Braose - Wingfield Connection Redux
The...@aol.com
Hello Rosie, Cris, Todd, et al.,
Thanks to the Library of Congress, I have acquired the text from
Copinger's The Manors of Suffolk which I think will move us almost to the
resolution of the Wingfield (Brews vs. Glanville) conundrum. I provide the
text below, including the notes as provided.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
From Vol. IV (p. 114 - Wingfield Old Hall Manor) [1]:
'This manor was vested in King Stephen, and in 1275 was the lordship of
Sir Richard de Brewse {1}. An entry on the Hundred Rolls informs us that
King Richard enfeoffed Frimsbald in Wingfield, "which land was held by
Richard de Brewse and the prior of Thetford" {2}. Sir Richard de Brewse had
a grant of free warren here in 1309 {3}. The manor remained in the family of
de Brewse until the time of Rich. II., when it appears to have gone to the
holders of the main Manor of Wingfield.
'There are two fines relating to this manor in 1357-8 and 1377. In the
former the manor is called "Wingfield Manor," in the latter "Wingfield Hall
Manor." The first was levied by John de Wynewyk, clerk, David de Wollore,
clerk, Sir John de Wengefeld, Thomas de Wengefeld, and Gilbert de Debenham
against Sir Richard Brewse {4}. The second was levied by John de Fordham,
clerk, John Baconn, clerk, John Daventree, parson of Brome church, Walter,
vicar of Kymberle, Edmund de Lakyngheth, Stephen de Langham, Richard Nootz,
and John Cranewys against Katherine Brewse {5}. '
Copinger's footnotes:
{1} See Hasketon Hall, Hasketon Manor, in Carlford Hundred.
{2} H.R. ii. 186.
{3} Chart. Rolls, 3 Edw. II. 22.
{4} Feet of Fines, 31 and 32 Edw. III. 40.
{5} Feet of Fines, 1 Rich. II. 12.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sir Richard de Brews (fl. 1357-8) was evidently the son of Richard de
Braose or de Brewes, knight, of Stradbroke, Suffolk [younger son of Sir
Richard de Braose or de Brewes, of Stinton & c., and his wife Alice le Rus -
see CP Vol. II, p. 304 and esp. note i on that page] and his wife Alianor.
See also prior posts on SGM [Braose-Wingfield Connection (2001), and also
Katherine Wingfield, Countess of Suffolk (1996)].
Copinger provides an even more direct link between Wingfield and Brews.
Under 'Manor of Wingfield or Wingfield Castle [Vol. III, p. 108-109]',
Copinger states that
_The above Sir John Wingfield, Knt., eldest son of Sir John
Wingfield the son, levied a fine of the manor with Alianora
his wife against David de Wollore, clerk, and Gilbert de
Debenham,.... . _ [ref. Feet of Fines, 33 Edw. III]
This further action involves David de Wollore and Gilbert de Debenham,
parties in the fine of 1357-8 against Sir Richard Brewse cited above (under
Wingfield Old Hall).
The text of the fines would be a great addition (presumably, the icing)
towards what hopefully would be a final resolution (any kind soul who might
have access to and post same to the list would have the thanks of myself and
many others; and, who knows, maybe a few Brews later?). There was one other
Katherine de Brews or de Brewse of which I am aware, the widow of Richard de
Brewse (d. a minor, 'in the King's ward', before 1326 -CP Vol. II, p. 305),
who sought the advowson of Whittingham Chapel as her dower in 1326 (Copinger
cites Close Rolls, 19 Edw. II. 10). The repetition of names has resulted in
past confusion, the correction of which is provided in CP, Vol II
(Breuse/Brewes), which lays out the errors in Blomefeld and their resolution
(see esp. correction at CP Vol II, p. 304, note i). The history of the manor
of Whittingham, and of the (Breuse or Brewse) lords of Stinton, Norfolk,
makes it clear that this is not the same individual as 'Katherine Breuse of
Wingfield Oldhalle' [see Copinger Vol. III, Whittingham: pp. 35 et seq.].
Given the corrections which have previously been made and posted, and the
foregoing details of fines provided by Copinger, it is evident at this point
that:
1. Sir Richard Brewse, of Wingfield Oldhalle [or Old Hall] and
Stradbroke (d. aft 1357), was the heir and successor to same
of Richard de Brewse, knight, of same and his wife Alianor;
2. Katherine Brewse, subject of the fine of 1377, was the
holder of same in dower;
3. Alianor, wife of Sir John de Wingfield, was born Alianor
Brewse, sole (or surviving) daughter and heiress of Sir
Richard Brewse and his wife Katherine.
The line of descent from John de Braose, of Bramber and Gower (d. 1232)
to Katherine Wingfield, heiress of Wingfield and Stradbroke, therefore shows
as follows:
1. John de Braose, of Bramber and Gower, d. 1232, m. Margaret ferch
Llywelyn, dau. of Llywelyn ap Iorwerth, Prince of Aberffraw
2. Richard de Braose or de Brewse, 2nd son, of Stinton, Norfolk &
c., d. bef 18 Jun 1292; m. Alice le Rus, dau. and heiress of
William le Rus, of Stinton, Norfolk, Stradbroke, Suffolk & c.,
and his wife Agatha de Clare [Alice was widow of Richard Lungespee
or Longespee]
3. Richard de Brewse, 4th [?] son, knight, of Stradbroke and Wingfield
Old Hall [Oldhalle], Suffolk [Stradbroke a grant from his
mother Alice, 25 Edw. II], born say 1275; d. aft 12 Mar 1300/01;
m. Alianore, dau. of Sir John de Shelton, of Stradbroke, Suffolk
4. Richard de Brewse, knight, of Stradbroke and Wingfield Oldhalle,
Suffolk, born say 1301; d. aft 1357; m. Katherine ________ [his
widow, who d. aft 1376, Feet of Fines l Ric II. 12]
5. Alianor de Brewse, sole [surviving ?] daughter and heiress, born
say 1320; m. bef 1339 to Sir John de Wingfield, of Wingfield,
Suffolk, Netterhall in Saxlingham, Norfolk & c.; d. bef 18 Oct
1361
6. Katherine Wingfield, sole daughter and heiress, m. bef 18 Oct
1361 to Michael de la Pole, held to have become Lord de la Pole,
cr lst Earl of Suffolk 6 Aug 1385; d. 5 Sept 1389 [2]
NOTES
[1] W. A. Copinger, The Manors of Suffolk: Notes on Their History
and Devolution (London, 1905-1911)
[2] Inquisition p.m. of Michael de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk (d. 5 Sept 1389)
and his wife Katherine Wingfield, found in Calendarium IPM, 13 Ric. II
(p.117) includes the following properties in Suffolkshire:
Wingefeld maner' ; Stradbroke maner' cum advoc' ecclie ; Wingfeld maner'
vocat' Oldhalle ; Wingfeld cantaria ; Wingfeld [and others, included as one
of the properties held of the Honour of Eye] 700 acr' terr' 20 acr' prat' 100
acr' pastur' 20 acr' bosc' 100 acr' bruer' 100 acr' marisc' et 100 __ reddit'
ut de honore de Eye .
Comment, criticism (and esp. the text of the Fines - ?) all certainly
welcome.
John *
* John P. Ravilious
Chris Phillips
> The text of the fines would be a great addition (presumably, the
icing)
> towards what hopefully would be a final resolution (any kind soul who
might
> have access to and post same to the list would have the thanks of myself
and
> many others; and, who knows, maybe a few Brews later?).
Thanks for that interesting post.
I assume that these feet of fines would be abstracted in Walter Rye's
"Calendar of the Feet of Fines for Suffolk" (1900)? I'll try to look at this
in the next few days, unless someone else gets there first.
Chris Phillips
The...@aol.com
Good morning, Chris,
Thanks for your reply, and offer - certainly the Suffolk source would
be logical [1]. I'll look forward to your fine findings.
Good luck, and good hunting.
John *
* John P. Ravilious
[1] Genealogy and logic are closely related (in the 2nd degree, as I
recall), but facts are a certainty, I'll warrant.
Shane Hines
This is presumably at Suffolk Record Office which is not far from me here in
Ipswich, so I've no objection to looking at it if you like, although I am
fairly new to this medieval lark and do not promise to understand the
documents.
Shane Hines
Chris Phillips
______________________________
Paul Mackenzie
I came across the following reference, which may be of interest.
"1316 - Brewosa, Ricardus de - Ricardus filius Egidii certified, pursuant to
writs tested at Clipston, 5 March as Lord or Joint Lord of the following
townships
Norfolk - Salle, Brisingham, Fressingheld ( to the later he is in the
wardship of Edmundus Bacon)
Suffolk - Stradboke and Wingfield, Martlesham, Newbourn and Waldringfield"
Parliamentary Writs and Military Summons by Palgrave. V2:589
I have some other references, which clearly show the manors Stradbroke, and
Wingefield and also Stinton were held in turn by William de Rus and his heir
Alice de Rus (inq. p.m. 44 Hen 111, No. 15), her husband Richard de Breuse d
bef 1292 (Coram Rege, 49 111, m. ii, a fine Hen 56 No. 70, ). There is no
mention of the Stradebroke and Wingfield manors in the Inq.p.m's for Alice,
her son Giles, his sons Richard, and Robert. They make reference only to
Stinton etc.
I not entirely sure how this Richardus de Brewosa (1316) of Stradbroke son
of Egidii (Giles) fits in the picture with respect to the de Brewes of
Stinton. Unfortunately, it does not fit in with your line of descent.
However, it is clear he is in someway related to the de Brewes of Stinton.
The following reference may be of some assistance in further investigation:
"1362
Inq. p.m. Edmund Bacon
Oxford. Manors of Ewelm, 'Spenseresfee', etc.
Edmund died 1337. He married one Joan de Brewes, by whom he had a daughter
Margery, who was married to William de Kerdeston and had a daughter Maud,
who was married to John Burgwash and had a son John de Burgwash. He also
married Margery Pounynges, by whom he had a daughter Margery, who was
married to William Molyns. This margery and John de Burgwash aforesaid are
his heirs. She is 21 years of age and more, and he is 18 years of age."
CIPM 11:11,12,13
You will note that Edmund Bacon was also the guardian of Richardus de Brewes
(1316) of Stradbroke, and Wingfield. I wonder if there are any references
to the grant of this wardship.
I also believe I have circumstantial evidence as to who was your Katherine
de Brewes (your reference [5]). In my collection of references on de Brewes
I found the following:
"Inq. p.m. Roger de Norwych (1372)
Norfolk
Kymberle. The manor, held by gift and grant of Walter de Norwico to him and
the heirs of his body, with successive remainders to Thomas son of said
Walter for life, and to Katherine de Brewes and her heirs. Roger is dead
without heir of himself; Thomas son of Walter is dead; and Katherine de
Brewes, aged 30 years and more survives. The manor is held of the lord de
Bardolf by service of a pair of gilt spurs at Easter." CIPM 13:92
I note that the fine you cited regarding Katherine Brewes and the Wingfield
manor refers to a Walter, vicar of KYMBERLE.
I have more references on this Katherine de Brewes. The following may be of
interest. I derived the following from CIPM Vol XIII p 92, CIPM Vol XIV p
43, CIPM Vol XV p 87, CIPM Vol XI p 305.
1. Walter de Norwich
1.1. John de Norwich d 1363 son and heir of Walter (1), m Margery liv
1363
1.1.1. Walter de Norwich d bef 1363 m Margaret liv 1375
1.1.1.1 John de Norwich b 1353 d 1375 grandson and heir of John
(1.1), m Wolrina Stapliton
1.2. Thomas de Norwich d bef 1372, son of Walter (1)
1.2.1 Katherine de Norwich b 1342 liv 1379 m. ___Brewes d bef 1379,
entered nunnery 1379, dau of Thomas (1.2) and heir of John de Norwich
(1.1.1.1),
1.3 Margaret de Norwich, daughter of Walter (1) m Robert Ufford,
1.3.1 William de Ufford b 1342, son of Margaret (1.3) and heir of
Katherine de Norwich (1.2.1).
Katherine de Norwich (de Brewes) entered a nunnery in 1379 and in her
Inq.p.m there was reference to many properties but unfortunately none to
Stradbroke and Wingfield. The other problem is that her heir was William de
Ufford.
As to the fines you mention, the transfer of the manors Stradboke and
Wingfield from the de Brewes to Wingfield seem strange from a chronological
point of view. I am not an expert on fines, so unfortunately I am unable
to offer a opinion. I look forward to reading other peoples comments.
Regards
Paul
The...@aol.com wrote in message ...
The...@aol.com
Hello Paul,
The family de Brews (or de Breuse; my 'spelling of the day') did not help their descendants by continuous reuse of the same name, or marrying similarly named people.
Reference to Todd's post of 10 Mar 1997 [Re: DE BRAOSE] and to the other posts in the earlier 2001 thread [Braose-Wingfield Connection], together with CP Vol II (esp. p. 304, note i) yields the following:
John de Breuse = Margaret ferch
of Gower & Bramber; I Llywelyn
d. 1232 I
________________________I______
I I
William de Breuse Richard de Breuse = Alice le
of Bramber & of Stinton & c. I Rus
Gower, d. ca. 1290 d bef 18 Jun 1292 I
I [CP Vol II p 304] I
V _______________________________I
BREUSE of I I
Gower; Giles de Breuse [1] Richard de = Alianora
Tetbury; of Stinton & Breuse I____
Wiston/ c; d. 1310 of Stradbroke .
Westneston = Joan [p 304 note i] .
I .
I .
__________I______________ .
I I I .
Richard [2] Robert John Sir Richard de
of Stinton of Stinton of Stinton Breuse,
dsp bef dsp 1325 d aft 1393 of Stradbroke,
1325 =KATHERINE = Eve Wingfield & c.
de Norwich d'Ufford [presumed
[3] father of
Alianor, wife of
Sir John de
Wingfield]
It appears from your cite of 1316 that Richard de Breuse, of Stinton held the overlordship of Stradbroke and Wingfield, with the younger branch (Richard de Breuse) holding same from him. It is clear from the citation in CP, Vol II (p. 304 note i) that Alice de Breuse, nee le Rus, gave the manor of Stradbroke to her SON Richard de Breuse; the question then is only, of whom did Richard her son hold the manor? Not untypically, it appears he held of his elder brother (Giles) and his heir (Richard, 'filius Egidii').
An item for further review, from your post of this morning: your reference to Edmund Bacon (Inq.p.m. 1337) notes his marriage to 'Joan de Brewes' - I believe she is NOT identified in CP. It SOUNDS like she was probably Joan, the widow of Giles de Breuse (d. 1310) and mother of 'Ricardus filius Egidii' and his brothers.
This needs a closer look (may make the descent of the Moleyns family more interesting yet....).
Thanks again for your input; I hope the foregoing is also helpful. With some luck (Chris? Shane?), we may be approaching a genuine fine-alization.......
John *
NOTES
[1] re: Giles de Breuse, see pp. 304-305 of Vol II, CP (under Brewes). In Latin, Giles = Egidius (hence Richard's name in your cite of 1316).
[2] 'Ricardus filius Egidii' himself, dsp 1325
[3] Katherine, aka Katherine de Norwich, aka Katherine de Brewes
* John P. Ravilious
Paul Mackenzie
I found the following reference in the victorian HISTORY of SUFFOLK Vol 1 p
152 which is of interest, though it does not advance the question at hand.
"The College of Wingfield
In 1362, Lady Eleanor , relict of Sir John Wingfield, and Thomas
Wingfield, brother of Sir John, being his executors, founded, in accordance
with his desires, a college of priests in the parish church of Wingfield.
......
..........................
Licence was granted in November, 1401, to the provost or master and the
chaplains of the collegiate church of Wingfield, for Thomas Doupe to grant
in mortmain to them land in Stadbroke, Wingfield, and Earsham. At the same
time Michael earl of Suffolk obtained licence to grant land rent in
Stradbroke, Wingfield, Silham, and Earsham, worth, 10s. yearly.
...........................
In this college were buried the bodies of William de la Pole, duke of
Suffolk, 1450, and his son and heir, John de la Pole, duke of Suffolk, 1491.
The fine seal of this college bears St. Andrew crucified on a saltire
cross; in the base the arms of Wingfiled. Legend:-
+COMMUNE + SIGILLUM+S+MARIE+DE WYNGEFIEELD"
The...@aol.com wrote in message ...
>Tuesday, 8 January, 2002
>
>
>Hello Rosie, Cris, Todd, et al.,
>
> Thanks to the Library of Congress, I have acquired the text from
>Copinger's The Manors of Suffolk which I think will move us almost to the
>resolution of the Wingfield (Brews vs. Glanville) conundrum. I provide the
>text below, including the notes as provided.
>
>- - - - - - - - - - - -
>
>
Paul Mackenzie
I found the following records from the PRO database which mention wingfield
and/or stradbroke.
1. Eleanor late the wife of John de Wyngefeld to grant a messuage, land, and
rent in Wingfield,
Earsham [Esham, now in Wingfield], Fressingfield,and Weybread, and the
advowsons of the churches of
Wingfield, Stradbroke, and Syleham, and of the chapelof Earsham, to the
warden and chaplains of a chantry
to be new founded by her at Wingfield, retaining land in Stradbroke and
Wingfield.
35 EDWARD III.
PRO records C143/339/1
2. Eleanor late the wife of John de Wyngefeld to retain her interest in land
and rent in Wingfield
settled by her husband on her and himself and the heirs male of their
bodies, with remainder to
Katharine wife of Michael de la Pole, knight, and the heirs of her body by
him, remainder to
Thomas de Wyngefeld, brother of the said John, and the heirs of his body,
remainder to
William de Wyngefeld and the heirs of his body,remainder to the right heirs
of the said John.
36 EDWARD III.
PRO records C143/343/2
3. Eleanor late the wife of John de Wynkefeld to grant a messuage and land
in Fornham All Saints,
and rent in Reydon by Wangford, to the chaplains of a chantry founded by the
said John at Wingfield,
retaining land in Wingfield and Stradbroke. Suffolk.
36 EDWARD III.
PRO records C143/343/9
4. Eleanor late the wife of John de Wynkefeld to grant a messuage and land
in Fornham All Saints, and rent in
Reydon by Wangford, to the chaplains of a chantry founded by the said John
at Wingfield, retaining land in Wingfield and Stradbroke. Suffolk.
36 EDWARD III.
PRO records C143/343/9
5. Michael de la Pole, earl of Suffolk, cousin and heir of John de
Wyngefeld, knight, deceased, to grant
the manor of Benhall, and a messuage, land, and rent in Benhall, Saxmundham,
Farnham, Sternfield, Rendham Snape, Swefling, Cransford, and Great Glemham
to the master and chaplains of a chantry in the church of Wingfield founded
by Eleanor late the wife of the said John, retaining land in Wingfield, Eye,
Lowestoft, and elsewhere.
7 HENRY IV.
PRO records C143/437/17
6. William de le Pole, earl of Suffolk, to grant the manor of Chickering [in
Wingfield], half the manor
of Walpole, and a messuage, land, and rent in Chickering, Hoxne, Stradbroke,
Horham, Wingfield, Syleham, Weybread, Walpole, Huntingfield, Middleton,
Darsham, and Yoxford to the master and chaplains of the chantry founded by
Eleanor late the wife of John Wyngefeld, knight, in the church of Wingfield,
retaining manors and lands in Lowestoft, Benhall, and elsewhere.
14 HENRY VI.
PRO records C143/448/5
Regards
Paul
Paul Mackenzie
I noticed something strange regarding the copinger references ( see below).
Or maybe I am being DENSE and did not understand it before. Copinger
mentions in Vol 1V p 114 under the heading of Wingfield OldHall manor, two
fees , a first fee in 1357-58 against Richard de Brewes and a second fee in
1377 against Katherine de Brewes. Copinger does mention the former is called
"Wingfield Manor", whereas the latter is called "Wingfield Old Manor".
However, Copinger mentions in Vol 111 p. 108-109 under the heading of
Wingfield Manor a third fee in 1359-60 by John Wingfield and Eleanor his
wife against a number of parties concerning the Wingfield Manor.
Disregarding Copinger's inference that the first and second fee relate to
the Wingfield Old Manor, and considering the first and third fees relate
instead to the Wingfield Manor. Then it could be said that Richard de
Brewes transferred his rights in Wingfield manor to third parties in
1357-58 by viture of the first fee, who subsequently transferred them to
John Wingfield and Eleanor his wife, by virtue of third fee. I understand
that this type of mechanism was popular at the times for transferring
property, especially to their children and spouses. Assuming, for the
present purposes, that Wingfield Manor and Wingfield Oldhall were separate
entities, then it could be argued that the Wingfield OldHall remained with
the de Brewes. Richard Brewes was alive during the first fee 1357-1358, but
was dead by the time of John Wingfield's will was made, sometime prior to
1361. Thus the assumption, made by John that Katherine de Brewes was holding
Wingfield OldHall in dower, and after her death it then proceeded to the
heirs of Richard de Brewes, namely Michael de la Pole and Katherine
Wingfield.
Any comments please.
Regards
Paul.
The...@aol.com wrote in message ...