Margaret Courtenay - again, please help
Chris Phillips
> I also have thought Sir Hugh Courtenay (one of the original Knights of the
> Garter and the eldest son of the 2nd Earl of Devon), and his wife, the
> former Lady Elizabeth de Vere, made better candidates as parents for
> Margaret Courtenay Grenville, than the 2nd Earl of Devon himself...
I'm not sure where the identification of Elizabeth as a de Vere comes from - CP vol.4 p.325 says only that Sir Hugh married, in 1341, before September, "Elizabeth".
A note by Vicary Gibbs adds that she is said to have been a daughter of Sir Guy de Bryan of Tor Bryan, Devon, but that this was undoubtedly through confusion with the couple's son son (who married Sir Guy's daughter Margaret).
(I haven't checked the "corrections and addenda" volume of CP.)
> But there becomes a problem of inheritance. Sir Hugh the Knight of the
> Garter was the heir to the Earldom of Devon and the vast majority of the
> family estates. When he died in 1349, his only son Hugh then became the
> heir apparent of his grandfather the 2nd Earl of Devon. When this younger
> Hugh died without issue a few months before his grandfather the Earl, the
> next heir was his first cousin Edward Courtenay, who succeeded as 3rd Earl
> of Devon.
>
> If Margaret Courtenay Grenville was indeed the daughter of Sir Hugh
> Courtenay the Garter Knight, I believe she would have inherited the bulk of
> the Courtenay estates after the death of her brother and her grandfather the
> 2nd Earl of Devon. The title of Earl of Devon would pass to the next heir
> male (and it did), but the lands would have passed to Margaret and her sons,
> since she would have been the only surviving descendant of Garter Knight Sir
> Hugh Courtenay, the 2nd Earl of Devon's ELDEST son?
Actually, I think such a daughter could have expected to inherit both the earldom and the associated lands. The inheritance of medieval earldoms is discussed in great detail by H. Arthur Doubleday in Appendix H of CP vol.4. If I understand correctly, he concludes that until the 14th century, it was normal for earldoms to be granted in fee simple, so that they would follow the usual course of inheritance, passing through female heirs in the absence of male heirs. Also, that it was an important principle that the earldom couldn't be separated from its lands.
> If there were any inquisitions post mortem taken on the 2nd Earl of Devon or
> on his grandson Hugh (son of the Garter Knight and brother-in-law of King
> Richard II), they could probably prove definitively if Margaret Courtenay
> Grenville was Garter Knight Hugh's daughter? I don't know how to find out
> if there were inquisitions, but maybe someone else from the list can shed
> more light?
These inquisitions have been published, in English abstract, by H.M.S.O., so they should be findable in University and similar libraries. Unfortunately, the inquisitions for this period aren't yet listed in the online catalogue of the Public Record Office.
CP vol.4, p.324, refers to an inquisition post mortem of Hugh the earl (d.1377), but for some reason it appears to have been delayed until 15 Richard II (1391-2) - presumably until after the death of his widow, who died in December 1391.
CP doesn't say whether there is an inquisition for Hugh the grandson (d.1373/4), but it does give an exact date for his death, so there may well be one (no monumental inscription is mentioned).
On the general problem of Margaret's parentage, my instinct would be to try to track down exactly where she is identified as the daughter of Hugh Courtenay - especially as there seem to be problems with the candidates that have been considered so far.
I think the only source I've seen mentioned in the discussion so far (apart from modern authors) is a visitation pedigree. That would be very weak evidence for the parentage of a woman of the mid-14th century. (I must say I have come across a couple of instances where Roskell apparently relies on visitation pedigrees for early 15th-century information.)
Chris Phillips
Louise Staley
"Chris Phillips" wrote in message
<snip>
> I'm not sure where the identification of Elizabeth as a de Vere comes
from - CP vol.4 p.325 says only that Sir Hugh married, in 1341, before
September, "Elizabeth".
<snip>
The note I have, and I have not seen the source personally, is Europaische
Stammtafeln III #630.
> On the general problem of Margaret's parentage, my instinct would be to
try to track down exactly where she is identified as the daughter of Hugh
Courtenay - especially as there seem to be problems with the candidates that
have been considered so far.
>
> I think the only source I've seen mentioned in the discussion so far
(apart from modern authors) is a visitation pedigree. That would be very
weak evidence for the parentage of a woman of the mid-14th century. (I must
say I have come across a couple of instances where Roskell apparently relies
on visitation pedigrees for early 15th-century information.)
>
> Chris Phillips
My original source for Margaret being a Courtenay is from Magna Charta
Sureties 22-10 where it is noted in passing that the parents of William
Grenville were Theobald Grenville and "Margaret(Courtenay)Grenville."
I completely agree that a visitation pedigree is weak evidence, as in this
case is Roskell, who manages to make Margaret both the daughter of the
Earl of Devon and Margaret Bohun and the daughter of Hugh of Haccombe,
neither of which appears possible.
From posts to soc.gen.med by Brad Verity last month quoting Rosekell
"In their article on Sir William Bonville II (1392-1461), the statement
is made "These ties were to be strengthened by the marriage of ... two
of his daughters, Philippa and Margaret, respectively to William Grenville
(a grandson of Sir Hugh Courtenay of Haccombe)..."
"[Roskell has] an article on Sir John GRENVILLE (d. 1412) of Stow in
Kilkhampton, Cornwall and Bideford, Devon. Sir John, Roskell states,
was the son and heir of Sir Theobald Grenville of Stow and Bideford
by Margaret, daughter of Hugh Courtenay, 2nd Earl of Devon and
Margaret de Bohun, granddaughter of Edward I."
Roskell appears to be wrong twice in the first excerpt, not only was
Margaret not likely to be a grand-daughter of Hugh of Haccombe, MC 22-10
says William Bonville was not the father of Philippa Bonville who
married William Grenville.
MC uses as sources at 22-10 Visitation of Cornwall and R.Granville "The
History of the Granville Family". The Granville book was written in 1895.
I have not seen it yet. It is quite possible every source points back to
the Cornwall Visitation.
However, thank-you for your suggestions on research avenues. This family
is particularly difficult to research due to the vast number of variations
(some quite major) on the Grenville name. Also, for me, the tyranny of
distance is still a problem unless the PRO puts the IPMs in its online
database.
regards
Louise
Tim Powys-Lybbe
cgp...@cgp100.dabsol.co.uk (Chris Phillips) wrote:
> Brad Verity wrote:
> > I also have thought Sir Hugh Courtenay (one of the original Knights of the
> > Garter and the eldest son of the 2nd Earl of Devon), and his wife, the
> > former Lady Elizabeth de Vere, made better candidates as parents for
> > Margaret Courtenay Grenville, than the 2nd Earl of Devon himself...
>
> I'm not sure where the identification of Elizabeth as a de Vere comes
> from - CP vol.4 p.325 says only that Sir Hugh married, in 1341, before
> September, "Elizabeth".
>
> A note by Vicary Gibbs adds that she is said to have been a daughter of
> Sir Guy de Bryan of Tor Bryan, Devon, but that this was undoubtedly
> through confusion with the couple's son son (who married Sir Guy's
> daughter Margaret).
>
> (I haven't checked the "corrections and addenda" volume of CP.)
>
CP Vol XIV, p.259 on DEVON has:
page 325
line 5, after 'Elizabeth' add 'da. of John (DE VERE OR VEER), Earl
of Oxford by Maud, widow of Robert FITZPAYN and 2nd da. of
Bartholomew LORD BADLESMERE'
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe t...@powys.org
For a patchwork of bygones: http://powys.org
brad verity
>I'm not sure where the identification of Elizabeth as a de Vere comes from
>- CP vol.4 p.325 says only that Sir Hugh married, in 1341, before
>September, "Elizabeth".
It comes from a later volume of CP, in the articles on the earldom of
OXFORD. Sorry I don't have my copy of it to quote from directly, but when
discussing the marriage of Elizabeth Courtenay (daughter of 2nd Earl of
Devon and Margaret Bohun) to the son and heir of the Earl of Oxford, CP
mentioned that the marriage of the 2nd Earl of Devon's son and heir Hugh to
Elizabeth, daughter of the Earl of Oxford, was probably arranged at the same
time.
I guess between the publication of CP volume 4 and the later volume with the
OXFORD articles, the editors uncovered evidence that allowed them to
postively identify Elizabeth, wife of Sir Hugh Courtenay, Knight of the
Garter.
>These inquisitions have been published, in English abstract, by H.M.S.O.,
>so they should be findable in University and similar libraries.
>Unfortunately, the inquisitions for this period aren't yet listed in the
>online catalogue of the Public Record Office.
Thanks for the leads, Chris! I'll check if the UCLA Library has the
inquisitions available. What does H.M.S.O. stand for?
>CP vol.4, p.324, refers to an inquisition post mortem of Hugh the earl
>(d.1377), but for some reason it appears to have been delayed until 15
>Richard II (1391-2) - presumably until after the death of his widow, who
>died in December 1391.
Margaret (Bohun), Countess of Devon, left a will that survived and is quoted
extensively in that 1735 Ezra Cleaveland book "A genealogical history of the
noble and illustrious family of Courtenay." I'll check and see exactly who
the old Countess of Devon mentions in it - maybe there will be a clue. I'll
also check the will of Archbishop William Courtenay, Countess Margaret's
son, which also survives and has been published.
>CP doesn't say whether there is an inquisition for Hugh the grandson
>(d.1373/4), but it does give an exact date for his death, so there may well
>be one (no monumental inscription is mentioned).
I'll check at the UCLA Library. In the meantime, does anyone else know of a
way to find out?
>On the general problem of Margaret's parentage, my instinct would be to try
>to track down exactly where she is identified as the daughter of Hugh
>Courtenay - especially as there seem to be problems with the candidates
>that have been considered so far.
Good instinct. Roskell states she was the daughter of the 2nd Earl of Devon
and Margaret Bohun, but doesn't give a source. The fact that the 2nd Earl
of Devon already had a documented daughter named Margaret who became Lady
Cobham throws a wrench into Roskell's statement. The 1735 Cleaveland book
(which ended up being the source for Collins' Peerage later that century)
states she was the daughter of Sir Hugh Courtenay of Haacomb, but Louise and
I have realized that, chronologically, it doesn't work out at all to make
her Hugh of Haacomb's daughter.
>I think the only source I've seen mentioned in the discussion so far (apart
>from modern authors) is a visitation pedigree. That would be very weak
>evidence for the parentage of a woman of the mid-14th century. (I must say
>I have come across a couple of instances where Roskell apparently relies on
>visitation pedigrees for early 15th-century information.)
Yes, I wonder what were the original sources for both Roskell's and old
18th-century Ezra Cleaveland's statements of Margaret Courtenay Grenville's
parentage. Neither bothers to cite one.
Louise,
If you have some $$ to invest in this research, you might want to start with
a book called "The Powderham Genealogical Database" by A.B. 'Tony' Rowland.
It is in 4 volumes and can be ordered through the following Courtenay
Society website: http://www.webcom.com/scourt/
The price is $45.50 U.S. for each volume. The New York Public Library has
Volume 2 (and only Volume 2) in it's catalogue. I looked at it last year
when I was living there and it's very detailed. I'm sure if the Grenvilles
are descended from the Powderham Courtenays, the relationship will be in the
work. Perhaps you can call the Library or someone from the list who lives
in New York can look it up next time they're at the Library? I would - but
I checked the Los Angeles Public and UCLA Libraries and neither one have any
of the Rowland volumes. Or maybe someone else on this list or the LDS
Library in Salt Lake would have them?
Another option could be to e-mail Powderham Castle directly - you can do so
through the above website.
I did a search of the website and came across this posting from 1998. There
were no posted replies to it:
>>2) I have a second Courtenay that I am researching Margaret Courtenay (d.
>>1380) m. Sir Theobald de Grenville. Does the society have any of the
>>Grenville decendent lines on record below Margaret Courtenay? If so, I
>>would like to know if Sir Roger Grenville (d. 1523) and Margaret Whitleigh
>>are the parents of Sir Richard Grenville (d. 1550/51) m. Matilda
>>Beville.>> Lisa Weinberg
>>email: lwei...@aol.com
I wonder if Ms. Weinberg ever received any response - perhaps an e-mail
inquiry to her would help? Also, she seems to have a date (1380) for
Margaret Courtenay Grenville's death! I wonder what her source for that is.
Hope these other leads can help you. I won't be able to make it to UCLA
this weekend - I'll be out of town - but I have it on my calendar to go over
there the following weekend.
Best regards, ---------Brad Verity
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Chris Phillips
I wrote:
> >I'm not sure where the identification of Elizabeth as a de Vere comes
from
> >- CP vol.4 p.325 says only that Sir Hugh married, in 1341, before
> >September, "Elizabeth".
Brad Verity replied:
> It comes from a later volume of CP, in the articles on the earldom of
> OXFORD. Sorry I don't have my copy of it to quote from directly, but when
> discussing the marriage of Elizabeth Courtenay (daughter of 2nd Earl of
> Devon and Margaret Bohun) to the son and heir of the Earl of Oxford, CP
> mentioned that the marriage of the 2nd Earl of Devon's son and heir Hugh
to
> Elizabeth, daughter of the Earl of Oxford, was probably arranged at the
same
> time.
>
> I guess between the publication of CP volume 4 and the later volume with
the
> OXFORD articles, the editors uncovered evidence that allowed them to
> postively identify Elizabeth, wife of Sir Hugh Courtenay, Knight of the
> Garter.
Thanks for that information, and to Tim Powys-Lybbe for mentioning that this
parentage for Elizabeth is accepted by CP vol.14 (additions and corrections
volume).
Just in case it's useful to anybody, the part in the Earl of Oxford article
where this is mentioned is vol.10, p.225, note (a).
There is fuller information in the Mowbray article - Elizabeth remarried to
John, Lord Mowbray, after the death of Hugh Courtenay - at vol.9, p.383.
This page actually cites some source material:
(1) For John de Mowbray's marriage, 2ndly, to Elizabeth [and her
parentage?]: in October 1353 and later he settled various manors on her for
life (Calendar of Patent Rolls 1350-4, p.501; 1354-8, p.413; 1361-4, p.43).
(2) For Elizabeth's subsequent marriage before 18 January 1368/9 to Sir
William de Cosynton, s and heir of Stephen de Cosynton of Cosynton (in
Aylesford) and Acrise, Kent, Calendar of Patent Rolls 1367-70, p.188; and
for the couple's later surrender to the Fleet Prison for debt, Calendar of
Patent Rolls, 1367-70, pp.188, 244.
(3) For Elizabeth's death, in August or September 1375, Calendar of Fine
Rolls, vol.8, p.326; Calendar of Close Rolls, 1374-7, p.377. Also two sets
of inquisitions post mortem, "both obviously perfunctory and inaccurate",
one set describing her as the widow of Hugh de Courtenay ("d. 23 September")
and the other as the widow of John de Mowbray ("d.16 August") (Chancery ipm
49 Edward III, 1st nos, no 27; 50 Edward III, 1st nos, no 44). The two sets
are proved to refer to the same person by Chancery ipm 19 Richard II, no 47.
It sounds as though the identification hinges on the identification of two
women - stated to have died at different dates in their inquisitions post
mortem - through a third inquisition post mortem. So it's perhaps not
surprising it was missed by earlier authors.
> What does H.M.S.O. stand for?
"Her [or His] Majesty's Stationery Office" - in other words, official
government publications.
Chris Phillips
Louise Staley
translate the Latin notes below or part of them? I would very
much appreciate it. However, more realistically, is there a
published English translation of "Inquisitions & Assessments
Relating to Feudal Aids", published by H.M.S.O?
Following Chris Phillips advice I got myself to the State
Library of Victoria. I had erroneously assumed that library
would not have the various publications of IPMs, Close Rolls
etc. It does have some but not all. Anyway I called up
"Inquisitions & Assessments Relating to Feudal Aids",
published by H.M.S.O in 6 volumes. From that I found the
following references to Grenville lands between 1284 and 1431.
These are transcribed below for anyone who reads Latin.
While I know this won't in itself identify Margaret, wife
of Theobald Grenville, I thought if I could see where the
Grenville land came from I might be able to see if any new
land appeared in the right time frame (1350-1381) which
might help identify her parents.
The Devon lands appear to be the right family for the husband
of Margaret (Courtenay), Theobald Grenville. (Theobald appears in
the IPM of Edward le Despencer 18 March II Richard II. Bydeforde
and Kilkhampton. 1 1/2 knight's fees, held by Theobald de Grenevylle,
knight.) The other counties lands appear to be related to eachother,
however that may just be my lack of Latin coming through. (Oh, to
have had a classical education ...)
Louise
Devon 1284-1286 Hundredum de Schefber
Ricardus de Grenevill tenet in Bydeford un. f. m. de eodem comite,
et idem comes de regis i. c.
Idem comes tenet un. f. in Langatrewe de rege i. c. per servicium militare.
Devon 1316 Hundredum de Sheftbere
Et est dominus ejusdem dominus rex, et in eodem hundredo:-
Burgus de Bydeford, et est dominus ejusdem Bartholomeus de Greynvyll.
Devon 1346 Hundredum de Sheftebear
De Johanne Ralegh de Charles pro di. f. m. in Bydeford, tento de honore
de Gloucestria i. c. quod Ricardus de Grenevyle quondam tenuit xx. s.
Devon 1428 Hundreda de Herteland et Shedtobere (rectius Sheftbear)
William Greynfeld tenet di. f. m. in Bydeford, quod Johannes Ralegh
quondam tenuit ibidem.
Lincoln 1428 Wappentachia de Lauris et Well
Heredes Roberti Grenfelde er Johannis Cresholm pro iiija parte j. f. m.
divisim, quondam Johannis Cresholm, in Stowe, Stretton, Braunceby, et
Marton, de quo tenteur et pro quanto quilibet per se, ignorant.
Lincoln 1431 Wappentachia de Coryngham et Welle
Inquisicio capta apud Hospitale super Stratum die Jovis proximo post
festum Epiphanie anno regni regis Henrici sexto decimo, coram Thoma Santon,
super sacramentum ... Roberti Grenfeld de Stokhitt, ...., qui dicunt quod:-
....
(here follow 2 illegible entries)
Willelmus Candelesby de civitate Lincolnie, armiger, fuit, seisitus etc.
de diversis terris et tenementis in Stowe, Stretton, Braunceby, et
Marton, que tenetur per servicium un. f. m.
Gloucester 1284-1285 Hundredum de Burnetre Juxta Bristoll
Ricardus de Grenevill tenet di. hidam terre in Halvington per idem
servicium de predicto episcopo, et episcopo de rege.
Ricardus de Grenevill tenet di. f. m. in Cumton de Galfrido de Axecote,
[Apecote] et idem Galfridus de Willelmo de Bello Campo, comite Warr(wici),
et idem comes de predicto [dicto] episcopus, et episcopus de rege.
Gloucester 1303 Hundredum de Hembury
De Ricardo de Greneville, pro di. f. m. in Compton Greneville. [De episcopo
Wigorniesi, added].
Gloucester 1346 Hundredum de Hembury
Ricardus de Greneville tenet di. f. m. in Compton Greneville, [quod Ricardus
Grenevill quondam tenuit ibidem.]
Gloucester 1402 Kyftesgate
Johanna, que fuit uxor Willelmi [Grevell] tenet de rege sine medio in Mune,
in eodem hundredo, di. f. m.
Essex 1303
Johannes [Geneville] (Grenevill) tenet quartum partem un. f. m.
de comite Gloucestrie. (Di. marca. J. de Bassingburn recepit inde xl. d. per
j. billam.)
Essex 1346-1350 Hundredum de Hengford
Dominus Willelmus de Stowe tenet di. f. in eadem, quod Johannes le Sencler
aliquando tenuir.
Walterus de Greneville et Thomas de Cheddeworthe tenent un. f. m. in
Stanburn, quod Rogerus le Gras aliquando tenuit.
Thomas de Geddeworth (sic) tenet quartam partem un. f. in eadem, quam
Johannes de Grenevill aliquando tenuit.
Buckingham 1284-1286 Hundredum de Essendone
Eustachius de Grenvile tenet in Wottone un. f. m. de Willelmo de Valencia,
et idem Willelmus de rege.
Buckingham 1302-1303 Hundredum de Hykesulle
Chiltone cum Esintone .. Johannes de Grenevile et tenetes sui
tenent in eademm ville di. f. m. i. c. de Ada filio Petri, et ipse de
Eumerico de Valeyns.
Buckingham 1302-1303 Hundredum de Essendone
Wottone-Ricardus de Grenevyle er tenentes sui tenent di. f.m. in eadem villa
de Almarico de Valence de mareschalcia.
Summa di. f. m.- Summa den. xx. s.
Buckingham 1316 Hundredum de Asshesdone
Wottone villata - Ricardus de Greneville
Buckingham 1346 Hundreum de Stone
De Johanne Sergeant, Johanne Mareschal, Agneta Greynville, Nicholaa
Greynville,
... pro di. f. m. in Hadenham, Byggesthrope et Codyntone, quod tenetur i. e.
de episcopo Roucestrie et quod Johannes filius Willelmi, Galfridus de
Byggesthrope
et Ricardus Fraunkelayne et tenentes sui quondam teneurunt.
Dorset 1316 Hundredum de Hundredasberg
Wyrgered cum Westeporte Byestwall et Wolleberg. Johannes Mohun, Henricus de
Glanvill, ...
Dorset 1316 Hundreda de Newton et Bocland
Wotton. Henricus de Glanvill.
Chris Phillips
> Up front, I'll come right out and ask if anybody is willing to
> translate the Latin notes below or part of them? I would very
> much appreciate it. However, more realistically, is there a
> published English translation of "Inquisitions & Assessments
> Relating to Feudal Aids", published by H.M.S.O?
I don't know of a translation, but below is my attempt at a translation of
the extracts. Generally these are pretty formulaic, so they aren't usually
too hard to translate if you've seen a few before.
HAVING SAID THAT, there are a couple of things that puzzled me. I've always
understood a tenant "in capite" ("i.c." in the extracts below) or "in chief"
to mean a direct tenant of the king. But in several of the extracts below,
it seems to be applied to other lords than the king. Is the sense here
simply that the tenants in question held directly from the lord in question,
or does "in chief" have another connotation applied to lords other than the
king, that I'm not aware of? (In the last but two, is "i.e." a
mistranscription for "i.e."?)
I was also unsure about "Summa den." near the bottom - is this "summa
denariorum" - "sum of the pence"?
> Devon 1284-1286 Hundredum de Schefber
> Ricardus de Grenevill tenet in Bydeford un. f. m. de eodem comite,
> et idem comes de regis i. c.
> Idem comes tenet un. f. in Langatrewe de rege i. c. per servicium
militare.
Devon 1284-1286 Hundred of Schefber
Richard de G holds in Bydeford one knight's fee of the same earl, and that
earl of the king in chief.
The same earl holds one knight's fee in Langatrewe of the king in chief by
military service.
> Devon 1316 Hundredum de Sheftbere
> Et est dominus ejusdem dominus rex, et in eodem hundredo:-
> Burgus de Bydeford, et est dominus ejusdem Bartholomeus de Greynvyll.
Devon 1316 Hundred of Sheftbere
And the lord the king is lord of the same,
and in the same hundred:
The borough of Bydeford, and Batholomew de G is lord of the same.
[?I'm confused by this construction, but can't see what else the meaning can
be]
> Devon 1346 Hundredum de Sheftebear
> De Johanne Ralegh de Charles pro di. f. m. in Bydeford, tento de honore
> de Gloucestria i. c. quod Ricardus de Grenevyle quondam tenuit xx. s.
Devon 1316 Hundred of Sheftbear
Of John Ralegh of Charles [place name] for half a knight's fee in Bydeford,
held
of the Honor of Gloucester in chief that Richard de G formerly held. 20s.
> Devon 1428 Hundreda de Herteland et Shedtobere (rectius Sheftbear)
> William Greynfeld tenet di. f. m. in Bydeford, quod Johannes Ralegh
> quondam tenuit ibidem.
Devon 1428 Hundred of Herteland and Shedtobere (correctly Sheftbear)
William G holds half a knight's fee in Bydeford, that John R formerly held
there.
> Lincoln 1428 Wappentachia de Lauris et Well
> Heredes Roberti Grenfelde er Johannis Cresholm pro iiija parte j. f. m.
> divisim, quondam Johannis Cresholm, in Stowe, Stretton, Braunceby, et
> Marton, de quo tenteur et pro quanto quilibet per se, ignorant.
Lincoln 1428 Wapentake of Lauris and Well
The heirs of Robert G and John Cresholm for the fourth part of one knight's
fee separately, formerly of John Cresholm, in Stowe, Stretton, Braunceby and
Marton, of whom it is held and for how much, they [the jurors] do not know.
> Lincoln 1431 Wappentachia de Coryngham et Welle
> Inquisicio capta apud Hospitale super Stratum die Jovis proximo post
> festum Epiphanie anno regni regis Henrici sexto decimo, coram Thoma
Santon,
> super sacramentum ... Roberti Grenfeld de Stokhitt, ...., qui dicunt
quod:-
> ....
> (here follow 2 illegible entries)
> Willelmus Candelesby de civitate Lincolnie, armiger, fuit, seisitus etc.
> de diversis terris et tenementis in Stowe, Stretton, Braunceby, et
> Marton, que tenetur per servicium un. f. m.
Lincoln 1431 Wapentake of Coryngham and Welle
Inquisition taken at the Hospital above "Stratum" Tuesday next after the
feast of Epiphany in the 10th year of the reign of Henry VI, before Thomas
Santon, on the oath of [jurors].... Robert G of Stokhitt ... who say that
....
William Candelesby of the city of Lincoln, esquire ("arms-bearer") was
seised etc of diverse lands and tenements in Stowe, Stretton, Braunceby and
Marton, which is held by the service of one knight's fee.
> Gloucester 1284-1285 Hundredum de Burnetre Juxta Bristoll
> Ricardus de Grenevill tenet di. hidam terre in Halvington per idem
> servicium de predicto episcopo, et episcopo de rege.
Gloucester 1284-1285 Hundred of Burnetre next to Bristoll
Richard de G holds half a hide of land in Halvington by the same service of
the aforesaid bishop, and the bishop [holds it] of the king.
> Ricardus de Grenevill tenet di. f. m. in Cumton de Galfrido de Axecote,
> [Apecote] et idem Galfridus de Willelmo de Bello Campo, comite Warr(wici),
> et idem comes de predicto [dicto] episcopus, et episcopus de rege.
Richard de G holds half a knight's fee in Cumton of Geoffrey de Axecote
[Apecote] and the same Geoffrey [holds it] of William de Bello Campo
[Beauchamp], the earl of Warwick, and the same earl [holds] it of the
aforesaid bishop, and the bishop of the king.
> Gloucester 1303 Hundredum de Hembury
> De Ricardo de Greneville, pro di. f. m. in Compton Greneville. [De
episcopo
> Wigorniesi, added].
Gloucester 1303 Hundred de Hembury
Of Richard de G, for half a knight's fee in Compton Grenevile
[Of the bishop of Worcester, added]
> Gloucester 1346 Hundredum de Hembury
> Ricardus de Greneville tenet di. f. m. in Compton Greneville, [quod
Ricardus
> Grenevill quondam tenuit ibidem.]
Gloucester 1345 Hundred of Hembury
Richard de G holds half a knight's fee in Compton Greneville [which Richard
G formerly held there]
> Gloucester 1402 Kyftesgate
> Johanna, que fuit uxor Willelmi [Grevell] tenet de rege sine medio in
Mune,
> in eodem hundredo, di. f. m.
Gloucester 1402 Kyftesgate
Joan who was the wife of William [G] holds of the king without an
intermediate (tenant) in Mune in the same hundred, half a knight's fee.
> Essex 1303
> Johannes [Geneville] (Grenevill) tenet quartum partem un. f. m.
> de comite Gloucestrie. (Di. marca. J. de Bassingburn recepit inde xl. d.
per
> j. billam.)
Essex 1303
John G holds a fourth part of a knight's fee of the earl of Gloucester
(Half a mark. J. de Bassingburn received thereof 40d by bill)
> Essex 1346-1350 Hundredum de Hengford
> Dominus Willelmus de Stowe tenet di. f. in eadem, quod Johannes le Sencler
> aliquando tenuir.
Essex 1346-1350 Hundred of Hengford
Sir William de Stowe holds half a fee in the same place, which John le
Sencler at one time held.
> Walterus de Greneville et Thomas de Cheddeworthe tenent un. f. m. in
> Stanburn, quod Rogerus le Gras aliquando tenuit.
Walter de G and Thomas de Cheddeworth hold a knight's fee in Stanburn, which
Roger le Gras at one time held.
> Thomas de Geddeworth (sic) tenet quartam partem un. f. in eadem, quam
> Johannes de Grenevill aliquando tenuit.
Thomas de Geddeworth holds a fourth part of one fee in the same place, which
John de G at one time held.
> Buckingham 1284-1286 Hundredum de Essendone
> Eustachius de Grenvile tenet in Wottone un. f. m. de Willelmo de Valencia,
> et idem Willelmus de rege.
Buckingham 1284-1286 Hundred of Essendone
Eustace de G holds in Wottone one knight's fee of William de Valencia, and
the same William [holds] of the king.
> Buckingham 1302-1303 Hundredum de Hykesulle
> Chiltone cum Esintone .. Johannes de Grenevile et tenetes sui
> tenent in eademm ville di. f. m. i. c. de Ada filio Petri, et ipse de
> Eumerico de Valeyns.
Buckingham 1302-1303 Hundred of Hykesulle
Chiltone with Esintone ... John de G and his tenants hold in the same vill
(township) half a knight's fee in chief of Adam son of Peter, and the
same of Aymer de Valeyns.
> Buckingham 1302-1303 Hundredum de Essendone
> Wottone-Ricardus de Grenevyle er tenentes sui tenent di. f.m. in eadem
villa
> de Almarico de Valence de mareschalcia.
> Summa di. f. m.- Summa den. xx. s.
Buckingham 1302-1303 Hundred of Essendone
Wottone - Richard de G and his tenants hold half a knight's fee in the same
vill (township) of Aymer de Valence of the marshalcy
Sum half a knight's fee - sum [of the pence?] 20s.
> Buckingham 1316 Hundredum de Asshesdone
> Wottone villata - Ricardus de Greneville
Buckingham 1316 Hundred of Asshesdone
Township of Wottone - Richard de G
> Buckingham 1346 Hundreum de Stone
> De Johanne Sergeant, Johanne Mareschal, Agneta Greynville, Nicholaa
> Greynville,
> ... pro di. f. m. in Hadenham, Byggesthrope et Codyntone, quod tenetur i.
e.
> de episcopo Roucestrie et quod Johannes filius Willelmi, Galfridus de
> Byggesthrope
> et Ricardus Fraunkelayne et tenentes sui quondam teneurunt.
Buckingham 1346 Hundred of Stone
Of John Sergeant, John Mareschal, Agnes G, Nicolaa G
.... for half a knight's fee in Hadenham, Byggesthrope and Codyntone, which
is held "i.e." ["i.c." = in chief?] of the bishop of Rochester and which
John the son of
William, Geoffrey de Byggesthrope and Richard Fraunkelayne and his tenants
formerly held.
> Dorset 1316 Hundredum de Hundredasberg
> Wyrgered cum Westeporte Byestwall et Wolleberg. Johannes Mohun, Henricus
de
> Glanvill, ...
Dorset 1316 Hundred of Hudredasberg
Wyrgered with Westeporte Byestwall and Wolleberg. John Mohun, Henry de
Glanvill...
> Dorset 1316 Hundreda de Newton et Bocland
> Wotton. Henricus de Glanvill.
Dorset 1316 Hundred of Newton and Bocland
Wotton. Henry de Glanvill
Chris Phillips
brad verity
<< A further thought is that Margaret seems to have married slightly beneath
her position as daughter of an earl, judging by the majority of husbands for
Courtenay daughters. This all leads me to a suspicion that Margaret may
have been illegitimate, was acknowledged by her father and had an unknown
mother.
The known husbands of daughters of the 2nd Earl of Devon:
1) John, 3rd Lord Cobham - arranged in marriage about 1332-33 (according to
CP), when he was very young to Margaret Courtenay, eldest daughter of the
2nd Earl of Devon. Her parents were married 11 Aug 1325, and her eldest
brother Hugh (the Knight of the Garter) was born 22 Mar 1326/7, according to
CP, which makes him the eldest child of the 2nd Earl of Devon. So Margaret
could not have been older than 5 years when her marriage to John de Cobham
was arranged.
2) John de Vere, son and heir of the Earl of Oxford - born about Dec 1335,
according to CP. On 24 Jul 1341, his father had license to make a
settlement on the marriage to Elizabeth, daughter of the 2nd Earl of Devon.
On 23 Jun 1350, the 2nd Earl of Devon had license to grant certain manors to
his daughter Elizabeth, late the wife of John de Vere (according to CP). So
John de Vere died before reaching the age of 15, and it is no surprise there
were no children from this marriage.
3) Sir Andrew Luttrell, of Chilton, Devon - son of Sir John Luttrell, who
(according to Roskell) "held property in Devon and represented that county
in Parliament in the 1360s." On 28 Jun 1359, the King granted Sir Andrew
Luttrell and Elizabeth Courtenay de Vere and annuity of f200 for their joint
lives, with a view to the marriage (according to CP). Roskell states
"...but the Luttrell fortunes in the west were established, at least
socially, by his father, whose marriage to the earl of Devon's daughter
allied him to the greatest family in the area and made him a kinsman of the
royal house. Thus Sir Andrew, who was by birth only a cadet of a younger
branch of the baronial family of Luttrell of Irnham, Lincolnshire, was by
his marriage raised to a much higher position in the social scale." CP
states the date of Sir Andrew's death "is uncertain." Roskell states he
died in 1378. Roskell's source for much of the Luttrell family background
is "History of Dunster and Families Mohun and Luttrell" by H.C. Maxwell
Lyte.
4) Sir Thomas Dengaine (or Engaine) of Laxton, Pytchley, and various other
manors - born about 1335 (he was aged 22 and more at his father's death on
16 Feb 1357/8, according to CP), the second son of the 1st Lord Engaine.
Sir Thomas' marriage to Katherine Courtenay "was probably being negotiated
in Dec 1351," according to CP. It is not known if Thomas' elder brother
John Dengaine (who dvp and sp) was alive at the time. Sir Thomas died 29
Jun 1367, in parts beyond seas (CP). He and Katherine had no children. She
(favorite sister of Archbishop William Courtenay) died 31 Dec 1399 (CP).
5) Sir John Chiverston - he was Seneschal of Gascony (according to documents
in the PRO). Cleaveland in "The Genealogical History of the Noble Family of
Courtenay" states: "This Sir John Chiverston married Joan the Daughter of
Hugh Courtenay, second of that Name, Earl of Devonshire; and in case of
failure of Issue, he settled his Estate upon his Father-in-law the Earl of
Devonshire, and he dying without Issue, the Earl of Devonshire had his
Lands, and conferred them all upon his Son Sir Peter, in the same Manner as
he did Moreton. And Ilton-Castle being the chief seat of Sir John
Chiverston, he was titled Sir John Chiverston of Ilton-Castle, and Sir Peter
Courtenay after him was called Sir Peter Courtenay of Ilton-Castle. This
Castle was demolished about Forty Years since. It did stand upon the River
that cometh from Dodbrook and falleth into Salcomb, and was in the Parish of
Marleborough, which Parish, together with the Castle, did come to the Bishop
of Norwich; as also the Manour of Thurleston near by; also Chiverston, and
other Estates which had been the lands of Chiverston."
These five gentlemen are the only documented husbands of the NINE daughters
(Margaret, Elizabeth, Katherine, Joan, Anne, Eleanor, Guinora, Isabella,
Philippa, according to Cleaveland) ascribed to the 2nd Earl of Devon and
Margaret Bohun. Of these, only two (John, Lord Cobham and Sir Andrew
Luttrell) had children by their Courtenay wives.
Of the Grenvilles of Devon and Cornwall, Roskell has this to say in the
article on Sir John Grenville, MP: "Grenville belonged to a family which had
settled in Devon soon after the Conquest. The family property as held in
the early 14th century consisted of the manors and advowsons of Kilkhampton
and Bideford. These estates, on the border between the counties of Devon
and Cornwall, explain how Grenville, who was resident in Cornwall, naturally
gravitated to Devon wherein lay the thriving port of Bideford. ... Grenville
seems to have been the most influential member of his family up to that
time, a position no doubt affected by his relationship with the Courtenays.
He was a member of the retinue of his cousin Edward, earl of Devon, serving
at sea from March 1387 under the admiral, Richard, earl of Arundel; and he
was with his cousin in 1391 when the latter's dispute with Sir William
Sturmy* was at its height and the earl called Sturmy a 'false traitor.'
Indeed, it was he who delivered the earl's message to (Sir) John Wadham*,
one of the justices, that he should 'sit more uprightly without partiality
in this session than he had at the last.'"
So, Roskell seems certain of a relationship between the Grenvilles and
Courtenays in the latter 14th century. I guess its just a matter of
determining exactly what the relationship was. If Sir John Grenville's
mother WAS a daughter of the 2nd Earl of Devon, Sir John would seem to have
had a similar career to his first cousin Sir Hugh Luttrell.
Courtenay girls were clearly tickets to upward mobility for the knights of
Devon in the 14th century. Hopefully a clearer picture will emerge of
exactly who and how many benefitted from such a match.
Regards, -----------Brad Verity
Louise Staley
again at my photocopy and it may say i. c., it's not very clear.
Louise
"Chris Phillips" wrote in message ...
<snip>
>(In the last but two, is "i.e." a
> mistranscription for "i.e."?)
<snip>
Ivor West
From: Chris Phillips
| HAVING SAID THAT, there are a couple of things that puzzled me. I've
| always understood a tenant "in capite" ("i.c." in the extracts
| below) or "in chief" to mean a direct tenant of the king. But in
| several of the extracts below, it seems to be applied to other lords
| than the king. Is the sense here simply that the tenants in question
| held directly from the lord in question, or does "in chief" have
| another connotation applied to lords other than the king, that I'm
| not aware of? (In the last but two, is "i.e." a mistranscription for
| "i.e."?) ["i.c."]
It would have been clearer if "i.c." had followed the name of the
tenant-in-chief.
| I was also unsure about "Summa den." near the bottom - is this
| "summa denariorum" - "sum of the pence"?
summa denarii? - sum of money, cash sum (denarii, cash or ready
money),
Ivor West