Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Who Is the Wife of Sir Richard Arches, Father of Joan Dinham?
718 views
Skip to first unread message
Polly
Aug 21, 2015, 8:40:29 PM8/21/15
to
CP (IV, 377-378) says that Joan (who m. John Dinham bef 12 Jul 1434,; he d. 25 Jan 1457/58) is the daughter of Sir Richard Arches by Lucy, his wife. A footnote (h) on p. 377 reports that "Joan is called da. and h. of Richard Arches, and Richard's MOTHER, Lucy, is mentioned." The footnote goes on to say that Joan Dinham was "da. of Lucy, da. of Agnes, sister of William de Shareswell. . ." Yet, Mr. Richardson, in PA (p. 275) reports that Joan Dinham is the dau. of Richard Arches by JOAN, granddaughter of Sir Giles Ardern and sister of John Arches. I can find no discussion in the archives of the identity of Joan's mother (Lucy ala CP or Joan ala PA), and XIV doesn't add anything, so any clarification would be appreciated.
Also, I'm confused about the conventions used in CP to designate titles. I notice that baronies by writ are usually designated in CP by both a Roman numeral and an Arabic numeral (eg., I.2 or II.7, depending on, I think, different creations, withe each new creation getting a Roman number and the Arabic numbers just counting everyone in order regardless of the creation--if that's wrong please someone let me know). But, the Dinhams are only given an Arabic number after the first lord Dinham, who is I.1. And, I notice that Mr. Richardson refers to the subsequent Dinhams only as Sir, not as 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc. Lord Dinham. I'm missing something that's probably explained somewhere in the vasty reaches of CP, but I can't find it. . .
I wish I could help the people on this list instead of always asking for help, but I have no expertise and so. . .
Also, I'm confused about the conventions used in CP to designate titles. I notice that baronies by writ are usually designated in CP by both a Roman numeral and an Arabic numeral (eg., I.2 or II.7, depending on, I think, different creations, withe each new creation getting a Roman number and the Arabic numbers just counting everyone in order regardless of the creation--if that's wrong please someone let me know). But, the Dinhams are only given an Arabic number after the first lord Dinham, who is I.1. And, I notice that Mr. Richardson refers to the subsequent Dinhams only as Sir, not as 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc. Lord Dinham. I'm missing something that's probably explained somewhere in the vasty reaches of CP, but I can't find it. . .
I wish I could help the people on this list instead of always asking for help, but I have no expertise and so. . .
marl...@att.net
Aug 22, 2015, 2:03:01 PM8/22/15
to
The HOP Biography of Sir Richard Arches should prove helpful in identifying further sources to research:
http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/arches-sir-richard-1417
HS
http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/arches-sir-richard-1417
HS
marl...@att.net
Aug 22, 2015, 2:09:59 PM8/22/15
to
http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/adderbury-%28abberbury%29-sir-richard-i-1331-1399
HS
Douglas Richardson
Aug 22, 2015, 5:41:14 PM8/22/15
to
Dear Polly ~
VCH Oxford 9 (1969): 103-112 includes the discussion copied below regarding the descent of the manor of Drayton, Oxfordshire. As you can see, the author clearly states that the lands of Sir Giles de Arden (died 1376) descended to his two grand-daughters, Margaret, wife of Lewis Greville, and Joan, wife of Richard Archer [Arches is surely intended].
The sources given for the statement that Sir Giles de Arden's heirs were his two granddaughters, Margaret and Joan, are C 136/18/2 and Leland, Itin. ed. Toulmin Smith, ii. 12.
The first citation is an inquisition post mortem for Giles de Arderne, or Darden, of Oxfordshire, dated 5 Richard II [i.e., 1381-1382]. This inquisition is in print and should be available to you.
Joan, wife of Richard de Arches, must have been a small child in 1381-2, as her own daughter, Joan Arches, wife of Sir John de Dynham, was born about 1410 (aged 11 in 1421).
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + +
Reference: VCH Oxford 9 (1969): 103-112
"On Nicole's death Drayton reverted to this Giles [de Arden], the son and heir of her first husband. (fn. 74) In 1366 his tenure was disputed by Elizabeth of Swinford, who claimed possession as the descendant of Sir Thomas Arden of Hanwell and Rose Vernon. She claimed to be the great-grand-daughter of Thomas, grandson of Sir Thomas Arden of Hanwell, but the defence asserted that this Thomas was a bastard and she evidently lost her case. (fn. 75) Sir Giles died in 1376 and, as his only son Sir Giles (II), predeceased him, his lands descended to his grandchildren, Margaret and Joan, both minors. (fn. 76) Their inheritance, according to Leland, had been greatly enlarged by their father's marriage with Philippa, 'a woman borne to faire landes'. (fn. 77) Sir Henry Arden, the children's cousin, was made guardian, and in 1380 he leased twothirds of Drayton manor to the Rector of Drayton, (fn. 78) the other third being held as dower by Sir Giles's widow Margaret. (fn. 79) In 1384 or 1385 she and her second husband Walter Power leased her life interest in Drayton to Sir Richard Abberbury. (fn. 80) Meanwhile the remaining two-thirds had reverted to the Crown on the ground that Sir Giles had held in chief, and in 1381 this portion was committed to the custody of Sir Reynold de Malyns during the minority of the co-heirs. (fn. 81)
The eldest girl, Margaret, married Lewis Greville, son and heir of William Greville of Chipping Campden (Glos.). (fn. 82) Lewis was evidently lord in 1398 when he presented to the church; he was recorded as such in 1417 and 1428. (fn. 83) Margaret's sister Joan married Sir Richard Archer, (fn. 84) and the Archers appear to have surrendered their claim to half the manor to the Grevilles, (fn. 85) for no evidence of two manors in Drayton during the 15th century has been found." END OF QUOTE.
VCH Oxford 9 (1969): 103-112 includes the discussion copied below regarding the descent of the manor of Drayton, Oxfordshire. As you can see, the author clearly states that the lands of Sir Giles de Arden (died 1376) descended to his two grand-daughters, Margaret, wife of Lewis Greville, and Joan, wife of Richard Archer [Arches is surely intended].
The sources given for the statement that Sir Giles de Arden's heirs were his two granddaughters, Margaret and Joan, are C 136/18/2 and Leland, Itin. ed. Toulmin Smith, ii. 12.
The first citation is an inquisition post mortem for Giles de Arderne, or Darden, of Oxfordshire, dated 5 Richard II [i.e., 1381-1382]. This inquisition is in print and should be available to you.
Joan, wife of Richard de Arches, must have been a small child in 1381-2, as her own daughter, Joan Arches, wife of Sir John de Dynham, was born about 1410 (aged 11 in 1421).
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + +
Reference: VCH Oxford 9 (1969): 103-112
"On Nicole's death Drayton reverted to this Giles [de Arden], the son and heir of her first husband. (fn. 74) In 1366 his tenure was disputed by Elizabeth of Swinford, who claimed possession as the descendant of Sir Thomas Arden of Hanwell and Rose Vernon. She claimed to be the great-grand-daughter of Thomas, grandson of Sir Thomas Arden of Hanwell, but the defence asserted that this Thomas was a bastard and she evidently lost her case. (fn. 75) Sir Giles died in 1376 and, as his only son Sir Giles (II), predeceased him, his lands descended to his grandchildren, Margaret and Joan, both minors. (fn. 76) Their inheritance, according to Leland, had been greatly enlarged by their father's marriage with Philippa, 'a woman borne to faire landes'. (fn. 77) Sir Henry Arden, the children's cousin, was made guardian, and in 1380 he leased twothirds of Drayton manor to the Rector of Drayton, (fn. 78) the other third being held as dower by Sir Giles's widow Margaret. (fn. 79) In 1384 or 1385 she and her second husband Walter Power leased her life interest in Drayton to Sir Richard Abberbury. (fn. 80) Meanwhile the remaining two-thirds had reverted to the Crown on the ground that Sir Giles had held in chief, and in 1381 this portion was committed to the custody of Sir Reynold de Malyns during the minority of the co-heirs. (fn. 81)
The eldest girl, Margaret, married Lewis Greville, son and heir of William Greville of Chipping Campden (Glos.). (fn. 82) Lewis was evidently lord in 1398 when he presented to the church; he was recorded as such in 1417 and 1428. (fn. 83) Margaret's sister Joan married Sir Richard Archer, (fn. 84) and the Archers appear to have surrendered their claim to half the manor to the Grevilles, (fn. 85) for no evidence of two manors in Drayton during the 15th century has been found." END OF QUOTE.
Douglas Richardson
Aug 22, 2015, 5:41:49 PM8/22/15
to
Dear Polly ~
VCH Oxford 9 (1969): 103-112 includes the discussion copied below regarding the descent of the manor of Drayton, Oxfordshire. As you can see, the author clearly states that the lands of Sir Giles de Arden (died 1376) descended to his two grand-daughters, Margaret, wife of Lewis Greville, and Joan, wife of Richard Archer [Arches is surely intended].
The sources given for the statement that Sir Giles de Arden's heirs were his two granddaughters, Margaret and Joan, are C 136/18/2 and Leland, Itin. ed. Toulmin Smith, ii. 12.
The first citation is an inquisition post mortem for Giles de Arderne, or Darden, of Oxfordshire, dated 5 Richard II [i.e., 1381-1382]. This inquisition is in print and should be available to you.
Joan, wife of Richard de Arches, must have been a small child in 1381-2, as her own daughter, Joan Arches, wife of Sir John de Dynham, was born about 1410 (aged 11 in 1421).
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + +
Reference: VCH Oxford 9 (1969): 103-112
"On Nicole's death Drayton reverted to this Giles [de Arden], the son and heir of her first husband. (fn. 74) In 1366 his tenure was disputed by Elizabeth of Swinford, who claimed possession as the descendant of Sir Thomas Arden of Hanwell and Rose Vernon. She claimed to be the great-grand-daughter of Thomas, grandson of Sir Thomas Arden of Hanwell, but the defence asserted that this Thomas was a bastard and she evidently lost her case. (fn. 75) Sir Giles died in 1376 and, as his only son Sir Giles (II), predeceased him, his lands descended to his grandchildren, Margaret and Joan, both minors. (fn. 76) Their inheritance, according to Leland, had been greatly enlarged by their father's marriage with Philippa, 'a woman borne to faire landes'. (fn. 77) Sir Henry Arden, the children's cousin, was made guardian, and in 1380 he leased twothirds of Drayton manor to the Rector of Drayton, (fn. 78) the other third being held as dower by Sir Giles's widow Margaret. (fn. 79) In 1384 or 1385 she and her second husband Walter Power leased her life interest in Drayton to Sir Richard Abberbury. (fn. 80) Meanwhile the remaining two-thirds had reverted to the Crown on the ground that Sir Giles had held in chief, and in 1381 this portion was committed to the custody of Sir Reynold de Malyns during the minority of the co-heirs. (fn. 81)
The eldest girl, Margaret, married Lewis Greville, son and heir of William Greville of Chipping Campden (Glos.). (fn. 82) Lewis was evidently lord in 1398 when he presented to the church; he was recorded as such in 1417 and 1428. (fn. 83) Margaret's sister Joan married Sir Richard Archer, (fn. 84) and the Archers appear to have surrendered their claim to half the manor to the Grevilles, (fn. 85) for no evidence of two manors in Drayton during the 15th century has been found." END OF QUOTE.
On Friday, August 21, 2015 at 6:40:29 PM UTC-6, Polly wrote:
VCH Oxford 9 (1969): 103-112 includes the discussion copied below regarding the descent of the manor of Drayton, Oxfordshire. As you can see, the author clearly states that the lands of Sir Giles de Arden (died 1376) descended to his two grand-daughters, Margaret, wife of Lewis Greville, and Joan, wife of Richard Archer [Arches is surely intended].
The sources given for the statement that Sir Giles de Arden's heirs were his two granddaughters, Margaret and Joan, are C 136/18/2 and Leland, Itin. ed. Toulmin Smith, ii. 12.
The first citation is an inquisition post mortem for Giles de Arderne, or Darden, of Oxfordshire, dated 5 Richard II [i.e., 1381-1382]. This inquisition is in print and should be available to you.
Joan, wife of Richard de Arches, must have been a small child in 1381-2, as her own daughter, Joan Arches, wife of Sir John de Dynham, was born about 1410 (aged 11 in 1421).
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + +
Reference: VCH Oxford 9 (1969): 103-112
"On Nicole's death Drayton reverted to this Giles [de Arden], the son and heir of her first husband. (fn. 74) In 1366 his tenure was disputed by Elizabeth of Swinford, who claimed possession as the descendant of Sir Thomas Arden of Hanwell and Rose Vernon. She claimed to be the great-grand-daughter of Thomas, grandson of Sir Thomas Arden of Hanwell, but the defence asserted that this Thomas was a bastard and she evidently lost her case. (fn. 75) Sir Giles died in 1376 and, as his only son Sir Giles (II), predeceased him, his lands descended to his grandchildren, Margaret and Joan, both minors. (fn. 76) Their inheritance, according to Leland, had been greatly enlarged by their father's marriage with Philippa, 'a woman borne to faire landes'. (fn. 77) Sir Henry Arden, the children's cousin, was made guardian, and in 1380 he leased twothirds of Drayton manor to the Rector of Drayton, (fn. 78) the other third being held as dower by Sir Giles's widow Margaret. (fn. 79) In 1384 or 1385 she and her second husband Walter Power leased her life interest in Drayton to Sir Richard Abberbury. (fn. 80) Meanwhile the remaining two-thirds had reverted to the Crown on the ground that Sir Giles had held in chief, and in 1381 this portion was committed to the custody of Sir Reynold de Malyns during the minority of the co-heirs. (fn. 81)
The eldest girl, Margaret, married Lewis Greville, son and heir of William Greville of Chipping Campden (Glos.). (fn. 82) Lewis was evidently lord in 1398 when he presented to the church; he was recorded as such in 1417 and 1428. (fn. 83) Margaret's sister Joan married Sir Richard Archer, (fn. 84) and the Archers appear to have surrendered their claim to half the manor to the Grevilles, (fn. 85) for no evidence of two manors in Drayton during the 15th century has been found." END OF QUOTE.
On Friday, August 21, 2015 at 6:40:29 PM UTC-6, Polly wrote:
taf
Aug 22, 2015, 8:04:40 PM8/22/15
to
On Saturday, August 22, 2015 at 2:41:49 PM UTC-7, Douglas Richardson wrote:
> Dear Polly ~
>
> VCH Oxford 9 (1969): 103-112 includes the discussion copied below regarding the descent of the manor of Drayton, Oxfordshire. As you can see, the author clearly states that the lands of Sir Giles de Arden (died 1376) descended to his two grand-daughters, Margaret, wife of Lewis Greville, and Joan, wife of Richard Archer [Arches is surely intended].
>
> The sources given for the statement that Sir Giles de Arden's heirs were his two granddaughters, Margaret and Joan, are C 136/18/2 and Leland, Itin. ed. Toulmin Smith, ii. 12.
>
> The first citation is an inquisition post mortem for Giles de Arderne, or Darden, of Oxfordshire, dated 5 Richard II [i.e., 1381-1382]. This inquisition is in print and should be available to you.
>
Neither documents the claimed relationship. In the first, the girls are, as yet, unmarried:
> Dear Polly ~
>
> VCH Oxford 9 (1969): 103-112 includes the discussion copied below regarding the descent of the manor of Drayton, Oxfordshire. As you can see, the author clearly states that the lands of Sir Giles de Arden (died 1376) descended to his two grand-daughters, Margaret, wife of Lewis Greville, and Joan, wife of Richard Archer [Arches is surely intended].
>
> The sources given for the statement that Sir Giles de Arden's heirs were his two granddaughters, Margaret and Joan, are C 136/18/2 and Leland, Itin. ed. Toulmin Smith, ii. 12.
>
> The first citation is an inquisition post mortem for Giles de Arderne, or Darden, of Oxfordshire, dated 5 Richard II [i.e., 1381-1382]. This inquisition is in print and should be available to you.
>
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.31158009518316;view=1up;seq=228
The second only attests to the identity of Greville's wife as daughter of Giles (the younger):
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.$b750863;view=1up;seq=24
taf
Douglas Richardson
Aug 23, 2015, 1:45:14 PM8/23/15
to
Dear Polly ~
There is a helpful discussion of the Ardern-Arden family published in French, Shakspeareana Genealogica Pt. 2 (1869): 445. I've copied the pertinent part of the discussion below.
The full discussion may be viewed at the following weblink:
https://books.google.com/books?id=efE8AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA445
There is also Arden pedigree chart on page 441.
As you can see, the author Mr. French supplies additional details on the Ardern-Arches descent, including the name of Joan Ardern's mother, Joan Trillow, and paternal grandmother, Margaret Molineux.
Mr. French appears to quote from "Visit. Harl. 1167." That's probably a visitation which is print and which can be consulted by you.
Curiously Mr. French refers to Joan Ardern's husband as Richard Archer, whereas his name was clearly Arches. He specifically states that Joan Ardern and Richard Archer are the parents of Joan, wife of Sir John Dynham. So he concurs with Roskell's and VCH Oxford's account of this family.
Mr. French states that Joan (Ardern) Arches' great-grandparents were Sir Robert Ardern and his wife, Nichole Bardolf. Nichole Bardolf's royal ancestry is traced in my book, Royal Ancestry (5 volume set), published in 2013. Contact me offlist about ordering a copy of the Royal Ancestry book.
I might add that if Mr. French has the earlier pedigree of the Ardern family correctly stated, then Joan (Ardern) Arches would also have a long meandering descent from the Pinkney, Lucy, and Basset families which I worked out last year.
I can't vouch for the accuracy of all of Mr. French's statements. I can say that he was a better than average genealogist but not without error. So, as with all secondary sources, you need to verify everything Mr. French says against contemporary records.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + +
Reference: French, Shakspeareana Genealogica Pt. 2 (1869): 445
"Sir Robert de Arden of Drayton, Knight, who by his wife Nicola, daughter and heir of _____ Bardolf, had, with a daughter, Nicola, married to Richard, son of Sir Ralph Basset, Kt., a son, Sir Giles de Arden, Knight, whose wife was Margaret, daughter of Sir John Molineux, Knight, and their son, Giles de Arden, (obt. vit. pat.), by his wife, Johanna, daughter of Sir John Trillow, Knight, had two daughters, his co-heirs, of whom the second, Johanna, married Sir Richard Archer, Knight, and the eldest, Margaret, married Ludovick Grevill, and their son William Grevill is the ancestor of the Warwickshire family of that name, who became Lords Brooks, and Earls of Warwick, and who quartered the arms of Arden in consequence of their descent from Sir Robert, or Lord Arden, as will be seen hereafter. Sir Richard Archer and his wife Johanna Arden had a daughter Johanna, who married Sir John Dinham, Knight. 'The Inquisition taken at Oxford after the death of Sir Giles Arden, Knight, 5 Ric. II., declares that Margaret and Johanna, daughters of Giles Arden, son of the said Sir Giles Arden, Knight, are heirs of the said Sir Giles Arden, Knight,' Visit. Harl. 1167. Sir John Dinham's second daughter Joan (by his wife Joan Archer) married John, eighth Lord Zouche of Harringworth ...." END OF QUOTE.
There is a helpful discussion of the Ardern-Arden family published in French, Shakspeareana Genealogica Pt. 2 (1869): 445. I've copied the pertinent part of the discussion below.
The full discussion may be viewed at the following weblink:
https://books.google.com/books?id=efE8AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA445
There is also Arden pedigree chart on page 441.
As you can see, the author Mr. French supplies additional details on the Ardern-Arches descent, including the name of Joan Ardern's mother, Joan Trillow, and paternal grandmother, Margaret Molineux.
Mr. French appears to quote from "Visit. Harl. 1167." That's probably a visitation which is print and which can be consulted by you.
Curiously Mr. French refers to Joan Ardern's husband as Richard Archer, whereas his name was clearly Arches. He specifically states that Joan Ardern and Richard Archer are the parents of Joan, wife of Sir John Dynham. So he concurs with Roskell's and VCH Oxford's account of this family.
Mr. French states that Joan (Ardern) Arches' great-grandparents were Sir Robert Ardern and his wife, Nichole Bardolf. Nichole Bardolf's royal ancestry is traced in my book, Royal Ancestry (5 volume set), published in 2013. Contact me offlist about ordering a copy of the Royal Ancestry book.
I might add that if Mr. French has the earlier pedigree of the Ardern family correctly stated, then Joan (Ardern) Arches would also have a long meandering descent from the Pinkney, Lucy, and Basset families which I worked out last year.
I can't vouch for the accuracy of all of Mr. French's statements. I can say that he was a better than average genealogist but not without error. So, as with all secondary sources, you need to verify everything Mr. French says against contemporary records.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
+ + + + + + + + + +
"Sir Robert de Arden of Drayton, Knight, who by his wife Nicola, daughter and heir of _____ Bardolf, had, with a daughter, Nicola, married to Richard, son of Sir Ralph Basset, Kt., a son, Sir Giles de Arden, Knight, whose wife was Margaret, daughter of Sir John Molineux, Knight, and their son, Giles de Arden, (obt. vit. pat.), by his wife, Johanna, daughter of Sir John Trillow, Knight, had two daughters, his co-heirs, of whom the second, Johanna, married Sir Richard Archer, Knight, and the eldest, Margaret, married Ludovick Grevill, and their son William Grevill is the ancestor of the Warwickshire family of that name, who became Lords Brooks, and Earls of Warwick, and who quartered the arms of Arden in consequence of their descent from Sir Robert, or Lord Arden, as will be seen hereafter. Sir Richard Archer and his wife Johanna Arden had a daughter Johanna, who married Sir John Dinham, Knight. 'The Inquisition taken at Oxford after the death of Sir Giles Arden, Knight, 5 Ric. II., declares that Margaret and Johanna, daughters of Giles Arden, son of the said Sir Giles Arden, Knight, are heirs of the said Sir Giles Arden, Knight,' Visit. Harl. 1167. Sir John Dinham's second daughter Joan (by his wife Joan Archer) married John, eighth Lord Zouche of Harringworth ...." END OF QUOTE.
taf
Aug 23, 2015, 2:03:28 PM8/23/15
to
On Sunday, August 23, 2015 at 10:45:14 AM UTC-7, Douglas Richardson wrote:
>
> Mr. French appears to quote from "Visit. Harl. 1167." That's probably a visitation which is print and which can be consulted by you.
That's definitely a visitation (Warwickshire 1619), as a very simple Google search shows.
>
> Mr. French appears to quote from "Visit. Harl. 1167." That's probably a visitation which is print and which can be consulted by you.
https://archive.org/stream/visitationcount01britgoog#page/n204/mode/2up
taf
Douglas Richardson
Aug 23, 2015, 3:53:41 PM8/23/15
to
Dear Polly ~
"Visit. Harl. 1167" is Lennard & Vincent, Visitation of Warwick 1619 (H.S.P. 12) (1877). A long pedigree of the Ardern-Arden family can be found on pages 176-182. It may be viewed at the following weblink:
https://books.google.com/books?id=4_sUAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA179
It appears that Mr. French has followed the visitation account. It takes the line all the way down to Joan Arches, wife of Sir John Dynham.
"Visit. Harl. 1167" is Lennard & Vincent, Visitation of Warwick 1619 (H.S.P. 12) (1877). A long pedigree of the Ardern-Arden family can be found on pages 176-182. It may be viewed at the following weblink:
https://books.google.com/books?id=4_sUAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA179
It appears that Mr. French has followed the visitation account. It takes the line all the way down to Joan Arches, wife of Sir John Dynham.
Douglas Richardson
Aug 23, 2015, 4:42:47 PM8/23/15
to
Dear Newsgroup ~
In a post earlier today, I mentioned Nichole Bardolf, wife of Sir Robert Arderne, of Drayton, Oxfordshire, and Thomas Wale, which lady has extensive royal and noble ancestry including descents from King William the Conqueror and Isabel de Vermandois.
My files indicate that the following 17th Century New World immigrants descend from Nichole (Bardolf) (Ardern) Wale:
Elizabeth Bosvile, George, Giles & Robert Brent, Charles Calvert, Mary Launce, William & Elizabeth Pole, Anne Skipwith, Mary Johanna Somerset.
In a post earlier today, I mentioned Nichole Bardolf, wife of Sir Robert Arderne, of Drayton, Oxfordshire, and Thomas Wale, which lady has extensive royal and noble ancestry including descents from King William the Conqueror and Isabel de Vermandois.
My files indicate that the following 17th Century New World immigrants descend from Nichole (Bardolf) (Ardern) Wale:
Elizabeth Bosvile, George, Giles & Robert Brent, Charles Calvert, Mary Launce, William & Elizabeth Pole, Anne Skipwith, Mary Johanna Somerset.
Polly
Aug 23, 2015, 6:47:47 PM8/23/15
to
Doh! I should by now at least know to check HOP, which of course was very helpful! As were the responses from Mr. Richardson and TAF about the visitations. Thanks to everyone as always. Polly Z
Douglas Richardson
Aug 24, 2015, 6:33:05 PM8/24/15
to
Dear Polly ~
Below are references to three court records dated 1337 involving Nichole Bardolf and her second husband, Sir Thomas Wale, K.G.
1. Court of Common Pleas, CP40/1422, image 1970f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/Just1no1422/aJUST1no1422fronts/IMG_1970.htm).
2. Court of Common Pleas, CP40/1422, image 1973f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/Just1no1422/aJUST1no1422fronts/IMG_1973.htm).
3. Court of Common Pleas, CP40/1422, image 1977f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/Just1no1422/aJUST1no1422fronts/IMG_1977.htm).
Below are references to three court records dated 1337 involving Nichole Bardolf and her second husband, Sir Thomas Wale, K.G.
1. Court of Common Pleas, CP40/1422, image 1970f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/Just1no1422/aJUST1no1422fronts/IMG_1970.htm).
2. Court of Common Pleas, CP40/1422, image 1973f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/Just1no1422/aJUST1no1422fronts/IMG_1973.htm).
3. Court of Common Pleas, CP40/1422, image 1977f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/Just1no1422/aJUST1no1422fronts/IMG_1977.htm).
Paulo Ricardo Canedo
Jul 20, 2018, 8:32:45 PM7/20/18
to
Giles Arden
Giles Arden
Margaret Arden m. Lewis Greville
William Greville
Ralph Greville
John Greville
Margaret Greville m. Edmund Tame
Margaret Tame m. Humphrey Stafford
Eleanor Stafford m. Thomas Barlow
Stafford Barlow
Audrey Barlow
CE Wood
Jul 23, 2018, 8:00:01 PM7/23/18
to
Which account is correct, French's or the Visitation of 1619?
In Shakespeareana Genealogica,p. 439, French says that Leverunia was Turchill's 2nd wife and that his first wife "must be the Countess of Perche."
However, in the Visitation, the first wife, the mother of Siward, is unnamed and the Countesss of Perche was Turchill's 2nd wife and mother of Margaret, wife of Henry de Beaumont.
Very confusing. Was French following some other Visitation, or, since he relied on Dugdale, did Dugdale differ?
CE Wood
In Shakespeareana Genealogica,p. 439, French says that Leverunia was Turchill's 2nd wife and that his first wife "must be the Countess of Perche."
However, in the Visitation, the first wife, the mother of Siward, is unnamed and the Countesss of Perche was Turchill's 2nd wife and mother of Margaret, wife of Henry de Beaumont.
Very confusing. Was French following some other Visitation, or, since he relied on Dugdale, did Dugdale differ?
CE Wood
taf
Jul 23, 2018, 9:16:04 PM7/23/18
to
On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:00:01 PM UTC-7, CE Wood wrote:
> Which account is correct, French's or the Visitation of 1619?
I would suggest that this is a false dichotomy. Asking which of them is correct ignores the distinct possibility that they are both dubious.
> Which account is correct, French's or the Visitation of 1619?
taf
Peter Stewart
Jul 23, 2018, 11:49:57 PM7/23/18
to
Dugdale's version left out a generation, since Torkil's heir was his son named Siward (who was father of the first Osbert). There is no contemporary evidence linking Leveruna (presumably Siward's mother) with Alfric of Mercia.
As to the visitation, there is no evidence that Beatrix, the countess of Perche in question (mother of Henry de Beaumont's wife Margaret), ever married an Englishman or anyone else apart from Geoffrey of Mortagne, who died either in 1099 or (more probably) 1100.
Peter Stewart
CE Wood
Jul 24, 2018, 7:28:33 PM7/24/18
to
On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 8:49:57 PM UTC-7, Peter Stewart wrote:
So the manor of Kingsbury cannot be traced to Leofric and Godgifu? The many tomes that claim so are simply repeating centuries of misinformation? Not the first such, but it is too bad that it is still being published. sigh.
CE Wood
snip
So the manor of Kingsbury cannot be traced to Leofric and Godgifu? The many tomes that claim so are simply repeating centuries of misinformation? Not the first such, but it is too bad that it is still being published. sigh.
CE Wood
snip
> There is no contemporary evidence linking Leveruna (presumably Siward's mother) with Alfric of Mercia.
>
> Peter Stewart
>
taf
Jul 24, 2018, 8:30:17 PM7/24/18
to
On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 4:28:33 PM UTC-7, CE Wood wrote:
> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 8:49:57 PM UTC-7, Peter Stewart wrote:
>
> So the manor of Kingsbury cannot be traced to Leofric and Godgifu?
By inheritance? No.
> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 8:49:57 PM UTC-7, Peter Stewart wrote:
>
> So the manor of Kingsbury cannot be traced to Leofric and Godgifu?
> The many tomes that claim so are simply repeating centuries of
> misinformation?
> Not the first such, but it is too bad that it is still being published.
Presumably because of some combination of the exhibitionism and the fact that the family are recorded at Domesday having held huge tracts of land that were later held by Normans, it became quite popular to invent descents from this couple. However, these mostly belong to the style of genealogy that foregoes the requirement that sources exist to support genealogical claims.
Alfgar is the only known child of Leofric, and he had four known children, Burgheard, Edgar, Morcar, and Eadgyth. Of these, Ealdgyth is the only one known to have had children by Harold, but they were infants at the Conquest and passed into obscurity. Her earlier husband, Gruffydd ap Llywelyn, is known to have had children, but I don't think there is anything close to contemporary that specifies their mother, and Eadgyth was not his only wife.
His daughter Nest married Richard Fitz Osborn and has descendants, and it is through her that most modern genealogists claim to trace from Leofric.
The other 'modern' route is thanks to David Kelley, who suggested that after the Conquest Edwin fled to Wales and is disguised in the Welsh pedigrees as Edwin, prince of Tegeingl, who has descendants, but this all depends on whether or not you are willing to accept Kelley's stranger-in-a-strange-land-with-an-invented-pedigree explanation for this Welsh lineage.
Any other line you see, whether it is through the Howards or Wakes claiming to descend from Hereward the Wake, 'son of Leofric', or the Malets from a daughter of Leofric, or the Earls of Chester from Lucia, a daughter of AElfric, or any of the other claims, it is at best mere guesswork and at worst outright invention.
taf
CE Wood
Jul 25, 2018, 8:52:49 PM7/25/18
to
Yet again, I am in awe of your depth and breadth of knowledge combined with the rare ability to explain precisely and thoroughly! We are all in your debt. Thank you.
CE Wood
CE Wood
taf
Jul 26, 2018, 4:03:29 PM7/26/18
to
On Wednesday, July 25, 2018 at 5:52:49 PM UTC-7, CE Wood wrote:
> Yet again, I am in awe of your depth and breadth of knowledge combined
> with the rare ability to explain precisely and thoroughly!
Except I went and gave Leofric's son the wrong name the second time I named him - it was Ælfgar.
> Yet again, I am in awe of your depth and breadth of knowledge combined
> with the rare ability to explain precisely and thoroughly!
I never mentioned the fate of the 4th child of Ælfgar - Burgheard is only known from the record of his death, and I am not aware of any effort to trace from him.
taf
Peter Stewart
Jul 26, 2018, 7:31:44 PM7/26/18
to
On Friday, July 27, 2018 at 6:03:29 AM UTC+10, taf wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 25, 2018 at 5:52:49 PM UTC-7, CE Wood wrote:
> > Yet again, I am in awe of your depth and breadth of knowledge combined
> > with the rare ability to explain precisely and thoroughly!
>
> Except I went and gave Leofric's son the wrong name the second time I named him - it was Ælfgar.
A harmless slip that serves to show how readily any error can get duplicated, as this one did by me without thinking. It might be useful for locating tombs and potential DNA samples if someone could invent a detector for spinning in graves, as Ælfgar's rest was perhaps disturbed by our negligence.
> On Wednesday, July 25, 2018 at 5:52:49 PM UTC-7, CE Wood wrote:
> > Yet again, I am in awe of your depth and breadth of knowledge combined
> > with the rare ability to explain precisely and thoroughly!
>
> Except I went and gave Leofric's son the wrong name the second time I named him - it was Ælfgar.
Peter Stewart
celticp...@gmail.com
Jul 27, 2018, 7:53:26 PM7/27/18
to
On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 6:32:45 PM UTC-6, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
< Dear Douglas, sorry for reviving an old thread but I believe immigrant Audrey < Barlow, wife of William Almy, is also a descendant. The line is:
< 1. Nichole Bardolf m. Robert Arden
< Dear Douglas, sorry for reviving an old thread but I believe immigrant Audrey < Barlow, wife of William Almy, is also a descendant. The line is:
< 2. Giles Arden
< 3. Giles Arden
< 4. Margaret Arden m. Lewis Greville
< 5. William Greville
< 6. Ralph Greville
< 7. John Greville
< 8. Margaret Greville m. Edmund Tame
< 9. Margaret Tame m. Humphrey Stafford
< 10. Eleanor Stafford m. Thomas Barlow
< 11. Stafford Barlow
< 12. Audrey Barlow
Dear Paulo ~
The above descent is good except that your Gen. 8 is actually Agnes Greville, not Margaret Greville.
Back in 2005, Bevan Shortridge proposed Nichole Bardolf (your Gen. 1) as a daughter of Hugh Bardolf, Knt., of Wormegay, Norfolk, by Isabel d'Aguillon. Mr. Shortridge presented evidence of a fine dated 1308–9 by which Isabel, there styled "daughter of (Robert) Aguyllon," settled the manor of Perching (in Fulking), Sussex on herself and her 2nd son, William Bardolf, with contingent remainders to her daughters, Nichole and Margery. See Salzman, Feet of Fines relating to Sussex 3 (Sussex Rec. Soc. 23) (1916): 2, available at the following weblink:
https://www.british-history.ac.uk/feet-of-fines-sussex/vol3/pp1-14
VCH Sussex 7 (1940): 203-204 adds the following information regarding the manor of Perching:
"Isabel [Bardolf] was still holding Perching in 1316 but was not seised of it at her death in 1323. The manor appears in the hands of Sir Robert de Arderne, who had land in Perching in 1327 and who was given license to crenellate his manor-house there in 1329. His wife Nichole was presumably the elder daughter of
Isabel Bardolf; she subsequently married Sir Thomas Wale,(55) who was chief
landowner in Perching in 1332 and held the fee.
For conclusive evidence that Nichole, wife of Sir Robert de Arderne and Sir Thomas Wale, was in fact the daughter of Isabel d'Aguillon, widow of Sir Hugh Bardolf, please see a lawsuit in the Court of King's Bench dated 1343, which contains the following statement:
“… man[oru]m de Perchyng c[u]m ptn in Com Sussex quod quidem man[oru]m Isabella Bardolf dedit p’fate Nicholae & p’dco Rob’to de Ardern quondam viro suo & heredibz de corporibz eor[um]d[e]m Rob’ti & Nicholae ...”
Reference: Court of King’s Bench, KB27/334, image 198f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/E3/KB27no334/aKB27no334fronts/IMG_0198.htm).
The above lawsuit specifically states that Nichole and her former husband, Robert de Arderne, had the manor of Perching, Sussex by the gift of Isabel Bardolf. Since the property was subject to the earlier fine by which Isabel Bardolf settled a remainder interest on her daughter, Nichole, it is clear from the lawsuit that Nichole, wife of Robert de Arderne, is the same person as Nichole, daughter of Isabel Bardolf.
VCH Sussex correctly stated that Nichole Bardolf was married to Sir Robert de Arderne and Sir Thomas Wale, K.G. However, Nichole had a hitherto unnoticed first marriage before 1310 (date of fine) to Robert Butvillein (or Botevileyn) (died 1314), of Hinwick (in Podington), Bedfordshire, Flordon, Norfolk, and Cottesbrooke, Northamptonshire, by which marriage Nichole had two sons, William, Knt., and Robert. By her Butvillein marriage, Nichole Bardolf is ancestress of the Kempe family of Virginia.
taf
Aug 9, 2018, 7:45:21 PM8/9/18
to
On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 5:30:17 PM UTC-7, taf wrote:
> Any other line you see, whether it is through the Howards or Wakes claiming
> to descend from Hereward the Wake, 'son of Leofric', or the Malets from a
> daughter of Leofric, or the Earls of Chester from Lucia, a daughter of
> AElfric, or any of the other claims, it is at best mere guesswork and at
> worst outright invention.
I have been thinking about this some more, and it is worth noting that there are very few documented lines of non-royal descent from pre-Conquest Anglo-Saxons, full stop. A lot were claimed in the Stuart era, but few of them held water. Some were outright inventions, Anglo-Saxons named Guy or Henry. Others took later men with and Anglo-Saxon name and stretched the chronology to force them back in time to before the Conquest, plus a lot of claimed pedigrees that go through a long string of undocumented (and likely apocryphal) names before ending in an Anglo-Saxon.
> to descend from Hereward the Wake, 'son of Leofric', or the Malets from a
> daughter of Leofric, or the Earls of Chester from Lucia, a daughter of
> AElfric, or any of the other claims, it is at best mere guesswork and at
> worst outright invention.
We have talked about the group of claimed Leofric descents. There are documented descents from the Northumbrian Waltheofs, and if I recall correctly, one of the Berkeley lines traces to a pre-Conquest Englishman. There is another one bouncing around my mind, but I can't quite grasp it.
Can anyone come up with another one?
taf
Andrew Lancaster
Aug 10, 2018, 10:50:06 AM8/10/18
to
The De Lancasters who were ancestral to the Barons of Kendal in modern Cumbria were probably Norman in my opinion, at least in their male line, but the first William named Ketel fitz Eldred as an avunculus, and I can't see him as Norman. In general there were more such families in the far north still using Anglo-Danish names into the 1100s.
In the south of course it is harder to tell who is Anglo-Saxon because French names started being used even before 1066 in the Norfolk area for example.
wibigett...@gmail.com
Aug 10, 2018, 11:21:32 AM8/10/18
to
On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 1:45:21 AM UTC+2, taf wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_Swinton
On a related note the Actons of Acton Scott, Shropshire still farm and live on an estate which has they have inherited in unbroken descent since at least 1203. In that year Acton Scott, Henley and Smethcott (all in Shropshire) were held by three coheiresses, who were daughters of William Leyngleys (‘the Englishman’). In the Domesday Book the same three properties were held by an Anglo-Saxon named Ealdred and in the reign of Edward the Confessor they were held by Ealdred’s cousin Eadric the Wild. So, while there is an undocumented gap between 1086 and 1203 it seems likely, or at least possible, that Acton Scott has been held by the same family since before the conquest. Can anyone come up with another example of property passing down in the same family since this period?
William Acton
taf
Aug 10, 2018, 11:49:05 AM8/10/18
to
On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 8:21:32 AM UTC-7, wibigett...@gmail.com wrote:
> The Swinton family might also qualify:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_Swinton
>
> On a related note the Actons of Acton Scott, Shropshire still farm and live
> on an estate which has they have inherited in unbroken descent since at
> least 1203. In that year Acton Scott, Henley and Smethcott (all in
> Shropshire) were held by three coheiresses, who were daughters of William
> Leyngleys (‘the Englishman’). In the Domesday Book the same three properties
> were held by an Anglo-Saxon named Ealdred and in the reign of Edward the
> Confessor they were held by Ealdred’s cousin Eadric the Wild. So, while
> there is an undocumented gap between 1086 and 1203 it seems likely, or at
> least possible, that Acton Scott has been held by the same family since
> before the conquest. Can anyone come up with another example of property
> passing down in the same family since this period?
The problem is that it can't be assumed that the three properties of 1086 were inherited together, rather than being confiscated and regranted en bloc. I seem to recall instances in which Henry I transferred together an enemy's lands in their entirety to a friend.
> The Swinton family might also qualify:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_Swinton
>
> On a related note the Actons of Acton Scott, Shropshire still farm and live
> on an estate which has they have inherited in unbroken descent since at
> least 1203. In that year Acton Scott, Henley and Smethcott (all in
> Shropshire) were held by three coheiresses, who were daughters of William
> Leyngleys (‘the Englishman’). In the Domesday Book the same three properties
> were held by an Anglo-Saxon named Ealdred and in the reign of Edward the
> Confessor they were held by Ealdred’s cousin Eadric the Wild. So, while
> there is an undocumented gap between 1086 and 1203 it seems likely, or at
> least possible, that Acton Scott has been held by the same family since
> before the conquest. Can anyone come up with another example of property
> passing down in the same family since this period?
taf
0 new messages