Braose - Wingfield Connection
The...@aol.com
Hello Bert, Doug, Tod, Tim et al.,
This query is in regard to some prior posts, primarily as I recall to and from Tod, concerning the ancestry of Katherine Wingfield (d.ca. 1386), wife of Michael de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk.
Based on work by Moriarty, cited by Tod in or before 1997, and subsequent posts to SGM re: the de Braose family, I show a hypothetical line of descent as follows :
1. John de Braose, of Bramber and Gower, d. 1232, m. Margaret ferch Llywelyn
2. Richard de Braose, 2nd son, of Stinton, d. bef 18 Jun 1292, m. Alice le Rus
3. Richard de Braose, 2nd son; m. Alianore
4. Sir Richard de Braose, aka Sir Richard Brews, of Wingfield, co. Suffolk; subject of the will of Sir John Wingfield
5. Alianor de Braose or Brews, b. say 1320,d. after 1362; m. Sir John Wingfield, of Wingfield [acquired manor of Wingfield by marriage]
6. Katherine Wingfield, m. bef 18 Oct 1361 to Michael de la Pole
This line is ancestral to the subsequent Earls and Dukes of Suffolk, and many besides (on and off the list). Assuming, of course, that the above construction is valid.
Is anyone aware of either additional information or research that would have a bearing on the above? Or, in fact, if any conflicting or disproving evidence has been discovered?
Please advise if there are any additional details required re: the above (based as indicated, on CP and relevant SGM posts).
John
Cristopher Nash
>This is in regard to some prior posts, primarily as I recall to and
>from Tod, concerning the ancestry of Katherine Wingfield (d.ca.
>1386), wife of Michael de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk.
>
> Based on work by Moriarty, cited by Tod in or before 1997, and
>subsequent posts to SGM re: the de Braose family, I show a
>hypothetical line of descent as follows :
>
>1. John de Braose, of Bramber and Gower, d. 1232, m. Margaret ferch Llywelyn
>
>2. Richard de Braose, 2nd son, of Stinton, d. bef 18 Jun 1292, m. Alice le Rus
>
>3. Richard de Braose, 2nd son; m. Alianore
>
>4. Sir Richard de Braose, aka Sir Richard Brews, of Wingfield, co.
>Suffolk; subject of the will of Sir John Wingfield
>
>5. Alianor de Braose or Brews, b. say 1320,d. after 1362; m. Sir
>John Wingfield, of Wingfield [acquired manor of Wingfield by
>marriage]
>
>6. Katherine Wingfield, m. bef 18 Oct 1361 to Michael de la Pole
>
> This line is ancestral to the subsequent Earls and Dukes of
>Suffolk, and many besides (on and off the list). Assuming, of
>course, that the above construction is valid.
>
> Is anyone aware of either additional information or research
>that would have a bearing on the above? Or, in fact, if any
>conflicting or disproving evidence has been discovered?
This reconstruction's intriguing. I seem to have missed both the
Moriarty (I assume you mean his "The Early Wingfields" in NEHGR CIII
[Oct 1949]: 287-95) and the 1997 postings you mention, and shouldn't
butt in without having checked them. Just in brief, though, can we
take it that these combined overturn the traditional recitation (e.g.
CP XII, pt 1 ['Suffolk'], 440, the DNB ['Michael de la Pole'],
together with Visit. of Suffolk 1561, new edition, Harl Soc n.s. vol
3, 212-15, which give Sir John Wingfield's wife and mo. of Katherine
as Eleanor de Glanville, da. of (perplexingly) 'Gilbert or Ralph' de
Glanville?
I've always found these rather weird, or, at best, unhelpful, and
would be grateful for your obviously fresher study! Particularly
since the Harleian seems -- perhaps along with CP and DNB -- to rely
for its source on the ever-worrisome Glanville-Richards, _Records of
the Anglo-Norman House of Glanville_ (1882).
Thanks a lot.
Cris
--
Louise Staley
"Cristopher Nash" wrote:
<and I snipped>
> I've always found these rather weird, or, at best, unhelpful,
and
> would be grateful for your obviously fresher study!
Particularly
> since the Harleian seems -- perhaps along with CP and DNB -- to
rely
> for its source on the ever-worrisome Glanville-Richards,
_Records of
> the Anglo-Norman House of Glanville_ (1882).
>
> Thanks a lot.
>
> Cris
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jglanville/roanhg.htm
Louise
The...@aol.com
Hello Cris, Todd *, Doug, Louise, Bert et al.,
As I indicated in my first post on the subject, the connection
indicated between a cadet of de Braose of Stinton and Wingfield seems as yet
unproven, but the information provided by Moriarty re: the manor of Wingfield
and Todd's 1997 outlining of the de Braose family on SGM seems compelling.
I am hoping to find more detail as to the prior history of the
ownership of Wingfield. I did come across a site on the Web providing
'details', but this seems poorly constructed and the chronology poor. After
I spend some more time later today I may post what little is there, but
hopefully I'll strike a more helpful vein elsewhere first.
Todd, I wonder if you might have some other detail in your notes
concerning Richard de Braose, younger son of Sir Richard of Stinton (d. bef
18 Jun 1292) and Alice le Rus, the younger brother of Sir Giles? Your 1997
post indicated he had married one Alianor or Alianore. Is there any further
detail you might have on this gentleman?
Thanks and good luck in the meantime.
John
* By this action I have re-'d'ed you. ;)
Cristopher Nash
John, this isn't a direct answer to your queries -- which I'm sure
Todd will take up -- but simply to mention in passing (and without
detailed assimilation of the considerable past discussion of the
Cleres here) that there's substantial matter on Alice de Rus &
Richard/William/Giles de Brewse throughout Sir Charles Clay, _Notes
on the Family of Clere_ (privately printed 1975) and particularly on
pp 25-30. I'm sure you and Todd have seen this. But in case not,
its detail (and bibliography) re their estate transactions -- while
providing no answers on earlier Brewse generations -- might be useful
in dealing with one or two later issues you and he have in front of
you. Again, it's not a line I've been involved with and I can't
promise it hasn't been superseded -- perhaps e.g. by Todd's own work.
I might just add that Clay gives "Alice, who married Richard de
Breuse and who held the manor of Stinton" as the granddaughter of
Roger de Clere III (13; Agatha de Clere, Roger III's da., being the
wife of William le Rus and mother of Alice, Richard de
Brewse/Beuse/Braose's wife). Details on the Clere line are of course
the substance of this monograph, and are in many respects well
covered by a posting of Richard Borthwick's <re:
Clere/Fay/Rus/Turnham> of 8/2/99. Should your/Todd's
Braose/Wingfield connection pan out, Richard's ample message will be
of greater interest to any here concerned with these families.
Forgive my reciting this if it's stuff you already have. I simply
don't happen to see the Clay mentioned in the Clere postings I have
(from John Parsons, Richard Borthwick, Douglas Richardson, Paul
Reed), and its date is by-and-large somewhat later than those of the
extensive biblio refs they offer.
Cris
--
Cristopher Nash
[SNIP]
>4. Sir Richard de Braose, aka Sir Richard Brews, of Wingfield, co.
>Suffolk; subject of the will of Sir John Wingfield
>
>5. Alianor de Braose or Brews, b. say 1320,d. after 1362; m. Sir
>John Wingfield, of Wingfield [acquired manor of Wingfield by
>marriage]
>
>6. Katherine Wingfield, m. bef 18 Oct 1361 to Michael de la Pole
I'm really sorry to be a nag about this, but I'm extremely interested
(along with others here perhaps) to know how this works. As you'll
recall, the father of the Sir John Wingfield described here as the
first to acquire Wingfield is consistently given as the son of Sir
John Wingfield "of Wingfield manor; grant of free warren 1335
...Rolls 9 Edward III.30 ... Generally stated to have married
Elizabeth, da. of John Honeypot of Wingfield". (Cf. e.g. 'Wingfield
of Wingfield and Letheringham', Visitat. of Suffolk, 1561, Harleian
Soc. N.S. vol 3, 212-14, 1981.) Whether or not (per my earlier
query) the Eleanor mo. of Katherine Wingfield is 'Elenor de Glanvyll'
or an Alianor de Brewse/Braose/Breuse, I think it might help to have
Moriarty's precise argument (concerning the events leading to the
acquisition of Wingfield) that has often been alluded to but never
articulated here, since it must be a unique achievement in overcoming
what seems compelling conventional evidence to the contrary, and one
that appears not to have been endorsed elsewhere in the half-century
since Moriarty's work.
It would be useful to have Moriarty's account, for example, for the
absence of Braose arms anywhere among those -- many of families far
less 'exalted' than Braose -- of the 34 cited in the 1561
visitation. I foresee the but-it's-a-cadet-branch explanation, but
in view of the scale of the estate Alianor's said to have brought
with her I think more needs to be said.
Sorry to be such a bore, but some of us aren't in the US and haven't
quickest access to the Moriarty, and allusions to it in this thread
(along with, so far as I can see, Todd's of 1997) have lacked
bibliographical reference. Again, I _imagine_ it's "The Early
Wingfields" in NEHGR CIII [Oct 1949]: 287-95, but if so I think we've
missed your confirmation.
Might we have a word or two by way of clarification? Otherwise I've
the chilling feeling that some here may begin to fancy that this
intriguing project stems less from care than from a care to
appropriate a powerful family's lines in place of that of the
Honeypots.
Many thanks!
Cris
--
The...@aol.com
Hello Cris, Doug, Todd, Louise (in absentia) et al.,
I am still prowling through my notes. The specific citation (date etc.)
for Moriarty (I think 1947) I have not found; perhaps another of the group
might have this to hand?
The notes I have relocated are the following:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[From Jocelyn Wingfield, of London]
A. re: Eleanor or Alianor 'de Glanvyle' [sic],
"Inherited 69 acres Wingfield Hall from De Brews"
B. re: inheritance of Katherine Wingfield, daughter of Eleanor ,
"Left by Father : Fressingfield Hall, Hoxne, Stradbrooke, Tyleham, Hurds
Hall, Saxmundham. Brought 3 if not 4 Wingfield manors to husband."
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
There was a family named Brews or Brewes associated with Fressingfield in
the 15th century, but other than tantalising this proves little.
However, the reference to Stradbrooke is extremely valuable. More
likely, Stradbrooke was a property not of Sir John Wingfield (except de jure
uxoris), but rather of his wife Eleanor or Alianor - I have seen no reference
to it being associated with the Wingfield family before this.
Paul MacKenzie had a detailed post on SGM on 5 Feb 1999, regarding
primarily issues re: the Longespee family, which touched on the Brews/Breus
family - Alice le Rus, widow of Richard Longespee, was secondly the wife of
Sir Richard de Braose of Stinton (d.ca. 1292). As part of his post, Paul
cited a fine of 1272, as follows:
'1272
A fine Hen 56 No. 70, between Richard de Breous and Alice his wife, and John
Giffard and Maltida [sic] his wife, as to the manors of Akenham, Whitingham,
Brumleigh, Stradbrok, Clopton, Asketon, Stynton, Lubure, and Syvelyngton in
cos. Suffolk, York, Lincoln, Norfolk and Surrey. They are the right of
Alice; and Richard and Alice grant Asketon and Stinton to John Giffard and
wife, for life of the said Maltida [sic].
De Braose Family, D.G.C. Elwes '
The subsequent history of Stinton in the de Braose family is familiar (at
least for the next few generations). However, the inclusion of Stradbrooke
[Stradbrok in the text above] as a property of Sir Richard de Braose's wife
makes it evident, this must have been a property which became that of a
younger son - in this case, apparently, Richard, younger son of Richard and
Alice.
Stradbrooke (the 'modern' village) stands approx. 2 miles south-east of
Wingfield College - the property being given for the foundation of the
college ca. 1362 by Sir John Wingfield. The mere geographical proximity
without other details again proves nothing, but the connection provided by
Paul MacKenzie and Jocelyn Wingfield supports one of the two hypotheses:
1. Either the de Braose or de Brews connection to Alianor, wife of Sir John
Wingfield, is as Moriarty surmised, or
2. Perhaps the mysterious Gilbert de Glanville did exist, and he acquired
Stradbrooke, and other properties, from a de Braose heiress.
Further progress on the issue, I think, hinges on location of the
Moriarty text. Hopefully, I can find same later this week, or someone else
will be luckier in the meantime.........?
Hope this helps (somewhat).
Good luck, and good hunting to us all.
John
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> However, the reference to Stradbrooke is extremely valuable. More
> likely, Stradbrooke was a property not of Sir John Wingfield (except de jure
> uxoris), but rather of his wife Eleanor or Alianor - I have seen no reference
> to it being associated with the Wingfield family before this.
>
> least for the next few generations). However, the inclusion of Stradbrooke
> [Stradbrok in the text above] as a property of Sir Richard de Braose's wife
> makes it evident, this must have been a property which became that of a
> younger son - in this case, apparently, Richard, younger son of Richard and
> Alice.
For this, see CP 2:304, note i. (re: bef. 18 June 1292 death of
Richard, husband of Alice le Rus)
"(i) At which date his widow was claiming her dower (assize Roll,
no. 1089 20 Edw. I, m. 20d). On the morrow of St. John the
Baptist 25 Edw. I, Richard de Brewose obtained from [his mother]
Alice, que fuit uxor Richardi de Brewosa, the manor of
Stradbroke, Suffolk. The younger Richard m. Alianore (Feet of
Fines,case 216, file 43, no. 42; file 45, no. 30). He was sum.
cum equis et armis 12 Mar. 1300/0. Blomefield erroneously
assigns to the elder Richard the Inq.p.m. on his nephew Richard,
for which see p. 308, note "d"."
taf
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> I am still prowling through my notes. The specific citation (date etc.)
> for Moriarty (I think 1947) I have not found; perhaps another of the group
> might have this to hand?
The Early Wingfields, G. Andrews Moriarty, NEHGR 103 [Oct. 1949]:
287-295.
taf
Rosie Bevan
44 Hen III (1260) and was thus part of the inheritance of Alice.
Cheers
Rosie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 3:36 PM
Subject: Re: Braose - Wingfield Connection
> The...@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > However, the reference to Stradbrooke is extremely valuable. More
> > likely, Stradbrooke was a property not of Sir John Wingfield (except de
jure
> > uxoris), but rather of his wife Eleanor or Alianor - I have seen no
reference
> > to it being associated with the Wingfield family before this.
> >
> > The subsequent history of Stinton in the de Braose family is
familiar (at
> > least for the next few generations). However, the inclusion of
Stradbrooke
> > [Stradbrok in the text above] as a property of Sir Richard de Braose's
wife
> > makes it evident, this must have been a property which became that of a
> > younger son - in this case, apparently, Richard, younger son of Richard
and
> > Alice.
>
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> Might we have a word or two by way of clarification? Otherwise I've
> the chilling feeling that some here may begin to fancy that this
> intriguing project stems less from care than from a care to
> appropriate a powerful family's lines in place of that of the
> Honeypots.
Except that the Honeypots are not displaced, but rather the
Glanvilles, and it is not obvious to be that Glanville is a
lesser family than Braose. As to the Honeypots "of Wingfield", a
distinction needs to be made here. THe early Wingfields were of
Wingfield, as in "from" Wingfield, and the same is true of the
Honeypots (Honeypot being a farm located within the manor of
Wingfield). As far as I can tell, the manor of Wingfield arrived
in the family with the marriage of Sir John to Eleanor, the
heiress, and then passed right back out with his daughter. (In
spite of your prohibition) the arms probably don't appear because
first it was a collateral relationship, and by the time of the
16th century's obscene quarterings, the true nature of the
connection had been lost (do Glanville appear?).
taf
Cristopher Nash
Wingfield's peculiar entry 'A' (strangely elliptical -- e.g. from
whom did she inherit? and with whom did she thus share as heir in the
manor? -- and with its oddly slightly anachronistic use of 'acres'.
[The Brewes records of the period speak, as you'd expect, in terms of
carucates/bovates].). It makes asking JW's sources irresistible!
I think your alternatives 1 and 2 are good ones (though it's possible
to conceive of one or two others, no doubt). And I see your idea
about Stradbrooke, though the Paul McKenzie and Jocelyn Wingfield
offerings are actually unsettlingly divergent rather than congruent,
don't you think -- at least on the matter in question? Why doesn't
manor of Wingfield show up in the McKenzie as you might expect/wish?
It's almost as though the fine of Hen 56 No. 70 had been designed to
_impugn_ the Wingfield-manor/Braose connection, except for the fairly
frail Stradbrooke feature.
Incidentally, I think it probably important to point out that while I
do see the manors
>Akenham, Whitingham, Brumleigh [actually now Bramley], Stradbrok,
Clopton, Asketon [Hasketon], Stynton, Lubure [Ludborough], and
Syvelyngton [Sinnington]<
in the accord between Richard and Alice (de Rus) de Brewes and John
and Maud Gifford (of 1271):
(a) except for Bramley these were, according to Clay, all manors of
the Rus inheritance, i.e. not of Brewse prior to Alice de Rus's
marriage to Richard. (Bramley descended from the Fay line.) And
(b) in Clay's more extensive account of Richard de Brewse's holdings
in this generation, and of the progressive dispersal of the holdings
of this Brewse line throughout subsequent generations, there is no
mention whatsoever of Wingfield.
This doesn't mean that earlier Brewse generations (of Bramber and
Gower) may not have held Wingfield, but the mechanism by which
Richard in the cadet line (and with - by Todd's reckoning - an older
brother and William's 5 sons ahead of him) might have come into
possession of it isn't as immediately plain as we might like. Was it
in the Rape of Bramber in the first place? (Stranger things have
happened.) Here, VCH (Norfolk: Wingfield) should be of some material
use. I assume you've you checked it. But in case not, I will.
>Further progress on the issue, I think, hinges on location of the
>Moriarty text. Hopefully, I can find same later this week, or someone else
>will be luckier in the meantime.........?
> Hope this helps (somewhat).
Yes, we owe you real thanks for taking the time/trouble -- it'll help
a lot, I'm sure! Moriarty has an uphill job, but he was capable of a
lot.
Best,
Cris
The...@aol.com wrote on Sunday, 4 November, 2001 --
> John
--
Cristopher Nash
Yes, thanks Todd, it's the one I mentioned. Now if someone has access
and might let us know his argument and sources? (!)
Thanks too, Todd and Rosie, for confirmation of the points I offered
today re the limitations of the Stradbrook inheritance as evidence
for a Braose/Wingfield connection. John, it really does look like --
if we're to carry on a meaningful conversation on this topic -- it's
Over to Moriarty, wot?
Cris
--
Cristopher Nash
Thanks for this, Todd, and I entirely agree with your suggestions.
You're quite right in asking whether Glanville appears in the arms,
and along with Braose, it doesn't. (I hold no brief with the
Glanvilles, they may be displaced all anyone feels keenly apt.) I
agree, too, about the phrase 'of Wingfield' not meaning possessor of
the manor of Wingfield. It's why, for example, I'm not all that
happy about e.g. rough paraphrases suggesting that in a fine of 'Hen
56 No. 70' nine named manors were in the possession of Richard de
Braose when in fact, in one case at least (Bramley), a moiety was
held by his predecessors, and in another (Sinnington), in the
previous generation only one bovate of a more extensive manor had
been held, and there appears to be no surviving record of when/how
the whole manor was reassembled. (One might as well say, when we
read that Eleanor de Glanville inherited "69 acres Wingfield Hall" --
! whose language ['acres', 'Hall'] is this? -- that she held the
manor of Wingfield, with all the predictable genealogical hiccups to
follow.)
The immediate issue rests, though, not on the Wingfield acquisition
of Wingfield via a Glanville marriage (which is a different
presumption and one, as I said, that I've long been uneasy about) but
on a Braose marriage and subsequent inheritance from Braose. My
point's of course simply that we need some clear sign that Braose had
the manor of Wingfield, and I've suggested a few ways we might find
out, some of which I'll try right away here. The remaining one - the
Moriarty argument - I feel perhaps someone who's argued from its
conclusion might be able to find more quickly than I out in this
English wilderness.
Sorry to bother you with these details, I just didn't want you to
think I wasn't listening! Again, this isn't a family I know anything
about, I just happened to drop in on the conversation, and no doubt I
should get out! Trouble is my curiosity's raised now.
Cris
--
The...@aol.com
Hello Todd, Cris, Rosie, Doug, Louise,......
Closer and closer still......
Muchas gracias! for all your digging & sharing the citations today (not
to mention your indulgence). The citations from the Inquisition p.m. for
William le Rus, and of the note from CP re: the manor of Stradbrook and
Richard de Braose ' The Younger ' [son of Richard and Alice le Rus] confirm
my earlier supposition as to the source of that manor's coming into the
possession of Katherine Wingfield, as indicated by Jocelyn Wingfield [see my
post of earlier today].
Cris, I think what occurred is that the manor of Wingfield came into the
de Braose / de Brews family's possession either (A) in the lifetime of
Richard ' The Younger ', of Stradbrook [possibly by marriage to Alianore, She
of the Missing Surname], or (B) in the next generation, prior to Alianor,
wife of Sir John de Wingfield, then becoming part of her inheritance. This
would fit with the fact that it is not evidently part of a de Braose or le
Rus inheritance of Richard ' The Younger ' .
Perhaps, as you ask, the answer lies with Moriarty? Staying tuned for
more....
Good luck, and good continued hunting to all !
John
Shane Hines
This is my first post, but I have read previous posts regarding the identity
of William Longespee's mother with interest, being supposedly descended from
him (like millions of others it seems) and living only about 20 miles from
the Bigod castle at Framlingham.
With regard to the Ida/Ikenai/de Akeny/de Toeni connection, I am wondering
whether the Suffolk parish names Iken and Akenham (see below) derive from
Akeny/d'Acquigny, bearing in mind also the Hikenai/Ykenai spellings I have
seen for William's mum. I would also mention that the modern parish name (I
don't know what manors exist) is Stradbroke not Stradbrooke, although the
local pronunciation is usually the latter. Perhaps also 'Asketon' as
mentioned below would equate to the modern Hasketon (near Woodbridge),
although I note several counties are listed.
Shane Hines
-----Original Message-----
From: The...@aol.com [mailto:The...@aol.com]
Sent: 04 November 2001 17:04
To: GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Braose - Wingfield Connection
Sunday, 4 November, 2001
Hope this helps (somewhat).
John
______________________________
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> With regard to the Ida/Ikenai/de Akeny/de Toeni connection, I am wondering
> whether the Suffolk parish names Iken and Akenham (see below) derive from
> Akeny/d'Acquigny, bearing in mind also the Hikenai/Ykenai spellings I have
> seen for William's mum.
Care is required here. William's mother was named Ida.
Hikenai/Ykenai was the name of the mother of Henry's other famous
bastard, Geoffrey. There is no evidence whatsoever that Hikenai
and Ida were the same woman, and chronology and other data
suggests the opposite. Regarding Ida, it has recently been
proposed, based on the use of the name Ida and her presumed
social status, that Ida was of the Toeni family, but this is mere
speculation. As to Hikenai, one source calls her a norman, but
that is all that is known.
taf
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> "Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com>
>
> >The Early Wingfields, G. Andrews Moriarty, NEHGR 103 [Oct. 1949]:
> >287-295.
>
> and might let us know his argument and sources? (!)
" Sir John de Wingfield, son and heir of John and Elizabeth, was
evidently the founder of the family fortunes. He was taxed 6/ in
the Subsidy of 1327 at Stradbrook cum Wingfield (ibid.l p. 48).
In 1335 Sir Edmund de St. Maur conveyed to him the manor and
advowson of Earsham and the manor and advowson of Sylesham
(Powerscourt). In 11 Edward III (1337/8), John de Wingfield and
Eleanor, his wife, were querants against Giles de Wingfield,
parson of Earsham, et als. (feoffees) deforciants in a fine for
lands in Sternefeld, Saxmundham, Benhale, Farnham, &c. and for
the advowson of Saxmundham church (Suffolk Fines, op cit., Rye,
p. 183). In 17 Edward III (1343/4) John de Wingfield chiveler
was querant cs. John de St. Maur, deforciant, for the manor of
Wydenton (Norfolk Fines, Rye, op cit., p. 312). In 1356 he,
together with his wife Eleanor, presented to Stradbrook church
(Powerscourt). In 1348 and 1349 he had presented alone to
Saxmundham church (ibid.). After his death in 1361, his widow,
Eleanor, settled the chapel at Earsham and the advowson of
Sylesham church on the chantry founded by her husband at
Wincfield (ibid.). By his will he made his wife Eleanor his
executrix, and she, together with his brother, Sir Thomas de
Wingfield, established, as provided by the will, a chantry at
Wingfield for the souls of himself, Sir John, and of his father
and mother, and of Sir Richard de Brews, and of John (Thomas?)
Varley and Joan his wife. The monument of Sir John was in
Wingfield Church (Powerscourt). He is stated to have risen in
the French War and to have been a trusted countillor of the Black
Prince in Guienne (ibid.). The pedigrees state that he married
Eleanor, daughter of Gilbert de Glanville, but it is far more
probable that she was the daughter of Sir Richard de Brews, as
stated by Garter Anstis, as Sir Richard was lord of Wingfield,
which now passed to Sir John, and the provision in the chantry
for the soul of Sir Richard, makes it likely that he was his
father-in-law. Eleanor, also, apparently, received from her
father, in addition to Wingfield, as part of her maritagium, the
manor of Brews in Stradbrook of which she died siezed in 1376
(ibid.). They had issue an only daughter and heiress, Catherine,
who was aged 26 at her mother's death (Wingfield Church and
Castle, op cit., p. 5). She made a great marriage with Michael
de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk, Lord High Chancellor of England, the
favorite and minister of Richard II, who died an Exile in Paris
in 1388/9. She brought Wingfield to the dde la Poles, who built
Wingfield Castle there. From Catherine descended the great and
historic house of de la Pole, which played such an important part
in English history in the 15th and early 16th centuries (cf.
Dudgale's Baronage, vol. II, p. 185)."
taf
The...@aol.com
Hello Todd, Cris, Bert, Rosie, Doug, et al.,
Thank you Todd. Your providing the relevant text from Moriarty's
article is a major benefit.
It would seem we are only short a statement, in an Inq.p.m. or other
contemporary document, stating or demonstrating that 'Eleanor [Alianor],
daughter of Sir Richard de Brews' did such-and-such. [Another probability
which would be confirmatory, nice but not necessary: if we found that Sir
Richard de Brews' wife's name was Katherine...........:) ]
From your post, the other references in Moriarty's text to the manors
of Wingfield & c. are helpful, but especially the specific reference to
Eleanor's receiving
'in addition to Wingfield, as part of her maritagium, the manor of
Brews in Stradbrook of which she died siezed [sic] in 1376.'
This cannot be other than the manor of 'Stradbroke' which was given by
Alice (ne Rus, or le Rus) to her son Richard de Braose in 25 Edw. I, as per
your citation from CP 2:304, note i. The line of descent then, all but
proven, must be as alluded to by yourself and others before and as I outlined
on 1 November (below, with slight additions):
1. John de Braose, of Bramber and Gower, d. 1232, m. Margaret ferch Llywelyn,
dau. of Llywelyn ap Iorwerth, Prince of Aberffraw
2. Richard de Braose, 2nd son, of Stinton, Norfolk, d. bef 18 Jun 1292; m.
Alice le Rus, dau. and heiress of William le Rus, of Stinton, Norfolk;
Stradbrook, Suffolk; & c., and his wife Agatha de Clere
3. Richard de Braose, 2nd son; knight, of Stradbrook, Suffolk [grant from his
mother Alice, 25 Edw. I]; born before 1277 [probably of age upon grant from
his mother]; d. aft 12 Mar 1300/01; m. Alianore
4. Richard de Braose or de Brews, knight, of Wingfield and Brews in
Stradbrook, Suffolk; born say 1300; d. bef 18 Oct 1361 [provision for his
soul in will of Sir John de Wingfield of that date]
5. Alianor or Eleanor de Brews, sole [surviving ?] daughter and heiress, born
say 1320; m. bef 1339 [querant with John de Wingfield her husband in 11 Edw
III, per Moriarty] to Sir John de Wingfield. Had manor of Brews in
Stradbrook as her maritagium, and the manor of Wingfield and poss. others as
her inheritance [Moriarty]
It would be interesting to know what property(ies) were conveyed or
inherited through the other spouses in Generations 3 and 4 above; however,
when somewhat short of names, that might be asking too much.......
Again, the above is certainly subject to criticism, and I hope to here
your views at your pleasure; however, I see no possible (i.e. reasonable)
explanation to fit the facts, other than the above.
Good luck, and good continued hunting to all.
John
Rosie Bevan
files that I have the wife of Richard de Brewse as Eleanor daughter of Sir
John Shelton. To my great embarassement there is no record of the source of
this information. (Possibly Blomefield)
However a quick search of the PRO records reveals that there was a Shelton
Hall in Stradbroke and that later on Sheltons appear to have had a landed
interest in Akenham, suggesting that a Brewse of Stinton daughter married
into this family. It is possible that there was a reciprocal arrangement
whereby a Brewse daughter married a Shelton son and a Brewse son married a
Shelton daughter. The fact that Shelton Hall passed into the hands of the
Wingfields suggests a degree of intermarriage between the families.
Unfortunately the following records are undated and not very specific to the
case in hand.
C 1/1270/25-26 (c1386-c1558)
Peter SENTHIELL and Katherine his wife, late the wife of Richard Townshend,
esquire, v. Jerome SHELTON of London, brother of the said Katherine.:
Failure to save the said Katherine harmless against a former lessee of the
manor of Akenham and the advowsons of the churches of Akenham, Claydon, and
Hemingstone, etc.
C 1/1353/59-62
Robert GRENLYNGE of Fressingfield v. Richard GRENLYNGE.: Manor of Shelton
Hall in Stradbroke, demised by Anthony Wyngfeld, knight, to defendant and
Robert, his brother, since deceased, father of complainant.: SUFFOLK.
From this we know that there were multiple manors in Stradbroke as we know
there was Brews Hall, a Shelton Hall and a Wingfield manor. An enquiry
cited below made in 1715 was made to establish just how many there were and
what they were called. It looks like their proliferation and names was
causing some confusion
E 134/12&13Anne/Hil11
Mary Digby, executrix of John Digby, John Lucas. v. Harbord Harbord, Peter
Wilson, Geo. Chappell, John Chappell, Jeffrey Shreeve, Danl. Lock, Willm.
Aldis.: Town of Stradbrooke (Suff.) "Are there any, and how many mannors in
the said towne or which extend into the said towne, what are the severall
names of the same, who is or are the p'sent lord or lords, lady or ladyes of
the said respective mannors.
12 & 13 Anne
The following records were kindly provided by Richard Borthwick and outlines
what Alice le Rus brought to the marriage.
1272
A fine Hen 56 No. 70, between Richard de Breous and Alice his wife, and John
Giffard and Maltida his wife, as to the manors of Akenham, Whitingham,
Brumleigh, Stradbrok, Clopton, Asketon, Stynton, Lubure, and Syvelyngton in
cos. Suffolk, York, Lincoln, Norfolk, and Surrey. They are the right of
Alice; and Richard and Alice grant Asketon and Stinton to John Giffard and
wife, for life of the said Maltida.
[De Braose Family, D.G.C. Elwes]
However not all the manors passed to the descendants of Alice as a property
deal made between the senior branch of the Braose family diverted Bromley to
the senior de Braose line. Bramley was initially granted in 1266 to Maud
(nee Clifford) widow of William (III) Longespee (Richard's elder brother)
for life by Alice. But after Alice's second marriage (to Brewes) she and her
husband in 1271 conveyed Bramley to Richard's impoverished brother, William
de Braose and his third wife Mary de Ros.[VCH Surrey 3:83]. There was an
ensuing battle by Maud to reclaim the property brought before the Coram
Rege.
1264
Coram Rege, 49 Hen 111, m. ii
Trial between Matilda Langespeye and Richard de Breus and Alice his wife
which settles the date of Richard and Alice's marriage as being between the
years 46 and 49 Hen 111 (1261-1264). Maltida sues Richard and Alice for
ejecting her men from the manors of Stradefford, Stinton, Bromleigh,
Lutheburg, Sevelington, which she had to farm. The defendants made many
defaults and the Sheriff was ordered to bring them up in Hilary Term.
De Braose Family, D.G.C. Elwes
1272
A fine Hen 56 No. 70, between Richard de Breous and Alice his wife, and John
Giffard and Maltida his wife, as to the manors of Akenham, Whitingham,
Brumleigh, Stradbrok, Clopton, Asketon, Stynton, Lubure, and Syvelyngton in
cos. Suffolk, York, Lincoln, Norfolk, and Surrey. They are the right of
Alice; and Richard and Alice grant Asketon and Stinton to John Giffard and
wife, for the life of the said Maltida.
De Braose Family, D.G.C. Elwes
I hope these ramblings haven't confused the picture further.
Cheers
Rosie
----- Original Message -----
From: <The...@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 1:42 AM
Subject: Re: Braose - Wingfield Connection
Todd A. Farmerie
25th April 1279 Going Beyond the Seas with Edward I Was William
De Brews, of Stowlangtoft, Suffolk Who Nominated John Wingfield
and Richard De Brews as His Attorneys until Christmas. (Reyce
257)
http://www.wingfield.org/Charts/dewin005.htm
Thus there appears to have been an association between the
families a full 2 generations prior to the proposed
intermarriage.
taf
Todd A. Farmerie
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jglanville/roanhg.htm
taf
Cristopher Nash
have put yourself to a lot more trouble in digging it out than you
had any wish for, and I-for-one am extremely grateful.
>Sir John de Wingfield... was...taxed ...at Stradbrook cum Wingfield
_This_ -- combined with John's earlier alert about Stradbroke --
turns the trick for me as much as, of course, the crucial citation
regarding "the provision in the chantry for the soul of Sir Richard",
and Moriarty's statement that
>Eleanor, also, apparently, received from her father, in addition to
>Wingfield, as part of her maritagium, the manor of Brews in
>Stradbrook of which she died siezed in 1376
It appears that -- until its development by the Wingfields/de la
Poles -- Wingfield had been concealed as a mere hamlet behind the
name of the manor of Stradbroke. This burial under 'cum', where a
parish sometimes 'masks' an equally densely populated and even more
important but more recently developed adjacent hamlet (i.e. having
only chantry status), can be a plague for anyone relying on placename
indexes for north country research -- espec. in Yorks -- and I should
have thought of the possibility here when perplexed as to why
Wingfield failed to show in the long list of Brewes holdings.
This can account too for Moriarty's otherwise puzzling (without
clearer evidence) phrase "Sir Richard was lord of Wingfield", if we
give him a bit of latitude as to what he meant by 'Wingfield'.
And yes, John, I want to take a bit more time with Moriarty's summary
(the 'apparently's' are unsettling) and in time follow up its leads
(some of which you suggest), but I feel that the line you're putting
together (with Todd's good Brewes links) is really worth pursuing.
>It would be interesting to know what property(ies) were conveyed or
>inherited through the other spouses in Generations 3 and 4 above;
I know what you mean. The Clay gives a bit more, but his account too
is still, as you say --
>somewhat short of names, that might be asking too much...
The real short-of-names problem is the lack of indep corroboration
that Richard had a da. Eleanor, though on onomastic grounds his
mother's name's heartening.
How la Glanville got in there -- and stuck there so long -- niggles,
but maybe for the time being it's an itch not to scratch.
I do think you've shown us a thing to develop here, John -- thanks
for hanging in there -- and thanks Todd for your work and patience!
Cris
--
Cristopher Nash
Stradbroke, which (as you can see from mine sent a few minutes ago)
is where I was drifting, too. Much of this is summarized in the
Clay, as I've mentioned, but it's not only extremely helpful to have
direct paraphrases giving more data -- it lends better focus to some
of the issues (re the difficulty in getting property transfers to
clarify family relationships) that were, again, 'niggling' but hard
to identify before. Thanks, too, Richard (Borthwick, I mean, though
some may also like to thank Brewes), if you're around.
Cris
--
The...@aol.com
Hello Todd, Doug, Cris, Bert, Rosie et al.,
Just one additional note on the subject:
The IGI records on the LDS site include a record for:
'Richard de Brews, b. 1301, Stradbrook, Norfolk'
I see no record of a 'Stradbrook' or Stradbroke in Norfolkshire; therefore this would appear to be the track of Richard de Brews, Generation #4 in my earlier post.
NOTE: There is another Richard de Brews shown at near the same date, but he is shown as being b. at Stinton, Norfolk, son of Giles de Brews [obviously of that branch]. There does not seem to be any confusion of these two in the IGI.
Hope this is helpful.
John
Cristopher Nash
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com> wrote -
>Just tooling around the web, I find the following:
Now that's what I call positive tooling around.
I notice that this was filed by Jocelyn Wingfield, whose curious
citation of Eleanor de Glanville as inheriting 'Wingfield
Hall...acres' I was asking about before.
Intriguing, and thanks.
Cris
--
Shane Hines
Thanks. I also understand Ikenai/Hikenai was said by Henry II's advisors to
be 'base-born', which (even if an insult) presumably would not have been
said of Ida.
Shane
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd A. Farmerie [mailto:farm...@interfold.com]
Sent: 05 November 2001 23:25
To: GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Braose - Wingfield Connection
taf
______________________________
The...@aol.com
Hello Rosie,
Thanks for your post from earlier this week on the Brews and Shelton
families of Stradbrook [Stradbroke], Suffolk.
I had a chance to do some poking about and try to see how this might fit
with other data I had, and that might pop up on the web. I found the
following:
1. IGI records
The are records of several individuals named John de Shelton associated
with Stradbrooke, Suffolk, or Suffolk (sans manor). Candidates for a
possible relationship to the Eleanor Shelton you identified (cited as shown
on the IGI records):
John de Shelton born abt. 1236, Stradbrooke, Suffolk
John de Shelton born 1280 Suffolk, England
John de Shelton born Abt 1308 Suffolk, England
John de Shelton born Abt 1259 Norfolk, Suffolk Eng.
John Shelton Marriage 1317, Stradbrooke, Suffolk
John de Shelton Marriage Abt 1305, Suffolk, England
John de Shelton Marriage Abt 1310, Suffolk, England
John (M. Abt 1305) married ' Maud ' ; John (M. Abt 1310) married ' Hawys
' .
The only Alianor or Eleanor Shelton (or de Shelton) I found on the IGI
was recorded as born 1303, Stradbrook, Norfolk [sic], the daughter of ' Sir
John Shelton '.
* Assuming the connection is correct, two good possiblities exist: (1)
Alianor, wife of Richard de Braose [of record in re: the contesting of
Stinton, & c. with Maud 'Lungespee'] was the daughter (or granddaughter ?) of
the John de Shelton of Stradbrooke, Suffolk, indicated as born 'Abt. 1236';
or (2) Eleanor or Alianor de Shelton, born 1303 (acc. to the IGI), daughter
of Sir John Shelton, was the wife of Richard de Brews [son of Richard and
Alianor above] and the mother of Alianor de Brews, our presumed spouse of Sir
John de Wingfield.
A load of suppositions, I suppose. Three generations with an Eleanor
might seem suspect, but certainly not impossible or even improbable. I note
also, we seem to be dealing with three Richards de Braose/Brews in a row [a
little different, being father-son situations....].
2. Web Site success
from http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com
I find a FTM Genealogy Report from Pam Shelton Anderson. I have
corresponded with Pam in the past (re: the Sheltons of Louisa Co., Virginia)
and have found her thorough; she has included some information from M. C.
Whitaker's book [see my note at end of post] on the Sheltons, but only where
she has noted the source and same and has spent a great deal of time with
quality sources (Blomefield, Copinger, the Calendar of Patent Rolls & c.). I
therefore see good value in passing on her findings in this area.
'Notes for John (of Stradbrooke) Shelton:
From NRS [1] who says he was a son of Henry Shelton, brother of Sir Robert
[2] and living in 1306. Harleian MSS of the Knights of Edward I listed him
as Sir John Shelton who was serving for Robert de Shelton (probably his
brother) on 6 July 1277. Summoned from Norfolk and Suffolk to serve against
the Scots 24 June 1301. He was pardoned for the death of a man in 10 Nov
1303 owing to his service in Scotland (the letter patent issue from
Dunfermline reads "Pardon in consideration of service in Scotland to John de
Shelton for the death of Robert le Yongebonde of Shelton")
Sources:
NRS Visitation of Norfolk
Harleian MSS v 83 Knights of Edward I, p. 247
Calendar of Patent Rolls Edward I, vol 4 p. 167 '
MY Notes:
[1] NRS = Norfolk Record Society
[2] Pam notes elsewhere, re: Sir Robert Shelton, of Shelton, that 'both
Blomefield and Copinger say he is the son of Henry' . Henry is Henry de
Shelton, of Shelton, Norfolk and Burnt Illegh, co. Suffolk.
The Sheltons of Stradbrook continued past this generation according to
IGI records and Pam Shelton Anderson; she noted that 'there was a John
Shelton son of Ralph Shelton of Stradbrooke who died in 1465.'
Obviously a bit more to mull over; it seems your recollection of
Blomefield as your earlier source is correct (well, maybe Copinger........ :)
). I will put my mulling cap back on over the next several days.
Let me know what you think, and also if you might have some other detail
re: dates, etc. re: your Eleanor de Shelton. It does sound like the link is
a good one [but which generation ?].
John
Rosie Bevan
I have had a fossick through my sources and have found extracts of an IPM
for Robert de Shelton 34 Edw I (1303).[Calendarium Genealogicum, Henry III
and Edward I (1865) v.2, p.714]
There appear to have been 2 inquiries one in Norfolk as given below and one
in Suffolk.
They reveal that Robert's heir was his son John aged 26 (i.e. born about
1277) and that Robert and his wife Isabella did not hold from the king but
held . Properties named include the manor of Shelton for a quarter of a
knight's fee which thry held jointly of the heirs of Robert de Tateshall,
lands and tenements in Bedyngham which they held jointly with son Robert
from Walter de Ditton, the manor Osemundeston which had been enfeeoffed to
their sons Thomas and Henry as well as themselves. The implication here is
that Isabella was not mother of Robert's heir John. As one would expect no
mention of daughters.
As it is roughly in the timeframe considered, thought I would mention it.
Cheers
Rosie
----- Original Message -----
From: <The...@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 2:53 AM
Subject: Re: Braose - Wingfield Connection
D. Spencer Hines
What other Australian and New Zealand gems are you, and your fellow
citizens, hiding from us? <g>
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing." -- Attributed to Edmund Burke [1729-1797]
Warriors ---- "There is much tradition and mystique in the bequest of
personal weapons to a surviving comrade in arms. It has to do with a
continuation of values past individual mortality. People living in a
time made safe for them by others may find this difficult to
understand." _Hannibal_, Thomas Harris, Delacorte Press, [1999], p. 397.
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
-------------------
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor
"Rosie Bevan" <cbe...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:006001c16a25$12e953e0$04794fcb@cbevan...
Rosie Bevan
Glad you appreciated a bit of NZ slang.
I used the word subconsciously - but genealogists would probably agree that
finding a significant piece of evidence is like finding a gold nugget.
Fossick is actually an old English (Warwickshire) dialect name for a
troublesome person (and there would be a few who agree that I am one). In
the early gold mining days a fossicker was one who undermined another man's
gold workings, but it later becames used in the sense of rummaging around
looking for gold or prospecting.
Sorry about the off-topic nature of this message.
Cheers