Beatrix: daughter of Anthony Hasilden & wife of Robert Freville

[mj...@btinternet.com]

As noted on earlier threads, A.W. Franks in his article 'The
Genealogical History of the Freville Family' [Cambridge Antiquarian
Society Quarto Series, No XIV, p 4 et seq] states that (John) Layer
records the marriage of Robert Freville to Beatrix, daughter of Anthony
Haselden. While I have read Palmer's 1932 edition of Layer's 1632
Cambridgeshire Monumental Inscriptions without finding such a
reference, it is worth noting that the statement appears to have a long
pedigree.

But, as we know, for instance from their wills and the MIs at Little
Shelford, Robert Freville (d 1521) married Rose (d 1529) who was the
mother of his children. Various attempts have been made to graft a
Beatrix Haselden onto this, either as a replacement for, equation with,
or addition to Rose, but none has found acceptance. Furthermore, the
will of Anthony Haselden, proved 1527, mentions only a son William and
a daughter Elizabeth.

However, I have located a document which sheds considerable light:

Calendar of Patent Rolls, Edward VI Vol 1, 1547-1548, pp 49-50

"21 May 1547: [Licence] for £5 8s to Robert Payton, knight, and
Frances his wife, Robert Payton the younger, son and heir apparent of
the said Robert and Frances, and John, brother of the foresaid Robert,
to grant the manor of Lytlington alias Huntingfeldes, 16 messuages, 500
acres of land, 40 acres of meadow, 50 acres of pasture, 10 acres of
wood, 40 acres of furze and heath, and £8 rent in Lytlington,
Cambridgeshire, to Richard More and John Fawnte, clerk, their heirs and
assigns: to be regranted to the said Robert for one month and, that
month finished, the moiety of the premises to remain to Elizabeth Bury,
now wife of Richard Bury, gentleman, and the heirs of her body, with
remainder in default to Beatrix the wife of Robert Frevyle, gentleman,
and the heirs of her body, with remainder in default to the said Robert
Payton, knight, and Frances and the heirs of the same Frances, and the
other moiety to remain to the foresaid Beatrix and the heirs of her
body, with remainder in default successively to the said Elizabeth, and
to Robert and Frances, and the heirs of Frances."

This should be noted in conjunction with the following:

PRO C 142/95/15: IPM for John Freville of Little Shelford, 6 Edward VI
(i.e. died 1552); this was the eldest son and heir of Robert and Rose
Freville

Cal. Patent Rolls Edward VI Vol 4, 1550-1553, p 232:

"30 May 1552: Licence to Robert Frevile, son and heir of John Frevile
esquire, deceased, [to enter on his inheritance]"

It therefore seems clear that Beatrix was the wife of Robert Freville,
son and heir of John Freville (d 1552), in turn son and heir of Robert
& Rose Freville of Little Shelford.

Furthermore, if we turn back to Anthony Haselden's will proved 1527,
the text of which I have posted in an earlier thread (10 September
2005), we find that, in a codicil, the testator amends his bequests to
his son William and his daughter Elizabeth by making reference to "that
childe my wife hath nowe w[i]t]h all ... iff God send it life to it".

"That child", it seems to me, was Beatrix, born c1527.

We know that Anthony & Jane Haselden's only son, William, died without
issue; his IPM is 35 Henry VIII. Elizabeth the daughter, named in the
Visitation of Cambridgeshire as her father's heir, and wife to Richard
Bury of Hengrange, Beds, appears to have been coheiress only, along
with her sister Beatrix.

Incidentally, the manor of Huntingfields at Littlington had belonged to
Anthony Haselden's great-great grandfather Richard Haselden (IPM 1405);
it was subject to a suit between "Robert Payton, esquire, and Frances
his wife, daughter and heir of Francis Hasylden of Guilden Morden,
esquire" on the one part, and Thomas Chicheley, "Jane Hasylden
executrix and late the wife of Anthony Hasylden and William Hasylden
his son" on the second part, in relation to the detention of deeds [PRO
C 1/665/1 1529-1532]. I have not attempted to trace its descent past
that date.

MAR

[Sutliff]

Naturally I am unable to place my hands on the book at present, but I seem
to recall that this may be in _Applied Genealogy_. I think the author's name
is Stratton. I think he proved that Beatrice Haselden married a later Robert
Freville as you have confirmed below.

HS

<mj...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:1127335931.2...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

[mj...@btinternet.com]

Many thanks for that, Mr Sutcliff.

I had a look at VCH Cambridgeshire today, sub Litlington (manor of
Huntingfields) [Vol. 8 p 57] which confirms:

"By 1386 acquired by Thomas Haselden; [descended to] Anthony Haselden
(d 1527) whose only son William died under age in 1537. William's
heirs were his sisters Elizabeth and Beatrice... in 1547 Francis
Haselden's daughter Frances and her husband Sir Robert Peyton resettled
the manor on Elizabeth and Beatrice and their husbands James Hutton
(sic) and Robert Freville who took a moiety each [ref. Cal. Pat. 1547-8
pp 49-50 - ie the document I quoted above; how VCH blundered into
stating that Beatrice's husband was James Hutton, I cannot say]. In
1565 both couples sold their shares."

Also, looking at the Little Shelford entry in the same volume at p 221:

"Robert Freville's wife Rose (d 1529) held much of the Little Shelford
estate for life [*] and was succeeded by their son John (d 1552).
John's son and heir Robert in 1556 granted the reversion of the manor
of Little Shelford, then held for life by his mother Dorothy, to John's
brother George. George sold Little Shelford in 1577 to John Bankes."

[*] Ref: BL Add. MS 5861 ff 77, 109; PRO C 142/36 no 19; E 179/81/130
rot. 6]

MAR

[WJho...@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/21/05 1:55:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
mj...@btinternet.com writes:

<< Calendar of Patent Rolls, Edward VI Vol 1, 1547-1548, pp 49-50

"21 May 1547: [Licence] for £5 8s to Robert Payton, knight, and
Frances his wife, Robert Payton the younger, son and heir apparent of
the said Robert and Frances, and John, brother of the foresaid Robert,
to grant the manor of Lytlington alias Huntingfeldes, >>

Thank you for this item.
This allows me to place parents for the Frances mentioned in the below
document which I found while researching the "John HUNT" family. I'm not quite
clear on the expression (below) "... to John Peyton, gent., brother of Robert, his
son, to Richard Peyton, brother of John:"

Is this saying that John Peyton and Richard Peyton are both sons of Robert
Peyton and his wife Elizabeth?
If so it seems a little odd to say it in this way instead of just saying "son
of"
OR is this saying that these two men are brothers to Robert Peyton (who
married Elizabeth) ?
Thanks
Will Johnson
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CONANT MSS
Catalogue Ref. DG11
Creator(s): Conant family of Lyndon Hall, Rutland
Barker family of Lyndon Hall, Rutland

MUNIMENTS OF TITLE - DEEDS
FILE [no title] - ref. DG11/271a - date: 6 Edward VI, January 5
[Access Conditions] At Lyndon Hall
[from Scope and Content] Letters Patent, Licence to alienate: by special
grace and for £6:3s:4d. paid into the hanaper, to Frances Peyton, widow, late wife
of Robert Peyton, knt., deceased, and to Robert Peyton, esq., son and heir of
Robert Peyton, knt., and to Elizabeth his wife, to John Peyton, gent.,
brother of Robert, his son, to Richard Peyton, brother of John: to alienate to John
Hunt, gent., manor of LYNDON with appurtenances, 16 messuages, 200 acres of
land, 300 acres of meadow, 500 acres of pasture, 20 acres of wood, 200 acres of
heath and furze, and £10 rents and view of frankpledge with appurtenances in
LYNDON and TYKYNCOTE, and the advowson of the church of LYNDON, which are held
in chief: to be held of the King and his successors by services due and
accustomed: (endorsed Paid £6:3s:4d. for fine

[mj...@btinternet.com]

WJho...@aol.com schrieb:

> I'm not quite clear on the expression (below) "... to John Peyton, gent., brother of
> Robert, his son, to Richard Peyton, brother of John:"
>
> Is this saying that John Peyton and Richard Peyton are both sons of Robert
> Peyton and his wife Elizabeth?
> If so it seems a little odd to say it in this way instead of just saying "son
> of"
> OR is this saying that these two men are brothers to Robert Peyton (who
> married Elizabeth) ?
> Thanks
> Will Johnson
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>

> Letters Patent, Licence to alienate: to Frances Peyton, widow, late wife

> of Robert Peyton, knt., deceased, and to Robert Peyton, esq., son and heir of
> Robert Peyton, knt., and to Elizabeth his wife, to John Peyton, gent.,

> brother of Robert, his son, to Richard Peyton, brother of John etc
________________________________

Will

I would read this to indicate the following:

1. Sir Robert Peyton [died 1550] married Frances Haselden [d 1582].
Issue:

2a. Robert Peyton married Elizabeth [Rich]
2b. John Peyton
2c. Richard Peyton

This is made clear in the following, connected document, in which John
is referred to as brother of Robert "the son" (rather than "his son"),
making the distinction between the late Sir Robert and Robert the
husband of Elizabeth:

DG11/275 - date: 7 Edward VI, morrow of Purification of B.V.M
Fine: John Hunt, gent., qt., and Frances Peyton, widow, late wife of
Sir Robert Peyton, knt., deceased, Robert Peyton, esq., his son and
heir, John Peyton, gent., brother Robert Peyton the son, and Richard
Peyton, gent., brother of John, deforcs.: of the manor of LYNDON and 16
messuages, 600 acres of land, 300 acres of meadow, 500 acres of
pasture, 20 acres of wood, 200 acres of furze and heath, £10 of rent
and view of frankpledge in LYNDON, TYKYNGCOTE, and advowson of the
church of LYNDON: consideration 400 silver marks.

Cheers

Michael

[mj...@btinternet.com]

Thanks for looking, John; that's very kind of you.

According to your earlier post (16 August):

'Gary Roberts, "Royal Descents of 600 Immigrants", pp. 538-39, says
that disproof of the Peyton descent and of the identification of Rose
Peyton as the wife of Robert Freville [the elder - MAR] is to be found
in Eugene A. Stratton, "Applied Genealogy", pp. 70-72, 74, 165, 170;
while disproof of any Haselden descent is found in "Nexus" 13
(1996):129'