Dowrish/Fulford/Courtenay (again)
coc...@yahoo.com
Courtenay ancestry of Mary Gye. The basic conclusion was that the
Thomas Dowrish m. Alice Fulford (dau. of Thomas Fulford/Phillipa
Courtenay) connection could not be supported and that there was much
against it.
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.genealogy.medieval/browse_thread/thread/40a4be93c786cc86/a79959f4a6104f37?q=fulford+group%3Asoc.genealogy.medieval&lnk=ol&
I have been trying to understand what the various sources say with
regard to the information Doug Richardson and others provided. I have
no new evidence – I’m just looking at the usual known sources. This
is a fairly long summary I wrote for myself and to perhaps stimulate
further discussion.
The pedigrees which follow the Visitations are clearly wrong. The
primary problem seems to be with the Visitations of Devon 1531, 1564
and 1620, by J.L. Vivian. Vivian attempts to combine multiple
Visitations and other sources to create a family’s pedigree and in the
case of Dowrish, I think he has completely confused it.
Vivian Visitations: Dowrishe p. 289; Courtenay p. 246; Fulford p. 378
http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/FHMedieval&CISOPTR=441&REC=2&CISOBOX=fulford&CISOSHOW=248
Dowrishe pedigree basically says:
Thomas Dowrish d. 1464 m. Alice Fulford dau. of Thomas Fulford remarr.
Thomas Coterell
|
Richard Dowrish m. 1st dau of Catsby and 2nd Joan dau. of Fulford
(with issue by both)
|
Thomas Dowrish d. 7 Dec. 1552 m. Elizabeth Taverner
Something is clearly wrong.
Baldwin Fulford was born c1404 (age 11 in 1415) and died 1461
Thomas Fulford was born c 1436 (age 28 in 1464)-20 Feb 1490, m.
Phillipa Courtenay
“Alice Fulford” could not have married Thomas Dowrish (bef 1407-1464)
and in fact she would belong to the generation of his grandson.
In Vivian’s Fulford line he says the ‘Joan, dau. of Fulford’ is the
daughter of the same Thomas Fulford as the Thomas Fulford in the
previous generation, and cites Westcote as his source for the Dowrish-
Fulford connection. But this is not what Westcote or the Visitation
actually said.
Westcote: Dowrish p. 618, Fulford p. 613
http://books.google.com/books?id=WJGEAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA600&lpg=PA600&dq=upton+hellions+fulford&source=bl&ots=dEHaLo9QHk&sig=g4Yj2-YZPxfEO57xUrWxcJAzwdc&hl=en&ei=W8CUSu-7MpP2NZiu2fkH&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#v=onepage&q=fulford&f=false
“Thomas, who had issue Thomas (in the time of Edward IV) who was the
recorder of Exeter, who had issue Richard” and “Richard Dowrish, of
Dowrish, married a daughter of Thomas Fulford of Fulford, knight and
had issue Thomas; secondly he married a daughter of Catesby, and had
issue Peter, Elizabeth and Katherine…”
Both the Visitations and Westcote (perhaps following the Visitations)
leave the daughter of Thomas Fulford unnamed and say that she married
Richard Dowrish, not a Thomas Dowrish. I think it is clear that
Vivian had a wife with no last name “Alice” married to a Thomas
Dowrish, a daughter of Fulford with no first name married to a
Dowrish, and combined the two to create “Alice Fulford.”
This of course agrees with what Douglas Richardson said in 2006 –
that Thomas Dowrish (d. 10 Feb. 1483) actually married 1st Margaret
Reke d. March 1476/7; and 2nd shortly before 7 May 1477 (as her 2nd)
Alice Stowell who had m. 1st John Cheyne and 3rd by 1484 Thomas
Coterell.
Ok, so we can completely dispense with “Alice Fulford” as an invention
of Vivian combining Alice Unknown with Unknown Fulford to create Alice
Fulford (for that matter it is best to dispense with Vivian entirely
for the Dowrish pedigree).
In 2006, Douglas then said that Thomas Dowrish (bef. 1407-1464) had
sons Richard and Thomas (bef 1423-1483)/husband of Margaret Reke and
Alice Stowell:
Thomas Dowrish (bef. 1407-1464)
| |
Richard Thomas(d. 1483)
This flies in the face of almost all evidence.
1. The Visitation of Devon of 1620 by Colby goes Thomas 18 Henry VI –
Thomas Ed 4 – Richard m. Catsby and Fulford
http://books.google.com/books?id=fqwKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA399&dq=visitation+of+devon#v=onepage&q=dowrish&f=false
2. Westcote given above says “Thomas, who had issue Thomas (in the
time of Edward IV) who was the recorder of Exeter, who had issue
Richard.” The Thomas who “was recorder of Exeter” was Thomas Dowrish
d. 1483.
3. Richard married a daughter of Thomas Fulford (c1436-2/20/1490).
If Richard was a brother of Thomas who was born before 1423, it is
very unlikely he is marrying the daughter of a man born c1436. But if
you simply accept what is directly stated by the Visitations and
Westcote then Richard and ‘dau. of Fulford’ are in the exact same
generation and approximately the same age.
4. Thomas, son and heir of Richard, b. c 1482 and d. 7 Dec 1552, it
highly unlikely he is the grandson of Thomas b. bef 1407
5. As given by Richardson, the Chancery Proceeding case says Richard
was the son of Thomas whose wife Alice married Thomas Coterell:
C 1/198/41: Thomas, son and heir of Richard, son of Thomas Dourisshe.
v. Thomas Coterell and Alys, his wife, previously the wife of the said
Thomas Dourisshe, the elder.: Detention of deeds relating to the
manors of Dourisshe, Holford, Credy Hillyng, and Upton Hillyng and to
lands in Radlegh and Britport. Date: 1493-1500.
So, if we just accept the Visitation as given, Westcote and the
Chancery Proceedings we have:
Thomas Dowrish (bef. 1407-1464)
|
Thomas (bef. 1423 -1483) m. 1st Margaret Reke and 2nd Alice Stowell
|
Richard (poss. wives “dau. of Catsby”, “dau. of Thomas Fulford”, and
Barbara Triffes)
|
Thomas (c1482 - 7 Dec 1552) = Elizabeth Taverner
As I said, this fits ‘almost’ all of the evidence as this leaves only
one IPM which must be explained. The 1483 IPM of Thomas Dowrish names
his heir as a daughter age 3. Doug left open the possibility that the
IPM concerned only the children by his 2nd wife Alice Stowell and I
think this is almost certainly true, esp. if we just look at some
dates again. Thomas m. Margaret Reke in 1444 [from Hal Bradley’s
website, evidence not stated, but would be supported by Doug’s
statement that “Thomas was patron of West Ogwell, Devon in 1445,
perhaps in right of his wife”]; Margaret died March 1476/7 – so a 32
year marriage and no surviving children? Thomas (at the age of 54+)
then marries [before 7 May 1477 (date of settlement)] an obviously
much younger Alice Stowell and they have a child Elizabeth. Alice
Stowell owned property in her own right which was settled on her in
1477; this property would go to her children and not the children of
Thomas Dowrish and his first wife Margaret Reke. The weight of the
evidence is Richard is the son of Thomas Dowrish (d. 1483) by his
first wife Margaret Reke.
Thomas Dowrish (bef. 1407-1464)
|
Thomas (bef. 1423 -1483) by his 1st wife Margaret Reke (m. 2nd Alice
Stowell)
|
Richard (poss. wives “dau. of Catsby”, “dau. of Thomas Fulford”, and
Barbara Triffes)
|
Thomas (c1482 - 7 Dec 1552) = Elizabeth Taverner
Joe Cochoit
coc...@yahoo.com
> In 2006, there were several threads about the Dowrish/Fulford/
> Courtenay ancestry of Mary Gye. The basic conclusion was that the
> Thomas Dowrish m. Alice Fulford (dau. of Thomas Fulford/Phillipa
> Courtenay) connection could not be supported and that there was much
>
> I have been trying to understand what the various sources say with
> regard to the information Doug Richardson and others provided. I have
> no new evidence – I’m just looking at the usual known sources. This
> is a fairly long summary I wrote for myself and to perhaps stimulate
> further discussion.
>
> The pedigrees which follow the Visitations are clearly wrong. The
> primary problem seems to be with the Visitations of Devon 1531, 1564
> and 1620, by J.L. Vivian. Vivian attempts to combine multiple
> Visitations and other sources to create a family’s pedigree and in the
> case of Dowrish, I think he has completely confused it.
>
>
> Dowrishe pedigree basically says:
> Thomas Dowrish d. 1464 m. Alice Fulford dau. of Thomas Fulford remarr.
> Thomas Coterell
> |
> Richard Dowrish m. 1st dau of Catsby and 2nd Joan dau. of Fulford
> (with issue by both)
> |
> Thomas Dowrish d. 7 Dec. 1552 m. Elizabeth Taverner
>
> Something is clearly wrong.
> Baldwin Fulford was born c1404 (age 11 in 1415) and died 1461
> Thomas Fulford was born c 1436 (age 28 in 1464)-20 Feb 1490, m.
> Phillipa Courtenay
> “Alice Fulford” could not have married Thomas Dowrish (bef 1407-1464)
> and in fact she would belong to the generation of his grandson.
>
> In Vivian’s Fulford line he says the ‘Joan, dau. of Fulford’ is the
> daughter of the same Thomas Fulford as the Thomas Fulford in the
> previous generation, and cites Westcote as his source for the Dowrish-
> Fulford connection. But this is not what Westcote or the Visitation
> actually said.
>
Another link to straighten out the Dowrish line:
Report and transactions of the Devonshire Association for the ...,
Volume 28
http://books.google.com/books?id=nUkDAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA355&dq=inquisition+post+mortem+dowrish#v=onepage&q=inquisition%20post%20mortem%20dowrish&f=false
“…respecting the inquisition post-mortem of Thomas Dowrish (deceased
10th February, 1483 inquisition August 1483, 1 Richard III.) that
Katherine, daughter of Richard Dowrish, son of Thomas Dowrish, subject
of the inquisition, was given in marriage to John Snedall…”
Thomas Dowrish d. 10 Feb, 1483
|
Richard Dowrish
|
Katherine Dowrish = John Snedall
Joe Cochoit
coc...@yahoo.com
Thomas Dowrish (bef. 1423 -1483) by his 1st wife Margaret Reke (m.
2nd Alice Stowell)
|
Richard (poss. wives “dau. of Catsby”, “dau. of Thomas Fulford”, and
Barbara Trisses)
|
Thomas (c1482 - 7 Dec 1552) = Elizabeth Taverner
So who are the wives of Richard Dowrish and which is the mother of
Thomas?
Westcote says:
p. 618
“Richard Dowrish of Dowrish, married a daughter of Thomas Fulford, of
Fulford, knight, and had issue Thomas; secondly, he married a daughter
of Catesby, and had issue Peter, Elizabeth, and Katherine married to
John Snedel…”
p. 613
“Sir Thomas Fulford, by Phillipa…” [daughter of Philip Courtenay of
Powderham and Elizabeth Hungerford] had a daughter “married to Richard
Dowrish of Dowrish.”
http://books.google.com/books?id=WJGEAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA600&lpg=PA600&dq=upton+hellions+fulford&source=bl&ots=dEHaLo9QHk&sig=g4Yj2-YZPxfEO57xUrWxcJAzwdc&hl=en&ei=W8CUSu-7MpP2NZiu2fkH&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#v=onepage&q=fulford&f=false
Vivian (p. 289) switches this around saying the “dau. of Catsby” is
the mother of Thomas, and that the “dau. of Fulford” is the mother of
Peter, Elizabeth, and Katherine. Vivian also adds in a footnote that
“Harl. MS 5185, give his wife as ‘Barbara filia Trisses’.
http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/FHMedieval&CISOPTR=441&REC=2&CISOBOX=fulford&CISOSHOW=248
Vivian has been shown to have several aspects of the Dowrish pedigree
wrong. If Thomas Dowrish is descended from the “dau. of Fulford” it
reopens a much more interesting descent for Mary Gye through the
Courtenay and Hungerford families. Is anyone able to shed light on
this?
Also, anyone able to lookup this reference to see if it is able to
answer the question?
Trease, G.E. Dowrich and the Dowrich family of Sandford, Devon and
Cornwall Notes and Queries 33, 1974, pp. 37-8, 71 73, 113-7, 154-5,
208-11, 252-7, & 348-52.
The second wife is clearly named Joan. She left an IPM as did Richard
Dowrish’s son Thomas. These may have clues if anyone is able to track
them down.
A calendar of inquisitiones post mortem for Cornwall and Devon: from
Henry III to Charles I
by Cornwall (England : County), Devon and Cornwall Record Society
http://books.google.com/books?id=fdoMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PT175&dq=%22calendar+of+inquisition%22&lr=&as_brr=3#v=onepage&q=%22calendar%20of%20inquisition%22&f=false
Dowrysshe, Joan, late wife of Richard, now Puntyngdon E, File 152, 3;
3-4 Henry VIII (c1511-1513)
Dourysshe, Margaret, wife of Thomas C 27 16 Edward IV (c 1476/7)
Dowrysshe, Thomas C 46 I Richard III (c 1483/4)
Dowrysshe, Thomas C, vol. 100, 13; I Mary (c 1553/4)
Joe Cochoit
Brad Verity
> So in the Mary Gye ancestry we have:
> Thomas Dowrish (bef. 1423 -1483) by his 1st wife Margaret Reke (m.
> 2nd Alice Stowell)
> |
> Richard (poss. wives "dau. of Catsby", "dau. of Thomas Fulford", and
> Barbara Trisses)
> |
> Thomas (c1482 - 7 Dec 1552) = Elizabeth Taverner
> So who are the wives of Richard Dowrish and which is the mother of
> Thomas?
My thoughts are as follows:
I think the evidence is fairly solid that there was a marriage between Richard Dowrish and a daughter of Thomas Fulford & Philippa Courtenay.
But per the Dowrish pedigree taken at the 1564 Visitation of Devon, the mother of Richard's son and heir Thomas Dowrish was "Barbara, d. of Triffes":
http://ukga.org/cgi-bin/browse.cgi?action=ViewRec&DB=13&bookID=136&page=85&submit=Submit
'Triffes' could be Trefusis, a Cornish gentry family?
Per the Dowrish pedigree taken at the 1620 Visitation of Devon, Richard Dowrish, alive in "1 Ric. 3" (1483), had his son and heir Thomas by a wife "Da. of Catsby", and by another wife "d. of Fulford", had another son Peter, and two daughters, Elizabeth and Katherine, wife of John Sneddall:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=fqwKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA399&dq=visitation+of+devon&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=visitation%20of%20devon&f=false
Thomas Westcote in 1630, in his pedigree of Fulford, states that Sir Thomas Fulford and Philippa Courtenay had a daughter "married to Richard Dowrish, of Dowrish, esq., but left no issue". He then contradicts his own statement, in his pedigree of Dowrish, when he states "Richard Dowrish, of Dowrish, married a daughter of Thomas Fulford, of Fulford, knight, and had issue Thomas; secondly he married a daughter of Catesby, and had issue Peter, Elizabeth, and Katherine". The children match those from the Visitation ten years previous, but Westcote has reversed the wives.
> The second wife is clearly named Joan. She left an IPM as did Richard
> Dowrish's son Thomas. These may have clues if anyone is able to track
> them down.
> A calendar of inquisitiones post mortem for Cornwall and Devon: from
> Henry III to Charles I
> by Cornwall (England : County), Devon and Cornwall Record Society
> http://books.google.com/books?id=fdoMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PT175&dq=%22calendar+of+inquisition%22&lr=&as_brr=3#v=onepage&q=%22calendar%20of%20inquisition%22&f=false
> Dowrysshe, Joan, late wife of Richard, now Puntyngdon E, File 152, 3;
> 3-4 Henry VIII (c1511-1513)
Joan's second husband was likely the "Thomas Puntyngdon, Puntyngton or Puntyngeon, of Shodbroke, Pynnecote and Uptonhillyngis, Devon, g.[entleman]" who received a general pardon from Henry VIII on 25 May 1510:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=102634
Joan's IPM is in the National Archives, here:
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C7757952
That, along with the following two documents concerning a case in Chancery, will no doubt help unravel which family - Fulford, Catesby, or Trefusis - Joan came from
"C 1/198/15 Dowrysshe v Dowrysshe. Plaintiffs: Thomas, son and heir of Richard Dowrysshe. Defendants: Johane Dowrysshe, executrix and late the wife of the said Richard. Subject: Detention of deeds relating to the manors of Crede Hyllyaunce and Stoke English. Devon. 1493-1500":
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C7460150
"C 4/31/103 Thomas Dowrysshe v. Joan Dowrysshe: commission and answer Date of document after 1500":
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C8921767
My hunch is that Richard Dowrish's surviving wife Joan was the Fulford spouse, mainly because of chronology. As a daughter of Sir Thomas Fulford and Philippa Courtenay, Joan would have to have been born in the 1460s, about 1465. Richard was born about 1445, so Joan was almost a full generation younger than him. This age difference would fit better for a second marriage.
So the next step in further identifying the wives of Richard Dowrish would definitely be to obtain the IPM of his widow Joan, and the two Chancery documents regarding her case with her stepson Thomas Dowrish.
I've added these to my To Do List the next time I'm at The National Archives (which won't be until next year), but if anyone in the meantime, who is interested in the ancestry of Mary Gye, gets a chance to view the IPM and Chancery documents sooner, wishes to share what light they shed on this topic, I'd greatly appreciate it.
Cheers, ----Brad
Matt Tompkins
> That, along with the following two documents concerning a case in Chancery, will no doubt help unravel which family - Fulford, Catesby, or Trefusis - Joan came from
>
> "C 1/198/15 Dowrysshe v Dowrysshe. Plaintiffs: Thomas, son and heir of Richard Dowrysshe. Defendants: Johane Dowrysshe, executrix and late the wife of the said Richard. Subject: Detention of deeds relating to the manors of Crede Hyllyaunce and Stoke English. Devon. 1493-1500":
>
> http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C7460150
>
http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT7/ChP/C1no198/IMG_0029.htm
and in the next two images (images 29-31). Unfortunately it's partly damaged.
Matt Tompkins
Brad Verity
> The plaint in this case can be seen here:
> http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT7/ChP/C1no198/IMG_0029.htm
> and in the next two images (images 29-31). Unfortunately it's partly damaged.
There is another Chancery case that could be useful:
"C 1/1522/8 Mostyn v Snydall. Plaintiffs: Nicholas MOSTYN, Robert LOVELL, Hugh CLYFE, Hugh DART and others. Defendants: Katherine SNYDALL, Thomas DOWRYSH. Subject: Manor of Stockleigh English. Devon. Bill, mutilated. Transferred from UNSORTED BUNDLES, SERIES II. 1956 Henry VIII":
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C7507889
Thomas Dowrish and Katherine Dowrish Snedell were children of Richard Dowrish, by two different wives, according to the 1620 Visitation pedigree and Westcote in 1630.
On Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:36:41 PM UTC-7, coc...@yahoo.com wrote:
> This of course agrees with what Douglas Richardson said in 2006 -
> Reke d. March 1476/7; and 2nd shortly before 7 May 1477 (as her 2nd)
> Alice Stowell who had m. 1st John Cheyne and 3rd by 1484 Thomas
> Coterell.
> one IPM which must be explained. The 1483 IPM of Thomas Dowrish names
> his heir as a daughter age 3. Doug left open the possibility that the
> IPM concerned only the children by his 2nd wife Alice Stowell and I
> think this is almost certainly true, esp. if we just look at some
> dates again. Thomas m. Margaret Reke in 1444 [from Hal Bradley's
> website, evidence not stated, but would be supported by Doug's
> statement that "Thomas was patron of West Ogwell, Devon in 1445,
> then marries [before 7 May 1477 (date of settlement)] an obviously
> much younger Alice Stowell and they have a child Elizabeth. Alice
> Stowell owned property in her own right which was settled on her in
> 1477; this property would go to her children and not the children of
> Thomas Dowrish and his first wife Margaret Reke. The weight of the
> evidence is Richard is the son of Thomas Dowrish (d. 1483) by his
> first wife Margaret Reke.
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C6545338
But the National Archives has filed it as "Dourysshe, Margaret, who was the wife of the late Thomas" This implies that she was a widow and had survived her husband the "late Thomas" Dowrish. If this is correct, the Dowrish pedigree will need even further revision, for Margaret cannot have been the first wife of the Thomas who died in 1483.
It will be interesting to see who was returned as Margaret's heir in 1477. If Richard was her son, as in the Dowrish pedigree constructed by Joe above, then he should have been returned her heir. Hopefully we will also get an age for him, too, which would be very helpful.
Cheers, -----Brad
Joe
> On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 1:08:27 AM UTC-7, Matt Tompkins wrote:
>
> > The plaint in this case can be seen here:
>
> > http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT7/ChP/C1no198/IMG_0029.htm
>
> > and in the next two images (images 29-31). Unfortunately it's partly damaged.
>
>
>
> Thank you so much for the link, Matt. I can make out some of it, and there does not seem to be any individuals named in it save for Thomas Dowrish, his father Richard Dowrish, and Richard's widow Joan. Were you able to make out any other names?
>
>
>
> http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C6545338
>
>
>
> But the National Archives has filed it as "Dourysshe, Margaret, who was the wife of the late Thomas" This implies that she was a widow and had survived her husband the "late Thomas" Dowrish. If this is correct, the Dowrish pedigree will need even further revision, for Margaret cannot have been the first wife of the Thomas who died in 1483.
>
>
>
> It will be interesting to see who was returned as Margaret's heir in 1477. If Richard was her son, as in the Dowrish pedigree constructed by Joe above, then he should have been returned her heir. Hopefully we will also get an age for him, too, which would be very helpful.
>
>
>
> Cheers, -----Brad
I'm glad to see you are interested in the Dowrish line - perhaps you can untangle it.
The reference Dowrich and the Dowrich Family of Sandford, by G.E. Trease in Devon and Cornwall Notes and Queries, vol. 33, (1974-1977). Serial form: pp. 37-38, 70-73, 113-117, 154-155, 208-211, 252-257, & 348-352. may help.
Trease says (he had seen her IPM) Margaret Reke was the wife of Thomas Dowrish sr. (d. 1464), mother of Thomas Dowrish (d. 1483) and grandmother of Richard Dowrish.
For the wives of Thomas Dowrish jr., he says:
"It appears that Thomas Dowrich was twice married. His first wife was Alice daughter of Thomas Fulford by whom he had two sons, Richard and Walter. Noted in the 1483 inquisition post mortem is the fact that in 1461Richard and Walter had received a substantial amount of property from their grandfather. In 1477 the major part of the estate was willed by Thomas to his wife Alice and their heirs. The assumed second marriage resulted in a daughter, Elizabeth, age three at the time of her father's death. She was named as heir but by this time it seems that most of the Dowrich estate was already in the hands of her step-brother, Richard."
However, with regard to Alice Fulford, this appears to be the one place in the pedigree that Trease cites and follows Vivian and so is not reliable. It would be nice to have proof. Vivian in his Visitations of Devon p. 289 cites for Alice Fulford 'Lord Iddesleigh's deeds.' Lord Iddesleigh would be from the line of John Northcote who married Elizabeth Dowrish (Stafford Northcote was created earl of Iddesleigh) - it maybe Vivian had seen actual evidence of the existence Alice Fulford.
For the next generation, Thomas Dowrish who married Elizabeth Taverner:
Trease says he was not a son Richard Dowrish, but probably a son of Richard's brother, Walter Dowrish. However, this appears to be wrong since the Chancery suit refers to 'Thomas, son and heir of Richard Dowrysshe.' The fine below likely led to the confusion and the subsequent suits.
This fine does not mention an older son Thomas and would seem to completely disinherit Thomas as the final remainder is not to the right heirs of Richard Dowrish:
CP 25/1/46/93, number 16.
County: Devon.
Place: Westminster.
Date: One week from Holy Trinity, 11 Henry VII [5 June 1496].
Parties: William Sh[.p?]ton' and Robert Torner, demandants, and Richard Doweryssh' and Nicholas Snape, impedients.
Property: The manor of Stocley Englyssh' and 21 messuages, 693 acres of land, 46 acres of meadow, 40 acres of wood, 62 acres of furze and heath and 14 shillings of rent and a moiety of 1 messuage and of 1 mill in Credyhelyon', Upton' Helyon', Wolvedon', Hatherlegh', Langber, Thornworthy, Ledebrugg', Pyddeslegh', Aller, Henstilhys, Yollond', Hollond' [deleted?], Holford', Bynholelypsion, Aysshberton', Bowtporte, Dowryssh', Lawarrodlegh', Plymmouth', Plymton' Prior and Plymton' Comitis.
Action: Plea of warranty of charter.
Agreement: Richard has acknowledged the manor and tenements to be the right of Robert, as those which Robert and William have of his gift.
For this: William and Robert have granted to Nicholas the manor and tenements and have rendered them to him in the court, to hold to Nicholas for the term of 1 month, and after the term the manor and tenements shall remain to Richard and Joan, his wife, to hold of the chief lords for the lives of Richard and Joan, and after their decease the manor and tenements shall remain to Peter Doweryssh', son of the aforesaid Richard, and the heirs of his body, to hold of the chief lords for ever. In default of such heirs, successive remainders (1) to Isabel, Alice and Katherine, sisters of the aforesaid Peter, and the heirs of their bodies and (2) to William Stapylhyll' and Walter York and the heirs of William Stapylhyll'.
Joe
Matt Tompkins
> For the next generation, Thomas Dowrish who married Elizabeth Taverner:
>
> Trease says he was not a son Richard Dowrish, but probably a son of Richard's brother, Walter Dowrish. However, this appears to be wrong since the Chancery suit refers to 'Thomas, son and heir of Richard Dowrysshe.' The fine below likely led to the confusion and the subsequent suits.
>
> This fine does not mention an older son Thomas and would seem to completely disinherit Thomas as the final remainder is not to the right heirs of Richard Dowrish:
>
> CP 25/1/46/93, number 16.
> County: Devon.
> Place: Westminster.
> Date: One week from Holy Trinity, 11 Henry VII [5 June 1496].
> Parties: William Sh[.p?]ton' and Robert Torner, demandants, and Richard Doweryssh' and Nicholas Snape, impedients.
> Property: The manor of Stocley Englyssh' and 21 messuages, 693 acres of land, 46 acres of meadow, 40 acres of wood, 62 acres of furze and heath and 14 shillings of rent and a moiety of 1 messuage and of 1 mill in Credyhelyon', Upton' Helyon', Wolvedon', Hatherlegh', Langber, Thornworthy, Ledebrugg', Pyddeslegh', Aller, Henstilhys, Yollond', Hollond' [deleted?], Holford', Bynholelypsion, Aysshberton', Bowtporte, Dowryssh', Lawarrodlegh', Plymmouth', Plymton' Prior and Plymton' Comitis.
> Action: Plea of warranty of charter.
> Agreement: Richard has acknowledged the manor and tenements to be the right of Robert, as those which Robert and William have of his gift.
> For this: William and Robert have granted to Nicholas the manor and tenements and have rendered them to him in the court, to hold to Nicholas for the term of 1 month, and after the term the manor and tenements shall remain to Richard and Joan, his wife, to hold of the chief lords for the lives of Richard and Joan, and after their decease the manor and tenements shall remain to Peter Doweryssh', son of the aforesaid Richard, and the heirs of his body, to hold of the chief lords for ever. In default of such heirs, successive remainders (1) to Isabel, Alice and Katherine, sisters of the aforesaid Peter, and the heirs of their bodies and (2) to William Stapylhyll' and Walter York and the heirs of William Stapylhyll'.
>
That 1496 fine is presumably the gift in tail Thomas referred to. Unless the properties were subsequently resettled, Thomas had no interest at all. One suspects he knew this perfectly well and was just harrassing his mother (or step-mother?) in the hope of forcng a compromise, or to gain some other advantage.
Matt Tompkins
Brad Verity
> I'm glad to see you are interested in the Dowrish line - perhaps you can untangle it.
> The reference Dowrich and the Dowrich Family of Sandford, by G.E. Trease in Devon and Cornwall Notes and Queries, vol. 33, (1974-1977). Serial form: pp. 37-38, 70-73, 113-117, 154-155, 208-211, 252-257, & 348-352. may help.
> Trease says (he had seen her IPM) Margaret Reke was the wife of Thomas Dowrish sr. (d. 1464), mother of Thomas Dowrish (d. 1483) and grandmother of Richard Dowrish.
> For the wives of Thomas Dowrish jr., he says:
>
> "It appears that Thomas Dowrich was twice married. His first wife was Alice daughter of Thomas Fulford by whom he had two sons, Richard and Walter. Noted in the 1483 inquisition post mortem is the fact that in 1461Richard and Walter had received a substantial amount of property from their grandfather.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.genealogy.medieval/QKS-k8eGzIY/oM8q11cuc9AJ
There is no way that Sir Thomas Fulford could have had a daughter Alice who was a mother of two sons in 1461, when Sir Thomas was not yet age 30. So Vivian is incorrect when he states in his pedigree of Dowrish, "Thomas Dowrich, Recorder of Exeter, temp. Edw. IV, ob. 1464. M.I. = Alice, da. of Thomas Fulford, remar. Thomas Coterell", and that they were the parents of Richard Dowrish. First, Vivian is wrong as to the date of death, for the Thomas Dowrish who died in 1464 and has a M.I. was the grandfather, not the father, of Richard Dowrish.
> Vivian in his Visitations of Devon p. 289 cites for Alice Fulford 'Lord Iddesleigh's deeds.' Lord Iddesleigh would be from the line of John Northcote who married Elizabeth Dowrish (Stafford Northcote was created earl of Iddesleigh) - it maybe Vivian had seen actual evidence of the existence Alice Fulford.
Vivian cites footnote 3 "Chancery Proceedings" as evidence for the marriage of Thomas Dowrish to an Alice, and cites footnote 4 "Harl. MS. 5185, fo. 46. & Chanc. Bills temp. Hen. VII and VIII, vol. xi, page 56" as evidence that Alice was daughter of Thomas Fulford.
"Harl. MS. 5185 fo. 46" is the Dowrish pedigree taken at the 1564 Visitation of Devon, where indeed "Thomas Dowrish of Dowrish = d. of Thomas Fulford", and were parents of "Richard Dowrish = Barbara, d. of Triffes":
http://ukga.org/cgi-bin/browse.cgi?action=ViewRec&DB=13&bookID=136&page=85&submit=Submit
But 1564 was one hundred years after the death of Thomas Dowrish the elder, and the descendants were clearly confused as to the identity of the wives in the first two generations when they gave the herald their pedigree. Perhaps they inadvertently switched the wives of Thomas Dowrish (d. 1483) and his son Richard Dowrish (d. c.1505) - it was Thomas who was actually married to Barbara Triffes [Trefusis?], and she was the mother of Richard, who was married to the daughter of Sir Thomas Fulford? The Richard Dowrish marriage to a daughter of Sir Thomas Fulford does at least appear to work, chronologically.
I don't know what "Chanc. Bills temp. Hen. VII and VIII, vol. xi, page 56" - the other source Vivian cites as evidence that Alice was daughter of Thomas Fulford - means.
Just like Thomas Westcote did in 1630, Col. Vivian also contradicts himself in two pedigrees. In the Dowrish pedigree he says, "Richard Dowrich, 1 Rich. III., named in the Inq. p.m. of his widow. = Joan, da. of ... Fulford, remar. ... Poyntyngton, d. 7 Oct. 1512, Exch. Inq.p.m. 3 and 4 Hen. VIII, No. 3", and by her had Peter, Elizabeth, Alice and Katherine.
Yet in his Fulford pedigree (p. 378), Vivian says that Sir Thomas Fulford and Philippa Courtenay had a daughter "Joan, mar. to Richard Dowrish of Dowrish, s.p."
Vivian's source for the three daughters of Sir Thomas Fulford & Philippa Courtenay was clearly Thomas Westcote in 1630, as Westcote states, "The next [child of Sir Thomas Fulford] was a daughter married to Sir John Kirkham, of Blagdon, knight, sans issue: another daughter, Joan, was wife of William Yeo, of Heanton-Sachvile, in the parish of Petrockstowe, esq., sans issue: the last was married to Richard Dowrish, of Dowrish, esq., but left no issue":
https://archive.org/stream/viewofdevonshire00west#page/612/mode/2up
As no daughters are given to Sir Thomas Fulford and Philippa Courtenay, in either the 1564 or 1620 Visitation pedigrees of the Fulford family, one wonders where Westcote obtained his information on them in 1630, and how accurate it could be more than a hundred years after these daughters were living.
But note that Westcote doesn't name the Fulford daughter who married Richard Dowrish. He certainly doesn't name her 'Joan', as he gives the daughter who married William Yeo that first name. It was Col. Vivian who gives the daughter who married Richard Dowrish the first name of 'Joan' (and Vivian still retains Westcote's Joan Fulford, wife of William Yeo, so Vivian has Sir Thomas Fulford with two daughters named Joan in his pedigree).
Vivian obviously saw the IPM for Joan Pountington, widow of Richard Dowrish, saw that the Dowrish pedigree in the 1620 Visitation of Devon had Richard's second wife as "d. of Fulford", and made an assumption that Joan Dowrish Pountington (d. 1512) was a daughter of Sir Thomas Fulford and Philippa Courtenay. That may well be the case, but Westcote contradicts this twice - first, in the Fulford pedigree when he states that the Fulford daughter who married Richard Dowrish died without issue (and gives the first name 'Joan' to another Fulford daughter, wife of William Yeo); and second, in the Dowrish pedigree when he states that the Fulford daughter was the first wife of Richard Dowrish (and mother of his son and heir Thomas), and not the second wife who survived him.
My hunch that Joan Dowrish's second husband was Thomas Pountington "of Shodbroke, Pynnecote and Uptonhillyngis, Devon" may be able to be verified by the two IPMs (one Chancery, one Exchequer) from 6 Hen. VIII (1514-15) of Thomas Pountington:
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C7818919
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C7757953
Luckily, Vivian must have seen Joan's IPM, as he provides her exact date of death, and the fact that her daughter Katherine Dowrish Snedell, presumably returned as Joan's heir, was "aged 30 at her mother's death", so born by 1482. This can work chronologically for Joan to have been a daughter of Sir Thomas Fulford and Philippa Courtenay, but it is cutting it close. Per the Somerset IPM of Sir Thomas Fulford, taken 3 November 1490, his son and heir Humphrey Fulford was "aged 23 and more", so born by 1467. There were two younger sons born after Humphrey. We don't know when the daughters were born, but if Joan Dowrish Pountington was one, and a mother of at least one child by 1482, she would necessarily have been older than her brother Humphrey Fulford.
> For the next generation, Thomas Dowrish who married Elizabeth Taverner:
> Trease says he was not a son Richard Dowrish, but probably a son of Richard's brother, Walter Dowrish. However, this appears to be wrong since the Chancery suit refers to 'Thomas, son and heir of Richard Dowrysshe.' The fine below likely led to the confusion and the subsequent suits.
> This fine does not mention an older son Thomas and would seem to completely disinherit Thomas as the final remainder is not to the right heirs of Richard Dowrish:
> CP 25/1/46/93, number 16.
> County: Devon.
> Place: Westminster.
> Date: One week from Holy Trinity, 11 Henry VII [5 June 1496].
> Parties: William Sh[.p?]ton' and Robert Torner, demandants, and Richard Doweryssh' and Nicholas Snape, impedients.
> Property: The manor of Stocley Englyssh' and 21 messuages, 693 acres of land, 46 acres of meadow, 40 acres of wood, 62 acres of furze and heath and 14 shillings of rent and a moiety of 1 messuage and of 1 mill in Credyhelyon', Upton' Helyon', Wolvedon', Hatherlegh', Langber, Thornworthy, Ledebrugg', Pyddeslegh', Aller, Henstilhys, Yollond', Hollond' [deleted?], Holford', Bynholelypsion, Aysshberton', Bowtporte, Dowryssh', Lawarrodlegh', Plymmouth', Plymton' Prior and Plymton' Comitis.
> Action: Plea of warranty of charter.
> Agreement: Richard has acknowledged the manor and tenements to be the right of Robert, as those which Robert and William have of his gift.
> For this: William and Robert have granted to Nicholas the manor and tenements and have rendered them to him in the court, to hold to Nicholas for the term of 1 month, and after the term the manor and tenements shall remain to Richard and Joan, his wife, to hold of the chief lords for the lives of Richard and Joan, and after their decease the manor and tenements shall remain to Peter Doweryssh', son of the aforesaid Richard, and the heirs of his body, to hold of the chief lords for ever. In default of such heirs, successive remainders (1) to Isabel, Alice and Katherine, sisters of the aforesaid Peter, and the heirs of their bodies and (2) to William Stapylhyll' and Walter York and the heirs of William Stapylhyll'.
It also tells us that Richard Dowrish was alive in 1496, and had four children by his second wife Joan by then. It also implies that Katherine was the youngest daughter, which means that at least two other children were born before she was in 1482. This now would make Joan Dowrish Pountington, if a daughter of Sir Thomas Fulford, at least seven years older than her brother Sir Humphrey Fulford, born by 1467.
It's odd and frustrating that no IPM appears to exist for Richard Dowrish. But there may have been at least a writ of diem clausit extremum issued for him in the Fine Rolls of Henry VII's reign, which would at least give us a good approximation of when he died.
On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 2:22:53 AM UTC-7, Matt Tompkins wrote:
> Interesting. In C 1/198/15 Thomas Dowrysshe, son and heir of Richard Dowrysshe, complained that his father died seised of the manors of Crede Hyllyaunce and Stoke Englisshe in Devon in his demesne as of fee tail, after which they ought to have descended to Thomas as his son and heir, and that the title deeds, including the gift in tail itself, were in the possession of Richard's executrix, his widow Joan, who refused to give them up. He said he was suing in Chancery because he could not sue at common law for lack of knowledge about the deeds and the interests they created.
>
> That 1496 fine is presumably the gift in tail Thomas referred to. Unless the properties were subsequently resettled, Thomas had no interest at all. One suspects he knew this perfectly well and was just harrassing his mother (or step-mother?) in the hope of forcng a compromise, or to gain some other advantage.
Thanks & Cheers, ----Brad
Matt Tompkins
> Vivian cites footnote 3 "Chancery Proceedings" as evidence for the marriage of Thomas Dowrish to an Alice, and cites footnote 4 "Harl. MS. 5185, fo. 46. & Chanc. Bills temp. Hen. VII and VIII, vol. xi, page 56" as evidence that Alice was daughter of Thomas Fulford.
>
> I don't know what "Chanc. Bills temp. Hen. VII and VIII, vol. xi, page 56" - the other source Vivian cites as evidence that Alice was daughter of Thomas Fulford - means.
>
Matt
Colin Withers via
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
Perhaps it is vol 9 in this series?
http://tna.koha-ptfs.co.uk/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=3471&query_desc=kw,wrdl:%20Early%20Chancery%20Proceedings
Wibs
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Jakub Mirza Lipka via
I looked into the Dourisshe family several years ago. From memory, I can shed some light on Margaret Ryke. Margaret married John Boyville the elder of Skiredon and West Ogwell some time before 1425. Her first husband died between 1428 and 1437. She subsequently married Thomas Dourisshe the younger. Although she would appear to be a lot older than Thomas the younger, in a temporary settlement with the heirs of John Boyville the younger around 1451 Margaret's husband is clearly identified as Thomas the younger. A few months after Margaret's death, the heirs of John Boyville the younger renewed their claim to West Ogwell, the reversion of which had been left to the heirs of Hugh Courteney in the absence of any children from the marriage of John the elder and Margaret. Thomas gave evidence that confirmed that he was the second husband of the late Margaret. Nothing definite can be said about Margaret's ancestry, however, there is circumstantial evidence that she may have been daughter/ grand-daughter of William Ryke, tin merchant of Asburton in Devon who, around 1370, provided the tin for the roof of Exeter Cathedral.
jhigg...@yahoo.com
>
>
>
> I'm glad to see you are interested in the Dowrish line - perhaps you can untangle it.
>
>
>
> The reference Dowrich and the Dowrich Family of Sandford, by G.E. Trease in Devon and Cornwall Notes and Queries, vol. 33, (1974-1977). Serial form: pp. 37-38, 70-73, 113-117, 154-155, 208-211, 252-257, & 348-352. may help.
>
Joe
> I looked into the Dourisshe family several years ago. From memory, I can shed some light on Margaret Ryke. Margaret married John Boyville the elder of Skiredon and West Ogwell some time before 1425. Her first husband died between 1428 and 1437. She subsequently married Thomas Dourisshe the younger. Although she would appear to be a lot older than Thomas the younger, in a temporary settlement with the heirs of John Boyville the younger around 1451 Margaret's husband is clearly identified as Thomas the younger. A few months after Margaret's death, the heirs of John Boyville the younger renewed their claim to West Ogwell, the reversion of which had been left to the heirs of Hugh Courteney in the absence of any children from the marriage of John the elder and Margaret. Thomas gave evidence that confirmed that he was the second husband of the late Margaret. Nothing definite can be said about Margaret's ancestry, however, there is circumstantial evidence that she may have been daughter/ grand-daughter of William Ryke, tin merchant of Asburton in Devon who, around 1370, provided the tin for the roof of Exeter Cathedral.
If Margaret's first husband died between 1428 and 1437 and then remarried Thomas Dowrish the younger (d. 1483), this fits very well with Richard being born by 1440 (as his grandfather gave him land in 1461 per the 1483 IPM of Thomas).
Thomas Dowrish occurs frequently as 'the younger' from 1442 on, including records with Margaret. e.g. CCR Henry VI vol. 5 p. 434-436 which involves the land in West Ogwell, Skiredon and elsewhere http://tinyurl.com/ppbqw7c (Any clues to Margaret's ancestry in this? Thomas and Margaret seem to be anticipating losing their estates).
However, as Brad pointed out the National Archives filing of Margaret's 1477 IPM as "Dourysshe, Margaret, who was the wife of the late Thomas" implies she out lived her husband. Could there be three successive Thomas Dowrish's leading to confusion over which one the term 'the younger' refers to in different records?
We really need to see Margaret Ryke's IPM
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C6545338
and also Thomas Dowrish's 1483 IPM to better understand the 1461 gift of land by Thomas Dowrish the elder to his grandsons Walter and Richard.
A couple of other notes:
John Boyville's reversion of West Ogwell to Hugh Courtenay is explained in Authority and Subversion ed. by Linda Clark (2003). p.92 http://tinyurl.com/m8ehkm3 It was payment extracted by Courtenay in exchange for defending Boyville from a John Wele (who was in line to receive the Boyville estates when John Boyville the younger died).
I believe Douglas stated in 2006 that Margaret was a sister of Richard Ryke. I see that in the 1454 will of Nicholas Sturgeon, priest he gives in successive items to his cousin Thomas Ryke a gilded cup, his cousin Richard Ryke a silver cup and his cousin Margrete Dowrigge a silver cup. Perhaps these relationships can provide a clue to Margaret's ancestry. http://tinyurl.com/7jq5vh7
Joe
MILLARD A.R. via
> Sent: 18 July 2014 01:42
> >From a snippet view on Google Books, there appears to be a later
> article (perhaps in parts) on the Dowrich/Dowrish family in vol. 38 of
> DCNQ (2001), apparently by Ian Gowers and titled "Problems of the
> Dowriches". I cannot readily get a more exact citation for it including
> page numbers. Has anyone seen this article and, if so, can you provide
> a better citation including page numbers?
Roberts, John, 2001. Problems of the Dowriches. DCNQ, 38, 10, 292-5.
Best wishes
Andrew
--
Andrew Millard - A.R.M...@durham.ac.uk
Chair, Trustees of Genuki: www.genuki.org.uk
Maintainer, Genuki Middx + London: homepages.gold.ac.uk/genuki/MDX/ + ../LND/
Academic Co-ordinator, Guild of One-Name Studies: www.one-name.org
Bodimeade one-name study: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/Bodimeade/
My genealogy: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/
jhigg...@yahoo.com
al...@mindspring.com
http://books.google.com/books?id=x5EUAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA131&lpg=PA131&dq=nicholas+sturgeon+london&source=bl&ots=95mXjJoeVX&sig=MHMxuhdFb8v6nAWDjMgNMryL9-s&hl=en&sa=X&ei=xY7JU9a0AoavyAS9i4GwBA&ved=0CGUQ6AEwCw#v=onepage&q=nicholas%20sturgeon%20london&f=false.
He mentions his "cousin" Margaret Dowrish as well as his cousins Richard and Thomas Ryke.
Doug Smith