)

The book, ‘London in the Later Middle Ages: Government And People 1200-1500’, (2005), by Caroline M. Barron, published by Oxford University Press, p. 370, states the following with respect to a William de Plessetis:

“Appendix 2: Civic Office Holders
(xii) Coroners

1249 – William de Plessetis
CCR 1247-54, 139, 159-60; CPR 1247-58, 35. (source: http://books.google.ca/books?id=PsKUIui2C24C&pg=PA370&dq=%22william+de+plessetis%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FIicT-7OKcj46QGbwdWVDw&ved=0CGUQ6AEwCTge#v=onepage&q=%22william%20de%20plessetis%22&f=false)

The book, 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Henry III, File 11', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 1: Henry III (1904), pp. 52-57, states the following with respect to ‘Richard de Wrotham’ and ‘William de Pleisseiz’:

217. Richard de Wrotham. Writ to Henry de Wingham, escheator, 27 Dec. 35 Hen. III. [1250]

William de Pleisseiz, aged 30, Custance, the wife of John le Blund, aged 40, Geoffrey de Skolonde, aged 24, and Christiana, the wife of Thomas Pikot, aged 30, are his heirs.

[Somerset.] Inq. (undated.) Mongton, Niweton, Katangre and Hamme manors (extents given) held of the king in chief by service of 1 knight's fee.
Katangre manor, ½ hide land held of William Luvel by service of 10s. rent, and 1 ferling land held of Henry de Erlegh by service of 1 sparrowhawk; and there are due to the abbot of Muchelnye yearly, 1 quarter each of wheat, barley and beans, and 2 quarters of oats.
Niweton, 2 messuages held of Stephen son of Michael by service of ½lb. cummin, and 2 virgates land held of Roger Stalble by service of 1 white wand.
Cricc town, ½ virgate held of the prior of Montacute by service of 5s.
Ceddre, a messuage and 3a. held of William de Clofford by service 0 1 pair of gloves price 1d.

Kent. Heghelande town, land worth 46s. 8d. yearly held of the Archbishop.
[...] Inq. (fragment undated.)

C. Hen. III. File 11. (12.)” (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108007&strquery=Wrotham)

The book, 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Edward I, File 7', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2: Edward I (1906), pp. 58-65, states the following with respect to ‘William de Plessetis alias de Plescys’:

81. William de Plessetis alias de Plescys. Writ, 6 Oct. 2 Edw. I. [1274]

Somerset. Inq. and extent, Wednesday the eve of St. Luke, 2 Edw. I.

Nyweton, Auekrigge and Exeton. The manors, with common in a moor called Northmora and the keepership of the park of Nyweton (extent given), held of the king in chief in serjeanty by service of ¼ knight's fee.
Richard de Barbeflut, aged 28, is his next heir.

C. Edw. I. File 7. (4.)” (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108079&strquery=Plessetis)

(other source information for William: Visitation of Hampshire, Wrothe of Petherton Park, Archaeologia Cantiana, Visitation of the county of Rutland and The History and Antiquities of the County of Rutland pedigrees above)

[?? 22-G - Sir Hugh de Pacetis/Plessetis/Plesetis ?? – Hugh was the brother or nephew of John, Earl of Warwick.

b.
m.
d.

Hugh’s brother or uncle is purported to have been John, Earl of Warwick. The book, 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Henry III, File 28', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 1: Henry III (1904), pp. 165-171, states the following with respect to the said John:

“558. John de Plessetis alias de Plascetis, earl of Warwick. Writ, 7 Mar. 47 Hen. III. [1263]

Hugh, his son, aged variously stated as 24 and more, 25 or more, and 26, is his heir.

[Oxford.]

Extent (undated).
Okenardton manor, held of the king in chief, together with the manors of Kedelinton and Bradeham, by service of one barony, finding in the king's army 2 knights or 4 (or? 3) serjeants for 40 days at his own cost.

[Oxford.] (Extent undated).
Kedelinton manor, held as abovesaid by service of 3 serjeants.
Musewell manor, held of the abbot of Messenden rendering 2 marks yearly.

[Buckingham.] Inq. Thursday in Easter week, 47 Hen. III.
Messenden, ½ knight's fee, held of the honour of Giffard, doing service to the earl of Leicester of 5s. yearly for view of frank pledge and scutage for ½ fee.

Salop. Inq. (undated.)
Stottesden manor (extent given), held of the king in chief by service of 1 knight's fee.
Mandate from the king's escheator to the escheator of co. Berks, reciting the above writ. Inq. (undated.)

Berks. Morton. 5½ virgates land held of the inheritance of Christina daughter of Hugh de Sanford, sometime his wife, by service of ½0 knight's fee.
West Witteham. 9½ virgates land similarly held of S. de Monte Forti, earl of Leycester, of the honour of Giffard, by service of 1/6 knight's fee.
Writ, 8 March, 47 Hen. III. Extent (undated).

Warwick. Warwick castle, with the manor and honour, held by the said earl for life and not in fee.
Breyles manor, similarly held for life, pertaining to the honour of the earldom of Warwick.
The above lands, &c. ought to pertain to Sir William Maudit after the said earl's death, because Alice Maudit his mother, whose heir he is, would have had the said lands by hereditary right, if surviving.
Writ (de escaeta), to the sheriff of Buckingham, 18 March, 47 Hen. III. Inq. (undated.)

[Buckingham.] Bradenham manor was not the escheat of Humphrey de Bohun, earl of Hereford and Essex, through the death of Margery, sometime countess of Warwick; for Humphrey de Bohun his grandfather gave the manor in free marriage to Henry de Oylly with Maud his sister, who had a son Henry and two daughters: Henry the younger had the manor for life and died without heir of himself, and the right in the manor descended to the daughters, from the elder of whom issued Thomas earl of Warwick and one Margery; the said Thomas had the manor for life and died without heir of himself, and the said Margery also; but from the younger sister, aunt of the said Margery, came one Walter de Daventre, and the jury believe that whilst there are any heirs of the younger sister the manor cannot be the escheat of the said Humphrey. After the death of the said Margery the said Humphrey obtained seisin of the manor for 15 days, because he understood that it was his escheat, and by his grant at the king's instance the late earl of Warwick held it for life.
Writ of seisin, 22 March, 47 Hen. III. Inq. Thursday in Easter week. On the petition of Hugh de Aungervill.

[Warwick.] Lodbroc manor. On Sunday the morrow of St. Matthias the Apostle about the evening hour, the sun still shining, came the said Hugh, bringing a deed which he had of the gift of the said earl of Warwick, and a letter patent from the earl to his constable of Warwick or reeve of Lodbroc, to place the said Hugh in full seisin of the manor, which the reeve did; and the said Hugh removed him and instituted his own reeve, and continued in peaceful possession until the following Sunday, when he was expelled by a servant of Sir W. Maudut and others. The jury know nothing of the day or hour of the said earl's death.

C. Hen. III. File 28. (13.)” (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108024&strquery=Plessetis)

(other source information for Hugh: Wrothe of Petherton Park, Archaeologia Cantiana and Visitation of the county of Rutland pedigrees above)

22-G - Muriel de Wrotham

b.
d. on or before December 27, 1250 (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108079&strquery=Plessetis)

(other source information for Muriel: Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above)]

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Dec 26, 2012, 3:18:32 AM12/26/12

I believe that my post is too long and was cut off. I have attached the balance of the post in the next one or 2 follow-ups. Thanks!

Cheers,

Pete

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 10:59:59 PM1/14/13

Greetings,

I have set forth below a revised draft of my Wroth ancestry (from my 14th G-Grandmother Elizabeth Wroth) following it back to the Placetis and Wrotham families via Maud Durant (b. approx. 1337-38 and d. before December 7, 1401). While I have made no progress in further establishing that the Wroth family of Enfield, Middlesex and Newton-Plecy, Somerset descended from the Wrotham family in the male line, I believe the evidence below (especially the IPMs) quite nicely shows a descent from Richard I de Wrotham (d. before February 16, 1218) who was the brother of the much better known William de Wrotham (d. before February 16, 1218). There is an interesting article from ‘The Genealogist’ (http://archive.org/stream/genealogist04mars#page/n5/mode/2up) which purports to identify the Wrotham family ancestry pre-William de Wrotham from the ‘Dering’ family.

Any thoughts, corrections, amendments or suggestions for additional research are most welcome and appreciated – including clarification regarding whether there was an earlier William de Wrotham (purported father of Richard I and William) and the origins of the Wrotham family in Kent and Placetis family in Normandy. Thank you.

Cheers,

Pete

********

14-G - Elizabeth Wroth – Elizabeth was the daughter of William Wroth of Enfield, Middlesex.

b. approx. 1415 – Enfield, Middlesex, England. Elizabeth has at least 1 sibling: (1) John of Enfield ((ob. 2 or 20 E. IV.) and m. to Elizabeth Lewknor/Lewkenor daughter of Sir Roger. They had a son John or Thomas of Enfield (ob. 6 or 9 H. VIII.) m. to Margaret or Johanna Newdigate daughter of Richard. (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees below)
d. approx. 1465 – Metfield (?), Suffolk, England

The book, ‘Middlesex pedigrees, as collected by Richard Mundy in Harleian ms. no. 1551’, (1914), edited by Sir George John Armytage, published by Mitchell, Hughes and Clarke, London, p. 17, provides a pedigree of the Wroth family from Enfield, Middlesex.
(source: http://www.archive.org/stream/middlesexpedigre65mund#page/16/mode/2up)

The book, ‘The visitations of the county of Somerset, in the years 1531 and 1573, together with additional pedigrees, chiefly from the visitation of 1591’, (1885), by Thomas Benolt, Robert Cooke, England. College of Arms, British Museum, edited by Frederic William Weaver, published by W. Pollard, pp. 91-93, provides a pedigree of the Wroth family from Enfield, Middlesex.
(source: http://books.google.ca/books?id=sf4GAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92&dq=%22wm.+de+wrotham,+lord+of+newton%22&source=bl&ots=H39b6BH9ea&sig=0wwOk4j1mS6tSrvefVmwp1pia-4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=rUpdT6GuMoPW0QHvxuieAw&sqi=2&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22wm.%20de%20wrotham%2C%20lord%20of%20newton%22&f=false)

An article, ‘William de Wrotham, Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports’, in the book, ‘Archaeologia Cantiana being Transactions of the Kent Archaeology Society’, (1878), Vol. XII, by Canon Scott Robertson, printed for the Society by Mitchell & Hughes, London, pp. 310-16, provides a history and pedigree of the of the Wrotham/Wroth family.
(source: http://www.archive.org/stream/archaeologiacant12kent/archaeologiacant12kent_djvu.txt)

The book, ‘The Genealogist’, (1880), edited by George W. Marshall, Vol. IV, printed by George Bell and Sons, London, pp. 106-108, critiques the Archaeologia Cantiana article above.
(source: http://archive.org/stream/genealogist04mars#page/n5/mode/2up)

15-G - William Wroth, Esquire, M.P. – William was from Durants, Middlesex and Newton, Somerset. (ob. 28 H. VI). Ob. 28 May temp. H. 6, 22 years old at the death of his father. (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above).

b. approx. 1389 – London, England and baptized in October 1389 in the church of All Hallows, Honey Lane, London. (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=7942)

m.
d. approx. May 8, 1450 – Somersetshire, England. He is buried on the north side of the chancel of the parish church of Bridgwater, Somersetshire. (source: http://www.archive.org/stream/historyantiqutit03colluoft/historyantiqutit03colluoft_djvu.txt; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=7942)

The book, ‘Calendar of the Fine Rolls – Vol. XVIII, Henry VI, A.D. 1445-1452’, (1939), published for the Public Record Office by His Majesty’s Stationery Office, states the following with respect to William Wroth:

“p. 133. 28 Henry VI. Membrane 31. Writs of diem clausit extremum, after the death of the following persons, directed to the escheators in the counties named: - ... May 8, 1450. Leicester. William Wrothe, esquire; Somerset; Essex and Hertford; Middlesex; London (Thomas Chalton, mayor and escheator).

p. 201. January 12, 1451. Membrane 18. Order to the escheator in the county of Somerset to take the fealty of John Wroth esquire, son and heir of William Wroth esquire, and cause him to have full seisin of all the lands which the said William held of the king in chief or was seised of in his demesne as of fee on the day of his death, as the king for ½ mark paid in the hanaper has respited his homage until Michaelmas next.

p. 177. 29 Henry VI. Membrane 34. Writs of diem clausit extremum, after the death of the following persons, directed to the escheators in the counties named: - ... January 28, 1451. Almerica late the wife of William Wrothe; Middlesex.” (source: http://archive.org/stream/calendaroffinero18greauoft#page/176/mode/2up)

The book, ‘History of Parliament – Biographies of the Members of the Commons House 1439-1509’, (1936), by Colonel the Right Honourable Josiah C. Wedgwood, in collaboration with Anne D. Holt, published by His Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, pp. 973-74, states the following with respect to William Wrothe:

“Wroth, William (1395-1450); of Durance in Enfield, and of Newton-Wrothe, Som. M.P. Middlesex 1437, 1445-6.
S. and h. of William Wrothe of the same, M.P. Mdsx. (d. 1410).(12)
He lived at Durance, Mdsx.; elector, Mdsx. 1420, 1426, 1429, 1432; and was sworn to the peace in Mdsx. 1434; Collins(12) says that he lived mostly at Newton by Bridgwater.

(1) Collinson, Somerset, iii. 63-67.

D. shortly before 8 May 1450 when his writ diem clausit was issued to the eschrs. of Somerset, Essex, Herts. and Middlesex;(1) buried at Bridgwater, where there was a stone bearing the date of his death and that he married a da. of John Mortimer, esq.(2) If so, she was the Amery who died, his widow, shortly before 5 Feb. 1451, when her writ diem clausit was issued to the eschr. of Norfolk and Suffolk.(3)

In May 1456 licence was granted for John Wrothe esq. s. and h. of William Wrothe, decd., to settle Newton-Pleysey (in N. Petherton), Som., on himself and Elizabeth, da. of Sir Roger Lewkenore, with remainder to his own right heirs. Long after a Thomas Wrothe of Durance was kntd. in 1547.

(1) Fine Roll, 28 Hen. VI (m.31).
(2) See note (12) on p. 973.
(3) ibid. 29 Hen.VI (m.33).”

William's IPM was published in very abbreviated form in the Record Society edition in 1828 (Calendarium Inquisitionem Post Mortem, vol. 4, p.240, 28 Henry VI [1449-50]). There is no entry for Averia or versions.

16-G - William Wroth, King’s Esquire, M.P. – William was from Enfield, Middlesex. (ob. 8 Sept. 9 H. 4). (ob. 10 H. IV.). (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above). He is described as being of Enfield, Middlesex and Newton Plecy, Somerset. (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408). Apparently, William inherited only his mother’s property. (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-john-1396)

b. – William has at least 2 half-siblings: (1) Sir John (M.P. for Middlesex, ob. 8 H. IV. He married Margaret [Willington/Willinton/Wellington – who is elsewhere identified as the wife of his son John or] Buckland and had the following children: John and Elizabeth [and another 2 sons and 2 daughters (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-john-1396)]; and (2) Agnes (she married Sir Pagan Tibbetofte/Pain Tibetot). (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above)

m.
d. September 9, 1408 (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=7942) or September 17, 1408 (source: ‘Calendar of the Inquisitions Post Mortem, and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, Vol. 19, 7-14 Henry IV (1405-1413), p. 109)

The website ‘History of Parliament online’ provides biographies with respect to William Wroth and his brother John Wroth
(source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408)
(source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-john-1396)

The book, ‘Calendar of the Fine Rolls preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1931), Vol. XII, Henry IV. – 1399-1405, published by His Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, p. 147, 3 Henry IV. (1401), Membrane 17 – cont., confirms William Wroth, esquire, as the son and heir of his mother Maud and, p. 231, 5 Henry IV. (1403), Membrane 15 – cont., as Sheriff of Somerset and Dorset
(source: http://archive.org/stream/calendaroffiner12greauoft#page/146/mode/2up)

The book, ‘Calendar of the Inquisitions Post Mortem, and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, Vol. 19, 7-14 Henry IV (1405-1413), edited by J. L. Kirby, HMSO, London, p. 189, states the following with respect to William Wrothe, Esquire:

“William Wrothe, Esquire
517. Writ 17 Nov. 1408.
Somerset. Inquisition. Bridgewater. 1 April 1409.
He held in his demesne as a fee of the king in chief by knight service a third part of the manor of North Newton with the advowson of the chapel at the third presentation, annual value 16 marks; and two tenements in Exton and Hawkridge with the advowsons of those places at the third presentations, annually value 2 marks.

He died on 17 Sept. 1408. William his son and next heir is aged 18 years and more.

C 137/71, no. 18
E 149/94, no. 7
E 152/427, no. 5”

17-G - John Wroth, ‘the younger’, J.P., M.P. – John was of Epping, Essex and Enfield, Middlesex. John was married twice. His first wife was N.N. John’s son from his first marriage was John. His second wife was Matilda (or Maud) Durant who married a second time in approx. 1376 to Baldwin de Radington, M.P. (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above, http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-john-1396; Michael Andrews-Reading blog post dated December 3, 2005 - http://groups.google.com/group/soc.genealogy.medieval/browse_thread/thread/9d70ef7ae059a97d/2e0587333990dab0)

b.
m. by 1353 (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=26951; Visitation of the county of Rutland pedigree below; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=26951)
d. 1375 - (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-john-1396; by 1376 (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=26951)

17-G - Matilda Durant – Matilda (or Maud) was the daughter and heir of Thomas Durant of Enfield, Middlesex and Newton Plecy, Somerset. (source: Wroth of Enfield, Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above; http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; Michael Andrews-Reading blog post dated December 3, 2005 - http://groups.google.com/group/soc.genealogy.medieval/browse_thread/thread/9d70ef7ae059a97d/2e0587333990dab0)

b. approx. 1337-38 – Enfield, Middlesex, England. (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1916), Vol. IX, Edward III, printed under the authority of His Majesty’s Stationery Office by The Hereford Times Limited, London, p. 311)
d. before December 7, 1401 (source: ‘Calendar of the Fine Rolls preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1931), Vol. XII, Henry IV. – 1399-1405, published by His Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, p. 147, 3 Henry IV. (1401), Membrane 17 – cont.)

18-G - Thomas Durant – Thomas was of Enfield, Middlesex and Newton Plecy, Somerset. (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408)

b. approx. 1310 (source: ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1909), Vol. VII, Edward III, printed for His Majesty’s Stationery Office by Mackie and Co. Ld., London, pp. 359-60)
m. 1333-34 (source: Visitation of Hampshire pedigree below)

d. Enfield, Middlesex, England – May 8-11, 1349 (source: ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1916), Vol. IX, Edward III, printed under the authority of His Majesty’s Stationery Office by The Hereford Times Limited, London, p. 311)

The book, ‘The Visitation of the county of Rutland in the year 1618-19: Taken by William Camden, Clarenceaux king of arms Volume 3 of Publications of the Harleian Society’, (1870), by William Camden, College of Arms (Great Britain), published by the Harleian Society, pp. 40-44, provides a pedigree of the Durant family.
(source: http://books.google.ca/books?id=SBys70CiCosC&pg=PA40&dq=%22walter+durant%22+%22sussex%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nNBnT7qRBafI0AGH1NXtCA&ved=0CEEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22walter%20durant%22%20%22sussex%22&f=false)

The book, ‘The history and antiquities of the County of Rutland’, (1684), by James Wright, printed for Bennet Griffin, London, p. 40, provides a pedigree of the Durant family.
(source: http://books.google.ca/books?id=V0EjAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=%22sir+walter+durant%22&source=bl&ots=GNhpABNxEP&sig=-cIJJfXV2NmsdDGqk3tDrzBuXJg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Xc9nT7HFC4H50gHezPW2CQ&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=%22sir%20walter%20durant%22&f=false)

The book, ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1916), Vol. IX, Edward III, printed under the authority of His Majesty’s Stationery Office by The Hereford Times Limited, London, p. 311, sets forth the IPM of ‘Thomas Duraunt’.
(source: http://archive.org/stream/cu31924011387879#page/n341/mode/2up)

19-G - Richard Durant – Richard was from Enfield, Middlesex and Lord of the 3rd part of Newton, Plecy, Somerset.

b. – approx. 1285-1293 (source: see ‘Knights of Edward I’, Vol. I [A to E.], published by The Harleian Society, est. 1869, Vol. LXXX for the year 1929, notices collected by Rev. C. Moor, p. 294) or approx. 1380 (source: ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other analogous documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1908), Vol. V, Edward II., printed for His Majesty’s Stationery Office by Mackie and Co. Ld, London, p. 192). Richard is the eldest son and has at least 3 siblings: (1) John (second son and m. to the daughter of Sir Charles Lupus as his second wife); (2) Simon (third son); and (3) Michael (fourth son and m. Ellenor, daughter and co-heir of Walter Alett). (source: Visitation of the county of Rutland)

m. 1311-12 (source: Visitation of Hampshire pedigree above)

d. Enfield, Middlesex, England – on or before October 7, 1333 (source: ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1909), Vol. VII, Edward III, printed for His Majesty’s Stationery Office by Mackie and Co. Ld., London, pp. 359-60)

The book, ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1909), Vol. VII, Edward III, printed for His Majesty’s Stationery Office by Mackie and Co. Ld., London, pp. 359-60, sets forth the IPM of ‘Richard Duraunt of Enefeld’.

20-G - John Durant/Duraunt

b.
m. 1288-89 (source: Visitation of Hampshire pedigree above)

d. August 23, 1293 (source: see ‘Knights of Edward I’, Vol. I [A to E.], published by The Harleian Society, est. 1869, Vol. LXXX for the year 1929, notices collected by Rev. C. Moor, p. 294)

20-G - Avelina/Evelina de Placetis/Plessetis – Avelina was the daughter and co-heiress of William de Placetis.

b. in or before 1268 (source: see ‘Knights of Edward I’, Vol. IV below). Avelina is the second eldest daughter of William. She has at least 3 siblings: (1) Richard (he held a 1/5 knight's fee of the manor of Enfield, Middlesex in 1235, he was called Barbafleta, [b. approx. 1246 (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108079&strquery=Plessetis)] d. on or before March 28, 1289; seized of the manors of Newton Forester and Exton in Somerset (1285-86). His wife was Margery – source: 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Edward I, File 54', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2: Edward I (1906), pp. 441-449 - http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108126) (d. July 1, 1293 (source: ‘Knights of Edward I’, Vol. I [A to E.], published by The Harleian Society, est. 1869, Vol. LXXX for the year 1929, notices collected by Rev. C. Moor, p. 294)); (2) Sabina (eldest daughter and m. to Nicholas Pech/Peche/Pecche/Peach and had sons Nicholas and Richard); and (3) Emme (third daughter and m. to John Heryon/Heyron/Heron/Hearne who died 1326-27).
d. approx. May 21, 1312 (source: see ‘Knights of Edward I’, Vol. I [A to E.], published by The Harleian Society, est. 1869, Vol. LXXX for the year 1929, notices collected by Rev. C. Moor, p. 294; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=26951)

The book, ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other analogous documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1908), Vol. V, Edward II., printed for His Majesty’s Stationery Office by Mackie and Co. Ld, London, p. 192, sets forth the IPM of Avelina Durant in 1312.
(source: http://www01.us.archive.org/stream/calendarofinquis05grea#page/192/mode/2up)

The book, 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Edward I, File 54', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2: Edward I (1906), pp. 441-449, sets forth the IPM of ‘Richard de Plessetis alias de Plescetis, de Pleysetis’.
(source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108126)

The book, ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and Other Analogous Documents Preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1912), Edward I., Vol. III, printed by The Hereford Times Limited, Hereford, p. 58, sets forth the IPM of ‘Margery, late the wife of Richard de Plessetis alias de Plesettis’ in 1293.
(source: http://archive.org/stream/cu31924011387812#page/n103/mode/2up)

21-G - William de Placetis/Plessitis/Plessetis

b. – approx. 1220 (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108079&strquery=Plessetis). William has at least 1 sibling: (1) John (who is the ancestor of the Placeys of Wimborne, Dorset [Hutchins, III. 166, 579] – source: Wrothe of Petherton Park pedigree above).
m.
d. on or before October 6, 1274 (source: The book, 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Edward I, File 7', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2: Edward I (1906), pp. 58-65 - http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108079&strquery=Plessetis)

The book, 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Henry III, File 11', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 1: Henry III (1904), pp. 52-57, sets forth the IPM of ‘Richard de Wrotham’ which references his nephew ‘William de Pleisseiz’.
(source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108007&strquery=Wrotham)

The book, 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Edward I, File 7', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2: Edward I (1906), pp. 58-65, sets forth the IPM of ‘William de Plessetis alias de Plescys’.
(source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108079&strquery=Plessetis)

22-G - Sir Hugh de Pacetis/Plessetis/Plesetis – Hugh was a kinsman and most likely the brother of John, Earl of Warwick. (source: ‘The history and antiquities of the county of Somerset (1791)’, Vol. 3, by John Collinson and Edmund Rack, published by R. Cruttwell, Bath, England, p. 64; ‘Oxford Dictionary of National Biography’, (2004), in association with The British Academy, Vol. 44 (Phelps-Poston), edited by H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison, published by Oxford University Press, pp. 577-79)

b. Normandy, France (source: ‘Matthew Paris’s English History from the year 1235 to 1273’, (1854), Vol. III, translated from the Latin by Rev. J. A. Giles, published by Henry G. Bohn, London, pp. 93-94, states that Hugh’s brother John, Earl of Warwick, “was a Norman by birth” - http://archive.org/stream/matthewparissen02rishgoog#page/n102/mode/2up)
m.
d. was still alive October 11, 1240 (source: The website, ‘http://www.teachergenealogist007.com’ - 19989516. Earl John de Plescy & 19989517. Christine de Saundford)

The book, ‘Somerset Record Society, Vol. XIV, Two Cartularies of the Benedictine Abbeys of Muchelney and Athelney in the County of Somerset’, (1899), edited by E. H. Bates, printed by Harrison and Sons, London, p. 134, #27 – Extracts from the Register of the Abbey of Athelney, references Hugh and Newton-Plecy.
(source: http://archive.org/stream/twocartulariesof00mulcrich#page/134/mode/2up)

Hugh’s brother is purported to have been John, Earl of Warwick. The book, 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Henry III, File 28', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 1: Henry III (1904), pp. 165-171, sets forth the IPM of the said John.
(source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108024&strquery=Plessetis)

22-G - Muriel de Wrotham

b. – [approx. 1200-1205]. Muriel has at least 4 siblings: (1) Richard (b. approx. 1200 (source: ‘Two Cartularies of the Benedictine Abbeys of Muchelney and Athelney in the County of Somerset’, (1899), edited by E. H. Bates, printed by Harrison and Sons, London,) and d. 1250) (m. to Margaret d. of John Shopland – see - Wrothe of Petherton Park pedigree above and/or Cecilia (mentioned in the Fine Roll 35 Hen. III m. 13) – see - Archaeologia Cantiana article above, p. 312); (2) Constance/Custance (b. approx. 1210) (m. to John le Blund); (3) Emma (m. to Geoffrey de Scoland/Skolande – they had a son Geoffrey b. approx. 1226); and (4) Christina/Christiana (b. approx. 1220) (m. to Thomas Picot/Pikot). (source: Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above; ‘The history and antiquities of the county of Somerset (1791)’, Vol. 3, by John Collinson and Edmund Rack, published by R. Cruttwell, Bath, England, pp. 55 and 64; 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Henry III, File 11', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 1: Henry III (1904), pp. 52-57 - http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108007&strquery=Wrotham)
d. on or before December 27, 1250 (source: The book, 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Edward I, File 7', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2: Edward I (1906), pp. 58-65 - http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108079&strquery=Plessetis)

The book, ‘Somerset Record Society, Vol. XIV, Two Cartularies of the Benedictine Abbeys of Muchelney and Athelney in the County of Somerset’, (1899), edited by E. H. Bates, printed by Harrison and Sons, London, provides evidence that Richard II de Wrotham, uncle of Geoffrey de Scoland (and ‘our’ William de Placetis) was the son of Richard I de Wrotham (see pp. 63-66) and thus ‘our’ Maud de Wrotham, Richard II’s sister, was likewise the daughter of Richard I de Wrotham. See also the Henry III Fine Rolls Project below for additional confirmation.
(source: http://archive.org/stream/twocartulariesof00mulcrich#page/n7/mode/2up)

The website of the ‘Henry III Fine Rolls Project’, states the following with respect to the Wrotham family:

2 HENRY III (28 October 1217–27 October 1218). Fine Roll C 60/9, 2 HENRY III (1217–1218).
Membrane 7
Image of membrane 7

“22
17 Feb. Ilminster. Somerset and Dorset. John Marshal has made fine with the king by 60 m. for having the custody and marriage of Richard, son and heir of Richard of Wrotham, who is the heir of William of Wrotham, from the lay fees and tenements formerly of William, to whom pertained the custody of the forest of Somerset as of fee. Order to the sheriff of Dorset and Somerset to cause John to have full seisin without delay of the lands and tenements formerly of Richard and William with custody of the forest. Because etc. Witness the earl.”
(source: http://www.finerollshenry3.org.uk/content/calendar/roll_009.html#it022_007)

23-G – Richard I de Wrotham

b. – Richard has at least 1 brother: (1) William de Wrotham (d. 1217/18 – before February 16, 1218). (source: ‘The history and antiquities of the county of Somerset (1791)’, Vol. 3, by John Collinson and Edmund Rack, published by R. Cruttwell, Bath, England, pp. 55 and 64; ‘Oxford Dictionary of National Biography’, (2004), in association with The British Academy, Vol. 60 (Wolmark-Zuylestein), edited by H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison, published by Oxford University Press, pp. 545-46)
m.
d. before February 16, 1218 when John Marshall received the wardship of his son Richard who was the nephew and heir of William de Wrotham (source: ‘Oxford Dictionary of National Biography’, (2004), in association with The British Academy, Vol. 60 (Wolmark-Zuylestein), edited by H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison, published by Oxford University Press, pp. 545-46); or approx. 1224 (source: Archaeologia Cantiana article above)

24-G – Geoffrey/Godwin – Godwin held land in Shipbourne, Kent, near Wrotham, and was perhaps a tenant of the Archbishops of Canterbury. (source: ‘Oxford Dictionary of National Biography’, (2004), in association with The British Academy, Vol. 60 (Wolmark-Zuylestein), edited by H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison, published by Oxford University Press, pp. 545-46). (other source information for Geoffrey: Wrothe of Petherton Park and Archaeologia Cantiana pedigrees above; ‘The history and antiquities of the county of Somerset (1791)’, Vol. 3, by John Collinson and Edmund Rack, published by R. Cruttwell, Bath, England, p. 55)

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Jan 17, 2013, 1:00:10 AM1/17/13

Greetings,

I have continued to conduct some additional research on the Plessetis/Placetis/Plescy family of Somerset. Notwithstanding Collinson’s statement (‘The history and antiquities of the county of Somerset (1791)’, Vol. 3, by John Collinson and Edmund Rack, published by R. Cruttwell, Bath, England, p. 64 - http://archive.org/stream/historyantiqutit03colluoft#page/64/mode/2up) that William de Plescy’s father was Hugh de Plescy, brother of John, Earl of Warwick and his mother Muriel, I have found no evidence to corroborate this. We know from the IPM of William’s uncle Richard de Wrotham that his father must have been a Plescy and mother a Wrotham but I have seen nothing to identify his mother as Muriel or his father as Hugh (http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=108007&strquery=Wrotham).

I would appreciate any assistance in corroborating the father (and mother’s first name) of William de Plescy (b. approx. 1220 and d. 1274).

I’ve also seen reference to his will:

(1) The book, 'Deeds: B.2701 - B.2800', A Descriptive Catalogue of Ancient Deeds: Volume 2 (1894), pp. 327-337, states the following with respect to William de Plessetis:

“Somers. B. 2771. Receipt by Sir Richard de Plessetis, steward of the king’s forest in Somersetshire, for the payment to him by Sir John, prior of Meydenebradelegh, 'ordinator' of the will of William de Plessetis and by Sir James de Plessetis, rector of the church of Samforde, executor of the said William, and by the other co-executors, of 100l. 9s. 1d., in return for which he binds himself to maintain a chaplain in the chapel of Nyweton for ever. Witnesses:—Giles de Flory, William Poleyn, and others (named). Thirteenth century. Seal, with impression of stag. (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=64285)

(2) The book 'North Petherton: Churches', A History of the County of Somerset: Volume 6: Andersfield, Cannington, and North Petherton Hundreds (Bridgwater and neighbouring parishes) (1992), pp. 308-312:

The chapel at North Newton was granted in 1186 with the mother church of North Petherton to Buckland priory by William of Erleigh. (fn. 87) Under the will of his uncle William de Plessis (d. c. 1274) Sir Richard de Plessis established a chantry in the chapel, (fn. 88) [S.R.S. xxx, pp. 331-2; P.R.O., E 210/1987] to which as a perpetual chantry or as a free chapel he and his successors appointed chaplains until the Dissolution. (fn. 89). (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=18689)

In addition, Collinson references a will of Richard de Plescy (Barbafluta) (http://archive.org/stream/historyantiqutit03colluoft#page/64/mode/2up) son of the abovementioned William.

I’d appreciate any insight as to whether one or both of the above 2 wills (for lack of a better term) have been recorded, or the information set forth therein detailed somewhere or if they are otherwise available. Thank you.

Regards,

Pete

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Jan 19, 2013, 10:40:24 PM1/19/13

Greetings,

I have further revised my information regarding John Durant (d. 1293), husband of Avelina de Plescy, and Great-Grandfather of Maud Durant (b. 1337/8 and d. before 1401 who married 1st John Wroth the younger, J.P., M.P. (d. 1375) and 2nd Baldwin de Radington, M.P.) and 3rd Great-Grandfather of William Wroth, Esq. (b. 1389 and d. 1450) of Enfield, Middlesex and Newton Plescy, Somerset.

I propose that John Durant is the son of Adam Durant of Enfield rather than Sir Walter Durant, Bailiff of Archendowne Forest, Sussex as set forth in written pedigrees. See –

(1) ‘William de Wrotham, Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports’, in the book, ‘Archaeologia Cantiana being Transactions of the Kent Archaeology Society’, (1878), Vol. XII - http://archive.org/stream/archaeologiacant12kent#page/314/mode/1up,

(2) ‘The Visitation of the county of Rutland in the year 1618-19’, Volume 3 of Publications of the Harleian Society’, (1870), pp. 40-44- http://books.google.ca/books?id=SBys70CiCosC&pg=PA40&dq=%22walter+durant%22+%22sussex%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nNBnT7qRBafI0AGH1NXtCA&ved=0CEEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22walter%20durant%22%20%22sussex%22&f=false and,

(3) ‘The history and antiquities of the County of Rutland’, (1684), by James Wright, printed for Bennet Griffin, London, p. 40 - http://books.google.ca/books?id=V0EjAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=%22sir+walter+durant%22&source=bl&ots=GNhpABNxEP&sig=-cIJJfXV2NmsdDGqk3tDrzBuXJg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Xc9nT7HFC4H50gHezPW2CQ&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=%22sir%20walter%20durant%22&f=false.

I look forward to any thoughts, corrections, additions or other insights and thank you in advance for reviewing this post.

Cheers,

Pete

20-G - John Durant/Duraunt

b.
m.
d. August 23, 1293 (source: see ‘Knights of Edward I’, Vol. I)

The book, ‘A Calendar to the Feet of Fines for London & Middlesex’ (1892), Vol. I, Richard I. to Richard III., by W. J. Hardy and W. Page, printed by Hardy & Page, London, states the following with respect to an ‘Adam Durant’ and ‘John, son of Adam Durand, of Eynfeud’:

“p. 28. Henry III. 217. Edward de Herlawe, and Adam Durant, and Margery, his wife. Premises in Enefeld. Anno [28.] [1243-44]”

“p. 51. Edward I. 30. Roger, prior of the New Hospital, without Bishopsgate, London, and John, son of Adam Durand, of Eynfeud. The service exacted by Elias de Honylane from the said John, for his free tenement in Enefeud; and also as to land in Enefeud, which John acknowledges to be the right of the same prior, and his church of St. Mary, without Bishopsgate. Anno 3. [1274-75]” (source: http://www02.us.archive.org/stream/acalendartofeet00unkngoog#page/n57/mode/2up; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/source.aspx?pubid=805)

The book, ‘The History of St. Bartholomew’s Hospital’, (1918), by Norman Moore, Vol. 1, printed by C. Arthur Pearson Limited, London, pp. 418, 434, 435 and 509, states the following with respect to an Adam and John Durant and Richard de Plesseto/ Plessetis/Pleset/de Barleflet:

p. 418 – see - http://archive.org/stream/historyofstbarth01mooruoft#page/418/mode/2up

Note: Please see references to Adam/Ada Durant and Ricardo de Plesseto in the second paragraph and footnote 2.

p. 434 – see - http://archive.org/stream/historyofstbarth01mooruoft#page/434/mode/2up

Note: Please see references to ‘Adam Durant: John his son’ and Richard of Barleflet in footnote 2 as witnesses to 2 charters.

p. 435 – see - http://archive.org/stream/historyofstbarth01mooruoft#page/434/mode/2up

Note: Please see reference to Richard of Pleset in footnote 1.

p. 509 – see - http://archive.org/stream/historyofstbarth01mooruoft#page/508/mode/2up

Note: Please see references to Richard de Plessetis and John Duraund in footnote 1.

Query: Whether John Durant is actually the son of Adam Durant of Enfield, Middlesex rather than, as according to the written pedigrees, Sir Walter Durant, Bailiff of Archendowne Forest, Sussex. I have found no independent evidence to corroborate Walter as John’s father. The references above to Adam and John Durant and Richard de Placetis appearing together as witnesses to charters would seem to corroborate this as John married Richard’s sister Avelina.

Further, I note that John Durant (c. 1274-75) and William Wroth (c. 1393), John’s 3rd Great-Grandson, are both referenced in disputes with New Hospital, without Bishopsgate, London (as previously set forth above). It does not appear that the property in question is the same but more inquiry is needed. See:

The book, ‘A Calendar to the Feet of Fines for London & Middlesex’ (1892), Vol. I, Richard I. to Richard III., by W. J. Hardy and W. Page, printed by Hardy & Page, London, states the following with respect to a ‘John, son of Adam Durand, of Eynfeud’:

“p. 51. Edward I. 30. Roger, prior of the New Hospital, without Bishopsgate, London, and John, son of Adam Durand, of Eynfeud. The service exacted by Elias de Honylane from the said John, for his free tenement in Enefeud; and also as to land in Enefeud, which John acknowledges to be the right of the same prior, and his church of St. Mary, without Bishopsgate. Anno 3. [1274-75]” (source: http://www02.us.archive.org/stream/acalendartofeet00unkngoog#page/n57/mode/2up; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/source.aspx?pubid=805)

The book, 'All Hallows Honey Lane 11/12', Historical gazetteer of London before the Great Fire: Cheapside; parishes of All Hallows Honey Lane, St Martin Pomary, St Mary le Bow, St Mary Colechurch and St Pancras Soper Lane (1987), pp. 102-104, states the following with respect to the William Wroth:

In 1393 the prior of the New Hospital of St. Mary without Bishopsgate brought actions of intrusion (presumably for disseisin of rent, but the actions were never prosecuted) against William Wroth, Baldwin Radyngton, knight, and his wife Maud, Thomas Veel, John Acton, clerk, and Paul Midylton, into his free tenement in the parish. William Wroth held the property, described as an inn (hospitium) called le Bullehed with 2 shops in Cheapside in this parish, on his death in 1408; it was valued at £5 p.a. (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=7942)

Lastly, I note that the Inquisition Post Mortem for a ‘Margaret, late the wife of Thomas Duraunt’, c. 1337, references Thomas as deceased. This Thomas Duraunt appears to be the one referenced in the above written Pedigree from the visitation of Hampshire (source: http://archive.org/stream/pedigreesfromvis64beno#page/122/mode/2up), i.e. his wife is named Margaret and references to her kin as ‘Tichibourne’ . However, he is dead by 1337 and ‘our’ Thomas Durant died in 1349. Thus, I propose, that the pedigree is in error as a result of 2 similarly named Thomas Durants being confused and that ‘our’ Thomas is the son of John and grandson of Adam Durant of Enfield, Middlesex.

The book, ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other analogous documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1913), Vol. VIII, Edward III, printed under the authority of His Majesty’s Stationery Office by The Hereford Times Limited, Hereford, pp. 59-60, sets forth the IPM of ‘Margaret, late the wife of Thomas Duraunt’ and ‘Thomas son of Thomas Duraunt’ – see - http://www01.us.archive.org/stream/calendarofinquis08grea#page/58/mode/2up)

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Jan 20, 2013, 2:45:41 PM1/20/13

Just a further tidbit re ‘our’ Thomas Durant, i.e. of Enfield. According to the Feet of Fines, he was married to Agnes in 1348-49.

Cheers,

Pete

The book, ‘A Calendar to the Feet of Fines for London & Middlesex’ (1892), Vol. I, Richard I. to Richard III., by W. J. Hardy and W. Page, printed by Hardy & Page, London, p. 125, states the following with respect to a ‘Thomas Duraunt, of Enefeld’:

“Edward III. 247. Thomas Duraunt, of Enefeld, and Agnes, his wife, and Bartholomew Fourneux, and Agnes, his wife. Premises in Enefeld. Anno 22. [1348-49]” (source: http://www02.us.archive.org/stream/acalendartofeet00unkngoog#page/n131/mode/2up; http://www.british-history.ac.uk/source.aspx?pubid=805)

unread,

Jan 23, 2013, 7:36:51 PM1/23/13

to pd...@peterdale.com

In your post of 14 Jan, you give Maud's birthdate:

"b. approx. 1337-38 – Enfield, Middlesex, England. (source: http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/wroth-william-1408; ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, (1916), Vol. IX, Edward III, printed under the authority of His Majesty’s Stationery Office by The Hereford Times Limited, London, p. 311)"

Om your post of 20 Jan, you state:

"According to the Feet of Fines, he was married to Agnes in 1348-49."

My point is that if both your posts are correct, and if the Thomas that Agnes married was the father of Maud, then Agnes was not Maud's mother.

CE Wood

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Jan 23, 2013, 7:54:12 PM1/23/13

to pd...@peterdale.com

Hi CE Wood,

For clarity, I meant to say: “According to the Feet of Fines, he was married to a women named Agnes in 1348-49”. I was just confirming the name of Thomas’ wife at the date of the Fine and not opining in any way as to the date of his marriage to Agnes. My apologies for the confusion and lack of clarity on my part!

Cheers,

Pete

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Jan 24, 2013, 6:49:37 PM1/24/13

to pd...@peterdale.com

I just noted an error in my post of January 19th. I stated in the second last paragraph thereof the following:

“Thus, I propose, that the pedigree is in error as a result of 2 similarly named Thomas Durants being confused and that ‘our’ Thomas is the son of John and grandson of Adam Durant of Enfield, Middlesex.”

I should have stated:

“Thus, I propose, that the pedigree is in error as a result of 2 similarly named Thomas Durants being confused and that ‘our’ Thomas is the son Richard, grandson of John and great-grandson of Adam Durant of Enfield, Middlesex.”

Cheers,

Pete

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Jan 25, 2013, 8:25:28 PM1/25/13

to pd...@peterdale.com

Greetings,

Some interesting new information and a significant correction my the pedigree I posted earlier. I set forth below the following:

(1) Abstracts of the IPMs of William Wroth, Esq. (d. 1408);
(2) Abstract of the will of John Wroth, the younger, (d. 1375); and
(3) Two entries from ‘Somerset Record Society, Vol. XXX, The Register of Nicholas Bubwith, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1407-1424 from the original in the Registry at Wells’, (1914), Vol. II, edited by Thomas Scott Holmes, printed for subscribers only by Harrison and Sons, London, pp. 328-32 [entry #784 – c. 1418], which provides a description of a charter of Richard de Plesseto establishing a perpetual chantry in the chapel of St. Peter within the court of Newton Forest alias the manor of Newton Plecy. Richard refers to William de Plesseto as his uncle “quondam avunculi mei”. Entry 784 also references William Wroth in connection with the manor of Newton and he is likewise referenced on p. 406 [entry #1039 – c. 1421]. Entry #784 also references James de Plesseto (who is elsewhere identified as the rector of the church of Samforde) who may be Richard, Avelina, et al’s brother or uncle.

Thus, I need to correct the pedigree I posted earlier to reflect the fact that William de Plescy (d. 1274) is not the father of Richard de Plescy (d. 1289) but, rather, his uncle. Richard, and by extension Avelina’s (d. 1312), father is now NN de Plescy presumably. However, we know William de Plescy’s father was a de Plescy and mother a Wrotham from Richard de Wrotham’s IPM in 1250 so the balance of the pedigree still seems sound.

As always I am keen for any other insights regarding the foregoing!

Cheers,

Pete

****

(1) IPMs of William Wroth

C 137/71/18

Somerset. Inquisition post mortem Monday after the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary 10 Hen IV [March 27, 1409]
... William Wrothe Esquire held in chief of the Lord King, on the day he died, in the county of Somerset, three parts of the manor of Newtonpleysey with advowson of the chapel there, by military service. And that he held of the King in chief by military service two tenements with appurtenances in Exton & Haukeryg with advowson of the church of Exton & Haukeryg. And that the said three parts are valued at 16 marks pa and the two tenements at 2 marks. And that William died on Monday before the feast of St Matthew the Apostle last past [September 19, 1408]. And that William son of the said William is his next heir, being 18 years of age.

E 149/94/7

This document is in very poor condition and is barely legible but it appears to be an Exchequer copy of the Chancery version. Hereafter follows important sections:

Somerset

... died Monday before St Matthew ... John [sic?] son of the said William is his son & next heir aged 18 years & above. ...

It seems curious that William is named as heir in the Chancery IPM while John is recorded as heir in the Exchequer IPM. Unless the IPMs refer to different properties?

E 152/327 no 5

This reference was not recognised by TNA. A Finding aid to this series in E501/18 gives 2 references to William Wroth for 10-11 Hen IV, shown as pieces 427 and 94(7). 427 now equates to E152/9 and 94 is part of E152/3. This is in very poor condition and much of it is unreadable.

(2) Will of John Wroth 1375.

Abstract of Latin will of John Wroth junior [Commissary Court of London 1375 MS9171/1, fol 27v]

dated Friday before the Translation of St Thomas the Martyr 1374
burial wherever it pleases God
to my wife - all utensils of household &c; all my goods &c at Enefeld
residue of estate, after payment of debts, to be distributed among my boys
[pueros meos] at the discretion of my executors; if any of those boys should be dead, then their portion to be divided among the survivors
all my lands & tenements &c in Enefeld & in the county of Kent, of which John Wroth senior, John de Midelton & others are enfeoffed, as appears by a certain deed, should be sold and the proceeds to be divided among my boys
the money and the boys to remain in the guardianship of John Wroth and lord John Okyndon, vicar of the church of Enefeld until their full age
to the fabric of the church of Enefeld 20s
to lord John Okyndon vicar of the church of Enefeld 13s 4d
to lord John Okyndon chaplain
to lord John Edward 6s 8d
to Simekin
to each of my servants
Executors: John Wrothe senior, John Okyndon vicar of the church of Enefeld & lord John Okyndon chaplain
This testament was proved on 8 July 1375

(3) The book, ‘Somerset Record Society, Vol. XXX, The Register of Nicholas Bubwith, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1407-1424 from the original in the Registry at Wells’, (1914), Vol. II, edited by Thomas Scott Holmes, printed for subscribers only by Harrison and Sons, London, pp. 328-32 [entry #784 – c. 1418], provides a description of a charter of Richard de Plesseto establishing a perpetual chantry in the chapel of St. Peter within the court of Newton Forest alias the manor of Newton Plecy. Richard refers to William de Plesseto as his uncle “quondam avunculi mei”. Entry 784 also references William Wroth in connection with the manor of Newton and he is likewise referenced on p. 406 [entry #1039 – c. 1421].

pp. 328-32 – see - http://www17.us.archive.org/stream/publicationssome30someuoft#page/328/mode/2up

p. 406 – see - http://www17.us.archive.org/stream/publicationssome30someuoft#page/406/mode/2up)

A researcher who has assisted me on a number of projects has provided a translated abstract of the abovementioned entries #784 and 1039:

“Items from The Register of Nicholas Bubwith, Bishop of Bath & Wells 1407-1424

784. 3 August. Wells

Inquisition taken in the parish church of Bruggewater on 2 August 1418 ... before Master William Andergate of Oterhampton, lords John Hancock of Chilton, &c Who say on their oath that a certain perpetual chantry was long ago set up in the chapel of St Peter within the court of Newton Forest alias the said manor of Newton Plecy, by Richard de Plesseto Knight, formerly lord of Newton Forest, who founded and endowed the said chantry, by assigning to a certain lord William Hilpryntone chaplain and all his successors for celebration of divine service in the chapel certain lands & tenements and other rights and commodities, as by a charter more fully appears ...

Also they say that the said chantry is a perpetual benefice requiring ...

Also they say that the said chantry is now vacant by the resignation of the said John Osborn, the last occupier of the free chapel or chantry, as from 9 July last past.

Also they say that the Earl Marshall, William Wroth and John Garton, lords of the manor of Newton, are the true patrons of the chantry ...

Also they say that King Henry IV, father of the present King Henry, presented the aforesaid John Osborn to the chantry, by reason of the minority of Edmund Earl Marshal, being in his custody ...

Ordination to the chantry of Newton Plecy:

To all the faithful in Christ ... Richard de Plesseto, Knight, lord of Nyweton Forest, greeting. Let it be known that I, for God and the salvation of my soul and of William de Plesseto, formerly my uncle [avunculi], and for the souls of my father and mother, and my ancestors and successor, and for all the souls of the faithful departed, have given, granted and confirmed to lord William de Hylpynton chaplain and all his successors, for celebrating divine service in the chapel of St Peter within my court of Nyweton Forest, all that messuage which lord William de Greynton chaplain formerly held in Nyweton &c, with a certain croft adjoining and enclosing nine acres, and with five and a half acres of arable land &c and nine acres meadow of my meadow in La Heymore by the park of North Pederton to the east and pasture for 6 oxen and 6 cows in my pasture of Lyntemor ... Moreover, I will and grant for me and my heirs that William and his successors should have all tithes &c, as William de Graynton chaplain, the predecessor of William, had ... Clause of Warranty
Signed in the presence of brother Richard de Bramford, then preceptor of Bocland, lord Geoffrey de Wrokehshale Knight, lord James de Plesseto, Richard de Nyewton, John de Marysco, Peter de Hamme, John Mauger & many others

1039. 21 August. Banewell

Writ of the King received by the bishop:

Henry &c to the Bishop of Bath & Wells greeting. You should know that William Wroth, in our court before the justices at Westminster, has recovered the presentation, against Thomas Chaucer Esq and William 'that was the parysh preest of Newton Plecy' chaplain, to the free chapel of Newton Plecy which is vacant and in his gift by the default of the same Thomas and William. And we command you that, notwithstanding the claims of the said Thomas and William, to appoint a suitable person on the presentation of the said William Wroth to the free chapel. Witnessed by R Hulle at Westminster 12 July 9 Henry [V]

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Jan 26, 2013, 3:30:03 AM1/26/13

to pd...@peterdale.com

Greetings,

Another source that further explores Richard de Plesseto’s chantry:

The book, ‘The Mediaeval Nunneries of the County of Somerset, and Diocese of Bath & Wells; together with the annals of their impropriated benefices, from the earliest times to the death of Queen Mary’, (1867), by Thomas Hugo, printed by J. R. Smith, London, pp. 16-16, 30-32 and 222-23, provides the following information regarding the Wrotham and Plesseto families and the abovementioned chantry:

pp. 15-16 – see http://books.google.ca/books?id=D55PAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=%22james+de+plesseto%22&source=bl&ots=5QA4-G53Hm&sig=4hvY5UtbbV4L5FU2nUePvgECAFA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JzQDUZr6PI7sqAH4n4CYDg&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAg#v=snippet&q=wrotham&f=false)

pp. 30-32 – see - http://books.google.ca/books?id=D55PAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=%22james+de+plesseto%22&source=bl&ots=5QA4-G53Hm&sig=4hvY5UtbbV4L5FU2nUePvgECAFA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JzQDUZr6PI7sqAH4n4CYDg&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=wrotham&f=false)

pp. 222-23 – see - http://books.google.ca/books?id=D55PAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=%22james+de+plesseto%22&source=bl&ots=5QA4-G53Hm&sig=4hvY5UtbbV4L5FU2nUePvgECAFA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JzQDUZr6PI7sqAH4n4CYDg&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAg#v=snippet&q=plesseto&f=false)

See also pp. 185-87 - http://books.google.ca/books?id=D55PAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=%22james+de+plesseto%22&source=bl&ots=5QA4-G53Hm&sig=4hvY5UtbbV4L5FU2nUePvgECAFA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JzQDUZr6PI7sqAH4n4CYDg&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAg#v=snippet&q=plesseto&f=false

Perhaps Richard de Plescy’s (d. 1289) father (and brother of his uncle William) is named Richard as well. I note that both Richard de Plescy (d. 1289) and another Richard de Plesseto (c. 1232) held 1/5 a knight’s fee in Enfield. One problem is that the earlier Richard seems a little old to be the father of Richard (d. 1289) and his sister Avelina (d. 1312). However, I wonder what are the odds that there are 2 generations of Richards de Plescys holding 1/5 a knight’s fee in Enfield (both apparently of the Honour of Mandeville) and they be unrelated? See below:

The book, 'Inquisitions Post Mortem, Edward I, File 54', Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, Volume 2: Edward I (1906), pp. 441-449, states the following with respect to ‘Richard de Plessetis alias de Plescetis, de Pleysetis’:

“719. Richard de Plessetis alias de Plescetis, de Pleysetis. Writ, 28 March, 17 Edw. I. Middlesex. Inq. 4 May, 17 Edw. I. [1289]

Enefeld. A messuage, 106s. 4½d. rent, 86 customs of freemen in August, a corn mill and fulling mill, 294a. land, 27a. meadow, 27a. pasture &c. held of the earl of Hereford by service of 1/5 knight's fee, two suits at the court of knights, viz.—one at Blanchesapeltone and another at Hertford, suit every three weeks at the earl's court in Enefeud, 7s. yearly, and 35 quarters wheat for the said two mills; a messuage, 15a. land, 1½a. pasture, whereof Hugh de Castello and Elicia his wife hold the messuage, pasture and 8a. land for life, rendering 29s. yearly, a fulling mill, which Matthew le Folour holds in fee, rendering 14s. 4d. yearly to the said Richard and his heirs, and to Alice late the wife of Richard the chamberlain for life as dower 16s., and a corn mill, all held of the abbot &c. of Waleden for 30s. yearly, and 10s. for tithes of the said mills; and 8a. land held of John Baldewyne, rendering 4s. 2d. yearly. All those lands pay 5d. to St. Peter's pence yearly. His sisters, Sabina the wife of Nicholas Peche, Avelina the wife of John Durant, and Emma the wife of John Heyron, are his next heirs and of full age.”

The book, ‘LIBER FEODORUM’, states the following with respect to a Richard de Plessi:

“INTRODUCTION. 411 ...

MIDDLESEX. A list of fees, distributed under seven honours or baronies, for which there is an original manuscript, is transcribed in the Book of Fees and epitomised very incorrectly in the Red Book of the Exchequer among the "inquisitions" assigned by the compilers to the twelfth and thirteenth years of the reign of John. The editor of that work has accordingly dated it "1210-1212", referring it to the period ending on the 2nd of May in the latter year. [2] Mr. J. Horace Round, perceiving that the texts in both books were derived from a common original, believed it to represent a return of June 1212, adding, however, that it was "made the basis for collecting the Aid for the marriage of the king's sister in 1235, the same personal names occurring in both lists". [3] He has been followed by others. [4] It is therefore necessary to explain in some detail why the original list is now referred to the year 1235.

(1) The writs of June 1212 required primarily lists of tenants in chief, and few of the dated returns thereto give much information about undertenants, whereas this document is a list of undertenants, specifying their respective holdings.

(2) The names in the document correspond exactly with those of the contributors to the Aid of 1235, there being no suggestion of any change of ownership between the preparation of the list and the actual collection of the money.

(3) Edmonton is mentioned in the document as belonging to the barony of William de Say, and William de Say, the tenant in chief of that manor, did not succeed his father, Geoffrey, until 1230. [5]

(4) Several of the names of tenants in the document are inconsistent with any date in the reign of John. Whereas Andrew Bukerel is entered in it as holding a fee at (West) Bedfont, Margery, the relict of Henry of Bedfont, had
________________________________________
[1] K.R. Memoranda Roll 14, m. 1.
[2] Pp. 542-544, cclxxxii-cclxxxiv. The only addition made in the Red Book is with regard to the surname of the tenant of East Bedfont, who may have been well known at Westminster as a clerk of the Earl of Cornwall. Cf. Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1232-1247, p. 456.
[3] The Commune of London, pp. xiv, 264, 265, 275, 277.
[4] V.C.H. Middlesex, vol. ii. p. 311.
[5] Historical MSS. Comm. Ninth Report, App. p. 30; Excerpta e Rotulis Finium, vol. i. p. 202.

412 A.D.1235-1236.

dower in a third of "the whole town" of West Bedfont as late as 1219. [1] Peter Butler (Boteiller), who is entered as holding three quarters of a fee in Northolt, is obviously the "Petrus Pincerna" who bought that manor in 1230. [2] Richard de Plessi, who is entered as holding a fifth of a fee at Enfield, acquired land there by purchase in 1232. [3] The William Longespe mentioned in connexion with Coleham was not William Longespe, Earl of Salisbury, who died in 1226, but his son of the same name, whose claim to the title was not recognised.

(5) The account of the collectors of the Aid of 1235 shows that Ralph de Auvers paid 8s. altogether, and we know that the levy was made in two instalments. A moiety of 8s. would be 4s. and this is the amount set against his name in the list under consideration, in the writing of the original scribe. Although no sums are set against the names of other persons in the list who held whole fees or simple fractions of fees, the assessment of which needed little arithmetical skill, it may have been thought desirable to calculate beforehand the exact amount to be levied from this particular tenant in respect of his complex holding of a quarter and a twentieth of a fee. ...

________________________________________
[1] Feet of Fines, Middlesex. For Andrew Bukerel, see Liber de Antiquis Legibus, p. 7, and Calendar of Charter Rolls, vol. iii. p. 430.
[2] Feet of Fines, Middlesex.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Catalogue of Ancient Deeds, B. 2351.
[5] K.R. Memoranda Roll 14, m. 14d. ...

MIDDLESEX. 475
MIDDELSEX.
S.ij.13.II.619-622. ...

Iidem reddunt compotum de v.s. iiij.d. de quinta parte unius feodi Ricardi de Plesset' de honore de Mandevill'.

[They give account of v.s. iiij.d. about one fifth of one fee of Richard de Plesset' of the honor of Mandeville]” (source: http://www.melocki.org.uk/liber/PartI_1235.html)

The book, 'London and Middlesex Fines: Henry III', A Calendar to the Feet of Fines for London & Middlesex: volume 1: Richard I - Richard III (1892), pp. 12-49, states the following with respect to a ‘Richard de Plesseto’:

“p. 19, 95. Richard de Plesseto, and Roger de Dantesye and Matilda, his wife, whom John, son of John, calls to warrant. Premises in Enefeud. Anno 16. [1231-32]” (source: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=78818)

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Jan 27, 2013, 3:18:59 AM1/27/13

to pd...@peterdale.com

Greetings,

I’m beginning to suspect that my research is a solitary task as I have heard very little from any SGM website participants. Notwithstanding, I have continued to make progress which I would like to share with you. I have found further corroboration that a Richard de Plescy may, indeed, be the father of ‘our’ Avelina de Plescy and her siblings (including Richard the Forester d. 1289). I note that in the Fine Rolls of Henry III a Richard de Plescy, of Essex, is noted as an executor of Richard de Wrotham’s estate (see below).

My present working theory is that the ‘our’ (i.e. the Somerset/Middlesex) Plescy family is not, as yet, connected with the Earl of Warwick. I’m guessing that with further research it will be discovered that the Enfield Plescy family is domestic, etc. In particular, I have found no evidentiary corroboration for the written pedigree’s suggestion that ‘our’ Plescy family is descended from a Hugh de Plescy, brother, uncle or nephew of Earl John. Likewise, I have found no evidence that Richard de Plescy’s (and Avelina et al’s) mother was named Muriel. She was, however, surly a Wrotham. I will report back post further inquiry.

As always (and with some anticipation!), I welcome any insight, commentary, corrections or additions.

Cheers,

Pete

****

The website of the ‘Henry III Fine Rolls Project’, provides the following search results for the following search term:

Search results
Search terms: '"richard of wrotham"'

• 35/46 (18 November 1250)
Concerning the debts of Richard of Wrotham. Because Richard of Wrotham, who has recently died, was bound to the king in several debts, order to the abbot and convent of Athelney to keep that sum of money, which has been deposited in their house, safely and in full until the king orders otherwise, so that they do not incur danger by this reason.

• 35/118 (28 December 1250)
[No date]. Concerning a fine of the executors of Richard of Wrotham. The abbot of Athelney in Somerset, Richard de Plessetis of Essex, Master William de Horton’ and John of Wrotham, parson, of Lincolnshire, and Geoffrey de Escoland’ of Somerset, executors of the testament of Richard of Wrotham, have made fine with the king by 400 m. for rendering all debts, chattels and wardships of the same Richard to the king, of which they are to render a moiety at the Exchequer of Easter in the thirty-fifth year and the other moiety at the Exchequer of Michaelmas next following. They have mainperned before the king (coram Rege) to make this payment, as aforesaid, together with William de Plessetis, John Blund and Thomas Picot, heirs of the same deceased.

• 35/281 (06 February 1251)
Concerning the homage and relief of the heirs of Richard of Wrotham. The king has taken the homage of John Blund and Thomas Picot, who have to wife the two sisters and heiresses of Richard of Wrotham, and the homage of William de Plessetis and Geoffrey Shoplond’, who are nephews and two heirs of the same Richard, for all lands and tenements which Richard held of the king in chief. Order to H. of Wingham that, having accepted security from the aforesaid heirs in Somerset and Dorset by his escheator there for rendering £15 to the king, he is to cause them to have full seisin of all lands and tenements, as above, having retained in the king’s hand the bailiwick of the forest which the same R. had in Somerset.

• 35/601 (15 May 1251)
For William de Plessetis, concerning a bailiwick of the forest committed to him, and for his parceners, the heirs of Richard of Wrotham. The king has rendered to William de Plessetis, who has the esnecy of the inheritance formerly of Richard of Wrotham, that bailiwick of the forest in the counties of Somerset and Dorset that Richard held from the king in chief, on condition that William shall render 14 bullocks and one steer per annum for the aforesaid bailiwick of Exmoor, or 10d. for each of them, and he will answer the king for the profit of the herbage of the aforesaid forest of Exmoor, and he is to satisfy his parceners and co-heirs of the aforesaid Richard in lands or tenements to the value of the portion pertaining to each of them of the aforesaid bailiwick. Order to G. de Langley, justice of the forest, that, having accepted good security from William for doing the foregoing, he is to cause him to have full seisin of the aforesaid bailiwick of the forest.

• 35/602 (15 May 1251)
For William de Plessetis, concerning a bailiwick of the forest committed to him, and for his parceners, the heirs of Richard of Wrotham. The aforesaid William and his parceners, the co-heirs of the aforesaid Richard, give the king £20 for the aforesaid bailiwick and for having their portion of the lands formerly of the same Richard to the value of the aforesaid bailiwick from the same William.

• 35/690 (26 May 1251)
Somerset. Cecilia, who was the wife of Richard of Wrotham, gives the king one mark for taking an assize of novel disseisin before H. of Bratton. Order to the sheriff of Somerset to take etc.

• 36/560 (10 May 1252)
Concerning the heirs of Richard of Wrotham. Because there is dispute between the heirs of Richard of Wrotham concerning the bailiwick of the forest of Somerset and Devon, and because the king has given them a day at Michaelmas in 15 days to hear their judgement concerning the aforesaid bailiwick, order to the barons of the Exchequer to place in respite the demand for £20 that they make from the same heirs by summons of the Exchequer for their relief of the same bailiwick, until the aforesaid day. By R. Walerand.
(source: http://www.finerollshenry3.org.uk/content/search/do_text_search)

Matt Tompkins

unread,

Jan 27, 2013, 6:30:05 AM1/27/13

On Jan 26, 1:25 am, "pd...@peterdale.com" <pd...@peterdale.com> wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Some interesting new information and a significant correction my the pedigree I posted earlier. I set forth below the following:
>
> (1) Abstracts of the IPMs of William Wroth, Esq. (d. 1408);

<snip>

>
> (1) IPMs of William Wroth
>
> C 137/71/18
>
> Somerset. Inquisition post mortem Monday after the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary 10 Hen IV [March 27, 1409]
> ... William Wrothe Esquire held in chief of the Lord King, on the day he died, in the county of Somerset, three parts of the manor of Newtonpleysey with advowson of the chapel there, by military service. And that he held of the King in chief by military service two tenements with appurtenances in Exton & Haukeryg with advowson of the church of Exton & Haukeryg. And that the said three parts are valued at 16 marks pa and the two tenements at 2 marks. And that William died on Monday before the feast of St Matthew the Apostle last past [September 19, 1408]. And that William son of the said William is his next heir, being 18 years of age.
>
> E 149/94/7
>
> This document is in very poor condition and is barely legible but it appears to be an Exchequer copy of the Chancery version. Hereafter follows important sections:
>
> Somerset
>
> ... died Monday before St Matthew ... John [sic?] son of the said William is his son & next heir aged 18 years & above. ...
>
> It seems curious that William is named as heir in the Chancery IPM while John is recorded as heir in the Exchequer IPM. Unless the IPMs refer to different properties?

Hello Pete,

The Exchequer versions of IPMs do sometimes differ from the Chancery
version in some details. We don't really know why, though in this
case it is presumably just a clerical error (assuming that both
versions have the same date and relate to the same properties - which
they probably do, because the Calendar of IPMs vol. 19 1405-13 entry
cites them both in relation to the same entry). From the related
entries in the Calendar of Fine Rolls vol. 13 1405-13, pp. 129, 183
(which I think you mentioned in an ealrier post), it seems clear that
William was the correct name.

I notice that the printed calendar says 'a third part of the manor',
and your researcher reports that it says 'three parts' - how certain
was he that the calendar is wrong here, do you know?

Matt Tompkins

CE Wood

unread,

Jan 27, 2013, 1:34:27 PM1/27/13

to pd...@peterdale.com

Hi Pete,

I cannot begin to tell you how marvelous is your erudition and, more importantly, is your willingness to share with us! I believe your lack of response may be that we are in awe.

I think you made a typo in the snippet below. The Feast of St. Matthew the Apostle is on September 21st. In 1408, that was on a Friday, and the Monday before was September 17th, not September 19th.

CE Wood

On Friday, January 25, 2013 5:25:28 PM UTC-8, pd...@peterdale.com wrote:
> Greetings,

>
>
> (1) IPMs of William Wroth

C 137/71/18

Somerset. Inquisition post mortem Monday after the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary 10 Hen IV [March 27, 1409]

... And that William died on Monday before the feast of St Matthew the Apostle last past [September 19, 1408].

Matt Tompkins

unread,

Jan 27, 2013, 4:23:32 PM1/27/13

> On Friday, January 25, 2013 5:25:28 PM UTC-8, pd...@peterdale.com wrote:
> > Greetings,
>
> > (1) IPMs of William Wroth
>
> C 137/71/18
>
> Somerset. Inquisition post mortem Monday after the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary 10 Hen IV [March 27, 1409]
> ... And that William died on Monday before the feast of St Matthew the Apostle last past [September 19, 1408].

On Jan 27, 6:34 pm, CE Wood <wood...@msn.com> wrote:
> Hi Pete,
>
> I cannot begin to tell you how marvelous is your erudition and, more importantly, is your willingness to share with us! I believe your lack of response may be that we are in awe.
>
> I think you made a typo in the snippet below. The Feast of St. Matthew the Apostle is on September 21st. In 1408, that was on a Friday, and the Monday before was September 17th, not September 19th.
>
> CE Wood

Also, the Monday after the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary in
10 Henry IV was 1st April 1409, not 27 March (the printed calendar
entry for this IPM has both dates correctly).

Matt

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Jan 28, 2013, 2:36:48 AM1/28/13

Greetings,

Thank you for the corrections CE & Matt – much appreciated. I will inquire re Matt’s question re “a third of the manor” v “three parts” and advise if I get clarity. I clearly need to take a remedial class in medieval dating!

I decided that I would methodically review all the published IPMs that I could access at the University of Toronto’s Robarts library for Durant and Wroth entries – volumes 1-26 (I will thereafter address Plescy (and derivatives) entries). I’m now ½ way through them. One very interesting IPM is that of ‘Elizabeth wife of William Palton, Knight’ in 1413. It sets forth the Wroth descent from John (d. 1396 m. Margaret, d of Sir Thomas Buckland) , John (d. 1407 m. d of Sir John Wellington) and John (d. 1412). It can be found in ‘Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other Analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office’, Vol. XX, 1-5 Henry V (1413-1418), edited by J. L. Kirby, published by Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, pp. 38-39.

#115 states, in part, “[Elizabeth wife of William Palton, Knight] died on 2 Sept. last. John Typtot, knight, is her kinsman and heir, being the son of Agnes, daughter of John Wroth, father of John Wroth, knight, father of John her brother, aged 30 years and more.”

#117 states, in part re Middlesex, “She held to herself and the heirs of her body ... [land description] ... in Enfield and Edmonton by a fine of 1369 ... by which John de Ekyndon, then vicar of Enfield, Thomas Payn, clerk, and Roger Derneford granted these premises to John Wroth and Margaret his wife for their lives with successive remainders to Francis de Enfield and the heirs of his body and the heirs of John Wroth. Francis de Enfield died without heirs of his body. Margaret died. John Wroth had issue John Wroth, knight, and Agnes. John Wroth, knight, inherited and had issue John and Elizabeth. This John died without heirs of his body. Then Elizabeth held.”

I thought this was a helpful clarification. I will have more to report as I work through the IPMs. I’m interested in any views, etc., as always, and thank you.

Regards,

Pete

Matt Tompkins

unread,

Jan 31, 2013, 12:17:22 PM1/31/13

On Jan 28, 7:36 am, "pd...@peterdale.com" <pd...@peterdale.com> wrote:
> I decided that I would methodically review all the published IPMs that I could access at the University of Toronto’s Robarts library for Durant and Wroth entries – volumes 1-26 (I will thereafter address Plescy (and derivatives) entries). I’m now ½ way through them. <snip>

It's possible to access quite a few of the printed calendars of
Inquisitions post Mortem on-line - there's a good collection of links
on Chris Phillips' wonderful Medieval English Genealogy website, here:

http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/sources/ipm.shtml

British History On-line are beginning to add the Calendars of IPMs to
their website, but so far only the two earliest volumes are there (up
to 1291) and it is likely to be quite a long time before any more
appear.

So far as I'm aware, excluding partial calendars focused on single
counties, no calendars covering between c1370 and c1497 are presently
available on-line. However In a couple of years' time the volumes
covering 1399-1447 will all have been put on-line by the university of
Winchester's Mapping the Medieval Landscape project, here:

http://www.inquisitionspostmortem.ac.uk/

There are not even any printed calendars for the period between 1447
and 1485 or after 1509. However the 1447-85 gap in the published
calendars is covered by the following lists of IPMs (these are not
full detailed calendars but mere lists, supplying little more than the
name of the subject of each inquisition) - the first can be found on-
line, the other two cannot:

J. Caley and J. Bayley, (eds), Calendarium inquisitionum post mortem
sive escaetarum ... vol. 4. [1413-1485] and Appendix [1216-1625]
(1828)

Inquisitions Post Mortem, Henry V - Richard III etc [; Inquisitions ad
quod damnum etc., Henry VII - Charles I (C138 - C142)], List and Index
Society, 268 (1998)

Name Index to Inquisitions Post Mortem, Henry V - Richard III (C138 -
C142), List and Index Society, 269 (1998)

Pete, I've just had a look in the List and Index Society's vol. 268
and can tell you that between 1447 and 1485 there is just one Wroth
IPM, and none for Plescy. The Wroth one is:

C 140/74/28, IPMs of John Wrothe esq., from Middlesex and Somerset, 20
Edw VI [1480-1].

The 1828 Calendarium supplies the extra information that Wrothe held
Durrant's manor in Enfield and Edmonton in Middx and the manor of
Newton Plescy and lands in Exton and Hawkridge in Somerset, plus the
advowsons of the last three places.

Matt Tompkins

Derek Howard

unread,

Jan 31, 2013, 12:50:29 PM1/31/13

On Thursday, January 31, 2013 6:17:22 PM UTC+1, Matt Tompkins wrote:
> There are not even any printed calendars for the period between 1447
> and 1485 or after 1509. However the 1447-85 gap in the published
> calendars is covered by the following lists of IPMs (these are not
> full detailed calendars but mere lists, supplying little more than the
> name of the subject of each inquisition) - the first can be found on-
> line, the other two cannot:
>
> J. Caley and J. Bayley, (eds), Calendarium inquisitionum post mortem
> sive escaetarum ... vol. 4. [1413-1485] and Appendix [1216-1625]
> (1828)
>
> Inquisitions Post Mortem, Henry V - Richard III etc [; Inquisitions ad
> quod damnum etc., Henry VII - Charles I (C138 - C142)], List and Index
> Society, 268 (1998)
>
> Name Index to Inquisitions Post Mortem, Henry V - Richard III (C138 -
> C142), List and Index Society, 269 (1998)
>
> Pete, I've just had a look in the List and Index Society's vol. 268
> and can tell you that between 1447 and 1485 there is just one Wroth
> IPM, and none for Plescy. The Wroth one is:
>
> C 140/74/28, IPMs of John Wrothe esq., from Middlesex and Somerset, 20
> Edw VI [1480-1].

The National Archives on-line Discovery catalogue covers this and provides the same data:
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C6545647

> The 1828 Calendarium supplies the extra information that Wrothe held
> Durrant's manor in Enfield and Edmonton in Middx and the manor of
> Newton Plescy and lands in Exton and Hawkridge in Somerset, plus the
> advowsons of the last three places.

Derek Howard

Matt Tompkins

unread,

Feb 1, 2013, 5:03:55 AM2/1/13

MILLARD A.R.

unread,

Feb 16, 2013, 3:19:27 PM2/16/13

to Colin B. Withers, gen-me...@rootsweb.com

> From: Colin B. Withers [mailto:Colin....@eumetsat.int]
> Sent: 16 February 2013 15:08

>
> This made me wonder if the reference given by Mr. Boyd was, in fact,
> correct, and that matters on the dorse of Patent Roll membranes are
> sometimes omitted from the published calendars, and just how much
> information is omitted (and the criteria for omission). Commissions can
> be very brief, and offer little useful information, but if material such
> as quoted by Mr. Boyd above was omitted by the Editors, I would be very
> surprised indeed.

The general introduction to the Calendar of Patent Rolls is in the first volume for Edward III.

See
http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/patentrolls/search.html

It includes this statement:

Character of entries omitted.

Every entry on the Patent Rolls is noticed in its due order in
this calendar, with the exception of ordinary commissions of gaol
delivery, and appointments of justices to try assizes of novel
disseisin, of mort dancestor, of darrein presentment, and the like.
The entries of these appointments occupy a considerable part of
the rolls of the reigns of Edward I. and II. and of the early years
of the reign of Edward III., but the scanty information contained
in them is not given in these Calendars.* It may hereafter be
made accessible to topographers and genealogists in a tabular form.

* Some account of these Commissions will be found in the Forty-second Report
of the Deputy Keeper of the Records, pp. 473-476, and in the Forty-third Report,
pp. 371-374.

http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/patentrolls/e3v1/front/Edward3vol1pre0011.pdf

Best wishes

Andrew
--
Andrew Millard - A.R.M...@durham.ac.uk
Bodimeade genealogy: http://community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/Bodimeade/
My family history: http://community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/
GenUKI Middx + London: http://homepages.gold.ac.uk/genuki/MDX/ + ../LND/

Colin B. Withers

unread,

Feb 18, 2013, 10:17:35 AM2/18/13

to Colin B. Withers, gen-me...@rootsweb.com

Many thanks Andrew for pointing out the omission policy in the published Calendars of Patent Rolls.

I have now found that the Calendar of Patent Rolls for 4 Edw I that I referred to below does NOT have the entry quoted by W. Boyd in Misc. Gen. Her., but the Calendar of Patent Rolls for 4 Edw I that appear in the 45th Report of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records DOES have the missing entry.

Guess I am going to have to check both Calendars in future (lesson learnt).

Wibs

-----Original Message-----
From: gen-mediev...@rootsweb.com [mailto:gen-mediev...@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Colin B. Withers
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 4:08 PM
To: gen-me...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Completeness of the published calendars of Patent Rolls

I have been doing a little more research on the Blanchard and d'Alencon families of Lincolnshire, when something caught my eye in Mr. Boyd's 'Dalison Notes' in Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica, 2nd Series, Vol iii, page 88:

Lincoln
Elias de Bekingham et Johannes de Metingham consignantur as assisam nove disseisine capiendam quam Johannes de Alazun et Matillis uxor ejus arrainiaverunt versus Rogerum de Arcy et alios de tenementis in Nettleton.
Patent Roll, 4 Edw. 1, m.33d., A.D. 1275-1276

I looked up this Patent Roll entry in the published calendar to see if it offered any further information, and was surprised to see it not listed at all.

I checked all names and places in the index, nothing. I checked the membrane number, nothing. So I wondered if the reference given was in error, after all, pleas of novel disseisin are normally on the Plea Rolls (aren't they?). But I did a word search of the published calendar to see if novel disseisin cases cropped up in the Patent Rolls, and there were a few references, including a very interesting note on page 243 of 5 Edw I, which states:

[The dorse ends with seven commissions to take assises of novel dissesin.]

http://archive.org/stream/calendarpatentr07offigoog#page/n256/mode/2up

This made me wonder if the reference given by Mr. Boyd was, in fact, correct, and that matters on the dorse of Patent Roll membranes are sometimes omitted from the published calendars, and just how much information is omitted (and the criteria for omission). Commissions can be very brief, and offer little useful information, but if material such as quoted by Mr. Boyd above was omitted by the Editors, I would be very surprised indeed.

I would appreciate any thoughts on this matter.

Wibs

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Colin B. Withers

unread,

Feb 18, 2013, 6:19:27 PM2/18/13

to gen-me...@rootsweb.com

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Mar 28, 2013, 3:33:51 AM3/28/13

to gen-me...@rootsweb.com

Greetings,

Please find below a very interesting item I found on the Boston University School of Law website dealing with a lawsuit involving John Wroth (d. 1375) and his wife Maud. It relates to an ancestor of both Maud and John Garton. I suspect that this is likely to be via Maud’s great-grandmother Avelina de Placetis’s family and, perhaps, her mother and wife of NN de Placetis (brother of William de Placetis and father of Richard de Placetis – Forester) as both Maud and John Garton descend from NN de Placetis. I have not reviewed it in detail so it may, however, just relate to the de Placetis sister’s inheritance upon the death of Richard de Placetis. Still, it is an exciting to find and I welcome any commentary, suggestions for further inquiry, etc. Many thanks.

Cheers,

Pete

********

The Boston University School of Law website provides the following summary of a legal proceeding involving, among others, John Wroth and his wife Maud:

“Legal History: The Year Books
Record Detail

Previous Record
Next Record

Image

For an image of this report text from the Vulgate Year Books Reprint, click here.

Seipp Number: Year Court Writ Marginal Heading

1356.111 1356 Common Pleas Scire facias
Vide plus Hill. xxxi.

Term Regnal Year King: Plea Number Folio Number

Mich. 30 Edw. 3 [65] 30a-31a

Serjeants/ Justices Plaintiff Surname Plaintiff First Name v.
Defendant Surname Defendant First Name

Birton, Richard de Sjt Burt (for D)
Greene, Henry JCP
Birton, Richard de Sjt Burt
Greene, Henry JCP
Birton, Richard de Sjt Burt
Birton, Richard de Sjt Burt
Sadelyngstanes, Hugh de Sjt Sadl (for D)
Moubray, John de Sjt Momb (for D)
Skipwyth, William de Sjt (for P)
Sadelyngstanes, Hugh de Sjt Sadl
Skipwyth, William de Sjt
Birton, Richard de Sjt Burt
Ssadelyngstanes, Hugh de Sjt
Skipwyth, William de Sjt
Sadelyngstanes, Hugh de Sjt
Sadelyngstanes, Hugh de Sjt Beauchamp Roger of

Other Plaintiffs Other Names Places Other Defendants

Wroth, John of
Wroth, Maud, wife of J. of
Garton, J. of
Salyn, relative (cousin) and ancestor of J. of Garton
K., relative (cosin) and ancestor of Maud
Nic.
Alice, wife of Nic.
D., father of Salyn and K. and Alice
Edward I, King of England Chancery
King's Bench

Abridgements Cross-References Statutes

Incipit (First Line) Number of Lines

Roger de Beauchamp suist un Scire facias vers R. Damor' d'aver execucion in valu per reason d'un garrante 50
Process and Pleading

Language Notes (Law French)

Abstract Context

perhaps Sir Richard Damory, sheriff of Oxford and Buckingham from 1308 to 1310, forester of Whittlewood Forest in Buckinghamshire from 1308, constable of Oxford Castle from 1311 to 1321, and steward of the royal household from 1311 to 1325, elder brother of s.v. Damory [Amory], Sir Roger, d. 1322, baron and courtier, in Oxford DNB. A Richard Daumary or de Amery was Sheriff of Oxfordshire and Berkshire from 21 Apr. 1308 to 6 Feb. 1311. A John Wroth was Lord Mayor of London from 1360-1361.

Commentary & Paraphrase

Roger of Beauchamp sued a Scire facias against R. Damore to have execution to the value by reason of a warranty proven (dereign') previously by a writ of Warranty of charter, and by reason of one part of 108 shillings of rent issuing from the tenements, of which the warranty was proven (dereigne), at the suit of J. of Wroth and his wife Maud', and J. of Garton. And the writ said that, whereas R. of B. had recovered the warranty of certain lands, fees, and advowsons, and bailiwicks against R. Damore, and whereas J. of G., relative (cousin) and heir of one Salyn, and John of Wroth and his wife M., relative (cosin) and heir of one K., made suggestion to us, how a partition was made between the aforesaid Salyn and K. and one N. and his wife Alice, daughters and heir of one D., of lands and tenements that belonged to the aforesaid D. in the Chancery of Edward I, and because the portion of the wife of Nic. was worth more than were the portions of the other parceners, N. and A. granted for them and their heirs to be bound to the other parceners in 112 shillings eight pence halfpenny, that is, to Salyn and to her heirs forever 56 shillings four pence, and to K. the other 56 shillings four pence to pay from year to year, and in case the rent was in arrears, that it would be levied from their lands and their chattels in this county and in other counties. They sued a Scire facias against the aforesaid Roger, tenant of the lands that belonged to N. and A., that he be before the king on a certain day to show if he knew anything to say why 112 shillings eight pence halfpenny of arrears of the aforesaid rent should not be levied from the aforesaid lands, and paid to J. G. and J. of W. and his wife Maud. On that day Roger came, and execution was awarded against him, so that he made to garnish the aforesaid Ric' if he knew anything to say why R. should not have to the value of the aforesaid rent. The defendant demanded a hearing (oyer) of the record by which the warranty was proven (dereign), (Latin begins) and he had it (Latin ends). And then he demanded a hearing (oyer) of the record by which the plaintiff supposed that he had lost. Greene JCP said that the record was not in this Court (cieins), and even if it were here, the defendant would not have a hearing (oyer) of this, because it was a good answer to say that there was no such record. The defendant said that the writ mentioned both the records, and if this record had not been, the writ did not lie. Therefore it seemed that the hearing (l'oyer) of this was grantable. Greene JCP said that the writ was warranted on the record here, and not on the other. The defendant said that the writ mentioned that there was a Scire facias sued in the King's Bench by reason of a partition made in the Chancery, which was the footing (pied) and foundation of the Scire facias, by which he lost. And he prayed a hearing (oyer) of this partition. (Latin begins) And this was not allowed (Latin ends). The defendant asked if he did not have anything that he could have defended his title.

(Latin begins) On another day (Latin ends) two serjeants challenged as before, and demanded a hearing (oyer) of the record by which it was supposed that the plaintiff had lost. The plaintiff said that, since the defendant had a day now to give an answer, and now he did not say anything else except the same challenge from which he was previously ousted, judgment, and he prayed execution. And then they were ousted from their challenge. The defendant said that the writ could not be warranted without the record, and this was not in this Court (cieins), and thus the writ issued without warrant. Judgment of the writ. The plaintiff said, judgment, since the warranty was recorded in this Court (cieinz) to a writ to which the defendant was a party, which should warrant this suit, and the rest was only a suggestion outside, to which the defendant could have an answer, as to say that the plaintiff did not lose, and he did not answer. Judgment, and the plaintiff prayed execution. The defendant said that the plaintiff could have made the one record and the other to come in one place, and he should have done this, and out of the two he could have sued a good writ. (Latin begins) Notwithstanding this (Latin ends) he was ousted. The defendant said, again judgment of the writ, because the plaintiff supposed at the beginning that the rent was granted to S. and K. severally, and then he supposed that they were in common, where this was contradictory to the grant as the writ supposed in itself. The plaintiff said that this challenge was given by him when the Scire facias was sued against him to have execution of the rent, and he was ousted. The defendant said, judgment of the writ, which supposed at the beginning that the land of the husband as well as the land of the wife was charged to pay his rent. And then the writ said that execution was sued against him as tenant of the land, which belonged to the wife only. (Latin begins) And this was not allowed (Latin ends). The defendant said that the Court had heard how the plaintiff demanded execution to have to the value, by reason of a warranty proven by force of a fine levied in this Court (cieinz) of certain land, manors, and bailiwicks in the 25th year of the present king, by reason of a recovery of 112 shillings eight pence halfpenny of rent recovered against him, as against the tenant of the aforesaid lands, manors, etc., which were charged with the same rent in the time of Edward I by reason of a partition made between parceners of the same lands and other lands in the Chancery of Edward I etc. And because the lands and manors thus allotted in partition were worth more than were the portion of the other two parceners, by reason of this surplusage the rent was granted, and by his writ he supposed that the writ by which he lost was brought against him in the 29th year of the present king, and also that the rent of 112 shillings eight pence halfpenny then was not in arrears for one year before, because no more was demanded against him (by his own supposition) except the arrears of one year, so he himself supposed that the land was charged with the same rent at the time the fine was levied by reason of the partition. And the warranty proven extended only to the land, of which he had lost nothing, because he supposed that he himself was tenant of the whole of the same land. Therefore the defendant demanded judgment if the plaintiff should have execution.”
(source: http://www.bu.edu/phpbin/lawyearbooks/display.php?id=13078)

Patricia A. Junkin

unread,

Mar 28, 2013, 11:14:56 AM3/28/13

to pd...@peterdale.com, gen-me...@rootsweb.com

I would check carefully the conclusion of some of the family connections on this site. Nevertheless, it is a wonderful site and very helpful.
Pat

On Mar 28, 2013, at 2:33 AM, pd...@peterdale.com wrote:

> Greetings,
>

> Please find below a very interesting item I found on the Boston University School of Law website dealing with a lawsuit involving John Wroth (d. 1375) and his wife Maud. It relates to an ancestor of both Maud and John Garton. I suspect that this is likely to be via Maudï¿½s great-grandmother Avelina de Placetisï¿½s family and, perhaps, her mother and wife of NN de Placetis (brother of William de Placetis and father of Richard de Placetis ï¿½ Forester) as both Maud and John Garton descend from NN de Placetis. I have not reviewed it in detail so it may, however, just relate to the de Placetis sisterï¿½s inheritance upon the death of Richard de Placetis. Still, it is an exciting to find and I welcome any commentary, suggestions for further inquiry, etc. Many thanks.

>
> Cheers,
>
> Pete
>
> ********
>
> The Boston University School of Law website provides the following summary of a legal proceeding involving, among others, John Wroth and his wife Maud:
>

> ï¿½Legal History: The Year Books

> (Latin begins) On another day (Latin ends) two serjeants challenged as before, and demanded a hearing (oyer) of the record by which it was supposed that the plaintiff had lost. The plaintiff said that, since the defendant had a day now to give an answer, and now he did not say anything else except the same challenge from which he was previously ousted, judgment, and he prayed execution. And then they were ousted from their challenge. The defendant said that the writ could not be warranted without the record, and this was not in this Court (cieins), and thus the writ issued without warrant. Judgment of the writ. The plaintiff said, judgment, since the warranty was recorded in this Court (cieinz) to a writ to which the defendant was a party, which should warrant this suit, and the rest was only a suggestion outside, to which the defendant could have an answer, as to say that the plaintiff did not lose, and he did not answer. Judgment, and the plaintiff prayed execution. The defendant said that the plaintiff could have made the one record and the other to come in one place, and he should have done this, and out of the two he could have sued a good writ. (Latin begins) Notwithstanding this (Latin ends) he was ousted. The defendant said, again judgment of the writ, because the plaintiff supposed at the beginning that the rent was granted to S. and K. severally, and then he supposed that they were in common, where this was contradictory to the grant as the writ supposed in itself. The plaintiff said that this challenge was given by him when the Scire facias was sued against him to have execution of the rent, and he was ousted. The defendant said, judgment of the writ, which supposed at the beginning that the land of the husband as well as the land of the wife was charged to pay his rent. And then the writ said that execution was sued against him as tenant of the land, which belonged to the wife only. (Latin begins) And this was not allowed (Latin ends). The defendant said that the Court had heard how the plaintiff demanded execution to have to the value, by reason of a warranty proven by force of a fine levied in this Court (cieinz) of certain land, manors, and bailiwicks in the 25th year of the present king, by reason of a recovery of 112 shillings eight pence halfpenny of rent recovered against him, as against the tenant of the aforesaid lands, manors, etc., which were charged with the same rent in the time of Edward I by reason of a partition made between parceners of the same lands and other lands in the Chancery of Edward I etc. And because the lands and manors thus allotted in partition were worth more than were the portion of the other two parceners, by reason of this surplusage the rent was granted, and by his writ he supposed that the writ by which he lost was brought against him in the 29th year of the present king, and also that the rent of 112 shillings eight pence halfpenny then was not in arrears for one year before, because no more was demanded against him (by his own supposition) except the arrears of one year, so he himself supposed that the land was charged with the same rent at the time the fine was levied by reason of the partition. And the warranty proven extended only to the land, of which he had lost nothing, because he supposed that he himself was tenant of the whole of the same land. Therefore the defendant demanded judgment if the plaintiff should have execution.ï¿½
> (source: http://www.bu.edu/phpbin/lawyearbooks/display.php?id=13078)

pd...@peterdale.com

unread,

Apr 15, 2013, 3:32:07 AM4/15/13

to pd...@peterdale.com, gen-me...@rootsweb.com

Greetings,

Just a short note to provide a link to a document which references both Richard de Wrotham and William de Plessetis post Richard’s death in 1250. I believe that it mentions “co-heirs” of Richard but am uncertain. If anyone is interested and has the time/capacity to review and summarize the attached perhaps it will assist in enlightening the group as per the Wrotham and Plessetis families. Many thanks.

Cheers,

Pete

********

‘Excerpta e Rotulis Finium in Turri Londinensi’, (1836), Henry III, Vol. II – 1246-1272, printed by the Commissioners on the Public Records, p. 105 (1251):

http://books.google.ca/books?id=J4ZTAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA105&lpg=PA105&dq=%22de+wrotham%22+%22de+plessetis%22&source=bl&ots=cMKdrYEzoV&sig=xAX_bSHg3RS7IYr2wDqpsfotzxQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nalrUeOPAaeR2wWxzoHICg&ved=0CE8Q6AEwBzge#v=onepage&q=%22de%20wrotham%22%20%22de%20plessetis%22&f=false

Matt Tompkins

unread,

Apr 15, 2013, 7:48:47 AM4/15/13

unread,

Aug 19, 2013, 4:40:24 AM8/19/13

pd...@peterdale.com wrote:

>
> There is an interesting reference above dated 1412-13 in the last entry on p. 107 to John Germyn being the brother of John Germyn and son of William Germyn.
>
> I’m uncertain how to interpret this, i.e. was there 2 siblings named John Germyn?

It's quite possible. This certainly did happen and not just in medieval
times as I know if an instance as late as the mid-C18th where the pair
were not just siblings but twins.

Such siblings were usually differentiated by terms such as "the first
born" or "the younger". As no such differentiation is made here ISTM
that there was only one brother surviving at this time.

--
Ian

The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang
at austonley org uk

Andrew Lancaster via

unread,

Oct 25, 2015, 5:55:42 AM10/25/15

to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com

Dear List

First, I give thanks to Pete Dale for his various posts on the Wroths,
including the recent one which focuses on the relationship of Elizabeth
Jermy née Wroth to the rest of the family.

Keeping my focus on this, given the wealth of information provided, I
want to confirm in a few words what we can say. I will try to summarize,
and I would ask for confirmation that the summary is correct.

1. From the Jermy pedigree in the Norfolk visitation we see the name of
her father was William Wroth Esq. of Enfield. This at least indicates an
Esquire status, and a place he is associated with.

2. The armorial evidence has been mentioned a few times, but this only
indicates the family Elizabeth was from, which does not seem unclear,
with the implication she was an heiress. Or is that evidence more
specific for some reason?

3. From the Wroth pedigree in the Essex visitation, the position of
Elizabeth is made clear in a pedigree, but the problem is apparently
that this pedigree is one that seems to contain errors? Indeed her
father is called "William or Thomas" (esq. of Durance in Enfield) which
does not inspire confidence! But in any case this pedigree associates
him more specifically with Durants in Enfield and names his wife as
Margarett née Newdigatt.

4. The complicated bit. If I understand correctly Matthew Tompkins has
found reasonably clear evidence that the William Wroth esq. associated
John Jermyn esq. in various land-related records, died DURING a legal
case around 1450, thus implying that the father-in-law of Jermyn was the
one mentioned as having died in Fine Rolls for 1450 and 1451.

Have I got that right, and am I missing any other evidence?

Concerning this William, can we say with confidence that he is the one
mentioned in the IPM of an earlier William, 1408, son and next heir aged
18 years and more?

And who was his wife?

Best Regards
Andrew

Matt Tompkins

unread,

Oct 25, 2015, 7:59:01 AM10/25/15

On Sunday, 25 October 2015 09:55:42 UTC, Andrew Lancaster via wrote:
<snip>

> 4. The complicated bit. If I understand correctly Matthew Tompkins has
> found reasonably clear evidence that the William Wroth esq. associated
> John Jermyn esq. in various land-related records, died DURING a legal
> case around 1450, thus implying that the father-in-law of Jermyn was the
> one mentioned as having died in Fine Rolls for 1450 and 1451.
>
> Have I got that right, and am I missing any other evidence?
>

<snip>

It was Pete and Chris who found the evidence - I have only commented on it. As I understand it, the evidence shows two things:

(1) that William Wroth of Somerset died some time before 8 May 1450, on which day someone went to the Chancery clerks in Leicester and procured the issue of the writs of diem clausit extremum (we don't know exactly when he died, though his IPMs would probably tell us - there are 2 of them, one from Somerset, the other from London, in the National Archives, C 139/137/6), and

(2) some time more than a month later, during Trinity term (10 June - 1 July 1450) the attorney acting for a William Wroth and John Jermyn in a lawsuit concerning lands in Forncett, Norfolk, made an appearance in the court of Common Pleas on behalf of his clients. The attorney made a further appearance on behalf of his clients in Michaelmas term (9 Oct - 28 Nov 1450). The entry on the roll was later vacated, but the reason for the vacation or its date apparently do not appear on the roll.

So there is some uncertainty as to whether the William Wroth whose attorney was making appearances on his behalf in Westminster in June-July and Oct-Nov 1450 was the same man as the one who died before 5 May 1450. I hesitate to be categorical on the point - it would be useful to hear from someone who has a detailed understanding of Common Pleas procedure and practice (Vance Mead?) - but I'm doubtful whether they could be the same man.

Matt Tompkins

Peter G. M. Dale

unread,

Oct 26, 2015, 10:03:53 PM10/26/15

Hi Matt & Andrew,

Thank you for your posts and the information therein. I appreciate your views Matt and welcome any additional commentary from others who have expertise with the Common Pleas procedure and practice. However, subject to qualifications I identified above, it is still my current proposition that William Wroth, esq. (d. 1450) is the individual who was a party to litigation dealing with property in Forncett, Norfolk with John Jermy, esq. and the father of John's wife Elizabeth Wroth. I believe this for the following reasons:

1. A William Wroth, esq. from Enfield/Durants is identified as the father of an Elizabeth (Wroth) Jermy who married John Jermy, esq. of Metfield in various printed pedigrees (both Wroth and Jermy);
2. The heraldic evidence points to a Jermy of Metfield and Wroth of Enfield marriage including on the tomb of sons of that purported marriage John Jermy, esq and his brother Thomas Jermy, esq.;
3. There is circumstantial documentary evidence that a John Jermy of Metfield and a William Wroth of Enfield had some form of business relationship;
4. There are no currently identified alternative William Wroth's that fit (I recognize that the absence of evidence of an individual from the 15th century does not equal the absence of an individual);
5. The senior Wroth line had already expired in the male line by the time of the purported Wroth - Jermy marriage;
6. Only one son - William Wroth - is identified along with his sister Christina Westwood in their father William Wroth's will dated November 9, 1407 (father of William Wroth d. approximately May 1, 1450); and
7. The Wroth-Jermy litigation was vacated at the 2nd session following the death of William Wroth (d. May 1, 1450) which is consistent with the death of a litigant (among a number of other factual events I am sure).

The argument against the William Wroth, esq. litigant in the Wroth-Jermy litigation being William Wroth d. May 1, 1450 is the approximately 1 month + time period that expired between his death and the reference to William Wroth, esq. in the June 1450 proceeding. There is, I believe, no other evidence to mitigate against William Wroth, esq. of Enfield/Newton Plecy d. 1450 being the litigant.

I do not have nearly enough experience to say whether a one month delay in conveying knowledge of Wroth's death in Somerset to his son-in-law John Jermy, esq. in Norfolk or, perhaps more likely, a failure by Jermy to convey same to his counsel is to be expected or unusual or a understandable chance event in the mid-15th century.

Cheers,

Pete

Below FYI I have set forth text of William Wroth d. 1450's IPM:

"IPM of William Wroth

Writ to the mayor of London and the escheator in the same city.
William Wroth', esquire.
Attested at Leycestr' 8 May 28 Henry [VI].

Another writ to the escheator in the county of Somerset.
William Wroth', esquire.
Same date.

Delivered into court 17 November 29 Henry VI.
Inquisition taken at Guyhald' [sic] of the city of London' before Thomas Chalton', mayor and escheator.
Jury named.
They say that William Wroth', esquire, was seised in his demesne as of fee tail with Aueria, his wife, who survives, and the heirs of their bodies
of the gift and feoffment of William Trodebek', esquire, on the day he died of 1 tenement called le Bull' Hede with 2 shops attached to the same
adjoining tenement, situated in the parish of All Saints in Honylane in the ward of Chepe of London'.
And they say that the tenement with the 2 shops for default of such issue shall remain to the aforesaid William Wroth' and the heirs of his body lawfully begotten.
And they say that the tenement with the 2 shops in default of such issue of William shall remain to the aforesaid Aueria and the heirs of her body.
And that in default of such issue of Aueria it shall remain to the right heirs of the said William Wroth' for ever.
And they say that the tenement with the 2 shops is held of the lord king in free burgage just as all the city of London' is held.
And they say that the tenement with the 2 shops is worth yearly beyond reprises 10 marks.
And that William Wroth' died on the 1 May last past.
And that John Wroth', esquire, is the son and heir of William Wroth' and Aueria, his wife, begotten of their bodies and is of the age of 26 years and more.
Furthermore they say that William Wroth' held no more lands, tenements or shops within the city of London' of the lord king or of any other on the day he died in demesne nor in service.
25 October 29 Henry VI.

Delivered into court 17 July 28 [Henry VI.]
Somerset
Inquisition taken at Briggewater in the county of Somerset before John Tyler, escheator in the aforesaid county, Monday next after the feast of the Nativity of St John the Baptist, 28 Henry VI.
Jury named.
They say that William Wroth', esquire, held of the lord king in chief in his demesne as of fee on the day he died a third part of the manor of Newton' Pleysey
with the advowson of the chapel in the same place, by the third turn of the presentation when it shall be vacant, by military service.
And that William Wroth' similarly held on the day he died in his demesne as of fee of the lord king in chief by military service 2 tenements in Exton' and Hawkerygge
in the aforesaid county with the advowsons of the churches of Exton' and Hawkerygge by the third turn of the presentation when they shall be vacant.
And that the third part is worth yearly in all issues by true value beyond reprises 16 marks.
And that the 2 tenements are worth yearly [etc] 26 shillings, 8 pence.
And that William Wroth' died on 1 May last past.
And that William Wroth' held no other lands [etc] of the lord king in chief or of any other in demesne nor in service in the aforesaid county on the day he died.
And that John Wroth', esquire, is son and next heir of William Wroth' and is of the age of 26 years and more."

Matt Tompkins

unread,

Oct 27, 2015, 4:53:33 AM10/27/15

On Tuesday, 27 October 2015 02:03:53 UTC, Peter G. M. Dale wrote:
<snip>

> 7. The Wroth-Jermy litigation was vacated at the 2nd session following the death of William Wroth (d. May 1, 1450) which is consistent with the death of a litigant (among a number of other factual events I am sure).
>
> The argument against the William Wroth, esq. litigant in the Wroth-Jermy litigation being William Wroth d. May 1, 1450 is the approximately 1 month + time period that expired between his death and the reference to William Wroth, esq. in the June 1450 proceeding. There is, I believe, no other evidence to mitigate against William Wroth, esq. of Enfield/Newton Plecy d. 1450 being the litigant.
>
> I do not have nearly enough experience to say whether a one month delay in conveying knowledge of Wroth's death in Somerset to his son-in-law John Jermy, esq. in Norfolk or, perhaps more likely, a failure by Jermy to convey same to his counsel is to be expected or unusual or a understandable chance event in the mid-15th century.
>

<snip>

Point 7 isn't quite right, Pete. The lawsuit wasn't vacated in the second law term following William's death - rather it was progressed by William's lawyer in the normal manner in that term, and the entry recording it in that term's roll was vacated at some later date (we don't know exactly when).

It would be surprising if a landed gentleman's lawyer was unaware of his own client's death 6 weeks after it occurred (ie in Trinity term), but Trinity term 1450 was an unusual one. It was the time of Jack Cade's rebellion, when East Anglia and the south east, and London and Westminster in particular, were experiencing considerable disorder and social dislocation. However I find it difficult to believe that the lawyer didn't know of the death in Michaelmas term, more than 5 months after it occurred,.

However it seems all the other evidence points to the plaintiff William being the same man as the deceased William, so the continuation of the lawsuit by his lawyer on behalf of a deceased client has to be explained away. To my mind the most likely explanation would be fraud - that Jermyn was the prime motivating force behind the lawsuit, with William merely consenting to be a co-plaintiff, and that Jermyn and his lawyer knowingly and improperly continued the case after William's death in order to obtain some advantage - perhaps in the hope of forcing the defendants to settle out of court before they became aware of the death. Though I'd have thought by October their own lawyer would have known of it.

Matt

Peter G. M. Dale

unread,

Oct 27, 2015, 6:25:29 PM10/27/15

Hi Matt,

Thank you for your clarifications - much appreciated. Your hypotheses regarding John Jermy, esq. engaging in dubious litigation tactics may be accurate - we'll likely never know for sure. However, assuming it is the same John Jermy, esq. (which I believe it is), Colin Richmond in his book 'John Hopton: A Fifteenth Century Suffolk Gentleman', (1981), Cambridge University Press, takes a dim view of Jermy and his son without providing much background (see pp. 249-50). Jermy's character is similarly questioned in 'The Paston Letters - A.D. 1422-1509', (1904), edited by James Gairdner in Vol. I - pp. 89, 91-93 and Vol. II - 183, 235, 241-43.

Cheers,

Pete

Peter G. M. Dale

unread,

Oct 27, 2015, 11:07:46 PM10/27/15

One additional comment of unknown significance, according to Gairdner in Vol. II of the Paston Letters referenced above, John Jermy, esq. was appointed Sheriff of Norfolk in the end of 1450 (Note 2 on p. 183). According to Richmond in John Hopton, he was Sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk in 1450-51 (Note 353 on p. 249) and a JP from 1450-58 (Note 353 on pp. 249-50) for both of which he references Gairdner. Again, he is described in somewhat disparaging terms in serving in these capacities.

Peter G. M. Dale

unread,

Oct 28, 2015, 1:27:16 AM10/28/15

For links to the above referenced items please see:

* The Paston Letters - Vol. I - https://archive.org/stream/pastonletters01gairuoft#page/n9/mode/2up

* The Paston Letters - Vol. II - https://archive.org/details/pastonletters02gairuoft

* John Hopton - A Fifteenth Century Suffolk Gentleman - https://books.google.ca/books?id=Y0hkh_WD01oC&pg=PA264&dq=%22John+Hopton%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAWoVChMI1KbLrbbkyAIVSGg-Ch2aSQVn#v=onepage&q=%22John%20Hopton%22&f=false

0 new messages