Zouche of Lubbesthorpe (revisited)
The...@aol.com
Hello All,
The following, from Wrottesley’s Pedigrees from the Plea
Rolls, was noted earlier today [1]:
‘ Curia Regis Roll. Hillary. 7. Hen. 3.
Salop. - Roger de la Zuche sued the Abbot of Shrewsbury for the
advowson of the church of Twange (Tong).
Philip de Beaumes, seised temp. H. 1.
_____I___________________________________________________
I I I
Philip, Ralph, Alice.
ob.s.p. ob.s.p. I
______________________________________________I
I I
William de la Zuche, Roger de la Zuche,
ob. s.p. the plaintiff.
This is an interesting record from 1222/3, confirming in part
the de Belmeis (‘Beaumes’) descent of the Zouche family, and
further evidencing that Sir Roger la Zouche had a brother William
(evidently his elder brother, whom he succeeded). The one prior
reference I have seen to Sir Roger la Zouche having an older
brother William was given in the HSP pedigree for St. Andrew, as
follows [2]:
Galfridus Vicomes de Porhoet.
I
I
Alanus la Zouche quondam comes Britanniae. = Alicia soror et haeres
I Ranulphi de Beaumeis.
______________________________________I___
I I
Guiliemus la Zouch, ob. s.p. Rogerus la Zouche =
frater et haeres I
14. H. 3. I
____________________________________________________I
I I
Gulielmus la Zouche 1. Alanus la Zouche = Elena filia secunda
53 H. 3. filius et haeres, et una haeredum
= Johanna 33 Ed. 1 Rogeri de Quincy
I Comitis Wintoniae
I ob. 24 E. 1)
__I_________________________________________
I I
Rogerus la Zouche miles cui = Juliana Jocosa = Dns Robertus
Milicenta de Montealto (uxor I de Mortumari.
Eudonis la Zouche sororq et haeres I
Georgii de Cantilupo) dedit manerium I
de Lobesthorp in Com. Leic. Willielmus cognomento
I Zouche =
I
I
Matildis = Rogerus la Zouche = Foelicia uxor 2a
uxor 1a I miles, 1 E. 3. I 1 E. 3.
I I
I I___________________________
I I
_______I_____________________________________ I
I I I I
Juliana Margareta Willielmus la Johanna
soror et cohaeres soror et Zouche miles, uxor
Will'i la Zouche, mil. cohaeres uxor filius et Marmaduci
=Johannes de S. Andrea Willielmi Bredon haeres Constable.
miles, 3 E.3, 14 E.3. 22 E.3 et
37 E. 3.
Thanks again to our friends at Google, I noted the text now
available of ‘The Manuscripts of His Grace the Duke of Rutland’.
Among several gems, a two-page section was noted (text in full
below) of the ‘Lubbesthorpe Charters’ [3].
Several items/points were noted in reviewing the charters
(or rather, translated extracts of the charters), of varying
import:
1. Sir Roger la Zouche of Lubbesthorpe, the ‘elder’, died
before 30 Sept 1302 (dated of the first document). His
death date was previously known only to have been prior
to his IPM of 28 August 1303.
2. Sir Roger ‘the elder’ was known to have had a son and
heir, Sir Roger ‘the younger’, and a younger son Ralph.
We now know he had two younger sons besides Ralph:
Eudo and Alan (named in the same first document).
3. The arms of Zouche of Lubbesthorpe are shown in the
extracts (charters of William la Zouche, son and heir
of Sir Roger ‘the younger’ of Lubbesthorpe) as
‘ Zouche [i.e. Gules, 10 Bezants] with a label. ‘ [4]
These arms (tinctures unknown) appear to be identical
to those of Mortimer of Richard’s Castle:
‘ Gules, 10 Bezants, a label of 3 points Azure.’
These arms reflect no difference for bastardy, so
we can comfortably assume the Zouche of Lubbesthorpe
descent (paternal) was a legitimate one.
A review of the Rutland MSS. below finds these charters, and
the dates for same, correspond with surprising accuracy to the
1662-1664 Visitation of Nottinghamshire pedigree above. Certain
of the charter references in the pedigree (1 E. 3 and 37 E. 3)
appear to correspond to specific charters in the Rutland MSS.
concerning Sir Roger la Zouche (1326-7) and his son Sir William
la Zouche (1363/4). The one discrepancy noted in the charter
texts: the grant of ‘Milisent de Montealto’ of Lubbesthorpe was
to Roger la Zouche, not to Richard (whether a transcription
error or other is not made clear). The only noticeable defects
in the 1662-4 pedigree are:
1. The first Alan la Zouche was not ‘sometime count of
Brittany’ ["quondam comes Britanniae"].
2. The mother of Joyce la Zouche, wife of Robert de
Mortimer and mother of Sir William (of Richard’s
Castle) was Maud de Hobrugg, not Joan.
Further, the arms of Zouche of Lubbesthorpe used in sealing
these charters are apparently the same as those of Mortimer of
Richard’s Castle, the first of whom (William) is shown as a
first cousin of Sir Roger la Zouche ‘the younger’ of
Lubbesthorpe [the only other arms cited: those of Zouche of
Harringworth, and those of Constable of Flamborough]. This
would appear to be appropriate, except that (if the pedigree
is correct) the adoption of these arms by Mortimer of Richard’s
Castle would have not been correct: Joyce, mother of the first
Sir William of this line, would have been the heiress of her
mother (Maud de Hobrugg, and not Joan as in the pedigree) but
not of her father.
I hope the foregoing, and the text given below, is of
interest. I look forward to hearing the views of other list
members with an interest in these families.
Cheers,
John *
NOTES
[1] Hon. George Wrottesley, Pedigrees from the Plea Rolls
(The Genealogist (N.S.), 1904), XX:223.
[2] Pedigree of St. Andrew, Visitation of Nottinghamshire,
HSP 5:19-20, courtesy Douglas Richardson.
[3] Historical Manuscripts Commission, The Manuscripts of His
Grace the Duke of Rutland, K.G. Preserved at Belvoir Castle
(London: Printed for His Majesty's Stationery Office by
Mackie & Co., LD., 1905) IV:10-11. The text in question
follows:
[3. LUBBESTHORPE CHARTERS.]
(26) 30 Sept. 1302. - Agreement between William la Zousche and
Juliana relict of Roger la Zousche, by which William grants to
Juliana the custody of the land of Roger son and heir of the
above Roger, of which his father died seised, for twenty-eight
pounds thirteen shillings and fourpence payable to him annually
at Haryngworth, till Roger is of age. And William grants that
ten marcs be allowed to Juliana annually, out of the above ferm,
to the use of her sons Eudo and Alan, which sum was assigned to
them by their father Roger, etc. (long detailed provisions
relating to the wardship).
Armorial seal: Zouche, with a canton.
(26) 15 Jan. 1328-9. - Notification of William la Zouche of
Haringeworthe that he has inspected and confirmed the charter of
Milicent his mother to Roger son of William la Zouche for (de)
the manor of Lubesthorp, as follows:-
[1289-1296.] - Charter of Milisent de Montealto, in her
widowhood, enfeoffing Richard la Zouche, son of Sir
William la Zouche in her manor of Lubesthorp, rendering
therefor to her and her heirs, on June 29 annually, a
chaplet of roses to be placed on the head of the image
of St. Peter in the church of Lubesthorp in her name.
Witnesses: Roger la Zouche, Alan la Zouche, Robert
Neyville, Alexander de harecourt, Andrew de Estoleye,
Peter son of Roger, John Fitz Peter, Henry de Notyngham,
John de Folevyle, knights; master Henry de Brandeston,
and Sirs (domini) Hugh de Brandeston, and John la Zouche.
Witnesses to Inspeximus: Robert Burdet, William Moton the
younger, Robert Champayn, Nicholas Charneyl, Ralph Malure,
knights (and 3 others).
Lubesthorp, Sunday after St. Hilary, 2 Edw. III.
Armorial seal: Zouche with a canton.
(26) Charter of William la Zousch’, lord of Haryngworth,
enfeoffing Roger la Zousch’, knight, son of Roger la Zousch’,
in his manor of Lubbesthorp for the above service.
Lubbesthorpe, Sunday after St. Peter’s Chair, 1 Edw. III.
[29 Feb. 1326-7].
Armorial seal: Zouche with a canton.
(26) 13 March 1362-3. - A feoffment by William la Souche,
chivaler, of ‘Sires’ Reynald son of William Hayward of Dalby
and John Wryght of Somerdeby is witnessed by William abbot of
Leicester, Ralf Turvyll of Normanton and three others.
Armorial seal of William: Zouche with a label.
(26) 6 Oct. 1377. - Receipt from Juliane relict of John Seint
Andrew ‘que dieux assoile’ to Robert de Swyllyngton ‘luncle’ for
six pounds thirteen shillings and fourpence paid her from the
manor of Lubstorp, for the Christmas and Easter terms last past.
Armorial seal: Seint Andrew (mascally, with a label) impaling
Zouche. Legend: S. IU..... O ANDREA.
(26) Deed of William la Zouche of Lobisthorp granting 100
shillings or rent there to Nicholas Grene of Isham, 25 July
37 Ed. III. [1363].
Armorial seal: Zouche with a label.
(26) April 1364. - Deed of William la Zouche of Lubesthorp,
knight, vesting his manor of Lubesthorp in feoffees. Monday
after St. Gregory, 38 Ed. III.
Armorial seal: Zouche with a label.
(26) 6 Nov. 1425. - Lease of the third part of the manor of
Lubbesthorp’ from Robert Cunstable of Holme in Spaldyngmore to
Thomas Assheby of Lowesby the elder for the term of his life
and two hundred years beyond, for a hundred shillings a year,
from which Robert undertakes to pay thirty shillings a year to
Katherine relict of Marmaduke Cunstable his father during her
life. Among the witnesses is Thomas Assheby the younger.
Armorial seal of Robert: Quarterly ( ) and vair, a bend.
Counterpart of preceding. Armorial seal of Thomas ‘Asseby’:
two bars.
(16) Letter of attorney from Robert Constable, knight,
concerning th third part of the manor of Lubbesthorp 5 Nov.,
4 Henry VI. [1425].
Armorial seal: Quarterly ( ) and vair, a bend.
(26) 1433. - Feoffment by Thomas Assheby of Lobesthorp, the
elder, of Ralf Assheby his son, and Isabel, Ralf’s wife, in a
third part of the manor of Lobesthorp; to be held in free
marriage, with reversion to himself in default of their having
issue.
Hiis testibus: Roberto Moton milite; Willelmo Trussell milite;
Thoma Fowlehyrst armigero; Baldewino Bugg’ armigero; Ricardo
Danet armigero.
Lobesthorp, 28 Jan. 11 Hen. VI [1432/3].
Armorial seal of Thomas: Two bars.
(26) Quitclaim from Robert Constable knight of his rights in
a third part of Lubsthorp, 8 June, 10 Edw. IV. [1470].
Armorial seal: Impaling Quarterly ( ) and vair, a bend.
[4] Historical Manuscripts Commission, ibid.
* John P. Ravilious
Douglas Richardson
Thank you for your good post. Much appreciated.
In regards to your comments about Roger la Zouche, of Lubbesthorpe,
Leicestershire, you're quite correct that there is most likely an error
in the transcript of the charter dated 1289-1296 in which Milicent de
Mohaut, widow of Sir Eudes la Zouche, granted the manor of
Lubbesthorpe, Leicestershire to "Richard" la Zouche, son of Sir William
la Zouche. As you have noted, this manor was actually granted to Roger
la Zouche, son of Sir William la Zouche.
That Roger, not Richard, la Zouche was the grantee of Lubbesthorpe is
directly stated in another Zouche family charter that I've found
published elsewhere:
"3 May 1406. - Grant by Monsieur William la Zouche, "seigneur" de
Harringworth, to Thomas Assheby, of the custody, during the minority of
Robert, son and heir of Monsieur Marmaduke Constable, of a third part
of the Manor, it [i.e. the Manor] having been held of the grantor in
chief by Marmduke, together with Robert Seint Andrew and Thomas
Assheby, severally and in purparty, for estates in tail, by the service
of one knight - they being the heirs of Roger son of William la Zouche,
to whom the Manor had been granted for an estate tail by Milicent de
Montalt; the ultimate remainder in default of their issue belonging to
the grantor. - Dated at London, 2 May, 7 Henry IV. In French. Very
fine remains of his Seal of Arms - bezantée (ten shewing), a canton
ermine; the shield (which is perfect and fine) couchée from helm
surmounted by crest - out of a coronet a mule's head; to the dexter
side of the helm (the other side is missing), an eagle rising.
[Legend:] ............ DE HARYNGWORTH." [Reference: Report on the MSS
of Reginald Rawdon Hastings, Esq. 1 (Hist. MSS Comm. 78) (1928): 60].
There is also in print a transcript of another charter in which
Milicent de Mohaut, widow of Sir Eudes la Zouche, specifically
addresses Roger la Zouche, who she calls "her beloved and faithful":
"12 March 1280/1. - Letters Patent of Milicent de Monte Alto, widow,
acknowledging that "her beloved and faithful" Roger la Zusche had
returned his account, before her and "her beloved and faithful" Sir
John de Harigworte, chaplain, and WIlliam de Kaune, clerk, and before
Thomas la Zusche, then steward of her household, comprising all his
receipts and expenses from the first day of his employment to the feast
of the Purification, 9 Edward I; and releasing him from the said
account. Witnesses - "the said auditors, Sir Richard de Geytynton,
chaplain, William de Harigworthe, clerk, John de Houdeyng, then
bailiff, and others. - St. Gregory the Pope, 9 Edward I. Her very fine
and nearly perfect pointed oval Seal, in green wax - her full-length
figure in long Empire dress and cloak, the dress charged with rows of
roundles nearly to the bottom, the lining of the cloak charged with
vair spots; square flat head dress; in either hand she holds a shield,
that to the dexter is charged with a lion rampant, that to the sinister
defaced, but suggestive of three leopards' faces inverted jessant de
lys. Legend: S' MILISENTE .........TO." [Reference: Report on the MSS
of Reginald Rawdon Hastings, Esq. 1 (Hist. MSS Comm. 78) (1928): 143].
Birch gives a similar seal for Milicent de Mohaut in his work,
Catalogue of Seals in the British Museum, 2 (1892): 393:
Pointed oval. In tightly-fitting dress, fur cloak, in each hand a
shield of arms. Standing on a carved corbel. Arms: right hand a lion
rampant, MONTALT; left hand three leopards' heads jessants-de-lis,
CANTELOWE. In the field on each side a wavy sprig of foliage).
We see above that a Thomas la Zouche was acting as Milicent de Mohaut's
steward in 1281. This Thomas la Zouche is surely the same person as
Thomas son of Eudes la Zouche who in 1307 was owed a debt in
Northamptonshire. In 1313 Thomas was pardoned for his involvement in
the death of Peter de Gavaston, Earl of Cornwall. In 1324 he was
pardoned for acquiring without license of King Edward I (prior to 1307)
five messuages and lands in Basford, Nottinghamshire for life from
William la Zouche [presumably his brother] [References: J. Throsby
Thoroton's Hist. of Nottinghamshire, 2: 227; Calendar of Patent
Rolls, 1321-1324 (1904): 393; C. Moor Knights of Edward I 5: 225].
If the same Thomas la Zouche is involved in all of these records, it
seems obvious that Thomas la Zouche was very likely the step-son of
Milicent de Mohaut, he being the son of Sir Eudes la Zouche (died
1279), by an unknown 1st wife or mistress. It seems possible that
Thomas la Zouche was a legitimate son of Eudes la Zouche. As best I
know, all of Eudes la Zouche's known land holdings were derived from
his wife, Milicent's extensive Cantelowe inheritance; if Eudes had a
son by a priior marriage, it would be obscured by the passage of all of
Eudes' wife's lands to their son, William la Zouche. There appears to
have been no inquisition post mortem taken following Sir Eudes la
Zouche's death.
With respect to the identity of Sir William la Zouche, father of Roger
la Zouche of Lubbesthorpe, he is undoubtedly the Sir William la Zouche,
Knt. (died 1272), of King's Nympton, Devon, Farleigh Wallop,
Hampshire, and Norton, Northamptonshire, which individual was the
brother of Milicent de Mohaut's husband, Sir Eudes la Zouche. Complete
Peerage 12 Pt. 2 (1959): 957 (sub Zouche) states that Sir William la
Zouche was survived by a sole daughter and heiress, Joyce la Zouche,
wife of Robert de Mortimer, but this is not correct. My research
indicates that Sir William la Zouche was actually survived by a son and
heir, William la Zouche the younger. Upon the death of the younger
William, the family estates fell to his full sister, Joyce la Zouche,
widow of Ncholas de Whelton, and then wife of Robert de Mortimer. It
appears that Roger la Zouche, later of Lubbesthorpe, was excluded from
the Zouche family inheritance, he being a brother of the half blood to
William la Zouche the younger.
Furthermore, given that Milicent de Mohaut addresses Roger la Zouche of
Lubbesthorpe as "her beloved and faithful," and not otherwise, I
believe this is fatal to the theory that Roger la Zouche was married to
an hitherto unknown daughter of Milicent de Mohaut's 1st marriage to
John de Mohaut. Had Roger la Zouche been married to Milicent de
Mohaut's daughter, or contracted to marry her daughter, this would
likely have been mentioned in either the charter that I have copied
above, or the one you cited in your post.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www.royalancestry.net
Patricia Junkin
Are we missing a line?
The William la Zouche son of Alice de Belmeis and Alan la Zouche took the
name de Belmeis. I am still searching for the answer to which William died
in 1199. Some sources are inclined to say it was the William la Zouche de
Belmeis. "Universis ecclesie filiis Willielmus de Belmeys filius Alan la
Zouch, salutem. Noverit, universitas vestra me dedisse, & c. canonicis de
Lillishull, pro salute mea, & anima patris mei Alani la Zouch & matris mee
Adhelize de Belmeys, & pro animabus Philipps de Belmeys senioris & Philippi
junioris, & Ranulphi fratris sui & omnium antecessorum &c. ecclesiam de
Esseby."
The children of Alan and Alice were, then, William la Zouche de Belmeis,
Roger la Zouche and possibly Philip. There is a William de Belmeis I,
archdcn. of London, prob. from before Jan. 1127 to Sept. 1152 or later.
Richard de Belmeis II, Bishop of London, 1152-1162.] Was there william de
Belmeis II to whom a death date of 1199 is assigned?
This Roger b.c. 1175 married Margaret Byset and had, at least: Alan, Eudo,
William, Lora and Alice. Several sources state that Alan had a brother Eudo
and in the 1251 PLEAS OF THE CROWN 36 HENRY III [12512] 15. Four unknown
malefactors encountered Richard son of the Parson on London Bridge. A
quarrel arising among them, they killed Richard and at once fled. It is not
known who they were. Richard Kyngesfeld and Ralph de Bradele were then in
company with Richard and were attached. They do not come and are not
suspected. Richard was attached by Ivor la Suche and William la Suzche
....The 1269 confirmation by Roger la Zuche, son and heir of Sir Alan la
Zuche, to the leprous women and the prior and brethren of Maydenebradelegh
is witnessed by Sirs Ivo la Zuche, Alan la Zuche.
If the transcription in Monasticon is correct then the Willielmi la Zouche
:Omnibus Christi fidelibus ad quospraesentes literae pervenerint, Willielmus
la Zouche, filius Rogeri la Zouche, salutem in Domino sempiternam. Noveritis
nos inspexisse omnes chartas et munimenta Rogeri patris nostri, ac chartaset
munimenta Alani Zouche avi nostri quondam comitis Britanniae facta priori
de Swavesey....is not the son of Alice and Alan but of Roger and Margaret
who in 1237 acquires Kings Nympton of his father, Roger. CPXII/2 p. 957 .
According to a post by Adrian from [Page 86, Vol iii] THE BATTLE ABBEY
ROLL. Alan, first Lord Zouche of Ashby was living in 1186, and is not said
on good authority to have been son of any Earl Alan, but of Geoffrey,
Vicomte of Rohan. Moreover, this Alan La Zouche of Ashby was succeeded by
his son William, William by his brother Roger, and Roger by his son Alan -
a descent not strictly identical with anything implied in the Swavesey
charter. (Nevertheless) Alan La Zouche, the undoubted founder of the family,
who in his charter to Lilleshall Priory styles himself "son of Geoffrey le
Vicomte," lived in the time of Henry II.,
And your note , John, ( 1. The first Alan la Zouche was not ’Äòsometime
count of Brittany’Äô ["quondam comes Britanniae"]) further questions the
validity of Dugdale's transcription.
Presumption then, according to Douglas, is that this William of Kings
Nympton is the same as the William of Essex b. c. 1198-1200. Is this the
same William is mentioned in Surrey and Sussex in the early 13th c.? In 1262
³Hundred of Bullingfield XXIII William la Zouche (Suche) the Sheriff, took ,
by Exchequer summons 40 s. from the vill of Cuckfield (Cokkefeld) and did
not aquit the debtors...William la Zouche was Sherrif of Sussex 1262-63.
Certainly Alan and Adeliza held interest there: date: 12th cBy (a) Alan la
Scuche and Alice de Belmeis his wife to (b) William de Alta Ripa [Dawtrey]
for homage and on remission to (a) of the right which (b) had in (a)'s woods
(nemoribus) of Forsistnd' (sic). I have a note without source that states
in 1196 William de Belmeis was charged scutage on 3 knight¹s fees in Sussex.
Most Belmeis land descended in the line of Alan-Roger-Alan, e.g.. Philip de
Belmeis, lord of the manor of Ashby (of which Blackfordby forms part), gave
the chapel of Blackfordby, with sixty acres attached, to the Abbey of
Lilleshull, in Shropshire. In 1313, the abbot of Lilleshull held half a
knight's fee in Blackfordby of Alan la Zouch who in the same year
appropriated North Molton to the monastery of Lilleshull, in Shropshire.
That a William was the father of Roger of Lubbesthorpe is accepted. In 1268
Milicent de Cantilupo de Montaldt grants William la Zouche, Lobesthorp.
"service of third of knight's fee of the gift of Millicent de Montealto in
52 Hen III." Lubbesthorpe was purchased by Sir William de Kalna (Cantilupe)
by 1253. In 1255 his heir George, brother to Milicent, is not quite 3 years
old and all rents of his 19 hides in Bedfordshire were assigned by Sir
William Cantilupo to John de Montealto, with his daughter. On Milicent's
death, her heir is her son William born ca. 1276. If in 1286, 28 Ap. Roger
la Zouche of Lubbsesthorpe "going over seas with K. he nominates attorneys,
³ then we must assume he is an adult born c.a. 1266 or before and his
father, William then before 1246. This William seems to be contemporary with
Milicent and Eudo.
Milicent's lands were tied to the de Boscos. William de Bois [Bosco]
enfeoffed Milicent in all his lands in the counties of Leicester, Warwick
and Northampton and in 1292, a suit took place between William de Bois
[Bosco}, plaintiff, and Peter Helewell and John la Zuche, defendants,
concrning the manors of Thorp Ernauld, Brentingby, Bushby, Belgrave and
Stretton and two knights fees in Great Peatling, Aylmerthorpe, Kyleby, and
Croston co. Leiocester, and divers lands in Weston, Wibtoft &c. co. Warwick;
Which ended in a settlement of the whole on William de Bois for life with
the remainder to William Zuch and Maud his wife, and their heirs; remainder
to the heirs of Maud; and then right heirs of William de Bois. Among the
settlements of Clarrell in Yorks is a document witnessed in late Hen.
III)bySir Maula Suche, Sir Ernulf de Bosco, Sir Wm. de Medburn, Sir Wm. de
Beurnais (Beaumais?) and Sir Wm. de Charneley, kts..
We have here two unidentified la Zouche men, John and Maula. Was John a son
of Milicent's and, if so, where does he fit? And, which William is the
father of Almaric?
In 1289 Emery (Almaricus) son and heir of William de la Zusche alias la
Zouche
Writ to Peter Heym and Robert de Radington, to enquire whether the said
Emery, who is in the king¹s wardship, is of full age as he says, or not 3
May 17 EI [1289]
Devon: Inq. Friday the eve of St. Barnabas 17 E I
The said Emery who was born at Toteleye and baptised in the church of
Blaktoriton
was 21 on th morrow of St. Edmund the king in the year above said.
William of Essex was dead ion 1272.
IPM of Roger la Zouche (1303) which says of his tenure in Lubbesthorpe,'The
manor (extent given) held of William la Zouche by service of third of a
knight's fee of the gift of Millicent de Montealto in 52 Hen III. ' It is
important to know who held the other 2/3?
According to Douglas, King's Nympton, Devon. was stated to be held in 1242
by William la Zouche, supposedly William la Zouche of Essex. It was
subsequently held by Robert de Morton (i.e., Mortimer), and then by
Geoffrey de Cornwall who married Robert de Mortimer's granddaughter and
heiress. [Douglas Richardson]. In 1280, Roger de Mortuomari and Milisent de
Mohaut, who was the wife of Eudo de la Zuche, were summoned to show by what
warrant they claimed a market in Bridgwater which was Milicent's inheritance
from her brother, Gorge.
There was also a Robert la Zouche of age in 1279 when Hugh Beaumis nominates
Robert la Zusch and Richard Tiffe in Ireland for four years.
Significant questions arise to remain uncertain about the Williams la
Zouche.
Look forward to observations.
Pat
----------
>From: "Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com>
>To: GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
>Subject: C.P. Correction/Addition: Zouche
>Date: Mon, Jan 9, 2006, 2:04 AM
>
> Birch gives a similar seal for Milicent de Montalt in his work,
> Catalogue of Seals in the British Museum, 2 (1892): 393:
>
> Pointed oval. In tightly-fitting dress, fur cloak, in each hand a
> shield of arms. Standing on a carved corbel. Arms: right hand a lion
> rampant, MONTALT; left hand three leopards' heads jessants-de-lis,
> CANTELOWE. In the field on each side a wavy sprig of foliage).
>
> We see above that a Thomas la Zouche was acting as Milicent de
> Montalt's steward in 1281. This Thomas la Zouche is surely the same
> person as Thomas son of Eudes la Zouche who in 1307 was owed a debt in
> Northamptonshire. In 1313 Thomas was pardoned for his involvement in
> the death of Peter de Gavaston, Earl of Cornwall. In 1324 he was
> pardoned for acquiring without license of King Edward I (prior to 1307)
> five messuages and lands in Basford, Nottinghamshire for life from
> William la Zouche [presumably his brother] [References: J. Throsby
> Thoroton's Hist. of Nottinghamshire, 2: 227; Calendar of Patent
> Rolls, 1321-1324 (1904): 393; C. Moor Knights of Edward I 5: 225].
>
> If the same Thomas la Zouche is involved in all of these records, it
> seems obvious that Thomas la Zouche was very likely the step-son of
> Milicent de Montalt, he being the son of Sir Eudes la Zouche (died
> 1279), by an unknown 1st wife or mistress. It seems possible that
> Thomas la Zouche was a legitimate son of Eudes la Zouche. As best I
> know, all of Eudes la Zouche's known land holdings were derived from
> his wife, Milicent's Cantelowe inheritance; if Eudes had a son by a
> priior marriage, it would be obscured by the passage of all of Eudes'
> wife's lands to their son, William la Zouche. There appears to have
> been no inquisition post mortem folliowing Eudes la Zouche's death.
>
> With respect to the identity of Sir William la Zouche, father of Roger
> la Zouche of Lubbesthorpe, he is undoubtedly the Sir William la Zouche,
> Knt. (died 1272), of King's Nympton, Devon, Farleigh Wallop,
> Hampshire, and Norton, Northamptonshire, which individual was the
> brother of Milicent de Montalt's husband, Sir Eudes la Zouche. The
> authoritative Complete Peerage 12 Pt. 2 (1959): 957 (sub Zouche) states
> that Sir William la Zouche (died 1272) was survived by a daughter and
> sole heiress, Joyce la Zouche, wife of Robert de Mortimer, but this is
> not correct. My research indicates that Sir William la Zouche was
> actually survived by a son and heir, William la Zouche the younger.
> Upon the death of the younger William, the family estates fell to his
> full sister, Joyce la Zouche, widow of Ncholas de Whelton, and then
> wife of Robert de Mortimer. It appears that Roger la Zouche, later of
> Lubbesthorpe, was excluded from the Zouche family inheritance, he being
> a brother of the half blood to William la Zouche the younger.
>
> Furthermore, given that Milicent de Montalt addresses Roger la Zouche
> of Lubbesthorpe as "her beloved and faithful," and not otherwise, I
> believe this is fatal to the theory that Roger la Zouche was married to
> an hitherto unknown daughter of Milicent de Montalt's 1st marriage to
> John de Montalt. Had Roger la Zouche been married to Milicent de
> Montalt's daughter, or contracted to marry her daughter, this would