C.P. Addition: Maud de Vaux, wife of William de Roos, 1st Lord Roos of Helmsley

357 views
Skip to first unread message

Douglas Richardson

unread,
Aug 11, 2016, 2:22:22 PM8/11/16
to
Dear Newsgroup ~

Complete Peerage 11 (1949): 96–97 (sub Ros) has a good account of Sir William de Roos (died 1316), 1st Lord Roos of Helmsley. Regarding his marriage, the following information is provided:

"He married Maud, younger daughter (and in 1287 coheiress) of John de Vaux, son of Sir Oliver de Vaux. She probably predeceased her husband, and was buried in Pentney Priory, Norfolk, her bowels in the wall at Belvoir." END OF QUOTE.

My research indicates that Maud de Vaux was born about 1261 (aged 26 in 1287). Maud's parents were Sir John de Vaux, Knt., of Frieston, Lincolnshire, Cley, Hackford, Holt, Houghton in the Hole, East Walton, Shimpling, Shotesham, Tharston, Watton, and Whitwell, Norfolk, Little Abington, Cambridgeshire, Wisset, Suffolk, etc., Sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, 1263–4, 1265, by his 1st wife, Joan, sister of Peter de Peleville.

Complete Peerage gives few details of Maud de Vaux's life. I've located the following contemporary records which concern her.

1. Date: 11th and 12th Edward I. [1282-84].

"270. J'no de Vallibz [John de Vaux] v. William fil. ... de Ros and Matilda his wife, in the manors of Wacton and Whytewille, Hacford. (Wm. de Gyney app. clam.)."

Reference: Rye, Short Cal. Feet of Fines for Norfolk 1 (1885): 125.

2. Date: 32 Edward I [1303-4].

"918. Oliver de Redham v. Petronilla de Nerford of the manor of Shotesham. (William de Ros and Matilda his wife app. clam.)."

Reference: Rye, Short Cal. Feet of Fines for Norfolk 1 (1885): 160.

3. In 1305 William de Ros, of Helmsley, and his wife, Maud, had license to alienate in free alms to the Prior and convent of Pentney one acre of land in Shotesham, Norfolk, together with the advowson of the church of St. Mary in that town. Reference: VCH Norfolk 2 (1906): 389.

4. In Trinity term 1313 Thomas de Verdoun sued Pernel, widow of William de Nerford, and William de Ros, of Hamelak [Helmsley], and Maud his wife, in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a moiety of the manors of Holt and Cleye, Norfolk. Reference: Court of Common Pleas, CP40/199, image 20f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E2/CP40no199/aCP40no199fronts/IMG_0020.htm).

In 1314 William de Ros, of Hamelak, appointed Aleyn de Weybredd and Sir James de Houton to arrange matters between Sir Thomas de Verdoun and himself touching the manors of Holt and Cleye, Norfolk. Reference: Turner, Cal. Charters & Rolls: Bodleian Lib. (1878): 190.

5. On 17 June 1313 Alan de Waybrede conveyed the manor of Stoke Albany, Northamptonshire by fine to William and Maud and the heirs of William. Reference: National Archives, CP 25/1/175/64, #138 [see abstract of fine at http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/index.html].

6. In Easter term 1317 William son of William de Ros and [his aunt] Pernel, widow of William de Nereford, sued Simon de Heyford, executor of the will of Roger le Bigod, Marshal of England, in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of £28 18s. 7d. Reference: Court of Common Pleas, CP40/218, image 97f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E2/CP40no218/aCP40no218fronts/IMG_0097.htm).

Reviewing the above records, we see that William de Roos and his wife, Maud de Vaux, were married before 1282-4 (date of fine). Maud occurs in records in 1282-4, 1303-4, 1305, and 1313. She was last known to be living 17 June 1313 (date of fine). She evidently died before Easter term 1317, when her son and heir, William de Roos the younger, and her sister, Pernel de Neford, joined as plaintiffs in a Common Pleas lawsuit.

For interest's sake, the following is a list of the numerous 17th Century New World immigrants that descend from Maud de Vaux and her husband, William de Roos, Knt., 1st Lord Roos of Helmsley.

Robert Abell, Dannett Abney, Elizabeth Alsop, William Asfordby, Walter Aston, Frances Baldwin, Charles Barnes, Henry, Thomas & William Batte, Dorothy Beresford, Richard & William Bernard, Essex Beville, William Bladen, George & Nehemiah Blakiston, Joseph Bolles, Thomas Booth, Elizabeth Bosvile, George, Giles & Robert Brent, Nathaniel Browne, Obadiah Bruen, Stephen Bull, Nathaniel Burrough, Elizabeth, John, and Thomas Butler, Charles Calvert, Edward Carleton, Grace Chetwode, Jeremy Clarke, William Clopton, William Crymes, James Cudworth, Francis Dade, Humphrey Davie, Anne Derehaugh, William Farrer, John Fenwick, Henry Fleete, William Goddard, Muriel Gurdon, Katherine Hamby, Elizabeth & John Harleston, Anne Humphrey, Henry Isham, Edmund Jennings, Edmund Kempe, Mary Launce, Hannah, Samuel & Sarah Levis, Henry, Jane & Nicholas Lowe, Thomas Lunsford, Agnes Mackworth, Roger & Thomas Mallory, Anne, Elizabeth & John Mansfield, Elizabeth Marshall, Anne Mauleverer, Richard More, Joseph & Mary Need, John and Margaret Nelson, Philip & Thomas Nelson, Ellen Newton, Thomas Owsley, John Oxenbridge, Herbert Pelham, Robert Peyton, Henry & William Randolph, George Reade, William Rodney, Thomas Rudyard, Richard Saltonstall, William Skepper, Diana & Grey Skipwith, Mary Johanna Somerset, John Stockman, Samuel & William Torrey, Jemima Waldegrave, John & Lawrence Washington, Olive Welby, John West, Hawte Wyatt.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

joe...@gmail.com

unread,
Aug 11, 2016, 7:19:06 PM8/11/16
to
On Thursday, August 11, 2016 at 2:22:22 PM UTC-4, Douglas Richardson wrote:
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Complete Peerage 11 (1949): 96–97 (sub Ros) has a good account of Sir William de Roos (died 1316), 1st Lord Roos of Helmsley. Regarding his marriage, the following information is provided:
<snip>

> For interest's sake, the following is a list of the numerous 17th Century New World immigrants that descend from Maud de Vaux and her husband, William de Roos, Knt., 1st Lord Roos of Helmsley.
>
> Robert Abell, Dannett Abney, Elizabeth Alsop, William Asfordby, Walter Aston, Frances Baldwin, Charles Barnes, Henry, Thomas & William Batte, Dorothy Beresford, Richard & William Bernard, Essex Beville, William Bladen, George & Nehemiah Blakiston, Joseph Bolles, Thomas Booth, Elizabeth Bosvile, George, Giles & Robert Brent, Nathaniel Browne, Obadiah Bruen, Stephen Bull, Nathaniel Burrough, Elizabeth, John, and Thomas Butler, Charles Calvert, Edward Carleton, Grace Chetwode, Jeremy Clarke, William Clopton, William Crymes, James Cudworth, Francis Dade, Humphrey Davie, Anne Derehaugh, William Farrer, John Fenwick, Henry Fleete, William Goddard, Muriel Gurdon, Katherine Hamby, Elizabeth & John Harleston, Anne Humphrey, Henry Isham, Edmund Jennings, Edmund Kempe, Mary Launce, Hannah, Samuel & Sarah Levis, Henry, Jane & Nicholas Lowe, Thomas Lunsford, Agnes Mackworth, Roger & Thomas Mallory, Anne, Elizabeth & John Mansfield, Elizabeth Marshall, Anne Mauleverer, Richard More, Joseph & Mary Need, John and Margaret Nelson, Philip & Thomas Nelson, Ellen Newton, Thomas Owsley, John Oxenbridge, Herbert Pelham, Robert Peyton, Henry & William Randolph, George Reade, William Rodney, Thomas Rudyard, Richard Saltonstall, William Skepper, Diana & Grey Skipwith, Mary Johanna Somerset, John Stockman, Samuel & William Torrey, Jemima Waldegrave, John & Lawrence Washington, Olive Welby, John West, Hawte Wyatt.
>

Marshall Kirk would probably have added Thomas Bradbury (via Fulnetby) and Thomas Dudley (2x) to this list.
--jc

D. Spencer Hines

unread,
Aug 11, 2016, 7:55:46 PM8/11/16
to
Dear Douglas,

This is a very welcome and useful post. Thanks for taking the time and the
detailed effort to post it.

Aloha,

D. Spencer Hines

"[If] the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be
led, like sheep to the slaughter."

George Washington - Newburgh Address to Officers of the Continental Army, 15
March 1783, Headquarters, Newburgh, New York, United States of America

"Douglas Richardson" wrote in message
news:7bd5d4a5-1d80-4546...@googlegroups.com...

Dear Newsgroup ~

Complete Peerage 11 (1949): 96-97 (sub Ros) has a good account of Sir
William de Roos (died 1316), 1st Lord Roos of Helmsley. Regarding his
marriage, the following information is provided:

"He married Maud, younger daughter (and in 1287 coheiress) of John de Vaux,
son of Sir Oliver de Vaux. She probably predeceased her husband, and was
buried in Pentney Priory, Norfolk, her bowels in the wall at Belvoir." END
OF QUOTE.

My research indicates that Maud de Vaux was born about 1261 (aged 26 in
1287). Maud's parents were Sir John de Vaux, Knt., of Frieston,
Lincolnshire, Cley, Hackford, Holt, Houghton in the Hole, East Walton,
Shimpling, Shotesham, Tharston, Watton, and Whitwell, Norfolk, Little
Abington, Cambridgeshire, Wisset, Suffolk, etc., Sheriff of Norfolk and
Suffolk, 1263-4, 1265, by his 1st wife, Joan, sister of Peter de Peleville.

Douglas Richardson

unread,
Aug 12, 2016, 1:38:51 PM8/12/16
to
On Thursday, August 11, 2016 at 5:19:06 PM UTC-6, joe...@gmail.com wrote:

< Marshall Kirk would probably have added Thomas Bradbury (via Fulnetby) and Thomas Dudley (2x) to this list.
< --jc

Dear Joe ~

With regard to the immigrant, Thomas Bradbury, I haven't been able to document Marshall Kirk's claim that Thomas Bradbury descends from John Fulnetby (living 1524) and his wife, Jane Dymoke, by way of the Dynwell family. Mr. Kirk could well be right about the Fulnetby-Dynwell connection but further evidence is needed to prove this theory. At the present time, I consider the Fulnetby-Dynwell connection a strong possibility. If you have additional evidence to clinch this line of descent, I'd very much like to see it.

With regard to Marshall Kirk's theory about the paternal ancestry of Gov. Thomas Dudley, I've failed to find any evidence whatsoever to connect his father, Capt. Roger Dudley, with Roger's alleged father, Henry Dudley. By his own admission to me in private, Mr. Kirk considered no other possibilities regarding Capt. Roger Dudley's parentage. In short, he tried to fit the evidence to his theory, rather than looking at all possible solutions. A better research approach would have been to consider all options, not just narrow down the focus to one and only one solution.

Hans Vogels

unread,
Aug 13, 2016, 4:33:26 AM8/13/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
Your remark about Marshall Kirk initiated an interest in his contributions here. I find that your remark is somehow at odds to his no nonsense approach. I can recall, as I still do, reading his contributions with interest for his outstanding views. As you participated in several of those strings it looks to me as if your approach has not improved with the years.

Hans Vogels


Op vrijdag 12 augustus 2016 19:38:51 UTC+2 schreef Douglas Richardson:

joe...@gmail.com

unread,
Aug 13, 2016, 6:11:09 PM8/13/16
to
To be fair to Marshall, he had a lot more confidence in the line than you hint at. He had done an exhaustive study of Sutton Dudley's.

Here is him fantisizing about having the time to write all the evidence into a formal work, and estimated it at 75pp.

https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!searchin/soc.genealogy.medieval/Marshall$20kirk$20dudley/soc.genealogy.medieval/xgMNMRNvYjo

Possibly it will all be resolved soon. There is an extensive work on the Dudley's underway. I would not be surprised to see it published sometime next year.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages