Re: Sir Richard Baskerville and his wife Isabel, and other C14 Baskerville wives
Millerf...@aol.com
Ingham has kindly sent me:-
1354 Calendar of Papal Registers Papal Letters III. 1342-1362. p.537/8.
6 Kal. June. Villeneuve by Avignon.
To the bishop of Hereford. Mandate to dispense Richard de Baskervyle [sic],
knight, and Isabella Gryseley [sic] to remain in the marriage, which she
contracted in ignorance that Eustace de Whiteney [sic], knight, her first
husband, was related to Richard in the fourth degree of kindred, declaring their
past and future offspring legitimate. [27 May 1354]
1354 Calendar of Papal Registers Papal Letters III. 1342-1362. p.522.
2 Kal. Aug. Villeneuve by Avignon.
Confirmation, with exemplification, at the request of Richard de Baskervile
[sic], knight, and Isabella his wife, of the diocese of Hereford, of the
letters issued by Clement VI. 2 Non. June, anno 3, ruling, in the case of John,
earl of Warenne, and Joan de Barro, that dispensation for the marriage of
persons related in the fourth degree of kindred shall hold good if they are
related in the fourth and third degrees. [31 Jul 1354].
What seems to have happened here is that Sir Richard and his wife Isabel
obtained a papal dispensation for their marriage on the basis that Isabel's
first husband was related to Sir Richard in the fourth degree of kindred, but
that it soon emerged that there was a closer relationship, in the third degree,
between the two husbands. The existence of this closer relationship between
the two husbands, not covered by the dispensation, might have thrown doubt on
the efficacy of the dispensation. But fortunately there was a papal
precedent available from an earlier ruling in the case of Warenne and de Barre, so
that Sir Richard's dispensation held good.
Does anybody know how Sir Richard was related to Sir Eustace de Whitney, or
who Isabel was, or when her marriages may have taken place?
Secondary sources variously give her as a Paveley or a Hampton. But was she
perhaps a Grisley?
Apart from the Papal documents I have yet to find any contemporary documents
mentioning any Isabel as wife of any of the Baskervilles. What we do have,
though, are references found by Tony Ingham to the following 14th century
wives of various Richard Baskervilles:-
A. Philippa, wife of RB(1), lord of Eardisley in 1323/4, when RB(1) and
Philippa settled Eardisley by Fine on themselves for life, with remainder to
RB(1)'s grandson Richard (RB2), son of RB(1)'s son Walter, and RB(2)'s wife
Joan, daughter of Nicholas Poynings. Philippa's maiden name is not stated, but I
think she must have been a Solers heiress, since I cannot otherwise account
for the appearance of the Solers arms - argent a chevron between three lions'
heads erased gules- on later Baskerville quarterings.
I take RB(1) to be the younger brother and successor of the Walter
Baskerville who died in 1286 as Lord of Eardisley, Combe, Orcop, Stretton Sugwas etc:
IPM C133/44/1. I have no date for the death of RB(1), but he must have lived
to a great age if he was still alive in 1323/4, since he and his brother
Walter were I believe the sons of an earlier Walter B whose IPM (C132/1/20) is
dated 1244. At any rate he was it seems sheriff of Herefordshire in 8 and 9
EII, when he must have been aged 70 or so.
B. Joan, daughter of Nicholas Poynings, married to RB(2) by 1323/4, named in
the Fine of that year. Morgan G.Watkins ("Collections ...in continuation of
Duncumb's History", 1897) asserts that RB(2) died in 1344, and that he was
succeeded by his son Sir Richard, perhaps RB(3). I have yet to trace an IPM for
him. But I think that he may have lived beyond 1348- see the Fine next
mentioned
C. Joan, daughter of Adam de Everingham, married to RB(3), who was I suggest
the son of RB(2). By a Fine dated the quinzaine of Hilary 1348/9 a Sir
Richard B settled the manor of Combe Baskerville on a Richard B and his wife, the
said Joan, and the heirs of their bodies, at an annual rent of a rose at the
Nativity of St John Baptist, with remainder to Sir Richard and his heirs, in
return for 100 marks of silver. A John de Stretton is named as the guardian
of the querents, which suggests that RB(3) was still an infant at the date of
the Fine. The Fine does not state any relationship between the Baskerville pa
rties, but the annual rent of a rose suggests one, and I would guess that the
100 marks may have been provided by Adam de Everingham as a dowry, paid to
the bridegroom's father in return for the settlement of the manor of Combe as
a home for the young couple
It appears that RB(3) died 1374 (IPMs C135/236/13 and C136/1/7), as lord of
Eardisley (Cal Pat Rot 48 EIII v16, 57) and had a son and heir Richard (4),
perhaps by his wife Joan Everingham, although if this Joan was already married
to RB(3) by 1349 it seems surprising that their eldest son was born as late
as 30th January 1369/70 (IPMs C135/236/13 and C136/1/7). Richard (3)'s
widow Joan (not necessarily Joan de Everingham)remarried Giles de "Malore":- see
Cal.Pat.Rot. EIII, v.16,199.
The identification of the various Richard Baskervilles, and their wives, has
been hopelessly confused by the work of Watkins. As an example, his
identification of Joan Everingham as the wife of RB(4) can be mentioned: he gives
this Richard Baskerville, d. 1396, as her husband, even though we know that this
Joan was already married by 1349, 20 years before the birth of RB(4)! She
may or may not have been his mother, but she was certainly not his wife. (I
have seen no reliable evidence as to the identity of his wife).
I am no further forward in identifying who may have been the children of
Isabel de Everingham and her husband Sir Richard B, married by 1354. Watkins,
op. cit., asserts erroneously that Isabel was the daughter of Sir Richard
Hampton.
All help, or criticisms, would be greatly welcomed
MM
mj...@btinternet.com
Dear Michael
Very interesting - as usual. It amazes me that there is both so much
material on the Baskervilles, and such a relative paucity of reliable
published studies of them as a whole. You and Tony seem to be doing a
sterling job at sorting them out. I seem to recall a putative Solers
heiress (earlier than 1320) in one or two of the Visitation records -
I presume that placement has been debunked?
I will try to pull out my Baskerville papers tomorrow afternoon, and
will post again once I have been through them, in case there are any
useful snippets for you. Keep up the good work!
Kind regards,
Michael Andrews-Reading
al...@mindspring.com
I would have to second that. Excellent work. Burke's Landed Gentry
(1852) sub Baskerville has some information but it appears to be weak
(not surprisingly). This family deserves more work. There was an
Eustace Whitney who died about 1346 as I recall alleged to have
married Elizabeth Freville. I do not have either line well documented
but I do not see any possible connection as yet. The line I have from
BLG is:
Richard d. 1297 m. Philippa de Solers
Walter d. 1319 m. Sybil Corbet
Richard d. abt 1344 m. Joan Poyntz (not Poynings)
Richard m. Isabel dau of Walter Paveley (not clear which one)
Richard d. 1395 m. Joan de Everingham (dau. Adam)
John d. 1415 etc.
Usual disclaimer - I wouldn't enter the above in any database (it is
likely wrong).
A Joan de Everingham dau. of Adam was married to William de Routh (d.
aft 1370 according toChris Humphrey, A Short History of the Family of
Routh, (2002). It is possible she was daughter of Adam II and that
the other Joan was daughter of Adam I. There are many possibilities
here including a Baskerville generation left out in this descent. It
would appear from what you posted that one Richard de B. was married
to a Joan de Everingham bef. 1348/9 but this may well have been a
child marriage with children born some years later.
Particularly with the dispensation that you cited, sorting this out
might prove very interesting.
Doug Smith
WJhonson
This John Baskerville is said to have been born 12 Feb 1403
Was he the son of that Richard de Baskerville who you've said was born 30 Jan 1369/70 ?
Thanks
Will Johnson
mj...@btinternet.com
All I have on this (in case it helps to date things) is this:
Elizabeth de Freville, daughter of Sir Alexande de Freville and Joan
Cromwell, married circa 1301 Eustace de Whitney:
"agreement made on 5 June, 29 Edward I before the Bishop, between Sir
Alexander de Frevylle and Eustace de Wyteneye, touching the marriage
between the said Eustace and Elizabeth, daughter of the said
Alexander; various settlements of lands, etc; witnesses: Sir Robert de
Chandos, the Lady Joan de Friville, mother of [Elizabeth], and John de
Stan', parson of Rippel'" (Episcopal Registers, Diocese of Worcester,
Bishop Godfrey Giffard)
Millerf...@aol.com
mother was Elizabeth, daughter and heiress of John Brugge of Letton. His
grandfather Richard had died in 1395, not long after proving his age at
C136/79/9 in 16 RII.
The John said to have been born in 1403 died in 1455: his IPM is at
C139/175/10, dated to 38-9 HVI.
His son Sir James was not KB, I think, but according to C.J Robinson's
Castles of Herefordshire he was knighted as a Banneret after some heroics at the
battle of Stoke in 1487. However the full acount of the battle given in
tudorplace.com.ar/Documents/the battle of stoke.htm
does not include him among the list of royalists knighted on that occasion.
Other secondary sources show Sir James as having been knighted at Henry
VII's coronation, but I have seen no primary source for this. His IPM dated 14
HVII (E150/408/1) shows him as a knight.
Hope that helps, Will
MM
WJhonson
His son Sir James was not KB, I think, but according to C.J Robinson's
Castles of Herefordshire he was knighted as a Banneret after some heroics at the
battle of Stoke in 1487. >>
I quote below
Will Johnson
Subj: Re: Hounding the BASKERVILLES
Date: 2/13/07 10:11:02 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: Millerf...@aol.com
To: gen-me...@rootsweb.com
On 1st Feb Louise Staley posted
<snip>
The main Eardisley Castle Baskerville seems to be;
<1. Sir John = Elizabeth Tuchet
<2. Sir James = Sybil Devereux
<snip>
I can confirm this line. There are IPMs for Sir James (E 150/408/1, dated 1499),
who was made Knight of the Bath at Henry VII's coronation, and
Matthew Connolly
[edit]
>
> The identification of the various Richard Baskervilles, and their wives, has
> been hopelessly confused by the work of Watkins. As an example, his
> identification of Joan Everingham as the wife of RB(4) can be mentioned: he gives
> this Richard Baskerville, d. 1396, as her husband, even though we know that this
> Joan was already married by 1349, 20 years before the birth of RB(4)! She
> may or may not have been his mother, but she was certainly not his wife. (I
> have seen no reliable evidence as to the identity of his wife).
>
His [RB(4)'s] wife seems to have been named Margaret- see Rosie
Bevan's work on Sir Nicholas Montgomery (I) of Cubley (c.1357-1424),
at number 11 here
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.genealogy.medieval/browse_thread/thread/3373814a2d8d7f37/c2f4fe41b972205c?lnk=gst
where she writes:
"Nicholas was married subsequently to Margaret, widow of Richard
Baskerville (1370-1394), and mother of John Baskerville, probably by
1403 when he was ordered by Henry IV to fortify Eardisley castle, a
Baskerville possession, against the Welsh. [Pedigrees of the Plea
Rolls, The Genealogist, v.16 p.86 ; M.Salter, The Castles of
Herefordshire and Worcestershire, 1992. p.19]. [...] Margaret and
Nicholas were involved in a suit over the manor of Chabnor,
Herefordshire
with Richard de la Bere in 1413 [The Genealogist v.16 p.86]. Nicholas
died
in 1424 and Margaret was still living in 1436 when she was assessed at
£26
income in Derbyshire [English Historical Review 49:631-2]"
>From the above, The Genealogist reference in particular should be
worth looking at.
Millerf...@aol.com
Matthew Connolly writes (citing earlier posts of Rosie Bevan):-
<Nicholas [Montgomery of Cubley] was married subsequently to Margaret, widow
of Richard
<Baskerville (1370-1394), and mother of John Baskerville.
Thank you very much, Matthew, for the helpful reference to Rosie Bevans's
earlier work. I noticed that Rosie did not give a maiden name for this Margaret.
Does anybody have a clue as to who her parents might have been? I suppose
she may have been a "king's widow", since the remarriage of Richard's mother
Joan to Giles de Malore was treated as requiring the king's licence in 1375.
But that may have been because the chief lords of Eardisley (at the death of
Richard's father), namely William Ferrers of Groby and Eleanor and Mary de
Bohun (later the wife of Henry, Earl of Richmond, who became Henry IV, were
all infant wards of the crown: see Cal.Pat.Rot. Edw III, v16,57.
I am not sure whether any of the Baskerville lands in Herefordshire were
held in chief.
MM
Douglas Richardson
I've copied below an abstact of the marriage record of Eustace Whitney
and Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Alexander de Freville:
Source: Register of Bishop Godfrey Giffard, Part 3 (Episcopal Regs.,
Dioc. of Worc.) (1900), pg. 546:
Date: 1301 - "Agreement made on 5 June, 29 Edward I. [1301], before
the bishop, between Sir Alexander de Frevylle and Eustace de Wyteneye,
touching
the marriage between the said Eustace and Elizabeth, daughter of the
said Alexander. Various settlements of lands, &c. Witnesses: Sir
Robert de Chaundos, the lady Joan de Friville, mother of the lady, and
John de Stan', parson of Rippel'."
Date: 1301: "Memorandum of a bond by the bishop for 66l. 13s. 4d., to
Eustace de Whyteneye, husband of Elizabeth de Frevyll, upon his
marriage."). END OF QUOTE.
The above record shows that Eustace de Whitney was married about 5
June 1301 to Elizabeth de Freville, daughter of Sir Alexander de
Freville (died 1328), of Tarrington, Herefordshire [by his wife, Joan
de Cromwell]. Bishop Giffard was evidently interested in Elizabeth de
Freville's marriage, as he was the maternal uncle of Elizabeth's
father, Sir Alexander de Freville.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah