On Monday, June 5, 2023 at 10:59:21 AM UTC-7, Will Johnson wrote:
> You're setting up a strawman to knock down.
> I did not refer to the Visitation.
>
> The BHO link I cited specifically refers to Joan's IPM, and how the land passed to John's heir.
> They do not claim there that Joan was the mother, and in fact the wording used "John's widow" instead of "isabel's mother" would suggest the very situation I stated.
>
> Joan as the mother of Isabel would not have to "demise" part of her holdings to Isabel, also the advowson passed to Isabel while Joan was yet living.
>
> They use a curious wording that Joan had a "life interest" instead of claiming that she had "dower rights". That could just be picky on my part, but the way these lands passed iimplies to me that Isabel was the heiress, or at least the wife of the heir, and that Joan was not the mother of the heir(ess).
The Paveley family on pages 111-112 in East Anglia’s History, Studies in Honour of Norman Scarfe, edited by Harper-Bill, Carole Rawcliffe and Wilson (2002). It is at JSTOR website
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7722/j.ctt163tbrr , but you need a subscription at JSTOR to read it unless you can long in through your local library. It states that John Paveley, Jr., was a King’s knight to Richard II, who died as a young man in 1393 after his father (actually it was 1392, before his father – see below). It states that in 1387 he had married Isabel at the command of the King (see record cited below). It states that it is virtually certain that Sir John Paveley, Jr.’s father was Sir John Paveley the elder, three times sheriff of Northamptonshire between 1379 and 1390. Sir John Paveley, Sr., died between June and October 1393. Supporting references are cited in footnotes 18, 19 and 20. Footnote 18 contain an English translation of excerpts from John Paveley, Jr.’s Will. So, I am not alone in my opinion that John Paveley, Jr., not his wife Isabel, was a child of John Paveley, Sr. (“the elder”) who died between June and October 1393.
John Paveley, Jr.’s Will was probated in the PCC on January 7, 1393 (PRO PROB 11/1/60)
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/D7619473 (mis-catalogued under the surname Paneley). It is written in Latin. I think the date it was written is there in Latin, but I cannot decipher it. The relevant translated excerpts of this Will in footnote 18 of the above-mentioned article are follows: “He made his will . . . at Dover on Thursday in the feast of St. Andrew 13 [blank]; it was proved at St. Paul’s cathedral on 7 January 1393 viz. 1394. He was to be buried where God willed he left most of his goods, including “uno magno Nowche quod est in custodia Ricardi Stury’, to his wife, but a gold cup given him by the earl of Nottingham he left to his father and another given him by Richard II he left to his mother. . . . His wife, Isabel, John Warwick and his ‘dear friend’ Richard Stury were to be his executors.”
Regarding the death date of John Paveley, Jr., this is established to have occurred overseas in 1392, probably in battle fighting for the king, in an account of his death on page 510-511 of The Westminister Chronicle 1391-1394.
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Westminster_Chronicle_1381_1394/U3ZnAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bshm=nce/1&bsq=Johannes%20Paule (in Latin) and
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Westminster_Chronicle_1381_1394/U3ZnAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=John%20Paveley&bshm=nce/1 Unfortunately, only excepts are available at this links. The date 1392 is at the top of page 510 and 510 which applied to the matter in the excerpts.
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Westminster_Chronicle_1381_1394/U3ZnAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Dominus%20vespares&bshm=nce/1 https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Westminster_Chronicle_1381_1394/U3ZnAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=choir%20Vespers&bshm=nce/1
Joan (Stury) Paveley’s IPM was conducted in 1414. There are 3 documents at the PRO (C 138/5, no.55, E 136/148, no 1 and E 149, no. 17). Here is what we learn from this IPM. Sometime prior to his death (which occurred by October 1394) John Paveley (the elder) put his manor of Paulerspury into a trust for the benefit of his wife, Joan, her life, the full terms of which are not specified. It seems to say that at that time Isabel was “then the wife of John Paveley junior”. This suggests that the trust deed was granted prior to John Paveley (the younger’s) death in 1392. On February 8, 1395, the trustees deeded Paulerspury to Joan, widow of John Paveley (the elder) for her lifetime and for one year more with the REMAINDER back to themselves. The REVERSION they granted to Isabel. Isabel remarried to John St. John (between August 18, 1394 and June 16, 1395). In 1403, Joan (Stury) Paveley, widow, attorned to Isabel, wife of John St. John with some exceptions, providing that after her death that John St. John and Isabel and their heirs and assigns could enter the manor as of ancient right. John and Isabel were then still alive. Isabel was age 40. Joan died on February 1, 1414. Margery, the daughter of her sister, Sybil, age 30, was her heir.
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951d01174085g&view=1up&seq=64 and
https://www.british-history.ac.uk/inquis-post-mortem/vol20/pp30-49 (scroll down to #127)
Nowhere in the IPM or in any of the other documents I have cited and mentioned above or in previous posts on this thread does is describe Isabel as the “daughter” or “heir” of John Paveley (the elder). There are no records in support a hypothetical previous wife of John Paveley (the elder) prior to his marrying Joan Stury. Isabel was not John (Stury) Paveley’s heir meaning she was not Joan’s daughter. If John Paveley (the elder was not previously married then Isabel cannot be his daughter. In addition, the use of the word “reversion”, rather than “remainder” for Isabel’s interest is also instructive. If Isabel was John Paveley’s , the elder’s, daughter, it seems that her interest would have described as a “remainder” interest after Joan’s death, not a “reversion” interest.
The finding of Joan (Stury) Paveley’s IPM are reiterated in an October 15, 1414 Calendar of Close Roll entry.
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015011275834&view=1up&seq=146 The interesting thing to note in this record that is the manor of Paulerspury is referred to at the manor of “Westpirye”.
There is a June 13, 1395, Feet of Fine record (PRO CP 25/1/178/89, No. 164 between John Bouer (or Boner) and Robert Walssh querents and John Seint Johan, knight, and Isabel, his wife, deforciants involving the manor of Westperye. It says that Joan, who was the wife of John Paulye “the elder”, knight, holds the manor for life. The agreement reached was that upon the death of Joan the manor “ought to revert” to John Bouer and Robert Walssh and the heirs of John, but as a result of the agreement after the decease of John the manor shall remain to John Seint Johan and Isabel and their heirs of their body, to hold of the chief lords forever. In default of such heirs,, successive remainders (1) to the heirs of the body of Isabel, (2) to the heirs of the body of John Seint John (3) to Walter Hulle for his life, and after his deceased to John Wode for his life, and after his deceased to the right heirs of Isabel.
http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/fines/abstracts/CP_25_1_178_89.shtml#164 (scroll down to #164)
This June 13, 1395, Feet of Fines record seems to be determinative of the issue. After Joan (Stury) Paveley’s death, the manor of Westperye/Paulerspury ought to “revert” to John Bouer (or Boner) and Robert Walssh, not of Isabel, the assumption being that John Bouer (or Boner) and Robert Walssh, were the next of kin of John Paveley, the elder (not Isabel). But the agreement reached was that upon the death of Joan that the manor would remain to John Seint Johan and Isabel and their heirs of their body, to hold of the chief lords forever. If Isabel was the daughter of John Paveley, Sr., she would have almost certain have had the remainder interest in Paulerspury/Westpurye after Joan’s death, but instead the right of reversion was with John Bourer and Robert Walssh.
The English Julian calendar in 1395 ran from March 25, 1395 to March 24, 1395.
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03738a.htm#beginning So, the June 13, 1395 Feet of Fines settlement agreement occurred before the February 8, 1395 trustees deed to Isabel and John St. John.
What appears to have happened is that John Paveley, Sr., wrote his trust deed while his son was still living. That is why Joan’s IPM said “then the wife of John Paveley, Jr.”. That trust deed probably did not provide for Isabel to inherit if John Paveley, Jr., died without heirs. Instead, John Bouer and Robert Waalsh were to inherit, probably as co-collateral heirs of John Paveley, Sr. However, due to the June 13, 1395 Feet of Fines Agreement, Isabel became the one to inherit. Later that year (1395), on February 8, 1395, the trustees deeded Paulerspury/Westpurye to Joan for life and the reversion they granted to Isabel (and her then husband, John St. John) as per the Feet of Fines Agreement. I think it is highly doubtful that John Paveley’s trust deed itself provided for Isabel