Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Criol/Kyryel lawsuit dated 1279
378 views
Skip to first unread message
celticp...@gmail.com
Jan 3, 2019, 8:32:58 PM1/3/19
to
Dear Newsgroup ~
There was a lengthy discussion a long time ago on the newsgroup regarding two women named Margery, both of whom were widows of Nicholas de Criol. According to Complete Peerage, the elder Nicholas de Criol (died 1273), who was the husband of the elder Margery, was previously married to Joan d'Auberville. It states that the 1st wife Joan d'Auberville was the mother of the elder Nicholas de Criol's son and heir, Nicholas. I know from other sources that the younger Nicholas de Criol was born about 1260. According to Planché, A Corner of Kent, pg. 291, Joan d'Auberville married (1st) in 1247 Sir Henry de Sandwich and (2nd) before 1254 Nicholas de Criol. As such, it seems to work chronologically for Joan d'Auberville to be the mother of the younger Nicholas de Criol, born about 1260. So far, so good.
Below is a weblink to the work by Planché:
https://books.google.com/books?id=j9Q2AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA291
However, I've found a Common Pleas record dated 1279 in which the younger Nicholas de Criol, then a minor, is styled "son and heir of Margerie de Kyryel." The younger Nicholas was then in the custody of Gilbert Pecche. Gilbert Pecche subsequently married the younger Nicholas de Criol (born c.1260) to his daughter, Margery Pecche, who is the younger Margery de Criol.
Here is a weblink to the 1279 lawsuit:
http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E1/CP40no30/bCP40no30dorses/IMG_0904.htm
If the 1279 lawsuit is correct, it supposes that the elder Nicholas de Criol's last wife, Margery, who was the mother of his son and heir, Nicholas. It also supposes that the elder Margery was dead by 1279. Yet it is commonly thought that the elder Margery de Criol survived until 1319. Something must be wrong.
Here's what I think happened. If Joan d'Auberville's name was really Joan, then the 1279 lawsuit got the name of the younger Nicholas de Criol's mother wrong. It should have read that he was the son and heir of Joan de Kyryel, not Margery de Kyryel. We know that Joan d'Auberville was an heiress. She brought the manor of Westenhanger, Kent to the Criol family. If the d'Auberville family also held Benhall, Suffolk, it would explain why the mother of the younger Nicholas is mentioned in the 1279 lawsuit which deals with this place.
Checking on the history of Benhall, Suffolk, it appears that this manor was in fact held by the Auberville family. This is confirmed by a discussion of Benhall, Suffolk found in Brown, Eye Priory Cartulary & Charters 2 (Suffolk Charters 13) (1994): 61–62. The Auberville/Benhall discussion by Brown may be viewed at the following weblink:
https://books.google.com/books?id=VJhw0FVGUtAC&pg=PA61
Mr. Brown (and other sources such as Planché) states that the elder Nicholas de Criol's 1st wife was named Joan d'Auberville. But do we know that for a fact? Could she have actually been named Margery, as alleged in the 1279 lawsuit?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
There was a lengthy discussion a long time ago on the newsgroup regarding two women named Margery, both of whom were widows of Nicholas de Criol. According to Complete Peerage, the elder Nicholas de Criol (died 1273), who was the husband of the elder Margery, was previously married to Joan d'Auberville. It states that the 1st wife Joan d'Auberville was the mother of the elder Nicholas de Criol's son and heir, Nicholas. I know from other sources that the younger Nicholas de Criol was born about 1260. According to Planché, A Corner of Kent, pg. 291, Joan d'Auberville married (1st) in 1247 Sir Henry de Sandwich and (2nd) before 1254 Nicholas de Criol. As such, it seems to work chronologically for Joan d'Auberville to be the mother of the younger Nicholas de Criol, born about 1260. So far, so good.
Below is a weblink to the work by Planché:
https://books.google.com/books?id=j9Q2AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA291
However, I've found a Common Pleas record dated 1279 in which the younger Nicholas de Criol, then a minor, is styled "son and heir of Margerie de Kyryel." The younger Nicholas was then in the custody of Gilbert Pecche. Gilbert Pecche subsequently married the younger Nicholas de Criol (born c.1260) to his daughter, Margery Pecche, who is the younger Margery de Criol.
Here is a weblink to the 1279 lawsuit:
http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E1/CP40no30/bCP40no30dorses/IMG_0904.htm
If the 1279 lawsuit is correct, it supposes that the elder Nicholas de Criol's last wife, Margery, who was the mother of his son and heir, Nicholas. It also supposes that the elder Margery was dead by 1279. Yet it is commonly thought that the elder Margery de Criol survived until 1319. Something must be wrong.
Here's what I think happened. If Joan d'Auberville's name was really Joan, then the 1279 lawsuit got the name of the younger Nicholas de Criol's mother wrong. It should have read that he was the son and heir of Joan de Kyryel, not Margery de Kyryel. We know that Joan d'Auberville was an heiress. She brought the manor of Westenhanger, Kent to the Criol family. If the d'Auberville family also held Benhall, Suffolk, it would explain why the mother of the younger Nicholas is mentioned in the 1279 lawsuit which deals with this place.
Checking on the history of Benhall, Suffolk, it appears that this manor was in fact held by the Auberville family. This is confirmed by a discussion of Benhall, Suffolk found in Brown, Eye Priory Cartulary & Charters 2 (Suffolk Charters 13) (1994): 61–62. The Auberville/Benhall discussion by Brown may be viewed at the following weblink:
https://books.google.com/books?id=VJhw0FVGUtAC&pg=PA61
Mr. Brown (and other sources such as Planché) states that the elder Nicholas de Criol's 1st wife was named Joan d'Auberville. But do we know that for a fact? Could she have actually been named Margery, as alleged in the 1279 lawsuit?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
celticp...@gmail.com
Jan 7, 2019, 1:14:34 PM1/7/19
to
Dear Newsgroup ~
In my earlier post, I cited doubtful evidence from a lawsuit dated 1279 which suggested that Nicholas de Criol the younger [born c.1260, died 1303] might have been the son of Nicholas de Criol the elder [died c.1272], by his surviving wife, Margery.
As a followup to my earlier post, I find there is ironclad evidence that Nicholas de Criol the younger [born c.1260, died 1303] was the son and heir of Nicholas de Criol the elder [died 1273], by his 1st wife, Joan, widow of Henry de Sandwich, and daughter of William d'Auberville. He was not the son of Nicholas the elder's surviving wife, Margery, as suggested by the 1279 lawsuit.
The Hundred Roll of 8 Edward I [1279-1280] specifically states that the elder Nicholas de Kyriel begot of Joan, daughter of William de Abrevile ["Johanna filie Will's de Abrevile"] a son Nicholas, then under age and in the king's custody. Reference: Rotuli Hundredorum 2 (1818): 432, available at the following weblink:
https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freader.digitale-sammlungen.de%2Fde%2Ffs1%2Fobject%2Fdisplay%2Fbsb10213242_00452.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7C195d4ea84c074fa30af408d6722e92a1%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636821941684944647&sdata=Pu95I7TLa3MmGU05MvW%2F3HMO3YuVV6KgieIJBEyCUcA%3D&reserved=0
The following fine proves that the elder Nicholas de Criol and his wife, Joan, were married before 29 June 1253:
Source: National Archives, Feet of Fines, CP 25/1/283/13, #291
co. Leic., Rutland, Cambridge, Hertford
At Westminster
Two weeks from Holy Trinity, 37 Henry [III] [29 June 1253].
Nicholas de Crioll' and Joan his wife, querents, by Geoffrey de Erde,
put in their place, and Bertram de Crioll', impedient, by Simon de Crioll', put in his place. Two carucates of land in Croxton', half a carucate of land in W[ur?]thinton' in the county of Leicester, half a carucate of land in Warleg' in the county of Rutland, 2 carucates of land in Hinton' in the county of Cambridge and half a carucate of land in Popeshale [Pope's Hall in Buckland] in the county of Hertford.
Plea of warranty of charter. Bertram has acknowledged the tenements to be the right of Nicholas at that which Nicholas and Joan have of his gift, to hold to Nicholas and Joan and the heirs which Nicholas shall beget on the body of Joan, of Bertram and his heirs for ever, doing the service of a 40th part of one knight's fee and doing to the chief lords [etc]. Warranty by Bertram and his heirs. In default, remainder to Nicholas and the heirs of his body. In default, reversion to Bertram and his heirs for ever. Nicholas and Joan have given him 1 sore sparrowhawk.
+ + + + + + + + + + +
There are two additional fines, one dated 1255 and one dated 1258, which specifically state that Joan, wife of Nicholas de Criol the elder, was the widow of Henry de Sandwich and daughter and heiress of William d'Auberville:
"Month of the Holy Trinity [20 June 1255]. Q. (pet.) Nicholas de
Crioll and w. Joan by Geoffrey de Erde, clerk. D. (ten.) Simon de
Sampwyc [Sandwich]; a third part of the manors of Preston, Ripple,
Wadling [in Ripple], Ham; Dene [in Margate], Margate and Asseton [in
Margate], which Q. claimed as the reasonable dower of Joan, whereof
Henry s. and h. of D. and Juliana formerly his wife endowed her at the
church door where they were espoused with the assent and consent of D.
and the said Juliana. Q. quitclaimed to D. and his heirs and to
Juliana and her heirs all their right of dower in the said manors or
any other lands and tenements of D. or which were of the said Juliana
formerly his wife. And for this D. granted for himself and his heirs
that henceforth they would pay yearly to Q. for the whole life of Joan
in the name of dower 20 li. at Preston, at Michaelmas and Easter.
Clause of distress during the life of D. in the manor of Preston and
after his death in all the said manors. After the death of Joan they
were to be quit of the payment." [Reference: Calendar of Kent Feet of
Fines (Kent Archaeological Soc. Recs. Branch 15) (1956): 261].
"Five weeks from Easter [28 April 1258]. Q. Nicholas de Cryell and w.
Joan, by Geoffrey de Erde for Joan. D. Symon de Holt; concerning this
that Q. complained that when William de Abervill father of Joan whose
heir she is, gave by his charter to D. 103s. of rent to be received
yearly of the free tenements of the said William in Halyrode [in
Stelling] and Eselingden, retaining to William the homage of the same
free tenement and suit at his court of Swingfield D. by occasion of the
said gift after the death of William acquired to himself the homages
and suits at his court of which homages and suits William was seised in
fee on the day he died. Q. granted for themselves and the heirs of
Joan so far as pertained to them that D. and his heirs should receive
yearly out of the said tenements 4 li. 2s. 5d. 182-1/2 hens and 280
eggs, saving to Q. and the heirs of Joan the homages, wards, reliefs,
escheats, aids, suits and all other things belonging to the said
tenements or there out. To hold to D. and his heirs of Q. and the
heirs of Joan, payment yearly at Christmas 5 grains of pepper at
Swingfield when before he had been accustomed to pay 3s. Warranty by
Q. and the heirs of Joan. And for this D. granted for himself and his
heirs that they henceforth would not exact from the said tenants or
their heirs or of their tenements other customs or service except only
the said annual rent." [Reference: Calendar of Kent Feet of Fines (Kent
Archaeological Soc. Recs. Branch 15) (1956): 292].
A well-written and lengthy article entitled "On the Heart-Shrine in Leybourne Church," in Archaeologia Cantiana, 5 (1863):133-193; 7 (1868): 329-341 provides evidence that Joan d'Auberville and her 1st husband, Henry de Sandwich, had one daughter, Juliana, who married Sir William de Leyburn, Lord Leyburn.
In Vol. 5, pp. 190-191, the following information is found:
"(41.) Among the Surrenden MSS. is a lease for life, (t. init. Hen. III.) by Simon de Sandwich and Juliana his wife, of land in Preston, [Kent], to William Sturemue; and, in another document in the same collection, there is a note in a hand of about the middle of Edward III., concerning the manor of Preston, by which it seems that at that time there existed a dispute about the manor, and that the Says were claiming it through an assumed grant of their grandmother, Juliana de Sandwico, in defiance of a previous entail made by the said Juliana and her husband, Sir William de Leyburn, on the right heirs of the said Sir
William, viz. the Infanta Juliana de Leyburn. From this note I extract the following passage, as more immediately bearing upon our genealogical researches: -
"Preston. Sir Simon de Sandwich formerly held the whole manor of Preston, in entirety with Capeles, and had two sons, namely Sir Henry and Sir Ralph; and the foresaid Sir Henry married a wife, who bore to him an only daughter, namely the Lady Juliane de Leyburne, and immediately afterwards, the said Sir Henry died: as it is said, death seized him beyond the sea. And Sir William de Leyburne afterwards took the foresaid Juliane to wife; after which the foresaid Simon, grandfather of the foresaid Lady Juliane, died, seised of the manor of Preston, and the foresaid Sir Ralph remained in it as heir, until Sir
William de Leyburn ejected him." END OF QUOTE.
Sir Henry de Sandwich had possession of his wife's lands in or before 1248 is confirmed by no less than six Kent fines, all dated 1248, in which Henry de Sandwich and Joan his wife dealt with various properties, among them lands in Walmer, Romney Marsh, and Stockbury, Kent, previously owned by the Auberville family. Reference: Calendar of Kent Feet of Fines (Kent Archaeological Soc.
Recs. Branch 15) (1956): 89, 94, 201, 205, 207, 209, 210.
As for Henry de Sandwich's date of death, it appears he was living 28 April 1250, on which date the king granted Henry of Sandwich "that, of the 50 marks which he owes him and which are exacted from him by summons of the Exchequer for his relief of the third part of a barony that William de Auberville held, he may render a moiety at Michaelmas in the thirty-fourth year and a moiety at Easter next following. Order to the barons of the Exchequer to cause him to have the same terms." Reference: Henry III Fine Rolls Project, Fine Roll C 60/47, 1249–1250, 334 (available at http://www.finerollshenry3.org.uk/home.html).
In summary, we find that Joan d'Auberville, daughter and heiress of William d'Auberville, married (1st) before 1248 Henry de Sandwich. They had one daughter, Juliana (wife of William de Leyburn, Knt., Lord Leyburn). Henry de Sandwich was living 28 April 1250. Joan d'Auberville married (2nd) before 29 June 1253 (as his 1st wife) Nicholas de Criol the elder. They had one son, Nicholas the younger, born c.1260. Joan d'Auverville occurs as the wife of Nicholas de Criol the elder in 1253, 1255, and 1258. He married (2nd) Margery. Nicholas de Criol the elder was living 25 November 1271, and died before 10 February 1272 [see National Archives CP 25/1/283/17, #489, and Cal. Patent Rolls, 1266-1272, p. 623].
For interest's sake, below is a list of the 17th Century New World immigrants that descend from Joan d'Auberville and her 1st husband, Henry de Sandwich (living 1250, dead by 1253):
Robert Abell, Anne Baynton, Essex Beville, Thomas Booth, Obadiah Bruen, Henry Corbin, Frances, Jane & Katherine Deighton, Edward Digges, John Fisher, John Fisher, Jane Greene, Thomas Greene, Edmund, Edward, Richard, & Matthew Kempe, Mary Launce, Nathaniel Littleton, Anne Lovelace, Thomas Lunsford, Robert More, John Oxenbridge, Mary Johanna Somerset, Samuel and William Torrey, Francis & Hawte Wyatt.
Below is a list of the 17th Century New World immigrants that descend from Joan d'Auberville and her 2nd husband, Nicholas de Criol the elder (died c.1272):
William Bladen, Francis Dade, Gabriel, Roger & Sarah Ludlow, John Oxenbridge.
If you descend from Joan d'Auberville, I'd appreciate it very much if you would post your line of descent from her down to about 1650.
In closing, I wish to thank Chris Phillips and John Ravilious for their helpful comments offline regarding this matter.
In my earlier post, I cited doubtful evidence from a lawsuit dated 1279 which suggested that Nicholas de Criol the younger [born c.1260, died 1303] might have been the son of Nicholas de Criol the elder [died c.1272], by his surviving wife, Margery.
As a followup to my earlier post, I find there is ironclad evidence that Nicholas de Criol the younger [born c.1260, died 1303] was the son and heir of Nicholas de Criol the elder [died 1273], by his 1st wife, Joan, widow of Henry de Sandwich, and daughter of William d'Auberville. He was not the son of Nicholas the elder's surviving wife, Margery, as suggested by the 1279 lawsuit.
The Hundred Roll of 8 Edward I [1279-1280] specifically states that the elder Nicholas de Kyriel begot of Joan, daughter of William de Abrevile ["Johanna filie Will's de Abrevile"] a son Nicholas, then under age and in the king's custody. Reference: Rotuli Hundredorum 2 (1818): 432, available at the following weblink:
https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freader.digitale-sammlungen.de%2Fde%2Ffs1%2Fobject%2Fdisplay%2Fbsb10213242_00452.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7C195d4ea84c074fa30af408d6722e92a1%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636821941684944647&sdata=Pu95I7TLa3MmGU05MvW%2F3HMO3YuVV6KgieIJBEyCUcA%3D&reserved=0
The following fine proves that the elder Nicholas de Criol and his wife, Joan, were married before 29 June 1253:
Source: National Archives, Feet of Fines, CP 25/1/283/13, #291
co. Leic., Rutland, Cambridge, Hertford
At Westminster
Two weeks from Holy Trinity, 37 Henry [III] [29 June 1253].
Nicholas de Crioll' and Joan his wife, querents, by Geoffrey de Erde,
put in their place, and Bertram de Crioll', impedient, by Simon de Crioll', put in his place. Two carucates of land in Croxton', half a carucate of land in W[ur?]thinton' in the county of Leicester, half a carucate of land in Warleg' in the county of Rutland, 2 carucates of land in Hinton' in the county of Cambridge and half a carucate of land in Popeshale [Pope's Hall in Buckland] in the county of Hertford.
Plea of warranty of charter. Bertram has acknowledged the tenements to be the right of Nicholas at that which Nicholas and Joan have of his gift, to hold to Nicholas and Joan and the heirs which Nicholas shall beget on the body of Joan, of Bertram and his heirs for ever, doing the service of a 40th part of one knight's fee and doing to the chief lords [etc]. Warranty by Bertram and his heirs. In default, remainder to Nicholas and the heirs of his body. In default, reversion to Bertram and his heirs for ever. Nicholas and Joan have given him 1 sore sparrowhawk.
+ + + + + + + + + + +
There are two additional fines, one dated 1255 and one dated 1258, which specifically state that Joan, wife of Nicholas de Criol the elder, was the widow of Henry de Sandwich and daughter and heiress of William d'Auberville:
"Month of the Holy Trinity [20 June 1255]. Q. (pet.) Nicholas de
Crioll and w. Joan by Geoffrey de Erde, clerk. D. (ten.) Simon de
Sampwyc [Sandwich]; a third part of the manors of Preston, Ripple,
Wadling [in Ripple], Ham; Dene [in Margate], Margate and Asseton [in
Margate], which Q. claimed as the reasonable dower of Joan, whereof
Henry s. and h. of D. and Juliana formerly his wife endowed her at the
church door where they were espoused with the assent and consent of D.
and the said Juliana. Q. quitclaimed to D. and his heirs and to
Juliana and her heirs all their right of dower in the said manors or
any other lands and tenements of D. or which were of the said Juliana
formerly his wife. And for this D. granted for himself and his heirs
that henceforth they would pay yearly to Q. for the whole life of Joan
in the name of dower 20 li. at Preston, at Michaelmas and Easter.
Clause of distress during the life of D. in the manor of Preston and
after his death in all the said manors. After the death of Joan they
were to be quit of the payment." [Reference: Calendar of Kent Feet of
Fines (Kent Archaeological Soc. Recs. Branch 15) (1956): 261].
"Five weeks from Easter [28 April 1258]. Q. Nicholas de Cryell and w.
Joan, by Geoffrey de Erde for Joan. D. Symon de Holt; concerning this
that Q. complained that when William de Abervill father of Joan whose
heir she is, gave by his charter to D. 103s. of rent to be received
yearly of the free tenements of the said William in Halyrode [in
Stelling] and Eselingden, retaining to William the homage of the same
free tenement and suit at his court of Swingfield D. by occasion of the
said gift after the death of William acquired to himself the homages
and suits at his court of which homages and suits William was seised in
fee on the day he died. Q. granted for themselves and the heirs of
Joan so far as pertained to them that D. and his heirs should receive
yearly out of the said tenements 4 li. 2s. 5d. 182-1/2 hens and 280
eggs, saving to Q. and the heirs of Joan the homages, wards, reliefs,
escheats, aids, suits and all other things belonging to the said
tenements or there out. To hold to D. and his heirs of Q. and the
heirs of Joan, payment yearly at Christmas 5 grains of pepper at
Swingfield when before he had been accustomed to pay 3s. Warranty by
Q. and the heirs of Joan. And for this D. granted for himself and his
heirs that they henceforth would not exact from the said tenants or
their heirs or of their tenements other customs or service except only
the said annual rent." [Reference: Calendar of Kent Feet of Fines (Kent
Archaeological Soc. Recs. Branch 15) (1956): 292].
A well-written and lengthy article entitled "On the Heart-Shrine in Leybourne Church," in Archaeologia Cantiana, 5 (1863):133-193; 7 (1868): 329-341 provides evidence that Joan d'Auberville and her 1st husband, Henry de Sandwich, had one daughter, Juliana, who married Sir William de Leyburn, Lord Leyburn.
In Vol. 5, pp. 190-191, the following information is found:
"(41.) Among the Surrenden MSS. is a lease for life, (t. init. Hen. III.) by Simon de Sandwich and Juliana his wife, of land in Preston, [Kent], to William Sturemue; and, in another document in the same collection, there is a note in a hand of about the middle of Edward III., concerning the manor of Preston, by which it seems that at that time there existed a dispute about the manor, and that the Says were claiming it through an assumed grant of their grandmother, Juliana de Sandwico, in defiance of a previous entail made by the said Juliana and her husband, Sir William de Leyburn, on the right heirs of the said Sir
William, viz. the Infanta Juliana de Leyburn. From this note I extract the following passage, as more immediately bearing upon our genealogical researches: -
"Preston. Sir Simon de Sandwich formerly held the whole manor of Preston, in entirety with Capeles, and had two sons, namely Sir Henry and Sir Ralph; and the foresaid Sir Henry married a wife, who bore to him an only daughter, namely the Lady Juliane de Leyburne, and immediately afterwards, the said Sir Henry died: as it is said, death seized him beyond the sea. And Sir William de Leyburne afterwards took the foresaid Juliane to wife; after which the foresaid Simon, grandfather of the foresaid Lady Juliane, died, seised of the manor of Preston, and the foresaid Sir Ralph remained in it as heir, until Sir
William de Leyburn ejected him." END OF QUOTE.
Sir Henry de Sandwich had possession of his wife's lands in or before 1248 is confirmed by no less than six Kent fines, all dated 1248, in which Henry de Sandwich and Joan his wife dealt with various properties, among them lands in Walmer, Romney Marsh, and Stockbury, Kent, previously owned by the Auberville family. Reference: Calendar of Kent Feet of Fines (Kent Archaeological Soc.
Recs. Branch 15) (1956): 89, 94, 201, 205, 207, 209, 210.
As for Henry de Sandwich's date of death, it appears he was living 28 April 1250, on which date the king granted Henry of Sandwich "that, of the 50 marks which he owes him and which are exacted from him by summons of the Exchequer for his relief of the third part of a barony that William de Auberville held, he may render a moiety at Michaelmas in the thirty-fourth year and a moiety at Easter next following. Order to the barons of the Exchequer to cause him to have the same terms." Reference: Henry III Fine Rolls Project, Fine Roll C 60/47, 1249–1250, 334 (available at http://www.finerollshenry3.org.uk/home.html).
In summary, we find that Joan d'Auberville, daughter and heiress of William d'Auberville, married (1st) before 1248 Henry de Sandwich. They had one daughter, Juliana (wife of William de Leyburn, Knt., Lord Leyburn). Henry de Sandwich was living 28 April 1250. Joan d'Auberville married (2nd) before 29 June 1253 (as his 1st wife) Nicholas de Criol the elder. They had one son, Nicholas the younger, born c.1260. Joan d'Auverville occurs as the wife of Nicholas de Criol the elder in 1253, 1255, and 1258. He married (2nd) Margery. Nicholas de Criol the elder was living 25 November 1271, and died before 10 February 1272 [see National Archives CP 25/1/283/17, #489, and Cal. Patent Rolls, 1266-1272, p. 623].
For interest's sake, below is a list of the 17th Century New World immigrants that descend from Joan d'Auberville and her 1st husband, Henry de Sandwich (living 1250, dead by 1253):
Robert Abell, Anne Baynton, Essex Beville, Thomas Booth, Obadiah Bruen, Henry Corbin, Frances, Jane & Katherine Deighton, Edward Digges, John Fisher, John Fisher, Jane Greene, Thomas Greene, Edmund, Edward, Richard, & Matthew Kempe, Mary Launce, Nathaniel Littleton, Anne Lovelace, Thomas Lunsford, Robert More, John Oxenbridge, Mary Johanna Somerset, Samuel and William Torrey, Francis & Hawte Wyatt.
Below is a list of the 17th Century New World immigrants that descend from Joan d'Auberville and her 2nd husband, Nicholas de Criol the elder (died c.1272):
William Bladen, Francis Dade, Gabriel, Roger & Sarah Ludlow, John Oxenbridge.
If you descend from Joan d'Auberville, I'd appreciate it very much if you would post your line of descent from her down to about 1650.
In closing, I wish to thank Chris Phillips and John Ravilious for their helpful comments offline regarding this matter.
lancast...@gmail.com
Oct 17, 2020, 4:59:45 AM10/17/20
to
On Monday, January 7, 2019 at 7:14:34 PM UTC+1, celticp...@gmail.com wrote:
Commenting on a mail from last year, but I notice that Sanders, English Baronies, p.1 suggests that Nicholas de Criol might be connected to the Ceriton or Cheritone family through his mother Joan de Albeville. Apparently he held their third of the old barony of Aldington in Kent.
More specifically he proposes him to somehow be a successor to Odo de Cheriton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odo_of_Cheriton whose immediate successor was apparently his brother Waleran. He comments that the Albevilles had some kind of connection with the Cheriton's predecessors the Fitz Helte family.
Would anyone happen to know more about this or be able to suggest a concrete connection?
Commenting on a mail from last year, but I notice that Sanders, English Baronies, p.1 suggests that Nicholas de Criol might be connected to the Ceriton or Cheritone family through his mother Joan de Albeville. Apparently he held their third of the old barony of Aldington in Kent.
More specifically he proposes him to somehow be a successor to Odo de Cheriton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odo_of_Cheriton whose immediate successor was apparently his brother Waleran. He comments that the Albevilles had some kind of connection with the Cheriton's predecessors the Fitz Helte family.
Would anyone happen to know more about this or be able to suggest a concrete connection?
lancast...@gmail.com
Oct 18, 2020, 8:58:09 AM10/18/20
to
In 1210/12 Willelm de Serinton and Anselme Biset held 3 and a half fees in Kent (Red Book Vol.2 p.475). The question of the Bisets role in the barony is still open. They appear in other records also.
In 1223/4 Scutage was paid on 1 and 1 sixth fees each by Robert de Setvans (vii Vannis), John de Marescallus and William de Ceriton. The latter two explicitly involved the fee of Will ftiz Helto. https://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/Research/05/1223/150.htm
1278/9. William de Cyrenton, Rob de vii Vannis [Setvans], and Nich de Crioll, each paid 3 marks and a half, each for a fee and a [sixth?] part of the fee of William fitz Helte http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/E1/E372no123/bE372no123dorses/IMG_7880.htm Pipe Rolls
lancast...@gmail.com
Oct 18, 2020, 12:55:32 PM10/18/20
to
Peter Stewart
Oct 18, 2020, 6:31:44 PM10/18/20
to
On 18-Oct-20 11:58 PM, lancast...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, October 17, 2020 at 10:59:45 AM UTC+2, lancast...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, January 7, 2019 at 7:14:34 PM UTC+1, celticp...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Commenting on a mail from last year, but I notice that Sanders, English Baronies, p.1 suggests that Nicholas de Criol might be connected to the Ceriton or Cheritone family through his mother Joan de Albeville. Apparently he held their third of the old barony of Aldington in Kent.
>>
>> More specifically he proposes him to somehow be a successor to Odo de Cheriton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odo_of_Cheriton whose immediate successor was apparently his brother Waleran. He comments that the Albevilles had some kind of connection with the Cheriton's predecessors the Fitz Helte family.
>>
>> Would anyone happen to know more about this or be able to suggest a concrete connection?
Hugo de Albeville apparently married the eldest daughter of Odo of
> On Saturday, October 17, 2020 at 10:59:45 AM UTC+2, lancast...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, January 7, 2019 at 7:14:34 PM UTC+1, celticp...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Commenting on a mail from last year, but I notice that Sanders, English Baronies, p.1 suggests that Nicholas de Criol might be connected to the Ceriton or Cheritone family through his mother Joan de Albeville. Apparently he held their third of the old barony of Aldington in Kent.
>>
>> More specifically he proposes him to somehow be a successor to Odo de Cheriton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odo_of_Cheriton whose immediate successor was apparently his brother Waleran. He comments that the Albevilles had some kind of connection with the Cheriton's predecessors the Fitz Helte family.
>>
>> Would anyone happen to know more about this or be able to suggest a concrete connection?
Cheriton's paternal uncle Helto, see *Curia Regis Rolls* for 1208 (8-10
John volume, 1931, p. 296): "Hugo de Aubervill' dabit Helte fratri
Willelmi de Ceriton' xij. marcas argenti citra festum sancti Michaelis
nisi maritaverit primogenitam filiam suam infra illum terminum: et, si
illa decesserit, aliam maritabit. Willelmus de Ceriton' est plegius"
(literally: Hugo de Auberville will give to Helto brother of William de
Cheriton 12 silver marks before Michaelmas unless he should have married
his firstborn daughter by then: and, if she should have died, will marry
another. William de Cheriton is pledged.)
For some reason Albert Friend read this marriage intention the other way
round in his 1948 *Speculum* article on Odo, p. 648 note 35: "William of
Cheriton plegius in contract for Helte his brother to marry a daughter
of Hugh of Auberville. The text seems corrupt."
Perhaps Friend saw a problem in reading Hugo de Albeville as subject of
"dabit" and of "maritaverit/maritabit" because William de Cheriton
pledged for fulfillment of the contract, taking this to mean pledging
for his brother's going through with a marriage himself rather than
giving away his daughter to Hugo within the agreed timeframe, and
stumping up another daughter if needed.
Peter Stewart
lancast...@gmail.com
Oct 19, 2020, 4:31:40 AM10/19/20
to
It also now seems tolerably clear that the Biset claim was a separate issue from the three original lines of inheritance, as mentioned in another post. It may be that some of the records noted by Sanders concerning the Aubervilles have a similar explanation involving claims and counter claims outside of the ones which regular inheritance would imply.
So the question of how Nicholas de Criol took over the Chauncy portion seems open. The Chauncies themselves continued to exist in Yorkshire. See the pedigree by Clay in EYC Vol. 2 p. 174. There are also some interesting notes by Colin Light here http://www.durobrivis.net/survey/db-ke/09-baronies.pdf I checked the Pipe Rolls and that seems to be his source for the comment that Anfrid de Canci was finished paying off an amount in 1186 in Kent, but the lands involved are of course not mentioned.
Clay points out that Amfrey de Canci held one fee in Kent in 1203 (Red Book p. 135). Although this does not match the 1 and 1/6 fees mentioned in various Pipe Rolls as value of these one-third portions of the old barony, it seems the types of record registered in the Red Book and Book of Fees do not always evaluate those the same way.
lancast...@gmail.com
Oct 19, 2020, 9:03:48 AM10/19/20
to
I now see that a basic question concerning this barony is whether Keats-Rohan is correct in presuming it derives from the Domesday holdings of Malger/Mauger. Colin Flight thinks it derives from the holdings of Ansgot, who had a son Helto. Apart from the article I already cited, which is light on footnotes, see this commentary on a primary source which Keats-Rohan seems not to use: http://www.durobrivis.net/articles/landowners.pdf
Ansgot did indeed hold both Aldington and Stockbury.
I still think Criol had his share of the barony indirectly from the Chauncys somehow. I think in the 1253/4 document the Bisets are holding the Cheriton portion, as the dispute had played out for some time between those two families. In fact, as Magister Odo's heir Walram de Ceriton is clearly mentioned several times in this document perhaps the Bisets took decisive control by this time.
lancast...@gmail.com
Oct 19, 2020, 10:49:23 AM10/19/20
to
lancast...@gmail.com
Oct 19, 2020, 11:08:31 AM10/19/20
to
> An earlier case in 1205 show the Bisets and Cheritons already in this dispute, it adds a Geoffrey de Boid to the discussion, but I can say I understand how this worked https://www.dhi.ac.uk/normans/viewObject.jsp?type=DocumentItem&id=1977
The Cheriton/Biset case was, I find, already discussed here, in an article I looked at too long ago:
Albert C. Friend, Master Odo of Cheriton, Speculum Vol. 23, No. 4 (Oct., 1948), pp. 641-658 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2850446
It mentions an apparent connection to John Marshall but does not really seem to explain it. I however think John Marshall's connection is somehow with the third which went to the Criols, and came from the Chauncys.
0 new messages